Not super sure about her but this all makes sense. Here is the Rumble link enter text
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (19)
sorted by:
So the answers to 1 & 2 tells me that Terrain theory also believes in "infections" similar to Virus theory. Agree?
The differences being a virus can supposedly multiply in the body vs a toxin is just inert substance, and virus attacking body vs body simply reacting as it detoxes. Agree?
This doesn't exactly hold up since the amount of pollens he was exposed to in a storm of pollen will be orders of magnitude less than the amount of pollens he would be shedding on us. To me, a germ growth in the body better explains why the infection might be able to pass from person to person without the quantity being transmitted getting reduced drastically.
This is my biggest issue. Your great opposition to viral theory is the fact that viruses have never been isolated. So, in a new theory that supposedly remedies this short coming, isolating, quantifying and cataloging the toxins should be the very first task before it can be publicised as an alternate theory.
Fair enough, all I want is someone who believes in terrain theory who is willing to answer questions because what I have seen - most people are super excited about terrain theory, but very reluctant to actually engage in answering anything beyond "no one has isolated a virus" - and this doesnt sit well to my scientific mind.
I really appreciate you taking the time to answer.
This is exactly what I try to do (and am trying to do right now as well)
I am not sure about this. I have seen drastic benefits from both homeopathy and accupuncture - just to give two examples. Perhaps you are referring to "new age" wholistic medicine - then I fully agree, the new age movement itself is a controlled operation.
This piques my interest, I will give it a try, thanks.
Fwiw, acupuncture, chiropractic and homeopathy have always been targeted and ridiculed by the AMA. As well as ayurvedic and shamanic healing. For the most part I would call those uncontrolled opposition, and generally forces for good.
Controlled opposition include folks like Dr. Oz and Dr. Andrew Weill, who reel people in with a few truths but leave them in the allopathic system. The Rockefeller system goal is to capture them entirely as much as possible, like osteopathy, which was a different healing philosophy that has now been fully coopted. In addition to external coercion of those schools of thought (i.e., participating in insurance reimbursement), I believe there are covert infiltrators who intentionally misrepresent those schools of thought.
Infection can also include bacteria and parasites, living creatures that multiply. Terrain theory is not inherently incompatible with viruses, if they existed, but for the most part those that espouse terrain theory have different explanations for the material that allopathic medicine calls a virus. I now believe virology is a fake science, but I also think it's largely a side debate to distract from the fact that real cures exist outside of prescription drugs and symptom treatment.
I don't especially like the term terrain theory, simply because most proponents of the term sound wacko, despite the literal meaning being straightforward. But many other schools of thought relating to healing arts, including homeopathy, are based on concepts that are in line with terrain theory generally, and most of them existed as schools of thought long before the concept of viruses. So the existence or nonexistence of viruses is almost academic, except that allopathic medicine requires viruses to be real for much (though not all) of its treatments.
I'm still learning, too.