Apparently, I didn't like the answers that I received on the blog in my previous post, so I flounced. The study that I asked for opinion on was Vitamin D and calcium supplementation reduces cancer risk: results of a randomized trial. If I showed you an RCT where deaths from all cancers fell by 77%, what would be your reaction? My reaction would be "That looks promising. More work is needed to investigate it". One person (sophia8) reacted thusly. Other reactions that I received (with their logical fallacies) were as follows:-
Pure coincidence. Argumentum ad ignorantiam.
More than 1,100iu/day of Vitamin D is harmful. Straw man. I didn't say that people should take more than 1,100iu/day of Vitamin D (even though I take 5,000iu/day, which isn't harmful). Also, argumentum ad ignorantiam. See enzyme kinetics in the previous post.
You're cranky. Ignoratio Elenchi.
The study wasn't testing Vitamin D on its own. Straw man. I didn't say that it did.
By the way, “Nigeepoo”, taking supplemental vitamin D is not a proven way to prevent sunburn and is not an adequate method of protection from getting skin cancer (despite assertions in your blog). Straw man for the first part of the sentence. I didn't say that it was. Argumentum ad ignorantiam for the last part of the sentence.
Going for long drives with the top down and broiling gently without sunscreen on a repeated basis is dumb. Straw man. I didn't say that I did. I obviously don't go for long drives with the top down in the middle of the day on a sunny Summer's day. That is dumb. Like, duh!
I'm curious why you found my response to be satisfactory but lilady’s to be unsatisfactory. Could you explain? Ignoratio Elenchi.
Did I mention all of the mis-quoting?... Oy!
Maybe they should have done a bit of basic research, like:-
Vitamin D and musculoskeletal health, cardiovascular disease, autoimmunity and cancer: Recommendations for clinical practice.
The effect of calcium and vitamin D supplementation on obesity in postmenopausal women: secondary analysis for a large-scale, placebo controlled, double-blind, 4-year longitudinal clinical trial.
Vitamin D, cardiovascular disease and mortality.
Why randomized controlled trials of calcium and vitamin D sometimes fail. Essential reading.
I'm the sort of person who's not interested in cliques or secret societies. I'm therefore not interested in joining a cliquey, ivory-towery blog where you have to conform to a set of unwritten "rules" to be accepted, some of which are eccentric (Question: Which blogs insist on the use of manually-typed blockquote tags? Answer: Only that one). I decided to leave. I even apologised to some commenters for my language in some of the arguments.
I wondered why that blog and its owner annoyed me so much. Then it hit me (like a lost boomerang)!
Hmmm. See Brain Surgeon meets Rocket Scientist ;-)
Other comments:-
Orac
May 19, 2013
Nigel, you need to tone it down, too.
I’ve warned both of you once already. This is the second warning. There won’t be a third. To show you I mean business this time, your comments are going into automatic moderation. You two have already wasted more of my time than you’re worth.
Which part of "Can people please stop leaving comments aimed at me, unless it’s an acknowledgement. I don’t want to have to leave any more comments on here – ever." did you not understand?
MI Dawn
May 19, 2013
@Nigel: we responded to the Lappe information. It didn’t prove what you say it proved. Now, if you do have something to say, give the peer-reviewed proof.
Straw man. I didn't say that it proved anything.
Which part of "Can people please stop leaving comments aimed at me, unless it’s an acknowledgement. I don’t want to have to leave any more comments on here – ever." did you not understand?
lilady
May 19, 2013
Thank you Orac for your intervention.
The bottom line for Nigel and Lisa is that they, by their vicious unwarranted personal attacks, have drawn unfavorable publicity to themselves and their blogs.
There's no such thing as unfavorable (sic) publicity for my blog, as far as I'm concerned. What you have done, by your vicious, unwarranted, lying and malicious defamatory personal attacks on me, is to draw unfavourable interest from me.
flip
In a place where no federal police turned up today
May 20, 2013
What a pity they both seem to have flounced off without bothering to respond to the questions put to them. I am not surprised though.
Which part of "Can people please stop leaving comments aimed at me, unless it’s an acknowledgement. I don’t want to have to leave any more comments on here – ever." did you not understand?
No comments:
Post a Comment