Nursing - Death by Medicine

Author

Death by Medicine

john

2004-10-08, 2:08 am

http://www.nutritioninstituteofamer...ByMedicine1.htm

The total number of iatrogenic deaths shown in the following table is
783,936. It is evident that the American medical system is the leading cause
of death and injury in the United States.

Jeff

2004-10-08, 7:07 am

"john" <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote in message
news:ck5dhq$jr$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
>
http://www.nutritioninstituteofamer...ByMedicine1.htm
>
> The total number of iatrogenic deaths shown in the following table is
> 783,936. It is evident that the American medical system is the leading
cause
> of death and injury in the United States.

No, it is evidence of the total stupidity of some authors.

The leading cause of deaths and injury in the US is people's stupidity: Not
getting enough excercise, not wearing seat belts, eating too much, smoking,
biking without helmets, listening to bungholes like John.

Jeff

Rich.Andrews

2004-10-08, 11:08 am

"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:ck5ure$r4d@library1.airnews.net:

>
> "john" <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote in message
> news:ck5dhq$jr$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
> http://www.nutritioninstituteofamer...ByMedicine/Deat
h
> ByMedicine1.htm
> cause
>
> No, it is evidence of the total stupidity of some authors.
>
> The leading cause of deaths and injury in the US is people's stupidity:
> Not getting enough excercise, not wearing seat belts, eating too much,
> smoking, biking without helmets, listening to bungholes like John.
>
> Jeff
>
>

If it wasn't for myths, falsehoods, and old quotes from the ignorant, john
wouldn't have anything to say at all.

r

--
Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes.

Howard McCollister

2004-10-08, 7:10 pm

"john" <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote in message
> news:ck5dhq$jr$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
>
http://www.nutritioninstituteofamer...ByMedicine1.htm[vbcol=seagreen]
> cause

So, even if this were true, John, what do you propose we do about it?

HMc

john

2004-10-08, 7:10 pm

"Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:4166dcd8$0$70488$45beb828@newscene.com...

>
>
>
> So, even if this were true, John, what do you propose we do about it?
>

"The pharmaceutical "business with disease" is the largest deception and
fraud business in human history. The product "health" promised by drug
companies is not delivered to millions of patients. Instead, the "products"
most often delivered are the opposite: new diseases and frequently,
death."--Dr Rath MD http://www.whale.to/a/rath.html

Howard McCollister

2004-10-08, 7:10 pm

"john" <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote in message
news:ck6vvu$ro8$1@titan.btinternet.com...
>
> "Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:4166dcd8$0$70488$45beb828@newscene.com...
>
>
> "The pharmaceutical "business with disease" is the largest deception and
> fraud business in human history. The product "health" promised by drug
> companies is not delivered to millions of patients. Instead, the
"products"
> most often delivered are the opposite: new diseases and frequently,
> death."--Dr Rath MD http://www.whale.to/a/rath.html
>

What does this have to do with medical errors and the resultant 700,000
deaths per year?

Obviously you have no idea whatsoever to do about it. Your intellect is
limited to quoting others.

HMc

Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com

2004-10-08, 7:10 pm

"Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message news:<4166dcd8$0$70488$45beb828@newscene.com>...
> "john" <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote in message
> http://www.nutritioninstituteofamer...ByMedicine1.htm
> cause
>
>
>
> So, even if this were true, John, what do you propose we do about it?
>
> HMc

COMMENT:

The bird-brained article he quotes recommends replacing antibiotics
with things like homeopathic occillococcinum. Which, if you know what
it is, is screamingly funny. Take a bit of goose liver and heart,
dilute 100 times, shake, take a bit of that, dilute 100 times, shake,
and repeat 198 more times (singing bottles of beer on the wall, no
doubt.). By the time you're left it's been diluted to one duck
molecule per universe. One duck a year serves as the source of the
world's supply, which sells a few million doses a year. There's
nothing of the duck left but the memory of the quack. And these
people get very upset when one calls their treatment "quackery."

Thufferin' thucketathth, what a maroon.

Daffy

Ed Mathes

2004-10-08, 10:08 pm

But Dr. Harris...it's not the substance that works, it's its "essence"...
;-)

"Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com" <sbharris@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:79cf0a8.0410081603.5d0f46b8@posting.google.com...
> "Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:<4166dcd8$0$70488$45beb828@newscene.com>...
http://www.nutritioninstituteofamer...ByMedicine1.htm[vbcol=seagreen]
is[vbcol=seagreen]
leading[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>
>
> COMMENT:
>
> The bird-brained article he quotes recommends replacing antibiotics
> with things like homeopathic occillococcinum. Which, if you know what
> it is, is screamingly funny. Take a bit of goose liver and heart,
> dilute 100 times, shake, take a bit of that, dilute 100 times, shake,
> and repeat 198 more times (singing bottles of beer on the wall, no
> doubt.). By the time you're left it's been diluted to one duck
> molecule per universe. One duck a year serves as the source of the
> world's supply, which sells a few million doses a year. There's
> nothing of the duck left but the memory of the quack. And these
> people get very upset when one calls their treatment "quackery."
>
> Thufferin' thucketathth, what a maroon.
>
> Daffy

john

2004-10-09, 4:08 am

"Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:41672155$0$7293$45beb828@newscene.com...

>
>
> What does this have to do with medical errors and the resultant 700,000
> deaths per year?
>
> Obviously you have no idea whatsoever to do about it. Your intellect is
> limited to quoting others.

You can't see the obvious and then say I have limited intellect!
http://www.whale.to/a/hoaxpharma.html

LOL

john

2004-10-09, 4:08 am

"Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com" <sbharris@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message
> COMMENT:
>
> The bird-brained article he quotes recommends replacing antibiotics
> with things like homeopathic occillococcinum. Which, if you know what
> it is, is screamingly funny. Take a bit of goose liver and heart,
> dilute 100 times, shake, take a bit of that, dilute 100 times, shake,
> and repeat 198 more times (singing bottles of beer on the wall, no
> doubt.). By the time you're left it's been diluted to one duck
> molecule per universe. One duck a year serves as the source of the
> world's supply, which sells a few million doses a year. There's
> nothing of the duck left but the memory of the quack. And these
> people get very upset when one calls their treatment "quackery."
>
> Thufferin' thucketathth, what a maroon.
>
> Daffy

But it works. Anyway, it's the over prescribing that's the problem. More
than 40% of about 50 million prescriptions were inappropriate. Leading to
diabetes, asthma etc

And you forget vitamin C which used properly will kill all viruses &
bacteria, and garlic also. http://www.whale.to/w/vitamin_c.html

Howard McCollister

2004-10-09, 7:08 am

"john" <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote in message
news:ck84or$eo$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
>
> But it works. Anyway, it's the over prescribing that's the problem.
More
> than 40% of about 50 million prescriptions were inappropriate. Leading to
> diabetes, asthma etc
>
> And you forget vitamin C which used properly will kill all viruses &
> bacteria, and garlic also. http://www.whale.to/w/vitamin_c.html
>

OK, now I see. You're a nut-job. The whale-to web site should have been a
tip-off.

HMc

Jeff

2004-10-09, 11:08 am

"Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:4167c6ff$0$94966$45beb828@newscene.com...
>
> "john" <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote in message
> news:ck84or$eo$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
> More
to[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> OK, now I see. You're a nut-job. The whale-to web site should have been a
> tip-off.
>
> HMc

Just take a look at what he says about cell phone towers. Makes it seem like
he has not been taking his meds.

Jeff

Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS

2004-10-09, 11:08 am

john wrote:
> "Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com" <sbharris@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
> message
>
>
>
> But it works. Anyway, it's the over prescribing that's the problem. More
> than 40% of about 50 million prescriptions were inappropriate. Leading to
> diabetes, asthma etc
>
> And you forget vitamin C which used properly will kill all viruses &
> bacteria, and garlic also. http://www.whale.to/w/vitamin_c.html
>
>
>
>
"Vitamin C actually softens hands while you do the dishes!"
"Really, Madge?!"
"You're soaking in it now!"
"OH..."
"Yes, it really does soften hands..."

Steve

--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001

Howard McCollister

2004-10-09, 11:08 am

"Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS" <bornfeldmung@dentaltwins.com> wrote in message
news:2sq5mmF1nnsncU1@uni-berlin.de...

> "Vitamin C actually softens hands while you do the dishes!"
> "Really, Madge?!"
> "You're soaking in it now!"
> "OH..."
> "Yes, it really does soften hands..."

Hoh hoh, you laugh now...but wait until he claims that vitamin C prevents
dental caries too. THEN we'll see...

HMc

john

2004-10-09, 11:08 am

"Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:4167e2b3$0$89783$45beb828@newscene.com...
>
> "Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS" <bornfeldmung@dentaltwins.com> wrote in
message
> news:2sq5mmF1nnsncU1@uni-berlin.de...

Death by Medicine purveyors, you can see how it makes them behave. The
Truth often has that effect, and laughter prevents uncomfortable truths
getting through

http://www.whale.to/v/c/index.html

Mark

2004-10-09, 11:08 am

"john" wrote

<snip>

> And you forget vitamin C which used properly will kill all viruses &
> bacteria, and garlic also.

Vitamin C kills garlic? Remind me not to drink orange juice while I'm
in my garden...

Mark, MD

Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS

2004-10-09, 11:08 am

Howard McCollister wrote:

> "Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS" <bornfeldmung@dentaltwins.com> wrote in message
> news:2sq5mmF1nnsncU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
>
>
>
> Hoh hoh, you laugh now...but wait until he claims that vitamin C prevents
> dental caries too. THEN we'll see...

>
> HMc
>
>
>

Nah, I've got the Coenzyme Q crew doin their hip-hop songs of love.

Steve

--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001

Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS

2004-10-09, 11:08 am

john wrote:

> "Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:4167e2b3$0$89783$45beb828@newscene.com...
>
>
> message
>
>
>
> Death by Medicine purveyors,

We don't seem to have any of these emporia in our neighborhood yet--I
thought we were gentrified.

you can see how it makes them behave. The
> Truth often has that effect, and laughter prevents uncomfortable truths
> getting through
>
> http://www.whale.to/v/c/index.html

I thought laughter was the best medicine?

Steve
>
>

--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001

john

2004-10-10, 2:11 am

"Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS" <bornfeldmung@dentaltwins.com> wrote in message
news:2sqffiF1oeh5iU2@uni-
>
> I thought laughter was the best medicine?
>

Not gallows laughter, but there is some black humour in people falling for
the pharma hoax, and then defending it

john

2004-10-10, 2:11 am

"Mark" <mlowry3@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> Vitamin C kills garlic? Remind me not to drink orange juice while I'm
> in my garden...
>
> Mark, MD

Garlic & orange juice, now that is better than all your med

David Wright

2004-10-10, 2:11 am

In article <ck84or$eo$1@hercules.btinternet.com>,
john <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote:
>
>"Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com" <sbharris@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
>message
>
>But it works. Anyway, it's the over prescribing that's the problem. More
>than 40% of about 50 million prescriptions were inappropriate. Leading to
>diabetes, asthma etc
>
>And you forget vitamin C which used properly will kill all viruses &
>bacteria, and garlic also. http://www.whale.to/w/vitamin_c.html

Vitamin C will kill garlic? All vampires reading this, take note.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

David Wright

2004-10-10, 2:11 am

In article <4167c6ff$0$94966$45beb828@newscene.com>,
Howard McCollister <nospam@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>"john" <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote in message
>news:ck84or$eo$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
>More
>
>OK, now I see. You're a nut-job. The whale-to web site should have been a
>tip-off.

It sure should. And john is the maintainer of the site (not the
author of the articles -- he's too stupid and ignorant to write them
himself).

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

fresh~horses

2004-10-10, 2:11 am

sbharris@ix.netcom.com (Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com) wrote in message news:<79cf0a8.0410081603.5d0f46b8@posting.google.com>...
> "Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message news:<4166dcd8$0$70488$45beb828@newscene.com>...
> http://www.nutritioninstituteofamer...ByMedicine1.htm
> cause
>
>
>
> COMMENT:
>
> The bird-brained article he quotes recommends replacing antibiotics
> with things like homeopathic occillococcinum. Which, if you know what
> it is, is screamingly funny. Take a bit of goose liver and heart,
> dilute 100 times, shake, take a bit of that, dilute 100 times, shake,
> and repeat 198 more times (singing bottles of beer on the wall, no
> doubt.). By the time you're left it's been diluted to one duck
> molecule per universe. One duck a year serves as the source of the
> world's supply, which sells a few million doses a year. There's
> nothing of the duck left but the memory of the quack. And these
> people get very upset when one calls their treatment "quackery."
>
> Thufferin' thucketathth, what a maroon.
>
> Daffy

Damn you're good! Thith ith one potht for pothterity.

Zee

Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com

2004-10-10, 2:11 am

"Ed Mathes" <emathes@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message news:<DwG9d.290198$bp1.37609@twister.nyroc.rr.com>...
> But Dr. Harris...it's not the substance that works, it's its "essence"...
> ;-)

Essence of bullshit, that is.

You know, John's answer only serves as further proof he never met a
quack he didn't like. Or could recognise.

Occillococcinum doesn't even make sense from the viewpoint of
homeopathic theory. The true story of how this remedy got into the
homeopathic armamentarium is more bizzare than I could relate in a
short space (read http://www.homeowatch.org/history/oscillo.html for
grins), but it involves a French doctor would though he saw little
vibrating double balls (hence the name) in the microscope back in the
days of the Spanish flu epidemic and thought they were the cause of
every disease (from scabes to cancer to the heartbreak of psoriasis),
a lot like Hulda Clark. Since he was French and obscessed with the
liver, he naturally decided that duck liver might have some
homeopathic curative power for all these diseases (and put in a bit of
duck heart too, for courage). And thus the duck dies every year to
make these madmen's stew.

If you look at homeopathic theorry books, most of them deride
dilutions of ANYTHING like 200C (certainly Hahnemann did). But since
that's the only dilution Occillococcinum comes in, they're sort of
stuck. Wups.

Anyway, it quacks like a duck. Vibrating balls or not.

Hey, John, you wanna explain more about all this to us? I dare you.

SBH

[vbcol=seagreen]

Howard McCollister

2004-10-10, 2:11 am

"David Wright" <wright@clam.prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:GMW9d.15270$Qv5.6971@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
> In article <4167c6ff$0$94966$45beb828@newscene.com>,

> Howard McCollister <nospam@nospam.net> wrote:
>
> It sure should. And john is the maintainer of the site (not the
> author of the articles -- he's too stupid and ignorant to write them
> himself).
>

It was an anomalous news filtering error that his post even hit my screen.
Sorry, won't happen again. ;)

HMc

Aristotle

2004-10-10, 2:11 am

I've seen many nurses in various institutional settings that
are very good at passing medications but do not have the
intellectual capacity nor the character to do patient
assessments and to intervene appropriately. It is simply
beyond them intellectually and emotionally. But these
institutions and health care employers hire these nurses
because they are very "cost effective". That is they are
good at performing medically related "task work", don't
"rock the boat" by notifying patients or doctors of a
significant change in a patient's condition,don't,generally,
have the emotional nor intellectual capacity to assess,
evaluate, and intervene with patients and are very servile
and conformist. But patients suffer as the result of the
same; and, the significant number of iatrogenic deaths in
the USA is clearly related to the same.

john wrote:
>
> http://www.nutritioninstituteofamer...ByMedicine1.htm
>
> The total number of iatrogenic deaths shown in the following table is
> 783,936. It is evident that the American medical system is the leading cause
> of death and injury in the United States.

Alan Turley

2004-10-10, 2:11 am

On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 14:32:19 +0000 (UTC), "john" wrote:

>Death by Medicine purveyors, you can see how it makes them behave. The
>Truth often has that effect, and laughter prevents uncomfortable truths
>getting through

Scoffing ridicule may also turn a misguided man from a foolish path,
and that seems to be the intent of the guffaws in this forum.

Unseemly exposure provokes uncomfortable laughter, John. However, the
laughter in response to your comments appears more related to ridicule
of your claims rather than discomfort at your purported "Truth."

Rather than tittering over their own bumble garb in comparison to your
imperial raiment, they're laughing at your nudity.

@~

David Wright

2004-10-10, 2:11 am

In article <ck5dhq$jr$1@sparta.btinternet.com>,
john <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote:
>http://www.nutritioninstituteofamer...ByMedicine1.htm
>
> The total number of iatrogenic deaths shown in the following table is
>783,936. It is evident that the American medical system is the leading cause
>of death and injury in the United States.

It's a shocking report -- shockingly badly done, that is.

Not a surprise when you see that Gary Null's name is on the list of
authors, however.

They also do things like blame "the medical system" for deaths in
nursing homes. As though if there were no nursing homes, things would
just be utopian.

There's also a lot of other handwaving about bedsores, and some
ominous-sounding but totally unsupported claims about surgery-related
deaths.

Overall, just as bad as I would have predicted. (The report, I mean,
not the actual situation.)

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

john

2004-10-10, 4:07 am

"Alan Turley" <arguilios@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1097374172.j4Hu6DpmA4x9f/Bq22eaeQ@teranews...

>
> Rather than tittering over their own bumble garb in comparison to your
> imperial raiment, they're laughing at your nudity.
>

I wouldn't go into analysis if I was you. The Naked Emperor is the pharma
industry, and one defence is to laugh at us when we point it out. I don't
think it's funny that the medical cartel kills over 700,000 people in the US
alone mostly with medicine that is ineffective and toxic while suppressing
dozens of non-toxic, non-cartel, effective medicine as I document
http://www.whale.to/m/therapies.html

do you think it funny that cot death could be prevented 100% with vitamin C,
known for 30 years, but it isn't used?

do you think it's funny that chemo is effective in 5% of patients but given
to 50%, when gerson therapy would cure most of them with no side effects?

and so on

N-H-P

2004-10-10, 10:07 pm

"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> No, it is evidence of the total stupidity of some authors.
>
> The leading cause of deaths and injury in the US is people's stupidity: Not
> getting enough excercise, not wearing seat belts, eating too much, smoking,
> biking without helmets, listening to bungholes like John.
>
> Jeff

Yeah, I know how it is Jeff! When doctors treat the disease rather
than the patient, these stupid people actually have the nerve to die
on them.

Ha, ... Hah, Ha!
--
John Gohde

Jeff

2004-10-11, 2:08 am

john wrote:

(...)
>
> do you think it funny that cot death could be prevented 100% with vitamin
C,
> known for 30 years, but it isn't used?

No. Nor do I think it is true. Please show the peer-reviewed studies that
support your claim.

> do you think it's funny that chemo is effective in 5% of patients but
given
> to 50%, when gerson therapy would cure most of them with no side effects?

Do you think it is funny that your statements are totally inaccurate?
Chemotherapy (along with surgery, radiation and other conventional therapy)
cures 50% of patients and 70-75% of kids. (It also helps a lot of the
patients it doesn't ultimately cure, but giving them more quality time.)

Do you think it is funny that results of gerson therapy are not published
in reputable jounrals, so that real oncologists can learn about this
supposedly effective treatment?

>
> and so on
>

Correct. Your lies and stupidy continue for ever.

Jeff

2004-10-11, 2:08 am

"N-H-P" <johngohde@naturalhealthperspective.com> wrote in message
news:16a9b594.0410101832.739deccc@posting.google.com...
> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
Not[vbcol=seagreen]
smoking,[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>
> Yeah, I know how it is Jeff! When doctors treat the disease rather
> than the patient, these stupid people actually have the nerve to die
> on them.
>
> Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

I am sorry to find that you think people dying is so funny. I don't.

Jeff

> --
> John Gohde

David Wright

2004-10-11, 2:08 am

In article <ckctt0$mag@library1.airnews.net>,
Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"N-H-P" <johngohde@naturalhealthperspective.com> wrote in message
>news:16a9b594.0410101832.739deccc@posting.google.com...
>Not
>smoking,
>
>I am sorry to find that you think people dying is so funny. I don't.
>
>Jeff

Don't worry about it, Jeff. Remember that Gohde is only actually
emitting one "Ha." The other two are the echoes rattling around in
his empty skull.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

john

2004-10-11, 2:08 am

"N-H-P" <johngohde@naturalhealthperspective.com> wrote in message
news:16a9b594.0410101832.739deccc@posting.google.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote:
Not[vbcol=seagreen]
smoking,[vbcol=seagreen]

Like you, you mean. You pharma agents have real blood on your hands by
keeping people ignorant, and leading cause o death now, plus all the ones
killed by the suppression o alternative medicine
http://www.whale.to/m/therapies.html

Jeff

2004-10-11, 7:07 am

"john" <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote in message
news:ckdana$jg1$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
>
> "N-H-P" <johngohde@naturalhealthperspective.com> wrote in message
> news:16a9b594.0410101832.739deccc@posting.google.com...
stupidity:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Not
> smoking,
>
> Like you, you mean. You pharma agents have real blood on your hands by
> keeping people ignorant, and leading cause o death now, plus all the ones
> killed by the suppression o alternative medicine
> http://www.whale.to/m/therapies.html

I am not sure that NHP is a pharma agent.

The only people I see here that keep people ignorant are people who advocate
alternative medicine. Alternative medicine is better called conjecture-based
medicine because it is based on conjecture rather than facts. And it has not
been proven to work.

Jeff

Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS

2004-10-11, 11:09 am

Howard McCollister

2004-10-11, 11:09 am

HMc

Wolfbrother

2004-10-11, 7:10 pm

"john" <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote in message news:<ckdana$jg1$1@hercules.btinternet.com>...
> "N-H-P" <johngohde@naturalhealthperspective.com> wrote in message
> news:16a9b594.0410101832.739deccc@posting.google.com...
> Not
> smoking,
>
> Like you, you mean. You pharma agents have real blood on your hands by
> keeping people ignorant, and leading cause o death now, plus all the ones
> killed by the suppression o alternative medicine
> http://www.whale.to/m/therapies.html

Hey maybe they are doing the world a favor. Perhaps they feel that by
murdering several million people a year they are reducing strain on
the planets from over population. After all some have said it is not
the fact that there is not enough oil on the planet that is the
problem. It is that there are too many people. That goes a long way
in showing what kind of morality exists at the top.

Jeff

2004-10-11, 7:10 pm

Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com

2004-10-11, 7:10 pm

drceephd@aol.com (DRCEEPHD) wrote in message news:<20041010213008.23542.00001576@mb-m18.aol.com>...
>
> Your comment about nurses is way off the mark.
> If a nurse dares to try and think, if the nurse dares to question the doctor or
> his orders, the nurse can be and often is fired by the holy high priest of
> medicine, the doctor.
> The fault is with the docs and not the nurses.
>
> DrC PhD.

COMMENT:

Nurses work for hospitals and hospital management corporations.
Hospital nurses do not, in general, work for doctors. And certainly
not for the attending physicians in hospitals (who may or may not work
for the same corporation the nurses do). Nurses have a pretty strong
union, and it's pretty difficult to get one fired. Not that doctors
usually are interested in getting nurses fired. You need to understand
that just about any initiative or thinking a nurse does when it comes
to patient care in a hospital helps or takes some load off the doctor.
Or decreases some doctors legal exposure. Doctors are almost
universally glad to see nurses observe and think. Don't imagine
otherwise. Cee, Ph.D., you haven't BEEN there.

The point about many nurses not having the skills to do good patient
assementment is valid as far as it goes. The problem is that patient
assessment is one of the hardest jobs in medicine, and doctors fail at
it all the time, too. Shift-work nurses miss some of the continuity of
care that the attending usually has. Also, it's hardly reasonable to
expect nurses to have great clinical diagnostic skills. I'm happy if
nurses can be taught to report when patients quit eating or drinking,
have a big change in mental status or mobility, start having odd vital
signs, and just plain look bad. You'd be surprised how often they
can't. Doctors themselves miss these simple things often enough,
especially when they don't know the patient's various "baseline"
states well. Whether or not this can be counted as "iatrogenesis"
depends on your standards. My feeling is that the medical care system
isn't really willing to pay the amount of money it would take for a
Marcus Welby to attend each and every patient 24/7.

Finally, I need to reemphasize the fact that these studies of numbers
of patients supposedly killed by medical mistakes, are simply guesses.
They come from taking the death rate in ill patient populations which
have suffered medical mistakes, and assuming that 100% of the deaths
are due to the mistakes. Which is equivalent to assuming that when
mistakes aren't made, ill hospital patients are immortal. We lack a
control group, and until we get one, we can't tell what % of deaths to
attribute to mistakes.

Finally, there's another important control we need, and that's a
non-treatment control. Some treatment situations are so complicated
that it may impossible to avoid mistakes. In that case the question we
need to ask is: which is more dangerous-- treating with mistakes we
know we're going to make, or not treating at all? For example, we know
chemotherapy and surgery kill some fraction of people who have it, but
we continue to use both because the results where we do nothing, are
worse.

SBH

Gymmy Bob

2004-10-11, 7:10 pm

I doubt most cannot. There is a reason they don't and typically this is
because of a condescending hierarchal structure that reprimands inititive.

"Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com" <sbharris@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:79cf0a8.0410111142.6dddf58f@posting.google.com...
> I'm happy if
> nurses can be taught to report when patients quit eating or drinking,
> have a big change in mental status or mobility, start having odd vital
> signs, and just plain look bad. You'd be surprised how often they
> can't.

Alan Turley

2004-10-11, 7:10 pm

On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 07:35:49 +0000 (UTC), "john" wrote:

>I wouldn't go into analysis if I was you.

Regardless of your advise, John, my assessment remains unchanged by
your idle commentary. The guffaws you've heard come from those who
find your position more ludicrous than profound. If you'd hoped to
credibly persuade the industry to change, you should present better
analysis yourself.

It's all fine and good to point out that pharmaceutical companies and
conventional medical practice cannot represent the be-all and end-all
in individual and aggregate healthcare. It's a huge leap to conclude
therefore that the anecdotal rambling of any unknown practitioners of
questionable medical practice two and three or more decades ago holds
the secret to unknown health and happiness today.

Much of the rubbish on your website is outdated, discredited, or just
so badly written that it cannot be properly evaluated. Your comments
are incredible not by their stupendous implications to healthcare but
because they lack the credibility to be believed, and you seem unable
to distinguish between visionary and deluded. So, you can't tell the
suppressed truths from the discarded quackery of bygone eras.

It's a shame, really, because you might be using your site to provide
real useful guidance to those seeking better health. Instead, you've
just linked to a wide range of contrary and discredited practitioners
as though any advise contrary to your physician's advise is good, and
that just ain't so.

>do you think it funny that cot death could be prevented 100% with vitamin C,
>known for 30 years, but it isn't used?

The 'funny' thing is your reliance on badly written, aging anecdotal
commentary about field testing 30 years ago, admittedly disdained then
and regarded as no less conclusory now.

If you can show that Vitamin C will prevent some percentage of SIDS,
then post the evidence. The links you've referenced just don't do it.

>do you think it's funny that chemo is effective in 5% of patients but given
>to 50%, when gerson therapy would cure most of them with no side effects?

Again, if you can show evidence that a dietary regimen introduced in
the 1930s as a treatment for tuberculosis and migraine headaches can
cure any percentage of cancers today, prove it.

Gerson himself reportedly claimed a 'favorable' response in only about
30% of his cancer patients, which says little of cure and nothing of
curing the majority. http://cis.nci.nih.gov/fact/9_7.htm

I'm sure that many practitioners would be interested in evaluating
such options, assuming you can present them to be viable options
rather than aimless ramblings of one grasping at healthcare straws.

Good luck.

@~

N-H-P

2004-10-11, 7:10 pm

"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Alternative medicine is better called conjecture-based
> medicine because it is based on conjecture rather than facts. And it has not
> been proven to work.

Says who?

The only unproven conjecture here is your above statement.

So, kindly post the proof, or shut the F...k up!
--
John Gohde

markd@toad-net.com

2004-10-11, 7:10 pm

"> Alternative medicine is better called conjecture-based
> medicine because it is based on conjecture rather than facts. And it has
not
> been proven to work.

Says who?

The only unproven conjecture here is your above statement.

So, kindly post the proof, or shut the F...k up!"

A look at or search on will answer:

http://www.quackwatch.org/index.html

If Homeopathy continues to be your intrest, there is a link there pointing
to a complete web site devoted to it.

Gymmy Bob

2004-10-11, 7:10 pm

After looking at the QuacksWatch site one would definitely feel there is
working cure other than the standard, allopathic medical field. Why else
would they be so afraid of it?

Protect the patients pocketbook? I bet the MDs pulldown a million times the
income from their crap. I get 2-5 minutes with my MD for $40 and an hour
with my Accupunturist, or ND for $35.

Stop the alts from grandstanding? I think the MDs have laws passed against
speaking out loud with successes.

Killing people? With the the MD/hospital's history, how could they possibly
be any worse?

What could they possibly so afraid of? Lacking existence?

<markd@toad-net.com> wrote in message
news:416b0bad$0$21383$4d5ecec7@reader.city-net.com...
> "> Alternative medicine is better called conjecture-based
> not
>
> Says who?
>
> The only unproven conjecture here is your above statement.
>
> So, kindly post the proof, or shut the F...k up!"
>
> A look at or search on will answer:
>
> http://www.quackwatch.org/index.html
>
> If Homeopathy continues to be your intrest, there is a link there pointing
> to a complete web site devoted to it.

Jeff

2004-10-11, 7:10 pm

"Wolfbrother" <davidvio@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c8d91119.0410110908.649107a@posting.google.com...
> "john" <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote in message
news:<ckdana$jg1$1@hercules.btinternet.com>...
stupidity:[vbcol=seagreen]
ones[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Hey maybe they are doing the world a favor. Perhaps they feel that by
> murdering several million people a year they are reducing strain on
> the planets from over population. After all some have said it is not
> the fact that there is not enough oil on the planet that is the
> problem. It is that there are too many people. That goes a long way
> in showing what kind of morality exists at the top.

John's stupidity has nothing to do with morality. It is just poor ignorance
and stupidity.

Jeff

Jeff

2004-10-11, 7:10 pm

Abuse-Reports-To: abuse at airnews.net to report improper postings
NNTP-Proxy-Relay: library2.airnews.net
NNTP-Posting-Time: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:50:07 -0500 (CDT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: !cOYU1k-X9K,kdXFV%u*B42F^ (Encoded at Airnews!)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
Xref: newsfeed-west.nntpserver.com misc.health.alternative:336516 misc.kids.health:93782 sci.med:153736 sci.med.nursing:98802 sci.med.nutrition:146782

"N-H-P" <johngohde@naturalhealthperspective.com> wrote in message
news:16a9b594.0410111452.2e0b1edc@posting.google.com...
> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
not[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Says who?

Me.

> The only unproven conjecture here is your above statement.

> So, kindly post the proof, or shut the F...k up!

http://www.quackwatch.org/

The fact of the matter is that when things are proven, they are accepted by
medicine. That's the way science and medicine work.

Some treatments, like chiropractic and homeopathy, have no basis in science.
The conjecture these "treatments" are based on are ancient. For example,
homeopathy is based on the conjecture that the less of something there is,
the more powerful the substance. And when something is diluted so much that
there is likely to be nothing but pure water, the stuff is most powerful.
Science and observation tell us this is utter nonsense. And chiropractic is
like a religion with no proof at all that subluxations exist.

Jeff

> --
> John Gohde

Bill Clinton

2004-10-11, 10:08 pm

"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ckdruh$32c@library1.airnews.net...
>
> "john" <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote in message
> news:ckdana$jg1$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
> stupidity:
ones[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> I am not sure that NHP is a pharma agent.
>
> The only people I see here that keep people ignorant are people who
advocate
> alternative medicine. Alternative medicine is better called
conjecture-based
> medicine because it is based on conjecture rather than facts. And it has
not
> been proven to work.
>
> Jeff

NHP is just another screen name for John Gohde. This
pinhead has long history of uselessness on sci.med.nutrition

As to the other point on the advocates of ignorance, I'll
suggest both camps have deep flaws and
neither seem all that well represented
on the Usenet. Indeed, some are such poor representives
for their causes that they do a disservice to their causes.
A quick and dirty way to eliminate such postings from
view is to sign up for misc.health.alternative and then
block most of the names and then unsubscribe from
that newsgroup.

Hawki63

2004-10-11, 10:08 pm

>Subject: Re: Death by Medicine
>From: "Gymmy Bob" nospamming@bite.me
>Date: 10/11/2004 4:34 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <kKmdnQzytPEFivbcRVn-gQ@golden.net>

>Protect the patients pocketbook? I bet the MDs pulldown a million times the
>income from their crap. I get 2-5 minutes with my MD for $40 and an

>hour
>with my Accupunturist, or ND for $35.

major difference being your doc may CHARGE $40...he is likely able to collect a
fraction of that

OTOH....accupuncture ND etc get to COLLECT the full $35...

ie they are making more than the doc

funny how you altie folks blame on allopaths on being the big money
makers...neglecting to mention that your altoquacks SURELY are not doing what
they for altruistic reasons...

ie...they make money..probably a lot of it....

for mostly unproven quackery

hawki.....

David Wright

2004-10-12, 2:08 am

In article <c8d91119.0410110908.649107a@posting.google.com>,
Wolfbrother <davidvio@gmail.com> wrote:
>"john" <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote in message
>news:<ckdana$jg1$1@hercules.btinternet.com>...
>
>Hey maybe they are doing the world a favor. Perhaps they feel that by
>murdering several million people a year they are reducing strain on
>the planets from over population. After all some have said it is not
>the fact that there is not enough oil on the planet that is the
>problem. It is that there are too many people. That goes a long way
>in showing what kind of morality exists at the top.

Go back to living with the wolves. You're too stupid and ignorant to
live among humans.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

Rich.Andrews

2004-10-12, 2:08 am

Howard McCollister

2004-10-12, 2:08 am

john

2004-10-12, 4:07 am

Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com

2004-10-12, 4:07 am

Jeff

2004-10-12, 11:08 am

"Gymmy Bob" <nospamming@bite.me> wrote in message
news:kKmdnQzytPEFivbcRVn-gQ@golden.net...
> After looking at the QuacksWatch site one would definitely feel there is
> working cure other than the standard, allopathic medical field. Why else
> would they be so afraid of it?

They are not afraid of it.

What they don't want to see is people using these treatments that don't
work and wasting their money instead of getting treatment that actually
helps them.

> Protect the patients pocketbook? I bet the MDs pulldown a million times
the
> income from their crap. I get 2-5 minutes with my MD for $40 and an hour
> with my Accupunturist, or ND for $35.

And your MD has 8 years of college and medical school, 3 or more years
of residency training and a real office staff.

> Stop the alts from grandstanding? I think the MDs have laws passed against
> speaking out loud with successes.

Not all. MDs don't pass laws unless they are in the legislature.

Rather, the Federal Trade Commission limits the false and misleading info
that may be in ads and on labels.

However, there is no law against publishing articles about alternative meds
in journals, including your own if you want, putting up web pages, etc.

> Killing people? With the the MD/hospital's history, how could they
possibly
> be any worse?

You mean the millions of lives saved with vaccines, 50% of patients with
cancer cured (and 70-75% for kids), improving treatment of patients who are
injured, have strokes, heart attacks, etc.?

> What could they possibly so afraid of? Lacking existence?

People dying because of falses claims of quacks.

Jeff

> <markd@toad-net.com> wrote in message
> news:416b0bad$0$21383$4d5ecec7@reader.city-net.com...
has[vbcol=seagreen]
pointing[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>

N-H-P

2004-10-12, 7:10 pm

"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote:

[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> http://www.quackwatch.org/
>
> The fact of the matter is that when things are proven, they are accepted by
> medicine. That's the way science and medicine work.

I am still waiting for you idiots to post the proof.

Just thought that you might want to know.
--
John Gohde

Robert

2004-10-12, 7:10 pm

"Bill Clinton" <governor@whitehouse.org> wrote in message
news:yPmdnRC_UfUVhfHcRVn-tQ@netaxcess.com...
> "David Wright" <wright@clam.prodigy.net> wrote in message
> news:4hHad.16289$Qv5.5566@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
> stupidity:
much,[vbcol=seagreen]
by[vbcol=seagreen]
> ones
>
>
> If you want to chastise Wolfbrother, point out that the John Whale has
> a long posting history of dubious and very dated comments.
> You could point out to Wolfie, that just because John Whale
> is anti-establishment does not prove he is a solid ally.
> In fact, John Whale just might be a vegetarian! ;-)
>
> Further, I suspect Wolfbrother is an alter ego to Tcomeau
> or at least his posting history has been in remarkable
> parallel to that of Tcomeau's.

That's a big surprise as they all sound the same, BS.
They take pride in calling themselves, himself as being anti establishment
mainstream medicine as if one could even remotely confuse him by his
blabbings as being mainstream.

>
>
>
>

Jeff

2004-10-12, 7:10 pm

markd@toad-net.com

2004-10-12, 7:10 pm

"I am still waiting for you idiots to post the proof."

About what, having now moved past homoepathy, what is the question now,
we wouldn't want you up nights not being able to sleep until the answer
is provided?

N-H-P

2004-10-13, 7:11 pm

markd@toad-net.com wrote:

> About what, having now moved past homoepathy, what is the question now,
> we wouldn't want you up nights not being able to sleep until the answer
> is provided?

About the following stupid quote of yours, of course.

> Alternative medicine is better called conjecture-based
> medicine because it is based on conjecture rather than facts. And it has not
> been proven to work.

PS: The crackpot Quackwatch web site proves nothing, but that it is
run by a bigoted shrink.

Just because one MD engages in consumer fraud does not mean that all
of medicine has yet to be proven to work. However, I am inclined to
believe that all of medicine is quackery.
--
John Gohde

markd@toad-net.com

2004-10-13, 7:11 pm

"PS: The crackpot Quackwatch web site proves nothing, but that it is
run by a bigoted shrink.

Just because one MD engages in consumer fraud does not mean that all
of medicine has yet to be proven to work. However, I am inclined to
believe that all of medicine is quackery."

This is the difference between health theology and science, the first is
belief into which one attempts to pour the real world, merrly snipping off
the corners to make it fit. The contents of that web site has the
specific references by which one can confirm the research results, or lack
thereof, of the conclusions he makes about the claims of quack health
theology. If someone has specific research references to the contrary we
would be happy to consider them. Continued recitation of health
theologies are not a substitute, nor hostility toward science, nor toward
evidence based health. The site doesn't exist in main to prove his views
of science/medicine/health, it is there to show the lack of proof for the
quack claims; thus he need not prove anything of his views but those
making the quack claims must provide proof to the contrary of what he
provides.

Alan Turley

2004-10-13, 7:11 pm

On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 16:25:12 +0000 (UTC), "john" wrote:

>you need the luck if you believe in the medical monopoly.

Had I expressed such a belief, your comment might be well considered.
However, since I didn't, yours isn't, which is the very problem with
your idea of alternative healthcare. You fail to read carefully and
fail to understand correctly. So, even if you lost your enormously
apparent anti-medical Luddite bias, your advise would still be no
better than that of a flipping coin.

But, you have that bias for whatever reason, and it compounds your
problem, making your advise worse than useless and actually unsound.

It might help if you realized that even if the enemy of your enemy
were your friend, that wouldn't make your friend a good healthcare
consultant. Your value to whatever alternative health constituency
you think you represent might improve if you posted about rational
alternatives to conventional care, rather than whatever hokum or
hogwash seems presently downtrodden by the establishment.

However, you'd have to learn to distinguish unconventional from
untenable, and you haven't yet managed. So, good luck - really.

@~

john

2004-10-13, 7:11 pm

PS. I knew a man who spent some time researching gerson therapy, wrote a
book about it with a medical doctor who used it in his clinic, this book was
suppressed by the UK gov, incidently. He told me gerson was curing 50% of
terminal cancers, and 100% stage 1 and 2 cancers.

"It is well established that a properly conducted Gerson therapy will
rescue 50% of terminal patients. Gerson was curing 50% terminal cancers,
and 100% stage 1 and 2 cancers."-- Frank Hourigan.

That was 50 or so years ago. Also it is similar to Kelley therapy--with one
group of 9 patients who followed his regime he had 100% cure rate with
pancreatic cancer, incurable with chemo. You can see this gerson cure of
terminal bone cancer recently http://www.whale.to/c/myeloma.html

Good luck with chemo you will need it. Moss wrote a book on it, I suggest
you read it.

"Two to 4% of cancers respond to chemotherapy..The bottom line is for a few
kinds of cancer chemo is a life extending procedure---Hodgkin's disease,
Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia (ALL), Testicular cancer, and
Choriocarcinoma."----Ralph Moss, Ph.D. 1995 Author of Questioning
Chemotherapy.

and hope you get one of these cancers only. With ALL it is "successful"
with only children, and who knows what cancers they get down the line.
Choriocarcinoma--I think 40 or so patients are saved with that every year.

Children who are successfully treated for Hodgkin's disease are 18 times
more likely later to develop secondary malignant tumours. Girls face a 35
per cent chance of developing breast cancer by the time they are 40----which
is 75 times greater than the average. The risk of leukemia increased
markedly four years after the ending of successful treatment, and reached a
plateau after 14 years, but the risk of developing solid tumours remained
high and approached 30 per cent at 30 years (New Eng J Med, March 21, 1996)
In an evaluation of five-year survival rates of 153 melanoma patients. Here,
100% of Gerson therapy patients with Stage 1 & 2 cancers survived, but only
79% survive had conventional therapy. With Stage 3 cancers (regional
metastases), the figures respectively were 70% and 41%; with Stage 4a
(distant metastases), 39% with Gerson and 6% with conventional therapy
survived.---- How Scientific are Orthodox Cancer Treatments? by Walter Last

If you want to die from your beliefs, fine, but you will need more than
luck. You need the luck to not get cancer in the first place.

and if you think vitamin C wont prevent cot-death then Dr Kalokerinos will
laugh at you, he has all the evidence to back up his claim, quite apart from
30-40 years work with third world children and NO cot deaths

"We know the cause of SIDS. We can and have prevented them. It's all done
with a compound called ascorbate. Not to use it means deaths will continue.
There is no other answer. There never will be. For our findings are based
on scientific facts. Not medical opinion."---Dr Kalokerinos
http://www.whale.to/vaccines/kalokerinos.html

arguably the greatest medical doctor alive today. I suggest you do some
research before you flaunt your ignorance and, incidently, it would take you
at least 6 months solid reading to get through whale.to not the minutes you
have spent.

"Alan Turley" <arguilios@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1097527436.Wb5/qx54nyLaPaBmtm4V7Q@teranews...
> On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 07:35:49 +0000 (UTC), "john" wrote:
>
>
> Regardless of your advise, John, my assessment remains unchanged by
> your idle commentary. The guffaws you've heard come from those who
> find your position more ludicrous than profound. If you'd hoped to
> credibly persuade the industry to change, you should present better
> analysis yourself.
>
> It's all fine and good to point out that pharmaceutical companies and
> conventional medical practice cannot represent the be-all and end-all
> in individual and aggregate healthcare. It's a huge leap to conclude
> therefore that the anecdotal rambling of any unknown practitioners of
> questionable medical practice two and three or more decades ago holds
> the secret to unknown health and happiness today.
>
> Much of the rubbish on your website is outdated, discredited, or just
> so badly written that it cannot be properly evaluated. Your comments
> are incredible not by their stupendous implications to healthcare but
> because they lack the credibility to be believed, and you seem unable
> to distinguish between visionary and deluded. So, you can't tell the
> suppressed truths from the discarded quackery of bygone eras.
>
> It's a shame, really, because you might be using your site to provide
> real useful guidance to those seeking better health. Instead, you've
> just linked to a wide range of contrary and discredited practitioners
> as though any advise contrary to your physician's advise is good, and
> that just ain't so.
>
C,[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> The 'funny' thing is your reliance on badly written, aging anecdotal
> commentary about field testing 30 years ago, admittedly disdained then
> and regarded as no less conclusory now.
>
> If you can show that Vitamin C will prevent some percentage of SIDS,
> then post the evidence. The links you've referenced just don't do it.
>
given[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Again, if you can show evidence that a dietary regimen introduced in
> the 1930s as a treatment for tuberculosis and migraine headaches can
> cure any percentage of cancers today, prove it.
>
> Gerson himself reportedly claimed a 'favorable' response in only about
> 30% of his cancer patients, which says little of cure and nothing of
> curing the majority. http://cis.nci.nih.gov/fact/9_7.htm
>
> I'm sure that many practitioners would be interested in evaluating
> such options, assuming you can present them to be viable options
> rather than aimless ramblings of one grasping at healthcare straws.
>
> Good luck.
>
> @~

Alan Turley

2004-10-13, 7:11 pm

On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 20:06:25 +0000 (UTC), "john" wrote:

>PS. I knew a man who spent some time researching gerson therapy, wrote a
>book about it with a medical doctor who used it in his clinic, this book was
>suppressed by the UK gov, incidently. He told me gerson was curing 50% of
>terminal cancers, and 100% stage 1 and 2 cancers.

That's not research, John. It's not evidence. It's more like double
or triple hearsay on double secret probation.

You say you heard from a guy who wrote about a doctor who may or may
not have used the same dietary formula in his own practice somewhere,
and this guy said Gerson, a U.S. physician, was selling himself short
by 20-70% in the number of cancers he was curing in the '30s, but this
guy couldn't tell anyone because the British government won't let him?

If this is the basis of your perspective - and this appears consistent
with the balance of your data - there's little if any reason to spend
months reading the rest of your meanderings.

Honestly, Yoda articulates himself more clearly, and you ain't Yoda.
Do you honestly believe that any healtcare professionals are laughing
at you out of fear of your message? Have you no shame?

@~

Gymmy Bob

2004-10-13, 7:11 pm

Quackswatch paints a great picture for anti-med people. It proves their
point so well.

<markd@toad-net.com> wrote in message
news:416d6f78$0$32174$4d5ecec7@reader.city-net.com...
> "PS: The crackpot Quackwatch web site proves nothing, but that it is
> run by a bigoted shrink.
>
> Just because one MD engages in consumer fraud does not mean that all
> of medicine has yet to be proven to work. However, I am inclined to
> believe that all of medicine is quackery."
>
> This is the difference between health theology and science, the first is
> belief into which one attempts to pour the real world, merrly snipping off
> the corners to make it fit. The contents of that web site has the
> specific references by which one can confirm the research results, or lack
> thereof, of the conclusions he makes about the claims of quack health
> theology. If someone has specific research references to the contrary we
> would be happy to consider them. Continued recitation of health
> theologies are not a substitute, nor hostility toward science, nor toward
> evidence based health. The site doesn't exist in main to prove his views
> of science/medicine/health, it is there to show the lack of proof for the
> quack claims; thus he need not prove anything of his views but those
> making the quack claims must provide proof to the contrary of what he
> provides.

N-H-P

2004-10-13, 7:11 pm

markd@toad-net.com wrote:

> "PS: The crackpot Quackwatch web site proves nothing, but that it is
> run by a bigoted shrink.
>
> Just because one MD engages in consumer fraud does not mean that all
> of medicine has yet to be proven to work. However, I am inclined to
> believe that all of medicine is quackery."
>
> This is the difference between health theology and science, the first is
> belief into which one attempts to pour the real world, merrly snipping off
> the corners to make it fit.

The difference between me and you is that I called your bluff, and you
turned out to be just so much hot-air.

Ha, ...Hah, Ha!

What a rube!

Just my opinion, but I am right as ususal.
--
John Gohde

Wolfbrother

2004-10-13, 7:11 pm

markd@toad-net.com

2004-10-13, 7:11 pm

"The difference between me and you is that I called your bluff, and you
turned out to be just so much hot-air.

"

A bluff existing in your mind alone as I have no idea what you are on
about. The quackwatch page is based on references showing the smoke and
mirrors of quack health theology, if you want to refute the info presented
there then references to the contrary should be presented. For example,
claims that a dilution of 50 percent of some homeopathy nostrum is more
"powerful" for having been diluted. This is a testable notion. Attacking
science is no substitute and your opinion is dime a dozen at any bar any
night of the week.

john

2004-10-13, 7:11 pm

"Alan Turley" <arguilios@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1097704550.ooSq/CG9JtIK9n9ufRMAzA@teranews...

>
> That's not research, John. It's not evidence. It's more like double
> or triple hearsay on double secret probation.

Yawn, don't use it then http://www.whale.to/a/studies_q.html

>
> You say you heard from a guy who wrote about a doctor who may or may
> not have used the same dietary formula in his own practice somewhere,
> and this guy said Gerson, a U.S. physician, was selling himself short
> by 20-70% in the number of cancers he was curing in the '30s, but this
> guy couldn't tell anyone because the British government won't let him?

Yawn http://www.whale.to/m/therapies.html

"We KNOW the answer to cancer.Yet the authorities, in the form of the law
of the land (UK), will not allow this book (The Good News On Cancer) to be
promoted to lay persons...it is not permitted that they can even be told
where to find information that might help them. That has got to be democracy
with a very small d..One eminent publisher.backed out as he feared he could
be jailed for infringing the Cancer Act by offering the book to the public.
Another.was deliberately pressured by an unnamed group after his medical
reader (an M.D.), having checked the manuscript, leaked its contents to a
confidential authority."---Dr Richards & Frank Hourigan.

> Honestly, Yoda articulates himself more clearly, and you ain't Yoda.
> Do you honestly believe that any healtcare professionals are laughing
> at you out of fear of your message?

When did the monopoly fear anyone http://www.whale.to/b/monopoly_q.html

They kill ones who get too noisy http://www.whale.to/b/assassinations_q.html

I have my aluminium hat on all the time, and black helicopters circle
continuously 0

You pyjama folk make me laugh.

Howard McCollister

2004-10-13, 7:11 pm

"Alan Turley" <arguilios@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1097704550.ooSq/CG9JtIK9n9ufRMAzA@teranews...

>
> Honestly, Yoda articulates himself more clearly, and you ain't Yoda.
> Do you honestly believe that any healtcare professionals are laughing
> at you out of fear of your message? Have you no shame?
>

Laughing? Yes.(for years now).

Fear? No.

HMc

N-H-P

2004-10-14, 7:13 pm

markd@toad-net.com wrote:

> "The difference between me and you is that I called your bluff, and you
> turned out to be just so much hot-air.

"

> The quackwatch page is based on references showing the smoke and
> mirrors of quack health theology, if you want to refute the info presented
> there then references to the contrary should be presented.

National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM)
http://nccam.nih.gov/
NCCAM is dedicated to exploring complementary and alternative healing
practices in the context of rigorous science, training researchers,
and disseminating ...

Why don't you try educating yourself, once every 30 years?

Unlike Quackwatch the National Center for Complementary and
Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) web site actually is about proof rather
than bigoted hot air.

Just thought that you might want to know.
--
John Gohde

Alan Turley

2004-10-14, 7:13 pm

On 14 Oct 2004 10:10:31 -0700, (N-H-P) wrote:

>NCCAM is dedicated to exploring complementary and alternative healing
>practices in the context of rigorous science, training researchers,
>and disseminating ...

While NCCAM provides a positive learning resource about the existence
and availability of alternative health practices, you shouldn't think
that the mention of any product, service, or therapy constitutes an
endorsement by NCCAM.

Indeed, NCCAM recommends scrutiny of those claiming to advise others
about their healthcare. Individuals are cautioned to consider key
factors in evaluating information on-line and advised not to believe
these sites can offer a substitute for the advise of one's primary
health care provider.

See "10 Things To Know About Evaluating Medical Resources on the Web"
< http://nccam.nih.gov/health/webresources/ >

@~

markd@toad-net.com

2004-10-14, 7:13 pm

Before giving "National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine"
(cam) it's "scientific" stripes, the below should be considered in light
of:

Problems with "CAM" Peer Review and Accreditation

http://www.quackwatch.org/04ConsumerEducation/peer.html

And quackwatch search results for "Complementary and Alternative
Medicine":

http://tinyurl.com/54p3t

>National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM)
>http://nccam.nih.gov/
>NCCAM is dedicated to exploring complementary and alternative healing
>practices in the context of rigorous science, training researchers,
>and disseminating ...
>
>Why don't you try educating yourself, once every 30 years?
>
>Unlike Quackwatch the National Center for Complementary and
>Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) web site actually is about proof rather
>than bigoted hot air.
>
>Just thought that you might want to know.
>--
>John Gohde

Aristotle

2004-10-14, 7:13 pm

David Wright

2004-10-14, 7:13 pm

john

2004-10-14, 7:13 pm

Ilena Rose

2004-10-14, 7:13 pm

On 14 Oct 2004 22:09:19 GMT, markd@toad-net.com wrote:

>Before giving "National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine"
>(cam) it's "scientific" stripes, the below should be considered in light
>of:
>
>Problems with "CAM" Peer Review and Accreditation
>
>http://www.quackwatch.org/04ConsumerEducation/peer.html
>

LOL ... why should Barrett's opinion matter ... he is "biased and
unworthy of credibility" in the opinion of the Appeal Court of
California.

Hawki63

2004-10-14, 10:09 pm

N-H-P

2004-10-14, 10:09 pm

markd@toad-net.com

2004-10-14, 10:09 pm

markd@toad-net.com

2004-10-14, 10:09 pm

"
LOL ... why should Barrett's opinion matter ... he is "biased and
unworthy of credibility" in the opinion of the Appeal Court of
California."

His opinion is not relevant, the quality of the references and the picture
about cam as lacking sound scientific practices is.

Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com

2004-10-14, 10:09 pm

drceephd@aol.com (DRCEEPHD) wrote in message news:<20041011174501.03671.00002068@mb-m04.aol.com>...
>
>
> You are still an arrogant XXX. I have been married to a nurse for over 30
> years. I have heard their remarks about the docs and have seen their comrades
> fired due to an irrate doc who threatens the hospital with the loss of his
> patronage.
>
> DrC PhD

COMMENT:

"Arrogant XXX"? Because I won't corroborate what are (literally!)
your old wive's tales?? ROFL.

Of course I go back only a bit more than 20 years as a licenced
physician, and can't vouch all the way back to the middle ages. If
you've got recent names, dates, and instances, feel free to post.
Otherwise, keep your urban legends and Dr. Kildare episodes to
yourself.

SBH

Gymmy Bob

2004-10-14, 10:09 pm

I think these two sides exemplifies this situation right, exactly as stated.

Here we have a doctor, arrogant as hell, can only see his side of the story
and denies abuse from his peers happens ever.

On the other side of the coin, we have a nurses side of the story (second
hand) about how they are mistreated and abused by the arrogant doctors, who
can't see past the end of their noses.

hmmmmmm...looks like a hard decision to me....

LOL

"Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com" <sbharris@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:79cf0a8.0410141655.6a9fe885@posting.google.com...
> drceephd@aol.com (DRCEEPHD) wrote in message
news:<20041011174501.03671.00002068@mb-m04.aol.com>...
30[vbcol=seagreen]
comrades[vbcol=seagreen]
his[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>
>
> COMMENT:
>
> "Arrogant XXX"? Because I won't corroborate what are (literally!)
> your old wive's tales?? ROFL.
>
> Of course I go back only a bit more than 20 years as a licenced
> physician, and can't vouch all the way back to the middle ages. If
> you've got recent names, dates, and instances, feel free to post.
> Otherwise, keep your urban legends and Dr. Kildare episodes to
> yourself.
>
> SBH

Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com

2004-10-15, 2:08 am