|
Home > Archive > Anonymous Servers > January 2006 > Are you guys aware of all this? (I wasn't)
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Are you guys aware of all this? (I wasn't)
|
|
|
|
| mixminion@snikt.net 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| This is a Type III anonymous message, sent to you by the Mixminion
server at straylight.snikt.net. If you do not want to receive
anonymous messages, please contact ADMIN. For more information about
anonymity, see URL.
-----BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-----
Message-type: plaintext
In <0H1BUBCI38743.0351157407@twistycreek.com> TwistyCreek <anon@comments.header> wrote:
>http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/frog/eelbash.html
>
>
Yeah, seen that before I have.
A small part of eelbash history it is and shamefull at that.
-----END TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-----
| |
| Anonymous 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| In article <20060126080317.E39D256B@blackwhale.net>
mixminion@snikt.net wrote:
>
>
> In <0H1BUBCI38743.0351157407@twistycreek.com> TwistyCreek <anon@comments.header> wrote:
>
> Yeah, seen that before I have.
>
> A small part of eelbash history it is and shamefull at that.
The real shame is that after all these years it continues on the very same
path.
| |
| Borked Pseudo Mailed 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| Anonymous wrote:
>
> The real shame is that after all these years it continues on the very same
> path.
Absolutely insane, isn't it?
I can't help but by wonder why a real RemOp would consider allowing
traffic to pass through anything the lunatic controls, but still some do.
It's almost as unbelievable as realizing that one alleged RemOp could
maintain such an unshakable level of inanity for such a long time. I often
muse about whether Eelbash has to take breaks from his intense stupidity
to divert power to breathing... let his heart beat a few times... stuff
like that... <g>
| |
| TwistyCreek 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, nobody@pseudo.borked.net (Borked Pseudo Mailed) wrote:
>Anonymous wrote:
>
>
>Absolutely insane, isn't it?
>
>I can't help but by wonder why a real RemOp would consider allowing
>traffic to pass through anything the lunatic controls, but still some do.
I don't block messages from him or to him. That is up to the user to
conciously decide if he/she wants to use Eel. What I do is make sure he is
not in my capability string. In my case, if a user selected random, random
and I happened to be the first random, Eel is not in my capability string
so my re-mailer could not forward the message through him. If someone wants
to, they can intentionally chain through me to Eel and I would let the
message go through.
IOW, it is not up to me to interfere with a message if the user
intentionally picks a chain from me to him. It just won't happen by random.
I think that is a fair compromise to all users. A new user, unfamiliar with
chains doesn't have to be concerned. An experienced user that wants that
chain can make it (I don't know why anyone would want to but, what can I
say?)
Personally, I have a strong disagreement with adding the giant disclaimer
at the bottom of the message. It impugns the integrity of the sender
(IMHO).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The message above came through a remailer.
The original sender is unknown.
Any address shown in the From header is unverified.
Complaints? See the Comments in the headers.
****************************************
*
Or the "shouted out" PLEASE SEND COMPLAINTS TO IAMUPSET@HOTPOP.COM INCLUDE
THE NUMBER 777 IN THE SUBJECT to ensure that your email reaches me. PLEASE
SEND COMPLAINTS TO IAMUPSET@HOTPOP.COM in the headers.
Caps represent shouting and is poor netiquette when used incorrectly.
Others may not feel like me, so it is their decision to use or not use a
chain from me to him.
They have to conciously make that chain, it just won't happen by accident.
This is just my opinion and intend nothing further by expressing it.
| |
| Anonymous 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| In article <9b5af7dea756e7346117a572f6e82eeb@pseudo.borked.net>
nobody@pseudo.borked.net (Borked Pseudo Mailed) wrote:
>
> Anonymous wrote:
>
>
> Absolutely insane, isn't it?
>
> I can't help but by wonder why a real RemOp would consider allowing
> traffic to pass through anything the lunatic controls, but still some do.
>
> It's almost as unbelievable as realizing that one alleged RemOp could
> maintain such an unshakable level of inanity for such a long time. I often
> muse about whether Eelbash has to take breaks from his intense stupidity
> to divert power to breathing... let his heart beat a few times... stuff
> like that... <g>
My musings are that the eelbash remailer is shared - a remailer remotely
administered by some regular remops who impersonate Eelbash Admin and take
turns doing wildly stupid things with the machine as some kind of freaky
joke. It reminds me of the Ernie Kovacs show.
| |
| Borked Pseudo Mailed 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| In article <QTPS7GVX38744.3247453704@twistycreek.com>
TwistyCreek <anon@comments.header> wrote:
>
> I don't block messages from him or to him. That is up to the user to
> conciously decide if he/she wants to use Eel. What I do is make sure he is
> not in my capability string. In my case, if a user selected random, random
> and I happened to be the first random, Eel is not in my capability string
> so my re-mailer could not forward the message through him. If someone wants
> to, they can intentionally chain through me to Eel and I would let the
> message go through.
Huh? If you are the first remailer, both scenarios are the same.
If a user chooses random,random it isn't the first remailer in the
chain who chooses the second remailer; the client chooses both
remailers.
As the first remailer in the chain, you have no way of knowing if
eelbash was chosen by the user intentionally, or by their client
randomly.
| |
| Bluejay 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:28:54 +0000 (GMT), Anonymous
<nobody@invalid.org> wrote:
>My musings are that the eelbash remailer is shared - a remailer
>remotely administered by some regular remops who impersonate
>Eelbash Admin and take turns doing wildly stupid things with the
>machine as some kind of freaky joke. It reminds me of the Ernie
>Kovacs show.
Nice try, Assmodeous.
When are you people going to accept that this whole eelbash,
assmodeous, etc., affair is simply some dumb Asian Canuck XXXXX
having her post-menopausal jollies?
- --
Bluejay at Cotse dot Net
The eelbash/cheshire/bogg/asmodeous/parsifal Chronicles
http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/...claration2.html
PGP Key is here:
http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/...ey-11-18-04.txt
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/ AwUBQ9o25OFjVI9fbU4iEQJXrgCeM4dyvl6rcacx
1nyPEDmLZUmr9pYAniLb
ScI4gh/cmorHfVRbDXAYVh0t
=Ph0D
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| |
| Bluejay 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Bluejay wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:28:54 +0000 (GMT), Anonymous
> <nobody@invalid.org> wrote:
>
>
> Nice try, Assmodeous.
>
> When are you people going to accept that this whole eelbash,
> assmodeous, etc., affair is simply some dumb Asian Canuck XXXXX
> having her post-menopausal jollies?
> - --
> Bluejay at Cotse dot Net
>
> The eelbash/cheshire/bogg/asmodeous/parsifal Chronicles
> http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/...claration2.html
>
> PGP Key is here:
> http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/...ey-11-18-04.txt
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use
> <http://www.pgp.com>
>
> iQA/ AwUBQ9o25OFjVI9fbU4iEQJXrgCeM4dyvl6rcacx
1nyPEDmLZUmr9pYAniLb
> ScI4gh/cmorHfVRbDXAYVh0t
> =Ph0D
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
It seems something went wrong with my pgp sig in the above post.
It is my post.
Let's see if the sig works this time. (Haven't used it in quite a
while. I guess it got rusty or something.)
Bluejay at Cotse dot Net
The eelbash/cheshire/bogg/asmodeous/parsifal Chronicles
http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/...claration2.html
PGP Key is here:
http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/...ey-11-18-04.txt
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/ AwUBQ9pBBeFjVI9fbU4iEQL1HwCfa17NsnV8bryA
VdWyvsQUZd4x5VgAoNSc
jKc3nR7n6d7gIjNGlyxQdhyE
=Vehw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| |
| Borked Pseudo Mailed 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| In article <MTEzODM3NzAxNS5ibHVlamF5.1138377016@nulluser.com>
"Bluejay" <bluejay-no-spam@cotse.net.invalid> wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Bluejay wrote:
>
Nobody cares, XXXXXXX.
| |
| TwistyCreek 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| On Fri, 27 Jan 2006, nobody@pseudo.borked.net (Borked Pseudo Mailed) wrote:
>In article <QTPS7GVX38744.3247453704@twistycreek.com>
>TwistyCreek <anon@comments.header> wrote:
>
>Huh? If you are the first remailer, both scenarios are the same.
>
>If a user chooses random,random it isn't the first remailer in the
>chain who chooses the second remailer; the client chooses both
>remailers.
>
>As the first remailer in the chain, you have no way of knowing if
>eelbash was chosen by the user intentionally, or by their client
>randomly.
Sorry, I was thinking of selecting a random hop. You can choose to do a
random hop from my remailer. In that scenario Eel would not be chosen. I
misspoke. You are quite correct. Too many things on my mind this AM and
suffering from a bad migraine headache. I am just not with it today 
Thanks for correcting me.
I still don't like the headers or footers though. Crap, how does one
protect a new user from an unpleasant surprise? Any suggestions?
| |
| Bluejay 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 09:23:41 -0700 (MST), Borked Pseudo Mailed
<nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote:
>In article <MTEzODM3NzAxNS5ibHVlamF5.1138377016@nulluser.com>
>"Bluejay" <bluejay-no-spam@cotse.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>Nobody cares, XXXXXXX.
>
That didn't take long, did it, kiddies? :0)
FO,assholeous.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/ AwUBQ9pLGuFjVI9fbU4iEQJ8IgCdFOAJ0axFzDXI
rVbpCrNYTLRo3ycAn25/
ZeggsZN/TcAQSNvKim8H0yl/
=Zd00
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| |
| Thrasher Remailer 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| In <e7f53331374a37697c901fad92fecc2d@pseudo.borked.net>, nobody@pseudo.borked.net wrote:
>In article <QTPS7GVX38744.3247453704@twistycreek.com>
>TwistyCreek <anon@comments.header> wrote:
>
>Huh? If you are the first remailer, both scenarios are the same.
>
>If a user chooses random,random it isn't the first remailer in the
>chain who chooses the second remailer; the client chooses both
>remailers.
>
>As the first remailer in the chain, you have no way of knowing if
>eelbash was chosen by the user intentionally, or by their client
>randomly.
If the user adds an Rhop # directive, the remailer chooses # random hops
| |
| Tudman Todmorden 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| | |
| TwistyCreek 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| In article <LSKNNXYQ38744.4803587963@twistycreek.com>
TwistyCreek <anon@comments.header> wrote:
>
> I still don't like the headers or footers though. Crap, how does one
> protect a new user from an unpleasant surprise? Any suggestions?
Block it in your client. JBN2, QS, and Mixmaster all make it simple to
block a remailer from being used. Simple and effective.
| |
| TwistyCreek 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| On 27 Jan 2006, Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>In <e7f53331374a37697c901fad92fecc2d@pseudo.borked.net>,
>nobody@pseudo.borked.net wrote:
>
>
>If the user adds an Rhop # directive, the remailer chooses # random hops
That was what I had in mind. Sorry I misspoke. My mind is clouded over
today. This migraine is killing me and I am not in a peasant state of mind.
The damn Percosett 10/325 helps the pain but confuses the senses and has
other awful feeling side effects. I hate the stuff, but it is the only
thing that works. So excuse me if I begin slurrrring my speech.
Again, thanks for correcting me and putting into words what I was thinking
at the time.
Now if Eelbash would only listen to reason, drop the damn stupid footer and
make a reasonable header, I would consider adding him to my cap string.
Until then, never.
This re-mailer has nothing added except the header about receiving unwanted
E-mail. My guess is the RemOp will block E-mail mail adresses on request
but is unlikely to block news groups unless there is "real" abuse going on
like flooding. Hell, even that dickhead Min latched on to it as his exit. A
lot of people, and I think this RemOp also, absolutely detest Min's posts
as much as I do. People that hate Min can "Plonk" him in their news
readers. Even Min has the courtesy to post with a consistant custom from
user name. People can plonk Min, but not other people that use the
re-mailer as an exit.
You can't Plonk out those horrible headers and footers that Eelbash stuck
in.
I am sorry everyone, I just don't believe a RemOp should add such a stupid
disclaimer as a footer in the message body and literally "scream" for abuse
complaints in his headers. Those headers and footers give all re-mailers a
bad name.
That is a clear sign of the immaturity and childish behavior of Eelbash.
And he has the nerve to call other people children and Psycho's?
If he wants to see a real childish psycho, he could look in a mirror for a
perfect example.
| |
| Anonymous 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| In article <MTEzODM3NDQzOC5ibHVlamF5.1138374438@nulluser.com>
"Bluejay" <bluejay@cotse.net> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:28:54 +0000 (GMT), Anonymous
> <nobody@invalid.org> wrote:
>
>
> Nice try, Assmodeous.
>
> When are you people going to accept that this whole eelbash,
> assmodeous, etc., affair is simply some dumb Asian Canuck XXXXX
> having her post-menopausal jollies?
> - --
> Bluejay at Cotse dot Net
>
> The eelbash/cheshire/bogg/asmodeous/parsifal Chronicles
> http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/...claration2.html
>
> PGP Key is here:
> http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/...ey-11-18-04.txt
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
>
> iQA/ AwUBQ9o25OFjVI9fbU4iEQJXrgCeM4dyvl6rcacx
1nyPEDmLZUmr9pYAniLb
> ScI4gh/cmorHfVRbDXAYVh0t
> =Ph0D
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Did you have a point, or is your only claim to fame still that
you hate Asmo/Eelbash/etc.?
| |
| Tudman Todmorden 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| Since when does Eelbash have a footer in its messages?
| |
| Bluejay 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 22:37:04 +0100 (CET), Anonymous
<nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>Did you have a point, or is your only claim to fame still that
>you hate Asmo/Eelbash/etc.?
>
You mean that ain't enough? :o)
Hate?
That's funny coming from a bunch of anonymous schmucks who spend
their time threatening, arguing and f------g up hundreds of usenet
newsgroups with their irresponsible behaviour while remaining safely
anonymous so as to avoid any responsibility for their actions.
I leave the "hate" shite to you anon punks. My pages regarding Frog
the Faggot and Assholeous were a public service. :o)
Bluejay @ cotse dot net
The eelbash/cheshire/bogg/asmodeous/parsifal Chronicles
http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/...claration2.html
PGP Key is here:
http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/...ey-11-18-04.txt
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/ AwUBQ9qjweFjVI9fbU4iEQKYBwCfVjkFw62rFMQT
MZRAR+MKOhv3si4AoJtK
jt8U1w03lN+znj6cpogcx3mA
=CurZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| |
| Anonymous 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| TwistyCreek wrote:
> Those headers and footers give all re-mailers a bad name.
Only a rogue remop would put in footers.
-=-
This message was sent via two or more anonymous remailing services.
| |
| Fritz Wuehler 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:47:38 +0000, TwistyCreek wrote:
>
> Personally, I have a strong disagreement with adding the giant disclaimer
> at the bottom of the message. It impugns the integrity of the sender
> (IMHO).
I could not agree more, and IMHO all disclaimers should be removed,
whether they are giant ones or not because all of them impugn the
integrity of the sender. I think 2 or 3 exit remailers have disclaimers,
but I can't remember if they are all giant, but the operators of those
remailers need to come in here and explain whether or not they are
impugning their senders. Why should a sender use an exit remailer if the
guy that runs it is going to insult him by putting in a disclaimer? Or
maybe you are right and it is only if the disclaimer is giant that it is
an insult to the sender, so if you are right then it is only this one
remailer that is impugning the integrity of its senders. But it is hard to
say about these things.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> The message above came through a remailer. The original sender is unknown.
> Any address shown in the From header is unverified. Complaints? See the
> Comments in the headers.
>
> ****************************************
*
>
> Or the "shouted out" PLEASE SEND COMPLAINTS TO IAMUPSET@HOTPOP.COM INCLUDE
> THE NUMBER 777 IN THE SUBJECT to ensure that your email reaches me. PLEASE
> SEND COMPLAINTS TO IAMUPSET@HOTPOP.COM in the headers.
>
> Caps represent shouting and is poor netiquette when used incorrectly.
It certainly is poor netiquette if used incorrectly. I guess the question
is, whether it is used incorrectly in headers, when the obvious intention
is to make sure that somebody having a complaint will see where he should
be complaining to. Personally, I want to know exactly how to contact
somebody to complain to when I have a problem with a message coming out
of a remailer. But that is just MHO and I could be wrong and maybe it
should not be mostly in caps.
| |
| Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| In article <3RBT8XHS38744.6202314815@twistycreek.com>
TwistyCreek <anon@comments.header> wrote:
>
>
> That was what I had in mind.
It's an old, rarely ever used cpunk directive that you can't use with
the mixmaster protocol. It's only occasionally useful in a nym with
multiple reply blocks.
| |
| anonymous@remailer.hastio.org 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| In article <RFTXG7E438744.7689236111@anonymous>
Anonymous <BigappleRemailer@bigapple.yi.org> wrote:
>
> TwistyCreek wrote:
>
>
> Only a rogue remop would put in footers.
>
> -=-
> This message was sent via two or more anonymous remailing services.
Oh, you silly rogue, you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.eu.org
for abuse and hashcash info.
| |
| Anonymous 2006-01-27, 9:03 pm |
| In article <4f4d8b3c8430a24185bbc8bbdfc16ab8@msgid.frell.theremailer.net>
Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-200601.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:47:38 +0000, TwistyCreek wrote:
>
>
> I could not agree more, and IMHO all disclaimers should be removed,
> whether they are giant ones or not because all of them impugn the
> integrity of the sender. I think 2 or 3 exit remailers have disclaimers,
> but I can't remember if they are all giant, but the operators of those
> remailers need to come in here and explain whether or not they are
> impugning their senders. Why should a sender use an exit remailer if the
> guy that runs it is going to insult him by putting in a disclaimer? Or
> maybe you are right and it is only if the disclaimer is giant that it is
> an insult to the sender, so if you are right then it is only this one
> remailer that is impugning the integrity of its senders. But it is hard to
> say about these things.
Disclaimers don't bother me so to each his own. I don't feel impugned by a
healthy disclaimer, after all I'm an anonymous schmoe. If they bother the
sender they shouldn't use that remailer like you say. No explanation is
necessary from the operators.
| |
| Anonymous 2006-01-29, 8:49 pm |
| In article < e22adc0e87719070f51418f94dcaddef@remaile
r.paranoici.org>
Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>
> In article <MTEzODM3NDQzOC5ibHVlamF5.1138374438@nulluser.com>
> "Bluejay" <bluejay@cotse.net> wrote:
>
>
> Did you have a point, or is your only claim to fame still that
> you hate Asmo/Eelbash/etc.?
You forgot worlds biggest XXXXXXX.
HTH
| |
| George Orwell 2006-01-29, 8:49 pm |
| In article <MTEzODQwMjI4Ny5ibHVlamF5.1138402287@nulluser.com>
"Bluejay" <bluejay-no-spam@cotse.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> My pages regarding Frog
> the Faggot and Assholeous
Prove your obsession with them.
| |
| Anonymous 2006-01-29, 8:49 pm |
| In article <MTEzODQwMjI4Ny5ibHVlamF5.1138402287@nulluser.com>
"Bluejay" <bluejay-no-spam@cotse.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 22:37:04 +0100 (CET), Anonymous
> <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> You mean that ain't enough? :o)
>
> Hate?
>
Hi Mike. Your kids are growing up fast. I saw them the other
day.
Don't press your luck.
| |
| Free-man 2006-01-29, 8:49 pm |
| On 27 Jan 2006 19:53:08 -0000, TwistyCreek <anon@comments.header>
wrote:
>That was what I had in mind. Sorry I misspoke. My mind is clouded over
>today. This migraine is killing me and I am not in a peasant state of mind.
>The damn Percosett 10/325 helps the pain but confuses the senses and has
>other awful feeling side effects. I hate the stuff, but it is the only
>thing that works. So excuse me if I begin slurrrring my speech.
FYI, the 325 is acetaminophen which is a known cause of liver disease
and practically worthless as pain medication. Some doctors have
publically stated that acetaminophen is the biggest cause of liver
transplants. Since opiates are the best pain medicine and can be
taken in large quantities without damaging organs, it would be better
to take an opiate without any acetaminophen. Tell your doctor.
Rick
| |
| TwistyCreek 2006-01-29, 8:49 pm |
| On Sat, 28 Jan 2006, Freedom_First@verizon.net (Free-man) wrote:
>On 27 Jan 2006 19:53:08 -0000, TwistyCreek <anon@comments.header>
>wrote:
>
>
>FYI, the 325 is acetaminophen which is a known cause of liver disease
>and practically worthless as pain medication. Some doctors have
>publically stated that acetaminophen is the biggest cause of liver
>transplants. Since opiates are the best pain medicine and can be
>taken in large quantities without damaging organs, it would be better
>to take an opiate without any acetaminophen. Tell your doctor.
>
>Rick
I agree. For my migraines, I could poison myself with Tylenol and it
wouldn't have any effect on reducing the pain. On a scale of 1 to 10, my
migraines are about 100.
I should probably have him switch it to the other combination of opiates
and aspirin. I forgot the name of that one at the moment.
The migraine eased up yesterday. I finally fell asleep. I slept from 3:00
yesterday afternoon until 9:00 this morning. I still feel kind of crappy,
like I was on a drunken sailor binge or something. By tomorrow, I should be
back to feeling normal.
I have a bad reaction to opiates too. They cause me to itch all over, cloud
my mind, and make me feel like crap. Unfortunately, they are the only thing
that works. I have to take Benedryl with them to reduce the allergic
reaction. I have had them for about 40+ years now. You would never believe
everything I tried for them. Imitrex, heart medications, suppositories,
darn near every drug ever made. The only thing that works are strong
opiates.
Thanks Rick, I will remember to have the meds switched to the one without
Tylenol.
|
|
|
|
|