Let's see if the anti-vacs oppose this...

[Markositiu Probertositiu]

UN calls for ceasefire in Uganda to immunize children
Thu Oct 9, 2:44 PM ET Add Health - AFP to My Yahoo!



KAMPALA (AFP) - Two UN agencies urged the Ugandan government and Lord's
Resistance Army (LRA) rebels to observe an eight-day ceasefire to allow
anti-measles immunizations of more than 12 million children in the country.

"UN Children's Fund (UNICEF (news - web sites)) and World Health
Organisation (WHO) calls on belligerents in Uganda to cease all hostilities
between October 14 to 21 so that children can be immunized against measles,"
they said in a joint statement released here.


The statement said the two agencies were making the appeal for days of calm
to allow more than 50,000 vaccinators and community mobilisers to immunize
every one of the estimated 12.7 million children in Uganda.


Army spokesman Major Shaban Bantariza, said the UN agencies were preaching
to the converted, because the government army already supports the campaign.


"They need to work a little harder to convince the LRA to observe their
call. For us, we want our children to be immunized, but if they attack
during the period, we are under obligation to defend the people," Bantariza
said.


WHO spokesman Ben Ssensasi told AFP that health workers will try to immunize
all children aged between six months and 15 years in conflict areas.


"Let peace reign in Uganda for at least the duration of the mass
immunization so that children could be saved," the statement quoted Ssensasi
as saying.


The LRA has been fighting President Yoweri Museveni's secular government
since 1988 to replace it with one based on the biblical Ten Commandments,
but they replenish their ranks by abducting young boys and girls, using the
boys as fighters and girls as concubines for rebel commanders.


Some 1.2 million people have been displaced so far and are forced to live in
squalid camps set up by the army to protect them from abductions.

[Alun Harford]

"Markositiu Probertositiu" > wrote in message >...
> UN calls for ceasefire in Uganda to immunize children
> Thu Oct 9, 2:44 PM ET Add Health - AFP to My Yahoo!
>
>
>
> KAMPALA (AFP) - Two UN agencies urged the Ugandan government and Lord's
> Resistance Army (LRA) rebels to observe an eight-day ceasefire to allow
> anti-measles immunizations of more than 12 million children in the country.
>
> "UN Children's Fund (UNICEF (news - web sites)) and World Health
> Organisation (WHO) calls on belligerents in Uganda to cease all hostilities
> between October 14 to 21 so that children can be immunized against measles,"
> they said in a joint statement released here.
>
>
> The statement said the two agencies were making the appeal for days of calm
> to allow more than 50,000 vaccinators and community mobilisers to immunize
> every one of the estimated 12.7 million children in Uganda.
>
>
> Army spokesman Major Shaban Bantariza, said the UN agencies were preaching
> to the converted, because the government army already supports the campaign.

WHAT???
Now THAT'S just silly.
The Ugandan army consistantly breaks ceasefires. Whether breaking the
creasefires is the right thing to do is harder to call.

>
>
> "They need to work a little harder to convince the LRA to observe their
> call. For us, we want our children to be immunized, but if they attack
> during the period, we are under obligation to defend the people," Bantariza
> said.
>
>
> WHO spokesman Ben Ssensasi told AFP that health workers will try to immunize
> all children aged between six months and 15 years in conflict areas.
I wish him luck. He'll need it. Lots of it.

>
>
> "Let peace reign in Uganda for at least the duration of the mass
> immunization so that children could be saved," the statement quoted Ssensasi
> as saying.
Not exactly something the LRA really cares about. Their basic military
tactic is to abduct children, treat them brutally (see
http://hrw.org/reports/2003/uganda0303/uganda0403-03.htm#P132_14720 ),
and then put a gun to their heads and make them run towards government
troops - sometimes lightly armed and sometimes unarmed - to see how
quickly they die so they know whether to retreat or attack. Any child
who stops, turns around, takes cover, etc. is shot in the back.

>
>
> The LRA has been fighting President Yoweri Museveni's secular government
> since 1988 to replace it with one based on the biblical Ten Commandments,
Incorrect.
This seems to be propoganda chucked out by Museveni. The LRA have
stated many times that this is not their objective (see 'Letter To A
London Friend'), and Kony (who claims to be posessed by the Holy
Ghost) would not want to be restricted by such rules.


> but they replenish their ranks by abducting young boys and girls, using the
> boys as fighters and girls as concubines for rebel commanders.
And fighters. Girls are often sent into battle (as above) with babies
or small children strapped to their backs.

>
>
> Some 1.2 million people have been displaced so far and are forced to live in
> squalid camps set up by the army to protect them from abductions.
Actually, 'forced' is another bit of propoganda - it is the Ugandan
military that 'forces' people to live in the so-called 'protected'
camps. They shoot anybody who tries to leave them, and anybody who is
in them is subject to gross human rights violations by UPDF and Arrow
group troops.

Alun Harford

[Jeff]

I wish we could stay away from the provaccine, antivaccine discussions. I
think they are driving down readership of the group. And, I don't think they
really help anyone.

I doubt people with internet access will get vaccine because of a
cease-fire. I don't see why you bring it up. It won't change anyone's views.
But it will anger the antivaccs.

I would much rather see parents asking questions about ear aches, weight
gain, weight loss, specific diseases and making appointments with their
doctors than see few posts and a lot of flames.

Jeff

[Jeff]

"Rich" <,@.> wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 10:44:34 -0400, "Jeff" >
> wrote:
>
> >I wish we could stay away from the provaccine, antivaccine discussions. I
> >think they are driving down readership of the group. And, I don't think
they
> >really help anyone.
>
> You must be kidding me. IMO vaccinations are responsible for saving
> more lives than any other intervention.

I think good sanitation, clean water and good access to food has saved more
lives than vaccination. But i have no question that vaccination is a major
success story of modern medicine and has saved millions of lives. And
continues to save thousands of lives each year.

> Vaccinations are preventive
> medicine. Vaccinations are responsible for wiping out smallpox
> completely. Vaccinations are responsible for almost completely wiping
> out polio. Vaccinations are responsible for reducing the incidence of
> many diseases resulting in reduced morbidity/mortality.
>
> If the anti-vacs have an "alternative" to vaccination then this is the
> group to discuss it in. They must of course provide some kind of
> evidence to support that their recommendation will be effective.

They don't have an alternative that they can support with evidence.

> Sadly there are those like Jan Drew who only post anti-vac web sites
> which only serve to scare people from vaccinating. Individuals like
> Jan Drew obviously care little about children. Otherwise why would
> they only give one side of the story.
>

I have absolutely no question that vaccines have saved millions of lives.

However, doing something that invites a flame war, IMHO, a very bad thing to
do. I suspect this will drive more people away from the group. And, it won't
help anyone.

> >
> >I doubt people with internet access will get vaccine because of a
> >cease-fire. I don't see why you bring it up. It won't change anyone's
views.
>
> Don't assume that everyone has ideas fixed in stone. There are many
> individuals who would like to hear both sides of the story.

And a flame war is not a good way to get them both sides of the story.

>
> >But it will anger the antivaccs.
>
> Too bad. I think it better to anger the antivacs than to ignore this
> important public health issue.

Then the antivacs will continue the flame war.

> >
> >I would much rather see parents asking questions about ear aches, weight
> >gain, weight loss, specific diseases and making appointments with their
> >doctors than see few posts and a lot of flames.
>
> I think vaccinations are more important than asking questions about
> ear aches, weight gain, etc.

Not if there are flame wars. I don't think people get much good informaiton
from flame wars. I would rather much more civil and effective conversations
about vaccines.

> If we suddenly suspend all vaccinations
> it would not be long before many children will die and then asking
> questions about ear aches, weight gain/loss would be moot. A word to
> the wise.

There is no reason why we can't discuss vaccines. But I see the oringinal
post as useless (a cease fire has almost nothing to do with the health of
most kids of people who are going to read this forum) and inviting a flame
war (see the title). I don't think flame wars help anyone and hurt those
people seeking real information.

Jeff

> Aloha,
>
> Rich
> >
> >Jeff
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> The best defense to logic is ignorance.

[[email protected]]

I understand your opinion, Rich.
That is the social reason vaccines are used.

There are other opinions.
There are people who believe that vaccines lower the body's vital
force sufficiently so the disease can act. The theory is similar to
the laws of vibration.

The body isn't static, so as it raises in vital force again, it
reenters the same range that the vaccine was used to cap the vital
force. The disease returns.

The people who examine this theory believe that a body brought to the
highest vital force would be raised above disease. However, the body
still isn't static at this level. What does it take to lower it other
than vaccines? Food quality and choices. Emotional states among many
other things. How easy would it be to maintain the higher level
especially in a child?

Is this theory easy to challenge today. Of course, because it ignores
the germ theory.
However, the antivirus actions are worth considering when you think of
putting live vaccines into a healthy infants body.

If you want to use vaccines, use them, but this is an alternative
discussion group. Not everyone will accept standard practice as the
end of the vaccine conversation.

Mike

[Jeff]

> wrote in message
...
>
> I understand your opinion, Rich.
> That is the social reason vaccines are used.

The medical reason too. Vaccines continue to save lives. No one died of
small pox this year. And in the western hemisphere, I don't think anyone
died of polio. Menigitis, chickenpox, influenza, measles -- all deadly
diseases -- are way down in the US, mostly becaues of vaccines. And in areas
where vaccines are not given as frequently as recommended, these vaccine
preventable diseases reappear.

Bottom line: vaccines save lives.

> There are other opinions.

That vaccines save lives is extremely strongly supported by the immunology,
virology, bacteriology, and clinical evidence.

The evidence on the other theories is either lacking or even against the
other theories.

With all due respect, a lot of alternative health theories are hog wash. If
you want to put your life or your kid's life at risk because you believe
this crap, fine with me. But I will bring up the scientifically valid facts
about the alternatives when the alternatives hurt people. And not getting
vaccines hurts people.

Remember, being "alternative" does not mean it works or has evidence to
support it.

A lot of times "alternative" really means an alternative way for someone to
make money.

I question the value of these discussions. But, I will not fail to respond
to a thread when opinions are given that can hurt people, especially
children.

Jeff

[[email protected]]

Rich,

You want evidence and proof of an alternative theory I simply
mentioned to you. Discussing it is one thing, but demanding evidence
on every line of convesation requires major research and
justification.

I didn't state it as a reason to stop you from taking vaccines and I'm
not out to prove or disprove this theory. I don't have the time or
research effort to do that, but if someone has, I'm interested. It's
an alternative thought that relates to vaccine operation. If this
interests you, look it up. If you don't find much, I wouldn't be
surprised, because the first time that was mentioned to me was by a
great healer I was having lunch with in 1986. We began watching that
theory in relationship to his method. It appears to have merit.
That's it.

There are other reasons for believing vaccines are not the way to go
in creating health. It doesn't mean those reasons are sufficient for
the masses to stop using vaccines, especially in third world
countries, but the theories behind them may lead to a new way of
creating true health.

Discard them all just because they don't fit your current concepts and
you stifle medical advancements outside the box.

Somewhere along the line if you want more from alternatives than you
are getting, you will need to stop the intense demand for examined,
classical proof and have the courage to look into the claims yourself
with an objective eye. I won't anticipate objections to that
statement. It would be great if you could look hard enough at that to
understand all that I am saying.

Aloha no ka oi,
Mike

[David Wright]

In article >, Rich <,@.> wrote:
>On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 12:33:51 -0400, "Jeff" >
>wrote:
>
>>
>>"Rich" <,@.> wrote in message
...
>>> On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 10:44:34 -0400, "Jeff" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >I wish we could stay away from the provaccine, antivaccine discussions. I
>>> >think they are driving down readership of the group. And, I don't think
>>they
>>> >really help anyone.
>>>
>>> You must be kidding me. IMO vaccinations are responsible for saving
>>> more lives than any other intervention.
>>
>>I think good sanitation, clean water and good access to food has saved more
>>lives than vaccination.
>
>Good sanitation actually made the polio problem MUCH WORSE. The best
>sanitation in the world would not rid us of small pox, polio or many
>of the illnesses for which there are effective vaccinations.

Perfect sanitation would eliminate polio, which is transmitted via
feces.

>>> If the anti-vacs have an "alternative" to vaccination then this is the
>>> group to discuss it in. They must of course provide some kind of
>>> evidence to support that their recommendation will be effective.
>>
>>They don't have an alternative that they can support with evidence.
>
>If they don't have an alternative that can be supported with evidence
>then why are they so against a preventative health modality that has
>overwhelming evidence to support its efficacy.

Because vaccines are produced by Evil Organized Medicine and are
therefore Bad and Awful and Don't Work.

>>However, doing something that invites a flame war, IMHO, a very bad
>>thing to do. I suspect this will drive more people away from the
>>group. And, it won't help anyone.
>
>Just because there are some people who react with anger when
>vaccinations are recommended is no reason to not recommend/advocate
>them.

I must agree. Although most of our anti-vac crowd here are simply
loons, failing to respond to their lunacy can be considered a cowardly
act that lends a semblance of legitimacy to their claims.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

[David Wright]

In article >, > wrote:
>
>I understand your opinion, Rich.
>That is the social reason vaccines are used.
>
>There are other opinions.
>There are people who believe that vaccines lower the body's vital
>force sufficiently so the disease can act. The theory is similar to
>the laws of vibration.

There are a few minor problems with this idea, such as nobody being
able to do any sort of objective measurement of "vital force" or the
aforementioned "vibrations". Therefore, I'd really hesitate to call
your suggestions a "theory", since theory implies falsifiability and I
have no idea how what you're suggesting could be shown to be false.

>The body isn't static, so as it raises in vital force again, it
>reenters the same range that the vaccine was used to cap the vital
>force. The disease returns.

Except that people who are vaccinated against most diseases don't get
the diseases, which makes your statement difficult to accept.

>However, the antivirus actions are worth considering when you think of
>putting live vaccines into a healthy infants body.

Live viruses get into an infant's body anyway, via the mouth and
lungs. Unless you propose to keep the infant in a bubble, you're
going to have to deal with these things.

>If you want to use vaccines, use them, but this is an alternative
>discussion group. Not everyone will accept standard practice as the
>end of the vaccine conversation.

No, they won't. Most of them don't have good reasons, but they
won't.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

[Orac]

In article >, Rich<,@.>
wrote:

> On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 19:15:26 GMT, wrote:
>
> >
> >Rich,
> >
> >You want evidence and proof of an alternative theory I simply
> >mentioned to you. Discussing it is one thing, but demanding evidence
> >on every line of convesation requires major research and
> >justification.
>
> I asked for evidence. I cannot demand anything. It is your choice to
> provide such evidence if it is available. I think it reasonable to ask
> a person for evidence if they make an assertion that I am skeptical
> of.

Indeed it is. It's equally reasonable to ask someone to elaborate when
he says that a therapy "makes physiological sense." He doesn't have to
respond, but his dodging the question does not reflect well on his
assertion.


> >I didn't state it as a reason to stop you from taking vaccines and I'm
> >not out to prove or disprove this theory. I don't have the time or
> >research effort to do that, but if someone has, I'm interested.
>
> Me too. I am interested in learning about evidence for various
> alternative theories which is why I asked. You should not be offended
> by my request for evidence. If you have none then just say so. Maybe
> someone else can provide it.

Quite correct. My sometimes pugnacious online persona may sometimes be
intimidating to alties (I just like the rough-and-tumble of debating
these things). However, I wouldn't be hanging out in this newsgroup if I
weren't genuinely interested in alternative therapy. I'm particularly
interested in finding out which ones may actually work.

[Snip]

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

[Roger Schlafly]

"Jeff" > wrote
> The medical reason too. Vaccines continue to save lives. No one died of
> small pox this year. And in the western hemisphere, I don't think anyone
> died of polio. ...

Yes, that's right, but there is still a legitimate debate about whether
those
vaccines are advisable, and whether they should be mandatory.

[Jeff]

"David Wright" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Rich <,@.> wrote:

(...)

> >Good sanitation actually made the polio problem MUCH WORSE. The best
> >sanitation in the world would not rid us of small pox, polio or many
> >of the illnesses for which there are effective vaccinations.
>
> Perfect sanitation would eliminate polio, which is transmitted via
> feces.

Except that there is live polio virus off the coast of NYC in the sewage
sludge. And you also need something that is impossible: Perfect hygeine.
Perfect hygiene is nearly impossible. You need to do a surgical-type scrub
after using the restroom, almost. Plus, even then, you won't every bacterium
and virus off the area of skin around the anus. I guess that we wear
underwear because that is a messy area,

> >>> If the anti-vacs have an "alternative" to vaccination then this is the
> >>> group to discuss it in. They must of course provide some kind of
> >>> evidence to support that their recommendation will be effective.
> >>
> >>They don't have an alternative that they can support with evidence.
> >
> >If they don't have an alternative that can be supported with evidence
> >then why are they so against a preventative health modality that has
> >overwhelming evidence to support its efficacy.
>
> Because vaccines are produced by Evil Organized Medicine and are
> therefore Bad and Awful and Don't Work.
>
> >>However, doing something that invites a flame war, IMHO, a very bad
> >>thing to do. I suspect this will drive more people away from the
> >>group. And, it won't help anyone.
> >
> >Just because there are some people who react with anger when
> >vaccinations are recommended is no reason to not recommend/advocate
> >them.
>
> I must agree. Although most of our anti-vac crowd here are simply
> loons, failing to respond to their lunacy can be considered a cowardly
> act that lends a semblance of legitimacy to their claims.

I think many are just mislead.

Jeff

> -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
> These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
> "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
> were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)
>

[Jeff]

"David Wright" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, >
wrote:
> >
> >I understand your opinion, Rich.
> >That is the social reason vaccines are used.
> >
> >There are other opinions.
> >There are people who believe that vaccines lower the body's vital
> >force sufficiently so the disease can act. The theory is similar to
> >the laws of vibration.
>
> There are a few minor problems with this idea, such as nobody being
> able to do any sort of objective measurement of "vital force" or the
> aforementioned "vibrations". Therefore, I'd really hesitate to call
> your suggestions a "theory", since theory implies falsifiability and I
> have no idea how what you're suggesting could be shown to be false.

A better for the vital force thing is "conjecture."

I have an idea? How about an experiment where some people are given
vaccines. And other aren't given vaccines. And then let's see who is more
likely to get the disease the vaccine prevents against, like Hib meningitis,
chicken-pox, measles, polio, whatever.

Oh yeah. That experiment has been done. Vaccines save many, lives each year.
In other words, they work.

Each day, I am exposed to many antigens like pollen, God knows what it is in
my colon, cuts and scrapes, colds, etc. The number of antigens in a vaccine
is really small compared to that. There is no reason to expect the number of
antigens in a vaccine to be a problem at all.

Vital force conjecture: 0, vaccines 2.

The real winner: People who get vaccines.

So much for weakened vital force conjecture.

Jeff

[David Wright]

In article >,
Roger Schlafly > wrote:
>"Jeff" > wrote
>> The medical reason too. Vaccines continue to save lives. No one died of
>> small pox this year. And in the western hemisphere, I don't think anyone
>> died of polio. ...
>
>Yes, that's right, but there is still a legitimate debate about whether
>those vaccines are advisable, and whether they should be mandatory.

Tell you what, Roger -- we'll give you a free pass on this one. You
don't have to vaccinate your kids. Ever. You don't have to justify
your decision, even.

(Anything to keep him from posting that execrable "FAQ" of his again.)

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

[David Wright]

In article >,
Jeff > wrote:
>
>"David Wright" > wrote in message
...
>> In article >, Rich <,@.> wrote:
>
>(...)
>
>> >Good sanitation actually made the polio problem MUCH WORSE. The best
>> >sanitation in the world would not rid us of small pox, polio or many
>> >of the illnesses for which there are effective vaccinations.
>>
>> Perfect sanitation would eliminate polio, which is transmitted via
>> feces.
>
>Except that there is live polio virus off the coast of NYC in the sewage
>sludge. And you also need something that is impossible: Perfect hygeine.

Yeah, I know. I just felt like being pedantic. Note that I have been
out front saying it does not make sense to cease polio vaccination
just because wild polio is extinct in the Western Hemisphere.

>> >>However, doing something that invites a flame war, IMHO, a very bad
>> >>thing to do. I suspect this will drive more people away from the
>> >>group. And, it won't help anyone.
>> >
>> >Just because there are some people who react with anger when
>> >vaccinations are recommended is no reason to not recommend/advocate
>> >them.
>>
>> I must agree. Although most of our anti-vac crowd here are simply
>> loons, failing to respond to their lunacy can be considered a cowardly
>> act that lends a semblance of legitimacy to their claims.
>
>I think many are just mislead.

The net result is the same. Honest ignorance is not notably better
than willful ignorance.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

[JG]

"Jeff" > wrote in message
...

> "Rich" <,@.> wrote in message
> ...

[...]

> > If the anti-vacs have an "alternative" to vaccination then this is
the
> > group to discuss it in. They must of course provide some kind of
> > evidence to support that their recommendation will be effective.

> They don't have an alternative that they can support with evidence.

Quarantine. *Plenty* of evidence of its effectiveness. Anyone who
denies that surveillance and containment measures played a pivotal role
in eliminating smallpox should do some research. Ditto typhoid
("Typhoid Mary" ring a bell?). And, more recently (and further evincing
your dearth of memory cells), SARS. An interesting article can be found
at http://www.msnbc.com/news/911613.asp.

....As amp used to say, "Play again?"

[...]

> There is no reason why we can't discuss vaccines. But I see the
oringinal
> post as useless (a cease fire has almost nothing to do with the health
of
> most kids of people who are going to read this forum) and inviting a
flame
> war (see the title).

Right, on both counts.

JG

When you choose the lesser of two evils, always remember that it is
still an evil.
-- Max Lerner

[Mark]

Orac > wrote

> I wouldn't be hanging out in this newsgroup if I
> weren't genuinely interested in alternative therapy. I'm particularly
> interested in finding out which ones may actually work.
>
> [Snip]


No you're not! You're just a Lackey of Barrett / member of Evil
Organized Medicine / greedy doctor...on a Quixotic quest to dissuade
people from using lifesaving alternative health remedies because
you've been paid off by Big Pharma.

Me, I'm still waiting for my check.

Mark, MD

[Dave]

"Mark" > wrote in message
m...
> Orac > wrote
>
> > I wouldn't be hanging out in this newsgroup if I
> > weren't genuinely interested in alternative therapy. I'm particularly
> > interested in finding out which ones may actually work.

If you were genuinely interested in evaluating alternative therapies, you
would have been interested enough in Bing Han Refined Ginseng Powder
to at least check to see why it is different. You don't have to eat it,
endorse
it or support it, but you have no right to disparage something you know
nothing about. That is ignorant and mean-spirited.

> No you're not! You're just a Lackey of Barrett / member of Evil
> Organized Medicine / greedy doctor...on a Quixotic quest to dissuade
> people from using lifesaving alternative health remedies because
> you've been paid off by Big Pharma.
>
> Me, I'm still waiting for my check.
>
> Mark, MD

[Mark Thorson]

Dave the SPAMMER wrote:

> If you were genuinely interested in evaluating alternative therapies, you
> would have been interested enough in Bing Han Refined Ginseng Powder
> to at least check to see why it is different.

We all know what makes it different.

Quoting from this file:
http://www.fda.gov/ora/fiars/ora_import_ia9908.html

[. . .]

REASON FOR ALERT: This alert provides a
compilation of all processed foods that may be subject
to detention without physical examination due to illegal
pesticide residues pursuant to the procedures outlined
in Chapter 9 of the RPM.

[. . .]

Ginseng Bing Han Medical Factory Quintozene
3/13/2001
(Powdered) 81, Cherng Gong Street *Pentachlorobenzene
211-9414883-5 Ell Jeun Village, Taiwan *Tetrachloroaniline
I290230/120531 FEI# 3003196781 *Hexachlorobenzene
54F[]R12 - SEA *BHC
Shipper: Bing Han (Canada) *Pentachloroaniline
Enterprises. Ltd. *Tecnazene
210-7911 Alderbridge Way *Pentachlorothioanisole
Richmond B.C., Canada
FEI# 3003196782

Quoting from this file:
http://www.fda.gov/ora/oasis/5/ora_oasis_i_54.html

Refusal Actions by FDA as Recorded in OASIS

Country of Origin Entry # DOC Line Suffix
Manufacture Name
City / ISO Country Code District
Product Code Product Description
Date Reason

[. . .]

Taiwan, Republic Of China 310-5216341-2 1 1
Bing Han Enterprises Ltdpharmaceutical Factory
Tainan , TW CIN-DO
54YBZ04 PANAX GINSENG, PERSONAL SHIPMENT
02-MAY-2003 PESTICIDES

[Markositiu Probertositiu]

At least you are not an anti-vac liar.


"Alun Harford" > wrote in message
om...
> "Markositiu Probertositiu" > wrote in
message >...
> > UN calls for ceasefire in Uganda to immunize children
> > Thu Oct 9, 2:44 PM ET Add Health - AFP to My Yahoo!
> >
> >
> >
> > KAMPALA (AFP) - Two UN agencies urged the Ugandan government and Lord's
> > Resistance Army (LRA) rebels to observe an eight-day ceasefire to allow
> > anti-measles immunizations of more than 12 million children in the
country.
> >
> > "UN Children's Fund (UNICEF (news - web sites)) and World Health
> > Organisation (WHO) calls on belligerents in Uganda to cease all
hostilities
> > between October 14 to 21 so that children can be immunized against
measles,"
> > they said in a joint statement released here.
> >
> >
> > The statement said the two agencies were making the appeal for days of
calm
> > to allow more than 50,000 vaccinators and community mobilisers to
immunize
> > every one of the estimated 12.7 million children in Uganda.
> >
> >
> > Army spokesman Major Shaban Bantariza, said the UN agencies were
preaching
> > to the converted, because the government army already supports the
campaign.
>
> WHAT???
> Now THAT'S just silly.
> The Ugandan army consistantly breaks ceasefires. Whether breaking the
> creasefires is the right thing to do is harder to call.
>
> >
> >
> > "They need to work a little harder to convince the LRA to observe their
> > call. For us, we want our children to be immunized, but if they attack
> > during the period, we are under obligation to defend the people,"
Bantariza
> > said.
> >
> >
> > WHO spokesman Ben Ssensasi told AFP that health workers will try to
immunize
> > all children aged between six months and 15 years in conflict areas.
> I wish him luck. He'll need it. Lots of it.
>
> >
> >
> > "Let peace reign in Uganda for at least the duration of the mass
> > immunization so that children could be saved," the statement quoted
Ssensasi
> > as saying.
> Not exactly something the LRA really cares about. Their basic military
> tactic is to abduct children, treat them brutally (see
> http://hrw.org/reports/2003/uganda0303/uganda0403-03.htm#P132_14720 ),
> and then put a gun to their heads and make them run towards government
> troops - sometimes lightly armed and sometimes unarmed - to see how
> quickly they die so they know whether to retreat or attack. Any child
> who stops, turns around, takes cover, etc. is shot in the back.
>
> >
> >
> > The LRA has been fighting President Yoweri Museveni's secular government
> > since 1988 to replace it with one based on the biblical Ten
Commandments,
> Incorrect.
> This seems to be propoganda chucked out by Museveni. The LRA have
> stated many times that this is not their objective (see 'Letter To A
> London Friend'), and Kony (who claims to be posessed by the Holy
> Ghost) would not want to be restricted by such rules.
>
>
> > but they replenish their ranks by abducting young boys and girls, using
the
> > boys as fighters and girls as concubines for rebel commanders.
> And fighters. Girls are often sent into battle (as above) with babies
> or small children strapped to their backs.
>
> >
> >
> > Some 1.2 million people have been displaced so far and are forced to
live in
> > squalid camps set up by the army to protect them from abductions.
> Actually, 'forced' is another bit of propoganda - it is the Ugandan
> military that 'forces' people to live in the so-called 'protected'
> camps. They shoot anybody who tries to leave them, and anybody who is
> in them is subject to gross human rights violations by UPDF and Arrow
> group troops.
>
> Alun Harford

[Orac]

In article >,
(Mark) wrote:

> Orac > wrote
>
> > I wouldn't be hanging out in this newsgroup if I
> > weren't genuinely interested in alternative therapy. I'm particularly
> > interested in finding out which ones may actually work.
> >
> > [Snip]
>
>
> No you're not! You're just a Lackey of Barrett / member of Evil
> Organized Medicine / greedy doctor...on a Quixotic quest to dissuade
> people from using lifesaving alternative health remedies because
> you've been paid off by Big Pharma.
>
> Me, I'm still waiting for my check.

Well, the alties keep telling me I'm well paid for spreading anti-alt
disinformation here. I could use the dough. I still have medical school
debt to pay off....;-)

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

[Orac]

In article >,
"Dave" > wrote:

> "Mark" > wrote in message
> m...
> > Orac > wrote
> >
> > > I wouldn't be hanging out in this newsgroup if I
> > > weren't genuinely interested in alternative therapy. I'm particularly
> > > interested in finding out which ones may actually work.
>
> If you were genuinely interested in evaluating alternative therapies, you
> would have been interested enough in Bing Han Refined Ginseng Powder
> to at least check to see why it is different. You don't have to eat it,
> endorse
> it or support it, but you have no right to disparage something you know
> nothing about. That is ignorant and mean-spirited.

Bull****. In the course of my exchanges with you, I looked up more
actual scientific studies on the proposed benefits of Ginseng than YOU
ever have. (Not difficult given that you clearly haven't looked up a
single one.) You're just lazy and unwilling to evaluate evidence
objectively, particularly if it might interfere with your MLM sales of
Ginseng.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

[Jeff]

> wrote in message
...
>
> Rich,
>
> You want evidence and proof of an alternative theory I simply
> mentioned to you. Discussing it is one thing, but demanding evidence
> on every line of convesation requires major research and
> justification.
>
> I didn't state it as a reason to stop you from taking vaccines and I'm
> not out to prove or disprove this theory. I don't have the time or
> research effort to do that, but if someone has, I'm interested. It's
> an alternative thought that relates to vaccine operation. If this
> interests you, look it up. If you don't find much, I wouldn't be
> surprised, because the first time that was mentioned to me was by a
> great healer I was having lunch with in 1986. We began watching that
> theory in relationship to his method. It appears to have merit.
> That's it.
>
> There are other reasons for believing vaccines are not the way to go
> in creating health. It doesn't mean those reasons are sufficient for
> the masses to stop using vaccines, especially in third world
> countries, but the theories behind them may lead to a new way of
> creating true health.
>
> Discard them all just because they don't fit your current concepts and
> you stifle medical advancements outside the box.
>
> Somewhere along the line if you want more from alternatives than you
> are getting, you will need to stop the intense demand for examined,
> classical proof and have the courage to look into the claims yourself
> with an objective eye.

Here is what my objective eye sees:

The vitral force conjecture has no objective evidence to back it up. And
plenty of evidence to suggest that vaccines save lives by preventing polio,
smallpox, measles, mumps, rubella, hepatitis, mengititis, etc. illness.

Please tell me what objective evidence I have missed about vaccine or the
vital force conjecture that should make me take this conjecture seriously.

Because someone can make a conjecture does not mean that the conjecture has
the same validity of scientifically proven concepts or that the conjecture
should be taken seriously. In philosophy, maybe. In science, no.

Jeff

> I won't anticipate objections to that
> statement. It would be great if you could look hard enough at that to
> understand all that I am saying.
>
> Aloha no ka oi,
> Mike
>

[Jeff]

"JG" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Jeff" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > "Rich" <,@.> wrote in message
> > ...
>
> [...]
>
> > > If the anti-vacs have an "alternative" to vaccination then this is
> the
> > > group to discuss it in. They must of course provide some kind of
> > > evidence to support that their recommendation will be effective.
>
> > They don't have an alternative that they can support with evidence.
>
> Quarantine. *Plenty* of evidence of its effectiveness. Anyone who
> denies that surveillance and containment measures played a pivotal role
> in eliminating smallpox should do some research. Ditto typhoid
> ("Typhoid Mary" ring a bell?). And, more recently (and further evincing
> your dearth of memory cells), SARS. An interesting article can be found
> at http://www.msnbc.com/news/911613.asp.
>
> ...As amp used to say, "Play again?"

You have a valid point. Buy, what would quarantine have done what against
polio, chicken pox, hepatitis and measles? Quarantine helps in certain
situations, but it does not compare to vaccination in preventing illness or
death from vaccine-preventable illnesses.

As Amp used ot say, "Play again?"

Jeff

[Jonathan Smith]

"JG" > wrote in message >...
> "Jeff" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > "Rich" <,@.> wrote in message
> > ...
>
> [...]
>
> > > If the anti-vacs have an "alternative" to vaccination then this is
> the
> > > group to discuss it in. They must of course provide some kind of
> > > evidence to support that their recommendation will be effective.
>
> > They don't have an alternative that they can support with evidence.
>
> Quarantine. *Plenty* of evidence of its effectiveness.

As a containment approach to limit second order infection, not as an
approach to avoid primary infection. And then again, infectivity and
diagnosis are not necessarily properly ordered making quarantine less
than effective without presumption based on exposure - and by that
time, it's already in the next level. If you quarantined the whole
population.....

> Anyone who
> denies that surveillance and containment measures played a pivotal role
> in eliminating smallpox should do some research.

But then again, smallpox immunization doesn't require that some get
the disease first. Looking at the current proposals, it appears that
quarantine with ring vaccination has the best likelihood of
containmnet with the minimal number of downsides - under the
assumption of terrorism.

> Ditto typhoid
> ("Typhoid Mary" ring a bell?). And, more recently (and further evincing
> your dearth of memory cells), SARS. An interesting article can be found
> at http://www.msnbc.com/news/911613.asp.

No vaccine for SARS - if there had been one the whole mess could have
been dealt with much differently.

Typhoid mary preceeded typhoid vaccine by about 90 years.

> ...As amp used to say, "Play again?"

OK - I played, - can you?

js

[Anth]

One reason why vaccines _could_ be dangerous - somatids.
Anth

> wrote in message
...
>
> Rich,
>
> You want evidence and proof of an alternative theory I simply
> mentioned to you. Discussing it is one thing, but demanding evidence
> on every line of convesation requires major research and
> justification.
>
> I didn't state it as a reason to stop you from taking vaccines and I'm
> not out to prove or disprove this theory. I don't have the time or
> research effort to do that, but if someone has, I'm interested. It's
> an alternative thought that relates to vaccine operation. If this
> interests you, look it up. If you don't find much, I wouldn't be
> surprised, because the first time that was mentioned to me was by a
> great healer I was having lunch with in 1986. We began watching that
> theory in relationship to his method. It appears to have merit.
> That's it.
>
> There are other reasons for believing vaccines are not the way to go
> in creating health. It doesn't mean those reasons are sufficient for
> the masses to stop using vaccines, especially in third world
> countries, but the theories behind them may lead to a new way of
> creating true health.
>
> Discard them all just because they don't fit your current concepts and
> you stifle medical advancements outside the box.
>
> Somewhere along the line if you want more from alternatives than you
> are getting, you will need to stop the intense demand for examined,
> classical proof and have the courage to look into the claims yourself
> with an objective eye. I won't anticipate objections to that
> statement. It would be great if you could look hard enough at that to
> understand all that I am saying.
>
> Aloha no ka oi,
> Mike
>

[Alun Harford]

(Alun Harford) wrote in message >...
> "Markositiu Probertositiu" > wrote in message >...
> > UN calls for ceasefire in Uganda to immunize children
> > Thu Oct 9, 2:44 PM ET Add Health - AFP to My Yahoo!
> >
> >
> >
> > KAMPALA (AFP) - Two UN agencies urged the Ugandan government and Lord's
> > Resistance Army (LRA) rebels to observe an eight-day ceasefire to allow
> > anti-measles immunizations of more than 12 million children in the country.
> >
> > "UN Children's Fund (UNICEF (news - web sites)) and World Health
> > Organisation (WHO) calls on belligerents in Uganda to cease all hostilities
> > between October 14 to 21 so that children can be immunized against measles,"
> > they said in a joint statement released here.
> >
> >
> > The statement said the two agencies were making the appeal for days of calm
> > to allow more than 50,000 vaccinators and community mobilisers to immunize
> > every one of the estimated 12.7 million children in Uganda.
> >
> >
> > Army spokesman Major Shaban Bantariza, said the UN agencies were preaching
> > to the converted, because the government army already supports the campaign.
>
> WHAT???
> Now THAT'S just silly.
> The Ugandan army consistantly breaks ceasefires. Whether breaking the
> creasefires is the right thing to do is harder to call.

I hate being right.

The Ugandan govt. just declared that it won't observe the ceasefire.

Alun Harford