Re: You are arguing apples and oranges and doing a poor job of it

"What an piece of work you are - and a rude one at that!"

You tell me that I don't know anything about cancer and I point out that you don't either - and that's being rude? 

"Nice hatchet job of attacking the messenger and avoiding addressing the mistakes and misrepresentations in your other posts that I pointed out.  The blog site in question's entire premise was false - trying to paint the study as saying that only 2-3% of cancer patients survive chemo when the study actually showed that chemo only raised cancer survival by 2.1 to 2.3 percent.   As I said, apples and oranges and an obvious attempt to discredit a study that that the mainstream wag didn't like by misrepresenting it, the same as you are doing here with your posts."

You're the one who did the hatchet job and you haven't listed one erroneous statement from that link.

"If you are going to take such an interest in myself and Luella, perhaps you should pay closer attention."

That was a genuine error on my part Tony.  I didn't intend to post that part, only the part that said you are rather deficient in your knowledge of cancer.  That other part only caught my eye after I posted it and I should have edited it out.  I am truly sorry about that.

"I must say you are certainly winning lots of points by quoting from a mainstream naysayer blogger who dispagages CureZone.  You claim to have passed courses in statistics.  Did you perchance take any courses in debate? You obviously missed the ones on civility."

I will continue to find and quote truthful sources, which is what I did.  I'm no less civil than you are.

Your original post belongs in the debate section because it certainly isn't news.  It's a highly edited and opinionated story by one Tony Isaacs, and nothing more.