A dog & canine forum. DogBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » DogBanter forum » Dog forums » Dog health
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Re chardonnay9 the thread crasher



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old January 21st 09, 04:08 PM posted to rec.pets.dogs.health
FurPaw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,469
Default Re chardonnay9 the thread crasher

Nitram wrote:

On another note after more detailed skin biopsy reviews my dog's cutaneous
lymphoma was determined to a be a recently identified form that progresses
very slowly. There appears to be no internal organ advance. She's just
started on a single drug protocol - Lomustine (ceeNU) once every 4 weeks and
appears to be handling the chemo quite well.


That sounds like good news, given the bad situation. I had a dog
who had squamous cell carcinoma, who, with treatment, lived 3.5
years after it was discovered and (probably) died of an unrelated
cause. But I know nothing about lymphoma and how to treat it, so
I can only offer my good wishes.

And this: according to the oncologist we worked with, the levels
of chemo used on dogs are usually considerably lower than those
used on humans, so dogs don't suffer the excruciating side
effects that humans do. We barely noticed a difference, other
than a slight drop in energy levels, when Dylan was on chemo.

I hope all goes well with her treatment.

FurPaw


--
Don't believe everything that you think.

To reply, unleash the dog.
  #12  
Old January 21st 09, 11:29 PM posted to rec.pets.dogs.health
Phyrie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 427
Default Re chardonnay9 the thread crasher


"chardonnay9" wrote in message
m...

It really scares all of you that so many people think like me doesn't it?


Really? Where are they, Chard? Why aren't the multitudes jumping in to
defend you and your ideas? If there are so many, let them post here and
now. Let's hear from the hordes of "Chard-thinkers". Today, right this
minute.
Go ahead. I'll wait.


  #13  
Old January 21st 09, 11:33 PM posted to rec.pets.dogs.health
diddy[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,108
Default Re chardonnay9 the thread crasher

"Phyrie" spoke these words of wisdom in
:


"chardonnay9" wrote in message
m...

It really scares all of you that so many people think like me doesn't it?


Really? Where are they, Chard? Why aren't the multitudes jumping in to
defend you and your ideas? If there are so many, let them post here and
now. Let's hear from the hordes of "Chard-thinkers". Today, right this
minute.
Go ahead. I'll wait.

I'm glad you have nothing to do Phyrie. I killfiled her long ago. But I
daresay this is going to be a short thread.
  #14  
Old January 22nd 09, 12:59 AM posted to rec.pets.dogs.health
chardonnay9
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,054
Default Re chardonnay9 the thread crasher

FurPaw wrote:
chardonnay9 wrote:
I'm one of an army of
people fed up with problems caused by the pet food industry and vets
who don't have a clue. Fortunately even some vets are actually looking
into natural methods and I can't wait till even more do so.


It's one thing to be disgusted with some pet food manufacturers, those
folks in the FDA and DA who are more interested in politics than food
safety, and those Chinese people who thought it would be OK to add
melamine to mimic higher protein content in wheat gluten.

It's a whole 'nuther thing to eschew good science in the name of using
"natural methods."


Good science? Where would that be? Good science leads to natural methods
that actually cure the underlying cause instead of temporarily relieving
symptoms without looking for a cause at all.

Is this good science?
http://www.iamscruelty.com/


It's as if you believe that "natural" equates to
"non-toxic."


Putting words in my mouth again. I've never said anything like that.
Funny how you have to make things up to respond against me. Can't find
fault in the truth huh?

(Have an Amanita virosa, m'dear?) As if you believe that
"traditional medicine" is by definition superior to modern medicine.


Many people do believe that. I'm one of them. Not in every case and in
every situation but most times yes it's so.


Your "studies" of "natural methods" and "traditional medicine" don't go
deep enough for you to be able to distinguish between effective
practices vs. those that are based solely on superstition and tradition
and are at best ineffective, at worst themselves harmful.


You have nothing to base that on. I think you don't know enough about it
to make such a call. I've put years of skeptical research into it all
before deciding to believe it. I guess you'd consider something like
this to be more effective?

http://tinyurl.com/5m6ppt



If you stopped trying to play vet, stopped "prescribing" to people who
post here,


If you stopped trying to twist what I say into situations that never
happened.... like when someone asked for opinions and I gave a website
to look at, all of a sudden I'm killing dogs! How silly!


stopped preaching your one-note sermon, stopped acting like a
True Believer, stopped discounting any evidence that contradicts your
opinion,


Has there been any? Not that I've seen. What planet are you on?

and started getting a real education (as opposed to
generalizing from all the anecdotes you read on "alternative medicine"
web sites) you might get a better reception.


From someone that has no clue what education I have and obviously can't
tell by my posts....

I mean, is this you?

"furpaw:
(SSRI, cognitive therapy)
otherwise, a fairly boring
and nondescript crazy person

"I'm out more than $5,000 in the past year because I
have one dog who developed a heart condition and
another one who required surgery for laryngeal paralysis
and went blind in one eye, reason unknown; in addition
to the surgery, a lot of diagnostic tests were required for
each one."


Do you think all happened because you fed them such a fabulous diet and
pumped them full of chemicals like flea products, heartworm
"preventatives" and vaccines?

And this?

Here's funky foots MURDERIN her own HOWESkat:


From: FurPaw )
Subject: OT:urk..cat poop
Newsgroups: alt.support.menopause
Date: 2002-07-03 16:23:10 PST


snip


yecchh! Now, why was he demanding
that YOU clean it up?


Once I had a housemate who acquired a
stray cat while I was on vacation. Before
I knew about the cat, when I walked into the
bedroom that we shared, I thought, "Damn,
Sarah must not have done laundry for WEEKS!"


Shortly after that, I spotted the cat.


Further investigation revealed that the damned
cat had been sh*tting in my SHOES. Not Sarah's
shoes. MINE.


Not too smart of that cat, particularly since I'm
allergic and he was treading on thin ice in that
domain already. He clinched it a couple of days
later when I was carrying him out of the bedroom
(now forbidden territory), and the dog (big white
Shepherd mix) came trotting around the corner.
Cat freaked, clawed and bit me.


Sorry, but that kitty had to go to the animal shelter
the next day. (I would have had the same reaction
if the dog had bit me.)


FurPaw


So you killed the cat because it was afraid of the dog?

  #15  
Old January 22nd 09, 01:14 AM posted to rec.pets.dogs.health
Melinda Shore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,732
Default Re chardonnay9 the thread crasher

In article ,
chardonnay9 wrote:
Good science? Where would that be? Good science leads to natural methods
that actually cure the underlying cause instead of temporarily relieving
symptoms without looking for a cause at all.


"Good science" refers to research methodology.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community
  #16  
Old January 22nd 09, 02:03 AM posted to rec.pets.dogs.health
chardonnay9
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,054
Default Re chardonnay9 the thread crasher

Phyrie wrote:
"chardonnay9" wrote in message
m...

It really scares all of you that so many people think like me doesn't it?


Really? Where are they, Chard? Why aren't the multitudes jumping in to
defend you and your ideas? If there are so many, let them post here and
now. Let's hear from the hordes of "Chard-thinkers". Today, right this
minute.
Go ahead. I'll wait.



All it takes is a look back at what happens to anyone who posts here
differently than you and the hate crew here and you'd know why most
people don't stay around. Gary for instance didn't last long at all, and
I've seen others in the archives. I can post many groups that are out
there that want to deal with their pets and themselves in a better way.

I bet most of you put lawn chemicals in your yards, use bleach and other
harsh chemicals in your house to clean, bug sprays inside and out, use
Frontline or Advantage or similar on your pets (plus heartworm "meds"
too), give your children fluoride in the water, toothpaste or both,
spray things in the air that you inhale like hair spray or Febreeze, use
toxic non stick pans to cook with, use milk that has been pastuerized,
and on and on. If you had the slightest clue the garbage you feed your
pets you'd never buy kibble ever again! I can't believe you are so blind
as to pretend that the waste products from the human foods are what
feeds your dogs, along with those wonderful recipes from the rendering
plants. And then I see you all complaining that you don't know why your
dog has a bad heart or why the cat is having seizures.

Not only should any of you own pets, your kids should be taken away from
you as well for putting them in such danger.

Here are just a few of the places that welcome people like me, because
they believe like I do.

http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralFL-BARF
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FL_Rawfeeder
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlternativeAnswers
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/homeopathy_open
http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/jstsayno2vaccs
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/minutus
http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/rawfeeding
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oleandersoup
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rawcat
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pets4Homeopathy
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HealthyAussies
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RawChat
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SilverPets
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WholeCatHealth
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Vaccinations
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Stopped_Our_Statins
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturalpetcare
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rawpaws
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NaturalHorseandPetCare
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sheltie-Naturals
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheNaturalBoxer
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CanineHealthCampaign
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/holisticcat
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NaturalRidgebacks
http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/BrachyNaturally
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SighthoundsNaturally
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SouthE...NaturalRearing
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CatNutrition
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/holisticnews
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HolisticPet
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturalpetcare
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/blacks...petswithcancer

Goodness, this is just a few Yahoo groups, nevermind usenet, Google
groups, actual websites.....
  #17  
Old January 22nd 09, 02:04 AM posted to rec.pets.dogs.health
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re chardonnay9 the thread crasher

chardonnay9 wrote:

Your "studies" of "natural methods" and "traditional medicine" don't go
deep enough for you to be able to distinguish between effective
practices vs. those that are based solely on superstition and tradition
and are at best ineffective, at worst themselves harmful.


You have nothing to base that on. I think you don't know enough about it
to make such a call. I've put years of skeptical research into it all
before deciding to believe it.


It definitely doesn't show.

Dianne
  #18  
Old January 22nd 09, 02:17 AM posted to rec.pets.dogs.health
chardonnay9
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,054
Default Re chardonnay9 the thread crasher

elegy wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 00:46:10 GMT, "Nitram" wrote:

On another note after more detailed skin biopsy reviews my dog's cutaneous
lymphoma was determined to a be a recently identified form that progresses
very slowly. There appears to be no internal organ advance. She's just
started on a single drug protocol - Lomustine (ceeNU) once every 4 weeks and
appears to be handling the chemo quite well.


i'm glad she's doing well with the chemo! i wish you guys the best of
luck with her treatment.

i'm sorry that your post got eaten by chard's idiocy. i agree with
those who believe it's too dangerous to allow her to post such
dangerous misinformation unchecked.


Giving a link to a Yahoo group about cancer is dangerous?

it's a shame that she's been
allowed to take over the group though.


Actually, Chardonnay9 AIN'T "been allowed to take over
the group though"; it's you MENTAL CASES who OBJECT
to the SCIENCE Chardonnay9 teaches.

Yep, thanks Jerry!
I'm not the one hijacking the threads here, it's the imbeciles who are
afraid to archive posts and think kibble is dog food. Why don't you want
your posts to archive elegy?

They flame me and some how I did something wrong?

Just because more than one lunatic posts in a group does not make them
right. Hey elegy, I heard you killed more than one rescue you've taken
in. How does that keep happening? Is that why you don't archive?
  #19  
Old January 22nd 09, 03:39 AM posted to rec.pets.dogs.health
chardonnay9
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,054
Default Re chardonnay9 the thread crasher

Melinda Shore wrote:
In article ,
chardonnay9 wrote:
Good science? Where would that be? Good science leads to natural methods
that actually cure the underlying cause instead of temporarily relieving
symptoms without looking for a cause at all.


"Good science" refers to research methodology.


Good science *LEADS TO* natural methods that actually cure the
underlying cause instead of temporarily relieving symptoms without
looking for a cause at all.

If you read it carefully and slower so it sinks in you will notice I was
not defining science. Brain fart?
  #20  
Old January 22nd 09, 03:43 AM posted to rec.pets.dogs.health
chardonnay9
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,054
Default Re chardonnay9 the thread crasher

(null) wrote:
chardonnay9 wrote:
Your "studies" of "natural methods" and "traditional medicine" don't go
deep enough for you to be able to distinguish between effective
practices vs. those that are based solely on superstition and tradition
and are at best ineffective, at worst themselves harmful.

You have nothing to base that on. I think you don't know enough about it
to make such a call. I've put years of skeptical research into it all
before deciding to believe it.


It definitely doesn't show.

Dianne


How would an obvious idiot like you know? And why would I pay attention
to an opinion coming from an idiot? I mean, after I've seen what you
call dog training I'd sooner never own a pet than do what you've done.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is there a thread about NOVA? Chris Dog behavior 8 February 5th 04 04:16 PM
Is there a thread about NOVA? Chris Dog behavior 0 February 4th 04 03:51 PM
another humping thread.. EmilyS Dog behavior 20 December 19th 03 03:58 PM
another humping thread.. EmilyS Dog behavior 0 December 17th 03 07:58 PM
another humping thread.. EmilyS Dog behavior 0 December 17th 03 07:58 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0 (Unauthorized Upgrade)
Copyright ©2004-2024 DogBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.