Re: (unknown)

August 8, 2000

I can't work out those sorts of details yet, although have only skimmed through

it. There is a heavy emphasis on conduct/misconduct, some of which is viewed

as multi-disciplinary. I do agree with that; abuse and crime tend to to be

generic, not discipline specific. There is also a section that says it is

important for each profession to speak for itself on matters relating to that

profession. But the general feel of the document (as in the title of the

Council) is that health visiting is viewed as a subsection of nursing. That

might mean that a separate voice for health visiting is not required. It is

not at all clear.

The project report that we (Margaret Buttigieg, Houston and I) prepared

for the UKCC has a large section that unravels the different implications for

regulation and education, of four different sets of assumptions:

1. that health visiting is part of nursing: they are indistinguishable

2. that health visiting is part of nursing: but health visiting is part of

community nursing, which is a distinct part of nursing

3. that nursing and health visiting are separate professions: they are

different but compatible

4. that nursing and health visiting are separate professions: they are

different and entirely separate

The general tone of the consultation is to veer towards the first two beliefs,

which is the way the UKCC currently regulates health visiting. These also

represent the official position of the RCN (point 1) and the CPHVA (point 2).

If these assumptions underpin regulation, it means that nurses are entirely

entitled to decide on matters on conduct, practice and education of health

visitors and it is still called 'peer self-regulation' because they are the

same profession.

There are a lot of anomalies in current education and regulation because of

this, and the consultation document does not, on first reading, do much to

clarify that.

I will interested to know if anyone has sent for the report since Maureen

flagged it up on the e-group last week and, like Maureen, I would be interested

in feedback. It is a large document but does highlight the questions to ask

when looking at the consultation document. (there is a short executive

summary, and you could just read chapters 1 and 6 to get the gist of it!)

Best wishes

Rowe wrote:

> I have just got the consultation document to comment on for the Chief

> executive - I have to read the thing yet. It is rather odd that HVs are

> not named as part of the constitution especially if they have a

> register. Does that also mean that if there were cases of misconduct

> going to the council - how would that work - or is that a daft question?

> Does it also mean that they would be not be required to seek health

> visiting advice? It probably spells that out in the document so I must

> read it.

> In message <l0313031eb5b4a86b8589@[137.73.105.149]>, Cowley

> <sarah.cowley@...> writes

> >The consultation document about replacement regulatory arrangements when

> >the UKCC is disbanded can be downloaded from:

> >

> >http://www.doh.gov.uk/pdfs/nmcconsult.pdf

> >

> >Responses are required within 3 months. The health visiting register is to

> >stay and there are to be 12 professional representatives: four nurses,

> >four midwives and four health visitors (one of each from each country) as

> >well as 11 appointed lay representatives. There is the possibility of

> >expanding the Council to 30; how that should work is one of the

> >consultation questions.

> >

> >Health visiting is not named in the constitution of the Council, committees

> >or glossary of what constitutes 'the professions'.

> >

> >Best wishes

> >

> > Cowley

> >Professor of Community Practice Development

> >Florence Nightingale School of Nursing and Midwifery

> >King's College, London

> >3.29b Clerk Maxwell Building

> >57 Waterloo Road

> >London SE1 8WA

> >

> >tel: 020 7848 3030

> >fax: 020 7848 3506

> >

August 8, 2000

Yes I have sent for the report from Maureen. I found it to be very interesting

reading and have quoted (unpublished) from it already. I can't say that I have

read

every page but it is an excellent resource and I particularly liked the

breakdown

of aspects of the role. Why isn't it being published - it seems such a shame and

I

will use it for students but it would be difficult to put it in short loan in

the

library. It is rather like in the Hitchikers Guide to the Universe where plans

are

freely available in an obscure filing cabinet on Alpha Centauri and if people

wanted to see them they could ... so consultation has taken place! In this case

an

extremely useful document that has presumably involved a large number of work

hours

is available, but only if you know about it and send for it. This really limits

its

impact and usefulness to health visitors who I am sure would greatly appreciate

its

contents.Thanks for the website address for the Nursing and Midwifery Council. I

have only skimmed it but have found the comments here useful and will read it on

my

return from a few weeks away.

Chambers

Cowley wrote:

> I can't work out those sorts of details yet, although have only skimmed

through

> it. There is a heavy emphasis on conduct/misconduct, some of which is viewed

> as multi-disciplinary. I do agree with that; abuse and crime tend to to be

> generic, not discipline specific. There is also a section that says it is

> important for each profession to speak for itself on matters relating to that

> profession. But the general feel of the document (as in the title of the

> Council) is that health visiting is viewed as a subsection of nursing. That

> might mean that a separate voice for health visiting is not required. It is

> not at all clear.

>

> The project report that we (Margaret Buttigieg, Houston and I) prepared

> for the UKCC has a large section that unravels the different implications for

> regulation and education, of four different sets of assumptions:

>

> 1. that health visiting is part of nursing: they are indistinguishable

> 2. that health visiting is part of nursing: but health visiting is part of

> community nursing, which is a distinct part of nursing

> 3. that nursing and health visiting are separate professions: they are

> different but compatible

> 4. that nursing and health visiting are separate professions: they are

> different and entirely separate

>

> The general tone of the consultation is to veer towards the first two beliefs,

> which is the way the UKCC currently regulates health visiting. These also

> represent the official position of the RCN (point 1) and the CPHVA (point 2).

> If these assumptions underpin regulation, it means that nurses are entirely

> entitled to decide on matters on conduct, practice and education of health

> visitors and it is still called 'peer self-regulation' because they are the

> same profession.

>

> There are a lot of anomalies in current education and regulation because of

> this, and the consultation document does not, on first reading, do much to

> clarify that.

>

> I will interested to know if anyone has sent for the report since Maureen

> flagged it up on the e-group last week and, like Maureen, I would be

interested

> in feedback. It is a large document but does highlight the questions to ask

> when looking at the consultation document. (there is a short executive

> summary, and you could just read chapters 1 and 6 to get the gist of it!)

>

> Best wishes

>

> Rowe wrote:

>

> > I have just got the consultation document to comment on for the Chief

> > executive - I have to read the thing yet. It is rather odd that HVs are

> > not named as part of the constitution especially if they have a

> > register. Does that also mean that if there were cases of misconduct

> > going to the council - how would that work - or is that a daft question?

> > Does it also mean that they would be not be required to seek health

> > visiting advice? It probably spells that out in the document so I must

> > read it.

> > In message <l0313031eb5b4a86b8589@[137.73.105.149]>, Cowley

> > <sarah.cowley@...> writes

> > >The consultation document about replacement regulatory arrangements when

> > >the UKCC is disbanded can be downloaded from:

> > >

> > >http://www.doh.gov.uk/pdfs/nmcconsult.pdf

> > >

> > >Responses are required within 3 months. The health visiting register is to

> > >stay and there are to be 12 professional representatives: four nurses,

> > >four midwives and four health visitors (one of each from each country) as

> > >well as 11 appointed lay representatives. There is the possibility of

> > >expanding the Council to 30; how that should work is one of the

> > >consultation questions.

> > >

> > >Health visiting is not named in the constitution of the Council, committees

> > >or glossary of what constitutes 'the professions'.

> > >

> > >Best wishes

> > >

> > > Cowley

> > >Professor of Community Practice Development

> > >Florence Nightingale School of Nursing and Midwifery

> > >King's College, London

> > >3.29b Clerk Maxwell Building

> > >57 Waterloo Road

> > >London SE1 8WA

> > >

> > >tel: 020 7848 3030

> > >fax: 020 7848 3506

> > >

August 11, 2000

I have sent for the report but as yet have not received it. HAs anyone

else?

On Tue, 08 Aug 2000 20:36:42 +0100 Cowley

<sarah@...> wrote:

> I can't work out those sorts of details yet, although have only skimmed

through

> it. There is a heavy emphasis on conduct/misconduct, some of which is viewed

> as multi-disciplinary. I do agree with that; abuse and crime tend to to be

> generic, not discipline specific. There is also a section that says it is

> important for each profession to speak for itself on matters relating to that

> profession. But the general feel of the document (as in the title of the

> Council) is that health visiting is viewed as a subsection of nursing. That

> might mean that a separate voice for health visiting is not required. It is

> not at all clear.

>

> The project report that we (Margaret Buttigieg, Houston and I) prepared

> for the UKCC has a large section that unravels the different implications for

> regulation and education, of four different sets of assumptions:

>

> 1. that health visiting is part of nursing: they are indistinguishable

> 2. that health visiting is part of nursing: but health visiting is part of

> community nursing, which is a distinct part of nursing

> 3. that nursing and health visiting are separate professions: they are

> different but compatible

> 4. that nursing and health visiting are separate professions: they are

> different and entirely separate

>

> The general tone of the consultation is to veer towards the first two beliefs,

> which is the way the UKCC currently regulates health visiting. These also

> represent the official position of the RCN (point 1) and the CPHVA (point 2).

> If these assumptions underpin regulation, it means that nurses are entirely

> entitled to decide on matters on conduct, practice and education of health

> visitors and it is still called 'peer self-regulation' because they are the

> same profession.

>

> There are a lot of anomalies in current education and regulation because of

> this, and the consultation document does not, on first reading, do much to

> clarify that.

>

> I will interested to know if anyone has sent for the report since Maureen

> flagged it up on the e-group last week and, like Maureen, I would be

interested

> in feedback. It is a large document but does highlight the questions to ask

> when looking at the consultation document. (there is a short executive

> summary, and you could just read chapters 1 and 6 to get the gist of it!)

>

> Best wishes

>

> Rowe wrote:

>

> > I have just got the consultation document to comment on for the Chief

> > executive - I have to read the thing yet. It is rather odd that HVs

> are > not named as part of the constitution especially if they have a

> > register. Does that also mean that if there were cases of misconduct

> > going to the council - how would that work - or is that a daft

> question? > Does it also mean that they would be not be required to

> seek health > visiting advice? It probably spells that out in the

> document so I must > read it.

> > In message <l0313031eb5b4a86b8589@[137.73.105.149]>, Cowley >

> <sarah.cowley@...> writes > >The consultation document about

> replacement regulatory arrangements when > >the UKCC is disbanded can

> be downloaded from: > >

> > >http://www.doh.gov.uk/pdfs/nmcconsult.pdf > >

> > >Responses are required within 3 months. The health visiting

> register is to > >stay and there are to be 12 professional

> representatives: four nurses, > >four midwives and four health visitors

> (one of each from each country) as > >well as 11 appointed lay

> representatives. There is the possibility of > >expanding the Council

> to 30; how that should work is one of the > >consultation questions.

> > > > >Health visiting is not named in the constitution of the Council,

> committees > >or glossary of what constitutes 'the professions'.

> > > > >Best wishes

> > > > >

> > > > > Cowley

> > >Professor of Community Practice Development > >Florence Nightingale

> School of Nursing and Midwifery > >King's College, London

> > >3.29b Clerk Maxwell Building > >57 Waterloo Road

> > >London SE1 8WA > >

> > >tel: 020 7848 3030 > >fax: 020 7848 3506

> > > > >

> > >

August 12, 2000

I received my report today. I can't say that I have read it yet but as I

have 'dipped in' it seems very comprehensive and I can't wait for some 'real

time' to devour it in its entirety.

Re: (unknown)

> I have sent for the report but as yet have not received it. HAs anyone

> else?

>

> On Tue, 08 Aug 2000 20:36:42 +0100 Cowley

> <sarah@...> wrote:

>

> > I can't work out those sorts of details yet, although have only skimmed

through

> > it. There is a heavy emphasis on conduct/misconduct, some of which is

viewed

> > as multi-disciplinary. I do agree with that; abuse and crime tend to to

be

> > generic, not discipline specific. There is also a section that says it

is

> > important for each profession to speak for itself on matters relating to

that

> > profession. But the general feel of the document (as in the title of

the

> > Council) is that health visiting is viewed as a subsection of nursing.

That

> > might mean that a separate voice for health visiting is not required.

It is

> > not at all clear.

> >

> > The project report that we (Margaret Buttigieg, Houston and I)

prepared

> > for the UKCC has a large section that unravels the different

implications for

> > regulation and education, of four different sets of assumptions:

> >

> > 1. that health visiting is part of nursing: they are indistinguishable

> > 2. that health visiting is part of nursing: but health visiting is

part of

> > community nursing, which is a distinct part of nursing

> > 3. that nursing and health visiting are separate professions: they are

> > different but compatible

> > 4. that nursing and health visiting are separate professions: they

are

> > different and entirely separate

> >

> > The general tone of the consultation is to veer towards the first two

beliefs,

> > which is the way the UKCC currently regulates health visiting. These

also

> > represent the official position of the RCN (point 1) and the CPHVA

(point 2).

> > If these assumptions underpin regulation, it means that nurses are

entirely

> > entitled to decide on matters on conduct, practice and education of

health

> > visitors and it is still called 'peer self-regulation' because they are

the

> > same profession.

> >

> > There are a lot of anomalies in current education and regulation because

of

> > this, and the consultation document does not, on first reading, do much

to

> > clarify that.

> >

> > I will interested to know if anyone has sent for the report since

Maureen

> > flagged it up on the e-group last week and, like Maureen, I would be

interested

> > in feedback. It is a large document but does highlight the questions to

ask

> > when looking at the consultation document. (there is a short executive

> > summary, and you could just read chapters 1 and 6 to get the gist of

it!)

> >

> > Best wishes

> >

> > Rowe wrote:

> >

> > > I have just got the consultation document to comment on for the Chief

> > > executive - I have to read the thing yet. It is rather odd that HVs

> > are > not named as part of the constitution especially if they have a

> > > register. Does that also mean that if there were cases of misconduct

> > > going to the council - how would that work - or is that a daft

> > question? > Does it also mean that they would be not be required to

> > seek health > visiting advice? It probably spells that out in the

> > document so I must > read it.

> > > In message <l0313031eb5b4a86b8589@[137.73.105.149]>, Cowley >

> > <sarah.cowley@...> writes > >The consultation document about

> > replacement regulatory arrangements when > >the UKCC is disbanded can

> > be downloaded from: > >

> > > >http://www.doh.gov.uk/pdfs/nmcconsult.pdf > >

> > > >Responses are required within 3 months. The health visiting

> > register is to > >stay and there are to be 12 professional

> > representatives: four nurses, > >four midwives and four health visitors

> > (one of each from each country) as > >well as 11 appointed lay

> > representatives. There is the possibility of > >expanding the Council

> > to 30; how that should work is one of the > >consultation questions.

> > > > > >Health visiting is not named in the constitution of the Council,

> > committees > >or glossary of what constitutes 'the professions'.

> > > > > >Best wishes

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Cowley

> > > >Professor of Community Practice Development > >Florence Nightingale

> > School of Nursing and Midwifery > >King's College, London

> > > >3.29b Clerk Maxwell Building > >57 Waterloo Road

> > > >London SE1 8WA > >

> > > >tel: 020 7848 3030 > >fax: 020 7848 3506

> > > > > >

> > > >

August 13, 2000

I have also received my copy and have not really read it yet. I wonder

about health visiting in the context of setting the educational

standards. It sort of mentions advisory networks but the standards for

education are somewhat important to the fitness to practise issue. I

also wonder where the educational debate will be in the future and

monitoring those standards against the future health policy agenda.

Most of the document appears to centre on the regulatory issues - quite

rightly - but standards can only be set if there are mechanisms to

develop the educational context to meet those standards - where does

this rightly sit now that the national Boards go - or have I missed a

trick here? Is this the role of the Royal Colleges as in medical

education or will it just be left to the higher education institutions

to develop them?

message <002601c00478$dc8898a0$db139fd4@computer>, Bidmead

<christine@...> writes

>I received my report today. I can't say that I have read it yet but as I

>have 'dipped in' it seems very comprehensive and I can't wait for some 'real

>time' to devour it in its entirety.

>

> Re: (unknown)

>

>> I have sent for the report but as yet have not received it. HAs anyone

>> else?

>>

>> On Tue, 08 Aug 2000 20:36:42 +0100 Cowley

>> <sarah@...> wrote:

>>

>> > I can't work out those sorts of details yet, although have only skimmed

>through

>> > it. There is a heavy emphasis on conduct/misconduct, some of which is

>viewed

>> > as multi-disciplinary. I do agree with that; abuse and crime tend to to

>be

>> > generic, not discipline specific. There is also a section that says it

>is

>> > important for each profession to speak for itself on matters relating to

>that

>> > profession. But the general feel of the document (as in the title of

>the

>> > Council) is that health visiting is viewed as a subsection of nursing.

>That

>> > might mean that a separate voice for health visiting is not required.

>It is

>> > not at all clear.

>> >

>> > The project report that we (Margaret Buttigieg, Houston and I)

>prepared

>> > for the UKCC has a large section that unravels the different

>implications for

>> > regulation and education, of four different sets of assumptions:

>> >

>> > 1. that health visiting is part of nursing: they are indistinguishable

>> > 2. that health visiting is part of nursing: but health visiting is

>part of

>> > community nursing, which is a distinct part of nursing

>> > 3. that nursing and health visiting are separate professions: they are

>> > different but compatible

>> > 4. that nursing and health visiting are separate professions: they

>are

>> > different and entirely separate

>> >

>> > The general tone of the consultation is to veer towards the first two

>beliefs,

>> > which is the way the UKCC currently regulates health visiting. These

>also

>> > represent the official position of the RCN (point 1) and the CPHVA

>(point 2).

>> > If these assumptions underpin regulation, it means that nurses are

>entirely

>> > entitled to decide on matters on conduct, practice and education of

>health

>> > visitors and it is still called 'peer self-regulation' because they are

>the

>> > same profession.

>> >

>> > There are a lot of anomalies in current education and regulation because

>of

>> > this, and the consultation document does not, on first reading, do much

>to

>> > clarify that.

>> >

>> > I will interested to know if anyone has sent for the report since

>Maureen

>> > flagged it up on the e-group last week and, like Maureen, I would be

>interested

>> > in feedback. It is a large document but does highlight the questions to

>ask

>> > when looking at the consultation document. (there is a short executive

>> > summary, and you could just read chapters 1 and 6 to get the gist of

>it!)

>> >

>> > Best wishes

>> >

>> > Rowe wrote:

>> >

>> > > I have just got the consultation document to comment on for the Chief

>> > > executive - I have to read the thing yet. It is rather odd that HVs

>> > are > not named as part of the constitution especially if they have a

>> > > register. Does that also mean that if there were cases of misconduct

>> > > going to the council - how would that work - or is that a daft

>> > question? > Does it also mean that they would be not be required to

>> > seek health > visiting advice? It probably spells that out in the

>> > document so I must > read it.

>> > > In message <l0313031eb5b4a86b8589@[137.73.105.149]>, Cowley >

>> > <sarah.cowley@...> writes > >The consultation document about

>> > replacement regulatory arrangements when > >the UKCC is disbanded can

>> > be downloaded from: > >

>> > > >http://www.doh.gov.uk/pdfs/nmcconsult.pdf > >

>> > > >Responses are required within 3 months. The health visiting

>> > register is to > >stay and there are to be 12 professional

>> > representatives: four nurses, > >four midwives and four health visitors

>> > (one of each from each country) as > >well as 11 appointed lay

>> > representatives. There is the possibility of > >expanding the Council

>> > to 30; how that should work is one of the > >consultation questions.

>> > > > > >Health visiting is not named in the constitution of the Council,

>> > committees > >or glossary of what constitutes 'the professions'.

>> > > > > >Best wishes

>> > > > > >

>> > > > > > Cowley

>> > > >Professor of Community Practice Development > >Florence Nightingale

>> > School of Nursing and Midwifery > >King's College, London

>> > > >3.29b Clerk Maxwell Building > >57 Waterloo Road

>> > > >London SE1 8WA > >

>> > > >tel: 020 7848 3030 > >fax: 020 7848 3506

>> > > > > >

>> > > >

August 13, 2000

"YOU PEOPLE ARE SICK SICK SICK!!!!!!!!"

hahahaha ... we are just living up to the name of the list "Being Sick" hahaha...

Love A.

August 22, 2000

I got the same call several weeks ago, with the line that two of my patients

had asked for them to contact me and sign me up. So I asked for the

patients names and of course they claimed it was confidential. So I asked

for a list of those companies in the general area that were using their

panel and sure enough none of them were located nor were they relocating to

Tillamook.

Take care

Steve Kinne

(unknown)

> Funny you should ask..... I got a call last friday from a ASHP rep,

> got me on the phone and told me how this was a great thing blah,

> blah, blah.

>

> After I cut him off and told him that insurance whoring was out of my

> scope, the phone call ended very quickly.

>

> Just say NO!! or FU or KMA or something to that effect.

>

> CYA,

>

> Mark

>

September 1, 2000

They don't do it for the kids. They do it for themselves!! They feel so

uncomfortable with how their child looks that they feel they must " fix "

them. It is sad and it is perverse and also cruel. I would never put my

beautiful through that kind of pain for my ego.

Elaine

(unknown)

>

> Hi-

> I am the parent of a beautiful 8 year daughter with Down

> Syndrome. I also watched the program the other night on

> the Discovery Channel.

> I think people are very quick to judge these parents as

> being out of touch, or in denial, or just plain cruel.

> While I do not agree with their decision, I respect

> their role as parents, making a decision THEY feel is in

> the best interest of their child.

> I personally feel this is very wrong to do to a child,

> especially of this age. Altering physical appearance

> does nothing to change what is inside a person, and part

> of accepting and understanding Down Syndrome is to

> accept and understand all aspects, including physical

> appearance. attends our local elementary school,

> and is included in a regular 2nd grade classroom. She

> has never been teased or ridiculed for her DS facial

> features, in fact she has never been teased or ridiculed

> at all. If people in the store or mall stare at her,

> she stares back until they are uncomfortable and look

> away.

> I am not a psychologist, however I am a Registered

> Nurse, so I have an understanding and knowledge of

> acceptance and denial. How difficult will it be for

> these parents to encourage their son to be comfortable

> with who he is, and have self esteem and self love, if

> they were not accepting of his appearance.

> The other part of the program that bothered me greatly,

> was the attitude of the plastic surgeon. He kept

> referring to the surgery as the " removal of the mask of

> deformity " . This attitude was greatly disturbing to

> me. A mask is unmoving, stationary, without a change in

> structure (such as a smile or frown). A mask also is

> designed to hide what is beneath, not so in our kids

> with DS. A deformity is some type of flaw, or as

> Webster's states, " a disfigurement " . I see neither when

> I look at a child with Down Syndrome. People have said

> in the past that the parents were out of touch, well so

> is the surgeon.

> Would I allow my daughter to have this type of surgery?

> No, I would not. If she was 30 years old, it would be a

> different story. But the decision would not be made

> lightly.

> As to the question of what type of counseling, etc.,

> these families should receive; I would think a great

> deal of time and energy should be spent looking into the

> families whole attitude toward DS, and whether or not

> they have accepted the diagnosis of DS in its entirety,

> or are they still living in a stage of denial, and

> hoping they can just " make it go away " .

> Good luck with your research. You certainly have chosen

> an interesting and volatile subject. I would be very

> interested in reading your findings and/ or paper.--

> Sharon, Mom to (8, DS) and (5)

>

September 6, 2000

Pardon my ignorance but what is " abalation " ?

September 6, 2000

I keep hearing that word also but do not know what it is.

By the way I am never concious when mine goes off. So no ladders driving or

anything else where I may fall and hurt myself. Does anyone else have that.

There is not enough time to do anything before kerplunk. Thelma-- Original

Message -----

From: <pschatsky@...>

Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2000 10:33 PM

Subject: Re: (unknown)

>

> Pardon my ignorance but what is " abalation " ?

>

> Please visit the Zapper homepage at

> http://www.ZapLife.org

>

September 6, 2000

- after I had several episodes that required shocks- I became sacred

and I did not like the way I felt- heart flutters,ect.. It was important

for me to share with others how I was felling and for my loved ones to do

the same. I did have abalation, which did not correct all the problems, but

appartently did some good, as I have not had to be shocked in over 5 years.

Best wishes and my thoughts our with your family! R

>My dad had his icd since March 2000. He has felt horrible

>since he came home from the hospital. The icd has

>gone off a number of times because of aflutter.

>His doctor recommened ablation which he just had

>done on 9/1.

>We thought there would be a big improvement but he is

>still feeling the fluttering when he gets up to do something

>and feels a tighness in his throat.

>He is afraid to go out of the house.

>Has anyone had this problem?

>

>__________________________________________________________________

>Get Verizon Online DSL for $39.95 and get 30 days of free service!

>http://www.bellatlantic.net/promos/p2banet.html

>

>Please visit the Zapper homepage at

>http://www.ZapLife.org

>

SUDDEN DEATH: A Survivor's Story

go to : http://web.infoave.net/~mewie

September 6, 2000

vt is ventricala tachacardia and abalation is where they go in like for a

cath and thead it up to the heart and use a lazer to deadin part of the

heart to take care of bad heart beats it burns and kills apart of the

heart it's okay to ask i know i ask alot to

stacie,17

Re: (unknown)

>

> Pardon my ignorance but what is " abalation " ?

>

> Please visit the Zapper homepage at

> http://www.ZapLife.org

>

September 6, 2000

Well Hi and linda :

I am 50 years old and have had my icd implant for almost a year.I concider

my self lucky .My icd has not gone off yet but close ,it sounded an alarm to

get checked out,but no one in our imediate area knows that much about them

..Thay have delt with pace makers but not icd

I have to travle about 2hr to the city where thay put it in to get it

checked out.the modle I have has a defect and I have to get a reprograming

to corect it .I feal like a fire stone tire . Well wishing your dad the best

of luck and hang in their I hardly know I have mine except some one bumpes

it ,with a stethiscope ouch lol.

>From: & P <lbuzz2@...>

>Reply-egroups

>egroups

>Subject: (unknown)

>Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 16:15:13 -0400 (EDT)

>

>My dad had his icd since March 2000. He has felt horrible

>since he came home from the hospital. The icd has

>gone off a number of times because of aflutter.

>His doctor recommened ablation which he just had

>done on 9/1.

>We thought there would be a big improvement but he is

>still feeling the fluttering when he gets up to do something

>and feels a tighness in his throat.

>He is afraid to go out of the house.

>Has anyone had this problem?

>

>__________________________________________________________________

>Get Verizon Online DSL for $39.95 and get 30 days of free service!

>http://www.bellatlantic.net/promos/p2banet.html

_________________________________________________________________________

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at

http://profiles.msn.com.

September 8, 2000

The " cornflake swallow test " is performed to measure the time it takes

your esophagus to empty. You sit in front of an x-ray camera & a small

bowl of cornflakes injected w/ a radioactive material is fed to you. You

eat the whole bowl of cornflakes (they spoon feed you very quickly).

The cornflakes then show up on the screen & are watched for 30 minutes.

A picture is taken every 5 minutes & a graph is made at the end. The

graph shows (in 5 minute increments) how your esophagus is performing.

In my opinion it shows exactly what is happening while eating. I guess

it's kind of like a barium swallow but w/ food which is a bit more

realistic. Take care & keep posting! Mike

September 9, 2000

Simpson's recommended treatment is evening primrose oil.

Jim

September 9, 2000

I believe there was a published study in a major medical journal a couple of

years ago that indicated evening primrose oil provided no benefit. Steve

Bullock

Re: (unknown)

>

> Simpson's recommended treatment is evening primrose oil.

>

> Jim

>

> This list is intended for patients to share personal experiences with each

other, not to give medical advice. If you are interested in any treatment

discussed here, please consult your doctor.

>

September 9, 2000

So interesting. I know my rbc's are probably malformed - MCH and MCV ( I

think that is right) have been low consistently which I think shows they are

too small. And evening primrose oil - I come allergic to it on the

Serramune delayed allergic response test ( ACT). And all EFAs make me

really achy.

> Simpson's recommended treatment is evening primrose oil.

>

> Jim

September 14, 2000

,

I'm not sure what article you're referring to but my suggestion would be

to get her to read The New Arthritis Breakthrough. I think it's the

most clear, complete explanation of the treatment and why to try it. It

certainly convinced me in a hurry.

Hugs,

a Peden

Dan Hines wrote:

> Could someone please send me the article on the reason for antibiotic

> treatment. I can't find it. I just talked to someone who has RA for 8

> years and is taking a toxic mixture of meds. I hope to get her interested

> in the ap...

September 16, 2000

Lactic and pyruvate are consequences of the smoke from your metabolic fires,

this is chocking the cells and there is some disruption in the pathway, you

take a guess what caused it? MERCURY

Kathy

[ ] (unknown)

>

>Hi all, The Neuologist ordered these tests and gave no feedback????

>Thought I might get some here.

>

>Quest Diagnostics

>I am only posting out of range results

>1. Oragnic Acid <urine>

> 3-Hydroxyisobutyric 140H range 109 or less

> Glutaric 6H range 5 or less

> Adipic 72H range 15 or less

>

>2. Amino Acid <Plasma>

> Theonine 16L range 35-226

> Cystine 2L range 5-45

> Isoleucine 20L range 22-107

>

>3. Thyroid test

> Lactate & Pyruvate 16H range 3-12

> Blood Lactate, 1.776H range 0.3-1.3

> plasma

>

>4. Pyruvate,blood 0.97H range 0.3-0.7

> 0.111H range 0.034-0.080

>

>5. Comp Metabolic Panel

> Creatinine 0.4L ramge 0.6-1.5

> A/G ratio 2.4H range 0.9-2.1

> Biliruben,total 0.4 in range 0.2-1.4

>

>She did order a retest of the Lactate & Pyruvate.

>Thanks, Trish

>

>Reference ranges are from 3-11 years old. My ASD daughter is 28 mos.

>

September 16, 2000

Corny,

Sure! But, improving eyesight from what condition? Apples, oranges,

peaches, pears or plums?

jim

Mike E Cornwall wrote:

> I'm wondering if anyone has come across an effective means for improving

> eyesight naturally?

>

> Corny

September 19, 2000

At 04:32 PM 9/19/2000 -0400, you wrote:

>

>is there anyone out there that has a child with a learning disorder? my son

>has some kind of learning disorder and he keeps forgetting to bring his

>homework home with him,he also has alot of other things going on.they think

>as of right now that he might have ADD or ADHD.he will be tested on the 6 of

>oct and the 19 of oct.the tests are OT Eval and Lang. Eval.does any one have

>any ways to help me to get him to remember to bring things home from school

>or to just remember things?

>_________________________________________________________________________

>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

>

>Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at

>http://profiles.msn.com.

>

>The quick and dirty answer for this dilemma is to request that the child's

>teacher do the following:

>For each assignment, important note of communication, etc. the teacher

>should " observe " while she has the child place each document in his

>backpack to transport home for the day. Then the parent's responsibilty

>is to check the backpack for documents each day. Returned documents can

>be retrieved in the same way by the teacher.

In the meantime, work on alternate ideas for helping the child remember

on his own. Can he remember to tell mom that there are documents to read

" before " she checks?

Good luck,

Bill Howe, Counselor

San Independendent School District

September 19, 2000

Mike,

Mountainclimbers & hikers , as a group, have better vision. It is

understandable if you know that looking at long distances & focusing

there, strenghtens your eyes. And, looking up close weakens them. Which

do you do the most? Tell the truth! You know who you are! ;-))

Well.....that AND eating enough fresh raw green vegetables!

jim

Mike E Cornwall wrote:

> Jim

> What are the approaches for correcting vision (myopia) that you are aware

> of?

>

> Corny

-----

For every human problem, there is a neat, simple solution; and it is

always wrong -- H.L. Mencken

jlambert@... http://www.entrance.to/madscience

http://www.entrance.to/poetry

September 20, 2000

Ah, , if I were anywhere near you, I'd take you up on that offer.

I wouldn't say I was nasty, more surly this morning than anything.

Reading the political news can have that effect on me.

Dang politicians.

P

)

> Dear , You need a Dive in my tank, People go in nasty and come out

happy :-)

> Underpressure in CA,

>

> The Chamber maid

>

> OxyPLUS is an unmoderated e-ring dealing with oxidative therapies, and

other alternative self-help subjects.

>

> THERE IS NO MEDICAL ADVICE HERE!

>

> This list is the 1st Amendment in action. The things you will find here

are for information and research purposes only. We are people sharing

information we believe in. If you act on ideas found here, you do so at your

own risk. Self-help requires intelligence, common sense, and the ability to

take responsibility for your own actions. By joining the list you agree to

hold yourself FULLY responsible FOR yourself. Do not use any ideas found

here without consulting a medical professional, unless you are a researcher

or health care provider.

>

> You can unsubscribe via e-mail by sending A NEW e-mail to the following

address - NOT TO THE OXYPLUS LIST! -

> DO NOT USE REPLY BUTTON & DO NOT PUT THIS IN THE SUBJECT LINE or BODY of

the message! :

>

> oxyplus-unsubscribeegroups

>

> oxyplus-normalonelist - switch your subscription to normal mode.

>

September 20, 2000

Well if you ever are, stop by,,,

Be like me, I work so much, I do not even know what is happening in the world...

- Re: (unknown)

Ah, , if I were anywhere near you, I'd take you up on that offer.

I wouldn't say I was nasty, more surly this morning than anything.

Reading the political news can have that effect on me.

Dang politicians.

P

)

> Dear , You need a Dive in my tank, People go in nasty and come out

happy :-)

> Underpressure in CA,

>

> The Chamber maid

>

> OxyPLUS is an unmoderated e-ring dealing with oxidative therapies, and

other alternative self-help subjects.

>

> THERE IS NO MEDICAL ADVICE HERE!

>

> This list is the 1st Amendment in action. The things you will find here

are for information and research purposes only. We are people sharing

information we believe in. If you act on ideas found here, you do so at your

own risk. Self-help requires intelligence, common sense, and the ability to

take responsibility for your own actions. By joining the list you agree to

hold yourself FULLY responsible FOR yourself. Do not use any ideas found

here without consulting a medical professional, unless you are a researcher

or health care provider.

>

> You can unsubscribe via e-mail by sending A NEW e-mail to the following

address - NOT TO THE OXYPLUS LIST! -

> DO NOT USE REPLY BUTTON & DO NOT PUT THIS IN THE SUBJECT LINE or BODY of

the message! :

>

> oxyplus-unsubscribeegroups

>

> oxyplus-normalonelist - switch your subscription to normal mode.

>

OxyPLUS is an unmoderated e-ring dealing with oxidative therapies, and other

alternative self-help subjects.

THERE IS NO MEDICAL ADVICE HERE!

This list is the 1st Amendment in action. The things you will find here are for

information and research purposes only. We are people sharing information we

believe in. If you act on ideas found here, you do so at your own risk.

Self-help requires intelligence, common sense, and the ability to take

responsibility for your own actions. By joining the list you agree to hold

yourself FULLY responsible FOR yourself. Do not use any ideas found here

without consulting a medical professional, unless you are a researcher or health

care provider.

You can unsubscribe via e-mail by sending A NEW e-mail to the following address

- NOT TO THE OXYPLUS LIST! -

DO NOT USE REPLY BUTTON & DO NOT PUT THIS IN THE SUBJECT LINE or BODY of the

message! :

oxyplus-unsubscribeegroups

oxyplus-normalonelist - switch your subscription to normal mode.

September 20, 2000

Dear , Where do you recommend for a used multiplace chamber in good

condition. We might give it a go for children if we can find one that isn't

too expressive. I believe the multiplace would be better for CP plus a

number of other circumstances. Thanks. Your friend,

Sign In

Re: (unknown)

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest