|
Post by gezunked on Apr 8, 2008 2:28:04 GMT -5
Recently gobucky wrote on a thread called "more ridiculous blogs from doctors": "Here's what puzzles me, and would like to hear your perspective: You seem to easily be able to find the logical flaws in the explanations proffered by Dermatologists and others in the traditional medical community. Sometimes these logical flaws are obvious, other times they are quite subtle. Yet, Hildy Staninger's theories (and other similar theories) are typically left unchallenged." The comment led to a discussion that I believe is very important to people with Morgellons Disease and that's why I have started up a new thread. The discussion is about how we critically analyse - without fear or favour - the information that attaches itself to Morgellons Disease. To get the ball rolling here are some of my views. I don't mean to be rude about individuals I mention, but I do reserve the right to assert my position - freedom of speech and all that. I am perplexed by Staningers method of reporting her 'findings' via rense.com and outheretv.com. Surely this would have to constitute the most flawed possible technique for disseminating what she apparently considers critical public health information. Placing Morgellons Disease in the same context as UFO's, anti-semitism and a multitude of minor conspiracies hardly lends credibility to the casue of rational, objective scientific analysis. Staninger is an apparently well credentialed scientist. Yet, not only has she publicised her 'findings' prior to writing them up for peer review. She has however recommended specific products and treatments without any data to back her assertions. It is interesting to note that her livejournal page: drhildy.livejournal.com/ carries no mention of morgellons yet it seems entirely professional with apparently genuine scientific articles. Why not publish the information there so the experiments can be replicated? Where peers can review and comment? And I guess the same could be reasonably said for Citovsky, Wymore, Schwartz and no doubt others. Now I am sure these people are all very nice and professional and largely acting in our best interests but I do wonder about the value of their contributions when they are essentially anecdotal. At the risk of being 'hissed out of the room' the same could apply to the supposed Lyme-Morgellons connection'. From my point of view this 'connection' is more an impression than fact and like peoples 'findings', should be considered referential rather than verified information. Something to think about, but not enough to stampede the herd over. Also on that thread another respondent didn't consider criticism of our perceived supporters (Dr Hildy) helpful. For them her treatment works and she is a nice person. This is a very valid point. For that person the treatment worked and Doc Hildy seems very nice. For my mind that's enough of a reference to be confident the Dr is genuine and acting in our best interests and may be on to something. Unfortunately it is not enough for me to embrace her findings. To papraphrase the psychiatrist from the Mayo Clinic, 'the challenge is to translate the narrative truth into scientific truth'. In Hildy's case her findings add to the narrative truth but confuse the scientific truth. As it has come up a million times on these pages I would also like to add that we shouldnt be fearful or concerned by the morgellonswitch website. Irrespective of what people think about the Morgellons community, anyone stumbling upon that site cannot avoid being struck by the specious rebuttals and vexatious activities of that obsessive and energetic trio. Even if you accept their every premise, that then leaves them as little more than bullies picking on ill people. For me what it all comes down to is verifiable analysis, information that stands up to scrutiny and can be replicated. I find it very interesting that Hildy and Citovsky seem to be both describing the same process in similar yet distinct terms. From things like that I take hope. Despair comes with continuous ignorance, a space where rumour flourishes and in lieu of fact gains credibility until rumour becomes truth and facts are redundant. That is the scary and distinctly possible future for the Morgellons Community without critical analysis, transparency and self-discipline.
|
|
|
Post by skytroll on Apr 8, 2008 2:58:32 GMT -5
gezunked,
Morgellons goes against the grain in the AMA and ADA, the CDC and NIH. They are gagged, they will not tell us what this is, because they do not want it out. This was conceived in a lab, many labs over many years. You cannot treat something where high tech is used, when there are no remedies.
There is not meant to be any. We have to use what protocols, and natural healing is best, since we cannot integrate the DNA properly. DNA is being used in everything, what nano is all about, and no scientist will write about the errors that have been made, in fact they become the ones who will try to cure it, as they have in the past.
Some of the peer reviewed papers and those posted are deceiving. They talk in manners the average person cannot understand, and this high tech infiltrated with natural and "novel organisms" created in Evolutionary Development, are just being extended into molecular machines, and DNA is the building block in many of these nanohorns, tubes, pores, etc. There are no medical answers to this.
Because there it not meant to be.
This is all part of the process to "transform" DNA, where RNA sends another message to DNA.
Replication by way of virus, vector delivery in carbon nanotubes or buckyballs etc.
We can't use the old ways, they only treat symptoms, they do not and have not looked for causes in most diseases.
In fact ulcers caused by heliobacter
Calcium in blood, arteriosclerosis. not cholesterol.
We have been lied to.
This is the crime, and it is by the whole medical community.
When you go up against the Big Boys, and the money, you will only have certain outlets to present your work to.
The media runs from this, because they too are gagged.
Common sense tells us what is going on.
If you are in a university, money granted to you by the government, your papers can easily be published, but you have to be in the university.
She was not given grant money, these tests were done at MIT though, for a fine price.
Would you not say MIT or Woods Hole Oceanic are reputable university organizations and labs?
The big real issue is: Disease caused by genes? or by viruses, bacteria, fungi etc.
Viruses mutate genes to cause mutable events, most for the worse, the break open DNA, alter DNA, now just add a bot that can exchange DNA or delete or integrate other DNA.
2 schools of medical theory.
However, many doctors are starting to integrate Natural healing with regular drugs.
This is a start, but it is small.
Many of our doctors working on Morgellons research are going up against brick walls, and are gagged as to what they can present the public. They get no grant money for the study of this.
Why?
Something is wrong at the top?
Truth often is not popular, in fact, it rarely is until it can be denied no longer.
Truth is always on the narrow road, because if we go with the flow we just may end up going over the dam, just because everyone said that is what we have to do.
They could be wrong, it takes a few strong people to challenge the flawed status quo.
Skytroll
|
|
|
Post by prevenge on Apr 8, 2008 4:37:51 GMT -5
one thing is this...
most of the scientific community will not touch the Morgellons subject with a ten foot pole, namely because they understand this risks their reputation, career and thusly their livelihood,
so you get nobody to peer review the papers, because their name is eternally bound to whatever paper is being reviewed.
so that cuts out a huge slew of those who would peer review it.
you do however have the usual suspects who would gladly review it all and slam it with all the insidious bullying a rabid pit-bull would have on a wounded puppy.
so what you're left with, are the ones you KNOW are going to peer-regurgitate your findings, AND.. you have your loyal compatriots that will by no doubt find parallels and supporting evidence, which can be a good AND bad thing..
because they're biased by whatever % towards HOPING to find something...
WHICH can't be very healthy or scientifically professional....
but thats ALL YOU GOT.
that's all you have.. people that will use their authorative position to naysay it..
and..
people that will hopefully be prudent in reviewing the data..
but more likely than so.. others in the community will see that it's the same peer members that have reviewed the past 10 articles on their findings.. and looked at with raised eyebrows.
the end all be all of this is this..
most people are sheep .. even doctors...
they will be swayed instantaneously by "authoritative individuals" saying "what it is".. because they've grown up their entire life knowing nothing but "EXPERTS SAY" .. as the magical subliminal preamble that opens their minds up for keying in a facet of reality.
because their minds are so busy with their day to day personal issues and the chaos storm that is local and world events..
that they just want a professional to say "what it is" .. and that's all they need to think about..
there .. nuff said.. CDC say it's DOP..
"so thats what it is.. " "ok what's on American Idol i need to escape from the stress of the day for now..."
etc etc..
then there are those who are not sheep...
the FACT... that Air Force Colonel Dr Maffert, Dermatologist, FORCEFULLY PUSHES the DOP aspect.. and willingly presses the sentiment that other Dermatologists to think of it as such, and view ANYONE that comes in complaining about this as "DOP".
should raise some eyebrows...
at least in minds that think for themselves among the scientific community.
anyone with an IQ above 130 would in retrospect, at that point, hearing the good Colonel's words of ADVISE... would KNOW to LAY OFF investigation.. and follow orders.
because if that's the Military's position.. then stay away from it.. EVEN if you use flat-slate unadulterated LOGIC, and see that it's actually something EXTREMELY SENSETIVE...
you "get the message" .. and lay off the interest and treat them as DOP. (with gloves and a mask that is)
so it's the feeble minded followers that parrot what the person on TV said "what it is".. and mindlessly go about their day referencing that snippet of lies as their little "thing to say for the day" .. to feel knowledgeable and confident in their "understanding" that it's just crazy people.. because crazy people are everywhere.. and toss up the the "what people will go to to get attention" line etc..
and then there's the people who actually understand that it's sensetive issue and back away from it.
that leaves you with a REAL defecit in the pool of potential peer-reviewers.
the reason I look at these findings that these brave doctors have come up with ..
is because THATS ALL WE HAVE TO LOOK AT!
hahah... maaan .. that's the ONLY DATA to even speculate about!!
it's not like you have a choice!
it's the data that stanninger and cytovsky come up with ..
OR
actually try to convince yourself of the ALTERNATIVE'S conclusion.. (data) .. that you're nuts and you might as well buy their drugs or end it all.
.....
and I ain't goin out like that. (ain't goin oouuut)
-M
|
|
|
Post by gezunked on Apr 8, 2008 5:19:01 GMT -5
Hi Skytroll,
Thanks for responding, I acknowledge what you are saying but would contend that in some ways the situation is different to how you perceive it.
I agree that Morgellons is not on the radar of the medical profession however, I'd argue that this is largely due to a combination of factors not particularly surreal:
1. professional isolation - doctors rely on the accumulated knowledge of their profession and they don't interact much with other scientific disciplines. In fact contemporary science is compartmentalised and specific. Generalists for the most part can't have a place in science such is the volume of information. So things that dont behave like the medical definition of pathogens dont show up. Think of it as medical fundementalism - if it isnt in the (medical) bible its not true.
2. The 'close enough category': The symptoms we feel and how we react to those symptoms put us well within the definition of an established but relatively rare medical condition - DoP. The psychological nature of skin sensations is valid and verified and this further muddies our situation. It's not that surprising that doctors are skeptical. Part of the problem is socially we are conditioned to believe that doctors are infallible. And for the most part they are! Medical science can and does do many increasingly amazing things, some of them may be open to criticism but i dont think the whole medical profession can be discounted out of hand because of their human failings.
3. Peer pressure: Doctors, like the rest of us are social creatures and beliefs and opinions are not only formed by intellect but also external influences. Opinions of parents, peers etc carry more influence than those of, for example, advertising. (well maybe!) Because of this it is socially difficult for doctors to 'go against the grain' of their peers collective opinion and start proclaiming they have stumbled across a novel organism. Indeed, they dont want to! Presumably like most of us they want a uncomplicated existence and the frontline of investigative medicine does not have portals to either general paractice or patient involvment. In essence, it's not their problem, by all accounts Morgies dont die in their offices and there is a defined medical condition that covers their a$$, therefore case closed. And if they did believe us wouldn't that then constitute a 'folie a deux'?
You also claim some knowledge that this condition involves DNA and nanotech and this knowledge stems from an implied ability to comprehend the 'deceiving' and 'infiltrated' peer reviewed papers. You also imply the authors of these papers won't admit their mistakes. I consider this largely irrelevant because as their work is published for review by their peers any mistakes would inevitably come out of the review process. That's why I think peer review has value and is a proven guard against deceptive practices.
Much of your response implies a rather far reaching, apparently long established deceptive collusion involving 'the whole medical profession', 'the media, and 'universities' (except MIT). You also state that all this position is verifiable with 'common sense'.
Using my perhaps slewed version of common sense I am, with respect, doubtful that there is enough valid information to come to any conclusion as to what causes this condition. Or whether it is treatable either by conventional or alternative medicine.
I dont set out to offend you skytroll but I probably have. I'm afraid I find most of what you say above and indeed most of your posts. counter-productive. I understand that you too have the right to speak your opinions however, there are continuous dual themes in your posts of fear and cutting edge science. I dont see any evidence to justify the fear you propogate or validate your apparent scientific insight.
As you post prolifically I'd ask you to consider whether such posts have a primary value to our cause or that of our detractors.
|
|
|
Post by gobucky on Apr 8, 2008 5:50:52 GMT -5
gezunked,
While I do not necessarily agree with the conclusions of Wymore, and the fellow from Stony Brook, I do acknowledge that they are engaging in legitimate scientific inquiry.
Staninger belongs in a different category altogether. You'll note that nowhere on any of her websites does she state where she got her PhD. Once on Rense she let it slip that it came from Kennsington University. Kennsington turns out to have been a classic diploma mill, and has since been shut down. If you try googling the other items on her CV, you'll find a shadowy trail that leads nowhere close to legitimacy. Another interesting exercise -- google RIET-1 toxicology. Staninger appears to be the only person in the world with these particular credentials.
If its credibility you seek, run as far from Hildy Staninger as you can.
|
|
|
Post by prevenge on Apr 8, 2008 6:13:25 GMT -5
gezunked and gobucky..
what symptoms of Morgellons Syndrome do you experience?
-M
|
|
|
Post by gobucky on Apr 8, 2008 6:49:53 GMT -5
I do not have Morgellons.
What's my interest then? Folks with Morgellons are suffering terribly. And when people suffer from a poorly understood condition, they understandably become desperate. That desperation creates a state of vulnerability. I am angered by "practitioners" who I believe are exploiting that vulnerability.
|
|
|
Post by janedough on Apr 8, 2008 7:23:06 GMT -5
It seems more and more independent researchers are coming up with similar results that silentsuperbug has. gobucky, as a dermatologist with military background, you should know about this. What is your opinion of the modified fusarium?
We know from experience that when reality starts showing is face on these threads, quickly the background of the doctor or researcher comes in to play, which is now the case in people wanting to find out about Mark Darrah. You are not worried about Citovsky because you know he will not get any research funding from Universities. No one will for this disease. $380,000? for the Kaiser study. That equates to five minutes in Iraq.
|
|
|
Post by prevenge on Apr 8, 2008 7:41:53 GMT -5
I do not have Morgellons. What's my interest then? Folks with Morgellons are suffering terribly. And when people suffer from a poorly understood condition, they understandably become desperate. That desperation creates a state of vulnerability. I am angered by "practitioners" who I believe are exploiting that vulnerability. so your interest is reduced to posing yourself in anger towards the only people researching this. there are plenty of obese people buying snake oil from crapshot weight-loss salsemen. there are "police" in Ghana garnering exploitative imposed tolls on public roads. there are pharmaceutical giants that get sued nearly every other month from hundreds of people dying from their products. why not peruse those aspects of perceived injustice in the world, rather than focus on this relatively obscure area of the chaotic world? why find this tiny area where there is tiiiiny actual research being done on a physical ailment, and try to bring justice to the poor desperate sufferers by freeing them from the plague of perceived snake oil research? what angers you more about the only researchers doing work on this, rather than all the other similar yet more widespread percieved exploitation in the world? -M
|
|
|
Post by gobucky on Apr 8, 2008 7:55:17 GMT -5
Don't move the goal posts. I made no comments regarding my assessment of the adequacy of research funding, and specifically did not denigrate the efforts of other investigators.
I'm simply making a specific critique of Hildy Staninger.
|
|
|
Post by prevenge on Apr 8, 2008 8:25:43 GMT -5
Don't move the goal posts. I made no comments regarding my assessment of the adequacy of research funding, and specifically did not denigrate the efforts of other investigators. I'm simply making a specific critique of Hildy Staninger. Well then do a complete in depth investigative report on her. I want all credentials scrutinized, all possible M.O.s covered in bullet list style accuracy, all previous relationships / partnerships / involvements explicitly detailed. I'll expect this in PDF format, in my box by Thursday noon. ?? do it up buckyball. lets see your sleuthage in action. bust the case wide open. free us from her predatory tactics. I mean, isn't that where all this is going? Just freaking do it. answer all the questions you have. for yourself and us. help me obi-wan bucky-nobi.
you're my only hope.-M
|
|
|
Post by cheetah on Apr 8, 2008 10:34:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jwf on Apr 8, 2008 14:20:22 GMT -5
Hi Gobucky,
'What if it could be shown that Morgellon's patients had demonstrable, verifiable neurologic problem that caused patients to experience the horrific symptoms that many of you have...'.
Does your statement above still sum up your position on Morgellons?
' While I do not necessarily agree with the conclusions of Wymore, and the fellow from Stony Brook....'
What conclusions made by Dr. Wymore and Dr. Cytovsky do you disagree with?
Blue Skies.........John
|
|
|
Post by skytroll on Apr 8, 2008 14:58:02 GMT -5
They sure come out of the woodwork on the attack
I carry this manifestation which after all these years is now producing those degenerate fibers.
Muscles baby muscles.
These are not fear tactics, this is proof.
I have the blueprint.
So, do some others. So, take your genetic reformation and shove it where the sun don't shine.
I know more than you can imagine, Baby because you cannot do the research yourself
You do not know how.
The cat is out of the box.
Riddles you would never understand.
Skytroll
|
|
|
Post by skytroll on Apr 8, 2008 15:04:25 GMT -5
I tried to explain to you, but you cannot hear because of your agenda.
When you can open your eyes and see you will know.
The Royalness of your endeavors will not get you the answer.
And it is all about the perfect gene isn't it?
It is about matter, it is about light scattering particles, it is about electroporation, it is about b subtilis, it is about melanin, it is about actin, it is about myosin, it is about RNA DNA proteins unfolding and folding, it is about fibers fibers fibers fibers fibers fibers.
It is about movement, it is about deletion and introns, it is about e-coli K-12 and other novel creations, it is about COX, it is about COX fibers, it is about mitochondria, it is about photons, it is about planes, it is about fatty acids, it is about lipases, amylase, phospholipids, it is about glycosylation.
It is about my heart.
Skytroll
|
|
|
Post by cheetah on Apr 8, 2008 20:40:49 GMT -5
Well put Skytroll... Damn.................scared - of - you.......................
|
|
|
Post by skytroll on Apr 8, 2008 22:19:48 GMT -5
You better be I am one mad................
well anyway at this manifestation and horrible thing we have.
Oh maybe Go Bucky knows about the Jahn-Teller thing. Or doesn't it ring a bell.
Skytroll
|
|
|
Post by reasonable on Apr 8, 2008 23:38:31 GMT -5
Hahahahaha - sorry, could not help it - so much for critical analysis and scientific discussion. ;D We're remarkably predictable.
|
|
|
Post by betsy on Apr 9, 2008 0:32:27 GMT -5
Skytroll-
The original poster of this strand raised some questions to which I did give to a moment of reflection. However, I felt your response in replay #1 was a very accurate description of the challenges faced by those few researchers who are courageous enough to help. I believe it should have put to rest the majority of honest concerns that might be posed.
Furthermore--I was overjoyed to see another side of your writing. Often your posts are dedicated to the technical and leave me far behind in the dust.
In reference to the original poster"s concerns about peer review, it would be my opinion that a doctor of environmental toxicology would not be publishing in a medical journal for medical doctors. Furthermore, I would imagine that all of Dr. Hildy's training and experience will not be listed under the same name. Men do not often experience more than one last name in careers. The same is not true for women.
|
|
|
Post by prevenge on Apr 9, 2008 3:31:11 GMT -5
who cares?
the only outstanding aspect of this .. that should cause an eyebrow or two to raise...
is why such deep focused interest in spreading speculation into the factual basis of Hildy's work.
i don't think scrutinizing any of this info is worthwhile.
if it's truly bad science they're doing.. and scamming sick people.. then they'll be arrested or sued.
if not.. then some may find relief.. if only from a placebo effect.
besides.....
all these bucky/reasonable threads are doing is making us babble on about nothing.
all these non-infected slime bags that get off on watching suffering people suffer are just antagonizing the situation.
piling on added stress to our lives.
we've been pinned with the worst imaginable situation ever to experience..
and in our one safe place to find support and compassion in others..
we are plagued by these excuses for human beings.
picking.. pestering us with redundant questioning that only causes more stress.
its amazing how much influence one or two people can cause in a group of disoriented and desperate people. like a domino starting a cascade effect. or sheep dogs herding sheep.
verbal techniques.. cause and effect..
i'm not going to let whatever this is in me sway me into behavior I don't want to express. namely.. frustration and anger.
these are the emotions I continually experience in conversation with these maggots who post here.
I've said all i will to these people.
i've gotten it out of my system.
I suggest this to the rest of you ... for your OWN HEALTH and emotional well-being...
don't reply to their posts anymore.. because it will always end in some jumbled mass of frustration and convoluted bickering.
I'm pushing myself to focus on love and self improvement..
These individuals definitely test that, but I'm not interested in continuing the spar.
I'm just too exhausted to compete with their spite.
and anyway, someone will do the same thing to them someday.
someday, they too will find themselves cold and alone, and suffering.
and If i was there to witness it, maybe I would be the one to put a hand on their shoulder and show them understanding and kindness. if anything, to show them a pathway more illuminated with love and brotherhood.
-M
|
|