Jump to content
RemedySpot.com

wikipedia

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Hot damn! We've come a long way baby! Hang in their 007 and

everyone else! Perhaps those still in the heat of battle need to

copy those old classic mindwashing posts of Dr. Skipper and others

to contrast the current articles that are circulating. A good

lawyer should be able to see how damaging the original articles were

in effecting how the boards use this test! I bet you those old

posts and articles will be hard to find. I imagine some have pulled

them off the net to prevent further scrutiny!

We should pool together all the articles that we have saved that

boasted the EtG wonder test for the " absolute proof " of alcohol

consumption. Man, maybe we all should contact a local fellow named

Fred Levin, Attorney at Law, that lives in my community! Fred Levin

is one of the richest lawyers in the nation concerning personal

injury and civil procedure! In fact, I know we should contact him!

I'll work on contacting him, perhaps this weekend I'll boat on over

to his dock at his plush estate! I'll act like I'm having engine

trouble! Seeriously, I'm going to contact him! Review his web

site, he is one of the most loved lawyer by some, and most hated

lawyer by others, in my small community. However, he is widely known

and respected all over the country! He has taken on the big guys,

like the Navy Government and Major Hospitals in this community and

trust he plays to win! Fred has always gone for the cases that have

the most public interest and controversy!

http://www.levinlaw.com/

Keep the faith!

Isanah

> >

> >

> > I notice that the Wikipedia discussion on EtG was brilliantly

updated

> on

> > August 19, 2006. Anybody here have anything to do with that?

> >

> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethyl_glucuronide

> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethyl_glucuronide>

> >

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Figured out who updated the Wikipedia information: Greg Skipper

Re: Wikipedia

Beautiful---I'm sending it on to my cm & the BRN.Lorie <lorieglanset> wrote:

I notice that the Wikipedia discussion on EtG was brilliantly updated on August 19, 2006. Anybody here have anything to do with that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethyl_glucuronide

Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Small Business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I already sent it to my attorney, thanks again :)Lorie Garlick <lorieg@...> wrote: Figured out who updated the Wikipedia information: Greg Skipper Re: Wikipedia Beautiful---I'm sending it on to my cm & the BRN.Lorie <lorieglanset> wrote: I notice that the Wikipedia discussion on EtG was brilliantly updated on August 19, 2006. Anybody here have anything to do with that? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethyl_glucuronide Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Small Business.

Stay in the know. Pulse on the new .com. Check it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allllriiighttt Greg!!!!!Lorie Garlick <lorieg@...> wrote: Figured out who updated the Wikipedia information: Greg Skipper Re: Wikipedia Beautiful---I'm sending it on to my cm & the BRN.Lorie <lorieglanset> wrote: I notice that the Wikipedia discussion on EtG was brilliantly updated on August 19, 2006. Anybody here have anything to do with that? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethyl_glucuronide Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Small Business.

Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow! Isn't that special! Bravo for Dr. Skipper, he has really gone

the extra mile and I hope he continues to do so!

I notice that the Wikipedia

discussion on EtG was brilliantly updated on August 19, 2006.

Anybody here have anything to do with that?

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethyl_glucuronide

>

>

>

>

>

> ---------------------------------

> Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help.

Small Business.

>

>

>

>

>

>

> ---------------------------------

> Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.

Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

--- http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-19940901-000025.html

In Ethylglucuronide , " isanahlei " <ddm2903@...> wrote:

>

> Wow! Isn't that special! Bravo for Dr. Skipper, he has really

gone

> the extra mile and I hope he continues to do so!

>

>

> I notice that the Wikipedia

> discussion on EtG was brilliantly updated on August 19, 2006.

> Anybody here have anything to do with that?

> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethyl_glucuronide

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ---------------------------------

> > Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help.

> Small Business.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ---------------------------------

> > Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.

> Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

> >

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skippers quote: " Ethyl glucuronide, EtG, as well as other non-

oxidative metabolites of ethanol, including ethyl sulfate, EtS, and

less commonly ethyl phosphate, EtP, are gaining popularity as they can

detect ethanol use for up to 7 days post exposure (depending on the

person and dose of ethanol). "

I notice he says 7 days now. This is up from the previously stated 5

days. Does this mean that they are using a test even more sensitive?

(ie more likely than ever to cause a false positive).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skipper wrote: " Ethyl glucuronide, EtG, as well as other non-oxidative

metabolites of ethanol, including ethyl sulfate, EtS, and less

commonly ethyl phosphate, EtP, are gaining popularity as they can

detect ethanol use for up to 7 days post exposure (depending on the

person and dose of ethanol). "

He wrote 7 days, previous to this it was 5 days. Does this mean they

are using a more sensitive test?(ie. more potential to cause false

positives).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hi c,yes it is true there are many more in the works..search "direct ethanol metabolites such as ethyl glucuronide..."by wurst et all for the 2006 isbra conference...many more tests in the works including etg for hair,blood tests,etc...some detect for several mos.it is sick that they are marketing direct metabolites when the whole obscure pathway represents less than 1/100 of hepatic etoh breakdown...so yes,many more bad tests and false positives in the pipeline...regards,r christopj123 <christopj123@...> wrote: Skippers quote: "Ethyl glucuronide, EtG, as well as other non-oxidative metabolites of ethanol, including ethyl sulfate, EtS, and less commonly ethyl phosphate, EtP, are gaining popularity as they can detect ethanol use for up to 7 days post exposure (depending on the person and dose of ethanol)."I notice he says 7 days now. This is up from the previously stated 5 days. Does this mean that they are using a test even more sensitive?(ie more likely than ever to cause a false positive).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just goes to show you, that not everything

you read on the internet is accurate.

From:

Ethylglucuronide [mailto:Ethylglucuronide ] On Behalf Of christopj123

Sent: Wednesday, September 06,

2006 12:00 PM

To:

Ethylglucuronide

Subject: Re:

Wikipedia

Skippers quote: " Ethyl glucuronide, EtG, as well

as other non-

oxidative metabolites of ethanol, including ethyl sulfate, EtS, and

less commonly ethyl phosphate, EtP, are gaining popularity as they can

detect ethanol use for up to 7 days post exposure (depending on the

person and dose of ethanol). "

I notice he says 7 days now. This is up from the previously stated 5

days. Does this mean that they are using a test even more sensitive?

(ie more likely than ever to cause a false positive).

********************************************************************************************The USF Health Mail Protection System has scanned this email and found that it violates the USF Health Mail Guidelines for one of the following reasons: (1) It contains a virus, (2) It is an attempt to relay mail, or (3) It contains other hostile content. The specific reason is shown in the details listed below. Please note that if a virus was found and could not be removed, it was deleted. For further information or if you have any questions, please contact the USF Health IT Help Desk at (813) 974-6288.********************************************************************************************\HTML Active Content: Found invalid IMG Tag, Found Web-beacon, Object Removed: 1 'img'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

They are all part of the stupid world brain wash, the want us all to be slaves for the medicine companies. Bob beck work saved my life and improved the lives of all people around me. Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone from Zain KuwaitFrom: <wineandgravy@...>Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 20:45:52 -0800 (PST)< >Subject: Wikipedia Does anyone know why Wikipedia does not have Bob Beck biography or anything else remotely related to him? (it was there before but then disappeared).Does anyone know why Hulda is portrayed as a charlatan on Wikipedia. Even Weil is allegedly criticizing her on her wikipedia page.Does anyone know why most alternative health and alternative energy ( Bedini, Stan Meyer) related claims on Wikipedia are labeled 'unreliable, unapproved, unorthodox, pseudoscience, and use at your own risk' methods.It makes me think what people, behind what group, for what purpose if not control are putting in the foreground this great looking website, full of disinformation, propaganda and lies in the invisible background.Welcome to Wikidepia !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A long time ago when I was adding comments to the Bob Beck wikipedia page there was a notice that they were considering removing it because the health claims were controversial and disputable.I think it is run by "conventional thinkers" or should I say "non-thinkers".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sharing Health from the Heart posted mcuh on Bob Beck on wikipedia. However,

" someone " edited the info, deleted key information, made deceptive and untrue

remarks and there was nothing Sharing Health could do about it.

Wikipedia is nothing more than a marketing outlet, run and totally controlled by

big pharma. I do not trust wikipedia as far as I can throw it. It is like

quackbusters - funded by pharma to discredit ALL natural therapies. Yes, ALL.

This is a known fact. See Tim Bolen's reports.

Russ ;)

>

> A long time ago when I was adding comments to the Bob Beck wikipedia page

there was a notice that they were considering removing it because the health

claims were controversial and disputable.

> I think it is run by " conventional thinkers " or should I say " non-thinkers " .

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Segio:

Read interspersed:

>Does anyone know why Wikipedia does not have Bob Beck biography

or

anything else remotely related to him? (it was there before but then

disappeared)<.

When you put something on Wikipedia that is not mainstream , such as

the Joe Cell (for instance), the "mainstream" takes immediate offense.

I put quite a long description of the Joe Cell that included some very

objective observations, tests, and results there. It stayed there for

about six months and others contributed to it. It got to be quite

accurate and even better. Then it was taken down and all references

were directed to a site that discussed magic and pseudoscience.

With the mainstream, are no longer dealing with "science", we are

actually discussing the "religion of science" here.

When you go against the long established rules, you make the

high priests angry and they suppress. It is

that simple. Once this information is revealed to the public,

however, it usually becomes mainstream. This is what happened with

Tesla and AC electricity. He was a mavorick, but his genius overwhelmed

them. The last huge exception was with Cold Fusion. The press jumped

in and embraced it, but MIT and Cal Tech saw it as a competitor with

their billion dollar hot fusion grant experiments and shot it down with

bungled experiments. It has never recovered.

>Does anyone know why Hulda is portrayed as a charlatan on

Wikipedia. Even Weil is allegedly criticizing her on her

wikipedia page.<

endorsed parasites as a cause on too grand a scale, for one

thing. was on the correct trail, but was sidetracked. Too much

discussion of parasites agers the priests. They like discussing

genetics, especially. Anything that takes the responsibily away from

the individual and gives them power is quickly endorsed.

But a better example is Dr. Simoncini. He has been ostracized by his

piers and has lost his license in Italy for discovering that cancer is

a pleomorphic form of candida. His cure rate for all cancers except

bone cancer is nearly 100% unless the patient has been previously

treated with mainstream treatments. However, his treatment carries the

same burdon. His treatment is too cheap and his target is too

simple... no genetics... too low tech. He must be punished! The AMA

tried to buy Rife's treatment unsuccessfully fifty years ago that came

to similar conclusions so that they could suppress it.

>Does anyone know why most alternative health and alternative energy

( Bedini, Stan Meyer) related claims on Wikipedia are labeled

'unreliable, unapproved, unorthodox, pseudoscience, and use at your own

risk' methods.<

See above. An even better example is Tesla. Most of his work after

he developed AC power generation is now considered pseudoscience. His

invention of wireless electricty was only rediscovered this year, but

on a much smaller scale, at MIT.

Certainly, Meyer, Bedini and the other's work may resurface on a more

grand scale, but only when mainstream applications point back to

them. In the meantime, they will remain curiosities. Hydogen fuel

could have pointed back to Meyer had the present administration

continued to endorse it. But that is not the case (but a good choice

IMHO).

>It makes me think what people, behind what group, for what

purpose if

not control are putting in the foreground this great looking website,

full of disinformation, propaganda and lies in the invisible

background.<

Welcome to Wikidepia !!!

Kind Regards,

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim, can't agree more, Amen.From: jim <huuman60@...>Subject: Re:Wikipedia Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2009, 11:22 AM

Hi Segio:

Read interspersed:

>Does anyone know why Wikipedia does not have Bob Beck biography

or

anything else remotely related to him? (it was there before but then

disappeared)<.

When you put something on Wikipedia that is not mainstream , such as

the Joe Cell (for instance), the "mainstream" takes immediate offense.

I put quite a long description of the Joe Cell that included some very

objective observations, tests, and results there. It stayed there for

about six months and others contributed to it. It got to be quite

accurate and even better. Then it was taken down and all references

were directed to a site that discussed magic and pseudoscience.

With the mainstream, are no longer dealing with "science", we are

actually discussing the "religion of science" here.

When you go against the long established rules, you make the

high priests angry and they suppress. It is

that simple. Once this information is revealed to the public,

however, it usually becomes mainstream. This is what happened with

Tesla and AC electricity. He was a mavorick, but his genius overwhelmed

them. The last huge exception was with Cold Fusion. The press jumped

in and embraced it, but MIT and Cal Tech saw it as a competitor with

their billion dollar hot fusion grant experiments and shot it down with

bungled experiments. It has never recovered.

>Does anyone know why Hulda is portrayed as a charlatan on

Wikipedia. Even Weil is allegedly criticizing her on her

wikipedia page.<

endorsed parasites as a cause on too grand a scale, for one

thing. was on the correct trail, but was sidetracked. Too much

discussion of parasites agers the priests. They like discussing

genetics, especially. Anything that takes the responsibily away from

the individual and gives them power is quickly endorsed.

But a better example is Dr. Simoncini. He has been ostracized by his

piers and has lost his license in Italy for discovering that cancer is

a pleomorphic form of candida. His cure rate for all cancers except

bone cancer is nearly 100% unless the patient has been previously

treated with mainstream treatments. However, his treatment carries the

same burdon. His treatment is too cheap and his target is too

simple... no genetics... too low tech. He must be punished! The AMA

tried to buy Rife's treatment unsuccessfully fifty years ago that came

to similar conclusions so that they could suppress it.

>Does anyone know why most alternative health and alternative energy

( Bedini, Stan Meyer) related claims on Wikipedia are labeled

'unreliable, unapproved, unorthodox, pseudoscience, and use at your own

risk' methods.<

See above. An even better example is Tesla. Most of his work after

he developed AC power generation is now considered pseudoscience. His

invention of wireless electricty was only rediscovered this year, but

on a much smaller scale, at MIT.

Certainly, Meyer, Bedini and the other's work may resurface on a more

grand scale, but only when mainstream applications point back to

them. In the meantime, they will remain curiosities. Hydogen fuel

could have pointed back to Meyer had the present administration

continued to endorse it. But that is not the case (but a good choice

IMHO).

>It makes me think what people, behind what group, for what

purpose if

not control are putting in the foreground this great looking website,

full of disinformation, propaganda and lies in the invisible

background.<

Welcome to Wikidepia !!!

Kind Regards,

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

I am posting this on other groups as well but Iknow each group has its own

experts. I was looking to see what a surfer might find if looking up mcs and

found at the top of the list Barrets quakwatch...crapwatch. But also

wikipedia mas a large article on mcs.

Causes

There is no clear consensus as to what causes the symptoms of MCS. There may be

several causes.

[edit] Misdiagnosis

More than half of 54 people from one study about MCS instead had somatoform

disorder[29] or panic disorder.[30] Other possible explanations include

migraine, anxiety disorder, lupus, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome or

other forms of orthostatic intolerance, hay fever and other allergies,

hypercalcemia, hypothyroidism, chronic fatigue syndrome, or fibromyalgia.

Sufferers may also have a tendency to " catastrophically misinterpret benign

physical symptoms " [31] or simply a disturbingly acute sense of smell.[32]

[edit] Psychological

Several mechanisms for psychological etiology have been proposed including

theories based on stress, Pavlovian conditioning, or misdiagnoses of an

underlying mental illness. Behavior exhibited by MCS sufferers may reflect

broader sociological fears about industrial pollution.[33]

Here is the site:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_chemical_sensitivity

Very derogotory about mccs, Pavlov may be the mechanism???

If anyone here with expertise who knows how to enter information on wiki cares

to cocntribute for us that would be great.

Meredith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I love that-other possible diagnoses may include migraines! Duh! I get

migraines because I'm exposed to things that trigger my migraines. How is any

self-respecting doctor ok with this?

--- In , " fontanafool " <productionking04@...>

wrote:

>

> I am posting this on other groups as well but Iknow each group has its own

experts. I was looking to see what a surfer might find if looking up mcs and

found at the top of the list Barrets quakwatch...crapwatch. But also

wikipedia mas a large article on mcs.

>

> Causes

> There is no clear consensus as to what causes the symptoms of MCS. There may

be several causes.

>snip-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

What wonderful info Leigh! I totally forgot that Wiki was edit-able...they

supposedly data check, but that would do us good!!!! What a great idea, I will

look at many postings tomorrow:)

So glad you were able to view Makenna's video. Let me know if you have any

questions...

Amy

>

> Evening,

>

> So two of my favorite internet resources are google and wikipedia. We're

looking at taking off Noah's cast at home next week and I've read several ISOP

posts and seen Makenna's videos of at home how-to's. So when googling/wiki'ing,

I started reading about casts and scoliosis and didn't notice any information at

all there about EDF or ISOP.

>

> I copied some EDF info from past threads for the orthopedic cast wiki. I also

added Casting (edf) as an option on the scoliosis page (it had just theraphy,

bracing and surgery).

>

> At the bottom of both pages, I added external links to

www.infantilescoliosis.org and www.luckycastclub.com as resources.

>

> I think there are many of you out there that have more info on the subjects

and I just thought that maybe it would be good if one of the many

bloggers/writers might have time to update and/or create some wiki pages (there

is not one for infantile scoliosis). Anyone can edit any page so it's a good

way to get the info out there - especially considering the hits wikipedia gets.

>

> Just a thought.

> Leigh

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...