Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 April 2005 at Liver Flush Debate Forum (MessageID: 413055)

Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 April 2...

/114 1 BSA by Webmaster 8 year 42,197 3 of 4 (75%) Liver Flush Debate / Liver Flus / Liver Flus

Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...2 by resurrectionist 8 year 11,232 0 of 3 (0%)
- Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...3 by resurrectionist 8 year 10,602 0 of 3 (0%)
- Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...4 by plantsheal 8 year 10,540 1 of 2 (50%)
  - Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...5 by resurrectionist 8 year 10,191 0 of 4 (0%)
Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...6 by DangerousProduce 8 year 10,562 0 of 1 (0%)

Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr... 7 R by DangerousProduce 8 year 10,707 1 of 1 (100%)

DangerousProduce

Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 April 2005
PM DangerousProduce
Date: 5/26/2005 9:36:49 PM ( 8 year ago )
Hits:   10708   Size: 1817 char.
URL:   http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=413055
Status:   R [Message recommended by a moderator!]
Already alerted! Already alerted!

I just read through the comments down to the bottom of the page and pasted your comment below the asterisks, so that you know the context without searching for it. You made a comment on interpreting biomedical research and using the gold standard in biomedical research.

Does the Lancet article you posted on the 40 year old woman's Gallstones have the characteristics of a randomized controlled trial used to obtain scientific fact?

To me and to most people who had a high school Science class, it would seem self-serving to require a controlled trial ONLY FOR YOUR OPPONENT to prove his point. But NOT in order FOR YOU to prove your point that the bowel matter that initially came out (in the case of the 40 year old woman in the article) was not some kind of green stone, but green feces. You give your opponent a harder scientific test to pass than yourself. That this is unfair is not even mentioned by you. Nor does it seem to matter.

Since you know what the gold standard would be, what do you see as the "control?"

****************************
Subject: Re: so do stones float or not?
From: resurrectionist | All resurrectionist's Messages |
Date: 5/25/2005 3:55:00 PM ( 29 h ago ) ... viewed 18 times since Feb 20 2005

0 of 1 (0%) persons found this message helpful. Hide votes What is this?
Was this message helpful to you? Yes No Hide this question

tell you what - a simple exercise in the interpretation of biomedical research:

what are the characteristics of a prospective randomised controlled trial and why is it the gold standard for assessing a treatment?

also another point that intrigues me - how is the Liver Flush an alternative treatment when it was written up in the Lancet. does the passage of time make something alternative?

Add To Favorites!

Alert Webmaster & Moderators
Already alerted! Already alerted!

How do you feel about this message? Agree Disagree Hide this question

1 of 1 (100%) readers agree with this message. Hide votes What is this?
How do you feel about this message? Agree Disagree Hide this question

This message was cross-posted across the next forums:

1. Liver Flush Debate Forum
2. Liver Flush Facts Forum
3. Liver Flush FAQ Forum

Reply to This Message

Use of CureZone is subject to the following Terms of Service

All messages by DangerousProduce across all forums & blogs:

Important Disclaimer!
Answers, comments and opinions provided on CureZone are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. CureZone does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in messages, comments or articles on CureZone. Your use of this website indicates your agreement to these terms and those published here. Read more ...

Selected Ads from CureZone Sponsors

Original Hulda Clark $35
Parasites Cleanse, Kidney Cleanse, Bowel Cleanse, Liver Flush

Epsom Salt Encapsulated
Can be used during the Liver & Gallbladder Flush as suggested by Hu...

Proven Candida Diet
The Only Legitimate Diet for Treating Candida in 30 Days

Proven Parasite Diet
The Only Legitimate Diet for Destroying Parasites in 30 Days or Less

Liver Flush Forever!
Try Dr. Eric Bakker’s Candida Crusher For Liver Flush & Candida Treatm...

Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...8 by spiralocean 8 year 10,162 0 of 2 (0%)
- Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...9 by Chaz 8 year 10,285 3 of 3 (100%)
  - Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...10 by spiralocean 8 year 9,995
    - Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...11 by Chaz 8 year 9,983
      - Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...12 by spiralocean 8 year 9,723
        
        Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...13 by #59001 7 year 9,739
        
        Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...14 by HMEPINOS 7 year 9,467
  - Re: Conspiracy Theories15 by spiralocean 8 year 10,127 1 of 1 (100%)
    - Re: Conspiracy Theories16 by Chaz 8 year 9,534
    - Re: Conspiracy Theories17 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,191 0 of 1 (0%)
      - Re: Conspiracy Theories18 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,348 0 of 2 (0%)
        
        Re: Conspiracy Theories19 by icky 8 year 9,378 0 of 1 (0%)
        
        Re: Conspiracy Theories20 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,321 0 of 1 (0%)
        
        Re: Conspiracy Theories /114 21 by icky 8 year 9,205
        
        Re: Conspiracy Theories22 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,219
Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet23 by DangerousProduce 8 year 10,055 2 of 2 (100%)
- Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet24 by spiralocean 8 year 9,639
  - Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet25 by DangerousProduce 8 year 9,483
    - Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet26 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,221
      - Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet27 R by johng 8 year 9,576 1 of 1 (100%)
        
        Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet28 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,184
        
        Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet29 by johng 8 year 9,284
        
        Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet30 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,201
        
        Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet31 by johng 8 year 9,309 1 of 1 (100%)
        
        Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet32 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,188
        
        Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet33 by johng 8 year 9,082
        
        face facts re green blobs johng34 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,171
        
        Re: face facts re green blobs johng35 by johng 8 year 9,218
        
        Re: face facts re green blobs johng36 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,254
        
        answer this.37 by johng 8 year 9,283
        
        green blobs38 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,367
        
        Re: green blobs39 by johng 8 year 9,277
        
        Re: green blobs40 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,119
        
        Re: green blobs /114 41 by johng 8 year 9,198
        
        Re: green blobs42 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,116
        
        Re: green blobs43 by johng 8 year 9,037
        
        Re: green blobs44 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,155
        
        Re: green blobs45 by johng 8 year 9,103
        
        Re: green blobs46 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,174
        
        exactly...47 by johng 8 year 9,052
        
        Re: exactly...48 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,205
        
        Re: exactly...49 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,069
        
        Re: exactly...50 by johng 8 year 9,117
        
        don't dodge - green blobs are potassium carboxylates51 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,233
        
        who is really dodging?52 by johng 8 year 9,109
        
        Re: who is really dodging?53 by resurrectionist 8 year 8,985
        
        Re: who is really dodging?54 by johng 8 year 9,161
        
        Re: who is really dodging?55 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,106
        
        Re: who is really dodging?56 by johng 8 year 9,114
        
        Re: who is really dodging?57 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,059
        
        Re: who is really dodging?58 by johng 8 year 9,195
        
        Re: who is really dodging?59 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,021
        
        Re: green blobs and blind faith60 by DangerousProduce 8 year 9,393 1 of 1 (100%)
        
        liver flush and blind faith /114 61 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,311
        
        Re: its your fixation62 by DangerousProduce 8 year 9,183
        
        ?????63 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,146
      - Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet64 by #9122 8 year 9,144
        
        Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet65 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,065
        
        Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet66 by #9122 8 year 8,967
        
        Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet67 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,043
        
        that's not an answer. n/m68 by johng 8 year 8,952
        
        it wasn't supposed to be69 by resurrectionist 8 year 8,846
        
        Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet70 by DangerousProduce 8 year 9,166
        
        Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet71 by resurrectionist 8 year 8,965
        
        Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet72 by DangerousProduce 8 year 9,250
        
        Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet73 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,141
      - Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet74 by HMEPINOS 7 year 8,901
  - Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet. 75 by #67307 7 year 9,090
- Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet76 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,157
  - Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet77 by #9122 8 year 9,080
    - Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet78 by resurrectionist 8 year 8,971
      - Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet79 by johng 8 year 9,055
        
        Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet80 by resurrectionist 8 year 8,987
        
        Re: ...on tests and testing in Lancet /114 81 by johng 8 year 9,077
        
        clutching at straws82 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,260
        
        Re: clutching at straws83 by johng 8 year 9,123
        
        One blob is much the same as another84 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,152
        
        Re: One blob is much the same as another85 by johng 8 year 9,081
        
        Re: One blob is much the same as another86 by resurrectionist 8 year 8,893
        
        Re: One blob is much the same as another87 by johng 8 year 9,082
        
        Re: One blob is much the same as another88 by resurrectionist 8 year 8,867
        
        Re: One blob is much the same as another89 by johng 8 year 9,054
        
        Re: One blob is much the same as another90 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,010
        
        Re: One blob is much the same as another91 by johng 8 year 9,019
        
        Re: One blob is much the same as another92 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,035
        
        Re: One blob is much the same as another93 by johng 8 year 9,161
        
        Re: One blob is much the same as another94 by resurrectionist 8 year 8,933
        
        frustrated?95 by johng 8 year 9,118
        
        dodging again96 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,041
        
        Re: dodging again97 by MrCooties 8 year 9,187
        
        Re: dodging again98 by resurrectionist 8 year 8,895
        
        Re: dodging again99 by MrCooties 8 year 9,116
        
        Re: dodging again100 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,054
        
        Re: dodging again /114 101 by MrCooties 8 year 8,920
        
        Re: dodging again102 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,141
        
        Re: One blob is much the same as another103 by HMEPINOS 7 year 9,116
        
        Re: clutching at straws104 by #9122 8 year 9,211
        
        Re: clutching at straws105 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,025
        
        Re: clutching at straws106 by DangerousProduce 8 year 9,153
        
        Re: clutching at straws107 by resurrectionist 8 year 9,179
        
        Re: clutching at straws108 by HMEPINOS 7 year 9,084
Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...109 RN by capco 8 year 10,007
- Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...110 by relpub3 7 year 9,361
  - Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...111 by HMEPINOS 7 year 9,065
Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...112 by HMEPINOS 7 year 9,095
Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...113 by VX 6 year 9,160
Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 Apr...114 by healthsage 31 mon 5,659

How can I view entire discussion thread on a single page?

How can I expand all forum messages on a single forum page?

Translate This Page:

Re: Could these be Gallstones? The Lancet Volume 365, Number 9468 16 April 2005

Translate This Page: