>may develop cancer after being exposed to a man-made virus (chemical
>warfare), or chemical poisoning, etc.
Huh? So Aajonus uses the particular multiple myeloma patient (who Peter
reported died) as his poster cure boy and then blames the death on
artificial cancer?!? This is what I mean about doublespeak.
>I genuinely don't see how Aajonus' fairly simple recommendations can
>seriously "harm" people.
Well, lets give rasberry mold to a thousand dolks and see what happens.
>And hey, if he really, truly is at fault, and is a
>complete liar, out to kill the human race as we know it,
Who claims that? He has a credibility problem. At worse he may be after
some of his exhorbinant hourly fees, but who said he was out to kill the
>However, based on my personal experience with
>him and his clients, he has truly helped many people learn about raw animal
>products and how they can be incorporated into our diets. I hope that
>perhaps there is a balance where we both recognize him for his shortcomings
>_and_ successes. What are your thoughts?
I think he is going to have the opposite effect in the long run. Like NFL
or the instincto purists, he (and his followers) can't resist the Simple
Solution to a Complex Problem, and, as mentioned, has a similar credibility
problem. Except for the few who fall under his spell, I think he will have
the effect of turning people off when they see how flakey his reasoning,
methodology, etc is. My two cents.
>Kirt suggested that I might want to write my own review or soften up the
>moss review before posting it to live-food.
Huh? I said I was interested to see the spin control (and I have in your
posts) and noted that you hadn't posted the review (ie hadn't acknowledged
it) on your list. If you "softened up" the Moss' review that would be
outrageous--we both agree I think.
BTW, if Liza does come to your party, let us all know if she drinks any
wine, eh? ;) ;)
Secola /\ Nieft
[log in to unmask]