RAW-FOOD Archives

Raw Food Diet Support List

RAW-FOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
8BIT
Sender:
Raw Food Diet Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Date:
Tue, 2 Mar 1999 00:17:46 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Raw Food Diet Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (62 lines)
Hi Kirt,

> >> Tom:
> >> Your correlation that the US has a high level of milk drinking,
> >> with high levels of ostoporosis, does not prove a causal link.
>
> Alan:
> >This is exactly what the milk industry says. You don't happen to be
> >funded by them by any chance?
>
> This is exactly what any reasonable person says, Alan. Your logic in
> drawing conclusions is lame. But, yeah, you can sure see it clearly. I
> recently discovered that Tom Billings is a front for the dairy industry. He
> just tries to fool people! <gag>
>
> >> Tom:
> >> And you should not let fundamentalist natural hygiene blind you. There
> >> is very little in NH that is "scientific."
>
>
> Alan:
> >All the authors I have read quote numerous research reports. And the
> >fact that people who practise it generally enjoy otherwise unknown
> >health and wellbeing is a "scientific finding" in itself don't you
> >think?
>
> OK, Alan, if you pretend that your bias is one that is supported by
> research then you better barf up "numerous research articles". For
> starters, how about one that shows Tom is a puppet of the dairy industry?
> Who are your "authors" anyway? You quip to another lister that they are
> obviously just believing something they read, but you sound like a blind
> man following the blind NH authors yourself, with your molecular words
> (which JL has completely humbled you on but you are, yes again, blind to
> it) and your rightous attitude.
>
> As for the supposed health of NHers. Gawd, gaff, and guffaw. NHers have a
> VERY poor track record anecdotally, and I challange you to show even a tiny
> bit of "numerous research articles" that support your claim otherwize.
>
> BTW, why don't fundamentalist NHers have their own mailing list, where they
> can pat each other on the back for being so privy to the Truth, mock anyone
> who disagrees (which is the rest of the world's population), and debate
> whether or not nuts should be sprouted and whether or not Herbert Shelton
> was actually God, or just the son of God.
>
> Is it just me, or is this getting tiresome?
>
You are getting tiresome...and as I have only 5 mails per day
on this echo I will reply in future to those who supply something
tangible and perhaps useful rather than someone who obviously has
nothing better to do with his/her spare time than complain about
all and sundry without any counterarguments. You give the impression
that you have some sort of (health?) problem and are rather
frustrated. As to the numerous research papers on milk (at least
those which were not funded by the milk industry) I would need
hours to name them all (try the Diamonds for starters as this is
neither a new nor unknown subject and there are plenty of quotes
even in there to keep you satisfied for a few weeks). If you want
a few German papers...I can quote them as well.

Alan

ATOM RSS1 RSS2