BU$TED?

stan wrote:
Raving Loonie wrote:
stan wrote:
Is this fun for you? Did daddy cut up your credit cards
or something? Why are you here?


-stan

To expose YOU.

Friend of Mark Probert.....


By golly, I think that's the first nice thing you've
said to or about me, Jan! Thanks!


-stan
This is Usenet, stan.

It is not RL.

You are talking bull****. **** off.

It doesn't *sound* like RL, either. So then who the hell
are you and what is this post of yours about?
I am the "Raving Loonie". Check the IP on the headers.

In real life psychiatric patients don't exist either, asshole.

Jan Drew wrote:
"Sdores" wrote in message
.. .
How you doing Coleah? I hope all is well. UM MOM Susan

My, my...........

**I just think posting something like this is
useless and doesn't say much about you to bother to Google things like this.
You complain that people belittle and so forth, so what is this, being nice!
****

"Coleah" wrote in message
...
Gosh Susan, I kind of read it that Jan was addressing Stand (sic) and
talking
about herself....being gay and 'wow'd' by SSRI's. Check the archives,
maybe
she came out of her closet before and we missed it. She's a fine
upstanding
Christian woman you know.....


"Sdores" wrote in message
.. .
What's to say? If he is gay so what? Does this have to do with
anything?
I am not lost as you say, I just think posting something like this is
useless and doesn't say much about you to bother to Google things like
this.
You complain that people belittle and so forth, so what is this, being
nice!
I don't think so. But do your thing, I just don't agree that this kind
of
behavior is useful. I'm not as stupid as you would like to think I am.
So
slam away! UM MOM Susan

"Jan Drew" wrote in message
y.net...
As usual, Sue. You are lost.

Hint: archives.

Nothing to say about that.



"Sdores" wrote in message
...

"Jan Drew" wrote in message
y.net...

"Raving Beauty" wrote in message
oups.com...
Ilena Rose wrote:
YOU ARE A MONEY GRUBBING LIAR!!


Stan honey ... down boy.

I just read some of your stuff on the net.

Looks like you came to help Mark with the Ritalin Pushing ...


Grass roots marketeering of addictive, psychosis, tourette and
death
inducing stimulants to children is in and of itself reprehensible.

What makes it doubly reprehensible is that disease mongering wrt
ADHD,
and, widespread drugging of children with stimulants is being doing
to
obscure the psychological injuries visited upon 1 in 3 females and
1
in
7 males who report having been sexually molested as children;
therefore, grass roots marketeers of stimulants are accomplices of
pedophiles, after the fact.

As a consequence, it shouldn't surprise anyone that ASAD's grass
roots
marketeers of addictive, psychosis, tourette and/or death
inducing
stimulanst most vocal supporters on ASAD are as follows:

Joe Parsons: Porn writer/Proprieter Phone Sex business
http://makeashorterlink.com/?B2FD65045

John Palmer, Dave et al made ASAD a ng where they posted their SSS
FAQ
wrt their deriving sexual pleasure from the
molestation/sodomizing/torture of girls and boys.

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.s...5afec82ff237b8

Mark Morin used ASAD as a venue to mess with psyche of mothers in
circumstances similiar to those of RL mother whose child Morin
sexually molested.
http://tinyurl.com/qoh4e

Jennifer Snow Wolff aka JenWolf's claim to fame includes posting
crap
to alt.suicide.holiday to encourage OP, incl. boys and girls, to
off
themselves.
http://tinyurl.com/mrcl3

Pablo is ASAD's resident child pornography buff and shadower of
homosexual
teens in usenets teen ngs.
http://tinyurl.com/pxsq6 http://tinyurl.com/m378d


I wonder what else abusive Stan does besides push addictive,
pyschosis,
tourette and/or death inducing stimulants?

Oops!

That's right.

Same thing as Sumbuny, et al!

"I work at a child development center as a toddler
teacher/caregiver."
-stan Jan 16 1999 http://tinyurl.com/lmppo

What a surprise!

(Not!)

WOW!!!!

Stanley W. Shura

I'm gay

Thank goodness for SSRI's

What does this mean? Are you saying Stan is gay,? UM MOM Susan









Why don't you call Virginia, Jan?

She is a mental patient and locked up. Does that threaten you?

Or is this Usenet and therefore NOT real life?

Here is the phone number to call ...

Awe shucks, nobody wants to know so I am not exactly betraying any
confidence, eh.

Raving Loonie

"stan" wrote in message
oups.com...

Jan Drew wrote:
WOW!!!!
Stanley W. Shura
I'm gay

Gee, how'dja figure that one out,

Umm...see it right under your name.

Yeah - cuz you typed it. And it was a lucky guess on
your part.

Ummm. NOT!


Snipped what you cannot handle?

Thank goodness for SSRI's

Again - a line that you typed. I snipped it because it
doesn't make any sense.

Thanks for admitting your posts make no sense.


Mother of god,

No need to take the Lord's name in vain.

Jan, get a life!

I have a great one. How about you?


This
conversation was beneath me 2 exchanges ago.

Bad memory....


This whole "I know you
are but what am I" has become very embarrassing.

You are embarrassed with your OWN posts.

Too bad. Your problem.


When you can raise
the level of discourse a couple of notches, maybe I'll respond again.
Blech!


-stan

Don't hold yourself back, Stanley W Shura....

Hi kiddo, things are well with me. (I see little has changed with Jan's
unending display of hateful righteousness g.)

I'm glad to hear that you are working and have a wonderful 'boss' g. You
have a sweet family.
Hugs,
Coleah


"Sdores" wrote in message
.. .
How you doing Coleah? I hope all is well. UM MOM Susan
"Coleah" wrote in message
...
Gosh Susan, I kind of read it that Jan was addressing Stand and talking
about herself....being gay and 'wow'd' by SSRI's. Check the archives,
maybe
she came out of her closet before and we missed it. She's a fine
upstanding
Christian woman you know.....


"Sdores" wrote in message
.. .
What's to say? If he is gay so what? Does this have to do with
anything?
I am not lost as you say, I just think posting something like this is
useless and doesn't say much about you to bother to Google things like
this.
You complain that people belittle and so forth, so what is this, being
nice!
I don't think so. But do your thing, I just don't agree that this kind
of
behavior is useful. I'm not as stupid as you would like to think I am.
So
slam away! UM MOM Susan

"Jan Drew" wrote in message
y.net...
As usual, Sue. You are lost.

Hint: archives.

Nothing to say about that.



"Sdores" wrote in message
...

"Jan Drew" wrote in message
y.net...

"Raving Beauty" wrote in message
oups.com...
Ilena Rose wrote:
YOU ARE A MONEY GRUBBING LIAR!!


Stan honey ... down boy.

I just read some of your stuff on the net.

Looks like you came to help Mark with the Ritalin Pushing ...


Grass roots marketeering of addictive, psychosis, tourette and
death
inducing stimulants to children is in and of itself reprehensible.

What makes it doubly reprehensible is that disease mongering wrt
ADHD,
and, widespread drugging of children with stimulants is being
doing
to
obscure the psychological injuries visited upon 1 in 3 females and
1
in
7 males who report having been sexually molested as children;
therefore, grass roots marketeers of stimulants are accomplices
of
pedophiles, after the fact.

As a consequence, it shouldn't surprise anyone that ASAD's grass
roots
marketeers of addictive, psychosis, tourette and/or death
inducing
stimulanst most vocal supporters on ASAD are as follows:

Joe Parsons: Porn writer/Proprieter Phone Sex business
http://makeashorterlink.com/?B2FD65045

John Palmer, Dave et al made ASAD a ng where they posted their SSS
FAQ
wrt their deriving sexual pleasure from the
molestation/sodomizing/torture of girls and boys.


http://groups.google.com/group/alt.s...5afec82ff237b8

Mark Morin used ASAD as a venue to mess with psyche of mothers in
circumstances similiar to those of RL mother whose child Morin
sexually molested.
http://tinyurl.com/qoh4e

Jennifer Snow Wolff aka JenWolf's claim to fame includes posting
crap
to alt.suicide.holiday to encourage OP, incl. boys and girls,
to
off
themselves.
http://tinyurl.com/mrcl3

Pablo is ASAD's resident child pornography buff and shadower of
homosexual
teens in usenets teen ngs.
http://tinyurl.com/pxsq6 http://tinyurl.com/m378d


I wonder what else abusive Stan does besides push addictive,
pyschosis,
tourette and/or death inducing stimulants?

Oops!

That's right.

Same thing as Sumbuny, et al!

"I work at a child development center as a toddler
teacher/caregiver."
-stan Jan 16 1999 http://tinyurl.com/lmppo

What a surprise!

(Not!)

WOW!!!!

Stanley W. Shura

I'm gay

Thank goodness for SSRI's

What does this mean? Are you saying Stan is gay,? UM MOM Susan

"stan" wrote in message
ups.com...

Is this fun for you? Did daddy cut up your credit cards
or something? Why are you here?


-stan

To expose YOU.

Friend of Mark Probert.....


By golly, I think that's the first nice thing you've
said to or about me, Jan! Thanks!


-stan

Two peas in a pod.

Poor stan.

Friend of a proven liar, disbarred attorney, name caller.... filthy mouthed
harasser.

"stan" wrote in message
oups.com...

Indigo Crow wrote:
stan wrote:
Raving Loonie wrote:
stan wrote:
Is this fun for you? Did daddy cut up your credit
cards
or something? Why are you here?


-stan

To expose YOU.

Friend of Mark Probert.....


By golly, I think that's the first nice thing you've
said to or about me, Jan! Thanks!


-stan
This is Usenet, stan.

It is not RL.

You are talking bull****. **** off.

It doesn't *sound* like RL, either. So then who the hell
are you and what is this post of yours about?
I am the "Raving Loonie". Check the IP on the headers.

In real life psychiatric patients don't exist either, asshole.

Okay - there are two explanations to this weird tangent.
One is that you are a troll who has gotten hold of someone's computer
and cannot handle the freedom, or two - that you are Raving Loonie/RL
and the instability you have been documenting, complaining about, and
demonstrating on ASAD lately is raging and your just lashing out -
without answering my question "what are you posting about" ie. why are
you using such hostile language towards me?

Either way - it is no longer a wise or intelligent idea for
me to continue this conversation with you. You're either an asshole
prankster, or a person in genuine emotional trouble. I'm not willing
to waste time dealing with one, and I am not qualified to handle the
other. So FOAD, or best of luck to you - whichever applies.

-stan

Yep a friend of Mark Probert.

**** FOAD****

Jan Drew wrote:
"stan" wrote in message
oups.com...

Indigo Crow wrote:
stan wrote:
Raving Loonie wrote:
stan wrote:
Is this fun for you? Did daddy cut up your credit
cards
or something? Why are you here?


-stan

To expose YOU.

Friend of Mark Probert.....


By golly, I think that's the first nice thing you've
said to or about me, Jan! Thanks!


-stan
This is Usenet, stan.

It is not RL.

You are talking bull****. **** off.

It doesn't *sound* like RL, either. So then who the hell
are you and what is this post of yours about?
I am the "Raving Loonie". Check the IP on the headers.

In real life psychiatric patients don't exist either, asshole.

Okay - there are two explanations to this weird tangent.
One is that you are a troll who has gotten hold of someone's computer
and cannot handle the freedom, or two - that you are Raving Loonie/RL
and the instability you have been documenting, complaining about, and
demonstrating on ASAD lately is raging and your just lashing out -
without answering my question "what are you posting about" ie. why are
you using such hostile language towards me?

Either way - it is no longer a wise or intelligent idea for
me to continue this conversation with you. You're either an asshole
prankster, or a person in genuine emotional trouble. I'm not willing
to waste time dealing with one, and I am not qualified to handle the
other. So FOAD, or best of luck to you - whichever applies.

-stan

Yep a friend of Mark Probert.

**** FOAD****

That's extremely rude, you know Jan, and in your case, extremely
hypocritical.

Jan Drew wrote:
"Indigo Crow" wrote in message
ups.com...
Why don't you call Virginia, Jan?

Be happy to do just that. Send me her phone number.

Emailed.

Cordially,

RL




She is a mental patient and locked up. Does that threaten you?

No, why should it? I am very sorry to hear that.

I helped her. She and I exchanged e-mails.

She knows I am thinking of her and praying for her.

Or is this Usenet and therefore NOT real life?

Her life is very real. Sad to say many in this group chose not to help her.

Here is the phone number to call ...

Awe shucks, nobody wants to know so I am not exactly betraying any
confidence, eh.

Raving Loonie

Jason Johnson wrote:
In article , Mark Probert
wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
In article , Mark Probert
wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
,
I ran across the site while I was looking for something else and did not
bookmark it or make a note.

Sure, Jason, sure. Of course. Naturally.,

They were trying to get people to volunteer
for new studies. It was one of several new studies that was mentioned.
My first thought was that any mother that would allow their babies to
be injected with vaccines containing mercury is NOT a good mother.

You came to this group with your mind made up. You asked questions, you
got answers, and, clearly, you were here with your agenda.


As you may know, thimerosal will not be used in vaccines in the very
near future. Many vaccines no longer contain thimerosal. I don't know why
they are conducting such a study. The study would have made sense if it
had been done many years ago when they first started making use of
thimerosal. You may want to google: "New Research Studies" or Research
Studies.

Maybe you read it on whale.to. There is a lot of weird stuff there.

Spend some time looking for proof of your claim.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
Try this link:

http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00138333?order=2

I have it bookmarked so let me know if you can't find it.
clinicaltrials.gov
title of study:
MERCURY LEVELS IN PREMATURE AND LBW INFANTS RECEIVING THIMERSAL-CONTAINING
VACCINES

Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From your original post:

"I read about a new study. They are injecting little babies with
vaccines containing thimerosal. They plan to determine if those
babies develop any reactions to the mercury."

The way you wrote it sounds like the study would do the injecting.

From the URL you posted:

"The primary objective is to describe the levels of mercury in the blood
of premature newborns 32 and 37 weeks gestation and birth weight
2000 but 3000 grams, who receive the routine birth dose of Hepatitis B
immunization containing ethyl mercury in the form of thimerosal and the
birth dose of BBG immunization, and to evaluate the excretion of mercury
in these newborns by examining mercury levels in stool and urine."

All of the children had the injection prior to coming to the study, and,
clearly, this does NOT support your original claim. The purpose of the
study is to see how much residual mercury is in each child. The HepB is
given at birth.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
You are correct--All of the children had the injections prior to coming to
the study. One of the goals was to evaluate the excretion of mercury
in these newborns by examining mercury levels in stool and urine.

Perhaps you could answer these questions:

Why are they still giving vaccines to babies that contain mercury?

1. There is no reason not to. There is no evidence that Thimerosal
causes any problems. I find it strange that you keep asking the same
question over and over and over, ad nauseum. You will not get a
different answer.

If thimerosal is safe, why are they conducting clinical trials related to
the mercury in babies?

Perhaps to answer the anti-vac liars claims, so that there can be no
question that their lies are just that.

Is it possible that they suspect that the levels of mercury in a premature
or LBW infant is very important and MAY be the cause of medical problems.

Nope. The principal investigator in the study you referenced is a well
known and well respected investigator who nearly had a prior study
negated because he did not realize just how fast the mercury from
thimerosal is cleared in newborns.

I should note that I do believe the levels of mercury in babies is VERY
important. I believe that babies should NOT be given vaccines that contain
mercury.

You keep saying it is your belief. You have a right to believe that.
However, there is no factual basis for it.

In article , Mark Probert
wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
In article , Mark Probert
wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
In article , Mark Probert
wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
,
I ran across the site while I was looking for something else and
did not
bookmark it or make a note.

Sure, Jason, sure. Of course. Naturally.,

They were trying to get people to volunteer
for new studies. It was one of several new studies that was mentioned.
My first thought was that any mother that would allow their babies to
be injected with vaccines containing mercury is NOT a good mother.

You came to this group with your mind made up. You asked questions, you
got answers, and, clearly, you were here with your agenda.


As you may know, thimerosal will not be used in vaccines in the very
near future. Many vaccines no longer contain thimerosal. I don't
know why
they are conducting such a study. The study would have made sense
if it
had been done many years ago when they first started making use of
thimerosal. You may want to google: "New Research Studies" or Research
Studies.

Maybe you read it on whale.to. There is a lot of weird stuff there.

Spend some time looking for proof of your claim.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
Try this link:

http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00138333?order=2

I have it bookmarked so let me know if you can't find it.
clinicaltrials.gov
title of study:
MERCURY LEVELS IN PREMATURE AND LBW INFANTS RECEIVING THIMERSAL-CONTAINING
VACCINES

Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From your original post:

"I read about a new study. They are injecting little babies with
vaccines containing thimerosal. They plan to determine if those
babies develop any reactions to the mercury."

The way you wrote it sounds like the study would do the injecting.

From the URL you posted:

"The primary objective is to describe the levels of mercury in the blood
of premature newborns 32 and 37 weeks gestation and birth weight
2000 but 3000 grams, who receive the routine birth dose of Hepatitis B
immunization containing ethyl mercury in the form of thimerosal and the
birth dose of BBG immunization, and to evaluate the excretion of mercury
in these newborns by examining mercury levels in stool and urine."

All of the children had the injection prior to coming to the study, and,
clearly, this does NOT support your original claim. The purpose of the
study is to see how much residual mercury is in each child. The HepB is
given at birth.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
You are correct--All of the children had the injections prior to coming to
the study. One of the goals was to evaluate the excretion of mercury
in these newborns by examining mercury levels in stool and urine.

Perhaps you could answer these questions:

Why are they still giving vaccines to babies that contain mercury?

1. There is no reason not to. There is no evidence that Thimerosal
causes any problems. I find it strange that you keep asking the same
question over and over and over, ad nauseum. You will not get a
different answer.

If thimerosal is safe, why are they conducting clinical trials related to
the mercury in babies?

Perhaps to answer the anti-vac liars claims, so that there can be no
question that their lies are just that.

Is it possible that they suspect that the levels of mercury in a premature
or LBW infant is very important and MAY be the cause of medical problems.

Nope. The principal investigator in the study you referenced is a well
known and well respected investigator who nearly had a prior study
negated because he did not realize just how fast the mercury from
thimerosal is cleared in newborns.

I should note that I do believe the levels of mercury in babies is VERY
important. I believe that babies should NOT be given vaccines that contain
mercury.

You keep saying it is your belief. You have a right to believe that.
However, there is no factual basis for it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark,
Thanks for your interesting post. I was NOT aware that
the principal investigator in the study you referenced is a well
known and well respected investigator who nearly had a prior study
negated because he did not realize just how fast the mercury from
thimerosal is cleared in newborns.

Now I understand the reason for the study.

Just in case mercury MAY be the cause of medical problems-especially in
premature and LBW infants--I don't believe that children should be given
vaccines that contain mercury. As we both know, in the near future, none
of the vaccines will contain mercury. The Hepatitis B vaccination (in my
opinion) should not have been given to those babies or any other babies
until the Hep B vaccine no longer contains mercury.

My problem related to this study is no longer with the "principle
investigator" since it's important to determine how fast the mercury from
thimerosal is cleared in premature and LBW infants. My problem is with the
medical establishment that continues to give children vaccines that
contain mercury--knowing full well that in the near future that none of
the vaccines will contain mercury. It would do no harm to wait until the
vaccines that do not contain mercury become available.

Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~