Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Leisure and Society
Hobbies, Interests & Entertainment
Conspiracy Theories
The Enemy is Attacking Life Right in Front of our Faces
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AphroditeGoneAwry" data-source="post: 69158641" data-attributes="member: 320113"><p>I posted this in the Christian only section because I really do not expect non-Christians to understand what I am saying here, because I know when I was an atheist-and even a new Christian-I did not believe in spiritual warfare or that the devil was an actual being with demons who served it, but a force or principle of evil.</p><p></p><p>Now I know better.</p><p></p><p>Being an INTP, I think about things a lot. I see patterns in things others might miss because I spend so much time in my head trying to figure this world out. Because of the kind of work I am engaged in, and have been engaged in for 20 years, and because I have 5 children of my own, I am in a position to notice this subject I am posting about in this thread.</p><p></p><p>I assert that the enemy is using technology against us at an alarming rate. I use technology myself and am currently trying not to covet my new Galaxy 6 Edge Plus, so don't think I am here to bash technology because I am not. I am here to bash the enemy and expose its evil plans to destroy life, the most sacred domain of God.</p><p></p><p>I have noticed that women can no longer birth naturally as much as they used to and this has changed drastically in about a 10 to 15 year window. The c-section rate in 1970 was around 5% if you can believe that. Despite what arguments you would like to make about health care and morbidity and mortality rates, and birth being safer, I will also state the World Health Organization has formally stated that c-sections should be between 10 to 15% for optimal safety of mom and baby in our modern times. This notwithstanding, I believe despite our best efforts to keep sections low, they are on the rise anyway, and this is not related to anything a care provider does in a woman's pregnancy or labor and delivery.</p><p></p><p>I believe I have traced the problem to vaccinations in girl babies and girl children. I will attach an article I wrote below.</p><p></p><p>But as I got to thinking about it, the devil is also attacking life in the male sector with cell phones. Where do boys/girls wear their cell phones? In their front jeans pocket (or back, but my boys is usually front). The World Health Organization came out in 2011 with a statement that cell phones might be linked to cancer, probably because of emitting radiation. I don't know about you, but radiation and gonads doesn't sound like a good mix to me, and I think of all manner of weird birth defects that will be occurring in the future because of this new trend. Here are two articles about the cell phone and cancer link:</p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2011/pdfs/pr208_E.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2011/pdfs/pr208_E.pdf</a></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/can-cell-phones-cause-brain-cancer/" target="_blank">http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/can-cell-phones-cause-brain-cancer/</a></p><p></p><p>God kicked Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden so that they would not reach out and pick of the Tree of Life. God is Ruler of Life and Death and it is His most sacred domain. It makes total sense that the devil will try to attack that with fervency, in as quiet a way as possible so that it will not be noticed until the damage has been done. And better yet for the devil that he turns us against ourselves and divides us in this, making us do his dirty work for him, exemplified by our very own governments enforcing, or at least strongly encouraging (can't attend public school or daycare without being up to date on your vaccinations!) this harmful protocol! I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I can sniff out an evil conspiracy when I see one.</p><p></p><p>I implore every parent or every potential parent here to forego routine immunizations in their babies until at least two years of age, and at that time, pick and choose only the most important immunizations you think your child will need to be safe (i.e. only the ones preventing death or long-term debilitating disease). Never get a vaccine for your baby at birth!!</p><p></p><p>~selah</p><p></p><p>Here is my article on vaccination and bone growth dysfunction:</p><p></p><p><strong>Is the Aluminum in Vaccines Causing the Female Pelvis to Grow Too Small for Vaginal Birth?</strong></p><p></p><p>I am not a vaccine alarmist, and we support a woman's right to accept or refuse any treatments, and that goes for vaccination recommendations by the CDC and AAP for their families! But we believe our job is to inform you of data as we are made privy to it.</p><p></p><p>There is an alarming trend that I want to draw your attention to. I have been perplexed by the epidemic proportions of woman needing cesarean sections for too-small pelvises in the past several years of practice. I have watched c section rates grow alarmingly fast from when I began midwifery in 1995 until today, 20 years later.</p><p></p><p>It is actually--in my opinion--becoming an epidemic, but it is still a silent one, lurking. I estimate women are at a 5 times higher risk of needing a cesarean section than their mother's generation, and I believe it is getting worse all the time. In 1970, the cesarean section rate was around 5%, and lower for midwives. Now it is notoriously 5-15% for midwives, depending on birth setting. It is typically lower for women accessing midwives and having homebirth, yes, but I believe the problem of women's pelvises being too small applies to all provider types and is independent of setting, meaning midwives as well as doctors, home as well as hospital, are seeing the same problem.</p><p></p><p>The pelvis is comprised of 3 bones and they fuse in adolescence. Any deficiency caused in this time period is serious and will affect the child for life. Inadequate bone growth causes osteomalacia, called rickets in childhood. It can lead to a deformation of the pelvis called triradiate pelvis, or beaked pelvis, making for the woman having a relatively normal inlet but a deep, long, and narrow outlet. Sidewalls will usually converge so baby is funneled into a smaller and smaller tunnel as he tries to make his way out. It is a pelvis similar to a bird-type pelvis or dinosaur pelvis, if you have read those books to your kids or visited the science museums. I submit that these deformaties are usually subclinical in women, are not detectable with the eye, and difficult even to asses during pelvimetry. The only diagnostic tool we have is a radiograph of some sort, x-ray or ct scan.</p><p></p><p>We know Vit D deficiency in on the decline since the 1980s (<a href="http://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fpubmed%2F21872696&h=_AQEWKJvcAQFM1HKWA_2nHA9hkqEciIBQllp8QwmboXeeIg&enc=AZP18U06VSKkhifLcPiiE2Em2rrQsdg567MimT8aYmBGW4uvqtqdeX9i0yziAVfp5GQ0INy58El8YZq_QfM500NtYa30grzkpU7RC6lcnCEyD2SQfmdI2iaRQHXWrdBxHhI4qml8av3f3Z5IRrY6_0MCErNa8l6vGbTucCuBcmxZV_9-mzNbYEDPt0uPCCVbo3E&s=1" target="_blank">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21872696</a>) and this affects bone growth. Calcium deficiency can affect bone growth too. But I am not sure we can attribute the startling and acute rise in necessary cesarean sections to this alone, though it definitely could be part of the problem.</p><p></p><p>However, if we look at the change in vaccination schedules recommended for babies, we can see a whopping increase beginning in the late 80s with the Hib vaccine, and the 90s with the addition of the HepB vaccine. In the 1970s, babies were only receiving 3 series of injections for 7 diseases. In the 80s that increased to 8 diseases, and kept increasing until today where babies are receiving 8 series of injections for 14 diseases (or thereabouts). It is recommended by the CDC that babies get 115 shots before their first two years of life! <a href="http://vaxtruth.org/2012/02/cdc-recommended-immunization-schedule-2012-birth-through-6-years/" target="_blank">http://vaxtruth.org/2012/02/cdc-recommended-immunization-schedule-2012-birth-through-6-years/</a></p><p></p><p>What does this mean? It means that exposures in our babies and children to aluminum is increasing greatly, and has been since the late 80s when Hib was added to the schedule. One of the major Hib manufacturers uses a large amount of aluminum in its product, 225 mcgs per shot. And the HepB vaccine contains 250 mcgs in one shot. This is significant information when we consider that we do not even know what the safe levels are for children because it has not been adequately studied yet. But Dr Sears extrapolated data (<a href="http://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.askdrsears.com%2F&h=sAQECMULCAQETzeDfZsTbCJKWuvLjaRUGZAIRX0Lysz3cvA&enc=AZM7ZLGMQ59NEHZ17mV2iu35l4TmpiYcVN6ywW5-xwywEdQLAK3BKjDFjCxekDR5JAfoOi08tDMOlJm12NKWxPTbaejDv-slRx00Kxvk-5TmGBWZ5mwgv1CdFffnp7gBXrvEPyVk0nKDVIZ1VD6i2IqVq4rwF6AOeUOAH9eSEJ-BsZVHa3ZO_ekFoqNrUb2q2DE&s=1" target="_blank">http://www.askdrsears.com/</a>…/health-co…/vaccines/vaccine-faqs) available for premature infants (published safe dosages) and adjusted for the weight of mature and normal infants, and he found that the maximum aluminum dose per day is probably below 30 mcgs for a 12 pound baby, and 50 mcgs for a 22 pound baby.</p><p></p><p>What can aluminum toxicity cause? A host of disorders, but for my current interest, it has been proven in many medical studies that aluminum toxicity causes abnormal bone mineralization and osteamalacia, especially in the bony pelvis; it prohibits bone growth and weakens bones. I believe, based on this information, that women who received most or all of their recommended childhood immunizations, and who were born in the late 1980s and beyond (those esp receiving the Hib vaccine with high aluminum content), have a 5-fold increase in needing a cesarean section. Those born every decade thereafter who received most or all of their immunizations (esp Hib and HebB) are at even increased risk, if we use linear progression as our statistical model (meaning as exposure to aluminum goes up so does likelihood of having a pelvic contracture). This is worsened in women who grew up without much sunlight (Vit D) and those who had diets low in calcium.</p><p></p><p>If there is indeed a correlation with aluminum toxicity and contracted pelvises, midwives and the 'low-risk' women they serve are in for a lot of time spent in the hospital for necessary cesarean sections due to pelvises that did not grow quite as big as they should have. This lends a new twist to immunization compliance. Yes, we are preventing our girl children from having a certain disease that might be uncomfortable or make them sick for a time, but possibly at the cost of their reproductive well-being....</p><p></p><p><a href="http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/09/21/could-this-be-the-most-dangerous-aspect-of-vaccines.aspx" target="_blank">http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/09/21/could-this-be-the-most-dangerous-aspect-of-vaccines.aspx</a></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AphroditeGoneAwry, post: 69158641, member: 320113"] I posted this in the Christian only section because I really do not expect non-Christians to understand what I am saying here, because I know when I was an atheist-and even a new Christian-I did not believe in spiritual warfare or that the devil was an actual being with demons who served it, but a force or principle of evil. Now I know better. Being an INTP, I think about things a lot. I see patterns in things others might miss because I spend so much time in my head trying to figure this world out. Because of the kind of work I am engaged in, and have been engaged in for 20 years, and because I have 5 children of my own, I am in a position to notice this subject I am posting about in this thread. I assert that the enemy is using technology against us at an alarming rate. I use technology myself and am currently trying not to covet my new Galaxy 6 Edge Plus, so don't think I am here to bash technology because I am not. I am here to bash the enemy and expose its evil plans to destroy life, the most sacred domain of God. I have noticed that women can no longer birth naturally as much as they used to and this has changed drastically in about a 10 to 15 year window. The c-section rate in 1970 was around 5% if you can believe that. Despite what arguments you would like to make about health care and morbidity and mortality rates, and birth being safer, I will also state the World Health Organization has formally stated that c-sections should be between 10 to 15% for optimal safety of mom and baby in our modern times. This notwithstanding, I believe despite our best efforts to keep sections low, they are on the rise anyway, and this is not related to anything a care provider does in a woman's pregnancy or labor and delivery. I believe I have traced the problem to vaccinations in girl babies and girl children. I will attach an article I wrote below. But as I got to thinking about it, the devil is also attacking life in the male sector with cell phones. Where do boys/girls wear their cell phones? In their front jeans pocket (or back, but my boys is usually front). The World Health Organization came out in 2011 with a statement that cell phones might be linked to cancer, probably because of emitting radiation. I don't know about you, but radiation and gonads doesn't sound like a good mix to me, and I think of all manner of weird birth defects that will be occurring in the future because of this new trend. Here are two articles about the cell phone and cancer link: [URL]http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2011/pdfs/pr208_E.pdf[/URL] [URL]http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/can-cell-phones-cause-brain-cancer/[/URL] God kicked Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden so that they would not reach out and pick of the Tree of Life. God is Ruler of Life and Death and it is His most sacred domain. It makes total sense that the devil will try to attack that with fervency, in as quiet a way as possible so that it will not be noticed until the damage has been done. And better yet for the devil that he turns us against ourselves and divides us in this, making us do his dirty work for him, exemplified by our very own governments enforcing, or at least strongly encouraging (can't attend public school or daycare without being up to date on your vaccinations!) this harmful protocol! I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I can sniff out an evil conspiracy when I see one. I implore every parent or every potential parent here to forego routine immunizations in their babies until at least two years of age, and at that time, pick and choose only the most important immunizations you think your child will need to be safe (i.e. only the ones preventing death or long-term debilitating disease). Never get a vaccine for your baby at birth!! ~selah Here is my article on vaccination and bone growth dysfunction: [B]Is the Aluminum in Vaccines Causing the Female Pelvis to Grow Too Small for Vaginal Birth?[/B] I am not a vaccine alarmist, and we support a woman's right to accept or refuse any treatments, and that goes for vaccination recommendations by the CDC and AAP for their families! But we believe our job is to inform you of data as we are made privy to it. There is an alarming trend that I want to draw your attention to. I have been perplexed by the epidemic proportions of woman needing cesarean sections for too-small pelvises in the past several years of practice. I have watched c section rates grow alarmingly fast from when I began midwifery in 1995 until today, 20 years later. It is actually--in my opinion--becoming an epidemic, but it is still a silent one, lurking. I estimate women are at a 5 times higher risk of needing a cesarean section than their mother's generation, and I believe it is getting worse all the time. In 1970, the cesarean section rate was around 5%, and lower for midwives. Now it is notoriously 5-15% for midwives, depending on birth setting. It is typically lower for women accessing midwives and having homebirth, yes, but I believe the problem of women's pelvises being too small applies to all provider types and is independent of setting, meaning midwives as well as doctors, home as well as hospital, are seeing the same problem. The pelvis is comprised of 3 bones and they fuse in adolescence. Any deficiency caused in this time period is serious and will affect the child for life. Inadequate bone growth causes osteomalacia, called rickets in childhood. It can lead to a deformation of the pelvis called triradiate pelvis, or beaked pelvis, making for the woman having a relatively normal inlet but a deep, long, and narrow outlet. Sidewalls will usually converge so baby is funneled into a smaller and smaller tunnel as he tries to make his way out. It is a pelvis similar to a bird-type pelvis or dinosaur pelvis, if you have read those books to your kids or visited the science museums. I submit that these deformaties are usually subclinical in women, are not detectable with the eye, and difficult even to asses during pelvimetry. The only diagnostic tool we have is a radiograph of some sort, x-ray or ct scan. We know Vit D deficiency in on the decline since the 1980s ([URL='http://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fpubmed%2F21872696&h=_AQEWKJvcAQFM1HKWA_2nHA9hkqEciIBQllp8QwmboXeeIg&enc=AZP18U06VSKkhifLcPiiE2Em2rrQsdg567MimT8aYmBGW4uvqtqdeX9i0yziAVfp5GQ0INy58El8YZq_QfM500NtYa30grzkpU7RC6lcnCEyD2SQfmdI2iaRQHXWrdBxHhI4qml8av3f3Z5IRrY6_0MCErNa8l6vGbTucCuBcmxZV_9-mzNbYEDPt0uPCCVbo3E&s=1']http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21872696[/URL]) and this affects bone growth. Calcium deficiency can affect bone growth too. But I am not sure we can attribute the startling and acute rise in necessary cesarean sections to this alone, though it definitely could be part of the problem. However, if we look at the change in vaccination schedules recommended for babies, we can see a whopping increase beginning in the late 80s with the Hib vaccine, and the 90s with the addition of the HepB vaccine. In the 1970s, babies were only receiving 3 series of injections for 7 diseases. In the 80s that increased to 8 diseases, and kept increasing until today where babies are receiving 8 series of injections for 14 diseases (or thereabouts). It is recommended by the CDC that babies get 115 shots before their first two years of life! [URL]http://vaxtruth.org/2012/02/cdc-recommended-immunization-schedule-2012-birth-through-6-years/[/URL] What does this mean? It means that exposures in our babies and children to aluminum is increasing greatly, and has been since the late 80s when Hib was added to the schedule. One of the major Hib manufacturers uses a large amount of aluminum in its product, 225 mcgs per shot. And the HepB vaccine contains 250 mcgs in one shot. This is significant information when we consider that we do not even know what the safe levels are for children because it has not been adequately studied yet. But Dr Sears extrapolated data ([URL='http://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.askdrsears.com%2F&h=sAQECMULCAQETzeDfZsTbCJKWuvLjaRUGZAIRX0Lysz3cvA&enc=AZM7ZLGMQ59NEHZ17mV2iu35l4TmpiYcVN6ywW5-xwywEdQLAK3BKjDFjCxekDR5JAfoOi08tDMOlJm12NKWxPTbaejDv-slRx00Kxvk-5TmGBWZ5mwgv1CdFffnp7gBXrvEPyVk0nKDVIZ1VD6i2IqVq4rwF6AOeUOAH9eSEJ-BsZVHa3ZO_ekFoqNrUb2q2DE&s=1']http://www.askdrsears.com/[/URL]…/health-co…/vaccines/vaccine-faqs) available for premature infants (published safe dosages) and adjusted for the weight of mature and normal infants, and he found that the maximum aluminum dose per day is probably below 30 mcgs for a 12 pound baby, and 50 mcgs for a 22 pound baby. What can aluminum toxicity cause? A host of disorders, but for my current interest, it has been proven in many medical studies that aluminum toxicity causes abnormal bone mineralization and osteamalacia, especially in the bony pelvis; it prohibits bone growth and weakens bones. I believe, based on this information, that women who received most or all of their recommended childhood immunizations, and who were born in the late 1980s and beyond (those esp receiving the Hib vaccine with high aluminum content), have a 5-fold increase in needing a cesarean section. Those born every decade thereafter who received most or all of their immunizations (esp Hib and HebB) are at even increased risk, if we use linear progression as our statistical model (meaning as exposure to aluminum goes up so does likelihood of having a pelvic contracture). This is worsened in women who grew up without much sunlight (Vit D) and those who had diets low in calcium. If there is indeed a correlation with aluminum toxicity and contracted pelvises, midwives and the 'low-risk' women they serve are in for a lot of time spent in the hospital for necessary cesarean sections due to pelvises that did not grow quite as big as they should have. This lends a new twist to immunization compliance. Yes, we are preventing our girl children from having a certain disease that might be uncomfortable or make them sick for a time, but possibly at the cost of their reproductive well-being.... [URL]http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/09/21/could-this-be-the-most-dangerous-aspect-of-vaccines.aspx[/URL] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Leisure and Society
Hobbies, Interests & Entertainment
Conspiracy Theories
The Enemy is Attacking Life Right in Front of our Faces
Top
Bottom