I didn't lump flu shots in with MMR and polio. Relax.
My flu shot post was in response to the flu shot posts earlier by Chaplainintraining.
Gotta go.
Genetically Modified Food
- Thread starter Croghanite
- Start date
- Status
I didn't lump flu shots in with MMR and polio. Relax.
My flu shot post was in response to the flu shot posts earlier by Chaplainintraining.
Gotta go.
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Here is a great article detailing the health hazards of GMO. I cringe at the part that mentions experiments showing that consuming GMO caused deterioration of organs.
Health Hazards of Genetically-Manipulated (GMO) Foods
PS. I personally believe the FDA can be bought, so I do not trust everything they say.
Health Hazards of Genetically-Manipulated (GMO) Foods
PS. I personally believe the FDA can be bought, so I do not trust everything they say.
MMR and Polio immunizations have been studied and the reports published in non-governmental peer reviewed medical journals. Flu shots less so.
You yourself typed that you read a CDC report and showed it to someone else to refute them. Do you believe that this is a "thus sayeth the Lord" report? You are arguing using overstatements, and rhetoric.
We follow CDC recommendations almost all the time.
We are not opining on all things scientific but we are opining on a narrower topic of immunizations and public health, which is my wife's expertise. I wasn't aware that being a theological student made you an expert on organic foods either.
You yourself typed that you read a CDC report and showed it to someone else to refute them. Do you believe that this is a "thus sayeth the Lord" report? You are arguing using overstatements, and rhetoric.
We follow CDC recommendations almost all the time.
We are not opining on all things scientific but we are opining on a narrower topic of immunizations and public health, which is my wife's expertise. I wasn't aware that being a theological student made you an expert on organic foods either.
We DO and CAN know how many vaccines have helped people by a sampling of general statistics, though this is not exact and this is done after the fact (i.e. of no use to us as a preventative measure).
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Here is a site outlining some facts of autism and vaccines.
K.N.O.W. Vaccines - The Autism – Vaccine Connection
Jenny McCarthy recently put out a book detailing her struggles with her autistic child. She says the boy was perfectly prior to vaccines. After vaccination autism set in. Since she has been a spokeswoman against vaccinations or at least the high mercury content in the vaccinations. I have not read it and obviously do not condone Mrs. McCarthy's lifestyle, but I hear the book is very informative.
K.N.O.W. Vaccines - The Autism – Vaccine Connection
Jenny McCarthy recently put out a book detailing her struggles with her autistic child. She says the boy was perfectly prior to vaccines. After vaccination autism set in. Since she has been a spokeswoman against vaccinations or at least the high mercury content in the vaccinations. I have not read it and obviously do not condone Mrs. McCarthy's lifestyle, but I hear the book is very informative.
I'll stick with Heirloom seeds.
In addition, when I go to the Farmer's Market I don't mind finding a few bugs in my vegetables. This tells me the farmer hasn't saturated their vegetables with pesticides. A few bugs aren't necessarily bad.
In addition, when I go to the Farmer's Market I don't mind finding a few bugs in my vegetables. This tells me the farmer hasn't saturated their vegetables with pesticides. A few bugs aren't necessarily bad.
It appears you can't or won't relax. You seem to be having trouble following some of my statements. No worries, friend. Take every shot they give you. Don't read the label. Don't read or accept any report contrary to those you have accepted already. Go your way in peace.
Note, I work full time - electrical engineering by vocation; I am a student of theology as well. So, I do not know what you're getting at by your last comment. No where was it implied I am an expert on organic foods. Rather, it was you who pulled the 'I'm a nurse and my wife is ....etc' comment to somehow bolster your assertions.
Excellent resource.
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Could I see some research on this?
What research I have seen on tribes that are secluded and live off the land is that cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and nearly all major illnesses are non-existent. I do not know about their life expectancy though.
Also several reports have been done in years past about people in Okinawa who would basically live off the land and fish. The reason for the research was an attempt to find out why these people lived longer than any other group in the world.
Good point. Anyone can do a simple google news search for autism rates in the Amish community. Guess how many of the Amish have autism and how fast is the rate growing?
Zero and zero.
TimV
Puritanboard Botanist
How long have you been on that Island? They've got GM seeds right now. If you switched all their traditional seeds and tubers with GM seeds and tubers they'd still be hungry.
I can of the top of my head think of about 25 practical ways which would lessen hunger on your island more significantly then GM foods. But it takes very slow, patient work. Ideas of thrift, hard work, and foresight.
I could go to your village with a not unreasonable amount of capital and within one year stop hunger in the area. I've done it several times. It involves using my authority as an employer (and hopeful some moral authority as well, which also takes about a year to build up in tribal areas) to force the people to do things they don't naturally want to do.
Showing up on time. Being detailed. Starting from one end and consistently working to the other. No petty bickering, building storage area, no stealing, doing what's asked instead of whining about doing more than the other guy, teaching hygiene, inventory control, record keeping.
Those are the things that make modern, productive agriculture.
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Good post Tim,
One thing that bothers me about GMO is that one of the previous posts even mentioned that it saved money. This leads me to see that GMOs arise not for the betterment of society, but they arise out of capitalism and monetary gain.
One thing that bothers me about GMO is that one of the previous posts even mentioned that it saved money. This leads me to see that GMOs arise not for the betterment of society, but they arise out of capitalism and monetary gain.
Croghanite
Puritan Board Sophomore
perg,
Did you get the opportunity to watch any of the documentaries I posted?
Did you get the opportunity to watch any of the documentaries I posted?
Autism and the Amish
Do The Amish Vaccinate? Indeed They Do, AND Their Autism Rates May be Lower
A narrow gene pool (yoder, yoder, gingerich, yoder, yoder and yoder).... and reluctance to give info might contribute...
Croghanite
Puritan Board Sophomore
Just wanted to know if you have seen any of the documentaries I posted and what you thought about it. Does this mean you have not?
bconway52
Puritan Board Freshman
Very wise statement. It seems that the anti-GM crowd here is doing most of their research on only one side of the issue.
If the documentary actually did say the pesticide genes keep producing pesticide once we eat GM foods and/or the genes actually get into our cells, then we should all think very seriously about the validity of the rest of the info portrayed in the documentary (I haven't watched it yet). These ideas are absolutely ludicrous, and anyone with a BS in biology in the last 10 years would know this.
It's good and necessary to discuss/debate the real issues of GMO/vaccines etc, but make sure your sources are reputable.
There also seem to be quite a few stories regarding associations of diseases and organic diets along with organic diets actually curing diseases like cancer. Although following an organic diet is probably a very healthy thing to do, these stories cannot in any way be used to bolster any arguments, as there is no way to know exactly what was happening. For every story you give about someone being cured of cancer from eating a healthy diet, I can provide you with 5 stories of people dying slow, horrible deaths from cancer because some charlatan convinced them that all they had to do was change their diet (usually a diet that the swindler would only provide if they bought his book). Eating healthy when in a diseased state IS important, but please don't insinuate that eating healthy is more important than listening to the advice of medical professionals.
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
If you say that seeing someone being cured from any disease (take your pick which one) and the only thing they did was change their diet is not a way to bolster one's argument, then one cannot say medications cured disease either because we do not know what was really going on inside either (for example if someone has a viral infection and begins to take antibiotics, eventually that person will get better but it is not from the antibiotics).
So to take your line of thinking to its logical conclusion. We really do not know what caused disease or what cured it (if in fact cure occured) because we do not get to see what is going on the inside.
Thus would it not be fair to say that we can only determine from experiments what improves one's likelihood of A) catching a disease and B) curing the disease upon contraction?
This line of thought would fall in line with my feelings of organic diet. It is not a cure all. It is not a guarantee of anything. I simply state that it improves one's chances for the body to naturally fight off disease.
So to take your line of thinking to its logical conclusion. We really do not know what caused disease or what cured it (if in fact cure occured) because we do not get to see what is going on the inside.
Thus would it not be fair to say that we can only determine from experiments what improves one's likelihood of A) catching a disease and B) curing the disease upon contraction?
This line of thought would fall in line with my feelings of organic diet. It is not a cure all. It is not a guarantee of anything. I simply state that it improves one's chances for the body to naturally fight off disease.
Yes, I agree that a healthy (not necessarily organic) diet improves one's chances for the body to naturally fight off diseases. Presumably all legit medical doctors agree too, which makes me a little skeptical of the medical doctors you referenced earlier who "were amazed" at the improvement of a diabetes patient who changed his diet. I study diabetes in an academic setting. Changing ones diet is the FIRST thing most doctors will tell patients to do when they are diagnosed with diabetes late in life (you said this was an adult). Type 2 diabetes runs in my family. All of my relatives that have been diagnosed with Type 2 have changed their diets. None of them have changed to an organic diet. All of them are now free of all Type 2 diabetes symptoms. See... we can go back an forth with stories (mine is true as well, by the way). It's possible (probable) that in your story, the switch to a healthier diet was more responsible for the mans health improvement rather than the organic nature of the diet.
I'm not sure I understand your other statements as many medications directly target distinct molecules and molecular mechanisms that have been shown to directly cause specific diseases. Examples for different cancers include Tamoxifen, herceptin, radiation and chemotherapy. Tamoxifen and herceptin target specific molecules that give rise to cancder; radiation and chemotherapy target specific molecular mechanisms that give rise to cancer.
I guess my main point is to be careful when you give testimonials about cancer patients who have been cured by an organic diet. If you really understand the nature of cancer, you would have to agree that advising people to go on an organic diet as opposed to seeking medical help after being diagnosed with cancer is extremely unwise and probably unethical.
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
I did not mean to say that one should not go to the doctors or seek medical attention. If I came off that way, I apologize.
Answerman
Puritan Board Sophomore
Here is the method that I typically use in studying an issue such as this. On the one side, it is good to be skeptical of government and corporations that stand to profit from convincing the public that something is good for us. On the other hand there are a lot of charlatans that are motivated by the same sin of greed and try to sell you something that doesn't work even though they may claim that it is based on "science". The point that I am making is that I think that skepticism of both sides of an issue is healthy.
As a husband and a father, I take seriously the call to be the protector of my family so I do my best not to make a bad and uninformed decision in regard to matters such as this. I would hope that no matter where you come down on this issue that you are not basing your opinion on blind trust in any authority or smooth talker. It is a good idea to be familiar with logical fallacies before doing your research. It takes time to research an issue and my suggestion is to find those facts that both sides of the issue agree on and make an informed decision based on these facts. If need be, dig a little deeper on a few key facts surrounding the subject and see if you can find respected publications that corroborate said claims. Many times you will find the scientific community contradicting themselves when you compare the dumb-downed story that is given to the public for mass consumption and the detailed scientific literature.
A classic illustration of this is on the issue of evolution. Although there are many aspects of evolution that can illustrate this point, I will only deal with one. Both creationists and evolutionists agree that there are billions of dead things buried in layers of rock. Evolutionists claim that these layers were laid out over millions, if not billions of years. Creationists claim that the global flood is the best explanation for the geologic column. One key fact that creationists insist should be hard for an evolutionist to explain is the fact that the vast majority of the geologic column consist of flat knife edged layers throughout the entire column. The question that needs to be asked is, where is all the signs of water and wind erosion between the layers? Take one look at the Grand Canyon, as far as the eye can see are straight, knife edged layers. The only way that the evolutionist could be right with his assertion, is that if after each layer was laid out that there was no wind or rain for millions of years. Another related fact is that trees and other large artifacts have been found fossilized passing through multiple layers, these are called polystrate fossils. Are we to assume that thousands if not millions of years passed without these trees rotting while the layers piled up around them?
As a presuppositionalist, I typically deal with the philosophical question of what would have to be true in order for argumentation itself to be intelligible before proceeding to examples that ought to embarrass unbelieving thought but Christians need to stop being so intellectually lazy with this as with any other issue.
Now full circle back to the issue of GMO foods. First off, after many years of researching the radical corruption that governments and corporations, including our own, have been found guilty of, it has left a very bad taste in my mouth and I have become radically skeptical of any of their inventions that they try to sell us as being “good” for us. So in case you are wondering, this is why I might come off as being conspiratorial but after reading the primary documents themselves of grotesque experimentation on humans (MK-ULTRA, Operation Paperclip, Operation Teapot, Project Bluebird/Artichoke, Tuskegee), the overthrowing democratically elected officials to set up puppet governments (Operation AJAX/Iran, which was the rationale the “radical” Muslims gave for the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979-81), false flag operations to get us into wars for the benefit of the Military/Industrial Complex (Gulf of Tonkin Incident/Vietnam) to name only a few, you should understand why I have very little trust that those government officials and those corporations that have willingly participated in these operations have our best interest at heart when it comes to our health and well-being. Now in regard to GMO foods, I must admit that I have not fully researched this subject enough but there are only so many hours in the day and with the inception of the internet age, we are being bombarded with so much information and disinformation that it is hard to wade through every single issue with meticulous scrutiny, so I typically choose to err on the side of caution and not participate in the latest scientific fads until I have had a chance to make an informed decision on a matter. I have heard that most European countries have banned GMO for many of the same reasons mentioned in these documentaries so there does seem to be some scientific evidence exposing the dangers of GMO foods and that some countries have found it prudent to ban their use.
The speculation around the conspiracy circles is that the GMO foods may alter our genetic make-up (which I admit seems to be far-fetched) to make us more vulnerable to certain biological attacks and that certain viruses may be given to us in a dormant form through hidden elements in our vaccines (a little more believable). I am not saying I believe any of this but after witnessing what happened last century and after reading through the national security archives of what some people in power are capable of, I believe that an open and public debate on this subject needs to be started. As for me and my house, we are avoiding GMO’s and encourage others to do their own research and draw their own conclusions.
For those of you that have already determined to try and avoid GMO's, the food items that I have heard have a high likelihood of being GMO are: corn, soy, canola/rapeseed and cottonseed products. The bad thing is, almost all processed foods have one or more of these ingredients.
So the lesson for today is, questioning the existence of God is unintelligible but questioning all other authorities is intelligent and encouraged.
As a husband and a father, I take seriously the call to be the protector of my family so I do my best not to make a bad and uninformed decision in regard to matters such as this. I would hope that no matter where you come down on this issue that you are not basing your opinion on blind trust in any authority or smooth talker. It is a good idea to be familiar with logical fallacies before doing your research. It takes time to research an issue and my suggestion is to find those facts that both sides of the issue agree on and make an informed decision based on these facts. If need be, dig a little deeper on a few key facts surrounding the subject and see if you can find respected publications that corroborate said claims. Many times you will find the scientific community contradicting themselves when you compare the dumb-downed story that is given to the public for mass consumption and the detailed scientific literature.
A classic illustration of this is on the issue of evolution. Although there are many aspects of evolution that can illustrate this point, I will only deal with one. Both creationists and evolutionists agree that there are billions of dead things buried in layers of rock. Evolutionists claim that these layers were laid out over millions, if not billions of years. Creationists claim that the global flood is the best explanation for the geologic column. One key fact that creationists insist should be hard for an evolutionist to explain is the fact that the vast majority of the geologic column consist of flat knife edged layers throughout the entire column. The question that needs to be asked is, where is all the signs of water and wind erosion between the layers? Take one look at the Grand Canyon, as far as the eye can see are straight, knife edged layers. The only way that the evolutionist could be right with his assertion, is that if after each layer was laid out that there was no wind or rain for millions of years. Another related fact is that trees and other large artifacts have been found fossilized passing through multiple layers, these are called polystrate fossils. Are we to assume that thousands if not millions of years passed without these trees rotting while the layers piled up around them?
As a presuppositionalist, I typically deal with the philosophical question of what would have to be true in order for argumentation itself to be intelligible before proceeding to examples that ought to embarrass unbelieving thought but Christians need to stop being so intellectually lazy with this as with any other issue.
Now full circle back to the issue of GMO foods. First off, after many years of researching the radical corruption that governments and corporations, including our own, have been found guilty of, it has left a very bad taste in my mouth and I have become radically skeptical of any of their inventions that they try to sell us as being “good” for us. So in case you are wondering, this is why I might come off as being conspiratorial but after reading the primary documents themselves of grotesque experimentation on humans (MK-ULTRA, Operation Paperclip, Operation Teapot, Project Bluebird/Artichoke, Tuskegee), the overthrowing democratically elected officials to set up puppet governments (Operation AJAX/Iran, which was the rationale the “radical” Muslims gave for the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979-81), false flag operations to get us into wars for the benefit of the Military/Industrial Complex (Gulf of Tonkin Incident/Vietnam) to name only a few, you should understand why I have very little trust that those government officials and those corporations that have willingly participated in these operations have our best interest at heart when it comes to our health and well-being. Now in regard to GMO foods, I must admit that I have not fully researched this subject enough but there are only so many hours in the day and with the inception of the internet age, we are being bombarded with so much information and disinformation that it is hard to wade through every single issue with meticulous scrutiny, so I typically choose to err on the side of caution and not participate in the latest scientific fads until I have had a chance to make an informed decision on a matter. I have heard that most European countries have banned GMO for many of the same reasons mentioned in these documentaries so there does seem to be some scientific evidence exposing the dangers of GMO foods and that some countries have found it prudent to ban their use.
The speculation around the conspiracy circles is that the GMO foods may alter our genetic make-up (which I admit seems to be far-fetched) to make us more vulnerable to certain biological attacks and that certain viruses may be given to us in a dormant form through hidden elements in our vaccines (a little more believable). I am not saying I believe any of this but after witnessing what happened last century and after reading through the national security archives of what some people in power are capable of, I believe that an open and public debate on this subject needs to be started. As for me and my house, we are avoiding GMO’s and encourage others to do their own research and draw their own conclusions.
For those of you that have already determined to try and avoid GMO's, the food items that I have heard have a high likelihood of being GMO are: corn, soy, canola/rapeseed and cottonseed products. The bad thing is, almost all processed foods have one or more of these ingredients.
So the lesson for today is, questioning the existence of God is unintelligible but questioning all other authorities is intelligent and encouraged.
Croghanite
Puritan Board Sophomore
well said.
You gave us junk science when you included the link from Donald W. Miller Jr., M.D. Here is a link to some of the ideas that he promotes: Questioning HIV/AIDS, Human-Caused Global Warming, and Other Orthodoxies in the Biomedical Sciences by Donald W. Miller, Jr., MD Saying that the majority of the info he includes is garbage would be much too kind.
Answerman
Puritan Board Sophomore
Nate, just curious, how do you define junk science? Questioning the majority held views of a particular scientific position?
If you notice, Dr. Miller prefaces his challenges to the current othodox scientific opinions with "Nevertheless, skeptics have raised valid questions about them. With the real cause, truth, or more probable hypothesis for the disease or phenomenon in question added, along with selected references, they are:" and it sounds like he is simply giving some references for you to do your own research.
I can't say I know much about most of the subjects in that article so I would prefer to reserve judgment until I have researched them more. I have looked into the global warming issue and I lean toward the hypothesis that global warming trends are mostly the result of solar activity. Even scientists that are in the other camp admit that some of the other planets in our solar system have been having a warming trend as well and their are not humans on these other planets to produce excessive CO2. Also his challenge to the cause of coronary artery disease seems to line up with much of the main stream literature on this subject.
Now if he started talking about aliens, I would have to agree that your criticism would be valid but maybe I am just to ignorant about the subjects that he is dealing with in that article, so can you enlighten me to which ones that you are familiar that demonstrate that he is promoting "garbage". I am not saying that I am buying everything this guy promotes but unless I know why what someone promotes is garbage, I prefer to reserve judgment until I have studied the subject.
Thank you,
If you notice, Dr. Miller prefaces his challenges to the current othodox scientific opinions with "Nevertheless, skeptics have raised valid questions about them. With the real cause, truth, or more probable hypothesis for the disease or phenomenon in question added, along with selected references, they are:" and it sounds like he is simply giving some references for you to do your own research.
I can't say I know much about most of the subjects in that article so I would prefer to reserve judgment until I have researched them more. I have looked into the global warming issue and I lean toward the hypothesis that global warming trends are mostly the result of solar activity. Even scientists that are in the other camp admit that some of the other planets in our solar system have been having a warming trend as well and their are not humans on these other planets to produce excessive CO2. Also his challenge to the cause of coronary artery disease seems to line up with much of the main stream literature on this subject.
Now if he started talking about aliens, I would have to agree that your criticism would be valid but maybe I am just to ignorant about the subjects that he is dealing with in that article, so can you enlighten me to which ones that you are familiar that demonstrate that he is promoting "garbage". I am not saying that I am buying everything this guy promotes but unless I know why what someone promotes is garbage, I prefer to reserve judgment until I have studied the subject.
Thank you,
David, you bring up a very important question: How does one define "junk science". I would never define junk science as "Questioning the majority held views of a particular scientific position". This is, in fact, how some of the most important scientific discoveries have been made. In the case of the link that I posted above, I argue that Dr. Miller's views that genetic mutations do not cause cancer, HIV does not cause AIDS, and cell function does not depend on the integrity of the cell membrane, and membrane "pumps" and "channels" are not what they seem are all "junk science". Dr. Miller is stating that his views and resources that he provides are the "real cause", "truth" and "more probable" than the accepted "dogma".
I say that his views in these cases are junk because of the HUGE amount of research that has gone into each of these questions. In my training, I have spent countless hours studying each of these topics, I have talked with some of the foremost experts in the world about HIV/AIDS research, and I myself have spent 3 years performing experiments on genetic mutations that cause cancer and anther 4 years performing experiments on the cell membrane and pumps and channels. Add to this the large number of chemical and small molecule therapies that have been developed to target genetic mutations in cancer and pumps and channels in other diseases. To put your mind at ease, I can assure you that although I receive my research money from the US gov't, I have never, never, never been pressured to perform experiments or interpret results according to the status quo. To think I, or the HIV or cancer scientists have been pressured by the gov't to dupe the public is just silly. Really, it is.
Dr. Miller is obviously a very talented surgeon and an highly intellectual individual, but I just can't figure out how he promotes these views.
Regarding the saturated fats/heart disease, global warming and linear no-threshold items, I will have to take your good advice and study these issues more closely before I make a judgment as I am by no means an expert in any of these areas.
Croghanite
Puritan Board Sophomore
Has anyone seen the OP documentary yet?
DDT and MALARIA RATES
spiked-science | Article | Without DDT, malaria bites back
DDT - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
gladwell dot com - the mosquito killer
South Africa Says DDT Helping To Slash Malaria Rate | World Association of Young Scientists
MALARIA FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL
Access : Health agency backs use of DDT against malaria : Nature
Interesting articles about DDT and malaria.
spiked-science | Article | Without DDT, malaria bites back
DDT - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
gladwell dot com - the mosquito killer
South Africa Says DDT Helping To Slash Malaria Rate | World Association of Young Scientists
MALARIA FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL
Access : Health agency backs use of DDT against malaria : Nature
Interesting articles about DDT and malaria.
- Status
