[From offlist] Re: FBI Says It Can't Find Hackers to Hire Because They All Smoke Pot
Because anything worth saying to me offlist is worth putting on the list, ESPECIALLY when it's trollbait. On 03/20/2017 07:03 PM, \0xDynamite wrote:
A person who smokes pot suggests someone who doesn't really care about excellence. They've stepped down from aiming high and have settled for being comfortable, much like a person who's done crack. They'll argue that crack is a "serious" drug, but it's all the same: escape.
Reality too tough for you?
\0x
YOU live in an altered reality far beyond anyone who pokes smot. Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg is the founder, CEO, and owner of Bloomberg L.P., the financial software, data, and media giant. As three-term mayor of New York City, he presided over tens of thousands of small-time pot busts, despite having famously answered a question about smoking pot with: "You bet I did, and I enjoyed it." NORML used those remarks as the basis for a full-page ad in the New York Times and ads on city buses, prompting Bloomberg to say he regretted those remarks, and that he was "a believer that we should enforce the laws, and I do not think that decriminalizing marijuana is a good idea." Richard Branson. The afore-mentioned Branson not only wants to invest in marijuana, he says he smokes it with his adult son. In a 2007 interview with GQ, he told Piers Morgan as much, saying father and son had lit up during an Australian beach vacation. In that same interview, Branson revealed that he had learned the art of joint-rolling from none other than Rolling Stone Keith Richards, who should know how it's done. Hugh Hefner. The Playboy magazine founder and octogenarian serial monogamist deserves kudos for being the first businessman to get behind pot legalization, donating $5,000 to help found NORML in 1970. Hef is still sticking to that position: “I don’t think there’s any question that marijuana should be legalized because to not legalize it, we’re paying the same price we paid for prohibition,” he said in 2010. But it wasn't just politics; Hefner liked what pot did for him: “Smoking helped put me in touch with the realm of the senses,” he told Patrick Anderson, author of High in America. “I discovered a whole other dimension to sex.” Mark Johnson. Johnson may not be as well-known as some other names on this list, but he is the CEO and founder of Descartes Labs, a New Mexico-based tech company, and before that, he was CEO of Zite, a Silicon Valley personalized news streaming company. Back in his Zite days, he told Bloomberg News he was a full-on stoner, toking up day in and day out, and that so many other tech workers were, too, that it was not an issue. “People just don’t care,” Johnson said. "If you do, you don’t need to hide it; and if you don’t, you accept that there are people around you that do.” He also defended marijuana users' productivity: “Pot is an extremely functional drug,” he said. “Coders can code on it, writers can write on it.” Peter Lewis. Lewis was CEO of Progressive Insurance from the 1960s to his retirement in 2000, and served as chairman until his death in 2013. He was also "a functioning pot head" who used weed for both fun and relief from chronic pain from a leg amputation in 1998. John Sperling. The University of Phoenix CEO died last year at age 93, but not before publicly acknowledging that he smoked marijuana manage the side effects of the treatment he received for prostate cancer. He, Lewis, and George Soros were the original troika of deep-pocketed marijuana reform businessmen; now only Soros is left, although Lewis's estate continues to invest in legalization efforts. Oprah Winfrey. The iconic Oprah isn't on TV anymore, but she' worth $3 billion and she's still the chairwoman and CEO of both Harpo Productions and the Oprah Winfrey Network, where she's also CCO. She has never staked out a position on marijuana legalization, but she has twice said she smoked it, although not for a long time. She told "Watch What Happens: Live" in 2013 that she had last smoked in 1982, and she told "The Late Show With David Letterman" earlier this year that she hadn't "smoked weed in 30 years." George Zimmer. The founder and recently ousted CEO of Men's Wearhouse is an unabashed pot smoker, as well as a financial backer of legalization efforts. Just a couple of weeks ago he told CNBC that he’s “been smoking marijuana on a regular basis for about 50 years.” And he's not take it easy after his 2013 firing, either: He has since gone on to create online tuxedo rental and tailoring companies. http://www.alternet.org/drugs/seven-successful-ceos-smoke-pot Top 50: 1. Barack Obama 2. 2016 Presidential Hopefuls (?) 3. Oprah Winfrey 4. Bill Clinton 5. John Kerry 6. Stephen Colbert 7. Clarence Thomas 8. Katy Perry 9. LeBron James 10. Jay Z 11. Bill Gates 12. George Soros 13. Jon Stewart 14. Bill Maher 15. Rush Limbaugh (ROTF to take the edge of his oxy jones!) 16. Andrew Cuomo 17. Sanjay Gupta 18. George W. Bush 19. Seth MacFarlane 20. George Clooney 21. Lady Gaga 22. Ted Turner 23. Brad Pitt 24. Rihanna 25. Whoopi Goldberg 26. Morgan Freeman 27. Angelina Jolie 28. Conan O’Brien 29. Martha Stewart 30. Gov. John Hickenlooper (CO) 31. Gov. Charlie Baker (MA) 32. Tom Brokaw 33. Michael Bloomberg 34. Justin Timberlake 35. Aaron Sorkin 36. Glenn Beck 37. Al Gore 38. Matt Damon 39. Susan Sarandon 40. Madonna 41. Robert Downey Jr. 42. Phil Jackson 43. Rick Steves 44. Jennifer Lawrence 45. Miley Cyrus 46. Jennifer Aniston 47. Matthew McConaughey 48. Snoop Dogg 49. Hugh Hefner 50. Maureen Dowd http://www.thecannabist.co/2015/08/26/famous-pot-smokers-mpp-list-2015/39859... Oliver Stoned > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/18/most-famous-marijuana-users_n_51600... The list is pretty fucking endless if you count closeted users who can't say because of job loss risk etc.
On Mar 20, 2017, at 10:16 PM, Razer <g2s@riseup.net> wrote:
Because anything worth saying to me offlist is worth putting on the list, ESPECIALLY when it's trollbait.
On 03/20/2017 07:03 PM, \0xDynamite wrote: A person who smokes pot suggests someone who doesn't really care about excellence. They've stepped down from aiming high and have settled for being comfortable, much like a person who's done crack. They'll argue that crack is a "serious" drug, but it's all the same: escape.
Reality too tough for you?
\0x
What an absurd outlook. Smoking crack is not nearly as much fun as smoking pot, for one thing :) It sounds like Captain Dynamite has been too timid to ever inhale - pot is an extraordinarily mild and harmless diversion, about 1000x safer than alcohol in every way, and enjoying it on occasion doesn't say anything about "excellence." I mean, unless it's some really fucking excellent nugs ;)
On 03/20/2017 08:27 PM, John Newman wrote:
On Mar 20, 2017, at 10:16 PM, Razer <g2s@riseup.net> wrote:
Because anything worth saying to me offlist is worth putting on the list, ESPECIALLY when it's trollbait.
On 03/20/2017 07:03 PM, \0xDynamite wrote: A person who smokes pot suggests someone who doesn't really care about excellence. They've stepped down from aiming high and have settled for being comfortable, much like a person who's done crack. They'll argue that crack is a "serious" drug, but it's all the same: escape.
Reality too tough for you?
\0x
What an absurd outlook. Smoking crack is not nearly as much fun as smoking pot, for one thing :)
It sounds like Captain Dynamite has been too timid to ever inhale - pot is an extraordinarily mild and harmless diversion, about 1000x safer than alcohol in every way, and enjoying it on occasion doesn't say anything about "excellence." I mean, unless it's some really fucking excellent nugs ;)
So OK, I've smoked a lot of marijuana. And it _is_ great with cocaine, especially for fucking. But I gotta say, smoking too soon after peaking on acid will totally poleaxe you. Short-term memory ~ zero.
A person who smokes pot suggests someone who doesn't really care about excellence. They've stepped down from aiming high and have settled for being comfortable, much like a person who's done crack. They'll argue that crack is a "serious" drug, but it's all the same: escape.
Reality too tough for you?
It sounds like Captain Dynamite has been too timid to ever inhale - pot is an extraordinarily mild and harmless diversion, about 1000x safer than alcohol in every way, and enjoying it on occasion doesn't say anything about "excellence."
Saying pot is harmless is like saying taking Prozac is harmless. The problem is the NET social consequences. And we can see the consequences: shit doesn't get done and things deteriorate. 'Nuff said? \0xd
On Mar 21, 2017, at 1:54 AM, \0xDynamite <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
A person who smokes pot suggests someone who doesn't really care about excellence. They've stepped down from aiming high and have settled for being comfortable, much like a person who's done crack. They'll argue that crack is a "serious" drug, but it's all the same: escape.
Reality too tough for you?
It sounds like Captain Dynamite has been too timid to ever inhale - pot is an extraordinarily mild and harmless diversion, about 1000x safer than alcohol in every way, and enjoying it on occasion doesn't say anything about "excellence."
Saying pot is harmless is like saying taking Prozac is harmless. The problem is the NET social consequences. And we can see the consequences: shit doesn't get done and things deteriorate.
'Nuff said?
No, nuff not said ;). Life is not about working 24 hours a day, and comparing pot to prozac is silly. It's great that you're straight-edge, how fashionable, but don't pass judgement on other people, about things of which you admittedly have no interest or experience. Making the broad claim that "shit doesn't get done" because of... marijuana... well, it's enough to crack me up, and my thc blood levels are just about zero right now.
\0xd
Saying pot is harmless is like saying taking Prozac is harmless. The problem is the NET social consequences. And we can see the consequences: shit doesn't get done and things deteriorate.
'Nuff said?
No, nuff not said ;). Life is not about working 24 hours a day,
Never said otherwise.
and comparing pot to prozac is silly.
It's not silly, both "take the edge off" (mild sedatives) and practitioners believe it's harmless.
It's great that you're straight-edge, how fashionable,
It's not fashionable, it's healthy. I shouldn't of used the fashionable term. I was answering your claim that I'm a pill-popper or an alcohol drinker, and the answer is: no.
but don't pass judgement on other people, about things of which you admittedly have no interest or experience.
So, you don't pass judgement? How about yoru leaders, capitialists, hmm? You're logically inconsistent, I suspect.
Making the broad claim that "shit doesn't get done" because of... marijuana... well, it's enough to crack me up, and my thc blood levels are just about zero right now.
All I know is that there are a lot of pot-smoking couch-activists. But, hey, maybe, you're in a holding pattern like me, and simply have to wait it out. In your case, becuase you don't know what the fuck to do, in mine, because everyone else thought THEY did. \0xd
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:49:32AM -0400, \0xDynamite wrote:
Saying pot is harmless is like saying taking Prozac is harmless. The problem is the NET social consequences. And we can see the consequences: shit doesn't get done and things deteriorate.
'Nuff said?
No, nuff not said ;). Life is not about working 24 hours a day,
Never said otherwise.
and comparing pot to prozac is silly.
It's not silly, both "take the edge off" (mild sedatives) and practitioners believe it's harmless.
Prozac is not a "mild sedative". It's an SSRI (Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor), very similar to a whole bunch of other anti-depressants, but not at all similar, in any way, to pot. The comparison _is_ silly. It's apples and oranges - they're both fruit, but the similarity ends there.
It's great that you're straight-edge, how fashionable,
It's not fashionable, it's healthy. I shouldn't of used the fashionable term. I was answering your claim that I'm a pill-popper or an alcohol drinker, and the answer is: no.
My claim of what? Umm.. check your email man. I take you at your word that you are "straight-edge" (although I'm sure you have no problem taking an aspirin if you have a headache or taking whatever meds a doctor might prescribe if you are ill). The fact that you seem to think I called you a pill-popper just goes to show: it doesn't take weed (or pills) to fuck with your memory :P For that matter, marijuana has finally and fairly quickly begun to be acknowledged as having legit medical benefits in the US, by the "authorities" (who I clearly give a big 'fuck you' to, but anyway). There are some cases where it is the only medication without significant side effects that controls seizures... and other cases where patients find it vastly preferable for treatment of painful conditions as opposed to long term prescribed opiates, which are of course extremely addictive, potentially dangerous, and can have a powerful "high" that some people simply do not like. Too sedating, too "strong", in comparison with marijuana. I presume you wouldn't be so quick to judge people who partake of the plant if they simply have a piece of paper from a higher authority that says they need it? `
but don't pass judgement on other people, about things of which you admittedly have no interest or experience.
So, you don't pass judgement? How about yoru leaders, capitialists, hmm? You're logically inconsistent, I suspect.
I don't pass judgment on someone's personal choices, no. Passing judgment on the actions of someone that has a direct negative consequence for others, like judging a murderer or a thief to be a piece of shit, or a politician who leads a nation into a war to be just a bigger piece of the same type of shit, is completely different than passing judgment on someone's personal choices. Judging someone for smoking pot is like judging someone for being gay - it's absurd. What you suspect about me is wrong.
Making the broad claim that "shit doesn't get done" because of... marijuana... well, it's enough to crack me up, and my thc blood levels are just about zero right now.
All I know is that there are a lot of pot-smoking couch-activists. But, hey, maybe, you're in a holding pattern like me, and simply have to wait it out. In your case, becuase you don't know what the fuck to do, in mine, because everyone else thought THEY did.
Anecdotes are nice, but they're just anecdotes, and in this case from someone who obviously considers themselves superior because they are "straight-edge". There are plenty of people that get all sorts of shit done who smoke marijuana, just as there are plenty of people that get nothing done who are "straight-edge". It is not the defining characteristic you seem to think, and to judge someone based solely on that trait is being judgmental, and having a closed mind. A condition that the occasional indulgence in pot (or other entheogens) could actually help you with, actually ;) John
Great, an oppurtunity to train the cyberPUNKS on the list about health. Forewarning, I am a Doctor of Holistic Health. That is equivalent to the best M.D. whether brain surgeon or otherwise. I am also published in the domain of cipher algorithms (CRYPTOLOGIA, 1993). On 3/25/17, John Newman <jnn@synfin.org> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:49:32AM -0400, \0xDynamite wrote:
Saying pot is harmless is like saying taking Prozac is harmless. The problem is the NET social consequences. And we can see the consequences: shit doesn't get done and things deteriorate.
'Nuff said?
No, nuff not said ;). Life is not about working 24 hours a day,
Never said otherwise.
and comparing pot to prozac is silly.
It's not silly, both "take the edge off" (mild sedatives) and practitioners believe it's harmless.
Prozac is not a "mild sedative". It's an SSRI (Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor), very similar to a whole bunch of other anti-depressants, but not at all similar, in any way, to pot.
So you're being "retarded" (inhibited) somehow? Hmm, I doubt you have sufficient scientific credentials to be argueing on this, but hey, it's your reputation. So you are saying that Prozac is an anti-depressant? No, not really. it is an anti-psychotic. Wellbutrin and Zoloft are classified as anti-depressents. The fact that some people feel "happier" on Prozac is a complex result of a very pathological society and the exreme drug interactions happening at the collective soul. I think you, like the fucking Establishment, are severely confused about mental health and you shouldn't be opening up your fucking mouth, if all you can do is parrot the Establishment like an ape.
The comparison _is_ silly. It's apples and oranges - they're both fruit, but the similarity ends there.
The comparison was a direct counter-response to the claim that "pot is harmless". Whether it's apples and oranges is irrelevant. Why don't you just admit that you're interested in the political battle of pot legalization rather than try to be a doctor? Like your friend "Dr. Carl Hart" who wants to "educate" me without bothering to ask me what I already know.
It's great that you're straight-edge, how fashionable,
It's not fashionable, it's healthy. I shouldn't of used the fashionable term. I was answering your claim that I'm a pill-popper or an alcohol drinker, and the answer is: no.
My claim of what? Umm.. check your email man.
Not your claim, Razer's I believe was. Please "check your email man".
I take you at your word that you are "straight-edge" (although I'm sure you have no problem taking an aspirin if you have a headache or taking whatever meds a doctor might prescribe if you are ill). The fact that you seem to think I called you a pill-popper just goes to show: it doesn't take weed (or pills) to fuck with your memory :P
No, I don't pop aspirin, nor would I trust a fucking doctor of this fucked up establishment to prescribe something to me. Why do you think America acts insane? It can presently be diagnose with several pathologies listed in the DSM. The fact that it hasn't been taken down for the protection of it's own values and to cease being a "danger to others" is a consequence of people like you who wants to keep the bullshit going fullsteam ahead while you sit back and enjoy a toke for YOUR "health and well-being".
For that matter, marijuana has finally and fairly quickly begun to be acknowledged as having legit medical benefits in the US, by the "authorities" (who I clearly give a big 'fuck you' to, but anyway).
Yeah, obvously. (Pshaw and *PUKE*) (Sarcasm intended.)
There are some cases where it is the only medication without significant side effects that controls seizures...
People have seizures because they've been lied to and their body is now fighting itself.
and other cases where patients find it vastly preferable for treatment of painful conditions as opposed to long term prescribed opiates, which are of course extremely addictive, potentially dangerous, and can have a powerful "high" that some people simply do not like.
Just like America to believe that pain is something to wish away, though, isn't? "Here, take two of these... <g>"
Too sedating, too "strong", in comparison with marijuana. I presume you wouldn't be so quick to judge people who partake of the plant if they simply have a piece of paper from a higher authority that says they need it?
See, once again, you (without explicitly stating it) are SUCKING THE COCK of the medical establishment here. You, without stating it again, are afraid of YOUR health and will RUN to the doctor if shit hits the fan and are too scared to sit it out. (broken bones and dermis, excepted in this critique).
but don't pass judgement on other people, about things of which you admittedly have no interest or experience.
So, you don't pass judgement? How about yoru leaders, capitialists, hmm? You're logically inconsistent, I suspect.
I don't pass judgment on someone's personal choices, no. Passing judgment on the actions of someone that has a direct negative consequence for others, like judging a murderer or a thief to be a piece of shit, or a politician who leads a nation into a war to be just a bigger piece of the same type of shit, is completely different than passing judgment on someone's personal choices.
Oh really? And how about when their "personal choices" mean that intelligent people with time on their hands AREN'T GETTING ANYTHING DONE on their own person WISHLIST? (like travel the world, or make world peace -- do pot smokers have no life whatsoever that they wish to create other than being a fucking deadbeat American?)
Judging someone for smoking pot is like judging someone for being gay - it's absurd. What you suspect about me is wrong.
I my God, you like EVERY LIBERAL, are fucking confused on the topic of homosexuality. So don't even go there, unless you think you are one. Because *I*, have been there. I know far more about it than most homosexuals.
Making the broad claim that "shit doesn't get done" because of... marijuana... well, it's enough to crack me up, and my thc blood levels are just about zero right now.
All I know is that there are a lot of pot-smoking couch-activists. But, hey, maybe, you're in a holding pattern like me, and simply have to wait it out. In your case, becuase you don't know what the fuck to do, in mine, because everyone else thought THEY did.
Anecdotes are nice, but they're just anecdotes, and in this case from someone who obviously considers themselves superior because they are "straight-edge".
Chill out man. You feel inferior. It's okay. Don't cover it up with bullshit -- I had enough of my share of sugar-coated pieces of dogshit and can now recognize it from miles away.
There are plenty of people that get all sorts of shit done who smoke marijuana,
Okay. Kinda of like how capitalists think they get a lot of shit done.
just as there are plenty of people that get nothing done who are "straight-edge". It is not the defining characteristic you seem to think, and to judge someone based solely on that trait is being judgmental, and having a closed mind. A condition that the occasional indulgence in pot (or other entheogens) could actually help you with, actually ;)
My mind is only as closed so as not to get infected with deadbeats and open enough to let every truth in to form a synthesis that can fix this planet -- whether religion vs. science or nature vs. capitalism. I doubt you can claim that. Straight edge is a by-product of that.
John
\0xD
Clarifying for John Newman; On 03/25/2017 05:20 PM Razer still thinks \0xDynamite is high on something besides 'life'. Rr
On March 25, 2017 8:20:39 PM EDT, "\0xDynamite" <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
Great, an oppurtunity to train the cyberPUNKS on the list about health. Forewarning, I am a Doctor of Holistic Health. That is equivalent to the best M.D. whether brain surgeon or otherwise. I am also published in the domain of cipher algorithms (CRYPTOLOGIA, 1993).
So forewarned. What THE FUCK do cipher algorithms have to do with drugs? Oh, that's right, NOTHING.
On 3/25/17, John Newman <jnn@synfin.org> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:49:32AM -0400, \0xDynamite wrote:
Saying pot is harmless is like saying taking Prozac is harmless. The problem is the NET social consequences. And we can see the consequences: shit doesn't get done and things deteriorate.
'Nuff said?
No, nuff not said ;). Life is not about working 24 hours a day,
Never said otherwise.
and comparing pot to prozac is silly.
It's not silly, both "take the edge off" (mild sedatives) and practitioners believe it's harmless.
Prozac is not a "mild sedative". It's an SSRI (Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor), very similar to a whole bunch of other anti-depressants, but not at all similar, in any way, to pot.
So you're being "retarded" (inhibited) somehow? Hmm, I doubt you have sufficient scientific credentials to be argueing on this, but hey, it's your reputation.
So you are saying that Prozac is an anti-depressant? No, not really. it is an anti-psychotic. Wellbutrin and Zoloft are classified as anti-depressents. The fact that some people feel "happier" on Prozac is a complex result of a very pathological society and the exreme drug interactions happening at the collective soul. I think you, like the fucking Establishment, are severely confused about mental health and you shouldn't be opening up your fucking mouth, if all you can do is parrot the Establishment like an ape.
NOT THAT IT MATTERS, but Prozac is in fact an anti-depressant.
The comparison _is_ silly. It's apples and oranges - they're both fruit, but the similarity ends there.
The comparison was a direct counter-response to the claim that "pot is harmless". Whether it's apples and oranges is irrelevant. Why don't you just admit that you're interested in the political battle of pot legalization rather than try to be a doctor? Like your friend "Dr. Carl Hart" who wants to "educate" me without bothering to ask me what I already know.
Pot IS harmless, you fucking twit. How much did you pay on the internet for your degree in "holistic health"? I suggest you get a refund.
It's great that you're straight-edge, how fashionable,
It's not fashionable, it's healthy. I shouldn't of used the fashionable term. I was answering your claim that I'm a pill-popper or an alcohol drinker, and the answer is: no.
My claim of what? Umm.. check your email man.
Not your claim, Razer's I believe was. Please "check your email man".
Then don't tell ME I made such a claim. Your response was to ME. I never claimed any such fucking thing, as you know.
I take you at your word that you are "straight-edge" (although I'm sure you have no problem taking an aspirin if you have a headache or taking whatever meds a doctor might prescribe if you are ill). The fact that you seem to think I called you a pill-popper just goes to show: it doesn't take weed (or pills) to fuck with your memory :P
No, I don't pop aspirin, nor would I trust a fucking doctor of this
Wow, what an amazing example of the "straight-edge" ideology taken to it's logical "retarded" extreme. I suppose you wouldn't take some phenytoin if you were in threat of death from a seizure condition either? Straight-edge to the max! Also a good example of natural selection in action.
fucked up establishment to prescribe something to me. Why do you think America acts insane? It can presently be diagnose with several pathologies listed in the DSM. The fact that it hasn't been taken down for the protection of it's own values and to cease being a "danger to others" is a consequence of people like you who wants to keep the bullshit going fullsteam ahead while you sit back and enjoy a toke for YOUR "health and well-being".
For that matter, marijuana has finally and fairly quickly begun to be acknowledged as having legit medical benefits in the US, by the "authorities" (who I clearly give a big 'fuck you' to, but anyway).
Yeah, obvously. (Pshaw and *PUKE*) (Sarcasm intended.)
There are some cases where it is the only medication without significant side effects that controls seizures...
People have seizures because they've been lied to and their body is now fighting itself.
Dude you are a fucking joke. You have no clue about neurology, please stop pretending. Really, save yourself some embarrassment.
and other cases where patients find it vastly preferable for treatment of painful conditions as opposed to long term prescribed opiates, which are of course extremely addictive, potentially dangerous, and can have a powerful "high" that some people simply do not like.
Just like America to believe that pain is something to wish away, though, isn't? "Here, take two of these... <g>"
Tough guy huh? Christ you're a fucking asshole. Have you ever flipped a motorcycle going 45 mph and landed on your face and arm? Ever been RUN OVER by a hit and run driver while crossing the road? Shit that hurts happens to people every day. In addition to the two personal anecdotes I just shared, there are people dying in horrible painful conditions all over the world... By your fucking moronic "logic" they should be left to suffer? Fuck you "tough guy"!
Too sedating, too "strong", in comparison with marijuana. I presume you wouldn't be so quick to judge people who partake of the plant if they simply have a piece of paper from a higher authority that says they need it?
See, once again, you (without explicitly stating it) are SUCKING THE COCK of the medical establishment here. You, without stating it again, are afraid of YOUR health and will RUN to the doctor if shit hits the fan and are too scared to sit it out. (broken bones and dermis, excepted in this critique).
Fuck you, you don't know shit about me or my health you judgemental fucking wannabe chump doctor of "holistic health"
but don't pass judgement on other people, about things of which you admittedly have no interest or experience.
So, you don't pass judgement? How about yoru leaders, capitialists, hmm? You're logically inconsistent, I suspect.
I don't pass judgment on someone's personal choices, no. Passing judgment on the actions of someone that has a direct negative consequence for others, like judging a murderer or a thief to be a piece of shit, or a politician who leads a nation into a war to be just a bigger piece of the same type of shit, is completely different than passing judgment on someone's personal choices.
Oh really? And how about when their "personal choices" mean that intelligent people with time on their hands AREN'T GETTING ANYTHING DONE on their own person WISHLIST? (like travel the world, or make world peace -- do pot smokers have no life whatsoever that they wish to create other than being a fucking deadbeat American?)
It's a PERSONAL CHOICE you fucking fascist. People are free to comport themselves in whatever manner they choose. And, again, since this seems to fly past your tiny little brain, smoking pot DOES NOT automatically destroy all ambition and render a person a fucking zombie!! You would've made great anti-drug ads for Nancy Reagan or any of America's war on drugs crusaders (of which you are obviously a prime example).
Judging someone for smoking pot is like judging someone for being gay - it's absurd. What you suspect about me is wrong.
I my God, you like EVERY LIBERAL, are fucking confused on the topic of homosexuality. So don't even go there, unless you think you are one. Because *I*, have been there. I know far more about it than most homosexuals.
Making the broad claim that "shit doesn't get done" because of... marijuana... well, it's enough to crack me up, and my thc blood levels are just about zero right now.
All I know is that there are a lot of pot-smoking couch-activists. But, hey, maybe, you're in a holding pattern like me, and simply have to wait it out. In your case, becuase you don't know what the fuck to do, in mine, because everyone else thought THEY did.
Anecdotes are nice, but they're just anecdotes, and in this case from someone who obviously considers themselves superior because they are "straight-edge".
Chill out man. You feel inferior. It's okay. Don't cover it up with bullshit -- I had enough of my share of sugar-coated pieces of dogshit and can now recognize it from miles away.
There are plenty of people that get all sorts of shit done who smoke marijuana,
Okay. Kinda of like how capitalists think they get a lot of shit done.
just as there are plenty of people that get nothing done who are "straight-edge". It is not the defining characteristic you seem to think, and to judge someone based solely on that trait is being judgmental, and having a closed mind. A condition that the occasional indulgence in pot (or other entheogens) could actually help you with, actually ;)
My mind is only as closed so as not to get infected with deadbeats and open enough to let every truth in to form a synthesis that can fix this planet -- whether religion vs. science or nature vs. capitalism. I doubt you can claim that. Straight edge is a by-product of that.
Bahaha. You are so full of shit your eyes are brown and it's coming out of your fucking ears. I'd recommend a doctor for such a condition, but.. ;)
John
\0xD
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 05:06:56AM -0400, John Newman wrote:
On March 25, 2017 8:20:39 PM EDT, "\0xDynamite" <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
Great, an oppurtunity to train the cyberPUNKS on the list about health. Forewarning, I am a Doctor of Holistic Health. That is equivalent to the best M.D. whether brain surgeon or otherwise. I am
P.S. - I didn't address this absurd claim directly because, well, it's so obviously an absurd claim, it doesn't seem to need addressing. But, briefly, being a so-called "doctor" of "alternative medicine" (or holistic health or whatever you want to call it) is obviously not equivalent to being a qualified surgeon. Anyone who would let you cut their brain open for brain surgery based on your little $15 holistic health certificate deserves the lobotomy (or death) they are about to get. I actually get the impression from your email that you may have performed some of these surgeries on yourself, except you don't come off as having quite as much brain-damage as I would expect.. close.. but not quite there ;) <SNIP>
Constructive discussion isn't really the strong suite of anyone on this list, is it? Perhaps try not to get offended at your first impression of your reading, interpret as positively as possible and stop your emotions from controlling your responses. Or just stick with the crypto ;-) On 03/26/2017 11:46 AM, John Newman wrote:
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 05:06:56AM -0400, John Newman wrote:
On March 25, 2017 8:20:39 PM EDT, "\0xDynamite" <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
Great, an oppurtunity to train the cyberPUNKS on the list about health. Forewarning, I am a Doctor of Holistic Health. That is equivalent to the best M.D. whether brain surgeon or otherwise. I am
P.S. - I didn't address this absurd claim directly because, well, it's so obviously an absurd claim, it doesn't seem to need addressing. But, briefly, being a so-called "doctor" of "alternative medicine" (or holistic health or whatever you want to call it) is obviously not equivalent to being a qualified surgeon. Anyone who would let you cut their brain open for brain surgery based on your little $15 holistic health certificate deserves the lobotomy (or death) they are about to get.
I actually get the impression from your email that you may have performed some of these surgeries on yourself, except you don't come off as having quite as much brain-damage as I would expect.. close.. but not quite there ;)
<SNIP>
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 12:30:54PM +0200, No wrote:
Constructive discussion isn't really the strong suite of anyone on this list, is it? Perhaps try not to get offended at your first impression of your reading, interpret as positively as possible and stop your emotions from controlling your responses.
Or just stick with the crypto ;-)
My first response to Captain Dynamite (sorry, Dr. Captain Dynamite) was measured. He came back like a rabid dog (obviously untreated, as befits his ideology) to "train the cyberPUNKS on the list about health" and then proceeded to type a bunch of insulting and idiotic inanities. Sorry for toxic nature of my reply. Perhaps I should've smoked a fucking joint before replying, but it's a bit early for that, and he was rather insulting and didactic, in the worst sort of way (listing his irrelevant certifications then proceeding to make a bunch of incorrect and insulting claims), and it raised my ire.
On 03/26/2017 11:46 AM, John Newman wrote:
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 05:06:56AM -0400, John Newman wrote:
On March 25, 2017 8:20:39 PM EDT, "\0xDynamite" <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
Great, an oppurtunity to train the cyberPUNKS on the list about health. Forewarning, I am a Doctor of Holistic Health. That is equivalent to the best M.D. whether brain surgeon or otherwise. I am
P.S. - I didn't address this absurd claim directly because, well, it's so obviously an absurd claim, it doesn't seem to need addressing. But, briefly, being a so-called "doctor" of "alternative medicine" (or holistic health or whatever you want to call it) is obviously not equivalent to being a qualified surgeon. Anyone who would let you cut their brain open for brain surgery based on your little $15 holistic health certificate deserves the lobotomy (or death) they are about to get.
I actually get the impression from your email that you may have performed some of these surgeries on yourself, except you don't come off as having quite as much brain-damage as I would expect.. close.. but not quite there ;)
<SNIP>
-- John
On March 25, 2017 8:20:39 PM EDT, "\0xDynamite" <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
Great, an oppurtunity to train the cyberPUNKS on the list about health. Forewarning, I am a Doctor of Holistic Health. That is equivalent to the best M.D. whether brain surgeon or otherwise. I am also published in the domain of cipher algorithms (CRYPTOLOGIA, 1993).
So forewarned.
What THE FUCK do cipher algorithms have to do with drugs? Oh, that's right, NOTHING.
Do you know what discussion list this is? Are you perhaps high now?
It's not silly, both "take the edge off" (mild sedatives) and practitioners believe it's harmless.
Prozac is not a "mild sedative". It's an SSRI (Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor), very similar to a whole bunch of other anti-depressants, but not at all similar, in any way, to pot.
So you're being "retarded" (inhibited) somehow? Hmm, I doubt you have sufficient scientific credentials to be argueing on this, but hey, it's your reputation.
So you are saying that Prozac is an anti-depressant? No, not really. it is an anti-psychotic. Wellbutrin and Zoloft are classified as anti-depressents. The fact that some people feel "happier" on Prozac is a complex result of a very pathological society and the exreme drug interactions happening at the collective soul. I think you, like the fucking Establishment, are severely confused about mental health and you shouldn't be opening up your fucking mouth, if all you can do is parrot the Establishment like an ape.
NOT THAT IT MATTERS, but Prozac is in fact an anti-depressant.
You mean not that it matters, because you don't have a way to argue out of your own hole, so "repeat what I already said tactic here".
The comparison _is_ silly. It's apples and oranges - they're both fruit, but the similarity ends there.
The comparison was a direct counter-response to the claim that "pot is harmless". Whether it's apples and oranges is irrelevant. Why don't you just admit that you're interested in the political battle of pot legalization rather than try to be a doctor? Like your friend "Dr. Carl Hart" who wants to "educate" me without bothering to ask me what I already know.
Pot IS harmless, you fucking twit. How much did you pay on the internet for your degree in "holistic health"? I suggest you get a refund.
I think you're getting pschotic. Perhaps you should actually try Prozac instead of self-prescribing marajuana to yourself.
It's great that you're straight-edge, how fashionable,
It's not fashionable, it's healthy. I shouldn't of used the fashionable term. I was answering your claim that I'm a pill-popper or an alcohol drinker, and the answer is: no.
My claim of what? Umm.. check your email man.
Not your claim, Razer's I believe was. Please "check your email man".
Then don't tell ME I made such a claim. Your response was to ME. I never claimed any such fucking thing, as you know.
I didn't tell you that you made such a claim. I responded to the list. Do you know how mailing lists work? YOU get a message and a copy of every conversation that happens on the list. Get off drugs, man. Pot inhibits your ability to track things properly and to care generally.
I take you at your word that you are "straight-edge" (although I'm sure you have no problem taking an aspirin if you have a headache or taking whatever meds a doctor might prescribe if you are ill). The fact that you seem to think I called you a pill-popper just goes to show: it doesn't take weed (or pills) to fuck with your memory :P
No, I don't pop aspirin, nor would I trust a fucking doctor of this
Wow, what an amazing example of the "straight-edge" ideology taken to it's logical "retarded" extreme.
Dude, you're getting a little longwinded on this idea of straight-edge. I mentioned it once as a short-hand way to say I don't do drugs. This is like your third time trying to use it AS AN ARGUMENT.
I suppose you wouldn't take some phenytoin if you were in threat of death from a seizure condition either? Straight-edge to the max! Also a good example of natural selection in action.
Dude, I'm not going to get a seizure, because I already know how to hold my body in a proper manner without internal self-contradictions.
fucked up establishment to prescribe something to me. Why do you think America acts insane? It can presently be diagnose with several pathologies listed in the DSM. The fact that it hasn't been taken down for the protection of it's own values and to cease being a "danger to others" is a consequence of people like you who wants to keep the bullshit going fullsteam ahead while you sit back and enjoy a toke for YOUR "health and well-being".
For that matter, marijuana has finally and fairly quickly begun to be acknowledged as having legit medical benefits in the US, by the "authorities" (who I clearly give a big 'fuck you' to, but anyway).
Yeah, obvously. (Pshaw and *PUKE*) (Sarcasm intended.)
There are some cases where it is the only medication without significant side effects that controls seizures...
Oh, well, I'm not surprised that pot-smokers have seizures, becuase they still probably think that they're homo sapiens, of the genus homo. Right? (Let me guess, you're a homo too?)
People have seizures because they've been lied to and their body is now fighting itself.
Dude you are a fucking joke. You have no clue about neurology, please stop pretending. Really, save yourself some embarrassment.
Ohp, catch-word of the day. It is a common trait of people who DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT to use specialized language to intimidate their talking partner into submission of authority.
Just like America to believe that pain is something to wish away, though, isn't? "Here, take two of these... <g>"
Tough guy huh? Christ you're a fucking asshole. Have you ever flipped a motorcycle going 45 mph and landed on your face and arm?
Okay, and you're solution is to "up the bar" and allow everyone to have an increased danger threshold because medicine is just an ambulance and needle away. No, you're supposed to have pain asshole. Believe me -- America needs some. It's like a fat fucking cow on the farm who makes no run for freedom and reality anymore because the shit keeps getting fed to him/her everyday.
Ever been RUN OVER by a hit and run driver while crossing the road? Shit that hurts happens to people every day. In addition to the two personal anecdotes I just shared, there are people dying in horrible painful conditions all over the world... By your fucking moronic "logic" they should be left to suffer?
Dude, you gave only blunt trauma scenarios. There temporary relief may be justified, but the truth is no one dies from pain. They die from their false beliefs, their lack of attention to their own karma, their brain-dead diets, and their psychotic lifestyles. Shit yes, there should be consequences and like I said -- no one dies from pain.
Fuck you "tough guy"!
See, you're (likely self-)prescribing marijuana, when perhaps you should be on an anti-psychotic like Prozac. Is your blood pressure elevated?
Too sedating, too "strong", in comparison with marijuana. I presume you wouldn't be so quick to judge people who partake of the plant if they simply have a piece of paper from a higher authority that says they need it?
See, once again, you (without explicitly stating it) are SUCKING THE COCK of the medical establishment here. You, without stating it again, are afraid of YOUR health and will RUN to the doctor if shit hits the fan and are too scared to sit it out. (broken bones and dermis, excepted in this critique).
Fuck you, you don't know shit about me or my health you judgemental fucking wannabe chump doctor of "holistic health"
Calm down. Your ad hominems are noted. But, since you have no data whatsoever on what I can cure with holistic health, your statements remain the ravings of a potential pre-psychotic personality. You do know that you gave no counter-argument, yes?
but don't pass judgement on other people, about things of which you admittedly have no interest or experience.
So, you don't pass judgement? How about yoru leaders, capitialists, hmm? You're logically inconsistent, I suspect.
I don't pass judgment on someone's personal choices, no. Passing judgment on the actions of someone that has a direct negative consequence for others, like judging a murderer or a thief to be a piece of shit, or a politician who leads a nation into a war to be just a bigger piece of the same type of shit, is completely different than passing judgment on someone's personal choices.
Oh really? And how about when their "personal choices" mean that intelligent people with time on their hands AREN'T GETTING ANYTHING DONE on their own person WISHLIST? (like travel the world, or make world peace -- do pot smokers have no life whatsoever that they wish to create other than being a fucking deadbeat American?)
It's a PERSONAL CHOICE you fucking fascist. People are free to comport themselves in whatever manner they choose.
No, that is patently not true. You did not make the organism in which you are leeching off of. So you have some responsibiltiy to its creator or the species itself, you might say. This is why I recommend hemp nuts for those who believe they need to toke up for health -- that, plus beleif system changes has all the medical benefits of smoking pot with none of the side-effects.
And, again, since this seems to fly past your tiny little brain, smoking pot DOES NOT automatically destroy all ambition and render a person a fucking zombie!!
OKAY PSYCHO!
You would've made great anti-drug ads for Nancy Reagan or any of America's war on drugs crusaders (of which you are obviously a prime example).
You idiot. I'm also a lawyer. I defend people who get arrested for smoking pot.
My mind is only as closed so as not to get infected with deadbeats and open enough to let every truth in to form a synthesis that can fix this planet -- whether religion vs. science or nature vs. capitalism. I doubt you can claim that. Straight edge is a by-product of that.
Bahaha. You are so full of shit your eyes are brown and it's coming out of your fucking ears.
UMkaaay.
I'd recommend a doctor for such a condition, but.. ;)
But you're not one. Thank you. Now STFU. You use of the F word has been completely defenseless, as presumably you have enough time sitting in front of your computer to compose a RATIONAL reply. G'day, sorry I don't toke up with you so you can feel better about your lack of WILL-TO-WORK/qualifications, but I'm also offering you solutions. You're choice to ignore them. \0xd
On 03/26/2017 08:43 AM, \0xDynamite, an intellectual 'hole' into which people throw their time responding, repied to John Newman's factual statement:
NOT THAT IT MATTERS, but Prozac is in fact ananti-depressant.
With:
You mean not that it matters, because you don't have a way to argue out of your own hole, so "repeat what I already said tactic here".
Fact:
The effectiveness of fluoxetine and other *antidepressants* in the treatment of mild-to-moderate depression is controversial. A meta-analysis published by Kirsch in 2008 suggests, in those with mild or moderate symptoms, the efficacy of fluoxetine and other SSRIs is clinically insignificant...
Lilly originally redacted a little bit in their study that showed a placebo, when given by a trusted health worker with the admonishment "Try this. It will help", worked as well as "Prozac" does.
A paper on *antidepressants* by Kirsch and co-authors published last month in PLoS Medicine has received a lot of attention. The antidepressants studied are the six most widely prescribed approved between 1987 and 1999: Prozac, Paxil, Effexor, Serzone, Zoloft, and Celexa.
The Editors' Summary explains:
The researchers obtained data on all the clinical trials submitted to the FDA ... They then used meta-analytic techniques to investigate whether the initial severity of depression affected the HRSD [Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression] improvement scores for the drug and placebo groups in these trials. They confirmed first that the overall effect of these new generation of antidepressants was below the recommended criteria for clinical significance. Then they showed that there was virtually no difference in the improvement scores for drug and placebo in patients with moderate depression and only a small and clinically insignificant difference among patients with very severe depression.
The difference in improvement between the *antidepressant* and placebo reached clinical significance, however, in patients with initial HRSD scores of more than 28—that is, in the most severely depressed patients.
Additional analyses indicated that the apparent clinical effectiveness of the *antidepressants* among these most severely depressed patients reflected a decreased responsiveness to placebo rather than an increased responsiveness to *antidepressants*.
The press simplified it further. The MSNBC headline was "*Antidepressants* may not help many patients". The Guardian announced: "Prozac, used by 40m people, does not work say scientists".
In Full, with charts, graphs, and statistical analyses: http://logbase2.blogspot.com/2008/03/upping-anti-depressant.html Marijuana works to relieve what can only be described as "Social Anxiety" (which is Zoloft's target market btw, singling out women) for MANY people, unlike the so-called ANTIDEPRESSANT Prozac ... and marijuana isn't even a drug. It's an herb, 'holistic boy'. Unless you think Comfrey, Sassafras, and the raft of other herbs you lernt about in assholistic skool are 'drugs' ... because they contain therapeutic ingredients. That said, "\0xDynamite" added to my spamcan list. Rr
On 03/26/2017 08:43 AM, \0xDynamite, an intellectual dynamo
NOT THAT IT MATTERS, but Prozac is in fact ananti-depressant.
With:
You mean not that it matters, because you don't have a way to argue out of your own hole, so "repeat what I already said tactic here".
Fact:
The effectiveness of fluoxetine and other *antidepressants* in the treatment of mild-to-moderate depression is controversial. A meta-analysis published by Kirsch in 2008 suggests, in those with mild or moderate symptoms, the efficacy of fluoxetine and other SSRIs is clinically insignificant...
Clinically insignificant.... <sotto voce:> for treating depression...
Lilly originally redacted a little bit in their study that showed a placebo, when given by a trusted health worker with the admonishment "Try this. It will help", worked as well as "Prozac" does.
Placebo worked equally well for prozac's use <sotto voce:> as an anti-depressant...
The researchers obtained data on all the clinical trials submitted to the FDA ... They then used meta-analytic techniques to investigate whether the initial severity of depression affected the HRSD [Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression] improvement scores for the drug and placebo groups in these trials. They confirmed first that the overall effect of these new generation of antidepressants was below the recommended criteria for clinical significance. Then they showed that there was virtually no difference in the improvement scores for drug and placebo in patients with moderate depression and only a small and clinically insignificant difference among patients with very severe depression.
The difference in improvement between the *antidepressant* and placebo reached clinical significance, however, in patients with initial HRSD scores of more than 28—that is, in the most severely depressed patients.
There's a contradiction there. It says it was clinically insignificant in severe depression, and then says it reached clinical significance in severe depression. The researchers do not know how to interpret their own results. Sorry. If you really care about these issues, feel free to put them in touch with me.
Additional analyses indicated that the apparent clinical effectiveness of the *antidepressants* among these most severely depressed patients reflected a decreased responsiveness to placebo rather than an increased responsiveness to *antidepressants*.
Just because you LABEL something "anti-X" doesn't make it anti-X. Do you understand? The study is showing that it is not, in fact, an anti-depressant even though it is labeled anti-depressant. I was referring to it's actions in the patient, not the label some doctors have given it.
The press simplified it further. The MSNBC headline was "*Antidepressants* may not help many patients". The Guardian announced: "Prozac, used by 40m people, does not work say scientists".
As I said, you've proven my point: Prozac is not an anti-depressant.
Marijuana works to relieve what can only be described as "Social Anxiety" (which is Zoloft's target market btw, singling out women) for MANY people, unlike the so-called ANTIDEPRESSANT Prozac
... and marijuana isn't even a drug. It's an herb, 'holistic boy'.
This is where pot smokers are completely and psychotically delusional. It is an herb up to the point that you BURN it. Just as any other plant. If I burn basil or cilantro IT IS NOT A HERB.
Unless you think Comfrey, Sassafras, and the raft of other herbs you lernt about in assholistic skool are 'drugs' ... because they contain therapeutic ingredients.
Those are generally eaten raw, so they have the full benefit of the orgnanism that created it. Boiling has mixed and more complicated reactions but isn't as severe as BURNING the SHIT OUT OF IT. Have you smelled your bowl? Smells like death, doesn't it? Now stop being idiots and help fix the world. \0xd
To the list: By the way, the only people who "need" marijuana, are those who believe they come from monkeys (R= ~0.91). You see, they are *taking* the love of Creation to offset their shitty beliefs, giving nothing back WHATSOEVER. Marxos On 3/26/17, \0xDynamite <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
On 03/26/2017 08:43 AM, \0xDynamite, an intellectual dynamo
NOT THAT IT MATTERS, but Prozac is in fact ananti-depressant.
With:
You mean not that it matters, because you don't have a way to argue out of your own hole, so "repeat what I already said tactic here".
Fact:
The effectiveness of fluoxetine and other *antidepressants* in the treatment of mild-to-moderate depression is controversial. A meta-analysis published by Kirsch in 2008 suggests, in those with mild or moderate symptoms, the efficacy of fluoxetine and other SSRIs is clinically insignificant...
Clinically insignificant.... <sotto voce:> for treating depression...
Lilly originally redacted a little bit in their study that showed a placebo, when given by a trusted health worker with the admonishment "Try this. It will help", worked as well as "Prozac" does.
Placebo worked equally well for prozac's use <sotto voce:> as an anti-depressant...
The researchers obtained data on all the clinical trials submitted to the FDA ... They then used meta-analytic techniques to investigate whether the initial severity of depression affected the HRSD [Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression] improvement scores for the drug and placebo groups in these trials. They confirmed first that the overall effect of these new generation of antidepressants was below the recommended criteria for clinical significance. Then they showed that there was virtually no difference in the improvement scores for drug and placebo in patients with moderate depression and only a small and clinically insignificant difference among patients with very severe depression.
The difference in improvement between the *antidepressant* and placebo reached clinical significance, however, in patients with initial HRSD scores of more than 28—that is, in the most severely depressed patients.
There's a contradiction there. It says it was clinically insignificant in severe depression, and then says it reached clinical significance in severe depression. The researchers do not know how to interpret their own results. Sorry. If you really care about these issues, feel free to put them in touch with me.
Additional analyses indicated that the apparent clinical effectiveness of the *antidepressants* among these most severely depressed patients reflected a decreased responsiveness to placebo rather than an increased responsiveness to *antidepressants*.
Just because you LABEL something "anti-X" doesn't make it anti-X. Do you understand? The study is showing that it is not, in fact, an anti-depressant even though it is labeled anti-depressant. I was referring to it's actions in the patient, not the label some doctors have given it.
The press simplified it further. The MSNBC headline was "*Antidepressants* may not help many patients". The Guardian announced: "Prozac, used by 40m people, does not work say scientists".
As I said, you've proven my point: Prozac is not an anti-depressant.
Marijuana works to relieve what can only be described as "Social Anxiety" (which is Zoloft's target market btw, singling out women) for MANY people, unlike the so-called ANTIDEPRESSANT Prozac
... and marijuana isn't even a drug. It's an herb, 'holistic boy'.
This is where pot smokers are completely and psychotically delusional. It is an herb up to the point that you BURN it. Just as any other plant. If I burn basil or cilantro IT IS NOT A HERB.
Unless you think Comfrey, Sassafras, and the raft of other herbs you lernt about in assholistic skool are 'drugs' ... because they contain therapeutic ingredients.
Those are generally eaten raw, so they have the full benefit of the orgnanism that created it. Boiling has mixed and more complicated reactions but isn't as severe as BURNING the SHIT OUT OF IT. Have you smelled your bowl? Smells like death, doesn't it?
Now stop being idiots and help fix the world.
\0xd
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 12:51:27PM -0400, \0xDynamite wrote:
On 03/26/2017 08:43 AM, \0xDynamite, an intellectual dynamo
NOT THAT IT MATTERS, but Prozac is in fact ananti-depressant.
With:
You mean not that it matters, because you don't have a way to argue out of your own hole, so "repeat what I already said tactic here".
Fact:
The effectiveness of fluoxetine and other *antidepressants* in the treatment of mild-to-moderate depression is controversial. A meta-analysis published by Kirsch in 2008 suggests, in those with mild or moderate symptoms, the efficacy of fluoxetine and other SSRIs is clinically insignificant...
Clinically insignificant.... <sotto voce:> for treating depression...
Lilly originally redacted a little bit in their study that showed a placebo, when given by a trusted health worker with the admonishment "Try this. It will help", worked as well as "Prozac" does.
Placebo worked equally well for prozac's use <sotto voce:> as an anti-depressant...
Gold! You could be a stand up comedian you know. Of course, you could be whatever you want, since you comprehend a few basic facts like "I didn't create my body" "I am not my body" and "there's really no need to take opposing views (or random interjected F-bombs) personally" - my, what strange and alien thoughts you have .. ...
Additional analyses indicated that the apparent clinical effectiveness of the *antidepressants* among these most severely depressed patients reflected a decreased responsiveness to placebo rather than an increased responsiveness to *antidepressants*.
Just because you LABEL something "anti-X" doesn't make it anti-X.
Oh come on! Surely you can't be serious about logical discussion - you must be new around here?
Do you understand? The study is showing that it is not, in fact, an anti-depressant even though it is labeled anti-depressant. I was referring to it's actions in the patient, not the label some doctors have given it.
My god! Next thing you'll be telling us you're mostly only into -applied- crypto and not theoretical but unusable crypto. Pff!
... and marijuana isn't even a drug. It's an herb, 'holistic boy'.
This is where pot smokers are completely and psychotically delusional. It is an herb up to the point that you BURN it. Just as any other plant. If I burn basil or cilantro IT IS NOT A HERB.
Now this is a new thought - what would you call a burnt herb? (I didn't do chemistry.)
This is where pot smokers are completely and psychotically delusional. It is an herb up to the point that you BURN it. Just as any other plant. If I burn basil or cilantro IT IS NOT A HERB.
Now this is a new thought - what would you call a burnt herb? (I didn't do chemistry.)
Toxins. \0xD
On Mar 26, 2017, at 11:43 AM, \0xDynamite <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
On March 25, 2017 8:20:39 PM EDT, "\0xDynamite" <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
Great, an oppurtunity to train the cyberPUNKS on the list about health. Forewarning, I am a Doctor of Holistic Health. That is equivalent to the best M.D. whether brain surgeon or otherwise. I am also published in the domain of cipher algorithms (CRYPTOLOGIA, 1993).
So forewarned.
What THE FUCK do cipher algorithms have to do with drugs? Oh, that's right, NOTHING.
Do you know what discussion list this is? Are you perhaps high now?
It's not relevant to the current discussion. Are you perhaps brain damaged? Or you just compulsively feel the need to list off 25 year old qualifications totally irrelevant to the discussion at hand?
It's not silly, both "take the edge off" (mild sedatives) and practitioners believe it's harmless.
Prozac is not a "mild sedative". It's an SSRI (Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor), very similar to a whole bunch of other anti-depressants, but not at all similar, in any way, to pot.
So you're being "retarded" (inhibited) somehow? Hmm, I doubt you have sufficient scientific credentials to be argueing on this, but hey, it's your reputation.
So you are saying that Prozac is an anti-depressant? No, not really. it is an anti-psychotic. Wellbutrin and Zoloft are classified as anti-depressents. The fact that some people feel "happier" on Prozac is a complex result of a very pathological society and the exreme drug interactions happening at the collective soul. I think you, like the fucking Establishment, are severely confused about mental health and you shouldn't be opening up your fucking mouth, if all you can do is parrot the Establishment like an ape.
NOT THAT IT MATTERS, but Prozac is in fact an anti-depressant.
You mean not that it matters, because you don't have a way to argue out of your own hole, so "repeat what I already said tactic here".
Look in your PDR. Not that it matters as in - who gives a shit? Regardless, you're wrong.
The comparison _is_ silly. It's apples and oranges - they're both fruit, but the similarity ends there.
The comparison was a direct counter-response to the claim that "pot is harmless". Whether it's apples and oranges is irrelevant. Why don't you just admit that you're interested in the political battle of pot legalization rather than try to be a doctor? Like your friend "Dr. Carl Hart" who wants to "educate" me without bothering to ask me what I already know.
Pot IS harmless, you fucking twit. How much did you pay on the internet for your degree in "holistic health"? I suggest you get a refund.
I think you're getting pschotic. Perhaps you should actually try Prozac instead of self-prescribing marajuana to yourself.
I think you're a self righteous cunt. Perhaps you should stop trying to tell people the appropriate way to live their lives.
It's great that you're straight-edge, how fashionable,
It's not fashionable, it's healthy. I shouldn't of used the fashionable term. I was answering your claim that I'm a pill-popper or an alcohol drinker, and the answer is: no.
My claim of what? Umm.. check your email man.
Not your claim, Razer's I believe was. Please "check your email man".
Then don't tell ME I made such a claim. Your response was to ME. I never claimed any such fucking thing, as you know.
I didn't tell you that you made such a claim. I responded to the list. Do you know how mailing lists work? YOU get a message and a copy of every conversation that happens on the list. Get off drugs, man. Pot inhibits your ability to track things properly and to care generally.
Do you know how a mailing list works? Your email was to me, with the list copied.
I take you at your word that you are "straight-edge" (although I'm sure you have no problem taking an aspirin if you have a headache or taking whatever meds a doctor might prescribe if you are ill). The fact that you seem to think I called you a pill-popper just goes to show: it doesn't take weed (or pills) to fuck with your memory :P
No, I don't pop aspirin, nor would I trust a fucking doctor of this
Wow, what an amazing example of the "straight-edge" ideology taken to it's logical "retarded" extreme.
Dude, you're getting a little longwinded on this idea of straight-edge. I mentioned it once as a short-hand way to say I don't do drugs. This is like your third time trying to use it AS AN ARGUMENT.
You just said you wouldn't take an aspirin if you had a headache - I'm pointing out the idiocy of your ideology when taken to such a moronic extreme, as was obvious.
I suppose you wouldn't take some phenytoin if you were in threat of death from a seizure condition either? Straight-edge to the max! Also a good example of natural selection in action.
Dude, I'm not going to get a seizure, because I already know how to hold my body in a proper manner without internal self-contradictions.
Dude, your holistic alternative medicine bullshit has nothing to do with epilepsy. You are spouting nonsense. You're a fucking quack.
fucked up establishment to prescribe something to me. Why do you think America acts insane? It can presently be diagnose with several pathologies listed in the DSM. The fact that it hasn't been taken down for the protection of it's own values and to cease being a "danger to others" is a consequence of people like you who wants to keep the bullshit going fullsteam ahead while you sit back and enjoy a toke for YOUR "health and well-being".
For that matter, marijuana has finally and fairly quickly begun to be acknowledged as having legit medical benefits in the US, by the "authorities" (who I clearly give a big 'fuck you' to, but anyway).
Yeah, obvously. (Pshaw and *PUKE*) (Sarcasm intended.)
There are some cases where it is the only medication without significant side effects that controls seizures...
Oh, well, I'm not surprised that pot-smokers have seizures, becuase they still probably think that they're homo sapiens, of the genus homo. Right? (Let me guess, you're a homo too?)
People have seizures because they've been lied to and their body is now fighting itself.
Dude you are a fucking joke. You have no clue about neurology, please stop pretending. Really, save yourself some embarrassment.
Ohp, catch-word of the day. It is a common trait of people who DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT to use specialized language to intimidate their talking partner into submission of authority.
Specialized language ? What specialized language would that be? Nobody is using big words here, "Doctor".
Just like America to believe that pain is something to wish away, though, isn't? "Here, take two of these... <g>"
Tough guy huh? Christ you're a fucking asshole. Have you ever flipped a motorcycle going 45 mph and landed on your face and arm?
Okay, and you're solution is to "up the bar" and allow everyone to have an increased danger threshold because medicine is just an ambulance and needle away. No, you're supposed to have pain asshole. Believe me -- America needs some. It's like a fat fucking cow on the farm who makes no run for freedom and reality anymore because the shit keeps getting fed to him/her everyday.
Accidents happen. It's a fact.
Ever been RUN OVER by a hit and run driver while crossing the road? Shit that hurts happens to people every day. In addition to the two personal anecdotes I just shared, there are people dying in horrible painful conditions all over the world... By your fucking moronic "logic" they should be left to suffer?
Dude, you gave only blunt trauma scenarios. There temporary relief may be justified, but the truth is no one dies from pain. They die from their false beliefs, their lack of attention to their own karma, their brain-dead diets, and their psychotic lifestyles. Shit yes, there should be consequences and like I said -- no one dies from pain.
But pain is often an accompanied symptom of terminal illnesses. Again, why should someone who is dying be forced to suffer? You're a fucking sadist.
Fuck you "tough guy"!
See, you're (likely self-)prescribing marijuana, when perhaps you should be on an anti-psychotic like Prozac. Is your blood pressure elevated?
Too sedating, too "strong", in comparison with marijuana. I presume you wouldn't be so quick to judge people who partake of the plant if they simply have a piece of paper from a higher authority that says they need it?
See, once again, you (without explicitly stating it) are SUCKING THE COCK of the medical establishment here. You, without stating it again, are afraid of YOUR health and will RUN to the doctor if shit hits the fan and are too scared to sit it out. (broken bones and dermis, excepted in this critique).
Fuck you, you don't know shit about me or my health you judgemental fucking wannabe chump doctor of "holistic health"
Calm down. Your ad hominems are noted. But, since you have no data whatsoever on what I can cure with holistic health, your statements remain the ravings of a potential pre-psychotic personality. You do know that you gave no counter-argument, yes?
My argument has been clear from the start: what people do in their private lives is none of your fucking business!
but don't pass judgement on other people, about things of which you admittedly have no interest or experience.
So, you don't pass judgement? How about yoru leaders, capitialists, hmm? You're logically inconsistent, I suspect.
I don't pass judgment on someone's personal choices, no. Passing judgment on the actions of someone that has a direct negative consequence for others, like judging a murderer or a thief to be a piece of shit, or a politician who leads a nation into a war to be just a bigger piece of the same type of shit, is completely different than passing judgment on someone's personal choices.
Oh really? And how about when their "personal choices" mean that intelligent people with time on their hands AREN'T GETTING ANYTHING DONE on their own person WISHLIST? (like travel the world, or make world peace -- do pot smokers have no life whatsoever that they wish to create other than being a fucking deadbeat American?)
It's a PERSONAL CHOICE you fucking fascist. People are free to comport themselves in whatever manner they choose.
No, that is patently not true. You did not make the organism in which you are leeching off of. So you have some responsibiltiy to its creator or the species itself, you might say. This is why I recommend hemp nuts for those who believe they need to toke up for health -- that, plus beleif system changes has all the medical benefits of smoking pot with none of the side-effects.
Lol. I don't owe my personal life choices to anyone, most especially not to whatever kind of spiritual nonsense you are babbling about. "Hemp nuts" - you really are a hilarious quack.
And, again, since this seems to fly past your tiny little brain, smoking pot DOES NOT automatically destroy all ambition and render a person a fucking zombie!!
OKAY PSYCHO!
You would've made great anti-drug ads for Nancy Reagan or any of America's war on drugs crusaders (of which you are obviously a prime example).
You idiot. I'm also a lawyer. I defend people who get arrested for smoking pot.
Well bully for you. Did you get your law degree at the same site selling the doctorate in holistic medicine?
My mind is only as closed so as not to get infected with deadbeats and open enough to let every truth in to form a synthesis that can fix this planet -- whether religion vs. science or nature vs. capitalism. I doubt you can claim that. Straight edge is a by-product of that.
Bahaha. You are so full of shit your eyes are brown and it's coming out of your fucking ears.
UMkaaay.
I'd recommend a doctor for such a condition, but.. ;)
But you're not one. Thank you. Now STFU. You use of the F word has been completely defenseless, as presumably you have enough time sitting in front of your computer to compose a RATIONAL reply.
My use of the F word? I can use whatever fucking word I want, just as I can smoke whatever plant I want.
G'day, sorry I don't toke up with you so you can feel better about your lack of WILL-TO-WORK/qualifications, but I'm also offering you solutions. You're choice to ignore them.
I don't lack a will to work. My professional life is none of your business - unlike you, I don't feel the need to brag about a piece of paper from an authority figure every five minutes. And I can't imagine a more unpleasant experience than smoking pot with a self righteous person like yourself. Cheers ;) John
\0xd
Okay, since you refuse to argue on reasonable grounds, I won't respond to all of your attacks which didn't have any real argument except attempts to demerit the concept of Holistic Medicine. For the sake of the list, I'm going to clarify what and why an H.D. is superior an M.D. which you so fondly massage their crotch for, even though you are probably overweight, nursing one or more addictions, and have lost some desire to live exhibitiing some low-level depression. (This is the common case for liberal Americans.) Holistic Health is greatly superior, even if not (to the published establishment) scientifically more superior, because *logically* health ITSELF is a factor of the WHOLE (hence HOListic), not the sum of it`s parts (like reductionist Occidental medicine, who's glory mostly goes back to the study of dead cadavers and anatomy -- those who failed at making health). Do you get this first point (reductionist vs. holistic)? Holistic Medicine *includes* the science that reductionism has built, but also includes a WHOLE other set of data: the subjective side of health (how does the placebo affect has such an effect on health, for example?). So, it *transcends* the present medical establishment in everyway, except when it comes to blunt trauma, like I said, where they have mastery (bone setting and wound dressing). EVERYTHING else is 100% better served via holistic medicine. Unfortunatley, there just aren't many people trained in it. I practially had to (re)invent the field, because it was awash in pseudo-science, naive spiritualism, and confusions of it's own identity and the use of drugs/supplements as medical aids. So I will define it here: Holistic Health can diagnose and cure ANY disease that Western medicine CLAIMS to cure but without invasive procedures, including chemical-based ingestives (or inhalation). Further, it can avoid the diseases and even mishaps in the first place by creative a more holistic relationship to self, family, the environment, and the divine. I'll define this latter, for the sake of arguing, as "that which transcends the human mind to grasp or comprehend, but, nonetheless, exerting a force upon life itself". Now that wasn't so hard was it? Is that really difficult to take or understand. Western medicine would confound you with specialized language, multi-million dollar equipment, and colored pillls -- all types of power you likely have already given away becuase it seemed impressive, right? Well, America is one of the most diseased, confused, and destructive nations on the planet and you and I know it. It's on the street, it's on Indian reservations, it's in abortion clinics and cosmetic enhancement clinics, the larger-than-usual prison population, and it's in the alarming severity of some brith defects. So, tell me, why do you keep arguing for THEM?
Do you know how a mailing list works? Your email was to me, with the list copied.
No, it was actually addressed to Razor. You, please, are in a state of delusion, arguing with me, holding on to your last little island of power that America has left you -- you're own voice.
Specialized language ? What specialized language would that be? Nobody is using big words here, "Doctor".
Do you actually understand "neurology"? No, and I know this because doctors don't understand it, so how could you?
But pain is often an accompanied symptom of terminal illnesses. Again, why should someone who is dying be forced to suffer? You're a fucking sadist.
They're not forced. They are feeling the weight of their life decisions.
Fuck you, you don't know shit about me or my health you judgemental fucking wannabe chump doctor of "holistic health"
You've given me a lot of data by your outbursts. Do they say something about you? About what forces run your life, for example?
My argument has been clear from the start: what people do in their private lives is none of your fucking business!
But it's not private. If you planted a tree 50 yrs ago and made a table with your own hands, the table is yours, but you didn't make the power in marijuana. Something else did. Should people be able to take whatever they want and use anything as they wish? Is that what you argue?
Well bully for you. Did you get your law degree at the same site selling the doctorate in holistic medicine?
No, I got it from the only school worhty of issuing one: the school of hard knocks. Maybe you feel intimidated by people with degrees when you have none, but I'm using them to educate you. Why fight me? \0xd
How marvelous, Dr Dipshit's treatise on modern quackery. Maybe you can submit this to some journal with a small fee and get another bragging point for your CV, but I'm not reading it. If it quacks like a (fascist, racist, theist) duck.... cheers John
On Mar 26, 2017, at 5:51 PM, \0xDynamite <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
Okay, since you refuse to argue on reasonable grounds, I won't respond to all of your attacks which didn't have any real argument except attempts to demerit the concept of Holistic Medicine. For the sake of the list, I'm going to clarify what and why an H.D. is superior an M.D. which you so fondly massage their crotch for, even though you are probably overweight, nursing one or more addictions, and have lost some desire to live exhibitiing some low-level depression. (This is the common case for liberal Americans.)
Holistic Health is greatly superior, even if not (to the published establishment) scientifically more superior, because *logically* health ITSELF is a factor of the WHOLE (hence HOListic), not the sum of it`s parts (like reductionist Occidental medicine, who's glory mostly goes back to the study of dead cadavers and anatomy -- those who failed at making health).
Do you get this first point (reductionist vs. holistic)? Holistic Medicine *includes* the science that reductionism has built, but also includes a WHOLE other set of data: the subjective side of health (how does the placebo affect has such an effect on health, for example?). So, it *transcends* the present medical establishment in everyway, except when it comes to blunt trauma, like I said, where they have mastery (bone setting and wound dressing). EVERYTHING else is 100% better served via holistic medicine. Unfortunatley, there just aren't many people trained in it. I practially had to (re)invent the field, because it was awash in pseudo-science, naive spiritualism, and confusions of it's own identity and the use of drugs/supplements as medical aids.
So I will define it here: Holistic Health can diagnose and cure ANY disease that Western medicine CLAIMS to cure but without invasive procedures, including chemical-based ingestives (or inhalation). Further, it can avoid the diseases and even mishaps in the first place by creative a more holistic relationship to self, family, the environment, and the divine. I'll define this latter, for the sake of arguing, as "that which transcends the human mind to grasp or comprehend, but, nonetheless, exerting a force upon life itself".
Now that wasn't so hard was it? Is that really difficult to take or understand. Western medicine would confound you with specialized language, multi-million dollar equipment, and colored pillls -- all types of power you likely have already given away becuase it seemed impressive, right?
Well, America is one of the most diseased, confused, and destructive nations on the planet and you and I know it. It's on the street, it's on Indian reservations, it's in abortion clinics and cosmetic enhancement clinics, the larger-than-usual prison population, and it's in the alarming severity of some brith defects.
So, tell me, why do you keep arguing for THEM?
Do you know how a mailing list works? Your email was to me, with the list copied.
No, it was actually addressed to Razor. You, please, are in a state of delusion, arguing with me, holding on to your last little island of power that America has left you -- you're own voice.
Specialized language ? What specialized language would that be? Nobody is using big words here, "Doctor".
Do you actually understand "neurology"? No, and I know this because doctors don't understand it, so how could you?
But pain is often an accompanied symptom of terminal illnesses. Again, why should someone who is dying be forced to suffer? You're a fucking sadist.
They're not forced. They are feeling the weight of their life decisions.
Fuck you, you don't know shit about me or my health you judgemental fucking wannabe chump doctor of "holistic health"
You've given me a lot of data by your outbursts. Do they say something about you? About what forces run your life, for example?
My argument has been clear from the start: what people do in their private lives is none of your fucking business!
But it's not private. If you planted a tree 50 yrs ago and made a table with your own hands, the table is yours, but you didn't make the power in marijuana. Something else did. Should people be able to take whatever they want and use anything as they wish? Is that what you argue?
Well bully for you. Did you get your law degree at the same site selling the doctorate in holistic medicine?
No, I got it from the only school worhty of issuing one: the school of hard knocks. Maybe you feel intimidated by people with degrees when you have none, but I'm using them to educate you. Why fight me?
\0xd
On 03/26/2017 07:38 PM, John Newman wrote:
How marvelous, Dr Dipshit's treatise on modern quackery. Maybe you can submit this to some journal with a small fee and get another bragging point for your CV, but I'm not reading it.
Actually it is good reading if you want to analyse a perfect snake oil pitch. "So I will define it here: Holistic Health can diagnose and cure ANY disease" I suppose once this is proven there will be no need for hyperbolic cultish promotion of this medicine.
If it quacks like a (fascist, racist, theist) duck....
Ayep
cheers John
On Mar 26, 2017, at 5:51 PM, \0xDynamite <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
Okay, since you refuse to argue on reasonable grounds, I won't respond to all of your attacks which didn't have any real argument except attempts to demerit the concept of Holistic Medicine. For the sake of the list, I'm going to clarify what and why an H.D. is superior an M.D. which you so fondly massage their crotch for, even though you are probably overweight, nursing one or more addictions, and have lost some desire to live exhibitiing some low-level depression. (This is the common case for liberal Americans.)
Holistic Health is greatly superior, even if not (to the published establishment) scientifically more superior, because *logically* health ITSELF is a factor of the WHOLE (hence HOListic), not the sum of it`s parts (like reductionist Occidental medicine, who's glory mostly goes back to the study of dead cadavers and anatomy -- those who failed at making health).
Do you get this first point (reductionist vs. holistic)? Holistic Medicine *includes* the science that reductionism has built, but also includes a WHOLE other set of data: the subjective side of health (how does the placebo affect has such an effect on health, for example?). So, it *transcends* the present medical establishment in everyway, except when it comes to blunt trauma, like I said, where they have mastery (bone setting and wound dressing). EVERYTHING else is 100% better served via holistic medicine. Unfortunatley, there just aren't many people trained in it. I practially had to (re)invent the field, because it was awash in pseudo-science, naive spiritualism, and confusions of it's own identity and the use of drugs/supplements as medical aids.
So I will define it here: Holistic Health can diagnose and cure ANY disease that Western medicine CLAIMS to cure but without invasive procedures, including chemical-based ingestives (or inhalation). Further, it can avoid the diseases and even mishaps in the first place by creative a more holistic relationship to self, family, the environment, and the divine. I'll define this latter, for the sake of arguing, as "that which transcends the human mind to grasp or comprehend, but, nonetheless, exerting a force upon life itself".
Now that wasn't so hard was it? Is that really difficult to take or understand. Western medicine would confound you with specialized language, multi-million dollar equipment, and colored pillls -- all types of power you likely have already given away becuase it seemed impressive, right?
Well, America is one of the most diseased, confused, and destructive nations on the planet and you and I know it. It's on the street, it's on Indian reservations, it's in abortion clinics and cosmetic enhancement clinics, the larger-than-usual prison population, and it's in the alarming severity of some brith defects.
So, tell me, why do you keep arguing for THEM?
Do you know how a mailing list works? Your email was to me, with the list copied.
No, it was actually addressed to Razor. You, please, are in a state of delusion, arguing with me, holding on to your last little island of power that America has left you -- you're own voice.
Specialized language ? What specialized language would that be? Nobody is using big words here, "Doctor".
Do you actually understand "neurology"? No, and I know this because doctors don't understand it, so how could you?
But pain is often an accompanied symptom of terminal illnesses. Again, why should someone who is dying be forced to suffer? You're a fucking sadist.
They're not forced. They are feeling the weight of their life decisions.
Fuck you, you don't know shit about me or my health you judgemental fucking wannabe chump doctor of "holistic health"
You've given me a lot of data by your outbursts. Do they say something about you? About what forces run your life, for example?
My argument has been clear from the start: what people do in their private lives is none of your fucking business!
But it's not private. If you planted a tree 50 yrs ago and made a table with your own hands, the table is yours, but you didn't make the power in marijuana. Something else did. Should people be able to take whatever they want and use anything as they wish? Is that what you argue?
Well bully for you. Did you get your law degree at the same site selling the doctorate in holistic medicine?
No, I got it from the only school worhty of issuing one: the school of hard knocks. Maybe you feel intimidated by people with degrees when you have none, but I'm using them to educate you. Why fight me?
\0xd
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 05:51:31PM -0400, \0xDynamite wrote:
So I will define it here: Holistic Health can diagnose and cure ANY disease that Western medicine CLAIMS to cure but without invasive procedures, including chemical-based ingestives (or inhalation). Further, it can avoid the diseases and even mishaps in the first place by creative a more holistic relationship to self, family, the environment, and the divine. I'll define this latter, for the sake of arguing, as "that which transcends the human mind to grasp or comprehend, but, nonetheless, exerting a force upon life itself".
Look, if you can't measure it -now-, then the force does not exist, just like the fact that you cannot travel faster than the speed of sound, even though we can measure the speed of sound. Now, the state of mind of inquisitiveness allowing for even the possibility of forces beyond our current measurement capabilities, some say is a requirement to not only discovery, but ultimately healing of the self and peace for everyone/ the whole planet. But as we all know, this is complete hogwash because we can't measure such forces, so to suppose their existence is a lunacy which is wildly dangerous and anti-systemic, and therefore MUST be opposed with every last dying breath! And even more so the concept that faith in forces which forever shall lay beyond all worldly measurement capabilities, may be the pre-requisite to states of consciousness far beyond any SSRI or THC induced "high", is such a subversive thought that not only laws, but extreme containment and resistence of such concepts must be opposed in the most extreme ways, to save our scientific, alopathic, Western statehood and stability and sanity. Such subversive thoughts, let alone discussion in a public forum, must never, under any circumstances, be permitted to be so thought nor discussed. The Ministry applauds your complionce. Compliance is coluntary, and expected, but not all can achieve this heightened state of submission to The Ministry. And so complionce is imposed, of necessity, to handle the pre-thoughts that the subjects of the state tend towards, due to their (admittedly natural, if subversive) inability to fully enact compliane. The department of pre-crime was expanded incognito to encompass pre-thought, and of necessity had to be entirely clandestine, up until now. Fortunately a new age of enlightenment looms and pre-thought, as well as mere pre-crime, shall be henceforth handled by your state.
Fuck you, you don't know shit about me or my health you judgemental fucking wannabe chump doctor of "holistic health"
You've given me a lot of data by your outbursts. Do they say something about you? About what forces run your life, for example?
The voices! The voices never stop!! It's crippling really, mudshark crippling, IF only I had a poetic answer in the form of a White pill, one I could pop for free. But oh! The humanity! The inequality! The insanity! All desires must be relinquished, sacrificed to the glorious STATE of a New World Order, equally brown the globe over like a sewerage settling pond masquerading as a swimming pool. "BUT EQUALITY!" scream the terminally disordered. "AND DIVERSITY!" wail the hopelessly, ignorantly hypocritical. And the most holy grail of all human idiocrisy, "SEXUAL IDENTITY!" bellow those so schooled they cannot see higher than their pelvis. "Please state, may I have a think?" "Think?! You want to THINK?!! HOW DARE YOU THINK TO THINK!!! You must -react- boy! Hawk out your pre-programmed defaults. It's all Science me boy - The Ministry will be in touch to keep you existential, within just a few seconds now - look into your phone deeply now, the answer appears..."
Further, it can avoid the diseases and even mishaps in the first place by creative a more holistic relationship to self, family, the environment, and the divine. I'll define this latter, for the sake of arguing, as "that which transcends the human mind to grasp or comprehend, but, nonetheless, exerting a force upon life itself".
But as we all know, this is complete hogwash because we can't measure such forces, so to suppose their existence is a lunacy which is wildly dangerous and anti-systemic, and therefore MUST be opposed with every last dying breath!
I think we also can't measure that you are actually conscious and alive, rather than a very convincing robot or zombie. \0xd
*wau!! fucken wau!!* it's one of the best explanations/insights i ever read about HolisticMedicine. i send it to all of my friends who already understand that "there is something MORE than the stupid MD approach to a multi-leveled creature like human being"... no way i'll send this pearl to the clowny-johny people. thanks from the depth of my heart, \0xd. alex. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: \0xDynamite <dreamingforward@gmail.com> Date: 2017-03-27 0:51 GMT+03:00 Subject: Re: [From offlist] Re: FBI Says It Can't Find Hackers to Hire Because They All Smoke Pot To: John Newman <jnn@synfin.org> Cc: cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org Okay, since you refuse to argue on reasonable grounds, I won't respond to all of your attacks which didn't have any real argument except attempts to demerit the concept of Holistic Medicine. For the sake of the list, I'm going to clarify what and why an H.D. is superior an M.D. which you so fondly massage their crotch for, even though you are probably overweight, nursing one or more addictions, and have lost some desire to live exhibitiing some low-level depression. (This is the common case for liberal Americans.) Holistic Health is greatly superior, even if not (to the published establishment) scientifically more superior, because *logically* health ITSELF is a factor of the WHOLE (hence HOListic), not the sum of it`s parts (like reductionist Occidental medicine, who's glory mostly goes back to the study of dead cadavers and anatomy -- those who failed at making health). Do you get this first point (reductionist vs. holistic)? Holistic Medicine *includes* the science that reductionism has built, but also includes a WHOLE other set of data: the subjective side of health (how does the placebo affect has such an effect on health, for example?). So, it *transcends* the present medical establishment in everyway, except when it comes to blunt trauma, like I said, where they have mastery (bone setting and wound dressing). EVERYTHING else is 100% better served via holistic medicine. Unfortunatley, there just aren't many people trained in it. I practially had to (re)invent the field, because it was awash in pseudo-science, naive spiritualism, and confusions of it's own identity and the use of drugs/supplements as medical aids. So I will define it here: Holistic Health can diagnose and cure ANY disease that Western medicine CLAIMS to cure but without invasive procedures, including chemical-based ingestives (or inhalation). Further, it can avoid the diseases and even mishaps in the first place by creative a more holistic relationship to self, family, the environment, and the divine. I'll define this latter, for the sake of arguing, as "that which transcends the human mind to grasp or comprehend, but, nonetheless, exerting a force upon life itself". Now that wasn't so hard was it? Is that really difficult to take or understand. Western medicine would confound you with specialized language, multi-million dollar equipment, and colored pillls -- all types of power you likely have already given away becuase it seemed impressive, right? Well, America is one of the most diseased, confused, and destructive nations on the planet and you and I know it. It's on the street, it's on Indian reservations, it's in abortion clinics and cosmetic enhancement clinics, the larger-than-usual prison population, and it's in the alarming severity of some brith defects. So, tell me, why do you keep arguing for THEM?
Do you know how a mailing list works? Your email was to me, with the list copied.
No, it was actually addressed to Razor. You, please, are in a state of delusion, arguing with me, holding on to your last little island of power that America has left you -- you're own voice.
Specialized language ? What specialized language would that be? Nobody is using big words here, "Doctor".
Do you actually understand "neurology"? No, and I know this because doctors don't understand it, so how could you?
But pain is often an accompanied symptom of terminal illnesses. Again, why should someone who is dying be forced to suffer? You're a fucking sadist.
They're not forced. They are feeling the weight of their life decisions.
Fuck you, you don't know shit about me or my health you judgemental fucking wannabe chump doctor of "holistic health"
You've given me a lot of data by your outbursts. Do they say something about you? About what forces run your life, for example?
My argument has been clear from the start: what people do in their private lives is none of your fucking business!
But it's not private. If you planted a tree 50 yrs ago and made a table with your own hands, the table is yours, but you didn't make the power in marijuana. Something else did. Should people be able to take whatever they want and use anything as they wish? Is that what you argue?
Well bully for you. Did you get your law degree at the same site selling the doctorate in holistic medicine?
No, I got it from the only school worhty of issuing one: the school of hard knocks. Maybe you feel intimidated by people with degrees when you have none, but I'm using them to educate you. Why fight me? \0xd
On Sun, 26 Mar 2017 11:43:45 -0400 "\\0xDynamite" <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
Great, an oppurtunity to train the cyberPUNKS on the list
so you don't even know what list you are posting to eh? This is the cyPHerpunks mailing list. CyBerpunk is a different beast. John N.> > It's a PERSONAL CHOICE you fucking fascist. People are free
to comport themselves in whatever manner they choose.
No, that is patently not true. You did not make the organism in which you are leeching off of. So you have some responsibiltiy to its creator or the species itself, you might say.
You might say that if you were a religious nutcase - which you are no? And the non-religious version 'responsibility to species' is just the same totalitarian bullshit anyway.
You would've made great anti-drug ads for Nancy Reagan or any of America's war on drugs crusaders (of which you are obviously a prime example).
You idiot. I'm also a lawyer. I defend people who get arrested for smoking pot.
lol - a lawyer...
On 03/20/2017 10:54 PM, \0xDynamite wrote:
A person who smokes pot suggests someone who doesn't really care about excellence. They've stepped down from aiming high and have settled for being comfortable, much like a person who's done crack. They'll argue that crack is a "serious" drug, but it's all the same: escape.
Reality too tough for you? It sounds like Captain Dynamite has been too timid to ever inhale - pot is an extraordinarily mild and harmless diversion, about 1000x safer than alcohol in every way, and enjoying it on occasion doesn't say anything about "excellence." Saying pot is harmless is like saying taking Prozac is harmless. The problem is the NET social consequences. And we can see the consequences: shit doesn't get done and things deteriorate.
Life isn't about 'getting things done', it's about "What things you get done.". Rr
'Nuff said?
\0xd
Because anything worth saying to me offlist is worth putting on the list, ESPECIALLY when it's trollbait.
<gggg>
A person who smokes pot suggests someone who doesn't really care about excellence. They've stepped down from aiming high and have settled for being comfortable, much like a person who's done crack. They'll argue that crack is a "serious" drug, but it's all the same: escape.
YOU live in an altered reality far beyond anyone who pokes smot.
True!
[list of famous people getting high, including former president Obama]
And there you see why this world has not been getting better: THEY are escaping reality too -- and they're the ones in charge. So obviously, no one knows what the F they're doing, so who's going to lay the pipe down and get down to business? \0xd
On 03/20/2017 08:17 PM, \0xDynamite wrote:
Because anything worth saying to me offlist is worth putting on the list, ESPECIALLY when it's trollbait. <gggg>
A person who smokes pot suggests someone who doesn't really care about excellence. They've stepped down from aiming high and have settled for being comfortable, much like a person who's done crack. They'll argue that crack is a "serious" drug, but it's all the same: escape.
YOU live in an altered reality far beyond anyone who pokes smot. True!
[list of famous people getting high, including former president Obama] And there you see why this world has not been getting better: THEY are escaping reality too -- and they're the ones in charge. So obviously, no one knows what the F they're doing, so who's going to lay the pipe down and get down to business?
\0xd
It depends on what your business is, and btw, the people who run the show are Alcoholics and Pill Junkies and that's why we're in the mess we're in. Because the ONE THING that pot excels at, is HELPING YOU (emphasis intentional) become absolutely disinterested in the accumulation of power. If you want to take that as meaning unmotivated or somesuch, that's because you're an alcoholic or a pill junkie. Rr
[list of famous people getting high, including former president Obama] And there you see why this world has not been getting better: THEY are escaping reality too -- and they're the ones in charge. So obviously, no one knows what the F they're doing, so who's going to lay the pipe down and get down to business?
It depends on what your business is, and btw, the people who run the show are Alcoholics and Pill Junkies and that's why we're in the mess we're in. Because the ONE THING that pot excels at, is HELPING YOU (emphasis intentional) become absolutely disinterested in the accumulation of power.
That's hilariously true. However, the people need to take the power back, otherwise shits gets bad.
If you want to take that as meaning unmotivated or somesuch, that's because you're an alcoholic or a pill junkie.
Not at all. I'm a straight-edge dude. Try again. \0xD
On 03/20/2017 10:57 PM, \0xDynamite wrote:
[list of famous people getting high, including former president Obama] And there you see why this world has not been getting better: THEY are escaping reality too -- and they're the ones in charge. So obviously, no one knows what the F they're doing, so who's going to lay the pipe down and get down to business? It depends on what your business is, and btw, the people who run the show are Alcoholics and Pill Junkies and that's why we're in the mess we're in. Because the ONE THING that pot excels at, is HELPING YOU (emphasis intentional) become absolutely disinterested in the accumulation of power. That's hilariously true. However, the people need to take the power back, otherwise shits gets bad.
If you want to take that as meaning unmotivated or somesuch, that's because you're an alcoholic or a pill junkie. Not at all. I'm a straight-edge dude. Try again.
\0xD
No you aren't. "Straight-edge" is a myth. Kind of like Alt-Right. Even Fundie Jesus-people are "High on Christ". Rr
participants (9)
-
\0xDynamite -
John Newman -
juan -
Marina Brown -
Mirimir -
No -
Razer -
Zenaan Harkness -
Александр