You can't read either, huh? Are you related to Jax? The virus strain
mutates...not the material used for immunization....
wrote in message
...
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:19:22 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz"

wrote:

Katy, the vaccines are a dead virus. Do you have any idea what you're
talking about??

Now you are starting to get the picture!

BB

Jon,
Like I said, you can argue until you're blue in the face...about all it will
get you is a certain level of asphyxia....

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
"katysails" wrote in message
...
The residents medical needs are met by Medicare but their room and board
is not....and no, I'm not against vaccination when it makes sense.
Influenza is a dangerous disease..to some. To you. You certainly need a
flu shot.

Most people would benefit from the vaccination. Check the CDC. Up until
this
fiasco, that's what they've been recommending.

It is not like the vaccines made for other diseases...it has to be
re-configured a guess every year and is not a broad spectrum vaccine.
The reasons why there were flu epidemics in the past are mostly gone in
this country.

They are reconfigured. It's more than a guess and less than a certainty.

You do not know that for a fact. It's a guess and not a very good one.

Get your facts straight.

We do not have wide-scale starvation (malnutrition is not starvation...it
means you are not eating correctly..not eating at all...),

We do have situations of starvation, but it isn't wide-scale. What's your
point?

we have adequate sanitation, and a better understanding of how viri are
caught. Handwashing, self quarantine when infected, and use of masks are
far better options to choose than the needle...for the healthy.

No. They're one of many things that help prevent getting or spreading the
virus.

And as far as the government being involved in health care goes...I
believe there should be research and development and there should be a
regulatory agency but I do not believe the government should be the
administrator of or the provider of health care services except to
assistance programs.

No one does. The point is that Bush's administration DID NOTHING.

"Thom Stewart" wrote in message
...
Katie,

I hope you're not saying, " no more Polio, TB, scarlet fever, small
pox,etc shots" I like the Federal Gov to be involved in our health
care.

Does your Health Care Center take Medicare Payments?

Ole Thom

The word ''vacines'' does not exist in the English language.

Scotty

wrote

Attention world: Stop making flu vacines!

RB

And, they guess quite well about what to use for the vaccine. If they
didn't, we would have even more deaths.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"katysails" wrote in message
...
You can't read either, huh? Are you related to Jax? The virus strain
mutates...not the material used for immunization....
wrote in message
...
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:19:22 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz"

wrote:

Katy, the vaccines are a dead virus. Do you have any idea what you're
talking about??

Now you are starting to get the picture!

BB

It's good enough for the CDC to recommend it.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"katysails" wrote in message
...
You misread....I know they inject dead virus samples....however, the virus
you are trying to protect against mutates too fast for that to be
efficacious for any period of time.

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
Katy, the vaccines are a dead virus. Do you have any idea what you're
talking about??
If you had said the inhaled version, then at least you'd have an
argument.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"katysails" wrote in message
...
No...injecting foreign substances into your body that you do not need is
not a good idea when it comes to viri. They mutate too fast in in ways
that are too complicated to keep up with new technology.
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
In article
,
katysails wrote:
Do that...you're still going to die sometime....

Whatever. The point is that innoculating people agaist the flu is a
very good idea. We normally lose 36K or so people every year to
it. Some people are at higher risk that others, but some flu strains
are deadly to even normally healthy people. We're lucky that this year
is a mild season. What if it had been a bad one, ala 1918, and Bush
had failed to follow up on the advice he was given to do something to
ensure the supply? Instead of a few extra deaths, we might have a few
tens of thousands of extra deaths. Bush did nothing.

--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

So, you're admitting you're wrong... no problem!


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"katysails" wrote in message
...
Jon,
Like I said, you can argue until you're blue in the face...about all it
will get you is a certain level of asphyxia....

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
"katysails" wrote in message
...
The residents medical needs are met by Medicare but their room and board
is not....and no, I'm not against vaccination when it makes sense.
Influenza is a dangerous disease..to some. To you. You certainly need
a flu shot.

Most people would benefit from the vaccination. Check the CDC. Up until
this
fiasco, that's what they've been recommending.

It is not like the vaccines made for other diseases...it has to be
re-configured a guess every year and is not a broad spectrum vaccine.
The reasons why there were flu epidemics in the past are mostly gone in
this country.

They are reconfigured. It's more than a guess and less than a certainty.

You do not know that for a fact. It's a guess and not a very good one.

Get your facts straight.

We do not have wide-scale starvation (malnutrition is not starvation...it
means you are not eating correctly..not eating at all...),

We do have situations of starvation, but it isn't wide-scale. What's your
point?

we have adequate sanitation, and a better understanding of how viri are
caught. Handwashing, self quarantine when infected, and use of masks
are far better options to choose than the needle...for the healthy.

No. They're one of many things that help prevent getting or spreading the
virus.

And as far as the government being involved in health care goes...I
believe there should be research and development and there should be a
regulatory agency but I do not believe the government should be the
administrator of or the provider of health care services except to
assistance programs.

No one does. The point is that Bush's administration DID NOTHING.

"Thom Stewart" wrote in message
...
Katie,

I hope you're not saying, " no more Polio, TB, scarlet fever, small
pox,etc shots" I like the Federal Gov to be involved in our health
care.

Does your Health Care Center take Medicare Payments?

Ole Thom

Well, we know you're not good for the children.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Horvath" wrote in message
...
On 29 Oct 2004 14:09:07 -0700, (Jonathan
Ganz) wrote this crap:


We spend something like 15% of GDP on healthcare in the US, but we
don't cover 41 million. Bush's "plan" would decrease that number by
about 2.5 million. Kerry's plan would decrease that number by about 27
million (not enough, but good progress). While Kerry's plan isn't
cheap, it would cover ALL children. I think that's the least we can do
for our citizens.


Next you'll try telling me the government should pay for our food and
shelter, because "it's good for the children."





Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

BOO ! I went trick or treating tonight dressed up as a hooker. I
gots lots of yummy candy.

Suzy

In article ,
wrote:

On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 20:19:12 GMT, "katysails"
wrote:

Si I dropped a friggin i from the word...so what? And I've never been to
receptionist school or whatever you call it...I went to a Catholic lib arts
college....and if you read any of the postings on this ng, you'd know that
your opinion is held in respect by one person only....you know, maybe
injecting a foreign substance into your veins might be a good idea...



Dropped an "i"? Hoo Boy!!! There is no such word as "virii" in the English
language either, ****forbrains. I'm guessing that you are looking for the
plural
of virus? It's "viruses"

Actually it's virii. Latin plural of a latin singular. Common usage is
viruses.

Try looking further than the cheap dictionary you use for failing to
solve kids' crosswords.

PDW

More to the point, do you think the legislators will ignore their rich and
powerful constituents, just like they did during the civil rights crises in
the 60s?

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On 29 Oct 2004 15:12:40 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz)
said:

More fundamentally, I think it's short-sighted, and a serious mistake, to
base Constitutional principle solely on whether it yields your desired
result in a particular case.

So, you would advocate the repeal of all civil rights legislation that
has taken place at the Federal level in favor of the legislation being
put to the individual states? Talk about short-sighted!!

From your last paragraph, should we infer that the Bill of Rights
should also be eliminated, since it was designed to specifically
address a desired result?

As usual, non-sequiturs.

And you still haven't answered the question:

you think the State legislators will ignore their
constituents if, as you say, and vast majority favor your position?

Or the second question:

Could it be that you have doubts about whether that vast majority is such
a
vast majority?