Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Eckhart Aurelius Hughes]

It seems to me all the arguments made in the OP have been refuted by post #3 by me and post #6 by Trajectory. And on those points the new claims raised in post #7 and post #9 are red herrings and do not answer any of the actual questions asked. If one thinks I am mistaken, please quote the specific question from post #3 or #6 and the answer to that specific question from post #7 or #9.

[Geordie Ross]

The human body contains millions of viruses. These include all of the above and many more. In fact all animals evolved from viruses and bacteria. If they could build a microscope strong enough, they would discover that cells use viruses as building blocks, like pieces of Lego. The reality is that, disease causes viruses, not viruses cause disease. I suggest that you look through the 'Vaccination Liberation' website and learn about the history of disease and vaccination before shooting your mouth off. Note - I know that Pasteur was a chemist and not a geologist. Sorry for the disinformation. Well, when your the rector's son-in-law you can be anything you want to be ..... right!

So because some bacteria and viruses aren't harmful to humans, and admittedly, some are beneficial, that means "germ theory is a fraud"? Don't you see the gap in logic there? You're throwing the baby out with the bath water.

"Disease causes viruses, not viruses cause disease"

You be hard pressed to find any medical professional that would agree with that, other than a homeopathic, Chinese rhino horn dealing, snake oil salesman witchdoctor.

Tell me, does disease cause HIV or does HIV cause disease?

[DarwinX]

This is much to simplistic.

There are many, many factors associated with extended lifespans, including much better food supply, better infant delivery, as well as major changes in lifestyle habits such as less smoking (the biggest reason for the drop in cancer mortality).

If one is looking for correlation between medical treatment and lifespans, there aren't any. Countries that use substantially less organized medical have longer or equal lifespans to the U.S. If there was a correlation, the U.S. would have the longest lifespan by far since the U.S. spends almost twice the per capita than any other developed nation. Instead, the U.S. lifespan is approximately equal to that of people living in Cuba which spends about $500 per capita vs. the $8000 in the U.S. The biggest difference is access to food by infants.

Its the quality of the food and water that is the most important factor. Also, the amount of iodine in the diet is a critical factor. Whether a country is rich or poor is irrelevant. Cancer can be caused by a lack of oxygen supply or toxification. This can be caused by smoking, tight fitting clothes, lack of exercise, diabetes and artifical hormones in the food supply from dairy products, chicken and pig farms. Adding halogen chemicals to the food and water supply can also shorten life span.

[Misty]

Food for thought:

http://www.safeshare.tv/w/UAGOcLSuLX

[DarwinX]

Tell me, does disease cause HIV or does HIV cause disease?

Well it appears that you have done very little research since your last comment. You obviously need to get a full education in medical deception. Lucky you've come to the right place. For a start HIV is not a new disease. It is just herpies and gonorrhea reinvented by the medical system. Have you ever wondered why herpies and gonorrhea suddenly disappeared? The medical institutions just make up names of diseases at their pleasure. Most of the time they haven't got a clue about disease. Diseases are generally idenified by symptoms only.

[Geordie Ross]

(Nested quote removed.)


Well it appears that you have done very little research since your last comment. You obviously need to get a full education in medical deception. Lucky you've come to the right place. For a start HIV is not a new disease. It is just herpies and gonorrhea reinvented by the medical system. Have you ever wondered why herpies and gonorrhea suddenly disappeared? The medical institutions just make up names of diseases at their pleasure. Most of the time they haven't got a clue about disease. Diseases are generally idenified by symptoms only.

...... I, not even going to respond to that, I fear if I spoke my mind I'd be in breach of forum rules. As for "germ theory is a fraud" and "expanding earth", all you're doing is stirring distrust and spreading conspiracies. I assume you think the Illuminati have mind reading satellites that your tinfoil hat prevents? Because that is how you come across.

[Creative]

So because some bacteria and viruses aren't harmful to humans, and admittedly, some are beneficial, that means "germ theory is a fraud"?

It is not a matter of some bacteria not being harmful. It is MOST bacteria aren't harmful. There are ten times more bacteria in the human body than there are cells:

scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=s ... human-ones

The problem is when bacteria grows out of control because of the environment. In fact, bacteria are essential to our well being (pharmaceuticals kill off necessary bacteria) and control each other just like any ecological system. The problem is not with logic. The problem is with fully understanding how to maintain a healthy ecological system - e.g. our human body. Western medicine provides little to know training in this regard, so one would suspect that all of the drugs that are being poured into our bodies are making things worse. This is supported by the facts that those developed countries that use less organized medicine actually have far longer lifespans.

The world health organization has confirmed that lifestyle is the biggest contributor to disease:

abc.net.au/news/2011-04-28/lifestyle-di ... er/2695712

Its the quality of the food and water that is the most important factor.

Yes, and also exercise and general movement. Movement moves the fluids which remove toxins from the body and brings nutritious food to the cell. Our society has become far to sedentary which leads to all kinds of diseases due to toxin buildup. Herbs and good food can remove these toxic elements from the body. Drugs, both legal and illegal, just add to the buildup.

The major issue is that organized medicine only treats the symptoms (e.g. fever, pain, etc.) and not the causes. Thus, simple, treatable diseases turn into chronic diseases because the causes remain. Of course, there is no incentive for drug companies and hospitals, or doctors to cure. In fact, the opposite is the case, which is why my family has learned to take care of itself. Between the three of us, we have been to an hospital twice over the last 30 years and only because we needed some emergency care for wounds, which is probably all that hospitals are really useful for.

[Geordie Ross]

(Nested quote removed.)


It is not a matter of some bacteria not being harmful. It is MOST bacteria aren't harmful. There are ten times more bacteria in the human body than there are cells:

scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=s ... human-ones

The problem is when bacteria grows out of control because of the environment. In fact, bacteria are essential to our well being (pharmaceuticals kill off necessary bacteria) and control each other just like any ecological system. The problem is not with logic. The problem is with fully understanding how to maintain a healthy ecological system - e.g. our human body. Western medicine provides little to know training in this regard, so one would suspect that all of the drugs that are being poured into our bodies are making things worse. This is supported by the facts that those developed countries that use less organized medicine actually have far longer lifespans.

The world health organization has confirmed that lifestyle is the biggest contributor to disease:

abc.net.au/news/2011-04-28/lifestyle-di ... er/2695712

I agree, to a certain extent, but I don't believe it is as simple as an unbalanced ecosystem that you describe, its simply a side effect of the microbial toxins produced by "bad bacteria".

Viruses are an entirely different story, where a bacteria is considered a 'living' organism, a virus is not.

From a philosophical point of view, I see bacteria like a complex machine with individual complex components, where a virus is simply a self replicating nano droid.

But all in all, the title "germ theory is a fraud" is provocative and erroneous.

[DarwinX]

From a philosophical point of view, I see bacteria like a complex machine with individual complex components, where a virus is simply a self replicating nano droid.

But all in all, the title "germ theory is a fraud" is provocative and erroneous.

Conception itself is a viral infection. The sperm is the virus and the ovum is a bacteria. Cancer is the reproduction of non-ovum cells due to mutation. This is why you shouldn't eat or drink any dairy products because they might contain rBGH. The halls of acedemia will be in meltdown if this information ever leaks out.

[Geordie Ross]

Yes, yes, you should write that on a sandwich board and shout it at traffic.

-- Updated May 18th, 2013, 7:15 pm to add the following --

I apologize that was uncalled for, I disagree with your views on medicine and germ theory, and believe they could be dangerous, there was recently a measles outbreak in the UK and a man died, because of mistrust spread about the medical industry. A simple vaccine would have spared his life, and many others who died as a result of mistrust.

[DarwinX]

Question - How many pandemics has Australia had. Answer - None. Reason - Too much sunshine which kills germs via ultra-violet light and vitamin D production. If they put UV lights in hospitals they wouldn't have any post operation infection problems. Lives saved - millions.

[Creative]

I agree, to a certain extent, but I don't believe it is as simple as an unbalanced ecosystem that you describe, its simply a side effect of the microbial toxins produced by "bad bacteria".

Your theory does not stand the weight of the overwhelming evidence that even though two cohorts of people will have exactly the same so called "bad bacteria", one group will not get any disease while the other will. There is no evidence of a one-to-one correspondence between a set of disease symptoms and a given bacteria.

Viruses are an entirely different story, where a bacteria is considered a 'living' organism, a virus is not.

I would say that there is certainly an open question as to what is considered "living". This is constantly debated in the scientific community. What is not debated is that he physical structure of bacteria is different from viruses. But this alone tells us nothing. Again. there are people who have the so-called bad herpes virus that never exhibit symptoms while others that have it do. There is no correspondence thus we have to look for a different understanding about the health problem. Those who do, e.g. those who study herbal medicine, quickly find a different way of looking at the body ecology and how it operates.

But all in all, the title "germ theory is a fraud" is provocative and erroneous.

At best it is very misleading and at worse (and I have no doubt this is accurate) it is used as a pretext to sell a whole host of drugs and anti-germicide products, which have virtually no value, but are the crux of multi=billion dollar money making enterprises. In total, the total amount of chemicals that are being poured into the body as well as into the general home and community ecology is probably doing more harm than good. This would account for the lower mortality rates in the U.S. vs other developed countries (I believe the U.S. is around #35 which is dismal considering we are spending 18% of our GDP on medicine alone).

-- Updated May 18th, 2013, 8:21 pm to add the following --

I apologize that was uncalled for, I disagree with your views on medicine and germ theory, and believe they could be dangerous, there was recently a measles outbreak in the UK and a man died, because of mistrust spread about the medical industry. A simple vaccine would have spared his life, and many others who died as a result of mistrust.

We will never know the answer to the question whether vaccines are causing more harm then good, simply because there never has been nor will there ever be a long term study comparing vaccine free children (and there is such a cohort available for study) vs. those who have been vaccinated in the proscribed methods. Claims are made by health officials which they cannot back up with any studies. Your claim equally has no foundation other than faith.

[Geordie Ross]

Your theory does not stand the weight of the overwhelming evidence that even though two cohorts of people will have exactly the same so called "bad bacteria", one group will not get any disease while the other will. There is no evidence of a one-to-one correspondence between a set of disease symptoms and a given bacteria.

That sounds interesting, any sources?

I would say that there is certainly an open question as to what is considered "living". This is constantly debated in the scientific community. What is not debated is that he physical structure of bacteria is different from viruses. But this alone tells us nothing. Again. there are people who have the so-called bad herpes virus that never exhibit symptoms while others that have it do. There is no correspondence thus we have to look for a different understanding about the health problem. Those who do, e.g. those who study herbal medicine, quickly find a different way of looking at the body ecology and how it operates.

I'm fairly sure that viruses aren't considered "life" http://www.virology.ws/2004/06/09/are-viruses-living/

[Creative]

That sounds interesting, any sources?

Of course. As I said, there are all kinds of viruses and bacteria that are diagnosed in people all of the time, e.g. e-coli, herpes simplex, etc. and most people don't ever see any symptoms. There is absolutely no correspondence. What will happen is that a person will come in with some symptoms, the physician will look for some bacteria or virus and then attribute the disease to the virus. It is rather simplistic but there is no cause and effect. Please name a bacteria that you believe infects and creates disease in everyone that houses it and I will gladly provide any evidence that you want. I will even show you statistics of people who have the HIV virus that never show any symptoms. This is well known.

I'm fairly sure that viruses aren't considered "life" http://www.virology.ws/2004/06/09/are-viruses-living/

serc.carleton.edu/microbelife/yellowsto ... slive.html

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2837877/

I can find as many counter sources as you wish. The list is quite long.

The primary problem you will find with your argument is that there is zero evidence to support it. It is simply another myth that is perpetuated because of the enormous money that it makes.

This is a short history that describes Pasteur's apparent recanting of his own bacteria theory:

susandoreydesigns.com/insights/pasteur- ... ecant.html

[Geordie Ross]

I don't consider viruses to be living organisms. There's many bacteria that are incredibly deadly, of course, they're virility depends on the hosts immune system, and small concentrations of certain bacteria will kill even the healthiest and fittest humans on earth. Regardless of corporate pharmaceutical companies.