Medical Forum / General / Nutrition / June 2006
How lying and spinning can kill you
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Phil Scott - 22 Jun 2006 19:38 GMT .
it appears that the larger a nation or corporation becomes the larger the mass of infighters and back stabbers there are just one step from the top.
as this mass increases in size, issues and motives become obscured or invisible...disabling good judgement, and viable motives as these will either not impliment.... or are seen by one or many others as counter to their own interests.
Gridlock and collapse ensue. These brains in justifying the mess become miswired and actually insae, destructively insane.
Naturs solution death, then a reboot... using the same atoms, but not the same molecules.
I notice that almost no matter what I say thees days in many quarters it is not understood, sinister motives are attributed to it etc. These think Im speaking code and either feel insulted or opposed.. Trying to make oneself clear looks aggressive... aggression causes more questioning of the motive...
Then these act on their bogus assumptions...it is going terminally south for most of corporate america and americans on this basis...history shows that entire nations go south as one large herd of lemmings.
Ive seen a few exceptions..small companies with superb leadership.....but not many.
I have clients that put out incompetent projects... then after the customer is in a total rage, and threatening non payment etc..tney call me to sort it out. I walk into the teeth of a knife fight as target number one.
what works on such a job is to be completely honest with the end user...they already know that something is terminally screwed up.. lying just invites them to be non cooperative and to harrass you as you are trying to sort the mess out... that environment precludes sorting anything out.
You must also educate the client as to whats real and what isn't... that takes credibility... such credibility is not established by lying or stone walling.
I find accurate education and truthfullness work virtually every time in those most trying situations.. often where not just one thing is wrong, but half a dozen things are wrong with ones product...and there are the clients extenuating circumstances and existing conditions not always discoverable.
Only honesty and earned trust work in the final analysis.
the company that had retained me in the past would preffer that I spin for them, and deny actuality or just clam up... and that might work in some aspects..
....but in the end is destructive to the person they put into the breech and fire at the job... such a bullet to be effective must have integrity.
These don't understand that of course, because they make their money by lying and spinning across many different areas ...as their heatlh goes totally into the tank.
oh well.
 Signature Phil Scott Ideas are bullet proof.
monty1945@lycos.com - 23 Jun 2006 07:51 GMT Phil:
You seem to think that "things are rotten to the core," or nearly so. Howevever, you failed to consider the underlying paradigm, which is the desire to sell a "product," and not just something like a piece of cheese, which nobody is going to pay $100 for, but rather something that is being touted as having almost magical qualities, and being priced accordingly. And yet where is the evidence that this is necessary? Do a google search for "Amish diet," for example. Basic physiology and avoidance of substances that act as oxidizing agents is the key to health - no need for much else, as far as diet is concerned. No need for "phytonutrients," "essential fatty acids," or antioxidant supplements, etc. My greatgrandparents lived long lives (mid-90s, 100+), never ate any omega 3 source (except trace amounts perhaps - no flax, oily fish, canola oil, etc.) and were not active. My greatgrandfather did a little gardening, but never any exercise. My grandfather is now in his early 90s and has been about as sedentary as an able-bodied person can be for decades.
You can go to my site and read about the scientific reality, as oppposed to the hype. The difference? I'm not trying to sell anyone anything.
http://groups.msn.com/TheScientificDebateForum-
Mr. Natural-Health - 23 Jun 2006 12:34 GMT > Phil: > > You seem to think that "things are rotten to the core," or nearly so. Go back to your group and STOP spamming this ng, Monty!
monty1945@lycos.com - 23 Jun 2006 16:19 GMT Perhaps if you just knew what "spam" is in this context you would demonstrate such a miinimal amount of competence that one person would take you seriously, but I doubt it. For "newbies," spam is when you try to sell someone something, pretending that you are providing important information. Instead, my site contains a great deal of citations from the professional literature. One may not agree with my interpretation, but anyone is welcome to ask questions and propose alternatives. I am only interested in discovering the scientific reality, so that I can eat in a way that is not unhealthy
Phil Scott - 23 Jun 2006 17:42 GMT <monty1945@lycos.com> wrote in message
snip
montie... there is something about your charisma here thats way too far south..normally when I kill file people like you I dont say anything.,.. but in your case...truly... the grease needs to be publicly dumped. accordingly, welcome to my kill file.
which is to not say eating heatlhy is bad,, its just your spamming of drivel with no respect to the context of the thread or other posters is south somehow montie...such idiocy rots the brain.. something to avoid.
Phil Scott
Mr. Natural-Health - 23 Jun 2006 22:19 GMT > Perhaps if you just knew what "spam" is in this context you would > demonstrate such a miinimal amount of competence that one person would [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > alternatives. I am only interested in discovering the scientific > reality, so that I can eat in a way that is not unhealthy Congratulations on your new group. That now makes you a spammer. :(
You are totally off-topic. Take it to your group, where you guys can hold farting contests over who is more insane.
Just thought that you might want to know.
monty1945@lycos.com - 24 Jun 2006 10:02 GMT Yes, it was posted to the wrong thread. It was a reply to nature boy's claim that I was "spamming" by telling people about the site I created so that people could just go there instead of searching for my posts here. On my site, everything is organized topically and there is also a message board. And I was responding to "corporate culture:" it is insidious and "something has to give," because the planet only has so much in terms of resources, and with current population and "economic" growth it is not sustainable for much longer at this pace. We'll be long gone before it become obvious to just about everyone, so it will be someone else's problem, but the corporate mentality basically provides people with a rationale for acting in horrible ways towards other people, animals, the environment, and even themselves. The internet now allows people to find alternatives to the "mainstream." In any case, this is supposed to be a science based newsgroup, so in a sense you are the one who is off topic, Phil. I just want to examine the evidence and discuss interpretations of it on this newsgroup, but I couldn't help point out to you that you are making assumptions that are not sustainable in their current form. These assumptions will just be a historical "blip" on the proverbial radar screen.
Mr. Natural-Health - 24 Jun 2006 13:36 GMT > It was a reply to nature boy's > claim that I was "spamming" by telling people about the site I created > so that people could just go there instead of searching for my posts > here. On my site, everything is organized topically and there is also > a message board. That is the definition of spam, Dumb Dumb. Posting to get people to go someplace else is Spam. And, you are now nothing but a Spamming Kook.
Just thought that you might want to know.
Phil Scott - 23 Jun 2006 17:35 GMT > Phil: > > You seem to think that "things are rotten to the core," or > nearly so. errr montie? yer reply is entirely non sequiteur to my post which was on corporate cultural issues. and yes its OK to post off topic occasionally to any ng,
Phil Scott
> Howevever, you failed to consider the underlying paradigm, > which is the [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > http://groups.msn.com/TheScientificDebateForum- just ed - 23 Jun 2006 22:38 GMT > errr montie? yer reply is entirely non sequiteur to my > post which was on corporate cultural issues. errr phil? this is sci.med.nutrition which has nothing to do with corporate cultural issues. yer post, like all of your posts is off topic everywhere I see them.
perhaps you sometimes post in an appropriate ng(?). that is why there are ngs with different subjects. please keep your crap out of here.
I find montie's non sequitur response to you to be quite appropriate. You deserve nothing more.
>and yes its OK > to post off topic occasionally to any ng, and it's simple courtesy to put 'OT' in the subject line (means OFF TOPIC) so that those interested in the ng topic can avoid such a post.
apparently you know full well that you are off topic and simply have no respect for us at all. thanks for nothing, phil.
you should be in alt.drugs.brainrot
|
|
|