Do men doctors actually understand patients who are not men?

Could it be men doctors (MDs) don't understand how
conditions of wellness or disease manifest in women
and children at all so they don't bother to interpret
salient data in these patients. Instead, ritual
proceedures make up the main stay of medical
care for women (ceasarian section operations,
masdectomys and hysterectomies) and children
(Thimerisol laden vaccines, ritalin , fluoride, silver
and mercury tooth fillings which expand and contract unlike
the enamel and dentin they fill and silver nitrate inoculations
for the eyeballs of new borns). More please, give me more...kind sir.

Views: 782


You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Join Atheist Nexus

Comment by Clarence Dember on November 24, 2011 at 12:23am
An interesting irrationality test for physicians would be 1). Ask them if they ever drove a taxi or rode in a taxi where it was obvious someone had done a poor job detailing the car after a gastric mishap.
2). Now ask them would you rather ride in a taxi used by 5 baked passengers or one used by 5 Drunks. If they chose the drunk cab, excuse yourself and look for a different physician.
Comment by Clarence Dember on November 16, 2011 at 1:48pm
My idea of health does not include metabolizing fluoride, mercury, other hazardous materials, aspartame or the pesticide Triclosan.
Comment by Clarence Dember on September 26, 2011 at 6:18am
This from
pproximately 50% of ingested fluoride is
cleared by the kidneys.2
In 1953, Dr Harold C Hodge, the leading F
toxicologist, applying Roholm' s intake
dosage range of 0.2- 0.35 mg/kg /day to the
range of weights of 100-229 lbs, concluded
that 20-80 mg/day of fluoride intake for
10- 20 years would be necessary to
produce skeletal fluorosis. This result was
published in 1953 by the National
Academy of Sciences/National Research
Council (NAS /NRC) . In 1990, in response
to queries about fluoride in a NAS/NRC
publication,3 NAS/NRC quoted Roholm as
supporting evidence for the statement that
"fluorosis occurs after years of daily
exposure of 20- 80 mg/day ". Unfortunately,
Hodge had made an incredible blunder,
because he had not corrected for pounds
(lbs ). He had calculated 0.2 mg x 100 (lbs )
= 20 mg and 0.35 x 229 (lbs ) = 80 mg
giving a range of 20- 80 mg/day .
This error was repeated in numerous
subsequent publications purporting to
report the range of intakes required to
produce skeletal fluorosis. The erroneous
statement was in the NAS/ NRC book
Fluorides of 1971. In 1991 NAS/NRC in a
letter quoted additional supporting
Hodge and Smith 1965 (In Fluorine
Chemistry. Academic Press, New York) ;
Fluorides and Human Health, WHO
Fluoride, and Fluorine and Fluorides.
WHO 1984.
This letter also stated "The RDA
subcommittee did not conduct experiments
and come up with this range; rather, we
reported this figure based on the work of
others and on review papers." However, all
the above reviews had accepted Hodge's
miscalculation from Roholm's classic study.
Thus all the above supporting references,
which have been widely cited to support
the safety of water fluoridation, contained
the same erroneous information.
The corrected intake range for people
between 100-229 lbs is 9.1- 36.4 mg/day
(based on 2.2 lbs/kg ). Hodge partially
corrected his error in a 1979 paper stating:
"Crippling fluorosis as an occupational
disease follows exposures estimated at 10
to over 25 mg of fluoride daily during
periods of 10-20 years." 4 In a 1993
American Dental Association pamphlet,
Fluoridation Facts, the incorrect dosage
range was quoted but cited Hodge's paper
of 1979. NAS/NRC finally quoted the
corrected Hodge's dosage rate for skeletal
fluorosis (SF ) (10 -25 mg/day of fluoride
for 10-20 years) in 1993. It was also stated
by NAS/NRC that "it is no longer feasible
to estimate with reasonable accuracy the
level of fluoride exposure simply on the
basis of concentration in drinking water
supply." 5.
Extrapolating from Roholm' s original
figures, it follows that for a 100 lb person,
at less than 2.5 mg/day fluoride intake,
stage 1 of SF can occur within 10 years. At
this same dosage rate, stage 2 of SF can
occur after 19 years and crippling skeletal
fluorosis after 45 years. There is evidence
that some people are ingesting at least 5
mg/day , in which case the stages of
skeletal fluorosis can occur after 5, 10 and
23 years, respectively.
Comment by Avicenna on September 25, 2011 at 12:23am

No, in Africa and Asia people don't have enough food to get diabetes. India also has one of the highest diabetes incidences in the world and Diabetes is rising rampantly in China. 1/5 indians are diabetic. It has nothing to do with chromium. Diabetes is an auto immune disorder where your body destroys pancreas cells that produce insulin or you eat so much food that your body stops recognising sugar by negative feedback.
Genetics has a bigger impact as does what you eat.
And I do have a blog. 

There are 6 drug categories you take in diabetes.

1. Insulins (very short, short, medium, long acting)
2. Insulin Secratagogues (Sulfonylureas, Meglitinides) 
3. Insulin  Sensitisers (Biguanides, Glitazones
4. Alpha Glucosidase inhibitors
5. Incretin Analogues

6. Amylin analogues

Not one require chromium. Nutritionists aren't really qualified to give advice, dieticians are. I may as well call my self a nourishmentarianist for all that would do. And Chromium is so poisonous they made a movie about fighting chromium in water supplies!

Erin Brockovich is about a woman who fought against chromium in the american water supply because chromium poisoning is about as fun as heavy metal poisoning. Which it is. 

Comment by Clarence Dember on September 24, 2011 at 11:52pm
To Avicenna: Glucose is derived from sugars and the metabolism of carbohydrates. Excess carbohydrates elevate triglycerides in blood and tissues. Glycogen is a storable form of energy from sugar stored in the muscle but storage space for this in muscle tissue is limited.
Certain populations (native American for instance) have adapted to metabolize carbohydrates without Chromium which is absent from the soil in North America. In Africa and parts of Europe and Asia the soil is high in Chromium and populations living there have incorporated this mineral in energy metabolism. Your assertion that Chromium is useless for this purpose will interest only those persons with empty skulls, void of pertinent primers on nutrition.
Why don't you start a blog for such people on your own dime and see if it developes traction among antiquacks like yourself?
Comment by Avicenna on September 24, 2011 at 3:43pm
I beg to differ. Glucose is one of the biggest killers of human beings across the globe in the form of diabetes.

Fluoride is a trace element, it is present in incredibly small amounts in our food.

And Chromium Picolinate has absolutely no effect on Glucose Levels. Honestly, you could replace it with a saline injection and have a better effect.

You aren't breathing in fluoride gas. The only way to get that much Fluoride in you is if you eat toothpaste.
Comment by Clarence Dember on September 24, 2011 at 3:37pm
Absorbtion of glucose can be mitigated by exercise, physical activity, the amount of lean muscle mass, insulin, food portion size and in many peoples by consuming chromium picolinate and limiting deep fried foods and transfats . What mitigates the fluoridosis in bones and teeth and the liver , brain and kidney problems caused by fluoride over dosing? Surely not the trace cyanide found in apricot pits or the concentrated cyanide found in prison death chambers.
Comment by Clarence Dember on September 24, 2011 at 4:06am
To Avicenna:
Glucose is not a hazardous material as is fluoride. Your analogy of a person getting a nontherapeutic dose of glucose having a verisimilitude to a person getting too much fluoride is preposterous. You are using a non sequiture to justify your claim that generic dosing of the municipal water supply is cogent to bioviability. This is flawed reasoning on it's face. Mere dogma.
Comment by Avicenna on September 23, 2011 at 7:32am
No because you cannot understand the very concept of dosage. 

You need fluoride in minute quantities which we stopped getting because we don't drink river melt and ground water. The Vast Majority of us in the west drink reservoir water because it's more reliable. It is also however bereft of a lot of minerals.

For instance fluoride... The dosage is vital like anything we eat. 

Our normal blood sugar is 72 mg/100 ml of blood. If we eat enough glucose we can cause our blood sugar to exceed 175 mg/100 ml (Oh and we do in some parts of the west or if we were diabetic and so had no mechanism to reduce the amount of sugar in our blood) then you start excreting sugar in your urine.

This slowly destroys your kidneys resulting in diabetic nephrotoxicity.

From glucose which is the basis of human energy, the very currency of all life be it plants or blue whales.

Concentrations and amounts is vital, its why I can drink a pint of homeopathic 50C cyanide but a few drops of cyanide will kill me.
Comment by Clarence Dember on September 23, 2011 at 4:54am
To Avicenna:
As I said previously; your banter and insults are just proof you know
nothing about hazardous materials and their effect when prescribed by
municipalities. Generic dosing of fluoride is as scientific as your carping
is rational. So why not zip it?


Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service