General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Kilikini Needs Our Help

Started by Damsel in dis Dress · · Last activity · 244 posts · 5,015 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
15 June 2006
Last activity
17 June 2006
Original author
Damsel in dis Dress
Posts
244
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
5,015
Views / 30 days
0

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

Showing posts 241–244 of 244
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. JoeSpareBedroom said:

    "Blair P. Houghton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    The statistics say that your anecdotal evidence is incorrect.

    I define anecdotal as information I didn't experience first hand. Sorry to
    burst your bubble, but my information is perfect.

    Okay. Now you're telling us that you're deliberately ignorant and
    proud of it.

    --Blair

  2. JoeSpareBedroom said:

    "Blair P. Houghton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    The statistics say that your anecdotal evidence is incorrect.

    I define anecdotal as information I didn't experience first hand. Sorry to
    burst your bubble, but my information is perfect.

    Here. You'll enjoy this. I'm going to use anecdotal evidence in a non
    sequitur.

    http://news.google.com/news?q=catholic%20healthcare%20west

    And to top it off, the fallacy of appeal to popularity: more people
    have been screwed by CHW than have been given discounts by your doctor.

    Therefore, since you think fallacy is logic, you declare me the winner!

    --Blair

  3. Quoted message said:

    You're a life saver. Simply amazing. Can you babysit my cat if I come
    to Austin?

    People like you have no business caring for animals when they
    can't even care for themselves.

    -sw

  4. Blair P. Houghton said:
    tert in seattle said:

    In general alternative
    medicine has not been taken seriously enough to go up against
    standard surgery/chemo/radiation in double blind phase 3 clinical
    trials.

    That's because voodoo doesn't have a thing to do with biochemistry.

    Quoted message said:

    Definitely. I do think
    alternative therapies should be studied more aggressively and I
    definitely think there should be a lot more serious consideration
    given to the affect a person's mind has on the body, and to
    integrating mind into the model of medicine far more than it is in
    Western medicine today.

    Cripes. New-age woo-woo cancer cures. Are you going to fix a flat
    tire with your mind, too? Your mind won't cure your cancer. The best
    it can do is reduce your stress level and in the small chance that
    your condition is on the verge, where the stress-related chemicals
    would
    have pushed you over the crisis and into mortality, that could make
    the difference.

    Quoted message said:

    I truly wish there were natural, noninvasive ways to treat cancer --
    I know what chemo, radiation, and surgery do to people. But I'm
    also a rational thinker and I understand science and statistics (I
    also understand cultural bias and take that into account) and in the
    balance I have to
    say that there's a reason why standard therapy for cancer is what it
    is, and while there are holes in that reason, it's a better reason
    than, for example, why 90% of computer desktops run Windows.

    It's clear you're not a rational thinker, you're more credulous than
    even the salmon thing hinted at.

    Cancer is an induced error in the encoding of genetic mechanisms.
    Throwing random junk at it hoping something will work magically is
    19th-century medicine. The therapies that work do their work by
    destroying the cells that have the erroneous code without harming the
    rest of the body as badly as the cancer does.

    What's needed is fewer eye-of-newt trials eating up research money and
    more chemical engineering directed toward defining a proper means of
    stopping the growth of and repairing broken cells. By now we should
    be designing these drugs, not hoping we'll find them lying around in
    the forest.

    Think about it this way: you have a puzzle, and you're missing one
    piece to complete it. You can buy a random box of puzzle pieces on
    eBay and hope that one is the right piece. Or you can find the right
    piece of cardboard and cut it to fit. Which one is more certain?
    Which one is not certain at all?

    Until we start doing deterministic engineering on cancer, which may
    require having a specific tool for each kind of cancer, or may result
    in a means of resetting all our cells at once (now that'd be a hell of
    a thing), we're going to have cancer as a major problem.

    --Blair

    Finally you are making a little sense.
    are you involved?
    If you are not running the program mentioned in my sig line please consider
    doing so. It mat be a small thing but it has the potential to make a
    difference.

    Ken.
    --
    Volunteer your idle computer time for cancer research
    http//www.grid.org/download/gold/download.htm
    Return address courtesy of Spammotel http://www.spammotel.com/

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.