Pull tabs and dialysis
mic...@hotmail.com
Excuse me if this information is not new. I've searched the Deja.com
archives for 'pull tabs' and none of the posts I read referred to it and
nor does the FAQ.
I'm a net-wandering dialysis patient who has often enjoyed lurking in AFU
and reading the AFU website. I had read the 'pull tabs' pages some time
ago and so when someone mentioned 'pull tabs for dialysis time' in a
patients' forum called 'Dialysis Online!' I said that it was listed as an
AFU urban legend and I doubted there was anything to it. One person
reminded me of Ronald McDonald House (also mentioned on the Pacific
Metals webpage referred to below) and someone else described a place
called Camp Dialysun in Ontario which benefits from pull tab fundraising.
Here is that second reply (from a fellow called 'joe'):
"Mick,
I have some info regarding the pop can tabs for you.
In 1984 a woman named Sharon Pentecost came up with an idea to collect
pop can tabs to help children with kidney disease go to camp. With the
help of the Lions club, a total of $30 000 dollars (by 1997) has been
presented to the Kidney Foundation to send kids to camp.
The tabs are taken to a recycler and are weighed. You get a $ amount per
pound.
The camp is called Dialysun, and is located in Ontario. At the camp the
children (ages 8 - 15) learn more about their treatment, special dietary
needs and exercise options. The cost of going to camp is $3000 per child,
without this program many would not be able to go.
I don't know if this is available world wide. I live in British Columbia,
Canada.
I can give you a phone number to call if you would like more info."
I'm in Australia and not immediately keen to phone Canada so I did some
searches for 'Dialysun' and got four hits.
A metals and recycling company in Vancouver BC has a page on its website
regarding pull tabs funding Camp Dialysun, a camp for children with renal
(kidney) disease. They list the person to contact for more info as Sharon
Pentecost and provide phone numbers. I e-mailed them to ask for further
information but haven't received a reply.
URL: http://www.pacificmetals.bc.ca/Pulltabs.html
The second hit was a webpage called 'Racing Angels'. Under the heading
'Kids in Canada go to camp' is the following entry;
"I live in Canada. My local chapter of the Kidney Foundation collected
$8000 last year from pull tabs (60 cents/pound). It doesn't go towards
dialysis "time", the money raised goes toward sending kids with kidney
disease to a camp called Dialysun. If anyone has any questions please
contact me at rbi...@sprint.ca"
URL: http://www.racingangels.org/lablels.html
I wrote to the e-mail address asking for more information (I'd like to do
what I can for kids with renal disease in my own area) or a further
contact and the poster was kind enough to reply immediately. I'll only
quote the relevant parts;
"...you can call The Kidney Foundation of Canada BC Branch at 736-9775 or
1-800-567-8112 if you are within British Columbia. I don't know if this
program is done world wide. It is done in Canada. I guess you would have
to find a recycler that would take the pull tabs for a dollar amount per
pound.
The camp is for children between the ages of 8 to 15 with kidney disease
or other related disorders. I believe there are dialysis facilities
there, however I don't know for sure. They also learn more about their
treatment, special dietary needs and exercise options. The camp is
located in Ontario, Canada. The cost is approximately $3000 per child."
The third hit was an article from the online version of the Toronto
Mirror/Guardian describing the camp. Here it says that they take kids
ages 8-18 but add a few more details (and the 'human element', of
course).
http://www.mirror-guardian.com/com330.html
The fourth hit was a page which lists health agencies. Their listing for
the Kidney Foundation of Canada (Windsor and District Chapter) includes
the following sentences; "The foundation provides an opportunity for
patients to enjoy a holiday away from home and still receive necessary
treatment at dialysis camps. The two camps offered are Lions Camp Dorset
for adults and families, and Camp Dialysun for children."
Okay, mentions on four apparently reputable webpages, consistent details
from five sources, I'd say there's something worth looking into here.
Some uncertainty about whether dialysis treatment is directly offered on-
site (althought the Kidney Foundation of Canada entry seems to make that
pretty clear). Some doubt about whether the pull-tab funds could be said
to 'pay for dialysis time' if you want to be a semantically anal
retentive pedant. On this information it still might not be 100%
scientific truth to say "Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected &
exchanged for dialysis machine time" but I'd be loathe to say it's 100%
falsehood as the AFU FAQ currently does. If any of the people who go need
dialysis and that expense is covered (or even partly covered) by the
fundraising then it would be fair enough to say that pull-tabs are paying
for dialysis time, whether on-site or not. These people can't holiday
_without_ dialysis, they'd die, so it has to be provided somehow.
I hope someone closer to BC (or who doesn't care about their phone bill)
will ring to check this out. If this results in a FAQ change I'd
appreciate being listed and would ask that joe and Rhonda are also
mentioned.
Mick.
--
"Many a mickle makes a muckle".
anon-...@anon.twwells.com
mic...@hotmail.com
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Richard Brandt
> "Mick,
> I have some info regarding the pop can tabs for you.
> In 1984 a woman named Sharon Pentecost came up with an idea to collect
> pop can tabs to help children with kidney disease go to camp. With the
> help of the Lions club, a total of $30 000 dollars (by 1997) has been
> presented to the Kidney Foundation to send kids to camp.
So over 13 years, an unknown number of donors had contributed $30,000
worth of pull tabs...
> The tabs are taken to a recycler and are weighed. You get a $ amount per
> pound.
So the tabs are exchanged at a recycling center for cash. (Hardly
news, that.) In no way can it be said they are exchanged for dialysis
time at any facility that provides same.
> The camp is called Dialysun, and is located in Ontario. At the camp the
> children (ages 8 - 15) learn more about their treatment, special dietary
> needs and exercise options. The cost of going to camp is $3000 per child,
> without this program many would not be able to go.
So in 13 years the tabs raised enough money to send ten children?
Then another cite which confirms that tabs, or even the money
collected from them, doesn't go towards dialysis time, to wit:
> "I live in Canada. My local chapter of the Kidney Foundation collected
> $8000 last year from pull tabs (60 cents/pound). It doesn't go towards
> dialysis "time", the money raised goes toward sending kids with kidney
> disease to a camp called Dialysun. If anyone has any questions please
> contact me at rbi...@sprint.ca"
> URL: http://www.racingangels.org/lablels.html
Another cite groundlessly speculates that there might even be
dialysis facilities at the camps:
> The camp is for children between the ages of 8 to 15 with kidney disease
> or other related disorders. I believe there are dialysis facilities
> there, however I don't know for sure.
Our author finally sums up:
> Some doubt about whether the pull-tab funds could be said
> to 'pay for dialysis time' if you want to be a semantically anal
> retentive pedant. On this information it still might not be 100%
> scientific truth to say "Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected &
> exchanged for dialysis machine time" but I'd be loathe to say it's 100%
> falsehood as the AFU FAQ currently does.
Call me anal retentive if you will. Is "collected" a traditional
part of the UL as opposed to "saved"? In any case you're missing
the major intermediate step, in which the tabs must first have
been exchanged for cash (at least until such time as recycling
centers volunteered to make contributions to the camps in lieu
of paying you cash for your tabs). That would be like saying
"Pull tabs can be exchanged for a Ferrari" or "Pull tabs can
be exchanged for a pizza and a six-pack" because you could use
the money for those, too. (We've already heard cites of people
collecting pull-tabs and saving the cash they get at recycling
centers to buy wheelchairs. That doesn't mean anyone is offering
to exchange pull-tabs for wheelchairs, either.)
> If any of the people who go need
> dialysis and that expense is covered (or even partly covered) by the
> fundraising then it would be fair enough to say that pull-tabs are paying
> for dialysis time, whether on-site or not. These people can't holiday
> _without_ dialysis, they'd die, so it has to be provided somehow.
Saying that money raised from selling pull tabs has been used
to send children to a camp which might or might not offer
dialysis onsite is hardly the same as saying that pull tabs have
been exchanged for dialysis. For one thing, the latter conjures
up images of a patient showing up for treatment with a dixie cup
or a bucket full of pull tabs hoping to exchange it for dialysis
time, whereas collating the information you provided suggests
that a coordinated group effort over more than a decade would be
required merely to send a group of ten children to camp for one
summer. For another, you don't consider whether Ms. Pentecost's
idea might have been inspired by hearing false tales of pull-tab
exchange; regardless, her devising a vaguely similar but far
from identical scheme does not validate the initial UL.
Saying your cites confidently demonstrate that "Pull tabs can
be exchanged for dialysis time" is not far from my saying that,
having recently seen Nicolas Cage in 8MM, we can be fairly
confident that if money had not been forthcoming to send these
poor children to camp and/or buy them dialysis time, they would
have been sold off to exploitation film producers for use as
snuff actors.
Richard "Plot holes you could drive James Gandolfini through" Brandt
--
=== Richard Brandt is at http://www.zenation.com/rsbrandt ===
"If you want entertainment you get two hookers and an 8-ball.
Film is too powerful a medium for just that." -- Sean Penn
Don Whittington
(snip all Richard's excellent points)
> Saying your cites confidently demonstrate that "Pull tabs can
> be exchanged for dialysis time" is not far from my saying that,
> having recently seen Nicolas Cage in 8MM, we can be fairly
> confident that if money had not been forthcoming to send these
> poor children to camp and/or buy them dialysis time, they would
> have been sold off to exploitation film producers for use as
> snuff actors.
You can get money for used cans. That is true. There is no special
talismanic value to pull tabs, which don't even exist anymore in the USA
as they did when the UL started.
Are there organizations which bow to the power of the UL and accept
aluminum cans and their parts? Absolutely.
Don "Why the hell not? Money is money." Whittington
mic...@hotmail.com
>
> > "Mick,
> > I have some info regarding the pop can tabs for you.
> > In 1984 a woman named Sharon Pentecost came up with an idea to collect
> > pop can tabs to help children with kidney disease go to camp. With the
> > help of the Lions club, a total of $30 000 dollars (by 1997) has been
> > presented to the Kidney Foundation to send kids to camp.
>
> So over 13 years, an unknown number of donors had contributed $30,000
> worth of pull tabs...
...according to that post.
> > The tabs are taken to a recycler and are weighed. You get a $ amount per
> > pound.
>
> So the tabs are exchanged at a recycling center for cash. (Hardly
> news, that.) In no way can it be said they are exchanged for dialysis
> time at any facility that provides same.
Where in the AFU FAQ statement of the UL does it say anything about a
facility? Perhaps the poster was not describing the picture well and the
recycler simply takes the tabs and pays the relevant body the relevant
sum if you tell them that's what the tabs are for. Did you even bother to
check the Pacific Metals page? "All proceeds from Pull-Tab collections go
directly towards sending kids with kidney disease to Camp Dialysun."
Exactly what that means we will only know if someone checks it out
further but it does not seem to indicate simply that 'the tabs are
exchanged at a recycling centre for cash'.
> > The camp is called Dialysun, and is located in Ontario. At the camp the
> > children (ages 8 - 15) learn more about their treatment, special dietary
> > needs and exercise options. The cost of going to camp is $3000 per child,
> > without this program many would not be able to go.
>
> So in 13 years the tabs raised enough money to send ten children?
...according to that post. BTW, why did you find this particular
mathematical note significant? I mean, very clever and all to divide
30,000 by 3,000 but what's the relevance of ten children being sent?
> Then another cite which confirms that tabs, or even the money
> collected from them, doesn't go towards dialysis time, to wit:
'confirms'? This was posted on a webpage and an e-mail address provided.
I wrote to the e-mail address and received a reply which you quoted in
part below, which stated something different again - the uncertain
'belief' that there are dialysis facilities available. If you're happy to
take one post on the net as 'confirmation' when the same e-mail address
provides a different opinion (see below) a little later I've _definitely_
got a bridge to sell you.
> > "I live in Canada. My local chapter of the Kidney Foundation collected
> > $8000 last year from pull tabs (60 cents/pound). It doesn't go towards
> > dialysis "time", the money raised goes toward sending kids with kidney
> > disease to a camp called Dialysun. If anyone has any questions please
> > contact me at rbi...@sprint.ca"
> > URL: http://www.racingangels.org/lablels.html
>
> Another cite groundlessly speculates that there might even be
> dialysis facilities at the camps:
This 'another cite' was from the same e-mail address as the previous
'cite'. Your statement that this cite 'groundlessly speculates' is a
conclusion based on little or no evidence. Apparently (as you'd know if
if you'd bothered checking) the person in question has renal disease and
lives where this program is said to take place. That suggests _some_
grounds for their speculation.
> > The camp is for children between the ages of 8 to 15 with kidney disease
> > or other related disorders. I believe there are dialysis facilities
> > there, however I don't know for sure.
And even though you respond to cites apparently from individuals which
expressed doubt or contradiction of the idea that dialysis time is
provided at the camps you snipped the sentences attributed to a national
organisation which strongly suggested that dialysis time is provided at
the camps ('receive necessary treatment at dialysis camps'). Is that also
'groundless speculation'? Better get that selective tunnel vision
checked.
> Our author finally sums up:
>
> > Some doubt about whether the pull-tab funds could be said
> > to 'pay for dialysis time' if you want to be a semantically anal
> > retentive pedant. On this information it still might not be 100%
> > scientific truth to say "Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected &
> > exchanged for dialysis machine time" but I'd be loathe to say it's 100%
> > falsehood as the AFU FAQ currently does.
>
> Call me anal retentive if you will.
As you like :)
Is "collected" a traditional
> part of the UL as opposed to "saved"?
I quoted it from the FAQ: "Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected &
exchanged for dialysis machine time".
In any case you're missing
> the major intermediate step, in which the tabs must first have
> been exchanged for cash (at least until such time as recycling
> centers volunteered to make contributions to the camps in lieu
> of paying you cash for your tabs).
Perhaps that is what happens with this company called 'Pacific Metals';
from the information I've seen that seems to be so but I don't know the
exact process and don't suggest that anyone concludes this without
checking - I provided the phone numbers so anyone without blinkers on
might check it for themselves. Since the Pacific Metals webpage says "All
proceeds from Pull-Tab collections go directly towards sending kids with
kidney disease to Camp Dialysun" I don't see why we should conclude that
exchange for cash is necessary.
That would be like saying
> "Pull tabs can be exchanged for a Ferrari" or "Pull tabs can
> be exchanged for a pizza and a six-pack" because you could use
> the money for those, too. (We've already heard cites of people
> collecting pull-tabs and saving the cash they get at recycling
> centers to buy wheelchairs. That doesn't mean anyone is offering
> to exchange pull-tabs for wheelchairs, either.)
Is there a company saying "All proceeds from Pull-Tab collections go
directly towards a Ferrari" or a place called 'Camp Ferrari' where some
people are sponsored to stay and given a Ferrari if they're lucky enough
to be chosen?
> > If any of the people who go need
> > dialysis and that expense is covered (or even partly covered) by the
> > fundraising then it would be fair enough to say that pull-tabs are paying
> > for dialysis time, whether on-site or not. These people can't holiday
> > _without_ dialysis, they'd die, so it has to be provided somehow.
>
> Saying that money raised from selling pull tabs has been used
> to send children to a camp which might or might not offer
> dialysis onsite is hardly the same as saying that pull tabs have
> been exchanged for dialysis.
Did someone suggest it was the same? I'm suggesting they're hardly polar
opposites and similar enough that the UL as stated in the FAQ is hardly
'100% falsehood'. Try looking at it from the point of view of someone who
needs dialysis. They can't have a holiday without dialysis; this program
gives them a place where they can have a holiday since it provides
necessary treatment. The pull tab sponsorship pays for their dialysis
time and their holiday at the camp.
For one thing, the latter conjures
> up images of a patient showing up for treatment with a dixie cup
> or a bucket full of pull tabs hoping to exchange it for dialysis
> time,
Thanks for volunteering what your rather gullible imagination 'conjures
up'. BTW, did you know that the word 'gullible' appears in no major
dictionary? I was more interested in what is actually stated in the FAQ
than in delusions about dialysis patients scrabbling through litter bins
for the few extra pull tabs needed to survive another day. If the above
is the UL you want to discuss then state it as such; "Patients can show
up with a dixie cup or bucket full of pull tabs and exchange it for
dialysis time". That is not what the FAQ statement says and the
interpretation of 'exchange' is loose enough that given the information
available - if it checks out - the FAQ statement is poorly characterised
as '100% falsehood'.
whereas collating the information you provided suggests
> that a coordinated group effort over more than a decade would be
> required merely to send a group of ten children to camp for one
> summer.
So? A more rational suggestion from the information is that since 1984
ten kids with kidney disease have been sponsored for a holiday at a camp
which provides treatment, according to comments attributed to the Kidney
Foundation of Canada. Further than that strikes me as unwarranted
speculation - I don't remember any suggestion, for instance, that
sponsored children attend in a single group on a single occasion. Again,
why the word 'merely'? What is the significance of ten children being
sent in one summer rather than a hundred or a thousand during two or more
separate summers?
For another, you don't consider whether Ms. Pentecost's
> idea might have been inspired by hearing false tales of pull-tab
> exchange; regardless, her devising a vaguely similar but far
> from identical scheme does not validate the initial UL.
Has anyone suggested that it does 'validate the initial UL'? I haven't,
but apparently you would. If one post on the net 'confirms' in your mind
that dialysis time is not provided then I'd suggest the comments
attributed to the Kidney Foundation of Canada on a health agencies
webpage 'confirm' that dialysis time _is_ provided by the Pacific Metals
Camp Dialysun sponsorship. But then, I wouldn't be silly enough to
suggest your original 'confirmation' so I wouldn't go that far :)
> Saying your cites confidently demonstrate that "Pull tabs can
> be exchanged for dialysis time"
Oh, has someone here said that? Perhaps you think you're responding to
someone who said that; hmmmm, doesn't show up in my newsreader. Maybe
it's someone conjured up by your fertile imagination.
What _I_ said (and you quoted it yourself) was, "On this information it
still might not be 100% scientific truth to say "Aluminum ring pull tabs
are collected & exchanged for dialysis machine time" but I'd be loathe to
say it's 100% falsehood as the AFU FAQ currently does." Nowhere did I
say, suggest, infer or imply that the cites 'confidently demonstrate that
"Pull tabs can be exchanged for dialysis time"'. Tilt at windmills much?
I used the statement as in the FAQ and the definitions for F and T as in
the FAQ. Sounds like I'm not too confident that the sentence listed in
the FAQ _is_ 100% falsehood, not that I'm confident it _is_ 100%
scientific truth. Simply put, I'm saying the statement as listed in the
FAQ doesn't warrant an F, not that it warrants a T - or at least that
this program could be misconstrued by the statement used in the FAQ thus
the statement is a poor representation of the UL referred to.
I dislike the promulgation of harmful urban legends. In the AFU archives
regarding the Pull Tab UL Terry Chan is (I'm pleased to say) intelligent
and compassionate enough to warn that we don't 'throw out the baby with
the bathwater' and the AFU FAQ has, in this instance as in others, been
cautious to mention any substantial truth behind or related to an urban
legend. If you'd like to think you have the vaguest claim to credibility
or responsibility in your UL-ing (not that I suggest you do, of course,
it's entirely up to you) then ignoring a circumstance which could be
described - although poorly - by using the phrase "Aluminum ring pull
tabs are collected & exchanged for dialysis machine time" would not be
your chosen course. It would be sad indeed if people reject attempts to
collect pull tabs to help child dialysis patients on the basis that,
"It's all a bullshit urban legend, I read it in the AFU FAQ".
is not far from my saying that,
> having recently seen Nicolas Cage in 8MM, we can be fairly
> confident that if money had not been forthcoming to send these
> poor children to camp and/or buy them dialysis time, they would
> have been sold off to exploitation film producers for use as
> snuff actors.
Your imagination is well ahead of your capacity for reasoning. This
analogy doesn't even jump, let alone fly.
> Richard "Plot holes you could drive James Gandolfini through" Brandt
Mick "Bothers to respond to the text in front of him rather than whatever
his imagination conjures up".
mic...@hotmail.com
dun...@mindspring.com (Don Whittington) wrote:
> In article <389E5B64...@rgfn.epcc.edu>, rsbr...@netscape.net wrote:
>
They were mainly laughable since he appeared to be arguing against the
notion that "Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected & exchanged for
dialysis machine time" which I was not arguing _for_. I restrained myself
enough to reply with some degree of respect.
> > Saying your cites confidently demonstrate that "Pull tabs can
> > be exchanged for dialysis time"
...which again I will point out I did not say and again will repeat what
I _did_ say; "On this information it still might not be 100% scientific
truth to say "Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected & exchanged for
dialysis machine time" but I'd be loathe to say it's 100% falsehood as
the AFU FAQ currently does."
BTW, anyone want to volunteer what '100% scientific truth' means?
is not far from my saying that,
> > having recently seen Nicolas Cage in 8MM, we can be fairly
> > confident that if money had not been forthcoming to send these
> > poor children to camp and/or buy them dialysis time, they would
> > have been sold off to exploitation film producers for use as
> > snuff actors.
>
> You can get money for used cans. That is true. There is no special
> talismanic value to pull tabs, which don't even exist anymore in the USA
> as they did when the UL started.
When was that?
> Are there organizations which bow to the power of the UL and accept
> aluminum cans and their parts? Absolutely.
On the information posted the program in question has been running since
1984, is advertised by a recycling company and is recognised by the
Kidney Foundation of Canada. As far as that information suggests this is
not a matter of people begrudgingly bending to some mysterious
superstitious folkloric power but simply of a charity fundraising drive
involving patient support groups, the Lions Club and a metal recycler.
What's the big deal?
> Don "Why the hell not? Money is money." Whittington
Mick "A credible skeptic has to address their own biases".
JoAnne Schmitz
>What _I_ said (and you quoted it yourself) was, "On this information it
>still might not be 100% scientific truth to say "Aluminum ring pull tabs
>are collected & exchanged for dialysis machine time" but I'd be loathe to
>say it's 100% falsehood as the AFU FAQ currently does."
The FAQ says:
Stupid People Tricks
F.* Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected & exchanged for dialysis
machine time. ["Redemption Rumors" in TMP]
T. ...Some places or people (e.g., The Ronald McDonald House in
Rochester, MN) do collect tabs for their scrap value and raise $$ for
various causes.
T.* There are two Canadians who collect them for wheelchairs. See Fred
Ennis's article.
You say you bother to respond to the text in front of you rather than
whatever your imagination conjures up; the next step might be to read
all of it, not just part of it.
JoAnne "ring ring it's for you it's the kettle" Schmitz
---
"Oh. My. God. My mother is flaming people in AFU."
-- Harry MF Teasley, on alt.folklore.urban
Richard Brandt
> > > Saying your cites confidently demonstrate that "Pull tabs can
> > > be exchanged for dialysis time"
>
> truth to say "Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected & exchanged for
> dialysis machine time" but I'd be loathe to say it's 100% falsehood as
> the AFU FAQ currently does."
Don't be bashful, mick, come out and tell us what you really think.
Making an inordinate stretch to say that you could, possibly,
conceive of selling aluminum cans or parts thereof for money
and using that money to pay for something that might, or might
not, include dialysis, as being not *that* different from
exchanging pull tabs for dialysis, still doesn't add up to
making the UL some percentage truer than it was before.
That said, I'd like to commend you for some excellent research,
which reveals just how far you have to reach to find any
truth that even remotely resembles the traditional UL. Should
have when I aired my gripe before; sorry.
Richard "Good Deeds Unpunished" Brandt
Richard Brandt
> ...according to that post. BTW, why did you find this particular
> mathematical note significant? I mean, very clever and all to divide
> 30,000 by 3,000 but what's the relevance of ten children being sent?
Because, for me, stories of "exchanging pull-tabs for dialysis"
really do conjure up images of someone going to a treatment
center and swapping a fistful or *whatever* quantity for time
on the machine. Call that gullibility if you will; I never said
I believed the story.
The relevance is that, instead of the quick-and-easy method
of exchange hinted at by the stock UL (and it is, as you say,
vague enough to be open to multiple interpretations), the posts
you quoted indicate that concerted effort over many years would
be required to raise sufficient funds to send ten children to
camp in *one* year. That raises sufficient doubt in my mind
that a treatment center would be willing to accept any number
of pull tabs for time on their machine, which is what the
"exchange for dialysis" myth certainly suggests to me.
Richard "Doesn't Write Vaguely Enough: Brandt
Richard Brandt
< Your statement that this cite 'groundlessly speculates' is a
> conclusion based on little or no evidence.
This sentence was just too good to pass up.
If memory serves, I believe I referred to the person's statement
that they "believed, but didn't really know."
> Mick "Bothers to respond to the text in front of him rather than whatever
> his imagination conjures up".
Richard "Don't We All" Brandt
mic...@hotmail.com
> >still might not be 100% scientific truth to say "Aluminum ring pull tabs
> >are collected & exchanged for dialysis machine time" but I'd be loathe to
> >say it's 100% falsehood as the AFU FAQ currently does."
>
>
> Stupid People Tricks
>
> F.* Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected & exchanged for dialysis
> machine time. ["Redemption Rumors" in TMP]
>
> T. ...Some places or people (e.g., The Ronald McDonald House in
> Rochester, MN) do collect tabs for their scrap value and raise $$ for
> various causes.
>
> T.* There are two Canadians who collect them for wheelchairs. See Fred
> Ennis's article.
The FAQ also says, in 'Introduction to The Listings':
Key to Listed FAQs
T = 100% scientific truth
Tb = believed true, but not conclusively proven
F = 100% falsehood
Ft = A legend, mostly untrue, but with a true occurrence or known origin.
Fb = believed false, but not conclusively proven
U = unanswered and may be unanswerable
P = Maybe it didn't happen, but it's scientifically possible (used
extremely sparingly, where the opposite is expected, as it could apply to
just about every legend)
Given the above I think it would be inadequate to use the statement
"Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected & exchanged for dialysis machine
time" to refer to the UL in question and give it an 'F' if the
information I'm looking into as best I can turns out to mean that
children have had the dialysis time necessary while they're on holiday
paid for by a recycler in lieu of cash in receipt of pull tabs collected
by charitable organisations. If that is so then I think the statement of
the UL could be better phrased and/or the Camp Dialysun scenario should
be described in the FAQ since it is far more similar to the statement of
the UL than either of the two current 'T' entries you've quoted (or the
other entry regarding Ronald McDonald House).
Even if dialysis time has not been provided on-site for children
sponsored by the pull-tab drive the situation has enough familiar
elements - charitable help for kidney disease patients, collection of
aluminum pull-tabs and the similarity between the words 'dialysis' and
'Dialysun' - that it could be mistaken for the UL and I do not think that
would be constructive and still would like the Camp Dialysun scenario
mentioned in the FAQ.
> You say you bother to respond to the text in front of you rather than
> whatever your imagination conjures up; the next step might be to read
> all of it, not just part of it.
I think the unavoidable implication here is that you're suggesting I have
not read the above 'T' entries following the 'F' UL. On what basis do you
suggest this? I have read them. I referred to the Ronald McDonald House
story in my first post and in the second paragraph after the one
containing the sentence you quoted above I wrote, "...the AFU FAQ has, in
this instance as in others, been cautious to mention any substantial
truth behind or related to an urban legend". Funny that you seem to
suggest I didn't read far enough and in the failed attempt to demonstrate
it you apparently failed to read far enough :)
Anyway, I frankly don't see what particular relation the two 'T' entries
bear to my quoted text above. Can you explain what you're getting at
please?
> JoAnne "ring ring it's for you it's the kettle" Schmitz
> ---
> "Oh. My. God. My mother is flaming people in AFU."
> -- Harry MF Teasley, on alt.folklore.urban
Mick "Put that mirror down, JoAnne".
mic...@hotmail.com
mic...@hotmail.com wrote:
[snip]
> The fourth hit was a page which lists health agencies. Their listing for
> the Kidney Foundation of Canada (Windsor and District Chapter) includes
> the following sentences; "The foundation provides an opportunity for
> patients to enjoy a holiday away from home and still receive necessary
> treatment at dialysis camps. The two camps offered are Lions Camp Dorset
> for adults and families, and Camp Dialysun for children."
I failed to include the URL for this page. I apologise for my oversight.
URL: http://www.informationwindsor.com/webhea.htm
The agencies are alphabetically listed and 'Kidney Foundation of Canada'
is about halfway down the page.
There is also a website for 'The Kidney Foundation of Canada' where, if
you go to 'Programs' and from there to 'Patient Services' you find:
"...Other services offered by a Foundation office vary depending on local
community needs and resources.
Other services could include:
Patient Symposia & Educational Days.
Peer Support Programs & Self Help Groups.
Bursaries.
Dialysis Camps and Vacations..."
URL: http://www.kidney.ca
I've e-mailed three Ontario branches of the Kidney Foundation of Canada
asking for more information about Camp Dialysun. I've specifically asked
whether dialysis is actually available on-site. My personal interest is
that it would be great to get something like that running here - doctors
expect kidney failure to be physically, mentally and emotionally
depressing at any age but for kids it's really horrible. You can't have a
'holiday' from dialysis unless you get a transplant so it's five or six
hours in hospital three days a week for the 'foreseeable future'. The
treatment saves their lives but it also usually involves some pain and is
quite an insult to the metabolism - imagine all the good stuff in your
blood chemistry being halved in a few hours. I think from what I've read
so far that dialysis is available at the camps, that's how the info reads
to me, but I want to get the story from the horse's mouth.
An extra factor is that there are two forms of dialysis, haemodialysis
(which means using a dialysis machine and artificial kidney) and
peritoneal dialysis (which involves no machine but is a bit complicated
to explain briefly). Few children with kidney disease are on
haemodialysis, and those that are will be top priority for
transplantation, so it's unlikely the ones sponsored by the Pacific
Metals pull-tab thing use haemodialysis whether it's available at the
camp or not.
Please understand that my original post was not intended to be conclusive
evidence of anything or confirmation of the UL as stated in the FAQ. I
intended to point out information which suggested the statement in the
FAQ might be inaccurately characterised as '100% falsehood' and that
there might be a program which, like the wheelchair guys and Ronald
McDonald house, bore some similarity to the UL or the statement of it.
I'm continuing to find out more, I hope someone else might try ringing
some of the phone numbers because I can't really afford long distance.
If the program works as I think on the info so far then it does seem to
mean that sponsored kids are getting their dialysis time paid for by the
collected pull-tabs while they're on holiday - depending on how you want
to use the language. If that's so it's not greatly different, to me, from
saying "Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected & exchanged for dialysis
machine time". I _don't_ think it's the same, I _don't_ think it
validates either the statement or the basic UL. I _do_ think the UL might
be better stated in light of this program and I _do_ think it merits a
mention in the FAQ, both because it bears similarity and so that people
don't dismiss a real charity as a UL. It'd be nice to see my name in
there but that's not really the point; I really don't want a genuine
charity being dismissed because people misinterpret it as an 'urban
legend' and a hoax.
BTW, in my dialysis centre in Aus just getting the bloodlines, artificial
kidney, needles, dressing-pack, blood-thinning agent, dialysate
concentrate and saline for a dialysis run costs around $150 according to
the nurses (varying according to market forces, budget restraints and
doctors' demands). That ignores the expense of the techs maintaining and
preparing the machine and ensuring the purity and constant flow of water,
the cost of that water and the electricity for the machine, the pay for
the nursing staff and a few zillion other expenses. And I'm in a 'limited
care' centre where the cost of staffing and infrastructure is minimal
compared to the usual hospital environment.
There is absolutely no doubt to me that actually trying to somehow
directly exchange pull-tabs for dialysis time at a dialysis centre is
wildly unfeasible. In some countries the bloodlines and artificial kidney
are sterilised and reused but even that costs money, of course. Further,
it's only been in the last 15 years that people have been able to dialyse
for less than five hours for much benefit, dialysing for less than an
hour would be virtually useless, and only a fairly healthy and
intellectually alert patient can risk dialysis without nursing
supervision. For someone to try to collect pull-tabs for themselves or
with a small group of friends and then somehow 'buy' dialysis time on the
premise that the dialysis centre could get cash for the recycle value
would mean turning up with a truckload of the things just to set up the
machine. To do the necessary four or five hours to get any benefit, two
truckloads - not a chance. Dialysis centres have rather more important
things in mind than accepting and disposing of truckloads of pull tabs.
The Camp Dialysun scenario is reasonable, though; a massive drive
collecting pull tabs which are left at a recycler who totals up their
value over time and then donates the sum when it reaches the right amount
would be enough to send one or two kids at a time for a week or two of
holiday and dialysis at an appropriately setup facility. I still don't
know if that's the case here. I'm saying it might be, there's nothing yet
to show that it isn't, it's worth investigating and I'm trying to do so.
Even if none of the kids have been dialysis patients the similarities
between the Camp Dialysun story and the UL as stated are enough that a
genuine charitable endeavour might be jeopardised by the UL. Just like
the wheelchair guys and Ronald McDonald House this shouldn't be
diminished just because it's similar to a UL in the AFU FAQ - and it's
more similar than either of those.
mic...@hotmail.com
rsbr...@netscape.net wrote:
> mic...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > Saying your cites confidently demonstrate that "Pull tabs can
> > > > be exchanged for dialysis time"
> >
> > truth to say "Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected & exchanged for
> > dialysis machine time" but I'd be loathe to say it's 100% falsehood as
> > the AFU FAQ currently does."
>
I'm trying, I really am, but I don't feel like it's getting across.
> Making an inordinate stretch to say that you could, possibly,
> conceive of selling aluminum cans or parts thereof for money
> and using that money to pay for something that might, or might
> not, include dialysis, as being not *that* different from
> exchanging pull tabs for dialysis, still doesn't add up to
> making the UL some percentage truer than it was before.
Okay, point form:
1. On the information so far I get the impression that a recycler in
Vancouver accepts pull-tabs which are collected by charitable
organisations and directs the money which might otherwise be paid for
them towards a place called 'Camp Dialysun'. That seems pretty definite.
2. According to a couple of individual reports from people who live in
the area and post as renal patients to a support forum this program has
sponsored several children with kidney disease having a holiday at this
camp. That doesn't seem unreasonable.
3. _If_ any of those kids are haemodialysis patients and _if_ the camp
has dialysis facilities and _if_ the sponsorship is paying for all their
requirements during the holiday then the sponsorship is paying for their
dialysis time.
4. It seems likely, but I do not yet say definite or even 'pretty
definite', that the camp does have dialysis facilities. I think I'll know
about that within a few days.
5. It seems _un_likely that any of the kids are haemodialysis patients
(that is a rare form of treatment for children with kidney disease) but
again I'll probably find out about that within a few days.
6. I've got no idea whether the sponsorship pays for everything and I'm
not sure whether I'll be able to get a clear picture of that; health
funding is bizarre.
7. I'm not trying to suggest that the UL in question is 'true' or that
this information makes it truer than it was before. Please see my post in
reply to my own first post in this thread to see how definitely and
absolutely I do not think this UL has any truth in itself. However, I
think the way it's stated in the FAQ is a bit too open especially given
the Camp Dialysun story.
8. I don't think of truth and falsity as a binary system, as polar
opposites, as a zero-sum game or as a 100% equation (check in to
sci.logic for a brain-floss on this issue one day if you don't get what I
mean or just talk to a good physicist or philosopher).
9. I think that the picture developing makes the statement of the UL as
listed in the FAQ less clearly false. That does not have to mean it makes
the actual UL 'some percentage truer than it was before'. If you disagree
about truth/falsity being a zero-sum game you might not get what I mean.
10. In any event I think that the Camp Dialysun story, as far as I know
so far and certainly if further information confirms my suggestions about
it, should be in the FAQ just as the wheelchair guys and Ronald McDonald
House are for two reasons; firstly it might be misconstrued as a hoax,
secondly it bears greater similarity to the UL than either of the
aforementioned.
> That said, I'd like to commend you for some excellent research,
> which reveals just how far you have to reach to find any
> truth that even remotely resembles the traditional UL. Should
> have when I aired my gripe before; sorry.
Thank you, Richard. Please excuse me if I've seemed snide.
> Richard "Good Deeds Unpunished" Brandt
>
> --
> === Richard Brandt is at http://www.zenation.com/rsbrandt ===
> "If you want entertainment you get two hookers and an 8-ball.
> Film is too powerful a medium for just that." -- Sean Penn
Mick "Trying to find the right wavelength".
mic...@hotmail.com
rsbr...@netscape.net wrote:
> mic...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> < Your statement that this cite 'groundlessly speculates' is a
> > conclusion based on little or no evidence.
>
>
> If memory serves, I believe I referred to the person's statement
> that they "believed, but didn't really know."
So... if you only 'believe' you referred to such a statement does that
mean you don't really know and thus you're groundlessly speculating?
> > Mick "Bothers to respond to the text in front of him rather than whatever
> > his imagination conjures up".
>
> Richard "Don't We All" Brandt
>
> --
> === Richard Brandt is at http://www.zenation.com/rsbrandt ===
> "If you want entertainment you get two hookers and an 8-ball.
> Film is too powerful a medium for just that." -- Sean Penn
Mick "Distinguishes between speculation and belief and allows that people
sometimes use the word 'believe' when they're actually quite sure but for
one reason or another don't choose to make a statement of certainty".
JoAnne Schmitz
>In article <o9ru9skukbu9bd4a8...@4ax.com>,
> jsch...@qis.net wrote:
>> On Mon, 07 Feb 2000 16:01:46 GMT, mic...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> >What _I_ said (and you quoted it yourself) was, "On this information it
>> >still might not be 100% scientific truth to say "Aluminum ring pull tabs
>> >are collected & exchanged for dialysis machine time" but I'd be loathe to
>> >say it's 100% falsehood as the AFU FAQ currently does."
>>
>> The FAQ says:
>>
>> Stupid People Tricks
>>
>> F.* Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected & exchanged for dialysis
>> machine time. ["Redemption Rumors" in TMP]
>>
>> T. ...Some places or people (e.g., The Ronald McDonald House in
>> Rochester, MN) do collect tabs for their scrap value and raise $$ for
>> various causes.
>>
>> T.* There are two Canadians who collect them for wheelchairs. See Fred
>> Ennis's article.
>
>The FAQ also says, in 'Introduction to The Listings':
>
>Key to Listed FAQs
>T = 100% scientific truth
>Tb = believed true, but not conclusively proven
>F = 100% falsehood
>Ft = A legend, mostly untrue, but with a true occurrence or known origin.
>Fb = believed false, but not conclusively proven
>U = unanswered and may be unanswerable
>P = Maybe it didn't happen, but it's scientifically possible (used
>extremely sparingly, where the opposite is expected, as it could apply to
>just about every legend)
>
>Given the above I think it would be inadequate to use the statement
>"Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected & exchanged for dialysis machine
>time" to refer to the UL in question and give it an 'F' if the
>information I'm looking into as best I can turns out to mean that
>children have had the dialysis time necessary while they're on holiday
>paid for by a recycler in lieu of cash in receipt of pull tabs collected
>by charitable organisations.
I suppose in that sense it's inadequate. It only answers the question
which is asked, that is, are ring-tabs collected and exchanged for
dialysis, not the question that you want it to ask, which is, what
should people do to help kids get free dialysis.
You have to read the following entries for answers to that question.
I mean, do you really think we should remove the question because it's
not the one you want answered, even if the question you do want
answered is also in the FAQ?
>If that is so then I think the statement of
>the UL could be better phrased and/or the Camp Dialysun scenario should
>be described in the FAQ since it is far more similar to the statement of
>the UL than either of the two current 'T' entries you've quoted (or the
>other entry regarding Ronald McDonald House).
I don't think you've supported the Camp Dialysun instance enough yet,
first of all.
Second, the usual story does not mention Camp Dialysun. The usual
scenario really doesn't have anything to do with any intrinsic value
of the rings being exchanged for money used to buy something. It's
more like saving coupons or trading stamps. In each case, there's
stuff that is sent to the manufacturer of the item, as proof that you
bought the item, so that they will send a predetermined cash amount
per item to a particular charity. The items themselves are
essentially worthless.
There are companies that do similar things now. For example, the
Giant grocery store in my state sometimes runs a promotion called
"Apples for the Students." For every dollar you spend at Giant, any
school of your choice in the Giant grocery store area will be given a
certain cash amount to be used to purchase some supplies, such as band
instruments, computers or books. You simply save the register tape
and give it to the school. The tape itself has extremely little
intrinsic value.
The other interesting thing about redemption rumors is that the one
giving money or dialysis time or whatever is often is engaged in
activities which directly cause the need for the thing given away.
The most blatant is the iron lung -- cigarette connection; you smoke,
you get emphysema, you need an iron lung, voila, the cigarette company
is kind enough to give you time on it. Provided your friends all
smoke, so they'll need the iron lung too. I suspect that the pop-top
kidney dialysis connection has to do with some belief that soda pop
may cause kidney problems. It certainly makes you urinate.
So it's got a lovely flavor of "there's no such thing as a free lunch"
to it.
>Even if dialysis time has not been provided on-site for children
>sponsored by the pull-tab drive the situation has enough familiar
>elements - charitable help for kidney disease patients, collection of
>aluminum pull-tabs and the similarity between the words 'dialysis' and
>'Dialysun' - that it could be mistaken for the UL and I do not think that
>would be constructive and still would like the Camp Dialysun scenario
>mentioned in the FAQ.
Provided we get good documentation of Camp Dialysun, I don't think
that's unfair. But you don't get anywhere by yelling and pretending
that the other entries don't exist.
>> You say you bother to respond to the text in front of you rather than
>> whatever your imagination conjures up; the next step might be to read
>> all of it, not just part of it.
>
>I think the unavoidable implication here is that you're suggesting I have
>not read the above 'T' entries following the 'F' UL.
Not at all. You can read something and then respond to your
imagination instead of what you read.
Your imagination seems to be leading you to believe that people will
not contribute tabs to Camp Dialysun after reading the entry. Do you
think that people have not read the McDonald's program entry? If
there is another entry created for Camp Dialysun (which there might
be), do you think people will not read that either? Why?
The point is that there are two pieces of information here. One is
that Coca-Cola is not giving away dialysis time because you bought
their products, nor are tobacco companies giving away time on iron
lung machines for every cigarette pack you collect. That's the
legend.
The other is that some companies, McDonalds for sure, have decided to
do this as a goodwill gesture, and recycling centers can give you
money for even small bits of aluminum if you have enough of them.
The alt.folklore.urban FAQ is a FAQ about urban legends. Not a FAQ
about dialysis. I hope you will understand if we do not feel we must
put something that is understandably important to you first in the
list.
>On what basis do you
>suggest this? I have read them. I referred to the Ronald McDonald House
>story in my first post and in the second paragraph after the one
>containing the sentence you quoted above I wrote, "...the AFU FAQ has, in
>this instance as in others, been cautious to mention any substantial
>truth behind or related to an urban legend". Funny that you seem to
>suggest I didn't read far enough and in the failed attempt to demonstrate
>it you apparently failed to read far enough :)
I guess you didn't read all the FAQ either.
>Anyway, I frankly don't see what particular relation the two 'T' entries
>bear to my quoted text above. Can you explain what you're getting at
>please?
If Camp Dialysun really takes pop tops and gives away then it would be
another T entry following the F one. But the redemption rumor itself
stays, because it's been applied to many things.
Did you know if your fingernails reach the length of one inch you can
sell them to Revlon for $10 each?
JoAnne "not" Schmitz
Jim Skillman
> If Camp Dialysun really takes pop tops and gives away then it would be
> another T entry following the F one. But the redemption rumor itself
> stays, because it's been applied to many things.
>
> Did you know if your fingernails reach the length of one inch you can
> sell them to Revlon for $10 each?
>
> JoAnne "not" Schmitz
I am in possession of a nice fold-up wheel chair that belonged to my
late grandmother. Does anyone know where I might trade it for a massive
quantity of pull-tabs.
--jim
Michael Glaser
>
> JoAnne Schmitz wrote:
>
> > If Camp Dialysun really takes pop tops and gives away then it would be
> > another T entry following the F one. But the redemption rumor itself
> > stays, because it's been applied to many things.
> >
> > Did you know if your fingernails reach the length of one inch you can
> > sell them to Revlon for $10 each?
> >
> > JoAnne "not" Schmitz
>
> late grandmother. Does anyone know where I might trade it for a massive
> quantity of pull-tabs.
>
> --jim
How many do you need?
Michael "I'm back to drinking" Glaser
Please direct e-mail to both of the following addresses :
mitc...@image-link.com
mitc...@att.net
Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.
Charles Wm. Dimmick
> I don't think you've supported the Camp Dialysun instance enough yet,
> first of all.
> [...]
> Provided we get good documentation of Camp Dialysun, I don't think
> that's unfair. .
A little bit more information about Camp Dialysun can be
found at:
http://www.informationwindsor.com/webhea.htm
scroll down to
KIDNEY FOUNDATION OF CANADA
Windsor and District Chapter
also a newspaper article at:
http://www.mirror-guardian.com/com330.html
Charles Wm. Dimmick
Wyatt Earp
>Because, for me, stories of "exchanging pull-tabs for dialysis"
>really do conjure up images of someone going to a treatment
>center and swapping a fistful or *whatever* quantity for time
>on the machine. Call that gullibility if you will; I never said
>I believed the story.
I find it interesting that you insist the legend implies that people
in need of medical treatment would have to take the pull-tabs to a
treatment center themselves. My big sighting of this legend was back
in college, when we lived in the dorms a few people organized massive
drives to save these things because they could be used to provide
dialysis to needy patients. The idea was we would save them all year,
then at the end of the term the organizers would send them off. Most
people that believed it seemed to assume that some wealthy person /
corporation would make a donation to some dialysis charity or research
organization for each pull-tab received. Then the philanthropists
would send the pull-tabs off to the scrap yard. But nobody thought
that the sick patients that needed dialysis were supposed to bring in
a handful of pull-tabs each day to the treatment center. That would be
just a bit too silly.
The drive went well, as college students tend to gravitate to
collecting things like this. I saved mine, and by the end of the term
I had a small coffee can full. I did not save them because I thought
doing so would help sick people, I (and most others) saved them
because they were "war trophies". We also saved our empty liquor
bottles, whomever had the most impressive collection at the end of the
year was obviously the person that had thrown the best, wildest, and
most heavily attended parties. After we moved into an apartment and
threw keggers (kegs were forbidden in the dorms) we saved those
plastic caps that come on the top of a new keg of beer. At the end of
the year, we could admire our collection of 50 or so keg caps and (try
to) remember all the good times we had during the year. College
students take pride of some strange things...
Anyway, at the end of the year in the dorms nobody knew where to send
the pull tabs, because (duh!) you can't really exchange pull-tabs for
dialysis treatment. So we just threw them out along with all the empty
liquor bottles. Now it seems there really is a place we could have
sent them to benefit sufferers of kidney failure. To me, this means
the legend we all thought was false really is true.
>The relevance is that, instead of the quick-and-easy method
>of exchange hinted at by the stock UL (and it is, as you say,
>vague enough to be open to multiple interpretations), the posts
>you quoted indicate that concerted effort over many years would
>be required to raise sufficient funds to send ten children to
>camp in *one* year. That raises sufficient doubt in my mind
>that a treatment center would be willing to accept any number
>of pull tabs for time on their machine, which is what the
>"exchange for dialysis" myth certainly suggests to me.
Well, the legend we heard might have been a mutation of the original
UL, but none of them thought that the collection efforts of a few
thousand beer-guzzling college students (The dorms housed about 4
thousand people at the time) would provide much treatment at all.
Obviously something like dialysis is extremely expensive, and it would
take a whole buttload of pull-tabs to provide even one treatment. But
if all the beer-guzzling college students in all the colleges in all
the world were to save all their pull-tabs, well then ya, that might
add up to a whole buttload of pull-tabs.
Wyatt "Now I collect Usenet postings" Earp
stanN...@simirescue.org
>
[snip]
> It only answers the question which is asked, that is,
> are ring-tabs collected and exchanged for dialysis, not
> the question that you want it to ask, which is, what
> should people do to help kids get free dialysis.
First, the answer to this question:
NOTHING. You do nothing to help kids get free dialysis.
Dialysis is FREE to the patient. At least in the United States. NO ONE
is refused dialysis. Call the National Kidney Foundation and ASK, if you
doubt.
Second, from personal experience, as a former volunteer for the NKF, I
know the pull-tab thing to be an annoyingly adhesive UL.
A number of years ago, I actually got involved in trying to track down
the pull-tab thing. It was rather educational and somewhat amusing. I
first posted the results of my efforts to AFU in December 1993, and then
again in about June of 1994. Here we go again. You might find this
enlightening:
********************************************
* Investigating the Great Pull-Tab Caper *
********************************************
This unmitigated waste of time has been around for a looooong time. I
know it has been around in Southern California since sometime before
1969, over 30 years ago, when I first ran into it. It is, for some
reason virtually impossible to extinguish, even though it has ABSOLUTELY
NO BASIS IN TRUTH!
In 1969, I was at UCLA and also volunteering for the National Kidney
Foundation. The thing made me so angry I personally roused a bit of
rabble amongst a couple of the other student volunteers and headed up a
"back-track" of this BS in an attempt to find the source of the rumor
and stop it. Boy, was I naive when I was young and foolish. What we
found, though, was both very interesting and frustrating:
Our local chapter of the National Kidney Foundation began to get call
after call after call from people asking where they were supposed to
bring their 10 pounds or 20 pounds, or more, of pull-tabs for the "poor
kid needing dialysis."
We got pretty tired of it and several of us got pretty angry, too (after
all, if these folks had used the same energy for something REAL, maybe
something good could have been accomplished). That's when I
rabble-roused a bit.
We figured, maybe we could get these people to put their energies to
some good use and actually volunteer for the National Kidney Foundation.
(We couldn't have been more wrong.)
Several of us do-gooder volunteers asked the receptionist to gather up
the names, addresses and phone numbers from the next ten people who
called and asked them why they were collecting the pull-tabs (figured 10
would be a nice round-numbered sample).
The stories all shared one exact same quality: they ALL entailed what,
at the time I called a "double-removal" from the source. That is to
say, the tabs were never being collected specifically for the person
collecting them, they were never being collected for someone once
removed from the collector, like a friend, a relative, a co-worker.
No, they were ALL for the acquaintance of an acquaintance.
(I would now recognize this as a FOAF-tale, but not back then.)
Everyone said something like: "My boss' secretary has a son who needs
dialysis, I collect the tabs and give them to my boss who gives them to
his secretary so the kid can get the dialysis."
When we followed all the 10 stories back one step, the source receded
one step. In the example, above, when we talked to the boss about his
secretary's son, the boss would say, "No, no. It's not for her son, I
give them to her because her son has a little friend in school who needs
the dialysis."
Then we'd follow it to the secretary and it would recede back yet
another step, "No, it's not for my son's friend, it's for my son's
friend's father. He's the one who needs the dialysis."
Now by this time the plastic garbage bag of pull-tabs had been added to
and passed down the line. And its contents were growing at each step.
Each person said something like, "Yes, and I have three or four other
people collecting for me, too."
Well, we'd follow it back another step and, yup, it'd recede yet another
step. The son would say, "Nah, my friend's dad is fine. It's for his
dad's sister."
We tried to track all ten of these back about 5 steps before we quit. At
each step it would recede one step further. It took us over a month of
phone calling if I remember correctly, maybe longer. Anyway:
In two of the ten cases we discovered something VERY interesting.
Now think about this a moment. Collector C knows the person s/he gets
the tabs from, person B but, usually doesn't have any knowledge of who
person B gets the tabs from. In the other direction, collector C knows
the person s/he gives the tabs to, person D but, probably has never met
the person that person D gives them to.
After all, how many of us know who all the friends of our friends are?
In our phone calling, we found two cases of the distribution going
something like this:
_________ A
| \|/
^ B
| \|/ the little "twigs" are "up-stream"
^ C people who collect for person C
| \|/ and give the tabs to him/her.
^ D
| \|/
^<-----------E
Yup, you've got it right! In two of the ten cases we tracked, someone
down below on the chain was giving the tabs to someone s/he THOUGHT was
downstream from him/her when, IN FACT, the person was somewhere UPSTREAM
from him/her! Or maybe downstream. Or, er... well. Hm.
Now, remember: there is really no way that E, who has friends D and A
could even know that A knows B who knows C who knows D. It's just too
far removed.
Conversely, A has no idea that E knows D who knows C who knows B!
All A knows is that s/he's got a REAL DYNAMITE pull-tab collector who
keeps giving her/him ever increasing quantities of pull tabs, fully
unaware that they are just the same ones going around in a circle with a
few more being added at each step along the way!
It's not really surprising the circles might be so small, either. After
all, these people were all pretty close geographically as well as
running in the same, or at least similar social circles.
Another interesting thing was, although we directly represented the
National Kidney Foundation, the MAJORITY of the people we contacted
REFUSED TO BELIEVE that there was no basis in fact for the collection or
pull-tabs and that absolutely no-one was going to get dialysis as a
result of their efforts!
They blindly continued to collect the be-damned things!
This really makes me angry!
Think of all the GOOD which could come about if the same effort were
directed toward some real project.
I've long since come to recognize the components of a "double-removal"
in a FOAF-tale is incredibly consistent. It seems that people who tell
these things, knowing deep inside that they have no solid proof of what
they are saying, can't just say, "My mom needs dialysis." That's just
too obviously a lie. Then again, to push it out three steps simply
sounds ridiculous, "My boss' secretary's son's friend" is just too bogus
sounding.
I now know the FOAF component is nearly a dead give-away that what you
are hearing is probably a UL.
Sorry this was sooooo loooooongg but, I thought you might be interested
in the details of the investigation.
This thing is still around and it is as insidious and hard to stop as
ever.
And be careful. Trying to debunk this to somone who is collecting
pull-tabs can be hazardous to your health and general well-being. When
you try to debunk this to someone who has gone to all this effort and
has told everybody they know that it's true, they have a real hard time
with it and can get VERY angry at you.
In June of 1994, I became aware that a friend of mine, a nice little old
granny-type lady who volunteers to help feed the homeless, was
collecting these things because a friend of hers told her that a friend
of a friend...well you know.
Anyway, I told her about the hoax, even brought in the FAQ and also
printed out this post for her.
Think it did any good?
Not a whit!
She actually acted insulted that I might suggest that her friend would
be mistaken and was mis-leading them both.
She clamped her lips tightly shut and wouldn't talk to me all evening at
church until later when she was about to leave and she told me in a
defiant tone, "Well, I'm going to keep collecting them 'cause this
litle boy needs his dialysis," over her shoulder to me as she walked out
giving me a withering glance as if I had personally taken a hatchet to
the tubes connecting this kid up to the dialyzer.
Her tone couldn't have been more derisive to me if I had taken KY jelly
and a drill press and done unspeakable acts to her fuzzy little pet
bunny.
This was even after I told her that it costs the patient NOTHING for
dialysis. If you don't believe this, CALL the National Kidney
Foundation and ASK. CALL your local hospital and talk to someone at a
dialysis unit.
She soon got into the collecting with an increased fervor and I am
afraid I may actually have been the spur because of *MY* meddling with
her concept of "The Truth."
GADS!!! This kind of stuff makes me angry. What a waste of energy.
*sigh*
Oh, and if you DO decide to talk to someone in healthcare about this do
NOT waste your time talking to someone if they don't work in dialysis,
why would they know any more about it than you do? If they're not
involved with a dialysis program, they're just as liable to be blindly
collecting these things as anyone else who doesn't work in dyalisis.
Oh, because they're "medical?" Riiiiight. Well, hey, then, if you're a
college Physics major, you should know *just* as much about the
Comparative Religions Program as any CR major, right? Well, I mean,
after all, they're on the same campus and they've got students, ta's and
profs just like the Physics Dept has students, ta's and profs, right?
They're college students, you're college students, right?
Here's an interesting note for you: Since this thing has been around
for at least 30 years, and it is so blasted hard to extinguish, and
since the people who do it seem bound and determined to collect the
litle buggers right in the face of evidence there's no place for them to
be put to use, in the last few years, precisely because the thing has
been so rampant and so impossible to stamp out, some folks have actually
gone so far as to try to find some kind of use for them.
A couple of folk now have a little thing or two going, here or there
just so the blasted pull-tabs won't be totally wasted, but there's no
real concerted effort. And why should there be? After all, they'd do
better with THE WHOLE D*MNED CAN, but I guess that's asking too much.
But notice, not a single one of these has ANYTHING to do with dialysis!
And these have grown out of people trying to figure out how to do some
good with the mis-guided, mis-spent energies, not the other way around.
From the FAQ:
True. ...Some places or people (e.g., The Ronald McDonald House in
Rochester, MN) do collect tabs now for their scrap value and
raise $$ for various causes.
True. The MN connection has been noted by many people. One of the
better and more recent articles was posted by Sarah
Skovronsky.
True. There are two Canadians who collect them for wheelchairs.
Ask Fred Ennis.
In October of 1994, in response to one of my postings about this,
William Carl Schmidt emailed me with information about the "Wheel Chair
Guys." I have his permission to include some of what he emailed to me
and it is well worth reading. Thank you very much William.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: <email.address.deleted> William Carl Schmidt
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 1994 08:39:03 -0300
Subject: Pull-Tab Investigation
[...]
My grandmother's church sends their tabs (by mail) to the
2 Canadian guys in Guelph that sell the aluminum to raise
money to buy wheelchairs. There are a few interesting
tidbits here.
First, they spend more on postage
than is recovered from the scrap aluminum sale.
Second, the do gooders only accept PULL TABS,
not the rest of the can!
The wheel chair guys were interviewed on the national
media, and were very proud of their accomplishments. They
bragged of receiving PULL TABS from all over the world,
the furthest donation coming from Austrailia.
The question is why don't people skip the PULL TAB stage
and just donate the money they would have spent on mailing
the damn things?
Keep up the battle,
Billy
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The moral? Go to the source.
Question authority...intelligently. _______
| =====
|
That's how new things get done.
|_______|
| =====
|
And never eat yellow snow. | * o o
|
~ _______________ | 50000
|
~ |.-------------.| |
|
\||/ ~ || || |
|
| @___oo ~ || ||
|||||||||
/\ /\ / (__,,,,| ~ ||ix.netcom.com||
|TTTTTTT|
) /^\) ^\/ _) " s ||_____________||
/_________\
+===) /^\/
_)======s==`-----____------'=================================+
| ) _ / / _) __ _s_ _____/____\_____ E-Mail:
St...@simirescue.com |
/\ )/\/ || | )_)--[\_/ / %%%%%%%%%%%%%% \ or:
Sor...@ix.netcom.com |
|| / \)___)\ / %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% \ All opinions are solely my
own.|
| \____( )___) )___^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ But, they should be yours,
too.|
\______(_______;;;
__;;;)===================================================+
-- Heisenberg may have been here. --
stanN...@simirescue.org
>
> JoAnne Schmitz wrote:
>
> > another T entry following the F one. But the redemption rumor itself
> > stays, because it's been applied to many things.
> >
> > Did you know if your fingernails reach the length of one inch you can
> > sell them to Revlon for $10 each?
> >
> > JoAnne "not" Schmitz
>
> late grandmother. Does anyone know where I might trade it for a massive
> quantity of pull-tabs.
No, but if you actually have such a beastie and you are looking to make
good use of it, I can turn you on to a ministry which takes in old
wheelchairs, refurbishes them and donates them to folks who need them,
and would otherwise be totally immobile, in third-world countries.
-Stan-
mic...@hotmail.com
No question is asked. A statement is listed with an indicator preceding
it.
that is, are ring-tabs collected and exchanged for
> dialysis, not the question that you want it to ask,
I do not want it to ask any question. Mind-reading is notoriously
unreliable.
which is, what
> should people do to help kids get free dialysis.
Has "What should people do to help kids get free dialysis?" been a
Frequently Asked Question here? If not, why would someone want it in the
FAQ? I don't and haven't suggested that I do.
> You have to read the following entries for answers to that question.
That question would only be very vaguely answered by the following
entries since they refer only to wheelchairs, Ronald McDonald House and
'various causes' not 'free dialysis time for kids'.
BTW, the answer to the question "What should people do to help kids get
free dialysis?" is "Pay tax" in the US, Aus, New Zealand, Canada, the UK
and Germany as far as I know. I presume it's the same in other EEC
countries and expect it's so in many other countries throughout the
world. I do not know of anyone being refused dialysis under government
subsidised health care in any of the countries I mentioned. Sometimes
patients are advised that the benefit of dialysis would only extend their
life to a minimal extent and that the risks and side-effects are not
worth that extension but even then if they insist on trying they are
allowed to do so (again, as far as I know).
> I mean, do you really think we should remove the question because it's
> not the one you want answered, even if the question you do want
> answered is also in the FAQ?
Your presumptions are inaccurate.
> >If that is so then I think the statement of
> >the UL could be better phrased and/or the Camp Dialysun scenario should
> >be described in the FAQ since it is far more similar to the statement of
> >the UL than either of the two current 'T' entries you've quoted (or the
> >other entry regarding Ronald McDonald House).
>
> I don't think you've supported the Camp Dialysun instance enough yet,
> first of all.
This is what I propose we can be confident of so far -
There is a place called Camp Dialysun in Ontario where children with
kidney disease can holiday in a medically safe environment and improve
their capacities for dealing with their illness. Some charitable
organisations have collected pull-tabs and co-operated with a metal
recycler in Vancouver so that the value of the pull-tabs has funded
children's attendance at this camp.
At the moment I think it is also likely that the camp has dialysis
facilities and possible (but unlikely) that one or more of the sponsored
children has received dialysis treatment at the camp. I do not propose
that either of these suggestions be taken as 'true' on the information
provided so far.
I am a little disappointed that there seems to be little interest in even
checking the URLs provided for this story let alone calling the telephone
numbers mentioned in my first post in this thread to find out what is
really happening but there has been repeated interest in presuming that I
think the UL is 'true' or has been 'validated' by the information I've
posted when I've repeatedly said I do not believe either of these
suppositions. C'est la vie. Sometimes people are so eager to say "No"
they blurt it out when no-one's proposing "Yes". If you review my first
post you'll find that I didn't propose any conclusive "Yes" but simply
provided what I believed to be new information on the topic and expressed
my opinion that the current state of the FAQ on the topic isn't entirely
satisfactory and that if certain possibilities turned out to be
substantiated then it might even 'be fair enough to say that pull-tabs
are paying for dialysis time' which is very close to the UL as stated.
> Second, the usual story does not mention Camp Dialysun. The usual
> scenario really doesn't have anything to do with any intrinsic value
> of the rings being exchanged for money used to buy something.
Yes, this is more my sense of the story too. As Wyatt Earp posted it
seems to be more about some sort of 'scheme' where dialysis patients can
get treatment because someone (or some company) will subsidise it at so
many minutes dialysis per tab. Richard Brandt's interpretation of the
essential UL is slightly different again, it seems; something more like
dialysis patients actually being able to take tabs along to a facility
themselves and be given dialysis time in return. I'm not sure if he only
thinks of it in terms of direct proportion to intrinsic recycling value
or allows that it might be more of a symbolic subsidised trade.
It's
> more like saving coupons or trading stamps. In each case, there's
> stuff that is sent to the manufacturer of the item, as proof that you
> bought the item, so that they will send a predetermined cash amount
> per item to a particular charity. The items themselves are
> essentially worthless.
Yes, again this is more my idea of the UL - the items themselves are only
tokens and their value is attributed by a sponsor. That's one reason I
think the UL statement in the FAQ is a poor characterisation - it doesn't
make the 'token' nature of the tabs clear.
> There are companies that do similar things now. For example, the
> Giant grocery store in my state sometimes runs a promotion called
> "Apples for the Students." For every dollar you spend at Giant, any
> school of your choice in the Giant grocery store area will be given a
> certain cash amount to be used to purchase some supplies, such as band
> instruments, computers or books. You simply save the register tape
> and give it to the school. The tape itself has extremely little
> intrinsic value.
Thanks, that's interesting. Do you think it would be fair to say that
'register tape is exchanged for school supplies' (or similar) in this
instance?
> The other interesting thing about redemption rumors is that the one
> giving money or dialysis time or whatever is often is engaged in
> activities which directly cause the need for the thing given away.
> The most blatant is the iron lung -- cigarette connection; you smoke,
> you get emphysema, you need an iron lung, voila, the cigarette company
> is kind enough to give you time on it. Provided your friends all
> smoke, so they'll need the iron lung too.
Beautifully ironic.
I suspect that the pop-top
> kidney dialysis connection has to do with some belief that soda pop
> may cause kidney problems. It certainly makes you urinate.
I hadn't even thought of that but it makes sense. I mean, it's not true
but I wouldn't be too surprised if some people believe it. The only
reality I could vaguely align with it is that Coke is very high in
potassium which kidney failure patients must minimise in their diet since
an excess of potassium can cause a heart attack and their kidneys can't
clear it, but that's the only 'soda pop' type drink that I'm aware of as
a hazard and that's after you've got the problem, not a cause of it.
On the other hand various analgesics have caused kidney failure. Most are
no longer legally available and I doubt any of those companies ever
suggested people send empty analgesic boxes on the basis that they'd pay
for some dialysis time. Like I really really really really doubt it.
> So it's got a lovely flavor of "there's no such thing as a free lunch"
> to it.
>
> >Even if dialysis time has not been provided on-site for children
> >sponsored by the pull-tab drive the situation has enough familiar
> >elements - charitable help for kidney disease patients, collection of
> >aluminum pull-tabs and the similarity between the words 'dialysis' and
> >'Dialysun' - that it could be mistaken for the UL and I do not think that
> >would be constructive and still would like the Camp Dialysun scenario
> >mentioned in the FAQ.
>
> Provided we get good documentation of Camp Dialysun, I don't think
> that's unfair. But you don't get anywhere by yelling
I know where the caps lock key is and if I'm yelling I'll use it.
and pretending
> that the other entries don't exist.
I repeat, I said "... the AFU FAQ has, in this instance as in others,
been cautious to mention any substantial truth behind or related to an
urban legend". I would appreciate it if you'd desist from repeating that
I in some manner or other did not accept the existence of the entries
following the UL we're discussing. I did read them and I did refer to
them. You and I might understand the sum of the UL and the three
following entries differently but I did not ignore them.
> >> You say you bother to respond to the text in front of you rather than
> >> whatever your imagination conjures up; the next step might be to read
> >> all of it, not just part of it.
> >
> >I think the unavoidable implication here is that you're suggesting I have
> >not read the above 'T' entries following the 'F' UL.
>
> Not at all.
Then what implication or meaning did you intend by posting the UL and two
of the following three entries with the 'read all of it' comment?
You can read something and then respond to your
> imagination instead of what you read.
You're darn tootin'.
> Your imagination seems to be leading you to believe that people will
> not contribute tabs to Camp Dialysun after reading the entry.
There's a difference between recognition of possibility and prediction of
eventuality.
Do you
> think that people have not read the McDonald's program entry?
I have no suggestion as to why they wouldn't if they're reading through
that section of the FAQ.
If
> there is another entry created for Camp Dialysun (which there might
> be), do you think people will not read that either? Why?
If there is another entry created for Camp Dialysun I have no suggestion
as to why people would not read it and I expect that if they are reading
through that section of the FAQ then they would read that entry. There is
currently no such entry. If there continues to be no such entry to read
then it won't be read. Why do you think I've consistently said that I
think such an entry should go in?
> The point is that there are two pieces of information here. One is
> that Coca-Cola is not giving away dialysis time because you bought
> their products, nor are tobacco companies giving away time on iron
> lung machines for every cigarette pack you collect. That's the
> legend.
I think the legend need to be more distinctly stated.
> The other is that some companies, McDonalds for sure, have decided to
> do this as a goodwill gesture, and recycling centers can give you
> money for even small bits of aluminum if you have enough of them.
Sure, but there seems to be a bit of a difference with the Camp Dialysun
story since the recycler is apparently part of the collecting process as
well - or at least not simply involved as a commercial enterprise that
gives cash for tabs and the recipient of the cash is then kind enough to
donate it. I don't think it's unreasonable if people don't feel this is a
significant difference but I do feel it's a significant difference.
> The alt.folklore.urban FAQ is a FAQ about urban legends. Not a FAQ
> about dialysis.
I'm well aware of that. There's only one mention of dialysis in the whole
thing and it's bloody enormous.
I hope you will understand if we do not feel we must
> put something that is understandably important to you first in the
> list.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'first in the list' but I don't think I've
suggested anything like this and I find a vaguely offensive inference
that I'm asking for 'special treatment'. This is simply an area that I
know a lot about and care about - the 'rules' should be no different.
> >On what basis do you
> >suggest this? I have read them. I referred to the Ronald McDonald House
> >story in my first post and in the second paragraph after the one
> >containing the sentence you quoted above I wrote, "...the AFU FAQ has, in
> >this instance as in others, been cautious to mention any substantial
> >truth behind or related to an urban legend". Funny that you seem to
> >suggest I didn't read far enough and in the failed attempt to demonstrate
> >it you apparently failed to read far enough :)
>
> I guess you didn't read all the FAQ either.
"...the AFU FAQ has, in this instance as in others, been cautious to
mention any substantial truth behind or related to an urban legend"
Please quit with this.
> >Anyway, I frankly don't see what particular relation the two 'T' entries
> >bear to my quoted text above. Can you explain what you're getting at
> >please?
>
> If Camp Dialysun really takes pop tops and gives away then it would be
> another T entry following the F one.
This doesn't seem to be the case (I'm assuming the words 'dialysis time'
were meant to be in there somewhere). I think charitable organisations
collect tabs and a recycling company participates in the charitable
endeavour by directing the recyling value towards children's holidays at
Camp Dialysun. I think this is worth a T entry in the FAQ since it has
the similar elements of people with kidney disease, pull tab collection
and charity, and the extra factor of similarity between the words
'dialysis' and 'Dialysun'. If we find that dialysis treatment has been
provided to children under this sponsorship scheme I think the current
statement of the UL should also change or it won't be fully justified as
an F.
But the redemption rumor itself
> stays, because it's been applied to many things.
I don't suggest that the essential UL is 'true' or should not appear in
the FAQ. However, the 'pull tabs for dialysis time' entry is the only
mention of 'redemption' in the FAQ and I think it could be better stated
given the differing impressions voiced in this thread and the potential
confusion about Camp Dialysun.
> Did you know if your fingernails reach the length of one inch you can
> sell them to Revlon for $10 each?
No, I didn't know that. I still don't.
> JoAnne "not" Schmitz
Mick "Oh Lord, Please Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood".
Joseph M. Shair
<mic...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:87mvgv$s11$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
: In article <duncow-0702...@user-33qsep1.dialup.mindspring.com>,
<hack/>
: BTW, anyone want to volunteer what '100% scientific truth' means?
<hack/>
Any hypothesis with which I agree.
Joe "Sheesh" Shair
mic...@hotmail.com
rsbr...@netscape.net wrote:
> mic...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > ...according to that post. BTW, why did you find this particular
> > mathematical note significant? I mean, very clever and all to divide
> > 30,000 by 3,000 but what's the relevance of ten children being sent?
>
> really do conjure up images of someone going to a treatment
> center and swapping a fistful or *whatever* quantity for time
> on the machine. Call that gullibility if you will; I never said
> I believed the story.
>
> of exchange hinted at by the stock UL (and it is, as you say,
> vague enough to be open to multiple interpretations),
Yeah, I think I'd probably like it if the description of the impression
you're suggesting was less open to interpretation, maybe including
'directly exchanged at a dialysis facility for treatment time' or
something like that.
the posts
> you quoted indicate that concerted effort over many years would
> be required to raise sufficient funds to send ten children to
> camp in *one* year.
My guess is that the kids went along singly or maybe two or three at a
time over the course of the thirteen years from '84 to '97 rather than
ten eventually sent in '97 when $30,000 had been reached. Anyway -
apparently ten kids were paid for by thirteen years of collection.
That raises sufficient doubt in my mind
> that a treatment center would be willing to accept any number
> of pull tabs for time on their machine, which is what the
> "exchange for dialysis" myth certainly suggests to me.
Okay, I think I get what you're saying. For your understanding of the UL
this information would be pretty insignificant. If it took 1.3 yrs of tab
collection per kid when there were apparently district chapters of
organisations like the Lions Club and the Kidney Foundation of Canada
working in concert with a recycling company then the effort for any
individual to get themselves equivalent attention, even if they get _all_
their friends of friends of friends of friends helping out, would be
beyond imagination.
What about JoAnne's interpretation of the UL which I think seems more
practically feasible on the surface (and is pretty much how I've thought
of it) - tabs (or box tops or whatever) being essentially tokens which a
company promises to match with so many minutes dialysis (or iron lung
time or whatever)? Wyatt Earp (hehehe) also described a college years
encounter where people thought they were collecting the tabs so that some
philanthropist would donate matching funds, treating each tab as a token
with a 'minutes of dialysis' value.
> Richard "Doesn't Write Vaguely Enough: Brandt
>
> --
> === Richard Brandt is at http://www.zenation.com/rsbrandt ===
> "If you want entertainment you get two hookers and an 8-ball.
> Film is too powerful a medium for just that." -- Sean Penn
Mick "Doesn't vague rightly enough"
mic...@hotmail.com
In article <38A14A...@simirescue.org>,
stanN...@simirescue.org wrote:
> JoAnne Schmitz wrote:
> >
> [snip]
>
> > It only answers the question which is asked, that is,
> > are ring-tabs collected and exchanged for dialysis, not
> > the question that you want it to ask, which is, what
> > should people do to help kids get free dialysis.
>
> First, the answer to this question:
>
> NOTHING. You do nothing to help kids get free dialysis.
>
> Dialysis is FREE to the patient. At least in the United States. NO ONE
> is refused dialysis. Call the National Kidney Foundation and ASK, if you
> doubt.
Erm, the money doesn't come out of thin air. The government pays for it
through their tax base; the insurance companies through premiums. If you
want to do something to help kids (and anyone else who needs it) get free
dialysis then if you pay taxes and/or have health insurance you're
already doing it.
> Second, from personal experience, as a former volunteer for the NKF, I
> know the pull-tab thing to be an annoyingly adhesive UL.
First, as a current and former dialysis patient and transplant recipient
I want to thank you for your efforts. Kidney failure is not a glamorous
illness and patients often do not have clearly visible disability even
though it's frequently extremely debilitating. People can't tell by
looking at me that I can't feel my left hand except for flashes of pain,
that my haemoglobin is 20% lower than average, that my blood chemistry
cycles like a rollercoaster, my bones are fairly brittle etc. Thankfully
the powers that be recognise that the extreme danger posed by renal
problems means that renal patients need all the help they can get (like
I'm dead in five or six days without dialysis, maybe ten at a stretch if
I'm absolutely scrupulous with everything that goes into my system - I'm
still young and have maintained reasonable health in comparison to most),
but the public are still very unaware of what it all really amounts to.
Volunteers are wonderful!
Second, while I think the essential UL is false, I don't think it's well-
stated in the FAQ. Third, have you read my other posts in the thread and
checked out the URLs?
> A number of years ago, I actually got involved in trying to track down
> the pull-tab thing. It was rather educational and somewhat amusing. I
> first posted the results of my efforts to AFU in December 1993, and then
> again in about June of 1994. Here we go again. You might find this
> enlightening:
I did find it enlightening and was impressed by your persistence in
investigating. There are points I'd like to respond to.
> ********************************************
> * Investigating the Great Pull-Tab Caper *
> ********************************************
>
> This unmitigated waste of time has been around for a looooong time. I
> know it has been around in Southern California since sometime before
> 1969, over 30 years ago, when I first ran into it.
This is the first time I've read a specific suggestion of how long this
has been around, so thanks for that.
It is, for some
> reason virtually impossible to extinguish, even though it has ABSOLUTELY
> NO BASIS IN TRUTH!
While I expect that the essential UL has no basis in truth I'm concerned
that the similarity between the UL as stated in the FAQ and the Camp
Dialysun story could lead to people treating the Camp Dialysun program as
a hoax. I'm pretty sure it isn't.
[snip]
> We figured, maybe we could get these people to put their energies to
> some good use and actually volunteer for the National Kidney Foundation.
> (We couldn't have been more wrong.)
Yeah, I'm afraid collecting something apparently a bit silly for a good
cause seems more appealing than actually doing the real work - with
collecting you can compete and show off how many tabs you've got, find
entertaining ways of getting them, you don't have to do it to a deadline
or schedule and so on. Don't get me wrong, it's great if people do
_anything_ but volunteer work for a Foundation is a lot less popular than
something which can seem a bit 'fun'. I think it's partly because when
you do stuff for a Foundation office you actually get a much clearer
picture of what the problem actually means; collecting stuff lets you
feel charitable without having to actually get too close to the scary
reality.
[snip]
> This thing is still around and it is as insidious and hard to stop as
> ever.
Well, the reason it's been brought up again is that I post on a patients'
support forum where someone mentioned 'pull-tabs for dialysis time' and I
replied that it was included as a UL in the AFU FAQ and Archives. Two
other people replied with information about Camp Dialysun so I went
hunting and thought people here would be interested in the results. I
also wanted to suggest that if Camp Dialysun is a genuine charitable
endeavour involving the collection of pull-tabs for the benefit of kidney
failure patients then that info went in the FAQ so people wouldn't
dismiss it.
[snip]
> Oh, and if you DO decide to talk to someone in healthcare about this do
> NOT waste your time talking to someone if they don't work in dialysis,
> why would they know any more about it than you do? If they're not
> involved with a dialysis program, they're just as liable to be blindly
> collecting these things as anyone else who doesn't work in dyalisis.
The Camp Dialysun program is run in Ontario and apparently supported by
the Kidney Foundation of Canada (see my other posts). I've contacted the
recycling company involved and they've given me an e-mail for the 'Queen
of Pull Tabs' (presumably the co-ordinator) but I haven't heard back from
her yet (errm, presuming it's that sort of 'queen'). I've also contacted
three Ontario branch offices of the Kidney Foundation of Canada but
haven't heard back from them yet either. What I'm pretty sure of so far
is that pull-tabs are collected and the recycler puts their worth towards
sponsoring child kidney patients to attend this place called Camp
Dialysun for a holiday where they can have some fun with other kids who
know what the situation is like, but also they learn more about dealing
with their illness. I think the camp does have dialysis facilities but
I'm not sure.
I acknowledge that even if Camp Dialysun _does_ have haemodialysis
facilities it's unlikely that the sponsored kids receive haemodialysis
treatment since haemodialysis is rarely the treatment of choice for
children, especially children under ten who would (I'd guess) be the most
likely candidates for the sponsorship.
[snip]
> Here's an interesting note for you: Since this thing has been around
> for at least 30 years, and it is so blasted hard to extinguish, and
> since the people who do it seem bound and determined to collect the
> litle buggers right in the face of evidence there's no place for them to
> be put to use, in the last few years, precisely because the thing has
> been so rampant and so impossible to stamp out, some folks have actually
> gone so far as to try to find some kind of use for them.
That might well be why the Camp Dialysun program was started.
> A couple of folk now have a little thing or two going, here or there
> just so the blasted pull-tabs won't be totally wasted, but there's no
> real concerted effort.
Umm, I think the Camp Dialysun thing looks 'concerted' to some extent. I
mean, the info so far suggests that the Lions Club, the Kidney Foundation
of Canada and a recycler called Pacific Metals are all involved, it's
been running since 1984 and has made at least $30,000 to send kids to
camp (apparently it's $3,000 per kid so ten kids as of 1997, the date
that thirty grand figure was placed). Whether or not that's 'concerted'
is up to you.
And why should there be? After all, they'd do
> better with THE WHOLE D*MNED CAN, but I guess that's asking too much.
I wondered that too. Ease of collection? Lack of sticky syrup? The tabs
are pure aluminum where if you want to recycle the cans you have to deal
with the paint or whatever inks are used to colour them? If you only use
tabs you get a better weight/volume ratio?
> But notice, not a single one of these has ANYTHING to do with dialysis!
I don't know if the Camp Dialysun program actually provides haemodialysis
for any of the sponsored children. It probably would provide peritoneal
dialysis since that's the more common treatment for kids. Even so, it
seems to be a situation where kidney failure patients are benefitting
from pull-tab collection so even if there's no haemodialysis for the
sponsored kids I think the FAQ should mention it.
> And these have grown out of people trying to figure out how to do some
> good with the mis-guided, mis-spent energies, not the other way around.
>
> From the FAQ:
>
> True. ...Some places or people (e.g., The Ronald McDonald House in
> Rochester, MN) do collect tabs now for their scrap value and
> raise $$ for various causes.
> True. The MN connection has been noted by many people. One of the
> better and more recent articles was posted by Sarah
> Skovronsky.
> True. There are two Canadians who collect them for wheelchairs.
> Ask Fred Ennis.
I'd certainly like to see the Camp Dialysun scenario as another 'True'
entry if we can establish what really _is_ true about it and it's as I've
indicated above.
[snip]
> The question is why don't people skip the PULL TAB stage
> and just donate the money they would have spent on mailing
> the damn things?
Yes, as far as I can tell if you live outside Ontario there won't be much
point trying to mail the things. Probably not if you live outside driving
distance of the recycler in Vancouver or one of the agencies doing a
collection drive.
BTW, the main reason I started to investigate is that I'd like to set up
a similar camp and sponsorship program here (I'm in Aus). Umm, no
disrespect and all, but when I'm getting info on this the main stuff I'm
after is how does the camp run and so forth. I'm not always asking people
about 'pull-tabs for dialysis time' UL stuff because frankly these people
might be a bit busy.
Mick "Thanks for the history lesson, Stan"
JoAnne Schmitz
>> >Given the above I think it would be inadequate to use the statement
>> >"Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected & exchanged for dialysis machine
>> >time" to refer to the UL in question and give it an 'F' if the
>> >information I'm looking into as best I can turns out to mean that
>> >children have had the dialysis time necessary while they're on holiday
>> >paid for by a recycler in lieu of cash in receipt of pull tabs collected
>> >by charitable organisations.
>>
>> I suppose in that sense it's inadequate. It only answers the question
>> which is asked,
>
>No question is asked. A statement is listed with an indicator preceding
>it.
F.* Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected & exchanged for dialysis
machine time. ["Redemption Rumors" in TMP]
T. ...Some places or people (e.g., The Ronald McDonald House in
Rochester, MN) do collect tabs for their scrap value and raise $$ for
various causes.
T.* There are two Canadians who collect them for wheelchairs. See Fred
Ennis's article.
The first statement is FALSE. No one is literally exchanging pull
tabs for dialysis.
The Camp Dialysun story is more similar to the second statement, which
includes the scrap value.
If there were another entry:
T. ...Camp Dialysun, a kids' camp for kids in dialysis, benefits from
some recyclers' programs. See (whatever wherever).
>that is, are ring-tabs collected and exchanged for
>> dialysis, not the question that you want it to ask,
>
>I do not want it to ask any question. Mind-reading is notoriously
>unreliable.
Then why do you insist that the question is not answered correctly?
It is. If you read the statement, it is false.
>I am a little disappointed that there seems to be little interest in even
>checking the URLs provided for this story let alone calling the telephone
>numbers mentioned in my first post in this thread to find out what is
>really happening but there has been repeated interest in presuming that I
>think the UL is 'true' or has been 'validated' by the information I've
>posted when I've repeatedly said I do not believe either of these
>suppositions. C'est la vie. Sometimes people are so eager to say "No"
>they blurt it out when no-one's proposing "Yes". If you review my first
>post you'll find that I didn't propose any conclusive "Yes" but simply
>provided what I believed to be new information on the topic and expressed
>my opinion that the current state of the FAQ on the topic isn't entirely
>satisfactory and that if certain possibilities turned out to be
>substantiated then it might even 'be fair enough to say that pull-tabs
>are paying for dialysis time' which is very close to the UL as stated.
Very close. But not the same.
This is a difficult point. But while there are degrees of truth or
falsehood, you will admit that a 99 percent true statement must be
considered false.
That's why the FAQ has references and further information.
>> Second, the usual story does not mention Camp Dialysun. The usual
>> scenario really doesn't have anything to do with any intrinsic value
>> of the rings being exchanged for money used to buy something.
>
>Yes, this is more my sense of the story too. As Wyatt Earp posted it
>seems to be more about some sort of 'scheme' where dialysis patients can
>get treatment because someone (or some company) will subsidise it at so
>many minutes dialysis per tab. Richard Brandt's interpretation of the
>essential UL is slightly different again, it seems; something more like
>dialysis patients actually being able to take tabs along to a facility
>themselves and be given dialysis time in return. I'm not sure if he only
>thinks of it in terms of direct proportion to intrinsic recycling value
>or allows that it might be more of a symbolic subsidised trade.
>
>It's
>> more like saving coupons or trading stamps. In each case, there's
>> stuff that is sent to the manufacturer of the item, as proof that you
>> bought the item, so that they will send a predetermined cash amount
>> per item to a particular charity. The items themselves are
>> essentially worthless.
>
>Yes, again this is more my idea of the UL - the items themselves are only
>tokens and their value is attributed by a sponsor. That's one reason I
>think the UL statement in the FAQ is a poor characterisation - it doesn't
>make the 'token' nature of the tabs clear.
I agree that this is a fair point.
>> There are companies that do similar things now. For example, the
>> Giant grocery store in my state sometimes runs a promotion called
>> "Apples for the Students." For every dollar you spend at Giant, any
>> school of your choice in the Giant grocery store area will be given a
>> certain cash amount to be used to purchase some supplies, such as band
>> instruments, computers or books. You simply save the register tape
>> and give it to the school. The tape itself has extremely little
>> intrinsic value.
>
>Thanks, that's interesting. Do you think it would be fair to say that
>'register tape is exchanged for school supplies' (or similar) in this
>instance?
Exchanged for funds for school supplies.
>> The other interesting thing about redemption rumors is that the one
>> giving money or dialysis time or whatever is often is engaged in
>> activities which directly cause the need for the thing given away.
>> The most blatant is the iron lung -- cigarette connection; you smoke,
>> you get emphysema, you need an iron lung, voila, the cigarette company
>> is kind enough to give you time on it. Provided your friends all
>> smoke, so they'll need the iron lung too.
>
>Beautifully ironic.
>
>I suspect that the pop-top
>> kidney dialysis connection has to do with some belief that soda pop
>> may cause kidney problems. It certainly makes you urinate.
>
>I hadn't even thought of that but it makes sense. I mean, it's not true
>but I wouldn't be too surprised if some people believe it. The only
>reality I could vaguely align with it is that Coke is very high in
>potassium which kidney failure patients must minimise in their diet since
>an excess of potassium can cause a heart attack and their kidneys can't
>clear it, but that's the only 'soda pop' type drink that I'm aware of as
>a hazard and that's after you've got the problem, not a cause of it.
Yeah. I was thinking of Moms telling kids that soda pop isn't good
for them.
>On the other hand various analgesics have caused kidney failure. Most are
>no longer legally available and I doubt any of those companies ever
>suggested people send empty analgesic boxes on the basis that they'd pay
>for some dialysis time. Like I really really really really doubt it.
Sure. But the reason no one would say that about analgesics is
because no one takes them for fun. The usual deal with the redemption
rumors is that the item you are buying is fun, but bad for you. The
redemption scheme means you can say, well, it's going for a good
cause, so I don't have to feel so guilty about it.
It's sort of like charity balls. You're wasting gobs of money on
dressing up and drinking and dancing, but it's okay because some of
the money goes to charity.
>and pretending
>> that the other entries don't exist.
>
>I repeat, I said "... the AFU FAQ has, in this instance as in others,
>been cautious to mention any substantial truth behind or related to an
>urban legend". I would appreciate it if you'd desist from repeating that
>I in some manner or other did not accept the existence of the entries
>following the UL we're discussing. I did read them and I did refer to
>them. You and I might understand the sum of the UL and the three
>following entries differently but I did not ignore them.
>
>> >> You say you bother to respond to the text in front of you rather than
>> >> whatever your imagination conjures up; the next step might be to read
>> >> all of it, not just part of it.
>> >
>> >I think the unavoidable implication here is that you're suggesting I have
>> >not read the above 'T' entries following the 'F' UL.
>>
>> Not at all.
>
>Then what implication or meaning did you intend by posting the UL and two
>of the following three entries with the 'read all of it' comment?
You can read it and ignore it. I never said you didn't read it.
If you disagree on the meaning of the first entry, I can see where it
might need some work. If it expresses the "token" idea is that enough
for you to agree that it's clearly False?
What is bugging me here is that you seem to shy away from accepting
the idea that the subsequent entries are meant to say, "yes, but" and
that the logical place for Camp Dialysun is there. It may not have
been written perfectly, and that's something that can be worked on.
But do you understand the intent? It's not to say that pop tops are
worthless and no one ever gets dialysis as a result of donating them
somewhere. It's to say that collecting pop tops and sending them to a
hospital for a kid to get dialysis is worthless.
Would changing the initial entry and adding Camp Dialysun in its own
entry, or in entry 2, be logical to you?
>> Your imagination seems to be leading you to believe that people will
>> not contribute tabs to Camp Dialysun after reading the entry.
>
>There's a difference between recognition of possibility and prediction of
>eventuality.
>
>Do you
>> think that people have not read the McDonald's program entry?
>
>I have no suggestion as to why they wouldn't if they're reading through
>that section of the FAQ.
So an entry for Camp Dialysun will cover that end of the deal.
>If
>> there is another entry created for Camp Dialysun (which there might
>> be), do you think people will not read that either? Why?
>
>If there is another entry created for Camp Dialysun I have no suggestion
>as to why people would not read it and I expect that if they are reading
>through that section of the FAQ then they would read that entry. There is
>currently no such entry. If there continues to be no such entry to read
>then it won't be read. Why do you think I've consistently said that I
>think such an entry should go in?
I want to differentiate between "change the main entry to say it's not
false" and "add an entry for Camp Dialysun."
>> The point is that there are two pieces of information here. One is
>> that Coca-Cola is not giving away dialysis time because you bought
>> their products, nor are tobacco companies giving away time on iron
>> lung machines for every cigarette pack you collect. That's the
>> legend.
>
>I think the legend need to be more distinctly stated.
With the token nature more emphasized? That seems fair.
>> The other is that some companies, McDonalds for sure, have decided to
>> do this as a goodwill gesture, and recycling centers can give you
>> money for even small bits of aluminum if you have enough of them.
>
>Sure, but there seems to be a bit of a difference with the Camp Dialysun
>story since the recycler is apparently part of the collecting process as
>well - or at least not simply involved as a commercial enterprise that
>gives cash for tabs and the recipient of the cash is then kind enough to
>donate it. I don't think it's unreasonable if people don't feel this is a
>significant difference but I do feel it's a significant difference.
>
>> The alt.folklore.urban FAQ is a FAQ about urban legends. Not a FAQ
>> about dialysis.
>
>I'm well aware of that. There's only one mention of dialysis in the whole
>thing and it's bloody enormous.
>
>I hope you will understand if we do not feel we must
>> put something that is understandably important to you first in the
>> list.
>
>I'm not sure what you mean by 'first in the list' but I don't think I've
>suggested anything like this and I find a vaguely offensive inference
>that I'm asking for 'special treatment'. This is simply an area that I
>know a lot about and care about - the 'rules' should be no different.
I apologize if that's the intent you read. I would have said the same
if you were a Johnny Cash enthusiast and I believed you were saying
that a UL about all country singers which is false should be retagged
true, rather than followed with an example showing that the UL in the
specific instance of Johnny Cash is true.
>> >On what basis do you
>> >suggest this? I have read them. I referred to the Ronald McDonald House
>> >story in my first post and in the second paragraph after the one
>> >containing the sentence you quoted above I wrote, "...the AFU FAQ has, in
>> >this instance as in others, been cautious to mention any substantial
>> >truth behind or related to an urban legend". Funny that you seem to
>> >suggest I didn't read far enough and in the failed attempt to demonstrate
>> >it you apparently failed to read far enough :)
>>
>> I guess you didn't read all the FAQ either.
>
>"...the AFU FAQ has, in this instance as in others, been cautious to
>mention any substantial truth behind or related to an urban legend"
>
>Please quit with this.
I was referring to the line noise at the end of your statement.
>> >Anyway, I frankly don't see what particular relation the two 'T' entries
>> >bear to my quoted text above. Can you explain what you're getting at
>> >please?
>>
>> If Camp Dialysun really takes pop tops and gives away then it would be
>> another T entry following the F one.
>
>This doesn't seem to be the case (I'm assuming the words 'dialysis time'
>were meant to be in there somewhere). I think charitable organisations
>collect tabs and a recycling company participates in the charitable
>endeavour by directing the recyling value towards children's holidays at
>Camp Dialysun. I think this is worth a T entry in the FAQ since it has
>the similar elements of people with kidney disease, pull tab collection
>and charity, and the extra factor of similarity between the words
>'dialysis' and 'Dialysun'. If we find that dialysis treatment has been
>provided to children under this sponsorship scheme I think the current
>statement of the UL should also change or it won't be fully justified as
>an F.
I disagree. The second statment handles this case.
>But the redemption rumor itself
>> stays, because it's been applied to many things.
>
>I don't suggest that the essential UL is 'true' or should not appear in
>the FAQ. However, the 'pull tabs for dialysis time' entry is the only
>mention of 'redemption' in the FAQ and I think it could be better stated
>given the differing impressions voiced in this thread and the potential
>confusion about Camp Dialysun.
I'll go with stating it better. I don't think the main entry should
say T, because the UL as it is usually told is False.
JoAnne "can't we all just get along" Schmitz
JoAnne Schmitz
>In our phone calling, we found two cases of the distribution going
>something like this:
>
> _________ A
> | \|/
> ^ B
> | \|/ the little "twigs" are "up-stream"
> ^ C people who collect for person C
> | \|/ and give the tabs to him/her.
> ^ D
> | \|/
> ^<-----------E
>
>Yup, you've got it right! In two of the ten cases we tracked, someone
>down below on the chain was giving the tabs to someone s/he THOUGHT was
>downstream from him/her when, IN FACT, the person was somewhere UPSTREAM
>from him/her! Or maybe downstream. Or, er... well. Hm.
>
>Now, remember: there is really no way that E, who has friends D and A
>could even know that A knows B who knows C who knows D. It's just too
>far removed.
>
>Conversely, A has no idea that E knows D who knows C who knows B!
>
>All A knows is that s/he's got a REAL DYNAMITE pull-tab collector who
>keeps giving her/him ever increasing quantities of pull tabs, fully
>unaware that they are just the same ones going around in a circle with a
>few more being added at each step along the way!
This is truly inspiring!
Retroactive thanks for your efforts in tracking it down, and thanks
for describing your findings to us now.
>And be careful. Trying to debunk this to somone who is collecting
>pull-tabs can be hazardous to your health and general well-being. When
>you try to debunk this to someone who has gone to all this effort and
>has told everybody they know that it's true, they have a real hard time
>with it and can get VERY angry at you.
I've had this experience myself.
I guess it's because they don't want to believe they've wasted so much
time on something that isn't of great value. They've built up a fair
portion of esteem on "helping little kids who need dialysis" and don't
want to give it up.
JoAnne "jaded no more" Schmitz
Mike Holmans
impart
>If we find that dialysis treatment has been
>provided to children under this sponsorship scheme I think the current
>statement of the UL should also change or it won't be fully justified as
>an F.
This seems to be your substantive point.
I would assume, being naive, that if children with diseased kidneys are
getting the opportunities to go on holiday at a Camp, that the Camp
would have dialysis facilities as a matter of routine. With guests in
their condition, such facilities would probably be as necessary as hot
and cold running water and HBO on the TVs in the rooms.
What the pull-tabs are for is the holiday, inclusive of accommodation,
meals and other necessities, all for one price. One of the necessities
happens to be dialysis.
Amending the FAQ on that basis is surely taking things to extremes. It's
like saying your frequent flyer miles are exchanged for the in-flight
movie rather than the whole flight.
The * by the F. in the current FAQ indicates that there is further
material to amplify. That's where an over-nice point such as this seems
to me to be belongs. If we expanded every FAQ entry susceptible to this
sort of treatment in the way you seem to be advocating for this one, it
would take about three weeks to load.
Mike "until we all get ADSL" Holmans
Dr H
On Wed, 9 Feb 2000 stanN...@simirescue.org wrote:
Stan, this is great. Nice report on an interesting bit of
field research.
[...]
}
}In our phone calling, we found two cases of the distribution going
}something like this:
}
} _________ A
} | \|/
} ^ B
} | \|/ the little "twigs" are "up-stream"
} ^ C people who collect for person C
} | \|/ and give the tabs to him/her.
} ^ D
} | \|/
} ^<-----------E
}
}Yup, you've got it right! In two of the ten cases we tracked, someone
}down below on the chain was giving the tabs to someone s/he THOUGHT was
}downstream from him/her when, IN FACT, the person was somewhere UPSTREAM
}from him/her! Or maybe downstream. Or, er... well. Hm.
[...]
This is hysterical, if not all that surprising. If you had gone
back a few more removes I don't doubt that you would have found a
few more circles.
}Another interesting thing was, although we directly represented the
}National Kidney Foundation, the MAJORITY of the people we contacted
}REFUSED TO BELIEVE that there was no basis in fact for the collection or
}pull-tabs and that absolutely no-one was going to get dialysis as a
}result of their efforts!
}
}They blindly continued to collect the be-damned things!
People believe what they want to believe. One point about this
particular UL that has always intrigued me is its persistence beyond
the era of removably flip-tops. At one point, when the rings were
actually intended to be completely removed from the can, one could
have at least justified collecting the damn things as benificial
in reducing a nasty form of litter. But for a long time now flip-tops
have been designed to remain attached to the can (a direct result of
the litter problem). Why would anyone imagine that there would be
any advantage in *removing* the attached tab when they could recycle
the whole can, and have that much *more* potential "money for
dialysis"?
}This really makes me angry!
}
}Think of all the GOOD which could come about if the same effort were
}directed toward some real project.
Yeah, like saving the red cellophane strips off Marlboro boxes...
[...]
}Sorry this was sooooo loooooongg but, I thought you might be interested
}in the details of the investigation.
It was interesting; thanks for posting it.
[...]
}And be careful. Trying to debunk this to somone who is collecting
}pull-tabs can be hazardous to your health and general well-being. When
}you try to debunk this to someone who has gone to all this effort and
}has told everybody they know that it's true, they have a real hard time
}with it and can get VERY angry at you.
Truth. But then, I get a lot of people angry at me. ;-)
[...]
}She soon got into the collecting with an increased fervor and I am
}afraid I may actually have been the spur because of *MY* meddling with
}her concept of "The Truth."
}
}GADS!!! This kind of stuff makes me angry. What a waste of energy.
}
}*sigh*
Getting angry about it is a waste of energy, too. You did what
you could.
[...]
}Here's an interesting note for you: Since this thing has been around
}for at least 30 years, and it is so blasted hard to extinguish, and
}since the people who do it seem bound and determined to collect the
}litle buggers right in the face of evidence there's no place for them to
}be put to use, in the last few years, precisely because the thing has
}been so rampant and so impossible to stamp out, some folks have actually
}gone so far as to try to find some kind of use for them.
}
}A couple of folk now have a little thing or two going, here or there
}just so the blasted pull-tabs won't be totally wasted, but there's no
}real concerted effort. And why should there be? After all, they'd do
}better with THE WHOLE D*MNED CAN, but I guess that's asking too much.
Indeed.
Carry on, boss.
Dr H
Richard Brandt
>
> In article <389FCF49...@rgfn.epcc.edu>,
> rsbr...@netscape.net wrote:
> > mic...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > If memory serves, I believe I referred to the person's statement
> > that they "believed, but didn't really know."
>
> So... if you only 'believe' you referred to such a statement does that
> mean you don't really know and thus you're groundlessly speculating?
Not much gets past you, does it?
Richard "Just Saw My Shadow" Brandt
mic...@hotmail.com
Mike Holmans <pos...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <87s7aj$k7n$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, mic...@hotmail.com decided to
> impart
> >provided to children under this sponsorship scheme I think the current
> >statement of the UL should also change or it won't be fully justified as
> >an F.
>
I don't know that I really have a substantive point, I'm afraid - just a
little bundle of information and some ideas about it. My rather woolly
position is that I'm presenting the info and saying, "Hey guys, what
about this?" but with a strong tendency towards wanting to protect any
benefit kidney patients might get from pull-tab charity.
> I would assume, being naive, that if children with diseased kidneys are
> getting the opportunities to go on holiday at a Camp, that the Camp
> would have dialysis facilities as a matter of routine. With guests in
> their condition, such facilities would probably be as necessary as hot
> and cold running water and HBO on the TVs in the rooms.
It's a bit more complicated. Kidney disease doesn't necessarily lead to
failure of either or both kidneys so dialysis is not necessarily an
implication of kidney disease; the best 'treatment' for a child with ESRD
(End Stage Renal Disease) is usually a transplant rather than dialysis
and such children won't usually go on dialysis for more than a critical
period first but would still probably be considered for the Camp Dialysun
program since learning to cope with a transplant at that age would be
heavy going; dialysis doesn't necessarily mean haemodialysis (ie with a
machine); the camp might be located near a hospital haemodialysis centre
so attending haemodialysis patients get shuttled there when necessary.
The impression I have so far is that the camp has dialysis treatment on-
site. I haven't seen a distinct reference to haemodialysis (meaning a
machine is used) as opposed to peritoneal dialysis (no machine and is
more common for kids and does not require the infrastructure and
maintenance of the machines).
HBO is necessary?
> What the pull-tabs are for is the holiday, inclusive of accommodation,
> meals and other necessities, all for one price.
I think so but I'm not sure. It's possible, for instance, that the
sponsorship pays for the accomodation and education stuff but that
dialysis (if needed and given) is still paid for by the usual government/
insurance means.
One of the necessities
> happens to be dialysis.
Possibly.
> Amending the FAQ on that basis is surely taking things to extremes.
I haven't proposed anything concrete so far but now I'd like to suggest
specifically that a 'T' entry follow the current 'F' entry, referring to
the Camp Dialysun Pull-Tab program to sponsor children with kidney
disease for a holiday. To me that's important since I think the Camp
Dialysun story could be mistaken for the UL statement.
If it was 'my FAQ' I'd also want to rephrase the statement of the UL
because I think as it stands it misses some of the flavour of the UL as I
understand it (see JoAnne's posts for a better picture of the UL as I
understand it than I would have been able to provide). For me, the UL
means that each and every pull-tab should be seen as some poor dialysis
patient's possible saviour if you could only get it to him/her - that
seems to be the impression of those who 'fall for it'. This would include
the 'token' value JoAnne describes.
I'm not very comfortable proposing anything specific about the UL
statement because I feel like that's more the territory of regulars here.
My territory is what I can report about reality with dialysis and the
Camp Dialysun info and my interest is mainly in that program being noted
in the sense of "Yes there's a UL but there's also this". Now that I've
thought more about the UL entry I think it would be difficult to word it
to include the full picture without either leaving it more open to
interpretation than I like (which is what I feel it does currently) or
making it an uncharacteristically long entry. Given that, perhaps the
best thing is to leave the entry as is and just append a T entry fo Camp
Dialysun.
It's
> like saying your frequent flyer miles are exchanged for the in-flight
> movie rather than the whole flight.
I see your point but the analogy seems a little weak since the movie
isn't necessary for the flight. Perhaps the analogy might be 'saying your
frequent flyer miles are exchanged for plane fuel rather than the whole
flight'.
> The * by the F. in the current FAQ indicates that there is further
> material to amplify. That's where an over-nice point such as this seems
> to me to be belongs.
You mean the Camp Dialysun information could go in the AFU Archives with
the other 'Pull Tab' related stuff? I'd still like it to be mentioned in
the FAQ after the UL because of the similar factors but that could only
be a sentence or two where more info could be included in an Archive
entry.
If we expanded every FAQ entry susceptible to this
> sort of treatment in the way you seem to be advocating for this one, it
> would take about three weeks to load.
It's already kinda large.
> Mike "until we all get ADSL" Holmans
Mick "Still thinking".
fred klein
>
> In our phone calling, we found two cases of the distribution going
> something like this:
>
> _________ A
> | \|/
> ^ B
> | \|/ the little "twigs" are "up-stream"
> ^ C people who collect for person C
> | \|/ and give the tabs to him/her.
> ^ D
> | \|/
> ^<-----------E
>
> Yup, you've got it right! In two of the ten cases we tracked, someone
> down below on the chain was giving the tabs to someone s/he THOUGHT was
> downstream from him/her when, IN FACT, the person was somewhere UPSTREAM
> from him/her! Or maybe downstream. Or, er... well. Hm.
"Hm," Indeed. How does a loop like this come into being, anyway?
E recruits D who recruits C who recruits B who recruits E. But E
has already been recruited (by F, not shown)! And for a while,
long enough for all the others (D, C, B) to be recruited.
Fred Klein
Viv
Dialysun in the FAQ under the pulltab legends section ie that if we
don't people might think a legitimate charity is a hoax]
:I am a little disappointed that there seems to be little interest in even
:checking the URLs provided for this story let alone calling the telephone
:numbers mentioned in my first post in this thread to find out what is
:really happening but there has been repeated interest in presuming that I
:think the UL is 'true' or has been 'validated' by the information I've
:posted when I've repeatedly said I do not believe either of these
:suppositions. C'est la vie. Sometimes people are so eager to say "No"
:they blurt it out when no-one's proposing "Yes". If you review my first
:post you'll find that I didn't propose any conclusive "Yes" but simply
:provided what I believed to be new information on the topic and expressed
:my opinion that the current state of the FAQ on the topic isn't entirely
:satisfactory and that if certain possibilities turned out to be
:substantiated then it might even 'be fair enough to say that pull-tabs
:are paying for dialysis time' which is very close to the UL as stated.
Thank you Mick for taking the time to explain your position more
fully. Unfortunately, through a quirk either in your phrasing or my
comprehension of your first few posts, it really did seem as if you
were just engaging in a "neener-neener you guys got it wrong" attitude
to the particular FAQ entry on pull-tabs.
I think your point about mentioning Camp Dialysun in the FAQ as a
valid endeavour (once we have full details on exactly what they do)
would be a good addition to the FAQ, perhaps along the lines of:
T. Various charities have programs where they redeem the pull-tabs for
cash to pay for programs, including Ronald McDonald House, 2 guys in
Canada who provide wheelchairs to the needy, and Camp Dialysun which
is actually approved by the Canadian Kidney Association as at last a
good way to use up all the otherwise useless sacks of pulltabs they
receive.
Someone will now probably come up with a pithier way of saying it - I
know the above paragraph is a bit laboured but I'm hungover this
morning and I can't be bothered thinking hard enough to edit for style
and wit right now.
Vivienne "g-g-r-r-o-o-a-a-n-n" Smythe
--
_.~:*'*:~Sydney, Australia - Olympics 2000 Construction site.~:*'*:~._
Fight gullibility now: see www.urbanlegends.com
_.~:*'*:~._.~:'*':~._.~:'*':~._.~:'*':~._.~:'*':~._.~:'*':~._~:*'*:~._
Ignorance may be bliss, but it's poor life insurance. -Sheri S. Tepper
Lee Rudolph
>I think your point about mentioning Camp Dialysun in the FAQ as a
>valid endeavour (once we have full details on exactly what they do)
>would be a good addition to the FAQ, perhaps along the lines of:
>
>T. Various charities have programs where they redeem the pull-tabs for
>cash to pay for programs, including Ronald McDonald House, 2 guys in
>Canada who provide wheelchairs to the needy, and Camp Dialysun which
>is actually approved by the Canadian Kidney Association as at last a
>good way to use up all the otherwise useless sacks of pulltabs they
>receive.
>
>Someone will now probably come up with a pithier way of saying it -
Particularly if they get dialythith.
Lee "hypocrite lecteur, ureter, you rat!" Rudolph
Charles Wm. Dimmick
> I haven't proposed anything concrete so far but now I'd like to suggest
> specifically that a 'T' entry follow the current 'F' entry, referring to
> the Camp Dialysun Pull-Tab program to sponsor children with kidney
> disease for a holiday. To me that's important since I think the Camp
> Dialysun story could be mistaken for the UL statement.
Whoa Nellie!
We _still_ do not have definite proof of this. Yes, we have a
metals recycler who donates money, but I am of the strong
impression that the money is donated to the Kidney Foundation,
who then apply a similar amount of money to the support of
Camp Dialysun, a camp they are supporting anyway,
whether or not the metal recycler donates. One too many
steps removed. Or perhaps two too many, since the
pull-tabs are given to McDonalds, who sends them to the
recycler, who sends money to the Ontario Kidney
Foundation, who supports Camp Dialysun. Somehow it
is all reminiscent of giving donations to Buddist Temples
who donate to political parties.
Charles Wm. Dimmick
R H Draney
> <snip diagram of circular collection clique>
>
> "Hm," Indeed. How does a loop like this come into being, anyway?
> E recruits D who recruits C who recruits B who recruits E. But E
> has already been recruited (by F, not shown)! And for a while,
> long enough for all the others (D, C, B) to be recruited.
The more I think about this, the more things I realize about it...for one,
your point about the origins of the chain is a good one...if I can suggest an
alternative, perhaps a whole lot of people just start collecting their own
pull-tabs...then in various combinations, two people discover each other doing
the same thing and decide to pool resources...(A says to B, "I don't really
have time to take them in, myself...how about I bring you whatever I
collect?")...the various parts of the circle can form either in parallel or in
any sort of sequence....
It seems obvious after a while that there need to be at least four people in
the circle...if A and B are aware of each other, likewise B and C, and C and
A, somebody will likely catch on that their "supplier" and "client" might know
each other...in a really large, impersonal organization, the loop might
actually be a quipu of large and small loops, but never less than four in each
complete circuit....
R H "there's a research grant in here somewhere" Draney
mic...@hotmail.com
Wy...@dis.org (Wyatt Earp) wrote:
> Richard Brandt <af...@rgfn.epcc.edu> wrote:
> >Because, for me, stories of "exchanging pull-tabs for dialysis"
> >really do conjure up images of someone going to a treatment
> >center and swapping a fistful or *whatever* quantity for time
> >on the machine. Call that gullibility if you will; I never said
> >I believed the story.
>
> in need of medical treatment would have to take the pull-tabs to a
> treatment center themselves.
To me a relevant part of this UL is the idea that pull tabs (box lids
etc) become a little 'magical' and that each one comes to represent
saving someone's life to some extent. I sorta see where Richard's coming
from now because that picture does have the same sort of 'fairytale' feel
to it.
My big sighting of this legend was back
> in college, when we lived in the dorms a few people organized massive
> drives to save these things because they could be used to provide
> dialysis to needy patients. The idea was we would save them all year,
> then at the end of the term the organizers would send them off. Most
> people that believed it seemed to assume that some wealthy person /
> corporation would make a donation to some dialysis charity or research
> organization for each pull-tab received. Then the philanthropists
> would send the pull-tabs off to the scrap yard. But nobody thought
> that the sick patients that needed dialysis were supposed to bring in
> a handful of pull-tabs each day to the treatment center. That would be
> just a bit too silly.
That's interesting too - people didn't fall for the Dickensian dialysis
patient opening his hand to display a few mangled pull tabs he's picked
out of a dumpster and saying "Please nurse, can I have some more?" but
they did find a 'rational' explanation for what was supposedly happening.
My personal take on ULs is that they usually have a 'borderline
believeable' quality, which is why Richard's interpretation threw me at
first.
> The drive went well, as college students tend to gravitate to
> collecting things like this.
Sure do. All that youthful energy... Did you have a muck-up day? We had
'Autonomy Day', celebrating the date our university became an autonomous
institution rather than an external unit of another university. Part of
that was a drive for clubs to score points by collecting things around
town - bits of McDonald's (the Hamburglar thing from the kids' playground
used to go missing pretty often), the Lord Mayor's numberplates, traffic
signs, taking a newscrew hostage, that sort of stuff. The worst problem
while I was there was when someone stole a bus and got it jammed under a
footbridge on campus. I don't think anyone stole a bus again but at some
later date someone stole a bus shelter...
[snip]
> Anyway, at the end of the year in the dorms nobody knew where to send
> the pull tabs, because (duh!) you can't really exchange pull-tabs for
> dialysis treatment. So we just threw them out along with all the empty
> liquor bottles. Now it seems there really is a place we could have
> sent them to benefit sufferers of kidney failure.
Well, sort of. If you were anywhere outside Ontario I'm pretty sure the
transport cost would have far exceeded the value of the recycled tabs.
To me, this means
> the legend we all thought was false really is true.
Well, the idea that pull tabs can help kidney patients isn't false
(anyone could collect and get recycle value and donate to a Kidney
Foundation) - and perhaps the Camp Dialysun story means that some kids
are having holidays including dialysis paid for by a pull-tab collection
drive. I still don't think the UL is 'true' because the UL in my mind has
the sort of mythical quality I mentioned above and includes the idea that
pull-tabs are essentially 'worth dialysis time'.
[snip]
> Well, the legend we heard might have been a mutation of the original
> UL, but none of them thought that the collection efforts of a few
> thousand beer-guzzling college students (The dorms housed about 4
> thousand people at the time) would provide much treatment at all.
You use the word 'provide', the AFU FAQ uses 'exchanged' and
www.snopes.com uses 'Pull-tabs from aluminum cans are redeemable for time
on dialysis machines'. This is one of the methodological problems with
studying ULs - they are flimsy things which mutate as people examine any
particular statement and definition. The Camp Dialysun program might mean
that it would be fair to say that pull-tabs provide dialysis time for
kids on holiday (if various 'if's are met). To me that wouldn't really
diminish the UL because the UL has a deeper and broader meaning than can
be simply phrased.
> Obviously something like dialysis is extremely expensive, and it would
> take a whole buttload of pull-tabs to provide even one treatment. But
> if all the beer-guzzling college students in all the colleges in all
> the world were to save all their pull-tabs, well then ya, that might
> add up to a whole buttload of pull-tabs.
>
> Wyatt "Now I collect Usenet postings" Earp
Mick "Now suffering an insane urge to call someone 'Pardner'".
mic...@hotmail.com
[snip]
> F.* Aluminum ring pull tabs are collected & exchanged for dialysis
> machine time. ["Redemption Rumors" in TMP]
> T. ...Some places or people (e.g., The Ronald McDonald House in
> Rochester, MN) do collect tabs for their scrap value and raise $$ for
> various causes.
> T.* There are two Canadians who collect them for wheelchairs. See Fred
> Ennis's article.
>
> The first statement is FALSE. No one is literally exchanging pull
> tabs for dialysis.
I basically agree there. I'm just a bit uncertain because the word
'exchanged' can be interpreted somewhat loosely. I notice www.snopes.com
refers to pull-tabs as 'redeemable' which gets the 'token' idea across
and also gives a better impression to me of direct exchange. I think just
the word 'exchanged' leaves things a bit open to the interpretation that
pull-tabs 'provide' something, as Wyatt Earp mentions - ie that the
'exchange' process might take a few steps. It's that sort of direct
redemption idea that the UL means to me, not whether or not some
insignificant item can be worth some sum if you collect a zillion of
them. However, 'redeemed' is the only word I could suggest that would
improve on 'exchanged' and 'exchanged' does have the advantage of
covering the broad range of mutations on the UL as it appears. Ho-hum,
it's easy to say you don't think something's perfect and a lot harder to
improve on it...
> The Camp Dialysun story is more similar to the second statement, which
> includes the scrap value.
>
> If there were another entry:
>
> T. ...Camp Dialysun, a kids' camp for kids in dialysis, benefits from
> some recyclers' programs. See (whatever wherever).
I think that's the best idea. I'm still not sure exactly what should be
said, though.
> >that is, are ring-tabs collected and exchanged for
> >> dialysis, not the question that you want it to ask,
> >
> >I do not want it to ask any question. Mind-reading is notoriously
> >unreliable.
>
> Then why do you insist that the question is not answered correctly?
> It is. If you read the statement, it is false.
It's because of my open interpretation. I agree that the statement is
simply false on a 'first OED' 'literal' interpretation.
[snip]
> >post you'll find that I didn't propose any conclusive "Yes" but simply
> >provided what I believed to be new information on the topic and expressed
> >my opinion that the current state of the FAQ on the topic isn't entirely
> >satisfactory and that if certain possibilities turned out to be
> >substantiated then it might even 'be fair enough to say that pull-tabs
> >are paying for dialysis time' which is very close to the UL as stated.
>
> Very close. But not the same.
...And now that I've explored options further I'm not sure there's a
better way to state it than is currently used. A variation of 'redeem' is
all I can suggest.
> This is a difficult point. But while there are degrees of truth or
> falsehood, you will admit that a 99 percent true statement must be
> considered false.
Well, I probably wouldn't admit it in terms of my personal understanding
of truth/falsity but I would admit that it's the convention for AFU and
that's fine. (I'm not trying to imply anything or be difficult, it's just
that with this sort of stuff I use the model of hypotheses for which
evidence falsifies, supports or is inconclusive - 'truth' doesn't really
come into it, 'proof' is for logic systems and law courts).
[snip]
> >Yes, again this is more my idea of the UL - the items themselves are only
> >tokens and their value is attributed by a sponsor. That's one reason I
> >think the UL statement in the FAQ is a poor characterisation - it doesn't
> >make the 'token' nature of the tabs clear.
>
> I agree that this is a fair point.
Maybe using the word 'redemption' (or 'redeemed' in context) would
communicate this. Or perhaps 'collected and used as tokens'... although
at first sight I think that's overly narrow.
> >> There are companies that do similar things now. For example, the
> >> Giant grocery store in my state sometimes runs a promotion called
> >> "Apples for the Students." For every dollar you spend at Giant, any
> >> school of your choice in the Giant grocery store area will be given a
> >> certain cash amount to be used to purchase some supplies, such as band
> >> instruments, computers or books. You simply save the register tape
> >> and give it to the school. The tape itself has extremely little
> >> intrinsic value.
> >
> >Thanks, that's interesting. Do you think it would be fair to say that
> >'register tape is exchanged for school supplies' (or similar) in this
> >instance?
>
> Exchanged for funds for school supplies.
I think that would be more accurate but that the other construction would
be acceptable in conventional usage - I think such inaccuracies in
description are one source of ULs since the plasticity of meaning gives
people a false impression where they want to see one and they take it
from there.
[snip]
> >On the other hand various analgesics have caused kidney failure. Most are
> >no longer legally available and I doubt any of those companies ever
> >suggested people send empty analgesic boxes on the basis that they'd pay
> >for some dialysis time. Like I really really really really doubt it.
>
> Sure. But the reason no one would say that about analgesics is
> because no one takes them for fun.
People used to take them far more flippantly than they do these days. In
Aus there were two brands - Bex and Vincent's - which were heavily
advertised, especially towards lower income women. When my parents were
growing up there were ads with the slogan "A cup of tea, a Bex and a good
lie down" to suggest that when you were tired or harried that was the
answer. It was common for people to buy a carton of the things with their
groceries as much as it was common to buy a bag of sugar and not unusual
to find people who took one with each cup of tea as readily as putting
sugar in it. Demographic research during the 70s and 80s found that renal
insufficiency was almost invariably much higher in low income areas and
was strongly correlated with analgesic sales - mechanism was also
demonstrated. That has changed as has the average age of patients since
that generation of patients has largely died out now. Anyway, forty and
fifty years ago people were basically taking them to just feel better
rather than as a specific medication.
The usual deal with the redemption
> rumors is that the item you are buying is fun, but bad for you. The
> redemption scheme means you can say, well, it's going for a good
> cause, so I don't have to feel so guilty about it.
>
> It's sort of like charity balls. You're wasting gobs of money on
> dressing up and drinking and dancing, but it's okay because some of
> the money goes to charity.
I hadn't thought of it that way but I agree that's frequently part of it.
[snip]
> If you disagree on the meaning of the first entry, I can see where it
> might need some work. If it expresses the "token" idea is that enough
> for you to agree that it's clearly False?
Yes, I think that would improve it. On the other hand, now that I've
thought about it more and read your and others' comments, I'm not so sure
my doubts could be addressed without resorting to a statement which would
be unsuitably detailed for the FAQ. Plus, editing that statement involves
issues of interpretation and meaning which regulars here are better
suited to address methinks.
> What is bugging me here is that you seem to shy away from accepting
> the idea that the subsequent entries are meant to say, "yes, but" and
> that the logical place for Camp Dialysun is there.
Sorry if that's how I've come across. Not my intention.
It may not have
> been written perfectly, and that's something that can be worked on.
> But do you understand the intent?
I think so.
It's not to say that pop tops are
> worthless and no one ever gets dialysis as a result of donating them
> somewhere. It's to say that collecting pop tops and sending them to a
> hospital for a kid to get dialysis is worthless.
>
> Would changing the initial entry and adding Camp Dialysun in its own
> entry, or in entry 2, be logical to you?
Yes, specifically adding Camp Dialysun (either way) - I think I'll zip my
lip on the initial entry and see what others think.
[snip]
> I want to differentiate between "change the main entry to say it's not
> false" and "add an entry for Camp Dialysun."
I definitely don't think the main entry should be 'not false' - maybe
slightly changed in wording if someone comes up with something good. I
think adding an entry for Camp Dialysun is a good idea.
[snip]
> >I'm not sure what you mean by 'first in the list' but I don't think I've
> >suggested anything like this and I find a vaguely offensive inference
> >that I'm asking for 'special treatment'. This is simply an area that I
> >know a lot about and care about - the 'rules' should be no different.
>
> I apologize if that's the intent you read. I would have said the same
> if you were a Johnny Cash enthusiast and I believed you were saying
> that a UL about all country singers which is false should be retagged
> true, rather than followed with an example showing that the UL in the
> specific instance of Johnny Cash is true.
Okay, thanks. I'm probably a little sensitive in that area.
[snip]
> >> >suggest I didn't read far enough and in the failed attempt to demonstrate
> >> >it you apparently failed to read far enough :)
> >>
> >> I guess you didn't read all the FAQ either.
> >
> >"...the AFU FAQ has, in this instance as in others, been cautious to
> >mention any substantial truth behind or related to an urban legend"
> >
> >Please quit with this.
>
> I was referring to the line noise at the end of your statement.
Duh. I completely forgot, sorry. My bad twice.
[snip]
> >I don't suggest that the essential UL is 'true' or should not appear in
> >the FAQ. However, the 'pull tabs for dialysis time' entry is the only
> >mention of 'redemption' in the FAQ and I think it could be better stated
> >given the differing impressions voiced in this thread and the potential
> >confusion about Camp Dialysun.
>
> I'll go with stating it better. I don't think the main entry should
> say T, because the UL as it is usually told is False.
Utterly agree there, and since trying to figure out how to state it
better I'm not so sure that's all that easy anyway - maybe I'd best focus
on what's so about the Camp Dialysun program and how to state it.
> JoAnne "can't we all just get along" Schmitz
Mick "No smiley but smiling".
Charles Frederick Goodin
Charles Wm. Dimmick <cdim...@snet.net> wrote:
>mic...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> I haven't proposed anything concrete so far but now I'd like to suggest
>> specifically that a 'T' entry follow the current 'F' entry, referring to
>> the Camp Dialysun Pull-Tab program to sponsor children with kidney
>> disease for a holiday. To me that's important since I think the Camp
>> Dialysun story could be mistaken for the UL statement.
>
>We _still_ do not have definite proof of this. Yes, we have a
>metals recycler who donates money, but I am of the strong
>impression that the money is donated to the Kidney Foundation,
>who then apply a similar amount of money to the support of
>Camp Dialysun, a camp they are supporting anyway,
>whether or not the metal recycler donates. One too many
>steps removed. Or perhaps two too many, since the
>pull-tabs are given to McDonalds, who sends them to the
>recycler, who sends money to the Ontario Kidney
>Foundation, who supports Camp Dialysun. Somehow it
>is all reminiscent of giving donations to Buddist Temples
>who donate to political parties.
>
A little more information -- my daughter is a kidney patient at British
Columbia Children's Hospital (I think it's actually been renamed to
Children and Women's Health Center or something like that). I was just in
at a parents' support group on Wednesday night, and I saw a jar of (tell
me you didn't see this coming...) pull tabs! (Actually, they're more like
pop tops these days). There's often pamphlets and posters around about
Camp Dialysun, too, although since my daughter's only 2 and nowhere near
renal failure yet, she neither camps nor gets dialysis.
--
chuk
mic...@hotmail.com
> Dialysun in the FAQ under the pulltab legends section ie that if we
> don't people might think a legitimate charity is a hoax]
I'll leave that because it's the most important point to me.
[snip]
> Thank you Mick for taking the time to explain your position more
> fully. Unfortunately, through a quirk either in your phrasing or my
> comprehension of your first few posts, it really did seem as if you
> were just engaging in a "neener-neener you guys got it wrong" attitude
> to the particular FAQ entry on pull-tabs.
It doesn't seem like you're the only one and I didn't actually make my
intentions clear because they hadn't coalesced in my own mind. Since
people do frequently come in here with the 'neener-neener' approach I
guess the misunderstanding isn't too surprising.
> I think your point about mentioning Camp Dialysun in the FAQ as a
> valid endeavour (once we have full details on exactly what they do)
Yes, I'm still just canvassing this because the information so far is not
very clear. I think we could reasonably conclude that there is (or at
least has been recently enough to still be mentioned on apparently active
webpages) a place called Camp Dialysun and that pull-tab recycling has
provided some funding towards children with kidney disease attending it.
I'd like a more concrete picture.
> would be a good addition to the FAQ, perhaps along the lines of:
>
> T. Various charities have programs where they redeem the pull-tabs for
> cash to pay for programs, including Ronald McDonald House, 2 guys in
> Canada who provide wheelchairs to the needy, and Camp Dialysun which
> is actually approved by the Canadian Kidney Association as at last a
> good way to use up all the otherwise useless sacks of pulltabs they
> receive.
Thanks Viv, I think something like that would be great. It's 'Kidney
Foundation of Canada' (think 'KFC') and I think it's interesting that the
program seems to have been running since 1984, although that might not be
significant in the entry. I mean, from a UL point of view if this has
been running since '84 I'd be willing to bet it has contributed somewhat
to the UL's persistence as well as taking advantage of it.
> Someone will now probably come up with a pithier way of saying it - I
> know the above paragraph is a bit laboured but I'm hungover this
> morning and I can't be bothered thinking hard enough to edit for style
> and wit right now.
I'd really appreciate it if anyone else finds further information so we
can get that 'more concrete picture'. I'm still waiting on replies to
several e-mails but I'm not immensely hopeful that much will come of that
since if they're heavily involved in charities the people at those
addresss won't have time to spare.
> Vivienne "g-g-r-r-o-o-a-a-n-n" Smythe
Mick "would that I could".
mic...@hotmail.com
rsbr...@netscape.net wrote:
> mic...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > In article <389FCF49...@rgfn.epcc.edu>,
> > rsbr...@netscape.net wrote:
> > > mic...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > If memory serves, I believe I referred to the person's statement
> > > that they "believed, but didn't really know."
> >
> > So... if you only 'believe' you referred to such a statement does that
> > mean you don't really know and thus you're groundlessly speculating?
>
> Not much gets past you, does it?
Well, the Early Bird is apparently instituting some sort of demarcation
suit over worm poaching. Doesn't stand a chance, of course, but just
between you and me McDonald's pays a surprising amount per kilo...
> Richard "Just Saw My Shadow" Brandt
>
> --
> === Richard Brandt is at http://www.zenation.com/rsbrandt ===
> "If you want entertainment you get two hookers and an 8-ball.
> Film is too powerful a medium for just that." -- Sean Penn
Mick "Often doesn't know what's got past him until some kind soul points
it out".
JoAnne Schmitz
>T. Various charities have programs where they redeem the pull-tabs for
>cash to pay for programs, including Ronald McDonald House, 2 guys in
>Canada who provide wheelchairs to the needy, and Camp Dialysun which
>is actually approved by the Canadian Kidney Association as at last a
>good way to use up all the otherwise useless sacks of pulltabs they
>receive.
T. Some charities have taken the rumor and run with it. They collect
pull-tabs which are recycled and the funds are put toward a cause.
Examples: Ronald McDonald House (kids in hospitals), 2 guys in Canada
(wheelchairs), Kidney Foundation of Canada (Camp Dialysun for kids in
dialysis).
With links for each of the above.
JoAnne "not much shorter, actually" Schmitz
JoAnne Schmitz
>In article <38a0a5e1...@news.alt.net>,
> Wy...@dis.org (Wyatt Earp) wrote:
>> Richard Brandt <af...@rgfn.epcc.edu> wrote:
>> >Because, for me, stories of "exchanging pull-tabs for dialysis"
>> >really do conjure up images of someone going to a treatment
>> >center and swapping a fistful or *whatever* quantity for time
>> >on the machine. Call that gullibility if you will; I never said
>> >I believed the story.
>>
>> I find it interesting that you insist the legend implies that people
>> in need of medical treatment would have to take the pull-tabs to a
>> treatment center themselves.
>
>To me a relevant part of this UL is the idea that pull tabs (box lids
>etc) become a little 'magical' and that each one comes to represent
>saving someone's life to some extent. I sorta see where Richard's coming
>from now because that picture does have the same sort of 'fairytale' feel
>to it.
Exactly. I remember the wording of the legend is often "each pull tab
donated means one minute of dialysis." It would be easy to confuse
"when recycled is worth" with "is exchanged for," especially if you're
a kid collecting them and don't realize that one pull tab couldn't be
worth one minute's dialysis anyway.
>The worst problem
>while I was there was when someone stole a bus and got it jammed under a
>footbridge on campus.
Interesting. Did a little boy come along and suggest that they let
the air out of the tires? That's a legend too.
JoAnne "ourobouros" Schmitz
mic...@hotmail.com
mic...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <38a0a5e1...@news.alt.net>,
> Wy...@dis.org (Wyatt Earp) wrote:
[snip]
Now it seems there really is a place we could have
> > sent them to benefit sufferers of kidney failure.
>
> Well, sort of. If you were anywhere outside Ontario I'm pretty sure the
> transport cost would have far exceeded the value of the recycled tabs.
I think this is the second time I've somehow indicated the pull tabs go
to Ontario. No kewpie doll for me. The recycler, Pacific Metals, lists
their location as Vancouver, British Columbia. Camp Dialysun has been
referred to as being located in Ontario.
Mick "Always was lousy at geography".
R H Draney
> T. Some charities have taken the rumor and run with it. They collect
> pull-tabs which are recycled and the funds are put toward a cause.
> Examples: Ronald McDonald House (kids in hospitals), 2 guys in Canada
> (wheelchairs), Kidney Foundation of Canada (Camp Dialysun for kids in
> dialysis).
Does not this essentially make the original entry Ft.?...while it's
commendable to provide pointers to specific organizations making the old UL
true, lists like this can rapidly go out of date as (fortunately) others
will do likewise and should really be included, and (unfortunately) ones
listed may either suspend the program or change their cyberwhereabouts....r
--
"Lately, everywhere I go it seems people are talking about synchronicity."
stanN...@simirescue.org
[snip]
> Most people that believed it seemed to assume that some
> wealthy person / corporation would make a donation to some
> dialysis charity or research organization for each pull-tab
> received. Then the philanthropists would send the pull-tabs
> off to the scrap yard.
The part of the UL I heard back in 1969 that "explained" the why of
collecting pulltabs in exchange for dialysis went like this:
<VIOLINS type=saccharine>
The INVENTOR OF THE PULLTAB had grown up rather poor, gotten married and
had a son or daughter. Years before he invented the pulltab, he was just
a poor working shnook when his young son/daughter developed kidney
failure. Unfortunately, the kid needed dialysis, but being just a poor
working shnook, the father just couldn't afford to pay for the
oh-so-expensive kidney dialysis so he had to watch his own kid die of
kidney failure.
When the guy eventually got around to inventing the pulltab, he became a
multi-gazillionaire and vowed no one would ever go through what he and
his family had gone through. Being also environmentally conscious
(remember, in 1969 pulltabs actually came off the can when you popped
open your drink), he decided to kill two birds with one kidney-stone, so
to speak, and established a fund which provided one minute of free
dialysis to some poor kid somewhere for every pulltab you turned in.
</violins>
Shalom,
-Stan 'Oy! such tsuris" Greene-
Don Whittington
Frederick Goodin) wrote:
> A little more information -- my daughter is a kidney patient at British
> Columbia Children's Hospital (I think it's actually been renamed to
> Children and Women's Health Center or something like that). I was just in
> at a parents' support group on Wednesday night, and I saw a jar of (tell
> me you didn't see this coming...) pull tabs! (Actually, they're more like
> pop tops these days). There's often pamphlets and posters around about
> Camp Dialysun, too, although since my daughter's only 2 and nowhere near
> renal failure yet, she neither camps nor gets dialysis.
>
>
Thank you. The legend arose when we had pull tabs, which were completely
separated from the can. Nowadays we have pop tabs, which are not. Once
the legend made a certain kind of silly, sense. Now it is just mass
idiocy.
Don "Aluminum equals money" Whittington
--
"One thing I've noticed is that the survivors often believe that
they were miraculously saved by the hand of God, whereas the dead
can't be interviewed. Too bad, because if they could, they'd have
better details on the God thing." necron99
R H Draney
> The INVENTOR OF THE PULLTAB had grown up rather poor, gotten married and
> had a son or daughter. Years before he invented the pulltab, he was just
> a poor working shnook when his young son/daughter developed kidney
> failure. Unfortunately, the kid needed dialysis, but being just a poor
> working shnook, the father just couldn't afford to pay for the
> oh-so-expensive kidney dialysis so he had to watch his own kid die of
> kidney failure.
Note irony component: the inventor of a crucial part of the container for
kidney-slamming beverages has a son with kidney trouble and so decides to
associate his fortune with helping out those affected...something like
Nobel, inventor of dynamite, establishing a prize for peace...or Bell,
inventor of the telephone, establishing a school for the deaf....r
Phil Edwards
wrote:
>Note irony component: the inventor of a crucial part of the container for
>kidney-slamming beverages has a son with kidney trouble and so decides to
>associate his fortune with helping out those affected...something like
>Nobel, inventor of dynamite, establishing a prize for peace...or Bell,
>inventor of the telephone, establishing a school for the deaf....r
Nice point, shame about that misspleling in the first line.
Phil "aluminiumy" Edwareds
--
Phil Edwards http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/amroth/
"How about if I admit to myself that I don't really care?"
- Ulo Melton
mic...@hotmail.com
>
> > I don't think you've supported the Camp Dialysun instance enough yet,
> > first of all.
> > [...]
> > Provided we get good documentation of Camp Dialysun, I don't think
> > that's unfair. .
>
> A little bit more information about Camp Dialysun can be
> found at:
> http://www.informationwindsor.com/webhea.htm
>
> scroll down to
> KIDNEY FOUNDATION OF CANADA
> Windsor and District Chapter
Thanks, I did mention this page but originally forgot to include the URL.
I've also tried e-mailing offices of the Kidney Foundation of Canada in
Ontario but haven't yet heard back from them. Since the recycling company
is in British Columbia I'll try e-mailing offices there tonight.
> also a newspaper article at:
> http://www.mirror-guardian.com/com330.html
I mentioned this page in my first post too. I just tried checking it
again and it's giving me a 'File Not Found' page now.
> Charles Wm. Dimmick
Mick.
mic...@hotmail.com
[snip]
> Exactly. I remember the wording of the legend is often "each pull tab
> donated means one minute of dialysis." It would be easy to confuse
> "when recycled is worth" with "is exchanged for," especially if you're
> a kid collecting them and don't realize that one pull tab couldn't be
> worth one minute's dialysis anyway.
Yes, that's the sort of thing I was thinking of. Maybe the www.snopes.com
wording with 'redeemable' is a better description.
> >The worst problem
> >while I was there was when someone stole a bus and got it jammed under a
> >footbridge on campus.
>
> Interesting. Did a little boy come along and suggest that they let
> the air out of the tires? That's a legend too.
It's played on in a recent television advertisement here where an elderly
man suggests the same to two younger men who have got their truck stuck
under a train bridge - the ad was for the International Year of Older
People with the message that older people are canny and helpful.
In the instance I was talking about, since some of the students involved
were from the engineering faculty I hope they would have thought of it.
Perhaps it was too well jammed for those few inches to help. I think the
eventual driving force for shifting the bus was more the Urban Transit
Authority's suggestion that they'd have no compunctions about suing the
university, the Students' Association and the individuals involved if
they didn't get their bus back very quickly and also an undertaking to
repair it. Uni Admin passed this information along to the Students'
Association (I was told that during the conversation it was mentioned
that the Students' Association office space could be shut down on a
moment's notice if Admin felt like it) and the Students' Association got
busy with every available muscle to dislodge said bus and then got it
towed back to the depot.
My impression of the story is from the discussions over a few meetings
when I was on the Association Council arranging following treasure hunts
and we had to make it clear this sort of escapade was Not A Good Thing. I
wouldn't guarantee its accuracy but there was enough in previous minutes
and Treasurer's reports for me to believe it at the time.
> JoAnne "ourobouros" Schmitz
Mick "Careful With That Bus, Eugene"
mic...@hotmail.com
>
> > I haven't proposed anything concrete so far but now I'd like to suggest
> > specifically that a 'T' entry follow the current 'F' entry, referring to
> > the Camp Dialysun Pull-Tab program to sponsor children with kidney
> > disease for a holiday. To me that's important since I think the Camp
> > Dialysun story could be mistaken for the UL statement.
>
> We _still_ do not have definite proof of this. Yes, we have a
> metals recycler who donates money,
I think that's effectively so.
but I am of the strong
> impression that the money is donated to the Kidney Foundation,
I'm not sure one way or the other. I'm not under the impression that the
recycler administrates the camp to any degree but nor do I have any
evidence that they simply donate the recycle value to the Foundation
rather than (for instance) paying the Foundation whatever sum is required
for a specific child to have a holiday with all necessities included.
> who then apply a similar amount of money to the support of
Why 'a similar amount of money'? With many charitable donations there is
a legal obligation for the receiving body to spend the sum in a defined
manner.
> Camp Dialysun, a camp they are supporting anyway,
> whether or not the metal recycler donates.
Yes, as far as I've seen Camp Dialysun exists independently of the
recycling program.
One too many
> steps removed. Or perhaps two too many, since the
> pull-tabs are given to McDonalds, who sends them to the
> recycler, who sends money to the Ontario Kidney
> Foundation, who supports Camp Dialysun.
You're well ahead of me here. Can you tell me why you say the pull-tabs
are given to McDonald's, that McDonald's send them to Pacific Metals or
that Pacific Metals sends money to the Ontario Kidney Foundation?
Somehow it
> is all reminiscent of giving donations to Buddist Temples
> who donate to political parties.
>
> Charles Wm. Dimmick
Mick "The money's neither here nor there - it's in Geneva".
Tim Dunne
<mic...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:885uda$gdn$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
<snip bus, tyres, deflation etc>
> My impression of the story is from the discussions over a few meetings
> when I was on the Association Council arranging following treasure hunts
> and we had to make it clear this sort of escapade was Not A Good Thing. I
> wouldn't guarantee its accuracy but there was enough in previous minutes
> and Treasurer's reports for me to believe it at the time.
My father, a great storyteller in the Irish tradition, but sadly an
inveterate bullshitter, told me this story in the mid seventies, claiming to
have seen it first hand in Gloucestershire, UK, in the 50's(L). He said
various scholarly types were chin - scratching and a little boy suggested
letting the tyres down... but then, he vectored so many UL's to me that I
became quite good at spotting them, even as a kid. Ho hum.
Tim ''Ere, son, did I ever tell you about the time that...''ZZzzzz' Dunne
mic...@hotmail.com
jsch...@qis.net wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2000 12:13:41 +1100, Viv <v...@au.mensa.org> wrote:
>
> >T. Various charities have programs where they redeem the pull-tabs for
> >cash to pay for programs, including Ronald McDonald House, 2 guys in
> >Canada who provide wheelchairs to the needy, and Camp Dialysun which
> >is actually approved by the Canadian Kidney Association as at last a
> >good way to use up all the otherwise useless sacks of pulltabs they
> >receive.
>
> pull-tabs which are recycled and the funds are put toward a cause.
> Examples: Ronald McDonald House (kids in hospitals), 2 guys in Canada
> (wheelchairs), Kidney Foundation of Canada (Camp Dialysun for kids in
> dialysis).
I wouldn't like to say 'kids in dialysis' on what I've seen so far and
I'd prefer a more accurate statement of the Ronald McDonald House setup,
so here are my editing suggestions:
T. Some schemes capitalise on the rumour, collecting pull-tabs and
directing the recycle value to a cause. Examples: Ronald McDonald House
(subsidised accomodation for families of kids in hospital), 2 guys in
Canada (wheelchairs), Kidney Foundation of Canada (Camp Dialysun for kids
with kidney disease).
> With links for each of the above.
If people want to check it out, a currently active link for a Ronald
McDonald House 'Pop Tabs For Kids' program is for Omaha, Nebraska:
http://www.rmhomaha.org/pop.htm
> JoAnne "not much shorter, actually" Schmitz
Mick "Just a little vertically challenged"
mic...@hotmail.com
[snip]
> A little more information -- my daughter is a kidney patient at British
> Columbia Children's Hospital (I think it's actually been renamed to
> Children and Women's Health Center or something like that). I was just in
> at a parents' support group on Wednesday night,
One of the best predictors of positive prognosis is supportive people in
the home environment, so that's good to read. I'm afraid sometimes family
and friends just don't handle the situation and try to 'shut it out' as
much as they can.
and I saw a jar of (tell
> me you didn't see this coming...) pull tabs! (Actually, they're more like
> pop tops these days).
In Aus I think removable pull tabs ended production around twenty years
ago. They were replaced with the snap top things where the ring piece
pushes the tab in and then folds back and stays fixed to the can. With
this jar of tabs - are these just the little ring bits on their own?
There's often pamphlets and posters around about
> Camp Dialysun, too, although since my daughter's only 2 and nowhere near
> renal failure yet, she neither camps nor gets dialysis.
With ever-improving methods of delaying End Stage Renal Disease and some
extraordinary developments in transplant technology and immunosuppression
it's quite possible she'll never need dialysis and that if she does
suffer renal failure she'll be able to have a transplant with very few
side effects. Time in hospital for a transplant is now expected to be 8
days where I am in Aus - when I had a transplant in 1990 I was in for
about five weeks and had been told a month was usual. As far as I know
Canada and Australia are both good places to have renal failure, if you
can accept the idea of there being a good place to have bad luck.
I'd appreciate it if you could check the story out with other parents,
and perhaps call the numbers provided earlier in the thread. It would be
interesting from a UL point of view if any of the sponsored kids had
received dialysis treatment while at the camp. The number I was given for
the Kidney Foundation of Canada (from within BC) is 1-800-567-8112. The
Pacific Metals Pull Tabs page says "For More Information in B.C. Canada,
give Pull tabs Coordinator Sharon Pentecost a call at 604-599-5039"
> --
> chuk
Mick "Pleased to meet you; best of luck".
mic...@hotmail.com
Dr H <hiaw...@efn.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 9 Feb 2000 stanN...@simirescue.org wrote:
[snip]
Why would anyone imagine that there would be
> any advantage in *removing* the attached tab when they could recycle
> the whole can, and have that much *more* potential "money for
> dialysis"?
[snip]
> }A couple of folk now have a little thing or two going, here or there
> }just so the blasted pull-tabs won't be totally wasted, but there's no
> }real concerted effort. And why should there be? After all, they'd do
> }better with THE WHOLE D*MNED CAN, but I guess that's asking too much.
>
> Indeed.
I wondered about this too, so I e-mailed the address on one of the Ronald
McDonald House 'Pop Tab' webpages and asked. Their explanation was
twofold; firstly space and secondly hygiene. My impression was that their
program is run by one household - they don't have space to save a million
cans but using pop tabs means manageable proportions in the turnover from
collection to recyler and they want the minimum of germs breeding off
sugary solution while they're collecting a useful volume.
> Carry on, boss.
>
> Dr H
Mick "Ewwwwwww, germies".
JoAnne Schmitz
>T. Some schemes capitalise on the rumour, collecting pull-tabs and
>directing the recycle value to a cause. Examples: Ronald McDonald House
>(subsidised accomodation for families of kids in hospital), 2 guys in
>Canada (wheelchairs), Kidney Foundation of Canada (Camp Dialysun for kids
>with kidney disease).
Looks good. Thanks for the links so far.
As for the initial entry, how about:
F.* Sponsor donates dialysis machine time in exchange for alumin(i)um
ring tabs; similar scheme with cigarette packets and iron lung time.
["Redemption Rumors" in TMP]
JoAnne "
Dr H
On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 mic...@hotmail.com wrote:
}In article <Pine.GSU.4.05.100020...@garcia.efn.org>,
} Dr H <hiaw...@efn.org> wrote:
}>
}> On Wed, 9 Feb 2000 stanN...@simirescue.org wrote:
}
}[snip]
}
}Why would anyone imagine that there would be
}> any advantage in *removing* the attached tab when they could recycle
}> the whole can, and have that much *more* potential "money for
}> dialysis"?
}
}[snip]
}
}> }A couple of folk now have a little thing or two going, here or there
}> }just so the blasted pull-tabs won't be totally wasted, but there's no
}> }real concerted effort. And why should there be? After all, they'd do
}> }better with THE WHOLE D*MNED CAN, but I guess that's asking too much.
}>
}> Indeed.
}
}I wondered about this too, so I e-mailed the address on one of the Ronald
}McDonald House 'Pop Tab' webpages and asked. Their explanation was
}twofold; firstly space and secondly hygiene. My impression was that their
}program is run by one household - they don't have space to save a million
}cans but using pop tabs means manageable proportions in the turnover from
}collection to recyler and they want the minimum of germs breeding off
}sugary solution while they're collecting a useful volume.
I'm surprised they're not concerned about the rat urine on the tabs.
And I guess it didn't occur to them that they could make up their
volume (or do they go by mass) of aluminum more quickly, and from
fewer sources, with whole cans?
Oh well...
Dr H
mic...@hotmail.com
stanN...@simirescue.org wrote:
> In article <38a0a5e1...@news.alt.net>, Wy...@dis.org (Wyatt Earp)
> wrote:
>
>
> > Most people that believed it seemed to assume that some
> > wealthy person / corporation would make a donation to some
> > dialysis charity or research organization for each pull-tab
> > received. Then the philanthropists would send the pull-tabs
> > off to the scrap yard.
>
> collecting pulltabs in exchange for dialysis went like this:
>
> <VIOLINS type=saccharine>
> had a son or daughter. Years before he invented the pulltab, he was just
> a poor working shnook when his young son/daughter developed kidney
> failure. Unfortunately, the kid needed dialysis, but being just a poor
> working shnook, the father just couldn't afford to pay for the
> oh-so-expensive kidney dialysis so he had to watch his own kid die of
> kidney failure.
>
> multi-gazillionaire and vowed no one would ever go through what he and
> his family had gone through. Being also environmentally conscious
> (remember, in 1969 pulltabs actually came off the can when you popped
> open your drink), he decided to kill two birds with one kidney-stone, so
> to speak, and established a fund which provided one minute of free
> dialysis to some poor kid somewhere for every pulltab you turned in.
> </violins>
>
> Shalom,
> -Stan 'Oy! such tsuris" Greene-
I was interested to find out when pull tab packaging was invented and
where that date sat in the history of haemodialysis so I went looking.
According to the Beer Can Collectors of America, "The pull tab beer can
was first test marketed by the Pittsburgh Brewing Company of Pittsburgh,
PA in March of 1962 and sold to the general public beginning in March the
following year."
http://www.bcca.com/bccacans.html
According to the Pittsburgh Brewing Company itself, "In 1962 Pittsburgh
Brewing introduced the world's first snap-top can, established in
conjunction with Alcoa."
http://www.pittsburghbrewingco.com/history.html
Even though the first commercially built artificial kidney was produced
in 1956 (http://www.baxter.com/investors/profile/history/index.html),
1962 and 1963 show up as 'Key Dates in The History of Dialysis' for
moral, legal and financial reasons according to a page at the Fresenius
website (Fresenius being a manufacturer of dialysis supplies). They cite
'Contemporary Nephrology Nursing', 1998:
'1962 - The New York Times publishes an article -- "Panel Holds Life or
Death Vote in Allotting of Artificial Kidney" -- describing the practice
of using Acceptance Committees to determine who qualifies and receives
life-saving dialysis treatments. In another important article that year,
Life magazine details the moral dilemmas put before doctors in "They
Decide Who Lives, Who Dies."
1963 - The U.S. Public Health Service approves the first 14 grants to
help pay for patients’ supplies needed for dialysis.'
http://www.fmcna.com/overview/keydates.htm
So just as pull tab cans were being marketed and becoming popular there
was something of a political issue over funding for dialysis, which was
not at that time free for all who needed it. In fact, the same page has
an entry for 1972 saying, "Congress passed the Social Security Amendments
of 1972 (H.R. 1) which allowed for a source of funding from the federal
government to pay for dialysis treatment", which I take to mean that free
dialysis was not a simple issue before then.
I'm always interested in how ULs come to be. In this case it looks like
there are at least two characteristic elements - the classic situation of
coincidental novelties being linked and the suggestion previously noted
that people wanted to drink their beer (or pop) and be able to say that
some part of that habit was actually charitable, in aid of those who were
suffering from a problem they believed the habit might cause.
Mick "hic... lemme jusht... hic... make a donayshun... hic"
mic...@hotmail.com
>
> > T. Some charities have taken the rumor and run with it. They collect
> > Examples: Ronald McDonald House (kids in hospitals), 2 guys in Canada
> > (wheelchairs), Kidney Foundation of Canada (Camp Dialysun for kids in
> > dialysis).
>
> Does not this essentially make the original entry Ft.?...
That's one thing I was wondering to start with. I think rephrasing the UL
entry would be better than making the current one Ft - especially since
I'm not sure that any of the sponsored kids have needed hemodialysis
treatment. BTW, I received an e-mail response from Ontario about the Camp
Dialysun setup - they say that it's managed by the Kidney Foundation of
Canada and is actually done by renting camp facilities for two weeks from
the Canadian Institue for the Blind and that the on-site medical facility
is operated in partnership with Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children.
This reply specified that the camp is for 'children age 8 - 15 years
(dialysis, transplant and pre-dialysis patients)'.
while it's
> commendable to provide pointers to specific organizations making the old UL
> true, lists like this can rapidly go out of date as (fortunately) others
> will do likewise and should really be included, and (unfortunately) ones
> listed may either suspend the program or change their cyberwhereabouts....r
Fair point. The Camp Dialysun pull-tab setup has been described as
running since 1984 and another poster in this thread who lives in the
appropriate area and whose daughter has kidney disease said he's seen a
jar apparently for pull-tab collection when he went to a support group.
It seems to be a consistent and organised effort, although of course
almost nothing is permanent. Has anyone checked recently if the
wheelchair guys are still going?
> --
> "Lately, everywhere I go it seems people are talking about synchronicity."
Mick "I'm sure I just read that somewhere else..."
mic...@hotmail.com
dun...@mindspring.com (Don Whittington) wrote:
> In article <881isc$scg$1...@morgoth.sfu.ca>, cgo...@sfu.ca (Charles
> Frederick Goodin) wrote:
>
> > A little more information -- my daughter is a kidney patient at British
> > Columbia Children's Hospital (I think it's actually been renamed to
> > Children and Women's Health Center or something like that). I was just in
> > me you didn't see this coming...) pull tabs! (Actually, they're more like
> > Camp Dialysun, too, although since my daughter's only 2 and nowhere near
> > renal failure yet, she neither camps nor gets dialysis.
> >
> >
>
> separated from the can. Nowadays we have pop tabs, which are not.
Perhaps people have overcome this seemingly insurmountable obstacle by
the devilishly clever stratagem of breaking the tabs away from the cans
themselves?
Once
> the legend made a certain kind of silly, sense. Now it is just mass
> idiocy.
According to the Kidney Foundation of Canada in British Columbia it's now
worth 17 million tabs or $10,000 of idiocy per annum directed to children
with kidney disease going to summer camp.
> Don "Aluminum equals money" Whittington
Mick "That'll do me"
mic...@hotmail.com
[snip]
> }I wondered about this too, so I e-mailed the address on one of the Ronald
> }McDonald House 'Pop Tab' webpages and asked. Their explanation was
> }twofold; firstly space and secondly hygiene. My impression was that their
> }program is run by one household - they don't have space to save a million
> }cans but using pop tabs means manageable proportions in the turnover from
> }collection to recyler and they want the minimum of germs breeding off
> }sugary solution while they're collecting a useful volume.
>
> I'm surprised they're not concerned about the rat urine on the tabs.
Thufferin' thuccotash, someone had better warn 'em!
> And I guess it didn't occur to them that they could make up their
> volume (or do they go by mass) of aluminum more quickly, and from
> fewer sources, with whole cans?
I'd be surprised if they hadn't considered that. They go by weight
according to what I've been told. I think if they used cans they'd have
to go to the recycler more often, like much more often, for no gain in
funds - ie transport cost eats into dollars to donate. My guess is that
it doesn't work out on efficiency ratios, if'n you get where I'm coming
from. In order to collect say, $100 worth of pull-tabs you might need
four garbage bags full (completely pot-shot guesses here, okay) - but the
same mass of aluminium in cans might take up the four rooms of my flat,
even though it would be quicker to collect. Transporting four garbage
bags is a lot easier than transporting four rooms full of cans, crushing
the cans would take a lot of extra time and I'd bet your average
charitable punter wouldn't crush them fully before dropping them in the
box. Taking one roomful at a time as soon as it's full is an option, but
that's only $25 worth and if the cost of the trip is $5 that's taking $20
out of your possible $100 instead of only $5 if you make the trip once.
Sure, you might reach the weight required for $100 more quickly using
cans but not necessarily quickly enough to offset that loss and the
hassle of the extra space and hygiene problems and crushing them. Of
course, these problems are worse if you're looking at $400 or $500. Plus
if you have a look at the size of the collection boxes they use you
wouldn't get many cans in one. To use an appropriately sized collection
box would mean taking up half of your McDonald's queue space or a car-
parking space and the idea for McDonald's is to keep making money while
being charitable, not to give away potential customers.
> Oh well...
>
> Dr H
Mick "And no I don't want to try and figure out the relevant equations"
mic...@hotmail.com
jsch...@qis.net wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 12:33:32 GMT, mic...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >T. Some schemes capitalise on the rumour, collecting pull-tabs and
> >directing the recycle value to a cause. Examples: Ronald McDonald House
> >Canada (wheelchairs), Kidney Foundation of Canada (Camp Dialysun for kids
>
> Looks good.
Thank you. Latest news indicates it needs another edit, though. After
chasing e-mail addresses through Vancouver and Ontario I eventually
contacted the Kidney Foundation of Canada's British Columbia office and
received a thorough response to my queries yesterday. According to them
the camp does have both forms of dialysis and they went into some detail
about the pull-tab fundraising and how it's organised:
"In 1984 a lady by the name of Sharon Pentecost started to collect pull
tabs with the idea that they could be recycled for money. That year she
collected 3 boxes. Today she collects (from many people around our
province) 17 million pull-tabs a year. This translates into
approximately $10,000. This is not actually a Kidney Foundation program
but an activity organized by Sharon who is one of our major donors. This
is Sharon's program, she organizes it all and presents us with a cheque
once a year. The Kidney Foundaion of Canada, BC Branch supports Sharon in
her efforts and takes direction from Sharon if she needs help. All
proceeds from Sharon's pull-tab activities go into a special designated
fund to help cover the cost of BC kids with kidney disease attend Camp
Dialysun. We usually have between 10 and 14 kids who wish to go to Camp
each year. The cost per child is approximately $3,000 ($2,200 for Camp
and $800.00 for travel)."
I was surprised at the figure of 17 million so I checked some stats. BC
has a population of just over 4 million according to their government
website (http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/data/QF_peopl.HTM#pop) so that's
4.25 tabs per person per annum. The Canadian Soft Drink Association
reckons the per capita consumption of soft drink in Canada was about 90
litres and rising in '98 (http://www.softdrink.ca/gro45f1e.htm) and
suggesting there's at least five cans per capita out of 90 litres doesn't
seem out of line. Add beer cans and the 17 million figure doesn't look
unreasonable to me. Note that in the AFU archives the wheelchair guys in
Ottawa say they got 80 million tabs in three years. Looks like Canadians
are just damn good at collecting pull-tabs.
But the second half of the quoted para indicates that the Kidney
Foundation doesn't manage the pull-tab collecting or recycling, although
they take part and assist. I don't know if Ms Pentecost wants her name in
a FAQ (and she doesn't have e-mail so I can't easily find out). I can
suggest replacing "Kidney Foundation of Canada (Camp Dialysun for kids
with kidney disease)" with "one-woman program in British Columbia (Camp
Dialysun for kids with kidney disease)". On the other hand maybe
replacing that first phrase with "and Camp Dialysun, also in Canada" then
adding a link to the whole e-mail I was sent would be cleaner - if the
person who sent the e-mail approves, that is.
> Thanks for the links so far.
>
> As for the initial entry, how about:
>
> F.* Sponsor donates dialysis machine time in exchange for alumin(i)um
> ring tabs; similar scheme with cigarette packets and iron lung time.
> ["Redemption Rumors" in TMP]
Looks excellent to me. Gets the right atmosphere of mystical benefaction
across with the link between product and problem and the vast
disproportion between value of item and treatment.
> JoAnne "
Mick.
mic...@hotmail.com
stanN...@simirescue.org wrote:
[snip]
> A couple of folk now have a little thing or two going, here or there
[snip]
> But notice, not a single one of these has ANYTHING to do with dialysis!
[snip]
The most recent e-mail I received from the Kidney Foundation of Canada's
British Columbia offices says, in reference to Camp Dialysun's medical
capacities;
"The on-site medical facility, operated in partnership with Toronto's
Hospital for Sick Children, is fully equipped and able to treat kidney
patients at all stages of the disease.
Patients in pre-dialysis, on hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis, or with
a transplant receive excellent care from an on-site pediatric
nephrologist and renal nurses."
So I think we can safely say that the pull-tab fundraising which is
donated specifically to send kids to Camp Dialysun has something to do
with dialysis.
Charles Wm. Dimmick
[snip]
> The Kidney Foundaion of Canada, BC Branch supports Sharon in
> her efforts and takes direction from Sharon if she needs help. All
> proceeds from Sharon's pull-tab activities go into a special designated
> fund to help cover the cost of BC kids with kidney disease attend Camp
> Dialysun.
[snip]
> But the second half of the quoted para indicates that the Kidney
> Foundation doesn't manage the pull-tab collecting or recycling, although
> they take part and assist.
Looks as though this is a lot closer to my initial
understanding of the situation.
Charles Wm. Dimmick
stanN...@simirescue.org
>
> In article <38A14A...@simirescue.org>,
> stanN...@simirescue.org wrote:
> [snip]
> > A couple of folk now have a little thing or two going,
> > here or there
> [snip]
> > But notice, not a single one of these has ANYTHING to
> >do with dialysis!
> [snip]
>
> The most recent e-mail I received from the Kidney Foundation of Canada's
> British Columbia offices says, in reference to Camp Dialysun's medical
> capacities;
>
> "The on-site medical facility, operated in partnership with Toronto's
> Hospital for Sick Children, is fully equipped and able to treat kidney
> patients at all stages of the disease.
>
> Patients in pre-dialysis, on hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis, or with
> a transplant receive excellent care from an on-site pediatric
> nephrologist and renal nurses."
>
> So I think we can safely say that the pull-tab fundraising which is
> donated specifically to send kids to Camp Dialysun has something to do
> with dialysis.
I disagree. I think you are picking nits. The dialysis is only
incidental.
Wherever a kid on dyalysis goes, the kid will need dialysis. It's just a
given. In reference to the UL, the UL is that pull-tabs go directly to
dialysis. That dialysis happens at Camp Dialysun is incidental to having
a CAMP the kids can go to. The pull-tabs are NOT related to the
dialysis, they are related to sending the kid to camp. You might as well
say collecting pull-tabs is related to buying salt/fat-free hotdogs for
kids on dialysis (or whatever kind of special treat-type food they might
have for the kids at the camp).
<RANT Type=snippy>
It would be an incredible dis-service to anyone wanting to go to Camp
Dialysun to vector ANYTHING about saving pull-tabs to send dialysis kids
to camp. It would just help to substantiate the stupid pull-tab thing,
maybe just mutated.
The pull-tab garbage is a monumental waste of time, energy and money. If
someone wants to send a kid to camp, and they can't afford to donate
money but they can afford to collect cans, then go collect the WHOLE
blasted can, turn it in to a recycling center and mail the actual MONEY
to the camp.
I may change the wording of the post for future use, but only to say
something like, "But notice, only one of these has ANYTHING to do with
dialysis: sending kids to Camp Dialysun. And that is only because
anywhere a kid on dialysis goes, the kid will need dialysis. The
dialysis is still free."
</rant>
If my tone is touchy, please forgive me. I have a real burr under my
saddle against this particualr UL because I think it wastes peoples'
personal time and resources which could otherwise be put to better use:
actual volunteer work.
Shalom,
-Stan-
JoAnne Schmitz
>I'd be surprised if they hadn't considered that. They go by weight
>according to what I've been told. I think if they used cans they'd have
>to go to the recycler more often, like much more often, for no gain in
>funds - ie transport cost eats into dollars to donate.
There are three things. You've hit on the first one -- size. Cans
weigh much less per unit volume than tabs. You can compress them but
even so I suspect you're still going to have more aluminum in one
quart of tabs than one quart of cans.
The second is mess. Cans have soda or beer residue in them. Some
will even have cigarette butts in them. Storing carbohydrate-coated
cans is a nightmare if you don't want to encourage cockroaches or mice
in your house.
The third is recycling. If you can get 2 or 3 or 5 cents back for a
can regardless of whether it still has its tab or not, you're more
likely to donate the tab than the whole can. Sort of a double-dip
effect, and in line with the "redemption" flavor, you actually get
something for hanging on to the can as well as feeling good about
sending on the tab.
Oh, maybe a fourth, sort of related to point one. If you put a gallon
jug on your desk and people drop in their tabs, it's fun and easy. If
you put a garbage bag next to your desk and ask people to donate their
cans, the boss will ask you to stop junking up the office.
JoAnne "
mic...@hotmail.com
Insofar as your impression included reference to a donation being made to
the Kidney Foundation of Canada who were then responsible for its
disbursement, I'd say it was correct.
> Charles Wm. Dimmick
Mick
mic...@hotmail.com
stanN...@simirescue.org wrote:
> mic...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > In article <38A14A...@simirescue.org>,
> > stanN...@simirescue.org wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > A couple of folk now have a little thing or two going,
> > > here or there
> > [snip]
> > > But notice, not a single one of these has ANYTHING to
> > >do with dialysis!
> > [snip]
> >
> > The most recent e-mail I received from the Kidney Foundation of Canada's
> > British Columbia offices says, in reference to Camp Dialysun's medical
> > capacities;
> >
> > "The on-site medical facility, operated in partnership with Toronto's
> > Hospital for Sick Children, is fully equipped and able to treat kidney
> > patients at all stages of the disease.
> >
> > Patients in pre-dialysis, on hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis, or with
> > a transplant receive excellent care from an on-site pediatric
> > nephrologist and renal nurses."
> >
> > So I think we can safely say that the pull-tab fundraising which is
> > donated specifically to send kids to Camp Dialysun has something to do
> > with dialysis.
>
> I disagree. I think you are picking nits.
I have not yet begun to nitpick. I don't think that I will either but I
wouldn't lightheartedly suggest semantic anal retentiveness as I did in
my first post in the thread unless it was something I recognised from the
mirror. My fundamental point here is about using the phrase 'not a single
one' and the word 'anything' in the context above. It's a bit like using
'everybody knows' or 'no-one thinks' - one exception and the statement is
falsified.
The dialysis is only
> incidental.
I wouldn't say food or water is incidental to a holiday...
> Wherever a kid on dyalysis goes, the kid will need dialysis. It's just a
> given.
Yes, I'd say it's a 'given' necessity rather than a 'given' incidental. I
would call the availability of television on holiday a 'given incidental'
in net-conversation since most net-users would expect it but few could
reasonably say they need it. I wouldn't say that food or water is a
'given incidental'.
In reference to the UL, the UL is that pull-tabs go directly to
> dialysis.
I think JoAnne's suggestion of how to state the false UL is an excellent
improvement. Do you have any comment on it?
That dialysis happens at Camp Dialysun is incidental to having
> a CAMP the kids can go to. The pull-tabs are NOT related to the
> dialysis, they are related to sending the kid to camp.
I think that's a moot point - 'relationship' in this context is arguably
interminably arguable.
You might as well
> say collecting pull-tabs is related to buying salt/fat-free hotdogs for
> kids on dialysis (or whatever kind of special treat-type food they might
> have for the kids at the camp).
I accept this point. Elsewhere I suggested an appropriate analogy might
be 'saying your frequent flyer miles are exchanged for plane fuel rather
than the whole flight'. However, I think some frequent flyers would be
dismayed if told that it was 'false' that their miles provided fuel -
like, "Okay, so I get the flight but we don't have any fuel... Huh?"
> <RANT Type=snippy>
> It would be an incredible dis-service to anyone wanting to go to Camp
> Dialysun to vector ANYTHING about saving pull-tabs to send dialysis kids
> to camp.
I don't really understand your absolute dogmatism here. Surely for a kid
who won't go to Camp Dialysun unless sponsorship is found they aren't
going to be too troubled that the sponsorship comes from a woman co-
ordinating pull-tab collections and donating the recycle value to the
Kidney Foundation of Canada so that kids can attend the camp?
It would just help to substantiate the stupid pull-tab thing,
> maybe just mutated.
>
> The pull-tab garbage is a monumental waste of time, energy and money. If
> someone wants to send a kid to camp, and they can't afford to donate
> money but they can afford to collect cans, then go collect the WHOLE
> blasted can, turn it in to a recycling center and mail the actual MONEY
> to the camp.
Yes, this would be ideal. I don't think we live in an ideal world. You
seem to be looking at this from the point of view 'what can the
individual do to help?' but I'm looking at it from the point of view
'what can a co-ordinated program do to raise funds?' The latter requires
an honest admission of what people will do on average rather than asking
that people do the best possible thing. You are a rare individual since
you were willing to go as far as doing volunteer work. Many people won't
even go as far as _listening_ to an appeal for charity.
The reason this pull-tab thing works on tabs rather than cans (according
to an informed opinion who disclaimed the opinion as representing his
company) is that British Columbia has a legal deposit on cans. Empty cans
are worth an artificially inflated value, far more than their recycle
value. I think he'd rather not be quoted because of the politics, since
according to the politically correct press he works for one of the many
Big Bad Tree-Munchers Inc - for a long time the recycling companies
actively discouraged pull-tab schemes but with the environmental movement
and more broad support for deposits on cans people were more willing to
hold on to cans to get some money back. However, redeeming the deposit
doesn't require the whole can. People will willingly collect and give
away that teensy aluminium tab because it costs them nothing while
they're getting money back on their cans. In non-deposit states or
provinces there's no conceivable reason to collect tabs instead of cans
according to this person-who-shall-remain-unnamed, but when deposits
apply people are willing to do it where they're not willing to do other
more apparently fruitful things.
> I may change the wording of the post for future use, but only to say
> something like, "But notice, only one of these has ANYTHING to do with
> dialysis: sending kids to Camp Dialysun. And that is only because
> anywhere a kid on dialysis goes, the kid will need dialysis. The
> dialysis is still free."
> </rant>
I think that would be great. I still wouldn't want to be as specific or
exclusive (I don't think I've exhausted all the information on all
schemes of this nature so I don't know that 'only one of these has
anything to do with dialysis') but that's a matter of preference.
> If my tone is touchy, please forgive me.
No problem.
I have a real burr under my
> saddle against this particualr UL because I think it wastes peoples'
> personal time and resources which could otherwise be put to better use:
> actual volunteer work.
If more people were willing to do that I'd agree. What do you do, though,
if 200 people will say "Yeah, I'll collect up some pull-tabs" for every
one who'll say, "I'll do some volunteer work"?
> Shalom,
> -Stan-
Love light and peace,
Mick.
JoAnne Schmitz
>> Wherever a kid on dyalysis goes, the kid will need dialysis. It's just a
>> given.
>
>Yes, I'd say it's a 'given' necessity rather than a 'given' incidental. I
>would call the availability of television on holiday a 'given incidental'
>in net-conversation since most net-users would expect it but few could
>reasonably say they need it. I wouldn't say that food or water is a
>'given incidental'.
But if everyone stops donating these tabs, will any child go without
dialysis that would otherwise get it? No.
I remember a post of Stan's from a few days ago. He described the
results of his explaining to someone that the tabs weren't going
anywhere:
"She clamped her lips tightly shut and wouldn't talk to me all evening
at church until later when she was about to leave and she told me in a
defiant tone, "Well, I'm going to keep collecting them 'cause this
litle boy needs his dialysis," over her shoulder to me as she walked
out giving me a withering glance as if I had personally taken a
hatchet to the tubes connecting this kid up to the dialyzer."
The perception is that if you don't do this, little kids will *die*
because they need the dialysis. While little kids, and big kids, love
to go to camp, and I think it's great that they can even if they need
dialysis, no one's going without dialysis because of our callous
tossing away of cans and their tabs.
If someone said, "donating these tabs will pay for food for hungry
kids," and the recycle value is put towards a tennis camp for rich
kids who in the course of the day get hungry, is that really
representative of that program? It's an exaggeration of the story,
yes, but I hope you can see the resemblance.
JoAnne "I am my favorite charity" Schmitz