Dr. Barrett gave up his license when he retired. That still doesn't change the fact that he is a psychiatrist who doesn't seem to stay current on his research literature. What makes him an authority?
Here is what the judge had to say about Barrett during his suit against King Bio Pharmaceuticals:
"As for his credential as an expert on FDA regulation of homeopathic drugs, the Court finds that Dr. Barrett lacks sufficient qualifications in this area. Expertise in FDA regulation suggests a knowledge of how the agency enforces federal statutes and the agency's own regulations. Dr. Barrett's purported legal and regulatory knowledge is not apparent. He is not a lawyer, although he claims he attended several semesters of correspondence law school. While Dr. Barrett appears to have had several past conversations with FDA representatives, these appear to have been sporadic, mainly at his own instigation, and principally for the purpose of gathering information for his various articles and Internet web-sites. He has never testified before any governmental panel or agency on issues relating to FDA regulation of drugs. Presumably his professional continuing education experiences are outdated given that he has not had a current medical licence [sic] in over seven years. For these reasons, there is no sound basis on which to consider Dr. Barrett qualified as an expert on the issues he was offered to address. Moreover, there was no real focus to his testimony with respect to any of the issues in this case associated with Defendants' products.
C. Credibility of Plaintiff's experts
Furthermore, the Court finds that both Dr. Sampson and Dr. Barrett are biased heavily in favor of the Plaintiff and thus the weight to be accorded their testimony is slight in any event. Both are long-time board members of the Plaintiff; Dr. Barrett has served as its Chairman. Both participated in an application to the U.S. FDA during the early 1990s designed to restrict the sale of most homeopathic drugs. Dr. Sampson's university course presents what is effectively a one-sided, critical view of alternative medicine. Dr. Barrett's heavy activities in lecturing and writing about alternative medicine similarly are focused on the eradication of the practices about which he opines. Both witnesses' fees, as Dr. Barrett testified, are paid from a fund established by Plaintiff NCAHF from the proceeds of suits such as the case at bar. Based on this fact alone, the Court may infer that Dr. Barrett and Sampson are more likely to receive fees for testifying on behalf of NCAHF in future cases if the Plaintiff prevails in the instant action and thereby wins funds to enrich the litigation fund described by Dr. Barrett. It is apparent, therefore, that both men have a direct, personal financial interest in the outcome of this litigation. Based on all of these factors, Dr. Sampson and Dr. Barrett can be described as zealous advocates of the Plaintiff's position, and therefore not neutral or dispassionate witnesses or experts. In light of these affiliations and their orientation, it can fairly be said that Drs. Barrett and Sampson are themselves the client, and therefore their testimony should be accorded little, if any, credibility on that basis as well."
What do personal attacks against EU members have to do with this discussion? And who exactly determines what is a science and what is not?
One definition of science is "Knowledge, especially that gained through experience" not "Knowledge, especially that gained through experience and only if the general public concurs."
That's a pretty broad statement. What sort of neuromusculoskeletal training do you have? And the doctorate of chiropractic degree is recognized by the U.S. Department of Education so they aren't pretending either.
Chiropractic is another quack theory that is obviously not useful for curing disease, but sometimes it can help with back and neck pain, and if you think of it as yet another form of massage, it's often somewhat helpful for many people.
Chiropractic doesn't claim to cure anything. In fact, the only thing that can cure the body is the body itself. I don't care how many pills you take or surgeries you have, science hasn't been able to create living tissue from nonliving tissue. Only the body has the ability to do that.
Thank you. It's funny how eager some members of the slashdot community are to spread FUD about topics they know little about (in a characteristically anonymous fasion) while condemning any company (see Microsoft) that spreads FUD about linux. That seems rather hypocritical.
Its just as likely that your pain disappearing is due to the idea in your head that someone "fixed" it, particularly if the pain is psychological in nature.
If only doctors were able to so skillfully (and anonymously) diagnose conditions over slashdot like you just did... and most likely without any real diagnostic training.
You are right about chiropractors not being able to fix herniated discs. The body can reabsorb the protruded nuclear material provided it has not progressed to the point of prolapse. If a disc has prolapsed, only surgery can help. In order for the body to reabsorb the discal material, the disc needs proper movement for imbibition. Removing fixations between vertebrae restores the joint's ability to imbibe. Therefore, chiropractic can help the body more efficiently reabsorb the herniated disc. Using an activator, herniations are not contraindicated to adjustment.
Please show me where you came across that claim. Straight chiropractors never claimed they could cure the body. Chiropractors know that the body has the power to heal itself. In fact, medicine doesn't even heal the body.
The chiropractic profession does have peer-reviewed scientific journals (e.g. JVSR) and in fact, chiropractors have been published in some of the more mainstream medical journals such as JMPT and Spine. What's more, a good amount of the research that is conducted in the profession is done with MDs and PhDs.
Wow! All of the insurance companies and the U.S. Government has been had?! Where are your sources? I'd love to read them. Or are you just spreading FUD?
Simply put, a subluxation = joint fixation with nerve interference. And there are many objective ways of measuring both joint fixation and nerve interference.
This should not be surprising. Back in the day, there were far fewer machines on the net, and therefore fewer opportunities for something to spread, particularly if it was attacking random IP's, most of which would have been unused. Now it's a different story. Pick a number, and there's a good chance you've got some kind of host there. A nice soft and juicy vulnerable host almost everywhere you stab. That was not the case back in the day.
Not only that but the people on the net back in the day were more technically savvy than the average Internet user today. Everyone and their brother has net access now including ignorant people who run anything people send them.
Thanks for your reply. I don't travel too often on a plane but I would be taking it to class with me every day. I've seen backpacks that can accommodate the 17" PB but having never owned a laptop before, I can't say how heavy it would feel by the end of the day. But I think you're correct, 15" PB may be the best size, especially for a student who has a limited amount of desk space in class.
A friend of mine has a brand new 15" PB that looks very nice and I've considered purchasing one. However, the 17" PB has more screen realestate and a faster processor at the cost of $400 more. Is it worth the price to upgrade to the 17" PB as opposed to the 15" PB? The 14" iBook looks nice from the pictures but would a power user grow out of it rather quickly? I haven't used an Apple computer since my IIc I had when I was a child but I'm anxious to try OSX. What has been your experience with your Apple laptop? Would you make the purchase again or go with an IBM ThinkPad or other Intel-based laptop?
I agree with your assessment that 64 oz. of water is not optimal for different body weights and activity levels. Instead, I use this formula:
(body weight in ounces) / 2
The formula gives you a more optimal amount of water for your weight. For example, a 150-pound man would drink 75 ounces of water per day. Adjust the number based on your activity level.
Also, you should drink the water gradually throughout the day. Drinkin a bunch of water all at once won't help you that much. Your kidneys will just remove the excess water from your system to maintain osmolarity and plasma levels.
Slashdot Mirror
You're talking about the U.S. Senate? Because there isn't a Senator Strawman in the U.S. Senate.
Which legislators wish to "outlaw science?"
Who said anything about Tim Bolen?
Dr. Barrett gave up his license when he retired. That still doesn't change the fact that he is a psychiatrist who doesn't seem to stay current on his research literature. What makes him an authority?
Here is what the judge had to say about Barrett during his suit against King Bio Pharmaceuticals:
"As for his credential as an expert on FDA regulation of homeopathic drugs, the Court finds that Dr. Barrett lacks sufficient qualifications in this area. Expertise in FDA regulation suggests a knowledge of how the agency enforces federal statutes and the agency's own regulations. Dr. Barrett's purported legal and regulatory knowledge is not apparent. He is not a lawyer, although he claims he attended several semesters of correspondence law school. While Dr. Barrett appears to have had several past conversations with FDA representatives, these appear to have been sporadic, mainly at his own instigation, and principally for the purpose of gathering information for his various articles and Internet web-sites. He has never testified before any governmental panel or agency on issues relating to FDA regulation of drugs. Presumably his professional continuing education experiences are outdated given that he has not had a current medical licence [sic] in over seven years. For these reasons, there is no sound basis on which to consider Dr. Barrett qualified as an expert on the issues he was offered to address. Moreover, there was no real focus to his testimony with respect to any of the issues in this case associated with Defendants' products.
C. Credibility of Plaintiff's experts
Furthermore, the Court finds that both Dr. Sampson and Dr. Barrett are biased heavily in favor of the Plaintiff and thus the weight to be accorded their testimony is slight in any event. Both are long-time board members of the Plaintiff; Dr. Barrett has served as its Chairman. Both participated in an application to the U.S. FDA during the early 1990s designed to restrict the sale of most homeopathic drugs. Dr. Sampson's university course presents what is effectively a one-sided, critical view of alternative medicine. Dr. Barrett's heavy activities in lecturing and writing about alternative medicine similarly are focused on the eradication of the practices about which he opines. Both witnesses' fees, as Dr. Barrett testified, are paid from a fund established by Plaintiff NCAHF from the proceeds of suits such as the case at bar. Based on this fact alone, the Court may infer that Dr. Barrett and Sampson are more likely to receive fees for testifying on behalf of NCAHF in future cases if the Plaintiff prevails in the instant action and thereby wins funds to enrich the litigation fund described by Dr. Barrett. It is apparent, therefore, that both men have a direct, personal financial interest in the outcome of this litigation. Based on all of these factors, Dr. Sampson and Dr. Barrett can be described as zealous advocates of the Plaintiff's position, and therefore not neutral or dispassionate witnesses or experts. In light of these affiliations and their orientation, it can fairly be said that Drs. Barrett and Sampson are themselves the client, and therefore their testimony should be accorded little, if any, credibility on that basis as well."
Explain this "crackpot theoretical basis" you mention please.
Because some people are morons.
What do personal attacks against EU members have to do with this discussion? And who exactly determines what is a science and what is not?
One definition of science is "Knowledge, especially that gained through experience" not "Knowledge, especially that gained through experience and only if the general public concurs."
That's a pretty broad statement. What sort of neuromusculoskeletal training do you have? And the doctorate of chiropractic degree is recognized by the U.S. Department of Education so they aren't pretending either.
Chiropractic is another quack theory that is obviously not useful for curing disease, but sometimes it can help with back and neck pain, and if you think of it as yet another form of massage, it's often somewhat helpful for many people.
Chiropractic doesn't claim to cure anything. In fact, the only thing that can cure the body is the body itself. I don't care how many pills you take or surgeries you have, science hasn't been able to create living tissue from nonliving tissue. Only the body has the ability to do that.
Thank you. It's funny how eager some members of the slashdot community are to spread FUD about topics they know little about (in a characteristically anonymous fasion) while condemning any company (see Microsoft) that spreads FUD about linux. That seems rather hypocritical.
Its just as likely that your pain disappearing is due to the idea in your head that someone "fixed" it, particularly if the pain is psychological in nature.
If only doctors were able to so skillfully (and anonymously) diagnose conditions over slashdot like you just did... and most likely without any real diagnostic training.
So says the anonymous coward - the authority on all things.
You are right about chiropractors not being able to fix herniated discs. The body can reabsorb the protruded nuclear material provided it has not progressed to the point of prolapse. If a disc has prolapsed, only surgery can help. In order for the body to reabsorb the discal material, the disc needs proper movement for imbibition. Removing fixations between vertebrae restores the joint's ability to imbibe. Therefore, chiropractic can help the body more efficiently reabsorb the herniated disc. Using an activator, herniations are not contraindicated to adjustment.
Please show me where you came across that claim. Straight chiropractors never claimed they could cure the body. Chiropractors know that the body has the power to heal itself. In fact, medicine doesn't even heal the body. The chiropractic profession does have peer-reviewed scientific journals (e.g. JVSR) and in fact, chiropractors have been published in some of the more mainstream medical journals such as JMPT and Spine. What's more, a good amount of the research that is conducted in the profession is done with MDs and PhDs.
Wow! All of the insurance companies and the U.S. Government has been had?! Where are your sources? I'd love to read them. Or are you just spreading FUD?
Simply put, a subluxation = joint fixation with nerve interference. And there are many objective ways of measuring both joint fixation and nerve interference.
Chiropractors are basically doing to your back what cracking your knuckles does to your finger joints.
On what do you base this statement?Are you basing this assumption on your extensive review of scientific literature?
This should not be surprising. Back in the day, there were far fewer machines on the net, and therefore fewer opportunities for something to spread, particularly if it was attacking random IP's, most of which would have been unused. Now it's a different story. Pick a number, and there's a good chance you've got some kind of host there. A nice soft and juicy vulnerable host almost everywhere you stab. That was not the case back in the day.
Not only that but the people on the net back in the day were more technically savvy than the average Internet user today. Everyone and their brother has net access now including ignorant people who run anything people send them.
I'm guessing he doesn't have a girlfriend.
Kids will still get their hands on violent video games either through clueless parents or bigger brother/sister/friends.
That or they'll get them through Kazaa and the like.
Would you be happy with Microsoft including a back-door to all their software as long as only they knew how to exploit it?
You mean like the NSA_KEY fiasco in Windows a few years ago?
Thanks for your reply. I don't travel too often on a plane but I would be taking it to class with me every day. I've seen backpacks that can accommodate the 17" PB but having never owned a laptop before, I can't say how heavy it would feel by the end of the day. But I think you're correct, 15" PB may be the best size, especially for a student who has a limited amount of desk space in class.
A friend of mine has a brand new 15" PB that looks very nice and I've considered purchasing one. However, the 17" PB has more screen realestate and a faster processor at the cost of $400 more. Is it worth the price to upgrade to the 17" PB as opposed to the 15" PB? The 14" iBook looks nice from the pictures but would a power user grow out of it rather quickly? I haven't used an Apple computer since my IIc I had when I was a child but I'm anxious to try OSX. What has been your experience with your Apple laptop? Would you make the purchase again or go with an IBM ThinkPad or other Intel-based laptop?
If that doesn't define a net-savvy campaign, then I defy you to come up with a better definition.
Which politician could be more net savvy than the former Vice President who invented the Internet? :)
I agree with your assessment that 64 oz. of water is not optimal for different body weights and activity levels. Instead, I use this formula:
(body weight in ounces) / 2
The formula gives you a more optimal amount of water for your weight. For example, a 150-pound man would drink 75 ounces of water per day. Adjust the number based on your activity level.
Also, you should drink the water gradually throughout the day. Drinkin a bunch of water all at once won't help you that much. Your kidneys will just remove the excess water from your system to maintain osmolarity and plasma levels.
The new beta (ver. 292 Beta 3) runs under Linux with WINE. Chami has a screenshot on their site.