What is Quackery?



In article <[email protected]>,
"Jez" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:eek:[email protected]...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > "Rich Shewmaker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > >
> > > > "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > Water fluoridation has been proved to cause more
> > > > > > > caries than it prevents.
> > > > > > > Go read up on Basel..Switzerland.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Provide the URL for your assertion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Am I part of your research team ?
> > > > > Google is available to all..........
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Use of the term "has been proved" puts the obligation on YOU to
> provide
> > > the
> > > > source of that proffered proof. Anything you state as a fact without
> > > citing
> > > > your source, we may reasonably presume to have been made up on the
> spot.
> > > >
> > > > As for Basel, Switzerland, the cheerleader article echoed all over the
> > > > anti-fluoridation web world is about politics, not science, and proves
> > > > nothing about the risk/benefit profile of fluoridation of public water
> > > > supplies.
> > >
> > > The onus is on those who would force un-proven medication upon us
> > > to prove it's safety....They have not.
> >
> > Saying that they have not proven its safety doesn't make it so (no
> > matter how much you appear to think otherwise), particularly since you
> > haven't been able to produce even one scientific study supporting your
> > contention that it's unsafe and or ineffective.
>
> As I said before, do your own research.

Still dodging the question, I see. Well, I'm not surprised.


> So you'd allow un-proven drugs to be used eh?
> Ah..just like Ritalin for kiddies eh......

Ritalin is one of the most studied drugs there is. Try doing a Medline
search on it sometime. There are thousands of scientific articles on it.


> Probably belived Saddam had WMD's too eh.....

Actually, I was highly skeptical of the claims that he did, but you seem
gullible enough to have believed.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Jez" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:eek:[email protected]...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > "Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:eek:[email protected]...
> > > > In article <[email protected]>,
> > > > "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "Marko Proberto" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > >
> > > > > > > Water fluoridation has been proved to cause more
> > > > > > > caries than it prevents.
> > > > > > > Go read up on Basel..Switzerland.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Provide the URL for your assertion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Am I part of your research team ?
> > > > > Google is available to all..........
> > > >
> > > > It is not up to Mark (or me, for that matter) to do YOUR work and
> prove
> > > > YOUR assertion for you. He who asserts must prove. So prove your
> > > > assertion that water fluoridation causes more caries than it prevents.
> > >
> > > No, it is up to those who wish to
> > > force mass-medication upon us to prove that it works.
> > > They haven't.
> >
> > Really? There's lots of evidence in the published scientific literature
> > that it does work. Could you kindly show me the evidence demonstrating
> > that it doesn't work, describe the specific flaws in the evidence
> > supporting its use, and put together a coherent argument showing that
> > your evidence trumps the existing evidence supporting fluoridation?
>
> Why bother?

Because you made an assertion and if you don't even try to back it up
you lose what little credibility you had to begin with?

Of course, I suppose a little thing like your credibility means nothing
to you, based on your behavior here.


> Assholes who want forced medication aren't worth a ****....

Tsk, tsk. I love it when you resort to ad hominems. It means you can't
deal with me on a rational basis and therefore resort to insults.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"
 
>"Jez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:eek:[email protected]...

> In article <[email protected]>,
>> > "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > "Rich Shewmaker" <[email protected]> wrote in message

>news:[email protected]...
>> > > >
>> > > > "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> > > > news:[email protected]...

>Water fluoridation has been proved to cause more
>> > > > > > > caries than it prevents.
>> > > > > > > Go read up on Basel..Switzerland.
>> > > > > >

>Provide the URL for your assertion.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > Am I part of your research team ?
>> > > > > Google is available to all..........

>Use of the term "has been proved" puts the obligation on YOU to
>> provide
>> > > the
>> > > > source of that proffered proof. Anything you state as a fact without
>> > > citing
>> > > > your source, we may reasonably presume to have been
made up on the
>> spot.

>As for Basel, Switzerland, the cheerleader article echoed all over
>the
>> > > > anti-fluoridation web world is about politics, not science, and
>proves
>> > > > nothing about the risk/benefit profile of fluoridation of public
>water
>> > > > supplies.

>The onus is on those who would force un-proven medication upon us
>> > > to prove it's safety....They have not.
>> >
>> > Saying that they have not proven its safety doesn't make it so (no
>> > matter how much you appear to think otherwise), particularly since you
haven't been able to produce even one scientific study supporting your
>> > contention that it's unsafe and or ineffective.

> As I said before, do your own research.
>>
>> So you'd allow un-proven drugs to be used eh?
> Ah..just like Ritalin for kiddies eh......
>
UUH HUUMMM.

We can now give them Nicotine, rather than Ritalin. Ain't that sweet??

http://tinyurl.com/uxwu

SFN: Nicotine as Good as Ritalin on Core Measure of Attention
Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
By Roberta Friedman, PhD

NEW ORLEANS, LA -- November 13, 2003 -- Nicotine serves as well as the commonly
prescribed drug methylphenidate (Ritalin) on measures of motor inhibition taken
in teens with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

Investigators of a small study presented here November 8th at the Society for
Neuroscience 33rd Annual Meeting, used the finding to suggest that smoking in
people with ADHD is an attempt at self-medication.

Alexandra Potter, PhD, postdoctoral fellow, Clinical Neuroscience Research
Unit, University of Vermont, Burlington, United States, noted that kids with
ADHD take up smoking and become hooked at twice the rate of other adolescents.
"If these findings are substantiated," Dr. Potter said, "these cognitive
improvements may explain the high rates of smoking initiation and maintenance
in ADHD."

Dr. Potter and colleagues carried out a double-blinded study of 8 teens ages 13
to 17 years, split equally as to gender. All had ADHD according to criteria
from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition.

Nicotine was delivered by a skin patch. Comparison was to oral Ritalin and a
placebo for both medications. The teens served as their own controls.

Reaction times significantly improved on 2 standard laboratory tasks that
measure inhibition of responding no matter which drug was used. Tests included
the Stroop Task, with nicotine significantly decreasing the so-called Stroop
effect (P < .05). Nicotine worked better on this task than did Ritalin.

Another test that highlights the inability of kids with ADHD to inhibit
behavior is the Stop Signal Task, with both drugs showing significant
improvement compared to placebo (P < .01). Accuracy on this test did not change
due to the drugs, nor did the reaction time, indicating the drugs worked by
specifically changing inhibition and not motor performance per se.

Inability of children to inhibit behavior "is recognized as the core cognitive
defect in ADHD," Dr. Potter said. In fact, the Stop Signal Task proves so
difficult that many with ADHD never are able to reach the 50% inhibition
criteria that need to be defined by the computer generating the signals. In
essence, they fail the test.

The Stop Signal Task involves hitting a button when an X rather than an O is
presented. Then a sound is presented after the letter, a quarter of the time,
which is a signal not to press. Kids with ADHD have enormous trouble stopping
themselves from hitting the button anyway. Nicotine reduced the stop signal
deficit "almost to published norms" for the test, Dr. Potter said.

Co-investigator Paul Newhouse MD, department of psychiatry, University of
Vermont, said, "It was a pretty surprising result that we got such a strong
signal in such a small group [to show the nicotine effect in ADHD]."

Dr. Newhouse added that at least 3 pharmaceutical companies are working on
novel nicotinic agents, and are "thinking of targeting ADHD" with these
investigational drugs.

"We have a saying in the lab about nicotine [as a component of cigarettes],"
Dr. Newhouse added. "'Good drug; bad delivery system.'"

Dr. Newhouse noted that long-term use of nicotine in a patch, by teens, has not
been studied adequately to determine safety.


[Study Title: Acute nicotine administration improves behavioral inhibition in
adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Abstract
18.9]

Lord have mercy.

Jan
 
"Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:eek:[email protected]...
>
> Ritalin is one of the most studied drugs there is. Try doing a Medline
> search on it sometime. There are thousands of scientific articles on it.
>
>

Drugging millions of children with a stimulant, which for reasons unknown
has the opposite effect on the young, is one more example of the war against
boys.
 
Once upon a time, our fellow George Conklin
rambled on about "Re: What is Quackery?."
Our champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

> Drugging millions of children with a stimulant, which for reasons unknown

The reason is quite well known.

Conventional medicine has historically had a marked preference for
heroic medicine. Heroic medicine is any medicine or method of
treatment that makes people suffer, get sick, get weak and run down,
and die.

Just thought that you might want to know. :)
 
"John 'the Man'" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Once upon a time, our fellow George Conklin
> rambled on about "Re: What is Quackery?."
> Our champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...
>
> > Drugging millions of children with a stimulant, which for reasons
unknown
>
> The reason is quite well known.
>
> Conventional medicine has historically had a marked preference for
> heroic medicine. Heroic medicine is any medicine or method of
> treatment that makes people suffer, get sick, get weak and run down,
> and die.
>
> Just thought that you might want to know. :)

The medicalization of society, where active boys become a medical
diagnosis, is a relatively new thing. It is a very difficult issue because
it does suggest that even ordinary behaviors need to be handled as a medical
'problem,' and that we are putting millions of people on drugs to alter
behavior. When we do that ourselves, as in Rush taking drugs, we call that
criminal. But when a MD does that, we call that what? I wonder: heroic?
 
In article <[email protected]>,
John 'the Man' <[email protected]> wrote:

> Oliver Wendel Homes (1809-1894), graduate of Harvard Medical School,
> described Homeopathy as a “mingled mass of perverse ingenuity, of
> tinsel erudition, of imbecile credulity, and of artful
> misrepresentation.”
>
> Obviously that was a mis-characterization of what Homes had intended
> to say. :(

Sounds like a near-perfect characterization of homeopathy to me, except
that I don't see any ingenuity there.


> Homes was obviously before his time when he talked about the dated
> Science Geek hasbins the world has left behind on these ngs, like
> Orac.

Ah, yes. Asking for solid evidence that these "alternative therapies"
actually do what their proponents (such as you) claim that they do and
then taking these proponents to task when they dodge the question and
fail to come up with the data makes me a "has been." I would take you
more seriously if you spent less time with the cutesy posts and ad
hominem attacks and more time actually making your argument with actual
scientific evidence.


> While the majority of contemporary physicians are cognizant of the
> fact that the world has changed, that alternative therapies are now
> accepted as mainstream treatment modalities, these Geeks are truly a
> “mingled mass of perverse ingenuity, of tinsel erudition, of imbecile
> credulity, and of artful misrepresentation.”

Of course, you can't provide a single example of such a
"misrepresentation."


> Just my opinion. But, I am *right* as usual!

Only if you define "usual" as around 1% of the time! (And I'm being
generous here.)
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"George Conklin" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:eek:[email protected]...
> >
> > Ritalin is one of the most studied drugs there is. Try doing a Medline
> > search on it sometime. There are thousands of scientific articles on it.
> >
> >
>
> Drugging millions of children with a stimulant, which for reasons unknown
> has the opposite effect on the young, is one more example of the war against
> boys.

George, I'm not a big fan of Ritalin. However, it clearly does some good
in select cases. The problem is not the drug per se, but the tendency to
overuse it because it's easier than behavioral modification, not that it
doesn't work. My wife, a school psychologist, sees this problem, where
teachers, rather than working with kids with mild ADD, immediately start
agitating to have them put on Ritalin.

What I was pointing out was that, contrary to the assertions otherwise,
Ritalin is a very well-studied drug.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"
 
Once upon a time, our fellow Orac
rambled on about "Re: What is Quackery?."
Our champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

>Ah, yes. Asking for solid evidence that these "alternative therapies"
>actually do what their proponents (such as you) claim that they do

I gave solid evidence twice for the effectiveness of the 'water cure'
in treating heart disease. This evidence was met with silence. Once,
the Geek actually got mad and said what does this have to do with
anything.

The problem is that you Geeks are behind the times. Time to catch up
with your colleagues.

Just thought that you might want to know. :)
 
Once upon a time, our fellow Orac
rambled on about "Re: What is Quackery?."
Our champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

>> “mingled mass of perverse ingenuity, of tinsel erudition, of imbecile
>> credulity, and of artful misrepresentation.”

>Of course, you can't provide a single example of such a
>"misrepresentation."

Your posts have the net effect of misrepresenting (ie, ignoring) the
effectiveness of alternative medicine and therapies.

Just my opinion. But, I am *right* as usual!
 
"John 'the Man'" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Oliver Wendel Homes (1809-1894), graduate of Harvard Medical School,

It is Oliver Wendel*l* Ho*l*mes. When you were told to get the 'l outa here,
it was not the two 'l's of his name.

> described Homeopathy as a "mingled mass of perverse ingenuity, of
> tinsel erudition, of imbecile credulity, and of artful
> misrepresentation."

Seems about right. When he spoke, they did not have the concept of RICO.

> Obviously that was a mis-characterization of what Homes had intended
> to say. :(

Yes, he probably meant to say trhat they were a bunch of charlatans, crooks,
and snake oil salescreeps, who, one day, would pollute the internet. He was
*very* smart.

> Homes was obviously before his time when he talked about the dated
> Science Geek hasbins the world has left behind on these ngs, like
> Orac.
>
> While the majority of contemporary physicians are cognizant of the
> fact that the world has changed, that alternative therapies are now
> accepted as mainstream treatment modalities,

After rigorous testing which has shown them to be safe and effective, unlike
homeopathy.

these Geeks are truly a
> "mingled mass of perverse ingenuity, of tinsel erudition, of imbecile
> credulity, and of artful misrepresentation."
>
> Just my opinion. But, I am *right* as usual!

So said Rush "Give me a line" Limboob.
 
Jan, you are cheating! You responded to a post of mine, but cut out my ID
information.

Check the attributions and threading on Google.

She said she is killfiling me. Now she has been outed.

"Jan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >"Jez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >> "Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:eek:[email protected]...
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> >> > "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > "Rich Shewmaker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> > > >
> >> > > > "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> > > > news:[email protected]...
>
> >Water fluoridation has been proved to cause more
> >> > > > > > > caries than it prevents.
> >> > > > > > > Go read up on Basel..Switzerland.
> >> > > > > >
>
> >Provide the URL for your assertion.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > Am I part of your research team ?
> >> > > > > Google is available to all..........
>
> >Use of the term "has been proved" puts the obligation on YOU to
> >> provide
> >> > > the
> >> > > > source of that proffered proof. Anything you state as a fact
without
> >> > > citing
> >> > > > your source, we may reasonably presume to have been
> made up on the
> >> spot.
>
> >As for Basel, Switzerland, the cheerleader article echoed all over
> >the
> >> > > > anti-fluoridation web world is about politics, not science, and
> >proves
> >> > > > nothing about the risk/benefit profile of fluoridation of public
> >water
> >> > > > supplies.
>
> >The onus is on those who would force un-proven medication upon us
> >> > > to prove it's safety....They have not.
> >> >
> >> > Saying that they have not proven its safety doesn't make it so (no
> >> > matter how much you appear to think otherwise), particularly since
you
> haven't been able to produce even one scientific study supporting your
> >> > contention that it's unsafe and or ineffective.
>
> > As I said before, do your own research.
> >>
> >> So you'd allow un-proven drugs to be used eh?
> > Ah..just like Ritalin for kiddies eh......
> >
> UUH HUUMMM.
>
> We can now give them Nicotine, rather than Ritalin. Ain't that sweet??
>
> http://tinyurl.com/uxwu
>
> SFN: Nicotine as Good as Ritalin on Core Measure of Attention
> Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
> By Roberta Friedman, PhD
>
> NEW ORLEANS, LA -- November 13, 2003 -- Nicotine serves as well as the
commonly
> prescribed drug methylphenidate (Ritalin) on measures of motor inhibition
taken
> in teens with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
>
> Investigators of a small study presented here November 8th at the Society
for
> Neuroscience 33rd Annual Meeting, used the finding to suggest that smoking
in
> people with ADHD is an attempt at self-medication.
>
> Alexandra Potter, PhD, postdoctoral fellow, Clinical Neuroscience Research
> Unit, University of Vermont, Burlington, United States, noted that kids
with
> ADHD take up smoking and become hooked at twice the rate of other
adolescents.
> "If these findings are substantiated," Dr. Potter said, "these cognitive
> improvements may explain the high rates of smoking initiation and
maintenance
> in ADHD."
>
> Dr. Potter and colleagues carried out a double-blinded study of 8 teens
ages 13
> to 17 years, split equally as to gender. All had ADHD according to
criteria
> from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th
edition.
>
> Nicotine was delivered by a skin patch. Comparison was to oral Ritalin and
a
> placebo for both medications. The teens served as their own controls.
>
> Reaction times significantly improved on 2 standard laboratory tasks that
> measure inhibition of responding no matter which drug was used. Tests
included
> the Stroop Task, with nicotine significantly decreasing the so-called
Stroop
> effect (P < .05). Nicotine worked better on this task than did Ritalin.
>
> Another test that highlights the inability of kids with ADHD to inhibit
> behavior is the Stop Signal Task, with both drugs showing significant
> improvement compared to placebo (P < .01). Accuracy on this test did not
change
> due to the drugs, nor did the reaction time, indicating the drugs worked
by
> specifically changing inhibition and not motor performance per se.
>
> Inability of children to inhibit behavior "is recognized as the core
cognitive
> defect in ADHD," Dr. Potter said. In fact, the Stop Signal Task proves so
> difficult that many with ADHD never are able to reach the 50% inhibition
> criteria that need to be defined by the computer generating the signals.
In
> essence, they fail the test.
>
> The Stop Signal Task involves hitting a button when an X rather than an O
is
> presented. Then a sound is presented after the letter, a quarter of the
time,
> which is a signal not to press. Kids with ADHD have enormous trouble
stopping
> themselves from hitting the button anyway. Nicotine reduced the stop
signal
> deficit "almost to published norms" for the test, Dr. Potter said.
>
> Co-investigator Paul Newhouse MD, department of psychiatry, University of
> Vermont, said, "It was a pretty surprising result that we got such a
strong
> signal in such a small group [to show the nicotine effect in ADHD]."
>
> Dr. Newhouse added that at least 3 pharmaceutical companies are working on
> novel nicotinic agents, and are "thinking of targeting ADHD" with these
> investigational drugs.
>
> "We have a saying in the lab about nicotine [as a component of
cigarettes],"
> Dr. Newhouse added. "'Good drug; bad delivery system.'"
>
> Dr. Newhouse noted that long-term use of nicotine in a patch, by teens,
has not
> been studied adequately to determine safety.
>
>
> [Study Title: Acute nicotine administration improves behavioral inhibition
in
> adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Abstract
> 18.9]
>
> Lord have mercy.
>
> Jan
>
>
 
"George Conklin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:eek:[email protected]...
> >
> > Ritalin is one of the most studied drugs there is. Try doing a Medline
> > search on it sometime. There are thousands of scientific articles on it.
> >
> >
>
> Drugging millions of children with a stimulant, which for reasons
unknown
> has the opposite effect on the young, is one more example of the war
against
> boys.

Actually, George, the effect is the same reagrdless of age, and the
mechanism of action is on the dopamine uptake system. Time to get updated.
 
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 15:54:39 GMT, "Marko Proberto"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Jan, you are cheating! You responded to a post of mine, but cut out my ID
>information.
>
>Check the attributions and threading on Google.
>
>She said she is killfiling me. Now she has been outed.

Jan's claim of killfiling people has been debunked many times over the
months. She claims that she has me killfiled and yet after I began
posting after a one month hiatus, Jan responded to my post by talking
about how she thought I just returned from nude hiking. It was obvious
that she noticed (since she does NOT have me killfiled) that I had not
posted for a while. She also occasionally slips up and responds
directly to my posts. And her repeatedly mentioning that I will bring
her up in my posts suggests that she is reading my posts.

Jan is a liar, and a pretty bad one at that.

But the lie of Jan's that is of most concern is her lie about her
bogus mercury poisoning. Jan cannot get away from her claim that the
way she knows it was the metal in her mouth is because she did not
begin to regain her health until after her mercury level dropped. Not
only is this not true but the opposite is true. Her dramatic
improvement following removal of amalgams occurred when her mercury
level was unchanged or even higher.

Jan Drew is a shill for alternative dentists. This is why she lies
about having mercury poisoning from amalgams. I exposed her lie and
all she could do is continue her lies by trying to discredit me.

The main strategy that Jan Drew uses in discussing topics with her
critics is to lie and bear false witness against them in order to
discredit them. Jan is a despicable human being who repeatedly lies
and bears false witness and then when she is exposed she lies and
bears false witness some more. Does this sound like someone who
respect the Ten Commandments. Lord have mercy. Jan should hope he
does.

Aloha,

Rich
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------

The best defense to logic is ignorance.
 
"Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:eek:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote:

> > > Really? There's lots of evidence in the published scientific
literature
> > > that it does work. Could you kindly show me the evidence demonstrating
> > > that it doesn't work, describe the specific flaws in the evidence
> > > supporting its use, and put together a coherent argument showing that
> > > your evidence trumps the existing evidence supporting fluoridation?
> >
> > Why bother?
>
> Because you made an assertion and if you don't even try to back it up
> you lose what little credibility you had to begin with?
>
> Of course, I suppose a little thing like your credibility means nothing
> to you, based on your behavior here.
>
>
> > Assholes who want forced medication aren't worth a ****....
>
> Tsk, tsk. I love it when you resort to ad hominems. It means you can't
> deal with me on a rational basis and therefore resort to insults.
>
Nah, just boredom.


--
Ho hum
Jez
"Few of us can easily surrender our belief that
society must somehow make sense. The thought
that the State has lost its mind and is punishing so
many innocent people is intolerable. And so the
evidence has to be internally denied."
- Arthur Miller
 
"Marko Proberto" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%HUsb.15059$p%[email protected]...
>
> "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:eek:[email protected]...
> > > In article <[email protected]>,
> > > "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Rich Shewmaker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > >
> > > > > "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > Water fluoridation has been proved to cause more
> > > > > > > > caries than it prevents.
> > > > > > > > Go read up on Basel..Switzerland.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Provide the URL for your assertion.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > Am I part of your research team ?
> > > > > > Google is available to all..........
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Use of the term "has been proved" puts the obligation on YOU to
> > provide
> > > > the
> > > > > source of that proffered proof. Anything you state as a fact
without
> > > > citing
> > > > > your source, we may reasonably presume to have been made up on the
> > spot.
> > > > >
> > > > > As for Basel, Switzerland, the cheerleader article echoed all over
> the
> > > > > anti-fluoridation web world is about politics, not science, and
> proves
> > > > > nothing about the risk/benefit profile of fluoridation of public
> water
> > > > > supplies.
> > > >
> > > > The onus is on those who would force un-proven medication upon us
> > > > to prove it's safety....They have not.
> > >
> > > Saying that they have not proven its safety doesn't make it so (no
> > > matter how much you appear to think otherwise), particularly since you
> > > haven't been able to produce even one scientific study supporting your
> > > contention that it's unsafe and or ineffective.
> >
> > As I said before, do your own research.
> >
> > So you'd allow un-proven drugs to be used eh?
> > Ah..just like Ritalin for kiddies eh......
>
> It is probably one of the top five most studied medications. Get a clue.

It has never been approved for use on children.
Get a clue.


--
Ho hum
Jez
"Few of us can easily surrender our belief that
society must somehow make sense. The thought
that the State has lost its mind and is punishing so
many innocent people is intolerable. And so the
evidence has to be internally denied."
- Arthur Miller
 
"Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:eek:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:eek:[email protected]...
> > > In article <[email protected]>,
> > > "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Rich Shewmaker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > >
> > > > > "Jez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > Water fluoridation has been proved to cause more
> > > > > > > > caries than it prevents.
> > > > > > > > Go read up on Basel..Switzerland.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Provide the URL for your assertion.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > Am I part of your research team ?
> > > > > > Google is available to all..........
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Use of the term "has been proved" puts the obligation on YOU to
> > provide
> > > > the
> > > > > source of that proffered proof. Anything you state as a fact
without
> > > > citing
> > > > > your source, we may reasonably presume to have been made up on the
> > spot.
> > > > >
> > > > > As for Basel, Switzerland, the cheerleader article echoed all over
the
> > > > > anti-fluoridation web world is about politics, not science, and
proves
> > > > > nothing about the risk/benefit profile of fluoridation of public
water
> > > > > supplies.
> > > >
> > > > The onus is on those who would force un-proven medication upon us
> > > > to prove it's safety....They have not.
> > >
> > > Saying that they have not proven its safety doesn't make it so (no
> > > matter how much you appear to think otherwise), particularly since you
> > > haven't been able to produce even one scientific study supporting your
> > > contention that it's unsafe and or ineffective.
> >
> > As I said before, do your own research.
>
> Still dodging the question, I see. Well, I'm not surprised.
>
>
> > So you'd allow un-proven drugs to be used eh?
> > Ah..just like Ritalin for kiddies eh......
>
> Ritalin is one of the most studied drugs there is. Try doing a Medline
> search on it sometime. There are thousands of scientific articles on it.

It has never been tested or approved for use on Children.
Yet is handed out like candy these days to the under 18's...........

(And someones making a HUGE profit...Quackery or what !!!)

> > Probably belived Saddam had WMD's too eh.....
>
> Actually, I was highly skeptical of the claims that he did, but you seem
> gullible enough to have believed.

Well, actually I was one of those who bothered to protest.
As it was plainly obvious that asshole Blair was lying thru his
teeth......... again...........


--
Ho hum
Jez
"Few of us can easily surrender our belief that
society must somehow make sense. The thought
that the State has lost its mind and is punishing so
many innocent people is intolerable. And so the
evidence has to be internally denied."
- Arthur Miller
 
"George Conklin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:eek:[email protected]...
> >
> > Ritalin is one of the most studied drugs there is. Try doing a Medline
> > search on it sometime. There are thousands of scientific articles on it.
> >
> >
>
> Drugging millions of children with a stimulant, which for reasons
unknown
> has the opposite effect on the young, is one more example of the war
against
> boys.

Ahh but as long as the studies are done on adults.....
it PROVES it's safe for kids to use.........
Great Science eh !!

--
Ho hum
Jez
"Few of us can easily surrender our belief that
society must somehow make sense. The thought
that the State has lost its mind and is punishing so
many innocent people is intolerable. And so the
evidence has to be internally denied."
- Arthur Miller
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back