Attention Parents Enterovirus68 Infects Children Across The Nation

Discussion in 'Pandora's Box' started by rain dancer, Sep 8, 2014.

  1. #1 rain dancer, Sep 8, 2014
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2014
    Over a thousand children in 10 states have been affected by enterovirus68

    the cdc has tested every child and found all samples to contain enterovirus 68 but they wont officially declare it.
    -----see----
    This site blames illegal immigration
    http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/09/04/illegal-immigrant-related-pandemic-diseases-are-appearing-in-the-us/http://www.kshb.com/news/health/viral-outbreak-of-enterovirus-68-sends-hundreds-of-kansas-city-metro-kids-to-hospital

    http://www.19actionnews.com/story/26468578/children-under-attack-by-enterovirus-68

    http://abcnews.go.com/Health/respiratory-virus-sickening-children-colorado/story?id=25317407

    http://www.kctv5.com/story/26467082/possible-enterovirus-outbreak-sickens-more-than-900-children

    Final thoughts?
    There is no treatment or cure other than being on a respirator and as you can see above, the children's hospitals are filling up.

    Fun fact, theres been less than 100 cases in the last 40 years in the UNITED STATES!!!
    http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/24/health/mystery-illness-in-california/

    73 cases in 40 years in the U.S.

    And now 1000 cases in the last month?

    What could be the cause? Is this why Obama is putting the immigration issue on the back burner for two months? The white house wont reply about the issue and the CDC wont admit what it is officially.

    Discuss.
     
  2. Ironic that as soon as school started, so did the outbreak...
     
  3. I don't know anything about this but I am sure brown people are to blame. 'Murica!
     
  4. 1 sentence: Glad I'm not a kid anymore, for that reason. Otherwise.. I wish I could be young again. 
     
  5. Ehh it'll die out.
     
  6. The Government likes to control the population haha.
    Poisonous Pesticides on produce, spontaneous outbreaks, Toxins in the water supply.
    Cancer was created by the government, the pollution, radioactive activity(X-rays, UV lights, Electromagnetic fields, cause cell mutation that does not happen in nature.
     
    They want to backhandedly keep us broken through some way, to give them the power.
    Theoretical but many people have discussed upon it.
     
  7. The government killing people?  I would be surprised if they weren't.
     
  8. Cancer was created by the government. Really dude? Have any proof of that? What is the incentive of the government to give people cancer? This post is nothing but fear mongering and doesn't have much to do with the op.
     
  9. #9 LuxSpiritus, Sep 8, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 8, 2014
    Cell mutation doesn't happen in nature, it happens to us and the animals embedded in our industrialized society so it's integrated in our genes and amplified by our environment.


    Sent from my iPhone using Grasscity Forum
     
  10. How do you define industrialized?
     
    http://www.history.com/news/3200-year-old-skeleton-is-oldest-known-case-of-human-cancer
     
    Obviously rates of cancer have increased due to pollutants in the environment as well as increased average lifespans, but cancer is not a new phenomenon, whipped up by the (I assume you're meaning US) government in the past 100 years to cull the herd.
     
  11. #11 nativetongues, Sep 8, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 8, 2014
    One of the biggest sources of radiation and a frequent cause of cancer is exposure to the sun. Is the sun some unnatural government created entity. I won't disagree that there are probably some government policies which have lead to increases in cancer, but I don't think people in the government are actively trying to increase cancer or disease in the population. Depends on how you want to define mutation. In animals the translation and replication of DNA frequently fucks up and mutates leading to a change. There are many natural sources of radiation that are extremely high and would definitely cause cancer. Things that people were exposed to long before the industrial era. Our government did not create cancer.
     
  12. That's not irony at all

    Sure it does
     
  13. Are you people retarded? Really our government made cancer? They released a mildly bad "flu" that most kids are surviving? For what? So much idiocy here.


    Sent from my iPod touch using Grasscity Forum
     
  14. #14 yurigadaisukida, Sep 8, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 8, 2014
    dude i just learned a lot about you from this one post.

    No wonder you have such insane viewd

    Here try this

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlKL_EpnSp8&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    Sent from my LG-E739 using Grasscity Forum mobile app
     
  15. The US government did not create cancer -
     
    \tArchaeologists find 3,200-year-old skeleton with cancerhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2582835/Archaeologists-3-200-year-old-skeleton-cancer-The-young-mans-bones-help-disease-evolved.html
     
    Also, as an avid genealogist, I read a LOT of death certificates, and cancer most definitely existed in the 1800s! It was rarer, than now, however! Heart disease and kidney failure were far more common than cancer as a cause of death.
     
    I think that besides all the pollutants, the food industry bears a fair part of the blame for the rise in cancer rates!  :eek:   They have radically changed our cooking oils- and you say, "So what? Oil is oil."   :confused_2: 
     
    The problem is what they are using in most prepared foods is a high Omega 6 oil like soy or corn oil. The Omega 6 oils are CHEAP and the food industry loves them! But this puts our bodies and minds at risk for all sorts of bad things! In women with breast cancer they found that they had high levels of Omega 6 and almost no Omega 3 in their bodies. Omega 6 is mostly pro-inflammatory, while Omega 3 is anti-inflammatory. Inflammation and cancer have been linked!  (n-3 = Omega 3, n-6 = Omega 6)
     
    [SIZE=11pt]Long-chain n-3-to-n-6 polyunsaturated fatty acid ratios in breast adipose tissue from women with and without breast cancer.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12416257 [/SIZE]
     
    Israeli 'cancer shift' over heart disease mortality may be led by greater risk in women with high intake of n-6 fatty acids.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17923822
     
    n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid intake and cancer risk in Italy and Switzerland.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12672040
     
    These articles will explain why too much Omega 6 is bad for you-
     
    How too much omega-6 and not enough omega-3 is making us sick 
    http://chriskresser.com/how-too-much-omega-6-and-not-enough-omega-3-is-making-us-sick
     
    The importance of the ratio of omega-6/omega-3 essential fatty acids.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12442909
     
    Deficiency of Dietary Omega-3 May Explain Depressive Behaviors (news - 2011) http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Deficiency+of+Dietary+Omega-3+May+Explain+Depressive+Behaviors.-a0248155576
     
    Our diets have changed, and our food has changed, and not for the better!
     
    Wild-caught fish has Omega 3, farm-raised fish are fed a diet based on corn (no Omega 3). Fish used to be served every Friday, but that custom has fallen by the wayside, so we have lost that weekly source of Omega 3.
     
    Beef is mostly feed-lot raised on corn to fatten them- grass-fed beef has Omega 3 from the grasses they ate.
     
    Walnuts are a source of Omega 3- my grandmother had a big burlap bag of them to put in breads, cookies and even salads. Walnuts used to be a poor person's food, but now they are as pricy as steak!
     
    Our diets are now also filled with artificial colors and flavors- many of which are banned in Europe because of their adverse health effects! Between the negative effects of the additives, and the lack of Omega 3 in our diets combined with the overabundance of Omega 6, it is not at all surprising that cancer rates are very high in the US!
     
     
    Granny
     
  16. Omega 3's are anti-inflammatory because they are immuno-suppressive.  Maybe ok in the short term, probably not so in the long term. Fish oil is also extremely susceptible to oxidation via heat, so it is very likely acting in a similar fashion to the highly oxidized omega 6's you were referring too.
     
    Just say no to fish oil, save your cash.
     
    I also suggest looking more deeply into "essential fatty acids".  There is actually nothing essential about them.
     
  17. Cancer was not 'Created' by the government, I overlook my typing.
    It has shown to be much more prevalent in areas with much more toxins airborne.
    Chemical fumes, drinking water(Tap) has chlorine a poisonous substance. By products.

    Oil wells, mines, Chemical storage, factories all workers develop more health problems than average especially cancer.

    All these unnatural by products we are exposed to everyday, make it more likely for amplified chromosome damage.

    Despite my earlier statement.
    The government loves cancer, I don't doubt they've found an adequate cute. Chemo can kill as many people as it can save.

    Cancer is big money.
    I don't see why this leveled off to disproving a mistaken statement, I was talking about the relevance of government schemes beyond our eyes. Which is absolutely positive.


    Sent from my iPhone using Grasscity Forum
     
  18. Dude you are paranoid as fuck. The government does not have some secret cure to cancer. If they did why wouldn't they just charge people a shitload of money to buy it, if there true motive was profit. The only other logical explanation is that the government is doing it to kill citizens, which is even more ludicrous than your original implication that they do it to make money. What's your point? That government and modern industry lead to higher cancer levels. No one is arguing that fact. What we are saying is that the government doesn't purposely try to infect people with cancer/withhold a cure which is what you implied in your posts. The increased rates of cancer is a mere by product of industrialization. If you don't want to be exposed to this shit then move somewhere off the grid, otherwise deal with it. Life is about pros and cons, and I think most would agree that the pros of modern society is worth the cons of increased diseases like cancer.
     
  19. #19 Storm Crow, Sep 8, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 8, 2014
    The importance of the ratio of omega-6/omega-3 essential fatty acids.     [SIZE=11pt]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12442909 [/SIZE]
     
    Several sources of information suggest that human beings evolved on a diet with a ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 essential fatty acids (EFA) of approximately 1 whereas in Western diets the ratio is 15/1-16.7/1. Western diets are deficient in omega-3 fatty acids, and have excessive amounts of omega-6 fatty acids compared with the diet on which human beings evolved and their genetic patterns were established.
     
    Excessive amounts of omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) and a very high omega-6/omega-3 ratio, as is found in today's Western diets, promote the pathogenesis of many diseases, including cardiovascular disease, cancer, and inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, whereas increased levels of omega-3 PUFA (a low omega-6/omega-3 ratio) exert suppressive effects. In the secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease, a ratio of 4/1 was associated with a 70% decrease in total mortality.
     
    A ratio of 2.5/1 reduced rectal cell proliferation in patients with colorectal cancer, whereas a ratio of 4/1 with the same amount of omega-3 PUFA had no effect. The lower omega-6/omega-3 ratio in women with breast cancer was associated with decreased risk.
     
    A ratio of 2-3/1 suppressed inflammation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and a ratio of 5/1 had a beneficial effect on patients with asthma, whereas a ratio of 10/1 had adverse consequences.
     
    These studies indicate that the optimal ratio may vary with the disease under consideration. This is consistent with the fact that chronic diseases are multigenic and multifactorial.
     
    Therefore, it is quite possible that the therapeutic dose of omega-3 fatty acids will depend on the degree of severity of disease resulting from the genetic predisposition. A lower ratio of omega-6/omega-3 fatty acids is more desirable in reducing the risk of many of the chronic diseases of high prevalence in Western societies, as well as in the developing countries, that are being exported to the rest of the world.
     
    *********
     
    Nutrient intake and plasma β-amyloid.   [SIZE=11pt]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22551728 [/SIZE]
     
    CONCLUSIONS:
    Our data suggest that higher dietary intake of ω-3 PUFA (Omega 3) is associated with lower plasma levels of Aβ42 (beta amyloid), a profile linked with reduced risk of incident AD (Alzheimer's disease) and slower cognitive decline in our cohort.
     
    *******
    [SIZE=12pt]Nutritional omega-3 deficiency abolishes endocannabinoid-mediated neuronal functions.          [/SIZE][SIZE=11pt]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21278728[/SIZE]
     
    In n-3-deficient mice, presynaptic cannabinoid CB(1) receptors (CB(1)Rs) normally responding to endocannabinoids were uncoupled from their effector G(i/o) proteins. Finally, the dietary-induced reduction of CB(1)R functions in mood-controlling structures was associated with impaired emotional behavior. These findings identify a plausible synaptic substrate for the behavioral alterations caused by the n-3 PUFAs deficiency that is often observed in western diets.
     
    (FYI- "getting high" is a[SIZE=12pt] [/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]"cannabinoid-mediated neuronal function")[/SIZE]
     
     
    All at PubMed.
     
  20. Youre absolutely right sheldon. It isnt irony. I shoudlnt have written that. How embarrassing!


    I should have said funny enough or something.

    When i wrote ironic, i was thinking that i find it ironic that we were told not to worry at the surge of immigration, with infected humans crossing borders into countries without resistance, and god only knows, spreading disease across continents and then as soon as school started, our fears were justified. Now obama is not going to touch the issue to help people from his political party win november elections. It isnt irony, but imo, it should be. At least some sort of situational irony.
     

Share This Page