FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   PreferencesPreferences   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Forum index » Medicine forums » General talk
Prostatitis questions
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 143 [2136 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page:  Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, ..., 141, 142, 143 Next
Author Message
Todd Gastaldo
medicine forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 165

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 12:19 am    Post subject: Rubella stuff - and Melania's chiro (bad) news Reply with quote

"Melania" <mdcnnn@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111708450.846474.232330@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Quote:

Todd Gastaldo wrote:
**DAILY** CHIROPRACTIC CARE

See below

"tech27" <tech27@mail.anonymizer.com> wrote in message
news:3oG0e.56483$NC6.49846@newsread1.mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net...
Well why didn't you say he had previously broken a collar bone?

Still, if you are the same one who takes her kids to the chiro when
then
have a cold coming on or after imunizations you are a fool.

MDs are fools in regard to "immunizations."

Only some, Todd.

MD vaccinations are only ATTEMPTED immunizations.

This is true - but it doesn't mean they don't work a certain percentage
of the time.


I never said vaccinations don't work a certain percentage of the time.

I said MDs are concealing a serious adverse vaccine reaction
(failure-to-immunize) thereby fraudulently promoting their vaccinations as
100% effective

Quote:
I choose to have myself regularly (appropriately) immunized because I
travel frequently to regions with poor public health, and because I
want to minimize my chances of, say, contracting rubella while
pregnant.


Good idea.

BUT MDs HAVE BEEN LESS THAN FORTHCOMING ABOUT VACCINATIONS...

SO...

FOR YOUR POSSIBLE READING INTEREST...

(Rubella stuff from a 1999 post.)

CDC vaccination czar Walter Orenstein, M.D. co-authored a 1981 rubella study
in JAMA Feb 20;245(7):711-3 which reported that 90% of obstetricians had
not submitted to rubella vaccination. ("only one of the 11 known
susceptible obstetrician-gynecologists was vaccinated.")
See Orenstein WA, et al.
Rubella vaccine and susceptible hospital employees. Poor physician
participation.
JAMA. 1981 Feb 20;245(7):711-3.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ht­bin-post/Entrez/query?uid=7463­660&form=...


Dr. Robert Berkow's Merck Manual indicates that obstetricians are "high
risk" for
contracting and spreading rubella and should definitely submit to rubella
vaccination. ("Efforts should also be made to screen and vaccinate high-risk
groups, such as hospital...workers..."
http://www.merck.com/pubs/mman­ual/section19/chapter260/260m.­htm#A019-...
2 )


Dr. Berkow's Merck Manual also gives good reasons obstetricians should
submit to
rubella vaccination:


"Effects on the fetus vary from death in utero to multiple anomalies to
isolated hearing loss...Women exposed to rubella early in pregnancy should b
e informed about the potential risks to the fetus, and termination of
pregnancy should be considered."
http://www.merck.com/pubs/mman­ual/section19/chapter260/260m.­htm#A019-...
2


I am sure that the percent of obstetricians refusing rubella vaccination has
plummeted since Orenstein's 1981 JAMA study - especially since rubella
vaccination is now required
for entry to medical residency. (Joanne Hatem, MD died on September 6, 1997,
a victim of rubella (German measles) vaccine administered as a requirement
for medical residency in New York state. Reported in Dr. Kristine M.
Severyn's Vaccine News, September 1997. )


Death and disability from rubella vaccination are reportedly quite rare; but
then again, maybe death and disability from rubella vaccination aren't as
rare as reported: MDs have a problem with reporting serious adverse
reactions...


In 1986, Congress had to DEMAND that MDs report serious adverse reactions
[Smith
Pediatrics 1988].


In 1993 - even though such reports are essential for
determining safety - MDs were failing to report up to 99% of serious adverse
reactions to medications. [Kessler JAMA 1993]


This latter fact is quite relevant because CDC's Vaccine Information Sheets
compare vaccine safety (unknown) to medication safety (unknown). It is in
part for this reason that I say that CDC Vaccine Information Sheets
FRAUDULENTLY indicate that MDs/CDC know vaccines are known to be safe
alternatives to risking immunization via natural disease. See
"Vaccines/Eugenics/Primatologi­st apes MD/Small Pox hoax (Jenner's "Spurious
Cowpox")"...
http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?­AN=513703325


Specifically in regard to RUBELLA vaccine safety, MDs and RNs (and other
hospital personnel) might be interested in The Chronic Rubella Viremia
Support Group, South 20655 Brown Rd., Cataldo ID 83810, (208) 689-3925...


The Chronic Rubella Viremia Support Group is a group of over 200 health care
professionals who submitted to rubella vaccination and ended up with chronic
debilitating symptoms attributable to rubella vaccine. The founder of the
group, Katy Fox, RN, suspects that many other health professionals were
adversely affected by the rubella vaccine. When 20/20 did a story on the
subject, she says, over 600 people responded.


IMPORTANT NOTE: As alluded to above, pregnant women who choose hospital
birth and who are seronegative for rubella can expect be asked to submit to
rubella vaccination immediately after birth...


According to Marsha Leen-Mitchell and John Carey, MD et al.:


"It is highly recommended that non-rubella immune new mothers be vaccinated
prior to discharge from
the hospital."
Teratogen Update
GENETIC DRIFT
Vol. 12: Fall, 1995
http://www.ahsc.arizona.edu/~m­srgsn/gd/gdvol12.htm#rubella


Except for the known 50% adverse reaction rate of rubella vaccination, this
would seem to be one way for mothers to confer passive immunity to rubella
on their newborns via breastfeeding. (Wouldn't oral rubella vaccination be
preferable? See "Breastfeeding/AAP's deletion/Two questions"...
http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?­AN=503292552 )


Leen-Mitchell and Carey et al. say that CDC says that rubella vaccination in
pregnancy is not associated with congenital rubella syndrome:


"Data collected by the CDC suggests that inadvertent use of rubella
vaccination in pregnancy or in the three months prior to pregnancy is not
associated with congenital rubella syndrome or any increase in the rate of
birth defects. However, theoretical risks dictate that the rubella
live-virus vaccine be avoided during pregnancy."


Further on, Leen-Mitchell and Carey et al. state that natural maternal
infection with rubella disease in the first eight weeks of pregnancy is
associated with an 85% risk for congenital rubella syndrome (CRS):


"All TORCH infections have been associated with varying degrees of pregnancy
loss...First described in 1941, this prototype of congenital infections
[Rubella] is
characterized by congenital heart defects, cataracts, deafness and mental
retardation. Maternal infection in the first eight weeks of pregnancy is
associated with an 85% risk for congenital rubella syndrome (CRS)."
http://www.ahsc.arizona.edu/~m­srgsn/gd/gdvol12.htm#rubella


(TORCH is an acronym for a group of maternally acquired communicable
diseases that include Toxoplasmosis, Other (varicella, Venezuelan equine
encephalitis, mumps, coxsackie, parvovirus, HIV), RUBELLA, Cytomegalovirus
and Herpes.)


Whatever the risk of congenital rubella syndrome following vaccination in
early pregnancy, the risk was not apparently "theoretical" for Tyler Rooks
(see below).


Which prompts the following question: Of the obstetricians still refusing
rubella vaccination, how many are
informing women of the potential risks to fetuses of their failure to
vaccinate themselves?


And what about physicians in general who refuse rubella vaccination and who
see women who may or may not know they are pregnant?


One thing is for sure, rubella risk has been very real for some fetuses -
whether by natural disease or by vaccination - though again, according to
CDC, natural disease is far riskier for fetuses...


@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@


According to Dr. Kristine M. Severyn's Vaccine News, September 1997, Tyler
Rooks was born with "cerebral dysgenesis" because her mother didn't know she
was one month pregnant when she obtained her rubella vaccination because of
a college enrollment requirement.


Tyler has not been compensated by the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program
(VICP). (VICP is the boondoggle Congress set up to free MDs and
pharmaceutical
manufacturers from most liability from their vaccination behavior. In
creating VICP
Congress had to DEMAND that MDs make reports of suspected vaccine injury and
suspected vaccine death. [Smith Pediatrics 1988] - yet in 1993 then-FDA
Commissioner David Kessler, MD published evidence that physicians were
failing to report up to 99% of serious adverse reactions to medications.)


According to Dr. Severyn, in 1997, VICP "Special Master" Laura D. Millman
was telling Tyler Rook's mother that she couldn't have any money from the
VICP
program because the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, which
established the VICP, requires that "an injured person must have 'received'
a...vaccine."


VICP "Special Master" Millman told Tyler's mother that Tyler did not
'receive' MMR vaccine "because he was not injected nor did he ingest the
vaccine," meaning that an unborn child cannot "receive" a vaccine given to
his/her mother!!!


Dr. Severyn, a registered pharmacist with a doctorate in biopharmaceutics,
found it remarkable that the government says that an unborn baby is a
"person" if s/he is damaged by rubella DISEASE; but if that same baby is
purportedly damaged by rubella VACCINE, the government asserts that unborn
babies are not "persons" - to avoid paying compensation...


Vaccination and vaccine safety are DEFINITELY relevant to pregnancy - and
they are also relevant to what happens after pregnancy, as in
misc.KIDS.pregnancy...


In this latter regard, controversial vaccination opponent Viera Scheibner,
PhD (see the provocative title of her book) studied the literature on
rubella vaccination and concluded that rubella vaccination "simply does not
work."
[Scheibner V. Vaccination: 100 years of orthodox research shows that
vaccines represent a medical assault on the immune system. First Australian
edition published in 1993 by Dr. Scheibner, 178 Govetts Leap Road,
Blackheath, NSW 2785, fax 047-87-8988.]


It is noteworthy that the December 16, 1995 Globe and Mail (Quebec) reported
that Dr. Viera Scheibner had been accepted as a vaccination expert by the
Quebec College of Physicians in its investigation of Gylaine Lanctôt, M.D.
following publication of Lanctôt's controversial book The Medical Mafia.
[McFarlane P. A renegade doctor adds fuel to the childhood-vaccination row.
(Dec16)1995]


According to The Globe and Mail: "the questions Dr. Lanctôt raises over
childhood vaccinations have been part of a more mainstream medical debate
that is only now coming into the open in Canada."


A side bar to the same Globe and Mail article notes that a group of 180
Swiss doctors oppose mass compulsory measles, mumps and RUBELLA vaccination
(MMR) because, they say, natural infections with these diseases help the
immune system mature; and because, even with a 95% immunization rate in the
U.S., they say, measles epidemics are increasing - with increasing severity
of measles cases. (The 1996 Report of the U.S. Preventive Services Task
Force, Guide to Clinical Preventive Services, does not mention increasing
severity of measles, but does state that "because of immunization failures,
a two-dose vaccination protocol...appears necessary.")

Quote:
END Rubella stuff...


Melania continued...

Quote:
Vaccines have been shown to be remarkably effective in curtailing the
spread of communicable disease.

My undergrad degree from UCLA was in Biochem - a hop skip and a jump from
immunology.

I sure like the idea that injecting people with dead stuff (or attenuated
live stuff - is that the right word?) protects them from live stuff.

As long as people are fully informed - I am totally in favor of
vaccination - though not mandatory vaccination.

Quote:
They also definitely have serious
potential side effects, are not always effective, and (as you say) are
frequently misrepresented to the public.

Yep.


Quote:
MDs do not bother, generally,
to adequately educate their patients on the pros and cons of
vaccination.


I think they hit the pros pretty hard - as in their fraudulent vaccination
promotion - see above.

Quote:

Ostensibly "pro-immunization" MDs are concealing a vaccine adverse
event
(failure-to-immunize) as
they fraudulently promote their vaccinations as being 100% effective
as they
(in effect) deny massive numbers of babies massive numbers of free
daily
immunizations.

MDs have no business hiding the fact that breastfeeding women scan
the
environment for pathogens and manufacture immunizations.

MDs have no business hiding the fact that breastfeedings are
immunizations
which reportedly make MD-needle-vaccinations work better...

MDs are mysteriously concealing a SIMPLE way to make both the
immunization
(breastfeeding) and vaccination rates skyrocket.

Excellent, largely overlooked points all. I breastfed my son on demand
till he was nearly 2 years old, and had the standard childhood
vaccinations (opting out of the varicella vaccine).


I like the idea of the University of Washington medical professor who
recommends waiting till age 2 before administering vaccinations.

Quote:

See Breasts as doctors (also: Medical Veritas)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/3284


The chiro was lucky to actually do something that helped, now
you've been
sucked into the vortex of idiocy.

This CULTURE is a vortex of idiocy.

RELAXATION

When Tech 27 suggested in another post that massage and chiropractic
"only"
cause people to relax, I replied:

I'LL TAKE IT.

Like the founder of chiropractic, I believe disease is caused by
external environmental irritation of the nervous system by
mech/chem/psychic(educational) factors. I think Hans Selye called it
"stress." Regular relaxation seems like a good idea - especially
since so
many people are mentally stressed and sitting in chairs all day long
-
missing/suppressing natural opportunities for taking their minds and
bodies
through full ranges of e/motion.

I'll lean in the direction of allopathy (sp?) here and say that I think
you're right overall, but that a lot of disease is caused by pathogens,
pure and simple.
snip

If I were forced to make a choice - vaccinate the whole world or give the
whole world food, shelter and clean water - I would do the latter.

Quote:

With this culture being a vortex of idiocy - humans being forced to
sit in
chairs all day and endure mental strain - I would say DAILY
chiropractic
spinal adjusting is in order - for whomever wants it.

When I started at Western States Chiropractic College (Portland,
Oregon)
circa 1975, one of the professors told me that if everyone moved
their
joints - ALL their joints - through full range of motion daily -
there would
be far less need for passive spinal and extremity manipulation by
chiropractors.

I think that's a really valuable statement. We contort our bodies most
of the time, constricting them, and then wonder why they don't thank us
for it.

Todd, most of the people I know who routinely visit chiropractors are
getting less healthy, not more so.

They should stop immediately!

Or find a different chiro!

Quote:
Their visits to the chiropractor
hurt, and don't relieve pain or illness, but they persist in going.


Some chiros do adjust roughly. Sad but true.

Now there are low force techniques.

Quote:
They often begin going out of a general sense of malaise, nothing
definite, and develop chronic pain which they then use the chiropractor
to "treat" (how something hurting more for a while and then going back
to the same level of background pain is treatment is beyond me).

Wow. When I was in spinal adjusting practice, the exact opposite was true -
they often came during an acute pain or an acute exacerbation of chronic
pain - sometimes got better in one adjustment (Yay!) - usually more - or
sometimes did not get better - and I referred them - to another DC if they
wanted - or to an orthopod or to whomever they wanted.

Quote:
I know
people who have had back surgery thanks to a messed-up spinal
adjustment resulting in spinal damage.

Sheesh!

Quote:
I know a few people who have
permanently lost feeling in fingers or hands due to adjustments.


One of my first patients REGAINED feeling thanks to my adjustments.

Melania, you are most remarkable, knowing all these people with poor
chiropractic outcomes.

Quote:
I also know a few people for whom chiropractors have been a godsend.


Phew!

Quote:
One man I know no longer experiences migranes thanks to his
chiropractor.

I remember my first migraine patient. Boy was she happy!

Quote:
A female coworker's hip pain and reduced movement in the
hip socket were cured.

YAY!

Quote:
Generally, however, I have become deeply
suspicious of chiropractors in general because of the sheer number of
people I know who keep going to them even though all it seems to do is
hurt them.


Who *wouldn't* be suspicious!

Your reference to "the sheer number" - again you are most remarkable,
knowing all those people with poor chiropractic outcomes.

Quote:
I'm deeply suspicious of joint manipulation *if there isn't any solid
indication to do it.*

Do any of your friends take NSAIDS - not just the ones suffering poor chiro
outcomes?

Quote:
I would not feel at all comfortable allowing
anyone to try and realign my baby's spine or limbs.


Wow - esp. not with all your friends having poor outcomes!

If your baby is suffering and the medics don't know - I swear - MOST chiros
who treat babies are GENTLE (I would say ALL - but I don't know all of
them.)

If it ever comes to that - I am sure you could ask the doc to ask a mother
if you can watch when her baby gets adjusted.

That's what I would do.

Quote:
In spite of all of this, I cannot look at the number of people in this
group who have so greatly benefitted from their chiropractors' care and
say to myself "they're all self-deluding nutcases!"

But you would make an exception for me, right? LOL!

Quote:
And I fully believe
that you care more passionately about the health and welfare of all
people - babies included - than virtually any doctor I've met,


Wow - high praise! Thanks!

Quote:
and that
you would never perform an adjustment on a person (especially a baby or
small child) without knowing that it was going to help them and not
hurt them.


First do no harm - Primo Non Nocere (?) - that's the hope - and in
chiropractic - except for your unfortunate friends and their chiros - the
hope is reality.

Chiropractic spinal adjusting is quite safe.

Medical spinal adjusting - well - as you know - the most prolific spinal
manipulators - MD-obstetricians - are GRUESOME spinal manipulators because
they chemically push and mechanically pull on tiny spines with birth canals
senselessly kept closed up to 30%.

When a baby turns up with problems that the medics can't help - parents
sometimes turn to a higher authority - a chiropractor.

JUST KIDDING.

I repeat what I wrote in the first post this thread ("Chiropractic for
babies")...

After a traumatic birth, GENTLE spinal manipulation has been reported (by
both medical and chiropractic doctors) to have a beneficial effect.

The German physician Beidermann [1992] used spinal adjusting to treat 135
babies referred to him by a pediatric orthopedist.
Beidermann [1992] wrote that traumatization of suboccipital structures
occurs during birth, giving rise to manipulable lesions and various
conditions which he has observed to subside soon after manipulation of
those lesions. [Beidermann H. Kinematic imbalances due to suboccipital
strain in newborns. J Manual Medicine 1992;6:151-156. H. Beidermann,
M.D., Surgical Department, University of Witten-Herdecke, Schützenstrasse
9, W-5840 Schwerte, Federal Republic of Germany.]


According to Beidermann [1992], conditions which have yielded to a single
upper cervical manipulation include neonatal torticollis, opisthotonus,
asymmetric motor patterns, sleeping disorders, asymmetric development and
range of motion of the hips, fever of unknown origin, and loss of
appetite.


Beidermann reports that manipulation and physiotherapy
complement each other, with about 50% of cases requiring physiotherapy
following spinal manipulation. ("[P]hysiotherapists report consistently that
the[ir] treatment is simplified after
manipulation.")


Beidermann [1992] also stated,


"Prolonged labor and the use of extraction
aids are especially overrepresented" in cases of the syndrome he calls
kinematic imbalance due to suboccipital strain, or KISS. The birth
canal, he says, is "one of the most dangerous obstacles we ever have to
traverse."


Melania concluded...


Quote:
It did scare the living daylights out of me, however, to see a couple
of my coworkers, the ones with the bruises and aches from their
adjustments, hauling their seemingly-healthy kids in to be similarly
manipulated.

I'm not even sure where I'm going with this, but I felt like I needed
to get some of it out.


I, for one, am glad you shared your experiences.

It is good to get scares off your chest; indeed, if you suspect child abuse
(like Tech 27) - you should report it.

I am astonished that the chiros of whom you speak can keep people coming
back - and bringing their children! - after causing their pain.

That is so amazing!

Quote:
cheers,
Melania
Mom to Joffre (Jan 11, 2003)
and #2 (edd May 21, 2005)


Todd
Back to top
Walter E.
medicine forum beginner


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 12:23 am    Post subject: Re: Familial battle over Schiavo's fate unprecedented - 30,000+ cases Reply with quote

I wonder who pays for 15 years of hospitalization and 7 years of litigation.
This must involve many millions of dollars.

--

Walter
The Happy Iconoclast www.rationality.net


<yared22311@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1111689409.242478.264440@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Quote:
Familial battle over Schiavo's fate unprecedented
Terri Schiavo's medical condition is not particularly rare -- an
estimated 30,000 to 45,000 patients in the United States are being kept
alive in persistent vegetative states through feeding tubes.
at http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050323-110304-4569r.htm
Back to top
Joel M. Eichen
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 4062

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 12:35 am    Post subject: Re: Informed Consent Discussion Reply with quote

Absolutely not!

(First paragraph is about DentalTown)


It was a gang to ten or twenty who use their DOCTOR power to put down
people ...... sorry but my opinion is my opinion ... about dental
hygienists, about false diagnosis, about what makes this world not
such a good place.

Why am I wasting many hours at the Fen-Phen trials?

I am trying to figure out where the whole business could have stopped.
Many of these people are just common people ,, good people who are
into scrapbooking, having barbecues, and family stuff. They are not
troublemakers.

Yet here they are in Philadelphia and the damage so far is $18,000
million ... ($18B).

Do you know how many have blood pressures of 160/100 in that range and
they are on no medication? So many have echocardiograms and NO DOCTOR
says a word to them. No kind words, no suggestions to reduce blood
pressure and no one dispensing the FACTS about PONDIMIN.

Doctors .. .ugh.


The echocardiograms were paid for by the lawyers, I heard three
doctors testify to $2.8 million take between the three of them for
echocardiograms for trial!

Joel









Quote:
Originally Posted by Sue
Hey Joel---
Maybe that thread who is the most annoying poster was meant in fun
only.

What do you honestly think. HOW did you guys take that thread at THAT
time (as fun or as a warning.. we do not want you here)



Joel344
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Joel344
Send email to Joel344
Find all posts by Joel344
Add Joel344 to Your Buddy List

#39 Today, 08:22 PM








On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:51:24 -0500, Joel M. Eichen
<joeleichen@yahoo.com> wrote:

Quote:
Informed Consent is extremely important!

Here's an example of how a jury verdict was reversed because of the
informed consent issue.


Joel

**


Wyeth says judge overrules jury in diet drug case
Wed Feb 23, 2005 08:55 PM ET

NEW YORK, Feb 23 (Reuters) - Drugmaker Wyeth (WYE.N: Quote, Profile,
Research) on Wednesday said a judge had set aside a jury's verdict
from last November that found in favor of a woman who claimed one of
the company's diet drugs had damaged her heart value and instead
entered a judgment in favor of Wyeth.

The company said in a statement the jury had originally found in favor
of plaintiff Geri McMurdie, awarding her $780,000 in damages, after
she alleged heart valve injury from the use of diet drug Pondimin,
which was once marketed by Wyeth.


FACT BOX
WYE.N (WYETH)
Last: 38.91
Change: 0.00
Up/Down: 0.00

Quote
Full Chart
Company Profile
Research Reports

News for WYE.N
HEADLINE STOCKS - U.S. stocks to watch on March 22
U.S. stocks seen lower; Fed comments awaited
Wall Street seen flat ahead of Fed meeting


But Wyeth said evidence showed McMurdie had signed a consent form
acknowledging the potential risks of diet drugs at the time she was
prescribed Pondimin and Judge Mark Bernstein of the Court of Common
Pleas of Philadelphia found McMurdie "knowingly and voluntarily
assumed the risks".

McMurdie was one of four Utah plaintiffs whose trials were combined
last year. The judge has not yet ruled on Wyeth's challenges to the
other three verdicts, Wyeth said.

The Madison, New Jersey-based drugmaker in 1997 recalled Pondimin and
a second drug, Redux, used in the fen-phen slimming cocktail after the
appetite suppressants were linked to heart valve damage and a fatal
lung condition.

Total charges to cover liabilities to former users of the drugs have
since crossed the $21 billion mark,


© Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved.

NYSE and AMEX quotes delayed by at least 20 minutes. Nasdaq and all
other quotes delayed by at least 15 minutes. Reuters does not endorse
the views or opinions given by any third party content provider.



Back to top
Jeff
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 1313

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 12:44 am    Post subject: Re: Obesity May Shrink U.S. Lifespan Reply with quote

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <andrew@heartmdphd.com> wrote in message
news:1111122355.77454b48fa5aa2d51ae514ac938da5a3@teranews...

(...)

Quote:
And so the need for the 2PD-OMER Approach is being underscored.

No, the need for diets that have been shown to work in peer-reviewed
articles and which have been properly tested in studies, combined with
excercise and supervision by physicians, is beeing underscored.

The 2PD-omer diet doesn't cut it.

If I am incorrect, please show me the citations to the peer-reveiew
articles.

Jeff

Quote:


At His service,

Andrew

--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist

**
Suggested Reading:
(1) http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048
(2) http://makeashorterlink.com/?O2F325D1A
(3) http://makeashorterlink.com/?X1C62661A
(4) http://makeashorterlink.com/?U1E13130A
(5) http://makeashorterlink.com/?K6F72510A
(6) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I24E5151A
(7) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I22222129
Back to top
Nan
medicine forum beginner


Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 12:45 am    Post subject: Re: Get flu, get spine adjusted? Reply with quote

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 22:34:12 GMT, "Todd Gastaldo"
<tgastaldo@earthlink.net> wrote:

Quote:

"Nan" <nobodys@home.com> wrote in message
news:tkd6411viuq169f6s4riek3g5757k9tq01@4ax.com...
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 16:37:59 -0500, "tech27"
tech27@mail.anonymizer.com> wrote:

That's the same effect as getting a massage. Most people come away feeling
"better" and relaxed. The big question is does chiro treat the cause? Big
answer - hardly ever.

Funny, I've had massages and while I do come away relaxed, I never
notice cold or flu symptoms are lessened in the way they are after an
adjustment.


Me neither. And sometimes the adjustment doesn't seem to do anything for
me. Tech 27 is right - we could just be fooling ourselves - at least I
could be fooling myself.

But I swear it works for me - but then again I haven't been getting colds or
flu very often. HEY! WAIT A MINUTE! MAYBE CHIROPRACTIC ADJUSTING HELPS
*PREVENT* COLDS AND FLU!

Actually, I believe this - but spinal adjusting is only one small part of
chiropractic.

PS-You will probably "enjoy" a barrage of posts from Gastaldo. Most people
plonk him. He is a seriously deranged lunatic.

I've been posting to usenet for quite a number of years. I know
exactly who Todd is.


LOL! At least Nan didn't say, "No, Todd is a REALLY seriously deranged
lunatic." : )

Todd

You're an okay guy when you're considerate ;-)

Nan
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 12:56 am    Post subject: Re: chronic swelling of the knee - joint inflammation Reply with quote

X-No-Archive: Yes

mousseux@mindspring.com wrote:
Quote:
Hello,

I'm sorry I can't get this note to be shorter... I have been going to
a
Rheumatology doctor since 1-1/2 year with no real diagnose of my
chronic pain and swelling of my left knee. My doctor says I have
reactive arthritis but she thinks something else is going on too.
The history of my "bones" condition is vast. I was born with "club
feet" on both of my feet. I had several major surgeries during my
youth and wore othopedic shoes until the age of 14. I had an
incident
back in 1996 (age 31) and was diagnosed by a 2nd doctor (2nd
opinion...) with 3 internal fractures on 2 bones on my right foot &
3
ligaments torn three months after the incident. It went downhill
from
then. In 1998, I had my right foot (RF) ankle fused, in 1999 I had
my
RF subtalar joint fused. In 2001, I had both ankle & subtalar joints
fused on my left foot (the doctor found unclear fluid in my ankle and
had to re-operate 3 weeks later after flushing the ankle and putting
in
antibiotic beads - no lab test came back positive for anything - no
fungus found). I have to wear rocker bottom shoes everyday to ease
my
walk. My left knee started to hurt 1 -1/2 year ago when I bent down
to
pick up something; I didn't think anything of it until it started
swelling up and the pain became greater. I had an MRI+x-rays within
6
months of treatment - I ended up with a partial ACL torn and patella
shifting to the left (my patella on the right knee also shifts to the
right but not as much as the left). I had 5 aspirations done
(drainage) of the fluid in my knee. The only abnormal lab test is
the
white cells count that was up to 32,000 as of 2 months ago. I had
another aspiration today and I have to wait until tomorrow for the
total count of white cells (doctor is guessing between 35,000 or 40).
The fluid was tested numerous times, including for Lyme disease and
infection which all came back negative. I take sulfasalazine &
naproxen everyday: this has been a relief for pain, but eventually I
swell up again and have to get it aspirated. I tried physical
therapy
for 6 weeks + at home, it was OK then started swelling up again, thus
my recent visit to the doctor. She thinks if I go thru arthroscopic
surgery, it will come back again. She wants to start me on biologic
response modifiers (BRMs) such as "etanercept" (Enbrel) and another
medication to choose from (Methotrexate, Leflunomide or
Hydroxychloroquine) which I am not really crazy about. I have an
appointment with an orthopedic doctor in mid-May; she asked him to
evaluate the possibility of a biopsy of the synovium and/or offer
other
options. I am frustrated with the fact that there is no certain
diagnose or cure. Any ideas anyone?



For your personal "databank".


Precautions from the CPS (pharmaceutical guideline) on ENBREL:
Patients with Heart Failure

There have been post-marketing reports of worsening of congestive heart
failure (CHF), with and without identifiable precipitating factors, in
patients taking ENBREL. Physicians should exercise caution when using
ENBREL in patients who also have CHF.

Two large clinical trials (2048 patients) evaluating the use of ENBREL
in the treatment of heart failure were terminated early due to lack of
efficacy. There was a suggestion of worse heart failure outcomes in
patients with moderate to severe CHF (NYHA Class IIIB) receiving ENBREL
treatment compared to patients receiving placebo in one of the two
trials.

Adverse effects:

Cardiovascular

heart failure, hypertension, hypotension, myocardial infarction,
myocardial ischemi a, deep vein thrombosis, thrombophlebitis.



Zee
Back to top
Melania
medicine forum beginner


Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:02 am    Post subject: Re: Rubella stuff - and Melania's chiro (bad) news Reply with quote

<snipped informative read about rubella - definitely glad to see it>
Quote:

Melania continued...

Vaccines have been shown to be remarkably effective in curtailing
the
spread of communicable disease.

My undergrad degree from UCLA was in Biochem - a hop skip and a jump
from
immunology.

I sure like the idea that injecting people with dead stuff (or
attenuated
live stuff - is that the right word?) protects them from live stuff.

As long as people are fully informed - I am totally in favor of
vaccination - though not mandatory vaccination.

Totally agree.
Quote:

They also definitely have serious
potential side effects, are not always effective, and (as you say)
are
frequently misrepresented to the public.

Yep.


MDs do not bother, generally,
to adequately educate their patients on the pros and cons of
vaccination.


I think they hit the pros pretty hard - as in their fraudulent
vaccination
promotion - see above.

Totally agree.
Quote:

snipped good stuff on immunizing effects of breastfeeding and harsh

critique of chiropractic>

Quote:

I'LL TAKE IT.

Like the founder of chiropractic, I believe disease is caused by
external environmental irritation of the nervous system by
mech/chem/psychic(educational) factors. I think Hans Selye called
it
"stress." Regular relaxation seems like a good idea - especially
since so
many people are mentally stressed and sitting in chairs all day
long
-
missing/suppressing natural opportunities for taking their minds
and
bodies
through full ranges of e/motion.

I'll lean in the direction of allopathy (sp?) here and say that I
think
you're right overall, but that a lot of disease is caused by
pathogens,
pure and simple.
snip

If I were forced to make a choice - vaccinate the whole world or give
the
whole world food, shelter and clean water - I would do the latter.

As would I. Right now, trying hard on both fronts (and really pushing
the latter as the solution - curing the cause, not the symptom) may be
the best chance to increase life expectancy/quality of life.

Quote:


With this culture being a vortex of idiocy - humans being forced
to
sit in
chairs all day and endure mental strain - I would say DAILY
chiropractic
spinal adjusting is in order - for whomever wants it.

When I started at Western States Chiropractic College (Portland,
Oregon)
circa 1975, one of the professors told me that if everyone moved
their
joints - ALL their joints - through full range of motion daily -
there would
be far less need for passive spinal and extremity manipulation by
chiropractors.

I think that's a really valuable statement. We contort our bodies
most
of the time, constricting them, and then wonder why they don't
thank us
for it.

Todd, most of the people I know who routinely visit chiropractors
are
getting less healthy, not more so.

They should stop immediately!

Or find a different chiro!

I agree! I think a lot of people go out of their way to find reasons to
seek treatment - any kind of treatment - even when they don't really
need it. Mild hypochondria, if you will. Or, people are experiencing
wellness problems that they themselves could solve without external
intervention (eat better, reduce stress, low impact exercise, etc.,
etc.), and want a quick fix rather than a lifestyle change. I've seen
this a lot in the workaholic environment of my old workplace. Some
doctors happily nurture these tendencies - and so do some
chiropractors.

People also turn to "alternative" medicine with the notion that it's
gotta hurt to work - they boast about the horse pill vitamins they
choke back, or how much the chiropractor really put them through their
paces, as though these are somehow a proof of how well these things are
helping them . . .

Quote:

Their visits to the chiropractor
hurt, and don't relieve pain or illness, but they persist in going.


Some chiros do adjust roughly. Sad but true.

Now there are low force techniques.

My friend's husband is a chiropractor (and, incidentally, one I would
happily go to if I needed him. He is the one who cured my coworker's
migraines). He took over the practice of another DC who suddenly
decided to take his practice to the USA, and he said after he looked at
this guy's client records, "this man should be in jail for what he has
done to some of these people's bodies."
Quote:

They often begin going out of a general sense of malaise, nothing
definite, and develop chronic pain which they then use the
chiropractor
to "treat" (how something hurting more for a while and then going
back
to the same level of background pain is treatment is beyond me).

Wow. When I was in spinal adjusting practice, the exact opposite was
true -
they often came during an acute pain or an acute exacerbation of
chronic
pain - sometimes got better in one adjustment (Yay!) - usually more -
or
sometimes did not get better - and I referred them - to another DC if
they
wanted - or to an orthopod or to whomever they wanted.

I know
people who have had back surgery thanks to a messed-up spinal
adjustment resulting in spinal damage.

Sheesh!

I know a few people who have
permanently lost feeling in fingers or hands due to adjustments.


One of my first patients REGAINED feeling thanks to my adjustments.

Melania, you are most remarkable, knowing all these people with poor
chiropractic outcomes.

I should be more specific: in the region where I grew up, there has
been a trend for poorly-educated people, suspicious of conventional
medicine, to get a half-assed education in chiropractic and hang up a
shingle. People don't say they're going to the chiropractor - they say
they're going to the "bone cruncher" or "bone cracker." This isn't just
in one town, this is a fairly large area.

I wish I was making it up - you can see how I would have grown up
scared of chiropractors!

Quote:

I also know a few people for whom chiropractors have been a
godsend.


Phew!

One man I know no longer experiences migranes thanks to his
chiropractor.

I remember my first migraine patient. Boy was she happy!

A female coworker's hip pain and reduced movement in the
hip socket were cured.

YAY!

Generally, however, I have become deeply
suspicious of chiropractors in general because of the sheer number
of
people I know who keep going to them even though all it seems to do
is
hurt them.


Who *wouldn't* be suspicious!

Your reference to "the sheer number" - again you are most remarkable,

knowing all those people with poor chiropractic outcomes.

I'm deeply suspicious of joint manipulation *if there isn't any
solid
indication to do it.*

Do any of your friends take NSAIDS - not just the ones suffering poor
chiro
outcomes?

Sorry, I don't know what those are.

Quote:

I would not feel at all comfortable allowing
anyone to try and realign my baby's spine or limbs.


Wow - esp. not with all your friends having poor outcomes!

If your baby is suffering and the medics don't know - I swear - MOST
chiros
who treat babies are GENTLE (I would say ALL - but I don't know all
of
them.)

If it ever comes to that - I am sure you could ask the doc to ask a
mother
if you can watch when her baby gets adjusted.

That's what I would do.

And if my baby was suffering, or I was suffering, and a chiropractor
was the next logical step, I wouldn't throw the baby out with the
bathwater and leap into something more invasive and potentially very
harmful.
Quote:

In spite of all of this, I cannot look at the number of people in
this
group who have so greatly benefitted from their chiropractors' care
and
say to myself "they're all self-deluding nutcases!"

But you would make an exception for me, right? LOL!

And I fully believe
that you care more passionately about the health and welfare of all
people - babies included - than virtually any doctor I've met,


Wow - high praise! Thanks!

and that
you would never perform an adjustment on a person (especially a
baby or
small child) without knowing that it was going to help them and not
hurt them.


First do no harm - Primo Non Nocere (?) - that's the hope - and in
chiropractic - except for your unfortunate friends and their chiros -
the
hope is reality.

That is reassuring. In getting to "know" you in your posts, I have been
feeling a lot less of a knee-jerk anti-chiro impulse, which is good! I
should add at this point that I am a non-to-low intervention person
generally - it bugs me generally to see well people seeking out pills,
surgeries, scans, quick fixes, etc from any medical source.
Quote:

Chiropractic spinal adjusting is quite safe.

Medical spinal adjusting - well - as you know - the most prolific
spinal
manipulators - MD-obstetricians - are GRUESOME spinal manipulators
because
they chemically push and mechanically pull on tiny spines with birth
canals
senselessly kept closed up to 30%.

My FIL, a GP of 25 years before he specialized in psychiatry, told me
last week that he was taught while studying obstetrics that the word
obstetrician comes from the Latin "obstetricis", for midwife, which
literally means "to stand by" or "to stand opposite" (i.e. the one
giving birth). He was wondering aloud when the role had begun to so
completely be the opposite of what it originally meant, referring of
course to this desperate need to over manage and control and manipulate
birth.

<snipped benefits of chiropractic to babies who have suffered trauma>
Quote:

Melania concluded...


It did scare the living daylights out of me, however, to see a
couple
of my coworkers, the ones with the bruises and aches from their
adjustments, hauling their seemingly-healthy kids in to be
similarly
manipulated.

I'm not even sure where I'm going with this, but I felt like I
needed
to get some of it out.


I, for one, am glad you shared your experiences.

It is good to get scares off your chest; indeed, if you suspect child
abuse
(like Tech 27) - you should report it.

I am astonished that the chiros of whom you speak can keep people
coming
back - and bringing their children! - after causing their pain.

That is so amazing!

Yes, it truly is.

Melania
Mom to Joffre (Jan 11, 2003)
and #2 (edd May 21, 2005)
Back to top
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 8540

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:06 am    Post subject: Re: Obesity May Shrink U.S. Lifespan Reply with quote

Jeff wrote:
Quote:

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <andrew@heartmdphd.com> wrote in message
news:1111122355.77454b48fa5aa2d51ae514ac938da5a3@teranews...

(...)

And so the need for the 2PD-OMER Approach is being underscored.

No, the need for diets that have been shown to work in peer-reviewed
articles and which have been properly tested in studies, combined with
excercise and supervision by physicians, is beeing underscored.

The 2PD-omer diet doesn't cut it.

If I am incorrect, please show me the citations to the peer-reveiew
articles.

It is the dictionary that shows you to be incorrect.

The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet but a lifestyle change.


At His service,

Andrew

--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist

**
Suggested Reading:
(1) http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048
(2) http://makeashorterlink.com/?O2F325D1A
(3) http://makeashorterlink.com/?X1C62661A
(4) http://makeashorterlink.com/?U1E13130A
(5) http://makeashorterlink.com/?K6F72510A
(6) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I24E5151A
(7) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I22222129
Back to top
Jeff
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 1313

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:22 am    Post subject: Re: Obesity May Shrink U.S. Lifespan Reply with quote

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <andrew@heartmdphd.com> wrote in message
news:42437221.8F8BF2E8@heartmdphd.com...
Quote:
Jeff wrote:

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <andrew@heartmdphd.com> wrote in message
news:1111122355.77454b48fa5aa2d51ae514ac938da5a3@teranews...

(...)

And so the need for the 2PD-OMER Approach is being underscored.

No, the need for diets that have been shown to work in peer-reviewed
articles and which have been properly tested in studies, combined with
excercise and supervision by physicians, is beeing underscored.

The 2PD-omer diet doesn't cut it.

If I am incorrect, please show me the citations to the peer-reveiew
articles.

It is the dictionary that shows you to be incorrect.

The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet but a lifestyle change.

I don't question that it is a life-style change. But it is also a diet.

More importantly, it has not been published in the peer-reviewed literature,
which means that for all intensive purposes, it has not been studied
properly.

I know you state that you have a database to track all the people who
participated and not one of them gained weight. IF the diet is this good,
one would think that you would publish the work.

Of course, I recall how about 2 or 3 years ago, you tried to do a web study
until the review boards at Emory started asking questions. Which makes one
really wonder how good the studies are, if they exist.

Jeff

Quote:
At His service,

Andrew

--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist

**
Suggested Reading:
(1) http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048
(2) http://makeashorterlink.com/?O2F325D1A
(3) http://makeashorterlink.com/?X1C62661A
(4) http://makeashorterlink.com/?U1E13130A
(5) http://makeashorterlink.com/?K6F72510A
(6) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I24E5151A
(7) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I22222129
Back to top
Jeff
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 1313

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:43 am    Post subject: Re: Codeblueblog Analyzes Terri Schiavo's Cat Scan Reply with quote

"Carey Gregory" <tiredofspam123@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ttm441pdju445idngcc3h2q30n0c63eq2i@4ax.com...
Quote:
poboxdc@ix.netcom.com wrote:

Carey Gregory wrote:

"Phil Calvert" <pcalvert@rocketmail.com> wrote:

CSI MEDBLOGS:

Do you seriously expect anyone with two brain cells to rub together to
actually read this crap, much less take it seriously?

Look, you and all the bloggers of the world who feel compelled to
interject
your ignorant selves into this should just shut the f*** up and politely
await your turn to rot in hell alongside the Congress and president of
the
United States.

And everyone should read this carefully:

Why? It's another political opinion piece based on 5th party
information.

This is not a political matter. Or shouldn't be. This is real life, real
people dealing with a real tragedy that thousands of other people deal
with
every day. No one else gets congressional and presidential intervention.
They make their hideous decisions and move on.

The first tragedy here is obviously Terri herself. But the second tragedy
is that she has been turned into a circus side show by her parents, their
lawyers, politicians, George Bush, Jeb Bush, Congress, the FL state
legislature, and the media.

I don't blame her parents and family one bit. When a loved on is involved,
people don't always think logically. They tend to grasp at straws. Nor do I
blame the families' lawyers, on either side. They are representing their
clients.

However, I fully blame the Bushes, Congress and the FL legislature. This is
matter is should not be a political football.

If anything, it shows the importance of checks and balances of the
government.


Quote:
And now all the fucking bloggers have an opinion.

Wonderful.

Meanwhile, feeding tubes are being removed and ventilators are being
turned
off every day by real people who have to face real decisions without the
"assistance" of bloggers and the US Congress.

No, the real tragedy here is that Terri, her husband, and her parents have
been made into political play toys and blogger meat. Everyone with a
fucking opinion on this matter who doesn't know the circumstances
first-hand, or second-hand through their official capacity in the FL state
courts, should hang their head in shame and pray that the same thing
doesn't
happen to them.

Actually, one good thing that is going to come out of this is a lot more
people are going to have living wills and health-care powers of attorney. So
people who end up as Terri does will have a voice that truely speak for
them.

I do think it is good that the neation is talking about end of life
decisions, because it does happen to people. But I feel really bad for Terri
and her husband.

The other thing I like about this is the actual court records are on the
internet. So those who are truelly interested in seeing what the courts did
can read the records. Then, they can look at what the courts did and what
the Bushes and the legislatures did, and come to their own conclusions about
it.

Too bad all this effort wasn't used for something useful, like ending the
war in Iraq. I guess those 100,000+ people who were killed or the those
millions of people who have been affected by the war are not as important as
one lade without a functioning cortex.

Jeff
Back to top
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 8540

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:59 am    Post subject: Re: Obesity May Shrink U.S. Lifespan Reply with quote

Jeff wrote:
Quote:

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <andrew@heartmdphd.com> wrote in message
news:42437221.8F8BF2E8@heartmdphd.com...
Jeff wrote:

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <andrew@heartmdphd.com> wrote in message
news:1111122355.77454b48fa5aa2d51ae514ac938da5a3@teranews...

(...)

And so the need for the 2PD-OMER Approach is being underscored.

No, the need for diets that have been shown to work in peer-reviewed
articles and which have been properly tested in studies, combined with
excercise and supervision by physicians, is beeing underscored.

The 2PD-omer diet doesn't cut it.

If I am incorrect, please show me the citations to the peer-reveiew
articles.

It is the dictionary that shows you to be incorrect.

The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet but a lifestyle change.

I don't question that it is a life-style change. But it is also a diet.

Not according to the on-line Webster's at:

http://www.m-w.com

Quote:
More importantly, it has not been published in the peer-reviewed literature,
which means that for all intensive purposes, it has not been studied
properly.

That does not seem to be bothering the more than 625,550 folks who have
used this method for more than 5 years to realize their "ideal" body
weight so why does it bother you intensively?

For all intents and purposes, the 2PD-OMER Approach has been studied
properly and you know this because you voiced false concerns more than 5
years ago that the study would not be properly conducted and yet here we
are, study completed.

Quote:
I know you state that you have a database to track all the people who
participated and not one of them gained weight. IF the diet is this good,
one would think that you would publish the work.

The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet but a lifestyle change. As for
publishing the 5 year experiences of the more than 625,550 people who
have made this lifestyle change, you will just have to wait, Jeff.

Quote:
Of course, I recall how about 2 or 3 years ago, you tried to do a web study
until the review boards at Emory started asking questions.

Actually, that was more than 5 years ago. Now you know your complaints
about the study were determined to be unfounded because the study was
properly crafted and more than adequately powered (actually vastly
overpowered) to prove the effectiveness of the proposed lifestyle
change.

Quote:
Which makes one
really wonder how good the studies are, if they exist.

I believe you and everyone following this thread now know that the
2PD-OMER Approach has indeed been properly studied.

At His service,

Andrew

--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist

**
Suggested Reading:
(1) http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048
(2) http://makeashorterlink.com/?O2F325D1A
(3) http://makeashorterlink.com/?X1C62661A
(4) http://makeashorterlink.com/?U1E13130A
(5) http://makeashorterlink.com/?K6F72510A
(6) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I24E5151A
(7) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I22222129
Back to top
Pizza Girl
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 440

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:06 am    Post subject: Re: Obesity May Shrink U.S. Lifespan Reply with quote

You know I hate this bullshit attitude of people that come into a discussion
group tooting all the so-called scientific methods that haven't been done
this way or that way. Even if you laid 1000 pages of peer reviewed double
blind studies there would always be some argument that the studies were
crap.

Let's see the peer reviewed articles that show the 2PD doesn't work?

tit for tat, a*****le?

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <andrew@heartmdphd.com> wrote in message
news:42437EAD.FD253FD3@heartmdphd.com...
Quote:
Jeff wrote:

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <andrew@heartmdphd.com> wrote in message
news:42437221.8F8BF2E8@heartmdphd.com...
Jeff wrote:

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <andrew@heartmdphd.com> wrote in message
news:1111122355.77454b48fa5aa2d51ae514ac938da5a3@teranews...

(...)

And so the need for the 2PD-OMER Approach is being underscored.

No, the need for diets that have been shown to work in peer-reviewed
articles and which have been properly tested in studies, combined
with
excercise and supervision by physicians, is beeing underscored.

The 2PD-omer diet doesn't cut it.

If I am incorrect, please show me the citations to the peer-reveiew
articles.

It is the dictionary that shows you to be incorrect.

The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet but a lifestyle change.

I don't question that it is a life-style change. But it is also a diet.

Not according to the on-line Webster's at:

http://www.m-w.com

More importantly, it has not been published in the peer-reviewed
literature,
which means that for all intensive purposes, it has not been studied
properly.

That does not seem to be bothering the more than 625,550 folks who have
used this method for more than 5 years to realize their "ideal" body
weight so why does it bother you intensively?

For all intents and purposes, the 2PD-OMER Approach has been studied
properly and you know this because you voiced false concerns more than 5
years ago that the study would not be properly conducted and yet here we
are, study completed.

I know you state that you have a database to track all the people who
participated and not one of them gained weight. IF the diet is this
good,
one would think that you would publish the work.

The 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet but a lifestyle change. As for
publishing the 5 year experiences of the more than 625,550 people who
have made this lifestyle change, you will just have to wait, Jeff.

Of course, I recall how about 2 or 3 years ago, you tried to do a web
study
until the review boards at Emory started asking questions.

Actually, that was more than 5 years ago. Now you know your complaints
about the study were determined to be unfounded because the study was
properly crafted and more than adequately powered (actually vastly
overpowered) to prove the effectiveness of the proposed lifestyle
change.

Which makes one
really wonder how good the studies are, if they exist.

I believe you and everyone following this thread now know that the
2PD-OMER Approach has indeed been properly studied.

At His service,

Andrew

--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist

**
Suggested Reading:
(1) http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048
(2) http://makeashorterlink.com/?O2F325D1A
(3) http://makeashorterlink.com/?X1C62661A
(4) http://makeashorterlink.com/?U1E13130A
(5) http://makeashorterlink.com/?K6F72510A
(6) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I24E5151A
(7) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I22222129
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:10 am    Post subject: Re: Similar to amalgam claims .....Re: CDC recommendations for DENTISTRY, Fen-Phen patients Reply with quote

Joel M. Eichen wrote:
Quote:
The latest study
..



R E P L Y

I am draweing analogies between Fen-Phen where some people were
harmed, so it seems, and amalgam toxicity as it is known, where no
people are harmed.

So your saying the FDA has not recieved 1000's of adverse
reactions reports for amalgam?

studies have not been published in journals linking high
Hg blood levels and micromercurialism to amalgam?


By the way how many dentists would report that they poisoned
thier patients with amalgam, when the ADA even threatend those
who replaced amalgam for health reasons with liscence removal.
And how many doctors would be able to definitively link high Hg levels
to amalgam and not, say fish. My personal experience is that dentists
are more concerned with removing patient records than filing adverse
reaction reports. The day a dentist calls up the FDA and say's "you
know what" i think my patient is suffering toxicity from an amalgam i
placed 10 years ago or, "someone came
in yesterday with signs of Hg toxicity from amalgam placed by
another dentist I'd like to file an adverse reaction report", is the
DAY THAT PIGS FLY!
Back to top
The Webby
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 491

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:13 am    Post subject: Re: Informed Consent Discussion Reply with quote

In article <tjq641tsesm7ok2er0q636al9th335h38f@4ax.com>,
Joel M. Eichen <joeleichen@yahoo.com> wrote:

Quote:
Absolutely not!

(First paragraph is about DentalTown)


It was a gang to ten or twenty who use their DOCTOR power to put down
people ...... sorry but my opinion is my opinion ... about dental
hygienists, about false diagnosis, about what makes this world not
such a good place.

Why am I wasting many hours at the Fen-Phen trials?

It is hauntingly similar to many of the people I met in the last
century... and I have not wondered for a single moment *why* you are
sharing information with us about these trials.

I'm quiet just now for reasons that should not be a mystery to anyone
who knows me. ... just wanted to respond to this post.

Webby
Quote:

I am trying to figure out where the whole business could have stopped.
Many of these people are just common people ,, good people who are
into scrapbooking, having barbecues, and family stuff. They are not
troublemakers.

Yet here they are in Philadelphia and the damage so far is $18,000
million ... ($18B).

Do you know how many have blood pressures of 160/100 in that range and
they are on no medication? So many have echocardiograms and NO DOCTOR
says a word to them. No kind words, no suggestions to reduce blood
pressure and no one dispensing the FACTS about PONDIMIN.

Doctors .. .ugh.
Back to top
David Wright
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 750

PostPosted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:47 am    Post subject: Re: Chiropractic for babies Reply with quote

In article <1111669360.494231.13180@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
Leslie <pennysyc@aol.com> wrote:
Quote:
Chiropractic treatment helps me so much and it also seems to really
help
them

I have to second this--I was a little nervous about taking such a
little baby to the chiropractor but was willing to try anything to help
Lorelei, but what he does with babies is so gentle and she absolutely
loves it! Plus her latch has improved and she just looks more
comfortable nursing.

What does "latch" mean in this context?

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"His staff loves to say Bush is a man who doesn't know the
meaning of the word 'quit.' Well, apparently he's not all
that conversant with the word 'shame' either." (Will Durst)
Back to top
Google

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 143 [2136 Posts] Goto page:  Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, ..., 141, 142, 143 Next
View previous topic :: View next topic
The time now is Sun Apr 22, 2018 2:12 pm | All times are GMT
Forum index » Medicine forums » General talk
Jump to:  

Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
No new posts Atropine questions acemanvx@yahoo.com vision 15 Wed Jul 12, 2006 9:33 am
No new posts The return of orthoK and some questions and answers acemanvx@yahoo.com vision 0 Tue Jul 11, 2006 9:33 am
No new posts Have questions John the Baptist Jr. dentistry 1 Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:23 am
No new posts Post implant surgery questions JimSocal dentistry 0 Sat Jul 08, 2006 12:50 am
No new posts Questions about few odd Conditions? Kumar cardiology 0 Tue Jul 04, 2006 7:35 am

Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
Other DeniX Solutions sites: email marketing campaigns , electronics forum, Science forum, Unix/Linux blog, Unix/Linux documentation, Unix/Linux forums


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0425s ][ Queries: 16 (0.0048s) ][ GZIP on - Debug on ]