Thunderbolts Forum v3.0

My stars, what have we here ?



🌐 (PDF) Reducing the population's sodium intake: the UK Food Standards ...
researchgate.net
› publication › 51467550_Reducing_the_population's_sodium_intake_the_UK_Food_Standards_Agency's_Salt_Reduction_Programme
June 23, 2011 - PDF | To describe the UK Food Standards Agency's (FSA) salt reduction programme undertaken between 2003 and 2010 and to discuss its... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

🌐 Lobby group calls for robust salt reduction programme in UK
foodnavigator.com
› Article › 2019 › 11 › 11 › Lobby-group-calls-for-robust-salt-reduction-programme-in-UK
November 11, 2019 - Salt is the forgotten killer, according to campaign group Action on Salt. It is calling on Public Health England to allocate ‘sufficient resources to immediately resuscitate’ the UK salt reduction programme.

🌐 2022 News Section - NEW Studies Suggest UK’s Salt Reduction ...
actiononsalt.org.uk
› news › news › 2022- › 2022-news-section › new-studies-suggest-uks-salt-reduction-programme-could-help-reduce-health-inequality-in-children--government-must-act-now.html
June 22, 2022 - Two NEW studies have examined the impact of the UK’s salt reduction programme, and the improvements needed to ensure the programme continues to be successful. The first study (Socioeconomic status and dietary sodium intake in children from 2008 to 2019 in the United Kingdom) published on ...

🌐 Bread - Action on Salt
actiononsalt.org.uk
› uk-salt-reduction-programme › innovation-technology › bread
Bakers just need to identify how much flour and salt they use – in grams, pounds or ounces. They can then see where they are in relation to the 2012 salt target for bread – 1g of salt per 100g of final product – and see how they can make reductions towards that target.

🌐 Action on sugar—Lessons from UK salt reduction programme ...
researchgate.net
› publication › 260839148_Action_on_sugar-Lessons_from_UK_salt_reduction_programme
Access 135+ million publications and connect with 20+ million researchers. Join for free and gain visibility by uploading your research.

🌐 Reducing the population's sodium intake: the UK Food Standards ...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
› 21729460

The UK's salt reduction programme successfully reduced the average salt intake of the population and increased consumers' awareness. Significant challenges remain in achieving the population average salt intake of 6 g/d recommended by the UK's Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition.

That's another concern for nanoparticle applications in biology.

This was one heck of a huge legal and scientific barrier that was hastily removed when mRNA wrapped in lipid nanoparticles was authorized for emergency use.

[quote=Brigit post_id=5582 time=1629508354 user_id=724]
by MotionTheory » Wed Aug 18, 2021 9:55 am
[i]"One more to ponder - what happen if/when(sensitized) MHC presents nano lipid particle as antigen?"
[/i]

You mean the shot accidentally immunized everyone against nanoparticles?
...
[/quote]

I implied - far from funny. Adaptive immune system could identify cellular lipid membrance (perhaps similar to cellular mimicry) as antigen = unconditional death.

by MotionTheory » Wed Aug 18, 2021 9:55 am
[i]"One more to ponder - what happen if/when(sensitized) MHC presents nano lipid particle as antigen?"
[/i]

You mean the shot accidentally immunized everyone against nanoparticles? That is so hilarious, I love it (: I really did laugh. Lovely thought.

Now we are getting up to a bit of fun. For which I thank you.

[i]"It would be fun to verbally - answer/discuss your questions starting at causal then down to consequential level. Easier to detect/measure indicator/contraindications at consequential level. Oh heck, perhaps best to start at Disease Theory(not dead yet, why not)" :roll:[/i]

You know, I really like the pace of online written discussions, but I admire people who do all this verbally in interviews etc. I need more time to reflect on what is really being said. If you would like to start a Disease Theory thread then tag! you're it. Every one is on some hyperspecial diet, you will find that right away. lol O and they never felt better and never get sick.

Brigit - aren't you beyond scope of topic ;) Many good questions raised.

One more to ponder - what happen if/when(sensitized) MHC presents nano lipid particle as antigen? Similar lipid as cell wall (ahhh miracle for passive transport).

It would be fun to verbally - answer/discuss your questions starting a causal then down to consequential level. Easier to detect/measure indicator/contraindications at consequential level. Oh heck, perhaps best to start at Disease Theory(not dead yet, why not) :roll:

Now this raises some important questions about the emergency use authorization of this mRNA drug delivery system which is being called a vaccine.

Using a lipid to coat mRNA Spike protein for it to be synthesized in the cell gives the two main structures of an active virus, the capsid and the nucleic acid.

Isn't coating mRNA instructions with a manmade lipid nanoparticle, and then injecting it into a person so that it is synthesized in the cells, the same as delivering a very active, manmade virus?

Do we have an adequate definition of a manmade virus? I am not talking about the original virus, but the treatment. The nanoparticle lipid is a capsid and the mRNA is the nucleic acid. Same as a virus.

The use of nanoparticles to invade cell walls and get into a cell is clever. That is how a virus breaches the cell wall. To package an active bit of nucleic acid within the lipid nanoparticle is even more clever. That is how a virus reproduces inside the cell of a living creature. For that nucleic acid to happen to match a ligand already produced by the body to maintain vital sodium and water levels is even more clever.

But wait. Why would your body produce an antibody against its own ligand? People take these same ACE2 blockers orally and they certainly don't develop antibodies against them. [b]That is because of the exquisite fine tuning of ligands and peptides and their receptors. They are so finely matched that a key in a lock does not even begin to describe how difficult it is for a ligand to bind with a receptor. It is extremely unlikely. [/b]Is your body really that likely to develop an antibody against a perfectly matched fake ligand? There are hundreds of drugs that block receptors and the body does not recognize them as an outsider in any of those cases. Has it ever happened?

So how is it that the extremely unlikely ACE2 antagonizing spike protein became a spike on a virus -- which it can be argued would cause all of the symptoms of the virus in question -- and then the spike was simply put inside of the capsid/nanonparticle in the treatment, where it was able to breach the cell wall and be reproduced by the hijacked cells?

I think too many questions were skipped over when the emergency use authorization for mRNA nanoparticle drug delivery to cells was given.

Does any one have a right to inject nanoparticles into a human body? And to add to that, nanoparticles that instruct the cell to produce a synthetic peptide? For one thing, you don't even know how much you dosed them, and that alone is complete rubbish.

Here's an easier description of how ACE 2 blocking drugs work, from the mayo clinic.

[list=][b]Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors.[/b] These help relax blood vessels by preventing the formation of angiotensin, a chemical in your body that narrows blood vessels.

There are several ACE inhibitors available. Examples include enalapril (Vasotec, Epaned), lisinopril (Prinivil, Zestril, Qbrelis) and ramipril (Altace).[/list]

[list=][b]Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs).[/b] These drugs block the action of angiotensin, a chemical in your body that narrows your arteries and veins. ARBs include valsartan (Diovan), losartan (Cozaar) and others.[/list]

You really would never take these in some unspecified dose, would you.

Yet when this was given to millions and millions of people across the globe, the ACE2 inhibiter was administered into the shoulder muscles for those cells to produce some unspecified amount of this drug.

I know someone who takes this blood pressure medication orally every 24 hours, and just recently he took it 9 hours early. In my view, that means that he overlapped his doses. Within hours he became very faint, and had pains around his chest.

Now we were assured that the synthesized ACE2 blocker in the delta muscle would simply present itself on the cell walls. Then the body would produce an antibody and attack those cells.

Yet we see evidence in the VAERS and a lot of the personal stories that that is not what is happening. The ACE2 blocker is clearly not staying in the shoulder muscle for the immune system to recognize and deploy antibodies against it. Instead, this is moving into the extracellular fluid and affecting many areas of the body. Especially the heart, in young men.

Thanks Brigit.
[quote]perhaps many people in the US have not updated their vision of how a cell is in reality covered with receptors [/quote]
One of those people is me.
I've got some updating to do..........

Interesting thoughts about the role of the double layer in both biology and in astronomy, jacmac. Always nice to take a step back and appreciate the larger picture. :idea:

by JP Michael » Thu Aug 12, 2021 10:31 pm
[i]"Brigit wrote: ↑Sun Aug 08, 2021 2:53 pm 'I am beginning to think that every one is after your cell receptors, and most of us don't even have diagrams that include them in the cell walls.'

"You may like to update your search criteria."[/i]

That is why I said the following in the same post:

"Most of us are not very aware of cell receptors because our education and training is based on simple and older models of the cell, but there are hundreds to thousands of receptors built in to our cell walls.

There is a lot to gain from revising our imagery and including the receptors in our mental picture of the cell.

For one thing, it would help us understand that actually, the DNA is receiving orders from our ligands, peptides and hormones which dock in those receptors."

The reason I chose to use books and older references is to show that many of us may be using older models of the cell, or even simplified models of the cell.

I think the problem I am working on is the fact that so many people are taking an experimental form of drug delivery without very much concern about the ACE2 blocking spike protein. I am wondering how that could be, and one idea I put forward is that perhaps many people in the US have not updated their vision of how a cell is in reality covered with receptors which then communicate with the DNA for synthesis.

I thought that was clear enough but I will try to communicate better.

[quote=Brigit post_id=5532 time=1628459622 user_id=724]I am beginning to think that [b]every one is after your cell receptors,[/b] and most of us don't even have diagrams that include them in the cell walls.
[/quote]
You may like to update your search criteria.

E.g. [url=https://www.storypick.com/people-react-picture-human-cell/]the most detailed model of a human cell to date[/url].

Original images [url=https://www.digizyme.com/cst_landscapes.html]here[/url] by Evan Ingersoll & Gael McGill (each image is fully interactable by selecting specific pathways and components)

Also worth checking out: [url=https://www.cellsignal.com/pathways/cellular-landscapes]Cellular Landscapes[/url].

Good luck.

[quote]The Britannica 1988 did have this to say about the subject:

"A cell is bound by a semipermeable membrane that enables it to exchange certain materials with its surroundings. One widely accepted model proposes a membrane made up of a double layer of lipids studded with proteins.[/quote]
Hmmmmm a double layer.
Where have we heard of that before.
Perhaps the ability and inclination of plasma to form double layers is at the root of, or the precursor to, the biological cell.
Almost everything in the universe is plasma.
We call it plasma, not gas, because of the charged particles it has.

Brigit:
[quote]Michael Clarage brought up a very closely related subject: he said that there are some really incredible scientific challenges to the idea that the DNA sits in the middle of the cell directing everything. It not only receives orders from "information substances" through our cell receptors, but he presented studies and experiments that showed that functions of the DNA can also be affected by the strength and polarity of electric fields. This is very exciting. [/quote]

Irving Langmuir called it plasma due to It's life like properties.
Plasma came first.
Plasma is a precursor to life.
Life is plasma like.
Jack

The entries for "Cell" I used for the survey were from 1974, 1988, 1996, 1999 and 2001.

The Britannica 1988 did have this to say about the subject:

"A cell is bound by a semipermeable membrane that enables it to exchange certain materials with its surroundings. One widely accepted model proposes a membrane made up of a double layer of lipids studded with proteins. Some of the proteins extend completely through the lipid layer, others only partially penetrate it, and still others are thought to be completely embedded within the lipid layer. In plants the membrane is enclosed in a rigid cellulose cell wall."

I may have given Br1988 credit for having absolutely included receptors, but marked them down for not using the term, "receptor," and having no diagram. Also, in the 1996 F&W, there was definitely a unique structure on the cell membrane which did not penetrate the cell wall, but it was not at all to scale and it was without any label.

Maybe I could have been nicer but I just wanted to make a point.

It's interesting, I just completed a brief survey of entries for the "Cell" in 5 different encyclopedias, for the purpose of looking at the diagrams.

The diagrams are all lovely illustrations of the various components of animal and plant cells. What I looked for in the quick informal survey are cell receptors.

None of the diagrams show cell receptors in the cell membrane.

Most of us are not very aware of cell receptors because our education and training is based on simple and older models of the cell, but there are hundreds to thousands of receptors built in to our cell walls.

There is a lot to gain from revising our imagery and including the receptors in our mental picture of the cell.

For one thing, it would help us understand that actually, the DNA is receiving orders from our ligands, peptides and hormones which dock in those receptors.

And for another thing, we each have some degree of control over our thinking and emotions, which can also alter which neuropeptides are released as a consequence into our own bodies, and therefor can alter how our own DNA expresses itself. (Although fortunately all of our vital systems are completely involuntary and carried out without our "help" /sarc or interference. Very fortunately. Praise God.)

Michael Clarage brought up a very closely related subject: he said that there are some really incredible scientific challenges to the idea that the DNA sits in the middle of the cell directing everything. It not only receives orders from "information substances" through our cell receptors, but he presented studies and experiments that showed that functions of the DNA can also be affected by the strength and polarity of electric fields. This is very exciting. I can't even say how exciting that is. In the Electric Universe the "Central Dogma" of DNA in biology is replaced with a completely different picture.

Michael Clarage: Electrical Shaping of Biology | Thunderbolts
dur 14:55
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQ-M_iPMPVk

But on the other hand, we need to take receptor blockers very seriously. Such as the ACE2 receptor blocker.

I am beginning to think that [b]every one is after your cell receptors,[/b] and most of us don't even have diagrams that include them in the cell walls.

*extracellular, sorry