"Do not eat food produced by publicly traded corporations. Remember,
large publicly traded companies are the enemy. They are producing
food
that is genetically modified, loaded with chemicals, growth hormones,
drugs, trans fats, and other ingredients specifically and purposely
created to increase your appetite, get you chemically addicted to the
food and make you fat.

You cannot trust any of the mass produced food they sell. They are
using deceptive advertising techniques in their ads intended to
trigger compulsive urges for their food.
Staying away from any brand name heavily advertised food is the best
course of action.

Knowing that every publicly traded company large food company will
use
deceitful and misleading tectniques and fancy food labels to get us
to
buy their products that damage our health and make us fat is reason
enough to avoid supporting them and to avoid buying their products."

From:
The Weight Loss Cure They Don't Want You to Know About
by
Kevin Trudeau

"Tim Campbell" <timcall@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1186194874.851169.200870@l70g2000hse.googlegr oups.com...
<buncha crap snipped>

I used to know someone with your name. I just hope you aren't him because
you're a bad icky spammer!

On Sat, 04 Aug 2007 02:34:34 -0000, Tim Campbell
<timcall@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

It seems I have heard this name before? Is the one on the " after
midnight" info commericials?

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

<guys@consolidated.net> wrote in message
news:1ip7b39rb5ilhckgmnahq9tch7nihk0ept@4ax.com...

That's him.

On Sat, 04 Aug 2007 02:36:18 GMT, "Julie Bove" <juliebove@verizon.net>
wrote:

Thank god, I could make a living without becoming a scam artist. They
are at alevel below a garbage can dog. But suckers make them rich.
Select who you would blame.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Tim Campbell wrote:
You respect him as an authority, do you?

Read about this charlatan here:

http://www.infomercialwatch.org/tran/trudeau.shtml

On Aug 3, 11:59 pm, Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net> wrote:

Don't know to what degree I regard him as an authority but he sure
accurately nails today's industrialized food processors in that
paragraph...whew...

On Aug 3, 11:59 pm, Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net> wrote:

What in the paragraph quoted do you dispute?

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 21:50:43 -0500, guys@consolidated.net wrote:


That's the same guy I saw with Tammy Faye Baker pandering his cancer cure. If
he were asked today, he would probably say "Tammy Faye Who?"



Grateful to be back.

Eddie MD OTF

On Aug 3, 10:34 pm, Tim Campbell <timc...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Maybe "they" don't want you to know about natural cures but I
guarantee you that if Blue Cross or any other insurer thought there
was a proven natural cure that you could get in your super market or
health food store, they would be writing their subscribers letters and
calling them on the phone to let them know. What insurance company
doesn't want to save money and have well clients paying those premiums
every month?
Dolores
Bye the way--I do not consider pills from a health food store as
natural cures. They are neither regulated nor standardized and the
amounts of active ingredients in them (if you can believe the labels)
are so large that they are beyond those same substances occuring
naturally in plants so that they would have to be considered
(unregulated and non standardized) drugs.

In article <1186325446.383341.202020@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups .com>,
dorsy1943 <dtms69@usadatanet.net> wrote:

Who decides what's proven?
What does it cost to prove something?
Who pays to provide the proof?
Why are those institutions willing to pay for the proof?
Why is proof so important where we have substantial evidence?

In article <1186194874.851169.200870@l70g2000hse.googlegroups .com>,
Tim Campbell <timcall@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Someone who is dumb enough to believe anything from Kevin Trudeau is
dumb enough to believe anything.

--
Our enemies shall talk themselves to death, and
we will bury them with their own confusion.
--
Remove "HatesSpam" and ".invalid" from email address to contact me.

On Aug 5, 1:13 pm, noname <nos...@aol.com> wrote:

I guess I mean proven by standard scientific tests. Drug companies
pay for tests. Other researchers get grants for studies from
government or private foundations. My husband was on an NIH grant to
study possible drugs for cancer when he was in grad school. Even
then, the population becomes one huge pool of guinea pigs once the
drug is on the market.

I wouldn't take a drug given to me by a doctor who said----here, take
this drug, it hasn't been tested but there is a lot of substantial
anecdotal evidence and results of a six person study which show that
it works. Nor do I believe the "substantial evidence" you see on tv
which shows those pieces of exercise equipment that will have me
looking like a 20 year old olympic athlete with just six minutes a day
working out with their product.

I will tell you that I have discovered a weight loss miracle but I
have to think of a catchy title and some filler material before I make
it into a book and go on tv to sell it. Here is the secret that
"they" don't want you to know. Eat less and exercise more. Cut out
fries and soda and fast food and any other junk food except for rarely
and only outside the home so you don't have it stored in your pantry
or fridge. Eat whole foods instead of stuff heavily processed.
Expand your circle of activities and friends so you are not sitting on
the couch trying to decide what to get from the fridge but out of the
house doing something. Have fruits and vegetables like carrots and
bell peppers handy when you just have to put something in your mouth
because you are stressed. When you look in the mirror, tell yourself
that you have accomplished other things in life and if you are
persistent and pick yourself up after failing, you can change your
lifestyle permanently to one that is more healthful. Be patient.
You didn't gain overnight and you won't lose overnight. Believe me
when I tell you there is substantial evidence that this will work.
Dolores

dorsy1943 <dtms69@usadatanet.net> wrote:

[snip]

[snip]

It costs hundreds of millions of dollars to prove something. Proof is
so important because it's what our legal system uses to make something
liability proof. Anything else and I can sue if I'm promised it will
help me and something bad happens instead. The problem is, bad things
happen for no reason all the time. So, people have grounds to sue all
the time - unless that magic proof exists. If proof exists, then the
court says, "this is proven to work, so your misfortune was just too
bad." If proof doesn't exist, the court says, "damn the person who
told you this works."

Almost all the studies funded by private foundations will not rise to
the level of proof. These only amount to evidence. Search Pubmed and
you will find mountains of evidence on many things that are unproven.

So, how is Blue Cross of another insurer going get proof? They aren't.
They can't afford it. They won't benefit that much. And, it's not fair
for a single insurance company to fund a huge study when everyone will
benefit, especially when there is risk - the study may show it doesn't
work.

No. Practically speaking, except for the rare huge government funded
studies, the only things that will ever find proof are drugs that drug
companies can profit from, and those are primarily patentable drugs.
If there's not huge profit potential, there will probably never be
proof. So, your choice is to use your own critical thinking and
evaluate the evidence that exists, or, only use things that are proven.

On Aug 5, 8:19 pm, Bob Blaylock <BobHatesS...@Blaylock.to.invalid>
wrote:

Forget who it was that said this.
Dispute, if you can, what he said...
What he said is absolutely true.

In article <1186880367.972686.242320@g12g2000prg.googlegroups .com>,
Tim Campbell <timcall@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Any idiot can make any gratuitous assertion, demand that those who
disagree with it must disprove it, and take any failure to do so as
proof that the assertion is true.

But logically, the burden always rests on someone who is going to make
an assertion outside of current thinking to prove that his assertion is
true.

Kevin Trudeau is a convicted criminal, who has spent time in prison
for fraud. He's built his life and his career on the practice of making
unsupportable assertions which have very often proven to be untrue, in
order to separate gullible and stupid people from their money.

Compare to Gene Ray and his "Time Cube" theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Ray
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Cube

You can say as many times as you want; you can say until you turn
blue, that "What he said is absolutely true", but that doesn't make it
so.

Especially given Trudeau's proven history as a fraud and a charlatan,
if you are going to assert that anything he has said is true, then the
burden is upon you to prove it.

--
Our enemies shall talk themselves to death, and
we will bury them with their own confusion.
--
Remove "HatesSpam" and ".invalid" from email address to contact me.

On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 00:59:27 -0000, Tim Campbell <timcall@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

I remember him telling Tammy Faye that there was no way cancer would kill her.
She made it a point that she would absolutely heed his advice.

So very true.



Grateful to be back.

Eddie MD OTF

On Aug 12, 11:32 am, Eddie Van Huffel <evanhu...@roadrunner.com>
wrote:

This, of course was a foolish thing for him to do.

I am simply saying that what I quoted him as saying at the top of this
thread is self-evident.

On Aug 5, 9:50 am, dorsy1943 <dtm...@usadatanet.net> wrote:
No actually there is no logic behind that assumption. If the
healthcare bills of Americans rose 10% then insurance companies would
just hike their rates up 10% to 15% and be done with it. Insurance
companies don't pocket excess cash based on their policyholders not
getting sick...what they do is lower rates for that risk group to stay
competitive. There is no financial motivation for insurance companies
or doctors to keep their patients healthy when you really think about
it.