The Instigator
Akhenaten
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
JuneW
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Germs in the blood is a secondary phase of the disease process.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/14/2017 Category: Science
Updated: 2 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 321 times Debate No: 105023
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (16)
Votes (0)

 

Akhenaten

Pro

A have been advised by some less educated persons on this site that germs are the cause of disease. It is assumed that because there are germs in the blood that these germs are the cause of disease. This is false information. This type of thinking was common in the past before modern technology proved that leaky gut syndrome allowed the germs from the gut to enter the blood. Thus, if you avoid foods which cause leaky gut syndrome you can also avoid all disease.
JuneW

Con

I will show that germs are the cause of many diseases. I will show that the "leaky gut" theory, even if accepted as true, will only explain at its best a small minority of diseases. I will show that even if one eliminated all "leaky gut" one would still be prone to a host of other diseases.

PRO has made a somewhat derogatory statement about being advised by " some less educated persons on this site that germs are the cause of disease". Pro must distinguish between "educated", "wise", "intelligent", and "comprehensive".

I have known many educated people who could not comprehend. I have known many intelligent people who were not wise.

Within this debate, we must take the medically educated as all three. Those who put forth "medical theories" which are not accepted by the "medical scholars" have the burden to prove their theory to those scholars first and lay people second. Writing a popular book to convince non medical readers that a theory has merit is akin to selling "snake oil".

We must not accept a popular book as a substitute for a medical textbook. We must see results from treatment of "leaky gut". We must see "leaky gut " clinics with a host of "leaky gut "survivors.

Anything short of these parameters must be taken as simply apocryphal.

Finally Pro must explain clearly his concept of " secondary phase of the disease process."
Debate Round No. 1
Akhenaten

Pro

To win this debate Con must show that germ theory is correct in all of its aspects. Con must show that Koch's postulates work under strict laboratory conditions and that germs can be replicated in a Petri dish and used to successfully contaminate a second host which should convincingly show the same symptoms as the first host. Then a saliva or blood sample of the second host should be taken and looked at under a microscope to see if the same germ is present that was responsible for the infection of the first host. Note - Humans must be used to demonstrate this principle.

Note - This experiment, which is the often quoted method by the medical system many times as proof of germ theory, has never been accomplished successfully in laboratory conditions. Thus, the germ theory of disease is a fraud.

The reason that this experiment has failed is because the germs from the gut have thousands of different types, any of which can leak from the gut into the in blood causing a disease. Thus, the medical system assumes that it is just one particular germ that is causing the problem. Thus, when they try to replicate the germ from the host they get a different variety of germ the second time around. Thus, the medical system will try to justify this change and say that the germ has mutated into a different germ, while insisting that this is still the same germ as before but is just a mutation of it. lol

What a load of complicated nonsense.!!!!!!!!!!

Why don't they just admit that germ theory is a fraud and go with the flow of new innovations. Leaky gut syndrome is the best and most logical explanation of the disease process.

https://www.youtube.com...

https://www.youtube.com...

Hippocrates - "All disease begins in the gut"
JuneW

Con

Pro starts right off in error, He says "To win this debate Con must show that germ theory is correct in all of its aspects. " This is incorrect. Inasmuch as pro has initiated the debate, the burden of proof rests with pro.
It must be pointed out too that Robert Koch won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1905 for his groundbreaking research on tuberculosis,. "he is known for his role in identifying the specific causative agents of tuberculosis, cholera, and anthrax and for giving experimental support for the concept of infectious disease. (1) In addition to his innovative studies on these diseases, Koch created and improved laboratory technologies and techniques in the field of microbiology, and made key discoveries in public health.(2) His research led to the creation of Koch"s postulates, a series of four generalized principles linking specific microorganisms to specific diseases that remain today the "gold standard" in medical microbiology.(3) The Robert Koch Institute is named in his honour.(4)"

Pro links "leaky gut" to all disease when he says " Thus, if you avoid foods which cause leaky gut syndrome you can also avoid all disease." All disease? This is ridiculous. Science recognizes that while there are some diseases linked to diet (such as xerophthalmia, rickets, beriberi, pellagra,scurvy, iron-deficiency anemia, and goitre) , these account for a very small percentage of the universe of diseases (5) (6)

Another area of concern has to do with the propagation of innovative new theories. When Einstein developed the theory of Relativity, he did not approach the public, but instead went to the collective of scientists. These "leaky gut" theorists seem to avoid the scientists and go to the public with their "snake oil sales".

Pro then uses two citations from YouTube. YouTube? Come on. Put forth at least some intellectual integrity.

Pro still leaves these items on the table
A. Pro must distinguish between "educated", "wise", "intelligent", and "comprehensive".
B We must see results from treatment of "leaky gut".
C. We must see "leaky gut " clinics with a host of "leaky gut "survivors.
D Finally Pro must explain clearly his concept of " secondary phase of the disease process."

*******************************************************************************

(1) Robert Koch." World of Microbiology and Immunology. Ed. Brenda Wilmoth Lerner and K. Lee Lerner. Detroit: Gale, 2006. Biography In Context. Web. 14 Apr. 2013.
(2) "Robert Koch." World of Microbiology and Immunology. Ed. Brenda Wilmoth Lerner and K. Lee Lerner. Detroit: Gale, 2006. Biography In Context. Web. 14 Apr. 2013.
(3)) Brock, Thomas. Robert Koch: A life in medicine and bacteriology. ASM Press: Washington DC, 1999. Print.
(4) https://en.wikipedia.org...
(5) WHO ICD 10
(6) International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Debate Round No. 2
Akhenaten

Pro

1. My opponent waffles on endlessly about the great achievements of Robert Koch. [Note - Most of this information is off topic nonsense which is irrelevant to the debate.] But Robert Koch wasn't such a great hero but was just a fool who added more disinformation to the huge store house of already existing medical disinformation. When it was first discovered that most disease was caused by Leaky gut Syndrome all previous Germ Theory and Koch's postulates information immediately became redundant and was no longer relevant to human health. It is only because germ theory is a great money spinner for the medical fraternity that they have collectively decided to turn a blind eye and hope that one day that leaky gut syndrome goes away somehow. But, sorry, medical fraternity, leaky gut syndrome won't go away and your glory days of prestige, wealth, power and influence are numbered until the general public eventually wakes up to the ongoing fraud.

2. The burden of proof.
In a democracy the burden of proof is shared equally. It is only dictatorships and dictators who insist that only one side needs to provide proof.
Thus, my opponent not only needs to prove that I am wrong, they also need to prove that their theory is right. This is the only logical course because you can't prove somebody wrong without proving that you are right first. It is like trying to draw on a white piece of paper with a white coloured pencil. You need the contrast of right and wrong (black and white) to determine what the truth is.

3. Quote - "Pro links "leaky gut" to all disease when he says " Thus, if you avoid foods which cause leaky gut syndrome you can also avoid all disease." All disease? This is ridiculous. Science recognizes that while there are some diseases linked to diet (such as xerophthalmia, rickets, beriberi, pellagra,scurvy, iron-deficiency anemia, and goitre) , these account for a very small percentage of the universe of diseases"

Reply - Con is saying that Hippocrates was liar. Sorry, opponent, Hippocrates wasn't a liar. he was the father of medicine because he knew the truth long before the truth could be proven using scientific methodologies.

If somebody presents as being sick, does a doctor examine their gut first to see if that is what is causing their problem? Answer - Hardy ever. This is because doctors are not trained to recognize or even imagine that leaky gut syndrome could be the cause of the illness. Doctors use symptoms to diagnose medical problems. They use temperature, heart rate, blood pressure and may do a blood test or urine sample. Now, will any of these tests indicate if the person has a leaky gut syndrome problem? Answer - Not a chance! Thus, the medical system is incapable of diagnosing leaky gut syndrome. Thus, if a person has a leaky gut and it is causing them to feel unwell the doctor may suggest that they take some antibiotics to fix the problem. Thus, the doctor is attacking the germs and not addressing the cause of the problem which is the leaky gut.
Note - The only way to fix a leaky gut is through proper diet and avoiding foods such as dairy, sugar, salt, grain, alcohol and fat.

Thus, we can plainly see that if leaky gut syndrome did cause all disease, then, the medical fraternity didn't even bother to entertain that possibility, and never ever conducted any tests to see if the gut was in fact, leaky or not. Therefore, we can conclude, that the medical fraternity has acted irresponsibly and carelessly. Thinking only about their personal profits and prestige and not caring too much about their patients health.

Research papers on Paleo diet which prevents leaky gut syndrome and all associated diseases.

http://www.drdebe.com...

http://thepaleodiet.com...
JuneW

Con

1, Quote from pro .."My opponent waffles on endlessly about the great achievements of Robert Koch. [Note - Most of this information is off topic nonsense which is irrelevant to the debate.]

--------------

It must be noted that pro brought up Koch in the first place. CON was merely responding.

------------------------

1 A, quote from pro .."But Robert Koch wasn't such a great hero but was just a fool..."

---------------

He became a Nobel Laureate in 1905. (1) Perhaps pro needs to list other "fools" who won the Nobel.

----------------

2. The burden of proof. ....The debate is "Germs in the blood is a secondary phase of the disease process." Pro has the burden to prove this point. CON is asking that pro define these terms rather than ranting about other topics. Therefore pro must prove that "Germs in the blood is a secondary phase of the disease process." CON needs only refute pro's stance.

-----------

3. Quote "Con is saying that Hippocrates was liar. "

---------------

CON is saying that Hippocrates set forth a "grain of observational truth". At best he observed that internal biology may have an influence on some diseases. His real contribution to medicine was making medicine an "art" rather than "magic". He separated medicine from religion. " It was Hippocrates who finally freed medicine from the shackles of magic, superstition, and the supernatural." (2)

--------------------

4.Quote .."If somebody presents as being sick, does a doctor examine their gut first to see if that is what is causing their problem? Answer - Hardy ever. "

----------------

Answer "quite often" Physicians often have a stool sample examined to aid in diagnosis. ( Do "leaky gut" proponents examine stools?) (3)

----------------

5. Quote " Doctors use symptoms to diagnose medical problems. They use temperature, heart rate, blood pressure and may do a blood test or urine sample. Now, will any of these tests indicate if the person has a leaky gut syndrome problem? Answer - Not a chance! "

--------------

Many doctors look for bacteria in a blood sample. (4). When bacteria are found, antibiotics might be given as an initial phase. If a patient's symptoms return in short order, a physician will look for a source of contamination. If the source is the intestine, the diagnosis may be given as to a small number of conditions such as Inflammatory bowel diseases, Irritable bowel syndrome, or Other limited inflammatory or autoimmune conditions. But certainly the diagnosis will not be that the patient has "all diseases".

.
----------------

6 Pro then posits what he calls " Research papers on Paleo diet"

--------------

. The first cite is "Nutritional strategies for skeletal and cardiovascular health: hard bones, soft arteries, rather than vice versa." and it addresses CALCIUM and osteoporosis . Paleo is NOT mentioned in the abstract.

#2 is about milk.

In the third article listed, it found " Paleolithic nutrition resulted in greater short-term pooled improvements
on each of the 5 components of the metabolic syndrome than did currently recommended guideline-based control diets. However,the greater pooled improvements did not reach significance " (5)

Thus, even the studies cited by pro to support pro's position, do not support pro's position.

----------------

The evaluation of germ theory can be done through evidence and through results ." The fight against infectious disease advanced dramatically with the consolidation of the germ theory in the 19th century. This focus on a predominant cause of infections (ie, microbial pathogens) ultimately led to medical and public health advances (eg, immunization, pasteurization, antibiotics). " (6)

CON asks pro to provide evidence of results rising out of "leaky gut theory".

---------------------

And still from round #2...Pro still leaves these items on the table
A. Pro must distinguish between "educated", "wise", "intelligent", and "comprehensive".
B We must see results from treatment of "leaky gut".
C. We must see "leaky gut " clinics with a host of "leaky gut "survivors.
D Finally Pro must explain clearly his concept of " secondary phase of the disease process."

****************************************

(1) Robert Koch." World of Microbiology and Immunology. Ed. Brenda Wilmoth Lerner and K. Lee Lerner. Detroit: Gale, 2006. Biography In Context. Web. 14 Apr. 2013.
(2) http://www.greekmedicine.net...
(3) https://www.webmd.com...
(4) https://labtestsonline.org...
(5) http://ajcn.nutrition.org...
(6) https://www.cdc.gov...
Debate Round No. 3
Akhenaten

Pro

Con has failed to respond in an appropriate manner to many of my statements. In round 2; for example - I clearly stated my case -
Quote from Pro- "The reason that this experiment has failed is because the germs from the gut have thousands of different types, any of which can leak from the gut into the in blood causing a disease. Thus, the medical system assumes that it is just one particular germ that is causing the problem. Thus, when they try to replicate the germ from the host they get a different variety of germ the second time around. Thus, the medical system will try to justify this change and say that the germ has mutated into a different germ, while insisting that this is still the same germ as before but is just a mutation of it"

Con didn't respond to this statement at all. This is because Con is trying to win the debate by using the tactic of avoidance. Con hopes that by avoiding certain weak aspects of the germ theory of disease that they can win the debate. Sorry Con. You can't win a debate by avoiding important issues.

Con uses many devious tactics such as avoidance, distraction, diversion and red herrings to put me off track and divert me from analyzing the obvious weak points of the germ theory of disease.

I have clearly identified one of many weaknesses in the germ theory of disease. The concept that only one particular germ is responsible for one particular disease is a big mistake which the medical fraternity tries to cover up constantly.

Quote from Con- "These "leaky gut" theorists seem to avoid the scientists and go to the public with their "snake oil sales".

My references completely negates this nonsense statement. I have included many scientific laboratory tests which prove that leaky gut syndrome is a real problem.

http://www.mdpi.com...

Quote from Con - "His real contribution to medicine was making medicine an "art" rather than "magic". He separated medicine from religion."

Reply - Con doesn't realize that modern medicine has reverted back to a religious cult which worships the Luis Pasteur God of germ theory. Alas, the God of germ theory is a mere mortal and a fraud.

Quote from Con - "Answer "quite often" Physicians often have a stool sample examined to aid in diagnosis. ( Do "leaky gut" proponents examine stools?) "

Reply - I have been to dozens of doctors over the years and none have diagnosed leaky gut syndrome or checked my stools. If a doctor detects germs in the blood, they will naturally assume that these germs arrived from an external source and were not a part of the guts digestive system. Thus, germ theory is wrong, in that it assumes that germs come from external sources. By doing this, the medical fraternity avoids the obvious conclusion that bad diet is the cause of most disease. Thus, in doing this; the medical fraternity can blame external germs as being the cause of disease. The medical system will then try to kill the germs which they assume will solve the problem. But, alas, the problem will persist because it is the leaky gut which is allowing the gut bacteria to constantly enter the blood supply. Thus, I have proven my case that germs in the blood are a secondary phase of the disease process.
JuneW

Con

Pro needs to respond to this issue from round #1...

Finally Pro must explain clearly his concept of " secondary phase of the disease process."

---------------------

And from round #2

Pro still leaves these items on the table
A. Pro must distinguish between "educated", "wise", "intelligent", and "comprehensive".
B We must see results from treatment of "leaky gut".
C. We must see "leaky gut " clinics with a host of "leaky gut "survivors.
D Finally Pro must explain clearly his concept of " secondary phase of the disease process."

--------------------------------

And from round #3

Koch won the Nobel. Pro calls him a fool. Pro needs to list other "fools" who won the Nobel.

-----------------------
----------------------

Quote from Pro- the medical system assumes that it is just one particular germ that is causing the problem.

----------------------

Let us look at the common cold. Using "germ theory", scientists have identified hundreds of germs as the primary cause ; Rhinovirus (1), Coronavirus (2) , RSV (3), parainfluenza.(4),. Thus pro's assertion is totally false... A myth.

Also "Another myth says your diet is the cause. Don't pay attention to that tall tale. (5)
---------------
--------------

Pro then asserts that " Con is trying to win the debate by using the tactic of avoidance. Con hopes that by avoiding certain weak aspects of the germ theory of disease that they can win the debate. Sorry Con. You can't win a debate by avoiding important issues."

-------------------

It is obvious that pro is the guilty party here...to wit CON calls upon pro to answer theses items

Pro needs to respond to this issue from round #1...

Pro must explain clearly his concept of " secondary phase of the disease process."

And from round #2

Pro still leaves these items on the table
A. Pro must distinguish between "educated", "wise", "intelligent", and "comprehensive".
B We must see results from treatment of "leaky gut".
C. We must see "leaky gut " clinics with a host of "leaky gut "survivors.
D Finally Pro must explain clearly his concept of " secondary phase of the disease process."

And from round #3

Koch won the Nobel. Pro calls him a fool. Pro needs to list other "fools" who won the Nobel.

CON has responded to every item put forth. It is pro that is avoiding the issues.

-------------------------------.
------------------------------

Pro claims " The concept that only one particular germ is responsible for one particular disease is a big mistake which the medical fraternity tries to cover up constantly."

--------------

CON has responded to this above regarding the common cold. Pro once again falls flat.

-----------------
----------------

Quote from Con- "These "leaky gut" theorists seem to avoid the scientists and go to the public with their "snake oil sales".

Pro then proves CON's point by referencing MDPI. Here is an analysis of the source "The Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute has garnered a reputation for "churning out" journals, "many of them of mediocre quality"" (6)

"In December 2011, the MDPI journal Life published Erik D. Andrulis' theoretical paper, Theory of the Origin, Evolution, and Nature of Life, aiming at presenting a framework to explain life. It attracted coverage by the popular science and technology magazines Ars Technica and Popular Science, which characterized it as "crazy"[7] and "hilarious".[8) (9)

Therefore pro is citing what academia considers a traveling medicine show....all claims and no results.

--------------------
--------------------

CON notes too that doctors recognize Enterobacterial Infections.

"The most common test that is used to identify the cause of diarrhea is the stool test. Examining a stool sample under a microscope can help to rule out parasitic and protozoal infections. Routine stool cultures, however, cannot be used to identify any of the four types of E. coli that cause intestinal infections. ETEC, EPEC, and EIEC are unusual in the United States and can usually be identified only by specialists in research laboratories. Because of concern about EHEC outbreaks, however, most laboratories in the United States can now screen for O157:H7 with a test that identifies its characteristic toxin. All patients with bloody diarrhea should have a stool sample tested for E. coli O157:H7." (10)

So when pro says " I have been to dozens of doctors over the years and none have ... checked my stools." CON questions where pro is going for medical treatment. I myself have had several stool samples examined where the symptoms indicate the need.

------------------
------------------

CON calls upon pro yet again to

A. respond to this issue from round #1... Pro must explain clearly his concept of " secondary phase of the disease process."
B.. Pro must distinguish between "educated", "wise", "intelligent", and "comprehensive".
C We must see results from treatment of "leaky gut".
D. We must see "leaky gut " clinics with a host of "leaky gut "survivors.
E. Pro must explain clearly his concept of " secondary phase of the disease process."
F. Koch won the Nobel. Pro calls him a fool. Pro needs to list other "fools" who won the Nobel.

-----------------------
----------------------

Thus it is seen that CON has completely destroyed pro's argument, and CON did it without saying everyone else is wrong or that doctors are conspirators. Therefore CON's universe is much less "cluttered" than is pro's. Thus in the theory of the structure and content of theories, the germ theory, which includes a condition commonly misinterpreted as "leaky gut", must be taken as superior to the "leaky gut " theory .

*****************************************************************

(1) https://www.webmd.com...
(2 )https://www.webmd.com...
(3) https://www.webmd.com...
(4) https://www.webmd.com...
(5) https://www.webmd.com...
(6) Beall, Jeffrey (2017). "What I learned from predatory publishers". Biochemia Medica. 27 (2): 273"279.
(7) Timmer, John. "How the craziest f#@!ing "theory of everything" got published and promoted". Ars Technica. Retrieved 17 January 2014.
(8) J Nosowitz, Dan. "Hilarious "Theory of Everything" Paper Provokes Kerfuffle". Popular Science. Retrieved 17 January 2014.
(9) https://en.wikipedia.org...
(10) https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...
Debate Round No. 4
Akhenaten

Pro

1. Con continues with her childish dictatorial demands. I must do this and I must do that. Sorry Con, but I don't have to jump through all your crazy psychotic hoops to satisfy your lust for power and control. Your demands are unreasonable, irrelevant and mostly off topic or have been answered numerous times in numerous ways previously. Note - This is all just a tactic to distract me from the task at hand in the hope that I won't have enough time and space to find any further weaknesses in her own arguments and theories.

2. Quote - "A. Pro must distinguish between "educated", "wise", "intelligent", and "comprehensive".

Con doesn't have any commonsense and wants me to distinguish between these words. My opponent doesn't have any of the above assets herself and they are most likely foreign concepts for her. Sorry Con, I am not going back to 3rd grade to satisfy your lust for power and control and play the childish master/slave game. Note - You are NOT my master and I am NOT your slave.

3. Quote - "Koch won the Nobel. Pro calls him a fool. Pro needs to list other "fools" who won the Nobel."

All those scientists who received a Nobel prize for research based on germ theory should be asked to return there prize money because germ theory is a fraud. Einstein can return his prize as well, because relativity is another fraud.

4. Quote - "Let us look at the common cold. Using "germ theory", scientists have identified hundreds of germs as the primary cause ; Rhinovirus (1), Coronavirus (2) , RSV (3), parainfluenza.(4),. Thus pro's assertion is totally false... A myth."

Reply - There is no such thing as a virus. See my other debates on this topic.

http://www.debate.org...

All these different names are just made up nonsense because there are no viruses to begin with.

http://neue-medizin.com...

5. Quote - "So when pro says " I have been to dozens of doctors over the years and none have ... checked my stools." CON questions where pro is going for medical treatment. I myself have had several stool samples examined where the symptoms indicate the need."

Reply - The medical system doesn't recognize leaky gut syndrome as a possible cause of any illness in general. I have been personally misdiagnosed by the medical system many times. I have been prescribed many useless medications which did nothing to fix my problems. It wasn't until I went onto a Paleo diet that my medical conditions disappeared. Thus, the medical system is just a money making fraud which is designed to deceive people. The medical system can't afford to recognize leaky gut syndrome because it will mean the end to their prestige, money, power and control. Proper diet is the only cure for disease in general, while most surgical operations and medications are just a waste of time and money.

Conclusions - Con is just a dictator who wants to control the debate. She is not interested in elucidating the subject matter or replying to my logical conclusions. In order to win a debate you are required to address all the important statements and conclusions. My opponent has failed to do this on many occasions. Vote 1 Akhey.
JuneW

Con

A. Within the confines of a debate, the instigator must clearly define his terms. Pro has failed to do so, even following repeated requests.

CON has asked 11 times for pro to define the term "secondary phase of disease". He has not.
CON has asked 6 times for pro to define the term "less educated persons". He has not.

Thus pro has failed to define his terms.
--------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------

B. Within the confines of a debate, the instigator must present data , especially where CON has made the lack of this data an integral part of the progress of the debate. Pro has failed to do so, even following repeated requests.

CON has asked pro 8 times for pro to outline results from treatment of "leaky gut" He has not
CON has asked 6 times for pro to list "successful "leaky gut" clinics. He has not
CON has asked 6 times for pro to list persons who would not have survived save treatment of "leaky gut" He has not

Thus pro has failed to substantiate his claims with any real world results.

---------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------

C. One also need to heed the effectiveness of vaccines in reducing world wide disease. See ""Winning the war against ancient diseases" (1) Or "12 Deadly Diseases Cured in the 20th Century" (2)
-------------------------
----------------------

D. Here is an assessment of pro"s position by an "educated person"...."Rather than look at the mountains of evidence to support germ theory and the complete lack of evidence to support pleomorphism as the reason for the dominance of germ theory, they resort to paranoid sounding conspiracy theories." (3)

---------------------
--------------------

E. CON has asked 4 times for pro to defend his assertion that Nobel Laureates are "fools" . He presented NO DEFENSE but merely said "All those scientists who received a Nobel prize for research based on germ theory should be asked to return there prize money because germ theory is a fraud."

And further "Einstein can return his prize as well, because relativity is another fraud."

Pro provided NO DEFENSE for either statement.

-----------------------------
----------------------------

F. Rabies is an example of a disease without intestinal involvement. Rabies comes ""extra corpus humanum without any connection to enterobacteria. " (4) Additionally the processes of fermentation and eutrophication take place "extra corpus humanum" without any connection to enterobacteria.

-------------------------
-----------------------

G. Another source "Title 17, California Code of Regulations (CCR) "2500, "2593, "2641.5- 2643.20, and "2800-2812 Reportable Diseases and Conditions* (5) calls out for example botulism - where some cases are shown to come from wounds, with no involvement of the digestive system. (6)

-------------------------
------------------------

H. The Mayo Clinic offers reasonable defense against germs and other microbes (7)

-----------------
-----------------
Conclusion

It appears that taking germs as a cause of disease, and taking medical actions based on that idea has reduced the incidence of many diseases worldwide, and lengthened life span.

Germ theory can save your life. "Leaky gut " theory might only reduce the intensity of your tummy ache.

Therefore the weight of data and evidence supports the CON position which must be declared the winner.

QED

******************************************************

(1)http://www.cnn.com...
(2)https://health.howstuffworks.com...
(3)https://sciencebasedmedicine.org...
(4)https://www.nobelprize.org...
(5)https://www.cdph.ca.gov...
(6)http://www.acphd.org...
(7)https://www.mayoclinic.org...
Debate Round No. 5
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Akhenaten 1 month ago
Akhenaten
It's all Greek to me. lol
Posted by Akhenaten 1 month ago
Akhenaten
Garbage in, garbage out. lol
Posted by JuneW 1 month ago
JuneW
What we have here is bladolian violep shenerzic . Pro kliakis on his delianian bazorlin.
Posted by Akhenaten 1 month ago
Akhenaten
Doctors and lawyers trick and deceive people into giving up their money for dubious services which generally speaking does nobody any good except the doctors and lawyers. People who are super rich need to trick and deceive people in order to get these riches. Working hard and long hours will never make you super rich. Deception is the fast way to get rich. Lawyers and doctors are masters of deception.
Posted by JuneW 2 months ago
JuneW
THIRD REQUEST

Kindly have your handlers define " criminally offensive act", and "criminal negligence"

============================

Your quote "Somebody who defends an organisation that is criminal will become a criminal by association." is thus an indictment of the entire legal profession. Apparently pro thinks that many lawyers who defend criminals are themselves criminals. Does he think that is why they are called "criminal lawyers"?
Posted by Akhenaten 2 months ago
Akhenaten
Somebody who defends an organisation that is criminal will become a criminal by association. Germ theory of disease is illogical. Thus, anybody who tries to defend it can't use logic to defend their position. Thus, they have to use other means other than logic which usually means they have to use devious manipulation and control of the situation. This is exactly what you were doing throughout the entire debate. You were trying to limit, control and manipulate me so that I would be constantly distracted, deviated and limited in my responses.
Posted by JuneW 2 months ago
JuneW
SECOND REQUEST

Kindly have your handlers define " criminally offensive act", and "criminal negligence"
Posted by Akhenaten 2 months ago
Akhenaten
A comment is only offensive if it is unwarranted. Your behaviour during the debate was childish, unco-operative, evasive, moronic, repetitive and causing distraction through the use of red herrings.
Posted by JuneW 2 months ago
JuneW
Kindly have your handlers define " criminally offensive act", and "criminal negligence"

Remember that this is a public forum. Remember too that there can be legal repercussions from making libelous claims.

New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
Harte-Hanks Communications v. Connaughton
Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.
Kaelin v. Globe Communications Corp.
Zeran v. America Online
Grace v. eBay Inc.
Posted by Akhenaten 2 months ago
Akhenaten
When somebody Knows what the debate is about but pretends not to know, this could be regarded as a criminally offensive act. Thus, I was just being polite is saying that it was childish. Thus, when an adult acts like a child and pretends not to understand, this is really criminal negligence. Note - In order to defend a criminal organization such as the pharmaceutical industry, then one must adopt criminal tactics and methodologies.
No votes have been placed for this debate.