Login

Join for Free!
114504 members


The Fiber Disease

Human Anatomy, Physiology, and Medicine. Anything human!

Moderator: BioTeam

Postby tamtam » Wed Nov 01, 2006 10:21 am

"Morgellons disease does not exist"

But what exists is the presence in public space of a contagious and environmentally resistant man made human pathogen in the form of a GMO (genetically modified micro organism)

This organism can consistently be connected to the unauthorized release of a highly modified GMO and "activity by the bio defense industry. (proteome research center and battlefield lab)

Nota Bene: the difference between offense and defense is rather arbitrary!

The organism is most associated with a synthetic model organism to know "a model organism based on a cyanobacterium"

reference:
http://www.technologyreview.com/read_ar ... h&sc=&pg=1

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whatever the motivation may be of the medical and scientific establishment; "they collaborate and keep in existence a most repressive type methodology"

A methodology that seems only to serve and protect vital scientific, economic and in particular military interest.

"I prefer to speak about the dilligent existence of a relentless self serving and seemingly highly corrupt medical and scientific body"

Coda:

Dr. Pesutic described torture as the “criminal expression of a perversion of society's values.” The criminal and unethical behaviour of doctors involved in or colluding in torture reflects a society's moral decline. The US bioethicist Edmund Pellegrino wrote: “Protection of the integrity of medical ethics is important for all of society. If medicine becomes, as Nazi medicine did, the handmaiden of economics, politics, or any force other than one that promotes the good of the patient, it loses its soul and becomes an instrument that justifies oppression and the violation of human rights.

Thus, whatever the cause may be of this ongoing confusion and incompetence of the medical establishment in relation to the unauthorized release of an environmentally resistant, contagious and pathogenic GMO:


To contact The President's Council on Bioethics:

Mailing Address:
1801 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Suite 700
Washington, DC 20006

Phone: 202-296-4669

E-mail: info@bioethics.gov


Notice: All written substantive comments addressed to the President's Council, its chairman, or members of its staff are legally part of the public record and are made available for public inspection at the Council offices on request during regular business hours.



Sincerely,

tamtam
tamtam
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 12:56 pm

Postby Skytroll » Wed Nov 01, 2006 4:05 pm

Tam Tam,

"Whatever the motivation may be of the medical and scientific establishment; "they collaborate and keep in existence a most repressive type methodology"

from your post.

Would that be Koch's postulates? As if there were no other.

Okay, I get it. Thanks.

skytroll
Skytroll
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 725
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 6:39 pm

Postby Skytroll » Wed Nov 01, 2006 4:21 pm

an example:

It seems one can play with the method. "Various interpretations"....

A bit conflicting here......

http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/12.htm

skytroll
Skytroll
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 725
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 6:39 pm


Postby mfromcanada » Wed Nov 01, 2006 4:30 pm

Has anyone researched "Aerogel" and whether this was used to create the microorganism? Did this microorganism come from chemtrails inside of the aerogel?
User avatar
mfromcanada
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 4:37 am

Postby Skytroll » Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:35 pm

From outer space?

"To collect particles without damaging them, Stardust uses an extraordinary substance called aerogel. This is a silicon-based solid with a porous, sponge-like structure in which 99.8 percent of the volume is empty space. By comparison, aerogel is 1,000 times less dense than glass, which is another silicon-based solid. When a particle hits the aerogel, it buries itself in the material, creating a carrot-shaped track up to 200 times its own length. This slows it down and brings the sample to a relatively gradual stop. Since aerogel is mostly transparent - with a distinctive smoky blue cast - scientists will use these tracks to find the tiny particles. "

more stardust:

http://stardust.jpl.nasa.gov/photo/aerogel.html

http://www.aerogel.com/

Use in zero-gravity:
http://www.zerogaerogel.com/

Vomit comet?
http://www.zerogaerogel.com/

http://fourier.mech.virginia.edu/~microhx/home1.html

Away from aerogels to this interesting one:

Cilia:
http://tst.ewi.utwente.nl/research/sens ... index.html

Sorta like hairs, sorta like ........

"The twofold objective of the CILIA project is to identify the common principles underlying this widespread use in nature of arrays of mechanical sensory cells for the extraction of significant information and to make those principles available for design of engineered systems. Because organisms and their environments form tightly coupled interacting systems in which all components environmental characteristics and dynamics, sensory and physical morphology, peripheral and central neural processing and behavioural patterns play a significant role this analysis will be carried out at three levels simultaneously: the morphology and mechanics, the neuronal processing, and the behavioural strategies of the model-systems. Extraction of significant information is considered an emergent property from processing going on at all three levels. The model systems will be the cerci of crickets, the lateral line system of fish and the auditory system of bats. Knowledge gained from a representative sample of species and individuals from a large phylogenetic and ontogenetic range will be used to formulate design rules for man-made or man-mediated systems. These will include organic neuronal networks (based on neural cells), MEMS based artificial electro-mechanical hair-sensors, and artificial pinnae-movement control."
"In both the visual and olfactory systems a "quantal" mechanism of detection is possible, because the absorption of a photon or the binding of an odorant molecule provides an energy change significantly greater than the thermal noise in the receptor molecule. In hearing, on the other hand, the energy of a phonon is far lower, and detection occurs by a "classical" mechanism. For vertebrate photoreceptors and olfactory receptor cells, sensory transduction employs a G-protein cascade that is remarkably similar in the two cases, and that is closely homologous to other G-protein signalling cascades. For auditory and vestibular hair cells, transduction operates via a mechanism of direct coupling of the stimulus to ion channels, in a manner reminiscent of the direct gating of post-synaptic ion channels in various synaptic mechanisms. The three classes of sensory receptor cell share similarities in their mechanisms of adaptation, and it appears in each case that cytoplasmic calcium concentration plays a major role in adaptation."

So, this can tranduct into invertebrates, the first inductions?..........We have hairs, and seems to be where stem begins......?

"G protein cascades

G protein cascades are characterized by the presence in the transducing membrane of three species of protein molecule: a receptor protein (R), a G protein (G) and an effector protein (E); (Lefkowitz et al., 1986; Ross, 1989; Stryer, 1991) (Figs 1D, E). Activation of the cascade by a stimulus proceeds according to: Stimulus ® R* ® G* ® E*, where the asterisks indicate activated forms. The occurrence of these reactions depends crucially on intermolecular collisions resulting from lateral diffusion of the protein molecules within the membrane (Lamb & Pugh, 1992). A single molecule of R* can repeatedly (or catalytically) activate molecules of G protein to G* (by triggering the exchange of a GTP for a GDP on G). Each activated G* continues diffusing until it contacts a molecule of E, whereupon the two proteins bind to form G*–E, which represents the activated effector, E*.

An important feature of G protein transduction is its potential to provide very high amplification, through the cascading of two stages of gain. The first stage is provided by the activated receptor protein R*, which catalytically activates the G protein. A second stage of gain is provided by the activated effector protein E*, which is typically an enzyme that catalyzes the synthesis (or destruction) of a cytoplasmic messenger molecule. "

source:
http://www.medibolt.com/users/rikr/Grok ... #G_cascade

Much info here

Rhodopsin?

Nuclear transfer? cloning?

Oh well.............

skytroll
Skytroll
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 725
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 6:39 pm

Postby Marcos » Wed Nov 01, 2006 10:04 pm

tamtam posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:48 pm

Coda:

A particular example is the possible similarity between scientific theory building and delusional thought. This can be understood using Bentall's (1990) analysis of how normal and by extrapolation pathological belief systems develop.

Most beliefs can be said to be established as a result of drawing inferences from some perceived data in the outside world. The belief is then normally subject to a further stage of information search in which additional data collection might refute or confirm it.

According to Bentall in the deluded psychotic there can be abnormalities at one or more of these stages for example: the patient misperceives the data in the first place or forms the wrong inference.

Either way, he or she gets caught in a self fulfilling cognitive loop of confirmation bias. The person only attends to select out for notice those data that corroborate and hence progressively strengthen the belief.

As Chadwick (1992) observes, scientific thinking could be said to proceed in the same way!

Chadwick lists a number of similarities: the thought is held with great conviction and the person can hardly ever be argued out of it. Talking about it causes considerable emotion to be expressed, especially anger at others failure to accept the ideas proposed.

There are other "paranoid" reactions like grandiosity and tenacious hold on the theory (delusion) despite evidential dis-conformation and so on.

Of course there are as Chadwick admits many differences among which are the fact that the scientific hypothesis generally does have a more plausible less person centered referent in the outside world (....)


That's an honorable post.
Marcos
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 8:19 am

Postby Skytroll » Wed Nov 01, 2006 10:40 pm

Right, so much can be done by computer nowadays.

There is no Mother Earth. It is simply earth, humans inhabit earth, animals inhabit earth, amoebas inhabit earth. Computers do not.

So, the biologicial evolutionary changes had to come first, then one could adeptly attach the rest in any way that would bring about total control.
Does the UN own the internet yet?

The earth is natural, and never needed to be tampered with, so as with humans.

Natural, in its existing state, untampered, untamed, unique in its own right., the same as in the beginning, the same in the end, UNLESS, one must make evolution happen.

This is not religion, this is "Natural Law" IT is!

When one wants playgrounds, one will create what is to be in that playground, man makes mistakes, always will.

SKytroll
Skytroll
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 725
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 6:39 pm

Postby Skytroll » Wed Nov 01, 2006 11:52 pm

About time!

"NIH's New Ethics Rules Lead Some to Ponder Jumping Ship

By Rita Beamish
Associated Press
Monday, October 30, 2006; Page A15

Nearly 40 percent of the scientists conducting hands-on research at the National Institutes of Health say they are looking for other jobs or are considering doing so to escape new ethics rules that have curtailed their opportunity to earn outside income.

Most scientists say the ethics crackdown is too severe, and nearly three-quarters of them think it will hinder the government's ability to attract and keep medical researchers, according to a survey commissioned by the government's premier medical research agency.

The tightened rules were established last year after NIH found that dozens of scientists had run afoul of existing restrictions with private consulting deals that had enriched them with money from drug and biotechnology companies.

Outside income from such companies is now banned. NIH also is placing greater restrictions and disclosure requirements on employees' financial holdings.

"Of course we are concerned when any employees are saying they might consider leaving as a result of a change of policy," said Raynard S. Kington, the agency's principal deputy director. But he said in a telephone interview Friday that the survey results are muddy because they combine those actively seeking to leave and those thinking about it.

NIH Director Elias A. Zerhouni, in a letter Thursday to the staff, said the survey "does suggest concerns about the impact of the regulations on recruitment and retention." But he added: "At this time we do not anticipate revisions in the regulations."

About 8,000 NIH employees, or about half the workforce, responded to the Internet-based survey. Employee job satisfaction was generally high, the survey found. But 39 percent of the scientists researching disease and cures -- known as tenure and tenure-track scientists -- said they were actively seeking new work or considering leaving NIH because of the rules.

Overall, 3,336 NIH scientists responded to the survey, including 512 tenure and tenure-track researchers.

Among all NIH scientists, 18 percent said they were trying to leave or considering it. Those not in the tenure group typically do not conduct research and instead manage outside research performed with NIH money by universities and other nonfederal entities. They are less likely to have private consulting opportunities.

One-third of all NIH scientists said they thought the new rules would hurt NIH's ability to fulfill its mission, and most said the old rules could have been enforced better rather than tightened.

Kington highlighted a finding that nearly nine in 10 scientists reported they intend to work at NIH a year from now. Despite rumblings of low morale, he said the scientists' job satisfaction rate of 81 percent reflects one of the government's most positive workforces.

Officials also emphasized employees' opinion that the new rules will boost the agency's credibility with the public; 73 percent of the employees who responded agreed with that, the survey found.

Arthur Caplan, medical ethics chairman at the University of Pennsylvania, said tighter rules are needed but "we still haven't figured out exactly how to manage conflict of interest."

"The leaders of the NIH and in Congress have to think a bit harder about giving a tiny bit of breathing room so that NIH scientists are not sent into a monastery from which they can't ever come out in the name of scientific integrity," he said."

From

The Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 00709.html

So,.......the NIH has always been privy to this information. So.....while you are at it NIH........tell us more. Just what has been put out there?



skytroll
Skytroll
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 725
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 6:39 pm

Postby Skytroll » Wed Nov 01, 2006 11:58 pm

After it is all done, NIH comes out and enforces the rules.........Like they had nothing to do with the funding and lobbyists............

Now, you can spend billions cleaning up the mess.

Skytroll
Skytroll
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 725
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 6:39 pm

Postby tamtam » Thu Nov 02, 2006 12:49 am

About "That's an honorable post"

This was an excerpt/ section of a famous publication called critical thinking or critical analysis. Will seek the source and mention the authors later.

I think the description fits the situation.

Remember also heliobacter pylori in 1982 and the introduction of a major (viral based) cause of prostrate cancer early this year.
Such introductions are devastating for much existing interest (...)

Again; my advise is to unite, create a legal base and to seek litigation.

Today the medic and scientist are like priests.
But shake that honorable tree and see what will happen next.
Case after case!
tamtam
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 12:56 pm

Postby Marcos » Thu Nov 02, 2006 1:30 am

Sorry man, my regrets. I thought you'd snuck in a confession.
Marcos
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 8:19 am

Postby Skytroll » Thu Nov 02, 2006 1:53 am

Heaven forbid if causes are found. That has never been the aim of medicine. Only treat the symptoms and they can go on and on and on.......and then one gets new symptoms from the drugs, so change drugs, and newer symptoms, by this time we have a real ongoing biofilm and then add some genes in the newest medicine and that will fix it. Sounds like a bonfire in the making!

Skytroll
Skytroll
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 725
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 6:39 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Human Biology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron