Comments on: Bad news from Copenhagen; Vroom! in Malaysia

By: Seage

Seage — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:20:51 +0000

Compromises between two political parties is already hard to be reached, what more between countries? Initiative should not be started by the government but human race itself. The smallest units has to initiate the to create the inertia for the larger mass to move… just like taichi’s “To break a thousand Kgs with a tael”… well, sounds funny but that’s the literal translation.

ps-Again, where is Gerakan K? Not interested in non-political but constructive topics?

By: Koo

Koo — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 03:05:19 +0000

Global warming is a myth. Go read up.
However,air pollution and denuding of forests is still criminal and detrimental to the environment and nature. If decisions doesn’t come top down, we, at the bottom, must make sure it goes up to those ignorant high-ups.

By: anilnetto

anilnetto — Fri, 25 Dec 2009 08:37:44 +0000

Hi Mist,
The “public service announcement” post is still online, but newer posts could have pushed it away from the front page.

It is still here:
http://anilnetto.com/health-care/cat-scans-mammograms-be-aware-of-the-risks/

By: Mist

Mist — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 16:05:36 +0000

I believe we shouldn’t just do things if it is fair. This is a classic example of how the mind justifies a wrong ; if you could do it so could we.

We should do it because it is the right thing to do, not because it is fair. We should ask ourselves, as a nation, what we can do and how we should go about doing it.

By: Mist

Mist — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 16:01:14 +0000

This is off-topic but the relevant topic was mysteriously removed or was it a server crash ?

Evidence-based medicine dictates that any medical regiment is based on evidences.

According to a British Medical Journal Clinical Evidence review of 2,404 conventional treatments, only

15% were rated as beneficial,
22% as likely to be beneficial,
7% as trade off between benefits and harms,
5% as unlikely to be beneficial,
4% as likely to be ineffective or harmful
and
47% of unknown effectiveness.

http://www.clinicalevidence.com/ceweb/about/knowledge.jsp

When evidence of harm were presented lucrative medical practices would have specialists and medical doctors practising authority based medicine. When the harm of hormone replacement therapy was uncovered a malaysian gynocologist publicly proclaimed that the study do not apply to malaysian women and that the benefits outweighed the harm.

When I presented some damning evidences of modern medical practice I was warned of how my post was irresponsible and may convince others of avoiding life-saving medical treatment. Such fear mongering, was perhaps the reason Anil had removed his “public service” article.

Do we suppress negative evidence of efficacy and worst yet evidence of harm ? In any scientific research the only evidence that is of use that could further our understanding would be negative evidence. Positive evidences should always be taken with large doses of salt.

Does mammography help ? 2 large studies pointed to the contrary. Does chemotherapy work ? “Death by doctoring – the good, the bad and the ugly” by steven ransom is highly revealing.

http://loveforlife.com.au/content/08/01/23/death-doctoring-cancer-good-bad-and-ugly-steven-ransom

How can justice flow like a mighty river when we are afraid of telling the truth.