Talk:Live blood analysis

message: * Do you have another reference that would allow access to the document ? I would like to read it. NATTO 05:20, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Providence journal 

message: * A very thorough assessment of what it is and why it is NOT science is found here: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=377  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajbombadill (talk • contribs) 00:46, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:Weight and WP:PSCI. Tim Vickers (talk) 17:21, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Validity of live blood cell analysis 

message: I found this odd comment. "We know today, from the use of Darkfield Microscopes that microorganisms are pleomorphic, that they can change and often do. A virus can become a bacterium which can mutate into a yeast or fungus. Modern medicine has yet to acknowledge this because it would turn the pharmaceutical interests on their backs like a helpless tortoise." I found it here. What I would like to know is where this person got this idea from. I can understand the theories of the medical industry being all about money. The question is though... can anyone find information as to what gave this person the idea that microorganisms are pleomorphic? Might help with the article, and might merit an inclusion as something to debunk, if information can be found on this idea. SadanYagci 20:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's one Morphological and biochemical features of Borrelia burgdorferi pleomorphic forms.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.69.177.200 (talk) 04:22, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Odd comment 

message: What are the criteria such practitioners use to evaluate the blood cells they see under the microscope, and where are they published? Badagnani (talk) 17:17, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Criteria of analysis

message: I think the FDA is very fast in claiming something complementary does not work in favour of the farmaceutical industry, which discribes lots of medicine which "maybe work, maybe not".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.85.213.99 (talk) 19:18, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, to play devil's advocate, the pharmaceutical industry does conduct double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials of their products prior to marketing them, and reputable laboratory tests are verified as accurate against a known gold standard before they are licensed by regulatory agencies. Are you aware of complementary medicines which met similarly high scientific standards of utility but were unfairly denied approval by the FDA? MastCell Talk 19:25, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: FDA

message: Talk of LBA as "junk science" has popped up extensively in the Malaysian media over the past few days.
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/10/5/starprobe/4824574&sec=starprobe
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/10/6/nation/4850643&sec=nation
http://www.guangming.com.my/forward/emailref/58119
http://search.sinchew-i.com/node/416945?k=%E9%A1%AF%E5%BE%AE%E9%8F%A1%E8%A7%80%E8%A1%80  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.167.232.239 (talk) 00:45, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This is extremely poor taste of biased behavior.You are quoting from people who draws conclusions based on personal opinions and biased websites,they just decided to put it on a newspaper.There are countless records of live blood analysis and darkfield microscopy being valid techniques worldwide.Dr.Luis Vitetta,MD from Australia has a comprehensive assessment from his paper marked "The live blood analysis technique".Dr.Hilbert Seeger,MD,PhD a well known Hematologist has countless papers on it,however it is not known to be a diagnostic test.Its a screening tool and the article states its an unestablished diagnostic test.It was written with an agenda and most other alternative forms of testing or methods on wikipedia are promoting misleading statements about CAM therapies also.Yet there is documented evidence that over 65000 lawsuits within a 6 year period against pharmaceutical companies for killing thousands of people worldwide.Some examples of drugs are Avandia,Paxil,Zoloft,Vioxx,Accutane etc.Yet for some reason the lobbyist try to attack anything alternative.LBA has wider research and this is a very short and meaningless description from a few individuals like Stephen Barrett and Ernst Edzard who only gave there opinions and Stephen Barrett were involved with a number of lawsuits and have lost every single one of them.Its funny how editors here pick at the nastiest words to use eg.Fraudulent-which refers to people who use an agenda to falsely lie to the public and to fool them into believing something does not work.Yet the clients actually see for themselves the function of the immune system eg.Hypersegmented Neutrophils which have been proven to determine if a client lacks B12 and Folic Acid,uric acid crystals,fibrinogen,platelet,microcytes,echinocytes etc.This is very valuable and can be used to identify hematological status of the blood.However,biased editors prefer to delete edits that can improve the biased views from certain people attacking alternative practice.The authorities should deal with people like them and I have even noticed certain alternative medicine practitioners are constantly being attacked on wikipedia and this web page is supposed to be edit friendly.Instead promoting lies,propaganda and pure vilified information and basically anyone who tries to put truthful or factual information is banned from further editing.I have to say the information by Dr.Barbara Starfield,MD states from the AMA that over 106000 deaths a per are due to properly prescribed prescriptions and that the dangers of drugs and deadly side effects continue to plague the lands of innocent people just for the love of money.I hope the lawyers will continue to deal with the pharmaceutical companies for killing hundreds of thousands of innocent lives around the world.Wikipedia needs unbiased and objective writers and its editors are not fooling anybody by covering up there removals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Medboy1 (talk • contribs) 23:22, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  LBA in the Malaysian Media 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Live blood analysis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050623021301/http://www.projo.com/news/content/projo_20050621_chiro21.2342042.html to http://www.projo.com/news/content/projo_20050621_chiro21.2342042.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140321025146/http://www.edp24.co.uk/mobile/news/crime/woodford_green_harley_street_worker_handed_19k_court_bill_after_claiming_he_could_cure_cancer_and_hiv_with_lifestyle_changes_1_3459178 to http://www.edp24.co.uk/mobile/news/crime/woodford_green_harley_street_worker_handed_19k_court_bill_after_claiming_he_could_cure_cancer_and_hiv_with_lifestyle_changes_1_3459178
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified