ebola

euroboom13 · 08-10-2014 07:53PM

jh79 wrote: »

When you say susceptibility do you mean a change in our biological defense mechanisms ?

Yes, and also by being mindful of it , there is a serendipity effect too.I am not saying that everyone mindful of it is going to get it but that there is an increase in infections directly proportional to awareness.

08-10-2014 08:03PM

euroboom13 wrote: »

Yes, and also by being mindful of it , there is a serendipity effect too.I am not saying that everyone mindful of it is going to get it but that there is an increase in infections directly proportional to awareness.

The increase in infections leads to more awareness not the other way round.

Would agree with you that fear can cause a nurse for example to be less confident and make mistakes, but can't see any reason why fear would help ebola spread through biological reasons.

euroboom13 · 08-10-2014 08:13PM

jh79 wrote: »

The increase in infections leads to more awareness not the other way round.

Would agree with you that fear can cause a nurse for example to be less confident and make mistakes, but can't see any reason why fear would help ebola spread through biological reasons.

Would you agree that when cancer patients ,give up hope the disease increases pace. This is the mind changing the biological defence.

My whole point is that ,if it is possible that fear increases its impact, why increase the fear. The why ,is the conspiracy ,why spread the fear.

Add that to the obvious incompetence of containment, bingo, prime time TV.
God help us.

enno99 · 08-10-2014 08:18PM

Effect on the Immune System

Chronic stress affects the immune system in complicated ways, and may have various results.

Susceptibility to Infections. Chronic stress may have an effect on the immune system's response to infections. Several studies claim that people who are under chronic stress have low white blood cell counts and are more vulnerable to colds. Once a person catches a cold or flu, stress can make symptoms worse. People who carry the herpes virus may be more susceptible to viral activation after they are exposed to stress.

Inflammatory Response. Some evidence suggests that chronic stress triggers an over-production of certain immune factors called cytokines. Such findings may partly explain the association between chronic stress and numerous diseases, including heart disease and asthma.

http://www.nytimes.com/health/guides/symptoms/stress-and-anxiety/possible-complications.html

Is this what you are getting at euroboom13 ?

euroboom13 · 08-10-2014 08:31PM

enno99 wrote: »

Effect on the Immune System

Chronic stress affects the immune system in complicated ways, and may have various results.

Susceptibility to Infections. Chronic stress may have an effect on the immune system's response to infections. Several studies claim that people who are under chronic stress have low white blood cell counts and are more vulnerable to colds. Once a person catches a cold or flu, stress can make symptoms worse. People who carry the herpes virus may be more susceptible to viral activation after they are exposed to stress.

Inflammatory Response. Some evidence suggests that chronic stress triggers an over-production of certain immune factors called cytokines. Such findings may partly explain the association between chronic stress and numerous diseases, including heart disease and asthma.

http://www.nytimes.com/health/guides/symptoms/stress-and-anxiety/possible-complications.html

Is this what you are getting at euroboom13 ?

Thanks enno99

My point was ,why pump the world with this ebola,if there is a chance of increasing the impact.

Now ,even beyond what I am saying , I believe that like biblical stories, intentional fear can evolve the virus, like the power of positive thinking or like mythical legends.

1900 no one believed we could fly,1901 Orwell Wright did it and then people heard about it and it grew legs, from zero to hero. Nothing more powerful than believing something is possible.

Even if you don't agree, it is worth being cautious with fear talk.

08-10-2014 08:32PM

euroboom13 wrote: »

Would you agree that when cancer patients ,give up hope the disease increases pace. This is the mind changing the biological defence.

My whole point is that ,if it is possible that fear increases its impact, why increase the fear. The why ,is the conspiracy ,why spread the fear.

Add that to the obvious incompetence of containment, bingo, prime time TV.
God help us.

Yeah agree with your point re cancer but not that an otherwise healthy person on seeing ebola on the news can become more susceptible to catching it.

If ebola on the news is enough to weaken your immune system then you probably have other issues.

Situations like this need to be monitored and the public have a right to know as it is in the public interest.

euroboom13 · 08-10-2014 08:42PM

jh79 wrote: »

Yeah agree with your point re cancer but not that an otherwise healthy person on seeing ebola on the news can become more susceptible to catching it.

If ebola on the news is enough to weaken your immune system then you probably have other issues.

Situations like this need to be monitored and the public have a right to know as it is in the public interest.

The right to know is one thing, but 24/7 news coverage is doing something more than politely informing.

08-10-2014 08:47PM

euroboom13 wrote: »

The right to know is one thing, but 24/7 news coverage is doing something more than politely informing.

If it wasn't on the news it would be a NWO cover up or something to that effect the authorities can't win with some.

enno99 · 08-10-2014 08:59PM

jh79 wrote: »

If ebola on the news is enough to weaken your immune system then you probably have other issues.

.

A little condecending dont you think

If the news story was about your next door neighbour or someone living close by dont you think it would affect your stress levels

euroboom13 · 08-10-2014 08:59PM

jh79 wrote: »

If it wasn't on the news it would be a NWO cover up or something to that effect the authorities can't win with some.

Agree , there is a balance to censorship .

I still think its doing more empowering than informing .
I will take my dog out of the fight now ,views purveyed

08-10-2014 09:03PM

enno99 wrote: »

A little condecending dont you think

If the news story was about your next door neighbour or someone living close by dont you think it would affect your stress levels

If you come into contact with Ebola can't see stress levels having any effect on your chances of contracting it.

euroboom13 · 08-10-2014 09:19PM

chipsdave wrote: »

too many Blackies being allowed into countries , BARRED , only saying what everyone else thinking

All your chips down in one post Dave.

08-10-2014 10:12PM

enno99 wrote: »

Therefore, Ebola virus might persist as an asymptomatic or subclinical infection in the reservoir species, with little or no transmission, and might be sporadically activated through an appropriate stimulus. The stimulus might be stress, co-infection, change in food sources, and pregnancy, as shown experimentally in vivo and in vitro.35,36 This hypothesis would explain the sporadic nature and periodicity of outbreaks of Ebola haemorrhagic fever in Africa.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3406178/

Only shown in animal studies and refers to activation within a carrier not susceptibility of contracting it.

This doesn't support the theory that a stressed person is more at risk.

enno99 · 08-10-2014 10:24PM

jh79 wrote: »

Only shown in animal studies and refers to activation within a carrier not susceptibility of contracting it.

This doesn't support the theory that a stressed person is more at risk.

oops sorry just realized that

enno99 · 08-10-2014 10:30PM

Was just reading through it for ref to the immune system as mentioned here

. Examination of infected populations indicates many are poorly nourished and present an impaired or ineffective immune system (Feldman et al., 2011). Thus, a compromised immune system and nutritional status exacerbate the potential risk of succumbing to an Ebola infection

and jumped the gun

on second thoughts they published over 30 papers in 2011
probably melt me brain quicker than Ebola

08-10-2014 11:51PM

So then if they are spreading fear to infect more people, why are they taking any measures at all to contain it?
Wouldn't it be far more effective to keep the whole thing quiet for a while and not announce the infections on the media, let more and more people get infected and spread the virus further, then start the scaremongering once the virus has a good foot hold?

And what is the purpose of spreading the virus in the first place?

Torakx · 09-10-2014 03:46AM

I'm always telling friends to stop eating sugar when they have the flu as well as take some garlic obviously

Here might be some proof behind that.
http://www.chemistryviews.org/details/news/870673/Virus_Needs_Sugar_For_Infection.html

I think it's related to cell penetration and the immune system.
I have a compromised immune system( in the gut), but I destroy flu viruses every time.
Low sugar diet(because I can't eat sugar or refined carbs) and garlic always works faster than any other treatment you can offer me.
I won't be licking any ebola patients just yet, but so far I think it's one of the best methods to combat infections.

Still looking for info on Garlic versus ebola. Out of curiosity mostly.
Some scientist must have gotten the idea at some stage to test it against this virus.
Although if the pharma corps are looking for vacine business, this would be the one treatment they would kill over, to keep it quiet.

09-10-2014 06:01AM

Torakx wrote: »

I'm always telling friends to stop eating sugar when they have the flu as well as take some garlic obviously
Here might be some proof behind that.
http://www.chemistryviews.org/details/news/870673/Virus_Needs_Sugar_For_Infection.html

I think it's related to cell penetration and the immune system.
I have a compromised immune system( in the gut), but I destroy flu viruses every time.
Low sugar diet(because I can't eat sugar or refined carbs) and garlic always works faster than any other treatment you can offer me.
I won't be licking any ebola patients just yet, but so far I think it's one of the best methods to combat infections.

Still looking for info on Garlic versus ebola. Out of curiosity mostly.
Some scientist must have gotten the idea at some stage to test it against this virus.
Although if the pharma corps are looking for vacine business, this would be the one treatment they would kill over, to keep it quiet.

What is your obsession with garlic?, it has no proven medicinal properties at all , sure lots of cultures use garlic in crazy amounts in their food and it doesn't prevent them from viruses.

http://nccam.nih.gov/health/garlic/ataglance.htm

enno99 · 09-10-2014 06:55AM

i

Torakx wrote: »

I'm always telling friends to stop eating sugar when they have the flu as well as take some garlic obviously
Here might be some proof behind that.
http://www.chemistryviews.org/details/news/870673/Virus_Needs_Sugar_For_Infection.html

I think it's related to cell penetration and the immune system.
I have a compromised immune system( in the gut), but I destroy flu viruses every time.
Low sugar diet(because I can't eat sugar or refined carbs) and garlic always works faster than any other treatment you can offer me.
I won't be licking any ebola patients just yet, but so far I think it's one of the best methods to combat infections.

Still looking for info on Garlic versus ebola. Out of curiosity mostly.
Some scientist must have gotten the idea at some stage to test it against this virus.
Although if the pharma corps are looking for vacine business, this would be the one treatment they would kill over, to keep it quiet.

There is a thread here might interest you

Like bird flu, Ebola kills with a cytokine storm - by pushing healthy immune systems into hyperdrive - and making your body kill itself.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1028709/pg1

euroboom13 · 09-10-2014 07:02AM

King Mob wrote: »

So then if they are spreading fear to infect more people, why are they taking any measures at all to contain it?
Wouldn't it be far more effective to keep the whole thing quiet for a while and not announce the infections on the media, let more and more people get infected and spread the virus further, then start the scaremongering once the virus has a good foot hold?

And what is the purpose of spreading the virus in the first place?

Measures to contain are laughable and reckless, and 24/7 coverage is reckless if not intentional.

Smart coverage isn`t being adhered too.

enno99 · 09-10-2014 07:12AM

King Mob wrote: »

And what is the purpose of spreading the virus in the first place?

So we can all have X ray vision :rolleyes:

FullblownRose · 09-10-2014 07:14AM

jh79 wrote: »

What is your obsession with garlic?, it has no proven medicinal properties at all , sure lots of cultures use garlic in crazy amounts in their food and it doesn't prevent them from viruses.

http://nccam.nih.gov/health/garlic/ataglance.htm

That's not true. The link you posted even indicateds some of its benefits! An some cases it says studies point to benefits but clinical trials haven't been conducted yet!

Garlic does have medicinal properties. They do not use crazy amounts of garlic, they might use more garlic than you would use so it might seem like that, but not particularly large amounts. Rubbing a salad bowl with a clove of garlic would be the most some people would do, others might use a clove of it in some dishes. I've not seen any significant or crazy amount of garlic in any dish that's regularly cooked in any culture that I know of!

This explains the rocess that makes how allicin in grlic good for you, and that's why it is best to chop or crush raw garlic before you eat it. I leave it to sit there for a while before I eat it.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090130154901.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090130154901.htm

enno99 · 09-10-2014 07:30AM

euroboom13 wrote: »

Measures to contain are laughable and reckless, and 24/7 coverage is reckless if not intentional.

Smart coverage isn`t being adhered too.

It makes you wonder alright

As for 24/7 coverage dont watch much news so cant tell

09-10-2014 07:37AM

FullblownRose wrote: »

That's not true. The link you posted even indicateds some of its benefits! An some cases it says studies point to benefits but clinical trials haven't been conducted yet!

Garlic does have medicinal properties. They do not use crazy amounts of garlic, they might use more garlic than you would use so it might seem like that, but not particularly large amounts. Rubbing a salad bowl with a clove of garlic would be the most some people would do, others might use a clove of it in some dishes. I've not seen any significant or crazy amount of garlic in any dish that's regularly cooked in any culture that I know of!

This explains the rocess that makes how allicin in grlic good for you, and that's why it is best to chop or crush raw garlic before you eat it. I leave it to sit there for a while before I eat it.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090130154901.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090130154901.htm

The link I posted is for a research org whose aim is to promote natural remedies. That is the best spin they can put on the lack of evidence for any medicinal benefits from garlic. When the say "may" they mean no evidence. The clinical trial they ran showed no benefits using garlic.

The setting up of the research group has back fired massively on those involved, the clinical trials they fund on natural remedies routinely fail to show any effects. Have a read through their fact sheets makes an interesting read.

However, an NCCAM-funded study on the safety and effectiveness of three garlic preparations (fresh garlic, dried powdered garlic tablets, and aged garlic extract tablets) for lowering blood cholesterol levels found no effect.

A clinical trial on the long-term use of garlic supplements to prevent stomach cancer found no effect.

The two links you provided are not evidence that garlic in its natural state has medicinal properties.

euroboom13 · 09-10-2014 07:53AM

enno99 wrote: »

It makes you wonder alright

As for 24/7 coverage dont watch much news so cant tell

General public are blind to the power of repeative news , if you start watching the news with an open mind , you start to question why they are putting all this effort into fear.it would make make you think why?

and as king mob defended with his life, that its for our benefit, is it, I seriously doubt it, and like you switch that voo doo stuff off...lol

FullblownRose · 09-10-2014 07:54AM

jh79 wrote: »

The link I posted is for a research org whose aim is to promote natural remedies. That is the best spin they can put on the lack of evidence for any medicinal benefits from garlic. When the say "may" they mean no evidence. The clinical trial they ran showed no benefits using garlic.

The setting up of the research group has back fired massively on those involved, the clinical trials they fund on natural remedies routinely fail to show any effects. Have a read through their fact sheets makes an interesting read.

However, an NCCAM-funded study on the safety and effectiveness of three garlic preparations (fresh garlic, dried powdered garlic tablets, and aged garlic extract tablets) for lowering blood cholesterol levels found no effect.

A clinical trial on the long-term use of garlic supplements to prevent stomach cancer found no effect.

The two links you provided are not evidence that garlic in its natural state has medicinal properties.

The links I posted are about further investigation into the already accepted and proven fact that garlic has medicinal benefits. Specifically that it is powerfully antioxidant. I've no idea who the people in your link are but over the years I've read a number of books on this stuff and they provide the source of the results of the studies that prove the benefits of garlic. They're not mystical new age type books, in case you're wondering. SO, I'm confident in what I am saying, and will leave it at that.

Here's one I came across, with studies on garlic and different cancer types, mixed results, some seem to be very good,:

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Prevention/garlic-and-cancer-prevention

The National Cancer Institute, part of the National Institutes of Health, does not recommend any dietary supplement for the prevention of cancer, but recognizes garlic as one of several vegetables with potential anticancer properties. Because all garlic preparations are not the same, it is difficult to determine the exact amount of garlic that may be needed to reduce cancer risk. Furthermore, the active compounds present in garlic may lose their effectiveness with time, handling, and processing. The World Health Organization’s (WHO) guidelines for general health promotion for adults is a daily dose of 2 to 5 g of fresh garlic (approximately one clove), 0.4 to 1.2 g of dried garlic powder, 2 to 5 mg of garlic oil, 300 to 1,000 mg of garlic extract, or other formulations that are equal to 2 to 5 mg of allicin

09-10-2014 07:59AM

FullblownRose wrote: »

The links I posted are about further investigation into the already accepted and proven fact that garlic has medicinal benefits. Specifically that it is powerfully antioxidant. I've no idea who the people in your link are but over the years I've read a number of books on this stuff and they provide the source of the results of the studies that prove the benefits of garlic. They're not mystical new age type books, in case you're wondering. SO, I'm confident in what I am saying, and will leave it at that.

That's not proof of the benefits of garlic, for one the benefits of antioxidants is still up for debate and two the links you provided show the benefits of allicin in-vitro only.

Can you link to a study showing the medicinal benefits of garlic?

You say it is a proven fact yet for some reason are hesitant to back that up with any studies??

FullblownRose · 09-10-2014 08:03AM

jh79 wrote: »

That's not proof of the benefits of garlic, for one the benefits of antioxidants is still up for debate and two the links you provided show the benefits of allicin in-vitro only.

Can you link to a study showing the medicinal benefits of garlic?

You say it is a proven fact yet for some reason are hesitant to back that up with any studies??

Not remotely hesitant, unwilling to trawl the net over it though! it's beginning to feel like an argument about whether the grass is green, pointless. You stated garlic has no medicinal properties, you were wrong, I wanted to object to that and I have done so.

09-10-2014 08:05AM

FullblownRose wrote: »

The links I posted are about further investigation into the already accepted and proven fact that garlic has medicinal benefits. Specifically that it is powerfully antioxidant. I've no idea who the people in your link are but over the years I've read a number of books on this stuff and they provide the source of the results of the studies that prove the benefits of garlic. They're not mystical new age type books, in case you're wondering. SO, I'm confident in what I am saying, and will leave it at that.

Here's one I came across, with studies on garlic and different cancer types, mixed results, some seem to be very good,:

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Prevention/garlic-and-cancer-prevention

The National Cancer Institute, part of the National Institutes of Health, does not recommend any dietary supplement for the prevention of cancer, but recognizes garlic as one of several vegetables with potential anticancer properties. Because all garlic preparations are not the same, it is difficult to determine the exact amount of garlic that may be needed to reduce cancer risk. Furthermore, the active compounds present in garlic may lose their effectiveness with time, handling, and processing. The World Health Organization’s (WHO) guidelines for general health promotion for adults is a daily dose of 2 to 5 g of fresh garlic (approximately one clove), 0.4 to 1.2 g of dried garlic powder, 2 to 5 mg of garlic oil, 300 to 1,000 mg of garlic extract, or other formulations that are equal to 2 to 5 mg of allicin

So to back up your claim that the medicinal benefits of garlic are fact and proven you provide a link that say it has potential??

09-10-2014 08:06AM

FullblownRose wrote: »

Not remotely hesitant, unwilling to trawl the net over it though! it's beginning to feel like an argument about whether the grass is green, pointless. You stated garlic has no medicinal properties, you were wrong, I wanted to object to that and I have done so.

Again what illness does it treat , in what quantity and by how much better than an alternative?

ebola

Comments