When Is Bill Combs Going To Answer My Questions???
Jan
Please do so.
You wrote:
>Evidently these other eleven charges did not mention mercury. They
>> >must have been about other matters of malpractice or violations of
>> >laws that did not relate to mercury.
I replied:
Uh huh, like I said, the same ole same ole. Was he also charged with using the
wrong color of toliet paper??
It is your choice of the word malpractice, is it not?
Plus the words, violations of the law??
>One charge is sufficient to remove a license to practice dentistry.
>> >Eleven charges, unrelated to mercury, would tend to show an
>> >overwhelming pattern of substandard practice.
What overwheming pattern of substandard practice?
Substandard and overwhelming are your cloice of words, are they not?
Which is overwhelming and which is substandard??
>If indeed this author is correct, and eleven patients were treated
>> >below standards with no relation to the mercury question, then this
>> >dentist should not be allowed to practice on the public -- regardless
>> >of any position he happened to take on dental amalgams.
> *Below Standards* Standards set by whom?????
>In most states, the standards are set by the state legislature.
And they get their standards from whom?
>>His pattern of malpractice in non-mercury cases
>> Say what?!?!
>>
> Using no mercury is malpractice??????
>I never said that.
>
>The reference I made was to the eleven NON-mercury cases in which he
>was charged with malpractice/substandard practice by the board.
Well, no, those are your words.
>Since
>these cases did not involve mercury, I refer to them as the
>non-mercury cases.
> Oh??? Like what?
>Like the three cases you list below.
>
He didn't wash his hands.
>> Not seeing decay.
>>
> Yelled at a patient.
That's malpracitice/substandard???
>Who made these charges???
>
>Didn't you know that when you posted the reference?
Yes, I knew, I am asking you if you knew? I should have posted, complaints.
>Generally, charges
>are made by a branch of the state government. In most states this is
>the government's dental board.
Uh huh, *organized dentistry*
> The 14 patients who files were used were friends of Dr Jacobson an made it
>> clear to the board, in writing, they wanted nothing to do with this so
called
>> *investion* which started immediately after he placed an ad which used the
>> words *mercury free*.
Concoeted charges, such as:
> He didn't wash his hands.
>>
>> Not seeing decay.
>>
>> Yelled at a patient.
>Surely you don't mean to imply that these charges should be taken
>lightly.
LOL!!!
My word this is certainly *fraud* and *incompetent* conduct.
> (I don't know what an *investion* is.)
Righto, ask someone to help you figure it out.
>With regard to the charge of "Yelled at a patient," this seems
>unlikely to result in a loss of license.
Yes.
Along with , not washed his hands, and not seeing decay.
Those don't sound one bit made up/concocted. do they?
>But if his patients all
>rallied to his defense, then HOW did the state learn that he had
>yelled at a patient?
It was made up!
Did any of his patients say that??
>Perhaps at least one of his patients reported this to the board. I doubt that
the state had any other way of
>learning that he "Yelled at a patient" unless that patient complained to the
board.
Give me a break. A patient is going to a board because a dentist yelled at
them.
You need to go back and read what the evidence showed about who made the
complaints.
Then read how his patients knew this was a chop job and wantedd nothing to do
with it.
>With regard to the charge of "Not seeing decay," this is more serious.
>Many patients go to a dentist specifically to find out if they have
>any tooth decay. If decay is present and the dentist misses it,
>serious complications can potentially occur to the patient. If a
>dentist continually misses an obvious diagnosis, state action is warranted.
In fact he did see it, he noted it in the file and made several attempts to get
the patient to come back and get it fixed, the patient refused.
>By far, the most serious charge is that of "He didn't wash his hands."
>In this age of deadly communicable diseases, the prevention of
>infection must be foremost in the minds of all members of the health
>care professions. It has been known since the 1880s that the simple
>act of washing one's hands has a dramatic effect in lowering the rate
>of disease transmission in the healthcare setting.
Who saw him not wash his hand??? Do your patients follow you in the bathroom??
I suggest to you, if everyone who didn't wash their hands, lost their licenses,
we would have very few licensced people in any field.
Doctors can cut off the wrong leg and still keep their license.
<snip>
Cutting to the chase, the fact he used the words mercuy free is EXACTLY why he
was harassed and the investigaters worked mighty hard to come up with this
trumpted up charges. It took them over twelve years.
The board membesr made it clear tey were upset with his refusal of the use of
mercury.
>Are there any cases on record that would better illustrate unfair
>> >prosecution?
>>
>> WOW!!!!!
>The ENTIRE case was nothing, but a farce from those who are EVIL.
>Even if we dismiss the amalgam-related charges as "nothing," what
>about the other eleven charges?
I didn't see eleven, did you?
>It is unreasonable to say "The ENTIRE case was nothing" without
>examining the charges that did not even involve amalgam.
No, it is totally unreasonable that the broad took twelve years to get these
charges made up!!!
>Was it true
>that he didn't diagnose dental caries? Was it true that he didn't even
>wash his hands?
B I N G O!!!!
Was it true sixty of his patients jammed the hearing room??
WHAT does that tell you?
Did you read all the steps taken to get these charges made. UNFAIR and
DISHONEST tactics.??
*Although the Humphrey's office and the board sought to peddle the notion that
its investigation of Gary was not centered on his refusal to use amalgam, the
Star Trubune was not fooled. The MN. broard of dentistry had accused the
dentist of fraud and and misconduct for allegedly pushing an expensive that
have never been proven to work, removing peoples' fillings call amalgams to
free them of mercury poisoning*
I all comes back to the gag order.
> YOU learn the LIES well from dental school.
>Is this meant as an ad hominem attack?
No, it is the TRUTH.
>What "lies" are in my posting??
>I can't find any.
WOW!!!!
Dentists have LIED for so long, they know longer know what is a LIE..
Your choice of words and DECEIVING are LIES.
There was NO fraud!!!
There was NO imcompetence!!!!!
There was NO Malpractice!!
There was NO substandards.
> PATHETIC!!
>> Jan
>No need to get insulting. I did not insult you.
There is a great need to get real and stop trying to deceive.
>My point remains -- are there any other cases that would better
>illustrate the author's claim of unfair prosecution? This particular
>case involved many charges, and only half of them seemed to involve
>amalgam. Instead of defending a doctor who apparently was also charged
>with failure to diagnose decay, and failure to practice infection
>control for his patients, wouldn't it be more effective for an author
>to put forward a case that involved ONLY amalgam-related issues?
>
>- dentaldoc
Your point is a LIE.
Jan
Joel M. Eichen
>Now for the points and questions you didn't address.
>
>Please do so.
>
>You wrote:
>
>>Evidently these other eleven charges did not mention mercury. They
>>> >must have been about other matters of malpractice or violations of
>>> >laws that did not relate to mercury.
>
>I replied:
>
>Uh huh, like I said, the same ole same ole. Was he also charged with using the
>wrong color of toliet paper??
>
>It is your choice of the word malpractice, is it not?
>
>Plus the words, violations of the law??
Bill Combs is always a gentleman ........
carabelli
"Jan" <jdrew...@aol.com> wrote ...............
Poor Jan, standing in line at the Chinese Buffet of life -
- with one chopstick
carabelli
Dr Steve
someone else's writing, when she cannot engage in a two-way discussion even
when the topic is not in conflict with her basic tenets?
Joel M. Eichen
wrote:
with which she stabs everyone in the back .......
>
Dr Steve
-- >>"Jan" <jdrew...@aol.com> wrote ...............
>>
>>Poor Jan, standing in line at the Chinese Buffet of life -
>>
>>- with one chopstick
>>
>>carabelli
>
> with which she stabs everyone in the back .......
AT least she could have the decency to sharpen it once in a while, not to
mention washing it between stabs.
Jan
>From: "Dr Steve" nos...@home.net
>Date: 11/9/2004 1:49 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <AXakd.17926$Rf1....@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com>
>
>Why would anyone respond
====
Now for the points and questions you didn't address.
Please do so.
You wrote:
>Evidently these other eleven charges did not mention mercury. They
>> >must have been about other matters of malpractice or violations of
>> >laws that did not relate to mercury.
I replied:
Uh huh, like I said, the same ole same ole. Was he also charged with using the
wrong color of toliet paper??
It is your choice of the word malpractice, is it not?
Plus the words, violations of the law??
Dr Steve
"Jan" <jdrew...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041109173907...@mb-m17.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: When Is Bill Combs Going To Answer My Questions???
>>From: "Dr Steve" nos...@home.net
>>Date: 11/9/2004 1:49 PM Pacific Standard Time
>>Message-id: <AXakd.17926$Rf1....@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com>
>>
>>Why would anyone respond
> ====
>
> Now for the points and questions you didn't address.
>
> Please do so.
>
> You wrote:
>
>>Evidently these other eleven charges did not mention mercury. They
>>> >must have been about other matters of malpractice or violations of
>>> >laws that did not relate to mercury.
That is lie. I never said those things. You have to learn to cut and paste
better.
Jan
> When Is Bill Combs Going To Answer My Questions???
You name isn't Bill Combs, kindly butt out.
Now for the points and questions you didn't address.
Please do so.
You wrote:
>Evidently these other eleven charges did not mention mercury. They
>> >must have been about other matters of malpractice or violations of
>> >laws that did not relate to mercury.
I replied:
carabelli
> >From: "Dr Steve"
>
>> When Is Bill Combs Going To Answer My Questions???
>
> You name isn't Bill Combs, kindly butt out.
>
Usenet is a public forum. Anyone can comment in a thread. Deal with it or
you can butt out Church Lady.
carabelli
Rich.
>>From: "Dr Steve"
>
>> When Is Bill Combs Going To Answer My Questions???
>
>You name isn't Bill Combs, kindly butt out.
Poor Jan. She really has control problems. This is a public newsgroup.
If she does not want others to reply then she should use private
email.
Aloha,
Rich
W_B
Take a class in cut&paste from j**D666 ?
Perish the thought.
--
W_B
wubbab...@RBAGEyahoo.com
Take out the G'RBAGE
Dr Steve
Jan knows BIll only sees her posts if included in someone else's response to
her.
No one is going to answer her long emesis of silly questions knowing full
well she is not going to discuss any of the points in return.
Jan
Jan
Please do so.
You wrote:
>Evidently these other eleven charges did not mention mercury. They
>> >must have been about other matters of malpractice or violations of
>> >laws that did not relate to mercury.
I replied:
carabelli
>> >From: "Dr Steve"
>
>>From: "carabelli"
>
>> You name isn't Bill Combs, kindly butt out.
>
Most Boston Butts are in the range of 8 pounds with the bone in. The
process is barbecuing a butt is pretty simple. Rub it, cook it, pull it.
*carabelli aside (don't even consider doing this without wood on the fire,
apple, hickory, pecan, cherry, oak in a pinch - just nothing with resins
(PINE!!!)), if you don't see a butt at the store ask the butcher - they'll
cut one for you. If you don't have a smoker it can be done on a Weber -
they make a deal that holds the charcoal on two sides to allow you to cook
the butt indirect (not directly over the coals). A pain - you will be
adding charcoal and wood way too often - get a cheap bullet smoker*
First, start you barbecue and get it up to temperature, 220 to 275F.
*carabelli aside - If you let the temp go over 275F I will turn you in* -
really don't worry too much - just low and slow.
Open the package and give the butts a rub with cheap yellow mustard. This
adds some flavor and helps the 'butt rub' to stay on the outside of the
meat. As for rubs, most any barbecue rub will do. However, I like to use a
rub with little of no sugar in it as the butt turns out a deep red color
instead of black, as it will if you use a rub with a lot of sugar in it.
*carabelli aside - NO SUGAR*
Whatever butt rub you use, give the outside of the meat a generous rub with
the spice blend.
Bill's Butt Rub
8 tablespoons paprika
4 teaspoons salt
4 teaspoons onion powder
4 teaspoons garlic powder
2 teaspoons cumin
4 teaspoons black pepper
1 teaspoon cayenne pepper
*carabelli aside - looks good to me - add anything else you think would be
good - spices are legal*
Mix ingredients and store in an air-tight bottle.
There are many commercial rubs available that are very good on pork butts.
OK, so you've got your butt rubbed, put the meat on the cooking grill and
covered the barbecue. Every 2 hours, turn the butts over and rotate so no
side gets too much heat. I no longer mop or baste my pork butts as the fat
on and within the meat self bastes them. If you want to mop, by all means
go ahead. You can use a mixture of 50:50 canola oil, apple juice and a
tablespoons of your butt rub. Mop the butts when you turn them.
*carabelli aside - if you really want to check it - open a beer, pour 1/4
over the butt - drink the rest - maybe turn it once if you remember -don't
be peeking at it all the time - the lid needs to be on!!*
After 8 hours of cooking, I will usually stick the Polder temperature probe
into the meat. It's done when the internal temperature in above 190F. This
temperature will arrive faster the higher the temperature you keep the
cooking chamber. I usually no longer bother checking the temperature as I
have barbecued so many butts, I can now tell by a fork jab if the meat is
ready to come off the smoker.
*carabelli aside - 10-12 hours, forget the thermometer, poke it with your
finger and if it feels like it will fall apart you're home*
Let the butts rest for about an hour and then with gloves on your hands
begin to tear it apart, discarding the bone, the fat, connective tissue and
gristle as you go along.
Barbecued pork butt can be eaten sliced, pulled or pulled and chopped. I
like it all three ways and especially in Pulled Pork Sandwiches.
I like to use 'gourmet' style hamburger buns to serve the pulled pork on,
resulting in a pulled pork sandwich. Open the bun, squirt on some sauce,
heap on some pulled pork and add some more sauce and put the top in the bun.
the pulled pork sandwich should be dripping sauce as you eat it.
I like to serve pulled pork with a Kansas City style sauce.
*carabelli aside - I like this guy*
When I use this sauce for pulled pork sandwiches, I often will add a
tablespoon of apple cider vinegar to a cup of this sauce to give it a little
more 'tang' and a pinch of cayenne chile powder to give it a little more
'bite'.
In the Carolinas, the pulled pork sandwiches are served with a scoop of
coleslaw on the sandwich or on the side. A real Carolina pulled pork
sandwich will also use a very different sauce, consisting of vinegar and hot
peppers. this sauce is something you need to grow up with and is not very
popular with Californians.
*carabelli aside - they're not stupid in North Carolina - try it this way
too - really good!!)
Dan
The Webby
TW
In article
<S%fkd.874118$Gx4.7...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
Joel M. Eichen
<hue...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>"Jan" <jdrew...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20041109205222...@mb-m17.aol.com...
>>> >From: "Dr Steve"
>>
>>>From: "carabelli"
>>
>>> You name isn't Bill Combs, kindly butt out.
>>
>Smoking a Boston Butt (stolen off the net with comments)
>Most Boston Butts are in the range of 8 pounds with the bone in. The
>process is barbecuing a butt is pretty simple. Rub it, cook it, pull it.
Not the Boston butts I have seen .......
(on the MTA).
How you weigh it, I have no idea.
Dr Steve
"Jan" <jdrew...@aol.com> wrote in message
Dr Steve
Immature rambling snipped
Dr Steve
--
~+--~+--~+--~+--~+--
Stephen Mancuso, D.D.S.
Troy, Michigan, USA
....................................................
This posting is intended for informational or conversational purposes only.
Always seek the opinion of a licensed dental professional before acting on
the advice or opinion expressed here. Only a dentist who has examined you
in person can diagnose your problems and make decisions which will affect
your health.
......................
"carabelli" <hue...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:S%fkd.874118$Gx4.7...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Joel M. Eichen
Yeah, who said, "you name?"
Its bad English ......
>
Steven Fawks
from PPP.
;-)
Fawks
The Webby
the first prize for Boston Butt!
TW
In article
<nospamattmjiatroepidemicno...@orngca-news03.soca
l.rr.com>,
Jan
>Message-id: <ENokd.18188$Rf1....@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com>
>
>
>
>Immature rambling snipped
Translation:
Jan is once again asking pointed questions.
We cowards just hate that.
Jan
>Date: 11/10/2004 7:13 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <Neqkd.10372$O11....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
>
>Kiss off...you...you...you very peculiar misinformed person suffering
>from PPP.
>;-)
>Fawks
Temper Temper tsk tsk
Jan
Hey there Bill!
Ready to answer my questions?
It appears you are refusing to answer and discuss.
Dr. Steve
>>Immature rambling snipped
..
Stephen Mancuso, D.D.S.
Troy, Michigan, USA
Writing on a tablet PC,so forgive me if the PC misreads my poor handwriting.
Jan
>Date: 11/10/2004 6:04 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <jah5p0d8msmu0lopl...@4ax.com>
Dr Steve
-- >
Jan
>Date: 11/11/2004 9:55 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <rINkd.18391$sw.1...@newssvr15.news.prodigy.com>
>
>Immature rambling snipped
Yeah is it real immature that dentists say things (adding selective words) they
can't back up, they refuse to discuss or answer pointed questions.
A truth’s initial commotion is directly proportional to how deeply the lie
was believed…When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the
masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its
speaker, a raving lunatic. -Dresden James
Jan
Dr. Steve
>>Immature rambling snipped
>
>Yeah is it real immature that Jan says things (adding selective words) she
>can't back up, she refuses to discuss or answer any questions.
>
>Jan
Anytime you wish to discuss any topic in a civil anner, you simply
have to promise to articipate in an adult discussion & clarify the
famous question.
Jan
>Date: 11/12/2004 12:58 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <ln8ap01r3emjnn7cs...@4ax.com>
>
>
>>>Immature rambling snipped
>>
>>Yeah is it real immature that Jan says things (adding selective words) she
>>can't back up, she refuses to discuss or answer any questions.
>
>>
>>Jan
>Subject: Re: When Is Bill Combs Going To Answer My Questions???
>From: Dr. Steve drs...@no-spam.com
>Date: 11/12/2004 12:58 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <ln8ap01r3emjnn7cs...@4ax.com>
>
>
>>>Immature rambling snipped
>>
>>Yeah is it real immature that Jan says things (adding selective words) she
>>can't back up, she refuses to discuss or answer any questions.
>
>>
>>Jan
>Anytime you wish to discuss any topic in a civil anner,
Is your name Bill Combs????
============
Dr. Steve
Anytime you wish to discuss any topic in a civil manner, you simply
have to promise to participate in an adult discussion & clarify the
W_B
wrote:
>
>Anytime you wish to discuss any topic in a civil manner, you simply
>have to promise to participate in an adult discussion & clarify the
>famous question.
>
>..
>Stephen Mancuso, D.D.S.
Are you holding your breath ?
Turned blue yet ?
Care to make a wager ?
Jan
>Anytime you wish to discuss any topic in a civil anner
Can't answer pointed questons, still.
>you simply have to promise
No, I don't have to promise anything. Either you are man of your word or you
are not and you have displayed a huge NOT.
Jan
Dr. Steve
>>
>>Anytime you wish to discuss any topic in a civil anner
>
>Can't answer pointed questons, still.
why can't you?
>>you simply have to promise
>
>No, I don't have to promise anything. Either you are man of your word or you
>are not and you have displayed a huge NOT.
I am a man of my word. Too bad you are not and cannot hold a simple
discussion. When you are ready just say so.