Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"You don't get political and then you pop up on the political debate boards? What 3rd person?"
I'm not sure who left this ^ reputation comment but it has a few questions attached to it so I thought I'd post it and answer. I can't answer back through reputation comments if I don't know which of you three sent it. I'm guessing it's Mr. Informed up there.
I stated I was usually on the political threads and not on the health threads and didn't usually get involved in issues pertaining to medicine except for healthcare/obamacare because that is what you find here. It's the opposite of what you think.
Suzy spoke in third person. Suzy does this, Suzy feels that. She explained it was a literary device, to use for what I'm unsure, you'll have to consult her on it.
(I also think there should be a sticky or vaccine forum for those who need to advertise by debating about vaccines. Also, for those who oppose them and the general public. This thread proves how polarized they are.) Don't worry, I won't visit. I'm here because I do visit the political thread often, that's all.
LMAO, is that a real thing? I thought it was just contrived smokescreen. I'll have to seek and find.
It's sole purpose is to slander people. It uses the weak, watered down half truths and pretends like it is evidence. It links to "rational wiki" as it's source which is ridiculous. It's big on name calling and the author is anonymous. How anyone could take this blog seriously is beyond me.
"You don't get political and then you pop up on the political debate boards? What 3rd person?"
I'm not sure who left this ^ reputation comment but it has a few questions attached to it so I thought I'd post it and answer. I can't answer back through reputation comments if I don't know which of you three sent it. I'm guessing it's Mr. Informed up there.
I stated I was usually on the political threads and not on the health threads and didn't usually get involved in issues pertaining to medicine except for healthcare/obamacare because that is what you find here. It's the opposite of what you think.
Suzy spoke in third person. Suzy does this, Suzy feels that. She explained it was a literary device, to use for what I'm unsure, you'll have to consult her on it.
(I also think there should be a sticky or vaccine forum for those who need to advertise by debating about vaccines. Also, for those who oppose them and the general public. This thread proves how polarized they are.) Don't worry, I won't visit. I'm here because I do visit the political thread often, that's all.
It could be anyone, Tokinouta. I have been quite surprised sometimes to find out who sent unsigned rep. It sometimes comes up in private conversations with moderators. Any time I make a rep comment, I sign it. If I just rep a post with no comment, I often do not sign.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
It's sole purpose is to slander people. It uses the weak, watered down half truths and pretends like it is evidence. It links to "rational wiki" as it's source which is ridiculous. It's big on name calling and the author is anonymous. How anyone could take this blog seriously is beyond me.
But, but, but. . .I thought you knew nothing about any of this stuff! You're giving yourself away, MissTerri. We know you feel any source that discredits the anti-vax movement is a "hate" group. If half of what Encyclopedia of American Loons says about Humphries is true, she's a loon. You don't like "Respectful Insolence" or "Science Based Medicine", either. SBM isn't even snarky! And what about all this garbage on the AV side about how doctors just want to make money by either a) withholding a treatment that works to keep the patient sick; or b) treating people who aren't really sick at all? (The latter sounding more like chiropractors.) What about stuff like this from the other side: Death Threats, Hate Mail: Autism Debate Turns Ugly - ABC News "Snyderman said on the program that the threats Offit received included a "phone call from an unidentified man who mentioned specific and private details" about Offit's family.
"And then he hung up," Offit said. "But the implication was clear -- he knew where my children went to school."
Dr. Gregory Poland, director of the Mayo Vaccine Research Group at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a vocal proponent of universal flu vaccination, says he is no stranger to such harassment."
But, but, but. . .I thought you knew nothing about any of this stuff! You're giving yourself away, MissTerri. We know you feel any source that discredits the anti-vax movement is a "hate" group. You don't like "Respectful Insolence" or "Science Based Medicine", either. SBM isn't even snarky! And what about all this garbage on the AV side about how doctors just want to make money by either a) withholding a treatment that works to keep the patient sick; or b) treating people who aren't really sick at all? (The latter sounding more like chiropractors.) What about stuff like this from the other side: Death Threats, Hate Mail: Autism Debate Turns Ugly - ABC News "Snyderman said on the program that the threats Offit received included a "phone call from an unidentified man who mentioned specific and private details" about Offit's family.
"And then he hung up," Offit said. "But the implication was clear -- he knew where my children went to school."
Dr. Gregory Poland, director of the Mayo Vaccine Research Group at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a vocal proponent of universal flu vaccination, says he is no stranger to such harassment."
Don't break your neck falling off your high horse!
I'm not the one who posts links to blogs (most of them very snarky and some nothing but half truths and hate) and use them as sources. I also don't associate with any group or people who issue death threats or leave hateful comments on anyone's facebook page. If you bring up a source and use it often, don't be surprised if people comment on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt
I'm tired of your "micro-agressions" (meaning, little digs) and I will point them out.
It would be nice if you took your own advice. If you can't take it then it might make sense to stop dishing it out at others. Some of your comments in pink.
Yea lets take our advice from quack homeopaths because we don't trust the ACTUAL science. While we are at it, I heard you don't need vaccinations if you just rub crystals all over your body once a day. Maybe we can use a ouija board to ask the spirits to protect us from the diseases instead!
Homeopathy is dumb
People who promote it are either dumb or scam artists
Why would you take health advice from someone who is either dumb or a scam artist?
I'm not the one who posts links to blogs (most of them very snarky and some nothing but half truths and hate) and use them as sources. I also don't associate with any group or people who issue death threats or leave hateful comments on anyone's facebook page. If you bring up a source and use it often, don't be surprised if people comment on it.
It would be nice if you took your own advice. If you can't take it then it might make sense to stop dishing it out at others. Some of your comments in pink.
One last comment and then maybe we can get back to discussing vaccines instead of people. You post many links. Don't go all innocent here.
A statement isn't slander if it's true. You note Suz hasn't sued the Encyclopedia.
Your "holier than thou" attitude is unbecoming and quite personal, which is not conducive to discussion.
One last comment and then maybe we can get back to discussing vaccines instead of people. You post many links. Don't go all innocent here.
Not to blogs or anti-vax websites. The only one I shared here was a link to Suzanne Humphries website after someone posted something about her that was full of half truths. She is a doctor. She's called a quack because she has questioned vaccines and believes in some alternative health options.
Quote:
A statement isn't slander if it's true. You note Suz hasn't sued the Encyclopedia.
It's not true. And who would she sue since the blog is anonymous?
Quote:
Your "holier than thou" attitude is unbecoming and quite personal, which is not conducive to discussion.
It's hypocritical for you to call me out continually as well as others yet you are very snarky to me and others in almost every post. Hold yourself accountable first. Take your own advice. Please.
Not to blogs or anti-vax websites. The only one I shared here was a link to Suzanne Humphries website after someone posted something about her that was full of half truths. She is a doctor. She's called a quack because she has questioned vaccines and believes in some alternative health options.
It's not true. And who would she sue since the blog is anonymous?
It's hypocritical for you to call me out continually as well as others yet you are very snarky to me and others in almost every post. Hold yourself accountable first. Take your own advice. Please.
Suzanne Humphries has an MD degree, and a license to practice medicine. Tell us what "half-truths" you are referring to.
What's not true? My definition of slander? I think the term you're actually looking for is libel. I'm sure her attorneys could find out who to sue, should she pursue it. That she doesn't is because it's the truth! She won't win!
Suzanne Humphries has an MD degree, and a license to practice medicine. Tell us what "half-truths" you are referring to.
Yes se is an MD and she practiced for a long time. If you read the link that was shared from the slanderous blog it is clear that there are no real details, just a series of vague accusations as well as a lot of name calling. The "sources" that the blogger uses are not credible at all. They are just links to other similar types of websites such as "rational wiki' etc. The blogger says that she made decisions based on "feelings" which is not true. There is much more to it then that. This blog is not factual and it uses childish antics to try to steer people away from learning more about the actual person. It is full of half truths and is not a credible source. At best it's entertainment for those who hate anyone who questions vaccines and those who believe in alternative health.
Quote:
What's not true? My definition of slander? I think the term you're actually looking for is libel. I'm sure her attorneys could find out who to sue, should she pursue it. That she doesn't is because it's the truth! She won't win!
It's obvious why the blogger chose to remain anonymous, because they could easily be sued by a lot of people who they have slandered. I'm sure Dr. Humphries has better things to do with her time then track down an anonymous angry blogger and take them to court. I don't see why anyone would take this blog seriously anyway.
It's sole purpose is to slander people. It uses the weak, watered down half truths and pretends like it is evidence. It links to "rational wiki" as it's source which is ridiculous. It's big on name calling and the author is anonymous. How anyone could take this blog seriously is beyond me.
That's the internet for you. I am surprised anyone would take it seriously myself.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
