
Originally Posted by
justaseeker
Grizz,
A week or so before you went on vacation you mentioned here that you were the “thread moderator”. I asked you what was involved in being a thread moderator and you never answered. I have read this entire thread and did not see anyone ASK you to be the moderator or any other similar discussion about anyone being a moderator or even needing a moderator for this thread.
So, being new to the forum and unfamiliar with the Netiqutte here, I explored the various links offered – including the “quick links” that lead to the section on moderators. There was NO mention of “thread moderators”. There was a list of “forum moderators”.
This thread is in the “Primal Blueprint Nutrition” forum and Mark is the moderator. And, moderators have the ability to eliminate spam posts after they are posted – which we have seen happen here occasionally in the past.
So, my conclusion is that SOMEONE is moderating this thread – at least occasionally – but that someone is not you. You are as entitled as anyone else here to post your views. You are not MORE entitled than anyone else. You are not entitled to dictate to others what they may post here – including their choice to include mainstream studies and the resulting statistics.
I told you before that I didn’t want you to continue to try to place me on a pedestal – and that the subsequent fall was likely to be a sharp one. Now, maybe you know what I was talking about. I told you that I question everyone and everything. It’s called “critical thinking/reasoning” – a faculty that you seem to lack when it comes to, among other things, discerning “theory” from fact.
In his own words, Dr. Derry is positing a “theory” (see my subsequent post on Dr. Derry) when he makes his statements about breast cancer. He is not a researcher – he is a retired family practice MD who chose that profession over academic research. I happen to agree with his reasoning that medicine could be advanced by entertaining – including testing – more competing theories. But, until there is testing done and a theory established, these statements are not to be taken as “fact” but as “possibility” – and food for thought.
I also happen to agree with Dr. Derry’s position on the iodine “skin test” – which position is actually based on “meticulous research” cited by Dr. Derry. But, I see that you feel that you have somehow “proven” them all wrong on this subject, singlehandedly with your n=1 application of iodine.
In the same vein, you state that “real statistics” can be acquired by asking around a few of our acquaintances for evidence of FBD – which is – according to Dr. Derry, asymptomatic and undetectable except by biopsy in 40% of the 90% of the population that have FBD. So, that 40% will hypothetically give us “false negative” responses. Sorry, but that’s not the procedure for getting “real statistics”.
The fact is, many women have breast health issues, and evidently these issues are occurring more frequently and at younger ages – like so many other hormonal related changes in the population. Iodine deficiencies, pollutants (including the halides, the psueudo-iodides, estrogens, pseudo- estrogens, and possibly more), and other factors like other nutritional deficiencies or excesses are very likely implicated.
I am all for getting the word out to everyone. But, I believe in free choice for adults, even our spouses. I believe in informed consent. Provide the information. Allow them the freedom to consent or to decline. None of us knows for sure exactly what we are doing right now with iodine. Why do we want to force our views on others?