Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Alternative / August 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Wonder Drugs That Can Kill

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Kevysmom - 20 Jul 2008 00:36 GMT
This was published in Discovery Magazine on June 20,2008. It is one of
the BEST
articles I have read on how drugs can kill.

Wonder Drugs That Can Kill
Modern pharmaceutical "breakthroughs" sometimes do more harm than
good.

Such limitations in a study's design can escape detection even by top
peer reviewers and medical editors. Marcia Angell, the former editor-
in-
chief of The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), says that most
doctors are ill equipped to critically assess the conclusions of
researchers. A trim woman with a warm smile, Angell leans forward in
her seat at her home in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and says, "Let me
tell you the dirty secret of medical journals: It is very hard to find
enough articles to publish. With a rejection rate of 90 percent for
original research, we were hard pressed to find 10 percent that were
worth publishing. So you end up publishing weak studies because there
is so much bad work out there." Doctors, Angell says, are not
skeptical
enough about what they read in top journals. "They should say, `I
don't
believe this; prove it to me.'"

http://discovermagazine.com/2008/jul/20-wonder-drugs-that-can-
kill/article_view?b_start:int=0&-C=

Donna
Jan Drew - 20 Jul 2008 01:13 GMT
> This was published in Discovery Magazine on June 20,2008. It is one of
> the BEST
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>
> Donna

http://discovermagazine.com/2008/jul/20-wonder-drugs-that-can-kill
vernono - 20 Jul 2008 05:05 GMT
Prescription is required BECAUSE of danger.

> This was published in Discovery Magazine on June 20,2008. It is one of
> the BEST
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>
> Donna
Hawki63@sbcglobal.net - 22 Jul 2008 00:19 GMT
> Prescription is required BECAUSE of danger.

hmmmm...funny

but tylenol...perhaps the most dangerous..is available OTC

>> This was published in Discovery Magazine on June 20,2008. It is one of
>> the BEST
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>>
>> Donna
Peter Bowditch - 22 Jul 2008 22:37 GMT
>> Prescription is required BECAUSE of danger.
>
>hmmmm...funny
>
>but tylenol...perhaps the most dangerous..is available OTC

I have pointed out several times to Vernon that of the two drugs I
take most often the prescription one (metformin) is essentially
harmless (take a couple of hundred and you get a bad case of the
trots) but the OTC one (paracetamol) is deadly (take a couple of dozen
and get in line for a liver transplant). He doesn't listen, because he
knows everything. After all, Vernon invented the computer tape that I
first used in 1966, among his other achievements.

Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

vernono - 22 Jul 2008 23:55 GMT
>>> Prescription is required BECAUSE of danger.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> knows everything. After all, Vernon invented the computer tape that I
> first used in 1966, among his other achievements.

Prescription is prescription because someone has proven dangers.  PROVE
otherwise.  Prescription is controlled.  Why controlled?  DUUUHHH
OTC is no guarantee of safety.  BTW, Tylenol in excess of 400 unnits per day
will cause liver failure in the average person.
AND Tylenol is safer than aspirin.
Nattokinase (non prescription) is safer and more effective than aspirin (non
prescription) or Plavix (prescription) (For blood thinning.)
Aspirin was popular before prescription was even a term.

It doesn't make one bit of difference what YOU take to change the definition
of a word.
Please tell us why YOU (no Doctor) think that certain products may be sold
ONLY under prescription.

BTW  Why is metformin given under controlled conditions ( prescription)

In many people a MAJOR renal problem.
Glyburide
In a single-dose interaction study in type 2 diabetes patients,
coadministration of metformin and glyburide did not result in any changes in
either metformin pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics. Decreases in
glyburide AUC and Cmax were observed, but were highly variable. The
single-dose nature of this study and the lack of correlation between
glyburide blood levels and pharmacodynamic effects, makes the clinical
significance of this interaction uncertain (see DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION:
Concomitant GLUCOPHAGE or GLUCOPHAGE XR and Oral Sulfonylurea Therapy in
Adult Patients).

Furosemide
A single-dose, metformin-furosemide drug interaction study in healthy
subjects demonstrated that pharmacokinetic parameters of both compounds were
affected by coadministration.

Furosemide increased the metformin plasma and blood Cmax by 22% and blood
AUC by 15%, without any significant change in metformin renal clearance.
When administered with metformin, the Cmax and AUC of furosemide were 31%
and 12% smaller, respectively, than when administered alone, and the
terminal half-life was decreased by 32%, without any significant change in
furosemide renal clearance. No information is available about the
interaction of metformin and furosemide when coadministered chronically.

Nifedipine
A single-dose, metformin-nifedipine drug interaction study in normal healthy
volunteers demonstrated that coadministration of nifedipine increased plasma
metformin Cmax and AUC by 20% and 9%, respectively, and increased the amount
excreted in the urine. Tmax and half-life were unaffected. Nifedipine
appears to enhance the absorption of metformin. Metformin had minimal
effects on nifedipine.

Cationic drugs
Cationic drugs (e.g., amiloride, digoxin, morphine, procainamide, quinidine,
quinine, ranitidine, triamterene, trimethoprim, or vancomycin) that are
eliminated by renal tubular secretion theoretically have the potential for
interaction with metformin by competing for common renal tubular transport
systems. Such interaction between metformin and oral cimetidine has been
observed in normal healthy volunteers in both single- and multiple-dose,
metformin-cimetidine drug interaction studies, with a 60% increase in peak
metformin plasma and whole blood concentrations and a 40% increase in plasma
and whole blood metformin AUC. There was no change in elimination half-life
in the single-dose study. Metformin had no effect on cimetidine
pharmacokinetics. Although such interactions remain theoretical (except for
cimetidine), careful patient monitoring and dose adjustment of GLUCOPHAGE or
GLUCOPHAGE XR and/or the interfering drug is recommended in patients who are
taking cationic medications that are excreted via the proximal renal tubular
secretory system.

Other
Certain drugs tend to produce hyperglycemia and may lead to loss of glycemic
control. These drugs include the thiazides and other diuretics,
corticosteroids, phenothiazines, thyroid products, estrogens, oral
contraceptives, phenytoin, nicotinic acid, sympathomimetics, calcium channel
blocking drugs, and isoniazid. When such drugs are administered to a patient
receiving GLUCOPHAGE or GLUCOPHAGE XR, the patient should be closely
observed for loss of blood glucose control. When such drugs are withdrawn
from a patient receiving GLUCOPHAGE or GLUCOPHAGE XR, the patient should be
observed closely for hypoglycemia.

In healthy volunteers, the pharmacokinetics of metformin and propranolol,
and metformin and ibuprofen were not affected when coadministered in
single-dose interaction studies.

Metformin is negligibly bound to plasma proteins and is, therefore, less
likely to interact with highly protein-bound drugs such as salicylates,
sulfonamides, chloramphenicol, and probenecid, as compared to the
sulfonylureas, which are extensively bound to serum proteins.
Hawki63@sbcglobal.net - 23 Jul 2008 01:34 GMT
>>>> Prescription is required BECAUSE of danger.
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> OTC is no guarantee of safety.  BTW, Tylenol in excess of 400 unnits per
> day will cause liver failure in the average person

you may want to look that number up...it is 4000 mgm that is the recommended
max daily dose...(not 400 units)

and actually even that dose will NOT cause liver failure in the "average
person"...

it is "merely the level at which other problems..ie alcohol consumption
other meds..etc ...should be considered

> AND Tylenol is safer than aspirin.

hardly...if one took the same amount per day of aspirin as tylenol...they
likely will bleed..thus it is not safer...

> Nattokinase (non prescription) is safer and more effective than aspirin
> (non prescription) or Plavix (prescription) (For blood thinning.)
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> Please tell us why YOU (no Doctor) think that certain products may be sold
> ONLY under prescription.

them's the rules...years ago drugs were divided into "script" only and
OTC,,,Peter and I had nothing to do with it...

I have no clue why you continue to argue with a doctor (peter) and an
advanced practice nurse with scriptive priviliges (me)...

obviously either of us know more than you do...

and again..neither of us make the rules...

> BTW  Why is metformin given under controlled conditions ( prescription)
>
[quoted text clipped - 67 lines]
> sulfonamides, chloramphenicol, and probenecid, as compared to the
> sulfonylureas, which are extensively bound to serum proteins.
D. C. Sessions - 23 Jul 2008 02:18 GMT
> Prescription is prescription because someone has proven dangers.

Prescription is the default.  It's not necessary to
prove "dangers," it's necessary to prove safety.  Thus
the rather involved process of taking a drug OTC.

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
vernono - 23 Jul 2008 05:42 GMT
>> Prescription is prescription because someone has proven dangers.
>
> Prescription is the default.  It's not necessary to
> prove "dangers," it's necessary to prove safety.  Thus
> the rather involved process of taking a drug OTC.

Boy have you swallowed the pharm game.
I can put ANYTHING on the market unless I make claims about it or someone
suffers a very negative response.

Read the history of red yeast rice.  Interesting pharm nonsense.
It's just a food and has been proven to be an effective statin.  Just don't
put it on the label.
Richard Schultz - 23 Jul 2008 06:54 GMT
: Boy have you swallowed the pharm game.
: I can put ANYTHING on the market unless I make claims about it or someone
: suffers a very negative response.

That's not the "pharm" game -- that's the effect of lobbying (and at least
one well-placed "political contribution") on the part of the "natural
supplements" industry.

-----
Richard Schultz                              schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing."
vernono - 23 Jul 2008 18:25 GMT
> : Boy have you swallowed the pharm game.
> : I can put ANYTHING on the market unless I make claims about it or
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> one well-placed "political contribution") on the part of the "natural
> supplements" industry.

Do what?
One well placed.
This is U.S. not Israel.
Natural supplement industry?  Which of the 300 plus?    DUUHHH
ONE contribution?  ha ha ha ha ha ha

> -----
> Richard Schultz                              schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
> Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
> Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
> -----
> "You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing."
Richard Schultz - 23 Jul 2008 19:24 GMT
:> : Boy have you swallowed the pharm game.
:> : I can put ANYTHING on the market unless I make claims about it or
:> : someone suffers a very negative response.

:> That's not the "pharm" game -- that's the effect of lobbying (and at least
:> one well-placed "political contribution") on the part of the "natural
:> supplements" industry.

: Do what?

It was the "nutritional supplement" industry that made sure that as long
as they make no explicit claims, the FDA can't do a thing to them.

: Natural supplement industry?  Which of the 300 plus?    DUUHHH

The industry that rakes in something like $27 billion/year in the U.S. alone.

: ONE contribution?  ha ha ha ha ha ha

I'm sure that they've made more than one (although you don't seem to realize
that the more that they've made, the weaker your case is).  The one I was
thinking of was the well-publicized one they made to Orrin Hatch, who
obediently pushed through the legislation that removed "nutritional
supplements" from the list of things that the FDA can regulate.

-----
Richard Schultz                              schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"Apparently, you take me for a complete fool."
"Yeah -- more or less."
                Bob & Ray, "Garish Summit"
vernono - 23 Jul 2008 22:27 GMT
> :> : Boy have you swallowed the pharm game.
> :> : I can put ANYTHING on the market unless I make claims about it or
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> obediently pushed through the legislation that removed "nutritional
> supplements" from the list of things that the FDA can regulate.

Good the FDA does no good.  We are not a socialist (NAZI) country.
Why would I want the government to regulate what I eat?

DUUUHHH
Should we limit the sales of blueberries because they are extremely potent?
Blueberries and cod liver oil are right at the top of nutritional
supplements.

You know nothing about American government OR medicine.

You are playing the EXACT same game as the Jews did in the 1930s, follow
Socialism AKA NAZI.
Yes, the Jew was very instrumental (positive) in the rise of the third
reich.  You and your kind are going to destroy Israel, not the Iranians.
Socialist bastards.

> -----
> Richard Schultz                              schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> "Yeah -- more or less."
> Bob & Ray, "Garish Summit"
Peter Bowditch - 24 Jul 2008 00:42 GMT
>> :> : Boy have you swallowed the pharm game.
>> :> : I can put ANYTHING on the market unless I make claims about it or
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
>reich.  You and your kind are going to destroy Israel, not the Iranians.
>Socialist bastards.

Wow! I visualise Vernon dressed like Crocodile Dundee and saying
"That's not a meltdown, THIS is a meltdown".

Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

vernono - 24 Jul 2008 00:53 GMT
>>> :> : Boy have you swallowed the pharm game.
>>> :> : I can put ANYTHING on the market unless I make claims about it or
[quoted text clipped - 44 lines]
> Wow! I visualise Vernon dressed like Crocodile Dundee and saying
> "That's not a meltdown, THIS is a meltdown".

When is the last time you defended the Jew dispite the FACT that they were
very instrumental in socialist take over in Germany?  How many relatives did
you have slaughtered.
The same is happening today in the U.S.
A huge number of Jews are backing liberals.  Listening to Obama's Rev.
Wright is about the same as Germany in 1930.
Peter Bowditch - 24 Jul 2008 13:51 GMT
>>>> :> : Boy have you swallowed the pharm game.
>>>> :> : I can put ANYTHING on the market unless I make claims about it or
[quoted text clipped - 51 lines]
>A huge number of Jews are backing liberals.  Listening to Obama's Rev.
>Wright is about the same as Germany in 1930.

Wow! More mouthfoam there than at a tooth cleaning record attempt.

Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

vernono - 24 Jul 2008 19:42 GMT
>>>>> :> : Boy have you swallowed the pharm game.
>>>>> :> : I can put ANYTHING on the market unless I make claims about it or
[quoted text clipped - 57 lines]
>
> Wow! More mouthfoam there than at a tooth cleaning record attempt.

Another Nazi ploy.  Joe numbnuts saying, "oh no it couldn't be"
Richard Schultz - 24 Jul 2008 20:07 GMT
: Another Nazi ploy.  Joe numbnuts saying, "oh no it couldn't be"

Where's Mike Godwin when you *really* need him?

-----
Richard Schultz                              schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing."
Peter Bowditch - 24 Jul 2008 21:00 GMT
>>>>>> :> : Boy have you swallowed the pharm game.
>>>>>> :> : I can put ANYTHING on the market unless I make claims about it or
[quoted text clipped - 59 lines]
>
>Another Nazi ploy.  Joe numbnuts saying, "oh no it couldn't be"

Wow! If this gets even better we will all have to fit drains to the
rear of our monitors.

Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

D. C. Sessions - 24 Jul 2008 14:43 GMT
> When is the last time you defended the Jew dispite the FACT that they were
> very instrumental in socialist take over in Germany?  How many relatives did
> you have slaughtered.
> The same is happening today in the U.S.
> A huge number of Jews are backing liberals.  Listening to Obama's Rev.
> Wright is about the same as Germany in 1930.

Do tell us more.

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
vernono - 24 Jul 2008 19:43 GMT
>> When is the last time you defended the Jew dispite the FACT that they
>> were
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> | chance that someone will see the light. |
> +- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+

Get an education and read what is happening, not that we can do much about
it except limit government for a while, (short while)
Jan Drew - 24 Jul 2008 06:35 GMT
Vernon is NOT the subject, Bow-itch.
Richard Schultz - 24 Jul 2008 05:46 GMT
: Why would I want the government to regulate what I eat?

The U.S. government does not regulate what you eat.  It does regulate what
people are allowed to sell you that is labelled as being fit for human
consumption.  The reason for that type of regulation is a very simple one:
once the society developed to the point where a significant fraction of
the people were not raising their own food, they discovered that they
could not rely on the manufacturers of food to supply them with stuff
that was fit to eat unless the government was looking over the shoulders
of the food manufacturers.  I suggest that you read _The Jungle_ by
Upton Sinclair, which, much to his surprise, led to a public outcry that
eventually led to the passage of the Pure Food and Drug Act.

: Yes, the Jew was very instrumental (positive) in the rise of the third
: reich.  You and your kind are going to destroy Israel, not the Iranians.
: Socialist bastards.

That's why being Jewish is so much fun -- we get to be the force behind the
Great Capitalist Conspiracy *and* the force behind the Great Communist
Conspiracy.  Plus we get this neat decoder ring when we officially join
the International Zionist Conspiracy.

-----
Richard Schultz                              schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
". . . for while he was not dumber than an ox, he was not any smarter."
                -- James Thurber, _My Life and Hard Times_
Jan Drew - 24 Jul 2008 06:39 GMT
From: schu...@mail.biu.ack.il (Richard Schultz)
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 15:17:21 +0000 (UTC)
Local: Sun, Jan 27 2008 11:17 am
Subject: Re: We have ventured off topic from the original posters topic
vernono - 24 Jul 2008 19:46 GMT
> From: schu...@mail.biu.ack.il (Richard Schultz)
> Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 15:17:21 +0000 (UTC)
> Local: Sun, Jan 27 2008 11:17 am Subject: Re: We have ventured off topic
> from the original posters topic

Government intervention is a large part of the topic regarding so called
safe prescription drugs.
vernono - 24 Jul 2008 00:22 GMT
> :> : Boy have you swallowed the pharm game.
> :> : I can put ANYTHING on the market unless I make claims about it or
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>
> : ONE contribution?  ha ha ha ha ha ha

YOU SAID

"(and at least one well-placed "political contribution")"

> I'm sure that they've made more than one (although you don't seem to
> realize
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> "Yeah -- more or less."
> Bob & Ray, "Garish Summit"
D. C. Sessions - 24 Jul 2008 14:42 GMT
> I'm sure that they've made more than one (although you don't seem to realize
> that the more that they've made, the weaker your case is).  The one I was
> thinking of was the well-publicized one they made to Orrin Hatch, who
> obediently pushed through the legislation that removed "nutritional
> supplements" from the list of things that the FDA can regulate.

Senator Hatch isn't necessarily for sale (or at least not that
cheaply.)  However, he does have a sound and well-honed sense
of "constituent service" and "nutritional supplements" are one
of Utah's main industries.  Right up there with MLMs and mail
fraud.

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
Jan Drew - 24 Jul 2008 06:32 GMT
OOPPS.  This thread is not about supplements.
Richard Schultz=hypocrite.

Jan
He who allows oppression, shares the crime.
-Erasmus Darwin, grandfather of Charles Darwin.

> : Boy have you swallowed the pharm game.
> : I can put ANYTHING on the market unless I make claims about it or
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> -----
> Richard Schultz
Richard Schultz - 24 Jul 2008 08:55 GMT
: OOPPS.  This thread is not about supplements.
: Richard Schultz=hypocrite.

Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?

-----
Richard Schultz                              schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean.  Do you have to salt your
truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?"
D. C. Sessions - 24 Jul 2008 14:47 GMT
> : OOPPS.  This thread is not about supplements.
> : Richard Schultz=hypocrite.
>
> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?

Are you asking rhetorical questions?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
Richard Schultz - 24 Jul 2008 15:41 GMT
:> : OOPPS.  This thread is not about supplements.
:> : Richard Schultz=hypocrite.

:> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?

: Are you asking rhetorical questions?

Who, me?

-----
Richard Schultz                              schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"an optimist is a guy/ that has never had/ much experience"
D. C. Sessions - 25 Jul 2008 03:03 GMT
> :> : OOPPS.  This thread is not about supplements.
> :> : Richard Schultz=hypocrite.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>  
> Who, me?

Who else?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
Richard Schultz - 25 Jul 2008 09:43 GMT
:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
:>  
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
:
: Who else?

Do I *look* like the kind of person who would ask rhetorical questions?

-----
Richard Schultz                              schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers which smell bad."
D. C. Sessions - 25 Jul 2008 14:26 GMT
> :> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
> :>  
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Do I *look* like the kind of person who would ask rhetorical questions?

Who do you think I am?  Superman?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 25 Jul 2008 19:12 GMT
>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Who do you think I am?  Superman?

Are you and Richard having a good time in this thread?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 26 Jul 2008 03:14 GMT
>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> Are you and Richard having a good time in this thread?

Would you like to join?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 26 Jul 2008 20:07 GMT
>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> Would you like to join?

Do I seem like someone who'd be interested in doing that?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 26 Jul 2008 20:46 GMT
>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> Do I seem like someone who'd be interested in doing that?

How would I know?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 27 Jul 2008 00:24 GMT
>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>
> How would I know?

Haven't you known me for years?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 27 Jul 2008 12:47 GMT
>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
> Haven't you known me for years?

Can you ever really know another person?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 27 Jul 2008 20:25 GMT
>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>
> Can you ever really know another person?

Feeling philosophical today are you?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 27 Jul 2008 22:22 GMT
>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
>
> Feeling philosophical today are you?

Is there ever a time (at least on UseNet) when I am *not*
philosophical?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
Peter Bowditch - 27 Jul 2008 22:30 GMT
>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
>
>Feeling philosophical today are you?

Who isn't?

Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

D. C. Sessions - 27 Jul 2008 22:52 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>
> Who isn't?

Did someone ask *you* to fork the thread?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 27 Jul 2008 23:06 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>
> Did someone ask *you* to fork the thread?

That's just like Peter, isn't it?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 28 Jul 2008 00:06 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
> That's just like Peter, isn't it?

Is this where we loop back five posts?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 28 Jul 2008 00:36 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
>
> Is this where we loop back five posts?

Can we do that?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 28 Jul 2008 01:54 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 31 lines]
>
> Can we do that?

Why not?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 29 Jul 2008 23:39 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 33 lines]
>
> Why not?

We wouldn't want to confuse anyone, would we?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 30 Jul 2008 14:25 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
>
> We wouldn't want to confuse anyone, would we?

How could anyone tell the difference?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 01 Aug 2008 01:10 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
>
> How could anyone tell the difference?

Tell the difference from what?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 01 Aug 2008 14:45 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
>
> Tell the difference from what?

You got me.

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 02 Aug 2008 19:02 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 41 lines]
>
> You got me.

Really?

Is this fork corked?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

MothWrangler - 27 Jul 2008 23:49 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>
> Who isn't?

You're rather late coming to join us now, aren't you?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 28 Jul 2008 00:05 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>
> You're rather late coming to join us now, aren't you?

*US*?  Do you have a mouse in your pocket?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 28 Jul 2008 00:39 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
> *US*?  Do you have a mouse in your pocket?

There isn't an "us"? :-(

So, you're admitting that thing in your pocket is a mouse?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 28 Jul 2008 01:56 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 31 lines]
>
> So, you're admitting that thing in your pocket is a mouse?

Did you think I was just glad to see you?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 29 Jul 2008 23:38 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 33 lines]
>
> Did you think I was just glad to see you?

How was I supposed to know that time would be different from all the others?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

Jan Drew - 30 Jul 2008 00:54 GMT
http://discovermagazine.com/2008/jul/20-wonder-drugs-that-can-kill
D. C. Sessions - 30 Jul 2008 14:28 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
>
> How was I supposed to know that time would be different from all the others?

How could you forget?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 01 Aug 2008 01:07 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
>
> How could you forget?

So, your change in attitude is *my* fault?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 01 Aug 2008 14:43 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
>
> So, your change in attitude is *my* fault?

Was that a rhetorical question?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 02 Aug 2008 19:02 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 41 lines]
>
> Was that a rhetorical question?

That's the essential question, isn't it?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 02 Aug 2008 19:25 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 43 lines]
>
> That's the essential question, isn't it?

Do you think it has an answer?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 02 Aug 2008 21:12 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 45 lines]
>
> Do you think it has an answer?

Do you really think the answer is all that important?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 02 Aug 2008 21:54 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 47 lines]
>
> Do you really think the answer is all that important?

Doesn't that depend on whether there *is* an answer?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
Jan Drew - 03 Aug 2008 19:09 GMT
http://discovermagazine.com/2008/jul/20-wonder-drugs-that-can-kill
MothWrangler - 03 Aug 2008 19:24 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 49 lines]
>
> Doesn't that depend on whether there *is* an answer?

If it's true that there isn't an answer, what other response can we give
to one question but to reply with another one?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 03 Aug 2008 19:35 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 52 lines]
> If it's true that there isn't an answer, what other response can we give
> to one question but to reply with another one?

What's the point of that?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 05 Aug 2008 01:47 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 54 lines]
>
> What's the point of that?

If there's a better alternative, why haven't you offered one?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 05 Aug 2008 02:52 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 56 lines]
>
> If there's a better alternative, why haven't you offered one?

Are we requiring answers to go with every question now?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 05 Aug 2008 23:23 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 58 lines]
>
> Are we requiring answers to go with every question now?

Is this MHA?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 06 Aug 2008 02:57 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 60 lines]
>
> Is this MHA?

Would that imply "yes" or "no?"

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 08 Aug 2008 20:26 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 62 lines]
>
> Would that imply "yes" or "no?"

Why does this need to be so darn complicated?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

D. C. Sessions - 09 Aug 2008 03:04 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 64 lines]
>
> Why does this need to be so darn complicated?

What would be simple enough for you?

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> -+
MothWrangler - 19 Aug 2008 19:55 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:>  
[quoted text clipped - 66 lines]
>
> What would be simple enough for you?

Did you miss me?

Signature

Proud member since 2007, WWWSC #1
Ann/Emma Anne #4

Jan Drew - 20 Aug 2008 01:17 GMT
Raving - 05 Aug 2008 23:38 GMT
> Are we requiring answers to go with every question now?
IAOI it is a rhetorical question.
Jan Drew - 03 Aug 2008 19:09 GMT
http://discovermagazine.com/2008/jul/20-wonder-drugs-that-can-kill
Jan Drew - 03 Aug 2008 19:08 GMT
http://discovermagazine.com/2008/jul/20-wonder-drugs-that-can-kill
Jan Drew - 03 Aug 2008 19:07 GMT
http://discovermagazine.com/2008/jul/20-wonder-drugs-that-can-kill
vernono - 28 Jul 2008 00:42 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>:> :> Why have you not posted similar criticisms of Vernon?
>>>>>>>>>>>>:>
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
>
> *US*?  Do you have a mouse in your pocket?

Subject, wonder drugs that can kill.

Kill what?
The subject thread.
Jan Drew - 26 Jul 2008 05:54 GMT
Nancy Knisley (aka)"MothWrangler" <mothwrangler@hotmail.com>

Is getting more and more Woo-zy.
Or, maybe she meant Boo-zee?
Jan Drew - 26 Jul 2008 05:45 GMT
> Do I *look* like  

Is not the subject.
However, since you insist on posting off topic...
Actually, we saw what you looked like.
Being the nice person I am, I will say no more.
Hawki63@sbcglobal.net - 23 Jul 2008 07:58 GMT
>>> Prescription is prescription because someone has proven dangers.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> It's just a food and has been proven to be an effective statin.  Just
> don't put it on the label.

as in many many "drugs"...they are basically precursors

ie Digoxin is foxglove..yes..an herb..and hardly "safe" enuf for folks like
you to take without advice of professionals...blood tests to measure Dig
levels etc....too much or too little is NOT safe

as for red yeast rice...yes it is a "food"...it is also exactly the same as
a certain statin...difference being that "evil pharma" requires that each
pill is exactly the dose as the next one....supplements,,and foods...do not
have this safety...

might as well buy your "pills in India" where uniform dosing is also a fairy
tale
Mike - 24 Jul 2008 03:19 GMT
>> Prescription is prescription because someone has proven dangers.
>
> Prescription is the default.  It's not necessary to
> prove "dangers," it's necessary to prove safety.  Thus
> the rather involved process of taking a drug OTC.

It is not only about safety, really. It's about money as well:
to keep prices up.

Claritin (loratadine) was a prescription drug, and obscenely expensive
in the USA. One could in fact get a bus trip from New York to Canada,
buy Claritin there and save money in the process. Then the patent
expired in 2002, and Claritin went OTC. According to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claritin,

*** quote ***
Although an FDA advisory panel ruled that Loratadine was SAFE enough to
be sold over the counter, Schering OPPOSED such a decision on the
grounds that it would REDUCE THE PRICE that could be charged for the
drug. The drug continued to be available only by prescription in the
U.S. until it went off patent in 2002. It was then immediately approved
for over-the-counter sales. Once it became an unpatented
over-the-counter drug, the price dropped precipitously, and insurance
companies no longer paid for it.
*** end of quote ***
(capitals mine)

Loratadine was something like $12 for 60 tablets in Target.

I changed the topic because the original topic does not apply here.
vernono - 24 Jul 2008 04:46 GMT
>>> Prescription is prescription because someone has proven dangers.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> expired in 2002, and Claritin went OTC. According to
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claritin,

Oh, for sure.
The excuse is safety.
> *** quote ***
> Although an FDA advisory panel ruled that Loratadine was SAFE enough to be
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> I changed the topic because the original topic does not apply here.
Jan Drew - 23 Jul 2008 02:09 GMT
Vernon is not the subject.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.