Re: Re: Questions For Dr. Pilcher

[Guest guest]

Englishvet,

Dr. Pilcher originally didn't make any statements. I posted the information

about Cutanix. I have nothing to do with the company. And all I did was

post a SMALL report explaining a little bit about a new product in case

anyone was interested in any further information that by no means explained

everything there was to say about the product or the experiments run on it.

This report did not make any claims that were not 100% factual in nature.

(a.k.a. the average improvement seen by cea sufferers using this new

lotion was 67%). That is a flat-out fact. The only way you can disagree

with this fact is to call Cutanix a bunch of liars, which is absolutely

ABSURD since you know nothing about the company.

Personally I don't think " vilified " is a bit strong it all, it seems to me

that you have just been sitting here looking for something, anything to be

wrong with this product. The fact of the matter is these studies were

double-blind placebo controlled studies performed by a very well-respected

dermatologist. The " non-standard scale " used to judge erythema, is the

EXACT same thing that was done by both Galderma AND Dermik when testing

Metronidazole and Noritate (feel free to look the studies up) The Only

differences I can see is Cutanix didn't have hundreds of thousands of

dollars to waste on these studies, and didn't waste their time by basing the

" success " of their product on achieving a slightly reduced papule count!

This group is here because conventional medicines DO NOT WORK! (at least not

for all of us) If they did, this group would not exist. So I for one would

appreciate it if you did not chase away people like Dr. Pilcher who are

actually trying to help us.

I understand why you wrote your first message voicing your concerns, but I

have to say its becoming a little rediculous. Personally I am rapidly

losing interest in this thread because as it turns out, the base of this new

product is formulated with at least two ingredients that I know I can not

tolerate. You are entitled to voice your opinions, but please understand

that everyone else is free to voice their opinions to. The best thing about

this forum is that it walks the line between conventional medical wisdom and

alternative treatments. Everybody gets a say. But now most people's voices

are being drowned out by a loud few.

Re: Questions For Dr. Pilcher

> - When those who

> > post new material or info regarding potential new treatments are so

> > vilified as was Dr. Pilcher, people will be discouraged from posting

> > new ideas, period.

>

> I think " vilified " is a bit strong. Dr. Pilcher made some statements

> and was asked to justify them. He did not. I suspect vilification will

> come, though, if this investigation is reviewed by a board of his peers.

>

> > The whole point of this forum is to discuss ideas; both medical and

> > non-medical. Ignoring any one or group of individual's posts does not

> > solve the problem at hand--that of **discouraging** people from

> > posting potentially valuable information.

>

> I agree wholeheartedly.....it should be open for discussion of ideas

> both medical and non-medical. The point is, this discussion WAS

> medical from the outset. Dr. Pilcher is a scientist and he presented

> his claims with a research investigation as evidence of authenticity.

> If that investigation is fundamentally flawed, I believe it is of

> everyone's benefit that it be exposed. You apparently disagree, though

> for the life of me I don't understand why.

>

>

>

>

>

> >

> >

> > > I really don't understand the problem here.

> > >

> > > The moderators of this group censor what they consider to be abusive

> > > or insulting posts (sometimes over-zealously I think, but that's

> > their

> > > privelege).

> > >

> > > ALL posts have the posters name to the side of it. If you are not

> > > interested in the views of Marjorie, myself, or anyone else for that

> > > matter, then why read them?

> > >

> > > While it could be claimed with some justification that my posts are

> > > confrontational, I don't think the same could be said for

> > Marjorie's.

> > > If you don't like the medical jargon between physicians, medical

> > > students, veterinarians and the like, absolutely nobody is forcing

> > > anyone to read them are they?

>

>

>

> --

> Please read the list highlights before posting to the whole group

(http://rosacea.ii.net/toc.html). Your post will be delayed if you don't

give a meaningful subject or trim your reply text. You must change the

subject when replying to a digest !

>

> See http://www.drnase.com for info on his recently published book.

>

> To leave the list send an email to

rosacea-support-unsubscribe

>

>