On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:29:22 -0000, "pearl" > wrote:

>"Jim Webster" > wrote in message ...
>> "Rubystars" > wrote in message
>> . com...
>> >> > note that when people have their tonsils out, these are now, in many
>> parts
>> > > of the UK if not all of it, tested for nvCJD.. The idea being that these
>> > > tissues are among the first parts to become infective and therefore will
>> > be
>> > > a useful marker as to the number of cases. So far none have come up
>> > >infected
>> >
>> > If they can't do anything to cure the person or prevent onset of the
>> > disease, then what's the point?
>> it is quite simple. We are monitoring a population, which is rather bigger
>> and probably more important than a person. If the disease is not present in
>> a population, then the person cannot get it. If the disease is present in a
>> population, then it is a risk to the individuals.
>> Also remember that there have been claims that millions of UK citizens will
>> die. When we callously refused to die and thus put a lot of lobby groups
>> noses out of joint. So they said actually we were just incubating it and
>> would all die later (which is in a way true, everyone dies later) so they
>> run these tests on tonsils and discover that in our brutally uncooperative
>> way, we aren't even incubating it.
>>
>> Jim Webster
>
>'..the director of the UK CJD Surveillance Unit warned that current
>tests might vastly under-represent the risk of infection.
>
>Professor James Ironside told the BBC last night that the tests were
>not sensitive enough to identify all those infected with the human form
>of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).
>
>He said: "Because of the nature of the specimens used in the study
>we have had to employ a technique that is not as sensitive as other
>methods that are currently available so in some ways even this finding
>might be an under-representation of the actuality in terms of infection
>with BSE."
>
>http://www.guardian.co.uk/bse/articl...795882,00.html

Pearl, don't expect the maroon to bother to go actually read something.
-- oh no, no, he flies solely in the seat of his pants.

On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:14:18 +0000, Oz > wrote:

>Rubystars > writes
>>I'm glad that it hasn't been found in the tonsils yet. I hope there aren't a
>>lot of people in the US who are incubating it.
>
>Ye gods....
>
>One case in an imported canadian cow and they think they are at risk....

We're all at risk from letting village idiots farm for us, cutting so
many corners that serious danger is imminent as has already been seen,
many people already dying from these corner cutting exercises. You and
your bumpkin friends may not care about yourselves or your simpleton
families but some of us care about ours.

Put that in your pipe and yank on it.













**********************************************




'You can't win 'em all.'
Lord Haw Haw.

Since I stopped donating money to CONservation hooligan charities
Like the RSPB, Woodland Trust and all the other fat cat charities
I am in the top 0.801% richest people in the world.
There are 5,951,930,035 people poorer than me

If you're really interested I am the 48,069,965
richest person in the world.

And I'm keeping the bloody lot.

So sue me.

http://www.globalrichlist.com/

Newsgroup ettiquette

1) Tell everyone the Trolls don't bother you.
2) Say you've killfiled them, yet continue to respond.
3) Tell other people off who repsond despite doing so yourself.
4) Continually talk about Trolls while maintaining
they're having no effect.
5) Publicly post killfile rules so the Trolls know
how to avoid them.
6) Make lame legal threats and other barrel scraping
manoeuvres when your abuse reports are ignored.
7) Eat vast quantities of pies.
8) Forget to brush your teeth for several decades.
9) Help a demon.local poster with their email while
secretly reading it.
10) Pretend you're a hard ******* when in fact you're
as bent as a roundabout.
11) Become the laughing stock of Usenet like Mabbet
12) Die of old age
13) Keep paying Dr Chartham his fees and hope one day you
will have a penis the girls can see.

---------------------------------------

"If you would'nt talk to them in a bar, don't *uckin' vote for them"

"Australia was not *discovered* it was invaded"
The Big Yin.

"Rubystars" > wrote in message
m...
>
> I'm glad that it hasn't been found in the tonsils yet. I hope there aren't
a
> lot of people in the US who are incubating it.
>
> -Rubystars

To put it in perspective. we had 180,000 cows and 20 cases a year and
falling.
You have one cow, work out the odds for yourself.

There is no way on gods earth the US could hide an outbreak like that we
had. In 2001 a LOT of US vets came over here and worked along side UK vets.
I know that BSE was discussed and you have a lot of vets who have had the
symptoms described by experts and know what to look out for.

Jim Webster

"Jim Webster" > wrote in message ...
>
> "pearl" > wrote in message
> ...
> > > it is quite simple. We are monitoring a population, which is rather bigger
> > > and probably more important than a person. If the disease is not present in
> > > a population, then the person cannot get it. If the disease is present in a
> > > population, then it is a risk to the individuals.
> > > Also remember that there have been claims that millions of UK citizens will
> > > die. When we callously refused to die and thus put a lot of lobby groups
> > > noses out of joint. So they said actually we were just incubating it and
> > > would all die later (which is in a way true, everyone dies later) so they
> > > run these tests on tonsils and discover that in our brutally uncooperative
> > > way, we aren't even incubating it.
> > >
> > > Jim Webster
> >
> > '..the director of the UK CJD Surveillance Unit warned that current
> > tests might vastly under-represent the risk of infection.
> >
> > Professor James Ironside told the BBC last night that the tests were
> > not sensitive enough to identify all those infected with the human form
> > of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).
> >
>
> So what.

So a test that isn't sensitive to identify all those infected could be
missing any number.

> We have found NONE!

'Of the samples removed in tonsil and appendix operations,
they found prion protein in one of them.' -September 20, 2002
http://www.guardian.co.uk/bse/articl...795882,00.html

> Sorry and all that, but there will be no huge corpse fest.

Sorry? You should be, livestock farmer jim.

> 3000 tissue samples.
> So if we were going to get 4 million dead (a figure much mooted by those
> shroud waving to get their grant allocation increased in the early days)
> then we would expect out of a population of 60 million (round figures) we
> would expect one in 15 samples to be infected
>
> Out of 3000 samples that would be 200.

How does 1 in 2,000 sit with you?

> So the test isn't that sensitive, we might miss 50%. Fine, we would expect
> 100 positive samples. Yet there are NONE

'Of the samples removed in tonsil and appendix operations,
they found prion protein in one of them.' -September 20, 2002
http://www.guardian.co.uk/bse/articl...795882,00.html

> The Guardian has papers to sell and James Ironside obviously needs more
> funding for surveillance,

"Because of the nature of the specimens used in the study
we have had to employ a technique that is not as sensitive as other
methods that are currently available so in some ways even this
finding might be an under-representation of the actuality in terms
of infection with BSE."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/bse/articl...795882,00.html

> after all he doesn't want the UK CJD
> Surveillance Unit to be wound down because there is nothing out there to
> look for.

'The study is funded by the Department of Health and has another
year to run.' - September 20, 2002
http://www.guardian.co.uk/bse/articl...795882,00.html

Tests could reveal how many will develop vCJD
30 October, 2003, 15:43 GMT
'..
A project aiming to test 100,000 tonsils for signs of vCJD has drawn
criticism - because there will be no way to track those who test positive.
...
Professor Noel Gill, from the Health Protection Agency, said that they
expected to find up to 50 tonsils with "rogue prions". ..'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3228049.stm

Not a good outlook for many it would seem, according to the experts.

"pearl" > wrote in message
...
> "Jim Webster" > wrote in message
...
> >
> > "pearl" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > > it is quite simple. We are monitoring a population, which is rather
bigger
> > > > and probably more important than a person. If the disease is not
present in
> > > > a population, then the person cannot get it. If the disease is
present in a
> > > > population, then it is a risk to the individuals.
> > > > Also remember that there have been claims that millions of UK
citizens will
> > > > die. When we callously refused to die and thus put a lot of lobby
groups
> > > > noses out of joint. So they said actually we were just incubating it
and
> > > > would all die later (which is in a way true, everyone dies later) so
they
> > > > run these tests on tonsils and discover that in our brutally
uncooperative
> > > > way, we aren't even incubating it.
> > > >
> > > > Jim Webster
> > >
> > > '..the director of the UK CJD Surveillance Unit warned that current
> > > tests might vastly under-represent the risk of infection.
> > >
> > > Professor James Ironside told the BBC last night that the tests were
> > > not sensitive enough to identify all those infected with the human
form
> > > of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).
> > >
> >
> > So what.
>
> So a test that isn't sensitive to identify all those infected could be
> missing any number.
>
> > We have found NONE!
>
> 'Of the samples removed in tonsil and appendix operations,
> they found prion protein in one of them.' -September 20, 2002
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/bse/articl...795882,00.html
>
> > Sorry and all that, but there will be no huge corpse fest.
>

Here is the full story

Four times as many Britons could be at risk of developing the human form of
mad cow disease than has been estimated, a leading scientist has warned.
Scientists had previously predicted that 7,200 people, or 120 per million,
could be at increased risk of developing variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease
(vCJD).

But the director of the UK CJD Surveillance Unit warned that current tests
might vastly under-represent the risk of infection.

Professor James Ironside told the BBC last night that the tests were not
sensitive enough to identify all those infected with the human form of
bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).

He said: "Because of the nature of the specimens used in the study we have
had to employ a technique that is not as sensitive as other methods that are
currently available so in some ways even this finding might be an
under-representation of the actuality in terms of infection with BSE."

Professor John Collinge of the Institute of Neurology in London said he
believed that if the research had been done on tonsils using the latest
techniques there could be four times as many positive results.

The research, published in the British Medical Journal, is the first
estimate of the number of people who could have vCJD. The study states that
the disease is almost certainly caused by the BSE agent.

The investigation, led by David Hilton of Derriford Hospital in Plymouth,
was looking for the accumulation of prion protein, a known reliable marker
of the disease in animals.

The researchers studied 8,318 samples from appendix and tonsil removal
operations between 1995 and 1999. They also looked at tissue removed during
postmortems or surgery from patients later confirmed as having vCJD.

Of the samples removed in tonsil and appendix operations, they found prion
protein in one of them.

Among specimens taken from patients who had vCJD but had not yet displayed
any symptoms, two out of the three studied tested positive for prion
protein.

For the samples removed during postmortems of people with vCJD who had died,
the figure was positive for 19 of the 20 studied.

Based on the one positive case per 8,318 samples, the researchers estimate
that 120 people per million could have a detectable accumulation of prion
protein, though the margin of error for this estimated figure is high.

Dr Hilton said that each time such an estimate was made the margin of error
increased, and large-scale prospective screening was needed.

"Jumping to any conclusions on the basis of our findings would be
dangerous," he warned. "The margin of error is high and also we don't know
if being positive will lead to the disease."

The study is funded by the Department of Health and has another year to run.

The chief medical officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, yesterday announced plans to
set up a new archive of tonsils so that more research could be conducted.

The archive will be anonymous, which means individual patients will not be
identified from their tissue samples.

-----------------------------
Note they had to say it was four times more than thought, as saying it might
be less that a tenth of one percent of what the loonies have been saying is
not good news paper selling material

Given that we have 20 deaths a year and the number isn't rising, looks like
they are frantically trying to boost funding

talking about funding , are you still making a living as an alternative
therapist,

Jim Webster

"Oz" > wrote in message
...
> Rubystars > writes
> >I'm glad that it hasn't been found in the tonsils yet. I hope there
aren't a
> >lot of people in the US who are incubating it.
>
> Ye gods....
>
> One case in an imported canadian cow and they think they are at risk....

I don't know if people in the U.S. are at risk or not. As a meat eater I'm
really happy that the downer cows were banned from the human food supply
though.

-Rubystars

On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 23:18:31 +0100, Torsten Brinch
> wrote:

on.
>>
>>Professor James Ironside told the BBC last night that the tests were
>>not sensitive enough to identify all those infected with the human form
>>of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).
>>
>>He said: "Because of the nature of the specimens used in the study
>>we have had to employ a technique that is not as sensitive as other
>>methods that are currently available so in some ways even this finding
>>might be an under-representation of the actuality in terms of infection
>>with BSE."
>>
>>http://www.guardian.co.uk/bse/articl...795882,00.html
>
>Pearl, don't expect the maroon to bother to go actually read something.
>-- oh no, no, he flies solely in the seat of his pants.

The Guardian article is 15 months old and speaks of changes that will
be made in tissue testing tonsils in the UK. Don't you think any
untoward results would have been made public so far?

Boron

On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:39:19 -0500, Boron Elgar
> wrote:

>On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 23:18:31 +0100, Torsten Brinch
> wrote:

>>Pearl, don't expect the maroon to bother to go actually read something.
>>-- oh no, no, he flies solely in the seat of his pants.
>
>The Guardian article is 15 months old and speaks of changes that will
>be made in tissue testing tonsils in the UK. Don't you think any
>untoward results would have been made public so far?

Back off Boron, the first few samples for that project were bl**dy
taken only a few weeks ago.

"Torsten Brinch" > wrote in message ...
> On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:29:22 -0000, "pearl" > wrote:
>
> >"Jim Webster" > wrote in message ...
<..>

> Pearl, don't expect the maroon to bother to go actually read something.
> -- oh no, no, he flies solely in the seat of his pants.

Right. A 'trickle down' effect of ineptitude, foolishness, irresponsibility,
utter negligence, and right about now, probably in the seat of his pants.

"Jim Webster" > wrote in message ...

> Given that we have 20 deaths a year and the number isn't rising, looks like
> they are frantically trying to boost funding

UK cases of all CJD's. [From: http://www.cjd.ed.ac.uk/figures.htm]

Year Spor Iatro Fam GSS vCJD Total
Deaths
1990 28 5 0 0 - 33
1991 32 1 3 0 - 36
1992 45 2 5 1 - 53
1993 37 4 3 2 - 46
1994 53 1 4 3 - 61
1995 35 4 2 3 3 47
1996 40 4 2 4 10 60
1997 60 6 4 1 10 81
1998 63 3 4 1 18 89
1999 62 6 2 0 15 85
2000 49 1 2 1 28 81
2001 57 3 3 2 20 85
2002 73 0 4 1 17 95
2003* 53 4 1 1 16 75

Total 687 44 39 20 137 927

Spor = Sporadic
Iatro = Iatrogenic
Fam = Familial
GSS = Another inherited TE
*To 1st dec 2003


Thought you read all of Oz's posts? (hey Oz! lol)

"pearl" > wrote in message
...
> "Jim Webster" > wrote in message
...
>
> > Given that we have 20 deaths a year and the number isn't rising, looks
like
> > they are frantically trying to boost funding
>
> UK cases of all CJD's. [From: http://www.cjd.ed.ac.uk/figures.htm]
>
> Year Spor Iatro Fam GSS vCJD Total
> Deaths
> 1990 28 5 0 0 - 33
> 1991 32 1 3 0 - 36
> 1992 45 2 5 1 - 53
> 1993 37 4 3 2 - 46
> 1994 53 1 4 3 - 61
> 1995 35 4 2 3 3 47
> 1996 40 4 2 4 10 60
> 1997 60 6 4 1 10 81
> 1998 63 3 4 1 18 89
> 1999 62 6 2 0 15 85
> 2000 49 1 2 1 28 81
> 2001 57 3 3 2 20 85
> 2002 73 0 4 1 17 95
> 2003* 53 4 1 1 16 75
>
> Total 687 44 39 20 137 927
>
> Spor = Sporadic
> Iatro = Iatrogenic
> Fam = Familial
> GSS = Another inherited TE
> *To 1st dec 2003
>
>
> Thought you read all of Oz's posts? (hey Oz! lol)

obviously you have to take your shoes and socks off to deal with big numbers

nv CJD figures are the column which reads
3
10-
10
18
15
28
20
17
16

so 20 deaths a year was an exaggeration on my part but the number isn't
rising

which column did you think it was?

Jim Webster

>Your logic makes about as much sense as your ideas on good farming
>practice, not to mention your ability to claim you own land you
>don't!!!

The agendas just keep creeping out, don't they?

"Rubystars" > wrote in message m...
>
> "Oz" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Rubystars > writes
> > >I'm glad that it hasn't been found in the tonsils yet. I hope there
> aren't a
> > >lot of people in the US who are incubating it.
> >
> > Ye gods....
> >
> > One case in an imported canadian cow and they think they are at risk....
>
> I don't know if people in the U.S. are at risk or not. As a meat eater I'm
> really happy that the downer cows were banned from the human food supply
> though.

Downers Will Still Be Used In Rendering Plants
'..
The products of the rendering industry fall within 2 major categories:
proteins and fats. Within the protein category there are meat meal and
meat and bone meal (MBM). MBM can generally be made from raw
material of all livestock species.

Obviously with the current feed rule, if the product contains raw materials
originating from ruminants, it cannot be fed to cattle or other ruminants.
Meat and bone meal could be made from pure bovine, porcine tissues,
etc. and traded as such. This may include blood meal, spray-dried animal
blood*, poultry meal, poultry byproduct meal, poultry hatchery byproducts,
and blood protein.

On the fat side, there are tallow, greases (yellow and white), fatty acids,
glycerine, etc. Tallow production could be edible or inedible; the same
for lard and yellow grease.

Some rendering companies produce fish meal and bakery byproduct meals.
Their uses include livestock and poultry feeds; pet foods; industrial uses such
as lubricants, paints, lipsticks, gums, glues, etc.
- Don A Franco, DVM, PhD Center for Biosecurity, Food Safety & Public Health
http://rense.com/general47/render.htm

*
http://www.google.ie/search?q=SPRAY+... ie=ISO-8859-1

"Jim Webster" > wrote in message ...
>
> nv CJD figures are the column which reads
> 3
> 10-
> 10
> 18
> 15
> 28
> 20
> 17
> 16
>
> so 20 deaths a year was an exaggeration on my part but the number isn't
> rising

Ok. Shall we look at cases of CJD misdiagnosed as Alzheimer's
and other dementias now?

"pearl" > wrote in message ...
> "Jim Webster" > wrote in message ...
> >
> > nv CJD figures are the column which reads
> > 3
> > 10-
> > 10
> > 18
> > 15
> > 28
> > 20
> > 17
> > 16
> >
> > so 20 deaths a year was an exaggeration on my part but the number isn't
> > rising
>
> Ok. Shall we look at cases of CJD misdiagnosed as Alzheimer's
> and other dementias now?

And note well the rise in 'Sporadic' CJD, and total cases.

> Year Spor Iatro Fam GSS vCJD Total
> Deaths
> 1990 28 5 0 0 - 33
> 1991 32 1 3 0 - 36
> 1992 45 2 5 1 - 53
> 1993 37 4 3 2 - 46
> 1994 53 1 4 3 - 61
> 1995 35 4 2 3 3 47
> 1996 40 4 2 4 10 60
> 1997 60 6 4 1 10 81
> 1998 63 3 4 1 18 89
> 1999 62 6 2 0 15 85
> 2000 49 1 2 1 28 81
> 2001 57 3 3 2 20 85
> 2002 73 0 4 1 17 95
> 2003* 53 4 1 1 16 75
>
> Total 687 44 39 20 137 927
>

On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 23:58:46 +0100, Torsten Brinch
> wrote:

>On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:39:19 -0500, Boron Elgar
> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 23:18:31 +0100, Torsten Brinch
> wrote:
>
>>>Pearl, don't expect the maroon to bother to go actually read something.
>>>-- oh no, no, he flies solely in the seat of his pants.
>>
>>The Guardian article is 15 months old and speaks of changes that will
>>be made in tissue testing tonsils in the UK. Don't you think any
>>untoward results would have been made public so far?
>
>Back off Boron, the first few samples for that project were bl**dy
>taken only a few weeks ago.

Drivel and nonsense.

Do you really think nothing was being tested between September 2002
and now? Do you really think everything would have been kept quiet
in the past 15 months? You think the entire research community
involved in testing and investigation were all sitting around, thumbs
up themselves waiting for some countdown to begin? You think no work
has been conducted in this area for 15 months and anything of danger
to public health kept under wraps?

You're a simpleminded conspiracy theorist who shows little
understanding of the numbers and ideas from the Sept '02 Guardian
article, nor any more of the topic at all.

No be nice little boy and hush.

Boron

On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 23:18:10 -0000, "pearl" >
wrote:

>"Jim Webster" > wrote in message ...
>>
>> nv CJD figures are the column which reads
>> 3
>> 10-
>> 10
>> 18
>> 15
>> 28
>> 20
>> 17
>> 16
>>
>> so 20 deaths a year was an exaggeration on my part but the number isn't
>> rising
>
>Ok. Shall we look at cases of CJD misdiagnosed as Alzheimer's
>and other dementias now?
>
Provide citations.

Boron
>

On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 23:21:28 -0000, "pearl" >
wrote:

>"pearl" > wrote in message ...
>> "Jim Webster" > wrote in message ...
>> >
>> > nv CJD figures are the column which reads
>> > 3
>> > 10-
>> > 10
>> > 18
>> > 15
>> > 28
>> > 20
>> > 17
>> > 16
>> >
>> > so 20 deaths a year was an exaggeration on my part but the number isn't
>> > rising
>>
>> Ok. Shall we look at cases of CJD misdiagnosed as Alzheimer's
>> and other dementias now?
>
>And note well the rise in 'Sporadic' CJD, and total cases.
>
>> Year Spor Iatro Fam GSS vCJD Total
>> Deaths
>> 1990 28 5 0 0 - 33
>> 1991 32 1 3 0 - 36
>> 1992 45 2 5 1 - 53
>> 1993 37 4 3 2 - 46
>> 1994 53 1 4 3 - 61
>> 1995 35 4 2 3 3 47
>> 1996 40 4 2 4 10 60
>> 1997 60 6 4 1 10 81
>> 1998 63 3 4 1 18 89
>> 1999 62 6 2 0 15 85
>> 2000 49 1 2 1 28 81
>> 2001 57 3 3 2 20 85
>> 2002 73 0 4 1 17 95
>> 2003* 53 4 1 1 16 75
>>
>> Total 687 44 39 20 137 927
>>
No reason to believe this is other than improved diagnosis and
reportage.

Boron

On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 18:24:09 -0500, Boron Elgar
> wrote:

>On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 23:58:46 +0100, Torsten Brinch
> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:39:19 -0500, Boron Elgar
> wrote:
>>>The Guardian article is 15 months old and speaks of changes that will
>>>be made in tissue testing tonsils in the UK. Don't you think any
>>>untoward results would have been made public so far?
>>
>>Back off Boron, the first few samples for that project were bl**dy
>>taken only a few weeks ago.
<..>
>Do you really think nothing was being tested between September 2002
>and now? <snip>

Yes. Believe it or not, one must start collecting the samples before one
can start testing them.

On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 20:19:50 +0100, Torsten Brinch >
wrote:
>On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:54:57 -0500, Boron Elgar
> wrote:
>>On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 19:42:42 +0100, Torsten Brinch
> wrote:
>>>>"Jim Webster" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>>> note that when people have their tonsils out, these are now, in many parts
>>>>> of the UK if not all of it, tested for nvCJD.. The idea being that these
>>>>> tissues are among the first parts to become infective and therefore will
>>>>> be a useful marker as to the number of cases. So far none have come up
>>>>>infected

>>><..> You can throw him
>>>a stick, and he'll get the wrong end 8 out of ten. Even an oyster can do
>>>better.
>>
>>Except, of course, that Mr. Webster was correct in his posting.
>><snip>
>
>Come, show me what you've got to support that. :-)

Wot, are we to understand you've got nothing _?_

"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 23:21:28 -0000, "pearl" >
> wrote:
<..>
> >And note well the rise in 'Sporadic' CJD, and total cases.
> >
> >> Year Spor Iatro Fam GSS vCJD Total
> >> Deaths
> >> 1990 28 5 0 0 - 33
> >> 1991 32 1 3 0 - 36
> >> 1992 45 2 5 1 - 53
> >> 1993 37 4 3 2 - 46
> >> 1994 53 1 4 3 - 61
> >> 1995 35 4 2 3 3 47
> >> 1996 40 4 2 4 10 60
> >> 1997 60 6 4 1 10 81
> >> 1998 63 3 4 1 18 89
> >> 1999 62 6 2 0 15 85
> >> 2000 49 1 2 1 28 81
> >> 2001 57 3 3 2 20 85
> >> 2002 73 0 4 1 17 95
> >> 2003* 53 4 1 1 16 75
> >>
> >> Total 687 44 39 20 137 927
> >>
> No reason to believe this is other than improved diagnosis and
> reportage.

Research into some neurological disorders (for example CJD and
Alzheimer's disease) relies almost entirely on brains from autopsies,
...
Despite the obvious value of autopsies, the proportion of deaths
(disregarding those investigated at the request of a coroner) subjected
to this highly informative medical investigation has fallen steadily
during the last few decades. Now, even in UK teaching hospitals,
the autopsy rate is usually below five per cent.

Although the organ retention 'scandal' has been associated with an
accelerated decline in the autopsy rate, this is not the major factor in a
ccounting for the now very low autopsy rates. The dominant factors
are declining clinical interest in autopsies, greater (but often
unwarranted) clinical confidence in the cause of death, and fear of
confronting the deceased's relatives with the prospect of an autopsy.
http://www.nhs.uk/nhsmagazine/archive/feb03/opinion.asp.

'An apparent slowing in thedeath rate could be generated by a decline
in case ascertainment. There is no reason to believe that this has occurred,
although **the autopsy rate has declined nationally, which might have
changed the number of cases of vCJD classified as definite.** '

http://tinyurl.com/3d57k (emphasis mine)

"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 23:18:10 -0000, "pearl" >

> >Ok. Shall we look at cases of CJD misdiagnosed as Alzheimer's
> >and other dementias now?
> >
> Provide citations.

See;
http://www.cyber-dyne.com/~tom/Alzhe...d.html#and%20C

... and from the UK;

Diagnosis and incidence of prion (CJD) disease: a retrospective
archival survey with implications for future research
Neurodegeneration vol 4 1995;357-368.
CJ Bruton, RK Bruton, SM Gentleman, GW Roberts. Corsellis
Collection Brain Bank, Dept of neuropathy, Runwell Hosp, Wickford,
Essex.

Reliable identification of CJD in the UK has become essential following
the suggestion that prion disease in cattle might transmit accidentally
to humans who eat contaminated beef. Recent data suggest that some
cases of CJD may be clinically unrecognized; in order to examine this
proposal we reviewed all cases of dementia (n-1000+) collected between
1964 and 1990. We identified 19 cases of CJD of which only 11 were
diagnosed before death. These 11 had a characteristic clinical history
of CJD. Their brains showed little or no external abnormality. In contrast
only 2 of the 8 clinically unrecognized cases had characteristic symptoms.
The remaining six presented atypically; their illness lasted 3 years or more,
motor signs were much less evident and simple dementia was the most
prominent feature. The brains showed moderate or severe cerebral
atrophy. Our data indicate that only about 60% of prion disease cases
with pathologically typical TSE were identified clinically during life. This
suggests that human prion disease may be more common than previously
supposed and that a further review of the epidemiology is required.
http://sparc.airtime.co.uk/bse/scij.htm

At the very least you've been missing about 42% of CJD cases
(prior to 1990).

At the very worst, 1.9% (or more) of current cases may have CJD.
(There are currently over 750,000 people in the UK with dementia.
http://www.cf.ac.uk/news/releases/0209/020913.html )

../...

On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 01:01:47 -0000, "pearl" >
wrote:

>"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 23:18:10 -0000, "pearl" >
>
>> >Ok. Shall we look at cases of CJD misdiagnosed as Alzheimer's
>> >and other dementias now?
>> >
>> Provide citations.
>
>See;
>http://www.cyber-dyne.com/~tom/Alzhe...d.html#and%20C
>
>.. and from the UK;
>
>Diagnosis and incidence of prion (CJD) disease: a retrospective
>archival survey with implications for future research
>Neurodegeneration vol 4 1995;357-368.
>CJ Bruton, RK Bruton, SM Gentleman, GW Roberts. Corsellis
>Collection Brain Bank, Dept of neuropathy, Runwell Hosp, Wickford,
>Essex.
>
>Reliable identification of CJD in the UK has become essential following
>the suggestion that prion disease in cattle might transmit accidentally
>to humans who eat contaminated beef. Recent data suggest that some
>cases of CJD may be clinically unrecognized; in order to examine this
>proposal we reviewed all cases of dementia (n-1000+) collected between
>1964 and 1990. We identified 19 cases of CJD of which only 11 were
>diagnosed before death. These 11 had a characteristic clinical history
>of CJD. Their brains showed little or no external abnormality. In contrast
>only 2 of the 8 clinically unrecognized cases had characteristic symptoms.
>The remaining six presented atypically; their illness lasted 3 years or more,
>motor signs were much less evident and simple dementia was the most
>prominent feature. The brains showed moderate or severe cerebral
>atrophy. Our data indicate that only about 60% of prion disease cases
>with pathologically typical TSE were identified clinically during life. This
>suggests that human prion disease may be more common than previously
>supposed and that a further review of the epidemiology is required.
>http://sparc.airtime.co.uk/bse/scij.htm
>
>At the very least you've been missing about 42% of CJD cases
>(prior to 1990).
>
>At the very worst, 1.9% (or more) of current cases may have CJD.
>(There are currently over 750,000 people in the UK with dementia.
>http://www.cf.ac.uk/news/releases/0209/020913.html )
>
>./...
>
Truly, I am sorry, but you are quoting a journal article that is 9
years old. None of this has borne out with recent numbers. At the time
this article was published, the estimates of nvCJD that were to be
occurring were alarming everyone the same way. This, too, was in
error.

It is not that BSE, or nvCJD or CJD are pleasantries or fluff - all
are quite serious, but Chicken Little, Casandra and the Boy who Cried
Wolf only serve to raise rabble and make fancy sound bites, quick
headlines & flame wars. Hard numbers and facts that have been shown to
be solidly based in research are much more intelligent and ultimately
effective than unsubstatiated percentages, scare tactics or ****ing in
the wind.

boron

On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 03:00:20 -0600, "Jeff" >
wrote:


> We had one cow in Canada and not one illness. These **** wads in the media
> don't care how they sell papers or get ratings.
>

I think those liberal **** wads DO care, even if you don't.

There are two salient points to be made from the Canadian
and US cow scares:

1. The practice of feeding animal protein to cattle, while
cost effective, isn't taking consumer health into
consideration.

2. Downer cows (of any sort) absolutely should not be sold
for human consumption.

Until the industry discontinues those practices, consumers
will remain wary.



Practice safe eating - always use condiments

Thighbone Lee Jackson > wrote:

>many people already dying from these corner cutting exercises.

Name 200.

Dennis

C.W. > wrote:
>"Foolishness caused by maybe a certain amount of greed."

The organizing principle of capitalism.

--Blair
"No maybe about it."

"pearl" > wrote in message
...
> "Jim Webster" > wrote in message
...
> >
> > nv CJD figures are the column which reads
> > 3
> > 10-
> > 10
> > 18
> > 15
> > 28
> > 20
> > 17
> > 16
> >
> > so 20 deaths a year was an exaggeration on my part but the number isn't
> > rising
>
> Ok. Shall we look at cases of CJD misdiagnosed as Alzheimer's
> and other dementias now?
>

No let us just concentrate on reality, the number of nvCJD cases, those that
may be linked with BSE, is not rising but is falling
In spite of hysterical lobbying by vested interests it is actually falling
American readers please note, no matter what the reality is, there are
people out there who want it to look worse than it is because it suits their
own interests and lines their own pockets

Jim Webster

"pearl" > wrote in message
...
> "pearl" > wrote in message
...
> > "Jim Webster" > wrote in message
...
> > >
> > > nv CJD figures are the column which reads
> > > 3
> > > 10-
> > > 10
> > > 18
> > > 15
> > > 28
> > > 20
> > > 17
> > > 16
> > >
> > > so 20 deaths a year was an exaggeration on my part but the number
isn't
> > > rising
> >
> > Ok. Shall we look at cases of CJD misdiagnosed as Alzheimer's
> > and other dementias now?
>
> And note well the rise in 'Sporadic' CJD, and total cases.

so what, note the increased number of Mars probes. That has as much to do
with BSE as Sporadic CJD.

Jim Webster

"pearl" > wrote in message
...

..
>
> Research into some neurological disorders (for example CJD and
> Alzheimer's disease) relies almost entirely on brains from autopsies,
> ..

funny that

there is a shortage of living people wanting pieces removed from their
brains

Jim Webster

"Torsten Brinch" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:39:19 -0500, Boron Elgar
> > wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 23:18:31 +0100, Torsten Brinch
> > wrote:
>
> >>Pearl, don't expect the maroon to bother to go actually read something.
> >>-- oh no, no, he flies solely in the seat of his pants.
> >
> >The Guardian article is 15 months old and speaks of changes that will
> >be made in tissue testing tonsils in the UK. Don't you think any
> >untoward results would have been made public so far?
>
> Back off Boron, the first few samples for that project were bl**dy
> taken only a few weeks ago.
>

Last year the government was making plans to slaughter the entire sheep
flock because they had found 'evidence' that there was BSE in it. Within a
few weeks of the tests showing positive the leaks had already started to get
everyone ready for the decision when it came officially.
Then they realised that the idiots had been testing bovine brain not sheep
brain and it all collapsed into embarrassed silence.
If there had been ANY samples showing anything at all significant, it would
already be known

Jim Webster

"Torsten Brinch" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 18:24:09 -0500, Boron Elgar
> > wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 23:58:46 +0100, Torsten Brinch
> > wrote:
> >
> >>On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:39:19 -0500, Boron Elgar
> > wrote:
> >>>The Guardian article is 15 months old and speaks of changes that will
> >>>be made in tissue testing tonsils in the UK. Don't you think any
> >>>untoward results would have been made public so far?
> >>
> >>Back off Boron, the first few samples for that project were bl**dy
> >>taken only a few weeks ago.
> <..>
> >Do you really think nothing was being tested between September 2002
> >and now? <snip>
>
> Yes. Believe it or not, one must start collecting the samples before one
> can start testing them.

Of course, and whole years can go by without anyone in the UK having their
appendix or tonsils removed

wake up and smell the coffee

Jim Webster

>

"OrionCA" > wrote in message
news
> On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:41:56 GMT, "Paul M. Cook©®"
> > wrote:
>
> >So you're saying that if prions could vote, they'd vote democrat? This
> >reminds me so much of the imbeciles that refuted the devastating affects
of
> >DDT back in the 60's. They were the one ultimately proven wrong, now
> >weren't they?
>
> The "imbeciles" that refuted the devastating effects of DDT back in
> the 60s - such as the administrative judge who ruled *for* DDT in the
> 1972 study but was overruled by the bureaucrats at the FDA - were
> never proven wrong: They were simply shouted down and ignored by the
> DDT-ban advocates. Subsequent studies have not born out the
> allegations against DDT. Early research claimed a link between breast
> cancer and DDT exposu This has been debunked
> (http://www.niehs.nih.gov/oc/news/notbc.htm)

It's all urban myth. How can there be a shred of truth to any of it? All
liberal lies. Just those awful, dreadful, lying sacks that want to destroy
capitalism and the free market. Now have your cookie and your bottle,
little boy and go hug your teddy bear.

Paul

"Paul M. Cook©®" > wrote in message
...

> It's all urban myth. How can there be a shred of truth to any of it? All
> liberal lies. Just those awful, dreadful, lying sacks that want to
destroy
> capitalism and the free market. Now have your cookie and your bottle,
> little boy and go hug your teddy bear.

actually when you look at the way DDT was applied (Look at the film footage
of GIs covering the population of SOuthern Italy in it during the cholera
outbreak in 1944) there would be massive numbers of human dead if it was
dangerous.
DDT was a problem in the environment, but not among humans

Jim Webster

pearl > writes
>Research into some neurological disorders (for example CJD and
>Alzheimer's disease) relies almost entirely on brains from autopsies,
>..
>Despite the obvious value of autopsies, the proportion of deaths
>(disregarding those investigated at the request of a coroner) subjected
>to this highly informative medical investigation has fallen steadily
>during the last few decades. Now, even in UK teaching hospitals,
>the autopsy rate is usually below five per cent.

In the UK CJD is notifiable. All suspected cases are autopsied.

Doubtless you can work out the date this happened from the figs.

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
DEMON address no longer in use.

pearl > writes

>Recent data suggest that some
>cases of CJD may be clinically unrecognized; in order to examine this
>proposal we reviewed all cases of dementia (n-1000+) collected between
>1964 and 1990. We identified 19 cases of CJD of which only 11 were
>diagnosed before death.

That matches up well with the early vs late cases for cjd.

Simply an early under-reporting, as expected.

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
DEMON address no longer in use.

Torsten Brinch > writes
>Pearl, don't expect the maroon to bother to go actually read something.
>-- oh no, no, he flies solely in the seat of his pants.

For those that don't know, please bear in mind that throughout the 80's,
torsten was gleefully predicting 10's of millions of UK deaths.

He is still pretty gutted that we are still alive, and his fervent
wishes have come to naught.

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
DEMON address no longer in use.

Rubystars > writes

>I don't know if people in the U.S. are at risk or not. As a meat eater I'm
>really happy that the downer cows were banned from the human food supply
>though.

Indeed, although bear in mind that many 'downers' are cattle properly
slaughtered on farm, with a vet certificate, who have bad feet and
cannot humanely be transported in a truck alive.

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
DEMON address no longer in use.

OrionCA > writes
>On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 10:50:34 +0000, Oz > wrote:
>
>>OrionCA > writes
>>
>>>The # of cases of human illness linked to BSE-infected meat is exactly
>>>-0-, even in the UK where the largest number of "Mad Cows" were found.
>>
>>Thats simply untrue. They are linked, not absolutely proven but more
>>than good enough evidence to base a strategy on.
>>
>
>"not absolutely proven" = Wild Eyed Guess. As I say below, it's
>SUGGESTED that these cases are linked but you might as well blame that
>butterfly in Tokyo for flapping its wings and blowing infectious
>spores up their noses for all the scientific proof they have.

Now you are being as unreasonable as the rabid veggie activists.
There is a very high probability that vCJD is caused by BSE.
The emergence, prion typing and the incidence curve are pretty good
evidence. Its certainly a sensible modus operandi for public health.

>>>There's about 10 cases
>>
>>Under 150 cases
>
>The other cases are in line with the world infection rate of CVW.

The pathology is different, bear that in mind.

>>> of neurological disorders that they SUGGEST
>>>could be linked to BSE but there's no evidence that these people ever
>>>consumed the "tainted" brain tissue so it's all speculation.
>>
>>No, their prion was quite a good match for BSE, and the case curve shape
>>is what you would expect if BSE was the cause.
>
>No one has proven that these "deformed prions" CAUSE the disease,
>child.

Hmm, no, if you don't know the evidence then you shouldn't be making
wild statements.

>Deformed prions are found in most cases, yes. Inflamed
>pustules on your butt must be proof you have smallpox, then. "All
>fillies are girls but not all girls are fillies". Remember that the
>doomsayers were predicting THOUSANDS of cases in the UK because of the
>level of contamination. "Under 150 cases" translates into under the #
>of Brits killed by gun violence during the same period of time.
>Again, there is NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF THE DISEASES ARE LINKED, ONLY
>CONJECTURE.

Hmmm. Another to join pearl and torsten, I think.

>>>Meanwhile there are thousands of cases of people getting sick each
>>>year - and even dying - from consuming spoilt or tainted beef. People
>>>are in more danger of being injured by an angry housewife dropping a
>>>frozen rump roast on their heads from a 4th story apartment window
>>>than being injured by meat from a so-called "Mad Cow".
>>
>>That's true, but remember the UK *DID* institute controls to reduce
>>human exposure very considerably. So please try to keep rational.
>
>"but" nothing. It takes 2-4 years before a case of "Mad Cow" can be
>diagnosed and it was several years before the health authorities began
>piecing together the puzzle and realized there was a problem with
>British herds. That means that from the time the disease actually
>appeared in the UK the British were exposed to it for FOUR TO TEN
>YEARS. "Rationally" there should be thousands of victims in Britain,
>not just 10 that "suggest" these are linked to the disease.

You are misinformed. Nobody knows the required human doserates nor the
exposure of the UK population. Fortunately humans seem to be rather
immune and the early controls were clearly partially effective.

For that I am thankful.


--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
DEMON address no longer in use.

"Jim Webster" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Paul M. Cook©®" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > It's all urban myth. How can there be a shred of truth to any of it?
All
> > liberal lies. Just those awful, dreadful, lying sacks that want to
> destroy
> > capitalism and the free market. Now have your cookie and your bottle,
> > little boy and go hug your teddy bear.
>
> actually when you look at the way DDT was applied (Look at the film
footage
> of GIs covering the population of SOuthern Italy in it during the cholera
> outbreak in 1944) there would be massive numbers of human dead if it was
> dangerous.
> DDT was a problem in the environment, but not among humans


DDT accumulates in fat tissue. Meaning it may not be harmful on your first
exposure, or even your second. After that, it was anybody's guess. To say
DDT destroys wildlife and is harmless to humans is just rank stupidity.

Paul

On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 08:39:45 +0000, Oz > wrote:

>Torsten Brinch > writes
>>Pearl, don't expect the maroon to bother to go actually read something.
>>-- oh no, no, he flies solely in the seat of his pants.
>
>For those that don't know, please bear in mind that throughout the 80's,
>torsten was gleefully predicting 10's of millions of UK deaths.
>
>He is still pretty gutted that we are still alive, and his fervent
>wishes have come to naught.

I don't know, you and your weird friends are clearly showing signs of
diet induced mental disability, not to mention the fact none of you
appear to be able to earn a decent living even in a heavily subsidized
industry! lol
















**********************************************




'You can't win 'em all.'
Lord Haw Haw.

Since I stopped donating money to CONservation hooligan charities
Like the RSPB, Woodland Trust and all the other fat cat charities
I am in the top 0.801% richest people in the world.
There are 5,951,930,035 people poorer than me

If you're really interested I am the 48,069,965
richest person in the world.

And I'm keeping the bloody lot.

So sue me.

http://www.globalrichlist.com/

Newsgroup ettiquette

1) Tell everyone the Trolls don't bother you.
2) Say you've killfiled them, yet continue to respond.
3) Tell other people off who repsond despite doing so yourself.
4) Continually talk about Trolls while maintaining
they're having no effect.
5) Publicly post killfile rules so the Trolls know
how to avoid them.
6) Make lame legal threats and other barrel scraping
manoeuvres when your abuse reports are ignored.
7) Eat vast quantities of pies.
8) Forget to brush your teeth for several decades.
9) Help a demon.local poster with their email while
secretly reading it.
10) Pretend you're a hard ******* when in fact you're
as bent as a roundabout.
11) Become the laughing stock of Usenet like Mabbet
12) Die of old age
13) Keep paying Dr Chartham his fees and hope one day you
will have a penis the girls can see.

---------------------------------------

"If you would'nt talk to them in a bar, don't *uckin' vote for them"

"Australia was not *discovered* it was invaded"
The Big Yin.