From: Mark Probert on
Jan Drew wrote:
> "Max C." <maxc246(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1147463673.916939.317270(a)j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> Mark Probert wrote:
>>> (They would not be worn out if *S*o *C*alled *A*lternative *M*edicine
>>> had some form of basis in reality.)
>> So Alternative Medicine is a S C A M? Is that what you're implying by
>> emphasizing those letters? Does that apply to all alternative
>> therapies? Many, if not most alternative practitioners focus on
>> nutrition and its role in human health. Are you saying that good
>> nutrition is a scam? Are you saying the chiropractors are scam
>> artists? Your sweeping generalization requires some specificity,
>> because if you really believe that modern medical professionals are the
>> only ones qualified to heal the human body, most readers in the
>> alternative news groups will have had enough personal experience with
>> alternative practitioners to think of you as a quack.
>>
>> You see, that's exactly what the pharma hounds and FDA lap dogs of
>> yesteryear preached. Many of these "experts" testified in court that
>> the absence of vitamins and minerals from the human diet could not
>> cause degenerative, functional or infectious disease. Of course, we
>> now know beyond a doubt that such testimony is pure rubbish. Even the
>> average person on the street understands that vitamins and minerals are
>> required for good health.
>>
>> So, what exactly do you mean by your above statement?
>>
>> Max.
>
> He doesn't know, it is just his insane need to argue.

Once again, Jan, you provide the proof that you are stalking, harassing
and annoying me.

>
> Sad he could not win a case in court... then was dishonest and disbarred.

Once again, Jan, you provide the proof that you are stalking, harassing
and annoying me.
From: Mark Probert on
Jan Drew wrote:
> "marcia" <design1(a)insight.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:1147472843.120768.191150(a)d71g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>> Jan Drew wrote:
>>> He doesn't know, it is just his insane need to argue.
>>>
>>> Sad he could not win a case in court... then was dishonest and disbarred.
>> Having a little trouble with the concept of live & let live?
>
> In the Matter of Mark Probert

Jan, when will you adopt the practice of Live & Let Live?
From: Mark Probert on
Jan Drew wrote:
> "Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
>> "marcia" <design1(a)insight.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Jan Drew wrote:
>>>> He doesn't know, it is just his insane need to argue.
>>>>
>>>> Sad he could not win a case in court... then was dishonest and
>>>> disbarred.
>>> Having a little trouble with the concept of live & let live?
>> Marcia, you have to realise that in altworld everyone with the same
>> name is the same person. Jan says that this Mark Probert is that Mark
>> Probert (without any evidence
>
> Wrong. The source has been posted.

Jan, is this post consistent with L&LL?

Of course not.
From: David Wright on
In article <1147402040.482724.111620(a)j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Max C. <maxc246(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>David Wright wrote:
>> >We've yet to see the "flu epidemic" we've been hearing about for so
>> >many flu seasons now., so if smallpox is transmitted at a lower rate
>> >than the flu, what is everyone so afraid of?
>>
>> Are you under the impression that flu is not terribly contagious?
>> I really don't understand what you're trying to say here.
>
>I'm trying to say that the mentions of smallpox spreading from one
>hospital room to many other "victims" on above floors through an open
>window is a load of hogwash. My position is supported by CDC
>documentation (which I have already posted direct links to.)

OK, how did the virus get up there, then? Remember the background on
this one? They had the patient in strict isolation, and the only
known vector was that he was opening the window so he could sneak some
cigarettes.

>I'm also trying to say that the "contageous-ness" of the flu, smallpox,
>or ANY other viral disease is dependent on the overall health of the
>individual.

News flash.

>I haven't had the flu since I was a kid, even though I've
>spent my fair share of time around those that I KNEW had the flu. I've
>NEVER had a flu vaccine, and I never will. The human body has natural
>defenses against viral infections. It just happens to be the case that
>most Americans today don't have a diet that provides the proper weapons
>for defense against those diseases.

You are one of the most self-impressed people I've seen on m.h.a, and
I've seen quite a few. How do you know your level of immunity
wouldn't be just as good if your diet were poorer? Answer: you
don't. Some people just don't get sick as often as others. Maybe
your diet's doing it, but since you can't live your life twice, once
on a great diet and once not, you have no idea.

>> >Mass smallpox vaccinations have proven ineffective.
>>
>> Older vaccinations, yes. But those quaint historical examples weren't
>> using the same vaccine we use today.
>
>Which were also ineffective until the ring quarantine method was used.
>As I said, because the new vaccine failed until the ring method was
>employed, it begs the question "Which deserves the credit for smallpox
>elimination, the vaccine or the quarantine?" The answer is, no one
>knows for sure... but we DO know, as John pointed out, that smallpox
>outbreaks can be and *have been* eliminated with quarantine alone.

Perhaps. But I think the combination approach is better.

>> >Histroy shows that
>> >very clearly. And even *IF* there's a smallpox outbreak, the vaccine
>> >can still be effective up to several days after exposure should one
>> >choose to get vaccinated. There's no good reason for mass vaccination.
>>
>> As of today, I agree with you. But if there were an outbreak, it
>> could only be because someone had weaponized the stuff. And that
>> would be scary.
>
>That *WOULD* be scary, but it still wouldn't require mass vaccination
>of an entire country. You could vaccinate the population that was
>believed to have been hit, quarantine them and let the rest of the
>country go about its business. Of course, there's still the problem of
>"Would it be the right vaccine?" If terrorists were smart enough to
>weaponize smallpox, I doubt they'd be dumb enough to use a variant that
>already has a vaccine available for it.

Whether you can have one without the other is an unanswered question.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me."
-- Alice Roosevelt Longworth
From: Jan Drew on

Mark Probert wrote:
> Max C. wrote:
>> Mark Probert wrote:
>>> Max C. wrote:
>>>> Mark Probert wrote:
>>>>> (They would not be worn out if *S*o *C*alled *A*lternative *M*edicine
>>>>> had some form of basis in reality.)
>>>> So Alternative Medicine is a S C A M? Is that what you're implying by
>>>> emphasizing those letters?

NO reply. Mark can NOT answer.


Does that apply to all alternative
>>>> therapies?

NO reply. Mark can NOT answer.



Many, if not most alternative practitioners focus on
>>>> nutrition and its role in human health. Are you saying that good
>>>> nutrition is a scam?

NO reply. Mark can NOT answer.


Are you saying the chiropractors are scam
>>>> artists?


NO reply. Mark can NOT answer.


Your sweeping generalization requires some specificity,
>>>> because if you really believe that modern medical professionals are the
>>>> only ones qualified to heal the human body, most readers in the
>>>> alternative news groups will have had enough personal experience with
>>>> alternative practitioners to think of you as a quack.
>>>>
>>>> You see, that's exactly what the pharma hounds and FDA lap dogs of
>>>> yesteryear preached. Many of these "experts" testified in court that
>>>> the absence of vitamins and minerals from the human diet could not
>>>> cause degenerative, functional or infectious disease. Of course, we
>>>> now know beyond a doubt that such testimony is pure rubbish. Even the
>>>> average person on the street understands that vitamins and minerals are
>>>> required for good health.
>>>>
>>>> So, what exactly do you mean by your above statement?

NO reply. Mark can NOT answer.


>>> I am sorry, your post did not contain any facts, just your opinion.
>>
>> Ah, the ol' question dodge game. Sorry, but that wasn't my opinion.
>
> I consider it an opinion and that is all that I need.

NO replies Mark could NOT answer.

>
> See? I learned your dodge real good!

Poor Mark.
>
>> It's an exact account of what happened the first time Dr. Royal Lee was
>> hauled to court by the FDA. The FDA brought "experts" that testified
>> in court that the absence of vitamins and minerals from the human diet
>> could not cause degenerative, functional or infectious disease. I've
>> listened to a lecture of Dr. Lee's explaining the entire case in
>> detail. You can see a sample of his story here:
>>
>> http://www.galaxynutrients.com/category_s/39.htm
>> "This is nothing new for Dr. Nelson. Ten years ago he, with his group
>> of experts, testified in a similar court, that neither degenerative
>> disease, infectious disease, nor functional disease could result from
>> any nutritional deficiency."
>>
>> So, my post did not contain my opinion at all. Now, answer the
>> questions.
>>
>> Max.