[Biofuel] Do Americans really believe in free enterprise?
http://killinghope.org/superogue/system.htm The United States invades, bombs, and kills for it, but do Americans really believe in free enterprise? William Blum Since the end of the cold war, prominent American economists and financial specialists have been advising the governments of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union on the creation and virtues of a free-enterprise system. The US-government-financed National Endowment for Democracy is busy doing the same on a daily basis in numerous corners of the world. The US-controlled World Bank and International Monetary Fund will not bestow their financial blessings upon any country that does not aggressively pursue a market economy. The United States refuses to remove its embargo and end all its other punishments of Cuba unless the Cubans terminate their socialist experiment and jump on the capitalist bandwagon. Before Washington would sanction and make possible his return to Haiti in 1994, Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide had to guarantee the White House that he would shed his socialist inclinations and embrace the free market. It would, consequently, come as a shock to the peoples of many countries to realize that, in actuality, most Americans do not believe in the free-enterprise system. It would, as well, come as a shock to most Americans. To be sure, a poll asking something like: Do you believe that our capitalist system should become more socialist? would be met with a resounding No! But, going above and beyond the buzz words, is that how Americans really feel? Supply and demand Following the disastrous 1994 earthquake in Los Angeles came the cry from many quarters: Stores should not be raising prices so much for basic necessities like water, batteries, and diapers. Stores should not be raising their prices at all at such a time, it was insisted. It's not the California way and it's not the American way, said Senator Dianne Feinstein. More grievances arose because landlords were raising rents on vacant apartments after many dwellings in the city had been rendered uninhabitable. How dare they do that? people wailed. The California Assembly then proceeded to make it a crime for merchants to increase prices for vital goods and services by more than ten percent after a natural disaster.[1] A similar tale followed the destruction caused by Hurricane Isabel in September 2003. In the Washington, DC area and points south, exorbitant prices were being demanded for generators, batteries, gasoline, ice, water pumps, tree-removal services, etc. The governor and attorney general of Virginia called on the legislature to pass the state's first anti-price-gouging law after receiving about 100 complaints from residents. North Carolina had enacted an anti-gouging law just shortly before.[2] In the face of all this, one must wonder: Hadn't any of these people taken even a high-school course in economics? Hadn't they learned at all about the Law of Supply and Demand? Did they think the law had been repealed? Did they think it should be? Even members of congress don't seem to quite trust the workings of the system. They regularly consider measures to contain soaring drug and health-care costs and the possible regulation of the ticket distribution industry because of alleged price abuses.[3] Why don't our legislators simply allow the magic of the marketplace to do its magic? The profit motive President Calvin Coolidge left Americans these stirring words to ponder: Civilization and profits go hand in hand. Hillary Clinton, however, while the First Lady, lashed out at the medical and insurance industries for putting their profits ahead of the public's health. The market, she declared, knows the price of everything but the value of nothing.[4] Labor unions regularly attack companies for skimping on worker health and safety in their pursuit of higher profit. Environmentalists never tire of condemning industry for putting profits before the environment. According to a survey in 2005, 70 percent of Americans think that the pharmaceutical companies are more concerned about making profits than developing new drugs.[5] Judges frequently impose lighter sentences upon lawbreakers if they haven't actually profited monetarily from their acts. And they forbid others from making a profit from their crimes by selling book or film rights, or interviews. The California Senate enshrined this into law in 1994, one which directs that any such income of criminals convicted of serious crimes be placed into a trust fund for the benefit of the victims of their crimes.[6] President George H. W. Bush, in pardoning individuals involved in the Iran-Contra scandal, stated: First, the common denominator of their motivation -- whether their actions were right or wrong -- was patriotism. Second they did not profit or seek to
[Biofuel] Attack of the Living Front Groups
Also, check website domain names at WhoIs for ownership, creation date, IP, other sites hosted on the server, addresses, contacts etc. http://whois.domaintools.com/ And: http://www.questianewsletter.com/newsletter/volume-5-issue-1/index.htm?CRID=nullCRnullOFFID=newsletter20090802q#searchsmart Frame an Effective Search Strategy - K - [Many links at the website version.] http://www.prwatch.org/node/8531 Attack of the Living Front Groups: PR Watch Offers Help to Unmask Corporate Tricksters Submitted by Anne Landman on August 28, 2009 Fake grassroots groups have started springing up like toadstools after a rain, and this time they're coming at us from every angle: they're on TV, Twitter, Facebook and YouTube: Americans for Prosperity, FACES of Coal, The Coalition to Protect Patients' Rights, Americans Against Food Taxes, the 60 Plus Association, Citizens for Better Medicare, Patients First ... It's making our heads spin! Issues affecting some of the country's biggest industries, like health insurance reform, a proposal to tax sodas and sugary drinks, and the FDA's possible reconsideration of the plastic additive Bisphenol A, have boosted corporate astroturfing up to a dizzying pace. With all these corporate fronts coming out of the woodwork, how can citizens tell true grassroots organizations from corporate fronts operated by highly-paid PR and lobbying firms? Here are some tips to help readers spot this kind of big-business hanky-panky. What is a front group, really? A front group is an organization that purports to represent one agenda while in reality it serves some other party or interest whose sponsorship is hidden or rarely mentioned. The front group is perhaps the most easily recognized use of the third party propaganda technique. One of the best examples is Rick Berman's Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF), which claims that its mission is to defend the rights of consumers to choose to eat, drink and smoke as they please. In reality, though, CCF is a front group for the tobacco, restaurant and alcoholic beverage industries, which provide all or most of its funding. Not all organizations that engage in manipulative efforts to shape public opinion can be classified as front groups, however. The now-defunct Tobacco Institute was a highly deceptive industry trade and lobbying group, but it didn't hide the fact that it represented the tobacco industry. There are also varying degrees of concealment. The Global Climate Coalition didn't hide the fact that its funding came from oil and coal companies, but nevertheless its name alone is sufficiently misleading that it can reasonably be considered a front group. The shadowy way front groups operate makes it difficult to know whether or not a seemingly independent grassroots group is really representing some other entity. Thus, citizen smokers' rights groups and organizations of bartenders or restaurant workers working against smoking bans are sometimes characterized as front groups for the tobacco industry, but it is possible that some of these groups are self-initiated (although the tobacco industry has been known to use restaurant groups as fronts for its own interests). Look for signs of astroturfing on the Web: * Does the organization list a phone number and street address on their Web site? If no address or phone numbers are shown, be skeptical. If they do list an address, note where it is. If it's in Washington, D.C., Google the address and/or the phone number to see what other companies or organizations share, or have shared, that same address or phone number. D.C. is home to many of the nation's largest professional PR and lobbying groups, and often one firm will operate several front groups with different corporate interests out of the same address. If you find other groups share the same address, look up the groups on SourceWatch.org to see if they are front groups or not; * If the group's Web site only offers a contact form to fill in and no street address, telephone number or email links to staff members, be suspicious. Likewise if the site offers a way to donate by credit card, but gives no fixed office to which you can mail a check, be suspicious; * Check to see if the site lists the names of the group's directors or staff. If names are listed, search Google Web, Google News and SourceWatch for the names of the top people running the group, and see where else they have worked, and if any news articles give hints about their corporate ties; and * Does the organization have a bus that tours the country promoting a certain point of view? Buses take money to operate, and a corporation may be footing the bill. Ask who's funding the bus. Characteristics of a corporate front group A front group typically has some, but not necessarily all, of the following characteristics: * Avoids mentioning its main sources of funding. Note that this does not necessarily mean absolute
Re: [Biofuel] Do Americans really believe in free enterprise?
parks, an interstate highway system, the peace corps, student loans, social security, insurance for bank deposits, protection of pension funds against corporate misuse, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Institutes of Health, the Smithsonian, the G.I. Bill, and much, much more. In short, the government has been quite good at doing what it wanted to do, or what labor and other movements have made it do, like establishing worker health and safety standards and requiring food manufacturers to list detailed information about ingredients. Activists have to remind the American people of what they've already learned but seem to have forgotten: that they don't want more government, or less government; they don't want big government, or small government; they want government on their side. None of the above, of course, will deter The World's Only Superpower from continuing its jihad to impose capitalist fundamentalism upon the world. A couple of more reasons why the jihad may have tough going Nearly half of adult Americans surveyed by the Hearst Corporation in 1987 believed Karl Marx's aphorism: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need was to be found in the US Constitution.[13] Mark Brzezinski, son of Zbigniew, was a post-Cold War Fulbright Scholar in Warsaw: I asked my students to define democracy. Expecting a discussion on individual liberties and authentically elected institutions, I was surprised to hear my students respond that to them, democracy means a government obligation to maintain a certain standard of living and to provide health care, education and housing for all. In other words, socialism.[14] NOTES 1. Los Angeles Times, January 2, 1995, Assembly Bills 36X and 57X 2. Washington Post, September 24, 2003 3. Los Angeles Times, September 29, 1994; Washington Post, December 26, 1999, p.16 4. Speech in Austin, Texas, April 1993, unveiling her health-care campaign. 5. Washington Post, February 26, 2005 6. Los Angeles Times, January 2, 1995, Senate Bill 1330 7. New York Times, December 25, 1992 8. Washington Post, June 11, 1995 9. Ibid., July 5, 1996, column by E.J. Dionne Jr. 10. Ibid., May 15, 1998, p.9 11. Ibid., June 20, 1995 12. Ibid., November 30, 1995 13. New York Times, June 7, 1987, Section 11CN (Connecticut Weekly Desk), p.36 14. Los Angeles Times, September 2, 1994 --- http://killinghope.org/bblum6/aer73.html The Anti-Empire Report September 2nd, 2009 by William Blum ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ -- Regards, Jim -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090903/55135ea0/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] Water: The Newest Wave of Corporate Social Responsibility
http://www.prwatch.org/node/8526 Water: The Newest Wave of Corporate Social Responsibility Diane Farsetta on September 1, 2009 Even critics of World Water Week, held annually in Stockholm, Sweden, agree that it's an important forum where thousands of people working on water issues share information. This year's event, held from August 16 to 22, placed special emphasis on the relationship between water and climate change. The closing statement (pdf) was literally a message to COP15, the major United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change meeting in Copenhagen, Denmark, this December. Water is a key medium through which climate change impacts will be felt, it reads, adding that water-related adaptation should be seen as part of the solution. The statement also calls for funding to assist vulnerable, low income countries already affected by climate change, along with longer-term adaptation efforts. So why are there critics of World Water Week? In a word, Nestlé. In 2007, not only did the world's largest bottler of water sponsor World Water Week, but speakers were also given bottled water to drink. Civil society groups protested and the plastic bottles disappeared, but Nestle did not. The 2009 event was again sponsored by Nestle, along with Sweco, a sustainable engineering and design company offering solutions for water supply, wastewater treatment, solid waste management and site remediation; Black Veatch, an engineering, consulting and construction company that calls itself one of the world's foremost providers of solutions for energy and water needs; and the charitable arm of Femsa, the largest beverage company in Latin America. In other words, World Water Week has become an opportunity for companies selling water, beverages, and water and sanitation services to grab a seat at the table, as water practices and policies are discussed. It must also be a networking gold mine, where companies can pitch their services to government representatives from around the globe. Another example of the creeping corporate influence is an international public opinion survey released to coincide with this year's World Water Week. The survey, which received media attention, found that more than 90 percent of respondents consider water pollution and a shortage of fresh water to be serious problems. The summary of survey results interpreted respondents' identifying both governments and companies as responsible for ensuring clean drinking water as indicating that [public-private] partnerships are an important component to resolving the world's fresh water sustainability challenges. The survey was funded by the Molson Coors Brewing Company. Molson Coors wasn't the only beer company lifting a frosted mug to World Water Week. SAB Miller paired with the environmental group WWF on a report presented at the event. After studying the water use, or footprint, for Miller beers made in South Africa and the Czech Republic, the report concluded that the total water involved ... is overwhelmingly used on the farm rather than in the brewery. Conveniently for SAB Miller, WWF added that beer's water footprint is relatively small, with a recent Pacific Institute study finding that coffee, wine and apple juice all have water footprints more than three times that of beer. Somehow, promoting beer as a less water-intensive beverage choice doesn't quite seem to meet the World Water Week goal of advancing the water, environment, health, livelihood and poverty reduction agendas. Carrying water for corporate social responsibility World Water Week is only one way in which corporations seek to promote themselves as good citizens on water issues. Molson Coors is a good case study. The beer maker recently partnered with Circle of Blue, which describes itself as an international network of leading journalists, scientists and communications design experts. Molson Coors also belongs to the Beverage Industry Environmental Roundtable, a corporate attempt to define a common framework for [environmental] stewardship -- without any pesky regulatory agency or independent watchdog groups present. Molson Coors also signed onto the CEO Water Mandate, part of the United Nations' voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) program, the Global Compact. Civil society groups fault both the Global Compact and CEO Water Mandate for allowing corporations to reap PR benefits from associating with the UN, without making significant changes to business practices. In March 2008, an international coalition of grassroots groups working on water issues wrote (pdf) to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, Led by Coca Cola, which has a highly questionable track record when it comes to water takings and water pollution, the companies which have signed on to the CEO Water Mandate all have a vested interest in securing control over water sources and services in times of increasing water scarcity.
[Biofuel] Bush's Third Term? You're Living It
Lots of further links at the website version. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article23411.htm Bush's Third Term? You're Living It By David Swanson September 02, 2009 TomDispatch --- It sounds like the plot for the latest summer horror movie. Imagine, for a moment, that George W. Bush had been allowed a third term as president, had run and had won or stolen it, and that we were all now living (and dying) through it. With the Democrats in control of Congress but Bush still in the Oval Office, the media would certainly be talking endlessly about a mandate for bipartisanship and the importance of taking into account the concerns of Republicans. Can't you just picture it? There's Dubya now, still rewriting laws via signing statements. Still creating and destroying laws with executive orders. And still violating laws at his whim. Imagine Bush continuing his policy of extraordinary rendition, sending prisoners off to other countries with grim interrogation reputations to be held and tortured. I can even picture him formalizing his policy of preventive detention, sprucing it up with some due process even as he permanently removes habeas corpus from our culture. I picture this demonic president still swearing he doesn't torture, still insisting that he wants to close Guantanamo, but assuring his subordinates that the commander-in-chief has the power to torture if needed, and maintaining a prison at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan that makes Guantanamo look like summer camp. I can imagine him continuing to keep secret his warrantless spying programs while protecting the corporations and government officials involved. If Bush were in his third term, we would already have seen him propose, yet again, the largest military budget in the history of the world. We might well have seen him pretend he was including war funding in the standard budget, and then claim that one final supplemental war budget was still needed, immediately after which he would surely announce that yet another war supplemental bill would be needed down the road. And of course, he would have held onto his Secretary of Defense from his second term, Robert Gates, to run the Pentagon, keep our ongoing wars rolling along, and oversee the better part of our public budget. Bush would undoubtedly be following through on the agreement he signed with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki for all U.S. troops to leave Iraq by the end of 2011 (except where he chose not to follow through). His generals would, in the meantime, be leaking word that the United States never intended to actually leave. He'd surely be maintaining current levels of troops in Iraq, while sending thousands more troops to Afghanistan and talking about a new surge there. He'd probably also be escalating the campaign he launched late in his second term to use drone aircraft to illegally and repeatedly strike into Pakistan's tribal borderlands with Afghanistan. If Bush were still the decider he'd be employing mercenaries like Blackwater and propagandists like the Rendon Group and he might even be expanding the number of private security contractors in Afghanistan. In fact, the whole executive branch would be packed with disreputable corporate executive types. You'd have somebody like John (May I torture this one some more, please?) Rizzo still serving, at least for a while, as general counsel at the CIA. The White House and Justice Department would be crawling with corporate cronies, people like John Brennan, Greg Craig, James Jones, and Eric Holder. Most of the top prosecutors hired at the Department of Justice for political purposes would still be on the job. And political prisoners, like former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman and former top Democratic donor Paul Minor would still be abandoned to their fate. In addition, the bank bailouts Bush and his economic team initiated in his second term would still be rolling along -- with a similar crowd of people running the show. Ben Bernanke, for instance, would certainly have been reappointed to run the Fed. And Bush's third term would have guaranteed that there would be none of the monkeying around with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) that the Democrats proposed or promised in their losing presidential campaign. At this point in Bush's third term, no significant new effort would have begun to restore Katrina-decimated New Orleans either. If the Democrats in Congress attempted to pass any set of needed reforms like, to take an example, new healthcare legislation, Bush, the third termer, would have held secret meetings in the White House with insurance and drug company executives to devise a means to turn such proposals to their advantage. And he would have refused to release the visitor logs so that the American public would have no way of knowing just whom he'd been talking to. During Bush's second term, some of the lowest ranking torturers from
Re: [Biofuel] Do Americans really believe in free enterprise?
] NOTES 1. Los Angeles Times, January 2, 1995, Assembly Bills 36X and 57X 2. Washington Post, September 24, 2003 3. Los Angeles Times, September 29, 1994; Washington Post, December 26, 1999, p.16 4. Speech in Austin, Texas, April 1993, unveiling her health-care campaign. 5. Washington Post, February 26, 2005 6. Los Angeles Times, January 2, 1995, Senate Bill 1330 7. New York Times, December 25, 1992 8. Washington Post, June 11, 1995 9. Ibid., July 5, 1996, column by E.J. Dionne Jr. 10. Ibid., May 15, 1998, p.9 11. Ibid., June 20, 1995 12. Ibid., November 30, 1995 13. New York Times, June 7, 1987, Section 11CN (Connecticut Weekly Desk), p.36 14. Los Angeles Times, September 2, 1994 --- http://killinghope.org/bblum6/aer73.html The Anti-Empire Report September 2nd, 2009 by William Blum ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ -- Regards, Jim -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090903/55135ea0/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Ethanol mini-refinery from Allard Research. Whey Ethanol
To, Ramirez.Glad to to here from you. what you looking at is fancy boiler. you will need plenty more eqipment. You will never be able From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]to brew more than 16% ethanol in brew. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] must filter it to use in this system Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 18:33:47 + Subject: [Biofuel] Ethanol mini-refinery from Allard Research. Whey Ethanole From theory to Practice. Finally I got some funds for my cheese whey to ethanol project, here in Panama, Central America. I like this automated system,touch screen, remote management, etc. What do you know about it? Any info of the company. Link: http://www.allardresearch.com/systems.html RGDS Dimas _ Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you. http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCBpubl=WLHMTAGcrea=TEXT_MSHYCB_BackToSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1 -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090902/5f182ce9/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ _ Windows Live: Make it easier for your friends to see what you’re up to on Facebook. http://windowslive.com/Campaign/SocialNetworking?ocid=PID23285::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:SI_SB_facebook:082009 -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090903/16ce1716/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] OT: Research Trove: Patients’ Onl ine Data
,” he said. “I worry about going back to observations of low quality and low power, and I want to be careful that we avoid misleading observations.” No one expects that observational research using online patient data will replace experimental controlled trials, said Ian Eslick, the M.I.T. doctoral student developing the LAMsight project. The data generated by the project will be used mainly for exploratory analysis and hypothesis generation, Mr. Eslick said, although he added that the online approach could eventually yield new models for conducting experimental research. **There*s an idea that data collected from a clinic is good and data collected from patients is bad,** he said. **Different data is effective at different purposes, and different data can lead to different kinds of error.** In June, the Belgian pharmaceutical company UCB announced a partnership to build an online epilepsy community with PatientsLikeMe, among the first private companies to develop a platform for data sharing by patients. PatientsLikeMe, based in Cambridge, has as members tens of thousands of patients who contribute detailed information about their diseases, drugs, doses and side effects. Mark McDade, UCB’s chief operating officer, said the regulatory approval process should be changed to incorporate not just safety and efficacy but also measurements on how drugs affect patients* lives — data that is now slow and expensive to collect. Genetic companies have also taken up patient-driven research. The Silicon Valley company 23andMe, for example, started a program this summer called **Research Revolution**. People can buy a stripped-down version of 23andMe*s genetic service, which gives people DNA information on ancestry and risk for certain diseases, for $99 and then contribute their genetic data toward research into the disease of their choice. The company plans to store the genetic profiles of thousands of people to use for research internally and in partnerships with other companies. **We call it research 2.0,** said Linda Avey, a founder of 23andMe. **It*s the Wikipedia approach versus Encyclopaedia Britannica approach.** Such databases could be a valuable resource for researchers needing to recruit huge numbers of patients quickly, said Dr. Robert Cooke-Deegan, director of the Center for Genome Ethics, Law Policy at Duke University’s Institute from Genome Sciences and Policy. But private companies like 23andMe and PatientsLikeMe are not bound by the same patient protection rules that govern traditional medical researchers who receive federal financing. Company leaders say they have detailed patient privacy statements and ethics policies. As these companies evolve, however, Dr. Cooke-Deegan said he expected them to have to deal with more issues of privacy and informed consent, since maintaining patient trust is crucial to their success. Ben Heywood, co-founder and president of PatientsLikeMe, said his company*s business model was built on trust. **We are only successful if our patients are engaged and using the site,** Mr. Heywood said. **If we break their trust, we lose our community and we have nothing.** Dr. Cooke-Deegan said the model was so new that its implications had yet to be thought through. **I*m very suspicious of a company that has tons of private data getting too cozy with the drug or biotech industry,** he said. **But I don’t want to say it*s not going to work, because I can see all kinds of value that could come out of this.** Dr. Farber hopes her Web site will become the world’s largest database of active LAM patients. More than 100 registered users on five continents are using the site, which has no advertising, she said. LAM, short for lymphangioleiomyomatosis, kills by slowly destroying the lungs. Breathing problems have not yet impeded Ms. Farber*s push for new research, but she says each healthy day with her husband and young daughter is a blessing. OT: -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090903/736c6ee1/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] fish in decline
http://oceanacidification.wordpress.com/2009/03/05/3-major-reports-paint-same-picture-ocean-fish-are-rapidly-in-decline/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090903/d97d4d76/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
