onewheeldave

Neither does Dr Mcdougal- he thinks vaccines are good (with the exception of the flu vaccine).

True. My mistake. I know. But he does back up his opinions with stats and evidence. Personally, I don't consider the view that colonoscopies are less benefical than has been claimed, and that they can cause serious harm, to be an extraordinary claim.

If you seriously think that Dr Mcdougal selling low fat vegan pot noodles is a coinflict of interest, then you should immediately contact the GMC, so they can deal with it Interesting that you don't think it's a conflict of interest that professionals whose careers depends on administering a procedure that seriously damages 1 in 200 of those who undergo it, aren't in a conflict of interest situation when it comes to recommending that procedure. Interesting that you don't think a underfunded medical system that is financially sustained by donation from pharmaceutical companies, isn't in a conflict of interest when it prioritises symptom management via drugs, over curing with dietary interventions.

I disagree. For the research, it's a lot more than a few hours. And, it involves listening to experts I do trust, who, in their turn, have done lots of research to form their opinions. I think when it comes to a procedure that many experts openly question the value and safety of, IMO it makes a lot of sense to be wary of the protestations of those experts whose entire career depends on that procedures survival. Not saying they're necessarily dishonest, just that it's human nature to not question too closely things that your life & career is built on. Then there's the actual facts as posted by Mcdougal and others, such as the one that, whereas patients are told serious colonoscopy complications are extremely rare, the actual stats are 1 in 200 procedures ends with a serious complication.

I know he's not your doctor. I assumed when you said people should listen to the experts that you weren't suggesting they should only listen to your doctor Dr Mcdougal appears to sell low-fat vegan versions of pot noodles in his online shop. On his main site, in his books, and, in the free articles he posts on the web, he advocates that people eat plant based, low fat, vegan foods, focusiing primarily on starches (potato, grains, corn, sweet potato etc), with leafy vegetables (broccoli, cabbage etc) and some fruits. He believes eating such a diet is a superior way of tackling health issues than many orthodox drug based symptom management procedures. He clearly does not benefit financially by people going out and buying potatoes and brocoli. Why does he sell what appears to be low-fat vegan versions of pot noodles in his online shop? I don't know. I'd guess that it's for those who've spent their entire lives eating processed crap, who are emotionally unable to deal with moving straight onto a diet of plant-based actual real food? So they can transition gently? Whatever the reason, he clearly advocates that people eat starches and vegetables, from which he clearly does not profit. Indeed, him and the many other doctors who advocate the eating of real food to deal with health issues, often comment on why, despite the masses of evidence that shows that eating real food and going plant based is so good for health, that the medical profession as a whole continues on it's course of symptom management via drugs. Pointing out that there is $billions in profit from drugs for the pharmaceutical industry (and therefore, for the medical system), but zero from getting people to eat real food. Obviously Dr McDougal could make a lot more money by performing colonoscopies and pushing drugs, than he does by encouraging his patients to eat real food. In contrast, your doctors entire career depends on him issuing the drugs and procedures that Dr Mcdougal doesn't. Not saying your doctors a crook- from what I can see the majority of UK doctors have no idea of the corruption that underlies our medical system. ---------- Post added 14-04-2015 at 12:44 ---------- I address with this in my post above

You appear to be calling me a liar? ---------- Post added 14-04-2015 at 12:21 ---------- I said Presumably you actually agree with me that some rich people do think for themselves, and that some are aware all is not well with the medical system'? I have no idea how many, or what proportion they constitute, neither do I care. I do know, however that some rich people do think for themselves, and that some are aware all is not well with the medical system. In the unlikely event that you believe no rich people do think for themselves, and that some are aware all is not well with the medical system', do feel free to offer evidence yourself. ---------- Post added 14-04-2015 at 12:29 ---------- I didn't say there was "substantial research that concludes that for every one person who's life is saved by having a colonoscopy, one person is killed." I stated the easily checkable fact that, in his article, Dr Mcdougal said it. Here it is (in the last sentence)- https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2010nl/aug/colon.htm

Dr Mcdougals a gp. Many medical professionals are standing up and saying the medical systems corrupted. Many would disagree with your GP. Ultimately you have to choose- choosing to blindly follow the advice of an arbitrary GP is itself a choice, especially when GPs are in deep conflict with each other.

?Really don't understand what you're getting at there. I think you'll find that some rich people do think for themselves, and that some are aware all is not well with the medical system. Steve Jobs, for example, tended to make his own health choices. Yes- personal responsibility extends very much to health, hence why people should, IMO, do their own research and take advice from the medical system as what it is- advice, not gospel. Once again I'll remind that I'm not against vaccination, I think there's evidence on both sides. I am against compulsory vaccination.

I really do understand your concern- if I believed, as you do, that colonoscopies are effective, I'd be saying the same. However, I believe colonoscopies are both ineffective, and, harmfull. What I'd say to anyone faced with the decision, is, do your own research- decide for yourself. Don't blindly listen to me, to JFKvsNixon, to your GP, or to anyone else. Do your own research, take others opinions into account, come to your own decision. It's your life, you are responsible for it, it's your decision. IMO, the medical system is seriously compromised, and people are dying as a result. If patients want to blindly follow it, that's their choice as well. But, my advice is, do your own research.

I said the article wasn't a research paper. It contains many references to actual research papers, for example- with the numbers refering tp other papers by experts, and research papers. It also points out that, for every person saved by colonoscopy, one will be killed (due to the fact that serious complications, like perforation (1 in 1000), occur in 1 in 200 colonoscopies. Usually patients are told that complications are 'extremely rare'- they are actually 1 in 200.

How big is the tank?

Here's the actual text of the article, so people can decide for themselves who was being arrogant. ---------- Post added 14-04-2015 at 07:56 ---------- It's 1 in 200. ---------- Post added 14-04-2015 at 08:04 ---------- As does any article (represent the views of it's writer). It's also worth remembering that Dr McDougal is a respected medical doctor of long standing who knows what he's talking about, and, I for one, am very gratefull that there are doctors like him, who will call bull**** when they see it and stand up against a medical system which is swayed more by pharmaceutical company cash and influence, than actual evidence. It's an out-of-date procedure than causes more harm than good, which persists soley due to the profit it produces. ---------- Post added 14-04-2015 at 08:12 ---------- I'd like to expect that I can talk about 2 separate things in one thread without people drawing connections that don't exist, yes. I'd also like to be taken as an honest person, which clearly you do not think I am. Like I said before, I'm autistic NOT STUPID. I could not mistake an article, for a research paper, unless, I was stupid. I'm going to leave it at that, cos I'm here to debate compulsory immunisation, not waste my valuable time dealing with people accusing me of being dishonest and/or stupid. ---------- Post added 14-04-2015 at 08:13 ---------- That's usefull ---------- Post added 14-04-2015 at 08:17 ---------- It's directed at the poor/underclass who generally live hand-to-mouth. Stripping their cash further, given they have children, is 'forcing'. I would dearly love to see the 'argument' that it's an incentive scheme If the govt encouraged the poor to vaccinate their children by giving them a cash incentve, that would be an incentive scheme.

The attack on statins which has brought the issue into the public eye, has mainly been led by 'renegade doctors' like Mcdougal. They're not just saying statins are ineffective and harmful, they're talking about why these, and many other drugs and treatments are still being pushed when they are ineffective and harmfull. They're pretty much in agreement that the root of this is money and corruption down to the pharmaceutical companies. That is the debate medical profession needs to engage with. That, they are not going to do, at least not till more millions die as a result of the current dire state of medical research. Statins are the tip of the iceberg, there's just as many 'renegade doctors' talking about the corruption within, for example, the cancer industry. ---------- Post added 13-04-2015 at 21:57 ---------- No, I did not imply in an earlier post that the link I was later to post in answer to your later question, was research. It's an article. I'm autistic, not stupid- why would I believe an article is research? I do not 'imply', I 'state'. Like most autistics 'implication' is not a skill I possess. You've clearly presumed something that I did not say. That's OK- you made a mistake. Please bear in mind for the future that I don't 'imply'- I use language in a very literal way. ---------- Post added 13-04-2015 at 22:11 ---------- Yes- Orthorexia nervosa, "an extreme or excessive preoccupation with avoiding foods perceived to be unhealthy". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthorexia_nervosa It's a safe bet that some of the doctors I've seen would view me as having that condition. And, it is true that, in our bizarre culture where most of the chronic illnesses that plague our population (heart disease, diabetes, strokes, cancer) are caused by what passes as 'food' (processed supermarket junk), eating healthily can be socially isolating. How strange that they'd be preoccupied with that, yet seemingly oblivious to the fact that a large chunk of our population are literally eating themselves into chronic disease and death.

I didn't. You asked what he (Dr McDougal) said about colonoscopies, I posted the link (to what he said about colonoscopies). Not sure why you're denying it's research, when I've not claimed it is?? ---------- Post added 13-04-2015 at 21:39 ---------- I'll take in anything you say about him if it's based on some kind of reasoned argument. Can't promise to agree with it, but, if it's valid, obviously I will. ---------- Post added 13-04-2015 at 21:44 ---------- Put it to bed then. But you saying that don't put it to bed, you're going to have to state some backed up facts/reasons. Much as Dr Mcdougal does in his article, which, as you seem not to have read it, I'll post a chunk of it here, that does contain the kind of facts/reasons you'll have to come up with if you want to 'put it to bed'

What a load of crap Seriously dude, if that's what you think, then why the hell do you bother? Find someone to debate with who does meet your standards. I don't know if we have (seen the eradication of two diseases by means of immunisation regardless of the difficulties of the local environment). Like I said before, improvements in sanitation could have been responsible (I don't know what happened to sanitation in Somalia in the 70's). From this link- http://informedcitizensagainstvaccination.blogspot.co.uk/2009/10/smallpox-eradication.html we have this view (one I've seem brought up on many of the anti-vaccinators websites): Additionally, even if somalia was undisputably an example of smallpox dissapearing in the absence of sanitation improvement and presence of vaccination program, it hardly justifies mass-vaccination as a whole. given the many examples of diseases not diminishing when mass vaccination occurs, it would basically be a fairly good example of cherry picking. Once again I'll remind that I'm not saying vaccines don't work- they may do, they may not: I can't say at this point. I'm primarily posting on this thread as I most definitly do oppose compulsory vaccination, most especially when it's forced on the poor and not on the rich.

I'm afraid that since onewheeldave found out he was autistic, he's become increasingly intolerant of having his time wasted by people failing to read what's actually been written and instead going on about their bizarre misinterpretations of what was written. Especially annoying when they persist in twisting what I say to mean (in their eyes) what they want me to have said. I do often remind people on here that I'm autistic, and that I therefore use language very literally (as, indeed, language is intended to be used), however, I'm then generally accused of 'playing a card' (incidently, not a reference to superhans post above), which presumably means I'm looking for sympathy (which I'm not). So I'm resigned to having to spend around four times as long as should be necessary when posting, in an attempt to prevent/head off the inevitable strawmen/misinterpretations/misunderstandings that arise when some people can't be bothered to read a post properly. As a result, onewheeldave can, on occasion, be a bit rude. He really doesn't like having his time wasted.

Dr McDougal is, overall, in favour of vaccinations- https://www.drmcdougall.com/health/education/videos/mcdougalls-moments/immunizations/ (it's a video I'm afraid, but, like I say above, in it he basically says that vaccines=good). Nevertheless, he's heavily critical of the flu vaccines- https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2014nl/nov/flushot.htm Mentioning- Again he mentions his support of vaccines in general, but says- Once again- he's a respected practicing Dr with a great passion for looking at the relevant research. He believes in vaccination, but he's very forthright about what he knows concerning the corruption of medical research but the financial interests of the pharmaceutical industry.

What points are you claiming I've not addressed? That's relevant how? Your 'knowing a couple of people that refuse immunisations completely' is totally compatible with my statement that 'a lot of parents ceased immunising their children wasn't because they didn't want to immunise against measles, but because of fears about the MMR vaccine'. Yes- that's what you believe. I disagree, as is clear from my previous post ---------- Post added 13-04-2015 at 18:22 ---------- Yes, that's the one His books advocate eating primarily plant starches (grains, legumes, potato/sweet potato, corn etc) along with leafy vegetables and fruits i.e. 'real food' that can be bought cheaply from any grocery store or supermarket. ---------- Post added 13-04-2015 at 18:23 ---------- https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2010nl/aug/colon.htm ---------- Post added 13-04-2015 at 18:26 ---------- Yet some quite prominent and established medical authorities are heavily critical of the research and question the safety of (for example) colonoscopies, statins, rife over prescription of long term 'symptom management drugs' and, sometimes, vaccines.

Grow up dude. I answer more than most here- just cos you don't like the answers I give doesn't mean they're not answers. We've been through this before- I don't have time to waste dealing with whiners who can't deal with actual debate. ---------- Post added 13-04-2015 at 17:32 ---------- Research approved of by the medical establishment. i.e. not research into why colonoscopy screening is ineffective and harmfull- that would not be an approved topic. I can't imagine a proposal to research evidence that vaccinations are ineffective and/or harmful would get approval either ---------- Post added 13-04-2015 at 17:37 ---------- Going back to that previously posted wiki link- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measles_outbreaks_in_the_21st_century#United_Kingdom Let's assume that mass vaccination is effective (as it may well be). That link indicates exactly why forcing vaccinations on people, and, dismissing their fears outright, is itself harmfull. i.e. prior to the MMR controversy, immunisation was going well. The reason a lot of parents ceased immunising their children wasn't because they didn't want to immunise against measles, but because of fears about the MMR vaccine. If they'd had access to a single measles jab, they'd have been OK with it. It was the official total disregard for their fears, and refusal to make the single jab available to them, that made many leave their children un-immunised,

I've not said vaccinations don't work. Just that there's evidence on both sides. Neither do I know enough about Bangladesh and Somalia in the 70's to comment on whether vaccination was responsible, or, whether the state of sanitation improved/declined in that period. No. Simply pointing out that if compulsory vaccination is forced on the underclasses children, and, not on the children of the rich, then it's going to **** people off. What I do object to about vaccination, is forcing it on people, and, the general attitude of dismissal when people question it. ---------- Post added 13-04-2015 at 17:20 ---------- I wasn't referring to just approved research. I was talking about some of the stuff that goes contrary to the medical status quo (such as the afformentioned objections to colonoscopy screening). It's a safe bet they're not encouraged to research that. ---------- Post added 13-04-2015 at 17:22 ---------- No, I didn't. I said that bad sanitation leads to disease. Which means that improving sanitation could lower/eliminate such diseases. ---------- Post added 13-04-2015 at 17:24 ---------- They're not contradictory. Not that I said either of them. I said that bad sanitation can cause disease, and, that improving sanitation can lower/eliminate disease.

Yep. Sadly, it's often the case that Drs are the biggest sheeple of all- they really do not question the issues of pharmacutical companies corruption of the medical system. But, it's understandable- doctors training is notoriously tough, long hours, with any kind of actual questioning of course content being strongly disapproved of (even if they had free time to do research of their own). Then it's a career of long hours, and big pay. Long hours means, again, little free time for research, and big pay means lots of opportunities to use that free time to be doing things which is a lot more fun than doing research into stuff that shows deep flaws in the system your career is geared to maintaining. Unfortunately, there's a lot of cranks out there with weird theories, many of them calling themselves 'doctors' when they are anything but. That's why I posted a link to the John Mcdougal article- he's a genuine doctor https://www.drmcdougall.com/ who is heavily critical of much of what passes for health care in our society. As is Doctor Caldwell (treated ex-president Clinton for heart disease by getting him off the pharmaceutical drugs (statins etc) and getting him on a plant-based diet instead), and, many other doctors who are openly, and heavily, critical of the pharmaceutical industries corruption of medical science.

This one? I asked for clarification on the first- and pointed out- for the second. Which is an alternative and plausible hypothesis as to why polio might be an issue in those areas. If you google sanitation and disease you'll find some scientific stuff indicating that bad sanitation, especially where waters concerned, can, and often has, lead to outbreaks of really serious diseases.

Unless mass vaccinations aren't effective and are harmfull (as those who don't vaccinate clearly believe), and then the reverse is true- those forced to vaccinate are being put at risk by those who support enforced vaccinations.

Those regions being...? Places with aid workers usually have serious sanitation and water issues. Places with aid workers under fire, generally even more so. ---------- Post added 13-04-2015 at 16:28 ---------- And you wonder why people have an issue with this?

My experience of medical science indicates that it's seriously compromised. Admittedly, immunisation isn't something I've spent hundreds of hours researching, but, when it comes to nutritional science, I most definitly have done, and, came to the conclusion, as have many others, many of them qualified doctors themselves, that it's a total mess, heavily tainted by the fact that most research is fueled by desire for profit, rather than knowledge. I'm also aware of the many procedures that are routinely pushed on patients, that actual science says are unnecessary and, overall, extremely harmfull, such as Colonoscopy Screening https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2010nl/aug/colon.htm That articles by a respected practicing doctor, though I'll warn you in advance that he's a strong advocate of low-fat vegan diets and uses dietary interventions to cure his patients, having weaned them off statins as he believes they are also generally useless and harmful; so I expect you'll dismiss him as a 'crank'. In short, many hundreds of hours of looking into medical 'science' has left me highly disillusioned and convinced that something is very rotten at the core of it. In the debate around vaccination, I see the same tactics of coercion and fear by the medical authorities, as I saw in the nutritional sciences. So, I disagree. I think that medical authority literally sometimes doesn't know what it's talking about, and that parents are well within their rights to stand up to it, do their research, and, go against that authority. Same line as before. It only puts others at risk if mass vaccination is valid. If it's not, then your own argument goes against you, cos, by forcing others to undergo a procedure that is ineffective and harmful- you're being 'soo' selfish. ---------- Post added 13-04-2015 at 16:18 ---------- Which ones?