Immortal Cells...Who would have known?

I'm in agreement with you 100%

My emotional coloring, based on my warm welcome to the board elsewhere, caused me to view your words "Educate yourself" as condescending. I took offense.
Forgive my incorrect assumption.

I'm all about open discussing and debate.
Such open discussion and debate cannot be forthcoming if there is only one side presented.

Because I present an opposing side does not mean I adhere to its principles.
I present it for the learning and expansion of the mind.

I dare say since I've been here, post count has increased.

We should always question any information unless we've been able to view the source documentation or talk to witnesses.

I tend to be like Mulder on the X-Files. 'Trust no one'.


Cross referencing is important but if you cross reference with information that is also false you come up with a false conclusion.

What is the truth?

I have no doubt that the government can easily, perhaps through the military, do covert biological warfare experimentation and research and the general public won't know a thing about it.

I'm just that cynical and untrusting.

I appreciate your post to discuss the topic with me.

Thank you.

 

I'm not saying I know anything on the subject.
I don't take your words to be mean at all.
I posted that theory because I wanted to know your thoughts on it, not because I thought that theory had merit or not.

This information is online for all to read.
I wanted your thoughts on it as you are the medical researcher on this site.

I also know that the media will influence the masses and such books combined with Hollywood movies and science fiction novels may cause the facts to be blurred for the general public.

As the song lyrics state "If I saw it on t.v. then it must be true."

or maybe I should
at the horrible thought of such gullibility of society.

I think the author postulates that the forms of cancer could be a result of the interaction of the DNA of the vaccines with the DNA of the person being inoculated.

A 20 year period of cell regeneration within the body could possibly be the length of time needed for that vaccine DNA to reveal itself in a different state now mutated specifically for that person, could it not?

And that personalized specificity could easily cause the myriad of different cancers prevalent today because yes, no two humans are exactly the same although their basic DNA is homosexual sapien.

Could it be much like a computer virus that attacks randomly the basic registries and directories and then splits off into the subdirectories and files infiltrating the whole system and each day for the computer technician to 'cure' the virus from the system, he must change his attack because the virus chooses random locations from which to set up its own attack and defense?

Thank you, for the reading material.

What if there were other compounds better used that are missed because the cell lines being used are masking potential better results because of their immortality? Has that question ever been addressed?


I'm saying that we become so use to thinking within the box of acceptable possibilities that we may forget to shake off the cobwebs and look outside the box to different possibilities.

It has always been those different possibilities that have brought us to new understanding about all aspects of life.

How many things do we take for granted today that 100 years ago would be laughed at as poppycock?

For the record, I've had all the vaccinations the board of health has required.
I have not taken the flu shot, nor will I.
So far, my own body has done quite well in defending itself.

Both my parents had cancer, so I'm expecting that specter to find me one day if it hasn't already.

I see the bigger picture for now.
What will be the bigger picture 200 years from now?


It was told to me the other day, that ideas can come from anywhere and are as valid as any idea.

Words out of the mouths of babes can humble the wisest of men.

 

I really didnt mean it offensively at all to tell you the truth.
I just meant go out there and get the info and never forget th ebig picture.
Lots of what is written becomes so myopic it by default becomes out of context.
Problem is, when somebody has true emotions connected to a topic based on personal experiences, you cant be biased. A lot of negative stuff published is from parents who had something bad happening, they ar eangry, rightully so but it will color what they write.

I, the other day was trying to get info about Elocon and some side-effects (peri0oral dermatitis) and all I found was horrible things. I know that the vast majority that uses Elocon have great results and a few do have issues (that are on the warning label) but as poeple dont end up writing stuff like that on the web when it is good - you look it up and it looks all bad.. terrible even... that doesnt mean its the truth. Peopl ealwasy take time to complain etc when things go wrong but people have a tendency to not take that time of it is all hunkydory.

Yes, there are risks, are they so large that it warrants not vaccinating. No, not even close.
I doubt we ever will be 100% sure in anythimg medical, we are humans.

If you feel this strongly about it, I suggest you get to a univesity library where you will have access to Pubmed and such. Also investigate the opposition and who they are and their background, just to make sure.

I have in the past acctually sent random e-mails to professors to ask if I could have 30 minutes of his time to ask a question and I have and believe it or not, many are willing to let you have some of their time to talk about thinsg they are passionate about.
So if you want, maybe you can do that with a vaccine scientist.

The government has done really shady things in the military before so Im not one to say it cant happen.

 

I know you didn't.
That was my own perception based on the hostility towards me on other threads. My perception was unwarranted. I do apologize for that assumption based on my own emotional colorings.

You can't discount the negatives, but you are correct the positives also need to be viewed.

It is much like viewing television news. It seems all you hear is the negative and nothing positive.

Again, it goes back to being biased.
Everyone will have some bias based on their own experiences.

If a mother loses her child to a drunk driver, she will focus her efforts to getting drunk drivers off the road.

If a mother loses her child to some vaccine complication, you know she's going to be researching into the depths of the basement security labs to find out why it happened.

My friend did get his cancer from vaccines. It happens.

 

I agree with you wholeheartedly!
Get on FB, blog, RSS feeds, twitter.....
Set up your own website. I'm sure there are web designers that would be willing to help you start your website!

The internet is the media of the future. Use it to your advantage.

This is a great idea.
Tell me more about it.

 

There is research bias based on funding.

It happens.
You even admitted to the rotten eggs.

I did not say ALL research was biased.
I said research can be biased.



My friend also has been privy to clinical studies that have been unbiased.

He's also knows of clinical studies that have been biased funded by an industry that wanted new drugs to fund the coffers so don't tell me that all researchers are pure angels when in fact they are not and the pharmaceutical companies and sports industry are paying big bucks for that magic bullet that will bring them the bonanza.


I didn't mean to be offensive to you FG.
I understand your passion and get it and respect it.

All industries, and research is an industry, will have their shady side.

I made a statement of fact that bias does happen.
Maybe not in your circles of influence but bias can be there.

 

Great post!

I can't rep ya but if I could I would!

It does prove my point about erroneous information and dishonesty in the scientific community.

I'm of the opinion we should help FG achieve her dream and passion.
How can we help her?

 

Reps to you too FG, but I can't rep you for your well written posts!

Women are being taught to not trust the positive information online because that information is biased towards the drug whatever the drug may be.
You said it yourself. Find out the source of the information and then determine its bias, if any.

To have a "drug interaction type checker" format on all the research would be fantastic for mothers and all those who need and want the information to make informed choices about their health.