Furry lobster covered with white filamentous bacteria found in Pacific

[MeaganM]

Could this be a breakthrough with the cause of Morgellons? These lobsters have grown white hair-like filaments to survive in a toxic environment. Interesting! Maybe our bodies are not trying to push out toxins with the filaments but producing them to filter new toxins introduced in our environment? Notice the lobsters are blind as well.

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Furry 'lobster' found in Pacific
Furry 'lobster' found in Pacific

Marine biologists have discovered a crustacean in the South Pacific that resembles a lobster or crab covered in what looks like silky fur.

Kiwa hirsuta is so distinct from other species that scientists have created a new taxonomic family for it.

A US-led team found the animal last year in waters 2,300m (7,540ft) deep at a site 1,500km (900 miles) south of Easter Island, an expert has claimed.

Details appear in the journal of Paris' National Museum of Natural History.

The diving expedition was organised by Robert Vrijenhoek of the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute in California.

The "Yeti Crab", as it has been dubbed, is white and 15cm (5.9in) long, according to Michel Segonzac of the French Research Institute for Exploitation of the Sea (Ifremer).

In what he has described as a "surprising characteristic", the animal's pincers are covered with sinuous, hair-like strands. It seems to reside around some Pacific deep sea hydrothermal vents, which spew out fluids that are toxic to many animals.

Bacterial refuge

Dr Segonzac told the BBC News website that the "hairy" pincers contained lots of filamentous bacteria.

Some scientists think the bacteria detoxify poisonous minerals from the water, allowing K. hirsuta to survive around the vents.

K. hirsuta is part of a diverse ecology that exists around Pacific vents
Alternatively, the animal may actually feed on the bacteria that live in the hair-like strands.

But observations of its behaviour suggest it may be a general carnivore. Dr Segonzac said he and his colleagues saw the animal fighting with two crabs over a piece of shrimp.

From its general shape and appearance, the new creature resembles freshwater "squat lobsters" found in South America. But Dr Segonzac said that genetic analysis showed it was closer to marine members of this group.

K. hirsuta is blind; the researchers found it had only "the vestige of a membrane" in place of eyes, the Ifremer researcher said.

[tcmgpt13]

Interesting critter Meagan although the fact that it is blind is not too unusual for animals found living in very deep ocean waters. Anyway, reading about this proves that animals can produce fibers and perhaps we or parasites we harbor inside our bodies do too. I believe the M parasite itself produces fibers. I know what hurtin1 means when he says he sees the parasites produce fibers. I do too and without a microscope to see it happen. I often throw what I see in the toilet and watch whatever it is move around as well as send out fibers though why it does so, who knows?:

Sunlight cannot penetrate below a depth of about 660 feet, around the start of what's known as the bathyal zone (it ends where the water temperature drops to 4 degrees Celsius -- at about 6600 feet). Some fish and crustaceans at these depths are blind; other animals -- as many as half of the creatures in the deep oceans -- have become bioluminescent, producing their own light in specialized organs called photophores.

www pbs.org/wnet/savageseas/deep-article.html

[scabdraggr]

The white to red fibers are excreted by the organism that we find in our lesions.I grew some in 70% alcohol between pieces of paper that I covered with plastic with the contents in a dish.After I placed a 10day growth under a light,it warmed up and shot out many fibers from it's edges all at one time.It totally covered it's entire body with these fibers.Here is one of my fiber growth pics.

[Baraka Obam]

What is it, and what is its body, I have seen many different shapes you refer to as it?

The fibers I have seen so so many times in everything, but with all the shapes I have seen in MASS, then I have to wonder, just which shape would be sorted out for discovery as the culprit?

If you go to my video of my internal parasite worm, it is in a cacoon of sorts which I have seen many many of, althogh only one with a parasite in it.

How can we be sure what we choose to be IT is actually it, then can we be sure that what we find is actually alive, or has been alive.

The pictures are interesting, I have to read it all over again later as right now I am gonna do laundry but I got more questions.

[Baraka Obam]

The Argument that Changed the Course of Medicine.


Pasteur promoted a theory of disease that described non-changeable microbes as the primary cause of disease. This is the theory of monomorphism. This theory says that a microorganism is static and unchangeable. It is what it is. Disease is solely caused by microbes or bacteria that invade the body from the outside. (This is the germ theory.)

Bechamp held the view that microorganisms can go through different stages of development and they can evolve into various growth forms within their life cycle. This is the theory of pleomorphism. He observed microbe like particles in the blood which he called microzymas. These microbes would change shape as individuals became diseased, and for Bechamp, this was the cause of disease; hence disease comes from inside the body.

Another scientist of the day, Claude Bernard, entered into the argument and said that it was actually the "milieu" or the environment that is all important to the disease process. Microbes do change and evolve, but how they do so is a result of the environment (or terrain) to which they are exposed. Hence, for Bechamp, microbes, being pleomorphic, will change according to the environment to which they are exposed. Therefore, disease in the body, as a biological process, will develop and manifest dependent upon the state of the internal biological terrain. At the core of that terrain, is pH.

Both men acknowledged certain aspects of each other's research, but it Pasteur was the stronger, more flamboyant, and more vocal opponent when compared to the quiet Bechamp. Pasteur also came from wealth and had the right family connections. He went to great lengths to disprove Bechamp's view. Pasteur eventually managed to convince the scientific community that his view alone was correct. Bechamp felt that this diverted science down a deplorable road - a road that held only half the truth.

On his deathbed, Pasteur finally acknowledged Bechamp's work and said, "Bernard was correct: the microbe is nothing: the terrain is everything." It was a 180 degree turnaround. With his death imminently at hand, he as much as admitted that his germ theory had flaws. But his admission fell on deaf ears. It was far too late. It could not reverse the inertia of ideas that had already been accepted by mainstream science at that time. Allopathic (drug based) medicine was firmly entrenched on the road that was paved by Pasteur.

The result of that road is what you see today practiced as medicine. When a body is out of balance, doctors attempt to put it back into balance, first through drugs, then through surgery. The general effect is to remove the symptoms, not to deal with the ultimate cause of the ailment.

This is what we will get from assumtion, this is this and that is that, and there are no options. We see in Pastrurs assumtion that it was made into a fact, a fact that was flawed, this done with money and influence.

[scabdraggr]

Excellent thoughts BO.This M organism may well destroy many accepted beliefs.It is not a germ or bacteria,nor does it have any genetics to consider.I think DR. Griener at Infectious disease and Pathology,Univ.Fla.nailed it when he considered it alien.Will this change the scientific community and it's preconcieved notions.I for one think so.If you BO wish to see the true organism,then do as I did and grow it for a while.Here are some early stages of developement.

[tcmgpt13]

Ellis Greiner, Ph.d. seems to be a professor emeritus (retired) in the veterinary college, dept. of infectious diseases and pathology at the University of Florida. So far I am unable to find any link between him and Morgellons, much less anything which shows he stated that Morgellons is something alien. Would you please share any online reference you have for that statement?

wwwvetmed.ufl.edu/directory/ellisgreiner.html

quote=scabdraggr;83567]Excellent thoughts BO.This M organism may well destroy many accepted beliefs.It is not a germ or bacteria,nor does it have any genetics to consider.I think DR. Griener at Infectious disease and Pathology,Univ.Fla.nailed it when he considered it alien.Will this change the scientific community and it's preconcieved notions.I for one think so.If you BO wish to see the true organism,then do as I did and grow it for a while.Here are some early stages of developement.[/quote]

[scabdraggr]

The statement wasn't about M but about the specimens that he had tested and what he knew about other tests at other labs.This statement was in the form of an e-mail to me as part of a ongoing conversation between the two of us.Do you know of anyone that has performed any tests on any samples from M sufferers?If so have they found any nucleic acid?

[tcmgpt13]

I am not sure I understand you when you say that statement in your post was not about M?

What you said in the post prior to the post quoted below here was:

This M organism may well destroy many accepted beliefs.It is not a germ or bacteria,nor does it have any genetics to consider.I think DR. Griener at Infectious disease and Pathology,Univ.Fla.nailed it when he considered it alien.

If you/he were not talking about the Morgellons organism here it certainly reads that way from what you wrote. So if Greiner was not referring to the M organism to what was he then referring? How would he know anything about what other labs have found about any specimens (whether Morgellons or other unknowns)? Was it shared information between labs? You now say it was not Morgellons specimens you/Greiner were talking about. So an undefined and unknown specimen was the alien organism to which you refer? So how does that fit into anything? If it was not Morgellons? Do you know what he actually meant by that? Or what specimens he was referring to that he had tested? If they were not Morgellons specimens then what were they? And why would it be related to Morgellons in anyway if it was not Mogellons specimens?

No, I do not know of any tests on M sufferers samples save those reported in some of the studies we have heard about, like with Dr. Harvey. And I do not know of anyone studying DNA except perhaps (perhaps a big perhaps) OSU and the newly hired person allegedly running some kind of tests there. And those the police lab did in that city etc. to see what the specimens might be.

quote=scabdraggr;83572]The statement wasn't about M but about the specimens that he had tested and what he knew about other tests at other labs.This statement was in the form of an e-mail to me as part of a ongoing conversation between the two of us.Do you know of anyone that has performed any tests on any samples from M sufferers?If so have they found any nucleic acid?[/quote]

[scabdraggr]

we were discussing some pics of mine when he made the statement that to his knowledge no one had found any nucleic acid in samples that had been sent in to labs looking into the unexplained dermopathy.What is your point?