Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 2:56 pm
Huh, so they took your original work, reworked it to something else, and when they handed it back to you, you didn't recognize it? I'd be angry too.
Mark
Mark
Welcome to This is MS, the leading forum for Multiple Sclerosis research and support. Join our friendly community of patients, caregivers, and researchers celebrating over 20 years of delivering hope through knowledge.
https://www.thisisms.com/forum/
So sorry, Marc. Believe me, I understand. It's no fun. I think Gen. McChrystal will watch his tongue next time, toomarcstck wrote:I was interviewed by the reporter who wrote this piece, and she used several of my quotes in the article, all taken completely out of context.....
Anyway, I've posted a full explanation of the quotes used and the context from which they were surgically extracted on my blog, which you can find here:
http://www.wheelchairkamikaze.com/2010/ ... ntext.html
Certainly learned a lesson, and if/when I again speak to the press, I'll stick to the facts and not be concerned about being charming and/or likable...
I think I may be the first person to quote myself on thisisms!!! I still have not received an answer as to why when people that are certainly not vascular specialists post something positive regarding CCSVI they are embraced as geniuses while people who post critical articles/posts about CCSVI are called out for not being vascular specialists. Anyone??? I can certainly post many examples of what I am referring to if what I am saying does not make sense.scorpion wrote:I am not upest fernando. My question is doesn't there seem to be a double standard on this forum when it comes to comments made about the vascular system and about CCSVI? If the poster or writer says something positive about CCSVI, regardless of their credentials, they are hailed as geniuses but if there is anything critical written about CCSVI right away the writers knowledge of the vascular system is thrown into question. Just throwin it out there.
This is one forum where selfless people (despite the issues they face due to MS) are going out of their way to help each other. And you felt that they are trying to further their own cause. The fact of the matter is that anything against CCSVI is spoken as a matter of fact and anything for it is "yet to be proven"oreo wrote:Scorpion, the answer to your question is YES. There is a double standard. Anyone who questions anything about CCSVI is wrong. Those who champion it all deserve the Nobel prize.
As for myself, I am still waiting for science to answer a lot of questions before I make up my mind either way.
I never said any of those things or meant to imply them. I was simply asking(implying) there is a double standard on this board. That is all.sbr487 wrote:This is one forum where selfless people (despite the issues they face due to MS) are going out of their way to help each other. And you felt that they are trying to further their own cause. The fact of the matter is that anything against CCSVI is spoken as a matter of fact and anything for it is "yet to be proven"oreo wrote:Scorpion, the answer to your question is YES. There is a double standard. Anyone who questions anything about CCSVI is wrong. Those who champion it all deserve the Nobel prize.
As for myself, I am still waiting for science to answer a lot of questions before I make up my mind either way.
If you think MS people are foolish to blindly rally around CCSVI then why don't you try to float your own theory on MS (or any other disease) and see what happens?
CCSVI has not come to this level of acceptability just like that ...
I think this is a very good point!sbr487 wrote:If you think MS people are foolish to blindly rally around CCSVI then why don't you try to float your own theory on MS (or any other disease) and see what happens?
CCSVI has not come to this level of acceptability just like that ...
Say it aint so...scorpion wrote: I never said any of those things or meant to imply them. I was simply asking(implying) there is a double standard on this board. That is all.
sbr487 wrote:This is one forum where selfless people (despite the issues they face due to MS) are going out of their way to help each other. And you felt that they are trying to further their own cause. The fact of the matter is that anything against CCSVI is spoken as a matter of fact and anything for it is "yet to be proven"oreo wrote:Scorpion, the answer to your question is YES. There is a double standard. Anyone who questions anything about CCSVI is wrong. Those who champion it all deserve the Nobel prize.
As for myself, I am still waiting for science to answer a lot of questions before I make up my mind either way.
If you think MS people are foolish to blindly rally around CCSVI then why don't you try to float your own theory on MS (or any other disease) and see what happens?
CCSVI has not come to this level of acceptability just like that ...