Martian, so as to be clear, I do my best not defend idiots and quacks. Moreso, my opinion is that patients go to quacks because they are not being given adequate care or consideration from the non-quacks.Martian wrote:I wonder why some people defend the publications and practices of the idiots and quacks who are amongst the so-called "llmds", no matter how questionable or right out ridiculous their findings, statements or conclusions are.
The conclusions in the study and the press release are a joke. This is pseudoscience, at best.
But one shouldn't expect better from "our friends" of the ILADS, who now have a history of over 10 years of idiocy and quackery and only going further downhill every year. Those who defend this are enablers of it.
I would like to understand why certain individuals think that it is appropriate to publish healthcare guidance and opinion pieces, clearly with the expectation that treating physicians follow such guidance, and yet their guidance in some ways is as unsubstantiated and inadequate as that of some of the quacks. To that end, I started a new thread entitled, "Questions for Henry".