Re: Lorie rants & makes her 2007 psychic predictions

[Guest guest]

right on lorie,perhaps upcoming class action litigation autobrewing this year will produce financial cosequences of belligerent denial and a change of heart and the labs will start to display and adhere to federal directions regarding this experimental not ready for prime time non FDA approved test....regards,rLorie <saclorie@...> wrote: While the whole EtG controversy is certainly not where we would like it to be, there has certainly been progress over the past 2

years. Until mid-2005, the term "incidental exposure" did not exist. It took the persistence of many people to convince Dr. Skipper that (1) their claims were absolutely possible, scientifically speaking and (2) someone needed to intervene on these people's behalf and advocate for what they were saying. Unfortunately, the lure of corporate profits was too much for some. As the evidence racked up that incidental exposure, including dermal and inhalation, to ethanol could account for positive EtG's, the labs changed to their "zero tolerance" strategy -- Those in zero tolerance programs, through vigilence, should not allow EtOH to enter their bodies and account for the presence of any EtG. Somehow, they need to keep the blame placed squarely upon the person being tested. And considering they are dealing with a population of addicts, alcoholics, and criminals -- Come on, it doesn't take a marketing genius to capitalize on these

stereotypes! But wait...I see two major flaws in their thinking. First, do we blame those who inhale second-hand cigarette smoke for the resulting negative health effects they suffer? We cannot hold a person accountable for EtOH absorption resulting from passive respiration! Second, show me a single shred of evidence that baseline EtG levels are zero. In fact, what are baseline EtG levels? Nobody knows! But we know that baseline alcohol levels (from endogenous production) are present in everyone, so there ARE baseline EtG levels. Bottom line...the marketing got way ahead of the science...The labs won't cut line now...big profits, admission of guilt, litigious nightmare... So what will 2007 bring? I think the tables will turn. Common sense and public outcry over this travesty will be heard. With their feet to the fire, accountability will be required from everyone. Perhaps a

little more basic research will even be done. But don't get hung up on that one. Remember, the labs will be held accountable for their BOLD CLAIMS in light of such a blatant lack of research. Stay tuned in 2007...I'm feeling very good about it all!!!

[Guest guest]

right on, guys!! I agree 100% I see an abundant and prosperous new year in my crystal ball.....oh wait, better not elude to the powers of my crystal ball or they will want to market that as a way to tell if someone drank!!!robin murray <remurraymd@...> wrote: right on lorie,perhaps upcoming class action litigation autobrewing this year will produce financial cosequences of belligerent denial and a change of heart and the

labs will start to display and adhere to federal directions regarding this experimental not ready for prime time non FDA approved test....regards,rLorie <saclorie > wrote: While the whole EtG controversy is certainly not where we would like it to be, there has certainly been progress over the past 2 years. Until mid-2005, the term "incidental exposure" did not exist. It took the persistence of many people to convince Dr. Skipper that (1) their claims were absolutely possible, scientifically speaking and (2) someone needed to intervene on these people's behalf and advocate for what they were saying. Unfortunately, the lure of corporate profits was too much for some. As the evidence racked up that incidental exposure, including dermal and

inhalation, to ethanol could account for positive EtG's, the labs changed to their "zero tolerance" strategy -- Those in zero tolerance programs, through vigilence, should not allow EtOH to enter their bodies and account for the presence of any EtG. Somehow, they need to keep the blame placed squarely upon the person being tested. And considering they are dealing with a population of addicts, alcoholics, and criminals -- Come on, it doesn't take a marketing genius to capitalize on these stereotypes! But wait...I see two major flaws in their thinking. First, do we blame those who inhale second-hand cigarette smoke for the resulting negative health effects they suffer? We cannot hold a person accountable for EtOH absorption resulting from passive respiration! Second, show me a single shred of evidence that baseline EtG levels are zero. In fact, what are baseline EtG levels? Nobody knows! But we know that baseline alcohol levels (from

endogenous production) are present in everyone, so there ARE baseline EtG levels. Bottom line...the marketing got way ahead of the science...The labs won't cut line now...big profits, admission of guilt, litigious nightmare... So what will 2007 bring? I think the tables will turn. Common sense and public outcry over this travesty will be heard. With their feet to the fire, accountability will be required from everyone. Perhaps a little more basic research will even be done. But don't get hung up on that one. Remember, the labs will be held accountable for their BOLD CLAIMS in light of such a blatant lack of research. Stay tuned in 2007...I'm feeling very good about it all!!!

Any questions? Get answers on any topic at Answers. Try it now.

[Guest guest]

well I head that the litigation was only pertaining to health cars professionals