any text versions? I looked at the timestamps. but what's a tl;dw? Some deficiencies and weakness in the body plus poisons cause disease?
actually pretty expected
but OP do you think it's basically both germs and terrain that decide if people get sick? Like, yeah, someone won't get sick from a "germ" if they have an immune system strong enough to resist. but there still seem to be some kind of "poisons" making people sick?
I get the idea it can be "safer" but this "safety" is produced by killing off healthy bacteria in the milk as well it seems, so it's a tradeoff
In a way I think both can coexist
A perhaps naive or simple germ theory suggests that germs cause disease
terrain theory asks, why do some people when exposed to the same germs either get sick or do not?
The difference is, some people have weaker immune systems or are more susceptible to the illness: the "terrain" of their body matters when factoring in if they will get sick or not
So a "naive germ theorist" might fail to recommend people build up the "terrain" of the health of their body
a naive terrain theory might deny that germs cause disease at all, which idk if that's the case; I guess a hypothetical "perfect body" (terrain) could not become ill, but we don't have that on earth as much....
reposting possible alternatives:
brave as the others mentioned: search.brave.com
searx.me has search instances people run
yandex.com is russian
> post more
I just heard it was an insurance claim scam, a planned sinking
i may or may not have read this but meh I think it can be summed up pretty easily without a long book
enemies of the Catholic Church didn't like Catholicism's disagreement with their sin so they decided to become "clergy' and then just when in positions of power direct it to be what they wanted it to be
same kind of thing as how leftists have become university professors and have brainwashed students
they finally elected a "pope" of their own in 1958, and then stated up the Second Vatican Council to push their "reforms"
So instead of try to forcibly destroy the Church, they just tried to take over its institutions and then make it seem irrelevant or promoting of anti-Catholic values
Less clear is how Catholics should respond - my view is Catholics should just walk away and reject the "Catholic Church" led by non-Catholics and consider it to not be the Catholic Church, or people need to wake up and make the Vatican 2 church Catholic again by converting them
according to some polls (which may not be reliable, but seem to be somewhat in line with what I see) in the U.S. anyway a majority of "Catholics" do not believe or follow Church teaching, which alone arguably makes them not Catholic:
Just 8 percent said contraception is morally wrong, with 89 percent saying it was either morally acceptable or not a moral issue at all
The Catholic Church teaches that artificial contraception, such as condoms and birth control pills, is morally unacceptable
About two-thirds of all U.S. Catholics (64 percent) say that homosexual behavior is either morally acceptable or not a moral issue at all, while 32 percent say it’s morally wrong.
On the issue of abortion, about half of all U.S. Catholics say it is morally wrong
I'm not following it closely but what about other treatments people suggest, like getting antibodies or something?
Is that an alternative to vaccination that is kind of like vaccination but actually helps?
Like could you get chickenpox antibodies or something?
sounds like another reason why I'd like us to have the freedom to open our own hospitals and allow people to practice medicine without mandated degrees
"oh no you don't want someone to get a degree from Youtube university do you?!"
well, if our options are expensive unaffordable care for some conditions or no care at all because we get locked out for being "unvaccinated" (or whatever pretext is drummed up in the future), what do you think is better?
So, discussion point here. Say FDA is shut down. Would you support creating "independent" labs that can "certify" if they think a substance is healthy or not? My understanding is this is the "free market" way to do it (or rather, encourage and coordinate the creation of such things by companies or citizens). People can decide if they wanna trust the reviewers or not