Re: Dictionary of Alternative Medicine
From: Darryl (umpolung_at_REMOVEhotmail.com)
Date: 10/24/04
- Next message: Rishi Giovanni Gatti: "Re: UV and Eyes"
- Previous message: Steve Harris sbharris_at_ROMAN9.netcom.com: "Re: This negative aricle about Antioxidants appeared in the Lancet"
- In reply to: GMCarter: "Re: Dictionary of Alternative Medicine"
- Next in thread: GMCarter: "Re: Dictionary of Alternative Medicine"
- Reply: GMCarter: "Re: Dictionary of Alternative Medicine"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:38:37 -0400
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 10:45:05 GMT, GMCarter <fiar@verizon.net> wrote:
>On 23 Oct 2004 22:39:05 GMT, markd@toad-net.com wrote:
>
>>
>>As in all matters of potential dangers to health, getting a 2nd opinion is
>>advised:
>>
>>http://www.quackwatch.org/index.html
>
>A completely discredited organization that is simply the flip side of
>the coin of the very WORST of the marketers who say all CAM is good.
How was quackwatch discredited? Last I read, they hadn't lost a legal
battle--contrary to unsubstantiated claims on the web.
- Next message: Rishi Giovanni Gatti: "Re: UV and Eyes"
- Previous message: Steve Harris sbharris_at_ROMAN9.netcom.com: "Re: This negative aricle about Antioxidants appeared in the Lancet"
- In reply to: GMCarter: "Re: Dictionary of Alternative Medicine"
- Next in thread: GMCarter: "Re: Dictionary of Alternative Medicine"
- Reply: GMCarter: "Re: Dictionary of Alternative Medicine"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]