[QUOTE=alice_in_wonderland]
I’m flattered that you and Garfield have managed to wrustle up all this righteous indignation just for little old me. So much so, that this post needs my new sig.
[/QUOTE]
Don’t get yourself all flattered there hon, most of my righteous indingnation is being directed at those who are answering for you.
I think we’re all tkaing this a bit too seriously. It’s Friday (at least where I’m sitting it is), maybe we can just shut up and do some shots.
[QUOTE=crazyjoe]
I think we’re all tkaing this a bit too seriously.
[/QUOTE]
Speak for yourself!
[QUOTE=crazyjoe]
I think we’re all tkaing this a bit too seriously. It’s Friday (at least where I’m sitting it is), maybe we can just shut up and do some shots.
[/QUOTE]
Coolio. I’ve got the limes and salt (high BP be damned!) if you can supply the tequila.
[QUOTE=alice_in_wonderland]
Dude - I’m not only the owner of my threads, I’m the owner of the INTERNET. You’d be advised to remember that in the future…
[/QUOTE]
**Al! ** Loved you last film. As to that election- you wuz robbed.
[QUOTE=Shayna]
(A) Why should she have to say she’s not interested in talking to her doctor about it when she quite clearly said in post #21 that she’d already confirmed it with her doctor?
(B) Why should she have to specifically say she’s not interested in talking to her doctor about random people’s links on a message board when in post #22 she expressed her appreciation for the information, and hoped she wouldn’t offend anyone by choosing to follow her doctor’s advice, particularly since doing so wasn’t going to actually hurt her anyway?
(C) Why should she have to make a showing she was “getting your point?” She specifically asked people, politely to refrain from continuing with that hijack, but she kept getting pounded and pounded. That’s just plain rude.
Then a moderator came along and implied she was an idiot for “disregarding informed opinions” on medical advice she didn’t even want. Ridiculous!
[/QUOTE]
She shouldn’t have to do any of that, but it wouldn’t have hurt and might have helped. The people who were arguing probably shouldn’t have kept bringing up their point. I would have done the same thing but I would have apologized for it later.
Okay, so she did make herself clear in a few posts, I can see that now looking at the posts individually. But overall I find it to be a confusing sequence of posts, particularly this post.
Maybe the problem is with me. Maybe it makes sense to everyone else and I’m the one who’s confused. It’s happened before.
I wouldn’t think so. If you did anything else, I’d just think you were confused at the time. Sometimes it happens. At the very worst I’d think you were kind of dense, but being dense doesn’t mean someone isn’t intelligent.
I feel like I’m just spreading confusion around in this thread. I found this link for you to try and make up for it. Hopefully it’s helpful.
If you claim the title, you’ll have your own theme song
[QUOTE=alice_in_wonderland]
I always have time to fit in a torrid affair. Silly boy!
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but with me. I’m not letting you off on creative semantics.
[QUOTE=Waverly]
Yeah, but with me. I’m not letting you off on creative semantics.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, yes - I get it. Here - it’s right in my book:
Torrid Affair with Waverly - Tuesday from 12:00 - 12:45.
[QUOTE=alice_in_wonderland]
Yes, yes - I get it. Here - it’s right in my book:
Torrid Affair with Waverly - Tuesday from 12:00 - 12:45.
[/QUOTE]
Doesn’t leave much time for drinks, lunch, or foreplay, but go ahead and send me an Outlook meeting invitation and I’ll try to keep it open.
[QUOTE=Waverly]
Doesn’t leave much time for drinks, lunch, or foreplay, but go ahead and send me an Outlook meeting invitation and I’ll try to keep it open.
[/QUOTE]
What is this drinks, lunch and foreplay of which you speak?
[QUOTE=Shayna]
No, it is quite clear that samclem was referring to the content of the advice wrt whether or not there was sufficient evidence to link aspartame to high (or low) blood pressure. He all but said she was an idiot for choosing to disregard these oh-so-brilliant anonymous posters “(including a real doctor)”!.
[/QUOTE]
Thank Og I didn’t actually say she was an idiot.
alice all but said that she thought the posters offering the information about aspartame/high blood pressure shoud fuck off. Her doctor knew better.
Good thing she didn’t actually phrase it that way.
And, yeah, I’ll take the information that Karl Gauss gave in that thread as pretty damned good.
…and I truly apologize for bringing this up during The Dating Show. 
[QUOTE=samclem]
And, yeah, I’ll take the information that Karl Gauss gave in that thread as pretty damned good.
[/QUOTE]
So you’re saying the SDMB has thoroughly vetted all the supposed credentialed professionals here? Whether the advice was good or not, I still think anyone who advises someone take the advise of complete strangers on the internet over their personal physician is a nutter. You had reason to close the thread, but that wasn’t it.
[QUOTE=samclem]
Good thing she didn’t actually phrase it that way.
[/QUOTE]
Why? Would that have been against the rules?
[QUOTE=XJETGIRLX]
Whether the advice was good or not, I still think anyone who advises someone take the advise of complete strangers on the internet over their personal physician is a nutter.
[/QUOTE]
Who did that? Have you read the thread? Did you read my first post in this thread? I can’t find ANYONE who suggested she blatantly disregard what her doctor said. What I see is people saying that her doctor might be mistaken, and maybe she should ask the doctor about it. Here’s what KarlGauss had to say, by way of example:
[QUOTE=alice_in_wonderland]
Why? Would that have been against the rules?
[/QUOTE]
Yes. In general questions you wouldn’t be allowed to tell people to fuck off, and I also would not be allowed to call you an idiot.
[QUOTE=samclem]
And, yeah, I’ll take the information that Karl Gauss gave in that thread as pretty damned good.
[/QUOTE]
No offense to Karl Gauss, but in general, a real life physician should get the nod. Not that healthy skepticism isn’t wise to use there as well.
And not to ruin your sense of superiority with some facts, but JAMA has included articles that link aspartame / nutrasweet to blood pressure, including a 1986 study which reported an acute effect on systolic pressure in lab rats. Another found the instances of tachycardia to be 16% and hypertension to be 5% among a database of 1200 human users. Irrefutable? No. But maybe a GP who knows a lot more about Alice’s health and habits made a well intentioned attempt to err on the side of caution. You should be ashamed for suggesting that message board is a better authority. In fact, you should be reprimanded, but that is just my opinion.
[QUOTE=Waverly]
No offense to Karl Gauss, but in general, a real life physician should get the nod. Not that healthy skepticism isn’t wise to use there as well.
And not to ruin your sense of superiority with some facts, but JAMA has included articles that link aspartame / nutrasweet to blood pressure, including a 1986 study which reported an acute effect on systolic pressure in lab rats. Another found the instances of tachycardia to be 16% and hypertension to be 5% among a database of 1200 human users. Irrefutable? No. But maybe a GP who knows a lot more about Alice’s health and habits made a well intentioned attempt to err on the side of caution. You should be ashamed for suggesting that message board is a better authority. In fact, you should be reprimanded, but that is just my opinion.
[/QUOTE]
See, now why did you have to ruin this perfectly absurd thread with facts and stuff? Nobody wants to know that my MD might actually have had a reason for suggesting what she did, other than being a total nutter.
[QUOTE=alice_in_wonderland]
See, now why did you have to ruin this perfectly absurd thread with facts and stuff? Nobody wants to know that my MD might actually have had a reason for suggesting what she did, other than being a total nutter.
[/QUOTE]
These aren’t REAL facts, Alice. It’s not like I used wiki or anything.
[QUOTE=Waverly]
These aren’t REAL facts, Alice. It’s not like I used wiki or anything.
[/QUOTE]
::snerk::
I almost choked on my coughdrop.
[QUOTE=Waverly]
No offense to Karl Gauss, but in general, a real life physician should get the nod. Not that healthy skepticism isn’t wise to use there as well.
[/quote]
Are you suggesting that Karl Gauss isn’t a real life physician?
If alice’s GP indeed made an attempt to err on the side of caution, that’s OK with me. I just don’t see leaving her GP’s advice as being a scientific fact in General Questions.
My response, in closing that thread was…
I DO see how one could interpret my response as suggesting to alice that she take the advice of the message board over her physician. That’s not how I meant it. I was only continuing to give my reasoning for closing the thread. It appeared to me that she decided to refuse to consider any of the information offered in that thread and, instead rely on the advice of her physician. Thus, I thought the thread was at a stalemate, and could only lead to further bickering.
My remaining interest in this whole question now is what did alice’s physician actually tell her about aspartame?. We have her response
which almost certainly isn’t what her physician said. If her physician used the term sodium aspartame, then what are we to make of her physician’s compentency? I know that if I had just come back from my doctor, and you asked my to tell you exactly what he/she said about a medical problem, I might just get my phraseology a bit off. Anyone would. And therein may lie the rub. Just what did her doctor tell her? Only her doctor knows. And, I’d love to know her doctor’s exact words. It might bring some clarity to this whole affair.