[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [APD] Ok, where do we start...

Greetings, once again sir. Let's begin:

First you say, "I read otherwise on fluoridealert.org. The country 
referenced was Morroco I believe." Once again, I feel I should point out 
that in the real world, Morocco only has one R in it.

To this I respond, you are correct. Sort of anyway. The country 
referenced on that's website study was Morocco. My question for you is 
how much time have you spent in Morocco? Have you ever been to Morocco? 
I have. And depending on when and where you go in Morocco, there very 
well could be water warnings when you visit. A water warning is what the 
local government posts to let you know not to drink the water at that 
time because it could make you sick or in some extreme cases, even be 
fatal. Of course most countries keep this quiet as it is not good for 
tourism if it gets too much press, so it doesn't get too much press. I 
still stand by what I said earlier. Every time foreign aid was given in 
the form of fluoride treatment for local water supplies, every single 
country offered fell over themselves to let us install and supply them 
with fluoride for their water. And yes, I have been their to help set 
some of these up many years ago.

Second you say, "Playing with suffixes is acceptable in conversation, as 
long as it sounds plausible, and you're being reasonable."

To this I reply, you are wrong. While English to an ever changing 
language, making up words is still wrong. My students used to say that 
sometimes made up words made them sound smarter, I would always reply 
the same answer; Not to those who know it is not a real word. In fact, 
it makes you look lazy for not learning the right word to use or stupid 
for not knowing it was not a real word. Either way, it puts you in a bad 
light. If you like that light, then that is your choice.

Third you say, "In that case, would you care to explain to us the 
corrolation between these three facts:

1)  All the school shooters in the past few years, have been on Prozac
amongst other psychotropic drugs

2)  The main ingredient in prozac is FLUOxetine hydrochloride

I'm no chemist, but perhaps someone like you or Liz with a privileged
education would care to explain to us common folk what fluoxetine
hydrocholride is." (Once again, I feel I should point out the correct spelling for correlation.)

To this I respond, your conclusions are wrong. To answer your last question first, fluoxetine hydrocholride is designated (+)-N-methyl-3-phenyl-3-[(-trifluoro-/p/-tolyl)oxy]propylamine hydrochloride and has the empirical formula of C17H18F3NO HC1. (On a side note here, I wasn't sure if this could post subtext formula numbers.)Its molecular weight is 345.79. Fluoxetine hydrochloride is a white to off-white crystalline solid with a solubility of 14 mg/mL in water. The oral solution contains fluoxetine hydrochloride equivalent to 20 mg/5 mL (64.7 u mol) of fluoxetine. It also contains alcohol 0.23%, benzoic acid, flavoring agent, glycerin, purified water, and sucrose. Prozac capsules, a delayed-release formulation, contain enteric-coated pellets of fluoxetine hydrochloride equivalent to 90 mg (291 u mol) of fluoxetine. The capsules also contain D&C Yellow No. 10, FD&C Blue No.2, gelatin, hypromellose, hypromellose acetate succinate, sodium lauryl sulfate, sucrose, sugar spheres!
 , talc, titanium dioxide, triethyl citrate, and other inactive ingredients. If this isn't clear or did not answer what you were looking for in answer, please be more clear in what you want to know. And, yes, I did cut and paste that from the PDR, 2008 ver. 2.3. As to your alluding to Prozac being the cause I respond by saying, did you ever consider how much worse the actions of the shooters could have been if the were not on Prozac. Maybe it was the medicine that kept the shooters from blowing the schools up and killing many more than they did.

Fourth you say, "Your argument "Yea it's bad for you so don't go drinking a bucket of it" is idiotic.  You don't go polluting the city's water with arsenic because it's only 1 ppm.  If you need to get rid of your toxic byproducts, pay to have this done.  The people's drinking water is not a waste disposable."

To this I respond, you are wrong. Using your logic, we should not put chlorine in water either because, of course, the is toxic also. Did it ever occur to you that maybe in certain levels(Yes, we have covered this before) even toxic chemical or compounds can work to our benefit. Crazy way of thinking I know, but hey, that's the way it is.

Fifth you say, " Whilst you are an expert in all forms of spelling the word "debate",
you are pure at debating.  You submit that the APA is against it, and then you quote their conflicting suggestion to supplement the child SYSTEMICALLY with fluoride drops."

To this I say, you are wrong. I am no expert in debate. Skilled, yes, expert, no. Maybe you have never seen a true expert in debate and that is where you go wrong in your judgment on that. Once again, do not be mad at me for reporting what was in their memo and not editing it to make my side look better. If you have issues with what they published, then direct your question to them, not me. I was merely filling a big blank you left out or never knew about.

Sixth you say, "Do you think for yourself or does the APA think for you?"

To this I answer, No one thinks for me, but me. Of course, it is easier to start personnel attacks when you don't like what the person is saying.

Seventh you say, "The last part of your email contains one long parapgraph that it seems
was cut and pasted."

To this I respond, finally, you are right. I think it would have been smarter for you to ask me for my source, but that would have been playing into the question I wanted you to ask. Most of the last paragraph is cut and pasted, with only me changing the parts I thought would make it clearer for you to understand. Of course, you could ask what gives me the right to change it to make it easier for you to understand? You could ask Ms. Lisa A. Goss, RDH, BS Dental Coordinator or Mr.Garrett B. Lyons Sr., DDS Director, Dental Services as they both reviewed the paper I co-wrote. The other author was the late Dr. Alvin Milner, so I guess you can't ask him. Both Lisa and Garrett work at Division of Dentistry, Alfred I. DuPont Hospital for Children, in Wilmington, DE. If you have any trouble finding their numbers, I am sure I can find them for you.

Eighth you say, "I hope you're not one of those "doctors" that encourages young mothers to administer certain vaccines from certain multi-use vials that contain thimerosal as a preservative."

To this I respond, Yes I was. Of course, I should point out that so did every other doctor in the country at that time. I am sorry if you feel doctors should never make mistakes. Mistakes are made in medicine all the time. Good doctors learn from them. For example, you seem to have left out of your statement the fact that Thimerosal has been removed from or reduced to trace amounts in all vaccines routinely recommended for children 6 years of age and younger, with the exception of inactivated influenza vaccine.

Ninth you say, "Doctor Watford, no offense, but it is time for you to hit the library
and start indulging in the latest medical journals."

To this I respond, does being an editor at large for 16 medical journals count as being current? My question for you is, when was the last time you read a medical journal? How many pages does read every week from a medical journal of any kind?

On a completely different note, Cary said:
"It most certainly does help.  Thank you."

To this I respond, you are welcome. In my experience, people only want to have other people agree with them, the facts don't really matter to them if they have a closed mind.

Once again, I hope this helps,

Dr. James Watford



Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com