Home > Archive > Psoriasis support > February 2006 > Re: deja fool II





You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread. To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to this thread please [click here]

Author Re: deja fool II
Brad_Chad

2006-02-25, 8:14 pm


randall wrote:
>
> How can i disagree with that? Since you really didn't point to
> anything specific, cept for calling real medicine and by implication
> real science some how inferior i'll toss you the bone of contention.


What are you talking about? I never said anything about real
science being inferior. Read this again slowly. I said that you don't
have to have tunnel vision when it comes to science. Sometimes there
are other issues besides science, like morals. If you were living 200
years ago, somebody like you would deny a person with scurvy an orange
because you would consider it "placebo". You would ask that it be
proven that oranges are good for a person with scurvy. I wouldn't sit
around and wait for SCIENCE to prove that oranges are good for a person
with scurvy. Since oranges are harmless, the person with scurvy has
nothing to lose. Your logic is overkill for this situation. Placebo
means that the symptoms are gone, any way that you slice it. "Placebo"
helped me and others better than anything else. Give people what works
best now. There are no drugs with this. It is ridiculous to fight
people over changing their diet. You are like the person who uses a
telescope to see a billboard that is 20 feet in front of you. You don't
need a ton of scientific logic for the scurvy situation, or this
situation. All that matter is that the symptoms are gone, and it is
safe. How is changing your diet unsafe? I told you that I helped my
cousin and a co-worker with this, after they saw conventional doctors.
No prescriptions.

Brad_Chad
>
> But I did say if your only purpose was to say go see a ND
> from acam, then fine. Thanks..... I know i said that.
>
> Could you go back and re-read that?
>
>
>
>
> If you had said that I would remember. OH! you meant that doc's
> need to refer their patients to NDs? Like a blanket type of thing?
> Wouldn't that open them for possible litigation more odious then
> what they currently face?


I said that if conventional doctors told people about Hidden Food
sensitivities, they wouldn't need to see NDs.I wasted years seeing
conventional doctors, because in the end, all I did was eliminate
certain foods from my diet, temporarily. I now eat corn and dairy on a
rotating basis. Every 4 days.

Brad_Chad
>
> Is it your position that for all uncurable conditions that the doc's
> are
> direlict if they don't let you pursue outside alternative dietary
> regimes?


I'm saying that if thousands of NDs have helped people with
something (Hidden Food Sensitivities) then maybe conventional doctors
should take notice.

Brad_Chad
>
> Most that i'm aware of will encourage everything i've talked about
> over the years. And that would include many alternative treatments.
>
> Surely increasing good Gi tract flora if properly understood would
> never
> be denied.
>
> Going on a grapefruit juice diet OTOH would and could depending
> on medication kill a patient or increase guttate psoriasis .


Did I say anything about ignoring doctors orders? I'm saying that
if your doctors allows you to eat anything that you want, how can it be
bad to change your diet a little.

Brad_Chad
>
> Imagine your derm giving your a pop dietary book by Jordan
> Rubin when you leave your appointment. lol
>
> So what? Well. A real doctor or ND both have the access to these
> facts. To say one is less ethical or more immoral then the other is
> ridiculous.


I said that it is AMORAL for somebody to stop someone from
changing their diet solely because of placebo. There would have been no
harm for conventional doctors to tell me to look for Hidden Food
Sensitivities. The issue wasn't safety. Think about it. A person can
live a pretty good life on "placebo". That is the point I made about
the scurvy example. Do you think someone, dying of scurvy, would care
about whether eating an orange is "placebo"? All they care about is
getting better, and an orange is food, not drugs. Why should they be
afraid of it? It is the same thing with Hidden Food Sensitivities.

Brad_Chad
>
> If you don't like real medicine and I can see why then fine.


I don't like it when arrogant doctors assume that every problem
must have a complicated solution. Many people have beaten doctors to a
solution, for their health problems, with something simple, and
conventional medicine is in denial. Conventional medicine didn't have
anything better for my condition than the one that I came up with.
Maybe they should give their patients the "placebo" option, when all
else fails? I'm mad because they didn't give me that option.

Brad_Chad
>
> We here mostly share your basic position and we want a cure. It's
> called
> a rant. Was that then your purpose? If so then sorry.
>
> But don't say that those here that are on biologicals have
> sold out or should feel animosity towards their pharma or
> care giver.


Pharmaceuticals will duck any solution that doesn't involve
medication. I told you to read, "What Doctors Don't Want You To Know"
by Evan Levine.

Brad_Chad
>
> Most of the people here like their repreives granted by them.
>
> The fact I go the route I do and achieve the same levels is proof
> that a alternative route has been successfully used. Is it practical
> for everyone?


You don't listen. I said that conventional medicine should give
Hidden Food Sensitivities a try in certain cases. I didn't say that it
cures everything. I'm mad that doctors threw up their hands, and didn't
give me your "placebo" option.

Brad_Chad
>
> NO.
>
> But it is detailed and free on this group. Yeah.
>
>
>
>
> What? I know what I said about placebo and i'm sure your not talking
> about that. So what are you off on now?
>
>
>
>
> What? Look. Any ND who uses homeopathics would fit that bill. And i'd
> put them in the arrogance category before anyone in the real arena.
>
> So your saying that homeopathics and alternative treatments that use
> sugar pills are really what your calling the status quo?


What sugar pill?

Brad_Chad
>
> Are you confusing one of us now?
>
> I know it's not me. lol
>
>
>
>
> Good.
>
> I would agree that those with huge investments in cash cows try to
> have our cake and eat it too.


I got tired of conventional doctors drugging me unnecessarily.
Brad
>
> But small innovative folks will currently work to have their more
> competitive
> products brought to market. Take FAEs for instance. They've
> been licensed to a company that has to wait for the feds to
> approve them. We could go to a country that has it if we want. Many
> of us have waited years to *cocktail* fae's into our current programs.
>
> If you feel that some *other* market system can bring you a miracle
> quicker then go there.


I got a "miracle" cure simply by changing my diet.[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> The basis of my treatments and regimes btw are all based on slowing the
> Th1 skew with diet and sunshine!
>
> If it takes a supplement, i'm game so long as it's not going to work
> adversely
> over the long haul.
>
>
> How much more alt can one get?
>
> And for years i've been the equal opportunity ranter.
>
> Both sides of that coin have been worn well.
>
> Untill we are cured nobody wins. And we come first as the customer is
> always right. lol
>
> So is this welcome to the group? deja boob?
>
> randall...is it on me now?
>

Copyright 2003 - 2008 pahealthsystems.com