WARNING: Industry Seeks to Impact the Public Discourse on Matters of Public Health On Usenet (updates to item #3 and other text)

In misc.health.alternative PeterB wrote:

As I pointed out in my previous post, PeterB spent 927 lines reposting
an earlier post of his without adding any new material or responding to
any of my comments. By his arguments, that must mean that he cannot
respond to them. Since 927 lines of even moderately interesting text
would try the patience of most people, I am not going to repost all of
my responses, which can already be read in the response that I posted
yesterday. But I do want to thank PeterB for giving me the opportunity
to highlight two of his comments that may have been buried too deeply for
most readers to have found.

: Internal bleeding is a disease response unless a person is undergoing
: surgery. If I'm wrong, name a bleeding disorder that is not
: classified as a disease.

I have already pointed out that nosebleeds are not normally classified as
a disease (although they can be a symptom of one). While it's not a
"disorder," menstruation is another obvious example of bleeding that is
not in any sense a disease response.

: Schutlzie, it may bother you that people die when mixing alcohol with
: Kava, but that does mean Kava was the cause of death.

I wonder how PeterB's sponsors will react when they find out that he has
come right out and said that if someone dies from taking kava mixed with
alcohol, it is the kava that is responsible.

-----
Richard Schultz
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"Gentlemen, Ciccolini here may look like an idiot, and talk like an idiot,
but don't let that fool you -- he really is an idiot."

On Apr 11, 2:05 am, (Richard Schultz) wrote:
In misc.health.alternative PeterB wrote:

As I pointed out in my previous post, PeterB spent 927 lines reposting
an earlier post of his without adding any new material or responding to
any of my comments.

Schultzie is telling us he has the right to eliminate material he
prefer readers not see, since his argument (whatever it is) can't
stand on its own. I agree with Schultzie that his argument doesn't
stand on its own, however it is up to readers, not posters, to decide
what constitutes an effective response. If anyone disagrees with this
other than Schultzie, please post your reasons why you think so. I
would love to hear the rationale behind the deletion of a person's
response to the same question earlier.

By his arguments, that must mean that he cannot
respond to them.

By my argument, a rebuttal is a response, and I have consistently
rebutted your unsupported opinions. Intellectual honesty requires
that you encourage readers to make up their own mind about both the
content of your posts and the positions of others, however stated.
Deleting large portions of my posts as you have done on many occasions
only reinforces my assertion that you are here on behalf of industry
for the purpose of protecting their interests.

Since 927 lines of even moderately interesting text
would try the patience of most people, I am not going to repost all of
my responses, which can already be read in the response that I posted
yesterday.

Wiping out whole sections of text you find inconvenient only proves
you are a fraud and a con.

But I do want to thank PeterB for giving me the opportunity
to highlight two of his comments that may have been buried too deeply for
most readers to have found.

: Internal bleeding is a disease response unless a person is undergoing
: surgery. If I'm wrong, name a bleeding disorder that is not
: classified as a disease.

I have already pointed out that nosebleeds are not normally classified as
a disease (although they can be a symptom of one).

Nosebleeds are often a symptom of poor tissue integrity, which can be
cured with adequate intake of vitamin C and bioflavonoids. When
sailors used to get scurvy, they bled to death from the inside out.
My mother was at times an acute nose bleeder and had to be taken to
the hospital, carrying a towel fully soaked in blood. The nutrient
remedy permanently cured her condition and her last nosebleed was many
years ago.

While it's not a
"disorder," menstruation is another obvious example of bleeding that is
not in any sense a disease response.

Since I said you should name a bleeding *disorder* that is not
considered a disease, menstruation is not a valid response.

: Schutlzie, it may bother you that people die when mixing alcohol with
: Kava, but that does [not] mean Kava was the cause of death.

I wonder how PeterB's sponsors will react when they find out that he has
come right out and said that if someone dies from taking kava mixed with
alcohol, it is the kava that is responsible.

Anyone who reads the original comment (which I corrected above) can
see it was intended to make the opposite point. Unlike your freudian
reference to you having a "diseased mind" while engaging in a person
attack of another poster, which says a great deal about you.

PeterB

In misc.health.alternative PeterB wrote:

: : Internal bleeding is a disease response unless a person is undergoing
: : surgery. If I'm wrong, name a bleeding disorder that is not
: : classified as a disease.
:
: I have already pointed out that nosebleeds are not normally classified as
: a disease (although they can be a symptom of one).
:
: Nosebleeds are often a symptom of poor tissue integrity, which can be
: cured with adequate intake of vitamin C and bioflavonoids.

Nosebleeds can be -- but do not have to be -- a *symptom* of a disease.
Nosebleeds per se are not, to my knowledge, *classified* as a disease.

: Since I said you should name a bleeding *disorder* that is not
: considered a disease, menstruation is not a valid response.

Contusions and hematomas are examples of internal bleeding that are not
considered diseases.

: : Schutlzie, it may bother you that people die when mixing alcohol with
: : Kava, but that does [not] mean Kava was the cause of death.

: I wonder how PeterB's sponsors will react when they find out that he has
: come right out and said that if someone dies from taking kava mixed with
: alcohol, it is the kava that is responsible.

: Anyone who reads the original comment (which I corrected above) can
: see it was intended to make the opposite point.

I will do precisely what you do in such circumstances: I will claim that
it is a "Freudian slip" that should be taken to mean exactly what it says.
Your sponsors will be pleased with that, I think.

-----
Richard Schultz
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"I love people. But I don't suffer fools gladly."
-- Deborah Lipstadt

On Apr 12, 1:11 am, (Richard Schultz) wrote:
In misc.health.alternative PeterB wrote:

: : Internal bleeding is a disease response unless a person is undergoing
: : surgery. If I'm wrong, name a bleeding disorder that is not
: : classified as a disease.
:
: I have already pointed out that nosebleeds are not normally classified as
: a disease (although they can be a symptom of one).
:
: Nosebleeds are often a symptom of poor tissue integrity, which can be
: cured with adequate intake of vitamin C and bioflavonoids.

Nosebleeds can be -- but do not have to be -- a *symptom* of a disease.
Nosebleeds per se are not, to my knowledge, *classified* as a disease.

I see you still take the liberty of deleting portions of my earlier
response, meaning your sponsors are bothered with accounts of people
being cured of their conditions using natural medicine. You've become
100% predictable, Schultzie.

: Since I said you should name a bleeding *disorder* that is not
: considered a disease, menstruation is not a valid response.

Contusions and hematomas are examples of internal bleeding that are not
considered diseases.

I already explained that use of the word "disease" is predicated on
the nature of causation. If a hematoma results from injury, its
effects may yet be identical to pathology resulting from genetic or
chemical causes. Thus, our use of language in such cases is
arbitrary. Illness resulting from exposure to drugs is no less a
disease response than illness resulting from exposure to a chemical in
the workplace. Your use of the semantic argument does not counter the
evidence. When HRT elevates the risk of breast cancer, or when
aspirin elevates the risk of gastrointestinal tract complications,
these drugs are a trigger for disease. The ill effects of any drug
are therefore a trigger in disease. Cue Schultzie to delete portions
of this comment in an effort to defend his sponsors' dangerous
products.

: : Schutlzie, it may bother you that people die when mixing alcohol with
: : Kava, but that does [not] mean Kava was the cause of death.

: I wonder how PeterB's sponsors will react when they find out that he has
: come right out and said that if someone dies from taking kava mixed with
: alcohol, it is the kava that is responsible.

: Anyone who reads the original comment (which I corrected above) can
: see it was intended to make the opposite point.

I will do precisely what you do in such circumstances: I will claim that
it is a "Freudian slip" that should be taken to mean exactly what it says.
Your sponsors will be pleased with that, I think.

Schultzie, a "freudian slip" is noted by reference to oneself, not a
bottle of Kava. When you admitted to having a "diseased mind," that
combined with your irrational arguments on behalf of the drug makers
is not just "freudian," but "fraudian." You are a fraud and a con,
and everyone here knows it.

PeterB

On Apr 12, 1:11 am, (Richard Schultz) wrote:
In misc.health.alternative PeterB wrote:

: : Internal bleeding is a disease response unless a person is undergoing
: : surgery. If I'm wrong, name a bleeding disorder that is not
: : classified as a disease.
:
: I have already pointed out that nosebleeds are not normally classified as
: a disease (although they can be a symptom of one).
:
: Nosebleeds are often a symptom of poor tissue integrity, which can be
: cured with adequate intake of vitamin C and bioflavonoids.

Nosebleeds can be -- but do not have to be -- a *symptom* of a disease.
Nosebleeds per se are not, to my knowledge, *classified* as a disease.

I see you still take the liberty of deleting portions of my earlier
response, meaning your sponsors are bothered with accounts of people
being cured of their conditions using natural medicine. You've become
100% predictable, Schultzie.

: Since I said you should name a bleeding *disorder* that is not
: considered a disease, menstruation is not a valid response.

Contusions and hematomas are examples of internal bleeding that are not
considered diseases.

I already explained that use of the word "disease" is predicated on
the nature of causation. If a hematoma results from injury, its
effects may yet be identical to pathology resulting from genetic or
chemical causes. Thus, our use of language in such cases is
arbitrary. Illness resulting from exposure to drugs is no less a
disease response than illness resulting from exposure to a chemical in
the workplace. Your use of the semantic argument does not counter the
evidence. When HRT elevates the risk of breast cancer, or when
aspirin elevates the risk of gastrointestinal tract complications,
these drugs are a trigger for disease. The ill effects of any drug
are therefore a trigger in disease. Cue Schultzie to delete portions
of this comment in an effort to defend his sponsors' dangerous
nostrums.

: : Schutlzie, it may bother you that people die when mixing alcohol with
: : Kava, but that does [not] mean Kava was the cause of death.

: I wonder how PeterB's sponsors will react when they find out that he has
: come right out and said that if someone dies from taking kava mixed with
: alcohol, it is the kava that is responsible.

: Anyone who reads the original comment (which I corrected above) can
: see it was intended to make the opposite point.

I will do precisely what you do in such circumstances: I will claim that
it is a "Freudian slip" that should be taken to mean exactly what it says.
Your sponsors will be pleased with that, I think.

Schultzie, a "freudian slip" is noted by reference to oneself, not a
bottle of Kava. When you admitted to having a "diseased mind," that
combined with your irrational arguments on behalf of the drug makers
is not just "freudian," but "fraudian." You are a fraud and a con,
and everyone here knows it.

PeterB