/kc/ - Krautchan

 >>/26260/
> Hercules
I don't think being a meathead obsessed with your body is that healthy of a thing to do.

 >>/26262/
Healthy body healthy mind and soul.

 >>/26262/
https://youtube.com/watch?v=WR1UiNdQnDw

Know what pisses me off? Here homeopathy is funded by the national healthcare system. Hospitals are overcrowded, posts are undersupplied, patients are dying from lack of care and yet precious public funds are wasted on glorified overpriced water. In this nation of widespread ignorance quacks and frauds spread like garden pests. And no politician dares to stop this for fear of losing votes from bydlos who believe it.

 >>/26358/
http://phoenixtears.ca/testimonials/

 >>/26358/
Homeopathy is basically treating something with a similar thing. This can include wide amount of stuff. Liek for cartilage problems people take glucosamin tablets. But you know what contains glucosamin? Cartilage. So eat that instead. This is homeopathy.
Ofc other areas of homeopathy are bullshit, and others might be bullshit. It would worth taking a look into it and separate the husk and the grain.

I've more to add to healthcare and stuff, maybe later.

 >>/26358/
you win the prize for the most normie

goodteeth pdf
(16.33 MB, 0x0)

this book has saved me a lot of money in dental bills. worth a read if you have any dental issues

 >>/26366/
So hospitals and healthcare.
This subject is treated by governments absolutely wrong, they should approach it from another direction: prevention. Great many of health issues comes from the fact that people are idiots t. House MD, their shitty lifestyle, lack of exercising, overeating, bad habits, addictions, bad hygiene, mindset, etc. (and ofc the combination of these) leads to a great variety of illnesses (both physical and mental). So not the healthcare what's have to be re-reformed over and over again, but education. People needs to be taught to care for their body, to rest enough, to exercise enough (and how to do it), good habits needs to be cultivated (e.g. eating moderately, being temperate etc.), their mindset has to be changed - for example - to refuse addictive substances (e.g. many starts smoking as a teenager because it's cool, it makes them cool and the others do it too, etc.) by themselves (banning shit doesn't work). Also proper information has to be given to them and make them understand (about illnesses, pathogens, how they spread, how to prevent spreading etc.).
Now ofc it can be said that: yo healthcare is business, it needs ill people. But frankly while people are ill they perform worse, do less work, or don't work at all, they are bad for the economy. What's loss for the health business, it comes back in other sectors.

 >>/26405/
> they are bad for the economy. 

not really
i mean for every sick whitey you can have a refuge

the main problem with people is that they reproduce uncontrollable and live too long

there's literally no point in this

1530455746164-0 png
(109.78 KB, 400x333)

 >>/26415/
> the main problem with people is that they reproduce uncontrollable and live too long
> 
> there's literally no point in this
I dont think you understand what you are writing here

 >>/26416/
regards, a country known for eugenics programs

helios png
(163.02 KB, 1038x922)

 >>/26361/
Weed and alternative medicine. I'm disgusted.

 >>/26370/
I seriously hope you don't believe in homeopathy.

 >>/26366/
Glucosamine and chondroitin's effectiveness is controversial and there's not just empirical counterevidence but also theoretical arguments against their viability. See:
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/new-evidence-for-chondroitin/

For comparison, see
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3150191/
Where some possible mechanisms are cited:
> It is an important precursor of the glycoprotein and glycosaminoglycan (GAG) synthesis.
> Glucosamine production is the rate-limiting step in GAG synthesis, and glucosamine supplementation may overcome this bottleneck.
Notice, firstly, that an actual biochemical mechanism has been described -something no homeopathic remedy ever provides, because it doesn't have any- and the word "supplementation". That's important.

See also pic related, it's glucosamine sold on a homeopathic (but not exclusively so) site. However, no homeopathic dillution notation is present, because it isn't homeopathy. It's a dietary supplement. Pay close attention to the description's wording:
> Three tablets provide the full 1500mg
1500mg is a lot. Homeopathic remedies usually contain 0,00000000000000000000000000000000 mg (there's no number at the end, just 0; I'll elaborate on this) of their advertised item.

> The powerful bioflavonoid quercetin has been included at a potent 60mg, plus 1200mg of ginger (as a concentrated extract), as well as 400mg of rose hip. Few, if any, joint formulas provide these potencies in a single formula.
Notice the association between concentration and potency. Homeopathy follows the law of infinitesimals: the lower the concentration, the higher the potency. This is anti-homeopathic, it's pure allopathy.

> Chondroitin mislabelling: Many companies use a preparation that is just 20% chondroitin but their label may declare this as if it is 100% chondroitin.
Once again, allopathy. In homeopathy 20% chondroitin would be stronger than 100%.

Chondroitin and glucosamine are supplements, and as such, are taken to increase the concentration of some molecule which is deemed insufficient. This is allopathy: effect and concentration are proportional. In homeopathy they're deemed inversely proportional. Why? Because Hahnemann said so. No mechanism is known, it's just wishful thinking and poorly backed empiricism.

So this is the law of infinitesimals, there's no homeopathy without it. What about "like cures like"? It means that dilluted compounds have the opposite of their expected effect. Dilluted snake venom becomes an immediate antidote and the like. In real medicine there's a paralell with vaccines, but vaccines are infinitely more concentrated and have a known, justified mechanism. So in homeopathic logic, what would dilluted glucosamine cause? It'd cure its own side effects.
> In this latest trial, people taking the glucosamine-chondroitin combination reported diarrhea and abdominal pain more often than those taking the placebo did. Other reported side effects include
> heartburn
> drowsiness
> headaches
> allergic reactions (especially if you have an allergy to shellfish).
So a homeopath could recommend glucosamine against those. For cartilage problems he'd recommend something which damages cartilage.

How much? Zero. Homeopathic medicine is water.
This isn't hyperbole. In your usual homeopathic vial there's only molecules of H2O and whatever impurities there were in the distilled water that made it.

natrium muriaticum png
(160.48 KB, 960x723)

This is a real homeopathic remedy: Natrium Muriaticum -table salt- 30 CH, that is, with 30 dillutions of a hundred times each, so that's 10^60 of dillution. It says it's net 30mL.

Assuming this dillution is mass/volume, then there are 10^60 mL of water for every gram of NaCl. For 30 mL of water, that's 3 x 10^-59 g of salt.

In 58,44 g (1 mol) of NaCl there are 6,02 x 10^23 (Avogadro's number) "molecules". Not real molecules because it's a crystal, but you get it; since it's in aqueous solution there's this number of sodium ions and an equal number of chlorine ones. 
Therefore in 3 x 10^-59 g there are 3,09 x 10^-37 sodium ions.

But there's no such thing as 3,09 x 10^-37 of an ion or atom or molecule. It's 0, 1, 2, 3, 500 trillion or so on. 
Sodium chloride was split in Na+ and Cl- the moment it was dissolved in water, but afterwards its constituent ions remained intact through the whole dillution process.
Maybe I had a wrong supposition or calculation mistake but any conceivable way to model this still shows an absurdly tiny result.

So what can we conclude? There's a very small chance some stray ion found its way into Natrium Muriaticum 30 CH. But it's safe to say there's none of it. 
Zero. Nothing.
"Natrium Muriaticum 30 CH" literally is just water without any table salt at all. This is the case for most homeopathic medicines. Some are just concentrated enough to have a handful of molecules of their claimed source, but above 12 C they're arithmethically just water. There is no discussing this.

You can distill this remedy to examine residue. You can run it through any kind of emission or absortion spectroscopy. Any expensive method in analitical chemistry. In any case all that you'll find are trace impurities.
When you buy this you're buying overpriced water.

If A=B, B=A. Homeopathy is water, therefore water is homeopathy. Every glass of water you drink is nearly every single kind of homeopathic remedy that ever existed, exists or will exist. Likewise, every homeopathic remedy you purchase is not only itself but is also a thousand other remedies at once. Why pay for homeopathy? You already consume several liters of extremely potent homeopathic remedies every single day.

Hahnemann was blissfully aware of the Avogadro constant and other complications. His successors are either bydlo consumers who are too ignorant to know it or "specialists" who are content with a handful of half-assed explanations that have not been fully developed and all have conclusive rebuttals from real medicine.
What is the theoretical basis for the law of infinitesimals and similia similibus curantur? Can they be proven as hard laws? Remedies consist of pure water that was in contact with a handful of molecules two dozen dillutions ago, what biochemical mechanism makes them effective?

Homeopaths can articulate some technobabble on water memory and the like but they know that's no answer. They don't care. They believe in their quackery, firstly because they trust Hahnemann and secondly because of some empirical evidence. Just some, because there's more and better evidence against it.
Science is based not on crude empiricism but on developing theoretical models to explain empirical evidence. Homeopaths have weak empirical evidence, no model to explain it and no initiative to come up with a proper one. That places them in the realm of iridology, reflexology, Ayurveda and so on. It's a fraud. Only shithole countries like Brazil and India finance it.

The one good thing in homeopathy is its personalized treatments increase patient morale. But building an entire field of lies and LARPing just to smooth patient feelings is unethical.

 >>/26421/
which im very shameful for

1447636422378 jpg
(13.06 KB, 480x360)

 >>/26415/
> the main problem with people is that they reproduce uncontrollable and live too long
I see you too have taken the blackpill

What does Natrium muriaticum (water LARPing as dilluted salt) do and how do homeopaths know they need to recommend it?
https://www.britishhomeopathic.org/charity/how-we-can-help/articles/homeopathic-medicines/n/nat-mur/

> Mother Ocean is not like Mother Nature. She is not like the apple tree, which gives shade and bears fruit in abundance: a nurturing, protecting image. Walk to the point of a rocky promontory, jutting out into the ocean, and gaze down at the sea and rocks in conflict below. Cast your eyes out to sea on a windy, heavily overcast day and look into the depths of your mother. She is chill and forbidding. 
> Unlike Mother Nature the ocean is an aloof, impersonal and often harsh mother. She does not cosset or spoil her children; she stands back and leaves them to fend for themselves. She appears distant, cold and unfeeling and applies discipline with uncompromising strictness and severity. To spare the rod is to spoil the child. It is often the lot of the Nat mur child to be born into a family in which these qualities are valued and applied; in which emotions are not expressed, sympathy and love are not demonstrated, and a stiff upper lip is expected. The child is encouraged to achieve independence without the sheltering warmth of maternal nurturing. There is a lack of mothering. Paradoxically, this mother whose maternal instincts are so repressed, is often herself manifesting a Mother Ocean archetype – Nat mur or Sepia.  
> The Nat mur personality
> The role of the mother figure is particularly critical in the healthy development of the Nat mur personality. There is a deep and often unfulfilled need for the security and warmth of maternal love, protection and nurturing in the Nat mur being, with an inability or unconscious reluctance to solicit, attract or accept the very sustenance they long for. The conditioning that it is weak to reveal dependency and needfulness compounds this. As a result they experience a sense of having been rejected or forsaken, left to their own fate, and therefore feel that they must be unimportant, unworthy of love and unlovable. In Nat mur this conclusion is attended by a persistent, even life-long feeling of resentment and grievance. There is no warmth in the childhood memories of mother, possibly only an awareness of indifference, criticism, harsh discipline and even neglect or abuse. 

I don't even need to post any more paragraphs, that's enough bullshit already. "You have this personality, so you must ingest 30ml of dilluted salt which isn't actual dilluted salt but just water". Well, then, just drink some water.

 >>/26427/
> Well, then, just drink some water.
And water is good. Since our body consists of 60% water or so. Now this is homeopathy.

I'll read ofc what you posted. Sometimes soon.

Btw, vaccination basically also homeopathy.

But homeopathy isn't just harmless quackery. When the ignorant buy it perhaps it's just their problem if a lack of real treatment makes them die. But oftentimes those who don't buy into the fraud get harmed.
This is most evident in countries like mine, where it's financed with public money. Every cent wasted on homeopathy is a cent not spent helping patients who died from insufficient care. Many lives could be saved if the homeopathy lobby were crushed. They have blood on their hands and are no different from corrupt administrators who appropriate healthcare funds.
And homeopathy is sometimes included in private health insurance programs, making them more expensive just to finance deadweight. If you've ever turned down an insurance program because of its cost, homeopathy may be partially at fault.

 >>/26432/
Vaccination has real concentrations, whereas homeopathy is literally water, and real mechanisms which have been thoroughly examined and proven. Homeopathy, Hahnamann's "science" has no mechanisms.

 >>/26358/
> Know what pisses me off? Here homeopathy is funded by the national healthcare system.

Here we also have some state-regulated homeopathy. Some homeopathy doctors can have medical profession and licenses, although official position of ministry of healthcare is somewhat indifferent with some negativity.

I guess this is actually a good thing, because educated and licensed homeopath is better than some random dude - at least he must not be insane.

Healthcare system is completely fucked though, doctors have 12 minutes for patient, long waiting times didn't disappear even when electronic registration is used, many local hospitals are underfunded, and doctors professionalism is very questionable. Wages are still low in many places, like 100-300$ (there were multiple media scandals about it).

I personally don't think that public healthcare could work at all, but this is debatable of course. Only good thing here is that private healthcare costs are relatively low - consultations and common tests are available for masses.

 >>/26423/
> There's a very small chance some stray ion found its way into Natrium Muriaticum 30 CH. But it's safe to say there's none of it. Zero. Nothing.

Many homeopaths have alternative theories, i.e. something like memory of water and other things, so they don't care about ions and such.

Although I may play devil's advocate and give some arguments for homeopathy too.

Placebo effect is real - human body is a complex thing and even believing in something may be beneficial, less depressed and optimistic mindset may act positively on immune system for example. There are plenty of stories when mind conditions had effect on real disease, even confirmed by science (that placebo effect too). Of course it can't replace real treatment, but can supplement it.

People believe in medicine and drugs, but most common diseases couldn't be treated by anything. Like common cold and related virus diseases. There is no cure from viruses (compared to bacteria with antibiotics), antiviral drugs are memes, only real cure is to wait until your immune system will crush viruses. But mind wants some solution, tablet, drink, whatever, and when there is nothing, people start to treat viral diseases with antibiotics or large doses of anti-inflammation drugs (paracetamol, ibuprofen, aspirin). All these things don't help, they also can be dangerous. But how doctor can stop patient from doing stupid things and force them to wait (especially when patient is nervous and uneducated, as always)? Best way is to prescribe some completely safe thing like low doses of vitamins or homeopathy medicine. Person will use at and stay calm. Main goal for doctor is to choose when real treatment is needed or when patient may be "treated" like this.

Of course, using only homeopathy without proper medical care is a completely different thing.

My father's a surgeon. Whenever he's around nearly half of what he talks about is quackery and health fads. Not a day goes by without a viral Whatsapp story: a nonexistant bean contamination (usually an old hoax which periodically resurfaces), a woman retrieving a gland from a chicken and claiming it's a parasitic worm, a story about how sodium bicarbonate with lemons cures cancer and so on. They always have technobabble language which sounds pompous and legitimate to bydlos and a dichotomic view where harmless everyday items are suddenly poisons that cannot be ingested in any case and expensive exotic foods work miracles.
There are also professional quacks, often with real degrees in Medicine, who make a lot of money using their respectability to swindle the ignorant. Dr. Lair Ribeiro is one such manipulator. They always come up with miracle diets and radical claims like that heavy consumption of alkaline foods is a fountain of youth.
And finally, there are entire fields and industries of meaningless medical LARPing, one of them being homeopathy.

No alternative medicine can cure a knife wound. Only plain materialism can do anything. Such alternative methods are mere psychological crutches for the desperate or those who are healthy and want something exotic.

From hearing all of this I have a lot of anger towards homeopathy and related industries and fads.

But he does often speak of  >>/26405/, sanitary lifestyles -nothing special and exotic, just what anyone can do at no cost- already prevent damage from happening. But this topic is a bland, boring one and can't generate any viral stories and sensationalistic headlines, so it is forgotten. The ignorant masses thus practice no prevention and resort to superstition to fill in the gaps, with greedy scammers enriching themselves in the process.

 >>/26435/
> Many homeopaths have alternative theories, i.e. something like memory of water and other things, so they don't care about ions and such.
Some homeopaths come up with alternative explanations, but they don't hold up well. If water retains the properties of something it previously in contact with, then all water has homeopathic properties. And each water molecule was on so many different places through its eons of existence. At which point do these properties disappear, and why? And this still doesn't provide hard explanations or any justification at all for the law of infinitesimals and "like cures like".  Water memory itself is a controversial subject.
And like I've shown, homeopathic diagnosis is often emotion- and feelings-based, and specific compounds are associated with specific personalities. Why? Why is table salt even related to a given personality? Table salt is a crystal, a personality is a very complicated interaction of hormones, neural connections and social relationships, there's no intrinsic tie between the two and homeopaths only see such a tie because of their own cultural notions of personality and cultural understanding of salt. 
In short, any attempted theoretical explanations only cover a small part of homeopathy and don't hold up under scrutiny. Even Flat Earth has a larger theoretical basis and a commitment to explaining itself.

And some homeopaths don't care. "It just works" and they go along with it.

> Person will use at and stay calm
Very good point, psychological well-being plays a part in physical recovery. Patients know nothing of science but trust it, so pseudoscience with a good veneer of respectability will secure their trust and placebo effect. Other patients have a mistrust of science but still love "natural" and "spiritual" technobabble, so scientific language together with emotional or ecological filler will swindle them and improve their recovery.

But though some small lies to get placebo effect working are justified, an entire industry built over lies is unethical. Ideally patients wouldn't be so ignorant and would have a basic understanding of biochemistry and medicine, and the psychological component of treatment would be carried out with less falsehood.

 >>/26442/
>  Ideally patients wouldn't be so ignorant and would have a basic understanding of biochemistry and medicine, and the psychological component of treatment would be carried out with less falsehood.

In ideal world, maybe. But we have reality where humans aren't ideal and never will.

For example, I know a woman, she has higher education (in psychology though), she is sane and relatively smart, but with first light symptoms of something non-serous (like that common cold) she is panicking and trying to use wide array of medicines. No argument can make her stop, even when she agrees with it in discussion. Thanks god that market is full of cheap herbal and vitamin things that don't do any harm, otherwise she would destroy her liver with NSAIDs or such.

I guess even understanding of biochemistry wouldn't fix that side of human personality, it is survival instinct-based thing.

serveimage jpeg
(50.48 KB, 480x480)

serveimage1 jpeg
(5.74 KB, 225x225)

like 90% of modern drugs have their roots in herbs and trad medicine

doctors are just scummers that do it better than homeopaths

 >>/26433/
> Hahnamann's "science"
I talk about homeopathy. It's older thought than that dude's. It's just means treating something with something similar. Vaccination is a textbook example, using a (weakened) pathogen to activate an immune reaction, so next time when the real thing comes the body would know how to kill the (normal) pathogens, and could heal itself.

And basically that's the thing: the body heals itself. Not the doctors. There are notable exceptions - autoimmune, cancer etc. - when this isn't true, or certain mechanical wounds are just too severe without medical help. Tho let's say if I break my leg I need a doc to put things back to and fix into place but the actual healing is made by the body. It's not liek the doc stands there with a welding machine growing the new tissue and connect the pieces...
So this guy  >>/26445/ is basically right. Docs are fast to call out quacks while they themselves are just the same.
What does the good doctor do when I get the flu? Humming a little and tells me to stay at home, rest, drink lots of fluids, preferably hot tea with lemon and honey basically this itself quackery since there's no actual guarantees if vitamin C and flavonoids will help, or if they really help, by how much, reduce days? who knows, if my temperature rises to high take a pill to bring it lower. Ergo create cushy circumstances and let the body heal itself: wow such a science. I learnt the formula right after the first instance I had the flu, I don't need doctor to tell me again and look smart that he knows stuff. Now I know even more than a doc would say.
And even with cancer. They try to cut out or destroy the tumor but they can't do jack shit with the cause. They don't even know where these come from. Supposedly they come and go all the time, the problem arises when they remain. Yeah they talk about shit that can give you cancer but some people get, some don't. Even strong smokers have better chance to die something else than throat/lung cancer. Fuckin lottery. It ain't science, science should be reproducible, if I drop something 100 times it will fall 100 times and not sometimes yes, sometimes no.
Tl;dr: doctors are quacks.

 >>/26442/
> surgeon
Funny thing, they are the most useful docs around even tho they didn't even count as doctors back in the day for a long long time. They came from an ancient line of proud butchers, carpenters, blacksmiths and barbers. Oh the proletariat of the physicians.

 >>/26445/
pretty much this.

 >>/26452/
this is swedebernd dont know why im wearing a stahlhelmet

 >>/26371/
http://www.whale.to/a/judd.html

a good tldr on the book

 >>/26445/
> like 90% of modern drugs have their roots in herbs and trad medicine
Traditional medicine is often helpful, centuries of experience are not something to be ignored. Other times it's ineffective. How to know what's valuable and what isn't? Only conventional medicine has the methods to find out.

> doctors are just scummers that do it better than homeopaths
Doctors have to put up tremendous effort to learn wide areas of human knowledge and then work under pressure knowing the government doesn't care about them, even their employers can sometimes mistreat them and their patients are clueless, hate them and anything that goes wrong may end their career. Depending on their area they have to deal with and solve gruesome injuries. The pay is good but theirs is a real, difficult job.
Homeopaths, on the other hand, just have to "learn" some made-up fantasies and then play pretend psychotherapist and hand out made-up remedies to emotionally insecure patients. Unlike physicians not a single homeopath has to deal with intense pressure and gore.

 >>/26450/
> I talk about homeopathy. It's older thought than that dude's. It's just means treating something with something similar. Vaccination is a textbook example, using a (weakened) pathogen to activate an immune reaction, so next time when the real thing comes the body would know how to kill the (normal) pathogens, and could heal itself.
Sure, it's one way to define it. But Hahnemann's homeopathy doesn't activate any immune reaction. It doesn't do anything at all besides placebo effect. So within this definition Hahnemann isn't even a homeopath. Yet nowadays that word is almost exclusively used for his followers. Homeopathic stores don't sell vaccines and self-proclaimed homeopaths don't produce them. Real vaccines, that is, which activate immune reactions. There is such a thing as self-proclaimed homeopathic vaccines, and as you may expect they're also water and cannot activate any immune reaction.

> Yeah they talk about shit that can give you cancer but some people get, some don't. Even strong smokers have better chance to die something else than throat/lung cancer. Fuckin lottery. It ain't science, science should be reproducible, if I drop something 100 times it will fall 100 times and not sometimes yes, sometimes no.
Radiation has an empirically observed effect on cancer risks and the theoretical basis behind it has been studied. Yet it doesn't provide a 100% chance, because human biology is complex and every body is different. So all that can be said is in terms of increased percentual chances. That isn't a lottery, it's actual meaningful statistical information backed by a theoretical basis.
This isn't the only area in the hard sciences or engineering where statistics and chances are used and that doesn't make them invalid. In the previous discussion about dillutions chemists also speak of the chances of a molecule being in the final solution after several dillutions. Astronomers, too, can easily make precise predictions on the orbit of celestial bodies but when those predictions are on the far future they have to speak of chances.
Same thing with tobacco, there's plenty of empirical evidence that it increases cancer risks. It is very much reproducible, that's what empirical studies do. And behind it are several proposed mechanisms. The result isn't in 0% or 100% but it's real.

That's what differentiates real medicine, it is ignorant and powerless for many things but only it can ask "how" and "why" and that allows it to do a lot of things its alternatives are completely incapable of pulling off.

 >>/26260/
I'm only eating toast and have 3 cups of tea in breakfast.

r8 my health and subscribe

 >>/26467/
why are you not drinking coffee?!

 >>/26450/
Well doctors use scientific methods as much as possible. Your fever is just a symptom, it might be flu, it might be rabies, it might be Saddam's spawn raping your soul.. 

In most cases you just have a flu, but what about the %0.5 cases? You die during chamber business.. painfully. As for cancer, imrpovments has made, istanbul didn't conquered in a day. If we let herb sellers handle these things we wont improve even after a century passed.

 >>/26469/
too bitter, I occasionally do drink coffee though.

 >>/26472/
sugar is not available in turkey?

 >>/26475/
what's the point if you need to drench the coffee in sugar to make it drinkable? it's not coffee then, it's coffee flavored sugar.

 >>/26476/
women drench themselves in make up in order to look presentable

 >>/26465/
Thanks for remaining patient despite my tirade. I would add more but most likely I'm just tired of the Hungarian healthcare (despite I have very little contact with them in professional manner, but even that's more than enough).

 >>/26467/
Why not three cups of three?

 >>/26470/
> chamber business
Playing CK2 I see. Kek.
Well both rabies and flu has more symptoms. But here's a joge for you:
The veterinarian visits the doctor, who asks:
- What's the problem? Tell me your symptoms.
- Really? I tell? That would be too easy...

 >>/26477/
Thank god. Humanity would go extinct fast if they didn't do it.
That's enough, grappa!

 >>/26477/
most women are disgusting. I'm not even being misogynist, this is the naked truth.

 >>/26493/
You're a disgrace of hornyturkdom.
> most women are disgusting
That's just human condition.

 >>/26494/
 >>/26494/
If you said this somewhere else after what I've said I would thought you're a woman. 

Btw I didn't get the joke. 

Speaking of coffee and tea, drinking tea is only a tradition that exist less than hundred years here, real tradition comes from russians. Originally we mostly sticked to coffee. 

I feel like rebellious teen for drinking tea now.

 >>/26481/
is this the best reply you can come up with? accusing me of being grappa?

 >>/26495/
> If you said this somewhere else after what I've said I would thought you're a woman.
I don't see why. Human beans are disgusting in general regardless of sex, and most people are ugly fuckers with bad proportions, weird shapes, bad skin - again - regardless of sex. It's just when we look at a woman, we think if we should bed her and if she looks disgusting the fact effects us more, while with men we just exist along and their physical appearance is more bearable and forgettable.
The joke is: hornyturks wouldn't say no to anything, the bar is never too high.
Huh I wish I would have some hornyturk posts saved from KC main. They were fun.

 >>/26496/
No. That's a joke since seeing a Swede commenting something negative about women is basically a meme now. My real comment is above that line.

 >>/26495/
 >>/26493/
 >>/26495/
does my fellow man read schopenhauer perhaps? 

we live in an age of lies, and the women question is no exception. our ancestors knew how women worked.

 >>/26498/
 >>/26498/
> commenting something negative 
it is merely the truth.

 >>/26498/
> Human beans are disgusting in general regardless of sex, and most people are ugly fuckers with bad proportions, weird shapes, bad skin - again - regardless of sex. 
are you projection this? perhaps swedes are generally quite good looking but I dont see ugly people that often. the ugly ones are usually norwegians that come here to visit

 >>/26498/
> Human beans are disgusting in general regardless of sex, and most people are ugly fuckers with bad proportions, weird shapes, bad skin - again - regardless of sex.
agreed. but when you say that after I said that about women, I would assume so. because:

> say something about women
> most people/men are that way too
this is typical women behaviour when it comes to >>>>>>arguing. 

 >>/26499/
I mostly like nietzche (probably typo'd) I only know schopenhauer from quotes and whatnot.

 >>/26495/
coffee is healthier too

 >>/26503/
I need validation since most coffee that humans drink are actually stale.

 >>/26502/
> this is typical women behaviour when it comes to >>>>>>arguing. 
well he comes across as a bit of a feminine

 >>/26504/
it has more vitamins, more caffeine etc. coffee drinkers live longer, protects against alot of diseases.

 >>/26506/
it's just tea drinkers (russia&china) either drink mercury to be immortal and kys in process or take crocodil in factory ruins. this has nothing to do with tea at all.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=hN_Dp03jDtw

 >>/26505/
nod really I'm just pointing out something else but we digress.

 >>/26507/
tea (esp) green tea has alot of fluoride and contaminents in it. white tea is probably best. 

here is two good articles if you want to read more about coffee and its health benefits

https://www.functionalps.com/blog/2014/06/04/coffee-done-right-tips-to-help-avoid-coffee-intolerance/

https://raypeat.com/articles/articles/caffeine.shtml

 >>/26495/
I forgot!
> coffee
We have a phrase, if we judge that a bad consequence will follow our action we say: "and here comes the black soup". The origin of this phrase is going back to the 16th century, to 29th August 1541 to be precise, when the Ottomans occupied the castle of Buda.
Suleiman received the child king János Zsigmond, the queen mother and several aristocrat in his camp at Buda (the Habsburgs prepared a siege and the arriving Turkish army warn them off). While they had a discussion, the janissaries were sent to "gaze around" in the castle since Suleiman was on seemingly friendly terms with the liege of the defenders. But the Turkish troops occupied the place quietly and while they do that at the end of the meeting coffee was served which were called black soup at that time (or translated as such), and as the servants brought it in, the sultan said, "and here comes the black soup". As the Hungarian leaders left it turned out the castle was taken.

 >>/26509/
 >>/26509/
> Coffee done wrong leads to anxiety, shakiness, sweating, feeling wired, inability to focus, and sometimes cold extremities
that's my genes overall oh well... 

anyway reading it now.

 >>/26512/
> that's my genes overall oh well... 
sounds like you might be hypothyroid

 >>/26501/
> perhaps swedes are generally quite good looking but I dont see ugly people that often
Hmm. Ugly people got used to the ugly so if others ugly they don't notice.

 >>/26509/
I've read it. 

>  One such step is adding a little coffee to milk/sugar instead of adding milk/sugar to coffee. 
what does this mean? I couldnt get it.

 >>/26518/
he meant a few teaspoons of coffee to get used to the taste

I brew my coffee in this

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0056ZVVHA/ref=ox_sc_act_title_6?smid=A28HOPZG8B4IYM&psc=1

very simple to use.

jajebe jpg
(23.15 KB, 288x288)

I accidently drenched my coffee in milk.

turkish coffee is probably very bitter, with all that contact and time

 >>/26523/
I mostly drink filter coffee though. Turkish coffee is for formal guests and traditional ceremonies and stuff.

what is the best mineralwater around?

I heard donat has most magnesium

dont find any donat in sweden

Does anybody here at this point not even care about how their food tastes anymore and just think about all the nutrients?

 >>/26559/
of course food has to be tasty

but I think that the future of food will be different then we are used to. veganism, no meat, all the vitamin pills is some of the things I see pushed on the public. 

you need meat and fish to get the necessary nutrients to function properly. a dumbed down population is what the elite is striving for.

 >>/26559/
have you heard about this soy drink that became a bit of a meme I dont remember the name of it. it is powder and you mix it with water. thats the future I think. very efficient (the elite loves efficiency) and very non human.

erős-pista-grou... jpg
(359.81 KB, 1308x1600)

 >>/26559/
I care about the taste. Just there was nothing to update the cooking thread.
I ate recently - what I can translate as - milk-loaf with butter, honey, and milk. I rarely eat anything with honey, I mostly just use it as tea sweetener. I didn't post this since it's too blogspotposty.
Nevertheless there's rarely a bad tasting food that couldn't be remedied with a healthy amount of hot paprika.

 >>/26560/
I think all the overt veganism is a psyop that they intentionally associate with weakness and leftism to hide the fact that most meat is the same, filled with chemicals et. al. Also to push beer as "trad" when it's also full of estrogen.

 >>/26562/
I dont like paprika

what you think about that

 >>/26563/
beer has always been pushed. in old egypt beer was staple drink of all people. 

not all meat is bad, try and get organic free range meat. usually you can find cheap argentina meat that is free range and organic. 

I dont agree that veganism is a psyop, but can you elaborate more on that. I see it being targeted mostly to young females here, which they always do, target the young since they are the future. women then teach their kids to be vegans

 >>/26566/
> I dont agree that veganism is a psyop, but can you elaborate more on that
Basically:
< veganism and soy gets pushed unto leftists and weaklings 
< so overtly that the right wing starts thinking commercial meat is a good alternative (while in reality, it's probably full of bad stuff and is probably tied to occult sacrifices)
< beer is also pushed as "manly", "traditional" and against "da soibois"

 >>/26570/
not everything is a psyop

cows have very efficient livers

 >>/26572/
I'm just saying that the entire pushing among veganism among leftists and weaklings and the promotion of commercial meat and beer as "manly" is a psyop. Not veganism itself as a concept.

 >>/26565/
Then it's high time for you to learn to like it, will grow out your pubes finally.

half_shooter_2 webm
(15.92 MB, 1280x720 vp8)

 >>/26572/
> not everything is a psyop
nyet, everything is a psyop until shown evidence and even with evidence it could be just fake assets.

Well, at least I'm happy we have no Hahnemann believers here.

How much can Bernd lift?

 >>/27633/
I can lift you.

 >>/27641/
I wish, Bogdan.

 >>/27667/
He couldn't anyway. You aren't a shop.

 >>/27633/
That depends. I can reliably lift over the doorstep a reasonably sized female. But if you gimme a forklift I might can do more and place her back into the ocean.

Lack-of-sleep png
(323.66 KB, 1000x1000)

Wasn't sure whether I should post this into the blogspot thread, or here. I decided here coz it is health related, mental and physical.
My sleep pattern went sideways and I find it hard to restore it. I sleep 5-6 hours daily for a half year now which is nowhere enough to rest for me and then all day I'm drowsy and distracted. My mind wanders around constantly as if it wants to make up in draydreaming what it lose with the lack of dreaming. It really takes an effort to concentrate and my work suffers, my hobbies too, even my I feel my writings declined, and haven't put forward much for a while now. And tasks, works are getting amassed.
I go to sleep late or can fall asleep late despite I'm in bed, and this is worse because then I get anxious about not getting sleep and that keeps me awake...
I had similar 7-8 years back. Then I forced myself into the patter: go to sleep at 22, wake up at 6. I did this consistently and it solved the problem for years. Now I find it hard to do it again. Needs more discipline.
I have another protip for those who have similar problems, or just as a "life hack":
I have this rule not to worry about the issues of life after 20:00, but prepare myself for a rest in the evening. This ofc should be paired up with another rule: solve the issues of life before 20:00, actually make an effort to do them.
Although sometimes one can find solutions during sleep, or just after awakes. It happens I dream of them, I'm sure happens with others too, but many times I just grinding the same problem in my dreams again and again with no solution, which is worse than the worse nightmare - this is important for me to have a buffer between the day and sleep.

 >>/34284/

Sleeping is for weak.

t. sleeps for 4-5 hours

 >>/34328/
At this point I was rather called weak but was well rested.
> 4-5 hours
Do you take at least power naps? I heard with age people needs less sleep. If you keep it up soon you won't even need the missing hours.

 >>/34332/
 >>/34332/
> Do you take at least power naps?

No, although I sleep on weekends much more.

> I heard with age people needs less sleep.

Yes, I've noticed this pattern, in past I've need 8-10 hours, now 7-8 is ok. But I think it is personal, and I don't think that less than 6 hours is ok anyway. 

Sleeping at day for few hours is actually good, but it isn't really available because of work. Kids in kindergartens here are "forced" to sleep at day, but don't like it. And when they grow, they remember that they were stupid and missed best time.

As completely different point, I remember that I've read multiple theories about ideal sleep pattern, and one was about 36 hours of action plus 12 hours of sleep. Some guy experimented in caves and found that humans try to adapt this pattern when there is no external day/night cycle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Siffre

There were even conspiracy theories about non-terrestrial origin of humans, like on home planet day cycle was different.

 >>/30283/
> convict_conditioning
> posted by a gypsy

lel did you use this when you went to jail?

 >>/34333/
> Kids in kindergartens here are "forced" to sleep at day, but don't like it.
It was the practice here too, I hated it, I could imagine to spend it more actively. Some children needed it tho.
How monkeys sleep I wonder? Taking naps like dogs? I can imagine our ancestors doing that and things slowly changed when they became more conscious and superstitious (when they created their first beliefs about death and night, and natural phenomenons), and decided to hole up for the night and sleep through it (when the Sun died and went visiting the after-life, they died too and visited the after-life, and then when it arose they arose too - or something like this).

coroner jpg
(62.29 KB, 1200x800)

Please use this thread for corona related postenings in the future.

 >>/34336/
I wonder if this guy is on a ventilator now. Imagine his final moments, an amusing coma dream, a smirk, he whispers, 'ha, ha, gypsy.' Then the sustained beep of this heart monitor.

 >>/36375/
Kek.
I dunno. Maybe he realized there are far better things to spend his time on. At least this would be the best scenario for him. But what you wrote sounds fairly plausible.

 >>/36376/
way off topic, but, have you seen the postings of this mentally ill spam bot?
>>>/gfx/
http://endchan.org/.media/1a88cb1d53fb163edc44ba0db30a0059-textplain.txt
https://youtube.com/watch?v=AK8jyzVLYmM

 >>/36378/
check teh location of teh posted video too
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Bolwoningen&sp=EiG4AQHCARtDaElKNHhuU3RTSHV4a2NSVmFsc2poVTEtRFU%253D
one other
https://youtube.com/watch?v=OPbWJNhGVDU

 >>/36378/
Yeah I've seen those posts. But haven't checked the videos. Or tried to read those stuff. I think other boards got some posts as well.

zorbán-on-feces png
(480.51 KB, 1108x619)

Some changes are coming here:
https://index.hu/english/2020/04/29/coronavirus_hungary_stay_at_home_order_partially_lifted/
I despise him for doing these announcements on Facebook. What's next, the e-adminstration moves to facebook? It's creating dangerous precedents. Let's just give the powers of the govt. to Facebook. Also many people (mostly the elderly) don't even fucking have facebook acc.
Anyway:
- Shops will have no limits on opening hours, 
- Terraces and gardens of restaurants can open,
- Open-air beaches and baths can open,
- but wearing facemasks in stores and on public transportation (like in Budapest) will be compulsory nationwide.
- Shops are still only allowed to admit customers above the age of 65 between 9:00 AM and noon each day.
Today more details will come. I can't wait.

 >>/36383/
Haha, Trump can reply on twitter.

In theory, it shouldn't spread too much if people are clean and sensible.

Kenneth Copeland... webm
(2.24 MB, 854x480 vp9)

We are saved.

AVN05DNg png
(584.66 KB, 728x724)

 >>/36385/
Hahaha, I thought he looked familiar so I looked it up.

Once upon a virus...... webm
(5.61 MB, 1280x720 vp9)

Haha, sirry Americans!

 >>/36390/
Nice.

 >>/36529/
Use the this thread instead for covid discussions.
> public interest had died 
Yeah, it gets boring after a while. For the vast majority of the people nothing happens. Maybe they know someone who knows someone. But that's not frightening enough, and the media can fan the hysteria just so long.

 >>/36410/
It seems as if they bang on the table because they can.

I wore a mask today in the train. it feels useless and I was the only one, it's not compulsory in Switzerland, just when you go to the hair dresser. Nobody cared until I put on the mask.
Meanwhile Britain should overtake Italy as country with most deaths in Europe this week.

 >>/36531/
The electric is about run out in my rented shit hole so I will be wearing my mask tomorrow on an expedition in the local shop.
I'm sure if anyone else had a mask, they would wear it.

 >>/36533/
From today we have to wear masks in shops. Who the fuck has that many masks to discard it on daily basis. I think I heard about masks with changeable filters, but haven't checked.

 >>/36534/
In Poland we are obliged to wear them almost everywhere oustide our own houses. I own 6 masks now. Two of them are made from some simple material but that's enough to not get me fined. The rest are medical stuff I got from friendly medical workers.  
The ones from simple material I just put in boiling water every day. I wash them in washing machine once per weak. 
The nurse who gave me the one medical mask told me I can just wash it by hand using warm water and simple soap, or I can just put it in washing machine just dont go over 60 degrees (or was it 40).
The two other mask the guy told me I can wash them using alcohol (I'm using 95% ethanol). The last mask fits badly on me so I'm not wearing it. 
Anyway they said I can just keep washing and reusing them. I don't have to change any filter or anything and no one said I should get a new mask and get rid of those after some time.

 >>/36535/
Some good tips. Thanks.

 >>/36537/
Well then let me add another info. Dogtors say you shouldnt wear one mask for more than 4 hours. You'll notice the front of the mask will get wet from all the humidity coming from your mouth and that's really not very comfortable. So consider having enough mask prepared for your day. I'm using 2 or 3 on a work day and sometimes 1 for a weekend because I don't go out very often. 

Breathing is hell and you will hate it too.

Justin Trudeau Sings... mp4
(4.57 MB, 640x360 h264)

 >>/36538/
When all this shit begin they talked about the usefulness of the masks, and they said it's good only for catching the exhaled stuff, but loses efficiency with every breath as it gets more moisture.

I still haven't worn a mask or even thought of buying one, a few people here are but most seem not to be. My uncle has taken my grandmothers sewing machine and is mass producing his own now though...

Apparently 80% of people have some degree of deviated septum. The septum is the barrier between your nostrils and when it is crooked it makes the nose crooked as well. This can also cause nose bleeding, loud breathing and difficulty sleeping on one side. I have been noticing that I have a slightly crooked neck and shoulder posture and I think this may be the cause of it. People say you should sleep on your side but probably sleeping on you back is better and some also put forth that view. It seems that the people advocating sleeping on the side are those looking at it from a respiratory point of view while the back fellows are looking at it through a posture point of view. One cannot have it all I guess.

Anyway I was just rambling.

 >>/36545/
One can improve his posture during the day. People should sleep how they find it comfortable (ofc we can get used to positions), and we usually move around while we sleep. Bad posture is coming from bad sitting habits, stooping over desks, in front of the monitors. Muscles getting cramped, or stretched in the wrong places.
School is especially bad for our posture and for our physique in general. Our youth is the time of physical growth and instead we taking care how our bones, ligaments, muscles grow and form, instead cultivating good habits, we spend our youth malforming our body, and promoting idle sitting instead of the love of activity and exercise. We create unhealthy individuals generation after generation. It's a scandal.

 >>/36545/
 >>/36545/
> Apparently 80% of people have some degree of deviated septum.

Yeah I actually have that too. I just noticed it since I can't really breathe well through my nose sometimes

 >>/36546/
The industrial revolution, etc etc

 >>/36548/
What do you mean?

 >>/36544/
I read an article recommending using vacuum cleaner filters for home made masks instead of using faulty chink masks.

 >>/36550/
According to recent ordinance, they recommend wearing scarfs, kerchiefs, whatever beside surgical and other medical masks.
I think the rationale is, that the virus spreads from our mouths via drops, and the barriers should be enough to prevent this moisture getting into the air, or slow them down so they don't travel meters. They don't need to be able to filter virus sized stuff.

tryapki jpg
(28.11 KB, 300x229)

700 jpg
(258.9 KB, 700x700)

 >>/36552/
> they recommend wearing scarfs, kerchiefs

And discard them every few hours, if you don't want your "mask" being a dust collector with optional coronavirus inside. Reusable mask is more like element of style, a fashion item, not protection. I don't think that most people really clean it properly as required.

Anyway, it is pretty easy to make somewhat reliable single-use mask from any cloth. Take common nonwoven fabric that is sold for cleaning, take few layers, fold, cut - and mask is done.

 >>/36556/
That explains it since it's fake.

drawfagsOriginalConte... png
(7.4 KB, 300x300)

 >>/36546/
I think that doesn't help but that causes things like pelvic tilt and a slouched posture, I more refer to my neck and shoulder being off centre and how that could be caused by sleeping on one side all the time.

 >>/36549/
> What do you mean?
> The industrial revolution and it's consequences have been a disaster for the human race

or somethings like that. A crazy dude saids that once

 >>/36565/
That's crazy. The invention of making fire was the one with disastrous consequences.

ghork1 png
(13.09 KB, 300x300)

 >>/36567/

 >>/36567/
 >>/36568/
Yeah lol

I'm just memeing right now.

But it looks like the site still has issues posting images right now

quote-to-read-too-man... jpg
(46.93 KB, 850x400)

 >>/36565/
Yeah I think it's one of those quotes that's posted everywere and now nobody knows the source

 >>/36565/
 >>/36574/
Ted Kaczynski/the "Unabomber" said that.

unabomber mem catala PNG
(541.31 KB, 600x451)

 >>/36579/
I see. Guess this meme I found makes sense now
It says ; Because of the damn industrial revolution he became a pickle

 >>/36580/
Why does pickles sound so weird to me?

Pickles. It's such a particular word. It sounds so odd put just seems to roll of the tongue for some reason

Pickles I don't like how they taste though

 >>/36581/
Sames with zokni.

 >>/36581/
There is a word for it. Like when you repeat a word so many times it loses it's meaning and starts sounding strange.

Hmm. I read somewhere we're gonna have large scale testing. I can't find the sauce. Anyway they will order a bunch of people (decided by... randomly???) for mandatory testing to get a better picture of what's going on in the country.

 >>/36564/
Do/did you carry your bag on one shoulder a lot?

https://energyandcleanair.org/air-pollution-deaths-avoided-in-europe-as-coal-oil-plummet/
Turns out the coronavirus epidemic is good for health.

Wanted to post a picrel, duckduckwent "healthy", got a bunch of food pics.

Justinianic-plague-sc... jpg
(120.71 KB, 1244x700)

https://www.medievalists.net/2020/05/impact-justinianic-plague/
> The new findings from this paper suggest that given the variation in ecological and social patterns across the region (e.g., climate, population density), it is unlikely that a plague outbreak would have impacted all corners of the diverse empire equally.
B-but I would have thought exactly 50% of the local population died everywhere...
Fucking geniuses, ofc there had to be variation.
Anyway one more proofs, written sources shouldn't be taken as is, even if they are primary ones. Imagine a millennia later someone would pull out all the articles written about this recent epidemic, and would blindly accept everything as true...

 >>/36621/
At least we know about the current pandemic and can deal with it rapidly. Must have been awful to have a plague during those times tbh

 >>/36622/
Also our current pandemic is far more mild, it probably would not actually have done much to a medieval society(because very few were in the age bracket at risk anyway). It would not spread so much either, it's possible that such viruses did occur but were not even note worthy enough to write down(or they didn't even know).

 >>/36622/
They knew about it too and tried to deal. Mostly on Galenic basis. Galen lived through the Antonine Plague, treating many cases, and he left his notes to the posterity. How effective was his treatments? Who knows. How effective our "treatment"? They don't do much in hospitals, just put peeps, who tired out and can't breath by themselves anymore, onto ventilators, but they just sit around and wait patience to get better. At least Galen was concerned about the general physical well being of the people. Now they don't even advise "lose weight fatsos". Otherwise they try to prevent the spread with quarantine. I think that was also known practice in the antiquity.

 >>/36623/
The risk is due to the unhealthy state of the heart and such - due to being fat, lazy and weak. The older these unhealthy people are, the weaker they are, the more likely they end up dead.
The low median age of the medieval is a little misguiding, the high mortality rate of children weighs a lot in that. Ofc many other conditions could ensure lower life expectancy, but peeps back then could live 60-80 fine.

 >>/36627/
It's true they could live that long but few did. Yes, not because of being unhealthy but they simply were likely to be impacted by something that modern medicine would cure. The older you get and the longer you live the higher the chance of this, you are effectively rolling the dice every year, yes you can live to 80 but few did.

 >>/36628/
> few did
I would call that number many.

 >>/36629/
Many did but per capita it's few.

 >>/36630/
Because many kid died.

 >>/36622/
> Must have been awful 
how do we even know that so many people died 

maybe its all bullcrap

 >>/26577/
sorry for the 1 year late reply

yes its a psy op. or to put it in finer terms, hegelian dialectic. thesis antithesis, synthesis. 

they need the opposition to go through with their plans.

throat-swab jpg
(259.1 KB, 1108x680)

https://index.hu/belfold/2020/05/12/semmelweis_egyetem_koronavirus_szures_merkely_bela_pcr_teszt_torokvaladek_antitest/
The testing is going well:
- 17 778 peeps were planned to be tested;
- 8276 peeps were tested via throat swab sample as of now, 2 active positive;
- 1524 with blood sample, 9 post-illness positive.
Based on this partial result it can be concluded:
- number of active infected:  243 - 7230;
- number of recovered: 22 399 - 92 624.
The tests does not calculates with under 14, and those who are living in "retirement homes".
Infection rate is very low, but no herd immunity either.

 >>/36647/
The article here  >>/36621/ questions the contemporary narratives and suggests there weren't that many victims.

 >>/36699/
Two days and this study ends.
https://index.hu/belfold/2020/05/16/orszagos_koronavirus-felmeres_merkely_bela_vegeredmeny/
They estimate about 40-88 thousand people could have infected, which is bout 0.6% of the country. In Spain this is 5%.
Some blahblah in the article, but one more thing is noteworthy. In Slovakia, they scrutinize every death, and they only classify those deaths covid deaths, where they find it was the direct cause. But here, they use a very broad sense, so basically anyone who had corona and died, is a covid death.

noooooooooo-squirrel jpg
(154.27 KB, 720x701)

 >>/36778/
I mean Northern Hungary. Northern Hungary!

I see here and there in the news that the air became cleaner, such as waters, rivers for example on the Hungary. It seems just a couple of months reduction in pollution results in quite a notable changes.
And the weather. While February was quite warm for the season, as China stopped (then Italy, then the others) March and April instead of getting into constant 20+, as it did in prev years, were quite cool.
So maybe this pollution, global warming thing could be solved quite easily.
Partially. Heard in telly that - for example - on the Hungary biodiversity is a problem. It's very nice that we have great many more animals in some species, but there's only a couple of species where dozens should be. And the reason is the monoculture practices, both in agriculture and forestry.
All right this part has not much to do with health, I'm just rambling.

greta-car jpg
(80.06 KB, 927x955)

 >>/36874/

> And the weather. While February was quite warm for the season, as China stopped (then Italy, then the others) March and April instead of getting into constant 20+, as it did in prev years, were quite cool.
> So maybe this pollution, global warming thing could be solved quite easily.

Most of modern sources who adhere to "scientific" "consensus" about global warming say that it is already irreversible, and even if we stop everything, it would continue, just with lesser pace.

And even if they are wrong they wouldn't admit this because there is too much money invested already.

 >>/36883/
I think after about a couple of month 90% of everyone would forget about it. And a year after that 99.9%.
Just during these months I read articles about corona which said contradictory statements with absolute certainty in the same news site within days from each other... Who cares.

Multiple sources say that Kadyrov has coronavirus and he is located in some Moscow hospital. Some recent rumors are about 70% lung damage so he'll be dead soon. Officials say that he is ok and everything is a lie though.

Few days ago he "asked" local (Chechen) doctors to "public apologize" after they said that there is heavy shortage of medical equipment in Chechnya. Of course they apologized on TV soon.

 >>/36908/
In fact in Chechnya coronavirus strengthens the immune system, heals cancer, and gives free ice cream to children.

5% of people have more than 2 nipples, what the hell. I'd never even heard of it yet 5% have it.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s004310050944

 >>/36950/
Wait. Isn't Jefferson had three nipples from Married with Children?
Also Al's ideal woman has three tits. One on her back in case of slow dance.
Furthermore I seen three tits in Total Recall.

 >>/36951/
*didn't Jefferson have
What am I writing again.

 >>/36950/
I have three lmao. But it's not symmetrical, rather it's just a smaller one below my left one.

 >>/36953/
Isn't that just a mole or something?

 >>/36954/
Maybe, but it looks different than any other mole I have.

 >>/36956/
It can always be cancer. Although I rather have an additional nipple.

 >>/36959/
I have it since my birth I think. Or at least as long as I can remember. No doctor ever paid any attention to it. Guess I'm just three nipple Bernd now.

 >>/36962/
If you are 5%, then there should be at least 20 Bernds around. We need more peeps, to make the statistics true.

 >>/36951/
I don't understand any of these references...

 >>/36953/
I don't think they are symmetrical.

 >>/36968/
You really should watch Married... with Children.
And Total Recall too, but the previous is mandatory.

abe-on-screen-tokyo jpg
(237.46 KB, 1108x739)

Japan and low covid.
https://index.hu/kulfold/2020/05/26/japan_koronavirus_japan_modell_fertozes_terjedes_abe_sinzo_gazdasag_valsag_jarvany/
This says in Japan was comparatively very successful handling the epidemic, despite they didn't have strict restrictions. What I found noteworthy in this article that in Japan, they didn't care if patients got covid or not, since there's no cure, the sick has to be and can only be treated as if they had "simple" pneumonia.
The article also talks about the depression, despite the swell handling of the epidemic, they got into the pit. Since it started in the last quarter of 2019... Again I have to say, the depression isn't caused by this, it was already incoming, it just really doesn't help.

 >>/36986/
It makes sense that it would not hit Japan so hard. They pretty much already practice social distancing(well maybe not in trains) and are quite hygienic.

everything went better than expected. almost all restrictions will be lifted during the summer. people had paid holidays or at least could work from home. environment is saved. people are now super fit thanks to biking boom. Britain, USA, Brazil and other second and third world shitholes are fucked with economic crash and lots of dead people. no Asian tourists this summer in Europe, so no queues anywhere. people are afraid to use public transport, so I usually have a train car for myself. Now I hope EU and Schengen area will have a travel ban for Sweden, so Greta has to go to school.

 >>/37010/
better than expected would be ww3 thou

 >>/37010/
Maybe for rich Bergjuden like you, there's still that omnipresent upcoming vaccine.

 >>/37010/
> I hope EU and Schengen area will have a travel ban for Sweden, so Greta has to go to school.
That would be something.

Apparently bats caused Ebola and some other viruses as well. I found an article that says they have such a strong immune system that they can live with a virus and not really be effected by it.

https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/why-bats-are-breeding-grounds-for-deadly-diseases-like-ebola-and-sars

 >>/37110/
More like the whole germ theory is fake, so it makes a good joke to make bats reoccur in their virus hoaxes.

 >>/37111/
Probably bats are fake as well, they are supposed to be the second largest order after Rodentia but when do you ever see them? I never do, how do we know they exist at all and that we are not just mistaking owls or other birds that fly at night for bats when we think we see bats?

 >>/37112/
> Probably bats are fake as well, they are supposed to be the second largest order after Rodentia but when do you ever see them? I never do, how do we know they exist at all and that we are not just mistaking owls or other birds that fly at night for bats when we think we see bats?
That's an appeal to ridicule. The germ theory is an actual flawed theory of science and you're classifying it with this nutcase-like belief.

 >>/37112/
I do see them. Not frequently but quite a few times per year, usually during summer. Their flight pattern is differ from birds', and they come out to a round when most birds hid already. Once one was even above our door hanging out. Neat little guy/gal, I like bats.

 >>/37113/
> actual flawed theory of science 
its never been proven 

EVER

the faggot pasteur tried his whole life to prove it but he failed miserably

 >>/37132/
How do phytopathogenic fungi spread from one plant to another?

 >>/37134/
Intoxinated insects, has nothing to do with germs. I already told you.

 >>/37137/
Is coffee rust a nonliving toxin injected by an insect, and if not, how does it spread?

 >>/37144/
> Is coffee rust a nonliving toxin injected by an insect
Yes it is.

 >>/37145/
Then why does the infected host always have the same fungus? What is the fungus doing? Why is is that if I rub material with the fungus on a healthy plant with zero contact with insects, it develops coffee rust?

 >>/37146/
> What is the fungus doing? 
Detox, because the leaf is intoxicated. 
> Why is is that if I rub material with the fungus on a healthy plant with zero contact with insects, it develops coffee rust?
So fungi is rubbed on the leaf to develop coffee rust? Pathogens supposedly spread through the air where you never notice. That's literally not what's going on.
Anyways, the fungi's role in it appears to be a detox reaction, while the intoxication of the leaf is caused by insects carrying it.

 >>/37147/
> So fungi is rubbed on the leaf to develop coffee rust?
Yes, and it develops as much coffee rust as the infected leaf you extracted it from even though you only use a tiny amount of actual fungal material. If you extract snake poison from someone bit by a snake and apply it in a healthy individual, the healthy individual will not have as strong symptoms as the original individual. Maybe poison can cause chain reactions but overall you'd expect nonliving toxins to have a much greater proportionality between quantity of contaminant/severity of symptoms compared to a parasite, which replicates itself. What you see in the healthy coffee leaves is a lot of rust with only a tiny quantity of contaminant. And not only that, but the contaminant are the signs of the fungi, so you have to assume that all of the symptoms developed by the healthy plant came from whatever quantity of toxin entered the fungus, was not yet decontaminated and got into its reproductive tissue.

Besides, that creates more questions about the fungi. By what you postulate it should be possible to have coffee rust without any of the fungi, though that is never observed. What is observed is that it only lives through that detox reaction as it only ever appears where there's coffee rust, and as much of it appears as there are symptoms. But how does it get to a leaf with the toxin? You've already ruled out known transmission methods. You could say it was laying dormant in the leaf, but if you grow 10 new coffee bushes from the first one's seeds, all of the leaves of all of the new bushes exhibit the same behavior when contaminated. Thus the fungi on the first bush had to be metabolically active, reproducing itself. Yet it couldn't be because observably it's only active wherever there's coffee rust. 
Does the fungi come with the toxin itself and both of them were previously within the insect? Can you chemically identify the toxin? Can you identify the insect? Is the occurrence of coffee rust lower in areas subject to measures which do insect control but don't affect fungi? If you do identify the insect and control it you'd also extinguish coffee rust, that would be lucrative and there'd be a lot of demand for it.

 >>/37149/
> Yes
Rubbed by whom? Does some anonymous man just go around and rub fungi on leaves and is that how it "pathogenically" spreads? Mind you, the fungi doesn't come with the toxin, nor does the leaf. All fungi are used for detox procedures, in this case when a insect goes and shits on a leaf, they're not damaging pathogens.

 >>/37151/
> Rubbed by whom?
I understand this is a "let's say" hypothetical situation, en example.
Here  >>/37146/ he writes:
> if I rub material with the fungus on a healthy plant with zero contact with insects

 >>/37151/
> Rubbed by whom?
Rubbed in a laboratory to inoculate the disease in a healthy plant. I've seen it done with coffee rust. That is a step of determining that a species is the pathogen, if you spread it from a contaminated to a healthy host and it develops the disease you have part of the confirmation.
> Does some anonymous man just go around and rub fungi on leaves and is that how it "pathogenically" spreads?
No, they spread by known means such as air.
> Mind you, the fungi doesn't come with the toxin
Then where does it come from? I've already shown it can't have just been waiting on the leaf.
> All fungi are used for detox procedures
How do they get to the leaf where the toxin is, in order to do their detox procedure? Why don't we see leaves where the toxin is, there are all of the symptoms, but the fungi is nowhere to be found?

 >>/37162/
> Rubbed in a laboratory to inoculate the disease in a healthy plant. I've seen it done with coffee rust. That is a step of determining that a species is the pathogen, if you spread it from a contaminated to a healthy host and it develops the disease you have part of the confirmation.
That's an experiment, not natural.
> No, they spread by known means such as air.
Whatever way they do spread or if they are dormant, fungi still aren't infectious. That's the point I'm making here.

 >>/37204/
> That's an experiment, not natural.
You have a theoretical model with certain implications for what is observed empirically, and that includes experiments. If you're right, certain things would always happen in the experiments. That they don't is relevant and you have to answer my questions.
> Whatever way they do spread or if they are dormant
"Whatever", so you can't explain anything, carry out your premises to their logical conclusions and compare with what is empirically observed.

 >>/37206/
> what is observed empirically
> what is empirically observed.
How does that confirm fungi are harmful?

 >>/37209/
Fungi being harmful and spreading through known means explains what is empirically observed better than your theory, which can't even offer an explanation.
Inoculation of very small quantities of fungal reproductive tissue produces disproportionate symptoms, this is explained as the living parasite expanding itself. I gave you a possible explanation but it's not as strong.
The diseases never appear without the fungus, which is only natural given the established causal relationship, but given you reverse the relationship -the disease causes the fungal signs- then it should be possible to have the disease alone.
Generations of thousands of healthy plants, completely devoid of both the disease and the fungus, can go before the two show up in one plant. If the fungus causes the disease this is easy to understand. If, on the other hand, it just shows up where the disease is and was laying on the plant, there are only questions and contradictions with what's observed.
This means the fungus was metabolically active, getting energy from somewhere, and reproducing itself so it would be positioned within each of the thousands of plants. But where was it getting its energy from, the plant itself? You do have to explain that. And why does nobody find the fungus in healthy plants, given how it must, by what your postulate, be in every single healthy plant?

Alternatively the fungi come from outside the healthy plant. This still means they have a metabolism elsewhere. However, if both the fungi and the disease come from outside and the disease never appears without the fungi, then they necessarily came in together. You said the disease are toxins from insects, then the fungi are necessarily from the insects too, and have a metabolism within them. It'd also mean there'd be an observable relationship between insect control and fungal disease control. But you discarded this.

The only alternative you're left with is that the fungi are spreading through the established means of germ theory, they just aren't harmful. But if harmless things spread this way, harmful things can, too.

 >>/37222/
> Fungi being harmful
> empirically observed
And how is that observed? 
> The diseases never appear without the fungus
Because the "diseases" visible on plants are simply a result of the detox reaction from a dormant fungus. 
> the disease causes the fungal signs- then it should be possible to have the disease alone.
But if the fungus was dormant, then it shouldn't be possible unless this disease is isolated, which it never has been, since Pasteur's theory is universally held and it's just explained as being caused by the fungus to begin with.
> This means the fungus was metabolically active, getting energy from somewhere, and reproducing itself so it would be positioned within each of the thousands of plants. But where was it getting its energy from, the plant itself? 
From the plant, if they can also supposedly get their energy from insects etc., then why not plants? 
> And why does nobody find the fungus in healthy plants, given how it must, by what your postulate, be in every single healthy plant?
Nobody find the fungus? What, are they on a scavenger hunt for fungi and they can't find it? 
> the disease never appears without the fungi, then they necessarily came in together
Assuming they're not dormant or that the fungus doesn't go through a detox procedure and that it really is "fungal disease control", which just assumes the germ theory.

 >>/37224/
> And how is that observed? 
Even with your eyes.
> Nobody find the fungus? What, are they on a scavenger hunt for fungi and they can't find it? 
I'm not on a scavenger hunt for lichens and I still see them, they're visible to the naked eye. So do the signs -unambiguously fungal tissue- of a number of fungi. What you postulate is easily verifiable.
> Because the "diseases" visible on plants are simply a result of the detox reaction from a dormant fungus. 
If the fungus is dormant, it isn't reproducing. If it isn't reproducing, it isn't getting to all of the plant's offspring, and the offspring's offspring and so on. Yet the offspring's offspring's offspring, maybe thousands of plants, still exhibit the same reaction, which would require the fungus, too, to grow by the thousands, and hence, be metabolically active. So dormancy is ruled out, plain and simple.
> From the plant, if they can also supposedly get their energy from insects etc., then why not plants? 
If they were metabolically active then sooner or later their signs would show up and you'd see that with your eyes. But they don't.
Besides, if they are getting their energy from the plant, then it might by symbiosis but just as well might be parasitism. There's no law stating parasitism is impossible.

 >>/37225/
> with your eyes
With mine? Explain how.
> they're visible to the naked eye
"Visible" during their detox process. What does the fungus itself look like?
> If the fungus is dormant, it isn't reproducing
How can they not reproduce? 
> If they were metabolically active then sooner or later their signs would show up and you'd see that with your eyes. 
Their signs are visible to the naked eye during their detox procedure.

 >>/37236/
> Explain how.
If you typed this you know how to use your eyes.
> "Visible" during their detox process.
Visible when they emit signs.
> What does the fungus itself look like?
The signs are easily visible. For a better look into its structure you can use a microscope.
> How can they not reproduce? 
Because they're dormant, not metabolically active. If they're multiplying at an extremely fast rate, and they necessarily must if they come from within the plant, they are increasing their biomass.
> Their signs are visible to the naked eye during their detox procedure.
Why only during the "detox procedure"? They're reproductive tissue. If it's metabolically active it will reproduce and propagate itself.
Besides, what purpose do they hold? What's the point of having all those spores if they cannot possibly ever propagate through the air, water, contact, vectors, etc.?

 >>/37238/
> If you typed this you know how to use your eyes.
I never saw it, and even if I did I wouldn't really get how it's harmful and it's not detox, as I've already said.
> Visible when they emit signs.
Yes, during a detox procedure. 
> The signs are easily visible. For a better look into its structure you can use a microscope.
During a detox procedure, and you're not exactly carrying a microscope with you at all times, are you?
> Because they're dormant, not metabolically active. If they're multiplying at an extremely fast rate, and they necessarily must if they come from within the plant, they are increasing their biomass.
Then they reproduce outside of the plant, but they still get into a plant dormant and unharmful.

Symptoms-and-morpholo... png
(453.82 KB, 850x830)

green mold... png
(2.08 MB, 1246x2168)

10.4315@03... pdf
(89.16 KB, 0x0)

 >>/37239/
> I never saw it
Now you have.
> Then they reproduce outside of the plant, but they still get into a plant dormant and unharmful.
And how do they get into the plant? 

You need to think further about inoculation. I've given you the example of taking fungal material from an infected leaf, applying it on a healthy leaf and the disease spreads. In your theory, of course, what actually happened was that the nonliving toxin was also within the fungal material and it was what infected the healthy leaf. There's the problem of contaminant/symptom disproportionality but you don't care.
However, consider this other scenario: you remove fungal material from a diseased plant, but this fungus can be grown on Petri dishes. You isolate it and grow colonies. In the course of this isolation you already take only a very small number of cells and grow your colonies from them. You can further isolate if you want. The point is, in the colonies you're growing there's almost nothing from the source material. You can safely say that the nonliving toxin is absent, or in homeopathic quantities. It's a non-factor. You have the fungus alone, no toxin.

What happens if you retrieve this fungus, devoid of the toxin that causes disease, and inoculate into a healthy plant? You now have a plant with the fungus, but without the toxin. And what happens? It develops the disease. Sounds conclusive to me.

This isn't simply hypothetical. On this paper this is done very casually. See:
> P. digitatum and P. italicum isolates were obtained from decayed orange (Citrus sinensis ‘‘Washington navel’’) and mandarin (Citrus reticulata)
So the source is a diseased plant.
> Prior to each experiment, the isolates were grown on potato dextrose agar
So you have the fungi alone with no toxin.
> P. digitatum and P. italicum spore suspensions (10^6 spores per ml) were inoculated by using the spot, wound, and piercing inoculation methods as in the in vitro studies described above. Each orange was inoculated at three sites around the stem end (7). The inoculated oranges were incubated at 25 C for 24 h in plastic boxes to let the inoculums dry.
Healthy plants are inoculated with the pure fungi. No toxins.
Then they get the disease. You can't explain this.

 >>/37240/
> And how do they get into the plant? 
They probably work parasitically. 
> So the source is a diseased plant.
> So you have the fungi alone with no toxin.
If it was attained from a diseased plant, it couldn't have been pure fungi, there had to have been toxins coming over from it.
Just another note, coffee rust is NEVER reported in history until 1869, after the industrial revolution reached Sri Lanka. These toxins are likely to have their source in industrial elements, which correlates with the beginning of coffee blight, otherwise it would've been reported long before that, as coffee production in Sri Lanka dates back at least a century before that.

 >>/37243/
> They probably work parasitically. 
That's what I'm telling you. It is harmful and disease-causing because it is a parasite.
You haven't answered my question, though. How do they get into the plant? Do they have teleportation?
> If it was attained from a diseased plant, it couldn't have been pure fungi, there had to have been toxins coming over from it.
The splotches you see on the Petri dish are grown from just a handful of cells. It's a massive dillution. Further and further and further dillutions can be done. You can dillute and dillute and dillute and dillute ad infinitum and your inoculation will be the same. The inoculation process may involve actual dillution in water. You might as well believe in homeopathy. 
Further, the contaminant/symptom problem comes back to haunt you. Why does this homeopathic quantity of toxin, if there is toxin at all, have the same disease-causing effectiveness as the comparatively gargantuan dose the insect must have originally inserted? That only reinforces that the disease is alive.

 >>/37245/
> harmful(...) because it is a parasite.
But parasites aren't bad, in humans they eat decaying tissue. The fungi in coffe rust just operates parasitically. Thus this has nothing to do with the germ theory, it claims that pathogens transmit through the air. I'm not claiming that parasites and fungi are pathogens or infectious in any ways, I'm saying that they help. 
> The splotches you see on the Petri dish are grown from just a handful of cells. It's a massive dillution. Further and further and further dillutions can be done. You can dillute and dillute and dillute and dillute ad infinitum and your inoculation will be the same. The inoculation process may involve actual dillution in water. You might as well believe in homeopathy. 
What does this have anything to do with what I said?
> Why does this homeopathic quantity of toxin, if there is toxin at all, have the same disease-causing effectiveness as the comparatively gargantuan dose the insect must have originally inserted? 
Quantity is irrelevant in the equation, presence of these toxins must all cause a similar reaction.

 >>/37246/
> But parasites aren't bad
Some parasitic fungi kill off the host cells to feast on the dead matter, doesn't sound like a good thing to me. 
> Thus this has nothing to do with the germ theory, it claims that pathogens transmit through the air.
Where do the fungi come from? You say they don't come from the plant (but reject every single possible entrance method), then say they do come from the plant and live parasitically.
> What does this have anything to do with what I said?
That it has little to none of your "toxin". 
If you repeat the isolation 20 times there probably isn't a single molecule of it in the material you'll use for inoculation.
> Quantity is irrelevant in the equation, presence of these toxins must all cause a similar reaction.
It's not irrelevant, it should be proportional to the dose. Extremely low doses should have no effect.

 >>/37247/
> Some parasitic fungi kill off the host cells to feast on the dead matter, doesn't sound like a good thing to me. 
What "host cells"? They're only getting rid of wasteful material in the body.
> Where do the fungi come from? You say they don't come from the plant (but reject every single possible entrance method), then say they do come from the plant and live parasitically.
Perhaps they come from outside but live inside, either way they're not harmful.
> That it has little to none of your "toxin". 
It's hard to isolate toxins, the way to get rid of it is detox which germ theory denies. Again, these "toxins" I'm talking about all come from fumes that contaminate natural life, caused by the industrial revolution. Uncoincidentally, coffee ruts only appears after the industrial revolution was introduced. 
> It's not irrelevant, it should be proportional to the dose. Extremely low doses should have no effect.
How so? Extremely low doses of anything always causes a reaction, like how extremely low amounts of an actual disease are used in vaccines, regardless of whether it's good or not. By your logic, vaccines should be useless as they contain only extremely low amounts of the disease.

 >>/37248/
> What "host cells"? They're only getting rid of wasteful material in the body.
"Wasteful material" such as entire fruits colonized.
> It's hard to isolate toxins
I can take a single cell from, say, a billion cell colony (1 billionth of the total toxin in the colony), grow a colony, take a single cell from it (1 billionth of a billionth), grow a colony from it and so on.
> Extremely low doses of anything always causes a reaction
There's a proportionality. Water is toxic if you drink enough of it, doesn't mean a glass will cause a toxic reaction. At the very least the disease from extremely low toxin doses would be lighter, but there's not the slightest hint of that.
With living beings it's different because they can replicate and expand. A single bacterial cell can grow into a massive colony, a single drop of toxin will remain a single drop.

 >>/37249/
> entire fruits colonized
And what fruits exactly?
> I can take a single cell from, say, a billion cell colony (1 billionth of the total toxin in the colony), grow a colony, take a single cell from it (1 billionth of a billionth), grow a colony from it and so on.
How exactly do you "take a cell"? You can't just pick from them, they're supposedly invisible. Either way, they're all going to be toxic because they're all exposed to these fumes. 
> Water is toxic if you drink enough of it, doesn't mean a glass will cause a toxic reaction. 
Analysing the real effects of the overconsumption of water is for another time, but with just some small toxic elements in a glass of water, you will experience a toxic reaction.

 >>/37250/
> And what fruits exactly?
Oranges and mandarins, such as that mold.
> How exactly do you "take a cell"?
Using isolation methods (e.g. streaking) you get a Petri dish with only a few colonies. In fact, when doing dillutions of bacteria in water to quantify bacterial concentrations, it is possible to do too many dillutions and get too few colonies. Each colony came from a single mother cell, maybe a small number, but it grows by many orders of magnitude by assimilating the culture medium it's on. Hence each colony is a "cell you've taken". That's roughly how you quantify bacterial concentration, you assume each colony is a single cell that was in the drop of water you used and relate the number of cells/volume.
Hence it is what I've described, a "billionth", there's almost nothing of the original material with the toxin. All of the cells save for one or a very small group, in a colony with an order of magnitude of cells, have not been exposed to the "fumes", nor did the biomass they're made of, which comes from the culture medium. Then you can repeat this and repeat ad infinitum.
> but with just some small toxic elements in a glass of water, you will experience a toxic reaction
You don't get a toxic reaction from toxic-based homeopathy, even in the higher concentrations that do actually contain the dilluted material. But when a toxic reaction does take place, it is related to the dose. With living being this relationship isn't as strong because they reproduce and expand, but nonliving toxins should follow this closer.

 >>/37251/
> Oranges and mandarins, such as that mold.
Result of GMOs, didn't arise naturally.
> Hence it is what I've described, a "billionth", there's almost nothing of the original material with the toxin. All of the cells save for one or a very small group, in a colony with an order of magnitude of cells, have not been exposed to the "fumes", nor did the biomass they're made of, which comes from the culture medium. Then you can repeat this and repeat ad infinitum.
But they have as they're simply the same cells isolated, thus they'd generate the same reaction.
> You don't get a toxic reaction from toxic-based homeopathy, even in the higher concentrations that do actually contain the dilluted material. But when a toxic reaction does take place, it is related to the dose. With living being this relationship isn't as strong because they reproduce and expand, but nonliving toxins should follow this closer.
Toxic reactions take place all the time among humans, which is why we require detox (done by fungi/parasites and bacteria).

 >>/37252/
> But they have as they're simply the same cells isolated, thus they'd generate the same reaction.
They're not the same cells isolated. At the center of the colony is the cell you've isolated, surrounding it are a billion cells that developed from it using uncontaminated material. At most you can say the toxin spread to the other billion cells, but then you get a dillution of a billion times. 
And you can do this again and again.
The toxin is a molecule or grouping of molecules, which means it is not infinitely divisible. Thus, just homeopathy is provably water, it should be possible to calculate and execute a sufficient number of isolations to mathematically and chemically be certain that not a single molecule from the original cell is present in the cells of a final colony. This colony, then, beyond a doubt is absolutely pure. 
> Toxic reactions take place all the time among humans
Homeopathy, if not coming from shady Indian laboratories, causes no toxic reactions in humans. No beneficial reactions, either, as it literally is overpriced water. 
When a nonliving toxin does cause a reaction, it is proportional to the dose, which is what you ignore again and again. The same toxin can be harmful in one dose and deadly in another. This should apply to your elusive "fumes", which have a stronger impact on the plant with stronger doses.

 >>/37253/
> surrounding it are a billion cells that developed from it using uncontaminated material
How could all those cells have remained uncontaminated? 
> molecules
Molecules are metaphysical entities, they do not really exist. Plant cells are actual physical entities that can be seen under a microscope, and toxins, a result of fumes from industrial factories physically enter and dilute them. 
> Homeopathy, if not coming from shady Indian laboratories, causes no toxic reactions in humans. No beneficial reactions, either, as it literally is overpriced water. 
Then shady Indian labouratories are the ones getting it right, because even small amounts of toxin do cause toxic reactions, they simply have to.
> When a nonliving toxin does cause a reaction, it is proportional to the dose, which is what you ignore again and again. The same toxin can be harmful in one dose and deadly in another. This should apply to your elusive "fumes", which have a stronger impact on the plant with stronger doses.
Even if this were the case, all these fumes are going to spread throughout billions of plant cells; again, they simply cannot be isolated.

 >>/37254/
> How could all those cells have remained uncontaminated? 
Dillution. Billionth of a billionth of a billionth of a billionth.
> Molecules are metaphysical entities, they do not really exist
And now you're denying atoms.
> Then shady Indian labouratories are the ones getting it right, because even small amounts of toxin do cause toxic reactions, they simply have to.
They're not "getting it right", they're doing a small dillution.  There's homeopathic lead. It is prepared from actual lead, just very dilluted. According to you it HAS to cause lead poisoning. But it doesn't! You annihilate yourself when you say "they simply have to".
> Even if this were the case, all these fumes are going to spread 
They're going to spread, not going to replicate themselves.

 >>/37256/
> Dillution. Billionth of a billionth of a billionth of a billionth.
And you're saying that somehow they can avoid all these fumes from factories? Again, plant cells are physical properties, they're all going to get affected. 
> And now you're denying atoms.
There is no provable thing as an atom. It's a metaphysical property that chemists pretended was real science back in the 19th century. Before that, it was seen as completely fictional. 
>  There's homeopathic lead. It is prepared from actual lead, just very dilluted. According to you it HAS to cause lead poisoning. But it doesn't! 
It doesn't cause lead poisoning, it still causes a toxic reaction from the body. Nobody would go through it unscathed.
> They're going to spread, not going to replicate themselves.
So these toxic fumes can only spread to one plant cell at a time?

 >>/37114/
I know I was joking. My cat caught one once, I tried to nurse it back to health but it died. If I stand outside at night and be quite and still, I can hear and feel what I think could be bats flying around and sonaring. They would be difficult to photograph, I guess I would have to find where they live and go there and then I could obtain evidence that they exist.

 >>/37257/
> And you're saying that somehow they can avoid all these fumes from factories?
You said it was from insects, then from factories. You don't really believe in anything. Orange mold was colonizing entire oranges when the Danes were still in tribal life.
> So these toxic fumes can only spread to one plant cell at a time?
If there's x toxin, 1 billion cells and the toxin spreads equally each cell will have x/1 billion. It will not have x. The total quantity of toxin remains the same. 
> It doesn't cause lead poisoning, it still causes a toxic reaction from the body.
So you distinguish between levels of effect, "toxic reaction" and "lead poisioning", one is stronger, and it's caused by a stronger dose. So you admit there's a dose-effect relation. Apply this to plant disease. A stronger dose has a different effect from a lighter dose. The insect or the fumes give a strong dose. Inoculation from a colony gives an orders of magnitude lighter dose. You must conclude they have a different effect. However the effect is observably pretty much the same.

 >>/37258/
Bats just love a nice ripe jackfruit. Lure them in for a photo.

 >>/37259/
> You said it was from insects, then from factories. You don't really believe in anything. 
I never said it wasn't from insects. I claimed that insects are intoxicated by the fumes and then easily spread them to plants when making contact, which they do quite a lot in-fact. Now you're trying to claim I'm inconsistent.
> Orange mold was colonizing entire oranges when the Danes were still in tribal life.
Is there any proof for this? Oranges are a relatively recent fruit, they never even existed in their current state until the colonial period, right around the corner when it comes to the time the industrial revolution began.
> If there's x toxin, 1 billion cells and the toxin spreads equally each cell will have x/1 billion. It will not have x. The total quantity of toxin remains the same. 
And what makes you assume the amount of toxicity has to be divided? Either they're intoxicated equally in a small amount, or they're intoxicated in varying small amounts. What makes you think that?
> the effect is observably pretty much the same.
The "effect" is a result of the fungus's detox procedure. An equivalent for men is not the actual effect of a toxic reaction or lead poisoning alone, but a detox procedure after that, with bacteria or fungi/parasites. Malaria for example, it's caused by a mosquito carrying a parasite, but it itself is actually a detox procedure.

I'm curious. What are toxins? Examples? How do they fit into the metabolism of bacteria and fungi? How the detoxification is going down? What happens with the toxins?

 >>/37262/
> I claimed that insects are intoxicated by the fumes and then easily spread them to plants when making contact
And absent human presence, there are no plant diseases at all?
> And what makes you assume the amount of toxicity has to be divided?
The toxin is the cause of disease. The toxin has a quantity, a mass, concentration, etc. Everywhere substances are observed to change their biological effect, including toxicity, according to dose. One concentration of snake poison does not have the exact same biological effect as another concentration. You yourself accept this in the case of lead, the different quantity, high in one case and zero (but tiny in your case as you deny atoms) in homeopathy, has a different impact, the higher quantity's is stronger. The quantity of lead got divided and so did the strength of its effect.

> The "effect" is a result of the fungus's detox procedure
No it isn't. The "effect" I'm talking about are the symptoms and damage i.e. something the toxin, and exclusively the toxin, cause. It is pretty much the same. If you do the isolation and then inoculate material from a colony into a healthy orange tree, in due time the fruits will rot and be rendered completely useless, that is the effect I'm talking about. 
> Malaria for example, it's caused by a mosquito carrying a parasite
Which parasite? Give me its name.

 >>/37263/
To give a really quick rundown, toxins as I'm talking about them are essentially fumes from industrial waste or other elements that is messed up with plants and other organisms, and thus infects them. Toxins are the cause of disease, not bacteria or fungi, which go through a detox procedure to remove them, primarily by decomposing wasteful material in the body. Germ theory holds that bacteria and viruses are the causes of disease, and thus they must be destroyed with antibacterials and drugs (not even mentioning vaccines), all extremely harmful to the human body as it prevents this industrial junk from being decomposed.
Pre-industrial diseases are similar, with plagues often being caused by elements within coal if not typical poisonings and nutrient deficiencies.

 >>/37264/
> And absent human presence, there are no plant diseases at all?
No, but there are and the consequences of the industrial revolution have left their mark for the time being.
> The toxin is the cause of disease. The toxin has a quantity, a mass, concentration, etc. Everywhere substances are observed to change their biological effect, including toxicity, according to dose. One concentration of snake poison does not have the exact same biological effect as another concentration. You yourself accept this in the case of lead, the different quantity, high in one case and zero (but tiny in your case as you deny atoms) in homeopathy, has a different impact, the higher quantity's is stronger. The quantity of lead got divided and so did the strength of its effect.
So it's limited in size?
> exclusively the toxin
Now what are you talking about? I never said that it's exclusively caused by the toxin, I'm saying that the effect of coffee rust being identical is explained via it being a detox procedure by the fungus in specific, like malaria within humans by its parasite.
> Which parasite? Give me its name.
Plasmodium parasites, which cleans the blood-stream in a detox procedure via targeting contaminated red-blood-cells.

 >>/37266/
> So it's limited in size?
In quantity. Less lead, less damage from lead. Less toxic fumes, less damage from toxic fumes. Observably, however, less toxic fumes has no impact whatsoever on damage from toxic fumes. This might suggest toxic fumes are not to blame.

 >>/37267/
And how can this work outside of the atomic theory? Can't it have a massive range of spread instead of individually infecting cells according to its quantity?

 >>/37281/
You deny that atoms exist, you don't deny that grams and milimeters exist.

 >>/37282/
> You deny that atoms exist, you don't deny that grams and milimeters exist.
False equivalency, grams and millimetres are simply small units of measurements, there's a whole different aspect to atoms, that they form crap or whatever. Atoms are again, metaphysical entities by definition, before the late 19th century the atomic theory was seen as completely fictional. 
> The idea that matter is made up of discrete units is a very old idea, appearing in many ancient cultures such as Greece and India. The word atomos, meaning "uncuttable", was coined by the ancient Greek philosophers Leucippus and his pupil Democritus (5th century BC).[1][2][3][4] However, these ancient ideas were based on metaphysical reasoning rather than empirical evidence. 
> the idea
> idea
> idea
> idea

 >>/37284/
> grams and millimetres are simply small units of measurements
Yes. And there is a quantitative dimension to the biological effects of substances, you yourself admit this. 0,0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 g of lead has a different biological effect than 1 g of lead. You yourself have said this. Likewise, 0,0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 g of toxic fumes, which is what you should find in inoculation material taken from the colonies, must produce a different damage on leaves than 1 g of toxic fumes.
But they don't, and you have yet to explain why.

 >>/37285/
Once again, you deflect. I'm not talking about the effects of the toxins themselves aside from howw how they have a similar detox reaction with the fungus, similar to the "disease" of malaria among humans, also caused by a parasite. There is always going to be a similar detox reaction, so even if humans feel that they're not getting poisoned, if they undergo some sort of detox procedure, they're virtually going through a similar reaction (esp. when eating raw meat, because it contains bacteria; although the germ theory explains this as raw meat being bad, it's actually just undergoing another detox procedure)

 >>/37287/
> I'm not talking about the effects of the toxins themselves
I am talking about the effects of the toxins themselves. 
> so even if humans feel that they're not getting poisoned
So 0,0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 g is exactly as harmful as 1 g of lead? Lead poisoning is not a "feeling", it is objective, observable damage. So is the damage plants suffer from disease. If it isn't exactly as harmful, then the same applies to the toxic fumes.

 >>/37288/
> I am talking about the effects of the toxins themselves. 
Unless you're specifically talking about the fungal reaction to it, then that's irrelevant to my claim and you're thus strawmanning.

 >>/37419/
It is completely relevant to your claim because your entire theory simply cannot explain it. Your theory necessarily predicts that certain things will occur, but they observably do not.
If I apply 1 g of mercury to a human there is damage.
If I apply 0,0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 g of mercury you can say "something happened" but the damage observed for 1 g is nowhere to be found.
If I apply 1 g of "toxic fumes" to an orange it will suffer damage, a small spot of soft, unuseable material will expand to the entire fruit and render it worthless. This is an actual harmful impact, not a fungal reaction. The fungal reaction is the fungus visibly growing on the fruit and releasing its signs. It is not the loss of the whole fruit because that's what the toxin did. Fungi cannot ever be harmful.
If I apply 0,0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 g of "toxic fumes" to an orange, as the origin of damage functions in the same manner as mercury, it should also not have the same damage as 1 g. Yet it does.

 >>/37420/
> If I apply 0,0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 g of "toxic fumes"
Are gasses measured in grams now? Give me a break. So you're just continuing to deflect from the argument that the signs of coffee rust is a reaction from the fungi
> The fungal reaction is the fungus visibly growing on the fruit and releasing its signs. It is not the loss of the whole fruit because that's what the toxin did. Fungi cannot ever be harmful.
Strawman, fungi are used for detox whenever any toxic elements affect a plant, you ignore this.

 >>/37263/
https://youtube.com/watch?v=fvqNc4m5oOI

 >>/37423/
> Are gasses measured in grams now?
Do they have mass? 
> So you're just continuing to deflect from the argument that the signs of coffee rust is a reaction from the fungi
The signs of coffee rust are the fungi's reproductive tissue you can see. Coffee rust isn't just signs, it is the entirety of the damage the coffee bush suffers. 
> whenever any toxic elements affect a plant
I am talking about "toxic elements affecting a plant". Different quantities of toxic elements must have different effects.

 >>/37423/
Yes, gasses can be weighed in weight too, not just by the volume.

 >>/37265/
Ok. So elements (like lead and mercury mentioned itt), and fumes, or industrial waste. To give an example to these, let's say CO/CO2 and asbestos (couple of different exists, they are silicates)?
> decomposing wasteful material in the body
How do they do that? Do they digest them? Why do they do that? Do they gain something out of it, feed on them? Do they change the elements, breaking down molecules and build new, harmless ones? I was curious about this part.

swineflu mp4
(53.79 MB, 640x360 h264)

Informative about swineflu and vaccines

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4809873/

Extremely interesting study

 >>/38203/
That was all right up until they started to talk about Hitler.
At least now I understand better what that detoxifying theory is about.

 >>/38824/
> cereal grain products, to which we were largely unaccustomed
I doubt this statement. Grains were cultivated even before the agricultural revolution, grass were bred by nomads (real nomads), they sowed seeds at both their living areas they wandered between, so when they arrived in the next cycle they could find more edibles and harvest them. They did this with berries, probably with tubers and such as well.
But ofc, this doesn't take away from the point they try to make in that paper.
> dental caries increased
Related: in Egypt the flour was frequently contaminated by sand, and that in the bread scratched and ground their teeth away. Supposedly in China during hard times, civil wars, when fields were destroyed or neglected they had healthier teeth, skulls preserved this.

Uhh this is long article, can't read it now.

american-v... jpg
(128.37 KB, 790x1402)

 >>/38824/

Pretty interesting, but some numbers look even too good, like when 40% of patients recovered from schizophrenia just by removing exorphins from blood.

Article is one-sided though, it links gluten and gluten-like diet with problems that started thousands years ago, but not accounting positive changes from that time. As a hypothesis: if that diet rises risk of mental problems like schizophrenia and autism, maybe it is also provides boost for intelligence, because all these mental things are closely related. Although it is too large goal for one article, even for multiple.

It is also interesting that concept of mental normality (and disorders) can exist only relative to majority, because it has no absolute criteria. I.e. if grain makes absolute majority slightly crazy, but not you, they don't have disorder, but you have.

Anyway, it is pessimistic, because:
> Yet bread is not alone; like it, other foodstuffs, such as milk, rice, and corn, release exorphins during digestion

So we all doomed.

 >>/38829/
It's the gluten too and phytic acid. I guess sourdough bread leavened for many hours breaks down the gluten more. 

https://wissenschafftplus.de/uploads/article/Dismantling-the-Virus-Theory.pdf

Virus doesnt exist

 >>/38829/
The article gives credit to cereals:
> That the association between humans and grains paid off nicely for both is beyond dispute.

In general I would add this to the discussion: we need to weigh the pros and cons.
And people consume bunch of things that has more downsides than up. Drugs, alcohol (well, that's a drug too), cigarettes comes to mind quick. But let's pick on that poor bread and pasta, throw out the baguette.

 >>/38858/
You fail to mention this 

"At the same time, our faces, jaws, and teeth progressively became smaller in response to the soft texture of bread (Larsen, 1995). Thus we domesticated grain, and in return grain domesticated us (Murphy, 2007)."

"Yet the agricultural revolution may have spelled trouble. Tellingly, whenever diets based on grain replaced the traditional diets of hunter-gatherers, lifespan and stature decreased—while infant mortality, infectious diseases, bone mineral disorders, and the frequency of dental caries increased (Cohen, 1987). "

"In South Pacific islands with a traditionally low consumption of wheat, schizophrenia rose dramatically (roughly, from 1 out of 30,000 to 1 out of 100) when Western grain products were introduced (Dohan et al., 1984)."

etc etc

 >>/38867/
I was reflecting to his line here  >>/38829/
> Article is one-sided though, it links gluten and gluten-like diet with problems that started thousands years ago, but not accounting positive changes from that time.
So I did not have the need to list all the supposed findings of the paper, just the line which give to cereals their due. If you had followed the course of the discussion I shouldn't have told you this. But for some reason you ignore what I really write and try to insert a narrative which doesn't exist outside your imagination: that I'm completely against everything you post. And you do this all the time. Instead of really considering what I said, you go ahead and figure I pick on you so here it is, now I do, which I don't ever in normal circumstances. I've no idea why you do this.

Anyway. The whole human civilization was built on grain, it is just too good source of nutrients (first and foremost calories) to pass on. Yeah, there is a "dark side", even if we consider it's role in obesity, and don't go down this lane of mental disorders it might cause, we can declare we should balance out our diet. In many countries it's possible to do it, even in Eastern Europe. Bit more meat, vegetables, fruits, legumes, nuts, diary products, little less cereals would mean a lot.
However there are lots of cereals, even rice has over 9000 subspecies. How each fare? How about buckwheat for example? Or different type of millets?

 >>/38872/
take a chill pill

toxins png
(300.77 KB, 637x541)

So toxins.
Medicine does not reject the idea that toxins are harmful to organisms. It knows and calculates with it. The effects are known, they are legit conditions, illnesses. They treat them. Why would medicine make up germs when they could blame anything on toxins? It's clear that poisoning does not account for everything.

> grain is bad

yeah i excluded (black) bread from my diet too (now)

--taoist diet master race

 >>/38897/
Black bread is probably the healthiest from breads.

 >>/38895/
> Why would medicine make up germs when they could blame anything on toxins? 
I dont have all the answers, but germ theory is complete bs. 

I guess its the same thing with flat earth.

 >>/38899/
Not much different than toxins. Foreign stuff gets into the body and the body reacts to them (or their activity). Except these are (mostly) living things and not chemicals, molecules, elements.
Even in the video here  >>/38203/ that dude says they put foreign germs into the body of humans.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=X5sBiVFGbNY

 >>/38991/
How many types of Omega fatty acids are there anyway?

Coronavirus_Updat... png
(27.52 KB, 428x489)

I was curious.

 >>/39004/
3-6-9 I think

I've been doing an experiment. 

For the last 2 weeks my diet has been - almost exclusively grains. Bread, pasta, rice has been the mainstay. Grains are defiantly addictive. There is something going on in the brain when I eat it. 

The effects has been as pronounced as I thought but I do feel like shit. I have less energy and I am more sedentary. Grains (gluten especially) seems like the perfect slave food.

30+ C outside I sweat, then I work, I sweat more. I enter a cooler place the sweat starts to pour down on me as if I was having a shower. What could be the reason behind this?

 >>/39102/
You supposed to hoeing the field all they beside that.
What will be your next experiment?

 >>/39102/
 >>/39118/
> You supposed to hoeing the field all they beside that.
True, and caffeine consumption should be low to none too. That affects energy as well.
> What will be your next experiment?
I'd recommend a raw primal diet a la Aajonus Vonderplaanitz.

 >>/39119/
> Aajonus Vonderplaanitz
Dutch?

 >>/39120/
Pseudonym; he's a Yankee.

 >>/39121/
Wait. That raw meat eater skinny guy with blondish red hair and talks absolute bs?

 >>/39122/
That's a complete ad hominem.

 >>/39123/
Nod really.
> raw meat eater skinny guy with blondish red hair
This is just for the identification.
> talks absolute bs
And this is my opinion.
My opinion is based on one of his videos - of the person whom I think we talk about - it was basically a reaction video where he watched a vegan trying to justify her insanity (she ate vegetable mix or something liek that, and took pills to complement her diet) and he reacted with "smart" and "insightful" remarks which were even lamer then her rationalizations.

 >>/39124/
> This is just for the identification.
"Raw meat eater skinny guy" sounds quite pejorative. 
> My opinion is based on one of his videos - of the person whom I think we talk about - it was basically a reaction video where he watched a vegan trying to justify her insanity (she ate vegetable mix or something liek that, and took pills to complement her diet) and he reacted with "smart" and "insightful" remarks which were even lamer then her rationalizations.
So can you explain why those remarks were lame?

 >>/39125/
> sounds quite pejorative. 
My intention was descriptive, it seems I was very accurate.
> why those remarks were lame?
For several reasons I remember, I can't recall exact words, now I saw it like a year ago or so. He didn't really disputed her claims, just called her stupid, and tried to justify his own insanity. He similarly advocated for lopsided diet - only from the other end of the scale:
> eating only vegatables is baed
> eating only raw meat is good
I think he also had some baseless claims.

 >>/39126/
If you read Aajonus's works you can see really clearly why Aajonus advocates eating raw meat; because it detoxifies your body (gets rid of toxins; "disease" induced by eating raw is just deooxification) and gives more energy. NOT that you should only eat raw meat. He's alright and advocates raw fruits, fresh dairy, honey and even ice cream, eating cooked meat for time to time isn't too bad either.

Probably we don't talk about the same person. It was this retard. Tho I can't find the exact video.
https://www.youtube.com/user/sv3rige/videos

 >>/39128/
No, Sv3rige is a Latvian lunatic who drinks raw blood on camera, and actually eats junk food off-camera while talking shit about vegans. He only sometimes cites Aajonus, perhaps that's where the confusion comes from.

 >>/39129/
Well I asked if the person in question was that raw meat eater skinny guy with blondish red hair and talks absolute bs?

 >>/39130/
Sv3rige? Basically yes, he fits your description well. "Raw-meat eater" yes, but he mostly eats junk food off-camera, and doesn't actually detox while eating raw as he typically just drinks blood and eats stuff like shellfish and rabbits on camera to spite vegans.

 >>/39130/
Aajonus isn't Sv3rige; he's actually been doing this research for years. I follow his raw primal diet.

 >>/39131/
I don't know. I saw only that video of his, and some pictures he was shilled on chans.

And now I eat my schnitzel, rice and fermented/leavened cucumber.

 >>/39118/
> You supposed to hoeing the field all they beside that.
> What will be your next experiment?
My job is pretty physical so 

Im probably doing a water fast because my gut is fucked up from all the grains

 >>/39119/
> I'd recommend a raw primal diet a la Aajonus Vonderplaanitz.
Only meat is too high in phosphate. My regular diet is very primal though

 >>/39128/
Gatis is a mentally deranged latvian who stabbed his classmates 

If his goal is to make meat eating something that only insane people do hes doing a good job

 >>/39118/
> 30+ C outside I sweat, then I work, I sweat more. I enter a cooler place the sweat starts to pour down on me as if I was having a shower. What could be the reason behind this?
Sounds like hypothyrodism to me.

 >>/39149/
I'll be on the IRC in just about an hour or so; in-case you have time.

 >>/39149/
I'm going on now, come get in.

 >>/39148/
They say fasting a day can be healthy. I heard in the case both men and dogs.

 >>/39151/
1.
Symptoms of hypothyroidism may be vague and can often mimic other conditions. They may include:
    Changes in the menstrual cycle
    Constipation
    Depression
    Dry hair and hair loss
    Dry skin
    Fatigue
    Greater sensitivity to cold
    Slow heart rate
    Swelling of the thyroid gland (goiter)
    Unexplained weight gain or difficulty losing weight
    Carpal tunnel syndrome

2.
Hypothyroidism signs and symptoms may include:
    Fatigue
    Increased sensitivity to cold
    Constipation
    Dry skin
    Weight gain
    Puffy face
    Hoarseness
    Muscle weakness
    Elevated blood cholesterol level
    Muscle aches, tenderness and stiffness
    Pain, stiffness or swelling in your joints
    Heavier than normal or irregular menstrual periods
    Thinning hair
    Slowed heart rate
    Depression
    Impaired memory
    Enlarged thyroid gland (goiter)

Nah, I don't have any of these. And age explains better he little slowly receding hairline.

 >>/39169/
Just my guess, can be many things. Try getting more potassium, sodium, magnesium and calcium (electrolytes).

https://youtube.com/watch?v=vPUTH0ZOBJ4

Its a mixture of disgust, sadness and hilariousness I feel watching this

Did some research about eggs and meat. 

https://academic.oup.com/jn/article/128/10/1716/4723080

The calculated true ileal digestibility of cooked egg protein amounted to 91%. 

In this study, it was shown that after ingestion of 25 g of raw egg protein, almost 50% is malabsorbed over 24 h. 

 “The true ileal digestibility of cooked and raw egg protein amounted to 90.9 ± 0.8 and 51.3 ± 9.8%, respectively.”

For meat bbq seems to be the best way 

https://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-86722015000200187#t3

http://www.scienceasia.org/2018.44.n2/scias44_92.pdf

https://youtube.com/watch?v=eGNNDXrRzfE

 >>/39361/
I met some exchange students from Africa who had literal picture perfect white teeth when I was in my University. They usually don't have any processed foods in their diet. The documentary you posted reminded me of that

 >>/39430/
> Why humans Have bad teeth

You a dentist Swedebernd? Or do you like having your teeth pretty?

 >>/39459/
 >>/39459/
> I met some exchange students from Africa who had literal picture perfect white teeth when I was in my University. They usually don't have any processed foods in their diet. The documentary you posted reminded me of that

They probably didn't have any flouride (which damages teeth), perhaps good calcium/phosphate balance and less vaccinations that us westerners. Most dental work damages the teeth, including x-rays, fillings (usually plastic or in the past amalgam (mercury))

 >>/39459/
> You a dentist Swedebernd? Or do you like having your teeth pretty?

Medical experience but I dont work in it nowadays

https://youtube.com/watch?v=4wVZVzSTFRA

Very fascinating. It seems alot regarding nutrition and food is just social learning ignoring our basic instincts.

kun spede turallin jpeg
(452.83 KB, 2473x2119)

 >>/39466/
> They probably didn't have any flouride (which damages teeth), perhaps good calcium/phosphate balance and less vaccinations that us westerners

T. noted

> Medical experience 

Dr. Bernd, M.D. How formal

> but I dont work in it nowadays
Well that stinks

 >>/39495/
From Tacitus's Germania, a text describing the Tribal Germanic peoples "Their food is plain - wild fruit, fresh game, and curdled milk. They satisfy their hunger without any elaborate cuisine or appetizers.". When the romans encountered the German Tribes they noted how much taller, broader and muscular they were, compared to the low meat diet of the romans.

"When not engaged in warfare they spend a certain amount of time in hunting, but much more in idleness, thinking of nothing else but sleeping and eating." Shows that the Germanic Tribes relied mostly on hunted meat, as well as herding.

 >>/39499/
Are you up for an IRC chat?

 >>/39495/
Since 90-95% of modern medicine is a lie I dont think its a bad decision. Bacteria doesn't cause illness, pathogenic virus does not exist for example.

> Bacteria doesn't cause illness, pathogenic virus does not exist for example.
Just to give some citations for this; Antoine Bechamp was right:
https://archive.org/download/LynesBarryTheCancerCureThatWorkedTheRifeReport/Lynes-Barry-The-Cancer-Cure-That-Worked-The-Rife-Report.pdf
https://medcraveonline.com/IJVV/who-had-their-finger-on-the-magic-of-life---antoine-bechamp-or-louis-pasteur.html
Also check out Aajonus Vonderplaanitz's website:
https://www.primaldiet.net/

 >>/39502/
The fact that so many people eat raw primal even when always choosing the meat with the most flies and bacteria at the butcher contradicts this idea that bacteria is what causes illness, does it?

 >>/39503/
*without contracting illnesses from that
Nevermind all the cultures that do regularly eat raw and part of that even being normalised in Europe now (with sushi)

https://youtube.com/watch?v=_A4XGoqW74s

Rockefellers role in the ban on RAW MILK [Reupload from 2018]

 >>/39515/
It's not banned here.
The problem is that the milk can be bought in average shops and supermarkets not just pasteurized but during the process it is taken apart and put together again while changing the original composition. These milk contain 1.5 or 2.8% fat, while the original milk has higher fat content (something liek 4% or so and I'm not talking about the cream floating atop after milking), which means they extract all the fat then set it at the prescribed percentage by adding it back (I also know someone who knows someone whose job to put the fat back).

destruction-of-built-... jpg
(168.97 KB, 1024x768)

 >>/39521/
I guess homogenisation is a way for the dairy companies to make even more money. Then they can sell you the cream.

 >>/39522/
I guess how diary products are manufactured. The milk arrives they take it apart, basically making powdered milk, they divide the stuff: X amount goes to making cheese products, Y goes making cream products, Z left they make milk again by adding water and fat. Then they press it through that pressure thingy to mix it well together.
They don't make the diary products on the usual way. Waiting until it's clotted then making cottage cheese, and butter from the cream and blah blah. They take apart to building blocks and build new stuff by adding new building blocks. Like enzymes to set the taste of the cheese and whatever.

 >>/39525/
Nutritionally low pasteurized milk isn't loosing alot of its vitamins and minerals. I think the point is, why change milk in the first place? 

I like to put cream in my coffee. If I had bought raw milk, I could have just scooped off the cream on the top and added it to my coffee. Instead of buying cream. 

Which brings us to technology yet again. Technology is sold to us as making us more free. Free from what? Look at grains for example. To even make bread it requires alot of work and the end product is not very tasty. Most people put butter and cheese on bread to make it tasty. 

When cheese is made, the waste product is whey. In the past it was often discarded but now they make protein powder of it. This is true for alot of "health" supplements. Or fluoride in toothpaste.

 >>/39527/
> why change milk in the first place? 
For fun and profit.
All foodstuff is similar. They add shit that doesn't belong to spare original ingredients with replacing part of them with something that would be discarded (like cornhusk) because they aren't food, but can be processed into something that is technically edible. It's like when drug dealers cut their products.
Milk is the same, they want to get the most out of it. Naturally there's not much cream on it, it has to be let sit a while. But after a day it starts clotting and more cream floats to the top, and when it is clotted completely you get a bunch of sour cream on top of it. Now they don't do this, they get as much cream out of it first as they can, because they want to sell more ("sweet") cream, and more sour cream. So they take out all of it, and they put back less. I heard the fat they add back is actually pigfat, but this info is practically gossip so I dunno.
Whey was consumed back then, even my parents drank it in their childhood.
Now they don't make cheese, but from the milk they extract casein, some of that they use for protein powders - similarly to whey -, but most they "build" cheese out of that. "Normal" cheese, and process ones too.

 >>/39501/
> Since 90-95% of modern medicine is a lie I dont think its a bad decision. Bacteria doesn't cause illness, pathogenic virus does not exist for example.

Really makes you think

 >>/39499/
> From Tacitus's Germania

I remember that book. It's pretty good tbh

 >>/39551/
 In 55 B.C., Caesar reported that “the people of the interior [of England] do not, for the most part, cultivate grain, but live on milk and meat, and are clothed in skins.”  [Hawkes J. The World of the Past. Random House, 1963.]  Grains were raised to feed animals, not people.  IMO the "civilized" agricultural diet has been used as a weapon to destroy the physical and mental vitality and spiritual capacity of all indigenous people in the world.  Francis Pottenger M.D. showed that animals (cats) could be reduced to sick, weak, infertile, sexually degenerated and brain-damaged shadows of their ancestors in just 3 generations by feeding them processed foods. Grains and beans are inedible and indigestible by our guts without processing so they are ALWAYS processed foods.  We are also unable to extract nutrients from vegetables without cooking or processing them in some way because we have no enzymes for digesting fiber (CELLulose), the main constituent of vegetables, to release the nutrients packed in plant CELLs.  A plant-based diet is a processed food diet, pure and simple.

From a youtube comment:


13Gladius 2
1 year ago (edited)
The roots of veganism is philosophy and the root of this philosophy is Jainism. Jainism is a non-theistic religion from India. It teaches salvation by perfection through successive lives and non-injury to living creatures. It is noted for it's asceticism. Jains worship the Tirthankaras. This religion is associated with Hindu mythology and their goal is to break free of the cycle of death and rebirth (Samsara). It teaches that desire is the root cause of our existence therefore freedom (moksha) from karma (Samsara) is achieved through desirelessness. Mahavira (aka Vardhamāna, was the twenty-fourth Tirthankara of Jainism) defeated samsara by long periods of fasting. Veganism is a short-cut to moksha.
  Yoga is a part of these non-theistic belief systems and is used to end samsara via ahimsa (non-violence). Yoga poses are for the purpose of unblocking the chakras to allow the Kundalini energy greater ease of movement up and down the central spine (Shushshumna) and energy pathways (Ida & Pingala to the left and right the spine). 
   In yoga you should at least be vegetarian bcz eating the product of death and suffering impedes the flow of Kundalini which accelerates the souls evolution.
   These beliefs have roots going very far back into pre-history. Elements of these can be seen in ancient Egyptian mythology (Ra with his crook and flail), Buddhism (receiving enlightenment under a tree), Judaism (Samson btwn the 2 pillars) and Christianity (Jesus on the cross/tree btwn the 2 thieves).
   But anyway the point is humans are carnivorous, by nature and attaching religious dogma to dietary practices that can be injurious to life and health of others is not prooer, to say the least. but most vegans are simply the useful idiots for things they don't fully understand. If anybody wants to live that way, it may be allowed as a personal choice but to try and impose it everybody else thru fear, insults, disinformation and lies, as so many of them do, is contemptible and needs to stop.

  I hope you don't mind I tried to make a synopsis of the ideas and comments presented here 


13Gladius 2
1 year ago (edited)
@Vandalism oV Veganism modern veganism is mostly an emotion driven belief based ideology that proposes to worship the created rather than the creator therefore a false religion. This regardless if you're theist or atheist. So yes it's a non-theist quasi religion. But why, in it's "worship" of nature is the human animal nature denigrated? Veganism's Jainist roots !!! Now I know 

https://youtube.com/watch?v=-BXXkFe9ETA

I think it was a very insightful comment. Summed up shortly, veganism = satanism. Today everything is inverted with humans being cattle and eating plants.

 >>/39563/
The remarkable "achievement" (this word tends to imply "goodness", hence the quotes) of agriculture and grain-based diets was not an improved nutrition for those who already had good access to resources, but for massive numbers of low-class individuals who would otherwise starve to death. In other words, they did not enable a (especially) healthier mankind, they enabled an exuberant mankind. It seems that massive populations were unsustainable previously.

 >>/39570/
> 13Gladius 2
Sounds like a lost chapter from the Bible.
Gonna read later.

 >>/39570/
To his comments:
> humans are carnivorous
Humans are omnivore. We're like bipedal pigs. Even canines eat and digest certain types of plant material.
> attaching religious dogma to dietary practices
...is silly, yes.
> can be injurious to life
Yeah, vegans can't live forever like us meat eaters do. Oh wait.
> veganism is mostly an emotion driven belief based ideology
I don't think such ideology exists, that is called vaganism. Vegan people exists, but that's just people living on food for rabbits. Similarly meat based diet isn't an ideology, it's a diet.
> false religion
Fugging Christians and their rhetoric, srsly.

A human bean should live long enough to reproduce, see his progeny to reproduce, and see that generation grow enough to reach the age of reproduction. That's about 45-60 years. Everything beyond that is a gift. Grain based diet was secured this since the neolithic revolution. Even the hindi practices are going on for some thousands of years. Although I think we should really check their diet (and not just accept the commenters opinion that veganism = Janaist dietary practices). What I know about it they consume dairy products such as cheese or butter. The closest I know personally are the Krishnas.
Also vegetarianism and veganism are different.

 >>/39571/
Forgot to reply.
That is a very good point. Without grains no civilization would had sprouted. Without it what we have now would collapse and most of the population would starve to death. After some cannibalism.

 >>/39582/
> hat is a very good point. Without grains no civilization would had sprouted
It would, it would just has less people with stronger health. Hittites and Hattis (these are different things) mostly relied ony animals. Having more people benefits the division of labour though.

> Similarly meat based diet isn't an ideology, it's a diet
because default behaviours are not ideology. veganism is an ideology assuming it's not a cult or religion, though I would not prefer to laber them that way.

>  Grain based diet was secured this
most early farmers had far worse health than hunter gatherers. this is how blonde indo european hunter gatherers wiped out early european farmers and their isolated languages. even today afaik only isolated language surviving is basque, the people very much still resembling early european farmers.

Speaking of them many people ignore the fact europe was mixed since eternity. I guess having certain phenotype (which is not genotype) is enough to larp as büre bl00ded aryanz and shiet. But I digress.

 >>/39581/
God gives us two choices when it comes to our egos. Humility or Humiliation. One is voluntary and mild. The other is often harsh and painful.

 >>/39581/
"Carnivore diet" is a total scam. Hence why Sv3rige isn't healthy, all he does is eat exotic meat and on the sidelines, disgusting fast food. 
Raw primal =/= just raw meat, milk and eggs.
 >>/39585/
Nice. Notwithstanding the reliability of the Indo-European theory, all ancient steppe nomads from the Yamnaya to the Scythians to the Huns actually weren't hunter gatherers, they were pastoralists. But yes, you are right here. They all drank raw fermented milk and ate raw meat, and that provided loads of energy and health.
The grain-based diet is the typical serf diet. Pane et circus. Give someone grain-based diet, some beer and entertainment and they'll happily cope out their life with bread and circuses, and they won't ever rise up against any tyrant. Nowadays, where we have video games, porn, and drugs that all overstimulate your whole body and wreck your sensitivity and masculinity overall, back then it was grains, beers, and circuses for the serfs.
This is also why the raw-diet Turks replaced the natives in Khwarezmia, in Tatarstan, Crimea, etc., and could even explain why the Bantus dominated the Khoisan (who ate assorted cooked meat) in South Africa.

 >>/39585/
Those civilizations in Anatolia and in the Caucasus were part of the goods exchange of the Middle East, and relied heavily on the products of Mesopotamia and Egypt. Without those civs (whom aroused earlier than the Hattis and Hittites, and these two got everything from them, well Hattis, got every civilizational achievement from them, and Hittites got everything from the Hattis) they couldn't have exist.
I'm aware. Hattis had agglutinative language, and Hittites Indo-Euro, in fact the first Indo-Euro which left a trace. Urartu also had agglutinative language, there's a chance this one was founded by Sumer refugees fleeing from Semite mass murderers.
> default behaviour
What is a default behaviour? When they couldn't hunt they ate berries, they defaulted to a vegan diet.
> indo european hunter gatherers wiped out early european farmers 
Are you sure? R1b is the highest in the Basques, it does seem that was the original haplogroup, and that is still the most prominent one in Western Europe. Just because in archaeological findings a new culture shows up it doesn't mean new people arrived. And when new languages show up, similarly, doesn't mean new people arrived.

 >>/39587/
In that case I was referring to 13Gladius 2's comment. He wrote humans are carnivores.

 >>/39587/
> they were pastoralists.
This is a very stark oversimplification. They had extensive agriculture, they even fed their animals with grains (preserved horse corpses like in Pazyrik are the testimony). They had gardens, they produced vegetables, fruits and wine. Herodotus even calls one of the Scythian group "Scythian cultivators", and he says about other steppe people (resembling to Scythians, but not Scythians) that they sow grains, onions, garlic, lentils, and millet. Again from Herodotus, in one of their myth of origin, a god sends them golden artifacts, among them a plough and a yoke!
They had available space for breeding large herds of animals (not just horses, but cattle, ox, goats, sheep, pigs(!), poultry) and they used that resource. But they were far from mere pastorals this was just a type of job in their society, and those who did this, exchanged their products with those who didn't.

 >>/39588/
> This is a very stark oversimplification. 
Yes, I admit this.
> They had extensive agriculture, they even fed their animals with grains (preserved horse corpses like in Pazyrik are the testimony). They had gardens, they produced vegetables, fruits and wine. 
I was talking about their own diet. Of course they fed animals grains, had some bread and wine and had agriculture; this isn't to say it was either this agriculture-based civilisation or some Darwinist fantasy where they were barbarians without any civilisation at all.

 >>/39589/
The grains, veggies and fruits were part of their own diet. Only in winter they fed oats to horses when the herders were stationary, otherwise they had their wide pastures.

 >>/39590/
> grains, veggies and fruits
Nothing wrong with having them only in-part. You're mixing things up here. All the steppe nomads drank raw milk and ate raw meat and that was a given.

 >>/39591/
> raw milk
Fermented horse milk isn't raw milk.
> ate raw meat
If you think they ate meat only raw, you are wrong. They frequently cooked their meat (see Hun cauldrons). Sure there were circumstances when ate raw. Also they conserved their meat by drying, and even made powdered meat (basically the predecessor of modern instant food, just add hot water).

 >>/39592/
> Fermented horse milk isn't raw milk.
It's fermented, not pasteurised. It still has all those nutrients. 
> If you think they ate meat only raw, you are wrong. They frequently cooked their meat (see Hun cauldrons). Sure there were circumstances when ate raw. Also they conserved their meat by drying, and even made powdered meat (basically the predecessor of modern instant food, just add hot water).
It was more likely than not that raw meat was the norm, and cooking was for special occasions.

 >>/39593/
I don't think there is info out there how much of their diet was raw meat.
Cooking is pre-digesting, fermenting is also pre-digesting by bacteria and/or yeast.
Pasteurizing is almost cooking, not even that, since it doesn't bring milk to boiling point, so pasteurized milk is less processed then fermented.
Pasteurizing also don't take the nutrients off from the milk. Carbs, fats, proteins, vitamins, minerals are all remain.
From this list here:  >>/39522/ B12 and the fatty acids mentioned can be considered as nutrients.

 >>/39594/
See; there's the problem. All that bacteria is now gone from that milk when it's pasteurised. Not when it's fermented.

 >>/39595/
> All that bacteria is now gone
How is that a problem? We don't digest the bacteria. And we have our own. Besides everything is full of bacteria, eat a slice of bread that will have bacteria (maybe if you can stand eat it hot straight from the oven then won't have, but if you let it cool, soon bacteria will appear).

 >>/39596/
We need all that bacteria from that milk in our system so we can detox.

 >>/39597/
Then eat your kefir.

As I said before toxins are recognized dangers to healthy by modern medicine. They know toxic elements, chemicals, and their poisoning. They treat it too. Many conditions don't fit in those classifications. They gain nothing by not recognizing those of the results of toxins if they would have cause by toxins. But those aren't.

 >>/39598/
I will!

 >>/39597/
Actually we don't need anything from raw milk. It's babyfood. Just because we have to gene to digest it, the vast majority of humanity don't and it's pretty abnormal to drink raw milk if you aren't a baby. Which also means we can get anything from other sources (and our body simply produces those what we need from the rest).

 >>/39602/
Yes we do; the energy and nutrients all come from raw milk. 
> abnormal
Only because of your industrial social conditions.

 >>/39603/
No. Way more than 50% of the people lacks the gene that allows the digestion of milk so they lose their ability during their childhood to do so. As far as I know all mammals are similar in this. Since at least 50% + 1 of humanity is lactose intolerant this means that is the norm and us drinking milk is abnormal.

 >>/39587/
>  weren't hunter gatherers
I might be mistaken but I remember the term "western hunter gatherer" were the ones wiped out early european farmer languages. 

And corder ware, yamnaya etc. these are cultures not nations based upon lingustic identities. I heavily assume (especially for andronovo one) proto Turks were part of them, because of a few ancient words are still have same roots.

As for diet, I remember a Xiongu kurgan the guy had above 1.80m height so yeah grain based diet fucks up people, I think some hunter-gatherer were healthier than many pastoralists though, due to much harsher natural selection, but this is just my wild guess.

 >>/39588/
>  When they couldn't hunt they ate berries
You know more than %60 of their diet relied upon meat from hunts right? Good luck not starving with berries. Remember the berries, fruits we grow today were not big and suitable for human diet in the past.

> . They had extensive agriculture,
Afaik schytians ostly treated regular farmers as slaves, and their farm did not receive regular tendings, they just sow and get what they got afaik.

>  R1b is the highest in the Basques
haplogroups in this case barely mean anything. also of course y-dna is mostly european but mtdna is different.  By the way even the proto-scandinavians were speaking non indo-european language.

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature14317

 >>/39598/
Yes take the Türkpill.