What would you do if...

Quoted message said:

Subject: What would you do if...
From: "Dave Wickware" [email hidden]
Date: 5/28/2004 6:36 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I will be having that simple surgical procedure, at a cost
of $150.00 CDN, by the way, in the hope that

a/scraping away at your jaw bone is FAR from simple little
procedure...

b/anyone who would do it for a mere $150 is
suspect...are you getting an anesthetic?? or a bullet
to bite for the pain??

just some questions..

hawki.....

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

Quoted message said:

Lets say that you have some disease or condition that has
been treated by your doctor until he has nothing further
to offer. At some point he must tell you that he can see
no hope and that you are terminal. Now you have a decision
to make. You can accept his word (some

do)

Quoted message said:

and go about preparing for your demise, or you can decide
to fight to continue living (many
do). So, you then proceed to find additional opinions on
your condition.

At

Quoted message said:

this juncture, some seek addition medical opinions and
some seek

alternative

Quoted message said:

means. If the additional medical opinions end with a
terminally ill diagnoses, those people also seek
alternative therapies. Some folks here appear to be so
against alternative ways that they would advocate

accepting

Quoted message said:

the hopeless diagnosis and recommend quietly dieing, to
others. The

question

Quoted message said:

I pose is, what if it was yourself? What if it was your
child? Would you still refuse to try an alternative
therapy? Would you not be willing to spend any any amount
of money as long as you had some hope of extending

your

Quoted message said:

life?

This is all quite valid. It is why healthfraud activities
are primarily about those making health care claims, not
about those consuming them. Healthfraud is about medical
ethics and the science of medicine, matters which are not
necessarily of major interest to the health care consumer.
The health care consumer could help, however , by
demanding better standards of evidence from any claiming
have useful remedies.

You have been advised that the surgery is not likely to help
you, and that dentists know nothing about emphysema, but it
is up to you what you do. No one will hold it against you.
Or they shouldn't, even if we think those treating you are
either fools or villains.

Quoted message said:

Would you not then find talking to others who had been in
your situation about how they had successfully solved their
problem with alternative means, of value?

If you haven't learnt yet to take WWW testimonial with a
huge grain of salt, you eventually will.

Peter Moran

The ethical and scientific concerns are completely
different.

Quoted message said:

I am writing this as a man who has lived those questions.
This is not hypothetical for me. I don't know the correct
answer for YOU. But I surely know the correct answer for
me. I have talked about having cavitation surgery on June
7. Some here have told me it is a scam. It is difficult

for

Quoted message said:

me to even contemplate the inappropriateness of that
comment. That person does not have the ight to even say
that to me. I will be having that

simple

Quoted message said:

surgical procedure, at a cost of $150.00 CDN, by the way,
in the hope

that

Quoted message said:

it will eliminate chronic infections which limit my
physical abilities. I

am

Quoted message said:

doing it because I have talked to a number of people who
have had serious systemic diseases eliminated by this
procedure.

Can you begin to imagine the impact of discovering that a
simple little procedure, performed with a local anesthetic
in a dentists office, in 30 minutes could eliminate a
major source of many diseases such as heart disease,
cancer, diabetes, arthritis and other systemic diseases?

I will be letting you and lots of others know my results.

"Hawki63" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: What would you do if... From: "Dave Wickware"
[email hidden] Date: 5/28/2004 6:36 AM Pacific
Daylight Time Message-id:
<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I will be having that simple surgical procedure, at a
cost of $150.00 CDN, by the way, in the hope

that

Quoted message said:

a/scraping away at your jaw bone is FAR from simple little
procedure...

b/anyone who would do it for a mere $150 is suspect...are
you getting an anesthetic?? or a bullet to bite for the
pain??

just some questions..

hawki.....

He gives a local anesthetic from a very well known dental
surgeon who has been doing these procedures for 18 years.
His fee is according to the Canadian dental fee schedule.

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Lets say that you have some disease or condition that
has been treated

by

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

your doctor until he has nothing further to offer. At
some point he must tell you that he can see no hope and
that you are terminal. Now you have a decision to make.
You can accept his word (some

do)

Quoted message said:

and go about preparing for your demise, or you can
decide to fight to continue living (many
do). So, you then proceed to find additional opinions on
your condition.

At

Quoted message said:

this juncture, some seek addition medical opinions and
some seek

alternative

Quoted message said:

means. If the additional medical opinions end with a
terminally ill diagnoses, those people also seek
alternative therapies. Some folks here appear to be so
against alternative ways that they would advocate

accepting

Quoted message said:

the hopeless diagnosis and recommend quietly dieing, to
others. The

question

Quoted message said:

I pose is, what if it was yourself? What if it was your
child? Would you still refuse to try an alternative
therapy? Would you not be willing to spend any any
amount of money as long as you had some hope of
extending

your

Quoted message said:

life?

This is all quite valid. It is why healthfraud activities
are primarily about those making health care claims, not
about those consuming them. Healthfraud is about medical
ethics and the science of medicine, matters which are not
necessarily of major interest to the health care consumer.
The health care consumer could help, however , by
demanding better

standards

Quoted message said:

of evidence from any claiming have useful remedies.

You have been advised that the surgery is not likely to
help you, and that dentists know nothing about emphysema,
but it is up to you what you do.

No

Quoted message said:

one will hold it against you. Or they shouldn't, even if
we think those treating you are either fools or villains.

Quoted message said:

Would you not then find talking to others who had been in
your situation about how they had successfully solved
their problem with alternative means, of value?

If you haven't learnt yet to take WWW testimonial with a
huge grain of

salt,

Quoted message said:

you eventually will.

Peter Moran

The ethical and scientific concerns are completely
different.

Quoted message said:

I am writing this as a man who has lived those
questions. This is not hypothetical for me. I don't know
the correct answer for YOU. But I

surely

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

know the correct answer for me. I have talked about
having cavitation surgery on June 7. Some here have told
me it is a scam. It is difficult

for

Quoted message said:

me to even contemplate the inappropriateness of that
comment. That

person

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

does not have the ight to even say that to me. I will be
having that

simple

Quoted message said:

surgical procedure, at a cost of $150.00 CDN, by the
way, in the hope

that

Quoted message said:

it will eliminate chronic infections which limit my
physical abilities.

I

Quoted message said:

am

Quoted message said:

doing it because I have talked to a number of people who
have had

serious

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

systemic diseases eliminated by this procedure.

Can you begin to imagine the impact of discovering that
a simple little procedure, performed with a local
anesthetic in a dentists office, in 30 minutes could
eliminate a major source of many diseases such as heart
disease, cancer, diabetes, arthritis and other systemic
diseases?

I will be letting you and lots of others know my
results.

So did you answer that you would rather die than face your
own ignorance? As for testimonials...your words of warning
have no power, I am already a living testimonial for what
you struggle to not see.

In article <40b7bb78$0$2823$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-
01.brisbane.pipenetworks.co

m.au said:

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Lets say that you have some disease or condition that
has been treated by your doctor until he has nothing
further to offer. At some point he must tell you that he
can see no hope and that you are terminal. Now you have
a decision to make. You can accept his word (some

do)

Quoted message said:

and go about preparing for your demise, or you can
decide to fight to continue living (many
do). So, you then proceed to find additional opinions on
your condition.

At

Quoted message said:

this juncture, some seek addition medical opinions and
some seek

alternative

Quoted message said:

means. If the additional medical opinions end with a
terminally ill diagnoses, those people also seek
alternative therapies. Some folks here appear to be so
against alternative ways that they would advocate

accepting

Quoted message said:

the hopeless diagnosis and recommend quietly dieing, to
others. The

question

Quoted message said:

I pose is, what if it was yourself? What if it was your
child? Would you still refuse to try an alternative
therapy? Would you not be willing to spend any any
amount of money as long as you had some hope of
extending

your

Quoted message said:

life?

This is all quite valid. It is why healthfraud activities
are primarily about those making health care claims, not
about those consuming them. Healthfraud is about medical
ethics and the science of medicine, matters which are not
necessarily of major interest to the health care consumer.
The health care consumer could help, however , by
demanding better standards of evidence from any claiming
have useful remedies.

Precisely. The problem with all too many alt-med
practitioners is that they take advantage of the very
desperation of such patients to push their remedy. Most
probably do it with good intentions, truly believing that
their remedy "works," but that does not excuse them. A
person treating a patient, whether doctor or alt-
practitioner, has an absolute obligation to tell the patient
what is known about the course of treatment proposed, what
its risks are, and what the likelihood of its accomplishing
what is claimed for it. In order to be able to give such
information, such information must be known, and the best
way for it to be known is through clinical trials.
Practitioners like Hulda Clark, who claims to have the "cure
for all cancers" or the "cure for AIDS" make such claims on
the basis of essentially no data or on the basis of data
that is so flawed that it is meaningless.

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

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

Quoted message said:

"Hawki63" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:20040528134833.07406.00000080@mb-
m03.aol.com...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: What would you do if... From: "Dave Wickware"
[email hidden] Date: 5/28/2004 6:36 AM Pacific
Daylight Time Message-id:
<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I will be having that simple surgical procedure, at a
cost of $150.00 CDN, by the way, in the hope

that

Quoted message said:

a/scraping away at your jaw bone is FAR from simple
little

procedure...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

b/anyone who would do it for a mere $150 is
suspect...are you getting an anesthetic?? or a bullet
to bite for the pain??

just some questions..

hawki.....

He gives a local anesthetic from a very well known dental
surgeon who has been doing these procedures for 18 years.
His fee is according to the Canadian dental fee schedule.

Hawki thinks that fair pricing in medicine should be
outlawed. Keep those Mercedes humming........

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

Quoted message said:

In article <40b7bb78$0$2823$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-
01.brisbane.pipenetworks.co

m.au said:

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Lets say that you have some disease or condition that
has been treated

by

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

your doctor until he has nothing further to offer. At
some point he must tell you that he can see no hope
and that you

are

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

terminal. Now you have a decision to make. You can
accept his word

(some

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

do)

Quoted message said:

and go about preparing for your demise, or you can
decide to fight to continue living (many
do). So, you then proceed to find additional opinions
on your

condition.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

At

Quoted message said:

this juncture, some seek addition medical opinions and
some seek

alternative

Quoted message said:

means. If the additional medical opinions end with a
terminally ill diagnoses, those people also seek
alternative therapies. Some folks

here

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

appear to be so against alternative ways that they
would advocate

accepting

Quoted message said:

the hopeless diagnosis and recommend quietly dieing,
to others. The

question

Quoted message said:

I pose is, what if it was yourself? What if it was
your child? Would

you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

still refuse to try an alternative therapy? Would you
not be willing

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

spend any any amount of money as long as you had some
hope of

extending

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

your

Quoted message said:

life?

This is all quite valid. It is why healthfraud
activities are primarily about those making health care
claims, not about those consuming them. Healthfraud is
about medical ethics and the science of medicine,
matters which are not necessarily of major interest to
the health care consumer. The health care consumer could
help, however , by demanding better

standards

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

of evidence from any claiming have useful remedies.

Precisely. The problem with all too many alt-med
practitioners is that they take advantage of the very
desperation of such patients to push their remedy. Most
probably do it with good intentions, truly believing that
their remedy "works," but that does not excuse them. A
person treating a patient, whether doctor or alt-
practitioner, has an absolute obligation to tell the
patient what is known about the course of treatment
proposed, what its risks are, and what the likelihood of
its accomplishing what is claimed for it. In order to be
able to give such information, such information must be
known, and the best way for it to be known is through
clinical trials. Practitioners like Hulda Clark, who
claims to have the "cure for all cancers" or the "cure for
AIDS" make such claims on the basis of essentially no data
or on the basis of data that is so flawed that it is
meaningless.

This dental surgeon is not an alt-med practitioner he is
main stream mercury using dentist. He told me the risks, he
told me it won't likely make any difference and I signed a
waiver to that effect. What is so very sad is that he had to
do it to protect himself not from me, but from persecution
from his own College of Dentistry.

I will let you all know if I survive this event. Based on
the discovery of this problem and all the research that has
been done (I posted it previously and Jan re-posted it)
showing the results I can expect, I am making arrangements
for the walk a round of golf with Dave day. So far I have 9
CPGA golfers, and 6 medical doctors and a host of others who
have actually witnessed my healing over the past year.

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

Quoted message said:

"Peter Moran" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:40b7bb78$0$2823$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-
01.brisbane.pipenetworks.com.au...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>

The ethical and scientific concerns are completely
different.

Quoted message said:

I am writing this as a man who has lived those
questions. This is not hypothetical for me. I don't
know the correct answer for YOU. But I

surely

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

know the correct answer for me. I have talked about
having cavitation surgery on June 7. Some here have
told me it is a scam. It is

difficult

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

for

Quoted message said:

me to even contemplate the inappropriateness of that
comment. That

person

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

does not have the ight to even say that to me.

If you have the right to be going on about a treatment of
which you lack the expertise to evaluate and of which you
don't even have any sure personal knowledge, others who
know a bit about human pathology and disease have the
right to assert that it is a scam. You could have gone and
had the treatment and kept quiet about it. You also, I
suspect, knew well that it would provoke adverse comment
before you posted.

This is a worse than average form of quackery. Firstly it
involves an invasive treatment that will inevitably have
risk, or ongoing discomforts, or create the need for further
procedures for some. Secondly it is not being advised for
unexplained facial pain, wherein the idea of cavitations
could remotely have some merit (although postulating bizarre
pathological processes never previously noted), it is being
advised for serious conditions even for cancer, with utterly
no evidence at all that it is likely to be of benefit.
Illustrative of this is the [censored] and bull story fed to you
about sinus infections from cavitations from wisdom teeth
causing your recurrent chest infections.

I think that if I were as desperate as you I might also try
treatments that have only a small likelihood of working, but
that does not justify armies of quacks exploiting those who
are gullible as well as desperate. It also scarcely excuses
the arrogance of those so blissfully ignorant of medical
matters as to do the quack's advertising for them.

Peter Moran

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave Wickware said:

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:orac-EA7395.21114428052004@news4-
ge1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...

Quoted message said:

In article <40b7bb78$0$2823$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-
01.brisbane.pipenetworks.co
m.au>,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This is all quite valid. It is why healthfraud
activities are primarily about those making health
care claims, not about those consuming them.
Healthfraud is about medical ethics and the science of
medicine, matters which are not necessarily of major
interest to the health care consumer. The health care
consumer could help, however , by demanding better

standards

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

of evidence from any claiming have useful remedies.

Precisely. The problem with all too many alt-med
practitioners is that they take advantage of the very
desperation of such patients to push their remedy. Most
probably do it with good intentions, truly believing
that their remedy "works," but that does not excuse
them. A person treating a patient, whether doctor or alt-
practitioner, has an absolute obligation to tell the
patient what is known about the course of treatment
proposed, what its risks are, and what the likelihood of
its accomplishing what is claimed for it. In order to be
able to give such information, such information must be
known, and the best way for it to be known is through
clinical trials. Practitioners like Hulda Clark, who
claims to have the "cure for all cancers" or the "cure
for AIDS" make such claims on the basis of essentially
no data or on the basis of data that is so flawed that
it is meaningless.

This dental surgeon is not an alt-med practitioner he is
main stream mercury using dentist.

Who has apparently figured out he can increase his practice
income by adopting some altie fad diagnoses and treatments,
such as "cavitations."

Quoted message said:

He told me the risks, he told me it won't likely make any
difference and I signed a waiver to that effect.

So let me get this straight. He told you that the procedure
probably won't help you, but will have risks, and you wanted
it anyway?

And why on earth would you trust a practitioner who tells
you that the SURGICAL PROCEDURE (and make no mistake about
it, what he proposes to do about your "cavitations" is a
surgical procedure) will likely make no difference in your
symptoms but is willing to do it anyway if you sign a
waiver (and, of course, pay him is fee)? To me, such
actions bespeak a questionable, at best, sense of
professional ethics.

Quoted message said:

What is so very sad is that he had to do it to protect
himself not from me, but from persecution from his own
College of Dentistry.

In the U.S., having a patient sign such a waiver would not
protect a dentist or doctor from either prosecution by the
State Medical Board or from malpractice suits. I doubt it
would in Canada, either.

Quoted message said:

I will let you all know if I survive this event.

Why would you think you wouldn't survive? Survival wasn't
the question, even among those of us like me who are
extremely skeptical of the whole concept of "cavitations."
Existence of the claimed diagnosis and efficacy of the
proposed treatment were. True, given what you've told us,
you aren't in the greatest of health; so there is certainly
a higher than average risk from the anaesthesia, but it's
still pretty unlikely you would die from this.

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

Jeez! Blah, blah, blah, blah and you run in tight
little circles.

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:orac-EEA241.17073929052004@news4-
ge1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...

Quoted message said:

In article
<[email hidden]>, "Dave

Wickware said:

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:orac-EA7395.21114428052004@news4-
ge1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...

Quoted message said:

In article

<40b7bb78$0$2823$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-
01.brisbane.pipenetworks.co

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

m.au>,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> This is all quite valid. It is why healthfraud
> activities are

primarily

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> about those making health care claims, not about
> those consuming

them.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Healthfraud is about medical ethics and the science
> of medicine,

matters

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> which are not necessarily of major interest to the
> health care

consumer.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> The health care consumer could help, however , by
> demanding better

standards

Quoted message said:

> of evidence from any claiming have useful remedies.

Precisely. The problem with all too many alt-med
practitioners is that they take advantage of the very
desperation of such patients to push their remedy.
Most probably do it with good intentions, truly

believing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that their remedy "works," but that does not excuse
them. A person treating a patient, whether doctor or
alt-practitioner, has an

absolute

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

obligation to tell the patient what is known about the
course of treatment proposed, what its risks are, and
what the likelihood of its accomplishing what is
claimed for it. In order to be able to give such
information, such information must be known, and the
best way for it

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be known is through clinical trials. Practitioners
like Hulda Clark,

who

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

claims to have the "cure for all cancers" or the "cure
for AIDS" make such claims on the basis of essentially
no data or on the basis of

data

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that is so flawed that it is meaningless.

This dental surgeon is not an alt-med practitioner he is
main stream

mercury

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

using dentist.

Who has apparently figured out he can increase his
practice income by adopting some altie fad diagnoses and
treatments, such as "cavitations."

Quoted message said:

He told me the risks, he told me it won't likely make
any difference and I signed a waiver to that effect.

So let me get this straight. He told you that the
procedure probably won't help you, but will have risks,
and you wanted it anyway?

And why on earth would you trust a practitioner who tells
you that the SURGICAL PROCEDURE (and make no mistake about
it, what he proposes to do about your "cavitations" is a
surgical procedure) will likely make no difference in your
symptoms but is willing to do it anyway if you sign a
waiver (and, of course, pay him is fee)? To me, such
actions bespeak a questionable, at best, sense of
professional ethics.

Quoted message said:

What is so very sad is that he had to do it to protect
himself not from me, but from persecution from his own
College of Dentistry.

In the U.S., having a patient sign such a waiver would not
protect a dentist or doctor from either prosecution by the
State Medical Board or from malpractice suits. I doubt it
would in Canada, either.

Quoted message said:

I will let you all know if I survive this event.

Why would you think you wouldn't survive? Survival wasn't
the question, even among those of us like me who are
extremely skeptical of the whole concept of "cavitations."
Existence of the claimed diagnosis and efficacy of the
proposed treatment were. True, given what you've told us,
you aren't in the greatest of health; so there is
certainly a higher than average risk from the anaesthesia,
but it's still pretty unlikely you would die from this.

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

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

Quoted message said:

Jeez! Blah, blah, blah, blah

You finally are posting what you are reallysaying.

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: What would you do if... From: "Peter Moran"
[email hidden] Date: 5/28/2004 2:21 PM Pacific Standard
Time Message-id: <40b7bb78$0$2823$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-
01.brisbane.pipenetworks.com.au>

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

Quoted message said:

Lets say that you have some disease or condition that has
been treated by your doctor until he has nothing further
to offer. At some point he must tell you that he can see
no hope and that you are terminal. Now you have a
decision to make. You can accept his word (some

do)

Quoted message said:

and go about preparing for your demise, or you can decide
to fight to continue living (many
do). So, you then proceed to find additional opinions on
your condition.

At

Quoted message said:

this juncture, some seek addition medical opinions and
some seek

alternative

Quoted message said:

means. If the additional medical opinions end with a
terminally ill diagnoses, those people also seek
alternative therapies. Some folks here appear to be so
against alternative ways that they would advocate

accepting

Quoted message said:

the hopeless diagnosis and recommend quietly dieing, to
others. The

question

Quoted message said:

I pose is, what if it was yourself? What if it was your
child? Would you still refuse to try an alternative
therapy? Would you not be willing to spend any any amount
of money as long as you had some hope of extending

your

Quoted message said:

life?

This is all quite valid. It is why healthfraud activities
are primarily about those making health care claims, not
about those consuming them.

Dave didn't ask for sermon, he asked what would YOU do???

Quoted message said:

Healthfraud is about medical ethics

Oh?? WHICH ones????

Would you say Dr Wilson had no medical ethics???? WHY did he
remain on staff???

WHY did you defend him EVEN THOUGH without a doubt he
committed FRAUD. COVER_UPS and REPEATED DELIBERATE
VIOLATIONS OF REGULATIONS???????

<snip>

Quoted message said:

, by demanding better standards

You thought the standards of Dr Wlson were A OK.

Quoted message said:

You have been advised that the surgery is not likely to
help you,

By those of *organized medicine* who also deny
cavitations,EVEN THOUGH THERE IS PLEANTY OF PROOF.

<snip>

Quoted message said:

even if we think those treating you are either fools or
villains.

But Dr Wilson is a stand up guy who remains on staff.

<snip>

Quoted message said:

If you haven't learnt yet to take WWW testimonial with a
huge grain of salt, you eventually will.

Peter Moran

If you haven't learned by now the LIES from organized
medicine and the double standards, you just read
another example.

The FACTS are Peter Moran is BLINDED!!!!

And didn't answer the question.

Jan

(Jan) said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: What would you do if... From: "Peter Moran"
[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

This is all quite valid. It is why healthfraud activities
are primarily about those making health care claims, not
about those consuming them.

Dave didn't ask for sermon, he asked what would YOU do???

Jan has a control problem. Poor Jan.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Healthfraud is about medical ethics

Oh?? WHICH ones????

Would you say Dr Wilson had no medical ethics???? WHY did
he remain on staff???

How did Dr. Wilson get into the conversation??
Diversion. Poor Jan.

Quoted message said:

WHY did you defend him EVEN THOUGH without a doubt he
committed FRAUD. COVER_UPS and REPEATED DELIBERATE
VIOLATIONS OF REGULATIONS???????

Poor Jan. All she can do is hurl personal attacks against
posters with whom she disagrees.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

, by demanding better standards

You thought the standards of Dr Wlson were A OK.

I wonder what Jan Drew thinks of the standards of Hulda
Clark. Kaboom!!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You have been advised that the surgery is not likely to
help you,

By those of *organized medicine* who also deny
cavitations,EVEN THOUGH THERE IS PLEANTY OF PROOF.

Ad hominem attack. Poor Jan.

Quoted message said:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

even if we think those treating you are either fools or
villains.

But Dr Wilson is a stand up guy who remains on staff.

Hulda Clark has the cure for ALL illnesses. Oh, that is
right. Jan just thinks that Hulda is "mistaken". Indeed!!

Quoted message said:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

If you haven't learnt yet to take WWW testimonial with a
huge grain of salt, you eventually will.

Peter Moran

If you haven't learned by now the LIES from organized
medicine and the double standards, you just read
another example.

Jan DRew is one to talk about lying as lying comes second
nature to her.

Quoted message said:

The FACTS are Peter Moran is BLINDED!!!!

More attacks. Such hatred. I hope Jan Drew gets some help.

Quoted message said:

And didn't answer the question.

Cue Jan to say I did not answer Bubba's questions. Indeed!!!

Aloha,

Rich

Quoted message said:

Jan

-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------

The best defense to logic is ignorance

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave Wickware said:

Jeez! Blah, blah, blah, blah and you run in tight little
circles.

I always know I've made a point you can't answer when you
are reduced to childish little comebacks like the above.
It's a legitimate point, and my pointing out what would be
obvious to anyone with some common sense clearly makes you
uncomfortable. Why would you trust a practitioner who tells
you that the surgical procedure he proposes to do about your
"cavitations" will likely make no difference in your
symptoms but proposes to do it anyway--but only if you sign
a waiver promising not to sue him (and, of course, pay him
his fee)? To me, such actions bespeak a questionable, at
best, sense of professional ethics.

I always thought you were exceedingly gullible when it came
to altie claims, but I never suspected you were that
gullible. This point has nothing to do with whether the
proposed treatment is "alt" or conventional, either.

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