From: PeterB - Original on
On Dec 1, 9:58 pm, Bob Officer <boboffic...(a)127.0.0.7> wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 14:28:12 -0800 (PST), in misc.health.alternative,
> PeterB - Original Dumbass <p...(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Nov 29, 12:04 am, Bob Officer <boboffic...(a)127.0.0.7> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 21:24:47 -0800 (PST), in misc.health.alternative,
> >> PeterB - Original <p...(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >Naturally-occurring substances to which human beings have evolved a
> >> >beneficial metabolic response (nutrients such as water, oxygen,
> >> >vitamins, etc.) are not inherently poisonous.  By contrast,
> >> >pharmaceutical drugs (and other substances that are not naturally
> >> >occurring) are toxic to living cells (or disruptive to normal
> >> >metabolic function at some level) regardless of dose, clinical
> >> >detection, or EPA toxicity thresholds.  EPA levels are designed only
> >> >to protect a person from immediate (not necessarily long-term) harm.
> >> >In human physiology, a little bit of mercury is still a poison.  The
> >> >industry-sponsored view that all chemicals are somehow analogous is
> >> >based on the fiction that dose makes the poison.  It's a convenient
> >> >axiom serving the interests of the drug and agriculture industries but
> >> >is contradicted by the latest science, which shows that even tiny
> >> >amounts of foreign substances in human biology can result in disease.
> >> >[Ref.http://www.ourstolenfuture.org.]
>
> >> Dumbass Petie has never read about water intoxication.
>
> >The point is that water is not inherently poisonous.  No one
> >expects you to get that part.
>
> No, Stupid, The point is the 'dosage' is what makes it poisonous.

That is not the point being made, Booby. The point being made is that
"dose makes the poison" falsely equates the inherently toxic nature of
drugs with the inherently non-toxic nature of nutrients. As evidence,
there are rarely reports of vitamin induced death but frequent reports
of drug induced death. Sorry that your limited intellect can't grasp
something almost as simple as you are.

> IT
> is what you have up as the topic. once the point is made, no matter
> what you continue to say, you are wrong. The Dosage size is what
> counts.



>>http://sportsmedicine.about.com/od/hydrationandfluid/a/Hyponatremia.h...
>
> >> Seem he has lost this point completely.
>
> >> --
> >> Bob Officer
> >> Posting the truthhttp://www.skeptics.com.au
>
> You still missed the point completely. Critical thinking is no one of
> your skills, is it?
>
> --
> Bob Officer
> Posting the truthhttp://www.skeptics.com.au

From: Peter B on
"PeterB - Original" <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote in message
news:09a015fd-d5e2-4e11-8555-09338454020c(a)s20g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 28, 7:49 pm, "Peter B" <origin...(a)frag.com> wrote:
> "PeterB - Original" <p...(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote in
> messagenews:51b3c12d-1a1f-4db9-b418-08b986550e18(a)g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 28, 3:20 pm, Tristan <twer...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> > PeterB - Original wrote:
> > > Naturally-occurring substances to which human beings have evolved
> > > a
> > > beneficial metabolic response (nutrients such as water, oxygen,
> > > vitamins, etc.) are not inherently poisonous....
>
> > Oxygen is extremely reactive and in high concentrations has
> > harmful effects on humans and most organisms.
>
> So does water, that doesn't make it *inherently* toxic. Mercury is
> inherently toxic because we have no beneficial metabolic response
> to it.
> =============================================
> It is inherently toxic, idiot. Read up on it. (oxygen & water)

Really? So how is water good for you if it's toxic?

> I'm going to watch you dance, again.

Tell the chimp who trained you that you need more treats.
===============================================

I'm going to leave this post alone for future use. No sense in trying to
teach an old fool.


From: Peter Bowditch on
PeterB - Original <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:

>The point being made is that
>"dose makes the poison" falsely equates the inherently toxic nature of
>drugs with the inherently non-toxic nature of nutrients.

Add "dose makes the poison" to the ever-growing list of terms you
either wish to redefine or do not understand.

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
From: RGrannus on
On Dec 1, 10:33 pm, PeterB - Original <p...(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 1, 9:58 pm, Bob Officer <boboffic...(a)127.0.0.7> wrote:
>>
> That is not the point being made, Booby. The point being made is that
> "dosemakes the poison" falsely equates the inherently toxic nature of
> drugs with the inherently non-toxic nature of nutrients. As evidence,
> there are rarely reports of vitamin induced death but frequent reports
> of drug induced death. Sorry that your limited intellect can't grasp
> something almost as simple as you are.


That's too great a generality. Many "drugs" are not inherently toxic
(or very weakly so). Some nutrients are quite toxic in high doses or
for certain people (eg, gluten).

RGrannus
http://sites.google.com/site/rgrannus/

From: Bob Officer on
On Thu, 03 Dec 2009 09:41:54 +1100, in misc.health.alternative, Peter
Bowditch <myfirstname(a)ratbags.com> wrote:

>PeterB - Original <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>
>>The point being made is that
>>"dose makes the poison" falsely equates the inherently toxic nature of
>>drugs with the inherently non-toxic nature of nutrients.
>
>Add "dose makes the poison" to the ever-growing list of terms you
>either wish to redefine or do not understand.

add to the list of words he doesn't know how to use or invents his
own meaning: "Inherently"
--
Bob Officer
Posting the truth
http://www.skeptics.com.au