Re: The Pharma Vaccine Franchise is a Product of Marketing, Not ???Science

In misc.health.alternative Citizen Jimserac <Jimserac@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

:> : You have never cited a study showing that aspirin increases human
:> : lifespan at all, thus your claims amount ot a lie.

:> (2) Explain what, in your opinion, the authors of the two studies that
:> I cited were talking about when they discussed the benefits of taking
:> aspirin.  Are you suggesting that the odds that a stroke will
significantly
:> shorten a patient's lifespan are not higher than the odds that a
:> gastrointestinal hemorrhage will significantly shorten a patient's
lifespan?
:> Is so, what evidence do you have for that claim?  If not, in what sense
is
:> the conclusion that "at least two recurrent strokes could prevented at
:> the cost of one gastrointestinal haemorrhage" (Derry and Loke, p. 1186)
:> *not* equivalent to saying that taking aspirin increases the lifespan
:> of someone at risk for recurrent stroke?
 
: Human life is beyond statistics Richard, there are FUNDAMENTAL flaws
: in your approach to these matters.
: Life is not a solution or chemical compound.
 
In what sense is reducing the likelihood of a stroke for someone at
risk for a stroke not equivalent to increasing his life expectancy?

: Your response fails to mention OTHER deleterious effects of aspirin -
: lower blood pressure, its dangerous effects on some children, AND, its
: long term use damage to cartilage, in addition to the admitted
: gastrointestinal problems.
 
I realize that logical thinking is simply not in your skill set, which is
why I show you far more patience than you deserve.  Also, your mastery
of the non sequitur is really a wonder to behold.  In case you weren't
paying attention -- as appears to be the case -- I made a particular
claim,
namely, that in *some* cases, it can be shown that the benefits of taking
aspirin outweigh the risks.  Peter-the-cowardly-Bee disputed that claim,
and I provided references to two studies that concluded that in *some*
cases, it can be shown that the benefits of taking aspirin outweigh the
risks.  

Now here's the clever bit -- this is the part where logical reasoning 
comes into play.  The observation that something is true in *some* cases
*does not* imply that it is true in *all* cases.  Since I never claimed
that the benefits of taking aspirin *always* outweigh the risks, and
since your examples are irrelevant to the cases that I cited, your 
response is what is known in the business as a "non sequitur."

I realize that the line of reasoning given in the previous two paragraphs
is completely beyond you, and hence will be ignored by you; but I include
them to illustrate to someone who probably can understand the argument
(say, a reasonably bright twelve-year-old) just how you failed to 
understand it.

: The American College of Gastroenterology has a good link covering the
: gastrointestinal issues - including asymptomatic ulcers. The
: statistics of the articles you mentioned, and  your own blind approach
: to statistical averages in evaluating medicine, does not take THAT,
: for example, into consideration.  

I have offered on many, many occasions to explain to you the statistical
problems involved with using clinical studies to *****s the efficacy of
a particular treatment.  Your lack of interest in the subject implies
what your response demonstrates -- you have no understanding whatsoever
of statistics or how to apply them properly.

-----
Richard Schultz                              schultr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"Apparently, you take me for a complete fool."
"Yeah -- more or less."
				Bob & Ray, "Garish Summit"