Sir Colin will know, like everybody else with eyes, that it wasn't "the boys" who secured the World Cup for the All Blacks, it was the (corrupt or incompetent) non-performance of the alleged referee, Craig Joubert.
His silence about this is especially hypocritical because in 1976, Meads was one of the loudest voices condemning the bias of referees like Gert Bezuidenhout, which they blamed for the series defeat of the All Blacks.
Now, all these years later, he chooses to turn a blind eye to a "refereeing" performance (or non-performance) that has been condemned around the rugby world.
Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the sponsor's fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
- show quoted text -
Vote now please. 1 vote for Breen Obsessed Moron.....
Two Dogs
 |
- show quoted text -
|
"Morrissey Breen" <morriss...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:17494c9d-7aef-4f46-9d54-
- show quoted text -
lose but "interpretationally correct" and great when you win?
|
On Feb 22, 11:41 am, "Mentalguy2k8" <Mentalguy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Referees make mistakes, certainly, and to selectively rail about an
honest mistake, as a few nuts did against Wayne Barnes in 2007, is
unwarranted and unsportsmanly behaviour.
However, the non-refereeing of Joubert in the 2011 RWC final is
something that has caused grave concern, and no doubt was the reason
the All Blacks did not win Team of the Year at the recent Laureus
Awards. The referee appears to have colluded with the cheating of one
team....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
- show quoted text -
honest mistake, as a few nuts did against Wayne Barnes in 2007, is
unwarranted and unsportsmanly behaviour.
However, the non-refereeing of Joubert in the 2011 RWC final is
something that has caused grave concern, and no doubt was the reason
the All Blacks did not win Team of the Year at the recent Laureus
Awards. The referee appears to have colluded with the cheating of one
team....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
|
- show quoted text -
|
On Feb 22, 2:34 pm, kev or lou <b...@b.com> wrote:
If only. More likely just had his internet privileges at the asylum
revoked.
- show quoted text -
revoked.
|
On Feb 22, 2:34 pm, kev or lou <b...@b.com> wrote:
- show quoted text -
Milquetoast".
|
On Feb 22, 2:34 pm, kev or lou <b...@b.com> wrote:
- show quoted text -
there is no hope of him ever being readmitted to this organization.
|
* Preliminary Investigation *
Facts:
1) The Imposter "Kerre Woodham" Uses Both This
Newsgroup (nz.general) And (rec.sports.rugby.union).
[kerreohowmadnewstal...@
2) "Radio Transcripts Ltd." Also Uses Both Of Those
Newsgroups.
3) A Totally Characteristic "---" Between Words Is Used
Continually By Both "Radio Transcripts Ltd." And
The Imposter "Kerre Ohowmad".
4) Posting Headers Also Confirm That The Software
Used By Both The Imposter "Kerre Ohowmad" And
"Radio Transcripts Ltd." Are The Same
5) It Is Already A Known Fact That "Radio Transcripts
Ltd." Has A Deep Hatred For NEWSTALK ZB.
6) At This Stage I Am Personally Convinced That The
Two Individuals Are The Same.
7) Janet Chapman (http://www.exorcist.org.nz/
Also Uses A Very Characteristic "Byeeee" Statement,
That Is Also Offered By The Imposter "Kerre Ohowmad"
"Radio Transcripts Ltd."
The Imposter Poster Uses A Characteristic ("---")
In Between Words In Sentences
http://groups.google.com/
* I Would Like To Call Kerre Woodham A Friend,
And Hopefully She Might Wanna Be Mine Also.
_____________________________
Ras Mikaere Enoch Mc Carty
Ambassador | Tainui Kiingitanga | Te Aotearoa
http://www.exorcist.org.nz
http://www.exorcist.org.nz/
http://www.exorcist.org.nz/
|
- show quoted text -
would be curious why you still feel the need to protest.
|
On Feb 22, 4:00 am, Te Umanga <uma...@pacific-ocean.com> wrote:
> * Preliminary Investigation *
>
> Facts:
>
> 1) The Imposter "Kerre Woodham" Uses Both This
> Newsgroup (nz.general) And (rec.sports.rugby.union).
> [kerreohowmadnewstal...@
>
> 2) "Radio Transcripts Ltd." Also Uses Both Of Those
> Newsgroups.
>
> 3) A Totally Characteristic "---" Between Words Is Used
> Continually By Both "Radio Transcripts Ltd." And
> The Imposter "Kerre Ohowmad".
>
> 4) Posting Headers Also Confirm That The Software
> Used By Both The Imposter "Kerre Ohowmad" And
> "Radio Transcripts Ltd." Are The Same
>
> 5) It Is Already A Known Fact That "Radio Transcripts
> Ltd." Has A Deep Hatred For NEWSTALK ZB.
>
> 6) At This Stage I Am Personally Convinced That The
> Two Individuals Are The Same.
>
> 7) Janet Chapman (http://www.exorcist.org.nz/
> Also Uses A Very Characteristic "Byeeee" Statement,
> That Is Also Offered By The Imposter "Kerre Ohowmad"
>
> "Radio Transcripts Ltd."
> The Imposter Poster Uses A Characteristic ("---")
> In Between Words In Sentences
> http://groups.google.com/> * Preliminary Investigation *
>
> Facts:
>
> 1) The Imposter "Kerre Woodham" Uses Both This
> Newsgroup (nz.general) And (rec.sports.rugby.union).
> [kerreohowmadnewstal...@
>
> 2) "Radio Transcripts Ltd." Also Uses Both Of Those
> Newsgroups.
>
> 3) A Totally Characteristic "---" Between Words Is Used
> Continually By Both "Radio Transcripts Ltd." And
> The Imposter "Kerre Ohowmad".
>
> 4) Posting Headers Also Confirm That The Software
> Used By Both The Imposter "Kerre Ohowmad" And
> "Radio Transcripts Ltd." Are The Same
>
> 5) It Is Already A Known Fact That "Radio Transcripts
> Ltd." Has A Deep Hatred For NEWSTALK ZB.
>
> 6) At This Stage I Am Personally Convinced That The
> Two Individuals Are The Same.
>
> 7) Janet Chapman (http://www.exorcist.org.nz/
> Also Uses A Very Characteristic "Byeeee" Statement,
> That Is Also Offered By The Imposter "Kerre Ohowmad"
>
> "Radio Transcripts Ltd."
> The Imposter Poster Uses A Characteristic ("---")
> In Between Words In Sentences
>
> * I Would Like To Call Kerre Woodham A Friend,
> And Hopefully She Might Wanna Be Mine Also.
>
> _____________________________
> Ras Mikaere Enoch Mc Carty
> Ambassador | Tainui Kiingitanga | Te Aotearoa
> http://www.exorcist.org.nz
> http://www.exorcist.org.nz/
> http://www.exorcist.org.nz/
Grant, you have really gone too far.> * I Would Like To Call Kerre Woodham A Friend,
> And Hopefully She Might Wanna Be Mine Also.
>
> _____________________________
> Ras Mikaere Enoch Mc Carty
> Ambassador | Tainui Kiingitanga | Te Aotearoa
> http://www.exorcist.org.nz
> http://www.exorcist.org.nz/
> http://www.exorcist.org.nz/
The Earl finds it slightly amusing that you try and convince other
posters that this poster ie moi has multiple identities, but to
actually go to that much effort is just bizarre. The Earl is somewhat
jealous of this "Radio Transcripts Ltd" person to inspire such a
devoted follower, but also finds it rather scary.
|
- show quoted text -
Two Dogs
|
On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 05:53:42 -0800 (PST), Earldullthing
<earldu...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Grant, you have really gone too far.
>The Earl finds it slightly amusing that you try and convince other
>posters that this poster ie moi has multiple identities, but to
>actually go to that much effort is just bizarre. The Earl is somewhat
>jealous of this "Radio Transcripts Ltd" person to inspire such a
>devoted follower, but also finds it rather scary.
Considering Earl - M0 and that Radio trany<earldu...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Grant, you have really gone too far.
>The Earl finds it slightly amusing that you try and convince other
>posters that this poster ie moi has multiple identities, but to
>actually go to that much effort is just bizarre. The Earl is somewhat
>jealous of this "Radio Transcripts Ltd" person to inspire such a
>devoted follower, but also finds it rather scary.
Are all the same.
|
"Morrissey Breen" <morriss...@gmail.com> wrote in message
- show quoted text -
The World Cup is over and the Referee's decisions can't be altered now.
The important thing about the ad is whether this Silberhorn stuff does any
good.
I haven't used it so wouldn't know.
But have any independent tests been done on it?
|
- show quoted text -
something will have to be done about it. The All Blacks have already
paid a price for it, in failing to win the Laureus Team of the Year
Award recently. French sports authorities no doubt lobbied intensely
to stop them benefiting any further from Joubert's non-performance.
>
> The important thing about the ad is whether this Silberhorn stuff does any
> good.
than a Craig Joubert refereeing non-performance.
- show quoted text -
|
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:35:57 +1300, "Geopelia" <Geop...@nowhere.com>
wrote:
From Wikipedia:
There are ethical and regulatory concerns regarding direct-to-consumer
(DTC) advertising, specifically the extent to which these ads may
unduly influence the prescribing of prescription medicines based on
consumer demands when, in some cases, they may not be medically
necessary.
All western nations, with the exception of New Zealand and the United
States, have historically (since the 1940s for Australasia, North
America, and Europe) banned direct advertising of pharmaceuticals to
consumers.
wrote:
- show quoted text -
There are ethical and regulatory concerns regarding direct-to-consumer
(DTC) advertising, specifically the extent to which these ads may
unduly influence the prescribing of prescription medicines based on
consumer demands when, in some cases, they may not be medically
necessary.
All western nations, with the exception of New Zealand and the United
States, have historically (since the 1940s for Australasia, North
America, and Europe) banned direct advertising of pharmaceuticals to
consumers.
|
- show quoted text -
apart from a dimwit rugby-drunk?
|
On Feb 23, 11:29 am, slay...@hotmail.com (-Newsman-) wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:35:57 +1300, "Geopelia" <Geope...@nowhere.com>
No he doesn't. He looks very fit---which he is.
>
> so why would anyone apart from a dimwit rugby-drunk?
"Dimwit"? Meads is arrogant, and he lacks the courage to speak
truthfully on rugby matters---but "dimwit" and "rugby-drunk"? You're
fantasising. Meads is bright and he looks as fit as a fiddle.
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:35:57 +1300, "Geopelia" <Geope...@nowhere.com>
- show quoted text -
>
> so why would anyone apart from a dimwit rugby-drunk?
truthfully on rugby matters---but "dimwit" and "rugby-drunk"? You're
fantasising. Meads is bright and he looks as fit as a fiddle.
|
On Feb 23, 11:24 am, slay...@hotmail.com (-Newsman-) wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:35:57 +1300, "Geopelia" <Geope...@nowhere.com>
All pharmaceuticals or just prescription only medicines? It would seem
ridiculous to ban the marketing of common supermarket items such as
aspirin.
However deer velvet and various other herbal remedies cannot be
represented as pharmaceuticals.
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:35:57 +1300, "Geopelia" <Geope...@nowhere.com>
- show quoted text -
ridiculous to ban the marketing of common supermarket items such as
aspirin.
However deer velvet and various other herbal remedies cannot be
represented as pharmaceuticals.
|
- show quoted text -
enhanced his performance vis-a-vis his students.
|
- show quoted text -
|
- show quoted text -
http://s1.reutersmedia.net/
|
On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:48:48 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Feb 23, 11:24=A0am, slay...@hotmail.com (-Newsman-) wrote:
>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:35:57 +1300, "Geopelia" <Geope...@nowhere.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >"Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:797ecfc2-af8c-46bf-ae1e-
>..
>>
>> >> > Listeners to commercial radio have no doubt heard the Silberhorn dee=
>r
>> >> > velvet ad, where the revered football legend "Sir" Colin Meads asser=
advertising of complementary "remedies," though how extensively isn't
clear. Manufacturers have to prove their products have been made to
strict standards and contain a consistent and clearly marked dose. It
seems the intention is eventually to ban the advertising of blatantly
un-provable claims like "May assist in aiding or reducing...."
>It would seem
>ridiculous to ban the marketing of common supermarket items such as
>aspirin.
Aspirin can be harmful in some instances, and in excess can be fatal.
Again, where does one draw the line?
promotion of drugs that can easily kill, the ads for them including
virtually unreadable small-print warnings and disclaimers for far too
brief a period to be easily read and assimilated.
OK, so the GP still has ultiimately to authorise use of the drug, but
this kind of advertising gives enormous heft to the process of
prescribing, both via the "innocent" patient and the subliminal
messaging to the already-aware medic.
Otherwise, why would Big Drug bother?
wrote:
>On Feb 23, 11:24=A0am, slay...@hotmail.com (-Newsman-) wrote:
>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:35:57 +1300, "Geopelia" <Geope...@nowhere.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >"Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>.
>> >On Feb 22, 11:41 am, "Mentalguy2k8" <Mentalguy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> >>news:17494c9d-7aef-4f46->> >On Feb 22, 11:41 am, "Mentalguy2k8" <Mentalguy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>..
>>
>> >> > Listeners to commercial radio have no doubt heard the Silberhorn dee=
>r
>> >> > velvet ad, where the revered football legend "Sir" Colin Meads asser=
>ts
>> >> > that "the boys", i.e., the All Blacks, have secured the World Cup.
>>
>> >> > Sir Colin will know, like everybody else with eyes, that it wasn't
>> >> > "the boys" who secured the World Cup for the All Blacks, it was the
>> >> > (corrupt or incompetent) non-performance of the alleged referee, Cra=>> >> > that "the boys", i.e., the All Blacks, have secured the World Cup.
>>
>> >> > Sir Colin will know, like everybody else with eyes, that it wasn't
>> >> > "the boys" who secured the World Cup for the All Blacks, it was the
>ig
>> >> > Joubert.
>>
>> >> > His silence about this is especially hypocritical because in 1976,
>> >> > Meads was one of the loudest voices condemning the bias of referees
>> >> > like Gert Bezuidenhout, which they blamed for the series defeat of t=>> >> > Joubert.
>>
>> >> > His silence about this is especially hypocritical because in 1976,
>> >> > Meads was one of the loudest voices condemning the bias of referees
>he
>> >> > All Blacks.
>>
>> >> > Now, all these years later, he chooses to turn a blind eye to a
>> >> > "refereeing" performance (or non-performance) that has been condemne=>> >> > All Blacks.
>>
>> >> > Now, all these years later, he chooses to turn a blind eye to a
>d
>> >> > around the rugby world.
>>
>> >> > Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the sponsor's
>> >> > fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
>>
>> >> But surely if you're a sportsman, the ref is always shit and biased wh=>> >> > around the rugby world.
>>
>> >> > Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the sponsor's
>> >> > fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
>>
>en
>> >> you
>> >> lose but "interpretationally correct" and great when you win?
>>
>> >Referees make mistakes, certainly, and to selectively rail about an
>> >honest mistake, as a few nuts did against Wayne Barnes in 2007, is
>> >unwarranted and unsportsmanly behaviour.
>>
>> >However, the non-refereeing of Joubert in the 2011 RWC final is
>> >something that has caused grave concern, and no doubt was the reason
>> >the All Blacks did not win Team of the Year at the recent Laureus
>> >Awards. The referee appears to have colluded with the cheating of one
>> >team....
>>
>> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?>> >> you
>> >> lose but "interpretationally correct" and great when you win?
>>
>> >Referees make mistakes, certainly, and to selectively rail about an
>> >honest mistake, as a few nuts did against Wayne Barnes in 2007, is
>> >unwarranted and unsportsmanly behaviour.
>>
>> >However, the non-refereeing of Joubert in the 2011 RWC final is
>> >something that has caused grave concern, and no doubt was the reason
>> >the All Blacks did not win Team of the Year at the recent Laureus
>> >Awards. The referee appears to have colluded with the cheating of one
>> >team....
>>
>>
>> >.............................
>>
>> >The World Cup is over and the Referee's decisions can't be altered now.
>>
>> >The important thing about the ad is whether this Silberhorn stuff =A0doe=>> >.............................
>>
>> >The World Cup is over and the Referee's decisions can't be altered now.
>>
>s any
>> >good.
>> >I haven't used it so wouldn't know.
>>
>> >But have any independent tests been done on it?
>>
>> From Wikipedia:
>>
>> There are ethical and regulatory concerns regarding direct-to-consumer
>> (DTC) advertising, specifically the extent to which these ads may
>> unduly influence the prescribing of prescription medicines based on
>> consumer demands when, in some cases, they may not be medically
>> necessary.
>>
>> All western nations, with the exception of New Zealand and the United
>> States, have historically (since the 1940s for Australasia, North
>> America, and Europe) banned direct advertising of pharmaceuticals to
>> consumers.
>
>All pharmaceuticals or just prescription only medicines?
Prescription, certainly, and there are regulations covering the>> >good.
>> >I haven't used it so wouldn't know.
>>
>> >But have any independent tests been done on it?
>>
>> From Wikipedia:
>>
>> There are ethical and regulatory concerns regarding direct-to-consumer
>> (DTC) advertising, specifically the extent to which these ads may
>> unduly influence the prescribing of prescription medicines based on
>> consumer demands when, in some cases, they may not be medically
>> necessary.
>>
>> All western nations, with the exception of New Zealand and the United
>> States, have historically (since the 1940s for Australasia, North
>> America, and Europe) banned direct advertising of pharmaceuticals to
>> consumers.
>
>All pharmaceuticals or just prescription only medicines?
advertising of complementary "remedies," though how extensively isn't
clear. Manufacturers have to prove their products have been made to
strict standards and contain a consistent and clearly marked dose. It
seems the intention is eventually to ban the advertising of blatantly
un-provable claims like "May assist in aiding or reducing...."
>It would seem
>ridiculous to ban the marketing of common supermarket items such as
>aspirin.
Again, where does one draw the line?
>
>However deer velvet and various other herbal remedies cannot be
>represented as pharmaceuticals.
One of my principal concerns is that in New Zealand there is DTC TV>However deer velvet and various other herbal remedies cannot be
>represented as pharmaceuticals.
promotion of drugs that can easily kill, the ads for them including
virtually unreadable small-print warnings and disclaimers for far too
brief a period to be easily read and assimilated.
OK, so the GP still has ultiimately to authorise use of the drug, but
this kind of advertising gives enormous heft to the process of
prescribing, both via the "innocent" patient and the subliminal
messaging to the already-aware medic.
Otherwise, why would Big Drug bother?
|
- show quoted text -
be able to be supported under current laws.
- show quoted text -
|
-Newsman- wrote:
> From Wikipedia:
> There are ethical and regulatory concerns regarding direct-to-consumer
> (DTC) advertising, specifically the extent to which these ads may
> unduly influence the prescribing of prescription medicines based on
> consumer demands when, in some cases, they may not be medically
> necessary.
> All western nations, with the exception of New Zealand and the United
> States, have historically (since the 1940s for Australasia, North
> America, and Europe) banned direct advertising of pharmaceuticals to
> consumers.
Between 1991-2010, there were 165 criminal and/or civil settlements
involving major pharmaceutical companies who paid $19.8 billion in
penalties.
Most of these were for promoting drugs for purposes other than which they
were authorised.
Four of the world's largest drug companies--GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer,
Eli Lilly, and Schering-Plough--accounted for 53% ($10.5 billion)
of penalties during these two decades.
73% of these settlements (121) and 75% of the penalties ($14.8
billion) occurred between 2006-2010.
But government suits against the pharmaceutical industry have failed
to address the harmful human consequences--WHY?
Read more... http://www.ahrp.org/cms/
> From Wikipedia:
> There are ethical and regulatory concerns regarding direct-to-consumer
> (DTC) advertising, specifically the extent to which these ads may
> unduly influence the prescribing of prescription medicines based on
> consumer demands when, in some cases, they may not be medically
> necessary.
> All western nations, with the exception of New Zealand and the United
> States, have historically (since the 1940s for Australasia, North
> America, and Europe) banned direct advertising of pharmaceuticals to
> consumers.
Between 1991-2010, there were 165 criminal and/or civil settlements
involving major pharmaceutical companies who paid $19.8 billion in
penalties.
Most of these were for promoting drugs for purposes other than which they
were authorised.
Four of the world's largest drug companies--GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer,
Eli Lilly, and Schering-Plough--accounted for 53% ($10.5 billion)
of penalties during these two decades.
73% of these settlements (121) and 75% of the penalties ($14.8
billion) occurred between 2006-2010.
But government suits against the pharmaceutical industry have failed
to address the harmful human consequences--WHY?
Read more... http://www.ahrp.org/cms/
|
On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 13:42:29 -0800 (PST), Morrissey Breen
<morriss...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On F
>>
>> > But surely if you're a sportsman, the ref is always shit and biased when
>> > you
>> > lose but "interpretationally correct" and great when you win?
>>
>> Referees make mistakes, certainly, and to selectively rail about an
>> honest mistake, as a few nuts did against Wayne Barnes in 2007, is
>> unwarranted and unsportsmanly behaviour.
>>
>> However, the non-refereeing of Joubert in the 2011 RWC final is
>> something that has caused grave concern, and no doubt was the reason
>> the All Blacks did not win Team of the Year at the recent Laureus
>> Awards. The referee appears to have colluded with the cheating of one
>> team....
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?
>>
>> ..............................
>>
>> The World Cup is over and the Referee's decisions can't be altered now.
>
>No, but his grievous non-performance will continue to be reviewed, and
>something will have to be done about it.
Who cares.
So last year.
If you want to be pedantic about playing by the rules.
Let talk about the murdering bastards sinking the rainbow warrior.
<morriss...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On F
>>
>> > But surely if you're a sportsman, the ref is always shit and biased when
>> > you
>> > lose but "interpretationally correct" and great when you win?
>>
>> Referees make mistakes, certainly, and to selectively rail about an
>> honest mistake, as a few nuts did against Wayne Barnes in 2007, is
>> unwarranted and unsportsmanly behaviour.
>>
>> However, the non-refereeing of Joubert in the 2011 RWC final is
>> something that has caused grave concern, and no doubt was the reason
>> the All Blacks did not win Team of the Year at the recent Laureus
>> Awards. The referee appears to have colluded with the cheating of one
>> team....
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?
>>
>> ..............................
>>
>> The World Cup is over and the Referee's decisions can't be altered now.
>
>No, but his grievous non-performance will continue to be reviewed, and
>something will have to be done about it.
Who cares.
So last year.
If you want to be pedantic about playing by the rules.
Let talk about the murdering bastards sinking the rainbow warrior.
|
On Feb 23, 12:43 pm, slay...@hotmail.com (-Newsman-) wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:48:48 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Feb 23, 11:24=A0am, slay...@hotmail.com (-Newsman-) wrote:
> >> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:35:57 +1300, "Geopelia" <Geope...@nowhere.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >"Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:797ecfc2-af8c-46bf-ae1e-
> >.
> >> >On Feb 22, 11:41 am, "Mentalguy2k8" <Mentalguy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >> >>news:17494c9d-7aef-4f46-
> >..
>
> >> >> > Listeners to commercial radio have no doubt heard the Silberhorn dee=
> >r
> >> >> > velvet ad, where the revered football legend "Sir" Colin Meads asser=
> >ts
> >> >> > that "the boys", i.e., the All Blacks, have secured the World Cup.
>
> >> >> > Sir Colin will know, like everybody else with eyes, that it wasn't
> >> >> > "the boys" who secured the World Cup for the All Blacks, it was the
> >> >> > (corrupt or incompetent) non-performance of the alleged referee, Cra=
> >ig
> >> >> > Joubert.
>
> >> >> > His silence about this is especially hypocritical because in 1976,
> >> >> > Meads was one of the loudest voices condemning the bias of referees
> >> >> > like Gert Bezuidenhout, which they blamed for the series defeat of t=
> >he
> >> >> > All Blacks.
>
> >> >> > Now, all these years later, he chooses to turn a blind eye to a
> >> >> > "refereeing" performance (or non-performance) that has been condemne=
> >d
> >> >> > around the rugby world.
>
> >> >> > Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the sponsor's
> >> >> > fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
>
> >> >> But surely if you're a sportsman, the ref is always shit and biased wh=
> >s any
> >> >good.
> >> >I haven't used it so wouldn't know.
>
> >> >But have any independent tests been done on it?
>
> Prescription, certainly, and there are regulations covering the
> advertising of complementary "remedies," though how extensively isn't
> clear. Manufacturers have to prove their products have been made to
> strict standards and contain a consistent and clearly marked dose. It
> seems the intention is eventually to ban the advertising of blatantly
> un-provable claims like "May assist in aiding or reducing...."
>
> >It would seem
> >ridiculous to ban the marketing of common supermarket items such as
> >aspirin.
>
> Aspirin can be harmful in some instances, and in excess can be fatal.
So can anything else, including water.
> Again, where does one draw the line?
No need to draw a line - just leave it as it is.
>
>
>
> >However deer velvet and various other herbal remedies cannot be
> >represented as pharmaceuticals.
>
> One of my principal concerns is that in New Zealand there is DTC TV
> promotion of drugs that can easily kill, the ads for them including
> virtually unreadable small-print warnings and disclaimers for far too
> brief a period to be easily read and assimilated.
I see no need for such nannyish concerns.
>
> OK, so the GP still has ultiimately to authorise use of the drug, but
Exactly. Not only that, but to educate the patient in it's dosage.
Same for the pharmacist. Whenever I collect a prescription mine gives
me a lecture on that.
> this kind of advertising gives enormous heft to the process of
> prescribing, both via the "innocent" patient and the subliminal
> messaging to the already-aware medic.
>
> Otherwise, why would Big Drug bother?
To increase sales - that's the only reason.
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:48:48 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Feb 23, 11:24=A0am, slay...@hotmail.com (-Newsman-) wrote:
> >> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:35:57 +1300, "Geopelia" <Geope...@nowhere.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >"Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:797ecfc2-af8c-46bf-ae1e-
> >.
> >> >On Feb 22, 11:41 am, "Mentalguy2k8" <Mentalguy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >> >>news:17494c9d-7aef-4f46-
> >..
>
> >> >> > Listeners to commercial radio have no doubt heard the Silberhorn dee=
> >r
> >> >> > velvet ad, where the revered football legend "Sir" Colin Meads asser=
> >ts
> >> >> > that "the boys", i.e., the All Blacks, have secured the World Cup.
>
> >> >> > Sir Colin will know, like everybody else with eyes, that it wasn't
> >> >> > "the boys" who secured the World Cup for the All Blacks, it was the
> >> >> > (corrupt or incompetent) non-performance of the alleged referee, Cra=
> >ig
> >> >> > Joubert.
>
> >> >> > His silence about this is especially hypocritical because in 1976,
> >> >> > Meads was one of the loudest voices condemning the bias of referees
> >> >> > like Gert Bezuidenhout, which they blamed for the series defeat of t=
> >he
> >> >> > All Blacks.
>
> >> >> > Now, all these years later, he chooses to turn a blind eye to a
> >> >> > "refereeing" performance (or non-performance) that has been condemne=
> >d
> >> >> > around the rugby world.
>
> >> >> > Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the sponsor's
> >> >> > fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
>
> >> >> But surely if you're a sportsman, the ref is always shit and biased wh=
> >en
> >> >> you
> >> >> lose but "interpretationally correct" and great when you win?
>
> >> >Referees make mistakes, certainly, and to selectively rail about an
> >> >honest mistake, as a few nuts did against Wayne Barnes in 2007, is
> >> >unwarranted and unsportsmanly behaviour.
>
> >> >However, the non-refereeing of Joubert in the 2011 RWC final is
> >> >something that has caused grave concern, and no doubt was the reason
> >> >the All Blacks did not win Team of the Year at the recent Laureus
> >> >Awards. The referee appears to have colluded with the cheating of one
> >> >team....
>
> >> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?> >> >> you
> >> >> lose but "interpretationally correct" and great when you win?
>
> >> >Referees make mistakes, certainly, and to selectively rail about an
> >> >honest mistake, as a few nuts did against Wayne Barnes in 2007, is
> >> >unwarranted and unsportsmanly behaviour.
>
> >> >However, the non-refereeing of Joubert in the 2011 RWC final is
> >> >something that has caused grave concern, and no doubt was the reason
> >> >the All Blacks did not win Team of the Year at the recent Laureus
> >> >Awards. The referee appears to have colluded with the cheating of one
> >> >team....
>
>
> >> >.............................
>
> >> >The World Cup is over and the Referee's decisions can't be altered now.
>
> >> >The important thing about the ad is whether this Silberhorn stuff =A0doe=> >> >.............................
>
> >> >The World Cup is over and the Referee's decisions can't be altered now.
>
> >s any
> >> >good.
> >> >I haven't used it so wouldn't know.
>
> >> >But have any independent tests been done on it?
>
> >> From Wikipedia:
>
> >> There are ethical and regulatory concerns regarding direct-to-consumer
> >> (DTC) advertising, specifically the extent to which these ads may
> >> unduly influence the prescribing of prescription medicines based on
> >> consumer demands when, in some cases, they may not be medically
> >> necessary.
>
> >> All western nations, with the exception of New Zealand and the United
> >> States, have historically (since the 1940s for Australasia, North
> >> America, and Europe) banned direct advertising of pharmaceuticals to
> >> consumers.
>
> >All pharmaceuticals or just prescription only medicines?> >> From Wikipedia:
>
> >> There are ethical and regulatory concerns regarding direct-to-consumer
> >> (DTC) advertising, specifically the extent to which these ads may
> >> unduly influence the prescribing of prescription medicines based on
> >> consumer demands when, in some cases, they may not be medically
> >> necessary.
>
> >> All western nations, with the exception of New Zealand and the United
> >> States, have historically (since the 1940s for Australasia, North
> >> America, and Europe) banned direct advertising of pharmaceuticals to
> >> consumers.
>
>
> Prescription, certainly, and there are regulations covering the
> advertising of complementary "remedies," though how extensively isn't
> clear. Manufacturers have to prove their products have been made to
> strict standards and contain a consistent and clearly marked dose. It
> seems the intention is eventually to ban the advertising of blatantly
> un-provable claims like "May assist in aiding or reducing...."
>
> >It would seem
> >ridiculous to ban the marketing of common supermarket items such as
> >aspirin.
>
> Aspirin can be harmful in some instances, and in excess can be fatal.
So can anything else, including water.
> Again, where does one draw the line?
No need to draw a line - just leave it as it is.
>
>
>
> >However deer velvet and various other herbal remedies cannot be
> >represented as pharmaceuticals.
>
> One of my principal concerns is that in New Zealand there is DTC TV
> promotion of drugs that can easily kill, the ads for them including
> virtually unreadable small-print warnings and disclaimers for far too
> brief a period to be easily read and assimilated.
I see no need for such nannyish concerns.
>
> OK, so the GP still has ultiimately to authorise use of the drug, but
Exactly. Not only that, but to educate the patient in it's dosage.
Same for the pharmacist. Whenever I collect a prescription mine gives
me a lecture on that.
> this kind of advertising gives enormous heft to the process of
> prescribing, both via the "innocent" patient and the subliminal
> messaging to the already-aware medic.
>
> Otherwise, why would Big Drug bother?
To increase sales - that's the only reason.
|
On Feb 22, 6:12 pm, Morrissey Breen <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 23, 12:01 pm, JohnO <johno1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 23, 11:51 am, Morrissey Breen <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 23, 11:48 am, JohnO <johno1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > >> > Listeners to commercial radio have no doubt heard the Silberhorn deer
> > > > > >> > velvet ad, where the revered football legend "Sir" Colin Meads asserts
> > > enhanced his performance vis-a-vis his students.
>
> > Sock puppets are not 'friends', Mowithey.
>
> Some would disagree....
>
> http://s1.reutersmedia.net/
He said "sock puppet" not "cock puppet".
You get sadder by the post....
Two Dogs
> On Feb 23, 12:01 pm, JohnO <johno1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 23, 11:51 am, Morrissey Breen <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 23, 11:48 am, JohnO <johno1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 23, 11:24 am, slay...@hotmail.com (-Newsman-) wrote:
>
> > > > > On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:35:57 +1300, "Geopelia" <Geope...@nowhere.com>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > >"Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > > > > >news:797ecfc2-af8c-46bf-ae1e-> > > > On Feb 23, 11:24 am, slay...@hotmail.com (-Newsman-) wrote:
>
> > > > > On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:35:57 +1300, "Geopelia" <Geope...@nowhere.com>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > >"Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > > > > >On Feb 22, 11:41 am, "Mentalguy2k8" <Mentalguy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > > > > >>news:17494c9d-7aef-4f46-> > > > > >> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
>
> > > > > >> > Listeners to commercial radio have no doubt heard the Silberhorn deer
> > > > > >> > velvet ad, where the revered football legend "Sir" Colin Meads asserts
> > > > > >> > that "the boys", i.e., the All Blacks, have secured the World Cup.
>
> > > > > >> > Sir Colin will know, like everybody else with eyes, that it wasn't
> > > > > >> > "the boys" who secured the World Cup for the All Blacks, it was the
> > > > > >> > (corrupt or incompetent) non-performance of the alleged referee, Craig>
> > > > > >> > Sir Colin will know, like everybody else with eyes, that it wasn't
> > > > > >> > "the boys" who secured the World Cup for the All Blacks, it was the
> > > > > >> > Joubert.
>
> > > > > >> > His silence about this is especially hypocritical because in 1976,
> > > > > >> > Meads was one of the loudest voices condemning the bias of referees
> > > > > >> > like Gert Bezuidenhout, which they blamed for the series defeat of the>
> > > > > >> > His silence about this is especially hypocritical because in 1976,
> > > > > >> > Meads was one of the loudest voices condemning the bias of referees
> > > > > >> > All Blacks.
>
> > > > > >> > Now, all these years later, he chooses to turn a blind eye to a
> > > > > >> > "refereeing" performance (or non-performance) that has been condemned>
> > > > > >> > Now, all these years later, he chooses to turn a blind eye to a
> > > > > >> > around the rugby world.
>
> > > > > >> > Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the sponsor's
> > > > > >> > fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
>
> > > > > >> But surely if you're a sportsman, the ref is always shit and biased when>
> > > > > >> > Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the sponsor's
> > > > > >> > fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
>
> > > > > >> you
> > > > > >> lose but "interpretationally correct" and great when you win?
>
> > > > > >Referees make mistakes, certainly, and to selectively rail about an
> > > > > >honest mistake, as a few nuts did against Wayne Barnes in 2007, is
> > > > > >unwarranted and unsportsmanly behaviour.
>
> > > > > >However, the non-refereeing of Joubert in the 2011 RWC final is
> > > > > >something that has caused grave concern, and no doubt was the reason
> > > > > >the All Blacks did not win Team of the Year at the recent Laureus
> > > > > >Awards. The referee appears to have colluded with the cheating of one
> > > > > >team....
>
> > > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?> > > > > >> lose but "interpretationally correct" and great when you win?
>
> > > > > >Referees make mistakes, certainly, and to selectively rail about an
> > > > > >honest mistake, as a few nuts did against Wayne Barnes in 2007, is
> > > > > >unwarranted and unsportsmanly behaviour.
>
> > > > > >However, the non-refereeing of Joubert in the 2011 RWC final is
> > > > > >something that has caused grave concern, and no doubt was the reason
> > > > > >the All Blacks did not win Team of the Year at the recent Laureus
> > > > > >Awards. The referee appears to have colluded with the cheating of one
> > > > > >team....
>
>
> > > > > >.............................
>
> > > > > >The World Cup is over and the Referee's decisions can't be altered now.
>
> > > > > >The important thing about the ad is whether this Silberhorn stuff does any> > > > > >.............................
>
> > > > > >The World Cup is over and the Referee's decisions can't be altered now.
>
> > > > > >good.
> > > > > >I haven't used it so wouldn't know.
>
> > > > > >But have any independent tests been done on it?
>
> > > > > From Wikipedia:
>
> > > > > There are ethical and regulatory concerns regarding direct-to-consumer
> > > > > (DTC) advertising, specifically the extent to which these ads may
> > > > > unduly influence the prescribing of prescription medicines based on
> > > > > consumer demands when, in some cases, they may not be medically
> > > > > necessary.
>
> > > > > All western nations, with the exception of New Zealand and the United
> > > > > States, have historically (since the 1940s for Australasia, North
> > > > > America, and Europe) banned direct advertising of pharmaceuticals to
> > > > > consumers.
>
> > > > All pharmaceuticals or just prescription only medicines? It would seem> > > > > >I haven't used it so wouldn't know.
>
> > > > > >But have any independent tests been done on it?
>
> > > > > From Wikipedia:
>
> > > > > There are ethical and regulatory concerns regarding direct-to-consumer
> > > > > (DTC) advertising, specifically the extent to which these ads may
> > > > > unduly influence the prescribing of prescription medicines based on
> > > > > consumer demands when, in some cases, they may not be medically
> > > > > necessary.
>
> > > > > All western nations, with the exception of New Zealand and the United
> > > > > States, have historically (since the 1940s for Australasia, North
> > > > > America, and Europe) banned direct advertising of pharmaceuticals to
> > > > > consumers.
>
> > > > ridiculous to ban the marketing of common supermarket items such as
> > > > aspirin.
>
> > > > aspirin.
>
> > > > However deer velvet and various other herbal remedies cannot be
> > > > represented as pharmaceuticals.
>
> > > My friend and colleague Professor Longhair says that deer velvet has> > > > represented as pharmaceuticals.
>
> > > enhanced his performance vis-a-vis his students.
>
> > Sock puppets are not 'friends', Mowithey.
>
> Some would disagree....
>
> http://s1.reutersmedia.net/
He said "sock puppet" not "cock puppet".
You get sadder by the post....
Two Dogs
|
"JohnO" <john...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1ddf084f-a7e3-48e9-8ddc-
- show quoted text -
Deer velvet has a good blood supply for the growing horn.
What else would it contain that could be of medical value? Hormones?
Do they just use the velvet, or sections of the growing horn itself?
So would Black Pudding have the same benefits?
|
"-Newsman-" <sla...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4f4579a7.578296@news.
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:48:48 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Feb 23, 11:24=A0am, slay...@hotmail.com (-Newsman-) wrote:
>>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:35:57 +1300, "Geopelia" <Geope...@nowhere.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >"Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> >news:797ecfc2-af8c-46bf-ae1e->>On Feb 23, 11:24=A0am, slay...@hotmail.com (-Newsman-) wrote:
>>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:35:57 +1300, "Geopelia" <Geope...@nowhere.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >"Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>.
>>> >On Feb 22, 11:41 am, "Mentalguy2k8" <Mentalguy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> >>news:17494c9d-7aef-4f46->>> >On Feb 22, 11:41 am, "Mentalguy2k8" <Mentalguy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>..
>>>
>>> >> > Listeners to commercial radio have no doubt heard the Silberhorn
>>> >> > dee=>>>
>>> >> > Listeners to commercial radio have no doubt heard the Silberhorn
>>r
>>> >> > velvet ad, where the revered football legend "Sir" Colin Meads
>>> >> > asser=>>> >> > velvet ad, where the revered football legend "Sir" Colin Meads
>>ts
>>> >> > that "the boys", i.e., the All Blacks, have secured the World Cup.
>>>
>>> >> > Sir Colin will know, like everybody else with eyes, that it wasn't
>>> >> > "the boys" who secured the World Cup for the All Blacks, it was the
>>> >> > (corrupt or incompetent) non-performance of the alleged referee,
>>> >> > Cra=>>> >> > that "the boys", i.e., the All Blacks, have secured the World Cup.
>>>
>>> >> > Sir Colin will know, like everybody else with eyes, that it wasn't
>>> >> > "the boys" who secured the World Cup for the All Blacks, it was the
>>> >> > (corrupt or incompetent) non-performance of the alleged referee,
>>ig
>>> >> > Joubert.
>>>
>>> >> > His silence about this is especially hypocritical because in 1976,
>>> >> > Meads was one of the loudest voices condemning the bias of referees
>>> >> > like Gert Bezuidenhout, which they blamed for the series defeat of
>>> >> > t=>>> >> > Joubert.
>>>
>>> >> > His silence about this is especially hypocritical because in 1976,
>>> >> > Meads was one of the loudest voices condemning the bias of referees
>>> >> > like Gert Bezuidenhout, which they blamed for the series defeat of
>>he
>>> >> > All Blacks.
>>>
>>> >> > Now, all these years later, he chooses to turn a blind eye to a
>>> >> > "refereeing" performance (or non-performance) that has been
>>> >> > condemne=>>> >> > All Blacks.
>>>
>>> >> > Now, all these years later, he chooses to turn a blind eye to a
>>> >> > "refereeing" performance (or non-performance) that has been
>>d
>>> >> > around the rugby world.
>>>
>>> >> > Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the
>>> >> > sponsor's
>>> >> > fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
>>>
>>> >> But surely if you're a sportsman, the ref is always shit and biased
>>> >> wh=>>> >> > around the rugby world.
>>>
>>> >> > Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the
>>> >> > sponsor's
>>> >> > fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
>>>
>>> >> But surely if you're a sportsman, the ref is always shit and biased
>>en
>>> >> you
>>> >> lose but "interpretationally correct" and great when you win?
>>>
>>> >Referees make mistakes, certainly, and to selectively rail about an
>>> >honest mistake, as a few nuts did against Wayne Barnes in 2007, is
>>> >unwarranted and unsportsmanly behaviour.
>>>
>>> >However, the non-refereeing of Joubert in the 2011 RWC final is
>>> >something that has caused grave concern, and no doubt was the reason
>>> >the All Blacks did not win Team of the Year at the recent Laureus
>>> >Awards. The referee appears to have colluded with the cheating of one
>>> >team....
>>>
>>> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?>>> >> you
>>> >> lose but "interpretationally correct" and great when you win?
>>>
>>> >Referees make mistakes, certainly, and to selectively rail about an
>>> >honest mistake, as a few nuts did against Wayne Barnes in 2007, is
>>> >unwarranted and unsportsmanly behaviour.
>>>
>>> >However, the non-refereeing of Joubert in the 2011 RWC final is
>>> >something that has caused grave concern, and no doubt was the reason
>>> >the All Blacks did not win Team of the Year at the recent Laureus
>>> >Awards. The referee appears to have colluded with the cheating of one
>>> >team....
>>>
>>>
>>> >.............................
>>>
>>> >The World Cup is over and the Referee's decisions can't be altered now.
>>>
>>> >The important thing about the ad is whether this Silberhorn stuff
>>> >=A0doe=>>> >.............................
>>>
>>> >The World Cup is over and the Referee's decisions can't be altered now.
>>>
>>> >The important thing about the ad is whether this Silberhorn stuff
>>s any
>>> >good.
>>> >I haven't used it so wouldn't know.
>>>
>>> >But have any independent tests been done on it?
>>>
>>> From Wikipedia:
>>>
>>> There are ethical and regulatory concerns regarding direct-to-consumer
>>> (DTC) advertising, specifically the extent to which these ads may
>>> unduly influence the prescribing of prescription medicines based on
>>> consumer demands when, in some cases, they may not be medically
>>> necessary.
>>>
>>> All western nations, with the exception of New Zealand and the United
>>> States, have historically (since the 1940s for Australasia, North
>>> America, and Europe) banned direct advertising of pharmaceuticals to
>>> consumers.
>>
>>All pharmaceuticals or just prescription only medicines?
>
>>> >good.
>>> >I haven't used it so wouldn't know.
>>>
>>> >But have any independent tests been done on it?
>>>
>>> From Wikipedia:
>>>
>>> There are ethical and regulatory concerns regarding direct-to-consumer
>>> (DTC) advertising, specifically the extent to which these ads may
>>> unduly influence the prescribing of prescription medicines based on
>>> consumer demands when, in some cases, they may not be medically
>>> necessary.
>>>
>>> All western nations, with the exception of New Zealand and the United
>>> States, have historically (since the 1940s for Australasia, North
>>> America, and Europe) banned direct advertising of pharmaceuticals to
>>> consumers.
>>
>>All pharmaceuticals or just prescription only medicines?
>
> Prescription, certainly, and there are regulations covering the
> advertising of complementary "remedies," though how extensively isn't
> clear. Manufacturers have to prove their products have been made to
> strict standards and contain a consistent and clearly marked dose. It
> seems the intention is eventually to ban the advertising of blatantly
> un-provable claims like "May assist in aiding or reducing...."
>
> advertising of complementary "remedies," though how extensively isn't
> clear. Manufacturers have to prove their products have been made to
> strict standards and contain a consistent and clearly marked dose. It
> seems the intention is eventually to ban the advertising of blatantly
> un-provable claims like "May assist in aiding or reducing...."
>
>>It would seem
>>ridiculous to ban the marketing of common supermarket items such as
>>aspirin.
>
>>ridiculous to ban the marketing of common supermarket items such as
>>aspirin.
>
> Aspirin can be harmful in some instances, and in excess can be fatal.
> Again, where does one draw the line?
>>
>>
>>However deer velvet and various other herbal remedies cannot be
>>represented as pharmaceuticals.
>
>>represented as pharmaceuticals.
>
> One of my principal concerns is that in New Zealand there is DTC TV
> promotion of drugs that can easily kill, the ads for them including
> virtually unreadable small-print warnings and disclaimers for far too
> brief a period to be easily read and assimilated.
>
> promotion of drugs that can easily kill, the ads for them including
> virtually unreadable small-print warnings and disclaimers for far too
> brief a period to be easily read and assimilated.
>
> OK, so the GP still has ultiimately to authorise use of the drug, but
> this kind of advertising gives enormous heft to the process of
> prescribing, both via the "innocent" patient and the subliminal
> messaging to the already-aware medic.
>
> Otherwise, why would Big Drug bother?
>
Sidenafil (Viagra etc) is always being advertised.> prescribing, both via the "innocent" patient and the subliminal
> messaging to the already-aware medic.
>
> Otherwise, why would Big Drug bother?
>
But it can be fatal to anyone with a heart condition, and there doesn't seem
to be much warning in the adverts.
A chemist would probably warn of any bad effects or interaction with
prescription drugs, but what of those who buy from less reputable sources,
or off the internet?
|
On Feb 22, 10:48 pm, JohnO <johno1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > Listeners to commercial radio have no doubt heard the Silberhorn deer
> > >> > velvet ad, where the revered football legend "Sir" Colin Meads asserts
>
> - Show quoted text -
The Earl wonders why you would advertise aspirin? It has some
miraculous properties, but as a painkiller or as a regular protection
against heart disease it has been demonstrated that the side effects
outweigh the benefits. So to advertise it as a "common supermarket"
item is dangerous and immoral.
> On Feb 23, 11:24 am, slay...@hotmail.com (-Newsman-) wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:35:57 +1300, "Geopelia" <Geope...@nowhere.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >"Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > >news:797ecfc2-af8c-46bf-ae1e->
>
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:35:57 +1300, "Geopelia" <Geope...@nowhere.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >"Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > >On Feb 22, 11:41 am, "Mentalguy2k8" <Mentalguy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >>news:17494c9d-7aef-4f46-> > >> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
>
> > >> > Listeners to commercial radio have no doubt heard the Silberhorn deer
> > >> > velvet ad, where the revered football legend "Sir" Colin Meads asserts
> > >> > that "the boys", i.e., the All Blacks, have secured the World Cup.
>
> > >> > Sir Colin will know, like everybody else with eyes, that it wasn't
> > >> > "the boys" who secured the World Cup for the All Blacks, it was the
> > >> > (corrupt or incompetent) non-performance of the alleged referee, Craig>
> > >> > Sir Colin will know, like everybody else with eyes, that it wasn't
> > >> > "the boys" who secured the World Cup for the All Blacks, it was the
> > >> > Joubert.
>
> > >> > His silence about this is especially hypocritical because in 1976,
> > >> > Meads was one of the loudest voices condemning the bias of referees
> > >> > like Gert Bezuidenhout, which they blamed for the series defeat of the>
> > >> > His silence about this is especially hypocritical because in 1976,
> > >> > Meads was one of the loudest voices condemning the bias of referees
> > >> > All Blacks.
>
> > >> > Now, all these years later, he chooses to turn a blind eye to a
> > >> > "refereeing" performance (or non-performance) that has been condemned>
> > >> > Now, all these years later, he chooses to turn a blind eye to a
> > >> > around the rugby world.
>
> > >> > Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the sponsor's
> > >> > fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
>
> > >> But surely if you're a sportsman, the ref is always shit and biased when>
> > >> > Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the sponsor's
> > >> > fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
>
> > >> you
> > >> lose but "interpretationally correct" and great when you win?
>
> > >Referees make mistakes, certainly, and to selectively rail about an
> > >honest mistake, as a few nuts did against Wayne Barnes in 2007, is
> > >unwarranted and unsportsmanly behaviour.
>
> > >However, the non-refereeing of Joubert in the 2011 RWC final is
> > >something that has caused grave concern, and no doubt was the reason
> > >the All Blacks did not win Team of the Year at the recent Laureus
> > >Awards. The referee appears to have colluded with the cheating of one
> > >team....
>
> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?> > >> lose but "interpretationally correct" and great when you win?
>
> > >Referees make mistakes, certainly, and to selectively rail about an
> > >honest mistake, as a few nuts did against Wayne Barnes in 2007, is
> > >unwarranted and unsportsmanly behaviour.
>
> > >However, the non-refereeing of Joubert in the 2011 RWC final is
> > >something that has caused grave concern, and no doubt was the reason
> > >the All Blacks did not win Team of the Year at the recent Laureus
> > >Awards. The referee appears to have colluded with the cheating of one
> > >team....
>
>
> > >.............................
>
> > >The World Cup is over and the Referee's decisions can't be altered now.
>
> > >The important thing about the ad is whether this Silberhorn stuff does any> > >.............................
>
> > >The World Cup is over and the Referee's decisions can't be altered now.
>
> > >good.
> > >I haven't used it so wouldn't know.
>
> > >But have any independent tests been done on it?
>
> > From Wikipedia:
>
> > There are ethical and regulatory concerns regarding direct-to-consumer
> > (DTC) advertising, specifically the extent to which these ads may
> > unduly influence the prescribing of prescription medicines based on
> > consumer demands when, in some cases, they may not be medically
> > necessary.
>
> > All western nations, with the exception of New Zealand and the United
> > States, have historically (since the 1940s for Australasia, North
> > America, and Europe) banned direct advertising of pharmaceuticals to
> > consumers.
>
> All pharmaceuticals or just prescription only medicines? It would seem> > >I haven't used it so wouldn't know.
>
> > >But have any independent tests been done on it?
>
> > From Wikipedia:
>
> > There are ethical and regulatory concerns regarding direct-to-consumer
> > (DTC) advertising, specifically the extent to which these ads may
> > unduly influence the prescribing of prescription medicines based on
> > consumer demands when, in some cases, they may not be medically
> > necessary.
>
> > All western nations, with the exception of New Zealand and the United
> > States, have historically (since the 1940s for Australasia, North
> > America, and Europe) banned direct advertising of pharmaceuticals to
> > consumers.
>
> ridiculous to ban the marketing of common supermarket items such as
> aspirin.
>
> aspirin.
>
> However deer velvet and various other herbal remedies cannot be
> represented as pharmaceuticals.- Hide quoted text ->
> - Show quoted text -
The Earl wonders why you would advertise aspirin? It has some
miraculous properties, but as a painkiller or as a regular protection
against heart disease it has been demonstrated that the side effects
outweigh the benefits. So to advertise it as a "common supermarket"
item is dangerous and immoral.
|
On Feb 23, 3:44 am, "Geopelia" <Geope...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> "-Newsman-" <slay...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:4f4579a7.578296@news.
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:48:48 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1...@gmail.com>
> or off the internet?- Hide quoted text -
conditions to improve the condition, even though it is not licensed
for the use. To say that it can be fatl to anyone with a heart
condition is ignorant and dangerous. It can be very useful tool in
treating some of the most complicated of congenital heart conditions
such as tetralogy of fallot and PA.
> "-Newsman-" <slay...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:4f4579a7.578296@news.
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:48:48 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1...@gmail.com>
- show quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Slow down my friend. Sidenafil is given to babies with some heart> - Show quoted text -
conditions to improve the condition, even though it is not licensed
for the use. To say that it can be fatl to anyone with a heart
condition is ignorant and dangerous. It can be very useful tool in
treating some of the most complicated of congenital heart conditions
such as tetralogy of fallot and PA.
|
"Earldullthing" <earldu...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:939a05b7-f4be-4eea-89f7-
- show quoted text -
Of course it is used for heart conditions, that it is what it was originally
for.
But it is now used for another purpose, and that is when it can be dangerous
to heart patients.
(Warfarin too is used in small controlled doses for medical reasons,
But in larger quantities it is rat poison!)
Here's a surprising coincidence. Today I received an advertisement for some
expensive item called Vital3, some amazing miracle drug. It claims to stop
the immune system attacking one's joints, and to repair the cartilage.
It was sent from Philadelphia USA and makes claims that would never be
allowed here.
I have no idea how they got my address or why they think I would be
interested - or able to afford it.
|
On 22/02/2012 6:32 AM, Two Dogs wrote:
> On Feb 21, 5:24 pm, Morrissey Breen<morrisseybr...@gmail.com
>> Listeners to commercial radio have no doubt heard the Silberhorn deer
>> velvet ad, where the revered football legend "Sir" Colin Meads asserts
>
> Vote now please. 1 vote for Breen Obsessed Moron.....
>
> Two Dogs
As if it was ever in doubt.
> On Feb 21, 5:24 pm, Morrissey Breen<morrisseybr...@gmail.com
>> Listeners to commercial radio have no doubt heard the Silberhorn deer
>> velvet ad, where the revered football legend "Sir" Colin Meads asserts
>> that "the boys", i.e., the All Blacks, have secured the World Cup.
>>
>> Sir Colin will know, like everybody else with eyes, that it wasn't
>> "the boys" who secured the World Cup for the All Blacks, it was the
>> (corrupt or incompetent) non-performance of the alleged referee, Craig>>
>> Sir Colin will know, like everybody else with eyes, that it wasn't
>> "the boys" who secured the World Cup for the All Blacks, it was the
>> Joubert.
>>
>> His silence about this is especially hypocritical because in 1976,
>> Meads was one of the loudest voices condemning the bias of referees
>> like Gert Bezuidenhout, which they blamed for the series defeat of the>>
>> His silence about this is especially hypocritical because in 1976,
>> Meads was one of the loudest voices condemning the bias of referees
>> All Blacks.
>>
>> Now, all these years later, he chooses to turn a blind eye to a
>> "refereeing" performance (or non-performance) that has been condemned>>
>> Now, all these years later, he chooses to turn a blind eye to a
>> around the rugby world.
>>
>> Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the sponsor's
>> fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
>
> Or you are an obsessed moron.>>
>> Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the sponsor's
>> fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
>
>
> Vote now please. 1 vote for Breen Obsessed Moron.....
>
> Two Dogs
As if it was ever in doubt.
|
On 22/02/2012 11:29 AM, Morrissey Breen wrote:
> Heh, heh. Maybe you were thinking of my friend and confrere "Caspar
> Milquetoast".
I want your address right now, Mowithey. When I'm home for Dear Old
Mum's Big 90th Birthday Bash in October, I'm going to come around to
your place, drag you squealing from your hot tub of 14 year old
schoolboys, and belt nine bells out of you.
Don't EVER EVER use words like "friend" and whatever that other dago
term means -- I know it can't be good -- in reference to me again. EVER.
CASPAR THE INTERNET WARRIOR
> Heh, heh. Maybe you were thinking of my friend and confrere "Caspar
> Milquetoast".
I want your address right now, Mowithey. When I'm home for Dear Old
Mum's Big 90th Birthday Bash in October, I'm going to come around to
your place, drag you squealing from your hot tub of 14 year old
schoolboys, and belt nine bells out of you.
Don't EVER EVER use words like "friend" and whatever that other dago
term means -- I know it can't be good -- in reference to me again. EVER.
CASPAR THE INTERNET WARRIOR
|
- show quoted text -
you're catching up on your reading.
How about the Force, huh?
|
On 22/02/2012 6:24 AM, Morrissey Breen wrote:
> Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the sponsor's
> fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
Or, more likely, you know less about rugby than the average doorknob.> Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the sponsor's
> fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
People who actually do know something about rugby realise two things:
that Joubert was head and shoulders the best ref at the world cup, and
that he was actually selected for the final by the imbecilic morons who
run world rugby is a miracle that makes turning water into wine look
like a playgroup birthday party magic trick.
But all this is irrelevant, isn't it Mowithey? The real reason is that
your beloved unwashed Froggy team lost the final, and you have been
sobbing and boo-hooing like a great big girl's blouse ever since.
Perhaps this will serve as an object lesson in exactly what I have been
lecturing you and various other ignoramuses on for the last decade. The
world cup is a lottery. France were purest driven shite throughout the
tournament while the All Blacks were untouchable. Did that matter? Not
to the extent of your tiny little invisible penis.
In the final, France played their best game of the year by a significant
margin, while the All Blacks made hard work of looking like average
journeymen, and France deserved to win.
But the world cup does not go to teams that deserve to win, as we all
know only too well. It goes to teams that finish with more points on the
board in the final, for whatever dodgy, debatable, inconsistent reasons
that may be.
And that's the way the croissant crumbles.
And now back to the proper rugby...
|
On 23/02/2012 6:51 AM, Morrissey Breen wrote:
> My friend and colleague Professor Longhair says that deer velvet has
> enhanced his performance vis-a-vis his students.
Was that vis-a-vis the hot tub and your arse, by any chance Mowithey? > My friend and colleague Professor Longhair says that deer velvet has
> enhanced his performance vis-a-vis his students.
|
- show quoted text -
and if they don't they were robbed, do keep up old bean.
|
On Wednesday, 7/Mar-2012 8:48 p.m., Earldullthing wrote:
> On Mar 7, 7:19 am, caspar milquetoast<b...@comswest.net.
>> On 22/02/2012 6:24 AM, Morrissey Breen wrote:
> On Mar 7, 7:19 am, caspar milquetoast<b...@comswest.net.
>> On 22/02/2012 6:24 AM, Morrissey Breen wrote:
> New Zealand deserve to win every match by 50 you heard it here first,
> and if they don't they were robbed, do keep up old bean.
Finally.. someone recognizes the truth about world rugby.> and if they don't they were robbed, do keep up old bean.
JC
|
On Mar 7, 8:19 pm, caspar milquetoast <b...@comswest.net.au> wrote:
> On 22/02/2012 6:24 AM, Morrissey Breen wrote:
>
> > Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the sponsor's
> > fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
>
> Or, more likely, you know less about rugby than the average doorknob.
>
> People who actually do know something about rugby realise two things:
> that Joubert was head and shoulders the best ref at the world cup, and
> that he was actually selected for the final by the imbecilic morons who
> run world rugby is a miracle that makes turning water into wine look
> like a playgroup birthday party magic trick.
Yes, "Caspar", he had the ability to referee the match. The fact is:> On 22/02/2012 6:24 AM, Morrissey Breen wrote:
>
> > Either Sir Colin was either drinking a bit too much of the sponsor's
> > fine products, or he is simply dishonest.
>
> Or, more likely, you know less about rugby than the average doorknob.
>
> People who actually do know something about rugby realise two things:
> that Joubert was head and shoulders the best ref at the world cup, and
> that he was actually selected for the final by the imbecilic morons who
> run world rugby is a miracle that makes turning water into wine look
> like a playgroup birthday party magic trick.
he chose to not referee the match. Which meant he colluded in the
systematic cheating of the home team. Just why he did this has not yet
been definitively established.
>
> But all this is irrelevant, isn't it Mowithey? The real reason is that
> your beloved unwashed Froggy team lost the final, and you have been
> sobbing and boo-hooing like a great big girl's blouse ever since.
failure of Mr. Joubert to referee the final, i.e. his decision to let
one team cheat and spoil at will throughout the second half.
>
> Perhaps this will serve as an object lesson in exactly what I have been
> lecturing you and various other ignoramuses
>
> on for the last decade. The
> world cup is a lottery.
This one was not.
>
> France were purest driven shite throughout the
> tournament while the All Blacks were untouchable. Did that matter?
refereed properly. The players in both teams fulfilled their roles,
but the referee clearly failed to do his.
>
> Not to the extent of your tiny little invisible penis.
mother's 90th, "Caspar"?
>
> In the final, France played their best game of the year by a significant margin,
tournament. But that's what happens when you're playing sixteen men.
>
> while the All Blacks made hard work of looking like average
> journeymen, and France deserved to win.
The All Black forwards realized early in the second half that the
referee would not penalize ANYTHING they did at the breakdowns, and so
France was almost unable to play any football at all.
Quite possibly the All Blacks would have won if the referee had
penalized their persistent cheating, but then again, maybe they would
not have. Joubert seemed determined to ensure that there would be no
chance of open play at all.
>
> But the world cup does not go to teams that deserve to win, as we all
> know only too well. It goes to teams that finish with more points on the
> board in the final, for whatever dodgy, debatable, inconsistent reasons
> that may be.
home team illegally and persistently killing any chance of the
visiting team playing football.
>
> And that's the way the croissant crumbles.
|
I wouldn't blame the ref. France played a better game, and the ABs were lucky to win.
|
You obviously have not watched the match, Bubba.
>
> France played a better game,
No, France was hardly able to play at all, due to the systematic (and
un-penalised) cheating of the home team.
>
> and the ABs were lucky to win.
The All Blacks benefited from having the referee turn a blind eye to
their cheating, and, yes, they won the match. But at what cost to
their reputation?
>
> France played a better game,
un-penalised) cheating of the home team.
>
> and the ABs were lucky to win.
their cheating, and, yes, they won the match. But at what cost to
their reputation?
|
- show quoted text -
|
- show quoted text -
|
- show quoted text -
schoolboy mistress uses to whip your fat, pasty arse with.
|
- show quoted text -
http://outfrontcolorado.com/
Give me a call some time. Please.
It's a free call on 0800 80 1080. You'll get straight through.
NewstalkZB. Tune Your Mind.
|
- show quoted text -
do this for you if you come to Auckland...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/
|
On 10/03/2012 6:38 PM, Kiki wrote:
> Maybe you looking for something like this, you big Australian. Maybe I
> do this for you if you come to Auckland...
>
> http://upload.wikimedia.org/
Only three sock puppets? How insulting. > Maybe you looking for something like this, you big Australian. Maybe I
> do this for you if you come to Auckland...
>
> http://upload.wikimedia.org/
No comments:
Post a Comment