Re: List of Lizard Ernst Articles - The Trojan Horse at Work

On Nov 11, 3:41 pm, marcia <so_you_...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 11, 3:30 pm, Citizen Jimserac <Jimse...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Nov 11, 3:13 pm, marcia <so_you_...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Nov 11, 1:47 pm, Citizen Jimserac <Jimse...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Nov 11, 9:55 am, "D. C. Sessions" <d...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Citizen Jimserac wrote:
On Nov 10, 8:58 am, "D. C. Sessions" <d...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Citizen Jimserac wrote:
On Nov 9, 7:52 pm, "D. C. Sessions" <d...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
However, it's nice to see you acknowledging the superiority
of exorcism over homeopathy.

And it's nice to see you acknowlege that your statistical
no show hasn't got a devil of a chance
of demonstrating anything at all.

CJ, I'm profoundly impressed by your ability to lie so blatantly.
I gave you the link, twice -- you're dumber than a box of rocks
or lying.  Personally, I wouldn't rule out both.

And YOU won't post the link.
Go ahead, here's your chance!!!
Easily prove Citizen Jimserac wrong and I will freely
admit to being a rock.

For the third time, despite the fact that you will continue to
claim illiteracy in being unable to follow it:

<bejqq5-731....@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

--
| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <d...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -+

DC, you will pleased to learn that I was able to locate your post
and find the link you provided has no bearing on the statistics that
you claim.

Here are my previous comments

Excuse me, but during that epidemic the mortality rate for those
taking the Homeopathic remedies (15% at worst), which you have told us
is equivalent to doing nothing, while for those actually doing
nothing, and and seeing no doctor was 50-60%.

your response was:

No, CJ, that 50-60% number was pulled out of the chamberpot by
your blogger.  It was not the figure for "doing nothing" in the
1854 London cholera outbreak.  That particular figure is easily
available for anyone who bothers to check facts (and I rest
assured that you are not one of them.)

You then proceed to provide the following link:http://courses.sph.unc.edu/john_snow/prologue.htm

This, though quite an interesting link - and I did like the
information
about Snow,  is related to the question at hand but does not
provide information specifically relevant to our discussion, regarding
the 50-60%  mortality, typical in cholera epidemics if no treatment
at all is done - which is what you claim Homeopathic treatment
amounts to (your own comments were something to the
effect that the Homeopathic remedies were just water, nothing more -
I agree about the "just water" part!!).

Again in this same thread, "Homeopathy and Cholera"
dated Sept 24, 2008,  you state that:

"Say what you will of other situations, but the question is what
prevailed in England the mid-nineteenth century.  There, the case
mortality was 53,000 deaths out of at least 250,000 cases.
That's just over 20% at most, and not all cases were reported. "

Sorry D.C. but among other references, Todar's Bacteriology online
textbook
confirms the 50-60% mortality figure for those who have cholera and
do nothing for it in the epidemics.

Do you have anything else to substantiate your assertion
or would you care to make a direct quote from the website you cited
that might edify us?

I don't believe there is one, which is why you provide links to the
newsgroup
discussion rather than the www link to the site itself.

Go ahead and prove me wrong DC, I love to be proven wrong
- give us a quote from that link that is germane to the discussion
at hand, regarding my statement that the Homeopathic remedies HAD to
be instrumental
in saving people's lives because of the dramatically lower mortality
rates the Homeopaths obtained compared both to doing nothing
and to the allopathic treatments of that era.   Note that the
statistics
involved were read into the minutes of parliament AND that a prominent
anti-homeopathic doctor, upon investigating the London Homeopathic
Hospital treatment methods for cholera,  stated that he was so
impressed
by their treatment protocols that he would entrust his own care
to them if he got cholera.

Citizen Jimserac

Not exactly. According to the World Health Organization (WHO),
approximately 80% of people who acquire cholera get a mild form that
resolves without treatment. That puts homeopathic treatment and no
treatment about even, statistically, and possibly worse than no
treatment depending on whose statistics you use.

Of the remaining 20% who develop a severe case of cholera,
approximately 50% die if untreated (this refers to allopathic
medicine).

Here's the exact quote:

"Among people developing symptoms, 80% of episodes are of mild or
moderate severity. Among the remaining cases, 10%-20% develop severe
watery diarrhoea with signs of dehydration. If untreated, as many as
one in two people may die. With proper treatment, the fatality rate
should stay below 1%."

For more information, see this link:

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs107/en/index.html

Thank the maker an intelligent response to my query!

AND a good link - there are several interesting points here -

First of all, a confirmation of my 50-60% mortality results
can be seen here :"If untreated, as many as one in two people may
die."

Second - regarding the inadequacy of cholera vaccinations:
What is the risk for cholera in the United States?
from the CDC website at:http://www.cdc.gov/nczved/dfbmd/disease_listing/cholera_gi.html
"    In the United States, cholera was prevalent in the 1800s but has
been virtually eliminated by modern sewage and water treatment
systems."

Third, regarding the discussion with D.C. - the high death toll from
the 1854 London epidemic, as with other epidemics
of that era was most certainly due to a contaminated water supply as
DC's link to Snow's observations indicate.

CONCLUSION: The statistics indicate that the Homeopathic treatments
were operative at a far higher than placebo level.

Again, for those interested the original blog entry which triggered
this was at:http://laughingmysocksoff.wordpress.com/2007/11/27/sock-horror-in-cho...

My profound thanks to Marcia for the link and information.

Citizen Jimserac

Wait, now. Don't misinterpret the information.

It says 75% of those infected show no symptoms at all, but are
carriers and can still spread the disease.

Therefore, only 25% of those infected become symptomatic.

Of the 25% that become symptomatic, 80% (most) only have mild to
moderate symptoms and recover on their own.

The remaining 20% who have severe symptoms represents the population
from which 50% may die if left untreated.

Of the 20% who require and receive treatment, only 1% die.

Treatment consists of oral rehydration salts,

Like drinkiong lots of homeoquackic concoctions.

IV fluids (Ringer's
Lactate), and occasionally antibiotics.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

.

Loading