ND In-fighting 2

Please remove me if you really removed Dr Yarnell
Expand Messages

		Anne Van Couvering  Message 1 of 10 , Feb 17 10:44 PM     View Source  I don't want to be here if people get kicked off for having opposing views. Dr Yarnell is one of our profession's treasures.

		I'm hoping it's a bad joke or ugly rumor and he's not speaking up because he went on vacation - if not, I'm out of here.

		We don't need an echo chamber, we need a place to hammer things out.

		Anne Van Couvering, ND
		Berkeley, CA


Ian Bier

Message 2 of 10 , Feb 18 3:59 AM

View Source

It makes perfect sense - I'm sure I've seen exactly this plot in numerous really bad movies.

Dr Yarnell (who we will now refer to as 'Dr Evil' - he didn't go to naturopathic medical school to be Mr. Evil after all), who only looks like he  has dedicated much of life force these last 20 years to the profession, is actually a double agent planted by the bad guys, or possibly was good at the beginning, but tempted by the dark side of the Force.

Fortunately, like all maniacal evil villains, despite being absolutely brilliant, he makes 1 unbelievably ridiculous mistake, (quoting his real bosses), and let's our heroes know his real identity and true leanings. We can now banish him to the phantom zone, where he can spend the rest of his days thinking about how close he came to realizing his nefarious plans to take over the naturopathic world.

Really?

Ian D. Bier, ND, PhD, LAc, FABNO


Colleen Huber, NMD

Message 3 of 10 , Feb 18 5:28 AM

View Source

I would also like to *respectfully* request that Dr. Yarnell not be removed from NatChat.  I am not afraid of anything he has to say, and he has worked too hard for naturopathic medicine ( - Just look at his texts on Naturopathic Urology or Naturopathic Gastroenterology - ) to be a mole.  It just doesn't make sense to me.

Incidentally, although I have been told that there is no moderator for NatChat, I never receive the digests when I have most likely been embroiled in debate.  I do not know why.  This is the first one I have gotten in 2 days.  I don't know how we got ...

FROM:

EY - DTAP - safe and works fine
and
CH - DTAP - makes pertussis more virulent, so not safe, not effective.

TO:
Remove EY from NatChat???

Let's not do that, please.

Colleen Huber, NMD
Naturopathic Oncologist (FNORI)
President, Naturopathic Cancer Society, NatOnco.org
Secretary, ANRI / NORI / INCRI, NaturopathicStandards.org
Medical Director, NatureWorksBest Cancer Clinic, NatureWorksBest.com


Mona Morstein

Message 4 of 10 , Feb 18 6:41 AM

View Source

One more post after reading all the attacks:  It is always easy to have one’s first opinion be, well, very opinionated and judgmental.  Considering that a total of four people have been banned from NatChat (and re-added one of those people)  in the 11 years I have been running it, it would be nice for people to stop, breathe, and think.  I am not banning people willy-nilly as some controlling dictator of the list.    The attacks written in the last daily scroll fail to realize that I alone am responsible for this list and I alone do all the work to run it, and try to keep it from being exposed to outside negative publicity.

Getting immediately angry at me for taking thoughtful actions with information I garner off list indeed does hurt my feelings.  As I said, I am doing the best I can everyday to accept people to NatChat, help them use the list, help them get things posted, and keep the list secure. I deal with this DAILY on top of the busy-ness of running a clinic, seeing patients, and everything else I do.    I am not some evil ogre with a quick ban finger.  I would ask that people try to think positively amount me and my work when a situation like this comes up, and that discussion is calm, cool, collected.  I hope that is an reasonable request.

Mona Morstein, ND, DHANP
Tempe, AZ
www.diamend.info
Official Sponsor of NatChat—Doctor’s Data Labs


tdtf5

Message 5 of 10 , Feb 18 7:28 AM

View Source

Frank Shallenberger, MD said  in his book on ozone therapies writes "I have never learned anything from anyone who agreed with me"

I love this quote and I think of it as I hear that that this decision about Dr. Yarnell was made.

science is not an unbiased attempt at the objective and i could say that we could all argue until we are blue in the face and have studies to back up either side for really any subject-my favorite is all of those studies about coffee that can support my cup a day habit.

I also belong to herbal hall which is the professional herbalist group and if you think a few opinions on this group get kicked around once in a while-I would say that a number of our leading herbalists practicing in the U.S. just LOVE to argue. In fact I think a big argument about something breaks out at least quarterly by them.

I really hope that this decision that was made can be reversed, understanding that people do fight-opinions are flung and then in the end we know we really must tolerate one another-we are in a community of diverse opinions and ways that we practice.

Anne Hill, ND
Portland, OR


Erin Holston Singh, N.D.

Message 6 of 10 , Feb 18 7:32 AM

View Source

Hello All,
I would be shocked if our esteemed colleague and naturopathic medical text author was a mole.

But I just have to point out what people clearly are not hearing Dr. Mona say: she has information from off-site sources that led her to investigate further.  She did not remove him because if his debates or views!

Perhaps it was in haste, perhaps it is wrong, perhaps she shouldn't have, but I just thought I'd point out what people aren't hearing what regarding Dr. Mona say about the WHY.

Erin Holston Singh, ND
Cleveland


dr_bier_portsmouth_nh

Message 7 of 10 , Feb 18 9:43 AM

View Source

Mona,

With the greatest of respect for the amount of time and effort this takes, and an acknowledgement of where the intention of this action came from, I have to say that the execution of the action was wrong on numerous levels.

You are starting from the assumption that there is one mole. Where is the proof that there are not numerous moles? If someone like Eric is truly our mole, I'm sad to say that there are likely many more, or will be soon.

IF Eric was the singular mole, chances of his remaining so are very small. There are 3300 people on this list, and I would find it extremely unlikely especially given the reaction you are seeing that there aren't many others who will keep him in the loop on what's going on, meaning that even if he's off the list he will likely have access to it if he wants.

Assuming (knowing) that he is not the mole, what would a half intelligent mole do right now? Keep passing information on in order to show they're still around and clear Eric's name, or lay low for a while to throw us off their trail and see what they can gather while we think we're secure and private?

Again, understanding your intention, there is no possible way banning Dr Yarnell is going to give you the information you want, and quite frankly the damage to the profession is far greater from this sort of internal conflict then it ever was from outside quack busters.

Ian


Ian D. Bier, ND, PhD, LAc, FABNO


Chian-Yi Liu (劉謙逸)

Message 8 of 10 , Feb 18 10:22 AM

View Source

Evil villain, huh...several of  Bastyr graduates I talked to and many graduate-to-be  in summer 2016 will love to be Dr Yarnells little minions :P And I'm sure the numbers would go up if we do a vote.

Chian-Yi


Laura Schissell

Message 9 of 10 , Feb 18 11:18 AM

View Source

Thank you Mona, I do not envy your job.
Laura Schissell, ND, DC
Vancouver, WA


whimsyanderson

Message 10 of 10 , Feb 18 12:31 PM

View Source

Hi Mona, being in charge sometimes means making unpopular decisions. I am sorry this has happened. I respect you a great deal and I really respect Dr. Yarnell. I really hope this gets sorted out; as we need a diverse group of voices to keep our profession honest and healthy.
hugs!
Dr. Whimsy
L.A., CA