Lorenzo's Oil is on HBO tonight!

Discussion in 'Food and nutrition' started by [email protected], Jan 16, 2006.

  1. The movie 'Lorenzo's Oil' (1992) is currently playing on HBO.

    http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&cf=info&id=1800182886&intl=us
    It is a "Story about a couple who defy the medical professionals and
    try to save the life of their son who's suffering from an "incurable"
    disease."

    This movie upon watching it once again, was even more engrossing than
    the first time that I saw it.

    It has something for anyone interested in Alternative Medicine and
    Medical Research.

    You will see researchers, following in the footsteps of Benjamin Rush,
    marching lock step in the blind pursuit of science with the patient be
    damned. You will see the parents of a patient doing the impossible,
    pressing all the time for something that will actually help their son,
    science be damned. Susan Sarandon will be sure to please any Right
    Wringers in the audience with her famous liberal lines.

    See, gaggles of weak willed parents buy into the Learned physician
    researcher bullshit and cheerfully watch their offspring die from ALD
    as science marches along at its own slow pace.

    See the unlearned parents find a treatment for ALD, science be damned.

    And, last but NOT least, you will see that dreaded toxic 'rapeseed' oil
    showing up as part of the miracle Lorenzo's Oil cure. Proving once
    again, that even poisons of the PUFA purests can actually benefit some
    people.

    Now, how is that for a timeless medical research drama from the point
    of view of patients who just want something that helps them, and
    researchers wishing that those pesky parents would simply shut up?
     
    Tags:


  2. http://www.jr2.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/booth/neurol/lorenz.html

    Clinical bottom line
    Lorenzo's oil has no value in patients with established symptoms. It may be
    of value of asymptomatic patients, and may delay onset of symptoms, but the
    extent of any effect is unclear. The problem is that the fatty acids in
    Lorenzo's oil do not replace the very long chain fatty acids in the brain
    because they do not cross the blood-brain barrier.
     
  3. In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
    >The movie 'Lorenzo's Oil' (1992) is currently playing on HBO.
    >
    >It has something for anyone interested in Alternative Medicine and
    >Medical Research.
    >
    >You will see researchers, following in the footsteps of Benjamin Rush,
    >marching lock step in the blind pursuit of science with the patient be
    >damned. You will see the parents of a patient doing the impossible,
    >pressing all the time for something that will actually help their son,
    >science be damned. Susan Sarandon will be sure to please any Right
    >Wringers in the audience with her famous liberal lines.
    >
    >See, gaggles of weak willed parents buy into the Learned physician
    >researcher bullshit and cheerfully watch their offspring die from ALD
    >as science marches along at its own slow pace.
    >
    >See the unlearned parents find a treatment for ALD, science be damned.
    >
    >Now, how is that for a timeless medical research drama from the point
    >of view of patients who just want something that helps them, and
    >researchers wishing that those pesky parents would simply shut up?


    Yes, it's a very nice story, but it is fiction. It's based on a true
    story, but the tragic ending -- the parents spent a fortune, and the
    magic remedy doesn't work -- was changed by Hollywood to make a more
    upbeat, salable movie. Unlike reality, fiction can have the outcome
    you really, really want, that the characters really, really deserve,
    unrestricted by boring science.

    Lots of movies based on true stories are changed this way, to make
    better stories. You shouldn't think that they accurately reflect
    reality, or are a source of real information. Some are art, some are
    entertainment, and some are propaganda. Just because a piece of
    fiction confirms your opinions doesn't make it true, even if you
    really, really want it to be.
     
  4. Nana Weedkiller wrote:

    > http://www.jr2.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/booth/neurol/lorenz.html
    >
    > Clinical bottom line
    > Lorenzo's oil has no value in patients with established symptoms. It may be
    > of value of asymptomatic patients, and may delay onset of symptoms, but the
    > extent of any effect is unclear. The problem is that the fatty acids in
    > Lorenzo's oil do not replace the very long chain fatty acids in the brain
    > because they do not cross the blood-brain barrier.


    I hate to break the bad news to you, but that fact was in fact in the
    movie.

    The movie defiantly implied that Lorenzo's oil was of value to new ALD
    victims ONLY. The movie ended with a trailer of supposed victims
    stating that they have been taking Lorenzo's oil for many years. They
    all appeared to be normal.

    The movie did in fact state many times that Lorenzo's oil would never
    undo brain damage already done.

    What is your problem? Oh, I know! The scientific mind in action. :(
     
  5. Mark Probert

    Mark Probert Guest

    Mr-Natural-Health wrote:

    > The movie did in fact state many times that Lorenzo's oil would never
    > undo brain damage already done.


    Johnny, that is a good point, and I am impressed. Those hawking
    chelation for treating Autism should bear that in mind.
     
  6. Mark Probert wrote:
    > Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
    >
    > > The movie did in fact state many times that Lorenzo's oil would never
    > > undo brain damage already done.

    >
    > Johnny, that is a good point, and I am impressed. Those hawking
    > chelation for treating Autism should bear that in mind.


    Yes, the original Lozenzo child ended up still being screwed for life
    but those who came after him were helped. Lorenzo's oil treats the
    symptoms and slows down the progression of the disease if not down
    right halts it.

    Lozeno was supposedly waiting for completely different therapy which
    apparently involved the implantation of new cells inside the brain.
    That is in 1990 or so the studies were still being conducted on
    animals.

    Of course, all this is according to the movie. Just how effective
    Lorenzo's oil is in reality I don't care and I have not researched. I
    just enjoyed the timely medical drama because it is a good microcosm of
    the American Health Care system in action.
     
  7. cathyb

    cathyb Guest

    Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
    > Mark Probert wrote:
    > > Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
    > >

    ><snip>
    > Of course, all this is according to the movie. Just how effective
    > Lorenzo's oil is in reality I don't care and I have not researched. I
    > just enjoyed the timely medical drama because it is a good microcosm of
    > the American Health Care system in action.


    Which says everything we need to know about your objectiveness.
     
  8. [email protected] wrote:

    > Lots of movies based on true stories are changed this way, to make
    > better stories. You shouldn't think that they accurately reflect
    > reality, or are a source of real information. Some are art, some are
    > entertainment, and some are propaganda. Just because a piece of
    > fiction confirms your opinions doesn't make it true, even if you
    > really, really want it to be.


    Ah! The scientific mind in action, yet again.

    Noticed the characteristic chronic negativity. :(

    Notice how the patient is presumed automatically to be stupid and
    living in a fantasy world. :(

    What this movie is, is a case-study of the length some patients have to
    go through in order to get something that works for them in the
    American Health Care system. Could be why people often resort to
    Alternative Medicine and that dirty word: natural health?

    Another good movie, that was also recently on HBO is the 'The Doctor.'
    The story of a successful heart surgeon who came down with a cancer on
    his vocal cords. That was another interesting case-study of how
    patients must aggressively advocate for themselves.

    see:
    http://attitude.naturalhealthperspective.com/empowerment.html

    Nobody, but nobody is suggesting that movies are reality. Perhaps, you
    might actually learn something from them, but I rather doubt it.

    Just thought that the public might be interested in an interesting
    case-study of Science in action. Science lives on forever, even if
    patients die in droves along the way.
     
  9. Carole

    Carole Guest

    "Nana Weedkiller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > http://www.jr2.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/booth/neurol/lorenz.html
    >
    > Clinical bottom line
    > Lorenzo's oil has no value in patients with established symptoms. It may

    be
    > of value of asymptomatic patients, and may delay onset of symptoms, but

    the
    > extent of any effect is unclear. The problem is that the fatty acids in
    > Lorenzo's oil do not replace the very long chain fatty acids in the brain
    > because they do not cross the blood-brain barrier.
    >


    How permeable is the blood-brain barrier?
    Obviously certain things cross it - blood, nutrition, alcohol, drugs.

    Carole
    http://www.conspiracee.com
    http://www.cellsalts.net

    >
     
  10. Carole

    Carole Guest

    "Mark Probert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
    >
    > > The movie did in fact state many times that Lorenzo's oil would never
    > > undo brain damage already done.

    >
    > Johnny, that is a good point, and I am impressed. Those hawking
    > chelation for treating Autism should bear that in mind.


    Isn't chelation more to do with removing heavy metals from the brain, rather
    than brain damage?

    I've heard that chelation is a suppressed technology. Should I be surprise
    that you are against it?

    Carole
    http://www.conspiracee.com
    http://www.cellsalts.net
     
  11. Carole

    Carole Guest

    <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > In article <[email protected]>,
    > [email protected]

    <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >The movie 'Lorenzo's Oil' (1992) is currently playing on HBO.
    > >
    > >It has something for anyone interested in Alternative Medicine and
    > >Medical Research.
    > >
    > >You will see researchers, following in the footsteps of Benjamin Rush,
    > >marching lock step in the blind pursuit of science with the patient be
    > >damned. You will see the parents of a patient doing the impossible,
    > >pressing all the time for something that will actually help their son,
    > >science be damned. Susan Sarandon will be sure to please any Right
    > >Wringers in the audience with her famous liberal lines.
    > >
    > >See, gaggles of weak willed parents buy into the Learned physician
    > >researcher bullshit and cheerfully watch their offspring die from ALD
    > >as science marches along at its own slow pace.
    > >
    > >See the unlearned parents find a treatment for ALD, science be damned.
    > >
    > >Now, how is that for a timeless medical research drama from the point
    > >of view of patients who just want something that helps them, and
    > >researchers wishing that those pesky parents would simply shut up?

    >
    > Yes, it's a very nice story, but it is fiction. It's based on a true
    > story, but the tragic ending -- the parents spent a fortune, and the
    > magic remedy doesn't work


    Yes, why spend a fortune on alternative remedies when you already have "safe
    and efficacious" pharmaceutical treatments.

    > -- was changed by Hollywood to make a more
    > upbeat, salable movie. Unlike reality, fiction can have the outcome
    > you really, really want, that the characters really, really deserve,
    > unrestricted by boring science.
    >
    > Lots of movies based on true stories are changed this way, to make
    > better stories. You shouldn't think that they accurately reflect
    > reality, or are a source of real information.


    And sometimes movies are made just to push disinformation.

    > Some are art, some are
    > entertainment, and some are propaganda. Just because a piece of
    > fiction confirms your opinions doesn't make it true, even if you
    > really, really want it to be.


    And it doesn't make it false either.

    Carole
    http://www.conspiracee.com
    http://www.cellsalts.net
     
  12. David Wright

    David Wright Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Carole <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >"Mark Probert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]
    >> Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
    >>
    >> > The movie did in fact state many times that Lorenzo's oil would never
    >> > undo brain damage already done.

    >>
    >> Johnny, that is a good point, and I am impressed. Those hawking
    >> chelation for treating Autism should bear that in mind.

    >
    >Isn't chelation more to do with removing heavy metals from the brain, rather
    >than brain damage?
    >
    >I've heard that chelation is a suppressed technology. Should I be surprise
    >that you are against it?


    Chelation is used to remove toxic heavy metals from the body. It's
    about as "suppressed" as television. It isn't infallible, and it also
    doesn't work well at removing mercury.

    -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    "If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me."
    -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth
     
  13. David Wright wrote:

    > Chelation is used to remove toxic heavy metals from the body. It's
    > about as "suppressed" as television. It isn't infallible, and it also
    > doesn't work well at removing mercury.


    Perhaps, if you Arses were to concentrate?

    Chelation was brought up by the biggest Arse of all. It has nothing to
    do with this thread.

    Just thought that you Arses, might want to know.
     
  14. cathyb wrote:

    > > Of course, all this is according to the movie. Just how effective
    > > Lorenzo's oil is in reality I don't care and I have not researched. I
    > > just enjoyed the timely medical drama because it is a good microcosm of
    > > the American Health Care system in action.

    >
    > Which says everything we need to know about your objectiveness.


    And, your point is?

    Obviously, just like most science people you talk the talk but you
    don't walk the walk. :)

    Obviously, you do NOT keep up with the literature.

    Just because science, or is it science people, are slow to prove that a
    particular therapy works doesn't mean that the therapy don't work.

    Both watching movies and Lozeno's oil at last count have been shown by
    science to work. )

    Just thought that you arses might want to know.

    "The usefulness of movies to illustrate the psychological and
    sociological conflicts of medical practice is widely recognized.
    However, the use of popular movies to teach less oriented medical
    sciences, such as pharmacology is not so common. In the present review,
    we report the use of three films (Awakenings, Lorenzo's Oil, and Miss
    Evers' Boys) as a teaching tool to allow students to better understand
    some conflicts which appear in the domain of clinical pharmacology.
    These movies may help to introduce some relevant topics such as the
    difficulties of planning and performing clinical research with new
    drugs, the need of considering bioethical principles when doing
    research with human beings, and the social and psychological aspects of
    drug therapy. The films may increase the motivation of students to
    understand clinical pharmacology principles and may become a driving
    force for an increased desire to learn."

    Farre M, Bosch F, Roset PN
    Putting clinical pharmacology in context: the use of popular movies.
    J Clin Pharmacol. 2004 Jan;44(1):30-6. Review.
    PMID: 14681339

    "CONCLUSIONS: In this single-arm study, hexacosanoic acid reduction by
    Lorenzo's oil was associated with reduced risk of developing MRI
    abnormalities. We recommend Lorenzo's oil therapy in asymptomatic boys
    with X-linked adrenoleukodystophy who have normal brain MRI results."

    Moser HW, Raymond GV, Lu SE
    Follow-up of 89 asymptomatic patients with adrenoleukodystrophy treated
    with Lorenzo's oil.
    Arch Neurol. 2005 Jul;62(7):1073-80.
    PMID: 16009761
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/..._uids=16009761&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum
     
  15. Mark Probert

    Mark Probert Guest

    Carole wrote:
    > "Mark Probert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    >
    >>Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>The movie did in fact state many times that Lorenzo's oil would never
    >>>undo brain damage already done.

    >>
    >>Johnny, that is a good point, and I am impressed. Those hawking
    >>chelation for treating Autism should bear that in mind.

    >
    >
    > Isn't chelation more to do with removing heavy metals from the brain, rather
    > than brain damage?


    Proper chelation removes heavy metals from the body, not just the brain,
    no question. The claim is that Autism is a form of brain damage due to
    mercury poisoning. The problem arises when someone claims that it can
    reverse Autism, they are claiming that chelation can reverse brain
    damage. When chelation is used to remove high levels of lead, the lead
    is out, but the damage done remains. Therefore, as a treatment to cure
    or reverse autism it is not going to happen. No one can explain why it
    would reverse brain damage in one situation (Autism) and not the other
    (lead poisoning).

    > I've heard that chelation is a suppressed technology.


    Chelation is an accepted medical therapy to remove toxic levels of
    certain metals. I have no problem with that at all.

    However, claiming that it can reverse Autism, or coronary artery
    disease, when there is no showing of a real clinical improvement, is
    hogwash, and dangerous.

    Should I be surprise
    > that you are against it?


    You should be surprised if I was for its use as a treatment for Autism.
     
  16. > "The usefulness of movies to illustrate the psychological and
    > sociological conflicts of medical practice is widely recognized.


    Ha, ... Hah, Ha! Somebody beat me to it. Sweet: There actually is
    published research on the movie: 'Lorenzo's Oil.'

    Too bad "widely recognized" does NOT apply in these backward ngs. :(

    > In the present review,
    > we report the use of three films (Awakenings, Lorenzo's Oil, and Miss
    > Evers' Boys) as a teaching tool to allow students to better understand
    > some conflicts which appear in the domain of clinical pharmacology.


    I got to check out these other two movies. :)

    Awakenings
    http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&cf=info&id=1800153918
    "Based on a true story, a passionate and somewhat unorthodox doctor
    struggles to cure patients of encephalitis, a sleeping disorder which
    struck many victims in the 1920s, rendering them motionless and
    seemingly thoughtless."

    Miss Evers' Boys
    http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&cf=info&id=1800275955
    "Faced with having their federal funding cut off entirely, the staff of
    a syphilis treatment center in Tuskegee, Alabama is forced to institute
    a government-mandated research project in which they study--without the
    patients' knowledge--the effects of the disease on untreated black
    patients. Based on the true story of the decades-long Tuskegee
    experiment, this HBO-produced drama is adapted from Dr...."

    > These movies may help to introduce some relevant topics such as the
    > difficulties of planning and performing clinical research with new
    > drugs, the need of considering bioethical principles when doing
    > research with human beings, and the social and psychological aspects of
    > drug therapy.


    YES! Whatever happened to ethics in medical research, when patients
    are dying?
     
  17. Carole

    Carole Guest

    "Mark Probert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Carole wrote:
    > > "Mark Probert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]
    > >
    > >>Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>The movie did in fact state many times that Lorenzo's oil would never
    > >>>undo brain damage already done.
    > >>
    > >>Johnny, that is a good point, and I am impressed. Those hawking
    > >>chelation for treating Autism should bear that in mind.

    > >
    > >
    > > Isn't chelation more to do with removing heavy metals from the brain,

    rather
    > > than brain damage?

    >
    > Proper chelation removes heavy metals from the body, not just the brain,
    > no question. The claim is that Autism is a form of brain damage due to
    > mercury poisoning. The problem arises when someone claims that it can
    > reverse Autism, they are claiming that chelation can reverse brain
    > damage. When chelation is used to remove high levels of lead, the lead
    > is out, but the damage done remains. Therefore, as a treatment to cure
    > or reverse autism it is not going to happen. No one can explain why it
    > would reverse brain damage in one situation (Autism) and not the other
    > (lead poisoning).
    >
    > > I've heard that chelation is a suppressed technology.

    >
    > Chelation is an accepted medical therapy to remove toxic levels of
    > certain metals. I have no problem with that at all.


    Are you sure?

    > However, claiming that it can reverse Autism, or coronary artery
    > disease, when there is no showing of a real clinical improvement, is
    > hogwash, and dangerous.


    Oh so its an accepted therapy, but its not very useful. I see.
    Should I be surprised that you find some way to discount the usefulness of
    an alternative therapy?

    >
    > Should I be surprise
    > > that you are against it?

    >
    > You should be surprised if I was for its use as a treatment for Autism.


    Actually, I'd be surprised if I could ever believe anything you or Dave said
    without checking it carefully.

    Carole
    http://www.conspiracee.com
    http://www.cellsalts.net
     
  18. Carole wrote:
    > "Mark Probert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > Carole wrote:
    > > > "Mark Probert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > > news:[email protected]
    > > >
    > > >>Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
    > > >>
    > > >>
    > > >>>The movie did in fact state many times that Lorenzo's oil would never
    > > >>>undo brain damage already done.
    > > >>
    > > >>Johnny, that is a good point, and I am impressed. Those hawking
    > > >>chelation for treating Autism should bear that in mind.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Isn't chelation more to do with removing heavy metals from the brain,

    > rather
    > > > than brain damage?

    > >
    > > Proper chelation removes heavy metals from the body, not just the brain,
    > > no question. The claim is that Autism is a form of brain damage due to
    > > mercury poisoning. The problem arises when someone claims that it can
    > > reverse Autism, they are claiming that chelation can reverse brain
    > > damage. When chelation is used to remove high levels of lead, the lead
    > > is out, but the damage done remains. Therefore, as a treatment to cure
    > > or reverse autism it is not going to happen. No one can explain why it
    > > would reverse brain damage in one situation (Autism) and not the other
    > > (lead poisoning).
    > >
    > > > I've heard that chelation is a suppressed technology.

    > >
    > > Chelation is an accepted medical therapy to remove toxic levels of
    > > certain metals. I have no problem with that at all.

    >
    > Are you sure?
    >
    > > However, claiming that it can reverse Autism, or coronary artery
    > > disease, when there is no showing of a real clinical improvement, is
    > > hogwash, and dangerous.

    >
    > Oh so its an accepted therapy, but its not very useful. I see.
    > Should I be surprised that you find some way to discount the usefulness of
    > an alternative therapy?
    >
    > >
    > > Should I be surprise
    > > > that you are against it?

    > >
    > > You should be surprised if I was for its use as a treatment for Autism.

    >
    > Actually, I'd be surprised if I could ever believe anything you or Dave said
    > without checking it carefully.
    >
    > Carole


    Carole, do you realize that you are talking to a debarred lawyer (ie,
    Mark Probert)?

    http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/cf64fa5f70e4afc0?hl=en&
    http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med/msg/07d6a11aa8c2c6ec

    In the Matter of Mark Probert (Admitted as Mark S. Probert), a
    Suspended Attorney, Respondent.
    Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, Petitioner.

    92-02731

    SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT

    183 A.D.2d 282; 590 N.Y.S.2d 747

    November 9, 1992, Decided

    PRIOR HISTORY: [***1]

    Disciplinary proceedings instituted by the Grievance Committee for the
    Tenth Judicial District. Respondent was admitted to the Bar on
    February 15, 1978, at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme
    Court in the Second Judicial Department, under the name Mark S.
    Probert.

    DISPOSITION: Ordered that the petitioner's motion to impose discipline
    upon the respondent based upon his failure to appear or answer is
    granted; and it is further,

    HEADNOTES: Attorney and Client - Disciplinary Proceedings

    Respondent attorney, who is charged with 22 counts of failing to
    cooperate with investigations of alleged misconduct by the Grievance
    Committee, and who has failed to answer or appear, is disbarred.

    COUNSEL:

    Frank A. Finnerty, Jr., Westbury (Muriel L. Gennosa of counsel), for
    petitioner.

    JUDGES: Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Bracken, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ.,
    concur.

    Ordered that the petitioner's motion to impose discipline upon the
    respondent based upon his failure to appear or answer is granted; and
    it is further,

    Ordered that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, effective immediately,
    the respondent, Mark Probert, is disbarred and his name is stricken
    from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law; and it is further,

    Ordered that the respondent shall continue to comply with this Court's
    rules governing the conduct of disbarred, suspended and resigned
    attorneys (22 NYCRR 691.10); and it is further,

    Ordered that pursuant to Judiciary [***2] Law § 90, the respondent,
    Mark Probert, is commanded to continue to desist and refrain (1) from
    practicing law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or
    employee of another, (2) from appearing as an attorney or
    counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission
    or other public authority, (3) from giving to another an opinion as to
    the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto, and (4)
    from holding himself out in any way as an attorney and
    counselor-at-law.

    OPINIONBY: Per Curiam.

    OPINION: [*282]

    [**747] By decision and order of this Court dated September 29,
    1989, the respondent was suspended from the practice of law until the
    further order of this Court based upon his failure to cooperate with
    the Grievance Committee. By further order of this Court dated June 4,
    1992, the Grievance Committee was authorized to institute and
    prosecute a disciplinary proceeding [*283] against the respondent
    and the Honorable Moses M. Weinstein was appointed as Special Referee.

    [**748] A notice of petition and petition was personally served upon
    the respondent on July 2, 1992. No answer was forthcoming. The
    petitioner now moves to hold the [***3] respondent in default. The
    motion was personally served upon the respondent on August 14, 1992.
    The respondent has failed to submit any papers in response to the
    default motion.

    The charges involve 22 counts of the respondent's failure to cooperate
    with the Grievance Committee in its investigations into complaints of
    professional misconduct.

    The charges, if established, would require the imposition of a
    disciplinary sanction against the respondent. Since the respondent has
    chosen not to appear or answer in these proceedings, the charges must
    be deemed established. The petitioner's motion to hold the respondent
    in default and impose discipline is, therefore, granted. Accordingly,
    the respondent is disbarred and his name is stricken from the roll of
    attorneys and counselors-at-law, effective immediately
     
  19. Mark Probert

    Mark Probert Guest

    Carole wrote:
    > "Mark Probert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    >
    >>Carole wrote:
    >>
    >>>"Mark Probert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >>>news:[email protected]
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>The movie did in fact state many times that Lorenzo's oil would never
    >>>>>undo brain damage already done.
    >>>>
    >>>>Johnny, that is a good point, and I am impressed. Those hawking
    >>>>chelation for treating Autism should bear that in mind.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Isn't chelation more to do with removing heavy metals from the brain,

    >
    > rather
    >
    >>>than brain damage?

    >>
    >>Proper chelation removes heavy metals from the body, not just the brain,
    >>no question. The claim is that Autism is a form of brain damage due to
    >>mercury poisoning. The problem arises when someone claims that it can
    >>reverse Autism, they are claiming that chelation can reverse brain
    >>damage. When chelation is used to remove high levels of lead, the lead
    >>is out, but the damage done remains. Therefore, as a treatment to cure
    >>or reverse autism it is not going to happen. No one can explain why it
    >>would reverse brain damage in one situation (Autism) and not the other
    >>(lead poisoning).
    >>
    >>
    >>>I've heard that chelation is a suppressed technology.

    >>
    >>Chelation is an accepted medical therapy to remove toxic levels of
    >>certain metals. I have no problem with that at all.

    >
    >
    > Are you sure?


    Absolutely. It is used to treat lead poisoning and hypercalcemia, just
    to name two conditions. And I am absolutely sure that if I had those
    problems, I would want to have chelation if it were the best treatment
    for me.

    >>However, claiming that it can reverse Autism, or coronary artery
    >>disease, when there is no showing of a real clinical improvement, is
    >>hogwash, and dangerous.

    >
    > Oh so its an accepted therapy, but its not very useful. I see.


    No, I did not say it is not very useful. I said it is useful in many
    circumstances, but not the ones that are being promoted by the rip-off
    artists.

    > Should I be surprised that you find some way to discount the usefulness of
    > an alternative therapy?


    Incorrect. It is a conventional therapy, and was developed by
    conventional medicine.

    >>Should I be surprise
    >>
    >>>that you are against it?

    >>
    >>You should be surprised if I was for its use as a treatment for Autism.

    >
    > Actually, I'd be surprised if I could ever believe anything you or Dave said
    > without checking it carefully.


    Did you check the URLs I posted so you can find your missing posts?
     
Loading...