Caffeine Cures...

[Ralph]

Eliminating toxins is something that could possibly help. No healer/doctor should ever guarantee that it would do so but the possibility exists.

Why are you such a sour puss on so many things?

Negativity = masked depression or masked emotional problems?

Just wondering.

What specific toxins need to be eliminated?

 

[Olaf/QII]

Yes. Babies should be protected.

Now. Do you have any evidence that mercury in vaccinations harms children? Since it's been taken out of vaccinations whether or not babies are being harmed is a moot point. Answer the question, Olaf the troll.

let's just say that I am of the opinion that this stuff (ethyl mercury something or another???????) could possibly be EXTREMELY toxic to some children based on some reading i have done.

However, I do not believe that any of this is definite.

So, it is my opinion that the stuff needs to banned and it should have been banned a long long time ago. Especially since the main reason for its use is ECONOMIC.

 

[Lisa Simpson]

let's just say that I am of the opinion that this stuff (ethyl mercury something or another???????) could possibly be EXTREMELY toxic to some children based on some reading i have done.

However, I do not believe that any of this is definite.

So, it is my opinion that the stuff needs to banned and it should have been banned a long long time ago. Especially since the main reason for its use is ECONOMIC.

Still. Not. Evidence.

 

[Olaf/QII]

What specific toxins need to be eliminated?

I have some strong evidence that lead is particularly damaging to the nervous system. removal of lead via oral chelation could be of good value in helping to reduce the severity of certain brain disorders.

can't wait for rolfe to come in here and state.........."i would only use EDTA if the child was on his death bed from lead poisoning" (typical rolfe exaggeration)

Actually i believe that DMSA is the prefered agent for lead not EDTA.

 

[Olaf/QII]

Still. Not. Evidence.

too busy.

all these shouts for evidence which is summarily rejected is very tiring.

 

[Whyatica]

too busy.

all these shouts for evidence which is summarily rejected is very tiring.

Opinions aren't evidence. Opinions aren't evidence. Opinions aren't evidence. Repeat this to yourself a few times, then come back with some actual evidence that chelation helps anything. Oh, and your other claim that vaccinations harm children. Evidence there is good, too.

 

[Lisa Simpson]

too busy.

all these shouts for evidence which is summarily rejected is very tiring.

In other words--I have no evidence, but I plan to keep on trolling anyway.

Valid evidence, from properly controlled studies is not rejected here. Find some of those, then we'll talk.

 

[apoger]

well let's see if you can admit that I am correct on this.

When it comes to babies shouldn't every protection be taken to be sure they are not harmed?

No, even on this simple thing you are not correct.
You are incorrect due to over use of absolutes. We can never take "every" protection, and we can never "be sure" when it comes to protecting children.

A better statement might be: " When it comes to babies shouldn't every reasonable protection be taken to attempt to see as little harm as practical will befall them?"

It is very heartless for people to sit at their keyboards shouting out --- "THERE IS NO EVIDENCE, SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE, IT'S ALL WOO"

The only "shouting" is yours, and the message "I have no idea what I'm talking about, but I need more attention" is loud and clear.

 

[Olaf/QII]

You are incorrect due to over use of absolutes. We can never take "every" protection, and we can never "be sure" when it comes to protecting children.

A better statement might be: " When it comes to babies shouldn't every reasonable protection be taken to attempt to see as little harm as practical will befall them?"

Well of course your sentence is better, but the only thing that proves is that you are a nitpicker.

Very little would ever get posted if we worry about making sure our sentences are so carefully worded.

 

[Olaf/QII]

, then come back with some actual evidence that chelation helps anything. Oh, and your other claim that vaccinations harm children. Evidence there is good, too.

afraid you are wrong about chelation. that it helps those who have been poisoned by heavy metals is fact.

i believe that DMSA is approved by the FDA for lead toxicity.

this may be in the merck manual, someone should check. i would but i don't care.


VACCINATIONS:

never said they harm. i said that the thimerosal may harm.

 

[Lisa Simpson]

afraid you are wrong about chelation. that it helps those who have been poisoned by heavy metals is fact.

i believe that DMSA is approved by the FDA for lead toxicity.

this may be in the merck manual, someone should check. i would but i don't care.


VACCINATIONS:

never said they harm. i said that the thimerosal may harm.

It's not that chelation doesn't have some legitimate medical use, for example lead toxicity. You are certainly right on that point. However, chelation is used for other "medical" purposes. From quackwatch:

Proponents claim that chelation therapy is effective against atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, and peripheral vascular disease. Its supposed benefits include increased collateral blood circulation; decreased blood viscosity; improved cell membrane function; improved intracellular organelle function; decreased arterial vasospasm; decreased free radical formation; inhibition of the aging process; reversal of atherosclerosis; decrease in angina; reversal of gangrene; improvement of skin color, healing of diabetic ulcers. Proponents also claim that chelation is effective against arthritis; multiple sclerosis; Parkinson's disease; psoriasis; Alzheimer's disease; and problems with vision, hearing, smell, muscle coordination, and sexual potency. None of these claimed benefits has been demonstrated by well-designed clinical trials.

 

[apoger]

Well of course your sentence is better, but the only thing that proves is that you are a nitpicker.

That is hardly the case when responding to this: "well let's see if you can admit that I am correct on this."

So now we are "nitpickers" when responding to your own challenges?

Very little would ever get posted if we worry about making sure our sentences are so carefully worded.

As opposed to what? The hasty garbage that you spew?
Perhaps there is some value to thinking before writing?


Olaf, do you intend to make any point? Perhaps you might explain what will be detoxified with the application of caffeine? Or are you going to continue to derail with chelation commentary from another thread, and/or innuendo about the skeptics here that are mistreating you?

 

[Olaf/QII]

.Proponents claim that chelation therapy is effective against atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, and peripheral vascular disease. Its supposed benefits include increased collateral blood circulation; decreased blood viscosity; improved cell membrane function; improved intracellular organelle function; decreased arterial vasospasm; decreased free radical formation; inhibition of the aging process; reversal of atherosclerosis; decrease in angina; reversal of gangrene; improvement of skin color, healing of diabetic ulcers. Proponents also claim that chelation is effective against arthritis; multiple sclerosis; Parkinson's disease; psoriasis; Alzheimer's disease; and problems with vision, hearing, smell, muscle coordination, and sexual potency

the possibility exists that it MAY indeed help with some of these conditions.

only a fool would automatically deny it without looking at all the evidence, and even after all the evidence is examined it is still an open question.


a pseudo-skeptic is a person who would claim that it is useless right from the get go.

 

[Lisa Simpson]

the possibility exists that it MAY indeed help with some of these conditions.

only a fool would automatically deny it without looking at all the evidence, and even after all the evidence is examined it is still an open question.


a pseudo-skeptic is a person who would claim that it is useless right from the get go.

So, present the evidence.

 

[Olaf/QII]

So, present the evidence.

Why should i?

I don't care about this very much.

 

[apoger]

I don't care about this very much.

... says the Troll that brought up the topic in the first place.

 

[Rolfe]

I have some strong evidence that lead is particularly damaging to the nervous system. removal of lead via oral chelation could be of good value in helping to reduce the severity of certain brain disorders.

Oh, wow! You have some "strong evidence" of the totally accepted medical fact that lead poisoning is bad for you, and that it causes neurological signs. And that chelating agents are an effective treatment. Gosh, we bow before your superior intellect! [/sarcasm mode]

By the way, have you ever treated or even seen a case of overt lead poisoning? No? Well, get in line then.

So, care to show that lead poisoning is a concern in any but the most unusual situations these days (lead having been removed from cosmetics and paints and stuff like that for very sensible safety reasons)? And to get back to where we were, care to show that coffee is of any value at all in removing lead from the system? Or that removing lead from the system has any effect on cancer risk?

To justify a rant that coffee might cure cancer (which is where we started) by agreeing that lead is poisonous and it is a good idea to treat lead poisoning, seems a bit of a stretch.

this may be in the merck manual, someone should check.

Sweetie, I wrote the Merck manual. (OK, that's a bit of a gross exaggeration, I in fact contributed a couple of chapters to the most recent edition of the Merck Veterinary Manual, by invitation. And they gave me my very own personalised copy, with my name embossed in gold on the cover. Pure dead cool. I just thought that I'd drop that one in, since Qlafxangold-yawner seems to have some degree of respect for the publication.)

Rolfe.

 

[Ralph]

I have some strong evidence that lead is particularly damaging to the nervous system. removal of lead via oral chelation could be of good value in helping to reduce the severity of certain brain disorders.

can't wait for rolfe to come in here and state.........."i would only use EDTA if the child was on his death bed from lead poisoning" (typical rolfe exaggeration)

Actually i believe that DMSA is the prefered agent for lead not EDTA.

I think everybody would agree that heavy metal toxicity when properly diagnosed--can & should be treated with chelating agents.

Any other examples (outside of the heavy metals) of toxins that should be eliminated?

 

[Olaf/QII]

I think everybody would agree that heavy metal toxicity when properly diagnosed--can & should be treated with chelating agents.

Any other examples (outside of the heavy metals) of toxins that should be eliminated?

rolfe does not agree. she thinks that you need to be on your death bed before that should happen.

 

[Olaf/QII]

.Sweetie, I wrote the Merck manual. (OK, that's a bit of a gross exaggeration, I in fact contributed a couple of chapters to the most recent edition of the Merck Veterinary Manual, by invitation.

Rolfe.

How do i know you aren't making that up? I'm not saying that you would make it up, but let's just say that i'm suspicious.