onewheeldave

A bit of consolation here for anyone concerned about the effects of the strike on patients- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18849101 (Doctors' strikes and mortality: a review) and, for those who prefer the tabloid account- http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/dr-raj-persaud/when-doctors-go-on-strike_b_1513689.html

The government has a obligation to treat mentally ill patients with the respect and decency they are legally entitled to. That means any assessments need to be done by people who are capable and properly trained to deal with the diverse needs of mentally ill people. ---------- Post added 20-11-2015 at 22:36 ---------- Basically some people cannot work. Many of them are in contact with various mental health professionals/occupational therapists etc, with reports by medical professionals who have genuine long term knowledge of said patients and their requirements/issues. Those reports should be soley sufficient to establish the ability or otherwise, of the patients, to work. ====================== http://blacktrianglecampaign.org/2014/10/21/uk-welfare-reform-deaths-updated-list-october-21st-2014/ list of welfare reform deaths- many of them suicides after having their benefits cut, and thus, facing loss of their homes, pets and a future where the only 3 options are find a job (when you cannot work), be homeless or take their own life.

A Tsunami is a natural disaster- it's not caused by humans so the victims have no humans to direct their anger/hatred towards. Bombing a family funeral isn't a natural disaster- it is caused by humans so the victims have clear human targets for their anger and hatred. There's never been, and there never will be, a 3 minute silence for the many innocent victims who have died in funeral bombings. That's why I'm quite sure that we do disregard the victims of family funerals.

He's right. I could give examples of atheist posters on here who are "as mean spirited as the faithful they are accusing here". I'm not going to, and would advise buck to refrain from doing so too. Why? It could be seen as "attacking posters rather than the points they are making", which probably contravenes board guidelines and could lead to a mod warning or a ban. It will certainly inflame the discussion to the point the thread will likely get pulled. You know that- I'm surprised you're encouraging him to do it. I've certainly found, amongst especially, atheists who are in the sceptic/rationalist crowd, not just on this board, a similar effect, along with, usually, a high degree of arrogance, a superior smug attitude, and, an estimation of their own logical prowess that vastly exceeds the actuality.

Probably not all of them have lost family. But I reckon most of them will have lost family members- it's a culture with big extended families that tend to stay in touch regardless of which countries they are split amongst.

Best of luck with it Much as I join you in hoping it does go that way, don't you wonder if banging it up on social media might be worth doing in conjunction with the above though. It might come to nothing, in which case you've lost nothing, but, we've all seen what can happen when stuff does take off and go viral. Admitedly a lot of that stuff is trash but, you're isn't. Yours is about established organisations who are blatantly breaking rules and health and safety, about to embark on killing lots more healthy trees- you've got it on video: it could be on Youtube being seen by thousands+ you've nothing to lose, and everything to gain. Stick it up, I'll rip it and start looking for local community/activist group facebook pages to put it on. Then they do the same, before you know it, it's everywhere.

Problem is, a lot of these fighters are in it cos they experienced, for example, being at a funeral party where they saw uncles/brothers/sisters blown apart by western missiles because intelligence indicated the presence of high-ranking terrorists. From the Wests perspective, of course, the innocents also killed in the attack were necessary and justified, as it's acceptable if innocent people die, because otherwise many more innocents in the west would die when the terrorists launch their attacks (in the event the funeral wasn't bombed). But, the children who experienced this and grew up to be fighters, only know that they lost uncles/brothers/sisters, and it's that kind of thing that leads to real hatred in peoples hearts.

I'm wondering if putting your video and photo evidence of Amey breaching H&S regs up on youtube/twitter might be more productive? You seem to be on the ball so I'm sure you're aware that the "official complaint route" is generally a fob-off tactic, whereas I believe several councils and dodgy operators have been much more inclined to take such evidence seriously when it's plastered across social media and being commented upon by thousands, than they did when it was sedately making it's way to the bin, via their 'official complaints route'

Awesome vid here- http://www.vegsource.com/news/2011/05/dr-mcdougall-nutrition-bill-passed-in-senate-committee-video.html Dr Mcdougal and several other doctors have managed to bypass medical system inertia by taking a legal route and getting a bill passed in California, "requiring all medical doctors in the state of California to include a course on nutrition as part of their continuing medical education." "The bill was strongly opposed by the California Medical Association, on the grounds that the legislature should not be telling doctors "how to practice medicine." A version of the bill modified from the initial draft passed the committee this past Monday." I'd be interested to see what any of the doubters on here think of the contents of the vid. I'll say in advance, for those who prefer not to watch the vid, and instead go searching for 'dirt' to discredit- yes, Dr McDougal is a Christian, and, he does sell products on his website. ---------- Post added 20-11-2015 at 11:48 ---------- Won't take half a day. Your choice. As always, you say it best ---------- Post added 20-11-2015 at 11:51 ---------- And, dude. There's clear evidence on this thread that when I cease to engage with your posts (due to your accusation that I'm 'off-topic') that, despite having the last word, you just can't cease posting your own off-topic posts complaining that my posts were off-topic. So, if you want to stay on-topic, do so, and cease blaming it on me, please.

No, I'm not confusing you- that poster made no claim to be autistic- you have made that claim (maybe you phrased it as 'being on the autistic spectrum?). If I'm wrong, and you've not made that claim, then I truly apologise; I know I've got serious memory issues but I didn't think they were that bad. If you have made that claim though, presumably you'll be happy to meet and exchange evidence?

I've got loads of evidence in addition to the anecdotal stuff- studies posted by actual qualified doctors along with their detailed analyses. Unfortunately, they're mainly getting the message out via youtube vids (as they're fully aware of the utter futility of trying to get it out via the highly biased medical journals that are funded primarily by ads, which greatly affects there priotities when selecting what gets published. And, you have a total aversion to 'evidence' via youtube vids, so, unless you say otherwise, I'll not bother giving you links to it. Speaking of evidence, as you seem so keen on the stuff, I do have clear medical evidence to prove my claim that I'm autistic, and, am prepared (as mentioned previously) to show it. Do you fancy meeting up in town briefly, so I can show you my evidence, and, you can show me your medical report proving that you've been officially diagnosed? It would be good for us to clear that up, as currently, I'm concerned that, in your case, it's possible that, given the 'understanding' of autism you display on these threads, you're actually self-diagnosed, and, under the misunderstanding that self diagnosis is a reliable method of establishing that. Still, easy to put that doubt to rest with a display of evidence, yes? No probs- always willing to help you out buddy ---------- Post added 20-11-2015 at 11:20 ---------- ====================================== http://www.dresselstyn.com/resolving_cade.htm Resolving the Coronary Artery Disease Epidemic through Plant-Based Nutrition article by Caldwell B. Esselstyn. Obelix- no doubt you'll either not read it, or, you'll read it and find it wanting. I'm not going to say it's evidence by your standards, but I'll post it on the thread as some here may find it usefull in some way. ps should pint out that while I have immense respect for Caldwell et al. The diet he advocates is a vegan one (actually no- it's a low-fat vegan diet, which is not the same), however, I personally, in a kind of bet-hedging manner, consume a low-fat plant based diet, with small amounts of animal produce. Unfortunately, that is an issue, in that I am fully aware of the abominalities of the meat/dairy industry, and, despite the fact that I am clearly contributing to that horror far less than the average meat eater, it is still a great moral dilema for me, and may well lead to me becoming vegan despite my fears that small amounts of animal produce are necessary for optimal health.

No problem. "Are there many/any documented examples of doctors being punished for not prescribing antibiotics?" was included in the quote you replied to- does our agreement to disagree impact upon that at all, in terms of you thinking on whether the existence or non-existence of actual incidences of doctors being punished would be relevant to it being something a doctor should take into account when deciding on prescribing an anti-biotic to a patient? You probably don't want to comment, in which case, that's cool- I don't want you to feel I'm being demanding or pushy. ---------- Post added 20-11-2015 at 01:15 ---------- Originally Posted by onewheeldave View Post I am aware of a large number of, mainly US, doctors (fully qualified practitioners in the orthodox medical system), who are very much into nutrition, and, who are highly condemning of the sympton management/illness maintenance approach of modern healthcare to the big illnesses of diabetes, heart disease (considered by them to be totally preventable and, curable by diet alone), obesity and cancer. If you want links to them, let me know. Evidence for what I'm claiming above? Yes. Evidence for my claim that "I am aware of a large number of, mainly US, doctors (fully qualified practitioners in the orthodox medical system), who are very much into nutrition, and, who are highly condemning of the sympton management/illness maintenance approach of modern healthcare to the big illnesses of diabetes, heart disease (considered by them to be totally preventable and, curable by diet alone), obesity and cancer." Here's one such US doctor who is "very much into nutrition, and, who are highly condemning of the sympton management/illness maintenance approach of modern healthcare to the big illnesses of diabetes, heart disease (considered by them to be totally preventable and, curable by diet alone), obesity and cancer." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caldwell_Esselstyn Highly qualified doctor who treated ex-president Clinton for heart disease after his heart bypass, with a program that was primarily diet based. I believe he also recently testified before a senate committee. So, I think that counts as evidence for my claim above- HOWEVER, I'm pretty sure (not accusing you of being overly predictable here), that you're going to violently disagree with Dr Esslestyns views, despite the fact that he's a fully qualified doctor and you're.....not..... In which case, you'll be able to contact him and, I'm sure, he'll be happy to provide you with an abundance of evidence, and you can then thrash it out with the source, as it were. (please do not come trailing after me for the evidence of Dr Esslestyns views, as, CLEARLY, he can do a far better job than me in providing you with evidence of his work). ---------- Post added 20-11-2015 at 01:19 ---------- here's his email contact details (found it on his site for you) To contact Dr. Esselstyn via email, please write to Jacqueline Frey at EssyProgram@ccf.org or call 216-448-8556. Due to the volume of emails, please limit email concerns to cardiovascular disease. Have just noticed he's selling DVDs on his site, and I recall you don't like that kind of stuff, so, I guess the 2 of you are going to have some interesting, if conflicting, discussions. Hope you find what you're looking for ---------- Post added 20-11-2015 at 01:33 ---------- I've been open about my respect for certain types of anecdotal evidence. I'm OK with certain types of anecdotal evidence as they came in very usefull during the process of me losing 2 stones of fat and greatly improving my own health, by dietary means. Being able to get away from futilely wading through the confusion, deception and corruption evident in most of the study-based 'evidence', and, instead, watch real people, and real communities, make solid progress in diet and health, and, post their results, for me and others to examine, question, test and, if desired, emulate, was, in comparison, refreshing, and, PRODUCTIVE. It does have a serious down-side, however. Sitting here, in possession of knowledge that saved me from ill-health, knowing that 1000's of others have similarly helped themselves, and are, in many cases, trying to get the message out to help others, it's incredibly frustrating watching the population of the 'developed world' suffering epidemics of unnecessary chronic disease that simply do not exist (in anything but small numbers) in populations that EAT REAL FOOD, but are ridiculed by low-intellect apologists for a system that IS CLEARLY NOT SANE.

True. In fairness though, the majority of GPs are sincere, very well intentioned, but, part of a medical system which leaves them ill-educated about preventative health, with procedures that gum up the system to the point that patients die unnecessarily, and a focus on long-term symptom management, not prevention. Incidentally, in case you don't know, you will soon be attacked for your post by several roaming pseudo-rationalists, whose mission will be to wind you up to the point you break some board rule and get either banned, and/or, the whole thread pulled. Don't get sucked into their game- stay cool, stay calm, do not swear, however great the provocation. Good to see a poster with some visioh and understanding of what's really happening out there ---------- Post added 19-11-2015 at 20:51 ---------- Also, I'll mention that during my extensive research into diet and nutritient over the past two years, I am aware of a large number of, mainly US, doctors (fully qualified practitioners in the orthodox medical system), who are very much into nutrition, and, who are highly condemning of the sympton management/illness maintenance approach of modern healthcare to the big illnesses of diabetes, heart disease (considered by them to be totally preventable and, curable by diet alone), obesity and cancer. If you want links to them, let me know.

No, I get the point, I just don't agree with it. I think the only way a doctor would be in trouble for not prescribing antibiotics to a patient and that patient then getting critically ill would be if there was solid evidence indicating that, at the time in question, there was good reason to have prescribed antibiotics. Are there many/any documented examples of doctors being punished for not prescribing antibiotics?

Unlikely a doctor will get in trouble for not prescribing anti-biotics, unless it's clear that the patient needs them. After all, said doctor has easy access to scientific evidence showing that over prescription of antibiotics is a serious problem likely to become more serious the longer innapropriate prescribing continues. And, ultimately, making the right decision about whether anti-biotics are necessary, is the doctors profession. Yes, mistakes are inevitable, and, it's a job with some hard choices- that applies to most jobs at that salary level. Even then, it generally takes a very serious error in judgement for a doctor to be actually punished.

I'll post whatever I want as long as it's within board rules. Get on with it then- discuss it, quit poking me, and have this discussion which so many here, allegedly, want to have. If people stop poking me, I can just quietly watch the developing flu discussion, and, if I feel there's a contribution to be make, join in at that time.

Am I allowed to reply to this? Clearly it's not about the flu vacc, and, if I do reply to it, my reply will also not be about the flu vaccine- which, according to what you wrote above, will surely further irritate the other posters further? Not sure why you're finding it hard to grasp that my responses to MLAR et al. have been exactly that- responses to their posts, especially those of their posts which address some of my posts. I'll also point out (for the 2nd time) that MLAR and the other posters have also made many posts themselves that DO NOT DIRECTLY ADDRESS the flu vaccine and it's efficacy/otherwise- for example and, including your posts above, which also DO NOT DIRECTLY ADDRESS the flu vaccine and it's efficacy/otherwise So why is everyone on your team fine to post comments that do not directly address...(etc), most of which, recently, have been critisisms of my posts that do not....(etc), while maintaining that I'm being somehow dubious/wrong for doing what they themselves are doing? Also, if MLAR does want to discuss the flu vaccine, why doesn't he discuss it with someone who also does want to discuss it, rather than someone who doesn't? JFK seemed very keen on discussing it, could not MLAR and JFK not discuss it, and then anyone else who also does want to discuss it could join in. Like I said earlier, I'd happily join in a flu-vaccine discussion myself, if it got to the point where someone came up with a point that hasn't been done-to-death, refuted, de-refuted, re-refuted etc on a thousand threads on hundreds of other discussion boards. ---------- Post added 19-11-2015 at 13:31 ---------- I'll 'bow out' when, and if, I want, thanks

Almost. I've let you know (again) I'm not interested in discussing the efficacy/otherwise of the flu vaccine, some of the reasons why, a bit about autism etc. I'll take your word about it being approx 500 words. I'll point out that, similarly, your above post also doesn't add to the old 'flu discussion' as it's purely a dig at mine, and, if you're going to criticize me on the grounds that my post doesn't, then pot..kettle....&...black. Is my word count on this one OK with you?

Do you? Personally, as Daven quoted my post, and put a particular section in bold, that his question related to me. The main reason I point out that it's not something I want to discuss, is, due to past experience on this board, I'm aware that the local circling NTs/sceptics/'rationalists () are VERY prone to attacking claims/views that I've not actually made. So, when I smell the precursors of that slipping in, I like to get a definitive statement in, clearly stating that I'm not making the claim they accuse me of, or point out that I'm not interested in the issues around that claim. Again, it's definitely a autism/NT comm block of a type well known to arise often between autistic/NT, or, indeed, between any 2 people who think and see the world in very different ways. I try my best to tackle it, however, progress can only happen if the cause is accepted by both sides, who then co-operate to remove the communication block. That requires an understanding of autism and it's very real consequences on communication tween autistic and NT. Unfortunately, said NTs refuse to believe that I possess those autistic traits that, in conjunction with the NT traits, trash communication- instead, presumably, they see me as a malingerer. Despite the fact that I'm happy to, (and indeed, have offered to one person on this thread) show them the medical documentation showing I'm diagnosed (officially, by an expert medical practitioner whose speciality is autism). I know a lot about autism, cos I've been (unknowingly) autistic all my life. A lot of the things I know about it, are, even in principle, unknowable by NTs- in the same way that there's lots about being NT, that I can never understand either. Main difference is, I can easily accept that I can't know what it's like to be NT, yet, almost without exception, every NT I've talked to sine my diagnosis, has seemed to have a really big problem with accepting that they cannot know what it's like to be autistic. The ones who 'knew' an autistic person once, are often the worse. The exceptions (who could accept that they can't 'understand' or know what it's like to be autistic) were all parents of autistic children, and generally ones who'd suffered greatly from the prejudice that is routinely inflicted on autistics by the main establishment systems (educational, medical, mental health, workplace etc). ---------- Post added 18-11-2015 at 22:32 ---------- I'm hardly stuck in a quandry You really are GAGGING for that discussion aren't you? You're actually trying to run it by attributing specifc arguments to me on a subject that I could not make any clearer that I'm not interested in. !!!!!ALERT!!!!!! just realised I need to state- by saying I'm not interested in discussing flu vaccs I'm not saying that I may not, at some future point, discuss flu vaccines. I say that cos some of the opposition here will likely accuse me of some kind of moral 'backtrack'. So- to be clear, I reserve to right to, in the future, change my decision to not discuss the flu vaccine. That will only happen if someone here comes up with something concerning flu vaccs that hasn't/is being 'discussed' in the pointless and circular ego-swelling, pseudo-rational way that it has/is been done to death. So I won't be, and would advise others, to, not hold my/their breathe

That one was, as the post you quoted states- Other of my posts have been to address some of the logical errors I saw popping up, one was to defend a poster who, I felt, was not getting a proper chance to express her/his thoughts, etc. To get to the point, none of them have been on the efficacy or otherwise of the flu vaccine (as, again, was stated in the post you quoted)- Admittedly, it does contain the phrase "flu vaccinations", and, while I know there are substantial, deep and unpredictable issues twixt autistic and NeuroT when it comes to communication, I assumed that everyone was aware of the fact that mere inclusion of a phrase in a statement, does not, in itself, constitute passing comment on the efficacy or otherwise of the object/procedure/entity that the phrase embodies. If I assumed wrongly, then apologies, and, I hope the above clears up the misconception.

in the post you're replying to i.e. I was simply flagging up a dishonest debating technique. I've little desire to engage in a 'discussion' here, on the efficacy or otherwise of flu vaccinations. It's not something that affects me, I don't really suffer from even colds these days. I have no desire to vaccinate myself against flu, and if I were a betting man, I'd put my money on me never using it in the future either. Plus, anything anyone says on the debate on flu vaccine efficacy or otherwise, has been said countless times already on a thousand virtually identical online 'debates'.

Post whatever quote you're talking about- it's a 9 page thread. Post the quote.

You know full well he doesn't want that. Nor does he believe that vaccinations prevent the above. You can critisise the evidence he uses to justify his belief- that's fair enough. But please, debate with honesty, not by slyly pretending you believe he wants the above mentioned suffering and then making out he's some kind of twisted sadist.

Are you? I don't recall you saying whether you'd been diagnosed last time this came up? Have you, or is it a self-diagnosis?

Yes, in hindsight, I did recognise that. Did you (prior to me mentioning it)? And, if so, knowing I'm autistic, and, knowing that the word 'obsessed' had 2 possible meanings in that context, did it not occur to you to bring up the possibility that we were on different meanings, before writing your post which seemed to be assuming the one meaning? Are you here to 'win' an argument, or, the find the truth? If you're after the truth, in future, if you see potential double meanings, it would be wise to point them out, rather than exploit them.