Vitamin D derived from tanning bed exposure
Nick Topolnyski
vitamin D3 which evolves in the body, into the therapeutic hormone
1,25-dihydroxy vitamin D. Vieth has made a strong case which indicates a
level of 1,25-dihydroxy must exceed 100 nmol/L in order for it to be an
effective immunosuppressant.
I wrote that I would apprise the board of my results.
Here it is...
After two months of using a full body tanning bed my 1,25-dihydroxy levels
are 135 nmol/L. The bed I used has twenty four, 100 Watt bulbs. There are 12
in the top shell and 12 on the bottom. My frequency of visitation was every
second day for 25 minutes after the first four sessions were gradational
from 10 to 15 minutes to build my base tan.
Cheers
Nick
Diane Komaroff
Hi Nick:
Thanks for the post. I have tanning beds where I live, and I am going
to start using them, just as you are. It seems that I always feel
better in the Summer; winters in the Seattle area are pretty much
overcast, if not rainy.
Does the artificial "sun" do anything to your skin? I had an aunt who
lived in Menlo Park, Calif, and was tan most of the year.. very veeery
dark, and her face looked like leather, rather like a bicycle seat.
(She was Swedish and Polish so started out with extremely light skin.
I'm the same way)
Thanks! Diane
Nick Topolnyski
has been tanned via the two different methods.
My wife suggests that my tanning booth tanned skin is more coarse than it
would be in the summer when I have a naturally derived tan. If this is a
concern I believe there are moisturizers that can be applied to address
this.
I am currently on a less frequent tanning schedule and will assess, in two
months, the amount of hydroxy vitamin D it produces .
I suspect that each tanning company has different specifications to their
hardware so I am reluctant to give any advice on how much UVR exposure one
should get.
My understanding of the process is that the portion of the UV spectrum
responsible for initiating the vitamin D process in the body is different
that what than what induces melanin production. This is the resulting
pimentation or tan.The following is from a tanning company's site
A tan occurs when your skin is exposed to ultraviolet light, from the sun or
from Fabutan. There are 3 types of ultraviolet rays: UV-A, UV-B, and UV-C.
UV-C rays are very dangerous and can cause extreme damage to your skin. It s
actually the main reason why scientists are worried about the depletion of
the ozone layer, as it filters out most of UVC rays. There are no UV-C rays
at Fabutan.
UV-B rays are a bit friendlier but can still cause burning when the skin is
overexposed. However, UV-B rays initiate beneficial responses in the skin,
such as the stimulation of the production of Vitamin D3, which we need to
regulate calcium, magnesium and phosphorus absorption in our bodies. In
small doses, UV-B increases the pigmentation of our skin, as well as the
natural Sun Protection Factor (SPF). There are some UV-B rays at Fabutan.
UV-A, known as the tanning ray, is the best of the three in the ultraviolet
spectrum and is responsible for darkening the pigment in our skin. It will
not cause a burn, except in extreme cases of skin sensitivity or
overexposure. The majority of the rays at Fabutan are UV-A.
So, a tan is started when your skin is exposed to small doses of UV-B rays
and the skin darkens with exposure to UV-A rays. Fabutan's tanning bulbs
have high UV-A output (95%) with small UV-B output (5%) to give you a rich,
golden tan.
Cheers
Nick
ed hill
the following is part of a thing i'm writing for pauls site. i expect paul will do some
editing to raise the standard a bit but here is the beginning as i've penned it.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Active VD3 (1,25(OH)/2D3) is created by your body in the following way.
UV or sunlight at between 290 and 315nm and heat on the skin results in the conversion of a
molecule called 7-dehydrocholesterol (provitamin D) into cholecalciferol.
The cholecalciferol or previtamin then goes through two hydroxylations (additions of hydrated
oxygen atoms -OH). The first hydroxylation usually happens in the mitochondria of liver and
kidney endothilial cells. this creates the relatively abundant 25OHD3. That's a weak form of
Vitamin D3 which has a sterol or steroid "ring" structure. 25OHD3 then goes through another
hydroxylation, mostly in the kidney's mitochondria, resulting in 1,25(OH)/2D3 which is really
the subject here.
These hydroxylations are also performed by immune system cells under specific
conditions. This "extrarenal" synthesis seems to be part of certain types of immune
responses which include lymphoid cells (both B and T cells) as well as myeloid cells.
This process by which sun or U.V. initiates VD3 synthesis is self limiting, so too much such
exposure is unlikely to ever cause VD3 overdose.
The active form of D3 has a particular molecular "tail" called a "side chain". That tail
fits into receptors on the surfaces of many kinds of cells in your body like a key into a
lock. These receptors are called VDR or vitamin D receptors. Fitting themselves into these
receptors, the VD3 molecules might be thought of as flipping switches that, depending on the
cells in question, set any of several processes in motion.
These include regulating serum (blood) calcium levels, stimulating cellular differentiation
and subsequent apoptosis (cell death), as well as modulating the production of cytokines that
pass signals within the immune and some other systems.
?????????????????????????
more to come. i thought this might inform the conversation a bit.
regards
ed
"Nick Topolnyski" <nt...@shaw.ca> writes:
>Cheers
>Nick
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The whole business of his life was in the plunder of his gaze..."
Daniel Halevy on Degas
| <include>ed's 3d stuff | http://world.std.com/~ehill | 617-629-4625 |
Ericam2
a small face lamp and use that at home.
Erica MM
Diane Komaroff
I just wrote a message on this ng as to "Things I tried that did
nothing."
I wonder if this is another: "My schemes are just like all my dreams,
ending in the sky..."
I think I will try the tanning beds; not a big deal, no $ this time!
Meanwhile, I've heard from "someone" that sniffing bus exhaust,
wearing a dragon's teeth necklace, eating cobwebs (where the hell did
all those cobs go?),
filling anal cavities with peat moss, and being stick beaten by
Taliban while wearing a bikini and Chanel MIGHT HOLD SOME PROMISE!
After all, don't knock it till you've tried it......................
Diane (Woman of La Mancha)
cocobunny
<frantically scribbling> would that be chanel #5?
Eliz.
^^^^^
"The Truth is out there.
But it ain't in the documentation"
ed hill
hi erica
far s i know that's a myth. lot's of docs still march to the drummer of some
very bad studies done a long time back resulting in the FDA listing absurdly
low D3 levels.
we evolved spending virtually all of our time outdoors and prolly not wearing a
whole lot.
that's a lotta skin getting a lot of sun.
in this issue. for what it's worth i'm pretty comfortable saying that those
docs are quite mistaken. the FDA is hopelessly behind in this area.
best regards
ed
eri...@aol.com (Ericam2) writes:
>Erica MM
Diane Komaroff
I go forth (or possibly with a fifth) into yon rays!
Diane
ed hill
Dianekk...@msn.com (Diane Komaroff) writes:
>Thanks, Ed!!!!!
whenever i can talk a woman inta bringing a fifth to "bed" i figure the world just got a little nicer.
or at least a little more agreeable.
merry xmass
ed
Ericam2
I'm going to florida in Feb. how much sun do you suggest I get 1 hr, 1/2 hr?
Erica MM
Nick Topolnyski
When I have elevated my serum vitamin D3 above 100 nmol/L by using either
sunlight or tanning booths my liver enzymes are very normal. However when I
use vitamin D3 supplements to elevate my serum vitamin D3 (even just 1,000
IU/d) my liver enzymes (alkaline phosphatase, ALT and GGT) jump well above
the normal ranges given by the labratory.
What do you think would account for my liver reacting obly to the
supplements?
I would like to clarify the specifics about your latest take on the
necessity of retinoic acid for vitamin D efficacy. Are you implying that the
active hormone 1,25(OH)/2D3 is rendered ineffective in the absence of
retinoic acid or that the hormone just isn't formed? If it is the former,
what of the effectiveness of using only vitamin D3 in eliminnating EAE in
mice by Hayes et al.? Are we different than our mice friends?
Cheers
Nick
"ed hill" <eh...@world.std.com> wrote in message
news:Goort...@world.std.com...
Nick Topolnyski
I achieved therapeutic amounts of serum vitamin D (116 nmol/L)by tanning,
full body exposure for 20 - 30 minutes per day during the summer at approx
11 AM here in southern Alberta.
It's quite likely that Florida at this time of the year is equivalent to our
summer wrt to the sun incidence. Depending on how much skin you're willing
to expose, an hour should be plenty.
Cheers
Nick
"Ericam2" <eri...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20011224160015...@mb-mp.aol.com...
ed hill
hi nick
glad to be helpful
"Nick Topolnyski" <nt...@shaw.ca> writes:
>Thanks for the spiel Ed. Perhaps you could address these issues for me.
>When I have elevated my serum vitamin D3 above 100 nmol/L by using either
>sunlight or tanning booths my liver enzymes are very normal. However when I
>use vitamin D3 supplements to elevate my serum vitamin D3 (even just 1,000
>IU/d) my liver enzymes (alkaline phosphatase, ALT and GGT) jump well above
>the normal ranges given by the labratory.
>What do you think would account for my liver reacting obly to the
>supplements?
this is purely a guess but tell me what you think.
maybe a few factors.
both the supplaments and your skin are delivering 25OHD3 to your system. it still requires the two hydroxylations to do much.
the renal hydroxylations, that is to say those taking place in the liver and kidneys are also happening (i think in the
mitochondria of) in leukocytes.
when you take D3 supplaments, the first hydroxylation is already done. when your skin does that the resulting 25OHD3 is
prolly distributed through your system pretty broadly over a period of time as it's created. it's the nature of that process
that there's surface area involved. hence prolly a more steady feed into the system than your gut is likely to deliver.
also some of the work is prolly being shared by the immune cells which seem to use D3 like a cytokine.
add the possibility that there might be more going on naturally than we are fully aware of. the body might be making the job
easier for the renal system by cofactors or just slight molecular differences in the 25OHD3 it produces.
we don't produce very good hormones in factories. manufacturers say otherwise, but they wouldn't have pregnant mares pissing
estrogen into rubber bladders if they could get it really right in a vat.
i'd stick with the tanning bed if you can.
>I would like to clarify the specifics about your latest take on the
>necessity of retinoic acid for vitamin D efficacy. Are you implying that the
>active hormone 1,25(OH)/2D3 is rendered ineffective in the absence of
>retinoic acid or that the hormone just isn't formed? If it is the former,
>what of the effectiveness of using only vitamin D3 in eliminnating EAE in
>mice by Hayes et al.? Are we different than our mice friends?
the hormone is there. but the typical VDR or vitamin d receptor works by activating a VDRE or vitamin d response
element. there are different versions of this element, i'm not sure how many or if that's yet known. if the VDR is only
one flavor there's no way to be
selective about what response element gets activated.
by forming a dimer or two headed molecule the VDR can be choosier about what it signals.
there are monodimers which are just VDR, homodimers VDR-VDR, and heterodimers like VDR-RXR which is one of a few different
vitamin D3-retinoid receptor molecules.
these response elements signal among other things transcription.
the mono and homo dimer are far less transcriptionally active. as are most of the other heterodimers. the VDR-RXR is the
most common and far as i know most active.
far as the mice go i don't know the degree to which that system is genetically conserved. nor do we know the typical lab
mouse diet. (i only know that the short one wants to take over the world)
i know that herbivors have a somewhat different system. we use D3, herbivors have adapted differently using D2. don't know
how deeply the difference extends or if it's pertinent in mice.
so for us retinoids are a good thing :)
regards
ed
Tracy B.
hi erica
far s i know that's a myth. lot's of docs still march to the drummer of
some very bad studies done a long time back resulting in the FDA listing
absurdly low D3 levels.
we evolved spending virtually all of our time outdoors and prolly not
wearing a whole lot.
that's a lotta skin getting a lot of sun.
in this issue. for what it's worth i'm pretty comfortable saying that
those docs are quite mistaken. the FDA is hopelessly behind in this
area.
best regards
ed
Back in those days, when we were "evolving", we also didn't live very
long, did we?
Tracy B.
ed hill
hi tracy
tra...@webtv.net (Tracy B.) writes:
>Ed Hill wrote:
>Tracy B.
did a vr project a few years back for the egyptian gov. it was a temple. gebal barcal site 106. did a bit of kicking around
with a guy from the MFA in boston who digs that stuff up. archeologist/curator for the egyptian dept.
unless i'm mistaken, that's a myth too. as in one woman in her 90's.
and i was told that wasn't such an odd find. and egyptians of those times weren't given to overdressing. the cover up head
to toe thing is newfangle idiocy.
a lot of those egyptiam mummys were getting on in years.
there were risky points though childbirth was risky as hell for both mom and baby. but if the kid got through the first
year i think that lifespan wasn't all that different from today.
i think the biggest change in life expectancy averages come from improving those two figures.
sounds odd but cut out childbirth and 1st year and if i remember the figures folks did ok.
i remember being suprised at the ages when looking into it.
and we're still evolving :)
and even now folks spending time in the sun get fewer cancers excepting skin cancer.
and that's because we toasted the ozone layer.
VD3 is way effective in stopping tumerogenesis. it promotes differentiation leading to apaptosis.
regards
ed
Reinhold Vieth
A point of clarification about which vitamin D metabolite to pay
attention to: it is NOT "the therapeutic hormone", but rather
25-hydroxyvitamin D, also written as 25(OH)D, or 25D, or as calcidiol.
The 25(OH)D from circulation is used by brain and immune tissues to
make 1,25-dihydroxy vitamin D ( 1,25(OH)2D , or 125D) which is NOT
released into the bloodstream. That 125D which is found in blood is
from the kidney, and is relevant to calcium homeostasis.
Yes, 135 picomol/L (or pmol/L) of 125D is reasonable number, but
unless you have a kidney defect, you should be focusing on the vit D
nutrition marker, the 25D.
I suggest that circulating 25D should exceed 100 nmol/L for those
concerned about non-bone forms of D-deficiency.
The following quotes are thus a bit misleading, and I suspect Nick
just misprinted the form of vitamin D he was referring to. It surely
is supposed to say, "25-hydroxy", not "1,25-dihydroxy".
> > level of 1,25-dihydroxy must exceed 100 nmol/L in order for it to be an
> > effective immunosuppressant.
> > After two months of using a full body tanning bed my 1,25-dihydroxy levels
Diane Komaroff
tanning.
(I've been assuming I should go every other day.) I stayed 10 min.
again, and THIS TIME I PULLED DOWN THE TOP! There's no handles on it,
and being rather weak in the hand/head I was concerned I would break
it the first time I went.
Upon asking when I did leave the first time I found that it would be
ok to pull it down.
Oh man, did it feel terrific! Hello D25!! I'm loving you!!!
I remember when I first started lurking on this site last winter there
was discussion about not bathing after the tanning bed. Is this still
the
understanding? If so, for how long?
Diane
Reinhold Vieth
"last winter there was discussion about not bathing after the tanning
bed. Is this still the understanding? If so, for how long? > Diane"
sun-acquired vitamin D. The question is a logical one and should be
looked into.
But since in human skin, vitamin D is generated beneath the protective
keratin layer of the skin, it probably does not make much difference
whether you bathe or not. Your sun-made vitamin D is absorbed from
the lower skin layers directly into the bloodstream.
There is some vitamin D produced in the oils of the skin, but
relatively little of that is absorbed back into the bloodstream.
Fur-bearing animals get their vitamin D by grooming their fur --
licking their fur, removing the oils with the vitamin D3. Thereby
most mammals take the sun-generated vitamin D by mouth. Thus, if one
were a fur-bearing animal, the bathing would make a difference, and
wash off the vitamin D.
Interesting note: most vit D3 for supplement use is derived from the
oil of defatted lamb's wool, exposed to UV light and purified from
that. Thus wool keeps you warm, and the oils from it can nourish you.
(Take care to note that vit D2 is NOT the natural product, be sure to
take vit D3, or get sunshine.)
Best wishes, Reinhold Vieth
Nick Topolnyski
Thanks for setting me straight re 25 and 1,25 hydroxy.
Cheers
Nick
"Reinhold Vieth" <reinhol...@utoronto.ca> wrote in message
news:22ca11f.01122...@posting.google.com...
ed hill
footnote to dr. vieth's comment.
it seems that much of the imunoregulation seen to involve 1,25d3 is "autocrine" in nature. the receptors for d3 are mostly in
the cell nucleus. the 1,25d3 we are helped by is actually produced within the cell that uses it. this is called an
"autocrine" system.
the cell produces the 1,25d3 to tell itself to move along a certain transcriptional or reproductive pathway.
dr vieth seems to be saying here that serum levels of 1,25D3 don't have the same effect as that produced by the individual
cell.
i respect and appreciate dr. vieth's opinion here but i'm not sure that the research bears this out. especially in cases of
autoimmune disease where supplamentation of the hormone may be helpful.
i'll be back on this in a bit.
best regards
ed
"Nick Topolnyski" <nt...@shaw.ca> writes:
>Reinhold
Paul Jones
>
> >Ed Hill wrote:
> >
> >far s i know that's a myth. lot's of docs still march to the drummer of
> >some very bad studies done a long time back resulting in the FDA listing
> >absurdly low D3 levels.
> >we evolved spending virtually all of our time outdoors and prolly not
> >wearing a whole lot.
OTOH, we probably all had very dark skins while we were
evolving under the harsh East African skies. While our
ancestors trundled across the ice-age tundra we probably
wore a lot of clothes or else we'd have died of exposure
pretty quick.
The pigment, Melanin, which gives people dark skins and
suntans absorbs u.v. and protects us from it. Melanin is
produced by skin cells called melanocytes in reponse to u.v.
radiation. Northern European Caucasians have particularly
low numbers of melanocytes which accounts for their
typically light skins.
Both the dark skins of Africans and the light skins of
Europeans are adaptive - the former are u.v. protective and
the latter to allow more light through which enable light
catalysed synthesis in the skin of essential products such
as VD3. It is no accident that the skin colour of indiginous
peoples gradually decrease in tone as the latitude
increases. Australian indiginous, Southern Indian caucasian
and African negroid populations have convergently evolved
dark skins while Inuit and Northern European caucasian
populations have convergently evolved pale ones. When it
comes to skin colour, evolution can run pretty quickly.
The obvious lesson is that Melanin deficient Northern
Europeans are particularly prone to u.v. associated skin
cancers as demonstrated by their high incidence of it in
sun-drenched countries like Australia or South Africa.
Perhaps we are better advised to get our VD3 orally than
through sunbeds.
Take care,
Paul
All About MS - the latest MS News and Views
http://www.mult-sclerosis.org/
Paul Jones
>
> i think the biggest change in life expectancy averages come from improving those two figures.
We went to Winchester catherdral this last weekend. We were
looking at the memorial flagstones on the cathedral floor.
Most were from the 16th and 17th centuries and showed people
dying at all ages and we can presume that these belonged to
the affluent classes. A very few did live into their
seventies and eighties but there were a lot from all ages in
between and they were both male and female. The youngest we
saw was two weeks old - there were a lot of children - but
most surprisingly there were a lot aged between 18 and 40
and not just from the years of the great plague. It seemed
that people of all ages were being carried off.
I've read that life-expectancy dropped radically when we
started to live in large conurbations. Comparing skeletons
from early farming South-West Asian settlements (c. 9000 BC)
with those of the surrounding hunter-gatherer populations is
interesting. The hunter-gatherers appear healthier, longer
lived, have a lower disease incidence, lower parasite
incidence and lower levels of repetetive bone injury
(oesteoarthritis from bending down grinding the grass seeds
- particularly seen in the women). It's estimated that the
hunter-getherers "worked" about 4 hours a day compared with
the 14 hours hard toil put in by the early agriculturalists.
The only department in which the hunter-gatherers seemed to
lose out on was an increased number of fractures. As one
paleohistorian put it, the question is not why it took us so
long to live in cities but why we did it all.
d...@cheetah.net
wrote:
and insight. Good stuff!
Donn
Reinhold Vieth
" > dr vieth seems to be saying here that serum levels of 1,25D3 don't
have the same effect as that produced by the individual cell.
> i respect and appreciate dr. vieth's opinion here but i'm not sure that the research bears this out. especially in cases of
> autoimmune disease where supplementation of the hormone may be helpful."
I agree that the "research" suggests that doses 1,25(OH)D or its
analogs have effects when they are given to people with some high-risk
conditions.
Similar evidence for "dosing" with vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol)
supplementation does not exist. However, the observational
epidemiology based on UV light all points to ONLY vitamin D nutrition
as being helpful.
One needs to realize that for some strange reasons, nobody has ever
considered the obvious possibility that doses of vitamin D that match
what the skin can make from sunshine might actually do anything. The
dose-administration "research" to this point, has all been supported
by drug companies that make the 1,25(OH)2D or its analogs.
The research funded by drug companies has always avoided comparisons
with plain and simple vitamin D3, because the companies don't want to
compromize the chance of showing an effect for their own products.
Yes, research needs to be done for use of nutritional vitamin D. It
is an agent that has been overlooked, and for which public research
funds need to be made available. No corporation can justify an
investment in a clinical study of an agent like vitamin D, that is
guaranteed to be of no financial value for the company.
One must never confuse vitamin D with 1,25(OH)2D or its analogs.
There is no such thing as a safe, "non-calcemic" vitamin D analog.
The drugs are all far more toxic and risky than plain vitamin D,
because their use involves addition to the whole body a powerful
agent that many tissues make locally when they need it.
Use of 4000 IU/d of vitamin D3 has never been shown to cause harm, and
it is the dose of vitamin D that should do for you what we think UV
light does.
Best wishes, Reinhold Vieth
Rob
We stopped "evolving" thousands of years ago... with the advent of a
more comercialized and militarized society we have now entered the
arena of devolution. Where less and less genetic advantages are
neccessary for survival. Due to the false advantages of medicinal
advance. Not only has mankind become genetically inferior to what we
were like 30 thousand years ago... we are considerably dumber. sorry
folks.
we also didn't live very
> long, did we?
>
> Tracy B.
once we passed adolesence, us males lived quite a while. Not so for
the women though. At least the archeological evidence suggests such.
The actual age of death has changed little when comparing occupations
to occupations. Most, once surviving contagious disease, lived into
their 70,s. Even 30,000 to 50,000 years ago. The reason we find
corpses preserved in their 30s and such is because it was an oddity.
Most died much later. the advent of so-called modern society was the
first notch in the belt of lowered life expectancy.
A society dies in 2 or 3 generations, without fail, without surviving
grandparents. The moms and pops, and their chilluns, just hadnt
garnered enough experience, knowladge, brains, to survive the pitfalls
of a rough and tumble hunter/gatherer society, with changes in climate
spanning decades.
Rob
Rob
> ed hill wrote:
> >
> > >Ed Hill wrote:
> > >
> > >far s i know that's a myth. lot's of docs still march to the drummer of
> > >some very bad studies done a long time back resulting in the FDA listing
> > >absurdly low D3 levels.
> > >we evolved spending virtually all of our time outdoors and prolly not
> > >wearing a whole lot.
>
> OTOH, we probably all had very dark skins while we were
> evolving under the harsh East African skies.
Actually, you and I would not exist if we hadnt decended from nearly
pure white folks. (of course their ancestors were progressively
darker and darker as they aproached the equator.) The reason we dont
produce our own vit d is because we never had any need to.
While our
> ancestors trundled across the ice-age tundra we probably
> wore a lot of clothes or else we'd have died of exposure
> pretty quick.
We never left the banks of a readily usuable river or tributary.
Ever. If we did... we died.
>
> The pigment, Melanin, which gives people dark skins and
> suntans absorbs u.v. and protects us from it. Melanin is
> produced by skin cells called melanocytes in reponse to u.v.
> radiation. Northern European Caucasians have particularly
> low numbers of melanocytes which accounts for their
> typically light skins.
The reason many of us have freckles is because we decended from people
that actually lived further north than our immediate ancestors lived.
Freckles are the result of the pigment trying to reintroduce some
modicum of uv protection.
> Both the dark skins of Africans and the light skins of
> Europeans are adaptive - the former are u.v. protective and
> the latter to allow more light through which enable light
> catalysed synthesis in the skin of essential products such
> as VD3. It is no accident that the skin colour of indiginous
> peoples gradually decrease in tone as the latitude
> increases.
Its not only not an accident, we would not exist otherwise.
Australian indiginous, Southern Indian caucasian
> and African negroid populations have convergently evolved
> dark skins while Inuit and Northern European caucasian
> populations have convergently evolved pale ones. When it
> comes to skin colour, evolution can run pretty quickly.
>
It only took the 18ft tall wooly mammoth 10,000 years to evolve into a
pigmy mammoth in mexico. Mankind has been around well in excess of
50,000 years.
> The obvious lesson is that Melanin deficient Northern
> Europeans are particularly prone to u.v. associated skin
> cancers as demonstrated by their high incidence of it in
> sun-drenched countries like Australia or South Africa.
>
And negroids die at higher rates in northern climates due to lowered
vit d assimilation. Evolution in action. When you compare income
levels and occupation it becomes even more appearant. Thats why black
survive better in northern climates having outdoor jobs and whites
survive better with indoor jobs in southern climes. In 10,000 years
the point will be moot. Well have acclimated by then, just like the
wooly mammoth.
> Perhaps we are better advised to get our VD3 orally than
> through sunbeds.
>
> Take care,
> Paul
orally taken vit d has to go through a first pass conversion in the
liver. That makes a big difference. sunlight first, shots second,
then resort to pills. And always use sunblock on chronically exposed
skin.
Rob
Most of us "white" folks who decended from northern lattitudes,
experienced an ice-age in our past. WE most certainly were not dark
skinned, we were as pale skinned as possible. Virtually our only
source of vit-d was our face, hands, and our diet. However, the
ancestors of those that did move north and then experienced the
ice-age were obviosly dark-er, prior to the ice-age. People dont
realize it, but most white people have webbed fingers and toes. Dont
think so? Go to a zoo, check out the monkeys hands... no webs, look
at yours, hold them up to the light, guess what? Little webs. We are
the aqautic ape that relied on fish for its vit-d. Its like the
difference between a lab and a weiner dog. One has webs on its toes,
one tastes good cooked over a grill.
Paul Jones
>
> Actually, you and I would not exist if we hadnt decended from nearly
> pure white folks. (of course their ancestors were progressively
> darker and darker as they aproached the equator.) The reason we dont
> produce our own vit d is because we never had any need to.
Skin pigmentation does not survive in the fossil record.
However, IMO, we are all descended from people who lived in
on the East African savannah and those with pale skins would
have died disproportionately from melanomas. You ancestors
were dark skinned, Rob - you'll have to look elsewhere for
psuedo-science to support your racism.
> > While our
> > ancestors trundled across the ice-age tundra we probably
> > wore a lot of clothes or else we'd have died of exposure
> > pretty quick.
>
> We never left the banks of a readily usuable river or tributary.
> Ever. If we did... we died.
This assertion runs contrary to accepted dogma. The evidence
from Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic finds suggests that
modern humans in Europe hunted big game of the type that
lived in the grassy tundra. Perhaps one of the best
references is what these people said of themselves in the
magnificent cave paintings at Altimira in Northern Spain and
Lascaux in Southern France. These include scenes of people
hunting these animals with spears and arrows.
> The reason many of us have freckles is because we decended from people
> that actually lived further north than our immediate ancestors lived.
> Freckles are the result of the pigment trying to reintroduce some
> modicum of uv protection.
All the evidence points to South-West Asian as an entry
point for repeated waves of immigration into Europe. While
there was clearly a complicated swirl of moving peoples with
some incursions from other directions (eg Viking incursions
into Britain and Goths and Huns from the East) the
overwhelming majority of the indiginous population of Europe
can be traced back to the Levant.
> Mankind has been around well in excess of
> 50,000 years.
It depends on what you define as mankind. The Klaises river
finds in South Africa which are skeletally fully modern date
back to 100,000 bp and indistinguishable from ourselves.
Archaic homo sapiens finds go back even further perhaps
400,000 bp.
> And negroids die at higher rates in northern climates due to lowered
> vit d assimilation.
It can certainly be a problem especially for women who
seldom leave the house and cover themselves head to foot
when they leave. I've not heard of people dying for want of
vitamin supplementation.
> Evolution in action. When you compare income
> levels and occupation it becomes even more appearant. Thats why black
> survive better in northern climates having outdoor jobs and whites
> survive better with indoor jobs in southern climes.
I would have thought that skin colour is one of the least
significant issues here. Blatant racism is probably a much
more significant cause. Black people are often simply kept
out of high-income jobs.
> People dont
> realize it, but most white people have webbed fingers and toes.
Skin tone aside, white people's hands do not differ
significantly from those of black people.
> Dont
> think so? Go to a zoo, check out the monkeys hands... no webs, look
> at yours, hold them up to the light, guess what? Little webs.
There are countless differences between human hands and
chimpanzee hands and between both our hands and those of
other primates. These differences can be better explained by
the chimps' primary reliance on its hands for climbing and
ours for manipulating objects. Chimps' fingers are curved
which enables them to hang from branches more easily whereas
ours are straight which better facilitates fine motor
activity. Chimps' thumbs are short and relatively weak which
keeps them out of the way as they brachiate. Ours are
longer, stronger and the end of our thumb lines up neatly
with our index fingers allowing us both to grip objects
tightly and to perform delicate tasks with them. Most
telling is the increased ennervation of our hands and the
corresponding sensory and motor expansions in the brain. All
of this is consistent with our hands having evolved for
using tools and not as paddles. I don't subscribe to the
notion that the skin between our fingers has an aquatic
evolutionary etiology.
> We are
> the aqautic ape that relied on fish for its vit-d.
Elaine Morgan's aquatic ape theory has been largely rejected
not least because there is virtually no fossil evidence that
unequivocally supports her assertions and because it's
completely daft. There really aren't any gaps in the
savannah hominid fossil record long enough for an aquatic
ape to develop. A lot of her assertions have been shown to
be pure accident - such as the direction of our hair growth.
We can swim but then so can all mammals - we're not really
that good at it. Morgan's theory is a just-so-story. It's
fun but one should read it as fiction and not as serious
paleoanthropology.
Paul Jones
>
> We stopped "evolving" thousands of years ago... with the advent of a
> more comercialized and militarized society we have now entered the
> arena of devolution.
We are never free from the forces of natural selection. For
example, our immune systems are constantly changing at the
population level. Sexual selection is probably a greater
force than ever it was.
> Where less and less genetic advantages are
> neccessary for survival.
It's not about survival of the individual, it's about
survival of the genes. All other things being equal, any
differential advantages that one alelle has over another
will result in its increased representation in the next
generation.
> Due to the false advantages of medicinal
> advance.
It is a mistake to see these as seperate from the process of
natural selection - it's all part and parcel of the same
process. The forces may have changed somewhat but we have
not escaped naturalk selection any more than we have escaped
the force of gravity.
> Not only has mankind become genetically inferior to what we
> were like 30 thousand years ago...
It's also a mistake to place a value judgement on one
species over another. We are smarter than mosquitos but they
survive in a niche in which we can't (some lawyers and
politicians excepted). It's hard to see how they would be
able to support large brains nor even what benefits
increased intelligence would give them.
> we are considerably dumber.
Perhaps you are. There is no evidence to support this
assertion.
ed hill
thanks doc.
no argument here.
regards
ed
reinhol...@utoronto.ca (Reinhold Vieth) writes:
>Best wishes, Reinhold Vieth
Basia
or rather the lack thereof. I believe cholera was responsible for many
of these deaths. Moreover, people just did not bathe as often as they
do now. Dental hygiene was not practiced among the masses, so there's
another critical entrance for disease and infection.
Paul Jones <jones...@btconnect.com> wrote in message news:<3C3B5A9E...@btconnect.com>...
ed hill
hi rob
once more you manage to bring comedy to an otherwise reasoned discussion.
you might consider going after an ignoble with this stuff.
send 'em you stuff on baldness too.
i know that there's a journal of irreproducable results. is there one for unsupported assertions?
fyi; did you know tha most guys go bald AFTER having kids!?
best regards
ed
robands...@hotmail.com (Rob) writes:
>Rob
ed hill
Paul Jones <jones...@btconnect.com> writes:
>ed hill wrote:
>>
>> >Ed Hill wrote:
>> >
>> >far s i know that's a myth. lot's of docs still march to the drummer of
>> >some very bad studies done a long time back resulting in the FDA listing
>> >absurdly low D3 levels.
>> >we evolved spending virtually all of our time outdoors and prolly not
>> >wearing a whole lot.
>OTOH, we probably all had very dark skins while we were
>evolving under the harsh East African skies. While our
>ancestors trundled across the ice-age tundra we probably
>wore a lot of clothes or else we'd have died of exposure
>pretty quick.
yup
>The pigment, Melanin, which gives people dark skins and
>suntans absorbs u.v. and protects us from it. Melanin is
>produced by skin cells called melanocytes in reponse to u.v.
>radiation. Northern European Caucasians have particularly
>low numbers of melanocytes which accounts for their
>typically light skins.
>Both the dark skins of Africans and the light skins of
>Europeans are adaptive - the former are u.v. protective and
>the latter to allow more light through which enable light
>catalysed synthesis in the skin of essential products such
>as VD3. It is no accident that the skin colour of indiginous
>peoples gradually decrease in tone as the latitude
>increases. Australian indiginous, Southern Indian caucasian
>and African negroid populations have convergently evolved
>dark skins while Inuit and Northern European caucasian
>populations have convergently evolved pale ones. When it
>comes to skin colour, evolution can run pretty quickly.
>The obvious lesson is that Melanin deficient Northern
>Europeans are particularly prone to u.v. associated skin
>cancers as demonstrated by their high incidence of it in
>sun-drenched countries like Australia or South Africa.
>Perhaps we are better advised to get our VD3 orally than
>through sunbeds.
>Take care,
>Paul
>All About MS - the latest MS News and Views
>http://www.mult-sclerosis.org/
my point was to our needing higher levels of D3 than the FDA suggests.
the reaction by which sulight sets D3 production in motion is self limiting.
you can't OD on D3 by getting too much U.V.
i think that the post i was responding to asked about overdosing on D3 via sunlight.
regards
ed
Paul Jones
>
> my point was to our needing higher levels of D3 than the FDA suggests.
>
> the reaction by which sulight sets D3 production in motion is self limiting.
> you can't OD on D3 by getting too much U.V.
>
> i think that the post i was responding to asked about overdosing on D3 via sunlight.
Yup, I agree completely. I was just worrying about u.v.
overdosing leading to skin cancer rather than u.v. induced
VD3 overdose. It seems to me that if we can get our extra
VD3 safely through oral methods then so much the better.
Obviously, some sunshine is good for us. We should all try
and get out and about as much as possible - it's good for us
for psychological reasons and not just VD3 ones. It's just
that lying on a beach or a sunbed without sunblock is
definitely risky especially if you have a pale skin.
Chris Fincham
"The reason many of us have freckles is because we decended from people
that actually lived further north than our immediate ancestors lived.
Freckles are the result of the pigment trying to reintroduce some
modicum of uv protection."
My mother told me that freckles were a sign of beauty.
I like her explanation better.
Chris F
ed hill
i agree on the risk being there. but as another poster mentioned the supplaments kick up liver enzymes.
i't balance and i'm not really sure where the best bet lay.
i tend to lean with you on supplaments and diet supplying most D3 as a safer bet.
regards
ed
Paul Jones <jones...@btconnect.com> writes:
Diane Komaroff
As for freckles, my mom had so many as a teenager that when she was
let out of boarding school for the summer, that little redhead would
"live" on the beach all summer, and actually tried to get enough
feckles that they would merge into a tan color. Never quite made it,
but came close.
As for me I also "lived" at the So.Calif. beach all summer, pure
white, no freckles, and felt that I had to start out with THE BIG
BURN, and then my friends and I believed the burn would turn into a
tan; I don't believe that anymore, but I did get progressively tanner
all summer.
It may have been bad for my skin, but boy, did it feel great at the
time.
We used to laughingly pray, "Oh great sun god: make me tanned and
desirable."
(And you know what? The invocation worked!!!!!!!!!!!!! hee hee)
Diane Komaroff
I have been going for ten min., recently, every other day, no sunblock
and I am a paleface, and I am not sunburning,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I also have gotten some D3 and have increased my over-all D intake
daily to 1200.
Thanks for all the posts!!! Diane
Kip King
Greeks and Romans took slaves from Africa as well as Europe. For
example, Aesop was a black Greek born in Greece to captured African
parents. Through intermarriage this black African blood traveled to even
the far north of Europe. More black ancestry came into Europe with the
Moors. "White" Americans gained more black ancestry at the end of the
Civil War when approximately 160,000 light skinned white looking blacks
"passed" into the "white" population. There haven't been any "pure"
white people for centuries and the white Americans of today aren't even
close. My own identity is (American) Indian but I have a significant
amount of "white" ancestry as well. I know of several other Indians and
blacks with MS.
ed hill
i dunno why anyone bothers posting serious refutations of this guys rants.
he's a closet racist. he's a great example of the "reasonable" nazi and all the more
contemptable for the pseudodidactic grease he slathers over his festering rot.
i've relatives who killed a lot like this in WWII. i deeply regret that they didn't
finish the job. he represents a human cancer.
he's pretty well beyond being able to see when facts and reason have blown away his anemic
intellectual underpinnings. i tend to agree with tony black in that racists like this guy are
mentally ill.
in their being too weak to accept responsability for their own condition they vent this
crap hopeing and sometimes succeed in convincing the similarly weak to follow along.
in my opinion you give too much respect to such by crediting them with reason.
he's well below insect in any taxonomy i would recognize.
i guess i'll thank you and paul for the excellent posts. i can't get that close. the stench is
stifling.
regards
ed
Kip King <wod...@home.com> writes:
Gaylan
a closet racist -- he is so "in your face" racist that it makes my blood
boil.
Gaylan
"ed hill" <eh...@world.std.com> wrote in message
news:Gpru5...@world.std.com...
Rob
way home from drinking or what. Whatever... Ill deal with the
assinine accusations as they present themselves.
"Gaylan" <gay...@attcanada.net> wrote in message news:<jVH%7.10035$Q06....@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>...
> I don't know why anyone bothers reading his posts to begin with.
Because I am doing more to shape MS research than this entire group
put together. That, and I am controversial. Im still clueless why
the idiot ed is calling me a racist. Gaylen as well. whatever.
He is NOT
> a closet racist -- he is so "in your face" racist that it makes my blood
> boil.
>
> Gaylan
>
>
> "ed hill" <eh...@world.std.com> wrote in message
> news:Gpru5...@world.std.com...
> > hi kip
> >
> > i dunno why anyone bothers posting serious refutations of this guys rants.
I dont either. If it werent the truth I wouldnt waste my time
responding, so why the stupidity on your part this time ed?
> >
> > he's a closet racist. he's a great example of the "reasonable" nazi and
> all the more
> > contemptable for the pseudodidactic grease he slathers over his festering
> rot.
LOL! nazi? Get real.
> >
> > i've relatives who killed a lot like this in WWII. i deeply regret that
> they didn't
> > finish the job. he represents a human cancer.
You have to be drunk again.
> >
> > he's pretty well beyond being able to see when facts and reason have blown
> away his anemic
> > intellectual underpinnings. i tend to agree with tony black in that
> racists like this guy are
> > mentally ill.
I am more violantly ANTI-racist than any person you have ever met. I
have had oriental girlfriends, black girlfriends, mexican girlfriends,
American Indian girlfiends, and am married to an italian. So, Ive no
clue as to why you make such a moronic statement that "I" am a racist.
Hell, my brother in-law is black, my other sisters husband is indian,
and my dad is a pollock. (joke for those of you left with a sense of
humour.)
> >
> > in their being too weak to accept responsability for their own condition
> they vent this
> > crap hopeing and sometimes succeed in convincing the similarly weak to
> follow along.
> >
> > in my opinion you give too much respect to such by crediting them with
> reason.
> >
> > he's well below insect in any taxonomy i would recognize.
You have got to be drunk. What the hell are you talking about?
> >
> > i guess i'll thank you and paul for the excellent posts. i can't get that
> close. the stench is
> > stifling.
> >
> > regards
> > ed
From this I am led to assume that someone else has seen fit to call me
a racist, for what reason I dont know, but I will find out soon. In
case you arent aware, I can easily pull your ISPs records and have my
lawyer file suit for defamation etc., And while I like you, paul, and
pretty much whoever else, I think money is a great insentive for
keeping ones mouth shut when drunk.
> > Kip King <wod...@home.com> writes:
> >
> > >Actually Rob, all people of European descent have black ancestry.
Yup.
The
> > >Greeks and Romans took slaves from Africa as well as Europe. For
> > >example, Aesop was a black Greek born in Greece to captured African
> > >parents. Through intermarriage this black African blood traveled to even
> > >the far north of Europe.
Who cares? That was LONG after the ice-age that shaped northerners.
More black ancestry came into Europe with the
> > >Moors. "White" Americans gained more black ancestry at the end of the
> > >Civil War when approximately 160,000 light skinned white looking blacks
> > >"passed" into the "white" population. There haven't been any "pure"
> > >white people for centuries
On this last part Im not sure what you mean. "pure" is a meaningless
qualifier. We are all the same, you cant UN-pure any of us. If you
mean white northeners who have never had any blood from a darker
person in their heritage... well, how many 10s of thousands of years
do you want to go back? We are all decendants of aprox 20,000 to
25,000 people. Most certainly all black, from the mideast.
and the white Americans of today aren't even
> > >close. My own identity is (American) Indian but I have a significant
> > >amount of "white" ancestry as well. I know of several other Indians and
> > >blacks with MS.
I am sure that the darker the skin tone, the higher the rate of MS, as
you go north and keep income levels and occupations the same. I am
still at a loss as to where this racist charge came from. It had
better not have been from you Kip. You are one of the few I would
hesitate trying to kick some ass on. ;^)
(Its that tough-guy picture that intimidates me!) 8*)
Rob
Ive no clue how things have been misconstrued... but I guess its
something for me to do anyways...
Rob
> hi rob
>
> once more you manage to bring comedy to an otherwise reasoned discussion.
> you might consider going after an ignoble with this stuff.
> send 'em you stuff on baldness too.
If the reason mankind has evolved to intentionally go bald is beyond
your comprehension... well, I guess thats no suprise.
>
> i know that there's a journal of irreproducable results. is there one for unsupported assertions?
I think youre the editor. Think about things a bit, prior to
responding. It will save you some time later on.
> fyi; did you know tha most guys go bald AFTER having kids!?
>
> best regards
> ed
Actually, most guys DONT go bald. Some are genetically pre-destined
to go bald. And this usually occurs around the age of (?). And
recall, if you can, a prior discusion that revolved around the avg age
of MS symptom onset. Can you find the link? I seriously doubt it.
In fact, unless I enlighten you, you will go to your grave wondering
"just what the hell is this guy talking about"?
You are out of your league my friend. Call me a racist again and Ill
nail your ass to the legal wall. You understand?
Rob
Rob
> It would have to be linked to public sanitation in the large cities,
> or rather the lack thereof. I believe cholera was responsible for many
> of these deaths.
Communicable disease, childbirth, and war. Thats what caused the
deaths of the middle aged people. Most lived to the same age that we
do now, if they avoided the former.
Moreover, people just did not bathe as often as they
> do now. Dental hygiene was not practiced among the masses, so there's
> another critical entrance for disease and infection.
Prior to the advent of the diet that most succumbed to, dental health
is/was a non-issue. Its only when you start eating the crap that we
eat, that dental health becomes an issue. The mummies have molars
that are ground down from eating grain based foods. (And thus the
inevitable occurs...)
>
> Paul Jones <jones...@btconnect.com> wrote in message news:<3C3B5A9E...@btconnect.com>...
> > ed hill wrote:
> > >
> > > i think the biggest change in life expectancy averages come from improving those two figures.
> >
> > We went to Winchester catherdral this last weekend. We were
> > looking at the memorial flagstones on the cathedral floor.
> > Most were from the 16th and 17th centuries and showed people
> > dying at all ages and we can presume that these belonged to
> > the affluent classes.
Disease, chilbirth, war. Thats what kills the younguns.
A very few did live into their
> > seventies and eighties but there were a lot from all ages in
> > between and they were both male and female. The youngest we
> > saw was two weeks old - there were a lot of children - but
> > most surprisingly there were a lot aged between 18 and 40
> > and not just from the years of the great plague. It seemed
> > that people of all ages were being carried off.
Disease, childbirth, war.
> >
> > I've read that life-expectancy dropped radically when we
> > started to live in large conurbations. Comparing skeletons
> > from early farming South-West Asian settlements (c. 9000 BC)
> > with those of the surrounding hunter-gatherer populations is
> > interesting. The hunter-gatherers appear healthier, longer
> > lived, have a lower disease incidence, lower parasite
> > incidence and lower levels of repetetive bone injury
> > (oesteoarthritis from bending down grinding the grass seeds
> > - particularly seen in the women). It's estimated that the
> > hunter-getherers "worked" about 4 hours a day compared with
> > the 14 hours hard toil put in by the early agriculturalists.
> > The only department in which the hunter-gatherers seemed to
> > lose out on was an increased number of fractures. As one
> > paleohistorian put it, the question is not why it took us so
> > long to live in cities but why we did it all.
> >
> > Take care,
> > Paul
The commodity, grain, allows cities to exist. All societies are grain
based, and thus are all prey to the pitfalls of such.
Rob
Rob
> >
> > We stopped "evolving" thousands of years ago... with the advent of a
> > more comercialized and militarized society we have now entered the
> > arena of devolution.
>
> We are never free from the forces of natural selection.
Never said we were.
For
> example, our immune systems are constantly changing at the
> population level. Sexual selection is probably a greater
> force than ever it was.
Perhaps in some societies.
> > Where less and less genetic advantages are
> > neccessary for survival.
>
> It's not about survival of the individual, it's about
> survival of the genes. All other things being equal, any
> differential advantages that one alelle has over another
> will result in its increased representation in the next
> generation.
Nope. Modern medicine has eliminated that player from the card game.
Our immune systems are falsly empowered, people with great genetic
DIS-advantages survive and have children, where 20,000 years ago...
they would be dead. Now we can pass on any bad gene we like.
> > Due to the false advantages of medicinal
> > advance.
>
> It is a mistake to see these as seperate from the process of
> natural selection - it's all part and parcel of the same
> process. The forces may have changed somewhat but we have
> not escaped naturalk selection any more than we have escaped
> the force of gravity.
Natural selection may play a part in the Congo, or the deltas of the
Amazon, but it surely does not play ANY part in civilized society. We
are DE-evolving. Not evolving. We are genetically worse now than
mankind has ever been in its history.
> > Not only has mankind become genetically inferior to what we
> > were like 30 thousand years ago...
>
> It's also a mistake to place a value judgement on one
> species over another. We are smarter than mosquitos but they
> survive in a niche in which we can't (some lawyers and
> politicians excepted).
I have a moral problem with agreeing that its a "mistake to place a
value judgement on one species over another". "I" am certainly more
important than all the mosquitos on this planet. You are, your
children are, my wife is, my dad is, and I am sure your wife is.
There is absolutely a hierarchy of value when it comes to life on this
planet, and mankind is at the top. I accept no other opinion in that
regard. If you honestly felt as you stated, you would spend just as
much money on your pets as you do your children... so cut the
bullshit.
It's hard to see how they would be
> able to support large brains nor even what benefits
> increased intelligence would give them.
>
> > we are considerably dumber.
>
> Perhaps you are. There is no evidence to support this
> assertion.
There is plenty. The existance of special education is proof enough.
Not too long ago they would have died, now they can grow up and have
children. There is always the possibility of some idiot grabbing onto
a truth and then trying to ascribe certain ethical attributes to the
author. Well, I dont play that game. I think its good that medicine
and society have brought us this far. It takes life and death from
the hands of genetic card shuffling and puts it into good honest
peoples hard work. I dont think that one is more deserving of
anything simply because of the genetic luck of the draw. But I am
also an honest, well educated person. We, as a genetic species, are
FAR dumber than we once were and anything to the contrary is shear
stupidity.
> Take care,
> Paul
Take care,
Rob
ed hill
if you are going to threaten a suit tben just do it and shut the hell up.
you are a racist and as far as i can see an utter loon.
your only possible effect on ms research is the confimation of suspicions as to the need to look at links to cognitive
deficits.
ed
robands...@hotmail.com (Rob) writes:
>LOL! nazi? Get real.
>Yup.
>Rob
ed hill
really?
robands...@hotmail.com (Rob) writes:
>eh...@world.std.com (ed hill) wrote in message news:<GpoFt...@world.std.com>...
>> hi rob
>>
>> once more you manage to bring comedy to an otherwise reasoned discussion.
>> you might consider going after an ignoble with this stuff.
>> send 'em you stuff on baldness too.
>If the reason mankind has evolved to intentionally go bald is beyond
>your comprehension... well, I guess thats no suprise.
>>
>> i know that there's a journal of irreproducable results. is there one for unsupported assertions?
>I think youre the editor. Think about things a bit, prior to
>responding. It will save you some time later on.
i'd be honored to edit it. but that's generally left to actual nobel winners who do it for fun.
>> fyi; did you know tha most guys go bald AFTER having kids!?
>>
>> best regards
>> ed
>
>Actually, most guys DONT go bald. Some are genetically pre-destined
>to go bald. And this usually occurs around the age of (?). And
>recall, if you can, a prior discusion that revolved around the avg age
>of MS symptom onset. Can you find the link? I seriously doubt it.
>In fact, unless I enlighten you, you will go to your grave wondering
>"just what the hell is this guy talking about"?
>You are out of your league my friend. Call me a racist again and Ill
>nail your ass to the legal wall. You understand?
you are deluded. you are a racist ass.
and seemingly able to type with out benefit of access to your own neocortex.
sue me asswipe.
yours in amusement
ed
>Rob
ed hill
(snip)
>25,000 people. Most certainly all black, from the mideast.
> and the white Americans of today aren't even
>> > >close. My own identity is (American) Indian but I have a significant
>> > >amount of "white" ancestry as well. I know of several other Indians and
>> > >blacks with MS.
>I am sure that the darker the skin tone, the higher the rate of MS, as
>you go north and keep income levels and occupations the same. I am
>still at a loss as to where this racist charge came from. It had
>better not have been from you Kip. You are one of the few I would
>hesitate trying to kick some ass on. ;^)
>(Its that tough-guy picture that intimidates me!) 8*)
>Rob
>Ive no clue how things have been misconstrued... but I guess its
>something for me to do anyways...
oooo oooo
oh boy!
kick my ass. c'mon!
you can backpedal all you want idiot.
you've been posting racist dogma here as fact for a long time.
you have by your own admission a disinhibition problem. learn to type your screeds offline and
wait a day before posting them. that way you won'thave to backpedal like you have above.
i am not suprised rob that you don't understand the problem. but it's easy to document.
so again...
sue me. i've some small experience in preparing evidence for trial.
there is ample evidence of you posting racist dogma and unsupportable medical "theory" to this
group as fact.
i'm waiting...
and far from posting anything interesting on ms your rants just reveal an utter ignorance of the
biology. you as much as admitted that during our last thread when i tried to draw you into
discussing protein folds and receptors. you were unable to follow there and unwilling to do the
work of learning.
you'll find suing me a very costly hobby. go for it!
ed
Susan
I guess a MS reunion is out of the question?
orld.std.com (ed hill) wrote:
--
Susan
If we weren't all crazy we would all go insane...... Jimmy Buffet
ed hill
sorry sue
it was a slow day.
i've tried to swear off kicking puppies.
but closet nazi's like this twit need aiting out now and then..
i'm waiting to be served on your "suit" rob.
repeat after me... frivolous suit.
regards
ed
Joan Carter
} Oh my, this is going to get UGGGG- LEEE
}I guess a MS reunion is out of the question?
Susan, I have an overdeveloped imagination. I can see the reunion now.
ROFL.
---
Joan
Rob
> >nail your ass to the legal wall. You understand?
>
> you are deluded. you are a racist ass.
Fine. Have it your way. Just for infos sake, why do you defame me by
calling me a racist?
> and seemingly able to type with out benefit of access to your own neocortex.
>
> sue me asswipe.
OK. The reason is that a moronic allegation like that can lead to
untoward results that neither you nor I can anticipate. I havent a
clue how you came to the decision that "I" of all people am a racist.
There is no doubt to anyone that knows me that I am not, BUT someday
the opinions of those that dont know me, may turn out to be important,
and your assinine allegation can turn to bite me in the ass in the
court of public opinion. You either apologise and admit your insult
is groundless, or suffer the consequence both legally, and here in
this ng for being an ass in your behavior. Some people, as evidenced
here, have trust in some of what you say. I would hate for people to
be mislead. I have no way of mitigating the damage to my charactor,
other than an apology by you, or the decision of a courtroom. Its
your call.
>
>
> yours in amusement
> ed
617-629-4625 |
Rob
not amused.
Rob
> sorry sue
>
> it was a slow day.
>
> i've tried to swear off kicking puppies.
> but closet nazi's like this twit need aiting out now and then..
>
Now you defame me by calling me a "closet nazi"?
>
> i'm waiting to be served on your "suit" rob.
>
In your jurisdiction small claims limit is $5,000. I think it only
costs $60.00 to file a lien after the decision is reached by the
court. You want to keep pulling shit? Keep on. You forget, this
forum is here for examination for all eternity. Your baseless claims
are here to haunt my reputation till the end of the internet. You
will either apologize now, or suffer the consequences and apologize
later.
>
> repeat after me... frivolous suit.
>
> regards
> ed
Frivolous? How so? You obviously are serious in calling me a racist.
(for what reason I have no idea) I would hardly call that frivolous.
Perhaps its obvious, perhaps not, but I am no stranger to the proper
utilzation of our legal system. Apologize now, or later... its your
call.
Rob
Susan
night I was telling my husband that I should invite some of my MS ng
friends to join me in PV for a week of fun n the sun...it was heavy on
my mind when these posts came up.
OMG! Can you imagine all us at the beach, sipping Pacifico and
MArgarita's. It might be a really good time. I do have an attorney
friend in PV just in case there are arrests!!! Hehehehe!!!!
--
Susan
No need to apologize to me.....go for it, Ed. You have my full
support, what ever that is worth. No need to apologize to Rob either.
If my poor memory is correct, I thinkthe last time Rob showed up here,
a number of people on this ng thought him to be racist and called him
on it. He half-ass defended himself. And then continued to post his
offensive language.
Why are his panties in a wad this time? He should be use to the way
people react to his posts by now.
On Sat, 12 Jan 2002 17:30:05 GMT, eh...@world.std.com (ed hill) wrote:
|
|sorry sue
|
|it was a slow day.
|
|i've tried to swear off kicking puppies.
|but closet nazi's like this twit need aiting out now and then..
|
|
--
Keith Snyder
> Now you defame me by calling me a "closet nazi"?
Dammit, how'd the closet Nazi get past my filters?
In order to successfully sue Ed for character defamation, Rob, it will be
necessary for you to show that his characterization of you is different in
some way from your actual personality.
If you need to be reminded of what your other personalities do while this
one's not dominant, I would suggest a web search of your own name and the
word "Jew." Even if you got past the "frivolous lawsuit" obstacle (which
you wouldn't), those posts will support the countersuit Ed brings against
you for being a big old racist booger and wasting his time.
I go now to killfile the time-wasting racist booger lo, a second time.
Keith
Susan
<ke...@woollymammoth.com> wrote:
|In order to successfully sue Ed for character defamation, Rob, it will be
|necessary for you to show that his characterization of you is different in
|some way from your actual personality.
Ohhh, that explains it....I was confused!
Michael
your intended suit is chock full of your own utterances... some of which are
indeed wide open to attack as expressions of racism.
Glass house, throw marshmallows.
--
Michael <<muir...@island.net>>
Peace is not the absence of war, but the universal presence of justice.
"Rob" <robands...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:dfbcd749.02011...@posting.google.com...
Diane Komaroff
asms. A lot of what I have read has convinced me, but I didn't read it
until after the last post I made.
Soooo, increase D3, stop tanning bed. Not worth the risk....
The thing is, each time I have gone sunbedding, I really feel
refreshed after, including my feet are softer and more flexible and
walking becomes easier for quite a bit of the day, until I tire myself
out.........
I don't believe this effect is placebo as I've gone six times, and I
tried to ignore this effect because of my innate optimism.
Therefore, maybe I'll go next time, fully clothed with sunscreen on
face.(roflol; How I do crack myself up!)
diannnnnnnnnnne
Carole Ford
> in article dfbcd749.02011...@posting.google.com, Rob said:
>
> > Now you defame me by calling me a "closet nazi"?
>
> Dammit, how'd the closet Nazi get past my filters?
He got past mine too. Let me know if you find out how it happened.
Rob, You do a good verbal imitation of a racist. Bet a judge and jury would
come to the same conclusion. If you aren't a racist, you need to rethink how
you word your statements.
Carole
Rob
> robands...@hotmail.com (Rob) writes:
>
> (snip)
>
> >25,000 people. Most certainly all black, from the mideast.
>
> > and the white Americans of today aren't even
> >> > >close. My own identity is (American) Indian but I have a significant
> >> > >amount of "white" ancestry as well. I know of several other Indians and
> >> > >blacks with MS.
>
> >I am sure that the darker the skin tone, the higher the rate of MS, as
> >you go north and keep income levels and occupations the same. I am
> >still at a loss as to where this racist charge came from. It had
> >better not have been from you Kip. You are one of the few I would
> >hesitate trying to kick some ass on. ;^)
>
> >(Its that tough-guy picture that intimidates me!) 8*)
>
>
> >Rob
>
> >Ive no clue how things have been misconstrued... but I guess its
> >something for me to do anyways...
>
>
> oooo oooo
>
> oh boy!
>
> kick my ass. c'mon!
Are you sober? Im serious. You call me racist and you will suffer
the consequences unless you apologize. Its that simple. Show me
something, anything, anywhere, where I have made some idiot racist
comment. Come on ed, lets see it. I am more anti-racist than any
person you have probably ever met in your life, and that is why I am
irked with you. Say what you like, but dont you ever, ever call me
racist. Especially when its unfounded. I have written articles for
magazines on the subject of race. You are in great error. And unless
you apologize you will get exactly what you think isnt going to occur.
I dont play the game of being slandered and doing nothing. I do
something about it.
> you can backpedal all you want idiot.
>
> you've been posting racist dogma here as fact for a long time.
What in the hell are you talking about?
> you have by your own admission a disinhibition problem. learn to type your screeds offline and
> wait a day before posting them. that way you won'thave to backpedal like you have above.
Backpeddle? What are you talking about?
>
> i am not suprised rob that you don't understand the problem. but it's easy to document.
Please do. Document away. Its an imposibility. I am a person who
doesnt even believe in race, so its rather hard for me to be a racist.
Let alone make a racist comment. So come on ed. Lets see your
documentation.
>
> so again...
>
> sue me.
No problem. Either apologize and shut up, or you will be.
Understand?
i've some small experience in preparing evidence for trial.
> there is ample evidence of you posting racist dogma
Racist dogma? WTF? Please provide some of this "ample evidence". In
context if you dont mind.
and unsupportable medical "theory" to this
> group as fact.
>
> i'm waiting...
>
> and far from posting anything interesting on ms your rants just reveal an utter ignorance of the
> biology. you as much as admitted that during our last thread when i tried to draw you into
> discussing protein folds and receptors.
What are you talking about?
you were unable to follow there and unwilling to do the
> work of learning.
Again, I have no idea of what you are talking about. Your
examinations into MS are almost always focused on "how" rather than
"why". I examine why. You examine how. You have come up with no
usefull recomendations whatsoever, while I have come up with dozens.
All supportable by scientific fact. Everyone knows this ed. I have
recomendations based on fact, reason, and logic. You however are just
a person who pronounces the obvious, recomends nothing, and have come
up with no usefull inovative, or original thoughts. You do what you
do, and Ill continue to improve our chances of beating MS.
> you'll find suing me a very costly hobby. go for it!
>
> ed
In the end, it wont cost me a dime. And you know it. Ill remind you
again, Im no stranger to the legal system. You may want to re-think
things.
Rob
Carole Ford
> Are you sober? Im serious. You call me racist and you will suffer
> the consequences unless you apologize. Its that simple. Show me
> something, anything, anywhere, where I have made some idiot racist
> comment. Come on ed, lets see it. I am more anti-racist than any
> person you have probably ever met in your life, and that is why I am
> irked with you. Say what you like, but dont you ever, ever call me
> racist. Especially when its unfounded. I have written articles for
> magazines on the subject of race. You are in great error. And unless
> you apologize you will get exactly what you think isnt going to occur.
> I dont play the game of being slandered and doing nothing. I do
> something about it.
Which magazines & titles of articles were yours?
>
>
> > you can backpedal all you want idiot.
> >
> > you've been posting racist dogma here as fact for a long time.
>
> What in the hell are you talking about?
That is what the judge & jury will want to know. Ed only has to seach Google to provide the answers to
their questions.
> Please do. Document away. Its an imposibility. I am a person who
> doesnt even believe in race, so its rather hard for me to be a racist.
> Let alone make a racist comment. So come on ed. Lets see your
> documentation.
Search Google and document it yourself. Maybe take an unbiased 3rd party to help you with the
documentation.
Carole
Michael
| context if you dont mind.
Mona
--
Laura aka Mona aka Boopsie Barfbrain,
Wife of Poopsie Sr.
Mom to Poopsie, Jr. and Lumpy
Queen of the Mercury Amalgam Aspartame Multiple Sclerosis Society
"Michael" <muir...@island.net> wrote in message
news:a1qgt1$rrea1$1...@ID-78693.news.dfncis.de...
ed hill
is there a problem with your screen?
you are a racist. and a deluded idiot.
your long history on the group are ample proof that my stmtents are well founded
and your threat is an attempt to intimidate so that i won't point out these facts.
should i say tha more slowly?
you are a racist and in my opinion an idiot as well.
you can stuff you little nuisance suit.
and just because you ARE a character doesn't mean that whatever modicum of charater
you retain is up to being "defamed". there just isn't enough there to really do
anything to.
maybe if i triangulated i could find it. in there with your brain.
bigot
now rob i have better things to do than make you look like an idiot.
and besides you do that far better than i.
so get to it. sue me idiot. or drop it.
but once you start you are my hobby, i will go after damages for all time spent on this.
now crawl back under your little rock, racist.
is that too ambiguous rob?
i have other things to do now.
so until i see something in the mail i'll consider this done.
ed
robands...@hotmail.com (Rob) writes:
>eh...@world.std.com (ed hill) wrote in message news:<Gptxn...@world.std.com>...
>> robands...@hotmail.com (Rob) writes:
>>
>> (snip)
>>
>> >25,000 people. Most certainly all black, from the mideast.
>>
>> > and the white Americans of today aren't even
>> >> > >close. My own identity is (American) Indian but I have a significant
>> >> > >amount of "white" ancestry as well. I know of several other Indians and
>> >> > >blacks with MS.
>>
>> >I am sure that the darker the skin tone, the higher the rate of MS, as
>> >you go north and keep income levels and occupations the same. I am
>> >still at a loss as to where this racist charge came from. It had
>> >better not have been from you Kip. You are one of the few I would
>> >hesitate trying to kick some ass on. ;^)
>>
>> >(Its that tough-guy picture that intimidates me!) 8*)
>>
>>
>> >Rob
>>
>> >Ive no clue how things have been misconstrued... but I guess its
>> >something for me to do anyways...
>>
>>
>> oooo oooo
>>
>> oh boy!
>>
>> kick my ass. c'mon!
>Are you sober? Im serious. You call me racist and you will suffer
>the consequences unless you apologize. Its that simple. Show me
>something, anything, anywhere, where I have made some idiot racist
>comment. Come on ed, lets see it. I am more anti-racist than any
>person you have probably ever met in your life, and that is why I am
>irked with you. Say what you like, but dont you ever, ever call me
>racist. Especially when its unfounded. I have written articles for
>magazines on the subject of race. You are in great error. And unless
>you apologize you will get exactly what you think isnt going to occur.
> I dont play the game of being slandered and doing nothing. I do
>something about it.
>> you can backpedal all you want idiot.
>>
>> you've been posting racist dogma here as fact for a long time.
>What in the hell are you talking about?
>> you have by your own admission a disinhibition problem. learn to type your screeds offline and
>> wait a day before posting them. that way you won'thave to backpedal like you have above.
>Backpeddle? What are you talking about?
>>
>> i am not suprised rob that you don't understand the problem. but it's easy to document.
>Please do. Document away. Its an imposibility. I am a person who
>doesnt even believe in race, so its rather hard for me to be a racist.
> Let alone make a racist comment. So come on ed. Lets see your
>documentation.
>>
>> so again...
>>
>> sue me.
>No problem. Either apologize and shut up, or you will be.
>Understand?
> i've some small experience in preparing evidence for trial.
>> there is ample evidence of you posting racist dogma
>Racist dogma? WTF? Please provide some of this "ample evidence". In
>context if you dont mind.
>and unsupportable medical "theory" to this
>> group as fact.
>>
>> i'm waiting...
>>
>> and far from posting anything interesting on ms your rants just reveal an utter ignorance of the
>> biology. you as much as admitted that during our last thread when i tried to draw you into
>> discussing protein folds and receptors.
>What are you talking about?
> you were unable to follow there and unwilling to do the
>> work of learning.
>Again, I have no idea of what you are talking about. Your
>examinations into MS are almost always focused on "how" rather than
>"why". I examine why. You examine how. You have come up with no
>usefull recomendations whatsoever, while I have come up with dozens.
>All supportable by scientific fact. Everyone knows this ed. I have
>recomendations based on fact, reason, and logic. You however are just
>a person who pronounces the obvious, recomends nothing, and have come
>up with no usefull inovative, or original thoughts. You do what you
>do, and Ill continue to improve our chances of beating MS.
>> you'll find suing me a very costly hobby. go for it!
>>
>> ed
>In the end, it wont cost me a dime. And you know it. Ill remind you
>again, Im no stranger to the legal system. You may want to re-think
>things.
>Rob
ed hill
>ehill
>> sorry sue
>>
>> it was a slow day.
>>
>> i've tried to swear off kicking puppies.
>> but closet nazi's like this twit need aiting out now and then..
>>
>Now you defame me by calling me a "closet nazi"?
>>
>> i'm waiting to be served on your "suit" rob.
>>
>In your jurisdiction small claims limit is $5,000. I think it only
>costs $60.00 to file a lien after the decision is reached by the
>court. You want to keep pulling shit? Keep on. You forget, this
>forum is here for examination for all eternity. Your baseless claims
>are here to haunt my reputation till the end of the internet. You
>will either apologize now, or suffer the consequences and apologize
>later.
my old corporate consulting rate was $1.000 plus expenses. i was pretty busy at that rate rob. that's
modest money now at the level i worked. that's about what i'll seek for every day i spend on this.
i'm just informing you of the likely costs of your little farce.
i suggest you do that little search on google inder your name for the word jew or black/negro
there's a lot of fodder there. i'm well within the bounds of reason in calling you a racist.
spare yourself the cost and just shut up.
ed
>>
>> repeat after me... frivolous suit.
>>
>> regards
>> ed
>Frivolous? How so? You obviously are serious in calling me a racist.
> (for what reason I have no idea) I would hardly call that frivolous.
> Perhaps its obvious, perhaps not, but I am no stranger to the proper
>utilzation of our legal system. Apologize now, or later... its your
>call.
>Rob
ed hill
my perspective on that is to listen to your body.
long as you aren't overdoing it i suspect the tanning bed is a lot easier on your system than the
supplaments.
besides. i'll bet you look pretty hot in a tan :)
regards
ed
dianekk...@msn.com (Diane Komaroff) writes:
>diannnnnnnnnnne
Rob
> >
> > Actually, you and I would not exist if we hadnt decended from nearly
> > pure white folks. (of course their ancestors were progressively
> > darker and darker as they aproached the equator.) The reason we dont
> > produce our own vit d is because we never had any need to.
I was refering specifically to us so-called "white folks". (Maybe
thats where this moronic accusation of racism came from?)
> Skin pigmentation does not survive in the fossil record.
Actually it does and has. In the Andies. As well as in the deserts
of China. In fact the remains of the people in Chinas desert were
redhaired freckled people. Kinda weird. What were they doing there?
I dont think anyone has an answer to that.
> However, IMO, we are all descended from people who lived in
> on the East African savannah and those with pale skins would
> have died disproportionately from melanomas.
I think this may have all come from an unintentional misunderstanding
of what I was saying. ALL OF MANKIND decended from somewhere near
where you describe. And every last one of them was black, or at least
dark brown. There were never any "white" people. ever. Until the
population moved north into colder climes with less UVA/B exposure.
There never were ANY white skinned people till 10s of thousands of
years later when migrations began.
You ancestors
> were dark skinned, Rob - you'll have to look elsewhere for
> psuedo-science to support your racism.
Paul. What in the fuck are you talking about? Of course my ancestors
were black. Everyones are. And this accusation of me using
"psuedo-science" is absurd. What are you talking about?
> > We never left the banks of a readily usuable river or tributary.
> > Ever. If we did... we died.
>
> This assertion runs contrary to accepted dogma. The evidence
> from Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic finds suggests that
> modern humans in Europe hunted big game of the type that
> lived in the grassy tundra. Perhaps one of the best
> references is what these people said of themselves in the
> magnificent cave paintings at Altimira in Northern Spain and
> Lascaux in Southern France. These include scenes of people
> hunting these animals with spears and arrows.
What does this have to do with never ever living far from a large
river or trubutary? Even Indians of the plains always had eaten fish.
Ive never said anything contrary to what you stated above.
> > The reason many of us have freckles is because we decended from people
> > that actually lived further north than our immediate ancestors lived.
> > Freckles are the result of the pigment trying to reintroduce some
> > modicum of uv protection.
>
> All the evidence points to South-West Asian as an entry
> point for repeated waves of immigration into Europe. While
> there was clearly a complicated swirl of moving peoples with
> some incursions from other directions (eg Viking incursions
> into Britain and Goths and Huns from the East) the
> overwhelming majority of the indiginous population of Europe
> can be traced back to the Levant.
You are talking and thinking about more recent future than I am. We
migrated and evolved skin tones long before any societies existed.
Indians in America were here 30,000 years before ANY written language
or paintings existed. The aboriginies of Australia were there 45,000
years ago. 45,000 years!
> > Mankind has been around well in excess of
> > 50,000 years.
>
> It depends on what you define as mankind. The Klaises river
> finds in South Africa which are skeletally fully modern date
> back to 100,000 bp and indistinguishable from ourselves.
Well, when we talk of "mankind" are we refering to our capacity for
self-conseptualization? Or to our physical form? IMHO I think that
our concept of "self" is the defining term, and I agree that it might
have even developed "prior" to the physical form we now have.
So-called "mankind" may have existed prior to actualy being what we
now refer to as MAN.
> Archaic homo sapiens finds go back even further perhaps
> 400,000 bp.
>
> > And negroids die at higher rates in northern climates due to lowered
> > vit d assimilation.
>
> It can certainly be a problem especially for women who
> seldom leave the house and cover themselves head to foot
> when they leave. I've not heard of people dying for want of
> vitamin supplementation.
Sure you have. remember? sailors? Lemons? 8*) berri berri,
scurvy, etc.,
> > Evolution in action. When you compare income
> > levels and occupation it becomes even more appearant. Thats why black
> > survive better in northern climates having outdoor jobs and whites
> > survive better with indoor jobs in southern climes.
>
> I would have thought that skin colour is one of the least
> significant issues here. Blatant racism is probably a much
> more significant cause. Black people are often simply kept
> out of high-income jobs.
Oh, I agree completely. In fact, racism is the soul cause of blacks
having a disproportionatly low representation in upper income level
occupations. And ironically it may be what in some minor way makes
them less succeptable to MS, as a whole. Due to the fact that as a
group they have an inordinant amount of manual labor jobs. All due to
racism. BUT, if you compare income and occupation levels of blacks
and whites Ill bet a million bucks that blacks have higher rates of MS
when paired on an equal basis. Due to an even worse chance of
garnering enough vit-d and the other unidentified neccesities to avoid
MS.
> > People dont
> > realize it, but most white people have webbed fingers and toes.
>
> Skin tone aside, white people's hands do not differ
> significantly from those of black people.
Havent a clue whether they do or not. Didnt mean to imply that whites
have small webs and blacks dont. I dont recall the context of the
sentance you snipped, but now that I think about it, it would make
sense that blacks of stable ancestory would never have had the need or
evolutionary impetus to develop webs. People dont even realize that
we have webs... until they look at a monkeys fingers... and realize
what a hand looks like that does NOT have webs.
I think Japan has those monkeys that live in the hot springs... I
wonder if they have lived there long enough to have developed webs
between their fingers like us? Any insight there?
> > Dont
> > think so? Go to a zoo, check out the monkeys hands... no webs, look
> > at yours, hold them up to the light, guess what? Little webs.
>
> There are countless differences between human hands and
> chimpanzee hands and between both our hands and those of
> other primates. These differences can be better explained by
> the chimps' primary reliance on its hands for climbing and
> ours for manipulating objects.
No. Yes. Maybe. We have webs because we evolved with a VERY close
association with water. So close in fact that we create fake lakes
and ponds and charge admision for people to "swim". Its an ingrained
evolutionary instinct to do such. Just checked my wifes toes... webs.
Chimps' fingers are curved
> which enables them to hang from branches more easily whereas
> ours are straight which better facilitates fine motor
> activity. Chimps' thumbs are short and relatively weak which
> keeps them out of the way as they brachiate. Ours are
> longer, stronger and the end of our thumb lines up neatly
> with our index fingers allowing us both to grip objects
> tightly and to perform delicate tasks with them. Most
> telling is the increased ennervation of our hands and the
> corresponding sensory and motor expansions in the brain. All
> of this is consistent with our hands having evolved for
> using tools and not as paddles.
No. Yes. maybe. You are inclining along a string of thought that
makes it an either/or question without entertaining the thought that
evolution progresses much more inteligantly and refined than you give
it credit for. Our hands evolved into the shape they are for far more
reasons than just paddles OR tool usage. Our hands are used for far
more things than just manipulation of tools.
I don't subscribe to the
> notion that the skin between our fingers has an aquatic
> evolutionary etiology.
Then you are going against the thoughts of anthropologists and
evolutionary scientists. Our webbed fingers and toes are a result of
our aquatic heritage. Some scientists refer to us as "aquatic apes".
Ed has a severe lack of broad knowladge. If vit-d assimilation were
the soul determinant of our skin colour, then none of the coast line
dwellers would have ever had the evolutionary imparative to lighten
skin tone. (sinse they had enough through there diet) Sinse thats
obviously not the case... something else is also in the mix in regard
to our lightened skin tone.
We need more than just vit-d, we need the distinct and separate
advantage of UVA/B immunomodulation. (thus my recomendation for
tanning beds... and I am glad that the MS community is finally
grasping the need for this... and yes, "I" am the ONE person who
deserves credit for this recomendation, thak you very much!)
> > We are
> > the aqautic ape that relied on fish for its vit-d.
>
> Elaine Morgan's aquatic ape theory has been largely rejected
> not least because there is virtually no fossil evidence that
> unequivocally supports her assertions and because it's
> completely daft.
Ive never heard of him or his theory, so Ive no info on what could be
used as arguments against it. Why do you say its "daft". Most people
think its fact.
There really aren't any gaps in the
> savannah hominid fossil record long enough for an aquatic
> ape to develop. A lot of her assertions have been shown to
> be pure accident - such as the direction of our hair growth.
> We can swim but then so can all mammals - we're not really
> that good at it.
Actualy, we are one of the best land based mammal swimmers on planet
earth. We can swim for days. Weeks, in a fresh water enviroment. We
can swim to depths unheard of in other land based mammals and can hold
our breath longer than any other land based mammel on earth except for
the Polar Bear. As for your reference to gaps... dont know what to
say. There are no gaps. All people are aquatic apes. Its our
heritage long before anything resembling "society" ever existed. Im
not sure what you disagreement lies on. We not only "arent" afraid of
water, we revel in it. We search it out. We fantasize about it. We
have our love for it buried in our genetic soul. If it werent the
case, swimming pools would have to be the most absurd, useless, thing
on earth.
Morgan's theory is a just-so-story. It's
> fun but one should read it as fiction and not as serious
> paleoanthropology.
>
> Take care,
> Paul
Im not familiar with Morgan so I have nothing to say on his theories.
Beaches, swimming pools, boats, diving boards, water skis, jet skis,
yada, yada, yada, wouldnt exist if this were not the case. There is
something inherant in our genetic nature inspiring us to get naked and
jump in the pond. We are natural water lovers. Its in our soul.
I think some of what people are taking issue with is based purely on
lack of knowladge, or in eds case a six-pack or two. We moved north,
the ice-age came, we moved south because we had to, and freckles are
the results of a white northener moving south into areas that
neccesitated greater UVA/B protection. This occured long before any
"societies" existed. Long before we farmed, long before we drew
pictures in caves, and long before we had elaborate burial rituals.
As I said before, evolution moves fast. Very fast. It only took the
18ft tall wooly mammoth 10,000 years to turn into a pigmy mammoth. We
have been around a hell of alot longer than 10,000 years.
Rob
(still wondering where this absurd accusation of racism came from)
ed hill
yup
su...@hwy285.com (Susan) writes:
>No need to apologize to me.....go for it, Ed. You have my full
>support, what ever that is worth. No need to apologize to Rob either.
>If my poor memory is correct, I thinkthe last time Rob showed up here,
>a number of people on this ng thought him to be racist and called him
>on it. He half-ass defended himself. And then continued to post his
>offensive language.
>Why are his panties in a wad this time? He should be use to the way
>people react to his posts by now.
because i'm calling him on something he seem embarrased about but
can't seem to stop.
last time i think it was mike and or paul dealing with his
seeming need for attention.
the nuisance suit is a new wrinkle.
der
ed
>On Sat, 12 Jan 2002 17:30:05 GMT, eh...@world.std.com (ed hill) wrote:
>|
>|sorry sue
>|
>|it was a slow day.
>|
>|i've tried to swear off kicking puppies.
>|but closet nazi's like this twit need aiting out now and then..
>|
>|
>--
>Susan
>If we weren't all crazy we would all go insane...... Jimmy Buffet
Rob
> We used to laughingly pray, "Oh great sun god: make me tanned and
> desirable."
>
> (And you know what? The invocation worked!!!!!!!!!!!!! hee hee)
8*) I still have freckles. Whats weird is I even have freckles on
my LIPS. To me thats weird. Im 35, I thought at some point the
freckles would go away. Guess I was wrong. And just a useless piece
of information here, I have for the past two years have been using
Vita-K lotion on my face, and rubbing the remaindor on my hands... and
now my freckles (age spots?) on my hands are GONE!
So I guess Vita-K is not just good for the skin on the face, but the
hands as well. Im looking at my hands and I used to have freckles...
now I have "one". Thats it. Maybe I should be putting it on my lips
as well! 8*)
Rob
ed hill
> you were unable to follow there and unwilling to do the
>> work of learning.
>Again, I have no idea of what you are talking about. Your
>examinations into MS are almost always focused on "how" rather than
>"why". I examine why. You examine how. You have come up with no
>usefull recomendations whatsoever, while I have come up with dozens.
>All supportable by scientific fact. Everyone knows this ed. I have
>recomendations based on fact, reason, and logic. You however are just
>a person who pronounces the obvious, recomends nothing, and have come
>up with no usefull inovative, or original thoughts. You do what you
>do, and Ill continue to improve our chances of beating MS.
you focus on whatever little rant pops into your head rob.
if you look at the archive you'll find that i was the first to mention the stuff below here.
these weren't mentioned here before i did and i'd both documented and used ACV and D before mentioning
them here. the forskolin is totally new in that i actually discovered the effect. nodody has ever used
it in that manner before me. same with mountain dew(or other caffeinated acidic suger drinks)
acyclovir/valtrex (prophylaxis and energy)
vitamin D/calderol (immune modulation)
forskolin (K channel blocker replacing 4-Ap)
mountain dew (post lumbar puncture headache protection)
arguably modestly helpful items.
if you're gonna sue me get to it. i'd love to see you rant to a judge. i promise to keep a streight
face.
and i will win.
then i'll get back to my little occasionally fruitful lay research.
ed
>> you'll find suing me a very costly hobby. go for it!
>>
>> ed
>In the end, it wont cost me a dime. And you know it. Ill remind you
>again, Im no stranger to the legal system. You may want to re-think
>things.
>Rob
Michael
| earth. We can swim for days. Weeks, in a fresh water enviroment.
We can *survive* in water for days, provided the water's not more than 5 or
6 celsius degrees cooler than our body temperature, and provided something's
there to keep us afloat. Go on... see how long you can remain moredately
active in an 80F pool before hypothermia begins to set in... depending on
your total mass, the thickness of your skin and the speed of your
metabolism, it's between 2 and 8 hours.
You've never checked out the PADI manuals, have you?
| We
| can swim to depths unheard of in other land based mammals
Au naturel? Unaided by fins or weights?
Beavers can match us, and so can martens and otters, though it shouldn't
come as a great surprise that they seldom have reason to do so. That's just
in North America... seems reasonable to think there may be others on other
continents.
| and can hold
| our breath longer than any other land based mammel on earth except for
| the Polar Bear.
... and the mink (about 3 minutes), the marten (about a minute and a half),
the otter (about 2 minutes), especially the beaver (up to 6 minutes)... and
they can *all* do this while working their asses off. We can't.
Just thought you'd like to know.
Michael
| earth.
Something else occurred to me on this note, Rob... so before you take my
last post and run off the edge of the Earth with some idea about us maybe
just being more *efficient* swimmers than other mammals, consider this:
I've watched many times (through my own binoculars right here at the desk,)
a deer charging into the 50F water on the shore in front of my house,
swimming nonstop at almost 4 knots out to Maude Island (about 2 miles from
here,) then hopping out of the water, bouncing up over the shorline rocks,
and immediately jumping over a 9-foot-high log to get into the woods and
into cover.
Maude's basically a mountain that sticks up out of the inlet... and I'd bet
that deer didn't stay near the shore, but headed straight up that mountain
to find some good browse in the clearcuts there.
I think it's safe to say that even a well-trained swimmer wouldn't be able
to manage a sprint up a mountain after swimming full-tilt for over half an
hour in 50F water.
d...@cheetah.net
>
>sorry sue
>
>it was a slow day.
>
>i've tried to swear off kicking puppies.
>but closet nazi's like this twit need aiting out now and then..
>
>
>i'm waiting to be served on your "suit" rob.
>
>
>repeat after me... frivolous suit.
>
>regards
>ed
Isn't it the most wonderful gift to receive,
to be loved regardless of the off day or not?
Donn
Keith Snyder
> I've watched many times (through my own binoculars right here at the desk,)
> a deer charging into the 50F water on the shore in front of my house,
> swimming nonstop at almost 4 knots out to Maude Island (about 2 miles from
> here,) then hopping out of the water, bouncing up over the shorline rocks,
> and immediately jumping over a 9-foot-high log to get into the woods and
> into cover.
On a complete tangent that allows me to casually drop the fact that I spent
five days in an Eskimo town a year ago...
When I spent five days in an Eskimo town a year ago, I was told that the
reason caribou hides are superior to Gor-Tex or any other man-made "outdoor"
material is that caribou hairs are hollow. Thus, the hides float. That's
why (I was told) caribou are able to swim across nearly frozen rivers
without (a) sinking, or (b) drowning.
A hunter who falls overboard in Gor-Tex will (I was told) sink and freeze.
A hunter who falls overboard in caribou hide will come up drenched, but
warm.
I vote for caribou for best land-based mammalian swimmers. However, if Rob
is dead set on proving himself better than a reindeer, I can probably
arrange for him to be thrown into a frozen river near Selawik.
Keith
UNUSUAL MUSIC AND STORIES: http://www.mp3.com/stations/ksny
http://www.woollymammoth.com/keith
Rob
>
> That is what the judge & jury will want to know. Ed only has to seach Google to provide the answers to
> their questions.
The problem is, this idiot has made up an accusation that is absurd.
Not to mention unsuportable. And you believe him, which proves that I
have been defamed and I have no defence other than to have him retract
his slanderous statements and apologize. There is nothing on Google
other than my vehemant anti-racism. So I havent a clue what you are
talking about. Ed is going to provide proof that Im not a racist?
Hell, everything I have ever written proves Im not a racist, but I
cant convince anyone otherwise, thanks to ed. His damage to my
reputation has been irreparable and will be recompensed in trial.
I take most things in stride. But not this. Not ever. Not for a
second. Unless he provides a suitable apology that I agree to, we
will meet in court. He thinks his tirades will go unanswered and
unchallenged. I have been here longer than ed, longer than most, and
everyperson who is familiar with me knows full well that I am
tenacious. I make pitbulls look like worms.
> > Please do. Document away. Its an imposibility. I am a person who
> > doesnt even believe in race, so its rather hard for me to be a racist.
> > Let alone make a racist comment. So come on ed. Lets see your
> > documentation.
>
> Search Google and document it yourself. Maybe take an unbiased 3rd party to help you with the
> documentation.
Since there is only statements by me that are ANTI-racist what would
be the point? Im not obligated to prove that I am anti-racist. I
hope someone will bother to look things up if they feel the
inclination, it might provide some funny insight into my humour as
well.
>
> Carole
Carole, why are you jumping in here? curious.
Rob
BTW, if ed has you convinced that I am a racist, then that alone
proves that I have been defamed by him and am due financial
consideration in a court of law. Care to keep yapping?
Rob
> to do, and I'm stuck at home in a bad mood today.
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dfbcd749.0110250155.1468c420%40pos
> ting.google.com&output=gplain
For some reason the link didnt work.
>
> In the original, in context. Hand it to a judge along with your
> evidence of slander. Hell... print out the whole damn thread, and give
> the judge the benefit of the *entire* context.
>
> The USSR was an enterprise dreamed up by criminal Jewish thugs
Yes. Duh. Hell, US goverment documents prove as much. Not to
mention Jewish owned media. Just take a gander at old copies of the
NY Times. rabbis the world over gloated over the creation of the
USSR. The Ney Yorker proudly proclaimed "Communism IS Judaism". So
whats your point? Ignorance?
in NYC
> whose latter-day equivalents are in control of your country's entire
> government an media structures?
When a religious entity that comprises less than 3% of the population
of the US, not to mention Canada, is in complete control of ALL the
mass media, is in control of virtually ALL of the main stream print
media, something is amiss, dont ya think? duh. In regard to the
goverment of the US, check out the population, then compare it to the
jewish presense in our house and senate, not to mention in Clintons
old cabinet, as well as his ambassadors that were disgustingly
over-represented all over the globe. Those facts didnt escape our
goverments intra-operatives for a second. And its common knowladge
that has already been documented by our goverment... so no work on my
part is needed at all. You can just look it up for yourself.
> Rob, if you sue, don't settle... invite me to be present at the trial.
> I'd love to see it all aired and properly tried.
>
> Oh, and maybe you should also pray real hard that the judge isn't an
> orthodox Jew.
LOL. I dont even think Orthodox jews are allowed to speak with goy.
(unless its a neccesity) I dont ever settle. Ever. I have taken
everything to the end, except once. Which cost me tens of thousands
of dollers. A very expensive lesson that I will never forget. Did
you know that in the Orthodox jewish religion its a sin worthy of
death for the women to show their hair? Just like in the taliban
controlled muslim areas. Its a nifty secret that has been well hidden
by conservative, and some un-ethical reform jews. Jewish law
prescribes death by stoning for such an offence. But you didnt know
that did you? They dont wear cover... they wear wigs, so as to pass
notice by putrid goy like you and I.
I could go on and on about the most disgusting, putrid, vile religion
to ever grace planet earth... but whats the point? This argument is
about race, racism, and defamation. Not about the screwball wingnuts
that comprise the jewish Orthodox religion. You know I dont pull
punches. If some idiot wants to drag theology into an argument about
race, Im not sure of the reason, but Ill respond just the same. There
never was, there isnt, and there never will be a jewish "race". Its a
religion. Thats all. nothing more.
Rob
Kip King
wasn't me, LOL! :). I'm more interested in pointing out that MS knows no
race preference. By the way, I've done some cutting edge stuff to study
MS myself. I seriously doubt you've done more. I'm a member of Gene
Trust, which is doing a genetic study of MS. I'm one of only twenty in a
worldwide MS bacterial antibiotic study sending in regular monthly (or
so) blood samples to Dr. Luther Lindner of Pathobiotek Diagnostics, Inc.
and Texas A&M and I'm using five IV's a week of IV Ca-AEP imported from
Germany (where it's called Ca-EAP). I had to get special approval from
the FDA to get it here in the US (where it's not FDA approved). I'm
PPMS. Kip
Rob wrote:
> (snip)
Kip King
Rob
> in article dfbcd749.02011...@posting.google.com, Rob said:
>
> > Now you defame me by calling me a "closet nazi"?
>
> Dammit, how'd the closet Nazi get past my filters?
More proof that ed has irrevocably slandered my name and reputation.
> In order to successfully sue Ed for character defamation, Rob, it will be
> necessary for you to show that his characterization of you is different in
> some way from your actual personality.
Considering that I am neither a nazi nor a racist, thats rather easy.
How the hell did judaism and nazi's get pulled into this? I wonder
who did that? Hmmm...
> If you need to be reminded of what your other personalities do while this
> one's not dominant,
This world isnt big enough for two of me. So no need to ever have a
second personality. This one, with all its faults, suits me just fine
thank you very much.
I would suggest a web search of your own name and the
> word "Jew."
Orthodox and Conservative Judaism is the most disgusting putrid vile
stench for a religion this world has ever known... but WTF does this
have to do with race?
If you are curious about judaism I do suggest reading my posts on the
issue. Every paragraph, every sentance, every word, is true. In
fact, every single thing regarding judaism is taken from jewish
sources no-less. Anti-semites are as wacked as the dingbat Orthodox
jews. So I just stick to jewish recources when people ask for
references. No point in doing anything else when the truth is so
readily appearent with jewish authors.
Even if you got past the "frivolous lawsuit" obstacle (which
> you wouldn't), those posts will support the countersuit Ed brings against
> you for being a big old racist booger and wasting his time.
>
> I go now to killfile the time-wasting racist booger lo, a second time.
>
>
> Keith
Please keep me kill-filed, your education level in regard to
religions/theology is severly lacking and further reading will only
serve to confuse and distress you. Move along now... its for your own
good. your reality may be shaken and stirred to such a point that you
may find yourself actually agreeing with people of morals and ethics.
We wouldnt want that now would we? After all, you have existed just
fine the way you are... havent you?
Rob
Kip King
and dad and my many relatives, as well as PamY's album. It was my first
studio portrait in several years. Other than that, in the last few years
there are only candid shots and news & internet clips of me singing with
Red Warrior, a drum (Indian singing group) that I belong to.
Rob
> Keith Snyder wrote:
>
> > in article dfbcd749.02011...@posting.google.com, Rob said:
> >
> > > Now you defame me by calling me a "closet nazi"?
> >
> > Dammit, how'd the closet Nazi get past my filters?
>
> He got past mine too. Let me know if you find out how it happened.
More evidence of eds irrevocable damage to my good charactor and
reputation. Thanks alot ed.
>
> Rob, You do a good verbal imitation of a racist.
How so? What on earth are you talking about? When? Where? WTF are
you guys talking about? ed has managed to convince people that I am a
nazi and a racist. And not one word of either sentiment has ever even
entered my mind. Amazing job of defemation ed. You should be proud.
Dya think youll pay?
Bet a judge and jury would
> come to the same conclusion. If you aren't a racist, you need to rethink how
> you word your statements.
>
> Carole
Carole, I dont need to re-think anything. ed just mindlessly glommed
onto something he has no comprehension of, and then accused me of
racism. And then Nazi-ism. That is unpardonable and will be
rectified... I would watch your mouth as well, as I am in no mood to
be slandered by more than the few idiots that have already done so.
Race: Division of humanity with distinct physical charactoristics.
Racism: Prejudice based on race. (see above for those with short
memories)
Nazi/nazi-ism: Adherants of the German National Socialist Partys
beliefs.
Since I am neither of the things which ed refers to me as, and sinse I
can not convince anyone otherwise, and because such ludicrous
accusations may haunt me in my inevitable political career (once I
grow up) ;^) I find no recourse other than to persue my only option.
Thanks a ton ed.
Rob
(I play around with many things... this isnt one of them.)
Rob
> Rob, the very forum where propose to find evidence with which to prosecute
> your intended suit is chock full of your own utterances... some of which are
> indeed wide open to attack as expressions of racism.
>
> Glass house, throw marshmallows.
> --
> Michael
Im sorry Michael, but just what in the hell are you talking about?
HUH? Explain please. Not only am I not a racist, I am violantly
Anti-racist. You are losing me everytime you post something. What
are you talking about?
Rob
Rob
> modest money now at the level i worked. that's about what i'll seek for every day i spend on this.
You may wish to wait in disclosing your financial assets. Once I set
things in motion I step back and let the attorneys do their work.
They prefer to work on a contingancy basis in situations such as this.
If I decide to get silly and take you to small claims, I guess the
point would be moot. But You continue this defamation of charactor,
it will cost you.
> i'm just informing you of the likely costs of your little farce.
Shall I remind you of the costs of losing a suit such as this? And,
you do know you are going to lose right? Seriously, how could you not
know this? Why continue slandering me, over and over and over again?
Whats your purpose ed? What is your reason for this?
> i suggest you do that little search on google inder your name for the word jew or black/negro
Ive no need. I already know my beliefs. I dont need to confim them.
> there's a lot of fodder there. i'm well within the bounds of reason in calling you a racist.
>
> spare yourself the cost and just shut up.
>
> ed
It wont have cost me a dime, ed. Youve made yourself perfectly clear.
Thank you very much. Have a nice day.
Rob
ed hill
the bigot speaks
robands...@hotmail.com (Rob) writes:
>> > What in the hell are you talking about?
>>
>> That is what the judge & jury will want to know. Ed only has to seach Google to provide the answers to
>> their questions.
>The problem is, this idiot has made up an accusation that is absurd.
>Not to mention unsuportable. And you believe him, which proves that I
>have been defamed and I have no defence other than to have him retract
>his slanderous statements and apologize. There is nothing on Google
>other than my vehemant anti-racism. So I havent a clue what you are
>talking about. Ed is going to provide proof that Im not a racist?
>Hell, everything I have ever written proves Im not a racist, but I
>cant convince anyone otherwise, thanks to ed. His damage to my
>reputation has been irreparable and will be recompensed in trial.
stop whining.
virtually every regular on this group has at one time or other asked
you to take you racist and antisemetic tripe elsewhere.
i don't know if it's stupidity. a genuine cognitive problem or you
think youare being clever.
you are demonstrably a racist and if you go to court it will cost
you a lot of money to make a further ass of yourself.
so shut up and do it idiot.
>I take most things in stride. But not this. Not ever. Not for a
>second. Unless he provides a suitable apology that I agree to, we
>will meet in court. He thinks his tirades will go unanswered and
>unchallenged. I have been here longer than ed, longer than most, and
>everyperson who is familiar with me knows full well that I am
>tenacious. I make pitbulls look like worms.
>
so you have worms. that's unfortunate.
actually you have not been here lonfer than me unless you first
posted late '95
your tenacity has more to do with not knowing when you've been
proven wrong.
>> > Please do. Document away. Its an imposibility. I am a person who
>> > doesnt even believe in race, so its rather hard for me to be a racist.
>> > Let alone make a racist comment. So come on ed. Lets see your
>> > documentation.
>>
only in court at this point. it's gonna cost you.
you know damned well what you've posted time after time. that you are
being called on it is embarrassing to you.
>> Search Google and document it yourself. Maybe take an unbiased 3rd party to help you with the
>> documentation.
>Since there is only statements by me that are ANTI-racist what would
>be the point? Im not obligated to prove that I am anti-racist. I
>hope someone will bother to look things up if they feel the
>inclination, it might provide some funny insight into my humour as
>well.
>>
>> Carole
>Carole, why are you jumping in here? curious.
>Rob
>BTW, if ed has you convinced that I am a racist, then that alone
>proves that I have been defamed by him and am due financial
>consideration in a court of law. Care to keep yapping?
go for it.
folks have been telling you off on this count for a long time here.
you are a recognized loon. and a racist.
ed
ed hill
hi
robands...@hotmail.com (Rob) writes:
>Keith Snyder <ke...@woollymammoth.com> wrote in message news:<B866215F.27757%ke...@woollymammoth.com>...
>> in article dfbcd749.02011...@posting.google.com, Rob said:
>>
>> > Now you defame me by calling me a "closet nazi"?
>>
>> Dammit, how'd the closet Nazi get past my filters?
>More proof that ed has irrevocably slandered my name and reputation.
yup! glad to help.
>> In order to successfully sue Ed for character defamation, Rob, it will be
>> necessary for you to show that his characterization of you is different in
>> some way from your actual personality.
>Considering that I am neither a nazi nor a racist, thats rather easy.
>How the hell did judaism and nazi's get pulled into this? I wonder
>who did that? Hmmm...
i did by recalling old posts of yours. weeks on end burdening this group
with your tripe.
>> If you need to be reminded of what your other personalities do while this
>> one's not dominant,
>This world isnt big enough for two of me. So no need to ever have a
>second personality. This one, with all its faults, suits me just fine
>thank you very much.
> I would suggest a web search of your own name and the
>> word "Jew."
>Orthodox and Conservative Judaism is the most disgusting putrid vile
>stench for a religion this world has ever known... but WTF does this
>have to do with race?
>If you are curious about judaism I do suggest reading my posts on the
>issue. Every paragraph, every sentance, every word, is true. In
>fact, every single thing regarding judaism is taken from jewish
>sources no-less. Anti-semites are as wacked as the dingbat Orthodox
>jews. So I just stick to jewish recources when people ask for
>references. No point in doing anything else when the truth is so
>readily appearent with jewish authors.
i have no doubt that you firmly believe every word as much as you
believe your theories on male balding.
and why is it rob that you are the only one posting to this, a
multiple sclerosis support group with your anti judaism rants?
sue me racist.
ed
> Even if you got past the "frivolous lawsuit" obstacle (which
>> you wouldn't), those posts will support the countersuit Ed brings against
>> you for being a big old racist booger and wasting his time.
>>
>> I go now to killfile the time-wasting racist booger lo, a second time.
>>
>>
>> Keith
>Please keep me kill-filed, your education level in regard to
>religions/theology is severly lacking and further reading will only
>serve to confuse and distress you. Move along now... its for your own
>good. your reality may be shaken and stirred to such a point that you
>may find yourself actually agreeing with people of morals and ethics.
>We wouldnt want that now would we? After all, you have existed just
>fine the way you are... havent you?
>Rob
ed hill
no problem idiot
and now we can convince a judge that you aren't only a net loon.
you are a racist antisemetic net loon.
fyi; in general racists who are also antisemetic are generally
identified as nazi these days. just that pesky holocaust WWII thing.
you want to go to court then do so.
an obvious nuisance suit.
ed
>Rob
>(I play around with many things... this isnt one of them.)
ed hill
robands...@hotmail.com (Rob) writes:
>Rob
just do it rob. and i doubt any sane lawyer would go to court at your
behest in such a case on contingency. you simply don't have that much
credability.
this is already tired. and as usual you are only flapping your gums.
but please go for it. i'm all atwitter.
ed
Carole Ford
> Carole, why are you jumping in here? curious.
>
> Rob
>
> BTW, if ed has you convinced that I am a racist, then that alone
> proves that I have been defamed by him and am due financial
> consideration in a court of law. Care to keep yapping?
I'm jumping in because I'm one of the people on this group that read your posts as racist. The content of
your posts is the reason I originally filtered you. Ed didn't have to convince me of anything as I am
capable of reading & deciding for myself.
I'll stop yapping as soon as I can figure out how to get you back in the filter file. I don't play mind
games with people like you so this is the end of our yap.
Carole
ed hill
just be forewarned rob
i want to say this clearly so you aren't embarrassed in court.
nearly every regular on this group has complained about either your racist or
antisemetic tripe at one time or other long predating my calling you a racist.
your reputation in that area is pretty well trashed by your own hand.
you have no grounds for a valid suit.
remember rob.
all i need to show is that reasonable person upon reading your posts could
conclude you to be racist and antisemetic.
the volume of complaints to that effect predating this thread are prima fascia
evidence to that end.
you are demonstrably racist in your writing here and proving so is a snap.
you will make a fool of yourself for nothing.
go for it racist.
ed
robands...@hotmail.com (Rob) writes:
>Rob
Rob
> Rob, It
> wasn't me, LOL! :).
this is a hell of a discussion isnt it? LOL 8*)
Well ive done research thats never been brought up here because theres
no point. But I have brought more to the table of defences against
exacerbations in this ng than any person in the world as far as I can
tell. Research has been guided by some of my conclusions, and this
wonderfull internet documents as such.
As an aside, I self treated an exacerbation once with amoxicilin and
had wonderfull success. Proving to me at least that I had averted a
potentially devestating exacerbation. And MRI showed as much. I
thought I was going to finally lose my left half. scared the shit out
of me, and thank god I had read up on some of the stuff you are into
and looked into your doctors theory. Its very sound and Cowboy
actually posted an article that in a lateral manner supported your
doctors conclusions. As well the antibiotic article Cowboy posted,
and the antibiotics your doctor recomends are frontline defences
against gum/periodontal infections. (one of the main causes of
exacerbations in my opinion) NOT the cause of MS, But an instigator
in the cytokine cascade that causes exacerbations. (thus also the
confusion with amalgam/mercury/MS relationship) Dental carries can
cause a great rise in TNF-A under the right circumstances.
But, Im not tooting my own horn, I recognise everyones contribution.
But I still maintain nobody has made more beneficial recomendations
than I. Certainly not ed.
Rob
(ed sucks!) nya! ;^)
Meg
real goal, after all?
--
Best regards, Meg
Rob
> "Rob" <robands...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:dfbcd749.02011...@posting.google.com...
> |
> | Actualy, we are one of the best land based mammal swimmers on planet
> | earth. We can swim for days. Weeks, in a fresh water enviroment.
>
> We can *survive* in water for days, provided the water's not more than 5 or
> 6 celsius degrees cooler than our body temperature, and provided something's
People have swam for days at a time, even up to a week in large fresh
water bodies.
Go on... see how long you can remain moredately
> active in an 80F pool before hypothermia begins to set in... depending on
> your total mass, the thickness of your skin and the speed of your
> metabolism, it's between 2 and 8 hours.
Its been routine since the advent of sea fairing (possibly as old as
50,000 years if some scientists are correct) to find
sailors/passengers that have been stranded/fallen overboard, afloat in
the open seas. It takes no effort whatsoever, to remain afloat. Turn
onto back, wave hands and legs slowly... nearly effortlessly. Hell,
its one of the reasons I like swimming. And when ones very life is at
stake, floating on ones back like an otter is an automatic
evolutionary imposed impulse we are powerless to control. Its
automatic in our inner mind and takes no thought to accomplish
whatsoever.
> You've never checked out the PADI manuals, have you?
Sorry, never heard of them/it. Is it a hypothermia index or
something?
> | We
> | can swim to depths unheard of in other land based mammals
>
> Au naturel? Unaided by fins or weights?
Sure. The au naturel divers in the pacific rim stay down for up to 5
minutes at a time just to nab a bag of oysters. But, now that you say
it... some of them do use rocks to limit boyancy. (if I recall
correctly)
>
> Beavers can match us, and so can martens and otters, though it shouldn't
> come as a great surprise that they seldom have reason to do so. That's just
> in North America... seems reasonable to think there may be others on other
> continents.
Im not stepping so far in claiming our water heritage/relationship as
to compare ourselves with otters/seals/etc., just in regard to
primates and so-called "land based mammals". Agreed, the ones you
mention have a closer relationship to water than us, but Im not really
talking along the lines of the above. (Beavers, etc.,)
> | and can hold
> | our breath longer than any other land based mammel on earth except for
> | the Polar Bear.
>
> ... and the mink (about 3 minutes), the marten (about a minute and a half),
> the otter (about 2 minutes), especially the beaver (up to 6 minutes)... and
> they can *all* do this while working their asses off. We can't.
>
> Just thought you'd like to know.
We can easily match all of the above, except of course the beaver.
Although the above are really beyond what I am refering to in our
relationship with water/evolution. What you are refering to is beyond
the scope of the relationship that I am implying. But your point is
well taken. Yes there are many mammals with closer relationships with
water, but none are "land based" as we supposedly are.
Rob
(who once held his breath for three minutes at the bottem of his pool
as timed by his best freind, his stop-watch, and the precise timing of
a suma-cum-laude MBA graduate)
Show me a dog, deer, goat, pig, cow, monkey, gorrila, rat, possum,
raccoon, bear, cat, lion, couger, wolf, coyote, etc., that can even
come close to that simple feat. And I wasnt even in that good of
shape at the time.
Rob
> to manage a sprint up a mountain after swimming full-tilt for over half an
> hour in 50F water.
Sure there are. Millions of em in fact. Theyre called tri-athletes.
In fact I was in one. Ill never do it again. (not that I can aymore
anyways) Humans on a regular basis swim several miles, jump on a
bike, ride 100 miles, then RUN over 26 miles. There isnt an animal on
earth that can do that. Non a single one. Except a human. Thats it.
Stef has been in the Hood to Coast relay twice. The second time she
finished 25th in the world. 25th in the WORLD! (and to top things
off she played a soccer match the same day she finished the race, I
shit you not) I think its the longest relay race in the world. Its
from the top of Mount Hood to the Oregon Pacific Coast of Seaside.
(or maybe its Cannon Beach, cant recall right now)
One lady, a breast cancer survivor, ran the entire race, by herself,
without stopping, from begining to end. Its hundreds of miles long
through incredible terrain. No animal in existance can accomplish
such a thing. Not a horse, not a dog/wolfe/coyote. Not even a camel.
Humans are superior to animals in multitudes of ways. The longest
run ever recorded was by an American Indian back in the 1800's I
think. It was far in excess of anything that has been ran today. I
wish I could recall more about it. Its a truly facinating story.
Im not saying that we are the best at suffering through cold swims.
We are obviously smart enough to avoid situations like that,
hopefully. But recall, we wouldnt attempt such a thing without
insulative and boyant clothing. We sure couldnt beat the deer in a
race like the above, but we could easily do it were it neccessary.
Rob
(wondering why people short change our superior abilities)
(we arent the dominant species on this planet without good reason, ya
know?) ;^)
Rob
> is dead set on proving himself better than a reindeer, I can probably
> arrange for him to be thrown into a frozen river near Selawik.
>
>
> Keith
Give me a parka of a good hide and I can easily swim longer than a
caribou. You can, I can, probably everyone here can. Easily in fact.
We are designed to survive such situations. Turn on back. Float.
In 8 hours or so, watch the caribou sink. Paddle to side, cast in
large fish-hook. Snare dinner and eat caribou steak. easily done by
probably everyperson reading this ng. even the most severly disabled.
Swimming isnt second nature to us... its ingrained in our genetic
soul. How in the hell did we end up discussing the merits of our
abilities to swim? LOL, this group, and you guys, never fail to snare
me in something entirely pointless. LOL. 8*)
Rob
Robert Hickey
>
> Considering that I am neither a nazi nor a racist, thats rather easy.
> How the hell did judaism and nazi's get pulled into this? I wonder
> who did that? Hmmm...
You did, dickhead! See below:
> Orthodox and Conservative Judaism is the most disgusting putrid vile
> stench for a religion this world has ever known... but WTF does this
> have to do with race?
Definition:
SEMITE: (Noun) Member of a group of Semitic speaking peoples of the Near
East and North Africa.
I guess your statement (above) could easily be construed as
anti-Semitic, which would be considered anti-Jewish. If you want to
split hairs about the race part then the Nazi portion is pretty obvious.
Mona
you just open your mouth and barf Robbie.
--
Laura aka Mona aka Boopsie Barfbrain,
Wife of Poopsie Sr.
Mom to Poopsie, Jr. and Lumpy
Queen of the Mercury Amalgam Aspartame Multiple Sclerosis Society
"Rob" <robands...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:dfbcd749.02011...@posting.google.com...
Rob
That is so kind of you ed. Your such a thoughtfull person. Your
sensativity is apriciated.
> nearly every regular on this group has complained about either your racist
Since Im not a racist, as you say, Ive never made a racist comment in
my life. Yet you continue to propagate such a myth, without ever
providing a single piece of evidence. Why people may ask... the
answer is because there is no racist comments by me. Thats why you
cant provide any. Yet your slander continues.
or
> antisemetic tripe at one time or other long predating my calling you a racist.
Havent a clue as to what you are talking about. Relating facts that
are documented and reported and written by and about jews by jews is
hardly a basis to slander someone by calling them an anti-semite.
Youve tread into dangerous territory my friend.
> your reputation in that area is pretty well trashed by your own hand.
>
> you have no grounds for a valid suit.
I, prior to your slander, had a wonderful reputation in regard to
ethics, morals, values, etc., but now me thinks youve damaged the true
impression of my charactor by statements that you continue to make.
You once erringly spoke of "back-peddling"... I think its much to late
for you in that regard. Dont you?
> remember rob.
>
> all i need to show is that reasonable person upon reading your posts could
> conclude you to be racist and antisemetic.
Exactly. All I need to prove is that someone has been convinced by
you that I am a racist, nazi, anti-semite. Thats it. The only issue
is the amount the damages are worth. In my case, youll find its
plenty. I am none of what you are convincing people of, you know it,
yet you continue. Your vendetta against me has left me bedazzled.
What on earth is your motive? I am still curious.
> the volume of complaints to that effect predating this thread are prima fascia
> evidence to that end.
I dont insult people because they are ignorant of some things. But
some people chime in, in insulting manners based on their erronious
education in politics and religions. On occasion I return a taste of
their venom. Im not perfect by any means... But I dont slander
peoples charactor with irrevocably damaging accusations that could
last a lifetime. I really think you may not understand the gravity of
your false allegations and the possibility of truly damaging a persons
future activities. I would hope you think long and hard before
continuing such a farce that has unfixable consequences.
> you are demonstrably racist in your writing here and proving so is a snap.
You continue to slander me, but yet have never, even once, provided a
single negative thing I have ever said. You know why? Because I have
never said any thing like what you imply... because its impossible for
me to, since its the opposite of what I believe.
>
> you will make a fool of yourself for nothing.
>
> go for it racist.
>
> ed
Keep digging ed, its getting deeper.
Rob
Rob
> >do, and Ill continue to improve our chances of beating MS.
>
>
> you focus on whatever little rant pops into your head rob.
Have to agree on that one. (I just hate to agree with you ed) ;^)
>
>
> if you look at the archive you'll find that i was the first to mention the stuff below here.
> these weren't mentioned here before i did and i'd both documented and used ACV and D before mentioning
> them here.
I believe I mentioned my use of Famvir well prior to your use of any
anti-virals except amantadine. Could be wrong though. And you
recall, my recomendations for the use of tanning beds was met with
critisism. From even you ed. Yet it may prove to be one of the most
usefull recomendations in regard to MS treatment ever. "I" researched
it, "I" examined it, "I" recomended it, and "I" make no qualms about
taking full credit for it.
Vit-d is great. But there is more to it than that. UVA/B have
immunomodulatory properties that are distinct and separate than their
vit-d producing qualities. Thats why tanning beds are much more
important than supplements. Not to mention sups orally need to make a
first pass transition through the liver, whereas in tanning vit-d is
produced not only at the cellular level... but has systemic
immuno-supressive effects as well. if we can get away from these
ridiculous allegations of racism/anti-semitism Ill be honest... while
you may not, I do enjoy our discource. even when its heated. That is
how scientific progress is made. Heated discusion brings out the
intelectually dead ideas and gives them a proper burial, while giving
birth to new and potentially benificial ideas/theories.
I dont for a minute discount your impact on some of my conclusions.
Cowboy, Steve, Michael, (sp?), Paul, Tic, etc have all contributed to
the progresive refinement of my ideas. And I expect that you will all
continue to help me refine even further some of my conclusions. I
have never once implied that I am right about everything. Heck. thats
the reason I bring some of my more controversial topics here... for
the opposing viewpoints that may provide insight into a false
conclusion I may have made. But, when I do make a recomendation I
believe in... you can take it to the bank that I am 100% right. And
research that follows my announcements arent a coincidence my friend.
At some point you will begin to notice this.
the forskolin is totally new in that i actually discovered the
effect. nodody has ever used
> it in that manner before me. same with mountain dew(or other caffeinated acidic suger drinks)
Not very familiar with forskolin outside of its conversation in regard
to bodybuilding. I will do a deja-news search of your efforts. Thats
the kind of discource I like. Innovative, cutting edge ideas/theories
are what is going to save our asses since science is obviously stuck
in a pointless rut revolving around minutia, rather than cause.
> acyclovir/valtrex (prophylaxis and energy)
Could be wrong but I believe my use of famvir, my post of the danish
(or was it swedish) study that showed a 30% decreese in exacerbations
predates anything you mention. But again I could be wrong. That was
a long time ago I think and to be honest I dont really remember much
from you in that regard, but then again that was about the time I was
ready to have a hole drilled into my skull/brain. 8*)
> vitamin D/calderol (immune modulation)
Yes, I recall you saying that you mentioned vit-d prior to my
recomendation for tanning. Buy you were critical of my ideas back
then, all the while maintaining that you were the one who brought up
the benifits of vit-d first. And again, that was so long ago I have
no clear memory of it.
> forskolin (K channel blocker replacing 4-Ap)
> mountain dew (post lumbar puncture headache protection)
I thought the mountain dew thing had been around awhile. (as an
aside, Ive been lucky enough to have more than my share of spinal taps
and I never once had a reaction of any kind) Perhaps I was one of the
lucky ones I suppose.
> arguably modestly helpful items.
Ed, I am not, nor am I ever, insinuating that your precense isnt
benificial. you have some great ideas. You obviously are bright,
inteligent, and driven. But we examine things from different
perspectives. You delve into "how". I delve into the "why". I just
think my perspective will be more fruitfull in the long run. I could
be wrong though. It wouldnt be the first time.
But when I make a recomendation it is unquestionably a safe one, a
benificial one, and one that is based on irrefutable scientific fact.
I value other peoples physical health far more that I value their
opinion of me. Not for a moment could I live with myself having
potential offered dangerous advice. And I have offered more
benificial items of knowladge than any man alive, bar none. Refer to
old posts if need be.
Hell, when I get the Noble Prize in Medicine Ill share it with you...
soon as you pull your head out of your butt and stop this baseless
slandering.
> if you're gonna sue me get to it. i'd love to see you rant to a jud i promise to keep a streight
> face.
>
> and i will win.
Youll have a straight face alright. I can assure that.
> then i'll get back to my little occasionally fruitful lay research.
>
> ed
> >> you'll find suing me a very costly hobby. go for it!
> >>
> >> ed
>
> >In the end, it wont cost me a dime. And you know it. Ill remind you
> >again, Im no stranger to the legal system. You may want to re-think
> >things.
>
> >Rob
d...@cheetah.net
>
>Give me a parka of a good hide and I can easily swim longer than a
>caribou. You can, I can, probably everyone here can. Easily in fact.
> We are designed to survive such situations. Turn on back. Float.
>In 8 hours or so, watch the caribou sink. Paddle to side, cast in
>large fish-hook. Snare dinner and eat caribou steak. easily done by
>probably everyperson reading this ng. even the most severly disabled.
> Swimming isnt second nature to us... its ingrained in our genetic
>soul. How in the hell did we end up discussing the merits of our
>abilities to swim? LOL, this group, and you guys, never fail to snare
>me in something entirely pointless. LOL. 8*)
>
>Rob
So when are you going in for the Big Fip?
Donn