montygram said:I'd prefer to let the evidence speak for itself.
Yeah, right, sure. Taking a closer look at this post of yours, I find
that it is total hot air, or B/S. And, I do NOT mind saying so either.
Quoted message said:I'm trying to show you all that there is
an underlying mechanism involved in "chronic disease" that is directly
tied to real, basic science.
I was once attacked on smn for using the term "chronic disease"
recklessly as you have above. Your use of "chronic disease" highlights
your lack of knowledge of this subject.
Quoted message said:Always ask for the raw data, and if you can get it ...
Ha, ... Hah, Ha! I was once told by another air head, like yourself,
to always email the study author for more information. Personally, I
think that only an idiot would do what you have just suggested.
But, what you should have said (but did NOT) was that you should always
take a close look at the tables and figures provided in the study.
These will always summarize the study data. This will allow you to
eyeball the data, or to even plug the study data into your own Excel
spreadsheet template. The authors will generally, also, make
interesting comments in the footnotes found on these graphic tables.
Just thought that you might want to know. 🙂
Quoted message said:Sometimes I do a better job
than other times, but if you read a lot of them, I think things will
begin to make sense.
You really sucked on this post. And, things do make a lot more sense
once you have considered their source.
You have my condolences.