Today's Articles

• OT: Energy Firms Lavish Funds on Inauguration

  Question:

  Energy Firms Lavish Funds on Inauguration By PETE YOST Associated Press, Sat Dec 18, 2004 http://tinyurl.com/5h2fn WASHINGTON – More than $4.5 million from the corporate world has flowed to President Bush’s inauguration fund, much of it from the energy industry and some of its executives in contributions of $250,000 each. Outside the energy sector, New Orleans Saints football team owner Tom Benson gave $50,000 and his companies gave $200,000, the fund reported Friday. Northrop Grumman Corp., the world’s largest shipbuilder and second-largest U.S. defense contractor, donated $100,000. Michael Dell, chairman of Dell Inc., the world’s largest personal computer maker, gave $250,000. So did United Technologies, maker products ranging from escalators to aircraft engines. Investment banking firm Stephens Group Inc. of Little Rock, Ark., gave $250,000. And the education loan firm Sallie Mae gave $250,000. Occidental Petroleum Corp., whose business stands to benefit from the president’s actions concerning Libya, donated $250,000, as did Exxon Mobil, the world’s largest publicly traded oil company. Exxon Mobil reported record third-quarter profits, thanks to higher prices for oil and natural gas. In April, Bush took steps to restore normal trade and investment ties with Libya, enabling four American oil companies, including Occidental, to resume commercial activities there after an 18-year absence. Bush’s action was a reward to Moammar Gadhafi for eliminating his most destructive weapons programs. Other donors from the energy sector included Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens, who gave $250,000; and former Enron President Richard Kinder, who left the firm five years before it collapsed and now is CEO of one of the largest energy transportation and storage companies in the country. Kinder also gave $250,000. Energy provider Southern Co., which owns utility companies in Alabama, Florida, Georgia and Mississippi, gave $250,000. The Nuclear Energy Institute, the policy organization of the nuclear industry, gave $100,000. _____ <http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=544&ncid=703&e=6&u=/a…>        Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access              >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-

  Response:

  > Energy Firms Lavish Funds on Inauguration > By PETE YOST > Associated Press, Sat Dec 18, 2004 > http://tinyurl.com/5h2fn > WASHINGTON – More than $4.5 million from the corporate world has flowed > to President Bush’s inauguration fund, much of it from the energy > industry and some of its executives in contributions of $250,000 each. > Outside the energy sector, New Orleans Saints football team owner Tom > Benson gave $50,000 and his companies gave $200,000, the fund reported > Friday.

  Yep, that’s one way to insure the Super Bowl often comes to the Big Sleazy even though the Saints are NEVER in it. (like I give a flyin’ frick). – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Northrop Grumman Corp., the world’s largest shipbuilder and > second-largest U.S. defense contractor, donated $100,000. > Michael Dell, chairman of Dell Inc., the world’s largest personal > computer maker, gave $250,000. So did United Technologies, maker > products ranging from escalators to aircraft engines. > Investment banking firm Stephens Group Inc. of Little Rock, Ark., gave > $250,000. And the education loan firm Sallie Mae gave $250,000. > Occidental Petroleum Corp., whose business stands to benefit from the > president’s actions concerning Libya, donated $250,000, as did Exxon > Mobil, the world’s largest publicly traded oil company. Exxon Mobil > reported record third-quarter profits, thanks to higher prices for oil > and natural gas. > In April, Bush took steps to restore normal trade and investment ties > with Libya, enabling four American oil companies, including Occidental, > to resume commercial activities there after an 18-year absence. > Bush’s action was a reward to Moammar Gadhafi for eliminating his most > destructive weapons programs. > Other donors from the energy sector included Texas oilman T. Boone > Pickens, who gave $250,000; and former Enron President Richard Kinder, > who left the firm five years before it collapsed and now is CEO of one > of the largest energy transportation and storage companies in the > country. Kinder also gave $250,000. > Energy provider Southern Co., which owns utility companies in Alabama, > Florida, Georgia and Mississippi, gave $250,000. > The Nuclear Energy Institute, the policy organization of the nuclear > industry, gave $100,000. > _____

  <http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=544&ncid=703&e=6&u=/a… 1218/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_inaugural_donors> – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >        Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access >              >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< > -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-

  Response:

  No comments nuclear energy
  
  

• I this energy-crap is MEGA – BOGUS

  Question:

  I think all this renewable or nuclear energy crap is MEGA – BOGUS, IMO a couple of good slaves are better than the energy made of crappy shit like hydrogen or gay metals like plutonium. I think we don

  No comments nuclear energy
  
  

• suggestion

  Question:

  > This kind of reward will never be paid because anyone offering this > kind of money must already firmly believe that none of these things > can be done.

  Richard Feynman offered a much more paltry $1000 prize for a motor no bigger than a 1/64 inch cube. One was made in fairly short order. It was on display at Caltech. A push button switch enabled it to run. It quit running a few years ago and I do not think it is going to be repared. Feynman paid off. He did, however, cancel a similar prize for writin a bible in a small area. With present day IC technology, that is possible. Bill

  Response:

  >… if walked in with a perpetual motion machine, you would never > be able to convince them that you weren’t somehow faking it, because > accepting it as real would invalidate their long held rock-hard core

  beliefs. Wrong on both counts. It would be easy to design a test. And there are plenty of scientists who would just love to get a Nobel prize for coming up with a new theory that allowed perpetual motion. There is tremendous diversity in science, and lots of rebellious thinkers. However any scientist worth his or her salt wants to see the proof.

  Response:

  - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->$10,000,000 reward for solving of problems which are insoluble from >the point of view of official science. >$10,000,000 reward for solving of unsolved problems like perpetual >motion macine, self-propulsion, squaring of circle, transformation of >ordinary substance into gold, universal stock exchange always-winning >strategy, curing of non-curable diseases, insoluble problems related >to faith and religion etc. >For more information please look at >www.members.lycos.co.uk/helpgoodideas/. > This kind of reward will never be paid because anyone offering this > kind of money must already firmly believe that none of these things > can be done. > If you brought in a machine that changed lead into gold, they would be > sure that you were somehow using slight-of-hand, even if they couldn’t > prove it, and would never pay you. > Likewise if walked in with a perpetual motion machine, you would never > be able to convince them that you weren’t somehow faking it, because > accepting it as real would invalidate their long held rock-hard core > beliefs. > So what’s the use?

  Well, as Issuer of the price I’d want a license to use the stuff. For example I’d buy truckloads of lead and turn it into gold. Those 10 millions are peanuts then. Same with a perpetual motion machine. 10 millions are peanuts when it works. Rene — Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar – http://www.ibrtses.com & commercial newsgroups – http://www.talkto.net

  Response:

  > $10,000,000 reward for solving of unsolved problems like perpetual > motion macine

  A perpetual motion machine, if it did exist, would be worth far more than $10,000,000, as would most of your list. .

  Response:

  >For more information please look at

  Surely someone with that amount of money to spare has a real website and a spelling checker…!?

  Response:

  - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> … >>> transformation of ordinary substance into gold, >> Solved. Doable with an accelerator. Don’t be >> shocked that it happens atom by atom, and the electric bill >> may outrun the gain from gold by orders of magnitudes. > Actually I recall hearing the punch line. The modern alchemist turns gold > into lead, in order to get a unique isotope which is worth way more than > gold because it permits tracing of the isotope in organic systems. > That is the same reason why gold was turned into mercury. With only one > isotope, the emission lines in a mercury lamp are much sharper.

  I’m missing something.  Why wasn’t it cheaper to use mass spectroscopy to separate the naturally occurring isotopes of mercury?  I understand the mechanism behind the transmutation approach (gold has only a single stable isotope, Au-197) but not the economics. In a previous life, I was a spectroscopist studying the structure of the diatomic copper molecule, Cu_2.  The spectrum was greatly complicated by the presence of Cu-63 and Cu-65 isotopes in roughly 3:1 proportions.  To identify more clearly what was going on, I purchased some almost pure Cu-63 that had been isolated by mass spec.  Back then (1980 or so) it was only pennies per milligram. Paul — The opinions expressed in this message   | Hanging on in quiet desperation is are my own personal views and do not     |     the English way. reflect the official views of Microsoft  | The time is gone, the song is over.

  Response:

  > $10,000,000 reward for solving of problems which are insoluble from > the point of view of official science. > $10,000,000 reward for solving of unsolved problems like perpetual > motion macine, self-propulsion, squaring of circle, transformation of > ordinary substance into gold, universal stock exchange always-winning > strategy, curing of non-curable diseases, insoluble problems related > to faith and religion etc. > For more information please look at > www.losers.lycos.co.uk/helpgoodideas/.

  Way to try and sell your crappy 3.95$ ebook.  "We Make Risky Investments In Good Ideas and We Don’t Demand Our Money Back In Case of Failure"  Sounds like the informercials that play at 4am about how to make 60000$ in a week by buying classified ads…. I hope your "project" is a flop, that you go broke and are forced to eat government cheese while you think about what you have done.

  Response:

  The idea of offerring a substantial prize to do something deemed impossible or very difficult sounds good to me especially if it’s something that would have significant benefits to humanity, however there are some problems with it – $10M is not much recompense for something really difficult. Work on turning Hydrogen into Helium, Lithium and lots of energy in a controlled way has cost hundreds (thousands) of times that amount ( without much success so far ). Of course successful developments tend to be lucrative regardless of the prize offered. Essentially it would be an incentive  to spend money on R&D, however I’d have a problem with any R&D investment decisions made just to get the prize money. In any case it’s probably easier to get $10M by applying for grants and investment for serious R&D efforts.

  Response:

  > >transformation of ordinary substance into gold

  it’s a two step process: 1) transformation of ordinary substance into cash (you sell the ordinary substance) 2) transformation of cash into gold (you buy gold with cash) Vincent — Vincent Granville, Ph.D. Strategy Architect & Founder Data Shaping Solutions, LLC http://www.datashaping.com

  Response:

  > I’m missing something.  Why wasn’t it cheaper to use mass spectroscopy > to separate the naturally occurring isotopes of mercury?  I understand > the mechanism behind the transmutation approach (gold has only a > single stable isotope, Au-197) but not the economics.

  I don’t know. Do the cost analysis. The transmutation would probably be done in a reactor rather than in a cyclotron. I first ran into this use of gold before the establishment of the IEEE more than 59 years ago. There was a cover photo of newton rings or (more likely) Fabry-Perot rings in an issue of the Journal of the IRE. The lines were clearly sharper when a single isotope was used. Between the development of laser sources and optical frequency stablization, the use mercury light as the preferred standard of length has fallen from favor. Bill

  Response:

  > > I’m missing something.  Why wasn’t it cheaper to use mass spectroscopy > to separate the naturally occurring isotopes of mercury?  I understand > the mechanism behind the transmutation approach (gold has only a > single stable isotope, Au-197) but not the economics. > I don’t know. Do the cost analysis. The transmutation would probably be done > in a reactor rather than in a cyclotron. I first ran into this use of gold > before the establishment of the IEEE more than 59 years ago. There was a > cover photo of newton rings or (more likely) Fabry-Perot rings in an issue > of the Journal of the IRE. The lines were clearly sharper when a single > isotope was used.

  Fascinating.  "More than 59 years ago", posted in 2004, suggests that the transmutation occurred by early 1945 at the latest.  I wasn’t aware that reactors were so easy to come by in those days, or used for much other than breeding plutonium. Mass spectrometers, on the other hand, date back to the 1920’s, if my decades-old memory of undergraduate lectures still serve . Paul — The opinions expressed in this message   | Hanging on in quiet desperation is are my own personal views and do not     |     the English way. reflect the official views of Microsoft  | The time is gone, the song is over.

  Response:

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > I’m missing something.  Why wasn’t it cheaper to use mass spectroscopy > > to separate the naturally occurring isotopes of mercury?  I understand > > the mechanism behind the transmutation approach (gold has only a > > single stable isotope, Au-197) but not the economics. > I don’t know. Do the cost analysis. The transmutation would probably be done > in a reactor rather than in a cyclotron. I first ran into this use of gold > before the establishment of the IEEE more than 59 years ago. There was a > cover photo of newton rings or (more likely) Fabry-Perot rings in an issue > of the Journal of the IRE. The lines were clearly sharper when a single > isotope was used. >Fascinating.  "More than 59 years ago", posted in 2004, suggests that >the transmutation occurred by early 1945 at the latest.  I wasn’t >aware that reactors were so easy to come by in those days, or used for >much other than breeding plutonium.

  From the 1930s on there were a string of remarkable transmutated isotopes and new elements announced, almost all by Lawrence at Berkeley’s radiation lab which housed what was, for the time, a huge cyclotron. Obviously, production was in very small quantities. In fact, reactors don’t generally produce the sort of high energy particles needed to effect such transmutations.     *       Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow         *     * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

  Response:

  >Fascinating.  "More than 59 years ago", posted in 2004, suggests that >the transmutation occurred by early 1945 at the latest.  I wasn’t >aware that reactors were so easy to come by in those days, or used for >much other than breeding plutonium. > From the 1930s on there were a string of remarkable transmutated > isotopes and new elements announced, almost all by Lawrence at > Berkeley’s radiation lab which housed what was, for the time, a > huge cyclotron. Obviously, production was in very small > quantities. In fact, reactors don’t generally produce the sort of > high energy particles needed to effect such transmutations.

  My copy of General Chemistry (Foster/Alyea), 1941, contains a lot on nuclear chemistry, including fission and fusion. << In 1933 EO Lawrence of CA constucted … the cyclotron, which will accelerate … H+, D+, and He++ .. to use them as missles in transmutations. [has an] effective energy of 40M e-volts. In December 1938 … this nuclear energy [fission] was tapped. [attempted to create elements above 92 with neutron bombardment]. Instead, the uranium atom had split approx in half, forming … and 175M e-volts. All this before the public knew about the Manhattan project.

  Response:

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >Fascinating.  "More than 59 years ago", posted in 2004, suggests that > >the transmutation occurred by early 1945 at the latest.  I wasn’t > >aware that reactors were so easy to come by in those days, or used for > >much other than breeding plutonium. > From the 1930s on there were a string of remarkable transmutated > isotopes and new elements announced, almost all by Lawrence at > Berkeley’s radiation lab which housed what was, for the time, a > huge cyclotron. Obviously, production was in very small > quantities. In fact, reactors don’t generally produce the sort of > high energy particles needed to effect such transmutations. >My copy of General Chemistry (Foster/Alyea), 1941, contains a lot on nuclear >chemistry, including fission and fusion. ><< >In 1933 EO Lawrence of CA constucted … the cyclotron, which will accelerate >… H+, D+, and He++ .. to use them as missles in transmutations. [has an] >effective energy of 40M e-volts. >In December 1938 … this nuclear energy [fission] was tapped. [attempted to >create elements above 92 with neutron bombardment]. Instead, the uranium atom >had split approx in half, forming … and 175M e-volts. >All this before the public knew about the Manhattan project.

  The public didn’t know about the Manhattan Project until 1945. It was earlier in 1938 that Meitner, Hahn and Strassman realized they had split the uranium atom, and the punlication of this by them in January and February of 1939 led to the members of the rather small world of physics to realize that there might be the possibility of a weapon. The Manhattan Project sprang from Leo Szilard’s conviction that a fission weapon was possible and that it was unlikely the Germans didn’t realize the same thing. This led to Szilard, with Wigner and Teller, to persuade Einstein to write his notorious August, 1939, letter to President Roosevelt that more or less led to the Manhattan Project. http://www.dannen.com/ae-fdr.html Szilard actually patented the bomb.     *       Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow         *     * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

  Response:

  >… This > led to Szilard, with Wigner and Teller, to persuade Einstein to > write his notorious August, 1939, letter to President Roosevelt > that more or less led to the Manhattan Project.

  Actually it didn’t. It was buried by bureaucratical means. At the time the USA wasn’t yet in the war. Later Einstein commented that his participation in the bomb was limited to one signature, and even that lead to nothing. British scientists – including a considerable number of German refugees – developed a working recipe for the bomb in 1940 (http://www.awe.co.uk/main_site/about_awe/history/timeline/1940/). A copy of their report was sent to Washington in autumn 1941, which lead to the Manhattan Project. — Lassi

  Response:

  > … >> transformation of ordinary substance into gold, > Solved. Doable with an accelerator. Don’t be > shocked that it happens atom by atom, and the electric bill > may outrun the gain from gold by orders of magnitudes. > Actually I recall hearing the punch line. The modern alchemist turns gold > into lead, in order to get a unique isotope which is worth way more than > gold because it permits tracing of the isotope in organic systems.

  That is the same reason why gold was turned into mercury. With only one isotope, the emission lines in a mercury lamp are much sharper. Bill

  Response:

  > $10,000,000 reward for solving of problems which are insoluble from > the point of view of official science. > $10,000,000 reward for solving of unsolved problems like perpetual > motion macine, self-propulsion, squaring of circle, transformation of > ordinary substance into gold, universal stock exchange always-winning > strategy, curing of non-curable diseases, insoluble problems related > to faith and religion etc. > For more information please look at > www.members.lycos.co.uk/helpgoodideas/.

  This kind of reward will never be paid because anyone offering this kind of money must already firmly believe that none of these things can be done. If you brought in a machine that changed lead into gold, they would be sure that you were somehow using slight-of-hand, even if they couldn’t prove it, and would never pay you. Likewise if walked in with a perpetual motion machine, you would never be able to convince them that you weren’t somehow faking it, because accepting it as real would invalidate their long held rock-hard core beliefs. So what’s the use? Double-A

  Response:

  >> For example, mercury into gold has been solved backwards. > That is gold has been turned into mercury to provide optical length > standards. Now hoever, such devices are obsolete. > The problem will be the same as it was for alchemy. There are some pretty > smart frauds out there ready to take money. > As Terry Pratchett puts it, they can turn gold into less gold.

  Heh heh… good one..

  Response:

  > For example, mercury into gold has been solved backwards. > That is gold has been turned into mercury to provide optical length > standards. Now hoever, such devices are obsolete. > The problem will be the same as it was for alchemy. There are some pretty > smart frauds out there ready to take money.

  As Terry Pratchett puts it, they can turn gold into less gold. — "Usenet is a strange place." – Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999. C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton

  Response:

  > $10,000,000 reward for solving of problems which are insoluble from > the point of view of official science. > $10,000,000 reward for solving of unsolved problems like perpetual > motion macine,

  solved. doesn’t exist. >transformation of ordinary substance into gold,

  Solved. Doable with an accelerator. Don’t be shocked that it happens atom by atom, and the electric bill may outrun the gain from gold by orders of magnitudes.  >[snip] Rene — Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar – http://www.ibrtses.com & commercial newsgroups – http://www.talkto.net

  Response:

  … >transformation of ordinary substance into gold, > Solved. Doable with an accelerator. Don’t be > shocked that it happens atom by atom, and the electric bill > may outrun the gain from gold by orders of magnitudes.

  Actually I recall hearing the punch line. The modern alchemist turns gold into lead, in order to get a unique isotope which is worth way more than gold because it permits tracing of the isotope in organic systems.

  Response:

  > $10,000,000 reward for solving of problems which are insoluble from > the point of view of official science. > $10,000,000 reward for solving of unsolved problems like perpetual > motion macine, self-propulsion, squaring of circle, transformation of > ordinary substance into gold, universal stock exchange always-winning > strategy, curing of non-curable diseases, insoluble problems related > to faith and religion etc. > For more information please look at > www.members.lycos.co.uk/helpgoodideas/. > Circles are squared with quadratrix curves.  The rest of your list is > bullshit.

  Other elements can be converted to Gold. Seaborg’s lab even converted some Lead into Gold. Also, some previously incurable diseases have been cured. Karl Johanson

  Response:

  $10,000,000 reward for solving of problems which are insoluble from the point of view of official science. $10,000,000 reward for solving of unsolved problems like perpetual motion macine, self-propulsion, squaring of circle, transformation of ordinary substance into gold, universal stock exchange always-winning strategy, curing of non-curable diseases, insoluble problems related to faith and religion etc. For more information please look at www.members.lycos.co.uk/helpgoodideas/.

  Response:

  > $10,000,000 reward for solving of problems which are insoluble from > the point of view of official science. > $10,000,000 reward for solving of unsolved problems like perpetual > motion macine, self-propulsion, squaring of circle, transformation of > ordinary substance into gold, universal stock exchange always-winning > strategy, curing of non-curable diseases, insoluble problems related > to faith and religion etc. > For more information please look at > www.members.lycos.co.uk/helpgoodideas/.

  This sounds like a safe offer. And indeed, if any such problem could be solved, it would be worth much more. Some have been solved aleady but ar too expensive. For example, mercury into gold has been solved backwards. That is gold has been turned into mercury to provide optical length standards. Now hoever, such devices are obsolete. The problem will be the same as it was for alchemy. There are some pretty smart frauds out there ready to take money. Bill

  Response:

  > $10,000,000 reward for solving of problems which are insoluble from > the point of view of official science. > $10,000,000 reward for solving of unsolved problems like perpetual > motion macine, self-propulsion, squaring of circle, transformation of > ordinary substance into gold, universal stock exchange always-winning > strategy, curing of non-curable diseases, insoluble problems related > to faith and religion etc. > For more information please look at > www.members.lycos.co.uk/helpgoodideas/.

  Circles are squared with quadratrix curves.  The rest of your list is bullshit. — Uncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/  (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"  The Net!

  Response:

  c-ing is believing… Jason

  Response:

  I currently have a Wasburn 5-string I’m not really a thumper I’m more of the finger groover, now I want to change my stylesI want to learn the 6-string is ther a lot of difference between the 2

  Response:

  c-ing is believing… Jason

  Response:

  I currently have a Wasburn 5-string I’m not really a thumper I’m more of the finger groover, now I want to change my stylesI want to learn the 6-string is ther a lot of difference between the 2

  Response:

  c-ing is believing… Jason

  Response:

  I currently have a Wasburn 5-string I’m not really a thumper I’m more of the finger groover, now I want to change my stylesI want to learn the 6-string is ther a lot of difference between the 2

  Response:

  c-ing is believing… Jason

  Response:

  I currently have a Wasburn 5-string I’m not really a thumper I’m more of the finger groover, now I want to change my stylesI want to learn the 6-string is ther a lot of difference between the 2

  Response:

  c-ing is believing… Jason

  Response:

  I currently have a Wasburn 5-string I’m not really a thumper I’m more of the finger groover, now I want to change my stylesI want to learn the 6-string is ther a lot of difference between the 2

  Response:

  c-ing is believing… Jason

  Response:

  I currently have a Wasburn 5-string I’m not really a thumper I’m more of the finger groover, now I want to change my stylesI want to learn the 6-string is ther a lot of difference between the 2

  Response:

  c-ing is believing… Jason

  Response:

  I currently have a Wasburn 5-string I’m not really a thumper I’m more of the finger groover, now I want to change my stylesI want to learn the 6-string is ther a lot of difference between the 2

  Response:

  c-ing is believing… Jason

  Response:

  I currently have a Wasburn 5-string I’m not really a thumper I’m more of the finger groover, now I want to change my stylesI want to learn the 6-string is ther a lot of difference between the 2

  Response:

  chipped 99 1.8T A4. cutch problem should i take off the chip before go back to the dealer?

  Response:

  To avoid any problems….I would take out the chip if you have that option. cheers shad – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > chipped 99 1.8T A4. cutch problem > should i take off the chip before go back to the dealer?

  Response:

  No comments nuclear energy
  
  

• OT. our buddies the French

  Question:

  "Polish troops in Iraq said they had found four French-built advanced anti-aircraft missiles. "To our surprise these missiles were produced in 2003," Polish Defense Ministry spokesman Eugeniusz Mleczak told Reuters on Friday." http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20031003/ts_nm/iraq… The Liberal Senators Staunchly continue to defend Saddam even when it is a lost cause. They claim they support the troops yet out of the other side of their mouths blast what they are doing as unjustified.The recent report on WMD did not have a critical mass of thermonuclear energy and a mushroom cloud erupting from Saddams asshole like the halo of a holy saint, no plagues with thousands of soldiers dying of deadly disease so they are not satisfied, they need absolute PROOF and mere violations isn’t gonna do it they need Biological agents still crawling, halo’s in the sky or nerve agent dripping from the eves. They must have the blood dripping from the dagger, no they will never side against Saddam even if  a Nuclear bomb was plugged up their ass or he dusted their trojans with ricin powder instead of dry lubricant for the more intimant moments. The Socialist Liberalislamic dictatorship is defeated, yet they are still fighting, speaking out that there was no case against him, that G.W. was wrong all the while the French Liberalislamists continue to supply fresh weapons….. Does anybody recall when Gore and Clinton funded inner city projects by the Nation of Islam? Vote for Howard Dean. — Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

  Response:

  >"Polish troops in Iraq said they had found four French-built advanced >anti-aircraft missiles. "To our surprise these missiles were produced in >2003," Polish Defense Ministry spokesman Eugeniusz Mleczak told Reuters >on Friday."

  The only problem being that France stopped production of the supposed missles in the 80’s. The Polish Defense Ministry has appologised.

  Response:

   I’m reminded of a politically in correct joke… TG

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->"Polish troops in Iraq said they had found four French-built advanced >anti-aircraft missiles. "To our surprise these missiles were produced in >2003," Polish Defense Ministry spokesman Eugeniusz Mleczak told Reuters >on Friday." > The only problem being that France stopped production of the supposed missles > in the 80’s. The Polish Defense Ministry has appologised.

  Response:

  No comments nuclear energy
  
  

• Alternative Energiegewinnung

  Question:

  >Vorteile-Nachteile

  No comments nuclear energy
  
  

• Energy-Density-Pyramid Re: petrol-based-farming

  Question:

  If the question were put to me now as to why I would think that a number of 2/3 which is the upper limit of fusion breakeven would transcend into all energy transformations, then my answer would lie in the fact of the Unification of the Forces of physics. That Unification says that all forces are Coulomb forces, some of which are broken symmetry. When we combine StrongNuclear to Weaknuclear we end up with a Coulomb. When we combine gravity to antigravity we end up with a Coulomb. Coulombs of different regions of the atom and hence different force strengths. Coulomb is perfect and hence represented as spherical. Broken symmetry of Coulomb such as StrongNuclear or gravity are represented as cylindrical. When you put spheres inside of cylinders the maximum surface-area or maximum volume is 2/3. And so, I think this number 2/3 pervades or transcends all of energy accounting in physics.

  Response:

  We can make all the 5 forces of physics as either spheres or cylinders. The broken symmetry forces of StrongNuclear broken to WeakNuclear can be viewed as a cylinder inside of sphere where its total energy maximization is 2/3 breakeven. Doing the same for the other two broken symmetry forces of gravity to antigravity. In this perspective, how does fission energy become the maximum allowed by Nature? Coulomb is a sphere. Weaknuclear is a sphere. But Strongnuclear is a cylinder, and no matter how hard we try to make Strongnuclear a sphere it is impossible and fitting the Strongnuclear cylinder inside a EM or Coulomb sphere the end result is always 2/3 breakeven. Simply because surface area is 2/3 maximum and because volume is 2/3 maximum. So why then does Radioactivity of WeakNuclear force offer humanity with the maximum commercial energy? The answer is that radioactivities can all be seen as spheres inside of spheres. Thus, the sphere can encompass not only 100% of another sphere, two identical spheres juxtaposed, but that one sphere can surpass the other sphere, and thereby surpassing breakeven. This is a geometrical explanation of forces. Something that Faraday would have approved if alive and thus awaiting for another Maxwell and Gauss to mathematize. By mathematize, I mean to formulate as the Unification of the 5 Forces of physics via broken symmetry in that all of them are Coulomb or broken-Coulomb where strongnuclear+ weaknuclear = Coulomb and where gravity+antigravity = Coulomb in specific regions of the atom domain. When we harness chemical energy such as burning fossil fuels or electric batteries we in essence are juxtaposing spheres inside of spheres. When we attempt to harness fusion energy we are left with the hurdle of putting spheres inside of cylinders, or cylinders inside of spheres, never able to turn the cylinder into a sphere. And the end result is always the same, that we reach 2/3 breakeven and impossible to attain any greater breakeven.

  Response:

  Energy diagram for agriculture minimum 2/3 difference in energy density from one level to another                                       /                                     /                                     Fission                               /                                             /                                                Fossil Fuels                        /                                                  /                                                      Muscle power For all of science, which is nuclear energy to chemical energy, we have this diagram: 2/3 energy density minimum difference from one level to another level                                   Fusion                                       /                                     /                                     Fission                               /                                             /                                               Covalent bonds                        /                                                  /                                                      Ionic bonds                  /                                                      /                                                           Metallic bonds           /                                                           /                                                                Polar bonds Why this magical number of 2/3? It appears most prominently in the Fusion Barrier Principle where it is impossible to surpass 2/3 breakeven. It appears in the Chart of Chemical Elements in that Iron is number 26 stable to both fission and fusion and bismuth at 83 is the last stable element 26/83 ~ 2/3 It appears in Mathematics in that when you enclose cylinder in sphere or sphere in cylinder that the maximum surface area or volume is 2/3. Here in physics we would consider the EM, Maxwell Equations as spherical coordinates and the StrongNuclear force as cylindrical coordinates. But this magical number of 2/3 does not stop at the interface of EM with StrongNuclear force. This magical number of 2/3 transcends throughout the chemical forces of the bonds between atoms. The strongest polar bonds compared to metallic-bonds is 2/3. The strongest ionic bonds compared to covalent bonds is 2/3. This 2/3 becomes a maximum or minimum difference between various levels of energy density. Consider the 2/3 as a quantization of spectral lines in spectroscopy, only here it is energy density levels.

  Response:

  (snipped) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->  I do not know where this thread will lead to. >                                   Fusion (impossible to attain commercial) >                                        / >                                      /     >                                Fission >                               /                 >                             /                     >                           Fossil Fuels >                        /                             >                      /                                 >                     Muscle power > The first two levels are nuclear energy. The bottom two levels > are chemical-electron energy.

  Now as we look at this preliminary diagram of a energy level pyramid we would think that the top two levels of fission and fusion with its 2/3 Barrier Limit are nuclear energy and have no relationship to the lower levels of chemistry bonding and chemical energy. Is there a direct proof that a Fusion-Barrier-Principle of nuclear energy with its 2/3 maximum breakeven transcends down to chemical energy and levels of chemical energy? Well the argument that it does would follow the reasoning that fusion energy is really a mix of the Electromagnetic Energy in the form of proton to proton repulsion versus Strongnuclear Energy in fusing nuclei. So, in a sense, Fusion is chemical energy and nuclear energy. This simplistic argument would then say that the number 2/3 breakeven must transcend into pure chemical energy accounting, even though muscle power or fossil fuels have no nuclear energy components to worry about. So let us consider forms of chemical energies such as van der Waals forces or polar forces or covalent bonds or electronegativities, or ionic bonds, etc etc. The burning question is how and where does this 2/3 number exist in all these various forms of chemical and nuclear energy? Fission is the top form of energy because fusion has a 2/3 breakeven barrier limit. The next level of energy is the highest form of Chemical Energy. And what exactly is the highest form of Chemical Energy? Is it liquid hydrogen ignited in liquid oxygen? And how does this 2/3 number enter the picture between fission and highest-form of Chemical Energy? Does it enter via some Density Measure? Energy levels suggest stratification of energy which suggests quantization of energy. The 2/3 number would then be like a Planck’s constant and act like a upper limit for energy level. Has anyone bothered to take all of the chemical bonds in chemistry and classified them according to energy density and attempted to see if a number such as 2/3 demarks the various levels of chemical-bonds. Covalent compared to ionic compared to polar bonds etc etc.

  Response:

   I do not know where this thread will lead to.                                   Fusion (impossible to attain commercial)                                        /                                      /                                    Fission                               /                                             /                                               Fossil Fuels                        /                                                  /                                                     Muscle power The first two levels are nuclear energy. The bottom two levels are chemical-electron energy. If the Fusion-Barrier-Principle is correct then it is impossible to reach commercial fusion power because 2/3 breakeven is the maximum. And that Fission is thus the maximum greatest energy source. But how do we scientifically categorize fission compared to chemical energy such as fossil fuels. Is it a Energy Density that is the defining concept for the major difference? Take our highest pure chemical energy. What would that be? liquid hydrogen burned in liquid oxygen? Rocket fuel? Now take the highest pure form of fission energy. Say perhaps a nuclear rod of fissile fuel in a power plant. So, what is the defining concept difference in these energies? Is it a *energy density*? Energy packed per unit volume? And we notice that iron at element 26 is stable to both fusion and fission and that 26 to the last stable element of bismuth at 83 is 2/3 of the stable elements. So this 2/3 appears again. So, can we say that given any energy level such as Fission to that of Fossil Fuels there exists this 2/3 or inverse 3/2 between those levels. And given the level of Fossil Fuel compared to the level of biopower such as muscles, does this 2/3 and 3/2 also appear. If so, what if we had a agriculture based not on fossil fuels which it presently is based upon. But rather based upon Fission energy. Would then the energy accounting be such that there is a 2/3 X 2/3 or a degradation of 4/9? Instead of the 2/3 degradation of 1.5 to 1, we have a 4/9 degradation of 2.25 to 1. 20th century agriculture degraded fossil fuel energy by at least 1.5 to 1. If the 22nd century uses fission energy to hook up to agriculture, will that be a degradation of energy by a 2.25 loss to 1.

  Response:

  (snipped) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> P.S. I want to write about Energy Hierarchies, sort of a energy > pyramid > such as the food pyramid. >                                      fission energy on top >                                fossil fuel energy below fission >                                         muscle energy > A pyramid based on this special number of 2/3 and inverse of 3/2 from > the Fusion Barrier Principle. > I claim it is no coincidence that commercial fusion is unattainable > beyond > 2/3 breakeven and that petrol based farming has this imposition of a > 1/5:1 > disfavor ratio. > I do not know what the concept behind this is. Perhaps something > called > Energy Densities. > Start a new thread just on Energy Densities.

  Correction in the above. That should read 1.5:1. Little bit of history: Back in 1986 I was watching TV on the Farm Crisis issue and a Rutgers University professor got up and made the statement of words to the effect: That for every 50 calories of food produced in 19th century agriculture that only 1 calorie was spent to get that 50. In our modern petrol based agriculture that every 1 calorie gained in food costs us 50 calories of petrol energy. Having had a recent dialogue with Torsten Brinch on this topic, I have come to the conclusion that the Rutgers ratio of 50:1 in disfavor of petrol-based farming is wrong. But also, I feel the currently world accepted standard of Pimental’s research that arable farmland using petrol-based methods is 1:2 in favor of petrol based farming, is also in error. And in error in two ways. One it says it is a Net Gain and secondly it says it is 2 to 1 gain. Pimental does not include the fact that petrol based farming sends the topsoil to the nearest river faster than nonpetrol based farming. And that if the tractors every year had to go down to the river bed, reclaim their topsoil and spread it back onto their fields, that the ratio would no longer be 1:2 in favor but something like 2:1 in disfavor. Some will say, who cares about 500 years from now and let them scoop up the Mississippi delta and cargo haul the topsoil back to the state of Iowa. I want to share some energy concepts with you. I notice that the Fusion Barrier Principle that says that maximum fusion breakeven is 2/3 breakeven. That means there will never exist a commercial fusion industry simply because it costs more energy than what fusion can ever deliver. It means that fission power plants are humanities highest form of energy. So, based on the Fusion Barrier Principle I can draw a energy pyramid similar to the biology food chain pyramid where the Sun is on the bottom and humans on the peak. Where plants on land and plankton in oceans are the bases of the pyramid and support all the higher animals. So I want to draw a Energy Pyramid: And I begin as such:                                        /                                      /                                    Fission                               /                                             /                                               Fossil Fuels                        /                                                  /                                                     Muscle power You see, I believe this number 2/3 is so important that it transcends throughout energy accounting. The Fusion Barrier Principle says that 2/3 is the maximum breakeven energy. And this number 2/3 seems to appear again when we look at the jump from Muscle Power to that of Fossil Fuels. When we compare 19th century style farming to 20th century petrol based farming this number 2/3 seems to reappear in the Pimental ratio once Pimental factors in topsoil erosion. The inverse of 2/3 is 3/2 which is 1.5. Pimental got 1:2 in favor of petrol based farming but Pimental ignored topsoil erosion. If we account for topsoil erosion, I believe the research will bear me out that the true ratio would be 1.5:1 in disfavor of petrol based farming. That leaves us with many questions about this Energy Pyramid. (1) Is there a similar 2/3 and 3/2 number when trading between the Fission level and the Fossil Fuels level? (2) This pyramid of Energy seems to say that whenever we use a higher level of energy to do something in a lower class of energy such as in farming when we beg for fossil fuels to do the farming rather than remain within that energy class of muscle power that we end up with Net Losses. This suggests that if a country were to use Fission energy to do their farming then the degradation of energy would be far worse than the 1.5:1 loss. (3) Farming to be a net gain should remain on the level plane of muscle energy, and when it reaches for fossil fuel or fission energy to do farming that net losses are large. Physics may already have these concepts readily available. I am guessing it involves Energy Densities. That fission is a higher form of energy density than is fossil-fuel, which in turn is a higher form of energy density than is bio-muscle power. But what is of the greatest interest to me is to see this number 2/3 consistently emerge in these energy concepts.

  Response:

  No comments nuclear energy
  
  

• Stupid anti-nuke activists

  Question:

  >you have some good points..but i dont think he was deliberatly being racist. >i think he was venting what he sees as a lost cause. >the mountain may be sacred indeed! >there are many places indians know about and have made history on or in that >are protected by our government. >they arent touched. >they cannot be touched because of the pact we have with the indians. >but life on those reservations is still bad for them and borders on ghetto >life. >its sad!

  I wasn’t trying to be anti-Indian, but there seems to be a vast cultural difference.  They may indeed consider Yucca Mountain to be "sacred," but all I see is a pile of rocks in the middle of nowhere.  The Indians are being used by the anti-nuke activists, I don’t really think that Yucca Mt. is really "sacred" to them. We could launch the waste into the sun but many cultures consider the sun to be "sacred."

  Response:

  Karl: Well spoken. Very lucid, very accurate. Dewey – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Quite so. Very sad. They’re spending billions more than they need to on > Yucca. Now fear mongers are tyrying to get billions more spents. Billions > which could be spent to save lives instead. > The 4,000 pounds ouf plutonium produced at the natural nuclear reactors at > Oklo didn’t migrate from the rock it was formed in. This in spite of it > being uncontained, unvitrified and in spite of boiling water flowing over it > for half a million years. Yucca isn’t a big issue. The UN recently reported > that fossile fuel & biomass emissions are killing around 2.3 million people > every year. If they’d quit caving to the fear mongers & stop spending > billions more studying weather the ground water speeds at Yucca are inches > per decade or feet per century, the billions could be spent replacing > fossile fuel and biomass energy instead. Billions which could be spent > making nuclear desalinators for the third world, etc. > Karl Johanson > Karl Johanson

  Response:

  >What Indians are you talking about?  There are no Indians there and never >were. There’s no >water there, no shade, no food, not even any scorpions.  The area is >desolate – they used to >set atomic bombs off there and nobody noticed.

  That’s not entirely true.  I did live in Southern Nevada for 11 years but never made it to Yucca Mountain.  But the region does have Paiute Indians, but I don’t know the exact extent of their range.  Valley of Fire State Park near Lake Mead has extensive petroglyphs made by their ancestors, but there is also plenty of water and wildlife to be found there.  Geologists are still arguing about whether groundwater has ever seeped into Yucca Mt., there certainly doesn’t seem to be any near the surface that could support human habitation. I’m sorry I caused such a ruckus with my casino remark.  But I still stand by it.  The Indians are being used by the anti-nuke activists, I seriously doubt that they really care about the mountain.  I took a course in Indian anthropology at UNLV and learned quite a bit about them.  I don’t want to overgeneralize, but I got the impression that ALL land was kind of sacred to them, it was the source of their sustenance.  A mountain in the middle of nowhere is "sacred" but their reservation land is not? But they have no problem building casinos and fireworks stands on their own reservation land.

  Response:

  >of this: >< ><>I don’t think Diablo’s statement was meant to be racist; >< ><http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=_EXL7.264%24oC1.245226%40newsfee…

  rp.net&output=gplain – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->< >< ><Mental Illness Page: ><http://www.nambla.de >Ok, Maybe he did mean it as a racist remark. If so, I feel sorry that >he has not grown enough to see where that leads, and the lies that >each side comes to believe, but I am still in agreement with his >statement about Yucca Mountain. I’ve read many articles it appears >that this is the best place we can put this stuff, not because the >Indians have any claim to it or not, but because it is the best >geological place we have available. It must stay there for many >thousands of years without leaching out into the environment. This >site takes into account what will most likely happen to the site over >even longer periods and things like plate tectonics come into play. >It’s sandstone structure well underground act to contain the material >as it starts to heat, and if it should produce more heat than >expected, all that will happen is that an increasingly thick layer of >glass will form around it, protecting leakage when in the far future >it find itself in the grind of being sucked underground by plate >tectonics where we will never have to worry about it again. >I think this is a well thought out solution to disposing of our >nuclear waste. > It is sad.

  Quite so. Very sad. They’re spending billions more than they need to on Yucca. Now fear mongers are tyrying to get billions more spents. Billions which could be spent to save lives instead. The 4,000 pounds ouf plutonium produced at the natural nuclear reactors at Oklo didn’t migrate from the rock it was formed in. This in spite of it being uncontained, unvitrified and in spite of boiling water flowing over it for half a million years. Yucca isn’t a big issue. The UN recently reported that fossile fuel & biomass emissions are killing around 2.3 million people every year. If they’d quit caving to the fear mongers & stop spending billions more studying weather the ground water speeds at Yucca are inches per decade or feet per century, the billions could be spent replacing fossile fuel and biomass energy instead. Billions which could be spent making nuclear desalinators for the third world, etc. Karl Johanson Karl Johanson

  Response:

  Perhaps the space industry can perfect a transport system to push the nuclear waste into the sun. I could be cheaper in the long run. Jon — —- "When greed is in the genes it’s path can be traced thoughout the world……" — Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

  Response:

  Im not exactly sure of the effects of fallout . nor am I sure of the containment process of keeping spent rods . But It sounds like a pretty good Idea to store them in Atolls etc where previous nuclear tests have been done . Im guessing the areas already pretty much fucked for the next million or so years due to previous explosions etc so why not store the rods etc in an already contaminated place ?  maybe at some stage in the future someone will work out how to clean it up and they can clean up the rods at the same time. Just a layman’s thoughts Flash

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Perhaps the space industry can perfect a transport system > to push the nuclear waste into the sun. > I could be cheaper in the long run. > Jon > — > —- > "When greed is in the genes it’s path can be traced thoughout the > world……" > — > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

  Response:

  =>  Sometimes what  means nothing to us is very important to someone else. That =>  doesn’t lesson their right to have strong feelings about it. I dont’ know if =>  the mountain is sacred to Indians or not, could care less really but your =>  statement about it not being too sacred to build a casino on is racist.  I =>  am not an American Indian this isn’t a personal thing to me but find the =>  statement  deragatory just as I would a statement that insinuates that all =>  Germans hate and kill jews, that all black men want to rape white woman and =>  that all mexicans will stab you in the back. How does a group of people =>  worried about the protection of the earth turn into slandering a race of =>  people even if inadvertently.  Is that not  the worst kind of polution being =>  done to the earth today. Hatred and bigotry of other human beings. =>   What Indians are you talking about?  There are no Indians there and never were.  There’s no water there, no shade, no food, not even any scorpions.  The area is desolate – they used to set atomic bombs off there and nobody noticed.     — Bill

  Response:

  you have some good points..but i dont think he was deliberatly being racist. i think he was venting what he sees as a lost cause. the mountain may be sacred indeed! there are many places indians know about and have made history on or in that are protected by our government. they arent touched. they cannot be touched because of the pact we have with the indians. but life on those reservations is still bad for them and borders on ghetto life. its sad! harpy

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Sometimes what  means nothing to us is very important to someone else. That > doesn’t lesson their right to have strong feelings about it. I dont’ know if > the mountain is sacred to Indians or not, could care less really but your > statement about it not being too sacred to build a casino on is racist.  I > am not an American Indian this isn’t a personal thing to me but find the > statement  deragatory just as I would a statement that insinuates that all > Germans hate and kill jews, that all black men want to rape white woman and > that all mexicans will stab you in the back. How does a group of people > worried about the protection of the earth turn into slandering a race of > people even if inadvertently.  Is that not  the worst kind of polution being > done to the earth today. Hatred and bigotry of other human beings.

  Response:

  ive never been an indigo girls fan…lol….you make me laugh! but you are correct about one thing..all those waste sites are dangerousely kept in insecure places. face it diablo my new pal..we are at risk all the time no matter wehat we do. its all in the plan of life! the harpy

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Tomorrow is Earth Day and the media has begun its annual brainwashing > campaign.  Today CNN interviewed the 2 women who make up the music > group Indigo Girls.  They were especially concerned with the plans > to transport millions of tons of high-level nuclear waste by road > and rail to the permanent waste repository being built at Yucca Mt. > But like all anti-nuke activists, they were so good at being AGAINST > it but they never offer any solutions.  I could accept the position > that nuclear energy be banned, but that doesn’t change the fact that > millions of tons of waste already exist and must be disposed of. > The Indigo Girls said that transporting it would put millions of > people at risk.  Well, how many people are at risk from the insecure > temporary on-site storage facilities?  Some of the storage buildings > are just made up of a pool of water covered by a cinderblock > structure, just waiting to be dispersed by a terrorist attack or > a leak in the pool. > To top it off the Indigo Girls had to mention that Yucca Mountain > is considered "sacred" by Indians!  What a crock of shit, the damn > mountain is in the middle of nowhere, I doubt there is a single > Indian within 100 miles of it.  I’ll bet the site wouldn’t be too > sacred to build a casino on!

  Response:

  Uh.  hmmmm Like they had a choice when the waste was created?

  Response:

  Sometimes what  means nothing to us is very important to someone else. That doesn’t lesson their right to have strong feelings about it. I dont’ know if the mountain is sacred to Indians or not, could care less really but your statement about it not being too sacred to build a casino on is racist.  I am not an American Indian this isn’t a personal thing to me but find the statement  deragatory just as I would a statement that insinuates that all Germans hate and kill jews, that all black men want to rape white woman and that all mexicans will stab you in the back. How does a group of people worried about the protection of the earth turn into slandering a race of people even if inadvertently.  Is that not  the worst kind of polution being done to the earth today. Hatred and bigotry of other human beings.

  Response:

  Tomorrow is Earth Day and the media has begun its annual brainwashing campaign.  Today CNN interviewed the 2 women who make up the music group Indigo Girls.  They were especially concerned with the plans to transport millions of tons of high-level nuclear waste by road and rail to the permanent waste repository being built at Yucca Mt. But like all anti-nuke activists, they were so good at being AGAINST it but they never offer any solutions.  I could accept the position that nuclear energy be banned, but that doesn’t change the fact that millions of tons of waste already exist and must be disposed of. The Indigo Girls said that transporting it would put millions of people at risk.  Well, how many people are at risk from the insecure temporary on-site storage facilities?  Some of the storage buildings are just made up of a pool of water covered by a cinderblock structure, just waiting to be dispersed by a terrorist attack or a leak in the pool. To top it off the Indigo Girls had to mention that Yucca Mountain is considered "sacred" by Indians!  What a crock of shit, the damn mountain is in the middle of nowhere, I doubt there is a single Indian within 100 miles of it.  I’ll bet the site wouldn’t be too sacred to build a casino on!

  Response:

  No comments nuclear energy
  
  

• Vitamin C CAUSES cancer?

  Question:

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->br> I just don’t think the average person can figure out what kind of >br> supplementation they should take, and understand how the various >br> supplements may interact — and they may not necessarily interact >br> in a beneficial way. >Jd> That’s because you know nothing about alternative medicine Bill. A >jd> CRA (muscle tester) can tell you all these things and more. Mine >jd> has an added benefit. Her hubby just graduated from med school. >    Jan, will her husband practice medicine from the vitamin/mineral >    therapy or the pharm drug side of medicine? >… End  of  message                                   21 Jun 01  21:22 >___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR] >He will be a holistic MD, believing there is a cause for disease, he has seen >his wife find the cause. They plan to have a clinic with all kinds of >practitioners and doctors where conventional and alternative can work together. >Certainly what we need. >I am very fortunate to live across the street from these two loving and caring >people, who came over in the middle of the night and helped me through my >illness. >Without charge I might add, even through he was in med school. A very rare find >of people. I see great things in their future.

  Hummmm … let’s see …. He put his entire future as a physician in jeapordy by risking a felony conviction for practicing without a license???  An unusual individual indeed. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->I will have to say in all my 62 years I have never met a more loving and caring >man. You see he got there the hard way as he used to have a drug problem. Just >nothing like real life experience with GOD included. >Jan

  Response:

  - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>br> I just don’t think the average person can figure out what kind of >>br> supplementation they should take, and understand how the various >>br> supplements may interact — and they may not necessarily interact >>br> in a beneficial way. >>Jd> That’s because you know nothing about alternative medicine Bill. A >>jd> CRA (muscle tester) can tell you all these things and more. Mine >>jd> has an added benefit. Her hubby just graduated from med school. >>    Jan, will her husband practice medicine from the vitamin/mineral >>    therapy or the pharm drug side of medicine? >>… End  of  message                                   21 Jun 01  21:22 >>___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR] >He will be a holistic MD, believing there is a cause for disease, he has >seen >his wife find the cause. They plan to have a clinic with all kinds of >practitioners and doctors where conventional and alternative can work >together. >Certainly what we need. >I am very fortunate to live across the street from these two loving and >caring >people, who came over in the middle of the night and helped me through my >illness. >Without charge I might add, even through he was in med school. A very rare >find >of people. I see great things in their future. >Hummmm … let’s see …. >He put his entire future as a physician in jeapordy by risking a >felony conviction for practicing without a license???  An unusual >individual indeed.

  Say what? Where did you read that? BTW his wife is licensed. He came with her,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,out of the goodness of his heart. Oh, I see you are a Hulda basher. Nuff said. Get a life. Jan

  Response:

  - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >br> I just don’t think the average person can figure out what kind of >br> supplementation they should take, and understand how the various >br> supplements may interact — and they may not necessarily interact >br> in a beneficial way. >Jd> That’s because you know nothing about alternative medicine Bill. A >jd> CRA (muscle tester) can tell you all these things and more. Mine >jd> has an added benefit. Her hubby just graduated from med school. >    Jan, will her husband practice medicine from the vitamin/mineral >    therapy or the pharm drug side of medicine? >… End  of  message                                   21 Jun 01  21:22 >___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR]

  He will be a holistic MD, believing there is a cause for disease, he has seen his wife find the cause. They plan to have a clinic with all kinds of practitioners and doctors where conventional and alternative can work together. Certainly what we need. I am very fortunate to live across the street from these two loving and caring people, who came over in the middle of the night and helped me through my illness. Without charge I might add, even through he was in med school. A very rare find of people. I see great things in their future. I will have to say in all my 62 years I have never met a more loving and caring man. You see he got there the hard way as he used to have a drug problem. Just nothing like real life experience with GOD included. Jan

  Response:

  ka> just out of curiousity, bill, do you take any vitamin supplements? Ro> Good question.  I have popped vitamin and mineral pills, Ro> and consumed vitamin C Ro> powder in the past.  I got tired of the hassle and expense, Ro> and of wondering if Ro> it was doing me good, bad or indifferent.  Reading some of Dr. Dean Ro> Edell’s comments has been enough to convince me I’m personally better Ro> off getting my nutrition through a healthy diet.  I just don’t think Ro> the average person can figure out what kind of supplementation they Ro> should take,  and understand how the Ro> various supplements may interact — and they may not necessarily     The real serious alt med type person tries to learn as much as     possible about the vitamin-mineral therapy side of medicine.     In order to function as their own de facto nutritional "doctor".     Since they realize the typical M.D. does not know anything about     the vitamin-mineral therapy side of medicine. … End  of  message                                   21 Jun 01  21:13 ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR]

  Response:

  br> I just don’t think the average person can figure out what kind of br> supplementation they should take, and understand how the various br> supplements may interact — and they may not necessarily interact br> in a beneficial way. Jd> That’s because you know nothing about alternative medicine Bill. A jd> CRA (muscle tester) can tell you all these things and more. Mine jd> has an added benefit. Her hubby just graduated from med school.     Jan, will her husband practice medicine from the vitamin/mineral     therapy or the pharm drug side of medicine? … End  of  message                                   21 Jun 01  21:22 ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR]

  Response:

  BUT, i wonder just how does dr. dean edell go about getting everyone to eat > that perfect diet instead of lowering themselves to the ole supplement > standard??? lots of persuasive talking and writing, from what you’ve said. > does he have a book out listing the perfect diet?

  Edell does have a book out called "Eat, Drink and Be Merry."  I don’t know if he believes there is a "perfect" diet.  "Perfect" is quite a high standard.  The "prudent" diet may be best.  It is probably a varied diet, and one that follows the recommendations of those who study human health and diet, and form a consensus based on science. good for you. good luck at improving your dietary practices. for most of us > it takes some sort of life or death scare to even consider the idea of > making drastic dietary changes.

  Thank you. i would like someone to detail the perfect healthy diet. i want to try to > copy it and make millions off of a book about it. plagiarism at its finest.

  You’re asking quite a lot.  In this life we just don’t get many definite answers on so many important things, such as "the perfect diet."  Humans don’t come with an owner’s manual. > too many everyones don’t eat a healthy diet. that’s the whole point of > supplementation.

  But supplementation based on good science.  Not based on the recommendations of unqualified people, or those that have radical views not backed up by good evidence. > i disagree, i am not aware of very many folks who advocate taking large > doses of vitamin A. why, are you?

  It can happen by accident, when it is so readily available. > and many, many more people just might actually be HELPED by supplements. > what a concept!!!

  Could be.  I’m not anti-supplement, just anti-quackery. > really? i had never even heard of citracal. all i have heard is dairy > industry propoganda…er, uh….advertising. mustaches and doing bodies good > and all that.

  Most company advertising is misleading, or slanted.  I agree that dairy and egg advertising is not a very good way to learn about nutrition, or get a balanced view. > well, yes, you have to consider all of the pesticides that citrus crops get > sprayed with. believe me, i know all about those. i live in florida.

  It’s a problem with no easy answers.  Do you advocate getting vitamin C from supplements *instead of* from everyday chemically touched foods? Wish I had time to respond more fully, Bill Ross

  Response:

  > > just out of curiousity, bill, do you take any vitamin supplements?

  > Good question.  I have popped vitamin and mineral pills, and consumed vitamin C > powder in the past.  I got tired of the hassle and expense, and of wondering if > it was doing me good, bad or indifferent.  Reading some of Dr. Dean Edell’s > comments has been enough to convince me I’m personally better off getting my > nutrition through a healthy diet.

  of course. everyone knows this. dean edell certainly did not invent the idea that a perfectly nutritious diet will make one healthier. BUT, i wonder just how does dr. dean edell go about getting everyone to eat that perfect diet instead of lowering themselves to the ole supplement standard??? lots of persuasive talking and writing, from what you’ve said. does he have a book out listing the perfect diet? >  I just don’t think the average person can > figure out what kind of supplementation they should take, and understand how the > various supplements may interact — and they may not necessarily interact in a > beneficial way.

  see, i disagree. and that is why i think that dissing non-md-dr.saul is unfortunate. whether the info that he provides is right or wrong, he does a service by providing the info. obviously, he is biased. just like barrett is. and just like yon hero dean edell. it’s up to all of us who read all of the contrasting opinions to make up OUR OWN minds about the various veracities of what they profess as the one and only way. > But you know I still do get some vitamin and mineral > supplementation.  I regularly consume a soy drink and some cereals that have > added calcium and other added nutrients.

  SOY? you fell for that one???? kidding. see, some cynic could quite happily come along and give you one helluva time about falling for the ole soy ploy. (( if you weren’t perceived as a skeptical persona on this NG then i am sure one would do just that.))  ah, the lovely MHA double standard dynamic. >  Calcium is about the only nutrient I > worry about not getting enough of.  But then I’ve read where too much calcium > may be a problem in some cases.

  too much of anything…….etc etc. > also, most vitamin supplements come from your normal, everyday pharm > company. same folks pushing claritin and viagra and that hair growing stuff. > The only pill I take is Prilosec for gastric reflux (heartburn symptoms). The > stuff seems to work amazingly well, but I am considering trying to get off of it > by improving my dietary practices.

  good for you. good luck at improving your dietary practices. for most of us it takes some sort of life or death scare to even consider the idea of making drastic dietary changes. > now, i can see where larger doses of those might present a problem! > also, i reckon you would be hard-pressed to find a pediatrician who is > *against* supplementing childrens’ diets or an OB who is against giving > moms-to-be prenatals. > I did hear a few days ago that the added folic acid which is added to some > foodstuffs is helping to curb spina bifida.

  indeed. this was the general consensus 5 years ago when i was prego. i stayed on prenatals for several years. then my insurance changed and i had to go to the regular ole one-a-days or whatever was on sale. > There definitely does appear to be > a place for some dietary supplements, even though folic acid is highly available > in a healthy diet.

  i would like someone to detail the perfect healthy diet. i want to try to copy it and make millions off of a book about it. plagiarism at its finest. >  Too many young mothers just don’t eat a very healthy diet.

  too many everyones don’t eat a healthy diet. that’s the whole point of supplementation. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> the controversy, then, is not surrounding the issue that supplementation > itself is bad. the tough questions are about the actual dosages. and i can > certainly see where large dosages might work quite well for some folks and > not work for others. and i can also see where the RDA might work for some > folks and not do a thing for others. > I agree.  Some supplements can be dangerous, however, as too much vitamin A can > be a real problem, for example, and some who do supplements are probably not > aware of that.

  i disagree, i am not aware of very many folks who advocate taking large doses of vitamin A. why, are you? > to pooh-pooh the idea of larger vitamin dosages just for the sake of > maintaining some type of ‘all-things-alt-med-are-bogus’ attitude is really > quite silly, imho. > I agree. > it’s not like experimenting with the dosages of vitamins is going to kill > anyone (providing they are reasonably informed about possible drug > interactions, etc and/or not allergic, etc) > I take it you are aware of the dangers of too much vitamin A?

  yes, i’ve read the info. once agian—too much of anything…..etc. > or is there some death-by-vitamin supplement epidemic going on that i am not > aware of?????? > I don’t think it’s a big problem, but we really don’t know what all the > supplements are doing to people.  I think some get a false sense of security > from taking supplements, which could result in harm.

  and many, many more people just might actually be HELPED by supplements. what a concept!!! > Calcium supplements are > pushed heavily as a way to combat osteoporosis.  Seldom is there any mention of > the importance of weight bearing exercise and it’s effects on bone density. > People are left with the impression that popping Citra-Cal is the answer.

  really? i had never even heard of citracal. all i have heard is dairy industry propoganda…er, uh….advertising. mustaches and doing bodies good and all that. anyway, even they SUPPLEMENT their products. > vitamin C causing cancer, well, i guess that just remains to be seen. like a > whole host of other things. suffice to say i’d be rather surprised if it > turns out that vitamin C causes cancer. me and the citrus industry. > Vitamin C from eating citrus fruits is quite different from isolated vitamin C > in supplements. > But I agree about the "remains to be seen" part.

  well, yes, you have to consider all of the pesticides that citrus crops get sprayed with. believe me, i know all about those. i live in florida. > Best regards,

  same to you, i quite enjoy your posts. and i get the impression that you are more ‘alternative’ than you would like to admit….(for fear of comparison to the jans or ilenas of the NG) — "The only religious opinion that I feel sure of is this: self-awareness is *not* just a bunch of amino acids bumping together." Robert A. Heinlein great mushy love song "i will love you" http://www.getmusic.com/calendar/ecoustics/fisher/index.html

  Response:

  - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> just out of curiousity, bill, do you take any vitamin supplements? >Good question.  I have popped vitamin and mineral pills, and consumed vitamin >C >powder in the past.  I got tired of the hassle and expense, and of wondering >if >it was doing me good, bad or indifferent.  Reading some of Dr. Dean Edell’s >comments has been enough to convince me I’m personally better off getting my >nutrition through a healthy diet.

  Big eye roll here.   I just don’t think the average person can >figure out what kind of supplementation they should take, and understand how >the >various supplements may interact — and they may not necessarily interact in >a >beneficial way.

  That’s because you know nothing about alternative medicine Bill. A CRA (muscle tester) can tell you all these things and more. Mine has an added benefit. Her hubby just graduated from med school.   But you know I still do get some vitamin and mineral >supplementation.  I regularly consume a soy drink and some cereals that have >added calcium and other added nutrients.  Calcium is about the only nutrient >I >worry about not getting enough of.  But then I’ve read where too much calcium >may be a problem in some cases. >I did hear a few days ago that the added folic acid which is added to some >foodstuffs is helping to curb spina bifida.  There definitely does appear to >be >a place for some dietary supplements, even though folic acid is highly >available in a healthy diet.   Too many young mothers just don’t eat a very healthy >diet.

  What is a healthy diet? How does one know? > the controversy, then, is not surrounding the issue that supplementation > itself is bad. the tough questions are about the actual dosages. and i can > certainly see where large dosages might work quite well for some folks and > not work for others. and i can also

  see where the RDA might work for some > folks and not do a thing for others. >I agree.  Some supplements can be dangerous, however, as too much vitamin A >can >be a real problem, for example, and some who do supplements are probably not >aware of that.

  If they aren’t aware of it I doubt they are taking large doses. > to pooh-pooh the idea of larger vitamin dosages just for the sake of > maintaining some type of ‘all-things-alt-med-are-bogus’ attitude is really > quite silly, imho. >I agree. > it’s not like experimenting with the dosages of vitamins is going to kill > anyone (providing they are reasonably informed about possible drug > interactions, etc and/or not allergic, etc) >I take it you are aware of the dangers of too much vitamin A?

  This has been discussed here many times.   > or is there some death-by-vitamin supplement epidemic going on that i am >not > aware of?????? >I don’t think it’s a big problem, but we really don’t know what all the >supplements are doing to people

  Oh yes we can know.  See above. >  I think some get a false sense of security >from taking supplements, which could result in harm.

  As compared to the side effects of drug? >Calcium supplements are >pushed heavily as a way to combat osteoporosis.  Seldom is there any mention >of >the importance of weight bearing exercise and it’s effects on bone density.

  By whom? I find it is often mentioned by both conventional and alternative. >People are left with the impression that popping Citra-Cal is the answer.

  Then they should educate themselves. > vitamin C causing cancer, well, i guess that just remains to be seen. like >a > whole host of other things. suffice to say i’d be rather surprised if it > turns out that vitamin C causes cancer. me and the citrus industry. >Vitamin C from eating citrus fruits is quite different from isolated vitamin >C >in supplements.

  In what way? Please explain. >But I agree about the "remains to be seen" part.

  Good. Now maybe someone will learn from all this to be more careful in choosing thread titles. Jan – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Best regards, >Bill Ross

  Response:

  > just out of curiousity, bill, do you take any vitamin supplements?

  Good question.  I have popped vitamin and mineral pills, and consumed vitamin C powder in the past.  I got tired of the hassle and expense, and of wondering if it was doing me good, bad or indifferent.  Reading some of Dr. Dean Edell’s comments has been enough to convince me I’m personally better off getting my nutrition through a healthy diet.  I just don’t think the average person can figure out what kind of supplementation they should take, and understand how the various supplements may interact — and they may not necessarily interact in a beneficial way.  But you know I still do get some vitamin and mineral supplementation.  I regularly consume a soy drink and some cereals that have added calcium and other added nutrients.  Calcium is about the only nutrient I worry about not getting enough of.  But then I’ve read where too much calcium may be a problem in some cases. > also, most vitamin supplements come from your normal, everyday pharm > company. same folks pushing claritin and viagra and that hair growing stuff.

  The only pill I take is Prilosec for gastric reflux (heartburn symptoms).  The stuff seems to work amazingly well, but I am considering trying to get off of it by improving my dietary practices. > now, i can see where larger doses of those might present a problem! > also, i reckon you would be hard-pressed to find a pediatrician who is > *against* supplementing childrens’ diets or an OB who is against giving > moms-to-be prenatals.

  I did hear a few days ago that the added folic acid which is added to some foodstuffs is helping to curb spina bifida.  There definitely does appear to be a place for some dietary supplements, even though folic acid is highly available in a healthy diet.   Too many young mothers just don’t eat a very healthy diet. > the controversy, then, is not surrounding the issue that supplementation > itself is bad. the tough questions are about the actual dosages. and i can > certainly see where large dosages might work quite well for some folks and > not work for others. and i can also see where the RDA might work for some > folks and not do a thing for others.

  I agree.  Some supplements can be dangerous, however, as too much vitamin A can be a real problem, for example, and some who do supplements are probably not aware of that. > to pooh-pooh the idea of larger vitamin dosages just for the sake of > maintaining some type of ‘all-things-alt-med-are-bogus’ attitude is really > quite silly, imho.

  I agree. > it’s not like experimenting with the dosages of vitamins is going to kill > anyone (providing they are reasonably informed about possible drug > interactions, etc and/or not allergic, etc)

  I take it you are aware of the dangers of too much vitamin A? > or is there some death-by-vitamin supplement epidemic going on that i am not > aware of??????

  I don’t think it’s a big problem, but we really don’t know what all the supplements are doing to people.  I think some get a false sense of security from taking supplements, which could result in harm.  Calcium supplements are pushed heavily as a way to combat osteoporosis.  Seldom is there any mention of the importance of weight bearing exercise and it’s effects on bone density. People are left with the impression that popping Citra-Cal is the answer. > vitamin C causing cancer, well, i guess that just remains to be seen. like a > whole host of other things. suffice to say i’d be rather surprised if it > turns out that vitamin C causes cancer. me and the citrus industry.

  Vitamin C from eating citrus fruits is quite different from isolated vitamin C in supplements. But I agree about the "remains to be seen" part. Best regards, Bill Ross

  Response:

  >Bill, >Saul has been slammed in this newsgroup many times and is considered a >non-authority by many. >rich

  The slamming groups are the ones who consider any thing other that drugs and chemicals non-authority. Pity for them. I’m waiting for the day when they can stand next to a GWS man and do their slamming bit. Jan – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Saul’s guidelines sound like something the healthfood marketers or > supplement manufacturers might be behind.  Definitely *slanted* to favor > dietary supplements.  What’s so "natural" about taking megadoses of > supplements? > Bill Ross >>> "Vitamin C, an essential nutrient found in fruits and vegetables >>> and taken in large doses by many people as a dietary supplement, >>> is a double-edged sword, providing benefits but also inducing the >>> production of compounds associated with cancer, researchers said >>> on Thursday." >> TEN WAYS TO SPOT ANTI-VITAMIN BIASES IN A SCIENTIFIC STUDY >> by Andrew Saul "The Doctor Yourself Newsletter" >> http://www.doctoryourself.com

  Response:

  > Saul’s guidelines sound like something the healthfood marketers or > supplement manufacturers might be behind.  Definitely *slanted* to favor > dietary supplements.  What’s so "natural" about taking megadoses of > supplements? > Bill Ross

  just out of curiousity, bill, do you take any vitamin supplements? i think it is quite interesting that so many of the naysayers and would-be cynics of MHA are actually (whether they admit it or not) popping herbs and vitamins right along with the rest of us. also, most vitamin supplements come from your normal, everyday pharm company. same folks pushing claritin and viagra and that hair growing stuff. now, i can see where larger doses of those might present a problem! also, i reckon you would be hard-pressed to find a pediatrician who is *against* supplementing childrens’ diets or an OB who is against giving moms-to-be prenatals. the controversy, then, is not surrounding the issue that supplementation itself is bad. the tough questions are about the actual dosages. and i can certainly see where large dosages might work quite well for some folks and not work for others. and i can also see where the RDA might work for some folks and not do a thing for others. to pooh-pooh the idea of larger vitamin dosages just for the sake of maintaining some type of ‘all-things-alt-med-are-bogus’ attitude is really quite silly, imho. (or, as in rich andrews’ case, to attempt to discredit a particular poster) it’s not like experimenting with the dosages of vitamins is going to kill anyone (providing they are reasonably informed about possible drug interactions, etc and/or not allergic, etc) or is there some death-by-vitamin supplement epidemic going on that i am not aware of?????? vitamin C causing cancer, well, i guess that just remains to be seen. like a whole host of other things. suffice to say i’d be rather surprised if it turns out that vitamin C causes cancer. me and the citrus industry. myself, i’d rather take vitamin C and polyphenols and/or nettle leaf than take claritin. whatever works best for you, go for it, you know? — "The only religious opinion that I feel sure of is this: self-awareness is *not* just a bunch of amino acids bumping together." Robert A. Heinlein great mushy love song "i will love you" http://www.getmusic.com/calendar/ecoustics/fisher/index.html

  Response:

  Saul’s guidelines sound like something the healthfood marketers or supplement manufacturers might be behind.  Definitely *slanted* to favor dietary supplements.  What’s so "natural" about taking megadoses of supplements? Bill Ross – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "Vitamin C, an essential nutrient found in fruits and vegetables > and taken in large doses by many people as a dietary supplement, > is a double-edged sword, providing benefits but also inducing the > production of compounds associated with cancer, researchers said > on Thursday." > TEN WAYS TO SPOT ANTI-VITAMIN BIASES IN A SCIENTIFIC STUDY > by Andrew Saul "The Doctor Yourself Newsletter" > http://www.doctoryourself.com

  Response:

  Bill, Saul has been slammed in this newsgroup many times and is considered a non-authority by many. rich – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Saul’s guidelines sound like something the healthfood marketers or > supplement manufacturers might be behind.  Definitely *slanted* to favor > dietary supplements.  What’s so "natural" about taking megadoses of > supplements? > Bill Ross >> "Vitamin C, an essential nutrient found in fruits and vegetables >> and taken in large doses by many people as a dietary supplement, >> is a double-edged sword, providing benefits but also inducing the >> production of compounds associated with cancer, researchers said >> on Thursday." > TEN WAYS TO SPOT ANTI-VITAMIN BIASES IN A SCIENTIFIC STUDY > by Andrew Saul "The Doctor Yourself Newsletter" > http://www.doctoryourself.com

  Response:

  >Saul’s guidelines sound like something the healthfood marketers or >supplement manufacturers might be behind.  Definitely *slanted* to favor >dietary supplements.

  As opposed to Steven Barrett’s guidelines of favoring drug and  chemical comapnies.,,,,,,,,,,,,,plus running all over trying to get any and all alternative practitioners throw in jail. Oh and 99.9% of the Americans people are mental ill if their health problem isn’t in the little recipe book.  What’s so "natural" about taking megadoses of >supplements? >Bill Ross

  I guess you’ve never had a weakened immune system Bill. What would you suggest? Jan

  Response:

  > "Vitamin C, an essential nutrient found in fruits and vegetables > and taken in large doses by many people as a dietary supplement, > is a double-edged sword, providing benefits but also inducing the > production of compounds associated with cancer, researchers said > on Thursday."

  TEN WAYS TO SPOT ANTI-VITAMIN BIASES IN A SCIENTIFIC STUDY by Andrew Saul "The Doctor Yourself Newsletter" http://www.doctoryourself.com 1. Where’s the beef?  How much of the original study is quoted in the media?  Are you just getting factoids, or are data provided?  Has the journalist writing about the subject actually read the original paper? 2. What exactly was studied, and how? Was it an IN VITRO (test-tube) study or an IN VIVO (animal) study? Was there a CLINICAL STUDY on people, or is its application to real life a matter of conjecture? 3. Follow the Money.  Who paid for the study?  Cash from food processors, pharmaceutical giants, and other deep pockets decides what gets studied, and how.  It is very difficult, if not impossible, for researchers to present findings that embarrass their financial backers. Published research will often indicate sources of funding, possibly at the end of the paper in an acknowledgements paragraph. If not, correspondence addesses of principle authors are invariably provided. Write and ask. 4. Check the dosages.  Any vitamin C study using less than 2,000 mg a day is a waste of time. Any vitamin E study employing less than 400 International Units (I.U.) is a waste of time. Any study using less than 1,000 mg niacin a day is a waste of time. All low-dose studies are set up to fail. Low doses of vitamins do not cure major diseases. Large doses cure diseases. 5. Check the form of supplement used. Was the vitamin used in the study natural or synthetic?   Any carotene study using the synthetic form of beta-carotene only is a waste of time. Any vitamin E study using the synthetic DL-alpha form is a waste of time. 6. Use the Pauling Principle: read the entire study and interpret the data for yourself.  Do not rely on the summary and/or conclusions of the study authors.  As Linus Pauling pointed out repeatedly, many researchers miss, or dismiss, the statistical significance of their own work.  Such behavior may be human error, or it may be politically motivated. Beware of editorializing. 7. Beware of Pauling-bashers.  If a media article is critical about twice Nobel prize-winning Linus Pauling, you can be confident it has been spin-doctored. 8. Watch for these throw-away slams against supplements: "You get all the vitamins you need form your daily diet." "Vitamins are dangerous if you take too many of them." "Excess vitamins are wasted." "More research is needed before supplements can be recommended." "There is no scientific support for large vitamin doses." 9. Watch for pontifical public recommendations at the end of the article such as: "Vitamins can do some good things, but can do some bad things as well." "You are better off not popping vitamin pills." "Just eat a balanced diet." "If you take vitamins, take no more than the US RDA." 10. Use the media backwards. The more headlines about a particular study, the more politically charged the subject and the less likely that the reporting, or the original study, is positive towards vitamins.  Negative news sells newspapers, and magazines, and gets lots of viewers.  Positive drug studies do get headlines, of course. Positive vitamin studies do not.  Is this a conspiracy? You mean with shady people all sitting around a shaded table in a darkened back room? Of course not. It is nevertheless an enormous public health problem with enormous consequences. Consider what might be called Saul’s Law of the Media: "Press and television coverage of a vitamin study is inversely proportionate to the study’s clinical usefulness." In other words, the more media hoopla, the worse the research. Truly valuable research does not scare people; it helps people get well. There are over 3,000 scientific references at Doctor Yourself.com for people who share in this goal. Reprinted from the book FIRE YOUR DOCTOR, copyright 2001 and prior years by Andrew Saul, Number 8 Van Buren Street, Holley, New York 14470 USA   Telephone (716) 638-5357 Newsletter mailing list http://doctoryourself.com/mailman/listinfo/newsletter_doctoryourself.com

  Response:

  >"Vitamin C, an essential nutrient found in fruits and vegetables >and taken in large doses by many people as a dietary supplement, >is a double-edged sword, providing benefits but also inducing the >production of compounds associated with cancer, researchers said >on Thursday." >http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010614/sc/health_vitamin_dc_1.html

  [snip] Check out these related links: If You Choose to Take Vitamin C Supplements, Stick to it —> http://osu.orst.edu/dept/lpi/new/vitamincancer2.html Test-Tube Science Plus Irresponsible Journalism Equals Consumer Confusion http://www.crnusa.org/Shellnr061501.html CRN’s Letter to the Tan Sheet http://www.crnusa.org/Shellnr061501TAN.html New Research Findings On Vitamin C Safety: An Interview with Dr. Balz Frei   http://www.nutritionfocus.com/nutrition_library/frei1.html This earlier article could also be of interest in this context: A Critical Analysis of The National Academy of Sciences’ Attack on Dietary Supplements May 9, 2000 http://www.lef.org/featured-articles/may2000_canasads_01.html — Matti Narkia

  Response:

  Who is responsibile for starting this thread? Talk about organized medicine going to any lengths to trash alt. This is totally absurd! Jan Can you imagine how Science mag. would have responded if the said test-tube experiment had produced a group of anti-cancer, tumor-inhibiting compounds? Of course, they would have said "this needs further study and corroboration with animal or clinical tests before we can publish such a claim". Since the claim goes against Vitamin C, they put out the red carpet. It really is a transparent lie they have woven, fully understandable when you consider that 50% of the pages of Science mag. are composed of advertisements for the bio-tech and pharm industry. Reminds me when they were issuing all sorts of articles "proving" how save and efficient nuclear energy was. James DeMeo, Ph.D. Vitamin C Foundation, I’ve already figured out what is wrong with the researcher’s work, and I’m a rank amateur at this. The researcher dropped vitamin C into lipid hyperoxide to see if it would produce genotoxic materials. Lipid hyperoxide is formed by free radical damage on lipids. People who take vitamin C DO NOT FORM lipid hyperoxide because vitamin C is a free-radical scavenger. In addition, lipid hyperoxide does a huge amount of bodily damage itself (such as heart disease plaques, I believe), and anything that combines with it would, under normal circumstances, be considered a good thing. Thus what this researcher did was to take a reaction out of context using a scenario that cannot occur, and blamed vitamin C for forming potentially harmful compounds from a particularly nasty one. Typical bogus research. Jon Campbell

  Response:

  "Vitamin C, an essential nutrient found in fruits and vegetables and taken in large doses by many people as a dietary supplement, is a double-edged sword, providing benefits but also inducing the production of compounds associated with cancer, researchers said on Thursday." http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010614/sc/health_vitamin_dc_1.html Tsu Dho Nimh If we are what we eat, I’m fast, cheap and easy

  Response:

  http://www.orgonelab.org Forwarded News Item Please copy and distribute to other interested individuals and groups  Does Vitamin C Cause Cancer – or Here We Go Again!. These guys will never give up! See the following for rebuttals: http://lpi.orst.edu/new/vitamincancer2.html http://www.vitamincfoundation.org/rebuttal.html  Chris Gupta http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/15/health/15VITA.html  Stan http://lpi.orst.edu/new/vitamincancer2.html Does Vitamin C Cause Cancer – or Here We Go Again!  A study in the June 15, 2001, issue of the journal Science shows that lipid hydroperoxides (rancid fat  molecules) can react with vitamin C to form products that could potentially harm DNA, although the reaction  of these products with DNA was not demonstrated in the study. Hence, it was suggested that vitamin C can  form genotoxins (DNA-damaging agents) from lipid hydroperoxides, the implication being that vitamin C may  enhance mutagenesis and the risk of cancer.  However, such a conclusion would be unwarranted. The study is a test tube experiment, showing some  intriguing chemistry of vitamin C. The study does not, however, describe biochemistry or biology, and its  relevance to reactions occurring in cells and tissues of the human body is unknown. Many reactions of  vitamin C occur in vitro (in the test tube) that will not and cannot occur in vivo (in the living organism). Why?  Because the physiological environment of the cell and the body contains thousands of substances that also  react with vitamin C and lipid hydroperoxides, "derailing" the chemistry observed in a test tube system.  For example, lipid hydroperoxides don’t just wait around in vivo to bump into a vitamin C molecule, but  instead are very rapidly reduced to harmless "alcohols" by a number of enzymes. Thus, the reaction rate of  lipid hydroperoxides with these enzymes compared to the reaction rate of the lipid hydroperoxides with  vitamin C is of crucial importance. Curiously, the reaction rate of lipid hydroperoxides with vitamin C was not  measured in the Science study. From what we know from the study, incubations were done for two hours,  an eternity in biochemical terms. Enzymatic reactions as those indicated above to reduce lipid  hydroperoxides to harmless alcohols that do not react with vitamin C usually take a fraction of a second, not  two hours!  In our own studies, we have shown that vitamin C effectively inhibits the formation of lipid hydroperoxides in  the first place. Thus, when human plasma is exposed to oxidizing conditions, vitamin C forms the first line of  antioxidant defense, and no lipid hydroperoxides are formed. Lipid hydroperoxides begin to form only after  vitamin C has been exhausted. Thus, in these experiments lipid hydroperoxides and vitamin C did not  co-exist in human plasma, and thus never had the opportunity to react with each other! … (more info at web site) OBRL News is a product of the non-profit Orgone Biophysical Research Lab Greensprings Research and Educational Center PO Box 1148, Ashland, Oregon 97520 USA http://www.orgonelab.org Building upon the discoveries of the internationally acclaimed natural scientist, Dr. Wilhelm Reich To subscribe to OBRL-News, send the message:         subscribe obrl-news to the following address: (Plain text email only!  No "HTML-mail"!) To unsubscribe, or change to a new email address, firstly: to the same address above. Then re-subscribe with your new address. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->"Vitamin C, an essential nutrient found in fruits and vegetables >and taken in large doses by many people as a dietary supplement, >is a double-edged sword, providing benefits but also inducing the >production of compounds associated with cancer, researchers said >on Thursday." >http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010614/sc/health_vitamin_dc_1.html >Tsu Dho Nimh >If we are what we eat, I’m fast, cheap and easy

  Response:

  No comments nuclear energy
  
  

• Power to China: U.S. Taxpayers Foot the Bill

  Question:

  >Power to China: U.S. Taxpayers Foot the Bill >Communist China has two new sources for generating power. Thanks to a >deal approved by the Clinton Administration, U.S. taxpayers have floated >a low-interest loan to the Chinese so that they could build efficient >new sources of low-cost nuclear energy. Meanwhile, areas of California >go dark on a near-daily basis, and Americans everywhere are paying >considerably higher prices for their gasoline and electricity.

  I see it says it was approved by Newt Gingrich as well. At least he did not object. It is just a loan to help capitalist Bechtel and Westinghouse make a few bucks.

  Response:

  > Power to China: U.S. Taxpayers Foot the Bill > Communist China has two new sources for generating power. Thanks to a > deal approved by the Clinton Administration, U.S. taxpayers have floated > a low-interest loan to the Chinese so that they could build efficient > new sources of low-cost nuclear energy. Meanwhile, areas of California > go dark on a near-daily basis, and Americans everywhere are paying > considerably higher prices for their gasoline and electricity. > Full story here: http://d21c.com/progun1/news.html

  Why not! NIMBY’s = California +  good chunk of the rest of US doesn’t want nuclear power.  They would rather put up with blackouts and the fallout from the consequences from the blackouts.

  Response:

  We have the courage of our convictions. > Why not! NIMBY’s = California +  good chunk of the rest of US doesn’t want > nuclear power.  They would rather put up with blackouts and the fallout from > the consequences from the blackouts.

  – Remove "REMOVE" from address (when present) for reply by e-mail

  Response:

  No comments nuclear energy
  
  

• why the Fusion Barrier Law is at 2/3 breakeven; shape of H & He atoms

  Question:

  > (snip) > It takes more energy input to create fusion than what energy can ever be > got out of fusion. > The above statement is blatantly false, as every hydrogen bomb test > amply proves.

  I was talking about "controlled machines". But maybe you believe a bomb explosion is a controlled machine. Look, you seem to be tramping around nitpicking over just about anything except seriously and objectively discussing the issues I raise. You seem bent on ad-hominem and not objective science. > Why this is so can be seen in terms of the geometry of atoms. Atoms of > uranium > (f orbitals, electrons or nucleus) can easily fission into s, p orbitals > leaving energy behind. > Atoms don’t fission into orbitals.  You are seriously confused. > –Donna

  Radioactive decay is fission and fission end result are stable atoms which usually is the s orbital of helium. Your posts are just ad hominem argumentative attacks. Plonk, you are now in my killfile

  Response:

  > I was talking about "controlled machines". But maybe you believe a bomb > explosion is a controlled machine.

    Yes, in fact I do. It does exactly what we want it to do, when we want it to do it, and in exactly the fashion we want it to happen. What could be more controlled than that. Heck, when the Titan blew it tossed the warhead a mile or so and nothing happened.   As I have asked many times before: what is your definition of controlled? Maury

  Response:

  – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> (snip) > > It takes more energy input to create fusion than what energy can ever be > > got out of fusion. > The above statement is blatantly false, as every hydrogen bomb test > amply proves. > I was talking about "controlled machines". But maybe you believe a bomb > explosion is a controlled machine.

  Non sequitur. The same argument could be made about internal combustion, which after all relies on a series of uncontrolled explosions. If a hydrogen bomb produces a net conversion of matter to energy, then it is a question of creating a controlled version of the same principle. Like the sun. It can be thought of as a prototype fusion reactor. It’s a simple matter of borrowing its key ideas and making a smaller version. So, you see, your original statement was false, and Uncle Al was right. > Look, you seem to be tramping around nitpicking over just about anything > except seriously and objectively discussing the issues I raise.

  WHAT? It was YOU who just switched from the technical to the personal. You haven’t even bothered to read and understand his argument. — Paul Lutus www.arachnoid.com

  Response:

  > I was talking about "controlled machines". But maybe you believe a bomb > explosion is a controlled machine.

  My question, that your Theory should answer is, What is the mechanism that allows break-even in a "uncontrolled machine" and  doesn’t allow for a "controlled machine"? Greg –You can lead a man to science but you can’t make him think–

  Response:

  the third time: : (What follows was cribbed from Kibo, who was here before all.) : : Archie-Poo was a cashier and then a dishwasher. . . There’s something strange about a guy who alters his address to "hate.spam.net" but posts the same off-topic personal attack numerous times.  Unfortunately, my irony meter seems to be out of service.  For —– Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University —– ". . .Mr Schutz [sic] acts like a functional electro-terrorist who impeads [sic] scientific communications with his too oft-silliness."

  Response:

  (snip) > It takes more energy input to create fusion than what energy can ever be > got out of fusion.

  The above statement is blatantly false, as every hydrogen bomb test amply proves. > Why this is so can be seen in terms of the geometry of atoms. Atoms of > uranium > (f orbitals, electrons or nucleus) can easily fission into s, p orbitals > leaving energy behind.

  Atoms don’t fission into orbitals.  You are seriously confused. –Donna

  Response:

  After 1997 with the discovery of the Fusion Barrier Law, I was looking for the upper limit for all controlled fusion machines. I did not have to go far to sense where the upper-limit was. Around 1997 Nagamine muon catalyzed fusion had reached 2/3 breakeven which what looked like insurmountable obstacles beyond 2/3 breakeven. And shortly afterwards JET proclaimed to have reached 64% breakeven. Having conjectured that 2/3 breakeven was the limit barrier itself. Thus began a search by me to ask why 2/3? Why not 3/4 or 90%? I first looked towards mathematics to see if any geometrical idea had a 2/3 special importance. I did not have to look far. I remembered in elementary geometry that the maximum a sphere fit inside a cone or a cone inside of a sphere is 2/3, not only in volume but in surface area. Then, knowing that geometrical fact, could I transfer that idea to the atoms of hydrogen and helium with regards to tokamaks of controlled fusion. I then realized that in radioactive decay and the success of uranium as a source of nuclear energy is a geometrical guarantee since in fission, complex geometries can create simple geometries of s orbitals but that fusion requires the fitting of spheres inside of cylinders (s inside of p orbitals). And that the maximum in volume or surface area is at most 2/3. The reason that Fermi demonstrated the truth of fission in his Chicago pile in 1940 and also in that same demonstration showed the world the first Nuclear Controlled Fission power plant. Is because fission has no breakeven barrier. Yet when fusion was demonstrated in 1950 and yet to this date of 2001 still no Fusion power plant in existence is because a Barrier Law exists upon fusion. It takes more energy input to create fusion than what energy can ever be got out of fusion. Why this is so can be seen in terms of the geometry of atoms. Atoms of uranium (f orbitals, electrons or nucleus) can easily fission into s, p orbitals leaving energy behind. Atoms of hydrogen forced to fuse is like trying to squeeze s geometries into elongated or p orbitals (electron or nuclear) and expect to get extra energy out of it. You cannot stuff a sphere or cylinder and get more than 2/3.

  Response:

  [snip] Nothing.  (What follows was cribbed from Kibo, who was here before all.) Archie-Poo was a cashier and then a dishwasher.  He started at Dartmouth’s Hanover Inn about 1990 (his previous employer was a relative of the manager of the Inn so he got a good reference, he’s said) and about 1993 started posting to various sci.* newsgroups.  He maintains he took the job at Dartmouth (paying $7/hour when the relationship ended in 1999) to get access to Dartmouth’s campus computers, which is odd because he took the job about three years before he discovered the the campus computers.   He was "Ludwig Plutonium" when he started posting in 1993; previously he was "Ludwig van Ludvig" and before that "Ludwig Hansen" [adopted name] and "Ludwig Poehlmann" [birth name].  When he posted about a run-in with some cops it was clear that the "legal" name changes he effected weren’t effective, because the cops looked him up as "Ludwig Hansen".  He is also struts as "The King Of Science And Logic," a title he awarded himself. Archie-Poo’s hot topics include (a) he invented spaghetti, (b) Allen Greenspan controls OPEC’s oil price increases, (c) he’s trying to install three wood stoves in his "homestead", and (d) he likes candy of various kinds. (d) seems to be the one he comes back to the most. Around 1998 he explained that the fact that he had a craving for shredded coconut proved his theory that the Universe was a giant plutonium atom that was making him superintelligent because the center of his brain also contains a plutonium atom, unlike the rest of us who have a carbon atom at the center of our brains. (Usenet central kill engine) — Uncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ http://www.ultra.net.au/~wisby/uncleal/  (Toxic URLs! Unsafe for children and most mammals) "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"  The Net!

  Response:

  > It takes more energy input to create fusion than what energy can ever be > got out of fusion. > Why this is so can be seen in terms of the geometry of atoms. Atoms of > uranium > (f orbitals, electrons or nucleus) can easily fission into s, p orbitals > leaving energy behind. Atoms of hydrogen forced to fuse is like trying > to squeeze s geometries into elongated or p orbitals (electron or > nuclear) and expect to get extra energy out of it. You cannot stuff a > sphere or cylinder and get more than 2/3.

  Question?: What keeps a star burning then ? Methinks your maths is wrong

  Response:

  Laurie writes: > Question?: What keeps a star burning then ? > Methinks your maths is wrong  

  Forget it Laurie. Arky’s so called ‘fusion barrier law’ is right up there with his ‘atom totality theory’ (that the universe is one giant Pu-238 atom) and Chucky’s ‘expanding earth’ theory. IOW it’s all in his head. "Archimedes Plutonium proves that 2*2=5 for sufficiently large values of 2" -from alt.sci.physics.plutonium — Sister Teresa               http://www.mit.edu/people/tuttt/   Boston Cacophony Society (You may already be a member!!!) "Koda-ba-san-da-an-dan-dada-bo-so-tohh…"    -Robert Tilton          

  Response:

  > Laurie writes: > Question?: What keeps a star burning then ? > Methinks your maths is wrong > Forget it Laurie. Arky’s so called ‘fusion barrier law’ > is right up there with his ‘atom totality theory’ (that > the universe is one giant Pu-238 atom) and Chucky’s > ‘expanding earth’ theory. IOW it’s all in his head.

  (What follows was cribbed from Kibo, who was here before all.) Archie-Poo was a cashier and then a dishwasher.  He started at Dartmouth’s Hanover Inn about 1990 (his previous employer was a relative of the manager of the Inn so he got a good reference, he’s said) and about 1993 started posting to various sci.* newsgroups.  He maintains he took the job at Dartmouth (paying $7/hour when the relationship ended in 1999) to get access to Dartmouth’s campus computers, which is odd because he took the job about three years before he discovered the the campus computers.   He was "Ludwig Plutonium" when he started posting in 1993; previously he was "Ludwig van Ludvig" and before that "Ludwig Hansen" [adopted name] and "Ludwig Poehlmann" [birth name].  When he posted about a run-in with some cops it was clear that the "legal" name changes he effected weren’t effective, because the cops looked him up as "Ludwig Hansen".  He is also struts as "The King Of Science And Logic," a title he awarded himself. Archie-Poo’s hot topics include (a) he invented spaghetti, (b) Allen Greenspan controls OPEC’s oil price increases, (c) he’s trying to install three wood stoves in his "homestead", and (d) he likes candy of various kinds. (d) seems to be the one he comes back to the most. Around 1998 he explained that the fact that he had a craving for shredded coconut proved his theory that the Universe was a giant plutonium atom that was making him superintelligent because the center of his brain also contains a plutonium atom, unlike the rest of us who have a carbon atom at the center of our brains. (Usenet central kill engine) — Uncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ http://www.ultra.net.au/~wisby/uncleal/  (Toxic URLs! Unsafe for children and most mammals) "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"  The Net!

  Response:

  No comments nuclear energy
  
  
• « Older Entries