Public Awareness Announcement #11

[Guest guest]

Dear Dusan,

Will you PLEASE REMOVE from the list the people like

Lee (who has made outrageous, libelous

statements!!), JALyons, who is Janice Lyons on the

healthfraud list, Pignotti, " Erasmus Sears " and

others who are making a total mockery of the Dr. CLark

list!!!!

Other lists, particularly the healthfraud list, have

no qualms about bumping people off when their " debate "

comes to the point of being abusive.

These people have carried their debates to the point

of harrassment. There are so many people on the

Drclark list from the healthfraud list they are doing

a great deal of the posting and posting back and forth

to each other. They have discussed - on their list -

the " fun " of going to " alt-med " lists and disrupting

them. They are doing that in spades on the Dr

list. This is totally scaring away and discouraging

the very people who should be getting a benefit from

this list.

A certain amount of debate is not bad, but the people

from the healthfraud list are trying to totally

discredit Dr. CLark and turn people away from her

protocol.

Blair was very discouraged, and shouldn't have

been made to try to defend her statements to the

extent that she did from the " quackpots " .

ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please show some responsibility.

Jan Bolen

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

Jan,

Sorry to see that you consider any challenge to the dogma of any

alternative treatment presented here, as " abusive " . To me, what's

really abusive is someone with a serious, life-threatening illness

who has been mislead and given a false guarantee that a treatment

will " cure " . Blair can cry " victim " because of my challenges

all she wants, but if you all would like to see real victims, look at

people who have had every bit of hope dashed because of false,

unsubstantiated promises of a cure. Read Ellen Burstyn McFarlane's

book, Legwork, for starters.

If you can't stand this kind of challenge and want to kick us all off

the list, then be my guest. That only shows, in my opinion, that

you're no different from any cult. Fortunately, the internet exists

and anyone wanting information on all sides of an issue can go and

search for it and find information on all sides of the issue. That,

you can do nothing to suppress.

Pignotti

>

> Dear Dusan,

>

> Will you PLEASE REMOVE from the list the people like

> Lee (who has made outrageous, libelous

> statements!!), JALyons, who is Janice Lyons on the

> healthfraud list, Pignotti, " Erasmus Sears " and

> others who are making a total mockery of the Dr. CLark

> list!!!!

>

> Other lists, particularly the healthfraud list, have

> no qualms about bumping people off when their " debate "

> comes to the point of being abusive.

>

> These people have carried their debates to the point

> of harrassment. There are so many people on the

> Drclark list from the healthfraud list they are doing

> a great deal of the posting and posting back and forth

> to each other. They have discussed - on their list -

> the " fun " of going to " alt-med " lists and disrupting

> them. They are doing that in spades on the Dr

> list. This is totally scaring away and discouraging

> the very people who should be getting a benefit from

> this list.

>

> A certain amount of debate is not bad, but the people

> from the healthfraud list are trying to totally

> discredit Dr. CLark and turn people away from her

> protocol.

>

> Blair was very discouraged, and shouldn't have

> been made to try to defend her statements to the

> extent that she did from the " quackpots " .

>

> ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>

> Please show some responsibility.

>

> Jan Bolen

>

> __________________________________________________

>

[Guest guest]

Although I would not like to see herbs come under control of the FDA, I do

thinkk that it would be good if there were some regulations somehow,

although I do not know what. Some people think that just because herbs are

natural, they cannot hurt you. This is not true. People have died from

using ma juong (spelling may not be right.) I research any herb thouroughly

before using it, as I am sure most of you do too, bit some people see things

on the shelf and assume they are safe for them, in any quantities. Lots of

people use St. 's Wart, without even realizing that they are increasing

their chances of getting cataracts. I would not want to see them over

regulated, but I would like there to be more study and readily available

information about side effects, interactions with other herbs and

medications, as well as the benefits.

Debra

_________________________________________________________________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

[Guest guest]

>From: " Pignotti " <pignotti@...>

>Reply-Dregroups

>Dregroups

>Subject: Re: Public Awareness Announcement #11

>Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 18:15:00 -0000

>

>Jan,

>

>Sorry to see that you consider any challenge to the dogma of any

>alternative treatment presented here, as " abusive " . To me, what's

>really abusive is someone with a serious, life-threatening illness

>who has been mislead and given a false guarantee that a treatment

>will " cure " .

Hmmmm.... Is there really a difference between someone who is graranteed a

cure and then dies when they don't fullfil all the protocol properly and

someone who is told a possibility exists for a cure and the treatment does

more damage than the problem (read: conventional medicine)? I'd flip a coin

to answer that one. The point is, conventional medicine doesn't have all

the answers and neither does alt. A person who has reasonable intellegence

(e.g. critical thinking skills) can sift through the hype of conventional

and alternative medicing. " any challenge to the dogma of any

>alternative treatment presented here, as " abusive " " ? Sounds like you're

>being a victim when someone states an opinion that you're not comfortable

>with. you really need to consider either staying off the internet, where

>that is likely to happen, or stay in a forum where your opinions will not

>be so often challenged. Challenging the beliefs here are not a problem.

>When you don't want to listen to any supporting evidence which doesn't

>support your preconcieved dogma that's a problem. This trend brings up the

>question, why are you here? It's not to learn about Dr 's methods,

>which this list is for. It's to disrupt, save us from our selves, and

>prevent the free exchange of information.

Blair can cry " victim " because of my challenges

>all she wants, but if you all would like to see real victims, look at

>people who have had every bit of hope dashed because of false,

>unsubstantiated promises of a cure. Read Ellen Burstyn McFarlane's

>book, Legwork, for starters.

Read any newspaper obituary column and see the failure of conventional

medicine.

>

>If you can't stand this kind of challenge and want to kick us all off

>the list, then be my guest.

That's what the vast majority of lists do when people are subscribed for no

other reason than to disrupt the free flow of information on the subject at

hand.

That only shows, in my opinion, that

>you're no different from any cult.

So, all the lists who exist for a specified purpose, and who kick people off

who disrupt and impede the accomplishment of that purpose are cults, right?

You are certainly intitled to your opinion, . I respectfully

disagree.

Fortunately, the internet exists

>and anyone wanting information on all sides of an issue can go and

>search for it and find information on all sides of the issue. That,

>you can do nothing to suppress.

AMEN Sister. And if we want to find out any more about how great the

conventional medicine methods are, we'll subscribe to YOUR favorite lists.

Glat you finally realize what everyone else already knew. We have that

option.

>

> Pignotti

>

>

> >

> > Dear Dusan,

> >

> > Will you PLEASE REMOVE from the list the people like

> > Lee (who has made outrageous, libelous

> > statements!!), JALyons, who is Janice Lyons on the

> > healthfraud list, Pignotti, " Erasmus Sears " and

> > others who are making a total mockery of the Dr. CLark

> > list!!!!

> >

> > Other lists, particularly the healthfraud list, have

> > no qualms about bumping people off when their " debate "

> > comes to the point of being abusive.

> >

> > These people have carried their debates to the point

> > of harrassment. There are so many people on the

> > Drclark list from the healthfraud list they are doing

> > a great deal of the posting and posting back and forth

> > to each other. They have discussed - on their list -

> > the " fun " of going to " alt-med " lists and disrupting

> > them. They are doing that in spades on the Dr

> > list. This is totally scaring away and discouraging

> > the very people who should be getting a benefit from

> > this list.

> >

> > A certain amount of debate is not bad, but the people

> > from the healthfraud list are trying to totally

> > discredit Dr. CLark and turn people away from her

> > protocol.

> >

> > Blair was very discouraged, and shouldn't have

> > been made to try to defend her statements to the

> > extent that she did from the " quackpots " .

> >

> > ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

> >

> > Please show some responsibility.

> >

> > Jan Bolen

> >

> > __________________________________________________

> >

[Guest guest]

>

>Hmmmm.... Is there really a difference between someone who is

>graranteed a cure and then dies when they don't fullfil all the

>protocol properly and someone who is told a possibility exists for a

>cure and the treatment does more damage than the problem (read:

>conventional medicine)? I'd flip a coin

>to answer that one.

Not fulfilling the protocol properly is, of course, one possible

explanation, but I think this can all too easily be used to explain

away what is actually a failure. Let's say someone assumes that just

because Treatment X did not achieve the predicted result, the

protocol was not followed. How do you know for sure that the

protocol was not followed? Because Treatment X always achieves a

cure. Can you see how this could be taken as circular reasoning?

>The point is, conventional medicine doesn't have all

> the answers and neither does alt.

I agree 100% with you on that one.

>A person who has reasonable intellegence

>(e.g. critical thinking skills) can sift through the hype of

>conventional and alternative medicing.

Hopefully, but I don't always see that happening.

>Read any newspaper obituary column and see the failure of

>conventional medicine.

We all have to die someday, Chiu's immortality magnets

notwithstanding. Conventional medicine has never claimed to be 100%

effective or without its flaws, but it does have its successes too.

If you like anecdotes, have you read about Lance Armstrong and the

highly successful results of his chemo? He is not only well, he's

winning major bicycle races. He made the statement that 20 years

ago, without the state-of-the art treatments he had, he would be

dead. I'm not saying that conventional medicine is perfect, but

let's look at it in a balanced way -- sometimes it actually does help

people.

>>If you can't stand this kind of challenge and want to kick us all

>>off the list, then be my guest.

>

>That's what the vast majority of lists do when people are subscribed

>for no other reason than to disrupt the free flow of information on

>the subject at hand.

How is issuing challenges disrupting the free flow of information on

the subject at hand? Would you rather be on a list where everyone

just soaked up everything like a sponge and never questioned or

challenged?

>

> That only shows, in my opinion, that

> >you're no different from any cult.

>

>So, all the lists who exist for a specified purpose, and who kick

>people off who disrupt and impede the accomplishment of that purpose

>are cults, right?

There are valid reasons to kick someone off a list. If the person is

being verbally abusive or rude, then they certainly do deserve to be

kicked off. I have not been verbally abusive or rude -- all I've

done is issued challenges to statements that have been made here that

have, IMO, no real evidence to support them. If someone takes this

as an attack, then it says more about that person than it does about

me. I also recognize and respect that moderators of any particular

list do have the right to kick anyone off for any reason. If,

however, this occurs simply because challenges have been made, then

that tells me something about the dogmatic nature of the list.

> You are certainly intitled to your opinion, . I respectfully

> disagree.

That's fine with me.

> Fortunately, the internet exists

> >and anyone wanting information on all sides of an issue can go and

> >search for it and find information on all sides of the issue.

That,

> >you can do nothing to suppress.

>

>AMEN Sister. And if we want to find out any more about how great

>the conventional medicine methods are, we'll subscribe to YOUR

>favorite lists.

I'm on a wide variety of lists and I can assure you they're not all

about conventional medicine. I'm not saying that conventional

medicine is without its flaws, but at least within that system there

are checks and balances. If an MD makes unsubstantiated claims and

misleads people, he can lose his license to practice medicine.

I don't like to see it as a war or a contest between alternative and

conventional treatments. The alternative treatments that do get

proven will become tomorrow's " conventional " medicine. Dateline NBC

did a whole hour New Year's day on clinical trials that are going on

for Tibetan herbs in the treatment of Stage 4 breast cancer (see

http://www.msnbc.com/news/502462.asp for a transcript of the program).

I highly respect the Tibetan doctor who's herbal alternative

treatments were being studied, for agreeing to have his work

subjected to clinical trials. This was done at a conventional

hospital and the study was run by a conventional oncologist. If the

hospitals are so controlled by the pharmaceutical industry, then how

do you suppose that happened? I think there should be a lot more of

this sort of research going on, to find out which alternative

treatments really do work and to what extent. I strongly support

this sort of clinical trial because it will ultimately give the

consumer solid data upon which to base decisions.

People here seem to want to make this into a " war " and anyone that

questions anything about " alternative " treatments gets put into the

camp of the enemy " quackers " , but that's not how I see it. On this

list, I've been cast in that role, and I'm amused at the assumptions

that are being made about me just because I dared to question. What

I am for is finding out the facts and accurate information about any

treatment, whether it be alternative or conventional. If this

offends people, so be it.

Pignotti

[Guest guest]

I used to buy something called Diet Pep, but I was using it for energy.

That started a whole series of heart symptoms that were finally explained

when I saw an enlightening special on Dateline. Needless to say I stopped

taking the " drug " , and thank the Lord nothing more serious happened to

me...the report covered several people that died from heart attacks while

using similar substances. The main ingredient was Ma Huang.

I agree that research should ALWAYS be done before taking any kind of herb.

That is the mistake I made when I thought that just because it was an " herb "

and sold over-the-counter, nothing could be harmful about it when taking it

in the recommended doses.

-

----- Original Message -----

From: D B <fairyflight@...>

<gallstonesegroups>

Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 1:48 PM

Subject: Re: Public Awareness Announcement #11

> Although I would not like to see herbs come under control of the FDA, I do

> thinkk that it would be good if there were some regulations somehow,

> although I do not know what. Some people think that just because herbs

are

> natural, they cannot hurt you. This is not true. People have died from

> using ma juong (spelling may not be right.) I research any herb

thouroughly

> before using it, as I am sure most of you do too, bit some people see

things

> on the shelf and assume they are safe for them, in any quantities. Lots

of

> people use St. 's Wart, without even realizing that they are

increasing

> their chances of getting cataracts. I would not want to see them over

> regulated, but I would like there to be more study and readily available

> information about side effects, interactions with other herbs and

> medications, as well as the benefits.

>

> Debra

> _________________________________________________________________

> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

>

>

> Collected testimonials:

> http:///messages/gallstones-testimonials

> You are receiving this email because you elected to subscribe to the

gallstonesegroups. To unsubscribe:

Mailto:gallstones-unsubscribeegroups

> To subscribe again: Mailto:gallstones-subscribeegroups

> To change status to digest: Mailto:gallstones-digestegroups

> To change status to normal: Mailto;gallstones-normalegroups

> By joining the list you agree to hold yourself FULLY responsible FOR

yourself!

> List Archives: http:///messages/gallstones

> Web Sites: http://home.online.no/~dusan/gallstones/

> Have a nice day !

>

[Guest guest]

,

Thanks for the responce. This post is getting cluttered, so let me go what

I consider are the key points.

>

>We all have to die someday, Chiu's immortality magnets

>notwithstanding. Conventional medicine has never claimed to be 100%

>effective or without its flaws, but it does have its successes too.

This is a very good example of the double standard between conventional

medicine and alternative. All Conventional medicine needs is some successes

along with it's failures. Alternative is supposed to have 100% success to

be valid. When people die from conventional medicine, it was just one of

those things. We all have to die sometime we hear connected only with

conventional - not alternative. When people die while undergoing

alternative medicine, it's the result of quackery and charletanism. What's

wrong with this picture?

>If you like anecdotes, have you read about Lance Armstrong and the

>highly successful results of his chemo? He is not only well, he's

>winning major bicycle races. He made the statement that 20 years

>ago, without the state-of-the art treatments he had, he would be

>dead. I'm not saying that conventional medicine is perfect, but

>let's look at it in a balanced way -- sometimes it actually does help

>people.

>

I know several people who have " survived " Radiation and chemo. They didn't

try any thing else because of their common but irrational view that the

doctors know everything there is to know about treating disease. A few

years later, most of them get cancer again and die from it. Again, for some

reason the alternative success stories don't get credit from the

conventional world. These are " obviously " spontaneous remissions.

>

>I'm on a wide variety of lists and I can assure you they're not all

>about conventional medicine. I'm not saying that conventional

>medicine is without its flaws, but at least within that system there

>are checks and balances. If an MD makes unsubstantiated claims and

>misleads people, he can lose his license to practice medicine.

>

>I don't like to see it as a war or a contest between alternative and

>conventional treatments.

Unfortunately, , your other list Healthfraud does see it as a war.

Hence the name Healthfraud. Everything in alternative medicine is a fraud

is the obvious conotation. The conventional medical world sees it as a war.

The pharmacartel sees it as a war....... It's a war for profits in the

name of helping people. Don't misunderstand me, profits for honest work is

not bad. I fully believe in rewording goods and services with adequate

compensation. When through greed promising treatments are squelched because

the Corporation's profit potential is threatend, that's bad.

The alternative treatments that do get

>proven will become tomorrow's " conventional " medicine. Dateline NBC

>did a whole hour New Year's day on clinical trials that are going on

>for Tibetan herbs in the treatment of Stage 4 breast cancer (see

>http://www.msnbc.com/news/502462.asp for a transcript of the program).

>I highly respect the Tibetan doctor who's herbal alternative

>treatments were being studied, for agreeing to have his work

>subjected to clinical trials. This was done at a conventional

>hospital and the study was run by a conventional oncologist. If the

>hospitals are so controlled by the pharmaceutical industry, then how

>do you suppose that happened?

, heres an opportunity for you to see a point of view that may have

excaped you. You agree that this should happen more of the time. The fact

that it doesn't happen daily and even every hour of the day in every

hospital is very telling about the close mindedness of the conventional

medical world in general. The reason this was such big news and on national

television is because it was SO UNCOMMON. That's the point. This

environment in the conventional medical world is why we have to take some

matters of our health into our own hands. The conventional medicine has

failed to explore many of the promising possiblities that exist. In most

cases they refuse to.

I think there should be a lot more of

>this sort of research going on, to find out which alternative

>treatments really do work and to what extent. I strongly support

>this sort of clinical trial because it will ultimately give the

>consumer solid data upon which to base decisions.

>

>People here seem to want to make this into a " war " and anyone that

>questions anything about " alternative " treatments gets put into the

>camp of the enemy " quackers " , but that's not how I see it. On this

>list, I've been cast in that role, and I'm amused at the assumptions

>that are being made about me just because I dared to question.

You dared to question, but how much have you dared to listen?

What

>I am for is finding out the facts and accurate information about any

>treatment, whether it be alternative or conventional. If this

>offends people, so be it.

>

That wouldn't have offended anyone that I know of. You call real life

experiences inaccurate. That's a pretty convenient way of clinging to

preconcieved notions.

> Pignotti

>

>

_________________________________________________________________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

[Guest guest]

,

You seem to be a real professional at this. Are you on a salary for doing this?

If so, who

pays you?

Pignotti wrote:

>

> >

> >Hmmmm.... Is there really a difference between someone who is

> >graranteed a cure and then dies when they don't fullfil all the

> >protocol properly and someone who is told a possibility exists for a

> >cure and the treatment does more damage than the problem (read:

> >conventional medicine)? I'd flip a coin

> >to answer that one.

>

> Not fulfilling the protocol properly is, of course, one possible

> explanation, but I think this can all too easily be used to explain

> away what is actually a failure. Let's say someone assumes that just

> because Treatment X did not achieve the predicted result, the

> protocol was not followed. How do you know for sure that the

> protocol was not followed? Because Treatment X always achieves a

> cure. Can you see how this could be taken as circular reasoning?

>

> >The point is, conventional medicine doesn't have all

> > the answers and neither does alt.

>

> I agree 100% with you on that one.

>

> >A person who has reasonable intellegence

> >(e.g. critical thinking skills) can sift through the hype of

> >conventional and alternative medicing.

>

> Hopefully, but I don't always see that happening.

>

> >Read any newspaper obituary column and see the failure of

> >conventional medicine.

>

> We all have to die someday, Chiu's immortality magnets

> notwithstanding. Conventional medicine has never claimed to be 100%

> effective or without its flaws, but it does have its successes too.

> If you like anecdotes, have you read about Lance Armstrong and the

> highly successful results of his chemo? He is not only well, he's

> winning major bicycle races. He made the statement that 20 years

> ago, without the state-of-the art treatments he had, he would be

> dead. I'm not saying that conventional medicine is perfect, but

> let's look at it in a balanced way -- sometimes it actually does help

> people.

>

> >>If you can't stand this kind of challenge and want to kick us all

> >>off the list, then be my guest.

> >

> >That's what the vast majority of lists do when people are subscribed

> >for no other reason than to disrupt the free flow of information on

> >the subject at hand.

>

> How is issuing challenges disrupting the free flow of information on

> the subject at hand? Would you rather be on a list where everyone

> just soaked up everything like a sponge and never questioned or

> challenged?

>

> >

> > That only shows, in my opinion, that

> > >you're no different from any cult.

> >

> >So, all the lists who exist for a specified purpose, and who kick

> >people off who disrupt and impede the accomplishment of that purpose

> >are cults, right?

>

> There are valid reasons to kick someone off a list. If the person is

> being verbally abusive or rude, then they certainly do deserve to be

> kicked off. I have not been verbally abusive or rude -- all I've

> done is issued challenges to statements that have been made here that

> have, IMO, no real evidence to support them. If someone takes this

> as an attack, then it says more about that person than it does about

> me. I also recognize and respect that moderators of any particular

> list do have the right to kick anyone off for any reason. If,

> however, this occurs simply because challenges have been made, then

> that tells me something about the dogmatic nature of the list.

>

> > You are certainly intitled to your opinion, . I respectfully

> > disagree.

>

> That's fine with me.

>

> > Fortunately, the internet exists

> > >and anyone wanting information on all sides of an issue can go and

> > >search for it and find information on all sides of the issue.

> That,

> > >you can do nothing to suppress.

> >

> >AMEN Sister. And if we want to find out any more about how great

> >the conventional medicine methods are, we'll subscribe to YOUR

> >favorite lists.

>

> I'm on a wide variety of lists and I can assure you they're not all

> about conventional medicine. I'm not saying that conventional

> medicine is without its flaws, but at least within that system there

> are checks and balances. If an MD makes unsubstantiated claims and

> misleads people, he can lose his license to practice medicine.

>

> I don't like to see it as a war or a contest between alternative and

> conventional treatments. The alternative treatments that do get

> proven will become tomorrow's " conventional " medicine. Dateline NBC

> did a whole hour New Year's day on clinical trials that are going on

> for Tibetan herbs in the treatment of Stage 4 breast cancer (see

> http://www.msnbc.com/news/502462.asp for a transcript of the program).

> I highly respect the Tibetan doctor who's herbal alternative

> treatments were being studied, for agreeing to have his work

> subjected to clinical trials. This was done at a conventional

> hospital and the study was run by a conventional oncologist. If the

> hospitals are so controlled by the pharmaceutical industry, then how

> do you suppose that happened? I think there should be a lot more of

> this sort of research going on, to find out which alternative

> treatments really do work and to what extent. I strongly support

> this sort of clinical trial because it will ultimately give the

> consumer solid data upon which to base decisions.

>

> People here seem to want to make this into a " war " and anyone that

> questions anything about " alternative " treatments gets put into the

> camp of the enemy " quackers " , but that's not how I see it. On this

> list, I've been cast in that role, and I'm amused at the assumptions

> that are being made about me just because I dared to question. What

> I am for is finding out the facts and accurate information about any

> treatment, whether it be alternative or conventional. If this

> offends people, so be it.

>

> Pignotti

>

> Learn more from:

> http://home.online.no/~dusan/gallstones/

> http://home.online.no/~huldakli/

> http://www..net/

> http://home.online.no/~dusan/

>

>

[Guest guest]

> ,

>You seem to be a real professional at this. Are you on a salary for

>doing this? If so, who pays you?

Why the drug overlords at Eli Lilly, of course, which are in turn

funded by the Illuminati -- just kidding!

LOL! No, it's a labor of love for me. I'm just an amateur and I've

never even met Barrett, although I hear from a friend that

he's really a nice guy.

Since you asked me, I'll ask you the same: do you have any financial

interest in what you are promoting?

Pignotti

[Guest guest]

<< > LOL! No, it's a labor of love for me. I'm just an amateur and I've

> never even met Barrett, although I hear from a friend that

> he's really a nice guy. >>

Oh my.........who was this friend? He claims to be protecting the people.

What a joke! Wonder why he isn't concerned about all the needless deaths we

have each year?????

Jan

[Guest guest]

, Unfortunately not even enough to begin to live on.....but would like

to!!!! It is a

dream of mine and I plan on pursuing it one of these days. And not for the

money, but to

offer people the same type of help I feel I and my daughter received. I do truly

believe in

this with all of my heart and soul, literally. And I truly feel it should be

shared.

Pignotti wrote:

>

> > ,

> >You seem to be a real professional at this. Are you on a salary for

> >doing this? If so, who pays you?

>

> Why the drug overlords at Eli Lilly, of course, which are in turn

> funded by the Illuminati -- just kidding!

>

> LOL! No, it's a labor of love for me. I'm just an amateur and I've

> never even met Barrett, although I hear from a friend that

> he's really a nice guy.

>

> Since you asked me, I'll ask you the same: do you have any financial

> interest in what you are promoting?

>

> Pignotti

>

> Learn more from:

> http://home.online.no/~dusan/gallstones/

> http://home.online.no/~huldakli/

> http://www..net/

> http://home.online.no/~dusan/

>

>