Important Announcement

Whilst we encourage healthy discourse and debate on this channel, please keep all comments in the chat on topic. We discourage inflammatory remarks, baseless accusations, or comments that are not topical, or unrelated to health and wellbeing.

The current accusations and in-fighting occurring in the chat are bringing the forum into disrepute. We stand for freedom of speech, however, the moderators will intervene if the conversation continues to degrade further. We do not want to have to remove individual comments, or block people from commenting.

Let's support one another, rather than bicker and fight.

You get what you give.

Let's rise above the negative energy.

Treat everyone with respect. Be kind. Be forgiving.

Thank you.

Around 1860, it seems as though doctors from across the world were beginning to realise that contagious diseases were not actually contagious. Is it a coincidence that just a few years later, Louis Pasteur published his germ theory, which was propped up by 'scientific institutions', government bodies and other vested interests?

The below was published in the American Medical Gazette and Journal of Health, Volume 10 in 1858, pg. 545.

Source

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

This video is a great visual display of what happens to the respiratory tract in response to a change in humidity.

When the humidity decreases, the mucocilliary clearance of the respiratory tract is impaired. During the winter months when absolute humidity falls, the mucous membranes of the lungs become dehydrated and are unable to clear inhaled particles.

The respiratory tract responds by sloughing off the lining of the respiratory tract. To remove this cellular debris, alveolar macrophages migrate to the area, the lungs produce mucus, and the body stimulates a cough and sneeze reflex to remove the sloughed material - aka a cold or flu.

No pathogen required.

All of this and much more will be covered in an upcoming book to be released in the next month or so.

Stay tuned.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZeAEZZtacA

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

10 reasons why we might be wrong about ‘vitamin deficiencies’

1. There is no direct experimental evidence demonstrating a diet deficient in a single nutrient causes any disease.

2. Countless experiments have failed to induce vitamin deficiency diseases in people eating a deficient diet for 6+ months.

3. Vitamin deficiency diseases induced by eating a diet of one particular food disappear when another food that is also deficient in the same vitamin is substituted.

4. Deficiency diseases like pellagra and beriberi were so ‘explosive’ doctors believed they were contagious diseases. The rapid development of these diseases is impossible to explain from a ‘deficiency’ perspective.

5. Well nourished people put into households suffering beriberi and pellagra developed the diseases within a week, despite the fact they should take months to develop.

6. Animals fed different foods deficient in the same vitamin develop completely different diseases.

7. There are countless instances in the literature of people with a deficiency disease failing to respond to supplementation with the deficient vitamin.

8. Vitamin deficiency diseases have been reversed with substances other than the deficient vitamin.

9. People develop nutritional deficiency diseases despite eating a nutritionally replete diet, suggesting the disease might be toxic in nature.

10. People who fast for 100+ days do not develop vitamin deficiency diseases.

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

Louis Pasteur supposedly created a vaccine against rabies. He tested his vaccine on two young boys who were supposedly bitten by rabid dogs. Neither of these boys developed rabies. This evidence is claimed as proof that the vaccine protected them against the deadly germ. Yet the evidence points towards the fact that neither of the dogs even had rabies.

You really have to wonder why Pasteur and his colleagues had to twist and bend the truth so much, if all of their accomplishments were truly above board.

Source

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

What's really in those pills you are taking?

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

Imagine massive numbers of marine life begin washing up dead along a stretch of coastline. A group of marine biologists are brought in to investigate the cause of the problem. A few months earlier, some unscrupulous companies started dumping all kinds of toxic waste into a major river system which flows directly into the ocean. The toxic waste includes pesticides, heavy metals, microplastics, synthetic fertilisers, persistent organic pollutants, pharmaceutical drugs like hormones and antibiotics, sewage, and various other toxins.

Following their ‘exhaustive’ investigation, the marine biologists triumphantly declare that naturally occurring plant compounds found in seaweed and algae are the problem. These naturally occurring chemicals include phytic acids, lectins, oxalates, polyphenols, tannins, and saponins. They propose that the only way to fix the problem is to change the feeding behaviours of the affected sea life, and to develop technologies which target these so-called harmful naturally occurring compounds.

Would any rational person of sound mind agree with the conclusions of the marine biologists?

This might seem like a far-fetched scenario, but this is precisely what is happening right now to human beings. Modern farming practices bombard our food with the toxic substances mentioned above. However, scientists and 'health professionals’ claim it’s the naturally occurring plant chemicals making you sick.

So ask yourself the question, is it the plants, or the poisons?

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

There is only one disease, it's called allostasis. Allostasis is the body in an active state of returning to homeostasis after being disrupted by an external input.

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

Those vitamin pills you are taking for your health are literally synthesised from petrochemicals.

Take thiamine (B1) for instance. It's made from a key building block known as grewe diamine (a coal tar derivative).

People want an alternative to drugs, but little do they realise that the ones making the drugs are also making the vitamins.

Your vitamins are not coming from food. They're being synthesised into existence from toxic chemicals in a lab.

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/0471238961.2008090102211804.a01

There is no such thing as pests, or weeds, or pathogens in nature. Everything plays an essential role in maintaining perfect balance.

Wolves were once considered pests in Yellowstone national park, and were completely eliminated by hunters. From that point onward, the park fell into disarray. It wasn't until the wolves were reintroduced that everything started returning back to balance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysa5OBhXz-Q

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanely

Permaculture farmers like Richard Perkins get it.

In this video, from 11 min 30 sec to 15 min 30 sec Richard drops so many gold nuggets.

He explains what weeds are, and what the role of 'pathogens' and 'diseases' are. Not only that but he describes how what happens in nature also reflects precisely what happens inside us!

The natural patterns we observe in nature are true of all ecosystems, including the human body.

The soil of the earth is akin to the soil of the human body (i.e. bodily fluids), a concept which was discussed at length in the medical literature just 100 years ago.

When the soil is disrupted in nature, the weeds grow to return the system back to balance. When we disrupt the soil of the human body (with toxicity, deficiency, trauma) the weeds grow to return the system to balance.

Practical examples like this are a great way of better understanding terrain theory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u79tiVcj8bY

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

What does health mean to you? How do we define it?

Some say the definition of health is the absence of disease. However, this definition is almost meaningless when disease is often defined as the absence of health. How can health and disease be the absence of one another, when neither has been properly defined? This task is complicated further when one considers what dis-ease actually is (the body in an active state of healing or returning to homeostasis).

Health has been defined in some textbooks as “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, not merely the absence of disease or infirmity”. The historian Robert Hughes claimed this definition was “more realistic for a bovine than a human state of existence”.

It’s almost impossible to stipulate specific parameters (like vital signs), lab numbers etc. when trying to define health because no two people are alike. So how do we objectively quantify whether someone is healthy or not? Ask the person! The individual is the only one who knows whether they are healthy, not some clinician parading around in a white coat.

How does an individual know if they are healthy? They “feel” it.

When asked about their state of health, people say things like “I feel great”, or “I’m not feeling very well”, or “I feel sick”. There are some people who don’t look healthy from the outside, yet say they “feel fine”. Whereas others who look healthy may complain they are always “feeling unwell”.

Do the parameters that claim to indicate good health or disease really matter when the person “feels” healthy? How many people have gone to their doctor saying they feel healthy, only to be told they are in fact, sick? Conversely, how many people who feel sick have been told, “there’s nothing wrong”?

Could health be a feeling? Does connecting to that feeling then put the body into a state of equilibrium which stimulates the innate healing response? Is the feeling the key determining factor? Is our physical state a reflection of what we feel? Could simply connecting to what being healthy “feels like” be the most potent medicine?

People have been conditioned not to trust their instincts and their intuition. They hand their power over to the white coat with the prescription pad. People are under the illusion that only the clinician has the power to heal them, when the fact of the matter is, only the person can heal themselves.

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

New book coming very soon! Stay tuned for more info.

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

I will be going live with Toni Wheel to talk about viruses on Thursday, 12 noon EST. Feel free to come and listen.

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

https://m.youtube.com/live/ALBIlSTjojQ?feature=share

Doctors used to know that signs & symptoms are not the disease, but are the body's healing response.

Believing that signs & symptoms are the problem, is simply confused thinking.

High cholesterol doesn't cause atherosclerosis.
High blood pressure doesn't cause heart disease.
The immune system doesn't cause autoimmune disease.
Low serotonin doesn't cause depression.
Elevated insulin doesn't cause diabetes.
Amyloid plaques don't cause Alzheimer's disease.
Elevated triglycerides don't cause metabolic syndrome.
Dysbiosis and SIBO doesn't cause gastrointestinal disease.
Elevated oestrogen doesn't cause PCOS.
Adipose tissue doesn't cause obesity.
Inflammation doesn't cause disease.

All of these things are signs and symptoms - the body's attempt to correct an imbalance caused by an aggravating factor.

Aggravating factors are toxins & poisons sprayed on food, dumped into the water supply, & released into the air. These are the things making you sick.

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

Put a bunch of maggots on some healthy skin and nothing happens. However, if they find their way into an open wound full of devitalised tissue, they will debride it with incredible efficiency, leaving the healthy tissue untouched. No one thinks maggots caused the wound.

Mother nature has equipped the human body with its own in built maggots. Bacteria! Yes, bacteria are much the same as maggots, only smaller. Bacteria are saprophytic meaning they only consume dead and dying tissue. They do not damage healthy tissue, nor do they cause disease.

The tissue becomes damaged, devitalised, and diseased first. Then the bacteria native to our own bodies proliferate to clean up the mess.

Stop blaming your body's waste disposal system as the cause of the rubbish.

Justice for germs!

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

Our homes are far more toxic today than they ever have been. There are over 300 harmful chemicals used in building materials. This is a far cry from homes built several decades ago which were made from more natural material.

Mother nature is self-correcting. When there are synthetic, toxic chemicals in a home, mother nature gets to work to clean up the mess.

How does it clean up the mess? With mould and various other micro-organisms.

It's not the mould making people sick, its the toxic chemicals.

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

Imagine a builder claiming to build eco-friendly homes. He prides himself on using natural materials because synthetic building materials not only harm humans, but destroy the environment. He also claims to stand for sustainability and conservation. Yet when you build your home with him, he uses the same synthetic materials as all the other builders. The only difference is that his materials are disguised as natural by including words like 'green' and 'sustainable'. This is the epitome of hypocrisy.

This is the same with most natural medicine practitioners. They claim to provide 'natural' and 'alternative' treatments, yet they do nothing of the sort. They prescribe toxic supplements made from petrochemicals. They request expensive and unnecessary 'functional tests'. Their treatments are against nature (ie. anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, anti-parasitic etc). They have confused the bodies natural healing response as the disease, and they have forgotten that the body has an innate capacity to heal itself. They disguise these practices by using words like 'natural', 'holistic', 'functional', 'integrative' etc.

They are essentially just another arm of medicine / big-pharma.

How do I know this? Because I spent 10 years teaching what I thought was natural medicine to students in colleges and universities. Only in the last few years did I realise the error of my ways and resigned from my position as a senior lecturer. I could no longer ethically teach students a curriculum comprised of utter non-sense, especially when they are spending upwards of $60k and four years of their time, under the impression they are learning about natural healing practices.

The entire field of natural medicine is a far-cry from what it once was. Our forefathers would be turning in their graves to see what it has become.

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley.com

This video has been shared on this page before, but it's time to share it again.

What is really being consumed when we put some food into our mouths? Are we slowly poisoning ourselves and the environment to death?

What happens when we move our diet towards a more organic based one? Whilst there are still chemicals sprayed on organic crops, there are many farmers who opt for a 'spray free' approach, who don't use any harmful chemicals at all.

We may never be able to completely eliminate pesticide consumption, however we should strive to minimise our exposure wherever possible.

https://youtu.be/UPirDWfxfKc?feature=shared

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

People aren’t healthy because of their ‘good gut bacteria’, or sick because of their ‘bad gut bacteria’. The gut microbiome is a direct consequence of inputs (i.e., food, water, drugs, exercise, alcohol, etc). If you drink soft-drink and eat chips all day, the bacteria that are optimised for digesting these foods will proliferate. People incorrectly label these bacteria as ‘bad’. Likewise, if you eat fresh organic produce, the bacteria optimised for digesting these foods will thrive. People incorrectly label these bacteria as ‘good’. It's not the 'good bacteria' making you healthy, it's the fresh organic produce. Nor is it the 'bad bacteria' making you sick, it's the soft-drink and chips.

It's high time we shifted our perspective on the microbiome.

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley

Virologists use cell cultures to prove the presence of a virus. Many different things are added to the cell culture including animal cells, the bodily fluids taken from sick people, antibiotics, and fetal calf serum. When the animal cells die, they claim it was due to the presence of a virus. On one hand they claim that the addition of things like antibiotics does not have any negative impact on the cell culture. On the other hand, they claim the use of antibiotics may void the scientific validity of a cell culture experiment.

Source

Follow Humanley: t.me/humanley