Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#381
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Mike Coslo
writes: How on earth do we know which chemical or combination of chemicals is doing what? Study both biology and chemistry. What is going to happen to these children as they age? Are the asthma cases going to worsen? Probably will. These children going through premature puberty will probably age more rapidly - but who knows? But something is wrong, and I think it is a whole lot of different chemicals. Join the groups against use of DIHYDROGEN MONOXIDE. If you can't find those sites, I'll give you some. Their websites yield much good safety information on the danger to humans from dihydrogen monoxide. At least one city administration has tried to put that in city ordinances. ------ Meanwhile, I still think of amateur radio as a HOBBY, a fun, interesting recreational activity involving radio arts which requires regulation and mitigation due to the physics of radio itself. Some misuse the word "service" as in a service to the nation as if it were akin to a military service or noble cause for humanity. However, in all of Title 47 C.F.R., the word "service" is a regulatory term denoting the type and kind of radio activity; e.g., Citizens Band Radio SERVICE. LHA / WMD |
#382
|
|||
|
|||
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes: How on earth do we know which chemical or combination of chemicals is doing what? Study both biology and chemistry. Unfortunately, the study includes case histories and unexpected accidents such as chemical interactions that we find out about only after damage is done. A gentleman I once worked with used to claim that no restrictions on chemical exposure or pollution were necessary. When I asked him how he could propose such a thing, his answer was "We will just adapt to the poisons". No doubt, but the process of adaptation is a lot easier to say than it is to go through! What is going to happen to these children as they age? Are the asthma cases going to worsen? Probably will. These children going through premature puberty will probably age more rapidly - but who knows? But something is wrong, and I think it is a whole lot of different chemicals. Join the groups against use of DIHYDROGEN MONOXIDE. If you can't find those sites, I'll give you some. Their websites yield much good safety information on the danger to humans from dihydrogen monoxide. At least one city administration has tried to put that in city ordinances. Ahh, the universal solvent! Breathing it can be very dangerous! 8^) Meanwhile, I still think of amateur radio as a HOBBY, a fun, interesting recreational activity involving radio arts which requires regulation and mitigation due to the physics of radio itself. Some misuse the word "service" as in a service to the nation as if it were akin to a military service or noble cause for humanity. However, in all of Title 47 C.F.R., the word "service" is a regulatory term denoting the type and kind of radio activity; e.g., Citizens Band Radio SERVICE. Since you brought this back on-topic, I'll comment that I think perhaps confusion may result from the fact that hams may be "of service" under some circumstances. It is hard to think of 75 meter illness comparison nets as a service, or chasing QSL cards, but there are times when our assistance is not a bad thing. - Mike KB3EIA - |
#383
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Mike Coslo
writes: Len Over 21 wrote: In article , Mike Coslo writes: How on earth do we know which chemical or combination of chemicals is doing what? Study both biology and chemistry. Unfortunately, the study includes case histories and unexpected accidents such as chemical interactions that we find out about only after damage is done. There's no magic instruction manual for Life. Even the ARRL website doesn't have a "good read" on that. A gentleman I once worked with used to claim that no restrictions on chemical exposure or pollution were necessary. When I asked him how he could propose such a thing, his answer was "We will just adapt to the poisons". No doubt, but the process of adaptation is a lot easier to say than it is to go through! The LEAD in ordinary solder is now considered to be a no-no for the environment and there is all sorts of whooping and hollering for LEAD FREE solder. In large industrial quantities that can be nasty on a small part of the environment, yes, but hardly a DANGER in a home workshop or an electronics service shop. I've never heard of anyone sucking on a soldering iron wiping sponge...which might be worse for an individual. The personal computer users who got all greenie in 1985 started whooping and hollering about color CRT RADIATION! They didn't bother to look elsewhere such as in TV broadcasting which had central control rooms full of RADIATING CRTs with 24 KV final accelerating anode potentials capable of generating X-Rays! Like since 1955 with all kinds of folks sitting, walking in front of them. So, now we've got little stickers on PC monitors or somewhere warning us and some say "approved" to some European country's standards. Color CRTs radiate light when on... The supposed DEADLY LONG-TERM RADIATION EXPOSURE from cell phones is still alive and kicking as a "possible health risk" even though the best smarts in medicine can't find a link to verify that. Cell phones radiate little teeny amounts of RF... There's the DANGER of RF RADIATION that is supposed to fry neighbors or something and so there's lots of relatively new rules in Part 97 about that. Is it needed? I doubt it. Hard to separate the hysteria from the real thing. Even the USAF School of Aero Medicine has a big bunch of science types studying all kinds of RF radiation effects. It can't find much evidence except for the already-legislated laws and warnings about RADIATION! Join the groups against use of DIHYDROGEN MONOXIDE. If you can't find those sites, I'll give you some. Their websites yield much good safety information on the danger to humans from dihydrogen monoxide. At least one city administration has tried to put that in city ordinances. Ahh, the universal solvent! Breathing it can be very dangerous! 8^) In large quantities it can destroy crops, even vast tracts of vegetation. The frozen form has been known to be a danger to ships on the open ocean. Meanwhile, I still think of amateur radio as a HOBBY, a fun, interesting recreational activity involving radio arts which requires regulation and mitigation due to the physics of radio itself. Some misuse the word "service" as in a service to the nation as if it were akin to a military service or noble cause for humanity. However, in all of Title 47 C.F.R., the word "service" is a regulatory term denoting the type and kind of radio activity; e.g., Citizens Band Radio SERVICE. Since you brought this back on-topic, I'll comment that I think perhaps confusion may result from the fact that hams may be "of service" under some circumstances. It is hard to think of 75 meter illness comparison nets as a service, or chasing QSL cards, but there are times when our assistance is not a bad thing. Yes, that's true, but it is NOT the "basis and purpose" of why many got into amateur radio. Nearly ALL hams got into amateur radio for the hobby aspects, for personal recreation and enjoyment. ANY citizen can, and many do perform real acts of service for their communities. No ham license needed for that. How many hams sit and monitor the ham bands strictly for emergency calls? Or even use a second receiver in a "guard" mode? Anyone monitor the old 500 KHz maritime distress frequency? The high-MF voice frequency? Anyone monitor the civil aviation distress frequency of 121.5 MHz? Feel free to take your own poll on that. I doubt you will find ONE who will answer affirmative on any of them. Those who want to be of REAL service can join the Peace Corps or something similar. No ham license needed there, either. Or volunteer working at a homeless shelter, or a shelter for battered women. LOTS of places can use volunteers doing a REAL service instead of prancing around saying "we're hams and we are basically an emergency service (and a noble credit to our community, etc.)." Now, if you want to start a real ruckus, you can claim you got into ham radio just to "do a service for your country." If you do that, you will be telling an [expletive deleted] untruth. :-) REALITY, folks, not false parading around on isolated stories of wonderfulness by others, waving your flags, etc. LHA / WMD |
#384
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: Ham-radio is a hobby not a service
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 4/5/2004 1:04 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , Mike Coslo writes: confusion may result from the fact that hams may be "of service" under some circumstances. It is hard to think of 75 meter illness comparison nets as a service, or chasing QSL cards, but there are times when our assistance is not a bad thing. ANY citizen can, and many do perform real acts of service for their communities. No ham license needed for that. Unless, of course, they choose to do that service as a control operator of an Amatuer Radio Staton. How many hams sit and monitor the ham bands strictly for emergency calls? Or even use a second receiver in a "guard" mode? Anyone monitor the old 500 KHz maritime distress frequency? The high-MF voice frequency? Anyone monitor the civil aviation distress frequency of 121.5 MHz? Feel free to take your own poll on that. I doubt you will find ONE who will answer affirmative on any of them. I use a Hamtronics receiver with ELT alarm function. I also monitor military guard and maritime guard with EPIRB alarm. We have tone alerting for ARES/SKYWARN locally. Those who want to be of REAL service can join the Peace Corps or something similar. No ham license needed there, either. Or volunteer working at a homeless shelter, or a shelter for battered women. LOTS of places can use volunteers doing a REAL service instead of prancing around saying "we're hams and we are basically an emergency service (and a noble credit to our community, etc.)." Of course we have Lennie to depend upon to tell us what "real" service is. Not that Lennie hiumslef has gotten himslef out of the house to do ANY kind of service...Unless you consider LIP service... Now, if you want to start a real ruckus, you can claim you got into ham radio just to "do a service for your country." If you do that, you will be telling an [expletive deleted] untruth. :-) REALITY, folks, not false parading around on isolated stories of wonderfulness by others, waving your flags, etc. REALITY, Lennie, are the reams of accolades bestowed to Amateur Radio by the governors of almost every state for various "Amateur Radio Weeks", all of which acknowledge the disaster relief and other public service activities of Amateur Radio. REALITY are the words of praise read into the Federal Register by elected representitives in Congress, from various disaster relief agencies, the Department of State, the Department of Defense, etc etc etc that atest to Amateur Radio's value as a "valuable national resource". REALITY, Lennie, is found in the Memorandums of Understanding by numerous private, civil and military agencies with the ARRL/ARES for rendering support in those very same scenarios. REALITY, Lennie, is that you are a loud mouthed idiot with absolutely NO basis for your anti-Amateur rantings save for your own wonded ego that won't let you take an Amateur exam lest you admit that you ARE a mere mortal and must do what other mere mortals must do to possess an Amateur Radio license. Sucks to be you, Putzy One. Steve, K4YZ |
#385
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
William wrote: PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , Mike Coslo writes: There is also a lot of bad science out there involving immunizations. For example, there are still folks trying to sell the idea that immunizations are somehow a cause of autism, even though repeated scientific studies have shown no causality. There *is* a sort of correlation in that the first definitive signs of autism are usually observed about the age of many common immunizations. The very success of immunizations has been a big part of the controversy sround their continued use. "After all, no one gets these diseases anymore, so why should we immunize for them?" TAFKA, Mike, my youngest son is autistic. He was immunizised. Can you tell me what caused it? Was it all the crap they pumped into me before I went to Somalia? Was it his own immunizations? Do you know? No I don't, and I'm sorry to hear that, Brian. I don't know either, and I'm also sorry to read that. I have some slight layman's experience with such disorders. From what I have read, seen, and heard, I doubt it is chemicals put into *you*. Most of that stuff is not good for you, though. And the rise in autism doesn't correlate too well with immunizations IMO. Here is my take on why a lot of children have developmental problems that seem to be on the increase, per capita wise: I think think there is a chemical problem in general. I think that possibly a combination of food additives and chemicals that are making people ill and interfering with proper development. That's certainly a very logical theory. Here are some other factors: 1) Certain chemicals and other environmental factors, by themselves, may not cause measurable problems. But in combination the total effects may be quite pronounced. Most product testing is single-factor. 2) A product that is "safe" in its original state may break down in the environment into waste products that are not. 3) Individuals have varying levels of genetic predisposition. Almost everyone has, and remembers, an "Uncle Charlie" who worked with toxic materials all his life, smoked 3 packs of Dromedaries a day, drank a quart of John Daniels and died at the age of 95 in a freak hang-gliding accident while on vacation with his 30 year old wife. But there's also "Aunt Ethel" who died of a rare malady at the age of 32 even though she never drank, smoked, or was knowingly exposed to anything more toxic than Ivory soap. 4) Health care professionals are getting better at diagnosis. Years ago, many developmental disorders (such as autism) were not differentiated from mental retardation. Here's an interesting link: http://www.nontoxic.com/nontoxic/injured.html lots of chemicals that we are using on a daily basis are not good for us at all. and http://www.edelsoncenter.com/aut_chem.htm yet another link dealing with premature puberty: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/479363.stm http://www.emagazine.com/november-de...gl_health.html The last links are here because kids are being exposed to these chemicals that mimic hormones and mess with their proper development. snippage There are so many chemicals that we are putting in our bodies, from the preservatives in vaccinations, to the carcinogens that we clean our carpets with, and then put our babies down on those same carpets thinking that they now have a clean healthy place to play in. We seal our houses tightly to save money on fuel, and then breathe formaldehyde contaminated air from the carpets, insulation, and paneling. We eat meat that has been raised with hormones and antibiotics so that it grows quicker. When I was a coach, an amazing amount of the kids playing on my teams had to use inhalers for their asthma. These are supposedly healthy kids - they are not. How on earth do we know which chemical or combination of chemicals is doing what? We don't. But if we protest, we are derided as "luddites" and "anti-progress". What is going to happen to these children as they age? Are the asthma cases going to worsen? Probably will. These children going through premature puberty will probably age more rapidly - but who knows? But something is wrong, and I think it is a whole lot of different chemicals. I agree, Mike. At the very least, the testing done on chemical products is woefully inadequate. At the same time, it's important to focus on solid scientific information. Repeated tests have shown no causal link between the tested immunizations and autism. Then there's the "facilitated communications" fiasco of some years back. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#386
|
|||
|
|||
N2EY wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message ... William wrote: (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , Mike Coslo writes: There is also a lot of bad science out there involving immunizations. For example, there are still folks trying to sell the idea that immunizations are somehow a cause of autism, even though repeated scientific studies have shown no causality. There *is* a sort of correlation in that the first definitive signs of autism are usually observed about the age of many common immunizations. The very success of immunizations has been a big part of the controversy sround their continued use. "After all, no one gets these diseases anymore, so why should we immunize for them?" TAFKA, Mike, my youngest son is autistic. He was immunizised. Can you tell me what caused it? Was it all the crap they pumped into me before I went to Somalia? Was it his own immunizations? Do you know? No I don't, and I'm sorry to hear that, Brian. I don't know either, and I'm also sorry to read that. I have some slight layman's experience with such disorders. From what I have read, seen, and heard, I doubt it is chemicals put into *you*. Most of that stuff is not good for you, though. And the rise in autism doesn't correlate too well with immunizations IMO. Here is my take on why a lot of children have developmental problems that seem to be on the increase, per capita wise: I think think there is a chemical problem in general. I think that possibly a combination of food additives and chemicals that are making people ill and interfering with proper development. That's certainly a very logical theory. Here are some other factors: 1) Certain chemicals and other environmental factors, by themselves, may not cause measurable problems. But in combination the total effects may be quite pronounced. Most product testing is single-factor. I have personal experience in the multiple chemical area. It is recognized as a big problem by environment workers. 2) A product that is "safe" in its original state may break down in the environment into waste products that are not. 3) Individuals have varying levels of genetic predisposition. Almost everyone has, and remembers, an "Uncle Charlie" who worked with toxic materials all his life, smoked 3 packs of Dromedaries a day, drank a quart of John Daniels and died at the age of 95 in a freak hang-gliding accident while on vacation with his 30 year old wife. But there's also "Aunt Ethel" who died of a rare malady at the age of 32 even though she never drank, smoked, or was knowingly exposed to anything more toxic than Ivory soap. 4) Health care professionals are getting better at diagnosis. Years ago, many developmental disorders (such as autism) were not differentiated from mental retardation. Here's an interesting link: http://www.nontoxic.com/nontoxic/injured.html lots of chemicals that we are using on a daily basis are not good for us at all. and http://www.edelsoncenter.com/aut_chem.htm yet another link dealing with premature puberty: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/479363.stm http://www.emagazine.com/november-de...gl_health.html The last links are here because kids are being exposed to these chemicals that mimic hormones and mess with their proper development. snippage There are so many chemicals that we are putting in our bodies, from the preservatives in vaccinations, to the carcinogens that we clean our carpets with, and then put our babies down on those same carpets thinking that they now have a clean healthy place to play in. We seal our houses tightly to save money on fuel, and then breathe formaldehyde contaminated air from the carpets, insulation, and paneling. We eat meat that has been raised with hormones and antibiotics so that it grows quicker. When I was a coach, an amazing amount of the kids playing on my teams had to use inhalers for their asthma. These are supposedly healthy kids - they are not. How on earth do we know which chemical or combination of chemicals is doing what? We don't. But if we protest, we are derided as "luddites" and "anti-progress". Uh-huh. And then when it is proven beyond a doubt that there IS a problem, the same people will talk about "We just didn't know that it was dangerous then!". What is going to happen to these children as they age? Are the asthma cases going to worsen? Probably will. These children going through premature puberty will probably age more rapidly - but who knows? But something is wrong, and I think it is a whole lot of different chemicals. I agree, Mike. At the very least, the testing done on chemical products is woefully inadequate. At the same time, it's important to focus on solid scientific information. Absolutely! I have worked with some dangerous stuff over the years. But what is needed is knowledge about what you are working with, and honesty in it's effects. Repeated tests have shown no causal link between the tested immunizations and autism. Then there's the "facilitated communications" fiasco of some years back. That was one of the sickest chapters in psycho-land. If you look at how it was done, Facilitated communications is almost like the old Ouija board. It mainly shows the mental state of the person that is "helping". And lots of them were pretty sick... - Mike KB3EIA - |
#387
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Mike Coslo writes:
N2EY wrote: Mike Coslo wrote in message ... William wrote: (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , Mike Coslo writes: There is also a lot of bad science out there involving immunizations. For example, there are still folks trying to sell the idea that immunizations are somehow a cause of autism, even though repeated scientific studies have shown no causality. There *is* a sort of correlation in that the first definitive signs of autism are usually observed about the age of many common immunizations. The very success of immunizations has been a big part of the controversy sround their continued use. "After all, no one gets these diseases anymore, so why should we immunize for them?" TAFKA, Mike, my youngest son is autistic. He was immunizised. Can you tell me what caused it? Was it all the crap they pumped into me before I went to Somalia? Was it his own immunizations? Do you know? No I don't, and I'm sorry to hear that, Brian. I don't know either, and I'm also sorry to read that. I have some slight layman's experience with such disorders. From what I have read, seen, and heard, I doubt it is chemicals put into *you*. Most of that stuff is not good for you, though. And the rise in autism doesn't correlate too well with immunizations IMO. Here is my take on why a lot of children have developmental problems that seem to be on the increase, per capita wise: I think think there is a chemical problem in general. I think that possibly a combination of food additives and chemicals that are making people ill and interfering with proper development. That's certainly a very logical theory. Here are some other factors: 1) Certain chemicals and other environmental factors, by themselves, may not cause measurable problems. But in combination the total effects may be quite pronounced. Most product testing is single-factor. I have personal experience in the multiple chemical area. It is recognized as a big problem by environment workers. Then you know exactly what I'm talking about - and then some! 2) A product that is "safe" in its original state may break down in the environment into waste products that are not. 3) Individuals have varying levels of genetic predisposition. Almost everyone has, and remembers, an "Uncle Charlie" who worked with toxic materials all his life, smoked 3 packs of Dromedaries a day, drank a quart of John Daniels and died at the age of 95 in a freak hang-gliding accident while on vacation with his 30 year old wife. But there's also "Aunt Ethel" who died of a rare malady at the age of 32 even though she never drank, smoked, or was knowingly exposed to anything more toxic than Ivory soap. 4) Health care professionals are getting better at diagnosis. Years ago, many developmental disorders (such as autism) were not differentiated from mental retardation. Here's an interesting link: http://www.nontoxic.com/nontoxic/injured.html lots of chemicals that we are using on a daily basis are not good for us at all. and http://www.edelsoncenter.com/aut_chem.htm yet another link dealing with premature puberty: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/479363.stm http://www.emagazine.com/november-de...gl_health.html The last links are here because kids are being exposed to these chemicals that mimic hormones and mess with their proper development. snippage There are so many chemicals that we are putting in our bodies, from the preservatives in vaccinations, to the carcinogens that we clean our carpets with, and then put our babies down on those same carpets thinking that they now have a clean healthy place to play in. We seal our houses tightly to save money on fuel, and then breathe formaldehyde contaminated air from the carpets, insulation, and paneling. We eat meat that has been raised with hormones and antibiotics so that it grows quicker. When I was a coach, an amazing amount of the kids playing on my teams had to use inhalers for their asthma. These are supposedly healthy kids - they are not. How on earth do we know which chemical or combination of chemicals is doing what? We don't. But if we protest, we are derided as "luddites" and "anti-progress". Uh-huh. And then when it is proven beyond a doubt that there IS a problem, the same people will talk about "We just didn't know that it was dangerous then!". And they're telling the truth. They didn't see the problem because they looked at "Uncle Charlie" rather than "Aunt Ethel". What is going to happen to these children as they age? Are the asthma cases going to worsen? Probably will. These children going through premature puberty will probably age more rapidly - but who knows? But something is wrong, and I think it is a whole lot of different chemicals. I agree, Mike. At the very least, the testing done on chemical products is woefully inadequate. At the same time, it's important to focus on solid scientific information. Absolutely! I have worked with some dangerous stuff over the years. But what is needed is knowledge about what you are working with, and honesty in it's effects. That honesty can cost big money, though. Repeated tests have shown no causal link between the tested immunizations and autism. Then there's the "facilitated communications" fiasco of some years back. That was one of the sickest chapters in psycho-land. If you look at how it was done, Facilitated communications is almost like the old Ouija board. Yep. What I find most amazing is how widespread it got before serious testing was done. As I recall, the testing that disproved it was done by people trying to prove that it worked. The tests were elegantly simple and completely damning. It mainly shows the mental state of the person that is "helping". And lots of them were pretty sick... Yep. And some people lost custody of their children and were accused of abuse based on "testimony" obtained through FC. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|