View Single Post
  #7  
Old October 8th, 2012, 04:15 PM posted to alt.support.diet.low-carb
Dogman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 540
Default In pursuit of sweetness

On Mon, 8 Oct 2012 07:11:02 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Oct 7, 7:26*pm, Dogman wrote:
On Sun, 7 Oct 2012 15:55:03 -0700 (PDT), "

wrote:

[...]

To ignore articles and information that I provide here, backed by
recognized authorities in the field, not to mention sound science,
solely because I hold contrarian views on other topics?


You mean like the scientific tour de force you just posted
about a gluten free diet causing diabetes remission?


Gluten-free was only part of it, if you'd taken the time to read the
entire study.


One should not have to read an entire study to learn


That *exactly* what a person needs to do, first, if he or she wants to
see if the study conforms to the scientific method, and wants to
actually LEARN something besides the typical boilerplate.

Of course, this leaves you out, because you're too lazy to do your own
due diligence, and prefer to rely on PR releases and propaganda.

You probably only read the Forewards of books, too. Idiot!

They were trying to prove that a gluten-free diet wasn't
harmful to a NON-Celiac.

Sheesh.

That kind of article?


It wasn't an article. It was a study.


To this day, you don't seem to know the difference.


I don't know the difference?


No, you do NOT.

See here is another fine example of your total inability
to comprehend "the scientific method". Here is the
link you posted, which you found via Dr. WheatBelly's
website, which seems to form the sole center of your
attention.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22729336

That is NOT a study. It's a case report on ONE PATIENT.


Yes, that is a study!

They were STUDYING the effects of a gluten-free diet on a NON-Celiac
with Type 1 diabetes! And they STUDIED him for many months, carefully
controlled his diet, measured his blood glucose, performed other
tests, reported the results, etc. They PROVED that even for a
NON-Celiac it was possible to safely go gluten-free, etc.

All of which you would have known had you actually read the STUDY.

What a maroon.

That's because there's no there there.

And yes, I think it's valid for people to know what else
you consider sound science, so they can figure you
out for the ignoramus that you are.


I'm not the one who relies on summaries, doesn't know what antibodies
are, thinks children as young as 12 years old should be given
Gardasil, thinks AZT is harmless, thinks everyone should avoid salt,
believes in Al Gore's version of "global warming," and thinks everyone
should just wait around for a "study" before doing anything.

You're not only an ignoramus, you're freakin' dangerous!


The above list of lies comes to you from the guy that is
an AIDS denialist and tells people HIV is harmless.


Those aren't lies, and anyone can see for themselves by checking the
archives.

That AIDS is really caused by diet and lack of sleep.


Now you're lying again. It's become a habit for you now, hasn't it?

AIDS *can* be caused by diet (i.e., chronic malnutrition), as it does
in Africa, when it accompanies poor hygiene, a lack of clean drinking
water, parasitical infestation, etc. It's called "wasting" or "slim"
disease, and is indistinguishable from "AIDS."

A lack of sleep, when accompanied by chronic recreational drug abuse,
chronic heavy drinking, routinely inhaling poppers, taking antibiotics
prophylactically (almost round the clock, for months at a time),
having multiple STDs, having hundreds of male-to male sexual
encounters a month, and essentially "burning the candle at both ends",
over time, will eventually DESTROY YOUR IMMUNE SYTEM (i.e., AIDS).

And when your immune system is gone, it's gone. And so are you.

Don't believe me? Update your insurance policy and give it a try.

It's the ultimate n=1 experiment.

Everyone can
figure out who the one giving out dangerous advice here
really is.


I sure hope so.

--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman