wayno wrote:or it could be the best thing to happen to the people on statins... the show not over till the fat lady sings
MrWalker wrote:But what the heart experts always ignore are the side effects of these drugs
I advise anyone taking statins to look up the side effects, and if affected by them, decide whether they are worth putting up with, for a 1% chance of living a bit longer.
wayno wrote:personally i wouldnt be surprised if statins were akin to slow suicide in the long run.... i'd take the risk of dying by other means than messing with my metabolism with statins. my dad was a strong fit man till he was put on them. he went downhill rapidly in a few years. can't help but think statins accelerated his demise
GPSGuided wrote:Human history has demonstrated that the society advances when the it and leaders become more objective in their decision making process, backwards when not. A basic understanding and practice of good scientific method is not that hard to adhere.
wayno wrote:please provide scientific proof
photohiker wrote:If pointing out that someone has bias is ad hominem, then there are no standards to the discussion.
but those who might want to consider alternatives that is their choice too. inform yourselves, make your own choice...
i'd quite likely be a worthless bag of nothing still if i didnt question what i was told by the medical establishment when i had chronic fatigue...
GPSGuided wrote:LandSailer: If you carefully read the earlier posts, no one applied the term charlatan to the present situation. The term was part of a list of social interactions where people are mislead from objective scientific facts. So please, quote objectively and don't do what politicians and charlatans do, twist facts.
PhotoHiker wrote:I have nothing against these people having books and websites. Good luck to them. I do have problems with them being selected as oracles of medical opinion as they are clearly
biased for publicity and income based on that publicity.
GPSGuided wrote:It's a sad day for our science education system when adults can't differentiate proper science, pseudo-science, "wacko" ideas and charlatans . Yet again, we always had them throughout human history. Those on the fringes just got smarter in the way they presented their wares, through their education.
LandSailor wrote:Its pretty clear your statement was at least in partial reference PhotoHikers previous post listing the Catalyst interviewees and their websites.
So you clearly were inferring they are charlatans and no, I dont think Im "twisting the facts" at all.
photohiker wrote:GPSGuided wrote:LandSailer: If you carefully read the earlier posts, no one applied the term charlatan to the present situation. The term was part of a list of social interactions where people are mislead from objective scientific facts. So please, quote objectively and don't do what politicians and charlatans do, twist facts.
Landsailer took exception (I think, please correct if I am wrong) to me highlighting these individual's websites, books and supplement sales websites, but I don't think my message was ever that they are charlatans. My message was that these people have demonstrable financial and opinion bias and the program could have done better than to select web salespeople to represent the case against managing cholesterol and the use of statins. Well, that and the fact the program also failed to provide balance.
As for not taking notice of what they say, they had a free ride and said plenty in the program. Did you watch it?
photohiker wrote:I don't think my message was ever that they are charlatans. My message was that these people have demonstrable financial and opinion bias and the program could have done better than to select web salespeople to represent the case against managing cholesterol and the use of statins. Well, that and the fact the program also failed to provide balance.
As for not taking notice of what they say, they had a free ride and said plenty in the program. Did you watch it?
GPSGuided wrote:Personally, I'd think they are more pseudoscience spinners.
LandSailor wrote:For those with an open mind on the subject he has written a few books that are well worth a read. And can we perhaps, give him the benefit of the doubt, assume they are not just full of lies and pseudo-science to sell books.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 7 guests