Infectious disease, including TB

[john.wantling]

Anyway, this guy is an anti society, anti science, anti work? anti whatever, he's not a scientist by primary school standards he is a rubbish picking homeless druggy with many mental problems, its sad, sad for him and sad for those who have to deal with TB on here who he's targeting this cr&p.. stop rationalising with him he's not rational.

Jackson4, the problem here is that we can easily think and function through a program or through habit, and this is the situation here. We are so fixated in our psycholgical programs, which we call good science or knowledge, to such a degree that we are like a drug addict in desperate need of a drug. When I go into bovine TB, I am looking at it, but almost every time someone responds, they dont look at it, they drift away into some theoretical concept or some theoretical program that has been installed into our heads. May I add that this theoretical concept is based on a failed scientific experiment! When this sets in stone, and through conformity and consensus, we get bogged down, and then we can never address the thing in question. Thankfully I go into this subject matter in my writings. I have posted links, but no one has followed those links. So this isnt about bovine TB anymore, it is about the defense of a program.

I am a critical thinker, I see the danger of falling into a web of programs, so I keep a distance. I fear that no one on this thread can do that simply because the conditioning is complete. This is why no one is capable of comprehending what I say, because you are far too busy defending your infectious program that does not solve a thing. You place your faith in a science that cannot find its own mode of transmission. Why dont you demand that they find it? But we all know deep inside that this is impossible especially if what I say is true. I say, go out there and find that mode of transmission and then I can pack up and go home. But you cannot do that. The academics old and new also cannot do it. They believe that it exists, but they cannot find it and will never find it. To 'find' it, they must drift into theory, and then theoretically they can find it, but this theory is fiction, not fact. When our faith is focused on that theory, we are completely lost. The thinking is then stagnant, just like the infectious theory of bovine TB. So will anyone on this thread focus on this program, our psychological condition, or will we hold onto it for dear life and then by default defend the quasi-science? I know the answer to that, but at the end of the day, it is your downfall. That is the dilemma that we all face. John Wantling, Rochdale

 

[john.wantling]

But John, this is exactly the science you are arguing against. The doctor had seen how. A woman living some distance from Broad street had fallen victim to Cholera, on questioning it turned out she had sent her , daughter I believe, to fetch a jug of this water for her as she preferred the taste.
This gave the clue to the fact this water was contaminated with the cholera bacteria. He had no means of seeing the infectious organism, but the sheer fact that , this woman was. Infected. By drinking the same water as the other victims meant he had a very good clue.
Another clue here was that most of the victims were women and children, the men who went out to work elsewhere and drank a lot of beer at home were ostensibly immune.
The truth was. They were not imbibing the bacteria as their families were.
His actions removing the pump handle cured the epidemic overnight in that ara.

Exfarmer, yes, you are correct. But don't use the word 'infected'. A more appropriate word is 'poisoned' or 'contaminated'. So the men out at work were not 'immune', they were simply not being poisoned. But let's now see what Florence Nightingale once said...

“And five years after Pasteur's breakthrough, Florence Nightingale wrote: 'What does contagion mean? It implies communication of disease from person to person contact. It presupposes the existence of certain germs like the sporules of fungi, which can be bottled up and conveyed any distance attached to clothing, to merchandise ... There is no end to the absurdities connected with this doctrine. Suffice it to say that in the ordinary sense of the word, there is no proof such as would be admitted in any scientific enquiry that there is any such thing as contagion.'”
The Medical Detective Sandra Hempel
Granta Books, London 2006 ISBN 978 1 86207 937 3

I am merely repeating what she said...
John Wantling, Rochdale

 

[john.wantling]

OH MY GOD, i thought i glanced his name.. i am sure john, you either didnt attend primary school ( maybe mother didn't believe in science?) or you weren't listening has anybody really got the energy to argue with him, he wont listen to a word that isnt his.

Jackson4, you are perfectly right, I am not educated, but I have always said that I am a critical thinker. I stress that we should look at issues directly, including the use of insight, and then there is a connection, not an empty theory based on conformity, not playing follow-the-leader.
I have just sent a letter to the Badger Trust chairman who banned me about a year or two ago, and spokesman Dominic Dyer. I have condemned them both for their support of biosecurity. I am also sending it to the Welsh government TB team. Of course, they will laugh at it and then throw it into the waste paper bin, just like what you farmers do. I will post it in my whale.to folder in about a weeks time and add a link to this thread. You too can have a good laugh. Meanwhile, here is a link to 'tuberculosis quotes'. One of my quotes is pasted on this page near the top. Basically I have just saved the tax payer £100m a year for the next 25 years. I have also saved another badger being culled and also no more slaughter of healthy cows based on a pointless skin test. I am your saviour, but you reject me. This is a very strange thing in itself.
John Snow once said, dont drink the cholera water, but you farmers take no notice and then you get sick. I am saying, dont drink the cholera water, because you will get sick, but you do not listen. You all inflict pain onto yourselves. A very odd thing. Even to this day, you still venture down to Broad Street and drink the cholera (sewerage) water. You say that I am a fool, but I am not that foolish. John Wantling, Rochdale
http://www.whale.to/a/tb_q.html

 

[Wellytrack]

Nurse Nurse! He's up out of bed again!!

 

[john.wantling]

Nurse Nurse! He's up out of bed again!!

I would suggest that most folk who used to end up in mental asylums were probably suffering from metal poisoning, such as lead poisoning as a classic example. Water pipes made of lead, not a bright idea. Aluminium, arsenic, mercury poisoning, you know what I mean. Sadly it is unlikely that they would have a smile on their faces. As usual, Wellytrack, nothing to add to the conversation. John Wantling, Rochdale

 

[Jackson4]

You say that I am a fool, but I am not that foolish. John Wantling, Rochdale

........ Yes you are.

If you want to spend 37 more pages arguing ?? there is definitely fairies at the bottom of the garden or the earth is the centre of our solar system... then i'm also unavailable, as rewarding as your scienceless, irrational, backwards, falls down at every hurdle meanderings of some bobble hatted hippy love child, litter picking anti establishment druggy who actually thinks because reason and enlightenment are 'mainstream' or 'establishment' he will have a go at talking absolute sh*t the like which hasnt been heard since the medieval era... yer on your own son.

I suggest if you come to the world of reasoning, education etc you might want to look up ideas like.. occams razor, the workings of the immune system, bacteriology etc etc. Not bad places to start.

 

[Muck Spreader]

 

[topground]

In the Thornbury trial in the 1970's MAFF did the Tb equivalent of removing the handle from the Broad Street pump, they removed Badgers from the area and with it the source of the Tb bacteria. Cattle in the area stayed clear of Tb all the while there were no Badgers.
What do you think of that then John?

Waiting!

 

[Exfarmer]

Exfarmer, yes, you are correct. But don't use the word 'infected'. A more appropriate word is 'poisoned' or 'contaminated'. So the men out at work were not 'immune', they were simply not being poisoned. But let's now see what Florence Nightingale once said...

“And five years after Pasteur's breakthrough, Florence Nightingale wrote: 'What does contagion mean? It implies communication of disease from person to person contact. It presupposes the existence of certain germs like the sporules of fungi, which can be bottled up and conveyed any distance attached to clothing, to merchandise ... There is no end to the absurdities connected with this doctrine. Suffice it to say that in the ordinary sense of the word, there is no proof such as would be admitted in any scientific enquiry that there is any such thing as contagion.'”
The Medical Detective Sandra Hempel
Granta Books, London 2006 ISBN 978 1 86207 937 3

I am merely repeating what she said...
John Wantling, Rochdale

But she did not say this in any shape or form.
She was meticulous in her demand for hygiene and sterilising everything as she had heard of this
Read through this
Florence-nightingale-avenging--angel.co.uk

 

[Blaithin]

I like the internet. You can find absolutely anything and someone that will back up an idea, no matter how silly.

 

[matthew]

I like the internet. You can find absolutely anything and someone that will back up an idea, no matter how silly.

... and selectively ignore the 'proper' epidemiological stuff.

 

[Blaithin]

I still want John to tell me how Mexican germs got inside a Canadian cow so that they could come outside from in.

 

[john.wantling]

........ Yes you are.

If you want to spend 37 more pages arguing ?? there is definitely fairies at the bottom of the garden or the earth is the centre of our solar system... then i'm also unavailable, as rewarding as your scienceless, irrational, backwards, falls down at every hurdle meanderings of some bobble hatted hippy love child, litter picking anti establishment druggy who actually thinks because reason and enlightenment are 'mainstream' or 'establishment' he will have a go at talking absolute sh*t the like which hasn't been heard since the medieval era... yer on your own son.

Jackson4, you claim that TB bacteria is an infectious process from outside, and I say that bacteria does exist outside the body but this is not related to the disease process, and so TB is an internal metamorphosis. So if we were interested in the scientific method, we would apply science to that, just like what Professor Bechamp did. but you do not do that. You throw this science away, the government have thrown it away, the scientists have thrown it away, preferring to defend, what I see as a dogma that has been conditioned into us all through industrial propaganda and this existed before we were even born. We are raised in this fog of propaganda, and then we merely repeat the mantra. It is this conditioning process that is important to see, but to see it, we must cease looking through those rose-coloured spectacles, because if we dont, all we will ever see is our own condition. This is a conditioned response as opposed to direct perception. So we then end up placing our faith in a theory, but its a theory that is built on a failed scientific experiment. That is the problem, there is a chain link in science but in this case a link is missing. That is a failed science. You then say, we know the mode of transmission exists but we cannot find it. All I am saying, is use your science and find it, but you can never find something that does not exist, especially if you are looking at the wrong environmental bacteria. It is clear that few people if any can understand what I mean, and this is the tragedy. When you do not understand, you call me names whilst defending a failed science. The question being, why do defend a failed science? Now that is a very odd thing to do. John Wantling, Rochdale

 

[john.wantling]

I still want John to tell me how Mexican germs got inside a Canadian cow so that they could come outside from in.

Blaithin, your question is unimportant. First of all understand that environmental bacteria is not tuberculosis, and so when you understand that bacteria is a product of filth, then you will cease thinking in terms of 'infectious' disease. The main issue is the filth, the cellular debris where the bacteria is born. In other words, an internal metamorphosis, and this is when TB is born. Established science is looking at the wrong bacteria, and this is the tragedy. But do not forget, they cannot turn around and walk into the other direction simply because they will be severely punished. It's just not worth their while. So they base their thoughts on a theory, but they cannot find a mode of transmission. Now they must find it to prove their science is right, but they cannot do that assuming that Professor Bechamp was right. As yet, the science has not been able to find this mode of transmission, and I claim that they will never ever achieve that because there isnt a mode of transmission to find. Your Mexican germs is a pointless pursuit. Why do you place your faith in these people who have turned science upside-down, built on theories that they cannot make any sense out of themselves. I know not what. John Wantling, Rochdale

 

[linga]

Blaithin, your question is unimportant. First of all understand that environmental bacteria is not tuberculosis, and so when you understand that bacteria is a product of filth, then you will cease thinking in terms of 'infectious' disease. The main issue is the filth, the cellular debris where the bacteria is born. In other words, an internal metamorphosis, and this is when TB is born. Established science is looking at the wrong bacteria, and this is the tragedy. But do not forget, they cannot turn around and walk into the other direction simply because they will be severely punished. It's just not worth their while. So they base their thoughts on a theory, but they cannot find a mode of transmission. Now they must find it to prove their science is right, but they cannot do that assuming that Professor Bechamp was right. As yet, the science has not been able to find this mode of transmission, and I claim that they will never ever achieve that because there isnt a mode of transmission to find. Your Mexican germs is a pointless pursuit. Why do you place your faith in these people who have turned science upside-down, built on theories that they cannot make any sense out of themselves. I know not what. John Wantling, Rochdale

Mr Wantling demands proof of us but fails to deliver proof of his chosen theory.
Instead he claims he needs no proof as he is a critical thinker. That his thinking is critical is beyond doubt !

 

[john.wantling]

Mr Wantling demands proof of us but fails to deliver proof of his chosen theory.
Instead he claims he needs no proof as he is a critical thinker. That his thinking is critical is beyond doubt !

Linga, I am saying look into it yourself, do not make the mistake of drifting away in self defense, changing the subject, calling me names, defending the faith. We all do this, and this is the reason that you cannot accept what I say. At the end of the day, it is you who are the losers as it is you who slaughter your own healthy cows. John Wantling, Rochdale

 

[linga]

Linga, I am saying look into it yourself, do not make the mistake of drifting away in self defense, changing the subject, calling me names, defending the faith. We all do this, and this is the reason that you cannot accept what I say. At the end of the day, it is you who are the losers as it is you who slaughter your own healthy cows. John Wantling, Rochdale

Where is your evidence ?
Where is your proof ?

 

[Storeman]

Linga, I am saying look into it yourself, do not make the mistake of drifting away in self defense, changing the subject, calling me names, defending the faith. We all do this, and this is the reason that you cannot accept what I say. At the end of the day, it is you who are the losers as it is you who slaughter your own healthy cows. John Wantling, Rochdale

No,John, the reason we can't accept what you're saying is down to the fact you are talking out of your arse.
Have you requested profesional help yet?

 

[milkloss]

Made me think of you @john.wantling , not sure why.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38650739

 

[Wellytrack]

Made me think of you @john.wantling , not sure why.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38650739

People like that, above all else make me despair for humanity - over the course of 11 years he had more than 80 people receive 'treatment'.

What an absolute sack of