The Parasite Paradigm

[Peatness]

Parasites--a New Paradigm​

View: https://rumble.com/v1owcgh-parasites-a-new-paradigm.html?mref=8nn9r&mc=3nyri


Find parasite protocols here

The Medical Rebel

 

[RealNeat]

Parasites--a New Paradigm​

View: https://rumble.com/v1owcgh-parasites-a-new-paradigm.html?mref=8nn9r&mc=3nyri


Find parasite protocols here

The Medical Rebel

Terrain theory would argue that the parasite is there to get rid of something the body can not. Once such chemical, pollutant, metal etc is removed the parasite will leave. It doesn't make sense for parasites to be able to survive/ welcome in healthy, effectively oxidizing, hosts.

Others would also argue that they are part of the pleomorphic process and will become present when there is a need for their "services" from other known "pathogens" like so called viruses, phages and bacteria.

It seems as though this is an example of blaming an effect rather than the cause.

 

[souperhuman]

Terrain theory would argue that the parasite is there to get rid of something the body can not. Once such chemical, pollutant, metal etc is removed the parasite will leave. It doesn't make sense for parasites to be able to survive/ welcome in healthy, effectively oxidizing, hosts.

Others would also argue that they are part of the pleomorphic process and will become present when there is a need for their "services" from other known "pathogens" like so called viruses, phages and bacteria.

It seems as though this is an example of blaming an effect rather than the cause.

posted by mind-controlling parasites

 

[Peatness]

@RealNeat I agree heavy metals such as mercury could definitely do this. It's interesting that Taurine is both an antiparasitic as well as being able to detox mercury. Selenium can do this too. My instinct tells me it would be too risky to leave the parasites untreated.

Selenium and protozoan parasitic infections: selenocompounds and selenoproteins potential - PubMed

The current drug treatments against protozoan parasitic diseases including Chagas, malaria, leishmaniasis, and toxoplasmosis represent good examples of drug resistance mechanisms and have shown diverse side effects. Therefore, the identification of novel therapeutic strategies and drug compounds...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Rethinking mercury: the role of selenium in the pathophysiology of mercury toxicity - PubMed

The interaction with selenium is a central feature in mercury toxicity. This interaction is complex depending on a number of features such as the form of mercury, the form of selenium, the organ and dose. The previously suggested "protective effect" of selenium against mercury toxicity may in...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Dr Merritt did not explain how or why parasites exists but if they are introduced into the body via vaccines then I think it's worth following a protocol to deal with them. In another interview she talks about the link between parasites and cancer. It's interesting.

Thiamine deficiency is another culprit. Probably explains why thiamine is effective in autoimmune diseases

Thiamine deficiency and parasitic infection in rural Thai children - PubMed

A study was carried out to determine whether thiamine deficiency in northeast Thailand is linked with parasitic infection. We assessed the thiamine status and tested for parasitic infections in 231 children between 6 and 12 years of age in Nam Phong District of Khon Kaen Province, Thailand...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Ben.]

Terrain theory would argue that the parasite is there to get rid of something the body can not. Once such chemical, pollutant, metal etc is removed the parasite will leave. It doesn't make sense for parasites to be able to survive/ welcome in healthy, effectively oxidizing, hosts.

Others would also argue that they are part of the pleomorphic process and will become present when there is a need for their "services" from other known "pathogens" like so called viruses, phages and bacteria.

It seems as though this is an example of blaming an effect rather than the cause.

The idea sounds good on paper but many healthy people falling ill after infections disagree big time.

Toxins and pollutions are able to cause damage/illness, so does malnutrition ... why not also parasites and bacteria?
No doubt their involvment is far more complex than "this bad pathogen is causative for X disease", but that does not mean their presence has to be due to a underlying factor (altough it can be). Just as apex predators such as lions for example either fail or succeed on a hunt, why woudn't a fungi, parasite or bacteria have succes or failure in establishing themself on a living, higher organism? Perhaps precisely due to the damaging actions on the host.

One can always say "that persons immunesystem was to weak" but how to know or even proof that? What is the ideal terrain? I would argue that there is no such thing as the biome/environment is far to complex for that. Just as some animals are equipped to deal with colds or certain venoms, they are weak to something else.

I don't think people falling ill to a parasite causing blindness or elephantiasis support the idea of them "taking care of a terrain issue". It sounds cool holisitically but many "hosts" do not survive their parasite occupation ... because of their toxins and cellulary disrupting effects. The mouse will very likely not survive the toxoplasmosis induced motivation to run straight at a cat either. Nor does the ant survive the fungus induced death grip fall off the tree.

 

[yerrag]

Lee Merritt starts off with a viable theory that explains howthis engineered pandemic occurred, first by spreading toxins through the air (geoengineering), getting people sick from it, justifying vaccination by fake PCR testing, further worsening the pandemic by the vaccine itself through further implantation of toxins such as through hydrogels.

She doesn't talk terrain theory nor pleomorphism because this is more complicated and would not be easy an idea to sell (mainly because most doctors are trained in germ theory) but so far her presentation allows terrain theory people to connect the dots. I did. As it is consistent with my view, as posted in earlier posts, that parasites are involved in COVID. But these parasites are fungal parasites, not external parasites such as worms. Terrain theory would have fungal parasites are the pleomorphed from symbionts that are as small as what are conventionally called virus. These symbionts are regulatory, meaning that they are harmless and beneficial in good terrain, or in a body that has conditions that are conducive to our well-being. In bad terrain, these symbionts develop or pleomorph into bacteria and into fungus, as conditions get worse and worse, culminating in the most virulent and pathological form in the fungal parasite.

Prior to the COVID hoaxing, the world had already been pre-seeded by decades of the buildup of Talmudist voodoo medicine to near tipping point, and the COVID hoaxing is like pushing a guy standing at a cliff's edge. Talmudists needed this push, as the body has thus far proved to be more resilient, as it continually adapts to the pre-seeding. Despite all the coordinated insults by the FDA, the USDA, the EPA, and the WHO, the population of the world kept on increasing to the chagrin of the WEF and the NWO.

Merritt is right talking about parasites as being overlooked and of viruses being the misdirection, but then she shifts into treating what I believe to be fungal parasites as if they are external parasites.

This mixing and matching approach only serves to confuse and plays into the tyranny of the established order of false and voodoo medicine.

Go ahead. Try taking her coxktail. But before doing that, you have to ask why the world is now still not showing any signs of any takeover by worms in the way worms normally express their takeover as parasites of the human host.

 

[RealNeat]

The idea sounds good on paper but many healthy people falling ill after infections disagree big time.

Toxins and pollutions are able to cause damage/illness, so does malnutrition ... why not also parasites and bacteria?
No doubt their involvment is far more complex than "this bad pathogen is causative for X disease", but that does not mean their presence has to be due to a underlying factor (altough it can be). Just as apex predators such as lions for example either fail or succeed on a hunt, why woudn't a fungi, parasite or bacteria have succes or failure in establishing themself on a living, higher organism? Perhaps precisely due to the damaging actions on the host.

One can always say "that persons immunesystem was to weak" but how to know or even proof that? What is the ideal terrain? I would argue that there is no such thing as the biome/environment is far to complex for that. Just as some animals are equipped to deal with colds or certain venoms, they are weak to something else.

I don't think people falling ill to a parasite causing blindness or elephantiasis support the idea of them "taking care of a terrain issue". It sounds cool holisitically but many "hosts" do not survive their parasite occupation ... because of their toxins and cellulary disrupting effects. The mouse will very likely not survive the toxoplasmosis induced motivation to run straight at a cat either. Nor does the ant survive the fungus induced death grip fall off the tree.

Where is the proof for your claims? Do you have a paper I can dissect claiming that one such organism is causal of the disease each and every time? The analogy of a lion is not fitting, their hunt is life, death or injury of the prey observable clearly by the human eye. Microorganisms don't work like that. They (if your theory is right) would benefit from killing the organism, which they don't do, and arguably don't want to do.

Toxins, pollutants and malnutrition are not living organisms with complex processes, however they can be produced by the organisms blamed for causing the disease (yes including malnutrition)

Your assumption that we are their prey is disproven in multiple studies where parasites are used transiently in people to IMPROVE their health (like allergies and "autoimmunity") same can be said about bacteria, many of which that are considered "pathogenic" have no trouble existing in a human with zero symptoms.

I'm not even going as far as saying "the weak fall ill because of the bacteria or parasite", I'm saying the bacteria and parasites blamed for their illness are there because the human is compromised in a way that doesn't allow them to process what the (specific) bacteria or parasite can. It's a different ideology all together.

The examples you give of toxoplasmosis (not zombifying fungi, as it's a different topic) have flaws in the way we perceive them to happen as opposed to what is actually happening as discussed/ debated here; Kill Toxoplasmosis for good

Many cultures around the world live with a "parasite" burden significantly higher than "developed" countries and fair just fine.

Much like virology we jump to conclusions based on limited information and anecdotes.

My cat dewormed from changing his diet, no drugs were given. Another example of parasites leaving the body once the real cause is addressed. Addressing symptoms from parasites is ok, blaming them entirely for the disease is not. These ideas are explored more deeply in that thread I linked above.

 

[RealNeat]

View: https://youtu.be/kUvPzVqB4VE



View: https://youtu.be/2gNbKfzW-js

 

[Peatness]

Thank you @RealNeat for those videos. I found this article Weinstock wrote back in 2012.

The worm returns: Joel V. Weinstock explains why several clinical trials are deliberately infecting people with helminths to treat autoimmune diseases

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Ben.]

Where is the proof for your claims? Do you have a paper I can dissect claiming that one such organism is causal of the disease each and every time?

No and i did not claim such a thing either. I think they can be causal in some individuals but don't have to be (individual ≠ dissease). I am way to far into chronic health issues to point fingers at singular things and say they are the sole cause for something. If they were we all would be sick ... by the same ******* thing with the same symptoms. As you've said, to many people with bacteria/"viruses"/spirochetes/parasites that are not ill and symptom free to conclude such a thing.

The analogy of a lion is not fitting, their hunt is life, death or injury of the prey observable clearly by the human eye. Microorganisms don't work like that. They (if your theory is right) would benefit from killing the organism, which they don't do, and arguably don't want to do.

Depends on the organism we are talking about. My point wasn't that they "go get at it and kill" which is missinterpreting what i wrote but rather they are opportunistic and inhabit/attach a host when they can, not just in the romanticized idea of "when they must". Some of them atleast. Why not? Doesn't realy contradict what you said.

They don't care necessarily about killing but want it to feed them and help them reproduce and reach more hosts.

Toxins, pollutants and malnutrition are not living organisms with complex processes, however they can be produced by the organisms blamed for causing the disease (yes including malnutrition)

These things do have complex effects on organisms and the biome... but my point here was again why wouldn't parasites or bacterial byproducts or toxins cause damage/symptoms? Ammonia for example can go up significantly burdening the host over its normal capacities. One could argue that the biome needs to change here rather than dropping nukes in. Valid approach, never said one can't do that. But nuking can work aswell if it is indeed causal for some issues. Many "nukes" also have effects on the cells and neurotransmitters and hormones. So who is to say by what mechanism something ultimately helped/worked in a person?

Your assumption that we are their prey is disproven in multiple studies where parasites are used transiently in people to IMPROVE their health (like allergies and "autoimmunity") same can be said about bacteria, many of which that are considered "pathogenic" have no trouble existing in a human with zero symptoms.

No i am not assuming. Parasites need a host to live or reproduce. Hence they are called parasites. Some can survive without one but not all. And they do "prey" (or rather wait until picked up) on potential hosts and while they don't kill the host instantly some of them shorten its lifespawn significantly and using up nutrients. That is a thing. I would like to see a paper tho on the contrary where they extend the hosts lifespawn + improve the hosts bodily functions in a undisputable way. Bacteria providing nutrients is not new to me but i haven't heard of parasites such as worms or single-celled ones doing that. Only that they can or do work as a garbagemen in some instances.

Also i never claimed parasites can't be helpful. It is established that they can be immune-modulating and they managed to rid some patients of certain symptoms. Even mainstream parasitologists say that. I never said they can't so i am not subcribed to the "bad germs fault at everything" theory as it might have come across.

Many cultures around the world live with a "parasite" burden significantly higher than "developed" countries and fair just fine.

Much like virology we jump to conclusions based on limited information and anecdotes.

My cat dewormed from changing his diet, no drugs were given. Another example of parasites leaving the body once the real cause is addressed. Addressing symptoms from parasites is ok, blaming them entirely for the disease is not. These ideas are explored more deeply in that thread I linked above.

I was not claiming your proposed theory/approach is wrong, rather the other side of the coin doesn't have to be totally wrong either. Not every bacterium or parasite is a welcome or necessary guest. I woudn't discard that just for the sake of romantizing the idea of nature's symbiotism. Don't trowh the baby out with the bath water (is that how the saying goes?).

Glad your cat is doing fine tho.

 

[RealNeat]

No and i did not claim such a thing either. I think they can be causal in some individuals but don't have to be (individual ≠ dissease). I am way to far into chronic health issues to point fingers at singular things and say they are the sole cause for something. If they were we all would be sick ... by the same ******* thing with the same symptoms. As you've said, to many people with bacteria/"viruses"/spirochetes/parasites that are not ill and symptom free to conclude such a thing.



Depends on the organism we are talking about. My point wasn't that they "go get at it and kill" which is missinterpreting what i wrote but rather they are opportunistic and inhabit/attach a host when they can, not just in the romanticized idea of "when they must". Some of them atleast. Why not? Doesn't realy contradict what you said.

They don't care necessarily about killing but want it to feed them and help them reproduce and reach more hosts.




These things do have complex effects on organisms and the biome... but my point here was again why wouldn't parasites or bacterial byproducts or toxins cause damage/symptoms? Ammonia for example can go up significantly burdening the host over its normal capacities. One could argue that the biome needs to change here rather than dropping nukes in. Valid approach, never said one can't do that. But nuking can work aswell if it is indeed causal for some issues. Many "nukes" also have effects on the cells and neurotransmitters and hormones. So who is to say by what mechanism something ultimately helped/worked in a person?



No i am not assuming. Parasites need a host to live or reproduce. Hence they are called parasites. Some can survive without one but not all. And they do "prey" (or rather wait until picked up) on potential hosts and while they don't kill the host instantly some of them shorten its lifespawn significantly and using up nutrients. That is a thing. I would like to see a paper tho on the contrary where they extend the hosts lifespawn + improve the hosts bodily functions in a undisputable way. Bacteria providing nutrients is not new to me but i haven't heard of parasites such as worms or single-celled ones doing that. Only that they can or do work as a garbagemen in some instances.

Also i never claimed parasites can't be helpful. It is established that they can be immune-modulating and they managed to rid some patients of certain symptoms. Even mainstream parasitologists say that. I never said they can't so i am not subcribed to the "bad germs fault at everything" theory as it might have come across.



I was not claiming your proposed theory/approach is wrong, rather the other side of the coin doesn't have to be totally wrong either. Not every bacterium or parasite is a welcome or necessary guest. I woudn't discard that just for the sake of romantizing the idea of nature's symbiotism. Don't trowh the baby out with the bath water (is that how the saying goes?).

Glad your cat is doing fine tho.

Ok we are saying a lot of the same things. But you misread a few things I wrote, I said their toxins can cause issues and that they can cause malnutrition, but this is in an attempt to rid the body of the real offender or debris.

So you are proposing (I'm summarizing) that instead of romanticizing symbiotic organisms, that some so called parasites (reminds of the word virus *with context removed*) just inhabit a host to feed, like a lion only catches a gazelle to eat.

I'm confused as to your point? Mine is that the only reason parasites exist in the body of a human is by chance (with some or no benefit/ transient) from eating/ injury or they are created within for a specific purpose.

Yours is that they can be disease causing? And that the hosts health is what determines the disease potential?

I want to make sure I'm debating a specific point.

 

[RealNeat]

@Peatness I think it's interesting that the paper states the hygiene improvements have diminished infections, but doesn't consider the potential that the infections diminished the toxins.

How much harm has the medical establishment done from preventing guided healing? I guess we will never know.

In Thomas Cowan's book "the changing nature of childhood illness" he states all the anti-cancer benefits of the childhood illness in connection with several types of common cancers. While we aim to eliminate the "disease" process altogether we may be harming. I think the chicken soup and moms love made resilient humans, guiding them through many illnesses by making sure they are well fed, hydrated and cared for.

What we now know is that those mothers prevented future cancers in their children.

Sometimes things like MB are used as antibiotics, like Fenbendazole is used as an anti parasite drug, but we then see/ realize their more potent MOA. Usually an improvement of oxidative metabolism, as Ray often states.

Here is a study on Fenbendazole that shows the MOA against cancer cells independent of any anti parasitic activity. Fenbendazole acts as a moderate microtubule destabilizing agent and causes cancer cell death by modulating multiple cellular pathways - PubMed

 

[RealNeat]

Thank you @RealNeat for those videos. I found this article Weinstock wrote back in 2012.

The worm returns: Joel V. Weinstock explains why several clinical trials are deliberately infecting people with helminths to treat autoimmune diseases

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Why I Eat Tapeworms & Whipworms Every Two Weeks: The Fascinating World Of Helminthic Therapy.

Why would I be inoculating myself with what are widely considered to be vicious little parasites? A primer on tapeworms & whipworms.

bengreenfieldlife.com

 

[Peatness]

Why I Eat Tapeworms & Whipworms Every Two Weeks: The Fascinating World Of Helminthic Therapy.

Why would I be inoculating myself with what are widely considered to be vicious little parasites? A primer on tapeworms & whipworms.

bengreenfieldlife.com

Eat ze bugs. I’m not sure about this.

 

[RealNeat]

Eat ze bugs. I’m not sure about this.

It's not in place of food WEF style. It's a therapeutic intervention like phages.

 

[Peatness]

Host–parasite coevolution - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Source Code]

Dr Hulda Clark does not approve of this lol

 

[bookshelf]

Has anyone checked out:
ContrabandCures.com and https://floridasharkman.org/protocol/protocol/? LOTS of information (especially on Florida Sharkman) and their social media has a lot of information and feedback from people who successfully have gone through the protocols.

There are plenty of others out there who feel parasites are a major contributing factor to a number of conditions and have offered a variety of ways to eliminate them and balance the body through that lens.

 

[Peatress]

Dr Peat answering questions about parasites


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NnPVCttNcs&t=1601s

 

[:M :B.]

Dr Peat answering questions about parasites


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NnPVCttNcs&t=1601s

Good share. Thank you.