 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Asthma / February 2006Antibiotic Major Problem.
I met this young man some years previously when he had a tendency for asthmatic type problems. The problem at that time was allayed by identifying the situation and avoiding the exposure involved. On that occasion he had been previoussly given several antibiotic courses over a short period of ten months or so. On this occasion he mentioned to me that he was going for an oral surgical procedure for wisdom tooth removal under a general anaesthetic. He was 32. The surgery went OK and he did mention that he was given a cephalosporin based antibiotic as a prophylactic which was different to anything he had ever previously had. He was also given a script for pain killers. (nsaid type) That was his doctors instructions. For the first couple of days he appeared OK but had some slight muscular discomfort begin to be apparent in his lower back. After the third day he began to have mild stomach cramps with the back-ache increasing. He began taking the pain killers which he previously had not used. At the end of the fourth day he was suffering quite severe stomach cramping and his back pains were becoming quite severe. The drug information mentioned "there may be some stomach effect" but made no mention as to how severe this would appear. He had no temperature or other apparent problem apart from constipation which he thought was causing the stomach cramps. At this point he ceased taking the antibiotics and the stomach pain became agonising and he was rushed to hospital and immediately admitted. The triage doctor suspected possible kidney stone problems and immediately ordered Xrays and a scan. Nothing was confirmed, but a kidneystone problem was suspected but it was thought it had been passed. A blood test revealed major kidney problems and he was transferred to a renal section with acute renal failure. Fractional operation remained in one kidney only. His condition hovered for several days and an emergency operation was organised for tissue sampling with possibility of a complex emergency organ removal. The situation was classed as "grave". He was on morphine for a full week. I was surprised that no consideration was given that it may be an allergic reaction and also that it may have been made more sensitive by the pain killer given. The doctors involved discounted that an allergic reaction had been involved and no attempt was made to sample the unused remaining antibiotic. The mans condition stabilised and gradually began to show some improvement after a week with dipstick and blood test showing improvement. I made a point of obtaining the unused drugs involved and contacted the pharmaceutical supply company requesting information in this regard, sending them a sample for testing. (upon their request) The young man has returned to his home but has been quite ill and required constant bed rest and high fluid intake and diet, but his condition is now improving. I was not impressed with the overall lack of determination of the likely problem cause, it was possible that the drug was contaminated or poisoned. It was also possible that this may affect others that may use it if that were the case. The origin of this medication manufacture was also a worry. Enough said! (Major chemist organisation) The information sheet with the drug had no mention of anything approaching these types of symptoms. A quick check on the net indicated a possible interstitial kidney disease kind of problem, which also mentioned allergy effects to these kinds of drugs. The relevant authorities have made no effort to try to positively determine the actual cause of the problem and the drug company no doubt is working feverishly to produce a "substance true to label" report. I am amazed to realize that the circumstance of the stomach cramps was not considered as a massive allergic reaction and that the pain killers could have increased that effect, then the kidney problem severity was not considered as an allergy reaction either. No assistive medication for an allergy condition was administered. It appears permanent kidney scarring will remain. As anyone can imagine this matter is not closed. So much for prescribing drugs that a person has never been given previously, especially antibiotics. Cheers, Merlin. >I met this young man some years previously when he had a tendency for > asthmatic type problems. <snip> > So much for prescribing drugs that a person has never been given > previously, especially antibiotics. > Cheers, Merlin. Merlin, You are full of crap. Of course, an allergic response to the antibiotic was considered. Whenever somene goes into acute renal failure after starting a new drug, especially a penicillin or cephalosprin antibiotic (NSAIDs also are common culprits), it is one of the first things that pops into just about every doctor's head. I am sure what happened, if this story is not just completely a figment, is that they considered it, tested for it, and moved on to try to address the real problem. The treatment is removal of the offending drug so there really was nothing else to be done from a therapeutic perspective. Much of this story does not ring true. Acute renal failure generally is not painful. I've never heard of it requiring a morphine drip. It also generally does not require nephrectomy nor does it cause the person to be severely ill once the inititial fluid and electrolyte issues are straightened out. The things you describe sound like the sequelae of whatever other systemic problem was causing the renal failure. The part where you step in and examine the left over drug and at the request of the manufacturer have samples tested is just way over the top. I'm calling you out as being a bald faced liar on that one. First off all, drug indicused interstitial nephritis does not involve faulty manufacturing, it is an allergic reaction (of sorts). Secondly, if they were interested in having it tested they would have delt with the patient, his family, the docs caring for him, government agencies - pretty much anyone except some casual acquaintance the patient met in a bar and who apparently has an interest in proving the drug was toxic. But I'll give you a chance (and I suspect prove my point all at once) - Who did you contact from what company? Or let me contact the pt.? This should be verifiable if you can.  Signature00doc > You are full of crap. > [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > once) - Who did you contact from what company? Or let me > contact the pt.? This should be verifiable if you can. Now remember, he must be dealing with people in the outback who have no doctors and must rely on him to solve all their medical problems.... This does sound like an urban legend, though. I think I read this on www.snopes.com . >> You are full of crap. >> [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > Now remember, he must be dealing with people in the outback who have no > doctors and must rely on him to solve all their medical problems.... Merlin likes to play doctor and brag about it here (at length). What else is new? I really am quite amazed that such rubbish is expounded by you pseudo medical exponents. Firstly I hold a signed release to ask for information on behalf of the young man and have made no indication that I was involved with any medical area. Secondly you would be aware of the problems with kidneys and the pain involved from possible blockages from them. In that this problem has happened and no one evidently made any attempt to determine the possible causes to a reasonable expected status, I personally have undertaken to ensure this will happen. Whether the medical personel at the hospital have acted appropriately is not my concern, however I am determined to ensure that a proper enquiry will be made and a proper explanation given. I have retained samples (which will be independently analysed) of all the involved medications and full statements of the available witnesses. The circumstances of how this particular medication was determined for suitability for this application remain to be seen. The medications manufactured source also creates a question, have you people had a look at sources lately, obviously "global" supply. To sum up it is quite obvious that the medical system here includes an element of pathetic arogant non-events like yourselves who go out of their way to try to descredit or close ranks, and this has happened without apparent reasonable responsible attitudes to try to explain it. Whether it is workload involved or there may be mitigating circumstances is outside my interest. Any knowledge base for this account was either taken from factual circumstances or from the internet sources covering this area. (American sources) I do have a formal meeting involving this material with authorities shortly. So I would suggest I am not playing at doctor, anything but! So you get three guesses as to why I am collecting all this material and am not going to disclose further info at this time. The account given was accurate. There is no bragging intended, simply an account as a warning to others. Cheers, Merlin. \ > I have retained samples (which will be independently analysed) > of all > the involved medications and full statements of the available > witnesses. Wow! He not only plays doctor, he also plays lawyer, too. He's like the old time movie where the town is so small he's the postmaster, the sheriff and the judge. I really am quite amazed that such ridiculous rubbish is expounded by you pseudo medical exponents. Obviously a circumstance of a supposed doctor that spends a major part of his time playing the great net oracle with a couple of other has beens in tow, you really excel as being obnoxious net junkies. You need to get out into the real world, you are all disgusting and mentally sick!!! Firstly I hold a signed release to ask for information on behalf of the young man and have made no indication that I was involved with any medical area to any person. A signed authorisation was also given to the drug company to make enquiries for their regulatory report. Samples of their product were sent to them at their request for their analysis as mentioned originating from a request from me for their advice in this matter. Secondly you should be aware of the problems with kidneys and the pain involved from possible blockages from them whether by "whatever cause". You quite obviously need some brushing up on your information. In that this problem has happened and no one evidently made any attempt to determine the possible causes to a reasonable expected status (as far as I can determine) or examine the unused medications involved, I personally have undertaken to ensure this will happen. Whether the medical personel at the hospital or elsewhere have acted appropriately is not my concern, however I am determined to ensure that a proper enquiry will be made and a proper explanation and report given. "Unconfirmed" does not wash!! Given the gravity of the circumstance where a person is made gravely ill by a medication given to avoid infection!! I have retained samples (which will be independently analysed) of all involved medications and have full statements of the available witnesses. The circumstances of how this particular medication was determined for suitability for this application also remains to be seen. The medications manufactured source and purity also creates a question, have you people had a look at sources lately, obvious "global" supply! You appear to be out of touch with reality once again! This is another area of query. You miss the possibility of dosage level accuracy or contamination being a factor. To sum up it is quite possible that the medical system here includes an element of pathetic arogant non-events like yourselves who go out of their way to try to descredit or close ranks, and if this has happened or is obvious by the apparent lack of reasonable responsible attitudes to satisfactorily explain, that will be highlighted. Whether it is workload involvment or there may be other mitigating circumstances is outside my interest. Any knowledge base for this account was either taken from factual circumstances or from the internet sources covering this area. (American sources, typically, http://www.aafp.org/afp/20000401/2077.html) Please advise if this source is in error. You might comment on the "interstitial disease" mentioned that I may convey your comments to the author, which I suggest would likely be somewhat more intelligent than your pathetic ramblings. I do have a formal meeting involving this and other collected material with authorities shortly. I would suggest I am not playing at doctor, anything but! I am surprised at your absolute misinterpretation. It really does not convey that any of you have much intelligence or comprehension ability especially compounded with the ridiculous dribblings of your cohorts. It would appear the doctors involved were female So you get only one guess as to why I am collecting all this material and am not going to disclose further info at this time. The account given was accurate. The bloody urine samples were not mentioned. I hope to obtain the test result shortly. You could have assisted with medical area information that I may have missed, but any input from your sources would obviously be suspect due to your obvious inept original replies. I draw the concluson that you find the whole episode smacks of incompetence, so we do at least agree on something, but I am not bound by the unwritten laws to coverup and lie as so-called medical "experts" are. Cheers, Merlin. <reams of rambling verbiage snipped> Then you can't provide the information that ooDoc requested? > <reams of rambling verbiage snipped> > > Then you can't provide the information that ooDoc requested? We're still waiting for the information that I requested!!! You are correct - renal obstruction does hurt. It can hurt worse than childbirth (or so I have been told by people who have experienced both). However, it is not caused by interstitial nephritis or NSAID induced uropathy. I pointed this out in my first post - that if it hurt it was not from the meds. Your statements only support what I have said. The article you linked also does not contradict me. If you have signed documents from the drug company then I assume you would be willing to share them. The company is not a patient and has no right to expect privacy. Faulty manufacturing of the drug would be a matter of public interest. So let me know if you want a fax number. I'll reimburse you the fee if that is an issue. If you don't want to share the documents then I will make other assumptions as to why not. Signature00doc >I really am quite amazed that such ridiculous rubbish is >expounded by > you pseudo medical exponents. You mean YOU, right? Because none of US have claimed to CURE people. Well, doc maybe, but then, he's got a license to cure people. DO YOU????? Well Roberts, I did believe you were somewhat more intelligent that that stupid woman CEO but once again it appears I am wrong. Have you been having it off with her? I believe it does rub off!! No, I am not playing at either being doctor or a lawyer, I am playing at determination of the cause of a problem. I know this is beyond your comprehension and you would probably not know what this meant, but careful collection of information from all sources will provide a proper and more informed basis for further tests if required, and understanding of the prognosis probabilities for this unfortunate man from a proper investigative panel, or a brief for a legal case presentation for a suitable agent dependent on apparent circumstances. (Bearing in mind that he now has possible permanent kidney damage) I suspect that this particular problem would not be an isolated case and there could possibly be others that have been glossed over by persons of similar persuasion as yourselves. As far as playing is concerned, many of my previous investigations of asthmatic sufferer's circumstances have uncovered blatant errors. You people really need to get out and obtain some field experience, you have lost sight of reality! You and people like you remain part of the overall problem rather than part of the solution. With regard to the hospital staff meeting today it is virtually certain that the actual diagnosis was Interstitial Nephritis, the explanation was pretty comprehensive with all the collected data and test results. Showing blood and other test results which I regret to admit I do not fully understand. There was no explanation for the agonising pain involved apart from the possibility of blockage material or inflamation as to create a blockage condition. This was presented as a possibility. There may have been some undetected kidneystone material involved. The young man indicated terrible pain was experienced especially more intensely after urinating on one occasion, (note after!) but he was not aware of any solid material being discharged. At the time he was in a very dopey state in substantial pain and was barely able to stand and urinate let alone inspect his stream. There was no positive explanation for the stomach cramping severity. One kidney had a dual arterial feed which was described as relatively common and not involved with the problem. Recorded drug information was taken from files and specifications and that appeared to be the reason for not "needing" to test the drug involved. A tissue sampling is being considered to try to confirm their findings. This procedure has been delayed due to possible problems involved and the patients apparent reluctance to undergo this procedure. Current blood tests are virtually normal, blood pressure was slightly high. His condition was described as almost normal apart from odd short term aches in the lower back. He still feels spells of extreme tiredness. Dietary constraints remain. Further blood tests and a 24 hour blood pressure test was arranged. One interesting finding was that it was accepted that the antibiotic involved was a standard medication, however further questioning found that the young man had received a script from the dental surgeon and when he presented it at the chemist dispensary had been asked if the cheaper generic drug version was preferable over the more expensive properly branded version of the same drug. He had requested the cheaper generic version. He was not aware this was actually a drug version that originated from India. So this is definitely becoming interesting. I mentioned this to the specialists and they were also unaware of it. The information from the hospital was frank and open, all files were viewable and notes were taken. The renal specialist was only too happy to assist in any way possible. I must admit I was impressed. In view of the sensitivity of this situation I will not release any commercial material at this time. Please re-read the arrangement with the pharmaceutical supply company. I am at their service, they have provided the standard substance information documentation but their investigation still remains current and incomplete. Their report goes to a government department, almost like self regulation as far as I can see. They have not said that I would receive a copy. I must say again I am impressed at the hospital people, having questions answered directly and fully with complete access to the file is a rare experience. Cheers, Merlin. To 00, It would appear there is some problem posting, the first answering post did not appear for a couple of days, so I reposted and I have been pretty busy, so I apologise if it appears I am not answering properly. Understand that I have passed an authorisation from the subject to the drug company to allow them to enquire to the various areas. Other official forms needed to be obtained and completed and resent. Everything is time consuming and trying to make it all come together is no easy job. I have to make appointments at others convenience and travel considerable distances. I do believe you may have an idea as to why I am acting in this matter. I will divulge any reasonable results to you directly or whatever as they may be determined, I do agree entirely that this matter may well need common exposure. Cheers, Merlin. > I do believe you may have an idea as to why I am acting in this matter. Several posibilities occur to me. None are all that savory. Signature00doc Well the tree has really been shaken now, we will see what falls out. One area of further interest has appeared by comparison of the various cephalosporin based antibiotic producing or distributing drug companies consumer information sheets. One mentions stomach cramping. The others don't. A clarification of reasons for this warning has been requested. Cheers, Merlin. Oh geeze, now you are down to harping on "discrepancies" between different patient information sheets? You really are a clueless twit. Signature00doc "Merlin" <lagas@tpg.com.au> wrote in message (in reply to NSCEO, not Roberts) news:1136892148.961656.134610@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Well Roberts, I did believe you were somewhat more intelligent that > that stupid woman CEO but once again it appears I am wrong. Too funny. Signature00doc <muddled and at times self contradictory stuff deleted> > In view of the sensitivity of this situation I will not release any > commercial material at this time. Didn't think you would. Senstitive for whom? The patient apparently doesn't mind an inquiry. The hospital apparently is off the hook (despite your earlier claims of incompetance). The drug company is making filings with government agencies that should be a matter of public record and they seem to be cooperating fully. So who would object if you gave us enough info to look up the parts of this that are in the public domain? One other thing - NSAIDs and antibiotics are well known to cause interstitial nephritis as a king of allergic reaction. You've already come out and accused the docs of incompetance and now seem to be back pedalling on that claim (despite your admission that you don't really understand what happened or their explanation of it). Why now make the same mistake in respect to the drug company and assume it has to do with manufacturing issues? OK - one more other thing - did you ever apologize to the docs for accusing them of not investigating the cause adequately, and specifically of not considering the diagnosis that they eventually arrived at? Signature00doc Well 00, would you kindly show me where I have accused the doctors of incompetence. A further reasonable explanation was that the hospital communicated with the dental surgeon and was advised the drugs prescribed. This was taken as being standard branded items. I understand they have a comparison program for problem possibility. The drugs were accepted as being to specification. This is an interesting area for apparent assumption. They were not aware that the generic product was used. I am informed that generics must also meet the same standards and are under strict standards regulations. The final diagnosis remains uncertain. Interestingly they did mention that it could have been done better, but that it is a public hospital. My enquiries are ongoing. The dental surgeons I have contacted use other antibiotics as precautionary. So far I have found reasonable explanations at each point. Cheers, Merlin. "Well 00, would you kindly show me where I have accused the doctors of incompetence. " In the original post to this thread you said: "I was surprised that no consideration was given that it may be an allergic reaction and also that it may have been made more sensitive by the pain killer given. The doctors involved discounted that an allergic reaction had been involved and no attempt was made to sample the unused remaining antibiotic. " "I was not impressed with the overall lack of determination of the likely problem cause, it was possible that the drug was contaminated or poisoned." "A quick check on the net indicated a possible interstitial kidney disease kind of problem, which also mentioned allergy effects to these kinds of drugs. " "The relevant authorities have made no effort to try to positively determine the actual cause of the problem and the drug company no doubt is working feverishly to produce a "substance true to label" report. I am amazed to realize that the circumstance of the stomach cramps was not considered as a massive allergic reaction and that the pain killers could have increased that effect, then the kidney problem severity was not considered as an allergy reaction either. No assistive medication for an allergy condition was administered. It appears permanent kidney scarring will remain. As anyone can imagine this matter is not closed. So much for prescribing drugs that a person has never been given previously, especially antibiotics. " You accuse them of not considering what you felt to be an obvious diagnosis, not being sufficiently persistent in finding the cause, suggest that the diagnosis could have been reached with "a quick check on the internet", hint at a cover-up, suggest that permanent damage may have been done, suggest that it was all caused by the choice of meds, suggest that drug interactions were not considered, accuse them of not treating the problem, and make a veiled threat about it "not being closed" . Again, I would point out that the severe pain was not consistent with your supposed obvious diagnosis (the one that you found after a quick check on the Internet) and that in hindsight you do admit that they did indeed consider the diagnosis. I still find a few things curious about the whole episode: 1) Despite the fact that neither interstitial nephritis nor obstruction (the more likely diagnosis) is due to manufacturing issues you are still hell bent on proving this is a "poinsoning" issue. 2) Depsite the fact that you admit to knowing little about the whole topic and have been proved wrong about many of your inital assertions you are still making wild accusations and "investigating". 3) It stil is not clear exactly what your role in in this and why anyone would be talking to you about it at all. 4) Despite an apparent need to come here and convince us of your wonderfulness you also are completely uninterested in letting any of this be confirmed. A lack of interest in convicing us is belied by the way you keep posting yet you still refuse. Why is that? Signature00doc > I still find a few things curious about the whole episode: > 1) Despite the fact that neither interstitial nephritis nor obstruction > (the more likely diagnosis) is due to manufacturing issues you are > still hell bent on proving this is a "poinsoning" issue. Self-aggrandizement. > 2) Depsite the fact that you admit to knowing little about the whole > topic and have been proved wrong about many of your inital assertions > you are still making wild accusations and "investigating". Self-aggrandizement. > 3) It stil is not clear exactly what your role in in this and why > anyone would be talking to you about it at all. That's a very good question. He seems to be always at the epicenter of asthma cases. Is that because he is holding himself out as some sort of expert on the subject? It would be even more interesting to know if he is charging for his services, or if the ego-gratification is sufficient. > 4) Despite an apparent need to come here and convince us of your > wonderfulness you also are completely uninterested in letting any of > this be confirmed. A lack of interest in convicing us is belied by the > way you keep posting yet you still refuse. Why is that? He certainly doesn't get much efficiency from his writing. All that verbiage without confirming a single element of his claims. Sounds like another Baron Munchausen episode. >> 3) It stil is not clear exactly what your role in in this and why >> anyone would be talking to you about it at all. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > he is charging for his services, or if the ego-gratification is > sufficient. Well, yeah, he would have to be charging or working on commission or something. One possibility is that he is holding himself out as some kind of health expert/consultant. In this case it is a scam since he clearly does not have the background to be offering this type of service. I suppose he could be just advertising himself as a general investigator of sorts but it seems strange that people might hire what is basically just a gumshoe to to look into health matters. Another option is that he could be an ambulance chasing lawyer. This would explain his interest in blaming it on fauly manufacturing of the drug as he may be smelling a class action suit or at least some other clients. The bottom line, though, is that he would have to have some offical role (i.e. be contracted as a rep of the patient) or the docs, hospitals, drug comapanies, etc would not be meeting with him. They wouldn't do that for a concerned aquaintance. They really wouldn't even do that for just any old family member. He would have to be the designated contact/rep for the family. What is strangest about all of this is that he has been asked exactly what he does several other times and has always been vague about it. One has to wonder, if he is any kind of legitimate consultant or contractor, why he would not be willing to say what it is he does. Heck, if he really is doing this for a (legitimate) living and being as effective as he claims one would think that instead of posting under a pseudonym that he would want to advertise his services. So I can think of only two likely explanations: 1) He is really involved but what he is doing is not something that is legitimate and can be advertised. 2) It is all just some fantasy. So we are at another point where he could, if he chose to do so, validate himself. If he has a legitimate business then it should be verifiable. There would be some paper trial - an office, an advertisement, a yellow pages listing, a tax document - something. Even if he is not at liberty to discuss this particular case (which, again, should be a matter of public record so there is no reason why he would not be - unless she is a lawyer with possible pending litigation) then he should be able to verify his official status. >> 4) Despite an apparent need to come here and convince us of your >> wonderfulness you also are completely uninterested in letting any of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > verbiage without confirming a single element of his claims. Sounds > like another Baron Munchausen episode. Yes, the writing style all but eliminates him as lawyer. They generally can write a coherent paragraph. Signature00doc >once again it appears I am wrong. This is the only accurate and succint portion of your post. >>once again it appears I am wrong. > > This is the only accurate and succint portion of your post. Oh, but ARoberts....Merlin has helped as many people solve their medical problems as Tom Cruise has. Why so GLIB? Maybe a naturopathic doctor (Yellow Pages) or an alternative doctor (www.acam.org) can help with your problem? They helped me realize that delayed food sensitivities were causing many of my health problems. They also helped me with other health problems as well. Brad_Chad > Maybe a naturopathic doctor (Yellow Pages) or an alternative > doctor [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Brad_Chad Now all we need is for Richard the Liar to weigh in and this thread will be complete. Note that his "reply" had nothing to do with the thread. Another cut-and-paste from the mindless. > Note that his "reply" had nothing to do with the thread. > Another > cut-and-paste from the mindless. It never does. I don't think he even reads the threads. As you say, he just cuts and pastes.... Too Funny. Thanks for proving that you are not even reading the posts - just making this same reply to every thread. Signature00doc G'day Brad_Chad, thankyou for your suggestion but I am acting for another party. He is now on a strict specific diet. It would appear the reaction is due to either a drug or combination of drugs. The listed foods he had eaten in the period before and during his illness has been cleared as not being involved with his problem. Thankyou for your information. Merlin. Gee when I pointed out that interstitial nephritis usually isn't severely painful you answered that the cause might be from obstruction (which is painful). Now you are back to blaming the drugs. Drug induced interstitial nephritis can be tested. What did the tests show? Obstruction can also be evaluated and "ruled in" or "ruled out". What did those tests show? If you are going to blame it on the drugs then how do you account for the pain? Signature00doc > Gee when I pointed out that interstitial nephritis usually > isn't [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > account for > the pain? He's making all of this up. That's become so obvious. First of all, where does he find these "cases"? (laughable that he even uses that term, in an attempt to give himself more credibility) Secondly, what person would trust a stranger who comes across like he does? He sounds like a nut and always has. Third, what doctor, hospital, pharmaceutical company would deal with him? Why should they? Fourth, he does research on the INTERNET and finds answers that trained people didn't consider? What is this, some bad Hollywood script? Fifth, when challenged here, he provides NO evidence of anything he says, he just attacks and calls names, as though any of us care what some nutcase in Australia posts about us. The very thought is laughable. I think the problem may well be drugs, and Merlin is the one taking them. He's hallucinating. > He's making all of this up. That's become so obvious. That's my best guess as well but I am trying to give him every chance to prove it is not so. It is clear that he does not understand the case at hand well enough to avoid contradicting himself. > First of all, where does he find these "cases"? (laughable that he even > uses that term, in an attempt to give himself more credibility) [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Third, what doctor, hospital, pharmaceutical company would deal with him? > Why should they? See my response to AR. He would have to be come kind of legal rep. It is unlikely that he would be persuing this in any kind of professional manner yet be so totally clueless. > Fourth, he does research on the INTERNET and finds answers that trained > people didn't consider? What is this, some bad Hollywood script? Well, we both know that it is possible to search the Internet and find diagnoses that trained people didn't consider. Hell, I am a trained person and sometimes that is how I find things that I hadn't considered. However, in this case he searched and found things that a third year med student would fail his rotation for not considering - then he bragged about it - then he tried so say he never said anyone was incompetant. That last bit just shows that even when I tried to point him in the direction of a clue he still just couldn't quite grasp it. > Fifth, when challenged here, he provides NO evidence of anything he says, > he just attacks and calls names, as though any of us care what some > nutcase in Australia posts about us. The very thought is laughable. It does suggest further that his is not a professional relationship with the person. If he is not family (he has described the patient as just an acquaintance) and he is not some kind of professional rep then the whole story is implausible. As you point out, no one would meet with him otherwise. > I think the problem may well be drugs, and Merlin is the one taking them. > He's hallucinating. I would gain respect for him if I found out that were true. Signature00doc >> Fourth, he does research on the INTERNET and finds answers >> that trained people didn't consider? What is this, some bad >> Hollywood script? > Well, we both know that it is possible to search the Internet > and find diagnoses that trained people didn't consider. Hell, I [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > bit just shows that even when I tried to point him in the > direction of a clue he still just couldn't quite grasp it. Yes, we both know you can find a wealth of information on the internet (if you look in the right places, which we also know you and I do). But, when I read your questions to him and saw his lame replies, it became clear that he was grasping at straws and making doctors, hospitals sound negligent and incapable of identifying something, as you point out, would be caught by a third year med student. What a saviour! If you morons had half a brain and the ability to read and comprehend you would appreciate I have outlined a factual circumstance which has implications in legal areas and therefore needs careful description. The companies involved are interstate and information is rather guarded. The whole thing is distorted by apparent psuedo intelligencia on this site which quite obviously is not specialist in anything apart from spouting crap, let alone these kinds of matters, and after my recent session with the renal specialist this was very obvious. I am not interested in arguing with you drongoes, I placed a position before you and it stands. So if you would like to put your money where your mouth is, make it worthwhile, let us organise a legal firm as a stakeholder and proceed. Suggest a bet, don't be shy! Lets get fair-dinkum, I suggest you are a bunch of gutless w.nkers!! Cheers, Merlin. > So if you would like to put your money where your mouth is, make it > worthwhile, let us organise a legal firm as a stakeholder and proceed. > Suggest a bet, don't be shy! > Lets get fair-dinkum, I suggest you are a bunch of gutless w.nkers!! > Cheers, Merlin. Ok - what would you like to bet? Money? OK - I'll put up $500 US dollars that says your story is complete fiction. Other? OK - Loser stops posting here. The ball is in your court. Signature00doc Well I would have preferred something a little more substantial and do feel that the other idiots there should also put up a stake especially that stupid woman. I kept telling you people that you weren't very smart, what about you Roberts or are you full of crap as well? Personally I find this whole thing ridiculously funny! Come on you other pansies the OO has the guts for a little wager, have you crapped in your tracks! You might match at least match him! Standing by! Cheers, Merlin. > Well I would have preferred something a little more substantial > and do [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Standing by! > Cheers, Merlin. No, no, no Lawrence Gasbag. I don't want you to go away. It's way too much fun reading your ramblings and making fun of you, you whacker. Do they really let you mental patients play with the computer long enough for you to leave your diarrhea all over the internet? Seems so! Merlin, You seem to have committed an unforgivable sin!. Your original posting was TOO ANECDOTAL It could not be genuine input and good clean copy even if written succinctly in the most fancy doctor-speak and without factual errors. Regards, Richard Friedel > Merlin, You seem to have committed an unforgivable sin!. > Your original posting was TOO ANECDOTAL [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > errors. > Regards, Richard Friedel Further proof that Richard the Liar pays no attention and has no clue as to what is going on. Next, we'll see Brad Chad cut and paste his bit about food allergies here. >You might match at least match him! Merlin, note to self. To all, I match the US$500 from 00 but would appreciate you other cowards also come forward. Especially the bigmouthed idiot CEO and slinking Roberts. Of course it wouldn't be in their cowardly nature to stick with a friend!! For what it is worth I am a semi-retired person and spend a great deal of my time doing voluntary kinds of jobs, especially assisting asthmatic people or helping those that have valid causes where reasonable justice has been trampled. Any charges would only be for materials or expenses involved in achieving this. G'day Richard, can you believe the distortions this pack of idiots have made of this subject, apart from calling me a liar, and suggesting there is a financial motive on my behalf. It is so ridiculous, pure invention, and to make it more incredible they have convnced themselves that they are correct. What is the medical term for that? Mass hysteria or something like that!! Obviously the CEO is squirming and doing rapid research that would suit her depraved mentality. I doubt if she will "put up" and show one "iota" of responsibility. So 00 it looks like it is just you and me, is that correct? Cheers, Merlin. > To all, I match the US$500 from 00 but would appreciate you > other > cowards also come forward. Especially the bigmouthed idiot CEO > and > slinking Roberts. Oh, I'm so very hurt that you would resort to name calling. I have no self confidence, you see, and really take it to heart when someone I have absolutely NO respect for refers to me in an unflattering way. > Of course it wouldn't be in their cowardly nature to stick with > a > friend!! Speaking of stick, keep trying to stir the pot, ya putz, because you make no sense. Doc knows ARoberts and I are sticking with him, and it doesn't change his deal one iota if we don't join in the bet. > G'day Richard, can you believe the distortions this pack of > idiots have [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > would suit > her depraved mentality. Squirming over what? You really are stupid, ya know that? And no, I'm not doing any kind of research. I remember your name and your hideous website from the yahoo asthma group, you yahoo. > I doubt if she will "put up" and show one "iota" of > responsibility. Responsibility for a bet I didn't agree to in the first place? What are you nuts? (rhetorical question requiring no response from you) I wasn't part of the bet for one reason. I don't trust you. Doc expects you to do the right thing. I have NO DOUBT you won't. I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't trump up paperwork. Besides, I was being really genuine when I said I don't want to see you have to stop posting here, because your long winded posts with you envisioning yourself as some modern day Don Quixote are ridiculously amusing, in some twisted way. It reminds me of how lucky I am that nobody I know personally is filled with such insane delusions of grandeur. \ > Responsibility for a bet I didn't agree to in the first place? What are > you nuts? (rhetorical question requiring no response from you) I wasn't > part of the bet for one reason. I don't trust you. Doc expects you to do > the right thing. I have NO DOUBT you won't. Not really. > I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't trump up paperwork. That's why I don't plan to take some faxed document as proof. The proof will have to be verifiable and from more than one source. Signature00doc Gee, Doc....do you feel abandoned? Unloved? All alone in your struggle against the boy wonder down under? Are you staying up nights, tossing and turning? Shaking in your scrubs? Or are you laughing your @$$ off like the rest of us? >Gee, Doc....do you feel abandoned? Unloved? All alone in your >struggle against the boy wonder down under? Are you staying up >nights, tossing and turning? Shaking in your scrubs? Or are >you laughing your @$$ off like the rest of us? I just got back from a brief vacation and read this latest in merlin absurdity. So he's ready to submit "proof" that he's not a total bs artist, but at a price of a $500 bet? What a hustler. If he had any integrity, he would have just posted his bona fides long ago. No No No Yes but for other reasons No Eh, just wondering how much weaseling will be involved. G'day OO please advise contact details so that we may get on with this. It is a shame your whole arogant ratpack couldn't be dealt with in one hit! You set the conditions, US$500 plus walk away. That stands. Who is to be the referee? Tnx Merlin. > G'day OO please advise contact details so that we may get on with this. > It is a shame your whole arogant ratpack couldn't be dealt with in one > hit! > You set the conditions, US$500 plus walk away. That stands. > Who is to be the referee? > Tnx Merlin. Both? OK. What do you suggest? I can give you contact info as soon as there is something to send me. However, I will warn you right now that I will expect to be able to make contacts on my own and verify things from original sources. Signature00doc G'day 00, I would like a neutral party of reputable character and proffessional status as a go between. I do feel it is not in anyones interest for open slather access for non-responsible persons involvement. Do you have a reputable bankmanager or similar person that may accept this duty. You would appreciate I am not interested in placing sensitive document copies directly into your hands. To put it quite bluntly I don't trust you or your ilk as honourable persons. I will disclose the sufferer's particulars and statement, doctors names and a complete chronological statement of the entire event including the hospital admission information, and the drug companies letters as sufficient for verification of the outlined account. I would expect a suitable undertaking on your behalf to make the neccessary verification and nothing more. By the way I have just received information describing the mentioned stomach cramps probable cause as "pseudomembranous colitis" which you would appreciate could rationally explain the initial effect. This was mentioned as the reason behind the warning in that drug companies warning pamphlet for that antibiotic. The young man that was involved is slowly recovering. He still has some problems. Cheers, Merlin. > Do you have a reputable bankmanager or similar person that may accept > this duty. > You would appreciate I am not interested in placing sensitive document > copies directly into your hands. > To put it quite bluntly I don't trust you or your ilk as honourable > persons. So there we have it. The one and only stipulation I have made is that I be able to independantly verify the information. I don't see how you could expect anything less. I also don't see why you would trust a person I identify but you don't know any more than me. If I give you a name and number will you really send the information to them? It seems unlikely to me. Besides, you would be better off with me. I am a licensed professional (you could verify that if you like) and charges of misconduct with regards to patient information would be taken seriously. I could be reprimanded, fined, and have conditions placed on my license for wrong doing. This, in turn, could cause problems with my employment as that kind of thing would be a contract violation that could result in me being fired. All you would have to do is have the patient send me a letter asking me to review the information and a statement giving permission to release the information to me. Then I could get all the information from the original sources but I would be professionally bound not to divulge it or misuse it in any way. To be honest I don't see any risk to you or your client in any way. It is certainly much less risk than with some person who I identify and claims to be a banker (WTF is up with that choice?). > I will disclose the sufferer's particulars and statement, doctors names > and a complete chronological statement of the entire event including > the hospital admission information, and the drug companies letters as > sufficient for verification of the outlined account. I would expect nothing less except that I must be able to contact the people involved and verify for myself. A long essay penned by you with no independant verification would be worthless. > By the way I have just received information describing the mentioned > stomach cramps probable cause as "pseudomembranous colitis" which you > would appreciate could rationally explain the initial effect. Yes, it would explain the cramping and some pain. It usually is not so severe as to require a morphine drip and still does not explain the renal failure. Apparently, this guy had PMC, interstitial nephritis, and some other process that causes severe abdominal pain. I'll make you a counter offer. I'll nominate Bob to do all the looking into things if he will do it and I will agree to abide by his findings. He is a professional and I think a reasonable and honest fellow that we both know. Just so that he is not totally dragged into this for nothing I will agree to pay any expenses he incurs (no, Bob, it would not include an in person site visit) and even a reasonable fee for his time. Another alternative is that I will entertain a nomination from you. It must be a person of whom I have some knowledge and trust. Signature00doc >> Do you have a reputable bankmanager or similar person that may accept >> this duty. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > number will you really send the information to them? It seems unlikely to > me. Doc, I believe that you're dealing with this: http://images.webz.cz/img/weasel.gif Good Evening 00, would you kindly contact me through my netsite at www.home.acenet.net.au/lagas Please place 00 as the subject in the email. I would appreciate discussing this matter directly with you by telephone at a mutually suitable time. (GMT) I don't know BOB. Sincerely, Merlin. > I don't know BOB. You wouldn't know anyone that I suggest either. Signature00doc Well 00 once again my answering post did not appear, so this is a trial. Bob is out. Disqualified by his obvious impartiality. That was the reason for requesting a telephone discussion with you. Cheers, Merlin. >Bob is out. Disqualified by his obvious impartiality. This is more evidence of confusion. >>Bob is out. Disqualified by his obvious impartiality. > > This is more evidence of confusion. Or a Freudian slip.... > Well 00 once again my answering post did not appear, so this is > a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > you. > Cheers, Merlin. Yeah, Bob IS obviously impartial. Let ME do it! >> Well 00 once again my answering post did not appear, so this is a >> trial. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Yeah, Bob IS obviously impartial. Let ME do it! No, me...me... >>> Well 00 once again my answering post did not appear, so this is a >>> trial. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >No, me...me... Why don't you flip for it? http://www.swingingairforce.com/vintage/Byron_Maryse_Smile-Flip.jpg > Well 00 once again my answering post did not appear, so this is a > trial. > Bob is out. Disqualified by his obvious impartiality. > That was the reason for requesting a telephone discussion with you. > Cheers, Merlin. Don't get me wrong (Bob or Merlin) - I like Bob. I really do. I think he is smart, funny, professional, and I am utterly convinced he is a many of his word. However, if you would peruse the archives of this board you would see that we have not always been on the same side of issues and I don't think he is so partial to me that he would be unwilling to tell me I am wrong. Again, I think my professional status (which can be confirmed) carries with it more safeguards that you need. No one else we could come up with could be punished for misusing the info. But I would be open to other suggesttions. Signature00doc >> Well 00 once again my answering post did not appear, so this is a >> trial. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >that we have not always been on the same side of issues and I don't think he >is so partial to me that he would be unwilling to tell me I am wrong. Yeah, but you probably get enough of that at home. > Yeah, but you probably get enough of that at home. True. My wife, not to mention my 4 and 5 year olds, have no fear of telling me I am wrong. My youngest still hasn't done so but I expect he will soon after he starts talking. Signature00doc Good Morning 00, standing by. (Or if you have an alternate contact method) Merlin. > > Yeah, but you probably get enough of that at home. > > True. My wife, not to mention my 4 and 5 year olds, have no fear of telling > me I am wrong. My youngest still hasn't done so but I expect he will soon > after he starts talking. Dear OO are you going to contact me or give me your contact info. Please decide. It would be preferable to avoid these mental midgets association or involvement. The sooner this is addressed the better, and we can move on. Personally I would be embarrassed to admit I knew these jerks at all if I were you. They are mentally, morally, and ethically bankrupt! I class them as obnoxious and disgusting! They obviously have too much time on their hands especially that ridiculous woman. Cheers, Merlin. > Dear OO are you going to contact me or give me your contact > info. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > ridiculous woman. > Cheers, Merlin. Why Lawrence Gasbag, you're paying so much attention to me that you seem obsessed. Please stop stalking me like this, it leaves you sounding even more delusional than usual, and far less entertaining. To CEO I couldn't help but get a laugh about your stalking inference, it proves you to definitely be a stupid woman. How is it that you are actually posting within this item, dummy! Plese try to refrain from proving conclusively that you are not only stupid but also a "BAREFACED LIAR". I would imagine the only "stalking" you would attract would be that of the "grim reaper" when you are eventually affected by your own venom which surely must happen. This time I wouldn't be bothered with a thought for a prayer for you. Entertain that! Merlin. > To CEO > I couldn't help but get a laugh about your stalking inference, [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > for you. > Entertain that! Merlin. Your references to my bout with cancer only illustrate that your attacks on people and aggression fall far outside the bounds of civilized behavior. Your intention may have been to shock and upset me, but you failed, Gasbag. I long ago came to expect this from you, and I need only to scrape my shoe vigorously against the curb and across the grass to get rid of any remnants of you. No offense to dog excrement. >To CEO >I couldn't help but get a laugh about your stalking inference, it >proves you to definitely be a stupid woman. >How is it that you are actually posting within this item, dummy! >Plese try to refrain from proving conclusively that you are not only >stupid but also a "BAREFACED LIAR". Barefaced, Bald-faced or Bold-faced; ever wondered? The story goes, a man known to shave his head clean upon occasion asked for the true story behind the phrase bald-faced liar. He wanted to know if an out-and-out liar is more properly called a bold-faced liar or a bald-faced liar. The truth is this: both are used, and so is Barefaced. Bald-faced is the newest term; its first known print appearance dates back only 62 years, to 1943. Bold-faced is some four centuries older than that, dating to 1591. Although you might guess bald-faced developed out of a mishearing of bold-faced, the meanings of the two adjectives are not synonymous. Bold-faced means bold in manner or conduct; impudent; bald-faced has the same meaning as barefaced: open; unconcealed; and having or showing a lack of scruples. Barefaced is one year older than bold-faced; its first print appearance dates to 1590. But the original meaning of barefaced was literal: it meant having the face uncovered, either beardless or wearing no mask. Not surprisingly, folks using the word barefaced were open to shifting the adjective into the metaphoric realm: barefaced soon came to describe something unconcealed or open; and then something showing or having a lack of scruples. Merlin, there is no lying on CEO's part. It is my sense that you are intimidated by a strong woman, and being from a culture that mistreats women, your behavior illustrates too plainly your chauvinistic interpretation of her simply asking you to prove the things you've stated as fact. >I would imagine the only "stalking" you would attract would be that of >the "grim reaper" when you are eventually affected by your own venom >which surely must happen. >This time I wouldn't be bothered with a thought for a prayer for you. >Entertain that! Merlin. Perhaps asking NSCEO for her forgiveness might help to put some hair on your face and head. > Merlin, there is no lying on CEO's part. It is my sense that > you are [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > hair > on your face and head. Why thank you, Bob. I won't hold my breath, but appreciate your support just the same. >> Merlin, there is no lying on CEO's part. It is my sense that you are >> intimidated by a strong woman, and being from a culture that mistreats [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Why thank you, Bob. I won't hold my breath, but appreciate your support > just the same. Then could you at least get someone to hold merlin's breath? > Then could you at least get someone to hold merlin's breath? That would leave him sounding even dizzier than he does NOW! >Dear OO are you going to contact me or give me your contact info. >Please decide. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >They obviously have too much time on their hands especially that >ridiculous woman. By "ridiculous woman", you mean the person who has asked you to put up or shut up, and you haven't been able to? She sounds pretty smart to me. Why not just do the proper thing and post your information? You've been dancing around this for weeks--either you're making it up or you're not. Frankly, I don't believe the lie is in your claim to have attempted to intervene in someone's case of asthma--you're just deluded enough to insinuate yourself into a place where you aren't qualified; it is in the passing yourself off to the unwitting as an expert in the first place. Based the bogus information in your postings (increased dietary salt, cold showers, etc.), that is the most pernicious lie of all. BTW, since it is you who has failed to bolster your own postings (or insist on making a buck out of the process with a needless bet), you are the one who qualifies for ethical bankruptcy. Dear Roberts, by ridiculous woman I mean exactly that, she obviously has no qualifications or any interest in anything apart from denigrating people, and grandiose displays of her own idiocy. So from my point of view she is simply a non-event, trying to co-erce poor desperate unfortunates into often damaging drug involvement assisted by pseudo intelligent appearing medical persons, which co-incidently also applies to yourself. Mega-ridiculous is probably a better term. She is even soliciting for finance. (probably expert at that in other areas also!) As far as putting up or shutting up, I would suggest that you have no financial involvement in this transaction and as such are not part of it although I had hoped you would be. If you might like to have financial participation you are welcome to enter. But I suspect you are a gutless wonder! Regarding the money involved I would point out to you that it was 00 that brought that into the situation, so once again you are quite wrong, but I must admit I am heartened by your inference that I might expect a positive financial outcome out of this. I do thank you for that comment, I needed the boost, I have been quite worried about this overall situation. (losing sleep actually) If I were to win, any amount will be immediately passed to a suitable charity of my choosing, so you may rest assured there will be no financial benefit for me apart from the satisfaction that the principle involved has been upheld, although I would expect recovery of expenses for outgoings. I already spend the majority of my free time involved with assisting others obligation free. This has been the case for the past 30 years. I regularly work with a Bishop and other religious persons and other non religious groups on a no-benefit to myself basis. What you appear to be missing is the simple fact that some grattitude is involved when you are given a second chance to be able to live a normal life from that of a chronic severe asthmatic. That is the major reason for my finding you people's comments so utterly disgusting and also why I believe your characters are so depraved. Gutter trash is a good description. As far as having you believe anything I may put forward whether you do or don't has no bearing on anything with me. As I have said on numerous occasions you can "take it, or leave it"! As far as salt having benefit, it is a simple fact, it commonly obviously does and lack of it obviously commonly figures in problem circumstances! Get out and do some field work!! As far as the shock system having benefit it obviously does also! As far as the showering system is involved there are benefits beyond your comprehension so take it or leave it! Any interested person can try it for free and form their own opinion. Most trying it will keep using it. It is silly not to use simple beneficial procedures because some idiot sceptic says it has no effect. As far as my involvement in these matters is concerned it has been ongoing, typically I have identified a problem in a home here that will be rectified this weekend. I make no personal charges to the owners at all, apart from expenses for items needed on their account. This particular home mentioned, belongs to a young couple both with asthma symptoms and problems, and quite obviously all the carpets in that home have been treated with some chemical substance. It appears their doctor had not explained this possibility to them. So much for dust mite sensitivities, I could well imagine even the dusmites would be asthmatic! I entered the home and immediately identified problems in every room using the most technical method. They are leaving the home for a couple of days. All carpets will be removed, they will need to pay for vacuum cleaner bags, rubbish removal and dump fees. The floors will be sanded and high-gloss finish will be applied by a contractor, this is at competitive rates. This contractor has been used previously for these kinds of situations and his materials and work have proven safe, effective and first class. They approached me for assistance or an "opinion". (A couple of trees in their yard will also be lopped.) This kind of problem has been common in my experience and this would put my carpet removal score into the fifties. (during the past thirtyfive years) Under normal circumstances these kind of suffering people have immediate condition improvement, their general health normally improves and their problem substance dependence usually improves within a few weeks to "nothing needed"! No claims made, it just happens to be a simple fact! (take it or leave it!) I realise the circumstance of helping people with these kind of problems would be alien to you people, but I am regularly involved in these situations and have been as a matter of course for at least the past thirty years. I follow the "catch my disease" principle but I am sure you would not understand what this meant! You will be happy to learn that I am pulling my internet site in a week or so, my ongoing involvement has become too much. It has existed for fourteen years, and had enormous response. Actually the majority of recipients have been in the U.S. especially in the eastern areas and this has allowed good substance intelligence gathering with many problem solutions. I also regularly visited many problem areas there, so have a reasonable understanding of that situation. (pill-poppers paradise!) Cheers, Merlin. > Dear Roberts, by ridiculous woman I mean exactly that, she obviously > has no qualifications or any interest in anything apart from > denigrating people, and grandiose displays of her own idiocy. So far, post for post, her qualifications far exceed yours. She has posted accurate and well-researched information that is capable of verification by multiple scientific sources. She has been able to back up what she has posted with citations and references. What you perceive as denigration, is merely her shining a bright light on a dissembling rat. If you ever caught yourself telling the truth, you'd work in a quick lie, just to keep your professional standing. > So from my point of view she is simply a non-event, trying to co-erce > poor desperate unfortunates into often damaging drug involvement > assisted by pseudo intelligent appearing medical persons, which > co-incidently also applies to yourself. Mega-ridiculous is probably a > better term. > She is even soliciting for finance. (probably expert at that in other > areas also!) Unlike you, not in her own behalf. Your last comment displays the gutter mentality that you have often displayed here. Right in character. > As far as putting up or shutting up, I would suggest that you have no > financial involvement in this transaction and as such are not part of > it although I had hoped you would be. That's the point. There should be no "financial involvement" in getting you to tell the truth. > If you might like to have financial participation you are welcome to > enter. But I suspect you are a gutless wonder! I don't gamble. It's a stupid pastime, made more stupid by your participation and the charade that you could speak the truth under any circumstance. Regarding gutless, why is it people who are hiding behind usenet and distance feel as if they are suddenly imbued with courage? You are a blowhard who posts misinformation, long-winded and self-absorbed tales that even if they were true, would be irrelevant. > Regarding the money involved I would point out to you that it was 00 > that brought that into the situation, so once again you are quite > wrong, but I must admit I am heartened by your inference that I might > expect a positive financial outcome out of this. The only way that you could gain anything from this is by cheating/changing the rules on the fly, and in that, I have utmost confidence in you. I do thank you for > that comment, I needed the boost, I have been quite worried about this > overall situation. (losing sleep actually) I suspect that you sleep quite well. Those who have no concience usually do. > I already spend the majority of my free time involved with assisting > others obligation free. > > As far as having you believe anything I may put forward whether you do > or don't has no bearing on anything with me. That is why you spend so much time typing this response. > As far as salt having benefit, it is a simple fact, it commonly > obviously does and lack of it obviously commonly figures in problem > circumstances! Get out and do some field work!! I posted citations that say that increased dietary salt exacerbates asthma. Post a citation from an accredited medical journal that refutes that--not some meaningless merlin homily. > As far as the shock system having benefit it obviously does also! > As far as the showering system is involved there are benefits beyond > your comprehension so take it or leave it! I can see why a person of your appeal would have to become familiar with cold showers. > I follow the "catch my disease" principle but I am sure you would not > understand what this meant! Since it is meaningless, no. > You will be happy to learn that I am pulling my internet site in a week > or so, my ongoing involvement has become too much. It has existed for > fourteen years, and had enormous response. Didn't know that you had one, but if it goes, that will be one less source of internet misinformation. > So far, post for post, her qualifications far exceed yours. > She has posted accurate and well-researched information that is [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > caught yourself telling the truth, you'd work in a quick lie, > just to keep your professional standing. Why thank you, ARoberts. Gasbag knows why he's so obsessed with me. It's because I was the first to tell him to prove everything (not some things, as the bet involves, but everything) that he's been claiming all this time. The fact that he's become so hostile toward me is proof that he's nothing more than a big old gasbag full of hot air. > Dear OO are you going to contact me or give me your contact info. > Please decide. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > ridiculous woman. > Cheers, Merlin. If you are ready to give me verifiable information then I will be glad to tell you where to send it. FWIW the e-mail addy used for posting here is real. It is a box that I do not often check but if prompted to do so I will (I just did and there is nothing from you in it). I don't see any advantage to private conversation about this rather than public ones here and see some disadvantages so you will pardon me if I prefer to have the negotiations out in public until sensitive information is actually being passed. I have given some thought to your suggestion for a neutral third party and don't think an agreement is likely to be found. I wouldn't trust anyone that you would suggest in Australia that I don't know (and I don't know anyone in Australia) and I would wonder what you were up to if you claimed to trust some unfamiliar name that I threw out here. As I have said before, the risk of abuse of the information can be minimized if I (or another licensed practicing physician) handle it but I am not about to drag one of my colleagues into this kind of embarrassing mess. I wouldn't relish the idea of explaining it to them and asking them to waste their time on it. The only real risk to you is that I would take the info and not be honest about what I was able to verify. As far as I can see your only defense against that is to allow someone else known and trusted by the people on this board to examine it and hope that person agrees, says so, and that I then succumb to the peer pressure to pay up. Of course, |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message