In sci.med.nutrition Jim Webster wrote:

"Brian Sandle" wrote in message
...
In sci.med.nutrition Jim Webster wrote:

"Mooshie peas" wrote in message
...
On 21 Aug 2003 06:56:45 GMT, Brian Sandle
posted:

The company wants to make money,

That's their sole and proper aim in life.
Caveat emptor.

exactly, it is only by making money that they can pay employees and also
pay
tax which goes towards the paying of all those civil servants, public
health
workers, and similar

But it also means they may not bother to be too careful about
helping their customers to attend to the proper choices, the refuges
if it means selling less GM seed, or herbicide or pesticide if it
frightens the customer off to draw their attention to the
instructions.

You might as well, and with as much evidence, claim that actually it is the
civil servants living of these immoral earnings which drive them to it.

The refuges may be in the Monsanto contracts, but can the civil
servants police what the farmers do? It is up to the local Monsanto
agent.

"Brian Sandle" wrote in message
...
In sci.med.nutrition Jim Webster wrote:

"Brian Sandle" wrote in message
...
In sci.med.nutrition Jim Webster wrote:

"Mooshie peas" wrote in message
...
On 21 Aug 2003 06:56:45 GMT, Brian Sandle
posted:

The company wants to make money,

That's their sole and proper aim in life.
Caveat emptor.

exactly, it is only by making money that they can pay employees and
also
pay
tax which goes towards the paying of all those civil servants, public
health
workers, and similar

But it also means they may not bother to be too careful about
helping their customers to attend to the proper choices, the refuges
if it means selling less GM seed, or herbicide or pesticide if it
frightens the customer off to draw their attention to the
instructions.

You might as well, and with as much evidence, claim that actually it is
the
civil servants living of these immoral earnings which drive them to it.

The refuges may be in the Monsanto contracts, but can the civil
servants police what the farmers do?

a government which passes a law and makes no attempt to police that law has
failed in its responsibilities

It is up to the local Monsanto
agent.

perhaps you would like private companies to be made responsible for other
forms of crime prevention and the administration of justice?

Jim Webster

On 21 Aug 2003 06:56:45 GMT, Brian Sandle
wrote:

In sci.agriculture wrote:
On a cursory scan I can see nothing
(unfortunately, there's someone called Butcher, BT, who seems to have
done a lot of work on byssinosis and cotton, but not as far as I can
see on Bt).

Who is going to bother to research it?

Who is bothering with the lungs of child outworkers helping their parents
to get paid for their contracts?

Please explain this further [child outworkers helping their parents
etc]

Linkname: Jan 2001, Child labour in Australian garment industry
URL: http://www.cleanclothes.org/campaign/00-01hwaus.htm
size: 105 lines

I think I have posted in the past refs to lists of companies who do or
don't adhere to a code since then.

I suppose some famrers will have tales to tell about child labour on
farms. Gordon has related stuff to us about the old days.

A problem with some farms is the back-breaking work.

My oh picked cotton along with his siblings and parents as long as he
can remember in the hot Texas sun every summer.
Picking cotton was a financial necessity for the family and for the
many other families who also did it.
They got 5c a pound - and if you have handled cotton bolls you know
light it is.

Yeah, it beat the shit out of their hands and they had achy backs
every night but years later, and his Dad is nearing 90, none have
suffered any disability - they all have very good backs for their age.

Last Thursday we stopped and watched the mechanical pickers not far
from us as they scooped up what is expected to be a bumper new
season's crop and not due to any spraying.

There is room for ingenious inventors of hand-tools.
My back was bad when I was young, but I wasn't doing bend over work.

From what?
Were you taken to a doctor by your parent/s/caregiver/s?
If so, what was the diagnosis and what treatment/s were recommended?
If not taken to a doctor, is there any particular reason why you
weren't?

As a young adult or an adult, have you sought any advice et al?

Now I am experimenting with not eating grain, even rice, and my lower back is much better.

Again, have you been diagnosed with any condition?


In a homogeneous society one way may suit everyone, but it may be cruel
when people are different. For some the chemicals are the trouble, and
they can't read the labels very functionally.

Then who is to know when nettles start growing in a Roundup Ready soy,
corn, or cotton field, and Roundup lets them grow, and someone says you'll
have to get Pursuit and mix it. It works but do they know the extra
cautions? The company wants to make money, and may not be the best
advisor. Who else is there?

Cath

On 24 Aug 2003 11:20:27 GMT, Brian Sandle
posted:

In sci.med.nutrition Jim Webster wrote:

"Mooshie peas" wrote in message
...
On 21 Aug 2003 06:56:45 GMT, Brian Sandle
posted:

The company wants to make money,

That's their sole and proper aim in life.
Caveat emptor.

exactly, it is only by making money that they can pay employees and also pay
tax which goes towards the paying of all those civil servants, public health
workers, and similar

But it also means they may not bother to be too careful about
helping their customers to attend to the proper choices, the refuges
if it means selling less GM seed, or herbicide or pesticide if it
frightens the customer off to draw their attention to the
instructions.

That's the job of the regulator you elected. Please get the job
designations right, or you will be ever disappointed.

On 20 Aug 2003 23:05:46 GMT, Brian Sandle
wrote:

Steve B wrote:
On 18 Aug 2003 23:01:13 GMT, Brian Sandle
wrote:


The spray is Bt.

Bt has been genetically engineered into cotton plants in an attempt to
resist the boll weevil, and they are quite widely planted.

So: do that with a few more plants (which no-one works with on a daily
basis or makes underpants out of), and we remove the need for
spraying, surely?

Isn't it witches don't like applying water?

Would the lint from Bt cotton undergarments cause any people more lung/eye
irritation than non-Bt cotton?

I think we do get nutrition through our lungs. Some things are directly
absorbed and some broken down a bit?

If Bt cotton is in the lungs will there be byssinosis more frequently than
for non-Bt?

Occupational disease affecting cotton workers, characterised by
chronic bronchitis, to save anyone else the effort of looking it up.
Happens more often on Mondays, apparently. ("Yeah, right!" some rooted
cynics may respond.).

http://chorus.rad.mcw.edu/doc/00053.html

[...]
Monday morning syndromes stemming from occupational exposure to toxic
substances have also been described in cardiology. One of the best
known is "Monday Morning Sudden Cardiac Death" among dynamite
manufacturing workers, most likely due to acute re-exposure to nitrate
esters upon return to work after a brief period of absence
[...]
from
Linkname: Proposed Agenda for OC
URL:
http://www.workhealth.org/Occ.%20Car...0for%20OC.html
size: 1268 lines

Seriously, I wonder whether there's a genuinely suggested cause for
this anomaly.

Apparently steam treatment of the cotton fibre is protective. Is it
killing bacteria which grow over the weekend, or moistening the cotton
fibers or otherwise making them stick into larger bundles?

Has anyone other than you, Brian, suggested there is more byssinosis
from Bt resistant cotton?

discussed on `byssinosis' thread.

On a cursory scan I can see nothing
(unfortunately, there's someone called Butcher, BT, who seems to have
done a lot of work on byssinosis and cotton, but not as far as I can
see on Bt).

Who is going to bother to research it?

Who is bothering with the lungs of child outworkers helping their parents
to get paid for their contracts?

Please explain this further [child outworkers helping their parents
etc]

Cath


I'm sure you'll have a reference or two (URLs only, please).

Meanwhile, let the double-blind underpant trials commence. I'd be a
lot less nervous about taking part than I would about using unbleached
loo-paper and bringing my sensitive underparts in contact with the
proven carcinogens secreted by those nasty trees.

I think the strong perfumes put into toilet paper may be troublesome.
Maybe they swell the tissues into piles, same as might be a result in some
people of using anti-angina nitroglycerin spray standing up. I wonder.

The company wants to make money, [...]
But it also means they may not bother to be too careful about
helping their customers to attend to the proper choices, the
refuges if it means selling less GM seed, or herbicide or
pesticide if it frightens the customer off to draw their
attention to the instructions.
That's the job of the regulator you elected. Please get the job
designations right, or you will be ever disappointed.

I doubt there is any country in the world where people get to elect
agribiz regulators (certainly not New Zealand, where Brian's posting
from). They're appointees, the appointments being made by governments
that are uniformly in the pockets of agribiz. In this situation you
can't expect them to take any decision that might affect their de
facto employers' profits.

The regulatory system is designed neither to work nor to be responsive
to democratic control, so there is no realistic alternative to direct
action in this instance.

======== Email to "j-c" at this site; email to "bogus" will bounce ========
Jack Campin: 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU; 0131 6604760
http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/purrhome.html food intolerance data & recipes,
Mac logic fonts, Scots traditional music files and CD-ROMs of Scottish music.

In sci.med.nutrition Mooshie peas wrote:
On 24 Aug 2003 11:20:27 GMT, Brian Sandle
posted:

In sci.med.nutrition Jim Webster wrote:

"Mooshie peas" wrote in message
...
On 21 Aug 2003 06:56:45 GMT, Brian Sandle
posted:

The company wants to make money,

That's their sole and proper aim in life.
Caveat emptor.

exactly, it is only by making money that they can pay employees and also pay
tax which goes towards the paying of all those civil servants, public health
workers, and similar

But it also means they may not bother to be too careful about
helping their customers to attend to the proper choices, the refuges
if it means selling less GM seed, or herbicide or pesticide if it
frightens the customer off to draw their attention to the
instructions.

That's the job of the regulator you elected. Please get the job
designations right, or you will be ever disappointed.

The regulator has got Monsanto to write it into the contract with the
intention of policing it that way. They could have gone around the farms
themselves and educated every farmer and told them what to buy from
Monsanto, and policed it themselves. Better?

"bogus address" wrote in message
...

The company wants to make money, [...]
But it also means they may not bother to be too careful about
helping their customers to attend to the proper choices, the
refuges if it means selling less GM seed, or herbicide or
pesticide if it frightens the customer off to draw their
attention to the instructions.
That's the job of the regulator you elected. Please get the job
designations right, or you will be ever disappointed.

I doubt there is any country in the world where people get to elect
agribiz regulators (certainly not New Zealand, where Brian's posting
from). They're appointees, the appointments being made by governments
that are uniformly in the pockets of agribiz. In this situation you
can't expect them to take any decision that might affect their de
facto employers' profits.

then change the government

The regulatory system is designed neither to work nor to be responsive
to democratic control, so there is no realistic alternative to direct
action in this instance.

I'm sorry you live in a country with no democratic accountability

Jim Webster

On 24 Aug 2003 14:08:36 GMT, Brian Sandle
posted:

In sci.med.nutrition Mooshie peas wrote:
On 20 Aug 2003 23:05:46 GMT, Brian Sandle
posted:

On a cursory scan I can see nothing
(unfortunately, there's someone called Butcher, BT, who seems to have
done a lot of work on byssinosis and cotton, but not as far as I can
see on Bt).

Who is going to bother to research it?

Plenty of scientists looking for phenomena to explore, or at least
I've known a few.

And who wants to fund it?

Research institutes, governments, universities, individual citizens,
trusts....

Who is bothering with the lungs of child outworkers helping their parents
to get paid for their contracts?

See above.

I'm sure you'll have a reference or two (URLs only, please).

Meanwhile, let the double-blind underpant trials commence. I'd be a
lot less nervous about taking part than I would about using unbleached
loo-paper and bringing my sensitive underparts in contact with the
proven carcinogens secreted by those nasty trees.

I think the strong perfumes put into toilet paper may be troublesome.

Which ones? Using the generic term "perfumes" is as useless as using
the generic term "pesticides". They are both a very broad group of
substances.

Maybe they swell the tissues into piles, same as might be a result in some
people of using anti-angina nitroglycerin spray standing up. I wonder.

Ummm, the mechanism of haemorrhoid formation and the action of
nitroglycerin on smooth muscle are hardly connected, I would have
thought. Haemorrhoids are genetic, in the main. Even with NO
constipation during one's life, they will form in some, and with
chronic constipation all ones life some will avoid them.

Some types of haemorrhoids are filled with blood more than others.

No, they are all varicose veins.

Sometimes the doc will let the blood out.

If it's been trapped. He can put a ligature on the varicosed vessel
until it drops off. Like lambs' tails.

Smooth muscle is the muscle of the arteries. Nitroglycerin relaxes
the smooth muscle and so blood pressure drops as more blood flows
through relaxed arteries. Any tendency to a haemorrhoid may be
supplied with more blood.

Why? If the bp drops?

If the patient is walking the haemorrhoid
may grow and get pinched by the anal sphincter. Inflammaiton may
occur causing swollen tissue in the area, too.

Yep.

On 25 Aug 2003 10:57:38 GMT, (bogus address)
posted:


The company wants to make money, [...]
But it also means they may not bother to be too careful about
helping their customers to attend to the proper choices, the
refuges if it means selling less GM seed, or herbicide or
pesticide if it frightens the customer off to draw their
attention to the instructions.
That's the job of the regulator you elected. Please get the job
designations right, or you will be ever disappointed.

I doubt there is any country in the world where people get to elect
agribiz regulators (certainly not New Zealand, where Brian's posting
from).

I thought NZ was even more democratic than Oz. We elect the regulator
who appoints executive officers to carry out their policy. Also
unappoints them.

They're appointees, the appointments being made by governments
that are uniformly in the pockets of agribiz.

Not here, but as you guys have "vote if you feel like it", then I
suppose you get what you deserve. Beau Blair, frinstance.

In this situation you
can't expect them to take any decision that might affect their de
facto employers' profits.

Speak for yourself. If that's what you lot voted for....

The regulatory system is designed neither to work nor to be responsive
to democratic control, so there is no realistic alternative to direct
action in this instance.

If that's what you believe about your country. It is not the case in
mine, and I suspect many others.

On 25 Aug 2003 10:59:05 GMT, Brian Sandle
posted:

In sci.med.nutrition Mooshie peas wrote:
On 24 Aug 2003 11:20:27 GMT, Brian Sandle
posted:

In sci.med.nutrition Jim Webster wrote:

"Mooshie peas" wrote in message
...
On 21 Aug 2003 06:56:45 GMT, Brian Sandle
posted:

The company wants to make money,

That's their sole and proper aim in life.
Caveat emptor.

exactly, it is only by making money that they can pay employees and also pay
tax which goes towards the paying of all those civil servants, public health
workers, and similar

But it also means they may not bother to be too careful about
helping their customers to attend to the proper choices, the refuges
if it means selling less GM seed, or herbicide or pesticide if it
frightens the customer off to draw their attention to the
instructions.

That's the job of the regulator you elected. Please get the job
designations right, or you will be ever disappointed.

The regulator has got Monsanto to write it into the contract with the
intention of policing it that way.

Fair enough, if that's what the electorate voted for.

They could have gone around the farms
themselves and educated every farmer and told them what to buy from
Monsanto, and policed it themselves. Better?

Sorry, which "they" are you talking about here?

Can you show me evidence of a regulator signing a contract with
Monsanto, as you appear to claim?

wrote in message
news
On 20 Aug 2003 23:05:46 GMT, Brian Sandle
wrote:

Steve B wrote:
On 18 Aug 2003 23:01:13 GMT, Brian Sandle
wrote:


The spray is Bt.

Bt has been genetically engineered into cotton plants in an attempt
to
resist the boll weevil, and they are quite widely planted.

So: do that with a few more plants (which no-one works with on a daily
basis or makes underpants out of), and we remove the need for
spraying, surely?

Isn't it witches don't like applying water?

Would the lint from Bt cotton undergarments cause any people more
lung/eye
irritation than non-Bt cotton?

I think we do get nutrition through our lungs. Some things are directly
absorbed and some broken down a bit?

If Bt cotton is in the lungs will there be byssinosis more frequently
than
for non-Bt?

Occupational disease affecting cotton workers, characterised by
chronic bronchitis, to save anyone else the effort of looking it up.
Happens more often on Mondays, apparently. ("Yeah, right!" some rooted
cynics may respond.).

http://chorus.rad.mcw.edu/doc/00053.html

[...]
Monday morning syndromes stemming from occupational exposure to toxic
substances have also been described in cardiology. One of the best
known is "Monday Morning Sudden Cardiac Death" among dynamite
manufacturing workers, most likely due to acute re-exposure to nitrate
esters upon return to work after a brief period of absence
[...]
from
Linkname: Proposed Agenda for OC
URL:

http://www.workhealth.org/Occ.%20Car...0for%20OC.html
size: 1268 lines

Seriously, I wonder whether there's a genuinely suggested cause for
this anomaly.

Apparently steam treatment of the cotton fibre is protective. Is it
killing bacteria which grow over the weekend, or moistening the cotton
fibers or otherwise making them stick into larger bundles?

Has anyone other than you, Brian, suggested there is more byssinosis
from Bt resistant cotton?

discussed on `byssinosis' thread.

On a cursory scan I can see nothing
(unfortunately, there's someone called Butcher, BT, who seems to have
done a lot of work on byssinosis and cotton, but not as far as I can
see on Bt).

Who is going to bother to research it?

Who is bothering with the lungs of child outworkers helping their parents
to get paid for their contracts?

Please explain this further [child outworkers helping their parents
etc]

Cath

Everyone that breaths small fibers, dust and smoke on a regular basis has
lung problems of some kind to some degree. Be it cotton, sand, asbestos,
smoke from a cooking fire, ciggerets, coal dust, feed dust or what evere.
Some are worse than others. But they all cause problems in some people.

I'm sure you'll have a reference or two (URLs only, please).

Meanwhile, let the double-blind underpant trials commence. I'd be a
lot less nervous about taking part than I would about using unbleached
loo-paper and bringing my sensitive underparts in contact with the
proven carcinogens secreted by those nasty trees.

I think the strong perfumes put into toilet paper may be troublesome.
Maybe they swell the tissues into piles, same as might be a result in
some
people of using anti-angina nitroglycerin spray standing up. I wonder.

I think you should be able to charge people that douse themselves with
perfume with assault.

Gordon

Why should people react to a combination when you state all harmless
by themselves? Does not make sense.


Cath


It doesn't entirely make sense to me either but see what is happening in the
community
http://www.stopthespray.co.nz/downlo...eport_feb03.pd
f


and see how we are going to be unwilling participants in a study (or is that
experiment)
http://www.stopthespray.co.nz/download/hra.htm

It might be intersting to do immune reaction tests on workers. They have
shown positive on Auckland people exposed to the spray.


http://www.stopthespray.co.nz/download/hra.htm

It would appear as if the people of Hamilton are going to be experimented
on.