Shalala/Quayle (was Re: Heavy drinking causes skin rash!)
Bill Anderson
: In article <23...@emoryu1.cc.emory.edu>, lib...@emory.edu (Bill Anderson) writes:
: > tonn...@FNALND.FNAL.GOV writes:
: > :
: > : Hi All,
: > :
: > : Did you catch Donna Shelala's speech to the AMA yesterday.
: > : She pronounced that "drinking is a major cause of psoriasis."
: > : WHAT?! Psoriasis is a skin disease! After all the doctors
: > : finished laughing AT her, she said she meant "cerrhosis" and
: > : that she needs to see her optometrist because she could not see
: > : what was written. Lets have a spelling lesson...
: > :
: > : PSORIASIS
: > : CERRHOSIS
: > :
: > : Nope, don't look the same at all. She lied. Gee, and this is the only
: > : person Bill Clinton interviewed for Secretary of *HEALTH* and Human
: > : Services because she was the most qualified for the position. NOT!
: > :
: > : I wonder why the press did not give this the potatoe coverage?
: > : When will the libs/dems start making fun of this? I won't hold my breath
: >
: > Oh, my God! She LIED about why she mispronounced the name of a
: > disease! This could have a profound effect on public policy for
: > decades to to come!
: > Once again, for those of you who don't get it: we made fun of
: > Dann-o because he consistently, repeatedly and unabashedly said
: > things which were outrageously stupid. If someone in the Clinton
: > administration turns out to be as much of an empty suit as the
: > Quayle-meister, I for one will make fun of that person with
: > gleeful abandon, and I think you can be pretty certain that the
: > late-night talk show hosts will too. However, the general hard
: > time we gave unto our intellectually challenged v.p. does not
: > require us to pounce on every isolated faux pas commited by
: > Al Gore or Donna Shalala. Everybody screws up from time to time;
: > Danny-boy made a career of it.
: >
: > Bill
: >
: > abandon.
:
: My, my. A little sensitive, are we?
:
: BTW, you'll have a hard time _documenting_ JDQ's "career" of screwing
: up. I'm not really a JDQ fan (or a GHB fan, for that matter), but
: my view is that when Bush selected a _young_, not-well-known, Mid-
: western running mate, the press and the late-night hosts jumped on
: everything he did or said and rode him like ticks on a junkyard dog
: for four years.
:
: Many people formed their impressions because of that treatment. But
: back to my point: if you _document_ the things "Danny-boy" did or
: said AND put them in the proper context, my guess is that he would
: compare favorably with most VPs in our history.
No problem documenting it at all, really, Tom- but I don't have
the FAQ files handy, so I'm turning you over to the gang at
alt.fan.dan-quayle, who should be able to help you out...
Bill
:
Maddi Hausmann
dares to show his face here again.
--
Maddi Hausmann mad...@netcom.com
Centigram Communications Corp San Jose California 408/428-3553
Kids, please don't try this at home. Remember, I post professionally.
Eric Smith
>I sent Bill the complete 11/2/92 file. Let's see if he
>dares to show his face here again.
Gee, I bet he receives several copies of this file ... :-)
-----
Eric Smith | "My friends, no matter how rough the road may be,
er...@netcom.com | we can and we will, never, never surrender
er...@infoserv.com | to what is right."
CI$: 70262,3610 | - J. Danforth Quayle
koppenhoefer kyle cramm
>mad...@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann) writes:
>>I sent Bill the complete 11/2/92 file. Let's see if he
>>dares to show his face here again.
>Gee, I bet he receives several copies of this file ... :-)
Gee, did anyone see the cover of Atlantic? Dan Quayle was
right.
Or, how close was JDQ on the REAL level of income for the
Clinton tax hike?
_______________________________________________________________________
| |
| Kyle Koppenhoefer "drinking is a major cause of |
| kk...@cern.ce.uiuc.edu psoriasis. " |
| |
| Donna Shalala (Head, HHS) |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Anderson
: I sent Bill the complete 11/2/92 file. Let's see if he
Whoops; sorry, Maddi- wrong target. I'm on your side. The guy
you want is Tom... er, somebody or other.
Oh, well- thanks for the file, anyway.
Bill
.
Sunil Gupta
> : In article <23...@emoryu1.cc.emory.edu>, lib...@emory.edu (Bill Anderson) wr
> : > :
> : > : Did you catch Donna Shelala's speech to the AMA yesterday.
> : > : She pronounced that "drinking is a major cause of psoriasis."
> : > : WHAT?! Psoriasis is a skin disease! After all the doctors
> : > : finished laughing AT her, she said she meant "cerrhosis" and
> : > : that she needs to see her optometrist because she could not see
> : > : what was written. Lets have a spelling lesson...
> : > :
> : > : PSORIASIS
> : > : CERRHOSIS
I wonder who needs the spelling lesson. BTW, it's "cirrhosis". And yes,
it was a stupid mistake.
Sunil Gupta
Monsoon Software, Inc.
s...@monsoon.com
sun...@access.digex.com
Jason K. Schechner
>er...@netcom.com (Eric Smith) writes:
>
>>mad...@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann) writes:
>
>>>I sent Bill the complete 11/2/92 file. Let's see if he
>>>dares to show his face here again.
>
>>Gee, I bet he receives several copies of this file ... :-)
> Gee, did anyone see the cover of Atlantic? Dan Quayle was
>right.
Right? About what? About teenage boys appreciating a statue
with a switch-blade penis?
> Or, how close was JDQ on the REAL level of income for the
>Clinton tax hike?
Folks, this is a wonderfully rich image. Just think of Dannoe
whipping out his pocket Mickey Mouse calculator, sticking out his
tongue a little while perspiring profusely trying to figure out just
how much the Clinton tax hike would cost. "Well, according to this...
nothing. Oh wait - maybe I should turn it on. Ok, now I get, um....
4,000,000,000,000. No wait, that's something else, though I can't
remember what. Oh well - I'll try again tomorrow."
For the last time, a tax hike is necessary to clean up the
crap that the republicones stuck us with the last 12 years.
>| Kyle Koppenhoefer "drinking is a major cause of |
>| kk...@cern.ce.uiuc.edu psoriasis. " |
>| Donna Shalala (Head, HHS)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Yeah, I guess I'll have to give you that point, but it won't
affect my opinion of her until we start getting enough quotes to take
up kilobytes. Besides, I bet Danny can't even pronounce psoriasis,
much have any idea what it is.
-Jason
--
"I sneak in my own house... it's 4 in the morning... I've had too much to
drink... said I was out with the boys... I sneak in my bedroom... slip
into bed... I know if I wake her, I'll wake up.... DEAD!"
-Dave Mustaine
koppenhoefer kyle cramm
>>| Kyle Koppenhoefer "drinking is a major cause of |
>>| kk...@cern.ce.uiuc.edu psoriasis. " |
>>| Donna Shalala (Head, HHS)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Yeah, I guess I'll have to give you that point, but it won't
>affect my opinion of her until we start getting enough quotes to take
>up kilobytes. Besides, I bet Danny can't even pronounce psoriasis,
>much have any idea what it is.
I'll add another Shalala quote :
'If we do not do something about AIDS, there will be no Americans left!'
Bet you didn't hear this piece of stupidity on the news ( wonder why? ).
Unrelated note:
GO HOKIES !!!!
koppenhoefer kyle cramm
>In article <C4py4...@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, kk...@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (koppenhoefer kyle cramm) writes:
>|> I'll add another Shalala quote :
>|>
>|> 'If we do not do something about AIDS, there will be no Americans left!'
>|>
>|>
>|> Bet you didn't hear this piece of stupidity on the news ( wonder why? ).
>Because it is a typical overstatement that politicians
>and other attention getters use to draw people to their
>cause. The reason it didn't get mentioned in the media
>is because:
> 1. It was not funny.
Is this your first reason for something not making the news?
> 2. It was not outrageous.
It is completely outrageous, and has been refuted by the AMA.
> 3. It was something people have heard before.
Oh really, by who? Their next door neighbor? Certain not a cabinet
member!
Jared Dahl
|> I'll add another Shalala quote :
|>
|> 'If we do not do something about AIDS, there will be no Americans left!'
|>
|>
|> Bet you didn't hear this piece of stupidity on the news ( wonder why? ).
Because it is a typical overstatement that politicians
and other attention getters use to draw people to their
cause. The reason it didn't get mentioned in the media
is because:
1. It was not funny.
2. It was not outrageous.
3. It was something people have heard before.
Jared Dahl
Opinions expressed are mine, not my employer's.
Don't send e-mail - I won't get it.
pat walsh
> GO HOKIES !!!!
HAL 9000 was (or will be :-)) designed and built at a Kiddie Kollege.
So there!
:-)
- Patrick Walsh
University of Virginia Department of Physics
p...@virginia.bitnet, p...@virginia.edu, p...@gomez.phys.virginia.edu
Michael Mogensen-Vermillion
>In article <C4py4...@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, kk...@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (koppenhoefer kyle cramm) writes:
>|> I'll add another Shalala quote :
>|>
>|> 'If we do not do something about AIDS, there will be no Americans left!'
>|>
>|>
>|> Bet you didn't hear this piece of stupidity on the news ( wonder why? ).
>
>Because it is a typical overstatement that politicians
>and other attention getters use to draw people to their
>cause. The reason it didn't get mentioned in the media
>is because:
>
> 1. It was not funny.
> 2. It was not outrageous.
> 3. It was something people have heard before.
>
I'll add another reason
4. Shalala isn't one heartbeat away from the Presidency. Sec. of
HHS is just about dead last among the cabinet when it comes to
the order of succession.
Herbert Rutledge
(koppenhoefer kyle cramm) writes:
|> I'll add another Shalala quote :
|>
|> 'If we do not do something about AIDS, there will be no Americans left!'
|>
|>
|> Bet you didn't hear this piece of stupidity on the news ( wonder why? ).
Oh, for crying out loud. If you want examples of stupid utterances from
cabinet members, look no further than Bush's Secretary of the Interior.
Shalala looks like Cicero when compared to Luhan.
--
_________________________________________________________________________
| | |
| Herbert Rutledge, aka Train | |
| Paramax Systems Corporation | "Penis." |
| Valley Forge Labs, M/S GVL-3 | |
| P.O. Box 517, Paoli, PA 19301 | ---Alexander Pope |
| Internet: tr...@vfl.paramax.com | |
|_________________________________|_______________________________________|
John Sims
But Jared,
Ms Shalala isn't an AIDS activist, she's the Surgeon General of the
United States of America. I would hope she could be trusted to make
remarks which would be more accurate than that. As I said, she's not
some wild-eyed protester, but an appointed official of one of the
largest government agencies around! Can't we expect more from her?
You're right, it was not funny, and it was something people have heard
before, from act up and queer nation, not from the surgeon general, and
the remark coming from her, makes it outrageous.
John
--
John Sims si...@pogo.den.mmc.com
Mark 'Mark' Sachs
Sims) says:
>OOPS!
>In my earlier post, I refered to Ms Shalala as Surgeon General. I
>haven't had my first cup of coffee yet.....
That's no excuse! I'm afraid you will have to be pilloried for thinking
that the Surgeon General and Secretary of HHS are the same thing. Too bad,
but under the new regulations we have to treate people who make a single
error (ie, Shalala) the same as those who make entire booksful (ie, Quayle,
Bush, Reagan.)
"...so I propose that we destroy the moon, neatly solving that problem."
[Your blood pressure just went up.] Mark Sachs IS: mbs...@psuvm.psu.edu
DISCLAIMER: If PSU knew I had opinions, they'd try to charge me for them.
Mark 'Mark' Sachs
> I'll add another Shalala quote :
> 'If we do not do something about AIDS, there will be no Americans left!'
> Bet you didn't hear this piece of stupidity on the news ( wonder why? ).
Because of the gigantic Evil Liberal Media Conspiracy, of course. Didn't
you hear about the conspiracy? It was in all the papers...
Bill Anderson
You're right; the statement was a lamentable exageration, and in
no way helps the cause Shalala was trying to promote. It would
be even more lamentable if she were, in fact, the Surgeon General-
but she isn't. She's the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
May a suggest a subscription to your local paper might be in order?
Bill
n
Bill Anderson
: OOPS!
:
: In my earlier post, I refered to Ms Shalala as Surgeon General. I
: haven't had my first cup of coffee yet.....
: John
: --
: John Sims si...@pogo.den.mmc.com
Nor had I. I should have learned by now not to run off at the
mouth before checking the follow-ups. My apologies, John.
Bill
m
Bill Anderson
: In article <C4py4...@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, kk...@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (koppenhoefer
: kyle cramm) says:
:
: > I'll add another Shalala quote :
:
: > 'If we do not do something about AIDS, there will be no Americans left!'
:
: > Bet you didn't hear this piece of stupidity on the news ( wonder why? ).
:
: Because of the gigantic Evil Liberal Media Conspiracy, of course. Didn't
: you hear about the conspiracy? It was in all the papers...
Shh! We didn't tell THEM...
Bill Anderson
Secretary of Secret Stuff
ELMC
:
Spencer PriceNash
>OOPS!
>
>In my earlier post, I refered to Ms Shalala as Surgeon General. I
>haven't had my first cup of coffee yet.....
You need more skill to be able to do this at the executive level.
Reagan once called one of his cabinet members "Mr. Mayor".
>John
>--
>John Sims si...@pogo.den.mmc.com
--
Spencer PriceNash spe...@spencer.ann-arbor.mi.us spe...@umcc.umich.edu
"I am the future." -- Senator Dan Quayle, 10/18/88 (reported in Esquire, 8/92)
Alexandre Pechtchanski
kyle cramm) says:
>jd...@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Jared Dahl) writes:
>>In article <C4py4...@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, kk...@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu
>>(koppenhoefer kyle cramm) writes:
>|> I'll add another Shalala quote :
>|>
>|> 'If we do not do something about AIDS, there will be no Americans left!'
>|>
>|> Bet you didn't hear this piece of stupidity on the news ( wonder why? ).
I don't think it's "a piece of stupidity". If we don't do something
about AIDS (read: stop epidemics), there will be no civilization left.
Proving the corollary (that there will be no Americans either) is left
as an exercise for the reader.
P.S. Now I have real problem: what smiley to put here? It's not funny....
-------
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Alex Pechtchanski, GCRC System Manager Phone: (212) 241-1804
Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York º-------------------------
internet: des...@msvax.mssm.edu º#include <std.disclaimer>
bitnet: appms@cunyvm º
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Opinions? If you find one, please let me know...
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Bob Rahe
>I don't think it's "a piece of stupidity". If we don't do something
>about AIDS (read: stop epidemics), there will be no civilization left.
It's a nice piece of stupidity since AIDS = epidemic is not true. That is
the stupidity. Calling it one, repeating the big lie, just ain't gonna make
it so....
Culled from a short piece in the National Review:
----Begin quote/paraphrase
1987:
The NY Times tells us, "AIDS May Dwarf the Plague.";
U.S. News declares "the disease of them suddenly is the disease of <us>";
Oprah solemnly informs her audience, "one out of five heterosexuals
will be dead of AIDS by 1990" (That's 50 million people.);
HHS Secretary Otis Bowen insists AIDS could make the Black Death seem
pale by comparison."
1993:
The NY TImes reports "the AIDS epidemic will have little impact ....
according to the NRC (Part of the Nat. Acad. of Sciences).
CDC releases year-end AIDS figures for 1992:
Overall, cases increased only 3.5% from year before, down
from the 5% in 1990-91.
Hetero xmitted cases increased 17%, down from 21% in 90-91
Female increases of 9%, down from 17% in 90-91
Cases diagnosed among teenagers - same as year before,
" " " 20-24 - down slightly.
Before releasing the figures, the CDC announced a second
time that it was revising downward its estimate of future
AIDS cases.
Last year, responding to a decline in teenage AIDS cases from a total of
170 in 1990 to 160 in 1991, Pat Schroeder's House Select Committee on
Children, Youth, and Families announced a veritable explosion of teenage
AIDS cases, resulting in headlines like "AIDS Runs Wild Among Teenagers,"
a cover story in US&World News Report calling teenage AIDS one of the top
ten health issues of the year.
Responding to the flattening of the epidemic, AIDS activists coreced the
CDC into broadly expanding the definition of what constitutes AIDS which
will cause the numbers to shoot up this year before beginning to decline
again the next. Beyond the general broadening, three new illnesses were
also added to the AIDS definition that will make it easier for women and
non-homosexuals to be included in the diagnosis.
HHS Secretary Donna Shalala, who has no medical credentials, told a House
panel the day before the release of the NRC report, " We could spend our
energy on research and immunization and education and still not have any
Americans left unless we're prepared to confront the crisis of AIDS."
(Not any??)
----- End quote/paraphrase
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Bob Rahe, Delaware Tech&Comm College | AIDS, Drugs, Abortion: - |
|Internet: b...@hobbes.dtcc.edu | - Don't liberals just kill you?|
|CI$: 72406,525 Genie:BOB.RAHE |Save whales; and kill babies? |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Smith
>In article <C4py4...@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, kk...@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu
>(koppenhoefer kyle cramm) writes:
>|> I'll add another Shalala quote :
>|>
>|> 'If we do not do something about AIDS, there will be no Americans left!'
>|>
>|>
>|> Bet you didn't hear this piece of stupidity on the news ( wonder why? ).
> Oh, for crying out loud. If you want examples of stupid utterances from
> cabinet members, look no further than Bush's Secretary of the Interior.
> Shalala looks like Cicero when compared to Luhan.
And *then* we could start in on James Watt ...
Mike Van Pelt
> HHS Secretary Donna Shalala, who has no medical credentials, told a House
>panel the day before the release of the NRC report, " We could spend our
>energy on research and immunization and education and still not have any
>Americans left unless we're prepared to confront the crisis of AIDS."
>(Not any??)
Depends on your definition of "American". If you aren't a berzerkly
promiscuous gay intravenous drug user, then you aren't a real American
in Clinton's America.
--
Reader, suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you | Mike Van Pelt
were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself. | m...@netcom.com
-- Mark Twain | m...@lsil.com
gar...@ingres.com
>In article <1pd089...@apache.dtcc.edu> b...@hobbes.dtcc.edu (Bob Rahe) writes:
>> HHS Secretary Donna Shalala, who has no medical credentials, told a House
>>panel the day before the release of the NRC report, " We could spend our
>>energy on research and immunization and education and still not have any
>>Americans left unless we're prepared to confront the crisis of AIDS."
>>(Not any??)
>
>Depends on your definition of "American". If you aren't a berzerkly
>promiscuous gay intravenous drug user, then you aren't a real American
>in Clinton's America.
Judging from the polls, 40% of American voters are berserkly promiscuous
gay intravenous drug users. At least by your definition.
>
>Reader, suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you | Mike Van Pelt
>were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself. | m...@netcom.com
> -- Mark Twain | m...@lsil.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"At that moment the bottom fell out of Authur's mind. Garrett Johnson
His eyes turned inside out. His feet began to leak out Gar...@Ingres.com
of the top of his head. The room folded flat around him,
spun around, shifted out of existence and left him sliding
into his own naval." - Douglas Adams
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Alfter
>about AIDS (read: stop epidemics), there will be no civilization left.
>Proving the corollary (that there will be no Americans either) is left
>as an exercise for the reader.
What epidemic? I don't exactly see people dropping like flies from
AIDS. It's not as if AIDS is the black plague of the 20th century--in
America, at least, it almost exclusively afflicts only a small handful
of socially marginal demographic groups. As long as you avoid illegal
drugs and keep your pants zipped, you should have nothing to worry
about.
The myth of a heterosexual AIDS epidemic is just that--a myth.
_/_ Scott Alfter Internet: sknk...@cs.unlv.edu
/ v \ Call the Skunk Works BBS today! Ask me about SoftDAC--digital
(IIGS( (702) 894-9619 300-14400 V.32bis audio for your Apple IIe/IIc!
\_^_/ ----=====##### Don't blame me...I voted for Bush/Quayle! #####=====----
John Sims
In my earlier post, I refered to Ms Shalala as Surgeon General. I
haven't had my first cup of coffee yet.....
John
--
John Sims si...@pogo.den.mmc.com
gar...@ingres.com
>It's not as if AIDS is the black plague of the 20th century--in
>America, at least, it almost exclusively afflicts only a small handful
>of socially marginal demographic groups. As long as you avoid illegal
>drugs and keep your pants zipped, you should have nothing to worry
>
Easier said then done. Have YOU given up sex?
> _/_ Scott Alfter Internet: sknk...@cs.unlv.edu
> / v \ Call the Skunk Works BBS today! Ask me about SoftDAC--digital
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Rahe
>Even if heterosexuals are getting AIDS, you're right -- AIDS is not even
>close to being like the Black Death. It killed off, what - 30% of European
>population in a few years? What percentage of the population has AIDS
>killed? Is it even 1%? Is it even close to heart disease? or diabetes?
Doesn't look like it.
But in the numbers I recently posted there was one that struck me as
either a misprint/off or they are REALLY pulling one on everyone. The
media has called it an epidemic among teens. The number reported of cases
in teens was 170 and 160. Not 170 thousand, just 170. Is that right? Can
they really be that dumb to not actually have a number even > 500 and call
it a disaster/catastrophe/epidemic???
Bill Anderson
silly grin off your face and assume the position...
Bill Anderson
Enforcement Guy
Clinton's America
Vern Morrison
In a previous article, sknk...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu (Scott Alfter) says:
>What epidemic? I don't exactly see people dropping like flies from
>AIDS. It's not as if AIDS is the black plague of the 20th century--in
>America, at least, it almost exclusively afflicts only a small handful
>of socially marginal demographic groups. As long as you avoid illegal
>drugs and keep your pants zipped, you should have nothing to worry
>about.
Gee thanks, Doctor Science! I guess this means that Arthur Ashe and
Kimberly Bergalis are still alive! Boy oh boy, you sure are swell! Gotta
go now--me an' Lassie are gonna go down to Johnsons Creek and try to catch
some crawdads!
> \_^_/ ----=====##### Don't blame me...I voted for Bush/Quayle! #####=====----
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I remember now . . . those were those two assholes who lost all the
debates before losing the election, right?
--
"The biggest problem with reading [Usenet] is there is so much and it
is all so interesting. It is easy to be enamored with it. Be selective
about which groups you read. It could mean your job, your family, or your
college career." --Ed Krol, _The Whole Internet User's Guide and Catalog_
Scott Alfter
>In article <SKNKWRKS.93...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu>, sknk...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu (Scott Alfter) writes...
>>drugs and keep your pants zipped, you should have nothing to worry
>>about. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Easier said then done. Have YOU given up sex?
Is it any of your business?
Are you attempting, in a roundabout way, to deny the truth that
abstinence/monogamy is a practically surefire way to avoid AIDS?
Better safe than sorry, no?
_/_ Scott Alfter Internet: sknk...@cs.unlv.edu
/ v \ Call the Skunk Works BBS today! Ask me about SoftDAC--digital
Tim Poston
but can some epidemiologist tell us whether drink
and psoriasis are correlated --- and if so, which way?
The connection drink/liver/cirrhosis is close,
while there's no obvious connection drink/skin;
but that doesn't make it obviously nonexistent.
(The connection between heavy smoking and wrinkled faces
is not obvious either, but the correlation is there.)
Drink does stuff to a lot of the body;
some parts of it protective.
Changes to body chemistry like those alcohol makes
could perfectly well favour --- or protect against ---
any given disease. A competent biochemist could
think up half a dozen plausible pathways in one
evening's drinking; testing them would be heavy.
The Hero who muddled cirrhosis and psoriasis
wasn't making that point,
but I'd still like to know.
Tim
pat walsh
>In article <1993Apr1....@pony.Ingres.COM> gar...@Ingres.COM writes:
>>In article <SKNKWRKS.93...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu>, sknk...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu (Scott Alfter) writes...
>>>of socially marginal demographic groups. As long as you avoid illegal
>>>drugs and keep your pants zipped, you should have nothing to worry
>>>about. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>>Easier said then done. Have YOU given up sex?
>Is it any of your business?
I think that's up to you. I'd have to say that:
1) Garrett's question was fair in this context, since you advocated a
specific course of action and his question addresses the credibility
of your recommendation.
2) You're under no obligation to answer his question.
3) The content of your answer, or your refusal to answer, is likely to
influence your listeners' perception of the credibility of your
recommendation.
>Are you attempting, in a roundabout way, to deny the truth that
>abstinence/monogamy is a practically surefire way to avoid AIDS?
I didn't read it that way. I think Garrett was just trying to point out that
some ideals, even worthy ones (e.g., "Just Say No!"), are often unworkable in
the real world.
>Better safe than sorry, no?
Depends what you mean by "safe". If we were all willing to die virgins, we'd
have little or no AIDS problem ('course, within a few generations there'd be
no human race to worry about either, but that's another issue). But an awful
lot of us might not feel the reward of living to a ripe old age is adequate
compensation for this particular sacrifice, or for certain others.
> \_^_/ ----=====##### Don't blame me...I voted for Bush/Quayle! #####=====----
Uh hunh. Say, I don't suppose your heroes told Ryan White to "Just Say No"?
Elizabeth G. Levy
>In a previous article, sknk...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu (Scott Alfter) says:
>>What epidemic? I don't exactly see people dropping like flies from
>>AIDS. It's not as if AIDS is the black plague of the 20th century--in
>>America, at least, it almost exclusively afflicts only a small handful
>>of socially marginal demographic groups. As long as you avoid illegal
>>drugs and keep your pants zipped, you should have nothing to worry
>>about.
>
> Gee thanks, Doctor Science! I guess this means that Arthur Ashe and
>Kimberly Bergalis are still alive! Boy oh boy, you sure are swell! Gotta
>go now--me an' Lassie are gonna go down to Johnsons Creek and try to catch
>some crawdads!
Vern, case studies do not an epidemic make. If this were so, we'd
have an epidemic of ALS because Lou Gehrig died of it, and Stephen
Hawkings has it.
What does make an epidemic is sheer numbers. I believe the World
Health Organization projected some 40 million HIV infections
world-wide by, I think, the year 2000, mainly in Africa and Asia. A
team in Harvard projected some 100 million. If we assume that
everyone infected will die of AIDS (not unreasonable: even though
there's new hope of a way to control HIV in the next 5 or 6 years,
treatment will be expensive, and it is unlikely that the poorer
sections of the world, where most of these infections will take place,
will be able to afford it), we will have a death toll about double
that of the Great Flu Epidemic of 1920, which killed 20 million
world-wide. The flu epidemic is supposed to be the most lethal plague
in history in terms of body count.
If you want something in terms of percentage of population killed,
you'd have to look at the population decline in the Americas after
Columbus. The Native American population was essentially a virgin
disease pool with regard to small pox, measles, etc. I believe
William McNeil, in his book _Plagues and People_, stated that there
was a decline of 90% (!) in the course of a century. Part of this
decline would be caused by famine, as the agricultural economy became
disrupted from the plagues.
--
From a radio call-in show:
"I really feel for David Koresh. He's going through a hard time. I should
know: last week I was Jesus."
Bob Rahe
>In article <1pd089...@apache.dtcc.edu>, b...@hobbes.dtcc.edu (Bob Rahe)
>wrote:
>> It's a nice piece of stupidity since AIDS = epidemic is not true. That is
>> the stupidity. Calling it one, repeating the big lie, just ain't gonna make
>> it so....
>My, testy, aren't we? And, of course, wrong. Proof By Repeated Assertion
>may be considered conclusive by the Porky Pundit and His Limbots, but it
>just doesn't cut it in the Real World. To wit:
Hmmm, ok, live by the sword.... You are about to die by it....
>> Culled from a short piece in the National Review:
>Ah, yes, the one medical journal deemed essential reading by every medical
>school in the US, not to mention by the AMA. (heavy sarcasm).
Hmmm, they are a piece of paper REPORTING something. Is only paper
produced by the AMA valid wrt health issues? If so, Hillary better get
them on board ;-)) and you will be backing up your following arguments with
AMA produced info, right? (heavy sarcasm).
>> ----Begin quote/paraphrase
>> 1987:
>> The NY Times tells us, "AIDS May Dwarf the Plague.";
>You have not demonstrated that it may not; you have only so asserted.
>Falsely.
No, I claim the NY Times SAID it, that's all.
>> U.S. News declares "the disease of them suddenly is the disease of
>> <us>";
>And it is; the fastest growing American segment of new victims is by far
>the heterosexual segment.
Meaninless statistic. Let me give you an example: suppose ALL of the
risk group has aids - then ANY group which has even ONE new case can be
the "fastest growing". The number is meaningless.
> Though the absolute numbers are much smaller than
>those of either intravenous drug users or homosexuals, the rate of increase
>is far, far faster among heterosexuals. Over time, that translates into
>many more individual cases, as well.
IF the rate remains the same, yes. But assuming that is a BIG assumption
and you haven't show (nor has anyone else) that that is a valid assumption.
In fact, later on, it appears that it is, in FACT invalid.
>> Oprah solemnly informs her audience, "one out of five heterosexuals
>> will be dead of AIDS by 1990" (That's 50 million people.);
>And Oprah, of course, speaks for the AMA. As do you, no doubt. Perhaps
>you'd care to post both her and your medical credentials?
I didn't say she did, all I claim is what she SAID. Part of the hysteria
promoted by groups with their own agenda.
>> HHS Secretary Otis Bowen insists AIDS could make the Black Death seem
>> pale by comparison."
>The whole world isn't like the DuPont compound at Granogue...(to use an
>example close enough to your home base that you should know it)
Irrelevant, they were talking about the US anyway, as was I.
>> 1993:
>> The NY TImes reports "the AIDS epidemic will have little impact ....
>> according to the NRC (Part of the Nat. Acad. of Sciences).
>> CDC releases year-end AIDS figures for 1992:
>> Overall, cases increased only 3.5% from year before, down
>> from the 5% in 1990-91.
>> Hetero xmitted cases increased 17%, down from 21% in 90-91
>> Female increases of 9%, down from 17% in 90-91
>> Cases diagnosed among teenagers - same as year before,
>> " " " 20-24 - down slightly.
>In each of the above, the 1992 overall number was *higher* than the 1991
>number. What's more, the number of *new* cases in 1992 was higher than the
>number in 1991. Of course, since 1992 deals with larger overall numbers
>than 1991 did, the percentages may easily go down while the numbers go up.
BXXXTTTXXXTT! Wrong answer, thanks for playing. The last one was an
absolute number. BUT, YOU were arguing that the fastest growing.... stats
were meaningful. Now it looks like the rates of increase are actually going
DOWN so by your argument we should be able to extrapolate out to where they
are zero/negative..... But of course, these weren't AMA figures so.....
>A good similar example (to use an analogy that can be appreciated by the
>gentle readers from a.f.r-l) is to compare two companies. One increases its
>sales by 300%, from $1 million to $4 million. The other increases its sales
>by only 10%, but from &650 million to $665 million. Which of those
>increases represented the greater growth? Hint: it's not the $3 million
>increase.
But which is the "fastest growing"? Now do you see why it's meaningless?
>> Before releasing the figures, the CDC announced a second
>> time that it was revising downward its estimate of future
>> AIDS cases.
>So? That in no way diminishes the threat, it just pushes it out by a year
>or two. Don't you understand anything about statistics and exponential
>growth curves?
Yes, do you? The exponential curves seem to be going DOWN not up, or
don't you understand anything about arithmetic along with the statistics?
If they are revising their numbers DOWNward, how can that be equated with
exponential GROWTH???
>> Last year, responding to a decline in teenage AIDS cases from a total of
>> 170 in 1990 to 160 in 1991, Pat Schroeder's House Select Committee on
>> Children, Youth, and Families announced a veritable explosion of teenage
>> AIDS cases, resulting in headlines like "AIDS Runs Wild Among Teenagers,"
>> a cover story in US&World News Report calling teenage AIDS one of the top
>> ten health issues of the year.
>Ten cases out of 160/170 is noise, not signal. (As, I might add, is your
>post :^)
BUT THE WHOLE THING IS NOISE! 160/170 is INSIGNIFICANT. To call this
an EPIDEMIC AND A CRISIS IS INSANE. that wasn't THOUSANDS it was less than
TWO HUNDRED IN THE WHOLE UNITED STATES!!! COme on!!! Wake up here, pay
attention! ;-))
>Had you quoted any of the *context* of that quote from the report, you'd
>have been forced to admit that that the reason AIDS is seen as one of the
>top ten health issues for teenagers is that they overwhelmingly practice
>unsafe sex, so as soon as AIDS starts its exponential (NB: "exponential",
>not "arithmetic") march through the teenage population, it'll spread like
>wildfire.
You can say that but the numbers prove you to be pitifully WRONG! 160
cases in the last year is barely a smoldering cigarette butt. You might
call it a wildfire it you would like but I reserve the right to call you
crazy!!! 8-)))))
>You might also have considered the six-to-ten-year incubation period of the
>disease, which alone makes it highly unlikely that more than a miniscule
>number of teenagers will ever become symptomatic - they're in their
>twenties by then. But, noooooo...
Well, it's been around a while so one would expect we would be seeing some
kind of significant numbers by now. We see them in the high risk populations
so what does that tell you??
>I seriously recommend a course in late-high-school level math. Your posting
>shows you're in sore need of one. And, hell, even Reader's Digest knows
>more about the spread of disease than you seem to!
So you suggest we get our AIDS info from Reader's Digest now? What happened
to the AMA requirement??? What are their numbers that back up your
arguments???
>> Responding to the flattening of the epidemic, AIDS activists coreced the
>> CDC into broadly expanding the definition of what constitutes AIDS which
>> will cause the numbers to shoot up this year before beginning to decline
>> again the next. Beyond the general broadening, three new illnesses were
>> also added to the AIDS definition that will make it easier for women and
>> non-homosexuals to be included in the diagnosis.
>What a steaming pile of distorted garbage!
>The "definition" of what constitutes AIDS was expanded in response to
>advances in understanding what the disease is, how it progresses, and when
>intervention is most useful. It was "coerced" by medical researchers, both
>within and outside of CDC, against the wishes of the Bush Administration,
>and not at all by AIDS activists (though they were undoubtedly glad that
>the Medical Establishment had finally found its own proof of what the
>activists had been claiming for years).
What a steaming pile of distorted garbage!
>And what's this crap about "women and non-homosexuals"? The blatant
>homophobia and rampaging medical ignorance that leap from that paragraph of
>yours disqualify you from any further word on the subjects, since you
>obviously (quite obviously) haven't a clue as to what you're talking about.
>All of which should qualify you to get into broadcast journalism With A
>Bullet, much like Your Hero (this is posted to a.f.r-l, as well as
>a.f.d-q).
Hmmm, down to name-calling now, are we?
>> HHS Secretary Donna Shalala, who has no medical credentials, told a House
>> panel the day before the release of the NRC report, " We could spend our
>> energy on research and immunization and education and still not have any
>> Americans left unless we're prepared to confront the crisis of AIDS."
>> (Not any??)
>Not any. Except the ones that never used intavenous drugs, never had sex,
>and, of course, had no mother.
Hmmm, I think you better get your Reader's digest out and check the
risky behaviour list again.
>Do you qualify?
I do not practice any of the MEDICALLY defined risky behaviours. Your
list however is not their list of said behaviours.
(And you have proven MY original point, which you took up at the beginning -
Proof By Repeated Assertion doesn't cut it. Telling the big lie over and
over doesn't make it so.)
Herbert Rutledge
sknk...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu (Scott Alfter) signs himself:
|> ----=====##### Don't blame me...I voted for Bush/Quayle! #####=====----
Lot of good it did them.
--
_________________________________________________________________________
| | |
| Herbert Rutledge, aka Train | |
| Paramax Systems Corporation | "To post is human; to flame, divine." |
G. Brown
> _/_ Scott Alfter Internet: sknk...@cs.unlv.edu
> / v \ Call the Skunk Works BBS today! Ask me about SoftDAC--digital
>(IIGS( (702) 894-9619 300-14400 V.32bis audio for your Apple IIe/IIc!
> \_^_/ ----=====##### Don't blame me...I voted for Bush/Quayle! #####=====----
Gee, another self-confessed loser.
===============================================================================
|Gregory Brown | "God is, as it were, the sewer |
|Department of Philosophy | into which all contradictions flow" |
|University of Houston | |
|Houston, TX 77204-3785 | --G.W.F. Hegel |
|GBR...@JETSON.UH.EDU | Lectures on the History of Philosophy |
===============================================================================
Bill Anderson
: In article <1993Apr1....@pony.Ingres.COM> gar...@Ingres.COM writes:
: >In article <SKNKWRKS.93...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu>, sknk...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu (Scott Alfter) writes...
: >>of socially marginal demographic groups. As long as you avoid illegal
: >>drugs and keep your pants zipped, you should have nothing to worry
: >>about. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: >
: >Easier said then done. Have YOU given up sex?
:
: Is it any of your business?
:
: Are you attempting, in a roundabout way, to deny the truth that
: abstinence/monogamy is a practically surefire way to avoid AIDS?
It depends, I suppose, on how important sex is to you. After all,
never leaving your house is a practically surefire way to avoid
dying in a traffic accident, too.
Bill
Scott Alfter
>> \_^_/ ----=====##### Don't blame me...I voted for Bush/Quayle! #####=====----
Is that the best you can come up with--personal attacks against people
who don't toe your line?
(Makes me wonder why I even bothered responding to this message...I
was about to insert a TNG quote about Q, Worf, and the consumption of
printed matter...but I'd rather not stoop to your level. :-P )
THE SKY ALREADY FELL. NOW WHAT?
>In article <1993Apr1....@pony.Ingres.COM> gar...@Ingres.COM writes:
>>In article <SKNKWRKS.93...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu>, sknk...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu (Scott Alfter) writes...
>>>of socially marginal demographic groups. As long as you avoid illegal
>>>drugs and keep your pants zipped, you should have nothing to worry
>>>about. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>>Easier said then done. Have YOU given up sex?
>
>Is it any of your business?
>
It's kind of like saying, "Just say NO to primal needs."
>Are you attempting, in a roundabout way, to deny the truth that
>abstinence/monogamy is a practically surefire way to avoid AIDS?
>
On the contrary, I agree with you. But does your advice mean anything in
the real world?
>Better safe than sorry, no?
If the topic was bungee-cord jumping, or playing in traffic, or wearing
leather pants to a KKK rally, then yes, you are right.
But asking a Democrat to give up sex, is like asking a Republican
to give up graft. (heavy dose of ;^))
>
> _/_ Scott Alfter Internet: sknk...@cs.unlv.edu
> \_^_/ ----=====##### Don't blame me...I voted for Bush/Quayle! #####=====----
Did they send you a thank-you card?
Kate d'Medici
>>In article <SKNKWRKS.9...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu>, sknk...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu (Scott Alfter) writes:
>>> \_^_/ ----=====##### Don't blame me...I voted for Bush/Quayle! #####=====----
>>Gee, another self-confessed loser.
>
>Is that the best you can come up with--personal attacks against people
>who don't toe your line?
Beggin' your pardon, Scott, but it seems your .sig is a bit of generalized
damnation on your own part. I'm assuming you're more than willing to be
blamed for the four years of Bush/Quayle before they lost the election.
Do you really expect to show up on this newsgroup, a newsgroup devoted to
laughing at stupid things Dan Quayle does, and not have people respond to
your bait? No, I think you like it.
Here you go. Another article. :)
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sheryl Stover (& Hemingway & Clio) = sst...@seattleu.edu
The Medici may be live near you!
For more information, send email............................................
koppenhoefer kyle cramm
>>Are you attempting, in a roundabout way, to deny the truth that
>>abstinence/monogamy is a practically surefire way to avoid AIDS?
>>
>On the contrary, I agree with you. But does your advice mean anything in
>the real world?
Monogamy should mean something in the 'real' world. If not, our
society is in bigger trouble than I thought . :-(
gar...@ingres.com
as in "no sex". Now if the perameters of this discussion have changed,
please use your signals first.
G. Brown
>>In article <SKNKWRKS.9...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu>, sknk...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu (Scott Alfter) writes:
>>> \_^_/ ----=====##### Don't blame me...I voted for Bush/Quayle! #####=====----
>>Gee, another self-confessed loser.
>
>Is that the best you can come up with--personal attacks against people
>who don't toe your line?
>
>(Makes me wonder why I even bothered responding to this message...I
>was about to insert a TNG quote about Q, Worf, and the consumption of
>printed matter...but I'd rather not stoop to your level. :-P )
Have you been spending a lot of time in tanning salons lately? You seem to
have developed a severe case of thin skin.
koppenhoefer kyle cramm
>In article <C4u4u...@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, kk...@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (koppenhoefer kyle cramm) writes...
>>gar...@Ingres.COM (THE SKY ALREADY FELL. NOW WHAT?) writes:
>>>>Are you attempting, in a roundabout way, to deny the truth that
>>>>abstinence/monogamy is a practically surefire way to avoid AIDS?
^^^^^^^^
Here's your signal
>>>>
>>>On the contrary, I agree with you. But does your advice mean anything in
>>>the real world?
>>
>> Monogamy should mean something in the 'real' world. If not, our
>>society is in bigger trouble than I thought . :-(
>>
>The question wasn't monogamy, the question was"keeping you zipper shut",
> as in "no sex". Now if the perameters of this discussion have changed,
>please use your signals first.
Looks like part of the question WAS monogamy.
gar...@ingres.com
>gar...@Ingres.COM writes:
>>In article <C4u4u...@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, kk...@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (koppenhoefer kyle cramm) writes...
>>>>On the contrary, I agree with you. But does your advice mean anything in
>>>>the real world?
>>>
>>> Monogamy should mean something in the 'real' world. If not, our
>>>society is in bigger trouble than I thought . :-(
>>>
>>The question wasn't monogamy, the question was"keeping you zipper shut",
>> as in "no sex". Now if the perameters of this discussion have changed,
>>please use your signals first.
>
> Looks like part of the question WAS monogamy.
And if you hadn't erased the original question you would know what the
discussion was about. I'm not going to get drawn into some petty arguement
about 'who said what'.
Sunil Gupta
> In article <SKNKWRKS.93...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu>, sknkwrks@sonny-boy
> >It's not as if AIDS is the black plague of the 20th century--in
> >America, at least, it almost exclusively afflicts only a small handful
> >of socially marginal demographic groups. As long as you avoid illegal
> >drugs and keep your pants zipped, you should have nothing to worry
> >about. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> Easier said then done. Have YOU given up sex?
Have you ever seen any female ditto-heads? One wonders how the species
reproduces.
Sunil Gupta
Monsoon Software, Inc.
s...@monsoon.com
sun...@access.digex.com
Herbert Rutledge
|> (Makes me wonder why I even bothered responding to this message...I
|> was about to insert a TNG quote about Q, Worf, and the consumption of
|> printed matter...but I'd rather not stoop to your level. :-P )
Why not? You stooped to voting for George Bush and Dan Quayle.
Paul Moloney
>In article <1993Apr1....@pony.Ingres.COM> gar...@Ingres.COM writes:
>Are you attempting, in a roundabout way, to deny the truth that
>abstinence/monogamy is a practically surefire way to avoid AIDS?
^^^^^^^^
Er, no it isn't. I may sleep with one partner in my entire life. If
they have the HIV virus, I will probably get it too.
P.
--
moorcockpratchettdenislearydelasoulu2iainmbanksneworderheathersbatmanpjorourke
clive p a u l m o l o n e y Come, let us retract the foreskin of misconception
james trinity college dublin and apply the wire brush of enlightenment - GeoffM
brownbladerunnersugarcubeselectronicblaylockpowersspikeleekatebushhamcornpizza
Robert Brewer
>
>Depends on your definition of "American". If you aren't a berzerkly
>promiscuous gay intravenous drug user, then you aren't a real American
>in Clinton's America.
>
And if you are not a doctor shooting, pistol packin, bible wavin,
radical right wing screwball, you are not a real American in Rush's
America.
Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rather than a "bake sale" we need a "half-baked sale". Then Rush would fit
right in.
Bear Jack Gebhardt
Fort Collins Coloradoan
March 24, 1993
pat walsh
>Have you ever seen any female ditto-heads? One wonders how the species
>reproduces.
I suppose they wait for a signal from Rush. :-)
Paul Moloney
>In article <1993Apr1.0...@gallant.apple.com> (Don Coolidge) writes:
>>In article <1pd089...@apache.dtcc.edu>, b...@hobbes.dtcc.edu (Bob Rahe)
>>wrote:
[Lots of deletions-to save bandwidth]
>>> time that it was revising downward its estimate of future
>>> AIDS cases.
>>So? That in no way diminishes the threat, it just pushes it out by a year
>>or two. Don't you understand anything about statistics and exponential
>>growth curves?
> Yes, do you? The exponential curves seem to be going DOWN not up, or
>don't you understand anything about arithmetic along with the statistics?
>If they are revising their numbers DOWNward, how can that be equated with
>exponential GROWTH???
They can revised the numbers of carriers at the present and the rate of
transfer downwards but the spread pattern will be like ALL contagious
diseases exponential (this is basic biology - we did this in 1st year)
>>> Last year, responding to a decline in teenage AIDS cases from a total of
>>> 170 in 1990 to 160 in 1991, Pat Schroeder's House Select Committee on
>>> Children, Youth, and Families announced a veritable explosion of teenage
>>> AIDS cases, resulting in headlines like "AIDS Runs Wild Among Teenagers,"
>>> a cover story in US&World News Report calling teenage AIDS one of the top
>>> ten health issues of the year.
>>Ten cases out of 160/170 is noise, not signal. (As, I might add, is your
>>post :^)
> BUT THE WHOLE THING IS NOISE! 160/170 is INSIGNIFICANT. To call this
>an EPIDEMIC AND A CRISIS IS INSANE. that wasn't THOUSANDS it was less than
>TWO HUNDRED IN THE WHOLE UNITED STATES!!! COme on!!! Wake up here, pay
>attention! ;-))
>>Had you quoted any of the *context* of that quote from the report, you'd
>>have been forced to admit that that the reason AIDS is seen as one of the
>>top ten health issues for teenagers is that they overwhelmingly practice
>>unsafe sex, so as soon as AIDS starts its exponential (NB: "exponential",
>>not "arithmetic") march through the teenage population, it'll spread like
>>wildfire.
> You can say that but the numbers prove you to be pitifully WRONG! 160
>cases in the last year is barely a smoldering cigarette butt. You might
>call it a wildfire it you would like but I reserve the right to call you
>crazy!!! 8-)))))
If there are 160 (say) reported cases of AIDS among teenagers this year
and they each sleep with 10 people in a year (which according to studies
I've read isn't implausible) and only 1 of these are infected then the
numbers double in a year. Now bearing in mind the fact that people can
be infected with AIDS for as long as 5 years without being detected so
the starting set of figures are a probably a gross underestimate this
sounds to me at least worrying if not terrifying. Also most detection
won't be until the people are no longer teenagers.
[more deletions]
>>And what's this crap about "women and non-homosexuals"? The blatant
>>homophobia and rampaging medical ignorance that leap from that paragraph of
>>yours disqualify you from any further word on the subjects, since you
>>obviously (quite obviously) haven't a clue as to what you're talking about.
>>All of which should qualify you to get into broadcast journalism With A
>>Bullet, much like Your Hero (this is posted to a.f.r-l, as well as
>>a.f.d-q).
> Hmmm, down to name-calling now, are we?
In this case this is justified name-calling - by trying to spread the
lie that AIDS is only a problem for the so-called 'high-risk' groups you
are saying that it is O.K. for the rest of us to sit back and pretend it
isn't happening - which will result in more people dying of ignorance.
[More deletions]
>>Not any. Except the ones that never used intavenous drugs, never had sex,
>>and, of course, had no mother.
> Hmmm, I think you better get your Reader's digest out and check the
>risky behaviour list again.
>>Do you qualify?
> I do not practice any of the MEDICALLY defined risky behaviours. Your
>list however is not their list of said behaviours.
The above list (Don's) describs the only person truely safe from AIDS -
it is simply that infectous - no one can absolutely be sure that they
are safe.
All the info I have on AIDS is that of a 3rd year Biology student how
has done courses in which AIDS have been covered and who has read a bit
about it myself.
--
moorcockheathersiainbankshamandcornpizzapjorourkebluesbrothersspikeleepratchett
clive P a u l M o l o n e y "Lines of light ranged in the nonspace of the rem
james Trinity College, Dublin mind." PMOLONEY%VAX1....@PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU vr
brownbladerunnerorsonscottcardwatchmenkatebushbatmanthekillingjoketolkienpmdawn
Eric Smith
> But in the numbers I recently posted there was one that struck me as
>either a misprint/off or they are REALLY pulling one on everyone. The
>media has called it an epidemic among teens. The number reported of cases
>in teens was 170 and 160. Not 170 thousand, just 170. Is that right? Can
>they really be that dumb to not actually have a number even > 500 and call
>it a disaster/catastrophe/epidemic???
It depends on what the numbers mean, and to understand that you'd have to
have more data like what is the actual infection pattern. I don't know
what the number is, although I'd guess that it's much higher than 170.
But even it it were 170, 170 cases among geographically widespread hetero-
sexual teens with no other risk factors would have a much different
implication than 170 gay male IV drug using teens in one major city.
AIDS is a condition with an extremely long latency period, so it's
impossible to say whether 170 individuals is the tip of an iceberg or
just a blip on the radar screen without understanding other factors.
After all, there was a time when there may have been only 170 gay men
with AIDS too and nobody thought it was a major problem. 170 teenagers
with AIDS may or may not mean that there will be hundreds of thousands
ten years from now, but we'd better understand what the infection pattern
implies, and not just say "hey, there's only 170 of them, nothing to
worry about."
-----
Eric Smith
er...@netcom.com
er...@infoserv.com
CI$: 70262,3610
Eric Smith
>gar...@Ingres.COM writes:
>>sknk...@sonny-boy.cs.unlv.edu (Scott Alfter) writes...
>>>of socially marginal demographic groups. As long as you avoid illegal
>>>drugs and keep your pants zipped, you should have nothing to worry
>>>about. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>Easier said then done. Have YOU given up sex?
>Is it any of your business?
>Are you attempting, in a roundabout way, to deny the truth that
>abstinence/monogamy is a practically surefire way to avoid AIDS?
>Better safe than sorry, no?
First of all, "keep your pants zipped" does not imply monogamy to me,
only abstinence. Secondly, if you want to talk surefire ways to avoid
AIDS, I'd guess suicide is about the surest but it wouldn't be very
practical would it? Total abstinence is only slightly more practical;
the human species just isn't built to avoid sex. It isn't built for
100% monogamy either. Thirdly, monogamy is no guarantee of safety if
your partner is engaging in risky behavior (since you seem to imply
that *you* should have no problem as long as *you* control your own
behavior).
Now, if we agree that AIDS is the enemy here, and not people with HIV,
isn't it better to try prevention programs that acknowledge the real-world
obstacles and attempt to deal with the problems in a practical manner?
Bob Rahe
... Lots of incorrect arithmetic like:
>They can revised the numbers of carriers at the present and the rate of
>transfer downwards but the spread pattern will be like ALL contagious
>diseases exponential (this is basic biology - we did this in 1st year)
Then:
I wrote:
>> You can say that but the numbers prove you to be pitifully WRONG! 160
>>cases in the last year is barely a smoldering cigarette butt. You might
>>call it a wildfire it you would like but I reserve the right to call you
>>crazy!!! 8-)))))
>If there are 160 (say) reported cases of AIDS among teenagers this year
>and they each sleep with 10 people in a year (which according to studies
>I've read isn't implausible) and only 1 of these are infected then the
>numbers double in a year. Now bearing in mind the fact that people can
>be infected with AIDS for as long as 5 years without being detected so
>the starting set of figures are a probably a gross underestimate this
>sounds to me at least worrying if not terrifying. Also most detection
>won't be until the people are no longer teenagers.
Again, you need to do your arithmetic. Back it out 5 years. No matter
what you come up with, it just ain't an epidemic as has been claimed for the
last n years. This is basic math, we did it in 1st year (grade school!!).
>>>And what's this crap about "women and non-homosexuals"? The blatant
>>>homophobia and rampaging medical ignorance that leap from that paragraph of
>>>yours disqualify you from any further word on the subjects, since you
>>>obviously (quite obviously) haven't a clue as to what you're talking about.
>>>All of which should qualify you to get into broadcast journalism With A
>>>Bullet, much like Your Hero (this is posted to a.f.r-l, as well as
>>>a.f.d-q).
>> Hmmm, down to name-calling now, are we?
>In this case this is justified name-calling - by trying to spread the
>lie that AIDS is only a problem for the so-called 'high-risk' groups you
>are saying that it is O.K. for the rest of us to sit back and pretend it
>isn't happening - which will result in more people dying of ignorance.
It is not a lie, unless you call the surgeon general a liar, various other
medical groups liars etc. etc. If I go to my blood bank to give blood,
guess where they are worried about getting it from? Get a clue...
>[More deletions]
>>>Not any. Except the ones that never used intavenous drugs, never had sex,
>>>and, of course, had no mother.
>> Hmmm, I think you better get your Reader's digest out and check the
>>risky behaviour list again.
>>>Do you qualify?
>> I do not practice any of the MEDICALLY defined risky behaviours. Your
>>list however is not their list of said behaviours.
>The above list (Don's) describs the only person truely safe from AIDS -
>it is simply that infectous - no one can absolutely be sure that they
>are safe.
Well, I'm also not safe from an airplane falling on my head... Come on
now, REALLY stretching it. What happened to all the talk about understanding
people with aids and how it wasn't so contagious that we should be
"discriminating" against them. If it is SO dangerous and SO contagious
then we should quaranteen them, right? A little consistency here. Is that
kid with aids a threat in school or not?
>All the info I have on AIDS is that of a 3rd year Biology student how
>has done courses in which AIDS have been covered and who has read a bit
>about it myself.
All AMA approved and generated info, as I remember, that was one of your
requirements. Most of my quotes came from the authorities in the field, they
were quoted in a non-medical magazine. Maybe your courses should be updated.
John Sims
>> I do not practice any of the MEDICALLY defined risky behaviours. Your
>>list however is not their list of said behaviours.
>The above list (Don's) describs the only person truely safe from AIDS -
>it is simply that infectous - no one can absolutely be sure that they
>are safe.
Well Paul, it would seem that you are admitting that AIDS is a
behaviorally spread disease.
BTW I assume from your statements about just how hideously
infectious AIDS is, that you agreed with the NBA players who
didn't want to play with Magic Johnson.
John
--
John Sims si...@pogo.den.mmc.com
Bob Rahe
>b...@hobbes.dtcc.edu (Bob Rahe) writes:
>> But in the numbers I recently posted there was one that struck me as
>>either a misprint/off or they are REALLY pulling one on everyone. The
>>media has called it an epidemic among teens. The number reported of cases
>>in teens was 170 and 160. Not 170 thousand, just 170. Is that right? Can
>>they really be that dumb to not actually have a number even > 500 and call
>>it a disaster/catastrophe/epidemic???
>It depends on what the numbers mean, and to understand that you'd have to
>have more data like what is the actual infection pattern. I don't know
>what the number is, although I'd guess that it's much higher than 170.
>But even it it were 170, 170 cases among geographically widespread hetero-
>sexual teens with no other risk factors would have a much different
>implication than 170 gay male IV drug using teens in one major city.
Well, you can guess all you want, those were the ACTUAL numbers reported.
They said 'teenagers'. Not "teens with no other risk factors".
>AIDS is a condition with an extremely long latency period, so it's
>impossible to say whether 170 individuals is the tip of an iceberg or
>just a blip on the radar screen without understanding other factors.
>After all, there was a time when there may have been only 170 gay men
>with AIDS too and nobody thought it was a major problem. 170 teenagers
>with AIDS may or may not mean that there will be hundreds of thousands
>ten years from now, but we'd better understand what the infection pattern
>implies, and not just say "hey, there's only 170 of them, nothing to
>worry about."
But unless you can show they just started getting it (unlikely) it would
seem that they aren't in a risk group, contrary to what the alarmists would
have us believe. To classify them as a high risk group along with the
KNOWN ones- homosexuals etc. then would expect them to have followed the
same pattern, and they have not.
Jason Hsu
> to give up graft. (heavy dose of ;^))
You seem to imply that Democrats are sexually promiscuous. As a
"liberal Democrat" (whatever that means), I defy the stereotype. I am 19
years old, and I am still a virgin. In fact, several of my peers think I
a prude. I admire Tipper Gore, do not regularly see pornography (as a
matter of fact, I haven't viewed any), do not religiously peruse Sports
Illustrated Swimsuit Issue (I still haven't taken a good look at a copy),
and do not listen to music with explicit lyrics (it just happens that none
of the music I listen is explicit). Conversely, there are "conservative
Republicans" who are promiscuous. For example, Pat Robertson committed
adultery behind everyone's backs while making sermons about how sex
education promotes promiscuity.
P.S. What is a graft?
PARENTAL ADVISORY EXCELLENT LYRICS below:
"You've come a long way baby
The saying is true
If the 70's freed our inhibitions, what good did it do?
Gotta shut it in, get it out, turn it away
'Cause you gotta be crazy to have sex, sex in the 90's."
from the song "Sex in the 90's" by Gloria Estefan
gar...@ingres.com
>In article <1993Apr1.2...@pony.Ingres.COM> gar...@Ingres.COM (THE
>SKY ALREADY FELL. NOW WHAT?) writes:
>> But asking a Democrat to give up sex, is like asking a Republican
>> to give up graft. (heavy dose of ;^))
>
> You seem to imply that Democrats are sexually promiscuous. As a
>"liberal Democrat" (whatever that means), I defy the stereotype. I am 19
>years old, and I am still a virgin.
Actually, computer nerds usually are. (even heavier dose of ;^))
Since it seems that you are relatively new to Usenet, smilies
are meant as a signal for the humor impared. There is nothing wrong with
being a virgin, as long as it's O.K. with you.
>I admire Tipper Gore, do not regularly see pornography (as a
>matter of fact, I haven't viewed any), do not religiously peruse Sports
>Illustrated Swimsuit Issue (I still haven't taken a good look at a copy),
>and do not listen to music with explicit lyrics (it just happens that none
>of the music I listen is explicit).
Are you sure you can describe yourself as a "liberal"?
>
> P.S. What is a graft?
Ever heard of a dictionary? It's the latest craze. Everyone is doing it.
Alexandre Pechtchanski
them and kinda cought some info, but methinks that 1) Paul doesn't
even hint on how behavior is connected with AIDS spread (that was
aside) and 2) yes, AIDS is extremely contagious. If your blood
or even vicous (sp?) membrane i.e. nose, mouth, eye comes in contact
with body fluids of HIV-infected person, your risk is _very_ high
(I don't have figures handy, but much higher than, say, risk of
getting TB if having contact with sick person.) The worth thing
is that your immune system is worth then forceless against HIV:
it lives in white blood cells (yes, that same cells which are
supposed to protect you from infection). So don't shrug off
AIDS threats so lightly...
I'm not saying that (as somebody else viciously suggested) all
HIV-infected people should be quarantined - if you take precautions
(_if_ you can take them; this effectually excludes all kinds of
team sports), you won't get infection. But can you guarantee
that you'll never get infected bllod infusion? That the guy
you knocked down for being drunk and obnoxious didn't have this
infusion five years ago and is now (unknown to himself) HIV-infected?
You won't find easy solutions here and calling AIDS non-epidemic
isn't one of them...
-------
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Alex Pechtchanski, GCRC System Manager Phone: (212) 241-1804
Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York º-------------------------
internet: des...@msvax.mssm.edu º#include <std.disclaimer>
bitnet: appms@cunyvm º
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Opinions? If you find one, please let me know...
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Jason Christian
>In article <1993Apr1.2...@pony.Ingres.COM> gar...@Ingres.COM (THE
>SKY ALREADY FELL. NOW WHAT?) writes:
>> But asking a Democrat to give up sex, is like asking a Republican
>> to give up graft. (heavy dose of ;^))
>
> You seem to imply that Democrats are sexually promiscuous. As a
>"liberal Democrat" (whatever that means), I defy the stereotype. I am 19
>years old, and I am still a virgin. In fact, several of my peers think I
>a prude. I admire Tipper Gore, do not regularly see pornography (as a
>matter of fact, I haven't viewed any), do not religiously peruse Sports
>Illustrated Swimsuit Issue (I still haven't taken a good look at a copy),
>and do not listen to music with explicit lyrics (it just happens that none
>of the music I listen is explicit). Conversely, there are "conservative
>Republicans" who are promiscuous. For example, Pat Robertson committed
...or was that Jimmy Swaggart. Dang, I keep getting those tvangelists
mixed up ...
>adultery behind everyone's backs while making sermons about how sex
>education promotes promiscuity.
Now if this were the beginning of Fall quarter, & young Jason confessed
to being 18, it would all make sense.
>
>
> P.S. What is a graft?
The way I heard it was, graft is a practice started by the father-in-law
of the late Winston Churchill, who used to offer substantial gratuities
to the Cunard Line booking agent in New York in order to ensure that he
would be served by his favorite steward, Mr. J. Eloysius Graft. Mr.
Graft was known to work on the North side of the ship, so that his
clients could better observe the Northern Lights. I think this has
something to do with the expression ``posh.''
Anyhoo---the gentlemen becoming used to offering gratuities to
reservations clerks, and by extension to stewards, began to extend the
practice to the stewards of the ship of state (and city), offering
gratuities large and small to those entrusted to guard the public
interest. The most frequent recipients of these favors eventually
formed an administration under Warren G. Harding, whence originated the
nickname Graft Old Party (G.O.P.).
Hope this helps---
Jason "Fleeced" Christian
>
>PARENTAL ADVISORY EXCELLENT LYRICS below:
>"You've come a long way baby
>The saying is true
>If the 70's freed our inhibitions, what good did it do?
>Gotta shut it in, get it out, turn it away
>'Cause you gotta be crazy to have sex, sex in the 90's."
>from the song "Sex in the 90's" by Gloria Estefan
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Christian Agricultural Economics
ja...@primal.ucdavis.edu University of California, Davis
Office:(916)752-1357 FAX:(916)752-5614 Davis, CA 95616
gar...@ingres.com
>In article <1993Apr2.1...@den.mmc.com>, si...@possum.den.mmc.com (John
>Sims) says:
>>pmol...@unix1.tcd.ie (Paul Moloney) writes:
>>>The above list (Don's) describs the only person truely safe from AIDS -
>>>it is simply that infectous - no one can absolutely be sure that they
>>>are safe.
>>
>>Well Paul, it would seem that you are admitting that AIDS is a
>>behaviorally spread disease.
>
>Well, I'm not a doctor/biologist myself, I just work closely with
>them and kinda cought some info, but methinks that 1) Paul doesn't
>even hint on how behavior is connected with AIDS spread (that was
>aside) and 2) yes, AIDS is extremely contagious. If your blood
[stuff deleted]
Pardon me for asking, but what does this discussion have to do
with either the Danster of Rush boy?
>
>Alex Pechtchanski, GCRC System Manager Phone: (212) 241-1804
>internet: des...@msvax.mssm.edu º#include <std.disclaimer>
>bitnet: appms@cunyvm º
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Alfter
>Do you really expect to show up on this newsgroup, a newsgroup devoted to
>laughing at stupid things Dan Quayle does, and not have people respond to
>your bait? No, I think you like it.
Hey, I've been following this thread from alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...
didn't realize that I've been crossposting. Personally, I'd rather
have Quayle in the Oval Office than the current assortment of
blowhards.
Followups to this post have been directed to alt.fan.rush-limbaugh ONLY.
_/_ Scott Alfter Internet: sknk...@cs.unlv.edu
/ v \ Call the Skunk Works BBS today! Ask me about SoftDAC--digital
(IIGS( (702) 894-9619 300-14400 V.32bis audio for your Apple IIe/IIc!
Tom Hinson
> In article <1pd089...@apache.dtcc.edu>, b...@hobbes.dtcc.edu (Bob Rahe)
> wrote:
>>
[snip]
>>
>> 1987:
>>
>> The NY Times tells us, "AIDS May Dwarf the Plague.";
>
> You have not demonstrated that it may not; you have only so asserted.
> Falsely.
>
>> U.S. News declares "the disease of them suddenly is the disease of
>> <us>";
>
> And it is; the fastest growing American segment of new victims is by far
> the heterosexual segment. Though the absolute numbers are much smaller than
> those of either intravenous drug users or homosexuals, the rate of increase
> is far, far faster among heterosexuals. Over time, that translates into
> many more individual cases, as well.
>
>> Oprah solemnly informs her audience, "one out of five heterosexuals
>> will be dead of AIDS by 1990" (That's 50 million people.);
>
> And Oprah, of course, speaks for the AMA. As do you, no doubt. Perhaps
> you'd care to post both her and your medical credentials?
>
>> HHS Secretary Otis Bowen insists AIDS could make the Black Death seem
>> pale by comparison."
>
> If you took the time to cast your jaded glance in the general direction of
> Africa, you would find countries where exactly that is happening (and, BTW,
> the method of infection there is overwhelmingly by heterosexual
> intercourse). The Black Death killed about 25% of the European population.
> There are countries in Africa where more than 45% of all breeding-age women
> test positive for AIDS - and it's incurable, passed by sexual intercourse,
> and passed on to developing fetuses, as I'm sure you know.
This is not meant as a flame or retort. I'm just curious. Haven't all
epidemics in history followed some exponential curve? And in all cases
haven't the curves "flattened out"? And therefore isn't the real
question simply the "level" that the AIDS curve will reach?
For example, a segment of the population practices one-partner sex, no
needles, etc. Therefore, even in the extreme, AIDS cannot wipe out
the population. Moreover, in the extreme, this "safe" segment becomes
a larger and larger fraction of the population as the non-safe segment
disappears.
Comment?
[snip]
>
>> Before releasing the figures, the CDC announced a second
>> time that it was revising downward its estimate of future
>> AIDS cases.
>
> So? That in no way diminishes the threat, it just pushes it out by a year
> or two. Don't you understand anything about statistics and exponential
> growth curves?
Re: my comments above, doesn't it all depend on the shape of the curve
_over time_ and not just the simple extrapolation of a "same rate"
geometric growth?
[snip]
>> HHS Secretary Donna Shalala, who has no medical credentials, told a House
>> panel the day before the release of the NRC report, " We could spend our
>> energy on research and immunization and education and still not have any
>> Americans left unless we're prepared to confront the crisis of AIDS."
>> (Not any??)
>
> Not any. Except the ones that never used intavenous drugs, never had sex,
> and, of course, had no mother.
Do you still stand by this statement? It is extreme, but maybe you
are using artistic license just for shock effect.
[snip]
--Tom
kmag...@eagle.wesleyan.edu
> In article <1pdutr$f...@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> aa...@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Vern Morrison) writes:
>
> What does make an epidemic is sheer numbers. I believe the World
> Health Organization projected some 40 million HIV infections
> world-wide by, I think, the year 2000, mainly in Africa and Asia. A
> team in Harvard projected some 100 million. If we assume that
> everyone infected will die of AIDS (not unreasonable: even though
> there's new hope of a way to control HIV in the next 5 or 6 years,
> treatment will be expensive, and it is unlikely that the poorer
> sections of the world, where most of these infections will take place,
> will be able to afford it), we will have a death toll about double
> that of the Great Flu Epidemic of 1920, which killed 20 million
> world-wide.
It was pointed out recently that hepatitis B, which is transmitted in
the same way as AIDS, kills many more people in a year than AIDS has since
it was discovered. Even despite availability of a vaccine, relatively
little is done to combat it in much of the world; it is much more of
an epidemic than AIDS.
> The flu epidemic is supposed to be the most lethal plague
> in history in terms of body count.
Not even close. I'm not sure about numbers but the Black Death was
much higher. There have also been epidemics in China of the flu
and plague that killed around 60 million people.
Karl
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| "Lastly, I come to China in the hope | "All you touch and all you see |
| of fulfilling a lifelong ambition - | Is all your life will ever be." |
| dropping acid on the Great Wall." --Duke | --Pink Floyd |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| A Lie is still a Lie even if 3.8 billion people believe it. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
vanc...@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu
Looks like the second part of the question is the conservative
rejection of sex. There are alot of sexually deprived individuals
parading under the 'Pro-Life/Pro-Family-Values' flag these days.
Take a look at sme of these people. Yuk.
A 'Simple Simon' Smiley to 'y'all :)
-Garrett
Eric Smith
>This is not meant as a flame or retort. I'm just curious. Haven't all
>epidemics in history followed some exponential curve? And in all cases
>haven't the curves "flattened out"? And therefore isn't the real
>question simply the "level" that the AIDS curve will reach?
>For example, a segment of the population practices one-partner sex, no
>needles, etc. Therefore, even in the extreme, AIDS cannot wipe out
>the population. Moreover, in the extreme, this "safe" segment becomes
>a larger and larger fraction of the population as the non-safe segment
>disappears.
>Comment?
It's also true that viruses that cause epidemics evolve over time. Any
virus that kills its host before it has a chance to pass into another
host is not exhibiting long-term survival traits itself. There is some
evidence to indicate that the HIV virus we're seeing in this world-wide
epidemic is a particularly virulent strain that is succeeding in large
part because it is able to pass from one host to another relatively
easily, and therefore the death of the host is not a big impediment to
its survival. However, should safer sexual practices and other practices
(clean needles for example, there's no requirement for "no" needles)
become much more prevalent, that would likely promote a change in the
virus' behavior as well - less lethal strains will become more prevalent
that are more interested in keeping the host alive. Thus prevention
programs can have a doubly positive effect; not only will fewer people
become infected, but the virus itself is likely to become less deadly.
Dwight Wilson
> I wrote:
>
>>> You can say that but the numbers prove you to be pitifully WRONG! 160
>>>cases in the last year is barely a smoldering cigarette butt. You might
>>>call it a wildfire it you would like but I reserve the right to call you
>>>crazy!!! 8-)))))
>
and
> Again, you need to do your arithmetic. Back it out 5 years. No matter
>what you come up with, it just ain't an epidemic as has been claimed for the
>last n years. This is basic math, we did it in 1st year (grade school!!).
and
>
>>In this case this is justified name-calling - by trying to spread the
>>lie that AIDS is only a problem for the so-called 'high-risk' groups you
>>are saying that it is O.K. for the rest of us to sit back and pretend it
>>isn't happening - which will result in more people dying of ignorance.
>
> It is not a lie, unless you call the surgeon general a liar, various other
>medical groups liars etc. etc. If I go to my blood bank to give blood,
>guess where they are worried about getting it from? Get a clue...
>
>
Then showing typical conservative consistency, ends with this .sig.
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>|Bob Rahe, Delaware Tech&Comm College | AIDS, Drugs, Abortion: - |
^^^^
>|Internet: b...@hobbes.dtcc.edu | - Don't liberals just kill you?|
>|CI$: 72406,525 Genie:BOB.RAHE |Save whales; and kill babies? |
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well Bob, is AIDS an epidemic or not? Clearly an upstanding
conservative patriot like you wouldn't be <gasp> spouting a
slogan he didn't believe. Why don't you run for public office.
I see a brilliant political career in store for you, culminating
in the vice-presidency.
-Dwight
"Things would be so different, if they were not as they are."
Anna Russell, "How to Your Own Gilbert and Sullivan Opera"
Kate d'Medici
>virus that kills its host before it has a chance to pass into another
>host is not exhibiting long-term survival traits itself. There is some
>evidence to indicate that the HIV virus we're seeing in this world-wide
>epidemic is a particularly virulent strain that is succeeding in large
>part because it is able to pass from one host to another relatively
>easily, and therefore the death of the host is not a big impediment to
>its survival. However, should safer sexual practices and other practices
>(clean needles for example, there's no requirement for "no" needles)
>become much more prevalent, that would likely promote a change in the
>virus' behavior as well - less lethal strains will become more prevalent
>that are more interested in keeping the host alive. Thus prevention
>programs can have a doubly positive effect; not only will fewer people
>become infected, but the virus itself is likely to become less deadly.
This would be true in the case of "x" virus, with general viral effects
(sinus congestion, etc.) which are actually symptoms arising when the
immune system attempts to combat the invading virus. HIV, however, slowly
immobilizes the immune system at several points, not only in the white
blood cells themselves, but in the T4 helper cells which build more white
blood cells. It infects cells in the stomach and intestines, making it
more difficult for the host to digest his/her food. This weakening is
most dangerous because the body has absolutely no defense against the
virus itself--it doesn't recognize it as foreign. The result is twofold
and terrifying: nothing attempts to eradicate the virus, so that it can
multiply either by killing its host cell or, more commonly, residing in
the cell and releasing duplicates of itself slowly, without killing the
cell; and the virus breaks down the immune system which would be able to
fight off *other* viruses dangerous to the health of the host. It is not
HIV itself, but the Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, which kills the
host--or more specifically, the common cold or flu which the body becomes
incapable of fighting. For this reason, we can't view HIV as we seen any
other virus, assuming that by bolstering the body's immune system we'll be
able to fight it off. We can't make a vaccine for it because if we
introduce small amounts of the virus into the bloodstream (the technique
for vaccinating against other viruses) we infect the patient irreversibly.
HIV and AIDS are so terrifying precisely because they don't follow rules
science has set down for the behavior of a disease.
Safer practices will never eradicate the disease, especially (ironically)
if we develop ways of treating people with HIV so that they survive and
can lead virtually normal lives. It will have to evolve itself into
extinction in order for us to be free of it. Since it is technically not
a living organism (and thus subject to environmental pressures only if its
host becomes a radically different type of environment), this may take
thousands of years (just as it has likely taken thousands of years for it
to reach the stage it is at presently)--although HIV is one of the
fastest-evolving known viruses. These are the main reasons we need to
learn to live with HIV and AIDS in our midst, and understand how to make
ourselves safer. At the same time, however, we can't necessarily adhere
to the unreasonable requirements of never receiving a blood transfusion,
never having a sexual relation with anyone, etc.--HIV is not the fault of
any one group, it is simply a fact of life which we are still learning to
take into account.
>-----
>Eric Smith
>er...@netcom.com
>er...@infoserv.com
>CI$: 70262,3610
>
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sheryl Stover (& Hemingway & Clio) = sst...@seattleu.edu
The Medici may be live near you!
For more information, send email............................................
Elizabeth G. Levy
>In article <1993Apr1.1...@news.columbia.edu>, eg...@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>
>> The flu epidemic is supposed to be the most lethal plague
>> in history in terms of body count.
>
>Not even close. I'm not sure about numbers but the Black Death was
>much higher. There have also been epidemics in China of the flu
>and plague that killed around 60 million people.
I went and looked up some numbers. There were three major occurances
of the bubonic/pneumonic plague: the Plague of Justinian (around 500
AD), the Black Death, and the plague of London. The Plague of
Justinian cost the most lives, around 100 million. The Black Death
killed around 35 million, and the one in London killed far fewer,
about 2 million (I don't recall exactly, since I don't have the
reference in front of me: the death toll from the three plagues is
around 137 million).
Both the Justinian plague and the Death killed about 2 million people
a year. The former, of course, last 50 years, the Death around 15.
The Flu Epidemic killed around 25 to 35 million in about 18 months,
and is the most lethal from a "deaths per week" kind of statistic.
Most of the above is from _Panetti's Extrodinary Endings for Almost
Everyone and Everything_, a admittedly lightweight reference, but is
fun for the morbid-of-mind/bathroom reading crowd. It was the nearest
thing available when the mood struck to look up the numbers yesterday.
William McNeil, in the more scholarly _Plagues and People_, notes that
the 20th Century would most likely have seen a resurgence of the
bubonic plague (Originating in China: seemingly, the plague is endemic
among minks or somesuch. Traditional trappers would avoid minks
exhibiting certain behavior because of centuries-old custom. More
modern trappers came along, and dismissed these customs as
superstition, and started a plague), perhaps a truly deadly episode,
given how the world is both more populous and interconnected than in
the Middle Ages. It was stopped by draconic quaranteen procedures
once the medical community realized what they were facing.
--
From a radio call-in show:
"I really feel for David Koresh. He's going through a hard time. I should
know: last week I was Jesus."
Eric Smith
>er...@netcom.com (Eric Smith) writes:
>>It's also true that viruses that cause epidemics evolve over time. Any
>>virus that kills its host before it has a chance to pass into another
>>host is not exhibiting long-term survival traits itself. There is some
>>evidence to indicate that the HIV virus we're seeing in this world-wide
>>epidemic is a particularly virulent strain that is succeeding in large
>>part because it is able to pass from one host to another relatively
>>easily, and therefore the death of the host is not a big impediment to
>>its survival. However, should safer sexual practices and other practices
>>(clean needles for example, there's no requirement for "no" needles)
>>become much more prevalent, that would likely promote a change in the
>>virus' behavior as well - less lethal strains will become more prevalent
>>that are more interested in keeping the host alive.
[etc.]
>This would be true in the case of "x" virus, with general viral effects
>(sinus congestion, etc.) which are actually symptoms arising when the
>immune system attempts to combat the invading virus. HIV, however, slowly
>immobilizes the immune system at several points, not only in the white
>blood cells themselves, but in the T4 helper cells which build more white
>blood cells. It infects cells in the stomach and intestines, making it
>more difficult for the host to digest his/her food. This weakening is
>most dangerous because the body has absolutely no defense against the
>virus itself--it doesn't recognize it as foreign.
[etc.]
Well, as I said, there is some evidence to indicate that the HIV virus
we're seeing in this world-wide epidemic is a particularly virulent strain.
I didn't just make that up. HIV-2, for example, seems to have a longer
latency period and lower death rates than HIV-1. Some strains of HIV-1
not only seem to not bring on full-blown AIDS, but do not even cause any
symptoms of AIDS. There is medical evidence that HIV viruses may have
been present in humans for a very long time, without causing the deadly
symptoms seen recently, in most cases. Newsweek had a cover story on
this subject a couple weeks back.
Spencer PriceNash
>In article <1pg1td...@sumax.seattleu.edu> sst...@sumax.seattleu.edu ( Kate d'Medici) writes:
>>Do you really expect to show up on this newsgroup, a newsgroup devoted to
>>laughing at stupid things Dan Quayle does, and not have people respond to
>>your bait? No, I think you like it.
>Hey, I've been following this thread from alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...
>didn't realize that I've been crossposting. Personally, I'd rather
>have Quayle in the Oval Office than the current assortment of
>blowhards.
BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
SMASHED UP HIS SANITY SMASHED UP INTEGRITY SMASHED UP WHAT HE
BELIEVED IN SMASHED UP WHAT'S LEFT OF HIM SMASHED UP HIS
EVERYTHING SMASHED UP ALL THAT WAS TRUE GONNA SMASH HIMSELF TO
PIECES HE DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO
>Followups to this post have been directed to alt.fan.rush-limbaugh ONLY.
Where are you? Somewhere between real and real real?
> _/_ Scott Alfter Internet: sknk...@cs.unlv.edu
> \_^_/ ----=====##### Don't blame me...I voted for Bush/Quayle! #####=====----
What a loser.
--
Spencer PriceNash spe...@spencer.ann-arbor.mi.us spe...@umcc.umich.edu
"I am the future." -- Senator Dan Quayle, 10/18/88 (reported in Esquire, 8/92)
theodore r krueger
>Scott Alfter of the Skunk Works writes:
>
>|> (Makes me wonder why I even bothered responding to this message...I
>|> was about to insert a TNG quote about Q, Worf, and the consumption of
>|> printed matter...but I'd rather not stoop to your level. :-P )
>
> Why not? You stooped to voting for George Bush and Dan Quayle.
Voting for Bush/Quayle is only a stoop for those of us who voted for
Ronaldus Magnus (President Reagan for you democrats). Voting for
Bush/Quayle would have been a step up for those of you who voted for
the Clinons.
Ted
--
When Chelsea Clinton's Secret Service agent had to be replaced by an active duty
soldier, she resisted on the grounds that her family dislikes the military.
----- kru...@gas.uug.arizona.edu -----
pa...@hsh.com
> In article <C4py4...@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, kk...@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu
> (koppenhoefer kyle cramm) writes:
>
> |> I'll add another Shalala quote :
> |>
> |> 'If we do not do something about AIDS, there will be no Americans left!'
> |>
> |>
> |> Bet you didn't hear this piece of stupidity on the news ( wonder why? ).
>
> Oh, for crying out loud. If you want examples of stupid utterances from
> cabinet members, look no further than Bush's Secretary of the Interior.
> Shalala looks like Cicero when compared to Luhan.
*snort*chuckle* Ho ho, we got another humorless so-and-so. Hey, chum, if
you want the right to dish it out, you gotta be able to _take_ it, too. Now
off to alt.fan.dan-quayle with you before somebody relates the one about
Algore gettin' lost in the woods. G'wan, now!
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
Paul Havemann (Internet: pa...@hsh.com)
* They're not just opinions -- they're caffeine for the brain! *
** (Up to 50 milligrams per cynical observation.) **
Recommended Minimum Daily Requirement: 1,000 mg. Keep reading.
Herbert Rutledge
kru...@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (theodore r krueger) shows what can
happen when you forget to edit alt.fan.rush-limbo from the Newsgroups
line:
|> Voting for Bush/Quayle is only a stoop for those of us who voted for
|> Ronaldus Magnus (President Reagan for you democrats). Voting for
|> Bush/Quayle would have been a step up for those of you who voted for
|> the Clinons. ^^^^^ ^^^
^^^ ^^^^^^^
Obviously, by using a write-in vote.
--
_________________________________________________________________________
| | |
| Herbert Rutledge, aka Train | |
| Paramax Systems Corporation | "To post is human; to flame, divine." |
| Valley Forge Labs, M/S GVL-3 | |
| P.O. Box 517, Paoli, PA 19301 | ---Alexander Pope |
| Internet: tr...@vfl.paramax.com | |
|_________________________________|_______________________________________|
bhj...@carina.unm.edu
the ones who hyped the "non-HIV AIDS" story, which still brings
so much amusement to the medical community?
Turns out that there is a lot more "medical evidence" that HIV-1
has been infecting humans for no more than a few decades.
I don't know what this has to do with Rush or Danno, tho.
Brian
pat walsh
>Voting for Bush/Quayle is only a stoop for those of us who voted for
>Ronaldus Magnus (President Reagan for you democrats). Voting for
>Bush/Quayle would have been a step up for those of you who voted for
>the Clinons.
If the RRWTRN passes in the forest, and no one's there to hear it, does it
make a sound?
- Patrick Walsh
University of Virginia Department of Physics
p...@virginia.bitnet, p...@virginia.edu, p...@gomez.phys.virginia.edu
pat walsh
>Voting for Bush/Quayle is only a stoop for those of us who voted for
>Ronaldus Magnus (President Reagan for you democrats). Voting for
>Bush/Quayle would have been a step up for those of you who voted for
>the Clinons.
^^^^^^^
Hey! I've never voted for a Klingon in my life!
(That is what you meant, isn't it? :-))
Paul J. Sanchez
>Sunil Gupta writes:
>
>>Have you ever seen any female ditto-heads? One wonders how the species
>>reproduces.
>
>I suppose they wait for a signal from Rush. :-)
>
>- Patrick Walsh
No, they do it by screwing minorities whenever possible.
ja...@cas.org
>> I wrote:
>>
>>>> You can say that but the numbers prove you to be pitifully WRONG! 160
>>>>cases in the last year is barely a smoldering cigarette butt. You might
>>>>call it a wildfire it you would like but I reserve the right to call you
>>>>crazy!!! 8-)))))
>>
The number of cases does not itself indicate an epidemic. The
important point is the ratio of the number of cases in two
periods. If the number of cases in one (week, month, year)
is 3-5-fold greater than in the control (week, month, year)
then it is classified as an epidemic if the disease is already
known to occur sporadically in the population of interest.
That's elementary epidemiology.
Alec Chambers
Jason K. Schechner
>In article <1993Mar31....@VFL.Paramax.COM>, tr...@gvls2.vfl.paramax.com (Herbert Rutledge) writes:
>>
>> Oh, for crying out loud. If you want examples of stupid utterances from
>> cabinet members, look no further than Bush's Secretary of the Interior.
>> Shalala looks like Cicero when compared to Luhan.
>
>*snort*chuckle* Ho ho, we got another humorless so-and-so. Hey, chum, if
>you want the right to dish it out, you gotta be able to _take_ it, too. Now
>off to alt.fan.dan-quayle with you before somebody relates the one about
>Algore gettin' lost in the woods. G'wan, now!
Well, first of all our current VP has 2 (wow! Amazing!) names:
'Al' and 'Gore'. Not 'Gorey Al' though many RRWTRNers have proposed
this, thinking themselves witty and cute. Wrongo. I will admit that
getting lost in the woods was a stupid thing to do. As was saying "a
leapard can't change its spots" or whatever the actual quote is. If
you want to stretch humor to its limits you could even say his not
paying attention to the tour-guide at Moticello then asking exactly
what the guy had just explained ("Who are these gentlemen?") might be
considered funny. Very well. You republicons now have 3 things to
put in your Al Gore quote file. If you want to _really_ feel good
about yourself you can even put Shalala's quote in there. Hell - put
all the silly quotes by Democrats in there. I'll be you 100:1 that
the entire file won't be 1/10th the size of the file we've got on Dan
Quayle. If you want to play on an even court we'll throw in quotes
from other republicolons, but considering that we'll use Reagan and
Bush you all don't stand a chance. But I invite you to give it your
best shot. (this ought to be good).
I assure you, we can take it. We just don't think of a person
as a total zero until he/she does something like a)keep his foot
permanently parked in his mouth, b)fall asleep at MAJOR state affairs,
c)totally screw over this country, etc etc etc
Get started now. You all may actually have a file >10k by the
year 2000!
>Paul Havemann (Internet: pa...@hsh.com)
^^^^^^^^
Unfrozen Haveman Lawyer? ;-)
>
> * They're not just opinions -- they're caffeine for the brain! *
> ** (Up to 50 milligrams per cynical observation.) **
> Recommended Minimum Daily Requirement: 1,000 mg. Keep reading.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jeez this is one arogant SOB! He's almost as arrogant and
brain-dead as Rush! ;-)
-Jason
--
"I sneak in my own house... it's 4 in the morning... I've had too much to
drink... said I was out with the boys... I sneak in my bedroom... slip
into bed... I know if I wake her, I'll wake up.... DEAD!"
-Dave Mustaine
Bob Rahe
>>In article <1phrsn...@apache.dtcc.edu> b...@hobbes.dtcc.edu (Bob Rahe) writes:
!>>>> You can say that but the numbers prove you to be pitifully WRONG! 160
!>>>>cases in the last year is barely a smoldering cigarette butt. You might
!>>>>call it a wildfire it you would like but I reserve the right to call you
!>>>>crazy!!! 8-)))))
> The number of cases does not itself indicate an epidemic. The
> important point is the ratio of the number of cases in two
> periods. If the number of cases in one (week, month, year)
> is 3-5-fold greater than in the control (week, month, year)
> then it is classified as an epidemic if the disease is already
> known to occur sporadically in the population of interest.
> That's elementary epidemiology.
> Alec Chambers
So then if there is a decrease from 170 to 160 in a year, that would
pretty much rule out an epidemic I guess (which is what I said). For one,
it isn't greater, and two, the change isn't 3-5 fold.
(There's gotta be some lower limit to that tho. I mean if it went
from 1 to 5 in a year, you wouldn't call it an epidemic, would you??)
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Bob Rahe, Delaware Tech&Comm College | AIDS, Drugs, Abortion: - |
Eric Smith
>Turns out that there is a lot more "medical evidence" that HIV-1
>has been infecting humans for no more than a few decades.
Care to present any? Or is this another case of an all-opinions,
no-evidence statement?
-----
Eric Smith | The day Dan Quayle is our President is the day
er...@netcom.com | Shelley Winters runs with the bulls in Pamplona.
er...@infoserv.com | - Dennis Miller
CI$: 70262,3610 |
EMIL CHUCK
#pa...@hsh.com writes:
#>tr...@gvls2.vfl.paramax.com (Herbert Rutledge) writes:
#>>
#>> Oh, for crying out loud. If you want examples of stupid utterances from
#>> cabinet members, look no further than Bush's Secretary of the Interior.
#>> Shalala looks like Cicero when compared to Luhan.
#>
#>*snort*chuckle* Ho ho, we got another humorless so-and-so. Hey, chum, if
#>you want the right to dish it out, you gotta be able to _take_ it, too. Now
#>off to alt.fan.dan-quayle with you before somebody relates the one about
#>Algore gettin' lost in the woods. G'wan, now!
# ^^^^^^
# Well, first of all our current VP has 2 (wow! Amazing!) names:
#'Al' and 'Gore'. Not 'Gorey Al' though many RRWTRNers have proposed
#this, thinking themselves witty and cute. Wrongo. I will admit that
#getting lost in the woods was a stupid thing to do. As was saying "a
#leapard can't change its spots" or whatever the actual quote is. If
#you want to stretch humor to its limits you could even say his not
#paying attention to the tour-guide at Moticello then asking exactly
#what the guy had just explained ("Who are these gentlemen?") might be
#considered funny. Very well. You republicons now have 3 things to
#put in your Al Gore quote file. If you want to _really_ feel good
#about yourself you can even put Shalala's quote in there. Hell - put
#all the silly quotes by Democrats in there. I'll be you 100:1 that
#the entire file won't be 1/10th the size of the file we've got on Dan
#Quayle. If you want to play on an even court we'll throw in quotes
#from other republicolons, but considering that we'll use Reagan and
#Bush you all don't stand a chance. But I invite you to give it your
#best shot. (this ought to be good).
Does my Clinton flip-flop file count?
# I assure you, we can take it. We just don't think of a person
#as a total zero until he/she does something like a)keep his foot
#permanently parked in his mouth, b)fall asleep at MAJOR state affairs,
#c)totally screw over this country, etc etc etc
Wait. Didn't Donna Shalala fall asleep at one of the heralded "Health
Care Task Force" town meetings last month? I think this happened in
Michigan.
If you can take it, great. Just make sure your guys don't screw up the
country.
# Get started now. You all may actually have a file >10k by the
#year 2000!
Why don't you ftp the Clinton jokes file from (I think it's)
cathouse.uiuc.edu? It's quite huge as it is. I also have a HUGE file
containing Top Ten lists written by Ed Ipser on another group of
newsgroups. It's definitely over 10K. Finally, I'm still working on
updating my White House Menu, which is coming close to 20K.
--
And so, the rubber spheroid arced beneath the brilliant lights.
Headed for a hoop of dreams he'd dreamt of all those nights.
The crowd gasped as the ball descended; Would it grant their fondest wish?
There was no doubt in FISHER's mind, He knew WEBBER took a time-out.
Sunil Gupta
Ah yes, no doubt they are the product of anal sex.
Sunil Gupta
: Voting for Bush/Quayle is only a stoop for those of us who voted for
: Ronaldus Magnus (President Reagan for you democrats). Voting for
^^^^^^
Sorry, it's President Penis for us Democrats <snicker>.
Alexandre Pechtchanski
>
>In article <93092.17...@CUNYVM.BITNET>, Alexandre Pechtchanski
><AP...@CUNYVM.BITNET> writes...
>>In article <1993Apr2.1...@den.mmc.com>, si...@possum.den.mmc.com (John
>>Sims) says:
>>>pmol...@unix1.tcd.ie (Paul Moloney) writes:
>
>[stuff deleted]
>
>Pardon me for asking, but what does this discussion have to do
>with either the Danster of Rush boy?
You are right! I apologize! Shame on me for two reasons:
- trying to convince a.f.r-l fans with reason and (even more shameful)
- perpetuating serious discussion _without ANY reference to our glorious
ex-vice-president_ into a.f.d-q.
I'm really sorry and promise _never do that again }8-|
BTW, did my notes about Dan Quayle Virus made it to the net? I saw them
here at CUNYVM, but it nobody showed his/her appreciation of groving
glory (should I say post-humous?) of our boy. I wonder... RRWTRN at
work?
-------
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Alex Pechtchanski, GCRC System Manager Phone: (212) 241-1804
Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York º-------------------------
internet: des...@msvax.mssm.edu º#include <std.disclaimer>
bitnet: appms@cunyvm º
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Opinions? If you find one, please let me know...
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
THE SKY ALREADY FELL. NOW WHAT?
>In article <1993Mar31....@VFL.Paramax.COM>, tr...@gvls2.vfl.paramax.com (Herbert Rutledge) writes:
>> In article <C4py4...@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, kk...@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu
>> (koppenhoefer kyle cramm) writes:
>> |> Bet you didn't hear this piece of stupidity on the news ( wonder why? ).
>>
>> Oh, for crying out loud. If you want examples of stupid utterances from
>> cabinet members, look no further than Bush's Secretary of the Interior.
>> Shalala looks like Cicero when compared to Luhan.
>
>*snort*chuckle* Ho ho, we got another humorless so-and-so. Hey, chum, if
>you want the right to dish it out, you gotta be able to _take_ it, too.
A.f.d-q and alt.fan.rush-lameboy have always had this "special" relationship.
The a.f.d-q'ers dish it out, and the dittoheads take it. I think it works
out quite well.
> Now
>off to alt.fan.dan-quayle with you before somebody relates the one about
>Algore gettin' lost in the woods. G'wan, now!
^^^^^^
Who is this Algore guy that you ditto heads keep talking about? Is he related
to this Clinon guy?
>Paul Havemann (Internet: pa...@hsh.com)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"At that moment the bottom fell out of Authur's mind. Garrett Johnson
His eyes turned inside out. His feet began to leak out Gar...@Ingres.com
of the top of his head. The room folded flat around him,
spun around, shifted out of existence and left him sliding
into his own naval." - Douglas Adams
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
keba...@msuvx1.memst.edu
Well, while we're doing juvenile humor here...
What's one of the possible interpretations of the phrase SLICK WILLIE?
And why is he screwing up the country? (Phonetic humor)
--See, I didn't even use any naughty words. "Butthead."-B. Tannen--
*.x,*dna**************************************************************
*(==) Ken Barnes, LifeSci Bldg. * Conservative libertarians *
* \' KEBA...@memstvx1.memst.edu * for Pro-Balance! *
*(-)**Memphis,TN********7532...@compuserve.com**********************
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by
little statesmen and philosophers and divines."--Ralph Waldo Emerson
gar...@ingres.com
>In article <1993Apr2.1...@VFL.Paramax.COM> tr...@gvls2.vfl.paramax.com (Herbert Rutledge) writes:
>>Scott Alfter of the Skunk Works writes:
>>|> (Makes me wonder why I even bothered responding to this message...I
>>|> was about to insert a TNG quote about Q, Worf, and the consumption of
>>|> printed matter...but I'd rather not stoop to your level. :-P )
>>
>> Why not? You stooped to voting for George Bush and Dan Quayle.
>
>Voting for Bush/Quayle is only a stoop for those of us who voted for
>Ronaldus Magnus (President Reagan for you democrats).
OOOHHHH! Secret nicknames! Do you have a secret handshake too?! Do I need
to be part of Skulls and Bones to be a member?
>Voting for
>Bush/Quayle would have been a step up for those of you who voted for
>the Clinons.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
I must have missed him on the ballot. What was his platform?
Peace with the Federation? Did Picard endorse him?
>Ted
> ----- kru...@gas.uug.arizona.edu -----
THE SKY ALREADY FELL. NOW WHAT?
>Ted Krueger writes:
>>Voting for Bush/Quayle is only a stoop for those of us who voted for
>>Ronaldus Magnus (President Reagan for you democrats). Voting for
>>Bush/Quayle would have been a step up for those of you who voted for
>>the Clinons.
>
>If the RRWTRN passes in the forest, and no one's there to hear it, does it
>make a sound?
I was there when it passed. I didn't hear it. But then I only listen to
things that make sense.
>
>- Patrick Walsh
> University of Virginia Department of Physics
> p...@virginia.bitnet, p...@virginia.edu, p...@gomez.phys.virginia.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Brown
>off to alt.fan.dan-quayle with you before somebody relates the one about
>Algore gettin' lost in the woods. G'wan, now!
You mean really want to relate that ONE story again. You guys really don't
have much material to work with do you? Have you ever seen the quote file on
Quayle? It would just make you green with envy. Now crawl back to
alt.fan.rush-l before some sends it to you and uses up all your computer
account space.
>
===============================================================================
|Gregory Brown | "God is, as it were, the sewer |
|Department of Philosophy | into which all contradictions flow" |
|University of Houston | |
|Houston, TX 77204-3785 | --G.W.F. Hegel |
|GBR...@JETSON.UH.EDU | Lectures on the History of Philosophy |
===============================================================================
Elizabeth G. Levy
> If you want to _really_ feel good
>about yourself you can even put Shalala's quote in there. Hell - put
>all the silly quotes by Democrats in there. I'll be you 100:1 that
>the entire file won't be 1/10th the size of the file we've got on Dan
>Quayle. If you want to play on an even court we'll throw in quotes
>from other republicolons, but considering that we'll use Reagan and
>Bush you all don't stand a chance. But I invite you to give it your
>best shot. (this ought to be good).
I'd be careful, Jason. Don't you remember how they constructed 128
tax hikes for Clinton during the campaign, and kept on repeating it in
that Big Lie kinda way?
bhj...@carina.unm.edu
>bhj...@carina.unm.edu () writes:
>
>>Turns out that there is a lot more "medical evidence" that HIV-1
>>has been infecting humans for no more than a few decades.
>
>Care to present any? Or is this another case of an all-opinions,
>no-evidence statement?
>
(archived) serum samples, involving HIV antibody testing
of sera collected for other purposes. The oldest known positive
sera are two from Zaire, 1959. A Manchester seaman was believed
to have had AIDS in 1959. Do you have *any* examples of seropositive
people *before* 1959? Didn't think so.
Brian
Bob Rahe
>I'd be careful, Jason. Don't you remember how they constructed 128
>tax hikes for Clinton during the campaign, and kept on repeating it in
>that Big Lie kinda way?
Were those the same 128 tax hikes that Clinton&Clinton argued weren't
there, picked apart and came up with a 'correct list' which had... 132?
Oh, THAT list.... Does that count?
BTW, AGAIN, Bush/Quayle/etc. were wrong. It turns out it wasn't 128 or
even 132. (Try BIGGER!) Sorta like the $30,000 and up for tax hits that
wasn't there either.... Hmmmmm.... I guess we just need to recognize our
diversity - Reps. had Quayle saying stupid things in public, and you have
a big file to prove it, Dems have Clinton&Clinton lying in public, and we
have the big file to prove it (supplied by clinton-campaign.org no less).
Ahhhh, I love the smell of diversity in the morning...... ;-))
Jason K. Schechner
>In article <1993Apr5.1...@hsh.com>, pa...@hsh.com writes:
>>off to alt.fan.dan-quayle with you before somebody relates the one about
>>Algore gettin' lost in the woods. G'wan, now!
>
>You mean really want to relate that ONE story again. You guys really don't
>have much material to work with do you? Have you ever seen the quote file on
>Quayle? It would just make you green with envy. Now crawl back to
>alt.fan.rush-l before some sends it to you and uses up all your computer
>account space.
Done. I posted the quote file to a.f.r-l and alt.r-l
yesterday. I'm surprised that I didn't find my mailbox swamped with
people threatening to 'enlighten' me <chuckle>. I also sent it to the
limbot who said something about having as many Clinton JOKES as we
have Quayle QUOTES. What a loser. Well, he's got his own copy of the
quote file now.
I wonder, maybe they haven't tried flamming me because they're
all off reading it? Shyeah, righ! Doesn't matter anyway, my computer
has a nice thick coat of asbestos.
Eric Smith
>In article <1993Apr7.0...@news.columbia.edu> eg...@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>>I'd be careful, Jason. Don't you remember how they constructed 128
>>tax hikes for Clinton during the campaign, and kept on repeating it in
>>that Big Lie kinda way?
> Were those the same 128 tax hikes that Clinton&Clinton argued weren't
>there, picked apart and came up with a 'correct list' which had... 132?
>Oh, THAT list.... Does that count?
> BTW, AGAIN, Bush/Quayle/etc. were wrong. It turns out it wasn't 128 or
>even 132. (Try BIGGER!)
Wow Elizabeth, I see what you mean! To paraphrase a famous ex-president,
"there they go again ... "
-----
Eric Smith | "My friends, no matter how rough the road may be,
er...@netcom.com | we can and we will, never, never surrender
er...@infoserv.com | to what is right."
CI$: 70262,3610 | - J. Danforth Quayle
Eric Smith
> I wonder, maybe they haven't tried flamming me because they're
^^^^^^^^
>all off reading it? Shyeah, righ!
^^^^
Been studying at the Dan Quayle Skool of Korect Speling, Jason?
-----
Eric Smith |
er...@netcom.com | "Golf is key to understanding the Vice President"
er...@infoserv.com | - close aide to Dan Quayle
CI$: 70262,3610 |
Eric Smith
>er...@netcom.com (Eric Smith) writes:
>>bhj...@carina.unm.edu () writes:
That's your "evidence"?? Says who? Heck, I can do that too: I know
somebody who heard a rumor that there was a report that at least
three people had the HIV virus back in Cairo, Illinois in the 1940's.
It was a housewife, a Baptist preacher and a retired admiral. They
used to take it to school on "show-and-tell" days and bring it to
minor league baseball games to throw out the first pitch. People came
from miles around. He swears it's true!
Man, I sure am getting tired of these posts filled with "facts" for
which there's absolutely no reference. I already said that my statements
were based on the Newsweek article. Go read it. Heck, I don't know if
it's a reliable reference, but it's sure better than your non-reference.
-----
Eric Smith
er...@netcom.com
er...@infoserv.com
CI$: 70262,3610