Diabetes Talking

Question:

cc’d by email It is posted as another Dr. Jai type piece of crap about one of a million worthless "studies"

The posting was clearly labelled as a ’study’ in the subject line.  I posted it with no comment or assertions of my own.  No one said you had to attempt to read or understand it. The only people posting tripe like this are eitehr the herb pushers, or people too stupid to knowe better Which are you?

Well, given that you clearly are unable to read and write at a level which would be adequate for this type of debate, I’m just puzzled as to why you would want to waste your time by responding to one of my postings to begin with. An in vitro or rodent study is MEANINGLESAS to a diabetic. If there is any potential merit, ten someone might do a human trial, – but it is unluikely.

You see, some of us find studies on potential new therapies to have much more meaning than your type of arrogant, puerile drivel. Human trials often only follow in most instances where the substance in question can be patented by a manufacturer.  That doesn’t mean that people are "dummies" because they may find interest in reading about a non-patentable substance.  What ‘merit’ is there in ‘your’ postings? Do you engage in anything other than ad honimen, canonical responses? After a few human studies – THEN it might become news.

Most of us are here to discuss and share information relating to complications of diabetes, current and potential treatments, and support for one another.  You seem to have none of these interests. If you do, you are nonetheless unable to comport yourself in a mature enough manner to be successful at it. BUT, you come onto the newsgroup pitching BUNCHES of frauds, sugar alcohols, Perricone, unaproved drugs, worthless studies.

It’s called sharing of information.  Did it ever occur to you that some other people who read this newsgroup(yourself excluded) are adults and are capable of making decisions regarding the value of material posted without your insolent interference? BUT, you come onto the newsgroup pitching BUNCHES of frauds, sugar alcohols, Perricone, unaproved drugs, worthless studies.

Sugar alcohols are substances most of us are familiar with and ingest.  Given the gross ignorance you’ve shown regarding the properties and usefulness of these substances in the relevant thread discussing sugar alcohols, it’s quite conspicuous that you are in no position to criticize others for discussing or sharing information about them. Now, where’s the "pitching of a fraud" here? BUT, you come onto the newsgroup pitching BUNCHES of frauds, sugar alcohols, Perricone, unaproved drugs, worthless studies.

Dr. Perricone is a professor of medicine at Yale(not good enough for you?), who has had two books which were nyt best sellers dealing in part with issues related to preventing sugar spikes in the diet and prevention of glycation — all of this information also being relevant to those with diabetes.  Letting others know about him and his research and books hardly constitutes a "pitching of a fraud."  On the contrary, I hope to find others sharing similar texts they found to be beneficial.  As a side note, this doctor was involved in promotion and study of the use of alpha lipoic acid for blood sugar, oxidation, and tissue glycation related issues, and this substance is now being added added to supplements and products for diabetics for aid in the preservation of eyesight and cardiovascular health, among other things. I’ve personally noticed a tremendous improvement in my health, skin, and ease of blood sugar control after following his program for two months exactly as prescribed and I want to share my experience with others.  Quite frankly, I don’t care if ‘you’ are intersted or not. BUT, you come onto the newsgroup pitching BUNCHES of frauds, sugar alcohols, Perricone, unaproved drugs, worthless studies.

Why don’t you speak for yourself?  And how does my posting links to the results of recent studies constitute the "pitching" of a fraud or anything else?  If you don’t like reading the postings here and can’t behave yourself, please feel free to stop posting.

Response:

cc’d by email It is posted as another Dr. Jai type piece of crap about one of a million worthless "studies" The only people posting tripe like this are eitehr the herb pushers, or people too stupid to knowe better Which are you? An in vitro or rodent study is MEANINGLESAS to a diabetic. If there is any potential merit, ten someone might do a human trial, – but it is unluikely. After a few human studies – THEN it might become news. BUT, you come onto the newsgroup pitching BUNCHES of frauds, sugar alcohols, Perricone, unaproved drugs, worthless studies. Go back to leafleting – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – cc’d by email Yea dummy,. and the next time my rat has retinopathy, I’ll give him some. Unfortunatly, I don’t know any diabetic rats. T This material was posted for informational purposes for everyone who may be interested in substances being developed/studied which may show some potential for treating diabetic symptoms. It was in regard to an herb which is undergoing current study for its possible benefits for conditions arising from hyperglycemia.  Most studies in the literature do involve rodents. No one said you had to read it, or respond to it. Next time, keep your nasty little comments to yourself, worm. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&…

Response:

cc’d by email Yea dummy,. and the next time my rat has retinopathy, I’ll give him some. Unfortunatly, I don’t know any diabetic rats. T

This material was posted for informational purposes for everyone who may be interested in substances being developed/studied which may show some potential for treating diabetic symptoms. It was in regard to an herb which is undergoing current study for its possible benefits for conditions arising from hyperglycemia.  Most studies in the literature do involve rodents. No one said you had to read it, or respond to it. Next time, keep your nasty little comments to yourself, worm. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&…

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text —— Original Message —– Newsgroups: misc.health.diabetes Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2003 8:25 PM Where is your independent proof?  What is needed is an objective peer review.  Otherwise, it is spam of the worst kind. I’m not selling anything.  This is just the results of a study. See here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&…

Response:

cc’d by email Yea dummy,. and the next time my rat has retinopathy, I’ll give him some. Unfortunatly, I don’t know any diabetic rats. T – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – —– Original Message —– Newsgroups: misc.health.diabetes Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2003 8:25 PM Where is your independent proof?  What is needed is an objective peer review.  Otherwise, it is spam of the worst kind. I’m not selling anything.  This is just the results of a study. See here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&…

Response: