Out of the mouths of babes

[Guest guest]

So I was nursing my baby and my 11 year old asks me, " Mom, if they want to

make raw milk illegal, are they going to make moms give their babies formula

since your body temperature doesn't get hot enough to pasteurize your milk? "

I wonder what other ideas are running through our kids' heads in the middle

of this war on dairy? I also wonder how all this is effecting their

attitudes towards traditional foods. Anyone interested in this discussion?

[Guest guest]

A very valid argument!

nne

On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Carol Frisk <carolfrisk@...> wrote:

>

>

> So I was nursing my baby and my 11 year old asks me, " Mom, if they want to

> make raw milk illegal, are they going to make moms give their babies

> formula

> since your body temperature doesn't get hot enough to pasteurize your

> milk? "

> I wonder what other ideas are running through our kids' heads in the middle

> of this war on dairy? I also wonder how all this is effecting their

> attitudes towards traditional foods. Anyone interested in this discussion?

>

>

[Guest guest]

Well, as ridiculous as that may sound (breastmilk being made illegal)that IS or

at least COULD BE a valid concern. Breastmilk is the ultimate raw milk for

humans and we certainly want to protect our right to feed it to our babies!

Kathy

[Guest guest]

>Well, as ridiculous as that may sound (breastmilk being made illegal)that IS or

at least COULD BE a valid concern. Breastmilk is the ultimate raw milk for

humans and we certainly want to protect our right to feed it to our babies

There is an organization that links people together to share breastmilk when

there is an inability to nurse (or the loss of a mother, for example). It's

only a matter of time before that is illegal.

Barb

[Guest guest]

>Then there is the organization I

>think you are talking about where the individuals are linked up and the

>milk is sent directly to the family from the donor. That would be a tragedy

>to have that banned. Imagine breast milk being an illicit underground

>substance.

That is the organization I was talking about. Can't think of the name.

There are already concerns about HIV transferring through breast milk. As

long at that is out there, I cannot see how it wouldn't be made illegal at

some point. Especially if it got larger and more organized. I would think

formula companies would not like it at all. They have the muscle and the

money to do it.

Barb

[Guest guest]

Just as " know your farmer " holds true for food, " know your breastmilk donor "

works as well.

Kathy

[Guest guest]

HIV is a fake. According to Heinrich Kremer MD: The Silent Revolution in

Cancer and AIDS Medicine, (www.Xlibris.com or 1 888-795-4272) " A positive

reaction to an " HIV test " merely indicates that at a certain point in time

there was a gradual shift in the amount of certain antibodies. " p 115 This

shift is caused by the loss of ability to produce nitric oxide, a substance

which allows a " respiratory burst " to kill off noxious microbes or other

abnormal matter in or around an immune cell. When a cell is depleted of

glutathione (GSH), as a self-protective measure, the Th cell ceases to

produce NO, likewise ceases to produce the type of cytokine (messenger

molecule) that would distinguish it as a healthy immune cell.

If the cell were to continue to produce NO (Nitric oxide), the oxidizing

free radicals would cause the cell to self destruct.

Kremer goes on to say, with enormous documentation from decades of

scientific literature, that an HIV virus has never actually been isolated.

There are elaborate pictures of it, all artists' renderings, and the

reputed discoverer of it has refused to talk about this discrepancy,

avoiding inquisitive people at meetings. Further, the criteria for AIDS in

this country are quite different from that in Africa, with the result that

it's much easier to end up with a diagnosis of AIDS in Africa, not only for

the easier criteria, but because malnutrition is so much more widespread, so

bodies are of course less able to support healthy cellular metabolism.

(Snide side comment, besides, they come from a different culture, so

" wouldn't understand " and thus more readily accept the magical western drugs

that we foist on them.) Sexual activity has nothing to do with HIV and AIDS

unless it's accompanied by the use of substances that increase nitric oxide

(poppers, Viagra) artificially.

GSH is a major oxidation controlling substance (aka " antioxidant " ), that

takes part in a variety of other supportive reactions in a body. Not only

does a cell stop producing nitric oxide when GSH is depleted, the cellular

metabolism shifts away from efficient Krebs or citric acid cycle production

of ATP (energy), toward what Otto Warburg (Nobel prize winner) called

aerobic glycolysis, or very inefficient sugar based energy production

characteristic of cancer cells.

Interestingly enough, statin drugs to inhibit cholesterol production allow

cells to bypass their natural cessation of NO production when they don't

have the protective GSH to support it. Add statins, and cellular mechanisms

can go ahead and keep producing nitric oxide by at least three different

routes. This might be the basis for statins being linked to another side

effect of increased risk for cancer years down the line -- typically excused

as it doesn't happen until people reach their seventies, so then it doesn't

matter (!!!???!!!). That's a side effect besides memory loss,

rhabdomyolysis (muscle tissue, including heart muscle, turning to jelly),

suicide, violence, and a few other inconveniences.

I've known many people who have gotten AIDS diagnoses. They cleaned up

their diet, stopped taking glutathione depleting, NO over-producing

substances, and are wonderfully alive and well years later.

Another reason to eat clean, be nice to each other, and have hope for the

holidays. L (faculty, and doctoral student w/ Hawthorn University

www.hawthornuniversity.org)

On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Barbara ez (Hartmann) <

barb@...> wrote:

> >Then there is the organization I

> >think you are talking about where the individuals are linked up and the

> >milk is sent directly to the family from the donor. That would be a

> tragedy

> >to have that banned. Imagine breast milk being an illicit underground

> >substance.

>

> That is the organization I was talking about. Can't think of the name.

>

> There are already concerns about HIV transferring through breast milk. As

> long at that is out there, I cannot see how it wouldn't be made illegal at

> some point. Especially if it got larger and more organized. I would think

> formula companies would not like it at all. They have the muscle and the

> money to do it.

>

> Barb

>

>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

>

[Guest guest]

On 12/15/2010 8:20 AM, Lyke wrote:

>

> I've known many people who have gotten AIDS diagnoses. They cleaned up

> their diet, stopped taking glutathione depleting, NO over-producing

> substances, and are wonderfully alive and well years later.

>

This is interesting. What are the key offending substances?

Gail

[Guest guest]

FDA and Milk Regulation

December 15, 2010 by Lynn Swearingen

http://ppjg.wordpress.com/2010/12/15/fda-and-milk-regulation/

EXCERPT:

If one hasn't figured this out by now - the FDA is discussing the Regulation of

Human Breast Milk. While this dangerous substance has indeed been used for a

recent assault in Kentucky, the curious mind would like to dissect why this

issue and why now? In light of FDAs stellar record of Regulating the Blood

Supply, Semen Usage and IVF clinics - why should anyone trust or accept any

future " guidelines " from this agency?

[Guest guest]

Wow, thank you to each poster for their input and excellent information. I

am intrigued about aids and horrified that the joke that the fda would

regulate breast milk is a reality.

Carol

[Guest guest]

I'll hazard pasting in a few paragraphs from Inventing The AIDS Virus by

Duesberg. It does seem relevant since the topic of HIV transmission to infants

came up above.

Dennis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_virus

**********

(d) The acid test of Koch's third postulate would be to infect newborn babies

with HIV, because newborns are immunotolerant and thus much more susceptible to

a virus than adults. It is known from experiments with animals that a virus is

totally harmless if it does not cause a disease in newborns.

It would, of course, be unthinkable to inject HIV experimentally in human

babies to test whether it causes AIDS. Yet, exactly this experiment has already

been done millions of times by nature to generate most of the seventeen million

healthy, but HIV-positive, people living on this planet. Most of these people

picked up HIV by natural infection from their mothers.

Indeed, all animal and human retroviruses, including HIV, depend on

mother-to-child (perinatal) transmission for survival. Since sexual transmission

is extremely inefficient, depending on one thousand sexual contacts in the case

of HIV, retroviruses could never survive by sexual transmission. They can only

survive by perinatal transmission, which is about 50 percent efficient.

Therefore perinatal transmission must be harmless or else the baby, the mother,

and the virus would not survive; HIV would be a kamikaze killer-it would kill

itself together with its host.

If that were true, one would expect thousands of healthy young American men or

women to have HIV but not AIDS. That is exactly what the U.S. Army reports. The

U.S. Army tests all applicants and all its young men and women annually and

identifies thousands of HIV-positives who are totally healthy. While some of

these might have acquired their virus sexually, it is impossible that thousands

would have had the 1,000 sexual contacts with HIV-positives or the 250,000

sexual contacts with average Americans (of which only 1 in 250 is HIV-positive)

that are necessary to pick up HIV by sexual transmission. Therefore, most of

these HIV-positive young men and women must have acquired HIV from their

mothers sixteen to twenty years prior to their application to the U.S. Army. The

same must be true for most of the remaining seventeen million humans who are

healthy and HIV-positive.

The fact that millions have acquired HIV at birth yet are healthy adults is the

most devastating argument against the HIV-AIDS hypothesis. It proves that HIV,

like all other microbes that are transmitted perinatally or sexually, cannot be

fatally pathogenic. Indeed no fatally pathogenic microbe exists in animals or

humans that depends either on perinatal or sexual transmission for survival.

No matter how one looks at the HIV hypothesis, it is flawed either in terms of

facts or in theory or in both.

[Guest guest]

I still don't think this belongs in a food group, but I'm not going to let

Duesberg be the last word - since he directly contributed to 35,000 HIV-infected

babies in South Africa. Let's take it offline.

" South Africa is one of the countries most severely

affected by HIV/AIDS. At the peak of the epidemic, the government,

going against consensus scientific opinion, argued that HIV was not

the cause of AIDS and that antiretroviral (ARV) drugs were not useful

for patients and declined to accept freely donated nevirapine and

grants from the Global Fund. Using modeling, we compared the

number of persons who received ARVs for treatment and prevention

of mother-to-child HIV transmission between 2000 and 2005 with an

alternative of what was reasonably feasible in the country during that

period. More than 330,000 lives or approximately 2.2 million personyears were

lost because a feasible and timely ARV treatment program was not implemented in

South Africa. Thirty-five thousand babies were born with HIV, resulting in 1.6

million person-years lost by not implementing a mother-to-child transmission

prophylaxis program

using nevirapine. The total lost benefits of ARVs are at least 3.8

million person-years for the period 2000–2005.

From:

" Estimating the Lost Benefits of Antiretroviral Drug Use in South Africa " by

Pride Chigwedere, MD, R. Seage III, ScD, MPH, Sofia Gruskin, JD,

MIA,Tun-Hou Lee, ScD, and M. Essex, DVM, PhD

J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2008

[Guest guest]

,

God, Move over! Was coined by Mark McAfee and not myself, so sure, I give

you permission to use it. :-)

I find what you wrote very interesting and I am going to digest it when I am

better awake.

One thing that did pop out at me is the idea that homosexual use of poppers

would make them more vulnerable. Buts Aids was rampant before popper became

readily available, no? What you are saying makes a lot of sense in terms of

nutritional deficiencies, but the connection between certain life styles is

so strong, such a correlation can't be ignored.

Thanks for your typing!

Carol

[Guest guest]

I remember seeing an interview with the man who now lives in Canada who

developed the hepatitis b vaccine and he has admitted several vaccine

problems, and one of which was that hiv was accidentally contaminating the

hep b vaccine. That would make a lot of sense. I wish I could remember his

name for the integrity of the discussion. Does any one know who I am

talking about.? I can try to find it this afternoon, but right now I need

to get my girls off to their Christmas play they have worked so hard to be

in!

Carol

[Guest guest]

Hello Carol!

-

You wrote:

-

" Are viruses harmless? "

-

Yes, for some people viruses are harmless. Those people are the 3% of

the American population that is " Vibrantly Healthy " . People who

suscrible to this list are more likely to be " Vibrantly Healthy " that

the general population.

-

Pasteur and Bechamp argued about the " Germ Theory " . Pasteur was wrong

and admitted it on his deathbed. His " Germ Theory " gave us the

Rockefeller abomination of Allopathic Medicine. Bechamp was right. The

cause of disease is the deterioration of the biological terrain.

-

http://biomedx.com/microscopes/rrintro/rr2.html

-

" Unlike bacteria, I can not think

of one good outcome of viruses "

-

Viruses, bacteria, mold, fungus, etc. are part of the natural order.

Their missions is to eliminate dead and dying organisms.

-

" So if Aids is not caused by HIV or sexual transmission, why is the Aids

rate

tremendously high with homosexual men? "

-

An experimental Hepatitis B vaccine was developed. There were two

versions: one version included the HIV virus and was given to

homosexuals and drug addicts in several US cities. The other version was

given to everyone else. The HIV retrovirus was developed in Camp

Dettrick land as a biowarfare agent. Here is the secret origin of

AIDS and HIV:

-

www.whale.to/v/cantwell3.html

-

AIDS is an autoimmune disease like cancer, diabetes, lupus, MS, etc. I

helped a friend of mine improve her biological terrain and rid herself

of the MS that had disabled and impoverished her. She eliminated her MS

in less than 4 months for less that $200 in 2003. She has now helped

over 21,000 people repair their biological terrain and heal themselves

of over 133 diffferent disease conditions including all of the most well

known incurable autoimmune diseases. Among them were 28 people with

incurable Stage 4 liver cancer and one case of AIDS.

-

www.tinyurl.com/2eqchwx

-

Phil Ratte'

763-32-3039

[Guest guest]

Very Nice Phil, have you been part of the list for a while? I don't recall

seeing anyone else on here with such a rational view on microbes ( " pathogens " )

aside from Ms. Giachetto.

Also in an effort to verify that Pasteur indeed did recant on his deathbed, all

my googling determined this claim to be somewhat dubious. Which has zero effect

on the fact that microbes are beneficial and necessary, the last 3 years of my

life are living proof of that, at least for me. I just like to make sure both

sides of the coin are viewed. Perhaps he did, but assertions to the contrary

have been made.

[Guest guest]

Woops, there are a few others, but I'm not sure how firm a view on it they take.