Re: Side effects: drugs called statins

From: Happy Dog (happydog_at_sympatico.ca)
Date: 12/08/04 

Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 02:29:21 -0500

<awthrawthr@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> You're right, I won't post what you THINK is 'real' evidence. I'm
> not limited by your narrow window of acceptance. There is more in this
>>> world than all your philosophies including your blind faith in the
>>> lyin-tific method,
>
>>Soooooo, I should accept your adorable anecdotes as evidence. As for
>>"faith", I have little. And, on that, anyone making this claim is an
>>expert. So, again, you don't know ***.
>
> Who cares what you do? I don't.

Then why respond? You enjoy the abuse? When asked for some real evidence
you asked "how much bandwidth do you have?" Now you suddenly don't care?

>>> I have cure myself many times of many different conditions. I have
>>> helped others do the same.
>
>>Liar, idoit. Pick one or both.
>
> Yeah, like you know me. You know my medical history. You know what I've
> done for other people who were sick.

I *know* that your claims are so improbable that real evidence is required
before any reasonable person believes that you can cure Stage IV cancer and
impotence.
>
>>> So I laugh when I see people like yourself who are still stuck in
> their belief systems.
>
>>The alternative is to believe your word. On Usenet. Right?
>
> You can depend on FDA-approved drugs all you want.

Sounds like Pascal's Wager. Here's the problem:

You can't establish that your methods are any safer than FDA approved ones
because you haven't demonstrated that they work. So your challenge is
bull***. You're as boring as the religious nutcases who fail at grade
school level logic.

>>> It is the hallmark of the mediocre scientist to ignore a good
> anecdote.
>
>>Gee, can I quote you?
>
> If you're going to quote me, be sure to include what I said. I told you
> that lesions disappearing is not an anecdote, bones growing back isn't
> an anecdote.

You're an imbecile who can't even follow his own reasoning. First, you
claim that good scientists don't ignore good anecdotes. OK. But then you
claim that your bull*** story isn't an anecdote. Your crap isn't even
interesting. Put up some real evidence or STFU.

>>The history of science is littered with
>>the memories of those who couldn't get over the fact that their
> beliefs were
>>contradicted by observation.
>
> The cemetaries are littered with millions of dead patients who were
> killed by your so-called science. They were killed by FDA-approved
> drugs. Not by their disease -- by their pills.
>
> In fact, I am arguing that it is you who is ignoring proper
> observation.

Nobody claims that modern medicine isn't replete with flaws. But how many
of those deaths would not have occurred if there was no medical
intervention?
>
> Try this. Have a bottle of elderberry capsules handy. The next time you
> start coming down with the flu, immediately take two capsules and
> observe what happens. The elderberry won't hurt you, so there is little
> risk in this exercise.

The risk is wasting time. Flu doesn't resolve in twenty minutes. Pigs
can't fly.

>>Rabies too, no doubt. But rabies is just another form of flu, no?
>
> I've never treated rabies with elderberry, so I can't tell you what
> would happen. But rabies is a combinaton of infection and trauma, so it
> would probably take more to handle it.. The wound would need to be
> cleaned thoroughly. The person would probably need to rest.

Rabies is almost 100% fatal. Your recommendations would result in someone
dying.

> I have an update. Yesterday, my boss woke up with a sore throat and
> swollen glands in her neck. She took one or two elderberry capsules,
> and within two hours she felt fine and her throat was no longer
> swollen.

Swollen throats can be caused by a wide variety of things and often resolve
on their own.

>>Spamming idiot. Tell me, does the virus clear from the body in that
> time?
>
> Who cares where the virus goes in the first 20 minutes as along as it
> is dead?

a( You don't know it was flu.

b) You have no evidence that the virus is dead. (Dead? Lordy.)
>
>>Can you do this with AIDS too?
>
> AIDS is a disease with four components. The first component is the
> viral stage.

Wrong.

> The second is bacterial infection. The third is systemic
> metabolic disorder with secondary bacterial infection. The fourth might
> best be described as system shut down.

Idiot. Rest of incoherrent AIDS nonsense snipped.

Spamming scumbag.

Le Moo