|
#57
09-05-2006, 11:25 PM
| |||
| |||
 Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications "Mark Probert" <markprobert[at]lumbercartel.com> wrote in message news:LZmLg.3292$Bu3.127[at]newsfe08.lga... - quote - > PeterB wrote:
Search Results> > Mark Probert wrote: > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > Mark Probert wrote: > > > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > > > Mark Probert wrote: > > > > > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > > > > > David Wright wrote: > > > > > > > > > In article <1157037524.268031.98290[at]p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> , > > > > > > > > > PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > David Wright wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > In article > > > > > > > > > > > <1157032834.562028.282980[at]m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> , > > > > > > > > > > > PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Johnny Huang wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, you are the one who is wrong! Peterb has already admitted > > > > > > > > > > > > > that he > > > > > > > > > > > > > is a paid representatitve of some supplement company. > > > > > > > > > > > > Notice that Johny cannot provide a link to this because it > > > > > > > > > > > > never > > > > > > > > > > > > happened. A review of the history of his posts will identify > > > > > > > > > > > > him as a > > > > > > > > > > > > PR grunt operating on behalf of industry. > > > > > > > > > > > It's so interesting that only the laser eye of PeterB can > > > > > > > > > > > somehow > > > > > > > > > > > identify all these "PR grunts" on the basis of "a review of the > > > > > > > > > > > history of [their] posts." > > > > > > > > > > As a lackey for Barrett's quackwatch (David is a member), his > > > > > > > > > > arguments > > > > > > > > > > are also found in the "Warning" post. It's up to readers to > > > > > > > > > > decide why > > > > > > > > > > this orchestrated effort is under way in the newsgroups. > > > > > > > > > That's a flat-out lie, PeterB. I am not a member of quackwatch > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > never have been. But it's what I would expect of you. Truth > > > > > > > > > isn't in > > > > > > > > > you. > > > > > > > > The ratbags outfit to which you, Barrett, Bowditch, Rosalind, > > > > > > > > Probert, > > > > > > > > Thorson, and others belong is indistinguishable from Barrett's > > > > > > > > Quackwatch. > > > > > > > Horseshit. You do not have a damn clue as to what you are saying. Do > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > lie like this to your loved ones? > > > > > > So explain the difference, Markey. I know you're protecting David > > > > > > from > > > > > > having to answer for himself, but you have to make it look good. > > > > > > kibble kibble. > > > > > More stupid comments by you. > > > > > > > > > > You claim I "belong" to quackwatch. Now, without playing your usual > > > > > semantics change the meaning game, prove that I, or anyone else who > > > > > posts here, "belongs". > > > > Your own website references quackwatch as "one of our websites." > > > > http://www.ratbags.com/posse. > > > Incorrect. It is NOT my website. If you check, you will see that it > > > belongs to Peter Bowditch. > > > > Yet, there is your name on the affiliated website. Your search for PeterB did not return any matches (6 documents were searched): - quote - >
LOL! For misinformation see ratbags and Quack, Quackwatch/> So what? The list is a bunch of people who are concerned with the > misinformation some people will put out to support *s*o *c*alled > *a*lternative *m*edicine. Poor Mark. LYING again! - quote - >
Irrelevant.> > > > This affiliation confirms your relationship to Quackwatch. > > > Only in you delusional mind. Since I do not own either Ratbags or > > > Quackwatch, you have not proven your claim. - quote - > >
Like this.> > I don't own *any* of the websites I reference, Markey. What does that > > prove? > > Neither do I. So, how do you prove your claim? By repeating what was > refuted. > > > > Why, > > > > Markey, do you not want to be associated with an outfit you believe in? > > > I read Quackwatch. There are things I agree with and things that I do > > > not agree with. I do not cite Quackwatch as authoritative. I use the > > > articles as a basis for reading more, with the major effort to find > > > primary material. > > > > I'm glad you agree that Quackwatch isn't authoritative. > > However, many of the articles do have references, and I do go to those, > when looking for primary material. Re: Researcher (Sandra Cabot) and theWarns of Cancer Risk From rBGH (non-organic) Dairy Foods - quote - >
No, those who are *truthful* would. Unlike YOU.> You might want > > to get your name removed from the affiliated website, or at least have > > a disclaimer saying that ratbag members don't necessarily endorse the > > views of Quackwatch. > > Only someone so steeped in conspiracy would suggest that. - quote - >
ZZzz. It proves your buzz words.> > > > > Find it and prove it. Otherwise, retract it. > > > > Are you saying you haven't paid your membership dues? Don't blame me. > > > There are no membership dues, idiot. > > > > That would explain a lot. > > It explains that your bleating and braying about "sponsors" etc. is > bullshit. Searched all groups Results 1 - 13 of 13 for your query (0.53 seconds) author. markprobert That's ONLY under your present name. - quote - >
Another famous buzz word. Which Mark is MOST guilty of.> > > > > You have, on occasion, alluded to my posting information from > > > > > Quackwatch. > > > > I see no difference in the propaganda put out by ratbags and > > > > Quackwatch, any more than between sleaze-balls like Bowditch and > > > > Barrett. If there is a difference, please tell me. > > > Before I can do that, try specifics. > > > > You claim to be familiar with both, why not give mha readers a little > > background? You are interested in informing the public about something > > you claim to believe in, right? > > I'll note your weasel. Searched all groups Results 1 - 26 of 26 for your query (0.37 seconds) author, markprobert - quote - >
ROTFLOL!!> > > > > Find it and prove it. Otherwise, retract it. > > > > Your own website proves it. It references quackwatch as "one of our > > > > websites." I thought you were proud of this? > > > It is not my website, you know that, and you are playing games. > > > > It's your name on the affiliated website, Markey, not mine. > > And, you will never have it. > > > > Just as I suspected you would. > > > > > > > > > > Apparently, a sizeable ante is required of corporate > > > > > > > > interests to join the latter, so possibly individuals are not > > > > > > > > admitted, > > > > > > > > but the moniker you operate under is hardly material to those of us > > > > > > > > supporting consumer rights. > > > > > > > You are really one, sick, paranoid idiot. You should be pitied. > > > > > > That's a rather childish comment to make, Markey. If you want to > > > > > > rebut > > > > > > someone's argument, you have to make one of your own. What's the > > > > > > difference between ratbags and Quackwatch? Here is your chance to > > > > > > shine for your sponsors. > > > > > I do not want to rebut your stupid claim, I want you to prove it. > > > > I did, using the ratbags website. Your name is on there, not mine. > > > No, you did not. Do try again. > > > > So why is your name on an affiliated website? > > Keep going...try to prove your claims... Shall I list the MANY claims--you have NOT proven. Poor, pathetic Markey. - quote - >
<snip nonsense> > > > > > Otherwise, retract it. > > > > > > > > > > > > You and those of your ilk support the same > > > > > > > > junk science that Barrett's Quackwatch uses in market-busting > > > > > > > > antics > > > > > > > > for which Bowditch was slapped down for. > > > > > > > Peter's court issue had nothing to do with alternative medicine or > > > > > > > science. > > > > > > Market busting isn't confined to the health products field, Markey. > > > > > > Bowditch operates a website that talks about leprechauns and ouija > > > > > > boards, too. And let's not forget his efforts to impersonate Buggs > > > > > > Bunny. Too bad he's witless. > > > > > Please, Petey, control the projection. > > > > Actually, I'm a big fan of Buggs Bunny. He's a cultural icon.  > > > Who is Buggs Bunny? - quote - > > |
|
#56
09-05-2006, 10:36 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications PeterB wrote: - quote - > Mark Probert wrote:
So what? The list is a bunch of people who are concerned with the> > PeterB wrote: > > > Mark Probert wrote: > > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > > Mark Probert wrote: > > > > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > > > > David Wright wrote: > > > > > > > > In article <1157037524.268031.98290[at]p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> , > > > > > > > > PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > David Wright wrote: > > > > > > > > > > In article <1157032834.562028.282980[at]m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> , > > > > > > > > > > PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Johnny Huang wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > No, you are the one who is wrong! Peterb has already admitted that he > > > > > > > > > > > > is a paid representatitve of some supplement company. > > > > > > > > > > > Notice that Johny cannot provide a link to this because it never > > > > > > > > > > > happened. A review of the history of his posts will identify him as a > > > > > > > > > > > PR grunt operating on behalf of industry. > > > > > > > > > > It's so interesting that only the laser eye of PeterB can somehow > > > > > > > > > > identify all these "PR grunts" on the basis of "a review of the > > > > > > > > > > history of [their] posts." > > > > > > > > > As a lackey for Barrett's quackwatch (David is a member), his arguments > > > > > > > > > are also found in the "Warning" post. It's up to readers to decide why > > > > > > > > > this orchestrated effort is under way in the newsgroups. > > > > > > > > That's a flat-out lie, PeterB. I am not a member of quackwatch and > > > > > > > > never have been. But it's what I would expect of you. Truth isn't in > > > > > > > > you. > > > > > > > The ratbags outfit to which you, Barrett, Bowditch, Rosalind, Probert, > > > > > > > Thorson, and others belong is indistinguishable from Barrett's > > > > > > > Quackwatch. > > > > > > Horseshit. You do not have a damn clue as to what you are saying. Do you > > > > > > lie like this to your loved ones? > > > > > So explain the difference, Markey. I know you're protecting David from > > > > > having to answer for himself, but you have to make it look good. > > > > > kibble kibble. > > > > More stupid comments by you. > > > > > > > > You claim I "belong" to quackwatch. Now, without playing your usual > > > > semantics change the meaning game, prove that I, or anyone else who > > > > posts here, "belongs". > > > Your own website references quackwatch as "one of our websites." > > > http://www.ratbags.com/posse. > > Incorrect. It is NOT my website. If you check, you will see that it > > belongs to Peter Bowditch. > > Yet, there is your name on the affiliated website. misinformation some people will put out to support *s*o *c*alled *a*lternative *m*edicine. - quote - > > > This affiliation confirms your relationship to Quackwatch.
Neither do I. So, how do you prove your claim? By repeating what was> > Only in you delusional mind. Since I do not own either Ratbags or > > Quackwatch, you have not proven your claim. > > I don't own *any* of the websites I reference, Markey. What does that > prove? refuted. - quote - > > Why,
However, many of the articles do have references, and I do go to those,> > > Markey, do you not want to be associated with an outfit you believe in? > > I read Quackwatch. There are things I agree with and things that I do > > not agree with. I do not cite Quackwatch as authoritative. I use the > > articles as a basis for reading more, with the major effort to find > > primary material. > > I'm glad you agree that Quackwatch isn't authoritative. when looking for primary material. You might want - quote - > to get your name removed from the affiliated website, or at least have
Only someone so steeped in conspiracy would suggest that.> a disclaimer saying that ratbag members don't necessarily endorse the > views of Quackwatch. - quote - > > > > Find it and prove it. Otherwise, retract it.
It explains that your bleating and braying about "sponsors" etc. is> > > Are you saying you haven't paid your membership dues? Don't blame me. > > There are no membership dues, idiot. > > That would explain a lot. bullshit. - quote - > > > > You have, on occasion, alluded to my posting information from Quackwatch.
I'll note your weasel.> > > I see no difference in the propaganda put out by ratbags and > > > Quackwatch, any more than between sleaze-balls like Bowditch and > > > Barrett. If there is a difference, please tell me. > > Before I can do that, try specifics. > > You claim to be familiar with both, why not give mha readers a little > background? You are interested in informing the public about something > you claim to believe in, right? - quote - > > > > Find it and prove it. Otherwise, retract it.
And, you will never have it.> > > Your own website proves it. It references quackwatch as "one of our > > > websites." I thought you were proud of this? > > It is not my website, you know that, and you are playing games. > > It's your name on the affiliated website, Markey, not mine. - quote - > > Just as I suspected you would.
Keep going...try to prove your claims...> > > > > > > > Apparently, a sizeable ante is required of corporate > > > > > > > interests to join the latter, so possibly individuals are not admitted, > > > > > > > but the moniker you operate under is hardly material to those of us > > > > > > > supporting consumer rights. > > > > > > You are really one, sick, paranoid idiot. You should be pitied. > > > > > That's a rather childish comment to make, Markey. If you want to rebut > > > > > someone's argument, you have to make one of your own. What's the > > > > > difference between ratbags and Quackwatch? Here is your chance to > > > > > shine for your sponsors. > > > > I do not want to rebut your stupid claim, I want you to prove it. > > > I did, using the ratbags website. Your name is on there, not mine. > > No, you did not. Do try again. > > So why is your name on an affiliated website? - quote - > > > > Otherwise, retract it.
If you are referring to the famous Bugs Bunny, try:> > > > > > > > > > You and those of your ilk support the same > > > > > > > junk science that Barrett's Quackwatch uses in market-busting antics > > > > > > > for which Bowditch was slapped down for. > > > > > > Peter's court issue had nothing to do with alternative medicine or science. > > > > > Market busting isn't confined to the health products field, Markey. > > > > > Bowditch operates a website that talks about leprechauns and ouija > > > > > boards, too. And let's not forget his efforts to impersonate Buggs > > > > > Bunny. Too bad he's witless. > > > > Please, Petey, control the projection. > > > Actually, I'm a big fan of Buggs Bunny. He's a cultural icon. > > Who is Buggs Bunny? > > A wabbit. http://looneytunes.warnerbros.com/st...ugs_story.html Bugs only has one g. |
|
#55
09-05-2006, 02:36 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications Mark Probert wrote: - quote - > PeterB wrote:
Yet, there is your name on the affiliated website.> > Mark Probert wrote: > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > Mark Probert wrote: > > > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > > > David Wright wrote: > > > > > > > In article <1157037524.268031.98290[at]p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> , > > > > > > > PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > David Wright wrote: > > > > > > > > > In article <1157032834.562028.282980[at]m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> , > > > > > > > > > PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Johnny Huang wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > No, you are the one who is wrong! Peterb has already admitted that he > > > > > > > > > > > is a paid representatitve of some supplement company. > > > > > > > > > > Notice that Johny cannot provide a link to this because it never > > > > > > > > > > happened. A review of the history of his posts will identify him as a > > > > > > > > > > PR grunt operating on behalf of industry. > > > > > > > > > It's so interesting that only the laser eye of PeterB can somehow > > > > > > > > > identify all these "PR grunts" on the basis of "a review of the > > > > > > > > > history of [their] posts." > > > > > > > > As a lackey for Barrett's quackwatch (David is a member), his arguments > > > > > > > > are also found in the "Warning" post. It's up to readers to decide why > > > > > > > > this orchestrated effort is under way in the newsgroups. > > > > > > > That's a flat-out lie, PeterB. I am not a member of quackwatch and > > > > > > > never have been. But it's what I would expect of you. Truth isn't in > > > > > > > you. > > > > > > The ratbags outfit to which you, Barrett, Bowditch, Rosalind, Probert, > > > > > > Thorson, and others belong is indistinguishable from Barrett's > > > > > > Quackwatch. > > > > > Horseshit. You do not have a damn clue as to what you are saying. Do you > > > > > lie like this to your loved ones? > > > > So explain the difference, Markey. I know you're protecting David from > > > > having to answer for himself, but you have to make it look good. > > > > kibble kibble. > > > More stupid comments by you. > > > > > > You claim I "belong" to quackwatch. Now, without playing your usual > > > semantics change the meaning game, prove that I, or anyone else who > > > posts here, "belongs". > > > > Your own website references quackwatch as "one of our websites." > > http://www.ratbags.com/posse. > > Incorrect. It is NOT my website. If you check, you will see that it > belongs to Peter Bowditch. - quote - > > This affiliation confirms your relationship to Quackwatch.
I don't own *any* of the websites I reference, Markey. What does that> > Only in you delusional mind. Since I do not own either Ratbags or > Quackwatch, you have not proven your claim. prove? - quote - > Why,
I'm glad you agree that Quackwatch isn't authoritative. You might want> > Markey, do you not want to be associated with an outfit you believe in? > > I read Quackwatch. There are things I agree with and things that I do > not agree with. I do not cite Quackwatch as authoritative. I use the > articles as a basis for reading more, with the major effort to find > primary material. to get your name removed from the affiliated website, or at least have a disclaimer saying that ratbag members don't necessarily endorse the views of Quackwatch. - quote - > > > Find it and prove it. Otherwise, retract it.
That would explain a lot.> > > > Are you saying you haven't paid your membership dues? Don't blame me. > > There are no membership dues, idiot. - quote - > > > You have, on occasion, alluded to my posting information from Quackwatch.
You claim to be familiar with both, why not give mha readers a little> > > > I see no difference in the propaganda put out by ratbags and > > Quackwatch, any more than between sleaze-balls like Bowditch and > > Barrett. If there is a difference, please tell me. > > Before I can do that, try specifics. background? You are interested in informing the public about something you claim to believe in, right? - quote - > > > Find it and prove it. Otherwise, retract it.
It's your name on the affiliated website, Markey, not mine.> > > > Your own website proves it. It references quackwatch as "one of our > > websites." I thought you were proud of this? > > It is not my website, you know that, and you are playing games. - quote - > Just as I suspected you would.
So why is your name on an affiliated website?> > > > > > Apparently, a sizeable ante is required of corporate > > > > > > interests to join the latter, so possibly individuals are not admitted, > > > > > > but the moniker you operate under is hardly material to those of us > > > > > > supporting consumer rights. > > > > > You are really one, sick, paranoid idiot. You should be pitied. > > > > That's a rather childish comment to make, Markey. If you want to rebut > > > > someone's argument, you have to make one of your own. What's the > > > > difference between ratbags and Quackwatch? Here is your chance to > > > > shine for your sponsors. > > > I do not want to rebut your stupid claim, I want you to prove it. > > > > I did, using the ratbags website. Your name is on there, not mine. > > No, you did not. Do try again. - quote - > > > Otherwise, retract it.
A wabbit.> > > > > > > > You and those of your ilk support the same > > > > > > junk science that Barrett's Quackwatch uses in market-busting antics > > > > > > for which Bowditch was slapped down for. > > > > > Peter's court issue had nothing to do with alternative medicine or science. > > > > Market busting isn't confined to the health products field, Markey. > > > > Bowditch operates a website that talks about leprechauns and ouija > > > > boards, too. And let's not forget his efforts to impersonate Buggs > > > > Bunny. Too bad he's witless. > > > Please, Petey, control the projection. > > > > Actually, I'm a big fan of Buggs Bunny. He's a cultural icon. > > Who is Buggs Bunny? |
|
#54
09-02-2006, 10:20 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications In message <61gJg.308$3b6.106[at]newsfe10.lga> , Mark Probert wrote: - quote - > Peter Bowditch wrote:
Brent O. Hatch> > Isn't Hatch the one whose son is a lobbyist for the alternative > > medicine industry who gets paid $2 million a year to lobby his father? > > > > Nice crime if you can get it. > > That does bear looking into.... > > do you know the son's name? HATCH, JAMES & DODGE, P.C. 10 West Broadway, Suite 400 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 That son of the Honorable Orrin Hatch? NB: I know of him thanks to his (ahem) participation in /SCO v. IBM/ -- the paste is from a Pacer Certificate of Service. -- begin signature.exe A:*Because*it*messes*up*the*order*in*which*people*normally*read*text. Q:*Why*is*top-posting*such*a*bad*thing? A:*Top-posting. Q:*What*is*the*most*annoying*thing*on*usenet? |
|
#53
09-02-2006, 04:20 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications GMCarter wrote: - quote - > On 1 Sep 2006 19:26:53 -0700, awthrawthr[at]yahoo.com wrote:
I agree with you that ephedra is safer than alcohol and tobacco. And> > > > > Mark Thorson wrote: > > > The recent court decision supports using risk-benefit > > > analysis to remove dangerous supplements from the > > > market: > > > > > > http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_4239960 > > > > If the article is accurate, and it appears to be so, the ruling by the > > three judge panel could be a HUGE setback for both the supplement > > industry and for the public that relies on supplements for their health > > care. > > The recent article is not accurate and inflates the reports of adverse > events of Ephedra. > > What's peculiar is that Ephedra may be removed from the market as a > botanical preparation but remains as part of the pharmaceutical > industry's garbage cold remedy market. > > Worse, alcohol and tobacco, "natural" substances that kill and maim > thousands yearly, remain on the market. Why? > > George M. Carter the article did grossly overstate the number of Adverse Event Reports to the FDA by a factor of 10. But the bottom line is that the court's ruling is likely to negatively impact our access to natural products. The FDA is likely to jump on this ruling with glee...and use it to gradually remove more and more products from the shelves...the most popular ones...the ones that impact the drug industry the most...such as red yeast rice. |
|
#52
09-02-2006, 10:45 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications On 1 Sep 2006 19:26:53 -0700, awthrawthr[at]yahoo.com wrote: - quote - >
The recent article is not accurate and inflates the reports of adverse> Mark Thorson wrote: > > The recent court decision supports using risk-benefit > > analysis to remove dangerous supplements from the > > market: > > > > http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_4239960 > > If the article is accurate, and it appears to be so, the ruling by the > three judge panel could be a HUGE setback for both the supplement > industry and for the public that relies on supplements for their health > care. events of Ephedra. What's peculiar is that Ephedra may be removed from the market as a botanical preparation but remains as part of the pharmaceutical industry's garbage cold remedy market. Worse, alcohol and tobacco, "natural" substances that kill and maim thousands yearly, remain on the market. Why? George M. Carter |
|
#51
09-02-2006, 02:26 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications Mark Thorson wrote: - quote - > The recent court decision supports using risk-benefit
If the article is accurate, and it appears to be so, the ruling by the> analysis to remove dangerous supplements from the > market: > > http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_4239960 three judge panel could be a HUGE setback for both the supplement industry and for the public that relies on supplements for their health care. I guess the case could be heard by the full panel to correct the errors of the three judges. Then there is the possibility of going to the Supreme Court. But the Supreme Court doesn't accept most cases. So the ruling is a dark day indeed for the public. It could be a long time before this attack on our freedom is corrected. Maybe the Hatch bill will get passed. But it shouldn't have to come to that. Who knows how long it would take to pass the bill! |
|
#50
09-01-2006, 10:01 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2005[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1157143710.339268.172590[at]b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... - quote - >
"Jan Drew" <jdrew1374[at]sbcglobal.net> wrote in message> Jan Drew wrote: > news:zQ0Kg.380$MF1.316[at]newssvr25.news.prodigy.net... - quote - > > "Sdores" <sdores[at]bellsouth.net> wrote in message > news:LNUJg.37477$e9.4824[at]bignews4.bellsouth.net... > > I have nothing to do with this > > You had plenty to do with it. YOU replied to Johnny's post--titled: > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....msg/516ffa41fe... > > Profile of Jan Drew, Cyberstalker > > Today, I received a call at my work. The female caller asked for > "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The > female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I > wasn't fooling anyone. > > > I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed > under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star > 69 said the call could not be traced. > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > stop NOW! > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > You believed his story and made 8 posts in that thread. > > > > and if it continues I will file a complaint. > > Leave me out of this garbage please. UM MOM Susan > > File away. YOU and YOU alone are responsible for your *garbage*! > Sadly, your *garbage*is below. > > And HIS. > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....283de70?hl=en& > > Sep 9 2005 2:42 pm > > I want to thank Susan for pointing out something I noticed, but did not > mention. > > Before the female caller spoke with me, Jan called me "Ted". > > > After the female caller spoke with me, Jan calls me "Johnny". > > > I don't believe that this is a coincidence! > > > Jan Drew, STOP CYBER-STALKING ME! > > > Jan Drew, STOP CYBER-STALKING! > > > > > "Jan Drew" <jdrew1374[at]sbcglobal.net> wrote in message > > news:OAMJg.5114$yO7.3703[at]newssvr14.news.prodigy.com... > > > > > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2005[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > news:1157050427.786067.239810[at]e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > Jan Drew wrote: > > > > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2005[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > > news:1157024048.669190.260130[at]74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan Drew wrote: > > > > > > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2005[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > > > > news:1156970984.428588.138730[at]h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > > > > > > Peter Bowditch wrote: > > > > > > > > > > "PeterB" <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Peter Bowditch wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Mark Probert <markprobert[at]lumbercartel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mark Thorson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The recent court decision supports using risk-benefit > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis to remove dangerous supplements from the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > market: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_4239960 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are a number of problems with FDA's position on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ephedra. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the majority of supplements containing ephedrine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > alkaloids are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > traditional ephedra root, which is why the ban does not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apply > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > traditional chinese medicine formulations (TCM.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > variety of synthetically mfctrd ephedrine products, with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > far > > > > > > > > > > > > > > greater > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pharmacology, including over-the-counter asthma meds and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nasal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sprays, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are also permitted to remain on drug store shelves. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nod > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TCM is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a shameless ruse to conceal FDA's efforts to prevent > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dietary > > > > > > > > > > > > > > supplement > > > > > > > > > > > > > > makers from competing against the drug makers in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > weight > > > > > > > > > > > > > > loss > > > > > > > > > > > > > > market. Closing with a quote from the same article: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "There > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in FDA who want to overregulate everything and if they > > > > > > > > > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > case to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > do that, we'll have to slap the FDA down." - Orrin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hatch > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Orrin Hatch? He's the senator from Utah where the > > > > > > > > > > > > > supplements > > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > manufactured. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Time Magazine October 1, 1993: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not only does it have a sizable war chest (the industry > > > > > > > > > > > > > grossed > > > > > > > > > > > > > $4 > > > > > > > > > > > > > billion last year) and loyal customers, it also has an > > > > > > > > > > > > > influential > > > > > > > > > > > > > friend in Washington: Senator Orrin Hatch. His home state > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > Utah > > > > > > > > > > > > > has an > > > > > > > > > > > > > important stake in the industry, and he himself owns 1% of > > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > company > > > > > > > > > > > > > that distributes vitamin C and iron supplements--an > > > > > > > > > > > > > apparent > > > > > > > > > > > > > conflict of > > > > > > > > > > > > > interest. (Hatch denies that anything is improper, saying > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > company deals mainly in real estate.) He has latched onto > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > vitamin > > > > > > > > > > > > > issue, speaking out against Kessler at every turn. In > > > > > > > > > > > > > April > > > > > > > > > > > > > he > > > > > > > > > > > > > introduced legislation that would permanently exempt > > > > > > > > > > > > > herbs, > > > > > > > > > > > > > vitamins, > > > > > > > > > > > > > minerals and amino acids from most FDA controls. The bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > > > > > > than > > > > > > > > > > > > > 50 Senate co-signers, and nearly 200 Representatives have > > > > > > > > > > > > > backed > > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > companion measure in the House. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Isn't Hatch the one whose son is a lobbyist for the > > > > > > > > > > > > alternative > > > > > > > > > > > > medicine industry who gets paid $2 million a year to lobby > > > > > > > > > > > > his > > > > > > > > > > > > father? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nice crime if you can get it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it's alright when your sponsors play that game, but not > > > > > > > > > > > when the > > > > > > > > > > > same tactics are used by your competitors? Your own court > > > > > > > > > > > room > > > > > > > > > > > antics > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of certain interests are every bit as sleazy, if > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > > > > so. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And which court room antics would they be? Also, please > > > > > > > > > > specify > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > "certain interests". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The same court room antics that resulted in the judge ruling > > > > > > > > > against > > > > > > > > > you, Bowditch. You were found to be engaging in a distortion of > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > facts and required to post a retraction. As for who you > > > > > > > > > represent, > > > > > > > > > that should be obvious. But feel free to come clean and tell us > > > > > > > > > all > > > > > > > > > about it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have never been in any court for any reason associated in > > > > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > > way > > > > > > > > > > with alternative medicine. Or real medicine, for that matter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Real" medicine is traditional herbal medicine, which has > > > > > > > > > existed > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > thousands of years. "Alternative" medicine is synthetic > > > > > > > > > medicine, > > > > > > > > > which has existed for a bit more than 100 years. See the > > > > > > > > > following > > > > > > > > > etymology on "pharmaceutical" and name your poison. > > > > > > > > > Pharmaceutical: > > > > > > > > > 1648 (pharmaceutic in the same sense is from 1541), from L. > > > > > > > > > pharmaceuticus "of drugs," from Gk. pharmakeutikos, from > > > > > > > > > pharmakeus > > > > > > > > > "preparer of drugs, poisoner," from pharmakon "medicine, > > > > > > > > > poison." > > > > > > > > > Pharmacology is attested from 1721, formed in Mod.L. (1683) with > > > > > > > > > Gk. > > > > > > > > > -logia "dealing with the topic of." > > > > > > > > > from http://www.etymonline.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If "Real medicine" is herbal medicine and "Alternative" medicine > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > synthetic medicine, why are you posting to this group? By your > > > > > > > > own > > > > > > > > arguments, you should just be posting in support of "Alternative > > > > > > > > medicine", which you now claim to be synthetic medicine > > > > > > > > (Pharmaceuticals, Surgery, etc). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My guess is that it has something to do with you being a paid > > > > > > > > agent of > > > > > > > > some commercial interest. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are noted for having WRONG > > > > > > > guesses................................. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No > > > > > > > > > > YES! > > > > > > > > > > Today, I received a call at my work. The female caller asked for > > > > > "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The > > > > > female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I > > > > > wasn't fooling anyone. > > > > > > > > > > I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed > > > > > under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star > > > > > 69 said the call could not be traced. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > > > > > stop NOW! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, I guess she just searched every online phone directory for my last > > > > > name and Acupuncture. Someone emailed me and said that she did > > > > > something like this to another acupuncturist. > > > > > > > > > > I've read that she has called family members of posters > > > > > > > > > > [ ] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Before that call, Jan called me Ted. After I received that call, Jan > > > > began to call me Johnny! > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....6ffa41fe3c0f05 > > > > > > Today, I received a call at my work. The female caller asked for > > > "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The > > > female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I > > > wasn't fooling anyone. > > > > > > I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed > > > under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star > > > 69 said the call could not be traced. > > > > > > > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > > > stop NOW! > > > > > > > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....1959d7f43f5ffd > > > > > > Susan, I'm tempted to report it, but I doubt anything can be done. She > > > didn't make any threats, just accused me of being someone else > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....ee251a7360b2f1 > > > > > > You kept calling him Ted and now since he posted about a phone call you > > > are > > > calling him Johnny, WHY???? (extra question marks for Jan) He said the > > > person who called asked for Ted, amazingly like you were calling him. I > > > didn't, for the record say that you were the caller and only said that > > > stalking people was something that the FBI takes seriously, you are the > > > one > > > that assumed I was speaking of you. Your name was in the subject line > > > but > > > that doesn't put it in my words. The out side activity and always trying > > > to > > > find out personal information about people is what is disturbing to me. > > > And > > > your slamming me with your nasty responses brings to mind, "sticks and > > > stones". UM MOM Susan, and I don't give a damn who's mother you are > > > that > > > is > > > not what my sign off means. > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....10ad21c1501450 > > > > > > Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > > > news:1126208879.051298.33560[at]g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > > You need to go to the FBI site, or call, and give them this information > > > > and > > > > also the email you received to stop who ever is doing this. It's > > > > frightening to me. UM MOM Susan > > > > > > > ---------- > > > > Susan, I'm tempted to report it, but I doubt anything can be done. She > > > > didn't make any threats, just accused me of being someone else. I've > > > > set my phone for anonymous caller rejection. If this person wants to > > > > call back, their number can be found with Star 69. > > > > > > > > > > The email was from someone telling me about Jan's history. > > > > > > > > > > > > Three guesses as to who that might be, the first two don't count. > > > > > > They do not > > > > > > > > > > > > > need to be involved. I can just use the links to those incriminating > > > > posts if I need to report her. > > > > > > > > > LOL!!!! > > > > > > Sure you can, see below. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was told that Jan likes to bully people into silence. > > > > Johnny Huang will NOT be silenced! > > > > > > > > > > > > OH? > > > > > > > > > Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > > > > > > news:1126185331.814375.283650[at]z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > > And am I the only one to notice that she has now apparently decided > > > > that Rich Shewmaker is Aloha Rich? They both come from Hawaii so they > > > > must be the same person. > > > > No, I noticed it, too. > > > > > > > > > Let's see just *where* both of you noticed it. > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer, that means *both* of you. > > > > > > > > > At first, I thought they were the same person > > > > > > > > > > > > > because of Jan's replies. > > > > > > > > > Do post these EXACT replies. > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why does she think that everyone she disagrees with is the same person? > > > > > > > > > I don't. > > > > > > > > > > Is she really that sick or is this just her way of insulting people who > > > > disagree with her? > > > > > > > > > You mean sick like this? > > > > > > > I don't know what is wrong with Jan, but I wish she would choke to > > > > > > > > > > > > > death on her anger > > > > > > > > > I see you are still eager to talk about me. > > > > > > Still waiting for you to answer. > > > > > > > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that if anyone is paid to post here, it must be her. Nobody > > > > posts are often > > > > > > > > > It that right? > > > > > > Have you counted everyones' posts? > > > > > > > > > Don't forget to answer. > > > > > > > > > and nobody does as much harm to the cause of > > > > > > > > > > > > > alternative medicine. > > > > > > > > > Be specific. > > > > > > Do show us exactly what your opinion is of how I have harm the cause of > > > alternative medicine. > > > > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > > > > You are falling behind on your list. > > > > > > > > > Here it is again. > > > > > > > > > I wonder why you post so frequently yet > > > > > > > > > > > > > so seldom discuss alternative medicine. > > > > > > > > > You don't say? > > > > > > You wouldn't wonder that about, say, Mark Probert? Richard H Jacobson? > > > Mark > > > Thorson? Or any of your buddies, would you Teddy? Now don't forget to > > > answer. > > > > > > > > > After you answer that, could you show us exactly where there were any > > > words > > > of harm, rage and wrath, and shameful behavior in this thread? > > > > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > > > > Did I mention, not to forget to answer? > > > > > > > > > I'll wait. > > > > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....51ffb840533a33 > > > > > > "Sdores" <sdo...[at]bellsouth.net> wrote in message > > > > > > > > > news:8LdUe.7917$Tn6.6936[at]bignews6.bellsouth.net... > > > > > > > > > > > > > "LadyLollipop" <LadyLolli...[at]insightbb.com> wrote in message > > > > news:uC2Ue.335367$xm3.40160[at]attbi_s21... > > > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > > > I did not know that, but that it a great idea. Do that > > > > > Johnny!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > > > > > > > > You kept calling him Ted and now since he posted about a phone call you > > > > are calling him Johnny, WHY???? (extra question marks for Jan) > > > > > > > > > > > > NO particular reason, Susan > > > > > > > > > He said the > > > > > > > > > > > > > person who called asked for Ted, amazingly like you were calling him. > > > > > > > > > He said a lot of things, his list keeps growing. He has NOT been able to > > > answer a SINGLE claim he has made, Susan!!!!!!(extra exclamation marks > > > for > > > Susan) > > > > > > > > > I didn't, for the record say that you were the caller and only said > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > stalking people was something that the FBI takes seriously, you are the > > > > one that assumed I was speaking of you. > > > > > > > > > Sure, Susan, sure. > > > > > > > > > Your name was in the subject line but that doesn't put it in my words. > > > > > > > > > Uh huh, Susan. > > > > > > > > > The out side activity and always trying to find out personal information > > > about people is what is disturbing to me. > > > > > > > > > You are pathetic, Susan. You thought nothing of *impersonation* which is > > > a > > > criminal offense, now you are in an uproar over a *reported* telephone > > > call, > > > by a liar and *insulter* who cannot answer questions. > > > > > > > > > And your slamming me with your nasty responses brings to mind, "sticks > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > stones". > > > > > > > > > Right backatcha, Susan. > > > > > > > > > UM MOM Susan, and I don't give a damn who's mother you are that is > > > > > > > > > > > > > not what my sign off means. > > > > > > > > > I know what your sign off says. > > > > > > > > > Sorry that ONCE AGAIN, you focus seems to be on me. > > > > > > > > > Very telling you prefer to overlook the below. > > > > > > > > > > > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > > > > > > news:1126185331.814375.283650[at]z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > > > > > And am I the only one to notice that she has now apparently decided > > > > that > > > > Rich Shewmaker is Aloha Rich? They both come from Hawaii so they must > > > > be > > > > the same person. > > > > No, I noticed it, too. > > > > > > > > > Let's see just *where* both of you noticed it. > > > > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer, that means *both* of you. > > > > > > > > > At first, I thought they were the same person > > > > > > > > > > > > > because of Jan's replies. > > > > > > > > > Do post these EXACT replies. > > > > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why does she think that everyone she disagrees with is the same person? > > > > > > > > > I don't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is she really that sick or is this just her way of insulting people who > > > > disagree with her? > > > > > > > > > You mean sick like this? > > > > > > > > > > I don't know what is wrong with Jan, but I wish she would choke to > > > > > > > > > > > > > death on her anger > > > > > > > > > I see you are still eager to talk about me. > > > > > > > > > Still waiting for you to answer. > > > > > > > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that if anyone is paid to post here, it must be her. Nobody > > > > posts > > > > are often > > > > > > > > > It that right? > > > > > > > > > Have you counted everyones' posts? > > > > > > > > > Don't forget to answer. > > > > > > > > > and nobody does as much harm to the cause of > > > > > > > > > > > > > alternative medicine. > > > > > > > > > Be specific. > > > > > > > > > Do show us exactly what your opinion is of how I have harm the cause of > > > alternative medicine. > > > > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > > > > You are falling behind on your list. > > > > > > > > > Here it is again. > > > > > > > > > I wonder why you post so frequently yet > > > > > > > > > > > > > so seldom discuss alternative medicine. > > > > > > > > > You don't say? > > > > > > > > > You wouldn't wonder that about, say, Mark Probert? Richard H Jacobson? > > > Mark > > > Thorson? Or any of your buddies, would you Teddy? Now don't forget to > > > answer. > > > > > > > > > After you answer that, could you show us exactly where there were any > > > words > > > of harm, rage and wrath, and shameful behavior in this thread? > > > > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > > > > Did I mention, not to forget to answer? > > > > > > > > > I'll wait. > > > > > > > > > I guarantee 99.9999999% Richard H Jacobson PROVEN cyberstalker will > > > reply > > > to > > > this post with more of his lies. see below. > > > > > > > > > Note he says many of the EXACT SAME THINGS about this poster as he says > > > about me.He was the same trouble maker then also. Somethings never > > > change. > > > This was back in 1995. OH YES, he is a PROVEN CYBERSTALKER. > > > > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....b14a4cbbb3c1a6 > > > > > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > > > > > > news:1126205095.451219.231690[at]o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > > Today, I received a call at my work. > > > > > > > > > So you say,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, > > > > > > The female caller asked for > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The > > > > female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I > > > > wasn't fooling anyone. > > > > > > > > > Who? > > > > > > > > > > I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed > > > > under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star > > > > 69 said the call could not be traced. > > > > > > > > > > > > Who? > > > > > > > > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > > > > stop NOW! > > > > > > > > > > > > I want YOU to answer you LONG list of questions that remain uanswered > > > NOW!! > > > > > > Why can't YOU do that Johnny?!?! > > > > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....8090bc4740a2d7 > > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > > > > > > news:1126215813.643661.140180[at]g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I want YOU to answer you LONG list of questions that remain uanswered > > > > > NOW!! > > > > > > > You may not demand anything of me. I do not fear bullies! > > > > > > > > > > > > I did NOT demand. I do not fear bullies, nor LIARS who make up stories, > > > nor > > > those who snip what the above was in reply to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > > > > stop NOW! > > > > > > > You should feel shame instead of anger. > > > > > > > > > > > > I felt no anger, you should take your own advice. > > > > > > > > > You should feel shame in making up LIES. > > > > > > > > > Today, I received a call at my work. The female caller asked for > > > "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The > > > female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I > > > wasn't fooling anyone. > > > > > > > > > I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed > > > under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star > > > 69 said the call could not be traced. > > > > > > > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > > > stop NOW! > > > > > > > > > Here are the characteristics of Jan Drew and her ilk! > > > > > > > > > > > > > You should stop posting unless you wish to discuss alternative > > > > medicine, not who you hate. > > > > > > > > > > > > You should stop trying to tell me what to do. > > > > > > > > > You should answer your many accusations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > And am I the only one to notice that she has now apparently decided > > > > that Rich Shewmaker is Aloha Rich? They both come from Hawaii so they > > > > must be the same person. > > > > No, I noticed it, too. > > > > > > > > > Let's see just *where* both of you noticed it. > > > > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer, that means *both* of you. > > > > > > > > > At first, I thought they were the same person > > > > > > > > > > > > > because of Jan's replies. > > > > > > > > > Do post these EXACT replies. > > > > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why does she think that everyone she disagrees with is the same person? > > > > > > > > > I don't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is she really that sick or is this just her way of insulting people who > > > > disagree with her? > > > > > > > > > You mean sick like this? > > > > > > > > > > I don't know what is wrong with Jan, but I wish she would choke to > > > > > > > > > > > > > death on her anger > > > > > > > > > I see you are still eager to talk about me. > > > > > > > > > Still waiting for you to answer. > > > > > > > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that if anyone is paid to post here, it must be her. Nobody > > > > posts are often > > > > > > > > > It that right? > > > > > > > > > Have you counted everyones' posts? > > > > > > > > > Don't forget to answer. > > > > > > > > > and nobody does as much harm to the cause of > > > > > > > > > > > > > alternative medicine. > > > > > > > > > Be specific. > > > > > > > > > Do show us exactly what your opinion is of how I have harm the cause of > > > alternative medicine. > > > > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > > > > You are falling behind on your list. > > > > > > > > > Here it is again. > > > > > > > > > I wonder why you post so frequently yet > > > > > > > > > > > > > so seldom discuss alternative medicine. > > > > > > > > > You don't say? > > > > > > > > > You wouldn't wonder that about, say, Mark Probert? Richard H Jacobson? > > > Mark > > > Thorson? Or any of your buddies, would you Teddy? Now don't forget to > > > answer. > > > > > > > > > After you answer that, could you show us exactly where there were any > > > words > > > of harm, rage and wrath, and shameful behavior in this thread? > > > > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > > > > Did I mention, not to forget to answer? > > > > > > > > > I'll wait. > > > > > > > > > > > > > You should not attempt to contact me. > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do not start threads with my name in the title! > > > > > > > > > > > > I will do that EXACTLY that, until you answer your many FALSE > > > accusations > > > and STOP TELLING LIES! > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do as I say, not as You do! > > > > > > > > > > > > SEE ABOVE! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan Drew, STOP CYBER-STALKING ME! > > > > > > Jan Drew, STOP CYBER-STALKING! > > > > Jan, Stop Lying about me being Ted! > |
|
#49
09-01-2006, 08:48 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications Jan Drew wrote: <snip> - quote - >
Jan, Stop Lying about me being Ted!> > Jan Drew, STOP CYBER-STALKING ME! > > > Jan Drew, STOP CYBER-STALKING! > |
|
#48
09-01-2006, 08:35 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications "Sdores" <sdores[at]bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:LNUJg.37477$e9.4824[at]bignews4.bellsouth.net... - quote - > I have nothing to do with this
You had plenty to do with it. YOU replied to Johnny's post--titled:http://groups.google.com/group/misc....msg/516ffa41fe... Profile of Jan Drew, Cyberstalker Today, I received a call at my work. The female caller asked for "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I wasn't fooling anyone. I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star 69 said the call could not be traced. Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to stop NOW! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ You believed his story and made 8 posts in that thread. and if it continues I will file a complaint. - quote - > Leave me out of this garbage please. UM MOM Susan
File away. YOU and YOU alone are responsible for your *garbage*!Sadly, your *garbage*is below. And HIS. http://groups.google.com/group/misc....283de70?hl=en& Sep 9 2005 2:42 pm I want to thank Susan for pointing out something I noticed, but did not mention. Before the female caller spoke with me, Jan called me "Ted". After the female caller spoke with me, Jan calls me "Johnny". I don't believe that this is a coincidence! Jan Drew, STOP CYBER-STALKING ME! Jan Drew, STOP CYBER-STALKING! - quote - > "Jan Drew" <jdrew1374[at]sbcglobal.net> wrote in message > news:OAMJg.5114$yO7.3703[at]newssvr14.news.prodigy.com... > > > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2005[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:1157050427.786067.239810[at]e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > Jan Drew wrote: > > > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2005[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > news:1157024048.669190.260130[at]74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > > Jan Drew wrote: > > > > > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2005[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > > > news:1156970984.428588.138730[at]h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > > > > > Peter Bowditch wrote: > > > > > > > > > "PeterB" <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Peter Bowditch wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Mark Probert <markprobert[at]lumbercartel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mark Thorson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The recent court decision supports using risk-benefit > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis to remove dangerous supplements from the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > market: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_4239960 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are a number of problems with FDA's position on > > > > > > > > > > > > > ephedra. > > > > > > > > > > > > > First, > > > > > > > > > > > > > the majority of supplements containing ephedrine > > > > > > > > > > > > > alkaloids are > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > traditional ephedra root, which is why the ban does not > > > > > > > > > > > > > apply > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > traditional chinese medicine formulations (TCM.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately, > > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > variety of synthetically mfctrd ephedrine products, with > > > > > > > > > > > > > far > > > > > > > > > > > > > greater > > > > > > > > > > > > > pharmacology, including over-the-counter asthma meds and > > > > > > > > > > > > > nasal > > > > > > > > > > > > > sprays, > > > > > > > > > > > > > are also permitted to remain on drug store shelves. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > nod > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > TCM is > > > > > > > > > > > > > a shameless ruse to conceal FDA's efforts to prevent > > > > > > > > > > > > > dietary > > > > > > > > > > > > > supplement > > > > > > > > > > > > > makers from competing against the drug makers in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > weight > > > > > > > > > > > > > loss > > > > > > > > > > > > > market. Closing with a quote from the same article: > > > > > > > > > > > > > "There > > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > in FDA who want to overregulate everything and if they > > > > > > > > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > case to > > > > > > > > > > > > > do that, we'll have to slap the FDA down." - Orrin Hatch > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Orrin Hatch? He's the senator from Utah where the > > > > > > > > > > > > supplements > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > manufactured. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Time Magazine October 1, 1993: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not only does it have a sizable war chest (the industry > > > > > > > > > > > > grossed > > > > > > > > > > > > $4 > > > > > > > > > > > > billion last year) and loyal customers, it also has an > > > > > > > > > > > > influential > > > > > > > > > > > > friend in Washington: Senator Orrin Hatch. His home state > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > Utah > > > > > > > > > > > > has an > > > > > > > > > > > > important stake in the industry, and he himself owns 1% of > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > company > > > > > > > > > > > > that distributes vitamin C and iron supplements--an > > > > > > > > > > > > apparent > > > > > > > > > > > > conflict of > > > > > > > > > > > > interest. (Hatch denies that anything is improper, saying > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > company deals mainly in real estate.) He has latched onto > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > vitamin > > > > > > > > > > > > issue, speaking out against Kessler at every turn. In April > > > > > > > > > > > > he > > > > > > > > > > > > introduced legislation that would permanently exempt herbs, > > > > > > > > > > > > vitamins, > > > > > > > > > > > > minerals and amino acids from most FDA controls. The bill > > > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > > > > > than > > > > > > > > > > > > 50 Senate co-signers, and nearly 200 Representatives have > > > > > > > > > > > > backed > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > companion measure in the House. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Isn't Hatch the one whose son is a lobbyist for the > > > > > > > > > > > alternative > > > > > > > > > > > medicine industry who gets paid $2 million a year to lobby > > > > > > > > > > > his > > > > > > > > > > > father? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nice crime if you can get it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it's alright when your sponsors play that game, but not > > > > > > > > > > when the > > > > > > > > > > same tactics are used by your competitors? Your own court > > > > > > > > > > room > > > > > > > > > > antics > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of certain interests are every bit as sleazy, if not > > > > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > > > so. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And which court room antics would they be? Also, please specify > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > "certain interests". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The same court room antics that resulted in the judge ruling > > > > > > > > against > > > > > > > > you, Bowditch. You were found to be engaging in a distortion of > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > facts and required to post a retraction. As for who you > > > > > > > > represent, > > > > > > > > that should be obvious. But feel free to come clean and tell us > > > > > > > > all > > > > > > > > about it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have never been in any court for any reason associated in any > > > > > > > > > way > > > > > > > > > with alternative medicine. Or real medicine, for that matter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Real" medicine is traditional herbal medicine, which has existed > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > thousands of years. "Alternative" medicine is synthetic > > > > > > > > medicine, > > > > > > > > which has existed for a bit more than 100 years. See the > > > > > > > > following > > > > > > > > etymology on "pharmaceutical" and name your poison. > > > > > > > > Pharmaceutical: > > > > > > > > 1648 (pharmaceutic in the same sense is from 1541), from L. > > > > > > > > pharmaceuticus "of drugs," from Gk. pharmakeutikos, from > > > > > > > > pharmakeus > > > > > > > > "preparer of drugs, poisoner," from pharmakon "medicine, poison." > > > > > > > > Pharmacology is attested from 1721, formed in Mod.L. (1683) with > > > > > > > > Gk. > > > > > > > > -logia "dealing with the topic of." > > > > > > > > from http://www.etymonline.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If "Real medicine" is herbal medicine and "Alternative" medicine > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > synthetic medicine, why are you posting to this group? By your > > > > > > > own > > > > > > > arguments, you should just be posting in support of "Alternative > > > > > > > medicine", which you now claim to be synthetic medicine > > > > > > > (Pharmaceuticals, Surgery, etc). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My guess is that it has something to do with you being a paid > > > > > > > agent of > > > > > > > some commercial interest. > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are noted for having WRONG > > > > > > guesses................................. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No > > > > > > > > YES! > > > > > > > > Today, I received a call at my work. The female caller asked for > > > > "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The > > > > female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I > > > > wasn't fooling anyone. > > > > > > > > I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed > > > > under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star > > > > 69 said the call could not be traced. > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > > > > stop NOW! > > > > > > > > > > > > No, I guess she just searched every online phone directory for my last > > > > name and Acupuncture. Someone emailed me and said that she did > > > > something like this to another acupuncturist. > > > > > > > > I've read that she has called family members of posters > > > > > > > > [ ] > > > > > > > > > > > Before that call, Jan called me Ted. After I received that call, Jan > > > began to call me Johnny! > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....6ffa41fe3c0f05 > > > > Today, I received a call at my work. The female caller asked for > > "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The > > female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I > > wasn't fooling anyone. > > > > I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed > > under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star > > 69 said the call could not be traced. > > > > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > > stop NOW! > > > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....1959d7f43f5ffd > > > > Susan, I'm tempted to report it, but I doubt anything can be done. She > > didn't make any threats, just accused me of being someone else > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....ee251a7360b2f1 > > > > You kept calling him Ted and now since he posted about a phone call you > > are > > calling him Johnny, WHY???? (extra question marks for Jan) He said the > > person who called asked for Ted, amazingly like you were calling him. I > > didn't, for the record say that you were the caller and only said that > > stalking people was something that the FBI takes seriously, you are the > > one > > that assumed I was speaking of you. Your name was in the subject line > > but > > that doesn't put it in my words. The out side activity and always trying > > to > > find out personal information about people is what is disturbing to me. > > And > > your slamming me with your nasty responses brings to mind, "sticks and > > stones". UM MOM Susan, and I don't give a damn who's mother you are that > > is > > not what my sign off means. > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....10ad21c1501450 > > > > Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > news:1126208879.051298.33560[at]g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > You need to go to the FBI site, or call, and give them this information > > > and > > > also the email you received to stop who ever is doing this. It's > > > frightening to me. UM MOM Susan > > > > > ---------- > > > Susan, I'm tempted to report it, but I doubt anything can be done. She > > > didn't make any threats, just accused me of being someone else. I've > > > set my phone for anonymous caller rejection. If this person wants to > > > call back, their number can be found with Star 69. > > > > > > > The email was from someone telling me about Jan's history. > > > > > > > > Three guesses as to who that might be, the first two don't count. > > > > They do not > > > > > > > > > need to be involved. I can just use the links to those incriminating > > > posts if I need to report her. > > > > > > LOL!!!! > > > > Sure you can, see below. > > > > > > > > > I was told that Jan likes to bully people into silence. > > > Johnny Huang will NOT be silenced! > > > > > > > > OH? > > > > > > Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > > > news:1126185331.814375.283650[at]z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > And am I the only one to notice that she has now apparently decided > > > that Rich Shewmaker is Aloha Rich? They both come from Hawaii so they > > > must be the same person. > > > No, I noticed it, too. > > > > > > Let's see just *where* both of you noticed it. > > > > Now don't forget to answer, that means *both* of you. > > > > > > At first, I thought they were the same person > > > > > > > > > because of Jan's replies. > > > > > > Do post these EXACT replies. > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > > > > > Why does she think that everyone she disagrees with is the same person? > > > > > > I don't. > > > > > > > Is she really that sick or is this just her way of insulting people who > > > disagree with her? > > > > > > You mean sick like this? > > > > > I don't know what is wrong with Jan, but I wish she would choke to > > > > > > > > > death on her anger > > > > > > I see you are still eager to talk about me. > > > > Still waiting for you to answer. > > > > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > > > > > I think that if anyone is paid to post here, it must be her. Nobody > > > posts are often > > > > > > It that right? > > > > Have you counted everyones' posts? > > > > > > Don't forget to answer. > > > > > > and nobody does as much harm to the cause of > > > > > > > > > alternative medicine. > > > > > > Be specific. > > > > Do show us exactly what your opinion is of how I have harm the cause of > > alternative medicine. > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > You are falling behind on your list. > > > > > > Here it is again. > > > > > > I wonder why you post so frequently yet > > > > > > > > > so seldom discuss alternative medicine. > > > > > > You don't say? > > > > You wouldn't wonder that about, say, Mark Probert? Richard H Jacobson? > > Mark > > Thorson? Or any of your buddies, would you Teddy? Now don't forget to > > answer. > > > > > > After you answer that, could you show us exactly where there were any > > words > > of harm, rage and wrath, and shameful behavior in this thread? > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > Did I mention, not to forget to answer? > > > > > > I'll wait. > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....51ffb840533a33 > > > > "Sdores" <sdo...[at]bellsouth.net> wrote in message > > > > > > news:8LdUe.7917$Tn6.6936[at]bignews6.bellsouth.net... > > > > > > > > > "LadyLollipop" <LadyLolli...[at]insightbb.com> wrote in message > > > news:uC2Ue.335367$xm3.40160[at]attbi_s21... > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > I did not know that, but that it a great idea. Do that > > > > Johnny!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > > > > > You kept calling him Ted and now since he posted about a phone call you > > > are calling him Johnny, WHY???? (extra question marks for Jan) > > > > > > > > NO particular reason, Susan > > > > > > He said the > > > > > > > > > person who called asked for Ted, amazingly like you were calling him. > > > > > > He said a lot of things, his list keeps growing. He has NOT been able to > > answer a SINGLE claim he has made, Susan!!!!!!(extra exclamation marks > > for > > Susan) > > > > > > I didn't, for the record say that you were the caller and only said that > > > > > > > > > stalking people was something that the FBI takes seriously, you are the > > > one that assumed I was speaking of you. > > > > > > Sure, Susan, sure. > > > > > > Your name was in the subject line but that doesn't put it in my words. > > > > > > Uh huh, Susan. > > > > > > The out side activity and always trying to find out personal information > > about people is what is disturbing to me. > > > > > > You are pathetic, Susan. You thought nothing of *impersonation* which is > > a > > criminal offense, now you are in an uproar over a *reported* telephone > > call, > > by a liar and *insulter* who cannot answer questions. > > > > > > And your slamming me with your nasty responses brings to mind, "sticks > > and > > > > > > > > > stones". > > > > > > Right backatcha, Susan. > > > > > > UM MOM Susan, and I don't give a damn who's mother you are that is > > > > > > > > > not what my sign off means. > > > > > > I know what your sign off says. > > > > > > Sorry that ONCE AGAIN, you focus seems to be on me. > > > > > > Very telling you prefer to overlook the below. > > > > > > > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > > > news:1126185331.814375.283650[at]z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > And am I the only one to notice that she has now apparently decided that > > > Rich Shewmaker is Aloha Rich? They both come from Hawaii so they must be > > > the same person. > > > No, I noticed it, too. > > > > > > Let's see just *where* both of you noticed it. > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer, that means *both* of you. > > > > > > At first, I thought they were the same person > > > > > > > > > because of Jan's replies. > > > > > > Do post these EXACT replies. > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > > > > > Why does she think that everyone she disagrees with is the same person? > > > > > > I don't. > > > > > > > > > Is she really that sick or is this just her way of insulting people who > > > disagree with her? > > > > > > You mean sick like this? > > > > > > > I don't know what is wrong with Jan, but I wish she would choke to > > > > > > > > > death on her anger > > > > > > I see you are still eager to talk about me. > > > > > > Still waiting for you to answer. > > > > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > > > > > I think that if anyone is paid to post here, it must be her. Nobody > > > posts > > > are often > > > > > > It that right? > > > > > > Have you counted everyones' posts? > > > > > > Don't forget to answer. > > > > > > and nobody does as much harm to the cause of > > > > > > > > > alternative medicine. > > > > > > Be specific. > > > > > > Do show us exactly what your opinion is of how I have harm the cause of > > alternative medicine. > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > You are falling behind on your list. > > > > > > Here it is again. > > > > > > I wonder why you post so frequently yet > > > > > > > > > so seldom discuss alternative medicine. > > > > > > You don't say? > > > > > > You wouldn't wonder that about, say, Mark Probert? Richard H Jacobson? > > Mark > > Thorson? Or any of your buddies, would you Teddy? Now don't forget to > > answer. > > > > > > After you answer that, could you show us exactly where there were any > > words > > of harm, rage and wrath, and shameful behavior in this thread? > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > Did I mention, not to forget to answer? > > > > > > I'll wait. > > > > > > I guarantee 99.9999999% Richard H Jacobson PROVEN cyberstalker will reply > > to > > this post with more of his lies. see below. > > > > > > Note he says many of the EXACT SAME THINGS about this poster as he says > > about me.He was the same trouble maker then also. Somethings never > > change. > > This was back in 1995. OH YES, he is a PROVEN CYBERSTALKER. > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....b14a4cbbb3c1a6 > > > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > > > news:1126205095.451219.231690[at]o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > Today, I received a call at my work. > > > > > > So you say,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, > > > > The female caller asked for > > > > > > > > > "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The > > > female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I > > > wasn't fooling anyone. > > > > > > Who? > > > > > > > I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed > > > under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star > > > 69 said the call could not be traced. > > > > > > > > Who? > > > > > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > > > stop NOW! > > > > > > > > I want YOU to answer you LONG list of questions that remain uanswered > > NOW!! > > > > Why can't YOU do that Johnny?!?! > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....8090bc4740a2d7 > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > > > news:1126215813.643661.140180[at]g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > > I want YOU to answer you LONG list of questions that remain uanswered > > > > NOW!! > > > > > You may not demand anything of me. I do not fear bullies! > > > > > > > > I did NOT demand. I do not fear bullies, nor LIARS who make up stories, > > nor > > those who snip what the above was in reply to. > > > > > > > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > > > stop NOW! > > > > > You should feel shame instead of anger. > > > > > > > > I felt no anger, you should take your own advice. > > > > > > You should feel shame in making up LIES. > > > > > > Today, I received a call at my work. The female caller asked for > > "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The > > female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I > > wasn't fooling anyone. > > > > > > I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed > > under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star > > 69 said the call could not be traced. > > > > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > > stop NOW! > > > > > > Here are the characteristics of Jan Drew and her ilk! > > > > > > > > > You should stop posting unless you wish to discuss alternative > > > medicine, not who you hate. > > > > > > > > You should stop trying to tell me what to do. > > > > > > You should answer your many accusations. > > > > > > > > > And am I the only one to notice that she has now apparently decided > > > that Rich Shewmaker is Aloha Rich? They both come from Hawaii so they > > > must be the same person. > > > No, I noticed it, too. > > > > > > Let's see just *where* both of you noticed it. > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer, that means *both* of you. > > > > > > At first, I thought they were the same person > > > > > > > > > because of Jan's replies. > > > > > > Do post these EXACT replies. > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > > > > > Why does she think that everyone she disagrees with is the same person? > > > > > > I don't. > > > > > > > > > Is she really that sick or is this just her way of insulting people who > > > disagree with her? > > > > > > You mean sick like this? > > > > > > > I don't know what is wrong with Jan, but I wish she would choke to > > > > > > > > > death on her anger > > > > > > I see you are still eager to talk about me. > > > > > > Still waiting for you to answer. > > > > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > > > > > I think that if anyone is paid to post here, it must be her. Nobody > > > posts are often > > > > > > It that right? > > > > > > Have you counted everyones' posts? > > > > > > Don't forget to answer. > > > > > > and nobody does as much harm to the cause of > > > > > > > > > alternative medicine. > > > > > > Be specific. > > > > > > Do show us exactly what your opinion is of how I have harm the cause of > > alternative medicine. > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > You are falling behind on your list. > > > > > > Here it is again. > > > > > > I wonder why you post so frequently yet > > > > > > > > > so seldom discuss alternative medicine. > > > > > > You don't say? > > > > > > You wouldn't wonder that about, say, Mark Probert? Richard H Jacobson? > > Mark > > Thorson? Or any of your buddies, would you Teddy? Now don't forget to > > answer. > > > > > > After you answer that, could you show us exactly where there were any > > words > > of harm, rage and wrath, and shameful behavior in this thread? > > > > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > > > > Did I mention, not to forget to answer? > > > > > > I'll wait. > > > > > > > > > You should not attempt to contact me. > > > > > > > > I did not. > > > > > > > > > Do not start threads with my name in the title! > > > > > > > > I will do that EXACTLY that, until you answer your many FALSE accusations > > and STOP TELLING LIES! > > > > > > > > > Do as I say, not as You do! > > > > > > > > SEE ABOVE! > > > > > > |
|
#47
09-01-2006, 01:28 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications Happy Dog wrote: - quote - > "PeterB" <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote in message news
Scary thought for the day: Yes. There are those who do take him seriously.> > > > As a lackey for Barrett's quackwatch (David is a member), his arguments > > > > are also found in the "Warning" post. It's up to readers to decide why > > > > this orchestrated effort is under way in the newsgroups. > > > That's a flat-out lie, PeterB. I am not a member of quackwatch and > > > never have been. But it's what I would expect of you. Truth isn't in > > > you. > > The ratbags outfit to which you, Barrett, Bowditch, Rosalind, Probert, > > Thorson, and others belong is indistinguishable from Barrett's > > Quackwatch. Apparently, a sizeable ante is required of corporate > > interests to join the latter, so possibly individuals are not admitted, > > Truly, madly, deeply fucking nuts. "Readers" have decided that you're a > certified member of the Usenet Crank Society. The lack of support for your > views (does ANYBODY here take PeterBs "WARNING" seriously?) does not deter - quote - > you nor the happily paranoid. You are boringly predictable. And, > predictably boring. > > moo > > > |
|
#46
09-01-2006, 11:30 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications I have nothing to do with this and if it continues I will file a complaint. Leave me out of this garbage please. UM MOM Susan "Jan Drew" <jdrew1374[at]sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:OAMJg.5114$yO7.3703[at]newssvr14.news.prodigy.com... - quote - > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2005[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:1157050427.786067.239810[at]e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com... > > > > Jan Drew wrote: > > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2005[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > news:1157024048.669190.260130[at]74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > Jan Drew wrote: > > > > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2005[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > > news:1156970984.428588.138730[at]h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > > > > Peter Bowditch wrote: > > > > > > > > "PeterB" <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Peter Bowditch wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Mark Probert <markprobert[at]lumbercartel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Mark Thorson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > The recent court decision supports using risk-benefit > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis to remove dangerous supplements from the > > > > > > > > > > > > > market: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_4239960 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are a number of problems with FDA's position on > > > > > > > > > > > > ephedra. > > > > > > > > > > > > First, > > > > > > > > > > > > the majority of supplements containing ephedrine alkaloids > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > traditional ephedra root, which is why the ban does not > > > > > > > > > > > > apply > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > traditional chinese medicine formulations (TCM.) > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately, > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > variety of synthetically mfctrd ephedrine products, with > > > > > > > > > > > > far > > > > > > > > > > > > greater > > > > > > > > > > > > pharmacology, including over-the-counter asthma meds and > > > > > > > > > > > > nasal > > > > > > > > > > > > sprays, > > > > > > > > > > > > are also permitted to remain on drug store shelves. The > > > > > > > > > > > > nod > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > TCM is > > > > > > > > > > > > a shameless ruse to conceal FDA's efforts to prevent > > > > > > > > > > > > dietary > > > > > > > > > > > > supplement > > > > > > > > > > > > makers from competing against the drug makers in the > > > > > > > > > > > > weight > > > > > > > > > > > > loss > > > > > > > > > > > > market. Closing with a quote from the same article: > > > > > > > > > > > > "There > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > in FDA who want to overregulate everything and if they use > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > case to > > > > > > > > > > > > do that, we'll have to slap the FDA down." - Orrin Hatch > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Orrin Hatch? He's the senator from Utah where the > > > > > > > > > > > supplements > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > manufactured. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Time Magazine October 1, 1993: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not only does it have a sizable war chest (the industry > > > > > > > > > > > grossed > > > > > > > > > > > $4 > > > > > > > > > > > billion last year) and loyal customers, it also has an > > > > > > > > > > > influential > > > > > > > > > > > friend in Washington: Senator Orrin Hatch. His home state of > > > > > > > > > > > Utah > > > > > > > > > > > has an > > > > > > > > > > > important stake in the industry, and he himself owns 1% of a > > > > > > > > > > > company > > > > > > > > > > > that distributes vitamin C and iron supplements--an apparent > > > > > > > > > > > conflict of > > > > > > > > > > > interest. (Hatch denies that anything is improper, saying > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > company deals mainly in real estate.) He has latched onto > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > vitamin > > > > > > > > > > > issue, speaking out against Kessler at every turn. In April > > > > > > > > > > > he > > > > > > > > > > > introduced legislation that would permanently exempt herbs, > > > > > > > > > > > vitamins, > > > > > > > > > > > minerals and amino acids from most FDA controls. The bill > > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > > > > than > > > > > > > > > > > 50 Senate co-signers, and nearly 200 Representatives have > > > > > > > > > > > backed > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > companion measure in the House. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Isn't Hatch the one whose son is a lobbyist for the > > > > > > > > > > alternative > > > > > > > > > > medicine industry who gets paid $2 million a year to lobby > > > > > > > > > > his > > > > > > > > > > father? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nice crime if you can get it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it's alright when your sponsors play that game, but not when > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > same tactics are used by your competitors? Your own court room > > > > > > > > > antics > > > > > > > > > on behalf of certain interests are every bit as sleazy, if not > > > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > > so. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And which court room antics would they be? Also, please specify > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > "certain interests". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The same court room antics that resulted in the judge ruling > > > > > > > against > > > > > > > you, Bowditch. You were found to be engaging in a distortion of > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > facts and required to post a retraction. As for who you > > > > > > > represent, > > > > > > > that should be obvious. But feel free to come clean and tell us > > > > > > > all > > > > > > > about it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have never been in any court for any reason associated in any > > > > > > > > way > > > > > > > > with alternative medicine. Or real medicine, for that matter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Real" medicine is traditional herbal medicine, which has existed > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > thousands of years. "Alternative" medicine is synthetic medicine, > > > > > > > which has existed for a bit more than 100 years. See the > > > > > > > following > > > > > > > etymology on "pharmaceutical" and name your poison. > > > > > > > Pharmaceutical: > > > > > > > 1648 (pharmaceutic in the same sense is from 1541), from L. > > > > > > > pharmaceuticus "of drugs," from Gk. pharmakeutikos, from > > > > > > > pharmakeus > > > > > > > "preparer of drugs, poisoner," from pharmakon "medicine, poison." > > > > > > > Pharmacology is attested from 1721, formed in Mod.L. (1683) with > > > > > > > Gk. > > > > > > > -logia "dealing with the topic of." > > > > > > > from http://www.etymonline.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If "Real medicine" is herbal medicine and "Alternative" medicine is > > > > > > synthetic medicine, why are you posting to this group? By your own > > > > > > arguments, you should just be posting in support of "Alternative > > > > > > medicine", which you now claim to be synthetic medicine > > > > > > (Pharmaceuticals, Surgery, etc). > > > > > > > > > > > > My guess is that it has something to do with you being a paid agent > > > > > > of > > > > > > some commercial interest. > > > > > > > > > > > You are noted for having WRONG > > > > > guesses................................. > > > > > > > > > > > > No > > > > > > YES! > > > > > > Today, I received a call at my work. The female caller asked for > > > "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The > > > female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I > > > wasn't fooling anyone. > > > > > > I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed > > > under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star > > > 69 said the call could not be traced. > > > > > > > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > > > stop NOW! > > > > > > > > > No, I guess she just searched every online phone directory for my last > > > name and Acupuncture. Someone emailed me and said that she did > > > something like this to another acupuncturist. > > > > > > I've read that she has called family members of posters > > > > > > [ ] > > > > > > > > Before that call, Jan called me Ted. After I received that call, Jan > > began to call me Johnny! > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....6ffa41fe3c0f05 > > Today, I received a call at my work. The female caller asked for > "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The > female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I > wasn't fooling anyone. > > I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed > under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star > 69 said the call could not be traced. > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > stop NOW! > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....1959d7f43f5ffd > > Susan, I'm tempted to report it, but I doubt anything can be done. She > didn't make any threats, just accused me of being someone else > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....ee251a7360b2f1 > > You kept calling him Ted and now since he posted about a phone call you > are > calling him Johnny, WHY???? (extra question marks for Jan) He said the > person who called asked for Ted, amazingly like you were calling him. I > didn't, for the record say that you were the caller and only said that > stalking people was something that the FBI takes seriously, you are the > one > that assumed I was speaking of you. Your name was in the subject line but > that doesn't put it in my words. The out side activity and always trying > to > find out personal information about people is what is disturbing to me. > And > your slamming me with your nasty responses brings to mind, "sticks and > stones". UM MOM Susan, and I don't give a damn who's mother you are that > is > not what my sign off means. > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....10ad21c1501450 > > Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:1126208879.051298.33560[at]g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > > > You need to go to the FBI site, or call, and give them this information > > and > > also the email you received to stop who ever is doing this. It's > > frightening to me. UM MOM Susan > > > ---------- > > Susan, I'm tempted to report it, but I doubt anything can be done. She > > didn't make any threats, just accused me of being someone else. I've > > set my phone for anonymous caller rejection. If this person wants to > > call back, their number can be found with Star 69. > > > > The email was from someone telling me about Jan's history. > > > > Three guesses as to who that might be, the first two don't count. > > They do not > > > > > need to be involved. I can just use the links to those incriminating > > posts if I need to report her. > > > LOL!!!! > > Sure you can, see below. > > > > > I was told that Jan likes to bully people into silence. > > Johnny Huang will NOT be silenced! > > > > OH? > > > Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > news:1126185331.814375.283650[at]z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > > > > And am I the only one to notice that she has now apparently decided > > that Rich Shewmaker is Aloha Rich? They both come from Hawaii so they > > must be the same person. > > No, I noticed it, too. > > > Let's see just *where* both of you noticed it. > > Now don't forget to answer, that means *both* of you. > > > At first, I thought they were the same person > > > > > because of Jan's replies. > > > Do post these EXACT replies. > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > Why does she think that everyone she disagrees with is the same person? > > > I don't. > > > > Is she really that sick or is this just her way of insulting people who > > disagree with her? > > > You mean sick like this? > > > I don't know what is wrong with Jan, but I wish she would choke to > > > > > death on her anger > > > I see you are still eager to talk about me. > > Still waiting for you to answer. > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > I think that if anyone is paid to post here, it must be her. Nobody > > posts are often > > > It that right? > > Have you counted everyones' posts? > > > Don't forget to answer. > > > and nobody does as much harm to the cause of > > > > > alternative medicine. > > > Be specific. > > Do show us exactly what your opinion is of how I have harm the cause of > alternative medicine. > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > You are falling behind on your list. > > > Here it is again. > > > I wonder why you post so frequently yet > > > > > so seldom discuss alternative medicine. > > > You don't say? > > You wouldn't wonder that about, say, Mark Probert? Richard H Jacobson? > Mark > Thorson? Or any of your buddies, would you Teddy? Now don't forget to > answer. > > > After you answer that, could you show us exactly where there were any > words > of harm, rage and wrath, and shameful behavior in this thread? > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > Did I mention, not to forget to answer? > > > I'll wait. > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....51ffb840533a33 > > "Sdores" <sdo...[at]bellsouth.net> wrote in message > > > news:8LdUe.7917$Tn6.6936[at]bignews6.bellsouth.net... > > > > > "LadyLollipop" <LadyLolli...[at]insightbb.com> wrote in message > > news:uC2Ue.335367$xm3.40160[at]attbi_s21... > > > > <snip> > > > > > I did not know that, but that it a great idea. Do that > > > Johnny!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > > You kept calling him Ted and now since he posted about a phone call you > > are calling him Johnny, WHY???? (extra question marks for Jan) > > > > NO particular reason, Susan > > > He said the > > > > > person who called asked for Ted, amazingly like you were calling him. > > > He said a lot of things, his list keeps growing. He has NOT been able to > answer a SINGLE claim he has made, Susan!!!!!!(extra exclamation marks for > Susan) > > > I didn't, for the record say that you were the caller and only said that > > > > > stalking people was something that the FBI takes seriously, you are the > > one that assumed I was speaking of you. > > > Sure, Susan, sure. > > > Your name was in the subject line but that doesn't put it in my words. > > > Uh huh, Susan. > > > The out side activity and always trying to find out personal information > about people is what is disturbing to me. > > > You are pathetic, Susan. You thought nothing of *impersonation* which is a > criminal offense, now you are in an uproar over a *reported* telephone > call, > by a liar and *insulter* who cannot answer questions. > > > And your slamming me with your nasty responses brings to mind, "sticks > and > > > > > stones". > > > Right backatcha, Susan. > > > UM MOM Susan, and I don't give a damn who's mother you are that is > > > > > not what my sign off means. > > > I know what your sign off says. > > > Sorry that ONCE AGAIN, you focus seems to be on me. > > > Very telling you prefer to overlook the below. > > > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > news:1126185331.814375.283650[at]z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > > > > > And am I the only one to notice that she has now apparently decided that > > Rich Shewmaker is Aloha Rich? They both come from Hawaii so they must be > > the same person. > > No, I noticed it, too. > > > Let's see just *where* both of you noticed it. > > > Now don't forget to answer, that means *both* of you. > > > At first, I thought they were the same person > > > > > because of Jan's replies. > > > Do post these EXACT replies. > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > Why does she think that everyone she disagrees with is the same person? > > > I don't. > > > > > Is she really that sick or is this just her way of insulting people who > > disagree with her? > > > You mean sick like this? > > > > I don't know what is wrong with Jan, but I wish she would choke to > > > > > death on her anger > > > I see you are still eager to talk about me. > > > Still waiting for you to answer. > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > I think that if anyone is paid to post here, it must be her. Nobody > > posts > > are often > > > It that right? > > > Have you counted everyones' posts? > > > Don't forget to answer. > > > and nobody does as much harm to the cause of > > > > > alternative medicine. > > > Be specific. > > > Do show us exactly what your opinion is of how I have harm the cause of > alternative medicine. > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > You are falling behind on your list. > > > Here it is again. > > > I wonder why you post so frequently yet > > > > > so seldom discuss alternative medicine. > > > You don't say? > > > You wouldn't wonder that about, say, Mark Probert? Richard H Jacobson? > Mark > Thorson? Or any of your buddies, would you Teddy? Now don't forget to > answer. > > > After you answer that, could you show us exactly where there were any > words > of harm, rage and wrath, and shameful behavior in this thread? > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > Did I mention, not to forget to answer? > > > I'll wait. > > > I guarantee 99.9999999% Richard H Jacobson PROVEN cyberstalker will reply > to > this post with more of his lies. see below. > > > Note he says many of the EXACT SAME THINGS about this poster as he says > about me.He was the same trouble maker then also. Somethings never change. > This was back in 1995. OH YES, he is a PROVEN CYBERSTALKER. > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....b14a4cbbb3c1a6 > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > news:1126205095.451219.231690[at]o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... > > > > Today, I received a call at my work. > > > So you say,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, > > The female caller asked for > > > > > "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The > > female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I > > wasn't fooling anyone. > > > Who? > > > > I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed > > under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star > > 69 said the call could not be traced. > > > > Who? > > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > > stop NOW! > > > > I want YOU to answer you LONG list of questions that remain uanswered > NOW!! > > Why can't YOU do that Johnny?!?! > > > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....8090bc4740a2d7 > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > news:1126215813.643661.140180[at]g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > I want YOU to answer you LONG list of questions that remain uanswered > > > NOW!! > > > You may not demand anything of me. I do not fear bullies! > > > > I did NOT demand. I do not fear bullies, nor LIARS who make up stories, > nor > those who snip what the above was in reply to. > > > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > > stop NOW! > > > You should feel shame instead of anger. > > > > I felt no anger, you should take your own advice. > > > You should feel shame in making up LIES. > > > Today, I received a call at my work. The female caller asked for > "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The > female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I > wasn't fooling anyone. > > > I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed > under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star > 69 said the call could not be traced. > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > stop NOW! > > > Here are the characteristics of Jan Drew and her ilk! > > > > > You should stop posting unless you wish to discuss alternative > > medicine, not who you hate. > > > > You should stop trying to tell me what to do. > > > You should answer your many accusations. > > > > > And am I the only one to notice that she has now apparently decided > > that Rich Shewmaker is Aloha Rich? They both come from Hawaii so they > > must be the same person. > > No, I noticed it, too. > > > Let's see just *where* both of you noticed it. > > > Now don't forget to answer, that means *both* of you. > > > At first, I thought they were the same person > > > > > because of Jan's replies. > > > Do post these EXACT replies. > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > Why does she think that everyone she disagrees with is the same person? > > > I don't. > > > > > Is she really that sick or is this just her way of insulting people who > > disagree with her? > > > You mean sick like this? > > > > I don't know what is wrong with Jan, but I wish she would choke to > > > > > death on her anger > > > I see you are still eager to talk about me. > > > Still waiting for you to answer. > > > You list keeps growing. > > > > > I think that if anyone is paid to post here, it must be her. Nobody > > posts are often > > > It that right? > > > Have you counted everyones' posts? > > > Don't forget to answer. > > > and nobody does as much harm to the cause of > > > > > alternative medicine. > > > Be specific. > > > Do show us exactly what your opinion is of how I have harm the cause of > alternative medicine. > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > You are falling behind on your list. > > > Here it is again. > > > I wonder why you post so frequently yet > > > > > so seldom discuss alternative medicine. > > > You don't say? > > > You wouldn't wonder that about, say, Mark Probert? Richard H Jacobson? > Mark > Thorson? Or any of your buddies, would you Teddy? Now don't forget to > answer. > > > After you answer that, could you show us exactly where there were any > words > of harm, rage and wrath, and shameful behavior in this thread? > > > Now don't forget to answer. > > > Did I mention, not to forget to answer? > > > I'll wait. > > > > > You should not attempt to contact me. > > > > I did not. > > > > > Do not start threads with my name in the title! > > > > I will do that EXACTLY that, until you answer your many FALSE accusations > and STOP TELLING LIES! > > > > > Do as I say, not as You do! > > > > SEE ABOVE! > > |
|
#45
09-01-2006, 07:29 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications "PeterB" <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote in message news - quote - > > > As a lackey for Barrett's quackwatch (David is a member), his arguments
Truly, madly, deeply fucking nuts. "Readers" have decided that you're a> > > are also found in the "Warning" post. It's up to readers to decide why > > > this orchestrated effort is under way in the newsgroups. > > > > That's a flat-out lie, PeterB. I am not a member of quackwatch and > > never have been. But it's what I would expect of you. Truth isn't in > > you. > > The ratbags outfit to which you, Barrett, Bowditch, Rosalind, Probert, > Thorson, and others belong is indistinguishable from Barrett's > Quackwatch. Apparently, a sizeable ante is required of corporate > interests to join the latter, so possibly individuals are not admitted, certified member of the Usenet Crank Society. The lack of support for your views (does ANYBODY here take PeterBs "WARNING" seriously?) does not deter you nor the happily paranoid. You are boringly predictable. And, predictably boring. moo |
|
#44
09-01-2006, 03:25 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications In article <1157044884.110345.164480[at]74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> , PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: - quote - >
It's responses like this, PeterB, that reveal you for the loon that> David Wright wrote: > > In article <1157037524.268031.98290[at]p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> , > > PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > David Wright wrote: > > > > In article <1157032834.562028.282980[at]m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> , > > > > PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Johnny Huang wrote: > > > > > > > > > > No, you are the one who is wrong! Peterb has already admitted that he > > > > > > is a paid representatitve of some supplement company. > > > > > > > > > > Notice that Johny cannot provide a link to this because it never > > > > > happened. A review of the history of his posts will identify him as a > > > > > PR grunt operating on behalf of industry. > > > > > > > > It's so interesting that only the laser eye of PeterB can somehow > > > > identify all these "PR grunts" on the basis of "a review of the > > > > history of [their] posts." > > > > > > As a lackey for Barrett's quackwatch (David is a member), his arguments > > > are also found in the "Warning" post. It's up to readers to decide why > > > this orchestrated effort is under way in the newsgroups. > > > > That's a flat-out lie, PeterB. I am not a member of quackwatch and > > never have been. But it's what I would expect of you. Truth isn't in > > you. > > The ratbags outfit to which you, Barrett, Bowditch, Rosalind, Probert, > Thorson, and others belong is indistinguishable from Barrett's > Quackwatch. you are. The "ratbags outfit" is simply a bunch of people who decided to allow themselves to be included in the list. We have no other affiliation. - quote - > Apparently, a sizeable ante is required of corporate interests to
"Apparently." "Possibly." Those, in your case, are simply PeterB> join the latter, so possibly individuals are not admitted, saying "I have no idea, so I'm going to claim this is true, because I have no better attack." - quote - > but the moniker you operate under is hardly material to those of us
Oh, now you're "supporting consumer rights." How inspirational.> supporting consumer rights. You're just like Tim Bolen. He's a "consumer advocate." Except that he's really a paid shill. It's his occupation. - quote - > You and those of your ilk support the same junk science that
"For which Bowditch was slapped down for?" That's both awful English> Barrett's Quackwatch uses in market-busting antics for which Bowditch > was slapped down for. and factually incorrect. - quote - > You are all joined at the hip, and you revel in it.
Nah, we just enjoy each other's posts, and we enjoy exposing you forthe paranoid loon that you are. - quote - > > And, as usual, you have not one shred of evidence that anyone here is
Your accusations are more like the scum on a pond.> > a paid agent. The "evidence" exists only in your little paranoid > > mind. > > Your denials are like fresh dew upon the grasses each and every > morning, not to mention brunch, lunch, tea, and toddy. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me." -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth |
|
#43
09-01-2006, 02:06 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2005[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1157050427.786067.239810[at]e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com... - quote - > http://groups.google.com/group/misc....6ffa41fe3c0f05> Jan Drew wrote: > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2005[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:1157024048.669190.260130[at]74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > Jan Drew wrote: > > > > "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2005[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > news:1156970984.428588.138730[at]h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > > > Peter Bowditch wrote: > > > > > > > "PeterB" <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Peter Bowditch wrote: > > > > > > > > > Mark Probert <markprobert[at]lumbercartel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Mark Thorson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > The recent court decision supports using risk-benefit > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis to remove dangerous supplements from the > > > > > > > > > > > > market: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_4239960 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are a number of problems with FDA's position on > > > > > > > > > > > ephedra. > > > > > > > > > > > First, > > > > > > > > > > > the majority of supplements containing ephedrine alkaloids > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > traditional ephedra root, which is why the ban does not > > > > > > > > > > > apply > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > traditional chinese medicine formulations (TCM.) > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately, > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > variety of synthetically mfctrd ephedrine products, with > > > > > > > > > > > far > > > > > > > > > > > greater > > > > > > > > > > > pharmacology, including over-the-counter asthma meds and > > > > > > > > > > > nasal > > > > > > > > > > > sprays, > > > > > > > > > > > are also permitted to remain on drug store shelves. The > > > > > > > > > > > nod > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > TCM is > > > > > > > > > > > a shameless ruse to conceal FDA's efforts to prevent > > > > > > > > > > > dietary > > > > > > > > > > > supplement > > > > > > > > > > > makers from competing against the drug makers in the weight > > > > > > > > > > > loss > > > > > > > > > > > market. Closing with a quote from the same article: > > > > > > > > > > > "There > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > in FDA who want to overregulate everything and if they use > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > case to > > > > > > > > > > > do that, we'll have to slap the FDA down." - Orrin Hatch > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Orrin Hatch? He's the senator from Utah where the supplements > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > manufactured. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Time Magazine October 1, 1993: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not only does it have a sizable war chest (the industry > > > > > > > > > > grossed > > > > > > > > > > $4 > > > > > > > > > > billion last year) and loyal customers, it also has an > > > > > > > > > > influential > > > > > > > > > > friend in Washington: Senator Orrin Hatch. His home state of > > > > > > > > > > Utah > > > > > > > > > > has an > > > > > > > > > > important stake in the industry, and he himself owns 1% of a > > > > > > > > > > company > > > > > > > > > > that distributes vitamin C and iron supplements--an apparent > > > > > > > > > > conflict of > > > > > > > > > > interest. (Hatch denies that anything is improper, saying > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > company deals mainly in real estate.) He has latched onto the > > > > > > > > > > vitamin > > > > > > > > > > issue, speaking out against Kessler at every turn. In April > > > > > > > > > > he > > > > > > > > > > introduced legislation that would permanently exempt herbs, > > > > > > > > > > vitamins, > > > > > > > > > > minerals and amino acids from most FDA controls. The bill has > > > > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > > > than > > > > > > > > > > 50 Senate co-signers, and nearly 200 Representatives have > > > > > > > > > > backed > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > companion measure in the House. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Isn't Hatch the one whose son is a lobbyist for the > > > > > > > > > alternative > > > > > > > > > medicine industry who gets paid $2 million a year to lobby his > > > > > > > > > father? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nice crime if you can get it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it's alright when your sponsors play that game, but not when > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > same tactics are used by your competitors? Your own court room > > > > > > > > antics > > > > > > > > on behalf of certain interests are every bit as sleazy, if not > > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > so. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And which court room antics would they be? Also, please specify > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > "certain interests". > > > > > > > > > > > > The same court room antics that resulted in the judge ruling > > > > > > against > > > > > > you, Bowditch. You were found to be engaging in a distortion of > > > > > > the > > > > > > facts and required to post a retraction. As for who you represent, > > > > > > that should be obvious. But feel free to come clean and tell us > > > > > > all > > > > > > about it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have never been in any court for any reason associated in any > > > > > > > way > > > > > > > with alternative medicine. Or real medicine, for that matter. > > > > > > > > > > > > "Real" medicine is traditional herbal medicine, which has existed > > > > > > for > > > > > > thousands of years. "Alternative" medicine is synthetic medicine, > > > > > > which has existed for a bit more than 100 years. See the following > > > > > > etymology on "pharmaceutical" and name your poison. > > > > > > Pharmaceutical: > > > > > > 1648 (pharmaceutic in the same sense is from 1541), from L. > > > > > > pharmaceuticus "of drugs," from Gk. pharmakeutikos, from pharmakeus > > > > > > "preparer of drugs, poisoner," from pharmakon "medicine, poison." > > > > > > Pharmacology is attested from 1721, formed in Mod.L. (1683) with > > > > > > Gk. > > > > > > -logia "dealing with the topic of." > > > > > > from http://www.etymonline.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If "Real medicine" is herbal medicine and "Alternative" medicine is > > > > > synthetic medicine, why are you posting to this group? By your own > > > > > arguments, you should just be posting in support of "Alternative > > > > > medicine", which you now claim to be synthetic medicine > > > > > (Pharmaceuticals, Surgery, etc). > > > > > > > > > > My guess is that it has something to do with you being a paid agent > > > > > of > > > > > some commercial interest. > > > > > > > > > You are noted for having WRONG > > > > guesses................................. > > > > > > > > > No > > > > YES! > > > > Today, I received a call at my work. The female caller asked for > > "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The > > female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I > > wasn't fooling anyone. > > > > I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed > > under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star > > 69 said the call could not be traced. > > > > > > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > > stop NOW! > > > > > > No, I guess she just searched every online phone directory for my last > > name and Acupuncture. Someone emailed me and said that she did > > something like this to another acupuncturist. > > > > I've read that she has called family members of posters > > > > [ ] > > > > > Before that call, Jan called me Ted. After I received that call, Jan > began to call me Johnny! Today, I received a call at my work. The female caller asked for "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I wasn't fooling anyone. I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star 69 said the call could not be traced. Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to stop NOW! http://groups.google.com/group/misc....1959d7f43f5ffd Susan, I'm tempted to report it, but I doubt anything can be done. She didn't make any threats, just accused me of being someone else http://groups.google.com/group/misc....ee251a7360b2f1 You kept calling him Ted and now since he posted about a phone call you are calling him Johnny, WHY???? (extra question marks for Jan) He said the person who called asked for Ted, amazingly like you were calling him. I didn't, for the record say that you were the caller and only said that stalking people was something that the FBI takes seriously, you are the one that assumed I was speaking of you. Your name was in the subject line but that doesn't put it in my words. The out side activity and always trying to find out personal information about people is what is disturbing to me. And your slamming me with your nasty responses brings to mind, "sticks and stones". UM MOM Susan, and I don't give a damn who's mother you are that is not what my sign off means. http://groups.google.com/group/misc....10ad21c1501450 Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1126208879.051298.33560[at]g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... - quote - > You need to go to the FBI site, or call, and give them this information > and > also the email you received to stop who ever is doing this. It's > frightening to me. UM MOM Susan > ---------- > Susan, I'm tempted to report it, but I doubt anything can be done. She > didn't make any threats, just accused me of being someone else. I've > set my phone for anonymous caller rejection. If this person wants to > call back, their number can be found with Star 69. - quote - > The email was from someone telling me about Jan's history. Three guesses as to who that might be, the first two don't count. They do not - quote - > need to be involved. I can just use the links to those incriminating > posts if I need to report her. LOL!!!! Sure you can, see below. - quote - > I was told that Jan likes to bully people into silence. > Johnny Huang will NOT be silenced! OH? Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1126185331.814375.283650[at]z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... - quote - > And am I the only one to notice that she has now apparently decided > that Rich Shewmaker is Aloha Rich? They both come from Hawaii so they > must be the same person. > No, I noticed it, too. Let's see just *where* both of you noticed it. Now don't forget to answer, that means *both* of you. At first, I thought they were the same person - quote - > because of Jan's replies. Do post these EXACT replies. Now don't forget to answer. You list keeps growing. - quote - > Why does she think that everyone she disagrees with is the same person? I don't. - quote - > Is she really that sick or is this just her way of insulting people who > disagree with her? You mean sick like this? - quote - > I don't know what is wrong with Jan, but I wish she would choke to - quote - > death on her anger I see you are still eager to talk about me. Still waiting for you to answer. You list keeps growing. - quote - > I think that if anyone is paid to post here, it must be her. Nobody > posts are often It that right? Have you counted everyones' posts? Don't forget to answer. and nobody does as much harm to the cause of - quote - > alternative medicine. Be specific. Do show us exactly what your opinion is of how I have harm the cause of alternative medicine. Now don't forget to answer. You are falling behind on your list. Here it is again. I wonder why you post so frequently yet - quote - > so seldom discuss alternative medicine. You don't say? You wouldn't wonder that about, say, Mark Probert? Richard H Jacobson? Mark Thorson? Or any of your buddies, would you Teddy? Now don't forget to answer. After you answer that, could you show us exactly where there were any words of harm, rage and wrath, and shameful behavior in this thread? Now don't forget to answer. Did I mention, not to forget to answer? I'll wait. http://groups.google.com/group/misc....51ffb840533a33 "Sdores" <sdo...[at]bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:8LdUe.7917$Tn6.6936[at]bignews6.bellsouth.net... - quote - > "LadyLollipop" <LadyLolli...[at]insightbb.com> wrote in message > news:uC2Ue.335367$xm3.40160[at]attbi_s21... - quote - > <snip> - quote - > > I did not know that, but that it a great idea. Do that > > Johnny!!!!!!!!!!!!! - quote - > You kept calling him Ted and now since he posted about a phone call you > are calling him Johnny, WHY???? (extra question marks for Jan) NO particular reason, Susan He said the - quote - > person who called asked for Ted, amazingly like you were calling him. He said a lot of things, his list keeps growing. He has NOT been able to answer a SINGLE claim he has made, Susan!!!!!!(extra exclamation marks for Susan) I didn't, for the record say that you were the caller and only said that - quote - > stalking people was something that the FBI takes seriously, you are the > one that assumed I was speaking of you. Sure, Susan, sure. Your name was in the subject line but that doesn't put it in my words. Uh huh, Susan. The out side activity and always trying to find out personal information about people is what is disturbing to me. You are pathetic, Susan. You thought nothing of *impersonation* which is a criminal offense, now you are in an uproar over a *reported* telephone call, by a liar and *insulter* who cannot answer questions. And your slamming me with your nasty responses brings to mind, "sticks and - quote - > stones". Right backatcha, Susan. UM MOM Susan, and I don't give a damn who's mother you are that is - quote - > not what my sign off means. I know what your sign off says. Sorry that ONCE AGAIN, you focus seems to be on me. Very telling you prefer to overlook the below. "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1126185331.814375.283650[at]z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... - quote - > And am I the only one to notice that she has now apparently decided that > Rich Shewmaker is Aloha Rich? They both come from Hawaii so they must be > the same person. > No, I noticed it, too. Let's see just *where* both of you noticed it. Now don't forget to answer, that means *both* of you. At first, I thought they were the same person - quote - > because of Jan's replies. Do post these EXACT replies. Now don't forget to answer. You list keeps growing. - quote - > Why does she think that everyone she disagrees with is the same person? I don't. - quote - > Is she really that sick or is this just her way of insulting people who > disagree with her? You mean sick like this? - quote - > I don't know what is wrong with Jan, but I wish she would choke to - quote - > death on her anger I see you are still eager to talk about me. Still waiting for you to answer. You list keeps growing. - quote - > I think that if anyone is paid to post here, it must be her. Nobody posts > are often It that right? Have you counted everyones' posts? Don't forget to answer. and nobody does as much harm to the cause of - quote - > alternative medicine. Be specific. Do show us exactly what your opinion is of how I have harm the cause of alternative medicine. Now don't forget to answer. You are falling behind on your list. Here it is again. I wonder why you post so frequently yet - quote - > so seldom discuss alternative medicine. You don't say? You wouldn't wonder that about, say, Mark Probert? Richard H Jacobson? Mark Thorson? Or any of your buddies, would you Teddy? Now don't forget to answer. After you answer that, could you show us exactly where there were any words of harm, rage and wrath, and shameful behavior in this thread? Now don't forget to answer. Did I mention, not to forget to answer? I'll wait. I guarantee 99.9999999% Richard H Jacobson PROVEN cyberstalker will reply to this post with more of his lies. see below. Note he says many of the EXACT SAME THINGS about this poster as he says about me.He was the same trouble maker then also. Somethings never change. This was back in 1995. OH YES, he is a PROVEN CYBERSTALKER. http://groups.google.com/group/misc....b14a4cbbb3c1a6 "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1126205095.451219.231690[at]o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... - quote - > Today, I received a call at my work. So you say,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, The female caller asked for - quote - > "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The > female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I > wasn't fooling anyone. Who? - quote - > I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed > under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star > 69 said the call could not be traced. Who? - quote - > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > stop NOW! I want YOU to answer you LONG list of questions that remain uanswered NOW!! Why can't YOU do that Johnny?!?! http://groups.google.com/group/misc....8090bc4740a2d7 "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang_2...[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1126215813.643661.140180[at]g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... - quote - > > I want YOU to answer you LONG list of questions that remain uanswered > > NOW!! > You may not demand anything of me. I do not fear bullies! I did NOT demand. I do not fear bullies, nor LIARS who make up stories, nor those who snip what the above was in reply to. - quote - > Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to > stop NOW! > You should feel shame instead of anger. I felt no anger, you should take your own advice. You should feel shame in making up LIES. Today, I received a call at my work. The female caller asked for "Ted". I told them that nobody named Ted worked at my office. The female caller said that accused me of being Ted Nadiffer and said I wasn't fooling anyone. I told this person that I wouldn't have an Acupuncture office listed under the name Huang if I were this Ted Nadiffer. She hung up. Star 69 said the call could not be traced. Jan Drew or someone acting on her behalf called me and I want it to stop NOW! Here are the characteristics of Jan Drew and her ilk! - quote - > You should stop posting unless you wish to discuss alternative > medicine, not who you hate. You should stop trying to tell me what to do. You should answer your many accusations. - quote - > And am I the only one to notice that she has now apparently decided > that Rich Shewmaker is Aloha Rich? They both come from Hawaii so they > must be the same person. > No, I noticed it, too. Let's see just *where* both of you noticed it. Now don't forget to answer, that means *both* of you. At first, I thought they were the same person - quote - > because of Jan's replies. Do post these EXACT replies. Now don't forget to answer. You list keeps growing. - quote - > Why does she think that everyone she disagrees with is the same person? I don't. - quote - > Is she really that sick or is this just her way of insulting people who > disagree with her? You mean sick like this? - quote - > I don't know what is wrong with Jan, but I wish she would choke to - quote - > death on her anger I see you are still eager to talk about me. Still waiting for you to answer. You list keeps growing. - quote - > I think that if anyone is paid to post here, it must be her. Nobody > posts are often It that right? Have you counted everyones' posts? Don't forget to answer. and nobody does as much harm to the cause of - quote - > alternative medicine. Be specific. Do show us exactly what your opinion is of how I have harm the cause of alternative medicine. Now don't forget to answer. You are falling behind on your list. Here it is again. I wonder why you post so frequently yet - quote - > so seldom discuss alternative medicine. You don't say? You wouldn't wonder that about, say, Mark Probert? Richard H Jacobson? Mark Thorson? Or any of your buddies, would you Teddy? Now don't forget to answer. After you answer that, could you show us exactly where there were any words of harm, rage and wrath, and shameful behavior in this thread? Now don't forget to answer. Did I mention, not to forget to answer? I'll wait. - quote - > You should not attempt to contact me. I did not. - quote - > Do not start threads with my name in the title! I will do that EXACTLY that, until you answer your many FALSE accusations and STOP TELLING LIES! - quote - > Do as I say, not as You do! SEE ABOVE! |
|
#42
09-01-2006, 12:19 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications "Mark Probert" <markprobert[at]lumbercartel.com> wrote in message news  kGJg.1313$TA5.981[at]newsfe11.lga...- quote - > PeterB wrote:
***The ratbags outfit****> > Mark Probert wrote: > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > David Wright wrote: > > > > > In article <1157037524.268031.98290[at]p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> , > > > > > PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > David Wright wrote: > > > > > > > In article <1157032834.562028.282980[at]m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> , > > > > > > > PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Johnny Huang wrote: > > > > > > > > > No, you are the one who is wrong! Peterb has already admitted > > > > > > > > > that he > > > > > > > > > is a paid representatitve of some supplement company. > > > > > > > > Notice that Johny cannot provide a link to this because it never > > > > > > > > happened. A review of the history of his posts will identify him > > > > > > > > as a > > > > > > > > PR grunt operating on behalf of industry. > > > > > > > It's so interesting that only the laser eye of PeterB can somehow > > > > > > > identify all these "PR grunts" on the basis of "a review of the > > > > > > > history of [their] posts." > > > > > > As a lackey for Barrett's quackwatch (David is a member), his > > > > > > arguments > > > > > > are also found in the "Warning" post. It's up to readers to decide > > > > > > why > > > > > > this orchestrated effort is under way in the newsgroups. > > > > > That's a flat-out lie, PeterB. I am not a member of quackwatch and > > > > > never have been. But it's what I would expect of you. Truth isn't in > > > > > you. > > > > The ratbags outfit to which you, Barrett, Bowditch, Rosalind, Probert, > > > > Thorson, and others belong is indistinguishable from Barrett's > > > > Quackwatch. > > > Horseshit. You do not have a damn clue as to what you are saying. Do you > > > lie like this to your loved ones? > > > > So explain the difference, Markey. I know you're protecting David from > > having to answer for himself, but you have to make it look good. > > kibble kibble. > > More stupid comments by you. > > You claim I "belong" to quackwatch. Now, without playing your usual > semantics change the meaning game, prove that I, or anyone else who posts > here, "belongs". - quote - >
You do likewise. Find it and prove it. Otherwise, retract THEM.> Find it and prove it. Otherwise, retract it. Mark Probert Makes Another Claim. Let's See* IF* He Can PROVE It! You made a claim that you were a licensed babysitter. I was "just curious"? Re: Researcher (Sandra Cabot) and theWarns of Cancer Risk From rBGH (non-organic) Dairy Foods http://tinyurl.com/d4b23 http://tinyurl.com/c3qua http://tinyurl.com/7985k http://tinyurl.com/9l6sh http://tinyurl.com/cyhmt As I pointed out to the moron, he is far from ill. You STILL have not shown WHERE you pointed this out! - quote - > You made a claim that you were a licensed babysitter. I was "just curious"? You STILL haven't shown us WHERE I madede that claim! You see, you complained that I called Ilena at her ADVERTISED phone listing. You STILL haven't shown WHERE I did any such thing. - quote - > The thread started with a claim that vaccines suppress the immune system. > You agreed. Please do copy and paste where I agreed. You STILL haven't done so. - quote - > An one-time troll, screw-loose nutcase posted some diatriber and you now attack someone who has posted here for years. - quote - > > Attacking?? Just WHERE did Debbee attack DC? Please post the attacking! You STILL haven't been able to do so. - quote - > You admitted that you stalked me to asbi. OOOOps. Do copy and paste this > claim. You STILL haven't been able to do so. Jul 2 2004 - quote - > Vaxa has been making claims for years. The FTC/FDA are reviewing them now.
Mark Probert Makes Another Claim. Let's See* IF* He Can PROVE It!> Do show us they are being reviewed. I filed a complaint with the FTC after > I reviewed the URL you posted and saw the egregious violations. If and > when I hear from the FTC, I will let you know. You made a claim that you were a licensed babysitter. I was "just curious"? Re: Researcher (Sandra Cabot) and theWarns of Cancer Risk From rBGH (non-organic) Dairy Foods http://tinyurl.com/d4b23 http://tinyurl.com/c3qua http://tinyurl.com/7985k http://tinyurl.com/9l6sh http://tinyurl.com/cyhmt As I pointed out to the moron, he is far from ill. You STILL have not shown WHERE you pointed this out! - quote - > You made a claim that you were a licensed babysitter. I was "just curious"? You STILL haven't shown us WHERE I madede that claim! You see, you complained that I called Ilena at her ADVERTISED phone listing. You STILL haven't shown WHERE I did any such thing. - quote - > The thread started with a claim that vaccines suppress the immune system. > You agreed. Please do copy and paste where I agreed. You STILL haven't done so. - quote - > An one-time troll, screw-loose nutcase posted some diatriber and you now attack someone who has posted here for years. - quote - > > Attacking?? Just WHERE did Debbee attack DC? Please post the attacking! You STILL haven't been able to do so. - quote - > You admitted that you stalked me to asbi. OOOOps. Do copy and paste this > claim. You STILL haven't been able to do so. Jul 2 2004 - quote - > Vaxa has been making claims for years. The FTC/FDA are reviewing them now. > Do show us they are being reviewed. I filed a complaint with the FTC after > I reviewed the URL you posted and saw the egregious violations. If and > when I hear from the FTC, I will let you know. == so you admit that you discriminated against children who were developmentally delayed and could not be potty trained before the age of 3. There was no lump, lump head. Jan 9th, 2006 Haley testifies for a fee, ergo, he is a professional expert witness. http://groups.google.com/group/alt.s...4c400a73fdd79b Wed, Mar 16 2005 4:20 pm I will, as of this posting, Wednesday, March 16, 2005, at 4:20 PM EST, unconditionally cease and desist from posting to Ilena, about Ilena or in response to Ilena. I hope that you, who have been a supporter of hers, will now move and directly ask her to do the same thing. Further, if she ceases her actions towards me, I will render the posts in the Fan Club unreadable. If she removes any and all webpages regarding me and/or my family, the Fan Club will cease to exist. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ No conditions--huh, Markey?? - quote - >
Mark Probert Makes Another Claim. Let's See* IF* He Can PROVE It!> You have, on occasion, alluded to my posting information from Quackwatch. > > Find it and prove it. Otherwise, retract it. You made a claim that you were a licensed babysitter. I was "just curious"? Re: Researcher (Sandra Cabot) and theWarns of Cancer Risk From rBGH (non-organic) Dairy Foods http://tinyurl.com/d4b23 http://tinyurl.com/c3qua http://tinyurl.com/7985k http://tinyurl.com/9l6sh http://tinyurl.com/cyhmt As I pointed out to the moron, he is far from ill. You STILL have not shown WHERE you pointed this out! - quote - > You made a claim that you were a licensed babysitter. I was "just curious"? You STILL haven't shown us WHERE I madede that claim! You see, you complained that I called Ilena at her ADVERTISED phone listing. You STILL haven't shown WHERE I did any such thing. - quote - > The thread started with a claim that vaccines suppress the immune system. > You agreed. Please do copy and paste where I agreed. You STILL haven't done so. - quote - > An one-time troll, screw-loose nutcase posted some diatriber and you now attack someone who has posted here for years. - quote - > > Attacking?? Just WHERE did Debbee attack DC? Please post the attacking! You STILL haven't been able to do so. - quote - > You admitted that you stalked me to asbi. OOOOps. Do copy and paste this > claim. You STILL haven't been able to do so. Jul 2 2004 - quote - > Vaxa has been making claims for years. The FTC/FDA are reviewing them now.
Mark Probert Makes Another Claim. Let's See* IF* He Can PROVE It!> Do show us they are being reviewed. I filed a complaint with the FTC after > I reviewed the URL you posted and saw the egregious violations. If and > when I hear from the FTC, I will let you know. You made a claim that you were a licensed babysitter. I was "just curious"? Re: Researcher (Sandra Cabot) and theWarns of Cancer Risk From rBGH (non-organic) Dairy Foods http://tinyurl.com/d4b23 http://tinyurl.com/c3qua http://tinyurl.com/7985k http://tinyurl.com/9l6sh http://tinyurl.com/cyhmt As I pointed out to the moron, he is far from ill. You STILL have not shown WHERE you pointed this out! - quote - > You made a claim that you were a licensed babysitter. I was "just curious"? You STILL haven't shown us WHERE I madede that claim! You see, you complained that I called Ilena at her ADVERTISED phone listing. You STILL haven't shown WHERE I did any such thing. - quote - > The thread started with a claim that vaccines suppress the immune system. > You agreed. Please do copy and paste where I agreed. You STILL haven't done so. - quote - > An one-time troll, screw-loose nutcase posted some diatriber and you now attack someone who has posted here for years. - quote - > > Attacking?? Just WHERE did Debbee attack DC? Please post the attacking! You STILL haven't been able to do so. - quote - > You admitted that you stalked me to asbi. OOOOps. Do copy and paste this > claim. You STILL haven't been able to do so. Jul 2 2004 - quote - > Vaxa has been making claims for years. The FTC/FDA are reviewing them now. > Do show us they are being reviewed. I filed a complaint with the FTC after > I reviewed the URL you posted and saw the egregious violations. If and > when I hear from the FTC, I will let you know. == so you admit that you discriminated against children who were developmentally delayed and could not be potty trained before the age of 3. There was no lump, lump head. Jan 9th, 2006 Haley testifies for a fee, ergo, he is a professional expert witness. http://groups.google.com/group/alt.s...4c400a73fdd79b Wed, Mar 16 2005 4:20 pm I will, as of this posting, Wednesday, March 16, 2005, at 4:20 PM EST, unconditionally cease and desist from posting to Ilena, about Ilena or in response to Ilena. I hope that you, who have been a supporter of hers, will now move and directly ask her to do the same thing. Further, if she ceases her actions towards me, I will render the posts in the Fan Club unreadable. If she removes any and all webpages regarding me and/or my family, the Fan Club will cease to exist. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ No conditions--huh, Markey?? - quote - >
Mark Probert Makes Another Claim. Let's See* IF* He Can PROVE It!> > > > > Apparently, a sizeable ante is required of corporate > > > > interests to join the latter, so possibly individuals are not admitted, > > > > but the moniker you operate under is hardly material to those of us > > > > supporting consumer rights. > > > You are really one, sick, paranoid idiot. You should be pitied. > > > > That's a rather childish comment to make, Markey. If you want to rebut > > someone's argument, you have to make one of your own. What's the > > difference between ratbags and Quackwatch? Here is your chance to > > shine for your sponsors. > > I do not want to rebut your stupid claim, I want you to prove it. > > Otherwise, retract it. You made a claim that you were a licensed babysitter. I was "just curious"? Re: Researcher (Sandra Cabot) and theWarns of Cancer Risk From rBGH (non-organic) Dairy Foods http://tinyurl.com/d4b23 http://tinyurl.com/c3qua http://tinyurl.com/7985k http://tinyurl.com/9l6sh http://tinyurl.com/cyhmt As I pointed out to the moron, he is far from ill. You STILL have not shown WHERE you pointed this out! - quote - > You made a claim that you were a licensed babysitter. I was "just curious"? You STILL haven't shown us WHERE I madede that claim! You see, you complained that I called Ilena at her ADVERTISED phone listing. You STILL haven't shown WHERE I did any such thing. - quote - > The thread started with a claim that vaccines suppress the immune system. > You agreed. Please do copy and paste where I agreed. You STILL haven't done so. - quote - > An one-time troll, screw-loose nutcase posted some diatriber and you now attack someone who has posted here for years. - quote - > > Attacking?? Just WHERE did Debbee attack DC? Please post the attacking! You STILL haven't been able to do so. - quote - > You admitted that you stalked me to asbi. OOOOps. Do copy and paste this > claim. You STILL haven't been able to do so. Jul 2 2004 - quote - > Vaxa has been making claims for years. The FTC/FDA are reviewing them now.
Mark Probert Makes Another Claim. Let's See* IF* He Can PROVE It!> Do show us they are being reviewed. I filed a complaint with the FTC after > I reviewed the URL you posted and saw the egregious violations. If and > when I hear from the FTC, I will let you know. You made a claim that you were a licensed babysitter. I was "just curious"? Re: Researcher (Sandra Cabot) and theWarns of Cancer Risk From rBGH (non-organic) Dairy Foods http://tinyurl.com/d4b23 http://tinyurl.com/c3qua http://tinyurl.com/7985k http://tinyurl.com/9l6sh http://tinyurl.com/cyhmt As I pointed out to the moron, he is far from ill. You STILL have not shown WHERE you pointed this out! - quote - > You made a claim that you were a licensed babysitter. I was "just curious"? You STILL haven't shown us WHERE I madede that claim! You see, you complained that I called Ilena at her ADVERTISED phone listing. You STILL haven't shown WHERE I did any such thing. - quote - > The thread started with a claim that vaccines suppress the immune system. > You agreed. Please do copy and paste where I agreed. You STILL haven't done so. - quote - > An one-time troll, screw-loose nutcase posted some diatriber and you now attack someone who has posted here for years. - quote - > > Attacking?? Just WHERE did Debbee attack DC? Please post the attacking! You STILL haven't been able to do so. - quote - > You admitted that you stalked me to asbi. OOOOps. Do copy and paste this > claim. You STILL haven't been able to do so. Jul 2 2004 - quote - > Vaxa has been making claims for years. The FTC/FDA are reviewing them now. > Do show us they are being reviewed. I filed a complaint with the FTC after > I reviewed the URL you posted and saw the egregious violations. If and > when I hear from the FTC, I will let you know. == so you admit that you discriminated against children who were developmentally delayed and could not be potty trained before the age of 3. There was no lump, lump head. Jan 9th, 2006 Haley testifies for a fee, ergo, he is a professional expert witness. http://groups.google.com/group/alt.s...4c400a73fdd79b Wed, Mar 16 2005 4:20 pm I will, as of this posting, Wednesday, March 16, 2005, at 4:20 PM EST, unconditionally cease and desist from posting to Ilena, about Ilena or in response to Ilena. I hope that you, who have been a supporter of hers, will now move and directly ask her to do the same thing. Further, if she ceases her actions towards me, I will render the posts in the Fan Club unreadable. If she removes any and all webpages regarding me and/or my family, the Fan Club will cease to exist. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ No conditions--huh, Markey?? - quote - > > > > You and those of your ilk support the same > > > > junk science that Barrett's Quackwatch uses in market-busting antics > > > > for which Bowditch was slapped down for. > > > Peter's court issue had nothing to do with alternative medicine or > > > science. > > > > Market busting isn't confined to the health products field, Markey. > > Bowditch operates a website that talks about leprechauns and ouija > > boards, too. And let's not forget his efforts to impersonate Buggs > > Bunny. Too bad he's witless. > > Please, Petey, control the projection. > > > > You are all joined at the > > > > hip, and you revel in it. > > > You are sick. Do get help. > > |
|
#41
08-31-2006, 08:45 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications PeterB wrote: - quote - > Mark Probert wrote:
Incorrect. It is NOT my website. If you check, you will see that it> > PeterB wrote: > > > Mark Probert wrote: > > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > > David Wright wrote: > > > > > > In article <1157037524.268031.98290[at]p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> , > > > > > > PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > David Wright wrote: > > > > > > > > In article <1157032834.562028.282980[at]m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> , > > > > > > > > PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Johnny Huang wrote: > > > > > > > > > > No, you are the one who is wrong! Peterb has already admitted that he > > > > > > > > > > is a paid representatitve of some supplement company. > > > > > > > > > Notice that Johny cannot provide a link to this because it never > > > > > > > > > happened. A review of the history of his posts will identify him as a > > > > > > > > > PR grunt operating on behalf of industry. > > > > > > > > It's so interesting that only the laser eye of PeterB can somehow > > > > > > > > identify all these "PR grunts" on the basis of "a review of the > > > > > > > > history of [their] posts." > > > > > > > As a lackey for Barrett's quackwatch (David is a member), his arguments > > > > > > > are also found in the "Warning" post. It's up to readers to decide why > > > > > > > this orchestrated effort is under way in the newsgroups. > > > > > > That's a flat-out lie, PeterB. I am not a member of quackwatch and > > > > > > never have been. But it's what I would expect of you. Truth isn't in > > > > > > you. > > > > > The ratbags outfit to which you, Barrett, Bowditch, Rosalind, Probert, > > > > > Thorson, and others belong is indistinguishable from Barrett's > > > > > Quackwatch. > > > > Horseshit. You do not have a damn clue as to what you are saying. Do you > > > > lie like this to your loved ones? > > > So explain the difference, Markey. I know you're protecting David from > > > having to answer for himself, but you have to make it look good. > > > kibble kibble. > > More stupid comments by you. > > > > You claim I "belong" to quackwatch. Now, without playing your usual > > semantics change the meaning game, prove that I, or anyone else who > > posts here, "belongs". > > Your own website references quackwatch as "one of our websites." > http://www.ratbags.com/posse. belongs to Peter Bowditch. - quote - > This affiliation confirms your relationship to Quackwatch.
Only in you delusional mind. Since I do not own either Ratbags orQuackwatch, you have not proven your claim. Why, - quote - > Markey, do you not want to be associated with an outfit you believe in?
I read Quackwatch. There are things I agree with and things that I donot agree with. I do not cite Quackwatch as authoritative. I use the articles as a basis for reading more, with the major effort to find primary material. - quote - > > Find it and prove it. Otherwise, retract it.
There are no membership dues, idiot.> > Are you saying you haven't paid your membership dues? Don't blame me. - quote - > > You have, on occasion, alluded to my posting information from Quackwatch.
Before I can do that, try specifics.> > I see no difference in the propaganda put out by ratbags and > Quackwatch, any more than between sleaze-balls like Bowditch and > Barrett. If there is a difference, please tell me. - quote - > > Find it and prove it. Otherwise, retract it.
It is not my website, you know that, and you are playing games.> > Your own website proves it. It references quackwatch as "one of our > websites." I thought you were proud of this? Just as I suspected you would. - quote - > > > > Apparently, a sizeable ante is required of corporate
No, you did not. Do try again.> > > > > interests to join the latter, so possibly individuals are not admitted, > > > > > but the moniker you operate under is hardly material to those of us > > > > > supporting consumer rights. > > > > You are really one, sick, paranoid idiot. You should be pitied. > > > That's a rather childish comment to make, Markey. If you want to rebut > > > someone's argument, you have to make one of your own. What's the > > > difference between ratbags and Quackwatch? Here is your chance to > > > shine for your sponsors. > > I do not want to rebut your stupid claim, I want you to prove it. > > I did, using the ratbags website. Your name is on there, not mine. - quote - > > Otherwise, retract it.
Who is Buggs Bunny?> > > > > > You and those of your ilk support the same > > > > > junk science that Barrett's Quackwatch uses in market-busting antics > > > > > for which Bowditch was slapped down for. > > > > Peter's court issue had nothing to do with alternative medicine or science. > > > Market busting isn't confined to the health products field, Markey. > > > Bowditch operates a website that talks about leprechauns and ouija > > > boards, too. And let's not forget his efforts to impersonate Buggs > > > Bunny. Too bad he's witless. > > Please, Petey, control the projection. > > Actually, I'm a big fan of Buggs Bunny. He's a cultural icon. |
|
#40
08-31-2006, 08:28 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications Mark Probert wrote: - quote - > PeterB wrote:
Your own website references quackwatch as "one of our websites."> > Mark Probert wrote: > > > PeterB wrote: > > > > David Wright wrote: > > > > > In article <1157037524.268031.98290[at]p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> , > > > > > PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > David Wright wrote: > > > > > > > In article <1157032834.562028.282980[at]m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> , > > > > > > > PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Johnny Huang wrote: > > > > > > > > > No, you are the one who is wrong! Peterb has already admitted that he > > > > > > > > > is a paid representatitve of some supplement company. > > > > > > > > Notice that Johny cannot provide a link to this because it never > > > > > > > > happened. A review of the history of his posts will identify him as a > > > > > > > > PR grunt operating on behalf of industry. > > > > > > > It's so interesting that only the laser eye of PeterB can somehow > > > > > > > identify all these "PR grunts" on the basis of "a review of the > > > > > > > history of [their] posts." > > > > > > As a lackey for Barrett's quackwatch (David is a member), his arguments > > > > > > are also found in the "Warning" post. It's up to readers to decide why > > > > > > this orchestrated effort is under way in the newsgroups. > > > > > That's a flat-out lie, PeterB. I am not a member of quackwatch and > > > > > never have been. But it's what I would expect of you. Truth isn't in > > > > > you. > > > > The ratbags outfit to which you, Barrett, Bowditch, Rosalind, Probert, > > > > Thorson, and others belong is indistinguishable from Barrett's > > > > Quackwatch. > > > Horseshit. You do not have a damn clue as to what you are saying. Do you > > > lie like this to your loved ones? > > > > So explain the difference, Markey. I know you're protecting David from > > having to answer for himself, but you have to make it look good. > > kibble kibble. > > More stupid comments by you. > > You claim I "belong" to quackwatch. Now, without playing your usual > semantics change the meaning game, prove that I, or anyone else who > posts here, "belongs". http://www.ratbags.com/posse. This affiliation confirms your relationship to Quackwatch. Why, Markey, do you not want to be associated with an outfit you believe in? - quote - > Find it and prove it. Otherwise, retract it.
Are you saying you haven't paid your membership dues? Don't blame me.- quote - > You have, on occasion, alluded to my posting information from Quackwatch.
I see no difference in the propaganda put out by ratbags andQuackwatch, any more than between sleaze-balls like Bowditch and Barrett. If there is a difference, please tell me. - quote - > Find it and prove it. Otherwise, retract it.
Your own website proves it. It references quackwatch as "one of ourwebsites." I thought you were proud of this? - quote - > >
I did, using the ratbags website. Your name is on there, not mine.> > > Apparently, a sizeable ante is required of corporate > > > > interests to join the latter, so possibly individuals are not admitted, > > > > but the moniker you operate under is hardly material to those of us > > > > supporting consumer rights. > > > You are really one, sick, paranoid idiot. You should be pitied. > > > > That's a rather childish comment to make, Markey. If you want to rebut > > someone's argument, you have to make one of your own. What's the > > difference between ratbags and Quackwatch? Here is your chance to > > shine for your sponsors. > > I do not want to rebut your stupid claim, I want you to prove it. - quote - > Otherwise, retract it.
Actually, I'm a big fan of Buggs Bunny. He's a cultural icon. > > > > You and those of your ilk support the same > > > > junk science that Barrett's Quackwatch uses in market-busting antics > > > > for which Bowditch was slapped down for. > > > Peter's court issue had nothing to do with alternative medicine or science. > > > > Market busting isn't confined to the health products field, Markey. > > Bowditch operates a website that talks about leprechauns and ouija > > boards, too. And let's not forget his efforts to impersonate Buggs > > Bunny. Too bad he's witless. > > Please, Petey, control the projection. |
|
#39
08-31-2006, 07:52 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Ephedra Decision Has Far-Reaching Implications PeterB wrote: - quote - > Mark Probert wrote:
Nope. What would make you "think" that? I am the most un-marginalized> > David Wright wrote: > > > In article <1157032834.562028.282980[at]m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> , > > > PeterB <pkm[at]mytrashmail.com> wrote: > > > > Johnny Huang wrote: > > > > > No, you are the one who is wrong! Peterb has already admitted that he > > > > > is a paid representatitve of some supplement company. > > > > Notice that Johny cannot provide a link to this because it never > > > > happened. A review of the history of his posts will identify him as a > > > > PR grunt operating on behalf of industry. > > > It's so interesting that only the laser eye of PeterB can somehow > > > identify all these "PR grunts" on the basis of "a review of the > > > history of [their] posts." > > > > > > It's curious that nobody else is able to do this. It's almost as if > > > PeterB were some loon who decides that anyone he dislikes is a paid > > > agent. > > That is part of Petey's plan to marginalize anyone who disagrees with > > him. He uses fallacious attacks. > > If you feel marginalized, Markey, person you are ever going to encounter, and, I have been vaccinated against being marginalized. I suggest you examine your - quote - > relationship to outfits endorsed by Stephen Barrett
Oh? Which ones are those? Could you care to name them, and also showthat Dr. Barrett had endorsed them? and Peter Bowditch, - quote - > some of the world's most unaccomplished quacks,
Peter cannot be a quack, as he is not a physician. As for Dr. Barrett,his resume reads like one of someone who had a successful career. impersonating the likes - quote - > of Buggs Bunny. He's a cultural icon, you know.
So is Tweety Bird, Porky Pig, and Roadrunner. |
|
#38
08-31-2006, 07:48 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: A brief lesson in ecconomics for PeteyB Rich wrote: - quote - > Okay, I went over this for you a couple of years ago, but it's time to
Oh drat! There goes that new GPS unit for my car.> explain it again. > > Let's pretend that I am a advertizing/public relations executive for a major > pharmaceutical firm. The most important part of my job is to decide how to > spend my advertizing budget. It's a large budget, of course, but I want to > make every dollar of it count for the highest possible return in sales. The > most effective advertizing is that which reaches the most people and does so > repeatedly, and that's why I might be willing to spend a million dollars or > more of my budget on a commercial during the SuperBowl where I can get my > message to many millions of people. The remainder of my advertizing money > will be spread throughout various media, always with an eye to how many > people I reach and at what cost. > > Now if I were to pay people to post on newsgroups, how many people could I > reach, and with what message? I obviously can't have them plug my products > directly; everybody would see through that. So the best they could do is to > counter the arguments of the anti-pharmaceutical posters, and that would > also benefit my pharm competitors at my expense. As for numbers, there are > at most a few hundred participants and lurkers in a newsgroup like mha, and > most of them are already strongly opinionated an not going to be swayed > either way. If I pay people in that newsgroup to post, and they do well, > I'll actually persuade a dozen or so at the most, not a very good return on > my money. How much money? Well, most of the posters to mha who write well > enough to be persuasive are college educated professionals, and are not > going to work for less than $30/hr or more, or, say, 50c/word if I pay them > that way. On the other hand, for far less money I can have one of my drug > reps take four or five doctors to a dinner at a nice restaurant, and > persuade them to prescribe my statin instead of my competitors'. Since each > of these doctors has several thousand patients in his practice, my return on > my investment will be much greater. > > Now, Petey, considering that there are twenty or so major pharmaceutical > companies, and each of them is in the same condition of knowing better than > spending their money paying us "pharmabloggers", I would guess that you, in > your paranoid manner, are going to suggest that they have formed a > conspiracy to do so, some kind of a secret industry guild that is cutting > our paychecks for the common good. Well, there's no such thing, because it > still wouldn't make sense to pay all that money to that many posters to > (maybe) change the opinions of a dozen or so mha readers. > > It just doesn't happen. Nobody here is getting paid to argue with your silly > posts. - quote - > > Cathy is not Rosalind, either. |
| Tags |
| decision, ephedra, farreaching, implications |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Iron overload reaching epidemic levels worldwide ironjustice@aol.com: Role of L-type Ca2+ channels in iron transport and iron-overload cardiomyopathy. Oudit GY, Trivieri MG, Khaper N, Liu PP, Backx PH J Mol Med. 2006 Apr 8; Excessive body iron or iron overload occurs under conditions such as primary... | ironjustice@aol.com | Nutrition | 15 | 04-15-2006 01:56 AM |
| Iron overload now reaching epidemic proportions worldwide ironjustice@aol.com: Medline Abstract Nat Med 2003;9(9): 1187-94 L-type Ca2+ channels provide a major pathway for iron entry into cardiomyocytes in iron-overload cardiomyopathy. GY Oudit, H Sun, MG Trivieri, SE Koch, F Dawood, C Ackerley, M Yazdanpanah, GJ... | ironjustice@aol.com | Nutrition | 1 | 05-23-2005 11:30 AM |
| Ephedra is Back 455: When will it go on sale? I can't wait to get my hands on some Stacker 3! | 455 | Nutrition | 3 | 05-08-2005 03:44 PM |
| FDA Bans Ephedra =?UTF-8?Q?Levelwave=A9?=: I just heard the news... So what does this mean for Advil Cold and Sinus that sports a whopping 60mg of pure Ephedrine HCL?... Or what about the Two-Ways that are so popular with the trucker crowd?... ~john! | =?UTF-8?Q?Levelwave=A9?= | Nutrition | 4 | 12-31-2003 01:06 AM |
| Benefits of reaching "ideal weight"? Wendy: In alt.support.diet Ignoramus14934 <ignoramus14934@nospam.14934.invalid> wrote: > I am 176 lbs, which makes me within the top of the normal weight > interval. 176 pounds of what? > And that makes sense, given that I still have a decent >... | Wendy | Nutrition | 100 | 11-22-2003 12:11 PM |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Linear Mode
