Have you tried an electric toothbrush?

Troll.

"M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t-May 6, 2004" M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t wrote

Path: bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!wnmaster11!wn12feed!worl dnet.att.net!199.218.7.141!news.glorb.com!news3.op tonline.net!news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t-May 6, 2004" M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t
Newsgroups: misc.kids.health
References: . net . net
Subject: Have you tried an electric toothbrush?
Lines: 55
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
Message-ID:
Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 13:06:18 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.194.64.219
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net 1083848778 68.194.64.219 (Thu, 06 May 2004 09:06:18 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 09:06:18 EDT
Organization: Optimum Online
Xref: wnmaster11 misc.kids.health:122024
X-Received-Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 13:06:31 GMT (bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net)


"John Doe" wrote in message
.. .
"CBI" wrote

snipped for focus

JS correctly points out that your argument is nothing more
than anecdotal

Where do you find that meaning of "anecdotal". I quoted testimony of other
Usenet users about their satisfaction with the electric toothbrush. The
enthusiasm was a pleasure reading. There are dozens if not hundreds more
where those experiences came from.

However, each one constitutes one anecdote. "Data" is not the plural of
anecdote.

but that there is objective evidence available (some but not all of
which supports your view) if only you would bother to look.

My view is from three and one-half years experience.

Another anecdote.

You responded by insulting him

Do you think Jonathan Smith is a delicate flower in need of protection?

Nope. The comment reflects on your actions, not JS's needs.

I simply provided quotes from others in various groups who Jonathan Smith
has recently trolled.

Your resorting to calling those who take you to task a troll is
demonstrative of a true troll.

and this time not even making any pretense of discussing the issue.

I think Jonathan Smith prefers debating himself.

Who is the troll?

Why do you claim to be a doctor?

Because CBI is?

Why not promote good dental health for kids?

by your definition.

BTW, I use an electric toothbrush and so do my kids.

Troll.

"M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t-May 6, 2004" M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t wrote

Path: bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!wnmaster11!wn12feed!worl dnet.att.net!199.218.7.141!news.glorb.com!news3.op tonline.net!news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t-May 6, 2004" M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t
Newsgroups: misc.kids.health
References: . net
Subject: Have you tried an electric toothbrush?
Lines: 102
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
Message-ID:
Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 13:06:55 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.194.64.219
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net 1083848815 68.194.64.219 (Thu, 06 May 2004 09:06:55 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 09:06:55 EDT
Organization: Optimum Online
Xref: wnmaster11 misc.kids.health:122025
X-Received-Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 13:07:08 GMT (bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net)


"John Doe" wrote in message
.. .
Troll.

As expected. Cannot engage in rational discussion without this.

begin prior header information
From: (amp_spamfree)
Newsgroups: rec.travel.europe,rec.travel.air,rec.food.cooking
Subject: OT: I Wonder How The "Quislings" Are Feeling Now...???
Date: 14 May 2003 05:57:31 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 31
Message-ID:
References:





NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.7.47.68
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052917052 13990 127.0.0.1 (14 May 2003
12:57:32 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 May 2003 12:57:32 GMT
end prior header information

(Jonathan Smith) wrote

Path:
bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!wnmast
er11!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!199.218.7.141!news. glorb.com!postnews1.google
.com!not-for-mail
From: (Jonathan Smith)
Newsgroups: misc.kids.health
Subject: Have you tried an electric toothbrush?
Date: 4 May 2004 23:16:13 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 34
Message-ID:
References:



. net



NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.123.214.105
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1083737776 9994 127.0.0.1 (5 May 2004
06:16:16 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 06:16:16 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: wnmaster11 misc.kids.health:121981
X-Received-Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 06:16:16 GMT
(bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net)

John Doe wrote in message
...
Troll.

Message-ID:
"Subject: Return of village idiot JS is back"

Message-ID:
"Karl, didn't you just comment on not arguing with a fool? lol Just
consider the source and laugh about the ignorance displayed"

Message-ID:
"No but you are a great replacement for the village idiot missing from
Crawford,
Texas."

Message-ID: m
"Your posturing and sophomoric debate efforts warrant no tit-for-tat
tete-a-tete, and while you may view your every utterance as equally
unique and praiseworthy, you are wrong. In polite society, one's more
noisome comments are said to be beneath others' notice. So, following
customary rules of civil dialog, I let your more boorish and redundant
comments go without the dignity of a response."

...and so on about the reply author.

Now that is priceless. You quote a troll from another NG and that is
how you want to make your point?

You are amazing.

Typical. No data, no concept, no brains.

You are a waste of bandwidth.

js

"John Do(p)e" wrote in message
.. .
Troll.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You are funny! You do not know the meaning of the word, and you are
demonstrating how you are one.



"M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t-May 6, 2004" M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t
wrote

Path:
bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!wnmast
er11!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!199.218.7.141!news. glorb.com!news3.optonline.
net!news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t-May 6, 2004" M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t

Newsgroups: misc.kids.health
References:



. net



. net

Subject: Have you tried an electric toothbrush?
Lines: 55
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
Message-ID:
Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 13:06:18 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.194.64.219
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net 1083848778 68.194.64.219 (Thu, 06 May
2004 09:06:18 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 09:06:18 EDT
Organization: Optimum Online
Xref: wnmaster11 misc.kids.health:122024
X-Received-Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 13:06:31 GMT
(bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net)


"John Doe" wrote in message
.. .
"CBI" wrote

snipped for focus

JS correctly points out that your argument is nothing more
than anecdotal

Where do you find that meaning of "anecdotal". I quoted testimony of
other
Usenet users about their satisfaction with the electric toothbrush. The
enthusiasm was a pleasure reading. There are dozens if not hundreds
more
where those experiences came from.

However, each one constitutes one anecdote. "Data" is not the plural of
anecdote.

but that there is objective evidence available (some but not all of
which supports your view) if only you would bother to look.

My view is from three and one-half years experience.

Another anecdote.

You responded by insulting him

Do you think Jonathan Smith is a delicate flower in need of protection?

Nope. The comment reflects on your actions, not JS's needs.

I simply provided quotes from others in various groups who Jonathan
Smith
has recently trolled.

Your resorting to calling those who take you to task a troll is
demonstrative of a true troll.

and this time not even making any pretense of discussing the issue.

I think Jonathan Smith prefers debating himself.

Who is the troll?

Why do you claim to be a doctor?

Because CBI is?

Why not promote good dental health for kids?

by your definition.

BTW, I use an electric toothbrush and so do my kids.

"John Do(p)e" wrote in message
.. .
Troll.

Self referential posts seem to be your forte.


"M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t-May 6, 2004" M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t
wrote

Path:
bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!wnmast
er11!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!199.218.7.141!news. glorb.com!news3.optonline.
net!news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t-May 6, 2004" M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t

Newsgroups: misc.kids.health
References:



. net





Subject: Have you tried an electric toothbrush?
Lines: 102
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
Message-ID:
Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 13:06:55 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.194.64.219
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net 1083848815 68.194.64.219 (Thu, 06 May
2004 09:06:55 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 09:06:55 EDT
Organization: Optimum Online
Xref: wnmaster11 misc.kids.health:122025
X-Received-Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 13:07:08 GMT
(bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net)


"John Doe" wrote in message
.. .
Troll.

As expected. Cannot engage in rational discussion without this.

begin prior header information
From: (amp_spamfree)
Newsgroups: rec.travel.europe,rec.travel.air,rec.food.cooking
Subject: OT: I Wonder How The "Quislings" Are Feeling Now...???
Date: 14 May 2003 05:57:31 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 31
Message-ID:
References:





NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.7.47.68
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052917052 13990 127.0.0.1 (14 May 2003
12:57:32 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 May 2003 12:57:32 GMT
end prior header information

(Jonathan Smith) wrote

Path:

bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!wnmast

er11!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!199.218.7.141!news. glorb.com!postnews1.google
.com!not-for-mail
From: (Jonathan Smith)
Newsgroups: misc.kids.health
Subject: Have you tried an electric toothbrush?
Date: 4 May 2004 23:16:13 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 34
Message-ID:
References:



. net



NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.123.214.105
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1083737776 9994 127.0.0.1 (5 May 2004
06:16:16 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 06:16:16 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: wnmaster11 misc.kids.health:121981
X-Received-Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 06:16:16 GMT
(bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net)

John Doe wrote in message
...
Troll.

Message-ID:
"Subject: Return of village idiot JS is back"

Message-ID:
"Karl, didn't you just comment on not arguing with a fool? lol
Just
consider the source and laugh about the ignorance displayed"

Message-ID:
"No but you are a great replacement for the village idiot missing
from
Crawford,
Texas."

Message-ID: m
"Your posturing and sophomoric debate efforts warrant no tit-for-tat
tete-a-tete, and while you may view your every utterance as equally
unique and praiseworthy, you are wrong. In polite society, one's
more
noisome comments are said to be beneath others' notice. So,
following
customary rules of civil dialog, I let your more boorish and
redundant
comments go without the dignity of a response."

...and so on about the reply author.

Now that is priceless. You quote a troll from another NG and that is
how you want to make your point?

You are amazing.

Typical. No data, no concept, no brains.

You are a waste of bandwidth.

js

John Doe wrote:
"CBI" wrote
John Doe wrote:

You post your personal opinion as fact.

An opinion derived from three and one-half years
experience using
various electric toothbrushes. Before that I used manual.
I know the
difference. I also understand the mechanics behind the
improvement.

Great - an n of 1.

I'll place more weight on trials bigger than one.



I suggested that there is at least one study that
contradicts it and told you the source of the study.
You asked for me to be more specific and give the exact
issue.
A simple search of the publication's website revealed the
information you requested and I passed it along to you.

You expect me to subscribe to Consumer Reports in order to
substantiate your recollection of their opinion.

Can you quote something from the article?

Why - then you will just accuse me of not typing it
accurately and taking things out of context or some such
drivel. Go tot he library and look it up. If you feel that I
have misrepresented something int he article post your
specific concerns here and I will address them.



You then replied by insulting me, finding fault with the
information I provided at your request, then topped it
off
by claiming that the study you admit you didn't read is
faulty.

Your recollection of their opinion.

Which is totally accurate. if you wish to say otherwise the
onus is on you to prove it.



JS correctly points out that your argument is nothing
more
than anecdotal

Where do you find that meaning of "anecdotal". I quoted
testimony of
other Usenet users about their satisfaction with the
electric
toothbrush.

Ummm... that would be anecdotal. If you don't know the
meaning of the words I use them look them up.



but that there is objective evidence available (some but
not all of
which supports your view) if only you would bother to
look.

My view is from three and one-half years experience.

Which is nothing.


You responded by insulting him

Do you think Jonathan Smith is a delicate flower in need
of
protection?

No, my point was not to protect him. It was to point out
that he made a reasoned factual response and yor reply to
him had no intellectual content at all.


I simply provided quotes from others in various groups who
Jonathan
Smith has recently trolled.

and this time not even making any pretense of discussing
the issue.

I think Jonathan Smith prefers debating himself.

I think he would prefer debating anyone who actually makes
some coherent answer.


Who is the troll?

Why do you claim to be a doctor?

Because I am one.


Why not promote good dental health for kids?

I do. I prefer to recommend proven facts, not falacies based
on one man's conjectures. BTW - if you would bother to read
my replies you would see that I (quoting Consumers Report)
did allow that electric toothbrushes may have some benefit
for some kids.

--
CBI, MD

"CBI" wrote
John Doe wrote:
"CBI" wrote

You post your personal opinion as fact.

You expect me to subscribe to Consumer Reports in order to
substantiate your recollection of their opinion.
Can you quote something from the article?

Why - then you will just accuse me of not typing it accurately and
taking things out of context

Or being plain wrong.

...Go tot he library and look it up. If you feel that I have
misrepresented something int he article post your specific concerns
here and I will address them.

A wild goose chasing your recollection of Consumer Reports' summary
opinion. That article is titled "Expert consumer advice and
recommendations on electric toothbrushes". That isn't about the
difference between electric and manual toothbrushes.

http://www.consumersearch.com/www/fa...s/reviews.html

Apparently, you attributed Clinical Research Associates 1998 results to
Consumer Reports December 2003 results about electric toothbrushes.

You have been misspelling "Consumer Reports" throughout this thread.

Me thinks you are careless.

You then replied by insulting me,

For malpractice.

... I am [a doctor].

Says who? Where?

Why not promote good dental health for kids?

BTW - if you would bother to read my replies you would see that I
(quoting Consumers Report)

Quote? In this thread?

did allow that electric toothbrushes may have some benefit
for some kids.

I appreciate that crumb. It is better than ego boosting topical garbage
and trolling.

In fact, electric toothbrushes are much better than manual toothbrushes.
According to everybody who has used one.

Try it, you'll like it.




--
CBI, MD




Path: bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!wnmaster11!wn12feed!worl dnet.att.net!199.218.7.141!news.glorb.com!border1. nntp.ash.giganews.com!border2.nntp.ash.giganews.co m!nntp.giganews.com!elnk-atl-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthl ink.net!newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net.POSTED!e1 5c1da9!not-for-mail
From: "CBI"
Newsgroups: misc.kids.health
References: . net . net
Subject: Have you tried an electric toothbrush?
Lines: 120
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
Message-ID: . net
Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 04:37:40 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 165.247.102.14
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net 1083904660 165.247.102.14 (Thu, 06 May 2004 21:37:40 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 21:37:40 PDT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net
Xref: wnmaster11 misc.kids.health:122084
X-Received-Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 04:37:40 GMT (bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net)

"John Do(p)e" wrote in message
...
"CBI" wrote
John Doe wrote:
"CBI" wrote

You post your personal opinion as fact.

You expect me to subscribe to Consumer Reports in order to
substantiate your recollection of their opinion.
Can you quote something from the article?

Why - then you will just accuse me of not typing it accurately and
taking things out of context

Or being plain wrong.

An empty claim which you will not bother to prove.

...Go tot he library and look it up. If you feel that I have
misrepresented something int he article post your specific concerns
here and I will address them.

A wild goose chasing your recollection of Consumer Reports' summary
opinion. That article is titled "Expert consumer advice and
recommendations on electric toothbrushes". That isn't about the
difference between electric and manual toothbrushes.

http://www.consumersearch.com/www/fa...s/reviews.html

Apparently, you attributed Clinical Research Associates 1998 results to
Consumer Reports December 2003 results about electric toothbrushes.

You have been misspelling "Consumer Reports" throughout this thread.

Wow! What an excellent example of "I think this way, so you must, too"
reasoning.

Me thinks you are careless.

Nah. You don't. think, that is.

You then replied by insulting me,

For malpractice.

Nope, Dope, not even close.

... I am [a doctor].

Says who? Where?

CBI being a MD is a well known factoid in this group.

Why not promote good dental health for kids?

BTW - if you would bother to read my replies you would see that I
(quoting Consumers Report)

Quote? In this thread?

did allow that electric toothbrushes may have some benefit
for some kids.

I appreciate that crumb. It is better than ego boosting topical garbage
and trolling.

You are being self-referential again.

In fact, electric toothbrushes are much better than manual toothbrushes.
According to everybody who has used one.

John Doe wrote in message .. .
"CBI" wrote
John Doe wrote:
"CBI" wrote

You post your personal opinion as fact.

You expect me to subscribe to Consumer Reports in order to
substantiate your recollection of their opinion.
Can you quote something from the article?

Why - then you will just accuse me of not typing it accurately and
taking things out of context

Or being plain wrong.

I have made a specific claim - that a specific source came to a
specific conclusion and told you exactly where you may confirm that
information if you so desire. If you wish to claim that I or they are
wrong then the onus is on you to review the article amd express
specific concerns.

I would point out that I have not cited an obscure reference that
would cause you great trouble or expense to make available. If you
prize convenience then the article is available on the web for a fee.
If you are unwilling to pay for it then it is available at just about
every public library for free. If you are both to cheap and too lazy
then that is not my fault or concern.


...Go tot he library and look it up. If you feel that I have
misrepresented something int he article post your specific concerns
here and I will address them.

A wild goose chasing your recollection of Consumer Reports' summary
opinion. That article is titled "Expert consumer advice and
recommendations on electric toothbrushes". That isn't about the
difference between electric and manual toothbrushes.

This is a rather incredible claim comming from someone who admits to
not having read the article.



http://www.consumersearch.com/www/fa...s/reviews.html

Apparently, you attributed Clinical Research Associates 1998 results to
Consumer Reports December 2003 results about electric toothbrushes.

Not at all. Read the article and see - or just admit you don't know.


You have been misspelling "Consumer Reports" throughout this thread.

Me thinks you are careless.

I guess I spend most of time reading the inside rather than the cover
or trying to interpret articles from their titles. I can think of a
word for that type of behavior that sounds an awful lot like
"careless".


You then replied by insulting me,

For malpractice.

Now I know you are full of BS.

... I am [a doctor].

Says who? Where?

Says me. Here.


In fact, electric toothbrushes are much better than manual toothbrushes.
According to everybody who has used one.

If that were true then all the research would be unanymous and there
would be no source for disagreement.

--
CBI, MD

John Doe wrote in message .. .

A wild goose chasing your recollection of Consumer Reports' summary
opinion. That article is titled "Expert consumer advice and
recommendations on electric toothbrushes". That isn't about the
difference between electric and manual toothbrushes.

http://www.consumersearch.com/www/fa...s/reviews.html

Apparently, you attributed Clinical Research Associates 1998 results to
Consumer Reports December 2003 results about electric toothbrushes.

That website references an article from 1998 (an none that are more
recent). What on earth makes you think it has anything to do with the
2003 article?

That is just great. In this whole threat you have provided exactly one
reference in one post. On this one occassion you cite a website that
summarizes other research and it 6 years out of date. You misidentify
the relevant article (the one from Consumer reports was the other one)
and fail to recognize the datedness of your source. You also for some
unknown reason think that you can glean the entire design of the study
and its findings from one little blurb about it.

--
CBI, MD

Troll.

"M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t-May 7, 2004" M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t wrote

Path: bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!wnmaster11!wn12feed!worl dnet.att.net!199.218.7.141!news.glorb.com!news3.op tonline.net!news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t-May 7, 2004" M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t
Newsgroups: misc.kids.health
References: . net . net . net
Subject: Have you tried an electric toothbrush?
Lines: 75
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
Message-ID:
Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 13:38:59 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.194.64.219
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net 1083937139 68.194.64.219 (Fri, 07 May 2004 09:38:59 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 09:38:59 EDT
Organization: Optimum Online
Xref: wnmaster11 misc.kids.health:122096
X-Received-Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 13:39:13 GMT (bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net)


"John Do(p)e" wrote in message
...
"CBI" wrote
John Doe wrote:
"CBI" wrote

You post your personal opinion as fact.

You expect me to subscribe to Consumer Reports in order to
substantiate your recollection of their opinion.
Can you quote something from the article?

Why - then you will just accuse me of not typing it accurately and
taking things out of context

Or being plain wrong.

An empty claim which you will not bother to prove.

...Go tot he library and look it up. If you feel that I have
misrepresented something int he article post your specific concerns
here and I will address them.

A wild goose chasing your recollection of Consumer Reports' summary
opinion. That article is titled "Expert consumer advice and
recommendations on electric toothbrushes". That isn't about the
difference between electric and manual toothbrushes.

http://www.consumersearch.com/www/fa...s/reviews.html

Apparently, you attributed Clinical Research Associates 1998 results to
Consumer Reports December 2003 results about electric toothbrushes.

You have been misspelling "Consumer Reports" throughout this thread.

Wow! What an excellent example of "I think this way, so you must, too"
reasoning.

Me thinks you are careless.

Nah. You don't. think, that is.

You then replied by insulting me,

For malpractice.

Nope, Dope, not even close.

... I am [a doctor].

Says who? Where?

CBI being a MD is a well known factoid in this group.

Why not promote good dental health for kids?

BTW - if you would bother to read my replies you would see that I
(quoting Consumers Report)

Quote? In this thread?

did allow that electric toothbrushes may have some benefit
for some kids.

I appreciate that crumb. It is better than ego boosting topical garbage
and trolling.

You are being self-referential again.

In fact, electric toothbrushes are much better than manual toothbrushes.
According to everybody who has used one.