There's more to it than just a dirty fight of insulting criticisms,
Well thank you for confirming what I already had ascertained which is that you are seeking to pick a fight with me. Please kindly note that I have no interest in fighting with you; and furthermore, there is no need for you to fight with me either; nor persist with the insults.
I guess you don't have answers to my questions…
I was under the impression that I had already provided the answers to all your questions…
Perhaps you might like to re-read through my replies?
you're only seeing what you want to see…
Not at all; I have already stated that I can see matters from your perspective. To clarify, with regards to your referring to natural HERBAL EXTRACTS and FOODSTUFFS, such as fructose, as DRUGS, I fully understand your rationale that any substance which has a PHARMACOLOGICAL or PHYSIOLOGICAL effect could be viewed as being a “DRUG” due to possessing said PHARMACOLOGICAL or PHYSIOLOGICAL effect(s); however, I have already stated my reasons for suggesting that you re-think your perspective on this matter.
The drug debate was boring, and you are completely wrong, so too are the doctors; all chemicals are drugs irrespective of whether or not they occur in plants or are synthesized in a lab.
With the utmost respect, you were the one to instigate and then pursue the “drug debate”, so if you found it “boring” then why on earth keen barking on about it like a dog with a bone, instead of letting the matter rest and focusing on matters more relevant to the topic of this thread?
Arguing over definition aside; you appear to be unaware that it is wholly irresponsible to be preaching that natural HERBAL EXTRACTS and FOODSTUFFS are DRUGS due to the very serious potential ramifications on their saleability and hence their availability to purchase by the general public should they be consequently reclassified as DRUGS, and hence require firstly a MEDICINAL LICENSE to sell, and secondly A PRESCRIPTION to purchase.
There have in fact already been numerous attempts, and there are others currently going on right now, wherein certain parties have been seeking to make this happen, both in EUROPE and in the UNITED STATES.
For example, there was a little piece of legislation called the EUROPEAN FOOD SUPPLEMENTS DIRECTIVE which had to be legally challenged at the EUROPEAN COURT to prevent it from essentially banning the sale of many VITAMINS and MINERALS and any such FOOD SUPPLEMENT containing them.
Further to this there have been several other bills and or items of legislation that have been sought to be brought into force that would similarly affect the sale and subsequent availability to the general public of natural HERBS and HERBAL EXTRACTS too.
Therefore, whilst you might think you are being somewhat ‘clever’ in preaching your view that all natural herbal extracts and foodstuffs are DRUGS, the fact of the matter is you are not.
I reiterate, it is wholly irresponsible to be preaching that natural herbal extracts and foodstuffs are DRUGS; and you are not in fact being at all clever by doing so.
Or do you perhaps agree with the bureaucrats backed by the pharmaceutical companies that any and all VITAMINS, MINERALS and HERBS / HERBAL EXTRACTS should be banned from sale to the general public, and made available via MEDICINAL LICENSE and hence PRESCRIPTION from your doctor?
Since we appear to be going round in circles, might I suggest that with regards to the “drug debate” that we simply agree to disagree, and shake hands as friends?
The intelligent part in my opinion was related to ashwagandha and half life and cycling…
There exists conclusive substantiated evidence that indicates that ASHWAGANDHA’s ANXIOLYTIC effect is due to its mechanism of action as a GABA RECEPTOR AGONIST. I have provided you with examples of published clinical studies that demonstrate this.
I have also confirmed that at the present time we do not have confirmed what is the half-life of the respective PHYTOCHEMICAL(S) responsible for its GABA RECEPTOR AGONISM or other actions.
In spite of this, with helpful intent, I have suggested a CYLING REGIMEN with starting (not to be confused with ideal) ON / OFF duration of 5 DAYS ON, followed by 2 DAYS OFF; to be adjusted accordingly using manifestation of TOLERANCE as marker, such that TOLERANCE is eliminated, and only beneficial therapeutic effects are experienced.
In short, I have answered all your questions, provided you with comprehensive information, and offered some helpful suggestions.
This should be sufficient for you; if it isn’t, then you are clearly being deliberately obtuse and argumentative as part of your continued effort to pick a fight with me.
As such, there is simply nothing further to discuss, unless of course you wish to ask me something else?
I am still sure I shall win in the sense of being more knowledgeable and less dogmatic…
…to which you supplied every dogmatic answer in your arsenal. Good luck to your in your dogmatic adventures.
With helpful intent I have presented facts and suggestions, backed up by substantiated science; how in any regard does that qualify as being DOGMATIC?
Meaning no insult, you really need to read this:
of, pertaining to, or of the nature of a dogma or dogmas; doctrinal.
asserting opinions in a doctrinaire or arrogant manner; opinionated.
With the utmost respect, you seem to be as misguided as to the definition of DOGMATIC as you are DRUGS; since, it is in fact you who are the one, not I, who is being both “opinionated” and “asserting opinions in a doctrinaire or arrogant manner”.
Here is just one of many examples of this: “you are completely wrong, so too are the doctors; all chemicals are drugs irrespective of whether or not they occur in plants or are synthesized in a lab.”
Suffice to say, I believe what we have here is an excellent example of ‘the pot calling the kettle black’.
I should probably ask these questions to someone more knowledgeable and open-minded than yourself if I hope to achieve good results, as it seems you come on these forums primarily for attention, not to pass on knowledge to your fellow inquirer.
Again you only do yourself a disservice with such insults and false accusations, which I will choose to simply ignore.
You only have to review a fraction of my many other threads and posts to see how much of a fallacy your accusations are. See this thread of mine as just a singular example of my contribution to this forum, which in itself demonstrates the fact that my motives are NOT in fact “for attention, not to pass on knowledge to your fellow inquirer”: TREATING ANXIETY SAFELY & EFFECTIVELY
If you want to run away from my questions and justify such behavior by labeling me as "rude, uncongenial, etc", that is your choice, and indeed many people run away from such debates… yet I will not respect such a one as you who flees good debates because they become provocative and challenging…
Ditch the wholly unwarranted attacks and puerile insults and I will happily answer your questions for you; attack me and insult me without any warranting whatsoever and I will not; plain and simple.
I do not in fact run away from debates. I typically take considerable time to reply comprehensively whenever possible or appropriate, as you will see from my many posts in both this and other threads to date.
I simply ask that posts be kept on an intellectual level that is above that of schoolyard name calling and bullying tactics. Such behaviour will only serve to lower other peoples’ opinion of you; and mean that the target of your insults will not be especially motivated to spend their valuable time comprehensively replying to your questions. Be nice, and they will.
I am working on becoming more congenial, but given my childhood, it is very difficult to be more sympathetic than critical. Read through my posts...you'll see I'm an asshole struggling to be nice. If you don't wish to sympathize with me on this point, I won't make any additional effort to try to win your loyalty, and I'm content for you to see me as how you do.
Firstly, I don’t think you are an “asshole”; I think you are simply an angry person who finds it difficult to communicate without attacking the other person, even when there is no cause for you to do so, as in this particular instance.
However, don’t take this the wrong way, but you cannot use your childhood as an excuse for bad behaviour today. I have a close friend who was beaten up by his alcoholic father for years, then ended up in a foster home where he was sexually abused, before running away at aged 15 to live by himself, and he’s the nicest guy you’d ever meet. And for what it’s worth I myself had a terrible childhood; and yet this is what created in me my passionate desire to improve the quality of the lives of others.
Bad past experiences can be like a ball and chain around your ankle in that they will impede your quality of life if you let them; you need to cut them loose.
I’ve treated many people for ADDICTION in the past, so trust me I never just a book by its cover.
You are clearly an intelligent chap; if you need to vent your anger it’s better to go down your local gym and beat up a boxing punch-bag, than to hurl insults at complete strangers on Internet forums.
See, I'm not the only one who can fight fire with fire if I want =P.
With regards to your analogy, you are in fact the only one using “fire” and who wishes to “fight”.
Like I have already said I won’t be baited into having a “fight” with you; nor will you find me attacking you with “fire”.
So, I would genially request that you please kindly ditch the anger, stop with the attacks and insults, and let’s keep things in line with the spirit of this forum, namely adult, intelligent debate. Reserve your mudslinging for YOUTUBE please, as it quite simply won’t be tolerated here, OK?
Edited by ScienceGuy, 01 July 2012 - 11:26 AM.