General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Why Is Richard H Jacobson Obsessed wth Jan?

Started by Jan · · Last activity · 3 posts · 231 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
27 December 2003
Last activity
27 December 2003
Original author
Jan
Posts
3
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
231
Views / 30 days
5

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

Showing posts 1–3 of 3
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. I thought I would begin a discussion about the dynamics of Rich's
    obsession with Jan. It is pretty obvious that he wants to
    demonize Jan as he obsessively posts his diagnosis of her, which is nothing new
    as he has a long pattern of the same with others.
    Of course any efforts to discuss whether Jan had Mercury Poisoning and
    Peripheral Neuropathy will be met with personal insults. Funny how Rich
    believes Jan has PN but not MP.

    So instead of trying to discuss this issue with Richard H Jacobson I thought I
    would share my thoughts about the dynamics behind his obsession.

    Wonder why he lies about his name?

    Wonder why he could never answer Bubba's questions?

    Wonder why Ka&g ended up in his killfile. (for those who don't know, she had a
    nack of putting him in his place and he can't stand that)

    Rich has never mentioned having a real job or family, it is known he leads
    nukie hikes and by his own admission he watches others do what comes naturally.
    Perhaps he has sexual problems, that might explain his obsessive hatred. He
    must be jealous of other people's happy families and sexual fullfillment as he
    must settle for just watching.

    I caution people not to trust the
    perceptions of Richard H Jacobson He has a big axe to grind with anyone who has
    used alternative medicine with success. He badgers them, asked for their
    medical records and states any success is placebo. He calls thems liars, while
    he lies. He is so ate up with his obsession, he will make comments using ill
    and even dead parents to belittle the person. Other times he belittle them by
    using their husband.

    I speculate that Richard H Jacobson has had many problems dealing with close
    relationships and fear something in his childhood has left it's mark on him.
    Therefore, he transferees his every weakness to others. and has an insane drive
    to put others down, perhaps to build himself up because of low self esteem,

    The reason he had these problems is because of the nature of his
    psychopathology. However his narcissism will not permit him to even
    consider that he may have had some role in his dysfunctional family as a child.

    So he blames others for many of the problems that he can not bring himself to
    deal with. He talks out of both sides of his mouth, showing his problems as he
    transferees them to others.

    So now in an effort to make his life in bearable, he constantly is diagnosing
    others while saying one should not diagnose over the net. Perhaps he flunked
    out of med school also?? His personality is so damaged he can't get along with
    others, so he has to settle for leading nudie hikes.
    His seems to be incapable of accepting personal responsibility for the
    failures, and incapabe of KNOWING WHEN TO SHUT UP.

    Wonder why he nuked his posts??

    Wonder why he stated MHA was a discussion group, but HE prefered to talk about
    whether Jan had mercury poisoning. Why is that so important to him? Why is he
    still yacking about it three years later??

    Is he looking for approval *here* because it is lacking in his life??

    Wonder why he is so obsessed, he prays to Saint Jude that something will happen
    to Jan that will cause her to stop posting. Hmm, must be because he has FAILED
    at running her off, like he did so many.

    Jan

    PS: Ducking while awaiting Rich's gratuitous bashing of me by posting
    out of context statements from years ago that have absolutely nothing
    to do with anything other than Richard H Jacobson's narcissistic rage.
    ------------------------------------------------
    ------------------------------------------------

    ..

  2. Jan the Accuser said:

    Poor Mark, decide to post here rather than under Reporting Adverse
    Reactions to Meds??

    No wonder you remain so confused.

    No, I posted here because you did not respond to my
    last posting in the previous thread.

    I've asked you to show me one of these lies you
    claim I made, but you have yet to do so.

    Your last posting contained statements that you marked
    off with stars (****). Do you claim that those statements
    are lies from me? Most of those statements marked with stars
    are not even statements I made. A lot of them are from
    Christian Drapeau (then of Cell Tech) referring to me or
    things I said. Surely you cannot count a statement made by
    somebody other than me as an example of a lie that I told?

    Some of those starred statements were made by you!
    Surely you cannot use statements that you made as examples
    of lies that I told, can you? That seems so unfair. )-;

    Of the statements I made, none of them are false, therefore
    they cannot be lies. Take for example:

    **During the last several years, I have from time to time
    posted to this and other newsgroups a file of information
    called "An Anatoxin-a Primer." I now retract the statements
    made in the Anatoxin-a Primer. ***

    That's a quote of statements I made, but surely you're not
    suggesting that this quoted passage itself contains a lie,
    are you?

    I'm saying I posted a file (true), and that I'm now
    retracting it (also true).

    Nothing in the quoted passage was untrue, right?

    Therefore nothing in the quoted passage was a lie, right?

    Now as regarding the statements _referred_to_ by the
    quoted passage, I'm not aware of any that are false or
    untrue. You did not quote from any of the statements
    in the file referred to by the quoted passage. How odd.
    That file is easily available, and it apparently (according
    to you) contains lies, but you do not quote directly from it
    when asked for an example of one of my (alleged) lies.

    How very very odd.

    Why is that?

    Is it because there are no lies in that file?

    If you disagree, let's see that statement.

    Let's see an example of one of these lies.

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

    Quoted message said:


    snip

    It is pretty obvious that he wants to

    Quoted message said:

    demonize Jan

    snip

    Jan demonizes herself.

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.