1

General Science / Tragic reaction to prescription drug

« on: 16/03/2009 00:46:59 »

NSM - you can not dictate to people what they think.

Not everyone think in the same way as you, you have to accept that not everyone believes the same things that you, nor do people 'fit' a cast from your mindset.

Further, if people disagree with you, it does not mean at all that they are the 'enemy'.

I am not dictating how you think.

That is being dictated already to you by the established entities around you.

Your failure to realize this makes you a co-operative pseudopod of these interests thus doing their bidding without realization and compounds your error.

This is called nested thinking.

I have not said you were an enemy.

I am always polite.

I am very sorry you cannot see the bigger picture.The wider perspective.

You are a unwitting victim of mendacity but you cannot help this as you are a product of your environment and vast effort would be required on your part to realize this.

2

General Science / How can we run out of landfill space?

« on: 16/03/2009 00:37:05 »

...
There are no "chasms" in the UK which would be cold enough all year round to prevent anaerobic decay - and as I posted above - as soon as the bugs get going it is very difficult to stop them as they are exothermic. 

Miss sophie still does not understand what a chasm is.She thinks it up a mountain or that a mountain is required for it to exist.I suggest you study geography and topography.

I have checked Holland and it is not perfectly flat at all as you suggest being riddled with chasms,gullies and mineshafts.

In any case Holland is not the world or any other country.

You are quite correct in being wrong in stating that no chasms exist in the UK which are cold.

I suggest you try visiting these chasms with a thermometer.

I fear the reason is you and miss sophie are obsessed with attacking the idea is that you did not think of this solution yourself and thus have to expend great energy on dissing someone who has the boldness and vision to break the mould of conventional thinking.

Ha Ha Ha,
No, the reason that I am "attacking the idea" is that most of my working life has been spent in waste management and particularly landfill - as a rule I tend to make comment on internet fora from knowledge and experience.  If I do make a speculative post, I will make it clear and when rational comment from those better informed than I "diss" it, I will accept being "dissed" with good grace.   

The idea of tipping into chasms or old quarries and mines has been used extensively in the past.  However, rightly, environmental standards have moved on with increasing knowledge of how things (like landfill sites) work.  Historically "dilute and disperse" was the philosophy behind tipping - any pollutants would be diluted down by rain fall/ groundwater and dispersed through the environment so as to be unnoticeable.  This approach has been discredited scientifically as heavy metals and certain organic compounds are so persistent / ecotoxic as to pose a risk to human health.

I can also assure you from personal experience that I do not need to take a thermometer into any chasms in the UK to know that they do not remain cold enough all year round to prevent the bugs starting to anaerobically break down waste.  There is one location high in the Cairngorms where snow has occasionally persisted all year round.  That particular location would not be able to accommodate the total UK waste arising, even if every possible item was removed for reuse or recycling.  For a bit of context, in 2004 a total (before recycling) 335000000 tonnes of waste was generated in the UK

Even if (in another country perhaps) a suitably cold chasm/ gully/ mine could be identified, the cost of haulage (however this is achieved) would be significantly greater than the cost of engineering a solution (whether landfill, recycling plant or incinerator (or all 3)) would be far lower. 

Mazurka you are wrong if you think experience qualifies you to reject the idea.

It is well known that older people tend to be ossified in their thought patterns and are resistant to any new ideas, therefore following this ingrained mind set,you dismiss the idea as it would force to adjust the thought patterns in your head into new pathways.This happens to older people.

Remember Clarke's Law?

You only have to look at any map and see it is full of mountainous areas with chasms adjacent in every country.

Refuse does not have to be transported at all.No danger of leakage as most rubbish is encased in plastic bags anyway. 

I fear that established thought patterns have moulded your thinking similar to the luddite brigade of years gone by.

 

3

General Science / Tragic reaction to prescription drug

« on: 11/03/2009 23:22:51 »

Thanks - I had also sought it out for you.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090225/tuk-teen-dies-after-taking-acne-pills-dba1618.html

.

There's a news story that puts a very different angle on it than you decided to do.  He suffered an acute reaction to a commonly prescribed drug, a bit like an allergy.  As he had never taken the drug before, how could anyone have known that he would react like this?  Should everyone be allergy tested prior to taking any common substance?  Thousands of others take these drugs without this reaction.

It's nonsense to imply that the doctor should be punished - should parents be punished when they first discover their child has a peanut allergy?  What if it leads to the child's death?  By your logic, the parents would be to blame.

And what has him being Welsh got to do with it?  This was a tradgedy, pure and simple, yet you have to bring xenophobia into it?

Shaun Jones a healthy 14 year old was killed by a doctors prescription for acne 5 days ago.

No, he wasn't.  He died as a result of an unfortunate reaction to a very common prescription medication.

The doctor has been held blameless by the doctors council.This is a classic case of doctors protecting their own.

On account of him doing nothing wrong.

The medication came with no warnings that it could kill.

This particular packet came with no warnings leaflet - it certainly should have, but that has nothing to do with the doctor who prescribed it, and the parent could have questioned it at that point.  As it happens, a list of the known side effects wouldn't have made ant difference.

Another unfortunate reason maybe that he Welsh and the Welsh people suffer discrimination and inbred bigotry from the English.

Offensive nonsense.

The medication called sebomin is worth $230 million in annual profit.

This may explain why there was no mainstream media publication and was confined to page 9 in a small paragraph.Clearly warnings had gone out to keep it buried.

Paranoid delusional nonsense.

Shaun Jones was a healthy rugby player, he was popular and fun loving.

He had his whole life ahead of him.

So?  Tragic things happen to all sorts of people.

Yet he killed by a single tablet prescribed by his doctor who never bothered to check for side effects.

How do you know?  Were you there at his consultation?  Have you thoroughly interviewed the doctor involved?  Is your paranoid delusion about pharma companies being evil leading you to conlude things that are not, in fact, true?

One doctor I spoke to said this was nothing and that more then 200000 people are killed every year in America but the drugs are just too profitable and the media and politicians have been bribed by the deep pockets of the pharmaceutical companies.

He said they had been paid $20 billion last year.

Evidence please.

You may have noted how the House of Lords peers were involved in a "money to change the law" scandal.

Relevance please.

I feel very sorry for the family of Shaun Jones.To have a 14 year old son killed by a single doctors tablet...words fail me.

Finally, something we can agree on.  I too feel sorry for the family in this tragic situation.  I don't, however, seek to blame anyone.

I find it disturbing that you think the medical profession is above criticism and we should hide their dirty laundary and bury their mistakes.

Here is another of their mistakes:-

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/88711/Boy-dies-of-cancer-after-doc-told-grow-up-

A boy with cancer was dismissed as having mental issues after seeing his doctor 6 times when he had cancer.

Even though it was visable on his chest.A second doctor at the hospital failed also.His blood tests were dismissed.


Is this why we are paying these "doctors" £250000 a year for?

Maybe they are being rewarded for failure instead success just like bankers.

He is dead now but could have been treated and cured if the incompetant doctor had done his job for which he is paid a kings ransom.
 
We can only wait for the excuses you will come up with to excuse his incompetance.

4

General Science / How can we run out of landfill space?

« on: 11/03/2009 11:44:59 »

It is true that significant amounts of waste (recyclate) plastic, metal etc is shipped around the world - in the majority of cases back to China where it is recycled. Contrary to what is written in the more sensationlist media, no domestic waste is shipped across the world.

This is economic solely because otherwise the ships and the containers that delivered goods to the west that originated in China would otherwise be travelling back empty.  Until recently, China's demand for raw materials was greater than could be provided by virgin resources, so the value of recyclate was high.


There are no "chasms" in the UK which would be cold enough all year round to prevent anaerobic decay - and as I posted above - as soon as the bugs get going it is very difficult to stop them as they are exothermic. 

Miss sophie still does not understand what a chasm is.She thinks it up a mountain or that a mountain is required for it to exist.I suggest you study geography and topography.

I have checked Holland and it is not perfectly flat at all as you suggest being riddled with chasms,gullies and mineshafts.

In any case Holland is not the world or any other country.

You are quite correct in being wrong in stating that no chasms exist in the uk which are cold.

I suggest you try visiting these chasms with a thermometer.

I fear the reason is you and miss sophie are obsessed with attacking the idea is that you did not think of this solution yourself and thus have to expend great energy on dissing someone who has the boldness and vision to break the mould of conventional thinking.

5

General Science / How can we run out of landfill space?

« on: 08/03/2009 15:31:13 »

Where are these 'chasms' to which you refer?
I think your view of the topography of mountain ranges may be a bit misguided. The few locations you refer to are very inaccessible. How much do you think it would cost to transport all your waste up there?
Can you imagine Holland paying Switzerland to look after all its waste? Get real

chasms are not "up there". AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA


they are "down there".    VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV

you expense argument is easily refuted after all waste is transported today all around the world in ships/tankers.

Every country has mountains and therefore chasms.The waste is simply dumped into the chasm and will cost less then today as no processing needs to be done.

Do you understand peaks and valleys with a line through the middle?

6

General Science / How can we run out of landfill space?

« on: 06/03/2009 09:18:39 »

How do you explain skyscrapers and multi story houses and tall buildings and mining and basements?

What sort of percentage of the radius of the Earth does a skyscraper or deep mine represent? By your argument, when you walk upright, you head can't be considered as being on the surface.

On mountains that are  enough for your 'scheme' there is still ample precipitation. Have you heard of glaciers? They may be a bit slow but they transfer the contents of high valleys down to the bottom and then they melt - delivering a load of the rubbish you plan to put up there. Bearing in mind the mass of snow / ice, could you restrain them?. Why do you think these high valleys are not used for storing nuclear waste? People have actually thought about the options, already.

How is frozen waste going to climb out of a chasm ?

7

General Science / How can we run out of landfill space?

« on: 05/03/2009 11:10:22 »

"You may have noticed that humans are NOT using the planet's volume but rather it's surface".

How do you explain skyscrapers and multi story houses and tall buildings and mining and basements?

Elementary calculations indicate what i said earlier that mountain chasms and troughs are more then capable of absorbing all the waste produced for the next 10000 years with plenty of room to spare.

They are the best places to dump all waste as the low temperatures solidify and inactivate the waste as is well known low temperatures slow down multiple chemical reactions and production of methane and other toxic wastes which leak into the water table.

Your much vaunted concern about the ecology of a few micro organisms in sub zero mountain chasms is irrelevant compared to the ecological damage caused by cutting vast areas of forestry harbouring vastly more life forms.

Are you worried when you walk you are squashing/killing micro organisms ?

A additional,but very insignificant,benefit is that it would level the land at these places and reduce the distance which foolish mountain climbers would fall when they lose their grip.I have no sympathy for these people as they seem to be adrenalin junkies,jaded with life and putting other people,like rescuers,at risk for their own selfish adrenalin drug rush.

8

General Science / Tragic reaction to prescription drug

« on: 05/03/2009 10:04:01 »

oh yes, very true...

if I can go back on topic

Just to reiterate, anyone who makes a claim of any kind ought to give a resource proving it or else it has no credibility

oh yes, very true...

if I can go back on topic

Just to reiterate, anyone who makes a claim of any kind ought to give a resource proving it or else it has no credibility

http://www.naturalnews.com/023074.html

"The discovery that drug companies have been ghostwriting scientific studies using in-house writers, then paying (bribing) doctors and high-level academics to pretend they were the author of the article is making shockwaves across conventional medicine. This latest revelation of scientific fraud exposes a massive, widespread system of fraud involving not only the drug companies, but also hundreds of different peer-reviewed, "scientific" medical journals that have published these ghostwritten articles. This scam is the latest embarrassment to conventional medicine...."


or you can try ghost writing big pharma in google...loads of articles from reputable papers...

here is another source:-

http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2008/12/12/grassley-probes-medical-ghostwriting-by-wyeth/


Sen. Charles Grassley, investigating instances of “medical ghostwriting,” has asked drugmaker Wyeth for information about whether it helped draft papers about the company’s hormone therapy products and recruited doctors to sign articles for medical journals.

grassley wyeth letter pdfGrassley, who has been

Grassley asks Wyeth for a list of all scientific reports or manuscripts prepared by DesignWrite since 1995. He also wants info on payments to DesignWrite as well as doctors whose names are published as authors of the studies.

In other words drugs are approved on ghost written articles by authors working for the company...and passed of as real doctors.

here is another one from the New York Times:-

http://stanford.wellsphere.com/bioethics-article/big-pharma-gets-caught-ghostwriting/150328

"From the NYT comes the news that Merck flacks were the real authors of "dozens of research studies" on Vioxx that were then shopped around to name-brand physicians. ( WaPo reports as well, here .) Presumably, docs who agreed received some kind of compensation--even if it was just another publication, which is the currency of academic science--for adding their names to the papers and submitting them to journals for peer review and publication. You can read the source article from the Journal of the American Medical Association here .



What's the big deal? Well, for starters, there's the potential for conflict of interest when a drug manufacturer (or anyone else) writes up positive research results about a product in which they have a financial interest. Disclosing such interests is the usual "solution." In this case, there wasn't just non-disclosure; rather, there seem to have been purposeful steps to make it appear as though Merck wasn't involved. Moreover, from the standpoint of research ethics, it's not kosher for people to attach their names to papers they had no role in writing, or research they weren't involved in.


The news also raises the question of whether the research results reported are, in fact, valid and trustworthy. Journal articles are the primary way the medical community learns about...."

9

General Science / Tragic reaction to prescription drug

« on: 05/03/2009 10:02:08 »

Naturalnews is 1 of those anti-pharma, Natural Health fanatical sites. Nowhere in that article does it say how the information came to light.

Another article from that site is "How the FDA is Becoming a Drug Company: Consumer Safety and Access to Natural Health Options Threatened"

By the look of it, it's basically not much more than yet another conspiracy site.

Journal of the American Medical Association here . too?

10

General Science / Tragic reaction to prescription drug

« on: 05/03/2009 09:47:25 »

ok.

11

General Science / Tragic reaction to prescription drug

« on: 04/03/2009 22:54:09 »

I spend my time writing scientific and promotional material for pharma companies. I can absolutely guarantee that nothing gets approved by the FDA (US) and EMEA (EU) without absolutely insane amounts of safety data. These things are tested rigourously through multiple phases of clinical trials, and it doesn't stop post-marketing either. Occasionally new side-effects do come to light, especially where a drug starts to be used for more and more indications.

And when it comes to listing side effects, they must all be listed, even where its not conclusive if it was caused by the drug or by some other confounding factor. There are so many variables when taking a drug, sometimes even down to what you eat and what genes you own, that its absolutely impossible for all side-effects to be predicted.

Furthermore, pharma companies are bound not only by law, which is extememly stringent to put it mildly, they must also abide by the pharmaceutical companies code of practice, called the ABPI in the UK. They can't just 'promote' a drug, not even to doctors and pharmacists. There are restrictions on what words you can use, in what context, when you can use them, and to whom in all adverts, articles, sales material etc etc etc.

Yes, of course pharma companies are out to make money, thats what we all go to work to do after all, but to make them out as greedy evil corporations is just plain ridiculous. You could say the same (or even worse) for sweet manufacturers, or cigarette companies. At least pharma co's are trying to make people well!

You seem to be unaware of the recent fraud where drug companies were using their own employees to review their own drugs or in some they were adding the names of prominant researchers and mailing them $5000 to $50000 cheques for "permission" to use their name.

Hardly impartial reviews as you claim.


In any case today Professor Micheal Oliver confirmed that doctors were being negligent and using tick boxes to inflate their own salaries by prescribing these drugs.

12

General Science / How can we run out of landfill space?

« on: 04/03/2009 22:33:31 »

Far better would be to reduce the amount of waste we produce in the first place, recycle what we can and extract energy from what we have to send to landfill.

That is exactly it: What really matters is not wasting resources and materials. And by all means recycle glass and aluminum/aluminium. This is where it makes a lot of sense from an energy point of view. I really wish people would throw out less. In the USA most people think that recycling solves all problems. It makes the consumption of over-packaged products easier. People tend to forget that it takes energy and resources to recycle. Often more than you gain or save. With the exception of glass and aluminum.

But, extracting energy from waste (by burning it I assume)? Does not sound healthy.

The planet's  size/volume compared to the amount of waste produced is huge.

The concerns expressed are of a a leisurely disposition

13

General Science / How can we run out of landfill space?

« on: 03/03/2009 11:46:10 »

Maybe it is a problem because nobody wants to have a landfill in their town/back yard. I imagine that opening a new landfill is rather difficult due to resistance of the local population (or those pesky environmentalists). So, rationing the waste that goes in (by volume) ensures that an existing landfill may last longer. But that is just a guess

.

You simply dump the waste in troughs adjacent to mountains.
All mountain ranges have troughs thousands of feet deep.Vast empty chasms into which vast amounts rubbish can be dumped.

And damage the very delicate ecosystems and water flow systems in these environments?  What a stupid idea.  There's loads of space in the ocean to dump rubbish too - shall we do that?

I have never ever recycled,knowing this is a totally pointless exercise, any effort by me is insignificant in the larger schemes of things.

It is just a passing media fad.

A passing media fad for the last 20 years?  Not recycling makes you an irresponsible person.  You do realise that recycling isn't just about saving landfill space?

I only became aware of this fad over the last 5 years which means it did not exist in the media in such high volumes.


No significant water flow exists in a frozen low sub-zero temperature environment as you well should know.

The ecosystems are insignificant and consist of little more than hardy lichen and algae,etc.

The chasm walls tend to isolate leakage and are very low temperature minimizing methane and toxic gas production from decay of said rubbish.

14

General Science / Tragic reaction to prescription drug

« on: 03/03/2009 11:39:06 »

I really like Charlotte Church !

Cheers Neil, I think we needed that!

I will talk to you later neilep.

On a lighter note as the newscaster would say I like Charlotte Church too ,but her pop singing has failed for me as it seems to be highly contrived and not spontaneous.

Unfortunately she has put on considerable weight since I saw her last time on television indicating a solidly built frame.

15

General Science / How can we run out of landfill space?

« on: 03/03/2009 11:21:22 »

Maybe it is a problem because nobody wants to have a landfill in their town/back yard. I imagine that opening a new landfill is rather difficult due to resistance of the local population (or those pesky environmentalists). So, rationing the waste that goes in (by volume) ensures that an existing landfill may last longer. But that is just a guess

.

You simply dump the waste in troughs adjacent to mountains.
All mountain ranges have troughs thousands of feet deep.Vast empty chasms into which vast amounts rubbish can be dumped.

I have never ever recycled,knowing this is a totally pointless exercise, any effort by me is insignificant in the larger schemes of things.

It is just a passing media fad.

16

General Science / What would happen if the Ottoman Empire returned?

« on: 03/03/2009 11:08:30 »

I don't think 'America' (do you mean the USA?) has a lot to shout about at the moment. They have impressed their influence on the Middle East for nothing but monetary gain from oil. They are still in the middle of an unforgivable and unjustifiable military involvement there and they have used their wealth to maintain an artificial situation in the region for decades.
NSM:

It was America that has driven all technological advancement and endeavour.

That remark just about says it all. Are you not aware of any of the work that has been going on in Europe, Asia and elsewhere for hundreds of years? The USA has been extremely fortunate to have so many natural resources (Oil, in particluar) and to have been wealthy enough to do more or less what it wants. But is it really the utopian dream for its own poorer and less privileged classes?

Haven't we all just seen the levels of corruption in the US financial sector?
I think a more balanced view is called for before you just knock 'those Moslems'.

America is the driving force for advancement.America has the most money.America has spent $86 billion over the last 20 years on a ballistic defense, which although is only marginally useful,has caused knock on advances in optics,lasers and related fields.

I have not knocked anyone.

The question was the return of the Ottoman Empire returning.

The answer is a definite no.

Do you really think the Ottoman Army on horseback with their scimitars waving could defeat a single Abrams tank?

A single Abrams tank could destroy all the Ottoman Empire armies on horseback with their scimitars.

17

General Science / Tragic reaction to prescription drug

« on: 03/03/2009 10:59:26 »

One doctor I spoke to said

Why would you be talking to doctors when you clearly despise them? They prescribe drugs that are made by big evil pharmacuetical companies afterall.

The mother only said it was not the doctors fault as he probably blamed "somebody" else.

Once she came to realize the facts ,She has started the legal action.I wish her the best and I HOPE SHE EXPOSES THE HORRIBLE TRUTH.

I do not despise doctors per se.


I despise the fact that most of them have put patient care at the bottom and other interests at the top.

They have become little more than overpaid vending machines and shop fronts for dangerous drug dealers.

18

Complementary Medicine / Saving Jade Goody - Urgent Humanitarian Appeal.

« on: 03/03/2009 10:42:44 »

Damo - My sympathies about your uncle. My cancer is likewise asbestos-related.

If NSM can offer a practical way that I can survive it then I shall be eternally grateful. Otherwise he/she should just shut the fek up! I too find his/her comments highly offensive.

Look there is a 4 protocol method to save yourself I read it on a forum by someone who tried it.You may even have come across it.You need to have an open mind and be proactive.

I could explain it to you but what is the point? Your so called "friends"would shoot shoot it down as it would conflict with their mind set and goes against their established mental programming.

The method works on a empirical level and where your life is involved that is all that matters.

It worked for him.It explained how it worked.

Of course it is not vouchsafed by the establishment s it stands for all those things they want to ban, control suppress as it would effect the bottom line.To have outsiders come in and show them up is a very bitter pill to swallow.

Everybody hates to be wrong.Doctors hate to be wrong.When they are wrong they always use the magic words "spontaneous remission" to cover their ignorance.

However it seems you Doctor Beaver are already resigned to your fate.You display a martyr complex already,assisted by your so called "friends" who egg you on to attack me for their own amusement.


The worst kind of "friends" to have.

19

General Science / Tragic reaction to prescription drug

« on: 02/03/2009 09:11:31 »

You think lamenting a young boys death due to a doctors carelessness is offensive?

Sorry, I missed this one earlier.  I think spreading defamatory lies about a medical professional is offensive.  I think using a tragic situation as an opportunity to spread your poisonous nonsense about the medical profession is nonsense.  I think launching off on a rant in which you accuse a person of malpractice, manslaughter or murder is offensive.

Is it defamatory to expose the truth?

Do you deny that 200000 people in the USA die every year as a direct result of side effects from prescription drugs from doctors?

Did you know that the parents of Shaun Jone are going to legal action as a result of this as reported in this mornings news?

Do you deny the need to make doctors and drug companies responsible for their products?

20

General Science / Tragic reaction to prescription drug

« on: 01/03/2009 21:34:48 »

I'm still wondering about inbred bigotry. It's a novel concept.

I'd also like to know where the notion that Welsh people are discriminated against by the Engllish comes from. If anything it's the other way around. English people in Wales are often subjected to abuse & violence. And who remembers English people having their homes in Wales blown up by Welsh nationallists?

What i am trying to say is that stand up comedians frequently cast aspersions on the character of the Welsh by connecting them to sheep in a
offensive way and this results in a dismissive attitude toward the Welsh making them seem less important.