Re: Apricot Kernels

In article said:

(Jan) said:

Quoted message said:

> Your turn. Perhaps you would now be so kind as to tell us the statistics
> for alt-med treatments and cancer. Which ones are effective? And do
> remember to include the statistics for cure rates or 5 year survival
> rates, as I just did. After all, fair's fair

Your suggestion isn't fair.

Double standard. Hmmmm.

Quoted message said:

Alternative medicine is the new kid on the block.

Translation: Don't ask alternative medicine to prove any of its claims
regardless of how outrageous it is.

Why bother to translate? Her statement is nonsensical anyway; most of
these alternative treatments are not by any means "new." Chiropractic
and homeopathy are simply two examples.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

hat's more organized
medicine won't accept anything alternative, as show here.

The difficulty with accepting anything alternative is that great
claims are often made by AM and when you ask for evidence you are
criticized simply for asking as Jan has done in this post.

Organized medicine now accepts acupuncture, just as an example.

-- 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)

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Apricot Kernels
From: [email hidden] (David Wright)
Date: 2/29/2004 2:11 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

In article said:

(Jan) said:

>> Your turn. Perhaps you would now be so kind as to tell us the statistics
>> for alt-med treatments and cancer. Which ones are effective? And do
>> remember to include the statistics for cure rates or 5 year survival
>> rates, as I just did. After all, fair's fair

Your suggestion isn't fair.

OOOPs a bit of snipping here, was it intentional to change the meaning???

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Double standard. Hmmmm.

Quoted message said:

Alternative medicine is the new kid on the block.

Translation: Don't ask alternative medicine to prove any of its claims
regardless of how outrageous it is.

Why bother to translate? Her statement is nonsensical anyway; most of
these alternative treatments are not by any means "new." Chiropractic
and homeopathy are simply two examples.

And the part snipped fits real well right here.

What's more organized medicine won't accept anything alternative, as show here.

Quoted message said:

The difficulty with accepting anything alternative is that great

Quoted message said:

claims are often made by AM and when you ask for evidence you are
criticized simply for asking as Jan has done in this post.

The truth is that Richard H. Jacobson has badgered, ranted and raved and then
diagnosed, followed by personally trashing. He even has the gall to ask for
people' medical records, and try to belittle by using ill and even dead
parent/s.

He pattern is so clear, he nuked all his posts.

Richard has a problem with transferring his EXACT weaknesses to others.

As one poster so perfectly described.

I think you are very unfair, Connie, you must leave Rich so frustrated.<g>>
He's probably off on one of his clifftop walks muttering and slashing at the
vegetation trying to vent his ire. Your form of mental jiu jitsu just leaves
him floundering. Unfortunately, he thinks he must have explained it wrongly
and comes back for another go. He doesn't seem to realise it doesn't matter
and he's the only one hot and bothered about it.

Rich wrote: a bunch of the same stuff. why are you SOOOO taken up by this,
richie???if connie is so beneath you and such a dishonest poster, why bother
withher????you keep on and on and on....

Rich you believe that everything you do is reasonable. Others can decide if
you have been reasonable in badgering Connie.

Quoted message said:

One thing that it is impossible to say with any reasonable certainty is that

she did NOT lie.

That's only your opinion. *WE* do not believe she lied. I can see you in a
room with her backing her into the corner, she sits with her arms covering her
head while you go at her. Sorta like some police scenes.......trying to break
down a suspected criminal. This is all so very ridiculous. People should be
able to share with others without being put on trial.

Have you ever made a mistake in your life Rich?

Is this how you treat your family and friends?

You have already proved what kind of person you are with your consistent
obsession with Connie.

Quoted message said:

Rich, I've read enough of Connie's postings to see that she is not a liar.

She doesn't care enough for your opinion to lie to you. I've seen others who
will lie rather than admit they have made mistakes but not Connie. She may
make mistakes, but we all do. She doesn't hide her mistakes, if you point
them out she will check and agree. But she will not lie to you and say she
has made a mistake when she hasn't. As to this test that was done by the
doctor, did you consider he did something which she misunderstood? All
Connie did was report what she believed happened. I've heard nothing from her
that makes me consider she is lying. Except for the suggestion that she copes
with the workload she has described. I can't believe that is possibly true.

No Connie. Richie was being manipulative and misleading with his post

Read the above, you omitted your quote in the post which misleads the
readers. Richie the master manipulator debungler.

You know very well that Jan will not see those questions and therefore cannot
answer.
You are a deliberate trouble-maker who targets posters here.
Without doubt you are a newsgroup stalker, Rich.

You should apologise, but for your own behavior.

Nope, for his behavior to Jan and to Connie.
His recent rant against Jan was typical.
He has said he intends to post a similar rant on a regular basis, claiming to
be 'policing' the group.
He is undoubtedly a cyber stalker and Jan is his current target.

Jan did not mailbomb or post to ADA-D at all. Rich did it all and
deliberately tried to deceive the posters there.

Rich is a cyberstalker and he has been stalking Jan for a long time.

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Apricot Kernels
From: [email hidden] (David Wright)
Date: 2/29/2004 2:11 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

In article said:

On 29 Feb 2004 18:40:33 GMT, [email hidden] (Jan) wrote:

<snip what I already covered>

Quoted message said:

Organized medicine now accepts acupuncture, just as an example.

Quack Quack Quack.

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/acu.html

Certification of acupuncturists is a sham. While a few of those so accredited
are naive physicians, most are nonmedical persons who only play at being doctor
and use this certification as an umbrella for a host of unproven New Age hokum
treatments. Unfortunately, a few HMOs, hospitals, and even medical schools are
succumbing to the bait and exposing patients to such bogus treatments when they
need real medical care.

The National Council Against Health Fraud has concluded:

Acupuncture is an unproven modality of treatment.
Its theory and practice are based on primitive and fanciful concepts of health
and disease that bear no relationship to present scientific knowledge
Research during the past 20 years has not demonstrated that acupuncture is
effective against any disease.
Perceived effects of acupuncture are probably due to a combination of
expectation, suggestion, counter-irritation, conditioning, and other
psychologic mechanisms.
The use of acupuncture should be restricted to appropriate research settings,
Insurance companies should not be required by law to cover acupuncture
treatment,
Licensure of lay acupuncturists should be phased out.
Consumers who wish to try acupuncture should discuss their situation with a
knowledgeable physician who has no commercial interest [20].

Jan

(Jan) said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Apricot Kernels
From: [email hidden] (David Wright)
Date: 2/29/2004 2:11 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

In article said:

On 29 Feb 2004 18:40:33 GMT, [email hidden] (Jan) wrote:

>>> Your turn. Perhaps you would now be so kind as to tell us the statistics
>>> for alt-med treatments and cancer. Which ones are effective? And do
>>> remember to include the statistics for cure rates or 5 year survival
>>> rates, as I just did. After all, fair's fair
>
>Your suggestion isn't fair.

OOOPs a bit of snipping here, was it intentional to change the meaning???

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Double standard. Hmmmm.
>
>Alternative medicine is the new kid on the block.

Translation: Don't ask alternative medicine to prove any of its claims
regardless of how outrageous it is.

Why bother to translate? Her statement is nonsensical anyway; most of
these alternative treatments are not by any means "new." Chiropractic
and homeopathy are simply two examples.

And the part snipped fits real well right here.

What's more organized medicine won't accept anything alternative, as show here.

Quoted message said:

The difficulty with accepting anything alternative is that great

Quoted message said:

claims are often made by AM and when you ask for evidence you are
criticized simply for asking as Jan has done in this post.

The truth

<snip>

is foreign to Jan Drew.

Aloha,

Rich
-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------

The best defense to logic is ignorance

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

Quoted message said:

http://www.quackwatch.org

Quoted message said:

Research during the past 20 years has <snip> demonstrated that acupuncture is
effective against any disease.