Trump's Drilling Ban Bombshell Rocks Oil Industry

[NickW + 2,714]

On 9/11/2020 at 10:39 PM, ronwagn said:

Actually, UV light does naturally work inside of the body. The skin is the largest organ in the human body. When one is exposed to sunlight the UV light creates Vitamin D naturally and also affects the peripheral blood vessels with full spectrum light waves. The same waves that cause plants to grow. Of course blood cells travel throughout the body and affect all areas of the body by nourishing them and fighting off harmful organisms. Light is very important to animals including humans. The pineal gland detects light and affects mood and alertness. Light panels are used in psychiatry to treat depression. I keep lots of lights on in the wintertime when the days are short. Light is natures great sanitizer also. You can sanitize many things with just plain sunlight, especially after washing. 

It is too bad that none of the physicians seemed educated about sunlight and light therapy. Not surprising though. Most doctors are not highly educated outside of their specialty. 

Not directly though as a sanitizer as it does in the open which is the inference here. . Also UV needs to hit the organism directly which is not going to happen if its inside a cell or opaque liquid. 

Indirectly, yes because  it generates Vit D and low Vit D is associated with Pneumonia complications. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

4 hours ago, NickW said:

Not directly though as a sanitizer as it does in the open which is the inference here. . Also UV needs to hit the organism directly which is not going to happen if its inside a cell or opaque liquid. 

Indirectly, yes because  it generates Vit D and low Vit D is associated with Pneumonia complications. 

What Ron is referring to, but does not know the particulars about and neither do I, is an OLD medical practice which was invented right before antibiotics were invented.  What they did was put a shunt into your arm run the blood past a UV high intensity light(killing virus's/bacteria, but not red/white blood cells) and then run the blood back into your body.  It killed approx ~90% of  the virus's thus the virus load would drastically be reduced and your body would naturally fight off the infection or virus, and you would gain immunity. Of course taking a pill a couple times a day requires far less time and $$$ than sitting in a chair with a machine attached to your arm for hours a day.... 🙄

Has not one thing to do with Vitamin D or skin interactions.  Though fruads put that forward today in "alternative clinics"

EDIT: It should be noted that the UV method does kill bugs that are currently immune to anti biotics so... not exactly useless, just time and $$$ intensive. 

Edited September 14, 2020 by footeab@yahoo.com

[NickW + 2,714]

1 hour ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

What Ron is referring to, but does not know the particulars about and neither do I, is an OLD medical practice which was invented right before antibiotics were invented.  What they did was put a shunt into your arm run the blood past a UV high intensity light(killing virus's/bacteria, but not red/white blood cells) and then run the blood back into your body.  It killed approx ~90% of  the virus's thus the virus load would drastically be reduced and your body would naturally fight off the infection or virus, and you would gain immunity. Of course taking a pill a couple times a day requires far less time and $$$ than sitting in a chair with a machine attached to your arm for hours a day.... 🙄

Has not one thing to do with Vitamin D or skin interactions.  Though fruads put that forward today in "alternative clinics"

EDIT: It should be noted that the UV method does kill bugs that are currently immune to anti biotics so... not exactly useless, just time and $$$ intensive. 

Ok that explains a bit more. I am not certain that UV is going to touch anything that is obscured which blood and cells do. Where Uv is used for water sanitiation the water needs to be crystal clear. 

As for Vit D and Pneumonia - the evidence is there in mainstream medical research

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3829945/

 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

1 hour ago, NickW said:

Ok that explains a bit more. I am not certain that UV is going to touch anything that is obscured which blood and cells do. Where Uv is used for water sanitiation the water needs to be crystal clear.

 

Not true, you just have to run it through longer period or stronger UV intensity with proper agitation.  Thus my comment about long time sitting on a machine verses a pill...  While it works, it is anything but convenient. 

Edited September 14, 2020 by footeab@yahoo.com
Sp... wrote pill as pile...

[NickW + 2,714]

3 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Not true, you just have to run it through longer period or stronger UV intensity with proper agitation.  Thus my comment about long time sitting on a machine verses a pile...  While it works, it is anything but convenient. 

Ive read a bit more. I can see why Antibiotics for bacteria was preferred. Still I'm surprised this isn't used routinely for difficult to treat viruses - HIV, Hep B & C etc. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

58 minutes ago, NickW said:

Ive read a bit more. I can see why Antibiotics for bacteria was preferred. Still I'm surprised this isn't used routinely for difficult to treat viruses - HIV, Hep B & C etc. 

Only reason I know anything at all about it is because my father distributed, repaired, and designed medical equipment during the period after it was eliminated by antibiotics and I VERY vaguely remember him talking about it for as you said, very difficult to cure bugs. 

The reason it is not used, is most likely due to the fact it is not a cure.  It is a crutch and a poor crutch.  Went out of everyone's knowledge base as it never was truly in everyone's knowledge base to begin with as it was during same period as beginning of antibiotics which obviously grabbed all the accolades for obvious reasons. 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

On 9/11/2020 at 7:08 PM, Dan Warnick said:

Oh Bullshit.  The West didn't know about China until Trump, and then they laughed him off and didn't want to unite.  The offers were made and nobody took up the cause.  

I think we have been over this before without agreeing so I doubt we will this time. my point is just that in my view neither Europe or the US is capable of "taking on China" alone (I do not consider sanctions creating lasting change); I know (and respect) that your opinion is different. 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

3 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I think we have been over this before without agreeing so I doubt we will this time. my point is just that in my view neither Europe or the US is capable of "taking on China" alone (I do not consider sanctions creating lasting change); I know (and respect) that your opinion is different. 

Yes we have.  The U.S. is capable of taking on China for the now-common-knowledge reasons.  Now, I absolutely agree that it would be more effective if the EU players had decided to join the U.S. in what is of course a common cause.

Tariffs (not sanctions) are a tool to bring about change, but if China and/or the EU chooses not to change then the tariffs can absolutely become semi-permanent (later administrations can obviously reverse them).

We have also been over that point, and myself and others expressed our feeling that the EU, at this point, would have to first level the EU/US playing field, which they are working on, and then the EU would have to join the Trump Administration in its fight.

That point has also been discussed and I think we pretty much agree that the EU players, once again, are not going to join the fight under Trump's terms, so the point is moot.

That doesn't mean there cannot be a two-pronged fight against China's "practices" with the EU doing so under their own terms and U.S. doing so under theirs.  But make no mistake, under the Trump Administration, both the EU and China will need to come around to the U.S. demands before any tariff threats will go away (EU) or before any tariffs are lifted (China).

[ronwagn + 6,290]

12 hours ago, NickW said:

Not directly though as a sanitizer as it does in the open which is the inference here. . Also UV needs to hit the organism directly which is not going to happen if its inside a cell or opaque liquid. 

Indirectly, yes because  it generates Vit D and low Vit D is associated with Pneumonia complications. 

Actually it reaches the capillaries and thus the blood cells themselves. The long waves are the most important according to articles I have read. 

https://library.med.utah.edu/kw/derm/pages/meet_2.htm

Sunlight was used for hundreds of years as the best disinfectant. 

http://sunlightinstitute.org/sanitizing-with-sunlight-the-best-disinfectant-know/#:~:text=The legendary humanitarian Florence Nightingale observed that sunlight,that sunlight is a powerful disinfectant and bactericide.

 

Edited September 14, 2020 by ronwagn
added reference

[ronwagn + 6,290]

15 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

Like the insistence the headquarters is in the USA?

 

https://howmuch.net/articles/united-nations-budget-contributions-by-country-2019

[NickW + 2,714]

43 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

Actually it reaches the capillaries and thus the blood cells themselves. The long waves are the most important according to articles I have read. 

https://library.med.utah.edu/kw/derm/pages/meet_2.htm

Sunlight was used for hundreds of years as the best disinfectant. 

http://sunlightinstitute.org/sanitizing-with-sunlight-the-best-disinfectant-know/#:~:text=The legendary humanitarian Florence Nightingale observed that sunlight,that sunlight is a powerful disinfectant and bactericide.

 

Interesting. However its the shorter wave lengths that have the highest disinfection power. 

As well as Vid D sunlight also generates other substances such as fumaric acid which has a number of benefits. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 minute ago, NickW said:

Interesting. However its the shorter wave lengths that have the highest disinfection power. 

As well as Vid D sunlight also generates other substances such as fumaric acid which has a number of benefits. 

I will have to research fumaric acid, thanks for that. My wife and I have been taking Vitamin D for about ten years. We first heard about it being commonly underprovided in our diet at a medical conference. It is just now getting the attention it deserves. 

I have heard that it takes twenty years for good information to get through the bureaucracy. 

Beyond disinfection power is longwave therapy. You will have to research that. I first heard about it fifty years ago, so I assume there are no earth shaking findings. 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

6 hours ago, NickW said:

Ive read a bit more. I can see why Antibiotics for bacteria was preferred. Still I'm surprised this isn't used routinely for difficult to treat viruses - HIV, Hep B & C etc. 

Whole bunch of downsides to UV light.  It is not selective and creates a bunch of reactive oxygen species / free radicals and TT dimers.  Chemical reactions that are "forbidden" occur in the presence of UV and you can get chemicals your body is not use to detoxifying.

All those viruses are highly treatable now.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodward–Hoffmann_rules#Selection_rules

Edited September 14, 2020 by Enthalpic

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

7 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Not true, you just have to run it through longer period or stronger UV intensity with proper agitation.  Thus my comment about long time sitting on a machine verses a pill...  While it works, it is anything but convenient. 

It actually was a quite effective "cure" for AIDS back before they figured out the retro virals. But cost and complexity trumped saving lives, often uninsured. Freddy Mercury could have afforded to do it, too bad no one recommended it to him. We might still have decent music getting written. 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

On 9/11/2020 at 3:39 PM, ronwagn said:

 

It is too bad that none of the physicians seemed educated about sunlight and light therapy. Not surprising though. Most doctors are not highly educated outside of their specialty. 

I disagree with that.

UV light is routinely used to treat neonatal jaundice and a variety of skin disorders.

It was a historically used as a treatment for TB.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

6 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

It actually was a quite effective "cure" for AIDS back before they figured out the retro virals. But cost and complexity trumped saving lives, often uninsured. Freddy Mercury could have afforded to do it, too bad no one recommended it to him. We might still have decent music getting written. 

I'm almost surprised you don't think HIV was created by God or the Illuminati to punish homosexuals. 

Edited September 14, 2020 by Enthalpic

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

There is a cure for HIV.  Well sort of, It has only been done once as far as I know of.

 

Unlucky person had cancer and HIV at the same time.  They used chemo and radiation to kill off all the bone marrow and any remaining white blood cells (eliminate Leukaemia and any HIV hideouts), used modern antiretrovirals, and then used donor marrow to rebuild his blood.

Not much reason to try to do that for most people with HIV, as with drugs it should not progress to AIDS.

Edited September 14, 2020 by Enthalpic

[ronwagn + 6,290]

32 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

I disagree with that.

UV light is routinely used to treat neonatal jaundice and a variety of skin disorders.

It was a historically used as a treatment for TB.

It was not mentioned by any of the doctors present however. The media and those online mocked Trump. 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

42 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

It was not mentioned by any of the doctors present however. The media and those online mocked Trump. 

That is for good reason, they can't make unsubstantiated claims.

The mocking was mostly the injection stuff (at least in my mind).   Regardless, summer warmth and sunlight did not wipe out covid, it did not magically disappear.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 hour ago, Enthalpic said:

That is for good reason, they can't make unsubstantiated claims.

The mocking was mostly the injection stuff (at least in my mind).   Regardless, summer warmth and sunlight did not wipe out covid, it did not magically disappear.

I never claimed it would, nor did Trump. It is an adjunctive therapy. One would ideally bask in the sun with a minimum of clothing for the maximum time that would avoid a sunburn. 

When I was five, I nearly died of double pneumonia and the measles. My Doctor prescribed vitamin C and sunshine. Fortunately I got a single dose of penicillin also. I also had something called a mustard pack. I cant vote against any of them but the penicillin would be my first choice. Later I had my tonsils out and went from scrawny to husky. Medicine is too complicated to make hasty judgements. 

Edited September 14, 2020 by ronwagn

[ronwagn + 6,290]

12 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

What Ron is referring to, but does not know the particulars about and neither do I, is an OLD medical practice which was invented right before antibiotics were invented.  What they did was put a shunt into your arm run the blood past a UV high intensity light(killing virus's/bacteria, but not red/white blood cells) and then run the blood back into your body.  It killed approx ~90% of  the virus's thus the virus load would drastically be reduced and your body would naturally fight off the infection or virus, and you would gain immunity. Of course taking a pill a couple times a day requires far less time and $$$ than sitting in a chair with a machine attached to your arm for hours a day.... 🙄

Has not one thing to do with Vitamin D or skin interactions.  Though fruads put that forward today in "alternative clinics"

EDIT: It should be noted that the UV method does kill bugs that are currently immune to anti biotics so... not exactly useless, just time and $$$ intensive. 

Actually, I was unaware of that process. I was just referring to the old time practice of using the sun to disinfect. Also longwave theories of healing and ultraviolet lights. 

[NickW + 2,714]

10 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

That is for good reason, they can't make unsubstantiated claims.

The mocking was mostly the injection stuff (at least in my mind).   Regardless, summer warmth and sunlight did not wipe out covid, it did not magically disappear.

There does appear to be some sort of seasonal factor going on. When you look at the Northern Hemisphere high daily death counts in the spring which then tail off in the summer. More pronounced in Europe than North America. May of course just be the disease running its course from when it hit. 

Correspondingly Oz, NZ and Argentina have had their peak death rates in the mid to late southern hemisphere winter. Chiles were a bit earlier in May and June. 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

15 hours ago, NickW said:

There does appear to be some sort of seasonal factor going on. When you look at the Northern Hemisphere high daily death counts in the spring which then tail off in the summer. More pronounced in Europe than North America. May of course just be the disease running its course from when it hit. 

Correspondingly Oz, NZ and Argentina have had their peak death rates in the mid to late southern hemisphere winter. Chiles were a bit earlier in May and June. 

It did go down massively in Canada during the summer but that is confounded by the shutdown measures.  It is difficult to determine what factors were most important (sun, isolation, sanitation, education).