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

>On Dec 2, 5:41�pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
>> PeterB - Original <p...(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.
>
>Since you apparently disagree that drugs are toxic at any dose, do
>explain how that is possible.

Add reading comprehension to the things you are ignorant of.

Just where did I "disagree that drugs are toxic at any dose"?

--
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: Peter Bowditch on
Jan Drew <jdrew63929(a)aol.com> wrote:

> Nonsense. No level of mercury is safe.
>
>It can and does cause mercury poisoning.

Why is it used in homeopathy?

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

>If you are suggesting that vaccine was responsible for declines in
>Smallpox, please feel free to cite your source backing that up.

Why? It would be somewhere in the 3631 articles found by a search for
"smallpox vaccination" at PubMed, and you aren't prepared to look
there.

--
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 3, 12:28 am, PeterB - Original <p...(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 2, 9:49 pm, RGrannus <RGran...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 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.
>
> The statement that drugs are toxic at anydoseis not a generality.
>
> Many "drugs" are not inherently toxic...
>
> Can you name them?
>
> > (or very weakly so).
> Toxicity is toxicity.

Is insulin inherently toxic? It can be, but it's a naturally produced
substance that is essential to all and indeed must be taken by some
people, but can be toxic.

You're just playing word games and resorting to childish name calling
when proven wrong.

RGrannus
http://sites.google.com/site/rgrannus/
From: Bob Officer on
On Wed, 2 Dec 2009 22:14:19 -0800 (PST), in misc.health.alternative,
Jan Drew <jdrew63929(a)aol.com> wrote:

>On Dec 3, 12:43?am, AusShane <quar...(a)live.com>
>
>Name calling deleted.

Jan Anal retentiveness Laughed at.

Jan do you really think you actually changed anything?

You're a dumbass.
and control freak.





--
Bob Officer
Posting the truth
http://www.skeptics.com.au