Is it wrong? (page 4)

Crumpet

FD will just come back and trash me for garnering sympathy.

Frannie - no he won't he is not that petty.

Frannie Banannie

FD will just come back and trash me for garnering sympathy.
Frannie - no he won't he is not that petty.

Yes, he IS that petty, Crumpie. Anyone that will go to the trouble to reiterate all their petty diatribe against someone, calling them mentally incompetent, ignorant, illiterate, irresponsible, shameful and disgusting in PUBLIC....IS that petty.

Crumpet

A michael winner insurance advert springs vividly to mind!

hugs all round

Frannie Banannie

Mackin

For the record, I totally agree with FunkyDerek.

Frannie's post may have been well intentioned but the information was bogus and may well give someone false hope or prevent them from getting proper treatment in the early stages of the disease. She deserved to be pulled up on it.

Anyone who thinks that "alternative therapies" cure anything is misinformed or deluded.

And Frannie, this is a public forum. From time-to-time others will disagree with something you say. Get over it. If you can't handle being taken to task on something you say in a public forum you'd be better off not posting.

To answer your original question, yes it is wrong to provide bogus, non-scientific, "alternative" medical information to anyone, especially someone with a serious disease or condition. Direct them to a properly qualified medical doctor as soon as possible for scientific medical treatment. Offering "alternative" treament is not giving them hope, you may be killing them.

Mackin

Frannie Banannie

It was the ad hominem attack, Mackin. Wake up.

funkyderek

Frannie Banannie:

I didn't "out" you personally on this thread, FD. You "outted" yourself. No one knew it was you, until you posted here and continued bashing me.

I didn't accuse you of outing me. I simply felt that as you'd decided to make your interpretation of events public, I should air my side as well. And please don't take anything I say as "bashing". It is a criticism of your behaviour which, as I have already stated, I view as inappropriate and unhelpful.

Equals - My post was reprehensible and sickeningly irresponsible.

Those aspects of it that I described as such, yes.

Equals - I use poor netiquette. I'm not satisfied with just giving false hope to cancer sufferers but wish to do the same to those with AIDS and while meaning well, I'm incapable of comprehending what I read and am unable to discern the difference between science and quackery and since I'm obviously so mentally deficient, I can't be held fully responsible for my actions. My behavior, however is unacceptable and unhelpful and it is totally OKAY to call me on it.

That's almost an exact restatement of what I wrote except that I did not claim you were mentally deficient. The "mitigating circumstance" I mentioned was the mental illness you revealed in your PM to me, which politeness and the rules of the board prevented me from mentioning. However you have now posted about it in another thread, so it's in the public domain. If your condition doesn't cause you to post inappropriately, then I apologise and withdraw my statement that there are factors absolving you of responsibility.

I get it, FD. I'm just a stupid, totally illiterate, mentally incompetent old woman, totally useless.

I never said any of those things, nor do I think them. All I was talking about was one post where you falsely claimed that there was a cure for cancer and for AIDS.

Please feel free to garner as much sympathy as you can. You seem to have quite a talent for it.

Mackin

***It was the ad hominem attack, Mackin. Wake up.***

What attack? All the comments made by FunkyDerek seemed pretty mild, I hardly think he was attacking you. You seem somewhat overly sensitive to me. And your responses in this thread and another I've just been reading are rather juvenile.

Mackin

Frannie Banannie

I didn't accuse you of outing me. I simply felt that as you'd decided to make your interpretation of events public, I should air my side as well. And please don't take anything I say as "bashing". It is a criticism of your behaviour which, as I have already stated, I view as inappropriate and unhelpful.

Of course you did, FD. And you stated it so graciously, reiterating what you viciously said in your PM to me, which is emblazoned on my brain. EXCUUUUUUUUUUUUUSE me if I get the attacks mixed up, mr. XXXXXXXXXXXXX!

I never said any of those things, nor do I think them. All I was talking about was one post where you falsely claimed that there was a cure for cancer and for AIDS.
Please feel free to garner as much sympathy as you can. You seem to have quite a talent for it.

Sure.....and I really believe you, too. As far as your snide remark about my garnering sympathy, did it hurt your pride to see that there ARE other valid opinions other than your own? Crumpet defended you, saying you weren't that petty, but I told her you ARE that petty and GUESS WHAT? You came back to prove I was right about you!!

What attack? All the comments made by FunkyDerek seemed pretty mild, I hardly think he was attacking you. You seem somewhat overly sensitive to me. And your responses in this thread and another I've just been reading are rather juvenile.

Catch up, Mackin. You're waaaaayyyy behind here. And guess what??? I'm just a kid at heart...what can I say? (shrugs)

You guys feel free to carry on with your back-slappin' and cud-chewin' freely here. I intend to ignore flotsam and jetsom from now on.

Zico

Frannie, I have no problem with you, in fact, from reading your past posts you've come across as a nice person to me, but don't you think at least Derek's main point stands, that you have to be careful what medical advice you give? (Even if you disagree with the manner in which he told you?)

Is it wrong?

Share this