ADMIN: ABOUT THE SCOTTSDALE LAB, RETRACTION
Rather that speculate on whether it’s real or not - why don’t you guys just call
and verify ? Seems simple enough.
BTW this should have been done prior to the posts. IMO.
6 Responses to “ADMIN: ABOUT THE SCOTTSDALE LAB, RETRACTION”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
July 31st, 2004 at 4:21 am
Despite being quite the Net geek myself, I concur here with Crystal’s point.
One phone call might just sort this all out.
stephen
www.xiveren.com
“But you know something? Sometimes you have to break the rules to free your
heart.”
-Homer Simpson
July 31st, 2004 at 4:57 pm
this out! Aren’t we here to help each other with blood theory? But don’t worry I
doubt either of us will post “helpful notices” to this list anymore. We are sick
of the “nasties” on this list when we are trying to be helpful. What a waste of
our time, it seems. Frankly I now wonder if someone on this list did the hoax in
the first place.
Frankly I wasn’t trying to be nasty and I don’t recall that I have ever been
nasty to anyone - but since you’ve publicly taken exception to my post - well
let me be frank here. I know your intent was to be helpful but I just can’t
understand why if you thought it was a hoax that you would post directly to the
list without trying to verify whether it was or not. Isn’t this part of the
supposed problem - making
speculation on the validity of information without validation. Tabitha is
already under a constraint not to talk about it on line - I think the
appropriate measure would have been to post off line to her to discuss the
possibility of a hoax - and in deference to her - refrain from discussing this
publicly since it is obvious from her post that she was greatly upset about the
matter. After all if it is real - this
is just one more negative rumor circulating against that company that Tabitha
isn’t supposed to talk about publicly online - additionally if it is real -
sheesh you basically called the doctor petty. So I hope that it isn’t real (for
more than one reason). The “you guys” comment is ’cause I assumed (perhaps
mistakenly) that you and others were trying to help ascertain whether the email
could be a hoax - so I meant
one of you all who were discussing the possibility of it being a hoax - it was a
generic term - I am not privvy to everyones relation to each other on the list
so I don’t know who’s close friends with who. I do know that you live fairly
close to the lab (and you did mention the phone book, etc) - I was just
wondering why *someone* didn’t call before making such a speculation publicly.
As for yours and Tabitha’s posts (the others not this matter) - well I do find
them very informative and it’s obvious you are trying to be helpful and impart
information that you believe to be true. I like to hear about others experiences
with nutrition and supplementation (even if they are selling the products as you
do). Although I’m generally cynical I do think you have a motivation other than
selling your
products (which is what some think I’m sure). I think Tabitha has gotten a bit
of the shaft lately and when I posted my concern was solely for her that this
was being brought up publicly before ascertaining whether it was indeed false.
Call me nasty if you wish - though if you took exception to my post you should
have emailed me privately to determine if I was indeed “one of the “nasties”"
rather than just jumped on
my post as you did. I have never ever complained about any post you and Tabitha
post… and in fact have referred people to Tabitha as a good source of advice.
Email is at best a hard medium to decipher one’s true intent as human cues are
missing (tone of voice, facial expression, etc) so at best please just consider
this a misunderstanding and move on - okay? I was not intending to be nasty nor
do I wish to become entangled in a flame war.
Crystal.
August 1st, 2004 at 1:11 am
of this and not me.
I was NOT referring to Tabitha’s post but to your speculation as being premature
- how did you not understand this.
in this matter and I had nothing to do with her posting of it.
I quote from your post
“Tabitha and I are still looking into this, but personally at this point, I
consider it a hoax. ”
This is what led me to believe you were indeed involved (”with authority”).
As I said intent in emails is sometimes hard to understand without human cues -
however from your post I inferred that you were working with Tabitha. A
statement such as “Hey this looks like a hoax to ME” probably would have left a
slightly different impression. (and wouldn’t have involved Tabitha).
NO ONE initially slammed you for the email - I made a mild statement - meaning
Why don’t you (guys) call? (one call would have ended all speculation and as I
mentioned above I thought you were indeed “working” with Tabitha to see if it
was) and as I said I thought should have been done prior to posting (I expanded
on that last email and don’t feel a need to reiterate myself here) and in turn
you basically had a cow and were quite nasty to me (and in turn to other list
members too). I am “allowed” to have an opinion as well as you.
And “sheesh” I’m not “blaming” anyone. I basically just made a suggestion. I
don’t really care enough to “blame” anyone .. sheesh. You still think this is a
personal attack on you and it wasn’t. That is why I tried to be generic and
said you guys.
If you still want to feel disgruntled about it (shrug) I can’t help how you
feel. I said in my earlier post that my intent was not to flame anyone and it
still isn’t - if you want to “blame” me /dislike me go ahead but please do not
use my post to reflect how “everyone” on the list is - it was/is just one
persons opinion. I also tried to tell you that I liked and found your (other)
post to be informative - however you seem to ignore that aspect of my post and
just focus on the negative - I guess anything I post will be fruitless to
assuage your obviously damaged feelings and I can’t help that.
Crystal. (who doesn’t quite get how big a deal this has become..sheeesh.)
August 1st, 2004 at 6:55 am
I am sure that Dr K, real or not real, will be chuckling when he reads the
last mails on this list. He will feel sufficiently vindicated. I am
surprised what this has turned into. Let us get back to basics. No more
emails blaming or justifying, please. We are on this list to discuss blood
type eating issues, so I have a question:
I am finding breakfast a difficult meal, as I do not feel like eating fish
or meat for breakfast and most cereal preparations are wheat based. What
could a good O breakfast consist of?
Is yoghurt with fresh fruit and for example spelt bread with
butter/honey/jam an acceptable breakfast, assuming that no bread is
consumed with lunch or dinner?
What is the best alternative to cows milk yoghurt - soya yoghurt or
sheep/goat yoghurt?
Are soya based dairy alternatives acceptable in general?
Any advice or suggestions would be most appreciated.
Thanks
Lise
August 1st, 2004 at 11:39 am
doubt either of us will post “helpful notices” to this list
anymore. We are sick of the “nasties” on this list when we are trying to be
helpful. What a waste of our time, it seems.<<<<<<
Wasn’t this suppose to be a ‘FAMILY” board?
Maybe some people should look in the mirror and see who to blame.
Too bad that something as wonderful as the blood type diet is getting into a
political BB. I feel for the new members.
This is not helping Peter’s work at all.
hmmmm………
August 1st, 2004 at 4:22 pm
As an O one should emphasize on protein. Also fasting for 8+ hours
breakfast is the most important meal of the day.
How about eggs?
butter/honey/jam an acceptable breakfast<<<<
Not for an O. It is way too high in carbs and too little in protein.
or sheep/goat yogurt?<<<
Sheep/goat
general<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Not. Poorly digested, so don’t make it a daily habit.
The O ration is 45% protein 35% carbs 20% fat.
Hope this helps.
love Thomas
PS: I wonder why my last post never made it…..