"gloria.p" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> My husband's late aunt was PhD in science (entomology) and decided in her
> declining years that she could not go out in public because she was afraid
> of getting the flu. She said she couldn't get a flu shot because
> she was allergic to albumen (egg, on which the virus is cultured.) Yet
> she ate eggs for breakfast every day for the last 30 years of her life, at
> least as evidenced by her food diary and the stacks of egg cartons in her
> garage.
>
> You can't convince people who don't want to be convinced.
>
> gloria p

It is entirely possible to be allergic to flu shots and not to eating eggs.
I am. I can eat eggs and chicken with no problems at all. If I get a flu
shot I suffer for three days. I am allergic to feathers.


Ms P

"BlueBrooke" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:19:48 -0800 (PST), "
> > wrote:
>
>>I'm not denying that people had food allergies back then. It just
>>wasn't as prevalent as it is today. Out of the hundreds of kids I
>>went through school with there was not one case of someone being
>>allergic to peanuts, soy, gluten, etc. If someone had died because of
>>it you would have known it.
>>
>>I believe part of the problem today, and others have speculated this
>>too, is people are too clean. They've also abused antibiotics and
>>they're always coming out with some new vaccine to fight the next
>>epidemic that's certainly going to wipe out a good chunk of the
>>population. Your body's immune system needs something to fight. When
>>there aren't any germs for it to fight it finds something else to
>>fight, like peanut proteins for example.
>>
>>I do believe for many people it has become a badge of honor to say
>>that their kid suffers from some sort of ailment, whether it be a food
>>allergy, ADHD, autism, or something else.
>
> That is certainly how it works around here. You need a label for your
> kid, and "strong, healthy kid" isn't one of them. My son ate a lot of
> dirt. Maybe there is something to that. :-)

My kids played outside in the dirt. My oldest son has developed allergies
to all sorts of things as an adult. My youngest son doesn't even have hay
fever.

Ms P

In article >,
BlueBrooke > wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 21:55:25 +1300, Miche > wrote:
>
> >We exist, and there are more of us than you think.
>
> I'm not saying you don't exist. I'm saying there aren't as many as
> statistics would have us believe.
>
> If you want to see an ADHD kid in every other seat, that's up to you.
> I prefer not to find something wrong with every kid.

I graduated from high school in 1968. One of my best friends had seven
brothers. They were all on drugs. I didn't know the name back then,
but they were stimulants that acted like tranquilizers on them. They
all had the same body build, like toothpicks. Their behavior was a
little strange (although I didn't meet the two oldest, who were in the
military, but I saw their pictures). My friend also had seven sisters.
None were on drugs, and they all had normal body builds, and normal
behaviors.

> Sometimes, a kid is just a kid, not a "patient."

Their father was a respected doctor in town, the head of pathology for a
local hospital.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Mr. Bill wrote:
> Omelet > wrote:
>
>>Best cure for ADD in kids (imho) is regular recesses and LOTS of
>>physical activity! Let them run off the excess energy that is perfectly
>>normal for kids.
>
> An ADD kid sure doesn't have a problem sitting in front of a game
> system for six hours at a time...concentrating!

It's not that we are deficit in attention. It's that you majority folks
are definicit in focus. It takes focus to do certain activities that
happen to include games and we have focus in abundance. There ya go.

BlueBrooke wrote:
>.
>
> That is certainly how it works around here. You need a label for your
> kid, and "strong, healthy kid" isn't one of them. My son ate a lot of
> dirt. Maybe there is something to that. :-)

That's called pica.

In article >,
BlueBrooke > wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 21:55:25 +1300, Miche > wrote:
>
> >We exist, and there are more of us than you think.
>
> I'm not saying you don't exist. I'm saying there aren't as many as
> statistics would have us believe.
>
> If you want to see an ADHD kid in every other seat, that's up to you.
> I prefer not to find something wrong with every kid.
>
> Sometimes, a kid is just a kid, not a "patient."

I'm not disputing that and I certainly don't see "an ADHD kid in every
other seat". In fact I tell parents with kids who show ADHD tendencies
not to get them tested _unless it's causing significant problems_.

I just can't help thinking how much better my life would have been if
I'd been diagnosed before my mid-30s.

I don't think "overdiagnosis" is the right word. I think the word to
use is "misdiagnosis". There are lot of kids who are being treated for
ADHD who aren't, sure (and there are other treatments besides
medication), but there are also a whole lot of kids who _do_ have ADHD
who _aren't_ being treated.

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 01:51:56 -0600, Sqwertz wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 14:27:02 -0700, gloria.p wrote:
>
>> When you consider that today's kids are from a generation of parents
>> that was heavily into various drugs and alcohol in college and beyond...
>
> Oh, come now. Not everyone was a acid taking flower child. I was
> born in the Summer of Love but neither of my parents had taken acid
> or smoked pot, and rarely drank until after I was born.
>
> -sw

i hope that wasn't the proximate cause of their drinking.

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 21:58:43 -0600, BlueBrooke wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:15:22 +1300, Miche > wrote:
>
>>In article >,
>> BlueBrooke > wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 01:01:45 -0600, Sqwertz >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:25:15 -0800 (PST), wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
>>> >> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
>>> >> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
>>> >> gluten was unless you were a baker?
>>>
>>> Good question. They didn't all have ADD back then, either.
>>
>>Yes, they did. It just went untreated.
>>
>>Miche
>
> Sorry, but I'm not buying that. If that was the case, the classrooms
> -- which had 30 or more students in them, not the 1:15 teacher:student
> ratio that seems to be required now --

um, where would this be? it might be thought a good thing, but i know of
no school system where it is 'required.' certainly not any public school.

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:53:57 +0000 (UTC), Steve Pope wrote:

> David Harmon > wrote:
>
" > wrote,
>
>>>How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
>>>a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
>>>intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
>>>gluten was unless you were a baker?
>>
>>No big mystery, you were just ignorant.
>
> Not exactly.
>
> Lactose intolerance is extremely common. Gluten intolerances are
> only somewhat common. Peanut allergies are extremely rare.
> You can almost bet any given alleged case of a peanut allergy is
> not medically accurate.
>
> Steve

what a boatlod of shit. cases that require emergency roon treatment are
'not medically accurate'?

blake

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 14:02:23 -0700, gloria.p wrote:

> Steve Pope wrote:
>> David Harmon > wrote:
>>
>>> " > wrote,
>>
>>>> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
>>>> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
>>>> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
>>>> gluten was unless you were a baker?
>>> No big mystery, you were just ignorant.
>>
>> Not exactly.
>>
>> Lactose intolerance is extremely common. Gluten intolerances are
>> only somewhat common. Peanut allergies are extremely rare.
>> You can almost bet any given alleged case of a peanut allergy is
>> not medically accurate.
>>
>> Steve
>
> Is that why a 10 year old died a few years ago when he was taking part
> in a peanut allergy study at National Jewish Respiratory Hospital and
> was accidentally given the wrong serum? And why so many mothers carry
> around epi-pens to jab their kids with when they are exposed to peanuts?
>
> Just because you haven't experienced it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
>
> gloria p

clearly, steve subscribes to the sheldon school of phenomenology.

your pal,
blake

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:10:30 +1300, Miche wrote:

> In article
> >,
> " > wrote:
>
>> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
>> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
>> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
>> gluten was unless you were a baker?
>
> People were allergic to gluten. They were the ones who were "sickly",
> the kids who "failed to thrive", the people who died early from weird
> cancers.
>
> Fortunately we know better now.
>
> Miche

there's that, and there's also that society now makes greater
accommodations to those who are out of the ordinary. formerly it was
'tough shit for you.'

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 22:00:56 -0600, Omelet wrote:

> In article
> >,
> " > wrote:
>
>> I do believe for many people it has become a badge of honor to say
>> that their kid suffers from some sort of ailment, whether it be a food
>> allergy, ADHD, autism, or something else.
>
> munchausen's syndrome anyone? ;-)
>
> Best cure for ADD in kids (imho) is regular recesses and LOTS of
> physical activity! Let them run off the excess energy that is perfectly
> normal for kids.
>
> Maybe we'd have fewer obese kids too...

what happened to you?

blake

blake murphy > wrote:

>On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:53:57 +0000 (UTC), Steve Pope wrote:

>> Lactose intolerance is extremely common. Gluten intolerances are
>> only somewhat common. Peanut allergies are extremely rare.
>> You can almost bet any given alleged case of a peanut allergy is
>> not medically accurate.

>what a boatlod of shit. cases that require emergency roon treatment are
>'not medically accurate'?

I said you can "almost bet" that alleged cases of peanut allergies
are not medically accurate.

Yes, there are a small number of actual cases. My statement is still true.
Key word being "almost".

Peanut allergies are down in the noise. They're there, but you
will have trouble finding one.


Steve

blake murphy > wrote:

>On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 14:02:23 -0700, gloria.p wrote:

>>> Lactose intolerance is extremely common. Gluten intolerances are
>>> only somewhat common. Peanut allergies are extremely rare.
>>> You can almost bet any given alleged case of a peanut allergy is
>>> not medically accurate.

>> Just because you haven't experienced it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Didn't say it "didn't exist", just that it's rare.

>clearly, steve subscribes to the sheldon school of phenomenology.

No amount of studying the facts will sway some people out there.

Peanut allergies are quite rare. Deal.

Steve

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 02:05:45 -0600, Sqwertz wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 09:32:59 -0500, Brooklyn1 wrote:
>
>> And food intolerance is NOT an allergy...
>
> Duh. Maybe that's why they call it an "intolerance" rather than an
> allergy.
>
> Kinda slow today, aren't you Katz?
>
> -sw

why is this day different from all other days?

your pal,
blake

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:05:38 -0500, blake murphy
> wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 21:58:43 -0600, BlueBrooke wrote:
>
> >
> > Sorry, but I'm not buying that. If that was the case, the classrooms
> > -- which had 30 or more students in them, not the 1:15 teacher:student
> > ratio that seems to be required now --
>
> um, where would this be? it might be thought a good thing, but i know of
> no school system where it is 'required.' certainly not any public school.
>
True, I haven't heard of that even for "needs improvement" schools.
Teachers may end up with a small class, but it's not that small by
mandate and the district packs them in as soon as possible. Umpteen
years ago the parents of a school friend of my daughter's moved to
Nevada because class size was 1 teacher to 18 students in elementary
at the time, but that's the lowest I've heard of for public school.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

Boron Elgar wrote:

>
> Seeing an anguished parent rush a kid
> to the ER with an allergic reaction or suffer through raising a
> troubled kid with ADHD, or watch one dealing with an autistic spectrum
> child is not seeing anyone having a grand old time. Shame on you.
> Really.
>
> Boron


Thank you for that. There are many more kids with educational, physical
and emotional problems today than ever before and we don't know why. We
were told "sit down, shut up, and learn" and it worked for most of our
generation (but not all!) It just doesn't work for today's kids for a
wide variety of possible reasons.

gloria p

"Steve Pope" > wrote in message
...
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:53:57 +0000 (UTC), Steve Pope wrote:
>
>>> Lactose intolerance is extremely common. Gluten intolerances are
>>> only somewhat common. Peanut allergies are extremely rare.
>>> You can almost bet any given alleged case of a peanut allergy is
>>> not medically accurate.
>
>>what a boatlod of shit. cases that require emergency roon treatment are
>>'not medically accurate'?
>
> I said you can "almost bet" that alleged cases of peanut allergies
> are not medically accurate.
>
> Yes, there are a small number of actual cases. My statement is still
> true.
> Key word being "almost".
>
> Peanut allergies are down in the noise. They're there, but you
> will have trouble finding one.
>
>
> Steve

I don't have any trouble finding somebody with a severe peanut allergy. My
oldest son thought he was going to die at work from eating a salted nut
roll. He was 27 when he developed that allergy. He has developed allergies
to numerous things since then.

Ms P

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:02:59 -0500, blake murphy wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 01:51:56 -0600, Sqwertz wrote:
>
>> Oh, come now. Not everyone was a acid taking flower child. I was
>> born in the Summer of Love but neither of my parents had taken acid
>> or smoked pot, and rarely drank until after I was born.
>
> i hope that wasn't the proximate cause of their drinking.

Of course it was.

-sw

Ms P > wrote:

>"Steve Pope" > wrote in message

>> Peanut allergies are down in the noise. They're there, but you
>> will have trouble finding one.

>I don't have any trouble finding somebody with a severe peanut allergy. My
>oldest son thought he was going to die at work from eating a salted nut
>roll. He was 27 when he developed that allergy. He has developed allergies
>to numerous things since then.

Thank you for the datapoint. I am sorry to hear this, and hope
he is not suffering too much from these allergies.


Steve

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 15:34:02 -0700, "gloria.p" >
wrote:

> Thank you for that. There are many more kids with educational, physical
> and emotional problems today than ever before and we don't know why.

People are now caring for their disabled children instead of putting
them in an orphanage or "a home". Remember that what the senior
Kennedy's did with their retarded child was common for the day. Those
who couldn't afford it, shut them away from society in their own homes
and never discussed the matter with anyone outside the family. It
just was another skeleton to be kept in the closet.



--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 21:58:43 -0600, BlueBrooke wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:15:22 +1300, Miche > wrote:
> >
> >>In article >,
> >> BlueBrooke > wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 01:01:45 -0600, Sqwertz >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:25:15 -0800 (PST), wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
> >>> >> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
> >>> >> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
> >>> >> gluten was unless you were a baker?
> >>>
> >>> Good question. They didn't all have ADD back then, either.
> >>
> >>Yes, they did. It just went untreated.
> >>
> >>Miche
> >
> > Sorry, but I'm not buying that. If that was the case, the classrooms
> > -- which had 30 or more students in them, not the 1:15 teacher:student
> > ratio that seems to be required now --
>
> um, where would this be? it might be thought a good thing, but i know of
> no school system where it is 'required.' certainly not any public school.

And guess what -- not all posters live in the USA.

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases

Omelet > wrote:

> (Steve Pope) wrote:

>> Peanut allergies are down in the noise. They're there, but you
>> will have trouble finding one.

>That's 'cause they often die young. Peanut allergy is a very, very
>deadly one.

Okay, there's a theory.

To support this theory, you're have to believe the actual number
of peanut allergy fatalities in the U.S. is much greater than the ten
or so per year currently reported; that there are underreported
peanut victims.


Steve

Omelet > wrote:

> (Steve Pope) wrote:

>> Didn't say it "didn't exist", just that it's rare.

>Rare, perhaps... but all it takes is one dead child.

Too vague.

One dead child means it is tragic.

One dead child does NOT mean it is other than rare, and one of the vexing
problems of healthcare in America is that rare conditions sometimes sap
away resources from areas that need much more attention, and/or
lead to confusion in diagnoses.

>Or do you feel like these people do?:

><http://www.koco.com/r/25833473/detail.html>

I think it's a bit of a logical leap from believing that some medical
conditions are rare, to wanting to see child deaths, don't you?

Steve

Omelet > wrote:

> (Steve Pope) wrote:

>> I think it's a bit of a logical leap from believing that some medical
>> conditions are rare, to wanting to see child deaths, don't you?

>Actually, no I don't. I work in Health Care. I've watched children die.
>Some from something as common as RSV. Deaths from it are not that common
>granted, but all too many parents don't know about it. And it tends to
>be rampant in day care facilities sometimes as it's so damned contagious.
>
>It's been a few years, but I can still see that little 3 year old girl
>in my memory being cuddled over her very worried mother's shoulder in
>the ER. Less than 24 hours later, she was dead. And it still makes me
>cry.
>
>She was very small, shoulder length brown curly hair with big brown
>eyes. She she looked so sad as she was not feeling well. Her baby
>brother also tested positive, but he survived.
>
>The death of even one child is one too many.
>
>If you cannot see nor feel that, I pity you...
>
>I don't give a rat's ass about how "rare" peanut allergies can be. Any
>consideration to protect children has to be considered.
>
>The "rare" death of a child probably might not bother YOU, until you
>experience it personally. And I hope you never do...
>
>The fact that you don't seem to care is disturbing.

Some medical conditions are rarer than others. This does not
mean I or anyone else does not care about the rare ones.
Did I say I don't care? No, but I can't stop you from thinking
that.


Steve

Omelet > wrote:

> (Steve Pope) wrote:

>> Omelet > wrote:

>> > (Steve Pope) wrote:

>> >> Peanut allergies are down in the noise. They're there, but you
>> >> will have trouble finding one.

>> >That's 'cause they often die young. Peanut allergy is a very, very
>> >deadly one.

>> Okay, there's a theory.

>> To support this theory, you're have to believe the actual number
>> of peanut allergy fatalities in the U.S. is much greater than the ten
>> or so per year currently reported; that there are underreported
>> peanut victims.

>Indeed...

>How can that be proven or disproven?

To a first order, you believe that cause-of-death statistics are
mostly accurate, unless you have a solid reason to believe otherwise.

Steve

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 21:58:43 -0600, BlueBrooke wrote:

> > Sorry, but I'm not buying that. If that was the case, the classrooms
> > -- which had 30 or more students in them, not the 1:15 teacher:student
> > ratio that seems to be required now --
>
> um, where would this be? it might be thought a good thing, but i know of
> no school system where it is 'required.' certainly not any public school.

The State of California implemented a voluntary class size reduction
program for public schools some years ago. The State funded about 80%
of the cost of reducing class sizes in certain grades down to 20
students. This was great, but where were the local school districts
going to get the other 20% of the money? Most got it by increasing
class sizes! In our local school district, which is only K-6, class
sizes had been averaging about 29. The program was only for K-3. So
they upped class sizes for grades 4-6 to 32, and scraped up the rest of
the money, and reduced all classes in K-3 to 20 students.

Unfortunately, with the huge cuts in school funding in the State of
California, the program is being gutted.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Omelet > wrote:

> (Steve Pope) wrote:

>> Some medical conditions are rarer than others. This does not
>> mean I or anyone else does not care about the rare ones.
>> Did I say I don't care? No, but I can't stop you from thinking
>> that.

>You appeared to disregard it, and ignore it's importance.
>You considered it to be "overdiagnosed" iirc?

I do not know that peanut allergies are over-diagnosed.

I do believe that there is a belief that they are more widespread
than they actually are.

>Admit that you might have misunderstood the possible issue.

Oh, for sure, I'll admit that: I only have a certain amount of
information on this issue. If I study it more and come across
more and different information, I may change my belief that it's
a rare condition. But right now, my belief it that's it's rare.


Steve

Omelet > wrote:

> (Steve Pope) wrote:

>> Omelet > wrote:

>> >You appeared to disregard it, and ignore it's importance.
>> >You considered it to be "overdiagnosed" iirc?

>> I do not know that peanut allergies are over-diagnosed.

>> I do believe that there is a belief that they are more widespread
>> than they actually are.

>You just contradicted yourself.

Big distinction between diagnosed and simply perceived by the public.

>> >Admit that you might have misunderstood the possible issue.
>>
>> Oh, for sure, I'll admit that: I only have a certain amount of
>> information on this issue. If I study it more and come across
>> more and different information, I may change my belief that it's
>> a rare condition. But right now, my belief it that's it's rare.

>1.3 people in 100 is not something I'd personally consider to be rare...

I'm not sure that's the best number. But yes, I think of "rare"
as being more like an annual prevalence of 0.2 per 100.

Steve

In article >,
(Steve Pope) wrote:

> Omelet > wrote:

> >Or do you feel like these people do?:
>
> ><http://www.koco.com/r/25833473/detail.html>
>
> I think it's a bit of a logical leap from believing that some medical
> conditions are rare, to wanting to see child deaths, don't you?

There's no logic in the WBC. They are happy to see people die, because
it means that they are successful in convincing God to kill people
because they don't believe as the WBC does.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

In article >,
Omelet > wrote:

> In article >,
> (Steve Pope) wrote:

> > One dead child means it is tragic.
> >
> > One dead child does NOT mean it is other than rare, and one of the vexing
> > problems of healthcare in America is that rare conditions sometimes sap
> > away resources from areas that need much more attention, and/or
> > lead to confusion in diagnoses.

> Actually, no I don't. I work in Health Care. I've watched children die.

> The death of even one child is one too many.
>
> If you cannot see nor feel that, I pity you...
>
> I don't give a rat's ass about how "rare" peanut allergies can be. Any
> consideration to protect children has to be considered.

The first step is to get rid of all private automobiles. Steve has been
advocating that, in some cases, anyway. That will save a *ton* of kid's
lives.

We'll start that tomorrow. Does everybody agree?

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

In article >,
Omelet > wrote:


> > >> Omelet > wrote:
> >
> > >> > (Steve Pope) wrote:
> >
> > >> >> Peanut allergies are down in the noise. They're there, but you
> > >> >> will have trouble finding one.
> >
> > >> >That's 'cause they often die young. Peanut allergy is a very, very
> > >> >deadly one.

> <http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=15618>
>
> 1.3% is slightly over 1 in 100.

So, you're BOTH wrong! Steve appears to be saying that there are very
few people with peanut allergies. Om says that peanut allergies are
very, very deadly.

The truth is, there are millions of people with peanut allergies. Only
ten of them die per year.

Therefore, there are a lot of people with minor peanut allergies. I
didn't know that.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:13:29 -0500, blake murphy wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:53:57 +0000 (UTC), Steve Pope wrote:
>
>> David Harmon > wrote:
>>
" > wrote,
>>
>>>>How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
>>>>a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
>>>>intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
>>>>gluten was unless you were a baker?
>>>
>>>No big mystery, you were just ignorant.
>>
>> Not exactly.
>>
>> Lactose intolerance is extremely common. Gluten intolerances are
>> only somewhat common. Peanut allergies are extremely rare.
>> You can almost bet any given alleged case of a peanut allergy is
>> not medically accurate.
>>
>> Steve
>
> what a boatlod of shit. cases that require emergency roon treatment are
> 'not medically accurate'?

Actaully, Wiki does say that extreme measures are often taken in
the emergency room that aren't necessary. Not just for peanut
allergies.

What's ironic is that allergy-free peanuts were developed over 3
years ago but have not made it to market yet. Because there's not
much of a demand for it.

It would be interesting to see if they did make it to market, and
it was kept hush-hush. And see if the incidence of alleged
allergic reactions continued. It would be a good experiment.

Of course it would take a few years to use upall the old allergen
peanuts.

-sw

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:07:29 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:

> The State of California implemented a voluntary class size reduction
> program for public schools some years ago. The State funded about 80%
> of the cost of reducing class sizes in certain grades down to 20
> students. This was great, but where were the local school districts
> going to get the other 20% of the money? Most got it by increasing
> class sizes! In our local school district, which is only K-6, class
> sizes had been averaging about 29. The program was only for K-3. So
> they upped class sizes for grades 4-6 to 32, and scraped up the rest of
> the money, and reduced all classes in K-3 to 20 students.
>
> Unfortunately, with the huge cuts in school funding in the State of
> California, the program is being gutted.

I don't know if I should laugh or cry!

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

Dan Abel > wrote:
-snip-
>
>The truth is, there are millions of people with peanut allergies. Only
>ten of them die per year.
>
>Therefore, there are a lot of people with minor peanut allergies. I
>didn't know that.

Bad assumption. Holding ones head under water for 20 minutes is
nearly always fatal for the entire population. That we aren't all
dead from it does not mean it isn't deadly for us.

There *might* be tons of folks with minor peanut allergies-- I'm just
saying you can't draw that conclusion from the number of deaths.

Jim

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:09:06 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:

> You should cry, but still be thankful that you are retired.

Exactly. I didn't know if I should laugh first because I'm retired
(thank god) or cry because the situation is so horrible. It's not a
good time to be either a teacher or a student in public school.
Desperate times call for desperate measures and all that.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

In article >,
Jim Elbrecht > wrote:

> Dan Abel > wrote:
> -snip-
> >
> >The truth is, there are millions of people with peanut allergies. Only
> >ten of them die per year.
> >
> >Therefore, there are a lot of people with minor peanut allergies. I
> >didn't know that.
>
> Bad assumption. Holding ones head under water for 20 minutes is
> nearly always fatal for the entire population. That we aren't all
> dead from it does not mean it isn't deadly for us.
>
> There *might* be tons of folks with minor peanut allergies-- I'm just
> saying you can't draw that conclusion from the number of deaths.

Well, I actually drew it not only from the death numbers, but also from
the cite that Om provided, and that I left in my post:

<http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=15618>

And holding one's head under water for 20 minutes is not fatal under
certain circumstances. I believe Om has personal experience here. It's
called SCUBA.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

In article
>,
" > wrote:

> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
> gluten was unless you were a baker?

Because you were unaware?

I was born in 1965 and was allergic to milk. One of my friends was
allergic to chocolate.

marcella

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:34:50 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger wrote:

> Miche wrote:

>> ADHD meds are stimulants, and one of the symptoms of ADHD is a
>> _paradoxical_ reaction to stimulants, meaning it calms them down and
>> helps them choose where to put their focus rather than having no
>> attention span and not being able to sit still.
>
> On the other hand if a kid is given stimulants and they calm the kid
> down then the kid has ADD/ADHD and it is not misdiagnosed.

i thought thee scoop was that stimulant drugs had a calming effect on *any*
pre-pubescent child, not just those with ADHD. i can't seem to find
reference, though. anyone know? goomba?

your pal,
blake

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 16:46:00 -0600, Sqwertz wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:02:59 -0500, blake murphy wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 01:51:56 -0600, Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, come now. Not everyone was a acid taking flower child. I was
>>> born in the Summer of Love but neither of my parents had taken acid
>>> or smoked pot, and rarely drank until after I was born.
>>
>> i hope that wasn't the proximate cause of their drinking.
>
> Of course it was.
>
> -sw

a case of reverse genetic effect, then.

your pal,
blake