Debating rules applied

[JohnT]

In an attempt to discuss some of the things EGW wrote, I will make this statement, and analogy. In forensics, it is the responsibility of the affirmative side, the side making the proposition that this is that to supply proof, or else the proposition fails FOR LACK OF EVIDENCE.

Now the statement: EGW wrote 'The eating of pork has produced scrofula, leprosy, and cancerous humors" {RH, June 20, 1899 par. 3}

Is it against the rules of the blog to request proof of that statement, (and any that may be similar) since it is EGW who makes the proposition?

Usually, SDAs ask nons to supply proof of the negative, but that is faulty argumentation, and since this site has more SDAs on it than CARM, I am merely asking for proof of a position she posits, and NOT mocking or making fun of her.

 

[NightEternal]

Good luck with that John. If my experience here has been any indication, it does not matter how much you protest that you are not attacking EGW by asking legitimate questions. That is what they will claim and they will never deviate from that claim, no matter what you say.

I am telling you this as a favor so you do not waste any further effort or typing time in this endeavor. Trust me, you will get absolutely nowhere, and will most likely be punished by the Trad mods for even daring to question anything she says.

Don't be suprised if your post gets reported eventually and this thread is deleted and you are charged with attacking a prominent SDA figure. Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt.

You have some fun times ahead. I hope you come out of it with less battle scars than some of the rest of us.

BTW, don't expect any answers or explanations for her outrageous claims. You will not get nothing here but blind EGW apologetics. I have a list of about 50 questions in the Prog area that no Trad seems to want to touch with a twenty foot pole:

http://christianforums.com/t6448638-still-waiting-for-my-answers.html

*Night hands the baton off to John and walks wearily away into the sunset, a defeated and broken man*

 

[AndrewK788]

Good luck with that John. If my experience here has been any indication, it does not matter how much you protest that you are not attacking EGW by asking legitimate questions. That is what they will claim and they will never deviate from that claim, no matter what you say.

I am telling you this as a favor so you do not waste any further effort or typing time in this endeavor. Trust me, you will get absolutely nowhere, and will most likely be punished by the Trad mods for even daring to question anything she says.

Don't be suprised if your post gets reported eventually and this thread is deleted and you are charged with attacking a prominent SDA figure. Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt.

You have some fun times ahead. I hope you come out of it with less battle scars than some of the rest of us.

BTW, don't expect any answers or explanations for her outrageous claims. You will not get nothing here but blind EGW apologetics. I have a list of about 50 questions in the Prog area that no Trad seems to want to touch with a twenty foot pole.

* Night hands the baton off to John and walks wearily away into the sunset a defeated and broken man *

Sad but true.

 

[freeindeed2]

In an attempt to discuss some of the things EGW wrote, I will make this statement, and analogy. In forensics, it is the responsibility of the affirmative side, the side making the proposition that this is that to supply proof, or else the proposition fails FOR LACK OF EVIDENCE.

Now the statement: EGW wrote 'The eating of pork has produced scrofula, leprosy, and cancerous humors" {RH, June 20, 1899 par. 3}

Is it against the rules of the blog to request proof of that statement, (and any that may be similar) since it is EGW who makes the proposition?

Usually, SDAs ask nons to supply proof of the negative, but that is faulty argumentation, and since this site has more SDAs on it than CARM, I am merely asking for proof of a position she posits, and NOT mocking or making fun of her.

LOL! I believe you're innocently asking the question (and it's a good one!). But I also know how good some are at avoidance and/or changing the question to a more suitable one, or just changing the topic all together. There's a hundred (at least) more questions that should be asked along these same lines from direct statements she made in her writings. But most of the time the answers are avoided or changed here.

Thanks for asking though!

In Christ alone...

 

[mva1985]

Any of the four of you could certainly answer this question - have at it.

 

[NightEternal]

Fine. She was WRONG, flat out. Any M.D. worth thier salt would laugh at such an absurd claim.

SHE WAS WRONG. She probably got some faulty medical information from Kellogg, but people treat the statement as if it went directly from the throne room of God to her lips.

Good luck at getting the EGW spinmasters to admit that however, without qualifiers and apologetic gymnastics.

Now I will wait for the Trads to produce even one documented medical case history of a person contracting leprosy from consuming pork.

Meanwhile, you have the unenviable task of explaining why 90% of the Asian population (the highest pork consumers per capita) are not walking around ringing a bell crying 'UNCLEAN' with thier limbs falling off.

 

[freeindeed2]

Fine. She was WRONG, flat out. Any M.D. worth thier salt would laugh at such an absurd claim.

SHE WAS WRONG.

Good luck at getting the EGW spinmasters to admit that however, without qualifiers and apologetic gymnastics.

Now I will wait for the Trads to produce even one medical case history of a person contracting leprosy from consuming pork.

Night, I ate some pepperoni pizza the other day and now my arms are starting to get some patchy white spots...

...and I don't find cancer humorous...

 

[NightEternal]

Bwahahahahahaha!

 

[OntheDL]

“They abstain from swine’s flesh, in consideration of what they suffered when they were infected by the leprosy to which this animal is liable.”---History V, Tacitus

An old NY Times article on the pork and leprosy.
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archiv...D143AEF33A25756C2A96E9C94689FD7CF&oref=slogin

 

[freeindeed2]

“They abstain from swine’s flesh, in consideration of what they suffered when they were infected by the leprosy to which this animal is liable.”---History V, Tacitus

An old NY Times article on the pork and leprosy.
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archiv...D143AEF33A25756C2A96E9C94689FD7CF&oref=slogin

Anything out of a medical journal?

 

[NightEternal]

Pure speculation from an outdated source. These guys were not much more advanced than Kellogg was, and we are supposed to believe their diagnosis as fact? They held the same understanding of that time!

Something from the 21st century please, backed by the facts of what we know of medicine today.

 

[Avonia]

Fine. She was WRONG, flat out. Any M.D. worth thier salt would laugh at such an absurd claim.

SHE WAS WRONG. She probably got some faulty medical information from Kellogg, but people treat the statement as if it went directly from the throne room of God to her lips.

Good luck at getting the EGW spinmasters to admit that however, without qualifiers and apologetic gymnastics.

Now I will wait for the Trads to produce even one medical case history of a person contracting leprosy from consuming pork.

Meanwhile, you have the unenviable task of explaining why 90% of the Asian population (the highest pork consumers per capita) are not walking around ringing a bell crying 'UNCLEAN' with thier limbs falling off.

You're so subtle. It's hard to know what you are really saying. How about some assertiveness training so you can speak your mind?

 

[RND]

While not specifcally related to leprosy one can still see that eating swine is indeed risky business.

Illegal Immigration and Public Health

According to Dr. Laurence Nickey, director of the El Paso heath district “Contagious diseases that are generally considered to have been controlled in the United States are readily evident along the border ... The incidence of tuberculosis in El Paso County is twice that of the U.S. rate. Dr. Nickey also states that leprosy, which is considered by most Americans to be a disease of the Third World, is readily evident along the U.S.-Mexico border and that dysentery is several times the U.S. rate ... People have come to the border for economic opportunities, but the necessary sewage treatment facilities, public water systems, environmental enforcement, and medical care have not been made available to them, causing a severe risk to health and well being of people on both sides of the border.”1

“The pork tapeworm, which thrives in Latin America and Mexico, is showing up along the U.S. border, threatening to ravage victims with symptoms ranging from seizures to death. ... The same [Mexican] underclass has migrated north to find jobs on the border, bringing the parasite and the sickness—cysticercosis—its eggs can cause[.] Cysts that form around the larvae usually lodge in the brain and destroy tissue, causing hallucinations, speech and vision problems, severe headaches, strokes, epileptic seizures, and in rare cases death.”

Cysticercosis

Cysticercosis: An Emerging Parasitic Disease
ROBERT KRAFT, MD, Smoky Hill Family Medicine Residency Program, Salina, Kansas

Cysticercosis (i.e., tapeworm infection) is an increasingly common medical problem in the United States, especially in the Southwest and other areas of heavy emigration from endemic areas or in populations with significant travel to these areas. The larval stage of the pork tapeworm, Taenia solium, causes the clinical syndrome of cysticercosis, with humans as dead-end hosts after ingestion of T. solium eggs.

Its clinical effects vary depending on site of larval lodging, larval burden, and host reaction. These effects include seizures, headaches, focal neurologic symptoms, visual disturbances, and localized skeletal muscle nodules and pain. Cysticercosis should be considered in any patient from an endemic area presenting with these symptoms. Treatment varies with the clinical presentation. Parenchymal neurocysticercosis generally is treated with albendazole in conjunction with steroids to limit edema and with antiepileptic medications for seizure control. Ocular and extraocular muscle cysticercosis generally requires surgical intervention. Skeletal muscle cysts are surgically removed only if painful. Because cysts can lodge in multiple locations, all patients with cysticercosis should have an ophthalmologic examination to rule out ocular involvement, and all patients with extraneurologic cysticercosis should have computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging of the brain to rule out neurocysticercosis. (Am Fam Physician 2007;75:91-6, 98. Copyright © 2007 American Academy of Family Physicians.)

 

[thecountrydoc]

I guess I must have been talking to myself when I posted this. It's for sure not everyone in the main SDA forun read it.

Also FYI, surly you all must have heard about all the heated dscussion over giving middle school girls the newely developed HPV vacine against cirvical cancer. Guess what? Ellen White wrote about cancer being a viral infection over 100 years ago.

I should also mention that there is a need to have a much greater clinical understanding of leporsy.
________________________________________________________

AMA RELEASES REPORT on the EFFECTS of MEAT EATING and CANCER

This is part of a newsletter I just recieved fron the American Medical Association. I thought it might be of interest.​

Respectfully,
Doc
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________​

AMA FINDS LINK BETWEEN MEAT EATING AND CANCER​

"Dr. Visek of Cornell University implicated a high protein diet in the development of cancer. He found out that ammonia, which is a by-product of meat metabolism, is highly carcinogenic, and can cause cancer development. A high protein diet also breaks down the pancreas and lowers our resistance to cancer, as well as contributing to the development of diabetes. The flavor in meat is due to the presence of uric acid, which is the major cause of gout. Uric acid is one of the by-products of protein metabolism. It is poisonous to living tissues. When it is not properly removed from the body by the kidneys, it is often deposited in the kidneys and causes kidney disease. An excess also causes bladder stones. A high protein diet is a high acid diet. This thickens the blood and puts a strain on the arteries and the heart."

 

[RND]

Q. Does daily pork consumption raise cancer risk? If so, to what degree?

Much of the research that has been conducted on the relationship between diet and cancer has not adequately distinguished consumption of pork from that of other forms of meat. Therefore, it is difficult to know precisely how much the risk of cancer due to pork consumption differs from that due to other forms of meat.

However, many epidemiologic studies have suggested that cancer is more common in countries with higher per capita consumption of saturated fat, red meat, and other foods of animal origin and less common in countries with higher per capita intake of whole grains, vegetables, and fruits.

 

[RND]

Colon Cancer Rise Linked to Beef, Pork
Low-Vegetable Diet Increases Effects
By Salynn Boyles
WebMD Medical News

Nov. 15, 2002 -- A new study serves as good evidence that a western diet can more than double the risk of colon cancer. Researchers found that an increasingly western diet has led to a dramatic rise in colorectal cancer in Singapore. Rates of the cancer have doubled in the past three decades, largely because residents eat more red meat and fewer vegetables than in the past.

Singapore is one of Asia's most rapidly developing nations. And for many of the ethnic Chinese who make up 77% of the population, industrialization has brought both changes in diet and a more sedentary lifestyle. Colorectal cancer rates now approach those in developed countries and are among the highest in Asia.

 

[RND]

Does Red Meat Cause Breast Cancer?

Of the 1021 women who developed breast cancer while participating in the study, women with a certain type of common breast cancer (estrogen and progesterone receptor positive) were more likely to have eaten, on average, at least 11 servings of red meat every week. In contrast, the study showed that women who ate 5 servings or fewer of red meat every week were only about half as likely to develop breast cancer.

In addition to beef, pork and bacon were both included as red meats. The study results showed that women who ate more pork were more likely to develop breast cancer than women eating beef or bacon. The study did not distinguish whether the women ate organic red meat or not. What is surprising, however, is that the red meat that is most associated with breast cancer in this study -- pork-- does not have the hormone residues that beef may have. The researchers therefore conclude that the fat content, processing, and other factors may be more important factors affecting breast cancer than whether the beef is organic or not.

 

[thecountrydoc]

Thanks RND for the additional post. I see that we both must have been enteing our post at the same time. I should also say, regarding your post, that even with what you have posted there is a great deal more information that has been established. Parasitic infections are showing up here in Sourthern California at an ever increasing rate also.

Respectfully, your brother in Christ,
Doc

 

[NightEternal]

No one is disputing anywhere that eating pork is unhealthy, so I don't know what the purpose is for all for this.

The specific item under question is leprosy, which has not been proven to be true by any modern, updated medical evidence yet.

That is what I am claiming is an absurd, wrong assertion that she made. I never mentioned cancer anywhere.

 

[NightEternal]

You're so subtle. It's hard to know what you are really saying. How about some assertiveness training so you can speak your mind?