Polio caused by mass poisoning?

Discussion in 'Opinions, Beliefs, & Points of View' started by me1, Mar 25, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member

    Fascinating article suggesting that the polio epidemics of the late nineteenth century to mid-twentieth century were actually caused by mass poisoning events, i.e. the wholescale usage of DDT in particular. Other causative factors being the injection of poisons through vaccination, causing paralysis in the vaccinated arm.

  2. aoeu

    aoeu Well-Known Member

    What the hell. I'm not going to dignify this shit with a proper response. What the hell.
  3. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member

    It is important to be able to read between the lines here. What the above poster actually means is that they cannot refute a word of it. :laugh:
  4. Aeterna

    Aeterna Account Closed

    I want to ask you a simple question:

    You've posted an article that is over 11,000 words. I read peer-reviewed research papers for university articles that were shorter, and I only read those because I have to.

    What exactly do you want us to say to this?

    How can I prove that your argument is false?

    Would you like me to dig through thousands of articles of research literature, construct a counter-argument reaching over 11,000 words, only for you to say, "You're using what the medical establishment tells you too?"?

    Or can I simply say, "We already know what causes polio: A virus.", only for you to say, "Oh, look at this gigantic article" or "Viruses do not exist" ala your other article?
  5. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member

    What would i like?

    The original documents depicting the isolation, biochemical characterisation and photography of the polio virus. Or any other virus said to cause a disease, for that matter.

    There is no experimental evidence proving that a non proven virus 'causes' polio. The experiments said to 'prove' it, consisted of injecting harmful material (said but never proven to contain) the non-verifiable 'polio virus' into some random test animals, and some isolated cells and interpreting the (inevitable) negative consequences as being 'caused' by the unproven to be present 'polio virus'.

    The number of words is irrelevant. The accuracy of them is all that is important. If you could provide the relevant evidence asked for in my opening paragraph i would be grateful.
  6. SpencerA

    SpencerA Well-Known Member

    i don't think this is the right place to be looking in all fairness, x
  7. Aeterna

    Aeterna Account Closed


    The World Health Organization's isolation of polio.


    Isolation of the AIDS virus.


    Postiron imaging of a virus (I'm assuming


    And finally, the Pièce de résistance, isolation and imaging of a virus.

    Also, here's a supposed method for imaging viruses: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16140755

    I found that from a discussion about the article you previous mentioned.

    So, what do I win?

    After a few more minutes, I found this: http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0050183

    Imaging of the polio virus.
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 25, 2009
  8. aoeu

    aoeu Well-Known Member

  9. bhawk

    bhawk Well-Known Member

    DDT poisoning??? are you taking the piss, i have seen the effects of this in peregrines over the years and to think that peregrines are far more susceptible to poisoning than humans and the effect on them is only made apparent after the bird had eaten poisoned food for a long period of time and even then the main effect is the softening of the shell and a weakening of the chalaza, not linked to polio in any way, it is carcinogenic, can effect development and reproduction in humans but not linked to polio!.....im going to put up a website claiming fairies are stealing peoples time.....then wait for you to put it up here, the internets full of cranks which most people come to realise!
  10. worlds edge

    worlds edge Well-Known Member

    DDT wasn't used on a mass basis (typically as an insecticide) until well into the 20th century, from the 1930s through the 1950s.

    Vaccination is at least as common today as it was in the 19th century. Why aren't we facing similar epidemics today?
  11. hammockmonkey

    hammockmonkey Well-Known Member

    Because you're just buying what the medical establishment is sellin, sheep.
  12. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member

    From the article:

    "In 1944, the US federal research centre the National
    Institutes of Health reported that DDT damaged the
    same part of the spinal cord (the anterior horn cells)
    that is damaged in infantile paralysis.

    The same year in Germany, Daniel Dresden found that
    acute DDT poisoning produced ‘degeneration in the
    central nervous system’ that seemed identical to
    that reported in severe cases of infantile paralysis.
    31 "

    As the title of my post states "Polio caused by mass poisoning?". I did not claim that DDT was the -exclusive- cause, I only highlighted it as a major causative factor. The article mentions numerous types of poisons and poisoning events.

    I only mentioned vaccination as one of many causative factors, I did not state that it was a major one. Vaccinations still cause polio today in many people who have them.
  13. Zurkhardo

    Zurkhardo Well-Known Member

    With all due respect, Polio has been almost completely eradicated by vaccination worldwide (in fact only four countries; Afghanistan, India, Nigeria, and Pakistan; still have icases). Therefore there seems to be a contradiction here: if what you said were true, Polio would be claiming millions of those vaccinated.

    Sadly, its this misinformation of vaccination that has caused diseases like Polio to remain due to parents fearful of their supposedly negative affects.
  14. hammockmonkey

    hammockmonkey Well-Known Member

    We should run a mass experiment, stop admistering the polio vaccine and then see if Polio comes back. Sound good?
  15. aoeu

    aoeu Well-Known Member

    Ignoring the dripping sarcasm, that would be a most unethical experiment.
  16. Aeterna

    Aeterna Account Closed

    So, theAM, what do you make of the evidence I've given you? I'm still waiting for a response.
  17. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member

    You never presented the evidence i asked for and by the look of what you did present ("I assume", etc) i dont think you really understand what has been asked of you.

    For a better understanding of what isolated virus particles should look like you could do worse than read the following response (by Lanka) to some pompous American quack, here:

  18. Aeterna

    Aeterna Account Closed

    I showed you imaging and isolation of a virus.

    The I'm assuming part was a half completed sentence on my part, and I do apologize. It was supposed to be, "I'm assuming you'll accept more than just electron microscopy".

    Seriously, did you even read what I showed you?

    AND AGAIN, you're posting 30k+ articles, that doesn't even have a fucking abstract. What kind of moron doesn't post an abstract? At least the articles I posted that were 10K or higher had abstracts.

    Also, I'd like to see "Dr." Lanka's thesis, his accreditation, and his work that's been peer reviewed, please.
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 26, 2009
  19. me1

    me1 Well-Known Member

    I asked you for electron micrograph shots of isolated virus particles. None of your links contain this evidence.

    I will accept that alone, let alone 'more' than it. Yet, you have failed to deliver. The first link is a set of bloody instructions and the second, is that of cells, not isolated virus particles. Do you even understand what is being asked of you?

    Sadly, yes i did. But, it quickly became apparent that you either didn't have the first clue what was being asked for, or else, you were being intentionally deceptive, hence why i ignored it until pressed into responding today.

    Aw, i am sorry that my links contain too many words for you! Would you like to sit down and i can read it to you instead? Why would a person's response to a 'critique', for want of a better word, of their original article, contain an 'abstract'. It isn't a research paper.

    I am sure if you do a google search you will find the relevant site that contains information about him, or at least a contact address, whereby you can enquire about the information you seek.
  20. bhawk

    bhawk Well-Known Member

    wont ever get peer reviewed papers from the am, ive tried many times but the only replies ive ever recieved were excuses. hence why im going to be making my own site claiming unicorns are a hybrid of wheat and binturong feaces, apparently anything on the internet is evidence so i may well become a renowned scientist for my site:biggrin:
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.