 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Dentistry / December 2004Other consequences of amalgam removal?
It seems that a lot of people claim a health improvement after removal of their mercury fillings. I was thinking there could be effects besides those that come from removing the amalgam itself. I was thinking the composite material or gold inlay or crown or whatever might make a better seal and cut off the food and oxygen supply to bacteria. And are antibiotics administered along with the amalgam removal? Maybe that would kill off something that was causing health problems. >It seems that a lot of people claim a health improvement after removal >of their mercury fillings. It's just a very vocal small group. There has been proof that more than one of these miraculous recoveries could not have been caused by mercury toxicity, nor cured by amalgam removal. >I was thinking there could be effects besides those that come from >removing the amalgam itself. Well, yeah, the tooth looks way better. I can't tell you how much nicer my composite fillings look than my old amalgams. >I was thinking the composite material or gold inlay or crown or whatever >might make a better seal and cut off the food and oxygen supply to bacteria. Composite materials are bonded to the tooth with a micromechanical bond. They will prevent even a very small molecule of stain to penetrate the interface. Amalgams (unless they are bonded) do not. There doesn't seem to be any advantage to this in terms of recurrent decay however. Gold inlays/crowns have a great track record, and while the oldest composites you see are about 20 years old, there is tons of 50 year gold work doing great service. >And are antibiotics administered along with the amalgam removal? Maybe >that would kill off something that was causing health problems. No, not unless there was an infection in the tooth, which would require root canal therapy. -- Adenosine Semi-informed Dental Consumer ? >>I was thinking the composite material or gold inlay or crown or whatever >>might make a better seal and cut off the food and oxygen supply to bacteria. > > Composite materials are bonded to the tooth with a micromechanical > bond. They will prevent even a very small molecule of stain to > penetrate the interface. Amalgams (unless they are bonded) do not. Thanks. > There doesn't seem to be any advantage to this in terms of recurrent > decay however. Okay, but I mean to ask about general morbidity (not just decay) due to leaks. >>>I was thinking the composite material or gold inlay or crown or whatever >>>might make a better seal and cut off the food and oxygen supply to bacteria. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Okay, but I mean to ask about general morbidity (not just decay) due to >leaks. Huh? The worst thing that can happen to your teeth is that bacteria get to the pulp, and infect it. This will only happen if there is decay (or tooth fracture). Amalgam fillings work just fine at stopping decay too. There is no proof of any systemic disease being caused by amalgam, nor any cured by removing it. Bottom line: if they aren't failing, and you don't mind the ugly, keep em, cuz they aren't harming you. -- Adenosine Semi-informed Dental Consumer ? >Subject: Re: Other consequences of amalgam removal? >From: Adenosine adenosine@nospam.com [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >Huh? So much for the not even semi-informed. Go to http://www.google.com and type in mercury vapors from dental fillings, there you'll find the scientific proof of the health effects of hg vapors. For starters: http://www.vimy-dentistry.com/nhanesstudy.htm Jan >So much for the not even semi-informed. > >Go to http://www.google.com and type in mercury vapors from dental fillings, >there you'll find the scientific proof of the health effects of hg vapors. Indeed. On June 16,1999 Jan Drew was bedridden claiming that she was dying of mercury poisoning secondary to dental amalgams. On June 17-18, 1999 Jan Drew had a total of eight amalgams removed (she still had four more to be removed on July 11, 1999). Within hours of having the 8 amalgams out Jan Drew said she felt better than she had in two years. When asked about it she said it was because of relief that all the dental work was done. A week later on June 26, 1999 Jan's health improved so much that she was able to go out line dancing (remember she was bedridden just a week before) with no more pain in her feet (the pain soon returned since placebo responses are short lived). Jan Drew even admits that her mercury level on June 26, 1999 was likely the highest in her life since she posted the following: >These studies show that mercury levels increase in the >days following amalgam removal, and don't decline [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Department of Restorative Dentistry and >Periodontology, University of Munich, Germany. Jan Drew has great difficulty explaining how on earth she could have went from bedridden and dying of mercury poisoning to line dancing with no more pain in her feet when her mercury level (by her OWN admission) was the highest in her life. Jan said that the removal of the 8 amalgams made a difference because she was no longer getting a daily dose of mercury. At the time that Jan made that statement she likely did not realize that the removal of the amalgams caused a massive increase in her mercury level. >http://tinyurl.com/674oy > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >>THANK GOD, my feet didn't hurt! I >>felt alive again. What a blessing! Jan Drew is a pathologic liar who never had mercury poisoning. She knows it but cannot admit it. Aloha, Rich In all fairness, maybe this person was bedridden but misunderstood the reason for the condition. (Viral illness can put an NFL football player in that condition -- ) By the 17-18, a couple days later, the viral illness was subsiding. It seemed to coincide with the dental treatment. The two years before that, she was just exhausted from something and no one feels well when exhausted from "whatever". Of course it was a relief to get all the dental work done. Who wants to hang around in a dental chair when you're feeling better from an acute viral illness that kept you in bed for two days? A week later, the viral illness was completely resolved *and* she had all her energy back. A virus and no activity for two days can weaken a person so that line dancing, or any other kind of dancing is just too much to manage. The mercury levels had nothing to do with two years of chronic exhaustion (maybe depression related, maybe chronic viral illness, maybe stress). Belief in Junk Science is the likely science behind her recovery. Can't we just move on, be glad that she is fully recovered ... in fact, so fully recovered that she has endless energy to do her "work". Let her do whatever she wants. Her programmer has it all planned. TW > > > [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > > Rich >In all fairness, maybe this person was bedridden but misunderstood the >reason for the condition. (Viral illness can put an NFL football player >in that condition -- ) How would that account for the severe inability to Break Dance? Joel >By the 17-18, a couple days later, the viral illness was subsiding. It >seemed to coincide with the dental treatment. [quoted text clipped - 85 lines] >> >> Rich > >In all fairness, maybe this person was bedridden but misunderstood the > >reason for the condition. (Viral illness can put an NFL football player [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Joel Would this explain it adequately? In fact, I can't even imagine "J** D***" going near *the scene* where break dancing would be "seen". Of course, I haven't looked at her closet or her music collection. But the word "bigot" does come to mind. http://arar.essortment.com/wherefindcanh_riym.htm > Have you ever wondered where break dancing came from? Read this article to > find out it's history. [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > Written by genevieve thiers > Copyright 2002 by PageWise, Inc > >By the 17-18, a couple days later, the viral illness was subsiding. It > >seemed to coincide with the dental treatment. [quoted text clipped - 87 lines] > >> > >> Rich >> >In all fairness, maybe this person was bedridden but misunderstood the >> >reason for the condition. (Viral illness can put an NFL football player [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >http://arar.essortment.com/wherefindcanh_riym.htm Funny, 'the scene' is used only by the electronic music lovers in this area. You can do a sort of breakdance to DnB music, and almost everybody who likes DnB likes its less hyperactive brother, breaks. Not to discriminate against the straight beat, but you just can't breakdance to it. -- Adenosine Semi-informed Dental Consumer ? >> >In all fairness, maybe this person was bedridden but misunderstood the >> >reason for the condition. (Viral illness can put an NFL football player [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >course, I haven't looked at her closet or her music collection. But the >word "bigot" does come to mind. I heard her say she could not go out and Break Dance after too many amalgams ...... >http://arar.essortment.com/wherefindcanh_riym.htm > [quoted text clipped - 141 lines] >> >> >> >> Rich > >> >In all fairness, maybe this person was bedridden but misunderstood the > >> >reason for the condition. (Viral illness can put an NFL football player [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I heard her say she could not go out and Break Dance after too many > amalgams ...... I think it was an excuse for the real reasons why she *would not* go out breakdancing (Break Dance). I think the "J**" known to smd would be scared to death if she was taken to a place where such activities took place. And forget the idea of DnB.... she'd **never** make it there. TW > >http://arar.essortment.com/wherefindcanh_riym.htm > > [quoted text clipped - 165 lines] > >> >> > >> >> Rich >> >> >In all fairness, maybe this person was bedridden but misunderstood the >> >> >reason for the condition. (Viral illness can put an NFL football player [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >TW Scared to death? But the 'scene' is so friendly! I think DnB would be good for her, it would let her get out some of her latent anger. Either that or maybe gabber. Maybe she's more into the uplifting beats? She could listen to hardcore. A style of music for everyone, and a music for every style. -- Adenosine Semi-informed Dental Consumer ? > >> >> >In all fairness, maybe this person was bedridden but misunderstood the > >> >> >reason for the condition. (Viral illness can put an NFL football [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > Adenosine > Semi-informed Dental Consumer ? Yes ... maybe we could get her a ticket to Burning Man next year. TW I equally bet she would not care to sit with us for a performance of Turandot.  Signature~+--~+--~+--~+--~+-- Stephen Mancuso, D.D.S. Troy, Michigan, USA .................................................... This posting is intended for informational or conversational purposes only. Always seek the opinion of a licensed dental professional before acting on the advice or opinion expressed here. Only a dentist who has examined you in person can diagnose your problems and make decisions which will affect your health. ...................... > >> >> >> >In all fairness, maybe this person was bedridden but misunderstood [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > TW Agreed. (But I would!!!!) TW > I equally bet she would not care to sit with us for a performance of > Turandot. [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > > > TW She wouldn't go with Sarah Brightman either, so we shouldn't feel left out, Dr. Steve. TW In article <nospamattmjiatroepidemicnospam-481B0E.10365301122004@orngca-news02.soca l.rr.com>, > Agreed. (But I would!!!!) > TW [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > > > > > > TW We are bringing friends to see "The Daughter of the Regiment" (by Donizetti) in June. That is a real nice performance. Prior to that, we have tickets to "Tosca" (by Puccini) in April. I am really looking forward to that one. Detroit is debuting a performance of "Margaret Garner" ( by Danielpour), but I returned the tickets to that performance. I could not get excited about it. Come visit in April, and I will treat you guys to seeing Tosca. You would LOVE the music in that one. Signature~+--~+--~+--~+--~+-- Stephen Mancuso, D.D.S. Troy, Michigan, USA .................................................... This posting is intended for informational or conversational purposes only. Always seek the opinion of a licensed dental professional before acting on the advice or opinion expressed here. Only a dentist who has examined you in person can diagnose your problems and make decisions which will affect your health. ...................... > Agreed. (But I would!!!!) > TW [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] >> > >> > TW What a lineup! Now that's an offer I probably can't refuse!!!!!!! *Thanks* :-))))))) TW > We are bringing friends to see "The Daughter of the Regiment" (by Donizetti) > in June. That is a real nice performance. Prior to that, we have tickets [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] > >> > > >> > TW Just give me at least two weeks notice so that I can get good seats. We usually go to opening night (very formal). Signature~+--~+--~+--~+--~+-- Stephen Mancuso, D.D.S. Troy, Michigan, USA .................................................... This posting is intended for informational or conversational purposes only. Always seek the opinion of a licensed dental professional before acting on the advice or opinion expressed here. Only a dentist who has examined you in person can diagnose your problems and make decisions which will affect your health. ...................... > What a lineup! Now that's an offer I probably can't refuse!!!!!!! > *Thanks* :-))))))) [quoted text clipped - 77 lines] >> >> > >> >> > TW > Just give me at least two weeks notice so that I can get good seats. We > usually go to opening night (very formal). Are shoes optional? carabelli We get the occasional attendee who looks really put off having to wear shoes. Sitting in the Directors Circle, we usually attire in tux and gown. Guess who wears what? Signature~+--~+--~+--~+--~+-- Stephen Mancuso, D.D.S. Troy, Michigan, USA .................................................... This posting is intended for informational or conversational purposes only. Always seek the opinion of a licensed dental professional before acting on the advice or opinion expressed here. Only a dentist who has examined you in person can diagnose your problems and make decisions which will affect your health. ...................... > >> Just give me at least two weeks notice so that I can get good seats. We [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > carabelli > We get the occasional attendee who looks really put off having to wear > shoes. Sitting in the Directors Circle, we usually attire in tux and gown. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > > > carabelli But both wear their own shoes, right? TW ;-) >> We get the occasional attendee who looks really put off having to wear >> shoes. Sitting in the Directors Circle, we usually attire in tux and [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > But both wear their own shoes, right? > TW ;-) Most times > >> We get the occasional attendee who looks really put off having to wear > >> shoes. Sitting in the Directors Circle, we usually attire in tux and [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Most times No way can you wear little Paulette's shoes!!!!!! ... her socks?, yes. Her shoes?, no way!!!!!! >We get the occasional attendee who looks really put off having to wear >shoes. Sitting in the Directors Circle, we usually attire in tux and gown. >Guess who wears what? Have heard that you look quite presentable in an evening gown Dr. Steve. -- W_B Take out the G'RBAGE wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com >>We get the occasional attendee who looks really put off having to wear >>shoes. Sitting in the Directors Circle, we usually attire in tux and >>gown. >>Guess who wears what? > > Have heard that you look quite presentable in an evening gown Dr. Steve. I doubt either one of us ever want to really find out. >>>We get the occasional attendee who looks really put off having to wear >>>shoes. Sitting in the Directors Circle, we usually attire in tux and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> >I doubt either one of us ever want to really find out. Too late, already saw your pix in alt.binaries.crossdressers -- W_B Take out the G'RBAGE wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com . ...................... >>>>We get the occasional attendee who looks really put off having to wear >>>>shoes. Sitting in the Directors Circle, we usually attire in tux and [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> > Too late, already saw your pix in alt.binaries.crossdressers Drat > >>>We get the occasional attendee who looks really put off having to wear > >>>shoes. Sitting in the Directors Circle, we usually attire in tux and [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > W_B Joel, see what you're missing on the binary groups with your cheap ISP carabelli >> >>>We get the occasional attendee who looks really put off having to wear >> >>>shoes. Sitting in the Directors Circle, we usually attire in tux and [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >carabelli Even some of the ones you pay for have awful binary groups. Missed posts everywhere. Nothing like being one part of a multi-part message away from what you want, even after you've paid for a 'better' usenet provider. -- Adenosine Semi-informed Dental Consumer ? >>> >> Have heard that you look quite presentable in an evening gown Dr. >>Steve. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >Adenosine >Semi-informed Dental Consumer ? EasyNews ain't all that bad. And besides that's what par files are for. -- W_B Take out the G'RBAGE wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com >>>> >> Have heard that you look quite presentable in an evening gown Dr. >>>Steve. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >EasyNews ain't all that bad. >And besides that's what par files are for. Easynews is excellent. It rarely has any missing messages, which is why I use it. Even WITH par files, I've had trouble downloading very large files with other nntp services. -- Adenosine Semi-informed Dental Consumer ? > Easynews is excellent. It rarely has any missing messages, which is > why I use it. How does anyone know if anything (from usenet) is truly missing? TW >> Easynews is excellent. It rarely has any missing messages, which is >> why I use it. > >How does anyone know if anything (from usenet) is truly missing? > >TW Well, in the binary groups it's pretty easy to tell, because the contents of any one message are spread out between a large number of individual posts. When these posts come up missing it's quite easy to notice it. -- Adenosine Semi-informed Dental Consumer ? > >> Easynews is excellent. It rarely has any missing messages, which is > >> why I use it. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Adenosine > Semi-informed Dental Consumer ? What does that prove about what might be missing from non-binary groups? TW >> Easynews is excellent. It rarely has any missing messages, which is >> why I use it. > >How does anyone know if anything (from usenet) is truly missing? > >TW Mailgate provides RED for what they got and blue for what they do not. I may post a jpg to demonstrate. Joel >Even WITH par files, I've had trouble downloading very large files >with other nntp services. Large files eh? You been reading anti-mercury stuff again? Joel > >We get the occasional attendee who looks really put off having to wear > >shoes. Sitting in the Directors Circle, we usually attire in tux and gown. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Take out the G'RBAGE > wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com No......... you can't upstage Mrs. Steve! TW Ouuuuu..... I love very formal!!!!!!!!! (The girls will have time to plan all the girlish details.) TW > Just give me at least two weeks notice so that I can get good seats. We > usually go to opening night (very formal). [quoted text clipped - 80 lines] > >> >> > > >> >> > TW Watch out for the ghoulish details however. >Ouuuuu..... I love very formal!!!!!!!!! (The girls will have time to >plan all the girlish details.) >TW > >> Just give me at least two weeks notice so that I can get good seats. We >> usually go to opening night (very formal). -- W_B Take out the G'RBAGE wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com > Watch out for the ghoulish details however. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Take out the G'RBAGE > wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com These girls are not ghoulish ... ;-) TW I've been pinching myself -- and it seems I'm not dreaming -- We can really go with you and Mrs. Steve to see Puccini's Tosca???? I can't believe this offer!!! Does this come with any strings attached such as ... bringing a case of San Diego sunshine in a can or something like that??? (I can handle that.) TW > Just give me at least two weeks notice so that I can get good seats. We > usually go to opening night (very formal). J** said she went *Line Dancing*. Joel just likes to get carried away. As far as the other explanations for her possible illness and miracle recovery, we have exhausted all other means with *NO* acceptance of any other cause (from the POI) than mercury poisoning from amalgam. The story in her own words contradicts that possibility, but it/he/she will never admit it. Go figure, Fawks > J** said she went *Line Dancing*. Joel just likes to get carried away. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Go figure, > Fawks I agree that the story is as it is. Trying to interpret it in any other way is useless. TW >> The story in her own words contradicts that possibility, but it/he/she >> will never admit it. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >TW Didn't you just give you own interpretation of her story including the idea that she had some viral illness that somehow resolved just as her dental work was being done??? Oh, that is right. YOu were just speaking "generally" and not about JD. My bad. Aloha, Rich >Subject: Re: Other consequences of amalgam removal? >From: "Fawks" tuthjockey@earthlink.net [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >As far as the other explanations for her possible illness and miracle >recovery There was no miracle recovery, that's a repeated lie. Removing the amalgams was just the first step, then it's on to ridding the body of the mercury and repairing the damage done. Frankly, I don't care what you believe, you haven't believed a single person who has shown up here that has been poisoned. You prefer to believe a proven liar with a pattern of the same ole same ole long before me. You could care less that he is a proven liar and a despicable person who used my ill and even dead parent/s to try and belittle me, who has nuked his posts. Go figure. I have helped others and will continue. Rich never could answer Bubba's questions. Rich <,@.> wrote in news:cfaedugogsokpianjg600s703prsefplaf@4ax.com: > On Tue, 7 May 2002 10:11:19 +1000, "P Moran" <pjmo...@gil.com.au> > wrote: >>Who are you trying to convince, Jan? Yourself, to justify your own >>excursion into amalgam removal, apparently without any spectacular >>success? > Bingo!!! That is likely, IMO, exactly the motivation behind Jan > obsessively posting about the dangers of mercury amalgams. Despite the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > she had mercury poisoning but also believes (paranoically) that there > is a vast conspiracy by the ADA to cover it all up. Sure, Rich! You couldn't support your position in our debate, but instead chose to run away not once, but twice. I suspect that there are many more members of MHA other than Jan and myself whom you have NOT convinced. Maybe you would like to take another shot at answering the questions that you could NOT address a few months ago. Have you learned anything new in that interval, Rich? Here, again, is the last post I made in our debate: Subject: Re: Psychologic factors influencing physical illness vs Amalgam Related Illness in the case of Jan Drew From: Bubba <bubbasthename...@doghotmail.com> Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative ************************************************************************** NOTE TO RICH: If you respond to this post, please be sure to identify all sections which you snip (preferably with "[...]"). Thanks! ************************************************************************** Rich <k...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in news:7ur05u86b0koq2fpdasnhuqcoqkoi3b469@4ax.com: - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > I thought it would be useful for me to summarize my opinion with > respect to the likelihood of Jan Drew having psychologic factors [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > actually may have been even higher due to the procedure to remove > them. > Here is the statement in its entirety followed by an analysis of it. >>Jan Drew says: >>Rich for the LAST time, I said I felt better than I had in two years. >>That was very true. I had been very very ill and my health was >>deteriorating fast. After much reading and research I was convinced it >>was my teeth. I wasn't absolutely positivity 100% sure, but it all fit >>together and I knew I had to do something. It wasn't easy, what if it >>didn't work? That was very stressful. >>Finally all the work was done, the metal was out, the bill was paid, I >>didn't have to sit in the dentist chairs for hours with a rubber dam in >>my mouth!!!!!!!!!! Of course I was very relieved. A big big burden was >>lifted. That makes one FEEL BETTER. >>What's so hard to understand? >>I also reported I had only begun, now on to chelating the mercury from >>my body. With mercury poisoning, it comes and goes, I had some pretty >>bad spells. I'm still chelating Rich and will be for some time. I slowly >>am regaining my health and my PN is much better. I don't have the >>painful periods that I once had, and yes it was after I started taking >>medication. >>You added a few words to what I said which *implied* that I was >>physicially free from pain..........as in BANG I'm home free. That is >>NOT what I meant.............and you know it. >>Now do you better understand? I hope so because I feel no need to >>explain it AGAIN. Please respect that I didn't have to explain AGAIN >>this time. >>Jan Rich, if you really believe that this post of Jan's provides "the most compelling evidence that it is psychologic factors vs ARI or MP," then you really don't have *much* to support your position. I still don't understand why you believe that Jan's account that she experienced some relief in the days immediately following her amalgam removal is relevant to the issue of whether she does or does not have "Amalgam-Related Illness" (ARI)? > First let me say that I think that it important not to take everything > that Jan says at face value. Well, then you (or I) could always make claims such as 1) "although Jan said ______, she really meant ______," or 2) "when Jan said _____, she was making a false statement (or lying)." You (and I) could make up any story we wanted and attribute it to Jan (which I believe you have tried to do - see below). > This is because she clearly has a > vendetta against conventional medicine as reflected by her frequent > kneejerk responses to most anyone who may endorse something that is > also endorsed by conventional medicine invoking some kind of > conspiracy using terms like "organized medicine". Jan will likely deny > this but as I have said before, the proof is in the pudding. Tangential point, irrelevant to the discussion. > It is also important not to take what she says at face value due to > the numerous inconsistencies that she has made over the years. > The above statement made by Jan Drew is important because it is likely > a truthful one. I say this because Jan clearly has a very negative [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > (as she did above) that psychologic factors were responsible for her > feeling better, at least initially is both amazing and likely true. So, Rich, it appears that you believe Jan *only* when her account supports your position. Am I correct? The explanation that Jan has provided (in the above statement) for her sense of relief is NOT the same as your "psychological factors" explanation. Therefore, her account does NOT support your claim! Although you state above that this "statement made by Jan Drew is important because it is likely a truthful one," you really don't even believe *all* of this statement, because part of it does NOT support your position (see below). > So let us look at her statement more closely. > In response to my question about how she could feel better than she > had for two years so quickly after having the amalgams removed, Jan > first admitted that she indeed did feel better than she had in two > years. > She then admits that after being told by Hulda Clark to check the > teeth that she did some research which resulted in her being quite [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > major health problems. She even believed that she was going to die as > a result of this. What credible evidence do you have that either of these beliefs were unfounded? > It is perfectly understandable why Jan would feel a great sense of > relief following the removal of the amalgams given her state of mind. > And as a result of this relief Jan felt better than she had in two > years. > This alone, to me, is very convincing evidence that Jan's initial > improvement was very likely psychological. Jan could not have given a > much more convincing statement to make my point. What evidence do you have to support *your opinion* that it is more likely that the relief Jan experienced was due to the fact that Jan believed she was no longer being exposed to the mercury from her amalgams rather than *Jan's explanation* that she was relieved because the painful, uncomfortable, and stressful amalgam removal procedure had been completed? Even after the amalgam removal procedure, Jan still had a body burden of mercury that would likely be responsible for continuing health problems for years to come. Why should she have felt relief knowing that MOST of the mercury was *still* in her body? > A question was raised as to whether Jan's symptoms preceded her > worrying about the amalgams. Certainly some of them did. After all she > has peripheral neuropathy, a very painful and uncomfortable disease. Please list all of Jan's signs and symptoms (and their severity - on a scale of 1-10) ... 1) *before* she knew that dental amalgams might be responsible for her health problems, and 2) *after* she knew that dental amalgams might be responsible for her health problems. > Fortunately for Jan the one treatment that even she admits is > responsible for reducing much of her pain are the meds (Elavil and > Neurontin) manufactured by those evil pharmaceutical companies that > are part of organized medicine. This is a tangential comment, completely unrelated to this discussion. > However following Hulda telling Jan about the dangers of amalgams Jan > began to believe that she was dying. Her health really deteriorated > after Hulda told Jan about the dangers of amalgams and after Jan did > her research. Please provide the URL(s) to any post(s) in the Google archives where Jan wrote THAT! [...] > There also has been a question about the characterization of her > improvement as being psychosomatic or psych factors influencing a > physical condition. Let me explain the difference between these two > conditions and how it is not very relevant to the question of whether > Jan's improvement was psychologic or due to the amalgams. > Psychologic factors influencing physical illness is where psychologic > factors are important in a preexisting physical condition. You *still* have not defined what you mean by "psychologic factors." I have asked you repeatedly to do so. ****************************************** Rich, PLEASE DEFINE "psychologic factors." Rich, PLEASE DEFINE "psychologic factors." Rich, PLEASE DEFINE "psychologic factors." Rich, PLEASE DEFINE "psychologic factors." ****************************************** > This would > be a more appropriate characterization for Jan's situation with > respect to amalgams. What were Jan's preexisting physical conditions with respect to amalgams? > Psychosomatic disorder refers to a physical condition which arises to > significant degree by psychologic factors such as anxiety, paranoia, > etc. FYI, the current DSM-IV-TR classification that has replaced "psychosomatic disorder" is Somatoform Disorders. "Psychosomatic disorder" is NOT a valid psychiatric diagnosis. > I have expressed my opinion that Jan's problems are psychosomatic as > well as due to psychologic factors influencing a physical condition. Are you changing your position AGAIN? > They are not mutually exclusive. I believe there is good evidence that > she has BOTH. Is it possible that Jan has *all* of the following conditions?: 1) ARI 2) "psychosomatic factors" (whatever they are) 3) one of Somatoform Disorders Isn't the probability that an individual has all three "conditions" almost the same as the probability that that same individual has only the last two? > In the case of the PN it is latter. Her belief that she > was infested with multiple parasites was, for example, likely the > latter. This is my opinion. I am not 100% sure of it. Does Jan meet the criteria of any of the DSM-IV-TR Somatoform Disorders? If she does NOT, then she does NOT have a Somatoform Disorder. (Please use the correct terminology in the future.) Jan does NOT have a "psychosomatic condition"! That is NO longer a valid psychiatric diagnosis! > Jan Drew's animosity toward conventional medicine is a matter of > record that she will likely deny. I can only suggest that people read > her posts to see what I mean. The proof is in the pudding as it were. This statement of yours is completely tangential to this discussion. > Jan has reported improvement with so many different unproven > alternative methods over the years that makes it quite likely that her > improvements are due to psychologic factors. The other explanation is > that all these alt treatments were effective for her serious ailments. > I will allow others to come to their own determination. There are other equally likely explanations. Check out the following link for some clues: Why Bogus Therapies Seem to Work, by Barry L. Beyerstein http://www.csicop.org/si/9709/beyer.html Several of these explanations do NOT require a psychological mechanism. What evidence do you have that your explanation is more likely than these other non-psychological mechanisms? > While I > personally don't think that all alt treatments are complete quackery, > I am doubtful that so many of them (as reported by Jan) can be helpful > other than for psychologic reasons. This is just my opinion. I am not > 100% certain of it. Just because Jan has had some treatments that might have not have had *any* efficacy in treating her conditions (but from which she believes she has derived some benefit) does NOT mean that she does not have ARI and has not had a significant improvement in her health as a result of the amalgam removal. > Another points raised was the Jan's comments should be taken at face > value or else we will be shooting at a moving target. With all due [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > "lying" as most of you are quite aware by her numerous accusations > while ridiculing OTHERS for calling people liars. Well then, Rich, maybe I should just "reinterpret" Jan's comments, too, to bolster *my* position. Right!!! > Another point raised was my certainty of her having a particular > psychiatric diagnosis. You have NOT supported your claim with a valid psychiatric diagnosis. Please do so. > While I often weigh in with my opinion I ALSO > specifically advise people to seek out qualified professional help to > reach diagnoses and that no one should accept anyone's opinion > (including mine) in this newsgroup. This is a discussion newsgroup for > expressing opinions. I advise NO ONE to accept my diagnoses as > definitive and have frequently stated this. > And with respect to the question of how one can rule out amalgam > related illness or mercury related illness in this case we cannot. You have NOT answered these questions I posted previously: So, you *do* agree that it is *possible* for Jan's health problems to be the result of her mercury exposures from her amalgams? 1) How would someone rule out that possibility? 2) How would *you* rule out that possibility? 3) In what ways would Jan's account have to differ for you to find it credible? Do you know that one of the exclusionary criteria for the Somatoform Disorders is that the patient's symptoms cannot be explained by the "direct effects of a substance" (e.g, mercury)? > Of > course I cannot also rule out interplanetary alien influence either. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > IAI. How would you go about ruling out IAI?? Please be specific since > you claimed that my analogy was a stupid skeptic trick. Rich, in a previous post, you implied that the probability that Jan experienced relief immediately following her amalgam removal was about the same as the probability that her relief was due to some "interplanetary influence." Is that your position? If so, it is a claim, which you have the responsibility to support. I have made NO claim! > Btw, I know of several individuals who thought that they had > electronic devices planted in their amalgams by interplanetary aliens [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > point. That point is that one cannot rule out with 100% certainty > anything. Irrelevant, tangential, self-serving, smug statement. [...] > Another point is that I asked for a scenario that would indicate that > Jan's problem was likely psychologic and was told that if she had [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > believing in a psychologic etiology or exacerbation from psych > problems it is very difficult to have a meaningful discussion. No, it isn't! If you were confident enough in your opinion to make a number of posts that Jan's account (i.e., that she believed that mercury exposures had an adverse physiological effect on her health, and NOT just through some purely psychological mechanism) was a "bogus claim," then you should have *plenty* of evidence to convince even the most die-hard skeptic that you are right! Rich, this debate should be a slam-dunk for you! I don't have to prove a thing! You are trying to deflect this discussion from the claims you have made, which you have the responsibility to support with credible evidence! I have made NO claims! > I hope that I have been clear in my opinion and reasons for my > opinion. I elected to make all these comments in a single post rather > than to answer specific questions in another post so my reasoning and > rationale for my opinions would be clear. I hope that I have answered > all questions that are *relevant* to the issue at hand. I prefer not > to get side tracked with tangential issues. You have *not* answered all of the relevant questions. > I would be happy to answer any substantive questions related to this > discussion but will likely decline to answer any tangential or > irrelevant questions that are designed to deflect from the issue at > hand realizing that that may trigger someone to impulsively kill file > me again. > I also hope that this discussion can be continued without the hurling > of insults. I am trying my best to raise the level of discussion here, > recognizing that I am not always successful in achieving that goal. Why don't we both agree NOT to engage in *any* sidebar discussions on MHA regarding anything discussed in this thread or anything concerning this thread (e.g., who made the best point in the most recent post)? And how would you characterize what you have written in the preceding two paragraph, if not an insult? > Another point is that this is an open discussion group and NOT for one > on one discussion. It is not appropriate in my opinion to discourage > others from participating in the discussion. If people want to have a > one on one discussion it would be better handled through e-mail. Fine. I'm still not going to respond to any posts about this topic (in a substantive manner) other than yours. > Rich SignatureBubba >There was no miracle recovery, that's a repeated lie. On June 16, 1999 Jan was bedridden, dying of mercury poisoning, unable to walk due to severe neuropathic pain from the poisoning. On June 17-18, 1999 Jan had 8 of 12 amalgams removed. Hours after she had the eight amalgams removed she felt better than she had in two years. On June 26, 1999 Jan Drew said that she was able to go out line dancing and her feet did not hurt. Sounds like a miraculous recovery to me. If Jan was a normal person I might ask her choose an adjective (other than miraculous) to describe how she went from bedridden to line dancing. She is not so I won't:-) Perhaps Jan is talking about *her* lie which implied she had a miraculous recovery. Aloha, Rich >J** said she went *Line Dancing*. Joel just likes to get carried away. Very true! Fawks hits the nail on the head again! Otherwise life gets boring. Joel >As far as the other explanations for her possible illness and miracle >recovery, we have exhausted all other means with *NO* acceptance [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Go figure, >Fawks >J** said she went *Line Dancing*. Joel just likes to get carried away. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Go figure, >Fawks Fawks, are you on board for the moratorium ? -- W_B wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com Take out the G'RBAGE > The story in her own words contradicts that possibility, but it/he/she > will never admit it. This is because, in my figuring anyways, SWNMNBM is not a PERSON but a COMMITTEE, all dedicated to furthering the cause of their leader; SWNMNBM. I think these committee members are quite consistent in their party line, except for a few slips once in a while, as SF has noticed here. If this is not true, why would it be that SWNMNBM is able to post all over the universe and at all times in the day? It is either that or SWNMNBM uses an automatic poster. JMO, though I know that nobody gives a cows-fart SP SignatureNot a real Addy, yet >In all fairness, maybe this person was bedridden but misunderstood the >reason for the condition. (Viral illness can put an NFL football player >in that condition -- ) In all fairness?!?!?!??! Well I am certainly not one to be unfair. You seem to be implying that I am treating Jan unfairly. Maybe you were just making a funny and forgot the smiley:-)) If you were being serious I would have to think about what would cause you to think that. Actually I believe a more reasonable explanation is that her physical deterioration resulting in being bedridden (of course assuming she did not make this up also) was caused by excessive worrying after reading a Hulda Clark book. I am not aware of a viral illness that would cause a rapid deterioration in her health over a several week period culminating in her being bedridden due to severe neuropathic pain. >By the 17-18, a couple days later, the viral illness was subsiding. It >seemed to coincide with the dental treatment. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Of course it was a relief to get all the dental work done. But she did *not* get all the dental work done. It had just begun!! I thought I posted that very fact dozens of times. And your failure to understand that reinforces in my mind the need to keep reposting her bogus claim since I have repeatedly shown how she lied about the dental work being over. The dental work started on June 17 continued on June 18th at which point she said that she felt better than she had in two years. She lied when she said the reason was because the dental work was over. If she did not lie then she had every opportunity to say that she was mistaken about her comment. Instead she accuses me of lying. Surprise, surprise:-)) The dental work would not be over for quite a while. > Who wants to >hang around in a dental chair when you're feeling better from an acute >viral illness that kept you in bed for two days? Jan claimed that her health was progressively deteriorating over several weeks with worsening of her symptoms of peripheral neuropathy and that this led to her being bedridden. >A week later, the viral illness was completely resolved *and* she had >all her energy back. A virus and no activity for two days can weaken a >person so that line dancing, or any other kind of dancing is just too >much to manage. I think you are confused. Jan said that the reason that she was bedridden was because the pain of the peripheral neuropathy was so bad that she could not walk. What virus would do that?? >The mercury levels had nothing to do with two years of chronic >exhaustion (maybe depression related, maybe chronic viral illness, maybe >stress). > >Belief in Junk Science is the likely science behind her recovery. Her deterioration was likely from psychologic factors due to worrying. Her dramatic improvement was likely from psychologic factors due to being relieved that she was finally doing something about what she thought was causing the problem. Jan had the same thing happen after reading about parasites. Her health deteriorated. She had a Hulda Clark parasite cleanse and she felt better. I have posted her own words about this event. >Can't we just move on, be glad that she is fully recovered Uh, Webby. What planet are you on?? Fully recovered??!?!?!!?!?!?!!? If you think that Jan Drew is fully recovered in ANY sense of that word then ..... (I am at a loss for words). The reason that I cannot "move on" is because Jan Drew continues to assert that she had mercury poisoning secondary to amalgams and that removing the amalgams saved her life. She makes posts encouraging people who have unanswered health problems to check their teeth, see an alternative dentist who might take advantage of their naivete. And the worst thing about it is that I believe that Jan Drew *knows* NOW that she *never* had mercury poisoning which is supported by her effort to change her history to make it seem more plausible that she did(have mercury poisoning). But the fascinating thing in my mind, Webby, is your attempt to discourage me from confronting Jan Drew about her bogus claim of mercury poisoning when you say "can't we just move on". It is fascinating but not surprising to me since I have seen others do the same thing. Jan Drew has an amazing ability to manipulate people into enabling her pathologic behavior by discouraging others from confronting her. >... in fact, >so fully recovered that she has endless energy to do her "work". Let >her do whatever she wants. Huh?? Are not you the one who wanted to make a formal complaint about Jan DRew to her ISP and to make her personally responsible for her posts in order to get her to *stop* doing what she was doing. Was it not you who wanted to know her real name so that she could be held "accountable" for her libelous comments?? Now you want her to do *whatever* she wants!?!?!?!!? Sounds like you are doing a 180. While I personally believe that Jan has the right to post all the bullshit she wants I am not going to just sit by and allow her to do it with impunity, increasing the chance that some unsuspecting lurker might believe her and unnecessarily get their amalgams out. Without someone exposing Jan's lies, her claims of mercury poisoning really don't seem that crazy. The devil is in the details though. When I used to post my real email address I would regularly get email from lurkers thanking me for exposing Jan's and other's lies. I encouraged them to post their comments publicly but they were reluctant to expose themselves to Jan's rage and stalking behavior. Aloha, Rich >> >> > [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] >> >> Rich > >In all fairness, maybe this person was bedridden but misunderstood the > >reason for the condition. (Viral illness can put an NFL football player [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > forgot the smiley:-)) If you were being serious I would have to think > about what would cause you to think that. My remark had nothing to do with anyone in particular. I was generalizing... and I mean *I* was generalizing. > Actually I believe a more reasonable explanation is that her physical > deterioration resulting in being bedridden (of course assuming she did > not make this up also) was caused by excessive worrying after reading > a Hulda Clark book. I am not aware of a viral illness that would > cause a rapid deterioration in her health over a several week period > culminating in her being bedridden due to severe neuropathic pain. The most important point of these comments rests in the lack of any validity as to the proven identity of the author of the posts made by who has come to be known as J** D***. > >By the 17-18, a couple days later, the viral illness was subsiding. It > >seemed to coincide with the dental treatment. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > bogus claim since I have repeatedly shown how she lied about the > dental work being over. She? Who? First you must prove to the readers who she/who is and secondly you must prove how it is that you know for a fact *anything* about that individual patient's dental/medical care. Is there anything about your claims that would stand up in a court of law? > The dental work started on June 17 continued on June 18th at which > point she said that she felt better than she had in two years. She > lied when she said the reason was because the dental work was over. How do you know that "she" lied about anything? First you must prove who she is. Can you do that? Please, don't tell us that who she is (IRL) does not matter. > If she did not lie then she had every opportunity to say that she was > mistaken about her comment. Instead she accuses me of lying. Surprise, [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > bedridden was because the pain of the peripheral neuropathy was so bad > that she could not walk. What virus would do that?? Are you suggesting that I could possibly know what condition caused her problems? I merely suggested a possibility of the cause for her inability to live a normal life. Peripheral neuropathy can occur as the result of any number of conditions. > >The mercury levels had nothing to do with two years of chronic > >exhaustion (maybe depression related, maybe chronic viral illness, maybe [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > If you think that Jan Drew is fully recovered in ANY sense of that > word then ..... (I am at a loss for words). As far as I know, I have absolutely no way to know if "Jan Drew" is recovered fully or in part from any malady. I can't prove if "Jan Drew" exists much less if the complaints/conditions of "Jan Drew" exist. So how on earth could I possible *know* if the conditions expressed via the posts of jd63929@aol.com exist at all much less if the conditions are resolved? I can't prove any of this. OTOH, I can tell you and every other reader that I have reason to believe that "JD" exists and is not well. Additionally, I have reason to believe that "JD" is the figment of someone's imagination. > The reason that I cannot "move on" is because Jan Drew continues to > assert that she had mercury poisoning secondary to amalgams and that [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > enabling her pathologic behavior by discouraging others from > confronting her. I, Webby, or The Webby, am not at all important when it comes to the believability of anything. My ideas are here for the mere purpose of sharing the possible. It is so, so easy to grasp "the impossible" when the expressions of those unknown to us seem ... impossible to believe. > >... in fact, > >so fully recovered that she has endless energy to do her "work". Let [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > not you who wanted to know her real name so that she could be held > "accountable" for her libelous comments?? Yes, I was/am. > Now you want her to do *whatever* she wants!?!?!?!!? Sounds like you > are doing a 180. It may seem that way, but what seems to be the case on the surface may not always be the case beneath the surface. > While I personally believe that Jan has the right to post all the > bullshit she wants I am not going to just sit by and allow her to do [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Rich When I posted any email address, I received thousands of emails from people asking me to comment upon their questions. And so I did, privately. *********Who************** were those thousands of people (IRL) with serious questions?????????????????????? I will never know. But they know. The Webby I did not get the impression Webby was trying to discourage you from your task at hand, but rather was simply pointing out a possible etiology for symptoms as described by J#$ which could explain her experience. I saw this as being supportive of the view that J@% 's symptoms could not have been due to dental amalgam. Signature~+--~+--~+--~+--~+-- Stephen Mancuso, D.D.S. Troy, Michigan, USA .................................................... This posting is intended for informational or conversational purposes only. Always seek the opinion of a licensed dental professional before acting on the advice or opinion expressed here. Only a dentist who has examined you in person can diagnose your problems and make decisions which will affect your health. ...................... > >>In all fairness, maybe this person was bedridden but misunderstood the [quoted text clipped - 184 lines] >>> >>> Rich >I did not get the impression Webby was trying to discourage you from your >task at hand, but rather was simply pointing out a possible etiology for >symptoms as described by J#$ which could explain her experience. I saw this >as being supportive of the view that J@% 's symptoms could not have been due >to dental amalgam. I agree that the first part of her post was to give some alternative explanation for Jan's symptoms. I explained why her alternate explanation was likely not true. But Webby's post included much more than just a possible alternative etiology. Read it again in its entirety and make comments if you like (without top posting since it makes it easier to understand the context of your statements). >>Webby said: >>Can't we just move on, be glad that she is fully recovered I do see, however, why it is so difficult for a group to bond together against a person who not only is deceitful about having mercury poisoning but it also very disruptive to the group in general. There are so many different motivations for people posting in this group that it makes it difficult to agree on a single purpose regardless of how noble that purpose may be. Aloha, Rich Rich, No one is looking to see what I have to say about this subject. Don't make my posts seem more important than they are; they are unimportant in the great scheme of things. I am closing the door to this subject and do not intend to reopen it. TW > But she did *not* get all the dental work done. It had just begun!! I > thought I posted that very fact dozens of times. And your failure to > understand that reinforces in my mind the need to keep reposting her > bogus claim since I have repeatedly shown how she lied about the > dental work being over. I think the hick is that no one with half a brain gives a cow-fart about what this individual thinks or says, as she is not willing to do anything to further her professed cause. Regards SP SignatureNot a real Addy, yet >> But she did *not* get all the dental work done. It had just begun!! I >> thought I posted that very fact dozens of times. And your failure to [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Regards >SP A new lurker who has unanswered health problems who listens to Jan Drew's story may care about what she says. Jan Drew's claim of mercury poisoning only becomes obviously bogus when her own words are used to impeach her credibility. Billions of dollars are spent each year on bogus health cures. Many of these people might have avoided getting ripped off (or losing their life) had someone given them the other side of the story. I have been there, done that. Jan Drew wants nothing more than to have people allow her to post her lying claim of mercury poisoning with impunity. she frustrates people endlessly resulting in posters choosing to ignore her. When you do, you play right into her hand. Don't discuss anything with her. Talk at or about her. Expose her lies about mercury poisoning by posting her own words. That is the ticket my friends. Aloha, Rich A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail? This might open up an old can of worms, but I think top posting is good. Let me explain. First of all Google Groups archives display the first 60 some odd lines of a post, if you want to read anything beyond that in a new thread you have to open a new window. Top posting would allow one to immediately read a short reply to a long post. Secondly, M$ software, predominant in NA automatically places replies at the top. It is a real PITA moving things such as text and signatures down to the bottom. Plus it is a PITA scrolling down to read a single line comment that is typical of much of the quick dialogue that happens here @ s.m.d. Don't know about you, but .... I read from left to right and from the top down, not from the bottom up. SignatureRoy rem NADA to reply | A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. | Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? | A: Top-posting. | Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail? > First of all Google Groups archives display the first 60 some odd lines of > a post, if you want to read anything beyond that in a new thread you have > to open a new window. Then post some key words at the top of your post. > Secondly, M$ software, predominant in NA automatically places replies at > the top. So do most News readers, my MacSoup included. >It is a real PITA moving things such as text and signatures down Then stand up while doing it..... ;-) >to the >bottom. Plus it is a PITA scrolling down to read a single line comment >that is typical of much of the quick dialogue that happens here @ >s.m.d. Then why is bottom posting the recommended procedure? This is not rhetorical; I' d like to know what the history behind this is. > Don't know about you, but .... I read from left to right and from the top > down, not from the bottom up. Point taken; BUT you are from T.O. , and as we all know: People from T.O. , well..... they're a bit.... T.O.-ish , so.... ..... ;-) Just pushin' yer leg, man. Tell me what you know about top/bottom posting history. Cheers, Roy SignatureNot a real Addy, yet >This might open up an old can of worms, but I think top posting is good. Let me >explain. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >a new window. Top posting would allow one to immediately read a short reply to a >long post. I agree with Roy but for more basic reasons ....... I keep wearing out mice if I have to scroll too much! Joel >Secondly, M$ software, predominant in NA automatically places replies at the >top. It is a real PITA moving things such as text and signatures down to the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Don't know about you, but .... I read from left to right and from the top down, >not from the bottom up. >This might open up an old can of worms, but I think top posting is good. Let me >explain. I'm not a big fan of the top posting whatsoever. >First of all Google Groups archives display the first 60 some odd lines of a >post, if you want to read anything beyond that in a new thread you have to open >a new window. Top posting would allow one to immediately read a short reply to a >long post. That's why you should learn to edit your replies so that you only have the relevent text... and also learn to use the page down key. >Secondly, M$ software, predominant in NA automatically places replies at the >top. It is a real PITA moving things such as text and signatures down to the >bottom. Plus it is a PITA scrolling down to read a single line comment that is >typical of much of the quick dialogue that happens here @ s.m.d. If your news client sucks.... get a new one. >Don't know about you, but .... I read from left to right and from the top down, >not from the bottom up. There should be a right -> left character encoding joke here, but I can't think of one. -- Adenosine Semi-informed Dental Consumer ? >Subject: Top posting -- Was: Other consequences of amalgam removal? >From: "Roy Brown" roybrown@sympatico.caNADA [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >down, >not from the bottom up. Rich only says this because we have a very honest poster on MHA who does it, it is just another time when Rich tries to tear others down to build himsrlf up. In fact, this is what he stated: "Posting at the top because that's where the cursor happened to be is like > sh.tting in your pants because that's where your a.shole happened to be." Rich is filled with hatred and is obsessed. Jan > Jan Drew wants nothing more than to have people allow her to post her > lying claim of mercury poisoning with impunity. she frustrates people > endlessly resulting in posters choosing to ignore her. You don't think that after a few posts, the discerning lurker would quickly come to the conclusion that SHNMNBM is a bit biased? And, we have your archive of past posts, and DrS's refutation that are posted from time to time as well. FWIW, I happen to think that most people who inquire here are looking more to confirm an opinion already formed than to actually weigh and consider. Don't misunderstand, Rich: I'm not against what you're doing. I just think that is is disappointing that the SMD is being reduced to a reactionary gang trying to fend off the Usenet terrorists who have nothing better to do with their time. Cheers SP SignatureNot a real Addy, yet >Subject: Re: Other consequences of amalgam removal? >From: StovesNewAddy@sympatico.DOTnet (StovePipe) >Date: 12/4/2004 10:42 AM Pacific Standard Time >Message-id: <1go9tmb.1r3f8hg8wvj5yN%StovesNewAddy@sympatico.DOTnet> Richard H Jacobson is still posting, LOL, I told ya he couldn't break his habit and obsession. Back in 1995, long before I was on the internet, he had the same pattern. From: Richard Jacobson (richj_@pixi.com) Subject: Re: Effexor Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative Date: 1995/04/02 I am not sure what you mean by too willing to accept the whole depression diagnosis. I am also not sure what you mean when you say that you don't buy the your depression is due to something mental. Is not the fact that they keep putting you on antidepressants evidence that they do NOT think it is just something mental. Afterall the biochemical theory of depression is that depression is due to a neurotransmitter imbalance and that the antidepressants correct that imbalance. Seems to me they are saying that your depression is physical and not ****psychologic.*** ============================================================ Notice how Richard is trying to compare Nazi war crimes with vaccinations. The sad thing is that Richard really sees little difference. Yes but it is unfortunate when parents make decisions with limitedinformation due to *****psychopathologic***** fears. : >>>I think it's time for us to ignore Mr. Finkelstein. He uses words : >>>like allopathic physician, which clearly states his real reasons : >>>for not wanting his kids vaccinated. It's against his religion. : >>>Fine, that is an important principle in this country, and I'm : >>>all for him to exercise it. Arguing with him is useless as he is : >>>not interested in scientific proof or anything other kind of proof : >>>for that matter. Yes Richard it is *I* who has the myopic view of the world.How many times have I suggested that you read about biology and immunology to broaden your horizons and how many times haveyou ignored this completely. I also realize that because mathematics does not use double blind studies to prove its theories that you think that this method could be applied to all things that we study. It is quite difficult for you (despitehow worldly you think you are) to conceive of some things being amenable to double blind studies and some things not Do some reading and you may learn something. Absolutely fascinating Richard. So your understanding based upon the posts is that the ONLY place that your baby could possibly pick up this bacterium is from sheep, cattle, other small animals and surgical operating theatres? Perhaps the problem you have extends beyond the *****psychological********. That is an interesting comment coming from someone who questions modern medicine using a treatment before studies are done to demonstrate efficacy and safety. Well ***Big Al*****, conventionalmedical practice is NOT to jump on every bandwagon but totest out theories before advocating their use. Yes ***Big Al****, I realize that you don't agree with my interpretation of the statistics and think that I have _no business_ commenting of the numbers. I will leave it up to the educated readers out thereto decide for themselves *who* is manipulating *what*. It always strikes me as curious that those who are so quick to accuse others of manipulation (especially without giving specifics) are the ones who are really manipulating. Sorry but I am going to continue to ask for evidence when I am in doubt about a treatment. Hope you can accept that my asking is not to be patronizing (although I will acknowledge that some of my more humorous postings have had a patronizing tone tothem) or inflate my ego but instead to get information that I think is important instead of just trusting whatever someone decides to post here especially when the nature of the post is so seeminglydefinitive. With aloha,Rich It is quite clear to me that you are unhappy with my postsand feel that I am being disingenuous with the group. Perhapsyou could share with me specifically what I have lied about. Do you notice that whenever someone does not have anything useful to say that they rely on ad hominum arguments to discredit the other person. And do you notice that those who complain so much about people discrediting them and not sticking to the facts are the ones who are the most guilty of discrediting people. It is very sad but it will likely>>continue as those who accuse others of>>being cynical or hypocrites or murderers>>in an attempt to discredit them and make>>themselves look good will continue to>>thrive in our society where personal>>freedom of speech is highly regarded.>>With freedom come responsibility.>>Hopefully those who accuse others of>>being irresponsible will take a good look>>in the mirror. But I will not hold my breath>>waiting for this to happen.>> giving all these false root causes and incorrect treatments. Iguess you understand that few people could understand healing like you do and most of the people are just ignorant and buying into the mainstream. It would take a VERY special person to understand the healing powers of Paul Iannone. There arelikely not very many people like that around. I give you a lotof credit Paul to keep your sanity when everyone around you is acting in such an insane manner. Yes you are a very special person indeed. And you can't help the fact that you are so special, knowledgeable, and selfless. You are not a pathologic narcissist. You ARE a great healer sent down from the mountaintop to heal mankind. <bowing head> I certainly could not agree with you more that if the doctor said that to you that it was very inappropriate. For some reason the doctors that you are seeing have pidgeon holed you into the "mentalpatient" and are not taking your complaints seriously. This is a common problem in medicine in which if a patient has a ***phychiatric***history it is assumed that |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message