|
Gee, this list has always seemed so friendly. Is that only if everyone agrees with each other? Is there no place here for polite disagreement?
Brenda and FoB's perception of my post that disagreed with them, and which included NCCN information (one of the most-respected entities and guides for cancer treatment in the country), was that I was being "disdainful, self-righteous, patronizing, and dismissive".
I've re-read my post several times and do not find those tones to it. It was not written with the intention to have those tones to it. I know that with email, it can be difficult to interpret tone. I tend to speak plainly. I'm not particularly warm and fluffy. But I don't speak dismissively. If that was how I sounded, I apologize. But I do not apologize for the content, which was a truth. I'll concede that it may not be your personal truth and lord knows we are all entitled to our own truths - but it's not an anecdote nor an emotion-ridden bit of information. It's the national guidelines.
My "duh" comment seems to have rankled considerably. The "duh" was in reference to the study's conclusion that TM's could herald mets before symptoms appeared. I think that fact is known by all and is not in dispute - not in this thread, not anywhere. Hence my "duh" comment - in my opinion, they did a study (and spent precious research dollars) to prove something that was already known; TM's can pick up mets before symptoms announce them. Yeah, we know that. DUH. To me, that's the correct use of the comment "duh". We knew that, why did they waste time on a study to say it again? I didn't say "duh" about anything anyone on the list said.
Has anyone read "The Four Agreements" by Don Miguel Ruiz? It's an amazing book - so simple. A good way to live life, and to correspond on email lists and message boards. I'd be glad to post the short version here, if anyone's interested.
Respectfully,
Debbie Laxague
|