|
|
Post by NonEntity on Nov 22, 2006 8:45:52 GMT -5
Scary stuff, Darren. Thanks. I wonder if the actual story was ever published. Any idea?
- NonE
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Nov 22, 2006 10:26:40 GMT -5
Well, consider the tail end of the video I linked: the Faux News talking head said essentially "...a former Fox News reporter claimed incorrectly that her boss fired her for NOT lying in a report (but I'm not even going to mention the NAME of the company on which she was reporting!). The appeals court has vindicated us, we weren't wrong, she's just a crazy lying beyatch aight?".
Essentially.
Remember, her bosses spent literally MONTHS trying to get her to change details of the story -- obviously the plan was to either air a "sanitized" (Hannitized? haha) version or none at all. She wouldn't go for the sanitizing so NAA is what happened.
Although the video clip probably will be seen by a larger audience, via the "We Hate Fox News" Internet surfers, than if it actually aired... ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Dec 6, 2006 19:54:59 GMT -5
-Paul McKeever ("Leader", Freedom Party of Ontario), 06Dec2006 National Post Letter ("Tainted beef good, raw milk bad") BINGO! That's the whole point, isn't it? The "state" controls people in a certain way against their will, and then after a while uses that very control as justification for why the state "must" control them in other, allegedly related/dependent ways... cuz of the state's "compelling interest"   |
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Jan 19, 2007 16:01:56 GMT -5
"Cheap, safe drug kills most cancers" "Miracle Cancer Drug: 'Shrinks Tumors, Costs $2, Can't Get Funding" I live in the "capital" "city" of "Alberta", so of course this was on the cover of our local city papers this week. But I wonder if CNN or Faux News made any mention of it? - - - From "Free Market News"  www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=31863CANCER CURE: SAFE, CHEAP AND EFFECTIVE? Friday, January 19, 2007 - FreeMarketNews.com Is there a miracle drug that kills cancer? What's more, is it really virtually harmless to healthy cells, and is it truly affordable by pretty much anyone, whatever their means? A New Scientist article poses all of these questions, and responds with a fairly resounding YES! The drug in question is dichloroacetate (DCA), which the story notes "has already been used for years to treat rare metabolic disorders and so is known to be relatively safe." Moreover, since there is no patent on the substance, it could easily be manufactured on demand, at a fraction of the cost of conventional Big Pharma medications. The story cites Evangelos Michelakis of the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada, who along with his colleagues has been testing DCA on human cells outside the body, finding it kills lung, breast, and brain cancer cells, while leaving healthy cells unharmed. Additional experiments on rats showed tumors shrinking just by feeding the rats with DCA-laced water for several weeks. The apparent reason for this effectiveness is in how cancer cells differ from normal ones: in the former case, the entire main body of the cell is used to produce energy through a process called glycolysis, which uses up large quantities of sugar; in the normal cell, this production is confined to the mitochondria, a distinct segment of each cell, which requires far less sugar to accomplish its task. In Michelakis’s experiments, the DCA reportedly reawakened the damaged mitochondria in the cancer cells, which then withered and died. - ST See also Google News , and the Y Files. |
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Jan 19, 2007 16:07:35 GMT -5
unrelated to cancer, but related to common medical treatments etc. " Anesthesia is essential to surgery, but does it kill brain cells?" Yikes. - - - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volatile_anaesthetic#Neurological_Theories_of_ActionThe full mechanism of action of volatile anesthetic agents is unknown and has been the subject of intense debate. "Anesthetics have been used for 160 years, and how they work is one of the great mysteries of neuroscience," says anesthesiologist James Sonner of the University of California, San Francisco“. Anesthesia research "has been for a long time a science of untestable hypotheses," notes Neil L. Harrison of Cornell University. Jeepers, I had no idea that even the "experts", who put these chemicals into the complex bodily systems of their trusting patients day after day, HAVE NO IDEA HOW THEY WORK! |
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Feb 8, 2007 18:20:57 GMT -5
history of psychiatry: a history of failureSome detailed, research-backed facts that go along with what a lot of us here have come to realize in our own "unplugging" journeys. "In the 19th century, a woman who experienced depression or discontent was likely to be diagnosed as "neurotic" and subjected to treatment ranging from vibrators (to induce orgasm) to clitoridectomy (to ensure that she never had another one again), with various talk, drug and institutional therapies in between. In the 1950s, a neurotic woman might find herself undergoing electroshock therapy, or, if she was lucky, she might be offered the sedation of Valium. Today, the depressed housewife is likely to find herself on one of the new antidepressants such as Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil or Wellbutrin..." (See also Bush's "New Freedom" baloney, and the opposing group "MindFreedom International".) |
|
|
|
Post by dvishnu on Feb 9, 2007 11:21:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Feb 9, 2007 11:40:06 GMT -5
NF! "Peter R. Breggin is a controversial psychiatrist from the United States. He is best known as a critic of biological psychiatry and psychiatric medication, and as the author of books such as Toxic Psychiatry, Talking Back to Prozac, Talking Back to Ritalin, and the medical textbook Brain-Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry. For over three decades, he has campaigned against psychoactive drugs, electroshock, psychosurgery, coercive involuntary treatment, and biological theories of psychiatry... Due to his outspoken criticisms of all the aspects of Psychiatry, Breggin has become a controversial figure regularly at odds with the mainstream mental health establishment. He uses terms like "fraud" to describe mental disorders, the medication used to treat these disorders, and the political process that determines the labels used for diagnosing mental disorders. He has also consistently warned about conflict of interest problems." ^ Although I admit to enjoying my weekly Monday comic book escapism, *this* guy is a *Real Life* Hero! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Feb 28, 2007 12:56:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sagas4 on Mar 2, 2007 1:43:20 GMT -5
Darren, Is there an FDA equivalent in Canada? I was reading The 2007 edition of the Old Farmers Almanac (I know it's also got something to do with Illuminati  ) Anyway on Page 14 there is an article talking about eating of "exotic" fruit in Canada is on the rise. Specifically it talks about it being on the rise because folks seem to think that Pomegranates (are good at preventing Prostrate cancer), Kiwis (are good at thinning the blood), and Apples (reduce risks of Asthma, risks of lung cancer, and lower cholesterol) and it briefly mentions that there are scientific studies that show this. You better let the Canadian FDA know cause people are likely to eat those drugs and seriously endanger themselves. Everyone knows the bureaucrats at the FDA know more about the effects of those drugs than a stupid scientist that conducts research and collects data for years on end. I mean if the scientists were that smart it wouldn't take them 5, 10, or 50 years to figure this stuff out, they could write it down on paper in an afternoon like the FDA does, saying this is good and approved or this is bad and not approved.  |
|
|
|
Post by NonEntity on Mar 2, 2007 7:27:18 GMT -5
Sagas, Speaking of Prostrate Cancer, it struck me that this is the condition afflicting all citizens: pros·trate (prŏs'trāt')
tr.v., -trat·ed, -trat·ing, -trates.
To put or throw flat with the face down, as in submission or adoration: “He did not simply sit and meditate, he also knelt down, sometimes even prostrated himself” (Iris Murdoch). I wonder if it's terminal? - NonE ;D |
|
|
|
Post by dentistsugardust on Mar 2, 2007 12:13:44 GMT -5
I remember Spock crying , "they cut their bodies with knives" something like that.
who really are the ones promoting Jarvic's point of view, or is it his? "The heart beats so and so amount of times in a lifespan", He states in a television commercial. the power horders scaring and planting thoughts in us that may or may not be true. it would be fascinating to live for at least 200 yrs and see the fruition and awakening of society pertaining to nonsenscal government routine.
This is sooooo over my head. some of you guys are super duper intelligentites. I understand some things though. this blog here has exposed me as a little straw hut in community of skyscrapers. I'm lovin' all your great minds. Adrenalin!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by eye2i2hear on Mar 2, 2007 16:32:42 GMT -5
Speaking of Prostrate Cancer, it struck me that this is the condition afflicting all citizens: pros·trate (prŏs'trāt')
tr.v., -trat·ed, -trat·ing, -trates.
To put or throw flat with the face down, as in submission or adoration
mahn, oh mahn, but do I wish I'd read this post before I saw the headlines of the other one! Where I heard "Marc is battling prostrate cancer" etc. Dude, you gave me a scare with that other thread's headline, because I didn't catch the metaphor in it initially. [where along with it, I'm now asking myself why "the prostate" gland has that word for its name?] That initial ("personal") scare set aside, it is an excellent metaphor. Clearly people are prostrating themselves and in doing it, are feeding the spread of the enforcement carcinoma delicti. * noting too, that "worship" is so often inclusive of prostrating; and worship so often a part of ("other") religions-- where I easily hear, too, religion = re-allegiancing; where the allegiance is realigned from a voluntary to enforcement state. |
|
|
|
Post by sagas4 on Mar 2, 2007 17:10:01 GMT -5
NonE, I couldn't very well spell it correctly because that is PRO-STATE. Besides Pomegranates may be good at helping one stand up, but in either case since they are good at preventing something classified as a "disease" we can't have people self medicating themselves by Pomegranate without proper labeling and control. Come to think of it the FDA should be all over this one especially if Pomegranates prevent PRO-STATE cancer. Ya know . . . that mental disease of believing the STATE can make everything better. |
|
|
|
Post by NonEntity on Mar 2, 2007 17:41:46 GMT -5
Pomegranite? Isn't that the greasy stuff you put in you hair to look like James Dean on Mount Rushmore?
- NonE
|
|
) Anyway on Page 14 there is an article talking about eating of "exotic" fruit in Canada is on the rise. Specifically it talks about it being on the rise because folks seem to think that Pomegranates (are good at preventing Prostrate cancer), Kiwis (are good at thinning the blood), and Apples (reduce risks of Asthma, risks of lung cancer, and lower cholesterol) and it briefly mentions that there are scientific studies that show this. 