JohnDJasper

I had a similar feeling of fear when I stopped believing in "God." After 18 years of indoctrination, if I even thought the words "There is no God," I would uncontrollably wince in case a lightning bolt struck me. It took several years to overcome that reflex.

Moncaloono, you state that my warnings are irrational, give no justification for the remark and then post a link to an article by a biologist who works in the vaccine industry re-stating the official vaccination propaganda. The only saving grace of the article is this quote: You've made it quite clear that you will only accept the medical cartel's official position on vaccination and disregard any evidence to the contrary. Are you trying to convince the rest of us to avoid using our brains and just trust the authorities to protect us?

Hi Greg. I was with you up to the point where you said "Telling people not to get vaccinated, we might as well be the Catholic Vatican telling them not to use condoms." That only makes sense if you accept as unquestionable that vaccinations are safe, effective and sensible. If asked, I would probably warn anyone not to trust in a Homeopath, a witch doctor or an astrologer but I would not insist that they take my advice. I would highly recommend that people not consume caustic soda because I'm convinced that it would be detrimental to their health. My advice concerning vaccination is not dogma based but based on sound evidence that directly conflicts with the establishment's position on this subject and is not founded on the popularity of the organisation. Hence, my warnings against vaccination are in no way similar to the Vatican's rules on the use of condoms. Would you agree?

Moncaloono, Yes, there are many examples of animals evolving themselves into extinction or near-extinction or alternatively not being able to adapt quick enough to severe changes in their environment. All of these incidents have been beyond the ability of those animals to affect or control and they are truly victims of misfortune. By comparison, humans have a large element of choice in what changes they make to their environment and lifestyle although granted that many changes will be forced on them by the choice of the greater society around them. A peace-loving person may have to become war-like to defend against belligerent neighbours, a hunter-gatherer may have to become a farmer or factory worker due to homesteading by others but the details of anyone's lifestyle is pretty much down to their own choice. Couch potato or healthily active? Junk food or health food? Natural health or dependency of pharmaceutical products? The lesson that is being overlooked is that alternative health advocates have proved that nothing produced by the pharmaceutical industry is required for health. Some of the products are undeniably useful such as anaesthetics for use during surgical procedures or pain relievers to relieve intense or chronic pain but it should be recognised that there is always a cost to the body when these are used. Just as every alcoholic drink that you consume will permanently damage brain and liver cells, every other medicine that you take will have some effect on some part of your body even if no symptoms present themselves. I suspect that humans are mutating (not evolving) ourselves through the use of vaccinations, medications, radiation and the ingestion of various toxic substances regularly used in medicinal preparations and processed foods and we're doing this because 1) we ignore the warnings that are regularly addressed to us by concerned professionals and 2) because we accept as gospel the assurances made by the medical and food cartels that all is as it should be. No need to worry about pesticides on our foods, flouride and caustic chemicals in our toothpaste, mercury and aluminum in our vaccines. Rightly or wrongly, these items are part of the general public's environment and over time, we will adapt to them and sometime in the future, we'll find that we can no longer function without their presence. Certain medicines already do this. After a few years on insulin, diabetics lose the ability to produce their own insulin and will die if the medicine is withdrawn. The same goes with thyroid medicines. You say "I think it's smarter to deal with things like polio, small pox, flu, papaloma, and diseases like that with "the present" in mind." I agree but instead of focussing on vaccination, why not make a greater impact on all of these by improving sanitation and clean water supplies, nutrition and shelter for those people who are the breeding grounds for these diseases. If you want to find people with TB, just visit the slums in your city where the homeless people hang out. If you want to find cholera, try looking where there's inadequate food, clean water and sanitation. If you want to find flu, look where people are overstressed, eating rich diets, breathing polluted air, drinking anything but clean water and not getting adequate exercise or rest/sleep. If you want to see people dying of flu, measles, etc, look where people are giving the patient medicines or treatments to reduce fever or "fight" the flu, where the patient is not given sufficient water to keep hydrated or where they're kept in stuffy rooms, rebreathing the same stale air. Of course, you can ask, where's the proof to all that I say. Well, the proof is available from numerous sources but it doesn't always come in the nice packages that "medical science" comes cloaked in. It's very seldom that a fatality report includes the measures taken or advised by the physicians attending but every now and then, they let slip a few clues. Rogue doctors are very good at spilling the beans in general but obviously will not relate actual, traceable cases but they do generate enough smoke to indicate the probability of "FIRE". Let's not forget the highly respected Cochrane Library report that blasted the flu vaccine out of the water. As reported by Gaia Health: No Value in Any Influenza Vaccine: Cochrane Collaboration Study PS: Another point about the CDC's study is that they counted as vaccinated anyone who had received at least one seasonal flu vaccination 14 or more days before the flu commenced. This doesn't allow for the failure rate of the vaccine which is not mentioned in the study and which I'm having trouble finding reference for at the moment but I know that vaccines don't always produce antibodies. They're completely ineffectual in immuno-suppressed people which includes infants and the elderly but also not 100% reliable in the average joe.

RestoringGuy, I actually know very little about statistics but what I do know is that they're regularly mis-employed to support whatever agenda the author is pushing. I believe that the weakest point of all statistics is the quality of the data that they're derived from and vaccine statistics are no exception. Hence, when I discuss problems with stats, it's from the position of arguing the case provided by the author but with a mental note that the data itself may be seriously flawed. A number of rogue doctors and vaccine historians have pointed out how the rules for diagnosing certain illnesses changed in concert with the release of the associated vaccine leading to a drop in reported cases which in turn was credited to the vaccine instead of the changed criteria. I fully agree with your thoughts on recommendations being based on long-term (and I think short-term as well) effects and goals. I agree, also, about the benefits of not taking part in election nights! []

Further to this discussion and while I'm challenging the assumptions about vaccination effectiveness and safety, here is a little tale of how those 'safe' vaccines disrupt lives on a regular basis. How the Medical Profession Covered Up Vaccine Injuries and Called it ‘Child Abuse’ An expert witness deliberately misleading a jury... and also misdirecting committees discussing vaccine dangers... To believe that vaccinations are saving lives, you have to ignore a lot of evidence to the contrary. Ignorance may be bliss but it can also kill you or one of your loved ones. If you're scared, get your shots but don't confuse this fear-induced conformity with intelligent decision-making.

The biggest fallacy of the OP is the idea that anything published by the CDC would be accepted as evidence when they have a long history of lying to support their agenda not unlike every other government agency. Dr David Brownstein provides a serious criticism of the CDC's claim in this article: More CDC Nonsense About the Flu Vaccine If you just look at those 1582 subjects, you don't get 50% effective, you get absolutely no proof of effectiveness whatsoever. He goes on to point out: So we're getting closer to the truth. But still: If the vaccine was, at best, 17% effective in this biased group, some fancy maths would be required to determine the likely effectiveness rate amongst the general population allowing for the fact that the flu vaccines are completely useless for the elderly as proven by the CDC themselves. Flu vaccines failed to provide protection this year, particularly among elderly But don't worry about these facts - just get your damn shots!

Ruppert9, I felt that the topic, though complicated, was well worth discussing as I've not heard any quality dissenting opinions since FDR introduced me to these concepts. Physical property is a no-brainer IMO except when it comes to real estate but intellectual property is complicated enough to be hard work to understand. The state currently sets the parameters for when words and music become property but should we ever realise a state-less existence, it will be important to have a clear understanding of these principles. Well put! The danger is that someone who doesn't understand this might try to make a point with a fully-automatic, full metal jacket type of argument. It's so worthwhile helping others get educated. "Education instead of medication!"

I've just finished listening to FDR2340 for the 3rd time and it was more painful than the first two times because I knew ever better what was coming. Every time that the caller started to make a point, you (Stefan) shut him down with an objection, a request for clarification or a sideways diversion most of which IMO could have been noted down and dealt with once the point had been made. The overall effect was to confuse the caller, derail the discussion, head off on a tangent and leave the listener (me) cursing at my mp3 player. I'm moved to write about this because I sense that this behaviour is becoming increasingly prevalent. So, are you becoming jaded having argued these points from first principles for so long that you're no longer able to go through the process one step at a time? Please bear with me while I provide some examples. Unfortunately, the podcast misses out the callers introduction so I'll just have to refer to him as the caller. At approx 16:00 of the recording, said caller was, at your behest, trying to compare the process of creating a music file to that of creating a bicycle. He started this because you shut down his point of how a music file can be used as either a consumer good or an item of capital. He was almost getting somewhere on this point when you shut it down because (loosely quoted) “we have to stay within the realms of possibility” and “no-one would build a factory to copy a bicycle.” Nevermind that earlier in the discussion, you yourself inserted the idea of car duplicating ray gun! and nevermind that at no time was the discussion limited to making just one copy. It's perfectly reasonable that someone might build a factory to make multiple copies of a bicycle to sell on to consumers just as it's perfectly reasonable that someone might make multiple copies of a music file to sell on to others . At least one person thought of doing that to copy Rolex watches. Later on, the caller was trying to make a point about copyright which you interrupted on some point of order and by the time you finished, it was clear that the caller was lost in space and so the discussion veered off on another tangent. His very valid points about homesteading complications and “who do you buy the land from” got dismissed due to the relative rarity compared to music copying AND with the hand wave that it had all been dealt with in common-law homesteading rules ages back despite the fact that it is all backed by state force. I wasn't necessarily agreeing with any of the callers points but then how could I as he was never able to complete any of them and if he got close, any real discussion of the points was shutdown. I suspect that 15 minutes after the caller hung up, he realized that he had wasted his time because the points that he (allegedly) genuinely wanted to hash out with you were never actually dealt with. That was also my firm conviction after 3 listenings. It was a clear example of the host 1) moving the goal posts (going from bicycle copying to getting sued for breathing private air) which is something that you often criticise callers for, 2) applying different rules for the host and the guest (staying reality-based!) and 3) persistently derailing the callers arguments. The latter is a tactic regularly used by politicians and government spokespeople. The rule is “I'll have my say but I won't let you finish a sentence.” UK politicians apparently get special training in this skill because they're all experts at it. It makes for extremely frustrating discussion programs but serves their purpose to a T. I don't for a minute think that you intend to derail arguments but you're doing it all the same. This is lowering the quality of your work and is fair to neither the caller nor the listener. If you haven't got the patience to deal with these matters effectively then please take a break. It cannot be easy juggling the show, the documentary and the family life but you mustn't endanger your reputation with output such as described above. This rant provided in the spirit of constructive criticism and posted openly so that other views can enrich the discussion. Kind regards, John

This appears to be a well-written artilce for those who are already aware of the MRM and who maybe have an inkling of what an MRA is and what FP stands for. For outsiders (like what I am) it's an almost unfathomable mystery. Having persevered with the linked website, I finally found out what the MRM stands for and can guess what MRA represents but lost interest well before running into FP. If you're reaching out to increase your audience, my suggestion is that you define (or better yet, avoid) the acronyms.

@RoseCodex, I finally gave up on the gnosticmedia interview as it was too painful to listen to. Unlike Stef who has definitely got the gift of the gab both as interviewer and interviewee, Jan Irving seemed to be too focussed on his prepared questions. So many times, Harriman seemed to pause at a "this is starting to get interesting" moment and instead of drawing out the rest of the story, Jan just went to another item on his list of questions. Harriman didn't seem to be able to carry the conversation on his own and after an hour or more of this, I lost the will to go on. This means that I probably missed the really useful bits at the end?!!! However!!!! I thoroughly enjoyed the YouTube lecture which has inspired me to dig deeper into Harriman's work. Thanks for posting.

Stop! This is way too much. It was bad enough discovering that I cannot trust religion, politics, mainstream economics, modern medicine, anything that I hear on the news and much of what counts as scientific proof. But in one YouTube video, to find out that both black holes and what I thought counted as solar physics are just so much nonsense? I must go lie down for a while... Do you see any specific holes in the Electric Universe theory?

In a world that turns a blind eye to paedophile rings, should cannibalism even raise an eyebrow? YES!!!

I agree, @Love Prevails. The following quote from Dr. R.T. Trall from 1860 shows that we're still fighting the same battle all these years later.

Thanks for the very helpful response. Although I choose not to use supplements (at least at the moment,) they are recommended by various alternative experts and it is a huge industry. I'm very glad that it is working for you. On the subject of colds, as a subscriber to the philosophy of Natural Hygiene, I believe that colds are the outword signs of the body's attempts to detoxify itself. I can (and recently did in the run-up to Christmas) bring on a cold by eating too much rich food, spending too much time in stuffy rooms, getting too lax on my exercise program and burning the candle at both ends. All of this increases the toxic burden on the body while simultaneously reducing the effectiveness of the elimination pathways. Once toxicity reaches a dangerous, organ-threatening level, the body will open up extraordinary elimination pathways using the mucous membranes (eyes, ears, sinuses, bronchials,) re-direct vital energy to the elimination process thus leaving the body feeling weak with a reduced/absent appetite and increase metabolism often resulting in higher temperature. Once the body reaches a safe level, these symptoms will disappear of their own accord. From that viewpoint, the occurrence of a cold would be a reflection of the internal state of the body and the duration might be due to the seriousness of that state or a reflection of how much energy was available to accomplish the house-cleaning activity. If the patient spends a lot of time resting, avoiding food but drinking sufficient water to meet their needs and does not complicate matters by ingesting "remedies" of any sort, the body will be able to focus on the job at hand and quickly return to health. If, instead, the patient remains active, eating regular meals and taking medicines to relieve the symptoms, the cold is likely to take a long time to resolve. How would supplements influence this scenario? If the supplements are supporting excellent health, then the body will be better able to resolve these crises when they occur. If, instead, the supplements are working against the body, then they will drain energy which may reduce the effectiveness of the elimination processes thus leading to a cold or other acute illness. I'm not saying that I'm right but just showing how I believe it works.

This seems to be a strange place for someone worried about dangerous talk considering that freedomainradio.com is very much about undermining the support for the political power structure - those people with the heavy artillery, courts, prisons and all the money they can print. Perhaps less panic and more calm discussion would be a better approach to any of these subjects. In the old days, doctors thought it proper to treat patients with regular doses of arsenic. How many people suffered and/or died before someone finally stood up against this practice? Austrian-Hungarian physician Ignaz Semmelweis discovered the link between poor hygiene and the spreading of infection between patients and campaigned to get doctors to wash their hands between patients. For this life saving discovery, he was hounded out of the medical profession. Unfortunately, doctors learn these lessons very slowly and the general adoption of handwashing between patients didn't occur for another 20+ years. I suggest that nothing has changed in that respect as doctors still hold fast to entrenched beliefs and pay scant attention at best to the opinions of any experts outside of their profession much less their patients. I've seen the results that come from trusting doctors too much; talk about dangerous!

That sounds like a good synopsis. My main reason for referring to it is the idea that people can be imprisoned for questioning the official "facts" although ostensibly because it's considered "hate speech" to certain other peoples. Nothing like freedom IMO. I didn't catch the part about Edell being threatended so will have to revisit. Fully agree on flouride issue. If it is a real need, we should be offered flouride tablets to allow us to control our intake instead of relying on getting the right amount through the water supply. I also tend to agree with the unscientific criticisms of alternative health but the placebo affect has been proven effective about 30% of the time scientifically and homeopathy, for one, has been proven to be nothing more than a placebo so it's effectiveness exceeds that of most cancer treatments. Homeopathists tend to spend more time with their patients which also carries a therapeutic benefit. The problem is managing expectations and charging according to the service being provided but once again, that's where the free market should play its part. The big upside is that Homeopathists never amputate the wrong limb, overdose or mix contrary medicines or cause any of the other iatrogenic injuries that add up to the 3rd biggest killer in modern societies. On the downside, one of their patients might occasionally die of an untreated mallady but I suspect that they would still be well ahead on points! I don't use them and I don't believe that they're good for you. My idea of a supplement is the blended salad where I put a head of lettuce, cucumber, celery, tomato and other raw salad stuffs into a blender and turn it into a sort of gazpacho soup. It makes it easier to consume a large salad on a daily basis without the jaw ache and pretty much insures a good intake of minerals and vitamins. Adding the odd brazil or other nut to the diet will help round out the selenium and other less available minerals. I think that consuming processed minerals and vitamins as powders makes as much sense as getting your iron requirements from cereal with added ground up nails. We're not designed to eat dirt but instead to eat the plants that synthesize dirt into usable nutrients or, if you're that way inclined, to eat the animals that eat those plants. Reseach shows that high doses of certain processed vitamins can have a beneficial effect on the body where a deficiency has developed but as with all medications, theres the effect (benefit) that you see and the effect (price) that you don't see; the immediate sustaining of life possibly but the long term loss of quality of life due to damaged kidneys/livers/other organs. I've learned that my fingernails give me a fair indication of the quality of my diet. If I'm keeping up with the blended salads on a regular basis, my nails are in good shape. If I leave them off for a week or more, I wind up with valleys in the nails and they become brittle. Returning to the salads resolves the issue. This implies that I'm not perfectly healthy if normal eating doesn't meet my requirements but after several decades of over-imbibing on the legal intoxicants, I'm not really surprised. Online, you'll find mostly Naturopaths, etc who are wanting to supply your nutrient needs via supplement sales. They may be right about their effectiveness but then again, would they argue against their product line? Natural Hygienists are split between those who have demonstrated four or more decades of healthy living without supplements and those who believe that the modern environment is so taxing that supplements are necessary to stay healthy. It's tough to know who to believe and easy to worry that making the wrong choice could have an adverse impact on your future health. I, for one, will trust in Mother Nature considering that she did a pretty good job with us for millions of years before we built the first pharmaceutical industry. I'm not anti-science but I'm convinced that the most important ingredient of our food is the "living" part of it. Once anything has been through the chemical mill that is the supplement extraction industry, there's no chance that any "life" still remains in it and a bottle of dead calcium, etc holds no appeal for me whatsoever. What's your take on it?

I very much like the format and delivery. Stef draws in the uninitiated and once he's got their attention, gradually starts building the case. If it continues in this vein, I believe it will be a masterpiece! No kidding, either. [Y]

Your comments about NN and the Alex Jones connection rings true for me too. I agree with quite a bit of what I see on NN but when tracing the references (those that are available to me, I sometimes feel that they have been taken out of context. That criticism applies to a number of websites which repeat these news items almost verbatim often without citing the actual source so that I have to go searching for the reference. AJ has proven himself to be a misinformation tool whether by design or accident and I cannot bear listening to his voice even if his messages were pure gold. My opinions on health matters were mostly formed by the works of Dr Herbert M Shelton but reinforced or adjusted by numerous rogue doctors, scientists and alternative practitioners. Indeed my opinions have been greatly impacted by close experience with practicing physicians and surgeons, most of whom are well meaning people who are locked into their programming. They cannot see past their indoctrinated beliefs in their own righteousness and their drugs and scalpels. I'm not familiar with Dr Edell but took a few minutes out to see what an internet search turned up. I'm learning to pay attention to a man's critics before getting too involved in his own work and for that reason I refer you to this webpage for what it's worth.

SaintElsewhere - with that tough start to life, you've earned a bit of health and happiness. Thanks for the reading recommendation. I've bookmarked an online version of Genealogy of Morals and will get started with it soon.

I use FB for multiple purposes mainly keeping track of distant family and friends, networking on various social issues in associated groups and interjecting into public discussions where I hope to sow the seeds of what I see as important truth. I don't add everyone I interact with to my friends list so it remains limited but not particularly exclusive. I'm not trying to reach the world and I don't expect to change any minds but if you're on my friends list, you may be exposed to ideas that you might find uncomfortable.

Further to this discussion, here is more detail concerning the actual history of polio and the polio vaccination. Suzanne Humphries, MD, Internist and Nephrologist speaking on Polio at the Association of Natural Health Conference, November 2012. Dr Humphries discusses polio and: the increased use of evaporated milk and formula for infants its relation to tonsillectomies the increased use of refined sugar its relation to DDT and arsenic Sister Kenny, the use of over-immobilization and the real tragedy of the iron lungs. The modern day "iron lung" Changes in diagnostic criteria for polio since 1955 [View:http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Twch-T-n8Ns]

As promised, here are my sources to back up the previous assertions. Concerning the relation of antibodies and immunity (extract from The Blood Poisoners by Lionel Dole) I highly recommend reading the above reference, The Blood Poisoners, completely. Then review the series of graphic tables provided by Raymond Obomsawin, PhD which dramatically challenge the widely held assumption that vaccines have historically benefited humanity throughout the world. You might also want to read more about the antibody theory. But whatever you do, don't miss the great insight into disease causation especially as it relates to polio in Franklin D. Roosevelt At Campobello.

Sorry! I should have said "bypass part of the immune system." Our immune system starts at the skin and mucuous membranes and injecting viruses inside the body bypasses the 1st line of defence. Once in the system, the body is then faced not only with any viruses injected but also all other materials included. There's every reason to believe that vaccination teaches our bodies to react allergically to various proteins resulting in allergies to eggs, chicken and other mediums that are used to culture the viruses. There are also studies that show that there is no correlation between titers/antibodies and immunity. Indeed one indicated an apparent relationship between antibodies and fatality immediately after vaccination. I'll have to dig out the link for that one but the important point is that there's nothing cut-and-dried about this subject but there's plenty of reason to be suspicious of the industry claims. I fully respect your position that you don't think my statement is justified. It does depend on your philosophical view of medicine and human health and unless you can be persuaded to adopt my philosophy, you're unlikely to accept my point of view. It's after midnight here so I'll attempt to post my sources tomorrow!

@TruthahnDerRuin, I can assure you that I've made no assumptions about our relative IQs or knowledge levels other than to presume that we are equals with probably different views on specific subjects. It was not my intention to "talk down" to you and if that is the way that I came across, then I must reflect on my delivery to avoid this in future. When I spoke of really knowing how the body works, I meant as opposed to how the medical profession views us. In their world, we are born to suffer and die and its only with the assistance of these learned men that we have any real chance of making it out of infancy much less survive to retirement age. The evidence of our physiology shows that we are actually born to live healthy and long lives as long as we provide the body with what it needs to operate and thrive and none of that involves vaccinations. I hope that this clears up any confusion. []