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. 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.

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!

--
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