gfp

THAT IS SOOOOOOO FUNNY! It's true. The more informed you appear, the better your grammar and the more succinct you are the more likely they are to take you seriously. I found that out years ago, having to write letters to physicians defending my findings and my patient assessment. With regard to the president, the smaller the words, the better! (Sorry, I was a W fan the first time, but after a couple of years in THAT presidency, began to wane in my belief in him. Now . . . don't ask.)

Its very true, even things like handwriting make a big difference (I'd be lost without a computer).

It doesn't matter here but if you are going to write a letter to a TV programme (how do you spell that in the US?) .. then they are going to decide on your "intellegence" from that letter.

Having both dyslexia and terrible handwriting I found this out the hard way.

Also people seem less able to spell correctly when they are passionate about something.

I used to have to see lots of CV's... and people most regularly make mistakes in areas they are passionate about.. like sports and hobbies ... My personal favorite was selecting the ones who made mistakes in professional experience because then I had a good chance they were passionate about their job.

However for some reason, with all their training HR departments seem to discriminate against spelling mistakes... you'd have thought they would catch on..I personally used to hire them or certainly get them in for an interview and I found they were equally passionate about those subjects at an interview...

and as some of you may of noticed, being succinct is not my style!

Right, that's why I think it would be difficult. That and I agree with you about "Irish" or "Spanish" or whatever ethnic group. Hadn't thought about it too much until I started doing geneaology and seeing this for first hand.

I'm more interested in tracing the gene back than any specific ethnic group. Problem is that we need the genes of all those dead folks to do this right and I'm pretty sure that isn't going to happen.

This gene has more to do with natural selection (I'm guessing) than being a group of folks with the same ethnicity (sp).

Mike

Geneaology only tells half the story because it only shows what is told to the family or is written on a birth certificate whereas genetics have shown a significant percentage of women lie about the true father of their children.

Even in gross cases where the child is going to look nothing like the father for instance there is a huge difference in the incidence of Rh -ve in American 'blacks' (7%) than African (9 people in 10,000) and many of these people regard and believe themselves as 100% black! Obviously they are not...and we are only talking a few generations here and the fact that 45-50% of Europeans have a RHD silent allele. Of course the native Americans have a very low RHD so perhaps that might provide a clue or dilution at double strength however the Asian-Native American allele is different to the European one so if you can get the DNA then you can find out....

As mentioned in North Africa the Berbers are very proud of their pure blood yet it is virtually unknown to find one without significant Arab and East African blood.... and the North African Arabs are equally proud to be pure Arab ... and again its virtually unknown to find one without Berber and east African blood.

and finally.........

There is lots of DNA of dead folks ... don't worry.

Gluten has to be ingested to cause a reaction if you are a Celiac. If you have a gluten allergy, you may react to topical gluten.

If you breath in particulate gluten then you are swallowing it. This is the whole purpose of the cilia and trachea to trap particulate matter in the mucous and transfer it to the trachea to be swallowed.

However perfumes are full of allergens. Before I went gluten-free I couldn't even stand outside a department store without streaming eyes and headaches, now I can run through one quickly... also my IgE allergy to Lavendar has decreased significantly.... which is I think linked.

Though I'm sure it'd be difficult I wonder if anyone has tried following the gene back in time to see where it might have come from. My guess is that it probably came from multiple sources/locations.

I have some thoughts on why this gene survived in my blog from this site.

Mike

Well this certainly won't happen while people keep referring to themselves as a certain race ....just because they are told this.

Even today with contraception 1:25 children is not the child of their presumed father. I'm sure it was a lot more in the past. People are adamant the world over thay they are of a "pure race" wheras genetic testing shows this is almost non existant.

There is no Irish race.... you cannot be genetically Irish or Indian for that matter.

Well I feel fine so they must have been okay. They said at the bottom of the indredients contains soy, and the only other thing was natural flavor. My poor mom thought she glutened me, lol. I had to call her and let her know I was feeling fine and not to feel bad. I looked at some brands on the net, and most of them do, but some don't. All the veggie ones are gluten-free.

I usually take the lists of other allergens as a good sign.

I also heard the 50% complaince rate in the US at a seminar. In my case it was pretty cut and dried as I had a positive Dx in a short time of treatment for my symptoms. Whether or not I adhere to the diet was strictly up to me. Someone correct me if I am wrong but did I not hear or read that 97% of those persons with Celiac Disease have not been diagnosed yet? I think there is a equal amount of blame to go to the doctor and the patient. I can't tell you the number of times I had a conversation with someone about my diet and the most common response was either "I don't have that" or " I could never do that diet". I have yet to meet the first person who would even say it "might" be what is wrong with them. How many times would a doctor have to tell the same person to change their diet before they just give up and start agreeing with the patient. I have a question about the average visit by a person to their family doctor. If you waited outside a doctor's office and could ask the patient when he/she went in if they wanted a prescription drug when they left what do you think they would say? I vote that the reason they were there to begin with was to get something they think would cure them. I don't think that answer would include a lifestyle change. The only reason the drug companies are making so much money is the same reason the oil compaines are so rich. The demand is out of sight. I have to admit since I have been on this diet the majority of persons I have met through my support group and this website are compliant with this lifestyle. I have said this before and I will say it again that anyone who was smart enough to find this website and ask questions should be smart enough and willing enough to give this diet a chance. If it doesn't work they can always go back to the medical profession. I truly believe if more people took the advice of doctors to change their diet more doctors might start suggesting it sooner.

Tom

An interesting perspective and I largely mostly agree.

However... I think the problem is also that MD's talk to people as if they are idiots.

Last time I saw one Dr. (for anti-histamines) she asked me how I was and I said not so good because I'd been glutened and she asks if I had eaten a cake or something by mistake.

I mean do I look that stupid? I guess so....

Wheras she has the arrogance to display her certificates on the wall and be addressed Dr. I don't bother because practically everyone I work with has a doctorate and even putting it on a business card would be extremely pretentious.

If Dr's spoke to patients like adults instead of like learning challenged children then some of the patients might take more notice.

Ok,

This is weird... its OT but

Open Original Shared Link

Belgian town bans school French

A school in Belgium.

Belgium's regions enjoy a wide degree of educational autonomy

The mayor of Merchtem in Belgium has defended a ban on speaking French in the town's schools.

Note this isn't in class, this on on the school premises....

I believe it applies to Canada as well.

I believe the same but I alsways think caution is better

Well I hope it works I am 23 and was diagnosed 5 yrs ago and I just did a report on it because I am in med school and you are right no one ever knows what it is... I am thinking about writing someone because the prices for gluten free food is rediculous...

Make sure you use a spell checker or they are unlikely to take you seriously, unless you still intend to write to the president in which case use small words but don't worry about spelling.

Most bouillion cubes seem to have gluten ...and if not dodgy labelling...

I only buy ones saying gluten free.

There's no doubt that many, perhaps even most, people will not change their diet and rely on drugs and accept that they're going to cut about 18 years off their life. But... if it were me, I'd want to know about ALL my options and not telling me that I could manage my diet and be drug free would really stink. Because they're operating under the assumption I'm too dumb or weak willed to manage my diet. I'm neither.

Even worse IMHO, much of this diabetes could be prevented in the first place if someone had to huevos to talk about the starchy sugar stuff people are eating is causing it.

Doll, I could point you to a bunch of people that have gotten off or reduced dramatically their drugs for managing their Type II through diet. There's a support forum I frequent where this story is played out time and time again.

The point is even worse.

Dr.s are now choosing not to tell diabetics to contro sugar or lose weight (depending I or II)

Its already been decided that screening downs kids is not worth it because of the inconvienience and "cost" of a gluten-free diet...

asthmatics in the US are being denied certain drugs because they are taken though inhalers and are instead given IV solutions due to the large fund paying to stop inhaler products being legislated even though the same drugs are available in europe in inhaler form

ADHD kids are given ritalin like candy..

I could go on but....

So can we eat it???? If we don't have corn intolerance.

If you are in the US then yes....

If you are elsewhere then it depends what it is made from.

Maltodextrin is made from corn.

This only applies to the US, elsewhere it is made from barley or wheat... or more or less any starchy vegetable.

The "malt" in the word is a misnomer and has nothing to do with malt at all.

That depends, malting is the process of allowing a cereal to geminate and then drying it .

They are formed by enzymatic degradation of starch by certain bacteria, for example Bacillus macerans.

I don't want to bring up conspiracy theories, but I do agree that Big Pharma and drug prescriptions are more prominent than I would like. But, while I agree kids shouldn't be handed Prozac like candy, it's ridiculous to say that a drug meant to correct the problem found in autoimmune diseases is not beneficial.

The point is ranitidine was beneficial but it was also engineered NOT to cure.

It is designed as a drug to be dependant upon.

The reason it became the worlds best selling drug was marketing....

They put it in a different colored packet....they targetted a disorder that is found in a large number of the population etc. etc.

and when someone came up with a cure they did everything possible including threats and bribary to prevent the cure being accepted.

This is not a conspiracy theory, it is well documented.

i found an interesting read here

Open Original Shared Link

There is a whole conspiracy side to this which I didn't bring up in that apparently (and according to Austrailian intellegence services) glaxo actually hired people to intimidate Warren and Mitchell ... to phone them and tell them they are watching their kids and make threats on their lives...

This however it is still in the realms of conspiracy theory.

So I think that if the president were to get enough letters from Celiac patients about the costly prices of gluten free foods that maybe he would lower them... Who is with me on this one?? It is rediculous and outrageous.. I go to the store and when I get to the health food section I get so furious.

The cost of food is set by two things, the market and the cost of producing it.

Most people eat rubbish... to start off with so the whole system is geared to producing cheap rubbish. This is just capitalism and I really don't expect your president to do anything he see's as anti-Capitalist.

There is a much larger debate which I don't really want to get into over what exactly Capitalism is... put simply we could say capitalism (small c) is an economic system largely as defined by Adam Smith in his treatise wealth of nations. Capitalism (large C) however is a more recent phenomenom, one could apply to the US where Capitalism is not seen merely as an economic system but as a polito-social system as well.

The point is that Capitalism simply promotes the most efficient way of the means of production but the means of production covers everything from raw materials though transport and sale and the most efficent way to do this is to own all the stages and to provide the minimum possible quality.

If you relate this to food then it is simply the lowest quality of food on which most people don't die quickly.

This means the most efficient way of producing chicken is in battery's, pumping them full of chemicals and feeding them whatever is cheapest and promotes the fastest growth rate. The cheapest method will always be used because most people want the cheapest hence the quality manufacturers will not be able to compete with the profit margins that the lowest quality manufacturers have.

On top of this you have the practice of political lobbying. The large corporations pay to have legislation set in their favor. An example of this is quality control of things that only happen in a low quality production environment. We can use chickens again....

If chickens are put in batteries then basically they stand in their own faeces all day, the burns you see on the legs of battery chickens are their own waste ...however they still produce eggs of a kind.

If you take a free range egg then there is no need to cook it so long as it is fresh and uncracked. You can make mayo or sorbet from the egg.

If on the other hand you take a battery egg then it has been covered in excrement from an unhealthy chicken and generally treated unhygenically but much cheaper.

Since the statement I made concerns most people not dying quickly and food poisioning from contaminated eggs can kill quickly then legislation happens BUT it doesn't happen only for the battery eggs because they are rich enoufgh to pay off polititians to make sure it goes across the board, otherwise the battery industry would lose some of its competitive advantage over the free range eggs.

Hence free range eggs need to be pasturised as well to be used....

Now it doesn't matter if we are talking Peanuts or Fruit .... very few presidents are likely to be concerned about something that minimises the profit of the peanut king or the fruit king.... (if you can't guess who I'm talking about then just stop and think)

The US political system is designed (specifically) so that only the independently wealthy can be elected to power and the way to be independently wealthy is to own a monopoly or near monopoly, be that fruit or peanuts.

Additionally getting into power is also so expensive that you need support that you pay back later so noone gets elected without a debt to the other fabulously rich who donated.

Anyway the point is you can only sell so much Fresh fruit, mango's and pineapples don't grow in NY state... so the most effcient way of preserving it is pack it full of chemicals and stick it in a tin or packet.

It is possibly a sad reflection that the most healthy thing average american is likely to eat i a day is tinned or packaged fruit. Average is important because this is where the largest market is.

The point is you don't see small producers or farmers owning free range farmers who are billionaires... but you do see producers owning mass prodcing farms and the who distribtion process being free range.

The only ways to address this balance is if enough people stop buying rubbish OR government intervention.

I don't see the first one happening....people don't want to even know how their food is made and what is added (we are a tiny exception)

The government intervention is against everything the US stands for.... if people buy it then they should have it (so long as it is made in the US and isn't drugs) .. and it seems what most people want is the basic food elements in a microwavable packet.

If you look at a country like France where I live then the government helps to support small farms and food manufacturers but they do this by intervention and all food on the whole costs a bit more than the US.

However French supermarkets sell well over 50% Free Range chickens and eggs....not to mention every other product. Fresh vegetable markets are common in Paris everyday ... indeed their are 20-30 daily fresh produce markets in Paris daily but this is not efficient, its much more efficient to have a single producer who owns the haulage companies and takes them direct to a warehouse for distribution to supermarkets.

Well I do wash all my produce very well, I just happen to think that organic is better then chemicals. They know for a fact that many pesticides can damage your DNA, I don't think that is true with manure related fertilizers.

This is pretty much my view. Besides a little e. coli is not such a bad thing every so often. The worst I ever had was in Africa when I had typhoid ... yep it sure sucks but I did get over it and that is almost as extreme a form of food poisioning as you can get.

But yes with just about anything you can find something wrong with it too much sun you get cancer, too much water you drown.... I think regardless of which you eat you should wash them all with care. They are all touched by people (kids) at the grocery store, some fall on the floor, etc. I don't know of anyone that picks them up and just eats them!

Yeah I know.... its weird you see people avoiding the potato that got dropped...its a potato... it was covered in earth and has been rolled around warehouses and wherever... get over it and wash it before you eat it!

I'm only speaking for myself, but finding out about things like wax or manure doesn't scare the hell out of me, it just makes me handle them or prepare them differently, not only am I concerned with gluten-free and my food allergies but good health in general.

I guess I don't scare very easily.

Em true but I do find it disturbing they add candida to citrus fruits (to fight bacteria) and a few other really noixious things.

Back in the 1960's polititians were eating DDT in chunks to prove its safety.... now we know better.

Susan

First, I want to say thank you to all of the people who have given me their support and prayers. I hope you all are blessed for your kindness. As far as all the conversations about discrediting the expert witness and just focusing on getting my baby back...you both are right. I have to go to court being as nice and pleasant as possible and agree to certain terms and conditions, for even though I know I did nothing wrong, right now they are calling all of the shots. I can't take a chance in losing my daughter by not agreeing to cooperate.

Yes cooperate but make sure you do so with a lawyer present.

At the same time, I have to work at finding the faults of this doctor so when I go into the court room I can give the judge good reason as to why she should not believe this doctor, but to believe me. I am just a nobody in this situation with this so called wonderful doctor testifying against me......who do you think the judge will believe. But, if I can show the judge that this doctor's character is not all that grand, then I bring her to my level and I stand a better chance of being the credible witness! I do not believe in revenge, but I do believe in doing what is right, and I will fight to make sure this does not happen to anyone else. Thanks for everything you guys!!! I will never give up on my daughter!! I will fight to the end!

Just to say, its your lawyers job (and that of your expert witnesses) to actually do that in court .... I know you know that but its important you think like that.

In other words you don't need to discuss the medical facts, that is your expert witness.

You don't need to bring up previous trails where the expert witness has been discredited, that is your lawyer...

So yes you are as pleasant and nice as possible, its the lawyers job to be as scathing and incisive as possible!

What you can do is dig about and try and find things your expert witness and lawyer can use.

Remember, this is your life but only their job....

The earlier you present things to your lawyer the earlier you know if he/she can use them and the less time you waste on dead ends but also because of the nature of this type of hearing the court records will be protected so your lawyer will need time to subpoena them.

One thing I learned from a very good lawyer who is a friend of a friend and very well known in France was when I told him my problem the first thing he asked me is "How far will you go?" .....

Now admitedily I was the plaintif in this but that doesn't really matter... the same applies.

If you are squabling with a neighbour over a tree is completely different to fighing for your child!

Perhaps your lawyer presumes you will do whatever it takes but all I'm saying is to admit this to yourself..

If your lawyer suggests getting dirty and this might end up with someone losing their job then be prepared....

I do not believe in revenge, but I do believe in doing what is right, and I will fight to make sure this does not happen to anyone else.

The time to do that is afterwards....

Any "dirty tricks" your lawyer uses now should be for one thing only.... getting back your child!

After you have your child back then you can help others and one of the best ways is by sharing information...and giving your time.

As someone whom was on the receiving end of someone determined to seperate me from my parents I might have a different viewpoint. As it happens my father was not and still is not a very touchy-feely person at all but it irks me to think how close I was to being taken into care by one person with all the power.

Hence, I am giving you my time.....

Glad to see you back!

Hope the articles I linked to weren't too heavy!

How about doing a BLOG... loads of free ones... use it as a food diary.

That way its really easy to share and ask questions on what you ate etc.

Ok, so I'm doing a biology research paper, and I thought what better to write about than this! So I wanted to know if anyone could give me links to good/interesting/informative links to articles about celiac disease. I want more than the basics, I've got those down cold. I just need some info on research and the technical stuff, maybe genetic theory, etc. Any help would be great! Thanks a bunch!!!

The largest collection I have seen anywhere is

Open Original Shared Link

If you live in a flouridised area then a non flouride one and if not one with.

Good point about the diet, but I think that the stance that many doctors will take is that it may be actually HEALTHIER and not just convenient for Celics to take the pill, because they will still be prone to another autoimmune diseases and intolerances if they don't. Just as we seem to be on the gluten-free diet.

Many of us on the gluten-free diet still have these problems, so the gluten-free diet in and of itself is not a "cure" for all Celiacs. I think this will benefit these people the most.

I also think that the gluten-free diet will always be around because of the interest in "natural" medicine and treatment through dietary means. I just don't think it is the most effective treatment for many Celiacs, in my opinion.

Doctors will prescribe the pill because they get gifts from the drug companies.

Doctors will write letters to medical journals saying the gluten-free diet is costly and ineffective...because drug companies pay them to do so.

This is the world we live in.

A zonulin blocker is a perfect drug.... for a drug company. It is a drug for life just like ranitidine for ulcer patients.

In the time between Warren and Mitchell discovering and publishing Helicobacter pylori and its eventual acceptance most dr's continued to prescribe ranitidine and NOT anitibiotics.

Many Dr's were paid to write to medical journals to discredit the work ....

Medical journals were threatened by glaxo that if they covered Helicobacter pylori in a positive way they would suspend their advertsing...

If you research ranitidine you will find two distinct trends....

Its obvious link to ulcers and its use in MBa programs as an example of a incredibly effective advertising campaign.

or

Open Original Shared Link

How Xantac became the best selling drug in history.

Meanwhile thousands died of complications from ulcers that were curable.

Again I can only offer my advice. Simply, my advice is that you get your children back. Work with the system to do this. Time will pass, you will lose your parental rights and all of your energy would of been put in the wrong place. You can save that battle for another day. Focus on getting your child/children back.

Destroying the credibility of what the court has already deemed an expert witness will take too long in the short time you are given to reunify with your children. Focus on what is important and that is the return of your children.

Best of luck

The deemed expert witness is an "expert witness" in a syndrome invented by a paeodtrician who has since be stripped of his MD!

"There is no evidence that cot deaths runs in families", said Meadow, "but there is plenty of evidence that child abuse does".

Whereas there is a whole load of evidence cot deaths are genetic.

Meadow's 73,000,000:1 statistic was paraded in the popular press, and provoked an uproar amongst professional statisticians who considered it dangerously over-simplistic. The president of the Royal Statistical Society wrote an open letter of complaint to the Lord Chancellor, stating that the figure had "no statistical basis".

The criticisms were twofold: Firstly, Meadow was accused of applying the so-called prosecutor's fallacy in which the probability of "cause given effect" (i.e. the true likelihood of a suspect's innocence) is confused with that of "effect given cause" (the likelihood that innocence will result in the observed double-cot-death). In reality, these quantities can only be equated when the a priori likelihood of the alternate hypothesis, in this case murder, is close to certainty. Murder (especially double murder) is itself a rare event, whose probability must be weighed against that of the null hypothesis (natural death).

The second criticism concerned the ecological fallacy: Meadow's calculation had assumed that the cot death probability within any single family was the same as the aggregate ratio of cot deaths to births for the entire affluent-non-smoking population. No account had been taken of conditions specific to individual families (such as the hypothesised cot death gene) which might make some more vulnerable than others. The occurrence of one cot-death makes it likely that such conditions exist within the family in question, and the probability of subsequent deaths is therefore greater than the group average (estimates are mostly in the region of 1:100).

Some mathematicians have estimated that taking both these factors into account, the true odds may have been greater than 2:1 in favour of Clark's innocence (Joyce, 2002). The perils of allowing non-statisticians to present unsound statistical arguments were expressed in a British Medical Journal (BMJ) editorial by Stephen Watkins, Director of Public Health for Stockport, claiming that "defendants deserve the same protection as patients"

Lord Howe described MSbP as "one of the most pernicious and ill-founded theories to have gained currency in childcare and social services in the past 10 to 15 years. It is a theory without science. There is no body of peer-reviewed research to underpin MSbP. It rests instead on the assertions of its inventor. When challenged to produce his research papers to justify his original findings, the inventor of MSBP stated, if you please, that he had destroyed them".

It was the destruction of the credibility of the expert witness that allowed several a not guilty verdict....

and this discredited ex-Dr. is the one who invented MSbP so the expert witness is an expert witness in a case of a syndrome invented by someone who has no credibility.

The reason this is so important is because the expert witness gives opinion not fact.

The expert witness says what in theirt opinion is likley or unlikely and by the nature of being an expert witness the "facts" they base this on are not required to be proven. It is up the the defense to question the validity or not of these "facts"...

Presently the current prima-donna of MSbP in NYS is the ex-prima-donna of SBS...Debra Esernio-Jenssen and spent most of her life studying lead poisioning..

Open Original Shared Link

Statements in the medical literature that perimacular retinal folds are diagnostic of shaken baby syndrome are not supported by objective scientific evidence. Non-comparative observational reports and unsystematic narrative review articles contain insufficient evidence to provide unbiased support for or against diagnostic specificity, and inferences about associations, causal or otherwise, cannot be determined. Clinical and autopsy evidence of ocular lesions must therefore be considered alongside other physical findings and a thorough investigation before concluding whether a head injury is caused by abuse. The child in our case had ocular haemorrhages (peripheral retinal, optic nerve sheath and intrascleral) and retinoschisis, which again some people consider specific for child abuse. Unfortunately, the evidence for these assumptions has similar problems to that for perimacular retinal folds. An evidence based analyis of indexed medical publications on shaken baby syndrome from 1966-1998 uncovered a weak scientific evidence base.11 Selection bias, inappropriate controls, and the lack of precise criteria for case definition were identified as important problems with the data. Many studies committed a fallacy of assumption, selecting cases by the presence of the clinical findings that were sought as diagnostically valid. Unsystematic reviews and consensus statements often mingled opinion with facts and added no original supporting evidence.

Perimacular retinal folds are associated with increased neurological morbidity and mortality in infants and children with abusive head injuries.6 The reported incidence of perimacular retinal folds in shaken baby syndrome varies from 6% in a consecutive clinical case series to 50% in a sequential autopsy case series.5 12 Clinical and autopsy studies with appropriately matched controls are needed to determine the causal mechanism of perimacular retinal folds and their specificity for abusive head injury. Until good evidence is available, we urge caution in interpreting eye findings out of context.

and the answer

Debra D. Esernio-Jenssen,

Director Child Protection Center

Schneider Children's Hospital

There are several important historical, social and developmental history that was not delineated in this case report. Nor were admission laboratory values, radiographs, and physical examination noted, as well as more details about the child's hospital course. There also was no mention of existing literature on television toppling injuries.

It would be important to know, for example how exactly the father found the child. It is not stated if he was face up, prone, or on his side. Was any blood present, from the childs nose, mouth, skull? Was there evidence of "cooking" in the kitchen? Why did he not telephone 911? There is no mention of what he informed happened to his child to the neighbor who drove them to the hospital.

They report that a "greasy smudged area" on the TV glass corresponded to the impact site on the child's head-but did not report the location of the impact site. With symmetrical parietal skull fractures a severe trauma to the crown or occiput would be expected.

Were there any previous injuries to this child or prior child protection reports. Was there family discord, known drug or alcohol use, or financial stressors? How were the children disciplined?

What were the developmental capabilities of this child? Was he standing, walking, and able to climb? How verbal was the 3 year-old sibling? Was he talking in complete sentences, does he understand cause and effect?

When he arrived at the hospital, what was this child's vitals, arterial blood gas, CBC, LFTs, coagulation studies? Any other cutaneous manifestations of abuse? If the television landed on his anterior chest, were there rib fractures or pulmonary hemorrhaging? There is no skeletal survey report mentioned. Was it done?

Why was there no mention of prior literature on television injuries. The Consumer Product Safety Commission statistics were not mentioned. How many children in the past have died from television toppling? How many with perimacular retinal folds? Was a report about this child sent to the CPSC?

And finally, many perpetrators of Shaken Baby Syndrome cite accidental injury as a cause of the physical findings in their victims. Twenty minutes is ample time to shake a toddler to death. The television certainly may of toppled onto the floor, angering the father, who then shook the crying, frightened toddler. His 3 year old sibling said "television fell", there was no detailed report of his forensic interview. This alleged accident was NOT witnessed by a non-family member. Furthermore too much data pertaining to this case was not included in the case report. Without providing the details of the aforementioned information requested, the authors' conclusions seem unfounded.

Competing interests: None declared

So here we have an expert in lead poisioning who frequently presented herself as an expert in SBS and now as MSbP....

or we can listen to a real expert... on the same thread.

Patrick E. Lantz,

Associate Professor

Department of Pathology, Wake Forest Unversity School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157 USA

Open Original Shared Link

too long to post but he counters every arguament the "self professed expert witness" makes.

Father: 100% Irish

Mother: 100% Lithuanian

Two of father's siblings had "stomach problems"

Mother & many of her relatives had Rheumatoid Arthritis -- another autoimmune disease.

Don't know for sure where my celiac disease came from, probably the Irish but given the prevalance of the autoimmune RA possibly also from the Lithuanians.

How can you say your father is 100% Irish? or your mother 100% Lithuanian?

What is Irish? Yoiu can only be Irish if you are born in Ireland.

Even if you have a family tree going back 2000 years this doesn't make you genetically 100% Irish...

I'm stunned gfp!!!

Who would have ever thought...

But then, who would have ever thought gluten would cause so many health issues.

Just another thing to add to the list.

Nancy

I was pretty amazed myself...

My ex-wife works for a food testing lab and one day I had to drop her car off for a service so I drove her to work as well, except she had to pick up samples of testing on the way.

We stopped at the "warehouse" which even to me having worked in a lot of labs looked like something from science fiction. Multiple airtight door and postive air pressure .. reduced oxygen and complete sterility...like something from NASA plus....

So when she got back to the car I asked...

I was pretty stunned.... when she said nearly all the fruit in supermarkets is stored this way.

I just found the first link I could.... but its pretty weird isn't it?

Its like we all think its "fresh" and don't really think where it comes from or where its stored .. and yet hundreds or thousands of people know but noone thinks to say ???

I noticed a few peple disregarded the post ....and its really like celiac...when you tell people they are "yeah sure" ..."how's the weather?" as if you just told them to wear tinfoil hats against aliens stealing your thoughts.

Very true... & the mixed greens with spinach, arugula &c. are even better-- but more expensive so I was guessing Lister was getting the watery stuff. At any rate, broccoli is a still more concentrated source of K.

Broccoli: Open Original Shared Link

Lettuce: Open Original Shared Link

Also brocolli has more calories and Lister needs calories....

Can you share your recipe? That sounds really good biggrin.gif

I just did! Seriously just as a tasty way to add brasiccas (works with cabbage too)

Just dice the bacon and I usually cut off the fat but leave it in the pan in as big pieces as possible (to take out) and fry up... you can add some stock as well....

Also works with cooked lentils....

Spinach is even better

Well its certainly very nice.... i like to cook it in just the water used to wash it... just shake dry and cook very low heat until its all wilted and the water more or less gone then add either sesame oil and some seeds or more bacon and pine nuts...