myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Why We Should All Fear Government
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 4303

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2015 9:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Laughing so hard it hurts worse than the bruised ribs from diving off the ski trail dodging a freedom fighter on a snow mobile.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 20935

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2015 4:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The federal government has been telling us for nigh on 50 years to avoid eating cholesterol. Neither science nor I ever supported that, in fact have supported just the opposite for decades ... that sat fat, eggs, etc. do not raise the harmful components of cholesterol. Just this week the government issued a formal statement on the issue: in short, "Never mind".

I will be eagerly awaiting the other shoe, about the advice to keep our serum cholesterol low: "Never mind". There is little science behind that BS, either, and MUCH in opposition.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 20935

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2015 4:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

coboardhead wrote:
Laughing so hard it hurts worse than the bruised ribs from diving off the ski trail dodging a freedom fighter on a snow mobile.

The only snow goon I've ever encountered was on skis. There are bad eggs in every nest, and that one got his ribs scrambled.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iso said:
Quote:
The federal government has been telling us for nigh on 50 years to avoid eating cholesterol. Neither science nor I ever supported that, in fact have supported just the opposite for decades ... that sat fat, eggs, etc. do not raise the harmful components of cholesterol. Just this week the government issued a formal statement on the issue: in short, "Never mind".

I will be eagerly awaiting the other shoe, about the advice to keep our serum cholesterol low: "Never mind". There is little science behind that BS, either, and MUCH in opposition.


And the left wonders why we are skeptics with all things government. It's hard to know the truth since so many "studies/research" are funded by someone/entity that has an agenda. I don't think this is a right or left issue, but accepting anything the government says as "fact" is likely a bit naïve. Even when an honest assessment of the truth appears, many times new research proves earlier "facts" as false.

It seems that Iso spends a fair amount of time digging into the "facts" to come up with a more balanced view of what is real and what isn't. Something we all should do.

I won't go into details, but just recently I have had to make two Dr. visits to get the "facts" in order to educate another Dr. about his false assumptions. He belittled my on line research and own experiences, but he made an incorrect assumption in an area where he lacked knowledge.

In that same light - anyone on Medicare been to a "Wellness Exam" by their Dr. What a waste of time (except for the blood work).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 5180

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2015 12:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eggs good, then bad, now good? Coffee bad, now good? Alcohol bad.......or good? Globe cooling........or warming? Ethanol good, now bad? Arab Spring good.......now not so good? So many "experts" telling us what to think, and how to behave with such great confidence.....until they do a U turn or try to weasel out of their original positions by calling them something different. Sensible people should rightly be skeptical and questioning. The "experts" are fortunate that, despite their many and glaring stumbles, there are sufficient unquestioning disciples who will blindly follow the "consensus" and will try to shout down and diminish those who ask "Does that make sense?". However, fortunately for all of us, over the course of history, enough people have refused to be shouted down and have continued to question the consensus view based upon their own experience and the evidence of their own eyes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 20935

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2015 1:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

techno900 wrote:
It seems that Iso spends a fair amount of time digging into the "facts" to come up with a more balanced view of what is real and what isn't. Something we all should do.

I won't go into details, but just recently I have had to make two Dr. visits to get the "facts" in order to educate another Dr. about his false assumptions. He belittled my on line research and own experiences, but he made an incorrect assumption in an area where he lacked knowledge.

Concerning national or regional issues, particularly political ones (aren't they all?) where our only influence is through our votes, debate here is pointless. Even if we come up with a valid solution no one else had thought of, we still have only one vote among hundreds of thousands or hundreds of millions.

But in our own individual health care, we have THE ONLY vote. i.e., no doctor can force us adults (or mac, pueno, KC, Chandler, etc.) to follow their advice.
THANK GOD AND OUR FOREFATHERS FOR THAT GIANT FAVOR.
My answer to the idiot doctors who warn me against using the internet is, "And how do you access Pubmed?" (Pubmed is the worldwide gateway, used by almost every physician on the planet, to peer-reviewed medical research papers by the millions.) It SHOULD form the foundation on which erudite bodies of leading physicians appointed for that purpose meet to decide and issue the evidence-based medical treatment mandates on which Western medicine and insurers operate.



The fallacies in that concept are so numerous and all-encompassing that I'll shorten them to this short list. Each doctor must divide her time among hundreds of patients; every one of us has only ONE patient. That patient is unique, has his own set of priorities, and is more invested in his own care than is his doctor. His doctor is very likely to rely on what she was taught in medical school, with little time and often little inclination to keep up even with valid and proven new medical science, let alone single studies that may or may not hold water. I'll spare you a long list of very fundamental, LONG- proven (as in several decades), very important medical facts many idiots in white coats refuse to even consider. Anyone who does not know enough about his or her medical issues to spot bad physicians or their bad advice is risking seriously wrong, often even unnecessarily fatal, treatment.

It's that damned simple, and it's apparently epidemic among medical practitioners at every level of specialization.

I'll spare you guys the other 500 pages I could type at full speed, gleaned from WAY over 10,000 pages of literature research plus extensive personal observation in many hospitals and with many physicians. Every week something new pops up to confirm my point of view. Last month it changed my own future; this week it will probably -- still unfolding -- strongly affect my brother's.

What supports my claims that we MUST do enough research to spot poor individual (and what other kind matters to each individual?) medical care? You guessed it: Research.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10588

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2015 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"It seems that Iso spends a fair amount of time digging into the "facts" to come up with a more balanced view of what is real and what isn't."


techno900, come one, do you really believe that? I think that we all watch and listen what's going on around us, and we ultimately develop our own sense of skepticism about the "facts" that are being presented. Do I believe folks like isobars that have a myriad of hateful views that he loves to spout here? Does he have a more balanced view on things? Not even close. He's a product of where he spends his time and energy. If you watch and listen to the wrong stuff, you come away with a decidedly warped view of things. Do you think that all the Islamic folks that are sucked up and brainwashed by the leaders and recruiters of ISIS have a balanced view of the things around them? That's where reasonable skepticism comes into play. Extremism and its ugly expressions scream a false road to sensible folks.

Regarding the government's latest 5 year update on recommended dietary requirements, it reflects the results of the latest scientific study. It doesn't surprise me that the latest study has ended up changing viewpoints and recommendations previously held in the 2010 recommendations. I like to think that scientific study opens new doors, while at the same time, it can revise our base of earlier knowledge and understanding. Also, it is important to remember that not everyone is the same. As a person with heart disease, I know that I face risks that many folks never have to be concerned with. My genetics require that I take particular attention to diet and exercise to remain at my healthiest. I'm sure that the findings and revised changes in diet cholesterol intake really don't change that much for someone like me. Maybe now it might be possible for me to eat a few more eggs per week without great concern, but that doesn't mean that I should forego any concern about eating foods loaded with hydrogenated fats and sugars.

What I don't get or believe from folks like you, isobars and mrgybe is the strong anti-government twist and negativity in your views. Why such ugly hateful view on things? It's because of where you hang out to gather your information and news. Why crap on science? If skepticism is truly warranted, I think that it should be directed at the negative viewpoints and selective "facts" promoted by hateful folks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17742
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2015 2:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chandler--sheer lunacy lies underneath the comments of mrgybe and isobars. It's the anti-science people screaming because we have learned something. It is a good thing that we know more about diet and health than we did twenty years ago. The reason that government is slow to update guidelines is, in part, that they have to deal with the anti-science hysteria from the lunatic right.

I get the same reaction to the Common Core educational materials. It is a sensationally more effective way to teach mathematics, at least in the first 5 grades where I've been involved. The hysteria from the right consists of two really stupid talking points: 1) this is the Federal government dictating to us again (it is a State developed and adopted set of materials), and 2) that's not the way that I learned math.

The obvious riposte--which goes right over the head of the hysterics--is "Don't you think we've learned something about how the brain learns since you were a kid?"

Always looking backwards, always with rose colored glasses that ignore disease, more overt racism, and pollution. Life in the bubble.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 20935

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2015 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I read your post, Chandler, and find serious, studied, factual flaws in almost every sentence, opinion, and accusation ... just way too much error for me to bother with. If I thought your motivation was any more than just hatred and thought it would be of any benefit to you, I'd offer pages more than this: If your cardiologists are ANYTHING like the ones I and some of my friends have consulted, do a great deal of reading on your heart problems to double-check your doctors. This "new" information on which these "new" nutrition guidelines are based is many decades old. The difference is that science FINALLY trumped momentum.

And, so sorry, but my intensity is driven by information, conviction, and perceived importance, not the other way around, and only an offended zealot refers to facts as "hatred".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 5180

PostPosted: Sat Feb 21, 2015 4:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Any opinion that does not align with theirs is hatred or racism. Truly pathetic.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63  Next
Page 59 of 63

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group