> I don't think that trials were run to prove that Synthetic drugs are
> superior to natural thyroid replacement when they were introduced.
>> So here's the challenge to the makers;
>> PROVE IT by supplying the evidence, details of the studies, outcomes
> and dates please. Prove to us here that I am wrong, because I know
> what I see, week in week out, in the thyroid newsgroups.
>> Make the studies accessible to doctors all over the World by re-publishing
> the results, they NEED looking at objectively.
>> Carol
What is it with you anyway? First vaccines, now thyroid drugs. Are you
a disciple of Jeremy Rifkin? Your kind has been around for centuries --
Ludites they used to be called 100 years ago. You know next to nothing
about the technologies you deplore, about the process the drugs and
vaccines go through for approval, or about the true costs and benefits
to society of such technologies. You have no appreciation of
statistical inference, about the difference between correlation and
causality, or even what constitutes the "proof" you so stridently
demand. You simply have a knee-jerk reaction against anything you don't
consider to be "natural". You and your "newsgroups" of like-minded
paranoids are a bane to society -- you refuse (or are incapable) to
invest the intellectual energy to really fully understand the science or
the issues, but you run around like Chicken Little crying that the sky
is falling. And unfortunately, given the deplorable state of science
education in this country, too many pople take you seriously. I know
this response is unlikely to have any effect on you, but at least you
should know that you are posting to the wrong newsgroup. Stick to the
"alt." sections of the web where the average I.Q. is more in your range.
Have a nice day.
-- D.G. Spinella
