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

[jrnyc]

Sharon...weren't you recently asked if you would post radiographs of
your daughters' X rays...?
or was it that you were asked the degrees of your daughters' curves
before and after surgery...?
i definitely remember you were asked about your kids...their curves...
and i thought the questioner also asked to see X rays...
if i took the time to look for it, i could find the post that asked...

maybe you remember it...?

jess

[Pooka1]

Why would you expect someone interested in anything other than surgery to hang around?

I expect people who aren't interested in evidence to leave. Treatment type is irrelevant. People are either interested or not interested in evidence for surgical or non-surgical treatments.

Evidence is the only way of knowing anything.

[Pooka1]

There is an ENTIRE THREAD on before and after surgical radiographs.

While nobody thinks it is the least bit rude to ask for those, there seems to be a social taboo against asking for radiographs from conservative and alternative treatments.

WHY? Why is that? If they claim to reduce curves then where is the rudidity of asking to see evidence that just like folks ask to see the reductions with surgery?

Radiographs are irrelevant if the claim is that pain is reduced. They are OBLIGATORY if the claim is the curves are reduced. Science/evidence 101.

I ask AGAIN. Would anyone have ever heard of Martha Hawes if she didn't publish her serial radiographs? If it's so rude asking for radiographs for conservative treatments then why did she publish those instead of just claiming she reduced her curves???

I suggest Hawes KNEW she had to publish her radiographs because she is a scientist and understands the centrality of evidence for claims. Can you imagine her trying to publish her case without those?

[hdugger]

OK, here's exactly what we've been talking about.

******
Originally Posted by jlp1
and her curve had been reduced to 28 degrees.
her curve has been reduced to 23 degrees.
Hi. Do you have these radiographs? Have you had an orthopedic surgeon measure them?

Might it help to have your orthopedic surgeon measure these also since you are paying CLEAR so much money?

There is a before an after thread for results of surgery but I think there should be one for results of conservative and alternative treatments also. It would be a contribution if you posted your daughters before and after radiographs to that if you were okay with that. Thanks.

******

I'd take more time to parse it in a more even-handed way, but really, what the hell! I posted in response, but it's worth repeating it here: in all my years on the forum, I don't believe I've *ever* seen a parent just entering the forum whose child had had surgery asked to post their before and after xrays. They may post on their own, but I don't believe I've ever heard some *asked* to post them. If it has happened, it has happened very, very, very rarely. And yet, if one uses a conservative treatment and very cautiously and without any promises or sweeping statements describes their experiences, *this* is how they're greeted? A *second* question about whether their surgeon measured them (I'd already asked), something about CLEAR charging her so much money. And then, post your xrays? Really? What ever happened to "I'm so happy to hear that your daughter is doing well?"

At the very least, anyone who'd seen surgical patients post previously would sense that they were being treated very differently. At the most, it might very well leave someone thinking that we think they're lying and need to see the xrays for ourselves in order to be certain. No matter what your interest might be in seeing those xrays, to ask someone to post their xrays *as a greeting* would be almost guaranteed to have a chilling effect.

I am shaking my head is disbelief so hard that you must be able to hear the marbles rolling around out there.

Why would you expect someone interested in anything other than surgery to hang around? Is it really your intention to *make* them leave?

[flerc]

flerc, I don't want you to feel that I'm turning on you in any way. I am in agreement that there is a serious issue which silence is not improving, and I am trying to do my part to help and appreciate that you are trying to do yours.

I would say, though, that I find the phrase "immoral accomplice" not only overcharged, but unhelpful. It sounds like Satan's minions are swarming. It's so overcharged that it just sort of drowns out everything else you're saying and makes it seem as if that, too, is just some overstatement.

Could you say it in some way which communicated the same thing, maybe even more clearly, without making me turn around to see if everyone nearby has cloven hoofs?

I think "harmful" is a good word. It says what I think you want to say - that's it's not just some he said/she said, but that you're speaking up because you think there is real damage being done. Not hurt feelings, not people needing to get a drink after posting because someone was short tempered. But real damage. In this case, that people seeking conservative treatment do not feel comfortable posting on this board. That's a simple fact. You only have to look around to see that person after person seeking conservative treatment has left the forum, and has said that the reason they left was because they did not feel comfortable posting here. You only have to stop for a second to realize that you have never seen the same thing happen with someone pursuing surgical treatment.

And then, you leave it up to the people you're talking to to decide how they feel about that. Are they comfortable with that? Do they feel like that's the purpose of the forum, to only comfortably support surgical patients? If not, how does that make them feel. Or, OTOH, maybe they don't think it's a problem at all? Maybe they feel like conservative treatments are just so dangerous that posters talking about it should be driven off.

You sort of have to just state what you see as clearly as you can, without telling people how they must feel about it. If you tell them how they must feel, they're just going to get annoyed with you and ignore everything you're saying.

Sorry Hdduger, I'm at work, then I'll reply about what I'm seeing in your post, by now I only can tell you I use (or I try) to say what I see regardless how may it sounds

[hdugger]

flerc, I don't want you to feel that I'm turning on you in any way. I am in agreement that there is a serious issue which silence is not improving, and I am trying to do my part to help and appreciate that you are trying to do yours.

I would say, though, that I find the phrase "immoral accomplice" not only overcharged, but unhelpful. It sounds like Satan's minions are swarming. It's so overcharged that it just sort of drowns out everything else you're saying and makes it seem as if that, too, is just some overstatement.

Could you say it in some way which communicated the same thing, maybe even more clearly, without making me turn around to see if everyone nearby has cloven hoofs?

I think "harmful" is a good word. It says what I think you want to say - that's it's not just some he said/she said, but that you're speaking up because you think there is real damage being done. Not hurt feelings, not people needing to get a drink after posting because someone was short tempered. But real damage. In this case, that people seeking conservative treatment do not feel comfortable posting on this board. That's a simple fact. You only have to look around to see that person after person seeking conservative treatment has left the forum, and has said that the reason they left was because they did not feel comfortable posting here. You only have to stop for a second to realize that you have never seen the same thing happen with someone pursuing surgical treatment.

And then, you leave it up to the people you're talking to to decide how they feel about that. Are they comfortable with that? Do they feel like that's the purpose of the forum, to only comfortably support surgical patients? If not, how does that make them feel. Or, OTOH, maybe they don't think it's a problem at all? Maybe they feel like conservative treatments are just so dangerous that posters talking about it should be driven off.

You sort of have to just state what you see as clearly as you can, without telling people how they must feel about it. If you tell them how they must feel, they're just going to get annoyed with you and ignore everything you're saying.

[Pooka1]

I want to make it abundantly clear that I don't want anyone horning in on my "immoral" gig.

This mean you, Maria, and Jess and Rohrer!

[mariaf]

I'm really short of time now and I don't want to forget this question for you:
You said that 'ignorant' in the context Pooka1 used that term is not a name calling. Why do you believe 'accomplice' in the context I use it is a name calling?

Because you used it along with terms like "immoral", so it was very clear what you meant.

[flerc]

I'm really short of time now and I don't want to forget this question for you:
You said that 'ignorant' in the context Pooka1 used that term is not a name calling. Why do you believe 'accomplice' in the context I use it is a name calling? I have explained what it means for me.

[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).

Please see above.

[flerc]

Tell me first what part you don't understand and I'll try to say it in a better English.

[mariaf]

flerc,

You STILL have not explained what you meant by "not seems to be the work that someone worry about a personal scoliosis problem may do" and I would STILL like to know so I can respond.

[flerc]

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......

And about scoliosis? Do you are not also ignorant? Say me who are and not are ignorant here.

[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.]

[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.