P
Peatness
Guest
Parasites--a New Paradigm
View: https://rumble.com/v1owcgh-parasites-a-new-paradigm.html?mref=8nn9r&mc=3nyri
Find parasite protocols here
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Click Here if you want to upgrade your account
If you were able to post but cannot do so now, send an email to admin at raypeatforum dot com and include your username and we will fix that right up for you.
Parasites--a New Paradigm
View: https://rumble.com/v1owcgh-parasites-a-new-paradigm.html?mref=8nn9r&mc=3nyri
Find parasite protocols here
posted by mind-controlling parasitesTerrain 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.
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.
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.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.
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.
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.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.
Eat ze bugs. I’m not sure about this.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
It's not in place of food WEF style. It's a therapeutic intervention like phages.Eat ze bugs. I’m not sure about this.
Dr Peat answering questions about parasites
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NnPVCttNcs&t=1601s