text:
The 206 bones in the body serve several purposes.
To diagnose bone cancer, the doctor asks about the patient's personal and family medical history and does a complete physical exam. In addition to checking the general signs of health, the doctor usually orders blood tests and x-rays. X-rays can show the location, size, and shape of a bone tumor. On x-rays, benign tumors usually look round and smooth, with distinct edges. Bone cancers generally have odd shapes and irregular edges.
If x-rays show that the tumor is possible cancer, some of the following special tests may be done. These tests can also show whether the cancer has begun to spread.
Bone scans outline the size, shape, and location of abnormal areas in the bone. A small amount of radioactive material is injected into the bloodstream. This material collects in the bones and is detected by a special instrument called a scanner.
CT or CAT scan is an x-ray procedure that gives detailed pictures of cross-sections of the body. The pictures are created by a computer.
MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) also creates detailed pictures of cross-sections of the body. MRI uses a very strong magnet linked to a computer.
Angiograms are special x-rays of the blood vessels. A dye that shows up on x-rays is injected into the bloodstream so that the vessels can be seen in detail. This test is also done to help plan surgery.
A biopsy is the only sure way to tell whether cancer is present. Biopsies are best done at a hospital where doctors are experienced in the diagnosis of bone cancers. The doctor removes a sample of tissue from the bone tumor. A pathologist looks at the tissue under a microscope. If cancer is found, the pathologist can tell the type of sarcoma and whether it is likely to grow slowly or quickly.
If a diagnosis of bone cancer is made, it is important for the doctor to know exactly where the cancer is located and whether it has spread from its original location. This information is very important for planning treatment. The results of exams, tests, x-rays, scans, and the biopsy are all used in staging the cancer. The stage indicates whether the disease has spread and how much tissue is affected.
2007 Dreamers


text:
Set which volume to control in your Android app!
If you're writing an Android application that plays sounds but doesn't constantly play sound/music then you've probably run into the same problem that I did where the phone's volume rocker changes the Ringer Volume instead of the Media Volume when pressed no sound is currently playing.
Good news! There's a one-liner that can fix this for you! The following single line sets the volume control stream so that when the volume buttons are pressed within your application it will adjust the Media Volume instead of the Ringer Volume:
AudioManager contains a list of other pertinent constants if you would like the volume rocker to control something other than the Media Volume (ie: Ring, Notification, Alarm or In-Call Volume).
Froyo Update for Droid with FLASH support! (FRG22D)
Verizon is pushing out ANOTHER Froyo update, this time including official Adobe Flash Player support in the package. If you haven't gotten this update yet, you can get it here! You can download the update.zip right here, copy it to your SD card and install it directly!
NOTE: You need to have previously installed Android 2.2 FRG01B to apply this update!
(NOTE: Download to your PC and copy to your phone over USB to avoid "Signature verification failed. Installation aborted" issues caused by corrupt downloads!)
1) Download update.zip here!
2) Copy update.zip to the root of your SD card.
3) Shut off your DROID.
4) Turn on your DROID while holding down the physical X key on the keyboard.
5) When you see the exclamation image, like below, press the volume up and camera keys at the same time.
6) Using the D-Pad select the "apply sdcard:update.zip" and press the center (gold) button.
7) Watch the update install and enjoy Android v2.2 with Flash support (FRG22D)!
You can now find Flash from Adobe in the Android Market!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
PureMobile.com has the latest accessories for your C6-01 smartphone, ready for fast and convenient shipping to your home or office, anywhere in the USA. Whether you are looking for Bluetooth cark kits, headsets or a versatile window holder so you can use your Nokia smartphone safely behind the wheel, we only carry high quality products from the most in demand manufacturers, with a selection you can't find anywhere else.
ClarityOne EB110 ClarityOne Premium Earbuds w Mic
$129.00 -
ClarityOne EB110BLCA Premiun Earbuds w Mic Blue
$129.00 -
ClarityOne EB110ORCA Premium Earbuds w Mic Orange
$129.00 -
ClarityOne ECW102BKCA Headphones Black
ClarityOne ECW102WTCA Headphones White
$179.00 -
Griffin Flat Aux Black
$17.99 -
Griffin GC10077 Crayola Earbuds Blue Berry
$17.99 -
Griffin GC10094 Crayola Myphones Earbuds Green
Griffin GC17103 Flat AUX Cable 3 ft
$17.99 -
Griffin GC35894 Kazoo Myphones Frog
$17.99 -
Griffin GC36540 Crayola MyPhone Girl
$26.99 -
Griffin NA22046 iTrip Universal Plus 3.5mm cable
iHome IB11BL Sports hook earbuds Blue
$17.99 -
iHome IB11QY Sports hook earbuds Green Yellow
$17.99 -
iHome IB11RY Sports hook earbuds Red Yellow
$17.99 -
iHome IB22 Rubberized Earphones Green


text:
What's The Sense In Sharing This One And Only Life, Ending Up Just Another Lost & Lonely Wife, You Count Up The Years & They Will Be Filled With Tears
'Just slow down, honey, and explain it to me again."
I tried to stifle down the tears, what little I had left, and attempted to make my voice clearer. I said, "Mother, this is is really it. It's really over." As I said those words I thought to myself that I should be more broken-hearted over the announcement. I announced it almost too confidently. No, that wasn't the word for it. I said it with a tinge of defiance, as if I was the one still behind the reins and my marriage was some stallion still under my control. Nothing could have been further from the truth.
It was beyond my mother asking if Greg and I had had another fight. That much was obvious. True to my mother's personality, she skipped right to the chase while remaining as courteous as ever.
"Now, now, honey. There's no use in getting worked over something that hasn't happened yet. I know it feels..."
"Feels like, mother. Like my world's been set on fire? Like I'm dying inside? Hell's bells, that's exactly what it feels like."
Sometimes I questioned the sanity of my decision to make my mother my first call, especially since I had such a large network of friends and family I could go to. It was just like one of things, like water flowing downstream, that you don't question. When you're car breaks down you call your mechanic. When you want to go see a movie you call your friend. And when your marriage dissipates into thin air, why, hell, you call your mother. Honestly, there wasn't anyone else that leapt to mind when it first happened. Besides, there would be plenty of time left to distribute the news afterwards, after the confirmation had come through that it was true. There was no sense in honking the horn if you haven't started the car yet, as my daddy says.
And now that I was on the phone with her it felt right. It felt like this is the person I needed to be talking to. My parents have been married to one another longer than there's been dirt on the Earth, or, at the very least, it's felt that way. It's been even longer than most folks' parents since they had to wait almost six years longer than they wanted to in having me. They were coming up quickly on that age where most people of their generation would have had their second grandchild by now. If there was anyone in the world I could ask the simplest advice about what goes into (and out of) a good marriage, she'd be the one. Granted, we haven't always had the easiest of times communicating with one another. At times it felt like trying to start a fire by rubbing two oranges together, you know? But when it's counted, when I've really needed someone who had my best interests at heart, without an ounce of cushioning the blow, it's my mother I've turned to. I love my daddy, but one failing of his is he always tries to shield me from the worst of it all. Involuntary as it may be, I know if I want to hear it straight from word one there's only one parent I can really turn to.
"Now tell me is that what you both decided?"
"Not in so many words, mother."
"Then in what words. Why don't you explain it to me from the beginning."
"I don't want to explain it from the beginning."
"Don't be petulant. I know I raised you better than that."
"Sorry," I offered.
"So start it from where you'd be comfortable starting it, Breanne."
I cradled the phone to my shoulder, wiped the beginnings of tear from beneath my eye, and explained as best as I could without delving too deeply into it. I explained how I said I needed to go on this business excursion for a prospective new client down near Florida. I had told Greg about it and he had reminded me how we had a couple's session with our therapist on two of the four days I needed to be down there. Clearly, not thinking, I told him it was okay. We could reschedule, I offered. That's when he had flown into a huff like ducks flying into a hurricane. He "reminded" me how I had told him that I would do anything to keep this marriage stable. He "reminded" me how I had made this solemn oath that keeping us was my only important goal and how everything else could wait. I tried to play it off, keep it light, which only fanned the flames of his indignation. He continued on how I wasn't taking this seriously. He postulated that I was only giving half of my effort when, there he was, giving it his everything. He said that it wasn't fair. It wasn't right. That's when I grew defensive. I started telling him that I was working. I pointed out to him how much time I'd already sacrificed in the last six months. I pointed out how I had stopped working five days a week, slowing my schedule down to four, sometimes three, workdays to allow for those counseling sessions. I pointed out how I never saw or traded news with my friends anymore because our doctor had said to minimize the distractions. I pointed out how I had given up writing on the blog, going out of town with anybody else but him, and how I had even curtailed the amount of time I spent in my own pursuits--jogging, reading, and fiddling around the dance studio--all so I could spend as much time with him as possible.
I told him in no uncertain terms that I deserved this break. I told him that I would be taking it and there was nothing he could do to stop me.
"The look he gave me, mother--I've only seen that look on daddy's face once or twice. It's the look he gave you when you and him were fighting over his ex, what's-her-name. It scared me then and I can tell you it still scares me. It's that look of absolute desperation, when you can see what they'd like to do as plain as rainbows on their face. And what they want to do ain't the kinds of things that can be called exactly Christian.
"That's when he walked out, but not before telling me there would be no need for me to wait up."
"Oh, honey."
"I've really done it this time, haven't I?"
"Now, there isn't any situation that can't be fixed so I wouldn't say that, child. But, yes, you may have pushed a bit too hard against the mountain on that one."
"I thought so."
I felt my eyes start to tear up again. Everyone always said that I was far too much prone to act out upon my emotions. I was impetuous, temperamental, and stubborn. It was a veritable trifecta of the worst traits of being prideful. Sometimes it made me feel strong as an ox. I knew, I just knew, there wasn't anyone who could truly push me around. There wasn't anyone who was the better of me because I wouldn't allow anyone to triumph over me. Other times, like the time on the phone with my mother, when my tears seemed never-ending and the regrets twice as abundant, I just felt like I wasn't in control of my own thinking. I was just a passenger on this journey through my life; the real woman at the reins was the gamut of emotions threatening to destroy any chance I would ever have at real happiness.
I had a habit of doing this, making myself seem more important than anyone else. I thought what was best for me was best for everyone. And it always got me into the most scalding of hot waters. Look at what it had gotten me, a husband that felt like he couldn't believe me as far as he could throw me and one more night on the phone trying to explain where it had all gone wrong. Between my mother, Patrick, and Katie--I felt like I had been spending the last eight months defending my actions. Frankly, I was tired of it. I was tired of being in arrears it seemed like every few days. Every time it felt like Greg and I had gotten somewhere, it all kept sliding back. Every time I felt like we had gone that extra mile, that we had crossed over that last hurdle and had left it behind us, another hurdle would appear--this one even higher than the last. It was exhausting. More than that, it was beginning to feel like more than little 'ole me could handle.
That's why I was crying. Not because I was overwhelmingly sad, but because it had really become sadly and suddenly (saddenly?) overwhelming. Hell's bells, it was nearing that point where even I had to admit I had been thoroughly trounced.
I had met my Waterloo and it looked an awful lot like little 'ole me.
"Why am I like this? Why can't I get anything right," I whispered, choking a bit through the words.
"Like what? Headstrong?"
"And a bitch."
"Language, Breanne."
I heard her mulling it around a bit before she came back to the conversation. On my end, I was still waiting an eternity for my eyes to stop their procession, but the tears would not be quelled. I patted my eyes softly with hands that had had a whole night of practice of wiping the drops away from reddened cheeks.
"Do you really want to know, honey?"
"Please, thank you. It would help me a lot, mother."
"So you're fiery. You came from a long line of fiery women on my side. It's nothing to be ashamed of. It's nothing you should apologize for. You speak your mind when the situation warrants it and hold your tongue when it doesn't."
"It's that last criteria that I fall short."
"And you do at that," she laughed in her own delicate way.
Laughing at her only child's character flaws. You've got to love my mother for her tact.
"I'm only saying you've got a spirit about you that doesn't need explanation. That husband of yours knew exactly what he was hitching him to when he signed up to wrangle you in. He knew what you were like. He knew he was never going to tame, not really. I don't think it's mighty understanding of him to crucify you for the very same things he once in high regard about you. That's like celebrating your birthday with peals of joy and cursing the day you were born underneath his breath, in my book."
"So you don't think he's right, in some way?"
"He's right. You're right. What does it matter? Why does there always have to be one person who's right? All that means is that there has to be one person who's wrong all the time. You don't want that person to be you and I know he doesn't want to be that person. That's where the problem lies. Right there."
She was right, like she always is. But she didn't feel right. To me it just felt like she was guessing. How could she know what my life was like? She wasn't involved in a marriage that seemed doomed to failure. Her marriage to my daddy had been relatively without its share of missteps. They had fought to be sure, but they had also made up in short fashion as well. To be plain, it had taken me a long time to even recognize the signs that they were, in fact, fighting. They always did their best to hide it away from me. They would be in the den before they thought I was even awake or else after they were sure I had drifted into slumber. Even then they would disguise their voices to a whisper-like state of yelling. Or I would catch them out in public exchanging a few words here and there. Encoded, they were free to carry out entire minutes of discourse back and forth without me being the wiser. Yet the picture they always presented was a united front. They presented that picture because that was what they had, a marriage of equals with neither husband nor wife having to give ground in the grand scheme of things.
They had what I wanted. They had what I felt I could never have.
"Yes, my baby girl."
"Can I ask you something?"
"Of course."
"What's yours and daddy's secret? How do you do it?"
"I don't understand."
"How do you keep it all together when obviously it's so easy to have it all fall apart on you?"
There it was. There was me asking what my mother's secret as plain as asking her for her favorite chicken recipe. I was expecting about as much success in this endeavor as that one. My mother is a lot of things, but forthwith when it comes to how and why she loves my daddy has never been one of those areas she's been eager to share with the world. The thing you have to understand about my mother is that she classifies all subjects into two areas: those that she's an expert in and those she doesn't speak at all about. Life, politics, religion, philosophy, the universe, and most everything fall into the former category. How my mother relates to my daddy falls into the latter category. It's always been that way. At a young age I would only catch a whiff of all this supposed romancing that my daddy was famous for when he was a younger man. They would sneak a kiss here, hold hands for a few precious moments, or sneak off in the middle of a vacation for a few minutes while I amused myself with the television on the hotel room. They weren't exactly firm supporters of public displays of affection, but, hell's bells, were they staunch backers of its lesser known offshoot, private displays of affection.
I knew they loved each other. I knew that about as well as I knew the chestnut shade of my hair, the unique shade of oceanic blue-green my eyes held, or which side my dimples were deeper upon. It wasn't something that I ever thought to have my parents explain in words. There was never a need.
Until just then.
After a few moments of uncomfortable silence, I rephrased the question a little more playfully.
"Come on, mother. How deep is your love?" I giggled with more than a few of my drying facial muscles.
It took her a few more seconds, but in the end, she ended up answering me.
"The secret, little lady, is that there is no secret. There's no secret in loving your husband just as there isn't a secret loving your parents or loving your friends. You just do it. You just think to yourself, what would I do normally in this situation. Then you start thinking what would I do if I really love this person. Nine times out of ten, honey, they're not going to be one and the same. Nine times out of ten you're going to have to go above and beyond what you normally do. And it isn't because it gets any easier when you're in love or when you get married. If anything, the trouble only escalates when you make that leap.
"You start having to worry about problems you never had to worry about before. You start fretting over if you're losing that special something the two of had when you first started seeing each other. You start seeing the sameness of your days and wondering if you have the fortitude to suffer through the monotony. You start wandering in different directions in your head when he starts telling the same 'ole story for the fiftieth time, each time forgetting he has already told you the story before. Then, after your daughter is born, you start having to worry about him loving her more than you. That leads to you feeling goddamn awful, because you're jealous of your own precious little girl. You start wondering if their marriage portion has at long last been pushed to the back burner of your life.
"And then you dwell on all the squabbles that taken separately don't amount to much, but pushed together add up to an agony you've never known before. It's like a thousand tiny pinpricks directly to your forehead--constant and barely noticeable except for its constancy.
"You start worrying if the struggle is too much of a payment for the reward," she finishes.
"I never knew," you reply.
"But then you realize maybe the struggle is the reward. Up until you got married, you had the bird well in hand. You never had to worry, you never had to complain. And another thing, you never had to worry about if you were happy. You just knew it But, that all changed, as soon as you got married. Now when you feel happiest, it's when you're with him. And you don't worry about being happy, because after all the pain and pressure and plain hogwash that occupies most of your days, you can feel the happiness. You feel it. You get so backed up in all the routine of what it takes to care for the house, care for the family, care for everyone and everything else, that when by some miracle the happiness creeps down upon you, you feel it. You feel it like a thunderbolt hitting deep within your skull, honey. And what passed for happiness when you were a teenager or, worse yet, a silly wisp of a girl, is ten times or maybe a hundred times more miniscule than this feeling of overall warmth that true joy, true bliss, takes on as its form.
"You don't take a pass on having a happy marriage. You muddle through it. You march right through the thick of it, like stomping on three-foot deep mud. Because what else are you going to do? Go back to being on your own when you only thought you could be happy? That's not an option.
"Marriage, at least my marriage, isn't about being happy everyday. That would be impossible. Being married is about getting to those moments when the happiness just fills you up inside like a candle filling a darkened room with light. It's about having those moments time and time again with the person next to you who is feeling just the same as you. It's about doing everything humanly possible to make those moments last longer the next time. It's about doing everything humanly possible to make those moments as frequent as possible. And most of all it's about appreciating those moments whenever and however they come because you know they aren't a constant. They're like clouds passing through the sky, Breanne. You've just got to smile at their wonder while they're there, because with the next gust of wind it seems, they'll be gone.
"You want to know the secret to a happy marriage. It's that. A happy marriage isn't some prize you win at the fair like Mary Mary, shooting water out of pistol at some clown's mouth. If anything it's the shooting water to fill a balloon you hope will pay off in the end, but probably won't. A happy marriage is the marriage that struggles to be happy, because without the struggle you wouldn't have anything at all. You'd be... what?"
"The foolish girl crying to her mom?" I offered.
"Perhaps. More like you'd be the young woman, beautiful and intelligent, thinking that she was too smart to get married or maybe that she was too good for anyone she might meet."
I don't know if her comment was directed at me or more at herself. But I took it for what it was, a stern warning that there are worse things to be in a marriage that needed attention. I could have been in a marriage where everything had been decided already. Instead, I at least had something in the process of being salvageable. I at least had the room to resume the struggle as my mother so eloquently put it.
I talked with my mother until Greg came home three hours later. We didn't continue any further on the topic of being married or being happy. What else was there to say? The proof was in the pudding, as they say. For as long as I knew my parents had been happy with one another and they were still together after thirty years of marriage. That's more than most folks these days get.
They never once talked about separating or getting divorced... and I already had.
They never once cheated on one another (as far as I know)... and I already had.
They never once paraded around their grievances with one another to the whole world... and I already had time and time again.
When I think of happy marriages, my parents are it. And if my mother told me the secret was just to endure the uncomfortableness, that's what I'd do. Hell's bells, if my mother had told me that the secret was a daily bath in oatmeal followed by a quick rinse in toothpaste I would have given it a shot.
The way I see it, if my marriage lasts as half as long and burns half as bright as my parents', I'll have done something right. With all the mistakes I've made so far, I know it's asking a lot to go the whole distance, but at this moment I'm starting to believe that Greg and I just may get there someday. And, at the end of it all, I'll have my mother to thank, for instilling in me the idea that perfection is only another word for hard work and steel grit.
Hard work I can do.
And steel grit I've got in spades. LOL
Labels: anguish, Candi Station, Coping, Dedication, Greg, love, marriage


text:
Stupid Question of the Week
Is vaccination the answer to preventing a measles epidemic?
Does anyone know of any other way of preventing a measles epidemic? Didn't think so. Measles is about 10 times more infectious than flu. No amount of hand-washing and mask-wearing will stop you from catching it, if you don't have immunity. Sufferers are usually infectious for two days before they develop symptoms and a rash. Only an effective vaccination program will make any difference at all. As for safety:
Risk of death from measles 1:1000
Risk of severe reaction from vaccine 1:10,000 (no reported deaths; no permanent disability)
Risk of measles encephalitis (inflammation of the brain) 1:1,000,000 (no reported deaths but about a 10% rate of permanent brain damage)
now for the math…
Assuming 50% of the approximately 150,000 un-immunised children get measles that translates to 75 deaths
Assuming all un-immunised children get measles vaccine that translates to 15 severe (but recoverable) reactions and an absolute risk of about 0.015% of a child developing encephalitis and being left with permanent brain damage (relative risk of death from measles is three times higher than this).
Get your child vaccinated against measles as soon as possible.
27 Comments
Leave A Reply-
Come on now, why do you oscillate between deriding public health bods for creating panic about very mild diseases, then do the same yourself- I just don't get it.
Isn't this the same minor disease I had as a kid, involving a few days in bed, then permanent immunity? Isn't the problem more when kids get immunised for this disease, forget to take their booster in their teens, then get it as adults when measles becomes really serious?
The problem with this post I think is that often the outbreak occurs among vaccinated children, not unvaccinated ones. Dr Nikki Turner appeared on tv to give the same old tired excuse just the other week for an outbreak among immunised children in NZ- that no vaccination has perfect efficacy, so we should expect some vaccinated children to get sick (ie they are just a statistical blip).
Hello? – This is old news that throws into doubt the whole fear-based rationale for vaccinating children that NZ parents have reacted so badly against in recent times- "vaccinate your kids, otherwise they'll get sick & you'll be a bad parent". As if there is ever evidence put forward that unvaccinated kids are getting sick in their droves compared to vaccinated kids. If the outbreak didn't start among unvaccinated children, and hasn't caused widespread serious illness among unvaccinated children while it has among vaccinated children, then your post is unfairly prejudiced against them and you might need to ask some deeper questions about the issue.
Sometimes, people believe vaccines to be so safe, that having a fit in reaction shortly after the jab, and dying "unexpectedly" 10 days later, Doctors to fall back on "George had died from a rare condition known as Sudden Unexpected Death in Childhood, due to an unascertained disease." Disease? Really?
Perhaps the vaccines are relatively safe, but I suspect adverse reactions and deaths are under reported. I've come across too many cases where the parents see a bad reaction to a vaccine leading to death and are totally stunned when the vaccine is ruled out, "because they are so safe, therefore, it's something else".
Just musing.
A query too – when you suggest getting a vaccination shot for measles, do you mean just measles or the MMR triple shot?
.-= ZenTiger´s last blog ..Question for 'anti-smackers' =-.Zen, I suggest measles only, but I think only MMR is funded. As the mumps and rubella components are harmless AFAIK, it probably makes little difference which you take.
Johnnieboy: Come on now, why do you oscillate between deriding public health bods for creating panic about very mild diseases, then do the same yourself- I just don't get it.
My post is hardly "creating panic", is it? I have just looked dispassionately at the facts. While I don't consider measles to be a panic-inducing disease, it is certainly not completely harmless. The mortality I have quoted is for New Zealand, not Africa.
More facts for you. The first dose of measles vaccine generates a decent immunity in about 56% of kids. The second dose boosts this to 80-90%. A third dose makes this 100%. The increased in immunity between the second and third dose is not considered great enough to advocate three doses.
Mathematically, there are at least twice as many inadequately immunised children than un-immunised children. It follows that an outbreak of measles is more likely to start in the partially immunised population rather than the un-immunised one. This is hardly a "tired old excuse", it is just standard statistics.
There are a number of other factors involved. Many creches and pre-schools refuse to take un-immunised children, thus reducing the exposure of these children. Many parent who choose not to immunise are quite well-off and do not use creches. There is also a level of caution in parents about exposing their un-immunised children that is often inappropriately absent from parents of immunised children.
Note that immunised children typically get an attenuated form of measles which appears less virulent. The mortality of this is unknown, but I suspect it is much lower.
Your comment contains much supposition and little fact. I suggest you may need to consider taking your own advice.
ZT: I should just point out that "George had died from a rare condition known as Sudden Unexpected Death in Childhood, due to an unascertained disease." was the coroner's verdict, not the doctor's diagnosis. The coroner usually has no medical background.
I should also point out that the case you linked to was a child that had had many previous seizures and who fitted within a couple of hours of the jab. He recovered fully and was then completely well for 10 days. It is therefore highly unlikely that the measles vaccine was responsible.
"Mathematically, there are at least twice as many inadequately immunised children than un-immunised children. It follows that an outbreak of measles is more likely to start in the partially immunised population rather than the un-immunised one. This is hardly a "tired old excuse", it is just standard statistics"
So how does that stack up with, "Assuming 50% of the approximately 150,000 un-immunised children get measles that translates to 75 deaths"? That is a bridge too far IMO, as it only deals with part of the issue.
How about showing us some statistics regarding the real risk that the vaccinated population currently faces from the measles outbreak within their midst by way of comparison? After all, that has actually happened, so maybe some valid statistics can be extrapolated. Then we can draw some valid conclusions about how best the outbreak can be contained. To avoid this side of the problem (ie the real problem) and to focus on unvaccinated children is unwarranted IMO, but hey, there go those public health bods again
The elephant in the room is that 6 out of 15 of these kids with measles were fully vaccinated, with technically 100% immunity as you suggested, so let's not beat around the bush- the efficacy of the measles vaccine is seriously questionable in practice.
Johnnieboy: So how does that stack up with, "Assuming 50% of the approximately 150,000 un-immunised children get measles that translates to 75 deaths"? That is a bridge too far IMO, as it only deals with part of the issue.
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about my focus on un-immunised kids. I focus there because un-immunised kids are most at risk. This is not to say that immunised kids have no risk. After two doses of MMR (which is what public health mean by fully immunised) 10% will have insufficient protection and are still at risk of measles. There is some evidence that, if they catch measles, the disease will be less dangerous than in un-immunised children.
Regardless of whether that is true or not, the fact remains that in a measles epidemic, about 5% of fully immunised children (650,000), 20% of partially immunised children (200,000) and 50% of un-immunised children (150,000) will get the disease. Assuming that the disease is as potent in immunised children as it is in un-immunised ones, a full epidemic translates to 32 deaths amongst the fully immunised, 66 deaths amongst the partially immunised and 75 deaths amongst the non-immunised. Immunising all the partial and non-immunised children would take this down to 10 deaths amongst the children previously partially immunised and 7 deaths amongst the previously non-immunised, saving the lives of 124 children.
In addition, massive immunisation may circumvent the development of a full-blown epidemic, saving a further 49 children's lives.
At a cost of about $15 million (about $30 a dose to give x 150,000 x 2 doses + 200,000 single doses), that is a cost of $86,705 per child saved – a lot better than the $1,2 million per child saved they spent on MeNZB
Agree 100% MacDoctor
It is no accident that child death rates have dropped over the last 100 years due to vaccination from the major childhood illnesses, ie. measles, mumps, rubella.
Flu is another type of issue from measles. Comparing them is like telling a surgeon to perform a craniotomy for a hangover. It all about relative risk and the risk from measles is huge compared with the current swine flu.
Further, the VAERS database shows that the reaction rate from MMR has proved to be a valid yardstick for vaccinations profiles in the wider public. ie it works and the harm is very minor. And you quite rightly point out the morbidity, mortality and financial savings obtained.
.-= MrTipsNZ´s last blog ..Carter's "Gay" Excuse =-. -
MacDoctor, do you have any idea how much this government is spending to encourage parents to get their child immunised?
I would bet it is not a fraction of what has been spent on telling parent how to discipline their children.
Look at this – http://childhealthsafety.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/measlesmortalityusa1971-75_1.jpg
Measles deaths in the US had dropped by over 90% before the 70s. Go onto Wiki and it will only show you the rates from the 50s. Take a look at the bigger picture.
Disease break outs still occur in highly vaccinated populations; E.g. In 1997 New Zealand had a measles vaccination rate of 99% yet that year there were 2'041 reported cases of measles. In 2002 we had a vaccination level of 84% and a measles case rate of 21. The next year the cases rate jumped to 66 but the vaccination level stayed the same.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccineI have some questions for you Doctor:
Why do doctors in NZ not treat measles with Vitamin A? Measles strips Vitamin A from the body, it attacks the retinal Vitamin A causing photophobia and blindness. If a patient is treated with Vit A there is no reason why they should have site complications. Measles doesn't cause blindness vitamin A deficiency does.
Why do NZ doctors recommend paracetamol at the onset of any illness in children? If a child has a fever (one of the primary symptoms of measles) I have no doubt in my mind a doctor would recommend 'pamol' or any other antipyretic. BUT fever is the bodies natural defence against infection, antipyretics will only allow the infection to take a stronger hold. Studies like the following should be shared around our doctors.
The Effect of Antipyretic Therapy upon Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients: A Randomized, Prospective Study. Schulman CI, Namias N, Doherty J, Manning RJ, Li P, Alhaddad A et al. Surgical Infections. – A small trial on the use of antipyretics in an intensive care unit was stopped because the mortality rate was 16% in the treated group and 1% in the group from whom antipyretics were withheld.
Frank Shann, Intensive Care Unit, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne. – Paracetamol may prolong infection and reduce the antibody response in mild disease, and increase morbidity and mortality in severe infection.
Why is encephalitis not treated with vitamin C when it has been proven that it is a vital tool in treating viral infections, perhaps you should read the study – The Treatment of Poliomyelitis and Other Virus Diseases with Vitamin C Fred R. Klenner, M.D.
Six cases of virus encephalitis were treated and cured with vitamin C injections. Two cases were associated with virus pneumonia; one followed chickenpox, one mumps, one measles and one a combination of measles and mumps. In the case that followed the measles-mumps complex, definite evidence was found to confirm the belief that massive, frequent injections are necessary in treating virus infections with vitamin C…………A lad of 12 years had generalized headache a week after having mumps, this followed by malaise, and in 12 hours a lethargic state and a fever of 105°. Admitted to hospital he was given 2000 mg. of vitamin C then, and 1000 mg. every two hours. Following the third injection he. was sitting up in bed, laughing, talking, begging for food and completely without pain……..Of mumps, 33 cases were treated with ascorbic acid. When vitamin C was given at the peak of the infection the fever was gone within 24 hours, the pain within 36 hours, the swelling in 48 to 72 hours. Two cases were complicated with orchitis. A young man of 23 years developed bilateral orchitis one Friday morning, by seven o'clock that night he was in severe pain, had a fever of 105° and was nursing testicles the size of tennis balls. Vitamin C was started at this time — 1000 mg. every two hours, intravenously. The pain began to subside following the first injection and ceased in 12 hours. There was no fever after 36 hours. The patient was out of bed feeling his old self after 60 hours………..A second boy, aged 11, was allowed to develop mumps to the point of maximum swelling without any therapy, then given vitamin C, 1000 mg. intramuscularly, every two to four hours. This lad was entirely well in 48 hoursn
Do you think that perhaps the reason for the reported mortality rates are the poor treatment of measles?
Why is there such a lack of singular vaccines? For people like my husband who contracted rubella and mumps before he was old enough to receive MMR there was no single measles vaccine, and what about the child who may have had measles but not mumps or rubella? Why are children suffering such sever measles complications as corneal scaring when it is preventable? (we must consider the children who are fully vaccinated and contract measles as well, there needs to be more options than just vaccination)
Why is the MMR vaccine and any other 'multi' vaccine pushed so hard? In NZ a six week old baby is given 15 strains of virus at once through their first two vaccines, yes most of the viruses are not alive, but the immune system does not know that, it still sees a threat and must work produce antibodies, how much stress do you think that puts on a new born's immune system? Is this really wise practice?
Measles deaths in the US had dropped by over 90% before the 70s
This is the hoary tale of how measles was disappearing before the vaccine was introduced. It is not exactly true. Deaths from measles were reducing, not cases of measles. This is because measles commonly kills malnourished children. Unfortunately it also kills previously healthy children (just not as many), which is why it is important to reduce the number of cases. If you expand that graph just over the last 25 years, you would find that both cases and deaths from measles have decreased dramatically since the vaccination program started.Disease break outs still occur in highly vaccinated populations
Yep. As I have posted, the vaccine is NOT 100% effective except at the third dose (which we don't give).Why do doctors in NZ not treat measles with Vitamin A
This is still an experimental treatment. There is some evidence from a recent trial in India that it may work and some theoretical basis for it. Unfortunately, we doctors have to demonstrate that a treatment actually works before we can use it…Why do NZ doctors recommend paracetamol at the onset of any illness
Because it reduces fever and makes people feel better. The trial you cite was very small, poorly done and involved critically ill patients with multiple problems. It is not possible to extrapolate from it. Frank Shann is talking about severe, life-threatening infections. There is absolutely no evidence that paracetamol is dangerous in mild childhood illnesses.Why is encephalitis not treated with vitamin C
Because there is no decent evidence that megadoses of vitamin C cure anything. The "study" you quote is a series of anecdotal cases and proves nothing except that Fred Klenner can spin a good yarn.Oh, and viral encephalitis is a self-limiting disease and recovery in children is rarely eventful.
Why is there such a lack of singular vaccines?
THAT is a good question. Don't know, but I bet it has to do with Pharmac's pricing system. We push MMR hard because of Measles. Mumps is trivial and Rubella only important in girls.And yes, I agree with you that we give far too many vaccines all at once. I am concerned about the level of immune response in children following vaccines. Anecdotally, it seems to dramatically worsen their eczema and allergies.
Here is another graph http://childhealthsafety.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/0707275measleslog.jpg
I have sent you some more studies regarding paracetomol.
"Because it reduces fever and makes people feel better" it also enables infection to take a stronger hold, a fever is not a bad thing and there are much better ways a child or an adult can be made comfortable with fever. Paracetamol pushing is why people die from meningitis.
Polymorphonuclear leukocytes are the first cells to arrive at sites of infection and play a crucial role against bacterial, viral, fungal and parasitic infections. They increase oxidative strategies by the body to kill pathogens by using the ability to make hydrogen peroxide in the body and hydroxyl radicals. These metabolites have a very powerful bactericidal effect. BUT not only does paracetamol inhibit the formation of these metabolites, paracetamol scavenges HOCL and thus paralyses the MPO-H202-Cl- antimicrobial system of the front line neutrophils.
Paracetomol welcomes in the infection and stops the immune system from doing its job.
The truth about vitamins is that they do work, it has been proven there are many cases, but they cannot be patented therefore why should people invest in them?? I would hope that if a child is suffering from encephalitis a doctor might at least try VitC because there are many cases were it has worked.
"Unfortunately it also kills previously healthy children just not as many"
Even in the past when there were higher levels of poverty and lower nutrition/ hygiene levels measles was rarely suffered by adults (because of childhood immunity) and complications where uncommon.
1968 28th Edition Black's Medical Dictionary:
"Measles may, however, occur in a very malignant form— Such cases are rare, occurring mostly in circumstances of bad hygiene, both as regards the individual and his surroundings. On the other hand, cases of measles are often of so mild a form throughout that the patient can scarcely be persuaded to submit to treatment."
"Measles is a disease of the earlier years of childhood— It is comparatively seldom met with in adults, but this is due to the fact that most persons have undergone an attack in early life. Where this has not been the case, the old suffer equally with the young"
Why has it in this modern age become such a scary disease?
In regards to allergies:
"After contracting measles and other childhood illnesses (e.g.. chickenpox, scarlet fever, whooping cough, rubella, mumps and may be others), it has been widely accepted by many health practitioners, including experienced orthodox paediatricians that this is often beneficial for the general health of many children. Specifically it has been shown that children contracting measles naturally were less likely to suffer from allergic conditions such as asthma, eczema and hayfever, (Lancer June 29 1996)."—Trevor Gunn BSc
"It is well known that measles is an important development milestone in the life and maturing processes in children. Why would anybody want to stop or delay the maturation processes of children and of their immune systems?"–Viera Scheibner
"Experiencing the measles actually strengthens the immune system. If measles is experienced generation after generation the disease gets weaker in its manifestation and becomes stronger in the identifying properties of the DNA/RNA chain. This passes on a permanent immunity to future generations from that particular lineage. If there is a virgin population that has never experienced the disease, then these individuals have a more likely chance of having more severe complications of that illness. Measles, along with, chickenpox, smallpox, any herpes, ringworm is a Tubercular Miasm."–Phyllis (AVN list)
Wahn U. The immunology of fetuses and infants: What drives the allergic march? Allergy 55 (7), 591-599 (2000)
Recovery from natural measles infection reduces the incidence of atopy and allergic responses to house-dust mites to half that seen in vaccinated children.ucukosmanoglu E, Cetinkaya F, Akcay F, Pekun F Frequency of allergic diseases following measles. Allergol Immunopathol (Madr). 2006 Jul-Aug;34(4):146-9. Links. Department of Pediatrics, Medical Faculty, Gaziantep University Istanbul, Turkey. email@example.com
OBJECTIVE: Viral and bacterial infections in childhood decrease the likelihood of allergic diseases in later life. The frequency of allergic diseases in patients with a history of measles has been reported to be low but some studies still suggest that measles can increase the frequency of allergic diseases. The aim of this study was to investigate the frequency of allergic diseases following measles in childhood. METHODS: Fifty-two children hospitalized in our clinic with measles were compared with 51 children without measles. Allergic diseases were investigated in both groups by using the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC) questionnaire. In all children, allergy skin tests were performed with the four most common allergens. RESULTS: Sensitivity to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus was less frequent in children with measles than in those without (p < 0.05). A history of nebulized salbutamol use in the emergency room in the previous 12 months was also less frequent in the measles group (p < 0.05). Inhaled corticosteroid use was more common in the group without measles (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicate that findings of allergic disease are less frequent in children with a history of measles. These children were less sensitive to D. pteronyssinus. PMID: 16854347 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINEYoshioka K, Miyata H, Maki S. Transient remission of juvenile rheumatoid arthritis after measles. Acta Paediatr Scand. 1981;70(3):419-20.
A 4-year-old Japanese girl with systemic juvenile rheumatoid arthritis had an attack of measles. On the day following the first signs of measles she became afebrile and free of joint pain even though aspirin therapy was discontinued. The remission lasted for 10 days. It appears that the measles virus infection may have been responsible for the brief remission in this patient. The observation of a remission of juvenile rheumatoid arthritis after measles is extremely rare. PMID: 7246137 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]So my last questions is, why do me immunize HEALTHY children that live in a developed country against a disease that actually has benefits, a disease in which children are perfectly able to battle on their own and a disease in which will increase the strength of their immune system? We are not a third world country, there needs to be more education about these sorts of issues instead of just resorting to jabbing EVERYONE (the same goes for Mumps and Rubella, rather mild diseases in children). Personally, I think we are walking down a very dangerous path.
The argument that childhood diseases strengthen the immune system is a reasonable one. However, it should be pointed out that measles has a small but significant mortality and morbidity. It therefore seems stupid to take even that small risk when the vaccine is readily available and relatively benign to administer.
I am all for scrapping mumps, rubella and chicken pox vaccines. These are all a waste of time and , as you point out, the diseases themselves may be beneficial. Rubella antibodies should be measured in girls at about age 12 and the vaccine given if they are non-immune.
Measles suppresses the immune system, so it does not surprise me if a patient with Juvenile RA improved during the illness.
There is no good evidence the paracetamol makes asthma worse. The studies quoted to support this are all epidemiological. Paracetamol usage in those studies is likely to be a surrogate for pyrexia and frequent fever is most definately associated with increase incidence of asthma.
Note that the effect of Paracetamol on neutrophil function is small and only significant in critically ill patients.
Can you get a measles vaccination separate to the MMR vaccine?
The reason my kids are not all immunised against measles is the MMR vaccine itself – I'd do it if I could get just the measles vaccine.
.-= Madeleine´s last blog ..Contra Mundum: A New Column in Investigate Magazine =-.I'm pretty sure that a measles-only vaccine is not available in NZ.
"measles has a small but significant mortality and morbidity rate"
Most likely if not always in children with poor nutrition(vitamin deficiencies, especially A&C, this is why measles is a third world disease. Because the children are so malnourished. Children who have gone blind from measles in third world countries have actually regained site after treatment with high doses of VitA) and poor health care management… i.e pumping them full of antipyretics.
Paracetamol inhibits the formation of the important polymorphonuclear leukocytes = immune system cannot do its job = infections take a stronger hole. This is one reason why meningitis is so common, because people take a panadol at the early signs of any infection. And why diseases like measles and even colds can become complicated. It is a clear and simple connection.
It has also been shown in various studies that people (otherwise 'healthy' people) who take panadol etc while having the flu are usually sicker for at least 1 or 2 days longer. I.e takes the immune system longer to fight off the infection.
Personally I see the vaccine as a higher risk than the disease itself, especially MMR.
Rebekah: It has also been shown in various studies that people (otherwise 'healthy' people) who take panadol etc while having the flu are usually sicker for at least 1 or 2 days longer.
I am not aware of any such studies. Do you have any references?
Here is one of the more simple reports on the subject…
You may also find this link helpful
I think the really interesting thing about topics such as this is that in the past doctors have known infection related fever is good, it has only been in the most recent years that it has become a bad thing and has been overly suppressed. Even the world health organisation has commented on this (see the PDF I sent to you) I wonder why this is, perhaps because of drugs such as panadol?
A doctors advice should really be more something like this
On a side note I can imagine a parent would find it very frustrating being told they should immunize against measles but that the only way to do that in NZ is through MMR and even their doctor doesn't support MMR.
"I'm pretty sure that a measles-only vaccine is not available in NZ."
Good luck with your further studies into these issues doctor, I really appreciate the time you took to reply to my comments and questions.
I am also curious about these figures
Risk of death from measles 1:1000 – what about all the minor cases of measles that go un-reported??
"On the other hand, cases of measles are often met of so mild a form throughout that the patient can scarcely be persuaded to submit to treatment." -1968 28th Edition Black's Medical Dictionary
"In 1966 there were 343,642 cases in England and Wales, with 80 deaths. One attack of measles does not give complete immunity from future attacks, though there is a certain amount of protection, and second attacks are rare."
So that is a rate of 1:4,295 not even close to the current reported risk of 1:1000. It is also important to remember this is from about 42 years ago in England, when living standards were lower, there was poorer nutrition, hygeine and poverty was a bit more common. It wasn't a scary illness and the author of the medical dictionary believes that the deaths are more often than not attributed to poor living circumstances, bad personal hygiene, already delicate health, and being a nurseling. So whats changed?!
Risk of severe reaction from vaccine 1:10,000 (no reported deaths; no permanent disability) –
Really? http://www.igovernment.in/site/child-death-forces-india-to-recall-measles-vaccine/
I think we all know that vaccine reactions are MASSIVELY under reported, there are so many factors in vaccine deaths and the current stats are so unreliable. Doctors often refuse to even consider a vaccine reaction (http://iansvoice.org/days3thru7.aspx) Usually a vaccine death will be labled un-determined cause of death or in babies SIDS.
The study you quoted is the old 2000 observational study from Pharmacotherapy. Not a bad study as it goes, but not a prospective one. There is, therefore, the distinct possibility that the paracetamol "prolonged" the flu because paracetamol was only given for the worst symptoms. Certainly, no subsequent study to my knowledge has ever demonstrated this effect. A good quality study in Indian Paediatrics recently showed that paracetamol is a good antipyretic and does not prolong fever.Risk of death from measles 1:1000 – what about all the minor cases of measles that go un-reported??
Certainly, these figures are from notified statistics only. It is likely that the actual mortality from measles is, like that of swine flu, much lower. However, the proportions in my figures would be correct, even if the absolute figures were lower. Note that in 1966, measles was an endemic virus in Britain and therefore general immunity was maximal. In New Zealand 2009, it is a rare disease and immunity against it is poor. It is entirely possible that the disease will hit New Zealanders worse than the 1966 British. Be that as it may. Even with your figure 15 unimmunised children will die in an epidemic. That is exactly 15 too many.I think we all know that vaccine reactions are MASSIVELY under reported
And I think we all know that the unreported ones are trivial.Usually a vaccine death will be labled un-determined cause of death or in babies SIDS
There is NO evidence that vaccination causes SIDS. There are a number of case studies of children who have died in an unexplained fashion following vaccination but this is merely anecdotal and proves nothing. An excellent article in Paediatrics elegantly demonstrated that, given that vaccination and SIDS occur at the same sorts of ages (2 months) it is statistically inevitable that some children will die from SIDS shortly after receiving the vaccine. -
So basically everything comes down to who carries out studies and how much publicity a study gets. Nothing can be proven until there have been 100s of studies carried out over years and years right?? So a couple of studies and a couple of trials mean nothing? (original studies back in the 90s – Ehsan Ali Shalabi, Ali Sulaiman Al-Tuwaijri, The thermal potentiation of oxidative metabolism in vitro acetaminophen-inhibited pmn. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/17343/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0) were the first studies that brought up the issue of paracetamol/antipyretics and immune suppressment. Nothing much else has been looked at and yet paracetamol is still being prescribed for use in the 'relief' of infections and much of it on a completely un scientific basis. How can something be safe if very few have been looking for the right information? It has been shown that suppressing fever is unnecessary (doctor have known this for years – measles used to be treated like this: mild diaphoretics such as accetate of ammonia and ipecacuanha, warm baths and drinks, in order to promote sweating! Doctors didn't want to suppress fever even up to 40 or 41C measles is toxin producing virus so you want the body to be able to expel those toxins) It has been shown that paracetamol inhibits the formation of vital metabolites allowing infection to take a stronger hold. You mention a study that shows paracetamol is a good antipyretic and does not prolong fever, I never said it does. It suppresses fever, that's the whole issue, fever suppressing is bad, it masks vital signs of infection and makes it harder to diagnose and thats one of the reasons why children suffer complications. Fever is good, fever is the bodies natural reaction to infection it is a universal survival function, there is no reason to suppress it and I still do not know why doctors recommend paracetamol left right and center. Or maybe I do, because if a sick grizzly child's fever goes down parents will be happy because the medicine has "fixed" the illness.
Yes I think if measles does lead to a epidemic in NZ it is possible there will be deaths, and yes there is a vaccine that may provide some kind of protection and if you prefer your child to get the vaccine than the disease then by all means go ahead. But over all I think there is a major flaw, I do not believe children should die from measles, I have herd doctors mention that if a child dies from measles questions should be raised about their care. This comes back to fever suppressing and vitamin deficiency, as Hilary Butler wrote in her book -Vaccines and Third World Countries "Studies in America, and New Zealand have found children who have measles often have third world micronutrient levels, and the recommendations in both countries since 2001 have been that all children with measles be given vitamin A. So I ask you two questions: Why, 75 years later, is Gerberding only wanting you to know that the measles vaccine works to reduce deaths? Don't you wonder what might have been, for Africa and the developed world as well, had doctors taken their heads out of the sand and administered vitamin A from 1932 onwards? Ah, but the catch with that was they wouldn't have had all those deaths and complications from pre-1996, to wave in front of your nose and say, in a nutshell, you need the vaccine because there is NOTHING we can do to help you if your child gets measles. The messages that "you need the vaccine" and "there is nothing we can do for you" were both lies. For whatever reason, the medical profession chose to ignore decades of literature on vitamin A." I think this article is also an eye opener regarding measles in the modern age – http://www.vaccinationnews.com/Scandals/Sept_13_02/Scandal33.htm
"And I think we all know that the unreported ones are trivial" I know cases where a child has had a vaccine reaction and the doctor as admitted it only for the parents to find out months later their doctor never reported it. Many vaccine reactions do go under reported because they are things like the development of autoimmune diseases or arthritis and these things take longer than a few days or weeks to develop, therefore the chances of the vaccine being recognized as the cause are much much lower. Just watch what happens with the Gardasil vaccine (another ridiculous vaccine)
And while we are on the topic of 'tests' 'trials' and vaccine reactions we could look at how poorly vaccines are tested in the first place. Trials are usually flawed in more than one way, a few being:
Studies are usually only small and only include "healthy" children. However, after a study is completed vaccines are given to ALL children, regardless of underlying health conditions or genetic predispositions.
Observation for side effects are usually only for a short term, a couple of weeks.
The desired end result is simply the presence antibodies which even the CDC admits does not equal immunity.
Poor use of a 'placebo' usually another 'approved' vaccine which had the same flaws in its trial or in some cases the vaccine without the virus strain in it. I.e any reactions caused by things like the adjuvants are ignored.
It still amazes me that there are vaccines out there being used that have had issues raised regarding there safety. Why did it take so long to get rid of the live oral polio vaccine that was giving children polio?
Why do we see articles like this? http://www.encognitive.com/node/5386
Why in NZ is prevenar being used when there have been people speaking out about its dangers and conflicts of interest in testing, promotion and approval – http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/prevnar.htm
Why was a polio vaccine contaminated with SV40 (a cancer causing virus) allowed to be used all over the world when authorities knew about it? It was not until millions of people had already received the vaccine that they decided to do some decent tests.
That is just a few examples… but have we learnt from our past mistakes? I don't think so, otherwise we wouldn't be giving NZ babies things like Prevenar. How can such important issues be ignored without proper testing, looking in the RIGHT place for the RIGHT things. If any of the same issues that are raised about vaccine safety were raised about a food product or about an appliance I have no doubt that those issues would be sufficiently dealt with or the product recalled, but not with vaccines.
I have sent you a paper regarding SIDS/vaccines in babies, it is a very good paper and also discusses the issue of immune system 'skewing'
Thanks for continuing to talk about measles MacDoctor. I still think in light of what has been said here that it is useless to emphasise the mortality rate for a disease, and the need for vaccination, while omitting to place the role of disease in its proper context- as both a killer and a saver of lives.
Therefore I think the message from the top concerning vaccinations has been revealed to be both shallow and condescending in light of what has been discussed here. This is more like an adult conversation!
As a parting potshot, I found an incredible article from the Huffington Post regarding a successful case in the US VICP regarding MMR vaccine damage causing ADEM, & PDD-NOS (which is said to be squarely on the autism spectrum) that I would be interested in your opinion on. This appears to be the new front in the fight both for and against vaccines, as plaintiffs may be able to win more cases against the govt.
It's a good article, but it is not discussing the scientific question, only the legal one. That the court has decided that there is enough evidence of causality in individual cases is not helpful in determining whether or not vaccines cause autism. The arguments used in court are quite different from the ones used in science (although, obviously, the court decision will access as much of the science as they can). The test in a court is "balance of probability" ("beyond reasonable doubt" is only for criminal cases). The test for science is statistical probability (or empirical proof if available).As there is certainly a correlation between vaccination and mild forms of autism AND there is a possible scientific explanation of this – I think it entirely reasonable for a court to award compensation, as long as it is not absurdly punitive.
But from a scientific point of view, I would like to see more than a simple correlation and an unproven, speculative explanation. At the very least there would need to be a decent single blind trial (say 100,000 vaccinated kids and 100,000 un-immunised kids) Would would need to be followed up for about 5-10 years. This would be hugely expensive, of course, which is the only reason I can think of why it has not yet been done. This would provide a definitive answer (note: you need the very large numbers because autism is quite rare).
Frankly, I think the vaccine manufacturers have not funded such a trial because it is cheaper to pay off individuals than do the trial. And, of course, they run the risk of finding out there is causation!
See my general remarks to Johnnieboy above, because they also apply to the web site you link to. The burden of proof is substantially lower on the web as compared to scientific journals!
The problem with most of these controversial issues about vaccines and paracetamol is that they are extremely hard to prove for the reasons already mentioned. It is all very well having in vitro studies and animal studies suggesting possible toxic effects of paracetamol, but they still need to be properly proven in vivo (in children). All the epidemiological evidence so far demonstrates that paracetamol is perfectly safe. The only trial that had demonstrated any link between paracetamol and extension of fever is one involving critically ill children. It still appears perfectly safe in self-limiting, minor febrile illnesses.
The problem in the vaccine debate is that legal people and lay people are quite willing to base their decisions on anecdotal stories (case studies), but doctors require proper scientific proof before changing their methods. This is true for vaccines, and it is true for paracetamol.
Having said that, It is clear to me that pharmaceutical manufacturers are deliberately "gaming" the system by funding multiple low-power trials to muddy the waters when the issue is the safety of a well established product. (they also play the system when they are testing new drugs as well – exaggerating benefits and playing down side effects). This is one of the reasons why I am in favour of state sponsored research – as long as it is fully independent and not sponsored to follow government agendas.
"It still appears perfectly safe in self-limiting, minor febrile illnesses." There have been no studies that have really looked into this issue so how do we know?? And is the fact that it inhibits the formation of important cells simply ignored?
What is "proper scientific proof" is it the CDC the WHO and the FDA making a huge announcement and saying "oh wait, yeah that drug is actually bad"
We all know that will never happen.
Even our own governement ignores such things. E.g. Tamiflu: after handing it out like candy and defending that action there have recently been a few questions raised about its safety. Yet those same questions had already been raised in the past and ignored. I wonder how many people suffered negative effects because of this ignorance? I wonder how many people were hospitilized because of the drug and not the flue, after all the side effects look alot like serious flu infection….
vomiting, diarrhea, bronchitis, stomach pain, dizziness and headache…then there are psychiatric side-effects.
The FDA recommended that flu drugs, Tamiflu and Relenza should carry warnings about possible side-effects. They reccommended the warning should be directed at patients of all ages, not just children (wonder who took the time to inform patients about these side effects during the swine flu hype)
FDA employees looked at 596 cases – most of them in Japan, of patients experiencing psychiatric side-effects which may be linked to Tamiflu use. Three Japanese adults committed suicide while on Tamiflu while five children died. The Japanese Ministry of Health warned against Tamiflu use for patients aged 10-19 in March 2007.
FDA – "Whether the side effects and deaths that have been seen were caused just by the drug(s), the flu virus, or the two together is not clear."
Should people really be using these drugs?? IF THEY HAVE UN-CLEAR SERIOUS SIDE EFFECTS?
With so much history of….lets be honest, screw ups (ref a few of my bad vaccine example) how as a doctor do you know what IS good and what IS bad? After all "it is clear to me that pharmaceutical manufacturers are deliberately "gaming" the system by funding multiple low-power trials to muddy the waters when the issue is the safety of a well established product."
Rebekah: how as a doctor do you know what IS good and what IS bad
The same way you do, by weighing the evidence. I am rarely fooled by the games of the pharmaceutical companies and most doctors that I know maintain a very healthy skepticism. We are also skeptical of the myriad websites that tell us how terrible the drugs we use are. We read our journals and keep an eye out for studies that rationally indicate problems.
The reality is that some of the things we currently do will be shown eventually to be bad. Vaccination may well be one of them. Paracetamol may be another (although I seriously doubt that). But to run around changing your opinion about a treatment on the flimsiest of evidence is not only unscientific but highly dangerous to patients. Doctors will always be inherently cautious about risk.
MacDoctor, the scientific question and the legal question are not that easy to separate. The courtroom is often the place to decide whether research has both validity and application to the real world. The judge ripped apart the government's PhD witness- someone knowing far more about vaccination than he did. As was said in the article,
"Abell also chided MacDonald for his assertion that "all the medical literature is negative" in regards to an ADEM-PDD link. "However, soon thereafter, he corrected this statement by clarifying, 'I can find no literature relating ADEM to autism or [PDD],'" Abell wrote. "It may be that Respondent's research reveals a dearth of evidence linking ADEM to PDD, but that is not the same as positive proof that the two are unrelated, something Respondent was unable to produce. Therefore, the statement that 'all the medical literature is negative' is incorrect."
The Court also took MacDonald to task for insisting that Bailey's initial symptoms were not 100% consistent with the signs of ADEM. "His distinction seems one of degree, not of type, and strikes as a trifle semantic," Abell sniffed. He also noted that McDonald was having a hard time determining Bailey's current diagnosis. "He ultimately concluded that 'Bailey falls into the large group of children with autism/PDD in which by our current evidence-based medicine we rarely can make a specific diagnosis.'""
I know researchers tend to rely on their unrivalled technical knowledge of a subject (ie their profession) as their only rebuttal to criticism of their actions. The trouble is this only holds true in academia and public policy to a certain extent before it gets tested by the judiciary, who are potentially more skilled in weighing up the merits of research than the researchers themselves, when that research happens to be relevant to a real-world situation (often also an intrinsically legal situation). The medical researcher's opinion and their research becomes secondary to that of the judge, and for good reason!
Despite despite the judge having found causation to a much higher degree than any researcher could in this particular field of inquiry, you speak of statistical correlation as being required for a definite conclusion for your profession. I find the argument that more evidence is required before a link between autism and the MMR vaccine also to be, "one of degree, not of type, and strikes as a trifle semantic". The message that the MMR vaccine is completely safe needs to be dropped by the MOH, & the question of the need for an MMR vaccine needs revisiting I imagine.
The judge's main criticism was very valid: that MacDonald stated that the literature was negative rather than sparse and equivocal. I still think that the anti-vaccine lobby overstates their case in exactly the same fashion.
The problem is that sometimes past evidence is ignored for too long, like Vit A, I wonder how many lives it could have saved or how many children in third world countries could avoid permanent damage? "had doctors taken their heads out of the sand and administered vitamin A from 1932″ Or I wonder how long it will take for Doctors to really use VitC or stress the importance of vitD in winter??
The SIDS/e-coli argument has been around for years, as you mention the document I sent you was from 2002, but today we see articles like this:
"Now, British researchers say they may have found that bacteria is a contributing factor in SIDS" How interesting!! NOW? Now they see the light??? But I wonder if anyone will do anything about it THIS time and I wonder how many babies could have been saved or could be saved in the future if someone takes this 'old' data and does something about it.
"The reality is that some of the things we currently do will be shown eventually to be bad. Vaccination may well be one of them" I think people already know this, just not enough people or not enough people in the right positions, willing to say anything :
I was told a couple of nights ago about a woman with a PhD in immunology
who confessed to a chiropractor that she was not in favour of vaccination.
When he asked her why not, she said "Well, looking at serum through the
microscope I could see that the antibodies went right past the
vaccine-injected antigens as if they weren't even there." When he then
asked, "Would you be willing to put that in writing?" she replied, "No, I
would lose my job." (Vaccination Information Service 2004)I am glad to see a doctor who is open minded enough to at least consider the other side of the story. I think these issues will go on long into the future, who knows what will happen? Is it too late with diseases being replaced left right and center? Like pneumococcus infection increase following haemophilus vaccination or HPV strains being replaced by more dangerous strains. It is all a little scary, especially with compulsory vaccines on the horizon.
Pneumococcus infection is a more common cause of septicaemia, NOT more frequent. This is because the Hib vaccine has all but eliminated the all too common Hib septicaemia. Septicaemia is now rarer than before. hence pneumococcus is more common. We don't know enough about HPV but I have expressed similar concerns on other posts. And compulsory vaccination will NEVER have my approval.
Sorry for the double post but last of all I just wanted to point out this clinic, some doctors taking an obviously different approach to medicine.
Homefirst Health Services: A clinic serving as an incredible beacon of health
Located on the outskirts of Chicago, Illinois, USA, the doctors at Homefirst are likely to recommend vaccinating not at all.
Medical Voices Vaccine Information Center has chosen to showcase Homefirst for the following reasons:
Homefirst has 35,000 pediatric patients, 90 percent of which are completely unvaccinated, and the rest have received few vaccines.
Zero known cases of autism. They are "supposed" to have hundreds
Asthma rates so low, insurance giant Blue Cross Blue Shield's systems flagged the "issue". Homefirst got a call wondering how this could be.
Their patients are so healthy, a lawmaker proposed a law requiring that a study be done to determine why these unvaccinated patients are so much healthier than their vaccinated counterparts.
Sounds interesting. I would like to see a competent epidemiologist look at the clinic and see if vaccination is the only differential.
Pneumococcal and meningococcal strains are responsible for most of the meningitis cases we see today, pneumococcal and meningococcal are allot harder to treat than Hib. Basically by vaccinating against Hib we have opened up a space for more dangerous and less treatable strains to take its place.
But I notice you have mentioned in previous posts your lack of 'faith' regarding this vaccine as well.
Your posts about Gardasil basically state the same concerns many people (who have bothered to look into it) have, the real problem is that the public isn't being told the whole 'truth' the public should be told that HPV is NOT really an 'STD' and that it is one of the most common and contagious everyday viruses that circulates this earth. Saying that someone should get vaccinated against it before they become sexually active is a joke. Children can have HPV, babies get it from their mothers, animals carry it. Bla bla bla I could go on for a while about the uselessness of this vaccine but it would be better if someone who needed to hear it was listening (i.e the hundred of parents lining up their teen girls to receive the jab) and if perhaps a Doctor or even the NZ health department was saying it, or if the adds on TV or the Gardasil pamphlets stated it! THAT would be REAL informed choice.


text:
Winter 2014 GRASP applications CLOSE Monday December 16th!
Girls Rock After School Program (GRASP) is a 10-week program for girls 8-18 years old. Students attend instrument lessons, form a band, collaboratively write an original song, participate in workshops, and perform with their band at a live showcase.
The last day to sign up is MONDAY DECEMBER 16th, 2013!
"COLORS" Premieres at OMCA
Women's Rock Camp wins Best of the East Bay 2013
The East Bay Express has deemed Women's Rock Camp "Best Rock 'n' Roll Fastasy Camp" of 2013!
Read the full article here. -
Jayla explains why BAGRC rocks!
Jayla Explains it all from Bay Area Girls Rock Camp on Vimeo.
Jayla is an amazing drummer and vocalist. She is ten years old and has been playing drums for 4 years. In this video she explains why BAGRC is a great program for all the girls in the world.
Bay Area Girls Rock Camp is a nonprofit dedicated to empowering girls through music, promoting an environment that fosters self-confidence, creativity and collaboration.
P.O.Box 22469
Oakland, CA 94609.
455 17th St, Suite 302
Oakland, CA 94612
Bay Area Girls Rock Camp is a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization.
©2012 Bay Area Girls Rock Camp
Handbuilt by Quilted & Golden Arrows
Hosted by GAIA Host


text:
Berkeley Heights Summer Concert Photo Contest: August 14, 2013 Contestants
Wednesday, August 14, 2013 • 10:36pm
The third annual Berkeley Heights Summer Concert Series Photo Contest is here! TheAlternativePress.com, in partnership with the Suburban Chamber of Commerce and local businesses, is proud to present the contest entries from the fourth and final concert which took place on Wednesday, August 14, 2013.
At each concert, a reporter from TheAlternativePress.com took photos of families and individuals who wanted to participate in the photo contest. At the end of the concert series, a winner will be drawn at random from the entries received and publicly recognized on TheAlternativePress.com.
The grand prize winner will receive at $100 gift certificate to Goodman's Deli in Berkeley Heights, sponsored by Smith Chiropractic.
Good luck to all contestants!
Click here to see entries from July 31st's concert.
Click here to see entries from July 24th's concert.
Click here to see entries from July 17th's concert.
The Third Annual Berkeley Heights Free Summer Concert Series Photo Contest, sponsored by TheAlternativePress.com and the Suburban Chamber of Commerce, has begun!
At the end of the concert series, winners will be chosen at random and receive prizes donated by area businesses.
The opinions expressed herein are the writer's alone, and do not reflect the opinions of TheAlternativePress.com or anyone who works for TheAlternativePress.com. TheAlternativePress.com is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information supplied by the writer.


text:
Vaystrem's Responses | Posts |
No Audiophiles in Hollywood
In the Italian Job, recent remake, with Seth Green & co, he has a rather nice setup right at the very end of the movie, even if what he spews regarding stereos after they complete . . . | 163 |
Your ''best kept secret'' speaker choice ?
Quad L-Series --- too much press in Britain not any in North America. These briallantly finished beautiful very revealing speakers with a gorgeous midrange - just seem ignored. . . . | 101 |
Best value speakers available
I'm going to throw my beloved Quad's into the list - the 11Ls / 12Ls for a bookshelf cannot be beat in their pricerange. The 12L easily bettered the B&W603 and I've seen others . . . | 91 |
How Important Is The Cdp?
I have the 3950 in my system. It was an improvement over my Pioneer DV-353. However. When compared to the AMC CD8b, Cambridge Audio Azur 640c, Arcam 73t, Rega Planet 2000, Creek . . . | 44 |
Were to go after a Rega Planet 2000?
Creek! This is a link to my in home comparison of the Creek CD50, Cary 308, Rega Planet 2000, Roksan Kandy MkIII, Cambridge Azur 640c, and Arcam 73t. http://db.audioasylum.com/. . . | 41 |
any new Quad 11/12L owners?
Hi I have the 21Ls but they are very similar in characteristics to the 12Ls, except with deeper bass. I love them to death, I actually bought them over the 12Ls because, someone . . . | 33 |
$2500 amp and pre/pro
Your could go with Outlaw's Pre-Pro the 950 http://www.outlawaudio.com/products/950.html for $799. It is a rebranded Sherbourn. and match with their equally well regarded . . . | 25 |
Got my very first system. What's my next move?
http://www.skylanstands.com/ Very good quality stands at a reasonable price. Very sturdy great sound quality I have spikes under mine although rollers are an option and are very. . . | 24 |
Small floorstander recommendations
The Quad 21L is an excellent small floorstander, excellent WAF - I listen to a very similar music mix as you have indicated and have found enjoyment with these wonderful speakers | 24 |
Best Floorstanding Speaker under $1000 USD
Quad 21L (I own) or the Epos M15 (Only other speaker in the price range I would consider). Quad is more detailed, Epos is a hair more musical. But I haven't heard them both in . . . | 23 |
floorstanding speakers for NAD C-320BEE amp
Quad 21L or 22L which I power with my NAD C350 but I'm sure the 320BEE would be fantastic for these outstanding speakers | 21 |
Anyone still excited about HDCD ?
"In September 2000, Microsoft Corporation acquired PMI. Microsoft continues to incorporate PMI's pioneering technology into offerings for the PC. This technology brings to . . . | 20 |
CD Players $1,000 - $1,500 US - any info on Talk?
Thanks so much for the responses :) Part of my bias in manufacturers is that I wish to continue to do business with my preferred local retailer. Musical Fidelity (A3.2), Talk . . . | 19 |
Cd players with variable output?
Don't forget the Quad 99 CDP. http://www.quad-hifi.co.uk/99series.htm http://www.quad-hifi.co.uk/cdp_hifinews.pdf There has been some discussion of this CD Preamp all in one . . . | 19 |
Rotel 1072 & Arcam 73 comparison
Maybe this will help. http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1083534349 My in home comparison of: Creek CD50mk1, Cary 308, Rega Planet 2000, Roksan Kandy mkIII, Arcam . . . | 17 |
Efficient Bookshelfs on a budget?
Just double check @ what OHM rating that 7.5 watts is... a lot of TV based amps output their watts @ 16 or 32 ohms. That would greatly affect your speaker selection | 15 |
QUAD 21L or 22L opinions please punch them in
I own the 21Ls :) I did not have the opportunity to audition the 22Ls at the time of purchase and they were also not within my budget at the time. First off these speakers are . . . | 14 |
Best Low Budget Speakers
Those would be my choices | 13 |
Where to start? New to Analog
I'll probably pickup the NAD PP2 as I can get it for around $150CDN locally. Still waiting on finding out what exactly the old turntable is, turns out my sister snarfed it from . . . | 13 |
Speakers to compare to Paradigm Studio 100 V.3
Quad 21L or 22L both will easily better the Paradigm in imaging, clarity, neutrality, detail, and has one of the sexiest midranges around. Both dig deep, the 22L deeper | 12 |
Looking for a speaker under $1000. used.
Quad 11L/12L/21L/22L, any Epos | 11 |
Paradigm Speaker Question:
I just want to chime in my agreement with Vm8444 here - having auditioned the Paradigms and B&Ws in that pricepoint - I ended up with the Quad 21Ls (Floorstanders)and auditioned . . . | 11 |
Paradigm or Monitor Audio's?? Any thoughts?
I recently auditioned Paradigm Studio 20s / B&W 603s / and ended up buying Quad 21Ls (would've got the 12Ls but got a great deal from www.canadianhifi.com on the 21s) I was . . . | 11 |
Bookshelf Speakers:500-900$CDN Advice for starter?
That's 366US$ -> 659US$ actually. I've finally narrowed it down to three Speakers: Paradigm Monitor 5 Quad 12L B&W602 Anything else in that range I should really be examining . . . | 11 |
Arcam CD73t or Rega Planet 2000
I have had both in my system. I do not think that the Arcam 73t is more 'detailed' than the Rega Planet 2000. I think that the detail levels they retrieve are similar, but that the. . . | 10 |
Quad L22 or Castle Cornway to replace B&W N805
As a Quad owner (21L) I just want to point out something very quickly. Is it your speaker or is it other components in your signal chain that is contributing to the brightness . . . | 10 |
Advice.. Integrated vs Seperates - Low Budget..
Thanks for the input all. My system is composed of: Quad 21L Speakers NAD C350 Integrated (To be Replaced) FT Audio LW1S2 Passive Pre-Amp Speaker Wire: NearSota - OTA Wire - Bi-. . . | 10 |
QUAD or Arcam ?
Just a quick comment regarding Quads & Amplification. I have Quad 21Ls myself and will be powering them with an Monarchy SM-70 within the next few months, moving away from a NAD . . . | 10 |
Advice Please - Where to Spend $3-400
Ya - I think the most reasonable option is probably a DAC - and Shersta you are correct about me being able to add a pre-amp to my system which I have been giving some thought to . . . | 10 |
The Smallest amp/speaker combination?
Amp / CD player / DAC from Audionote (Zero Series) http://www.audionote.co.uk/lev0.htm Small speakers (but have never heard them) Anthony Gallo's http://www.roundsound.com | 9 |
Guidance for a college student...
The NAD T742 isn't actually that bad for two channel - its comparable to NAD's integrateds in that regard. I own a NAD C350 and the dealer I bought it from was a B&W/Wharfdale . . . | 9 |
Cheap - effective A/D converters?
Monitor Audio Gold 10's or Quad 12L
Another vote for the Quad's | 8 |
Subwoover and Quad L-Series Speaker comb. help
That's awesome - you've already gone with the Sunfire's but just wanted to mention that some Quad L-series owners have gone with the new Velodyne DD series and seem to be enjoying . . . | 7 |
In the Beginning
I should add as well that I thoroughly enjoy listening too all kinds of music on this system and it really has exceeded all my expectations - I hope to be adding a NAD or Cambridge. . . | 7 |
Remote Preamp $1000 Used
I own the FT Audio as well and they do have a remote option now as well. It is a fantastic line stage. $550 US for the Pre-Amp $199 US for the Remote www.ftaudio.com The remote . . . | 7 |
Nad new C352CT
Here are some "facts" to refute James Lipiski http://www.nadelectronics.com/reviews/C352-0404_framset.htm " Of the changes made the most important are . . . | 7 |
Epos els 3 vs Triangle Titus $300 range new/used..
Just wanted to comment on the Epos. I myself own Quad 21Ls and had the chance to listen to the entire Quad line - all of which are wonderful. Recently I had the pleasure of . . . | 7 |
Monitor or fullrange ?
In that pricepoint you truly must give a listen to the Quad 11/!12L. There is a decent amount of information on these speakers here on the 'Gon but they are the absolute darlings . . . | 7 |
Scott Nixon - Sarudac+? TubeDac+? vs CI Audio
Thanks for the responses :) In response to Listener57 I am running a pair of Quad 21Ls with a NADC350 Integrated Amplifier (click on my system for far too much information and . . . | 7 |
NAD C350 or Cambridge A500?
I have ended up with the NAD C350 - the 352 will not be available in my local market until December or so - and I sold my old Pioneer receiver so I bought what was available at . . . | 7 |
Recommendation for a cd player-tricky question
Arcam 73T | 6 |
Head To Head: Creek/Arcam/Cary/Roksan... LONG
Thank you :) The Cary & Creek comparison is still ongoing they are very close in each of their respective merits but both have different presentation styles which is making it . . . | 6 |
Von Schweikert VR 1's or Totem Model 1 Signatures?
Audition the Quad 12Ls if you can as well too. www.quad-hifi.co.uk | 6 |
Quad 11L or B&W 601 S3?
I also chose Quads over the B&Ws and Paradigm Reference 20s. I own the 21Ls myself which are 'quicker' than the 22s and go lower than the 12Ls. Your distance off the backwall is . . . | 5 |
Quad 21L vs. Epos m15
I own the Quad 21Ls and have had the chance to listen to the Epos M15s for a total of about 8 hours. Not in thesame system, but both in home living room environments with similar . . . | 5 |
Gamut CD1 Mk.2: Anyone own or listened to it?
I have heard this unit and significantly prefer the Bluenote Stibbert | 4 |
Recommendation wanted to upgrade my NAD CDP
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1083534349 That is my in house comparison of the... Arcam 73T, Creek CD50, Cary 308, Rega Planet 2000, Roksan Kandy MkIII, and . . . | 4 |
QUAD 21L Advice &
I have the 21Ls I find that they need a LOT of room to breathe. 40 inches plus off the backwall if possible, its not with my current living room layout (sigh) so they are only 32 . . . | 4 |
Which Quad's
I own the Quad 21Ls. I would not call them "pronounced" I would call them non-forgiving. If you feed them a bright etchy source, that's how they will sound. Not saying that's . . . | 4 |
Amps for Quad 12L
I really suspect the Plinius will sound good. Monarchy Audio works well, so does Sophia Electric. I've heard good things about Tripath digital based amplifiers as well such as . . . | 4 |
Will the Quad 22L fit my room and other equipment?
I have the 21Ls and I completely agree with all the posters - especially about room placement sensitivity they aren't "incredibly picky" but do spend some time with them . . . | 4 |
Paradigm 60 vs. Quad 21L
From Quad's Website these are the listings for NY City only 2 other dealers in the state. ------------------------------------------- Park Avenue Audio, 425 Park Avenue South, New . . . | 4 |
Epos M 12, Quad 11L or Von Schweikert VR - 1
I own Quads and love them - but you should probably add the Green Mountain Audio Europa's to your listening list | 3 |
Thiel 1.5 vs. Paradigm Reference Studio 60
From a previous thread: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?cspkr&1072447746 If you are looking at the Paradigm 60s you really - really need to give the Quad 21Ls a listen. . . | 3 |
NAD C372 vs C370
I would concur with the previous poster, I own the NAD C350, but am not considering an upgrade to the C352 because the feature changes are not sufficient in my mind. Perhaps at . . . | 3 |
Quad CDP 99 CD player
This player has been getting a lot of forum time on the Audio Asylum so you may want to look there as well for some information. If you dig a bit here on the 'Gon it has been . . . | 2 |
NAD C522BEE.. any info?
Here's a site that has info on almost all the new NAD stuff. http://www.musicalapproach.co.uk/news/index.htm Including PDFs for most of them. The only new NAD Players I could . . . | 2 |
Entry Level Transport
.. Should have put this in the initial post. The Pioneer I am considering because I have heard it is a decent transport and down the road I can certainly add an external DAC to it. . . | 2 |
Cambridge 640c output voltage?
I have used the 640c with a Passive Pre-Amp (FT Audio's LW1S2) with no difficulties, so the output is likely north of 2.5v | 1 |


text: OpenWeb // Southampton is a free meetup for all freelance, agency, or client side web developers, designers, entrepreneurs and investors. A simple and ad hoc evening up to share, and inform. The third OpenWeb event of 2009 will take place at the Royal Southampton Yacht Club, in Ocean Village, Southampton, using their meeting room facilities. This event will start at 6pm. We'll have drinks and networking, a couple of talks, and we'll move on to the Pitcher and Piano for those wishing to carry on networking. Again we are planning Micro-Keynote speaking slots, followed by time with drinks for networking and informal discussion. Confirmed slots for OpenWeb 3: MINI-KEYNOTE: Kevin Wilson, Collaborate KEYNOTE: Paul Boag, Boagworld.com MINI-KEYNOTE: TBC As usual with OpenWeb we'll aim to keep things fluid, allowing as much time as possible for networking, skill sharing, meeting and socialising with fellow web workers from the Southampton area.


text:
Last night I saw Jane Eyre at the Electric on Portobello Road. From pop up back rests to leather footstools, I have catapulted across the cinema spectrum in 24 hours.
It is slightly unfortunate that my discovery of boutique cinemas comes so soon after my discovery of the joys of film watching. I can see this being quite expensive. After sitting in one of these with a glass of wine, it will be hard to go back.
I was worried that the combination of tired Issa, wine and slouchy armchairs would overpower the reason for going; but, actually, it was great to have an unblocked view and uncramped legs, and to be able to fully enjoy the experience of watching a good film.
And it was a good film.
Jane Eyre is one of my favourite novels. I didn't know if two novels-to-films in close promximity was a bit risky but I seem to have done okay. The characters didn't jar with my imagination, and the power of Brontë's language was not lost. What's more, the dresses were great and Mr Rochester, whilst not quite as angry or passionate as my version, was lovely to look at.
If not, here are a few other things that made my boutique cinema experience…
- There was a bar at the back and the nachos were on plates, rather than in cardboard boxes
- You could also buy posh sausage rolls or olives, if popcorn isn't your thing
- If you're feeling flash, you can pay a little extra for a sofa
- …or for a bottle of champagne to go in the wine cooler things that were built into the armrest
- The lights are on through the trailers so you know that, when it gets darker, the film is really about to begin.
- They have cowshed soap in the toilets. It's the little things….
As you might have guessed, I'm going back.


text:
about us
vision & mission
corporate profile
organisation structure
board of directors
Tan Sri Dr Ahmad Tajuddin Ali
Dato' Wan Abdullah Wan Ibrahim
Dato' Izzaddin Idris
Md Ali Md Dewal
Oh Kim Sun
Sheranjiv Sammanthan
Professor Philip Sutton Cox
Lim Tian Huat
Dato' Srikandan Kanagainthiram
Ungku Suseelawati Ungku Omar
senior management
corporate governance
information & downloads
investor relations
our projects
Symphony Hills
Environment Programme
School Education Programme
Community Building Programme
CSR News
media centre
UEM Land secured agreement for the establishment of Johor State New Administrative Centre as the first signature development of Nusajaya
UEM Land undertook de-gearing exercise involving strategic disposal of 4,500 acres in Nusajaya to Khazanah
Physical works on Southern Industrial Logistics Clusters (SiLC) commenced
288 units of single and double storey terraces of Nusa Idaman were launched in Nusajaya, Iskandar Malaysia, Johor
UEM Land launched Horizon Hills and Nusajaya Industrial Park Phase 2. Physical works on Puteri Harbour commenced
UEM Land signed a Memorandum of Collaboration with General Electric Inc., to jointly develop Nusajaya as a world class city. The areas of collaboration are safety, infrastructure and environment
UEM Land listed on Bursa Malaysia
UEM Land unveiled Nusajaya Security Master Plan
UEM Land launched East Ledang development in Nusajaya, Iskandar Malaysia, Johor
UEM Land unveiled its Environment Management Plan known as the "Nusajaya Green Plan"
UEM Land acquired 449 acres of freehold land in Bangi
UEM launched Symphony Hills development in Cyberjaya, Selangor
UEM Land launched Nusa Bayu development in Nusajaya, Iskandar Malaysia, Johor
UEM Land launched Bio-XCell, Malaysia's first dedicated Biotechnology Park in Nusajaya, Iskandar Malaysia, Johor
The acquisition of Sunrise Berhad was completed on 16 February 2011 with Sunrise becoming a wholly owned subsidiary of UEM Land Holdings Berhad. The acquisition was synergistic and complementary for both parties as it is an amalgamation of a macro township developer and a specialised property player
UEM Land unveiled Angkasa Raya development in KLCC on 8 November 2011. Fronting the remarkable Petronas Twin Towers, Angkasa Raya is a 1.59 acre freehold mixed use development
UEM Land jointly manages the marketing and development of six land parcels in Marina South and Ophir-Rochor sites in Singapore for M+S Pte Ltd, a joint venture company between Khazanah Nasional Berhad and Temasek Holdings Pte Ltd.
UEM Land launched its first property showcase beyond Malaysian shores. Known as "Property Gallery", it is located in Singapore's Heritage Place
Nusajaya Lifestyle Sdn Bhd a joint venture company between UEM Land and Iskandar Harta Holdings Sdn Bhd, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Iskandar Investment Berhad held the soft opening of Phase 1 of Mall of Medini
UEM Land entered into a joint-venture agreement with Ascendas Land International Pte Ltd to develop a 519 acre integrated eco-friendly tech park located in Gerbang Nusajaya, within Nusajaya in Iskandar Malaysia, Johor
UEM Land entered into a joint venture agreement with FASTrack Autosports Pte Ltd on the development of Motorsports City in Gerbang Nusajaya located in Nusajaya, Iskandar Malaysia.
© 2009-2012 UEM Land Holdings Berhad. All rights reserved.