if you want a lethal dosage of israeli patting self on back, just go to israel. indeed you get an overdose.

>> ^SlipperyPete:
wow - it's like the creator lives inside my brain


Time to up your dosage.

Edit to remove most of what I was saying, I find that I don't give a shit anymore. And I doubt anyone else does either.

I logged in here a bit ago because two videos were just posted on YouTube that are worth sifting, but I find myself not caring at the moment. If anyone wants a couple of good science vids on dosage and risk as it relates to vaccines parts 1 and 2 are at the following links.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKujq-TcJLM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXHwmzCr_0o

Later.

You touch on another issue that's cropped up in my practice on multiple occasions: back injury.

I cannot count the number of patients whose downward spiral could be traced to a back injury. It's easy to dismiss it as an excuse, but I've seen it often enough to recognize that it's like being shot: sometimes it's luck on how bad it is, some people manage to overcome, and some people don't, but it's a very, very traumatic event where the cards are stacked against recovery.
The following anecdote highlights that issue and another as-yet-undiscussed: there are people who genuinely need pain medication, and there are addicts. It gets particularly thorny where those groups overlap.

As an example, one patient (we'll call him X) related how a morbidly obese man crashed his car into X's front yard. X was attempting to assist the man (who X did not realize was already dead) and threw his back out. He suffered over the next decade through multiple surgeries with the placement, removal, and replacement of pins and rods. (He showed me a plastic sack of parts from a previous surgery.)
In a case like this, several factors conspire against a person:
-Even with insurance, it's expensive. Every penny not spent on absolute essentials goes to medical costs.
-Chronic pain. Many of these people suffer from pain constantly and are perpetually medicated with increasing dosages of narcotic pain medications as their resistance builds. They become dependent.
-Inability to work, both due to the injury and inability to concentrate under constant medication, which in turn compounds the first problem

With the combination of unemployment, constant pain, and continuous medication (and possible dependence/addiction), often these people lose the will to properly care for themselves. As a dentist, I see this in people who gave up caring for their teeth, and then could not afford to fix them as they "rotted out". These rotten teeth become yet another source of infection and pain, and another reason they can't secure a job. X came to me to get the rest of his teeth taken out in preparation for dentures (yet another significant but necessary expense).
He neglected to inform me that he was being treated for chronic pain (and narcotic dependence) at a pain management clinic, but that's another issue.
The problem is that X was having all his teeth out, so post-operative pain is almost a certainty, but not only would you hesitate to give a recovered addict a narcotic Rx, but their tolerance to pain medication is so high that they actually need more than the average person to achieve relief. It's a Catch-22.

This isn't to say back injuries are absolutely life-ending, or to completely discount some degree of personal responsibility, but the recurring pattern of economic hardship, chronic pain, and drug dependence following these types of injuries is impossible to ignore.

Homeopathy is a fraud on two levels. On the first level they apply chemicals that have an effect opposite to the one you actually want. I.E. taking the active chemical in poison oak/ivy(urushiol)as a cure for a skin rash. This effect is allegedly achieved by diluting the chemical in water. This is the second level of fraud in homeopathy. Common homeopathic treatments are so diluting that the chance of there even being a single molecule of the active ingredient in the dosage is astronomically small.

Now, about acupuncture. There is no evidence that it works as advertised. That is by redirecting qi at your meridians. In fact, there is ample evidence that these meridians were actually a very recent invention and a massive fraud. Any perceived effect acupuncture has is either coincidental or a placebo effect. Which is what many, many recent studies have shown.

Well Evan though this advert is still an exaggeration (depending on dosage and age) at least its slightly informative compared to some of the worse adverts out there. and Frank as a service is quite well run. my biggest problem is that alcohol is worse than cannabis yet its legal. we do have some anti drinking adverts on tv which are semi nicely done but thay are still pretty stupid.

>> ^rychan:
This interview is so full of weasel words and misrepresentation of our scientific community. Conspiracy theories galore.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiomersal_controversy
This lawyer speaks with such certainty, how does he rebut all of these large-scale studies which show that autism rates are unchanged (or actually increase a tiny amount) when Thiomersal isn't used?
This study from Denmark http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/290/13/1763 shows that 20,000 children who received no Thiomersal had the same autism risk. Increasing dosages of Thiomersal didn't cause increasing in autism rate.
What can this guy possibly say about that study? There was no nuance in what he was claiming -- he very much implied that Thiomersal was the exclusive source of autism. That autism hadn't even existed before it was used.
He's just a weasel. There's no way an objective person can review the literature and make the conclusions that he's made.


I tihnk there are other factors involved...but nobody can deny the odd coincidences with autism and vaccines. The fact that you dismiss an arguement based on an irrelevant wikki entry written by fellow american's and likely a proponent of pharmaceuticals is astounding. You should take someone's word who does the real studies and has done so for a long time. Maybe there is no direct correlation right now, but something is going on, and Judos to this guy for trying to figure it out. And Fuck you for your dismissive, ignorant, and lame ass excuses.

This interview is so full of weasel words and misrepresentation of our scientific community. Conspiracy theories galore.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiomersal_controversy

This lawyer speaks with such certainty, how does he rebut all of these large-scale studies which show that autism rates are unchanged (or actually increase a tiny amount) when Thiomersal isn't used?

This study from Denmark http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/290/13/1763 shows that 20,000 children who received no Thiomersal had the same autism risk. Increasing dosages of Thiomersal didn't cause increasing in autism rate.

What can this guy possibly say about that study? There was no nuance in what he was claiming -- he very much implied that Thiomersal was the exclusive source of autism. That autism hadn't even existed before it was used.

He's just a weasel. There's no way an objective person can review the literature and make the conclusions that he's made.

This is the best I could find - it's a video of a tv screen and doesn't include the "rape, murder, arson, and rape" guy.

In reply to this comment by swampgirl:
Crap, I can't find a replacement. There are similar clips but not the one I used. Mine started at the beginning of the registration and ended seeing the KKK guys.

In reply to this comment by jonny:
haha - I love that line. I use it whenever I can. I'll probably never have another opportunity like I did on my first day working at a PET center. We were given radiation badges to measure cumulative radiation dosages, so I turned to my friend that hired me and said, "Badges? We don't need no stinking badges!". The whole room lost it.

[edit] I just went to view and vote for your vid, but it's dead.

In reply to this comment by swampgirl:
Hilarious. I think I posted the first half of that scene. When the bad guys were registering and saying "we don't need no stinking badges"


In reply to this comment by jonny:
Thanks! Funny, I thought you'd like the this one more.

In reply to this comment by swampgirl:
*promote

Crap, I can't find a replacement. There are similar clips but not the one I used. Mine started at the beginning of the registration and ended seeing the KKK guys.

In reply to this comment by jonny:
haha - I love that line. I use it whenever I can. I'll probably never have another opportunity like I did on my first day working at a PET center. We were given radiation badges to measure cumulative radiation dosages, so I turned to my friend that hired me and said, "Badges? We don't need no stinking badges!". The whole room lost it.

[edit] I just went to view and vote for your vid, but it's dead.

In reply to this comment by swampgirl:
Hilarious. I think I posted the first half of that scene. When the bad guys were registering and saying "we don't need no stinking badges"


In reply to this comment by jonny:
Thanks! Funny, I thought you'd like the this one more.

In reply to this comment by swampgirl:
*promote

haha - I love that line. I use it whenever I can. I'll probably never have another opportunity like I did on my first day working at a PET center. We were given radiation badges to measure cumulative radiation dosages, so I turned to my friend that hired me and said, "Badges? We don't need no stinking badges!". The whole room lost it.

[edit] I just went to view and vote for your vid, but it's dead.

In reply to this comment by swampgirl:
Hilarious. I think I posted the first half of that scene. When the bad guys were registering and saying "we don't need no stinking badges"


In reply to this comment by jonny:
Thanks! Funny, I thought you'd like the this one more.

In reply to this comment by swampgirl:
*promote

This drug doesn't make you retarded. It's just that during the influence which is from 3 to 8 minutes, dpending on the dosage, you can't function normally because you are almost totally out of your mind and out of this world. You're supposed to take it in a quiet darkened room, sitting or lying down.
It's one of the most amazing psychedelic experiences I've ever had.
Also this drug is not toxic, the only danger lies in hurting yourself while under the influence. That's why a sitter is advised.

>> ^rembar:
From the actual article:
"To be sure, the concentrations of these pharmaceuticals are tiny, measured in quantities of parts per billion or trillion, far below the levels of a medical dose."
Contaminants, including pharmaceuticals, in our water is a danger, but this report is a crock of crap regardless because 1. effects on organisms occur at many factors higher dosages than the AP reported, 2. the AP is misinterpreting focused studies like the feminization of male fish to fit its narrative, and 3. the AP clearly doesn't understand why concentrations measured by ppt are idiotic and why biomagnification is important.
Now, let's discuss why the AP isn't a scientific publication and how newspapers profit off fearmongering at the expense of public health policy that should be guided by scientific results.

Dude, I'm not saying that what was found in the water is affecting the human population, as of yet. However the "scientific" fact of the matter is that small quantities of pharmaceuticals have been found in the water supply, by scientists from the US Geological Survey. Do you dispute that? I'm NOT talking about over-reaching conclusions, just the data that has been measured by real scientists. That's why I included this in the "Science" channel. This isn't the journal "Science", BTW. I'm not talking about a hypothesis, research, and conclusion. Just data that was extracted by real scientists.

I'm not a perpetual motion enthusiast or a conspiratorial "fluoride is evil" dude. Just a guy who's putting out information. I'll grant you that many people may not be able to differentiate between a hypothesis, a theory, and a fact. But the fact remains that there's stuff in our drinking water that no one has disclosed before.

I've seen videos in the "Science" channel before that include theories still rejected by the majority of scientists in their field. Does that make them unworthy of the Science channel too? If you don't want to include this in the Science channel I won't lose any sleep over it. But just think about it.

Dude, I'm not saying that what was found in the water is affecting the human population, as of yet. However the "scientific" fact of the matter is that small quantities of pharmaceuticals have been found in the water supply, by scientists from the US Geological Survey. Do you dispute that? I'm NOT talking about over-reaching conclusions, just the data that has been measured by real scientists. That's why I included this in the "Science" channel. This isn't the journal "Science", BTW. I'm not talking about a hypothesis, research, and conclusion. Just data that was extracted by real scientists.

I'm not a perpetual motion enthusiast or a conspiratorial "fluoride is evil" dude. Just a guy who's putting out information. I'll grant you that many people may not be able to differentiate between a hypothesis, a theory, and a fact. But the fact remains that there's stuff in our drinking water that no one has disclosed before.

I've seen videos in the "Science" channel before that include theories still rejected by the majority of scientists in their field. Does that make them unworthy of the Science channel too? If you don't want to include this in the Science channel I won't lose any sleep over it. But just think about it.

In reply to this comment by rembar:
From the actual article:
"To be sure, the concentrations of these pharmaceuticals are tiny, measured in quantities of parts per billion or trillion, far below the levels of a medical dose."

Contaminants, including pharmaceuticals, in our water is a danger, but this report is a crock of crap regardless because 1. effects on organisms occur at many factors higher dosages than the AP reported, 2. the AP is misinterpreting focused studies like the feminization of male fish to fit its narrative, and 3. the AP clearly doesn't understand why concentrations measured by ppt are idiotic and why biomagnification is important.

Now, let's discuss why the AP isn't a scientific publication and how newspapers profit off fearmongering at the expense of public health policy that should be guided by scientific results.

From the actual article:
"To be sure, the concentrations of these pharmaceuticals are tiny, measured in quantities of parts per billion or trillion, far below the levels of a medical dose."

Contaminants, including pharmaceuticals, in our water is a danger, but this report is a crock of crap regardless because 1. effects on organisms occur at many factors higher dosages than the AP reported, 2. the AP is misinterpreting focused studies like the feminization of male fish to fit its narrative, and 3. the AP clearly doesn't understand why concentrations measured by ppt are idiotic and why biomagnification is important.

Now, let's discuss why the AP isn't a scientific publication and how newspapers profit off fearmongering at the expense of public health policy that should be guided by scientific results.