Flu is not the biggest danger ...... It's the vaccine

[Tonington]

Question: How is it that every industrialized nation in the world has banned Monsanto's rBGH as unsafe, but it's legal (and unlabeled) in the United States?

Answer: In order for the FDA to determine if Monsanto's growth hormones were safe or not, Monsanto was required to submit a scientific report on that topic. Margaret Miller, one of Monsanto's researchers put the report together.

rBGH isn't banned in Canada because the hormone is unsafe, it's banned because increasing milk production in cows is an animal welfare concern. The reason you can use it in beef cows but not in dairy cows is not related to human health. Increasing milk production causes more mastitis infections. That's not a result of the hormone, that's a physiological response to increased milk production. This is all available on the Health Canada website.

And independent reviews have assessed the safety, including to see if there is a discernable difference in the IGF hormone content of the milk. There is none. And even if there was, insulin like growth factor would not survive the conditions in your stomach. Have you ever seen someone take oral insulin? Such a product doesn't exist because there is currently no technology to reliably get the hormone into your blood stream intact.

Lastly, perhaps you are unaware of the structure in these organizations. It isn't just FDA employees that peer reviews submissions.

 

[L Gilbert]

I'm no expert, but if one of you guys can't disprove this...

Former Monsanto employees currently hold positions in US government agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Supreme Court. These include:

• Michael A. Friedman, MD, was Senior Vice President of Research and Development, Medical and Public Policy for Pharmacia, and later served as an FDA deputy commissioner.[287][288]
• Linda J. Fisher was an assistant administrator at the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) before she was a vice president at Monsanto from 1995 to 2000. In 2001, Fisher became the deputy administrator of the EPA.[136]
• Michael R. Taylor was an assistant to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) commissioner before working as an attorney for King & Spalding, a private-sector law firm that represented Monsanto among other clients.[289][290] He later served as deputy commissioner for policy to the FDA on food safety between 1991 and 1994 during which time the FDA approved rBST.[136] He was accused of a conflict of interest, but a federal investigation cleared him. Following his tenure at the FDA, Taylor returned to Monsanto as Vice President for Public Policy.[259][260][261] On 7 July 2009, Taylor entered government as Senior Advisor to the Commissioner of the US Food and Drug Administration for the Obama administration.[263][291]
• United States Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas worked as an attorney for Monsanto in the 1970s. Thomas wrote the majority opinion in the 2001 Supreme Court decision J. E. M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.[292] which found that "newly developed plant breeds are patentable under the general utility patent laws of the United States."[136][292][293]

Public officials with indirect connections or who worked for Monsanto after leaving public office include:

• Mickey Kantor served on Monsanto's board after serving in government as a trade representative.[136]
• William D. Ruckelshaus served as the first head of the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) in 1970, was subsequently acting Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and then Deputy Attorney General of the United States. From 1983 to 1985, he returned as EPA administrator. After leaving government he joined the Board of Directors of Monsanto; he is currently retired from that board.[294]
• Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was chairman and chief executive officer of G. D. Searle & Company, which Monsanto purchased in 1985. Rumsfeld's stock and options in Searle were $12 million USD at the time of the transaction.[136]

... I'm going to have to agree with Stretch.


There's a serious conflict of interest going on here. One that leads me to believe that the FDA, EPA and USDA are no longer capable of living up to their mandate.

heheh I have no problem with some of what Stretch says, which is why I still post in his threads. The problem lies in where he gets his information from. Mercola isn't exactly what I'd call a fount of truth and fact. So, like I said, I prefer not to swallow even the water around the hook, let alone the hook, line and sinker of whatever Mercola is spewing.
Same thing for the FDA, EPA, etc., as I already knew about Monsanto and it's malevolent infiltrations.
And I'm careful about what I believe about what Stretch posts, too, because of some of the info that he posts.

As I pointed out a long time ago when Stretch went on one of his crusades against mercury in vaccines: the amount of mercury in one vaccine dosage is about 1/400th the amount in a can of tuna. And I showed the math for it, too.

BTW, Tonnington is right. The concern over human health in relation to rBGH is minimal and the reason it is banned in Canada is for veterinary reasons.

 

[darkbeaver]

No, it doesn't, but like any human institution it makes mistakes sometimes. Haven't you figured out the Internet yet Stretch? Anybody with an axe to grind can put up a site, unregulated, unreviewed, undisciplined, and unverified, other people put up similar sites, they cite each other in self-referential and self-validating circles of nonsense, and credulous people fall for it. You're not careful enough out there.

topical index: critical thinking - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com

Skeptic's Dictionary Newsletter - Skepdic.com

I think these sites are very similar to the unregulated, unverified, unreliable you mention in your above quote. You have obviously not been careful out there and have very taxed critical thinking abilities which have led you to religious adulation and slavery to professional critical thinking quacks. Of course it's a common thing to see a religious person use their own favourite self validating circles of nonsense to attack and ridicule the truth whenever they feel threatened by facts.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Yeah, that's about what I expected of you. I won't try to help you again.

 

[L Gilbert]

Yeah, that's about what I expected of you. I won't try to help you again.

“Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.” - Euripides

 

[Cliffy]

There is no debate possible when one dogma slams into another.

 

[darkbeaver]

There is no debate possible when one dogma slams into another.

In this case there is but one dogma that of the Stupid Relativists and hopelessly Backward Big Bangers who argue against the verified facts of an electric universe. I present the electric toaster, electric kettle, electric shaver, electric dil do, electric car, electric telephone lights heaters ovens etc; even the joints of the human body only work because of electrical repulsion.

Here watch Crothers destroy the stupid relativists.

Yes, it’s an exotic subject, but Stephen Crothers has delivered a resounding critique of the most popular dogma in the theoretical sciences, all given at a level of common sense, free from mathematical elaborations.
Download a PDF of Crothers’ powerpoint presentation here.




STEPHEN CROTHERS: Black Holes & Relativity, Part One | EU 2013


STEPHEN CROTHERS: Black Holes & Relativity, Part Two | EU 2013 - YouTube

“Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.” - Euripides

at first they laugh and then they grovel-----------DB Eaver

 

[L Gilbert]

at first they laugh and then they grovel-----------DB Eaver

Yeah, the fools Euripedes was referring to are like that.

"Verified facts"? More Biblespeak.

 

[darkbeaver]

Yeah, the fools Euripedes was referring to are like that.

Sinister and you have had a lot of vaccinations haven't you?

 

[L Gilbert]

Sinister and you have had a lot of vaccinations haven't you?

I wouldn't know about Dexter. I've had two. Funny thing is that in spite of all Stretch's and your postings from quacks like Mercola, I'm still alive, healthy, and my mind is stable. It seems Dex is, too. You have my sympathies.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

There is no debate possible when one dogma slams into another.

It's not dogma if it's testable, falsifiable, logical, predictive, comprehensive, repeatable, and the evidence and arguments offered in support of it are sufficient to justify accepting it as true. That's what critical thinking and science mean when they say something is true, it means its been tested against the way nature actually behaves and found to be an accurate description and analysis. A proposition that doesn't meet those standards is an emotive claim that might say something interesting or revealing about the person making it, but it has no rational propositional content.

The anti-vaccination crowd's claims do not meet those standards and should not be accepted as true. DB's electric universe claims do not meet those standards and should not be accepted as true. The anti-AGW crew's claims do not meet those standards and should not be accepted as true. Other things that fail those tests and thus should not be accepted as true: homeopathy, astrology, palmistry, iridology, reflexology, reiki, reincarnation, creationism, telepathy, dowsing, psi, telekinesis, clairvoyance, graphology, ancient astronauts, almost all religious claims, post facto claims about what Nostrademus meant, and anything Deepak Chopra's ever said.

 

[darkbeaver]

Critical thinking is the nemesis of dogmatic cult ideas like the relativity rubbish and it's comic cousin black hole nonsense. Crothers demonstrates logically why Sinister is a religious nut of the professional skeptic quack cult. Nowhere does any testable evidence exist for relativity or black holes. Both are nothing but science fiction designed from the ground up to be substitutes for stolen realities unsuitable for the maintenance of the powerful. Electricity is the only rational explanation of the universe, nothing else even approaches for sheer volume of verifiable observable evidence.

 

[L Gilbert]

heheh Attaboy, DB, Stretch, et al. Keep proving R W Emerson's comment to be true (A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines).

 

[MHz]

Barkey, a full double round for all my 'friends' here.

The anti-vaccination crowd's claims do not meet those standards and should not be accepted as true.

Ever personally know a person before and after the vaccines? If not your version is parroting those you currently have faith in. If your wife or child died after a shot you would not have the same viewpoint.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Ever personally know a person before and after the vaccines?

Not many before, that happens pretty young, but after, yes, at least hundreds, possibly thousands, pretty much everybody I've ever known in real life has been vaccinated. No sign of harm there, and I have known some dozens of adults before and after a seasonal influenza vaccination.

If not your version is parroting those you currently have faith in. If your wife or child died after a shot you would not have the same viewpoint.

Post hoc fallacy, another thing you're good at. My version is the results of science. Vaccination is one the single greatest public health measures of all time in terms of lives saved and misery avoided, only an ignorant, unthinking fool could deny it.

 

[darkbeaver]

heheh Attaboy, DB, Stretch, et al. Keep proving R W Emerson's comment to be true (A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines).

And I'll admit to the habit Lester whereas you might think your immune. Nice quote mining just the same. Even if you don't appreciate it personally.

 

[Tonington]

My version is the results of science. Vaccination is one the single greatest public health measures of all time in terms of lives saved and misery avoided, only an ignorant, unthinking fool could deny it.

Not to mention, the antibiotic use avoided. Without vaccines, we'd be facing an even greater dilemma than we currently are from the increasing resistance to a wide variety of drug classes.

 

[darkbeaver]

Not many before, that happens pretty young, but after, yes, at least hundreds, possibly thousands, pretty much everybody I've ever known in real life has been vaccinated. No sign of harm there, and I have known some dozens of adults before and after a seasonal influenza vaccination. Post hoc fallacy, another thing you're good at. My version is the results of science. Vaccination is one the single greatest public health measures of all time in terms of lives saved and misery avoided, only an ignorant, unthinking fool could deny it.

Your version is the results of science selection because it agrees with your view. There are many hundreds of scientific studies by now all casting doubt on the claims made by vaccination proponents. I suggest that you support the static institution and not the more recent science. Both sides of this debate cannot make the simple claim of scientific support. It's your PHDs against our PHDs. The vaccination programs have been far more successful revenue machines than medical miracles. You are stuck in the first decades of the last century.

Not to mention, the antibiotic use avoided. Without vaccines, we'd be facing an even greater dilemma than we currently are from the increasing resistance to a wide variety of drug classes.

What dilemma? Drug sales have never been better.

 

[L Gilbert]

And I'll admit to the habit Lester whereas you might think your immune.

Might, but don't.

Nice quote mining just the same.

Sorry, I didn't go mining for it. I keep a list fairly handy and some are even embedded in my memory banks for easy access.

Even if you don't appreciate it personally.

I appreciate all the ones I have collected, otherwise I wouldn't have collected them.

Your version is the results of science selection because it agrees with your view. There are many hundreds of pseudo-scientific studies by now all casting doubt on the claims made by vaccination proponents. I suggest that you support the static institution and not the more recent science. Both sides of this debate cannot make the simple claim of scientific support. It's your PHDs against our PHDs(like Mercola).

FIFY

The vaccination programs have been far more successful revenue machines than medical miracles.

For whom? For the most part, it isn't the patients that fork over out-of-pocket for them. Besides, there are no such things as miracles anyway.

You are stuck in the first decades of the last century.

So are you and your pal, Velikovsky.

What dilemma? Drug sales have never been better.

I don't think you quite understood what he said.

 

[darkbeaver]

The patient the consumer the sheep always pay. Health care dollars always go down the bank drain. Medicine is a pseudo scientific corporation where most research concentrates on profit margins. They sell flu shots like they sell cell phones. If the system is so forking good why do Americans have the worst health outcomes in the developed world. It's pretty clear to me that it's pure business and very little medicine.
If the food industry didn't boil and fumigate all the nutrients out of the canned grub we could in the west eliminate 50% of disease that presently stuffs dollars into banks.