Re: Facts about Wakefield and his Report

[Guest guest]

May I suggest removing your bonnet?

> I have a bee in my bonnet about Wakefield and his report that

> has endangered so many children, caused so much trouble and spawned

> purposely ill-informed celebrities like McCarthy to pop up.

Irony: Best claims that the audience fixates on the doctor beside her

in talk shows rather than her. May I suggest he also read the actual

documentation, and stop drinking kool-aid....

> For those of you who are interested in a few details about Wakefield,

> I've compiled some revealing facts for you to read.

>

> Raven

> Co-Administration

>

> *********************************************************************

>

> According to the figures released under the Freedom of Information

> Act, Wakefield was paid £435,643 in fees, plus £3,910 expenses by a

> team of lawyers wanting a specific testimony to fit their lawsuit. It

> would appear quite profitable to start vaccine litigation when one

> can fleece the British tax payer to the tune of nearly half a million

> pounds.

>

> What's more, the lawyers invested a considerable amount of money into

> the 'research' and the children in the study used as evidence against

> the vaccine were also claimants in the lawsuit. This professional

> misconduct for unreported conflicts of interest and highly unethical

> and unprofessional behavior is ignored by militant anti-vaccine

> parents.

And what kind of " research " , perhaps which colour bathroom is most appealing...

>

> Wakefield's work for the lawyers began two years before he published

> his now notorious report in The Lancet medical journal in February

> 1998, proposing a link between the vaccine and autism. That being

> said, even though Wakefield never proved there was a link, he led a

> campaign in the UK that caused immunisation rates to slump from 92%

> to 77%. For the first time in 20 years, children in G8 countries are

> DYING from measles because their parents have not had them

> innoculated against measles.

>

> Still militant anti-vaccine parents cling to the concept that dying

> from measles is preferable to living with Autism (which will not kill

> the individual).

I seem to enjoy my life, with all of it's rich facets. I think perhaps

those parents (I prefer not to use the term " militant " as they are not

taking up arms (although Mr. Best seems to want a bloody fight).

Extremists, yes.) it might do them well to ask an aspie/autie for

their opinion.

>

> Wakefield did not disclose when he published his 'results' that he

> had applied for a patent for a single jab vaccine for measles that

> would have been highly profitable if the MMR jab was abandoned.

> Again, this was yet another case of professional misconduct for

> unreported conflicts of interest and highly unethical and

> unprofessional behavior.

He should probably have asked another doctor to double check him at

the very least.

>

> But let's take a look at some of those 12 children in the original

> Wakefield study.

>

> Child One, from Cottesmore, Leicestershire and was 3½ years old.

> Wakefield and his team reporting that Child One's parents

> said " behavioural symptoms " started " one week " after he received the

> MMR.

>

> The boy's medical records reveal a subtly different story, one

> familiar to mothers and fathers of autistic children. At the age of

> 9½ months, 10 weeks before his jab, his mother had become worried

> that he did not hear properly: the classic first symptom presented by

> sufferers of autism. Child One was among the eight reported with the

> apparent sudden onset of the condition.

>

> Child Two, an eight-year-old boy from borough, Cambridgeshire,

> who was diagnosed with regressive autism. Wakefield's report stated

> that symptoms associated with Autism started 2 weeks after receiving

> the MMR jab. Child Two's medical records, backed by numerous

> specialist assessments, said his problems began four and five months

> later. The difference between 14 days and a few months is quite

> significant wherein children are concerned.

>

> Wakefield's report claimed that Child Three suffered from regressive

> autism and bowel disease: specifically " acute and chronic nonspecific

> colitis " . The boy's hospital discharge summary, however, said there

> was nothing untoward in his biopsy.

>

> Child Six, aged 5, received his vaccine at the age of 14 months, but

> had twice previously been admitted with fits. Wakefield's report

> diagnosed him with regressive autism with an onset of symptoms 1 week

> after the jab.

>

> Child Seven, aged 3, received his vaccine at the age of 20 months.

> Wakefield's report diagnosed him with regressive autism as well with

> an onset of symptoms 24 hours " after the MMR jab.

>

> But medical records show that neither boy was " previously normal " and

> that both children had already been hospitalised with brain problems

> long before their MMR jabs.

>

> In fact, Child Seven was diagnosed with " pathological demand

> avoidance syndrome " . This usually manifests as social

> manipulativeness, and is nothing like the " syndrome " being claimed.

> It is sometimes marked by a child putting his hands on his ears,

> while singing " lah-lah-lah, can't hear you " . Furthermore,the child

> had had an EEG done at 15 months, which was abnormal.

>

> Child Eight, aged 3, from Whitley Bay, Tyne & Wear was reported in

> Wakefield's report as having suffered a brain injury 2 weeks after

> MMR. Her medical records did not support this. Before she was

> admitted, she had been seen by local specialists, and her GP told the

> Royal Free of " significant concerns about her development some months

> before she had her MMR jab " .

>

> Three of the other children had been diagnosed with Asperger

> Syndrome, in which language is not lost, and which is not regressive,

> and which is nothing like what afflicted Child One and Child Two.

>

> The factual information is available for those who wish to make time

> to read and internalize and research the facts. And still militant

> anti-vaccine parents refuse act logically, insisting that

> their 'parent instinct' is more accurate than facts.

>

> Autism usually reveals itself in the second year of life, when the

> vaccine is routinely given. This is also a fact.

>

>

[Guest guest]

" I have a bee in my bonnet about Wakefield and... "

Ditto, I was just thinking about this last night. It has been really

getting to me that this guy is still working and earning and IMO has

not suffered any real consequences for the vast amount of damage he

has caused.

" Still militant anti-vaccine parents cling to the concept that dying

from measles is preferable to living with Autism (which will not kill

the individual). "

Nor do I understand parents that withold vaccines that could prevent

the death of their children. I am a cautious parent, I recall my son

getting his MMR, there were some fears around vaccinations even back

then. I by no means automatically and blindly trust doctors, due to

the things that happened to me when I was younger concerning doctors;

however I discussed my fears with the doctor at the time, fortunately

a reasonable doctor.

There was a very small risk that a child would re-act badly to the

MMR and that is why after the vaccine one had to wait with their

child in the surgery for 15mins, if the rare re-action was to occur,

it would occur quite quickly. Also the rare re-action against the

vaccine, as the wording implies was/is very 'rare' and weighed

agaisnt the fact that the illnesses that it vaccinates agaisnt can

and do kill! I seriously do not understand some parents :-( I know

that they have to do what they feel is best for their child and

answer to their own conscience, but I really do not get where they

are coming from, how they can be so misguided and not understand that

they are putting their own child and others at risk.

>

> I have a bee in my bonnet about Wakefield and his report

that

> has endangered so many children, caused so much trouble and spawned

> purposely ill-informed celebrities like McCarthy to pop up.

> For those of you who are interested in a few details about

Wakefield,

> I've compiled some revealing facts for you to read.

>

> Raven

> Co-Administration

>

>

*********************************************************************

>

> According to the figures released under the Freedom of Information

> Act, Wakefield was paid £435,643 in fees, plus £3,910 expenses by a

> team of lawyers wanting a specific testimony to fit their lawsuit.

It

> would appear quite profitable to start vaccine litigation when one

> can fleece the British tax payer to the tune of nearly half a

million

> pounds.

>

> What's more, the lawyers invested a considerable amount of money

into

> the 'research' and the children in the study used as evidence

against

> the vaccine were also claimants in the lawsuit. This professional

> misconduct for unreported conflicts of interest and highly

unethical

> and unprofessional behavior is ignored by militant anti-vaccine

> parents.

>

> Wakefield's work for the lawyers began two years before he

published

> his now notorious report in The Lancet medical journal in February

> 1998, proposing a link between the vaccine and autism. That being

> said, even though Wakefield never proved there was a link, he led a

> campaign in the UK that caused immunisation rates to slump from 92%

> to 77%. For the first time in 20 years, children in G8 countries

are

> DYING from measles because their parents have not had them

> innoculated against measles.

>

> Still militant anti-vaccine parents cling to the concept that dying

> from measles is preferable to living with Autism (which will not

kill

> the individual).

>

> Wakefield did not disclose when he published his 'results' that he

> had applied for a patent for a single jab vaccine for measles that

> would have been highly profitable if the MMR jab was abandoned.

> Again, this was yet another case of professional misconduct for

> unreported conflicts of interest and highly unethical and

> unprofessional behavior.

>

> But let's take a look at some of those 12 children in the original

> Wakefield study.

>

> Child One, from Cottesmore, Leicestershire and was 3½ years old.

> Wakefield and his team reporting that Child One's parents

> said " behavioural symptoms " started " one week " after he received

the

> MMR.

>

> The boy's medical records reveal a subtly different story, one

> familiar to mothers and fathers of autistic children. At the age of

> 9½ months, 10 weeks before his jab, his mother had become worried

> that he did not hear properly: the classic first symptom presented

by

> sufferers of autism. Child One was among the eight reported with

the

> apparent sudden onset of the condition.

>

> Child Two, an eight-year-old boy from borough, Cambridgeshire,

> who was diagnosed with regressive autism. Wakefield's report stated

> that symptoms associated with Autism started 2 weeks after

receiving

> the MMR jab. Child Two's medical records, backed by numerous

> specialist assessments, said his problems began four and five

months

> later. The difference between 14 days and a few months is quite

> significant wherein children are concerned.

>

> Wakefield's report claimed that Child Three suffered from

regressive

> autism and bowel disease: specifically " acute and chronic

nonspecific

> colitis " . The boy's hospital discharge summary, however, said there

> was nothing untoward in his biopsy.

>

> Child Six, aged 5, received his vaccine at the age of 14 months,

but

> had twice previously been admitted with fits. Wakefield's report

> diagnosed him with regressive autism with an onset of symptoms 1

week

> after the jab.

>

> Child Seven, aged 3, received his vaccine at the age of 20 months.

> Wakefield's report diagnosed him with regressive autism as well

with

> an onset of symptoms 24 hours " after the MMR jab.

>

> But medical records show that neither boy was " previously normal "

and

> that both children had already been hospitalised with brain

problems

> long before their MMR jabs.

>

> In fact, Child Seven was diagnosed with " pathological demand

> avoidance syndrome " . This usually manifests as social

> manipulativeness, and is nothing like the " syndrome " being claimed.

> It is sometimes marked by a child putting his hands on his ears,

> while singing " lah-lah-lah, can't hear you " . Furthermore,the child

> had had an EEG done at 15 months, which was abnormal.

>

> Child Eight, aged 3, from Whitley Bay, Tyne & Wear was reported in

> Wakefield's report as having suffered a brain injury 2 weeks after

> MMR. Her medical records did not support this. Before she was

> admitted, she had been seen by local specialists, and her GP told

the

> Royal Free of " significant concerns about her development some

months

> before she had her MMR jab " .

>

> Three of the other children had been diagnosed with Asperger

> Syndrome, in which language is not lost, and which is not

regressive,

> and which is nothing like what afflicted Child One and Child Two.

>

> The factual information is available for those who wish to make

time

> to read and internalize and research the facts. And still militant

> anti-vaccine parents refuse act logically, insisting that

> their 'parent instinct' is more accurate than facts.

>

> Autism usually reveals itself in the second year of life, when the

> vaccine is routinely given. This is also a fact.

>

[Guest guest]

Hi :

Possibly the parents who oppose vaccines have never encountered some one ill with one of the diseases that they won't permit their child to be vaccinated against.

I am not defending their choice, merely thinking it may be a choice based on ignorance.

In Canada, I have met people who had polio as a child, some with 'pox' from Small pox, a person who had a lung removed due to Tuberculosis. (in the 1950's)

BUT I have not encountered some one with those diseases active.

My mom told me of families in her village being quarantined due to communicable diseases..I think diptheria and scarlet fever? and spoke of the 'Sanitorium" for tuberculosis patients in Hamilton during the 1930's and 1940's. ..(Hamilton Ontario)

In the city where I now live, there was an isolation hospital in the 1930's and 40's, the building is a protected historical resource.

I realize quarantine may be necessary to protect others But hate the thoughts of an innocent person being confined.

Apparently as more people are not vaccinated against some diseases, these diseases may become more widespread again.

renaissanzelady

Subject: Re: Facts about Wakefield and his ReportTo: FAMSecretSociety Received: Wednesday, February 18, 2009, 1:53 AM

"I have a bee in my bonnet about Wakefield and..."Ditto, I was just thinking about this last night. It has been really getting to me that this guy is still working and earning and IMO has not suffered any real consequences for the vast amount of damage he has caused."Still militant anti-vaccine parents cling to the concept that dying from measles is preferable to living with Autism (which will not kill the individual). "Nor do I understand parents that withold vaccines that could prevent the death of their children. I am a cautious parent, I recall my son getting his MMR, there were some fears around vaccinations even back then. I by no means automatically and blindly trust doctors, due to the things that happened to me when I was younger concerning doctors; however I discussed my fears with the doctor at the time, fortunately a reasonable doctor.There was a very

small risk that a child would re-act badly to the MMR and that is why after the vaccine one had to wait with their child in the surgery for 15mins, if the rare re-action was to occur, it would occur quite quickly. Also the rare re-action against the vaccine, as the wording implies was/is very 'rare' and weighed agaisnt the fact that the illnesses that it vaccinates agaisnt can and do kill! I seriously do not understand some parents :-( I know that they have to do what they feel is best for their child and answer to their own conscience, but I really do not get where they are coming from, how they can be so misguided and not understand that they are putting their own child and others at risk.>> I have a

bee in my bonnet about Wakefield and his report that > has endangered so many children, caused so much trouble and spawned > purposely ill-informed celebrities like McCarthy to pop up. > For those of you who are interested in a few details about Wakefield, > I've compiled some revealing facts for you to read.> > Raven> Co-Administration> > ************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ***> > According to the figures released under the Freedom of Information > Act, Wakefield was paid £435,643 in fees, plus £3,910 expenses by a > team of lawyers wanting a specific testimony to fit their lawsuit. It > would appear quite profitable to start vaccine litigation when one > can fleece the British tax payer to the tune of nearly half a million > pounds.> > What's more, the

lawyers invested a considerable amount of money into > the 'research' and the children in the study used as evidence against > the vaccine were also claimants in the lawsuit. This professional > misconduct for unreported conflicts of interest and highly unethical > and unprofessional behavior is ignored by militant anti-vaccine > parents.> > Wakefield's work for the lawyers began two years before he published > his now notorious report in The Lancet medical journal in February > 1998, proposing a link between the vaccine and autism. That being > said, even though Wakefield never proved there was a link, he led a > campaign in the UK that caused immunisation rates to slump from 92% > to 77%. For the first time in 20 years, children in G8 countries are > DYING from measles because their parents have not had them > innoculated against

measles.> > Still militant anti-vaccine parents cling to the concept that dying > from measles is preferable to living with Autism (which will not kill > the individual).> > Wakefield did not disclose when he published his 'results' that he > had applied for a patent for a single jab vaccine for measles that > would have been highly profitable if the MMR jab was abandoned. > Again, this was yet another case of professional misconduct for > unreported conflicts of interest and highly unethical and > unprofessional behavior.> > But let's take a look at some of those 12 children in the original > Wakefield study.> > Child One, from Cottesmore, Leicestershire and was 3½ years old. > Wakefield and his team reporting that Child One's parents > said "behavioural symptoms" started "one week" after he received the > MMR.

> > The boy's medical records reveal a subtly different story, one > familiar to mothers and fathers of autistic children. At the age of > 9½ months, 10 weeks before his jab, his mother had become worried > that he did not hear properly: the classic first symptom presented by > sufferers of autism. Child One was among the eight reported with the > apparent sudden onset of the condition. > > Child Two, an eight-year-old boy from borough, Cambridgeshire, > who was diagnosed with regressive autism. Wakefield's report stated > that symptoms associated with Autism started 2 weeks after receiving > the MMR jab. Child Two's medical records, backed by numerous > specialist assessments, said his problems began four and five months > later. The difference between 14 days and a few months is quite > significant wherein children are

concerned.> > Wakefield's report claimed that Child Three suffered from regressive > autism and bowel disease: specifically "acute and chronic nonspecific > colitis". The boy's hospital discharge summary, however, said there > was nothing untoward in his biopsy.> > Child Six, aged 5, received his vaccine at the age of 14 months, but > had twice previously been admitted with fits. Wakefield's report > diagnosed him with regressive autism with an onset of symptoms 1 week > after the jab.> > Child Seven, aged 3, received his vaccine at the age of 20 months. > Wakefield's report diagnosed him with regressive autism as well with > an onset of symptoms 24 hours" after the MMR jab. > > But medical records show that neither boy was "previously normal" and > that both children had already been hospitalised with brain

problems > long before their MMR jabs. > > In fact, Child Seven was diagnosed with "pathological demand > avoidance syndrome". This usually manifests as social > manipulativeness, and is nothing like the "syndrome" being claimed. > It is sometimes marked by a child putting his hands on his ears, > while singing "lah-lah-lah, can't hear you". Furthermore, the child > had had an EEG done at 15 months, which was abnormal.> > Child Eight, aged 3, from Whitley Bay, Tyne & Wear was reported in > Wakefield's report as having suffered a brain injury 2 weeks after > MMR. Her medical records did not support this. Before she was > admitted, she had been seen by local specialists, and her GP told the > Royal Free of "significant concerns about her development some months > before she had her MMR jab". > > Three of the other children

had been diagnosed with Asperger > Syndrome, in which language is not lost, and which is not regressive, > and which is nothing like what afflicted Child One and Child Two. > > The factual information is available for those who wish to make time > to read and internalize and research the facts. And still militant > anti-vaccine parents refuse act logically, insisting that > their 'parent instinct' is more accurate than facts.> > Autism usually reveals itself in the second year of life, when the > vaccine is routinely given. This is also a fact.>

All new Yahoo! Mail - Get a sneak peak at messages with a handy reading pane.

[Guest guest]

renaissanzelady wrote: " Possibly the parents who oppose vaccines

have never encountered someone ill with one of the diseases that they

won't permit their child to be vaccinated against ... <snip> ... "

The first DEATHS from measles in the UK happened in 2007 after a 20

year period. Almost an entire generation free from death caused by

measles. However, that does not excuse parents from taking the time

to educate themselves on WHY they ought to vaccinate their children

and what COULD happen if their children are not protected against

certain childhood diseases.

Pertussis (whooping cough) -- a fatal illness for infants especially -

- was wiped out in America according to WHO and specifically BECAUSE

of the pertussis vaccination. In 2004, the number of whooping cough

cases spiked past 25,000 — the highest level since the 1950s --

BECAUSE parents were refusing to innoculate their children due to

the 'Vaccines Cause Autism' myth.

The CDC reported that in 2000, there was a 100% drop in the number of

deaths from diphtheria, measles, smallpox, rubella (German measles),

paralytic poliomyelitis (the most severe type of polio), and invasive

Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) disease from one hundred years

earlier. Unfortunately, that record no longer exists BECAUSE of the

parents who refused to innoculate their children due to the 'Vaccines

Cause Autism' myth.

Officially smallpox was eradicated in 1980.

Twenty years ago many infectious diseases were on the brink of

extinction.

A study published by epidemiologists from s Hopkins Bloomberg

School of Public Health in December 2008 in the American Journal of

Epidemiology examined school children in Michigan whose parents had

chosen not to vaccinate them. They compared clusters of unvaccinated

children with clusters of documented whooping cough (pertussis)

outbreaks. Not surprisingly, the clusters overlapped. The authors

concluded: "

Geographic pockets of vaccine exemptors pose a

risk to the whole community [end quote]. "

Ignorance of the law is no excuse according to law enforcement.

Ignorance of health facts is also no excuse then for endangering

one's own child/ren as well as someone else's child/ren.

renaissanzelady wrote: " ... <snip> ... I am not defending their

choice, merely thinking it may be a choice based on ignorance ...

<snip> ... "

Decisions made from ignorance is no excuse and decisions based on

hysterical mythology has no good reason. It is a parent's

responsibility to conduct due diligence before making any decisions

that will affect their minor child/ren directly and/or indirectly as

well as affect other people's minor child/ren directly and/or

indirectly.

renaissanzelady wrote: " ... <snip> ... In Canada, I have met people

who had polio as a child, some with 'pox' from Small pox, a person

who had a lung removed due to Tuberculosis. (in the 1950's) BUT I

have not encountered some one with those diseases active ...

<snip> ... "

That's odd regarding the TB situation especially since Saskatchewan

and Manitoba have TB clinics in their major hospitals BECAUSE there

is such a high incidence of active TB in both those provinces,

especially in the Aboriginal populations.

renaissanzelady wrote: " ... <snip> ... My mom told me of families

in her village being quarantined due to communicable diseases..I

think diptheria and scarlet fever? and spoke of the 'Sanitorium " for

tuberculosis patients in Hamilton during the 1930's and 1940's. ..

(Hamilton Ontario) In the city where I now live, there was an

isolation hospital in the 1930's and 40's, the building is a

protected historical resource ... <snip> ... "

I was diagnosed with scarlet fever in 1969 and I have known others

who contracted scarlet fever in the 1970s. Scarlet fever is not an

illnesses whose last known appearance is relegated to the Depression

and WWII years.

Buildings are designated protected historical resources as evaluated

for their architectural, historical or contextual value. The

isolation hospital would not have been preserved solely because no

one contracts a disease in the present that requires isolation

(quarantining).

renaissanzelady wrote: " ... <snip> ... I realize quarantine may be

necessary to protect others But hate the thoughts of an innocent

person being confined ... <snip> ... "

Quarantine not only protects others from contracting something like

measles or small pox or scarlet fever, it protects the individual who

has the illness from further endangering their own life.

renaissanzelady wrote: " ... <snip> ... Apparently as more people

are not vaccinated against some diseases, these diseases may become

more widespread again ... <snip> ... "

That's not a possibility; that's a reality.

Raven

[Guest guest]

Quarantines and Sanitariums were harsh things, but when you have a disease that is easily spread and can't be treated, that is the only logical step. Since many diseases are developing immunity to antibiotics, thanks largely to their overuse by doctors and also feeding them to livestock (which is totally unnecessary even in crowded conditions), we may well see the return of such things.

I think we will see either the bird flu, drug-resistant TB, or drug-resistant MRSA (the flesh-eating bacteria) cause this to happen. The bird flu would be terrible but short lived. TB can stay in a population pretty much forever. MSRA is spreading out of the hospitals and into the general population. Just how bad it will be remains to be seen.

It would just be nice if people would use a little logic and what they should have learned in high school science class. If an antibacterial soap says that it kills 99.9% of germs, then that 0.1% that survives is going to have a chance of being resistant. It will then pass that resistance along to its progeny. If they are exposed to the same stuff, then the cycle repeats. The same also happened with medicine and cleaning solutions in the hospitals.

Mind you, I would hate to be in such a place, a Sanitarium, but if the choice was letting people with incurable, readily contagious diseases run loose and unmarked on the streets, potentially infecting all they meet, then Sanitariums it will be. Now, if the person was capable of living at home under quarantine, then that would be an option, it would be a matter of supplying them with food, care if they needed it, and monitoring them to keep them in the house.

I realize quarantine may be necessary to protect others But hate the thoughts of an innocent person being confined.

Apparently as more people are not vaccinated against some diseases, these diseases may become more widespread again.

renaissanzelady Need a job? Find an employment agency near you.

[Guest guest]

" I seriously do not understand some parents :-( I know

that they have to do what they feel is best for their child and

answer to their own conscience, but I really do not get where they

are coming from, how they can be so misguided and not understand that

they are putting their own child and others at risk. "

One would think that their own conscience would tell them to research

the autism and vaccine myth more rather than trust in the fear

mongerers and risk the life of their child/ren, but they don't seem

to do this.

People have a hard time believing in science, but they believe in

myth, UFOs, etc. You name it.

Like you, I don't understand it either.

Administrator

[Guest guest]

" My mom told me of families in her village being quarantined due to

communicable diseases..I think diptheria and scarlet fever? and spoke

of the 'Sanitorium " for tuberculosis patients in Hamilton during the

1930's and 1940's. "

I remember when I was very young my dad driving us to visit my

grandparents in Chicago every other Sunday and we would pass a gated

area with a sign over the entrance marked " Sanitorium. "

I did not like the word.

I did not know what the word meant at the time but associated it with

the word " Sanitary. " My mother explained to me what a Sanitorium was

and I asked if there were still people there. Neither my mother or

father knew, and so I began to worry about whether there were people

there or not and what would become of them.

Eventually I heard on the news they were tearing it down.

That was an immense relief to me.

Administrator

[Guest guest]

Hi Raven and others who have posted knowledgebly on this topic and vaccinations;My contacts and knowledge of the people I meet are quite narrow or limited, I might have met people who had tuberculosis or other diseases but don't know their background. renaissanzelady " ... <snip> ... Apparently as more people

are not vaccinated against some diseases, these diseases may become

more widespread again ... <snip> ... "

That's not a possibility; that's a reality.

Raven

Yahoo! Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now!