Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
reply to post by A Fortiori
He offers diagnosis through his website, which is illegal considering he has no license (he is not an oocupational therapist, so I fail to why you keep bringing that up).
Because he has stated elsewhere he is an OT and sells OT products? *shrugs*
And yes, I am being a bit insulting to you because you are insulting the intelligence of everyone on this website by continually pushing what this charlatan is selling.
Woah, there. What am I doing? What have I pushed, exactly? Did I say that I believed the mini-stroke argument? No, I did not, and if you were not in such a rush to point, counter point you would have observed that.
I've said that you could have taken the time to explain why the hypothesis he touts is invalid, but instead chose to first attack his attempts to "sell" something, then you state why he ought to have published more, etcetera, etcetera.
You are obfuscating. If it is quite clear to you why he is wrong, why vaccines do not cause ministrokes then why not state it clearly? Why attack him?
That has been my entire point. I am now going to put it into bold so that it is emphasized...
It is important that topics of discussion that are of interest to board citizens be debated on their merit and not become ad hominem playgrounds
He is no different than people who push "herbal remedies" for HIV and any other disorder under the sun.
This is also hyperbolic. Using HIV/AIDS an an example is entirely wrong and if you are a medical doctor then you know the difference between a disease, a viral infection, a genetic influence, and a systemic imbalance that can be adjusted with diet, exercise, and nutritional supplements.
Perhaps, I should use hyperbole now? Celiac's is now considered "real" and is treatable with a change of diet. Should I use that methodology in a converse argument to state that others can be cured the same way? No. All conditions should be evaluated and treated differently.
They simply prey on those who are in dire straits and will believe in anything that gives them hope.
I work with public health communications, disease tracking, HIV/AIDS prevention, outreach, and treatment. I can U2U (if interested) our website for verification.
Every day I pass oncologists and research scientists in the hallways. In order to work hospice when I first joined I had to take a class in "dying". The oncologists all spoke of the things we would notice and see along the way, and told us not to be surprised if you saw something "miraculous" and to not get your hopes up for a repeat performance. These are doctors that worked in the Ukraine with the children of Chernobyl. They all said that with some conventional treatment works, with others it doesn't. With some alternative treatments have worked, with others they haven't.
Stating that it works for some and not for others is not getting people's hopes up, it is treating humans like the unique creatures that they are.
And no, I'm not Canadian, I'm American.
Then why did you speak of Canada as though you were intimately connected with it? My mistake.
I've ordered at least 40 MRIs so far this month, and most insurance agencies will cover them when medically relevant (though sometimes you have to wrestle with them a bit). It's called defensive medicine, and it's a blight on the profession right now. Look it up.
Well, I would love to send people to your hospital then because I know of very few people that have had them performed.
But back to the rudeness...
You do not have to be rude. You choose to be. You can state that it is to protect people, but again, you can do that by arguing the assumptions, not attacking the persons.
Johns Hopkins has a Center for Complimentary and Alternative Medicines. Johns Hopkins is regarded worldwide as a leader in medicine. Are they charlatans? Are they pushing snake oil?
The only reason I posted anything to you at all is because I am tired of the level of debate that consists of attacking individuals (easy peasy) without refuting the argument (less easy). Think of all of the posts you've wasted attacking me when you could be using these posts (if helping to rescue the idiots out there who need the type of hope he is selling) to iterate why what he is talking about will not work.
No one listens when you act as though you are condescending to speak to them. You might as well just say: blah blah blah blah blah.
There are other posters who could come on here, especially with the medical knowledge that you claim to possess, and refute his points and educate everyone on here. I even provided you with fuel!
I said: but JHU says that ministrokes are hard to detect.
Instead of stating why that is not true, and why they are easy to detect, or talk about a personal experience, etc. you just do the pomp and ridicule routine again.
Lastly, you assume that I am defending him when I have yet to do that. All I have done is attempt to demonstrate why we ought not attack the person in a vague manner. Vague rebuttals can be made. A circular argument that gets the topic nowhere begins and now people aside from us have left this entire thread.
So, let's save this thread. I promise to applaud you tho you have been mean to me if you will but take the time and explain why his hypothesis is untrue.
Why is it not possible that vaccines cause transient ischemic attacks in some children and adults?
[edit on 13-10-2009 by A Fortiori]
