----- Original Message ----

-From: bo

To: WETHEPEOPLE_UNITED@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 6:02 PM

Subject:  THE MYTH OF IMMUNIZATION AND OTHER MEDICAL STUPIDITIES

 

If there is anything more absurd than the belief in "cures," then it is in the belief of "preventive medicine" through vaccinations, inoculations, etc, introduced into the body hypodermically, orally, or otherwise.  The whole practice is founded on empirical delusions and misunderstanding of vital body responses.  Medical researchers get boundless publicity on their doings, their conjectures, and their imaginings in the press, over TV, and on radio.  They're developing cancer vaccines, cold vaccines, influenza vaccines and a whole host of other vaccines with which to combat the many diseases to which we're subject.  Their whole concept of vaccination is simplistic to the core and is on this order as I will demonstrate.  Let's give a simplistic illustration. Can You Drink Alcohol Without Being Affected? No one will deny that humans can imbibe alcohol and not become drunk.   Let's say we try to develop a vaccie that will prevent drunkenness in drinkers.  Sounds absurd, doesn't it - and it is.  But that's precisely what the medical researchers are trying to do. In concept you have no doubt that, no matter what kind of vaccine was administered to a drinker, if he or she drank again he or she would most certainly become drunk again. 

 

No matter what "immune" factors the vaccines caused the body to create - no matter what "anti-bodies" against alcohol were developed - alcohol in the body would continue to inebriate the drinker into insensibility.  About this you and I and even the medical profession have no doubt.  We have no delusions here.  But with vaccinations with assorted pusses, chemicals, "viruses," fermentation and putrefaction byproducts, broths, and cultures, we are expected to be so aroused that our body responds by creating specific "anti-bodies" or other "immune factors" such that, when the real thing comes around, our bodies call out the troops trained to do battle with this enemy and, ergo, we do not fall prey.  The enemy is speedilyvanquished.  This is the rather simple delusion fostered by the medical profession.  It is all mere superstition, but they provide "statistics" to show that it works! 

 

Again, it's like giving alcohol to a  person that, if his body is again "invaded" by alcohol, that person will be immune to the effects of alcohol in the system.  Disease is a Healing Process, Vaccinations Destroy Healing Ability - Just as a beginner taking two or three ounces of alcohol becomes drunk because of the vigorousness with which his or her vital defenses respond, and it later takes 8 to 12 ounces to achieve the same effect because of a loss of vitality and consequent ability to resist or defend, so too, does the vaccinated individual lose his or her ability to so defend himself or herself against toxic substances that cause disease.  With the loss of vitality due to vaccination the body has degenerated that much just as the alcoholic's body degenerates from his first drink on. 

 

Disease symptoms are evidences of body purification and healing.  Destroy body vitality and it cannot conduct the disease process at the low level of toxicity it once did.  With lowered and destroyed vitality it takes a much larger toxic load to cause the body to go into a crisis purification and healing just as it takes more alcohol to produce drunkenness. The point is that the medical profession has been deluded.  Of course the having of measles or the administration of "measles vaccine" reduces one's chance of again having measles.  But it is NOT because the body has developed an imagined immunity against the measles "germ" or "virus."  What has actually happened is that the body, in its crisis of purification and healing with an affection known as measles, an affection that involves a relatively low body tolerance point, an affection that only a relatively vital body can develop, has, in the course of the crisis, lost body vitalit.

 

It will now accommodate a much greater toxic load before its reduced vitality will effect a crisis of purification and healing.   The inoculated one loses much ability to have such simple healing crises as measles, poxes, etc, where the body ejects its toxic load through the skin.  Reduced vitality, not some supposed immunity, is behind the relative absence of further affections of measles, poxes, etc.  I say relative because vaccines show a statistical improvement, not an absolute improvement.  Not all the inoculated have their vitality reduced so much that they cannot again conduct the type of crisis against which they have been inoculated. Poisons Destroy Vital Abilities, Not Enhance Them -Inoculations, instead of creating immune factors, are just so much more filth put into the system that lowers vitality.  Lowered vitality means the body has greater tolerations for poisons, i.e., it is not as able to resist hem and will take a greater load of them before reaching a crisis point. 

 

So, instead of having the simple affection against which the subject has been inoculated , MORE serious disease is in the building!  A greater toxic load in the body means the crisis, when it happens, will be of a far more serious nature.  The purification and healing task is now so much greater.  The inoculation has laid the groundwork for more disease! In short, the inoculated don't have the same disease again but get much MORE serious affections.  Do the inoculated become immune to diseases? Indeed not! Statistics show that they evolve into more and more disease, each disease crisis more serious than the previous.  Never mind that they do not have the disease against which they have been inoculated. 

 

The more vaccines with which the body is loaded the less vital it is.  Dead people have no vitality whatsoever and it goes without saying, dead people have no diseases! Inoculations, in destroying vitality, are making the inoculated one a little bit more dead with each administration.  That, precisely is why "immunization" seems to work. Charlatans Vs Quacks - The American Medical Association, the Drug industry, the food processing industry, and that ancient hand-maiden of the interests of exploitation, the government, have joined hands in what they term an all-out war on quackery. With more flagrant misuse of the term quackery that has heretofore been indulged they are even referring to "food quackery." As, in a fight of this kind, it is well understood by all rackets that "we all stand together or we all go down together," the various disease foundations have entered into a fight to get rid of all the unnecessary competition.  It will be noted that in this glorious land of "free enterprise," nobody has any confidence in free enterprise. 

 

Things must be outlawed, controlled, regulated, destroyed, not in the interest of anything that looks or smells like freedom, but in the interest of the LARGER INTERESTS.  Disease is BIG Business - The Arthritis and Rheumatism Foundation, one of the leading disease rackets that fleeces people of millions of dollars yearly and wastes this money in salaries, commissions, office expenses and in cruel experiments on animals and on patients, says that "these people," by whom I assume they mean sufferers with arthritis and "rhem atism" spend over $252 million a year on worthless remedies.

This amount of money is understood to be spent by such patients on "remedies" other than the "worthless" remedies of the medical profession.  "What a lot of legitimate medical treatment that would buy!" exclaims a newspaper writer, after giving these figures.  By "legitimate" medical treatment, he means regular medical treatment.  We can only wonder if he ever took the trouble to investigate the value of this "legitimate" treatment for a few months or years?  Has he ever visited an institution that is devoted to the care of such patients and watched them hobbling around on crutches and canes or wheeled about in wheel chairs, after taking the "legitimate" treatment and suffering the tortures of the damned and growing worse year by year as they slowly die?  The answer to these questions are certain when we reveal the name of the writer.  He is none other than Leonard W. Lar-son, M.D., President of the American Medical Association.

It is too much to expect us to think that this man is not fully aware that his profession freely admits that it has no effective treatment for arthritis and "rheumatism."  It is too much to expect us to be-lieve that he is not fully aware of the common fate of arthritis.  He is fully cognizant of the fact, known to every arthritis sufferer, that "legitimate" medical treatment is not only useless, but that it is actually hurtful.  To put this more bluntly, but strictly honestly, this man is aware that his prof-ession is guilty of the grossest charlatanry in its handling of arthritis.  They are guilty of accepting these sufferers and treating them and accepting their hard-earned money, although they know deep down that there is nothing they can do of lasting benefit for them.  If ever there was a form of quack-ery that is more reprehensible than that indulged in by the "legitimate" medical profession than its mistreatment of arthritics, it is the cancer qackery that they are at present engaged in.But to crown his asinity, he continues his chin music in this way,

 

"But that isn't the worst of it.  While arthritics tinker with such remedies, which are at best harmless, the disease progresses, and relief grows more difficult.  Finally, they lose faith in all medical treatment."  He is well aware that the "disease progresses" while the "legitimate" medical treatment is administered, that it spreads from joint to joint and that the patient grows into a helpless invalid under the mal-administrations of his medical colleagues.  But he cannot say, as he says of the "quack" remedies, the "legitimate medical" treatments are harmless, even at their best. Another simple fact that he fails to mention is that the great mass of arthritics who resort to these "quack" remedies, do not do so until they have given the "legitimate medical" treatment a lasting trial.  The fact is, that there could be no "quack" remedies and no "quacks" if his profession was a hundredth as successful in caring for these sufferers as his article would seem to mply.