New FOIA docs related to C19 origins. Forget speaker drama and start digging in !
(twitter.com)
🧐 Research Wanted 🤔
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (42)
sorted by:
Are you suggesting that bacteria can't harm people either? Where does your sanitation argument fit into that? What could sanitation possibly accomplish in the health regime other than reduce bacterial breeding grounds?
I'm not sure what to say to this, but in this concept of "the flu," what is the flu?
Wait, so its a microorganism that can make you sick and possibly kill you, but you are also saying:
...
There are people, such as myself, who can eat raw chicken and other foods liable to make one sick, in small quantities. The small amount of microbes present in such meals simply don’t stand a chance against a human in good shape. If I ate it daily it would be a different story.
With sanitation the issue is keeping the level of microbes in one’s environment and thus, in one’s body, low enough that they don’t become a threat.
Of course, none of this has anything to do with viruses, which only multiply in their hosts. Given that, you’d think sanitation wouldn’t affect viral infectious diseases. Yet it does!
The symptoms one experiences when one’s body’s latent population of microbes becomes large enough to threaten one. In a healthy person this event might almost never take place.
So you admit that viruses and bacteria likely exist and that they make people sick, sometimes even very sick or kill them. Is that true? It's still pretty confusing.
As for the rest, you seem to be espousing certain elements of nutrition as if you think I disagree. I don't. I agree completely. I also eat raw meat, and there is no reason to limit yourself to "sometimes." On the contrary, I am starting to think that "cooking" is, and has always been harmful, though it may be just cooking at certain (high) temperatures. More research is needed.
Your body can handle anything it is prepared to handle. I wouldn't suggest eating raw meat from just anywhere. Like, don't buy chicken at the grocery store (unless it is sourced from a local farm that you know). The processing methods in general are far from sanitary, and some bacteria can kill you in smaller numbers than others (certain strains of e. coli found in chicken and/or beef are particularly nasty). You won't find those bacteria in well processed meat. It is the processing methods that introduce the bacteria.
Having said that, even there, with a healthy immune system, you will likely be far better off than someone who doesn't have one. That is very rare though, and has absolutely nothing to do with your theory of a "covid scam" (which I wholeheartedly agree exists, just not in the way you suggest it).
It’s only confusing because you keep misreading what I’m saying in an attempt to get your gotcha moment.
Like when you misinterpreted my disbelief that a handful of micro Davids could enter a giga Goliath like a healthy human body and, within a few hours to days, bring that giga Goliath to his knees. A human doesn’t go from healthy to suffering from the flu that quickly. It takes months for a microbe to go from first entry to being able to threaten the body and that’s only possible if the human being invaded is weakened.
Also viruses don’t exist.
Cooking is associated with larger brain size in the evolutionary record. I consider it to be rudimentary sanitation, that is to say, a means of reducing microbes in one’s environment. It obviously damages the nutritional value of themeat too, but the alternative of always eating raw meat isn’t viable with factory food, you WILL make yourself sick, even with beef.
And for my own food operation, I can’t bring myself to kill. So I eat eggs, often raw, also often cooked (over easy on mashed potatoes mmmm).
I can’t see how you can subscribe to the idea that someone sneezing on you can make you sick, but eating salmonella-ridden raw chicken meat on the regular is okay. And you say my beliefs are confusing!
My goal is not one of malice, but of getting to the truth. Please stop ascribing false intent to my actions. It is my belief that you are basing your conclusions on false premises. I say that because I keep seeing things in your stated beliefs that go directly against experimental evidence and you are not providing evidence to support your beliefs. Therefore I am trying to understand your position more fully. I am not intentionally "misunderstanding" you (if indeed that is what is happening). If I am doing so, either I am not hearing you, or you are not being clear. You assume it is the first.
Viruses replicate at different rates and in different conditions. Some viruses can completely their cycle in around an hour, or a few hours. We'll call it two hours for simplicity. This means they can go from a single invader to hundreds or thousands in an hour. We'll call it "1,000" for simplicity.
A single virion from a virus like a coronavirus then will, after finding a target cell, create 1,000 more. It doesn't have to be SARS if you believe that one doesn't exist, any old coronavirus will do. It will only attach to cell types that are actively expressing a specific receptor (or similar one, depends on the virus). Once so infected the virion gets endocytosed and is thus wholly out of the reach of what we think of as our "immune system," at least until the virus finishes it's cycle.
So in this contrived case, two hour after a single virion finds its target, there will then be 1,000 new virions introduced into a region of the body where the cells are already expressing the receptors that particular virus uses to invade. That means that all of those cells will be targets. What happens when you "gum up," or in many cases kill a bunch of different cells in a single location of the body, a single organ? You do damage to the tissue.
All of these things cause an immune response, but there are multiple immune responses. For example, there's the "find invader" response, but there's also damage, so there's an inflammation response. The virus won't stay localized as it sounds like I'm suggesting, but I don't think you fully appreciate how quickly things can get out of hand. If a single cell creates 1,000 virions in 2 hours, in 4 hours there can be 1,000,000. In 6 hours there can be 1,000,000,000. Every one born in an environment where they barely have to look for their favorite receptor site.
But not all will stay there. On the contrary, they will spread, causing damage all over. The body knows this and has a "sickness response." This puts the body on high alert, creating an inflammation response everywhere to be ready to fix what's broken, and do everything it can to halt 1,000,000,000 (one billion) virions from becoming 1,000,000,000,000 (one trillion), or 1,000,000,000,000,000 (one quadrillion), etc.
This is (loosely, or perhaps overly simplistically) what experiment shows. In order for this to be incorrect you would have to show me the actual flaws (not just your supposition) in the millions of experiments that have led to the statements above of how it works.
Not only have you shown no "evidence against" the "evidence for" in any case, you have shown no evidence or even reasonable explanation against any of it, except your "disbelief," and, in my opinion, a lack of understanding (or more likely knowledge) of the evidence.
It is ONLY necessary for food that has been sitting and/or processed in a unsanitary environment. You attribute it to "Larger brain size." Getting into our real history is too far outside of this discussion, but I suggest you ask yourself this question:
Why are we the only animals (omnivore or carnivore) on the planet that get sick eating raw meat?