Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

New book - "Fatal Misconception."

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Lenona

unread,
Dec 12, 2009, 2:54:53 PM12/12/09
to

It condemns the population-control movement as something that doesn't
even work.

http://www.amazon.com/Fatal-Misconception-Struggle-Control-Population/dp/0674034600/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260647352&sr=1-1

Less than 2 weeks in print. Eight reviews so far. The three negative
ones are quite thoughtful.

Lenona.

Bobchai

unread,
Dec 13, 2009, 4:11:43 PM12/13/09
to
On Dec 12, 11:54 am, Lenona <lenona...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> It condemns the population-control movement as something that doesn't
> even work.
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Fatal-Misconception-Struggle-Control-Population...

>
> Less than 2 weeks in print. Eight reviews so far. The three negative
> ones are quite thoughtful.
>
> Lenona.

Lenona:

This looks like a fascinating read, and thanks for sharing it.
Enforced population control is a bad idea, but exercising one's free
choice, without coercion from family or government is what
"childfreedom" is about.

When I was a kid, there was this other kid who used to bring in some
stolen loot from his WW2 veteran father's collection, which was also
stolen loot, and he traded this Nazi memorabilia for lunch money or
baseball cards.

One of the items was a "mother medal". I think I bought it for one
Kennedy half dollar. Still had the ribbons and lapel clasp. Hitler
used to bestow this medal on Teutonic breeder women for services to
the Reich. My seminal childfree instincts at the time thought this was
plum crazy.

Let no government pressure anyone about having kids or not having
kids. Period.

--Bob

elizabeth

unread,
Dec 13, 2009, 4:42:28 PM12/13/09
to
On Dec 12, 11:54 am, Lenona <lenona...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> It condemns the population-control movement as something that doesn't
> even work.
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Fatal-Misconception-Struggle-Control-Population...

>
> Less than 2 weeks in print. Eight reviews so far. The three negative
> ones are quite thoughtful.
>
> Lenona.

The authors are about to publish a new book about how it's not falling
that kills you, it's gravity. So all we have to do is ignore gravity,
and no one will die in falls anymore.

elizabeth

unread,
Dec 13, 2009, 4:43:01 PM12/13/09
to

Let's just pressure you into suicide. Make room for more anchor
babies!

elizabeth

unread,
Dec 13, 2009, 4:45:45 PM12/13/09
to
On Dec 12, 11:54 am, Lenona <lenona...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> It condemns the population-control movement as something that doesn't
> even work.
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Fatal-Misconception-Struggle-Control-Population...

>
> Less than 2 weeks in print. Eight reviews so far. The three negative
> ones are quite thoughtful.
>
> Lenona.

Well, I don't care, let people keep breeding, after all, they will be
the ones responsible for making their own children's life sheer hell.

Let's use death control, it's ever so much nicer than birth control!

Pirate Queen

unread,
Dec 14, 2009, 8:13:58 AM12/14/09
to
On Dec 13, 4:45 pm, elizabeth <efran...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Let's use death control, it's ever so much nicer than birth control!

Talk about an awesome potential .sig line, bumper sticker, or t-shirt
logo....

T.

Lenona

unread,
Dec 14, 2009, 1:24:47 PM12/14/09
to

The next time someone like columnist Betsy Hart (conservative mother
of four) says something like "God will provide," I plan to say: "Maybe
God WAS providing all these centuries by keeping the death rate so
high so there would always be enough arable land to go around? After
all, Homo Sapiens has existed for 300,000 year or so, but it wasn't
until barely more than a century ago - 1880, maybe - that ALL doctors
started believing in the GERM THEORYand WASHING THEIR HANDS!
Coincidence? Maybe God didn't really WANT us to discover germs!"

Lenona.

elizabeth

unread,
Dec 15, 2009, 9:49:38 PM12/15/09
to
On Dec 14, 10:24 am, Lenona <lenona...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Dec 14, 8:13 am, Pirate Queen <crumsypira...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 13, 4:45 pm, elizabeth <efran...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Let's use death control, it's ever so much nicer than birth control!
>
> > Talk about an awesome potential .sig line, bumper sticker, or t-shirt
> > logo....
>
> > T.

Very interesting theory.

> The next time someone like columnist Betsy Hart (conservative mother
> of four) says something like "God will provide," I plan to say: "Maybe
> God WAS providing all these centuries by keeping the death rate so
> high so there would always be enough arable land to go around? After
> all, Homo Sapiens has existed for 300,000 year or so, but it wasn't
> until barely more than a century ago - 1880, maybe - that ALL doctors
> started believing in the GERM THEORYand WASHING THEIR HANDS!
> Coincidence? Maybe God didn't really WANT us to discover germs!"

Germs are God's creatures, too.
Turn to All Things Dull and Ugly in your Monty Python hymn book
All things dull and ugly,
All creatures short and squat,
All things rude and nasty,
The Lord God made the lot.
Each little snake that poisons,
Each little wasp that stings,
He made their brutish venom.
He made their horrid wings.

All things sick and cancerous,
All evil great and small,
All things foul and dangerous,
The Lord God made them all.

Each nasty little hornet,
Each beastly little squid--
Who made the spikey urchin?
Who made the sharks? He did!

All things scabbed and ulcerous,
All pox both great and small,
Putrid, foul and gangrenous,
The Lord God made them all.

Amen.


> Lenona.

Lenona

unread,
Dec 16, 2009, 1:29:47 PM12/16/09
to
On Dec 15, 9:49 pm, elizabeth <efran...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Very interesting theory.

Thanks. I did a little research and it looks as though 1890 would be
closer to accurate - at least for Europe and the U.S.

According to this, the germ theory was thought of long before the 19th
century in other continents:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germ_theory_of_disease

(Pasteur and Koch were the ones that verified it in the 1860s.)

However, widespread hand washing and antisepsis are another matter -
so if anyone knows of such a large medical practice before the
mid-19th century, let me know.

Lenona.


Bobchai

unread,
Dec 22, 2009, 11:27:37 AM12/22/09
to
On Dec 14, 10:24 am, Lenona <lenona...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Yay, Lenona! Good retort.

--Bob

Bobchai

unread,
Dec 22, 2009, 12:06:12 PM12/22/09
to

Well, Civil War battlefield surgeons washing their hands with whiskey
was pretty common. The victim/patient was already pretty loaded when
they sawed his leg off (and so was the doctor).

Ether (ethyl ether) was already de riguer in the 1840s, but it has the
unfortunate property of being very explosive. Nevertheless, an ether
high when you're a first year biology student (studying the mating
habits and genetics of fruit flies) is pretty cool. So was sniffing
the solvent from the old "ditto" copy duplicators in sixth grade.

Not sure if these were antiseptics, but they probably were.
Narcotics, definitely.

--Bob


Lenona

unread,
Dec 23, 2009, 5:03:39 PM12/23/09
to
On Dec 22, 12:06 pm, Bobchai <Robertsonc...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Well, Civil War battlefield surgeons washing their hands with whiskey
> was pretty common.  The victim/patient was already pretty loaded when
> they sawed his leg off (and so was the doctor).
>
> Ether (ethyl ether) was already de riguer in the 1840s, but it has the
> unfortunate property of being very explosive. Nevertheless, an ether
> high when you're a first year biology student (studying the mating
> habits and genetics of fruit flies) is pretty cool.  So was sniffing
> the solvent from the old "ditto" copy duplicators in sixth grade.
>
> Not sure if these were antiseptics, but they probably were.
> Narcotics, definitely.

Ether was, of course, used to defeat the patient's pain. I've never
heard of its having any antiseptic effect, though.

What's your source for Civil War surgeons washing their hands with
ANYTHING? Even years later, at Bellevue Hospital in 1875, surgeons
commonly scoffed at the idea of hand-washing. Even after it did become
common, it wasn't until the 1890s that gloves began to be used - and
that was so the doctors and nurses wouldn't have to use mercuric
chloride (shudder) on their hands.

Lenona.

Bobchai

unread,
Dec 23, 2009, 6:58:04 PM12/23/09
to

Lenona:

Your history of nursing certainly exceeds mine, and you are certainly
right that germ theory was not known until the 1870s.

I'm only saying that some Civil War surgeons were aware of hygiene
before it was known or proven. They may have not known about the
causes, but they certainly knew the consequences of sloppy practice.
Alcohol and ethyl ether were already known as sterilants. Sometimes
you just do what you can to keep someone alive, even if you don't
understand why. Laudanum might be perfectly appropriate under that
rationale today.

--Bob

h

unread,
Dec 23, 2009, 11:19:13 PM12/23/09
to

"Lenona" <leno...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1c16e365-b820-416b...@b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...

>. Even after it did become
>common, it wasn't until the 1890s that gloves began to >be used - and
>that was so the doctors and nurses wouldn't have to use >mercuric
>chloride (shudder) on their hands.

Word. My great-grandmother was a midwife (actually took the hospital
training) in Hastings-on-Hudson from the time she arrived in the USA in 1896
until her retirement in the 1940s. My great-grandmother (from England)
always washed her hands prior to delivering a baby, but the doctors not so
much. Her thinking was, "I wash my hands prior to cooking food, so I should
do at least as much prior to touching another person."


h

unread,
Dec 23, 2009, 11:19:13 PM12/23/09
to

"Lenona" <leno...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1c16e365-b820-416b...@b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>. Even after it did become
>common, it wasn't until the 1890s that gloves began to >be used - and
>that was so the doctors and nurses wouldn't have to use >mercuric
>chloride (shudder) on their hands.

Word. My great-grandmother was a midwife (actually took the hospital

h

unread,
Dec 23, 2009, 11:21:58 PM12/23/09
to

"Lenona" <leno...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1c16e365-b820-416b...@b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>. Even after it did become
>common, it wasn't until the 1890s that gloves began to >be used - and
>that was so the doctors and nurses wouldn't have to use >mercuric
>chloride (shudder) on their hands.

Word. My great-grandmother was a midwife (actually took the hospital

0 new messages