You Can Trust The Government

Thalidomide, which was developed by the Nazis,  was highly recommended for pregnant women.


About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

67 Responses to You Can Trust The Government

  1. Sparks says:

    It was for “morning sickness” no less. Any pregnant woman should never take anything artificial, that also includes sweeteners, I have a suspicion that they are causing brain deformities and defects. diet drinks and the various alcohol sugar based drinks should never be drank by a pregnant woman. No child should be drinking these high energy drinks either, honestly they are bad for you.

    • Yeah, most sugar is bad for you. But it’s in almost everything you buy. It’s even in salt packets in some fast food places. America is deeply addicted to it. I am sure most road rage, and ADD, is from high quantities of sugar.

      But people are more worried about butter, salt, and eggs than sugar. America is upside down.

      You ever try a little butter on top of your eggs? OMG, good!

    • The calories are bad for you, definitely. Pregnant woman probably shouldn’t be drinking alcohol.

      • Sparks says:

        Will, I know of two young lady’s who when pregnant, who may have thought drinking alcoholic-pop drinks are better than drinking normal alcoholic beverages, sugary drinks are very unhealthy especially combined with alcohol and even more so when artificial sugars are added as a dietary promotion. Both of the young lady’s had children who have had, well… one has a child with Angel man syndrome and another has a child who is autistic.

  2. RobertvdL says:

    Mercury Air Toxics Standards and the Extreme Punishment Agency (EPA) | Dr. Willie Soon

    • Sparks says:

      RobertvdL What is your problem with an Environmental Protection Agency?
      The UK has an Environmental Enforcement Agency, it’s only a matter of time before they carry tasers to enforce the LAW. In a fue years, you could throw a cigarette butt or even better… discard an apple core on the ground and Zap.

    • RobertvdL says:

      you will also like this one

      Endangering The Polar Bear: How Environmentalists Kill | Willie Soon

    • Bonita says:

      I heard in passing yesterday that Senator Inhoff is up in arms against the EPA for their human experiments. Hmmm what took him so long to figure that one out???? I am for a Constitutional Government but what we have is a runaway defacto government! Time for the people to say enough!!!! My husband and I fought the government in the 90s against the Anthrax vaccine given to our troops. At the time Admiral Crowe had holding stock in the company that made it and a Lebanese owned the company. Always follow the money!

  3. Marian says:

    Weren’t the Nazis also the first to fluoridate the water?

    Put fluoride in the water of POWs and Jewish Concentration camps They used it to mainly pacify/subdue. Not to socalled prevent tooth decay. Since Fluoride also has an effect on the brain and behaviour modification..

  4. Every night at midnight I trust my government for one millisecond. That way, when I am asked “Do you trust your government?” I can truthfully say that I do. It is the rest of the day that I have a problem with my government. It is too big, trying to do too much of too many things, and failing to perform as promised on almost everything it does. Then it has the audacity to say it knows better how to spend my money than I do and demands still more of what I earn. Maybe I shouldn’t trust my government so much.

    • Eric Simpson says:

      Govt lacks the ‘fire in the belly’ incentives that fiercely drives free enterprise toward efficiency and effectiveness. Govt by nature is inefficient and ineffective. Further, funding imperatives often enshrine inefficiencies. Govt agencies almost always become bloated bureaucracies that engage in costly but often pointless endeavors.

    • Bonita says:

      I hear ya Lionell!!! Great statement!

  5. NikFromNYC says:

    All those women chasing men who will buy them the largest slave labor blood diamond, all picky about bottled water container polymerizer residues, strutting around with liter volume plastic tits inside their body. What mom wants, she gets!

  6. A more recent example which is also an utter disgrace, relates to the drug Avandia, which should never have made it onto the market.

  7. Sparks says:

    @Amino Acids in Meteorites

    There is no reply link… Yes I agree, butter is natural and healthy, there are more nutrients in butter than there is in some of these artificial spreads, I’m assuming this for a healthy active person, If someone was not active and healthy then butter should not be part of their diet, It’s not for me to say, I’m not a dietitian.

  8. daveburton says:

    I don’t think thalidomide was developed by the NAZIs. It was introduced in 1957. I think you mean ex-NAZIs — not quite the same thing.

    I’d like to buy some. Truly. My buddy’s dog has cancer, and thalidomide is an effective antiangiogenic agent, which doesn’t make the patient sick. Unfortunately, veterinarians aren’t permitted to get it or prescribe it, and I’ve been unable to find a source. If anyone knows where I can get some (at a reasonable price), please tell me.

    • You can contact doctor Bob Marshall or doctor Joel Wallach. They may be able to help.

      Bob Marshall:

      Joel Wallach:

      Joel Wallach is both a vet and a doctor. He is one of the doctors that helped Susanne Summers.

    • daveburton says:

      AAiM, it appears that Wallach is widely recognized as a class-A quack:

      But, back to my original question, do you agree with my assertion that Wallach’s claim, at 10:19, is clearly untrue? This what he claimed: “We know that today there’s only about 8% protein in our wheat. In 1900 there was 23% protein in our wheat.”

      After googling for wheat protein, do you believe that statement is true of false?

    • daveburton says:

      That’s not what I said, AAiM. I never said “anything.” I was talking about wheat. The quoted word “knows” was a reference to what I quoted him saying that he “knows” about wheat protein — which is clearly untrue. This is what I said:

      …I heard him say something that is clearly untrue, at 10:19: “We know that today there’s only about 8% protein in our wheat. In 1900 there was 23% protein in our wheat.”

      Google wheat protein and you’ll quickly learn much more about it that Dr. Wallach “knows.”

      After googling for wheat protein, do you believe that statement of his is true of false?

      • daveburton says:

        s/true of false/true or false/

      • Get back to me when you have more experience than him. It will take you about 60 years to be where he is right now.

        You also think reflux is from having stomach acid that is too strong. You are wrong about that too.

      • I’ve gone far enough with you on this. Please get back to me after your 60 years of study.

      • Ockham says:

        Your appeal to authority in the face of clearly wrong information reminds me of alarmists. I am an Agronomist. Wheat protein content has not changed in over 80 years. Wheat protein is a function of soil fertility and water availability. We typically get anywhere from 10% to 15% protein in our trials. I don’t care how much experience or how much someone has accomplished, if the facts don’t support what they claim, then they are wrong. Wallach is wrong.

      • So you say 80 years equal 112 years. Good math.

        I appealed to authority? It’s ok that you’re wrong.

      • What you say he claimed is not what he claimed.

      • Did you watch the video or did you rely on what dave said?

      • Are you also going to tell me reflux comes from stomach acid that is too strong?

      • daves way of posing his question was either a trap or just poor english. And he is also wrong about reflux. But he talked like he knew it all. I didn’t feel like even answering him because of that.

      • And I really didn’t see daves point of acting like he tossed out all that Joel Wallach said because he thought he heard something wrong, and then suddenly changing and acting like he didn’t mean it like that. But then changing again and pointed out other things he thinks are wrong. Obviously consistency and communication are not his strong suits.

        Acid reflux does not come from stomach acid that is too strong. It is from stomach acid that is too weak and cannot kill yeast thoroughly and stop carbohydrates from fermenting. Because of that happening stomach acid is pushed upwards toward the throat and causes the burning of acid reflux.

        But dave says that is wrong. Do you too?

      • Ockham

        I wasn’t appealing to authority. I was talking about daves knowledge of reflux and the doctors knowledge of it. dave doesn’t understand the issue. Maybe if he studies for 60 years he will come to the same conclusion about stomach acid that the doctor has. Because as it is right now it appears he has spent zero time looking into it and has jut believed what tv says about it. Or maybe if he just uses betaine hydrochloride to increase the acid of his stomach when he gets reflux he will see he was wrong.

        I know from years of personal experience working my own digestion issues that weak stomach acid not only causes reflux but weakness, sickness, pale skin, and a lot of other issues. Not only does the doctor in the videos know more about digestion than dave I do too.

    • ozspeaksup says:

      look into DMS? dimethyl suphoxide? from memory some amazing results from canadian research re tumour reductions.
      human trial at stage two and going well.
      its a food additive. cheap.
      rip off prices usa round 300 for a moth or so dosages.
      beats chemo etc.
      get vit C into the pooch also.
      and hawaiian company making a mushroom blend wioth good data also.
      webpage with a name like cancer dog ? or petcancer?
      browse -its out there
      hope the buddys dog makes it.

      re butter, and lard.
      marg has the SAME calorie count but far more toxic crap to make it etc.
      it goes mouldy butter doesnt.
      butter and lard are natural.
      you CAN be anorexic and have High cholesterol, I was, the doc was puzzled, I tried statins for week, muscle pain badly.
      research ing I found many very thin folks have high Cholesterol, we tend to keep the fat available for energy and the blood tests cant tell the diff..
      I eat butter lard full crem everything and cheese.
      what sorted me was Grapeseed extract dropped from 9.6 to 7 in 3 mths no side effects and now down to 5 🙂
      bottom line?
      if it comes from a processor and you couldnt make it at home, leave it on the shelf.

  9. tckev says:

    If Wikipedia can be believed –
    Thalidomide was developed by German pharmaceutical company Grünenthal in Stolberg near Aachen. Heinrich Mückter, a former Nazi Party member and army physician, had headed Grünenthal’s research department since the foundation of the company and was responsible for inventing thalidomide.

    • Adam Gallon says:

      Thalidomide was a failure of the pharmaceutical testing & licensing system.
      It has no tetragenic effects on rats, thus was passed as being safe for human consumption in pregnancy.
      Really, some of the conspiracy crap on here, must be delighting Lewdinsky (spelling?) & his ilk over at (Un)Skeptical Science!

  10. Lou says:

    The sun scare is probably the worst of the worst ever came up. Wide spread vitamin D deficiency that is causing all kinds of health problems…

  11. Me: The reason we see ads from sleazy lawyers all time is they can make money with the cooperation of the scientifically illiterate. When you can sue Paxil for birth defects and sue Paxil if you stopped taking it and then killed your baby in a delusional state, there really is no science. Many lawsuits are over STATED side effects. My theory: No woman should be given any drugs. Maybe if she’s past menopause and signs a form saying she won’t use IVF to get pregnant at 65. Otherwise, all drugs are unsafe if a woman gets pregnant. Think I’m kidding–count the number of lawsuits out there. This also includes no contraceptives, since they cause stroke and blood clots and heart attacks. Women can either stop having sex or get pregnant. Drugs are just TOO dangerous. No drugs for hair loss, lack of eyelashes, depression, etc. They are all TOO dangerous. In fact, maybe we should just shut down the whole drug industry because it’s all too dangerous. There really is no point to listing side effects–people are too stupid to understand the risk anyway. Maybe take a personal injury lawyer to the doctor and have him sign off on the drug before the doctor can prescribe it, though I can see a whole new industry around one lawyer suing another for failure to prevent the drug from being prescribed in the first place. Again, stop making drugs. They’re all too dangerous and people are too stupid to understand this.

  12. phlogiston says:

    Pharma research is still looking at thalidomide for other diseases, it has endless power to fascinate on the basis of some powerful cytokine effects. But its sad in a way that big Pharma has now become the permanent James Bond baddie doctor evil monster, the days of scientific medicine are practically over, new drug development is increasingly limited to end-of-life cancer and other small corners that are safe from the anti-Pharma litigation trolls. Anti-pharma litigation has killed stone cold dead any real new drug development for any disease you are likely to suffer below the age of 70. Still due to the inertia of current drugs most people wont notice this for many years, until so many drugs are out of patent that big Pharma will disappear, thanks to your friendly neighborhood lawyer, and we’ll be back to standing in line at your local witch doctor. Well at least evolution will be able to get back to business as usual weeding out unfit genomes – how’s your genome?

    • As previously stated, I agree lawyers are a huge problem in drug use and development. In all fairness, though, I should add that greedy people looking to blame someone for their misfortune (I don’t mean people who were truly harmed by negligence, though I am not for “pain and suffering” awards that make millionaires out of people harmed, just compensated for actual damages) are also culpable in this. In addition, a legal system that places totally unqualified people in the position of deciding if a drug was at fault or not is to blame. Jurors may think “I could be next and if I vote $2 million dollars for an award, I could get the same later.” If people were less believers in emotional appeals and magic and more believers in science and the scientific method, these lawyers would have lean pickings. However, the lawyers are still exploiting the system and adding to the overall ignorance and greed in society.

  13. daveburton says:

    Here’s the problem, AAiM: liars lie, and quack doctor Joel Wallach is a liar.

    That doesn’t mean that everything he says is untrue, but it does mean you can’t trust anything he says. It means he’s worthless as a source of information, per Luke 16:10.

    In fact, it means he’s worse than worthless as a source of information. You should make it a practice to avoid listening to liars, especially glib ones like Wallach. Listening to expert liars will only confuse you, because you’ll hear both truth and lies, and you won’t be able to tell which is which. As time goes by you’ll forget even where you heard them, so that the lies become lodged in your memories along with the truths. It damages your judgement, and your ability to make good decisions.

    Will Rogers (or maybe Mark Twain or Josh Billings) said, “It’s not the things you don’t know that hurt you, it’s the things you know that aren’t so.”

    Obvious lies are relatively innocuous. It’s the non-obvious ones that trip you up. As Chesterton noted, “Falsehood is never so false as when it is very nearly true.”

    The most expert liars skillfully interweave truth and lies, to confuse you. That’s why Satan is quoted in scripture quoting scripture, and why the Climate Movement’s top ethicist, Peter Gleick, anonymously released a mixture of genuine and forged documents to smear Heartland.

    Wallach’s lie about wheat protein is not an accidental error. It is an en extravagant falsehood, expertly told, and embellished with fabricated statistics to make it sound authoritative. As such, it does not merely diminish his authority, it discredits him entirely.

    Honest people sometimes make honest mistakes, but they do so accidentally, and they correct those mistakes when they’re discovered. Careful honest people make fewer mistakes than careless honest people, but everyone makes mistakes. If someone makes an honest error, and admits it when he discovers his mistake, that doesn’t make him worthless as a source of information. In fact, when he “mans up” and admits his mistake he gives evidence of his trustworthiness. But when someone intentionally and extravagantly lies, as Wallach plainly did, it means that, if you are wise, you will hit the “stop” button, and cease listening to him altogether.

    You should not listen to Joel Wallach for the same reason that you shouldn’t listen to Peter Gleick or Peter Doran: because they’ve proven that you can’t trust them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s