[Ibogaine] Ibogaine is the answer to everything: GDNF IS thestrong theoretical argument!

DC in AZ dcollier9 at cox.net
Mon Feb 25 10:40:04 EST 2008


i thought we were talking about "published" science, ala dr. wodak, 
something his abstract is "demanding", as if.
enjoy those, smile.
dc
****************************************************************************************************************************
Donzo
"Love converts hearts, and gives peace."
****************************************************************************************************************************

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Brockman" <davebroc at gmail.com>
To: "The Ibogaine List" <ibogaine at mindvox.com>
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 8:29 AM
Subject: Re: [Ibogaine] Ibogaine is the answer to everything: GDNF IS 
thestrong theoretical argument!


> don't wanna get my head bit off by saying something in the middle of
> all this, but there's a shitload of science about ibogaine. a lot more
> then most 'herbal remedies' the only thing i've noticed is that there
> are always these big claims, Glick is developing mc-18, Mash is
> submitting her data to the FDA, wait lemme check youtube there it is,
> 'next month' that's a vid from 2005
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cowq9EqVjY4
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5535788820502156331
>
> so where is it? its 3 years later. where's mc-18, where's the
> nor-ibogaine patch, where's the progress?
>
> I don't think there's a lack of science, but there is a massive lack
> of any kind of follow through from not any one person but looks like
> every scientist involved with ibo.
>
> dana, bro, don't stop the science, your detracters are just trying to
> keep you down, smoking a blunt and listening to you talk science is
> mad entertaining :-) ok mebbe nothing you say actually makes sense,
> but nitpicking details is for small minds. the show must go on!
>
> btw dana, where's the dirt-cheap synthetic ibogaine your labs were
> going to produce last year? speaking of no followup whatev happened
> with all that?
>
> sofar as ken alper goes, the bro needs to reup or get some new meds,
> he's one cranky motherfucker of late.
>
> -broc
>
> On 2/25/08, Eric Madison <ericmadison07 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dana I have never stated that any particular ibogaine presentation should
>> not be made. I have only directly stated that you're not the one who 
>> should
>> be giving medical and science based ibogaine presentations. The purpose 
>> of a
>> presentation is presumably to enlighten the audience regarding the topic 
>> and
>> subject being presented. Your "science" based talks are to be blunt, 
>> awful.
>> They're sloppy, incoherent and convey no new level of understanding to 
>> the
>> audience.
>>
>> As I stated in my opening message I do believe that Dr. Wodak's abstract
>> begins in a biased manner. I've seen nothing in his interactions with 
>> Nick
>> Sandberg to indicate he will change this stance. You have a panel with a
>> sceptic. Accept it instead of throwing tantrums.
>>
>> I've no idea what Dr. Cohen said that so "flustered Dimitri he quit after 
>> 5
>> minutes", while I have not been present at every panel Dimitri has ever 
>> been
>> part of, those I have attended are all essentially the same power to the
>> people speech which imparts no novel information beyond that of ibogaine
>> working for him and his continued efforts to dose people with ibogaine
>> without medical training or supervision. In New Orleans he wrapped up his
>> motivational talk sooner and began screaming "fuck all of you".
>>
>> Be that as it may my points have nothing to do with user activism, 
>> Dimitri
>> gives the same speech with varying results but he doesn't spend his time
>> trying to impart knowledge or information he doesn't understand in the 
>> first
>> place. If anything he remains willfully ignorant. That's fine, it's 
>> honest,
>> it's user activism. No doctor or researcher needs to hear any of that, 
>> but
>> he doesn't carry on about science he doesn't understand. You do Dana.
>>
>> Speaking of Dr. Ken Alper, I do realize that this forum is very much the
>> ibogaine gathering, fair enough, but I see a lot of selective editing
>> regarding what participants choose to share here.
>>
>> Correct me if I'm wrong Mr. Beal, but at your recent Washington DC forum,
>> didn't Dr. Alper publicly berate Howard Lotsof for making specious claims
>> about ibogaine and Hep C? Didn't Dr. Alper have some additional thoughts
>> about your own presentation? My overall impression is that Dr. Alper had
>> issues with both your and Mr. Lotsof's presentations and was quite upset 
>> at
>> the forum with regards to the "scientific" claims being made for 
>> ibogaine.
>>
>> Did you perhaps attend another ibogaine forum in another universe where 
>> this
>> did not happen Mr. Beal? Do you imagine that Dr. Wodak will be kinder 
>> then
>> an M.D. who is already firmly in the ibogaine camp and seems to be quite
>> sick of what's being passed off as the "science" of ibogaine?
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 4:19 PM, Dana Beal <dana at phantom.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > The fact remains: in the GDNF finding, there exists the strong 
>> > theoretical
>> > argument to justify ibogaine research that Wodak is demanding. The big
>> > concern right now in harm reduction circles about crystal meth, and the
>> GDNF
>> > stuff shows how ibogaine works for crystal. BTW, Wodak has gotten 
>> > himself
>> > scheduled for the first international conference on crystal meth in
>> Prague.
>> > So far my powerpoint has not.
>> >
>>
>> Nor should it be. What do you know about GDNF and ibogaine Dana? When I 
>> look
>> up this topic, what I see is: Ernest Gallo Clinic and Research Center, 
>> with
>> Dr. Dorit Ron and colleagues. For some reason I do not find a "Dana Beal"
>> listed anywhere, having any publication in any journal or lay magazine,
>> explaining ibogaine and GDNF. I wonder why that is.
>>
>> To bring this back to focus, I am aware of your activism and tireless
>> promotion of ibogaine over the years. I have much respect for this. I
>> honestly do not understand why you feel the need to give scientific or
>> medical presentations about ibogaine though. You contribute nothing 
>> except
>> making seemingly miraculous claims seem even more ridiculous. Saying that 
>> no
>> other M.D. or Ph.D. who is sympathetic to ibogaine will attend, so you 
>> have
>> to give the talks, does nothing to strengthen your claims or position.
>>
>
>  -=[) ::::::: MindVox | Ibogaine | List Commands ::::::: (]=-
> (][%]  :: http://mindvox.com/mailman/listinfo/ibogaine ::  [%][)
>  -=[) :::: Change Account Settings :: [Un]Subscribe :::: (]=- 




More information about the Ibogaine mailing list