Good News/Bad News?

"Jeff" wrote in message
...

"JG" wrote in message
...

[...]

Speculation. now that is helpful. Ironically, according to the BMJ
article,
injection practices in sub-Saharin Africa than parts of the
middle-east and
south Asia.

HUH? Care to restate this meaningless jibberish? ("Injections in
sub-Saharan Africa ..." *WHAT* "....than parts of the Middle East
and
South Asia"?)

In parts of the Middle East and South Asia, the rate of reusing
needles is
higher than in sub-Sahara Africa.

Okay. Your point being...what? That rates of the diseases linked to
needle "sharing" are higher (or lower?) in the Middle East and South
Asia than in Africa? So? Either way, it's not relevant to the point I
was making.

Oh, so *now* you're dropping your liberal, "we're really *all*
brothers," "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of
the
problem" mantel? Ooookaaaay. Whatever. g

Gee, I don't remember saying that.

Oh, please. Your political leanings ("I like Howard Dean"**) are
quite
clear.

Please do not put words in my mouth. That I like Howard Dean does not
mean
that I agree with everything he says or with every liberal position or
Democratic position. I have voted for many Republicans and will vote
for
more.

LOL. Yeah. And some of *my* best friends are Greenies...

However, the reality of this is that we can speak about needles
and
AIDS and
vaccines and whatever, and the people in Africa will be much less
likely to
read this than the people in the US and other English speaking
countries.
The vast majority of readers of this forum are unlikely to get
used
needles
during the injection of vaccines.

Of course. It's beyond me why, and how, you got off on this
tangent--this erroneous inference--that my intent in posting the article
was to dissuade US citizens from getting vaccinated because needles used
IN AFRICA are often contaminated.

Hey, with everything/everyone "just a plane ride away" (as the CDC
loves
to point out), it's a GLOBAL problem, isn't it? We're all jes' one
big,
happy planet/family now, ain't we? Are we not our brother's keeper?

Nice weasel move. Unfortunately, our most of our brothers and sisters
in
Africa won't be able to read this. The people who will read this are
almost
exclusively from the developed nations. The vast majority of the
people who
will be reading this live in areas where needles are not reused.

Of course. SO? Do you understand (obviously you don't!) that
dissuading readers from getting vaccinated, if that's what they wish to
do, WASN'T my reason for posting the article? You've (not surprising)
made an erroneous conjecture.

I don't see how realizing that most people in 3rd world countries,
especially in the places where contaminated needles would be
reused,
has
anything to do with my liberal views.

Funny, I thought most liberals supported such organizations as WHO
and
were proponents of the New World Order...

I support WHO. I do not know what you mean by New World Order.

Sigh Google the term, Jeff.

Besides, this does not hide the fact that the article was about
"medications," and not vaccines.

Again, the article didn't specify for WHAT the needles were used.

I realize that this *may* apply to
vaccines, about the article clearly is not about that. Instead,
the
issue
was studied seperately by the WHO.

(Pssst, Jeff: Go to http://www.spellcheck.net or
http://spellcheck.freeurl.com before posting.)

So you were caught fear-mongering. PERIOD.

No. That's Mark P.'s baseless accusation. (Now you're "me too-ing"
*him* ...too funny.) Nevertheless, are you asserting that rising
HVB,
HVC, and AIDS cases/rates in Africa *shouldn't* concern those in the
"industrialized" world?

No. I am saying that people in the developed world don't need to worry
about
getting HBV, AIDS, etc. from contaminated needles because contaminated
needles are not used in the developed world for immunizations or other
medications.

No, they're not. What people in the "developed world" should be
concerned about a (1) the fact that a government, or
quasi-government, using THEIR money, is yet again(!), in its intervening
attempts to "solve" one problem, inadvertently creating another, likely
MORE SERIOUS problem; and (2) the fact that a dangerous, avoidable (at a
cost, to be sure) practice--the use of contaminated needles--is causing
many more cases of serious, often-fatal diseases, carriers of which,
thanks to lax enforcement of immigration laws, can potentially infect
citizens of "developed world" countries.

[...]

**Put a Confederate flag in your pickup yet? g

No. I have a car. I will not put a flag of any type on my car. The
flags
fade, get dirty, torn, etc., really fast. I think this is
disrespectful to
the flag. If I had a house, I would put a flag pole up and shine a
light on
it, so it would be displayed properly.

SIGH My comment was in jest. I forget you're humor-impaired. Sorry.

I find the Confederate flag disrespectful to human rights, ...

Told Howard "We won't always have the strongest military" Dean this yet?
g (---note grin, Jeff)

"PF Riley" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 22:22:01 GMT, "JG" wrote:

"Jeff" wrote in message
...

Speculation. now that is helpful. Ironically, according to the BMJ
article, injection practices in sub-Saharin Africa than parts of
the middle-east and south Asia.

HUH? Care to restate this meaningless jibberish? ("Injections in
sub-Saharan Africa ..." *WHAT* "....than parts of the Middle East and
South Asia"?)

Reminds me of Jane Curtin on Weekend Update on Saturday Night Live in
the late 1970's (not a direct quote):

"The U.S. State Department today said that China, Russia, Lithuania,
Spain, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Israel."

Hehehe. Paraphrasing Dan Ackroyd ("Point/Counterpoint" segment):
"Jeff, you ignorant slug!"

Besides, this does not hide the fact that the article was about
"medications," and not vaccines.

Again, the article didn't specify for WHAT the needles were used.

I'm just curious what your purpose for posting the article was in the
first place.

Well, it certainly wasn't to instill fear in anyone reading it! (I'm
far from an alarmist/scaremonger.) I enjoy irony. Others (who shall
remain nameless) obviously do not. (Or, perhaps more likely, they just
don't "get it.") Here we are, via our tax dollars, intervening to
prevent (via vaccination) many diseases that are
usually--overwhelmingly, in reasonably healthy persons--benign, or to
treat (via injected pharmaceuticals) diseases/conditions of varying
gravity, yet the end result, apparently, is the transmission of often
fatal (at the very least, expensive-to-treat) diseases!

You and Roger have a habit of posting articles without
saying outright your opinion. Should we stop immunizing in third-world
countries?

It's worth considering, unless and until it can be done with more safety
(e.g., with single-use needles). At any rate, I don't like the idea of
coerced money--tax dollars--being used for *any* health programs, here
or abroad. I believe health care is best (= more effectively and
efficiently) handled by the private sector. ...but you knew that
already. g

Roger presented a valid point: Any increase, anywhere, in the
number/incidence of such diseases as HVB, HVC, and AIDS should be of
concern to everyone, everywhere, until health officials take realistic
measures (e.g., rigid enforcement of immigration laws) to prevent
infected individuals from transmitting the disease.

JG

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:19:33 GMT, "JG" wrote:

"PF Riley" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 22:22:01 GMT, "JG" wrote:

Reminds me of Jane Curtin on Weekend Update on Saturday Night Live in
the late 1970's (not a direct quote):

"The U.S. State Department today said that China, Russia, Lithuania,
Spain, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Israel."

Hehehe. Paraphrasing Dan Ackroyd ("Point/Counterpoint" segment):
"Jeff, you ignorant slug!"

Thirty lashes to you! No more picking on Jeff for his spelling! It's
Dan AYkroyd, and the segment was called "Count/Pointercount."

I'm just curious what your purpose for posting the article was in the
first place.

Well, it certainly wasn't to instill fear in anyone reading it! (I'm
far from an alarmist/scaremonger.) I enjoy irony.

Fair enough. I found it absurd as well. Maybe Bill Gates can buy some
fresh needles for all of Africa.

Others (who shall remain nameless) obviously do not.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Jeff is a goober.

PF

"PF Riley" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:19:33 GMT, "JG" wrote:

"PF Riley" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 22:22:01 GMT, "JG"
wrote:

Reminds me of Jane Curtin on Weekend Update on Saturday Night Live
in
the late 1970's (not a direct quote):
"The U.S. State Department today said that China, Russia,
Lithuania,
Spain, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Israel."

Hehehe. Paraphrasing Dan Ackroyd ("Point/Counterpoint" segment):
"Jeff, you ignorant slug!"

Thirty lashes to you! No more picking on Jeff for his spelling! It's
Dan AYkroyd, and the segment was called "Count/Pointercount."

I stand corrected. I guessed at the spelling and Googled "Dan Ackroyd";
22K+ sites have it wrong as well. g I'll take your word
"Point/Counterpoint" vs. "Count/Pointercount"; I'm not THAT anal. :-)
(What were you, like 5 or 6 when SNL first aired ['75]? I trust your
recall is based on reruns. g) As for Jeff, some of his manglings are
just too darn (unintentionally) funny to let pass. I mean, c'mon, he
could write for Yogi Berra!

I'm just curious what your purpose for posting the article was in
the
first place.

Well, it certainly wasn't to instill fear in anyone reading it! (I'm
far from an alarmist/scaremonger.) I enjoy irony.

Fair enough. I found it absurd as well. Maybe Bill Gates can buy some
fresh needles for all of Africa.

Maybe someone will forward the article to him. I imagine he'd willingly
do what he can to keep prospective MS customers (all what, 6.3+B?**)
alive...

Others (who shall remain nameless) obviously do not.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Jeff is a goober.

....in denial. So sad...g

JG

**Here's a cool site; you can watch the world's population figure
increase right before your eyes!:
http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/popclockw (just keep clicking your
"refresh" button).

"JG" wrote in message
...
"Jeff" wrote in message
(...)

Of course. SO? Do you understand (obviously you don't!) that
dissuading readers from getting vaccinated, if that's what they wish to
do, WASN'T my reason for posting the article? You've (not surprising)
made an erroneous conjecture.

What was your point in posting the article?


I don't see how realizing that most people in 3rd world countries,
especially in the places where contaminated needles would be
reused,
has
anything to do with my liberal views.

Funny, I thought most liberals supported such organizations as WHO
and
were proponents of the New World Order...

I support WHO. I do not know what you mean by New World Order.

Sigh Google the term, Jeff.

OK, I still do not know what *YOU* mean.

Besides, this does not hide the fact that the article was about
"medications," and not vaccines.

Again, the article didn't specify for WHAT the needles were used.

I realize that this *may* apply to
vaccines, about the article clearly is not about that. Instead,
the
issue
was studied seperately by the WHO.

(Pssst, Jeff: Go to http://www.spellcheck.net or
http://spellcheck.freeurl.com before posting.)

So you were caught fear-mongering. PERIOD.

No. That's Mark P.'s baseless accusation. (Now you're "me too-ing"
*him* ...too funny.) Nevertheless, are you asserting that rising
HVB,
HVC, and AIDS cases/rates in Africa *shouldn't* concern those in the
"industrialized" world?

No. I am saying that people in the developed world don't need to worry
about
getting HBV, AIDS, etc. from contaminated needles because contaminated
needles are not used in the developed world for immunizations or other
medications.

No, they're not. What people in the "developed world" should be
concerned about a (1) the fact that a government, or
quasi-government, using THEIR money, is yet again(!), in its intervening
attempts to "solve" one problem, inadvertently creating another, likely
MORE SERIOUS problem; and (2) the fact that a dangerous, avoidable (at a
cost, to be sure) practice--the use of contaminated needles--is causing
many more cases of serious, often-fatal diseases, carriers of which,
thanks to lax enforcement of immigration laws, can potentially infect
citizens of "developed world" countries.

The article did not address the issue of whether the founding from the
developed world is increasing or decreasing the misuse of needles. In fact,
I would think more funding, including funding for teaching people who to
clean needles or buy new needles, will help aleviate the problem.

Last time I checked, there was no requirement that immigrants and visitors
to developed nations be free of Hep B or AIDS.

[...]

Jeff

"Roger Schlafly" wrote in message
et...
"Jeff" wrote
Unfortunately, rich countries with loose immigration policies are also
affected. HBV is only common in countries like China that vaccinate
with dirty needles. Then immigrants from those countries flood into
the USA, where health authorities decided that it is more politically
correct to vaccinate all newborns, regardless of risk.
So, should we tighten our immigration policies?

Yes.

I remember that our immigration policies were changed after WWI. They
excluded more people from eastern europe, including many Jews. Our
immigration policies, today, are excluding many scientists and others from
third world countries, often countries that don't treat all of their
citizens well. Being that I am a descendent of immigrants, I welcome
immigrants. Even if they don't speak English or have different colored skin
than I.

Who will cut our grass, pick
our fruit and vegetables, clean our offices and homes and watch our
children

We don't need HBV+ illegal aliens doing those things.

No, but we do need people to do these things. And having HBV+ people picking
our fruit, cleaning our offices and homes, etc., does not pose a threat to
us. HBV+ people have rights, too.

Vaccine Policy FAQ
http://www.mindspring.com/~schlafly/vac/vaccfaq.htm

I am not sure what your lies have to do with this.

You should rename this a FMQ - frequently misanswered questions.

For example, you state that pediatricians usually do not know more than what
is stated on the label. Unlike you, pediatricians have taken care of kids
with vaccine preventable diseases, answered questions from parents about
vaccines before and after vaccines were given, and had training vaccination
during medical school and residency and read about vaccines in journals and
other good sources.

Another example is that you state that pediatricians are only following the
laws. There is no law that says that a pediatrician has to vaccinate anyone.

Another example. You state that the AAP and other physician organizations
agreed to endorse schedules determined by the federal government. This is
bull****. They only endorse a schedule after they look at it and determine
that is appropriate.

You state the feds do get some advice from pediatricians on the ACIP, and
the AAP usually sends a couple of non-voting observers, but that's all.

But that is not all. The last recommendation from the ACIP was for the live
Influenza vaccine. ACIP Influenza working group who is responsible for the
report included a member of the AAP, a member from the ACOG (the OB/GYN
group), a member from the ACP (internal med), a member from the
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, a member from the
infectious diseases society of America, two from the AAFP, as well as other
members.

ACIP included as voting members: the chairman, who is a pediatrician, and at
least one other pediatrician (in both cases, they were affiliated with a
children's hospital). The other voting members included people from other
hospitals, universities, and community organizations. With one exception,
they all have MDs. So your statement that pediatricians don't have input
into the vaccine policy, when at least one voting member and the chairman
are pediatricians is blatantly false. In addition, the AAP has its own
committee of experts that reviews the ACIP recommendations. And, as you note
on your page of misanswered questions, the AAP can and does disagree with
the official recommendations.

You also state that physicians no longer take the Hippocratic Oath. This is
wrong. I do not know if all medical schools have grads take the oath, but at
least the majority do. It may not be the oath that you would want them to
take, but it is a version of the Hippocratic Oath. Besides, the Hippocratic
Oath is an anachronism. It states that physicians may not take out bladder
stones (gee, many urologists would disagree with that).

You also state that all states have laws requiring children to be
vaccinated. This is false. Not one state requires children to be vaccinated.

Your lies continue.

Jeff

"Jeff" wrote
So, should we tighten our immigration policies?
Yes.
I remember that our immigration policies were changed after WWI. They
excluded more people from eastern europe, including many Jews. Our
immigration policies, today, are excluding many scientists and others from
third world countries, often countries that don't treat all of their
citizens well.

We have a couple of million immigrants coming in every year to the USA.
How many of them are mistreated scientists? A dozen? The number is
so small as to be completely insignificant.

Being that I am a descendent of immigrants, I welcome immigrants.

Would you welcome 50M from Mexico, 50M from China, and 50M
from India if they all came next year?

"Jeff" wrote
What was your point in posting the article?

The truth seems to be a little disturbing to you and Riley. If JG or I
post a news article, you want to know that our motives are
consistent with the objectives of the medical establishment.

"Roger Schlafly" wrote in message
et...
"Jeff" wrote
What was your point in posting the article?

The truth seems to be a little disturbing to you and Riley. If JG or I
post a news article, you want to know that our motives are
consistent with the objectives of the medical establishment.

No. I am curious why someone posted an article about vaccines supposedly
causing serious illness when the article does not apply to the kids of the
vast majority of readers of this forum. In fact, the original poster
commented "You're liable to get hepatitis C (or hep B or AIDS)." Not, third
world people are liable to get hep B or C or AIDS from used needles.

It seems rather misleasding, if you ask me. I am just wonder why the poster
did this.

Please don't try to read my mind, Roger. You seem to do a very poor job of
it. And please don't try to speak for me either.

Thanks.

Jeff

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 17:13:22 GMT, "JG" wrote:

"PF Riley" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:19:33 GMT, "JG" wrote:

Thirty lashes to you! No more picking on Jeff for his spelling! It's
Dan AYkroyd, and the segment was called "Count/Pointercount."

I stand corrected. I guessed at the spelling and Googled "Dan Ackroyd";
22K+ sites have it wrong as well. g I'll take your word
"Point/Counterpoint" vs. "Count/Pointercount"; I'm not THAT anal. :-)

The name "Count/Pointercount" was itself a joke. "Sixty Minutes" at
that time featured a segment called "Point/Counterpoint."

(What were you, like 5 or 6 when SNL first aired ['75]? I trust your
recall is based on reruns. g)

Close, but you have overestimated my age.

PF