Engineering disease

Historical insights & thoughts about the world we live in - and the social conditioning exerted upon us by past and current propaganda.

Re: Engineering 'disease'

Unread postby sharpstuff on Wed Apr 06, 2016 12:06 pm

My dear Cluedin and possibly others,

Quote: In regards to the "new" immunotherapy they claim is the cat's meow, re: cancer:

My apologies but what on earth are you talking about?

What exactly is the 'new' immunotherapy, (if it was anything comprehensible in the first place)?

What on earth is a 'cat's meow'? It this in the English language?

Quote: A gift of $125 million — mostly from former Mayor Michael Bloomberg and fashion mogul and film producer Sidney Kimmel — makes this sort of shot-in-the-dark research all the more viable, Pardoll says.

Who are all these people you allude to? I have never heard (or want to hear) from them.

Quote: The institute patents its research, and licenses it to drug makers.Treatment requires a two-hour IV infusion every two weeks for anywhere from six months to two years, plus a “treatment vaccine” that may be administered periodically to rev up the immune system. So far, Pardoll says, only 3 percent of his patients have experienced any side effects, such as inflammation of the lungs On the other hand, Pardoll says, prostate and pancreatic cancers have proved more resistant and less receptive to treatment.

http://nypost.com/2016/04/05/this-groun ... ng-cancer/

So what? All this 'cancer' stuff (especially in the singular) is a total piece of nonsense from the outset, hence the title of this thread 'Engineering disease'. Give me strength!

I may add that this forum, so far as I observe it, follows conventions of the English language so far as is possible with those whose first language is is not English. American English is not first language English.
sharpstuff
Member
 
Posts: 147
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 1:31 pm

Re: Engineering 'disease'

Unread postby CluedIn on Wed Apr 06, 2016 3:32 pm

Posts like yours, Sharpstuff, are why a lot of people don't post, because of the nasty way you went about tearing mine apart. Yes, I get the cancer game. I was just posting more information about the push for this very real treatment they will be foisting on the cancer population.

The cat's meow is just a saying which means It's the latest and greatest in the cancer cure industry. I mean, really, did you have to jump on a little phrase like that and insult me?

I notice you used the same kind of wording with me on this post as you did with Fubarfuthark, right before he was banned: "My apologies but what on earth are you talking about?" And I might add, I was the one who stood with you regarding that disgusting video he linked to.

If you don't know who Michael Bloomberg is, well that's your problem. I wasn't "alluding" to them, I was providing a quote about a donation he made for this new "therapy".
CluedIn
Member
 
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 12:15 pm

Re: Engineering 'disease'

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Thu Apr 07, 2016 2:45 am

I would like to know a couple things from you folks.

One, CluedIn, what really was the point of your post? No sarcasm or rhetoric intended. What is your point? Please feel free to patiently explain without fear of sharpstuff crawling up your ass.

Two, sharpstuff, can you lay off CluedIn about "cat's meow"? That is a pretty typical turn of speech. "Bee's knees" would also be acceptable in this case. Or perhaps "popular". Sheesh.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5059
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Engineering 'disease'

Unread postby CluedIn on Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:35 am

I posted an article about this "new" treatment method and this was just expanding on my original post.

CluedIn wrote:We are now being indoctrinated into the belief that living with cancer is a better option than eradicating it completely. Living with disease and liking it - welcome to 21st century medicine. Drug commercials for everything and anything. Remember the day when cigarettes and alcohol commercials were a no-no? And don't forget - you too can cut body parts off if you have a .0000001% chance of possessing "bad" genes.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/ ... tists.html


This topic is called Engineering Disease, therefore I believe it should also include Engineered Cures for these diseases, especially since this is where they will make their billions, giving false hope to cancer patients.

They are making wild claims about this new treatment and brushing aside the side effects - inflammation of the lungs - as no big deal. This is a trend in medicine - downplaying significant side effects. This treatment also includes "treatment" vaccines, which is a term I have never heard before and believed worth sharing.

Just knowing that Bloomberg is connected to this in any way shape or form, not to mention the fashion mogol, turns my stomach. Thought others might be interested.
CluedIn
Member
 
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 12:15 pm

Re: Engineering 'disease'

Unread postby sharpstuff on Fri Apr 08, 2016 7:28 am

CluedIn wrote:
We are now being indoctrinated into the belief that living with cancer is a better option than eradicating it completely. Living with disease and liking it - welcome to 21st century medicine.

I completely agree with that statement. I must have missed it reading the original post.

CluedIn wrote:
This topic is called Engineering Disease, therefore I believe it should also include Engineered Cures for these diseases, especially since this is where they will make their billions, giving false hope to cancer patients.


Absolutely!.

CluedIn wrote:

This is a trend in medicine - downplaying significant side effects.


I firmly believe that the notion of 'side effects' is something we should be very careful about. The notion ('side effects') presupposes that whatever is 'causing' the 'side effects' has some sort of benefit in the first place.

Medicines of any kind (natural or not) have effects.

Again, the notion of 'side-effects is being banded about and that is part of the problem that when taking (especially) pharmacological drugs, we are expected to accept that they have 'bad' effects as well as 'good' effects, thus leading to having to take other drugs to counter the 'side effects': a downward spiral to perpetual dependency for the patient and prosperity for those making drugs and those peddling them.


**********************************************************************
Just out of interest, I managed to find a scan of Florence Nightingale's work 'Notes on Nursing: What it is and what it is not.'

The book is dated 1865. It is a footnote on page 32.

I found the (google-scanned) .pdf on the Internet Archive.

https://archive.org/details/NotesOnNursingByFlorenceNightingale

The side-note reads: 'Diseases are not individuals arranged in classes, like cats and dogs, but conditions growing out of one another.'

The full note reads:

* Is it not living in a continual mistake to look upon diseases, as we do now, as separate entities, which must exist, like cats and dogs?
instead of looking upon them as conditions, like a dirty and clean condition, and just as much under our own control: or rather as the reactions of kindly nature, against the conditions in which we have placed ourselves.
I was brought up, by both scientific mean and ignarant women, distinctly to believe that small-pox, for instance, was a thing of which there was once a first specimen in the world, which went on propagating itself, in a perpetual chain of descent, just as much as that there was a first dog, (or a first pair of dogs,) and that small-pox would not begin itself any more than a new dog would begin without there having been a parent dog.
Since then I have seen with my eyes and smelt with my nose small-pox growing up in first specimens, either in close rooms, or in overcrowded wards, where it could not by any possibility have been "caught," but must have begun.
Nay, more, I have seen diseases begin, grow up, and pass into one another. Now, dogs do not pass into cats.
I have seen, for instance, with a little overcrowding, continued fever grow up; and with a little more, typhoid fever; and with a little more, typhus, and all in the same ward or hut.
Would it not be far better, truer, and more practical, if we looked upon disease in this light?
For diseases, as all experiences shows, are adjectives, not noun substantives.


I think the book is a good read for anyone.
sharpstuff
Member
 
Posts: 147
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 1:31 pm

Re: Engineering 'disease'

Unread postby ICfreely on Thu Apr 14, 2016 5:08 am

NASA & Pig Pharma: a marriage made in H-E Double Hockey Sticks

International Space Station Plays Role in Vaccine Development
Feb. 29, 2012

Have you ever been afflicted with a case of food poisoning so awful it made you stop to wonder why no one's found a cure or sure-fire preventative for it yet? [ :huh: ] And chances are you or someone you know has experienced a bacterial staph infection so aggressive it was resistant to nearly every antibiotic used by the medical profession. The development of vaccines to different pathogens has impacted our global health in ways we could have never anticipated as recently as the early 20th century, and there are still plenty of pathogens to protect ourselves from. The evolution of vaccine development is being streamlined with the help of the microgravity environment exhibited on the International Space Station.

Researchers Timothy Hammond, Ph.D., at the Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Cheryl Nickerson, Ph.D., at Arizona State University have both flown experiments, using microgravity in their search for therapeutic agents or vaccines against Salmonella bacteria. Salmonella infection is one of the most common forms of food poisoning in the U.S. Worldwide, Salmonella diarrhea remains one of the top three causes of infant mortality, so a vaccine has the potential to make dramatic improvements in health for developing countries. The space environment has been shown to induce key changes in microbial cells that are directly relevant to infectious disease, including alterations of microbial growth rates, antibiotic resistance, microbial invasion of host tissue, organism virulence (the relative ability of a microbe to cause disease) and genetic changes within the microbe. Collectively, this body of work has shown that the virulence of this organism increases in microgravity. The targets identified from each of these microgravity-induced alterations represent an opportunity to develop new and improved therapeutics, including vaccines, as well as biological and pharmaceutical agents aimed specifically at eradicating the pathogen.

Early work that laid the foundation for the microgravity-based vaccine development studies began in 1998, when Nickerson initially was funded by NASA in an effort to understand how Salmonella bacteria would respond to a microgravity environment. This was the first of what would be multiple studies from this team on Salmonella bacteria grown in true microgravity or ground-based analogues of microgravity.

Follow-on experiments conducted on space shuttle flights to the space station have examined the virulence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, known as MRSA, as well as other microbes. MRSA is a type of Staphylococcus bacteria that is resistant to certain beta-lactam antibiotics; these antibiotics include methicillin, penicillin, and amoxicillin. More severe or potentially life-threatening MRSA infections occur most frequently among patients in healthcare settings. MRSA is especially troublesome in hospitals, where patients with open wounds, invasive devices and weakened immune systems are at greater risk of infection than the general public.

The studies of Salmonella and MRSA bacteria in space are part of the U.S. National Laboratory pathfinder program to demonstrate the use of the space station as a research platform for commercial research and development. The pathfinder research approach uses a set of flight experiments to identify the components of the organisms that facilitate increased virulence in space, and then applies that information to pinpoint targets for anti-microbial therapeutics, including vaccines. Discovering the factors responsible for growth and virulence of bacteria will contribute to the development of novel therapeutic treatments, including vaccines. In fact, the commercial corporation Astrogenetix's space-based Salmonella research has resulted in the discovery of a potential candidate vaccine for this pathogen and is currently in the planning stages for review and commercial development. More recently, two Arizona State University teams led by Nickerson and Roy Curtiss III, Ph.D., worked together to deliver vaccine samples that were flown to the space station on STS-135. The investigation seeks to improve on existing vaccines against Streptococcus pneumonia - a bacteria that causes life-threatening diseases, such as pneumonia, meningitis, and bacteremia. This organism is responsible for more than 10 million deaths annually and is particularly dangerous for newborns and the elderly, as they are less responsive [more vulnerable] to current anti-pneumococcal vaccines [poisons] traditionally delivered by needle. An orally delivered vaccine known as the Recombinant Attenuated Salmonella Vaccine, or RASV, is currently undergoing clinical trials, and the Arizona State University research teams are seeking to increase this vaccine's anti-pneumococcal effectiveness by maximizing its ability to induce a protective immune response. "We have the opportunity," commented Nickerson, "to utilize spaceflight as a unique research and development platform for novel applications with potential to help fight a globally devastating disease." The samples sent to the space station were a genetically altered strain of Salmonella that carries a protective antigen against the Streptococcus pneumonia bacteria. Molecular targets identified from this work hold promise for translation to develop new and improve existing anti-pneumococcal RASVs to prevent disease for the general public. Moreover, because RASVs can be produced against a wide variety of human pathogens, the outcome of this study could influence the development of vaccines against many other diseases in addition to pneumonia.

This space-based research provides evidence that the International Space Station as a National Laboratory is a valuable resource that can be utilized for the benefit of Earth. Discovery of therapeutic targets for MRSA and Salmonella infections are examples of efforts to use the novel microgravity environment to develop new pharmaceutical agents, and as the station nears completion, there will be an increase in such opportunities to utilize the International Space Station National Laboratory as a platform for drug discovery. [ ^_^ ] Overall, these results represent just a fraction of the possibilities of future microgravity discoveries. Scientists participating in these studies plan to fly a continuing series of experiments to the space station, giving them streamlined access that will help to accelerate progress for several different lifesaving vaccines.

Tara Ruttley, Ph.D
Associate International Space Station Program Scientist
NASA


Last Updated: July 30, 2015
Editor: NASA Administrator

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/benefits/vaccine_development.html



$50 or more...for the House of G-d!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVRPEDOVJzk
ICfreely
Member
 
Posts: 757
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: Engineering 'disease'

Unread postby ICfreely on Thu Apr 14, 2016 6:28 am

ICfreely wrote:
An orally delivered vaccine known as the Recombinant Attenuated Salmonella Vaccine, or RASV, is currently undergoing clinical trials, and the Arizona State University research teams are seeking to increase this vaccine's anti-pneumococcal effectiveness by maximizing its ability to induce a protective immune response.


Disney's imagineers were way ahead of NASA!

Saving Mr. Banks

DICK: It’s gotta be like a slogan!
BOB: Her prescription for life.
DICK: Yeah! Yes! A stitch in time!
BOB: An apple a day.
DON: Time and tide wait for--
BOB: Sugar!
DICK: Sugar?
DICK (CONT’D): What? That’s not--
BOB: Jeff had vaccination day at school yesterday.
DICK: Ouch.
BOB: No ouch.
DICK: No ouch?
BOB: Sugar. They put it in a cube.
DICK: Medicine in sugar?
BOB: Cube’s an odd word.
BOB (CONT’D): Spoonful?
DON: Yeah, we have sugar.

DICK & BOB (singing it incorrectly): Just a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down!

http://screenplayexplorer.com/wp-content/scripts/saving-mr-banks.pdf
ICfreely
Member
 
Posts: 757
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: Engineering 'disease'

Unread postby sharpstuff on Thu Apr 14, 2016 10:48 am

My dear ICfreely,

I really do not want confrontations with you. I know nothing of you (or you of myself) but I cannot understand in plain English what it is you are trying to say! Goodness forgive that I am not trying to undermine you.

The 'germ theory' and anything relevant to it (for example the 'cancer' myth) is a no-no!

Please, please, read this volume before making further comments, I implore you, or other explorers for possible truths.

https://archive.org/details/bechamporpasteur00hume_0

It is downloadable as a .pdf.

Please comment after you have read it (or even some of it). If that is not possible, then make no comments.

Peace be with you.
sharpstuff
Member
 
Posts: 147
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 1:31 pm

Re: Engineering 'disease'

Unread postby ICfreely on Thu Apr 14, 2016 1:24 pm

sharpstuff wrote:I really do not want confrontations with you. I know nothing of you (or you of myself) but I cannot understand in plain English what it is you are trying to say! Goodness forgive that I am not trying to undermine you.



The notion of vaccines providing 'immunization' from 'viruses' is pure mythology. As is NASA's 'space' exploration. I was merely pointing out how two hoaxes are combined to prop up one another. We're being led to believe that we mere mortals can't possibly hope to lead healthy lives without the expertise of technocrats. They, and only they, possess the 'keys to the Kingdom of Heaven.' We should be grateful to them & strictly follow their orders like good little slaves!


sharpstuff wrote:The 'germ theory' and anything relevant to it (for example the 'cancer' myth) is a no-no!

Please, please, read this volume before making further comments, I implore you, or other explorers for possible truths.

https://archive.org/details/bechamporpasteur00hume_0

It is downloadable as a .pdf.

Please comment after you have read it (or even some of it). If that is not possible, then make no comments.



You're preaching to the choir, my dear, Sharpstuff!


ICfreely wrote:The following book is one of many which thoroughly eviscerate the “Germ Theory.”

The Dream & Lie of Louis PasteurBy R. B. Pearson (originally Pasteur, Plagiarist, Imposter 1942)
http://www.whale.to/a/b/pearson.html

http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=1455&start=60#p2398214



sharpstuff wrote:Peace be with you.



With you be peace!
ICfreely
Member
 
Posts: 757
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: Engineering 'disease'

Unread postby ICfreely on Fri Apr 15, 2016 4:52 pm

A brief overview of allopathic authoritarianism:


Power Politics and the Takeover of Holistic Health in North America: An Exploratory Historical Analysis - Farah M Shroff, PhD

Abstract

Allopathic medicine, while it is well entrenched in North America, has only held this influential position for approximately one century. Dispelling myths that allopathic dominance was gained exclusively through evidence based health outcomes using scientific diagnostic and treatment protocols, this paper demonstrates that [b]two systems of healthcare were overturned in North America, using primarily financial, military, and political tools[/b]. In analyzing these social forces, this paper is in no way a wholesale critique of allopathy. Indeed, allopathy has tremendous value in improving population health, particularly in acute and emergency care.

Holistic systems of medicine were ascendant in the past and their decline was less about “the progress of science” and more about power and politics. Despite this decline, holistic health is re-emerging. Medical pluralism is experiencing a renaissance.

Indigenous Holistic Health Care Practices in North America: a Brief Overview

While not romanticizing indigenous systems of medicine, it is clear that this genius emanates from societies that were deeply connected to all forms of life and accepted few limits on the capacity of the human being for excellence and self-fulfillment.

Indigenous systems of medicine generally focus on returning people to a state of harmonious balance both internally and in relationship with the outer world. The holistic approach of many indigenous systems of medicine worked to create changes in (ill) people’s self knowledge, their relationships with the world around them, and ultimately move them back to health transformed. Behavioural changes were often expected by those guiding the healing (Continuum Centre for Health and Healing, 2003). Illness is thus an opportunity for growth and learning despite the suffering.

Colonial Influences on Indigenous Systems of Medicine: A Brief Overview

With the colonizers came extreme trauma in many forms — genocide, war, removal from ancestral lands, relocation, forced labour, religious conversion, and more. Residential schools were an attempt to convert indigenous children to Christianity, stripping them of their own culture, language, and belief systems.

“Humanitarianism” and colonial medicine were used to pathologize indigenous peoples and a regime of doctors, hospitals, and field matrons was established to encourage assimilation (Kelm, 2005). Nonetheless, many indigenous peoples have been able to resist and alter these forces to preserve their own cultural understanding of their bodies, disease, and medicine (G. Oleman, personal communication, April 25, 2007).

Annie Guno, a First Nations holistic health care practitioner and teacher, for example, states that much of the holistic health care she practices, such as therapeutic touch and energy medicine, stem from ancient traditions that, in her words, “tap into the Universe.” These practices survived, and some, such as therapeutic touch, have now been established within Canadian hospitals, practiced by nurses (personal communication, January, 2007).

European Holistic Medicine in North American History: A Brief Overview of Homeopathy

Samuel Hahnemann (1755–1843), a German physician, is credited with coining the word “homeopathy” (“homoios” in Greek means similar, “pathos” means suffering, so homeopathy is a system of medicine which induces a condition that mimics the disease in order to treat illness) to refer to the pharmacological principle, the law of similars, that is its basis. This law was previously described by Hippocrates and Paracelsus and was utilized by many cultures, including the Mayans, Chinese, Indians, Greeks, and indigenous peoples (Ullman, 1991), but it was Hahnemann who is thought to have codified the law of similars into a systematic medical science. Homeopathy’s principles were in direct contrast to those of allopathy. Homeopathy posed a philosophical, clinical, and economic threat to orthodox (allopathic) medicine as will be explained below.

External challenges to homeopathy: The formation of the AMA and its alliance with early capitalists


In 1847, the American Medical Association (AMA) was formed to represent allopathic medicine. Allopathy was informed by the thought of Rene Descartes, Francis Bacon, and others. It was largely, but not entirely, defined by a reductionist and dualist Cartesian scientific base. In Greek, “allo” means different and “pathy” means suffering, so allopathy is a system of medicine that creates a different illness in order to treat illness.9 As part of its code of ethics, the AMA specifically prohibited its members from professional consultation with homeopaths (Solberg, 2009). From its inception, the AMA advocated educational reforms to establish its type of medicine as the only legitimate one and itself as the only legitimate medical association (Loop, 2008). For example, the AMA lobbied to strike down the licensure law, which allowed different sects to have their own licensure boards and the right to examine their own candidates. The abolishment of the licensure law played an important role in losing homeopathy the power to govern itself (Barzansky and Gevitz, 1992; Edlin and Golanty, 2009).

By the late 1890s an alliance between the AMA and large industrial capitalists was formed, assisting the AMA in gaining the political influence and influential friends it sought. This initiated the sociopolitical hegemony of allopathy which continues today. The modern medical sector is a reflection of socioeconomic hierarchies in society (Navarro, 2007) which are based on race, class, gender, and other categories of difference. Corporations and the upper classes who dominate society in general also direct the functions and structures of medical industrial complexes.

The Flexner Report

A Council on Medical Education was established in 1904 by the AMA and was composed solely of representatives from universities which followed the Johns Hopkins’ model.

The Council then applied, through the AMA, to the Carnegie Foundation to commission an independent report to verify its work. Abraham Flexner, an educator whose brother was an allopath, was selected for the task. He was accompanied by Nathan Colwell, MD, Secretary of the Council, and a participant in all the site visits. They visited all the medical schools in North America.

In 1910, the Flexner Report, Medical Education in the United States and Canada was released by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. The report marked a turning point in medical education. It suggested new guidelines for medical schools to make them more scientific (in the reductionist and dualist tradition). Approved schools were to provide full-time research faculty as well as a solid, technological base — the modern research laboratory (Barzansky and Kenagy, 2010) — which required a large amount of funding.

Flexner (1930, p. 189) wrote: “the influence of the board of trustees determines, in the social and economic realms, an atmosphere of timidity which is not without effect on critical appointments and promotions.” He stated that the first and final voice is theirs, concerning the highest decisions. An “atmosphere of timidity” thus helped to shape medical education about one hundred years ago. Their first goal was to ensure that “the aims of higher education, of course, are to be attuned to the needs of the industrial (corporate) system” (Galbraith, 1967, p. 370). In the process, Flexner rebuked homeopathic schools along with other holistic schools for their poor standard despite their successful establishment and many were excluded from the reconstruction of the medical system.

Funding was the chief distinguishing factor between the Flexner report and the innumerable other reports which were published in the same era as several foundations financed its implementation. By 1934, large foundations had donated $154 million to reform medical education along Flexnarian lines. The Rockefeller General Education Board supplied $83.3 million to nine medical schools (Fedunkiw, 2005). Other schools lost their funding and many were forced to close down, including schools of natural medicine and the only medical schools which admitted African Americans and women (Hiatt and Stockton, 2005). Amongst the medical schools that were heavily funded by many corporations in order to meet the high expectations set by the Flexner report and the AMA, only two homeopathic schools could stay open with the help of devoted alumni and local benefactors.

A reform movement at the turn of the 20th century, commonly called progressivism, posited that scientific knowledge could be applied beyond medicine and public health to politics, law, labour relations, industrial production, and so forth. Proponents believed that science combined with capitalism would solve the problems of rapid industrialization. Alexander Peter Reid, a Canadian allopath born in 1836, was a leader in this movement. He firmly believed that science could solve social problems (Petrou, 1998). These kinds of social elements created a stronger foundation upon which allopathic medicine could flourish, particularly as prominent allopaths were in leadership positions.

One such prominent allopath was Morris Fishbein who became the editor of the Journal of the AMA in 1924. He became well known when Time Magazine referred to him as the nation’s most ubiquitous and perhaps most influential medico.

The rise in allopathic medicine was also influenced by the needs of the battlefield. Most notably, the “world” wars made rapid research in acute care necessary; approximately 39,488 Canadian soldiers were killed in action during World War I and approximately 12,048 died of wounds (Salisbury and English, 2003). It was considered a “medical miracle” that approximately 154,361 were injured yet survived and approximately 4 out of 5 of these soldiers returned to active military service (Salisbury and English, 2003).

World War II catalyzed the rapid research and development of high technological approaches to medicine and resulted in clearly visible successes. The necessity for crisis surgical intervention techniques for battlefront wounds also encouraged use of morphine, sulfa drugs, and penicillin. The introduction of “heroic” medicine and “wonder” drugs during the war had lasting effects. This type of medicine produced instantaneous results which awed the general public. People’s faith in allopathic medicine grew tremendously during this time period (Magner, 2005).

People of varying socioeconomic positions continued to turn to practitioners of holistic health care. Treatments offered by holistic practitioners were not always cheaper than allopathic treatments. People turned to holistic treatments partly because they were less painful than allopathic treatments but some holistic treatments were not painless. Both ill and healthy people sought out holistic practitioners based on sound information and experience, not fear and ignorance. While those who sought treatment from holistic practitioners may have been critical of some aspects of allopathic care, they were not interested in mounting collective social challenges to allopathy in general (Clow, 2001).

As long as we accept the premise that doctors monopolized health care in the last century, we will continue to believe that criticism of and opposition to conventional medicine is a recent phenomenon. And as long as popular disenchantment with the medical profession is seen as a product of the 1960s counter-cultural revolution, we will continue to formulate solutions to the current health care crisis that ignore enduring traditions of independence, self-help, and anti-authoritarianism. (Clow, 2001, p. 7)

North Americans thus have a strong tradition of working towards medical pluralism.

http://www.pimatisiwin.com/online/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/07Shroff.pdf


A few resources for those who reject false allopathic authority:


Anna's Herbal - An Education in the Healing Power of Herbs
http://www.fairmontstate.edu/collegeofliberalarts/sites/default/files/ANNAS%20HERBAL.pdf

Culpeper's Complete Herbal – Nicholas Culpeper (1814)
http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924001353279

Culpeper's Complete Herbal Alphabetical Index
http://www.complete-herbal.com/culpepper/completeherbalindex.htm

The Physiomedicalist Dispensatory by William Cook, M.D., (1869)
http://medherb.com/cook/cook.pdf

THE MEDICINAL PLANTS OF NORTH AMERICA Volume I - ARTHUR WEIR SMITH, A.M., M.D., (1914)

http://soilandhealth.org/wp-content/uploads/The-Medicinal-Plants-of-North-A-Arthur-Weir-Smith.pdf

Traditional Medicine for Canada's First Peoples - Raymond Obomsawin, PhD, (2007)
http://soilandhealth.org/wp-content/uploads/02/0203CAT/020337.traditional.medicine.pdf
ICfreely
Member
 
Posts: 757
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: Engineering 'disease'

Unread postby ICfreely on Sat Apr 16, 2016 9:37 am

War! What Is It Good For?

Oncologists, of course!


The TRUTH about CHEMO
By Ty Bollinger

Treating cancer is BIG business! In fact, each year in the USA alone, allopathic (conventional) treatments generate over $200 billion!

Big Pharma, physicians, and others involved in the “Cancer Industry” profit heavily each time a cancer patient submits to the conventional “Big 3” treatment model:

1. Cutting out essential body parts via surgical intervention,
2. Poisoning with chemotherapy, or
3. Burning the body with ionizing radiation,

…or perhaps a barbaric combination of the three… hence the slang “cut, poison, burn.”

In this article, we’re going to focus solely on chemotherapy (chemo).

A Lethal Accident Spawns Medical “Breakthrough”

Chemotherapy was discovered during World War II when a ship carrying sulfur mustards (a nerve agent to be used in chemical warfare) was bombed and the troops on board were exposed to the chemical.

Those men affected tested for depleted bone marrow and lymph systems – cells that naturally divide faster than other cells. Scientists at the time wondered if mustard gas could be used in the treatment of cancer cells that also divide faster than normal cells in the human body.

The first versions of chemotherapy drugs were called “nitrogen mustards.” In 1942, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center secretly began treating breast cancer with these nitrogen mustards. No one was cured.

Chemotherapy trials were also conducted at Yale University around 1943 where 160 patients were treated. Again, no one was cured. But, since chemotherapy shrank the tumors, researchers were so excited that they proclaimed the chemotherapy trials to be a “success.”

Chemo Destroys Healthy Cells Along With Cancer Cells

Gradually, synthetic versions of the nitrogen mustards were developed, but they all had one common trait… they are unable to differentiate between “healthy” cells and “cancerous” cells and they kill everything.

All the healthy cells (bone marrow, immune cells) that are naturally fast dividing are mowed down as surely as the fast-dividing cancer cells.

As an analogy, suppose you were to tell an exterminator that you have a termite infestation in your home. The exterminator is a professional whose advice you trust. Image he tells you that the best course of action would be to use a chemical which is known to eat away at both the wood and foundation of homes, as well as cause irreparable damage to furniture and windows. Would you still go ahead with it?

Common Side Effects of Chemotherapy

The repercussions of chemotherapy on the human body are intense. Some people call them “side effects,” but the truth is they’re “direct effects.” [Sharpstuff! ;) ]

Cognition is affected during chemotherapy. Many patients who have undergone this modality refer to it as “chemo brain” – difficulty with memory, basic thought processes, coordination, and mood.

Peripheral neuropathy is tingling in the extremities and may be accompanied by general fatigue or weakness, shakiness, numbness, or pain. These symptoms also affect basic balance, reflexes, and coordination.

Xerostomia is extremely dry mouth and can lead to sores in the soft tissues, difficulty swallowing, and make you more prone to bleeding. Patients report that taste is also affected.

Nausea is one of the most common direct effects of chemotherapy.

Dehydration as a result of vomiting or diarrhea is a concern and drinking plenty of water is critical during chemotherapy treatment. Adequate hydration may ease symptoms of xerostomia and protect your kidneys (working hard to flush the chemo toxins from your body) as well.

Anemia occurs when your body can’t make enough red blood cells. Red blood cells carry the oxygen to your tissues and lack of necessary oxygen results in fatigue, dizziness, inability to concentrate, feelings of being cold, and overall weakness.

Neutropenia is what happens when your body doesn’t have enough white blood cells – the backbone of your immune system. This leaves you more susceptible to infection and reduces their ability to fight the residual cancer.

Thrombocytopenia is caused by a low platelet count. You need platelets for blood clotting and not enough means you are more likely to bruise or bleed. This can cause issues with your menstruation, cause bleeding in your digestive tract that manifests in vomit or stools, and cause you to have nosebleeds.

Cardiomyopathy is a weakening of the heart muscle. This may cause irregular heartbeat (arrhythmia) which can increase your risk of a heart event.

Alopecia will affect all the hair on your body and usually occurs quickly when this treatment is begun. Within several weeks after the conclusion of chemotherapy the hair begins to grow back. Fingernails and toenails may change as well, either turning colors or becoming very brittle.

Skin Sensitivity is also common and patients report symptoms of irritation, itchiness, rashes, dryness, and burning more easily in the sun.

Infertility in both men and women can occur with chemotherapy, affecting hormones and sperm count. It may also wreak havoc on menstrual cycles, impact overall sex drive, and cause extreme vaginal dryness. Sometimes it even triggers the onset of menopause.

Osteoporosis is the loss of bone mass. As you age, this is a natural occurrence (women are most at risk). Chemotherapy speeds up the process by lowering estrogen levels rapidly and weakening bone marrow.

As you can see, the impact of chemotherapy on the body can be brutal. It lays waste to your immune system, which is your first line of defense against cancer.

As a result, another direct effect of chemotherapy is… ironically… cancer. Yeah, it’s printed right on the chemo drug warning labels (in small print, of course). For instance, Doxorubicin may increase your risk for developing leukemia (cancer of the white blood cells), especially when it is combined with other chemotherapy drugs and radiation. Cyclophosphamide increases the risk of bladder cancer and ovarian cancer. And the list goes on and on…

If you go into a cancer treatment clinic with one type of cancer, and you allow yourself to be injected with chemotherapy, frequently a second type of cancer develops as a result. Your oncologist will often claim to have “successfully” treated your first cancer even while you develop a second or third cancer directly caused by the chemo used to treat the original cancer.

According to a study conducted by the Department of Radiation Oncology at Northern Sydney Cancer Centre and published in the December 2004 issue of Clinical Oncology, the actual impact of chemotherapy on a 5-year survival in American adults is a paltry 2.1%. (See the chart below.)


Sadly, the truth is that many people who “die from cancer” really die from the conventional treatments long before they would have actually died from the cancer itself. To put it plainly, the treatment kills them before the cancer kills them. As a matter of fact, the chemotherapy drug 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is sometimes referred to by doctors as “5 feet under” because of its deadly side effects. Not to mention that a team of researchers at the University of Rochester Medical Center (URMC) and Harvard Medical School have linked 5-FU to a progressing collapse of populations of stem cells and their progeny in the central nervous system.

For most adult cancers, the typical best case scenario is that the “Big 3” buys a little time. In a worst case scenario, you will die from the treatment rather than the disease.

Natural, Non-toxic Treatments for Cancer

There are solutions to treating cancer naturally that involve more than just doing nothing. Here at The Truth About Cancer, we are dedicated to bringing you the latest and most up-to-date information about natural, non-toxic treatments for cancer. Herbal remedies, B-17, hyperthermia, hemp, bio-oxidative therapies, frequency machines, and detoxification are just a few non-toxic treatments that are being successfully used by thousands of people across the globe to treat their cancer.

https://thetruthaboutcancer.com/the-truth-about-chemo/


--

Prepare for Globalist Church of Modern Medicine
MAY 11, 2015

In the process of providing alternative healthcare services to the public, one of the hardest areas to overcome is the patient’s psychology in his relation to mainstream medicine. When you try to tell someone that vaccines and chemo are being avoided even by doctors who administer them, they would tell you that doctors are not capable of lying, but you are.

Anybody who wears a uniform, robe or anything that signifies they belong to a club that speaks a complex language and meet in exclusive elaborate gatherings with their peers, where they renew their allegiance to professional medical code and ethics; plan and agree to any updates and revisions of their established protocols. These exclusive gatherings are always sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry.

In short, the medical priesthood of professional doctors and Big Pharma work as one coherent church. We, the faithful, are at their mercy.

http://myeclinik.com/prepare-for-globalist-church-of-modern-medicine/



When (not if) a critical mass of the faithful finally does away with its programmed/ingrained fear and ignorance these witchdoctors will rightly be relegated to the bowels of history.


“We have not lost faith, but we have transferred it from God to the medical profession.”—GB Shaw
ICfreely
Member
 
Posts: 757
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: Engineering 'disease'

Unread postby ICfreely on Wed Apr 27, 2016 6:07 am

The death of an emperor – Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi and his political cancer

Ardavan Khoshnood, Arvin Khoshnood

Received 18 July 2015; revised 1 November 2015; accepted 5 November 2015 - Alexandria Journal of Medicine


On noticing a swelling in the left upper abdomen on April 9, 1974, the Shah called upon his personal physician, Dr. Ayadi who diagnosed the Shah with a splenomegaly.

Later, in April,11 the Shah met Fellinger, and, according to the historian Andrew Cooper,18 the Shah was informed that he had lymphoma.

On September 9, 1974, however, the Shah again complained of splenomegaly.9 Accompanied by Bernard and Milliez, Flandrin arrived in Tehran on September 18, 1974, and started to treat the Shah with 6 mg of the chemotherapy medicine Chlorambucil.

For unknown reasons, however, the Shah was only treated for one week.

The third time the French physicians met the Shah was in Zurich, on January 18, 1975. The Shah still had a splenomegaly; consequently, the dosage of the Chlorambucil was increased.

In his next visit during February 1976, the Shah was again found to have splenomegaly and an abnormal blood count, making the physicians disturbed and worried. It was then revealed that the Shah’s valet [was the groundskeeper busy?], having no idea that the containers labeled Quinercil, were in fact Chlorambucil, had ordered the wrong medication, and as a result the Shah used Quinercil for a period, explaining why his condition had worsened.

In April 1976 treatment with Chlorambucil recommenced, and five months later the Shah’s blood count was normalized.

Late January, 1979 Shortly after arrival, the Shah found a lymph node above his clavicle, which, after aspiration by Flandrin,8 showed large cell lymphoma. Chlorambucil proved to be ineffective [too toxic] so a treatment with [a medly of other toxins like] Vincristine, Procarbazine, Nitrogen mustard and Prednisone was implemented.

June, 1979 The Shah’s chemotherapy dosage was raised, but he developed a fever and jaundice. The Mexican doctors, not knowing about the Shah’s cancer, diagnosed the Shah with hepatitis and malaria, though this was soon ruled out and the Shah instead diagnosed with an obstructive jaundice.


The surgery was performed on the October 24 with a cholecystectomy and excision of a cervical lymph node. Additionally, several gallstones were removed. When the surgery was underway, Coleman was informed and asked Thorbjarnarson to also remove the spleen, but Thorbjarnarson did not feel right performing an elective surgery while performing an urgent cholecystectomy.

The histopathology of the removed cervical node showed malignant lymphoma, and the Shah was diagnosed with histiocytic lymphosarcoma, now called large cell lymphoma.

…the first of the Shah’s ten radiation treatments began on November 9 by Chief Radiation Therapist, Dr. Florence Chu. As the radiation therapy came to an end on the November 27.

Three days after the Shah’s arrival in Cairo, DeBakey and his six-member team arrived, and, on the March 28, 1980, at 8 pm, the Shah’s splenectomy began. The spleen weighed close to 2000 g and was riddled with tumorous nodules; thus, a liver biopsy was taken, which later showed signs of multiple metastases. 8 According to DeBakey, the surgery was successful,32 and later events, however, would prove just the opposite. Three days after the surgery the Shah complained of low posterior left thoracic pain, making Flandrin and the Egyptian surgeon Dr. Fouad Nour, suspect a subphrenic abscess, which DeBakey’s Australian assistant dismissed.8

This melting pot of physicians resulted in chaos. Flandrin kept insisting that Shah was developing a subphrenic abscess, Coleman believed that the Shah’s symptoms were due to salmonellosis and DeBakey, to Flandrins surprise, insisted that the Shahs deterioration is because of the chemotherapy [ :o ], the dosage of which he reduced [ :wacko: ].

On June 30, the Shah was once again under the knife. Flandrin states: ‘‘Using Fagniez’s technique, he had made a limited left subcostal incision to proceed directly to where the pus had collected. . . . Fagniez and the Egyptian surgeons were all beaming. They were in the process of draining a liter and a half of pus and necrosed pancreas debris.”8

On the night of July 26, 1980, the Shah’s condition deteriorated and he slipped into a coma. Flandrin and Fagniez diagnosed a massive internal hemorrhage and resuscitation was started. It was Ramadan; consequently, the Egyptian physicians had left to break their fast.

At 9.45 am on the morning on July 27, 1980, the Shah finally lost his long battle with cancer. The Queen8 states: ‘‘The king breathed quickly twice, then drew in a long breath and stopped. It was over.” From under the Shah’s pillow the Queen withdrew a little bag containing soil from Iran, the country he had reigned over for 37 years.

http://ac.els-cdn.com/S2090506815000822/1-s2.0-S2090506815000822-main.pdf?_tid=23007b32-0c36-11e6-9500-00000aab0f6b&acdnat=1461733913_a05a14fe7735578ad2a7691988043eed



At 9.45 am on the morning on July 27, 1980, the Shah finally lost his long battle with allopathic (cut-burn-poison) ‘cancer treatment.’ Those who place blind faith in the medical establishment will suffer similar consequences. Those who heed the words of Sharpstuff will live to thank him. It’s that simple.
ICfreely
Member
 
Posts: 757
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: Engineering 'disease'

Unread postby Equivoque on Tue May 03, 2016 8:56 pm

I'd appreciate your (or anyone else's) thoughts on the "Engineering 'disease'" thread. Have you found it useful/empowering in any way? Has it changed your outlook on healthcare? Do you have any questions? Anything you'd like me to clarify? Should I focus more on allopatic abuse or holistic healing? There's a million ways I can go with it...
This quote is taken from this post : http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=485&start=3690#p2400011.
ICfreely, since you asked for it, I will answer some of your questions. But first, let me thank you for the e-books you linked here. I didn't read them yet, I only gave a glance at some of them, and I spend some time reading "Nutrition and Physical Degeneration: A Comparison of Primitive and Modern Diets and Their Effects", which is, in my opinion, very self-explaining on the reasons why we should follow such a so-called "primitive" diet. However, I am concerned with the emphase on dairies, which are nowadays linked to osteoporosis. Also, I'm pretty sure that you have noticed the on-going fight towards diets including gluten, coming with some sort of cereals.
That's why I would like to know what are your takes concerning our alimentation, and more especially the "6 group foods" that we are supposed to consume on a daily basis. (my opinion is that dairy and cereal groups are scams, both leading to diseases, hence the need for medications)

sharpstuff, since you seem to spit on the whole cancer treatment paradigm, it would be wise to present things that actually work against cancer, don't you think ? Since these things actually exist but aren't presented to the public for obvious "let's make money" reasons, i'm looking forward to your next explanation.
Equivoque
Member
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 9:04 pm

Re: Engineering 'disease'

Unread postby ICfreely on Wed May 04, 2016 10:00 am

Dear Equivoque,

Thanks for the feedback.

Equivoque wrote:However, I am concerned with the emphase on dairies, which are nowadays linked to osteoporosis.



Milk indeed does a body good. Mother’s milk, that is (and only for the first two years of life). That’s it!

Simply put, pasteurized/homogenized milk (with trace amounts of antibiotics, vaccines, etc.) is one of the worst beverages one can consume.


Equivoque wrote:Also, I'm pretty sure that you have noticed the on-going fight towards diets including gluten, coming with some sort of cereals.



Absolutely! John Harvey Kellogg did for milk what Edward Bernays did for bacon.


When he became a physician Dr. Kellogg determined to devote himself to the problems of health, and after taking over the sanitarium he put into effect his own ideas. Soon he had developed the sanitarium to an unprecedented degree, and he launched the business of manufacturing health foods. He gained recognition as the originator of health foods and coffee and tea substitutes, ideas which led to the establishment of huge cereal companies besides his own, in which his brother, W. K. Kellogg, produced the cornflakes he invented. His name became a household word.
http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/bday/0226.html



Here’s a clip of Bernays speaking on his role in the establishment of bacon & eggs as the ‘all American breakfast’:

Edward L. Bernays Beech-Nut Packing Co

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vFz_FgGvJI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vFz_FgGvJI


Equivoque wrote:That's why I would like to know what are your takes concerning our alimentation, and more especially the "6 group foods" that we are supposed to consume on a daily basis. (my opinion is that dairy and cereal groups are scams, both leading to diseases, hence the need for medications)



I call it the ‘Foo(le)d Pyramid Scheme.’ For starters, the "6 group foods" that we are supposed to consume on a daily basis are based on the Caloric theory.


Caloric theory

The caloric theory is an obsolete scientific theory that heat consists of a self-repellent fluid called caloric that flows from hotter bodies to colder bodies. Caloric was also thought of as a weightless gas that could pass in and out of pores in solids and liquids. The "caloric theory" was superseded by the mid-19th century in favor of the mechanical theory of heat, but nevertheless persisted in some scientific literature -- particularly in more popular treatments -- until the end of the 19th century.[1]

Early history
There is one version of the caloric theory that was introduced by Antoine Lavoisier. Lavoisier developed the explanation of combustion in terms of oxygen in the 1770s. In his paper "Réflexions sur le phlogistique" (1783), Lavoisier argued that phlogiston theory was inconsistent with his experimental results, and proposed a 'subtle fluid' called caloric as the substance of heat.[2] According to this theory, the quantity of this substance is constant throughout the universe,[citation needed] and it flows from warmer to colder bodies. Indeed, Lavoisier was one of the first to use a calorimeter to measure the heat changes during chemical reaction.

In the 1780s, some believed that cold was a fluid, "frigoric". Pierre Prévost argued that cold was simply a lack of caloric.

Since heat was a material substance in caloric theory, and therefore could neither be created nor destroyed, conservation of heat was a central assumption.[3]

The introduction of the caloric theory was also influenced by the experiments of Joseph Black related to the thermal properties of materials. Besides the caloric theory, another theory existed in the late eighteenth century that could explain the phenomenon of heat: the kinetic theory. The two theories were considered to be equivalent at the time, but kinetic theory was the more modern one, as it used a few ideas from atomic theory and could explain both combustion and calorimetry.

Successes
However, one of the greatest confirmations of the caloric theory was Pierre-Simon Laplace's theoretical correction of Sir Isaac Newton’s calculation of the speed of sound. Newton had assumed an isothermal process, while Laplace, a calorist, treated it as adiabatic.[4] This addition not only substantially corrected the theoretical prediction of the speed of sound, but also continued to make even more accurate predictions for almost a century afterward, even as measurements of the index became more precise.

Later developments
In later combination with the law of energy conservation, the caloric theory still shows a very valuable physical insight into some aspects of heat. For example, the emergence of Laplace's equation and Poisson's equation in the problems of spatial distribution of heat and temperature. The caloric theory is now also remembered for the naming of the calorie.[citation needed]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caloric_theory



I love it when my calorie-counting health-nut friends tell me, “Geez Louise, IC! Why are you so obsessed with the science gods? What are you trying to prove anyway?”

Anyhow, back to the pyramid…


USDA’s 2005 MyPyramid
The difference between the 1992 USDA Food Guide Pyramid and the 2005 version released by the USDA as MyPyramid was now the pyramid was no longer attempting to delineate a perception of “better or worse foods” by where they appeared in succession from the bottom to the top of the new pyramid, but instead they were now a scattered, unidentified rainbow of colors from the left-hand side of the pyramid to its right-hand side.

Each color of the rainbow was supposed to be identified as a specific food group, but unless you visited the MyPyramid.gov website (now defunct), or learned and memorized the designated colors as being the foods they were intended to represent, you were left out in the dark with this rainbow.

[url]https://www.hivehealthmedia.com/food-guide-pyramid-mypyramid-and-myplate-useful-at-all-for-nutrition/2/[/url]



I truly pity people who rely on (fill in the blank).gov for helpful health information.


MyPyramid recommends that you should eat a variety of fruits, but go easy on the fruit juice. Chose [sic] fresh, frozen, canned or dried fruit.

http://www.foodpyramid.com/mypyramid/



Fresh, frozen, canned or dried – there is no good or bad!

Or so they’d have you believe…

Health Through Nutrition By Dr. Joel Robbins

The following is the hierarchy of food preparation starting at the top with no preparation leaving the food with its full
nutrient content, ending at the bottom with the most processing, rendering the food dead and useless to the body -
little or no nutrient value retained:

RAW and WHOLE
JUICED and consumed immediately once the skin of fruits or vegetables is broken, oxygen combines with the enzymes and kills them (this process is called "oxidation")

DEHYDRATED or DRIED
loses 2-5% of nutrient value dried without chemicals or additives commercial brands of dried fruit contain sulfur dioxide; exception: raisins)

FROZEN
freshly picked and frozen immediately loses 5-30% of nutrient value

STEAMED
loses 15 - 60% of nutrient value steamed means the green bean is still a bit crispy (if it's limp, its cooked)

COOKED
baked, broiled, boiled, grilled, steamed too long, home canned the green bean is limp loses 40 -100% of nutrient value, depending on how long it is cooked

COOKED LEFTOVERS MICRO WAVED
Loses 90 - 99% of nutrient value

COMMERCIALLY CANNED FOODS-- FRIED FOODS-- FOODS with ADDITIVES
These not only lose 100% of their nutrient value, but have toxins added to them


http://healmarketplace.com/pdf_files/Health-Through-Nutrition.pdf



Commercially canned foods are the FDA’s raison d'être!

I’ll stop here for now but will definitely elaborate on the food pyramid in future posts.
ICfreely
Member
 
Posts: 757
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: Engineering 'disease'

Unread postby arc300 on Wed May 04, 2016 10:07 am

Equivoque wrote: However, I am concerned with the emphase on dairies, which are nowadays linked to osteoporosis.


If you are talking about today's pasteurised, homogenised, fat-reduced, vitamin-enriched sorry-arsed excuse for milk, then you are perfectly right to be concerned with the emphasis on dairy. However, when someone like Weston Price talks about dairy, you can be sure he is talking about unmolested (especially by heat) raw milk, or fermented products made from that milk.

So, is raw milk consumption beneficial? I don't know because milk hasn't been part of my diet for 25 years, but, through personal experience, I know that the general principles of Price's "primitive" dietary advice are sound and, if I could get it, I wouldn't hesitate to include raw milk in my diet for long enough to determine whether it was beneficial for me or not.
arc300
Member
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 10:13 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General World Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests