[]
So - time will time, now won't it.
It often takes a long time to get rid of establishment thinking and
in this day and age of pHARMa control, it may take longer than a long time.

As for me, I will continue to question and read all I can.
Sheri


"It is widely believed by the general public that a retrovirus called
HIV causes the group of diseases called AIDS. Many biochemical
scientists now question this hypothesis. We propose that a thorough
reappraisal of the existing evidence for and against this hypothesis
be conducted by a suitable independent group. We further propose that
critical epidemiological studies be devised and undertaken."

For political reasons, the AIDS establishment has refused to fund a
single scientific study designed to resolve the scientific
controversy as outlined by the statement above.


http://rethinkingaids.com.93.seekdot...9/Default.aspx

<http://rethinkingaids.com.93.seekdotnet.com>
Rethinking AIDS
Thursday, September 11, 2008

[]


In 1987, <http://www.duesberg.com/>Dr. Peter Duesberg published a
paper on cancer research in which he made the case, almost as an
aside, that HIV (a retrovirus, the same class of virus suspected at
the time to cause cancer) cannot be the cause of AIDS.

Four years later, in 1991, after mounting criticism over Duesberg's
position, and simultaneous support from a growing number of
scientists who felt that HIV science just didn't add up, a number of
scientists formed "The Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the
HIV/AIDS Hypothesis" (usually shortened to simply "The Group"), and
crafted a letter for submission to the editors of Nature, Science,
The Lancet, and The New England Journal of Medicine, all of whom
refused to publish the letter.

Yet another four years later, The Group was able to have this
statement, signed by 32 scientists with advanced medical degrees,
published in Science (17 Feb. 1995, vol. 267, pp. 945-946):

"It is widely believed by the general public that a retrovirus called
HIV causes the group of diseases called AIDS. Many biochemical
scientists now question this hypothesis. We propose that a thorough
reappraisal of the existing evidence for and against this hypothesis
be conducted by a suitable independent group. We further propose that
critical epidemiological studies be devised and undertaken."

Since this letter was published, over 2,100 people have signed their
names in agreement to this statement. This list comprises "The Group
for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV/AIDS Hypothesis."

Also since this statement was published, The Group established a
long-running newsletter titled
"<http://www.rethinkingaids.com/Default.aspx?tabid=69>Rethinking
AIDS" (renamed "Reappraising AIDS" for a time, and then back again),
and subsequently established itself as a 501(3)(c) [non-profit]
organization, with the official combined name: "Rethinking AIDS: The
Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV/AIDS Hypothesis." As
a result of the newsletter's name and its synonymity with the
organization, The Group is also known as "RA".

A subset of the 2,100 signatories comprise the
<http://www.rethinkingaids.com/Default.aspx?tabid=60>RA Board of Directors.

The bylaws of the organization can be viewed at
<http://rethinkingaids.com/TheBoard/Bylaws/tabid/83/Default.aspx>rethinkingaids.com/TheBoard/Bylaws/tabid/83/Default.aspx

The Board
The Board
Minimize


David Crowe
Rethinking AIDS President
HBSc Hons. Biology/Mathematics, 1978 (Lakehead University, Ontario).
President, Alberta Reappraising AIDS Society. Treasurer, Green Party
of Alberta.
<mailto:david.crowe (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com>david.crowe (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com

Etienne de Harven, MD
Rethinking AIDS Past President
Member and Professor in cell biology, Sloan Kettering Institute, New
York, 1956-1981. Isolated and obtained the first electron
microscopic studies of the murine Friend leukemia virus, and
retroviral budding. Director of the Electron Microscopy Laboratory at
the Banting Institute, Department of Pathology, University of
Toronto. He is also a member of South Africa's Presidential AIDS
Advisory Panel.
<mailto:etienne.deharven (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com>etienne.deharven (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com

Robert Leppo
Rethinking AIDS Treasurer
BA, Stanford University (1965); MBA, Harvard Business School
(1969). Historian, philanthropist, and investor.
<mailto:robert.leppo (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com>robert.leppo (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com

And, in alphabetical order (by last name):

Peter H. Duesberg, PhD
Professor of molecular and cell biology at the University of
California, Berkeley. In 1968-1970 he demonstrated that influenza
virus has a segmented genome. This would explain its unique ability
to form recombinants by reassortment of subgenomic segments. He
isolated the first cancer gene through his work on retroviruses in
1970, and mapped the genetic structure of these viruses. This, and
his subsequent work in the same field, resulted in his election to
the National Academy of Sciences in 1986. He was also the recipient
of a seven-year Outstanding Investigator Grant from the National
Institutes of Health from 1985-1992. He is also a member of South
Africa's Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel.
<mailto:peter.duesberg (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com>peter.duesberg (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com

Charles L. Geshekter, PhD
Professor of African history at California State University, Chico,
recipient of grants from the Ford Foundation, Fulbright-Hayes,
National Endowment for the Humanities and Social Science Research
Council. From 1991-95, he chaired the History of Science Section of
the AAAS and was a member of its Executive Council. He is also a
member of South Africa's Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel.
<mailto:charles.geshekter (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com>charles.geshekter (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com

Roberto Giraldo, MD
(University of Antioquia, Colombia, specialty internal medicine) ;
Master of Science in infectious and tropical diseases (U. of London,
The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine). Member of South
Africa's Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel.
<mailto:roberto.giraldo (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com>roberto.giraldo (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com

Claus Koehnlein, MD
Specialist in internal medicine, Dept. of Oncology, Univ. of Kiel,
Germany (1983 -1993). Since 1993, in private practice increasingly
treating HIV- positive people who decline antiviral drugs. Member of
SA Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel.
<mailto:claus.koehnlein (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com>claus.koehnlein (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com

Frank Lusardi
Professional software development.
<mailto:frank.lusardi (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com>frank.lusardi (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com

Christine Maggiore
Founder/director of Alive & Well AIDS Alternatives and author of the
book What If Everything You Thought You Knew About AIDS Was Wrong? A
former public speaker and educator for AIDS Project Los Angeles and
founding board member of Women at Risk, Maggiore tested HIV positive
in 1992 and lives in health without AIDS medications.
<mailto:christine.maggiore (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com>christine.maggiore (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com

David Rasnick, PhD
Senior Researcher, Rath Health Foundation, Africa. Between 1978 and
1996, he worked as a pharmaceutical protein chemist at Abbott
Laboratories, Enzyme Systems Products, Prototek, Inc., and Khepri
Pharmaceuticals. He was a visiting scholar at the department of
molecular and cell biology, UC Berkeley (1996-2005), where he worked
in the Duesberg laboratory on the aneuploidy theory of cancer. He
is also a member of South Africa's Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel.
<mailto:david.rasnick (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com>david.rasnick (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com

Gordon Stewart, MD
Emeritus Professor of Public Health, Univ Glasgow, UK; Formerly
professor of epidemiology, Univ. NC at Chapel Hill, NC; Watkins Chair
of Epidemiologyepid and professor medicine, Tulane Univ., New
Orleans, LAa; consultant, New York City Health Dept; WHO; Senior
Visiting Fellow, US National Science Foundation; emeritus fellow,
Infectious Diseases Soc. America. Member of South Africa's
Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel.
<mailto:gordon.stewart (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com>gordon.stewart (AT) rethinkingaids (DOT) com

----------
http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/group.htm

http://www.rethinkingaids.com/quotes/aidsquotes.htm

IS "HIV" REALLY THE CAUSE OF AIDS?
ARE THERE REALLY ONLY "A FEW"
SCIENTISTS WHO DOUBT THIS?

<http://www.rethinkingaids.com/quotes/rethinkers.htm>Over 2,000
scientists, medical professionals, authors and academics are on
record that the "Hiv-Aids" theories, routinely reported to the public
as if they were facts, are dubious to say the least.

following is the list of names and quotes
*******
http://www.freerepublic.com/~godgunsguts/
What follows are a number of selected videos, articles, and
scientific papers that expose the social agenda mentioned above, and
present the views of the scientists and medical doctors who challenge
the notion that HIV causes AIDS.


Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
http://www.wellwithin1.com/homeo.htm & http://www.wellwithin1.com/vaccine.htm
ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood
Diseases - next classes start in September

I can't keep reading, but will just start adding blanket disclaimers:
NOTE, these posts of Sheri's on the topics of AIDS and the nature of
disease, bacteria and viruses are NOT on the topic of homeopathy, and
are NOT necessarily the views of the homeopathic community.
Read at your own discretion, and make your own decisions from there.

PS, Hahnemann *did* believe that certain diseases are transmissible, so
Sheri, in your claims (not in these posts, but previously) that no
disease is contagious, you are at odds with homeopathic teaching, as
well as with mainstream medicine. Maybe it's "reassuring" to know
there are at least *some* things that the two schools agree on? :-)


On Sep 11, 2008, at 4:45 AM, Sheri Nakken wrote:

>
> []
> So - time will time, now won't it.
> It often takes a long time to get rid of establishment thinking and in
> this day and age of pHARMa control, it may take longer than a long
> time.
>
> As for me, I will continue to question and read all I can.
> Sheri
>
>
> "It is widely believed by the general public that a retrovirus called
> HIV causes the group of diseases called AIDS. Many biochemical
> scientists now question this hypothesis. We propose that a thorough
> reappraisal of the existing evidence for and against this hypothesis
> be conducted by a suita

Jon made you moderator, I see.
But how are they transmissible? Hahnemann didn't say HIV causes
AIDS. He didn't say a virus injects something into a cell even
though the virus is dea. He didn't say any of
that. Miasms...............they are still somewhat of a mystery, now
aren't they.

He didn't know and we don't know.
We don't have to know to treat a person
Treat according to the symptom picture, regardless of name of
disease, regardless of so-called bacterial or viral cause.
But it is important to know what is going on in the world and how
people are lied to to make them take drugs and vaccines that will
worsen their health and affect their vital force.
Sheri

>I can't keep reading, but will just start adding blanket disclaimers:
>NOTE, these posts of Sheri's on the topics of AIDS and the nature of
>disease, bacteria and viruses are NOT on the topic of homeopathy,
>and are NOT necessarily the views of the homeopathic community.
>Read at your own discretion, and make your own decisions from there.
>
>PS, Hahnemann *did* believe that certain diseases are transmissible,
>so Sheri, in your claims (not in these posts, but previously) that
>no disease is contagious, you are at odds with homeopathic teaching,
>as well as with mainstream medicine. Maybe it's "reassuring" to
>know there are at least *some* things that the two schools agree on? :-)

Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
http://www.wellwithin1.com/homeo.htm & http://www.wellwithin1.com/vaccine.htm
ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood
Diseases - next classes start in September

On Sep 11, 2008, at 10:06 AM, Sheri Nakken wrote:

> Jon made you moderator, I see.

Just a concerned citizen. :-)
If you feel it's relevant to *homeopathy*, please explain how.
If you can't, then it's off-topic. Some off-topic has always been
okay, but this is getting to be a whole different animal. I feel it is
COMPLETELY UNFAIR, as well as the dangers I mentioned, for you to be
trying to give the impression, to any casual observers, that
"homeopathy" endorses this viewpoint. It does NOT. I am trying to
defend my own reputation, basically.

> But how are they transmissible? Hahnemann didn't say HIV causes AIDS.
> He didn't say a virus injects something into a cell even though the
> virus is dea. He didn't say any of that.

Right, and I did not claim any of that.
*You* have in the past claimed that no disease is contagious, that
viruses and bacteria are benign, and none of them causes any disease.
When I ask specific questions about "can you catch..." etc., you have
never taken the trouble to answer, so no actual discussion on the point
has been possible; just reams and reams of often outrageous material.

> Miasms...............they are still somewhat of a mystery, now aren't
> they.

Yes, and completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
Well, not completely; why not talk about *those* connections instead?
That at least would be topical, and interesting to perhaps all.
>
> He didn't know and we don't know.
> We don't have to know to treat a person
> Treat according to the symptom picture, regardless of name of disease,
> regardless of so-called bacterial or viral cause.

Thank you.
So can we leave off this barrage about what is or isn't the cause?
And can you stop repeating that AIDS isn't contagious?

> But it is important to know what is going on in the world and how
> people are lied to to make them take drugs and vaccines that will
> worsen their health and affect their vital force.

Those too are useful topics. Why not talk about that, with a *variety*
of different well-drawn examples, instead of going on and on with these
claims that viruses don't exist and no one's every seen one (there are
photos on the web, including of the HIV), or if they do, they're
actually manufactured by the cells and are beneficial, and no disease
(including AIDS) is contagious? You've got so much *good* material to
offer; why not stick to that?

Probably some of these links you're posting and quoting *do* have good
information in them, but it's way, way too much, and some of the claims
are DANGEROUS, would actually be *legally* dangerous, can are NOT what
people should be reading on a homeopathy site!

You want to introduce these other ideas, great, so offer the links, and
a quick summary. Let people decide if they want to look into it--I'm
not suggesting a book-banning, just some practicality and courtesy!

Some of them have positions that seem pretty outrageous, and *if* they
are also true (I don't deny that the "obvious" is not always "true"),
then there's some learning curve, some reading to do--and it is our
individual choices when and whether to do that. Post links then, with
a short comment or excerpt, to be followed up on by those that are
interested. And for long, ongoing discussions, let's go back to
homeopathy.
Shannon


> Sheri
>
>> I can't keep reading, but will just start adding blanket disclaimers:
>> NOTE, these posts of Sheri's on the topics of AIDS and the nature of
>> disease, bacteria and viruses are NOT on the topic of homeopathy, and
>> are NOT necessarily the views of the homeopathic community.
>> Read at your own discretion, and make your own decisions from there.
>>
>> PS, Hahnemann *did* believe that certain diseases are transmissible,
>> so Sheri, in your claims (not in these posts, but previously) that no
>> disease is contagious, you are at odds with homeopathic teaching, as
>> well as with mainstream medicine. Maybe it's "reassuring" to know
>> there are at least *some* things that the two schools agree on? :-)
>
> Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
> http://www.wellwithin1.com/homeo.htm &
> http://www.wellwithin1.com/vaccine.htm
> ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood
> Diseases - next classes start in September
>

I wish you were listening to the internet radio program right now
instead of typing here
Shows me you aren't serious about learning.
Sheri

At 05:11 PM 9/11/2008, you wrote:
>On Sep 11, 2008, at 10:06 AM, Sheri Nakken wrote:
>
>>Jon made you moderator, I see.
>
>Just a concerned citizen. :-)
>If you feel it's relevant to *homeopathy*, please explain how.
>If you can't, then it's off-topic. Some off-topic has always been
>okay, but this is getting to be a whole different animal. I feel it
>is COMPLETELY UNFAIR, as well as the dangers I mentioned, for you to
>be trying to give the impression, to any casual observers, that
>"homeopathy" endorses this viewpoint. It does NOT. I am trying to
>defend my own reputation, basically.
>
>>But how are they transmissible? Hahnemann didn't say HIV causes AIDS.
>>He didn't say a virus injects something into a cell even though the
>>virus is dea. He didn't say any of that.
>
>Right, and I did not claim any of that.
>*You* have in the past claimed that no disease is contagious, that
>viruses and bacteria are benign, and none of them causes any disease.
>When I ask specific questions about "can you catch..." etc., you
>have never taken the trouble to answer, so no actual discussion on
>the point has been possible; just reams and reams of often outrageous material.
>
>>Miasms...............they are still somewhat of a mystery, now aren't they.
>
>Yes, and completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
>Well, not completely; why not talk about *those* connections instead?
>That at least would be topical, and interesting to perhaps all.
>>
>>He didn't know and we don't know.
>>We don't have to know to treat a person
>>Treat according to the symptom picture, regardless of name of
>>disease, regardless of so-called bacterial or viral cause.
>
>Thank you.
>So can we leave off this barrage about what is or isn't the cause?
>And can you stop repeating that AIDS isn't contagious?
>
>>But it is important to know what is going on in the world and how
>>people are lied to to make them take drugs and vaccines that will
>>worsen their health and affect their vital force.
>
>Those too are useful topics. Why not talk about that, with a
>*variety* of different well-drawn examples, instead of going on and
>on with these claims that viruses don't exist and no one's every
>seen one (there are photos on the web, including of the HIV), or if
>they do, they're actually manufactured by the cells and are
>beneficial, and no disease (including AIDS) is contagious? You've
>got so much *good* material to offer; why not stick to that?
>
>Probably some of these links you're posting and quoting *do* have
>good information in them, but it's way, way too much, and some of
>the claims are DANGEROUS, would actually be *legally* dangerous, can
>are NOT what people should be reading on a homeopathy site!
>
>You want to introduce these other ideas, great, so offer the links,
>and a quick summary. Let people decide if they want to look into
>it--I'm not suggesting a book-banning, just some practicality and courtesy!
>
>Some of them have positions that seem pretty outrageous, and *if*
>they are also true (I don't deny that the "obvious" is not always
>"true"), then there's some learning curve, some reading to do--and
>it is our individual choices when and whether to do that. Post
>links then, with a short comment or excerpt, to be followed up on by
>those that are interested. And for long, ongoing discussions, let's
>go back to homeopathy.
>Shannon
>
>
>>Sheri
>>
>>>I can't keep reading, but will just start adding blanket disclaimers:
>>>NOTE, these posts of Sheri's on the topics of AIDS and the nature
>>>of disease, bacteria and viruses are NOT on the topic of
>>>homeopathy, and are NOT necessarily the views of the homeopathic community.
>>>Read at your own discretion, and make your own decisions from there.
>>>
>>>PS, Hahnemann *did* believe that certain diseases are
>>>transmissible, so Sheri, in your claims (not in these posts, but
>>>previously) that no disease is contagious, you are at odds with
>>>homeopathic teaching, as well as with mainstream medicine. Maybe
>>>it's "reassuring" to know there are at least *some* things that
>>>the two schools agree on? :-)
>>
>>Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
>>http://www.wellwithin1.com/homeo.htm & http://www.wellwithin1.com/vaccine.htm
>>ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood
>>Diseases - next classes start in September
>>

Thanks Sheri,
Actually I'd meant to listen and your jog got me there for the last 2+
hours (whew, my kitchen is CLEAN now!! :-) )

I have to say it was a very compelling show and I'm glad I did listen.
Much of what they talked about is very reminiscent of the same issues
we see with (pick a severe disease) cancer and many others--vested
interests, especially financial, polluting the science. Actually it
sounded *very* like the situation with cancer, with a few added
wrinkles.

And tho it wasn't emphasized, one speaker or another did say, as you've
said, that they consider AIDS not contagious, but caused by lifestyle
factors etc. No offense intended :-) but I did find it more
persuasive in the context of the whole show etc. I'm not saying I'm
now convinced that there's no contagion involved... I still don't see
how else to explain some of the cases that have been written up here
and there--infants, health care workers, apparently "innocent" spouse
etc. But I simply don't know enough...

At the end they mentioned a court case they are planning, and that
should be *extremely* interesting! (I don't think he gave a timetable
for that, do you know?)

Whew, now I'd better get to my outdoor chores.
(Honestly tho, you could have gotten me to listen to the show without
the whole preceding avalanche...)
'Later,
Shannon

On Sep 11, 2008, at 11:49 AM, Sheri Nakken wrote:

> I wish you were listening to the internet radio program right now
> instead of typing here
> Shows me you aren't serious about learning.
> Sheri
>
> At 05:11 PM 9/11/2008, you wrote:
>> On Sep 11, 2008, at 10:06 AM, Sheri Nakken wrote:
>>
>>> Jon made you moderator, I see.
>>
>> Just a concerned citizen. :-)
>> If you feel it's relevant to *homeopathy*, please explain how.
>> If you can't, then it's off-topic. Some off-topic has always been
>> okay, but this is getting to be a whole different animal. I feel it
>> is COMPLETELY UNFAIR, as well as the dangers I mentioned, for you to
>> be trying to give the impression, to any casual observers, that
>> "homeopathy" endorses this viewpoint. It does NOT. I am trying to
>> defend my own reputation, basically.
>>
>>> But how are they transmissible? Hahnemann didn't say HIV causes AIDS.
>>> He didn't say a virus injects something into a cell even though the
>>> virus is dea. He didn't say any of that.
>>
>> Right, and I did not claim any of that.
>> *You* have in the past claimed that no disease is contagious, that
>> viruses and bacteria are benign, and none of them causes any disease.
>> When I ask specific questions about "can you catch..." etc., you have
>> never taken the trouble to answer, so no actual discussion on the
>> point has been possible; just reams and reams of often outrageous
>> material.
>>
>>> Miasms...............they are still somewhat of a mystery, now
>>> aren't they.
>>
>> Yes, and completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
>> Well, not completely; why not talk about *those* connections instead?
>> That at least would be topical, and interesting to perhaps all.
>>>
>>> He didn't know and we don't know.
>>> We don't have to know to treat a person
>>> Treat according to the symptom picture, regardless of name of
>>> disease, regardless of so-called bacterial or viral cause.
>>
>> Thank you.
>> So can we leave off this barrage about what is or isn't the cause?
>> And can you stop repeating that AIDS isn't contagious?
>>
>>> But it is important to know what is going on in the world and how
>>> people are lied to to make them take drugs and vaccines that will
>>> worsen their health and affect their vital force.
>>
>> Those too are useful topics. Why not talk about that, with a
>> *variety* of different well-drawn examples, instead of going on and
>> on with these claims that viruses don't exist and no one's every seen
>> one (there are photos on the web, including of the HIV), or if they
>> do, they're actually manufactured by the cells and are beneficial,
>> and no disease (including AIDS) is contagious? You've got so much
>> *good* material to offer; why not stick to that?
>>
>> Probably some of these links you're posting and quoting *do* have
>> good information in them, but it's way, way too much, and some of the
>> claims are DANGEROUS, would actually be *legally* dangerous, can are
>> NOT what people should be reading on a homeopathy site!
>>
>> You want to introduce these other ideas, great, so offer the links,
>> and a quick summary. Let people decide if they want to look into
>> it--I'm not suggesting a book-banning, just some practicality and
>> courtesy!
>>
>> Some of them have positions that seem pretty outrageous, and *if*
>> they are also true (I don't deny that the "obvious" is not always
>> "true"), then there's some learning curve, some reading to do--and it
>> is our individual choices when and whether to do that. Post links
>> then, with a short comment or excerpt, to be followed up on by those
>> that are interested. And for long, ongoing discussions, let's go
>> back to homeopathy.
>> Shannon
>>
>>
>>> Sheri
>>>
>>>> I can't keep reading, but will just start adding blanket
>>>> disclaimers:
>>>> NOTE, these posts of Sheri's on the topics of AIDS and the nature
>>>> of disease, bacteria and viruses are NOT on the topic of
>>>> homeopathy, and are NOT necessarily the views of the homeopathic
>>>> community.
>>>> Read at your own discretion, and make your own decisions from there.
>>>>
>>>> PS, Hahnemann *did* believe that certain diseases are
>>>> transmissible, so Sheri, in your claims (not in these posts, but
>>>> previously) that no disease is contagious, you are at odds with
>>>> homeopathic teaching, as well as with mainstream medicine. Maybe
>>>> it's "reassuring" to know there are at least *some* things that the
>>>> two schools agree on? :-)
>>>
>>> Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
>>> http://www.wellwithin1.com/homeo.htm &
>>> http://www.wellwithin1.com/vaccine.htm
>>> ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood
>>> Diseases - next classes start in September
>>>

I'm glad you and others who have written to me listened.

I did NOT know the show was going to be on. If I had I would have
waited and not wasted my typing.
The first hour was pretty bad with Gary Null reading from Janine's book.
But it is a very hard subject to do on radio without
background. But I'm sure many were lost in that first hour.
So good you missed it as it was hard to follow. He basically read
about the documents she obtained which show NO WHERE did Gallo prove anything.

Glad you listened.

It really is groundbreaking and too hard to get that across without a
lot of background info
Sheri


>Thanks Sheri,
>Actually I'd meant to listen and your jog got me there for the last
>2+ hours (whew, my kitchen is CLEAN now!! :-) )
>
>I have to say it was a very compelling show and I'm glad I did listen.
>Much of what they talked about is very reminiscent of the same
>issues we see with (pick a severe disease) cancer and many
>others--vested interests, especially financial, polluting the
>science. Actually it sounded *very* like the situation with cancer,
>with a few added wrinkles.
>
>And tho it wasn't emphasized, one speaker or another did say, as
>you've said, that they consider AIDS not contagious, but caused by
>lifestyle factors etc. No offense intended :-) but I did find it
>more persuasive in the context of the whole show etc. I'm not
>saying I'm now convinced that there's no contagion involved... I
>still don't see how else to explain some of the cases that have been
>written up here and there--infants, health care workers, apparently
>"innocent" spouse etc. But I simply don't know enough...
>
>At the end they mentioned a court case they are planning, and that
>should be *extremely* interesting! (I don't think he gave a
>timetable for that, do you know?)
>
>Whew, now I'd better get to my outdoor chores.
>(Honestly tho, you could have gotten me to listen to the show
>without the whole preceding avalanche...)
>'Later,
>Shannon
>
>On Sep 11, 2008, at 11:49 AM, Sheri Nakken wrote:
>
>>I wish you were listening to the internet radio program right now
>>instead of typing here
>>Shows me you aren't serious about learning.
>>Sheri
>>
>>At 05:11 PM 9/11/2008, you wrote:
>>>On Sep 11, 2008, at 10:06 AM, Sheri Nakken wrote:
>>>
>>>>Jon made you moderator, I see.
>>>
>>>Just a concerned citizen. :-)
>>>If you feel it's relevant to *homeopathy*, please explain how.
>>>If you can't, then it's off-topic. Some off-topic has always
>>>been okay, but this is getting to be a whole different animal. I
>>>feel it is COMPLETELY UNFAIR, as well as the dangers I mentioned,
>>>for you to be trying to give the impression, to any casual
>>>observers, that "homeopathy" endorses this viewpoint. It does
>>>NOT. I am trying to defend my own reputation, basically.
>>>
>>>>But how are they transmissible? Hahnemann didn't say HIV causes AIDS.
>>>>He didn't say a virus injects something into a cell even though
>>>>the virus is dea. He didn't say any of that.
>>>
>>>Right, and I did not claim any of that.
>>>*You* have in the past claimed that no disease is contagious, that
>>>viruses and bacteria are benign, and none of them causes any disease.
>>>When I ask specific questions about "can you catch..." etc., you
>>>have never taken the trouble to answer, so no actual discussion on
>>>the point has been possible; just reams and reams of often outrageous material.
>>>
>>>>Miasms...............they are still somewhat of a mystery, now aren't they.
>>>
>>>Yes, and completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
>>>Well, not completely; why not talk about *those* connections instead?
>>>That at least would be topical, and interesting to perhaps all.
>>>>
>>>>He didn't know and we don't know.
>>>>We don't have to know to treat a person
>>>>Treat according to the symptom picture, regardless of name of
>>>>disease, regardless of so-called bacterial or viral cause.
>>>
>>>Thank you.
>>>So can we leave off this barrage about what is or isn't the cause?
>>>And can you stop repeating that AIDS isn't contagious?
>>>
>>>>But it is important to know what is going on in the world and how
>>>>people are lied to to make them take drugs and vaccines that will
>>>>worsen their health and affect their vital force.
>>>
>>>Those too are useful topics. Why not talk about that, with a
>>>*variety* of different well-drawn examples, instead of going on
>>>and on with these claims that viruses don't exist and no one's
>>>every seen one (there are photos on the web, including of the
>>>HIV), or if they do, they're actually manufactured by the cells
>>>and are beneficial, and no disease (including AIDS) is
>>>contagious? You've got so much *good* material to offer; why not
>>>stick to that?
>>>
>>>Probably some of these links you're posting and quoting *do* have
>>>good information in them, but it's way, way too much, and some of
>>>the claims are DANGEROUS, would actually be *legally* dangerous,
>>>can are NOT what people should be reading on a homeopathy site!
>>>
>>>You want to introduce these other ideas, great, so offer the
>>>links, and a quick summary. Let people decide if they want to
>>>look into it--I'm not suggesting a book-banning, just some
>>>practicality and courtesy!
>>>
>>>Some of them have positions that seem pretty outrageous, and *if*
>>>they are also true (I don't deny that the "obvious" is not always
>>>"true"), then there's some learning curve, some reading to do--and
>>>it is our individual choices when and whether to do that. Post
>>>links then, with a short comment or excerpt, to be followed up on
>>>by those that are interested. And for long, ongoing discussions,
>>>let's go back to homeopathy.
>>>Shannon
>>>
>>>
>>>>Sheri
>>>>
>>>>>I can't keep reading, but will just start adding blanket disclaimers:
>>>>>NOTE, these posts of Sheri's on the topics of AIDS and the
>>>>>nature of disease, bacteria and viruses are NOT on the topic of
>>>>>homeopathy, and are NOT necessarily the views of the homeopathic community.
>>>>>Read at your own discretion, and make your own decisions from there.
>>>>>
>>>>>PS, Hahnemann *did* believe that certain diseases are
>>>>>transmissible, so Sheri, in your claims (not in these posts, but
>>>>>previously) that no disease is contagious, you are at odds with
>>>>>homeopathic teaching, as well as with mainstream
>>>>>medicine. Maybe it's "reassuring" to know there are at least
>>>>>*some* things that the two schools agree on? :-)
>>>>
>>>>Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
>>>>http://www.wellwithin1.com/homeo.htm &
>>>>http://www.wellwithin1.com/vaccine.htm
>>>>ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood
>>>>Diseases - next classes start in September
>>>>