Are Pharmaceutical Corps. Ethical ?

The fundamental leap in science is this one simple rule that people forget:
  • THE DISCOVERY OF IGNORANCE.
That's it. You must have the bravery to admit what you do not know. This is a frightening thing for people to do. We see it with River. River marinates in a pool of Dunning-Kruger. Like a lot of online trolls, admitting that he is ignorant of how the world and science works is humiliating. A lot of people lack so much inside that all they have is this online world where they can pretend to be smarter, braver, and more scientific than what they are. They can pick up a pop-science book or read a website and assume --as we want to be-- that he has the inside scoop on this really esoteric field.

Admitting that one is ignorant is the foundation of all learning. It is essential to the scientific and medical method. It's why these fields take EIGHT years to master. Not because they're run by a cabal of snooty people but because we know all too well what happens when someone pretends to know more than they do. We know what happens when a charlatan makes lofty claims. We whittle down those who get the power to use the scientific and medical process not because we want an ivory tower of people all echoing the same story, but because the humiliation of saying to the universe, "I'm an ignorant fool" is too much for some people.

This is what is happening with River. The second axiomatic necessity of all intelligence, science and medicine is this: "IF YOU WANT TO BE RIGHT, YOU MUST BE PREPARED TO CHANGE YOUR MIND AND ANNOUNCE THAT YOU WERE WRONG." If you are too much of a cowards to say, "I was wrong. You were right. You changed my mind. Today I'm a better person." Then you're too much of a coward to discuss scientific or medical matters. You're just a conspiracy theory moron who pursues self-actualization online because the real world, with real pressures, and real professionals who will tear you to shreds is too much. Better to be locked away behind the safety of anonymity and your basement walls than to go out and do the real work to learn about something that is truly, mind-splittingly difficult as science and medicine.
 
superstring01 said:
The fundamental leap in science is this one simple rule that people forget:
  • THE DISCOVERY OF IGNORANCE.
That's it. You must have the bravery to admit what you do not know. This is a frightening thing for people to do. We see it with River. River marinates in a pool of Dunning-Kruger. Like a lot of online trolls, admitting that he is ignorant of how the world and science works is humiliating. A lot of people lack so much inside that all they have is this online world where they can pretend to be smarter, braver, and more scientific than what they are. They can pick up a pop-science book or read a website and assume --as we want to be-- that he has the inside scoop on this really esoteric field.

Admitting that one is ignorant is the foundation of all learning. It is essential to the scientific and medical method. It's why these fields take EIGHT years to master. Not because they're run by a cabal of snooty people but because we know all too well what happens when someone pretends to know more than they do. We know what happens when a charlatan makes lofty claims. We whittle down those who get the power to use the scientific and medical process not because we want an ivory tower of people all echoing the same story, but because the humiliation of saying to the universe, "I'm an ignorant fool" is too much for some people.

This is what is happening with River. The second axiomatic necessity of all intelligence, science and medicine is this: "IF YOU WANT TO BE RIGHT, YOU MUST BE PREPARED TO CHANGE YOUR MIND AND ANNOUNCE THAT YOU WERE WRONG." If you are too much of a cowards to say, "I was wrong. You were right. You changed my mind. Today I'm a better person." Then you're too much of a coward to discuss scientific or medical matters. You're just a conspiracy theory moron who pursues self-actualization online because the real world, with real pressures, and real professionals who will tear you to shreds is too much. Better to be locked away behind the safety of anonymity and your basement walls than to go out and do the real work to learn about something that is truly, mind-splittingly difficult as science and medicine.
Click to expand...

First off I READ BOOKS , I rarely if ever go to any online website to gather any information on anything .

These books get into depth of the subject . With detail .

Now you and others can , degrade me , humilate me , etc.

But the fact is , is that there is sound science that looks at cancer in a far different way with results that have been ignored . And have a PH.D in their field .

river
 
river said:
First off I READ BOOKS , I rarely if ever go to any online website to gather any information on anything .

These books get into depth of the subject . With detail .

Now you and others can , degrade me , humilate me , etc.

But the fact is , is that there is sound science that looks at cancer in a far different way with results that have been ignored . And have a PH.D in their field .

river
Click to expand...

If you have read the books, and have such a great education in this, then you should have no problem bringing to light specific examples and cases that back these claims up?
 
Kittamaru said:
If you have read the books, and have such a great education in this, then you should have no problem bringing to light specific examples and cases that back these claims up?
Click to expand...

No problem ;

The book by Travis Christofferson , MS . Tripping over the Truth .



 
river said:
No problem ;

The book by Travis Christofferson , MS . Tripping over the Truth .


Click to expand...

*buzzer* Wrong answer - that is not a specific example or case.

Don't ask us to do your homework for you - you are claiming this metabolic treatment option to be true, so back it up.
 
Kittamaru said:
*buzzer* Wrong answer - that is not a specific example or case.

Don't ask us to do your homework for you - you are claiming this metabolic treatment option to be true, so back it up.
Click to expand...

This is the thing . Lets say that I did , you would come back with some rebuttle , then I would have to come back with my rebuttle , and so on .

In the end , we would go through the whole frigg'n book , which I'm not prepared to do .
 
river said:
This is the thing . Lets say that I did , you would come back with some rebuttle , then I would have to come back with my rebuttle , and so on .

In the end , we would go through the whole frigg'n book , which I'm not prepared to do .
Click to expand...

In that case, I accept your withdrawal and concession,and believe we can consider that entire side tangent concluded.
 
river said:
This is the thing . Lets say that I did , you would come back with some rebuttle , then I would have to come back with my rebuttle , and so on .

In the end , we would go through the whole frigg'n book , which I'm not prepared to do .
Click to expand...
So in other words, you're slinking away like a coward. Every time I've asked you for specifics, you've tucked your tail between your legs and run away. I asked you at least FIVE TIMES now for specifics and you've played the perfect victim coward and never answered one of them. Right on cue, you did it again. So brave of you to admit that you don't know what you're taking about.

I like you better this way. An admission means you can grow as a person. This will serve as my permanent example of just how silly, immature and ignorant you are.

river said:
These books get into depth of the subject . With detail
Click to expand...

I re-iterate what I said several posts ago ... but we both know what you'll do, don't we? Sure we do -- you will play a crybaby coward and not answer any of these questions:

superstring01 said:
Okay. Then let's put it this way. No fluff:
  • What SPECIFICALLY would you have done? Do you know what 'specifically' means? I mean SPECIFICALLY?
  • How would you have run those tests?
  • How would you have paid for those tests?
  • Who would have drawn the blood for you?
  • Who would have created the new magical treatments you're proposing?
  • What hospital would do that for you?
  • Which SPECIFIC labs would have done whatever process you demanded of them? (and just to be clear: the LITERAL and SPECIFIC name and address of the labs + plus the specific technicians and scientists who'd be doing the work; or do you have this equipment in your basement?)
All you've done is offer up conspiracy fluff. Fine. That's who you are. But when a human being has LITERALLY two weeks to live and her son was overseas fighting for this country and couldn't get home for five days and she was LITERALLY going to die, I'm asking you not what you think you would have done but SPECIFICALLY. I mean, SPECIFICALLY and LITERALLY what specific tests would you have done.

Where is the machinery to do these tests? Where are the people to process these tests? Where is the lab to formulate your magic cure?

If you can't answer that, then all you're going to do is do the standard conspiracy theory cowardly rhetoric, "Well, like, and um, I would have like, gotten a book and stuff and like read it and stuff." Great. Got it. But spare me what you think causes cancer. I'm asking you SPECIFICALLY how you would have over-ridden her husband (my dad) and her best friend (her Gyn) and every one around her and how you SPECIFICALLY would have gotten the blood out of her body and the SPECIFICALLY how you would have over-ridden Ohio laws on the possession of human bio samples and how you would have selected your lab and how you would have gotten all of this done.

Specifically. Not what you maybe read in a book. But SPECIFICALLY what you would have done in two weeks to literally rewrite the laws of medicine in the US to get these magical results you were after.

Specifically.



Right. And brave River on a website has blown this story WIDE OPEN. Dear River -- My name is Daniel Bradbury Holliday. I have a BSc in Computer Science. I'm currently enrolled with the University of Florida (Tampa) to get my Masters in Electrical Engineering. I'm not a scientist but I spent the better part of the past five years learning how the scientific method and logic works. Go ahead. Grow a spine and tell me your full name and where you got an education in science. I mean SPECIFICALLY where this education comes from. Thereafter, offer me up your empirical, verifiable evidence that withstands the scientific method.

Here -- let me answer that for you:
  • You're too afraid to reveal your real name.
  • You're too afraid to reveal your university education.
  • You're too afraid to show how you gained any insight into the scientific and medical method.
  • You won't offer up any empirical evidence to support your case.
  • You'll chime in with more conspiracy nonsense that feeds your science woowoo-ism.
  • You'll run away like a coward in the face of considerable scrutiny into what you think, dropping a few bon mots, pretending that you've gotten the inside scoop, but will otherwise shrink from any challenge into the abstruse details of science because the real truth is this: You have no real scientific understanding an depend upon fluff, conspiracy nonsense to make yourself feel like you've got a set of balls.
We know what will happen. Go ahead. Prove me wrong.
Click to expand...

So again, River, one last try:
  • What SPECIFICALLY would you have done? Do you know what 'specifically' means? I mean SPECIFICALLY?
  • How would you have run those tests?
  • How would you have paid for those tests?
  • Who would have drawn the blood for you?
  • Who would have created the new magical treatments you're proposing?
  • What hospital would do that for you?
  • Which SPECIFIC labs would have done whatever process you demanded of them? (and just to be clear: the LITERAL and SPECIFIC name and address of the labs + plus the specific technicians and scientists who'd be doing the work; or do you have this equipment in your basement?)
 
I was prescribed an antidepressant which did little for depression but it was a fantastic diet pill. it curbed hunger like no other. too bad they changed the formula. they did not know about this fantastic side effect.

actually very few antidepressants seem to work, they have massive (bad) side effects or leave you comatose feeling nothing at all. but it has it's uses if someone is in a very serious state of depression at a certain time and feeling nothing is better than pain that is intolerable.
 
birch said:
I was prescribed an antidepressant which did little for depression but it was a fantastic diet pill. it curbed hunger like no other. too bad they changed the formula. they did not know about this fantastic side effect.

actually very few antidepressants seem to work, they have massive (bad) side effects or leave you comatose feeling nothing at all. but it has it's uses if someone is in a very serious state of depression at a certain time and feeling nothing is better than pain that is intolerable.
Click to expand...

Anti-depressants have a few categories, the most commonly prescribed of which is an SSRI, or Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. Basically, it attempts to slow/reduce the re-absorption of Serotonin in the synaptic pathways between nerve cells, enabling higher levels to bind to receptors and activate. Others act on similar transmitters, such as dopamine or norepinepherine.

The problem is, if the cause of the depression isn't a lack of activity of these chemicals... well, it can have some interesting results, ranging from mania (extreme highs and a loss in inhibitions) to wild swings in mood and emotion (which is why almost every antidepressant has, as a side effect, the risk for an increased chance of suicidal thoughts), etc.
 
Kittamaru said:
Anti-depressants have a few categories, the most commonly prescribed of which is an SSRI, or Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. Basically, it attempts to slow/reduce the re-absorption of Serotonin in the synaptic pathways between nerve cells, enabling higher levels to bind to receptors and activate. Others act on similar transmitters, such as dopamine or norepinepherine.

The problem is, if the cause of the depression isn't a lack of activity of these chemicals... well, it can have some interesting results, ranging from mania (extreme highs and a loss in inhibitions) to wild swings in mood and emotion (which is why almost every antidepressant has, as a side effect, the risk for an increased chance of suicidal thoughts), etc.
Click to expand...

My father was on an antidepressant which had as a side effect an increased risk of strokes. We did not realise until he had had two of them! An example of iatrogenic disease. Now he's a wheelchair case and can hardly speak. But he doesn't need depressants any more. Having got to 89, and outlasting most of his contemporaries, seems to have made him feel rather a success.
 
superstring01 said:
So in other words, you're slinking away like a coward. Every time I've asked you for specifics, you've tucked your tail between your legs and run away. I asked you at least FIVE TIMES now for specifics and you've played the perfect victim coward and never answered one of them. Right on cue, you did it again. So brave of you to admit that you don't know what you're taking about.

I like you better this way. An admission means you can grow as a person. This will serve as my permanent example of just how silly, immature and ignorant you are.



I re-iterate what I said several posts ago ... but we both know what you'll do, don't we? Sure we do -- you will play a crybaby coward and not answer any of these questions:



So again, River, one last try:
  • What SPECIFICALLY would you have done? Do you know what 'specifically' means? I mean SPECIFICALLY?
  • How would you have run those tests?
  • How would you have paid for those tests?
  • Who would have drawn the blood for you?
  • Who would have created the new magical treatments you're proposing?
  • What hospital would do that for you?
  • Which SPECIFIC labs would have done whatever process you demanded of them? (and just to be clear: the LITERAL and SPECIFIC name and address of the labs + plus the specific technicians and scientists who'd be doing the work; or do you have this equipment in your basement?)
Click to expand...


https://molecular-cancer.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1476-4598-1-9

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22399428
 
Last edited:
superstring01 said:
Hi River -- I've asked you LITERALLY four times what you would have done with that information. Or are you too afraid to answer those questions?
Click to expand...
He's being a c*nt.

It's obvious that in a medical crisis like this one chooses a good doctor or doctors and then one discusses with the doctors (i.e. the experts one is putting one's trust in) what the best treatment options are. One does NOT go fcuking around bothering researchers, not least because any decent researcher will refuse to make comments on the treatment of a patient they are not responsible for and whose history they do not know. It would be both unethical and a legal minefield for them.

It's hard to know to what extent River is an unpleasant individual and to what extent he is just an idiot. I suppose if we are charitable we might try to persuade ourselves it is the latter.
 
↑
I understand your point , but all things being equal , I would have delved into the metabolic mitochrondria malfunction alot more .
Click to expand...

Okay. Then let's put it this way. No fluff:
  • What SPECIFICALLY would you have done? Do you know what 'specifically' means? I mean SPECIFICALLY?
  • How would you have run those tests?
    Click to expand...
I would have got intouch with people , researchers that understand these tests . It would have been pointless to do otherwise .
Hopefully through my mothers insurance , if not , we couldn't .
Who was recommended by the researchers , although , I'm sure there are compentent people here .
Magical treatments , irrelevent . There is no magical treatment , just cutting edge treatment .
None that I know of here .

Which SPECIFIC labs would have done whatever process you demanded of them? (and just to be clear: the LITERAL and SPECIFIC name and address of the labs + plus the specific technicians
Click to expand...

Don't know , but I would have started with Dominic P. D’Agostino.
 
river said:
↑


Okay. Then let's put it this way. No fluff:
  • What SPECIFICALLY would you have done? Do you know what 'specifically' means? I mean SPECIFICALLY?
I would have got intouch with people , researchers that understand these tests . It would have been pointless to do otherwise .
Hopefully through my mothers insurance , if not , we couldn't .
Who was recommended by the researchers , although , I'm sure there are compentent people here .
Magical treatments , irrelevent . There is no magical treatment , just cutting edge treatment .
None that I know of here .



Don't know , but I would have started with Dominic P. D’Agostino.
Click to expand...

In other words -- you have no clue what you're talking about and are desperate to pretend otherwise. Got it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top