Re: Moderator abuse

 You had no idea before posting as to DQ's opinions on the causes/origins of cancer?
In my neck of the woods we call that a "porky-pie" as you most definitely have debated the origins/causes of cancer with DQ previously. I recall how you adamantly stated that cancer was viral in origin, and that DQ disagreed with that premise.
Hard to believe therefore that there was no intent to bait or challenge DQ.

If I did have this discussion with DQ before I do not recall it.  The only person I recall debating this fact was Justin, who looked for anything to attack on just like Innercalm does.  If I did have this discussion before I am sorry that I cannot recall the details of every post I have done here on CZ for the last 2 years.  I am not perfect, nor do I have a total recall memory, especially when it comes to people I rarely interact with.  So it is not called "porky pie", it is called the average normal person who is not going to remember the details of each of thousands of responses posted over the years.  And it is also called an assumption on your part, which is something that is way too rampant on CZ.

Been there and done that .  I reposted DQs quote with the insult for him to see that he started it.  Again you assumed it was not done.  This is also a good reason that people that have not bothered to find out the facts first should really stay out of it.

The only time that cancer was considered to be transmissible was between the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries when special hospitals were built in certain European countries to isolate patients with cancer: much in the same way as was done for patients with leprosy.

What a total load of crap!!!!!  The viral origins of cancer are still recognized to this day , which is well beyond the 17th and 18th centuries, and this has been proven.  Again, where do you think the extra genetic material in chemo-resistant tumors comes from?  Simple it is the viral genes.   The microbes are not artifact, they are a cause.

In fact I doubt viruses were even known at that time. They did not have the means to image viruses back in those days, so this really calls your claim in to question. Since you are talking about backing up claims though show us proof that viruses were known in the 17th century.