OT is JT OK?

So would I. I should have made it clear that is a conclusion on my part but not without basis. In one text which I consider fairly comprehensive on th e subject, at least for about 22 minerals, a recurring phrase is "content d epends on the soil in which it is grown". Another piece of supportive fact is that they have to give livestock supplements or they die. They are eatin g the same species of grass or grain as their ancestors 100 years ago, back then they could live on it and now they can't.

Real data are hard to come by on this subject. There are doubts about the m orality of double blind testing because then you have to purposely make one of the groups sick. Same reason they don't test vaccines much, well to see if they kill you, but not for efficacy. They also can't get a really accur ate picture with blood work because the for the most part, minerals don't b elong in the blood. (permanently anyway)

Oh, and I meant to respond to something you wrote but I was on the way out the door to the jobsite - I do not think fluoride is bad for you. However t hat does not give them the right to put it in the water supply. They could give it out in packets or something people could stick in their drink IF TH EY CHOOSE TO. The stuff is a waste product anyway. There is also the slight possibility of someone who already gets more than enough fluoride getting fluoroses. Also it DOES stunt neural growth, or something like that but onl y in massive quantities.

The benefits are only proven statistically, not the most empirical data to say the least. The adverse effects are usually not enough to worry about, b ut what if they found that ground up peanuts save lives, and improve health and lower the cost of healthcare to society, they should force it on every one ? The people who have extreme allergies to peanuts can just go f*ck the mselves or what ?

Their job is to purify the water so it is potable, not try to develop a fou ntain of youth or any of that shit. Sodium fluoride does nothing to that en d and therefore DOES NOT BELONG IN THE PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY.

Doesn't matter if it is good or bad. I'm paying for water, I want water.

I really don't like discussing topics like this with you, but I hate seeing you post stuff that is basically drivel. It becomes a great deal of work to find proof of this and you never believe any of it anyway. Part of the problem is your posts are so long with so much wrong.

ut not without basis.

I should have known.

t for about 22 minerals, a recurring phrase is "content depends on the soil in which it is grown". Another piece of supportive fact is that they have to give livestock supplements or they die. They are eating the same species of grass or grain as their ancestors 100 years ago, back then they could l ive on it and now they can't.

Clearly you have not looked into this at any length. The hay they feed hor ses is a limited combination of plants that are easily grown by the farmers . There are a number of different types of hay with different nutrition. Typically the type of hay fed to horses depends on what is best for the far mer to grow and harvest at that time. When horses ran free they weren't li mited to the nearly mono-culture they are fed now. They do get supplements in the form of oats, barley, molasses and other things as you say because the hay "grass" is not the same as their diet in the wild.

You assign too much importance to that phrase about the soil. Of course if a soil has little of a given mineral there won't be as much in the plant a s in a soil that is rich in that mineral. That does not equate to a crop g rown in the soil not being nutritious. Unless you can show me some studies that clearly indicate widely varying levels of essential nutrients, I can' t believe a tomato grown today that tastes good, is not a good source of nu trients. There are tomatoes that are developed for ease of shipping and co nsist of much more connective materials and less of the fleshy parts, but t hese taste bad and are no longer sold as much.

morality of double blind testing because then you have to purposely make o ne of the groups sick. Same reason they don't test vaccines much, well to s ee if they kill you, but not for efficacy. They also can't get a really acc urate picture with blood work because the for the most part, minerals don't belong in the blood. (permanently anyway)

Both of those are pretty much nonsense. While studies can't ethically make people sick in any serious way, they can withhold treatment to some extent . Many studies have started out with a control group receiving a placebo. Then when early data is analyzed they find such a pronounced effect they d ecide it is not ethical to withhold a treatment that clearly works! Even s o, this is irrelevant. They know what the important nutrients are and can just measure their content in food. Your claim is really about the food, s o measure it.

Minerals in the blood should be a perfectly good measure of the body's nutr ient content. All nutrition gets to the rest of the body through the blood stream. So why wouldn't it accurately reflect the nutrient levels in the body? Saying things like "minerals don't belong in the blood" is completel y without value in issues of nutrition.

t the door to the jobsite - I do not think fluoride is bad for you. However that does not give them the right to put it in the water supply. They coul d give it out in packets or something people could stick in their drink IF THEY CHOOSE TO. The stuff is a waste product anyway. There is also the slig ht possibility of someone who already gets more than enough fluoride gettin g fluoroses. Also it DOES stunt neural growth, or something like that but o nly in massive quantities.

Yes, fluoride is a poison in sufficient quantities which isn't really very much. But there are essential nutrients that are the same way! The dose o f fluoride in water is very low compared to toxic levels.

As to the issue of putting it in the water, why single out fluoride? They also add chlorine and other things. Chlorine combines with the organic com pounds to produce known carcinogens and this is a significant issue in publ ic drinking water. However, the down side from not using it is disease fro m organisms in the water. Likewise fluoridation has some astronomically lo w risk with a downside from not using it of rotting teeth.

o say the least. The adverse effects are usually not enough to worry about, but what if they found that ground up peanuts save lives, and improve heal th and lower the cost of healthcare to society, they should force it on eve ryone ? The people who have extreme allergies to peanuts can just go f*ck t hemselves or what ?

Huh? What do you mean statistically? All studies are statistical in that the results are considered to be statistically significant or not. I think you are misconstruing something you have been told, or they misrepresented it.

Peanuts aside, what problems have you had, known anyone who had, or found r eliable reports of anyone who had health issues from fluoridation of the pu blic drinking water?

ountain of youth or any of that shit. Sodium fluoride does nothing to that end and therefore DOES NOT BELONG IN THE PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY.

So you don't mind a few organic halides, but something that is harmless lik e fluoride is too much? Why the bug up your butt about fluoride exactly? Forget all the pseudo-science. What prompted this paranoia about fluoride?

Rick C.

coffee alert!

eg: Venus flytrap.

:)

I don't know of any that absrob it from the atmosphere, but there's a lot I don't know about Botany.

ote:

ail.com:

ation is of no value. Ask them for the basis for their belief, it's truly c lueless. "

d they told me that plants can get the nutrients right from the air.

erals very very little.

rom the air for most plants. That is why nitrogen fixation is so important . A few plants do it and lightning supplies some. The rest of the plants must get fixed nitrogen from the soil.

s two men to the rabbi to settle a dispute. The rabbi listens to the first man patiently, reflects and says, "Yes, you are right." The assistant say s, "But rabbi, you haven't heard the other man yet." So the other man tell s his side of the dispute with the rabbi listening intently and when the ma n is done the rabbi says, "Yes, you are right!"

rabbi, they can't both be right!!!" The rabbi replies, "Yes, you are rig ht."

get it frmo the soil, a percentage get it from other nitrogen fixing plant s. Are you really claiming to be unaware of that?

Wow. They're called nitrogen fixing.

NT

So has anyone heard anything from JT? We've been arguing in his honor for a while now with no word.

Rick C.

That's saying something since you must disagree with him about 80 % of the time.

I got his phone number, mI can't seem to set this thing to use my web based email, it want Outlook Express, and even though I got real Outlook. But I just use the web for email. So the envelope icon on his website does me no good.

He's old, I doubt he has a shop and I would bet he works from home. What the hell does he need a shop for if he knows his shit is going to work ?

The phone number is supposedly 480-460-2350 but it doesn't seem to work.

That dosent sound like the Jim we know. He usually has things working. The Email link is an encrypted address that gets decoded by another web site. I see 'Aaron David Thompson' in the html. I don't know where he is from but I believe that's one of his sons.

I do hope he is ok, but as time goes on....

Cheers

e:

gmail.com:

ntation is of no value. Ask them for the basis for their belief, it's truly clueless. "

and they told me that plants can get the nutrients right from the air.

ion

inerals very very little.

from the air for most plants. That is why nitrogen fixation is so importa nt. A few plants do it and lightning supplies some. The rest of the plant s must get fixed nitrogen from the soil.

ngs two men to the rabbi to settle a dispute. The rabbi listens to the fir st man patiently, reflects and says, "Yes, you are right." The assistant s ays, "But rabbi, you haven't heard the other man yet." So the other man te lls his side of the dispute with the rabbi listening intently and when the man is done the rabbi says, "Yes, you are right!"

ut rabbi, they can't both be right!!!" The rabbi replies, "Yes, you are r ight."

at get it frmo the soil, a percentage get it from other nitrogen fixing pla nts. Are you really claiming to be unaware of that?

They don't actually fix the nitrogen themselves, so they don't get it from the air. They get it from the microbes they encourage to colonize their ro ot system in nodules. We call the plants nitrogen fixing because the farme r doesn't care who is responsible. If the plant made a phone call and had fertilizer delivered it would be the same result, but the plant wouldn't be any more or less nitrogen fixing.

Rick C.

for a while now with no word. "

e time.

Yeah, I disagree with friends and we are still friends. I don't actually l ike JT - because of the way he feels about people. He is one of the few pe ople I've met who I believe genuinely hate many people he has never met. H e seems to classify people into broad categories and considers everyone in each category to be identical. Hence the way he tries to demean people on the left. He seems to believe they all think exactly alike and are out to take advantage of him if not outright harm him.

But that is no reason to wish him harm other than perhaps political unhappi ness. Maybe that is a difference between you and myself.

Rick C.

ote:

.@gmail.com:

mentation is of no value. Ask them for the basis for their belief, it's tru ly clueless. "

d and they told me that plants can get the nutrients right from the air.

ation

minerals very very little.

me from the air for most plants. That is why nitrogen fixation is so impor tant. A few plants do it and lightning supplies some. The rest of the pla nts must get fixed nitrogen from the soil.

rings two men to the rabbi to settle a dispute. The rabbi listens to the f irst man patiently, reflects and says, "Yes, you are right." The assistant says, "But rabbi, you haven't heard the other man yet." So the other man tells his side of the dispute with the rabbi listening intently and when th e man is done the rabbi says, "Yes, you are right!"

"But rabbi, they can't both be right!!!" The rabbi replies, "Yes, you are right."

that get it frmo the soil, a percentage get it from other nitrogen fixing p lants. Are you really claiming to be unaware of that?

m the air. They get it from the microbes they encourage to colonize their root system in nodules. We call the plants nitrogen fixing because the far mer doesn't care who is responsible. If the plant made a phone call and ha d fertilizer delivered it would be the same result, but the plant wouldn't be any more or less nitrogen fixing.

yeees. In the same sense that we don't make wine, the yeast does. But for p ractical purposes we say we make it. What a waste of time.

Indeed. Same as we say Christopher Wren built St. Paul's. Like f*ck he did!

-- This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

He was the architect, not the builder, and supervised the construction. Anybody who said that he built the place would be guilty of expressing themselves imprecisely.

MDs tend to a) be overworked, and b) have egos like most other people and don't like being wrong much more than anyone else does.

In extreme cases you end up with tragedies like this one:

IME most have egos well beyond reasonable.

the request to subscribe? no loss. Tragedies due to medical hubris are routine.

NT

Don't know about "most". Some of the specialists I go to have a superiority complex but most act like regular guys who are good at what they do (would you go to a wishy-washy doctor?). One surgeon was quite annoying but I wasn't there for small talk. I wanted the best surgeon, not dancing partner. The PCPs I've gone to are split between "regular, and quite interesting people" and "dumb as a rock" but mostly just bored. One was a really nice guy but we had to leave him because he moved into concierge medicine. Obamacare forced him into it.

Especially with surgeons!

-- This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

Obamcare didn't compel any medico to do anything.

It did make some forms of medical practice more profitable than others.

What krw could have said - if he were less intellectually challenged - that Obamacare bribed his PCP into moving into concierge medicine. The fact that this let him off having krw as a patient might have contributed too.

I think we can lay to rest the argument about "nitrogen fixing plants" that "get nitrogen from the air". They get it from colonies of bacteria that they house, rather than from their own cells. Hopefully we can all agree that this is what happens, and the terminology is not hugely important.

But what do you mean that "Of the ones that get it from the soil, a percentage get it from other nitrogen fixing plants" ? That makes it sound like there are some plants that require nitrogen fixing plants (beans, clover, etc.) as their source of nitrogen, while others get it elsewhere.

Do you simply mean that nitrogen fixing plants are one source of soil nitrogen, but not the only source? If so, you are correct. The main natural sources are soil bacteria and archaea, with a small amount from NOx created by lightning.

I'm sure we've all heard of planting N fixers with nonfixers. This is all too basic to need any discussion isn't it.