Dandruff or scalp irritation? Try BLOO.
@b1 said in Can I replace water with milk?:
What do you drink then? or do you just not drink?
Just noticed I quoted the wrong person:
@RawGoatMilk88
Until I learn to get my nutrients from the sun and absorb moisture from the atmosphere I'm drinking milk, juice, coffee, tea (during the allergy season) sometimes a coke.
@RawGoatMilk88
Until I learn to get my nutrients from the sun and absorb moisture from the atmosphere I'm drinking milk, juice, coffee, tea (during the allergy season) sometimes a coke.
Water's not very good for hydration. In a study where they looked at hydrating effect of coffee, it had a slightly diuretic effect on people who normally don't drink coffee but for regular drinkers it was as hydrating as water. But both sugar water and salt water were better.
I have a glass of water at night in case I sleep need to drink at night (normally don't) but other than that I almost never drink just water, oh and even that has a little salt.
@ThinPicking said in Bird Flu 2024/25:
Maybe that stepping back and watching anything is optional. But I don't know exactly, I don't feel like a passive observer in my own life.
I suppose what I meant by stepping back was about perspective. During covid for most of us, even the ones who didn't buy into the propaganda, a lot of what was happening and the motives weren't clear until later. But now that we've seen how it unfolded it's like watching a rerun. I guess it was poor phrasing on my part.
@Peatful said in Bird Flu 2024/25:
I don’t know who that poster is-
And I appreciate you TP for not hiding behind a new name or identity like many others have from the old forum.
Sorry about the name, I wanted to disassociate my account from the email address I was using so had to change the name as well. I was mostly on just to read studies Georgi posted and get info on Dr Peat's new interviews so you probably wouldn't recognise me anyway. I did post some vaccines and RFK's campaign. Posted a topic on prenatal ultrasound and the one on Gonzalo Lira's death as well.
One of the basic arguments for the coming bird flu pandemic is that wild birds spread the flu and it jumps to humans all over the place. Neither of which points is based in reality. First of all it used to be argued that it might some time in the future jump to humans (a single individual event) and start spreading among humans) but not this unlikely event is supposed to be happening all over the world several times a year. Secondly, I just posted about the wild birds spreading it being a hoax here: https://bioenergetic.forum/topic/2253/wild-birds-do-not-spread-bird-flu
Kit Knightly is doing some good (and funny) reporting on bird flu at Off-Guardian: https://off-guardian.org/category/bird-flu/
It's like stepping back and watching covid plandemic fold before your eyes. It'll be interesting to see how the people who bought into the covid narrative react. Will they be fooled twice?
A review of European and Asian studies published in a German nature magazine Die Vogelwelt proves that migrating birds don't infect domestic poultry with avian flu but rather it's the domestic chickens that cause infections in wild birds. The epidemics are spread through domestic poultry transportation. Wild bird pose no real danger to either domestic poultry nor people.
This gives an unfair advantage to large poultry producers (or rather, the few breeders that own the breeds and control the industry) and threatens ethical species-appropriate management of poultry for both regenerative farmers and backyard poultry enthusiasts.
"In Europe the virus caused outbreaks between November 2014 and February 2015 in eleven poultry holdings [...] Following the outbreaks in Western European poultry holdings, a few cases of infected wild birds were reported (some ducks, two Mute Swans and one gull), however, so far without scientific and transparent documentation.
[...]
"As in 2006 and 2007, the Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute (FLI), the German Federal Institute for Animal Diseases, propagated the “wild bird hypothesis” as explanation for the introduction of highly pathogenic AIV in Europe.
[...]
"However, no evidence for this thesis has been found anywhere in the world. To the contrary, it seems rather unlikely: among 800,000 wild birds tested world-wide HPAIV was usually only detected, where the virus was already circulating in commercial poultry holdings. In poultry it frequently appears first in large factory farm holdings with high biosecurity. Wild birds are dead ends for HPAI viruses. If they die, the virus vanishes as well. Longer chains of infection are not known from the wild. Even after events of mass infections of wild birds the virus disappears from the environment in a few weeks, at most. Additionally there has never been any evidence for wild birds carrying the virus into a poultry holding.
"Furthermore, the FLI still composes its Avian Influenza Risk Assessment on the assumption of the wild bird hypothesis. To support this the FLI authors cite several publications, some of which, however, have already been shown some years ago to be faulty or inadequate (Steiof 2005, Petermann 2006, Feare 2007). [...] Indeed, the monitoring of avian influenza in wild birds and poultry has so far failed to detect highly pathogenic Avian Influenza in any one case before outbreaks became obvious. Similarly the way of introduction of HPAIV could not be determined in any one case. It is an error to focus the monitoring effort on wild birds, free-range and backyard poultry. This should urgently been replaced by effective controls and actions in factory poultry farming. Without any real solution, some common values may be endangered: wild birds are threatened by release of perilous viruses from poultry holdings to the environment. Furthermore, rare poultry breeds and races are threatened by obligatory housing due to veterinary law, which makes their keeping impossible. Eco-farming as well as animal welfare is being challenged by the difficulties to keep free-range poultry in species-appropriate conditions, while factory poultry holdings in closed biosecurity premises are being privileged."
And this one from Minnesota Public Radio News (2016-03-01):
[...]
"Last year, in a massive hunt for the source of bird flu, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources tested more than 6,200 wild bird samples, mostly droppings, for signs of the virus.
"The search turned up only two infected birds and neither was a waterfowl.
""We certainly did the best that we could using the tools that we had to describe infection. We just didn't find it," said Lou Cornicelli, wildlife research manager at the DNR.
"The agency has spent several hundred thousand dollars on its wild bird surveillance — and that doesn't even include laboratory tests. The federal government has paid the $30 testing fee for most of the thousands of bird samples.
[...]
""We're not doing this again," [Cornelli] said.
[...]
"[Steve] Olson [executive director of the Minnesota Turkey Grower's Association] says poultry producers will press the DNR to keep searching for avian flu in wild birds. He says the industry will ask the DNR to test different species of wild birds, collect samples for more consecutive days, and switch to testing blood instead of droppings in an effort to find the source of the virus.
""Despite the industry pointing its finger at the wild birds, it's just not there, said Michael Osterholm, who directs the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota."
"Osterholm said there are a couple of holes in the waterfowl theory.
"Backyard poultry flocks should have been hit hardest because those birds were most exposed to migrating waterfowl. Instead, those birds were largely spared, he said.
"Osterholm also said the lone Pope County case popped up before wild ducks and geese had even traveled through the area.
"Disease investigators found poor biosecurity practices allowed the virus to move easily between farms."