| Dr. Jai Maharaj 2005-07-20, 2:08 pm |
| In article <D1vCe.50$IG2.37@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>,
"David Wright" <wright@clam.prodigy.net>
"David Wright" <alphabeta@prodigy.net>
"David Wright" <wright@hi.com>
"David Wright" <wright@l1000.prodigy.net>
posted:
>
> Robert, you have fallen into the common error of assuming that "Jai"
> is some sort of Indian. He's not; he's a fake.
You have shown yourself to be a liar. I am a Bharatiya ("Indian") and
not a "fake", as you put it.
> His name is Jay Stevens . . .
You're lying again. Your credibility, if you had any, has been destroyed.
> . . . and I think he's in Hawaii
That part is correct, however.
But David Wright is well known for publishing lies:
> From: ilena@san.rr.com (Ilena Rose)
> Newsgroups: misc.kids.health,misc.health.alternative,alt.support.attn-deficit,alt.support.breast-implant
> Subject: Early David Wright ...
> Message-ID: <ilena-0802021932240001@dt011n65.san.rr.com>
> Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2002 03:34:01 GMT
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.210.13.101
> X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com
> X-Trace: typhoon.san.rr.com 1013225641 204.210.13.101 (Fri, 08 Feb 2002 19:34:01 PST)
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 19:34:01 PST
> Organization: Road Runner
>
>
> David Wright, Hitachi Computer Products (America), Inc. Waltham, MA
> continued to spread Langer's Lies ...
>
> **Nice try, Ilena, but unless I was misreading your post, you were
> **posting his *wife's* email, phone number, etc.
>
> Ilena wrote:
> **>You're wrong again ... Langer posted his own address and phone number on
> **>Usenet ... not me.
> **
>
> You are misreading my post and believing Langer's lies.
>
> I wrote a polite email to his wife ... he posted it ... then cancelled it.
>
> I had made a copy before he did ... knowing how underhanded you all are.
>
> Of course, I have no delusion that means you would stop spreading Langer's
> victim story that I posted his info ...
> http://www.humanticsfoundation.com/langervsilena.html
>
> BTW ... just found a post from several years ago ... Schaezler as one of
> her Ilena Obsessed emails, called herself then "Ilentoo@aol.com"
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?q=+....aol.com&rnum=1
>
> Very interesting ...
>
>
> Subject: To David Wright
> From: Ilena Rose <ilena@connectnet.com>
> Date: 1996/08/03
> Newsgroups: alt.support.breast-implant,sci.med
>
> From "David Wright" <wright@clam.Hi.COM>
> Organization English Language Relay Satellite Service
> Date 26 Jul 1996 17:15:00 -0400
> Newsgroups alt.support.breast-implant,sci.med
>
> wright@clam.Hi.COM (David Wright) states (incorrectly)
>
> *I've learned a lot by reading your posts, too. You are certain,
> beyond question, that all these women are sick because of their
> implants, any contrary evidence be damned, and anyone who disagrees
> with you is a Bad Person.*
>
> Dear David,
>
> You amuse me by mis-interpreting my words and meanings. Nowhere have I
> ever written that anyone who disagrees with me is a "Bad Person."
> Dis-informed, probably, and perhaps too caught up in their own self
> importance to look beyond the headlines.
>
> I read every word I can find on breast implants. The "contrary evidence" that
> you mention is not credible for a number of reasons, and I will list but a few:
>
> 1) The studies quoted have all been for far too short a time to cover the
> latency
> period of immune, auto-immune, and neurological diseases, not to mention
> cancer.
>
> 2) The studies were funded by the manufacturers who have a HUGE stake in
> keeping implants on the market and not taking responsibilitiy for their
> defective products. They have a long brutal history (asbestos - also a silicate
>
> product - Agent Orange) of denying guilt, blaming the victims, and stalling for
>
> time in the courts.
>
> 3) The studies were on on far too few women - the (in)famous Mayo and
> Harvard studies had less than 2000 women!!!!!
>
> 4) The studies looked at risk factors only - not causation.
>
> 5) The studies eliminated the final two years of evidence collection ~ evidence
>
> that may be extremely valuable.
>
> 6) The controls in one study were Mayo clinic patients ~ not exactly a normal
> control group.
>
> 7) Not one woman was examined.
>
> 8) In one study, 70+ implanted women were dropped with no explanation.
>
> 9) These studies did not look at the diseases which the women have.
>
> 10) Nothing about neurological disorders was addressed altho nearly every
> implanted woman I know who is experiencing difficulties has severe
> neurological symptoms.
>
> 11) If implants were safe - the manufacturers had until 1992 to prove it. They
> didn't because they can't - they are not safe. They have known it since the
> 50's
> and concealed the evidence. If you are interested, I can direct you to this.
>
> 12) The FDA has on file over 113,000 adverse reports on silicone gel
> implants.
>
> 13) The FDA has on file over 23,000 adverse reports on saline implants.
>
> 14) Silicone is a known adjuvant - and all implants leak. This is constantly
> overworking the immune system which kicks in when foreign objects are in the
> system.
>
> 15) The women are the evidence and few studies are really looking at them.
> The ones that are, are finding many similarities to their symptoms, and it's
> very
> frightening.
>
> 16) The symptoms often begin immediately after implantation - not always - and
> are often relieved after explantation. Causal?
>
> Best regards,
> Ilena Rose
> Non*Moderator, alt.support.breast-implant
Jai Maharaj
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti
|