I've made an enormous breakthrough in medicine. It is big enough that without an introduction the enormity of the breakthrough would make me sound like a cracked pot if I contact someone out of the blue. So I'm hoping some of you might be able to get me an introduction via email or such to a major medical university.
The Patent Office can, for $10, put an official stamp on it to stand as proof of conception, or you can simply have each page notarized. With that properly handled you can be a bit more at ease with farming out the concepts.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
HEy all to prove I'm serious, here is the 'minor' insight that cures allergies and autoimmune diseases - diabetes, allopecia, celiac disease, graves disease. About 300 diseases in total - market value 300 billion a year.
This is the smallest of the insights,
allergys are not an immune dysfunction.
Instead they represent the body protecting itself from four underlying nutrient defiencys that are critical to fetal development.
1) cysteine + serine the pathway leading to gluthione production - any allergy related to coachroach and mites, or pollen and all cross reactions are this one allergy. This is about protecting the fetus from oxidative stress. 2) biotin deficiecy - this is egg allergy - my brain is to tired right now to remember the prupose - will send it later but it is obvious developement pathway. 3) iron defiencys - this is caesin, soy, wheat and whole grain allergies - this is to ensure the fetus has adequte L-DOPA and blood.
the reason for these allergies is that they are primiarly to protect the developing fetus from critical defiencys.
The severity of immune response is based on how defient the individual is in the above three nutrients.
All autoimmune diseases are cross reactions related to the above, and can be cured simply by fixing the underlying defiency.
So - that cures diabetes, allopecia, and about 300 other immunological and allergy diseases. I can provide the formula to cure it also.
The big insight also cures every neurological disorder including all developmental disorders, all movement disorders, and all neurodegenerative disorders.
No that the cure costs about 15 dollars total for a month then you are likely done...
Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
note that the cure requires some ingredients not mentioned above, so it takes the 'big insight' to cure the little insight diseases.
Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
So we conclude that serine and/or cysteine deficiecys should be found in those with such allergies
Cyesteine it needs glycine and glutamic acid to produce glutathione. Cyesteine is usually the limiting substrate in its synthesis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cysteine
posted
If I understand you correctly -- you've not made a "breakthrough", you just have an idea about the topic which might be a breakthrough, if it ends up being correct.
But you don't know yet if it's a correct idea, because it hasn't actually been tested on anyone yet; am I reading you correctly?
posted
You should stop posting about it here. I hope you're right, but of course we're all going to doubt a discovery first published on an internet forum.
This sounds like it has lots of potential good, and needs lots of examination to know whether it's good. If you really believe it's an idea, go fight really hard to make it turn into something.
It's important to protect yourself, and you should do that to whatever extent you're able. But more importantly, just get the information out there so it can be examined. If you've really made some huge medical breakthrough that's going to improve so many people's lives, how can you risk getting in a car accident tomorrow?
Don't spend any time trying to convince us. We're a bunch of cynics.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not trying to convince you - have been typing it up for the past 12 hours or so Arguing on the nets is my break time...
Realize that patenting it is infeasible since you have to prove (as in physiological data with outcomes) that it works for each and every disease even if it should be darn well obvious.
Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Use the spellings "deficient" and "deficiency" when you're typing it up for formal usage - you've been misspelling the words in various different ways.
Also the spelling "allergen", not "allergin".
Posts: 3318 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
I know how to spell them, when I type fast or brain is busy thinking I make more mistakes though (heh had about 5% of the words missing in this response). My brain has been on overload since Wednesday or so, so typos are going through the roof as my hands are trying to keep up.
Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
Richard Cummings, Ph.D. William Patterson Timmie Professor and Chair Wayne Rollins Research Center 1510 Clifton Road, Suite 4001 Tammie Starks, Senior Administrative Assistant 404-727-5962, FAX 404-727-2738
Have several friends who went through the school. Asked one who you might need to contact, this is likely the guy.
Posts: 6333 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
LR, I don't think you're helping by adding new things to the list of diseases you believe your theory explains before first conclusively demonstrating that it explains any one of them. The longer you make the list when you tell it to someone with credentials, the less likely they are to take you seriously.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
really don't much care It is a unified theory of disease. I can now explain every correlation in every paper I've found of various commorbidities, I can explain assorted gender differences in disease, assorted age differences in disease, I can explain twin study data, I can explain why certain mutations lead to certain diseases, and assorted epidemiological disease trends over time and their geographical distribution. I can even provide detailed methodology how to replicate the disease in animal models de novo.
Some of it will be left as an 'exercise to the reader' in the final paper (half done or so), but any reader who is familiar with the topic shouldn't have problems following the reasoning and finding the conclusion compelling.
posted
I understand that you're excited, but again, you would have a far easier time convincing people of the power of your theory if you focused on conclusively proving that it satisfactorily resolves one open question. It would be very hard for me to recommend you to some of the people I know if your opening gambit is that you've found a "unified theory" that explains everything. I mention this to you because I don't think you're a quack, and I'd like real researchers to give what you have to say a fair shake -- but it'll be hard for them to bring themselves to do that if you're going all cold fusion on them.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
I fully understand that - in the paper i completely explain autism and its comorbidities. The unification happened because to explain a significant subset of the comorbities requires all three pathways and then things snowballed from there.
I should be having a team of local specialists (immunology, neurology, fetal development, cardiology, nutrition, and probably a few others) trying to poke holes in it soonish. The MDs I've let see it so far have been unable to find any holes (lots of questions, but have been able to address them all easily) in it so the reviewer pool is going to be expanded.
Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LetterRip: I fully understand that - in the paper i completely explain autism and its comorbidities. The unification happened because to explain a significant subset of the comorbities requires all three pathways and then things snowballed from there.
Explaining autism isn't enough; you have to be able to predict it. Epicycles could explain known orbits but couldn't predict new ones. Without studies you **cannot** become confident about causation relations variables related to human health because there are just too many variables.
Honestly, if correlations exist between some disease and some vitamin deficiency or whatnot then they are probably already known. There are tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people looking for the same types of relations that you are. That doesn't mean that you are incapable of making breakthroughs but it does mean that you should be extremely skeptical of your theories when they havent been tested. Given the scope of your claims and your confession that you haven't tested any of them, I know that you **couldn't** have done the necessary amount of research to be as excited as are.
As much as medical research might be a huge pain in the ass (shooting in the dark to come up with new theories, lots of initial trials that go nowhere, trials that take years to complete and go nowhere, etc.), the reason that it's such a pain in the ass is because it's ****ing hard. You can't skip any of the stages and arrive at anything reasonable without an astronomical amount of luck. There are too many variables and too few data.
posted
Frankly, if he were able to *cure* any of the things he suggest, that'd be completely amazing, even without an ability to thoroughly explain or predict.
As for me, I wish he stops claiming to have cured stuff, until he actually cures one single person of anything. "I hope to cure" is different from "I have cured". "I am hoping to make a great breakthrough" is different from "I have made a great breakthrough".
In this I don't really mean to discourage. I'm quite unsarcastically saying that there's no reason that LetterRip can't be the most important figure in the history of medicine since Louis Pasteur. After all a mere employee at a Swiss patent office did end up the most important figure in the history of physics since Isaac Newton.
But unless LetterRip actually tests his ideas, and cures a single person, he should stop saying he cured (or can cure) ANYTHING. It seems... improper.
Posts: 3318 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
end of next week at the latest I will reveal the paper to the world.
Yes can fully explain Dyslexia and ADD and why they are commorbid.
threads - I can predict autism and most other significant diseases and their commorbidities as well. I can predict middle age spread and obesity epidemics. I can predict migraine headaches, hangovers, Depression, psychopathology and schizophrenia.
Anywho, like I said, give me till end of next week or so.
Aris, Katsaris - initiating some testing next week likely - my model already has been validated by others research they just didn't understand WTF they were doing ie 'this works but we have no idea why'.
Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
I will just mention that saying you can explain something is different from the explanation being verifiably true. If you can get this published, it will be interesting to see where it goes. If any of it is plausible enough for researchers and reviewers to feel like it's worth paying attention to, there will be an exciting blowup in various medical research fields.
More likely, honestly speaking, is that LR's work overlooks some critical aspects of physiology and will make little to no impact. For every one of that guy from Lorenzo's Oil, there's a thousand cranks with YouTube videos about how they've invented a perpetual motion machine. But it will be exciting if LR's hypothesis shows validity!
Posts: 3791 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
A question, if I demonstrate the whole enchilada for Autism and a few other major baffling diseases, how much hand waving would you tolerate for other diseases? Once I establish the pattern it should be blindingly obvious. I can offer to fill out details on an as asked for basis.
Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tolerate in what sense? You're welcome to wave your hands, and it can be an interesting thing for you to say. If there is not a clearly described set of mechanisms, with predictive value for disease risk and prognosis and useful implications for research to develop treatments - and above all if you cannot provide experimental evidence for your claims - I don't really see the point. The best case scenario for your hypothesis under those circumstances is that you have an interesting idea that might or might not turn out to be correct. Nobody but nobody is going to accept handwaving for any kind of practical application. And I don't understand why you would want anyone to do so.
Posts: 3791 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks to a bit of feedback from Ops, I was able to correct a few errors. I think she will agree that my proposed eitiology for Autism (and other early developmental diseases) is now completely plausible and even testable
She is less convinced on allergies, autoimmune and other diseases, though I think I can convince her my idea is reasonable with a few more decent references.
posted
Hi LR & Ops! Both of you have asked about my son, and I just had what I think is great news ... from brain scans that just came back, it looks like what he has isn't autism after all, but limbic encephalopathy. Apparently encephalopathy IS after all a known issue with the MMR vaccine. And I'm told that it's actually treatable! We've got one more set of scans to get, off to San Francisco next month.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think she will agree that my proposed eitiology for Autism (and other early developmental diseases) is now completely plausible and even testable
Well, that's overstating my position by quite a bit. Insofar as I can tell what you are hypothesizing, I would say that it doesn't all seem like complete nonsense. It seems possible that what I see as your central hypothesis is even testable, provided one leaves aside all the peripheral claims and explanations.
quote: isn't autism after all, but limbic encephalopathy
That does sound like great news! I hope that the new diagnosis is accurate and that the treatment works. I understand totally how a diagnosis of a disease with a clear aetiology and a reasonable prognosis with treatment can be an occasion for great relief - even though if someone offered you that diagnosis for your healthy child, who hasn't been mysteriously and untreatably ill for years, you would feel really sad. Good luck in San Francisco! You and your family will be in my prayers.
posted
Thank you OT. On further examination it looks like I'm mistaken about treatability, at least with current research. But I don't understand why, with hundreds of doctor visits, why it's only now that we find out about T2's encephalopathy -- at a visit recommended by our attorney -- and a brain scan that Medicare would not pay for? Why didn't T2's doctors check this out earlier?
It really feels like the system was set up to prevent us from finding out that T2's problems were something that could have been caused by the vax.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
have emailed, you if you contact me you can glance through the paper. May be of benefit to him as well even if it turns out to not be autism.
Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
