Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site mcnc.mcnc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!mcnc!bch
From: bch@mcnc.UUCP (Byron C. Howes)
Newsgroups: net.med
Subject: Re: In Support of Hazards of Amalgams (the question of references)
Message-ID: <813@mcnc.mcnc.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 15-Sep-85 12:22:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: mcnc.813
Posted: Sun Sep 15 12:22:20 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 16-Sep-85 00:27:31 EDT
References: <2172@ukma.UUCP>
Reply-To: bch@mcnc.UUCP (Byron C. Howes)
Distribution: na
Organization: North Carolina Educational Computing Service
Lines: 155
Summary: 

In article <2172@ukma.UUCP> wws@ukma.UUCP (Bill Stoll) writes:
>Byron Howes says "gimmee a break" regarding his partially enlightened
>ideas about the effects of amalgam dental fillings.
>
>I say the same right back to him:  he makes a whole lot of statements
>of "fact" for which he has listed not one reference.  How come I have
>to go back to my files and look up the  exact article that helped lead
>me to my conclusions and he doesn't?

Oooh! An attack!  Good.

Here's the story.  

On several occasions you have made reference to articles in the popular
media (Newsweek, CBS) on various aspects of health.  You have then gone
on to exposit your favorite theories and statistics as if the articles
you refer to presented them.  Often the articles or reports you look to
for support specifically *contradict* your claims.

I consider this practice both dishonest and deceptive.  You can at least
stop essentially misquoting the sources you claim to represent, as with
the toxicity level of mercury in amalgum filling.  If I find you dishonest
in this respect, how am I to believe your less substantiated claim?
Certainly not without sources.  

Remember, *you* are the one offering cures, not me.  I only report what I
see and hear that I feel you have misrepresented.  I am not a doctor nor
any kind of health practitioner.  I am simply someone leery of snake-oil
salesmen who is trying to do the best for his health as he can.  I expect
those offering panacaea's to do a better job with facts than you seem to
be capable of.

>I am continually amazed at the low opinion some readers of the net
>have of the intelligence, honesty, sincerity, morality (I was even
>accused of a LIE) & general capability, of professionals who care
>enough to share their knowledge on the net.

You have been the one accusing AMA related physicians of the same sort of
thing!  I see you like being on the receiving end of that sort of cr*p
about as much as Bill Oliver does.  Perhaps you will begin to tone down
your own accusations.

>I have attended hundreds of hours of AMA sanctioned postgraduate
>training regarding the risks of amalgams.  I work closely (three days
>a week) with one of the top dental experts (in the risks of amalgams)
>in the country.  Dr. Ballard Morgan (the dentist in question) has
>taken thousands of hours of training in the fields of amalgam toxicity
>as well as the effects the generation of electrical currents, by those
>amalgams, have on the total stress created by the amalgams.  Dr.
>Morgan has taught hundreds of hours on this subject to his colleagues
>around the world.

This tells me nothing.  I've known *lots* of perennial graduate students.
What is the *source* (and the precise levels found) of your data on
mercury toxicity in amalgum fillings.  According to the CBS report, which
you originally cited, even Dr. Morgan admits that this is only a problem
with people particularly sensitive to heavy-metal poisoning (I don't know
what that means, but it seems different from what you are saying.)

>The opinions I have shared were not discovered by me.  They are shared
>by all of the Holistic Organizations I know. We would all be the first
>to admit that we don't know everything about this problem yet.
>However, we are a LOT closer to the truth than the establishment is.
>I challenge anyone to spend 1/100th of the effort studying this
>problem that I have to come up with a different conclusion.  I'm ready
>to listen.  The more minds we have working on this the better.

Like I said originally, the ADA (or whatever professional Dentist's
association) *has* been studying this problem and long before your
lawyer friend wrote a letter.  Obviously, being self-serving sons of
b*tches, they don't count, right :->  They do disagree with you, or
at least according to the CBS report.

>My first impulse was to smile at Byron Howes comments.  However, he
>writes like a thinking person---he is just seriously underinformed.

I don't claim to be informed.  I'm just noting that while you and I
claim to have seen the same CBS report, your article said very different
things about it than I saw.  The same happened with the Newsweek report
about sugar.  You made very different claims for the article than were
actually in the text of the article.

In what *other* ways are you making misstatements of fact that I don't
know about if my poor feeble underinformed brain can spot these.

>He makes his comments based on the flimsiest amount of information
>and, like most humans, tends to judge others on his standards.  I
>would be a fool to make comments that had not been substantiated
>beyond any reasonable doubt.  What possible motive could I have for
>doing such a thing?

I haven't the faintest idea what your motives are, and I don't care.
I'm only afraid that serious damage (not to mention expense) is going
to be incurred from misinformation, from any quarter.

> Mr. Howes assumption that I am a fool reflects
>more on him than it does on me.  I have found it much safer to assume
>that the other person has the highest level of ability and integrity
>until proven otherwise.

I think Bill Oliver has noted that simply isn't true.  You impune the
ability and integrity of all AMA related doctors all the time.  I'll
let the readers of this newsgroup decide whether I am a fool or not.
That is hardly relevant.

> That attitude has placed me much closer to
>the truth, while vastly improving what I can learn from that person,
>than assuming the worst and missing out.

Right.  A direct line on the truth.

>My computer is at home.  My professional references and resources are
>at my medical centre where I have assistants to gather together
>articles and bibliographies readers of the net may desire.  I have
>offered before, and I hereby do offer again, to provide references to
>anyone who would send such a request, accompanied by a Stamped,
>Self-addressed envelope to my address below.  If you want things like
>reprints (basically anything you think might be too bulky to ship in a
>standard envelope) please send the appropriate size envelope and
>postage.  If I'm willing to provide the above, the least the requester
>can do is bear the mailing costs.

I routinely distrust individuals unwilling to make their complete arguments
publicly. I've been through this with the fundamentalists and the creationists
and I'll go through it with you.  If you believe what you have to say is
important, than back it up.  As one of the posters to net.origins is very
fond of saying "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof" not simply
your word or promises of references.

>I enjoy sharing breakthroughs in my specialty with the net.  My
>standards for choosing what to share does not allow for anything I'm
>likely to have to eat somewhere down the road.  If I EVER have to
>"eat" something I will consider it a learning experience & thank (and
>admire) the person who fed it to me.  However, unless I happen to have
>the research data accidentally close at hand, I will not be routinely
>placing it on the net with the subject being shared.  Those who want
>to know can take advantage of my generous offer above.  Those who just
>want to blow off steam will just have to wipe egg off their faces when
>the time comes.  

What time is this, Walt?  Again, are you seriously interested in people's
health and well being or merely proving yourself "superior" to mainstream
medicine.  Understand, I have no disagreement with Holistic medicine or
the concept thereof.  Some of your ideas may be accurate.  There is
possibly much to be learned there.

So long as you continue to misrepresent others, however, in an effort to
"sell" your position I find I am unable to distinguish truth from falsehood
in what you say.  I certainly am not going to take you very seriously if
I feel I have found evidence (which I do) that you are selling me a bill
of goods with little substance.
-- 

						Byron C. Howes
				      ...!{decvax,akgua}!mcnc!ecsvax!bch


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com