Factual · Powerful · Original · Iconoclastic
Last night I watched the movie "Erin Brockovitch" [sic] on DVD. To put it simply, it inspired me to "get off my ass and make something of my life". You are a hipocrit [sic]. Why do you try to shit on every factual event which [sic] has ever occured [sic]? Is this just your way of making money Mr [sic] Stink. I am quite certain that deep down you believe their stories. You love the attention and notoriety you have gained from pissing people off. I hope you're satisfied. Geez, I hope my email makes it to HATE MAIL VOLUME 1 and not HATE MAIL VOLUME 422!!!! My First Name AND my last Name are NOT FOR PUBLICATION or I'll sue the pants off you. I'm sure you'd find a story in that!!!! Silvia Novak
Australia here Dear Ms. SILVIA NOVAK: "Based on a true story," this movie portrayed the KKK as heroes. I know enough intelligent Australians to believe you are probably the only person in the country who doesn't know that when a movie claims to be "based on a true story" it's total fiction. All you know about Erin Brockovich was what Hollywood told you. Actually you don't even know that much since you can't even spell the name of the movie and the lead character correctly. Ever since "The Birth of a Nation" (based on a true story) glorified the Ku Klux Klan, Hollywood has found ways of making money by glorifying wicked people. Leni Riefenstahl did so with Hitler and Steven Soderberg did so with Erin Brockovich. Since you have no arguments to make against my factual portrayal of Brockovich, you go after my motives and simply invent those. I'm in it for the bucks, really? That's why my first expose of her paid $300 while the longest one ran in a magazine that pays nothing. Meanwhile Brockovich makes millions by terrifying poor innocent people. You know I routinely do not list people's names in my hate mail, for you SILVIA NOVAK, I'm going to make an exception. There's no law preventing me from doing so and I'm guessing SILVIA NOVAK isn't going to shell out lots of money for an American lawyer who will tell SILVIA NOVAK exactly what I just told SILVIA NOVAK. Finally, I'm glad SOMETHING made SILVIA NOVAK decide to get off her ass and do something with her life. But I wish it had been a film with more basis in reality such as perhaps "Planet of the Apes," which is "based on a true story" since there truly are planets and there truly are apes. * *Sincerely,
Michael Fumento Dear Mr Stink A few things. Based on a true story is exactly that - BASED - but facts are also FACTS Mr Stink. Do you have a dictionary? First, Brockovitch is infact [sic] the original and correct spelling of a name which has changed in spelling over time - about 500 years (the change was to accommodate a few stupid Americans like yourself) and my Freudian slip was exactly that, a slip. The SLIPS YOU MAKE are much more PATHETIC AND OBVIOUS. Why is your last update on your WebPage [sic] showing as 20 August 2002? Could you have taken my threat seriously??? HHHmmmm....... [sic] Yes - BrockoviTch [sic] has inspired me to do something with my life other than the so-called success which I have had to date. At least I am honest. But, being a Public [sic] Servant [sic] is not all that bad - you should try it sometime - you know - SERVE the public instead of SHIT ALL OVER the public like you do. The rest of your email was purely defensive and not worth responding to. Goodbye Mr Stink - and don't be too sure about who [sic] you are dealing with....... Waiting in anticipation for your response as I wade through the tonnes of hate email on your website. Do you make money when I visit your page? Dear SILVIA NOVAK: Let's see. Because some people spell or once did spell their name as "Brockovitch," it's okay for you to apply that spelling whenever you feel like it despite the fact that names are legal identifiers. That means that you can spell the name of your kindred spirit Eva von Braun as "Eve von Brown" if you feel like it? Freud has nothing to do with it; this is just your quaint way of trying to cover up that you can't even spell the name of your new-found heroine nor of the fictional movie you watched. The** one** thing I will grant that both the character played by Julia Roberts and the Wicked Witch of the West who works for Ed Masry have in common is that they both spell their names the same way. It is also not yours, SILVIA NOVAK, to define what "based on a true story" means. There is no fixed definition, not in a dictionary or anywhere else. It's whatever the producer and director want it to mean. In the case of "Erin Brockovich" (no, not "Brockovitch" or "Brockobitch" or "Brockowench" or "Brockowitch"), "based on a true story" meant little more than that there is a person with that name who does live in the state of California and does contribute to the litigious society that is America. Finally, how egocentric are you, SILVIA NOVAK, to believe that I would stop updating my entire web site out of fear of being sued by you. I don't match web site updates to hate mail postings and as anyone who's visited the hate mail pages knows (with the sole exception of you), whole volumes go up at once. I'm not going to post a volume just to please your vanity, no matter how great that vanity may be. Oh, and by the way, we have another term for "public servant" here, SILVIA NOVAK. Generally it means "living on the dole." *Sincerely,
Dear Mr Fumento
No matter what you say - you HAVE NOT upset me in the slightest. Obviously, I have hit a nerve with my emails. Your defensive words are just that - defending your screwed, disjointed and lacking-in-evidence myths. * [Blah, blah, blah.]* [Blah, blah, blah.] Geez am I really worthy of all these emails?? [Blah, blah, blah.] You've met your match.... SILVIA NOVAK Dear SILVIA NOVAK: * Actually, no you weren't worth any of those e-mails? Bye.* Sincerely,
Michael Fumento * Hahahahaha - thank you! You've given up which means that I won that one [sic] hands down. Goodbye, and thank you for taking the time to send me numerous emails - I must have been worth it! Keep up the good work - who else are people going to hate.... Best wishes
Australia here *[Hmmm . . . Methinks that if I had "won" by answering SILVIA NOVAK's e-mails in perpetuity, I would have lost. Maybe the person who invented the expression "can't win for losing" knew SILVIA NOVAK.] #### Successful and Parasitical, to Be Sure
You are no better than Erin Brockovich. You are probably just swolle [sic] because she has no law degree and is a more successful parasitic lawyer than you are. Mike. Mike Dear Mike: * Sorry, but first of all, in the U.S. you can't be a lawyer without a law degree. Therefore, since as you concede Brockovich has none she cannot be a lawyer, parasitical or otherwise. Second, I do have a law degree and am a member of the bar, but I don't practice. I could still be a parasite, but I cannot be a parasitical lawyer. Third, it may be true that I'm "swolle," but I haven't the least idea what that means. * Sincerely,
Michael Fumento I used to work in* [or live in?]* a prison (Rahway, NJ). The inmates use the term 'swolle' in the following way. Swolle is basically the word 'swollen' pronounced in Ebonics. To say someone is 'swolle' means the same as saying that person is sore. It is like saying 'you're just sore because . . .' In other words, they are using an ebonical version of swollen, as a substitute for sore. Of course, in our MTV culture, anything black people innovate is considered original and authentically hip and cool, simply based on the fact that black people think it is hip, so it must be. This is a symptom of white self hate and self doubt. That is another subject, however. I use these type terms sort of half jokingly. Sometimes the ebonics [sic] people come up with good stuff, and sometimes they come up with tired and lame stuff, just like everyone else.
In any case, when I watched the Erin B movie I thought it was a good story, but when I went online and read some background, I realized Erin is just like most lawyers - a money grubbing Jewbagel. I realize she may not be Jewish, and I realize that not all Jews are money grubbing pushy obnoxious arrogant loyalists to a foreign power - but enough of them are to support the truth of the stereotype, just like enough blacks are ignorant violent criminals to support the nigger stereotype. Just like enough lawyers are money grubbing despicable troublemakers to smear the entire profession. Italian Americans [sic], on the other hand do not have enough mobsters and adulterers among their population to justify the stereotypes of Italians being gangsters and Italians being people who bicker loudly and ignorantly around the family dinner table to support those stereotypes, but since Italians are fair game, they wear the stereotype just because it has been deemed okay to pick on them. Just as not enough Irish are drunken shanty Irish to support the barfly stereotype, since Irish are white and able to take care of themselves, they are fair game also. Have a nice day. Mike. P.S.: My spellchecker wanted to change 'Jewbagel' to Jew, but I vetoed the suggestion. Dear Mike, You give new meaning to the term "HATE mail."
Women have known for years about the problems with the tampons and pads sold through mass marketing. We all get occasional rashes and problems you wouldn't know about. Why don't you ask women themselves what they want? I love what tera fem is doing to help women have a choice about our personal products. What's your problem? Krow Dear Krow, Let's get this straight. Since I'm a man, I can't possibly know anything about tampons and pads. Likewise, since you're a woman you've never heard that men have this special ability to urinate while standing. As it happens I have something in my house called a "wife." Perhaps you've heard of them; they're fairly common around here. And through my wife I learn all sorts of things about feminine hygiene products. This is in addition to the scientific research that is evident in the article (http://www.fumento.com/tampons.html) you attacked. Meanwhile, you don't even know how to spell the product you're defending, Terre Femma. You should be eating Krow.
Subject: Gary Taubes Michael, If Gary Taubes's piece in the [New York] Times [Sunday Magazine of July 7, 2002] on dietary fat is accurate then the dietary contentions in your book fall flat, do they not? Why is that you find it necessary to take cheap shots at people with whom you disagree? For instance, instead of calling Robert Atkins wrong, you call his books "dumb." If you turn out to be wrong, does that make you dumb? Sometimes it seems like your writing career is one long effort to smear people and get the anger out of your soul. Eric [omitted] * Dear Eric,* * Gee, thanks for the free psychoanalysis! But as short as your letter is, it fails rather miserably both in logic and in fact. Logically, your proposition appears to be that if somebody somewhere writes something that contradicts something Michael Fumento has said, then Michael Fumento is wrong. Ergo, if Michael Fumento says it's 92 and sunny today in Washington, D.C. but Seymour Stalbovskaya writes in the Uzbekistan Herald Tribune that it is 55 and raining, then Michael Fumento is incorrect. This is called a non-sequitur, meaning "it does not (logically) follow."*
As to facts, Dr. Atkins claims his diet will allow you to lose massive amounts of weight even while pigging out on fatback, pork rinds, and lard until you sweat grease. He also claims his diet will relieve "fatigue, irritability, depression, trouble concentrating, headaches, insomnia, dizziness, joint and muscle aches, heartburn, colitis, premenstrual syndrome, and water retention and bloating." Atkins draws the line at curing cancer � though only in his book. In 1993, he temporarily lost his medical license for treating a breast cancer patient with worthless intravenous ozone. The New York State Supreme Court restored it but forbade Atkins from ever using the ozone treatment again. Is this not a classic quack? * Now you'll pardon me if I attach a letter I received at the same time I did yours but that takes a slightly different angle.*
Dear Michael, Your book on obesity was a breath of fresh air since we live in a culture where the food culture is so wacky that we now think it's normal. We needed someone like you to step back and give us an objective view. I have always been overweight by anywhere from 30-50 pounds and my self-esteem has suffered terribly even though at my lowest weight many people tell me that I don't need to lose any weight. Believe me, I'm not someone who is thin but is so obsessed I think I need to lose more weight. I really do need to lose weight and am working on it slowly, as your successful dieters did. There is one restaurant where I can get a breakfast that is so huge I can literally take it home and get two more meals out of it! I don't go there anymore. In fact, if I'm paying attention to myself, I'm amazed at how little I really need to eat to feel full and to have sufficient energy. I do feel sorry for fat people though because I know that they just do not know how to get out of their predicament; that's why they develop organizations called "Society for Fat Acceptance." They'll never be accepted though.
Kim [omitted] Agent Orange Hate
From: WGungHo@[omitted] Sir,
You cartainly [sic] have a strange sense of humor. You mock those who suffer injustice. As a disabled Viet Nam vet (wounds [sic] in combat), I never questioned my duty. My family's record of military service is documented back to the Revolution. I knew full well the dangers of military service, and accepted them when I enlisted. I was decorated for valor by the marine [sic] corps [sic]. But I have to say that my actions may have differed had I known beforehand that my own goverment [sic] was going to poison me and my comrades, much less the enemy. All the other chemicals in the herbicides aside, TDCC was a known toxin. Period. A known fact! I haven't discerned from your writings exactly what your military service was, but I doubt not that you would have left for Canada had you known that you were to be poisoned by your own government. You obviously do not suffer cancer, diabetes, or [sic] have children with birth defects, or any number of other ailments undeniably connected to defoliants. Perhaps I'll have the pleasure of reading some humorous comment of yours concerning this letter. [omitted] * *Dear Mr. Gung Ho: It's sad that they decorated you for valor, but you can't even spell "Marine Corps" correctly. As to your family having fought in the Revolution, I hope Washington's troops kicked their butts into Canada. Saying TCDD is toxic three times in one line does not make it so, but if that's the best you can do – and obviously it is – then go for it. You're right that I never suffered any illness connected to defoliants. That's because other than the skin ailment called chloracne, which afflicted those who directly touched Agent Orange and its civilian counterpart 2-4-D, NOBODY has. Finally, regarding your Canada remark, I just love those "what-if" attacks you people make on me. Why don't you speculate on what I would have done if the U.S. were engaged in combat against Martian craft with death rays? But it remains that I enlisted the day after my 18th birthday and served honorably as a paratrooper in combat arms for my full term of four years. Had I gone to war, it's a fairly good bet that I wouldn't have run screaming in terror from � and then blamed all future illnesses on � a chemical that to this very day has never been shown to harm anything other than plants. Sincerely,
Such a glib tongue. You might want to check your rules of capitalization. As a phrase, "marine corps" is simply an adjective preceding a noun. Of course, if you add "United States," it's a horse of a different color. Marines don't usually feel the need for extra ornamentation [sic]. Some of us backward jarheads actually attended Army (soldiers like the capitol A!) jump school, but we don't wear an assortment of badges and ribbons proclaiming our ability to jump from a plane. We just do it. As for the effects of defoliants, one of the world's foremost oncologists and oncology researchers, Dr. Walter Lawrence, happens to be my personal oncologist, and he has a different opinion. A simple check of the net using his title and name will reveal a host of qualifications. I don't think statistics would mean much to you either, so we won't go there. (For your own information, though, you might want to check the statictics [sic] for cancer deaths among marine [sic] Viet Nam veterans as compared to both military and civilian populations.)
In combat, each of us has his own terrors. Most of us deal with them. Some can't. Mine still visit me nightly after all these years. They have become companions. It's a common occurrence among those who served in combat. They serve to remind me that war is a terror to be avoided if possible. Until you've been there, you have no right to voice an opinion. As for deserving decorations for valor, mine cost me two of the best men I'll ever know. That I was decorated for valor at the cost of their lives and dire wounds to others saddens me, also. There is no fancy piece of metal hung from pretty ribbons worth the price. I would hope that you stand tall with your National Defense Ribbon pinned beneath your jump wings. Their price was sweat, not blood. I sincerely appreciate your careful grading of my letter. If there are more spelling and punctuation errors in this letter, please let me know. I do not ridicule criticism. As a last thought, if Agent Orange (those pesky capitols again) were available to you, would you spray the weeds in your kids sandbox with it? Absolutely sincerely,
[omitted] Regarding your spelling, first you didn't use "marine corps" as an adjective; you used it as a noun. Second, even in adjective form it's still in upper case. That's also true of just the word "Marine" when referring to the U.S. Marines. * *I did look up Walter Lawrence on the web and while he's certainly eminently qualified as an oncology surgeon, that's exactly what he is. He has no background in any area that would provide expertise in the epidemiology and etiology of any disease. He simply removes tumors. I'm sorry to say, but tumors do not come labeled as to their origin. Nor, except in private, does Dr. Lawrence pretend to have any expertise outside of surgery as his listing of his own publications indicates. *
You are apparently unaware that I've published a book with a whole chapter on Agent Orange, and that I've written many Agent Orange articles since then that are all available on my web site. No study has ever found any elevation of cancer among soldiers who were or even may have been exposed to Agent Orange. The ongoing study of Ranchhanders who actually sprayed the stuff is included in that. The largest study, conducted by the CDC, found only one elevation in Vietnam Vets of cancer. That was a single type of cancer and it was elevated only in the blue water Navy. These are men who by definition could have received no exposure to Agent Orange.* "Until you've been there, you have no right to voice an opinion." Really? An alleged vet tells me to shut up about the issue of chemicals and carcinogens because even though I did serve my country, I didn't do so in Vietnam. No can do, buddy. I don't know why you went to Vietnam, assuming you did it at all. Maybe it was the pretty girls in Saigon you could rent overnight for a dollar. But the rest of us served precisely so that the people back home would have rights we hold sacred, including free speech. If you don't like it, go back to Vietnam where the government holds the same beliefs you apparently do. (Alas, you'll probably find the girls are a bit more expensive.) As to your last thought, no I wouldn't spray any weeds in a personal sandbox. I'd rip them up. That said, as with the myth of Agent Orange, sometimes once a weed takes root there's nothing that science has to offer that can kill it. Sincerely,
Michael Fumento #### Andy Rooney?
Michael Fumento author, journalist, and attorney specializing in plagiarizing the writing style of the crotchety master (Andy Rooney) has done it again. Shocking the journalistic world with his opposite viewpoint agenda and wisdom. Fumento dispels the myth that Lawrence ever visited Arabia * Michael Fumento lives in Arlington or does he. [sic] I say no! Dear Michael I haven't seen much news on you and Gulf War Illness lately. It has been some time since you have disparaged Gulf War veterans seeking medical care. What's wrong? Science got your tongue? Would you like to debate the issue on live television. [sic] I have a producer at FOX that would love to do a story. I told her I would ask you because you seem so sure veterans have been faking illness to get something they don't deserve. I told her science would win over rhetoric any day. Want to prove me wrong? Before you say yes you should read this report. Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans Illnesses
June 1, 2002 A. Conclusions 1. Gulf War veterans are ill. (See Appendix A.) * [Rest of report omitted; it's congressional committee baloney from Rep. Mike Shays.]*
Dear Loser, Actually I'd love to debate anybody on TV about this. The problem is your producer at Fox TV is as real as your Gulf-related illness. The last time I wrote on GWS is the last time there was a major news item on it. Sorry if I'm not into flogging dead logs. As to your report, I'm also sorry that you were stunned to discover that service in the Gulf does not confer immunity to all illness. I'm sorry you don't have the mental capacity to appreciate that everybody gets sick and everybody dies and Gulf vets are no exception. But mostly, as Bob Dylan put it, I'm sorry "you just kind of wasted my precious time." Sincerely,
Michael Fumento #### Warped Speed
Subject: Gulf War Syndrome Dear Mr. Fumento, Having reviewed several of your articles on Gulf War Syndrome, I find you having an amusing sense humor [sic], warped humor. Many Gulf War veterans are ill, physically ill. May you live long enough to learn the cause of our illnesses. FIRST IN SUPPORT!
Disabled Gulf War Veteran Dear Rita, * Obviously you already do know the cause. The vets were in the Gulf ten years ago, and since then they've become sick. What more needs to be said?* FIRST IN CLEAR THINKING!
Michael Fumento #### Another Victim of the Pursain Gulf War
Maybe you can explain to me why I have had medical problems since returning from the Pursain [sic] Gulf. I never had any medical problems the whole eight years I was in the Marine Corps and After [sic] two months out of the corps [sic] I have trouble staying awake, joint pain and then I get Diabetes [sic] and that was even before they even mentioned the word [sic] Gulf War Illness. I have no dout [sic] that the problems that I have now are from the Gulf, maybe it was the burning oil fieds [sic] that I was in for three weeks or the Anthrax [sic] Vacine [sic] (which I had to sign for???????) you know that the military is the best way to test the new called drugs or inventions these scientist invent. that way they can see half of us die and pay a settlement for the remaining service people. You have to admit its [sic] a perfect system. Well, I'm sure this will not change your mind, but hey! I feel a little better. sincerely [sic]
Jeff Farnham * Dear Jeff,* * Will watching the Gulf War on CNN force me to get these? Maybe you can explain to me why since the Persian Gulf War I was diagnosed with arthritis in both hips at age 41. Maybe you can explain why my friend just had surgery for colorectal cancer at age 43, why another friend died of liver cancer last year at age 45, why two of my wife's sisters have MS and one of her friends recently died two weeks after being diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. All this happened after the Gulf War, yet none of us were there. The difference between us and you is that we aren't looking for somebody to blame and don't have a conspiracy theory to fall back on, even if it's an utterly idiotic one such as that you're being used as guinea pigs to test drugs and inventions that were actually tested and approved decades earlier. Well, I'm sure this will not change your mind, but (Hey!) I feel a little bit better. Too bad my hips still ache from having been exposed to the Gulf War by watching it on CNN.* Sincerely,
Michael Fumento Thanks for your response at least you believe in what your [sic] doing, more than I can say for most people in your position and not being hipoctrical [sic]. Dear Jeff: * You were supposed to reply with something nasty! No fair!* Sincerely,
Michael Fumento ADHD Hate
Subject: Trashing Dr. Mary Ann Block Well I found your web site purely by accident but while I'm here I will put my 2 cents worth in, I'm sure you will just pooh pooh [sic] me too. Well I know for a fact that the drug companies who are making billions of dollars certainly wont [sic] sit still when someone comes up with answers that work without drugs! God forbid that we find natural cures for cancer or ADHD, etc. I thing that Dr. Block should be applauded for her courage and the stand she is taking. Have you read her book about Ritalin? She went through HELL! going from doctor to doctor and putting her little girl on this drug and that drug it darn near ruined her health.
Dr. Block began to realize something just didn't add up, so she became a doctor and learned all she could to save her daughter ........now that is Love! [sic] Not Greed! [sic] The drug companies are operated by greed, and most doctors are puppets or just don't give a damn as long as they drive their fancy cars, fancy homes, yachts, etc.* [I sure wish I had a fancy home to drive.] So here you are bad mouthing [sic] a person who is trying to help people, what's your problems [sic]? Maybe you are into greed too? Yes I know some drugs do save life's [sic] on occasion, but you and I know that drugs are being pushed on people like peez [sic] candy.......give me a break, well I could say more don't have time. But if there is any conscience or a heart in there then think man! Don't knock the people that are helping others, personally I have little respect for all the big shot organizations that you mention most of them are corrupted to the core....it is called MONEY! That it [sic], the Bible says the Love [sic] of Money [sic] is the Root [sic] of all EVIL! PERIOD! Money in itself is not evil just the Love [sic] of it. GET THE PICTURE. Disgusted! *Dear Disgusted: * Excuse me, but you're the one who seems to be missing the picture. First, how do you know that Block even "went through HELL!" Why, because she says so! I assume you have no outside way of confirming this heroic feat of hers. In any case, it would seem rather irrelevant because that daughter allegedly had some sort of bladder problem and while "bladder" and "brain" do both begin with the same letter, that hardly makes Block an expert on ADHD. The National Library of Medicine's Medline system lists about 7,500 articles on ADHD, with zero by Block. There are over 160,000 articles on allergies, with zero by Block. In fact, Block has no articles at all on Medline. She has absolutely no standing in the medical community, no doubt you would say as a result of a vast right- and left-wing conspiracy.* Dr. Block claims that ADHD is a "made-up, psychiatric label." This puts her in direct contradiction with the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Surgeon General, the National Institute of Mental Health, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the American Medical Association, and even her own American Osteopathic Association. But lo! when it comes to putting bucks in her pocket, she changes her diagnosis. What would be the point of buying her line of three different nutritional supplements, including "CONCENTRATION For-Your-Kids," if there weren't such as thing as ADHD? Doesn't "CONCENTRATION For-Your-Kids" imply that the kids are having trouble concentrating, and isn't that one of the hallmarks of ADHD?
Block is no savior. She's just another capitalist pushing her product over everybody else's, just like Coke says it's superior to Pepsi and Pizza Hut claiming its food is actually edible. Assertions like these are harmless puffery, but Block's made-up claims and accusations are downright dangerous. Kids with ADHD need clinically-tested and FDA approved treatments, not stupid vitamins that you can buy at the corner drugstore for half the price Block charges for them. Look at the fine print on the bottles as repeated on her web site: "These statements [the claims she makes for her pills] have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This Product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease." It's not? Then what's the purpose? Why, to stuff Mary Ann's pockets with lucre. Her other products, the books, directly bring in money and also help sell her snake oil. And you treat Block like Mother Theresa reincarnate! If there is any conscience or a heart in there then think man! We're dealing with the Martha Stewart of medicine! There's nothing wrong with wanting to earn a good living. But doing so by terrifying parents about the affects of real ADHD drugs and re-inventing the ADHD diagnosis to fit one's competing costly "remedies" is monstrous. * *Sincerely, Michael Fumento
Subject: Hmmmmm..... Hmmmmm.... Well Sir, I find it curious you didn't say one word about the BILLIONS of dollars made by the corrupt drug companies hmmmmmm! Maybe you have a lot of stock in drug companies otherwise why are you pounding your drum and knocking people who are trying to use safer, cheaper, and maybe more effective methods to help others? Mary Block is just one person, there are many others who are trying to do things to help people, other doctors, etc are looking to help treat people with many diseases, by using safer natural methods. But the TRUTH IS! [sic] The medical establishment really doesn't want people to get entirely well otherwise how could they push their DRUGS! I know a kid that is grown now and he was put on Ritalin, now he is in jail for killing a baby because it wouldn't shut up from crying! Ritalin is a very dangerous drug and I believe it contributed to this senseless killing! Prozac is probably one of the most dangerous drugs on the market today! NO SIR! when it comes to drugs I am very conservative, I personally don't trust most doctors I have had my own bad experiences....what have you to say about that? Can't blame Doctor Block for that can you? Hey the stories and testimonies are endless you will not be able to shut everyone up! But you seem to have and [sic] axe to grind or money to make in the drug company business otherwise why are you acting the way you are? What pulled your trigger? Very [sic] Curious [sic] ! Personally I am not impressed by the American Academy of pediatrics [sic], and so on, they are all controlled by the greedy bas___ they want total control and money. I know that for a fact! I don't think Dr. Block just made up these stories I guess anything is possible, you could use that same old tired argument on just about anything. As far as I am concerned you are telling stories hmmmmmm that's different huh? Sincerely
Still Disgusted!!! Dear Disgusted or Still Disgusted or whatever you go by these days: * I did discuss medical company profits; you just didn't bother to read it. Lest this time you slip up and do actually read what I write I'll reiterate that my reply was that there's nothing wrong with earning lots of money honestly. That's the problem with Mary Ann Block. However much she earns, she does it dishonestly. Maybe when you write "The TRUTH IS" you mean "The Truth is Out There," the slogan for the late Fox TV series "The X-Files." You are clearly big on conspiracies. There are countless companies throughout the world that make pharmaceuticals. It's hard to even keep track of everybody who makes ADHD drugs. But you're saying they all gather in smoke-filled rooms chomping on their fat cigars deciding what drugs the conspiracy will market and what drugs they'll kill because they happen to be too effective. Now add to this that all the professional medical organizations are also in cahoots with the drug companies. Boy, I'm glad you're defending Block and not me. Are you also convinced that the CIA has planted a chip in your butt? That seems pretty big among the conspiracy set these days.*
So someone takes Ritalin and later he commits murder. Well word has it that John Wayne Gacy and Ted Bundy both used aspirin. Better outlaw that stuff! Stimulants have been used safely and effectively against ADHD since 1937. Ritalin itself goes back four decades. In an upcoming article, I quote a top authority on such drugs as saying Ritalin is the safest mood-altering drug out there. Certainly it has fewer side effects than caffeine. It's also amazingly typical for Ritalin bashers to bash Prozac at the same time. No matter that they work in completely different ways and are prescribed for completely different purposes. The people I've talked to who have children with ADHD say that Ritalin and its cousins have been lifesavers. But I personally know of people who have suffered severe depression to the point of suicide, and when they say that Prozac and the related drugs are life-savers they are not exaggerating. Prozac merely allows people who suffer a shortage of serotonin to slow down the resorption of the serotonin their bodies create. It gives them nothing normal people don't have. It simply allows depressed persons to be normal. Why people like you find this to be so utterly horrific is beyond me. * *Do I have money in drug company stocks? Yes, I've invested a little money in a "total market" fund. I probably have half a share of Pfizer and a fourth of a share of Lilly. * Ultimately though, Mr. Disgusted, I showed that Saint Mary Ann prevaricates to line her pockets. You simply ignored that and instead claimed you just somehow "know" about this massive drug company/medical organization conspiracy. I'm sorry if I find your case less than convincing. If you don't like pharmaceuticals, become a Christian Scientist. But don't accuse the rest of world of stupidity or greed because we happen to think you're slightly cracked down the middle.* Sincerely,
Dear Mr. Pooh Pooh, * [Entire rambling letter omitted except for this sentence.]* Guess what, I bet if you lived back then you would be on your soap box supporting that and if anyone spoke against that, they would be railed at and mocked! Still Disgusted Dear Still Demented, Once again, you guys play the game of "Since I can't find a way to attack your arguments, I'll attack you. And since I can't find a way of attacking you directly, I'll create a fictitious "you" and attack that! Stay happy watching those "X-Files" reruns. The truth may be out there, but you'll never find it. Please tell the nurse to up your thorazine level. What you're taking now is obviously not doing the trick. And I'm happy that you're happy to belong to the Cult of the Mary Ann Block. Maybe some day she'll ask you to poison yourself to live on a comet. Sincerely,
Maybe you just like to argue for the fun of it .... well whatever turns you on it takes all kinds. But judging by what I see you are an extreme left wing [sic] fanatic! You Love [sic] anything the doctors say without question, and you Love [sic] drugs, tell me how many drugs are you on? Also if I were a betting man I bet [sic] you are an atheist, homosexual loving [sic], abortion loving [sic], anti family [sic], anti God [sic], you probably are one of the people who are frothing at the mouth wanting to take one nation under God from our pledge of allegiance.......am I getting hot! If the shoe fits! Don't write to me anymore it is a waste of my time, go pop some pills. Really Disgusted!!!!! [And then another letter . . . ] Hey weirdo I was finished talking to you but now youj [sic] are getting cute and blocking my e-mail........kind of stupid I thought! COWARD! Dear Larry: * It was never blocked. It failed to get to my office server because the server was down over the weekend. But Larry, if you WERE finished talking to me, why would you send a message?* Now I AM going to block you. Sincerely,
Michael Fumento #### A Bit Touchy, Aren't We?
Mr. Fumento, I am writing in response to an article on your website discussing Dan Rather's segment on ADHD. In it, you imply that one of Rather's sources is not a "real" doctor because she is the holder of a Doctor of Osteopathy (D.O.) degree. Frankly, I don't really care what your opinion of ADHD is. Your ignorance of Osteopathy [sic], however, is another matter. In fact, an Osteopath [sic] IS a medical doctor. The fact is, an MD [sic] and a DO [sic] degree are exactly equivalent both in the eyes of the law and in medical practice. A DO [sic] is the holder of an UNRESTRICTED medical license. If your contention is that this doctor's opinion is suspect because she is a primary care physician and not a neurologist or psychiatrist, that is fine (although I don't agree with this line of reasoning); but you are wrong to imply that her opinion is baseless simply because she is a DO [sic]. Would her opinion be suspect if she was [sic] an MD family physician? In your article, you even quote the official opinion of the American Osteopathic Association (AOA). This leads me to believe that you must have conducted some research into Osteopathy, and you probably know this already. If this is the case, you are intentionally distorting the facts to help your argument, which is the same thing you accuse Dan Rather of doing. Sincerely,
First Year Medical Student
[omitted] College of Osteopathic Medicine Dear Stephen: * One obvious difference between M.D.s and D.O.s is that I'm told that students in medical colleges are treated like slaves during their first year while you obviously have more time than you know what to do with. Another might be that medical doctors know that in American usage "doctor" is lower case, as is "osteopath" but that you are ignorant of this. But let me take your hand, Stephen, and I'll lead you through this one simple step at a time. Go to my web site and see what the actual wording is. "The show's prime (and repeatedly displayed) critic of treating ADHD with drugs is an osteopath – not a medical doctor and certainly not a psychiatrist, neurologist, or pediatrician." Now go to the home page of the American Osteopathic Association and you'll find that it's almost entirely devoted to explaining how medical doctors are and are not like doctors of osteopathy. If they were "exactly equivalent" why would they be doing that, Stephen? Those are your people and they're saying you're wrong, Stephen. And do you know what else, Stephen? If they could talk to you directly, I'd bet they'd be telling you that you should be spending more time hitting the books and cutting up cadavers and less time spilling your own spleen. Obviously you feel a bit insecure about working towards a D.O. instead of an M.D., in which case you should be talking to somebody called a "doctor of psychiatry." You look that one up on your own.* Sincerely,
Michael Fumento Crop Hate
Dear Michael Fumento, From the type of wordings and examples used in article, it is hard to believe that Fumento is a senior fellow at such highly regarded institute.
The article shows total illiteracy or rather I would say misunderstanding of Fumento about Vandana's work. Also at the position where he sits he can't evaluate the Indian situation properly. It was very na�ve on Fumento's part to site [sic] the example of reduction in the crop yields in case [sic] of Organic [sic] Farming [sic]. His 'Narrow mindedness' [sic] and 'Pro-Biotech mind' [sic] failed to understand the damage that conventional farming causes to factory workers producing fertilizers and pesticides, farm workers, consumers, animals, birds, environment�.in short the ecosystem as a whole. Use of fertilizers, pesticides, genetically modified seeds, meet [sic] increased requirement for water and energy resources etc. is expensive and it has put many Indian farmers into huge debts, which has led to several cases of farmer suicides. On the other hand Organic [sic] farming creates fine [sic] balance in the ecosystems [sic] and I think, that more than makes up for the reduction in yield. From whatever I've read and heard about Vandana Siva [sic], I feel her work is creditable [sic]. Vandana Siva is not the only one; India has several dozen people like her. They are spreading the word about sustainable agriculture across the country. What is needed is an appreciation, encouragement and support of such efforts by our government servants and politicians. And what does Fumento know about the situation in India? Those people in India who work at the grass-root level know better. The Survey of Indian Agriculture 2002 states that India is self-sufficient in food grains. Total Food [sic] grain production for 2000-2001 stood at 196.13 million tones. ["Tones"? They're producing music?] Well this looks good on paper. But the reality is different. I would say India have [sic] 'grain mountains and starving millions'. Thousands of tones [sic] of food grains go to rates [sic] and dogs where as on the other hand thousands of poor people are starving. This situation is created because of lack of proper distribution channels for food grains and corrupt politicians.* [We simply must come up with better distribution channels for corrupt politicians.]*
Talking about consuming Organic [sic] food, majority [sic] of the US supermarkets have separate sections of Organic [sic] stuff. It shows a lot of immaturity on part [sic] of Fumento to say that Organic [sic] is a money-making idea for the US farmers and that the current Time editor is a na�ve [sic]* [he means "na�f"]*. In his own country the US, the demand for Organic [sic] food is growing at 20%-40% per year. Total sale of Organic [sic] food was $7.8 billion in 2000. So does he mean to say that Americans are such fools and illiterate that they spend billions of dollars on Organic [sic] Food [sic] without understanding the advantages that they offer? There are several Colleges [sic] and Universities [sic] in the US that have Organic [sic] Farming [sic] as part of their curriculum, and if Fumento would call this also as money-making gimmick [sic] than [sic] that will be the insult and mockery of the US education system as a whole. Also if Fumento thinks only the American yuppies can spend money thatn [sic] he should not underestimate the purchasing power of Indians, we are Regarding [sic] the remark about the Time editor it will be interesting to know his remarks about he being called a na've. I have gone through the following article published by Fumento and even there I found his language rude, insulting and immatured [sic]. http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publication_details&id=924 Therefore once I even thought of not putting this reaction on the net [sic] but on the other hand I thought that unless we criticize such crape [sic] stuff, it will continues to appear. Well [sic] Fumento let Time editors, Vandana Siva [sic] and thousands others like her around the world do their good work and you do yours. There are always two sides of a coin and always looking at the wrong side will do no good. Biotechnology may have created wonders in the initial years but slowly it's [sic] bad effects are showing. These bad effects will outgrow the good ones over a period of time. I can go on and on but I will finish by saying that Fumento you take my words that 'within a span of 50 years there will be no factories producing fertilizers, pesticides, genetically modified seeds etc. and all the world's agriculture will go organic. Biotechnology will be a thing of the past'. Sincerely,
Dear Rajiv Bhatt: *
Actually you DID go on and on. And I like the way you address me in the second person. Nifty! My primary point on organic farming was that it makes financial sense for some farmers in some countries, but would be nightmarish in places where food supplies are just enough to fend off starvation. You yourself state that because of "rates" and other things, India's poor are teetering on the edge. Yet you would happily sacrifice them to your "ecosystem" gods. Organic consumption in the U.S. is growing because conventional food itself has become a small fraction of the average household budget. For many of us, paying double for a few food items is well within our budgets. This is a country where cars are as big as Indian houses, TVs as big as Indian living rooms. Those who consume these foods may be intelligent in many ways, but American counterparts of Vandana Shiva (along with paid representatives of the organic food industry) have convinced them organic food is safer. They don't know that a mass of scientific literature has shown otherwise and that certain organic foods, such as sprouts, are relatively dangerous.* * As to teaching organic farming, if it's profitable it would be foolish not to teach it just as a car company would be foolish not to sell giant SUVs to people who demand them, notwithstanding that purchasers may only need a third of the car they're buying. Quite often, selling things that people THINK they need is far more profitable than selling them what they actually do need.* But what about India? If organic farming results in only a fifth fewer crops per acre, as one study I cited showed, and India is growing just enough to feed itself, then ipso facto organic farming would condemn about a fifth of your countrymen to starvation. That doesn't bother Vandana Shiva because she knows she won't be in that category. Obviously the same is true of you. You, too, are willing to have hundreds of millions of the world's poor starve for your principles. Yes, the imputs for non-organic crops cost money. But they save far more than they cost. That's why conventionally-grown food is almost always considerably cheaper to produce than organic. A farmer who is in debt because of imputs would instead be much further in debt for lack of crops to sell. * It's also true that some of these imputs can be harder on the ecosystem than using none. But that's not always the case. For example, no-till farming can prevent a tremendous amount of topsoil erosion. But it also requires a heavy amount of herbicides to kill weeds with chemicals rather than a till. Biotech plants are also tremendously reducing the amounts of herbicides and pesticides needed to grow crops, and some biotech crops under development would reduce the need for fertilizer by a third. But you dismiss this simply by saying, "it's [sic] bad effects are showing." What bad effects? Is that why each year both the U.S. and the world grow more and more acres of these and more and more varieties. It's virtually always the case that a given technology keeps improving until another technology takes over. So, too, with biotech crops. * * Finally, your prediction is already proving false. As biotechnology spreads, the use of imputs will decrease. You seem not to have noticed that India recently gave its blessing to biotech cotton after years of resistance? Why? Because its biggest rival China is reaping huge profits and greatly reducing pesticides use by growing such cotton. Whether you or Vandana Shiva like it, the market ultimately rules. Yes, there are two sides to every coin. As it happens, both of your sides are wrong. You and Shiva may not care if hundreds of millions of poor persons are sacrificed to your Earth Goddess, but guess what? THEY do care and they outnumber you.* * Sincerely,
Michael Fumento* GENERIC HATE
Wow. i've spent a lot of time reading all you've had to say, including e-mail. i have pretty much come to the realization that deception is your method of acquiring "news". while i admire your conviction and obvious talent, i can't help but laugh every time i'm finished reading your articles. now i'm sure that you'll try to write a witty retort, so as to discredit my statements, but i will continue regardless. all your opinions seem run of the mill for an upper class white man, with nothing to gain by negatively reporting on a government who has [sic] provided you with everything (i'm guessing you were raised from wealth, as your background never came up as a point of interest to me), and everything to lose by exposing any of their [sic] MANY faults (or the faults of the corporations that got them there). so i ask the question that irritates me... when did your job and financial security become more important then the truth? now, your [sic] not an ignorant man so i'll assume you are aware of the current political/corporate situation. as a journalists [sic], your greatest responsibility is to expose those things that truly matter, to the people who otherwise would have no way of knowing. but that isn't where the money is. the money comes from a publishing firm, which is no doubt one of the few conglomerate media monopolies, which in turn has its interests eye-level with the politicians that it donated to, who in turn create or destroy the laws according to the wishes of the corporation...rape of the ignorant minds. now here is where you claim i'm a conspiracy theorist, except i'd have to theorize on more than this which simply leaves this as my belief. [Huh?] *you may attack what i say, but this all seems fairly obvious to me...and a growing number of literate people who hate to see their once majestic nation become the pawn of the wealthy. now you may question my evidence,( which i lack to provide [sic] in the hopes of leaving those sources untainted by your false scrutiny, embellished or created statistics from sources no more honest than you, or accusations of incompitence.) [sic] but i don't care if you insult my beliefs...my conscience is clear. so in closing, make fun of trivial things, like how i don't capitalize. i just hope this can make you question your purpose... were you sent here to be shrill you've become [sic], happily driving your bmw on the road to self-interest? or could you use your talent to serve the people you've misled, and hopefully bring change...or even equality. i wrote this under another's scrnnme *[Huh?], as to opaque [interesting use of a noun to a verb] my identity. an anonymous voice for the conscious masses. Dear scrnnme: Your conscience can't possibly be as clear as the inside of your cranium. But at least you admit you have no evidence for any of your accusations, though the reasons you provide are a bit thin. That said, raping innocent minds DOES seem to be a rather serious charge that one MIGHT think should be supported by something other than innuendo and Marxist references to class struggle.