Re: NCCAM Should be defunded

It seems that the discussion has gone to the NCCAM as who Dr Rath
approached, this is only conjecture.
Anth

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

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Peter - they can't even get there - Dr Rath tried and failed to get a

trial

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

with vitamin C.

Really? When? The NCCAM started out small and has only become the $116
million a year behemoth Center that it is over the last three or four
years.

--
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:

Peter - they can't even get there - Dr Rath tried and failed to get a

trial

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

with vitamin C.

Really? When? The NCCAM started out small and has only become the $116
million a year behemoth Center that it is over the last three or four
years.

Money well spent.
Anth

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

It seems that the discussion has gone to the NCCAM as who Dr Rath
approached, this is only conjecture.

I never said it wasn't. However, given the relatively low burden of
preliminary evidence NCCAM is funding studies based on, if Dr. Rath has
even mildly promising results that hold up to scientific scrutiny, he
would almost certainly get funded if he submitted a formal grant
application.

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