Page 4 of 29 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 433

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

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,748
    Quote Originally Posted by flerc View Post
    Yes, actually you are. Read your previous posts. Not only because this, but how many times did you said that has not any sense to demand a proof about her categorical assertion 'There is no evidence any conservative treatment has prevented any surgery'? If you think so because it cannot be proved is her problem not mine and instead of saying that for me you should have to said her that she should not do at least in this forum such kind of assertions. This is what I'm doing, as everybody here should to do.
    Flerc,
    I know what I posted and why. Sharon's statement, "There is no evidence any conservative treatment has prevented any surgery" may well be a true statement even though it may not be true. It doesn't mean that I agree with the statement. Look at Tamztom's thread. He appears to be helping his daughter nonsurgically. However, from a scientific standpoint ONE CASE is not enough "evidence". To prove something, as I have stated, it needs to be predictably reproducible. Tom's method may only work on HIS daughter, or it may only work on kids with JIS before their growth spurt, etc... Those are the variables that researchers would sort out before applying Tom's "therapy" to every child out there with idiopathic scoliosis. It's the way the scientific community works. There are rules that have to be followed in order to make a legitimate claim that a particular therapy works. You CAN'T prove that "any" conservative will work or fail. It's too vague. For example:
    1. taking a bath every day will cure scoliosis.
    2. eating a vegan diet will cure scoliosis.
    3. standing under a full moon for three consecutive months will cure scoliosis.
    .
    .
    .
    n. standing on one foot while jumping up and down will cure scoliosis.

    My point here is that there are an infinite number of things that can be "claimed" to cure scoliosis. Researchers need to investigate specific claims. All of these ridiculous claims I just made up would fall under the category of "conservative treatment". You know as well as I do that these things are bogus. However, there may be people out there that would believe that stuff. The claims that researchers are interested in researching have to meet certain criteria. That is WHY you can't say, "Prove that any alternative treatment could not help scoliosis." or however you worded it. It's too broad, and that's exactly why I defended Sharon's statement. You have to be specific about the treatment. You have to collect meaningful data to support the claim. Then you have to be able to reproduce your findings on a large random sample. Then you have to do it again. Sharon's argument was that non-mainstream practitioners do not collect such data and can not back up their claims. I have to agree that if someone is not willing to collect the data on successes and failures, then there may be something to hide OR they just aren't interested in fitting into the scientific community. Either way, if a treatment is not studied and doesn't meet the criteria for "proof", then it can't be endorsed by institutions such as Medical Associations. It doesn't mean that the treatment never works. It means that there is no "evidence" that it works.

    Anyway, Flerc, I'm going to leave it at that. You misunderstand me and that's okay. I'm trained in the sciences and am just trying to explain how it works. I'm sorry if I offended you by not defending you to Sharon. In this case, SCIENTIFICALLY, her statement was correct whether it is true or false. If I thought surgery were my only solution, I would be fighting to have it done and I'm not.

    I don't know why you are avoiding the topic of treatments for your daughter. It makes me question why the topic of your thread upsets you so, especially if you are not employing any alternative methods in trying to get your daughter well. I wish her all the best.
    Last edited by rohrer01; 02-25-2013 at 12:29 AM.
    Be happy!
    We don't know what tomorrow brings,
    but we are alive today!

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    9,289
    Quote Originally Posted by rohrer01 View Post
    I don't know why you are avoiding the topic of treatments for your daughter. It makes me question why the topic of your thread upsets you so, especially if you are not employing any alternative methods in trying to get your daughter well. I wish her all the best.
    Fer,

    Can you please tell us all the treatments your daughter has tried and what was the result in terms of changes to her Cobb angle? You have mentioned so many and I just wonder which of those she has tried. That would be a far better contribution to this forum than abstractly defending the idea of alternative treatments as you have done to no effect.

    I am hoping this is not going to be like that Clear chiro whose own daughter would not do the Clear protocol. That kid sounds appropriately skeptical to me! Maybe she will become a research scientist. :-)

    Thanks in advance.

    Sharon
    Last edited by Pooka1; 02-25-2013 at 06:01 AM.
    Sharon, mother of identical twin girls with scoliosis

    No island of sanity.

    Question: What do you call alternative medicine that works?
    Answer: Medicine


    "We are all African."

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,976
    Quote Originally Posted by rohrer01 View Post
    I don't know why you are avoiding the topic of treatments for your daughter. It makes me question why the topic of your thread upsets you so, especially if you are not employing any alternative methods in trying to get your daughter well. I wish her all the best.
    If you believe something as Pooka1 is suggesting that I donít want to talk about that because I want to promote that some alternatives methods really works although not worked for me or something like that, I have nothing to talk with you any more, as I have not with her. It not imply I will not continue demanding what Iím demanding in this thread, where I will not talk about nothing not having to do with my demand, and of course what I believe or not about alternative treatments my knowledge or experiences with them and so on has absolutely nothing to do. This remember me the dark times of my country when people denounced of doing atrocities never was investigated, but yes who did the denouncement (in fact tortured and killed).

    It really surprise me very much you don't know what I believe about alternative and medical treatments, what means for me 'Works', 'Evidence', the rol of science and so on.. I'm almost sure you participated here http://www.scoliosis.org/forum/showt...-to-Scoliscore
    Certainly It makes me question why the topic of this thread not upsets also you, someone with a science background. Regardless if alternatives methods worked or not with you or what you may believes of them, if someone is trying to convince that are unuseful, but in a non scientist/logic/rational but confusing way, it should to upsets you too.
    But it seems you think that only idiots may be influenced by that work, so not matter you. We think and I may say we feel in a very different way.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,976
    Quote Originally Posted by rohrer01 View Post
    "There is no evidence any conservative treatment has prevented any surgery" may well be a true statement even though it may not be true.
    SCIENTIFICALLY, her statement was correct whether it is true or false.
    But if you use it (mainly in a non scientist/philosophical forum) as proof in order to proclaim to the world in a categorical way that those treatments are useless (and all the implications as stupid/ignorant people, dishonest professionals..) because if not, would be evidence that worked sometime.. All this logic construction is RIGHT for you?
    If A certainly (or almost) implies B but I cannot prove if A is true or not, may I be absolutely sure about the veracity of B? that is, may I proclaimed the veracity of B and all his implications? I donít think that. I believe that someone doing or supporting it has not a rational mind or is trying to convince others in any way.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,748
    Quote Originally Posted by flerc View Post
    If you believe something as Pooka1 is suggesting that I don’t want to talk about that because I want to promote that some alternatives methods really works although not worked for me or something like that, I have nothing to talk with you any more, as I have not with her. It not imply I will not continue demanding what I’m demanding in this thread, where I will not talk about nothing not having to do with my demand, and of course what I believe or not about alternative treatments my knowledge or experiences with them and so on has absolutely nothing to do. This remember me the dark times of my country when people denounced of doing atrocities never was investigated, but yes who did the denouncement (in fact tortured and killed).

    It really surprise me very much you don't know what I believe about alternative and medical treatments, what means for me 'Works', 'Evidence', the rol of science and so on.. I'm almost sure you participated here http://www.scoliosis.org/forum/showt...-to-Scoliscore
    Certainly It makes me question why the topic of this thread not upsets also you, someone with a science background. Regardless if alternatives methods worked or not with you or what you may believes of them, if someone is trying to convince that are unuseful, but in a non scientist/logic/rational but confusing way, it should to upsets you too.
    But it seems you think that only idiots may be influenced by that work, so not matter you. We think and I may say we feel in a very different way.
    Wow, Flerc. You can stop with the personal attacks. You have every right to post about alternative treatments on this forum, just as others have the right to post about scientific discoveries. My "beliefs" are irrelevant. Science is based on provable facts. There are some major issues that Sharon and I have to agree to disagree on. I'm not attacking her personally because we think differently. Where do you get the notion that I think everyone is an idiot who tries an alternative treatment? Why would you even say that to me? I said that I think a person would be an idiot to rely solely on what they read on a public forum to make their medical decisions. You and I are more different than I thought. It's not because we have both tried alternative therapies, but because of the way you are attacking me for things that I have not said or done, because you think I'm somehow in cahoots with Sharon in some elaborate scheme to undermine all therapies except surgery. I will remind you again, I HAVE NOT HAD SURGERY. I HAVE ONLY TRIED ALTERNATIVE THERAPIES. Yes, you can be done discussing things with me. You clearly don't understand a word I have said here and choose to attack me because I tried to explain the scientific method to you. Your demand will never be met here because it is impossible to prove. I directed you to a thread that I thought you would find very useful. It seems to be a nonsurgical success story, so far... That's about all the "proof" I can give you.

    I ask you about your daughter because I have been very forthright about what treatments I have had. I have been very open about my own children's scoliosis. You, on the other hand, post many things about alternative therapies but never say if you have tried them with your daughter or what the outcome has been. But sometimes, no matter how "logical" a therapy seems to be, it just doesn't work. The human body is so much more complex than any human knows, so there will always be "unknown" factors that throw a wrench in our way of thinking. But you have answered my question about your daughter. What you have tried has obviously not worked or else you would have been shouting it to the world. If a therapy failed, why would you not want to share that? This would be helpful information for other parents so that they could know in advance that the therapy might not work for them. Then if they still want to proceed, it wouldn't be based on an unfounded promise like the ones that some chiropractors make, giving people false hope.

    Not only did I participate in the Scoliscore thread, I participated in the study. YES, they have my DNA in their data base. I will participate in studies that I believe can end up helping other people. I do not see the harm in having a simple test done to try to predict whether a child is at a high risk for progression. A high score doesn't mean that the children will get surgery for subsurgical curves. It just means that they will be watched more closely. For the kids that score low, it saves them a ton of radiation exposure since they will need fewer x-rays.

    As far as nonsurgical therapies go, the ONLY help I have received from any of them so far is some reduction in pain, not curve magnitude. Exercise "may" possibly have helped with a 5* curve reduction in my smaller curve. But posture could have played a factor in that. My next set of x-rays will tell more of the story as I have no intention of quitting the exercise.

    I feel bad that you are so hostile toward me. I have really enjoyed some of our chats over the years. Just because people don't agree on every issue is no reason to be uncivil. I have no idea how you relate the atrocities in your country to this topic. There have been atrocities throughout the world. It all boils down to greed, anger, and intolerance (not agreeing to disagree). It's too bad, really
    Last edited by rohrer01; 02-25-2013 at 01:33 PM.
    Be happy!
    We don't know what tomorrow brings,
    but we are alive today!

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,748
    Quote Originally Posted by flerc View Post
    But if you use it (mainly in a non scientist/philosophical forum) as proof in order to proclaim to the world in a categorical way that those treatments are useless (and all the implications as stupid/ignorant people, dishonest professionals..) because if not, would be evidence that worked sometime.. All this logic construction is RIGHT for you?
    If A certainly (or almost) implies B but I cannot prove if A is true or not, may I be absolutely sure about the veracity of B? that is, may I proclaimed the veracity of B and all his implications? I donít think that. I believe that someone doing or supporting it has not a rational mind or is trying to convince others in any way.
    If you can't prove A, then B is irrelevant. That's the whole point. That's WHY reproducible results are NECESSARY. Then if that is the case, then A is valid and B follows.
    Be happy!
    We don't know what tomorrow brings,
    but we are alive today!

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    9,289
    Fer,

    You have no dog in this fight. Why are you fighting????
    Sharon, mother of identical twin girls with scoliosis

    No island of sanity.

    Question: What do you call alternative medicine that works?
    Answer: Medicine


    "We are all African."

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,976
    Quote Originally Posted by rohrer01 View Post
    If you can't prove A, then B is irrelevant.
    Irrelevant? sorry I do not understand.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    9,289

    In defense of Rohrer who needs no defense

    Rohrer is pretty much the only line we have into biology in this sandbox now that Pnuttro has left.

    She is a CRITICAL player in terms of putting out many, many folk science and pseudoscience fires as they relate to biology. (We have a few others who can put out the straight illogical fires.)

    I am very grateful Rohrer is a member here as, if she left, we would be much less armed against nonsense. I have some biology but no where near as much as Rohrer.
    Sharon, mother of identical twin girls with scoliosis

    No island of sanity.

    Question: What do you call alternative medicine that works?
    Answer: Medicine


    "We are all African."

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,748
    Quote Originally Posted by flerc View Post
    Irrelevant? sorry I do not understand.
    I know.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Be happy!
    We don't know what tomorrow brings,
    but we are alive today!

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,748
    Quote Originally Posted by Pooka1 View Post
    Rohrer is pretty much the only line we have into biology in this sandbox now that Pnuttro has left.

    She is a CRITICAL player in terms of putting out many, many folk science and pseudoscience fires as they relate to biology. (We have a few others who can put out the straight illogical fires.)

    I am very grateful Rohrer is a member here as, if she left, we would be much less armed against nonsense. I have some biology but no where near as much as Rohrer.
    Thank you, Sharon, but I don't feel that qualified. However, I'm not going anywhere.
    =)
    Be happy!
    We don't know what tomorrow brings,
    but we are alive today!

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,976
    Quote Originally Posted by rohrer01 View Post
    If you can't prove A, then B is irrelevant.
    Quote Originally Posted by flerc View Post
    Irrelevant? sorry I do not understand.
    When I asked you this, I was in the work and I have not read yet your previous post.

    Yes, it was right what I felt when I read what you said about idiots making medical decisions only thinking in what they read in a forum.. and if decision rely in other source, what they read here cannot weigh in their decision? Really a strange thought. Surely I should had not 'attacked' you after that, but I didn’t was talking any more with the great Rorher I knew, I’ll miss so much.. something really very sad for me. But anyway is a good news to know surgery is not necessary for you,( regardless if some of those methods had to do or not) and I keep pretty memories of our past chats.

    But show must go on. Ok, suppose as you are doing I don’t know anything about Logic, Maths, science.. and suppose is true all in the really very large list that may be done with all you said in this thread about me.
    If I not understood what you was saying, maybe because I thought I was talking with someone I knew and then I made many assumptions about what you could be trying to say or not. So tell me now what you means with irrelevant. Do you are refering to the Truth tables? If A is false, then not matter if B is false or true, the implication is true? Of course if this is the point, it has not any sense to say that, since what is relevant in this thread is if B is true, not the implication (A=>B) Inot discussed it.

    Nobody with a minimal training in logic may not understand what I said:
    If A implies B but I don’t know if A is true or not, then I cannot be sure if B is true or not. Except for instance I know C=>B and I can prove C. So is someone proclaim B as true only because A=>B, although not knowing if A is true or not, then has not a rational mind or have some particular interest.
    Of course A is ‘There is no evidence...' and B is ‘Alternative methods are a fraud’, not 'Alternative methods don’t work'. I said also in this thread about I also don’t think that ant current particular method really ‘works’

    'Either way, if a treatment is not studied and doesn't meet the criteria for "proof", then it can't be endorsed by institutions such as Medical Associations. It doesn't mean that the treatment never works. It means that there is no "evidence" that it works.'

    We were talking about evidence that at least one time it worked, not that it works.
    So it has not any sense what you were saying in order to say is wrong what I'm saying here.
    Last edited by flerc; 02-25-2013 at 11:45 PM.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,976
    Quote Originally Posted by rohrer01 View Post
    It seems to be a nonsurgical success story, so far... That's about all the "proof" I can give you.
    Then in this forum we may assume that A is false?.. it seems she should to look for other argument to 'prove' what she proclaim.. how many post she must to delete or reedite..

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,748
    Quote Originally Posted by flerc View Post
    Yes, it was right what I felt when I read what you said about idiots making medical decisions only thinking in what they read in a forum.. and if decision rely in other source, what they read here cannot weigh in their decision? Really a strange thought. Surely I should had not 'attacked' you after that, but I didn’t was talking any more with the great Rorher I knew, I’ll miss so much.. something really very sad for me. But anyway is a good news to know surgery is not necessary for you,( regardless if some of those methods had to do or not) and I keep pretty memories of our past chats.
    I'll take that as an apology and apology accepted. I am the same Rohrer I have always been.
    I will address what I said about "idiots" one more time. I said that anyone who makes healthcare decisions solely on the basis of information from a public forum is an idiot. I stand by that.

    What I DID NOT say is, anyone who uses a public forum to weigh into their healthcare decision is an idiot. EVERYONE here uses information they find to help them make decisions, just not solely from information they find here. I've found a ton of helpful information here that I have weighed into my healthcare decisions along with input from my healthcare providers AND what makes sense to me personally.

    Do you see the difference in the two statements? Is it a language barrier? If what you thought were true, we would ALL be idiots for using the forum.

    Quote Originally Posted by flerc View Post
    Ok, suppose as you are doing I don’t know anything about Logic, Maths, science.. and suppose is true all in the really very large list that may be done with all you said in this thread about me.
    If I not understood what you was saying, maybe because I thought I was talking with someone I knew and then I made many assumptions about what you could be trying to say or not. So tell me now what you means with irrelevant. Do you are refering to the Truth tables? If A is false, then not matter if B is false or true, the implication is true? Of course if this is the point, it has not any sense to say that, since what is relevant in this thread is if B is true, not the implication (A=>B) Inot discussed it.
    Nobody with a minimal training in logic may not understand what I said:
    If A implies B but I don’t know if A is true or not, then I cannot be sure if B is true or not. Except for instance I know C=>B and I can prove C. So is someone proclaim B as true only because A=>B, although not knowing if A is true or not, then has not a rational mind or have some particular interest.
    Of course A is ‘There is no evidence...' and B is ‘Alternative methods are a fraud’, not 'Alternative methods don’t work'. I said also in this thread about I also don’t think that ant current particular method really ‘works’

    This is a logic question. Math logic works the same as logic in general. Have you been educated in this? I made the assumption that you had when I replied. You are assigning the wrong values to A and B. I will try to be more clear:

    A represents a particular treatment.
    B represents a positive outcome (in our discussion a curve reduction of a large degree).

    (A==>B) ONLY if A is true. Otherwise A and B are independent of each other. In a logic statement like (A==>B), (B=/=>A), meaning B does not lead to A or imply anything about A. It only goes one direction; from A leading to B and not the other way around. So if you have used a particular treatment, A, that is unproven (would be considered false until proven) and get B (positive outcome), then in this case you must PROVE that (A==>B) by PROVING that A is true. Otherwise B is independent of A which makes B irrelevant to A and you can not positively say that (A==>B) because A is false (ambiguous, not proven). In order to prove A, then A has to consistently and predictably lead to B. That's why one or two good outcomes, B's, in relation to a particular treatment, A, aren't enough. A has to lead to B every time for A to be true.

    The above reason is why I used my son's case as an example. He had a positive outcome, B, without any particular treatment, A. Therefore, in his case, and many others, B was independent of A. Had I used a particular treatment, A, and he had the outcome, B, I still could NOT claim (A==>B) in his case, even though it would appear that A was true. I can't make assumptions about A based on B because (B=/=>A). I can say this in my son's case because I know the natural history of his scoliosis. I also know that the majority of cases where nothing is done do not end up with the same good results, B. Therefore, in this case the particular therapy was to do nothing, A, and the outcome was complete correction of his curve (close to 20*), B. In this case I can apply the principles of logic (A=/=>B) because I know A is FALSE and B was irrelevant or independent of A in my son's case.

    This is also why it is impossible to prove your demand with logic. You would have to analyze every alternative therapy individually. That is impossible because there are an infinite number of alternative therapies out there (as I demonstrated in another post). A handful of positive outcomes, B's, doesn't prove anything, especially when the majority of outcomes do not meet the requirement of B (reducing curves by a significant degree) as set forth in our logic statment.

    We know that JIS cases respond differently than AIS cases. They are WAY more responsive to non-invasive treatments than AIS. So a practitioner could say to a parent of a JIS child that (A==>B) 75% more of the time than spontaneous resolution (I'm just picking a random number and not endorsing a particular treatment). With this information the parent of the JIS child would probably try the therapy in hopes that their child is in that 75% rather than taking a chance on spontaneous resolution vs. worsening of the scoliosis.

    This is one reason we can't say with 100% accuracy that Dingo's son is benefitting, B, from his torso rotation training, A, even though his curve has reduced by significant degrees. Does this mean that Dingo should stop his son's training because he doesn't know for sure if A is true? NO. There are studies being conducted, one at least by Kevin McIntire, to show one way or another if A is true.

    Quote Originally Posted by flerc View Post
    'Either way, if a treatment is not studied and doesn't meet the criteria for "proof", then it can't be endorsed by institutions such as Medical Associations. It doesn't mean that the treatment never works. It means that there is no "evidence" that it works.'

    We were talking about evidence that at least one time it worked, not that it works.
    So it has not any sense what you were saying in order to say is wrong what I'm saying here.
    The bold is a requote of something I said for those following along.

    So, in the case of Dingo's son, no one can say with certainty that the treatment, A (torso rotation), will work for all JIS. Does this mean that a doctor will recommend that a parent not try it? NO. Doctors have recommended all kinds of alternative therapies in hopes of finding one that works. If a doctor or researcher sees enough successes or has a very strong, logical explanation of why they hypothesize the treatment will work, then they apply for grant money to study the therapy in an effort to prove that it will work in a significant number of cases. But, unless the treatment always works, then they can NEVER claim that (A==>B). They can only claim that (A==>B) in a certain percentage of cases.

    Thus far the ONLY treatments that can claim (A==>B) are surgical interventions. Fortunately, they are coming up with better, non-fusion, techniques for growing children such as VBS and tethering. Even EDF that you were considering for your daughter is considered a surgical intervention. The child has to be sedated and taken to an operating room where they are forcefully stretched and casted.
    www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFHAED_BHVk

    This does not mean that all other treatments are of no value at all. Other treatments may work for individuals for reasons that we may not understand. The individual may have an underlying condition or an anatomical difference that makes them more responsive to a particular treatment. But there can never be given a guarantee that the treatment will reduce the curve/s.
    Last edited by rohrer01; 02-26-2013 at 02:51 AM.
    Be happy!
    We don't know what tomorrow brings,
    but we are alive today!

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    9,289

    Post of the month nomination

    Very clear and elegant exposition, Rohrer. This issue is put to bed in my opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by rohrer01 View Post
    This does not mean that all other treatments are of no value at all. Other treatments may work for individuals for reasons that we may not understand. The individual may have an underlying condition or an anatomical difference that makes them more responsive to a particular treatment. But there can never be given a guarantee that the treatment will reduce the curve/s.
    Case in point... Hawes. I am sure she had legions of people flocking to her feet begging to know how she did what she did (~10* reduction in a JIS curve held with work). So why don't we see hundreds/thousands of people who use her method successfully? Nobody knows the real reason but here are some contenders...

    1. JIS versus AIS where most of the would-be acolytes have AIS (much more prevalent than JIS)
    2. She did many HOURS of stuff a day for several years by her own account. That is going to weed out a lot of people with full-time jobs.
    3. She was trying to avoid frequent chest infections and address pain, NOT straighten her scoliosis as far as I can tell from her published articles. She increased the distance from sternum to spine and this mechanically straightened the T spine a bit as far as I can tell. I think she was blind-sided by the straightening at first and now works on it specifically, probably by continuing to change the shape of her rib cage. If this is the mechanism, her case has exactly ZERO relevance to TL and L curves and can't help with those curves even in principle.
    4. The decrease in curvature seems to be in the bounds of other PT that just corrects the posture-related part but can't touch the structural part.
    5. She continues to do PT and whatever else (breathing?). Some people can't fathom doing something the rest of their life and in some cases can't do something if they get sick or hospitalized or whatever. In some cases, the cure is worse than the disease and PT until you die might be in that category for some.

    Those are the first five that pop into my head. There are probably many other reasons why surgery goes on as usual post-Hawes (and post Schroth and post chiro and post any PT).
    Sharon, mother of identical twin girls with scoliosis

    No island of sanity.

    Question: What do you call alternative medicine that works?
    Answer: Medicine


    "We are all African."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •