Very Important Information---

[jaster]

Dear Sirs
Passing 50 to 100 microamperes of simple d.c. electrical current through Aids infected blood disables the Aids virus and stops it reproducing it was discovered in 1992.
It also works on a broad range of other viruses/bacteria including Hep-A,B,C and also quite importantly for maleria.see below.

BLOOD ELECTRIFICATION.
Research conducted at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, 1300 Morris Park Ave., Bronx, N.Y.10461 in New York but researchers forced to keep quiet after being threatened by the *******eutical companies who would lose many 100 of billions of dollers if the method came into wide spread use.Remember an Aids person is a revenue stream for an average of 5 years of between $5000 to $20000 per person per year for the *******eutical industry.

PRACTICAL APPLICATION.
Remember it is simple electrical current nothing else that disable the virii/pathogens.In the case of the Aids virii the electrical current stops it reproducing and the bodys immune system removes the remaining virii.
The level of the current is very low, 25 milliamps is required to electrocute a person.These devices only use 0.3 milliamps to 1 milliamp maximum.This is much less than a Tens device.1 milliamp is 0.001amps.
1 microampere is 0.000001 amps. No money can be made from such devices which are very cheap and easy to produce. No expensive toxic drugs with dangerous side effects are involved.

The practical device to neutralise Aids inside the body consists of two 0.5cm by 2cm long electrodes wrapped in wet cotton or alternatively conductive foam attached to wrist pulse points or other major artery points and then a direct current of 300 microamperes TO 1000 microamperes (0.3 Milliamps to 1 Milliamps MAX to allow for losses through the skin) is passed through the electrodes and then through the blood.The curent maybe adjusted to suit the condition or individuals.
It is important to use these particular electrode dimensions as the current density must be maintained at 4 to 9 microamperes per square millimetre of electrode.The higher currents near 1 milliamp produce more rapid results.
Every 5 minutes the current direction is reversed to prevent possible electrolysis.The voltage required to drive this current is from 20 to 40 volts max depending on skin resistance. Four 9 volt batteries in series would be sufficent.In poorer countries three 12 volt car batteries can be used in series.
Application times vary from 20 minutes to up to an hour or more daily depending on condition.

BLOOD ELECTRIFICATION RESULTS.
At Beck-n-Stuff and Microelectricitygermkiller a number of private individuals have tried it for a number of viral/bacterial conditions including Aids, Malaria, Cfs, lymphomas and other Cancers with excellent results backed up by blood tests have submitted reports.The devices are very easy to make yourself and instructions are included at the links below.

Also remember the majority of cancers are caused by virii, bacteria, fungi ,parasites and vaccines and is therefore contagious as a result.
Check it for yourself by typing 'cancer microbe' in search engine Google for many hundreds of research papers.The mainstream medical establishment continues to deny this as it would be an admission of their closed minds over the decades.In the same way they denied for 20 years that their was a link between stomach ulcers and the bacterium Heliobactor Pylori.

Thats why the incidence of cancer has risen to 1 in 3 now and continues to rise with no cure being found for the last 60 years and no cure in sight and the medical establishment denying that it is caused by viruses/microbes due to their entrenched position.
Last year 126 000 people in the U.K died from cancer and 36 000 died from *******eutical drug side effects.
In the U.S. 245040 people died from *******eutical drug side effects alone last year.

More information as well as original research at below sites. The method is not confined to Aids only but has a broad spectrum of uses which is why the *******eutical companies are desperate to keep it hidden.

You have to type these complex links EXACTLY as otherwise they wont work or copy/paste.

http://www.papimi.gr/safe-hiv/AppendixE.htm <---full research paper
http://www.excel.net/~jaguar/experiments.html <---abbreviated paper
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/microe...itygermkiller/ <----how to make devices yourself.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Beck-n-stuff/ <---user groups of electromed
http://rense.com/general44/russell.htm <---Cancer caused by microbes
http://www.bolenreport.com/articles/timbolen.html <---background to suppression

More general information can be found by typing 'BLOOD ELECTRIFICATION' or 'BECK PROTOCOL'
in web browser.

Below is a easy to understand version of the original paper.Look at the graphs and tables below.
The BBC Horizon programme showed the futility of making vaccines for Aids viruses recently due to multi varient strains.Think of all the people who could have been saved since 1992 but due to this suppression have died.Also the Aids virus is spreading due to increased promiscuity in the general population.

I ask you to bring this knowledge to public awareness and for you to ask governmnent officals some searching questions after studying the research papers above and below carefully. It is very important that the below research paper is read a few times over and over again to make it clear in your own mind. Once again it is simple direct electrical current that disables pathogens in the blood.

A research project by a small company in Africa showed blood electrification effectiveness on malaria as detailed below.The test is impossible to conduct in U.S.A due to interference by vested interests.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lab Test Results of HIV inactivation by electric current from Appendix E Paper by W. Lyman, et al. Reporting Inactivation of AIDS Virus by Electric Current William D. Lyman, Irwin R.Merkatz
William C. Hatch and Steven C. Kaali
Departments of Pathology,
and Obstetrics & Gynecology
Albert Einstein. College of Medicine,
1300 Morris Park Ave., Bronx, N.Y.10461

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

Overview: A non-flow vessel or cell included a pair of platinum electrodes 1 mm apart inserted into a well 1.56 mm in length and 8.32 mm in depth. The non-flow vessel was connected to a direct current source capable of creating an electric field at a constant voltage and constant amperage. Into this well was laced a suspension of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) at a concentration of 1,000,000 infectious particles per ml. An aliquot of approximately 10 ul of the virus suspension was placed into the well. Thereafter, the viral suspension was exposed to direct currents ranging from 0 microamps (uA) for up to 12 minutes, to 100 microamps for up to 6 minutes. Intermediate currents of 25, 50 and 75 microamps were used to expose similar viral aliquots. After exposure of the viral suspension to electric currents, the contents of the non-flow vessel were removed and placed into sterile microtubes. 5 ul of each sample were removed and diluted with 95 ul tissue culture medium supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum (FCS. unborn calf blood)
In Experiment 1, the resuspended and treated viral stocks were incubated with a human T lymphoblastoid cell line named CEM-SS. This cell line, upon exposure to HIV-1, forms syncytia (giant cells). It is well documented that the viral titer (amount) used is directly correlated with the number of syncytia formed. Therefore, evaluation of infectivity of HIV-1 can be used with this assay. In contrast, Experiment No. 2 used a differnet human T lymphoblastoid cell line named H9. This cell line, in contrast to CEM-SS cells, produces, upon exposure to HIV-1, many viral particles. The amount of virus produced is proportional to the amount of virus to which the cells are exposed. Therefore, quantitation of viral particles, or more commonly associated viral protein (in this case reverse transcriptase), can be used as an index of viral infection. In both assays, the CEM syncytia forming assay and the H9 viral protein assay, similar type results were obtained. That is, with the CEM cells, although syncytium formation and quantitation is preferrable, one can quantitate the HIV-1 associated protein (reverse transcriptase) activity and conversely with the H9 cells, although reverse transcriptase quantitation is preferred, one can quantitate giant cell (syncytia) formation. Both of these assays are widely used as reproducible measures of viral infection and can be used to determine if alterations in viral infectivity as a product of this electrical treatment can be detected.

Experiment #1

Approximately 100,000 CEM-SS cells per sample were incubated with a treated or untreated (control) viral aliquot for up to 4 days. The cells were placed into microtiter plate wells and monitored for formation of syncytia every 24 hours by microscopic observation. In a standardized fashion, as it has been reported in the literature and is currently being conducted in many laboratories, the number of syncytia at 3 and 4 days was determined. Table 2 summarizes the results from a representative experiment using this assay. As can be noted, the number of syncytia formed was inversely proportional to the amount of electric current. That is, additionally, with increased current (100 vs 50 uA) there was a reduction in the number of syncytia formed. These results and those of additional experiments using the CEM-SS cell line indicate a consistent finding that electrical treatment of the RF strain of HIV-1 attentuates the virus potential for inducing syncytium formation in this cell line.


Experiment #2
A separate and independent assay to determine the ability of electric current to alter HIV-1 infectivity using H9 cells was employed. The basic strategy was similar to that used for the CEM cells with the exception that the initial suspension of treated and controlled (non-treated) viral stock was incubated with 100,000 H9 cells for 2 hours at 37 degees Celsius. Thereafter, the cell virus suspensions were further diluted to 5 ml in standard tissue culture medium. The cell-viral suspensions were then incubated for up to 14 days at 37 degrees Celsius with 5% carbon dioxide. At 3 day intervals (beginning at day 2), aliquots of cell suspension were removed from each sample. The aliquots were centrifuged at 1,000 rpm for 5 minutes in order to pellet the cells. After centrifugation, the supernatant and cell pellets were seperated. The supernatant was cyropreserved for subsequent reverse transcriptase assay and the cell pellets were resuspended in fixatives and maintained in a tissue bank for additional studies employing in situ hybridization and immunocytochemistry to detect qualitatively and semi-qualitatively viral infection by HIV-1. At the end of each experiment, the supernatant samples from each of the tests and time points were examined using standard reverse transcriptase assay. The results of the representative experiment are shown in Table 3. The results of this experiment indicate the ability of HIV-1 to infect H9 cells is attenuated by the magnitude of the electrical currents to which the virus is exposed. Additionally, at lower current magnitude, but with prolonged exposure time, attenuation of viral infectivity is achieved. That is, analogous to the results observed using syncytium formation and the CEM-SS cell line, either increased current or increased duration of exposure time was inversely proportional to the amount of reverse transcriptase produced by the cell line.

In conclusion, these experiments which have been repeated several times, and those using the CEM-SS cell line, indicate at a statistically significant level that direct electrical current at biocompatible amperages for discrete exposure time intervals can attenuate the ability of HIV-1 to infect normally healthy cells which are susceptible to the HIV-1 AIDS virus.

TABLE 2
Syncytium Formation
------------------------------------------
Dilution
of virus (Number of Syncytia)
-------- --------------------------------
1:20 TNTC TNTC 28 66 15
1:40 TNTC 175 22 42 7
1:80 TNTC 90 20 25 4
1:160 180 44 9 9 2
1:320 115 28 4 6 0
1:640 70 10 0 2 0
1:1280 40 7 0 0 0
1:2560 28 4 0 0 0
1:5120 15 2 0 0 0
1:10,240 10 1 0 0 0
1:20,480 4 0 0 0 0
------ ----- ----- ----- ------
0uA 25uA 50uA 75uA 100uA
---------------------------------------------
(TNTC=too numerous to count)

TABLE 3
Reverse Transcriptase Activity
(count per million x .001)
-------------------------------------
Days of Incubation
------------------
uAmps/Time(min.) 2 days 4 days
---------------- ------- ------
0/6 0 13.8
0/12 0 11.7
50/3 0 9.1
50/6 0 9.1
50/12 0 4.8
100/3 0 5.7
100/6 0 3.6
------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BELOW IS RECENT TEST ON MALARIA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subj: [microelectricitygermkiller] SOTA's Clinical Trial Results on Malaria
Date: 05-Aug-03 11:04:49 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From: russ@sotainstruments.com (sotainstruments)
Reply-to: microelectricitygermkiller@yahoogroups.com
To: microelectricitygermkiller@yahoogroups.com

Hello Group,
Below is a copy of an e-mail that SOTA has sent to Spectrum magazine.
I thought it would be also appropriate to share this with some of the
BECK chat lines. Please feel free to copy it and pass it on to
whomever you wish. It is time to get the word out. We are not making
ANY claims here! We are simply sharing the results of our clinical
trials. Please draw your own conclusions, as free individuals with
free will and sound minds.
I only wished that Dr. Bob Beck could be here (physically) to see the
fruits of his labour. Sincerely, Russell Torlage, SOTA Instruments
Inc.

******************************************************
Hello everyone at Spectrum Magazine (http://www.thespectrumnews.org)

We so very much enjoy your magazine, and we were pleasantly surprised
to find this month's Spectrum with an article on Bob Beck's great
work (August 2003)

Thank you for the kind words about our company.

In future if you are planning any follow-ups to Bob's work may we
suggest you contact us ahead of time? We are working on many things
to bring Bob's work to the world and we would be happy to share with
you up-to-date research etc.

We've recently concluded a small trial we conducted in conjunction
with a medical doctor in Nigeria. We have not shared this publicly as
of yet and most likely won't until we can get a second trial done.
[SOTA has decided to share on BECK chat lines.] However, we decided
to share this with you and if you so choose your readers. We see
Spectrum as being on the cutting edge...

As many of your readers know, it is very expensive and very difficult
to get medical studies done in North America. However, because of the
current situation in Africa, where so many people are sick,
government regulatory bodies are easing up the requirements and, of
course, the cost of doing studies there are not near so costly.

SOTA relies on doctors who have been exposed to the BECK Protocol to
approach us about conducting a study. When that happens, a
practitioner's heart is in the right place and money is not the
primary issue. When we pursue a researcher to do a study, the costs
quoted are prohibitive for us at this time.

MALARIA

A Medical Doctor in Nigeria contacted us in 2001 asking if the blood
electrification aspect of the BECK Protocol was effective against
Malaria. We told him we didn't know but it could be. We sent him a
unit to try on one person who was willing to try it and whose life
would not be put into danger by trying it. About two months later we
heard back from him—the units had been effective with malaria in 5
out of 6 people.

Then we began the long journey (almost eighteen months) of putting
together a proper small trial study. The Nigerian government gave us
a letter of support. Unfortunately due to cultural differences
everything took a lot longer to accomplish. We learned much about
patience. In the end, we decided to stop the study prematurely (we
were originally hoping to have 60 people included in the trial). When
we stopped the trial, 37 people had been enrolled. Stopping
prematurely meant that several of them had not finished the protocol
or the testing. Another limitation was the fact once people tested
negative for malaria, they no longer returned to complete testing and
lab work (they were well so why keep returning to the doctor).

Of the 37 people, 12 were women and 25 were men. The age range was
from 18 to 38. Subjects were either asymptomatic or symptomatic with
malaria. We were unable to test the protocol on individual's with
resistant malaria cases. The type of malaria was P. Falciparum, known
to be the worst strain.

Blood Electrification was administered daily for one hour until lab
work showed negative for malaria. Each person was to be tested for
malaria on days 0, 3, 7, 14 and 28.

Only 8 people completed all the testing. Of these 7 tested negative
for malaria and 1 still tested for malaria.

14 people completed the blood electrification and tested negative,
but they did not complete all of the lab work subsequent to testing
negative.

11 people didn't finish the protocol due to the study being stopped.
Of these 11, all of their malaria loads were reduced, but not
negative.

3 people's records weren't complete so we cannot use the details.

1 person was removed from the study before beginning because they
also had typhoid and due to the parameters of the study they could
not be included with the study.

An important note is that the majority of people testing negative
showed negative between day 3 and day 7 testing. Also, virtually
everyone had a significant reduction or elimination of symptoms on
day 3.

This study is by no means conclusive, however we feel it has given us
some good information as to the possible effectiveness of blood
electrification as per Bob Beck with malaria. We are very much
interested in continuing the research in this area, and are doing our
best at finding funds that may be available to us now that we have an
indication of the effectiveness.
We have other research projects that are in the beginning
administrative stages. Once completed we will release the information.

DONATIONS:

SOTA has also been donating units to a few organizations in Africa.
One such group operates out of remote villages in South Africa. They
have approximately 90 health care workers that go out into the
villages, trying to help people. SOTA sent them several units to use
in the villages. We have not had a lot of feedback from them...you
can imagine how difficult communication is between third world
conditions in these villages and our ultra-modern society. However
the feedback we get always touches our hearts. We are planning on
sending a unit for each of their health care workers so that they
will be able to help more individiuals. We have recently designed a
unit for those in economically poor countries so they can afford what
we consider the most important part of the BECK Protocol—blood
electrification.

We have been told that people in the villages line up to use the
units. The blood electrification units have to be shared and so go on
to the next worker in another village. Unfortunately this means the
treatment gets stopped prematurely in each village. For this reason
we are going to send one unit per heatlh care worker.

Thank you again Spectrum for being so interested in the BECK
Protocol. In today's world there are so many gifts we have been given
that can help us...we only need to have the desire to seek them.

Thank you,
Russell Torlage and Lesley Punt
SOTA Instruments Inc.
http://www.sotainstruments.com

[fwgx]

Public Trust in Scientific Information
By: Peder Jensen, IPTS Date: 14/9/00

Abstract

It has been said that public trust in scientists, and indeed in science, is dwindling. People seemingly rely on beliefs rather than on fact and in any case do not trust authoritative information. In stead they rely on information presented to them by groups of individuals with whom they share beliefs or ideologies. This paper sets out to explore this assumption by looking at available evidence of the level of trust in science, scientists, scientific information and in scientific institutions. The study is based entirely on already published material and is therefore confined to analyse on the questions asked in previous surveys. Especially the establishment of time-series is therefore difficult as very few longitudinal studies exist in the area. Time-series results should therefore be viewed as merely indicative of trends.

Summary
1-2 pages incl. Illustrative graph on historical development in 3 regions

Context
It seems to be a widely held view that the public do no longer trust scientists or the information they bring forth. In fact it has come to the point where this is not considered a point of view but rather a fact that is no longer questioned. Newspapers regularly report on the issue1 referring to the growing gap, the existing gap, etc. Thus something is definitely not right, since so many sources state that it isn't. Also in scientific magazines and journals this view can be found. In the debate columns of Nature2 a debate has been going on for some time regarding public trust in science. Under the heading "How to restore public trust in science" two leading members of Greenpeace set out to help science get into closer contact and trustful partnership with the public. Their view is that science should be much more attentive to public opinion, and much less act as an appendix to government and industry. Whether such suggestions would have any impact on public perception is not the issue of this paper. The paper merely sets out to gauge whether there has actually been a change in public perception, especially related to trust in science, and to the extent possible to shed light on who and what the public trust if it does not trust science. The notion is interesting, however, because it points towards the role of science, which has changed significantly over the past 100 years. 100 years ago science had a limited volume and a limited impact on people's daily life. Scientists may well have been viewed as trustworthy experts, but it mattered little to most people as they seldom came in close contact with science. Up through the first half of the 20th century the role of science changed gradually, and especially World War II speeded up this change dramatically. Discoveries and developments such as the Atomic Bomb, Cyclon B and certain medical experiments on human beings carried out during the war spurred discussions on the ethical responsibility of scientists, and marked a gradual departure from the view that science was innocent, pure and "value free". The decades after the war, where the Cold War was raging, saw a very strong focus on science as an important tool or rather a weapon of the war. Developments such as the H-bomb, satellites, manned space flight, micro electronic, bio-warfare products, etc. are all products of the arms race. These developments in many cases have produced spin-off technology, which has transformed our daily life at an ever-increasing pace. Personal computers, Internet, cellular phones, satellite television, medical discoveries are all examples of "science products" which now affects all of us every day. Thus the experience of the public is that of science evolving over a period of 100 years from a position of obscurity to a position at the centre stage of societal development. Over the same time people have experienced a mixture of blessings and curses brought on by science in conjunction with industry, government, military, etc. Science today takes on enormous proportions claiming in the range of 2-3% of GDP in major industrialised countries3.

The effects are felt every day by people using high-tech products, just as well as the adverse effects of our science based industrial society are becoming more and more visible. Many effects may in reality not be the effects of science, but rather the effects of our use and dispose of products of science and industry. However, also here science plays a role, as it is often scientists, who warn the public of the danger. E.g. scientists have been strongly involved in the identification of ozone depletion, global warming, endocrine disrupters, etc. just to mention a few recent examples. Thus a significant role of scientists today is that of heralds of bad tidings.

A number of parallel developments may have affected the public perception of science during the second half of the 20th century:

· Science at the universities has been matched by science in companies. These companies have a vested interest in results, which helps them develop their products, and in some cases in suppressing evidence of potential harmful effects of use of their products. This has fostered discussions regarding definition of reasonable doubt4, which is crucial in science, but potentially difficult for people to understand.
· Over the past 20 years a growing influx of private capital into universities have blurred the distinction between "objective" university science and "subjective" privately funded research. In a number of cases this has led to arguments about publication of results not favourable to the sponsoring organisation5.
· The hunt for funds for universities has led some universities to publicise research findings, which had not undergone the proper peer-review process of the scientific community. In cases where findings were later found to be erroneous this has generated a view of science as rather speculative, and not founded in common sense6.
· General confidence in governments and authorities have decreased over the last half century. As scientists in many cases work for governments this also reflect on the confidence in the advice given by these scientists. Recent examples such as BSE has accelerated the decrease in governments in some countries.
· The role of NGO as a filter between the increasingly complex findings presented by scientists and the public, may have added to the decrease in confidence in authorities as these organisations are in many cases able to match the scientific skills of some scientists. Thus the discussion of e.g. reasonable doubt between science and the public (represented by NGO's) take on a rather scientific style.

All in all science today play a much larger role that it did early in the last century. Science today serves many masters (governments, industry, NGO's, etc). This in turn may have affected how the public view science. The object of this paper is to look into available studies and try to summarise the most visible trends.

Major reference studies

Very few studies exist, which explicitly set out to explore the public trust in science. Therefore this study rely on studies of other aspects parallel to the issue at stake. The studies are presented by region.

Europe
The Eurobarometer study series is a semi-annual study carried out to evaluate a range of topics of interest to European organisations. In addition to establishing very long time-series on a number of core-issues the studies focus on issues relevant for the present debate, e.g. the implementation of the Euro. From time to time themes such as public trust are treated as well.
Eurobarometer 35.1, (autumn 91) Source pt. not available
Eurobarometer 39.1, (spring 1993) Source pt. not available
Eurobarometer 46.1, (autumn 1996) Source pt. not available
Eurobarometer 52.1, (15-3-00)7

This Eurobarometer theme study was conducted in November-December 1999 and reported in early 2000. It is the fourth study on Europeans attitudes towards science and technology.

In this survey people have been asked specifically about their trust in information originating from different sources concerning modern biotechnology. People have been asked to identify the source they trusted the most, and to indicate whether they trusted other types of organisations. Thus this question is not about science in general, but limited to biotechnology. This leads to the following table 8:

Consumer organisations (26+29%) and the medical profession (24+29%) emerge as clearly the trustworthiest entities, with environmental organisations (14+31%) trailing somewhat behind. Animal protection organisations (4+21%), universities (7+19%) and the media (4+16%) are rather low as first choice, but uphold some trustworthiness as secondary source. Industry (0+3%) and political parties (0+3%) are by far the least trusted organisations.

Even though there are some minor differences in the formulation of the questions, as compared with the 1996 study9, an indicative comparison has been made10:

It can be seen from this comparison that there is a growing trust in consumer organisations (+6%) and the medical profession (+8%). There is some reduction in the trust placed in environmental organisations (-3%), and there is a slightly reduced trust in universities (-2%). For the remaining organisations differences amount to 1% or less.

Looking at the sociodemographic variables there is a tendency among women, elderly, lowincome groups and low education level to place relatively higher trust in the medical profession. Among men, young people, high-income groups and those with long education there is a tendency to place relatively more trust in consumer organisations

It is possible to group these organisations to get a clearer picture11

Based on these figures it is not possible to detect any trend towards less trust in governments or industry. However, the trust is at a very low level and the time between the two studies is relatively short. On the other hand there is a strong growth in trust in NGO's and in Independent Science. This could indicate that the public tend to look for its own advocates - someone who does not have a financial interest in the outcome of a debate.

Select Committee on Science and Technology, House of Lords, UK, Third Report, (23-2-00)

The Select Committee on Science and Technology (SCST), House of Lords, UK, is charged with studying the area of science and technology policy. SCST does this by regularly reporting to the House on relevant policy issues. The third report, issued early 2000, reports on public attitudes and values12, understanding of science, trust in different sources of information and science education.

The report contains a rather detailed discussion regarding the apparent paradox that many science and technology related products and services are taken for granted, just as well as popularised books on science sell very well, whereas people on the other hand are reluctant to embrace many of the tools deemed necessary for the advancement of science. An example is animal testing which is rejected on ethical grounds. The report also notes that rejection of developments is not necessarily a new trend. Both electricity, steam railroads and many other technologies have at one time been rejected by smaller or larger groups of the public. Thus there is a tendency towards rejection of new technologies until the public becomes familiar with them. The main question is then whether this tendency is growing and intensifying.

In a poll taken in 1996 a group of people were asked to name 2-3 groups to be trusted as regards the truth about pollution. Since people could name more than one source the figures does not add up to 100%. The ranking was the following13:
Based on questions to 1015 persons, 16 years and older.

In a similar question concerning the truth about BSE the ranking was the following:

The trend is rather clear. The public trust sources they to some extent believe to be independent from government and industry. This is emphasised by reference to a range of other studies, all reaching similar conclusions.

The report also looks at different international studies of the interrelationship between supportiveness of science and how well the public understand science. It is reported 14 that better understanding of science tend to generate less unmitigated enthusiasm for science. This is explained by the fact that people have a better understanding of positive as well as negative consequences.

The report contains no specific survey as to the development of trust over time. However, references are made to the deterioration of public trust in science. Thus the report provides a good look into the issues affecting trust, but not the development over time.

1 The Daily Telegraph in reporting on a report by the Select Committee on Science and Technology refers to the lack of confidence, due to e.g. BSE crises and debate on GM foods. Another example is The Guardian reporting on Tuesday March 14 that "Scientists must talk to public".
2 Nature. October 7, 1999. Commentary.
3 Reported in COM (2000) 6, quoting Eurostat.
4 The most publicized case is probably the discussion on the harmful effects of smoking. Here industry has been charged with withholding evidence concerning health-related problems. The view of science in this case is that of participating in the cover-up, and as that of adding to endless discussions about reasonable doubt in scientific results.
5 In a recent case a Danish oral hygiene chewing gum manufacturer was charged with trying to suppress results of sponsored research which showed that the gum was not as effective as claimed in advertisement.
6 The best publicized case is probably the case of cold fusion, where two well esteemed researchers at a press conference told about their experience with fusion a room temperature in some palladium electrodes immersed in heavy water. No one has been able to replicate their findings since then.
7 In all 16082 people have been interviewed in this survey covering all 15 EU member states.
8 Eurobarometer 52.1 report, page 79. The figures on 1st choice do not add up to 100%. This is probably due to rounding off effects.
9 Eurobarometer 46.1
10 Eurobarometer 52.1 report, page 82. When comparing it is important to note that columns do not add up to 100% due to rounding off. Thus differences of 1 or less should be viewed as insignificant
11 The 1996 figures add up to 99% whereas the 1999 figures add up to 103%. A significant part of differences should therefore be assigned to rounding off effects. The grouping of responses into 6 groups cannot be found in the report and is the responsibility of the author of this paper.
12 The committee deals with attitudes and values of people living in UK. I does, however, include some international comparisons. I should be borne in mind that public attitudes towards science in the UK may have been affected more by the BSE crises than the attitudes in other countries.
13 Select Committee on Science and Technology, Third Report, 23-2-2000, Annex 6, Table 5.
14 SCST report paragraph 2.8-2.10

[Omega X]

Um.......I don't know where you guys find the time to put all of this into a post but this is a significant discovery. No wonder Majic Johnson can claim that he has no sign of the HIV virus. He or his personal doctor must have come across this and tried it on him. Also I can see how the *******utial(sp?) Industry could have an impact on types of medical treatment. BUT ultimately they cannot control this for long. Alternative Medicine is getting popular and this method can be added to that growing list of things that work 110% better than the pill.

This is good to know. I will ask a couple of friends about it and mention this to doctors that specialize in this whenever I visit one. I don't want to jump the gun just yet about this because of the lack of support behind it BUT I'm always objective when it comes to scientific research.

[griffinn]

So... it's "very important information", but not important enough to deserve a meaningful thread title?

[THPSFG]

um, is it possible to get the shortnews version?

[Bilbo Baggins]

Electricty + AIDS = cure?

[baafie]

Moron + Hotshit = Bilbo Baggins?

[griffinn]

"Electric AIDS" sounds so much like a boyband...

[Bilbo Baggins]

Originally posted by baafie
Moron + Hotshit = Bilbo Baggins?

You want to be careful saying stuff like that.

[godoncrack]

Let us all not forget Electroshock Therapy
Science at its best.

[zootm]

i think i read about this electrocution therapy before, it's not safe yet. i don't remember hearing it worked on AIDS, though.

also, here's some fun things about it:

Q- I am wondering if you have any information about claims that a blood electrifier can decrease viroloads in HIV patients?

A- I have seen no credible reports on that. Since 99% of the virus is in the tissues treating only the blood would unlikely result in significant benefit. KH

(Source)

also, the thread-starting post on this page has been made in at least 5-6 different forums.

[griffinn]

Two posts. Both gems. If the trend is linear, he might post again in January 2005.

[ujay]

I told you it was habit forming

I vaguely remember a woman doctor was using something similar to treat heroin addiction, must be 20 years ago though, and never heard what became of it.

UJ

[horse-fly]

WARNING... USELESS POST

holy crap those are long posts!