 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
fedup taxpayer
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2012 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 6th, 2009 05:47 am |
|
MadHabber wrote: fedup taxpayer wrote:
Whatever. I guess what it all boils down to is that you can believe what you want to believe and I guess I will do the same. I know that I won't be taking the flu shot and I am sure that I will not get the flu. If I do I will let you know, if I survive.  For the record, I normally do not get the flu shot, but with this particular strain I am not fooling around. Remember, its not just a question of dying, its also preventing yourself from getting pretty sick. In addition, if you get it, you can also spread to someone who could have a better chance of dying from it. 3 people died yesterday in London from it because they got it from someone else. Do you not care about spreading this deadly strain??
Anyway, you are right I don't know all that much about vaccines other than what I have read but I don't think that you can call yourself an expert on the subject, either. The question we both have to ask ourselves and figure out is who is telling the truth and who is not. I have read enough about the vaccine and it didn't look like any fear mongering to me on the part of the people you call "fear mongers". Why would anybody want to put the fear in people about these vaccines if they were suppose to be safe and can save lives? It would make no sense to me. You are right, I am not an expert in vaccines, but I am formally educated in Science (MSc. in Biochemistry & Biotechnology), and know how to read and intrepret scientific papers. With the way companies are sued now a days, especially Pharma co., I tend to believe studies done. Remember, Pharma funds the studies, but independent centres and doctors run the studies on patients. They are then peer reviewed, etc., before Health Canada or the FDA just approves them. There are hundreds and hundreds of drugs submitted for approval each year, but only a small % of them make it to market.
But just maybe some people are trying to warn us about the dangers that may be lurking in some of those vaccines. Wouldn't you at least want to know as to whether a vaccine is safe or not? I know I would and if someone has something to say about vaccines and their safety I know I would listen and go from there. I agree, but it depends on who is saying it and where its coming from.
You say that I should do more research? Well, why don't you? Why don't you go to youtube and type in the dangers of the swine flu and read what some other doctors have to say about the dangers of this swine flu and other vaccines. I don't know why you would say that I should do more research when I already have. I have checked out both sides, have you? Like I said above, it depends on where its coming from and who is saying it. Youtube is not the New England Journal of Medicine, as an example.
I don't think that I am blathering on about something I don't know anything about. Maybe now I do know a little more about vaccines and the dangers and your the one here who is blathering on about something you know nothing about. Hee Hee. Funny.
Ever heard of Thalydamide? Spelling, not sure. It was suppose to be safe and look what happened. Maybe there were people at the time trying to warn people about the drug but nobody would listen. At least today we have the internet and have a great opportunity to at least get to read and hear the other side of the story. Yes, I remember that drug. Unfortunately, back then, they didn't do enough research on pregnant women before approving it for its use with them. Do you know that drug was re-introduced back into the market a few years back? And if you trust everything people post on the internet, then you've got a problem.
Hey, I am willing to admit that I could be totally wrong on all of this but for now I am sticking with what I think I now know unless you can 100% prove me brainwashed. I don't think you are brainwashed. You can have your opinion. What I know is this, that my kids and I will pretty much never get the flu from this strain. That's the bottom line. Did the safety of the vaccine cross my mind, sure it did, but nothing has been shown to cause anything serious from any flu vaccine. The H1N1 strain has.
As far as your "summary" goes. It looks like GSK did the testing. So why should anyone believe what they say. It would not be in their interest to find a not so good result. If I want to sell you a product, I want to make that product look fantastic. As mentioned above, GSK would fund the testing, but not carry it out. Sure, it would be in their interest if it works, but it would also be in their interest to find out if it didn't work. That's why they did the testing. Litigation is too much of a risk to put out a potential harmful product on purpose. And what surprises me, about you on this, is your position on Pharma companies making a profit. Kinda makes you sound like a.......LIBERAL, or even worse, NDP'er. Oh MY!!!!!!
I have no problem with anybody making an honest profit. What I don't like is when there are people trying to make money at the expense of hurting or killing someone.
And I am sure Conservatives,Liberals and NDP'ers can all agree with that.
Youtube may not be the New England Journal of Medicines but are you trying to tell me that what one reads about whatever on Youtube that it should not be believed, that it is just a bunch of hooey? That does show a closed mind if you think like that.
So, did you bother to take the time to listen to what some other doctors had to say about the swine flu on Youtube? Probably not. If you don't hear it on CTV or CBC or read it in the NEJof M well then to you it must be just a bunch of foolishness, uhm?
Anyway, like you said above "it all depends on where it is coming from and who is saying it and who is paying for it". Big corporations have been known to lie just to make more money. Nothing new there. It's a well known fact that big pharma has paid off people to make false statements for them. Nothing new there. Hey, maybe somebody is being paid off here to give a good report on the swine flu vaccine and that if we all don't take it we will endup with the flu. Remember, you gave the figure of 98%, which means that even if I do take the shot I could still get it and spread it. Maybe the vaccine is not protecting anybody from the swine flu at all, uhm?
A good read for anybody who wants to learn a little more about big pharma should go read a book written by Kevin Trudeau called "Natural Cures What "They" Don't want You To Know About". He explains it all about the big drug companies. It's a book written for people who want to expand their knowledge about big pharma and some of the games they play at the people's expense. Very enlightning, indeed.
|
MadHabber
Member
|
Posted: Fri Nov 6th, 2009 02:19 pm |
|
fedup taxpayer wrote: MadHabber wrote: fedup taxpayer wrote:
Whatever. I guess what it all boils down to is that you can believe what you want to believe and I guess I will do the same. I know that I won't be taking the flu shot and I am sure that I will not get the flu. If I do I will let you know, if I survive. For the record, I normally do not get the flu shot, but with this particular strain I am not fooling around. Remember, its not just a question of dying, its also preventing yourself from getting pretty sick. In addition, if you get it, you can also spread to someone who could have a better chance of dying from it. 3 people died yesterday in London from it because they got it from someone else. Do you not care about spreading this deadly strain??
Anyway, you are right I don't know all that much about vaccines other than what I have read but I don't think that you can call yourself an expert on the subject, either. The question we both have to ask ourselves and figure out is who is telling the truth and who is not. I have read enough about the vaccine and it didn't look like any fear mongering to me on the part of the people you call "fear mongers". Why would anybody want to put the fear in people about these vaccines if they were suppose to be safe and can save lives? It would make no sense to me. You are right, I am not an expert in vaccines, but I am formally educated in Science (MSc. in Biochemistry & Biotechnology), and know how to read and intrepret scientific papers. With the way companies are sued now a days, especially Pharma co., I tend to believe studies done. Remember, Pharma funds the studies, but independent centres and doctors run the studies on patients. They are then peer reviewed, etc., before Health Canada or the FDA just approves them. There are hundreds and hundreds of drugs submitted for approval each year, but only a small % of them make it to market.
But just maybe some people are trying to warn us about the dangers that may be lurking in some of those vaccines. Wouldn't you at least want to know as to whether a vaccine is safe or not? I know I would and if someone has something to say about vaccines and their safety I know I would listen and go from there. I agree, but it depends on who is saying it and where its coming from.
You say that I should do more research? Well, why don't you? Why don't you go to youtube and type in the dangers of the swine flu and read what some other doctors have to say about the dangers of this swine flu and other vaccines. I don't know why you would say that I should do more research when I already have. I have checked out both sides, have you? Like I said above, it depends on where its coming from and who is saying it. Youtube is not the New England Journal of Medicine, as an example.
I don't think that I am blathering on about something I don't know anything about. Maybe now I do know a little more about vaccines and the dangers and your the one here who is blathering on about something you know nothing about. Hee Hee. Funny.
Ever heard of Thalydamide? Spelling, not sure. It was suppose to be safe and look what happened. Maybe there were people at the time trying to warn people about the drug but nobody would listen. At least today we have the internet and have a great opportunity to at least get to read and hear the other side of the story. Yes, I remember that drug. Unfortunately, back then, they didn't do enough research on pregnant women before approving it for its use with them. Do you know that drug was re-introduced back into the market a few years back? And if you trust everything people post on the internet, then you've got a problem.
Hey, I am willing to admit that I could be totally wrong on all of this but for now I am sticking with what I think I now know unless you can 100% prove me brainwashed. I don't think you are brainwashed. You can have your opinion. What I know is this, that my kids and I will pretty much never get the flu from this strain. That's the bottom line. Did the safety of the vaccine cross my mind, sure it did, but nothing has been shown to cause anything serious from any flu vaccine. The H1N1 strain has.
As far as your "summary" goes. It looks like GSK did the testing. So why should anyone believe what they say. It would not be in their interest to find a not so good result. If I want to sell you a product, I want to make that product look fantastic. As mentioned above, GSK would fund the testing, but not carry it out. Sure, it would be in their interest if it works, but it would also be in their interest to find out if it didn't work. That's why they did the testing. Litigation is too much of a risk to put out a potential harmful product on purpose. And what surprises me, about you on this, is your position on Pharma companies making a profit. Kinda makes you sound like a.......LIBERAL, or even worse, NDP'er. Oh MY!!!!!!
I have no problem with anybody making an honest profit. What I don't like is when there are people trying to make money at the expense of hurting or killing someone.
And I am sure Conservatives,Liberals and NDP'ers can all agree with that. I know your an ultra-conservative, wing nut. But you are sounding like a left wing hippie on Pharma.
Youtube may not be the New England Journal of Medicines but are you trying to tell me that what one reads about whatever on Youtube that it should not be believed, that it is just a bunch of hooey? That does show a closed mind if you think like that.
So, did you bother to take the time to listen to what some other doctors had to say about the swine flu on Youtube? Probably not. If you don't hear it on CTV or CBC or read it in the NEJof M well then to you it must be just a bunch of foolishness, uhm? No, I tend to listen to the head of the WHO and he only proclaims: "Dr. Keiji Fukuda, the agency's top flu expert, says 20 countries have started to administer the pandemic vaccine, which appears to be very safe." http://news.ca.msn.com/canada/cp-article.aspx?cp-documentid=22514591 Do yourself a favour Fed. Read the studies yourself, and not listen to some yahoo "doctor" on youtube. Unless they appear on CBC. (That's a joke)
Anyway, like you said above "it all depends on where it is coming from and who is saying it and who is paying for it". Big corporations have been known to lie just to make more money. Nothing new there. It's a well known fact that big pharma has paid off people to make false statements for them. Nothing new there. Hey, maybe somebody is being paid off here to give a good report on the swine flu vaccine and that if we all don't take it we will endup with the flu. Remember, you gave the figure of 98%, which means that even if I do take the shot I could still get it and spread it. Maybe the vaccine is not protecting anybody from the swine flu at all, uhm? Its obvious you do not understand how a vaccine works. If you take the vaccine, the chances of you getting the flu reduces by 98%, or you pretty much won't get it. If you can't get it, you can't spread it!! Get it??
A good read for anybody who wants to learn a little more about big pharma should go read a book written by Kevin Trudeau called "Natural Cures What "They" Don't want You To Know About". He explains it all about the big drug companies. It's a book written for people who want to expand their knowledge about big pharma and some of the games they play at the people's expense. Very enlightning, indeed.
I know the book. And Mr. Trudeau made how much off that book?? Has Pharma had questionable past games as you say? Yes, some have, but its a fraction. The fact is Pharma has saved countless lives. "Natural" won't save sh*t. Remember, cocaine is natural too. Will also give you a natural death.
|
TenaciousC
Member
|
Posted: Fri Nov 6th, 2009 02:21 pm |
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Trudeau#No_medical_training
![[fallingdown]](/forums/themes/default/laughing.gif)
Really?.....You're really referencing the late night infomercial guy as your source for the advocating of not getting the shot?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
ahhhh
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
|
fedup taxpayer
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2012 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 6th, 2009 11:18 pm |
|
TenaciousC wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Trudeau#No_medical_training
Really?.....You're really referencing the late night infomercial guy as your source for the advocating of not getting the shot?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
ahhhh
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Look stunned, the reason why most people like Kevin are on late nights is because the elite like big pharma, whom you love to listen to so much, don't want people to hear what Kevin has to say or maybe hear the truth which might turn out to save someones life. Most people are asleep at midnights. People like you are so closed minded and are so far out in dumboland and cannot stand anybody who dares to speak political incorrectness. I have found that out with you many times.
That is what is good about Youtube, one can get both sides of a story and maybe just learn the "truth". Of course the word truth scares the hell out of liberals like you and who have no idea or clue as to what it really means but are actually quite afraid of the word. Imagine the gall of someone like Kevin to have a different point of view or opinion that is not sanctioned by liberalism.
Stay ignorant all your useless life, who cares. Now go take your shot and dry up with your whining about everybody who doesn't think like you. Not everybody wants to be stunned like you and who like to be able to think for themselves. Unlike you.
Kevin is not telling anybody what they should and should not do. All he is doing is trying to inform people of some of the games outfits like big pharma play, with people's health and lives. There is nothing wrong with listening to someone else who may have something to say that just may be the truth, stunned.
"To know one side of the story, is to know nothing at all". Teeny asks, can there actually be two sides to every story. Oooooo scary, eh?
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha to you to. 
|
MadHabber
Member
|
Posted: Fri Nov 6th, 2009 11:22 pm |
|
fedup taxpayer wrote: TenaciousC wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Trudeau#No_medical_training
Really?.....You're really referencing the late night infomercial guy as your source for the advocating of not getting the shot?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
ahhhh
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Look stunned, the reason why most people like Kevin are on late nights is because the elite like big pharma, whom you love to listen to so much, don't want people to hear what Kevin has to say or maybe hear the truth which might turn out to save someones life. Most people are asleep at midnights. People like you are so closed minded and are so far out in dumboland and cannot stand anybody who dares to speak political incorrectness. I have found that out with you many times.
That is what is good about Youtube, one can get both sides of a story and maybe just learn the "truth". Of course the word truth scares the hell out of liberals like you and who have no idea or clue as to what it really means but are actually quite afraid of the word. Imagine the gall of someone like Kevin to have a different point of view or opinion that is not sanctioned by liberalism.
Stay ignorant all your useless life, who cares. Now go take your shot and dry up with your whining about everybody who doesn't think like you. Not everybody wants to be stunned like you and who like to be able to think for themselves. Unlike you.
Kevin is not telling anybody what they should and should not do. All he is doing is trying to inform people of some of the games outfits like big pharma play, with people's health and lives. There is nothing wrong with listening to someone else who may have something to say that just may be the truth, stunned.
"To know one side of the story, is to know nothing at all". Teeny asks, can there actually be two sides to every story. Oooooo scary, eh?
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha to you to.
Yes, let's all listen to Kevin. If this is your Guy, good luck to you Fed.
Obviously, you never read his link. Here it is:
No medical training
One common criticism by consumer groups is that Trudeau has had no medical training. Trudeau responds that by not having such training, he is not biased towards pharmaceutical companies and the FDA, and that medical doctors "are taught only how to write out prescriptions" for "poisons" and "cut out pieces of a person's anatomy." [54]
[edit] No proof of claims
Trudeau has also been criticized for his inability to provide substantial evidence to back up many of his claims. Although he provides anecdotal evidence, he has not provided evidence that such customer claims have been evaluated by a licensed medical practitioner. As such, any claims made by Trudeau or his supporters that his book or other business endeavors have helped people cannot be verified and are based solely on testimonials. In instances where Trudeau has been asked to provide proof of his claims, he has misinterpreted medical studies or cited dubious or fictitious studies. This includes, but is not limited to, a nonexistent 25-year research study involving a natural cure for diabetes at the University of Calgary.[55][56]
[edit] False endorsements
In August 2005, the New York Consumer Protection Board warned consumers that Trudeau has used false claims of endorsements to promote his products, noting that the back cover of Natural Cures includes false endorsements. Further, the NYCPB states that Trudeau's television ads “give the false impression that Tammy Faye Messner opposes chemotherapy in favor of the ‘natural cures’ in Trudeau’s book.” A representative for Messner before her death from cancer said that was not true and that she was starting chemotherapy again.[40]
The back cover includes the following quote from Dr. Herbert Ley, a former commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration who died three years before the book was written: "The thing that bugs me is that people think the FDA is protecting them. It isn't. What the FDA is doing and what people think it's doing are as different as night and day." Trudeau's lawyer, David J. Bradford, says that this quote does not constitute a false endorsement of his book by Ley but rather is merely a statement that is in line with the purpose of his book
|
fedup taxpayer
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2012 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 7th, 2009 03:26 am |
|
MadHabber wrote: fedup taxpayer wrote: TenaciousC wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Trudeau#No_medical_training
Really?.....You're really referencing the late night infomercial guy as your source for the advocating of not getting the shot?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
ahhhh
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Look stunned, the reason why most people like Kevin are on late nights is because the elite like big pharma, whom you love to listen to so much, don't want people to hear what Kevin has to say or maybe hear the truth which might turn out to save someones life. Most people are asleep at midnights. People like you are so closed minded and are so far out in dumboland and cannot stand anybody who dares to speak political incorrectness. I have found that out with you many times.
That is what is good about Youtube, one can get both sides of a story and maybe just learn the "truth". Of course the word truth scares the hell out of liberals like you and who have no idea or clue as to what it really means but are actually quite afraid of the word. Imagine the gall of someone like Kevin to have a different point of view or opinion that is not sanctioned by liberalism.
Stay ignorant all your useless life, who cares. Now go take your shot and dry up with your whining about everybody who doesn't think like you. Not everybody wants to be stunned like you and who like to be able to think for themselves. Unlike you.
Kevin is not telling anybody what they should and should not do. All he is doing is trying to inform people of some of the games outfits like big pharma play, with people's health and lives. There is nothing wrong with listening to someone else who may have something to say that just may be the truth, stunned.
"To know one side of the story, is to know nothing at all". Teeny asks, can there actually be two sides to every story. Oooooo scary, eh?
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha to you to.
Yes, let's all listen to Kevin. If this is your Guy, good luck to you Fed.
Obviously, you never read his link. Here it is:
No medical training
One common criticism by consumer groups is that Trudeau has had no medical training. Trudeau responds that by not having such training, he is not biased towards pharmaceutical companies and the FDA, and that medical doctors "are taught only how to write out prescriptions" for "poisons" and "cut out pieces of a person's anatomy." [54]
[edit] No proof of claims
Trudeau has also been criticized for his inability to provide substantial evidence to back up many of his claims. Although he provides anecdotal evidence, he has not provided evidence that such customer claims have been evaluated by a licensed medical practitioner. As such, any claims made by Trudeau or his supporters that his book or other business endeavors have helped people cannot be verified and are based solely on testimonials. In instances where Trudeau has been asked to provide proof of his claims, he has misinterpreted medical studies or cited dubious or fictitious studies. This includes, but is not limited to, a nonexistent 25-year research study involving a natural cure for diabetes at the University of Calgary.[55][56]
[edit] False endorsements
In August 2005, the New York Consumer Protection Board warned consumers that Trudeau has used false claims of endorsements to promote his products, noting that the back cover of Natural Cures includes false endorsements. Further, the NYCPB states that Trudeau's television ads “give the false impression that Tammy Faye Messner opposes chemotherapy in favor of the ‘natural cures’ in Trudeau’s book.” A representative for Messner before her death from cancer said that was not true and that she was starting chemotherapy again.[40]
The back cover includes the following quote from Dr. Herbert Ley, a former commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration who died three years before the book was written: "The thing that bugs me is that people think the FDA is protecting them. It isn't. What the FDA is doing and what people think it's doing are as different as night and day." Trudeau's lawyer, David J. Bradford, says that this quote does not constitute a false endorsement of his book by Ley but rather is merely a statement that is in line with the purpose of his book
I have no training in politics, but because I don't does that mean that I shouldn't be able to bitch,moan and whine or write a book about politics and politicians and about the lies and bull that they tell me and the games that they play? Am I suppose to have some kind of a degree to be able to speak or write a book about whatever?
Anyway, read the bloody book before you start quoting what others have to say. I see no reason why I should not believe most if not all that is written in the book. As a matter of fact, there is a hell of a lot of things in there that make quite a bit of sense. Everything in the book can't be all "false". There could be some false statements made but does that mean that the whole book has no merit or truth in it? Again, read the bloody book first before you listen to what others have to say about the book or Trudeau. That's what I dislike about sheeple like you, you don't take the time to checkout what the other side has to say, you quote what others have to say because it is so easy that way. Why don't you think for yourself?
|
fedup taxpayer
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2012 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 7th, 2009 04:10 am |
|
MadHabber wrote: fedup taxpayer wrote: MadHabber wrote: fedup taxpayer wrote:
Whatever. I guess what it all boils down to is that you can believe what you want to believe and I guess I will do the same. I know that I won't be taking the flu shot and I am sure that I will not get the flu. If I do I will let you know, if I survive. For the record, I normally do not get the flu shot, but with this particular strain I am not fooling around. Remember, its not just a question of dying, its also preventing yourself from getting pretty sick. In addition, if you get it, you can also spread to someone who could have a better chance of dying from it. 3 people died yesterday in London from it because they got it from someone else. Do you not care about spreading this deadly strain??
Anyway, you are right I don't know all that much about vaccines other than what I have read but I don't think that you can call yourself an expert on the subject, either. The question we both have to ask ourselves and figure out is who is telling the truth and who is not. I have read enough about the vaccine and it didn't look like any fear mongering to me on the part of the people you call "fear mongers". Why would anybody want to put the fear in people about these vaccines if they were suppose to be safe and can save lives? It would make no sense to me. You are right, I am not an expert in vaccines, but I am formally educated in Science (MSc. in Biochemistry & Biotechnology), and know how to read and intrepret scientific papers. With the way companies are sued now a days, especially Pharma co., I tend to believe studies done. Remember, Pharma funds the studies, but independent centres and doctors run the studies on patients. They are then peer reviewed, etc., before Health Canada or the FDA just approves them. There are hundreds and hundreds of drugs submitted for approval each year, but only a small % of them make it to market.
But just maybe some people are trying to warn us about the dangers that may be lurking in some of those vaccines. Wouldn't you at least want to know as to whether a vaccine is safe or not? I know I would and if someone has something to say about vaccines and their safety I know I would listen and go from there. I agree, but it depends on who is saying it and where its coming from.
You say that I should do more research? Well, why don't you? Why don't you go to youtube and type in the dangers of the swine flu and read what some other doctors have to say about the dangers of this swine flu and other vaccines. I don't know why you would say that I should do more research when I already have. I have checked out both sides, have you? Like I said above, it depends on where its coming from and who is saying it. Youtube is not the New England Journal of Medicine, as an example.
I don't think that I am blathering on about something I don't know anything about. Maybe now I do know a little more about vaccines and the dangers and your the one here who is blathering on about something you know nothing about. Hee Hee. Funny.
Ever heard of Thalydamide? Spelling, not sure. It was suppose to be safe and look what happened. Maybe there were people at the time trying to warn people about the drug but nobody would listen. At least today we have the internet and have a great opportunity to at least get to read and hear the other side of the story. Yes, I remember that drug. Unfortunately, back then, they didn't do enough research on pregnant women before approving it for its use with them. Do you know that drug was re-introduced back into the market a few years back? And if you trust everything people post on the internet, then you've got a problem.
Hey, I am willing to admit that I could be totally wrong on all of this but for now I am sticking with what I think I now know unless you can 100% prove me brainwashed. I don't think you are brainwashed. You can have your opinion. What I know is this, that my kids and I will pretty much never get the flu from this strain. That's the bottom line. Did the safety of the vaccine cross my mind, sure it did, but nothing has been shown to cause anything serious from any flu vaccine. The H1N1 strain has.
As far as your "summary" goes. It looks like GSK did the testing. So why should anyone believe what they say. It would not be in their interest to find a not so good result. If I want to sell you a product, I want to make that product look fantastic. As mentioned above, GSK would fund the testing, but not carry it out. Sure, it would be in their interest if it works, but it would also be in their interest to find out if it didn't work. That's why they did the testing. Litigation is too much of a risk to put out a potential harmful product on purpose. And what surprises me, about you on this, is your position on Pharma companies making a profit. Kinda makes you sound like a.......LIBERAL, or even worse, NDP'er. Oh MY!!!!!!
I have no problem with anybody making an honest profit. What I don't like is when there are people trying to make money at the expense of hurting or killing someone.
And I am sure Conservatives,Liberals and NDP'ers can all agree with that. I know your an ultra-conservative, wing nut. But you are sounding like a left wing hippie on Pharma.
Youtube may not be the New England Journal of Medicines but are you trying to tell me that what one reads about whatever on Youtube that it should not be believed, that it is just a bunch of hooey? That does show a closed mind if you think like that.
So, did you bother to take the time to listen to what some other doctors had to say about the swine flu on Youtube? Probably not. If you don't hear it on CTV or CBC or read it in the NEJof M well then to you it must be just a bunch of foolishness, uhm? No, I tend to listen to the head of the WHO and he only proclaims: "Dr. Keiji Fukuda, the agency's top flu expert, says 20 countries have started to administer the pandemic vaccine, which appears to be very safe." http://news.ca.msn.com/canada/cp-article.aspx?cp-documentid=22514591 Do yourself a favour Fed. Read the studies yourself, and not listen to some yahoo "doctor" on youtube. Unless they appear on CBC. (That's a joke)
Anyway, like you said above "it all depends on where it is coming from and who is saying it and who is paying for it". Big corporations have been known to lie just to make more money. Nothing new there. It's a well known fact that big pharma has paid off people to make false statements for them. Nothing new there. Hey, maybe somebody is being paid off here to give a good report on the swine flu vaccine and that if we all don't take it we will endup with the flu. Remember, you gave the figure of 98%, which means that even if I do take the shot I could still get it and spread it. Maybe the vaccine is not protecting anybody from the swine flu at all, uhm? Its obvious you do not understand how a vaccine works. If you take the vaccine, the chances of you getting the flu reduces by 98%, or you pretty much won't get it. If you can't get it, you can't spread it!! Get it??
A good read for anybody who wants to learn a little more about big pharma should go read a book written by Kevin Trudeau called "Natural Cures What "They" Don't want You To Know About". He explains it all about the big drug companies. It's a book written for people who want to expand their knowledge about big pharma and some of the games they play at the people's expense. Very enlightning, indeed.
I know the book. And Mr. Trudeau made how much off that book?? Has Pharma had questionable past games as you say? Yes, some have, but its a fraction. The fact is Pharma has saved countless lives. "Natural" won't save sh*t. Remember, cocaine is natural too. Will also give you a natural death.
Thanks for telling me that I am suppose to be one of those ultra-conservative wing nuts? I didn't know that? Uhm, interesting. Personally though, I think you are one of those leftwing liberal loonie wing nuts myself. But I am getting personal here.
Anyway, I knew that you wouldn't take the time to go to youtube to see what others had to say about the swine flu. I knew that it would probably be a waste of time to even suggest it to you. You have a closed mind like most Canadians and it's nothing new. It's probably more like you are a little to scared to because you might read something that would burst your little politically correct bubble about your precious swine flu vaccine. There is a 2%(it could be a higher percentage)chance that if I do take the shot I can still get it and still spread it. Get it? I am still not taking the shot.
Yes, there have been instances where big pharma has helped saved lives, no denying that, but there have been plenty of stories where big pharma has caused injury and death. So you go go ahead and stick with big pharma drugs and vaccines and I will take my chances with natural alternative medicines sans vaccines.
|
MadHabber
Member
|
Posted: Sat Nov 7th, 2009 04:56 am |
|
fedup taxpayer wrote: MadHabber wrote: fedup taxpayer wrote: MadHabber wrote: fedup taxpayer wrote:
Whatever. I guess what it all boils down to is that you can believe what you want to believe and I guess I will do the same. I know that I won't be taking the flu shot and I am sure that I will not get the flu. If I do I will let you know, if I survive. For the record, I normally do not get the flu shot, but with this particular strain I am not fooling around. Remember, its not just a question of dying, its also preventing yourself from getting pretty sick. In addition, if you get it, you can also spread to someone who could have a better chance of dying from it. 3 people died yesterday in London from it because they got it from someone else. Do you not care about spreading this deadly strain??
Anyway, you are right I don't know all that much about vaccines other than what I have read but I don't think that you can call yourself an expert on the subject, either. The question we both have to ask ourselves and figure out is who is telling the truth and who is not. I have read enough about the vaccine and it didn't look like any fear mongering to me on the part of the people you call "fear mongers". Why would anybody want to put the fear in people about these vaccines if they were suppose to be safe and can save lives? It would make no sense to me. You are right, I am not an expert in vaccines, but I am formally educated in Science (MSc. in Biochemistry & Biotechnology), and know how to read and intrepret scientific papers. With the way companies are sued now a days, especially Pharma co., I tend to believe studies done. Remember, Pharma funds the studies, but independent centres and doctors run the studies on patients. They are then peer reviewed, etc., before Health Canada or the FDA just approves them. There are hundreds and hundreds of drugs submitted for approval each year, but only a small % of them make it to market.
But just maybe some people are trying to warn us about the dangers that may be lurking in some of those vaccines. Wouldn't you at least want to know as to whether a vaccine is safe or not? I know I would and if someone has something to say about vaccines and their safety I know I would listen and go from there. I agree, but it depends on who is saying it and where its coming from.
You say that I should do more research? Well, why don't you? Why don't you go to youtube and type in the dangers of the swine flu and read what some other doctors have to say about the dangers of this swine flu and other vaccines. I don't know why you would say that I should do more research when I already have. I have checked out both sides, have you? Like I said above, it depends on where its coming from and who is saying it. Youtube is not the New England Journal of Medicine, as an example.
I don't think that I am blathering on about something I don't know anything about. Maybe now I do know a little more about vaccines and the dangers and your the one here who is blathering on about something you know nothing about. Hee Hee. Funny.
Ever heard of Thalydamide? Spelling, not sure. It was suppose to be safe and look what happened. Maybe there were people at the time trying to warn people about the drug but nobody would listen. At least today we have the internet and have a great opportunity to at least get to read and hear the other side of the story. Yes, I remember that drug. Unfortunately, back then, they didn't do enough research on pregnant women before approving it for its use with them. Do you know that drug was re-introduced back into the market a few years back? And if you trust everything people post on the internet, then you've got a problem.
Hey, I am willing to admit that I could be totally wrong on all of this but for now I am sticking with what I think I now know unless you can 100% prove me brainwashed. I don't think you are brainwashed. You can have your opinion. What I know is this, that my kids and I will pretty much never get the flu from this strain. That's the bottom line. Did the safety of the vaccine cross my mind, sure it did, but nothing has been shown to cause anything serious from any flu vaccine. The H1N1 strain has.
As far as your "summary" goes. It looks like GSK did the testing. So why should anyone believe what they say. It would not be in their interest to find a not so good result. If I want to sell you a product, I want to make that product look fantastic. As mentioned above, GSK would fund the testing, but not carry it out. Sure, it would be in their interest if it works, but it would also be in their interest to find out if it didn't work. That's why they did the testing. Litigation is too much of a risk to put out a potential harmful product on purpose. And what surprises me, about you on this, is your position on Pharma companies making a profit. Kinda makes you sound like a.......LIBERAL, or even worse, NDP'er. Oh MY!!!!!!
I have no problem with anybody making an honest profit. What I don't like is when there are people trying to make money at the expense of hurting or killing someone.
And I am sure Conservatives,Liberals and NDP'ers can all agree with that. I know your an ultra-conservative, wing nut. But you are sounding like a left wing hippie on Pharma.
Youtube may not be the New England Journal of Medicines but are you trying to tell me that what one reads about whatever on Youtube that it should not be believed, that it is just a bunch of hooey? That does show a closed mind if you think like that.
So, did you bother to take the time to listen to what some other doctors had to say about the swine flu on Youtube? Probably not. If you don't hear it on CTV or CBC or read it in the NEJof M well then to you it must be just a bunch of foolishness, uhm? No, I tend to listen to the head of the WHO and he only proclaims: "Dr. Keiji Fukuda, the agency's top flu expert, says 20 countries have started to administer the pandemic vaccine, which appears to be very safe." http://news.ca.msn.com/canada/cp-article.aspx?cp-documentid=22514591 Do yourself a favour Fed. Read the studies yourself, and not listen to some yahoo "doctor" on youtube. Unless they appear on CBC. (That's a joke)
Anyway, like you said above "it all depends on where it is coming from and who is saying it and who is paying for it". Big corporations have been known to lie just to make more money. Nothing new there. It's a well known fact that big pharma has paid off people to make false statements for them. Nothing new there. Hey, maybe somebody is being paid off here to give a good report on the swine flu vaccine and that if we all don't take it we will endup with the flu. Remember, you gave the figure of 98%, which means that even if I do take the shot I could still get it and spread it. Maybe the vaccine is not protecting anybody from the swine flu at all, uhm? Its obvious you do not understand how a vaccine works. If you take the vaccine, the chances of you getting the flu reduces by 98%, or you pretty much won't get it. If you can't get it, you can't spread it!! Get it??
A good read for anybody who wants to learn a little more about big pharma should go read a book written by Kevin Trudeau called "Natural Cures What "They" Don't want You To Know About". He explains it all about the big drug companies. It's a book written for people who want to expand their knowledge about big pharma and some of the games they play at the people's expense. Very enlightning, indeed.
I know the book. And Mr. Trudeau made how much off that book?? Has Pharma had questionable past games as you say? Yes, some have, but its a fraction. The fact is Pharma has saved countless lives. "Natural" won't save sh*t. Remember, cocaine is natural too. Will also give you a natural death.
Thanks for telling me that I am suppose to be one of those ultra-conservative wing nuts? I didn't know that? Uhm, interesting. Personally though, I think you are one of those leftwing liberal loonie wing nuts myself. But I am getting personal here.
Anyway, I knew that you wouldn't take the time to go to youtube to see what others had to say about the swine flu. I knew that it would probably be a waste of time to even suggest it to you. You have a closed mind like most Canadians and it's nothing new. It's probably more like you are a little to scared to because you might read something that would burst your little politically correct bubble about your precious swine flu vaccine. There is a 2%(it could be a higher percentage)chance that if I do take the shot I can still get it and still spread it. Get it? I am still not taking the shot.
Yes, there have been instances where big pharma has helped saved lives, no denying that, but there have been plenty of stories where big pharma has caused injury and death. So you go go ahead and stick with big pharma drugs and vaccines and I will take my chances with natural alternative medicines sans vaccines.
Good for you. Remember that when you are sitting on a hospital begging for morphine.
Yeah, me and the leaders of the federal and provincial NDP'ers are best buddies. Whatever fed.
|
MadHabber
Member
|
Posted: Sat Nov 7th, 2009 05:04 am |
|
fedup taxpayer wrote: MadHabber wrote: fedup taxpayer wrote: TenaciousC wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Trudeau#No_medical_training
Really?.....You're really referencing the late night infomercial guy as your source for the advocating of not getting the shot?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
ahhhh
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Look stunned, the reason why most people like Kevin are on late nights is because the elite like big pharma, whom you love to listen to so much, don't want people to hear what Kevin has to say or maybe hear the truth which might turn out to save someones life. Most people are asleep at midnights. People like you are so closed minded and are so far out in dumboland and cannot stand anybody who dares to speak political incorrectness. I have found that out with you many times.
That is what is good about Youtube, one can get both sides of a story and maybe just learn the "truth". Of course the word truth scares the hell out of liberals like you and who have no idea or clue as to what it really means but are actually quite afraid of the word. Imagine the gall of someone like Kevin to have a different point of view or opinion that is not sanctioned by liberalism.
Stay ignorant all your useless life, who cares. Now go take your shot and dry up with your whining about everybody who doesn't think like you. Not everybody wants to be stunned like you and who like to be able to think for themselves. Unlike you.
Kevin is not telling anybody what they should and should not do. All he is doing is trying to inform people of some of the games outfits like big pharma play, with people's health and lives. There is nothing wrong with listening to someone else who may have something to say that just may be the truth, stunned.
"To know one side of the story, is to know nothing at all". Teeny asks, can there actually be two sides to every story. Oooooo scary, eh?
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha to you to.
Yes, let's all listen to Kevin. If this is your Guy, good luck to you Fed.
Obviously, you never read his link. Here it is:
No medical training
One common criticism by consumer groups is that Trudeau has had no medical training. Trudeau responds that by not having such training, he is not biased towards pharmaceutical companies and the FDA, and that medical doctors "are taught only how to write out prescriptions" for "poisons" and "cut out pieces of a person's anatomy." [54]
[edit] No proof of claims
Trudeau has also been criticized for his inability to provide substantial evidence to back up many of his claims. Although he provides anecdotal evidence, he has not provided evidence that such customer claims have been evaluated by a licensed medical practitioner. As such, any claims made by Trudeau or his supporters that his book or other business endeavors have helped people cannot be verified and are based solely on testimonials. In instances where Trudeau has been asked to provide proof of his claims, he has misinterpreted medical studies or cited dubious or fictitious studies. This includes, but is not limited to, a nonexistent 25-year research study involving a natural cure for diabetes at the University of Calgary.[55][56]
[edit] False endorsements
In August 2005, the New York Consumer Protection Board warned consumers that Trudeau has used false claims of endorsements to promote his products, noting that the back cover of Natural Cures includes false endorsements. Further, the NYCPB states that Trudeau's television ads “give the false impression that Tammy Faye Messner opposes chemotherapy in favor of the ‘natural cures’ in Trudeau’s book.” A representative for Messner before her death from cancer said that was not true and that she was starting chemotherapy again.[40]
The back cover includes the following quote from Dr. Herbert Ley, a former commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration who died three years before the book was written: "The thing that bugs me is that people think the FDA is protecting them. It isn't. What the FDA is doing and what people think it's doing are as different as night and day." Trudeau's lawyer, David J. Bradford, says that this quote does not constitute a false endorsement of his book by Ley but rather is merely a statement that is in line with the purpose of his book
I have no training in politics, but because I don't does that mean that I shouldn't be able to bitch,moan and whine or write a book about politics and politicians and about the lies and bull that they tell me and the games that they play? Am I suppose to have some kind of a degree to be able to speak or write a book about whatever?
Anyway, read the bloody book before you start quoting what others have to say. I see no reason why I should not believe most if not all that is written in the book. As a matter of fact, there is a hell of a lot of things in there that make quite a bit of sense. Everything in the book can't be all "false". There could be some false statements made but does that mean that the whole book has no merit or truth in it? Again, read the bloody book first before you listen to what others have to say about the book or Trudeau. That's what I dislike about sheeple like you, you don't take the time to checkout what the other side has to say, you quote what others have to say because it is so easy that way. Why don't you think for yourself?
You are calling me a sheep and you are following the book of a guy that's been criminally charged??? Please, my gut can't take that much laughter. Look, I know all sides, I'm scientifically trained. Trudeau has been proven to be a liar and nothing but a guy out looking to make a dime. Hey, good for him. But he's going to end up hurting a lot of people because yahoos like you (who don't know any better) choose to listen to a guy with no formal medical training over doctors. The fact that a neo-conservative, george bush lovin, narrow minded guy like you follows a guy like this is baffling. But hey, its your grave your diggin listening to his "natural cures". Good times! Booya!!
|
fedup taxpayer
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2012 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 9th, 2009 06:33 am |
|
MadHabber wrote: fedup taxpayer wrote: MadHabber wrote: fedup taxpayer wrote: TenaciousC wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Trudeau#No_medical_training
Really?.....You're really referencing the late night infomercial guy as your source for the advocating of not getting the shot?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
ahhhh
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Look stunned, the reason why most people like Kevin are on late nights is because the elite like big pharma, whom you love to listen to so much, don't want people to hear what Kevin has to say or maybe hear the truth which might turn out to save someones life. Most people are asleep at midnights. People like you are so closed minded and are so far out in dumboland and cannot stand anybody who dares to speak political incorrectness. I have found that out with you many times.
That is what is good about Youtube, one can get both sides of a story and maybe just learn the "truth". Of course the word truth scares the hell out of liberals like you and who have no idea or clue as to what it really means but are actually quite afraid of the word. Imagine the gall of someone like Kevin to have a different point of view or opinion that is not sanctioned by liberalism.
Stay ignorant all your useless life, who cares. Now go take your shot and dry up with your whining about everybody who doesn't think like you. Not everybody wants to be stunned like you and who like to be able to think for themselves. Unlike you.
Kevin is not telling anybody what they should and should not do. All he is doing is trying to inform people of some of the games outfits like big pharma play, with people's health and lives. There is nothing wrong with listening to someone else who may have something to say that just may be the truth, stunned.
"To know one side of the story, is to know nothing at all". Teeny asks, can there actually be two sides to every story. Oooooo scary, eh?
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha to you to.
Yes, let's all listen to Kevin. If this is your Guy, good luck to you Fed.
Obviously, you never read his link. Here it is:
No medical training
One common criticism by consumer groups is that Trudeau has had no medical training. Trudeau responds that by not having such training, he is not biased towards pharmaceutical companies and the FDA, and that medical doctors "are taught only how to write out prescriptions" for "poisons" and "cut out pieces of a person's anatomy." [54]
[edit] No proof of claims
Trudeau has also been criticized for his inability to provide substantial evidence to back up many of his claims. Although he provides anecdotal evidence, he has not provided evidence that such customer claims have been evaluated by a licensed medical practitioner. As such, any claims made by Trudeau or his supporters that his book or other business endeavors have helped people cannot be verified and are based solely on testimonials. In instances where Trudeau has been asked to provide proof of his claims, he has misinterpreted medical studies or cited dubious or fictitious studies. This includes, but is not limited to, a nonexistent 25-year research study involving a natural cure for diabetes at the University of Calgary.[55][56]
[edit] False endorsements
In August 2005, the New York Consumer Protection Board warned consumers that Trudeau has used false claims of endorsements to promote his products, noting that the back cover of Natural Cures includes false endorsements. Further, the NYCPB states that Trudeau's television ads “give the false impression that Tammy Faye Messner opposes chemotherapy in favor of the ‘natural cures’ in Trudeau’s book.” A representative for Messner before her death from cancer said that was not true and that she was starting chemotherapy again.[40]
The back cover includes the following quote from Dr. Herbert Ley, a former commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration who died three years before the book was written: "The thing that bugs me is that people think the FDA is protecting them. It isn't. What the FDA is doing and what people think it's doing are as different as night and day." Trudeau's lawyer, David J. Bradford, says that this quote does not constitute a false endorsement of his book by Ley but rather is merely a statement that is in line with the purpose of his book
I have no training in politics, but because I don't does that mean that I shouldn't be able to bitch,moan and whine or write a book about politics and politicians and about the lies and bull that they tell me and the games that they play? Am I suppose to have some kind of a degree to be able to speak or write a book about whatever?
Anyway, read the bloody book before you start quoting what others have to say. I see no reason why I should not believe most if not all that is written in the book. As a matter of fact, there is a hell of a lot of things in there that make quite a bit of sense. Everything in the book can't be all "false". There could be some false statements made but does that mean that the whole book has no merit or truth in it? Again, read the bloody book first before you listen to what others have to say about the book or Trudeau. That's what I dislike about sheeple like you, you don't take the time to checkout what the other side has to say, you quote what others have to say because it is so easy that way. Why don't you think for yourself?
You are calling me a sheep and you are following the book of a guy that's been criminally charged??? Please, my gut can't take that much laughter. Look, I know all sides, I'm scientifically trained. Trudeau has been proven to be a liar and nothing but a guy out looking to make a dime. Hey, good for him. But he's going to end up hurting a lot of people because yahoos like you (who don't know any better) choose to listen to a guy with no formal medical training over doctors. The fact that a neo-conservative, george bush lovin, narrow minded guy like you follows a guy like this is baffling. But hey, its your grave your diggin listening to his "natural cures". Good times! Booya!!
So just what crime was Trudeau suppose to have committed that was so criminal? Did he kill someone or was he a drug dealer and got caught? Maybe you could take a timeout from laughing your sillyass guts out and tell me what it was?
So just what are you scientifically trained in? Are you an expert on virusus? And just what makes you think or how would you know that "I don't know any better", eh? You saying something like that just shows how arrogant you really are. The problem with people like you is that whenever someone questions or denies anything that is contrary to what you believe in well they have to be a kook. Get real, will you, Mac.
I will bet that onetime in your life you have lied. So don't go knocking someone else about there so-called lying when you have most likely done the samething yourself. I have lied in the past, we all have, and anybody who tries to deny that fact, is a liar.
So I suppose yahoos like you and the people you listen to and believe in have never done any harm or killed anybody, uhm? Moses, go tell that one up on the mountain and see if someone will listen to you. I think that Trudeau has done a good service by trying to expose some of the dasterdly deeds that have been done by the medical and drug industry on their patients. They may be doing some good at times but they also have been responsible for many injuries and deaths and what is wrong with Trudeau exposing it? Again, you need to read one of his books before you start to condemn the guy.
But yet here you are running the guy down when you never read any of his books, like I have, and because he doesn't have a degree or is scientifically trained like you he doesn't qualify to speak. Bullchit. My boy, if you read one of his books he explains and does show that he knows a lot more than what you think he does.
There is nothing baffling about listening to anyone. How else are you going to know the other side of a story if you don't read what the other side has to say? Obviously, you are a liberal, because I know a few liberals and they are the most closed minded people you can come across. They don't care what you have to say, they know all and others who think differently to them, know nothing, even if one has the proof.
Maybe it is you who is digging his own grave by listening to the wrong people. But hey, it's your life, pump all the vaccines you want into your body, I couldn't careless.
Good times to you to, fella. Happy vaccinations.
PS: Anybody interested to learn a little more about the swine flu do an internet search for a Dr.Leonard Horowitz and then scroll down to Youtube Mexican Swine Flu Outbreak and then click on and listen to what the Doctor has to say. I say this to others here as I know Mad won't. He is to busy to give a chit.
|
MadHabber
Member
|
Posted: Mon Nov 9th, 2009 06:54 pm |
|
fedup taxpayer wrote:
So just what crime was Trudeau suppose to have committed that was so criminal? Did he kill someone or was he a drug dealer and got caught? Maybe you could take a timeout from laughing your sillyass guts out and tell me what it was? Fed, don't be a lazy a$$ and look it up yourself
So just what are you scientifically trained in? Are you an expert on virusus? And just what makes you think or how would you know that "I don't know any better", eh? You saying something like that just shows how arrogant you really are. The problem with people like you is that whenever someone questions or denies anything that is contrary to what you believe in well they have to be a kook. Get real, will you, Mac. I've already said, I have a Masters in Biochemistry and Biotechnology. And, like I said before, I am not an expert in virusus although I did study how they work in some of the courses I took. I also base my decisions on study and proof in study. I know how to read scientific papers, I am trained in that. If a leading expert wants to present data on why the H1N1 vaccine doesn't work, I'd read it. Not from some yahoo like Trudeau or some "dentist" like Leonard Horowitz.
I will bet that onetime in your life you have lied. So don't go knocking someone else about there so-called lying when you have most likely done the samething yourself. I have lied in the past, we all have, and anybody who tries to deny that fact, is a liar. Yes, I'd be lying if I would say I never lied. However, I haven't lied to make money off people and possibly hurt them at the same time.
So I suppose yahoos like you and the people you listen to and believe in have never done any harm or killed anybody, uhm? Moses, go tell that one up on the mountain and see if someone will listen to you. I think that Trudeau has done a good service by trying to expose some of the dasterdly deeds that have been done by the medical and drug industry on their patients. They may be doing some good at times but they also have been responsible for many injuries and deaths and what is wrong with Trudeau exposing it? Again, you need to read one of his books before you start to condemn the guy. The guy is a proven liar and a fraud. Enough said.
But yet here you are running the guy down when you never read any of his books, like I have, and because he doesn't have a degree or is scientifically trained like you he doesn't qualify to speak. Bullchit. My boy, if you read one of his books he explains and does show that he knows a lot more than what you think he does. Again, the guy has ZERO medical training and ZERO credentials, not to mention he's been called out on all of his bullchit in his books, but if you would rather listen to a guy like this than the medical trained community then you are a bigger idiot than I thought.
There is nothing baffling about listening to anyone. How else are you going to know the other side of a story if you don't read what the other side has to say? Obviously, you are a liberal, because I know a few liberals and they are the most closed minded people you can come across. They don't care what you have to say, they know all and others who think differently to them, know nothing, even if one has the proof. there you go again, someone's opinion is different than yours, proves you to be an idiot, then you scream LIBERAL, LIBERAL, like that's going to help you win your arugument. You are nothing but a broken record.
Maybe it is you who is digging his own grave by listening to the wrong people. But hey, it's your life, pump all the vaccines you want into your body, I couldn't careless. Then why keep responding?
Good times to you to, fella. Happy vaccinations.
PS: Anybody interested to learn a little more about the swine flu do an internet search for a Dr.Leonard Horowitz and then scroll down to Youtube Mexican Swine Flu Outbreak and then click on and listen to what the Doctor has to say. I say this to others here as I know Mad won't. He is to busy to give a chit. One little tidbit fed left out. The man is a dentist NOT a doctor. But hey, I'm sure he knows more than the head of the WHO.
|
Calgary Libertarian
Member
|
Posted: Wed Nov 11th, 2009 01:38 am |
|
| The latest swine flu info: Attachment: song-chart-memes-flu-coverage.jpg (Downloaded 20 times)
|
fedup taxpayer
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2012 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 12th, 2009 12:09 am |
|
MadHabber wrote: fedup taxpayer wrote:
So just what crime was Trudeau suppose to have committed that was so criminal? Did he kill someone or was he a drug dealer and got caught? Maybe you could take a timeout from laughing your sillyass guts out and tell me what it was? Fed, don't be a lazy a$$ and look it up yourself
So just what are you scientifically trained in? Are you an expert on virusus? And just what makes you think or how would you know that "I don't know any better", eh? You saying something like that just shows how arrogant you really are. The problem with people like you is that whenever someone questions or denies anything that is contrary to what you believe in well they have to be a kook. Get real, will you, Mac. I've already said, I have a Masters in Biochemistry and Biotechnology. And, like I said before, I am not an expert in virusus although I did study how they work in some of the courses I took. I also base my decisions on study and proof in study. I know how to read scientific papers, I am trained in that. If a leading expert wants to present data on why the H1N1 vaccine doesn't work, I'd read it. Not from some yahoo like Trudeau or some "dentist" like Leonard Horowitz.
I will bet that onetime in your life you have lied. So don't go knocking someone else about there so-called lying when you have most likely done the samething yourself. I have lied in the past, we all have, and anybody who tries to deny that fact, is a liar. Yes, I'd be lying if I would say I never lied. However, I haven't lied to make money off people and possibly hurt them at the same time.
So I suppose yahoos like you and the people you listen to and believe in have never done any harm or killed anybody, uhm? Moses, go tell that one up on the mountain and see if someone will listen to you. I think that Trudeau has done a good service by trying to expose some of the dasterdly deeds that have been done by the medical and drug industry on their patients. They may be doing some good at times but they also have been responsible for many injuries and deaths and what is wrong with Trudeau exposing it? Again, you need to read one of his books before you start to condemn the guy. The guy is a proven liar and a fraud. Enough said.
But yet here you are running the guy down when you never read any of his books, like I have, and because he doesn't have a degree or is scientifically trained like you he doesn't qualify to speak. Bullchit. My boy, if you read one of his books he explains and does show that he knows a lot more than what you think he does. Again, the guy has ZERO medical training and ZERO credentials, not to mention he's been called out on all of his bullchit in his books, but if you would rather listen to a guy like this than the medical trained community then you are a bigger idiot than I thought.
There is nothing baffling about listening to anyone. How else are you going to know the other side of a story if you don't read what the other side has to say? Obviously, you are a liberal, because I know a few liberals and they are the most closed minded people you can come across. They don't care what you have to say, they know all and others who think differently to them, know nothing, even if one has the proof. there you go again, someone's opinion is different than yours, proves you to be an idiot, then you scream LIBERAL, LIBERAL, like that's going to help you win your arugument. You are nothing but a broken record.
Maybe it is you who is digging his own grave by listening to the wrong people. But hey, it's your life, pump all the vaccines you want into your body, I couldn't careless. Then why keep responding?
Good times to you to, fella. Happy vaccinations.
PS: Anybody interested to learn a little more about the swine flu do an internet search for a Dr.Leonard Horowitz and then scroll down to Youtube Mexican Swine Flu Outbreak and then click on and listen to what the Doctor has to say. I say this to others here as I know Mad won't. He is to busy to give a chit. One little tidbit fed left out. The man is a dentist NOT a doctor. But hey, I'm sure he knows more than the head of the WHO.
(1)Me, the lazy a$$? Your the one that brought it up, so show us?
(2)I don't care what you mastered in, but are you trying to say that Dr. Horowitz, is a liar, uhm? Did you at least go and checkout his website? Probably not, again. I guess it's because Dr. Horowitz speaks political incorrectness and that he somehow has to be some kind of snake oil salesman. So just how would know that those other leading experts out there whom are telling a different story in regards to the dangers of some vaccines are not worth listening to? Maybe your a snake oil salesman yourself, uhm? So why don't you tell us all as to just what are some of the chemical ingrediants that go into some of these "safe" vaccines are?
(3)And just how are we all suppose to know as to whether or not all this hype about trying to, what I believe, scare the sheeple into taking this swine flu vaccine are not out for making a tidy little profit, on the side, using scare tactics? I read that three big pharma outfits had "patented" a vaccine for this upcoming pandemic long before it appeared on the scene. Why did they patent something that was not even here yet or was even coming?
(4)Read his books before you call the man a liar and a fraud. You obviously do judge a book by it's cover. You sure you don't have a masters in BS'ing?
(5)Yup, then I must be an idiot because I listen to what the other guy/gal has to say and not just to what people like you have to say, at face value. Sounds like you have a closed mind for sure. Your side of the fence is not all covered with green grass, buddy boy. There is a lot of lies and bullchit being told by you and your experts.
So why do you continually deny and think that just maybe people like Trudeau or Horowitz are not stating some good and true facts? If you like to quote Trudeau as a liar and a fraud, then what has Dr. Horowitz done to make you think that he could also be a liar or a fraud? Christ, you don't even take the time to listen to what he has to say. Dr. Horowitz has training and I am sure good credentials, he is a Doctor also. Why should we not listen to what he has to say?
(6)C'mon, admit it, your a liberal, be honest here? I think I know a liberal when I deal with one. If you are not a liberal well it's your views and opinions that make me think that you are a liberal. So are you? Be honest.
(7)Exactly, so why do you keep responding?
(8)One little tidbit Mad leaves out is that anybody who is not a so-called Doctor or expert, as according to well trained Mad, well they should have no opinion or point of view on vaccines, even though there are doctors out there who are saying the samething as Dr. Horowitz that some vaccines are dangerous. They have to be a bunch of kooks and should be avoided. The "WHO" has to have the last say and that under no circumstances should anybody ever listen to anyone but them. Bullchit. 
|
MadHabber
Member
|
Posted: Thu Nov 12th, 2009 04:22 am |
|
OK Fed, here's all about your FRAUDULANT, looking to screw people out of their money, no-nothing, ZERO credential hero and his criminal record history. This may take a while to read, but well worth it.
Criminal history and legal proceedings
Trudeau was convicted of fraud and larceny in the early 1990s.[16] The FTC has sued him repeatedly. A court order currently restricts his ability to promote and sell any product or service; however, he is permitted to promote books and other publications due to free-speech protection under the First Amendment as long as they are not used to promote or sell products or services and do not contain misrepresentations.[13][14] On November 19, 2007, a court found Trudeau in contempt of that court order for making what they consider deceptive claims about his book The Weight Loss Cure "They" Don't Want You to Know About.[17][18] In August 2008, he was fined more than $5 million [19] and banned from infomercials for three years for continuing to make fraudulent claims pertaining to the book. The amount of the money damages was later increased to $37 million.[20]
[edit] 1990-1991: Larceny and credit card fraud
In 1990, Trudeau posed as a doctor in order to deposit $80,000 in false checks, and in 1991 he pleaded guilty to larceny. Trudeau had used the credit cards of eleven customers of a mega memory product to fraudulently charge approximately $122,735.68.[21] He spent two years in federal prison because of this conviction (Choi, 2005). Later, in his book Natural Cures, Trudeau claimed that he has since learned from his experience, and is now motivated to help people rather than merely make money for himself.[9]
[edit] 1996: SEC and various states
Trudeau began working for Nutrition For Life, a multi-level marketing program, in the mid-1990s. In 1996, his recruitment practices were cited by the states of Illinois and Michigan, as well as the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Illinois sued Trudeau and Jules Leib, his partner, accusing them of operating an illegal pyramid scheme. They settled with Illinois and seven other states for $185,000 after agreeing to change their tactics. Michigan forbade him from operating in the state.[9][10][11][12] A class action lawsuit was filed by stockholders of Nutrition for Life for violations of Texas law, including misrepresenting and/or omitting material information about Nutrition for Life International, Inc.'s business. In August 1997, the company paid $2 million in cash to common stockholders and holders of warrants during the class period to settle the case. The company also paid the plaintiffs' attorney fees of $600,000.[22]
[edit] 1998: FTC fine
In 1998, Trudeau was fined $500,000, the funds to be used for consumer redress by the FTC, relating to six infomercials he had produced and in which the FTC determined he had made false or misleading claims. These infomercials included "Hair Farming," "Mega Memory System," "Addiction Breaking System," "Action Reading," "Eden's Secret," and "Mega Reading."[23][24] The products included a "hair farming system" that was supposed to "finally end baldness in the human race," and "a breakthrough that in 60 seconds can eliminate" addictions, discovered when a certain "Dr. Callahan" was "studying quantum physics."[9][25]
[edit] 2004: FTC contempt of court and injunction
In June 2003, the FTC filed a complaint in the Northern District of Illinois against Trudeau and some of his companies (Shop America (USA), LLC; Shop America Marketing Group, LLC; and Trustar Global Media, Limited), alleging that disease-related claims for Coral Calcium Supreme were false and unsubstantiated. In July 2003, Trudeau entered into a stipulated preliminary injunction that prohibited him from continuing to make the challenged claims for Coral Calcium Supreme and Biotape.
In the summer of 2004, the court found Trudeau in contempt of court for violating the preliminary injunction, because he had sent out a direct mail piece and produced an infomercial making prohibited claims. The court ordered Trudeau to cease all marketing for coral calcium products.
In September 2004, Trudeau agreed to pay $2 million ($500,000 in cash plus transfer of residential property located in Ojai, California, and a luxury vehicle) to settle charges that he falsely claimed that a coral calcium product can cure cancer and other serious diseases and that a purported analgesic called Biotape can permanently cure or relieve severe pain. He also agreed to a lifetime ban on promoting products using infomercials, but excluded restrictions to promote his books via infomercials.[13][14][26] Trudeau was the only person ever banned by the FTC from selling a product via television. Lydia Parnes, speaking for the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection stated "This ban is meant to shut down an infomercial empire that has misled American consumers for years." Trudeau claimed the government was trying to discredit his book because he was "exposing them."[27]
[edit] 2005: Trudeau v. FTC
On February 28, 2005, Trudeau filed a complaint against the FTC in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. Trudeau also filed a motion for preliminary injunction, which the court denied.[28]
The complaint charged that the FTC had retaliated against him for his criticism of the agency by issuing a press release that falsely characterized and intentionally and deliberately misrepresented the 2004 Final Order. That conduct, Trudeau asserted, exceeded the FTC's authority under 15 U.S.C. § 46(f) and violated the First Amendment. The Federal Trade Commission responded with a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), and for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted under Rule 12(b)(6).
The district court granted the FTC's motion to dismiss. First, the court concluded that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because the press release was not "a 'final agency action'" under “section 704 of the [Administrative Procedure Act]”, 5 U.S.C. § 704. Second, the court held, "in the alternative, that Trudeau’s claims failed to state a viable cause of action as a matter of law."[28]
Trudeau later filed an appeal which resulted in the unsuccessful attempt to reverse the previous court's ruling.[29]
[edit] 2005: Trudeau v. New York Consumer Protection Board
Trudeau filed a lawsuit on August 11, 2005, accusing the New York State Consumer Protection Board of violating his First Amendment rights by contacting television stations in New York state and urging them to pull Trudeau's infomercials promoting his book Natural Cures "They" Don't Want You to Know About.[30] Trudeau won a temporary restraining order on September 6, 2005 prohibiting the Board from sending letters to the television stations. The temporary restraining order was replaced by a preliminary injunction. However, Trudeau lost a motion to have the Board send a "corrective letter" to the television stations and subsequently dropped all claims for monetary damages. The case is still in litigation.[31][32][33]
[edit] 2007: FTC contempt of court action
The FTC filed a contempt of court action against Trudeau and the companies that market The Weight Loss Cure 'They' Don't Want You to Know About, alleging that Trudeau was in contempt of a 2004 court order by "deceptively claiming in his infomercials that the book being advertised establishes a weight-loss protocol that is 'easy' to follow." The action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on September 17, 2007.[34] According to an FTC press release, Trudeau has claimed that the weight loss plan outlined in the book is easy, can be done at home, and readers can eat anything they want. When consumers buy the book, they find it describes a complex plan that requires intense dieting, daily injections of a prescribed drug that is not easily obtainable, and lifelong dietary restrictions.[35]
On November 19, 2007, Trudeau was found in contempt of the 2004 court order for "patently false" claims in his weight loss book. U.S. District Court Judge Robert W. Gettleman ruled that Trudeau "clearly misrepresents in his advertisements the difficulty of the diet described in his book, and by doing so, he has misled thousands of consumers."[17][18][36] On August 7, 2008, Judge Gettleman issued an order that Trudeau was not to appear in infomercials for any product, in which he has any interest, for three years from the date of the order, and was to pay a penalty of $5,173,000, an estimate of the royalties received from the weight loss book.[37][38] On November 4, 2008, Judge Gettleman amended the judgment to $37,616,161, the amount consumers paid in response to the deceptive infomercials. The court denied Trudeau’s request to reconsider or stay this ruling on December 11 of the same year.[20
|
fedup taxpayer
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2012 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 12th, 2009 05:06 am |
|
MadHabber wrote: OK Fed, here's all about your FRAUDULANT, looking to screw people out of their money, no-nothing, ZERO credential hero and his criminal record history. This may take a while to read, but well worth it.
Criminal history and legal proceedings
Trudeau was convicted of fraud and larceny in the early 1990s.[16] The FTC has sued him repeatedly. A court order currently restricts his ability to promote and sell any product or service; however, he is permitted to promote books and other publications due to free-speech protection under the First Amendment as long as they are not used to promote or sell products or services and do not contain misrepresentations.[13][14] On November 19, 2007, a court found Trudeau in contempt of that court order for making what they consider deceptive claims about his book The Weight Loss Cure "They" Don't Want You to Know About.[17][18] In August 2008, he was fined more than $5 million [19] and banned from infomercials for three years for continuing to make fraudulent claims pertaining to the book. The amount of the money damages was later increased to $37 million.[20]
[edit] 1990-1991: Larceny and credit card fraud
In 1990, Trudeau posed as a doctor in order to deposit $80,000 in false checks, and in 1991 he pleaded guilty to larceny. Trudeau had used the credit cards of eleven customers of a mega memory product to fraudulently charge approximately $122,735.68.[21] He spent two years in federal prison because of this conviction (Choi, 2005). Later, in his book Natural Cures, Trudeau claimed that he has since learned from his experience, and is now motivated to help people rather than merely make money for himself.[9]
[edit] 1996: SEC and various states
Trudeau began working for Nutrition For Life, a multi-level marketing program, in the mid-1990s. In 1996, his recruitment practices were cited by the states of Illinois and Michigan, as well as the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Illinois sued Trudeau and Jules Leib, his partner, accusing them of operating an illegal pyramid scheme. They settled with Illinois and seven other states for $185,000 after agreeing to change their tactics. Michigan forbade him from operating in the state.[9][10][11][12] A class action lawsuit was filed by stockholders of Nutrition for Life for violations of Texas law, including misrepresenting and/or omitting material information about Nutrition for Life International, Inc.'s business. In August 1997, the company paid $2 million in cash to common stockholders and holders of warrants during the class period to settle the case. The company also paid the plaintiffs' attorney fees of $600,000.[22]
[edit] 1998: FTC fine
In 1998, Trudeau was fined $500,000, the funds to be used for consumer redress by the FTC, relating to six infomercials he had produced and in which the FTC determined he had made false or misleading claims. These infomercials included "Hair Farming," "Mega Memory System," "Addiction Breaking System," "Action Reading," "Eden's Secret," and "Mega Reading."[23][24] The products included a "hair farming system" that was supposed to "finally end baldness in the human race," and "a breakthrough that in 60 seconds can eliminate" addictions, discovered when a certain "Dr. Callahan" was "studying quantum physics."[9][25]
[edit] 2004: FTC contempt of court and injunction
In June 2003, the FTC filed a complaint in the Northern District of Illinois against Trudeau and some of his companies (Shop America (USA), LLC; Shop America Marketing Group, LLC; and Trustar Global Media, Limited), alleging that disease-related claims for Coral Calcium Supreme were false and unsubstantiated. In July 2003, Trudeau entered into a stipulated preliminary injunction that prohibited him from continuing to make the challenged claims for Coral Calcium Supreme and Biotape.
In the summer of 2004, the court found Trudeau in contempt of court for violating the preliminary injunction, because he had sent out a direct mail piece and produced an infomercial making prohibited claims. The court ordered Trudeau to cease all marketing for coral calcium products.
In September 2004, Trudeau agreed to pay $2 million ($500,000 in cash plus transfer of residential property located in Ojai, California, and a luxury vehicle) to settle charges that he falsely claimed that a coral calcium product can cure cancer and other serious diseases and that a purported analgesic called Biotape can permanently cure or relieve severe pain. He also agreed to a lifetime ban on promoting products using infomercials, but excluded restrictions to promote his books via infomercials.[13][14][26] Trudeau was the only person ever banned by the FTC from selling a product via television. Lydia Parnes, speaking for the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection stated "This ban is meant to shut down an infomercial empire that has misled American consumers for years." Trudeau claimed the government was trying to discredit his book because he was "exposing them."[27]
[edit] 2005: Trudeau v. FTC
On February 28, 2005, Trudeau filed a complaint against the FTC in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. Trudeau also filed a motion for preliminary injunction, which the court denied.[28]
The complaint charged that the FTC had retaliated against him for his criticism of the agency by issuing a press release that falsely characterized and intentionally and deliberately misrepresented the 2004 Final Order. That conduct, Trudeau asserted, exceeded the FTC's authority under 15 U.S.C. § 46(f) and violated the First Amendment. The Federal Trade Commission responded with a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), and for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted under Rule 12(b)(6).
The district court granted the FTC's motion to dismiss. First, the court concluded that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because the press release was not "a 'final agency action'" under “section 704 of the [Administrative Procedure Act]”, 5 U.S.C. § 704. Second, the court held, "in the alternative, that Trudeau’s claims failed to state a viable cause of action as a matter of law."[28]
Trudeau later filed an appeal which resulted in the unsuccessful attempt to reverse the previous court's ruling.[29]
[edit] 2005: Trudeau v. New York Consumer Protection Board
Trudeau filed a lawsuit on August 11, 2005, accusing the New York State Consumer Protection Board of violating his First Amendment rights by contacting television stations in New York state and urging them to pull Trudeau's infomercials promoting his book Natural Cures "They" Don't Want You to Know About.[30] Trudeau won a temporary restraining order on September 6, 2005 prohibiting the Board from sending letters to the television stations. The temporary restraining order was replaced by a preliminary injunction. However, Trudeau lost a motion to have the Board send a "corrective letter" to the television stations and subsequently dropped all claims for monetary damages. The case is still in litigation.[31][32][33]
[edit] 2007: FTC contempt of court action
The FTC filed a contempt of court action against Trudeau and the companies that market The Weight Loss Cure 'They' Don't Want You to Know About, alleging that Trudeau was in contempt of a 2004 court order by "deceptively claiming in his infomercials that the book being advertised establishes a weight-loss protocol that is 'easy' to follow." The action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on September 17, 2007.[34] According to an FTC press release, Trudeau has claimed that the weight loss plan outlined in the book is easy, can be done at home, and readers can eat anything they want. When consumers buy the book, they find it describes a complex plan that requires intense dieting, daily injections of a prescribed drug that is not easily obtainable, and lifelong dietary restrictions.[35]
On November 19, 2007, Trudeau was found in contempt of the 2004 court order for "patently false" claims in his weight loss book. U.S. District Court Judge Robert W. Gettleman ruled that Trudeau "clearly misrepresents in his advertisements the difficulty of the diet described in his book, and by doing so, he has misled thousands of consumers."[17][18][36] On August 7, 2008, Judge Gettleman issued an order that Trudeau was not to appear in infomercials for any product, in which he has any interest, for three years from the date of the order, and was to pay a penalty of $5,173,000, an estimate of the royalties received from the weight loss book.[37][38] On November 4, 2008, Judge Gettleman amended the judgment to $37,616,161, the amount consumers paid in response to the deceptive infomercials. The court denied Trudeau’s request to reconsider or stay this ruling on December 11 of the same year.[20
This may all be very well and true, and I have to face the fact that all is true. I recall Trudeau saying that in one of his books that he was charged for fraud and so be it.
But you know, if your enemies want you out of the picture bad enough they will look for anything to get you. It's common practise, especially if you are somebody trying to just maybe expose the truth and the bad boys don't like what you are saying. If someone wants you bad enough, they will get you, especially if they have the system behind them, as it may be in this case, I don't know. Piss off the US Federal government and they will have you audited by the IRS and close you down and force you to fork over some supposedly owed taxdollars. It happens quite often.
Anyway, he also explains in his book that because of his books and the information he has in them that the FDA and big pharma were after him because he was explaining and exposing what the big pharma outfits were doing and getting away with, with the help of the FDA, and apparently didn't like that. He was taking on the big boys now. Lookout. Trudeau also explains that many people working with the FDA have been given jobs with some big pharma outfit after they quit the FDA for their part in trying to coverup some nefarious deeds being committed by big pharma.
But just like you, I think we are all wanting to know the truth and like I said before you must first read his books and then after that decide for yourself as to whether or not Trudeau is a liar or a saviour. I am not here trying to defend any wrong doing on his part, but I don't always believe what I read in the mainstream controlled press or what the government says. They are not well known for their honesty and their truthfullness. They do tell big fibs. I am not saying that all may be truthful in any of his books but a hell of a lot of things he does say makes a lot of very good sense.
So where does Dr. Horowitz fit in? Can you also believe that he is a fraud artist and a liar also? It's not only Trudeau that has said many times in his books that vaccines are not safe but also many other doctors and Dr. Horowitz who are saying the samething. Are you still going to try and tell me that they don't know what they are talking about? Not all people trying to expose some truth are fraudsters and liars.
Believe what you want to believe and I will believe what I want to be believe, ok?
|
MadHabber
Member
|
Posted: Thu Nov 12th, 2009 03:35 pm |
|
fedup taxpayer wrote: MadHabber wrote: OK Fed, here's all about your FRAUDULANT, looking to screw people out of their money, no-nothing, ZERO credential hero and his criminal record history. This may take a while to read, but well worth it.
Criminal history and legal proceedings
Trudeau was convicted of fraud and larceny in the early 1990s.[16] The FTC has sued him repeatedly. A court order currently restricts his ability to promote and sell any product or service; however, he is permitted to promote books and other publications due to free-speech protection under the First Amendment as long as they are not used to promote or sell products or services and do not contain misrepresentations.[13][14] On November 19, 2007, a court found Trudeau in contempt of that court order for making what they consider deceptive claims about his book The Weight Loss Cure "They" Don't Want You to Know About.[17][18] In August 2008, he was fined more than $5 million [19] and banned from infomercials for three years for continuing to make fraudulent claims pertaining to the book. The amount of the money damages was later increased to $37 million.[20]
[edit] 1990-1991: Larceny and credit card fraud
In 1990, Trudeau posed as a doctor in order to deposit $80,000 in false checks, and in 1991 he pleaded guilty to larceny. Trudeau had used the credit cards of eleven customers of a mega memory product to fraudulently charge approximately $122,735.68.[21] He spent two years in federal prison because of this conviction (Choi, 2005). Later, in his book Natural Cures, Trudeau claimed that he has since learned from his experience, and is now motivated to help people rather than merely make money for himself.[9]
[edit] 1996: SEC and various states
Trudeau began working for Nutrition For Life, a multi-level marketing program, in the mid-1990s. In 1996, his recruitment practices were cited by the states of Illinois and Michigan, as well as the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Illinois sued Trudeau and Jules Leib, his partner, accusing them of operating an illegal pyramid scheme. They settled with Illinois and seven other states for $185,000 after agreeing to change their tactics. Michigan forbade him from operating in the state.[9][10][11][12] A class action lawsuit was filed by stockholders of Nutrition for Life for violations of Texas law, including misrepresenting and/or omitting material information about Nutrition for Life International, Inc.'s business. In August 1997, the company paid $2 million in cash to common stockholders and holders of warrants during the class period to settle the case. The company also paid the plaintiffs' attorney fees of $600,000.[22]
[edit] 1998: FTC fine
In 1998, Trudeau was fined $500,000, the funds to be used for consumer redress by the FTC, relating to six infomercials he had produced and in which the FTC determined he had made false or misleading claims. These infomercials included "Hair Farming," "Mega Memory System," "Addiction Breaking System," "Action Reading," "Eden's Secret," and "Mega Reading."[23][24] The products included a "hair farming system" that was supposed to "finally end baldness in the human race," and "a breakthrough that in 60 seconds can eliminate" addictions, discovered when a certain "Dr. Callahan" was "studying quantum physics."[9][25]
[edit] 2004: FTC contempt of court and injunction
In June 2003, the FTC filed a complaint in the Northern District of Illinois against Trudeau and some of his companies (Shop America (USA), LLC; Shop America Marketing Group, LLC; and Trustar Global Media, Limited), alleging that disease-related claims for Coral Calcium Supreme were false and unsubstantiated. In July 2003, Trudeau entered into a stipulated preliminary injunction that prohibited him from continuing to make the challenged claims for Coral Calcium Supreme and Biotape.
In the summer of 2004, the court found Trudeau in contempt of court for violating the preliminary injunction, because he had sent out a direct mail piece and produced an infomercial making prohibited claims. The court ordered Trudeau to cease all marketing for coral calcium products.
In September 2004, Trudeau agreed to pay $2 million ($500,000 in cash plus transfer of residential property located in Ojai, California, and a luxury vehicle) to settle charges that he falsely claimed that a coral calcium product can cure cancer and other serious diseases and that a purported analgesic called Biotape can permanently cure or relieve severe pain. He also agreed to a lifetime ban on promoting products using infomercials, but excluded restrictions to promote his books via infomercials.[13][14][26] Trudeau was the only person ever banned by the FTC from selling a product via television. Lydia Parnes, speaking for the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection stated "This ban is meant to shut down an infomercial empire that has misled American consumers for years." Trudeau claimed the government was trying to discredit his book because he was "exposing them."[27]
[edit] 2005: Trudeau v. FTC
On February 28, 2005, Trudeau filed a complaint against the FTC in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. Trudeau also filed a motion for preliminary injunction, which the court denied.[28]
The complaint charged that the FTC had retaliated against him for his criticism of the agency by issuing a press release that falsely characterized and intentionally and deliberately misrepresented the 2004 Final Order. That conduct, Trudeau asserted, exceeded the FTC's authority under 15 U.S.C. § 46(f) and violated the First Amendment. The Federal Trade Commission responded with a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), and for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted under Rule 12(b)(6).
The district court granted the FTC's motion to dismiss. First, the court concluded that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because the press release was not "a 'final agency action'" under “section 704 of the [Administrative Procedure Act]”, 5 U.S.C. § 704. Second, the court held, "in the alternative, that Trudeau’s claims failed to state a viable cause of action as a matter of law."[28]
Trudeau later filed an appeal which resulted in the unsuccessful attempt to reverse the previous court's ruling.[29]
[edit] 2005: Trudeau v. New York Consumer Protection Board
Trudeau filed a lawsuit on August 11, 2005, accusing the New York State Consumer Protection Board of violating his First Amendment rights by contacting television stations in New York state and urging them to pull Trudeau's infomercials promoting his book Natural Cures "They" Don't Want You to Know About.[30] Trudeau won a temporary restraining order on September 6, 2005 prohibiting the Board from sending letters to the television stations. The temporary restraining order was replaced by a preliminary injunction. However, Trudeau lost a motion to have the Board send a "corrective letter" to the television stations and subsequently dropped all claims for monetary damages. The case is still in litigation.[31][32][33]
[edit] 2007: FTC contempt of court action
The FTC filed a contempt of court action against Trudeau and the companies that market The Weight Loss Cure 'They' Don't Want You to Know About, alleging that Trudeau was in contempt of a 2004 court order by "deceptively claiming in his infomercials that the book being advertised establishes a weight-loss protocol that is 'easy' to follow." The action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on September 17, 2007.[34] According to an FTC press release, Trudeau has claimed that the weight loss plan outlined in the book is easy, can be done at home, and readers can eat anything they want. When consumers buy the book, they find it describes a complex plan that requires intense dieting, daily injections of a prescribed drug that is not easily obtainable, and lifelong dietary restrictions.[35]
On November 19, 2007, Trudeau was found in contempt of the 2004 court order for "patently false" claims in his weight loss book. U.S. District Court Judge Robert W. Gettleman ruled that Trudeau "clearly misrepresents in his advertisements the difficulty of the diet described in his book, and by doing so, he has misled thousands of consumers."[17][18][36] On August 7, 2008, Judge Gettleman issued an order that Trudeau was not to appear in infomercials for any product, in which he has any interest, for three years from the date of the order, and was to pay a penalty of $5,173,000, an estimate of the royalties received from the weight loss book.[37][38] On November 4, 2008, Judge Gettleman amended the judgment to $37,616,161, the amount consumers paid in response to the deceptive infomercials. The court denied Trudeau’s request to reconsider or stay this ruling on December 11 of the same year.[20
This may all be very well and true, and I have to face the fact that all is true. I recall Trudeau saying that in one of his books that he was charged for fraud and so be it.
But you know, if your enemies want you out of the picture bad enough they will look for anything to get you. It's common practise, especially if you are somebody trying to just maybe expose the truth and the bad boys don't like what you are saying. If someone wants you bad enough, they will get you, especially if they have the system behind them, as it may be in this case, I don't know. Piss off the US Federal government and they will have you audited by the IRS and close you down and force you to fork over some supposedly owed taxdollars. It happens quite often.
Anyway, he also explains in his book that because of his books and the information he has in them that the FDA and big pharma were after him because he was explaining and exposing what the big pharma outfits were doing and getting away with, with the help of the FDA, and apparently didn't like that. He was taking on the big boys now. Lookout. Trudeau also explains that many people working with the FDA have been given jobs with some big pharma outfit after they quit the FDA for their part in trying to coverup some nefarious deeds being committed by big pharma.
But just like you, I think we are all wanting to know the truth and like I said before you must first read his books and then after that decide for yourself as to whether or not Trudeau is a liar or a saviour. I am not here trying to defend any wrong doing on his part, but I don't always believe what I read in the mainstream controlled press or what the government says. They are not well known for their honesty and their truthfullness. They do tell big fibs. I am not saying that all may be truthful in any of his books but a hell of a lot of things he does say makes a lot of very good sense.
So where does Dr. Horowitz fit in? Can you also believe that he is a fraud artist and a liar also? It's not only Trudeau that has said many times in his books that vaccines are not safe but also many other doctors and Dr. Horowitz who are saying the samething. Are you still going to try and tell me that they don't know what they are talking about? Not all people trying to expose some truth are fraudsters and liars.
Believe what you want to believe and I will believe what I want to be believe, ok?
I agree with your last sentence, so let's no have this go back and forth forever.
Here are my general feelings and thoughts about this topic. As it been overblown, probably yes. Is it necessary for everyone to take the vaccine, no. If I didn't have kids under 5, would I get vaccinated, No. Is it safe, by all acounts to date, a big yes. Do I feel you are listening to the wrong people on this, yes. Horowitz is no more qualified than you and I on this subject. He is not medically trained, nor an expert on vaccines. He is a self proclaimed expert, and nothing more than a dentist, (not that being a dentist is not impressive) and you put it beautifully in an earlier post, a modern day snake oil salesman. Just look at his website. Its cheesy and he pushes his products on it. No respectable "doctor" does this. And yes, he too, has had run ins with the FDA on past false claims regarding a SARS treatment he claimed worked. Anyone who is looking to profit off this or other conditions by telling you not to use something, but use their stuff because they have "testimonials", I'm sorry they can not be trusted. Period.
I agree with you. Look at both sides, but listen to someone really qualified, like an Immunologist or a Virologist. They are the true experts. Even more so than MD's. Fair enough? Now go have a beer on me.
|
fedup taxpayer
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2012 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 13th, 2009 04:51 am |
|
MadHabber wrote: fedup taxpayer wrote: MadHabber wrote: OK Fed, here's all about your FRAUDULANT, looking to screw people out of their money, no-nothing, ZERO credential hero and his criminal record history. This may take a while to read, but well worth it.
Criminal history and legal proceedings
Trudeau was convicted of fraud and larceny in the early 1990s.[16] The FTC has sued him repeatedly. A court order currently restricts his ability to promote and sell any product or service; however, he is permitted to promote books and other publications due to free-speech protection under the First Amendment as long as they are not used to promote or sell products or services and do not contain misrepresentations.[13][14] On November 19, 2007, a court found Trudeau in contempt of that court order for making what they consider deceptive claims about his book The Weight Loss Cure "They" Don't Want You to Know About.[17][18] In August 2008, he was fined more than $5 million [19] and banned from infomercials for three years for continuing to make fraudulent claims pertaining to the book. The amount of the money damages was later increased to $37 million.[20]
[edit] 1990-1991: Larceny and credit card fraud
In 1990, Trudeau posed as a doctor in order to deposit $80,000 in false checks, and in 1991 he pleaded guilty to larceny. Trudeau had used the credit cards of eleven customers of a mega memory product to fraudulently charge approximately $122,735.68.[21] He spent two years in federal prison because of this conviction (Choi, 2005). Later, in his book Natural Cures, Trudeau claimed that he has since learned from his experience, and is now motivated to help people rather than merely make money for himself.[9]
[edit] 1996: SEC and various states
Trudeau began working for Nutrition For Life, a multi-level marketing program, in the mid-1990s. In 1996, his recruitment practices were cited by the states of Illinois and Michigan, as well as the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Illinois sued Trudeau and Jules Leib, his partner, accusing them of operating an illegal pyramid scheme. They settled with Illinois and seven other states for $185,000 after agreeing to change their tactics. Michigan forbade him from operating in the state.[9][10][11][12] A class action lawsuit was filed by stockholders of Nutrition for Life for violations of Texas law, including misrepresenting and/or omitting material information about Nutrition for Life International, Inc.'s business. In August 1997, the company paid $2 million in cash to common stockholders and holders of warrants during the class period to settle the case. The company also paid the plaintiffs' attorney fees of $600,000.[22]
[edit] 1998: FTC fine
In 1998, Trudeau was fined $500,000, the funds to be used for consumer redress by the FTC, relating to six infomercials he had produced and in which the FTC determined he had made false or misleading claims. These infomercials included "Hair Farming," "Mega Memory System," "Addiction Breaking System," "Action Reading," "Eden's Secret," and "Mega Reading."[23][24] The products included a "hair farming system" that was supposed to "finally end baldness in the human race," and "a breakthrough that in 60 seconds can eliminate" addictions, discovered when a certain "Dr. Callahan" was "studying quantum physics."[9][25]
[edit] 2004: FTC contempt of court and injunction
In June 2003, the FTC filed a complaint in the Northern District of Illinois against Trudeau and some of his companies (Shop America (USA), LLC; Shop America Marketing Group, LLC; and Trustar Global Media, Limited), alleging that disease-related claims for Coral Calcium Supreme were false and unsubstantiated. In July 2003, Trudeau entered into a stipulated preliminary injunction that prohibited him from continuing to make the challenged claims for Coral Calcium Supreme and Biotape.
In the summer of 2004, the court found Trudeau in contempt of court for violating the preliminary injunction, because he had sent out a direct mail piece and produced an infomercial making prohibited claims. The court ordered Trudeau to cease all marketing for coral calcium products.
In September 2004, Trudeau agreed to pay $2 million ($500,000 in cash plus transfer of residential property located in Ojai, California, and a luxury vehicle) to settle charges that he falsely claimed that a coral calcium product can cure cancer and other serious diseases and that a purported analgesic called Biotape can permanently cure or relieve severe pain. He also agreed to a lifetime ban on promoting products using infomercials, but excluded restrictions to promote his books via infomercials.[13][14][26] Trudeau was the only person ever banned by the FTC from selling a product via television. Lydia Parnes, speaking for the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection stated "This ban is meant to shut down an infomercial empire that has misled American consumers for years." Trudeau claimed the government was trying to discredit his book because he was "exposing them."[27]
[edit] 2005: Trudeau v. FTC
On February 28, 2005, Trudeau filed a complaint against the FTC in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. Trudeau also filed a motion for preliminary injunction, which the court denied.[28]
The complaint charged that the FTC had retaliated against him for his criticism of the agency by issuing a press release that falsely characterized and intentionally and deliberately misrepresented the 2004 Final Order. That conduct, Trudeau asserted, exceeded the FTC's authority under 15 U.S.C. § 46(f) and violated the First Amendment. The Federal Trade Commission responded with a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), and for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted under Rule 12(b)(6).
The district court granted the FTC's motion to dismiss. First, the court concluded that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because the press release was not "a 'final agency action'" under “section 704 of the [Administrative Procedure Act]”, 5 U.S.C. § 704. Second, the court held, "in the alternative, that Trudeau’s claims failed to state a viable cause of action as a matter of law."[28]
Trudeau later filed an appeal which resulted in the unsuccessful attempt to reverse the previous court's ruling.[29]
[edit] 2005: Trudeau v. New York Consumer Protection Board
Trudeau filed a lawsuit on August 11, 2005, accusing the New York State Consumer Protection Board of violating his First Amendment rights by contacting television stations in New York state and urging them to pull Trudeau's infomercials promoting his book Natural Cures "They" Don't Want You to Know About.[30] Trudeau won a temporary restraining order on September 6, 2005 prohibiting the Board from sending letters to the television stations. The temporary restraining order was replaced by a preliminary injunction. However, Trudeau lost a motion to have the Board send a "corrective letter" to the television stations and subsequently dropped all claims for monetary damages. The case is still in litigation.[31][32][33]
[edit] 2007: FTC contempt of court action
The FTC filed a contempt of court action against Trudeau and the companies that market The Weight Loss Cure 'They' Don't Want You to Know About, alleging that Trudeau was in contempt of a 2004 court order by "deceptively claiming in his infomercials that the book being advertised establishes a weight-loss protocol that is 'easy' to follow." The action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on September 17, 2007.[34] According to an FTC press release, Trudeau has claimed that the weight loss plan outlined in the book is easy, can be done at home, and readers can eat anything they want. When consumers buy the book, they find it describes a complex plan that requires intense dieting, daily injections of a prescribed drug that is not easily obtainable, and lifelong dietary restrictions.[35]
On November 19, 2007, Trudeau was found in contempt of the 2004 court order for "patently false" claims in his weight loss book. U.S. District Court Judge Robert W. Gettleman ruled that Trudeau "clearly misrepresents in his advertisements the difficulty of the diet described in his book, and by doing so, he has misled thousands of consumers."[17][18][36] On August 7, 2008, Judge Gettleman issued an order that Trudeau was not to appear in infomercials for any product, in which he has any interest, for three years from the date of the order, and was to pay a penalty of $5,173,000, an estimate of the royalties received from the weight loss book.[37][38] On November 4, 2008, Judge Gettleman amended the judgment to $37,616,161, the amount consumers paid in response to the deceptive infomercials. The court denied Trudeau’s request to reconsider or stay this ruling on December 11 of the same year.[20
This may all be very well and true, and I have to face the fact that all is true. I recall Trudeau saying that in one of his books that he was charged for fraud and so be it.
But you know, if your enemies want you out of the picture bad enough they will look for anything to get you. It's common practise, especially if you are somebody trying to just maybe expose the truth and the bad boys don't like what you are saying. If someone wants you bad enough, they will get you, especially if they have the system behind them, as it may be in this case, I don't know. Piss off the US Federal government and they will have you audited by the IRS and close you down and force you to fork over some supposedly owed taxdollars. It happens quite often.
Anyway, he also explains in his book that because of his books and the information he has in them that the FDA and big pharma were after him because he was explaining and exposing what the big pharma outfits were doing and getting away with, with the help of the FDA, and apparently didn't like that. He was taking on the big boys now. Lookout. Trudeau also explains that many people working with the FDA have been given jobs with some big pharma outfit after they quit the FDA for their part in trying to coverup some nefarious deeds being committed by big pharma.
But just like you, I think we are all wanting to know the truth and like I said before you must first read his books and then after that decide for yourself as to whether or not Trudeau is a liar or a saviour. I am not here trying to defend any wrong doing on his part, but I don't always believe what I read in the mainstream controlled press or what the government says. They are not well known for their honesty and their truthfullness. They do tell big fibs. I am not saying that all may be truthful in any of his books but a hell of a lot of things he does say makes a lot of very good sense.
So where does Dr. Horowitz fit in? Can you also believe that he is a fraud artist and a liar also? It's not only Trudeau that has said many times in his books that vaccines are not safe but also many other doctors and Dr. Horowitz who are saying the samething. Are you still going to try and tell me that they don't know what they are talking about? Not all people trying to expose some truth are fraudsters and liars.
Believe what you want to believe and I will believe what I want to be believe, ok?
I agree with your last sentence, so let's no have this go back and forth forever.
Here are my general feelings and thoughts about this topic. As it been overblown, probably yes. Is it necessary for everyone to take the vaccine, no. If I didn't have kids under 5, would I get vaccinated, No. Is it safe, by all acounts to date, a big yes. Do I feel you are listening to the wrong people on this, yes. Horowitz is no more qualified than you and I on this subject. He is not medically trained, nor an expert on vaccines. He is a self proclaimed expert, and nothing more than a dentist, (not that being a dentist is not impressive) and you put it beautifully in an earlier post, a modern day snake oil salesman. Just look at his website. Its cheesy and he pushes his products on it. No respectable "doctor" does this. And yes, he too, has had run ins with the FDA on past false claims regarding a SARS treatment he claimed worked. Anyone who is looking to profit off this or other conditions by telling you not to use something, but use their stuff because they have "testimonials", I'm sorry they can not be trusted. Period.
I agree with you. Look at both sides, but listen to someone really qualified, like an Immunologist or a Virologist. They are the true experts. Even more so than MD's. Fair enough? Now go have a beer on me.
Sounds like a good plan to me, but I think it is going to be scotch instead.
|
MadHabber
Member
|
Posted: Fri Nov 13th, 2009 02:54 pm |
|
fedup taxpayer wrote:
Sounds like a good plan to me, but I think it is going to be scotch instead.
You know, I've tried the scotch thing, but my palate hasn't adjusted to it yet. I'm not giving up though, but I think you are a more sophisticated drinker than me. I'll give you that.  Good debate fed. Respect. And remember, I'm only half Liberal.  I just won't tell you what half.Last edited on Fri Nov 13th, 2009 02:55 pm by MadHabber
|
Current time is 07:06 pm | Page:   1 2 |
|
|
|
|
