Fruit vs the root....

What could be more simple than yes and no?
Anth

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Also wrong, by definition anything that's used to treat a disease is a

drug.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Using Ginseng to treat a specific disease means you have then crossed

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

drug barrier.

I think you're being a bit too simplistic here, so I'll try to explain.
Vitamins can be drugs in some clinical situations, but most drugs are
NOT vitamins. Vitamins BY DEFINITION are essential to human life, and
the conditions treated by vitamins are for the most part conditions that
result from a deficiency of those vitamins, like scurvy resulting from
inadequate vitamin C intake. Drugs are not essential to human life, nor
do they perform the same functions as vitamins. Indeed, some drugs are
antagonistic to certain vitamins (for instance, vitamin K reverses the
effects of coumadin, which itself blocks the synthesis of vitamin
K-dependend clotting factors).

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

Quoted message said:

"Ilsa9" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Dave is probably too blinded by his beliefs to realize that if ginseng
> can have a postive effect in diabetics, it probably has pharmaceutical
> activities and is therefore a drug, not strictly a food.

You can relax I won't be selling it in the U.S. The FDA has already

stopped

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it.

All it took was one phone call....and I've got two lines standing by.

Hey, careful or you'll make us think you are a real power broker! LOL

Well, I'm glad you got the joke. Obviously, the joke is on you, Dave, as the
FDA has labled your "uncontaminated" Ginseng as tainted. Another humorous
aspect is how Mark T's research proved you to be a liar on that count as well
as your claim that your product would be sold in the USA.

We Americans deserve far better than your tainted ruffage.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

What could be more simple than yes and no?
Anth

Thank you for reinforcing my point that you were being too simplistic.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

In article <[email hidden]>,

Eric Bohlman said:

Orac <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

I think you're being a bit too simplistic here, so I'll try to
explain. Vitamins can be drugs in some clinical situations, but most
drugs are NOT vitamins. Vitamins BY DEFINITION are essential to human
life, and the conditions treated by vitamins are for the most part
conditions that result from a deficiency of those vitamins, like
scurvy resulting from inadequate vitamin C intake. Drugs are not
essential to human life, nor do they perform the same functions as
vitamins. Indeed, some drugs are antagonistic to certain vitamins (for
instance, vitamin K reverses the effects of coumadin, which itself
blocks the synthesis of vitamin K-dependend clotting factors).

A good example of the subtlety of the distinction is the use of high-dose
niacin to treat dyslipidemia. The cholesterol-lowering effect is actually
a drug effect, not a nutritional effect, because it's not due to increased
availability of substrate for producing NAD and NADP, whereas the
nutritional effect of niacin *is* to provide substrate for NAD and NADP.
There's also the fact that the therapeutic effect occurs only at doses that
are much larger than anyone could obtain from food alone.

I'm sure such subtle distinctions are lost on Anth. He appears to prefer
simple "yes or no" dichotomies.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

There's disorders and diseases.
Anth

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

What could be more simple than yes and no?
Anth

Thank you for reinforcing my point that you were being too simplistic.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

Take for example Scurvy which is a genetic disorder which afflicts 100% of
the population.
The 'disease' is the end result of the disorder (or the symptoms of the
imbalance)
You can control the disorder by correcting the imbalance, and therefore
halting the manifestation of the disease.
Treating clinical scurvy with vitamin c is using a drug (as you are treating
disease to restore the disorder)
Anth

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

What could be more simple than yes and no?
Anth

Thank you for reinforcing my point that you were being too simplistic.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

"Anth" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Take for example Scurvy which is a genetic disorder which afflicts
100% of the population.
The 'disease' is the end result of the disorder (or the symptoms of
the imbalance)
You can control the disorder by correcting the imbalance, and
therefore halting the manifestation of the disease.
Treating clinical scurvy with vitamin c is using a drug (as you are
treating disease to restore the disorder)

By your same logic, meat is a drug for cats, because they need a
substantial amount of dietary taurine to survive. You simply can't
proclaim the fact that a particular nutrient is essential to an entire
species a "genetic disorder" solely on the grounds that some other species
can synthesize it, any more than you can claim that humans' inability to
fly under their own power or to breathe underwater unassisted are "genetic
disorders" solely because birds and fish don't have those limitations.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Take for example Scurvy which is a genetic disorder which afflicts 100% of
the population.

Scurvy is not a genetic disorder. Period.

Quoted message said:

The 'disease' is the end result of the disorder (or the symptoms of the
imbalance)
You can control the disorder by correcting the imbalance, and therefore
halting the manifestation of the disease.
Treating clinical scurvy with vitamin c is using a drug (as you are treating
disease to restore the disorder)

Do you realize just how little sense you are making?

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

There's disorders and diseases.

And your point?

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Fruit vs the root....
From: Eric Bohlman [email hidden]
Date: 9/28/2003 1:49 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

"Anth" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Take for example Scurvy which is a genetic disorder which afflicts
100% of the population.
The 'disease' is the end result of the disorder (or the symptoms of
the imbalance)
You can control the disorder by correcting the imbalance, and
therefore halting the manifestation of the disease.
Treating clinical scurvy with vitamin c is using a drug (as you are
treating disease to restore the disorder)

By your same logic, meat is a drug for cats

Diversion.

Stupid skeptic tricks.

Ways to suppress truth.

Jan

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Take for example Scurvy which is a genetic disorder which afflicts 100% of
the population.

That's a contradiction in terms.

I have a suggestion for you, Anth: take all your stupid word-game
postings about scurvy being a genetic disorder. Print them out on
heavy stock (card stock would be good). Crumple the printouts up
until they are corners everywhere. Then shove them up your ass.

-- 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:

The 'disease' is the end result of the disorder (or the symptoms of the
imbalance)
You can control the disorder by correcting the imbalance, and therefore
halting the manifestation of the disease.
Treating clinical scurvy with vitamin c is using a drug (as you are treating
disease to restore the disorder)
Anth

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

What could be more simple than yes and no?
Anth

Thank you for reinforcing my point that you were being too simplistic.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

"Ilsa9" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"Ilsa9" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

>
>"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>news:[email hidden]...
>> Dave is probably too blinded by his beliefs to realize that if

ginseng

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> can have a postive effect in diabetics, it probably has

pharmaceutical

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> activities and is therefore a drug, not strictly a food.
>
>You can relax I won't be selling it in the U.S. The FDA has already

stopped

Quoted message said:

>it.

All it took was one phone call....and I've got two lines standing by.

Hey, careful or you'll make us think you are a real power broker! LOL

Well, I'm glad you got the joke. Obviously, the joke is on you, Dave, as

the

Quoted message said:

FDA has labled your "uncontaminated" Ginseng as tainted. Another humorous
aspect is how Mark T's research proved you to be a liar on that count as

well

Quoted message said:

as your claim that your product would be sold in the USA.

What I actually said is in two parts. I said Bing Han officially opened for
business
in the U.S. last week.

Secondly I said GlowLife won't be selling Ginseng in the U.S.

You are a bunch of goofs, who are a danger to yourselves and society.

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

There's disorders and diseases.

And your point?

No.

In article <[email hidden]>,

(David Wright) said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Take for example Scurvy which is a genetic disorder which afflicts 100% of
the population.

That's a contradiction in terms.

Indeed. If 100% of the population has a genetic trait, it is NOT a
disorder or disease. It is the norm.

[Snip]

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

Scurvy _is_ a genetic disorder.
If you read stone's work you can clearly see this.
Anth

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Take for example Scurvy which is a genetic disorder which afflicts 100%

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the population.

Scurvy is not a genetic disorder. Period.

Quoted message said:

The 'disease' is the end result of the disorder (or the symptoms of the
imbalance)
You can control the disorder by correcting the imbalance, and therefore
halting the manifestation of the disease.
Treating clinical scurvy with vitamin c is using a drug (as you are

treating

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

disease to restore the disorder)

Do you realize just how little sense you are making?

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

Why don't _you_ shove it up your ass?
Anth

"David Wright" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Take for example Scurvy which is a genetic disorder which afflicts 100%

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the population.

That's a contradiction in terms.

I have a suggestion for you, Anth: take all your stupid word-game
postings about scurvy being a genetic disorder. Print them out on
heavy stock (card stock would be good). Crumple the printouts up
until they are corners everywhere. Then shove them up your ass.

-- 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:

The 'disease' is the end result of the disorder (or the symptoms of the
imbalance)
You can control the disorder by correcting the imbalance, and therefore
halting the manifestation of the disease.
Treating clinical scurvy with vitamin c is using a drug (as you are

treating

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

disease to restore the disorder)
Anth

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
"Anth" <[email hidden]> wrote:

> What could be more simple than yes and no?
> Anth

Thank you for reinforcing my point that you were being too simplistic.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Scurvy _is_ a genetic disorder.

No, it it NOT. A condition that affects 100% of the population is
NORMAL, not a "disorder."

Quoted message said:

If you read stone's work you can clearly see this.

Stone is only marginally more coherent than your ramblings--and no more
correct. Simply because he tries to redefine scurvy as a genetic disease
on the basis that most other mammals have the enzyme that synthesizes
ascorbic acid (vitamin C) and humans do not does not make scurvy a
genetic disease.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Scurvy _is_ a genetic disorder.

No, it it NOT. A condition that affects 100% of the population is
NORMAL, not a "disorder."

Quoted message said:

If you read stone's work you can clearly see this.

Stone is only marginally more coherent than your ramblings--and no more
correct. Simply because he tries to redefine scurvy as a genetic disease
on the basis that most other mammals have the enzyme that synthesizes
ascorbic acid (vitamin C) and humans do not does not make scurvy a
genetic disease.

Here's the point. You "scientists" don't understand what's going on at all.
You
can't agree with each other and each of you thinks you know it all.
Meanwhile
the real world is passing you by and you remain oblivious to it. If everyone
ate
ginseng your "discussion" would become irrelevant because scurvy would no
longer exist.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave said:

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
"Anth" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If you read stone's work you can clearly see this.

Stone is only marginally more coherent than your ramblings--and no more
correct. Simply because he tries to redefine scurvy as a genetic disease
on the basis that most other mammals have the enzyme that synthesizes
ascorbic acid (vitamin C) and humans do not does not make scurvy a
genetic disease.

Here's the point. You "scientists" don't understand what's going on
at all.

We understand far better than you do. You make that much obvious with
your every post.

Quoted message said:

You can't agree with each other and each of you thinks you
know it all.

There is broad agreement on many general principles in science, and you
routinely post assertions that run counter to these well-accepted and
well-documented principles. It is mainly at the cutting edge where there
is major disagreement, mainly because by definition the cutting edge is
where things are not as well understood.

Quoted message said:

Meanwhile the real world is passing you by and you
remain oblivious to it. If everyone ate ginseng your "discussion"
would become irrelevant because scurvy would no longer exist.

Really? What is your evidence for this statement. While you're at it,
perhaps you can tell us the vitamin C content of ginseng.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

No more coherent than the hundreds of years it took for scurvy to be
noticed, as it will for cvd.
Anth

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Scurvy _is_ a genetic disorder.

No, it it NOT. A condition that affects 100% of the population is
NORMAL, not a "disorder."

Quoted message said:

If you read stone's work you can clearly see this.

Stone is only marginally more coherent than your ramblings--and no more
correct. Simply because he tries to redefine scurvy as a genetic disease
on the basis that most other mammals have the enzyme that synthesizes
ascorbic acid (vitamin C) and humans do not does not make scurvy a
genetic disease.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"