A+ A A-

Let chiropractic community try to prove validity of anecdotal evidence

To The Daily Sun,

After reading Russ Wiles' most recent letter to the Sun it finally dawned on me who Russ really is. Russ is the equivalent of a modern-day Don Quixote. Like Don Quixote, the mythical literature protagonist who saw monsters and giants in windmills, Russ sees similar monsters in Western medicine and Big Pharma.

Armed with only his lance, Don Quixote attacks only to be rudely rebuffed. Russ armed only with his computer is equally rebuffed by truth and scientific reasoning. While Don Quixote rides into battle on his trusty steed Rocinante, Russ rides into battle sitting on his you know what. You get the point. Don Quixote announced himself a knight, likewise Russ in a recent letter proclaimed himself a "chiropractic warrior," both kind of delusional.

The world viewed Don Quixote as insane, defeated by common sense and reality, I take a similar view of you, Russ.

But I did find something that Russ and I can agree on. In the aforementioned letter, Russ has this to say about Crossroads and Awakening Chiropractic wellness centers." They offer a variety of health inspiring workshops, ably assisted by some of the most cheerful, upbeat, well adjusted staff this side of Disneyland." I wonder if this quote is what is wrong with Russ?

Russ, you do know that Disneyland is a fantasy world, right?

I wonder if Russ is aware of the recent ruling by the Chiropractic Board of Australia, which announced all registered chiropractors would be required to remove anti-vaccination claims from their websites and offices. "We will not tolerate registered chiropractors giving misleading or unbalanced advice to patients or providing advice or care that is not in the patients best interest," claimed chairman Phillip Donato. While some may view this a violation of chiropractors First Amendment rights, I view this as the moral equivalent of shouting fire in a crowded theater — for public safety, not allowed.

Or the writings of two chiropractors, Stephen Perle and Randy Ferrance, who said this, "We are not aware of a single well-controlled study which found that chiropractic care prevented any infectious disease or reduced the severity of such a disease" claiming that it can they charged is either "scientific misconduct, error or willful ignorance." Willful ignorance or scientific misconduct, which one is it?

In his letter he channels George Will in talking about the treatment of TB. I venture that neither George or Russ have ever treated TB. Streptomycine only cured 1-3 percent of TB patients, proclaims Russ. Not only was the Nobel Prize in Medicine given for the discovery of streptomycine, some of the first good validated studies were done with this medication, as it was the first drug available to treat TB.

The studies did show that the success rate was low, as Russ states. But this had more to do with the particular properties of the TB bacteria. From those initial studies, Western medicine found out that to treat TB you have to be on three to four drugs because of the bacteria's ability to develop resistance. It was not the failure of Western medicine as Russ seems to imply, but rather it speaks to Western medicine relentless pursuit of studies to validate and develop proven therapies, something chiropractic practitioners should strive for.

It is not government's responsibility to waste money trying to prove anecdotal evidence. If there is, as Russ states, centuries of anecdotal evidence, let the chiropractic community do the studies. In this they have fallen far short. Even to this day streptomycine is used throughout the world as part of some common drug regiments in treating TB. Tilting at windmills once again, Russ. Mainstream medicine uses anecdotal evidence to develop studies to validate or disprove hypothesis scientifically, and once done, if the studies show benefits, incorporate this into treatment modalities.

India declared itself polio-free last week. With 800 million people, with many millions living in slums, with poor water, poor sanitation and close living conditions, it is quite clear that the use of the polio vaccine is responsible for the eradication of polio. If not, then given the living conditions, by our reasoning, polio should continue to flourish.

Finally, you channel Russel Blalock, MD. Question Russ, what do Jillian Whitaker, Mercola, and Dr. Blalock have in common. They all left medicine to sell products to susceptible people like you, making millions.

Let's talk about vaccines. If you gave 200 people a vaccine and one person had a severe reaction, the rest had no reaction, would you stop the vaccine to save one person. How about 1,000 to 1 ratio, 100,000 to 1, or 1 million to 1. Which one Russ? Would you sacrifice the million people who will get the benefit for the one severe reaction?

Yes, we have a vaccine injury fund, because with most vaccines severe reactions are in the 1/600,000 to 1/1 million dose given. If one million can take a vaccine and one has a severe reaction is it the vaccine or that patient's genetic makeup that is responsible?

By the way, the ratio of 2/200 is the incidence of peanut allergy in the general population. Should we stop the sale of all products containing peanuts to protect this one person?

Finally Russ, I want to thank you for giving me the opportunity to continue to get my point out. Please continue to attack me with your rants, it is quite amusing.

Mirno Pasquali PA C


Last Updated on Friday, 11 April 2014 10:47

Hits: 181

Gilford should take castle by eminent domain& sell it to committee

To The Daily Sun,
It seems that the Town of Gilford is prepared once again to violate the intent of a property donor.
Selectmen have gone on record stating, "the Board of Selectmen is unanimous in its desire to allow Kimball Castle to be torn down safely with a goal of allowing this privately owned property to remain on the tax rolls and that the land be developed as one single family home...."
The selectmen have absolutely no business offering assistance to the current property owner by helping eliminate a residential deed restriction on the property, thereby enhancing its value. The Town of Gilford was given the castle and its property with specific instructions on its use. These intentions have been violated once before when the town pushed to get approvals for a restaurant and inn many years ago. Charlotte Kimball made it clear the property was not given for residential use and I have been told by the town administrator that there is a deed restriction prohibiting residential use of the castle property in place at this time.
Any negotiations between the Town of Gilford and the castle wwners to allow a residence on the castle property must be terminated out of respect for the donor.
The owner is not without options. He could always build the proposed inn and restaurant he fought to obtain from his limited partners. He could also honor the order requiring a fence or demolition of the castle he watched erode during his ownership.
Perhaps if he just fences it in, it may have more value to the Kimball Wildlife Forest Committee that is seeking the property. So what is it really worth? Since the buildings are worthless, I submit to you that the current assessment for the land, with its deed restriction in place, is fair. That number is $190,090.
This is fair market value for a single parcel with limited access and a residential deed restriction.
The Town of Gilford should be supporting the Wildlife Forest Committee not the castle owner. The town should take the property by eminent domain and soon after with the help of limited grants and private donations, sell it to the Wildlife Forest Committee for its real value. If the wwner fences it in (which is less expensive than proper demolition), the castle will remain eligible for Historical Register status. This may preserve some value of the castle property.
Remember, the Town of Gilford holds a mortgage for a large percentage of the real value. Accordingly, the capital outlay should be both nominal and temporary while the Wildlife Forest Committee raises the funds to support the purchase of the property at a realistic and appropriate value.
Robert Heinrich

Last Updated on Friday, 11 April 2014 10:36

Hits: 366

What I heard at Kimball Castle hearing in Gilford was lots of apathy

To The Daily Sun,

I have just come from the forum for Kimball's Castle. I got to hear a few speakers from Gilford on what they would like done to the castle. The overall census was that it should be fenced, and allowed to deteriorate naturally. One businessman spoke that it was not worth anything, and should be torn down. I am sure his reasoning is that someone from Mass. could buy the land, and build a monstrosity of a house. Of course he would need a boat as so many of Mass intruders come and abuse our natural beauty.

What I did hear tonight (Thursday) was a bunch of apathy. Gilford residents had a chance to come forward, and let their opinion be known, and have an option to vote whether or not they wanted to keep the castle or not. This did not happen as I am afraid you could care less. America is failing because of APATHY! You go to the polls, and hardly anyone is there. The next day the papers tell of the poor turnout. Guess what America, there are lot's of countries watching this, and they will soon invade us as we idly stand by, and allow them to!

Gilford was sadly remiss in not acting sooner on this problem. It was clear that the stipulations of the sale of the castle were not followed through and it should have reverted back to the town long before the castle, and grounds, were allowed to decay to this point!

Gilford is not the only town. Too many towns have allowed many historical landmarks to fall into disrepair or torn down to make way for so called improvement. I am so sick and tired of watching this happen. My husband and I joined the committee to save the castle. Most meetings we had maybe four or five people show. I saw this happening with the local Grange. I was paying all the bills out of my retirement to keep it going while no one was joining, and helping to save it. It took going from door-to-door asking the community to come together to decide what they wanted to do with the grange. We had 32 people join that night, and through the wonderful group of people that have come forward, joined, and got a lot of businesses to help restore the Wicwas Lake Grange; we have the largest Grange in N.H.

What I am getting at is that as citizens of the U.S., we need to start being proactive. This means that we need to start in our communities. We need of make our voices heard. I hear so many people complain about the politicians, but do go out, and vote! Wake up America, before it's too late!

Linda Phelps

Last Updated on Friday, 11 April 2014 10:25

Hits: 308

Come to Monday night City Council meeting to share MetroCast thoughts

To The Daily Sun,

I would like to remind all concerned citizens that on Monday night at 7 p.m., our city councilors at the regularly scheduled city council meeting will discuss the new MetroCast contract agreement. This is your opportunity to be heard.

I am personally asking for as many people to attend as possible. I will do my best to be there. However, I am experiencing a sudden severe illness that is leaving me tired and weak because of it. I promise I will do my best to be there and share what I have learned recently.

Scott Kipreotis


Last Updated on Thursday, 10 April 2014 09:18

Hits: 181

U.S. revenues went from $1.88 trillion to $2.57 trillion under Bush 43

To The Daily Sun,

The other day, Henry Osmer somewhat gloatingly stated that the Bush tax cuts cost the country $1.8 trillion in lost revenues. Of course he had put together his letter in order to defend the indefensible . . . that is, Professor Maloof and the current administration . . . and that gross number was used for its shock value.

In researching Mr. Osmer's $1.8 trillion reference, I found that it was based on a set of assumptions, mainly that there would be virtually no difference in tax receipts if taxes were lowered or increased. However, that assumption is in direct contradiction to what has become known as the Laffer Curve, which states that no change in tax revenues occurs only at the extreme ends . . . either at a zero tax rate or at a 100 percent tax rate. Further, as tax rates are raised or lowered, there is a point where the tax rate is optimum to achieve maximum revenues. As the following paragraphs will show, tax revenues increased as the Bush tax cuts took effect, so it is a reasonable assumption that Laffer's theory is more plausible than the one cited by Mr. Osmer. What follows is a little historical perspective on the issue.

Just prior to President Bush taking office in January 2001, the "Dot Com" (Internet growth) bubble burst. It had a devastating impact on the economy as a number of major companies had continued to build the products to accommodate the Internet's high rate of growth, when in a flash, the demand for those products virtually ceased. Also in 2001, the country was shaken by the 9-11 attacks, which also devastated the economy. Total annual tax revenues which were $2.03 trillion in 2000, dropped down to $1.78 trillion by 2003.

The so-called Bush tax cuts that were passed in 2002 gradually began to turn around that downward trend, and in 2004, there was a slight upturn as revenues reached $1.88 trillion. From that point on, for 50 straight months, the economy grew. In 2007, revenues reached a high of $2.57 trillion. In 2008, when the housing bubble burst, incoming revenues dropped to $2.52.

When President Obama took office in 2009, revenues dropped to $2.1 trillion but then grew each of the following years, with 2013 reaching a high of $2.78 trillion. It should be noted that in 2012, Congress and the president let the Bush tax cuts expire but, on the very next day, they passed and signed into law most of those same broad-based tax cuts . . . while inflicting some tax pain on high income earners and on those who were receiving income from dividends and capital gains. They also re-instated the "death tax" but raised the threshold before that tax could be imposed. (Mr. Osmer might ask himself, if the Bush tax cuts were "bad," why did President Obama re-instate the majority of them?)

During his tenure, in addition to his tax reduction policies to stimulate growth, President Bush instituted a number of spending measures in an effort to stimulate the economy. During his eight years in office, his average deficit spending per year amounted to $313.9 billion. President Obama also instituted a number of spending programs. During his first five years in office he has averaged deficit spending of $1.155 trillion per year.

The country does not have a revenue problem. It has a spending problem. We cannot continue to spend over 40 percent more than we take in. We have an out-of-control government that, in the pretense of doing good for the people, is steadily burdening them with so much debt, that it will ultimately make them servants of the government. The road we're on will change our political system from what has been a government of, by, and for the people, to, sadly, a government that diminishes our freedoms and invites tyranny.

Bob Meade


Last Updated on Thursday, 10 April 2014 09:14

Hits: 200

The Laconia Daily Sun - All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy
Powered by BENN a division of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Login or Register