Re: Chalcid Wasp?

Hello again.

Re:
"
Your message makes alot of sense. Until a few basic things are answered I'm banging my head against a wall in a manner of speaking. So, I- or someone - should be able to figure out whether there are still wasps (I wonder if there's wasp venom that builds up?)
"

At this point, I think 'anything' seems possible.







"
...and, I wonder what your thoughts are on the blood test to detect the antibodies for Strongyloides?
"

Antibody detection tests are usually very reliable, according to the experts. I think most problems come afterwards, when it's time to "interpret" the results obtained. In this "interpretation" is where the 'weakness' of those methods still lies, I think, maybe not on the tests themselves. In this sense and in my opinion, it's much like man's weak use of the machine.





"
I had Campylobacter a couple years ago and it took months of misery- and 12 or 15 stool samples - with Great Smokies to determine the issue.
"

I'm not surprised, as I've said before in other posts. I've read that many other people are in the same situation when it comes to such tests. I invite you to look forward to a post I should be making shortly on why I must question the usefulness of such tests as they are used nowadays.






"
I bring this up only because I wonder how does a non scientist determine whether a lab like Great Smokies or RHRPlus will actually help?
"

I think that's a great question. The best short answer I can think of is "Truth", meaning, "by examining Truth".




"
Thanks for all your insights. They are much appreciated. Take care, K
"

Anytime, you too.






"
I didn't realize I asked you a dumb question...
"

I still think it's a valid question.









"
it appears YOU did the very detailed study of a fellow member under


http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1011818#i


and I asked about RHRPlus. I can understand how answering that question may not be comfortable.
"

Being a part of the rhrplus team, an answer from me in that regard could be "seen" as an action of immodesty and a 'mundane' and commercial attempt to gain a new client while discrediting someone else. That appearance could be true, of course, unless I try to answer rigidly with Truth wherever truth is. Truth speaks for itself all the time and it can be examined repeatedly with similar results again and again [as we should know well already]. Most importantly, it needs to offer no rewards to convey its validity, nor to display commercial/salesmanship abilities of any kind.


Therefore and in regard to the question above, the facts are that for many reasons already posted and for some more I might post yet, it seems that:

"the way most 'lab tests' are being carried out is inefficient and yields great error."

Your comment itself is more evidence of it. rhrplus was born after this realization, as you might learn if someone provides a link to how and why rhrplus came to be, and our way of examining specimens is not just "novel", it's factual. I dare to say this simply because we just don't stop until either a) the entire sample is examined thoroughly [and I mean THOROUGHLY], and exhausted with 'nothing found' , or until b) "something" is found undeniably, according to the client's wishes, order and selection.

Due to these simple facts and to some more I won't mention for the moment, I don't see how we shouldn't find in one sample what others wouldn't in four, five, six or even many more. It's "man against machine" all over again [it seems to me], and machine's logic may be at fault because of faulty minds. All this always in my opinion, of course.




"
I just finished reading that report and it's really something.
"

Thanks. I hope that it answers for you and for others why sometimes it may take such a long time for results to surface.





"
I can't imagine completing it, or receiving it, or treating the person with it. But it could be me.
"

It could be anyone, I agree. [Actually, evidence does suggest that it IS many]






"
I'll show it to my husband. take care, thanks
"

You're welcome, you too. Tweet