s1k3sT Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Your comment at 10:04AM today implies that healthy people are invulnerable to disease. You, by my question probing as to whether or not you've been sick and your answer to it, implies that you've been invulnerable to disease. That's your interpretation, but is your interpretation correct? You're the authority on interpreting other people's writings? I already explained it once, but in case you missed it: You seem to think I'm saying diet and exercise are better than vaccines, but that wasn't the point. I was using a strawman, similar to the apricot seeds and silver reference, to show how ridiculous it was... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdood Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Are you really going to tell me that perfectly healthy people get colds? Really? Is that how far from common sense we've gotten? There's no natural immunity and no amount of "being healthy" or eating vitamins or excercising can prevent viruses (and microorganisms) from entering your body, so yes. There is a reason why it's called the common cold. I've also often wondered how people can know that they're "in perfect health." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solid Knight Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 That's your interpretation, but is your interpretation correct? You're the authority on interpreting other people's writings? I am the authority on interpreting other people's writing because if I wasn't, I wouldn't be able to determine what said writing meant. In fact, if I wasn't then all writing would be nonsense. I already explained it once, but in case you missed it: I don't believe you actually said that. Even if posted under your own account there is no proof that the idea originated from your mind. If you're going claim that this idea is yours then you better have some proof to go with it. After all, the burden of proof is on you and you haven't provided anything substantial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polyarchist Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 There's no natural immunity and no amount of "being healthy" or eating vitamins or excercising can prevent viruses (and microorganisms) from entering your body, so yes. There is a reason why it's called the common cold. I've also often wondered how people can know that they're "in perfect health." The cold is common because almost everybody in the western world is far from being in perfect health. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaCrip Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Except that the flu can easily kill those of weaker health. The shots may be useless to you, but they save the lives of others, and maybe even you as you get older or your health worsens. i agree with you but at the same time, as i said before, if your THAT WEAK to begin with your probably not going to live much longer regardless if you get the vaccine or not. Blindly demonizing it is far worse. Well it's not a stretch of imagination that some people have there $$$ of higher concern than people's health. so i prefer to take the cautious route. but if people want to get them, that's fine by me because it's their life at the end of the day. we all gotta make our own choices ;) That's not to say it wasn't blown out of proportion. I think it was, and even though it has shown to be more deadly than other variants, it's still mostly only lethal to those who are already in poor health. The vaccine saved lives there. Mass vaccination of the general population was excessive, but I don't know if a conspiracy was behind it. Paranoia is enough. The fear of a pandemic that would overwhelm the health care system. It doesn't take that much before it all breaks down. that's basically my point. the media just trying it PUSH it on people to influence them to get the shots so the drug companies etc can line there pockets. it's not hard to see that much of it if you ask me. because if they can pump just enough fear into people they will go out and get it and as we all know everything is still fine for VAST majority of people out there today. so it was basically not really needed but yet the media was damn near acting like it was a plague. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solid Knight Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Yes, because weaponized strains are so relevant to this topic because people regularly get vaccines against bioweapons. :rolleyes: Depends on your job actually. You say that vaccines are ineffective and that healthy people don't get infections yet you defenestrate that logic when the virus has been modified in a lab. Why do you do this? Further, why would the military waste money on vaccinations if being healthy is a requirement of military personnel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdood Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 i agree with you but at the same time, as i said before, if your THAT WEAK to begin with your time will surely be limited regardless if you get a vaccine or not. Uhm, sure, but are you saying that we shouldn't bother because they're going to die in X years anyway? Maybe we should just round them all up and throw them off of a cliff? Well it's not a stretch of imagination that some people have there $$$ of higher concern than people's health. so i prefer to take the cautious route. but if people want to get them, that's fine by me because it's their life at the end of the day. we all gotta make our own choices ;) Everyone has a choice, but I think it's important that people make informed decisions, and that's not something you can do without educating yourself ? and just reading conspiracy blogs doesn't cut it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polyarchist Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Depends on your job actually. However, you say that vaccines are ineffective and that healthy people don't get infections yet you defenestrate that logic when the virus has been modified in a lab. Further, why would the military waste money on vaccinations if being healthy is a requirement of military personnel? Anybody can see you are clearly changing to the topic. Get back to it and I'll answer you. As for your last question that is still relevant, the answer is the same as my first comment in this thread. Vaccinations are designed to hurt people. Military grunts are just the first guinea pigs. Vaccines are a slow acting toxin, and since grunts are trained to fight, a government would obviously want them to have a faster expiration date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s1k3sT Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 I don't believe you actually said that. Even if posted under your own account there is no proof that the idea originated from your mind. If you're going claim that this idea is yours then you better have some proof to go with it. After all, the burden of proof is on you and you haven't provided anything substantial. How can it be "mine"? I didn't bring anything with me when I came into this world, and I'm not planning to take anything with me when I go either... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solid Knight Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 As for your last question that is still relevant, the answer is the same as my first comment in this thread. Vaccinations are designed to hurt people. Military grunts are just the first guinea pigs. Vaccines are a slow acting toxin, and since grunts are trained to fight, a government would obviously want them to have a faster expiration date. That doesn't make any economical sense and most grunts leave after four years of service. Further this makes no tactical sense since you need grunts to fight a war and making them "expire" would seriously hamper their ability to fight. Further, what about all those grunts who got vaccinated in WW1 and WW2 and lived to be over 90? Kind of goes against this whole expiration theory you have. Think harder. How can it be "mine"? I didn't bring anything with me when I came into this world, and I'm not planning to take anything with me when I go either... So you didn't say it and you admit to lying. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s1k3sT Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 So you didn't say it and you admit to lying. Thanks. Are you saying it's not possible to use something without "owning" it? Not everything is either black or white... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdood Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 The cold is common because almost everybody in the western world is far from being in perfect health. No. In fact, even if you're in "perfect" health your body still has to mount a response, which causes symptoms. Unless you're just playing with semantics here. Obviously you're no longer technically in perfect health when a virus has entered your body. Vaccinations are designed to hurt people. Vaccines are designed to trigger an immune response and introduce your body to a certain antigen. Vaccines are a slow acting toxin Care to elaborate? In detail? In your own words, with no conspiracy links and quotes that no one wants to dig through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaCrip Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Uhm, sure, but are you saying that we shouldn't bother because they're going to die in X years anyway? Maybe we should just round them all up and throw them off of a cliff? Everyone has a choice, but I think it's important that people make informed decisions, and that's not something you can do without educating yourself ? and just reading conspiracy blogs doesn't cut it. i agree with you. yes, i am sure i do tend to read to many conspiracy type websites etc. lol but at the end of the day... playing the odds i am sure ill be fine without the vaccines. i just prefer to be cautious of people in general instead of blindly trusting everyone like some people do. this much surely can't be a bad mindset. but as far as the whole 'educating yourself' stuff... your right, i am sure i need to do more research. but at the same time, there is so much crap out there it's hard to sort between the truth and BS when it comes to health. i just wonder how much those vaccines really work as far as 'saving lives from random flu viruses when say your 75-80 years old'? ... my grandma is 92 years old right now (she will be 93 later this year). i just figure some people are blessed with good health while others are not. just got to hope for the best, we all can't live forever ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solid Knight Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Are you saying it's not possible to use something without "owning" it? Nope. I'm saying you admitted to the quote you posted as not coming from your mind. That you admit that your brain did not create a pattern of signals in such a manner that caused you to type that quote. So now that you admit to lying, why are you withholding the secret to disease free life? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polyarchist Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 That doesn't make any economical sense and most grunts leave after four years of service. Economical sense? The military is paid for by taxes. They have nearly unlimited funds and do as they please. Further this makes no tactical sense since you need grunts to fight a war and making them "expire" would seriously hamper their ability to fight. The expiration date would obviously be well after the war is fought. :rolleyes: Further, what about all those grunts who got vaccinated in WW1 and WW2 and lived to be over 90? Kind of goes against this whole expiration theory you have. They got nothing compared to the stuff the military tests on soldiers today, and people were healthier in the 1940's than they are today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solid Knight Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Economical sense? The military is paid for by taxes. They have nearly unlimited funds and do as they please. Wrong. They run out of money all the time. But seeing as you never read about it--because you choose not to--you don't know this. The expiration date would obviously be well after the war is fought. :rolleyes: And they'd know when the war would end two to three years before initiating the war how? What about all the vaccinations during peace time? The military has access to a time machine? That's what it'd take to predict these things. Also, how to people make thirty to forty year careers out of the military if they are set to expire? *ROLLS EYES* Further if it is so far after the war date then what the hell is the purpose of even having it? You're going to kill them in their old age because...? They got nothing compared to the stuff the military tests on soldiers today, and people were healthier in the 1940's than they are today. That's straight up bullcrap. The only reason why you say this is because the rise in obesity but you ignore the ever growing community of athletes. Look at the number of people running marathons back in the 1940s as compared to now. Huge increase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s1k3sT Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Nope. I'm saying you admitted to the quote you posted as not coming from your mind. That you admit that your brain did not create a pattern of signals in such a manner that caused you to type that quote. So now that you admit to lying, why are you withholding the secret to disease free life? Against better judgement, I'll play along... I admit, I probably should have been more precise in the line of questioning. I don't believe you actually said that. Even if posted under your own account there is no proof that the idea originated from your mind. If you're going claim that this idea is yours then you better have some proof to go with it. After all, the burden of proof is on you and you haven't provided anything substantial. How can it be "mine"? I didn't bring anything with me when I came into this world, and I'm not planning to take anything with me when I go either... The question should have been: how can the idea be "mine"? I want to know where the evidence is that I own anything. Sure, a thought may enter the mind I'm using; but does that mean the thought or mind belong to me? The way I look at it is this: I think we can all agree that energy isn't created or destroyed, it just changes. I think reality is just energy, nothing more, nothing less; so if that's the case and energy isn't creator or destroyed, how can anything belong to me? How can I "own" a part of reality? The body I'm using; will I take it with me when I leave this planet or will it go into the ground? I'm not saying the perspective I use is right, just wanted to explain it since I seem to be catching an awful lot of flak because of it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solid Knight Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 The question should have been: how can the idea be "mine"? I want to know where the evidence is that I own anything. Sure, a thought may enter the mind I'm using; but does that mean the thought or mind belong to me? The way I look at it is this: I think we can all agree that energy isn't created or destroyed, it just changes. I think reality is just energy, nothing more, nothing less; so if that's the case and energy isn't creator or destroyed, how can anything belong to me? How can I "own" a part of reality? The body I'm using; will I take it with me when I leave this planet or will it go back into the ground? This is all irrelevant to the main point. The main idea was that you have no proof that you were the one who typed that quote. I don't give a crap if you read that quote in a book and copied it. You have no proof that you, in fact, typed that quote much less believe that quote. Until you provide said proof I will not acknowledge it as being true. So then, why do you withhold the secrets to being invulnerable from disease? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polyarchist Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Wrong. They run out of money all the time. But seeing as you never read about it--because you choose not to--you don't know this. Yes, because it's in always in the news about how our military is woefully underfunded and how our country has one of lowest military expenditures per GDP. :rolleyes: And they'd know when the war would end two to three years before initiating the war how? You know, because lots of the vaccines are given only once. What about all the vaccinations during peace time? The military has access to a time machine? That's what it'd take to predict these things. *ROLLS EYES* Obviously the military would only roll out the heavy stuff before deploying men overseas, which is not something that does not have ample prep time. :shifty: That's straight up bullcrap. The only reason why you say this is because the rise in obesity but you ignore the ever growing community of athletes. Look at the number of people running marathons back in the 1940s as compared to now. Huge increase. Marathon runners do their body harm. People aren't meant to be running that much. Compare the way a sprinter looks to a marathon runner. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamawesomewicked Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 This is all irrelevant to the main point. The main idea was that you have no proof that you were the one who typed that quote. I don't give a crap if you read that quote in a book and copied it. You have no proof that you, in fact, typed that quote much less believe that quote. Until you provide said proof I will not acknowledge it as being true. So then, why do you withhold the secrets to being invulnerable from disease? He's not immune to disease. He just frauds the health care system by writing someone else's name on the paper so that he doesn't get the bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solid Knight Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Yes, because it's in always in the news about how our military is woefully underfunded and how our country has one of lowest military expidentures per GDP. :rolleyes: Doesn't matter that it's not always in the news. There are articles about the military not having enough to fund a project. And within the organizations in the military there are articles about how little funding the Marines have and how they have to make due with outdated equipment. Obviously the military would only roll out the heavy stuff before deploying men overseas, which is not something that does not have ample prep time. :shifty: And they'd know when the war would be over how? And the purpose to waiting for people to be well past retirement before they "expired" them would be? Marathon runners do their body harm. People aren't meant to be running that much. Compare the way a sprinter looks to a marathon runner. :laugh: Marathon runners do not harm their bodies. As with any physical activity, even something like getting off the couch, you use resources within your body. As long as you replace those resources you're fine. The reason marathoners look skinny (which not all of them are as I've seen 200+ pound muscle guys doing marathons on occasion) is because the body optimizes itself for endurance where cutting weight and muscle mass would be advantageous. However, you can look at people who do Ironman and see that they have a bit more bulk than people who only run because the swim and biking portions require some strength which increases muscle mass slightly. Sprinters have big legs because they work anaerobically and it requires much more strength to run as fast as you can than it does to run for extended periods of time. But the fact that people can train themselves to go 100+ miles running, or do something like the Endurance 50 (50 marathons in 50 states in 50 days) demonstrates that a single 26.2 mile run isn't really pushing the limit of the human body. He's not immune to disease. He just frauds the health care system by writing someone else's name on the paper so that he doesn't get the bill. So then he does fall ill. Lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s1k3sT Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent! -a man that uses the name Bill Gates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdood Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 -a man that uses the name Bill Gates Are you saying you don't agree? Are you saying people in poor countries are worth less or something? Personally I agree with him. We need to improve health care and living conditions for the world world so that there is no need to have 10 children in the hope that 1 or 2 will survive. It's a win-win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solid Knight Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 -a man that uses the name Bill Gates You do realize he is referring to areas that have lots of babies because they tend to get killed off by disease later on, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
He's Dead Jim Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Heres one, like most kidz in the uk I got the tuberculosis vaccination round about age 11, round about age 43 I was admitted to the emergency ward and diagnosed with advanced pulmonary tb and double pneumonia, the doc said that without immediate treatment I would only have lasted another 3 days at home, then they would have come to get me with a bag... do vaccinations really work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts