Natropathetic



M

markd

Guest
We had this discussion in the ng of the below recently. Just one of the
boys in the choir, "I'm ok you are ok and all of us in the choir telling
each other we are ok is; well er ah OK". This from another ng:

"The benefits, or otherwise, of using Naturopaths was discussed recently here.

Just one recent local example:

Naturopath gets five years for baby's deadly treatment
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/02/13/1076548205730.html

Of course, he can't serve the sentence because he has cancer. "Physician", heal thyself?"
 
J

John 'The Man

Guest
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Once upon a time, our fellow [email protected]
net.com rambled on about "Natropathetic." Our champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts,
thusly ...

>Naturopath gets five years for baby's deadly treatment
>http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/02/13/1076548205730.html
>
>Of course, he can't serve the sentence because he has cancer. "Physician", heal thyself?"

As if a physician has never been busted and sued for killing their patients?

Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

"... you have my sympathies" Science Officer Ash to Ripley, in the movie ALIEN.
 
M

markd

Guest
The distinction you make is important, the quack was not a physician, just a quack who killed a
child and couldn't prevent cancer in himself; both testimonies to the effectivness of his "miricle
pills" and anti scientific based medicine.

>>Naturopath gets five years for baby's deadly treatment
>>http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/02/13/1076548205730.html
>>
>>Of course, he can't serve the sentence because he has cancer. "Physician", heal thyself?"
>
>As if a physician has never been busted and sued for killing their patients?
>
>Ha, ... Hah, Ha!
>
>"... you have my sympathies" Science Officer Ash to Ripley, in the movie ALIEN.
 
J

John 'The Man

Guest
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Once upon a time, our fellow [email protected]
net.com rambled on about "Re: Natropathetic." Our champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition
retorts, thusly ...

>a quack who killed a child and couldn't prevent cancer in himself

Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

So, says you ... years after the fact.

What is the matter? Don't you read about current events? When they happen?

Ha, ... Hah, Ha!
 
J

John 'The Man

Guest
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Once upon a time, our fellow [email protected]
net.com rambled on about "Re: Natropathetic." Our champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition
retorts, thusly ...

>a quack who killed a child and couldn't prevent cancer in himself

Speaking of Quacks ....

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=97&ncid=97&e=16&u=/hsn/20040211/hl_hsn/defendersatt-
ackreportonatkinsdeath "The report showed that Dr. Robert Atkins had a history of heart attack,
congestive heart failure and hypertension, and that he was obese when he died, according to details
published Tuesday by the Wall Street Journal. The newspaper received a copy of the medical
examiner's report from a physicians group that promotes a vegetarian diet. ... The Journal reported
that Atkins, who stood 6 feet tall, weighed 258 pounds at the time of his death."

Dr. Robert Atkins was an MD, was he not?
 
M

markd

Guest
So are you saying the natropathetic quack is excused for the death of a child and failure to prevent
cancer in himself because...?