anon schreef:
> Luke is a vicious, obsessive psychopath
I don't think anybody at asap is interested in your feuds. I think you
would do everyone a favour by taking asap off your list for crossposted
mesages. Thank you!
Philip
who seemingly has no other purpose
> in life but to search out op****tunities to flame me like a lunatic on
this
> newsgroup, with this trite little flinging around of the word "troll" at
> someone he disagrees with. How trenchant and original! And how sad. He
> somehow failed to register any indignation when Debs spewed obscenity at
a
> poster and told him he was mentally ill--that's not "trolling" to Lukey.
The
> only "trolling" is tra****ng him in debate and proving that he's an inept
> fool, which earns one an indefinite helping of his s****adic belches of
> personal bile masquerading as public service. How pathetic, stupid, and
> sad--how obviously the product of a spiteful cipher with no life.
>
> He, like other members of his little seventh-grade wolfpack, has no
evident
> moral concern for now many people might be misled into assuming that
> benzodiazepines are innocuous, wonderful, nonaddictive pass****ts to
> relaxation and bliss rather than possible invitations to hellish
dysfunction
> and runied lives. No-Luke couldn't care less about such matters, which
is
> why he hasn't shown his malicious little head up to this point. All he
cares
> about is to see if he can find an op****tunity to play "gotcha" with me
> because I've shown him to be a misinformed incompetent on numerous
occasions
> on this newsgroup.
>
> Let's be clear about something--I have NEVER recommended the use of any
> prescription drugs or medical procedures to ANYONE on this group, unlike
> Vanny and others irresponsible nonprofessiionals who constantly dole out
> pharmacological and medical advice on this newsgroup. I merely warned
people
> about the evident risks of casually resorting to benzodiazepines in the
face
> of a mountain of scientific evidence of their very real addictive
> dangers--evidence that I proffered in copious detail.
>
> As for his latest dopey venture into the realm of pharmacological
> "expertise," there are so many scientifc double-blind studies attesting
to
> the effectiveness of melatonin as a sleep aid that a list of them would
take
> up excessive bandwidth. It's not going to knock you out like a big dose
of
> ativan or klonopin, but neither is it going to cause cognitive deficits,
> memory loss, depression, or addiction--none of which Lukey seems to care
> about. Based on the timing of his intervention in this discussion, he
could
> care less what agonies of hell benzo addicts might suffer. He just
doesn't
> give a **** about anything but pursuing infantile personal flame wars.
>
> Here's just some of the most recent evidence about the effectiveness of
> melatonin as a sleep aid, contrary to Lukey's asinine cherry picking:
>
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/05/060501113641.htm
>
> I quote from the article: "Researchers from the Divisions of Sleep
Medicine
> at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School have found in
a
> double-blind placebo-controlled clinical study, that melatonin, taken
orally
> during non-typical sleep times, significantly improves an individual’s
> ability to sleep."
>
> Of course, I would ALWAYS defer to the dopey clown Lukey than to any
serious
> scientific study done at Harvard Medical School, just as I would ALWAYS
> defer to the dopey clown Lukey on the question of enteric-coated
probiotics
> rather than the most esteemed consumer research organizaiton in the
world,
> Consumer Union, which has the gall to dispute Professor Lukey's opinion
that
> enteric-coated probiotics do not do a better job of colonizing good bugs
in
> the gut--even though Lukey himself uses one! LOL!
>
> As for interaction problems between Melatonin and prednisone, this would
> occur only if one were using very high doses of Melatonin. The usual
> effective dose of melatnon as a sleep aid--half a miligram or so--is so
> small that it would have no appreciable impact on the effectiveness of
the
> prednisone taken in the large doses that is typical of Crohn's patients.
>
> This is the danger of Usenet cranks like Lukey and Vanny. Vanny recently
> pompously and ignorantly declared that LDN (low-dose naltrexone), a
> promising Crohn's treatment, should not be used with Imodium--but she
forgot
> to consider that the LDN is taken in such a small dose and acts for such
a
> short period (4-6 hours) that there is no interaction problem. Moreover,
the
> gastroenterologists who conducted the Penn State trial of LDN as a
Crohn's
> treatment allowed the use of Imodium in their patients, with no
diminution
> in effectiveness of either drug.
>
> Poor Lukey--wrong and stupid to the last.
>
> Keep at it, Lukey--you'll get me some day, you whining clown! I hope
your
> spite for me isn't keeping you up at night--if it is, I suggest a bit of
> melatonin and some valerian. Nighty night, clown.
>
>
|
