Rush Limbaugh, big fat ass freaking idiot...

Quote from Dr. Zhivodka:

I actually wouldn't know anything about the website of the Libertarian Party as I've never been there.
More...
Strange, coming from someone who ended his previous post with "VOTE LIBERTARIAN"
Quote from Dr. Zhivodka:

However, if you're under the impression that we have anything other than an (effectively) open border now then you're deluding yourself. Bush would rather stick an icepick in his own eye than get serious about illegal immigration.


Lemme guess: Would that be the same drug-addicted draft-dodging hypocrite neo-con war-loving chicken-hawk puzzy who pretends to be conservative but who's really a Fascist?

:D
More...
I'm under no misimpression regarding our current lame border situation. But it's a far cry from having an ineffective border to making it completely nonexistent, which is the official Libertarian Party position. If this concerns you, you should find out more about the party you're endorsing.

Regarding everything you said about Bush and Limbutt, I couldn't agree more. :)

Had Enough? Vote Democratic!
 
Quote from dddooo:

Oh, please...How can people possibly be so ignorant?


Quote from pattersb:

Given the research is still in its infancy, the following campaign-promise from Edwards was a little bit over-the-top?

"If we do the work that we can do in this country, the work that we will do when John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk, get up out of that wheelchair and walk again."

A legitimate campaign promise, Or disgraceful demagoguery? (You'd think they'd learn from the first go around ...)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34167-2004Oct14.html
More...
More...

The thread is about Rush's reaction to a campaign ad, I was sticking to the theme of the thread.

You failed to answer the question. Is it demagoguery? My ignorance aside, I'm simply wondering if this is an acceptable way to frame the issue during a campaign. You know, promising miracle cures from unproven research, and blaming the opponent for standing in the way of said miracle cures.

By the way, to compare this issue to the moon landing simply demonstrates your ignorance. There were ZERO ethical concerns about placing a man on the moon, (besides the opinion it was money poorly spent, an opinion that could include just about any expenditure). Many people have concerns about green-lighting the mass production of human embryos for, as yet, unproven research.

You seem to think it unnecessary to place any restriction on this research. Let me ask you a question, What if letting these embryos develop for a month or two produced more harvest cells, would you allow that? Shit, its just a nameless, product of some lab. How about injecting embryos as a wrinkle reducer (ala, Botox)? If human embryos turned out to be a great soil fertilizer, would you have any objections on ethical grounds for Scotts, Inc to start mass producing them? ....

I'd prefer to find alternatives on ethical grounds, and I am not alone.


The "progressive"-liberal future:

Mass industrial production of human embryos ... And the recognition of a Man and Women's marriage as no more important than: a man-man, woman-woman, transgender-man, transgender-woman, transgender-transgender, (and any other biological abomination you can imagine).

The road to hell indeed ...

VOTE PELOSI!


Where do stem cells come from?
Pluripotent stem cells are isolated from human embryos that are a few days old. Cells from these embryos can be used to create pluripotent stem cell "lines" —cell cultures that can be grown indefinitely in the laboratory. Pluripotent stem cell lines have also been developed from fetal tissue obtained from fetal tissue (older than 8 weeks of development).
 
Quote from pattersb:
More...

The thread is about Rush's reaction to a campaign ad, I was sticking to the theme of the thread.
Really? What does Edwards and Kerry's campaign promise have to do with Rush's reaction?

You failed to answer the question. Is it demagoguery?
Wasn't my opinion obvious when I posted this quote:
Scientists and advocacy groups view embryonic stem cell research as perhaps the best hope for finding cures for debilitating diseases like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/08/09/stem.cell.bush/index.html
Of course it was not demagoguery as it was based on the opinion of the scientific community. It was demagoguery to promise to be "greeted as liberators" when every expert was saying it would not happen though.

My ignorance aside,
Fine, but you should start working on it. :D


By the way, to compare this issue to the moon landing simply demonstrates your ignorance.
I did not compare the issues, we were discussing the idea of a "government bureaucracy" getting involved in a major scientific project and in this context my comparison was more than applicable, it therefore does not demonstrate my ignorance, it demonstrates your inability to comprehend what you read.

You seem to think it unnecessary to place any restriction on this research.
I did not say that, I'd let the scientific community as opposed to politicians and religious fundamentalists make these decisions.

The "progressive"-liberal future:Mass industrial production of human embryos...
Actually the future is quite clear, in 100 years stem cell research will have created hunderds of miracle drugs curing debilitating diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and many others. The issue is whether it's going to happen in 10 or in 30 years, whether the research will take place in this country or in China/India, whether the drugs will be created by american drug companies or French or Russian pharmaceutical industries.

History will also not look kindly on people like you standing in the way of scientific progress, it never has and it never will. You and your ilk are going to join the ranks of those who persecuted Copernicus, Darwin, Galileo, of course for all the "good" moral and religious reasons.

"Galileo was ordered to stand trial on suspicion of heresy in 1633. The sentence of the Inquisition was in three essential parts: Galileo was required to recant his heliocentric ideas; the idea that the Sun is stationary was condemned as "formally heretical"...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei
 
Quote from pattersb:

Given the research is still in its infancy, the following campaign-promise from Edwards was a little bit over-the-top?
More...

What does the fact that the research is in its infancy have to do with the promise of tissue regeneration? Edwards apparently didn't say 'he'll get up out of the chair and walk by 2008'.

The research is the thing. That's how we got to the point where you can sit at home and post your faith-based objections to research.
 
Quote from dddooo:

Clearly that's not what I said, there is no problem with being a Catholic Doctor, the problem is that she is conflating her religous beliefs with Medicine.
More...

Sorry I did not catch this response.

funny that is not what I took away from you previous message. What exactly do you mean by the above.

She is not a reasonable source for information because she is not willing to kill a fetus directly but will allow a fetus to die if she is saving the mothers life. Is that her Cathoicism conflating her medicine. Does that mean she cant give unbiased info. Nice try but you know your original post was the illogical liberal trick of attacking the messenger when you dont like the message.
 
Rush Limbaugh is a liar.

Limbaugh's story is that he completely recovered from a very heavy oxy addiction by using bupe for only 13 days. Anyone with a similar medical history knows that <b>Limbaugh is obviously lying.</b>

Here are three realistic possibilities, regarding what actually happened:

1) He's lying- He's still on bupe.
2) He's lying- He's back on oxy.
3)(Best case scenario) He's lying- he is off the opiates <i>now</i>, but it took him over half a year on bupe, from start to slow-taper finish.

_________

Limbaugh transcript, June 16, 2006

CALLER: I want to congratulate you for being able to be very successful in getting yourself off prescription medications for pain. But my question was, I worried about you for five days and five nights when you first left. I've heard that those are the worst days of anybody's life. Is that true?

RUSH: Well, it depends. They weren't for me.

CALLER: Good.

RUSH: But I tried unsuccessfully two previous times to detox on me own, and in one case it was like 12 days of hell. I assume you're talking about withdrawal?

CALLER: Yes, and throwing up constantly.

RUSH: Let me tell you. I am convinced that most people who are addicted to opiates -- be it heroin or prescription drugs or prescription pain medication or whatever, it's all opiates; I'm convinced that most of them -- after a certain passage of time will do anything to avoid withdrawal. It is hell on earth, and opiate withdrawal is the absolute worst withdrawal. Crystal meth is a bad one from what I learned, and cocaine, but those are basically psychological. This is a physical addiction. Nobody would want to do it if they knew that it was going to happen to them.

CALLER: What helped you get through this?

RUSH: Well, the first two times I tried what was called rapid detox, which is, basically they pump Naltrexone into you while you're under anesthesia. Naltrexone attaches to opiate receptors in the brain much faster and tighter and stronger than opiates do, and it basically flushes the opiates out of the brain. That puts you into immediate withdrawal, but you are under anesthesia, so theoretically you don't feel it and you don't know it.

CALLER: Well, that's what I was hoping you were under. I was hoping you didn't feel it.

RUSH: No, no, no. I don't know about anybody else, but it was not good for me, because after five, ten days, it was murder.

CALLER: Oh, I'm sorry.

RUSH: It was absolute horror. But when I went to the professional place, there are ways the detox people -- I don't want to say "painless," but compared to a cold turkey or a step-down withdrawal, it's a piece of cake. They've developed ways. They used to use methadone. There's a new drug that's been developed called Buprenorphine, and Buprenorphine you take in a reduced dosage according to the doctor's analysis of your circumstance over the course of anywhere from two weeks to a month, and you reduce the dosage. They reduce it for you, and you step down.
You step down. Some magic in the drug (I'm not a scientist to understand it to explain it scientifically), but there's also in the drug a derivative of this Naltrexone, and if you, in the process of stepping down, then take more than you are supposed to, the Naltrexone kicks in, and you go into immediate cold turkey withdrawal. So the motivation is to stay on this, and they had me on it for 13 days, and it was painless.

CALLER: I'm so glad to hear that.

RUSH: The first five days... There was no -- I had zero physical discomfort when I was at The Meadows. The first five days I was in denial. "I can't believe I'm here."

CALLER: Yeah.

RUSH: I thought I was going to be with the dregs of society. I learned that that's not the case. I was there with two former NFL quarterbacks. There were executives from major corporations there. I was stunned by what I found there. There's a code of silence for everybody that goes there so I can't talk about names or any of that, but it was quite eye opening. But after those first five days, I got into it. I sunk my teeth into it like I got into electronics school when I was 16 years old. I soaked that in. It was probably the most valuable five weeks as an adult I have ever spent in terms of learning about myself. It would be worthwhile for anybody who has no alcohol or any kind of addiction whatsoever to go through. It was just, if you get into it, profound.

CALLER: Was it like psychotherapy in a way?

RUSH: Well, you might say that in terms of one word to convey it to people, but it's really... you don't see psychiatrists.

CALLER: Right, exactly.

RUSH: Or psychologists. You don't. They take you deep back into your earliest memories and they try to show you exactly why you do what you do and what motivates you, as a means of overcoming those things yourself. They don't teach willpower. They don't teach it because that doesn't work. They teach a whole bunch of things that, if you really get into it, they're the best. For me, it was the most important thing that I have done to ever learn about myself. You know, everybody has pain in their life, emotional pain and so forth, and most people suppress it. It's not manly to show it or to express it, so you either suppress it or you medicate it, however you medicate it, and eventually after you've suppressed it or medicated it for so long it's going to explode into destructive behavior, and that's what the learning experience is all about is how that cycle began and how to avoid it repeating.

__________

Note also how Limbaugh got his dumb ass <b>scammed</b> by the 'rapid-detox' industry... twice!
Even the most ignorant, clueless newbie opiate addicts all know that 'rapid-detox under anesthesia' is the wizetrade of detox methods, a useless $10,000-$17,000 mistake.

Pffffft....Limbaugh gives us junkies a bad name. :p

www.ProhibitionKills.com
 
I'm surprised that Ibogaine is not more widely used and discussed as an opiate addiction interruption. I've heard great things about it. Eventhough is illegal in the U.S. it's perfectly legal in Canada. Could it be that there's U.S. prohibition to cures....or better methods of treatment? Sad.

Bupe is cool and all but I've read it's no "get out of jail free" card. But I suppose nothing is when one is gripped in the throes of addiction.


And yes Rush is a lier, and he...and like Drudge, is a homosexual, IMO. Not that there's anything wrong with that. :D


Quote from Rearden Metal:

Rush Limbaugh is a liar.

Limbaugh's story is that he completely recovered from a very heavy oxy addiction by using bupe for only 13 days. Anyone with a similar medical history knows that <b>Limbaugh is obviously lying.</b>

Here are three realistic possibilities, regarding what actually happened:

1) He's lying- He's still on bupe.
2) He's lying- He's back on oxy.
3)(Best case scenario) He's lying- he is off the opiates <i>now</i>, but it took him over half a year on bupe, from start to slow-taper finish.

_________

Limbaugh transcript, June 16, 2006

CALLER: I want to congratulate you for being able to be very successful in getting yourself off prescription medications for pain. But my question was, I worried about you for five days and five nights when you first left. I've heard that those are the worst days of anybody's life. Is that true?

RUSH: Well, it depends. They weren't for me.

CALLER: Good.

RUSH: But I tried unsuccessfully two previous times to detox on me own, and in one case it was like 12 days of hell. I assume you're talking about withdrawal?

CALLER: Yes, and throwing up constantly.

RUSH: Let me tell you. I am convinced that most people who are addicted to opiates -- be it heroin or prescription drugs or prescription pain medication or whatever, it's all opiates; I'm convinced that most of them -- after a certain passage of time will do anything to avoid withdrawal. It is hell on earth, and opiate withdrawal is the absolute worst withdrawal. Crystal meth is a bad one from what I learned, and cocaine, but those are basically psychological. This is a physical addiction. Nobody would want to do it if they knew that it was going to happen to them.

CALLER: What helped you get through this?

RUSH: Well, the first two times I tried what was called rapid detox, which is, basically they pump Naltrexone into you while you're under anesthesia. Naltrexone attaches to opiate receptors in the brain much faster and tighter and stronger than opiates do, and it basically flushes the opiates out of the brain. That puts you into immediate withdrawal, but you are under anesthesia, so theoretically you don't feel it and you don't know it.

CALLER: Well, that's what I was hoping you were under. I was hoping you didn't feel it.

RUSH: No, no, no. I don't know about anybody else, but it was not good for me, because after five, ten days, it was murder.

CALLER: Oh, I'm sorry.

RUSH: It was absolute horror. But when I went to the professional place, there are ways the detox people -- I don't want to say "painless," but compared to a cold turkey or a step-down withdrawal, it's a piece of cake. They've developed ways. They used to use methadone. There's a new drug that's been developed called Buprenorphine, and Buprenorphine you take in a reduced dosage according to the doctor's analysis of your circumstance over the course of anywhere from two weeks to a month, and you reduce the dosage. They reduce it for you, and you step down.
You step down. Some magic in the drug (I'm not a scientist to understand it to explain it scientifically), but there's also in the drug a derivative of this Naltrexone, and if you, in the process of stepping down, then take more than you are supposed to, the Naltrexone kicks in, and you go into immediate cold turkey withdrawal. So the motivation is to stay on this, and they had me on it for 13 days, and it was painless.

CALLER: I'm so glad to hear that.

RUSH: The first five days... There was no -- I had zero physical discomfort when I was at The Meadows. The first five days I was in denial. "I can't believe I'm here."

CALLER: Yeah.

RUSH: I thought I was going to be with the dregs of society. I learned that that's not the case. I was there with two former NFL quarterbacks. There were executives from major corporations there. I was stunned by what I found there. There's a code of silence for everybody that goes there so I can't talk about names or any of that, but it was quite eye opening. But after those first five days, I got into it. I sunk my teeth into it like I got into electronics school when I was 16 years old. I soaked that in. It was probably the most valuable five weeks as an adult I have ever spent in terms of learning about myself. It would be worthwhile for anybody who has no alcohol or any kind of addiction whatsoever to go through. It was just, if you get into it, profound.

CALLER: Was it like psychotherapy in a way?

RUSH: Well, you might say that in terms of one word to convey it to people, but it's really... you don't see psychiatrists.

CALLER: Right, exactly.

RUSH: Or psychologists. You don't. They take you deep back into your earliest memories and they try to show you exactly why you do what you do and what motivates you, as a means of overcoming those things yourself. They don't teach willpower. They don't teach it because that doesn't work. They teach a whole bunch of things that, if you really get into it, they're the best. For me, it was the most important thing that I have done to ever learn about myself. You know, everybody has pain in their life, emotional pain and so forth, and most people suppress it. It's not manly to show it or to express it, so you either suppress it or you medicate it, however you medicate it, and eventually after you've suppressed it or medicated it for so long it's going to explode into destructive behavior, and that's what the learning experience is all about is how that cycle began and how to avoid it repeating.

__________

Note also how Limbaugh got his dumb ass <b>scammed</b> by the 'rapid-detox' industry... twice! Even the most ignorant, clueless newbie opiate addicts all know that 'rapid-detox under anesthesia' is the wizetrade of detox methods!

Pffffft....Limbaugh gives us junkies a bad name. :p

www.ProhibitionKills.com
More...
 
<i>Quote from Dr. Zhivodka:
I'm surprised that Ibogaine is not more widely used and discussed as an opiate addiction interruption. I've heard great things about it. Eventhough is illegal in the U.S. it's perfectly legal in Canada. Could it be that there's U.S. prohibition to cures....or better methods of treatment? Sad.</i>

---->This is a very complex issue. It would take me quite a while to explain this properly, but basically: Buprenorphine is a more appropriate detox tool than Ibogaine, because getting through the first 5-7 days of withdrawal (the physical part) isn't even half the battle.

Prolonged opiate use causes your brain to grow many new opiate receptors, which demand to be 'fed'. Once the first (physical) stage of withdrawal has passed, your body feels better, but your mind is still months to years away from adjusting back to its previous state.

To make this even more complicated, some people instinctively become addicted to opiates because our bodies don't produce sufficient levels of the endogenous opioids. (The endorphins present in your own brain are 48 times more potent than heroin, believe it or not. ) Some people have a natural deficiency of these vital chemicals, and have no choice but to consume opioids from an external source in order to feel 'normal'. These people shouldn't be completely detoxing off all opiates in the first place.

____

Another thing: You have no idea how many highly useful, perfectly safe medications are robbed away from you by the politicians, without you even knowing it. Did you know there's a non-narcotic analgesic that's far safer than acetaminophen (tylenol), yet the pain relief it provides is far superior to anything they let you buy at the drug store?

If you're American with little overseas travel, you've probably never heard of Dipyrone. Dipyrone is non-narcotic pain reliever available without prescription, everywhere in the world except the nanny-states. It's a non-narcotic analgesic like aspirin, acetaminophen and ibuprofen, but with one major difference- It actually works.

This highly useful medication was completely banned by the FDA in 1977. Reason? If taken in ridiculously high doses every day, about one in a few thousand people will develop leukemia-like symptoms from this overuse.

Since it can't *gasp* produce a narcotic high, there is little risk of punishment beyond confiscation, if you attempt to bring a stash of dipyrone back with you when traveling abroad. Highly recommended.

Instead of dipyrone, the politicians shove crap like vioxx onto people. Vioxx! An analgesic so <i>safe</i>, it was found responsible for tens of thousands of deaths by heart attack & stroke.

<i>Bupe is cool and all but I've read it's no "get out of jail free" card. But I suppose nothing is when one is gripped in the throes of addiction.</i>

---->I've been on bupe for almost a year now.
 
Very interesting.

Does bupe not require a gradual come down detox period like other opiates? I'm told it's strange drug with both Agonist/Antagonist properties that one cannot stop taking immediately without experiencing withdrawals.

Also I'm told that Ibogaine removes most if not all withdrawal symptoms until a person can get back on their feet

Alas I'm only a trader. Not a chemist.




Quote from Rearden Metal:

<i>Quote from Dr. Zhivodka:
I'm surprised that Ibogaine is not more widely used and discussed as an opiate addiction interruption. I've heard great things about it. Eventhough is illegal in the U.S. it's perfectly legal in Canada. Could it be that there's U.S. prohibition to cures....or better methods of treatment? Sad.</i>

---->This is a very complex issue. It would take me quite a while to explain this properly, but basically: Buprenorphine is a more appropriate detox tool than Ibogaine, because getting through the first 5-7 days of withdrawal (the physical part) isn't even half the battle.

Prolonged opiate use causes your brain to grow many new opiate receptors, which demand to be 'fed'. Once the first (physical) stage of withdrawal has passed, your body feels better, but your mind is still months to years away from adjusting back to its previous state.

To make this even more complicated, some people instinctively become addicted to opiates because our bodies don't produce sufficient levels of the endogenous opioids. (The endorphins present in your own brain are 48 times more potent than heroin, believe it or not. ) Some people have a natural deficiency of these vital chemicals, and have no choice but to consume opioids from an external source in order to feel 'normal'. These people shouldn't be completely detoxing off all opiates in the first place.

____

Another thing: You have no idea how many highly useful, perfectly safe medications are robbed away from you by the politicians, without you even knowing it. Did you know there's a non-narcotic analgesic that's far safer than acetaminophen (tylenol), yet the pain relief it provides is far superior to anything they let you buy at the drug store?

If you're American with little overseas travel, you've probably never heard of Dipyrone. Dipyrone is non-narcotic pain reliever available without prescription, everywhere in the world except the nanny-states. It's a non-narcotic analgesic like aspirin, acetaminophen* and ibuprofen, but with one major difference- It actually works.

This highly useful medication was completely banned by the FDA in 1977. Reason? If taken in ridiculously high doses every day, about one in a few thousand people will develop leukemia-like symptoms from this overuse.

Since it can't *gasp* produce a narcotic high, there is little risk of punishment beyond confiscation, if you attempt to bring a stash of dipyrone back with you when traveling abroad. Highly recommended.

Instead of dipyrone, the politicians shove crap like vioxx onto people. Vioxx! An analgesic so safe, it was found responsible for tens of thousands of deaths by heart attack & stroke.

<i>Bupe is cool and all but I've read it's no "get out of jail free" card. But I suppose nothing is when one is gripped in the throes of addiction.</i>

---->I've been on bupe for almost a year now.
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top