Welcome to the About Words website. Below is a brief audio introduction to this site.
Did you know that one of the most popular words on the internet is God?
In 1993, shortly after his retirement, Dr. Meinig learned of the 1,174 pages of research done on root canal teeth by Dr. Weston Price, D.D.S., F.A.C.D. and 60 fellow research dentists. Their findings had been suppressed by the American Dental Association since 1925. This research, done over 20 years, showed, beyond any doubt, that there was no safe way to do a root canal filling. Not only that, but the research established root canal teeth as the cause of many serious degenerative conditions, including cancers. “
The dental root canal issue has been studied and verified (in that the location of the root canal – which teeth- reliably predicts exactly where the “cancering” will manifest). Further, I assert that the single intervention of replacing metal dental work with porcelain fillings has produced a full reversal of many cases of cancer (no dietary change and no lifestyle change).
“Cancer has only one prime cause. It is the replacement of normal oxygen respiration of the body’s cells by an anaerobic [i.e., oxygen-deficient] cell respiration.” -Dr. Otto Warburg-1931 & 1944 Nobel Prize-Winner
I say that Warburg was right, but his comment alone is not useful. *Why* do cells lose the ability to metabolize oxygen?
pH is the answer (and that may not have been established scientifically as of 1931 or whatever). Why is pH so far off from “normal” in so many people? Dental fillings “bleeding” electrons is my answer. That is a very useful answer whenever a filling can be easily replaced with porcelain.
This article focuses mostly on toxicity as it relates to cancer, but has lots of interestign actual data for any science nerds out there.http://www.icnr.com/cs/cs_21.html
They do not detail “getting a bridge” (a dental bridge) to replace a root canal, but that is the “useful info” in terms of reversing the process that causes the symptoms known as cancer.
J R Fibonacci Hunn I could say that “mindfulness is the key.” My standard recommendations to “most people” are #1 slow down your breathing to increase the CO2 levels in your blood (which will increase oxygen to the brain). I slow my breath as a routine most every time that I lay down (and I tend to lay down briefly several times a day if possible). I know about that and (several other methods I like) specifically because of this group in general and Max Smile in particular.
Next is that I stay grounded almost all the time (and always while sleeping/resting), usually through copper wires. I also use a very specific product for hydration (see link).
J R Fibonacci Hunn I will not detail diet here in depth, Valerie, but I do have a “mixed” adherence to the primal diet and related ideas of [Aajonus Vanderplantiz] – sometimes more WAPF [Weston A. Price Foundation], sometimes more “paleo,” etc….
I also have been using Iodine on my skin daily. Because of Barry Soetoro and other facebook interactions (on and off this group), I am considering a conservative experiment with using iodine orally. What I learned recently is that if I was also taking Selenium, then my some of biggest concerns regarding oral consumption of dilluted iodine (like heavy detoxes of Flourine or Chlorine) are a non-issue.
J R Fibonacci Hunn A newer thing is that I regularly (a few times a week) put my feet in very cold water for 15-30 minutes (lately, usually while watching football games on TV). If someone wants to learn why, they can research “cold thermogenesis” or “Wim Hof Ted talk.”
J R Fibonacci Hunn So, with mindfulness comes a clear awareness of priorities. For instance, you cannot replace breathing with diet. You either breathe or you die. Diet is irrelevant if there is no respiration.
So, I assess a set of possible targets of focus and then I go down my list. I do not have a comprehensive routine that I rigidly follow in a perfectionist paranoia of hysterical panicking. I have a set of priorities that I frequently review, explore, and re-prioritize. Some of the practices, like keeping grounding wires at the bed, have become a routine and others, like eating “high meat,” I do quite sporadically.
A huge factor in the “randomness” of what I do when is my wife. We do some things together and then some things I tend to do when she is away, like for most of a day (like eating “high meat”). I almost never think of “high meat” except on weekend mornings, so it is not exactly random, but certainly not a routine.
In the image below, NaHCO3 (at the bottom left) refers to what is otherwise known as baking soda:
VS asked: …Do cancers feed on protein? Does this idea not apply to raw protein? I know sugars feed cancer.
SC: Sugars, lack of oxygen, glutamate and acidity all feed cancer. This is why I question the balance of it all. One says that being too alkaline is too “yin” but it’s good for starving cancer cells. However, in order to digest protein, one needs more acid, which I assume is more “yang.”
JR: the issue of the low pH of stomach acid (to digest protein) is completely distinct from overall pH or pH in a particular part of the body where there might be the physiological effect/ process called “cancer.”
It is like saying “blood and urine should have liquid in it but not so much that you drown.” Acidity in the stomach and overall pH are very, very different issues.
SC: Yes, J R, I am aware of this fact. However, what one consumes will either lower or raise the pH of the stomach as well as the body itself.
Also, I’m not on this forum for any type of contention. I don’t find your analogy to be of any relevance. Thank you.
JR: SC, maybe you are open to learning and maybe not. If you do not understand what pH measures, then my comments may seem irrelevant or even threatening. pH is simply a measure of electromagnetic charge (which comes down to the number of electrons relative to protons).
Consider the idea that cancer is a label for an effect of prolonged acidity in a particular tissue / area. It is “localized” (like arthritis).
Reducing the pH of a skin tumor reverses the process called cancer. Injecting an alkaline solution in to the area of a tumor does too. This article covers a lot of what VS referenced:
More on the use of slight alkalinity (baking soda) to reverse cancer: http://azcc.arizona.edu/node/4187
As for the idea that cancer is a living thing that feeds on protein, I do not acccept those presumptions. Cancer is just a label for the natural result of prolonged localized acidity in any living tissue.
So, it is common to say things like “oxygen feeds a fire.” However, to mix metaphors and ask if fires like to eat protein is “inattentive language.”
Eating sugar can “feed” cancer in the general sense. However, it is helpful to be calmly attentive to our language. It is not as if we must hysterically avoid proteins because proteins contain amino acids and “I read that acidity is bad and car battery acid can burn your skin.”
That is misunderstanding the simplicity of the issues. Acidity is not something to avoid hysterically “no matter what because it leads to cancer.” For someone who understands clearly what cancer is, it is is easy to treat. It is also easy to alter pH (and that is why it is easy to treat the natural result of prolonged localized low pH… AKA “cancer”).
Did I “oversimplify” in my comments? Yes. When people are confused about little details, it can be useful to “zoom out.”
SC: J R, an old Chinese proverb says, “you can catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar.” Your assumptions of me, as I stated, are irrelevant and all the information that you have supplied, I am aware of. Have a nice day and may you continue to be blessed.
JR: I do not recall stating any presumptions about you, SC. If you presumed that you were a fly that I was trying to catch, you might be wrong.
For those that think of cancer cells as “the source of a problem,” there can be a hysteria about cancer. But “cancer cells” are just regular cells that stopped behaving “normally” and for very specific reasons. Cancer is a symptom, not a cause.
So, to me, the best way to respond to the effect called cancer is to know how to produce it and then stop producing it. Also, the assumption that diet is the primary cause of the effect called cancer does not explain why cancer shows up only in certain places/ areas of the body.
Is skin cancer caused by one dietary factor and breast cancer by another? No. Diet is not the primary issue at all.
However, can dietary changes “make a difference?” Yes, and so can many other things- some much more effective than drinking “baking soda tea.”
(For more info, ask me.)
JR: I say that guilt involves a fear of future punishment (as distinct from remorse which is a type of disappointment/ grief about unmet desire).
To J.R.: Maybe, but guilt is used as a weapon against someone. I know my ex partner used it often, in an abusive way and that made me remorseful.
Guilt or shame is used to hold people back in a religious or societal sense we are told not to do this but that, what would *___* think about that, we can’t possibly go out in those clothes, hair unkempt, not bought a new TV/ mobile yet?! Future punishment is fear not guilt, but perhaps these walk hand in hand depending on ones beliefs.
I question all emotions on if they are real or not, evwn love and hate. The line between them is very much similar and there studies that show the same part of the brain activates. Love is not instilled… i know that. Hate can be.
The idea that emotions should not be how they are is similar.
Guilt, shame and fear are the lowest vibrations; joy and excitement, compassion and concern, these are high vibrations — Quite simply, change your complex frequencies and vibrations, you are born a Master of this ability as cocreator.
J R Fibonacci Hunn The use of terms like “low” and “high” are arbitrary preferences. Of course people prefer experiences of gratitude and joy over terror or frustration.The one who fears shame is still a slave, even if joyful or grateful in a moment. The one who embra
ces shame will be humbled / humiliated… Which can produce the most precious learning.And the faith that is required involves immense courage. Most people do not have it. They will chase joy and “high vibrations” out of fear (for in fact it is paranoia that drives their frightened chase for higher vibrations). They will eventually encounter frustration and exhaustion, which is a very valuable lesson (though they may resist learning for quite awhile).
Embracing shame, Grace also arises… Through the relaxing of the shames programmed by schools and in culture (including shames about human bodies). Modesty develops after the terror of idealism relaxes.
By the way, a message like “just think positive and raise your vibrations” does have some value. However, if people relate to that idea / “method” as an affirmation that is a “cure-all,” that is idealism.
the idea that people “should not feel how they feel” is shaming / psychological warfare. If circumstances produce the result of a child screaming in terror, that is just a momentary behavior. There is no need to shame the child for “low vibrations” or be aloof and obsess about “high vibrations.”
I am not just talking theory here. I have made some “mistakes” as a parent and slowly or quickly I have learned from them.
J R Fibonacci Hunn Chaffee, you speak as if shame is primarily a conscious process. Shame is all about the internal suppression of consciousness.How does shame relax? With the opening of chronic physical tensions (and bodily pain), panicked breathing, terrified confus
ion, and no immediate sense of a trigger.Of course, there is also the issue of withdrawing any prior condemnation of the past. However, that is not “forgiving people for doing wrong.” That is completely releasing any idealism about how the past should have been (or should not have been). Most people are terrified of shame and retreat in to higher vibrations … Which allows them to begin relaxing.
But their retreat from shame is not relaxing it. That is a coping mechanism to decrease the addition of new layers of shame.
That is an important step. However, it is a baby step. Withdrawing from shame In fear is wise at a particular stage but is a *very* long way from the end of the path.
J R Fibonacci Hunn I see what you mean now by “real,” Clare. Shame is always social.In a state of alarm, there are two main alternatives: flight (the natural #1 preference) or fight. Next is “freeze.”
Shame is a type of “freezing.” It has a very specific set of physical tensions, such as “holding back” and holding your tongue.”
Is all shame cultural? Close enough…. but a pet can display what would be called shame. So can a wild animal.
In this image, one wolf has a head kept low as a sign of submission to the alpha male. You can say “shame is not real,” but saying that does not alter the reality of the various patterns of BEHAVIOR. Note that I am referencing emotions as neurological patterns of ACTIVITY.
J R Fibonacci Hunn There is a fourth type of fear (besides fight, flight, and freeze). I called it “faking.” That includes any behavior to distract others from fear.Mixing aspects of “flight” and faking” would be behaviors to divert ourselves from perceived triggers of panic, such as a mantra or repeating an affirmation. That CAN be beneficial.
However, that is not the absence of distress. That is moving the attention away from distress as a temporary coping mechanism.
If your house is on fire, a mantra will not put out the fire or make it safe. It is fine to use a mantra to calm down a bit. Then, get a fire extinguisher and put out the fire (or leave the building and call 911).
Fear is healthy. Paranoia and shame about fear is a state of chronic emotional distress. It is getting caught up in a desperate panic of “faking” calm.
J R Fibonacci Hunn To Brenda, to face a place that has been in the shadows is to bring light (consciousness) to it. In some cases, it is useful to do this “with company” … with other people who have already seen what has been hidden in a shadow.The “freezing” of cons
ciousness to create a blindspot or “shadow” is a healthy coping mechanism… temporarily. If I am not disgusted or disturbed by something, then I can assist others in bringing light (lightness, humor) to it- perhaps especially if I used to be disgusted or ashamed or disturbed by that same shadow.I know how to joke about some shames with tremendous power and familiarity. In other cases, I can offer lightness but not any personal expertise or insight- just curiosity. However, innocent curiosity can be incredibly powerful.
J R Fibonacci Hunn Clare, again thank you for sharing your interests and experience. I have a tendency to present contrary ideas to create new openings for conversation. So, keep that in mind when I say….“We should only use fear when…” Clare is not afraid to use it
?In an extreme situation, might it be best to refrain from drawing any attention to myself? Might it be best to remain totally silent… to wait… even to suddenly withdraw with no explanation or justification?
Isn’t caution intelligent sometimes? Isn’t “being afraid of what people will think” intelligent sometimes? Isn’t “being afraid of what people might do as a consequence / in retaliation” sometimes an intelligent consideration?
J R Fibonacci Hunn Clare, if I am conscious of a shame (like if I can admit it as a subject of shame), then it may not be especially powerful of a demon for me. The ones that someone is not aware of as any issue at all can be the most dominant.For instance, with behavi
ors like alcoholism or gambling addictions, those are coping mechanisms. Those are not the shame. Those are methods for distracting myself from the actual issue of shame.What happens when someone experiences a core shame from which they have been hiding? Trembling, nausea, hyperventilation, etc….
J R Fibonacci Hunn Clare, what “I feel is the right thing” is a product of social conditioning. That is not a problem. That is just a fact. “What is right” is dependent on a cultural context or social context. The idea of “inherently right behaviors” is cultural idealism.The *idea* of “who I really am” is also a cultural construct. Who I really I am is simply not an idea at all. Am I afraid of dropping any idea of “who I really am” and learning something new about me… or even evolving in to somehting that I have never been?
J R Fibonacci Hunn As for wanting to evolve, you really have no choice. You will evolve!But being curiously attentive to the process certainly can have advantages over not recognizing it or resisting it.
For anyone who wants more background on this tangent, here’s an article: http://jrfibonacci.wordpress.com/2012/08/30/courage-and-the-four-fears-fight-flight-freeze-and-fake/
Hope Johnson wrote:
Through my early experiences in dating and relationships, I learned to pretend like I was enjoying sex even when I was not. I tried being honest about what sensations I was feeling up until I was about 21 years old, but after being rejected a few times for not “getting into it enough” with guys I thought were really great, I decided that in order to be accepted by any man I needed to express pleasure in response to All of his sexual efforts.
It’s not that I didn’t enjoy sex much of the time…it’s just that when I wasn’t enjoying it, I chose to keep egos intact instead of being authentic…because I was afraid of being rejected. Following this choice, I became a believer in the “fake it till you make it” philosophy because I experienced that my body did respond favorably…often leading to one or many orgasms.
In this way, much of my sexual practice was really a form self masturbation…using a partner sort of as a sexual object…while helping to feed his illusion that he was “making me cum”…oh yeah baby! Lol!
I can see that this strategy was quite valuable, useful and served me well for the time I believed in certain illusions….And it’s now apparent to me that said strategy was also a barrier to deepening intimacy and awakening the mind.
I’ve also come to recognize that pursuing or initiating sex has never felt natural for me, and I only did it because I believed it was what I needed to do in order to get love.
As soon as I became aware that these strategies were playing themselves out through me, they could no longer persist. At first there was a bit of anxiety about this, but over time my mind has become perfectly content with sexual authenticity…even it speaks to sexual insecurity…and even it means I’ll have experiences of being rejected.
After all, every interaction can either awaken the mind or perpetuate illusions…and sex is no exception.
May everyone be free to express themselves authentically. Blessings!
Interesting…. Regarding “what I needed to do in order to get love,” I thought what does Hope mean by “love?”
We witness attention, interest, and validation or approval and we may call it love. Or maybe only when there is an economic investment behind it, like buying dinner or paying rent.
For a guy, it may be “of course I know for sure that she loves me because we finally had sex.” It is such a “charged” (sacred) word: love.
However, do we say that an employer loves us? They may appreciate us. But love?
Love to me implies an aspect of a relaxed, casual, spontaneous fun process. Sometimes, to role-play and “pretend” (like Hope referenced) can be “fun” and relaxing, which can lead to greater enjoyment of physical arousal.
I am reminded of other intriguing references to love like “he intentionally burned me with a cigarette, but at least he loves me!” Other people say things like “I cut in to my skin with a razor blade day after day because it feels familiar and reassuring.”
As for “responding favorably” eventually and having orgasms, that sounds to me like enjoyment. Was there joy in “tricking” the guy? Maybe, but I am not aware of anything so repressed and taboo in modern cultures as sexual pleasure (oddly enough).
We may be constantly stimulated, but that is actually part of the repression programming. We get stimulated (like by pornographic beer commercials for men or romantic comedies for women), but then we are discouraged from pursuing the arousal. Even simple masturbation is discouraged in most settings. Pleasure is shamed as “selfish” … for it distracts from the indoctrination programs of schools etc…. Spontaneous learning (or experimental exploring for pleasure) is at least “off-task” and conforming to the holy curriculum (being on task) is rewarded.
We live in high density civilization in which certain forms of nudity in public is a crime. In some cultures, a woman must cover her face in public or face criminal penalties, right?
The LAST thing that public schools should produce is fertile females who are sensitive to physical pleasure. We need focused employees for the centrally-planned economy!
“I had a girlfriend who made me erect, but I did not like it. (Or that is what I later said to my mom out of shame). However, I pretended to like it and soon I had a real orgasm.”
To me, that entire commentary sounds like “ego.” That means a neurological protective mechanism to minimize social anxiety and avoid punishment. It means “displaying that I am a good person- how i should be according to a social idealism.”
The modern concept of “love” is allegedly only a few hundred years old and is not worldwide. It is the core of certain propaganda systems like “love is the ONLY natural way for two spiritually advanced creatures to relate.”
Love is the object of worship. Love is the target of utopian idolatries: “god is love!”
Really? “There is a time for love and a time for hate.” – Ecclesiastes, chapter 3
The idealism about love becomes a mechanism for guilt and for shaming:
“If there is any problem in your life at all, the only possible thing that is wrong with you (!) is that you need to be more loving. For instance, if you have been diagnosed with asthma, Gregg Braden said that Louise Hay said that it is CAUSED by your unwillingness to love others. You should more ashamed of yourself… you know, like as ashamed of you as I am ashamed of you.”
The New Age idolatries contain a lot of “friendly-sounding” psychological warfare. I am not saying that modern psychiatry is any “kinder” or “friendlier,” but, in regard to something like a correlation between asthma and “fear of expressing love,” finding a correlation does NOT establish causality.
If all public school students are traumatized to associate sexual arousal with physical punishment and social shaming, then yes, in extreme cases, even moderate amounts of sexual arousal will lead to a panic attack- they will both experience a panic of hyperventilation (“asthma”) as well as a compulsive retreat from intimacy or sexual pleasure. Certainly, there are other biochemical risk factors, but those are only focused on by people who do not understand the simplicity of how to produce an epidemic of asthma. If asthma can EVER be produced just through social conditioning (like the Pavlovian indoctrination methods of public schools), then no biochemical “causes” are actually causes.
If you watched a lot of Friday the 13th movies, those movies are packed with “stacking” sexuality (softcore pornography) with violence (murder). Any young man (in particular) watching those movies is being programmed to associate sexual arousal with danger. The message of “sex = death” is similar to the message of *unauthorized* sex = eternal tortures in hell.
Even without all of that, can it be scary to experience intense physical sensations? Sure! Should there ever be social anxiety about “what if I get caught?!?!” (by my parents, my spouse, my priest, Santa Claus, St. Peter, etc….) If there ever is, then there is.
Also, I am reminded here of one of my friend’s frequent references to “manipulation and deception as things that are WRONG- that should not be.” Why would someone ever say that “religiously?”
Because you were programmed with that reflexive denial response by public schools, right? Why was it so important that you reactively condemn all deceptions and manipulations? Because otherwise you would be confronted with the “Mr. Obvious simplicity” that the entire design of school systems is manipulative. Since you were trained that schools are holy and manipulation/deception is unholy, then “obviously” schools could not be manipulative or deceptive, right?
That is the standard usage of what social psychologists call “cognitive dissonance” – the standard protocol in the psychological warfare programs known as public education. Those methods cause trauma, disassociation, “compartmentalization,” hypnotic “delusions,” chronic distress disorders, etc….
It is standard practice. It is very effective.
Manipulation is called wrong because if it was not demonized as wrong (named as a taboo), then you might notice that it is the standard practice not just in schools or mass media, but in a huge portion of human interactions. “Sincerity” is called holy not only to cripple you with guilt for natural humorous insincerity, but to hide the systematic insincerity of the “rulers.”
If I listed 100 treatment methods and then analyzed each of them for popularity, an odd thing might be that the more profitable the treatment method is, the more likely it is to be popular. Huge profits allow for big marketing budgets and swarms of lobbyists and lawyers (and biased researchers).
Consider how long it took for an immensely inexpensive treatment method for “curing” the diagnosis of scurvy (the consumption of citrus fruit) to become popular in western civilization. Do you know the history? Immense resistance to a simple, effective method can lead to immense campaigns to discredit it.
In the famous case of snake oil, it was not that certain snake oils did not produce tremendous benefit. They did. This terrified certain commercial interests.
So, those interests hired some salesman to sell snake oil that was not actually snake oil at all. That reactive wave of traveling snake oil salesman was sent across the nation (USA) with a tremendous marketing budget and soon the “threat” of snake oil (to conventional medical practitioners of the day) was eliminated.
There was no quality control in those days. Consumers could not reliably assess which liquids marketed as snake oil were effective and which were fraudulent. The demand for snake oil collapsed.
The above comment was in response to the following thread: (note that my own comments begin several down)
This has always been a big issue for me. The self-righteous ignorance of the anti-vaccination crowd, and how their ignorance endangers those around them while their own kids are benefiting from the so-called “herd immunity” of a vaccinated population in schools. In the mid-nineties, I almost lost a client over it – a chiropractor who refused to get his children vaccinated according to school requirements. Prior to that encounter, I had bashed heads with a chiropractor who I visited for a back problem – one who had in his office pamphlets encouraging patients to use “Chiropractic” and not vaccination to prevent disease. I told him to stick with his own field and quit spreading bullshit to his patients.
I’m vaccinated. It isn’t anywhere close to what the CDC recommends for children or adults. As one example how out of control the patented technology being used has gone past science and back to snake oil the only flu vaccination that proved to be effective last year was the active agent. The other two offered less protection than placebo.
The appropriate and useful thing isn’t to requires vaccination of particular MFG, it’s to simply test for the antigens. My and almost all of our blood donations are screened for the tetanus antigen and if it is there the antigen is extracted and used in emergency room treatments. If I have the anitgen I don’t need to be vaccinated for tetanus again.
Given the breakthroughs on lab tests on a chip it wouldn’t seem tough to have a antigen test that really wouldn’t be more complex than a modern blood sugar test. Patients who are lacking antigens could then make choices. Even better that would make the validation of vaccination technology far better than the antiquated FDA procedures that simply measure undifferentiated antigen response. WHILE allowing vaccine mfg to use adjuncts in their formulations that provoke undifferentiated antigen responses in dead animals.
Children should be taught to think and socialize in a world of diverse opinions and cultures – not insulated and hidden away. Schools teach more than facts.
Adam brings up something that I consider an intelligent point: measuring the actual effectiveness of various interventions (including various vaccines). Respectfully,I did not see anything that I consider an intelligent point in your comments.
as someone interested in promoting health, that focus would involve considering both the alleged benefits and alleged risks of any treatment. Perhaps a month ago, I shared a recent report by the US department of justice on the recent wave of civil court cases in the US in which damages were awarded to family members of people in whom vaccines allegedly caused results as extreme as death.
commercial interests are prominent in many (all?) political institutions. The Science taught in most public schools is not presented for open debate, but as if correlation was the same as causality. In other words, it is not very scientific.
In many communities home schooling is evolving to being schooling, just without the support of public monies that are going to maintaing these charming little prisons run by gangs.
The idea of “bullying” as something that “we are all against” is notable. Notice that how public schools define bullying will tend to exclude all forms of systematic coercion by governments (at least “our” governments) and by schools.
What I have found is that there is tremendous ignorance of heAlth and physiology amongst the mainstream (including MDs). The promotion of hysterias and delusional paranoias by schools and mass media is, I argue, not just a major influence on popular thought, but further I assert that promoting delusional hysterias is the specific target of certain campaigns.
We may think “that only happened hundreds of years ago” or “that only happens in other places.” What a fascinating response to the stress of cognitive dissonance, eh? Delusional hysteria, even when wildly popular, is still hysterical and still delusional. Calling it “science” is… predictable.
Hysteria can be great for business, right?
This client/chiropractor I mentioned was the one who first triggered such a strong response in me. He was anti-vaccine, but he was also a user of people.
WASH YOUR HANDS! There are plenty of instructional video’s and it does not require anything but soap. There is no single action you can take to reduce the spread ofdisease with greater efficacy than this one thing. PLEASE WASH YOUR HANDS….
COVER YOUR MOUTH AND NOSE! Wear a mask in public if you have to. Again this is completely supported by science. Every expulsion with cough or sneeze atomizes bodily fluids that act as a disease carrier. Many of the expectorant droplets are micronized and can float in the air for hours acting as a huge carrier of viral and bacterial contagens.
If all of us did these two things reliably there is NO DOUBT the incidence of ALL viral and bacterial illness would be DRAMATICALLY reduced.