Just a quickie, and then we can go off-topic with questions of ethics vs.
morals:
Biological (and chemical)warfare technologies have progressed to the point
where smallpox and probably anthrax are simply red herrings offered up to
provoke FUD. I'm not implying that the diseases themselves or their
recombinant forms are not dangerous, just that the technology has come up
with much worse agents - more virulent, less detectable, with no
foreseeable, mountable defenses.
And as a related question, does anyone know whether CS is of any use
against Mad Cow (or Elk, or Mink, or Deer, or ??) disease?
Happy nightmares, Malcolm
At 11:34 AM 12/14/02 -0800, you wrote:
Andy:
The very nature of small pox makes successful treatment a nightmere-- even
just considering the reproductive rate of small pox between the time the
virus begins replication in the body and the time of actual diagnosis.
Remember that small pox is strictly controlled, and I am aware of no lab
outside of the CDC that has small pox to test silver against. The small pox
virus explodes into the body - that's the only way I can describe it.
I know that vaccinations are a very hot topic, and I believe that both sides
of issue have some valid points to consider.
There is a moral obligation to consider: The individual's right for a
choice on taking a substance that can cause self harm.
There is an ethical obligation to consider: A completely vaccinated
population can slow and/or stop the spread of small pox to the point where
it is possible to isolate an outbreak.
Do the needs of the many outway the needs of the few, or the one? Never (
isn't that why Spock was reborn through the Genesis project? Gotta love Gene
Roddenbury ). For without the "one", there would be no "many". It doesn't
"take a village" to raise a person, it takes a family. This is the dynamic
and underlying principle behind social evolution, the evolution of
consciousness, and, paradoxally, the reason behind the ultimate failure of
all moralistic systems ( as apposed to ethical and spiritual systems ).
When considering my own son's vaccination ( not for smallpox ), I could not
take a moralistic stance, but had to make the decision based on a higher
ethical stance. The matter became not a matter of right or wrong, good or
bad... I was making a personal decision that could negatively impact the
life of one being, or perhaps hundreds of beings, with foreknowledge. The
decision not to vaccinate would benefit, at maximum, one being: that being
my son. The decision not to vaccinate could affect my son, and countless of
people he would come in contact with during his lifetime.
The very nature of such a decision is enough to cause sleepless nights.
I decided to vaccinate with knowledge, and used large amounts of hydrated
bentonite to pull the the toxic byproducts out of his body within hours of
each vaccine administration.
Do not let the powers that be fool you: The vaccines are all dangerous...
Interested parties may wish to follow the current mercury poisoning
treatment, that reached near lethal levels, due to vaccinations:
http://www.eytonsearth.org/mercurytoxicity.html
To my knowledge we simply don't have the data on the small pox virus, one
way or the other.
Jason
> Hello all.
> What is the general consensus about CS being good against smallpox? If the
> threat gets more real will you refuse vaccination and rely on CS?
>
> Pres. Bush got vaccinated yesterday, our health care workers and military
> are getting it too.
>
> Thanks
> A
--
The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver.
Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org
To post, address your message to: [email protected]
Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html
List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
