Re: the height of paranoia

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/27/2002 2:22:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

csr@... writes:

> I believe God created a wonderful paradise for us, where we don't have

> to kill anything, and there aren't any hard choices. This isn't it.

>

Amen, !

God bless,

[Guest guest]

,

I seriously doubt that you have anything to worry about with the Armour,

although nothing in this world is ever completely safe. Can you take

the synthetics? If you can, switch. If not, you will just have to

settle for the fact that this is a very imperfect world, full of things

that would be nice if we had the choice, but we often do not. Don't let

yourself stress out over things you have no control over!

--

[Guest guest]

I agree with your moral dilemma. The torture that animals suffer through in the

name of science is appalling.

I vaguely remember seeing a story on 20/20 or another news magazine show that

featured a guy who had had an pig

organ transplant, I think it was his heart. His doctors were talking of their

concerns about it and how the guy should be monitored for the rest of his life

for signs of disease and I thought they said that either he shouldn't have

children or that he shouldn't have sex. The details are quite foggy. I'll see

if I can find the story.

Tori

In a message dated Thu, 27 Jun 2002 9:34:14 AM Eastern Standard Time,

petri017@... writes:

> Okay all --

>

> This is the sort of question I hate to ask because it is so paranoid. But

someone asked me recently about the chances that diseases could be transmitted

through armour thyroid,which is, after all PIG thyroid

>

> Now I'm thinking mad cow disease.

>

> Okay, pregnancy does make one a bit wacko and nervous and I would not be the

exception to that. But has anyone read, heard anything about how the pig

thyroid is transformed into human? I also must admit that I have a bit of an

ethical issue here, too, thinking more about how cruelly so many animals are

treated during their short lives so we can eat them or use

> their fluides and hormones, etc.

>

> B

[Guest guest]

I couldn't disagree more! I think the world we be a better place if we all used

products according to our conscience. You have to be true to yourself. I think

our mindset has a big effect on the body's healing ability. If you're taking

something that you makes you feel guilty, your body is probably under stress and

won't be performing up to it's fullest healing capability.

Personally, I value all life equally. I wouldn't take Armour because I don't

think my life is more valuable than that of the pig. Just as if there were a

miracle drug that instantly made me healthy, thin, and beautiful but killed a

child if I took it, of course I wouldn't take it. That's not meant to be

insulting to humans! I have a hard time believing that with all the wonderful

plants God created for us, we have to kill an animal to be healthy.

I hope I didn't offend anyone.

Peace,

Tori

In a message dated Thu, 27 Jun 2002 9:43:08 AM Eastern Standard Time,

csr@... writes:

> ,

>

> I seriously doubt that you have anything to worry about with the Armour,

> although nothing in this world is ever completely safe. Can you take

> the synthetics? If you can, switch. If not, you will just have to

> settle for the fact that this is a very imperfect world, full of things

> that would be nice if we had the choice, but we often do

> not. Don't let

> yourself stress out over things you have no control over!

>

> --

[Guest guest]

Hi , I know it's hard NOT to be paranoid while pregnant... Here are

some links for you that might help answer your questions, though you've

probably already been to them:

http://www.thyroid-info.com/articles/madcow.htm " If you are willing to eat

American pork products, you shouldn't be any more concerned about Armour

thyroid, as far as risk of mad cow disease. Caution is encouraged, however,

with over-the-counter glandular supplements, which may contain unregulated

meat products from areas of Europe known to have mad cow infected livestock.

"

http://www.armourthyroid.com/faq.html

http://www.armourthyroid.com/armourthyroid.pdf

http://www.thyroid-info.com/pregnancy.htm

and then there is the babycenter.com's pregnant with thyroid complications

board: http://www.babycenter.com/bbs/1143655

:)Pam B.

[Guest guest]

and this too:

http://thyroid.about.com/library/weekly/aa042798.htm

Armour and Mad Cow Disease?

There's been some concern and confusion about Armour Thyroid, because Dr.

Weil, in his newsletter " Self Healing, " said he preferred to

prescribe Thyrolar instead of Armour for thyroid problems because Armour

presents a danger of getting Mad Cow disease.

I contacted the Deiters, Drug Information Pharmacist of the

Professional Affairs Department at Forest Pharmaceuticals, who said that

Armour Thyroid comes from U.S. grain-fed pig (porcine) thyroid. It is NOT

cow (bovine) thyroid hormone. Because the animals are domestic, and they are

grain fed (not fed meat that might potentially be contaminated by Mad Cow

disease itself) there is no danger of Mad Cow disease from the Armour

Thyroid products.

I also mentioned that there seemed to be confusion, as I've even seen

reputable endocrinologists post on various lists and such that Armour is

bovine. said people may be remembering that years ago, Armour did

produce a thyroid product, called Thyrar, (not to be confused with

Thyrolar.), that was made from bovine thyroid.

[Guest guest]

Pam -

I'm so glad you had those links! I remember reading somewhere about how the

risk of anything like Mad Cow with Armour was extremely unlikely, but I

couldn't remember _where_ I read it! Darn Graves' brain!

RE: the height of paranoia

>Hi , I know it's hard NOT to be paranoid while pregnant... Here are

>some links for you that might help answer your questions, though you've

>probably already been to them:

>

>http://www.thyroid-info.com/articles/madcow.htm " If you are willing to eat

>American pork products, you shouldn't be any more concerned about Armour

>thyroid, as far as risk of mad cow disease. Caution is encouraged, however,

>with over-the-counter glandular supplements, which may contain unregulated

>meat products from areas of Europe known to have mad cow infected

livestock.

> "

>

>http://www.armourthyroid.com/faq.html

>

>http://www.armourthyroid.com/armourthyroid.pdf

>

>http://www.thyroid-info.com/pregnancy.htm

>

>and then there is the babycenter.com's pregnant with thyroid complications

>board: http://www.babycenter.com/bbs/1143655

>

>:)Pam B.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>-------------------------------------

>The Graves' list is intended for informational purposes only and is not

intended to replace expert medical care.

>Please consult your doctor before changing or trying new treatments.

>----------------------------------------

> DISCLAIMER

>

>Advertisments placed on this yahoo groups list does not have the

endorsement of

>the listowner. I have no input as to what ads are attached to emails.

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------

>

>

[Guest guest]

Tori,

I wasn't offended at what you said, but I am going to reply, rather than

ignore it.

I will still say that Armour is probably very safe (talking here about

prions, not animal use ethics!) While, like I said before, nothing is

guaranteed, the chance of danger from contamination from this drug is

pretty small. I do suspect that this is a case where there is an

argument for the synthetic being a safer choice than the

naturally-derived one. But I repeat, from a patient safety POV, both

synthetic and naturally-derived hormones are fine for the vast majority

of people.

Animal use ethics: I said that if (or anyone else) felt

uncomfortable with the source of Armour, then there is no reason not to

take the synthetic instead. If there is some medical reason why a

person can't take the synthetic, I don't think anyone should be made to

feel guilty for contributing to the use of an already dead pig. No one

is breeding pigs just for their thyroids and throwing the rest away. I

will admit to bias here: I am an omnivore, and perfectly happy being

one. If a mature adult decides that they would prefer to die rather

than take a medicine that is derived from animals, I would personally

think it a bad decision, but their decision to make. I don't feel the

same way about someone making that decision about their child, or about

any other person.

It is impossible to value all life equally. If you have a bacterial

infection, your own body will do everything in its power to kill the

small life forms causing it, and I don't know anyone who would want to

stop the immune system in order to save the bacteria. If you have a

yeast infection, or Athlete's Foot, or ringworm, you will probably try

to treat it in some way, rather than allow those life forms to

proliferate. If you got lice, there is no " capture and release " program

available. If your house is infested with fleas, ants, cockroaches, or

rats, you get rid of them. If you can find a way to do it without

directly killing them, I expect you might choose that method, but in the

end, they are being removed from food and shelter, and most will die.

If you eat a grain product, you support efforts to kill the rodents that

eat them, whether that is poison or a barn cat. If you are eating it,

then the rat isn't. Rodents reproduce at an astounding rate, and their

population has always been controlled by starvation/disease and

predation. You can't teach them about birth control and family

planning. You have to decide which is worth more to you, the rat or the

human. The rat, of course, has its own priorities. If it gets a

chance, it will eat you and not feel guilty.

We do have to kill an animal to be healthy. There is very legitimate

debate on what animals we have to kill, and how many; how we should

treat them when they live, and how we should kill them. Those things do

matter. I think we need to be aware of these things, and think on them.

I worked for some years as a biological scientist in a medical college.

Since my training was in chemistry, I was unprepared to be involved with

animal research, and very suspicious of it. The first time someone came

in to my lab to sacrifice some rats, I stayed to watch when everyone

else left the room because I needed to know exactly what it was that I

was being a part of. I wasn't willing to hide from something ugly and

ignore it. Everyone I ever knew working there was bothered at the

deaths of animals. Efforts are made to find ways of doing research that

don't cost animal lives, and when they are available, they are used.

There are times when that isn't possible. It will probably never be

completely possible to eliminate animals from research, unless we decide

to use humans instead. I don't support that. I am sure there are

people in research and animal resources who are callus and indifferent

to the animals they use/maintain. I never saw any in the labs where I

worked, and I would guess that they are pretty rare.

I believe God created a wonderful paradise for us, where we don't have

to kill anything, and there aren't any hard choices. This isn't it.

-- in Fla.

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

You can go to the http://www.armourthyroid.com/contact.html

site and they have a toll free number you can call and talk to someone

about this. I have called them on several occasions and they have

been very easy to talk to and pretty upfront. Let us know if you find

out anything.

Jody

> Okay all --

>

> This is the sort of question I hate to ask because it is so

paranoid. But someone asked me recently about the chances that

diseases could be transmitted through armour thyroid,which is, after

all PIG thyroid

>

> Now I'm thinking mad cow disease.

>

> Okay, pregnancy does make one a bit wacko and nervous and I would

not be the exception to that. But has anyone read, heard anything

about how the pig thyroid is transformed into human? I also must

admit that I have a bit of an ethical issue here, too, thinking more

about how cruelly so many animals are treated during their short lives

so we can eat them or use their fluides and hormones, etc.

>

> B

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

,

I believe that Armour Thyroid is a by-product of all the pork products

supplied by the Armour Company -- Armour Bacon, Armour Ham, etc., so there

should be no extra risk of disease than if you were eating these products.

It is from a natural source, at least, and many swear that it is more

effective for them than synthetic products, which include most of the

standard thyroid replacements.

If you are a vegetarian, you may have an ethical objection.

And a note from your friendly, " neighborhood " farmer: Not all meat animals

are treated cruelly. If we get into that discussion on this list, we will

get woefully off track.

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

Courage doesn't always roar.

Sometimes courage is the quiet voice at the end of the day saying,

" I will try again tomorrow. "

[Guest guest]

Tori,

>>>Personally, I value all life equally. I wouldn't take Armour

because I don't think my life is more valuable than that of the

pig.<<<

First regarding Armour...don't rule it out right now, down the road

you very well may need the benefits it brings to our lives. Having

been left in hypOhell for over 4 years after RAI, and finally finding

a doctor who would do something, the one thing that put quality back

in my life was going on Armour Thyroid. It contains ALL of the T's

from T-0 to T4, including the T2 our own bodies make which is needed

for conversion of T4 to active T3...it also has calcitonin. People on

Armour have a lesser chance of ending up with osteo.

On the down side, because of my experience and my experimenting with

my Armour regarding labs, I do believe it *can* increase our TSI

antibodies that attack our eyes as well as our thyroids...for this

reason I will be starting back on a synthetic hormone replacement of

T4 with T3 time released until absolutely none of my thyroid

autoantibodies register, if I continue to do well with it I will

remain on it, if I am not comfortable on it because my body does not

convert synthetic T4 to the T3 we need, I will request to go back on

Armour again, without hesitation. The bottom line is that for many of

us, Armour makes a HUGE difference in the quality of our lives and

until you have been living in hypOhell for a period of time, you may

not understand what I am talking about; Armour is already being made,

it is being used, it is out there and if it can add to the quality of

our lives, why not consider it, if the time comes in your journey

where the synthetic hormones just aren't doing what needs to be done

for your body to work properly.

I am mixed on feelings of using animals for research. I hate the

thought of cruelty to animals, but in the same token, I appreciate all

of the medical accomplishments that have occured over decades of

research. When it is for a medical and life giving or life sustaining

for the good of mankind and other animals then sacrifices do need to

be made. If your child, or a child of a friend needed a product that

was tested on animals but would save a life, wouldn't that make it

worthwhile?

I think we sometimes have to cross the barriers of ethics in this...

look how so much research has been stopped regarding stem cells

because of ethics, and stem cell research is our best hope, I believe.

Now, only 68 <or 65> current stem cell research products can continue

because people got on a pulpit and start screaming ethics, I don't

know if any thyriod stem cell research is in that group, but the

research using stem cells for the pancreas ARE curing diabetes

according to studies and news reports. If the product needed to do

thsi research is THERE anyhow, and it will be disposed of, what is

wrong with using it in research to help mankind?

Just my 2 cents, and no, I wasn't offended by your opinions on this

issue :-) We will just have to agree to disagree on it.

Take care,

Jody

> I couldn't disagree more! I think the world we be a better place if

we all used products according to our conscience. You have to be true

to yourself. I think our mindset has a big effect on the body's

healing ability. If you're taking something that you makes you feel

guilty, your body is probably under stress and won't be performing up

to it's fullest healing capability.

>

> Personally, I value all life equally. I wouldn't take Armour

because I don't think my life is more valuable than that of the pig.

Just as if there were a miracle drug that instantly made me healthy,

thin, and beautiful but killed a child if I took it, of course I

wouldn't take it. That's not meant to be insulting to humans! I have

a hard time believing that with all the wonderful plants God created

for us, we have to kill an animal to be healthy.

>

> I hope I didn't offend anyone.

>

> Peace,

>

> Tori

>

> In a message dated Thu, 27 Jun 2002 9:43:08 AM Eastern Standard

Time, csr@c... writes:

>

> > ,

> >

> > I seriously doubt that you have anything to worry about with the

Armour,

> > although nothing in this world is ever completely safe. Can you

take

> > the synthetics? If you can, switch. If not, you will just have

to

> > settle for the fact that this is a very imperfect world, full of

things

> > that would be nice if we had the choice, but we often do

> > not. Don't let

> > yourself stress out over things you have no control over!

> >

> > --

[Guest guest]

,

I'm well aware of the paradox we animal rights advocates deal with. I

experience it every time I see a bug in my house or my cats bring in a mouse.

Driving my car to work every day kills hundreds of insects. I try to live a

life free of cruelty, but you're right, I can't possibly do that in this world.

When offered a choice, I try to choose the method that causes the least amount

of suffering. I try not to push my agenda, but I won't pretend I don't have

one. I only spoke about the moral aspects of armour because mentioned

her struggle with it. I don't want to make her feel guilty for taking it, but

believe if you're feeling guilty about something, don't do it. Why put yourself

through that? If it's a choice between life with Armour or death, I don't

recommend her choosing death. I choose natural remedies rather than

prescription drugs when possible because I don't agree with methods used in

laboratory animal tests. My mother died last year after a 6 year fight with

ALS, Lou Gerig's disease. She would have tried anything to help, but US laws

prevent drug companies from trying experimental medicine on humans in its early

stages. When she was able to get experimental drugs, they were horribly

expensive and depleted their savings entirely. So, she was unable to get the

drugs she wanted to use while they were probably given to mice, etc. Human

experiments are also more accurate. Animal based testing often has to be

repeated on humans because our of physiological differences. Do you see my

point? I honestly am not trying to make anyone feel guilty. We should make our

decisions based on all information, not just that which is pleasant. I'm sorry

if I caused anyone to feel upset or guilty, I'm not very lucid these days and

tend to distort my thoughts.

Tori

In a message dated Thu, 27 Jun 2002 1:23:00 PM Eastern Standard Time,

csr@... writes:

> Tori,

>

> I wasn't offended at what you said, but I am going to reply, rather than

> ignore it.

>

> I will still say that Armour is probably very safe (talking here about

> prions, not animal use ethics!) While, like I said before, nothing is

> guaranteed, the chance of danger from contamination from this drug is

> pretty small. I do suspect that this is a case where there is an

> argument for the synthetic being a safer choice than the

> naturally-derived one. But I repeat, from a patient safety POV, both

> synthetic and naturally-derived hormones are fine for the vast majority

> of people.

>

> Animal use ethics: I said that if (or anyone else) felt

> uncomfortable with the source of Armour, then there is no reason not to

> take the synthetic instead. If there is some medical reason why a

> person can't take the synthetic, I don't think anyone should be made to

> feel guilty for contributing to the use of an already dead pig. No one

> is breeding pigs just for their thyroids and throwing the rest away. I

> will admit to bias here: I am an omnivore, and perfectly happy being

> one. If a mature adult decides that they would prefer to die rather

> than take a medicine that is derived from animals, I would personally

> think it a bad decision, but their decision to make. I don't feel the

> same way about someone making that decision about their child, or about

> any other person.

>

> It is impossible to value all life equally. If you have a bacterial

> infection, your own body will do everything in its power to kill the

> small life forms causing it, and I don't know anyone who would want to

> stop the immune system in order to save the bacteria. If you have a

> yeast infection, or Athlete's Foot, or ringworm, you will probably try

> to treat it in some way, rather than allow those life forms to

> proliferate. If you got lice, there is no " capture and release " program

> available. If your house is infested with fleas, ants, cockroaches, or

> rats, you get rid of them. If you can find a way to do it without

> directly killing them, I expect you might choose that method, but in the

> end, they are being removed from food and shelter, and most will die.

> If you eat a grain product, you support efforts to kill the rodents that

> eat them, whether that is poison or a barn cat. If you are eating it,

> then the rat isn't. Rodents reproduce at an astounding rate, and their

> population has always been controlled by starvation/disease and

> predation. You can't teach them about birth control and family

> planning. You have to decide which is worth more to you, the rat or the

> human. The rat, of course, has its own priorities. If it gets a

> chance, it will eat you and not feel guilty.

>

> We do have to kill an animal to be healthy. There is very legitimate

> debate on what animals we have to kill, and how many; how we should

> treat them when they live, and how we should kill them. Those things do

> matter. I think we need to be aware of these things, and think on them.

>

> I worked for some years as a biological scientist in a medical college.

> Since my training was in chemistry, I was unprepared to be involved with

> animal research, and very suspicious of it. The first time someone came

> in to my lab to sacrifice some rats, I stayed to watch when everyone

> else left the room because I needed to know exactly what it was that I

> was being a part of. I wasn't willing to hide from something ugly and

> ignore it. Everyone I ever knew working there was bothered at the

> deaths of animals. Efforts are made to find ways of doing research that

> don't cost animal lives, and when they are available, they are used.

> There are times when that isn't possible. It will probably never be

> completely possible to eliminate animals from research, unless we decide

> to use humans instead. I don't support that. I am sure there are

> people in research and animal resources who are callus and indifferent

> to the animals they use/maintain. I never saw any in the labs where I

> worked, and I would guess that they are pretty rare.

>

> I believe God created a wonderful paradise for us, where we don't have

> to kill anything, and there aren't any hard choices. This

> isn't it.

>

> -- in Fla.

[Guest guest]

Hi Tori,

>>>I'm sorry if I caused anyone to feel upset or guilty,<<<

You haven't upset me in the least, nor made me feel guilty ;-) We are

just having an honest dicussion here and I love when this happens, as

long as it doesn't turn into personal attacks, or hurt feelings

because we disagree on some things. Healthy debates are good, and who

knows, you may change some minds! With so many people in this group

now, I am sure there are several different opinions on this, and I

enjoy reading this thread immensely.

Take care,

Jody

> ,

>

> I'm well aware of the paradox we animal rights advocates deal with.

I experience it every time I see a bug in my house or my cats bring

in a mouse. Driving my car to work every day kills hundreds of

insects. I try to live a life free of cruelty, but you're right, I

can't possibly do that in this world. When offered a choice, I try to

choose the method that causes the least amount of suffering. I try

not to push my agenda, but I won't pretend I don't have one. I only

spoke about the moral aspects of armour because mentioned her

struggle with it. I don't want to make her feel guilty for taking it,

but believe if you're feeling guilty about something, don't do it.

Why put yourself through that? If it's a choice between life with

Armour or death, I don't recommend her choosing death. I choose

natural remedies rather than prescription drugs when possible because

I don't agree with methods used in laboratory animal tests. My mother

died last year after a 6 year fight with ALS, Lou Gerig's disease.

She would have tried anything to help, but US laws prevent drug

companies from trying experimental medicine on humans in its early

stages. When she was able to get experimental drugs, they were

horribly expensive and depleted their savings entirely. So, she was

unable to get the drugs she wanted to use while they were probably

given to mice, etc. Human experiments are also more accurate. Animal

based testing often has to be repeated on humans because our of

physiological differences. Do you see my point? I honestly am not

trying to make anyone feel guilty. We should make our decisions based

on all information, not just that which is pleasant. I'm sorry if I

caused anyone to feel upset or guilty, I'm not very lucid these days

and tend to distort my thoughts.

> Tori

>

>

>

> In a message dated Thu, 27 Jun 2002 1:23:00 PM Eastern Standard

Time, csr@c... writes:

>

> > Tori,

> >

> > I wasn't offended at what you said, but I am going to reply,

rather than

> > ignore it.

> >

> > I will still say that Armour is probably very safe (talking here

about

> > prions, not animal use ethics!) While, like I said before,

nothing is

> > guaranteed, the chance of danger from contamination from this drug

is

> > pretty small. I do suspect that this is a case where there is an

> > argument for the synthetic being a safer choice than the

> > naturally-derived one. But I repeat, from a patient safety POV,

both

> > synthetic and naturally-derived hormones are fine for the vast

majority

> > of people.

> >

> > Animal use ethics: I said that if (or anyone else) felt

> > uncomfortable with the source of Armour, then there is no reason

not to

> > take the synthetic instead. If there is some medical reason why a

> > person can't take the synthetic, I don't think anyone should be

made to

> > feel guilty for contributing to the use of an already dead pig.

No one

> > is breeding pigs just for their thyroids and throwing the rest

away. I

> > will admit to bias here: I am an omnivore, and perfectly happy

being

> > one. If a mature adult decides that they would prefer to die

rather

> > than take a medicine that is derived from animals, I would

personally

> > think it a bad decision, but their decision to make. I don't feel

the

> > same way about someone making that decision about their child, or

about

> > any other person.

> >

> > It is impossible to value all life equally. If you have a

bacterial

> > infection, your own body will do everything in its power to kill

the

> > small life forms causing it, and I don't know anyone who would

want to

> > stop the immune system in order to save the bacteria. If you have

a

> > yeast infection, or Athlete's Foot, or ringworm, you will probably

try

> > to treat it in some way, rather than allow those life forms to

> > proliferate. If you got lice, there is no " capture and release "

program

> > available. If your house is infested with fleas, ants,

cockroaches, or

> > rats, you get rid of them. If you can find a way to do it without

> > directly killing them, I expect you might choose that method, but

in the

> > end, they are being removed from food and shelter, and most will

die.

> > If you eat a grain product, you support efforts to kill the

rodents that

> > eat them, whether that is poison or a barn cat. If you are eating

it,

> > then the rat isn't. Rodents reproduce at an astounding rate, and

their

> > population has always been controlled by starvation/disease and

> > predation. You can't teach them about birth control and family

> > planning. You have to decide which is worth more to you, the rat

or the

> > human. The rat, of course, has its own priorities. If it gets a

> > chance, it will eat you and not feel guilty.

> >

> > We do have to kill an animal to be healthy. There is very

legitimate

> > debate on what animals we have to kill, and how many; how we

should

> > treat them when they live, and how we should kill them. Those

things do

> > matter. I think we need to be aware of these things, and think on

them.

> >

> > I worked for some years as a biological scientist in a medical

college.

> > Since my training was in chemistry, I was unprepared to be

involved with

> > animal research, and very suspicious of it. The first time

someone came

> > in to my lab to sacrifice some rats, I stayed to watch when

everyone

> > else left the room because I needed to know exactly what it was

that I

> > was being a part of. I wasn't willing to hide from something ugly

and

> > ignore it. Everyone I ever knew working there was bothered at the

> > deaths of animals. Efforts are made to find ways of doing

research that

> > don't cost animal lives, and when they are available, they are

used.

> > There are times when that isn't possible. It will probably never

be

> > completely possible to eliminate animals from research, unless we

decide

> > to use humans instead. I don't support that. I am sure there are

> > people in research and animal resources who are callus and

indifferent

> > to the animals they use/maintain. I never saw any in the labs

where I

> > worked, and I would guess that they are pretty rare.

> >

> > I believe God created a wonderful paradise for us, where we don't

have

> > to kill anything, and there aren't any hard choices. This

> > isn't it.

> >

> > -- in Fla.

[Guest guest]

> Animal use ethics: I said that if (or anyone else) felt

> uncomfortable with the source of Armour, then there is no reason not

> to

> take the synthetic instead. If there is some medical reason why a

> person can't take the synthetic,

In my never to be HO, this is probably not the time to switch. The ONLY

reason I can think of for switching would be if there was any question of

mad cow disease, etc., which the research seems to show is not an issue

here. I don't believe that the treatment of animals is an appropriate

variable in this discussion since we're talking about the life of a human

being.

Take care, Fay

________________________________________________________________

GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!

Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!

Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:

http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

[Guest guest]

I would also like to add my 10 cents. Soon we will have a dollar. I agree

with Jody. I don't think that there are many people that would willingly

hurt an animal if they could help it, but sometimes it is neccessary. Our

species, like all species that live on this planet, will do what we need to

do to survive. And let's face it, if we weren't driving around in our nice

cars, living in our beautiful houses, and consuming huge amounts of

everything, we would be out there fighting to survive, eating anything that

stopped us from starving, just like all the other animals. How many of us

think about all the little things that we are squashing as we are speeding

down the road ? Or animals that have their homes destroyed as we build our

nice new homes ? Or the ruin of the environment in general as we belch fumes

from cars and factories ?

" I believe God created a wonderful paradise for us, where we don't have to

kill anything, and there aren't any hard choices. This isn't it. "

This is the truth . Personnally I don't think it is the researchers

that are the criminals here, it is the crime of mass consumerism of which we

are all guilty of.

Meaning no offence to anyone...... :0)

Katy.

[Guest guest]

Good! I'm okay with agreeing to disagree. Just let me know if I come off

sounding like a militant animal rights activist.

I have a couple of things I forgot to reply to in 's response. You

said that the pig is already dead, no pigs are bred specifically for their

thyroids. It all adds to the bottom line. Commercial pig farms are able to

rake in more money by selling the parts that aren't desired for food to pet food

and drug companies. So, buying an animal by-product contributes to the pig

farm's profits and allows them to be able to lower the price they sell their

meat, if needed, thus increasing market damand, which in turn increases the

number of pigs they raise.

Also, if I find an insect of mouse in my house, I catch it and take it outside.

I'm actually quite good at catching mice! With 3 cats, I've had lots of

experience. Maybe my veggie influence is rubbing off on them. They've been

bringing in lots of mice and birds alive and letting them go in the house. Of

course, they quickly lose interest in the creatures after they're inside or

maybe they enjoy watching me crawl around, sticking my head in precarious places

in search of the runaway mouse! However, I do buy my cats meat. I'm concerned

about their health and the impact of commercial farms on the environment, so I

try to buy them nitrate-free naturally raised meat (mostly turkey) and fish in

addition to high quality dry cat food from their vet (I know, it's supporting

factory farms, but I can't eliminate it all). I hope I'm not barraged too much

for this hypocrisy :-)

Peace,

Tori

In a message dated Thu, 27 Jun 2002 2:03:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,

luckystrike@... writes:

> Hi Tori,

> >>>I'm sorry if I caused anyone to feel upset or guilty,<<<

>

> You haven't upset me in the least, nor made me feel guilty ;-) We are

> just having an honest dicussion here and I love when this happens, as

> long as it doesn't turn into personal attacks, or hurt feelings

> because we disagree on some things. Healthy debates are good, and who

> knows, you may change some minds! With so many people in this group

> now, I am sure there are several different opinions on

> this, and I

> enjoy reading this thread immensely.

> Take care,

> Jody

[Guest guest]

Hi Jody & ,

I'm hoping to avoid RAI by using natural remedies, but I can certainly

understand your desparation. I think if I were hypo (I think I vary from two

extremes now), I'd try synthetic hormones. If that didn't work, I honestly

don't know what I'd do. Animal derivatives would have to be a last resort for

me and only after careful and heavy contemplation.

Did you read the article that Pam sent regarding Reliv supplements? Even it

said that 95% of the medicines in the world are plant based.

I think animal experiments are a bad idea morally and scientifically. Most

people think that only animal rights activists oppose animal based experiments,

but that is not the case. There is a growing medical community that favors

human tests instead. Veternarians can treat animals with higher quality meds

because animals were used in developing those meds. Human tests are totally

voluntary and much more accurate. For example, penicillin is toxic to some

species but incredibly beneficial to humans. Any drug testing on animals must

be repeated on humans, regardless of the result. People who really need the

medication could be using it instead of wasting time with animal testing. I

just read an article in Time (I think) about autism. Towards the end of the

article, it said that researchers are scrambling to create mutant mice for lab

experiments. If they mutate the mice, they obviously know what caused the

mutation, so what good is it to study them in order to gain insight into the

cause of autism in humans? Animal research has become a huge industy.

Universities across the country repeat the same useless experiments solely

because the get government grants to do so. I have nightmares because of the

things I've seen and read that go on in research labs. , I don't know

what they did in the lab where you worked. I can only comment on my experience.

A friend of mine was studying to be a doctor and began working in a research

lab. What she saw horrified her so much, she decided to quit and become a

naturopathic doctor instead. The god I believe in would not create animals with

feelings so they could be tortured for the benefit of humans, here on earth or

the afterlife.

Tori

In a message dated Thu, 27 Jun 2002 1:49:06 PM Eastern Standard Time,

luckystrike@... writes:

> Tori,

>

> >>>Personally, I value all life equally. I wouldn't take Armour

> because I don't think my life is more valuable than that of the

> pig.<<<

>

> First regarding Armour...don't rule it out right now, down the road

> you very well may need the benefits it brings to our lives. Having

> been left in hypOhell for over 4 years after RAI, and finally finding

> a doctor who would do something, the one thing that put quality back

> in my life was going on Armour Thyroid. It contains ALL of the T's

> from T-0 to T4, including the T2 our own bodies make which is needed

> for conversion of T4 to active T3...it also has calcitonin. People on

> Armour have a lesser chance of ending up with osteo.

>

> On the down side, because of my experience and my experimenting with

> my Armour regarding labs, I do believe it *can* increase our TSI

> antibodies that attack our eyes as well as our thyroids...for this

> reason I will be starting back on a synthetic hormone replacement of

> T4 with T3 time released until absolutely none of my thyroid

> autoantibodies register, if I continue to do well with it I will

> remain on it, if I am not comfortable on it because my body does not

> convert synthetic T4 to the T3 we need, I will request to go back on

> Armour again, without hesitation. The bottom line is that for many of

> us, Armour makes a HUGE difference in the quality of our lives and

> until you have been living in hypOhell for a period of time, you may

> not understand what I am talking about; Armour is already being made,

> it is being used, it is out there and if it can add to the quality of

> our lives, why not consider it, if the time comes in your journey

> where the synthetic hormones just aren't doing what needs to be done

> for your body to work properly.

>

> I am mixed on feelings of using animals for research. I hate the

> thought of cruelty to animals, but in the same token, I appreciate all

> of the medical accomplishments that have occured over decades of

> research. When it is for a medical and life giving or life sustaining

> for the good of mankind and other animals then sacrifices do need to

> be made. If your child, or a child of a friend needed a product that

> was tested on animals but would save a life, wouldn't that make it

> worthwhile?

>

> I think we sometimes have to cross the barriers of ethics in this...

> look how so much research has been stopped regarding stem cells

> because of ethics, and stem cell research is our best hope, I believe.

> Now, only 68 <or 65> current stem cell research products can continue

> because people got on a pulpit and start screaming ethics, I don't

> know if any thyriod stem cell research is in that group, but the

> research using stem cells for the pancreas ARE curing diabetes

> according to studies and news reports. If the product needed to do

> thsi research is THERE anyhow, and it will be disposed of, what is

> wrong with using it in research to help mankind?

>

> Just my 2 cents, and no, I wasn't offended by your opinions

> on this

> issue :-) We will just have to agree to disagree on it.

> Take care,

> Jody

[Guest guest]

Hi Tori,

>>>There is a growing medical community that favors human tests

instead.<<<

Okay...I have to bring this up...

Unfortunately the drug industry and government has been doing far to

much human *testing* of ALL vaccines on people without knowing the

long term effects of it on our bodies. There are NO long term studies

of vaccines and adverse affects down the road...so much for human

testing.

I have researched vaccines for more than 2 years now, and I am

CONVINCED that vaccines are the culprit in many, if not all,

autoimmune diseases. Vaccines, as well as other drugs developed, but

shall stick to vaccines, alter our DNA, they alter our immune systems,

and the drug companies keep churning them out <another 200 in the

pipelines right now>...the government then *mandates* that these

vaccines, which contain; mercury, tin, aluminum, ethoyl alcohol,

anti-freeze, animal cells and aborted fetus cells, just to name a

*few* of the added ingrediants besides live virus in many of them.

Since there are no long term studies <you can read about this on the

CDC web site> they ARE doing *human* testing in this manner and it is

costing lives, and quality of life. The rise in ALL autoimmune

diseases is alarming, the rise in children now being diagnosed with

autoimmune disease that *use* to be only adult disease. The CDC has

already admitted to the vaccine connection and Type 1 autoimmune

diabetes in children. You can read some good articles and more on

vaccine ingrediants at www.whale.to . Also, you can read more about

this issue along with other triggers in Elaine's NEW book,

Autoimmune Diseases and Their Environmental Triggers, which you can

order from barnesandnoble.com and is an EXCELLENT book on autoimmune

diseases.

But human testing? No, I don't think so, it is already causing too

many problems, especially when this testing is funded by drug

companies who DO jury rig the outcomes in their favor.

>>>I just read an article in Time (I think) about autism. Towards the

end of the article, it said that researchers are scrambling to create

mutant mice for lab experiments.<<<

Curious, did this article speak of the vaccine connection in it also?

I just got a new post on the Congressional Hearins on vaccines and the

autism connection along with other complications.

>>>For example, penicillin is toxic to some species but incredibly

beneficial to humans. Any drug testing on animals must be repeated on

humans, regardless of the result. People who really need the

medication could be using it instead of wasting time with animal

testing.<<<

Penicillin is deadly for me, having already survived anaphalactic

<sp?> shock from it as a child. Your right, testing must be done on

humans also, but if testing on animals prevents human death in the

early stages of research, then I believe it is acceptable for and

necessary for animal testing to continue.

As for the med's being wasted...there are so many more drugs approved

for certain treatments in Europe that drug companies are holding up in

the states after YEARS of so called testing here, that are successful

but not available to people, even in experimental cases. THIS comes

down to the all mighty dollar totally and completely, it has nothing

whatsoever to do with *tests* but it does have to do with wasting

time and costing lives...all for the love of big business and money.

Take care,

Jody

> Hi Jody & ,

>

> I'm hoping to avoid RAI by using natural remedies, but I can

certainly understand your desparation. I think if I were hypo (I

think I vary from two extremes now), I'd try synthetic hormones. If

that didn't work, I honestly don't know what I'd do. Animal

derivatives would have to be a last resort for me and only after

careful and heavy contemplation.

>

> Did you read the article that Pam sent regarding Reliv supplements?

Even it said that 95% of the medicines in the world are plant based.

>

> I think animal experiments are a bad idea morally and

scientifically. Most people think that only animal rights activists

oppose animal based experiments, but that is not the case. There is a

growing medical community that favors human tests instead.

Veternarians can treat animals with higher quality meds because

animals were used in developing those meds. Human tests are totally

voluntary and much more accurate. For example, penicillin is toxic to

some species but incredibly beneficial to humans. Any drug testing on

animals must be repeated on humans, regardless of the result. People

who really need the medication could be using it instead of wasting

time with animal testing. I just read an article in Time (I think)

about autism. Towards the end of the article, it said that

researchers are scrambling to create mutant mice for lab experiments.

If they mutate the mice, they obviously know what caused the

mutation, so what good is it to study them in order to gain insight

into the cause of autism in humans? Animal research has become a huge

industy. Universities across the country repeat the same useless

experiments solely because the get government grants to do so. I have

nightmares because of the things I've seen and read that go on in

research labs. , I don't know what they did in the lab where

you worked. I can only comment on my experience. A friend of mine

was studying to be a doctor and began working in a research lab. What

she saw horrified her so much, she decided to quit and become a

naturopathic doctor instead. The god I believe in would not create

animals with feelings so they could be tortured for the benefit of

humans, here on earth or the afterlife.

>

> Tori

>

> In a message dated Thu, 27 Jun 2002 1:49:06 PM Eastern Standard

Time, luckystrike@h... writes:

>

> > Tori,

> >

> > >>>Personally, I value all life equally. I wouldn't take Armour

> > because I don't think my life is more valuable than that of the

> > pig.<<<

> >

> > First regarding Armour...don't rule it out right now, down the

road

> > you very well may need the benefits it brings to our lives.

Having

> > been left in hypOhell for over 4 years after RAI, and finally

finding

> > a doctor who would do something, the one thing that put quality

back

> > in my life was going on Armour Thyroid. It contains ALL of the

T's

> > from T-0 to T4, including the T2 our own bodies make which is

needed

> > for conversion of T4 to active T3...it also has calcitonin.

People on

> > Armour have a lesser chance of ending up with osteo.

> >

> > On the down side, because of my experience and my experimenting

with

> > my Armour regarding labs, I do believe it *can* increase our TSI

> > antibodies that attack our eyes as well as our thyroids...for this

> > reason I will be starting back on a synthetic hormone replacement

of

> > T4 with T3 time released until absolutely none of my thyroid

> > autoantibodies register, if I continue to do well with it I will

> > remain on it, if I am not comfortable on it because my body does

not

> > convert synthetic T4 to the T3 we need, I will request to go back

on

> > Armour again, without hesitation. The bottom line is that for

many of

> > us, Armour makes a HUGE difference in the quality of our lives and

> > until you have been living in hypOhell for a period of time, you

may

> > not understand what I am talking about; Armour is already being

made,

> > it is being used, it is out there and if it can add to the quality

of

> > our lives, why not consider it, if the time comes in your journey

> > where the synthetic hormones just aren't doing what needs to be

done

> > for your body to work properly.

> >

> > I am mixed on feelings of using animals for research. I hate the

> > thought of cruelty to animals, but in the same token, I appreciate

all

> > of the medical accomplishments that have occured over decades of

> > research. When it is for a medical and life giving or life

sustaining

> > for the good of mankind and other animals then sacrifices do need

to

> > be made. If your child, or a child of a friend needed a product

that

> > was tested on animals but would save a life, wouldn't that make it

> > worthwhile?

> >

> > I think we sometimes have to cross the barriers of ethics in

this...

> > look how so much research has been stopped regarding stem cells

> > because of ethics, and stem cell research is our best hope, I

believe.

> > Now, only 68 <or 65> current stem cell research products can

continue

> > because people got on a pulpit and start screaming ethics, I don't

> > know if any thyriod stem cell research is in that group, but the

> > research using stem cells for the pancreas ARE curing diabetes

> > according to studies and news reports. If the product needed to

do

> > thsi research is THERE anyhow, and it will be disposed of, what is

> > wrong with using it in research to help mankind?

> >

> > Just my 2 cents, and no, I wasn't offended by your opinions

> > on this

> > issue :-) We will just have to agree to disagree on it.

> > Take care,

> > Jody

[Guest guest]

Hi Jody, this vaccination thing has been bugging me. Even if you don't want

your kid to be vaccinated, he has to be in order to go to public school.

Luke has had about 1/2 of his vaccinations, then they ran out of supply...

humnnn, maybe they didn't really run out, maybe they have finally realized

that they are harmful and are planning damage control... LOL, but it could

be true. I think I am going crazy because I keep thinking these strange

things, like conspiracy theories, and that maybe I want to sell the house

and get a little farm where I can grow our own food that is healthy and

safe, and home schooling, and all these things that are not ME. I used to be

the most normal, mainstream person out there. Now I think I'm just out

there. Well, that is unless I'm right about all these things

:)Pam B. who is probably going crazy and is definitely becoming paranoid,

even though not pregnant.

-

[Guest guest]

No slam against " friendly, neighborhood " farms. Factory farms usually supply

such things and they are horribly cruel. And they threaten to put small farmers

out of business, since they're able to sell at such low prices.

-Tori

In a message dated Thu, 27 Jun 2002 5:29:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, redhengirl

writes:

> ,

> I believe that Armour Thyroid is a by-product of all the pork products

> supplied by the Armour Company -- Armour Bacon, Armour Ham, etc., so there

> should be no extra risk of disease than if you were eating these products.

> It is from a natural source, at least, and many swear that it is more

> effective for them than synthetic products, which include most of the

> standard thyroid replacements.

>

> If you are a vegetarian, you may have an ethical objection.

>

> And a note from your friendly, " neighborhood " farmer: Not all meat animals

> are treated cruelly. If we get into that discussion on

> this list, we will

> get woefully off track.

[Guest guest]

Maybe we can agree that the gov't mandates are the heart of the problem. I

don't think drug companies torture animals for jollies, I think they're

employing the cheapest, quickest way to FDA approval and profits. If they did

human testing, it would not be nearly as fast and they couldn't cover up the

mistakes as well. Things that kill animals still end up being approved and

prescribed. Sacchirin causes cancer in lab animals and we have it on restaurant

tables with a label warning us it's deadly! What about all the people who died

or have major problems from taking various diet pills? Read the warnings on

your prescription/otc drugs--still think the current method of animal testing

protects humans?

tori

In a message dated Thu, 27 Jun 2002 5:41:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,

luckystrike@... writes:

> Hi Tori,

> >>>There is a growing medical community that favors human tests

> instead.<<<

>

> Okay...I have to bring this up...

> Unfortunately the drug industry and government has been doing far to

> much human *testing* of ALL vaccines on people without knowing the

> long term effects of it on our bodies. There are NO long term studies

> of vaccines and adverse affects down the road...so much for human

> testing.

>

> I have researched vaccines for more than 2 years now, and I am

> CONVINCED that vaccines are the culprit in many, if not all,

> autoimmune diseases. Vaccines, as well as other drugs developed, but

> shall stick to vaccines, alter our DNA, they alter our immune systems,

> and the drug companies keep churning them out <another 200 in the

> pipelines right now>...the government then *mandates* that these

> vaccines, which contain; mercury, tin, aluminum, ethoyl alcohol,

> anti-freeze, animal cells and aborted fetus cells, just to name a

> *few* of the added ingrediants besides live virus in many of them.

> Since there are no long term studies <you can read about this on the

> CDC web site> they ARE doing *human* testing in this manner and it is

> costing lives, and quality of life. The rise in ALL autoimmune

> diseases is alarming, the rise in children now being diagnosed with

> autoimmune disease that *use* to be only adult disease. The CDC has

> already admitted to the vaccine connection and Type 1 autoimmune

> diabetes in children. You can read some good articles and more on

> vaccine ingrediants at www.whale.to . Also, you can read more about

> this issue along with other triggers in Elaine's NEW book,

> Autoimmune Diseases and Their Environmental Triggers, which you can

> order from barnesandnoble.com and is an EXCELLENT book on autoimmune

> diseases.

>

> But human testing? No, I don't think so, it is already causing too

> many problems, especially when this testing is funded by drug

> companies who DO jury rig the outcomes in their favor.

>

> >>>I just read an article in Time (I think) about autism. Towards the

> end of the article, it said that researchers are scrambling to create

> mutant mice for lab experiments.<<<

>

> Curious, did this article speak of the vaccine connection in it also?

> I just got a new post on the Congressional Hearins on vaccines and the

> autism connection along with other complications.

>

> >>>For example, penicillin is toxic to some species but incredibly

> beneficial to humans. Any drug testing on animals must be repeated on

> humans, regardless of the result. People who really need the

> medication could be using it instead of wasting time with animal

> testing.<<<

>

> Penicillin is deadly for me, having already survived anaphalactic

> <sp?> shock from it as a child. Your right, testing must be done on

> humans also, but if testing on animals prevents human death in the

> early stages of research, then I believe it is acceptable for and

> necessary for animal testing to continue.

>

> As for the med's being wasted...there are so many more drugs approved

> for certain treatments in Europe that drug companies are holding up in

> the states after YEARS of so called testing here, that are successful

> but not available to people, even in experimental cases. THIS comes

> down to the all mighty dollar totally and completely, it has nothing

> whatsoever to do with *tests* but it does have to do with wasting

> time and costing lives...all for the love of big business

> and money.

> Take care,

> Jody

[Guest guest]

Pam -

Yes, this drives me nuts, too! My daughter's going to Kindergarten this year

and I have to hustle to get her shots done before August. She just had her

5th birthday (have to be 5 before they'll give those last shots here) and I

called for appt. in early June and the first I could get was first week of

July! Woe to you if you've got an August birthday because all the records

have to be in to school by August 7th. AND on top of this, they've just

changed the stupid vaccination cards from a 3x5 card to an 8x11 card

(statewide thing here - don't know if it's like that in other states), so

the 3x5 one I had been taking to the doc when she got shots is no longer

valid and I have to get the new 8x11 filled out and signed. What a pain! I

just hate any government organization telling me what to do! :-)

RE: Re: the height of paranoia

>Hi Jody, this vaccination thing has been bugging me. Even if you don't want

>your kid to be vaccinated, he has to be in order to go to public school.

>Luke has had about 1/2 of his vaccinations, then they ran out of supply...

>humnnn, maybe they didn't really run out, maybe they have finally realized

>that they are harmful and are planning damage control... LOL, but it could

>be true. I think I am going crazy because I keep thinking these strange

>things, like conspiracy theories, and that maybe I want to sell the house

>and get a little farm where I can grow our own food that is healthy and

>safe, and home schooling, and all these things that are not ME. I used to

be

>the most normal, mainstream person out there. Now I think I'm just out

>there. Well, that is unless I'm right about all these things

>

>:)Pam B. who is probably going crazy and is definitely becoming paranoid,

>even though not pregnant.

>

>

>

>-

>

>

>

>-------------------------------------

>The Graves' list is intended for informational purposes only and is not

intended to replace expert medical care.

>Please consult your doctor before changing or trying new treatments.

>----------------------------------------

> DISCLAIMER

>

>Advertisments placed on this yahoo groups list does not have the

endorsement of

>the listowner. I have no input as to what ads are attached to emails.

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Pam,

The vaccine shortage is either a *money* issue or just exactly what

you said, backing off a bit. All states do have exemptions though,

usually religious or medical, and 18 have philosophocal exemptions. I

know many people who do home school just because of this issue. When

my daughter was pregnant with her second child, there was a Doctor on

a radio call in show, he was the head of the Erie County Health

Department so I called, explained that I have an autoimmune disease,

that there is a history in 3 generations of autoimmune diseases in my

family and asked him if or when should my grandchild be vaccinated and

is autoimmune disease a factor in this. He stated that he should NOT

even begin vaccinations before age 2, preferably age 3, after his

immune system had fully developed. And that anyone who has a history

of autoimmune diseases in their direct family, parents, siblings,

aunts, uncles or grandparents this should be the common practice.

Keep in mind this doctor is very pro vaccine, was getting beat up on

with a lot of calls from those that are totally anti-vaccine, he feels

vaccines are totally safe for the majority, but when autoimmune

disease is present in the family, they should not begin before those

ages stated above. I still have the tape of that radio show and my

question and his answer....just need to find it. I was flabbergasted

at his answer though, so for us, each of us, as well as our children,

vaccines and when/if they are given does need to be taken into

consideration.

Jody

> Hi Jody, this vaccination thing has been bugging me. Even if you

don't want

> your kid to be vaccinated, he has to be in order to go to public

school.

> Luke has had about 1/2 of his vaccinations, then they ran out of

supply...

> humnnn, maybe they didn't really run out, maybe they have finally

realized

> that they are harmful and are planning damage control... LOL, but it

could

> be true. I think I am going crazy because I keep thinking these

strange

> things, like conspiracy theories, and that maybe I want to sell the

house

> and get a little farm where I can grow our own food that is healthy

and

> safe, and home schooling, and all these things that are not ME. I

used to be

> the most normal, mainstream person out there. Now I think I'm just

out

> there. Well, that is unless I'm right about all these things

>

> :)Pam B. who is probably going crazy and is definitely becoming

paranoid,

> even though not pregnant.

>

>

>

> -

[Guest guest]

In a message dated Thu, 27 Jun 2002 8:37:32 PM Eastern Standard Time,

luckystrike@... writes:

> states do have exemptions though,

> usually religious or medical, and 18 have philosophocal

> exemptions

Jody,

Do these exemptions allow children to go to public school without being

vaccinated?

Tori

[Guest guest]

Hi Tori,

Yes, once the exemption is in, they are fully allowed to attend public

schools without vaccines. I will try to find the site that lists most

states exemptions laws for you. If I don't locate it tomorrow, it

will be after I come back on the 6th...though I will try hard.

If you would like to read more on this issue, e-mail me off the list

and I will send you some url's where you can begin reading to form

your own opinion on vaccines. In the near future I predict it is

going to be one of the hot topics on the nightly news, these new

congressional hearings are heating up...Thank you Congressman

Burton!!!

Jody

> In a message dated Thu, 27 Jun 2002 8:37:32 PM Eastern Standard

Time, luckystrike@h... writes:

>

> > states do have exemptions though,

> > usually religious or medical, and 18 have philosophocal

> > exemptions

>

> Jody,

>

> Do these exemptions allow children to go to public school without

being vaccinated?

>

> Tori