Hi Radiation In Michigan From Japan

[Dr. Bob]

I told you in person many moons ago what I think about you using radiation scare tactics to sell oil. I prefer not to have stupid fighting here over stupid things, is that so wrong?

 

Well said. So let's see if my discussions undermine public health or merely undermine what you are talking about by using facts to refute BS.

 

PB, I am sure you are a good guy deep down. But to accuse a physician that has spent COUNTLESS uncompensated hours working with clubs, organizations, legislatures, destitute patients, etc. One that is developing the integrated concept of 'suffering' clinics approaching the problem from an holistic standpoint using both traditional and non-traditional methods at an affordable price for the average patient. One that is developing primary care throughout the state for working patients without insurance as a viable alternative to urgent cares and ers. To accuse that person of 'undermining' public health because I don't buy into your arguments about radiation sickness in Orlando is a bit uncalled for.

 

While you are at it PB, even my opponents in here acknowledge I have put together quite a body of information on my site. You have any idea of the expense and the hours I put in, uncompensated, to provide accurate, primary source information to the community? The unpaid expert testimony about this and other issues at trial and to prepare defense attorneys to ask the right questions and bring up the right subjects?

 

I know you have been active in this community, but there are others here that you don't seem to feel contribute. Many do. And the thanks we get is threatening calls to our offices from WITHIN THE COMMUNITY because I don't favor their pet money making project, smear campaigns for the same reason. When I tell people what I do, they ask how much my signature costs with and without records, assuming I am a mill like they see in the paper.

 

So let me just put it this way. Don't EVER accuse someone as active in medicine and this community as I am of undermining public health because I don't wear a tin hat, use your oil, or take homeopathic doses of activated charcoal. We all have different opinions of things, yours counts, but so does mine. You and your friends/supports can take that as you wish. But I have a little backing with mine.

[Dr. Bob]

 

 

I'll stick with the tin hat thank you. At least I have some data to back that.

 

Just pisses me off when folks make unqualified statements that question ethics, competence, or goals. It requires a response.

[Restorium2]

[CaveatLector]

Don't be so foolish. Dr Bob can defend himself without it beng considered a "pat on the back."

 

Peanut and others can accuse Dr Bob of hurting the community because he is concerned about the standard of care or medical ethics?

 

If I called my GP and told her that I hurt my pinky finger so please prescribe me some meds would that be okay? Even if I legitimately hurt my finger she shouldn't give me a script without an exam. So if she writes a script is it okay for others to call her out as acting inappropriately? According to peanut the answer is no. Afterall, why would we "hurt" or try to "jail" doctors if they are doing what we want, regardless of whether they follow the law and standards of care---right?

 

It is perfectly appropriate for Dr Bob to be concerned about medical practices and to accuse him of being against the movement for advocating proper and safe practices is absurd.

 

Lastly, I LOVE how imbiui posted something here that is COMPLETELY off topic in an effort to settle some sort of score that is not relevant to the thread. Normally peanut would be barking about that but since it props him up I suppose the off topic post is okie dokie. Then to accuse zap of "covering the trail" for disinviting foreign conflict...smacks of jojo the clown's reasoning or lack thereof.

[solabeirtan]

Which topic are we talking about, anyways ? Zman

[michaelscott]

radiation in michigan from japan, that does not sound good, on topic

 

Dr bob although I do not think you come off as a caring individual I have talked to several people that say only the nicest things. I do have issue with someone that says they spend countless uncompensated hours helping the community. Sounds a little familiar doesn't it. you saying you dont do recs for compensation at all of these club meetings? Do you see no Roi for your website? Cmon get real.

 

 

[CaveatLector]

radiation in michigan from japan, that does not sound good, on topic

 

Dr bob although I do not think you come off as a caring individual I have talked to several people that say only the nicest things. I do have issue with someone that says they spend countless uncompensated hours helping the community. Sounds a little familiar doesn't it. you saying you dont do recs for compensation at all of these club meetings? Do you see no Roi for your website? Cmon get real.

Unfortunately, when someone attacks you as doing nothing for the community your only response can be to lay out what you do. To then take issue for someone to say what they do to defend themselves after attacked is a little wanky isn't it...? If Dr Bob gets compensation for certs that makes him, what, a rotten individual? It means he doesn't help the community? I suppose caregivers that charge a dime are in that same boat ay? Cmon get real...

[michaelscott]

 

Unfortunately, when someone attacks you as doing nothing for the community your only response can be to lay out what you do. To then take issue for someone to say what they do to defend themselves after attacked is a little wanky isn't it...? If Dr Bob gets compensation for certs that makes him, what, a rotten individual? It means he doesn't help the community? I suppose caregivers that charge a dime are in that same boat ay? Cmon get real...

Getting compensated for work is not the problem, its saying you do it for free for the good of the community when I have issue. I thought you felt the same way from reading your past posts.

[Dr. Bob]

Getting compensated for work is not the problem, its saying you do it for free for the good of the community when I have issue. I thought you felt the same way from reading your past posts.

 

Actually there have been a couple of times I've done clinics for clubs and donated all but the gas money to the club. I also run a 1/2 price clinic in Clare (I'm there right now) for those that can't afford certifications. I've driven half way across the state to speak at clubs for zero certs and I'll actually be driving 2-3 hours each way to be a guest on a panel discussing medical marijuana at a drug abuse meeting.

 

Bottom line is I've never refused a cert for someone that needed one simply because they couldn't pay, and I don't collect the money up front.

 

But I've addressed this enough, believe me or don't, question my motives or don't. I'll just continue working with the community as I do. You are welcome to come see, or go see someone else.

[michaelscott]

 

 

Actually there have been a couple of times I've done clinics for clubs and donated all but the gas money to the club. I also run a 1/2 price clinic in Clare (I'm there right now) for those that can't afford certifications. I've driven half way across the state to speak at clubs for zero certs and I'll actually be driving 2-3 hours each way to be a guest on a panel discussing medical marijuana at a drug abuse meeting.

 

Bottom line is I've never refused a cert for someone that needed one simply because they couldn't pay, and I don't collect the money up front.

 

But I've addressed this enough, believe me or don't, question my motives or don't. I'll just continue working with the community as I do. You are welcome to come see, or go see someone else.

 

ok, my only point was that you earn a living doing certs, not that there's anything wrong with that. I remember when a certain somebody used to say he gave oil, was fighting in lansing for us, speaking at clubs, all to help the patients. no profit motives at all. I find myself to be a bit cynical when people start telling everyone how much they are helping, but that could just be my own character flaw. no worries

 

 

[Dr. Bob]

not a problem man, we all do our part. yes I do this for a living, but I actually have long term goals for patients (I am working toward a series of primary care clinics for working folks with no insurance as an alternative to urgent cares and ers), increased acceptance of cannabis by primary care docs, and replacement of narcotic therapy. this is but a step in that direction. first the certification clinics financed the pain clinics which will finance the primary care centers. that is the agenda folks are always wondering about. the result is that folks without insurance can have a medical home with a doctor that is following them. y'all heard it here first.

[peanutbutter]

As for you PB- I was pretty nice to you even though you had some rather strange ideas. I pretty much realized what you were when you started hawking your oil as a cure for cancer. The proof you offered was several pictures of the same lesion a few days apart, and everyone what chirping in about how much better they looked. They were no different, other than a crust was wiped off. I specifically asked for follow up photos and doctor reports when you asked me to put my thoughts up, you danced and wouldn't give me a follow up photo of the same spot much less the physician reports I needed to look for change in the lesions. We went round and round for weeks. You made the announcement, I asked for the evidence, you wouldn't produce it.

 

I had hoped for a confirmation from a doctor. Then his own dermatologist from the DMC said in an interview that it was, perhaps, 60% gone.

 

This was a doctor that had worked his case from the word go.

 

How could you possibly add to that?

 

Next you made your conclusions clear .. without an exam. "It looked to me like.." Even in your statement above "there was no difference." Conclusion without exam=bias.

 

With your foregone conclusions and the much higher qualifications of the other doctor, there was no need for the trouble you seemed determined to cause.

 

By that time there were many people talking about skin cancers going away after applying my oil. Joe Cain included.

 

I had always believed that RSO was the best, cannabinoid, method for cancers. One of the main reasons I developed the oil was to extend the available hemp resources of the community. That would allow what RSO existed to be concentrated toward those in largest need. This becomes MUCH more important in light of the fallout and solar storm issues.

 

Some Chrone's patients only need a single drop of the topical oil per day. That makes 1/2 gram of cannabis last for months.

Using RSO for such a patient may require a half ounce worth of bud per week.

 

There are way to many patients that need and want the RSO. To me, that implies we STILL need to expand what is available and direct those resources where the most intense need exists.

 

As for what my oil is able to do for people, I don't have to brag much at all. Many of the people that post here know for themselves. They know what their own body is telling them. Your attempt to convince them it doesn't work is laughable. You can't imagine how foolish you look to such a person.

 

Several folks have been doing the same here. Conclusions without exam. They have never used my oil yet conclude it does next to nothing. Textbook bias.

 

So keep pushing paper, I need your permission slip to work with the bodies. To bad you aren't allowed to.

Edited August 17, 2012 by peanutbutter

[Restorium2]

I had hoped for a confirmation from a doctor. Then his own dermatologist from the DMC said in an interview that it was, perhaps, 60% gone.

 

This was a doctor that had worked his case from the word go.

 

How could you possibly add to that?

 

Next you made your conclusions clear .. without an exam. "It looked to me like.." Even in your statement above "there was no difference." Conclusion without exam=bias.

 

With your foregone conclusions and the much higher qualifications of the other doctor, there was no need for the trouble you seemed determined to cause.

 

By that time there were many people talking about skin cancers going away after applying my oil. Joe Cain included.

 

I had always believed that RSO was the best, cannabinoid, method for cancers. One of the main reasons I developed the oil was to extend the available hemp resources of the community. That would allow what RSO existed to be concentrated toward those in largest need. This becomes MUCH more important in light of the fallout and solar storm issues.

 

Some Chrone's patients only need a single drop of the topical oil per day. That makes 1/2 gram of cannabis last for months.

Using RSO for such a patient may require a half ounce worth of bud per week.

 

There are way to many patients that need and want the RSO. To me, that implies we STILL need to expand what is available and direct those resources where the most intense need exists.

 

As for what my oil is able to do for people, I don't have to brag much at all. Many of the people that post here know for themselves. They know what their own body is telling them. Your attempt to convince them it doesn't work is laughable. You can't imagine how foolish you look to such a person.

 

Several folks have been doing the same here. Conclusions without exam. They have never used my oil yet conclude it does next to nothing. Textbook bias.

 

So keep pushing paper, I need your permission slip to work with the bodies. To bad you aren't allowed to.

Nope. You never did show a picture of the cancer gone. You can't duck that one now. We waited and you didn't produce. Waited for months. Patients with skin cancer waited for you to show them. You left them hanging for months. Made claims of hope and went and hid from them. Now you want to change history? Sorry, you can't. A lot of us make cannabis oil. Your oil doesn't 'extend' it, it sullies it. Makes it less, not more.

[peanutbutter]

Your oil doesn't 'extend' it, it sullies it. Makes it less, not more.

 

And you know this how?

 

Again, conclusion without examination is textbook bias.

Edited August 17, 2012 by peanutbutter

[Restorium2]

And you know this how?

By simple definition. We know what you have cooking. It's no secret. Cannabis oil, pure, is better medicine, the best. Those empty vials and 'extenders' you sell for $75 do nothing. It's the cannabis that's doing all the work. Your additives sully it, make it weak and unpure.

[Dr. Bob]

Gersh, are you saying that I can't look at a photo of skin cancer and get a pretty good idea of what it is? I never made a diagnosis, I compared picture a with picture b and didn't see a difference. Others saw the same and some followed the hype and said it was gone when it rather clearly wasn't to a trained eye that actually knows how to look at a photo of a lesion.

 

The exact same thing happened with the radiation level graphs. You saw what you wanted to see and missed the obvious because you were only looking for one answer. That isn't science, nor is it truth.

 

Next time make sure the photo is clear, has a reference like a ruler next to the lesion, and if you are going to show 20 photographs, make them a time line over 3-4 months not 2-3 weeks. Include biopsy reports confirming the cancer and a follow up biopsy and/or report from the treating physician showing it to be gone. That is a report folks can draw ANY conclusion, either for or against, from with reasonable accuracy based on data, not hype.

[peanutbutter]

Nope. You never did show a picture of the cancer gone. You can't duck that one now. We waited and you didn't produce. Waited for months. Patients with skin cancer waited for you to show them. You left them hanging for months. Made claims of hope and went and hid from them. Now you want to change history? Sorry, you can't.

 

We are a long way from being able to estimate that every cancer will be cured via cannabinoids. We have a large number of cases where cancers have shrank.

 

There are a LOT of unanswered questions on that topic.

Are there cases where the cancers completely go away? I believe so, but I'm still waiting to find a doctor that can take the bias blinders off and spend a LOT of time observing. "Cured" requires the cancer to stay away for five years.

What kinds of cancers are impacted? Rick believes every kind of cancer can be cured this way. We are now seeing a softening of that line and now he is saying something about 80% of CASES.

What cannabinoid profile is likely to produce the best results?

many more questions .. many more.

 

It is abundantly clear there is impact on cancer.

 

Taking that to the next level requires major studies in universities and hospitals. Delays in them getting to work translates into lost lives.

 

All I hoped to get done was to present them with enough cases where then simply HAVE to notice there is an effect.

 

Shrinking most tumors is very easy.

[Dr. Bob]

Are you not paying attention PB? You haven't made the case yet you still hawk the oil? Clearly years of study are needed but these statements of fact that it is shrinking tumors (I personally have seen some results I can't explain outside of the oil, but that doesn't mean the oil is responsible, only that I have not found what is).

 

You can do what you want, but you had better hold short of claiming your oil cures cancer or you could get a letter from the FDA. I tried to tell you how to conduct an actual case report, very simple steps, but you dodged. Repeatedly. That raised red flags about you and the oil, as noted by others here.

 

Do the work before you make the claim or you are selling a 'cure' not a 'medicine'.

[peanutbutter]

Next time make sure the photo is clear, has a reference like a ruler next to the lesion, and if you are going to show 20 photographs, make them a time line over 3-4 months not 2-3 weeks. Include biopsy reports confirming the cancer and a follow up biopsy and/or report from the treating physician showing it to be gone. That is a report folks can draw ANY conclusion, either for or against, from with reasonable accuracy based on data, not hype.

 

I believe I provided a link to the interview on AM950 where the attending DERMATOLOGIST made his public statement.

 

With your obvious bias toward discrediting the case, I didn't want to waste the time. AND allow you the platform for your efforts.

Edited August 17, 2012 by peanutbutter

[Restorium2]

We are a long way from being able to estimate that every cancer will be cured via cannabinoids. We have a large number of cases where cancers have shrank.

 

There are a LOT of unanswered questions on that topic.

Are there cases where the cancers completely go away? I believe so, but I'm still waiting to find a doctor that can take the bias blinders off and spend a LOT of time observing. "Cured" requires the cancer to stay away for five years.

What kinds of cancers are impacted? Rick believes every kind of cancer can be cured this way. We are now seeing a softening of that line and now he is saying something about 80% of CASES.

What cannabinoid profile is likely to produce the best results?

many more questions .. many more.

 

It is abundantly clear there is impact on cancer.

 

Taking that to the next level requires major studies in universities and hospitals. Delays in them getting to work translates into lost lives.

 

All I hoped to get done was to present them with enough cases where then simply HAVE to notice there is an effect.

 

Shrinking most tumors is very easy.

Why do you think they would listen to you? What are your qualifications? Go back to school and get some. They listen to doctors, not people selling empty vials for an exorbinant profit.

[Restorium2]

I believe I provided a link to the interview on AM950 where the attending DERMATOLOGIST made his public statement.

 

With you obvious bias toward discrediting the case, I didn't want to waste the time. AND allow you the platform for your efforts.

I'm tired of you pointing fingers and crying 'bias'. None of us that have tried to refute your attempts to make money have any motives other than trying to help patients with the truth. You have went to the extreme and said I was a cop. You have also said someone pays me to do it. Wrong on both counts. It's much simpler than that, we care about patients and don't want them hurt by sullied oil and false hopes. We help patients.

[peanutbutter]

Why do you think they would listen to you? What are your qualifications? Go back to school and get some. They listen to doctors, not people selling empty vials for an exorbinant profit.

 

I don't expect them to believe me.

 

I expect them to believe their own eyes as they examine their own patients.

[Dr. Bob]

I believe I provided a link to the interview on AM950 where the attending DERMATOLOGIST made his public statement.

 

With you obvious bias toward discrediting the case, I didn't want to waste the time. AND allow you the platform for your efforts.

 

Ok, so telling you, again, the proper way of doing a case study is biased on my part, or some sort of platform? I care about truth, I don't care from whom it comes. You don't get that do you? Show your work is all I am saying. And where is the study, article, etc written by the attending dermatologist? I would think if it was as you say, this would have resulted in publication in a peer reviewed journal. Or is that a 'platform' too?

[peanutbutter]

Ok, so telling you, again, the proper way of doing a case study is biased on my part, or some sort of platform? I care about truth, I don't care from whom it comes. You don't get that do you? Show your work is all I am saying. And where is the study, article, etc written by the attending dermatologist? I would think if it was as you say, this would have resulted in publication in a peer reviewed journal. Or is that a 'platform' too?

 

I understand the dermatologist is no longer with the DMC. Need I say more?

 

There have been several people, working in hospitals, that have lost their jobs over this topic.

Edited August 17, 2012 by peanutbutter

[peanutbutter]

You realize the fruit of your efforts about doctor standards is, don't you?

 

Your campaign to discredit other licensed doctors had now been put into proposed law.

 

Which will be used to put patients and caregivers in jail. Not these other doctors you yell about. Patients and caregivers.