Are there any conspiracy theories that you just think could have an element of truth?

[AhhhHereItGoes]

I love all things conspiracy theory - from a psychological/social point of view it's interesting to see what makes people fearful or pessimistic.

But I often do see some conspiracy theories a bit like Urban legends in that they could be an exaggerated truth.

Are there any conspiracy theories or rumours that you just think 'maybe...' or even ones you're completely sold on.

hopes nobody thinks the Queen is a metamorphic lizard alien

Not considered incurable at all,even as long ago as sixty-seventy years, and the Tavistock was pioneering in attempting treatments. Admittedly some people with BDP are profoundly, damaged, unstable and the Tavistock sometimes works with the ones who are high-risk.

The Tavistock's world renowned and works generally to ensure that families stay together, with many successes. I find it extraordinarily hard to believe that SS are 'paid' to take children away at all, never mind that the Tavistock would work with them.

It sounds a great deal more likely that some of the mothers, sadly, could not be helped and are claiming that their children were 'taken and sold on' as a way of coping.

The mainstream media only tell us what they want us to know. I don't think that's even a conspiracy, it's obvious to anyone with a brain cell.

As opposed to the non-mainstream media? As if they didn't have agendas.

@Lweji

But the more serious non-mainstream media often declares its agenda up front. Whereas the mainstream media never does: it implies it's free and independent but of course is anything but these days.

If you read both the Telegraph and the Guardian you pretty much get a balanced view.

I really don't understand how the mainstream media got such a bad rap compared to non-mainstream. It's not true that their agenda is such upfront.

The Guardian has become a joke where investigative reporting is concerned. I and colleagues have been working on a massive story over the past few years that several Guardian journalists have expressed an interest in but then get told by editors/owners to leave it alone. Why? Well, let's just say it would cause quite a bit of damage to some of their major advertisers.

@FlameIngSofa can you share?

Yes, of course. It's an issue that affects everyone, particularly children and their health. There's a pretty good summary in the latest edition of Private Eye: www.private-eye.co.uk/in-the-back. The Eye passed on the story a couple of years back but it seems the fact this is now being looked at by a select committee has made a difference. As said, many Guardian reporters have been very excited about the story but gone silent at some point. Recently, a Daily Express reporter was honest enough to say that he'd love to run it but suspected his team would not, mainly because it would piss off their advertisers (sofa and mattress makers).

The bottom line of this is simple: UK homes contain the highest levels of flame retardant dust in the world. Flame retardants are constantly banned for being toxic (but not before they get into millions of products). They get into mothers' breast milk and babies' blood. Worst of all, perhaps, is that the government itself proved 5 years ago that they don't even work in fires. Just make fires more toxic.

The Department for Business is responsible but has refused to act for the past five years. They just keep telling everyone, "We're reviewing the regulations and will do something in due course." The minister concerned, Kelly Tolhurst, is due to face the Environmental Audit Committee this afternoon and they are set to give her a hard time. You can watch on Parliament TV at the EAC "toxic chemicals in everyday life" site. Also worth reading some of the submissions there - not the ones from the chemical industry!

Tolhurst faced the All Party Parliamentary Fire Rescue and Safety Group a few weeks back. She was asked what her department was doing about the fact that organophosphate chemicals were banned in weedkiller for being so toxic yet are still used in children's mattresses. She got very angry, saying how dare you imply that I don't care about children's health. But she didn't answer the question.

I do think we are being poisoned. Not on purpose agenda 42 (or whatever it's cslled) style.

I just think governments and businesses don't care. Profit is more important.

Plastic in the water, chemicals on our furniture, our clothes, drugs and chemicals in our food.

It'll come out eventually that all the plastic and chemicals have been causing cancer, infertility, birth defects and more. It'll be the lead of our time.

@Firstimpressionsofearth I believe you are correct, although you can go some way to avoid these things. Avoid fish, buy organic fruit & veg, buy good quality clothes made with organic cotton, avoid all unnecessary medications, be careful about the furniture you buy, etc.

It's extremely difficult to avoid flame retardants in UK furniture. Our flammability laws are the toughest in the world - even though they don't work! And yes, it's all about profits. If we changed our laws to do what the rest of the world does, which is essentially to not have flame retardants in our furniture, four industries would lose millions overnight. That includes the UK furniture industry which benefits hugely in the home market from the trade barrier the regs create. They are largely crooked and really don't give a shit about our health or even our fire safety.

It won't come out 'eventually' how toxic these chemicals are; it's already come out. But the system has been set up to help business, e.g. the chemical industry is allowed to issue a new chemical without any checks other than what it runs itself. Years later, and after someone else has to go the expense and trouble of proving it, a chemical is banned for being toxic. However, in the case of one of the most toxic flame retardants, DecaBDE, it's still in millions of UK sofas and mattresses, despite now being banned.

@HermioneMakepeace

You're right but it's difficult to get the full facts; and is usually expensive to buy, for example, furniture without flame retardants. It doesn't help that a lot of organic furniture makers cheat, e.g. by claiming they don't use flame retardants when they really mean they don't bother to ask their suppliers what's in the fire treatments made to the fabrics and fillings.