BS: New disease

Subject: BS: New disease
From: SINSULL
Date: 17 Mar 03 - 09:17 PM

The CDC is carefully monitoring cases of a new disease/infection. They do not suspect terrorism but rather a mutated virus or an agent that has jumped species. 127 cases have been reported worldwide mainly in Asia and there are some suspected cases in California.

The symptoms are high fever and pneumonia. They advise that you contact a doctor immediately if you experience unusual symptoms. Everybody feeling OK?

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: open mike
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 02:02 AM

I have a pretty tense feeling in the pit of my stomach due to the tension in the world, but i do not attribute it to any small organism, rather to the large threat that looms on the horizon: troop movements,
threats, untimatums, invasion plans, and such.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: mouldy
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 02:44 AM

I have just e-mailed my other half about this bug, as the first suspected case has arrived in the UK from Hong Kong. He is due back from NE China in 3-4 weeks and is a dab hand at picking up coughs and colds via airliner air recirculation. Last time he kindly shared it with me for Christmas!

Andrea

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: JennyO
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 07:11 AM

There has been a confirmed case in Australia, too, and another 20 suspected cases are being investigated.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: manitas_at_work
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 08:17 AM

How can we tell it from ricin poisoning?

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: MMario
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 08:30 AM

report I saw last night said that according to W.H.O. is is not easily transmitted and should not become pandemic

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Jeri
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 09:12 AM

Ricin is not contagious - only the people originally exposed would get sick. There's no fever, high or otherwise. The symptoms begin within hours of exposure. The symptoms are much more similar to anthrax, but again, anthrax isn't spread from person to person and could have been detected by nasal swabs relatively quickly.

The fact that this IS spreading indicates it's an infectious agent, although as MMario said, not a very infectious one. If I were to play arm-chair epidemiologist, I think the biggest clue would be looking for what it's hardest/more time-consuming/not likely to test for.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 18 Mar 03 - 07:10 PM

Ah yes, but what other diseases have they said 'it's OK, we can contain it' or 'don't worry, it's not spread that way'......

Suspect those at most risk are the usual groups, very young, elderly, those with pre-existing respiritory tract illnesses and supressed immune systems.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: SINSULL
Date: 30 Mar 03 - 02:07 PM

54 dead. Hundreds of confirmed cases. 2 Toronto hospitals closed and their employees asked to quarantine themselves. The doctor who first identified it is dead. And China is suspected to be the origin but officials there are not cooperating.

Just what I needed - more good news.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Ebbie
Date: 30 Mar 03 - 02:23 PM

The word is that it is related to the common cold, and just as with the cold they have no cure for it. I have always wondered if offices, schools, stores and other elective sites were shut for a week, could we stop something like this in its tracks?

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 30 Mar 03 - 02:52 PM

Probably not. Usually, the only way to stop an airborne disease is quarantine. It sounds like this won't inflict so much damage as to be worth a global transportation shut-down.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Peg
Date: 30 Mar 03 - 03:24 PM

Liz, true, the cases where people have died from this mostly includes the elderly and those with compromised immunity...

Still, it's scary, like the revival of bubonic plague and incresed cases on TB over the last few years...I find myself wondering if the (USA) overuse of antibiotics is responsible? But that wouldn't go very far towards explaining how it originated in China...

One wonders if communicabilty would become a bigger problem when urban centers find themselves affected...at this point one has to be near the sick person and in contact with the virus from their sneezing, etc. But in cities where colds and flu are spread quickly during outbreaks during the winter season (also due to recycled indoor air in pubic buildings and transportation vehicles, as well as compromised immunity from winter lifestyle changes including less exercise and heavier foods), it stands to reason this one would, too.

One more thing to worry about, but also a good reminder that the best "cure" for disease is prevention in living healthy. I am thinking this might be a top news story if not for the war (the media loves scaring the public with the latest health threat).

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 30 Mar 03 - 03:28 PM

Peg-If this is a virus, the antibiotics overuse isn't related. Increasing cases of plague and tuberculosis could very well be pinned on it, though.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: JennyO
Date: 31 Mar 03 - 05:58 AM

I heard that it is thought to have come from Hong Kong, where they are having the most trouble with it, and has only got out of control now because they ignored warning signs as long ago as late last year. I believe they have closed schools in Hong Kong now.

Jenny

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: annamill
Date: 31 Mar 03 - 10:40 AM

Sinsull, does it have a name I can go look up?

Annamill

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Doktor Doktor
Date: 31 Mar 03 - 10:55 AM

See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2891467.stm

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Doktor Doktor
Date: 31 Mar 03 - 10:57 AM

PS DONT PANIC

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Cluin
Date: 01 Apr 03 - 03:39 AM

They are calling it SARS. It's VERY infectious and lethal. You won't see much about it on CNN at the moment, even though it is potentially a more immediate threat than whatsisname.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: JennyO
Date: 01 Apr 03 - 09:20 AM

SARS Sudden (or severe) acute respiratory syndrome.

It was discovered in China as long ago as last November, but not reported. Then a patient was sent to Hong Kong, where a number of medical staff and visitors were infected.

They are urging people to take care if they have to travel to Asian countries.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Apr 03 - 09:55 AM

The Principal of the local Junior High has been diagnosed with SARS. She is now quarantined in her house and the school has been closed until next week sometime. Pretty scary stuff. She was in China a while back and from what I can gather this is where she contracted it.There has been quite a few people complaining of scratchy throats and such so now everyone is running to their Drs. and local hospital for a checkup. (I'm in New Brunswick, Canada, by the way.)

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: VoxFox
Date: 01 Apr 03 - 10:06 AM

Crap! Lost my cookie. Last post was mine. :o) VF

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: GUEST,James
Date: 01 Apr 03 - 12:44 PM

CBC news did an excellent job of reporting on this last night. Although I have not checked out the website, I bet they will have quite a bit of info.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Cluin
Date: 01 Apr 03 - 09:26 PM

Our local hospital in Sault Ste. Marie has now banned visitors; strict mask-wearing, gloves wearing, washing and laundering procedures in place now. There are 2 possible/probable cases admitted and quaranteen is in effect. No direct link to China is involved, but there is one to a Toronto hospital with several cases.

They say that even the mask-wearing isn't enough protection. This is very infectious and protective eyewear is also needed. It can enter the body through a tear duct or porous membrane like those around an eyeball.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: mouldy
Date: 02 Apr 03 - 01:56 AM

I spoke to my sister-in-law on Monday, and she was on a slight panic trip because her gastro-enterologist husband had recently been in Hong Kong to lecture, and at the hospital where it was first diagnosed. (He seems to be perfectly fine, and was probably nowhere near that part of the hospital).
The other half, in NE China (Shenyang), last week replied that he was aware of it, and was 2500km from the nearest case. Haven't they reported one in Beijing now? - He flies to Europe from there in 10days' time. (He sometimes comes down with a cold when he gets home, and always blames it on the recycled air/germs on the aircraft).

Andrea

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Cluin
Date: 02 Apr 03 - 08:49 PM

The doctor who first diagnosed/identified SARS, Dr Carlo Urbani, has died from it.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: hesperis
Date: 02 Apr 03 - 11:58 PM

Hmmm, I'm in Toronto... been avoiding Chinatown and public transit lately, but don't know how much longer I can do that.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: katlaughing
Date: 03 Apr 03 - 12:03 AM

Andrea, good thoughts of protection going his way...maybe by then they will have enough info to keep people safer. Is there any way that he can re-route?

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: mouldy
Date: 03 Apr 03 - 01:56 AM

He has to go from Beijing initially, as it is only an hour's internal flight from Shenyang. (It's far better than the other option of coming home via Shanghai). But he doesn't seem bothered by it at the moment, as he never mentioned it at all in the mail I got from him on Monday. The bulk of cases are still in the south, I believe. The risk is probably from people taking internal business flights between north and south. He did originally say that he was monitoring how things were going, when I mentioned it a couple of weeks ago. He's a very pragmatic sort, and not prone to panic.

Andrea

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: GUEST,Dreaded Guest
Date: 05 Apr 03 - 03:39 PM

SARS is supposed to be a 'new disease'. Bushit. The timing of its appearance is highly suspicious.

The US govt tried to make a big issue out of smallpox, but that fizzled when people found out they could avoid contracting it by wearing gloves and masks. Now we have SARS, which penetrates both.

And Bush just signed an Executive Order adding it to the quarantinable diseases...first one in twenty or so years to be added.

This is an engineered virus. There are thousands of them in the arsenals of several countries, and the govts of most countries are now acting in unison to bring about tyrannical world govt. We will be hit with wars, economic collapses, terrorism and plagues now, and SARS is the first of the new ones. Or so it seems. But the elitists wouldn't release it unless there was a vaccine, so they're protected, while they say research is ongoing in that area. Bushit yet again. Don't take the carcenogic vaccines.

But what I wanted to ask was about the patent for the AIDS virus. The other day I heard it was developed at Fort Detrick, Maryland in the 1970's and patented by the US govt, but I can't find any record of it in my patent searches.

The history of the AIDS virus I've been able to piece together is that Kissinger convinced Nixon to free up ten million or so for research into something to strengthen the US arsenal of bioweapons. They came up with AIDS (which may have been the result of luekemia mutations) at Fort Detrick and tested it on federal prisoners, who use intravenous drugs and engage in homosexuality. So they infected some prisoners, who then got out on 'good behavior' after they fulfilled their part of the deal, and most of the prisoners migrated to New York City, which is where the backtracking shows it first came into open society. Kissinger had his weapon, but the incubation period was a lot longer than they'd calculated, so AIDS isn't a good short-term weapon, as they were hoping. But it works well for the U.N.'s purposes of long-range population reduction, so they dumped it on Africa, with the results we can all see.

Anyway, does anyone know the patent number or date or title of the patent application? I'd like to get that info. And since SARS came from China (which is notorious for not abiding by patent law) I doubt there is any record of that, but would any of you know about that?

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Peg
Date: 05 Apr 03 - 10:30 PM

the theory so far accepted by many about the spread of AIDS in the United States was that it DID start in New York City (as Dreaded Guest says) but it was brought there during the Bicentennial celebrations in New York harbor; the tall ships and other ships carrying Navy and other naval service personnel from various nations, all there for the big party!
The virus is said to have originated in Africa, according to pathologists who have researched it. If it was brought to New York in this way (having been contracted in foreign ports by naval personnel) it would be a short time before it spread rapidly in the gay community because of the prevalence, at that time, of casual, promiscuous sexual acivity. The reason it was so much worse in New York than it was in San Francisco, despite the similarity in populations, was that San Francisco's gay community mobilized faster to increase awareness and their municipal government was more sympathetic to the problem than the (it is said) closeted mayor of New York at the time, Ed Koch...

This is all detailed in Randy Shilts' book ...And the Band Played On.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: katlaughing
Date: 06 Apr 03 - 03:26 AM

I don't know if I still have my copy of this book, but it is well worth studying for an alternative look at HIV and its supposed connection to AIDS. Here are a couple of reviews of Inventing the AIDS myth:

This is the book every AIDS-watcher has been awaiting, in which the most prominent and persistent critic of HIV as the cause of AIDS presents his case most exhaustively and popularly. Duesberg, himself a virologist, stoutly maintains that HIV cannot cause AIDS because it fails to meet the rules by which a virus is implicated as disease-causing. He says that the causes of AIDS in First World countries most probably are overuse of toxic drugs--by legal prescription (e.g., AZT) as well as illicit use (e.g., the nitrite inhalants known as poppers that are used to enhance sexual capability)--and multiple and repeated infections with venereal diseases; in the Third World, they are malnutrition and maladies (e.g., tuberculosis) rare in wealthy nations but still prevalent in poor ones as well as, again, substance abuse. Duesberg massively documents and cogently argues these positions but not before laying out the historic and political reasons why most members of his profession and related medical specialists seized on a viral causation for AIDS. Basically, virologists wanted another success like that with polio and, frustrated by complete failure to find viral causes for cancer, took up AIDS as the perfect challenge as well as, once HIV was discovered, a ticket for prolonging their first-class ride on the medical research gravy train. Strong stuff, but Duesberg has never been alone in this analysis or in his scientific arguments. He has never before gathered his case together and presented it to the general public, though, so regard this book as a milestone essential to any collection concerned with AIDS. Ray Olson --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Kirkus Reviews

A well-credentialed scientist's hard-driving attack on the accepted view that AIDS is an infectious disease caused by HIV. Duesberg (Molecular biology/Univ. of Calif., Berkeley), an early researcher in the field of retroviruses, asserts that HIV, like virtually all retroviruses, is harmless. He finds that HIV meets none of the usual criteria (such as the six laws of virology) used to establish that a microbe causes disease. But if that is so, why do scientists persist in saying that AIDS is an epidemic caused by HIV? As Duesberg tells it, the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention needed a serious epidemic to justify its continued existence, and by naming AIDS a single contagious disease, it created an atmosphere of public fear that brought it increased funding and power. The biomedical establishment took note. Having failed to find a viral cause of cancer, Duesberg says, virus hunters needed a new disease, and AIDS was it. The HIV-AIDS connection was then announced by Robert Gallo, head of a retrovirus lab at the National Cancer Institute, at a 1984 press conference rather than demonstrated in a peer- reviewed scientific paper. Further, Duesberg charges, the pharmaceutical companies exploited the situation by bringing back highly toxic failed cancer drugs, such as AZT, which, he says, destroys the immune system and causes AIDS-like symptoms. Duesberg cites other scientists who have questioned the HIV-AIDS hypothesis, among them several Nobel laureates, including Kary Mullis (for Chemistry), the author of this book's foreword. Duesberg's own theory is that AIDS is linked to the use of immunity-suppressing illicit drugs (such as crack and "poppers"), and he urges investigation along these lines. One need not accept Duesberg's drug hypothesis, however, to be persuaded that the serious charges he makes deserve serious answers. A controversial book, certain to be met with strong resistance from the biomedical establishment. Four appendixes (not seen) include articles on HIV by Duesberg in scientific journals. -- Copyright ©1996, Kirkus Associates, LP. All rights reserved. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

I am sure one could find used copies of it. At Amazon dot com there are several other books out, now, which debunk claims about the correlation of HIV and AIDS, as well as other supposed facts, as Duesberg has done.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Jeri
Date: 06 Apr 03 - 11:23 AM

The fact that infection with HIV consistently is seen in patients who have AIDS is just a weird coincidence. If those babies with AIDs hadn't smoked crack prior to being born, they would have been fine.   And medical workers who get stuck with contaminated needles, and (formerly) transfusion patients. Sounds like a more scientific-SOUNDING version of "God is punishing them for being gay/drug addicts/promiscuous/etc."

I suppose if one had a friend who had been in a monagamous relationship and never used drugs, and seen him first learn he was infected with HIV and later develop AIDS, one would be less likely to believe alternative explanations.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Peg
Date: 06 Apr 03 - 12:02 PM

the "alternative" explanations are pretty interestinga nd one is tempted to believe them simply because this "virus" is so hard to get a handle on. These days researchers have acknowledged some half-dozen different permutations of the virus.
It does seem true that certain lifestyle choices make one more prone to infection, while some make one more prone to die quickly. Once the virus entered the intravenous drug-using population in the US, deaths were much faster than they were in the gay community because heroin and crack addicts' immune systems are already severely compromised.

In the parts of Africa where AIDS is now a full-fledged epidemic and where it is killing an enormous portion of the population, poverty, malnutrition and poor immunity are also playing a part, as are cultural behaviors around sexuality (it's acceptable for men to have extramarital sex without protection; and the genital mutilation common in some areas makes women more prone to contracting HIV).

There was a theory in the last 1980s that AIDS was actually the tertiary stage of syphilis, and indeed some of the symptoms of late-stage AIDS-related complications do match it (delirium, blindness, etc.). The thing about this theory that makes it seem plausible is that there was such a pandemic of sexually-transmitted diseases in the 1970s and it sort of made sense thatthe long-range effects of this woudl rear its ugly head at some point. Of course nwo we have STDS back in full force despite the caveat that everyone should be practicing safe sex to prevent the spread of HIV. But some STDS are transmitted even through latex or despite condom use: human papilloma virus (HPV) for one. And the practice of "barebacking" in the gay community (in which HIV-positive men have unprotected sex with each other) does nothing to halt the spread of other STDs and may in fact speed up the progression of AIDS. Althoguh various drug cocktails and therapies allow people with HIV and AIDS to live much longer, it woudl appear it is still a death sentence...and living with it can be in and of itself painful and difficult, depending on one's drug regime and one's own individual reactions to the drugs. I have read about programs of alternative measures (herbs, natural foods, etc.) that decrease the need for these drugs but that also help halt the progression of the syndrome, because they bolster the immune system.
It seems no coincidence that the so-called auto-immune diseases (multiple sclerosis, Type 1 diabetes, lupus, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue and Epstein-Barr) have risen in occurrence concomitant with the ubiquitousness of AIDS..both are related to immune system function, which must be affected by the increasing amount of toxins in our environment...
I am tempted to say we reap what we sow, but that sounds too much like "the wages of sin is death" which I do not believe...at least not in the way it is normally meant...

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: GUEST,Dreaded Guest
Date: 06 Apr 03 - 04:18 PM

Thanks, but none of that answers my question. I can't get into the patent databases relevant to this. New pharmaceuticals and microbiological inventions are patented just like anything else, and I heard the US govt patented the AIDS virus in the 1970's. The new 'tool' was commissioned by Kissinger and was developed at Fort Detrick, Maryland. Of course the later 'government' studies of the disease would point to it coming from somewhere else, but many believe it came out of the US prison system experimentation program, as I described. Would any of you know how to locate that patent? I believe it was connected to leukemia 'research'.

As a sidelight, Gulf War Syndrome, some believe, is connected to mass spraying done by the military. An 'AIDS vaccine' sprayed on the troops 12 years ago...50 thousand dead from it now. So, this 'research' is on-going, and there should be a paper trail through the patent office.

Ahh...it just occurred to me I might find my answer by searching Dr. Len Horowitz' articles. Nevermind.

Y'all might want to read some of his stuff...I plan to do a google search of 'Horowitz AIDS' later...maybe he'll mention the patent angle. A year ago I read some stuff by him...ultra-qualified, and he says the govt is killing us with vaccines, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Peg
Date: 06 Apr 03 - 05:20 PM

Uh, GUEST, Gulf War Syndrome has nothing whatsoever to do with AIDS. The symptoms aren't even similar...and why would a vaccine be "sprayed" en masse? That makes absolutely no sense.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: fat B****rd
Date: 07 Apr 03 - 03:32 AM

Speaking of SARS, a workmate of moine returns to-day after a short holiday in Hong Kong. Discussions have already taken place as to wether or not he should be forced to have a medical.......Personally I see no harm in being "on the safe side" but there are some who may treat the man like some sort of "Typhoid Mary"

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: GUEST,Dreaded Guest
Date: 07 Apr 03 - 10:36 AM

The US military is one of the largest testing ground for medical procedures in existence. Radiation tests, maritime tests. The best environment for testing sprayed contagion is aboard ship...out at sea...few variables. US navy has always been used as guinea pigs. Many many many recorded instances of that over the decades. And the Gulf War stuff...probably just soft-kill weapons. Our own military killing it's own. There is a world-wide population reduction plan ongoing, and the US is not exempt. 50thousand dead from Gulf War Syndrome...lots of forced anthrax vaccinations and lots of other things went on in Desert storm. Weapons are CONSTANTLY being tested on people by governments. The Chechnyans in the Moscow theater...300+ hostages killed by a 'valium like gas'. That's the crap that'll probably be sprayed on American cities when the big surprise (whatever it is) comes. Gun confiscation, round up of dissidents, introduction of foreign troops. Hundreds died in that 'rescue' in Moscow. And the last smallpox outbreak of size was in a Russian port town (forget the name) when the Soviets sprayed smallpox to test a new aerosol delivery system. Right now, as I type, the US military is spraying Goldsby, Oklahoma daily with a coctail of stuff including BT (Bactillus something or other). We are being sprayed constantly, and some of it is just outright lethal. There are articles about Gulf War and the 'aids vaccine' sprayed on the troops. A google search would probably turn it up.

I guess no one has the AIDS patent number. Oh well.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Wolfgang
Date: 07 Apr 03 - 10:44 AM

I have been at Duesberg's homepage and it seems he hasn't written anything about AIDS since 1998. No update, nothing. Does anyone know whether he has given up, recanted, or is dead?

From sci.med.aids.faqs:

Duesberg's Risk-Group Theory

Duesberg's theory is: HIV is a harmless retrovirus that may serve as a marker for people in AIDS high-risk groups. AIDS is not a contagious syndrome caused by one conventional virus or microbe. AIDS is probably caused by conventional pathogenic factors: administration of blood transfusions or drugs, promiscuous male homosexual activity associated with drugs, acute parasitic infections, and malnutrition. Drugs such as AZT promote AIDS, rather than fight it. His theory is explained in detail in "Human Immunodeficiency Virus and Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome: Correlation but not Causation", Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA V86 pp.755-764, (Feb. 1989).

Virtually the entire scientific community considers Duesberg's AIDS theory to be unsupportable, although he was a respected researcher before he proposed it. There is no suggestion that his theories are the result of a political agenda or homophobia.

Details of the debate can be found in published rebuttals to Duesberg, such as in Nature V345 pp.659-660 (June 21, 1990), and in Duesberg's debate with Blattner, Gallo, Temin, Science V241 pp.514-517 (1988).

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: katlaughing
Date: 07 Apr 03 - 05:02 PM

Well this website has several articles linked that were written by him, the latest in 2000.

I have not followed him, nor read his other co-authored books. I do think it is good to look at other theories and I never took his book to be homophobic, in fact it was recommended to me by several gay and gay-friendly friends.

Oh, well, I am sure there's more out there that we do not know, so we just have to keep looking and reading.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Cluin
Date: 07 Apr 03 - 05:34 PM

Holy Shit! Who let the DG take the wheel?

Fasten your seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy ride!

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: GUEST,Dreaded Guest
Date: 08 Apr 03 - 12:16 AM

This is the kind of stuff I'm looking for relating to the patenting of the AIDS virus by the US in the 1970's. The patent number is out there, somewhere:

Reference to US govt patent of mutated herpes virus

From the article:

U.S. Patent 5,604,093: Human Herpes virus-6 (HHV-6) Isolution and
Products (Chronic Fatigue Syndrome; Health and Human Services) February
18, 1997 U.S. Patent 5,189,022: underlying viral cause of CFS (Health and
Human
Services) U.S. Patent 5,242,820: Pathogenic Mycoplasma (Mycoplasma
fermentans in
CFS; Department of Defense) September 7, 1993
U.S. Patent 5,827,750: JHK Virus in CFIDS (Grossberg retrovirus)
National Institutes of Health Grant RO1-AI-32710...

Pretty much gibberish to me, but it looks like a govt patent, and isn't 'mycoplasma' also mentioned in the Chemtrails reports. The long white stringy stuff (like ash) that sifts down after an Air Force spraying?

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 08 Apr 03 - 12:21 AM

DG-You know perfectly well that a gene or organism can be patented based on DISCOVERY, not only on invention. It doesn't surprise me in the least that the CDC would be among the first to unravel and patent the genomes of infectious diseases; it exists to control such diseases.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: GUEST,DG
Date: 08 Apr 03 - 12:38 PM

So now you're telling me what I know? Kind of presumptuous. Why does the patent above mention the Department of Defense? God you're in denial. The US govt is patenting viruses. The Department of Defense spends money on developing weapons. 1+1=?

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 08 Apr 03 - 01:48 PM

2, or 10, or whatever DG says, apparently.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: SINSULL
Date: 08 Apr 03 - 06:45 PM

Last night officials in Hong Kong were discussing the possibility of shutting down all schools and non-essential businesses for two weeks in the hopes of checking the spread of the disease. Doctors are exhausted. hospitals are filled. All elective surgeries have been cancelled. Nasty business.

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: Troll
Date: 09 Apr 03 - 01:15 AM

Last week over 900 people died of pneumonia and influenza in the US alone. Last year there were over 5,000 deaths from hepatitis.
So far there have been about 100 deaths from SARS WORLDWIDE.
Draw your own conclusions.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: New disease
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 09 Apr 03 - 11:26 AM

Troll-Those diseases have spread world-wide already. SARS hasn't. I dubt it's going to be a true pandemic by any means, but it could, within a decade, kill more people annually than either of those diseases. It does have a three percent mortality rate, which is much higher than most influenzas.