Dave wrote:
- quote -

You're wrong about that. Here's what the spammer
said about his site on 7/21/07:

- quote -

So he indeed is working promotions for his
products into his web site. You should
pay more attention.

Much worse, however, is what he is trying to do.
He's trying to drive traffic to his commercial
blogspot web site in the hope of attracting sponsors.
If that happens, it will encourage more spammers
to try the same Internet-get-rich-quick scheme.

The flood of spam will become even worse than today.
That's why it is important not to even let it get
that far.

- quote -

Dave, you've got a lot of nerve making a statement
like that when you have frequently made LYING
accusations against me. You have several times
accused me of being a "pharmaceutical chemist".
Falsely accusing someone of being a "pharmaceutical
chemist" in this newsgroup is exactly like accusing
someone of being a Communist back in the 1950's.
You have been practicing a form of neo-McCarthyism.

You don't care about that. When you can't defend
your poorly written articles against honest criticism,
you'll use any kind of character assassination
to attack the critic rather than the criticism.

Your articles are always slanted to support
sales of supplements. You never mention the
risks or drug interactions that the products
you promote may have. You only mention the
aspects that would cause people to buy the
products, never the aspects which would give
them caution.

Your articles could actually harm people,
because you omit this information. I fill in
those gaps, and when I do, you respond with
nasty attacks and name-calling. You have no
interest in helping people -- your only
interest is getting your share of the
multi-billion dollar supplement business.
You lack common human decency.

The Blogpot SPAMMER wrote:
- quote -

I have put nothing up on your site.

I'm telling you now to remove any of my words that
appear on your blogspot web site. This is your
final warning.

I have no objection to you rewording earlier
"articles" of yours to accommodate the errors
I pointed out in those "articles". Just don't
use my words, and don't credit any authorship
to me.

I also have no objection to you citing the same
references that I cited in my rebuttals, as long
as you take full responsibility for the accuracy
of any quoted materials.

If you feel that my research on these topics
deserves mention, don't worry about that.
You may incorporate any insights you gain
from my material without acknowledgement.
In fact, I insist on that.

Dave wrote:
- quote -

I didn't put up anything on your site.
But lies aren't a surprise coming from you.

You have a history of making lying accusations,
when you cannot defend yourself against
legitimate criticism. You always attack the
critic, not the criticism.

On Aug 28, 4:59 pm, Mark Thorson <nos...[at]sonic.net> wrote:
- quote -

Mark, well in the future, please use the nicer tone you use in the
rebuttals you put up on my site, OK?

Also, I think that people know you simply keep paragraphs like your
above text in a file for cut and paste. You can't even put up an
argument without looking like a troll!

Dave

Dave wrote:
- quote -

It isn't name-calling when I accurately describe
your advertisements masquerading as "research reports"
as spam and describe you as a spammer. You pollute
the non-commercial discussion newsgroups with spam
for your commercial blogspot web site, in violation
of the charters for those newsgroups.

Your poorly researched "articles" could actually
hurt people, but you don't care about that.
All you care about is your Internet-get-rich-quick
scheme. Fortunately, it's easy to expose the enormous
gaps in your amateurish "articles", so thanks to my
efforts I don't think many people will be taken in
by your exaggerations, distortions, and lies.

You wish you could have exclusive control over the
communications channel so my rebuttals to your crap
articles couldn't get through. Too bad. That's
not the way Usenet works. I'm all about complete
information and full disclosure, not the biased
selection of information to support sales of
supplements.

On Aug 28, 1:25 pm, Mark Thorson <nos...[at]sonic.net> wrote:
- quote -

Mark, I find your rambling pseudo science a bit confusing. Actually, I
thought your comments on my site were much more succinct and
appropriate (and minus the name-calling, thank you!). You are
certainly right about the blood/brain barrier, which is now the
obstacle to overcome with this garlic research. But labeling my
message as spam?Why don't you save that name calling for cross-
posters, or for penis enlargement ads.

If you had a brain cancer Mark, wouldn't you want to do anything
possible to eliiminate that death sentence? That's why these
researchers, knowing that they have years of trials ahead of them,
actually talked to the Newswire reporter about how to use garlic TODAY
for that purpose, with no promises of course. And then, as I said in
my article, its something that you discuss with your naturopath or
holistic MD. It's not a matter of supplements, as you can read in the
final paragraph above. In fact, Garlic supplement suppliers have taken
a nosedive off the face of the earth since some negative clinical
trials about a year ago. I go to trade shows and scientific meetings
all the time, and they are totally absent (while they used to sponsor
the meetings, or provide bags to carry all your literature in,etc).

If I had a brain cancer today, after this discovery, you'd smell me
coming from a half-mile away.

Dave

Polyunsaturated fatty acids are basically cancer fuel, so if you avoid
dietary sources, you will do a great deal to prevent cancer in the
first place.

Dave wrote:
- quote -

That's a serious misinterpretation of this work,
though not surprising coming from you. The authors
_did_not_ find that garlic compounds were effective
against tumors. This was a lab study on glioblastoma
cells, not on tumors in actual animals or people.

There's LOTS of compounds which will kill brain
tumor cells in a test tube, but which are utterly
ineffective against actual tumors because the brain
is protected by the Blood-Brain Barrier. Many
compounds which can penetrate other tissues
can't get into the brain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood-brain_barrier

- quote -

Fighting against reactive oxygen species is the
main reason people take antioxidant vitamins.
If the garlic compounds get into the bloodstream
but fail to enter the brain, this could cause
much more harm than benefit. There might not be
any benefit at all.

- quote -

Without animal and human studies, it is almost
worthless information, not at all a breakthrough.

- quote -

With only a test-tube study, it's way too early
to be describing how to use garlic compounds
therapeutically. The reactive oxygen species
they produce could be doing much more harm than
good. There might not be any good. They only
way to know that is to do studies in animals and
people.

But the blogspot spammer will never tell you that.
Nobody can expect to get complete information from
the spammer, because everything he writes is slanted
to support sales of the supplement companies he wishes
to have as sponsors for his commercial blogspot web site.
He'll exaggerate the flimsiest evidence to support
sales of supplements, and he'll ignore any evidence
of potential for harm. He doesn't care that his
irresponsible advice could hurt somebody. He only
cares about getting his share of the multi-billion
dollar supplement business. He lacks common human
decency.

For the first time, compounds found in garlic have been identified as
effective against glioblastoma, a type of brain tumor equivalent to a
death sentence within a short period after diagnosis.

Scientists at the Medical University of South Carolina studied three
pure organo-sulfur compounds (DAS, DADS, and DATS) from garlic and the
interaction with human glioblastoma cells. All three compounds
demonstrated efficacy in eradicating brain cancer cells, but DATS
proved to be the most effective. The study will be published in the
September issue of the American Cancer Society's journal, "Cancer."

Cancer cells have a high metabolism and require much energy for rapid
growth. In this study, garlic compounds produced reactive oxygen
species in brain cancer cells, essentially gorging them to death with
activation of multiple death cascades.

This research highlights the great promise of plant-originated
compounds as natural medicine for controlling the malignant growth of
human brain tumor cells. While more studies are needed in animal
models of brain tumors before application of this therapeutic strategy
can be recommended for brain tumor patients, it is indeed a very
positive breakthrough.

"Our basic studies will eventually be translated to clinics for
patient care. We may have to wait several years before its application
to humans, but the significance of this discovery is enormous," Dr.
Banik, lead author, said. "The benefits from this research to brain
cancer patients will bring great satisfaction to researchers and
clinicians who are trying to find a successful treatment for this
devastating cancer."

Garlic-derived organo-sulfur compounds are small molecules that would
not necessarily require complicated methods of delivery for treating
brain tumor patients, the scientists said, and their natural origin is
probably better for the human body than synthetic treatment options.

To take advantage of any potential anti-cancer benefits from garlic
now, certain rules apply. These authors say to cut and peel a piece of
fresh garlic and let it sit for fifteen minutes before eating or
cooking it. This time allows for the release of the enzyme allinase
that produces the anti-cancer compounds. Eating too much garlic can
cause diarrhea, allergies, and internal bleeding, so it is important
to monitor garlic consumption. As always, talk to your holistic MD or
naturopathic physician about your plans.

Dave

Full text article above extracted from http://shamvswham.blogspot.com/