Print

Print


Yes medical research journals are very suspect at times.

It's been the wet dream of pharmaceuticals for some time to get all  
Type 2 Diabetics under what they call "Insulin Therapy" regardless of  
whether they need it or not. A paper emerged (unfortunately I did not  
note the url ref) where they allegedly proved that all Type 2  
Diabetics would be better off taking insulin. And who funded the  
research? Why a major  pharmaceutical firm that makes insulin.  
Surprise, surprise!

Frank

On 29 Nov 2009, at 20:31, Nick Green wrote:

> Dear Luc,
>
> Just as I write this my old friend from Liverpool has rung me to say  
> her son has just caught an MRSA  infection, she says, for the 5th  
> time (he is a kidney patient on dialysis). In the UK despite ten  
> years of reminders from the Parliamentary Health Committee NHS only  
> started recording Hospital Acquired Infections at all four or five  
> years ago and by type two or three years ago. Unbelievable but true.
>
> Yes Pask would talk of discussing his symptoms with a General  
> Physician as the right way with these things. That is if you can  
> find a General Physician- they are very rare in London.  Most are  
> specialists.
>
> But there is a straight forward "decision making under uncertainty"  
> solution. Say you have a diagnostic error rate of 25%. If you can  
> have ten physicians agree the diagnosis independently (blind of  
> previous findings) that will produce and error rate of 1 part per  
> million. Accurate diagnosis would save a lot of time and money. But  
> to the doctor a compliant agreeable patient is what is wanted.
>
> However note  in UK 50% of death certificates are wrong so  
> establishing a "Gold Standard" post mortem confirmation of diagnosis  
> is elusive unless randomly selected patients (why not all? or a lot  
> more than the 5% we get here rather than the 10% recommended) are  
> subject to Post Mortem examination.  Heart disease and cancer, for  
> example, are routinely over diagnosed. See http://jcp.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/55/7/499
>
> There's a doctor and newspaper columnist called Ben Goldacre a self  
> appointed Bad Science expert. I posted these error rates to his  
> website. He went into total denial as my posting mysteriously  
> disappeared. "Never happened before" he said then added "we though  
> you were just knocking the NHS".  He doesn't know the bounds on his  
> own discipline. Trouble is critics of science are rare I guess its  
> one role for the cybernetician. But there are radical souls. In 2004  
> Richard Smith the editor of the British Medical Journal asked "Is  
> surgery an anachronism in an evidence based age?" and complains that  
> medical journals have become the creatures of the pharmacology  
> industry "rife with fraudulent research". Then there's a GP, Vernon  
> Coleman, who writes a book "How to stop your doctor killing you".
>
> Best
>
> N.
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Luc Hoebeke" <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 3:48 PM
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: The Next 100 Years ($2.50 causes ***in hospitals***)
>
>> Dear Nick,
>>
>> The medical ethos is the same as the "would be climate healers".   
>> Medicine as a science is a misnomer, it is still an art. Art is  
>> not  interested in mastering or controlling "reality", but in  
>> interacting  with it and continuously learning from successes and  
>> failures in those  interactions. The expectation that MD's could be  
>> responsible for my  health, my life is a way in which the patient  
>> also colludes with the  attributed power of the medical profession.  
>> Patients also could  require from their nurses and their doctors  
>> that at least they behave  as human beings relating to human beings  
>> and not as mechanics dealing  with bladders, arteries, etc. But  
>> again, shifting responsibility is  the name of the game. So eg., at  
>> once euthanasy becomes a problem for  the doctors, the lawmakers  
>> and the judges.
>> Remember that our dear friend Arthur is the first one interested in  
>> flight safety, because he is the pilot. Perhaps patients and their   
>> family should have a bigger say in hospital safety, because they  
>> are  the pilots in that case. But I am sure that not many of them  
>> would  like to take up that responsibility. Much easier is the  
>> blaming game.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Luc
>>
>>
>> Op 29-nov-09, om 16:10 heeft Nick Green het volgende geschreven:
>>
>>> Right yes, Luc, a rather poor joke by me. You can see Latour   
>>> modernity by-passed in, of all things, medicine.
>>>
>>> In UK news today there's a text book example of the irresponsible  
>>> science- politics nexus from the basically unaccountable National   
>>> Health Service. Unaccountable because error rates have no formal   
>>> controls and were barely counted at all until recently. Reporting  
>>> of  errors by anybody is resisted rather than welcomed as vital  
>>> feedback.
>>>
>>> Some years ago Sir Brian Jarman (ex Chairman of British Medical  
>>> Association- the Doctors trade union) realised that people die in  
>>> hospital for the wrong reasons. His analysis of patient risk and  
>>> viability bears some study. He addresses preventable errors (e.g.   
>>> Poor nursing care, misdiagnosis, filthy wards producing  
>>> unnecessary  deaths) in UK hospitals. Learned references are given  
>>> at the  Imperial College site.
>>>
>>> BBC Reports
>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/nov/29/nhs-hospitals-safety-report
>>> Dr Foster website
>>> http://www.drfosterintelligence.co.uk/
>>> University base
>>> http://www1.imperial.ac.uk/medicine/about/divisions/ephpc/pcsm/research/drfosters/
>>>
>>> Usual story: ghastly bureaucrats with no incentive for quality  
>>> doing fuck all or nothing as we say in polite society. Add in the  
>>> elite: surgeons who by and large won't work at weekends,  on  
>>> Fridays or Wednesday afternoons.
>>>
>>> The name Dr Foster ( a character who avoids unpleasantness) comes   
>>> from the children's nursery rhyme. As a word "foster" means nurture.
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Foster
>>>
>>> The NHS is basically a low pay uneducated culture: in hospitals   
>>> about 75,000 autopoietic and underworked doctors are supported by   
>>> more than 1 million (mostly low pay) staff serving, at any one  
>>> time  about, 185,000 patients in a bed. That is an extraordinary  
>>> variety  equation. Fewer staff getting in each others way and more  
>>> hand  washing would be the "$2.50 relay" solution here. Far too  
>>> much  statistically naive (false positive rates are largely  
>>> unknown) time  wasting ritual bullshit that only the gullible can  
>>> believe survives  in UK's NHS -and elsewhere I wouldn't doubt.
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> N.
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Luc Hoebeke
>>> Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 8:23 AM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: The Next 100 Years ($2.50 causes)
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear Nick,
>>>
>>>
>>> No missing vowel. In Serb and Croat languages this r is  
>>> pronounced  er as in her.
>>> Having followed this thread, I learn how the old responsibility   
>>> avoiding mechanism between Pope and Emperor has shifted towards   
>>> Science and Politics. We never have been modern as Bruno Latour   
>>> eloquently argues in his book with the same title.
>>>
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>>
>>> Luc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Op 29-nov-09, om 03:17 heeft Nick Green het volgende geschreven:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Brklacic an imperfect clone of Stafford? The missing vowel in his   
>>> name surely proves this. Anyway New Scientist went with this  
>>> saying  this week "Climate researchers have been inundated with  
>>> what feels  like malicious demands for their data" Why aren't the  
>>> data  downloadable and come to that how about a listing of their  
>>> program -  like the Meadows etc did with Limits to Growth.
>>>
>>>
>>> From: russell_c
>>> Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2009 9:53 PM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: The Next 100 Years ($2.50 causes)
>>>
>>>
>>> And just when you thought is was safe to believe the simple story:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Hacked climate change email furore" -- Hacked climate change  
>>> emails  - a tempest in a teapot or a real storm? Paul Jay talks to  
>>> Michael  Brklacic, November 28, 2009.
>>>
>>> http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=4533
>>>
>>>
>>> Again, at the end, "... don't latch on to one or two pieces of   
>>> [$2.50] evidence ...", hmmmm?
>>>
>>> rc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Doug McDavid  <[log in to unmask] 
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> This thread alone is worth the price of admission!  Great stuff!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 4:28 AM, Frank Wood <[log in to unmask]
>>> > wrote:
>>>> Ha ha, love the "marginal seat theory!" Where on earth did we  
>>>> get  the idea
>>>> that we humans are rational beings!
>>>> Yeh, we're extremely rational in the context of greed and power  
>>>> and  the
>>>> notion of power extends to the "I'm right and you're wrong"   
>>>> attitude. That
>>>> is why your carefully balanced approach is the way to go.
>>>> Regards
>>>> Frank
>>>> On 28 Nov 2009, at 12:12, russell_c wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Frank,
>>>>
>>>> ... and yes, there is that zeal is creeping in, and  
>>>> unfortunately,  many
>>>> opportunists can smell a "win" ... and that will surely attract  
>>>> the "lovers
>>>> of winning" ... and so, off we go on another round of tail  
>>>> chasing. It's not
>>>> that they are completely wrong, just not completely right, and the
>>>> simplicity of over self confidence is always a concern. One step   
>>>> closer to
>>>> blind fundamentalism?
>>>>
>>>> Oh, and thanks for the agricultural angle. Guess what: not only  
>>>> is Australia
>>>> not responsible for the coal based greenhouse gasses that China  
>>>> produces
>>>> from burning the stuff we export to them; but also the farming   
>>>> lobby here
>>>> has successfully managed to get exclusions from the emissions   
>>>> trading system
>>>> being proposed! It is called "marginal seat theory" I think! (see:
>>>> http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/  
>>>> 0,23739,26350929-953,00.html )
>>>>
>>>> Now we know there are a lot of sheep (and cattle) down here, and   
>>>> some even
>>>> have learned to walk on two legs, and vote, but this type of  
>>>> partial
>>>> partisan response will just distort the whole by over weighting  
>>>> the load on
>>>> those other parts that cannot afford the right lobbyists.
>>>>
>>>> You have nailed it here imo -- "... develop sustainable  
>>>> societies  that
>>>> effectively respond". Unfortunately, while economics theory and   
>>>> praxis
>>>> cannot operate outside/beyond the "Growth" paradigm, we will  
>>>> just  have to
>>>> communicate in that weird language that growing small is not   
>>>> shrinking!
>>>> Pulling out is not surrendering, stopping is not failing, etc...
>>>>
>>>> Mind numbing! So, surely, one of the functions of groups like  
>>>> this is
>>>> ensuring that we can see more clearly through what is happening and
>>>> communicate with others as Margaret Mead implied:
>>>>
>>>> I specifically want to consider the significance of the set of
>>>> cross-disciplinary ideas which we first called 'feed-back' and  
>>>> then called
>>>> 'teleological mechanisms' and then called 'cybernetics' -- a form  
>>>> of
>>>> cross-disciplinary thought which made it possible for members of  
>>>> many
>>>> disciplines to communicate with each other easily in a language   
>>>> which all
>>>> could understand. (cited in
>>>> http://www.stanford.edu/group/SHR/4-2/text/foerster.html )
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately reasonable climate science speculation (e.g.  
>>>> Lovelock  et al)
>>>> is being used for partisan corporate politics and unsustainable   
>>>> policy
>>>> implementation! BAU I'm afraid.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Russell
>>>>
>>>> p.s.  Oh, BTW, the other $2.50 cause is the 80% of CO2 human  
>>>> activity
>>>> systems living on less than $2.50 per day! And as mobile phone  
>>>> penetration
>>>> heads into the exponential in developing economies (e.g. see   
>>>> various World
>>>> Bank reports) we will see more awareness of the differentials   
>>>> between rich
>>>> and poor ... and we may start to hear echos of those famous 17th  
>>>> C French
>>>> words "Let them eat cake!".
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Frank Wood <[log in to unmask]
>>>> >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Great piece of writing Russell. The biting irony is that it is the
>>>>> environmentalists that are the reductionists with their $2.50  
>>>>> relay
>>>>> attitude.
>>>>> There are so many vested interests on both sides of the debate   
>>>>> that any
>>>>> genuine enquiry into what should be done gets lost.
>>>>> To add to the complexity, I saw part of a TV programme a few  
>>>>> days  ago (it
>>>>> was to do with Obama's carbon reduction campaign) which said  
>>>>> that  most of
>>>>> the "greenhouse gas" was caused by food production.
>>>>> Here is an article that lends support to this assertion.
>>>>> Rearing cattle produces more greenhouse gases than driving  
>>>>> cars,  UN report
>>>>> warns
>>>>> http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=20772&Cr=global&Cr1=warming
>>>>> and another article on the proposed remedy.
>>>>> 'Burpless' Grass Cuts Methane Gas From Cattle, May Help Reduce   
>>>>> Global
>>>>> Warming
>>>>> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080506120859.htm
>>>>> but here again dear old complexity rears its head again. And of   
>>>>> course
>>>>> there is the issue of gene modification. Oh dear.
>>>>> We expect in our campaign to cut down CO2, that third world   
>>>>> countries to
>>>>> cut down or cease logging. Of course these countries see through  
>>>>> our
>>>>> hypocrisy. Consider that the UK used to be almost covered in   
>>>>> forests and
>>>>> now....
>>>>> I still think that we must develop sustainable societies that  
>>>>> effectively
>>>>> respond to climate change (whether it be warming or cooling)  
>>>>> and  worry less
>>>>> about Gaia as that old girl is going to do her own sweet thing   
>>>>> anyway.
>>>>> Frank
>>>>>
>>>>> On 28 Nov 2009, at 00:55, russell_c wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Nick,
>>>>>
>>>>> Re: $2.50 causes
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I still don't know whether I fully 'get it' in respect to  
>>>>> this
>>>>> example either. I came to a similar conclusion as yourself about  
>>>>> the
>>>>> multiple causes -- with one additional aspect: it was also a   
>>>>> comment about
>>>>> reductionist ways of thinking in respect to complex problems.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the author was pointing to the phenomena of a whole  
>>>>> organisational
>>>>> system straining to get the simple answer as a cause. It (ie  
>>>>> those  in it)
>>>>> fears the looming circularity of deep systemic investigation.
>>>>>
>>>>> The $2.50 climate change cause 'issue' is said to be CO2, or   
>>>>> 'carbon',
>>>>> reflecting the escaping output sun rays/energy and thus  
>>>>> bouncing  them back
>>>>> to earth.
>>>>>
>>>>> And of course, as in all these things, the underlying  
>>>>> assumptions  are not
>>>>> often questioned. We assume that this heating phenomena is not  
>>>>> the Gaia
>>>>> system (of which we, by definition, must be a significant  
>>>>> thinking part)
>>>>> working in its own time scale to extend our happy modern  
>>>>> existence between
>>>>> the next pending 10,000 year interglacial cold cycle.
>>>>>
>>>>> One can take that 1974 Time article and replace a few key words   
>>>>> and we
>>>>> have the same media-message being run today -- the sky will  
>>>>> fall,  the crops
>>>>> won't grow, the hens won't lay ... touching almost every deeply   
>>>>> held often
>>>>> neurotic fear we have as a society, culture and empire. So how  
>>>>> do  we know
>>>>> the truth? We cannot, and so acting on the precautionary  
>>>>> principle  is the
>>>>> best defense. But again, what to do, or not do?
>>>>>
>>>>> What I'm really pointing to is the same phenomena that says bin   
>>>>> Laden
>>>>> caused the Twin Towers attack and not the red flag of US foreign  
>>>>> policy etc.
>>>>> It is the cultural/systemic blindness to the bigger systemic  
>>>>> picture.(*) I
>>>>> saw it as a comment on the way 'the system' works -- i.e. who  
>>>>> are  the 'they'
>>>>> that will find the cause? IMO, they are the believers in their own
>>>>> confidences -- whatever side they take in a situation of  
>>>>> concern.  As Frank
>>>>> said: we need more humility by scientists.
>>>>>
>>>>> But the rush is on. And so now it is not science and its quest  
>>>>> for truth
>>>>> and answers: it is politics and its power games. But what else  
>>>>> can  be done?
>>>>> Adaptation is the secondary theme in the climate change debate  
>>>>> but  it is not
>>>>> much focused on by the media. Why? Because it means operating   
>>>>> system change
>>>>> (to use the computing analogy), not just program change. And  
>>>>> can  we trust
>>>>> systems programmers? Who are they working for? I think the  
>>>>> elites  are not
>>>>> yet certain of where they can stand safely in the wash up, and  
>>>>> so things are
>>>>> more complex than they need to be.
>>>>>
>>>>> Instead of CO2, why don't we start with population, blame the   
>>>>> medical
>>>>> sciences for stopping malaria, polio, plague, etc without also  
>>>>> implementing
>>>>> birth control and sustainable socio-economic reform? What about   
>>>>> the other
>>>>> 'club of rome' that will not support birth control etc? We will  
>>>>> willingly
>>>>> look at plant food (CO2) as the enemy, but not the local doctor   
>>>>> who is
>>>>> working beyond his/her wellbeing limits, usually on a healthy   
>>>>> state subsidy,
>>>>> to save CO2 producing humans (you & I) who should perhaps cease  
>>>>> this
>>>>> function permanently. Where do we stop? A $2.50 cause is all we   
>>>>> need to stop
>>>>> the process of systemic change occurring naturally.
>>>>>
>>>>> One opportunity all this offers is a wide window on science  
>>>>> studies.
>>>>>
>>>>> Russell
>>>>>
>>>>> (*) BTW, on my way out the door yesterday (c.o.b. Friday) a  
>>>>> young  lady
>>>>> came running past straight from a 1-day management guru seminar  
>>>>> by some
>>>>> professor x, and showed me a slide that said tomorrows leaders   
>>>>> will need,
>>>>> guess what, yes, "systems thinking". Oh, dear, here we go again!  
>>>>> I responded
>>>>> that it will drive them mad if they try, and that imo  
>>>>> leadership  is so
>>>>> 'yesterday', as is management -- and that we are entering a  
>>>>> heroic stage.
>>>>> G-d help us!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 11:39 PM, Nick Green <[log in to unmask]
>>>>> >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks Russell.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Re your previous on the $2.50 relay.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Both Stafford and Gordon emphasised multiple causes. So why  
>>>>>> did  the relay
>>>>>> fail etc.  I have to say I didn't really "get it" at first   
>>>>>> because like any
>>>>>> other operational Joe I would go to stores and replace the  
>>>>>> relay  job done.
>>>>>> But Pask and Beer wanted to look at how the relay was designed,  
>>>>>> managed etc
>>>>>> I eventually concluded. One can be very thick sometimes.  Pask  
>>>>>> preferred
>>>>>> "produces" rather than "causes". It's that circular causality   
>>>>>> problem again,
>>>>>> Does the spark cause the explosion or the presence of petrol   
>>>>>> vapour. We know
>>>>>> the product of spark, petrol vapour and oxygen is an explosion   
>>>>>> but there is
>>>>>> no single cause. Connect a bulb to a battery. Go away. Come  
>>>>>> back,  The bulb
>>>>>> is out. Why? There's no way of telling until each component is   
>>>>>> tested in
>>>>>> another trusted circular system: the bulb, the 4 connections,  
>>>>>> the  2 leads,
>>>>>> the battery. All this means something for Climate change etc-  
>>>>>> not sure quite
>>>>>> what-yet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: russell_c
>>>>>> Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 10:25 AM
>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>> Subject: Re: The Next 100 Years (CSIRAC)
>>>>>> If anyone is interested in this CSIRO 'report card' released   
>>>>>> today (27th)
>>>>>> then see:
>>>>>> http://www.csiro.au/multimedia/Marine-report-card.html and
>>>>>> http://www.oceanclimatechange.org.au/content/index.php/site/  
>>>>>> welcome/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 8:00 PM, russell_c <[log in to unmask]>   
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nick
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not sure this is on topic, but this CSIRAC story (below)  
>>>>>>> came
>>>>>>> through today and caused me to reflect on a comment (by  
>>>>>>> Staford  I think?)
>>>>>>> that "they will find the cause" to a major US power outage (a   
>>>>>>> $2.50 relay?).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why are we blaming climate change causes on CO2 when the energy
>>>>>>> increases have a lot to do with the complexities related to   
>>>>>>> power station
>>>>>>> upgrades needed for PC proliferation, building air- 
>>>>>>> conditioning capacity
>>>>>>> increases, flat plasma screens and additional housing demand  
>>>>>>> due  to family
>>>>>>> break down etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In respect to heat and power production -- are there any   
>>>>>>> estimates of
>>>>>>> the energy generation involved in the growth of ICT and  
>>>>>>> Internet over the 60
>>>>>>> years from when this machine came to be? (there is a picture   
>>>>>>> with the story)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is this technology phenomena equally the cause of climate  
>>>>>>> change  and can
>>>>>>> it be somehow statistically correlated to CO2 increases?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Russell
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Australia's first 'iPod' marks 60th birthday
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "The CSIRAC - Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research
>>>>>>> organisation Automatic Computer - is housed in the state's   
>>>>>>> museum and has
>>>>>>> today been granted heritage listing as part of its birthday  
>>>>>>> celebrations.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is the first computer ever to be made in Australia; the  
>>>>>>> fourth
>>>>>>> computer ever to be made in the world; and the only first   
>>>>>>> generation
>>>>>>> computer that remains intact. . . ."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/25/2752781.htm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  
>>>> For  more
>>>> information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the Metaphorum   
>>>> Collaborative
>>>> Working Environment (MCWE) go to: www.platformforchange.org   
>>>> METAPHORUM eList
>>>> Archive available at - https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html
>>>> Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
>>>> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html
>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>>
>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  
>>>> For  more
>>>> information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the Metaphorum   
>>>> Collaborative
>>>> Working Environment (MCWE) go to: www.platformforchange.org   
>>>> METAPHORUM eList
>>>> Archive available at - https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html
>>>> Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
>>>> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html
>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Doug McDavid
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>> 916-549-4600
>>>
>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>
>>> For more information go to: www.metaphorum.org
>>>
>>> For the Metaphorum Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to: www.platformforchange.org
>>>
>>> METAPHORUM eList Archive available at - https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html
>>>
>>> Archive of CYBCOM eList available at - http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html
>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>
>>>
>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For   
>>> more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the Metaphorum   
>>> Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to: www.platformforchange.org 
>>>  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at - https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
>>>  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at - http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
>>>  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For   
>>> more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the Metaphorum   
>>> Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to: www.platformforchange.org 
>>>  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at - https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
>>>  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at - http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
>>>  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>
>>>
>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For   
>>> more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the Metaphorum   
>>> Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to: www.platformforchange.org 
>>>  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at - https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
>>>  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at - http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
>>>  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> For more information go to: www.metaphorum.org
>>>
>>> For the Metaphorum Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to: www.platformforchange.org
>>>
>>> METAPHORUM eList Archive available at - https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html
>>>
>>> Archive of CYBCOM eList available at - http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html
>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> For more information go to: www.metaphorum.org
>>
>> For the Metaphorum Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to: www.platformforchange.org
>>
>> METAPHORUM eList Archive available at - https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html
>>
>> Archive of CYBCOM eList available at - http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For more information go to: www.metaphorum.org
>
> For the Metaphorum Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:  www.platformforchange.org
>
> METAPHORUM eList Archive available at - https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html
>
> Archive of CYBCOM eList available at - http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For more information go to: www.metaphorum.org

For the Metaphorum Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:  www.platformforchange.org

METAPHORUM eList Archive available at - https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html

Archive of CYBCOM eList available at - http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~