Psycho-Babble Medication | about biological treatments | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: Judges from Maryland » linkadge

Posted by Larry Hoover on March 11, 2007, at 10:46:47

In reply to Re: Judges from Maryland, posted by linkadge on March 11, 2007, at 9:52:50

> But whats the point of labling somebody a quack, and then subsequently dismissing everything they say?
>
> Life isn't black and white like that. Even quacks can make good points.
>
> Linkadge

Credibility is easier lost than gained. Breggin went over the top with his hypotheses, and it is no longer possible to simply accept his seemingly studious and considered approach as being able to support the conclusions he reaches.

I never read the book, but I read excerpts from it. They are found on the 'net. And when I read the referenced pieces, and looked at his reasoning, I found real problems in his logic. I had to really work hard to even find his argument, in some cases. I'm just going to avoid considering the man's product as it is too much work for too little benefit.

There's another guy, Dr. Mercola. He's into hyping (and selling) various health foods, and books and such. I just got a newsletter from this guy which included supposed proof (and supposedly suppressed proof) that GM potatoes were linked to cancer in lab rats. He's a doctor. You're supposed to trust this guy, right? But when I went to the primary cited source, and read it, I found no mention of neoplasm, in any context. Moreover, non-GM potatoes demonstrated similar and sometimes greater adverse effects. My only conclusion is that it is not wise to feed Russet Burbank potatoes to rats, instead of lab rat chow. In no way can I conclude that GM Russet Burbanks are associated with cancer induction in humans. Ya know? His credibility is blown.

You happened to have mentioned the corkscrewing of neurons. Just for the record, the paper upon which that argument was first (and ever) raised is worthless. The primary reference is unreliable. Junk science. Any decent scientist would see that, upon reading it. If I recall correctly, Breggin used it to support one of his hypotheses. Then he is not credible, either. You see?

Lar

 

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Medication | Framed

poster:Larry Hoover thread:739762
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20070308/msgs/740104.html