This is pretty off-topic, but does anybody here know the name of the window manager theme this guy Jeff uses in his screenshot? I really like the look of it.
Does anyone else here thing this is horrible?
Yes, I for one certainly do. It won't be very long before there's nothing - not even the night sky - left unscarred by the rape of our civilization. I can't say I'm at all surprised that some people are serious about this, though.
And yes, fluoridation of the water is dangerous and I wish we didn't have it here in Ontario, but remember how important Big Business is in this world. Luckily I have a Brita to filter the water before I drink it.:-)
WHO's intention is that ".health" will immediately identify the domain-name holder as adhering to agreed quality and ethical standards, thereby instilling confidence and security in the information provided. Such standards would emerge from international consultations WHO would initiate with governments, medical associations, consumer groups, the health industry and others.
I could see this raising a big problem with sites that promote unconventional therapies and medicine that are't approved by the medical establishments. Take Dr. Lorraine Day's site or the Gerson Institute for instance. I doubt the methods of curing cancer described on Dr. Day's site would be considered as "adhering to agreed quality standards" by the health industry, for the simple reason that such a cure for cancer would hurt the pharamaceutical companies (i.e. Big Business). It's unlikely that WHO would let them become part of the.health domain, because these ideas are disapproved and mocked by the "medical experts". Meanwhile, such methods have been proven to be extremely effective, in fact more effective than the conventional treatments like chemo and radiation (but your doctore will undoubtedly deny it).
These alternative medicine sites could still continue to be hosted at a.com or.org, but they will be difficult if not impossible to find in the.health arena. People who have been told to trust only.health sites for quality medical content won't even give unconventional practices chance if they're not under the.health umbrella. With.health in effect, the public is shown yet another way to identify which practices are "good" and which ones to avoid and "shouldn't be trusted".
As I see it, this is just the latest attempt by the establishment to suppress effective and safe medical therapies that would hurt Big Business. It's disgusting.
Ok, well at least they're starting to move in the right direction. But I still don't see why one would rather the chemotherapy with the side effects than by natural means which has no side effects at all. As it stands now, you still have to have a very strong immune system to be able to withstand chemotherapy treatment, and then it's quite likely that the cancer will come back sooner or later (since you you probably won't change your lifestyle--this is why so many people are getting cancer in the first place, after all).
Why not strengthen your body and your immune system instead of using chemicals to kill the cancer (and possibly yourself at the same time)? For God's sake, so many people have cured themselves *without* taking chemotherapy but instead by healing their bodies, and they continue to live today because by doing so, they have shown themselves that their changed lifestyle eliminated the cancer, and naturally prevents the cancer from returning.
Of course, your doctor will tell you all this is hogwash. Why? Because doctors have been very misled by the Big Cancer Business. It would be complete nonsense for a natural, inexpensive cure to exist. Why would we spend so much time and money perfecting the well-established cancer-killing technology like chemo, radiation and drugs? Well, because they keep the money coming into the cancer business. Cancer is Big Business. Find out for yourself.
By the moderation of "Funny" given to my message, it seems the moderator, like most people, has passed off my words as absurd, as if I'm some lunatic. I'm not surprised, since so many people before (even my own relatives) have done the same when told about this. People want proof. I guess those websites aren't proof enough.
Go ahead, get cancer, go to the doctor and let them kill you with their magic chemotherapy and radiation and drug potions. It makes little difference to me at this point, as I probably don't know you personally.
I find it amazing how many people don't know about the truth about the cancer industry. I wouldn't pay the Cancer Society a cent, let alone support some mindless organization by providing my computer to help study drug effects on cancer. I'm not against the concept of distibuted computing in any way--it's an extremely powerful tool that should be put to practical use, not mindless use.
Every time I hear people "developing a cure for cancer" it drives me up the wall. It seems silly, in my opinion, to spend money trying to develop something that already exists. (I'm not talking about chemo or radiation or drugs. Those are obviously treatments, but they're far from being cures.)
I know this is a bit off-topic, but I feel I have to make it known in any way I can. Check out Dr. Day's site or the Gerson Institute for some examples of the ideas I'm talking about. Open your eyes.
Slashdot Mirror
It was US oil production that peaked in the 1970s, not global oil production. There's a huge difference there.
That's not what's showing on Amazon. That's just a teaser.
This is pretty off-topic, but does anybody here know the name of the window manager theme this guy Jeff uses in his screenshot? I really like the look of it.
Indeed. I think the author must be insane.
Does anyone else here thing this is horrible? Yes, I for one certainly do. It won't be very long before there's nothing - not even the night sky - left unscarred by the rape of our civilization. I can't say I'm at all surprised that some people are serious about this, though.
And yes, fluoridation of the water is dangerous and I wish we didn't have it here in Ontario, but remember how important Big Business is in this world. Luckily I have a Brita to filter the water before I drink it. :-)
I could see this raising a big problem with sites that promote unconventional therapies and medicine that are't approved by the medical establishments. Take Dr. Lorraine Day's site or the Gerson Institute for instance. I doubt the methods of curing cancer described on Dr. Day's site would be considered as "adhering to agreed quality standards" by the health industry, for the simple reason that such a cure for cancer would hurt the pharamaceutical companies (i.e. Big Business). It's unlikely that WHO would let them become part of the .health domain, because these ideas are disapproved and mocked by the "medical experts". Meanwhile, such methods have been proven to be extremely effective, in fact more effective than the conventional treatments like chemo and radiation (but your doctore will undoubtedly deny it).
These alternative medicine sites could still continue to be hosted at a .com or .org, but they will be difficult if not impossible to find in the .health arena. People who have been told to trust only .health sites for quality medical content won't even give unconventional practices chance if they're not under the .health umbrella. With .health in effect, the public is shown yet another way to identify which practices are "good" and which ones to avoid and "shouldn't be trusted".
As I see it, this is just the latest attempt by the establishment to suppress effective and safe medical therapies that would hurt Big Business. It's disgusting.
Why not strengthen your body and your immune system instead of using chemicals to kill the cancer (and possibly yourself at the same time)? For God's sake, so many people have cured themselves *without* taking chemotherapy but instead by healing their bodies, and they continue to live today because by doing so, they have shown themselves that their changed lifestyle eliminated the cancer, and naturally prevents the cancer from returning.
Of course, your doctor will tell you all this is hogwash. Why? Because doctors have been very misled by the Big Cancer Business. It would be complete nonsense for a natural, inexpensive cure to exist. Why would we spend so much time and money perfecting the well-established cancer-killing technology like chemo, radiation and drugs? Well, because they keep the money coming into the cancer business. Cancer is Big Business. Find out for yourself.
Go ahead, get cancer, go to the doctor and let them kill you with their magic chemotherapy and radiation and drug potions. It makes little difference to me at this point, as I probably don't know you personally.
Every time I hear people "developing a cure for cancer" it drives me up the wall. It seems silly, in my opinion, to spend money trying to develop something that already exists. (I'm not talking about chemo or radiation or drugs. Those are obviously treatments, but they're far from being cures.)
I know this is a bit off-topic, but I feel I have to make it known in any way I can. Check out Dr. Day's site or the Gerson Institute for some examples of the ideas I'm talking about. Open your eyes.