View Full Version : Πλεομορφισμός vs Μονομορφισμός
ή Παστέρ vs Μπωσάμ (ο δεύτερος επιβεβαιώθηκε από πολλούς με γνωστότερο τον Enderlein)
http://www.rawpaleodiet.org/pleomorphism-1.html
Pleomorphism is basically the concept that cells, and especially one-celled microorganisms, can change form under certain conditions to cells of another type. For example an example of pleomorphism in human cells might be the morphing of skin cells to connective tissue cells, or of blood cells to bone tissue. In the field of microbiology, the concept primarily implies that bacteria of one species might change to bactera of another species under certain conditions. For example, this theory might allow that under certain environmental conditions, a typhoid bacillus could morph into a staphylococcus bacteria.
In the alternative healing world, and on the fringes of conventional mainstream science, there are those who feel that pleomorphism of mircoorganisms is widespread, and that such pleomorphism is how nature performs various tasks of toxin cleanup and tissue removal in the human body. In effect, this theory states that bacteria simply change to whatever form is most handily needed in the body, based upon cues from the body itself. Indeed, in the many parallel theories of biological terrain assessment and adjustment, the underlying assumption is that "infection" by microorganism really indicates nothing more than imbalances in the inner biochemical terrain of the body, and that if the inner terrain of the body is allowed to normalize, then the "infectious organisms" will cese their inflammatory activity, as their presence is no longer needed, as determined by the interior milieu.
In these models, bacteria and other microogranism are not seen as dangerous, invasive or pathogenic, nor infectious, but rather as simply responding to cues from the body that cleanup is needed. In other words, they are seen as performing simply necessary cleanup functions in response to cues from the local body tissues. So, in these models, bacteria are not seen as pathogenic or aggressive, but rather, inner biological terrain, the interior mileiu of the body, is seen as the chief determinant of the presence or absence of certain "infectious" processes. Therefore, in these particular pleomorphic models, the interior milieu, or inner terrain, is seen as having primacy in determining presence or absence of "diseases" due to microorganisms. Thus, it would make sense that one would treat an infectious illness by simply adjusting the inner terrain of the body to allow it to become more healthful, thus eliminating the need for the presence of the "infectious" organisms. Conversely, any attempt to treat an infectious illness with antibiotics (or hydrogen peroxide, ozone or colloidal silver, all of which are favorite armamentaria in the alternative healing world) or other "aggressive" means would be seen in most cases as short-sighted and merely cosmetic, as the practitioner would be attempting to treat a symptom of a deep imbalance, rather than addressing the deep imbalance. Further, these theories would suggest that most, if not all, antibiotics and other aggressive antimicrobial means would actually further imbalance and disrupt the inner terrain, thus eventually leading to further degeneration.
http://explorepub.com/articles/enderlein3.html
Today's mainstream medicine is governed by consent of opinions rather than hard scientific evidence. This is the reason why false and fraudulent teachings can survive even though the truth has been known for a long time. There are basically three dogmas that are still adhered to:
The first and probably most disastrous error originates from Ferdinand Cohn, who in 1870 proclaimed that all microbes and bacteria have only one form (Monomorphism). This was also taught by Louis Pasteur. This teaching was opposed to the teaching of Antoine Bechamp who, roughly at the same time, could demonstrate that microbes can alter their form and appear as different germs (pleomorphism). Enderlein basically confirmed this and many other researchers after him.
All microbes that permanently live in our organism go through the same stages of their development. According to Enderlein they are as follows: Colloid -- microbe (primitive phrase), bacteria (middle phase), fungus (end phase). Royal Rife could show that with increased toxicity the transformation goes into non-filterable forms, not visible with ordinary light microscopes (viruses). This also disproves Pasteur's infection theory as the "pathogenic bacteria" do not have to come from outside and in fact hardly ever do. The state of development depends on the medium the germ lives in:
Primitive phases live in a strong alkaline pH
Bacterial phases live in mild alkaline pH
Fungal forms live in a medium acid pH
Viral forms live in a strong acid pH
In order to keep the right environment, every microbe produces an organic acid:
Mucor racemosus -- lactic acid,
Aspergillus niger -- citric acid.
The pathogenity of a particular germ lies only in one phase of its development. Our "constant tenants" are the only exemption where all but the very early stages are pathogenic. Only what Enderlein termed protit and chondrite are completely avirulent and play an important regulatory role in reducing higher virulent forms to primitive forms by copulating with them.
Those phases can be easily seen in living blood under the microscope, but only in "darkfield" as the small primitive forms are invisible in "brightfield."
Even Louis Pasteur said in the last minutes of his life: "Bernard is right; it is the soil and not the germ, that makes the plant grow."
The second major error originates from William Harvey who stated in 1651 (!!) that the cell is the smallest unit of life. This statement can be easily understood considering the very limited magnification and resolution of the microscopes of his time. Enderlein demonstrated and published in 1921 and 1925 that the smallest unit of life is not the cell but the protit, named microzyma by Bechamp and somatid by Gaston Naessens.
The third error came again from Pasteur who claimed that the blood is sterile, a piece of nonsense still taught by modern bacteriologists. A look through a high power darkfield microscope quickly disproves this theory (provided one wants to see). Pasteur had the talent of teaching the biggest nonsense and of making people believe it. It is now well known that he even falsified the results of his research when it did not show the results he wanted. He was also quite ready to plagiarize the results of others. The vaccination fraud is based on his manipulated "research". Whole generations of researchers followed his example. Modern "scientific medicine" became a collection of long disproven theories (blood clot and obstruction theory of coronary heart disease, germ theory and infection theory, single cell theory of cancer, etc.).
rawpaleodiet.org
Raw Paleolithic Diets
Welcome to the Raw Paleolithic Diet Website!
(rawpaleodiet.org)
The primary purpose of this site is to provide information, articles and links on largely-raw traditional diets which include raw animal products along with raw plant (vegetation) products. Such diets have been repeatedly implicated in helping people (and animals) to achieve:
rapid recovery from chronic disease
rapid recovery from illness
greater health and vitality
greater stamina and robustness
normalization of body weight (gain for those underweight, loss for those overweight)
My Mission in Presenting This Site
My mission in presenting this site (it has been on the air since about 10/2000) is to offer an educational and balanced, decidedly non-missionary introduction to Paleolithic (so-called "caveman") diets in general, and especially to the largely-raw versions of these diets. You will find no fanaticism, no rigidity, no over-zealousness on these pages, and no judgements of people or diets which do not conform the diets presented here, although you may find some ample -- and sometimes silly or crazy -- humor. Please enjoy this site; feel free to explore it fully! I firmly believe that there is no place for fanaticism, fundamentalism, sanctimoniousness or rigidity in diet or lifestyle. While I personally choose to eat a largely-raw Paleolithic diet, I willingly and lovingly allow my fellow humans the freedom to pick and choose whatever diet and lifestyle works for them.
My background? I have had a number of careers over my lifetime. Among many other things, I have broad and deep Master's degree in health and wellness research (health sciences), and a wide background in "alternative" nutrition and "alternative" healing. To see a more complete " About the Author" page , including my resumes, please click here . To contact the author, please click here .
sincerely,
Vinny, Frederick, Maryland, USA. last updated November 13, 2002.
http://explorepub.com
Explore Publications is devoted to putting in front of the discriminating reader, quality reliable information from the cutting edge of Alternative and Holistic Medicine, Nutritional Therapies, Energy Medicine, Homeopathy and Physics. Explore Journal is published for the Medical Profession, Scientists, and other serious researchers who are interested in these areas. This site gives a glimpse into the journal’s contents on an ongoing basis.
Το παραπανω ποστ προς γνωση και συμμορφωση των συνηθη υποπτω ν που κανουν τον κοπο να απαντουν με επιχειρηματα [και τους ευχαριστω γι'αυτο], αλλα δειτε ποσο πιο απλο ειναι με χρηση λινκ.
Kain, εμπνευσμενο!!!
σε επιστημονικές θεωρίες απαντάς με απόψεις σεχτών;
σε επιστημονικές θεωρίες απαντάς με απόψεις σεχτών;
:rofl:
Μόλις έβαλες τρικλοποδιά στον εαυτό σου.
σε επιστημονικές θεωρίες απαντάς με απόψεις σεχτών;
:rofl:
Μόλις έβαλες τρικλοποδιά στον εαυτό σου.
η ωμοφαγία, ο πρωτογονισμός, κλπ είναι σέχτες, τα παραπάνω είναι επιστημονικές θεωρίες ΑΛΛΟΥ ΠΑΡΑΔΕΙΓΜΑΤΟΣ, που ακόμα κάποιοι τις επεξεργάζονται και ίσως τώρα με τα φαινόμενα της συμβίωσης που παρατηρούνται παντού να τις επαναφέρουν στο προσκήνιο.
Πάντως ταιριάζουν πολύ καλά σαν ερμηνείες πολλών εναλλακτικών προσεγγίσεων της υγείας. Και το λένε, ότι οι συγκεκριμένες παρατηρήσεις γίνονται σε φρέσκο ΖΩΝΤΑΝΟ αίμα και σε σκοτειν΄΄ο πεδίο στο μικροσκόπιο.
Δες λίγο τα urls από τα οποία παρέθεσες την εναλλακτική επιστήμη. Μετά δες λίγο και τα urls των σεχτών που παρέθεσε ο Kain. Αφού καταλάβεις την γκάφα σου μπάλωσέ τα όπως μπορείς πριν πλακώσουν οι άλλοι..
Δες λίγο τα urls από τα οποία παρέθεσες την εναλλακτική επιστήμη. Μετά δες λίγο και τα urls των σεχτών που παρέθεσε ο Kain. Αφού καταλάβεις την γκάφα σου μπάλωσέ τα όπως μπορείς πριν πλακώσουν οι άλλοι..
επαναλαμβάνω ότι το περιεχόμενο κοιτάς και όχι την προέλευση. Δηλαδή άμα κάποια νιου έητζ σέχτα βάλει άρθρο για την κβαντομηχανική αυτό σημαίνει ότι η κβαντομηχανική είναι γτπ; Εγώ έβαλα τυχαία κάποια που παρουσιάζουν ικανοποιητικά αυτή τη θεωρία.
Δες λίγο τα urls από τα οποία παρέθεσες την εναλλακτική επιστήμη. Μετά δες λίγο και τα urls των σεχτών που παρέθεσε ο Kain. Αφού καταλάβεις την γκάφα σου μπάλωσέ τα όπως μπορείς πριν πλακώσουν οι άλλοι..
επαναλαμβάνω ότι το περιεχόμενο κοιτάς και όχι την προέλευση. Δηλαδή άμα κάποια νιου έητζ σέχτα βάλει άρθρο για την κβαντομηχανική αυτό σημαίνει ότι η κβαντομηχανική είναι γτπ; Εγώ έβαλα τυχαία κάποια που παρουσιάζουν ικανοποιητικά αυτή τη θεωρία.
Saved :thumbsup:
Γιατί όμως δεν έβαλες urls από σοβαρές πηγές τότε που θα την παρουσιάζουν και πιο αξιόπιστα; Δε βρήκες; Ή μήπως δεν υπάρχουν;
Δες λίγο τα urls από τα οποία παρέθεσες την εναλλακτική επιστήμη. Μετά δες λίγο και τα urls των σεχτών που παρέθεσε ο Kain. Αφού καταλάβεις την γκάφα σου μπάλωσέ τα όπως μπορείς πριν πλακώσουν οι άλλοι..
επαναλαμβάνω ότι το περιεχόμενο κοιτάς και όχι την προέλευση. Δηλαδή άμα κάποια νιου έητζ σέχτα βάλει άρθρο για την κβαντομηχανική αυτό σημαίνει ότι η κβαντομηχανική είναι γτπ; Εγώ έβαλα τυχαία κάποια που παρουσιάζουν ικανοποιητικά αυτή τη θεωρία.
Saved :thumbsup:
Γιατί όμως δεν έβαλες urls από σοβαρές πηγές τότε που θα την παρουσιάζουν και πιο αξιόπιστα; Δε βρήκες; Ή μήπως δεν υπάρχουν;
εφόσον δεν ασχολείται η συμβατική επιστήμη με αυτές είναι απίθανο να υπάρχει σε αποδεκτό από εσένα σάιτ. Αλλά και όταν έβαζα τέτοια λινκ πάλι την άκουγα.
Το ότι ασχολήθηκαν τόσοι πολλοί με αυτό το θέμα και ακόμα ασχολούνται αυτό δεν έχει καμία αξία; Δεν αποδείχθηκαν λάθος οι παρατηρήσεις ή θεωρίες τους, όπως έγινε με παλιότερες (πχ φλογιστό, καλοριφίκ, κλπ) απλώς αγνοήθηκαν
από wiki
In the first decades of the 20th century, the term was used to refer to the supposed ability of bacteria to change shape dramatically or to exist in a number of extreme morphological (changing) forms. This claim sparked a controversy among the microbiologists and split them into two schools: the monomorphists, who opposed the claim, and the pleomorphists. The monomorphists, supported by Rudolf Virchow, Ferdinand Cohn, and Robert Koch, won the debate. It is now almost universally believed that each bacterial cell is derived from a previously existing cell of practically the same size and shape
Darkling
16-03-2006, 22:56
ποσο πιο ρεζιλι?
Οχι ολοκληρωτικα saved.
Και σε μια Λιακοπουλιαδα μπορει να αναφερθουν καποια μεμονωμενα σωστα, η να γινει αναφορα σε κατι που γενικοτερα χαιρει εκτιμησης και σεβασμου.
Οταν ψαχνεις ομως σε σκατα, ειναι δυσκολο να βρεις κατι που δεν εχει βρωμισει.
Οποτε το να αραδιαζεις λινκς, χωρις τουλαχιστον να ξεχωριζεις τι εσυ πρωτα-πρωτα θεωρεις σωστο και τι οχι, και χωρις να εκφραζεις εστω περιληπτικα/περιεκτικα το δικο σου συμπερασμα[ενω παραλληλα απαιτεις απο ολους τους αλλους να διαβασουν ο,τι παραθετεις με προσοχη και να εκφερουν αποψη δικη τους] ειναι τουλαχιστον αναγωγο, αν οχι ανεντιμο.
Εξαλλου οι πηγες που χρησιμοποιουμε, δινουνε και ενα στιγμα, που καλο ειναι να γνωριζουμε, παρ'αυτα.
Οχι ολοκληρωτικα saved.
Και σε μια Λιακοπουλιαδα μπορει να αναφερθουν καποια μεμονωμενα σωστα, η να γινει αναφορα σε κατι που γενικοτερα χαιρει εκτιμησης και σεβασμου.
Οταν ψαχνεις ομως σε σκατα, ειναι δυσκολο να βρεις κατι που δεν εχει βρωμισει.
Οποτε το να αραδιαζεις λινκς, χωρις τουλαχιστον να ξεχωριζεις τι εσυ πρωτα-πρωτα θεωρεις σωστο και τι οχι, και χωρις να εκφραζεις εστω περιληπτικα/περιεκτικα το δικο σου συμπερασμα[ενω παραλληλα απο ολους τους αλλους να διαβασουν ο,τι παραθετεις με προσοχη και να εκφερουν αποψη δικη τους] ειναι τουλαχιστον αναγωγο, αν οχι ανεντιμο.
δεν έχω χρόνο για ανάπτυξη, παρόλα αυτά κάτι έχω κάνει.
επίσης από μεγάλα άρθρα βάζω τα πιό περιεκτικά αποσπάσματα. Αλλωστε είναι θέμα που λίγο το κατέχω για να γράψω κατεβατά.
Ισως η πιό πλήρης, αλλά αρκετά στιρφνή από όρους περιγραφή αυτών των θεωριών βρισκεται στο σάιτ euroamerican health και ένα πιό προσιτό κείμενο είναι αυτό:
http://www.euroamericanhealth.com/pleo.html
freezing_moon
16-03-2006, 23:51
Making yourself vomit after eating something you 'shouldn't haven eaten', is not bulimia, just because you did it. In the process, it does rid the body of the 'dietary indiscretion' along with, excess acid.
kali fasi, pa na valw daxtylo.
http://www.euroamericanhealth.com
A "New" Biology
Bacteria are being found
in the diseased tissues
of all degenerative
diseases...
Where do these organisms come from?
The answer to this question has been known for 150 years.
Mycoplasma in heart disease,
Hyliobacter in stomach ulcers, etc.
The blood is not sterile.
Louis Pasteur was wrong! His idea of the bacterial cause of disease was wrong!
Cancers are full of microorganisms.
For the practice of medicine, the implication of these concepts is enormous.
Medicines for these conditions are now available in this country.
* * *
Eclectic Medicine is Synthesis of Options
Knowledge of options is freedom of choice
We were all taught pharmaceutical medicine, patients and doctors alike. After practicing such medicine for thirty years I KNOW it is dangerous (side effects) and that basically it does not work. Prescription drugs treat the symptoms of chronic disease, not the causes. Drugs do not cure high blood pressure, arthritis, cancer...they may control the symptoms of such diseases but no one is cured. You can cut out or radiate a cancerous tumor but the cause still remains.
Yet, the causes of such diseases and ways to eliminate these causes (by definition this does not mean to treat) have been known for more than 150 years. Basically, it is just common sense.
WHY DOES 'MODERN' SCIENCE NOT KNOW THIS?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHAT THIS WEB SITE IS ABOUT
This web site is not about diagnosis or treatment, it is about causes.
Ignorance is Knowledge divided.
The Knowledge of Health has been divided into many 'specialties'. At this time there are basically two such divisions, each competing for their share of the market place. These are;
Modern allopathic, prescription drugs and,
So-called alternative medicine; isopathic medicine, naturopathy, holistic medicine et al.
Alternative medicine, as sold in industrialized countries, is no different than modern, allopathic, prescription drugs.
To take an herb for a migraine headache is no different than taking an aspirin for the same; you are treating a symptom, not dealing with causes. Neither has cured anything.
Instead, you use the best of all forms of medicine together (herbal, homeopathic, isopathic, chiropractic, allopathic et al.); in a sequential and logical manner, individualized for every patient.
Poso poli mporeite na to kourasete?
rotaei o koinos thnitos,alla den lambanei kammia apantisi ...
:cry:
κάιν δεν βλέπω τίποτα το περίεργο σε αυτά που πόσταρες πέρα αό την διαφοροποίηση από την συμβατική μικροβιολογία, θα περίμενα να εντοπίσεις άλλα πιό εξωφρενικά που και εγώ δεν τα καταλαβαίνω.
Dr. Death
17-03-2006, 10:39
κάιν δεν βλέπω τίποτα το περίεργο σε αυτά που πόσταρες πέρα αό την διαφοροποίηση από την συμβατική μικροβιολογία, θα περίμενα να εντοπίσεις άλλα πιό εξωφρενικά που και εγώ δεν τα καταλαβαίνω.
h "symbatikh mikrobiologia" (na kai kati kainourgio loipon ..diakrish enalaktikhs mikrobiologias me symbatikh) ana ton kosmo apokalei to HELICOBACTER pylori me to onoma tou...
oi kyrioi to apokaloun Hyliobacter.
alla ayto den einai e3wfreniko(xoxo)...einai typografiko la8os ( :rofl: )...synexiste
Dr. Death
17-03-2006, 10:44
These "tiny white dots" or protits change first into:
* viral forms which can change into
* bacterial forms which can change into
* fungi.
re kanta ayta copy paste sto by8oulka kai pes tou na ri3ei kammia periergh skonh sto nero na ta deite ola kollyomena.
Malaka ayta den ta grafei oute prezoni stis megales ntagkles.
entit:
Correct the Acid/Base Imbalance, take some kind of alkalinizing Base Powder; Balanced Base Powder, baking soda will do.
ROOOFL ROFL ROFL ,W NA GAMHSW ROFL...PE8AINW..EXW LIWSEI
8eiko site
gamaei einai kayla
trela...pe8ainw
a sorry 3exasa :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
http://www.euroamericanhealth.com/pleo.html
Louis Pasteur is said to have said on his deathbed that really he had been wrong about his "Germ Theory" of disease. He said then, in so many words, that, it is not the germ that is the problem, it is the internal environment, the internal milieu that allowed the germ to develop in the first place that is the problem.
Να προσθέσω ότι κι ο Δαρβίνος είχε αποκυρήξει τη θεωρία του στο νεκροκρέβατό του.
http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/comment/pasteur.htm
Pasteur's Last Words
Pseudoscience has few heroes. There's Immanuel Velikovsky and Nicola Tesla, of course, and perpetual motion frauds like John Keeley, but nothing like the pantheon of genius that real science can point to. One way of redressing this imbalance is to adopt real heroes and show how they were right when others around them were wrong (Galileo and Semmelweiss, for example), as if all it takes to be right is to have people say you are wrong. They also like to point to failed predictions by famous people, apparently to convince us that because, for example, Bill Gates was wrong in 1981 about how powerful personal computers would become that scientists could be wrong when they say that homeopathy, mind reading or faster-than-light travel are not possible. Another tactic is to discredit real heroes by suggesting that the heroes themselves have recanted and admitted that their work was a fraud. One target of this kind of attack is Louis Pasteur.
It might surprise you to find that there are people who deny that infectious diseases are caused by infectious agents like bacteria and viruses. By doing this, they are able to support other mad ideas such as the "myth" of AIDS, and also to generally attack most of conventional medicine. (I am always amused when these people forget and offer Ingaz Semmelweiss as an example of a person persecuted by conventional medicine. If there are no germs, why would hand washing matter?). As Pasteur was such a seminal and important figure in the history of microbiology and medicine he and his works had to be discredited, so a story was fabricated that he had renounced all his works on his death bed. There are various versions of the story, but they usually look something like this example:
Pasteur had the gold. He forced other competing theories to his germ theory to be ignored. I do believe that his biographer was correct when he reported that Pasteur said: "Bernard is correct. The bacteria are nothing. The soil is everything." Pasteur was revealing to the world that his germ theory of disease was concocted and false. Sad, isn’t it, that modern docs still believe his lie.
Well, I obtained a copy of Pasteur's biography, and to nobody's surprise, he said no such thing. Of course, if Pasteur had really been demented and announced on his death bed that germs were little coloured flashing lights attached to tangles of green wires and you could see them on Christmas trees this would not have altered the facts. For some reason, however, the story of how he had renounced the germ theory of disease gives comfort to those with minds so decayed that they believe that all medical knowledge was complete at the end of the American Civil War.
Thanks to a second-hand and rare bookshop found through Amazon.com. I was able to obtain a 1926 English translation of "The Life of Pasteur" by Renι Vallery-Radot, first published in 1900. (I hope that I am in this good a condition when I'm 78 years old.) Vallery-Radot was Pasteur's son-in-law, and therefore much more likely to have been there during Pasteur's final hours than some other anonymous biographer or someone who waited until 44 years after Pasteur's death to write a book about one of his rivals (now forgotten except by quackery supporters). I will quote the last four paragraphs, and I invite people to save these words and fling them back the next time some liar says that Louis Pasteur supported their delusions.
Please note that the quackery supporters' derogation of Pasteur's memory also implies an attack on the countless millions of people, both children and adults, who lived (and continue to live) longer and happier lives because of what this man did. Part of the reason that they need to damage his epitaph is that they realise that the witchcraft and pretend medicine which they espouse will never throw up a person with a millionth of Pasteur's qualities, even if given a million years to do it. They resent goodness and genius because the presence of these shines a searchlight on the mediocrity and duplicity which are all they can offer.
Here is what Pasteur's biographer, one with a real name, had to say:
Pasteur's strength diminished day by day, he now could hardly walk. When he was seated in the Park, his grandchildren around him suggested young rose trees climbing around the trunk of a dying oak. The paralysis was increasing, and speech was becoming more and more difficult. The eyes alone remained bright and clear; Pasteur was witnessing the ruin of what in him was perishable.
How willingly they would have given a moment of their lives to prolong his, those thousands of human beings whose existence had been saved by his methods; sick children, women in lying-in hospitals, patients operated on in surgical wards, victims of rabid dogs saved from hydrophobia, and so many others protected against the infinitesimally small! But, whilst visions of those living beings passed through the minds of his family, it seemed as if Pasteur already saw those dead ones who, like him, had preserved absolute faith in the Future Life.
The last week in September he was no longer strong enough to leave his bed, his weakness was extreme. On September 27, as he was offered a cup of milk: "I cannot," he murmured; his eyes looked around him with an unspeakable expression of resignation, love and farewell. His head fell back on the pillows and he slept; but, after this delusive rest, suddenly came the gaspings of agony. For twenty-four hours he remained motionless, his eyes closed, his body almost entirely paralyzed; one of his hands rested in that of Mme. Pasteur, the other held a crucifix.
This, surrounded by his family and disciples, in this room of almost monastic simplicity, on Saturday, September 28, 1895, at 4:40 in the afternoon, very peacefully, he passed away.
αυτό στο οποίο επικεντρώθηκες είναι φήμη και συνεπώς ΑΝ το είπε ή όχι πιθανόν να το είπε οφ δε ρέκορντ λίο πριν το θάνατό του. Επιπλέον ΠΟΤΕ μια βιογραφία δεν είανι αντικειμενική: ακόμα και αυτή έχει το μελλοδραματικό στοιχείο και φυσικά ΠΟΤΕ ο βιογράφος δεν θα έβαζε στο στόμα του την διαγραφή με μια μονοκονδυλιά των όσων πεπραγμένων του παρέθεσε σε εκατοντάδες σελίδες πριν.
Ομως αυτό είναι το πλέον΄αδιάφορο για μένα. Το θέμα είναι ότι ΠΟΛΛΟΙ αναπαρήγαγαν τα αποτελέσματα του Μπεσάμ αντίπαλου του παστέρ και επιπλέον υπάρχουν ένα σωρό ενδείξεις, πέρα από τις παρατηρήσεις του που είναι απλούστατες να τις αναπαράγεις, πχ η ταχύτατη μετάλλαξη ιών και μικροβίων, η συμβίωση, κλπ.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bechamp
Professor Antoine Bechamp. French biologist 1816 - 1908. He worked on silkworm diseases, identifying one as due to a parasite - a separate, smaller organism which entered the body from outside, in this case causing disease. However in a period when considerable scientific interest and effort was applied to this problem he did not correctly evaluate the role of bacteria in disease as is generally accepted today.
He was a contemporary of Pasteur, who developed and demonstrated the currently acceptedgerm theory, and of Robert Koch whose postulates are the basis of deciding whether a microbe is the cause of a disease. Bechamp however maintained a pleomorphic theory - essentially that bacteria change form and are not the cause of, but the result of, disease, arising from tissues rather than from a germ of constant form. This has also been called the cellular disease theory, in that scavaging bacteria are supposed to arise from what he called microzymas(microrganisims)that he says are present in matter(including tissues). These bacteria then feed on dead or decaying cells, or cells in need of repair. Philosophically, it could appear to follow the ancient Greek idea of spontaneous generation however many of Bechamp's experiments did not support the theory of spontaneous generation.
His theory was discarded by brewers, bakers and doctors in favor of Pasteur's repeatable demonstrations.
Other notable pleomorphists since then are Wilhelm Reich, Gaston Naessens, Alan Cantwell, and Prof Enderlein.
Royal Rife claimed to resolve pleomorphic viruses by heterodyning their ultra-violet frequencies with his telescope which dispensed with the laws of optics. Virginia Livingston Wheeler travelled from Seattle to join him in San Diego.
Latterly, Bechamp's name and work have been misused by multi-level marketers and anti-vaccinationists in efforts to construct plausible-sounding alternatives to current scientific theory and reality which would allow their financial or meta-medical schemes to be possible of effectiveness.
επαναλαμβάνω ότι το περιεχόμενο κοιτάς και όχι την προέλευση. Δηλαδή άμα κάποια νιου έητζ σέχτα βάλει άρθρο για την κβαντομηχανική αυτό σημαίνει ότι η κβαντομηχανική είναι γτπ; Εγώ έβαλα τυχαία κάποια που παρουσιάζουν ικανοποιητικά αυτή τη θεωρία.
Σαφώς θα κοιτάξω και την προέλευση. Είναι ιδιαίτερα σημαντική για την εγκυρότητα της πληροφορίας και το γενικότερο συλλογιστικό πλαίσιο κάτω απ'το οποίο διαμορφώθηκε η πληροφορία. Τώρα, αν απ'τα 10 πράγματα που λένε, το 1 τυγχάνει να είναι σοβαρό και έγκυρο και τα άλλα 9 μαλακίες, προφανώς θα ψάξω άλλη, πιο έμπιστη πηγή που να επιβεβαιώνει αυτό το 1.
με μια φήμη για το αν είπε ή όχι (που αν το είπε θα τ ο είπε οφ δε ρέκορντ όταν ήταν στα καλά του) δεν καθαρίζεις με ολόληρο επιστημονικό έργο που ΑΚΟΜΑ όσοι ενδιαφέρονται το επιβεβαιώνουν. Χώρια τις ενδείξεις που έχουμε με την συμβίωση, τις ραγδαίες μεταλλάξεις, κλπ.
Πάντως η πόλωση υπάρχει παντού, ή ο ένας ή ο άλλος θα είναι απόλυτα λάθος ή α πόλυτα σωστός.
Οταν αυτά τα έργα δεν βρίσκονται σε επίσημα σάιτ τα αναζητείς οπουδήποτε. και στο κάτω κάτω και απατεώνες να είναι θα έχουν σημαντικές πληροφορίες να σο προσφέρουν με την παράθεση του άρθρου.
wraithgr
17-03-2006, 16:03
Όταν κάποια πράγματα δεν τα βρίσκεις σε επίσημα σάιτ, θέλω να ελπίζω οτι (σαν λογικός άνθρωπος :? )αναρωτιέσαι πρώτα γιατί δεν τα βρίσκεις εκεί αλλά μόνο σε εναλλακτικά/underground/klp.
Α ναι ξέχασα, είναι η παγκόσμια συνομωσία που μας σπρώχνει αποτελεσματικά, low(er) profit margin φάρμακα, αντί να βγάζει 100 τόνους ομοιοπαθητικά από 1 κιλό ουσία και να τα πουλάει και ακριβότερα...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bechamp
Professor Antoine Bechamp. French biologist 1816 - 1908. He worked on silkworm diseases, identifying one as due to a parasite - a separate, smaller organism which entered the body from outside, in this case causing disease. However in a period when considerable scientific interest and effort was applied to this problem he did not correctly evaluate the role of bacteria in disease as is generally accepted today.
He was a contemporary of Pasteur, who developed and demonstrated the currently acceptedgerm theory, and of Robert Koch whose postulates are the basis of deciding whether a microbe is the cause of a disease. Bechamp however maintained a pleomorphic theory - essentially that bacteria change form and are not the cause of, but the result of, disease, arising from tissues rather than from a germ of constant form. This has also been called the cellular disease theory, in that scavaging bacteria are supposed to arise from what he called microzymas(microrganisims)that he says are present in matter(including tissues). These bacteria then feed on dead or decaying cells, or cells in need of repair. Philosophically, it could appear to follow the ancient Greek idea of spontaneous generation however many of Bechamp's experiments did not support the theory of spontaneous generation.
His theory was discarded by brewers, bakers and doctors in favor of Pasteur's repeatable demonstrations.
Other notable pleomorphists since then are Wilhelm Reich, Gaston Naessens, Alan Cantwell, and Prof Enderlein.
Royal Rife claimed to resolve pleomorphic viruses by heterodyning their ultra-violet frequencies with his telescope which dispensed with the laws of optics. Virginia Livingston Wheeler travelled from Seattle to join him in San Diego.
Latterly, Bechamp's name and work have been misused by multi-level marketers and anti-vaccinationists in efforts to construct plausible-sounding alternatives to current scientific theory and reality which would allow their financial or meta-medical schemes to be possible of effectiveness.
θες να σου ποστάρω και το wiki λήμα γιατον Ράιχ όπου αναφέρονται επιβεβαιώσεις των πειραμάτων του;
O tritos Raix htan megalos sapounoparagwgos pantws.
Dr. Death
17-03-2006, 19:00
w na gamhsw ayto to topic me kanei kai klaiw ap ta gelia
eilikrina einai apisteyta ayta pou leei
pwwww pw ,mpa se kalo mas...apisteyto gelio exw liwsei.
entit: :rofl: :lol: :rofl: :lol: :rofl: :lol:
Dr. Death
17-03-2006, 19:26
Pleomorphism on the other hand maintains that "germs" occur in many forms beginning with the protit, which can change into a virus, which can change into a bacteria, which can change into a fungus. Any of these forms; bacterial, viral or fungal can and do eventually, break all apart and turn back into the protits from whence they came. It starts all over again, life. The protit never dies. This is a nature of life, It goes on no matter what. A germ is 'a beginning', that is all.
malakes oti kalytero meta to chihuahua.gr
zwh ek tou mh ontws loipon
einai apisteyto apisteyto diamanti to site...gamaei TO SYMPAN (kanonika omws)
kayla :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
oi ioi ginonte bakthria kai ta bakthria mykhtes.....oooooooooooAAAAAAAAAAXAXAAAAAAAAAA
8a 3erasw :puke: ap ta gelia :rofl: :lol:
entit: ta emotes einai gia spasimo
οχι,οχι,οχι, μη συγκρινεις με το επικο site, pls.
Κατα τα αλλα, πρεπει να σκεφτουμε μαρκεταριστικα.
Π.χ. σε προηγουμενο θεμα που εμμεσως θιχτηκε σχετικα με τα διαιτολογια, τα εστιατορια με ωμο μενου τα σπανε.
Τι θα μπορουσαμε να κανουμε με αυτο το concept?
Ελα να κανωμε brainstorming!!!!
περισσότερο γέλιο τώρα αμέσως:
http://www.vaccinationnews.com/DailyNew ... bioAge.htm (http://www.vaccinationnews.com/DailyNews/September2001/PostAntibioAge.htm)
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13718611.900.html
http://aids.esmartdesign.com/paradigm.html
http://www.freewebs.com/scientific_anti ... accine.htm (http://www.freewebs.com/scientific_anti_vivisectionism16/rabiesvaccine.htm)
Before he died, Pasteur instructed his family not to release some 10,000 pages of lab notes after his death. Not until 1975, after the death of his grandson, were these "secret" notes finally made public. An historian from Princeton, Professor Geison made a thorough study of the lab notes. He presented his findings in an address to The American Association for the Advancement of Science in Boston in 1993. Dr. Geison's conclusions: Pasteur published much fraudulent data and was guilty of many counts of "scientific misconduct," violating rules of medicine, science, and ethics.
.............
Before he died, Pasteur instructed his family not to release 10,000 pages of lab notes after his death. It is only after the death of his grandson in 1975 that Pasteur's secret notes were made public. Professor Gerald Geison, a science historian from Princeton University, made a thorough study of the notes and compared them with Pasteur's publications. He presented his findings in 1993 during a congress of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Boston. This re-evaluation made him conclude that Pasteur committed scientific misconduct. He violated the medical, ethical and scientific rules and published fraudulent data.
For example, contrary to what Pasteur published, he never tested his anti-rabies vaccine on animals before he started experimenting on humans. The vaccine Pasteur used during his famous "antrax experiment" on sheep was - contrary to his claim - not his own vaccine. He stole it from a colleague, Toussaint. (Toussaint died a few months later after a nervous breakdown.) According to Geison, money was the primary motivation for Pasteur's misconduct.
..............
The real story behind Pasteur`s rabies vaccine did not emerge until over a hundred years later. Pasteur had kept secret laboratory notebooks of his work, but had decreed that his family was not to show these to anyone. In 1964, his last surviving grandson donated the documents to the Biblioteque Nationale, in Paris. A decade later, limited access to Pasteur`s hand-written notes was granted to a few historians - one of whom was Gerald Gelson. In 1993, at an AAAS Annual Meeting in Boston, America, Gelson revealed that Pasteur had tried his rabies vaccine on two patients with advanced sysmptoms of rabies - before he had tested the accine in symptomatic animals. The information presented showed that, in 1885, two boys were inoculated with the vaccine based on virus grown in the spines of rabbits - but Pasteur had not subjected this to experiments on animals. Of subsequent animal experiments, Gelson pointed out "Even his [animal] experiments trying to prevent rabies were inconclusive at the time"(147).
With the introduction of Pasteur`s rabies vaccine, it was claimed that of the first 350 human patients treated only one died(157) - but, in 1886, of 2,671 vaccinated 25 died(156). A year later, 1,778 people were given Pasteur`s rabies vaccine(157).The results were declared a "success" and made Pasteur world famous(158) - but in the first three years of vaccination - 1886 to 1889, the average death-rate from rabies was 36 per annum - whereas prior to its introduction - 1850 to 1872 - the average death-rate from rabies was 30 per annum(159) - i.e. mortality was lower before the introduction of vaccination. With a death following inoculation in 1887 at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, Michel Peter, a French professor, declared that Pasteur`s method was not only useless but dangerous(152). He repeated this assertion in a French medical journal in 1890, declaring "I have said, repeatedly, and professed, that the inoculation - pretended to be anti-rabic - of M Pasteur are in principle nonsense, and in practice would be deceptive"(161).
τι έχουν να πουν οι ειδήμονες και θεματοφύλακες της επιστημοσύνης;
Dr. Death
17-03-2006, 20:04
XAAAAAAAAAAAXAXAXAXAXAXAXA :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
XTYPA KI ALLO
περισσότερο γέλιο τώρα αμέσως:
http://www.vaccinationnews.com/DailyNew ... bioAge.htm (http://www.vaccinationnews.com/DailyNews/September2001/PostAntibioAge.htm)
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13718611.900.html
http://aids.esmartdesign.com/paradigm.html
http://www.freewebs.com/scientific_anti ... accine.htm (http://www.freewebs.com/scientific_anti_vivisectionism16/rabiesvaccine.htm)
Before he died, Pasteur instructed his family not to release some 10,000 pages of lab notes after his death. Not until 1975, after the death of his grandson, were these "secret" notes finally made public. An historian from Princeton, Professor Geison made a thorough study of the lab notes. He presented his findings in an address to The American Association for the Advancement of Science in Boston in 1993. Dr. Geison's conclusions: Pasteur published much fraudulent data and was guilty of many counts of "scientific misconduct," violating rules of medicine, science, and ethics.
.............
Before he died, Pasteur instructed his family not to release 10,000 pages of lab notes after his death. It is only after the death of his grandson in 1975 that Pasteur's secret notes were made public. Professor Gerald Geison, a science historian from Princeton University, made a thorough study of the notes and compared them with Pasteur's publications. He presented his findings in 1993 during a congress of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Boston. This re-evaluation made him conclude that Pasteur committed scientific misconduct. He violated the medical, ethical and scientific rules and published fraudulent data.
For example, contrary to what Pasteur published, he never tested his anti-rabies vaccine on animals before he started experimenting on humans. The vaccine Pasteur used during his famous "antrax experiment" on sheep was - contrary to his claim - not his own vaccine. He stole it from a colleague, Toussaint. (Toussaint died a few months later after a nervous breakdown.) According to Geison, money was the primary motivation for Pasteur's misconduct.
..............
The real story behind Pasteur`s rabies vaccine did not emerge until over a hundred years later. Pasteur had kept secret laboratory notebooks of his work, but had decreed that his family was not to show these to anyone. In 1964, his last surviving grandson donated the documents to the Biblioteque Nationale, in Paris. A decade later, limited access to Pasteur`s hand-written notes was granted to a few historians - one of whom was Gerald Gelson. In 1993, at an AAAS Annual Meeting in Boston, America, Gelson revealed that Pasteur had tried his rabies vaccine on two patients with advanced sysmptoms of rabies - before he had tested the accine in symptomatic animals. The information presented showed that, in 1885, two boys were inoculated with the vaccine based on virus grown in the spines of rabbits - but Pasteur had not subjected this to experiments on animals. Of subsequent animal experiments, Gelson pointed out "Even his [animal] experiments trying to prevent rabies were inconclusive at the time"(147).
With the introduction of Pasteur`s rabies vaccine, it was claimed that of the first 350 human patients treated only one died(157) - but, in 1886, of 2,671 vaccinated 25 died(156). A year later, 1,778 people were given Pasteur`s rabies vaccine(157).The results were declared a "success" and made Pasteur world famous(158) - but in the first three years of vaccination - 1886 to 1889, the average death-rate from rabies was 36 per annum - whereas prior to its introduction - 1850 to 1872 - the average death-rate from rabies was 30 per annum(159) - i.e. mortality was lower before the introduction of vaccination. With a death following inoculation in 1887 at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, Michel Peter, a French professor, declared that Pasteur`s method was not only useless but dangerous(152). He repeated this assertion in a French medical journal in 1890, declaring "I have said, repeatedly, and professed, that the inoculation - pretended to be anti-rabic - of M Pasteur are in principle nonsense, and in practice would be deceptive"(161).
τι έχουν να πουν οι ειδήμονες και θεματοφύλακες της επιστημοσύνης;
exoume na poume :
http://www.vaccinationnews.com/ :
The mission of Vaccination News is multifold:
Vaccination News is published in order to provide a wide range of news and views on vaccinations and vaccination policy. By providing all sides of the vaccination controversy, it is believed the public/consumer will be best equipped to make reasoned decisions regarding vaccination use, decisions which will have profound implications for them and their family’s health. By providing all sides of the vaccination controversy, it is also believed that readers will recognize both the complexity of the controversy and the dearth of good information available to them.
Among the views provided will be those of the publisher and Editor Sandy Gottstein (aka Mintz) on a variety of vaccination related issues and news, including commentary on breaking news items.
Vaccination News is not against an informed parent choosing to vaccinate his or her child. Vaccination News is against bad science being used to justify forcing parents to vaccinate. It is against bad science being used to convince a parent to vaccinate. And it is against a parent, any parent, being forced to do something that has even a remote chance of harming their child.
What all parents deserve is good information, untainted by conflict of interest, on the safety of vaccines. They deserve the right to choose whether or not to vaccinate their children. And those that choose to vaccinate, after weighing the known benefits and risks, deserve safer vaccines.
http://www.newscientist.com/home.ns
Headlines :
Catastrophic immune response may have caused drug trial horror
The new drug that triggered life-threatening reactions in six men may have done so by massively over-stimulating their bodies' T cells, an investigation by New Scientist suggests
14:22 17 March 2006
Best ever map of the early universe revealed
And the new evidence agrees that the universe went through a traumatic growth spurt before it was a billionth of a billionth of a second old
11:57 17 March 2006
EU's butterfly havens are vanishing
Disappearing wet grasslands are making a nonsense of the European Union's plan to halt biodiversity loss by 2010, judging by butterfly numbers
10:56 17 March 2006
Dawn asteroid mission could rise again
NASA has pried up what appeared to be the final nail in the coffin of its mission to visit the two largest main-belt asteroids, Ceres and Vesta
10:55 17 March 2006
Methanol-powered artificial muscles start to flex
Incorporating carbon nanotubes or shape-memory wires, the two types of muscle aim to create battery-free prosthetics and robotic limbs
19:00 16 March 2006
Mystery of Saturn's vanishing 'spokes' illuminated
19:00 16 March 2006
New analysis says global warming boosts hurricanes
19:00 16 March 2006
Big new reservoir of water ice suspected under Mars
13:54 16 March 2006
Saved by 'sand' poured into the wounds
10:00 16 March 2006
'DNA origami' creates map of the Americas18:23 15 March 2006
http://aids.esmartdesign.com/
CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE
By Neville Hodgkinson
The Sunday Times (London) 3 April 1994
Everyone knows HIV is the cause of AIDS, "except maybe two people", says Dr Robert Gallo, the American government scientist who 10 years ago skilfully marketed HIV to the world. There is no debate, he says. "Call 5,000 scientists and ask."
Most doctors, nurses, health educationists and others on the AIDS front line concur. They are given to understand by the general scientific community that even to doubt HIV shows mental and moral deficiency. Scientists, too, have to be careful not to rock the HIV boat, which carries jobs, reputations and huge research funds.
Despite this pressure, a large and growing network of highly-qualified "dissidents" has become established worldwide over the past two years. They not only challenge the HIV hypothesis, but have "come out" publicly about their concerns. More than 450 have put their names to a letter demanding a reappraisal of the conventional view, arguing that the HIV hypothesis is at best unproven, at worst discredited.
The group contains more than 70 PhDs, scores of medical doctors and numerous other health workers and scientists, along with AIDS patients, activists and others who have been working for years with those most affected by the epidemic. Most of the names are American-based, but overall the list spans 23 countries.
It is the tip of an iceberg of dissent. The group's newsletter has a mailing list of more than 2,000. A debate over AIDS causation is breaking out around the world, reflected in a wave of conferences highlighting alternative ways of thinking about the disease. The latest of these takes place in Bologna, Italy, this month.
The challenge has its origins in theoretical considerations first set out in detail by Professor Peter Duesberg, an eminent American virologist. But it has drawn strength from the failure of AIDS researchers, after 10 years' work on HIV, to show how the virus could be doing the damage attributed to it. Gallo claimed to have shown it made its victims vulnerable to infections by directly killing cells of their immune system. It is now known he was wrong.
A further blow to orthodoxy has been the failure to show any lasting benefit from expensive but highly toxic and potentially lethal anti-HIV drugs.
A third concern is that the link between HIV and AIDS is much less close than had been thought. HIV is not the "death sentence" many were given to understand. The collapse of doomsday predictions about HIV's spread (3m UK HIV-positives by 1990, according to a 1985 forecast; actual 10-year cumulative total to date: 21,000) has become apparent in most countries with careful testing programmes.
The HIV test itself is discredited. There has been no reasoned response to scientists who argue it was never properly validated, and that false positives are the rule not the exception. A crisis looms, probably the biggest faced by the modern scientific community.
All the more reprehensible, then, in a discipline dedicated to openness, that most doctors and scientists are unfamiliar with the dissidents' detailed arguments because leading scientific and medical journals refuse to publish them.
Despite the issue's importance, journal editors and advisers seem to reason, like Gallo, that since "everyone" agrees HIV is the cause of AIDS, anyone seriously proposing otherwise is eccentric and illogical. Dissidents are dangerous, it is argued, because if people doubt HIV's role in AIDS, they might not heed warnings about the need to change sexual habits.
John Maddox, editor of Nature, the science journal, feels so strongly on the issue that he has been trying to dissuade this newspaper from reporting evidence that the virus is probably not the cause of AIDS, and that AIDS may not be an epidemic putting everyone at risk.
Other publications, lay and professional, follow a similar line. New Scientist magazine, under the headline "HIV: beyond reasonable doubt", declared that despite "a mountain of scientific evidence" showing that HIV does cause AIDS, "a small number of journalists and dissident scientists continue to question the link". That "mountain" of evidence never existed; the HIV consensus is crumbling. Maddox admits that the failure to find a mechanism for how HIV causes the disease has been "a profound disappointment to the research community", and that the only evidence implicating the virus an epidemiological association between testing HIV-positive and being diagnosed as having AIDS "necessarily seems circumstantial".
Signatories of the reappraisal letter are united in wanting a change in direction; they differ in the extent to which they reject the HIV theory.
Some, like Dr Charles Thomas, a molecular biologist and former Harvard professor of biochemistry, say it is complete nonsense. "The HIV-causes-AIDS dogma represents the grandest and perhaps the most morally destructive fraud that has ever been perpetrated on the young men and women of the Western world," he says.
Equally outspoken is Phillip Johnson, senior professor of law, University of California at Berkeley, and a former visiting professor at University College London.
"One does not need to be a scientific specialist to recognise a botched research job and a scientific establishment that is distorting the facts to promote an ideology and maximise its funding," he says. "That establishment continues to doctor statistics and misrepresent the situation to keep the public convinced that a major viral pandemic is under way when the facts are otherwise."
Others, like Dr Lawrence Bradford, a biology professor in Atchison, Kansas, and Dr Roger Cunningham, a microbiologist and director of the centre for immunology at the State University of New York at Buffalo, think the virus could be one factor among many, but maintain an unbiased reassessment is urgently needed.
"Unfortunately," Cunningham says, "an AIDS 'establishment' seems to have formed that intends to discourage challenges to the dogma on one side and often insists on following discredited ideas on the other."
Bradford lists drug use, multiple infections, exposure to blood products, rectal exposure to semen, and autoimmune phenomena in which the immune system becomes so confused that it starts to self-destruct as among interacting events that may lead up to AIDS.
Many other signatories hold a similar view. Professor Arthur Gottlieb, head of microbiology and immunology at Tulane University medical school, New Orleans, believes HIV can disrupt the immune system, but lists several co-factors, including malnutrition, as important.
Dr Steven Jonas, professor of preventive medicine, State University of New York at Stony Brook, says evidence is now "rapidly accumulating" that the original theory of HIV as the sole cause of AIDS is not correct. He thinks it plays a part in most cases, but "by itself it is not sufficient to cause the disease".
Dr Alfred Hassig, former professor of immunology at the University of Bern and director of a Swiss blood transfusion laboratory, says multiple stresses on the immune system provoke an acute reaction, allowing latent microbes, including HIV, to proliferate. He believes dietary measures can reverse this process, and urges that "the sentences of death now accompanying the medical diagnosis of AIDS should be abolished".
Dr Gordon Stewart, professor emeritus of public health, Glasgow University, and a former World Health Organisation AIDS adviser, who links AIDS in Western countries to behaviours carrying high risks of genital and other infections, points out that the implication of such alternative views is that existing efforts to fight AIDS are "very wasteful of effort and expenditure".
Most of the signatories, such as Dr Henk Loman, professor of biophysical chemistry at the Free University in Amsterdam, deplore the neglect of non-HIV lines of research. "There are many people with AIDS but without HIV, and a great many people with HIV but without AIDS," says Loman. "These two facts mean that HIV AIDS is much too simple. Plausible, alternative, testable causes of impairment of the immune system which may ultimately lead to AIDS should become part of regular AIDS research."
Many of the scientists believe the fight against AIDS was derailed by a flaw in reasoning over HIV in which "the hypothesis itself got incorporated in the definition of AIDS," as Dr Kary Mullis, winner of last year's Nobel prize for chemistry, puts it. When people fall sick and HIV is present or thought to be present, it is called AIDS; when HIV is not present, it is called something else.
Mullis, who invented a genetic test used worldwide by AIDS researchers, says that "the HIV theory, the way it is being applied, is unfalsifiable and therefore useless as a medical hypothesis". He believes AIDS arose through "an enormous level of exposure to human viruses and bacteria".
Robert Maver, consulting actuary to healthcare and insurance industries, and former vice-president and director of research with the giant Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Co, agrees that incorporating HIV into the definition of AIDS "has created a high correlation that is tautologically contrived".
Harry Rubin, professor of molecular and cell biology, University of California at Berkeley, declares himself "an HIV agnostic. It is not proven that AIDS is caused by HIV infection, nor is it proven that it plays no role whatever in the syndrome."
An Italian signatory, Dr Fabio Franchi, a specialist in preventive medicine and infectious diseases in Trieste, declares: "I am not agnostic; I am well convinced, above all by the arguments of Professor Peter Duesberg." Duesberg, professor of molecular biology at the University of California at Berkeley, and a founder of the reappraisal group, says HIV is harmless, and believes long-term misuse of both recreational and medical drugs is the prime cause of AIDS.
Equally sure of HIV's innocence is Dr Bernard Forscher, formerly managing editor of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. "The HIV hypothesis ranks with the 'bad air' theory for malaria and the 'bacterial infection' theory for beriberi and pellagra (caused by nutritional deficiencies)," he says. "It is a hoax that became a scam."
Paul Rabinow, professor of anthropology, University of California at Berkeley, who interviewed Duesberg after becoming "intrigued by the highly emotional reactions" to his ideas, found there were no convincing answers to his questions. "In particular I have pursued the situation of haemophiliacs and HIV because it was the arena least charged with moralism. Systematic attempts to be allowed to look at the data or to find rigorous controlled studies have failed."
Another Berkeley scientist, Dr Richard Strohman, emeritus professor of molecular and cell biology, is concerned that "while it becomes increasingly clear that factors other than HIV must be involved in AIDS, the major research effort continues to focus on the virus".
Harvey Bialy, research editor of the New York-based journal BioTechnology, who has a background in molecular biology and tropical disease study in West Africa, insists that "AIDS" in Africa can mostly be attributed to economic decline, decline in health care and development of drug-resistant infections. "All these things can explain exactly what is going on, to much greater good for the public health than saying the diseases are being made worse by HIV," he says.
Several signatories say that apart from misdirecting energies, the HIV theory has caused great psychological damage. Paul Lineback, counselling psychologist, Eastern Oregon State College, says: "Protecting and promoting the unproven HIV hypothesis as fact is inducing unnecessary stress, probably emotional harm, and maybe even psychological murder."
Michael Ellner, president of Heal (Health Education AIDS Liaison), based in New York City, a medical hypnotherapist who has worked with thousands of people with AIDS-related fears and conditions, says: "I have seen the constant terror, and programming to get sick and die, that people at risk for developing AIDS face. I am certain that the hypothesis that long-term drug use is a primary cause of what is now called AIDS is far more likely to prove true than the failed notion that AIDS is caused by a germ."
According to David Mertz, a philosopher of science at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, HIV is an "entity of convenience" that met the needs of powerful groups: researchers competing for personal and national prestige after the failure of the United States government's "war on cancer"; gay civil rights campaigners "who wanted to remake AIDS as an 'equal opportunity killer'," and the right wing, "who wanted an agent to concretise the 'wrath of God' that they fantasised as visited upon gays".
If Mertz is right, will the illusion ever end?
Professor Hiram Caton, head of the school of applied ethics at Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia, believes it will. The orthodox view will collapse, he says, "because it flunks the practical tests. No vaccine will be forthcoming. No effective treatment will appear. The hype will exhaust its credibility.
"Scientists will then have to come to terms with the awful fact that the AIDS epidemic was a mirage manufactured by scientists who believed that integrity could be maintained amidst the diverting influences of big money, prestige and politics."
http://www.freewebs.com/scientific_anti_vivisectionism/
ANIMAL EXPERIMENTS
THE VIVISECTORS` CLAIMS
REFUTED
This site is unique
with fully referenced
SCIENTIFIC
MEDICAL
HISTORICAL
evidence
no graphic images,
no moral, no ethical,
no philosophical
arguments
HERE ARE THE FACTS
prepare to be
informed
This site has been written and compiled by medical historians with supportive references from medical journals, researcher`s papers, historical documents. The information presented is within the remit of providing substantiated evidence of the invalidity of animal experimentation.
Nothing on this is intended to, nor should be interpreted as, offering medical advice nor should be construed as a medical pharmacopia.
The context of the whole of this site and attached sub-pages is the copyright of Science Anti-Vivisectionism. Requests for reproduction, in whole or part, of any article must - before posting, copying, or reproducing within the normal terms of copyright - be first be submitted by e-mail for verification
καλά, όταν παρουσιάζω φάκτς πουλάτε εξυπνάδα! τα ντοκουμέντα δια χειρός Παστέρ έχουν δημοσιευτεί και σχολιαστεί ποικιλοτρόπως. Μιλάνε μόνα τους! Οποιος θέλει να δει βλέπει, οι υπόλοιποι μπορούν να γελούν όσο θέλουν.
Dr. Death
17-03-2006, 20:22
quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack quack
file ena 8a sou pw ...den exeis idea gia to ti grafeis
pantws bgazeis apisteyto gelio
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Tonosalata
17-03-2006, 20:56
?
Ελα να κανωμε brainstorming!!!!
tsk tsk tsk
den eisai politically correct
to brainstorming mporei na prosvalei anthrwpous pou exoun epilipsia,h kapious pou gnwrizoun epiliptikous.
thought shower parakalw.
h estw word storm.
e afou mou xaliesai pc mpourouxitsa[sic],
idea stores, allo ena concept pou pairnei diastaseis.
ideastorm esto, ektos ki an prosvalloume ki autoys pou einai se katastasi fytou...
καλά, όταν παρουσιάζω φάκτς
Κι ο Λιακόπουλος το ίδιο λέει. "Μα δε τα λέω εγώ, τα λένε τα βιβλία". Ο Kain, ευλόγως, αμφιβάλλει για την αξιοπιστία των πηγών που παραθέτεις και, προσωπικώς, δε μπορώ παρά να συμφωνήσω. Ιδιαίτερα η αρθρογραφία του New Scientist παραήταν κίτρινη.
Dr. Death
18-03-2006, 03:05
καλά, όταν παρουσιάζω φάκτς πουλάτε εξυπνάδα!
e kapoioi spoudasan/zoun se panepisthmio
alloi anakalypsan to internet sthn wra ergasias.
epishs kapoioi spoudasan/zoun ayto pou agapane.
Alloi anakalypsan oti mporei na ma8oun TA PANTA epeidh anakalypsan to internet sthn wra ergasias.
καλά, όταν παρουσιάζω φάκτς πουλάτε εξυπνάδα! τα ντοκουμέντα δια χειρός Παστέρ έχουν δημοσιευτεί και σχολιαστεί ποικιλοτρόπως. Μιλάνε μόνα τους! Οποιος θέλει να δει βλέπει, οι υπόλοιποι μπορούν να γελούν όσο θέλουν.
Σκάσε ρε γαμημένε σκοταδιστή γαμώ το σόι σου.
Ποια μιλάνε μόνα τους ρε ΚΑΜΕΝΕ; Τη φράση "(τα ντοκουμέντα) μιλάνε μόνα τους" θα την άκουγα μόνο από Λιακόπουλο... Σκάσε επιτέλους, δεν έχεις καταλάβει τι άτομα προσπαθείς να κοροϊδέψεις; Λοιπόν, τελείωσε το μπλα μπλα, κάνε ό,τι γουστάρεις. Απλά κόψε το ποστάρισμα ηλίθιων links.
Δεν πίστευα ποτέ ότι θα το έλεγα αυτό... αλλά πρέπει να έχεις ξεπεράσει και τον DM σε μαλακία. Αναρωτιέμαι τι μπάζο είναι η γυναίκα σου που αντί να την γαμάς κάθεσαι εδώ ρε ΚΑΜΕΝΕ, με άτομα που είναι 10 χρόνια μικρότερα από σένα και συζητάς για "πολιτική και τσιχλόφουσκες" ενώ πας ρε ΚΑΜΕΝΕ στο sexion και αραδιάζεις και κει τις μπούρδες σου με τα κωλογλυφάδια και μας λες ότι πρέπει να απελευθερωθούμε και τέτοιες παπαριές... Ψόφα επιτέλους γαμημένε.
Ή "εναλλακτικά" σταμάτα να γράφεις στο forum μπούρδες ή ΓΕΝΙΚΩΣ ΣΤΑΜΑΤΑ ΝΑ ΓΡΑΦΕΙΣ.
phthoggon
18-03-2006, 05:24
Και για μη ξεχνιόμαστε, αυτό υποτίθεται ότι είναι το politics section.
AD HOMINEM;
πωπώ! η σκευωρία τςη χιλιετίας. Οι σατανικοί quacks γράψαν 10.000 σελίδες και πλαστογράφησαν την υπογραφή του παστέρ, παρουσίασαν έναν δικό τους σαν απόγονό του με το παραμύθι να μην δημοσιεύσει τα κείμενα, αυτός αφού πέθανε, τα δημοσίευσαν και σπεύσαν όλες οι σκοταδιστικές εφημερίδες, σαίτ, περιοδικά να τα δημοσιεύσουν και να χτυπήσουν αυτήν την εξέχουσα προσωπικότητα που έχει σώσει και σώζει εκατομμύρια κόσμο.
Δυστυχώς οι μάσκες πέφτουν. Την εποχή της απομυθοποίησης ένα σωρό μεγάλοι στοχαστες και διαννοούμενοι μας εξέπληξαν με τα γραπτά τους που βρήκαν από την αφάνεια. (Παστέρ, Νεύτωνας, Μαλινόφκσι, κλπ) αυτούς θυμάμαι τώρα.
metamelia3
18-03-2006, 10:45
Δεν περίμενα να το πω ποτέ, αλλά είμαι με τον Καντιρού. Όχι λόγω αυτών που γράφει, αλλά γιά το υφάκι που του πουλάτε.
"Σκοταδιστή". Λολ
Darkling
18-03-2006, 11:20
Παρε μια και συ. :moutza:
metamelia3
18-03-2006, 11:21
βρε ουστ
φως στο σκοτάδι:
http://pup.princeton.edu/titles/5670.html
Ιn The Private Science of Louis Pasteur, Gerald Geison has written a controversial biography that finally penetrates the secrecy that has surrounded much of this legendary scientist's laboratory work. Geison uses Pasteur's laboratory notebooks, made available only recently, and his published papers to present a rich and full account of some of the most famous episodes in the history of science and their darker sides--for example, Pasteur's rush to develop the rabies vaccine and the human risks his haste entailed. The discrepancies between the public record and the "private science" of Louis Pasteur tell us as much about the man as they do about the highly competitive and political world he learned to master.
Although experimental ingenuity served Pasteur well, he also owed much of his success to the polemical virtuosity and political savvy that won him unprecedented financial support from the French state during the late nineteenth century. But a close look at his greatest achievements raises ethical issues. In the case of Pasteur's widely publicized anthrax vaccine, Geison reveals its initial defects and how Pasteur, in order to avoid embarrassment, secretly incorporated a rival colleague's findings to make his version of the vaccine work. Pasteur's premature decision to apply his rabies treatment to his first animal-bite victims raises even deeper questions and must be understood not only in terms of the ethics of human experimentation and scientific method, but also in light of Pasteur's shift from a biological theory of immunity to a chemical theory--similar to ones he had often disparaged when advanced by his competitors.
Through his vivid reconstruction of the professional rivalries as well as the national adulation that surrounded Pasteur, Geison places him in his wider cultural context. In giving Pasteur the close scrutiny his fame and achievements deserve, Geison's book offers compelling reading for anyone interested in the social and ethical dimensions of science.
Reviews:
"Geison's controversial but stunning biography raises many important questions about the nature of science, past and present. . . . [I]t requires us to reevaluate our heroes and consider the complexities of science as it is actually created instead of merely clinging to comforting and heroic myths."--Elizabeth Fee, New England Journal of Medicine
"A fascinating and detailed account of much of Pasteur's life and of French science in the last century."--Lewis Wolpert, The New York Times Book Review
"This book is a scientific biography at its best. With a fine sense of judgment, clear exposition, and the sophistication of the seasoned scholar, Professor Geison has produced a tour-de-force. Unswayed by the extremes of social construction or the prejudices of an animus against science, he has nevertheless revealed the nature of the Pastorian legend and has traced out the manner of its construction. Pasteur emerges still the skillful experimentalist, but also a bold combatant, versed in the art of oratory, and so secretive about his day-to-day work that until his laboratory notebooks became available recently it was impossible to check the myths that have made the legend."--Robert Olby, University of Pittsburgh
". . . a well-documented, evenhanded biography that will be useful for many years to come. . . . a readable, enjoyable biography."--Booklist
"Geison makes Pasteur in many ways worthier of our admiration than the saintly figure of legend was."--The Economist
"In Geison's hands, Pasteur is shown to have been a consummate publicist and showman . . . He was also single minded, secretive and rather selfish. . . . He is, in short, the perfect anti-hero for our anti-heroic age."--W. F. Bynum, Nature
τώρα πείστηκαν οι άπιστοι θωμάδες; Η θα συνεχίσουν να κάνουν quack quack (την πάπια);
Δεν περίμενα να το πω ποτέ, αλλά είμαι με τον Καντιρού. Όχι λόγω αυτών που γράφει, αλλά γιά το υφάκι που του πουλάτε.
"Σκοταδιστή". Λολ
Έχουν καταντήσει πολύ ερειστικά τα σχόλια ενάντια στον Candiru, αυτό είναι ένα δυστυχές γεγονός.
Απ'την άλλη, πολυσέλιδες διαφωνίες (αφού στην ουσία πραγματευόμαστε πάνω-κάτω τα ίδια θέματα περί ιατρικής σε τρία ήδη τόπικ, τα δύο 15+ σελίδων) είναι αναμενόμενο να εκφυλίζονται σε καβγάδες άνευ ουσίας.
Εγώ πάντως έχω σπουδάσει γκομπιουτερζ. Δεν ξέρω, αν το έχει ψάξει κανείς, αλλά ο Shockley, εφευρέτης του τραντζίστορ, λέγεται ότι ήταν απ' τα μεγαλύτερα καθίκια ever.
Το τραντζίστορ βέβαια συνεχίζει να λειτουργεί.
Εγώ πάντως έχω σπουδάσει γκομπιουτερζ. Δεν ξέρω, αν το έχει ψάξει κανείς, αλλά ο Shockley, εφευρέτης του τραντζίστορ, λέγεται ότι ήταν απ' τα μεγαλύτερα καθίκια ever.
Το τραντζίστορ βέβαια συνεχίζει να λειτουργεί.
εφόσον η πολυπλοκότητα της ζωής μπορεί να αναχθεί και περισταλθεί σε ένα τρανζίστορ, μπορείς να πιστεύεις ό,τι θέλεις.
wraithgr
18-03-2006, 14:19
Μπορεί να επηρεαστεί από νεράκι φραπέ τότε όμως;
Εγώ πάντως έχω σπουδάσει γκομπιουτερζ. Δεν ξέρω, αν το έχει ψάξει κανείς, αλλά ο Shockley, εφευρέτης του τραντζίστορ, λέγεται ότι ήταν απ' τα μεγαλύτερα καθίκια ever.
Το τραντζίστορ βέβαια συνεχίζει να λειτουργεί.
εφόσον η πολυπλοκότητα της ζωής μπορεί να αναχθεί και περισταλθεί σε ένα τρανζίστορ, μπορείς να πιστεύεις ό,τι θέλεις.
Όταν τα επιχειρήματα καταρρέουν, όταν κάποιος δεν έχει να απαντήσει. Είναι λογικό Candiru. Λογικό και απόλυτα κατανοητό.
freezing_moon
18-03-2006, 14:44
Δεν ξέρω, αν το έχει ψάξει κανείς, αλλά ο Shockley, εφευρέτης του τραντζίστορ, λέγεται ότι ήταν απ' τα μεγαλύτερα καθίκια ever.
Toulaxiston den itan POUSTARA opws o Turing.
(:fear: avenger :fear:)
:offtopic:
Το τραντζίστορ βέβαια συνεχίζει να λειτουργεί.
εφόσον η πολυπλοκότητα της ζωής μπορεί να αναχθεί και περισταλθεί σε ένα τρανζίστορ, μπορείς να πιστεύεις ό,τι θέλεις.[/quote]
Όταν τα επιχειρήματα καταρρέουν, όταν κάποιος δεν έχει να απαντήσει. Είναι λογικό Candiru. Λογικό και απόλυτα κατανοητό.[/quote]
αν το ότι δεν βάζεις το μυαλ΄σου να σκεφτεί σημαίνει κατάρευση δικών μου επιχειρημάτων τι να πω. Σε ένα τρανζίστορ μπορείς να πριραματιστείς μέχρι να το κάψεις. Κάνεις το ίδιο σε ανθρώπους μόνο και μόνο για να επισπέυσεις τα αποτελέσματα του εμβολίου της λύσσας; Βάζεις σε τέτοιες περιπτώσεις πάνω από όλα την προσωπική δόξα και ανέλιξη;
Ένα τραντζίστορ δε σταματά να λειτουργεί επειδή ο εφευρέτης του ίσως να ήταν καθήκι. Ένα φάρμακο δε σταματά να θεραπεύει αν ο εφευρέτης του είναι παοκτζής ομοφυλόφιλος. ΓΙΑ ΤΟ ΘΕΟ ΔΗΛΑΔΗ!
φως στο σκοτάδι:
http://pup.princeton.edu/titles/5670.html
Ιn The Private Science of Louis Pasteur, Gerald Geison has written a controversial biography that finally penetrates the secrecy that has surrounded much of this legendary scientist's laboratory work. Geison uses Pasteur's laboratory notebooks, made available only recently, and his published papers to present a rich and full account of some of the most famous episodes in the history of science and their darker sides--for example, Pasteur's rush to develop the rabies vaccine and the human risks his haste entailed. The discrepancies between the public record and the "private science" of Louis Pasteur tell us as much about the man as they do about the highly competitive and political world he learned to master.
Although experimental ingenuity served Pasteur well, he also owed much of his success to the polemical virtuosity and political savvy that won him unprecedented financial support from the French state during the late nineteenth century. But a close look at his greatest achievements raises ethical issues. In the case of Pasteur's widely publicized anthrax vaccine, Geison reveals its initial defects and how Pasteur, in order to avoid embarrassment, secretly incorporated a rival colleague's findings to make his version of the vaccine work. Pasteur's premature decision to apply his rabies treatment to his first animal-bite victims raises even deeper questions and must be understood not only in terms of the ethics of human experimentation and scientific method, but also in light of Pasteur's shift from a biological theory of immunity to a chemical theory--similar to ones he had often disparaged when advanced by his competitors.
Through his vivid reconstruction of the professional rivalries as well as the national adulation that surrounded Pasteur, Geison places him in his wider cultural context. In giving Pasteur the close scrutiny his fame and achievements deserve, Geison's book offers compelling reading for anyone interested in the social and ethical dimensions of science.
Reviews:
"Geison's controversial but stunning biography raises many important questions about the nature of science, past and present. . . . [I]t requires us to reevaluate our heroes and consider the complexities of science as it is actually created instead of merely clinging to comforting and heroic myths."--Elizabeth Fee, New England Journal of Medicine
"A fascinating and detailed account of much of Pasteur's life and of French science in the last century."--Lewis Wolpert, The New York Times Book Review
"This book is a scientific biography at its best. With a fine sense of judgment, clear exposition, and the sophistication of the seasoned scholar, Professor Geison has produced a tour-de-force. Unswayed by the extremes of social construction or the prejudices of an animus against science, he has nevertheless revealed the nature of the Pastorian legend and has traced out the manner of its construction. Pasteur emerges still the skillful experimentalist, but also a bold combatant, versed in the art of oratory, and so secretive about his day-to-day work that until his laboratory notebooks became available recently it was impossible to check the myths that have made the legend."--Robert Olby, University of Pittsburgh
". . . a well-documented, evenhanded biography that will be useful for many years to come. . . . a readable, enjoyable biography."--Booklist
"Geison makes Pasteur in many ways worthier of our admiration than the saintly figure of legend was."--The Economist
"In Geison's hands, Pasteur is shown to have been a consummate publicist and showman . . . He was also single minded, secretive and rather selfish. . . . He is, in short, the perfect anti-hero for our anti-heroic age."--W. F. Bynum, Nature
τώρα πείστηκαν οι άπιστοι θωμάδες; Η θα συνεχίσουν να κάνουν quack quack (την πάπια);
Eimai daimonios omws! :
"Geison's controversial but stunning biography raises many important questions about the nature of science, past and present. . . . [I]t requires us to reevaluate our heroes and consider the complexities of science as it is actually created instead of merely clinging to comforting and heroic myths."--Elizabeth Fee, New England Journal of Medicine
-
Eisenberg, D.M., Kessler, R. C., Fee E., Foster, C., Norlock, F. E., Calkins, D.
R., & Delbanco, T. L. (1992). Unconventional medicine in the United
States. New England Journal of Medicine. 328(4), 246-252.
This is the telephone survey on alternative medicine what quite a few
authors are calling complementary medicine but not necessarily holistic
medicine. The only non-Western treatments listed is acupuncture.
The researchers did not try to define "folk remedies", "faith healing"
or "herbal medicine" all of which could fall into regional categories.
The other therapies include: homeopathy, relaxation techniques,
chiropractic, massage, imagery, spiritual healing, commercial weight-loss
programs, lifestyle diets (macrobiotics), megavitamin therapy, self-help
groups, energy healing, biofeedback, hypnosis, exercise, and prayer.
One thing I think you will all agree is: homeopathy is not a non-Western
system. For those of you who haven't read much about it, homeopathy
was conceived and developed by Samuel Hanemann, a German physician who
wrote Organon der rationellen Heilkunde in 1810
"This book is a scientific biography at its best. With a fine sense of judgment, clear exposition, and the sophistication of the seasoned scholar, Professor Geison has produced a tour-de-force. Unswayed by the extremes of social construction or the prejudices of an animus against science, he has nevertheless revealed the nature of the Pastorian legend and has traced out the manner of its construction. Pasteur emerges still the skillful experimentalist, but also a bold combatant, versed in the art of oratory, and so secretive about his day-to-day work that until his laboratory notebooks became available recently it was impossible to check the myths that have made the legend."--Robert Olby, University of Pittsburgh
-
Robert Olby
olbyr@comcast.net
Research Professor. Formerly at the University of Leeds, UK, Robert Olby is known as a historian of nineteenth and twentieth century biology, his special fields being genetics and molecular biology. His best known works are The Origins of Mendelism (1966, 1985) and The Path to the Double Helix (1974, 1994), but he has published widely in historical journals, and more recently in Nature, Nature Reviews Genetics, and Endeavour . He has prepared a history of biology for the general reader, and is currently completing the official biography of the late Dr. Francis Crick with support from the National Science Foundation and the award of an Archives Fellowship at Churchill College, Cambridge. With his colleagues in Leeds he edited The Companion to the History of Modern Science (1990).
Books & Papers :
Charles Darwin's Manuscript of pangenesis', British Journal of the History of Science , 1 (1963), 251-263
The Mad Pursuit, X-ray crystallographers' Search for the Structure of Haemoglobin', HPLS , 7(1985), 171-193.
The Dimensions of Scientific Controversy: The Biometric-Mendelian Debate', BJHS, 22 (1988), 299-320.
Scientists and Bureaucrats in the Establishment of the John Innes Horticultural Institute under William Bateson', Annals of Science, 48 (1989), 497-510.
Social Imperialism and State Support for Agricultural Research in Edwardian Britain', Annals of Science, 48 (1991), 509-526
Too Young for Gardening': 25(2003), Inspiring Science. Jim Watson and the Age of DNA' , edited by John Inglis et al, Nature 426 (2003), 229-230
Kai ftanoume loipon se ena telma (sic!). Amfisbhteis ta apotelesmata twn ereunwn tou paster epeidh htan ola auta pou aneferes. Anti8etws,otan emeis amfisbhtoume ta links sou, pisteueis pws koitame to dentro kai oxi to dasos. As synexisoume loipon auto to paixnidi,mporw na brw syndeseis me Alternative 8ewries kai nootropies gia ka8e link/atomo pou postareis. Opws blepeis agnow to oti ekanes post ws trantaxto epixeirhma ena Book review pou afora thn proswpikothta tou paster gia na mas katatropwseis kai na synexiseis ston xaroumeno dromo ths hmima8eias.
εσείς τόχετε δει με όρους κατατρόπωσης, εγώ απλώς παραθέτω την εναλλακτική σκοπιά, την απομυθοποίηση, το ότι τα πράγματα δεν είναι απαραιτητα έτσι, κλπ, κλπ.
Εσεις απορρίπτετε ipso facto κάθε τι εναλλακτικό. Μόνο που θα βρείτε κάπου αυτη τη λέξη ΕΙΝΑΙ ΑΠΑΤΗ, ΕΙΝΑΙ ΑΝΑΞΙΟΠΙΣΤΟ τελεία και παύλα. και ΕΣΕΙΣ αμβισβητήσατε τα αποσπάσματα από το βιβλίο που παρέθεσα αρχικά σχολιάζοντας το ποιόν των σάιτς και εγώ μετά παρουσίασα την οριτζινάλ έκδοσή του.
Και δεν θα επέμενα, αν ΔΕΝ είχα θετικές προσωπικές εμπειρίες. Ανάθεμά με αν ένας από εσάς ξέρει πραγματικά σε τι επιτίθεται με τέτοιο μένος, διότι αν δεν το κατέχεις, αν δεν έχεις την παραμικρή επαφή με αυτό, ΔΕΝ το γνωρίζεις, τουλάχιστον το απορρίπτεις με κάποια μετριοπάθεια, όπως εγώ θεραπείες με τις οποίες δεν είχα καμία επαφή (βοτανοθερεπεία, αρωματοθερεπεία, κλπ)
Ε πές μας πως έχεις και περισσότερη εμπειρία πάνω σε ιατρικά θέματα απο μας.
Vae Victus, Deus Ex Machina και Mastodon και σε σένα.
Ε πές μας πως έχεις και περισσότερη εμπειρία πάνω σε ιατρικά θέματα απο μας.
Vae Victus, Deus Ex Machina και Mastodon και σε σένα.
ex cathedra
και για να ξαναγυρίσουμε ον τόπικ, ο πλεομορφισμός ΔΕΝ αποδείχθηκε πλάνη, ούτε κατά το ελάχιστο. Απλώς κοινωνικοπολιτικοί λόγοι και η καιροσκοπική και διπλωματική προσωπικότητα του Παστέρ (με ροή χρημάτων, κλπ προς αυτόν) σε συνδυασμό με τις επιτυχίες του, έκαναν το δικό του Παράδειγμα να κυριαρχήσει και να υποχωρήσει αυτό του πλεομορφισμού, το οποίο όμως δεν εξαφανίστηκε, αντιθέτως έστω και άντεργράουντ συνεχίζει ακόμα και σήμερα να υφίσταται. Κυριάχρησε λοιπόν ΄και εκλεπτύστηκε με τα χρονια Η ΜΙΣΗ αλήθεια για την υγεία.
Ετσι υγεία για την ιατρική είναι απλώς η απουσία αρρώστειας. Δεν είναι η ολόπλευρη σωματική και ψυχική ευεξία (όπως στο περίπου είναι και ο ορισμός της από την ΠΟΥ). Πχ μπορεί να αισθάνεσαι χάλια, όμως να μην σου βρίσκουν τίποτε. Οι παρατηρήσεις του αίματος (εντερλάιν, ράιχ) δείχνουν ότι η αρρώστεια δίνει κάποια σημάδια από πολύ πιο πριν γίνει ορατή. Για την εναλλακτική επιστήμη είσαι δυνάμει άρρωστος σε τέτοια πε΄ριπτωση και με κατάλληλη διατροφή ή αλλαγή συνθηκών διαβίωσης βελτιώνεσαι. Αυτές οι παρατηρήσεις στο αίμα δείχνουν ότι και η θεωρία της ομοιοπαθητικής για την υγεία είναι στο ίδιο μήκος κύματος.
Dr. Death
19-03-2006, 10:08
ex cathedra
libido airbag
http://www.disabled.gr/at/?p=2425
για το τι είναι υγεία
Dr. Death
19-03-2006, 10:56
http://www.disabled.gr/at/?p=2425
για το τι είναι υγεία
na sou pw ..kana kalo me tainies/mousikh gia download paizei?
εσείς τόχετε δει με όρους κατατρόπωσης, εγώ απλώς παραθέτω την εναλλακτική σκοπιά, την απομυθοποίηση, το ότι τα πράγματα δεν είναι απαραιτητα έτσι, κλπ, κλπ.
Εσεις απορρίπτετε ipso facto κάθε τι εναλλακτικό. Μόνο που θα βρείτε κάπου αυτη τη λέξη ΕΙΝΑΙ ΑΠΑΤΗ, ΕΙΝΑΙ ΑΝΑΞΙΟΠΙΣΤΟ τελεία και παύλα. και ΕΣΕΙΣ αμβισβητήσατε τα αποσπάσματα από το βιβλίο που παρέθεσα αρχικά σχολιάζοντας το ποιόν των σάιτς και εγώ μετά παρουσίασα την οριτζινάλ έκδοσή του.
Και δεν θα επέμενα, αν ΔΕΝ είχα θετικές προσωπικές εμπειρίες. Ανάθεμά με αν ένας από εσάς ξέρει πραγματικά σε τι επιτίθεται με τέτοιο μένος, διότι αν δεν το κατέχεις, αν δεν έχεις την παραμικρή επαφή με αυτό, ΔΕΝ το γνωρίζεις, τουλάχιστον το απορρίπτεις με κάποια μετριοπάθεια, όπως εγώ θεραπείες με τις οποίες δεν είχα καμία επαφή (βοτανοθερεπεία, αρωματοθερεπεία, κλπ)
Προφανώς γνωρίζουν όσοι σου επιτίθονται. Το πρόβλημα είναι βέβαια που εσύ παραθέτεις τις προσωπικές σου εμπειρίες ως απόδειξη - και ζητάς από άλλους να έχουν προσωπικές εμπειρίες. Η πραγματικότητα είναι όμως ότι οι λογικοί άνθρωποι θέλουν απλά αποδείξεις για να πειστούν. Οι προσωπικές εμπειρίες του καθενός σε επιστημονικά θέματα δεν νομίζω ότι ενδιαφέρουν τον οποιονδήποτε, πόσο μάλλον έχουν ισχύ σε κάποια μορφή επιχειρήματος.
Οπότε καταλαβαίνεις ότι όποιος σου επιτίθεται δεν θα επέμενε αν ΔΕΝ είχε αποδείξεις γι'αυτά που λέει. Και εσύ κάνεις την πάπια, αντί να απαντήσεις στα σημαντικά που δεν χρειάζεται να ψάξεις για κανένα link στο internet αλλά απλά να κάτσεις 10 λεπτά και να σκεφτείς λογικά, χωρίς πόλωση.
Λυπάμαι επίσης Khalkji γιατί ο χαρακτηρισμός αυτός ίσως να είναι και ο μοναδικός που πραγματικά εννοώ. Τέσπα, μάλλον δεν έχεις διαβάσει πολλά topics τους τελευταίους μήνες που ήρθε ο Candiru και δεν έχεις ασχοληθεί μαζί του, και γελάς με το "υφάκι που του πουλάμε". Τραγελαφικό να το λες αυτό, αλήθεια.
κανείς σας δεν ξέρει αλλά μιλάτε μόνο με συλλογισμούς.
Η επίθεση του ιατρικού κατεστημένου συλλήβδην ενάντια σε κάθε εναλλακτική θερεπεία είναι ολόϊδια περίπτωση με την επίθεση της εκκλησίας στις αιρέσεις. Διεκδικούνε μερίδα από την χρυσή κουτάλα, είτε είναι σωστές είτε τσαρλατάνοι και γιαυτό ανησυχούν. Οπως ακριβώς και οι αιρέσεις: δεν είναι απαραίτητα ένας απλός εναλλακτικός τρόπος ζωής και πίστης, αλλά πολύ πιθανόν και μια απατηλή κερδοφόρα επιχείρηση. Συνεπώς λυσσάνε να κρατήσουν το ποίμνιό τους με το μέρος τους και να το ποτίζουν συχνά με άχρηστα φάρμακα. Ιδια η εκκλησία!
Αναλογιστήκατε ποτέ το τζίρο έχουν οι φαρμακοβιομηχανίες; Και ταξιδάκια για συνέδρια πληρώνουν στους γιατρούς και στενό μαρκάρισμα στα ιατρεία τους από τους πλασιέ, κλπ, κλπ.
wraithgr
19-03-2006, 19:00
Αυτή την καραμέλα την πιπιλάς εδώ και καιρό, χωρίς να εξηγείς γιατί οι φαρμακοβιομηχανίες προωθούν τις συμβατικές θεραπείες αντί να σπρώχνουν τις εναλλακτικές, που όπως σου απέδειξα στο άλλο thread είναι πιό φτηνές στην παραγωγή και πουλιούνται πιο ακριβά.
Αυτή την καραμέλα την πιπιλάς εδώ και καιρό, χωρίς να εξηγείς γιατί οι φαρμακοβιομηχανίες προωθούν τις συμβατικές θεραπείες αντί να σπρώχνουν τις εναλλακτικές, που όπως σου απέδειξα στο άλλο thread είναι πιό φτηνές στην παραγωγή και πουλιούνται πιο ακριβά.
είναι διαφορετικές εταιρείες, αλλά δεν αποκελίεται και καμιά συγνώνευση και να τα βρουν (όπως μπόντυ σοπ και λορεάλ) Επίσης μόνο ορισμενα πουλιούνται πιό ακριβά και αυτά είναι και αμφίβολης αποτελεσματικότητας ή μονο για ήπια πριστατικά. Επιπλέον τα οριτζινάλ ΔΕΝ ΠΑΤΕΝΤΑΡΟΝΤΑΙ.
katwrimos
19-03-2006, 20:56
vlakoilithie candirou sou epanalamvano oti i mana mou pou einai farmakopoios vgazei perissotera apo ta omoiopathitika farmaka se sxesi me ta simvatika. An oloi pairnan omoiopathitika i mana mou tha ploutize perissotero. Giafto skase me tis malakies sou.
Η μανουλα σου δεν πουλαει τα οριτζιναλ.
Γιατι δεν καταλαβαινετε οτι τα οριτζιναλ δεν εχουν κοστος, δεν πατενταρονται, και δινονται για την ψυχη της Τερεζας?
ΕΕΕΕΕΕΕ?Τον σκασατε τον καντιρου πια! :shock:
Η μανουλα σου δεν πουλαει τα οριτζιναλ.
Γιατι δεν καταλαβαινετε οτι τα οριτζιναλ δεν εχουν κοστος, δεν πατενταρονται, και δινονται για την ψυχη της Τερεζας?
ΕΕΕΕΕΕΕ?Τον σκασατε τον καντιρου πια! :shock:
Ayto paizei na einai kai apo ta liga post poy kai diavazontai kai akoygontai malakismena ...
w0rd
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.