or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Women's Health  › Spin-off discussion about Chlorine Dioxide/MMS and the eradication of disease
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Spin-off discussion about Chlorine Dioxide/MMS and the eradication of disease

post #1 of 339
Thread Starter 

I have to go, hence the big parade of posts all at once.  But in a thread about eradication of disease, I can't in all good conscience not mention chlorine dioxide (ClO2).  When I get back, I will start a thread.  It will contain details about the chemistry, some videos (there are thousands more children healed now), people I've personally met who healed from AIDS symptoms with it, and other things.  I just didn't want this to go down that path and get the thread shut again.  I'll post here when I start the thread.

 

UPDATE: During this thread's progression, I discovered that chlorine dioxide is being used in some patented drugs under a different name.  Dioxyclor and WF10 (under further names as Immunokine and Macrokine).  They are used successfully against a wide array of diseases mostly HIV and cancer... although autoimmune diseases, inflammatory conditions and many others.  There are past clinical trials and current ones for it.

 

This is not discovered until about page 12, and until that point, sarcasm and ridicule ruled this thread and getting past the absoluteness of the closed mindedness took many pages, so perhaps save yourself the drama if you are looking up this thread for info about MMS/chlorine dioxide and skip to the posts with the FAQ on this post here, and the WF10 etc starts from this post here.  


Edited by Calm - 5/7/11 at 2:37pm
post #2 of 339

Spin-off discussion about Chlorine Dioxide and the eradication of disease

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calm View Post

I have to go, hence the big parade of posts all at once.  But in a thread about eradication of disease, I can't in all good conscience not mention chlorine dioxide (ClO2).  When I get back, I will start a thread.  It will contain details about the chemistry, some videos (there are thousands more children healed now), people I've personally helped heal from AIDS with it, and other things.  I just didn't want this to go down that path and get the thread shut again.  I'll post here when I start the thread.

 

 

 

I can't wait.
post #3 of 339

Spin-off discussion about Chlorine Dioxide and the eradication of disease

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calm View Post

I have to go, hence the big parade of posts all at once.  But in a thread about eradication of disease, I can't in all good conscience not mention chlorine dioxide (ClO2).  When I get back, I will start a thread.  It will contain details about the chemistry, some videos (there are thousands more children healed now), people I've personally helped heal from AIDS with it, and other things.  I just didn't want this to go down that path and get the thread shut again.  I'll post here when I start the thread.

 

 

 

 

Please don't. :(
 

 

post #4 of 339

Vaccine eradication of disease

Calm, ClO2 is bleach.  It doesn't "heal" anyone.  It causes diarrhea and vomiting.  

 

We would all love to see a cure for AIDS.  Bleach isn't it.

post #5 of 339

Vaccine eradication of disease

 Calm, I too am waiting on pins and needles for a thread all about the miracle of MMS...because that is what you are promoting isn't it?

The panacea of all panaceas...

 

Now whether this thread will ever appear...I will just wait patiently because I would love to have a discussion purely on this subject.

post #6 of 339

Vaccine eradication of disease

CIO2 - I would love to see some peer reviewed studies.  Double blind is probably expected along with independant testing of blood samples before and after. (CD4 t-cell count  and HIV antibody testing.)

 

If poosible, get your name on the first peer reviewed studies - cause that Nobel Prize will look great on your wall. I think they even pay your way to Norway, which would be a nice vacation for the familly.

 

post #7 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calm View Post

 

http://fiocco59.altervista.org/ALLEGATI/MORGAN.PDF

 

This one is just the chart from that pdf: http://healyourselfathomefl.health.officelive.com/HEALTHPROBLEM_CANCER_ChemotherapySuccessRates.aspx

 

Yes, a five year survival rate.  

 

 

Only adult cancers and excludes leukemia, which means that acute lymphocytic leukemia in children, which is perhaps one of the most effective uses of chemo, is doubly out. 

 

But that is exactly the sort of thing I was talking about.  It says right at the start of the first section that head and neck cancer are normally treated with surgery and radiation, not chemo.  And that studies done to see if adding chemo would improve survival rates showed no real improvement. And that really is useful information for anyone dealing with that sort of cancer.  But what in the world is the point of averaging that and a bunch of other cancers where chemo isn't generally used and some cancers for which it has been shown to be quite effective together to find an average that depicts chemo as horribly ineffective?  It's lie doing a study of vitamin C and diseases of nutritional deficiency by seeing how scurvy, beriberi, rickets, goiter, and pellagra respond to vitamin C supplements, and saying since average is quite a low number, vitamin C is not a good solution to nutritional deficiencies.   

 

It also has too narrow of a definition of success. Sometimes chemo is used to shrink a tumor to make surgical removal easier and allow them to take less tissue. It may not add much to the five year survival rate, but isn't a less complicated surgery that is a bit easier to recover from a success? Or a woman able to have a lumpectomy insead of losing an entire breast?  Or with some types of breast cancer, chemo has been shown to be quite effective in decreasing the number of  reoccurances years down the road.  This doesn't do much for the five year rate, but does mean that fewer women have to start treatment and undergo surgery all over again, and does have a larger effect on ten and fifteen year survival rate.  Is that not a success? 

 

 

Do you really think that back in the day they didn't have studies and evidence to show the effectiveness of blood letting?  They recorded things back then, they weren't dribbling fools, they were just in a different era.  They suffered the same superiority complex we still do, the same medical arrogance.

 

I would say it had "actual evidence to show just how ineffective it is".  I think you're in the minority with the idea that we can't quantify and qualify the effectiveness of chemo... it is far from absurd.  For how else do we evaluate it?  Oh yes, that's right, we don't.  It's just what doctors do, so it's what we do.  Chlorine dioxide, so quickly ridiculed, has killed not one of the hundreds of thousands who have used it, and the FDA even stresses it is so dangerous because it causes "nausea and dehydration" in some.  Yeah.  Tummy upset is real scary, better not drink that "bleach" which has a lethal dose less than table salt.  Better off mainlining liters of toxic radioactive chemicals that are the same chemicals that are being measured leaking from Japan's recent disaster.  THAT makes so much more sense.  

 

Pot.  Meet kettle.

 


I don't think they were dribbling fools, and I don't doubt that many records were kept of so and so who was pulled back from the brink of death and such.  But the power of the anecdote is an amazing thing - still is today, even - and the scientific method is much improved since the days of yours.  Unless you can point me to controlled randomized studies of a decent size or the like from back then which showed how effective it was?  

 

If it were shown to be an effective treatment, FDA would have no problem with the side effects.  Where are the peer reviewed double blind placebo controlled random trials?  It's bleach.  Good for killing germs on surfaces and water, but not so good at getting to them in the human body.  

 

Lovely to hear that you are curing AIDS though.  Bet the doctors formerly treating your patients were just absolutely shocked when their patients started coming in with proof that they were no longer HIV positive.  I'm surprised none of them thought to call a reporter to get it in the news and spread the word! 

 

post #8 of 339

edited as told to.


Edited by Ldavis24 - 4/28/11 at 5:07am
post #9 of 339

Sylvia Fink died of drinking MMS in Vanatu in 2009: http://www.dailypost.vu/content/prosecutor-decides-no-charges-can-be-laid-case-death-linked-mms

 

Canada reports a life-threatening reaction: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/advisories-avis/_2010/2010_74-eng.php

 

IMO, the reason there haven't been more deaths is that, despite a massive PR campaign on the web, most people have either never heard of MMS, or can clearly tell that MMS is a fraud, and Jim Humble is a con man.  

post #10 of 339

Okay, we've got a lot of new information since I last had a chance to post, but it has been a fascinating read.  I think starting another thread to discuss ClO2 would be a good idea if people would like to discuss that theory.  In this thread, I'd like to leave it at including the importance of research into medications/chemicals to prevent and/or treat infections.  A lot of the medications used are or contain strong chemicals that can cause serious side effects, and I'm not going to weigh in on one particular treatment or another.  I believe that just as people should have a right to use or refuse any particular vaccine, I believe they should have the right to look at the evidence for and againts the treatments they are considering and choose what they believe to be best.

 

Thank you all for a lively discussion!  It is a pleasure to converse with such great minds, each with your own perspective and information to add to the discussion.  It is interesting to see ideas from people who politely disagree because it gives me such an amazing chance to see the conflicting arguments from many angles, and I think it brings more clarity if we can see strong arguments by educated people who think differently.


Edited by JMJ - 4/26/11 at 2:16pm
post #11 of 339


Actually, there are frozen samples of smallpox at one or two very well guarded government labs. 

"Three known repositories of the virus were left, one in Birmingham, England which was later destroyed after an accidental escape from containment caused the death of Janet Parker, and two still remaining at the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia and the State Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology (VECTOR) in Koltsovo, Russia." (wikipedia)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calm View Post
 

Do you really think that back in the day they didn't have studies and evidence to show the effectiveness of blood letting?  They recorded things back then, they weren't dribbling fools, they were just in a different era.  They suffered the same superiority complex we still do, the same medical arrogance.

 

Evidence based medicine. I am a big fan :-) Back in the 18th century, docs were trained to do bloodletting and told that it worked. Maybe patients even asked for it by name! So they did it.


Up until recently, ob/gyns offered episiotomy (or did it without asking) to a majority of patients. Then someone did a controlled study and (surprise!) no benefit was found. So ob/gyns have greatly decreased use of episiotomy in the past 10 years.

 

Part of the process is a risk/benefit analysis. For example, if we (hypothetically) circumcise 1000000 male infants, can we (hypothetically) prevent 57 hospitallizations due to UTI? Can we magically prevent one or two cases of HIV transmission (as has been claimed). We also need to look at risk What if circumcised males are less likely to wear condoms, or more likely to engage in riskier sex practices (ano-genitial contact) ?  How many cases of meatal stenosis caused by the surgery? How many MRSA infections? How many other complications?

 

post #12 of 339

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMJ View Post

I know that to an extent, that is true, that our immune systems respond better when we are well nourished, that deficiencies in Vitamin C, zinc, vitamin A, etc, can make it more likely to catch a bug and make the illness more serious. 

 

This country completely slacks on promoting natural health.  Of course the vitamins you mention above in addition to Vitamin D.  We rarely ever hear about the importance of vitamins and a diet consisting of whole foods being advertised openly in fighting illness.  Why? Because no money is to be made from natural sources. We only see ads on TV and in magazines for drugs.  People who don't realize the importance of vitamins are certainly going to think vaccines are the only way to keep them "healthy." People should be better informed of the importance of diet and nutrients and the impact it has on health.
 

Take the flu for example.  Rather than spending time working on a flu shot for young children that is an assault to their system,  since they can never pinpoint the next strain anyway,  and since people usually wind up WITH the flu after the vaccine, they should be concentrating on getting the word out on taking Vitamin D supplements, eating the proper foods, and getting out in the sun in the summer.  However, they don't promote that.  The idea of the US is that being healthy comes from the flu shot (and all other vaccines).  God forbid we try to build our bodies up with natural supplements.  Studies have shown those deficient in D are prone to more respiratory illness and colds and flu.  I

 

This is why I give my son a Vitamin D3 supplement in the winter.  In the summer, he gets adequate doses from the sun.  I would much rather work on taking vitamins and eating a good diet than resort straight away to vaccination, especially for things such as the flu.  I believe in having a healthy base, inside out, rather than outside in to fight illness/disease.


Edited by SilverMoon010 - 4/22/11 at 4:03pm
post #13 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 View Post

 

 

 

 

This country completely slacks on promoting natural health.  Of course the vitamins you mention above in addition to Vitamin D.  We rarely ever hear about the importance of vitamins and a diet consisting of whole foods being advertised openly in fighting illness.  Why? Because no money is to be made from natural sources. We only see ads on TV and in magazines for drugs.  People who don't realize the importance of vitamins are certainly going to think vaccines are the only way to keep them "heathy." People should be better informed of the importance of diet and nutrients and the impact it has on health.
 

Take the flu for example.  Rather than spending time working on a flu shot for young children that is an assault to their system,  since they can never pinpoint the next strain anyway,  and since people usually wind up WITH the flu after the vaccine, they should be concentrating on getting the word out on taking Vitamin D supplements, eating the proper foods, and getting out in the sun in the summer.  However, they don't promote that.  The idea of the US is that being healthy comes from the flu shot (and all other vaccines).  God forbid we try to build our bodies up with natural supplements.  Studies have shown those deficient in D are prone to more respiratory illness and colds and flu.  I

 

This is why I give my son a Vitamin D3 supplement in the winter.  In the summer, he gets adequate doses from the sun.  I would much rather work on taking vitamins and eating a good diet than resort straight away to vaccination, especially for things such as the flu.  I believe in having a healthy base, inside out, rather than outside in to fight illness/disease.

 

Bolding mine.  No money to be made from natural sources?  This is an interesting assertion.  Americans spend $33.9 BILLION a year on complementary and alternative therapies, and $14.8 Billion of that is spent on herbs and supplements, not even including vitamins.

 

Not exactly chump change.
 

 

post #14 of 339

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by WildKingdom View Post



 

Bolding mine.  No money to be made from natural sources?  This is an interesting assertion.  Americans spend $33.9 BILLION a year on complementary and alternative therapies, and $14.8 Billion of that is spent on herbs and supplements, not even including vitamins.

 

Not exactly chump change.
 

 

 

To be absolutely clear, I was saying there is no money to be made for the pharmaceutical companies by using natural remedies, since after all, we are on the topic of vaccines/drugs. I thought it was a given I was speaking about the drug companies and didn't realize I would need to reiterate.

 

Anyway, I'm glad to see people are spending money on alternative therapies.  That is a good thing and is certainly nothing to look down upon.  There would be a huge blow to the pharmaceutical companies if the word got out about vitamins and fighting illnesses.  If ads were continuously ran on TV for natural remedies to prevent illness and/or reduce complications, such as herbs, specific vitamins, etc, as much as they are for vaccines, you better believe the drug companies' stock would certainly drop!  


Edited by SilverMoon010 - 4/22/11 at 4:24pm
post #15 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 View Post

 

 

To be absolutely clear, I was saying there is no money to be made for the pharmaceutical companies by using natural remedies, since after all, we are on the topic of vaccines/drugs. I thought it was a given I was speaking about the drug companies and didn't realize I would need to reiterate.

 

Anyway, I'm glad to see people are spending money on alternative therapies.  That is a good thing and is certainly nothing to look down upon.  There would be a huge blow to the pharmaceutical companies if the word got out about vitamins and fighting illnesses.  If ads were continuously ran on TV for natural remedies to prevent illness and/or reduce complications, such as herbs, specific vitamins, etc, as much as they are for vaccines, you better believe the drug companies' stock would certainly drop!  

But what you're saying doesn't make any sense.  Of course there's money to be made by pharmaceutical companies by manufacturing "natural" remedies- 14.8 billion dollars of it.  They can manufacture and market vitamins and supplements just as well as anyone else can.  In fact, many of them already do.  http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,525643,00.html 

 

Even better, thanks to the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994, they can market supplements and vitamins without having to do any of that pesky R&D and FDA approval.


 

 

post #16 of 339

So, Big Supp was really Big Pharma all along...

post #17 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jugs View Post

So, Big Supp was really Big Pharma all along...



oh my gosh! ROTFLMAO.gif

 

sorry i don't have much else to add to this thread, but i thought that was funny.

post #18 of 339

Exactly!  And the conspiracy continues....ROTFLMAO.gif

post #19 of 339

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by PlayaMama View Post





oh my gosh! ROTFLMAO.gif

 

sorry i don't have much else to add to this thread, but i thought that was funny.


Yes, it's all so hilarious to have such a closed mind and have no idea what's going on in the country.  Not my problem.

 

Anyhow, I doubt any of you above will read the article, but that's okay...Just keeping getting your vaccines and antibiotics for every ailment (superbugs anyone?) and continue falling trap to every single thing you see on TV and read.  What do I care.  Oh, if you still haven't gotten my point, my point was they don't push vitamins! They push the vaccines. Do you ever hear them push Vitamin D for the flu??? NO! I still haven't heard (from the last three posts) anyone make a comment regarding vitamins and illnesses versus vaccination.  You can contribute any time you like, to the topic at hand, rather than focus on everything I say.  If you had anything good to say, you would have said it by now. JMO.

 

http://www.naturalnews.com/022586.html 

 

On that note, I'm out, so no need to respond.  I really need to speak to mature adults and I certainly can't find that here, at least on this thread anyway.wave.gif

 

 


Edited by SilverMoon010 - 4/23/11 at 6:12am
post #20 of 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 View Post

 



Yes, it's all so hilarious to have such a closed mind and have no idea what's going on in the country.  Not my problem.

 

Anyhow, I doubt any of you above will read the article, but that's okay...Just keeping getting your vaccines and antibiotics for every ailment (superbugs anyone?) and continue falling trap to every single thing you see on TV and read.  What do I care.  Oh, if you still haven't gotten my point, my point was they don't push vitamins! They push the vaccines. Do you ever hear them push Vitamin D for the flu??? NO! I still haven't heard (from the last three posts) anyone make a comment regarding vitamins and illnesses versus vaccination.  You can contribute any time you like, to the topic at hand.

 

http://www.naturalnews.com/022586.html 

 

On that note, I'm out, so no need to respond.  I really need to speak to mature adults and I certainly can't find that here, at least on this thread anyway.wave.gif

 

 

And to continue the hilarity, I think it is ludicrous that to prove your point that people are not pushing vitamins, you link to natural news and Mike Adams- one of the biggest hucksters out there.  It's hard to find the article amongst all the ads.

 

To address your point regarding vitamins versus vaccinations- it's not a case of pick one, and don't do the other. Some good preliminary evidence does exist that Vitamin D has anti-viral action.  Human studies have not been completed yet, but there is good in-vitro evidence. 

 

So, this might BLOW YOUR MIND- but as an allopathic doctor I actually check vitamin D levels on my patients.  I recommend supplementation to get to a good level, especially in the winter.  I also recommend the flu shot.  So, where do I fit into your schema?  Am I in the thrall of Big Pharma, since I'm an allopathic doctor?  Am I a rebel because I prescribe vitamin D supplements?  Is the AMA out to get me because of that?

 

Or maybe, just maybe, the practice and art of medicine is not as black and white as you are making it out to be.  Maybe doctors actually do educate themselves on the latest research out there and change their behavior and prescribing practice accordingly.  Maybe we don't stop learning in med school- maybe we keep learning- from CME and our patients. 

 

Hope this was mature enough for you to read.

 

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Women's Health
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Women's Health  › Spin-off discussion about Chlorine Dioxide/MMS and the eradication of disease