Re: other groups... toothpaste choices

[Guest guest]

On 2011-02-25 1:36 PM, Dolores wrote:

> You are grasping at straws here if you think this proves that what is

> spit out does not contain bacteria and viruses and is therefore of

> little value for oral (and overall) health

<sigh>

No one said that the resulting liquid in the mouth that you spit out

after an oil-pulling session didn't contain any 'bad guys'.

All we said was, the fact that it turns white has nothing to do with it

and/or proves nothing. Period.

This thread lost any/all potential meaning a long time ago.

[Guest guest]

No YOU didn't say that but Duncan - for all intents and purposes - did. That's

why I addressed my response to him and not to you. I think I have made my case

and if you think this thread has lost any/all potential meaning then why respond

to it? For example, I found no meaning whatsoever in your OT post - warning

about posting pictures online.

Dee

> > You are grasping at straws here if you think this proves that what is

> > spit out does not contain bacteria and viruses and is therefore of

> > little value for oral (and overall) health

>

> <sigh>

>

> No one said that the resulting liquid in the mouth that you spit out

> after an oil-pulling session didn't contain any 'bad guys'.

>

> All we said was, the fact that it turns white has nothing to do with it

> and/or proves nothing. Period.

>

> This thread lost any/all potential meaning a long time ago.

>

[Guest guest]

On 2011-02-25 2:49 PM, Dolores wrote:

> No YOU didn't say that

Yes, in fact, I did... I was the one who said it proves nothing.

> but Duncan - for all intents and purposes - did.

What Duncan did was back up my assertion with facts.

> That's why I addressed my response to him and not to you. I think I have

> made my case and if you think this thread has lost any/all potential

> meaning then why respond to it? For example, I found no meaning

> whatsoever in your OT post - warning about posting pictures online.

Then you didn't watch the vid... or you don't care that a picture you

take at home and post online can be used to find out where you live, by

anyone, anytime, for any purpose...

[Guest guest]

And you obviously didn't read the entire conversion that preceded my comments

regarding the color of the sputum. In those posts Duncan was trying to devalue

oil pulling - saying that it didn't " pull " anything. Duncan then latched upon

your comment below in order to validate his contention. In my latest posts I

conceded that the color was no doubt due to the emulsifying effect but also

provided studies that DID prove that the sputum from the pulling also contained

bacteria, etc. AND that it has very profound effects on all kinds of physical

ailments. If that doesn't concern you so be it.

Dee

p.s. and no I don't worry about pictures I take at home and show online.

> > No YOU didn't say that

>

> Yes, in fact, I did... I was the one who said it proves nothing.

>

> > but Duncan - for all intents and purposes - did.

>

> What Duncan did was back up my assertion with facts.

>

> > That's why I addressed my response to him and not to you. I think I have

> > made my case and if you think this thread has lost any/all potential

> > meaning then why respond to it? For example, I found no meaning

> > whatsoever in your OT post - warning about posting pictures online.

>

> Then you didn't watch the vid... or you don't care that a picture you

> take at home and post online can be used to find out where you live, by

> anyone, anytime, for any purpose...

>

[Guest guest]

Dee, I highlighted Bruce's statement that " oil pulling " doesn't pull toxins from

the tissues, in contradiction to what you thought might be happening. I also

pointed out that emulsified liquids are white. Both are only points of fact.

Full stop.

I'm sure you do spit out lots of bacteria. I have never addressed or contested

that point.

The confusion over the last 3-4 days has been your own. I think you should read

things more carefully, as I pointed out last year as well. That's our Dee, same

ol' gal.

all good,

Duncan

>

> Duncan,

>

> You are grasping at straws here if you think this proves that what is spit out

does not contain bacteria and viruses and is therefore of little value for oral

(and overall) health

[Guest guest]

Oops there you go confusing things once again. Same ol' Duncan.

Here is exactly what Bruce said (copied and pasted):

> It does not, however, pull toxins out of the

> bloodstream and into the mouth.

As I pointed out in another post, blood fluid and tissue fluid are not one and

the same thing:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_blood_and_tissue_fluid

And as far as never contesting the point that oil pulling pulls out lots of

bacteria - here is what you said:

" * waterpik with CS and peroxide or ozone; waterpik has better reach and much

stronger jet pressure than swishing oil in your mouth (some call it " oil

pulling " but it doesn't " pull " anything from the tissues); and kills viruses,

parasites and fungi THAT COCONUT OIL DOES NOT " (my emphasis).

So where's the proof for your above statement?

Dee

p.s. Sorry Don et all but I just can't let him get away with his accusation of

" confusion " when confusion is what he loves to use in order to win any and every

argument. For those of you who can't tolerate this subject any longer just don't

click on the subject line.

> >

> > Duncan,

> >

> > You are grasping at straws here if you think this proves that what is spit

out does not contain bacteria and viruses and is therefore of little value for

oral (and overall) health

>

[Guest guest]

Nope, Dee, I think I was pretty clear that you generated all of your own

confusion for the last three days.

><Coconut Oil/message/33789>

Is it rude to order up a Paki slap for someone else? I don't know of any other

name for it

all good,

Duncan

>

> No YOU didn't say that but Duncan - for all intents and purposes - did. That's

why I addressed my response to him and not to you. I think I have made my case

and if you think this thread has lost any/all potential meaning then why respond

to it? For example, I found no meaning whatsoever in your OT post - warning

about posting pictures online.

>

> Dee

>

[Guest guest]

Oops, my bad. The Youtubes on Paki slaps look like an assault; here on the west

coast we deliver only a simple forehead slap to indicate someone gapped or is

being stupid. Call us pacifists

all good,

Duncan

> >

> > No YOU didn't say that but Duncan - for all intents and purposes - did.

That's why I addressed my response to him and not to you. I think I have made

my case and if you think this thread has lost any/all potential meaning then why

respond to it? For example, I found no meaning whatsoever in your OT post -

warning about posting pictures online.

> >

> > Dee

> >

>

[Guest guest]

May I point out just how offensive and racist the term " Paki Slap " is? I think

using a term including a racial slur is inappropriate here, or anywhere else, no

matter how pissed off you might be at one another. Rant, rave, go back and forth

calling one another names, but leave out the racism.

M

> Is it rude to order up a Paki slap for someone else? I don't know of any other

name for it

>

> all good,

>

> Duncan

>

[Guest guest]

On 2/25/2011 3:16 PM, Dolores wrote:

> And you obviously didn't read the entire conversion that preceded my

> comments regarding the color of the sputum.

And you obviously are wrong, because I did. Your attitude seems a bit

bizarre... both confrontational and defensive at the same time. Why is that?

> Duncan then latched upon your comment below in order to validate his

> contention.

No, he didn't. this is ridiculous. He simply pointed out that oil

'swishing' will cause it to mix with water (saliva) and cause it to

emulsify, which in turn causes it to turn white, thus validating my

unsubstantiated assertion.

> In my latest posts I conceded that the color was no doubt due to the

> emulsifying effect

Yes - and continued arguing as if you were right all along. Arguing with

know-it-all's that don't know when to just admit they were wrong is

tiring and pointless (so why am I doing it? glutton for punishment I guess).

> but also provided studies that DID prove that the sputum from the

> pulling also contained bacteria, etc. AND that it has very profound

> effects on all kinds of physical ailments. If that doesn't concern

> you so be it.

It does... and *again*, *I* never said that the resulting mix didn't

contain bad guys, I *only* challenged your silly assertion that the fact

that it was white 'proved' anything.

I agree that Duncan is simply wrong that oil-pulling doesn't pull bad

guys from the tissues that it actually comes into direct contact with

(inside of mouth, gums, teeth, tongue, etc), but I'm willing to just say

so and leave it at that, I'm not going to make it my life's work to try

to prove him wrong.

[Guest guest]

On 2/25/2011 4:39 PM, Duncan Crow wrote:

> Dee, I highlighted Bruce's statement that " oil pulling " doesn't pull

> toxins from the tissues,

Tissues != blood Duncan. Bruce said blood, not tissues. Without semantic

precision all we have is a lot of noise.