General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Re: 'Laetrile' in science

Started by Jan · · Last activity · 6 posts · 363 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
31 July 2003
Last activity
1 August 2003
Original author
Jan
Posts
6
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
363
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–6 of 6
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Quoted message said:

    Subject: Re: 'Laetrile' in science
    From: "Anth" [email hidden]
    Date: 7/31/2003 4:18 AM Pacific Standard Time
    Message-id: <[email hidden]>

    Dr Barret was kind enough to reply to my email - he didn't have any
    references to back that statement up.

    Thanks for the information. Much of what is on his lying website is HIS SICK
    OPINION.

    Quoted message said:

    Now llsa if you want to back that statement up, then I am all ears, show me
    the reports? I would like to see them and put my mind to rest.
    I have supplied the mouse reports for Laetrile (which were done at Sloan)
    which show Laetrile blocking metastasis in mice.


    Your statement quoting the quackwatch article is as you would term without

    Quoted message said:

    credibility.
    Anth

    Andrew has zero credibility.

    Thanks for this discovery.

    B I N G O!!

    Jan

  2. I wouldn't say he has zero credibility, what I would say is that he has
    double standards with the respect of himself and others.
    (And if he ceases calling me stupid petty names like 'Monkey Boy' 'Credulous
    [censored]' etc. I will talk to him again)
    Anth

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

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Subject: Re: 'Laetrile' in science
    From: "Anth" [email hidden]
    Date: 7/31/2003 4:18 AM Pacific Standard Time
    Message-id: <[email hidden]>

    Dr Barret was kind enough to reply to my email - he didn't have any
    references to back that statement up.

    Thanks for the information. Much of what is on his lying website is HIS


    SICK

    Quoted message said:

    OPINION.

    Quoted message said:

    Now llsa if you want to back that statement up, then I am all ears, show


    me

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    the reports? I would like to see them and put my mind to rest.
    I have supplied the mouse reports for Laetrile (which were done at Sloan)
    which show Laetrile blocking metastasis in mice.


    Your statement quoting the quackwatch article is as you would term without

    Quoted message said:

    credibility.
    Anth

    Andrew has zero credibility.

    Thanks for this discovery.

    B I N G O!!

    Jan

  3. Quoted message said:

    I wouldn't say he has zero credibility, what I would say is that he has
    double standards with the respect of himself and others.

    Anth, if you feel my contempt, consider the situation. You calmly, blythely,
    serenely, happily, and joyfully proclaim that the healthcare industry, at least
    the parts connected to Oncology, only exist as a conspiracy against the health
    of the public, world-wide.

    What type of respect are you showing to all the educators, researchers,
    doctors, pharmacists, and industrialists for lumping them together as
    conspirators. You claim that they are deliberately withholding known cures for
    cancer (and other diseases) in order to make money. You claim they callously
    let their patients, loved ones, collegues, and selves die from the diseases
    when they KNOW of a cure.

    Consider all the people, world-wide, that you are slandering. Can you think of
    something more hateful or odious than being called a cold-blooded, money
    hungry, calculated killer? Do you think you are showing respect for the people
    who put invest their time, effort, and heart into the treatment of cancer?

    Do you think calling someone a Monkey Boy is worse than accusing an entire
    industry of, as Rath calls it, Genocide?

    Quoted message said:

    (And if he ceases calling me stupid petty names like 'Monkey Boy' 'Credulous
    [censored]' etc. I will talk to him again)
    Anth

    I'll state it again for you, Anth, do you think accusing all the oncologists
    and their associates of Genocide is disrespectful? Do you really think calling
    YOU a Monkey Boy is anywhere near as bad as your blanket condemnation of an
    entire industry?

    You accuse people of genocide but are to thin skinned to handle a little
    "Monkey Boy" comment, despite your interest in a more "primate" diet. Egad!

    Quoted message said:

    I haven't used the word "[censored]" to describe you.

  4. Simply put, you're a credulous [censored].
    Do you want to continue to dig deeper?
    Anth

    From: Ilsa9 ([email hidden])
    Subject: Re: Rath's battle for justice!

    View: Complete Thread (81 articles)
    Original Format
    Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative
    Date: 2003-07-23 07:02:38 PST

    Quoted message said:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/medicalscience/story/0,1129,603206,00.html
    There you go in black and white. Simply some drug companies are criminal
    [censored]!
    No re-evaluate your stance and ask yourself why these companies have fixed
    the price of vitamins and more recently trying to control them?

    Get on the Internet and buy your vitamins from the lowest bidder. Or, if
    you
    want them for next to nothing, try eating a proper diet.

    Quoted message said:

    Simply put Rath claims are probably right; whether he gets anywhere time
    will tell.

    Because you find some people in a conventional medicine company engaged in
    criminal activity, you feel that Rath's bizzare claims about vitamin C are
    true. Simply put, you're a credulous [censored].

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

  5. Quoted message said:

    Simply put, you're a credulous [censored].

    You, sir, are correct, I _DID_ say that. I truly forgot and I wrongly stated
    that I didn't call you that.

    Quoted message said:

    Do you want to continue to dig deeper?
    Anth

    Nope, I was wrong, you were right.

    Quoted message said:


    From: Ilsa9 ([email hidden])
    Subject: Re: Rath's battle for justice!

    View: Complete Thread (81 articles)
    Original Format
    Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative
    Date: 2003-07-23 07:02:38 PST

  6. Quoted message said:

    Subject: Re: 'Laetrile' in science
    From: "Anth" [email hidden]
    Date: 7/31/2003 3:42 PM Pacific Standard Time
    Message-id: <[email hidden]>

    I wouldn't say he has zero credibility

    That because you weren't here back when he got caught lying.

    Quoted message said:

    what I would say is that he has
    double standards with the respect of himself and others.

    Yes, as do the rest of the debunker group,

    Quoted message said:

    (And if he ceases calling me stupid petty names like 'Monkey Boy' 'Credulous
    [censored]' etc. I will talk to him again)
    Anth

    Fair enough. I doubt that he can quit.

    Jan

    Quoted message said:

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

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Subject: Re: 'Laetrile' in science
    From: "Anth" [email hidden]
    Date: 7/31/2003 4:18 AM Pacific Standard Time
    Message-id: <[email hidden]>

    Dr Barret was kind enough to reply to my email - he didn't have any
    references to back that statement up.

    Thanks for the information. Much of what is on his lying website is HIS


    SICK

    Quoted message said:

    OPINION.

    Quoted message said:

    Now llsa if you want to back that statement up, then I am all ears, show


    me

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    the reports? I would like to see them and put my mind to rest.
    I have supplied the mouse reports for Laetrile (which were done at Sloan)
    which show Laetrile blocking metastasis in mice.


    Your statement quoting the quackwatch article is as you would term without

    Quoted message said:

    credibility.
    Anth

    Andrew has zero credibility.

    Thanks for this discovery.

    B I N G O!!

    Jan

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.