Stop trying to convince that official western medical community is the only option..

[hdugger]

No please .. and of course I was not referring to the age.. it would not be a good bussines for me..

Yes, I knew you weren't, I just wanted to point out how it read in English.

When I took Spanish, in response to a question from my teacher about how one would respond to the question "How much will this apple cost me," I helpfully told him that I would put him to bed and that I would cost him five pesos. (I mixed up "cuesta" and "acostar" (I think) and then totally flubbed which thing was costing). Anyway, just to say that I'd get into *far* more trouble trying to have a discussion on a Spanish-speaking forum.

[flerc]

She claimed she could wear it for two years and get a permanent curve reduction when it is only indicated for pain in adults. It did reduce her pain. There is no evidence an adult can wear a brace for two years and permanently reduce a curve. The moderator admonished her not to make the claim without evidence.

Of course it not surprises me that the moderator have taken actions against people doing more difficult your immoral work here, as it seems she did also with Tom. And of course don’t do absolutely anything against you and your direct accomplices. You continue using the term ‘evidence’ as you want without any problem in order to continue doing what you do here. She never will amonish you because not prove what you say, but yes to people not doing what you promote. Of course the moderator is the main accomplice here and not because her posts doing the same that you and your other accomplices does here, but because this kind of actions and not actions.
In fact the moderator is the real problem here not you.. at least if we decide to stop there and not continues going up.
Sorry Hdugger but I knew what I said when I said I would not hope any kind of help here, except about good members (news or old) understanding what is happening here,
In fact the moderator is the real problem here not you.. at least if we decide to stop there and not continues going up.
Sorry Hdugger but I knew what I said when I said I would not hope any kind of help here, except about good members (new or old) understanding what is happening here,
I have not any element to not think that the only kind of ‘help’ we may expect is to be banned.. or other actions as Pooka1 commented tending to silent us. Of course as ever tending to make more easy the immoral work done here since many years ago.
People wanting to do immoral works finally use the power in order to continue doing it. And of course it works! Someone was right when he said to his opponent using the power (in a more wild form) 'Gross, ideas can not be killed'. He was right, but certainly may be silenced.

[hdugger]

Whoa there big fella!

I just did *exactly* the same thing that Linda did, like two seconds ago. Someone made an overstatement about the risks of surgery, and I corrected them. Nicely (I hope) but clearly a correction.

It *is* Linda's job to ask people not to lead other people astray about expected results. I'd fault her if she wasn't doing that. I do not think that Linda sees the back and forth as anything other than that - just people disagreeing. That you and I see it as something different does not mean that Linda sees it the same way but just chooses to ignore it. I just think she sees it differently, and acts in accordance with what she sees.

The issue with the adult who braced is not that someone corrected her statement, but that people slandered her character and her intelligence. *That* is not a useful, factual correction, and that is the kind of thing I want to see stopped.

[hdugger]

I'd say something else about this, this time to Pooka.

I find your frequent statement that thoraic surgery is "one stop shopping" very troubling. And I found the following series of two posts in a row to a patient trying to decide on surgery also very troubling.

First, you repeated the "one stop shopping" thing. Then you mentioned the case where a 30 degree curve just collapsed. Yes, you said that it was rare, but it was still an odd thing just to throw into a reasoned discussion. It's a single case, the sort of thing we don't usually quote to someone trying to figure out the expected outcome. Usually, people are told to expect the expected outcome. I do not, for example, tell people trying to decide on surgery that I've seen patients on this forum who died during surgery/recovery, even though it is true. It's not what I would expect, and sharing it gives an overly frightening perception.

When a parent has a child with a curve barreling down on them, it is perfectly reasonable and kind to tell them that their child will go on to have no problems. It would be cruel to say anything else to them.

But, if someone is just considering surgery and has some time to consider it, then painting an overly-rosy picture of surgery based on information that we just don't know (how will pedicle screws turn out 20/30/50 years down the road), coupled with quoting a single troubling case about what happens if you don't have surgery seems like more then just sharing information. It feels like spin - true enough that no one calls it out as lie, but meant to sway opinion rather then inform.

[jrnyc]

hey Maria
your experience with scoliosis in your family and mine having scoli,
count for nothing, apparently...go figure...
but we come from a different background of being an adult, not needing
name calling, and not being afraid of the ideas and theories of others...

Sharon....the idea that you ever needed "immoral accomplices" or
accomplices of any kind, is pretty funny...
i just cannot stomach name calling and bombastic bullying that comes
from these unscientific minded people, who resort to name calling in their
fear of any ideas that are different from their own...

but they become repetitive, boring, and tiresome...
so i wish you both a happy holiday wkend...
i expect to enjoy it without returning to this thread for any reason...
the name calling has overtaken any possible discussion of ideas.

jess

[hdugger]

Gently, this:

i just cannot stomach name calling

cannot reasonably coexist in the same realm as this

these unscientific minded people, who resort to name calling in their
fear of any ideas that are different from their own...

If one does not like name-calling, one tries to avoid saying unpleasant things about others.

[flerc]

Flerc,

I have asked over and over again if we could stop the name calling, but I guess you don't see THAT as an obstruction to helping people. Better to waste time referring over and over again to "Pooka and her accomplices" - how is that helping those you claim to want to help?

I assume I am one of Sharon's "accomplices" because I dare ask that we stop attacking her and get back to discussing ideas rather than personalities because I thought that was what this forum was for. Rather, this thread seems to have become a forum for you and others to let off steam, spread sarcasm and continue personal attacks. Not very productive in my view, but what do I know?

When you say the work of Sharon and her accomplices "not seems to be the work that someone worry about apersonal scoliosis problem may do" can you please explain what you mean so that I can defend myself? Are you saying I don't care about people with scoliosis? (My track record would gravely dispute that). Are you saying I have never had to personally worry about someone with scoliosis? (Again, not accurate).

I know there is a language barrier and I honestly don't know what you meant.

May be, but I don’t believe is a language matter as you ever say when you says to not understand what I say about Pooka1’s work. In any case is a matter of different conceptions. You should not to confuse name callings with facts and attacks with defense. Do you know that if someone enter to your house trying to kill your family and in order to avoid it, you kill him you would not be accused to be a killer? So why are you saying to people against what she does here, that we are attacking her? Do you really believe she never REALLY attacked anybody here? Why you not say her what are you saying to me? What strange idea you have about what an attack really means!
And what a strange way to help people really worry about a health problem!
Why I should to hide the fact that you are an accomplice? If you not realize it, I don’t understand you, and it’s not because a language barrier.


May be, but I don’t believe is a language matter as you ever say when you says to not understand what I say about Pooka1’s work. Why other people understand me? In any case is a matter of different conceptions. You should not to confuse name callings with facts and attacks with defense. Do you know that if someone enter to your house trying to kill your family and in order to avoid it, you kill him you would not be accused to be a killer? So why are you saying to people against what she does here, that we are attacking her? Do you really believe she never REALLY attacks anybody here? Why you not say her what are you saying to me? What strange idea you have about what an attack really means!
And what a strange way to help people really worry about a health problem!
Why I should to hide the fact that you are an accomplice? If you not realize it, I don’t understand you, and it’s not because a language barrier.

[Pooka1]

Called someone unscientific minded is not name-calling. They either are or are not thinking scientifically. If folks really thought that was a slur they would all be thinking scientifically or at least advocating it. But we don't see that so clearly some people are not insulted by being told they are not thinking scientifically. In fact the foot soldiers in the war on science would take it as an insult if you accused them of thinking scientifically since they think science is the work of the devil (in-between hypocritically taking antibiotics that are designed with the principle of evolution in mind).

Thinking scientifically or not is a choice. People are not their ideas and they can learn. That's why it isn't name calling. Calling someone ignorant is also not name calling. It just means they don't know some fact case. We are all ignorant about many things.

Impugning people's intelligence is as bad as any other form of discrimination because it is largely a biological trait as far as I know. Just like sexual orientation.

[flerc]

My God!! Do you are pretending you never used that terms (ignorant, fool, desperate..) in order to attack people saying something against your work here? Fortunately we have tons of evidence.
And certainly, do you believe you think in a scientifically way?. You have never showed that. Do you believe you have a scientist knowledge that ignorant folks cannot understand, so they try something different of what you promote? I don’t believe you may believe that, and of course if it would be true, you would not be doing what you do in that immoral way.
Stop to continue talking in the name of science. Stop to denigrate it.

[Pooka1]

There are 223,054 views of this thread.

If you can believe it.

[mariaf]

When you say the work of Sharon and her accomplices "not seems to be the work that someone worry about apersonal scoliosis problem may do" can you please explain what you mean so that I can defend myself? Are you saying I don't care about people with scoliosis? (My track record would gravely dispute that). Are you saying I have never had to personally worry about someone with scoliosis? (Again, not accurate).

Flerc,

You did not explain what you meant by "not seems to be the work that someone worry about a personal scoliosis problem may do" and I really would like to know.

Can you answer this for me please (and kindly without mentioning Sharon or the fact that you consider me her accomplice)? Can we just stick to what that quote meant please?

Thanks.

[hdugger]

Logically, it does not make sense that every person who considers conservative treatment *also* has an illogical mind, or that every person who is not interesting in conservative treatment *also* has a logical mind. That the discussions always seem to break down in this way - that people who consider conservative treatment need to have their logic questioned while those who consider surgery do not - suggests that something else is at play.

I'd also say that, in my case, I was considered pretty clear headed right up until the moment that I began to participate in one of Dingo's threads. Again, it just seems odd that people can be thinking clearly one minute and then *poof* suddenly their thought is all muddled.

I *believe* the more parsimonious explanation is that, if people disagree with you, they appear to be illogical. That would explain both cases more reasonably.

[mariaf]

My God!! Do you are pretending you never used that terms (ignorant, fool, desperate..).

Sharon just stated what she meant by ignorant:

"It just means they don't know some fact case. We are all ignorant about many things."

I could say I am ignorant when it comes to making car repairs, for example. Meaning that I simply don't know enough to lift a car hood and fix an engine. None of us know everything about everything.

Try not to look for an argument in every single word she uses and take it in the worst possible context. Imagine if we did that with every word that everyone posts......

[Pooka1]

At first you admitted you didn't even read Dingo's biochemistry threads. Lately, you say you are coming around to the germ theory of scoliosis.

If that isn't the clearest departure from scientific thinking I don't know what is.

YOU changed; The world around you did not.

[hdugger]

Sharon just stated what she meant by ignorant:

"It just means they don't know some fact case. We are all ignorant about many things."

Ignorant has two definitions. The second is the one you point out - ignorant *of* something. The more common, first definition is "Lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated or unsophisticated". That is the one that is meant by saying that someone is ignorant (rather then that they're ignorant *of* a specific fact.)

The first construct is simply insulting. One does not refer to other people as ignorant and mean it kindly.

If one is trying to use the second meaning and fill in some knowledge which the other person does not have (is ignorant of), one shares that fact with them. Once one has shared that fact, presumably they are no longer ignorant of that fact and one can stop using *either* form of the word.

[Edit: Actually, I suspect that if you took your car into a shop and described what you thought the problem was and they said "ma'am, you are ignorant of the way that cars work" you'd turn on your heels and leave. So, even the second construct is considered insulting, when said about someone else.]