Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 Tandy Xenix 02/17/86; site gilbbs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!ncr-sd!hp-sdd!hplabs!qantel!ptsfa!gilbbs!mc68020
From: mc68020@gilbbs.UUCP (Tom Keller)
Newsgroups: net.sci
Subject: Re: Contempt prior to Investigation
Message-ID: <107@gilbbs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 21-Mar-86 20:17:23 EST
Article-I.D.: gilbbs.107
Posted: Fri Mar 21 20:17:23 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 31-Mar-86 05:41:33 EST
References: <635@hou2f.UUCP> <97400003@uiucdcs>
Organization: Gil's Place, Santa Rosa CA
Lines: 36

In article <97400003@uiucdcs>, mcewan@uiucdcs.UUCP writes:
> 
> The adherents of every quack medical treatment I've ever heard of claim
> (probably correctly) that a majority of people treated *thought* the
> treatment was beneficial.
> 
> 			Scott McEwan
> 			{ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!mcewan

   SO, Mr. McEwen, have a majority of the people treated by every "legitimate"
medical treatment.  So what?

   You obviously have a strong negative view of psychology and psychiatric
therapy.  You are welcome to them, and welcome to express them.  Unless you
are able to produce significant evidence to support your claims, however,
you have no right to label such therapy as "quack medical treatment".

   It is wonderful for you that you are so together and self-assured that you
don't need help.  Where do you get the audacity to presume that everyone else
ought to be the same, and that those who can't do so without outside assistance
are somehow failures?  This is what your derogation of the entire field of
psycho-theray implies.

  Sure, there are quacks.  Lots of them...some of the are MDs, some are DCs,
some are DDSs, etc., etc....

-- 

====================================

Disclaimer:  I hereby disclaim any and all responsibility for disclaimers.

tom keller
{ihnp4, dual}!ptsfa!gilbbs!mc68020

(* we may not be big, but we're small! *)