Britain?s healthcare system better

[Don Roberto]

I clearly demonstrated that I do not rely extensively on Humalog
and it is clear to any honest intelligent reader that Humalog was
only the best example I could muster.

Been a while since we've agreed on anything - but you've summed it up
perfectly.

That must be because you are such an "honest intelligent reader".

Don Roberto
-----------------------------
To live is to war with trolls.
--Henrik Ibsen

[Don Roberto]

Waterloo, Randy's Waterloo, bayt, Randy's Waterloo,,Clay, Sentient

So how do taxpayers in the USA who subsidize universal single-payer
drug coverages through Medicare and Medicaid do the same for universal
single-payer drug coverages in other countries?

Medicare and Medicaid are legally Prohibited from negotiating with
drug companies for better pricing. Not so for many other countries
that import drugs manufactured in the US.
Margins for US manufactured pharmaceuticals are much higher in the US
and allow for other countries to Demand lowered pricing because,
unlike the US, these countries Do negotiate with big pharma.
Because the US Congress *legally sanctions* US based drug to charge
whatever they want in the US,other countries can demand lower pricing
and get away with it
1. Other countries might pay more.
2. US would most likely pay less (most likely)
3. Drug companies would stop manufacturing this or that drug because
margins would drop to much (unlikely)
4. Very likely -Stock prices of big pharma would drop because P:/E
ratios would increase.
5. R&D might decrease.
The Only reason the US legally refuses to negotiate for better drug
pricing is the big pharma lobby.

REALLY?

What is the world coming to...


Don Roberto
-----------------------------------------------------
The chief business of the American people is business
--Calvin Coolidge

[matt]

On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 16:58:58 -0700, Don Roberto

Waterloo, Randy's Waterloo, bayt, Randy's Waterloo,,Clay, Sentient

So how do taxpayers in the USA who subsidize universal single-payer
drug coverages through Medicare and Medicaid do the same for universal
single-payer drug coverages in other countries?

Medicare and Medicaid are legally Prohibited from negotiating with
drug companies for better pricing. Not so for many other countries
that import drugs manufactured in the US.
Margins for US manufactured pharmaceuticals are much higher in the US
and allow for other countries to Demand lowered pricing because,
unlike the US, these countries Do negotiate with big pharma.
Because the US Congress *legally sanctions* US based drug to charge
whatever they want in the US,other countries can demand lower pricing
and get away with it
1. Other countries might pay more.

Probably not. For most drugs threre are several drugs in the class,
and while Big Pharma would like you to think that they are very
different, the reality is that most are pretty much interchangeable
within a class. As a result negotiate prices either leads to price
fixing (illegal in the USA), or substantially lower prices.

2. US would most likely pay less (most likely)
3. Drug companies would stop manufacturing this or that drug because
margins would drop to much (unlikely)

Very unlikely. There is a very interesting case to look at. Something
called the prescription benefits scheme (PBS)in Australia. The
Government goes out every few years for bids. The two low bidders in
each drug class get the PBS contract. That would suggest that the
number of drugs in the class would be limited to two. The reality is
others are welcome to sell, but any 'brand premium' must be paid by
the consumer.
Most refuse, so you find that while there are 2 ACE inhibitors that
are on the PBS schedule, the last time I checked, there were in fact 7
ACE inhibitor drugs available. If the companies couldn't make money at
the PBS price, there would be absolutely no reason to sell the
products. The fact that they sell them says they obviously believe
the can make reasonable margins at the PBS price, The PBS 'private'
(unsubsidized price) is typically about 1/4 of the US retail.

4. Very likely -Stock prices of big pharma would drop because P:/E
ratios would increase.
5. R&D might decrease.
The Only reason the US legally refuses to negotiate for better drug
pricing is the big pharma lobby.

Who were able to convince the Congress that it is in the best
interests of the Citzens of the USA that it should be illegal for the
Government to negotiate prices, and that it should be illegal for
anyone to import, or re-import pharmaceutical products except for the
manufacturer. The only US made product that you cannot freely bring
back into the USA are pharmaceuticals. Everything else made in the USA
can be re-imported without duty.

This produces some truly absurd situation. Have you seen the
advertisements of Opdivo on TV? The average dose of Opdivo costs
$42,000, for high dose Melanoma, closer to $100,000. The dose is given
every other week. I'll let you figure out how much the extra few
months of life costs.

[Science psycho]

Post by matt
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 16:58:58 -0700, Don Roberto

Waterloo, Randy's Waterloo, bayt, Randy's Waterloo,,Clay, Sentient

So how do taxpayers in the USA who subsidize universal single-payer
drug coverages through Medicare and Medicaid do the same for universal
single-payer drug coverages in other countries?

Medicare and Medicaid are legally Prohibited from negotiating with
drug companies for better pricing. Not so for many other countries
that import drugs manufactured in the US.
Margins for US manufactured pharmaceuticals are much higher in the US
and allow for other countries to Demand lowered pricing because,
unlike the US, these countries Do negotiate with big pharma.
Because the US Congress *legally sanctions* US based drug to charge
whatever they want in the US,other countries can demand lower pricing
and get away with it
1. Other countries might pay more.

Probably not. For most drugs threre are several drugs in the class,
and while Big Pharma would like you to think that they are very
different, the reality is that most are pretty much interchangeable
within a class. As a result negotiate prices either leads to price
fixing (illegal in the USA), or substantially lower prices.

The reason there is so much chronic degenerative disease is due to
pharmaceutical drugs which are are bandaid effect rather than a cure.
Big pharma hates alt med because alt med can do what it can't, ie cure
rather than treat.

People would on the whole, be better off giving up the pharmaceutical
drugs and going alternative with natural remedies and other health
preventative measures such as diet and exercise.
It is a fools paradise thinking that drugs are good for anything.
Get out in the fresh air, do some exercise, eat healthy and research
your own health issues rather than depending on mainstream quacks.

with pharmaceutical drugs its all about corporate profits. The longer
they can keep their customers the better. They don't want anybody
healthy, but chronically ill and dependent on drugs.

Wake up and smell the roses.


--
Science psycho
Debunking the Placebo Effect
http://www.chiro.org/nutrition/FULL/Debunking_the_Placebo.shtml

Chemotherapy - none-evidence-based experimental drug
http://www.cancervictors.net/resources/news-archive?start=30

www.chemokills.info
Oncologists routinely tell two lies:
1. "You'll be dead in x months if you don't take chemotherapy"
2. "Chemotherapy is the only option" - when there are a dozen options,
the worst of which is chemotherapy.

How scientific are orthodox cancer treatments?
http://www.curenaturalicancro.com/en/the-science-of-the-orthodox-cancer-treatments

Western medicine is Rockefeller medicine - all the way.
http://tinyurl.com/p26c3wy

Most Scientific Research of Western Medicine Untrustable & Fraudulent,
Say Insiders and Experts
http://tinyurl.com/qf24w6s

Academic oligarchy: Majority of science publishing is controlled by
just six companies
http://tinyurl.com/owpz75z

Gotzsche wrote a book published back in 2013 entitled Deadly Medicine
and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma Has Corrupted Healthcare that
exposes the drug industry for engaging in massive fraud and deception
to push deadly drugs like psych meds on the public. The system has
been so corrupted by this influence that millions of people are now
taking drugs that don't work and are extremely deadly.
http://tinyurl.com/p66yu3q

How Bogus Scientific Studies Are Created
http://www.cancertutor.com/Other/BogusScience.html
"How Bogus Scientific Studies Are Created
The pharmaceutical industry, with their total control over the
National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Cancer Institute (NCI),
Food and Drug Administration (FDA), etc. have also funded many, many
millions of dollars of bogus scientific studies. In fact, their budget
is in the billions of dollars every year!! Couple this with their
control of the media and you have the situation we are in today.
It is the Prime Directive of medical research to do two things: First,
make it appear there is "scientific evidence" for orthodox cancer
treatments, orthodox heart disease prevention treatments, etc., and
Second, make it appear there is "no scientific evidence" for
alternative cancer treatments, alternative heart disease prevention
treatments, and so on."

The Massive Flaw with the Scientific Hierarchy of Evidence
http://tinyurl.com/lmcwlvb

Calling the FDA, AMA and Big Pharma: What the Term “Medical Mafia”
Means
http://naturalsociety.com/what-the-term-medical-mafia-means/

The History of the Pharma-Cartel
http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/THE_FOUNDATION/history_of_the_pharma_cartel.html




7 Drugs Whose Dangerous Risks Emerged Only After Big Pharma ...
www.alternet.org/personal-health/7-drugs-whose-dangerous-risks-emerged-only-after-big-pharma-made-its-money

[W. Wesley Groleau]

Post by Science psycho
It is a fools paradise thinking that drugs are good for anything.
Get out in the fresh air, do some exercise, eat healthy and research
your own health issues rather than depending on mainstream quacks.

To think that drugs can do anything and so-called naturals can do
nothing is a fool's paradise.

To think that drugs can do nothing and so-called naturals can do
anything is equally wrong.

[Francher]

Post by W. Wesley Groleau

Post by Science psycho
It is a fools paradise thinking that drugs are good for anything.
Get out in the fresh air, do some exercise, eat healthy and research
your own health issues rather than depending on mainstream quacks.

To think that drugs can do anything and so-called naturals can do
nothing is a fool's paradise.
To think that drugs can do nothing and so-called naturals can do
anything is equally wrong.

I agree Wes,

One needs to look at the long term benefit of any type of drug, natural
or otherwise.

I tend to look at studies done by the NHS GB. They have no bias against
natural remedies because the pharmaceutical companies just increase
their costs. I read a study years of ago of green lipped muscle oil from
New Zealand. It has great results. However, it had to be cold pressed
and not first cooked.

I began taking this "drug" years ago and it worked amazingly well. Then
everyone else seemed to have discovered it, the price went up, and I
could not longer justify paying that cost when Health Canada would pay
for most of the price of a drug called Tramadol. It is not as good as
the muscle oil, but the price is right.

It seems to me that often there are nutters who eschew all
pharmaceutical drugs on some sort of almost religious reasons. This
sounds crazy to me, but again, they are nutters, what can I say. I have
had to add many of these nutters here to my kill list. I just don't see
them anymore unless someone feels they must reply and I read the quotation.

It is up to us to choose what looks best for us based on track record.

Francher

[Clay]

Post by Francher

Post by W. Wesley Groleau

Post by Science psycho
It is a fools paradise thinking that drugs are good for anything.
Get out in the fresh air, do some exercise, eat healthy and research
your own health issues rather than depending on mainstream quacks.

To think that drugs can do anything and so-called naturals can do
nothing is a fool's paradise.
To think that drugs can do nothing and so-called naturals can do
anything is equally wrong.

I agree Wes,
One needs to look at the long term benefit of any type of drug, natural
or otherwise.
I tend to look at studies done by the NHS GB. They have no bias against
natural remedies because the pharmaceutical companies just increase
their costs. I read a study years of ago of green lipped muscle oil from
New Zealand. It has great results. However, it had to be cold pressed
and not first cooked.

I believe you have wanted to write MUSSEL oil.

Is the freeze dried version acceptable?

http://tinyurl.com/gvz7oba

http://tinyurl.com/zv4t9oo

http://tinyurl.com/jyqj3rc

Post by Francher
I began taking this "drug" years ago and it worked amazingly well. Then
everyone else seemed to have discovered it, the price went up, and I
could not longer justify paying that cost when Health Canada would pay
for most of the price of a drug called Tramadol. It is not as good as
the muscle oil, but the price is right.
It seems to me that often there are nutters who eschew all
pharmaceutical drugs on some sort of almost religious reasons. This
sounds crazy to me, but again, they are nutters, what can I say. I have
had to add many of these nutters here to my kill list. I just don't see
them anymore unless someone feels they must reply and I read the quotation.
It is up to us to choose what looks best for us based on track record.
Francher

[Francher]

Post by Clay

Post by Francher

Post by W. Wesley Groleau

Post by Science psycho
It is a fools paradise thinking that drugs are good for anything.
Get out in the fresh air, do some exercise, eat healthy and research
your own health issues rather than depending on mainstream quacks.

To think that drugs can do anything and so-called naturals can do
nothing is a fool's paradise.
To think that drugs can do nothing and so-called naturals can do
anything is equally wrong.

I agree Wes,
One needs to look at the long term benefit of any type of drug, natural
or otherwise.
I tend to look at studies done by the NHS GB. They have no bias against
natural remedies because the pharmaceutical companies just increase
their costs. I read a study years of ago of green lipped muscle oil from
New Zealand. It has great results. However, it had to be cold pressed
and not first cooked.

I believe you have wanted to write MUSSEL oil.
Is the freeze dried version acceptable?
http://tinyurl.com/gvz7oba
http://tinyurl.com/zv4t9oo
http://tinyurl.com/jyqj3rc

Post by Francher
I began taking this "drug" years ago and it worked amazingly well. Then
everyone else seemed to have discovered it, the price went up, and I
could not longer justify paying that cost when Health Canada would pay
for most of the price of a drug called Tramadol. It is not as good as
the muscle oil, but the price is right.
It seems to me that often there are nutters who eschew all
pharmaceutical drugs on some sort of almost religious reasons. This
sounds crazy to me, but again, they are nutters, what can I say. I have
had to add many of these nutters here to my kill list. I just don't see
them anymore unless someone feels they must reply and I read the quotation.
It is up to us to choose what looks best for us based on track record.
Francher

You are correct Clay. I mispelled mussel as muscle. I guess I was
thinking of the kind I once had when young. Thanks for the correction.
It is really good stuff for arthritic pain, but the cold pressed oil is
just so expensive now. The study I saw specified cold pressed mussels.
It said nothing about freeze dried. It did say that cooking the mussel
ruined the therapeutic value. I wish I could still afford to be buying
it now. It was just amazing. I think there are just so many New Zealand
green lipped mussels. It is a sellers market.

Francher

[W. Wesley Groleau]

It did say that cooking the mussel ruined the therapeutic value.

This is a very common claim of those promoting "natural" remedies.
Quite often, it is true, but not always. In this case, I do not know.

[Science psycho]

On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 11:09:50 -0500, "W. Wesley Groleau"

Post by W. Wesley Groleau

Post by Science psycho
It is a fools paradise thinking that drugs are good for anything.
Get out in the fresh air, do some exercise, eat healthy and research
your own health issues rather than depending on mainstream quacks.

To think that drugs can do anything and so-called naturals can do
nothing is a fool's paradise.
To think that drugs can do nothing and so-called naturals can do
anything is equally wrong.

I might have slightly exaggerated that alt med is always the better
option.
I can think of a couple of examples where pharmaceutical drugs work
better than naturals, although I could be wrong - painkillers and
anaesthetics.

What is kept from the public is the therapeutic value of anything that
can't be patented, the high rate of deficiency symptoms which should
be addressed before any drugs are considered. I make a general
sweeping statement that alt med can cure but pharmaceutical only
treats, due to the fact of the massive amount of propaganda from
mainstream medicine. The public don't have a clue what natural
products work and there is very little research done, and any really
positive effects are suppressed.

There is no profit for big pharma is alternative medicine which can't
be patented and a cured patient is a lost source of income.
Pharmaceuticals are big business and profits are what counts, not
cures.


--
Science psycho

7 Drugs Whose Dangerous Risks Emerged Only After Big Pharma ...
www.alternet.org/personal-health/7-drugs-whose-dangerous-risks-emerged-only-after-big-pharma-made-its-money

"This situation has come about because research is now so expensive
that only governments and multinational corporations can pay for it.
The funds are dispensed by agencies staffed and run by bureaucrats who
aren’t scientists themselves."
http://blog.phoreveryoung.com/2014/12/02/political-science-the-politics-of-medical-science-and-research/

Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the
Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America Paperback
http://www.amazon.com/Anatomy-Epidemic-Bullets-Psychiatric-Astonishing/dp/0307452425/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_y

Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma Has Corrupted
Healthcare
http://www.amazon.com/Deadly-Medicines-Organised-Crime-Healthcare/dp/1846198844

[W. Wesley Groleau]

Post by Science psycho
What is kept from the public is the therapeutic value of anything that
can't be patented, the high rate of deficiency symptoms which should

This is not entirely the fault of "Big Pharma," though of course they
are very interested in making money.

Part of the problem is that a poor doctor doesn't bother to do any
research, and a good doctor may have so many patients that he/she has
little time for research. Consequently, the only studies they are aware
of are the reprints the drug salesmen give them.

There ARE articles on other things, but the Pharm Sellers
don't pass those out.

[Don Roberto]

Post by W. Wesley Groleau

Post by Science psycho
What is kept from the public is the therapeutic value of anything that
can't be patented, the high rate of deficiency symptoms which should

This is not entirely the fault of "Big Pharma," though of course they
are very interested in making money.
Part of the problem is that a poor doctor doesn't bother to do any
research, and a good doctor may have so many patients that he/she has
little time for research. Consequently, the only studies they are aware
of are the reprints the drug salesmen give them.

Once you get past "poor doctors" - WTF "poor" stands for in this case -
and "good doctors with so many patients", try to add "proactive patient"
to your very incomplete picture of ye olde healthcare system on this
here planet, and you'll be off to a much better start.

Post by W. Wesley Groleau
There ARE articles on other things, but the Pharm Sellers
don't pass those out.

This is just the cliffhanger, right?
You will elaborate, won't ya?

Don Roberto
------------
Trolls suck.
--Betty White

[Science psycho]

On Sat, 20 Aug 2016 22:48:59 -0500, "W. Wesley Groleau"

Post by W. Wesley Groleau

Post by Science psycho
What is kept from the public is the therapeutic value of anything that
can't be patented, the high rate of deficiency symptoms which should

This is not entirely the fault of "Big Pharma," though of course they
are very interested in making money.
Part of the problem is that a poor doctor doesn't bother to do any
research, and a good doctor may have so many patients that he/she has
little time for research. Consequently, the only studies they are aware
of are the reprints the drug salesmen give them.
There ARE articles on other things, but the Pharm Sellers
don't pass those out.

Its not the doctors' fault - big pharma knows how to control the
doctors. While they're training the doctors are sleep deprived and
kept on a pretty tight schedule, with no time to question, they are
fed big pharma lies that alt med is useless and pharmaceuticals are
the only solution, alt med is rubbished as whoo whoo medicine,
nutritional remedies are mostly ignored and then when the doctors
graduate they are hit with pharmaceutical reps and all sorts of
enticements to stay on track with pharmaceuticals. The doctors don't
have a chance.

Its all very corrupt and a great lie that alt med is useless. When an
alt med remedy comes along that works and threatens pharmaceutical
profits, it has propaganda put out about it that it is dangerous, a
con or similar and made illegal. Anybody who promotes the alt med
remedy is gone after by big pharma police and threatened or gaoled.

The public are fed pharmaceutical propaganda from the time they're
born about the need for mass vaccinations, all about "safe and
efficacious" remedies for this and that childhood to adulthood.
Alt med is largely illegal, it is illegal to make any claims to a
remedy unless it has "scientific support" and the only way to get this
is through testing that costs millions, and they know how to rig it as
well to get the result they want - ie alt med no good, pharmaceutical
drugs great. They have all the government instrumentalities under
their control with their people on the inside. The game is thoroughly
rigged.


--
Science psycho
Debunking the Placebo Effect
http://www.chiro.org/nutrition/FULL/Debunking_the_Placebo.shtml

7 Drugs Whose Dangerous Risks Emerged Only After Big Pharma ...
www.alternet.org/personal-health/7-drugs-whose-dangerous-risks-emerged-only-after-big-pharma-made-its-money

"This situation has come about because research is now so expensive
that only governments and multinational corporations can pay for it.
The funds are dispensed by agencies staffed and run by bureaucrats who
aren’t scientists themselves."
http://blog.phoreveryoung.com/2014/12/02/political-science-the-politics-of-medical-science-and-research/

Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the
Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America Paperback
http://www.amazon.com/Anatomy-Epidemic-Bullets-Psychiatric-Astonishing/dp/0307452425/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_y

Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma Has Corrupted
Healthcare
http://www.amazon.com/Deadly-Medicines-Organised-Crime-Healthcare/dp/1846198844

[Clay]

Post by Science psycho
On Sat, 20 Aug 2016 22:48:59 -0500, "W. Wesley Groleau"

Post by W. Wesley Groleau

Post by Science psycho
What is kept from the public is the therapeutic value of anything that
can't be patented, the high rate of deficiency symptoms which should

This is not entirely the fault of "Big Pharma," though of course they
are very interested in making money.
Part of the problem is that a poor doctor doesn't bother to do any
research, and a good doctor may have so many patients that he/she has
little time for research. Consequently, the only studies they are aware
of are the reprints the drug salesmen give them.
There ARE articles on other things, but the Pharm Sellers
don't pass those out.

Its not the doctors' fault - big pharma knows how to control the
doctors. While they're training the doctors are sleep deprived and
kept on a pretty tight schedule, with no time to question, they are
fed big pharma lies that alt med is useless and pharmaceuticals are
the only solution, alt med is rubbished as whoo whoo medicine,
nutritional remedies are mostly ignored and then when the doctors
graduate they are hit with pharmaceutical reps and all sorts of
enticements to stay on track with pharmaceuticals. The doctors don't
have a chance.

Pharmaceuticals were developed to treat acute medical conditions because
alternatives were either too weak or didn't work at all.

Medical schools require coursework in nutrition.

If a nutritional remedy will work, most doctors will recommend it.

The problem is that most nutritional remedies are too weak for acute
conditions.

A patient with a condition doesn't need a doctor to prescribe a
nutritional remedy. Most informed patients will make that choice on
their own if it will help them.

Post by Science psycho
Its all very corrupt and a great lie that alt med is useless. When
an alt med remedy comes along that works and threatens
pharmaceutical profits, it has propaganda put out about it that it is
dangerous, a con or similar and made illegal. Anybody who promotes
the alt med remedy is gone after by big pharma police and threatened
or gaoled.

Alt med is a breeding ground for quacks and charlatans.

Tullio Simoncini prescribed sodium bicarbonate instead of conventional
chemotherapy for cancer. The mainstream medical community rejected it,
citing a lack of peer-reviewed studies that supported its use. Simoncini
was tried and found guilty of fraud and manslaughter in 2006 after a
patient died using his bicarb treatment for cancer.

Post by Science psycho
The public are fed pharmaceutical propaganda from the time they're
born about the need for mass vaccinations, all about "safe and
efficacious" remedies for this and that childhood to adulthood.

The vast majority of pharmaceuticals work for people, providing
treatment as advertised.

Post by Science psycho
Alt med is largely illegal, it is illegal to make any claims to a
remedy unless it has "scientific support" and the only way to get
this is through testing that costs millions, and they know how to rig
it as well to get the result they want - ie alt med no good,
pharmaceutical drugs great. They have all the government
instrumentalities under their control with their people on the
inside. The game is thoroughly rigged.

If alt med worked, it would be called medicine.

The problem is that you have an ax to grind with pharmaceutical
products, and that creates an overwhelming bias in your opinion.

No treatment is without side effects. The central question is always
whether the risks outweigh the benefits to be derived.

People with medical conditions should always do their own research, and
make informed decisions about treatment options.

[Don Roberto]

Post by Clay

Post by Science psycho
On Sat, 20 Aug 2016 22:48:59 -0500, "W. Wesley Groleau"

Post by W. Wesley Groleau

Post by Science psycho
What is kept from the public is the therapeutic value of anything that
can't be patented, the high rate of deficiency symptoms which should

This is not entirely the fault of "Big Pharma," though of course they
are very interested in making money.
Part of the problem is that a poor doctor doesn't bother to do any
research, and a good doctor may have so many patients that he/she has
little time for research. Consequently, the only studies they are aware
of are the reprints the drug salesmen give them.
There ARE articles on other things, but the Pharm Sellers
don't pass those out.

Its not the doctors' fault - big pharma knows how to control the
doctors. While they're training the doctors are sleep deprived and
kept on a pretty tight schedule, with no time to question, they are
fed big pharma lies that alt med is useless and pharmaceuticals are
the only solution, alt med is rubbished as whoo whoo medicine,
nutritional remedies are mostly ignored and then when the doctors
graduate they are hit with pharmaceutical reps and all sorts of
enticements to stay on track with pharmaceuticals. The doctors don't
have a chance.

Pharmaceuticals were developed to treat acute medical conditions because
alternatives were either too weak or didn't work at all.

And many (not all) popular pharmaceuticals, unbeknowst to most users
and probably many doctors, are much much weaker than suspected.

Yeah - users and doctors! WTF do they know...

And

some nutritional rememdies, often unused, are significantly stronger.

Yep - especially the "unused" ones.

The only way to truely judge the effectiveness of a medical
intervention is via it's NNT (number needed to treat) and that's
solely lacking from the info most patients see..

So that's where you've been the past few days: talking to most patients
about what they don't see...

Welcome back.

Don Roberto
-----------------------------
To live is to war with trolls.
--Henrik Ibsen

[Don Roberto]

On Fri, 26 Aug 2016 05:23:18 -0700, Don Roberto

Post by Don Roberto

Post by Clay

Post by Science psycho
On Sat, 20 Aug 2016 22:48:59 -0500, "W. Wesley Groleau"

Post by W. Wesley Groleau

Post by Science psycho
What is kept from the public is the therapeutic value of anything that
can't be patented, the high rate of deficiency symptoms which should

This is not entirely the fault of "Big Pharma," though of course they
are very interested in making money.
Part of the problem is that a poor doctor doesn't bother to do any
research, and a good doctor may have so many patients that he/she has
little time for research. Consequently, the only studies they are aware
of are the reprints the drug salesmen give them.
There ARE articles on other things, but the Pharm Sellers
don't pass those out.

Its not the doctors' fault - big pharma knows how to control the
doctors. While they're training the doctors are sleep deprived and
kept on a pretty tight schedule, with no time to question, they are
fed big pharma lies that alt med is useless and pharmaceuticals are
the only solution, alt med is rubbished as whoo whoo medicine,
nutritional remedies are mostly ignored and then when the doctors
graduate they are hit with pharmaceutical reps and all sorts of
enticements to stay on track with pharmaceuticals. The doctors don't
have a chance.

Pharmaceuticals were developed to treat acute medical conditions because
alternatives were either too weak or didn't work at all.

And many (not all) popular pharmaceuticals, unbeknowst to most users
and probably many doctors, are much much weaker than suspected.

Yeah - users and doctors! WTF do they know...
And

some nutritional rememdies, often unused, are significantly stronger.

Yep - especially the "unused" ones.

The only way to truely judge the effectiveness of a medical
intervention is via it's NNT (number needed to treat) and that's
solely lacking from the info most patients see..

So that's where you've been the past few days: talking to most patients
about what they don't see...
Welcome back.

Thanks- glad you missed me.
I've actually returned trying to keep some of your suggestions (that
did make sense) in mind. Your button pushing is straining my resolve,
but I"Ill try a bit longer

Remember: not responding is not an option - the withdrawal symptoms are
too ghastly to contemplate.
And then there's the prospect of having
nothing else to do.
You're in a fix :-)

Don Roberto
----------------------------------
Why did Randy fall into that well?
Because he couldn't read that well.

[Don Roberto]

A patient with cholesterol that's elevated requires something more
than the "Mediterranean Diet" to bring it down.

That's not what the evidence shows.

You haven't shown any evidence.

It's all on theNNT.com site.

There's nothing there that carries the proof in one direction or the other.
What's your point?
Or is it too complicated for you to elaborate?

1. Here's the page for NNT and references for statins and primary
http://www.thennt.com/nnt/statins-for-heart-disease-prevention-without-prior-heart-disease/

/quote
Finally we believe that lifestyle interventions such as Mediterranean
diet are substantially more powerful than statin medications in
achieving cardiovascular benefits, and come without harms.
Belief? The Church of the Mediterranean Diet?
Where's the evidence?

2. Here's the page for NNT and statins for secondary prevention.
http://www.thennt.com/nnt/statins-for-heart-disease-prevention-without-prior-heart-disease/

Statin therapy is essential to reducing the incidence of coronary and
cerebrovascular events, and thereby a necessary part of the overall
strategy in preventing heart disease and mortality. Can't have one
without the other.

http://www.thennt.com/nnt/statins-for-heart-disease-prevention-with-known-heart-disease/

/quote
As a public health measure, this suggests that statins may have an
identifiable effect, because while the chances of any one individual
being affected are small (19 out of 20 people who took the drugs for
five years saw no effect), when one million people take them roughly
45,000 people saw some benefit, while another 6,000 may see a harm.

http://www.thennt.com/nnt/mediterranean-diet-for-heart-disease-prevention-without-known-heart-disease/

/quote
In addition, the control group in this study was culturally
Mediterranean and therefore already was engaging in a Mediterranean Diet
to some degree.
Good luck getting Americans to change their eating behavior.
Moreover, good luck changing your own eating behavior, after you ditch
the statin.
Please keep the ng advised of your progress.

http://www.thennt.com/nnt/mediterranean-diet-for-post-heart-attack-care/

1. Got 2000 folks without heart disease but increased risk - like most
folks here.. Gave half a statin and the other half got a placebo.
2. After 5 years the folks that got a statin had 10 fewer heart
attacks. No very impressive to my mind. Had to treat 100 folks to
prevent 10 heart attack
They did the same thing with the Med diet for 5 years. There were 16
fewer heart attacks after 5 years.
Had to treat 62 patients for 5 years to prevent a heart attack

Sometimes people don't have 5 years.

HUH? Does not compute

Your computation has an error.
There are patients in the population who need to get their risk of heart
attack lowered sooner than 5 years. Mortality hangs in the balance.

Med diet beats statins in this population.

So you say without evidence in support thereof.

The NNT measurement is a concept that has been popularized by the
Evidence Based Medicine Movement. It's currently the best way to
evaluate the effectiveness of any medical treatments.
Granted folks may choose to swallow a pill rather than change their
diet, but that is irrespective of what works best.
http://www.cebm.net/number-needed-to-treat-nnt/
Here's a good review of different drugs and procedures.
Folks might be shocked by the relative ineffectiveness of some meds
they may be taking.
http://www.thennt.com/
http://www.thennt.com/home-nnt/

A "Mediterranean Diet" is all good if you've lived in the region of
the
Mediterranean Sea and ingested that type of diet during the course of
your lifetime.

Five years of eating Med beats 5 years of eating statins. Those
experiments have been done.
My point is not that a diet beats statins but there alot of drugs that
folks may be taking that are not near as effective as they think.

They need to be effective only in bringing a lipid profile within normal
ranges, not in affecting thought processes.

There is no doubt statins work great a lowering lipids in most all
cases. BUT- Lipids are Not the end point being studied!! Heart attacks
and early deaths are. Statins, especially in primary prevention are
puny in effect. Having to treat 100 folks to prevent in heart attack
is not impressive.

Statins are impressive enough to be considered a routine part of
standard medical treatment for reducing heart attack risk.
Statins are an important tool in the overall strategy to reduce risk of
cardiovascular events, and they're not puny enough to leave out.
When you earn a medical degree and successfully complete residency
training in cardiology, you *maY* be qualified enough to suggest a
change in standard medical practice with regards to reducing the risk
of cardiovascular events.

You mean dropping out of UT doesn't qualify Randy to be a usenet physician?

Until then, I'll comply with what my trusted medical doctor advises.
Toodles.

[Clay]

Post by Don Roberto

A patient with cholesterol that's elevated requires something more
than the "Mediterranean Diet" to bring it down.

That's not what the evidence shows.

You haven't shown any evidence.

It's all on theNNT.com site.

There's nothing there that carries the proof in one direction or the other.
What's your point?
Or is it too complicated for you to elaborate?

1. Here's the page for NNT and references for statins and primary
http://www.thennt.com/nnt/statins-for-heart-disease-prevention-without-prior-heart-disease/

/quote
Finally we believe that lifestyle interventions such as Mediterranean
diet are substantially more powerful than statin medications in
achieving cardiovascular benefits, and come without harms.
Belief? The Church of the Mediterranean Diet?
Where's the evidence?

2. Here's the page for NNT and statins for secondary prevention.
http://www.thennt.com/nnt/statins-for-heart-disease-prevention-without-prior-heart-disease/

Statin therapy is essential to reducing the incidence of coronary and
cerebrovascular events, and thereby a necessary part of the overall
strategy in preventing heart disease and mortality. Can't have one
without the other.

http://www.thennt.com/nnt/statins-for-heart-disease-prevention-with-known-heart-disease/

/quote
As a public health measure, this suggests that statins may have an
identifiable effect, because while the chances of any one individual
being affected are small (19 out of 20 people who took the drugs for
five years saw no effect), when one million people take them roughly
45,000 people saw some benefit, while another 6,000 may see a harm.

http://www.thennt.com/nnt/mediterranean-diet-for-heart-disease-prevention-without-known-heart-disease/

/quote
In addition, the control group in this study was culturally
Mediterranean and therefore already was engaging in a Mediterranean Diet
to some degree.
Good luck getting Americans to change their eating behavior.
Moreover, good luck changing your own eating behavior, after you ditch
the statin.
Please keep the ng advised of your progress.

http://www.thennt.com/nnt/mediterranean-diet-for-post-heart-attack-care/

1. Got 2000 folks without heart disease but increased risk - like most
folks here.. Gave half a statin and the other half got a placebo.
2. After 5 years the folks that got a statin had 10 fewer heart
attacks. No very impressive to my mind. Had to treat 100 folks to
prevent 10 heart attack
They did the same thing with the Med diet for 5 years. There were 16
fewer heart attacks after 5 years.
Had to treat 62 patients for 5 years to prevent a heart attack

Sometimes people don't have 5 years.

HUH? Does not compute

Your computation has an error.
There are patients in the population who need to get their risk of heart
attack lowered sooner than 5 years. Mortality hangs in the balance.

Med diet beats statins in this population.

So you say without evidence in support thereof.

The NNT measurement is a concept that has been popularized by the
Evidence Based Medicine Movement. It's currently the best way to
evaluate the effectiveness of any medical treatments.
Granted folks may choose to swallow a pill rather than change their
diet, but that is irrespective of what works best.
http://www.cebm.net/number-needed-to-treat-nnt/
Here's a good review of different drugs and procedures.
Folks might be shocked by the relative ineffectiveness of some meds
they may be taking.
http://www.thennt.com/
http://www.thennt.com/home-nnt/

A "Mediterranean Diet" is all good if you've lived in the region of
the
Mediterranean Sea and ingested that type of diet during the course of
your lifetime.

Five years of eating Med beats 5 years of eating statins. Those
experiments have been done.
My point is not that a diet beats statins but there alot of drugs that
folks may be taking that are not near as effective as they think.

They need to be effective only in bringing a lipid profile within normal
ranges, not in affecting thought processes.

There is no doubt statins work great a lowering lipids in most all
cases. BUT- Lipids are Not the end point being studied!! Heart attacks
and early deaths are. Statins, especially in primary prevention are
puny in effect. Having to treat 100 folks to prevent in heart attack
is not impressive.

Statins are impressive enough to be considered a routine part of
standard medical treatment for reducing heart attack risk.
Statins are an important tool in the overall strategy to reduce risk of
cardiovascular events, and they're not puny enough to leave out.
When you earn a medical degree and successfully complete residency
training in cardiology, you *maY* be qualified enough to suggest a
change in standard medical practice with regards to reducing the risk
of cardiovascular events.

You mean dropping out of UT doesn't qualify Randy to be a usenet physician?

"Usenet physician" - that's a good one! LOL!

Post by Don Roberto

Until then, I'll comply with what my trusted medical doctor advises.
Toodles.

[Don Roberto]

Post by Clay

Post by Don Roberto

A patient with cholesterol that's elevated requires something more
than the "Mediterranean Diet" to bring it down.

That's not what the evidence shows.

You haven't shown any evidence.

It's all on theNNT.com site.

There's nothing there that carries the proof in one direction or the other.
What's your point?
Or is it too complicated for you to elaborate?

1. Here's the page for NNT and references for statins and primary
http://www.thennt.com/nnt/statins-for-heart-disease-prevention-without-prior-heart-disease/

/quote
Finally we believe that lifestyle interventions such as Mediterranean
diet are substantially more powerful than statin medications in
achieving cardiovascular benefits, and come without harms.
Belief? The Church of the Mediterranean Diet?
Where's the evidence?

2. Here's the page for NNT and statins for secondary prevention.
http://www.thennt.com/nnt/statins-for-heart-disease-prevention-without-prior-heart-disease/

Statin therapy is essential to reducing the incidence of coronary and
cerebrovascular events, and thereby a necessary part of the overall
strategy in preventing heart disease and mortality. Can't have one
without the other.

http://www.thennt.com/nnt/statins-for-heart-disease-prevention-with-known-heart-disease/

/quote
As a public health measure, this suggests that statins may have an
identifiable effect, because while the chances of any one individual
being affected are small (19 out of 20 people who took the drugs for
five years saw no effect), when one million people take them roughly
45,000 people saw some benefit, while another 6,000 may see a harm.

http://www.thennt.com/nnt/mediterranean-diet-for-heart-disease-prevention-without-known-heart-disease/

/quote
In addition, the control group in this study was culturally
Mediterranean and therefore already was engaging in a Mediterranean Diet
to some degree.
Good luck getting Americans to change their eating behavior.
Moreover, good luck changing your own eating behavior, after you ditch
the statin.
Please keep the ng advised of your progress.

http://www.thennt.com/nnt/mediterranean-diet-for-post-heart-attack-care/

1. Got 2000 folks without heart disease but increased risk - like most
folks here.. Gave half a statin and the other half got a placebo.
2. After 5 years the folks that got a statin had 10 fewer heart
attacks. No very impressive to my mind. Had to treat 100 folks to
prevent 10 heart attack
They did the same thing with the Med diet for 5 years. There were 16
fewer heart attacks after 5 years.
Had to treat 62 patients for 5 years to prevent a heart attack

Sometimes people don't have 5 years.

HUH? Does not compute

Your computation has an error.
There are patients in the population who need to get their risk of heart
attack lowered sooner than 5 years. Mortality hangs in the balance.

Med diet beats statins in this population.

So you say without evidence in support thereof.

The NNT measurement is a concept that has been popularized by the
Evidence Based Medicine Movement. It's currently the best way to
evaluate the effectiveness of any medical treatments.
Granted folks may choose to swallow a pill rather than change their
diet, but that is irrespective of what works best.
http://www.cebm.net/number-needed-to-treat-nnt/
Here's a good review of different drugs and procedures.
Folks might be shocked by the relative ineffectiveness of some meds
they may be taking.
http://www.thennt.com/
http://www.thennt.com/home-nnt/

A "Mediterranean Diet" is all good if you've lived in the region of
the
Mediterranean Sea and ingested that type of diet during the course of
your lifetime.

Five years of eating Med beats 5 years of eating statins. Those
experiments have been done.
My point is not that a diet beats statins but there alot of drugs that
folks may be taking that are not near as effective as they think.

They need to be effective only in bringing a lipid profile within normal
ranges, not in affecting thought processes.

There is no doubt statins work great a lowering lipids in most all
cases. BUT- Lipids are Not the end point being studied!! Heart attacks
and early deaths are. Statins, especially in primary prevention are
puny in effect. Having to treat 100 folks to prevent in heart attack
is not impressive.

Statins are impressive enough to be considered a routine part of
standard medical treatment for reducing heart attack risk.
Statins are an important tool in the overall strategy to reduce risk of
cardiovascular events, and they're not puny enough to leave out.
When you earn a medical degree and successfully complete residency
training in cardiology, you *maY* be qualified enough to suggest a
change in standard medical practice with regards to reducing the risk
of cardiovascular events.

You mean dropping out of UT doesn't qualify Randy to be a usenet physician?

"Usenet physician" - that's a good one! LOL!

Yep - righteous ranting Randy is ASD's very own Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
wannabe.

Don Roberto
----------------------------
The thoughts written on the walls of madhouses by their inmates
might be worth publicizing.
--Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

And so God gave us usenet.

[Don Roberto]

NNT's are speculative at best.

Then science and math is speculative at *best*.

Science and math are always part of theoretical constructs.
If the NNT's were anything else, they'd have affected standard medical
practice by now.

Deriving NNTs from hazard ratio's and population numbers is math, no
speculation involved. The numbers are derived by the same methods
that brought us indoor plumbing, air conditioning, and satellite
communication. Those methods of have a pretty good track record.

That track record isn't good enough.

Your track record on the other hand...

I don't have a track record.
I don't present myself here as the Dr. Meta Analysis of Randomized
Controlled Trials.
I'm just a consumer of medical services from doctors that have kept me
healthy and alive for a long time, and that makes their track record
worth crowing about, as far as I am concerned.

I'm not trying discourage anyone from taking statins.

It would help if you had relevant qualification instead of conducting
yourself here like a rank amateur.

Just wish most folks knew what the reality was. If you don't have
heart disease in most case the benefits of statins are very weak.

Quit practicing medicine without a license.

This was all generating by your claim that nutritional solutions are
*weak* and pharmaceuticals are *strong*

The studies cited in your NNT links bear me out.
Nutritional remedies are weak for people with acute medical conditions.
The Mediterranean Diet alone, without more, will not save those folks.

Patients too, more often than not, will not heed NNT forecasts and
reject statins or other medication in favor of dubious
alternatives

Yep and so what?

So quit bloviating about nutritional remedies as sole treatment for
folks with cardiovascular issues.

What *dubious alternatives*

The ones you're touting.

Note - With heart disease statins are much more effective. The more
serious the disease the more effective the drug. But still the data
we do have show that the Med diet can be equally or significantly
more effective even in folks that have current heart disease.
http://www.thennt.com/nnt/mediterranean-diet-for-post-heart-attack-care/

And there you go again, misrepresenting what that links says.
/quote
It is difficult to make sweeping statements from a single study, but
given the existing data and lack of harms the Mediterranean diet seems
beneficial and should be strongly recommended at this time.
Key words: single study, seems beneficial.

:-)
Don Roberto
-----------------------------------------------
If they can get you asking the wrong questions,
they don't have to worry about answers.
--Thomas Pynchon, Gravity's Rainbow

[Don Roberto]

I believe it's now common practice for most pubs to require NNT
numbers, if available, to avoid the confusion between relative and
absolute numbers.

NNT's are speculative at best.

Then science and math is speculative at *best*.
Deriving NNTs from hazard ratio's and population numbers is math, no
speculation involved.

You really have no clue, do you?
Just as English is not poetry, math is neither a glucose meter nor a
space ship.

The numbers are derived by the same methods that

brought us indoor plumbing, air conditioning, and satellite
communication. Those methods of have a pretty good track record.

Yes, but there is good indoor plumbing and then there is shitty indoor
plumbing, i.e., the method is of little help when the plumber is a dud.

Your

track record on the other hand...

He's only been here for a few weeks, but I can see where you are coming
from: another one of those despicable posters who don't agree with
righteous ranting Randy on everything :-)

Poor baby :-)

I'm not trying discourage anyone from taking statins.
Just wish most folks knew what the reality was.

Now *THAT* - coming from you - is funny.


If you don't have

heart disease in most case the benefits of statins are very weak.

Sort of like the benefits of insulin for those who don't have diabetes?

This was all generating by your claim that nutritional solutions are
*weak* and pharmaceuticals are *strong*

Reality sucks, eh?

Patients too, more often than not, will not heed NNT forecasts and
reject statins or other medication in favor of dubious alternatives

Yep and so what?
What *dubious alternatives*
Note - With heart disease statins are much more effective. The more
serious the disease the more effective the drug. But still the data we
do have show that the Med diet can be equally or significantly more
effective even in folks that have current heart disease.
http://www.thennt.com/nnt/mediterranean-diet-for-post-heart-attack-care/

Do you already know what study/review you'll be pushing next week?
So we can prep for it.

on Roberto
-----------------------------
To live is to war with trolls.
--Henrik Ibsen

[Don Roberto]

Your track record on the other hand...
He's only been here for a few weeks, but I can see where you are coming
from: another one of those despicable posters who don't agree with
righteous ranting Randy on everything :-)

No I was talking about his bat shit crazy statements about Foo (real
outsider)

Sure you were...
Too bad you didn't make an issue out of it until after he got onto
*your* case.

Don Roberto
-----------------------------
To live is to war with trolls.
--Henrik Ibsen

[Clay]

Post by Don Roberto

Your track record on the other hand...
He's only been here for a few weeks, but I can see where you are coming
from: another one of those despicable posters who don't agree with
righteous ranting Randy on everything :-)

No I was talking about his bat shit crazy statements about Foo (real
outsider)

Sure you were...
Too bad you didn't make an issue out of it until after he got onto
*your* case.

I dispute your characterization of "getting on his case."
I'm challenging some of the assertions in his posts.
Haven't you done that as well?

[Don Roberto]

Post by Clay

Post by Don Roberto

Your track record on the other hand...
He's only been here for a few weeks, but I can see where you are coming
from: another one of those despicable posters who don't agree with
righteous ranting Randy on everything :-)

No I was talking about his bat shit crazy statements about Foo (real
outsider)

Sure you were...
Too bad you didn't make an issue out of it until after he got onto
*your* case.

I dispute your characterization of "getting on his case."
I'm challenging some of the assertions in his posts.
Haven't you done that as well?

The point I was making was that righteous ranting Randy had no beef with
your "bat shit crazy statements about Foo (real outsider)" until you got
on righteous ranting Randy's case.

Don Roberto
------------------------------
'You should be nicer to him,'
a schoolmate had once said to me of some awfully ill-favored boy.
'He has no friends.' This, I realized with a pang of pity that I can
still remember, was only true as long as everybody agreed to it.
--Christopher Hitchens, Hitch-22: A Memoir

[Clay]

Post by Don Roberto

Post by Clay

Post by Don Roberto

Your track record on the other hand...
He's only been here for a few weeks, but I can see where you are coming
from: another one of those despicable posters who don't agree with
righteous ranting Randy on everything :-)

No I was talking about his bat shit crazy statements about Foo (real
outsider)

Sure you were...
Too bad you didn't make an issue out of it until after he got onto
*your* case.

I dispute your characterization of "getting on his case."
I'm challenging some of the assertions in his posts.
Haven't you done that as well?

The point I was making was that righteous ranting Randy had no beef
with your "bat shit crazy statements about Foo (real outsider)" until
you got on righteous ranting Randy's case.

The less I say now about you-know-who now, the better.

Post by Don Roberto
------------------------------
'You should be nicer to him,'
a schoolmate had once said to me of some awfully ill-favored boy.
'He has no friends.' This, I realized with a pang of pity that I can
still remember, was only true as long as everybody agreed to it.
--Christopher Hitchens, Hitch-22: A Memoir

I enjoyed listening to Hitchens make comments a few political seasons
ago on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews. He passed away far too
soon. His comments on the current political season would have been
very interesting.

[Don Roberto]

Your track record on the other hand...
He's only been here for a few weeks, but I can see where you are coming
from: another one of those despicable posters who don't agree with
righteous ranting Randy on everything :-)

No I was talking about his bat shit crazy statements about Foo (real
outsider)

Are you aware of the post from Outsider to Clay *since* Clay's "bat shit

I wish you courage, grace, and strength on your road to recovery,
health, happiness and longevity. I hope you find and get the best that
medical science has to offer. I extend to you my whole-hearted support
and camaraderie.

Thank you.

Reminds me of your persistent reminders about how - after being at each
others throats years ago - Outsider and I were able to switch to civil
discourse. After all, once righteous ranting Randy hates someone for
disagreeing with him, it's forever and ever and ever. Something everyone
else should do lest they be outed as idiots and such by righteous
ranting Randy.

Don Roberto
------------------------------
Hate is a lack of imagination.
--Graham Greene, The Power and the Glory

[Clay]

Post by Don Roberto

Your track record on the other hand...
He's only been here for a few weeks, but I can see where you are coming
from: another one of those despicable posters who don't agree with
righteous ranting Randy on everything :-)

No I was talking about his bat shit crazy statements about Foo (real
outsider)

Are you aware of the post from Outsider to Clay *since* Clay's "bat shit

I wish you courage, grace, and strength on your road to recovery,
health, happiness and longevity. I hope you find and get the best that
medical science has to offer. I extend to you my whole-hearted support
and camaraderie.

Thank you.

Reminds me of your persistent reminders about how - after being at each
others throats years ago - Outsider and I were able to switch to civil
discourse. After all, once righteous ranting Randy hates someone for
disagreeing with him, it's forever and ever and ever. Something everyone
else should do lest they be outed as idiots and such by righteous
ranting Randy.

I missed that one.
what was the associated date/time or message ID?

[Don Roberto]

On Mon, 29 Aug 2016 19:18:53 -0700, Don Roberto

On Sun, 28 Aug 2016 01:08:24 -0700, Don Roberto

Post by Don Roberto

Your track record on the other hand...

He's only been here for a few weeks, but I can see where you are coming
from: another one of those despicable posters who don't agree with
righteous ranting Randy on everything :-)
No I was talking about his bat shit crazy statements about Foo (real

outsider)

Are you aware of the post from Outsider to Clay *since* Clay's "bat shit

I wish you courage, grace, and strength on your road to recovery,
health, happiness and longevity. I hope you find and get the best that
medical science has to offer. I extend to you my whole-hearted support
and camaraderie.

Thank you.

Yes - I did see that and good for real Outsider.

*And* good for Clay.

But that doesn't erase the tracks of those *bat shit crazy remarks*.

I know. Once someone (except righteous ranting Randy, of course) says
something hateful, there is nothing that person can do about it: no
apology will do: that person must be hated forever.

And again - I didn't make a comment during that exchange because that
it was being handled by others. I didn't want to pile on.

When you join in the defense of some injustice, it's not called "piling on".

I did step in, weeks earlier, in real Outsider defense when, no one
else did, when this started brewing.
don Roberto

Post by Don Roberto
Reminds me of your persistent reminders about how - after being at each
others throats years ago - Outsider and I were able to switch to civil
discourse.

After reviewing our exchanges over the years I will concur - I should
have only asked this once and not pressed.
In context, though, during the period when real Outsider was being
abused, by you, I was appalled by the way he was being treated by you.
I was the only one to step in his defense - only to open myself up to
your attacks ever since..

Just as you didn't come to the defense of Outsider when he and Clay had
it out recently

I wasn't even online when the bulk of that took place (17 -24).
Weeks earlier I did step in on that same thread when Clay was
needling real Outsider.
When I came back online, clay was apologizing. Thought about saying
something then but it didn't feel appropriate.

until Clay got on your case,

Clay has never been off my case. Even before I knew who he was he was
posting message after message via one of his nyms trying to get my
attention via insults.

Are we back to that again? You know - when Randy identifies every new
"nym" as an alias of his current adversary - like for a while I was
every "Bob" who had ever posted here.

Lest you are determined to look ridiculous you don't do that unless you
have _proof positive_ that the "nyms" "attacking" you are indeed aliases
of the folks you claim they are.
And such proof is usually hard to come by, i.e., it's rare that someone
uses one of his nyms on the header, then signs off with another, as
(Fake) Outsider did when he signed as Francher.

I"ve never viewed him as anything but as foe.

Say what you want but the suggestion that I didn't support real
Outsider because of some allegiance to clay in bogus. It would have
been too easy to criticize clay at the time if I was around.

So righteous ranting Randy says. "Would have" doesn't cut it here.

Also my exchange with real Outsider yesterday was sincere and heart
felt. Say what you or anyone else will that is true.

Of course it was.
But then I don't think I, for one, ever claimed you are not sincere -
someone can be both sincere *and* completely full of it. Where whatever
it is you are full of does not include enough logic, as our current
common "friend" Sometimer has diagnosed more than once.

you didn't back Outsider when he and I had it out years ago.

Untrue. I did back up real Outsider against you in 2011/12. I remember
it clearly. Real Outsider even responded and encouraged me not to do
it. That's old history, with much time in between. But it happened.
I'm surprised you don't remember it. Past history - I've done enough
damage here with my references to past history.

As for the reason for the recent relative calm from Randy's corner not
being obvious to you: not even a psychologically damaged unit like Randy
can handle the heat of a two or three front war.

It's not the heat of more posters but the research I've done because
of the additional heat.

Same thing.
It helps to know what you are talking about when you want to come across
as someone who claims he knows what he is talking about.

The reason for my relative quiet, not so much in verbiage as
negativity, is that I've been reviewing my past posting history..
That's been disturbing, very disturbing to me.
Just going thru "Burgers, Bacon and Sausages......,thread has been a
painful eye opener.
I too owe apologizes, maybe even to you, but that will have to wait
until all this settles in myself.

I'm looking forward to that.
Meantime *DO* use spell checkers as much as you can.

Don Roberto

[Don Roberto]

(And - unfortunately my activity here for the last few years - I'm
as bad (almost) as those I'm railing against. I'm not happy about
this and somewhat contrite )

Deal with your "activity."

I don't present myself here as the Dr. Meta Analysis of Randomized
Controlled Trials.

I'd take that over what you present yourself as.

You are known as "the Queen of Misrepresentation."
Strange you prefer having difficulty with the truth.

If you need to consume a lot medical services to stay healthy you
may not be as healthy as you think.

Playing "usenet doctor" again?
Maybe you're more ignorant than you think?

No "maybe" about that.

on Roberto
-----------------------------
To live is to war with trolls.
--Henrik Ibsen

Quit practicing medicine without a license.

Wishing folks were more informed is not practicing medicine without
a license.

You've done more than "wish."
"Folks" do just fine informing themselves, particularly when you
misrepresent rather than inform.

The studies cited in your NNT links bear me out.

And of course they don't.

Yes they do.

Otherwise theNNT.org wouldn't have presented them.

They didn't present what you represented they did.

Just another example of your arbitrary pronouncement of what counts
and what doesn't depending on your agenda

So you say.

Nutritional remedies are weak for people with acute medical
conditions. The Mediterranean Diet alone, without more, will not
save those folks.

That's false and a disservice.

You've cited no evidence to the contrary.

The PREDIMED study was so successful in preventing heart attacks
that it was stopped early so the information could be released to
the public and the controls could be placed on the Med diet.
http://www.thennt.com/nnt/mediterranean-diet-for-heart-disease-prevention-without-known-heart-disease/

The study speaks for itself.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23432189
/quote
The multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios were 0.70 (95% confidence
interval [CI], 0.54 to 0.92) and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.54 to 0.96) for the
group assigned to a Mediterranean diet with extra-virgin olive oil (96
events) and the group assigned to a Mediterranean diet with nuts (83
events), respectively, versus the control group (109 events).

The other Med diet studyused folks that had already had heart attacks
and achieved better results than most statin only studies in this
population.
http://www.thennt.com/nnt/mediterranean-diet-for-post-heart-attack-care/

The study (published in 1994) speaks for itself.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7911176
/quote [*emphasis added*]
An alpha-linolenic acid-rich Mediterranean diet *seems to be* more
efficient than presently used diets in the secondary prevention of
coronary events and death.

My point has never been that statins don't work or should never be
used.

The point is on your head.

Even if you're at low risk and want an extra 2 points in you're
favor take statins. or change your diet or both.

http://healthcare.findlaw.com/patient-rights/what-is-the-unauthorized-practice-of-medicine.html
/quote
The unauthorized practice of medicine occurs when someone gives medical
advice or treatment without a professional license

1. There is wide spread misconceptions about how effective are statins
are for folks that haven't had a heart attack. They work but nowhere
near the public perception.

Thanks for yet another opinion in your capacity as "usenet doctor."

2. The data on diet show powerful results even in folks that have
already had a heart attack.

How powerful did you say?
Oh wait. You didn't say.

All weapons should be brought to the fight - pharmaceuticals, diet,
lifestyle.

Thank you for affirming, in your learned opinion, what most if not all
patients already know.

[Don Roberto]

NNT's are speculative at best.

Then science and math is speculative at *best*.

Science and math are always part of theoretical constructs.
If the NNT's were anything else, they'd have affected standard medical
practice by now.

Deriving NNTs from hazard ratio's and population numbers is math, no
speculation involved. The numbers are derived by the same methods
that brought us indoor plumbing, air conditioning, and satellite
communication. Those methods of have a pretty good track record.

That track record isn't good enough.

Your track record on the other hand...

I don't have a track record.

Just look at your activity here for the last couple of weeks.
(And - unfortunately my activity here for the last few years - I'm as
bad (almost)

hehehehe.....

as those I'm railing against.

So tell us - why are you, f.i. "railing against" yours truly?
After all, I have never tried to hide the fact that I am only "railing
against" you to show how out to lunch you are, ergo not responding would
go a long way all toward showing you are not out to lunch. But you *are*.

Are you are aware of the famous definition of insanity attributed to
Einstein?


I'm not happy about this

and somewhat contrite )

Poor Baby :-)

I don't present myself here as the Dr. Meta Analysis of Randomized
Controlled Trials.

I'd take that over what you present yourself as.

Which is what? Another guy who can't get it across that on ASD righteous
ranting Randy is the final arbiter when it comes to truth, justice and
the American Way?

Poor Baby :-)

I'm just a consumer of medical services from doctors that have kept me
healthy and alive for a long time, and that makes their track record
worth crowing about, as far as I am concerned.

If you need to consume a lot medical services to stay healthy you may
not be as healthy as you think.

I suppose the way to stay healthy is to drop out of school so you can
"consume" lots and lots of studies and then go online and try to play
doctor on a diabetic support group - tell them about how your
consumption of studies has kept you from becoming diabetic, although you
have been pre-diabetic for close to 15 years now, FBGs of 150
notwithstanding.

I'm not trying discourage anyone from taking statins.

It would help if you had relevant qualification instead of conducting
yourself here like a rank amateur.
Just wish most folks knew what the reality was.

Most folks do - *you* are the unreal one.

If you don't have

heart disease in most case the benefits of statins are very weak.
Quit practicing medicine without a license.

Wishing folks were more informed is not practicing medicine without a
license.

You are not just "wishing folks [be] more informed" - you are
continuously telling them *WHAT* to do, and when they disagree,
righteous ranting Randy gets VERY angry and commences with name-calling.
Just like his role model, the good Dr Chung eternally condemns anyone
not on his page...

This was all generating by your claim that nutritional solutions are
*weak* and pharmaceuticals are *strong*

The studies cited in your NNT links bear me out.

And of course they don't.

You forgot to add: "no matter what they say".

Otherwise theNNT.org wouldn't have presented

them. Just another example of your arbitrary pronouncement of what
counts and what doesn't depending on your agenda

The only one here who does that is righteous ranting Randy, but it's
okay for him to do so because he is always right. Infidels can always
ask him: he'll gladly affirm his infallibility.

Nutritional remedies are weak for people with acute medical conditions.
The Mediterranean Diet alone, without more, will not save those folks.

That's false and a disservice.
The PREDIMED study was so successful in preventing heart attacks that
it was stopped early so the information could be released to the
public and the controls could be placed on the Med diet.
http://www.thennt.com/nnt/mediterranean-diet-for-heart-disease-prevention-without-known-heart-disease/
The other Med diet study used folks that had already had heart attacks
and achieved better results than most statin only studies in this
population.
http://www.thennt.com/nnt/mediterranean-diet-for-post-heart-attack-care/
And - I'd be willing to bet the results would have even been Better if
statins were used.
Not to mention how diet has effectively eliminated diabetes without
drugs.

Sure it has...

My point has never been that statins don't work or should never be
used.

Now *that* is true. In fact, Randy was pitching statins so much here,
other posters thought he was shilling for Big Pharma.

[snip]

Don Roberto
-----------------------------
To live is to war with trolls.
--Henrik Ibsen

[Bob Officer]

Post by Science psycho

Post by matt
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 16:58:58 -0700, Don Roberto

Waterloo, Randy's Waterloo, bayt, Randy's Waterloo,,Clay, Sentient

So how do taxpayers in the USA who subsidize universal single-payer
drug coverages through Medicare and Medicaid do the same for universal
single-payer drug coverages in other countries?

Medicare and Medicaid are legally Prohibited from negotiating with
drug companies for better pricing. Not so for many other countries
that import drugs manufactured in the US.
Margins for US manufactured pharmaceuticals are much higher in the US
and allow for other countries to Demand lowered pricing because,
unlike the US, these countries Do negotiate with big pharma.
Because the US Congress *legally sanctions* US based drug to charge
whatever they want in the US,other countries can demand lower pricing
and get away with it
1. Other countries might pay more.

Probably not. For most drugs threre are several drugs in the class,
and while Big Pharma would like you to think that they are very
different, the reality is that most are pretty much interchangeable
within a class. As a result negotiate prices either leads to price
fixing (illegal in the USA), or substantially lower prices.

The reason there is so much chronic degenerative disease is due to
pharmaceutical drugs which are are bandaid effect rather than a cure.

Previously falsified, Carole. Totally invalidated.

Try to bring something worthwhile to the conversation.

Post by Science psycho
Big pharma hates alt med because alt med can do what it can't, ie cure
rather than treat.

Actually it is Atl Med which can not cure. You like usual get the claims
ass backwards.

Post by Science psycho
People would on the whole, be better off giving up the pharmaceutical
drugs and going alternative with natural remedies and other health
preventative measures such as diet and exercise.

Why in the hell would that work. Alt Med simply doesn't work.

Try to less boring in the future, Carole.

The truth be know you have done more damage in this group to alt.med than
all the skeptics combined.

[Don Roberto]

Waterloo, Randy's Waterloo, bayt, Randy's Waterloo,,Clay, Sentient

I already told this troll I was done arguing with him. Now I've said it
twice. Is that enough?

Only you can answer that.
You don't speak for me nor I for you.
Randy

The troll's behavior will provide the only legitimate answer, it
certainly isn't up to me. BTW, that was another of those rhetorical
questions I occasionally ask.

And Randy's response was just another attempt to suck up to you.

Don Roberto

[Don Roberto]

I clearly demonstrated that I do not rely extensively on Humalog
and it is clear to any honest intelligent reader that Humalog was
only the best example I could muster.

Been a while since we've agreed on anything - but you've summed it up
perfectly.

Certainly it constitutes bad news when the people who agree with you are
buggier than batshit.
--Philip K. Dick

[Don Roberto]

Exactly.
And once you disagree with any of his interpretations, you are called an
an idiot and/or a liar.

Well examples should be easy to find but are never forth coming but
dodges abound.

Of course examples are easy to find, just like it was easy to find the
message in which you called ***@ck an idiot after you claimed you had
never called anyone an idiot (except perhaps yours truly).
And what did you do with the example about you calling ***@ck an idiot?
You let us in on "the fact" that when you call someone an idiot it's not
personal.
But sh*t - I'm starting to repeat myself :-)

*OTOH* he is on record that - unlike someone calling him an idiot - him
calling someone an idiot is not personal.
I sh*t you not.

Yes - after Don Roberto scoured the archives the only reference to my
calling anyone an *Idiot* was one where I qualified term

Been skipping remedial English classes again?

Don Roberto
-----------------------------
To live is to war with trolls.
--Henrik Ibsen

[Don Roberto]

The unauthorized practice of medicine occurs when someone gives medical
advice or treatment without a professional license

If discussion of research is practicing without o license, then BOTH of
you are doing it along whit most of the rest of us.

Except Randy does more than discuss research.

Examples??

That's one of his standard replies when he runs out of bullsh*t.

Don Roberto
-----------------------------
To live is to war with trolls.
--Henrik Ibsen

[Don Roberto]

On Mon, 29 Aug 2016 19:26:33 -0700, Don Roberto

*AND* no one, not Gys, not Ozlover, not Randy is tuning in to support
you, just like when the creep actually outed himself as the fake Outsider.

Long ago I expressed my disgust with the various fake Outsiders
imposters and I know Frank has also.

There aren't *various fake Outsiders imposters - there's only one with a
long list of nyms. Can't you ever get anything right?

The fact that we don't do it each time he post is not tacit approval.
Just like the fact that other members don't post disapproval of your
shenanigans is not a tacit approval of what you do.

So you are comparing my "shenanigans" to Fake (Outsider's)?
You really are FITH.


Don Roberto
-----------------------------
To live is to war with trolls.
--Henrik Ibsen

That's what you get for "noticing that Randy has, for reasons not
obvious to you, significantly calmed down".
Gys was *there* to support *that* without hesitation, and so was
Ozlover, demonstrating once again just how pathetic many the group's
"active" posters" are.
As for the reason for the recent relative calm from Randy's corner not
being obvious to you: not even a psychologically damaged unit like Randy
can handle the heat of a two or three front war.
As for yours truly, I see no point in posting to a medical support group
unless you at least try to get down on the resident psychos whether they
are here to attack you as does the sicko currently calling itself # or
they are here to practice medicine to compensate for lacking *real*
qualifications like righteous ranting Randy.
Don Roberto

On 8/29/2016 3:50 PM, Michael, pseudo-me, boomer, # and other sock

puppets, having once again lost track of who he is and has been for
On 8/29/2016 12:14 PM, Michael, pseudo-me, boomer, # and other sock
puppets, having once again lost track of who he is and has been for

If I am the only one you attack anymore, it will all have been worth it.

Megalomania: delusion about one's own power or importance (typically as
a symptom of manic or paranoid disorder). Based on your recent postings
the definition appears to fit.
The rest of your posting is simply more of the same. It appears that
you consider being called to the mat on your conduct to be an attack.
Yet here you are, trying to give the appearance that you're sacrificing
yourself for the sake of the rest of the readers of this newsgroup. But
recently you posted that Christians and Muslims are against you and
pose a danger to you and all homosexuals. Still, somehow, only F00,
according to you, has been attacking you.
Does not equate.
Have you thought about seeking state aid to get you the anti psychotic
medication you appear to need so badly? OTOH druggie burnout cases
don't seem to fare very well. Is that your case as I suspect? Wouldn't
you be happier institutionalized in a nice facility? You'd have nothing
to worry about, three squares a day, warm and dry, programs to keep you
occupied! It sounds like a life much better than the one you've been
providing for yourself.
http://tinyurl.com/h27485x

[Don Roberto]

*AND* no one, not Gys, not Ozlover, not Randy is tuning in to support
you, just like when the creep actually outed himself as the fake
Outsider.

They each weigh all the options and in classic European fashion play
their petty little game that I finally recently understood. This is
a support group in name only, and even that depends on the day.
There's a secondary subplot in which each thinks they're some sort
of a warrior on a quest for greatness. That's looking for love in
all the wrong places.
Sorry if that's cryptic. Best to leave it that way.

I disagree: IMO these games must be confronted head on. This is, after
all, a *medical* support group and the games some folks play can have
dire consequences.
Don Roberto

are you providing medical advice ?
will i die on the spot if i don't follow your advice ?

No, but *you* should see a shrink about worrying that you may die on the
spot for not following the medical advice of someone who didn't provide
any medical advice. Be honest with your shrink and then follow his advice.

Don Roberto
-----------------------------
To live is to war with trolls.
--Henrik Ibsen

[Gys de Jongh]

Post by Don Roberto

*AND* no one, not Gys, not Ozlover, not Randy is tuning in to support
you, just like when the creep actually outed himself as the fake
Outsider.

They each weigh all the options and in classic European fashion play
their petty little game that I finally recently understood. This is
a support group in name only, and even that depends on the day.
There's a secondary subplot in which each thinks they're some sort
of a warrior on a quest for greatness. That's looking for love in
all the wrong places.
Sorry if that's cryptic. Best to leave it that way.

I disagree: IMO these games must be confronted head on. This is, after
all, a *medical* support group and the games some folks play can have
dire consequences.
Don Roberto

are you providing medical advice ?
will i die on the spot if i don't follow your advice ?

No, but *you* should see a shrink about worrying that you may die on the
spot for not following the medical advice of someone who didn't provide
any medical advice. Be honest with your shrink and then follow his advice.
Don Roberto
-----------------------------
To live is to war with trolls.
--Henrik Ibsen

so,
more medical advice ?

Can I keep you as a shrink or should I seek the advice of one of your
peers ?

[Don Roberto]

Post by Gys de Jongh

Post by Don Roberto

*AND* no one, not Gys, not Ozlover, not Randy is tuning in to support
you, just like when the creep actually outed himself as the fake
Outsider.

They each weigh all the options and in classic European fashion play
their petty little game that I finally recently understood. This is
a support group in name only, and even that depends on the day.
There's a secondary subplot in which each thinks they're some sort
of a warrior on a quest for greatness. That's looking for love in
all the wrong places.
Sorry if that's cryptic. Best to leave it that way.

I disagree: IMO these games must be confronted head on. This is, after
all, a *medical* support group and the games some folks play can have
dire consequences.
Don Roberto

are you providing medical advice ?
will i die on the spot if i don't follow your advice ?

No, but *you* should see a shrink about worrying that you may die on the
spot for not following the medical advice of someone who didn't provide
any medical advice. Be honest with your shrink and then follow his advice.
Don Roberto
-----------------------------
To live is to war with trolls.
--Henrik Ibsen

so,
more medical advice ?

Telling an obviously sick person to see a doctor is not "medical
advice". It's a gesture of compassion.

Don Roberto
--------------------
The thoughts written on the walls of madhouses by their inmates might be
worth publicizing.
--Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

So on the eight day God created usenet...

[Clay]

Post by Don Roberto
Don Roberto
--------------------
The thoughts written on the walls of madhouses by their inmates might be
worth publicizing.
--Georg Christoph Lichtenberg
So on the eight day God created usenet...

Good one! :-D

[Don Roberto]

*AND* no one, not Gys, not Ozlover, not Randy is tuning in to support
you, just like when the creep actually outed himself as the fake
Outsider.

They each weigh all the options and in classic European fashion play
their petty little game that I finally recently understood. This is
a support group in name only, and even that depends on the day.
There's a secondary subplot in which each thinks they're some sort
of a warrior on a quest for greatness. That's looking for love in
all the wrong places.
Sorry if that's cryptic. Best to leave it that way.

I disagree: IMO these games must be confronted head on. This is, after
all, a *medical* support group and the games some folks play can have
dire consequences.
Don Roberto

are you providing medical advice ?
will i die on the spot if i don't follow your advice ?

No, but *you* should see a shrink about worrying that you may die on the
spot for not following the medical advice of someone who didn't provide
any medical advice. Be honest with your shrink and then follow his advice.

Don Roberto
-----------------------------
To live is to war with trolls.
--Henrik Ibsen