Why the University of Google bothers pro-vaxers so much - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-27-2007, 02:50 PM
 
delphiniumpansy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: north of the equator
Posts: 2,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktbug View Post
Look. Let's steer it back to the topic at hand, shall we?

Yellowpansy, would you care to tell the University of Googlers what would be wrong with a vaccine study which gave the control group, let's say, an adjuvant-free version of the vaccine being tested? Obviously, we can't go stepping on medical ethics to give the control group sterile saline (my GOD! what if they all died of mumps!?), but what would be wrong with an adjuvant-free control shot?

Just for sh*ts and giggles, you know.
Apparently,I cannot leave this thread. :

This is not my area of expertise. I understand it in basic terms but I am not well versed enough to explain it and do it justice. Perhaps some PhD candidates will pop up and explain it more fully? willysmom or sm?
delphiniumpansy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 10-27-2007, 02:51 PM
 
mykdsmomy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: On the way to or from Starbucks
Posts: 3,170
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowpansy View Post
First of all, did you read my post where I stated that elementary school kids can be taught to figure out if website is valid or not? Secondly, spirituality is faith-based and not scientific or logical. Science is based on logic and reason. Why would we argue science in the spirituality board? That would be illogical. :

forgive my ignorance with grammar and spelling but would you agree that science is not always black and white? There are holes and flaws in science. Meds that are proven (scientifically) to be safe one day are taken off the market the next....

Here's me I married then we had dd15 , dd11 , ds10 , and then and now we and I blog!
mykdsmomy is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 02:53 PM
 
delphiniumpansy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: north of the equator
Posts: 2,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mykdsmomy View Post
forgive my ignorance with grammar and spelling but would you agree that science is not always black and white? There are holes and flaws in science. Meds that are proven (scientifically) to be safe one day are taken off the market the next....
Of course. How does this relate to the university of google?
delphiniumpansy is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 02:53 PM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,332
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowpansy View Post
two clicks later and I got this

http://www.cdc.gov/od/science/iso/pu...blications.htm

easy as pie.

Huh?
Nothing there backs up the 33,000 figure.
What in the world does a link abut the VSD have to do with the incidence of HepB in kids under 10 in the prevaccine era???
mamakay is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 02:56 PM
 
ktbug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 2,368
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
OH MY SCIENCE!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_God_Go_XII

sorry, sorry, carry on

This is about to get to the point where we're all gonna have to post our CV ...
ktbug is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 02:56 PM
 
HappyPuppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowpansy View Post
Of course. How does this relate to the university of google?
Forgive me if I'm incorrect, but I read that as saying "you don't need a college degree to know that medicine changes, so it's not a crazy thing to think that it's advisable to double-check the information health care professionals put forth."
HappyPuppy is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 02:57 PM
 
delphiniumpansy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: north of the equator
Posts: 2,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamakay View Post
Huh?
Nothing there backs up the 33,000 figure.
What in the world does a link abut the VSD have to do with the incidence of HepB in kids under 10 in the prevaccine era???
I had no idea you were using that particular quote as an example of stats that did not hold up. I did not know why you quoted that. My point is simply that you can find research on the parent page. That was your point, that you cannot. I just pointed you can if you do a few clicks. I am not interested, in this thread, in researching your 33,000 figure.
delphiniumpansy is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 02:58 PM
 
LavenderMae's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: where I write my own posts!
Posts: 12,213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emmeline II View Post
I'm sorry you don't count. My dh doesn't count either because he hasn't finished his AA yet.


I, however, do count as I graduated from a (real) University, and I am not offended by the term "University of Google."

, thanks.

OUR DAUGHTERS ARE PROTECTED SHOULDN'T OUR SONS BE TOO! :
LavenderMae is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 02:58 PM
 
readytobedone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: not dissertating
Posts: 3,466
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by holly6737 View Post
Secondly, I truly believe most of you will just never get it. I mean, honestly. I'm pro-science and so that's a vital difference in where each of us are coming from. I respect formal education and those who have been formally educated. I respect peer-reviewed articles, for the most part. There is junk science and there is good science. I don't believe there is a world-wide conspiracy to inject children with poisons for the financial benefit of several major companies. I don't believe in homeopathy. I don't believe in special energetics that guide bacteria. I *firmly* believe in germ theory. I don't believe in crystal children or indigo children. We're just coming from two seperate universe's really. It makes it difficult to have a discussion about something like this.
oh, my. well, i am "formally educated." i have 2 masters and am earning a PhD, but what i respect is not formal education or those who have been formally educated--i respect insight, truth, and people who can think and are not afraid to think.

i don't see that a whole whole lot inside the academy on most days, but i do see it a lot on the internet :

dissertating wife of Boo, mama of one "mookie" lovin' 2 year old girl! intactlact:: CTA until 7/10 FF 1501dc
readytobedone is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 02:59 PM
 
delphiniumpansy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: north of the equator
Posts: 2,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyPuppy View Post
Forgive me if I'm incorrect, but I read that as saying "you don't need a college degree to know that medicine changes, so it's not a crazy thing to think that it's advisable to double-check the information health care professionals put forth."
huh? There are too many negatives and I cannot follow.
delphiniumpansy is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 02:59 PM
 
holly6737's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,252
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowpansy View Post
I always think there is a correlation between someone's spelling, especially when they readily acknowledge in public threads that they do not have much education, and their understanding of scientific information. Not always as some highly intelligent, well-educated persons are bad spellers simply because they type hurriedly. But, others are poor spellers because they simply do not know better. Those types need to educate themselves on all fronts. Then, perhaps both their understanding of the science as well as their spelling will improve.
Yeah I agree. Sometimes I misspell things because I type too fast. Other times, when I'm not sure how a word is spelled, I look it up. But in general, I tend to view posts riddled with bad grammar and misspellings differently as well.

CNM mama.

holly6737 is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:00 PM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,332
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowpansy View Post
I had no idea you were using that particular quote as an example of stats that did not hold up. I did not know why you quoted that. My point is simply that you can find research on the parent page. That was your point, that you cannot. I just pointed you can if you do a few clicks. I am not interested, in this thread, in researching your 33,000 figure.

Hhhmmm...

Ok. Let me try it this way.

Do you now see that the information on the parents pages is unreferenced?
(difficult or impossible to verify as accurate?)
mamakay is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:00 PM
 
ktbug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 2,368
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowpansy View Post
I had no idea you were using that particular quote as an example of stats that did not hold up. I did not know why you quoted that. My point is simply that you can find research on the parent page. That was your point, that you cannot. I just pointed you can if you do a few clicks. I am not interested, in this thread, in researching your 33,000 figure.
Of course you aren't

I think she was saying that you can find "research" on the parent pages ... and when you try to verify any of the data, you start to see things like that weird-ass 33,000 hep b cases in non-hep b infected moms before the vaccine came out. The number, but no citation, no way to know where they got that number or what that number actually represents.
ktbug is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:03 PM
 
delphiniumpansy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: north of the equator
Posts: 2,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamakay View Post
Hhhmmm...

Ok. Let me try it this way.

Do you now see that the information on the parents pages is unreferenced?
(difficult or impossible to verify as accurate?)
I see that the CDC made a page where parents can read about vaccines. Most people are not interested in references. Call them sheeple if you want but it is true. I also see that if you really want to research their "facts" you can do so and spend some time reading about vaccine research. If you really wanted to research every single fact on the parent pages, you would spend quite some time reading. Personally, I don't like it when information pages always have references. Mothering used to do that to all their articles and I much prefer it now without the citations. If I want more info, I will search for it.

But, I do see your point that even the CDC could have information on their pages that may or may not be verifiable and this makes them suspect to some as a valid and reasonable source of information.
delphiniumpansy is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:04 PM
 
thefragile7393's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 2,785
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktbug View Post
OH MY SCIENCE!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_God_Go_XII

sorry, sorry, carry on

This is about to get to the point where we're all gonna have to post our CV ...
*snort* Ouch, what an attack there! Actually I very much believe in God but that sounds quite funny! *ahem* Sorry, carry on!

Oh, and I do have another question about ethics. Scientists all over are now working on cloning and on stem cells....two things that are considered very hot topics for ethics. Some consider them for the greater good that these tests are done. Why can't it be the same for vaccines...for the greater good of everyone, that the studies that need to be done are done?

fambedsingle2.gifnovaxnocirc.gifHappy to be a mommy and teacher to D fencing.gif, born 1-17-06 via waterbirth.jpg  and A  blahblah.gif, born 10-6-08 with a homebirth.jpghomeschool.gif

thefragile7393 is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:06 PM
 
HappyPuppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowpansy View Post
huh? There are too many negatives and I cannot follow.
I apologize. English-major-syndrome.

"you don't need a college degree to know that medicine changes, so it's not a crazy thing to think that it's advisable to double-check the information health care professionals put forth."

=

Things change. You don't need advanced education to know this. It is probably a good idea for everyone to think critically on their own when presented with information that may or may not change.
HappyPuppy is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:06 PM
 
LavenderMae's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: where I write my own posts!
Posts: 12,213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by holly6737 View Post
Yeah I agree. Sometimes I misspell things because I type too fast. Other times, when I'm not sure how a word is spelled, I look it up. But in general, I tend to view posts riddled with bad grammar and misspellings differently as well.

You are being prejudiced.

OUR DAUGHTERS ARE PROTECTED SHOULDN'T OUR SONS BE TOO! :
LavenderMae is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:07 PM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,332
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktbug View Post
Of course you aren't

I think she was saying that you can find "research" on the parent pages ... and when you try to verify any of the data, you start to see things like that weird-ass 33,000 hep b cases in non-hep b infected moms before the vaccine came out. The number, but no citation, no way to know where they got that number or what that number actually represents.
Yes.
I could have been more clear about the point I was making, in retrospect.

YP's comment that:


Quote:
When you visit the parent pages there are links to more information. Anyone who wants to can follow the links and find research. I've pointed this out before. The citations on easy to find.
....Is totally incorrect.
Unless she meant that because it's located on the CDC website, links to totally different and unrelated research can be found.
mamakay is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:09 PM
 
delphiniumpansy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: north of the equator
Posts: 2,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyPuppy View Post
Things change. You don't need advanced education to know this. It is probably a good idea for everyone to think critically on their own when presented with information that may or may not change.
Agreed


Quote:
Oh, and I do have another question about ethics. Scientists all over are now working on cloning and on stem cells....two things that are considered very hot topics for ethics. Some consider them for the greater good that these tests are done. Why can't it be the same for vaccines...for the greater good of everyone, that the studies that need to be done are done?
Good question.
delphiniumpansy is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:10 PM
 
delphiniumpansy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: north of the equator
Posts: 2,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamakay View Post
Yes.
I could have been more clear about the point I was making, in retrospect.

YP's comment that:




....Is totally incorrect.
Unless she meant that because it's located on the CDC website, links to totally different and unrelated research can be found.
I should rephrase that you can find citations and research but not specifically citations and research for every point made on the parent pages unless you want to spend a lot of time searching. Has anyone ever written to the CDC to ask them this question?
delphiniumpansy is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:11 PM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,332
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowpansy View Post
But, I do see your point that even the CDC could have information on their pages that may or may not be verifiable and this makes them suspect to some as a valid and reasonable source of information.
Some of the figures can't be verified anywhere at all.
Anywhere.
Some of it is cherry picked for shock value in spite of being debunked and outdated, and some is just flat-out made-up.
mamakay is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:12 PM
 
delphiniumpansy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: north of the equator
Posts: 2,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamakay View Post
Some of the figures can't be verified anywhere at all.
Anywhere.
Some of it is cherry picked for shock value in spite of being debunked and outdated, and some is just flat-out made-up.
Have you written to the CDC to point this out and ask them about it? Perhaps it is an error? When I see errors, sometimes I write in and point them out and when I do I am usually thanked and corrections are made.
delphiniumpansy is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:13 PM
 
mykdsmomy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: On the way to or from Starbucks
Posts: 3,170
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowpansy View Post
I see that the CDC made a page where parents can read about vaccines. Most people are not interested in references. Call them sheeple if you want but it is true. I also see that if you really want to research their "facts" you can do so and spend some time reading about vaccine research. If you really wanted to research every single fact on the parent pages, you would spend quite some time reading. Personally, I don't like it when information pages always have references. Mothering used to do that to all their articles and I much prefer it now without the citations. If I want more info, I will search for it.

But, I do see your point that even the CDC could have information on their pages that may or may not be verifiable and this makes them suspect to some as a valid and reasonable source of information.
Let me preface this by saying I am NOT trying to be snarky here AT ALL. This has bothered me for some time and I want to ask this question as respectfully as possible.......

How is it that a person/people who believes so strongly in science and fact checking can thoroughly research vaccines, put a fine tooth comb through the cdc vax pages and STILL come up advocating the safety and efficacy of them? I'm so baffled by this. I read through the cdc parent and dr pages and came up horrified at all the contradictions.
I've read books, studies, transcripts and they all shout "Danger Will Robinson!!!!" How do you (who are vehemently pro vax) come up with a different conclusion?

Here's me I married then we had dd15 , dd11 , ds10 , and then and now we and I blog!
mykdsmomy is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:15 PM
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paradise
Posts: 7,827
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
* Totally not posting that, nevermind.
transformed is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:15 PM
 
prettypixels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: MD
Posts: 2,622
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
poop all over everyone... ROFLMAO!
Quote:
I always think there is a correlation between someone's spelling, especially when they readily acknowledge in public threads that they do not have much education, and their understanding of scientific information. Not always as some highly intelligent, well-educated persons are bad spellers simply because they type hurriedly. But, others are poor spellers because they simply do not know better. Those types need to educate themselves on all fronts. Then, perhaps both their understanding of the science as well as their spelling will improve.
:

Quote:
why does my 6'3", 280lb husband get the same dose of any vaccine that an 8lb baby would?
Because a vaccine is not like cough medicine.

Quote:
why does my child need to be put at risk for permanent, life-long health problems or death when modern medicine can now easily and quickly treat childhood disease to prevent complications?
Have you seen this website?
http://www.vaccineinformation.org/photos/
Quote:
Dr. Jean Dodds, the foremost vaccine expert (IMO) in veterinary medicine is working to do a huge rabies study that involves exposing both unvaccinated and vaccinated animals to rabies to test the efficacy. Now, it seems that such a trial in humans would indeed be unethical, however, is it necessary? Why can't they do a study of vaccinated children and titer them over a long period of time? Wouldn't this give us much-needed information regarding the number of boosters require, the true efficacy, etc?
Those poor dogs.

Re: the OP... I love Google, it is what enabled me to research my decisions. It's how I learned more about breastfeeding and AP in general and how I made the decision to vaccinate. I do not, however, feel that being able to use Google to find information makes me a scientist. I'm not a scientist. I do know how to sort out good sources from bad... hence all my old posts bemoaning the frequent use of ********* as a reliable source.

Quote:
You are being prejudiced.
Nonsense.
prettypixels is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:17 PM
 
HappyPuppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mykdsmomy View Post
How is it that a person/people who believes so strongly in science and fact checking can thoroughly research vaccines, put a fine tooth comb through the cdc vax pages and STILL come up advocating the safety and efficacy of them? I'm so baffled by this.

Just take a look at the Dr. Sear's vax book. A few factual errors have, in some minds, discredited every page in the book.

There is absolutely a double-standard. Being an alum of UofGoog is bad. However, if you're getting your research from such fine, peer-reviewed sites as the CDC's site, it's okay. And if there are some flaws in said site? Well, things happen!
HappyPuppy is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:21 PM
 
delphiniumpansy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: north of the equator
Posts: 2,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mykdsmomy View Post
I've read books, studies, transcripts and they all shout "Danger Will Robinson!!!!" How do you (who are vehemently pro vax) come up with a different conclusion?
I'll ask this again, for like the 20th time, please cite any scientific research that concludes that the risks of vaccination are greater than the benefits. When I read, I read that the benefits outweigh the risks. It is all about risk assessment.
delphiniumpansy is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:22 PM
 
HappyPuppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prettypixels View Post

Because a vaccine is not like cough medicine.
Cough medicine kills babies. But until recently, it was a-okay to give it out.
So, in that aspect, you're incorrect. I still would like to know why vaccines are the only thing we inject into a child that is not scaled for their size.



Quote:
Originally Posted by prettypixels View Post
Yes. Where are the write-ups about the specific cases? When was medical treatment sought? How healthy were these people prior to becoming infected? Where do they live? What year were they taken? A tiny bit of critical thinking goes a long, long way in the face of such outlandish fear tactics.
HappyPuppy is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:23 PM
 
HappyPuppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowpansy View Post
I'll ask this again, for like the 20th time, please cite any scientific research that concludes that the risks of vaccination are greater than the benefits. When I read, I read that the benefits outweigh the risks. It is all about risk assessment.
Please define "risk" and "benefit."

With my definition of "risk" and "benefit," the evidence shows the opposite of your position.
HappyPuppy is offline  
Old 10-27-2007, 03:29 PM
 
delphiniumpansy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: north of the equator
Posts: 2,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyPuppy View Post
Just take a look at the Dr. Sear's vax book. A few factual errors have, in some minds, discredited every page in the book.

There is absolutely a double-standard. Being an alum of UofGoog is bad. However, if you're getting your research from such fine, peer-reviewed sites as the CDC's site, it's okay. And if there are some flaws in said site? Well, things happen!
Here is the difference.

All sites have the potential for mistakes and flaws. One flaw does not discredit a site. If we compare, say the CDC site to *********, there are flaws at each site but there is so much whacky information at ********* that it looks bad enough to be not a good source, imo. Also, ********* has nowhere on it the name of its owner, John Scudamore. You have to search far and wide on Google to figure that out. Hiding the owner is a bad sign. The owner of a site should be easy to find as a way of considering the validity of the information. You should also be able to write to the owner to ask questions, point our flaws, and find more information. There is no way to do this at *********. You should also be able to find out how to contribute or how information is contributed. Again, no way to do this at *********. Information should seem real, also, which on ********* that is not the case. I cannot agree with information from a website that talks about flying dolphins. That is soooo flawed that it puts a negative cloud over everything else. That is very different from having one fact that does not check. If someone were to write to the CDC and ask them about that fact, they would probably write back and give you more information or correct the flaw. At *********, there is no way to question the validity of the flying dolphin information.

Do you see the difference?
delphiniumpansy is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off