It sounds like e have some Vegans. Are you interested in vegan
discussion? That would be interesting.

The soy research interests me. The rat studies more than got my
curiosity, but no dangers have been shown in human populations,
primate populations, or cultures that eat soy their entire lives.
Never the less, the research is compelling.

What are some vegan sources of B12. I've had mine regularly monitored
(as all vegans do). My blood has great chemistry. When I was a fat
vegan, I had high lipid and bad profiles. Exercise must be part of the
equation. I can only wonder how much worse it would have been if I ate
artery clogging meat.


I will respond to anyone with reasonable, non mean spirited arguments.

As far as environmental issues. there is no question that Bush has done
all he can to let coal produce dirty air, rollback improved mpg
regulations, and build is he worst environmental president in American
history.

He also is a failure as a war leader. Where is Bin Laden? After 250
people died in Iraq he said we won. Over a thousand American's have
died since. We are deeply in debt, (from a president that took over a
surplus).

I'm against the terrorists as much as anyone, but Bush has been totally
ineffective.

He let the navy use sonar that hurts and beaches whales and marine
mammals He is building roads into pristine forests.

They spent more investigating Monica Lewisnksy than Enron Lay and the












Challenger put together.

We need change.

and we have two calamities facing the world, global warming and
anti-biotic resistant bacteria. Our president ignores these critical
issues.

Did Bush win the election?
UIC Prof's Statistical Analysis Casts Doubt on '04 Election Result

Chicago, IL 60607 July 4, 2005

By Gigi Wasz
Gazette news magazine, Chicago

A University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) professor recently
issued a report calling into question the results of the 2004
presidential election.

In the 30-plus page report, Ron Baiman, PhD, of UIC's Institute
of Government and Public Affairs, along with eleven other
colleagues from other prestigious universities, applied
quantitative data to explain the discrepancy between exit poll
projections and votes actually recorded in the November
election and to understand the analysis given by Edison Media
Research & Mitofsky International (E/M), the pollster of record
for the national election.

E/M's poll projections predicted a win for Democrat John Kerry
by 3%, however, when votes were tallied, Republican President
George W. Bush was given the win by 2.5%-the largest
discrepancy in the poll's history. In its post-election
analysis and report, E/M discredited its own poll projections,
claiming the official vote was not corrupted and that "Kerry
voters were more amenable to completing the poll questionnaire
than Bush voters."

"Using their (E/M's) data tables, we demonstrated that their
hypothesis of outspoken Kerry supporters is implausible,"
explained Baiman. "If the polls were faulty because Bush voters
were shy in the presence of Kerry voters and less likely to
cooperate with pollsters, the polls should be the most accurate
in the precincts where Bush voters were in the overwhelming
majority and where exit poll participation was also at its
maximum. What we find is just the opposite. In fact, the mean
exit poll discrepancy was dramatically higher in Bush
strongholds than in Kerry strongholds."

Baiman and his research team then set out to explain the
discrepancy between the national exit poll and the official
vote. They initially targeted random chance or exit poll
errors. Said Baiman, "There have been several methods to
estimate the probability that the national exit polls would be
as different as they were from the national popular vote by
random chance. These estimates range from one in 1,240 to one
in 16.5 million. No matter how one calculates it, the
discrepancy cannot be attributed to chance."

National research shows "exit polling is a well developed
science, informed by half a century of experience and
continually improving methodology," Baiman explained. For
example, E/M samples voters not only for the nationwide exit
poll but for each state's exit poll. Furthermore, the research
team found that the same exit polls accurately projected U.S.
Senate races; both the Presidential and Senate poll results are
derived from the exact same responders.

"If Bush supporters were refusing to fill out the survey as
hypothesized, the accuracy of the exit polls should have been
just as poor in the Senate races as it was in the Presidential
race," the research team charged in its report. According to
Baiman, by ruling out random chance and exit poll errors, the
only other logical explanation would be that the official vote
was corrupted. In its executive summary, the group's report
states, "the many anecdotal reports of voting irregularities
create a context in which the possibility that the overall vote
count was substantially corrupted must be taken seriously." The
report concludes by calling for a thorough investigation and a
"careful, exhaustive recount in key states."

"Our goal is to raise awareness of the exit poll problems and
to highlight the need for broad election reform," commented
Baiman. "The fact that Edison/Mitofsky has not released its raw
data, which would facilitate independent corroboration of its
analysis, is problematic. The biggest problem is not what
Edison/Mitofsky has concluded, but the fact that it is sitting
on its substantive analysis and data and not allowing any other
independent party to look at it. That this is allowed to
continue is a national and media disgrace."

According to a website dedicated to investigating the 2004
Presidential election, www.bushoccupation.com, "To believe that
Bush won the election, you must also believe: that the exit
polls were wrong; that Zogby's [a traditionally accurate
pollster] 5 p.m. election day calls for Kerry winning Ohio and
Florida were wrong...; that incumbent rule #1-undecideds break
for the challenger-was wrong; that the 50% rule-an incumbent
doesn't do better than his final polling-was wrong; that the
approval rating rule-an incumbent with less than 50% approval
will most likely lose the election-was wrong; that it was just
a coincidence that the exit polls were correct where there was
a paper trail and incorrect (+5% for Bush) where there was no
paper trail; that the surge in new young voters had no positive
effect for Kerry; that Kerry did worse than (Al) Gore against
an opponent who lost the support of scores of Republican
newspapers who were for Bush in 2000...."

To learn more about the election analysis by Baiman and his
team of professionals, contact Baiman at .

wrote:

>
> rick wrote:
>
> wrote in message
roups.com...
>>
>>
>>nemo wrote:
>>
>>><dh@.> wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 10:35:40 GMT, Beach Runner
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Usual suspects has done nothing but be nasty.
>>>>>He has accused a member of my family of being a homosexual.
>>>>>He is CLEARLY not interested in VEGAN lifestyle or beliefs.
>>>>>He has
>>>>>stated he doesn't care about the suffering of animals.
>>>>>He calls Osteopaths quacks that teach at major universities.
>>>>>His constant insults accomplish nothing but make this a
>>>>>useless news
>>>>>group. It has a purpose, promoting and discussion of a
>>>>>vegan life, but
>>>>>his agenda is sick.
>>>>>He complains about removing unnecessary text, then when I
>>>>>post
>>>>>Dr. Greger's newsletter complains about the length.
>>>>>
>>>>>He is clearly a very sick, mean person and is now killfiled.
>>>>>
>>>>>I welcome discussions on vegan subjects.
>>>>
>>>> · Vegans contribute to the deaths of animals by their use
>>>>of
>>>>wood and paper products, electricity, roads and all types of
>>>>buildings, their own diet, etc... just as everyone else does.
>>>
>>>What part of "To a much lesser extent" don't you understand?
>>>
>>>
>>>>What they try to avoid are products which provide life
>>>>(and death) for farm animals, but even then they would have
>>>>to avoid the following in order to be successful:
>>>>
>>>
>>>Same old tosh!
>>>
>>>In other words you're saying if you can't stop contributing to
>>>the death of
>>>animals 100%, you shouldn't try for, say, 50%, 80% or whatever
>>>by not eating
>>>the poor buggers. This is illogical, it's rubbisha dn it's just
>>>a wind-up.
>>>
>>>So their's gelatin in paper, white sugar is refined using bone
>>>charcoal, and
>>>by law just about everything has to be tested using the
>>>infamous and largely
>>>ineffective LD50 test, the end is listless.
>>>
>>>It's not us Vegan's fault. We do our best and rubbish like
>>>yours isn't going
>>>to deflect us from this and iota.
>>
>>
>>exactly!!
>>
>>Useless and etter can go to hell.
>>===============
>>Ahhh, feel the typical vegan compassion. You guys crack me
>>up!!!
>
>
>
> All right then, go to heaven but just shut yer piehole if you have
> nothing positive to say.....and the same goes for your girlfriend
> ~jonnie~.
>