Page 5 of 7
Re: So Clean
Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2016 7:11 pm
by palerider
seawolf wrote:seawolf wrote: And what "industry" would that be?
flightco wrote: That would be sterilization of surgical instruments and high level disinfection of medical equipment; that industry.
I bet you had to go to school a long time to become such a knowledgeable expert in the science of sterilization and disinfection. What is your academic background?
you should crawl back under your rock, and stop embarrassing yourself with your ignorance.
Re: So Clean
Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2016 7:11 pm
by wm_hess
Seawolf you seem extremely interested in others educational levels. Would you mind sharing yours while you're at it?
Flightco has proven himself very helpful without the need of sharing his prior education. He has shown knowledge and helpfulness in multiple threads. You on the other hand, have a grand sum of 7 posts to your name so far. Each and every one of your posts is in this thread.
Please feel free to share your educational and employment history with us so we can evaluate your credibility while you're waiting for Flightco to respond. This will help us in evaluating your contributions to this thread.
Thanks!
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Re: So Clean
Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2016 7:28 pm
by Goofproof
Feel free to make something up! After all its the internet. Jim
Re: So Clean
Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2016 7:41 pm
by seawolf
palerider wrote:seawolf wrote:seawolf wrote: And what "industry" would that be?
flightco wrote: That would be sterilization of surgical instruments and high level disinfection of medical equipment; that industry.
I bet you had to go to school a long time to become such a knowledgeable expert in the science of sterilization and disinfection. What is your academic background?
you should crawl back under your rock, and stop embarrassing yourself with your ignorance.
After you, punk.
Re: So Clean
Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2016 7:53 pm
by chunkyfrog
Probably unemployed, except as a paid shill for a certain snake oil dispenser.
Re: So Clean
Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2016 8:24 pm
by palerider
chunkyfrog wrote:Probably unemployed, except as a paid shill for a certain snake oil dispenser.
they're getting paid too much, since so many of 'em turn nasty... maybe they believe the old "there's no such thing as bad press"?
Re: So Clean
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 6:39 am
by seawolf
seawolf wrote:seawolf wrote: And what "industry" would that be?
flightco wrote: That would be sterilization of surgical instruments and high level disinfection of medical equipment; that industry.
I bet you had to go to school a long time to become such a knowledgeable expert in the science of sterilization and disinfection. What is your academic background?
Apparently the resident expert in the "industry" has no credentials to share that would help to support his claim of "facts." Is there anyone else here that would like to share how they became so knowledgeable with the "facts" concerning this "industry?"
Re: So Clean
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 7:03 am
by chunkyfrog
And yours are?
Based on all your posts-----ZERO, GOOSE EGG, NADA.
Yes, we know your kind. Shill, buffoon, psycho.
Re: So Clean
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 8:55 am
by seawolf
chunkyfrog wrote:And yours are?
Based on all your posts-----ZERO, GOOSE EGG, NADA.
Yes, we know your kind. Shill, buffoon, psycho.
You obviously must suffer from some sort of reading impairment: I have made no claims of "fact," nor have I made statements that would lead others to believe that I was an "expert" in any topic in this forum. Therefore, by what absurd logic should I offer any credentials to this group?
You know nothing.
Re: So Clean
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 9:04 am
by Julie
If we're not worthy of you (or your writing) why are you still here?
Re: So Clean
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 10:39 am
by seawolf
Julie wrote:If we're not worthy of you (or your writing) why are you still here?
You mistakenly assume "we." My responses have been to specific members of this forum, and they have not included you (Julie) or anyone else (yet).
Re: So Clean
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 11:00 am
by chunkyfrog
Seawolf, you are full of the ca-ca your employer's machine does NOT REMOVE.
Re: So Clean
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 11:50 am
by seawolf
chunkyfrog wrote:Seawolf, you are full of the ca-ca your employer's machine does NOT REMOVE.
As I stated, you know nothing; you only presume to know. Your small-minded, pathetic, presumptive arrogance (and that of a few other forum members here) is only exceeded by the cowardly verbal bullying you spew on anyone that doesn't agree with you. It's quite easy for you and your idiot brother, palerider, to sit behind a computer screen and puke your childish invective upon unsuspecting newcomers to this forum. In the real world, I have no doubt either of you is so brave. Here's a newsflash for you, Ms. FatToad --- I don't work for SoClean, and I knew nothing about the company or the device until I inherited one from a deceased family member. I only came on this forum to find out more about it (and other cpap issues) after briefly using it.
So, if you think I can be verbally intimidated to leave this discussion, this forum, or anything else I choose to become involved in, you are AGAIN mistaken.
I'm here to stay, b*tch. Get over it.
Re: So Clean
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 12:17 pm
by chunkyfrog
Condolences for your loss; but considering the fate of the former user, why did it occur to you to use that filthy machine?
And hey, I'm just being honest--and trying to prevent decent people from being sucked in by the lies perpetrated by SoClean.
Sticks and stones will not deter me from defending others from the greed of a lying company and some inbred hillbilly.
Re: So Clean
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 12:45 pm
by seawolf
chunkyfrog wrote:Condolences for your loss; but considering the fate of the former user, why did it occur to you to use that filthy machine?
Previous user's death had nothing to do with use of the machine, so why would I consider it? As I previously stated, I knew nothing about the SoClean device other than what the previous user had used it for, and this forum discussion has been quite successful in providing nothing more than rabid, unsubstantiated "facts" on its purported ineffectiveness. I'm looking for peer reviewed research on the machine itself, or the principle upon which it is based --- positive or negative results, it makes no difference to me. If you, or anyone "in the industry" can provide references to such FACTS, that would be greatly appreciated.