It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by space cadet
reply to post by windwaker
that article doesn't prove anything at all. Sorry. The legs pictured look like the legs of a staph infected meth user. The 'lesions' do not look anything different than impetigo or staph. I meant actual proof, pictures of many people and their 'lesions', not one woman's legs and a guess that it could be caused by microbs that are eating oil.
Originally posted by paxnatus
reply to post by KringleFantastico
I respect your opinion. Now I would like to comment on a few of your quotes........
The article is not poorly written perhaps misunderstood. As I stated in my OP, I am working with Dr. Riki Ott reknowned toxicologist whose legacy belongs to her research with the Exxon Valdez spill. I happen to know things about the illness infecting the people in the Gulf that thegeneral public does not. I am a nurse with 15 years trauma experience along with infectious diseases. I have done extensive research along the lines of what exactly is happening to real people in the gulf region. Including personally talking with several everyday.
As well, bacteria don't just randomly, successfully infect multicellular species. The process of establishing a new primary host species is a very long process (even/especially if it is engineered... ), often fraught with incalculable failures for every one success.
The article states
.In 2003, JCVI successfully synthesized a small virus that infects bacteria. By 2008, the JCVI team was able to synthesize a small bacterial genome. On May 6, 2010, JCVI revealed they had already created a self-replicating bacterial cell controlled by a chemically synthesized genome they named “synthetic Mycoplasma mycoides.
Within those bacteria are several gram- and gram+ bacterium. People have been dying of the Flesh eating bacteria in the gulf normally the bacterium responsible is streptococcus A however, here is an article stating vibrio vulnificus is responsible. West Orlando News. The Flesh eating bacteria is rare, but to have 7 people die within a few weeks of one another, is really bizarre!
the reason that penicillin does not affect mycoplasma, is because mycoplasma does not have a cell wall. It isn't considered gram negative, but it sure as heck isn't gram positive. Penicillin attacks the ability for a gram positive bacteria to synthesize a cell wall from peptidoglycan. Mycoplasma has no peptidoglycan. This is but one example of the serious basic, scientific errors in this article.
Yes, you are right about the bacteria not having a cell wall, that is because typically mycoplasma are classified as a fungus they act in the same way a fungus replicates, however they have been classifed by some taxonomists as bacteria. They don't respond to typical drugs in the Penicillin class but they will respond to other antibiotics. They respond well to antifungals, Amphotericin B being the number 1 choice.
As a final thought, I wouldn't worry too much about the whole "connecting the dots" thing here. Some of the article is based in fact, but there is a good bit of it that is supremely questionable. I am about as big a conspiracy theorist as they come, but this whole thing stinks with amateur fear mongering. Just my two cents.
Here is where you and I differ. This I'm afraid is not a conspiracy theory this is reality.
Thanks for your post.
Pax
signature:
I respect your opinion. With that said I would also like to point out a few facts regarding your quotes...
Friends of the Earth called for a stop to research until regulations are in place, and ETC Group (which cleverly named the then-uncreated organism “Synthia” in 2007) warned that “Craig Venter is handing this powerful technology to the world’s most irresponsible and environmentally damaging industry by partnering with the likes of BP and Exxon” (see the June 23, 2009 LRBJ*). The Vatican viewed the results as “positive,” before pointedly adding an injunction to “never forget that there is only one creator” (hint: not Venter). Meanwhile the White House called for a commission to study the implications.
reply to post by paxnatus
A grandmother made me rethink all the bio-remediation hype. The "naturally-occurring oil-eating bacteria" have been newsworthy of late as they are supposedly going to come to the rescue of President Obama and BP and make good on their very premature statement that "the oil is gone."
We were talking about subsurface oil in the Gulf when she said matter-of-factly, "The bacteria are running amok with the dispersants." What? "Those oil-eating bacteria -- I think they're running amok and causing skin rashes." My mind reeled. Could we all have missed something so simple?
I first heard about the rash from Sheri Allen in Mobile, Alabama. Allen wrote of red welts and blisters on her legs after "splashing and wading on the shoreline" of Mobile Bay with her two dogs on May 8. She reported that "hundreds of dead fish" washed up on the same beach over the following two days.
The rashes have been diagnosed as scabies and staph infections, including MRSA, the potentially lethal Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteria. Most cases lingered for months, as the rash did not respond well to antibiotics, steroid creams, or steroid shots.
A mysterious persistent skin rash has occurred across the Gulf, coincident with BP's release of oil and chemical dispersants. Mobile, Alabama, resident Sheri Allen was one of the first to report its occurrence in early May. (Photo: Sheri Allen)
Referring to Allen's case, she said, "I can say without hesitation that these skin rashes have nothing to do with scabies. Scabies is a parasite, which causes a skin infection and is extremely contagious. It spreads from person to person by direct skin contact or by wearing an article of clothing worn by an infected person." Schmidt said, "If this were scabies you would see entire families infected and NOT just a single family member."
Medical doctors are diagnosing skin rashes on Gulf visitors and residents alike as scabies and staph infections, including MRSA (this photo, identity protected). The rashes resist prescribed treatments and often reoccur for months. (Photo permission: Riki Ott)
Another clue to the real cause of the mystery rash is its prevalence across the entire oil-impacted Gulf. Something in the water or air, or both, could explain this.
Which all brings me back to the grandmother. After talking with her, I've been reading about bacteria, and I now think the Great Gulf Experiment is going very badly for humans. One can only wonder about the rest of the ecosystem.
Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
Originally posted by space cadet
reply to post by windwaker
that article doesn't prove anything at all. Sorry. The legs pictured look like the legs of a staph infected meth user. The 'lesions' do not look anything different than impetigo or staph. I meant actual proof, pictures of many people and their 'lesions', not one woman's legs and a guess that it could be caused by microbs that are eating oil.
Then try looking for yourself because there are many examples of this out there for the world to see. How insulting it is for you to say this person must have these lesions from being a "meth user". That's the most ignorant thing I've heard in awhile. You would think that there is an obvious connection between these wounds and the massive amounts of dead marine life there, of which there is also considerable photo evidence of, but I guess not
Oh, and consider the fact that local doctors don't even want to properly address this massive medical issue for some reason, why is that?
Originally posted by DOADOA
and you know whats funny about all of this? there isn't a thing we can do about it. these people have too much power, nothing short of divine intervention or alien invasion will change the course of our future.
our children are about to become slaves, tough luck eh?
Just imagine, a virus that only a computer can control.