Blogging Humor
- Get link
- Other Apps
- Get link
- Other Apps
Marisol Maldonado "comes out" of the autoimmune closet with husband Rob Thomas' hit song & video "Her Diamonds" - check it out; it's way cool
Watch the music video Rob Thomas - New Music - More Music Videos I think Marisol Maldonado has taken a very brave step, career-wise, to come out like this about her autoimmune disease. Being a model is a very physical profession and as those of us with ICI know, coming out at work, any kind of work, is a big deal. I'd like to send her a really big thank you for raising awareness of autoimmune disease in general. I wonder what the song/video title means? Her Diamonds. And she says ooh I can't take no more Her tears like diamonds on the floor And her diamonds bring me down 'Cause I can't help her now Losing her sparkle? Here's what Rob Thomas says about it: The album’s first single, the kaleidoscopic “Her Diamonds,” is the most personal song Thomas has yet committed to disc. Rob’s wife Marisol is courageously battling an autoimmune disease, and “Her Diamonds” was written “about a couple dealing with that on a day-to-day basis,” explains Thomas. “There’s an incre
Out of curiosity I’d like to ask what are Dr. Barrett’s credentials? As an advocate for Fibromyalgia and other illnesses, I like to research in order to help the millions who suffer. I’ve googled him and was wondering if you have researched his background too? Apparently he's been in several court cases and the judge did not show him in favor for each case. Try looking him up by googling: Dr. Barrett, Court Case - and you’ll see what I mean. There are quite a few links that are disturbing. If you are looking to him to help you, then maybe you better think again. Just from what I’ve read, he will not benefit you in the long run because of his prior court cases as well as his credibility. As we all know time is a valuable commodity and once it’s spent , our time cannot be reversed. Just something to think about as you pursue this.
ReplyDelete---
Here is something that I found on public record by googling:
At trial, under a heated cross-examination by Negrete, Barrett conceded that he was not a Medical Board Certified psychiatrist because he had failed the certification exam.
This was a major revelation since Barrett had provided supposed expert testimony as a psychiatrist and had testified in numerous court cases. Barrett also had said that he was a legal expert even though he had no formal legal training.
The most damning testimony before the jury, under the intense cross-examination by Negrete, was that Barrett had filed similar defamation lawsuits against almost 40 people across the country within the past few years and had not won one single one at trial.
---
It looks as if there are a lot of people in the United States who already know him by first hand experience. I thought this would be of great interest to you since you are dedicating your time and effort.
FFM Advocate: When I google Barrett and look at the big picture I see that quite a few of those he has quack-busted have filed law suits against him in retaliation, trying to discredit him, but none of them have succeeded. On first glance, the main objective (not produced by one side or the other) site I see about Barrett is wikipedia. I'll go with what they say until I find a better source, or a source that adds something credible to the discussion.
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Barrett#Defamation_lawsuits
Wikipedia's official policies and guidelines can be summarized as five pillars that define the character of the project:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars
The first pillar:
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia incorporating elements of general encyclopedias, specialized encyclopedias, and almanacs. All articles must follow our no original research policy, and strive for verifiable accuracy: unreferenced material may be removed, so please provide references. Wikipedia is not the place to insert personal opinions, experiences, or arguments. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Wikipedia is not a soapbox, an advertising platform, a vanity press, an experiment in anarchy or democracy, or a web directory. It is not a newspaper or a collection of source documents; these kinds of content should be contributed to the Wikimedia sister projects.
You get the idea. Verifiable; accurate; references.
One last point, FM Advocate - why are you writing anonymously? The only thing I can tell about you is that you joined Blogger in May of 2008. If you are so into "researching to help the millions" then where's your stuff? Or did you just join and leave this comment in order to try to confuse the issues about Whitcomb? And to suggest to me that I am wasting my time with Dr. Barrett? Please. Do you work for Whitcomb? That wouldn't surprise me at all. I've only been receiving anonymous comments since I started writing about Whitcomb. And I've also received some general name calling on the Amazon site for discussion of Whitcomb’s book, and my first hate mail suggesting (twice) that I walk into oncoming traffic. Way to reasonably argue the point. That was the very first comment I ever rejected.
I am rather undecided about what to do about anonymous commenters. One of my other Skepticism heroes, Peter Bowditch of The Millennium Project, http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/files/about.htm, has these things to say about anonymous comments and/or complaints:
“Anonymous complaints are ridiculed, laughed at, mocked and ignored. Complaints from real people are read, filed, published on this site and ignored unless evidence is offered of inaccuracy in something appearing on the site.
“…The only people who would be expected to complain about the contents of this site are those whose beliefs or practices are criticised or exposed by the information here.
“… whatever they have to say is worthless, because they do not even believe in it enough themselves to put their names to it. … because it is impossible to reply to the messages, they show that they are frightened of engaging in debate. Because of this, I will periodically declare a moratorium on receiving anonymous mail. Messages coming from email addresses which do not allow a reply or which do not originate at a traceable IP address may be deleted unread. This doesn't mean that people cannot write from Hotmail, for example, but only applies to anomymiser services. I get sick of wasting my time on lying cowards who are ashamed of what they have to say. When the filter is on, they can talk to someone else, because I'm not listening.”
FM Advocate, I think that If you were really interested in helping people with Fibromyalgia, you would work to keep wolves like Whitcomb from preying upon them.
P.S. Why did you have to put this comment (with the totally unsubstantiated "public record" quotes) on my funny t-shirt picture??? I'm still irritated about this.
ReplyDelete