PDA

View Full Version : Gee, thanks a bunch... Lady Mod



Doc Bunkum
06-26-2010, 10:34 PM
Gee, thanks a bunch, Doc. I wouldn't call Northfield Acupuncture clinic though, I haven't worked there in over a year, nor am I a patient there any longer, my health problems were resolved. You are liable to be disappointed if you call sweetheart.

I know what excuse that George gave to Len about why it was down for a brief time, but I take it with a grain of salt. I don't care why it was down, the same thing happened before and it was down a hell of a lot longer. It's back up and running and I suspect many who left will probably go back. And they will probably come here as well.

Glad to hear your health problems were resolved - whatever they were.

Now if you actually believe "many who left will probably go back" to scam.com, I think you're delusional.

I doubt many of the regulars will be back posting there much - at least not as long as Lenny the Loser is running things there.

As I said before, I like your style, even if we don't agree too often.

But as for that piece of trash over there with the big "A" on his t-shirt that's just using up oxygen on this planet, why even waste the time posting something that the pompous prick is going to delete anyhow?

Sojustask
06-27-2010, 07:51 AM
Glad to hear your health problems were resolved - whatever they were.

Now if you actually believe "many who left will probably go back" to scam.com, I think you're delusional.

Many are going back. So, I guess I'm not delusional.


I doubt many of the regulars will be back posting there much - at least not as long as Lenny the Loser is running things there.

That could be true, but then that site will just end up getting a new batch of regulars. The site will recover.



As I said before, I like your style, even if we don't agree too often.

But as for that piece of trash over there with the big "A" on his t-shirt that's just using up oxygen on this planet, why even waste the time posting something that the pompous prick is going to delete anyhow?

There are ways to post without making it easy for Len to come up with a reason to delete your post. Just takes a little creativity.
It is a problem that he is so Pro-MLM. But it was also a problem having the site so against MLM too. Nothing is going to be a perfect
match. I think it would have been better to not appoint an Admin and for George to have taken more interest in the site. I think a lot
things could have been done differently in the last 5 years I've been a moderator there. For one thing, there are ways to automatically
moderate the forums so that what has to be moderated by people effectively could be handled without having to spend hours and hours
on the site. I've had more techy members on the site tell me about them and I've always tried to get George to implement them. SubJunk,
could have actually done that for George, he had done some work for him on his other sites, but George didn't want to do that. I think
he was too much of a tight wad for it or just didn't understand how it worked.

Lots of people on both sites just use up oxygen on the planet Doc, just because they do doesn't mean you should throw in the towel and stop
fighting the good fight yourself. You are letting one person dictate how you behave. Stop attacking that one person and focus on scams and
you shouldn't have any problems. Or don't. I always liked your posts, at least any that ended up in the Political forum. I really didn't spend much
time on the MLM forum. Once in awhile some topic would catch my eye and I would hang out there for awhile, but basically, that wasn't my preference. I don't know very many of the regulars on that forum that you guys keep talking about. Some names I recognize, others, I don't.

I've told Len if he is going to participate in the threads then he has to lighten up and recognize that if you post and someone calls you out or calls your character into question a hundred times, you have three choices, address it a hundred times, address it once and ignore the rest, or ignore them all and carry on. He's going to have to spend a lot of time trying to keep those threads just to the topic. I'm thinking that allowing him to figure that out for himself and seeing where it will lead might be a good thing. That's just my opinion though. It seems that if you all left, then he won. No opposition.

If you called the ball by leaving, you kind of gave up the right to complain about the consequences, IMO.

Lady Mod @ scam.com

Subway_Eat Fresh!!!
06-27-2010, 06:56 PM
I never respected lady mod. She needs to go to therapy and develop some social skills

Sojustask
06-27-2010, 10:55 PM
I never respected lady mod. She needs to go to therapy and develop some social skills

You might want to take a lesson or two yourself.

Unsaved Trash
06-28-2010, 01:28 AM
You might want to take a lesson or two yourself.

Snappy comeback. Damn, you're quick with the lame wit.


Hmmm, I'll have to work on that, then.

How about actually working over at what should be your first priority, but never has been, scam.com? As you could see if you actually looked around over there, the place is a mess. How many different threads do you need on Lightyear? I do see that you've had a problem merging threads and the likes since it's been years since you actually did anything, but give it a shot. You might also want to observe some of the forums and move a few to the correct areas. As the Supermod, I would assume you would have intervened in the Berryview thread (my favorite) and put a stop to it. But no, Katie locked it, Len unlocked it and proceeded to rant and defend himself rather than just STFU, then locked it again. And you? Nothing as usual. Ah, right, Len is an ADMIN and that trumps your magical powers.

You're really not wanted here. My suggestion is quit while you're ahead. Should you decide not to, I shall figuratively take you to the Texarkana slaughterhouse, hang you by your cloven hoofs (or hooves), slit you down the middle, expose you as the Medusa you are, rip out your guts, and call a hazmat team in to dispose of the toxic waste. That would be a major haul from the pics you've posted of yourself. Your choice.

Sojustask
06-28-2010, 06:41 AM
Snappy comeback. Damn, you're quick with the lame wit.

Not hard when it was a lame insult to begin with. You must be airplane pilot guy. Or No_Moron. Probably Tom. Nice screen name and it seems to suit you well so far.




How about actually working over at what should be your first priority, but never has been, scam.com? As you could see if you actually looked around over there, the place is a mess. How many different threads do you need on Lightyear? I do see that you've had a problem merging threads and the likes since it's been years since you actually did anything, but give it a shot. You might also want to observe some of the forums and move a few to the correct areas. As the Supermod, I would assume you would have intervened in the Berryview thread (my favorite) and put a stop to it. But no, Katie locked it, Len unlocked it and proceeded to rant and defend himself rather than just STFU, then locked it again. And you? Nothing as usual. Ah, right, Len is an ADMIN and that trumps your magical powers.

You're really not wanted here. My suggestion is quit while you're ahead. Should you decide not to, I shall figuratively take you to the Texarkana slaughterhouse, hang you by your cloven hoofs (or hooves), slit you down the middle, expose you as the Medusa you are, rip out your guts, and call a hazmat team in to dispose of the toxic waste. That would be a major haul from the pics you've posted of yourself. Your choice.

Threats? To what purpose? Would it help you sleep better at night?

Who says I'm not wanted? You? And you are???? Apparently, not someone important enough to do more than make threats and post pictures like some juvenile delinquent. SoapBoxMom had some website do that to her, it's a pretty hateful site as well as being pretty stupid. So, you are going to drop to the same level as those guys and do that to me, here? Will using the same tactics they used against her somehow make you a superior or a better person? Do you really think doing that will make this forum look more legit?

This is starting out as a really good site. Why don't you engage your brain and think twice before you decide to bring it's value down by trashing it up with your immature behavior?


Lady Mod @ scam.com

Sojustask
06-28-2010, 07:13 AM
Should you decide not to, I shall figuratively take you to the Texarkana slaughterhouse, hang you by your cloven hoofs (or hooves), slit you down the middle, expose you as the Medusa you are, rip out your guts, and call a hazmat team in to dispose of the toxic waste. That would be a major haul from the pics you've posted of yourself. Your choice.

Actually, it's your choice whether or not you put the rules here to the test. Note rule #7. Then note that at the top of this forum it says the rules here are relaxed but not unmoderated.

Since I'm not running a business, I'm not a scam. I'm not selling anything, I'm not trying to steal the traffic here, I just don't qualify as any reason to get so worked up over other than I moderate on another forum that you no longer like.

So, basically, it's really YOUR choice whether or not you want this place to go down as nothing better than the site you so dislike. I don't think the increase in traffic for starting a pissing match with Lady Mod is what they had in mind here when they built this forum.

But by all means, put their integrity and rules to the test. Prove whether or not they will be better enforcers than I have been.

I'm curious to see what happens.

Lady Mod @ scam.com



06-24-2010 03:18 PM #1
Soapboxmom

Administrator

Rules and Guidelines
RealScam.com Rules and Guidelines

RealScam.com Rules and Guidelines:
Welcome to REALSCAM.COM!


7: Sexually oriented language, excessive foul language, threats, porn, hate posts, racist material, violent depictions, libelous, defamatory material and / or any content that the administrators and / or moderators find objectionable will not be permitted and will be edited or removed. Anything that includes or links to porn, threats, child abuse related material, material that encourages any type of criminal activity and the like will be removed and result in an immediate permanent ban.



Forum: Ranting, Raving and other Ridiculous Diatribes
If you must flame, do it here. Relaxed rules but not un-moderated.

littleroundman
06-28-2010, 10:02 AM
Since I'm not running a business, I'm not a scam. I'm not selling anything, I'm not trying to steal the traffic here, I just don't qualify as any reason to get so worked up over other than I moderate on another forum that you no longer like.
Are you kidding me ????
You're the worst kind of scammer.
The kind who uses their position to push such monstrous lies as
natural methods can cure cancer
Natural methods can cure diabetes
There is no proof the H.I.V. is responsible for A.I.D.S.
Even Clements and Co pale into insignificance next to you and your kind.
You're a complete and utter disgrace, and a low level one at that.
At least they're only chasing the money, and not playing with EXTREMELY desperate and vulnerable peoples' health and wellbeing.

Earl Lee Tobed
06-28-2010, 11:03 AM
Actually, it's your choice whether or not you put the rules here to the test. Note rule #7. Then note that at the top of this forum it says the rules here are relaxed but not unmoderated.

Since I'm not running a business, I'm not a scam. I'm not selling anything, I'm not trying to steal the traffic here, I just don't qualify as any reason to get so worked up over other than I moderate on another forum that you no longer like.

So, basically, it's really YOUR choice whether or not you want this place to go down as nothing better than the site you so dislike. I don't think the increase in traffic for starting a pissing match with Lady Mod is what they had in mind here when they built this forum.

But by all means, put their integrity and rules to the test. Prove whether or not they will be better enforcers than I have been.

I'm curious to see what happens.

Lady Mod @ scam.com



06-24-2010 03:18 PM #1
Soapboxmom

Administrator

Rules and Guidelines
RealScam.com Rules and Guidelines

RealScam.com Rules and Guidelines:
Welcome to REALSCAM.COM!


7: Sexually oriented language, excessive foul language, threats, porn, hate posts, racist material, violent depictions, libelous, defamatory material and / or any content that the administrators and / or moderators find objectionable will not be permitted and will be edited or removed. Anything that includes or links to porn, threats, child abuse related material, material that encourages any type of criminal activity and the like will be removed and result in an immediate permanent ban.



Forum: Ranting, Raving and other Ridiculous Diatribes
If you must flame, do it here. Relaxed rules but not un-moderated.

I dont generally like to involve myself in "people politics",but to my mind SJA seems to be here merely to flame and cause unrest.Already she is insinuating that Unsaved Trash,s remark was a threat,when it was actually an amusing tongue in cheek remark.
Comments please?

Lisa
06-28-2010, 12:49 PM
I dont generally like to involve myself in "people politics",but to my mind SJA seems to be here merely to flame and cause unrest.Already she is insinuating that Unsaved Trash,s remark was a threat,when it was actually an amusing tongue in cheek remark.
Comments please?

I found Unsaved Trash's remarks disgusting, to be honest. But this is the rant and rave section so SJA can flame and cause unrest and people can respond however they please. I mean, this thread really is calling her out so I do think she has a right to respond (only fair).

Personally, I wouldn't dream of saying what some people have said when attempting to insult someone. But then, even though this is the internet, I try and remind myself that I'm talking to a real person. So ya, I'll call people names and be mean sometimes. But I could never actually physically threaten someone nor would I ever dream of imagining violent acts happening to anyone - including Len. But that's just me.

Unsaved Trash
06-28-2010, 08:30 PM
Actually, it's your choice whether or not you put the rules here to the test. Note rule #7. Then note that at the top of this forum it says the rules here are relaxed but not unmoderated.

Since I'm not running a business, I'm not a scam. I'm not selling anything, I'm not trying to steal the traffic here, I just don't qualify as any reason to get so worked up over other than I moderate on another forum that you no longer like.

So, basically, it's really YOUR choice whether or not you want this place to go down as nothing better than the site you so dislike. I don't think the increase in traffic for starting a pissing match with Lady Mod is what they had in mind here when they built this forum.

But by all means, put their integrity and rules to the test. Prove whether or not they will be better enforcers than I have been.

I'm curious to see what happens.

Lady Mod @ scam.com



06-24-2010 03:18 PM #1
Soapboxmom

Administrator

Rules and Guidelines
RealScam.com Rules and Guidelines

RealScam.com Rules and Guidelines:
Welcome to REALSCAM.COM!


7: Sexually oriented language, excessive foul language, threats, porn, hate posts, racist material, violent depictions, libelous, defamatory material and / or any content that the administrators and / or moderators find objectionable will not be permitted and will be edited or removed. Anything that includes or links to porn, threats, child abuse related material, material that encourages any type of criminal activity and the like will be removed and result in an immediate permanent ban.



Forum: Ranting, Raving and other Ridiculous Diatribes
If you must flame, do it here. Relaxed rules but not un-moderated.

Thanks for all of the advice and posting of the rules for me. I was just totally clueless. Now, my Dearest Princess of Darkness, I have a few questions for you and this is just the beginning. I would really appreciate it if you would respond to them honestly.

1. Why did you return to scam.com after leaving in disgust and posting that lovely "Saying Goodbye" announcement? Afterall, George, your "very good friend" did in fact hire more mods and we cleaned up your mess. Yes, posts that went back for years. No, not ones that were just a year old, but years old. Why didn't you return to help out?

2. Is it a fact or not that once the rules were modified by SBM after consulting with all of the other mods and I personally removed your "Saying Goodbye" announcement, you did in fact return within two days to reclaim your crown? Isn't that a coincidence?

3. Did you or did you not give me holy hell for removing your announcement and jump all over SBM for modifying the rules because they no longer had your little name on them? They were basically the same rules with just a very few modifications. You jumped her big time.

4. If you don't want to get into a "pissing match," then why are you on this section at all? What was your point of coming here? Some truce!

That's all for right now. I do have a lot more but I'm just waiting to see if you'll respond with honest answers. And keep in mind that I have nearly every PM and email from you which I can use as proof in case you aren't exactly forthcoming with the truth. And no, I'm not "some pilot." You ain't that dumb.

Sojustask
06-28-2010, 10:14 PM
Are you kidding me ????
You're the worst kind of scammer.
The kind who uses their position to push such monstrous lies as
natural methods can cure cancer
Natural methods can cure diabetes
There is no proof the H.I.V. is responsible for A.I.D.S.
Even Clements and Co pale into insignificance next to you and your kind.
You're a complete and utter disgrace, and a low level one at that.
At least they're only chasing the money, and not playing with EXTREMELY desperate and vulnerable peoples' health and wellbeing.

I've posted articles and I've seen natural methods and even experienced them curing cancer. That's not a scam and I've never used my position
to "push" any kind of cures. Just shared other points of view.

You know? Until you've actually tried walking in my shoes or faced what I faced, or even conquered what
I've conquered, you might want to remain a little open minded to other possibilities than those that Big Brother
serves you during commercial breaks.

Sojustask
06-28-2010, 10:24 PM
Thanks for all of the advice and posting of the rules for me. I was just totally clueless. Now, my Dearest Princess of Darkness, I have a few questions for you and this is just the beginning. I would really appreciate it if you would respond to them honestly.

1. Why did you return to scam.com after leaving in disgust and posting that lovely "Saying Goodbye" announcement? Afterall, George, your "very good friend" did in fact hire more mods and we cleaned up your mess. Yes, posts that went back for years. No, not ones that were just a year old, but years old. Why didn't you return to help out?

2. Is it a fact or not that once the rules were modified by SBM after consulting with all of the other mods and I personally removed your "Saying Goodbye" announcement, you did in fact return within two days to reclaim your crown? Isn't that a coincidence?

3. Did you or did you not give me holy hell for removing your announcement and jump all over SBM for modifying the rules because they no longer had your little name on them? They were basically the same rules with just a very few modifications. You jumped her big time.

4. If you don't want to get into a "pissing match," then why are you on this section at all? What was your point of coming here? Some truce!

That's all for right now. I do have a lot more but I'm just waiting to see if you'll respond with honest answers. And keep in mind that I have nearly every PM and email from you which I can use as proof in case you aren't exactly forthcoming with the truth. And no, I'm not "some pilot." You ain't that dumb.

No Tom, I'm not that dumb. By the tone of the post I figured it was most likely you but, there was an off chance that it was the pilot guy, since he too uses a lot of venom in his posts.

Nor am I going to reply to your questions.

Why are you worried about the past when you have a whole future of scambusting in front of you? It seems to me that all that has gone on in the past worked out the best for SBM, she now has her own site to Administrate. So, what appeared to be a bad thing at the time turned out to just be stepping stones to something she's wanted in the first place.

So, what are you continuing to bitch about? Can't you just be happy with how things turned out for your friendz? Hey, I'll bet if you asked, she would even make you a Moderator. Maybe even a Super Mod. Oooh, sounds good doesn't it? No-Moron the SuperMod! Kind of has a ring to it, don't ya think?

Sojustask
06-28-2010, 10:28 PM
I dont generally like to involve myself in "people politics",but to my mind SJA seems to be here merely to flame and cause unrest.Already she is insinuating that Unsaved Trash,s remark was a threat,when it was actually an amusing tongue in cheek remark.
Comments please?

Maybe you should no involve yourself in this one either. I wasn't here to cause unrest or flame people, though I can give out as good as I get when the mood strikes me. Tom's remark was anything but tongue in cheek and that wasn't hard to figure out. At least, not for people with more than one brain cell bouncing around in their empty little heads.

littleroundman
06-29-2010, 12:34 AM
I've posted articles and I've seen natural methods and even experienced them curing cancer. That's not a scam and I've never used my position
to "push" any kind of cures. Just shared other points of view.

You know? Until you've actually tried walking in my shoes or faced what I faced, or even conquered what
I've conquered, you might want to remain a little open minded to other possibilities than those that Big Brother
serves you during commercial breaks.

How excellent,

I'd really like to discuss your use of the words "cure" and "possibilities" as well as asking how the h**l you know what miles I've walked in my shoes, your shoes or anyone elses' shoes.
Oh, having worked the odd hour or two in the HIV/AIDS field, I wouldn't mind seeing some of your "proof" with regard to the Human Immunodeficiency Virus NOT being responsible for A.I.D.S.

Just think, there's around 40+ MILLION HIV+ people living in the world and they're all living under the illusion the H.I.V. is responsible for A.I.D.S. but not Sojustask.

More than 25 MILLION people have died since 1981 thinking that the H.I.V. was responsible, but not Sojustask,

NO, NO, she knows it's a giant conspiracy.

A conspiracy SOOOOOOOO well carried out, it fooled every single one of those MILLIONS of people. (well, except David Icke and Sojustask)

Why, just in the relatively short time I was directly involved in the HIV/AIDS field, I stopped counting the number of people I'd met who died when the total passed a thousand. If I'd just known Sojustask at the time.

(BTW, SJA, exactly how many HIV+ and/or AIDS+ people have you met or known. Surely you're not basing your statements on something you've "heard" or "read" Surely the humanitarian side of your nature leads you to the "coalface" so to speak, where your miracle work will be more effective.

While were clarifying things,

when we're discussing "diabetes" are we talking about Type 1 (insulin dependent) diabetes or Type 2 (non insulin dependent) diabetes or Gestational diabetes ????

As we both know, most Type 2 non insulin dependent diabetes can be arrested and/or eliminated in most people by a simple weight loss/exercise program, so I guess the cases of diabetes you have seen "cured" must have been insulin dependent or gestational diabetes.

Does your "cure" work for people who've already suffered the side effects of untreated "diabetes"???? You know, the neuropathy, blindness and heart disease which have been sneaking up on the unwary victims of the "silent killer"

BTW, you DO know why diabetes is often referred to as "the silent killer" don't you ???

Silly me,

of COURSE you do.

You know how diabetes works away in the background, silently carrying out its' devious work while the victim lives in ignorant bliss.

Why, believe it or not, in your country alone there are hundreds of thousands of people who either have NO idea they are at risk, or, even worse, have convinced themselves they're "cured" because they have no obvious symptoms.

Think rust. You may not be able to see it, hear it or smell it and you may even think you've stopped it, but it's there working away 24/7 doing its' damage.

But, of course you know that.

As you well know, Ma'am, Diabetes Retinopathy related blindness is the second or third largest cause of vision impairment/blindness in the Western world.

What's so shocking is it can take 8 to 10 years before it leads to total blindness, and every minute of the time symptomless.

But your "cure" wouldn't be contributing to such a thing, would it ?????

Nah, you have "da knowledge"

Again, to be absolutely clear, when you say you've seen "cancer" cured, to which particular type of cancer are you referring ????

I checked with some of my contacts and they've kindly provided me with a list of different types of "cancer" just let your adoring public know whether your "cure" works for any or all of these cancers:

Anal cancer
Asbestos & lung disease (mesothelioma)
Bile duct cancer
Bladder cancer
Bone cancer (sarcoma)
Bowel cancer
Brain & spinal cord tumours
Breast cancer
Carcinoid tumours (neuroendocrine)
Cervical cancer
Connective tissue cancer
Endocrine cancer (thyroid)
Eye cancer
Family cancers (genetics & risk)
Gall bladder cancer
Kaposi's sarcoma
Kidney cancer
Leukaemia
Liver cancer
Lung cancer
Lymphoma (non-Hodgkin & Hodgkin)
Melanoma
Mesothelioma
Mouth, nose & throat cancers
Multiple myeloma
Oesophagus cancer
Ovarian cancer
Pancreatic cancer
Penis cancer
Peritoneal cancer
Prostate cancer
Skin cancers (non-melanoma)
Soft tissue cancers
Spinal tumours
Stomach & oesophageal cancer
Testicular cancer
Thymus cancer
Uterine cancer (cancer of the uterus)
Vaginal cancer
Vulval cancer

Please also fill us in as to how, exactly your "cure" knows how to differentiate between the many forms the disease we humans lump together as "cancer" to make communication easier.

P.S. is it true you and Mr Icke have been nominated for a Nobel Prize in medicine this year for your willingness to share your incredible "cures" with the world ????

P.P.S. Is there any way you could be persuaded to share your incredible secrets with any or all of the African nations ???? There's in excess of 30 MILLION HIV+ poor souls in Africa at the minute who are labouring under the illusion that the H.I.V. is whats' causing A.I.D.S.

Sojustask
06-29-2010, 07:22 AM
How excellent,

I'd really like to discuss your use of the words "cure" and "possibilities" as well as asking how the h**l you know what miles I've walked in my shoes, your shoes or anyone elses' shoes.

Discuss it all you want, you will discuss it alone.

And I don't know what miles you have walked anymore more than you know what I have walked, but you are the one making the accusations, not I. The last time I checked, people are still allowed to believe what they choose to believe and even voice those beliefs wherever they choose that will allow it.

I've never told anyone to stop with any of the traditional treatments and I've never had a doctor tell me that supplementing traditional treatments with alternative would negate the traditional ones. Nor have there been many doctors that I know who denied the possibilities that going straight to alternative treatments and not taking the traditional route would cure a person either. Why?

Because people are individuals and what works for one may not work for others. However, that doesn't mean that what did work for the one is a bad thing either.

Only you seem to take offence by the very thought that someone isn't walking lockstep with your beliefs. You really have tunnel vision don't you? You're right, everyone else who thinks differently is wrong no matter what they have personally seen or experienced.
LOL, you're an odd duck, to say the least.

WishfulThinking
06-29-2010, 09:32 AM
Anyone who sells or recommends unproven treatments for life threatening diseases has a tremendous personal responsibility to a victim of those diseases. It may or may not have occured to the procurers of some of the miracle cure jungle juices that these victims are generally desperate people who are trying to save their lives.

You may or may not understand it, but it makes people who work to help victims of serious diseases angry to see lotions and potions and jungle juice pushed to these victims for profit, financial freedom or whatever you like to call it.

Money should never be an issue when trying to help people, and, even less, money made through selling MLM products. Dying of cancer is not a game or part of anyone's "belief system" - it's a very painful and frightening prospect. Of course you and everyone else are entitled to your beliefs, but remember when recommending products to someone who is desperate and clutching at straws, you have a very very big responsibility for everything you say and sell. An MLMers goal to reach financial freedom selling health products is often incompatible with the health of their customers and is sometimes a very dangerous thing.

There are plenty of complimentary remedies for cancer that already exist and some of which are recognised as helping but not curing available at a very reasonable cost with no direct selling company or MLM involved and no expensive supplements required. Diet is the best known - try reading Professor Jane Plant's works. Great suggestions to help cure, or reduce the damage of many illnesses including cancer, and not a drop of overpriced jungle juice in sight. But, of course, she is not "in it for the money", she is working towards a real solution for sufferers of serious and often mortal diseases. There are many other fine highly qualified men and women who have made it their life's work to continue towards solving the, as yet, unsolveable problem for cancer treatment. They publish their findings and they do not work for manufacturers who sell products by MLM.

Emet
06-29-2010, 10:37 AM
Anyone who sells or recommends unproven treatments for life threatening diseases has a tremendous personal responsibility to a victim of those diseases.
Yep!


The problem is, nutritional supplements can and do cure cancer and diabetes. But it takes a lot more of it than what you can ingest orally on a daily basis and I don't care how good your product is.

However, it is half the equation. I've seen cancer reversed by Vitamin C and Hydrogen peroxide IV therapies, COPD reversed using Hydrogen peroxide therapy along with vitamin IV's.

Lady Mod

(my bolding)
scams - View Single Post - FDA defeated in federal court... (http://scam.com/showpost.php?p=933214&postcount=8)

Potential in mice does not equate to treatment/prevention in humans (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070910132848.htm).


According to the American Cancer Society, there is no scientific evidence that hydrogen peroxide is a safe, effective or useful cancer treatment.
Cancer Center - Complementary and Alternative Therapies (http://cancer.ucsd.edu/outreach/publiceducation/CAMs/hydrogenperoxide.asp)


More recently, intravenous (IV) vitamin C has been touted to have different effects than does vitamin C taken orally. This has sparked renewed interest in the use of IV vitamin C as a cancer therapy. However, there is still no evidence that vitamin C has any effect on cancer.
High-dose vitamin C: Can it kill cancer cells? - MayoClinic.com (http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/alternative-cancer-treatment/AN01572)

littleroundman
06-29-2010, 10:41 AM
LOL, you're an odd duck, to say the least.

HeHeHe,

You jolly joker, you.

Sojustask makes the very public claim/s that she knows of a cure for diabetes and cancer and that there is no proof the H.I.V. is responsible for A.I.D.S

says nothing in defense of her delusions when questioned

then calls the questioner an odd duck.

Backpedal any faster, can we ????

P.S. I think it's important you keep your adoring public appraised of your vital knowledge.

Forget what "WishfulThinking" says about "personal responsibility" or "ethics" or making those who deal with such diseases on a daily basis "angry"

You just keep on posting your shi......err........crackpot ide.........err......stuff and help maintain the reputation you've obviosly worked at so assiduously over recent times.

P.S.S. Apparently you missed my questions, so I've taken the liberty of reposting them so you can answer (in your own time, of course)

Here ya go:


While were clarifying things,

when we're discussing "diabetes" are we talking about Type 1 (insulin dependent) diabetes or Type 2 (non insulin dependent) diabetes or Gestational diabetes ????

As we both know, most Type 2 non insulin dependent diabetes can be arrested and/or eliminated in most people by a simple weight loss/exercise program, so I guess the cases of diabetes you have seen "cured" must have been insulin dependent or gestational diabetes.

Does your "cure" work for people who've already suffered the side effects of untreated "diabetes"???? You know, the neuropathy, blindness and heart disease which have been sneaking up on the unwary victims of the "silent killer"

BTW, you DO know why diabetes is often referred to as "the silent killer" don't you ???

Silly me,

of COURSE you do.

You know how diabetes works away in the background, silently carrying out its' devious work while the victim lives in ignorant bliss.

Why, believe it or not, in your country alone there are hundreds of thousands of people who either have NO idea they are at risk, or, even worse, have convinced themselves they're "cured" because they have no obvious symptoms.

Think rust. You may not be able to see it, hear it or smell it and you may even think you've stopped it, but it's there working away 24/7 doing its' damage.

But, of course you know that.

As you well know, Ma'am, Diabetes Retinopathy related blindness is the second or third largest cause of vision impairment/blindness in the Western world.

What's so shocking is it can take 8 to 10 years before it leads to total blindness, and every minute of the time symptomless.

But your "cure" wouldn't be contributing to such a thing, would it ?????

Nah, you have "da knowledge"

Again, to be absolutely clear, when you say you've seen "cancer" cured, to which particular type of cancer are you referring ????

I checked with some of my contacts and they've kindly provided me with a list of different types of "cancer" just let your adoring public know whether your "cure" works for any or all of these cancers:

Anal cancer
Asbestos & lung disease (mesothelioma)
Bile duct cancer
Bladder cancer
Bone cancer (sarcoma)
Bowel cancer
Brain & spinal cord tumours
Breast cancer
Carcinoid tumours (neuroendocrine)
Cervical cancer
Connective tissue cancer
Endocrine cancer (thyroid)
Eye cancer
Family cancers (genetics & risk)
Gall bladder cancer
Kaposi's sarcoma
Kidney cancer
Leukaemia
Liver cancer
Lung cancer
Lymphoma (non-Hodgkin & Hodgkin)
Melanoma
Mesothelioma
Mouth, nose & throat cancers
Multiple myeloma
Oesophagus cancer
Ovarian cancer
Pancreatic cancer
Penis cancer
Peritoneal cancer
Prostate cancer
Skin cancers (non-melanoma)
Soft tissue cancers
Spinal tumours
Stomach & oesophageal cancer
Testicular cancer
Thymus cancer
Uterine cancer (cancer of the uterus)
Vaginal cancer
Vulval cancer

Please also fill us in as to how, exactly your "cure" knows how to differentiate between the many forms the disease we humans lump together as "cancer" to make communication easier.

P.S. is it true you and Mr Icke have been nominated for a Nobel Prize in medicine this year for your willingness to share your incredible "cures" with the world ????

P.P.S. Is there any way you could be persuaded to share your incredible secrets with any or all of the African nations ???? There's in excess of 30 MILLION HIV+ poor souls in Africa at the minute who are labouring under the illusion that the H.I.V. is whats' causing A.I.D.S.

Emet
06-29-2010, 10:55 AM
Sadly, a once prominent Ph.D., Peter Duesberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Duesberg), who won international acclaim for his groundbreaking work on cancer, is now a central figure of AIDS denialism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_denialism).

Lil Ol' Radical Me
06-29-2010, 11:25 AM
Bravo, LRM for some very sound common sense comments and bravo, WT for reminding all purveyors of lotions and potions that people's right to hold their own beliefs pales into insignificance if, at the same time, they are persuading sufferers of mortal diseases that their lotions and potions will save their lives. It makes me sick to hear these unproven claims being sung by people who want to sell their products. Don't they care?

There will always be dissenters to common proven treatments, including non conventional medical treaments. That doesnt give anyone the right to play russian roulette with the lives of mortally sick and desperate people. Sure there are great advances in the treatment of cancer, but noone has yet discovered the cure. We are still hoping and praying. There are foods to be eaten and foods to be avoided and other plant derived products that seem to help. And dont forget that the majority of pharmaceuticals are based on plants. I work with our cancer association and have seen first hand the benefits of good attitude and change in diet and the taking of suplements - principally in the area of prevention - but, as yet, I have never seen any guaranteed cures. I have also never seen any of the supplements used being from MLM companies either

The same goes for HIV and AIDS. Noone who is fortunate enough to receive medications to control HIV (based on the premise that HIV and AIDS are linked and which are very expensive) is going to give them up for an MLM product and risk their life. Anyone who tries to tell them different is just plain irresponsible. If it is ever proved that there is no link, then so be it. Then qualified professionals who care about human life will surely develope treatments on that basis. Until such time we are back to the purveyors of these products putting their beliefs and desire to make money through them before their sense of humanity and responsibility.

There's quite a good standard to use if you think these products are so great. Would you use them on your own child, if they were suffering from cancer or aids? I wouldn't and I'll bet 99.9% of the people who sell them wouldn't either. So much for "belief".

The sickening aspect of the discussions by those who promote these products is that they hurl insults at the critics that they are anti-mlm zealots or some such nonsense. Maybe the critics are simply people who care?

littleroundman
06-29-2010, 11:47 AM
The sickening aspect of the discussions by those who promote these products is that they hurl insults at the critics that they are anti-mlm zealots or some such nonsense. Maybe the critics are simply people who care?

Or maybe, just maybe,

the critics have seen at first hand and up close and personal what happens when one/some of these self appointed "experts" gets a hold on someone who has one of the diseases in question.

By the very nature of that which we're discussing, there are none of their victims around to dispute the crap they spout.

Hell, "sojustask" doesn't (or didn't) even know there is more than one type of diabetes,

The silly woman still considers "cancer" to be a singular condition, treatable by a single therapy.

"One size fits all" cancer therapy. What a concept.

As for her ideas on the H.I.V./A.I.D.S connection and her assertion/s that the millions upon millions of current and deceased victims were all under some sort of conspiracy or illusion, the less said the better.

Earl Lee Tobed
06-29-2010, 12:13 PM
Maybe you should no involve yourself in this one either. I wasn't here to cause unrest or flame people, though I can give out as good as I get when the mood strikes me. Tom's remark was anything but tongue in cheek and that wasn't hard to figure out. At least, not for people with more than one brain cell bouncing around in their empty little heads.

Thanks for the kind reply.Be careful that your sharp tongue doesnt cut you.
Looks like the membership on this board have you all weighed up,and then some!

Unsaved Trash
06-29-2010, 03:31 PM
No Tom, I'm not that dumb. By the tone of the post I figured it was most likely you but, there was an off chance that it was the pilot guy, since he too uses a lot of venom in his posts.

Nor am I going to reply to your questions.

Wise move. I'll give you credit for that.


Why are you worried about the past when you have a whole future of scambusting in front of you? It seems to me that all that has gone on in the past worked out the best for SBM, she now has her own site to Administrate. So, what appeared to be a bad thing at the time turned out to just be stepping stones to something she's wanted in the first place.

So, what are you continuing to bitch about? Can't you just be happy with how things turned out for your friendz? Hey, I'll bet if you asked, she would even make you a Moderator. Maybe even a Super Mod. Oooh, sounds good doesn't it? No-Moron the SuperMod! Kind of has a ring to it, don't ya think?

I think SBM would have been happy to have remained at scam.com had you not banned her, belittled her on the public forums, etc., but this opportunity came along and she was asked to be an ADMIN. I was asked to be a moderator. I declined. That was a smart move on my part, especially since I told the owner one of my reasons was that I wasn't out so much to scambust but for revenge. Not a good reason to be a mod on this type of site. The fun ended for me at scam.com in that area and if I don't enjoy something, I'm smart enough to pass.

On a personal level, I don't like you but I do respect you for castrating Len. There was never any doubt in my mind and should he contiue, you shall prevail. I predicted that from the very beginning. Of that, you should be proud. And that is a compliment.

Lil Ol' Radical Me
06-29-2010, 05:16 PM
Or maybe, just maybe,

the critics have seen at first hand and up close and personal what happens when one/some of these self appointed "experts" gets a hold on someone who has one of the diseases in question.

By the very nature of that which we're discussing, there are none of their victims around to dispute the crap they spout.

Ergo the standard test I suggested

Would you use them on your own child, if they were suffering from cancer or aids?

I dont know the Lady Mod, but judging from some of her replies on scam.com, she seems to have a fairly impressive opinion of her own opinions. Patronizing is a word that comes to mind. Irrespective of anything she may be able to do to show up Len Clements on that board (whose juvenile level of posting has to be seen to be believed), I'd be surprised if she impressed any new readers to that forum with her sanguine objectivity. Noone who promotes unproven treatments for mortal diseases deserves much respect in my book, whatever the financial benefits to the seller. We have quite enough problems with vested interest in the pharmaceutical industry without adding "belief sellers" to the equation.

Emet
06-30-2010, 06:09 AM
Looks like someone deleted 1-4 pages of this thread. LM was called to task for her false medical claims, woeful lack of knowledge about basic anatomy, and inaccurate views on how the FDA works.
FDA defeated in federal court... (http://scam.com/showthread.php?t=129040)
:RpS_thumbdn:

Emet
06-30-2010, 06:54 AM
The thread was cross posted, and remains intact. ( I only saw it in the medical section today-- as it was bumped up with the now false accusation that the thread had been scrubbed) It is also in the MLM section, but is now back a page or two. I had remembered 2 posters taking the opposite side, but that was only in the MLM section, the main one I read.

Sorry for wasting so much space on the Interwebs with these two posts. :RpS_blushing:

Sojustask
06-30-2010, 06:55 AM
Looks like someone deleted 1-4 pages of this thread. LM was called to task for her false medical claims, woeful lack of knowledge about basic anatomy, and inaccurate views on how the FDA works.
FDA defeated in federal court... (http://scam.com/showthread.php?t=129040)
:RpS_thumbdn:

Well if you are Ashanda, then you already know you went to the wrong forum and that the thread you were looking for is in the MLM forum and intact.

FDA defeated in federal court... (http://scam.com/showthread.php?t=129041)

Care to throw any more false accusations my way?

Sojustask
06-30-2010, 07:03 AM
Of course, you aren't Ashanda. You are just some schmuck with an axe to grind.

Emet
06-30-2010, 07:09 AM
Well if you are Ashanda, then you already know you went to the wrong forum and that the thread you were looking for is in the MLM forum and intact.

FDA defeated in federal court... (http://scam.com/showthread.php?t=129041)

Care to throw any more false accusations my way?

Actually, I didn't throw any false accusations your way. I posted here as there were already quotes associated with that thread in this thread about you. I believe I said here that someone deleted them, and that you had been called to task for your assertions.

If I thought you had deleted them, I would have said so.

I could take your statement here and say you are accusing me of being Ashanda, but I won't.

I am Spartacus.

Mike!
06-30-2010, 07:12 AM
No. I am Spartacus!

Sojustask
06-30-2010, 07:20 AM
And before you start gloating over that thread, read the entire thing. In the end, only Chris N decided that it was not OK for me to have my opinions, or my beliefs (at least I will walk my talk) whether they are right, wrong or even agreed with them.

It's the small minded that can't allow others the same freedoms they themselves expect to receive.

Even smaller minded are those who will try to make a big deal and a villian out of people whose belief doesn't match theirs and think that somehow makes them better.

Sojustask
06-30-2010, 07:26 AM
Actually, I didn't throw any false accusations your way. I posted here as there were already quotes associated with that thread in this thread about you. I believe I said here that someone deleted them, and that you had been called to task for your assertions.

If I thought you had deleted them, I would have said so.

I could take your statement here and say you are accusing me of being Ashanda, but I won't.

I am Spartacus.

Then I apologize to you, Emet. Will you allow me to be wrong in my assumption and forgive my false accusation?

Spartacus? Did you even post to that thread? Ashanda was very well informed and didn't twist or insult a person if
they weren't exactly right about what they said. He was smart enough to actually see what people were trying to say
even if they stumbled in trying to say it.

And he posted good information about the FDA.

Sojustask
06-30-2010, 07:27 AM
No. I am Spartacus!

You aren't Mike! on both sites? LOL

Emet
06-30-2010, 05:47 PM
Of course, you aren't Ashanda. You are just some schmuck with an axe to grind.

A schmuck is an assault on my character and ad hominem, but you are certainly entitled to your opinion. Some people who have actually met me may agree with you.

I have neither an axe nor a grinder, and I don't believe you will find any evidence of that. I have a POV and opinions, and am not beyond using snark and sarcasm to make a point. But I really have no axe to grind.


Did you even post to that thread?
Irrelevant. It should be obvious that I read it, and that is all that matters.


...and didn't twist or insult a person if
they weren't exactly right about what they said.
(my bolding)

I'm not sure what you mean about this, but if it's my statement:


LM was called to task for her false medical claims, woeful lack of knowledge about basic anatomy, and inaccurate views on how the FDA works.

I stand by that statement--it is factual. If it's insulting, well, compared to:


You are just some schmuck with an axe to grind.

Well, there is no comparison.


Then I apologize to you, Emet. Will you allow me to be wrong in my assumption and forgive my false accusation?

Yes I will and I do.

I think if you peruse my posts here or on other forums, you will be hard pressed to find me hurling ad hominem attacks or using vulgar or insulting language. Something I post may be interpreted as an insult, but there really is a difference between the two. (You are clearly ill informed vs. You are an idiot)

My posting style is to present facts and opinions in a relatively non offensive way. They are often glossed over and ignored. (sniff) But that's okay with me.

Emet
(the mild and meek)

Lil Ol' Radical Me
06-30-2010, 06:25 PM
And before you start gloating over that thread, read the entire thing. In the end, only Chris N decided that it was not OK for me to have my opinions, or my beliefs (at least I will walk my talk) whether they are right, wrong or even agreed with them.

It's the small minded that can't allow others the same freedoms they themselves expect to receive.

Even smaller minded are those who will try to make a big deal and a villian out of people whose belief doesn't match theirs and think that somehow makes them better.

Of course everyone is entitled to their opinions and beliefs, BUT with the caveat that it doesnt give them the right to use their personal beliefs and opinions (and personal financial wellbeing) to persuade sufferers of terminal illnesses to try unproven and therefore possibly dangerous alternative treatments, instead of their safer and proven treatments - whether they are conventional medical or proven dietary treatments. Selling false hope is cruel and dangerous. When a dietary supplement or other product is discovered to cure any life threatening illness, it will be published worldwide and prescribed worldwide. It will not remain the "secret formula" of an MLM business that can give you "financial freedom".

I guess villany is a relative term.

Doc Bunkum
06-30-2010, 06:50 PM
Of course everyone is entitled to their opinions and beliefs, BUT with the caveat that it doesnt give them the right to use their personal beliefs and opinions (and personal financial wellbeing) to persuade sufferers of terminal illnesses to try unproven and therefore possibly dangerous alternative treatments, instead of their safer and proven treatments - whether they are conventional medical or proven dietary treatments.

Leaving personal financial well being out of the equation, what happens in the case where "safer and proven treatments" aren't effective?

Somebody that's desperate is rightfully willing to try anything.

Said "cure" may be unproven and therefore possibly dangerous, but isn't it worth the risk to the sufferer?

And how did "safer and proven treatments" become safer and proven treatments in the first place?

At one time they had to be unproven, and therefore possibly dangerous before being tested.

Somebody had to be a guinea pig.

All kinds of examples come to mind where supposedly safe and proven drugs didn't turn out to be safer and proven (thalidomide).

Just askin', for the sake of discussion, ya know?

Emet
06-30-2010, 07:58 PM
Leaving personal financial well being out of the equation, what happens in the case where "safer and proven treatments" aren't effective?

People always have the right to choose an alternative therapy, even if there is a safer and proven treatment.


Somebody that's desperate is rightfully willing to try anything.
Yes, and even if they're not desperate, they have the right to choose anything they wish to.


Said "cure" may be unproven and therefore possibly dangerous, but isn't it worth the risk to the sufferer?
As long as there is full disclosure, then there is no problem. The problem with many alternative therapies is that not only is there not full disclosure, there is misinformation and factual inaccuracies. That prevents people from making informed decisions.


And how did "safer and proven treatments" become safer and proven treatments in the first place?
Over time and with science based evidence (data).


At one time they had to be unproven, and therefore possibly dangerous before being tested.

Yes, but it's not that simple. Treatment modalities, be they interventional or pharmacologic, usually begin with an idea--move to a testing ground (test tube, petri dish, robotics or scientists practicing on non living things such as fruits)--then animals--then people. There have been many cases where a modality was immediately suspended when the results with humans were immediately devastating and unexpected.

But the same is true of all endeavors in science and technology, when humans are involved.


Somebody had to be a guinea pig.
After the test tube, the guinea pig, eventually it will be a person. Informed consent papers spell out all of the details and risks.


All kinds of examples come to mind where supposedly safe and proven drugs didn't turn out to be safer and proven (thalidomide).

I can no longer find the article that was posted due to word censoring at that other web site. Even looking where I thought it might be yielded no results. But at least some of the article's points were preserved, even though the gist of the srticle was about the FDA:


The FDA isn't weak on safety. The problem is that some drugs expose safety issues only after being on the market for years, long past the FDA's review and approval process. Critics think this implicates the FDA.

2002 Associated Press story illustrated their point of view: "One in five new drugs has serious side effects that do not show up until well after the medicine has received approval, according to a study that exposes what one researcher calls an alarming game of medical Russian roulette."

The unstated implication is that the FDA could and should approve only safe drugs. How are drugs deemed safe? Well, only by long-term usage by many millions of patients. Wolfe even admits this. But giving drugs to a large number of patients for long-term use before they are proven safe is deemed by some to be "Russian roulette."

So we have a Catch-22. The only feasible alternatives are never to use any new drug or to use new drugs that may have problems that will show up only after lots of experience. Which is better: the possibility of health or the guarantee of illness?

The FDA has taken a "better safe than sorry" approach and Wolfe will forge an even "safer" approach. Wolfe and the FDA shouldn't forget who the real enemy is: disease.



The entire post is located here (http://scam.com/showthread.php?t=129041&page=3).

Thalidomide makes a comeback (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,411395,00.html)

Thalidomide (http:///en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide)

littleroundman
06-30-2010, 08:20 PM
Leaving personal financial well being out of the equation, what happens in the case where "safer and proven treatments" aren't effective?

Somebody that's desperate is rightfully willing to try anything.

Said "cure" may be unproven and therefore possibly dangerous, but isn't it worth the risk to the sufferer?

And how did "safer and proven treatments" become safer and proven treatments in the first place?

At one time they had to be unproven, and therefore possibly dangerous before being tested.

Somebody had to be a guinea pig.

All kinds of examples come to mind where supposedly safe and proven drugs didn't turn out to be safer and proven (thalidomide).

Just askin', for the sake of discussion, ya know?

Of course its' the patients right to try "unproven and therefore possibly dangerous" treatments.

The problem arises when "unproven and therefore possibly dangerous" has become ""MISREPRESENTED, unproven and therefore possibly dangerous" treatments.

There is a vast difference between someone saying "You know what, I THINK XXXXXXXX will cure diabetes/cancer/lupus" or "Theoretically, XXXXXXXX should be able to cure diabetes/cancer/lupuscure diabetes and someone saying "XXXXXXX WILL cure cancer/diabetes/lupus"

What's even more fundamentally misleading is the claim that ANYTHING will "cure" cancer/diabetes/lupus.

Arrest or retard or put into temporary remission or alleviate the symptoms of, maybe.

But "cure" ????

There's not a bloody thing on this planet currently known to "cure" any of them.

Lil Ol' Radical Me
06-30-2010, 09:08 PM
People always have the right to choose an alternative therapy, even if there is a safer and proven treatment.


Yes, and even if they're not desperate, they have the right to choose anything they wish to.


As long as there is full disclosure, then there is no problem. The problem with many alternative therapies is that not only is there not full disclosure, there is misinformation and factual inaccuracies. That prevents people from making informed decisions.



Great post Emet and it makes the point with far greater clarity than I ever did. (I'm definitely not coherent when I'm spitting fur and feathers.lol)

You've pointed out the crux of the matter. People need to be able to make informed decisions. As LRM has pointed out - there is no cure for cancer, HIV, Aids and several other illnesses. There are alternative treatments offered, and some appear to be more helpful than others. However, indications of their effectiveness are generally based on empirical scientific evidence and testing and not the word of the saleman or woman.

The sickening element of some alternative treatments appears when the people who make the claims about their effectiveness are neither qualified to make them, make them based on parroting other people's unverified claims, and give false hope to sufferers, when their principal objective is to make money and not cure illness.

The outrageous claims made by some of the purveyors of food supplements and jungle juices, some of which were quoted earlier by LRM, are the things that anger people who are involved directly or indirectly with sufferers of these foul diseases.

This is not intended to take the thread wildly off-topic. Scam.com's Lady Mod has just defended people's rights to "belief" and I understand that to include their right to sell untested, unproven "cures" for incurable diseases on the basis that they will in fact help them when their existing treatments do not. Under those circumstances, whilst I defend everyone's rights to believe in what they like, it is difficult to condone their rights to sell false hope because of something written in a businesses promotional package. There are times when it is decent to keep your beliefs to yourself.

And NO I don't believe that you can leave the "personal financial wellbeing" motivation of the seller out of the equation, especially when the lady in question is taking the moral high ground.

Emet
06-30-2010, 11:47 PM
Thanks for that, alasycia.


And NO I don't believe that you can leave the "personal financial wellbeing" motivation of the seller out of the equation, especially when the lady in question is taking the moral high ground.
I understand what you're saying. For me, it runs deeper. Whether it's for money, ego, grandiosity, delusion, or even a desire to genuinely help people, it is simply immoral to misinform and mislead people for any cause or purpose. When their lives and/or well being is at stake, it's downright criminal.

littleroundman
07-01-2010, 02:12 AM
Thanks for that, alasycia.


I understand what you're saying. For me, it runs deeper. Whether it's for money, ego, grandiosity, delusion, or even a desire to genuinely help people, it is simply immoral to misinform and mislead people for any cause or purpose. When their lives and/or well being is at stake, it's downright criminal.

For me,

it doesn't need to go any further than "someone" posted "something" on a forum designed for discussing scams and that "something" is incorrect

If "Sojustask" had posted on "alt26 natural therapies" on Usenet, or the "CrackpotTheories.com" forum, to use the words of the poet: "quite frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn"

But,

she didn't.

In fact, she posted on SCAM.com (http://www.scam.com/) which, until recent times was a forum on which posters could openly discuss what constituted a "scam" and how such definitions related to various situations/businesses/people/circumstances.

Let's forget, for one moment, all the rationalizing, justifying and blame laying taking place and concentrate one one single aspect of the statement in question, before moving on.

"There is a cure for diabetes"

Simple enough statement.

Let's begin analyzing that simple six word statement by asking the simple questions:

"There are several forms of disease commonly referred to as "diabetes"

Is the OP referring to "Diabetes mellitus" or "Diabetes Insipidus" ????

If, in fact, Sojustask is referring to the more common "Diabetes mellitus", to which of the separate and distinct sub groups is she referring ????

1) Insulin Dependent diabetes AKA Juvenile onset diabetes AKA Type 1 diabetes AKA sugar diabetes ?

2) Non insulin dependent diabetes AKA Type 2 diabetes AKA adult onset diabetes ?

3) Gestational diabetes ?

Let's just clarify this teensy, weensy point in her original statement, shall we, before we move on to actually proving or disproving any-bloody-thing.

Or, could it be that "Sojustask" is aware of some form of natural therapy "cure all" which can act on and cure all forms of the disease commonly referred to as "diabetes" ????

Lil Ol' Radical Me
07-01-2010, 07:08 AM
Sojustask - where are you? This is a discussion forum. Please comment.

Sojustask
07-01-2010, 07:20 AM
Ok, I see your points and I was wrong to be so general. I apologize. I did try to explain that these were my experiences and what I've personally seen. I did say that you have to take a hell of a lot of supplements and that it wouldn't happen as quickly and I don't promote the sales of any MLM nutritional supplement. I don't support any of them, even Amways is mediocre at best. I don't purchase any of them and I get rather put off by any mention of special formula's or non disclusure of what proprietary ingredients are and how much.

Though I've experienced a cure in my life via alternative therapies, which I spelled out, my using the word "cure" was probably misleading to those who would take offence to that word.

I'm sorry. I'll post this on the other thread as well if that will make you happy, but at the moment there is a more important thread that some people and I would like your participation in and a vote on. What the hell does George want for this site? (http://scam.com/showthread.php?p=941512#post941512) And I don't want to pop the other thread above it. But I will post my apology to the thread in question this weekend after the other one takes off.

Sojustask
07-01-2010, 07:24 AM
I've been working some 12 hour days at the clinic. And there is a pissing match on scam that I've been moderating and talking to some moderators involved about. I didn't have time to get back here until this morning and right now, I've got to get ready for work. I have a test I must take tonight if I can't do it at lunch so I might not get back here until tomorrow. And then I have 11 chapters left to read and one last test before I take a certification test in September. With a busy life, training a new Patient Care Technician and Receptionist, I'm getting a little pressed for time to discuss things on forums. Sorry.

littleroundman
07-01-2010, 07:29 AM
I'm sorry. I'll post this on the other thread as well if that will make you happy,

Apology gracefully given and thoroughly accepted.

And, there's no need to post an apology anywhere else.

What would or would not make ME "happy" is irrelevant.

As always in this arena, I like to think my only concern is for those affected, or likely to be affected.

Lil Ol' Radical Me
07-01-2010, 07:41 AM
Thanks for that, alasycia.


I understand what you're saying. For me, it runs deeper. Whether it's for money, ego, grandiosity, delusion, or even a desire to genuinely help people, it is simply immoral to misinform and mislead people for any cause or purpose. When their lives and/or well being is at stake, it's downright criminal.

I agree with your argument 100%, Emet. However, as far as this forum discussion goes, we have been talking about false product claims made by a moderator of a supposed anti scam forum. The topic of treatments for life threatening diseases is an enormous one, but in this case we are talking about someone who is defending the sale of unproven (and in many cases un-tested) products to desparate souls for profit motives.

The people who push these products are frequently zealots of their companies (often MLMs) and products and some are passionate salesmen (buy one and find three more people to buy one and, hey presto, you cure cancer/diabetes/HIV/Aids etc and get rich in the process. They are not in the business of healthcare. Unlike other treatments which are generally withdrawn if found to be damaging, they persist with the sale of their supplements in spite of health warnings. To my mind, they are no different from the Tobacco companies who sell a highly addictive and now proven cancerogenic product and refuse to withdraw it from the market nor disclose its composition.

If you think that the quacks that believe in their useless products are criminal, then what do you call these people? They are ten times worse.

Lil Ol' Radical Me
07-01-2010, 07:45 AM
Posted this whilst sojustask was posting her response.

Ditto LRM's reply. I look forward to seeing you crushing the false claims of the promoters of food supplements etc on scam.com

Emet
07-01-2010, 08:20 AM
In fact, she posted on SCAM.com which, until recent times was a forum on which posters could openly discuss what constituted a "scam" and how such definitions related to various situations/businesses/people/circumstances.

This post is offered respectfully:
1. Do you believe that scamdotcom has ever had any respectability as a web site?

My opinion: No. Google rankings, membership or post numbers does not equate to respectability. The site is so littered with profanity, lunatic ranting from both sides of any debate, with very little credible evidence to support claims.

2. Do you believe that misinformation on a site such as this is dangerous?

My opinion: No. LM has no more credibility than any other poster on any other forum or blog who posts wild, unsubstantiated claims. And the Internet is littered with garbage. The dangerous folks, IMO, are the ones with degrees (even if they are woo degrees), that post cogent, calm claims with links or quotes to woo science "studies" that are potentially dangerous to a reader.

3. Do you believe your responses in this thread about diabetes successfully refutes her claims?

In my opinion: While you posted accurate facts about diabetes, the best way to refute garbage is to present your argument and borrow heavily from reliable medical sources, using both quotes and links.

I read the thread on the MLM forum about the FDA, and one poster did just that (I have been accused of being that poster, but as i previously stated, I am Spartacus). :RpS_smile: He didn't address the false medical information you did here, but he gave the reader clear facts about the FDA. He didn't engage in directly attacking any of the posters who posted garbage; he simply provided evidence that stands on its own.

Please do not misinterpret this post as a criticism, as it is not. I too am a scientist (As Ashanda claimed to be). I also understand how many scamdotcom folks are angry right now.

If I had chosen to respond to LM about diabetes, what constitutes cures vs. control of diseases, and why there is a difference, I would have explained that in detail, again referencing my explanations.

Let me close by reiterating: I am not criticizing anyone or any post per se: I am simply offering my opinion as to how I believe the best way to respond to garbage is.

Feel free to rip my post to shreds. It is only my opinion; nothing more, nothing less.

Respectfully,

Emet

Soapboxmom
07-01-2010, 05:57 PM
View Poll Results: What do you want from this site?
The Admin to step down. 6 100.00%
The SuperMod to step down. 1 16.67%
The owner to take more interest in his site. 2 33.33%
Get rid of the MLM forum altogether. 0 0%
Moderators to follow the same rules the members must. 1 16.67%
No rules. Make this site a free for all. 0 0%


View First Unread Thread Tools Display Modes
#1 07-01-2010, 02:59 AM
sojustask
Lady Moderator- Just call me Your Majesty Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: East Texas
Posts: 18,271


What the hell does George want for this site?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK, even I have to admit that things are way out of hand around here. On one hand we have a new Admin who had some good ideas but can't seem to follow through on them without going overboard, getting in pissing matches with the Moderators and chasing them off and upsetting long standing members.

On the other hand, the spam is still being taken care of.

But there is a lot of threads missing in the MLM forum. People are getting their thread titles and posts edited. Members aren't really wanting to participate because they feel it's impossible to know when their posts will be edited out of the conversation next.

So, now we've gone from an extreme where every MLM supporter was ruthlessly attacked by both Mods and members to every MLM hater is being attacked by Admin?

Where's the balance? Where's the Nuetrality? Where's the fairness? What happened to controversy, everyone getting a voice and runaway threads? And why are the only threads that are running away those that the Admin took off track by getting involved in?

George, where the hell are you? And what the hell do you really want for this site?

OK, members, what do you want from this site?

Now is the time to speak out and Len, I don't want to see dozens of posts from you on this thread justifying your actions. Nor will I be justifying any of mine, and we ALL know I've made some whopper mistakes of my own here.

I think you overstepped yourself messing with people's posts and thread titles. That was uncalled for and unneccessary and it didn't increase your popularity one bit. So, I don't want to hear from you, and how put upon you feel. You got the berryview thread in the Internet forum, if you want a thread to air your grievances, start another. Right now, I would like to hear from members and they need to be able to do it without either one of us making them feel like they are going to be censored. We might just learn something about ourselves that we failed to learn already.

This thread will be tolerated and so will the member's views. If greviances are petty and small minded I think the majority of those who read these threads are smart enough to see that.

So, speak out folks. I can't guarantee you will ever get another chance like this again.
Keep lying about us Mods Stephanie. You will continue to get butchered here and drive traffic our way. The longtime members know that is complete fiction. We rescued ChrisDoyle and his posts and made sure every voice was heard. Everyone was treated with kindness and respect. Everyone was made to feel welcome and offered any assistance and support they needed by us. Funny how George is attracted to liars and egotistical, narcissistic boneheads. You, Lenny and George all deserve one another!

Soapboxmom

Doc Bunkum
07-03-2010, 11:20 AM
That was what, like a 3 or 4 year old thread I revived over there?

The intent was to add something humorous to the OP's post - not to draw attention to the title.

Soapboxmom
03-03-2011, 05:57 PM
http://www.scam.com/images/statusicon/post_old.gif 03-30-2006, 03:15 AM


http://www.scam.com/image.php?u=3871&dateline=1222543720 (http://www.scam.com/member.php?u=3871)sojustask (http://www.scam.com/member.php?u=3871) http://www.scam.com/images/statusicon/user_offline.gif
Lady Moderator- Just call me Your Majesty
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: East Texas
Posts: 18,613


Re: Poll: Remove Subjunk As Moderator
Quote:
Originally Posted by umdkook



no i dont think its about being hated by people at all, but rather more about you and your new role as cleanup man.



Just a correction here. Subjunk was made moderator at the same time I was. That was over a year ago. This is not a new thing for him. He is just taking over the responsibilities of moderating the political forum, which he was gracious enough to do so that I can just participate without being called bias all the time.I hate moderating the political forum. But it was needing moderating badly.



Lady Mod

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
09-07-2009, 08:37 AM




sojustask

Lady Moderator- Just call me Your Majesty Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: East Texas
Posts: 18,112



Re: dchristie banned? Let's not do that...




Once upon a time it was clear that the Political forum was mine to moderate with the exception of spambots.




There are many on the political forum who have my personal email address, I've never been lax to respond to cries for help in this forum. And just because I'm not spending hours on here daily doesn't mean that I don't show up and look things over and do what needs to be done. I gave up the rest of the board, I only retained the right to moderate the Political forum exclusively.




So, if that is still agreeable to the members, let it be so. If not, then let's make a change.

Lady Mod
---------------------------------------------------------------------



Besides, I do look in every week or so.

Lady Mod
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I rarely read the MLM forum at all unless I'm contacted by email or PM to check something. I find this forum distasteful, full of hysterical naysayers as well as people who are over zealous in protecting their particular MLM company. I would be just as happy if this particular part of the forum disappeared completely as there is very little to learn from it in it's current state.



But that's not my call. I'm only here to keep an eye on things until SoapBoxMom completes her ban.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, who is taking care of the forum and doing all the problem solving over yonder? Sojustask sure as hell doesn't bother to remove spam or doing any real work. She pops in on rare occasion when it suits her fancy. And let's be frank. No one can post about anything because so many words and names are ***** out anyway.



Soapboxmom

Doc Bunkum
03-03-2011, 06:11 PM
I see they let Doyle out early, probably on good behavior, now he's racking up his post total again.


Mmmm....whats happened now with SBM?
I always knew she was not one to be trusted.

Very interesting.