Kevin Smith/Backcrkr/Lotsatone/KeyserSoze/Atlas

Discussion in 'rec.music.guitar' started by Atlass, Aug 25, 2003.

  1. Atlass

    Atlass Guest

    Atlas <c1sublux@hotmail.comSPAM> wrote in article <f6r1kv4ou0m5qongmp5885djq86m9b4ujm@4ax.com>...

    > I have been able to reduce disc herniations with my techniques - to the point to where the patient was completely asymptomatic


    No, you most certainly have not "reduced" disc herniations, Kevin...ABSURD.

    But...how about some references or links to back up your allegation.

    >No drugs, no surgery - just adjustsments,


    What "adjustsments"? How are you shoving a herniated disc back to its origin?

    >trigger point therapy,


    Symptom management...doesn't do a thing to correct a herniated disc.

    >traction,


    Oh...my...God.

    You are going to fuck someone up one day...guaranteed, Kevin.

    >and specific rehabilitative exercises to stabilize, and strengthen the supportive soft tissue structures.>


    Symptom management for musculoskeletal pain.

    Not one thing to "reduce a herniated disc".

    None.

    > As far as the disc herniations, it depends on how bad the herniation is, where it is, and how long it's been there.>


    Uh, huh...keep going...

    >If the nuclear material is extruded into the thecal sac,


    Kevin.... ( sigh..)

    You just keep on with incorrect medical information.

    A "herniated disc" BY DEFINITION is "a rupture or herniation of the nucleus pulposus" !!!!!!!!!

    Read that again!

    >and has calcified...


    Has nothing to do with it.

    >it's a surgical case.>


    A herniated disc will never, ever repair itself other than with surgery.

    People can live with the pain and do whatever for symptom relief, but the disc will always remain herniated.

    > But most people aren't to that point. And they CAN have their problem managed conservatively.


    That is another terrible generalization of people with disc injuries.


    > Yeah - IF you believe Jack's story. I don't believe him. He
    > bullshitted about the chiropractor asking him to come in seven days
    > per week. Makes you wonder how much else of his story is pure
    > fiction.


    LOL! Jack already said that he assumed that the chiro wanted him to come in for 7 days straight, and admitted he was wrong!

    Get over it!

    > Spine surgery has an absolutely horrible track record.


    How about those medical references?


    >A couple of months ago, there was a spine symposium at Allegheny General
    > Hospital (here in Pittsburgh). They had a panel of speakers which
    > read as a veritable "who's who" in neuro and orthpedic surgery. And
    > they admitted that their own success rate is abyssmal. There is a
    > less than 50% chance of success.>


    And again...any proof of that?

    >Compound that with a 1 in 10,000 chance of death (due to general anesthesiology). Please see the following references:>
    > Basics of Anesthesia by Stoelting and Miller: (considered by some to
    > be the bible of modern anesthesia practice). Here is the pertinent
    > passage from the third edition:
    > "An estimated 20 to 25 million anesthetics are administered annually
    > in the United States. The risk of mortality due solely to the
    > administration of anesthesia is extremely rare (about 1 in 10,000
    > administrations, or 0.01%). " (p 12)


    Uh..Kevin?

    Pretending that you "quote" this book correctly and can even understand if you take it out of context:

    1 in 10,000 is 0.0001 %.

    Not 0.01%.

    Am I wrong?

    What else are you misquoting or misunderstanding?

    > Clinical Anesthesia Procedures of the Massachusetts General Hospital,
    > edited by Hurford, Bailin, Davison, Haspel and Rosow, published 1997:


    > "In the 1950s it was estimated that anesthesia care contributed to
    > three deaths in 10,000 surgical procedures. More recent data suggest
    > that the rate may be on the order of 1 per 10,000." (p 117)


    Hmmm..."contributed"....maybe the patients got pneumonia and that was the "contribution" from anesthesia.

    I am positive you take it out of context.

    Any guess on what it is in 2003?

    > Jack posted some bullshit about chiropractors beating drums,
    > magnets...and other things - trying to insinuate that this is
    > commonplace.


    What "bullshit"?

    >It's not. I've never done that. None of my chiropractic friends & colleagues do that. And I don't know of ANYONE who's done

    that.>

    Really? Hmmmm...do you deny chiropractors use these techniques?

    > Jack was upset with the price of the chiropractic care -


    That wasn't all..the dude HURT Jack.

    Did you read that part?

    > because he felt his chiropractor wanted to make a jag payment (or
    > something like that).


    > Let's look at this from a financial perspective. A typical
    > chiropractic case costs about $1,500.00 (start to finish). An average
    > spine surgery costs $50,000.00. >


    Wow...where did you come up with that?

    Any references or proof of these figures you allege?

    I mean..my own spinal surgery cost $17,000.

    > So while Jack's offended that the chiropractor charged his
    > fees, he's going to run to a neurosurgeon (who'll charge him 33 TIMES
    > more). Now if that isn't Polfusian logic, I don't know what is.


    Holy crap, dude..you miss the point.

    And I *knew* you would have to mention "Polfus" at least once today.


    > > Nah. Lots of people here discuss CTS and stuff. It would have
    > >come up via that.

    >
    > Okay, perhaps I mis-phrased it.


    Yup, and I called you on it.

    >I should have said: "If neither of them had ever met me online, and thus there were no
    > subsequent frictions, neither of them would have ever said a single negative thing about chiropractic.>


    And again, you would be wrong with all the talk people have about guitar playing injuries.

    The world doesn't revolve around you, Kevin.

    > Jack will probably have a surgery done. And I despite all of
    > the lovely things he's said to and about me,


    You need to reread the majority of your posts, son.

    >I do wish him the best of luck.
    > Atlas


    That's gonna be a little hard to believe, unfortunately.

    --
    Jason
    http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs
  2. Atlas

    Atlas Guest

    x-no-archive: yes

    On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 16:37:55 GMT, "Polfus"
    <http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs> trolled:

    Before I respond to Polfus' comments, I just want to make
    mention that he is ****YET AGAIN**** altering his online ID in order
    to slip through kill filters. In this case, he's blatantly forging my
    ID...which in itself underscores just how obsessed he is.

    So for those of you who get your panties in a twist whenever I
    thrash Polfus...y'all may want to avert your eyes. This won't be
    pretty.

    >No, you most certainly have not "reduced" disc herniations, Kevin...ABSURD.


    Actually Jason, I have been able to help people with disc
    herniations. LOTS of them. People who've been in severe pain for a
    long, LONG time. People who've already been to the M.D.'s, to the
    physical therapists...got the steroid injections...and a couple of
    people who had surgeries.

    They got absolutely no relief until they came to me. Sorry if
    my ability to help suffering people upsets you. But that's YOUR
    problem, not mine. And it's certainly not my patient's problem.

    >But...how about some references or links to back up your allegation.


    Sure. Please see:
    http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Research1.html

    Here check this out:

    Magnetic resonance imaging and clinical follow-up: study of 27
    patients receiving chiropractic care for cervical and lumbar disc
    herniations.
    BenEliyahu DJ J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1996 Nov-Dec;19(9):597-606

    I quote: "Anatomically, after repeat MRI scans, 63% of the
    patients studied revealed a reduced size or completely resorbed disc
    herniation."

    Perhaps you don't completely understand this - so I'll explain
    it for your clarification. Dr. BenEliyahu had MRI studies done - then
    chiropractically treated the study group - then did POST MRI studies.
    And 63% of the patients had a reduced or completely resorbed disc
    herniation.

    So before you blindly dismiss my claims as "aburd" (thus
    sticking your foot into your mouth)- and without knowing what you're
    talking about (per usual) - I have now just provided multiple studies
    that were published in highly respected, and PEER REVIEWED index
    medicus scientific journals.

    NEXT!

    >What "adjustsments"? How are you shoving a herniated disc back to its origin?


    Very specific, high velocity, low force adjustments which
    re-aligns the vertebrae, corrects biomechanical distortions, and in
    the case of flexion-distraction technique, can actually suck the
    nucleus pulposus back in the center of the disc. (See above for the
    scientific references PROVING this).

    There are different types of herniations. Please see:
    http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Herniation2.html

    If the herniation is contained or extruded, there is the
    possibility of it being able to be reduced (or completely resorbed)
    via chiropractic treatments.

    >Symptom management...doesn't do a thing to correct a herniated disc.


    Symptom management is what patients come to you for in the
    first place. They are in pain, and they want relief. And I provide
    all natural, drug free relief that's safe, has no side effects and
    gets excellent results.

    >Oh...my...God.


    Oh please spare me your melodramatic bullshit.

    >You are going to fuck someone up one day...guaranteed, Kevin.


    Actually not really. Traction is widely accepted and widely
    used by physical therapists and chiropractors alike - to decompress
    the involved area, as well as correct abnormal curves. That's also
    backed up by peer reviewed research.

    If you want to find the group of people who fuck people up,
    you'd best stop looking at the chiropractors...and start looking at
    the M.D.s whom you worship. According to the research, they kill
    about a quarter of a million people every year.

    http://www.mercola.com/2000/jul/30/doctors_death.htm

    >Symptom management for musculoskeletal pain.
    >Not one thing to "reduce a herniated disc".
    >None.


    1. Symptom management is part of the clinical picture - and a very
    important aspect of treatment. If you're unable to reduce or
    eliminate the patient's symptoms what's the purpose of the treatment?

    2. As I've already stated (and PROVEN), there is ample research -
    (that was published in scientific journals) - which shows that
    chiropractic care can and will reduce or completely resorb a herniated
    disc.

    >Uh, huh...keep going...


    Thank you, I think I will. Given that I'm educated, trained,
    and have the clinical experience to diagnose and treat disc
    herniations, I'm in a specific position to act as the resident
    authority on such issues.

    You, on the other hand have NO training in diagnosis, NO
    training in radiology, NO training in physical medicine, and are
    completely ignorant in regard to the scientific literature.

    >You just keep on with incorrect medical information.


    Errrrrrrrr! Wrong, Polfus. Here's a website that you may be
    interested in checking out:
    http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Main.html

    It covers anatomy, mechanism of disc injury, a FAQ, &
    research.

    >A "herniated disc" BY DEFINITION is "a rupture or herniation of the nucleus pulposus" !!!!!!!!!


    Yes...and? What's your point? This page shows all about
    herniated discs:
    http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Herniation1.html

    >>and has calcified...

    >
    >Has nothing to do with it.


    No, actually it has a lot to do with it. Please see:
    http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Herniation2.html

    And look at the variants for disc herniations. The "free
    form" herniation means that a part of the nucleus pulposus has broken
    free. And if there for a time being, it can calcify - at which point,
    it becomes that much more serious because it becomes rigid. You have
    an irregularly shaped, rigid object floating around in the thecal sac
    (which surrounds the cord) - and creating massive damage to the cord.
    THAT would be a definite surgical case. Fortunately, that's also
    quite rare.

    >A herniated disc will never, ever repair itself other than with surgery.


    Bullshit. There's research that proves you wrong. Do
    yourself a favor and at least do a LITTLE homework before you go and
    embarrass yourself like you're doing now.

    >People can live with the pain and do whatever for symptom relief, but the disc will always remain herniated.


    Yes - some. And there's proof that chiropractic can not only
    get people out of pain COMPLETELY as well as reduce and/or completely
    reabsorb the herniated disc. Argue with me all you want, Polfus. But
    the chiropractors have 108 years of success stories to back up their
    claims. And we also have sound scientific research.

    >That is another terrible generalization of people with disc injuries.


    A "terrible generalization"? No, it's a rational, sound
    conclusion. Surgery should ONLY be considered as an absolutely last
    ditch resort - and then ONLY after all other interventions have
    already been tried - and have failed to work.

    Chiropractic has a 94+% success rate. What's "terrible" is
    that people like you pass along some really bad information - which
    shuttles poor victims into the surgical theater where they are at risk
    of dying from general anesthesia (1:10,000), getting a hospital-born
    infection (80,000 / year), and residual impairments due to the surgery
    itself (countless).

    "Nobody should be allowed to have back surgery unless they
    have seen a chiropractor first."
    -- Dr. Robert Mendelsohn M.D.


    >LOL! Jack already said that he assumed that the chiro wanted him to come in for 7 days straight, and admitted he was wrong!


    LOL! So why are you continuing to support his original
    (wrong) contention? LOL!

    >How about those medical references?


    Salenius, P. & Laurent, L.E. Results of operative treatment of lumbar
    disc herniation. Octa-Orthop Scand, 1977, iS, pp. 630-634.

    Dommisse, G.E & Grahe, R.P The failure of surgery for lumbar disc
    disorders. Disorder of the lumbar spine. Lippincott, 1978.

    Davis, H. Increasing rates of cervical and lumbar spine surgery in the
    United States, 1979-1990. Spine, 1994, 1,9(10), pp. 1117-1124.

    Need any more princess?

    >And again...any proof of that?


    LOL! The panel of surgeons and neurologists concluded that
    the current medical and surgical approaches to back pain are a
    miserable failure - and you don't believe them. Tell you what Polfus,
    when you become a doctor, maybe you can argue with them.

    >Uh..Kevin?
    >
    >Pretending that you "quote" this book correctly and can even understand if you take it out of context:
    >
    >1 in 10,000 is 0.0001 %.
    >
    >Not 0.01%.
    >
    >Am I wrong?


    Uh, Polfus? Even if the decimal point was in the wrong
    place...the ratio was 1 in 10,000. That is ALARMINGLY high. And it's
    not been refuted by a single M.D. I've ever spoken to about it.

    I cited the reference - as well as providing the actual page
    number that the data appeared. That's about as crystal clear as it
    gets.

    >What else are you misquoting or misunderstanding?


    Oh the irony! Have you ever wondered by RMMG'ers use the
    term "Polfusian Logic"? It's because you are famous - or should I say
    infamous for misquoting, misunderstanding - or outright intellectual
    dishonesty (read - LYING).

    >Hmmm..."contributed"....maybe the patients got pneumonia and that was the "contribution" from anesthesia.
    >
    >I am positive you take it out of context.


    It's quoted directly out of the book. You can try to deflect
    blame away from the anesthesia, but the truth of the matter is that
    it's very VERY dangerous stuff.

    ALL doctors would agree with that. Of course, you're not a
    doctor (and from your online behavior, I feel it's a pretty far
    stretch to even consider you a healthcare professional). You're more
    of a half-educated technician with a chip on your shoulder, and a very
    profound learning disability.

    >What "bullshit"?


    Oh, probably the part about the beating drum circle, and the
    reiki, or whatever else it was. The vast majority of chiropractors
    practice very conservative things such as osseous manipulations,
    exercise/rehabilitation, nutrition, and muscle/trigger point therapy
    work.

    I'm quite sure that Jack knew this - yet deliberately
    mentioned the other stuff in order to distort things. That's why it's
    bullshit.

    >Really? Hmmmm...do you deny chiropractors use these techniques?


    I don't know of any, so I'm not in a position to comment. If
    YOU know of any, please cite their names. Otherwise, I'll just
    conclude that you're full of shit too. Oh wait - I've already done
    that.

    >That wasn't all..the dude HURT Jack.


    No, Jack made mention that the chiro wanted to make a jag
    payment. In fact, he mentioned that a few times. He also mentioned
    that he stiffed the chiro on his bill.

    >Did you read that part?


    Yes, Polfus - I read the whole story. If he thought he was in
    pain then, just wait until post-surgery.

    http://groups.google.com/groups?q=s...419095233.00535.00006117@mb-md.aol.com&rnum=2

    >Wow...where did you come up with that?


    For what - the chiropractic costs or the surgery costs? I
    think I know what the chiropractic costs are. As for the surgery
    costs, I'm friends with a lot of M.D.'s in town. We've had numerous
    discussions about costs involved with medical procedures. Surgery is
    expensive. Surgeons are very well known to be among the highest paid
    of all physicians.

    (It should be amusing to watch Polfus try to deny this).

    >Any references or proof of these figures you allege?


    Oh for crying out loud.

    >I mean..my own spinal surgery cost $17,000.


    LOL! Thank you for proving my point for me. Your surgery
    (which only involved trimming an osteophyte from the intervertebral
    foramen) - was $17,000.00.

    I'll bet you a dollar that you have a hypolordosis - with
    forward head translation (which closes down on the IVF's). I could've
    done extension-compression traction, specific adjustments, and
    decompression traction...gotten you completely symptom free...and for
    less than $2k.

    But then you wouldn't have been able to pop all of those
    percocets.

    >Holy crap, dude..you miss the point.


    Oh, the irony! Oh, the projection!

    >Yup, and I called you on it.


    You're just about the most full of shit nincompoop I've ever
    met in my entire life.

    >And again, you would be wrong with all the talk people have about guitar playing injuries.


    Can ANYONE translate that sentence into English for me?

    >The world doesn't revolve around you, Kevin.


    No, of course it doesn't, pOlFuS. Except for you, of course.
    You obsess about me day and night. That is - when you're not
    obsessing about Odin.

    >You need to reread the majority of your posts, son.


    No need, boy. I stand behind what I wrote.

    >That's gonna be a little hard to believe, unfortunately.


    Believe what you want. You're generally always wrong....which
    makes you (if nothing else) - highly predictable.

    I think that about sums up the education portion of this
    program. It should be abundantly clear to all who are reading this
    that Polfus had no clue about disc herniations, and still - to this
    minute remains as clueless as he is about music, wood, astro-physics,
    and everything else.




    Atlas
    --
    http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Main.html
  3. Nobody

    Nobody Guest

    Let's archive this precious gem:

    Atlas <c1sublux@hotmail.comXXXSPAM> wrote in article <k9okkv0ealkj73gk0vcfmfip27b7oasuu4@4ax.com>...

    >
    > On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 16:37:55 GMT, "Polfus"
    > <http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs> trolled:
    >
    > Before I respond to Polfus' comments, I just want to make
    > mention that he is ****YET AGAIN**** altering his online ID in order
    > to slip through kill filters. In this case, he's blatantly forging my
    > ID...which in itself underscores just how obsessed he is.
    >
    > So for those of you who get your panties in a twist whenever I
    > thrash Polfus...y'all may want to avert your eyes. This won't be
    > pretty.
    >
    > >No, you most certainly have not "reduced" disc herniations, Kevin...ABSURD.

    >
    > Actually Jason, I have been able to help people with disc
    > herniations. LOTS of them. People who've been in severe pain for a
    > long, LONG time. People who've already been to the M.D.'s, to the
    > physical therapists...got the steroid injections...and a couple of
    > people who had surgeries.
    >
    > They got absolutely no relief until they came to me. Sorry if
    > my ability to help suffering people upsets you. But that's YOUR
    > problem, not mine. And it's certainly not my patient's problem.
    >
    > >But...how about some references or links to back up your allegation.

    >
    > Sure. Please see:
    > http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Research1.html
    >
    > Here check this out:
    >
    > Magnetic resonance imaging and clinical follow-up: study of 27
    > patients receiving chiropractic care for cervical and lumbar disc
    > herniations.
    > BenEliyahu DJ J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1996 Nov-Dec;19(9):597-606
    >
    > I quote: "Anatomically, after repeat MRI scans, 63% of the
    > patients studied revealed a reduced size or completely resorbed disc
    > herniation."
    >
    > Perhaps you don't completely understand this - so I'll explain
    > it for your clarification. Dr. BenEliyahu had MRI studies done - then
    > chiropractically treated the study group - then did POST MRI studies.
    > And 63% of the patients had a reduced or completely resorbed disc
    > herniation.
    >
    > So before you blindly dismiss my claims as "aburd" (thus
    > sticking your foot into your mouth)- and without knowing what you're
    > talking about (per usual) - I have now just provided multiple studies
    > that were published in highly respected, and PEER REVIEWED index
    > medicus scientific journals.
    >
    > NEXT!
    >
    > >What "adjustsments"? How are you shoving a herniated disc back to its origin?

    >
    > Very specific, high velocity, low force adjustments which
    > re-aligns the vertebrae, corrects biomechanical distortions, and in
    > the case of flexion-distraction technique, can actually suck the
    > nucleus pulposus back in the center of the disc. (See above for the
    > scientific references PROVING this).
    >
    > There are different types of herniations. Please see:
    > http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Herniation2.html
    >
    > If the herniation is contained or extruded, there is the
    > possibility of it being able to be reduced (or completely resorbed)
    > via chiropractic treatments.
    >
    > >Symptom management...doesn't do a thing to correct a herniated disc.

    >
    > Symptom management is what patients come to you for in the
    > first place. They are in pain, and they want relief. And I provide
    > all natural, drug free relief that's safe, has no side effects and
    > gets excellent results.
    >
    > >Oh...my...God.

    >
    > Oh please spare me your melodramatic bullshit.
    >
    > >You are going to fuck someone up one day...guaranteed, Kevin.

    >
    > Actually not really. Traction is widely accepted and widely
    > used by physical therapists and chiropractors alike - to decompress
    > the involved area, as well as correct abnormal curves. That's also
    > backed up by peer reviewed research.
    >
    > If you want to find the group of people who fuck people up,
    > you'd best stop looking at the chiropractors...and start looking at
    > the M.D.s whom you worship. According to the research, they kill
    > about a quarter of a million people every year.
    >
    > http://www.mercola.com/2000/jul/30/doctors_death.htm
    >
    > >Symptom management for musculoskeletal pain.
    > >Not one thing to "reduce a herniated disc".
    > >None.

    >
    > 1. Symptom management is part of the clinical picture - and a very
    > important aspect of treatment. If you're unable to reduce or
    > eliminate the patient's symptoms what's the purpose of the treatment?
    >
    > 2. As I've already stated (and PROVEN), there is ample research -
    > (that was published in scientific journals) - which shows that
    > chiropractic care can and will reduce or completely resorb a herniated
    > disc.
    >
    > >Uh, huh...keep going...

    >
    > Thank you, I think I will. Given that I'm educated, trained,
    > and have the clinical experience to diagnose and treat disc
    > herniations, I'm in a specific position to act as the resident
    > authority on such issues.
    >
    > You, on the other hand have NO training in diagnosis, NO
    > training in radiology, NO training in physical medicine, and are
    > completely ignorant in regard to the scientific literature.
    >
    > >You just keep on with incorrect medical information.

    >
    > Errrrrrrrr! Wrong, Polfus. Here's a website that you may be
    > interested in checking out:
    > http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Main.html
    >
    > It covers anatomy, mechanism of disc injury, a FAQ, &
    > research.
    >
    > >A "herniated disc" BY DEFINITION is "a rupture or herniation of the nucleus pulposus" !!!!!!!!!

    >
    > Yes...and? What's your point? This page shows all about
    > herniated discs:
    > http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Herniation1.html
    >
    > >>and has calcified...

    > >
    > >Has nothing to do with it.

    >
    > No, actually it has a lot to do with it. Please see:
    > http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Herniation2.html
    >
    > And look at the variants for disc herniations. The "free
    > form" herniation means that a part of the nucleus pulposus has broken
    > free. And if there for a time being, it can calcify - at which point,
    > it becomes that much more serious because it becomes rigid. You have
    > an irregularly shaped, rigid object floating around in the thecal sac
    > (which surrounds the cord) - and creating massive damage to the cord.
    > THAT would be a definite surgical case. Fortunately, that's also
    > quite rare.
    >
    > >A herniated disc will never, ever repair itself other than with surgery.

    >
    > Bullshit. There's research that proves you wrong. Do
    > yourself a favor and at least do a LITTLE homework before you go and
    > embarrass yourself like you're doing now.
    >
    > >People can live with the pain and do whatever for symptom relief, but the disc will always remain herniated.

    >
    > Yes - some. And there's proof that chiropractic can not only
    > get people out of pain COMPLETELY as well as reduce and/or completely
    > reabsorb the herniated disc. Argue with me all you want, Polfus. But
    > the chiropractors have 108 years of success stories to back up their
    > claims. And we also have sound scientific research.
    >
    > >That is another terrible generalization of people with disc injuries.

    >
    > A "terrible generalization"? No, it's a rational, sound
    > conclusion. Surgery should ONLY be considered as an absolutely last
    > ditch resort - and then ONLY after all other interventions have
    > already been tried - and have failed to work.
    >
    > Chiropractic has a 94+% success rate. What's "terrible" is
    > that people like you pass along some really bad information - which
    > shuttles poor victims into the surgical theater where they are at risk
    > of dying from general anesthesia (1:10,000), getting a hospital-born
    > infection (80,000 / year), and residual impairments due to the surgery
    > itself (countless).
    >
    > "Nobody should be allowed to have back surgery unless they
    > have seen a chiropractor first."
    > -- Dr. Robert Mendelsohn M.D.
    >
    >
    > >LOL! Jack already said that he assumed that the chiro wanted him to come in for 7 days straight, and admitted he was wrong!

    >
    > LOL! So why are you continuing to support his original
    > (wrong) contention? LOL!
    >
    > >How about those medical references?

    >
    > Salenius, P. & Laurent, L.E. Results of operative treatment of lumbar
    > disc herniation. Octa-Orthop Scand, 1977, iS, pp. 630-634.
    >
    > Dommisse, G.E & Grahe, R.P The failure of surgery for lumbar disc
    > disorders. Disorder of the lumbar spine. Lippincott, 1978.
    >
    > Davis, H. Increasing rates of cervical and lumbar spine surgery in the
    > United States, 1979-1990. Spine, 1994, 1,9(10), pp. 1117-1124.
    >
    > Need any more princess?
    >
    > >And again...any proof of that?

    >
    > LOL! The panel of surgeons and neurologists concluded that
    > the current medical and surgical approaches to back pain are a
    > miserable failure - and you don't believe them. Tell you what Polfus,
    > when you become a doctor, maybe you can argue with them.
    >
    > >Uh..Kevin?
    > >
    > >Pretending that you "quote" this book correctly and can even understand if you take it out of context:
    > >
    > >1 in 10,000 is 0.0001 %.
    > >
    > >Not 0.01%.
    > >
    > >Am I wrong?

    >
    > Uh, Polfus? Even if the decimal point was in the wrong
    > place...the ratio was 1 in 10,000. That is ALARMINGLY high. And it's
    > not been refuted by a single M.D. I've ever spoken to about it.
    >
    > I cited the reference - as well as providing the actual page
    > number that the data appeared. That's about as crystal clear as it
    > gets.
    >
    > >What else are you misquoting or misunderstanding?

    >
    > Oh the irony! Have you ever wondered by RMMG'ers use the
    > term "Polfusian Logic"? It's because you are famous - or should I say
    > infamous for misquoting, misunderstanding - or outright intellectual
    > dishonesty (read - LYING).
    >
    > >Hmmm..."contributed"....maybe the patients got pneumonia and that was the "contribution" from anesthesia.
    > >
    > >I am positive you take it out of context.

    >
    > It's quoted directly out of the book. You can try to deflect
    > blame away from the anesthesia, but the truth of the matter is that
    > it's very VERY dangerous stuff.
    >
    > ALL doctors would agree with that. Of course, you're not a
    > doctor (and from your online behavior, I feel it's a pretty far
    > stretch to even consider you a healthcare professional). You're more
    > of a half-educated technician with a chip on your shoulder, and a very
    > profound learning disability.
    >
    > >What "bullshit"?

    >
    > Oh, probably the part about the beating drum circle, and the
    > reiki, or whatever else it was. The vast majority of chiropractors
    > practice very conservative things such as osseous manipulations,
    > exercise/rehabilitation, nutrition, and muscle/trigger point therapy
    > work.
    >
    > I'm quite sure that Jack knew this - yet deliberately
    > mentioned the other stuff in order to distort things. That's why it's
    > bullshit.
    >
    > >Really? Hmmmm...do you deny chiropractors use these techniques?

    >
    > I don't know of any, so I'm not in a position to comment. If
    > YOU know of any, please cite their names. Otherwise, I'll just
    > conclude that you're full of shit too. Oh wait - I've already done
    > that.
    >
    > >That wasn't all..the dude HURT Jack.

    >
    > No, Jack made mention that the chiro wanted to make a jag
    > payment. In fact, he mentioned that a few times. He also mentioned
    > that he stiffed the chiro on his bill.
    >
    > >Did you read that part?

    >
    > Yes, Polfus - I read the whole story. If he thought he was in
    > pain then, just wait until post-surgery.
    >
    >

    http://groups.google.com/groups?q=s...l=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=2002041909523
    3.00535.00006117%40mb-md.aol.com&rnum=2
    >
    > >Wow...where did you come up with that?

    >
    > For what - the chiropractic costs or the surgery costs? I
    > think I know what the chiropractic costs are. As for the surgery
    > costs, I'm friends with a lot of M.D.'s in town. We've had numerous
    > discussions about costs involved with medical procedures. Surgery is
    > expensive. Surgeons are very well known to be among the highest paid
    > of all physicians.
    >
    > (It should be amusing to watch Polfus try to deny this).
    >
    > >Any references or proof of these figures you allege?

    >
    > Oh for crying out loud.
    >
    > >I mean..my own spinal surgery cost $17,000.

    >
    > LOL! Thank you for proving my point for me. Your surgery
    > (which only involved trimming an osteophyte from the intervertebral
    > foramen) - was $17,000.00.
    >
    > I'll bet you a dollar that you have a hypolordosis - with
    > forward head translation (which closes down on the IVF's). I could've
    > done extension-compression traction, specific adjustments, and
    > decompression traction...gotten you completely symptom free...and for
    > less than $2k.
    >
    > But then you wouldn't have been able to pop all of those
    > percocets.
    >
    > >Holy crap, dude..you miss the point.

    >
    > Oh, the irony! Oh, the projection!
    >
    > >Yup, and I called you on it.

    >
    > You're just about the most full of shit nincompoop I've ever
    > met in my entire life.
    >
    > >And again, you would be wrong with all the talk people have about guitar playing injuries.

    >
    > Can ANYONE translate that sentence into English for me?
    >
    > >The world doesn't revolve around you, Kevin.

    >
    > No, of course it doesn't, pOlFuS. Except for you, of course.
    > You obsess about me day and night. That is - when you're not
    > obsessing about Odin.
    >
    > >You need to reread the majority of your posts, son.

    >
    > No need, boy. I stand behind what I wrote.
    >
    > >That's gonna be a little hard to believe, unfortunately.

    >
    > Believe what you want. You're generally always wrong....which
    > makes you (if nothing else) - highly predictable.
    >
    > I think that about sums up the education portion of this
    > program. It should be abundantly clear to all who are reading this
    > that Polfus had no clue about disc herniations, and still - to this
    > minute remains as clueless as he is about music, wood, astro-physics,
    > and everything else.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Atlas
    > --
    > http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Main.html
    >
  4. > >
    > >1 in 10,000 is 0.0001 %.
    > >
    > >Not 0.01%.
    > >
    > >Am I wrong?

    >
    > Uh, Polfus? Even if the decimal point was in the wrong
    > place...the ratio was 1 in 10,000. That is ALARMINGLY high.

    And it's
    > not been refuted by a single M.D. I've ever spoken to about

    it.


    And now, a word from the Central Scrotumizer:
    I'm not taking sides in this, but allow me to clarify the math
    here. Kevin's original assertion is correct.

    1:10000 is 0.01%, not 0.0001%
    A percentage expresses a ratio of x:100
    Proportionally speaking, 1:10000 :: 0.01:100 (aka 0.01%).

    Bonus question from your pharmacology daze:

    How much NaCl is contained in 50mL of NS (memory jog: NS =
    normal saline = 0.9% sodium chloride in H2O)?

    a) 900mg
    b) 9g
    c) 450mg
    d) 45g
    e) (Anna Nicole Smith's waistline in cm * Fender
    treble-switch bypass cap value in mF * Odin's Harley engine
    displacement in cc * Rich Koerner's average number of
    exclamation points per post) / average_RMMG_IQ_constant
    Note: jokes about divide-by-zero errors on answer -e- will be
    posted in the faculty washroom for our general amusement

    Academically yours,
    Covell

    PS Remember to show your work
    PPS Scantrons? Scantrons??? We don't need no steeenkin'
    Scantrons!
  5. Zoloft does wonders...

    "Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
    news:01c36b64$868d1380$a6cda7ac@715162529worldnet.att.net...
    > Let's archive this precious gem:
    >
    > Atlas <c1sublux@hotmail.comXXXSPAM> wrote in article

    <k9okkv0ealkj73gk0vcfmfip27b7oasuu4@4ax.com>...
    >
    > >
    > > On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 16:37:55 GMT, "Polfus"
    > > <http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs> trolled:
    > >
    > > Before I respond to Polfus' comments, I just want to make
    > > mention that he is ****YET AGAIN**** altering his online ID in order
    > > to slip through kill filters. In this case, he's blatantly forging my
    > > ID...which in itself underscores just how obsessed he is.
    > >
    > > So for those of you who get your panties in a twist whenever I
    > > thrash Polfus...y'all may want to avert your eyes. This won't be
    > > pretty.
    > >
    > > >No, you most certainly have not "reduced" disc herniations,

    Kevin...ABSURD.
    > >
    > > Actually Jason, I have been able to help people with disc
    > > herniations. LOTS of them. People who've been in severe pain for a
    > > long, LONG time. People who've already been to the M.D.'s, to the
    > > physical therapists...got the steroid injections...and a couple of
    > > people who had surgeries.
    > >
    > > They got absolutely no relief until they came to me. Sorry if
    > > my ability to help suffering people upsets you. But that's YOUR
    > > problem, not mine. And it's certainly not my patient's problem.
    > >
    > > >But...how about some references or links to back up your allegation.

    > >
    > > Sure. Please see:
    > > http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Research1.html
    > >
    > > Here check this out:
    > >
    > > Magnetic resonance imaging and clinical follow-up: study of 27
    > > patients receiving chiropractic care for cervical and lumbar disc
    > > herniations.
    > > BenEliyahu DJ J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1996 Nov-Dec;19(9):597-606
    > >
    > > I quote: "Anatomically, after repeat MRI scans, 63% of the
    > > patients studied revealed a reduced size or completely resorbed disc
    > > herniation."
    > >
    > > Perhaps you don't completely understand this - so I'll explain
    > > it for your clarification. Dr. BenEliyahu had MRI studies done - then
    > > chiropractically treated the study group - then did POST MRI studies.
    > > And 63% of the patients had a reduced or completely resorbed disc
    > > herniation.
    > >
    > > So before you blindly dismiss my claims as "aburd" (thus
    > > sticking your foot into your mouth)- and without knowing what you're
    > > talking about (per usual) - I have now just provided multiple studies
    > > that were published in highly respected, and PEER REVIEWED index
    > > medicus scientific journals.
    > >
    > > NEXT!
    > >
    > > >What "adjustsments"? How are you shoving a herniated disc back to its

    origin?
    > >
    > > Very specific, high velocity, low force adjustments which
    > > re-aligns the vertebrae, corrects biomechanical distortions, and in
    > > the case of flexion-distraction technique, can actually suck the
    > > nucleus pulposus back in the center of the disc. (See above for the
    > > scientific references PROVING this).
    > >
    > > There are different types of herniations. Please see:
    > > http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Herniation2.html
    > >
    > > If the herniation is contained or extruded, there is the
    > > possibility of it being able to be reduced (or completely resorbed)
    > > via chiropractic treatments.
    > >
    > > >Symptom management...doesn't do a thing to correct a herniated disc.

    > >
    > > Symptom management is what patients come to you for in the
    > > first place. They are in pain, and they want relief. And I provide
    > > all natural, drug free relief that's safe, has no side effects and
    > > gets excellent results.
    > >
    > > >Oh...my...God.

    > >
    > > Oh please spare me your melodramatic bullshit.
    > >
    > > >You are going to fuck someone up one day...guaranteed, Kevin.

    > >
    > > Actually not really. Traction is widely accepted and widely
    > > used by physical therapists and chiropractors alike - to decompress
    > > the involved area, as well as correct abnormal curves. That's also
    > > backed up by peer reviewed research.
    > >
    > > If you want to find the group of people who fuck people up,
    > > you'd best stop looking at the chiropractors...and start looking at
    > > the M.D.s whom you worship. According to the research, they kill
    > > about a quarter of a million people every year.
    > >
    > > http://www.mercola.com/2000/jul/30/doctors_death.htm
    > >
    > > >Symptom management for musculoskeletal pain.
    > > >Not one thing to "reduce a herniated disc".
    > > >None.

    > >
    > > 1. Symptom management is part of the clinical picture - and a very
    > > important aspect of treatment. If you're unable to reduce or
    > > eliminate the patient's symptoms what's the purpose of the treatment?
    > >
    > > 2. As I've already stated (and PROVEN), there is ample research -
    > > (that was published in scientific journals) - which shows that
    > > chiropractic care can and will reduce or completely resorb a herniated
    > > disc.
    > >
    > > >Uh, huh...keep going...

    > >
    > > Thank you, I think I will. Given that I'm educated, trained,
    > > and have the clinical experience to diagnose and treat disc
    > > herniations, I'm in a specific position to act as the resident
    > > authority on such issues.
    > >
    > > You, on the other hand have NO training in diagnosis, NO
    > > training in radiology, NO training in physical medicine, and are
    > > completely ignorant in regard to the scientific literature.
    > >
    > > >You just keep on with incorrect medical information.

    > >
    > > Errrrrrrrr! Wrong, Polfus. Here's a website that you may be
    > > interested in checking out:
    > > http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Main.html
    > >
    > > It covers anatomy, mechanism of disc injury, a FAQ, &
    > > research.
    > >
    > > >A "herniated disc" BY DEFINITION is "a rupture or herniation of the

    nucleus pulposus" !!!!!!!!!
    > >
    > > Yes...and? What's your point? This page shows all about
    > > herniated discs:
    > > http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Herniation1.html
    > >
    > > >>and has calcified...
    > > >
    > > >Has nothing to do with it.

    > >
    > > No, actually it has a lot to do with it. Please see:
    > > http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Herniation2.html
    > >
    > > And look at the variants for disc herniations. The "free
    > > form" herniation means that a part of the nucleus pulposus has broken
    > > free. And if there for a time being, it can calcify - at which point,
    > > it becomes that much more serious because it becomes rigid. You have
    > > an irregularly shaped, rigid object floating around in the thecal sac
    > > (which surrounds the cord) - and creating massive damage to the cord.
    > > THAT would be a definite surgical case. Fortunately, that's also
    > > quite rare.
    > >
    > > >A herniated disc will never, ever repair itself other than with

    surgery.
    > >
    > > Bullshit. There's research that proves you wrong. Do
    > > yourself a favor and at least do a LITTLE homework before you go and
    > > embarrass yourself like you're doing now.
    > >
    > > >People can live with the pain and do whatever for symptom relief, but

    the disc will always remain herniated.
    > >
    > > Yes - some. And there's proof that chiropractic can not only
    > > get people out of pain COMPLETELY as well as reduce and/or completely
    > > reabsorb the herniated disc. Argue with me all you want, Polfus. But
    > > the chiropractors have 108 years of success stories to back up their
    > > claims. And we also have sound scientific research.
    > >
    > > >That is another terrible generalization of people with disc injuries.

    > >
    > > A "terrible generalization"? No, it's a rational, sound
    > > conclusion. Surgery should ONLY be considered as an absolutely last
    > > ditch resort - and then ONLY after all other interventions have
    > > already been tried - and have failed to work.
    > >
    > > Chiropractic has a 94+% success rate. What's "terrible" is
    > > that people like you pass along some really bad information - which
    > > shuttles poor victims into the surgical theater where they are at risk
    > > of dying from general anesthesia (1:10,000), getting a hospital-born
    > > infection (80,000 / year), and residual impairments due to the surgery
    > > itself (countless).
    > >
    > > "Nobody should be allowed to have back surgery unless they
    > > have seen a chiropractor first."
    > > -- Dr. Robert Mendelsohn M.D.
    > >
    > >
    > > >LOL! Jack already said that he assumed that the chiro wanted him to

    come in for 7 days straight, and admitted he was wrong!
    > >
    > > LOL! So why are you continuing to support his original
    > > (wrong) contention? LOL!
    > >
    > > >How about those medical references?

    > >
    > > Salenius, P. & Laurent, L.E. Results of operative treatment of lumbar
    > > disc herniation. Octa-Orthop Scand, 1977, iS, pp. 630-634.
    > >
    > > Dommisse, G.E & Grahe, R.P The failure of surgery for lumbar disc
    > > disorders. Disorder of the lumbar spine. Lippincott, 1978.
    > >
    > > Davis, H. Increasing rates of cervical and lumbar spine surgery in the
    > > United States, 1979-1990. Spine, 1994, 1,9(10), pp. 1117-1124.
    > >
    > > Need any more princess?
    > >
    > > >And again...any proof of that?

    > >
    > > LOL! The panel of surgeons and neurologists concluded that
    > > the current medical and surgical approaches to back pain are a
    > > miserable failure - and you don't believe them. Tell you what Polfus,
    > > when you become a doctor, maybe you can argue with them.
    > >
    > > >Uh..Kevin?
    > > >
    > > >Pretending that you "quote" this book correctly and can even understand

    if you take it out of context:
    > > >
    > > >1 in 10,000 is 0.0001 %.
    > > >
    > > >Not 0.01%.
    > > >
    > > >Am I wrong?

    > >
    > > Uh, Polfus? Even if the decimal point was in the wrong
    > > place...the ratio was 1 in 10,000. That is ALARMINGLY high. And it's
    > > not been refuted by a single M.D. I've ever spoken to about it.
    > >
    > > I cited the reference - as well as providing the actual page
    > > number that the data appeared. That's about as crystal clear as it
    > > gets.
    > >
    > > >What else are you misquoting or misunderstanding?

    > >
    > > Oh the irony! Have you ever wondered by RMMG'ers use the
    > > term "Polfusian Logic"? It's because you are famous - or should I say
    > > infamous for misquoting, misunderstanding - or outright intellectual
    > > dishonesty (read - LYING).
    > >
    > > >Hmmm..."contributed"....maybe the patients got pneumonia and that was

    the "contribution" from anesthesia.
    > > >
    > > >I am positive you take it out of context.

    > >
    > > It's quoted directly out of the book. You can try to deflect
    > > blame away from the anesthesia, but the truth of the matter is that
    > > it's very VERY dangerous stuff.
    > >
    > > ALL doctors would agree with that. Of course, you're not a
    > > doctor (and from your online behavior, I feel it's a pretty far
    > > stretch to even consider you a healthcare professional). You're more
    > > of a half-educated technician with a chip on your shoulder, and a very
    > > profound learning disability.
    > >
    > > >What "bullshit"?

    > >
    > > Oh, probably the part about the beating drum circle, and the
    > > reiki, or whatever else it was. The vast majority of chiropractors
    > > practice very conservative things such as osseous manipulations,
    > > exercise/rehabilitation, nutrition, and muscle/trigger point therapy
    > > work.
    > >
    > > I'm quite sure that Jack knew this - yet deliberately
    > > mentioned the other stuff in order to distort things. That's why it's
    > > bullshit.
    > >
    > > >Really? Hmmmm...do you deny chiropractors use these techniques?

    > >
    > > I don't know of any, so I'm not in a position to comment. If
    > > YOU know of any, please cite their names. Otherwise, I'll just
    > > conclude that you're full of shit too. Oh wait - I've already done
    > > that.
    > >
    > > >That wasn't all..the dude HURT Jack.

    > >
    > > No, Jack made mention that the chiro wanted to make a jag
    > > payment. In fact, he mentioned that a few times. He also mentioned
    > > that he stiffed the chiro on his bill.
    > >
    > > >Did you read that part?

    > >
    > > Yes, Polfus - I read the whole story. If he thought he was in
    > > pain then, just wait until post-surgery.
    > >
    > >

    >

    http://groups.google.com/groups?q=s...l=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=2002041909523
    > 3.00535.00006117%40mb-md.aol.com&rnum=2
    > >
    > > >Wow...where did you come up with that?

    > >
    > > For what - the chiropractic costs or the surgery costs? I
    > > think I know what the chiropractic costs are. As for the surgery
    > > costs, I'm friends with a lot of M.D.'s in town. We've had numerous
    > > discussions about costs involved with medical procedures. Surgery is
    > > expensive. Surgeons are very well known to be among the highest paid
    > > of all physicians.
    > >
    > > (It should be amusing to watch Polfus try to deny this).
    > >
    > > >Any references or proof of these figures you allege?

    > >
    > > Oh for crying out loud.
    > >
    > > >I mean..my own spinal surgery cost $17,000.

    > >
    > > LOL! Thank you for proving my point for me. Your surgery
    > > (which only involved trimming an osteophyte from the intervertebral
    > > foramen) - was $17,000.00.
    > >
    > > I'll bet you a dollar that you have a hypolordosis - with
    > > forward head translation (which closes down on the IVF's). I could've
    > > done extension-compression traction, specific adjustments, and
    > > decompression traction...gotten you completely symptom free...and for
    > > less than $2k.
    > >
    > > But then you wouldn't have been able to pop all of those
    > > percocets.
    > >
    > > >Holy crap, dude..you miss the point.

    > >
    > > Oh, the irony! Oh, the projection!
    > >
    > > >Yup, and I called you on it.

    > >
    > > You're just about the most full of shit nincompoop I've ever
    > > met in my entire life.
    > >
    > > >And again, you would be wrong with all the talk people have about

    guitar playing injuries.
    > >
    > > Can ANYONE translate that sentence into English for me?
    > >
    > > >The world doesn't revolve around you, Kevin.

    > >
    > > No, of course it doesn't, pOlFuS. Except for you, of course.
    > > You obsess about me day and night. That is - when you're not
    > > obsessing about Odin.
    > >
    > > >You need to reread the majority of your posts, son.

    > >
    > > No need, boy. I stand behind what I wrote.
    > >
    > > >That's gonna be a little hard to believe, unfortunately.

    > >
    > > Believe what you want. You're generally always wrong....which
    > > makes you (if nothing else) - highly predictable.
    > >
    > > I think that about sums up the education portion of this
    > > program. It should be abundantly clear to all who are reading this
    > > that Polfus had no clue about disc herniations, and still - to this
    > > minute remains as clueless as he is about music, wood, astro-physics,
    > > and everything else.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > Atlas
    > > --
    > > http://www.geocities.com/cbpdoc/DiscHerniation_Main.html
    > >
  6. Nobody

    Nobody Guest

    David and/or Rena Covell <covell@jps.net> wrote in article <s7y2b.3569$3E.2313@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>...

    > 1:10000 is 0.01%, not 0.0001%
    > A percentage expresses a ratio of x:100
    > Proportionally speaking, 1:10000 :: 0.01:100 (aka 0.01%).


    You're right...I was wrong.


    > Bonus question from your pharmacology daze:
    >
    > How much NaCl is contained in 50mL of NS (memory jog: NS =
    > normal saline = 0.9% sodium chloride in H2O)?
    >
    > a) 900mg
    > b) 9g
    > c) 450mg
    > d) 45g


    I believe it's c.

    --
    Jason
    http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs
  7. Dan Stanley

    Dan Stanley Guest

    "David and/or Rena Covell" <covell@jps.net> wrote in message
    news:s7y2b.3569$3E.2313@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    > PS Remember to show your work
    > PPS Scantrons? Scantrons??? We don't need no steeenkin'
    > Scantrons!


    I would like to present my answer in the form of an interpretive dance.
    I call it:

    "Sal Anthony's Revenge"


    <insert dance here>


    Thank you,
    Dan
  8. Dan Stanley wrote:

    >I would like to present my answer in the form of an interpretive dance.
    >I call it:
    >
    >"Sal Anthony's Revenge"
    >
    >
    ><insert dance here>
    >


    Reminded me somewhat of Julia Louis-Dreyfus as Elaine dancing on the
    Seinfeld show.

    >
    >Thank you,


    Your welcome.

    Texas Pete
  9. howldog

    howldog Guest

    On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 12:33:56 GMT, "Dan Stanley" <vze2bjcf@verizon.net>
    wrote:

    >
    >"David and/or Rena Covell" <covell@jps.net> wrote in message
    >news:s7y2b.3569$3E.2313@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    >> PS Remember to show your work
    >> PPS Scantrons? Scantrons??? We don't need no steeenkin'
    >> Scantrons!

    >
    >I would like to present my answer in the form of an interpretive dance.
    >I call it:
    >
    >"Sal Anthony's Revenge"
    >



    (mary catherine gallagher leaps, falls over, reveals cute little
    catholic shoolgirl panties, destroys rmmg)
  10. Dan Stanley

    Dan Stanley Guest

    "Pete Kerezman" <petekerez@aol.com> wrote in message
    news:3f4b6081.8780049@news.intcomm.net...
    > Dan Stanley wrote:
    >
    > >I would like to present my answer in the form of an interpretive dance.
    > >I call it:
    > >
    > >"Sal Anthony's Revenge"
    > >
    > >
    > ><insert dance here>
    > >

    >
    > Reminded me somewhat of Julia Louis-Dreyfus as Elaine dancing on the
    > Seinfeld show.


    I taught her that. True. We grew up together in the hot sands of Nevada, a
    small town. Her dad worked at the post office with my aunt, who raised me
    after my parents ran away to join the circus. We, me and Jule ( I called her
    Jule, she called me "Dan", using her fingers to make the quotie marks),
    played together all the time, we were likethis. I saved her life once, in
    Girl Scouts.


    > >Thank you,

    >
    > Your welcome.
    >
    > Texas Pete


    What a darn polite place this newsgroup is!

    Dan
  11. ryanm

    ryanm Guest

    "Pete Kerezman" <petekerez@aol.com> wrote in message
    news:3f4b6081.8780049@news.intcomm.net...
    >
    > Reminded me somewhat of Julia Louis-Dreyfus as Elaine dancing on the
    > Seinfeld show.
    >

    Heh... "little kicks"

    ryanm
  12. As "Dan Stanley" <vze2bjcf@verizon.net> so eloquently put:
    [] "David and/or Rena Covell" <covell@jps.net> wrote in message
    [] > PS Remember to show your work
    [] > PPS Scantrons? Scantrons??? We don't need no steeenkin'
    [] > Scantrons!
    []
    [] I would like to present my answer in the form of an interpretive dance.
    [] I call it:
    []
    [] "Sal Anthony's Revenge"
    []
    []
    [] <insert dance here>

    Lilly Langtree would be pleased.

    Chris

    ----
    "...there would have been no Holdsworth or
    Hendrix without the genius of Boxcar Willie"
    -- Mark Garvin
    Remove X's from my email address above to reply
    [These opinions are personal views only and only my personal views]
  13. "Not A Speck Of Cereal" <XchrissherwoodX@Xcomcast.netX> wrote in
    message news:23fokvoigch2785at8o0g5ntkvubl83cmi@4ax.com...
    > As "Dan Stanley" <vze2bjcf@verizon.net> so eloquently put:
    > [] "David and/or Rena Covell" <covell@jps.net> wrote in

    message
    > [] > PS Remember to show your work
    > [] > PPS Scantrons? Scantrons??? We don't need no steeenkin'
    > [] > Scantrons!
    > []
    > [] I would like to present my answer in the form of an

    interpretive dance.
    > [] I call it:
    > []
    > [] "Sal Anthony's Revenge"
    > []
    > []
    > [] <insert dance here>
    >
    > Lilly Langtree would be pleased.


    Sal Anthony may be good pie material, but let's not forget the
    original master of interpretive dance, *Saint* Anthony. A
    little ergot in your bread can really torque out your day.

    Speaking of Sal, what's the skinny for November? There's a
    fair chance that I'll make it this year.
  14. As "David and/or Rena Covell" <covell@jps.net> so eloquently put:
    [] > [] <insert dance here>
    [] >
    [] > Lilly Langtree would be pleased.
    []
    [] Sal Anthony may be good pie material, but let's not forget the
    [] original master of interpretive dance, *Saint* Anthony. A
    [] little ergot in your bread can really torque out your day.
    []
    [] Speaking of Sal, what's the skinny for November? There's a
    [] fair chance that I'll make it this year.

    Outstanding. We'll keep you posted. I hope it happens (again).

    Chris

    ----
    "...there would have been no Holdsworth or
    Hendrix without the genius of Boxcar Willie"
    -- Mark Garvin
    Remove X's from my email address above to reply
    [These opinions are personal views only and only my personal views]

Share This Page