Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Does solder fume contain lead content?

B

Benj

Sorry, I haven't swallowed the antismokerists' cult dogma.

Smoke is NOT the cause of cancer. If it were, then every smoker would
get cancer, which they don't, and NO nonsmokers would get cancer, which
they do.

Please note that a "carcinogen" is NOT an agent which "causes"
cancer!!! It is only an agent that makes cancer more likely. Hence
smoking does NOT "cause" cancer. Smoking only makes it more likely
that you may get it.
Cancer is caused by denied self-hatred.

I know some are laughing, but truth is that mental attitude is a HUGE
factor in curing cancer (and contracting it, I presume) There are so
many cases of "spontaneous remission" that are clearly related to
mental attitude (like the Placebo effect) that mental attitude clearly
qualifies as both a "carcinogen" as well as a "cure" for cancer.
 
R

Richard Henry

Please note that a "carcinogen" is NOT an agent which "causes"
cancer!!! It is only an agent that makes cancer more likely. Hence
smoking does NOT "cause" cancer. Smoking only makes it more likely
that you may get it.


I know some are laughing, but truth is that mental attitude is a HUGE
factor in curing cancer (and contracting it, I presume) There are so
many cases of "spontaneous remission" that are clearly related to
mental attitude (like the Placebo effect) that mental attitude clearly
qualifies as both a "carcinogen" as well as a "cure" for cancer.

"...truth is..."
"...clearly related to..."

Please provide references.
 
G

Guy Macon

Richard said:
"...truth is..."
"...clearly related to..."

Please provide references.

"Various psychologic methods are being promoted to cancer patients
as cures or adjuncts to other treatment. The techniques include
imagery, visualization, meditation, progressive muscle relaxation,
and various forms of psychotherapy. These techniques may reduce
stress, alleviate depression, help control pain, and enhance
patients' feelings of mastery and control. Individual and group
support can have a positive impact on quality of life and overall
attitude. A positive attitude may increase a patient's chance of
surviving cancer by increasing compliance with proven treatment.
However, it has not been demonstrated that emotions directly
influence the course of the disease.

"Bernie Siegel, M.D., author of Love, Medicine & Miracles and
Peace, Love & Healing, claims that "happy people generally don't
get sick" and that "one's attitude toward oneself is the single
most important factor in healing or staying well." Siegel also
states that "a vigorous immune system can overcome cancer if
it is not interfered with, and emotional growth toward greater
self-acceptance and fulfillment helps keep the immune system
strong." However, he has published no scientific study
supporting these claims. A 10-year study co-authored by Siegel
found that 34 breast cancer patients participating in his
program did not live longer after diagnosis than comparable
nonparticipants. The program consisted of weekly peer support
and family therapy, individual counseling, and the use of
positive imagery [52]. In November 1998, Siegel sent a series
of email messages to Dr. Barrett in which he said that the
study bearing his name had been done by a student and was
improperly designed.

"O. Carl Simonton, M.D., claims that cancers can be affected
by relaxation and visualization techniques. He claims that
this approach can lessen fears and tension, strengthen the
patient's will to live, increase optimism, and alter the
course of a malignancy by strengthening the immune system.
However, he has not published the results of any well-
designed study testing his ideas. Simonton theorizes that
the brain can stimulate endocrine glands to inspire the
immune system to attack cancer cells. He and his wife
Stephanie (a psychotherapist) taught cancer patients to
imagine their cancer being destroyed by their white blood
cells. However, there is no evidence that white cells a
ctually attack cancer cells in this manner or that "immune
suppression" is a factor in the development of common cancers.

"Simonton's book Getting Well Again included reports on
patients who got better after using his methods. However,
an analysis of five of the reports that might seem most
impressive to laypersons noted that two of the patients
had undergone standard treatment, one had a slow-growing
tumor, and one probably did not have cancer. The fifth
patient's tumor was treatable by standard means.

"Some people suggest that Simonton's program may have
positive effects by helping people to relax and to feel
that they are "doing something" positive. Although his
approach is physically harmless, it can waste people's
time and money and encourage some to abandon effective
care. It can also cause people to feel ashamed or guilty
that some inner inadequacy caused them to develop cancer
and is interfering with their recovery. Patients seeking
a support program should select one that is based on
scientific principles and has competent professional
supervision."

REFERENCES:

Friedlander ER. Mental imagery. In Barrett S, Cassileth BR.
Dubious cancer treatment. Tampa, Florida: American Cancer
Society, Florida Division, 1991, pp 73-78.

Questionable Cancer Therapies, Stephen Barrett, M.D..
Victor Herbert, M.D., J.D.. _Quackwatch_
http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/cancer.html
 
G

Guy Macon

Benj said:
Please note that a "carcinogen" is NOT an agent which "causes"
cancer!!! It is only an agent that makes cancer more likely. Hence
smoking does NOT "cause" cancer. Smoking only makes it more likely
that you may get it.

Over 1,400 have died after jumping off The Golden Gate Bridge,
but 26 people are known to have survived the jump despite multiple
internal injuries and broken bones (*that* sound like a fun swim!).
So, would you say that for those 1,400+ who didn't survive, jumping
off The Golden Gate Bridge did not cause their death, but was only
an agent that makes death more likely? If so, what *was* the cause
of death?
 
R

Richard Henry

Over 1,400 have died after jumping off The Golden Gate Bridge,
but 26 people are known to have survived the jump despite multiple
internal injuries and broken bones (*that* sound like a fun swim!).
So, would you say that for those 1,400+ who didn't survive, jumping
off The Golden Gate Bridge did not cause their death, but was only
an agent that makes death more likely? If so, what *was* the cause
of death?

The sudden decelaration at the surface of the water, leading to brain
damage, shock, internal bleeding, exposure, and/or drowning.

The jump is merely the willful act that preceded the most probable
result, just like smoking that second cigarette.
 
R

Richard Henry

Questionable Cancer Therapies, Stephen Barrett, M.D..
Victor Herbert, M.D., J.D.. _Quackwatch_http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/cancer.html

If I ever get the medical death sentence ("less than n months to
live") I intend to cash a piece of my retirement, buy a handgun and a
small rv and head out on the road on unfinished business. (Hopefully,
it will be near the start of ski season.) The RV is to get me where I
want to go. The handgun is to take me away from where I do not want
to be.
 
G

Guy Macon

Richard said:
The sudden decelaration at the surface of the water, leading to brain
damage, shock, internal bleeding, exposure, and/or drowning.

The jump is merely the willful act that preceded the most probable
result, just like smoking that second cigarette.

True enough, but according to the basic principle "Benj" is
touting, the sudden decelaration at the surface of the water,
brain damage, shock, internal bleeding, etc. was *not* the cause
of death as long as a few manage to survive. I am interested
in his logic.
 
Richard said:
If I ever get the medical death sentence ("less than n months to
live") I intend to cash a piece of my retirement, buy a handgun and a
small rv and head out on the road on unfinished business. (Hopefully,
it will be near the start of ski season.) The RV is to get me where I
want to go. The handgun is to take me away from where I do not want
to be.

My plan for dealig with ternimnal cancer (fiction, for entertainment
purposes only):

White van, 50 caliber sniper rifle firing through small hole, silencer,
scope, adjustable holding vise for perfect aim, solenoid operated
quick-change license plate, easy-to-pull off vinyl logo of various
companies that have a lot of white vans. Handgun for the quick
suicide if needed.

Select target with long sight line and little chance of hitting
the innocent (leader of a gang standing around in a public park
at 3AM, murderer who got off because he is rich playing golf...)
and put a bullet through his head from 20 football fields away.

Those idiot beltway snipers used the same gun they had used to rob
a liquor store in Alabama, left Tarot cards and long handwritten
notes demanding money for the police to find, fired from 50-100
yards away, and stayed in one area. If they hadn't been so stupid,
it would have been almost impossible to find them. Most police
work is based on the attacker knowing the victim.


http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28181
 
C

ChairmanOfTheBored

Over 1,400 have died after jumping off The Golden Gate Bridge,
but 26 people are known to have survived the jump despite multiple
internal injuries and broken bones (*that* sound like a fun swim!).
So, would you say that for those 1,400+ who didn't survive, jumping
off The Golden Gate Bridge did not cause their death, but was only
an agent that makes death more likely? If so, what *was* the cause
of death?


Water is thicker than Oxygen, and harder to breathe. It also does more
damage when you run into it at 120mph.
 
C

ChairmanOfTheBored


You mean after you get a clue?

You CANNOT silence a .50 round, dipshit.

Only sub-sonic velocity rounds can be silenced.

20+ football field snipers do NOT use silencers, and such an item would
adversely affect shot accuracy 100% of the time.
 
C

ChairmanOfTheBored



Also, it does not matter how close one is to one's target. What
matters is how close the nearest witness to the shot origin is...

In every case.
 
C

ChairmanOfTheBored

White van, 50 caliber sniper rifle firing through small hole, silencer,
scope,


If "firing through a small hole", how does one get scope function?

Think, IDIOT!
 
R

Rich the Philosophizer

Please note that a "carcinogen" is NOT an agent which "causes"
cancer!!! It is only an agent that makes cancer more likely. Hence
smoking does NOT "cause" cancer. Smoking only makes it more likely
that you may get it.


I know some are laughing, but truth is that mental attitude is a HUGE
factor in curing cancer (and contracting it, I presume) There are so
many cases of "spontaneous remission" that are clearly related to
mental attitude (like the Placebo effect) that mental attitude clearly
qualifies as both a "carcinogen" as well as a "cure" for cancer.

Yeah, isn't it ironic? Here I am, with the cure for cancer, and nobody
wants it because it involves self-knowledge, and evidently people would
rather die than look critically at their own mental attitudes.

Oh, well.

Cheers!
Rich
 
R

Richard The Dreaded Libertarian

The sudden decelaration at the surface of the water, leading to brain
damage, shock, internal bleeding, exposure, and/or drowning.

The jump is merely the willful act that preceded the most probable
result, just like smoking that second cigarette.

Man, you religious fanatics just don't stop preaching, do you?

I'll bet a month's pay that you get either colorectal or prostate
cancer before I even come down with COPD.

Are you man enough to take that bet? BTW, I turned 58 last March.

Good Luck!
Rich
 
Top