# An Imaginary Pitting for Crafter Man **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 8, 2003, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902 "2003-05-08T14:45:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2003, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/21 "2003-05-08T21:30:53Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Guinastasia \* > \*\*And you have evidence to the contrary where? You studied psychology and medicine, **Crafter\_Man**? > > CITE!!! > > What credentials do you have to make this claim that you KNOW better than us? \*\* From a paper at [http://www.alpacas.com/](http://www.alpacas.com/) (you’ll have to register to gain access): > [@](#): > > Over 30% of American consumers surveyed by the International Wool Secretariat reported that they were “allergic” to wool. After extensive study, scientists have determined that these consumers were not allergic to wool. The perceived allergic reaction to wool was actually a painful response by sensitive skin to coarse fibers. The consumers were being “prickled” by coarse guard hair or kemp-like fiber found in the wool. > > Scientists have determined that it doesn’t matter whether a garment is made of wool, mohair, or man-made acrylics, if over 5% of the fabric is comprised of fiber with a diameter of excess of 30 microns, it will prickle and itch. Research has also established that once the average diameter of the fiber in a fabric or sweater exceeds 22 microns, the prickle factor begins to appear. In other words, the person wearing the garment begins to itch. I also found this comment at [http://www.epicmenswear.com/drestrousfaq.html#3:](http://www.epicmenswear.com/drestrousfaq.html#3:) > [@](#): > > You can’t be allergic to wool any more than you can be allergic to your own hair. To avoid irritation, don’t wear hairy, woolen fabrics next to the skin. And why am _I_ providing cites? Shouldn’t _you_ provide a cite stating that some people _are_ allergic to wool? In other words, wool is innocent until proven guilty. 😉 And from [MSG symptom complex: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia](http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001126.htm), > [@](#): > > Many studies were performed, but a majority failed to show a connection between MSG and the symptoms that some people describe after eating Chinese food. ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2003, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/22 "2003-05-08T21:34:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Billdo \* > \*\*’ > > If you read the linked webpage, it makes clear that a wool alergy is rare, but real. > > In other words, the very page **Crafter\_Man** cites refutes his claim that “_no one_ is allergic to wool. Zip. Zero.” \*\* The author just didn’t want to make an absolute statement. I contend that _no one_ is allergic to wool (i.e. the wool itself). Please provide evidence to the contrary and I’ll eat my words. ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2003, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/23 "2003-05-08T21:40:53Z")
BTW: I would also like to state that no one is allergic to water. I am looking for a cite. Please be patient. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2003, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/24 "2003-05-08T21:48:46Z")
Apparently some people are allergic to facts. ---
**Author:** ![Aslan\_of\_Narnia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@Aslan\_of\_Narnia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aslan_of_Narnia)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2003, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/25 "2003-05-08T21:49:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Crafter\_Man \* > \*\* > > This may be a shocker to some folks, but the idea that ADD and alcoholism are diseases is a subject of _debate_. There are those who believe they _are_, and there are those who believe they’re _not_. I’m in the latter camp. Don’t like it? Tough. > > \*\* Even if it were imaginary, which it’s not, it would be a disorder, not a disease. It’s Attention Deficit **Disorder**. ---
**Author:** ![Tony\_Barber\_s\_Underwear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/58f4c7/32.png) [@Tony\_Barber\_s\_Underwear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tony_Barber_s_Underwear)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2003, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/26 "2003-05-08T22:32:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Guinastasia \* > \*\*Apparently some people are allergic to facts. \*\* What facts are those, **Guinastasia**. At least he has come up with some cites for his claims. What have you provided? ---
**Author:** ![White\_Lightning](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@White\_Lightning](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/White_Lightning)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2003, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/27 "2003-05-08T23:07:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by \*\*Billdo \*\*\* > If you read the linked webpage, it makes clear that a wool alergy is rare, but real. Fine with me. I didn’t look at it. I don’t have a dog in that race. Just wanted to point out **Guinastasia** ’s allergy to making meaningful posts. ---
**Author:** ![Ferrous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Ferrous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ferrous)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/28 "2003-05-09T00:10:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Guinastasia \* > \*\*Oh god…not again. Not ANOTHER fuckwad saying ADHD doesn’t exist. > > Fuck him. \*\* I didn’t see anyone saying that. **Crafter\_Man** said it was a “behavioral disease”, not that it doesn’t exist. Now I don’t know what he means by “behavioral disease”, or if ADHD would fit that definition, whatever it is, but you might consider finding out before getting all indignant. Unless you just want to indulge your outrage fetish, then by all means, knock yourself out. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/29 "2003-05-09T00:50:37Z")
About **Crafter\_Man** ’s cites: 1. [www.epicmenswear.com](http://www.epicmenswear.com)…yup, I’d find that authoritative. :rolleyes: 2. [www.alpacas.com](http://www.alpacas.com) - who knows? 3. NIH is a strong source; too bad **Crafter\_Man** just shows the parts most favorable to him, and not parts like this: > [@](#): > > Expectations (prognosis) > > Most people recover from mild cases of Chinese restaurant syndrome on their own. Their prognosis is excellent. > > People who have experienced life-threatening reactions need to be extremely cautious about what they eat and should always carry medication prescribed by their doctor for emergency treatment. I’ve managed to avoid tangling with **C\_M** lately, but like a bottle of Ripple or Boones Farm, he doesn’t seem to have improved with time. Oh yeah, gotta mention his original cite, and his more recent comment: > [@](#): > > The author just didn’t want to make an absolute statement. I contend that no one is allergic to wool (i.e. the wool itself). Please provide evidence to the contrary and I’ll eat my words. Dig out the catsup, friend: > [@](#): > > Lanolin is wool alcohol, extracted from wool. Many people do have a true contact allergy to lanolin. That’s from _your_ cite, so eat hearty. And don’t say, “that’s just the _extract_ from the wool, not the wool _itself_.” Because that makes about as much sense as saying, “It’s the THC that makes you high, not the marijuana itself.” ---
**Author:** ![Primaflora](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/898d66/32.png) [@Primaflora](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Primaflora)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/30 "2003-05-09T00:51:13Z")
I’d guess that behavioural disease would be a disease that is modifiable by changing behaviours and environment. Thing is though that most paeds, psychs and psychiatrists have already thought of that and one of the diagnostic issues for ADD and ADHD is that the behaviour remains constant in different environments. And I’m in the Crafter Man’s OP was jerkish camp. Sure misdiagnosis happens, sure people adopt conditions as their own special fetish when those conditions are fashionable but it doesn’t make the disease or the syndrome imaginary. ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/31 "2003-05-09T01:52:07Z")
> [@](#): > > Even if it were imaginary, which it’s not, it would be a disorder, not a disease. It’s Attention Deficit Disorder. I’d call it a syndrome. It is a constellation of symptoms that cause one to have significant difficulty in one’s daily life (as part of the definition) that responds to a particular mode of treatment and not very well to anything else. IMO, that’s enough; whether or not it has an underlying organic cause is irrelevant (unless that knowledge can lead to better treatment). I treat diabetics every day, but I rarely think about their pancreases or the mechanism of their beta-cell dysfunction. Dr. J ---
**Author:** ![Aslan\_of\_Narnia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@Aslan\_of\_Narnia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aslan_of_Narnia)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/32 "2003-05-09T02:15:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DoctorJ \* > \*\*I’d call it a syndrome. It is a constellation of symptoms that cause one to have significant difficulty in one’s daily life (as part of the definition) that responds to a particular mode of treatment and not very well to anything else. > > IMO, that’s enough; whether or not it has an underlying organic cause is irrelevant (unless that knowledge can lead to better treatment). I treat diabetics every day, but I rarely think about their pancreases or the mechanism of their beta-cell dysfunction. > > Dr. J \*\* It could be both, as certain misfirings in various chemical reactions occur in a persons with ADDs brain, a disorder of the brain function, thus causing a syndrome of symptoms. ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/33 "2003-05-09T03:35:33Z")
**RTFirefly** : Must I dig up research reports? How dense _are_ you? Besides, the onus is on _you_ to prove wool is guilty. Cite, please? ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/34 "2003-05-09T03:47:18Z")
Good grief. All you people who have taken offense at **Crafter\_Man** ’s posts on this subject need to pull the sticks outta your asses. Not once did he suggest that _every_ occurence of the diseases was imaginary, merely that some, or occassionally most, are. And I’m looking squarely at you who merely came by to call him an asshole or asshat or other name without providing any evidence to back up your position. Some people are just not happy unless they have something to get offended about, and most of you in this thread fall into that category, it seems. Jesus Christ, get over yourselves. ---
**Author:** ![Catfood\_Purrito](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Catfood\_Purrito](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Catfood_Purrito)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/35 "2003-05-09T06:09:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Crafter\_Man \* > \*\ ***RTFirefly** : Must I dig up research reports? How dense _are_ you? Besides, the onus is on _you_ to prove wool is guilty. Cite, please? \*\* Why is the onus on him? You’re the one who first claimed that wool allergies are imaginary. If you come in here claiming that the sky is green and chickens come from Mars, we’re not going to bother digging up cites to prove you wrong. You made an assertation, back it up. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/36 "2003-05-09T11:44:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Crafter\_Man \* > **RTFirefly** : Must I dig up research reports? Is there a _Cites for Dummies_ book I can refer you to? I thought my post was a pretty good start, but obviously not enough. It shouldn’t even take the IQ of a kumquat to realize that Epic Men’s Wear isn’t an authoritative cite. > [@](#): > > How dense _are_ you? Apparently pretty dense, in your eyes. But since the feeling is mutual, that doesn’t particularly bother me. > [@](#): > > Besides, the onus is on _you_ to prove wool is guilty. Cite, please? I cited **your** cite. Problem? ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/37 "2003-05-09T12:10:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RTFirefly \* > \*\*It shouldn’t even take the IQ of a kumquat \*\* You leave **Gary** alone! ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/38 "2003-05-09T13:14:17Z")
Thanks **Q.E.D.** The vast majority of people are ignorant about the scientific process ( **RTFirefly** , for example). While I would expect such ignorance on a lesser board, this is the _Straight Dope_ fercryingoutloud. There are those who claim “MSG gives them headaches.” There are also people who believe the Holy Ghost is talking directly to them. Both of these are considered abnormal conditions. The onus is _not_ on me to prove them wrong; the onus is on _them_ to _prove_ they’re right. Alas, I contend there is no _credible scientific evidence_ to substantiate either claim. **I** do not need evidence; **they** do. Ditto for wool. ---
**Author:** ![Velma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/85e7bf/32.png) [@Velma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velma)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/39 "2003-05-09T13:39:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Q.E.D. \* > Good grief. All you people who have taken offense at **Crafter\_Man** ’s posts on this subject need to pull the sticks outta your asses. Not once did he suggest that _every_ occurence of the diseases was imaginary, merely that some, or occassionally most, are. I came into this thread with an open mind, in fact my first post is a request for **Crafter\_Man** to clarify his position. I hoped that his OP was poorly worded and he did not mean to imply that the diseases themselves were imaginary, only that some people imagined having them, as you said. After reading his further posts this is not what he appears to be saying. > [@](#): > > _originally posted by Crafter\_Man_This may be a shocker to some folks, but the idea that ADD and alcoholism are diseases is a subject of debate. There are those who believe they are, and there are those who believe they’re not. I’m in the latter camp. Don’t like it? Tough. > > Same goes for “Chinese Restaurant Syndrome” and “allergic reaction to wool.” There is no evidence the former exists (to the best of my knowledge). As for wool… yes, I know some people are allergic to lanolin. But I was talking about the wool itself. And no one is allergic to wool. Zip. Zero. There are cites in this thread that show Chinese Restaurant Syndrome is real, in fact **Crafter\_Man** ’s own cite says this. **DoctorJ** has stated that ADD is real, and there is evidence to back him up. Even the idea that no one is allergic to wool has been shown to be false - at least, that people are allergic to a component of wool (to me that’s close enough for people to say they are allergic to wool. No one wants to take 10 minutes to break it down every time they have to say why they can’t wear wool.) It doesn’t seem to me like he is saying some people really do have these diseases at all. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902/40 "2003-05-09T15:55:57Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Q.E.D. \* > All you people who have taken offense at **Crafter\_Man** ’s posts on this subject need to pull the sticks outta your asses. Not once did he suggest that _every_ occurence of the diseases was imaginary, merely that some, or occassionally most, are. Considering that he’d said “I contend that _no one_ is allergic to wool” six hours earlier, I must ask you to retract this wholly inaccurate statement. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Crafter\_Man \* > Thanks **Q.E.D.** This from the great defender of the scientific process. Yup. > [@](#): > > There are those who claim “MSG gives them headaches.” There are also people who believe the Holy Ghost is talking directly to them. Both of these are considered abnormal conditions. The onus is _not_ on me to prove them wrong; the onus is on _them_ to _prove_ they’re right. Alas, I contend there is no _credible scientific evidence_ to substantiate either claim. **I** do not need evidence; **they** do. Ditto for wool. If we were sitting here, doing the science for the very first time, that would be the case. But we are not in the lab, or presenting evidence in scientific journals. And evidence has already been presented in those fora. We are, or **were** , debating _what the current state of scientific knowledge is_ on these questions. You have now gone beyond that and made an assertion, not about the state of scientific knowledge, but about the underlying fact: "_no one_ is allergic to wool ". Given that, according to your own cite, the professionals have concluded otherwise, the onus is on **you** to show why your knowledge is superior to theirs. Ditto for any other afflictions you claim do not really exist, but that scientists recognize. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-imaginary-pitting-for-crafter-man/173902.md?page=3)