I can't find any record of a user ID of Selmer, but that could be because of several adverse situations.
Yes, I've left this thread open, although it grates me, as it is, as Purgatory noted, a re-opening of a closed thread, which is effectively a violation. Why? I've just been too effing sick to care if you guys want to tear each other apart. Amazingly, you have not done that this time.
I hope you are feeling better, 142!
re: that last sentence: It is amazing(though I sense some negative stuff is starting to creep in) but the mystery to me is why would it ever happen(i.e. the "tearing apart")? It does of course happen on other subjects, but there is something about
this subject that seems to inevitably leads to accusations or insults, or at least it gets very close to that. Why am I qualifying that, when the evidence for my last sentence is the obvious fact that so many of these threads get locked?
I could probably understand it if one of us was on here aggressively advocating for or making claims for a given supplement or even food or diet, without the gold standard proof
of large, expensive RCTs. Or if someone was saying "hey, this is what I do, and you should definitely do this". Just like if they said that about
a certain treatment, I can see how that would not go over well. And for sure, if some one was saying "you don't need treatment, you just need this vitamin or food". But IMO, that rarely if ever happens. Unless providing a link to a study(though probably not a large RCT), and/or copying text from a reputable institution, a university or medical center, and reputable researchers, that provides evidence(not proof, but evidence) in favor of whatever it is, is considered advocating? Why would it be? Any evidence presented against said non-prescript
ion approaches does not seem to be considered a problem for most.
So I remain baffled at any of us who "want to tear each other apart.". Now in case some one is saying: " But BB, look at how many links you provided just in this thread alone that seem to be favorable towards vitamin D, hence you are obviously advocating for every one to buy and take this supplement". Well, I always admit that there is no gold standard proof, and that there are conflicting studies, and caution that folks just take my stuff as food for thought and that they consult with their docs on these subjects, particularly as any given antioxidant, for example, might work against certain treatments. Still, even though I will occasionally start a new thread with a link to a study to what seems interesting new information on some food or supplement, exercise or sunshine, etc, very often when I supply a barrage of links to studies, it is in response to a few statements along the line of "there is absolutely no evidence, not even any studies providing any evidence that any of this stuff might be helpful". I just don't think such a claim is true and thus provide a sampling of the evidence. As always, I could be wrong. And as always, I suggest that you do not just blindly follow any advice you think I might be giving you. Asl your doctors and research it for yourself, look at all of the pros and cons, just as though you are trying to decide between AS and RP or RT.
But any anger arising because of a simple discussion of any possible evidence in favor of anything that does not come via a prescript
ion pad just baffles me, I just don't understand it. And I am really hoping that my little rant here is not too far OT causing the thread to be closed. If so, my apologies in advance.
Bill in MS