--- In [email protected], "Hugo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "Hugo" <richardhughes103@> > wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Hugo" <richardhughes103@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > In any case, two TMO-related organizations *did* > > > sue Andrew Skolnick for that disgraceful muck- > > > raking article he wrote for JAMA, and that certainly > > > must have been with blessings from the top. > > > > Sued successfully? > > > > The only story by Skolnick I can find in JAMA is > > the one about Chopra and co lying about having > > financial intertsts in ayurveda. This one in fact: > > > > http://www.skeptictank.org/gs/sci603.htm > > > > Doesn't sound like muckraking to me. Maybe he has > > expectations borne of experience about how researchers > > should conduct themselves. Perhaps this is a case of > > your opinion clouding judgement? Happens a lot round > > here I've noticed. I've commented myself that the TMO > > often seems to use science as a marketing tool and isn't > > really interested in whether the claims it makes are > > true or not, and that is something I worked out over > > many years, not an unreasoned rant. Quantum physics and > > jyotish anyone? > > > > I would like to know what happened in court with > > Skolnick though. > > > > Call off the search, I've found it. Case dismissed and, > I have to say, quite rightly so. > > I should have added ayurveda to my list of things the > TMO should be testing (or rather independent people > should be testing). The thing that gets me riled the > most is the cancer curing claims made for amrit kalash. > There haven't, as far as I know, been any tests done > on humans with this stuff and yet it is routinely > prescribed in large doses to people with terminal > cancer. I have known two people who died after being > reommended the wonder gloop, both of whom had a long > slow miserable death. What justification is there for > this? A study showing cancer cells are destroyed in > a petri dish, what they don't mention is that bodies > behave somewhat differently and one result cannot be > infered from the other. Didn't stop the TMO though > did it? Shame it isn't illegal to refuse medical help > in favour of untested folk medicine. The fact that it's > time-tested wisdom of the vedas cuts no ice with me, > it works or it doesn't. > > Judy, a serious question: Given that you're into > fighting for truth and justice and all that shouldn't > you be on Skolnicks side in this? Far from muckraking > he was making some serious points about medical > quackery that should be exposed. How much of ayurvedic > medicine has actually been double-blind tested and > independently at that? >
Gee why don't you go to pubmed and search? There's been recent research published on the genetic markers of doshas, for example. btw, for what it is worth: http://www.mapi.com/en/research/index-chemotoxicity.html Lawson
