Re: FDA adds diabetes, memory loss to statin label

[mainframetech]

On Feb 28, 3:31 pm, Susan <su...@nothanks.org> wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> "The value of statins in preventing heart disease has been clearly
> established,"
>
> That's what they said for 25 years about Premarin, CVD, stroke and
> dementia protection.
>
> Then non industry research proved the opposite was true.
>
> No way a drug that causes diabetes, dementia and muscle myopathy has a
> favorable health/QOL risk/benefit ratio.
>
> Susan

Susan,
Yes, I believe you've gotten on to a problem for many people.
Here's an article (references at the bottom) along the lines you
mention.

Chris

[trigonometry1972@gmail.com |]

Link? Reference? All I see is Chris ;-)

[Ozlover]

Susan <su...@nothanks.org> wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> "The value of statins in preventing heart disease has been clearly
> established,"
>
> That's what they said for 25 years about Premarin, CVD, stroke and
> dementia protection.
>
> Then non industry research proved the opposite was true.
>
> No way a drug that causes diabetes, dementia and muscle myopathy has a
> favorable health/QOL risk/benefit ratio.

Considering your 'reasoning', *not* taking it, apparently doesn't do
much good either!

--
Frank Slootweg

[Ozlover]

Well, a link/reference has to point at *something*. It can't point at
nothing. Hence the link/reference had to be absent. Elementary, dear
Watson.

--
Frank Slootweg

[Colt T]

A week ago my true LDL was likely 55 on only 500 mg of otc niacin, do
many on a statin have lower LDL than that? If I didn't drink french
press coffee every day my LDL would proably be 10-20 pts lower still. A
yr ago on 1000 mg of otc niacin my true LDL was more like 45.

[mainframetech]

On Feb 29, 3:27 pm, Ozlover <t...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:

> trigonometry1...@gmail.com | <trigonometry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 28, 4:02 pm, mainframetech <mainframet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On Feb 28, 3:31 pm, Susan <su...@nothanks.org> wrote:
>
> > > > x-no-archive: yes
>
> > > > "The value of statins in preventing heart disease has been clearly
> > > > established,"
>
> > > > That's what they said for 25 years about Premarin, CVD, stroke and
> > > > dementia protection.
>
> > > > Then non industry research proved the opposite was true.
>
> > > > No way a drug that causes diabetes, dementia and muscle myopathy has a
> > > > favorable health/QOL risk/benefit ratio.
>
> > > > Susan
>
> > > Susan,
> > >   Yes, I believe you've gotten on to a problem for many people.
> > > Here's an article (references at the bottom) along the lines you
> > > mention.
>
> > > Chris
>
> > Link? Reference? All I see is Chris ;-)
>

Sorry if I left it out. Here it is:
http://healthyfixx.com/15/the-truth-about-statin-drugs-may-cause-heart-attacks

References at the bottom.

Chris

[Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD]

Susan wrote:
>
> http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/28/us-fda-statins-idUSTRE81R1O220120228

Literally smarter to avoid statins by losing the visceral adipose
tissue (VAT) that is the proximate cause of the dyslipidemia which
would be the indication for these medications.

The absolutely only healthy way to lose the VAT is to http://WDJW.net/Guard
(Proverbs 4:23) the heart by holding to the right amount, which is 32
oz of daily food, thereby stopping the overeating without harmful
undernourishment.

Yes, right amount ( http://WDJW.net/2PD-OMER Approach ) control as
Chris Malcolm, MU, **and** Rod Eastman are doing is much more
sophisticated and smarter:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.diet.low-carb/msg/8d2ef74488074acf?

and

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/522ce5c058224656?

**and**

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/da03131060efa3b5?

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/055f2e7cf3c590ee?

Be hungrier, which really is wonderfully healthier especially for
diabetics and other heart disease patients:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/9642aafa0aad16eb?

... because we mindfully choose to openly care with our heart,

Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
EmoryIMVC.org Cardiologist
and Author of the 2PD-OMER Approach:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/9ad0c19df5ffc2f7?

[Colt T]

I cut the niacin from 750 mg to 500 mg because I wanted my LDL to go up
but it went down instead.

[Colt T]

I use whole milk and butter, fbg 78 this am.

[Dr. Brian Gene Kelley, PhD]

On Mar 1, 3:10 am, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lov...@thetruth.com>
wrote:
> Susan wrote:
>
> >http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/28/us-fda-statins-idUSTRE81R1O...

>
> Literally smarter to avoid statins by losing the visceral adipose
> tissue (VAT) that is the proximate cause of the dyslipidemia which
> would be the indication for these medications.
>
> The absolutely only healthy way to lose the VAT

Bizzzt wrong.

Study: Overweight People Live Longer
http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20090625/study-overweight-people-live-longer

A Little Extra Weight Protects People From Early Death
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090623133523.htm

BBC NEWS | Health | Overweight people live longer
http://www.health-forums.com/alt-support-diabetes/bbc-news-health-overweight-people-live-longer-173039.html

'Overweight' people live longer than those of 'ideal' weight
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/24/overweight_live_longer/

Portland researchers find slightly overweight people live longer
http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2009/06/portland_researchers_find_slig.html

Japanese study shows overweight people live longest
http://www.physorg.com/news164519566.html

Chubby people live longest
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.c7aaeb7940626693fa418a1eab2291f6.81

Study shows overweight people live longer
http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/diet-and-fitness/study-tips-scales-the-other-way-overweight-people-live-longer-20090618-cm13.html

Fat people live longer! - Indian Express
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/fat-people-live-longer/478786/

Indeed, it is smarter to hold to the right amount, which is
approximately 2 kilograms (4.4 lbs/70 oz) of daily food, thereby
stopping the hunger without harmfully overeating.

Yes, right amount and right type: 2KG-HEALTHY Method; approximately
2kg of lean meats, whole grains, vegetables and fruits, avoiding
animal fat, sugar and processed foods, as
Fred Farcus, MOO, **and** Dodi Westman are doing is both sophisticated
and smarter, especially because no weighing is needed :-))) Remember,
regarding the type of food you eat... if man made it, stay away from
it.

http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/ef05ac78d97a3894?hl=en

Better to:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.c7aaeb7940626693fa418a1eab2291f6.81

Be fuller, which really is wonderfully healthier:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/thediethound/blog/2009/06/28/fat-people-are-much-healthier-than-thin-people

Because we mindfully choose to openly care with our heart, that all
have a full stomach, full of **nutritious foods**.

Anyone can insincerely say "Jesus is Lord"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeN7oF78Xkg

--

Brian Gene Kelley, PhD

"Starvation and Hunger, Humankind's Constant Companions"
http://gherkinstomatoes.com/2009/11/10/14837/

"Stop Hunger Now"
http://www.stophungernow.org/site/PageServer

[mainframetech]

> Sorry if I left it out.  Here it is:http://healthyfixx.com/15/the-truth-about-statin-drugs-may-cause-hear...

>
>    References at the bottom.
>
> Chris

The FDA adding memory loss to labels in Early 2012 is late for some
who have experienced the problem of loss. As far back as 2004 and
maybe earlier a doctor had these bad experiences twice from Lipitor
and wrote a book about it. The book is called "Lipitor: Thief of
memory" by Duane Graveline, MD. When you read the details, his
experience was certainly indicative of a problem with one statin, and
maybe others, since many of them work pretty much the same. So far,
they found that the stronger the dose of statin, the more chance of
the side effects. And there many side effects.

Dr. Graveline discusses his book and the memory problem here:
http://www.spacedoc.com/lipitor_thief_of_memory.html

Chris

[Ozlover]

You have wiped my post off the board!

That kind of clamping down on the freedom of information is a crime to
me of great proportions.

--
Frank Slootweg

[mainframetech]

On Mar 1, 5:12 pm, Ozlover <t...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Sorry if I left it out.  Here it is:

> >http://healthyfixx.com/15/the-truth-about-statin-drugs-may-cause-hear...

>
>   That kind of clamping down on the freedom of information is a crime to
> me of great proportions.

I know how you must feel, but I was told in no uncertain terms that
it was OK for anyone to wipe parts of posts that they weren't
interested in or weren't going to reply to, and save the stuff that
was going to be dealt with in this group. Not much of yours was
desirable and I didn't have that much to reply to except to ask if you
need an explanation of the general rules the folks in this group use
when dealing with posts. It has been told to me over and over. Let me
know if you want the instructional session, I'll be around, unless you
put me on killfile.

Chris

[Jan Drew]

It has been well known for a number of years that Statins are
dangerous.


http://www.adrugrecall.com/crestor/danger.html

http://www.healthcentral.com/cholesterol/h/dangers-of-crestor.html

http://www.wellnessresources.com/freedom/articles/researchers_document_the_dangers_of_statins/

Researchers Document the Dangers of Statins
Wednesday, February 04, 2009 - Byron J. Richards, CCN

A new scientific review of the dangers of statin medications is the
first official paper to shed light on what I have been saying for
years. It reviews 900 studies on the adverse effects of statins. It
shows beyond any doubt that statins are potent disrupters of normal
energy production by cells – meaning that the drugs are anti-life. It
is technically not possible to have a drug that is anti-energy have
any value in long term use. Yet, the statin machine rolls on, killing
and injuring countless Americans.

The study is the first to connect the mitochondrial statin dots, a
revelation that proves beyond any doubt that statins are too dangerous
to consume for almost anyone. Serious side effects include loss of
muscle function, cognitive loss, neuropathy, pancreatic and hepatic
dysfunction, and sexual dysfunction. These side effects are worse in
people with genetic susceptibility, in combination with other drugs,
or in the presence of other energy related problems such as thyroid
disease.

Side effects are worse with age and the new data clearly demonstrates
that the risks for any person over the age of 70 far outweigh the
benefits – even for patients with heart disease. This study lends
futher support to my observation that 450,000 new cases of heart
failure per year are likely due to widespread statin use in older
Americans.

Of course, you haven’t seen this information on the front page of any
Big Pharma sponsored media.

Related Entries: Top Cholesterol and Statin News of the Past Year
Statins Damage Liver, Kidneys, Eyes, & Muscles
Statins Increase the Risk for Pneumonia
Statins Interfere with Normal Brain Function

http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Extreme-Dangers-of-Statins&id=1678397

http://public-healthcare-issues.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_dangers_of_statin_drug_use

http://ezinearticles.com/?Reasons-to-Avoid-Statins-For-Cholesterol-Control&id=4310315

http://www.berkeleywellnessalerts.com/register_ppc_healthyheart/statins_landing.html?st=ppc&s=GLP_008010_Statins_-_Side_Effects&c1=GAW_CM_NW&source=HEART_statin&kw=Statins_-_Side_Effects&cr5=4711114045&gclid=CLPygdK726QCFQtL5wodX2xZlA


On Mar 1, 8:23 am, "Dr. Brian Gene Kelley, PhD"

<metalicstu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 3:10 am, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lov...@thetruth.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Susan wrote:
>
> > >http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/28/us-fda-statins-idUSTRE81R1O...
>
> > Literally smarter to avoid statins by losing the visceral adipose
> > tissue (VAT) that is the proximate cause of the dyslipidemia which
> > would be the indication for these medications.
>
> > The absolutely only healthy way to lose the VAT
>
> Bizzzt wrong.
>

> Study: Overweight People Live Longerhttp://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20090625/study-overweight-people-live-...
>
> A Little Extra Weight Protects People From Early Deathhttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090623133523.htm
>
> BBC NEWS | Health | Overweight people live longerhttp://www.health-forums.com/alt-support-diabetes/bbc-news-health-ove...
>
> 'Overweight' people live longer than those of 'ideal' weighthttp://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/24/overweight_live_longer/
>
> Portland researchers find slightly overweight people live longerhttp://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2009/06/portland_researche...

>
> Japanese study shows overweight people live longesthttp://www.physorg.com/news164519566.html
>

> Chubby people live longesthttp://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.c7aaeb7940626693fa418a1ea...
>
> Study shows overweight people live longerhttp://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/diet-and-fitness/study-tips-scales-th...
>
> Fat people live longer! - Indian Expresshttp://www.indianexpress.com/news/fat-people-live-longer/478786/

>
> Indeed, it is smarter to hold to the right amount, which is
> approximately 2 kilograms (4.4 lbs/70 oz) of daily food, thereby
> stopping the hunger without harmfully overeating.
>
> Yes, right amount and right type: 2KG-HEALTHY Method; approximately
> 2kg of lean meats, whole grains, vegetables and fruits, avoiding
> animal fat, sugar and processed foods, as
> Fred Farcus, MOO, **and** Dodi Westman are doing is both sophisticated
> and smarter, especially because no weighing is needed :-))) Remember,
> regarding the type of food you eat... if man made it, stay away from
> it.
>

> http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/ef05ac78d9...
>
> Better to:
>
> http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.c7aaeb7940626693fa418a1ea...

>
> Be fuller, which really is wonderfully healthier:
>

> http://www.blogtalkradio.com/thediethound/blog/2009/06/28/fat-people-...

[Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD]

Jan Drew wrote:

> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > > Susan wrote:
> >
> > > >http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/28/us-fda-statins-idUSTRE81R1O...
> >
> > > Literally smarter to avoid statins by losing the visceral adipose
> > > tissue (VAT) that is the proximate cause of the dyslipidemia which
> > > would be the indication for these medications.
> >

> > > The absolutely only healthy way to lose the VAT is to
> > > http://WDJW.net/Guard (Proverbs 4:23) the heart by holding

> > > to the right amount, which is 32 oz of daily food, thereby
> > > stopping the overeating without harmful undernourishment.

[Dr. Brian Gene Kelley, PhD]

On Mar 2, 7:44 pm, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lov...@thetruth.com>
wrote:

>

> Be hungrier, which really is wonderfully healthier

Bizzzt wrong.

Fred Farcus wrote:
> A crackpot quack wrote:
>
> > wonderfully hungry :-)

Suggested reading:
NIMH (National Institute of Mental Health) Eating Disorders:
http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/eating-disorders/complete-index.shtml

"An eating disorder is an illness that causes serious disturbances to
your everyday diet, such as eating extremely small amounts of food or
severely overeating."

> Therefore, eating the right amount, which is 32 oz of daily food

Incorrect; as evidenced by the fact that the crackpot continually
states being in a constant state of perpetual hunger,
meaning the crackpot obviously is not eating enough.

Indeed, it is smarter to hold to the right amount, which is

approximately 2 kilograms (4.4 lbs/70 oz) of daily food, thereby
stopping the undereating without harmfully overeating.

Yes, right amount and right type: 2KG-HEALTHY Method; approximately
2kg of lean meats, whole grains, vegetables and fruits, avoiding
animal fat, sugar and processed foods, as
Fred Farcus, MOO, **and** Dodi Westman are doing is both sophisticated
and smarter, especially because no weighing is needed :-))) Remember,
regarding the type of food you eat... if man made it, stay away from
it.

http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/ef05ac78d97a3894?hl=en

Dodi Westman wrote:
> > https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.199971148065.167331.196255898065&type=3
>
> Yuck! Hundreds of pictures of hundreds of plates stacked with
> unhealthy junk food.

Gross! Looks like almost all processed foods full of fat, sugar and
starch. Very little nutritional value seen there. Just mainly empty
calories.

http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/329f4a62a3cf5a57?hl=en

Better to:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.c7aaeb7940626693fa418a1eab2291f6.81

Be fuller, which really is wonderfully healthier:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/thediethound/blog/2009/06/28/fat-people-are-much-healthier-than-thin-people

Because we mindfully choose to openly care with our heart, that all
have a full stomach, full of **nutritious foods**.

Anyone can insincerely say "Jesus is Lord"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeN7oF78Xkg

--

Brian Gene Kelley, PhD

"Myth: You Can't Be Overweight and Healthy"
http://www.obesitymyths.com/myth4.1.htm

"Study: Overweight People Live Longer"
http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20090625/study-overweight-people-live-longer

"Starvation and Hunger, Humankind's Constant Companions"
http://gherkinstomatoes.com/2009/11/10/14837/

"Stop Hunger Now"
http://www.stophungernow.org/site/PageServer

Paul is not talking about just saying the words "Jesus is Lord".
Anyone can say that. Even demons can say it through people whom they
have possessed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL7AhTdZHas

**again**

Anyone can say insincerely say "Jesus is Lord".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpH28urOlqE

***and***

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfcEWZceWhI

[Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD]

duke wrote:

> someone whose name has been blotted(Rev3:5) from His Book(Rev20:15) wrote:
>
> > Paul is not talking about just saying the words "Jesus is Lord".
> > Anyone can say that.

Lie.

The following religious Christian children can't though they wanted to
in order to get extra pieces of candy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lo53axJ4x1o

> > Even demons can say it through people whom they
> > have possessed

Demons possess only those who can say "Jesus is LORD" and do so when
there has been a failure to http://WDJW.net/Guard (Proverbs 4:23) the
heart which is deceitfully wicked (Jeremiah 17:9) in allowing them to
abide there.

> Amen to that.

This physician ( http://WDJW.net/HeartDoc ) is reminded that Jesus
rescuing His sheep who had wandered (Matthew 15:24) by casting out the
demons that possessed them is different from His saving the souls of
the religious like Nicodemus who needed to be born again (John 3:3 &
5) to become new creatures in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17) http://WDJW.net/Forgiven
by GOD.

Source:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/f47fae452f4e5d7a?

someone whose name has been blotted(Rev3:5) from His Book(Rev20:15)
wrote:
>
> Andrew B. Chung is claiming that besides Jesus Christ, Andrew B. Chung
> is the only true living human Bible teacher;

Lie.

This physician ( http://WDJW.net/HeartDoc ) has not made that claim
for he is not a Bible teacher simply because physicians are by
definition not Bible teachers though the Great Physician is also the
Great Bible Teacher. Just as your church is not the Church (Matthew
16:18) Christ is building, your Bible teacher is not the Great Bible
Teacher, and your lord (satan) is not LORD Almighty GOD.

Source:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/8f26f91ad51db396?

someone whose name has been blotted(Rev3:5) from His Book(Rev20:15)
wrote:
>
> Wouldn't it be interesting to see Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> post a link to an interpreter/teacher of Scripture whom Andrew B.
> Chung doesn't consider to be false?

It really wouldn't be interesting to the discerning.

Any born-again (John 3:3 & 5) Bible teacher who truthfully says they
are "wonderfully hungry" whenever they are greeted would be someone
who would be a truthful Bible teacher.

Here is a link to the written words of Apostle Paul, who is one such
example of a truthful Bible teacher:

http://t.co/5UPcZDxa

Here is a link to a YouTube video of another:

http://youtu.be/-URd0CQsTyo

Source:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/a0602460d126e75e?

someone whose name has been blotted(Rev3:5) from His Book(Rev20:15)
wrote:

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzNu5bC5hT0

"Anyone can say 'Jesus is LORD'" -- A false Bible teacher cited by
someone whose name has been blotted(Rev3:5) from His Book(Rev20:15) of
Life.

Source:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzNu5bC5hT0

"No one can say 'Jesus is LORD' except by the Holy Spirit." -- Apostle
Paul (1 Corinthians 12:3)

Verification of 1 Corinthians 12:3 by a gentile Christian disciple ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lo53axJ4x1o

(Though the above featured religiously Christian children wanted to
say 'Jesus is LORD' for extra pieces of candy, they could not because
they needed to be born again per John 3:3 & 5 to become new creatures
http://WDJW.net/Forgiven by GOD per 2 Corinthians 5:17 so that He
would be their GOD per Ezekiel 11:19-20 & 36:26 and they would be His
children)

May GOD ever so severely curse to the Nth generation all who grieve
His Holy Spirit by falsely teaching that "Anyone can say 'Jesus is
LORD'" in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Amen.

"Deaf-mutes obviously can't say anything much less say 'Jesus is LORD'
except by the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the statement 'Anyone can say
"Jesus is LORD"' has been logically proven to be false since anyone
would include deaf-mutes." -- gentile Christian disciple in the Holy
Spirit

Suggested additional reading:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/5be9c7429d83a0d0?

**and**

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/a9494e037c47b328?

someone whose name has been blotted from His Book of Life(Rev20:15)
wrote:
>
> Only Satan would try to lull people into a false assurance of
> Salvation in Jesus Christ, by claiming it's summed up in someone's
> ability to parrot the second half of a Bible verse.

Only those who work for satan would claim they know what satan would
do.

It is written that the deceived like you would be deceiving others,
going from bad to worse (2 Timothy 3:13).

This physician ( http://WDJW.net/HeartDoc ) has the experience of
training parrots to speak and has discovered that they cannot say
"Jesus is LORD" with their mouth (Romans 10:9) much less the entirety
of the second half of 1 Corinthians 12:3.

Lisa McClung has a similar experience as evident by her African grey
parrot being able to say many religious phrases **except** "Jesus is
LORD" as seen on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nT_0gyOQI1E

Thus, you have been caught in another lie.

Source:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/06fa5c7ff7727403?

someone whose name has been blotted from His Book of Life(Rev20:15)
wrote:
>
> The charlatan Christian says, "The fact that I can quote the words
> written in 1 Corinthians 12:3b, proves that I'm a genuine Christian".

Source:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/524c5702d8c4db06?

This physician ( http://WDJW.net/HeartDoc ) has not witnessed anyone
saying that.

Instead, what he has witnessed is born-again (John 3:3 & 5) Christians
saying "no one can say 'Jesus is LORD' except by the Holy Spirit." (1
Corinthians 12:3)

> But remember that Satan also quoted Scripture (Psalm 91:11) in Matthew
> 4:5-6

This physician ( http://WDJW.net/Healer ) remembers Jesus Christ of
Nazareth pointing out that satan cannot call Him LORD (Matthew 4:7)
for if he could, he would have prefaced with "LORD, if You are the Son
of GOD ..." in Matthew 4:6.

> and that one of his servants can just as easily quote 1
> Corinthians 12:3b.

Actually, you cannot just as your master (satan) cannot for "no one
can say 'Jesus is LORD' except by the Holy Spirit." (1 Corinthians
12:3).

May GOD ever so severely curse you and all around you to the Nth
generation, in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Amen.

This prayer is being answered by GOD with all glory to the Father:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/a9494e037c47b328?

Bottom line concerning you:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/be51c482109ff735?

[Dr. Brian Gene Kelley, PhD]

Steve Gregg: http://www.thenarrowpath.com/radio_program.php

Here we have an expert professional true Christian Bible teacher named
Steve Gregg, who's been teaching the Bible for 40 years
and who has been all over the world on mission tours, stating from eye-
witness experience that anyone can say the words "Jesus is Lord".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL7AhTdZHas

And to prove Steve Gregg correct in this matter we have an unbeliever,
a scoffer of Christianity boldly saying the words "Jesus is Lord" in
pure blasphemous mockery.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeN7oF78Xkg

Thomas Bertoli: http://www.tommybertoli.com/

Here we have yet another expert professional true Christian Bible
teacher named Thomas Bertoli who was the director
of a Calvary Chapel Bible College for 8 years and has been an ordained
pastor of a church for over 10 years since then
confirming what Steve Gregg said, that anyone can say the words "Jesus
is Lord"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpH28urOlqE

And to prove both Steve Gregg and Pastor Bertoli are correct in this
we have an unbeliever, a scoffer of Christianity boldly saying the
words
"Jesus is Lord" in pure blasphemous mockery in yet a 2nd video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWnl6ucHnSE

What did the Apostle Paul really mean when wrote:
"Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of
God calls Jesus accursed,
and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit" (1
Corinthians 12:3)?

Here is the correct answer:

Does saying "Jesus is Lord" make one a Christian? by Jesus Alive
Ministries http://jesusalive.cc/

http://jesusalive.cc/ques76.htm

The Litmus Test of True Believers? First Corinthians 12:3 by Bob
Wilkin http://www.faithalone.org/index.html

http://www.faithalone.org/news/y1993/93jan3.html

[Dr. Brian Gene Kelley, PhD]

On Feb 18, 4:12 am, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lov...@thetruth.com>
wrote:
> duke wrote:
>
> > someone whose name has beenblotted(Deu29:20) from His Book(Deu32:33) wrote:

Yet more silly desperate duplicity from a sad beaten lil' crackpot.

Duke's actual post:

On Dec 31 2011, 5:08 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 01:25:47 -0800 (PST), "Brian Gene Kelley, PhD"

>
> <metalicstu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Paul is not talking about just saying the words "Jesus is Lord".

> >Anyone can say that. Even demons can say it through people whom they
> >have possessed
>
> Amen to that.
>
> The dukester, American-American

Source:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.christnet.theology/msg/883b5a191154afe8?hl=en


Even more silly desperate duplicity from a sad beaten lil' crackpot


On Feb 29, 1:44 am, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lov...@thetruth.com>
wrote:

>
> % wrote:
> > someone whose name has been blotted(Rev3:5) from His Book(Rev20:15) wrote:
>
> >> Anyone can say "Jesus is LORD"
>

> > i can't
>
> > Source:http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/b6d6107875ce3c9d?


This is the **actual** original post:

> i can't

Source:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/1701d9cfbe467a2...

%" is a generic anonymous pseudonym that is used by dozens of
different
people.

Most likely in this case "%" <percent @ gmail .com> was used by Andrew
B. Chung or his lackey, Courtney "MU" Brown.

[Dr. Brian Gene Kelley, PhD]

A self-righteous judgmental prideful ignorant crackpot wrote:


> someone whose name has been blotted(Deu29:20) from His Book(Deu32:33)
> of Life.

Bizzzt wrong:

Mosaic Covenant - Covenant in Moab: Only applicable to Israel under
the Old Covenant.

> from His Book(Deu32:33)

Bizzzt wrong:

"Their wine is the poison of serpents,
And the cruel venom of cobras" (Deu32:33)

Nether the verse nor the entire chapter (The Song of Moses) is
applicable.

<Crackpot shifts gears>

> someone whose name has been blotted(Rev3:5)

Bizzzt wrong:

"He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not
blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name
before My Father and before His angels" (Rev3:5)

Rev 3:5 is obviously an assurance of Salvation, not a threat.

> Eternal condemnation of

> someone whose name has been blotted

Let's see the crackpot provide a concise
straightforward explanation of precisely why this person's name
supposedly was blotted from God's Book of Life?

> The reason is simply lying to someone in the Holy Spirit is lying to
> the Holy Spirit:

Bizzzt wrong:

None of the misused Bible verses supplied by the crackpot; Deu29:20,
32:33; Rev 3:5, 20:15 substantiate this claim :-)

> This does mean that lying to the Holy Spirit is equivalent to
> blaspheming against the Holy Spirit.

Bizzzt wrong:

Blaspheming the Holy Spirit The Unpardonable Sin (Matthew 12:21,32)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yWk0PtrhdQ

> Non-christians simply cannot publicly say "Jesus is LORD"

Bizzzt wrong:

A non-christian saying "Jesus is Lord" in pure blasphemous mockery:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeN7oF78Xkg

Bottom line concerning the crackpot charlatan:

"While evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving
and being deceived" (2 Timothy 3:13).

[Dr. Brian Gene Kelley, PhD]

On Feb 27, 7:28 am, •*´¯`*•.¸ஐ*•.¥.•*ஐ¸.•*´¯`*• <bus...@cbgb.net>
wrote:
> Sick twisted evil Andy Chung wrote:
>
> > May ever so severely curse you and all around you

>
> > This prayer is being answered
>

> >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/a9494e037c47b328?
>
> > My health insurance has expired. They figure I'd have 6 months at
> > best with continued treatments. 2 months at best without. I'm down to 120
> > lbs. My family is suffering all kinds of health problems as well. We
> > may be homeless soon. But I'll keep plugging away till the end."
>
> This is what poisonous creeps like fake Christian Andy Chung "pray"
> for?
> What a miserable reprobate sicko Andy Chung is.

Yep.

--

Brian Gene Kelley, PhD

"Myth: You Can't Be Overweight and Healthy"
http://www.obesitymyths.com/myth4.1.htm

"Study: Overweight People Live Longer"
http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20090625/study-overweight-people-live-longer

"Starvation and Hunger, Humankind's Constant Companions"
http://gherkinstomatoes.com/2009/11/10/14837/

"Stop Hunger Now"
http://www.stophungernow.org/site/PageServer

Paul is not talking about just saying the words "Jesus is Lord".
Anyone can say that. Even demons can say it through people whom they
have possessed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL7AhTdZHas

**again**

Anyone can say insincerely say "Jesus is Lord".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpH28urOlqE

***and***

Beware of the loner (Someone who is alone in their interpretation of
the Bible)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfcEWZceWhI

[Dr. Brian Gene Kelley, PhD]

A deceitful evil ignorant crackpot wrote:

> Dr. Brian Gene Kelley, PhD wrote:
>
> > Only Satan would try to lull people into a false assurance of
> > Salvation in Jesus Christ, by claiming it's summed up in someone's
> > ability to parrot the second half of a Bible verse.
>
>
> Only those who work for satan would claim they know what satan would
> do.

"So that no advantage would be taken of us by Satan, for we are not
ignorant of his schemes" - Paul (2 Corinthians 2:11)

"No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light" -
Paul (2 Corinthians 11:14)

"Satan comes and takes away the word which has been sown in them" -
Jesus (Mark 4:15)

“Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded permission to sift you like
wheat" - Jesus (Luke 22:31)

"Satan filled your heart" - Peter (Acts 5:3)

"That is, the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of
Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders" - Paul (2
Thessalonians 2:9)

"Satan, who deceives the whole world" - John (Revelation 12:9)

> Non-christians simply cannot publicly say "Jesus is LORD"

Bizzzt wrong:

A non-christian scoffer of Christianity boldly saying the words "Jesus

is Lord" in pure blasphemous mockery.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeN7oF78Xkg

**and***

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWnl6ucHnSE

The truth about anyone can say "Jesus is Lord" and what is genuine
Salvation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL7AhTdZHas

Bottom line concerning the crackpot charlatan:

"While evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving
and being deceived" (2 Timothy 3:13).

A pastor tells us about crackpot charlatans:

[Dr. Brian Gene Kelley, PhD]

> lose the VAT

Bizzzt Wrong

Study: Overweight People Live Longer
http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20090625/study-overweight-people-live-longer

A Little Extra Weight Protects People From Early Death
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090623133523.htm

BBC NEWS | Health | Overweight people live longer

http://www.health-forums.com/alt-support-diabetes/bbc-news-health-overweight-people-live-longer-173039.html

'Overweight' people live longer than those of 'ideal' weight
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/24/overweight_live_longer/

Portland researchers find slightly overweight people live longer

http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2009/06/portland_researchers_find_slig.html

Japanese study shows overweight people live longest
http://www.physorg.com/news164519566.html

Chubby people live longest
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.c7aaeb7940626693fa418a1eab2291f6.81

Study shows overweight people live longer

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/diet-and-fitness/study-tips-scales-the-other-way-overweight-people-live-longer-20090618-cm13.html

[Dr. Brian Gene Kelley, PhD]

Steve Gregg: http://www.thenarrowpath.com/radio_program.php

Here we have an expert professional true Christian Bible teacher named
Steve Gregg, who's been teaching the Bible for 40 years
and who has been all over the world on mission tours, stating from eye-
witness experience that anyone can say the words "Jesus is Lord".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL7AhTdZHas

And to prove Steve Gregg correct in this matter we have an unbeliever,

a scoffer of Christianity boldly saying the words "Jesus is Lord" in

pure blasphemous mockery.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeN7oF78Xkg

Thomas Bertoli: http://www.tommybertoli.com/

Here we have yet another expert professional true Christian Bible
teacher named Thomas Bertoli who was the director
of a Calvary Chapel Bible College for 8 years and has been an ordained
pastor of a church for over 10 years since then

confirming what Steve Gregg said, that anyone can say the words "Jesus
is Lord"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpH28urOlqE

And to prove both Steve Gregg and Pastor Bertoli are correct in this

we have an unbeliever, a scoffer of Christianity boldly saying the
words

[Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD]

wrote:
>
> Only Satan would try to lull people into a false assurance of
> Salvation in Jesus Christ, by claiming it's summed up in someone's
> ability to parrot the second half of a Bible verse.

Only those who work for satan would claim they know what satan would
do.

[Dr. Brian Gene Kelley, PhD]

A self-righteous judgmental prideful Biblically incorrect crackpot
wrote:

> someone whose name has been blotted(Deu29:20) from His Book(Deu32:33)
> of Life.

Bizzzt wrong:

Mosaic Covenant - Covenant in Moab: Only applicable to Israel under
the Old Covenant.

> from His Book(Deu32:33)

Bizzzt wrong:

"Their wine is the poison of serpents,
And the cruel venom of cobras" (Deu32:33)

Nether the verse nor the entire chapter (The Song of Moses) is
applicable.

<Crackpot shifts gears>

> someone whose name has been blotted(Rev3:5)

Bizzzt wrong:

"He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not
blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name
before My Father and before His angels" (Rev3:5)

Rev 3:5 is obviously an assurance of Salvation, not a threat.

> Eternal condemnation of

> someone whose name has been blotted

Let's see the crackpot provide a concise
straightforward explanation of precisely why this person's name
supposedly was blotted from God's Book of Life?

> The reason is simply lying to someone in the Holy Spirit is lying to
> the Holy Spirit:

Bizzzt wrong:

None of the misused Bible verses supplied by the crackpot; Deu29:20,
32:33; Rev 3:5, 20:15 substantiate this claim :-)

> This does mean that lying to the Holy Spirit is equivalent to
> blaspheming against the Holy Spirit.

Bizzzt wrong:

Blaspheming the Holy Spirit The Unpardonable Sin (Matthew 12:21,32)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yWk0PtrhdQ

> Non-christians simply cannot publicly say "Jesus is LORD"

Bizzzt wrong:

A non-christian saying "Jesus is Lord" in pure blasphemous mockery:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeN7oF78Xkg

Bottom line concerning the crackpot charlatan:

"While evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving
and being deceived" (2 Timothy 3:13)

"A whole system of false doctrine blended with a lot of truth" - Dr.
Gene Getz
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfcEWZceWhI

[Dr. Brian Gene Kelley, PhD]

A self-righteous judgmental prideful Biblically incorrect crackpot

wrote:

> someone whose name has been blotted(Deu29:20) from His Book(Deu32:33)
> of Life.

Bizzzt wrong:

Mosaic Covenant - Covenant in Moab: Only applicable to Israel under
the Old Covenant.

> from His Book(Deu32:33)

Bizzzt wrong:

"Their wine is the poison of serpents,
And the cruel venom of cobras" (Deu32:33)

Nether the verse nor the entire chapter (The Song of Moses) is
applicable.

<Crackpot shifts gears>

> someone whose name has been blotted(Rev3:5)

Bizzzt wrong:

"He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not
blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name
before My Father and before His angels" (Rev3:5)

Rev 3:5 is obviously an assurance of Salvation, not a threat.

> Eternal condemnation of

> someone whose name has been blotted

Let's see the crackpot provide a concise
straightforward explanation of precisely why this person's name
supposedly was blotted from God's Book of Life?

> The reason is simply lying to someone in the Holy Spirit is lying to
> the Holy Spirit:

Bizzzt wrong:

None of the misused Bible verses supplied by the crackpot; Deu29:20,
32:33; Rev 3:5, 20:15 substantiate this claim :-)

> This does mean that lying to the Holy Spirit is equivalent to
> blaspheming against the Holy Spirit.

Bizzzt wrong:

Blaspheming the Holy Spirit The Unpardonable Sin (Matthew 12:21,32)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yWk0PtrhdQ

> Non-christians simply cannot publicly say "Jesus is LORD"

Bizzzt wrong:

A non-christian saying "Jesus is Lord" in pure blasphemous mockery:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeN7oF78Xkg

Bottom line concerning the crackpot charlatan:

"While evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving

[ra...@val.com]

>Sorry if I left it out. Here it is:
>http://healthyfixx.com/15/the-truth-about-statin-drugs-may-cause-heart-attacks

I spent some time investigating the claims on the is site. They ranged
from mildly deceiving to out right mischaracterizations and untruths.
I'm talking about erros on the level of 2+2=5.

Also while it may appear that the site is unbiased, it's actually a
front for a vitamin supplement company (http://www.iherb.com).

If a pharmaceutical company made these claims they would be subject to
severe Federal sanctions, but a supplement can get away with these
stunts.

In no way am I a fan of statins, nor would I take them myself, but
that does not mean that it's OK to demonize statins (or anything else)
with bad science. There is no doubt that Statins can and have saved
lives, but the numbers are not that impressive to me as a single
person.The best studies show that you need to treat about 50 people to
prevent 1 death in 5 years. For me personally that's not very
impressive. From the point of view of medicine and the population at
large it's quite significant. Treat 10 million people and save 200,000
lives in 5 years.

Negative side effects do exist and it's clear that the numbers are
certainly higher that reported in the literature, but I see no reason
to believe they are near the levels nor severity reported by fringe/
blogs/pseudo sources.

In any case here are the specifics point by point. I'm going to be
brief cause this stuff can get quite involved. I've tried to provide
good solid counter references.

Claim 1:
"There is no clear correlation between blood cholesterol levels and
the risk or even the advancement of heart disease. "

In 70's the largest, most rigorist study to date was commissioned to
looked into this very questions. 316,000 folks were monitored for 12
years to see who got heart attacks.

The results were striking as regards serum cholesterol. The lower the
cholesterol levels the lower the rate of heart attacks. This effect
was continuous through the all cholesterol ranges. This study was done
before statins were available.

See: http://www.gpnotebook.co.uk/simplepage.cfm?ID=718274624

From the study:

"for each five-year age group, the relationship between serum
cholesterol and CHD death rate was continuous, graded, and strong.
the pattern of a continuous, graded, strong relationship between serum
cholesterol and six-year age-adjusted CHD death rate prevailed for
nonhypertensive nonsmokers, nonhypertensive smokers, hypertensive
nonsmokers, and hypertensive smokers. These data of high precision
show that the relationship between serum cholesterol and CHD is not a
threshold one, with increased risk confined to the two highest
quintiles, but rather is a continuously graded one that powerfully
affects risk for the great majority of middle-aged American men"

see ref:1

Claim 2:
The web site claims the homocysteine is a cause of blood vessel damage
and can be lowered by certain nutrients and vitamins implying better
heart health.

BUT - What they don't tell you is that numerous large scale studies
have been done. B vitamins did indeed lower homocysteine levels, but
the heart attack rate did not decrease. In other words the notion that
lowering homocysteine levels to reduce heart attacks has been
investigate and disproved. You wouldn’t know this from reading the
article. Remember this is a disguised supplement company out to sell
supplements.

See ref:2

Claim 3:
"Lowering Cholesterol has nothing to do with the benefits of Statin
Use. Statin drugs "work" by lowering inflammation, not by lowering
cholesterol."

That broad statement does not stand up to current understandings and
data.

First of all the inflammation metric they are referring to is C-
reactive protein. It's recently been established (2008) this is a
marker not a cause of heart disease. For scientist that study this
stuff this was a big deal and a game changer in the understanding of
the role of C-reactive protein and heart disease.

When ldl initiates the disease process inflammation is increased
because it part of an inappropriate immune/inflammatory process.
The ldl disease process and inflammatory process are not necessarily
separate.

Even more importantly when C-reative protein is decreased ldl is also
decreased. In the Jupiter study ldl was reduced by 50% along with the
C-reactive protein reduced by 37%. It's not clear at all that these 2
processes are distinct.

see ref: 3

Claim 4:
This deception is very alluring and appears in different forms in many
activities. It runs something like this " If "something" (food,
supplement, activity, habit) is good for you, then any less of this
"something" is going to be bad for you. In this case, cholesterol is
necessary component of life. Its involved in hundreds or thousands of
functions. In fact it's so fundamental that it probably doesn't make
sense to even try to number its functions. For instance one function
of cholesterol is involved in hormone production.

The argument is that if we lower our cholesterol level our hormone
production will decrease with undesired results. That's a very
reasonable concern and one that medical research took seriously. A
number of well controlled trials have been undertaken to investigate
just this fact, with consistent negative findings. Unfortunately,
these studies are not mentioned on the web site. Instead the results
of two negative findings by studies without the degree of rigor/
control as the other studies are reported. Wouldn't a fair
presentation present all the information?

Ref: 4

Not done, but I think you get the picture. A very one sided, biased
presentation from this web site. It's very easy to provide a link with
what looks to be a convincing argument, no so easy to produce the
other, in my view, fuller picture.

Randy



Refs:
1. http://www.gpnotebook.co.uk/simplepage.cfm?ID=718274624

2.
299:2027-2036, 2008
Ebbing M and others. Mortality and cardiovascular events in patients
treated with homocysteine-lowering B vitamins after coronary
angiography: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 300:795-804, 2008.

SEARCH Collaborative Group. Effects of homocysteine-lowering with
folic acid plus vitamin B12 vs placebo on mortality and major
morbidity in myocardialinfarction survivors: A randomized trial. JAMA
303:2486-2494, 2010.

House AA and others. Effect of B-vitamin on progression of diabetic
nephropathy: A controlled trial. JAMA 303:603-1309, 2010.

Lonn E. Homocysteine-lowering B vitamin therapy in cardiovascular
prevention—Wrong again? JAMA 299:2086-2087, 2008.

3.
http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/news/20081029/crp-not-cause-of-heart-disease
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0807646

4.

Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Merz CN, et al. Implications of recent clinical
trials for the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment
Panel III guidelines. Circulation. 2004;110:227-239. Abstract

Johnson C, Waters DD, DeMicco DA, et al. Comparison of effectiveness
of atorvastatin 10 mg versus 80 mg in reducing major cardiovascular
events and repeat revascularization in patients with previous
percutaneous coronary intervention (post hoc analysis of the Treating
to New Targets [TNT] Study). Am J Cardiol. 2008;102:1312-1317.

Abstract
Travia D, Tosi F, Negri C, Faccini G, Moghetti P, Muggeo M. Sustained
therapy with 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme-A reductase
inhibitors does not impair steroidogenesis by adrenals and gonads. J
Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1995;80:836-840. Abstract

Isaacsohn JL, Bakker-Arkema RG, Fayyad R, Whitcomb R, Black DM.
Atorvastatin, a new HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor, does not affect
glucocorticoid hormones in patients with hypercholesterolemia. J
Cardiovasc Pharmacol Therapeut.1997;2:243-249.

Dobs AS, Schrott H, Davidson MH, et al. Effects of high-dose
simvastatin on adrenal and gonadal steroidogenesis in men with
hypercholesterolemia. Metabolism. 2000;49:1234-1238. Abstract

Bairey Merz CN, Olson MB, Johnson BD, et al. Cholesterol-lowering
medication, cholesterol level, and reproductive hormones in women: the
Women's Ischemia Syndrome Evaluation (WISE). Am J Med. 2002;
113:723-727. Abstract

Santini SA, Carrozza C, Lulli P, Zuppi C, CarloTonolo G, Musumeci S.
Atorvastatin treatment does not affect gonadal and adrenal hormones in
type 2 diabetes patients with mild to moderate hypercholesterolemia.
J

Atheroscler Thromb. 2003;10:160-164. Abstract
Dogru MT, Basar MM, Simsek A, et al. Effects of statin treatment on
serum sex steroids levels and autonomic and erectile function.

Urology. 2008;71:703-707. Abstract
Stanworth RD, Kapoor D, Channer KS, Jones TH. Statin therapy is
associated with lower total but not bioavailable or free testosterone
in men with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2009;32:541-546. Abstract

Kocum TH, Ozcan TI, Gen R, et al. Does atorvastatin affect androgen
levels in men in the era of very-low LDL targeting therapy? Exp Clin
Endocrinol Diabetes. 2009;117:60-63.

2. Lonn E. Homocysteine-lowering B vitamin therapy in cardiovascular
prevention—Wrong again? JAMA 299:2086-2087, 2008.

3.Effects of homocysteine-lowering with folic acid plus vitamin B12 vs
placebo on mortality and major morbidity in myocardialinfarction
survivors: A randomized trial. JAMA 303:2486-2494, 2010.

4.Albert CM and others. Effect of folic acid and B vitamins on risk of
cardiovascular events and total mortality among women at high risk for
cardiovascular disease: a randomized trial. JAMA 299:2027-2036, 2008

5.Malinow MR and others. Homocyst(e)ine, diet, and cardiovascular
diseases: A statement for healthcare professionals from the nutrition
committee, American Heart Association. Circulation 99:178-182, 1999.

6. Tanne D and others. Prospective study of serum homocysteine and
risk of ischemic stroke among patients with preexisting coronary heart
disease. Stroke 34:632-636, 2003.

[Dr. Brian Gene Kelley, PhD]

On Feb 18, 4:12 am, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lov...@thetruth.com>
wrote:

> duke wrote:
>
> > someone whose name has beenblotted(Deu29:20) from His Book(Deu32:33) wrote:

Yet more silly desperate duplicity from a sad beaten lil' crackpot.

Duke's actual post:

duke wrote:

> "Brian Gene Kelley, PhD" wrote:
>
> >Paul is not talking about just saying the words "Jesus is Lord".

> >Anyone can say that. Even demons can say it through people whom they
> >have possessed
>
> Amen to that.

Source:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.christnet.theology/msg/883b5a191154afe8?hl=en

[Dr. Brian Gene Kelley, PhD]

A self-assured judgmental prideful Biblically incorrect crackpot
wrote:

Bizzzt wrong:

A non-christian saying "Jesus is Lord" in pure blasphemous mockery:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeN7oF78Xkg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWnl6ucHnSE

> false Bible teachers

Bizzzt wrong - They were correct

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL7AhTdZHas

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpH28urOlqE

Only Satan would try to lull people into a false assurance of
Salvation in Jesus Christ, by claiming it's summed up in someone's
ability to parrot the second half of a Bible verse.


> Only those who work for satan would claim they know what satan would
> do.

Bizzzt wrong

"So that no advantage would be taken of us by Satan, for we are not

ignorant of his schemes" (2 Corinthians 2:11)

Bottom line concerning the crackpot charlatan:

"While evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving

and being deceived" (2 Timothy 3:13).

[ra...@val.com]

On Feb 29, 5:41 pm, mainframetech <mainframet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 29, 3:27 pm, Ozlover <t...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > trigonometry1...@gmail.com | <trigonometry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Feb 28, 4:02 pm, mainframetech <mainframet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > On Feb 28, 3:31 pm, Susan <su...@nothanks.org> wrote:
>
> > > > > x-no-archive: yes
>
> > > > > "The value of statins in preventing heart disease has been clearly
> > > > > established,"
>
> > > > > That's what they said for 25 years about Premarin, CVD, stroke and
> > > > > dementia protection.
>
> > > > > Then non industry research proved the opposite was true.
>

> > > > > No way a drug that causesdiabetes, dementia and muscle myopathy has a

> > > > > favorable health/QOL risk/benefit ratio.
>
> > > > > Susan
>
> > > > Susan,
> > > >   Yes, I believe you've gotten on to a problem for many people.
> > > > Here's an article (references at the bottom) along the lines you
> > > > mention.
>
> > > > Chris
>
> > > Link? Reference? All I see is Chris ;-)
>

> Sorry if I left it out.  Here it is:http://healthyfixx.com/15/the-truth-about-statin-drugs-may-cause-hear...

>
>    References at the bottom.
>
> Chris

Sorry if I left it out. Here it is:

>http://healthyfixx.com/15/the-truth-about-statin-drugs-may-cause-hear...

http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/news/20081029/crp-not-cause-of-hea...

Reply Reply to author Forward Report spam

[Ozlover]

<whoosh!>

I did *not* write what you said I wrote, and you snipped what I *did*
write.

And when I point that out, you're post-editing/falsifying my response.

And no, I don't killfile dishonest twats.

--
Frank Slootweg

[Wes Groleau]

On 03-04-2012 01:08, ra...@val.com wrote:
> person.The best studies show that you need to treat about 50 people to
> prevent 1 death in 5 years. For me personally that's not very
> impressive. From the point of view of medicine and the population at
> large it's quite significant. Treat 10 million people and save 200,000
> lives in 5 years.
>
> Negative side effects do exist and it's clear that the numbers are
> certainly higher that reported in the literature, but I see no reason
> to believe they are near the levels nor severity reported by fringe/

But are they worse than one in fifty?

--
Wes Groleau

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you
what can't be done and why. Then do it.
— Robert A. Heinlein

[mainframetech]

On Mar 4, 2:23 pm, Ozlover <t...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:

> mainframetech <mainframet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 1, 5:12 pm, Ozlover <t...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>
> > > > Sorry if I left it out.  Here it is:
> > > >http://healthyfixx.com/15/the-truth-about-statin-drugs-may-cause-hear...
>
> > >   That kind of clamping down on the freedom of information is a crime to
> > > me of great proportions.
>
> >   I know how you must feel, but I was told in no uncertain terms that
> > it was OK for anyone to wipe parts of posts that they weren't
> > interested in or weren't going to reply to, and save the stuff that
> > was going to be dealt with in this group.  Not much of yours was
> > desirable and I didn't have that much to reply to except to ask if you
> > need an explanation of the general rules the folks in this group use
> > when dealing with posts. It has been told to me over and over.  Let me
> > know if you want the instructional session, I'll be around, unless you
> > put me on killfile.
>
>

>   I did *not* write what you said I wrote, and you snipped what I *did*
> write.
>

I can understand your anger at having parts of your text 'snipped'.
It makes it difficult to have a debate and sometimes a normal
conversation of any length. But it's OK to do that snipping if I have
no neeed of the snipped text to reply to, which I didn't. I was told
that very clearly. So why are you complaining again? I've done
everything within bounds that were described to me as acceptable.

Chris

[Ozlover]

Nope, you snipped ALL my text, not just part of it. What remained was
a lie, because you said

"On Feb 29, 3:27 pm, Ozlover <t...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:"

while I did not write ANY part of what you quoted.

So to which one of your traits can we chalk this one up? Ignorance?
Cluelessnes? Stupidity? Dishonesty?

--
Frank Slootweg

[Ozlover]

mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Mar 4, 2:23�ｿｽpm, Ozlover <t...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> > mainframetech <mainframet...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > On Mar 1, 5:12�ｿｽpm, Ozlover <t...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Sorry if I left it out. �ｿｽHere it is:
> > > > >http://healthyfixx.com/15/the-truth-about-statin-drugs-may-cause-hear...
> >
> > > > �ｿｽ That kind of clamping down on the freedom of information is a crime to
> > > > me of great proportions.
> >
> > > �ｿｽ I know how you must feel, but I was told in no uncertain terms that

> > > it was OK for anyone to wipe parts of posts that they weren't
> > > interested in or weren't going to reply to, and save the stuff that

> > > was going to be dealt with in this group. �ｿｽNot much of yours was

> > > desirable and I didn't have that much to reply to except to ask if you
> > > need an explanation of the general rules the folks in this group use

> > > when dealing with posts. It has been told to me over and over. �ｿｽLet me

> > > know if you want the instructional session, I'll be around, unless you
> > > put me on killfile.

Dishonest silent snip duly noted.

> > �ｿｽ I did *not* write what you said I wrote, and you snipped what I *did*
> > write.

Dishonest silent snip duly noted.

> I can understand your anger at having parts of your text 'snipped'.
> It makes it difficult to have a debate and sometimes a normal
> conversation of any length. But it's OK to do that snipping if I have
> no neeed of the snipped text to reply to, which I didn't. I was told
> that very clearly. So why are you complaining again? I've done
> everything within bounds that were described to me as acceptable.

This bit covered in an earlier response.

--
Frank Slootweg

[ra...@val.com]

Randy Wrote:

" person.The best studies show that you need to treat about 50 people
to
prevent 1 death in 5 years. For me personally that's not very
impressive. From the point of view of medicine and the population at
large it's quite significant. Treat 10 million people and save
200,000
lives in 5 years.

Negative side effects do exist and it's clear that the numbers are
certainly higher that reported in the literature, but I see no reason
to believe they are near the levels nor severity reported by
 fringe/"

Wes Wrote:
" But are they worse than one in fifty?"

Here's the numbers for side effects in the Jupiter study ( the current
top dog statin study).
Also the NNT (numbers needed to treat) for all heart attacks, deaths,
surgery was 18/5 years, which by itself is impressive.

The study was double blinded so neither doctors or subjects know who
was getting placebo or the real thing (Crestor).
About 8900 folks in each group.

69 folks in the Crestor group reported nervous system disorders.
76 folks in the placebo group reported nervous system disorders.

515 folks in the Crestor group reported psychiatric issue
533 folks on the placeob group reported psychiatric issue

BUT
4 folks in the placebo group experienced a "confused" mental state
16 folks in the Crestor groups experinece a "confused" mental state.
That's a significant difference!

There were no reported differences in muscle weakness, myopathy
between groups. [1] [2]

But - I am convinced via reports from real researchers, not fringe
bloggers, that in the real world side effects are more frequent. This
report is from a ADA publication [3]

Statins definitely save lives, that's undeniable, and most folks are
not destroyed by side effects - But I think anyone that anyone that
can bring down a A1C >6.5 to less < 6, without drugs has got a much
stronger cure working for them (but I don't know for sure).

As an aside - Low dose statins are available (or used to be) over the
counter without a script in the U.K.

Ref:
1.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2012/02/29/how-rare-are-statin-related-memory-issues/

2.
http://circoutcomes.ahajournals.org/content/2/3/279.full

3.
http://docnews.diabetesjournals.org/content/4/12/1.1.full

Randy

[mainframetech]

On Mar 4, 6:13 pm, Ozlover <t...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> > >   I did *not* write what you said I wrote, and you snipped what I *did*
> > > write.
>
> >   I can understand your anger at having parts of your text 'snipped'.
> > It makes it difficult to have a debate and sometimes a normal
> > conversation of any length.  But it's OK to do that snipping if I have
> > no neeed of the snipped text to reply to, which I didn't.  I was told
> > that very clearly.  So why are you complaining again?  I've done
> > everything within bounds that were described to me as acceptable.
>
>   Nope, you snipped ALL my text, not just part of it. What remained was
> a lie, because you said
>
>

> while I did not write ANY part of what you quoted.
>

I promise you that anything I put quotes around was printed by the
person I said did it. If snipping caused something to look like it
was yours when it wasn't, that's one of the problems with snipping
what you don't need. I have no need to make you look foolish or
combative with clever little ploys...you do it on your own. And if I
snip something, stop complaining (that's what I was told). Your
original is still there and can be viewed by anyone, or you can find
it and repost it. What is your problem?

Chris

[Wes Groleau]

On 03-04-2012 18:13, Ozlover wrote:
> So to which one of your traits can we chalk this one up? Ignorance?
> Cluelessnes? Stupidity? Dishonesty?

Guidelines for judging others:

1. Don't attribute to malice that which
can be adequately explained by stupidity.

2. Don't attribute to stupidity that which
can be adequately explained by ignorance.

3. Don't attribute to ignorance that which
can be adequately explained by misunderstanding.

Of course, trolls always manage to move rapidly UP the list.

--
Wes Groleau

Can we afford to be relevant?
http://www.cetesol.org/stevick.html

[Wes Groleau]

On 03-04-2012 18:20, ra...@val.com wrote:
> 4 folks in the placebo group experienced a "confused" mental state
> 16 folks in the Crestor groups experinece a "confused" mental state.
> That's a significant difference!

Do you mean that or is it sarcasm?

0.05% vs. 0.20% is significant?

--
Wes Groleau

He that complies against his will is of the same opinion still.
— Samuel Butler, 1612-1680

[ra...@val.com]

On Mar 5, 12:01 am, Wes Groleau <Groleau+n...@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> On 03-04-2012 18:20, ra...@val.com wrote:
>
> > 4 folks in the placebo group experienced a "confused" mental state
> > 16 folks in the Crestor groups experinece a "confused" mental state.
> > That's a significant difference!

Wes Wrote:
> Do you mean that or is it sarcasm?
>
> 0.05% vs. 0.20% is significant?

No no I meant it.
But it's .16% vs .04% of the total population, so its a pretty small
number.
On the other hand there was a 44% reduction in Heart attacks between
groups.

Also there were a couple of qualifiers.
You can read about it here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2012/02/29/how-rare-are-statin-related-memory-issues/

Regards
Randy

[ra...@val.com]

On Mar 5, 12:01 am, Wes Groleau <Groleau+n...@FreeShell.org> wrote:

Whops I left some some important numbers for a proper overview:

Cardiac Events Crestor - 142
Cardiac Events placebo- 252.

Confused states Crestor 16
Confused states placebo 4

Regards
Randy

[mainframetech]

Chris says:
Actually, the pharmaceutical companies get away with more heinous
stunts. They are corporations with only one purpose, and that's to
maximize value for investors. See below for info.

We have to recognize that while 'blogs' and websites are ways for
people to advertise their products and spread their ideas, that drug
and medical companies mostly have 'science' and studies to do their
advertising, which allows for articles to be published making claims
of efficacy after a successful study or trial. How many times have we
seen drug corporations being fined in the news for misleading
consumers and holding back information from studies that was negative,
allowing them to get FDA approval and begin making money as soon as
possible? How many people may have died from that information that
was withheld? And they brush away fines that were really a pittance
next to the size of profits they make.

While there is use to the scientific method, and researchers and
their studies often try to stick to those criteria, there are also
studies that are suppressed when they come up with negative results
about the product involved, or are slewed to the good side where
possible in hopes of more funding for future projects.

My message is not to ignore studies, but to take them with a grain
of salt, and consider the funder of the study and who benefits from
it. No different than using information from websites where doctors
and medical researchers 'publish' their ideas and beliefs when they
can't afford to run a study like the big guys. And yes, they
sometimes advertise their books, which many of us would do if we had
one.

Example of company used by major drug companies so they have less
liability in the fraud:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/27/us-fda-research-fake-idUSTRE76Q66L20110727

American Bar Association describes drug industry methods in
manipulating studies and information:
http://www.americanbar.org/newsletter/publications/aba_health_esource_home/Morrissey.html

General fraud and unethical behavior toward consumers:
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video?id=3667941

As with Terry Wahls and her testing of an MS diet, she couldn't
begin a study and wait all that time as she deteriorated with MS, nor
could she afford to pay to run a study anyway on her own. She has a
'blog' effectively advertising her treatment for MS. If we wiped out
'blogs', then how many people with MS might not get the information
that might save and improve their lives?
http://www.terrywahls.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLjgBLwH3Wc

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Mar 4, 2:23 pm, Ozlover <t...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:

Killfiling is your choice, as your constant delving into insults
is. I do not falsify responses because you make enough of a fool out
of yourself without my help, however such a problem may occur with a
careless erasing of text in a post one is responding to.

Chris

[mainframetech]

The reporting of side effects are often done by physicians as well
as consumers. As in the case of Rhabdomyolysis from statins, how many
doctors want to report to the patient or the authorities that they
prescribed the damaging drug? Perhaps less than is obvious.

Chris

[outsider]

On 3/4/2012 11:57 PM, Wes Groleau wrote:
> On 03-04-2012 18:13, Ozlover wrote:
>> So to which one of your traits can we chalk this one up? Ignorance?
>> Cluelessnes? Stupidity? Dishonesty?
>
> Guidelines for judging others:
>
> 1. Don't attribute to malice that which
> can be adequately explained by stupidity.
>
> 2. Don't attribute to stupidity that which
> can be adequately explained by ignorance.
>
> 3. Don't attribute to ignorance that which
> can be adequately explained by misunderstanding.
>
> Of course, trolls always manage to move rapidly UP the list.

Mirror mirror, on the wall......

[outsider]

On 3/5/2012 12:01 AM, Wes Groleau wrote:
> On 03-04-2012 18:20, ra...@val.com wrote:
>> 4 folks in the placebo group experienced a "confused" mental state
>> 16 folks in the Crestor groups experinece a "confused" mental state.
>> That's a significant difference!
>
> Do you mean that or is it sarcasm?
>
> 0.05% vs. 0.20% is significant?

Expanded to a national population, any fourfold increase is significant
regardless.

[GysdeJongh]

outsider is the nicest guy in the hall

[outsider]

Thank you, thank you, please come to the ball

[GysdeJongh]

Ok, I will stay till after midnight and loose a shoe

[outsider]

Are there any participants here who will admit to a shoe fetish? :-)

[Ozlover]

Look buster, the parts in my pants are none of your business and you
can shove you Greek cheese where the sun doesn't shine!

--
Frank Slootweg

[Wes Groleau]

On 03-05-2012 02:20, ra...@val.com wrote:
> On Mar 5, 12:01 am, Wes Groleau<Groleau+n...@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>> 0.05% vs. 0.20% is significant?
>
> No no I meant it.
> But it's .16% vs .04% of the total population, so its a pretty small
> number.

My numbers like yours, were just estimates. Obviously 4/8900 is not
precisely .4%

But "pretty small number" is exactly why I question "significance"


--
Wes Groleau

------
“The reason most women would rather have beauty than brains is
they know that most men can see better than they can think.”
— James Dobson

[outsider]

On 3/6/2012 12:04 AM, Wes Groleau wrote:
> On 03-05-2012 02:20, ra...@val.com wrote:
>> On Mar 5, 12:01 am, Wes Groleau<Groleau+n...@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>>> 0.05% vs. 0.20% is significant?
>>
>> No no I meant it.
>> But it's .16% vs .04% of the total population, so its a pretty small
>> number.
>
> My numbers like yours, were just estimates. Obviously 4/8900 is not
> precisely .4%
>
> But "pretty small number" is exactly why I question "significance"

If 1 out of 1,000,000 acquires some designated condition, it is of
little significance
unless you are that 1.

[ra...@val.com]

Wes wrote:
> My numbers like yours, were just estimates.  Obviously 4/8900 is not
> precisely .4%
>
> But "pretty small number" is exactly why I question "significance"

I agree, the numbers are small but your still significantly more
likely to get "confused" on Crestor than placebo. although your not
very likely to get confused on either on.
Your much more likely to have a heart attack prevented on Crestor than
placebo than getting "confuse" on Crestor.

Cardiac Events Crestor - 142
Cardiac Events placebo- 252.
Confused states Crestor 16
Confused states placebo 4

Randy

[mainframetech]

---------------------------

Pfizer ads are now showing up with a disclaimer: "LIPITOR has
not been shown to prevent heart disease or heart attacks."
http://www.healthequations.com/articles/facts_cholesterol.html

Chris

[outsider]

Randy, I need a much more solid definition of what is meant by a
"cardiac event."

I have arrhythmias that I feel. If those, and angina, are included. the
results are
meaningless to someone like me. If by the term they mean something that
requires
surgical intervention, then that changes the meaning for me.

[ra...@val.com]

Outsider wrote:
> Randy, I need a much more solid definition of what is meant by a
> "cardiac event."

It's actually considered a "major cardiac event"

Here's the definition from here:http://www.forbes.com/sites/
matthewherper/2012/02/29/how-rare-are-statin-related-memory-issues/

"major cardiovascular event (that includes heart attack, stroke,
hospitalization, and surgery to open clogged arteries) by"

A more detailed definition should be available here:
http://circoutcomes.ahajournals.org/content/2/3/279.full

Regards
Randy

[ra...@val.com]

Outsider wrote:
> Randy, I need a much more solid definition of what is meant by a
> "cardiac event."

Sorry the first got mangled here's the correction:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ matthewherper/2012/02/29/how-rare-are-
statin-related-memory-issues/

[ra...@val.com]

On Mar 6, 10:02 am, outsider <outsi...@sometime.individual.net> wrote:

Here's the definition:
http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Major+Adverse+Cardiac+Events

MACE
An acronym for objective measures of acute and/or adverse
cardiovascular events (e.g., acute myocardial infarction, ischaemic
stroke, coronary arterial occlusion, death) which are used to assess
the effects of various interventions (e.g., rotablation, angioplasty,
stenting) or therapeutics (e.g., antiarrhythmics, statins, ACE
inhibitors) on outcomes, in the context of a clinical trial.