First off that article says nothing about MS increased rates anywhere. But also, it talks about something that happened from July 9, 1953 to Aug 1, 1953. It’s one instance of testing a chemical for the cold war that was for trying to determine how Nuclear Fallout would spread in the area. Also, worst of all, you said there was an increased rate of MS in Saskatchewan but then posted an article that talks about something that happened in Winnipeg, which last I checked, was in Manitoba not Saskatchewan.
Edit: It does list an event that happened in Alberta but those were just claiming they could see some “distanctly visible emissions” but no study has shown any evidence for that being an actual chemical being ejected from the planes. There is also a supposed instance of it in St. Lois where they use just two people as evidence for it. It also talks about other tests the cia and other government agencies have done on the populace but none of those listed were a chemical dispersal except the original.
Maybe cause that’s not exactly why I posted the article. There’s a whole lot more to dig into, from reputable sources, I was just pointing you in the general direction with an article from a national paper. And not only 1953. They’ve been trying to figure out that geographic MS thing for years. You have enough info now to look into it yourself. (Medicine Hat is also mentioned too, it’s like you skimmed that article) It’s hilarious y’all are always like “They’d never do that, blah blah blah” “Here’s a documented and verified instance of them doing it at least twice, in the fifties and 60’s” “Welll… so what?” You’re (not subtly) misrepresenting what was in that article in order to belittle it. Cognitive dissonance is a bitch, i know,
Gee. I wonder why I can’t be bothered to recall everything i’ve read on the subject over the years, track it all down, and serve up a bunch of neatly listed links for people bitching i don’t
There ya go again, comparing it to that after verified proof was posted, at least to one aspect. You all already showed me you’ll immediately misrepresent what you’re shown to assuage your prior held beliefs.
First off that article says nothing about MS increased rates anywhere. But also, it talks about something that happened from July 9, 1953 to Aug 1, 1953. It’s one instance of testing a chemical for the cold war that was for trying to determine how Nuclear Fallout would spread in the area. Also, worst of all, you said there was an increased rate of MS in Saskatchewan but then posted an article that talks about something that happened in Winnipeg, which last I checked, was in Manitoba not Saskatchewan.
Edit: It does list an event that happened in Alberta but those were just claiming they could see some “distanctly visible emissions” but no study has shown any evidence for that being an actual chemical being ejected from the planes. There is also a supposed instance of it in St. Lois where they use just two people as evidence for it. It also talks about other tests the cia and other government agencies have done on the populace but none of those listed were a chemical dispersal except the original.
Maybe cause that’s not exactly why I posted the article. There’s a whole lot more to dig into, from reputable sources, I was just pointing you in the general direction with an article from a national paper. And not only 1953. They’ve been trying to figure out that geographic MS thing for years. You have enough info now to look into it yourself. (Medicine Hat is also mentioned too, it’s like you skimmed that article) It’s hilarious y’all are always like “They’d never do that, blah blah blah” “Here’s a documented and verified instance of them doing it at least twice, in the fifties and 60’s” “Welll… so what?” You’re (not subtly) misrepresenting what was in that article in order to belittle it. Cognitive dissonance is a bitch, i know,
“Do your own research”
Classic.
Had a verified link and pointed you in the right direction, This isn’t university, if you care, look it up.
I don’t really but thank you
Gee. I wonder why I can’t be bothered to recall everything i’ve read on the subject over the years, track it all down, and serve up a bunch of neatly listed links for people bitching i don’t
Probably the same reason why I can’t be arsed to “look up” every deranged conspiracy I see on the Internet.
There ya go again, comparing it to that after verified proof was posted, at least to one aspect. You all already showed me you’ll immediately misrepresent what you’re shown to assuage your prior held beliefs.
I’m gonna need at least a dozen YouTube videos to really be convinced.
got curious, googled it, here’s something interesting:
https://news.usask.ca/articles/research/2018/u-of-s-study-hones-in-on-causes-of-ms-disability.php
seems genetic. which makes sense.
apparently that region just got unlucky with its gene pool, though, as the news release states: more research is necessary in order to be certain.
being caused by environmental chemicals hasn’t been definitively ruled out, but it’s not looking likely
(btw, bravo on an actually readable press release by a university!)