"CBI" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Mark Probert-February 25, 2004 wrote:

Their hero was even more conflicted since he was paid for
the initial
study, and stood to be paid for his testimony.


This is the bogger point - it really was more than just
funding a study. He stood to be made wealthy through paid
testimony if he found one thing and to get nothing if he
found another. That needed to be disclosed.

This new information puts the shoddy science and his active
campaigning for publicity in a while new light. I alsways
just figured he was greedy for notariety. Now I see that he
is just greedy.

Using the anti-vac line, just follow the money...and I was confident that
one day it would come out. He was just too attached to his theory for any
other conclusion to make sense.