Discussion that challenges supposed mainstream beliefs and officially accepted stances

[4channel]

Some issues when discussed can cause a range of reactions. Sometimes they can lead to an awakening, the beginning of a journey to discovering something new, or they can can cause a certain type of reaction in a person who may not like what they hear. I think that it's all about how we choose to deal with the info we're hearing and how we process it.

Take the issues of let's say ....  fluoride and mobile phone tower radiation. The government has allowed the fluoridation of our water and they have allowed the construction of mobile phone towers in residential areas. Does that mean the water is safe to drink and it causes no ill affect? Does that mean that the mobile phone towers are safe?  What about the handsets. Are they safe for children to use and hold against their heads?

Well, we discuss these things and some people do react angrily to the people discussing these issues. Does this mean that we have to stop discussion that challenges the supposed official stance or challenges what we are told is the mainstream belief? Do we have to self-censor or have this in a [private group? I have noticed that in discussion forums or the media that racist beliefs are a;allowed a platform and yet issues that many folk feel that need to be addressed because of health concerns are not given the same platform. To me racism is abhorrent and yet in the media, it gets the pass ticket while issues that some call important to health freedom do not! Why is that?  Could it be political? What are your thoughts?

NOTE:

Spoiler

This is a discussion that some people here would be interested in while others may not be. Folks with opposing views are welcome as  always. Please, if someone has an issue with these topics being discussed or another member, could they refrain from any attacks on others or deliberately flooding this thread with off topic filler.

[domino-710]

---

@4channel wrote:

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

https://www.discountfilters.com/blog/10-types-of-chemicals-lurking-in-your-bottled-water/

---

Nearly all of that is not present in my cartons of water.

Interesting though about fluoride as it is only effective topically, it also contributes to the damage to teeth that keep dentists busy.

I also noticed that it contributes to a lowered immune system (incorrectly functioning) that would keep the vaccine makers busy.

---

Course it's not - your water is sitting on a shelf - for how long - in a box - contained in a bladder.

All good.

[katistrophik]

# Point  Domino-710

Spoiler

Decided to start keeping score

[4channel]

---

Re: Discussion that challenges supposed mainstream beliefs and officially accepted stances

in reply to *tippy*toes* 

on ‎11-28-2020 03:45 PM

@simone4010 wrote: 
Tippy toes

I think you have misinterpreted what I said. I did not say the husband got the flu from the flu shot. As is the case of a lot of people I know, they still get a strain of flu. There is a lot of different flu strains and the flu vaccine does not protect you against all of them. Your doctor will tell you that.

Not sure where you're getting the 2 weeks from. It only takes 1-4 days for flu symptoms to show once you've caught it.

---

There is the  fact that  there are various and changing strains around and we hear often that people get the flu in spite of being vaccinated. People often feel ill after the flu vaccination. Could they be weakened by the preservative and other stuff that's in the vaccine? I know  of some people who have never had the flu vaccine and they just don't get affected much by the flu.

I think for those that take the flue shot either by choice or being talked into it, they should still concentrate on optimising their immune system by eating and living healthy. Good nutrition is of paramount importance!

I think one of the first steps to ensuring the best possible health that is within our means is to avoid any food that has been genetically modified. Be aware too that supporters of GM (paid comment shills incl.) will try to counter people's concerns and throw them off track by using selective breeding as an example of GM. Untrue and totally different than the GM laboratory manufactured plants with corrupted and foreign inserted DNA  that educated, intelligent and decent people are concerned about.

---

The Washington Post

Opinions

Good reasons not to eat genetically modified foods

Michael Gerson’s May 15 op-ed column, “A polluting discourse over GMOs,” ignored the reason many or most of us want to avoid foods made with genetically modified organisms: We don’t want to consume glyphosates, the active ingredient in most herbicides.

Many crops are genetically modified so that they won’t be killed by the weed killer; they can be drenched in it and, for example, live to produce corn. Traces of glyphosates and some equally problematic additives are in the GMO corn chips Mr. Gerson mentioned. Some of us choose to eat foods not soaked with substances that kill some plants, have been proven harmful to animals and — the research is increasing — might be harmful to humans. One doesn’t have to dig deeply to find that legitimate researchers are questioning the safety of glyphosates.

To read more - click here

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/good-reasons-not-to-eat-genetically-modified-foods/2015/05/1...

---

It's been said before that the best of truth isn't going to find its way to you any time soon. One has to look for it as the main stream media is selectivity's unreliable..  Allowing oneself to be brow-beaten, intimidated , mocked into being silent, or made to feel uncomfortable about discussing health related issues is a real tragedy. And this is why valuable knowledge remains out of reach.