Dear Nancy, Allan leaned on me to weigh in on this issue. What Mark Purdy says makes immanent sense. To explain the lack of up-take by officialdom of Mark's thesis you don't have to go too far. The industries processing manganese wouldn't like it to come to the fore, and there is widespread environmental damage to repair. I can see how the political resolve to address Mark's thesis just isn't there yet. All the more reason to get involved in politics. Grass roots politics, as politics from corporate contributions long ago has gone too far.
Science, the basis of which is observation, is a separate function than politics. Politics is in the realm of feeling, not thinking. Mark Purdy is operating from thinking and somewhere this must be united with feeling if we are to see appropriate action. Otherwise economic interests will continue to diss him. Best, Hugh Lovel >>>I have to admit, however, that I'm pretty concerned that Mark Pudey's >>>thesis has not raised one question or even a comment on BD Now! >>> >>>Talk about dissing someone's life work!! > >No dissing at all! maybe just acceptance that his theory makes a lot more >sense than the official one. Congratulations to Mark, not only for >developing all this work but for demonstrating what one regular person can >accomplish. Personally, I don't have the chemical or biological knowledge >to question or challenge what Mark has put forward - the official theory >doesn't explain why we see clusters of the disease, Mark does. It was news >to me that Staten Island/Long Island has "the highest incidence cluster of >CJD in the USA". How many cases constitute a cluster? (I figured that >either CJD/mad cow was not a problem in North America OR there was indeed >a cover-up, more likely to favour the latter.) > >Mark's ideas appear to have developed a lot in the past two years. I first >heard about them, either here at BDNow or through Acres, as a connection >between the warble fly insecticide and Mad Cow. He is presenting a much >more comprehensive picture of the various components at play in the >documents just posted on BDNow. > >Will we see an expansion of TSEs into other mammals? Specifically, I'm >thinking dogs & cats, eating commercial food made up partly of rendered >dogs & cats (and what other unnaturals, imbalances) and subjected to flea >insecticides, one of which is applied along the spine. Hope this isn't a >dumb question due to my inadequate grasp of the science involved, but why >wouldn't other animals be affected by the same environmental/geographic/ >insecticide factors? > >The saddest thing is the lack of funding, I don't understand this. Nobody >is accepting this research?? We're not talking UFOs here. It perhaps >demonstrates the extent to which universities, foundations, NGOs, >environmental groups have been bought off by corporate money. Even so ... >What level of funding is needed for some of this work? Thousands, tens or >hundreds of thousands? > >Nancy Geffken >-- > > > > >__________________________________________________________________ >Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. >Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! >http://shopnow.netscape.com/ > >Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at >http://webmail.netscape.com/
