OT is JT OK?

they are here in the UK too. It's called getting paid, it doesn't matter wh o by. Lots of people have been recommended a very long series of bs treatme nts with no success rate when the one that actually works has been known fo r many decades. Seen that play out numerous times.

Meaning it contradicts your assumptions. (I don't know if I'd call them ran dom.)

Well, I've found many useful leads from non-mds.

That's one of those Big Myths. You'd be quite right if we had good reliable data on both mainstream and all other conditions, but we don't. I've read enough med research papers to know that most are garbage grade science. Unf ortunately in medicine we often have just unreliable data to go on.

Also a valid study showing eg this drug fixes a condition does not mean it' s the best option. Things that can't be patented are little studied because studies cost money. No company backs financial loser studies. Sometimes yo u're better off going the 'well this worked for me' route.

Whatever path you take it's a roll of the dice.

That world is currently a dream. The options are not adequately studied, so if you follow your plan you'll miss out on a lot.

Out of date - such childlike faith. Read up on chemo. Read up on arthritis. Read up on diabetes. Read up on the many conditions on which your doc's ad vice is a known car crash.

NT

On Wednesday, 8 August 2018 21:47:54 UTC+1, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote: NT

Lol! The death toll is less funny.

NT

NT:

Nitrogen, carbon, oxygen can all be got from the air. Other minerals very very little.

NT

e:

rote:

ote:

rote:

rmation on the causes & treatments of disease - and it wouldn't be too hard to gather. Then a lot of currently dubious ideas would be proven or dispro ven by the numbers on a massive scale.

ot of medical questions, saving great numbers of lives & suffering. Yet a g reat deal of it is simply not gathered.

, rather than collecting data on sick people and the consequences of trying to treat them.

of data, but it takes time and money (which could have been spent on treat ing more patients, or treating the same number of patients more intensively ).

how to treat a patient and discourages rumination about how a different a t reatment might have worked better - doctors are prone to suicidal depressio n, and losing a patient can be a depressing experience.

jor causative factors are and what treatments do & don't work, we can

reatments

tive treatments

ts etc come close but start developing epigenetic difference before birth.

to. That stuff can be added if/when available for even more info.

get the individual genomes, and add them to all the data that was collecte d for each participant? It's theoretically possible, but impractical in the real world.

sequencing which used to be very expensive and still costs about $1400 for a single draft sequence.

standard when it gets cheap enough.

ly like arguing that vaccination isn't necessary because we've only done in for the last few hundred years.

lly sequence the genome of each patient to find out why some treatments are more effective for some patients than others.

of a lot of your difficulties.

ople following advice that's far from sound or proven.

w clinical trials don't include any women at all, and the test subject pool used to be drawn from relatively young people.

cale data.

lation - studying all the eighteen year-old males who get conscripted for m ilitary service, which was a popular way of doing large scale studies - doe sn't tell you anything like as much as studies of a more representative pop ulation

enough informed to consent to anything sensible.

uld tell you, you've got to soak up all the information that a six year med ical course instills into your doctor.

ailing to understand points that don't suit your argument.

llshit would work on you.

etting properly informed - after all you do seem to miss the obvious remark ably frequently

llshit their patients, and thus always read up on the topic first, unless n ot physically able.

ent as little as you can get away with.

he'd like to be.

s above other people's heads. My impression is more that he's rather more t ransparent that he likes to think.

to say so.

't put you in particularly impressive company.

I'm gonna leave you on your own on planet stupid. I simply don't have the m otivation to join you there.

NT

andom.)

They are slightly worse than random. You've got to be a bit nuts to think t hawt you know better than the medical profession, and a bit more nuts to wa ste time offering up your expertise on the web.

Leads that NT found "useful" might not be quite as attractive to people who can manage rational argument.

le data on both mainstream and all other conditions, but we don't. I've rea d enough med research papers to know that most are garbage grade science. U nfortunately in medicine we often have just unreliable data to go on.

NT thinks his judgement is not only reliable, but also more reliable than t he judgement of people who have years of training on working out what data can be trusted.

t's the best option. Things that can't be patented are little studied becau se studies cost money. No company backs financial loser studies. Sometimes you're better off going the 'well this worked for me' route.

Always assuming that the guy who tells you that "this worked for me' has di agnosed his own problem correctly, and that you have diagnosed yours correc tly.

Sure but the odds are rather better if you stick with conventional medicine .

so if you follow your plan you'll miss out on a lot.

Most of what you'll miss out on a bad options peddled by people who want to make money out of desperate customers.

s. Read up on diabetes. Read up on the many conditions on which your doc's advice is a known car crash.

Chemo works, if your particular cancer is susceptible, and the chemo starts early enough. there are magic bullets for particular cancers - like cis-pl atinum for testicular cancer.

There's a moderately recent treatment for arthritis - first tried in 1980

which relies on low doses of methotrexate which was first used for chemothe raphy back in 1947.

Salfusalazine works much the same way, though it's less aggressive

The drug was developed for the job around 1970, but didn't see much use unt il the late 1990's. My rheumatologist prescribed it as something new around 2005, and it has worked a treat for me.

What NT is thinking about with diabetes isn't clear. If he were a fan of th e minerals deficiency fringe, he'd be a dangerous nutter, but he may have s ome other eccentric theory to push.

NT has his own planet stupid, and he's too far up himself to notice where he's posting from. You can take a half-wit to information, but you can't make him think.

That might be a good case in point. If they like tropical areas what is wrong with Florida, down on the Bayou, whatever ? Parts of Mexico ? I say soil.

Never heard of those apple things, sounds interesting. But there are some things that just can't be had sometimes.

There's another thing that it hardly takes shit to grow.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought nitrogen did *not* come from the air for most plants. That is why nitrogen fixation is so important. A few plants do it and lightning supplies some. The rest of the plants must get fixed nitrogen from the soil.

Rick C.

You can say what you want...

If you pay for air shipping and the packing I bet you can get some. Money can do a lot of things.

Rick C.

You are correct.

Some plants (like beans and clover) have pods with bacteria in them that can take nitrogen from the air and turn it into chemicals the plant can use. Most plants don't have such bacteria. No plants AFAIK can use nitrogen from the air directly themselves - they need the bacteria helpers.

ry very little.

air for most plants."

Supportive of that is that most major fertilizer is based on NPK, nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium. You look at the different types they all have t hat, and then whatever else. One set of additives and the label says "tomat o" and another "corn" or whatever. Whatever formulation they arrived at for specific plants.

It is still only what the plant needs, it doesn't cover our needs. in reall y rich soil all plants will have alot of potassium and a few other things, that is universal except maybe mushrooms or something. They get what they n eed but there are also "residuals" like, of the others - some trace element s that we need.

And the problem is insidious, 2 tomatoes, nice, red, ripe. One could have a ton of iron in it and all kinds of oses and ides in it and probiotic prope rties and all that, practically a miracle food, and the one next to it that looks the same is almost as nutritious as a cardboard box.

We are both quite correct.

NT

very very little.

e air for most plants."

n, phosphorous and potassium. You look at the different types they all have that, and then whatever else. One set of additives and the label says "tom ato" and another "corn" or whatever. Whatever formulation they arrived at f or specific plants.

lly rich soil all plants will have alot of potassium and a few other things , that is universal except maybe mushrooms or something. They get what they need but there are also "residuals" like, of the others - some trace eleme nts that we need.

a ton of iron in it and all kinds of oses and ides in it and probiotic pro perties and all that, practically a miracle food, and the one next to it th at looks the same is almost as nutritious as a cardboard box.

I'd love to see some references that indicate this. It is hard for me to i magine vegetables that are no better than cardboard.

Rick C.

m:

is of no value. Ask them for the basis for their belief, it's truly clueles s. "

told me that plants can get the nutrients right from the air.

very very little.

e air for most plants. That is why nitrogen fixation is so important. A f ew plants do it and lightning supplies some. The rest of the plants must g et fixed nitrogen from the soil.

You remind me of the joke about the rabbi. The assistant rabbi brings two men to the rabbi to settle a dispute. The rabbi listens to the first man p atiently, reflects and says, "Yes, you are right." The assistant says, "Bu t rabbi, you haven't heard the other man yet." So the other man tells his side of the dispute with the rabbi listening intently and when the man is d one the rabbi says, "Yes, you are right!"

With that the assistant becomes agitated and cries to the rabbi, "But rabbi , they can't both be right!!!" The rabbi replies, "Yes, you are right."

So how exactly are we both right?

Rick C.

Too true. And then when you're a terminal case they put you on the ironically-named Liverpool Care Pathway - something I wouldn't do to a cat, let alone a dog.

e:

com:

n is of no value. Ask them for the basis for their belief, it's truly cluel ess. "

ey told me that plants can get the nutrients right from the air.

s very very little.

the air for most plants. That is why nitrogen fixation is so important. A few plants do it and lightning supplies some. The rest of the plants must get fixed nitrogen from the soil.

o men to the rabbi to settle a dispute. The rabbi listens to the first man patiently, reflects and says, "Yes, you are right." The assistant says, " But rabbi, you haven't heard the other man yet." So the other man tells hi s side of the dispute with the rabbi listening intently and when the man is done the rabbi says, "Yes, you are right!"

bi, they can't both be right!!!" The rabbi replies, "Yes, you are right."

I'm shaking my head here. Seriously. Some plants get nitrogen from soil, some from the air. Of the ones that get it frmo the soil, a percentage get it from other nitrogen fixing plants. A re you really claiming to be unaware of that?

NT

You'd likely be prosecuted if you did that to an animal.

NT

e:

ote:

l.com:

ion is of no value. Ask them for the basis for their belief, it's truly clu eless. "

they told me that plants can get the nutrients right from the air.

als very very little.

m the air for most plants. That is why nitrogen fixation is so important. A few plants do it and lightning supplies some. The rest of the plants mu st get fixed nitrogen from the soil.

two men to the rabbi to settle a dispute. The rabbi listens to the first m an patiently, reflects and says, "Yes, you are right." The assistant says, "But rabbi, you haven't heard the other man yet." So the other man tells his side of the dispute with the rabbi listening intently and when the man is done the rabbi says, "Yes, you are right!"

abbi, they can't both be right!!!" The rabbi replies, "Yes, you are right ."

et it frmo the soil, a percentage get it from other nitrogen fixing plants. Are you really claiming to be unaware of that?

Yes, I'm not aware of that. Which plants get nitrogen from the air???

Rick C.