off topic

[Guest guest]

i vote for unfettered release of the unconscious process. that's where all of

the really good stuff comes from. we can always grandfather in some sort of

oxygen relation.

[Guest guest]

SURE WRITE ME BACK SO WE CAN CHAT

[Guest guest]

How about Off-Topic-L

Chuck

I wouldn't hurt a fly, but only because they taste funny!

On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 19:00:19 -0500, Erma <erma3@...> wrote:

>Remember when this happened on the oxytherapy list........we spun off and

>became oxyplus........if you or anyone in the group does not want all of

>this off topic, I would be glad to start a group for anything that wants to

>be discussed. I just need a name............taking suggestions.

>

>Erma

[Guest guest]

Hello,

I vote to stick to oxy/ozone topics, ones that have at least a tie to the

oxy/ozone topic. Today I received 160 messages, and I down load them multiple

times each day.

There are lists for most all, if not totally all, of these Way Off Topics,

topics. There is the Raw Meat list, RawFoods list, the Dog/Cat list, MedPolPlus

(I am enjoying that one!), there must even be an Old Hippie/Used To Do Allotta

Drugs list : o)...

I am on Oxyplus for oxygen related topics. Yes I know all life is related to

oxygen...But I think a dis-service is being done to new and old members here by

going, as we used to say...off in the ozone, with the WayOffTopics, topics.

My suggestion, before beginning a new list, is to search the OneList and other

list servers, for the group that fits your interests. It's the old; Invent A

New Wheel thing.

Personally I miss the oxy talk and am hitting the Delete button way more than I

would like.

Thanks,

Diane

Erma wrote:

> Jim,

>

> Remember when this happened on the oxytherapy list........we spun off and

> became oxyplus........if you or anyone in the group does not want all of

> this off topic, I would be glad to start a group for anything that wants to

> be discussed. I just need a name............taking suggestions.

>

> Erma

[Guest guest]

Jim wrote:

Kenzie,

You are operating under a misconception: This list is NOT devoted

=====

only

=====

to

oxygen therapies. That is the oxylist at http://www.oxytherapy.com

This list splintered off from that list because we DID want to talk

about health subjects other than

=====

in addition to

=====

oxidative therapies. That is why it is

named oxy-plus.

jim

Kenzie wrote:

>

> Hello,

>

> I vote to stick to oxy/ozone topics, ones that have at least a tie to the

oxy/ozone topic.

Green

[Guest guest]

Kenzie,

You are operating under a misconception: This list is NOT devoted to

oxygen therapies. That is the oxylist at http://www.oxytherapy.com

This list splintered off from that list because we DID want to talk

about health subjects other than oxidative therapies. That is why it is

named oxy-plus.

jim

Kenzie wrote:

>

> Hello,

>

> I vote to stick to oxy/ozone topics, ones that have at least a tie to the

oxy/ozone topic.

[Guest guest]

:

I'm sorry I have no knowledge of the test but wish you all the best and want

you to know I am praying for you.

Love,

(mom to )

[Guest guest]

,

I had a stress test of the heart about 4 months ago because they are

considering putting in a pacemaker in me because of bradycardiac episodes

with dizziness and faintness. It is not a difficult or painful test. All

they do is hook you up to a machine which will measure heart rate/exercise

and your blood pressure is also monitored. You are put on a treadmill and

they start the exercise very slowly then increase the intensity

(speed/incline) until your heart reaches the max heart rate for your age. You

will be with a nurse the entire test and the doctor is in the room to read

the results immediately to let you know if there were any abnormalities. They

are looking how well your heart handles the stress put upon it from the

exercise. I think you should consider talking to your cardiologist and

mention your concerns. He should be able to answer any questions that you

might have. Good luck and let us know the outcome.

Belinda Rose,

Mom to Allyssa (10) and Cassie, (7), igg immunodeficient, asthma, sinusitis,

IVIG for 5 years (off for retesting)

[Guest guest]

walmart has an 1 inch

http://r1.us.rmi./rmi/http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.gsp;jses

sionid=5222067943fe67ec0176c61723fb8f81d2980bb68_10-15-20-196.20221.1022988500

158.ymm08k3hm1.:0f/rmivars%3ftarget=_top?product_id=1186142 &

sourceid=0100000012230215302434

CROSS AND ANGELS

white gold half inch

http://shop.store./crossesandangels/14whitgolcro2.html

gold half inch

http://click.shopping./clicks/src=14489115/dst=23501379/ctx=w:t,did:6

4,stid:crossesandangels,mid:47203,pid:14smalanddel,p:9.95,pf:,pt:,k:cross+gold

+small,q:,x:1/*http://shop.store./cgi-bin/clink?crossesandangels+shop

ping:dmks/cross_gold_small+14smalanddel.html

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/1/02 9:16:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time, codemann@...

writes:

> : -unsubscribe

>

>

[Guest guest]

Sorry I need to unsubscribe i wont be online much longer. im not doing well

so i dong get time to read all the massages anymore. I had 920 messages to

read within 1 month and I thank you for caring. I will try to keep in contact

with some of you. Thank you.

[Guest guest]

Perfect!! that was great.

Vern

Becoming Republican

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >There was a young teenage girl who was about to finish her first year

> of

> > > >college. She considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat and her

> > > >father was a rather staunch Republican.

> > > >

> > > >One day she was challenging her father on his beliefs and his

> opposition

> > to

> > > >programs like welfare. He stopped her and asked her how she was doing

> in

> > > >school.

> > > >

> > > >She answered that she had a 4.0 GPA but it was really tough. She had

to

> > > >study all the time, never had time to go out and party and often went

> > > >sleepless because all of the studying. She didn't have time for a

> > boyfriend

> > > > and didn't really have many college friends because of all her

> > studying.

> > > >

> > > >He then asked how her friend , who was attending the same

college,

> > was

> > > >doing.

> > > >

> > > >She replied that she was barely getting by. She had a 2.0 GPA, never

> > > >studied, was very popular on campus and was at parties all the time.

> She

> > > >often wouldn't show up for classes because she was hung over.

> > > >

> > > >He then asked his daughter why she didn't go to the Dean's office and

> ask

> > > >why she couldn't take 1.0 off her 4.0 and give it to her friend that

> only

> > > >had a 2.0. That way they would both have a 3.0 GPA.

> > > >

> > > >She fired back and said " that wouldn't be fair, I worked really hard

> for

> > > >mine and my friend has done nothing. "

> > > >

> > > >After a moment of silence, she replied, " I guess I will never vote

> > Democrat

> > > >again. "

> > > >

> > > >Kathy Huebner

> > >

> > >

> > > _________________________________________________________________

> > > STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*

> > > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

>

>

>

> OregonDCs rules:

> 1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the listserve is to

foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on listserve

members will be tolerated.

> 2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name.

> 3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up anywhere.

However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print, forward,

or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member without his

or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed.

>

>

[Guest guest]

A very good article and spot on. The US intelligence services are totally inept. There are a few reasons for this however.

Back in the 1960's, the CIA was watching various domestic groups because they had ties to Russia and were engaged in suspicious activity. So, some leftist Congressmen bulled through legislation restricting CIA activity and setting up oversight committees. This hampered their efforts.

In the 1990's, Clinton destroyed their Human Intelligence branch (that is the branch that uses spies and infiltrators in dangerous foreign groups like terrorists and drug operations). He passed a decree forbidding the CIA to use or associate with people of, I don't recall the exact phrase but, "ill repute". In other words, the CIA could not associate itself with terrorists or drug runners because that would make the US look bad. This left the CIA and other angencies totally reliant on spy satellites and communication intercepts.

The US has also always love gadgets. General Patton (a cousin of mine) once said that America had fine engineers and a talent for machines and that we should use our machines as much as possible to do our fighting rather than spend American lives. He had a point so far as it went. He said this not long after WW1 when so many millions had been slaughtered and maimed in the trenches. However, the US often had second rate equipment up until the 1980's. Even in WW2 our tanks were amongst the worst in the war, but at least we faired better with aircraft. Even today while we may have good tanks, we lag behind in many other regards, but that's another post.

China is building its military for one key purpose: to invade Taiwan and keep us from stopping it. For this they have been buying the latest anti-ship and anti-aircraft weapons. They have been buying deisel subs, which in coastal waters are better than nuclear subs because they are much quieter and very hard to detect.

The Chinese plan is what is called an "out of the blue" attack. That is to say, the Chinese would look like they were going to hold an exercise but then it became a real attack. It would happen so fast that it could be over before anyone could react, perhaps a few days of a week or two in this case. To facilitate this, China is acquiring enough high tech weapons to handle any US fleet in the area. Since we would likely only have one carrier group in the area, all the planes and missiles could be focussed on it. Given how light out anti-missile defenses are on our ships, many missiles would get through sinking or mauling a number of ships.

It would take time for another fleet to arrive. It would be slowed due to the threat of quiet deisel subs in the area, subs capable of firing more missiles from close in, giving little time to react. China would use that time to complete its conquest of Taiwan and pack it full of troops and supplies. This would mean a major counter-invasion to kick them out. That would put a large fleet at risk to more Chinese attacks, some of which would succeed. If we even did land troops, those would be China's best trained and equipped, which would make for a costly fight.

In addition, China has nuclear weapons which they have expressed a willingness to use. They have threatened many time to use them to stop US or anyone else from interfering with a Taiwan invasion. Just how serious they are is hard to measure. They might be able to get away with nuking a fleet, but blowing up a city of using and EMP to knock out the US electrical systems probably would get them hammered at least warhead per warhead.

Still, I think China is banking on it not coming to that. The US would not threaten to use nulcear weapons to froce China to leave Taiwan. They also probably think, probably rightly, that if they mauled a carrier group, that the losses would discourage the US from further mlitary action. Certainly if they destroyed or damaged follow up forces, then tide would quickly turn against military action. Certainly a land campaign limited to Taiwan would be very bloody and likely to turn the US against the effort.

What will be interesting to see is if the Chinese will use chemical weapons in the attack. That is one option they have seriously explored. The idea would be to hit the key military bases with non-persistant nerve gas fired by ballistic missile. This would kill of pin down many troops. The bases would then be attacked by paratroopers, who would arrive as the gas was dissapating. The use of gas would also panic the civilian population and the chaos would hamper Taiwanese military operations.

Still, you can bet the Chinese intelligence services have been watching. A few years ago there was a training operation held in the Persian Gulf. The US Navy was going to conduct a theoretical invasion. A former Marine was chosen to lead the opposition. He was going to be allowed only weapons that nation would be likely to have, which wasn't really a lot. At any rate, his speedboats equipped with anti-ship missiles "sank" US Navy ships and damaged several others. It went on from there all equally bad for the regulars. In the end, the military "refloated" the ships, brought back to life the dead soldiers and took away some of the oppositions positions and equipment. They did this because somehow this Marine cheated. He had to have cheated because the regulars had all this techonology and computer generated data on the battles as they were being fought that they HAD to have won. There was no way a Marine with a few radios and nothing more sophisticated than an old fashioned map board could have beaten the Navy and its computers. You can bet the Chinese watched that and learned. Just like the Japanese watched an learned when one of our own officers used our own planes to prove that Pearl Harbor could be successfully attacked from the air in 1938.

[Guest guest]

Learned a lot with your email. Maybe I will come back later on it to see if I find some points to discuss with ya.

Hugs

Marilia

Re: off topic

A very good article and spot on. The US intelligence services are totally inept. There are a few reasons for this however.

Back in the 1960's, the CIA was watching various domestic groups because they had ties to Russia and were engaged in suspicious activity. So, some leftist Congressmen bulled through legislation restricting CIA activity and setting up oversight committees. This hampered their efforts.

In the 1990's, Clinton destroyed their Human Intelligence branch (that is the branch that uses spies and infiltrators in dangerous foreign groups like terrorists and drug operations). He passed a decree forbidding the CIA to use or associate with people of, I don't recall the exact phrase but, "ill repute". In other words, the CIA could not associate itself with terrorists or drug runners because that would make the US look bad. This left the CIA and other angencies totally reliant on spy satellites and communication intercepts.

The US has also always love gadgets. General Patton (a cousin of mine) once said that America had fine engineers and a talent for machines and that we should use our machines as much as possible to do our fighting rather than spend American lives. He had a point so far as it went. He said this not long after WW1 when so many millions had been slaughtered and maimed in the trenches. However, the US often had second rate equipment up until the 1980's. Even in WW2 our tanks were amongst the worst in the war, but at least we faired better with aircraft. Even today while we may have good tanks, we lag behind in many other regards, but that's another post.

China is building its military for one key purpose: to invade Taiwan and keep us from stopping it. For this they have been buying the latest anti-ship and anti-aircraft weapons. They have been buying deisel subs, which in coastal waters are better than nuclear subs because they are much quieter and very hard to detect.

The Chinese plan is what is called an "out of the blue" attack. That is to say, the Chinese would look like they were going to hold an exercise but then it became a real attack. It would happen so fast that it could be over before anyone could react, perhaps a few days of a week or two in this case. To facilitate this, China is acquiring enough high tech weapons to handle any US fleet in the area. Since we would likely only have one carrier group in the area, all the planes and missiles could be focussed on it. Given how light out anti-missile defenses are on our ships, many missiles would get through sinking or mauling a number of ships.

It would take time for another fleet to arrive. It would be slowed due to the threat of quiet deisel subs in the area, subs capable of firing more missiles from close in, giving little time to react. China would use that time to complete its conquest of Taiwan and pack it full of troops and supplies. This would mean a major counter-invasion to kick them out. That would put a large fleet at risk to more Chinese attacks, some of which would succeed. If we even did land troops, those would be China's best trained and equipped, which would make for a costly fight.

In addition, China has nuclear weapons which they have expressed a willingness to use. They have threatened many time to use them to stop US or anyone else from interfering with a Taiwan invasion. Just how serious they are is hard to measure. They might be able to get away with nuking a fleet, but blowing up a city of using and EMP to knock out the US electrical systems probably would get them hammered at least warhead per warhead.

Still, I think China is banking on it not coming to that. The US would not threaten to use nulcear weapons to froce China to leave Taiwan. They also probably think, probably rightly, that if they mauled a carrier group, that the losses would discourage the US from further mlitary action. Certainly if they destroyed or damaged follow up forces, then tide would quickly turn against military action. Certainly a land campaign limited to Taiwan would be very bloody and likely to turn the US against the effort.

What will be interesting to see is if the Chinese will use chemical weapons in the attack. That is one option they have seriously explored. The idea would be to hit the key military bases with non-persistant nerve gas fired by ballistic missile. This would kill of pin down many troops. The bases would then be attacked by paratroopers, who would arrive as the gas was dissapating. The use of gas would also panic the civilian population and the chaos would hamper Taiwanese military operations.

Still, you can bet the Chinese intelligence services have been watching. A few years ago there was a training operation held in the Persian Gulf. The US Navy was going to conduct a theoretical invasion. A former Marine was chosen to lead the opposition. He was going to be allowed only weapons that nation would be likely to have, which wasn't really a lot. At any rate, his speedboats equipped with anti-ship missiles "sank" US Navy ships and damaged several others. It went on from there all equally bad for the regulars. In the end, the military "refloated" the ships, brought back to life the dead soldiers and took away some of the oppositions positions and equipment. They did this because somehow this Marine cheated. He had to have cheated because the regulars had all this techonology and computer generated data on the battles as they were being fought that they HAD to have won. There was no way a Marine with a few radios and nothing more sophisticated than an old fashioned map board could have beaten the Navy and its computers. You can bet the Chinese watched that and learned. Just like the Japanese watched an learned when one of our own officers used our own planes to prove that Pearl Harbor could be successfully attacked from the air in 1938.

[Guest guest]

Hey Adam from Pa my wish is for a pleasant weekend for you as well and all the others. Hugs Adam Wilder <bermudatriangle1793@...> wrote: Adam here, I simply wanted to wish everyone a pleasant weekend and will have more to say in the general context next week.Signed,Adam

Get your email and more, right on the new .com

[Guest guest]

I love that song by Mercy Me. One of my favorites.

I think I saw this father and son on a tv program recently. Awesome!

Wish all fathers were like that.

Thanks for sharing it, Chris.

BJ

>

> Just wanted to pass this video on, shared in another group. I know we

> OCD parents struggle but this video was inspiring and touching! (hope

> the link works)

>

> http://www.metacafe.com/watch/460162/can_world_strongest_dad/

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

That was a beautiful, amazing video. Thank you for posting the link...

[Guest guest]

My doc office routinely calls in my prescriptions... Rx calling/faxing my doc and getting a refill taken care of is also standard operating procedure... doc doesn't charge me anything to respond and take care of this... sounds like the doc is 'nickel & diming' you but I don't know what else he charges you... maybe my doc charges more for an office visit ($95.00 minimum) and this is why he doesn't charge for this incidental stuff... he does charge me to fill out forms and such though so I guess it depends on the doc and their rate structure...

I'd definitely discuss it further with them...

off topic

A few weeks ago I needed refills for hiv meds...I asked the doc's office to mail me an rx cause my appt wasn't for a week later and i didn't have enough..Sec. said that i should have my pharmacy call in the rx on a rx that had no more refills..Went fine..Went to office for a dr visit and they told me i owe them$10 for when they must fax back to the pharmacy..IS this usual?? should i pay>??? suggestions? ? thanks

AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.

[Guest guest]

My doc office routinely calls in my prescriptions... Rx calling/faxing my doc and getting a refill taken care of is also standard operating procedure... doc doesn't charge me anything to respond and take care of this... sounds like the doc is 'nickel & diming' you but I don't know what else he charges you... maybe my doc charges more for an office visit ($95.00 minimum) and this is why he doesn't charge for this incidental stuff... he does charge me to fill out forms and such though so I guess it depends on the doc and their rate structure...

I'd definitely discuss it further with them...

off topic

A few weeks ago I needed refills for hiv meds...I asked the doc's office to mail me an rx cause my appt wasn't for a week later and i didn't have enough..Sec. said that i should have my pharmacy call in the rx on a rx that had no more refills..Went fine..Went to office for a dr visit and they told me i owe them$10 for when they must fax back to the pharmacy..IS this usual?? should i pay>??? suggestions? ? thanks

AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.

[Guest guest]

My doc office routinely calls in my prescriptions... Rx calling/faxing my doc and getting a refill taken care of is also standard operating procedure... doc doesn't charge me anything to respond and take care of this... sounds like the doc is 'nickel & diming' you but I don't know what else he charges you... maybe my doc charges more for an office visit ($95.00 minimum) and this is why he doesn't charge for this incidental stuff... he does charge me to fill out forms and such though so I guess it depends on the doc and their rate structure...

I'd definitely discuss it further with them...

off topic

A few weeks ago I needed refills for hiv meds...I asked the doc's office to mail me an rx cause my appt wasn't for a week later and i didn't have enough..Sec. said that i should have my pharmacy call in the rx on a rx that had no more refills..Went fine..Went to office for a dr visit and they told me i owe them$10 for when they must fax back to the pharmacy..IS this usual?? should i pay>??? suggestions? ? thanks

AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.

[Guest guest]

my man

my answer is hell no, never heard of it before,don't pay him a penny.

I do use more than 10 medications so it will cost me a 100 $ to refill my

medication

dump your doctor's ass

Good luck

off topic

A few weeks ago I needed refills for hiv meds...I asked the doc's office to

mail me an rx cause my appt wasn't for a week later and i didn't have

enough..Sec. said that i should have my pharmacy call in the rx on a rx that had

no more refills..Went fine..Went to office for a dr visit and they told me i

owe them$10 for when they must fax back to the pharmacy..IS this usual?? should

i pay>??? suggestions? ? thanks

________________________________________________________________________________\

____

8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time

with the Search movie showtime shortcut.

http://tools.search./shortcuts/#news

[Guest guest]

"..Went to office for a dr visit and they told me i owe them$10 for when they must fax back to the pharmacy..IS this usual?? "Many HIV practices are doing so poorly economically that they must charge for every single service they provide to stay in business.   HIV medicine requires lots of lab test and specialized services, yet HMOs reimburse typically at rates for doctors with a patient population including those who see the doctor every two years for a routine physical. Barrowpozbod@...

[Guest guest]

"..Went to office for a dr visit and they told me i owe them$10 for when they must fax back to the pharmacy..IS this usual?? "Many HIV practices are doing so poorly economically that they must charge for every single service they provide to stay in business.   HIV medicine requires lots of lab test and specialized services, yet HMOs reimburse typically at rates for doctors with a patient population including those who see the doctor every two years for a routine physical. Barrowpozbod@...

[Guest guest]

"..Went to office for a dr visit and they told me i owe them$10 for when they must fax back to the pharmacy..IS this usual?? "Many HIV practices are doing so poorly economically that they must charge for every single service they provide to stay in business.   HIV medicine requires lots of lab test and specialized services, yet HMOs reimburse typically at rates for doctors with a patient population including those who see the doctor every two years for a routine physical. Barrowpozbod@...

[Guest guest]

nadonm wrote:

>

>and still use it you will find that small

> stuff can make you happy.

>

years ago I decided that I wanted to be a happier person than I was and

so I started looking for small things to be happy about, and since I was

looking I found them. The more things you find to make you happy, the

happier you are overall. It seems kind of simplistic, but it's true. A

whole bunch of little moments of happiness with a few big things thrown

in add up to a lot more time spent being happy than just those few big

things. Happiness can be a choice.

Tasha