On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 02:40:35PM -0400, Norbert Cartagena wrote:
> Paul M Foster wrote:
> >
<snip>
> > I've heard a lot of junk science about mad cow. Apparently, the agent
> > responsible is essentially a protein. But proteins do not
> > self-replicate. So I'm not sure this isn't a bogus claim.
> >
> > Paul
> >
>
> You know, I could reply to this with enough evidence to spin you head,
Oh sure, there's plenty of evidence. People come up with evidence every
day for all kinds of things. But how is it that prions, which have no
DNA, can reproduce? Unless you can show scientific evidence for that,
then I'm not inclined to believe any other evidence. For all I know,
prions are an artifact of some other unseen and hitherto undiagnosed
agent.
> but right now I'm too busy with Finals (hey, I'm almost done with
> college, almost at the point of graduating Cum Laude, I don't wanna blow
> it). Can we put this off 'till about next Tuesday (week&1/2 from now)?
>
Yeah sure, run away, ya sissy! ;-} (Good luck on finals. Your degree is
in... ?)
> By the way, anything about 5ppb (parts per billion) is too much.
According to whom? Remember, these people doing this research are the
same ones who gave us the "salt-is-bad-no-salt-is-good" and
"eggs-are-bad-no-eggs-are-good" refrains.
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:38:19 EDT