- Barry wrote: does baking soda alkalise the digestive system or the blood? or both?
J R Fibonacci Hunn Let’s start simple. Every pancreas on this planet (in every animal that has a functioning pancreas) makes baking soda (NaHCO3- which is in the picture above is in the bottom left in the blue text).
It is released in to the very top of the small intestine to neutralize the intense acidity that is present when the contents of the stomach are releasedin to the small intestines (which SHOULD contain a lot of HCl- hydrochoric acid). The acidity of HCl and the alkalinity of the baking soda mix to produce NaCl (salt) and H2O (water).
For more info, see: http://jrfibonacci.wordpress.com/…/how-much-salt-and…/
J R Fibonacci Hunn Baking soda is commonly used (typically, when moistened with water) on the skin for countering any type of acidic inflammation, such as from a bee sting. It is also used in foot baths or full-body bathing.
Consuming baking soda in a liquid may or maynot be favorable depending on the person and the dosage. (For instance, since cancer is basically a label for the effects of an acidic pH in a particular tissue or region, baking soda has been used orally to treat cancer, but solutions – liquids- with baking soda have also been directly injected in to acidic areas to neutralize the acidity and discontinue the effects of the acidity- which can be labeled “cancer”).
For more info, see: http://jrfibonacci.wordpress.com/…/baking-soda-cures…/
J R Fibonacci Hunn Taking baking soda orally is typically the method that people have used to excess, leading to reducing the acid levels of the stomach to the point of causing a huge cascade of negative effects resulting from incomplete digestion of proteins. The acidity of the stomach is THE mechanism for digesting proteins and if it does not happen there, then undigested proteins beyond the stomach are likely to be attacked as foreign proteins.
J R Fibonacci Hunn Another term for that is “an allergic reaction to the proteins in food.” Compromising the digestive process by raising the pH of the stomach so much that the stomach acid is ineffective… can be disastrous.
Also, given that the masses of people consume so little seafood or other food rich in iodine, the massive deficiencies of iodine lead directly to a deficiency in stomach acid, and that means that even small amounts of baking soda added orally can be quite unfavorable because the organism’s digestive function is already so compromised.
J R Fibonacci Hunn So, even though there is an intense emotional hysteria regarding baking soda and salt amongst certain “alternative health” enthusiasts, that is the logical equivalent of the mainstream paranoia about cholesterol [which I address in detail in the previous blog], saturated fat, or unpasteurized mammary fluids (milk). Human bodies make these things for a reason. Discard the mainstream religions of hysteria (if relevant, one hysteria at a time).
J R Fibonacci Hunn Here is a picture again showing NaHCO3 (baking soda) in the pancreas ready to be released in to the upper small intestines. Keep in mind the simplicity of the issues here.
J R Fibonacci Hunn Next, here is a news item about $2 million of funding in 2012 for baking soda as a cancer treatment at University of Arizona. I have criticized the ignorance of the PhDs (directly to them) in their use of terminology like this:
“… acid destroys surrounding tissue, which allows the tumor to grow, invade surrounding areas, and metastasize to other organs in the body.”
J R Fibonacci Hunn They are still talking about cancer from a model of 19th century demon worship. Yes, acids rips apart molecules and destroys tissue, then that accumulation of non-functioning matter can increase in size- but it is not ALIVE, so it does not GROW. Acidity is not a living creature (a demon) that INVADES other areas.
If enough acidity is present in a tissue, that will destroy the tissue and lead to the accumulation of the waste that has not yet been removed. That can be labeled a cancerous tumor.
Cancer is not alive. Cancer is not a demon. Most MDs are just unaware of the lack of scientific credibility in their “religion.”
J R Fibonacci Hunn Valerie, it is understandable to sometimes have an orientation of resolving problems. However, such a “remedial” model (which is “against problems” as in “allopathic”) will never produce the efficiency of a holistic model.
People who are seeking remedies operate in a very different “wavelength” than those simply focused on promoting health. They suppress symptoms and manage symptoms. That is one way to proceed but can eventually produce catastrophes.
So, anyone appraoching health with an exclusive emphasis on diet or nutrition is not operating from holism. Anyone focusing on biochemistry is missing the much more efficient realm of electromagnetics (physics), which includes the issue of pH / acidity / voltage.
Voltage is a scale that measures electromagnetic charge. So is pH. They are like fahrenheit and celsius. The vast majority of people do not comprehend the simplicity and basics of physics, and so they argue about biochemical remedies (dietary changes) and so forth.
That could be like building a house with your eyes closed. Sure, it can be done, but it can be confusing and frustrating. Why not open your eyes while building a house? Why not set aside the inefficiencies and confusions of a biochemical, remedial orientation?
One issue is that there is so much social reinforcement (including the propaganda of public schools and so on) that promotes the use of models developed in the 19th century. (Many of those models were also discarded by leaders in their fields within that same century, but how many people today know that?)
Valerie Steinfeld J R, you just identified 5 factors that help to form a bigger perspective from which to look and improve health and life. I believe we are saying the same thing. I was giving you a compliment. I hope that came through in my communication. Improvement comes with an increase in understanding and awareness. The more understanding and awareness, the greater the improvement. You are adding to understanding and awareness with your insight and information. I appreciate you. I do feel that there are problems that come up in life and in living to resolve. Resolving them effectively leads to happiness. How is that remedial? I agree with you that allopathic approach is a tunnel vision approach. It is difficult for me to tell sometimes whether you are disagreeing with what I am saying or simply making another point! Have a good Sunday! Val
J R Fibonacci Hunn “Tunnel vision” has many forms. That was my point (distinct from yours, but related).
Anything that is not a holistic model that studies how a healthy organism functions will never provide the efficiency of that perspective. So, we can be skeptical about the way that the researchers at the Univ. of Arizona report their findings. Their findings are useful as evidence, but of what?
If they base their conceptual model on what I am calling 19th century demon worship, which they clearly do, then that explains why their results show only a tiny fraction of the effectiveness of the actual trail-blazing researchers in health. They may have results maybe 500 times as efficient as chemotherapy. So what? That is 1/100th of what is easily available. (10 years ago, I would have been excited by that, but today that seems trivial.)
What will get publicity? The U of A research.
What will not get publicity? The research of folks like Jerry Tennant, MD (for instance) who in two minutes could dispel 90% of the pseudo-scientific presumptions of the mainstream model of demon worship [and a fair amount of my comments on the issue of cancer are abbreviated paraphrases of his comments and findings].
Further, the chemotherapy lobbyists are not going to just suddenly disappear. Their interest is profit, not health. No government agency is every going to approach the scientific efficiency of leading independent researchers. Bureaucracies cannot operate with that degree of flexibility.
Isn’t it fascinating that the U of A researchers (among millions of others) continue to speak of cancer as a living entity that spreads and grows and “attacks?” To me, that is remarkable.
Valerie Steinfeld Fascinating…but honestly words and their nuances of meaning can be an infuriating way to communicate especially when you cannot see someone and I feel that we are distinct ships passing in the night. I am not sure that counts for real communication!!!! I am not certain how the University of Arizona comes into play here, but you possibly posted something about it earlier in the thread? Don’t know.
I acknowledge and understand what you are saying. To simplify: Problems present themselves. A wholistic view is best to carry forth resolution. If I am inaccurate or not using the correct words, forgive me, but I do intuit we are in agreement!Barry, I hope you have gotten some answers that are helpful to you!
J R Fibonacci Hunn One point was that the research at any university (such as U of A) will typically get more publicity than the results of a single practitioner (or even a group). It could be important to realize that the mainstream media (and mainstream schools) are not primarily vehicles for promoting intelligence, but for promoting the special interests of those who form those organizations and fund their operations. The media will typically be unreceptive to “independent researchers” (especially research that would “offend” their advertisers) and will only publicize things like university research, plus only in certain cases and only in certain ways.
(Also, Valerie, yes I posted a link way back there to research at U of A establishing that drinking water with baking soda has been documented as reversing a variety of forms of cancer.)
J R Fibonacci Hunn Next, I have been offering a holistic view. An example is this: someone contacts me and says that they have a list of problems.
I say “let’s focus instead on what promotes health” and then go through a hierarchy of issues, asking them what they are doing or not doing. In many cases, one or two very basic changes can resolve a huge list of medical complications with a single method.
To a mainstream medical practitioner, they would see arthritis, bursitis, leaky gut syndrome, GERD, fibromyalgia, bone cancer, and skin cancer. They might have 7 different treatments to inefficiently address each diagnostic label independently.
To me, I would see 7 forms of one thing: inflammation. What causes inflammation? Acidity reliably causes inflammation, like if you dip your hand in some battery acid briefly, your skin will AT LEAST get inflamed, right?
Acidity at a joint causes joint inflammation, which is labeled “arthritis.” (Note that when a TV ad says “arthritis causes joint inflammation” that is like saying “heat causes a high temperature.”)
Acidity in the upper small intestines causes inflammation of the intestinal wall (AKA leaky gut syndrome). Each various location of acidity (like acidosis of the blood etc) will get a different label by an MD as if there is something fundamentally distinct about that inflammation from the rest of the inflammatory symptoms in the patient.
J R Fibonacci Hunn So, the MD’s conceptual model may be “reductionist” and therefore their treatment methods tend to be complicated and inefficient (as they “attack” each symptom as if it is an isolated thing). In a week, I can produce results that they might not produce in a decade.
How? Stop contributing to ANY inflammation and start countering ALL of the inflammation… very efficiently.
I do not get confused by the diagnostic labels like MDs seem to be. I do not relate to arthritis as a mysterious cause. I relate to it as an incidental label for a [predictable] effect.
Posts Tagged ‘Cancer’
Many people throw around the word “cause” when all that they know about is a correlation. A “cause” would ideally mean 100% precision.
So, can a specific “bad” diet cause the effect labeled cancer 100% of the time? Can a specific diet can produce an effect 100% of the time (and not just in a sample of 50 city dwellers, but in a scientifically-relevant sample that includes many healthy humans of many ages- and, on the subject of skin cancer- many races)? Even if so, then there is the question of exactly how- what is the mechanism of producing the effect of cancer?
To me, cancer is just a simple label for a very simple phenomenon that is very simple to cause 100% of the time (and food is NOT the *primary* factor, but certainly is a factor). Further, when making a bold and plain statement like this, it is interesting how many people who may say that they are interested in understanding health will immediately flee (in terror?).
So, one of the first issues I raise is whether someone is willing to question the idea that cancer is a living organism that attacks another living organism, invades it, possesses it, and grows or spreads. In other words, are you willing to at least question the religion of demon worship that has been promoted through mainstream propaganda sources?
If the effect labeled cancer is as simple to produce as I suggest, then 100% precision in producing it is not only the measure that we should have in mind. If the effect is really so simple, then not only should we expect 100% precision in “causing” it, but we should also expect 100% success in regard to discontinuing the production of that effect.
It is always interesting to see folks flee away from science toward their religion of worshiping “incurable” demonic possessions. They will invest thousands of dollars and months of their lives worshiping their sacred demon. Then, they may want others to invest hours of time with no compensation to “convince” them that the effect of cancer is just a simple physiological effect which can easily be produced or discontinued. Their hysteria is… totally hysterical.
For us to say “cancer is caused by toxicity” is not as precise (or useful) as to say that extreme acidity (and/or dehydration) causes inflammation and other dysfunctions, such as the extreme form called cancer. Is there ever an effect called cancer which is not produced by biochemical toxicity? Yes. That is a major issue for the theory of “toxicity causes cancer.”
Bombardment of tissue with neutrons or protons (for instance) can alter the electromagnetic balance (the pH or voltage). That disrupts cellular function, such as mitochondrial functionality (metabolism, energy production). The effect called cancer results.
All “cancers” can be slowed or reversed with electrons (raising pH). However, the most serious obstacle when filling up a bucket is when there is a hole in the bottom, such as the case when there is a metal filling draining electrons. In many cases, simply plugging the hole produces an end to the effect called cancer.
What do I mean by plugging the hole? Let’s start with identifying the hole.
A metal filling (such as mercury or silver or gold) MAY OR MAY NOT be so close to the natural electrical circuits of an organism’s nervous system that it connects/ conducts electrons, producing an CONSTANT leak or drain on energy in to the air. Over the course of decades produces the effects that are given labels like “cancer.” While it is also possible to produce cancerous effects simply by bombarbing an organism with certain kinds of radiation, that does not explain WHERE the cancerous effects develop.
The electrical explanation (which is the same as pH since pH is simply a measure of electrical charge) predicts not only which organ(s) will develop the effects labeled cancer, but more. By removing the metal filling(s) and replacing them with porcelain, that removes the short circuit from the circuit and CAN (when an organism is properly grounded and has access to an abundant supply of electrons) contribute to the electromagnetic rebalancing of the tissue and removal of the accumulated cells of a tumor, such as we call “remission.”
So, Susan asked about how all of this is related to electrical eels. That is a great question.
When I personally lacked the insulation (myelin sheath) to transmit a nerve signal between my brain and my leg, I called that paralysis. 1 single pint of raw cream later (and a good night’s sleep), and “my paralysis disappeared.”
However, paralysis is just a label for an effect. It is not a demon possessing people- no more than scurvy or cancer or autism or acne. (Of those, autism is the closest to a demon because it involves a large colonization of parasites driven in to brain tissue, typically driven there by toxic levels of mercury in vaccines.)
Here is a quote from the article Susan cited:
“How the fish [electric eels] are seemingly able to tolerate large currents at certain times and not at others is a mystery which still eludes research scientists. The answer may lie partly in a thick layer of fat which behaves as an electrical insulator, protecting the eels from their own shocks and, to some extent, the shocks of others.”
So, ignorant researchers in institutions label lots of nature as “a mystery.”
What if the science is quite simple and the researchers have been blind because of false presumptions unsupported by evidence?
When a cell is properly insulated with saturated fat, then it can hold a charge and also maintain proper charge even when strong electromagnetic currents are present. Modern humans mostly consume low amounts of saturated fat and high amounts of PUFAs (fatty acids that are inferior in many ways including for electrical insulation). That is why the modern humans are so easy to electrocute (or even to injure with cell phone radiation or wifi radiation).
Further, by lack of electrical contact with the earth (being ungrounded), they no only cannot hold charge well (because of lack of cellular insulation), but often do not have the proper charge/voltage in the first place (they have too many protons relative to electrons, as in a systemic pH that is too acidiic as in below 7.35). Combine bad fats (poor insulation) with no grounding (no supply of electrons) and lots of electrical drainage from metal fillings (most often\ made from mercury amalgam), and there is a recipe for a huge rise in frequency of the effect called “cancer,” as well as a long list of other auto-immune disorders that are simply not present at all in the populations of most traditional cultures.
If you understand all of this, then it becomes obvious why it is not good to drink sodas with a pH of 3. Why does cooking reduce the electromagnetic integrity of organic tissue? First, it destroys the hydrating effects of the moisture by burning off the liquid. That issue alone is HUGE.
What happens when you have a well-insulated battery cell (in a car battery), plus an ample supply of charge, but no water in the cell? Nothing happens! Without hdyration INSIDE the cell, the electromagnetic functionality of the “battery” is ZERO.
That is why I focus so much on #1 electromagnetic balance, such as by using $1 copper wires, and #2 hydration (by using water engineered to hydrate efficiently OR water from natural sources that provides superior hydration to the average source of water). Hydration is essential to holding charge (just as myelin and saturated fats are essential for insulating the charged or ionized water).
So, acidity plus dehydration always produces the EFFECT of inflammation. Inflammation is not a root cause. It is as simple to produce as putting your skin directly on the burner of a hot stove.
When tissue is being slowly burnt (cooked) from the inside by acidity, we can call that cancer. The paranoid focus on which diagnostic label to worship is a testament to the ignorance of most modern scientists. Why are they so focused on disease and lucrative remedial interventions and so little focused on promoting health? Again, the issue is rather simple.
It does not matter whether you have ever “had” paralysis or cancer or inflammationitis. If you have proper hydration and proper electromagnetic flow, that is the only way to have optimal health.
Alternative medicine is just as much guilty of simplification as conventional medicine. Both have an issue with understanding that “one size fits all” approach doesn’t work really well. So you can have a chemo or radiation for cancer, or on the other end b-17 or cannabis oil or green smoothies… our desire for a one-step simple solution to a complex problem is understandable, but doesn’t work well in real life.
The same with PD [the primal diet]. The fundamentals are simple yet as you go deeper you discover some things work for you and some don’t and you adjust your diet accordingly.
I am satisfied with my understanding of “cancer” as an effect of low pH (AKA improper voltage /more protons than electrons). I am not aware of any controversy in that regard. Please feel free to show me any well-constructed scientific research on the subject that is not absolutely clear.
If people do not fully understand the simplicity of cancer, then they may only be able to repair damage efficiently (like through diet to remove the accumulated waste of the tumor) without at all addressing the basic cause: the electromagnetic short-circuiting of something like a mercury tooth filling which leads to the continual draining of the voltage from that physical circuit. Changing of diet does not alter the short circuit, does it?
Because of the near complete ignorance of electromagnetics and the worship of what may ultimately be a largely inaccurate model of biochemical cause and effect, many conventional and alternative models are still rooted in the familiar and popular 19th century falsehoods called “mainstream biochemistry.” When the simple elegance of physics is properly respected, highly efficient models are already rather well-developed for us to apply.
However, we must stop exhausting ourselves with attacking the FDA or AMA if we wish to develop insight and spread it. Their continuing power may even RELY on us attacking them instead of promoting science.
Back to the topic of my recent exchange with A.R., imagine if millions of people said “I do not care what the FDA recommends. I am interested in actual science!” Why pay thousands of dollar as a co-pay for an insurance-covered treatment that is highly dangerous? Perhaps because people do not know there are $5 cures- or have not loosened their worship of the FDA (blind faith or blind attacks) enough to “bother” to go on to the internet and then assess the simplicity of the most remarkable claims and evidence and theories.
Back to the original topic of this thread, let’s consider grounding (which always raises pH of someone experiencing cancer, who always is acidic). Is grounding sufficient to remedy all of the symptoms labeled cancer? No!
Grounding does not remove short circuits created by mercury dental fillings (avoidable with porcelain fillings)! Grounding also does not provide hydration (which, along with pH, are the two most prevalent “epidemics” … of 19th century ignorance)!
However, proper grounding ALWAYS promotes health and reverses the causes of cancer. It will slow down some “cancering” (slower malignancy of tumors) and reverse some (remission of tumors) and simply create stability in some cases (benign tumors). Will grounding PLUS a primal diet ALWAYS be sufficient? NO!!! Will removing a filling while eating a bad diet lead to the same speed of recovery as removing the filling plus eating a great diet? NOOOO!!!!
If an alternative medical approach is anything but holistic, then it could still be struggling against symptoms. That is just medicine (or at least only “remedial medicine”). That is not promoting health.
I will here address the effect labeled “cancer” and how to to produce it, prevent it, etc…. I will also address how pH alters the ability to use oxygen (meaning that adding oxygen while ignoring pH may be ineffective).
Some of you may know my orientation that electromagnetics rules biochemistry (& nutrition), which is based on the observation that if you take 1000 lab rats who eat a wide variety of diets (even with a variety of exposure to toxins) and you dunk all of them in very strong acid for 60 seconds or expose them to strong shocks like 1-minute long lightning bolts, they all tend to die. Yes, no matter what their biochemistry, they all die.
So, I propose that electromagnetism rules biochemistry. In this case, pH levels rule the use of oxygen. To see documentation that falling pH reduces cellular oxygen consumption, see “table 1″ at the top of page 3 of the journal of the American Heart Association:http://stroke.ahajournals.org/content/4/2/221.full.pdf
Next, I want to correct a possible misconception before we proceed. Celsius and Fahrenheit are two scales that measure the same thing. Likewise, voltage and pH are also two scales that measure the same thing: the relative amount of electrons to protons. In other words, they measure magnetic polarity.
When there is a relative abundance of electrons, that can be measured numerically as a negative voltage or a pH above 7 (alkalinity). When there is a relative abundance of protons, that can be measured numerically as a positive voltage or a pH below 7 (acidity). How do batteries produce voltage? Things like battery acid (with a very low pH or positive voltage) are involved in creating a current of flowing electrons. Electricity is magnetism.
So, what happens when you pour acid on a lab rat’s skin? It burns. It produces inflammation. It gets red. It irritates nerves and signals pain (if the rat is healthy rather than numbed/comatose).
Now, what happens if there is internal acidity (not as strong as pouring battery acid on the rat’s skin)? The EXACT same thing happens.
However, when the dropping of pH is happening slowly, like across decades, there is no intense pain (but often there is chronic pain like “from” fibromyalgia or “from” arthritis- all from acidity). With falling pH, there is a decreasing ability to use oxygen in aerobic metabolism. Why? Because electrons are needed to metabolize oxygen. When pH is below 7, that means that all the electrons are already coupled with protons.
It requires a very strong magnetism to pull electrons away from a proton. It requires very little magnetic polarity to pull away an uncoupled electron.
So, when pH is low, anaerobic bacteria (and even fungus) will proliferate. Parasites may also come to consume the decaying tissue.
Keep in mind that all living tissue naturally decays eventually. A healthy organism will be replenishing tissues as fast as they are decaying. Otherwise, decayed tissue can accumulate. If the body is unable to remove accumulations of decayed tissue, someone may label that “having cancer,” as if presuming that cancer is some living thing that can “spread” and “produce” the effect of a tumor.
That idea is idiotic (though popular). Cancer is a label for an effect, like “rash.” Rash does not cause inflammation. Rash is a name for a type of inflammation. What causes the rash? The same thing causes the rash that causes the tumor/cancer:
electromagnetics (which can be measured as pH or as voltage)
#1 What causes joint pain and inflammation?
A) a biochemical demon called “Arthritis” that can spread and possess YOU
B) Electromagnetic polarity
#2 What causes an accumulation of decayed tissue called a tumor?
A) a biochemical demon called “Cancer” that can spread and possess YOU
B) Electromagnetic polarity
#3 What causes the rash on the skin of a lab rat?
A) a biochemical demon called “a fever” that can spread and possess YOU
B) Electromagnetic polarity
#4 What causes a pH of 6.9?
A) a biochemical demon called “acidosis” that can spread and possess YOU
B) Electromagnetic polarity
In other places, I just read this stupidity:
I got genetically tested. turns out that I have a mutation that makes me 300% more likely to get skin cancer. I went and got checked and it turned out that I had a melanoma. I was 43. I know that is only one data point. but it made me think
so not one direction only
An acid burn and a burn from lightning are functionally the same electromagnetically. (or maybe the lightning functions like a very high pH- I do not know that detail).
J: what food has a pH of 2 – i am presuming this is a food thing.
so what causes the change in PH… in the body
Basically, pH extremes can destroy tissue. To label that “cancer” is trivial. To say “stage 3 cancer” is also horribly imprecise relative to saying “that tissue has a pH of exactly 6.5413.”
Grounding (and EMFs) make a difference on plants, on pets, on livestock, and on all humans. Further, most of this is extremely inexpensive (except it may be a few thousand dollars for someone in the US to have all their fillings replaced with porcelain). That is just because of the politics of health care in the US which wildly increase health care costs.
Under the spell of the witchcraft of modern medicine, people flock to oncologists who do not even know what cancer is or how to prevent it or discontinue it. However, because of marketing and propaganda and the power of marketing and emotion (panic), many people lack the cognitive capacity to recognize the simplicity of this issue and they will continue to invest faith in their religion of demon worship, saying things like “I have melanoma.” They are hypnotized. They do not even know what causes the effect that they call melanoma, but then they worship their sacred label as if it is something real and tangible and powerful (something besides a label for an effect). They are idolaters who discard God for the demon that the MDs have programmed them to worship.
So, it does not matter what “stage” of cancer that some imbecile labels you with. They still have no idea what to really do to END the effect ONE HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE TIME.
Diagnostic labels are largely worthless trivia. What is important is to know how far the pH is from ideal. Also, it is pretty easy to precisely measure the voltage of tissue (or the resistance, pH, etc). It is pretty easy to alter the pH /voltage, like by touching both ends of a battery to the tongue.
Modern medicine is failing not because 21st century technology is inaccurate. The issue is that conceptual models include a lot of garbage. We use electromagnetics for diagnostics, like MRIs and CAT scans and EKG. However, other than after heart attacks, there is virtually no use of electricity as an intervention by the demon-worshiping priesthood of western medical paranoias and delusions.
However, I do not think that the medical industry wants to acknowledge the importance of electricity. We know that applying shocks to the brain has drastic effects. There is no doubt about it. Also, it is clear that seizures and alzheimer’s are related to neuro-electromagnetics.
They are not THAT stupid, are they? Maybe most of them, but ALL of them?
I think some of them know exactly how quickly a few simple innovations would destroy the current medical industry. The pharmaceutical industry would be devastated. The cancer treatment industry would disappear.
The paranoia of the sheeple would dramatically drop and independent thinking would flourish. That’s not good from the perspective of ruling the masses efficiently. Worshiping demons is what the MDs indoctrinate the masses to do and that is because the systems works rather well for them that way. ;)
Oh, and you might want to research conservative measures for exploring ways to raise pH, like baths with added baking soda. I’ll say more about that later.
“Hey JR… if you have any writings, comments or insights on the need for vegetarianism, if it affects your spiritual path and any Wisdom writing on that subject, I am open.”
I am a former vegetarian. I can say a few positive things about it.
First, vegetarianism brings a level of attention to the importance of diet and physical health. Next, many people have allergies to dairy or eggs (which vegans tend to avoid), so, until the allergy is reversed, extreme vegetarianism may be beneficial. Also, many forms of overcooked modern muscle meat are not especially healthy and contain lots of pro-inflammatory omega 6 fats.
Next, many people are so emotionally tender (crippled really) that even imagining that a creature experienced physical pain (even a fish) is disturbing to them. They may call their vegetarianism “moral”, which is just a frightened “shadow projection” of arrogant contempt for anyone who confronts them with the reality of the existence of physician pain.
Anyway, vegetarianism “done well” can be favorable for a monastic lifestyle because it reduces production of things like testosterone. However, many modern vegetarians end up eating an extremely inflammatory diet which promotes irritability and neurological impairment, paranoia, panic, rage and so forth that make them very easily herded by socialist propaganda, by the way.
Many vegetarians present the idea of vegetarianism being a dietary practice that corresponds to “evolutionary biology.” However, consider that evolutionary biologists reject that “rationalization” and instead have consulted with anthropologists to identify various sets of dietary practices called primal, paleo, and Epi-paleo ( with Epi referencing the science of epigenetics).
Vegetarians will say things like “diet can cure cancer.” They will show rates of remission proudly and that is understandable, right?
Scientists on cancer
Evolutionary biologists and linguistic anthropologists may say things like “cancer is just a rudimentary diagnostic label and is not itself a tangible physical reality, though physical tumors can signal health issues which can be labeled as cancerous.” The diagnostic label “cancer” is used in some social groups and religions to refer to a form of demonic possession promoted by their priesthoods of witchcraft and of curses. The priesthood is called mainstream science and mainstream medicine, with the exception of the more effective models within those broad traditions, such as the specialty of “functional medicine.”
Most of the mainstream personnel working in the disease management industry will say things like “Room 318 has cancer.” They mean that the chattel organism warehoused in Room 318 (let’s call “it” Bob) has been possessed by a demon called cancer.
They then generally ignore Bob and instead focus on the demon (and exorcising the demon). It is a very lucrative system and also very useful for enslaving human resources, which is why mainstream institutions promote that system of mythology and religion and call it science. Note that mass media, government and of course the health care industry are all businesses for promoting the interests of certain groups relative to all other groups.
The solution for cancer?
So, what is “the solution to cancer?” Study the diets and lifestyles of a long list of primitive tribes who live in ways that promote the functioning of the immune system (rather than systematically suppress it and attack it with medications) and thereby produce zero incidence of cancer (along with impeccable physical health in general).
Ruling elite or zombie herds?
It is also worth noting that linguistic anthropologist and evolutionary biologists may be among the ruling classes of modern societies. They may directly benefit from having huge populations of biochemically-compromised human resources who serve them, such as farm workers and factory workers and soldiers. They may widely promote that others adopt vegetarianism, such as Richard Dawkins, who calls himself an evolutionary biologist.
So, primitives are primitive because of their lack of complex social organization. The ruling elites are privileged because of herds of zombies who follow their command/social propaganda. The complex social engineering (governing) by the ruling elites is what allows them to organize the herds of zombies in ways that lead to the slaughter of primitives.
By the way, what I just laid out for you reminds me of an elitist interpretation of the “two paths” prophecy of the Hopi. In this version, the two paths do not refer to two alternative paths for humanity, but two alternative life paths for humans: zombie or ruling elite.
- WATCH: Richard Dawkins Wishes Everyone was Vegetarian (nackpets.wordpress.com)
- Protein Diet Foods For Vegetarian (healthylifestylesliving.wordpress.com)
- Trend or Lifestyle? The debacle of vegetarianism (veglyfe.wordpress.com)
- Vegetarianism (whenyoujustknow.wordpress.com)
- Lifestyle Transitions: Going Vegetarian (1transitiontales.wordpress.com)
- Vegetarians, are they just about saving animals? (gwmichaels.wordpress.com)
- WATCH: Richard Dawkins Wishes Everyone was Vegetarian | Ecorazzi (peace4animalscornwall.wordpress.com)
- From Vegetarian to Venison Chef (backinthebush.wordpress.com)
- Mark Levin to the ruling elite: We’re going to crush you | by The Right Scoop (jericho777.wordpress.com)
- NWO – World Bank Whistleblower Karen Hudes Reveals How The Global Elite Rule The World (endtimeheadlines.wordpress.com)
A BOLD CLARITY: the cure for common medical misconceptions
A brief statement of “the problem” that we propose to resolve is this:
Currently, there is a certain way that it is popular to relate to health in general and, in particular, to the language of diagnostic labels (such as a phrase like “incurable scurvy”). I am identifying that way of relating as “resigned,” “despondent,” and “helplessly victimized.”
People tend to think of diagnostic labels as “having power over them.” They say things that fit the “logic” of statements like this: “I have incurable scurvy which is causing my vitamin C deficiency.”
Now, let’s investigate very briefly how this issue is important to you, then how this pattern of relating to diagnostic language developed, and finally what is available for those who mature beyond that “old model” of how to communicate about well-being. First, here are some more examples of the kind of statements that people may make without really thinking about what they are saying:
“Well, clearly you have no hair because of your baldness.”
That is obviously nonsense, right? But next let’s look at a very similar linguistic construction that may seem “obviously true” simply because it is so familiar….
“You have a tumor because you have cancer.”
That is simply false. Cancer is a diagnostic label, not a physical substance. Cancer does not cause tumors. Cancer is a label for the presence of physical tumors, like “receding hairline” is simply a label for the presence of a certain pattern of hair growth. When people say “you are genetically predisposed to cancer,” could they be making any inaccurate presumptions about epigenetics (how an issue of gene EXPRESSION is often mistaken as an issue of actual genetics)?
Tonsillitis is merely a label for an inflammation of the tonsils. The label for the symptom does not cause the symptom.
“You have high blood sugarbecause you have diabetes, which runs in your family.”
That is also false. Diabetes is a diagnostic label, not a physical substance.
“You are deficient in Vitamin C because you have contracted scurvy, probably from one of your parents. You do know that scurvy is contagious and incurable, right?”
Again, that is all simply absurd. Furthermore, all that follows from such an absurd misunderstanding of diagnostic labels will be actions that are, at best, inefficient.
So, I gently rebuke those who make the naive presumption that when people notice a set of symptoms and then invent a label for that set of symptoms, then that might mean that the new label (such as “scurvy, cancer, diabetes, etc”) is an incurable pathogenic demon that is “possessing” the organism, thereby causing the various symptoms. That is absurd.
Consider that the label on a jar of of food does not cause the jar to have a particular kind of food in it, does it? If one removes a label from a jar, does that change the contents? What if one adds a second label or covers an old label with a new label? What happens to the contents of the jar when altering the labeling of the jar?
Now, when a diagnostic label is invented for a particular physiological pattern, that label is used to distinguish that physiological pattern from other physiological patterns. That is all. The label does not intrinsically cause physiological patterns or alter physiological patterns.
If you take your dog to the veterinarian and the vet says to the dog “your tonsils are inflamed because you have tonsillitis,” then does that effect any inflammation of the dog’s tonsils? Labels simply do not cause symptoms! So, cancer does not cause tumors. Cancer is a label for the presence of tumors.
Likewise, the diagnostic label “diabetes” does not cause blood sugar imbalance or “insulin resistance.” Diabetes is simply a label for the presence of blood sugar imbalances and insulin resistance and, eventually, for all of the predictable effects of the excessive presence in the blood of simple sugars and complex sugars (carbohydrates)- which all arise very predictably from a single cause: the consumption of excessive amounts of carbohydrates.
Notably, the vast majority of diagnostic communications seem to me to be based on a basic lack of comprehension of the nature of diagnostic labels. Saying things like that “baldness causes hair loss” is absurd. That is simply faulty logic (as in “voodoo” science or “psychopathological” pathology).
Clearly, baldness is clearly not a physical substance, but a linguistic unit (a label). However, because physical brains can respond to language, that means that the “curses” of the licensed high priests (toward whom I have the utmost respect for their technical expertise, but no reverence whatsoever) can be very powerful (creative).
So, to summarize, my purpose for sharing is to clearly establish that our culture’s primary context for relating to diagnostic terminology is presumptive, naive, inaccurate, and disempowering. People who “get” this content will no longer be at the effect of diagnostic terminology (dissolving the sincere “curses” of demonic possession by “allegedly pathogenic” diagnostic labels). They’ll have a huge breakthrough in peace of mind and freedom.
Plus, new actions will be recognized as relevant and so new outcomes will be available. We will detail a variety of well-established resources, such as The Institute of Functional Medicine, as well as offer a brief catalog of the recoveries produced in the work of www.ppnf.org, Dr. Nora Gedgoudas, Dr. Cate Shanahan, & Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride MD, MMedSci (neurology), MMedSci(human nutrition).
First, I will feature a short version of the recovery (from Multiple Sclerosis) of medical doctor Terry Wahls. To tell recovery stories is powerful, so I will tell several of them, including the story of my own overnight recovery of the ability to walk (after suffering “from” Multiple Sclerosis- as in after I experienced the symptoms that would be labeled as “Multiple Sclerosis”).
That’s where this content will begin to have you saying things to yourself like “there really is something I can do to have power and produce new results with my health and well-being!” The resignation that most people have been trained to have about well-being and even so-called incurable conditions… will simply vanish.
- High dose IV vitamin C kills cancer cells (sott.net)
- How would you cure tonsil stones (wiki.mozilla.org)
- Differences In Tissue Stiffness Have Potential To Aid In Diagnosis, Therapy Of Breast Cancer (medicalnewstoday.com)
- Changing School (coopcatalyst.wordpress.com)
- Tiny Molecule Now Argued to Help Cure for Cancer (news.softpedia.com)
- World Cancer Day aims to dispel stereotypes (usatoday.com)
- Brain tumor genes revealed (yaledailynews.com)
- Researchers Gather To Discuss Therapy Alternative For Breast Cancer (medicalnewstoday.com)
- ICMR evolving standards for cancer care (thehindu.com)
- 10 talks to help you better understand cancer (ted.com)