Yet another car smashed into a house.

On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 00:07:26 -0700 (PDT), Simon Mason
wrote:

On Jun 7, 5:33*am, Doug wrote:
On Jun 5, 6:37*pm, Simon Mason wrote:



On Jun 5, 6:22*pm, "Nightjar \"cpb\"@" "insertmysurnamehere wrote:

This outbreak has a very low incidence of infecting young children. That
would be unusual if it were due to infected meat, but, as they do not
normally form a significant part of the diet of young children, it is
consistent with the source being fresh vegetables.

Colin Bignell

German beansprouts were the culprit. I've been eating them every day
on holiday.
In fact, here's our dinner in Heidelberg last Wednesday.

http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/4587/jun013.jpg

No it seems beansprouts have been exonerated.

As we were then.


I assume you mean as your were on holiday abroad - enjoying all the local
sites, food, drink and experiences etc.

Oh - No - you mean "as we were" being a sad ******* on a newsgroup you can't
keep away from - are "we" your only friends?

Simple really.

--
Simple Simon Mason - who cycles at 25mph in 20mph limits just because the limits do not apply to cyclists.
This includes exceeding the speed limit past three schools. A total disregard for the well-being of vulnerable road users.
The actions of a true psycholist.

On 07/06/2011 09:14, Norman Wells wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 5, 6:37 pm, Simon Mason wrote:
On Jun 5, 6:22 pm, "Nightjar \"cpb\"@" "insertmysurnamehere wrote:

This outbreak has a very low incidence of infecting young children.
That would be unusual if it were due to infected meat, but, as they
do not normally form a significant part of the diet of young
children, it is consistent with the source being fresh vegetables.

Colin Bignell

German beansprouts were the culprit. I've been eating them every day
on holiday.
In fact, here's our dinner in Heidelberg last Wednesday.

http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/4587/jun013.jpg

No it seems beansprouts have been exonerated. The main sources of e-
coli are farm animal food and waste products.

"E. coli O104:H21 was discovered in 1982, when it caused an outbreak
of severe bloody diarrhea. It had infected hamburgers, and those
affected had eaten these hamburgers not fully-cooked.[2]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escherichia_coli_O104:H21

Well, jolly good for H21.

Why didn't you quote the following bit that says:

"An outbreak of E. coli responsible for at least 22 deaths in Northern
Europe in May of 2011 was reported to be caused by _another_ O104
strain, Escherichia coli O104:H4"? There's a separate, surely more
relevant Wikipedia page about that.

The H4 strain of E. coli undoubtedly originated in animals, quite
possibly humans. No-one denies that. But vegetables still remain the
prime suspects as carriers.

Do please tell us then why the Precautionary Principle, which you and
your friends are so keen on promoting when it suits you, shouldn't apply
here. Surely all vegetables should be immediately taken off the market
throughout Europe until long term trials can show that they're
completely safe?

First of all, Doug doesn't have any friends, apart from Malcolm &
Cressida Wright-Prat.

Secondly he is a vegetablist & would stave if they did that.



How many more deaths do vulnerable food users have to suffer as a result
of doing nothing in this regard?

******* vegetable weapons...



--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

On Jun 7, 9:20*am, "Nightjar \"cpb\"@" "insertmysurnamehere wrote:
On 07/06/2011 05:33, Doug wrote:









On Jun 5, 6:37 pm, Simon *wrote:
On Jun 5, 6:22 pm, "Nightjar\"cpb\"@""insertmysurnamehere *wrote:

This outbreak has a very low incidence of infecting young children. That
would be unusual if it were due to infected meat, but, as they do not
normally form a significant part of the diet of young children, it is
consistent with the source being fresh vegetables.

Colin Bignell

German beansprouts were the culprit. I've been eating them every day
on holiday.
In fact, here's our dinner in Heidelberg last Wednesday.

http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/4587/jun013.jpg

No it seems beansprouts have been exonerated. The main sources of e-
coli are farm animal food and waste products.

As I pointed out, if the source were meat, it would be expected to have
infected more children than it has. Any food source may be infected by
contact with a human carrier who does not practice good food hygiene.

E. coli O104:H21 also infects children.

"E. coli O104:H21 was discovered in 1982, when it caused an outbreak
of severe bloody diarrhea. It had infected hamburgers, and those
affected had eaten these hamburgers not fully-cooked.[2]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escherichia_coli_O104:H21

According to the World Health Organisation, bean sprouts are a specific
hazard, even if this particular producer has been cleared:

'In recent years, the popularity of sprouted seeds has increased
significantly owing to their nutritional value. However, reports of
foodborne outbreaks associated with such raw vegetable sprouts have
raised concerns among public health agencies and consumers. Outbreak
investigations have indicated that pathogens found on sprouts most
likely originate from the seeds. The seed may be contaminated in the
field or during harvesting, storage or transportation. During the
germination process in sprout production, low levels of pathogens
present on seeds may quickly reach levels high enough to cause disease.'

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs125/en/

OK you have made your point but it seems now that the infections are
not caused by sprouts so what next?

Doug.

On Jun 7, 9:14*am, "Norman Wells" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 5, 6:37 pm, Simon Mason wrote:
On Jun 5, 6:22 pm, "Nightjar \"cpb\"@" "insertmysurnamehere wrote:
This outbreak has a very low incidence of infecting young children.
That would be unusual if it were due to infected meat, but, as they
do not normally form a significant part of the diet of young
children, it is consistent with the source being fresh vegetables.

Colin Bignell

German beansprouts were the culprit. I've been eating them every day
on holiday.
In fact, here's our dinner in Heidelberg last Wednesday.

http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/4587/jun013.jpg

No it seems beansprouts have been exonerated. The main sources of e-
coli are farm animal food and waste products.

"E. coli O104:H21 was discovered in 1982, when it caused an outbreak
of severe bloody diarrhea. It had infected hamburgers, and those
affected had eaten these hamburgers not fully-cooked.[2]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escherichia_coli_O104:H21

Well, jolly good for H21.

Why didn't you quote the following bit that says:

"An outbreak of E. coli responsible for at least 22 deaths in Northern
Europe in May of 2011 was reported to be caused by _another_ O104 strain,
Escherichia coli O104:H4"? *There's a separate, surely more relevant
Wikipedia page about that.

The H4 strain of E. coli undoubtedly originated in animals, quite possibly
humans. *No-one denies that. *But vegetables still remain the prime suspects
as carriers.

Do please tell us then why the Precautionary Principle, which you and your
friends are so keen on promoting when it suits you, shouldn't apply here.
Surely all vegetables should be immediately taken off the market throughout
Europe until long term trials can show that they're completely safe?

How many more deaths do vulnerable food users have to suffer as a result of
doing nothing in this regard?

You do go on don't you.

You overlook the fact that one precautionary principle can override
another. Hence starvation takes priority over infection. In this case
the precautionary principle should only be applied to foods which in
the recent past have been responsible for e-coli outbreaks and this
would of course include meat and other animal products as well as veg.
There would then remain sufficient foods to prevent starvation and
properly cooked foods are completely safe anyway.

Doug.

Doug wrote:

OK you have made your point but it seems now that the infections are
not caused by sprouts so what next?

According to the precautionary principle that you espouse, we should surely
remove all vegetables from the shelves throughout Europe until scientists
can prove that they're completely safe.

You'd agree with that, wouldn't you?

On 08/06/2011 05:58, Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 9:20 am, "Nightjar\"cpb\"@""insertmysurnamehere wrote:
On 07/06/2011 05:33, Doug wrote:









On Jun 5, 6:37 pm, Simon wrote:
On Jun 5, 6:22 pm, "Nightjar\"cpb\"@""insertmysurnamehere wrote:

This outbreak has a very low incidence of infecting young children. That
would be unusual if it were due to infected meat, but, as they do not
normally form a significant part of the diet of young children, it is
consistent with the source being fresh vegetables.

Colin Bignell

German beansprouts were the culprit. I've been eating them every day
on holiday.
In fact, here's our dinner in Heidelberg last Wednesday.

http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/4587/jun013.jpg

No it seems beansprouts have been exonerated. The main sources of e-
coli are farm animal food and waste products.

As I pointed out, if the source were meat, it would be expected to have
infected more children than it has. Any food source may be infected by
contact with a human carrier who does not practice good food hygiene.

E. coli O104:H21 also infects children.

Indeed, but in a normal outbreak it would do so in far greater numbers.
This indicates that the source is not part of the usual diet of
children. That is one reason they have been concentrating on raw vegetables.

"E. coli O104:H21 was discovered in 1982, when it caused an outbreak
of severe bloody diarrhea. It had infected hamburgers, and those
affected had eaten these hamburgers not fully-cooked.[2]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escherichia_coli_O104:H21

According to the World Health Organisation, bean sprouts are a specific
hazard, even if this particular producer has been cleared:

'In recent years, the popularity of sprouted seeds has increased
significantly owing to their nutritional value. However, reports of
foodborne outbreaks associated with such raw vegetable sprouts have
raised concerns among public health agencies and consumers. Outbreak
investigations have indicated that pathogens found on sprouts most
likely originate from the seeds. The seed may be contaminated in the
field or during harvesting, storage or transportation. During the
germination process in sprout production, low levels of pathogens
present on seeds may quickly reach levels high enough to cause disease.'

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs125/en/

OK you have made your point but it seems now that the infections are
not caused by sprouts so what next?

That is not quite true. Initial trials, involving 23 of 40 samples taken
from current production, showed no evidence of infection. If the tests
had proved positive, they would have pinpointed the farm as the source
of the infection but the fact that they were negative does not mean it
is in the clear. That will require the results from longer term testing
on the remaining samples and from tests on samples of older production
and packaging.

The German authorities are confident that there is a clear trail of
evidence leading back to this farm, so they are exepcting the longer
term testing to show evidence of the E.Coli infection originating there.

Colin Bignell

Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 9:14 am, "Norman Wells" wrote:

The H4 strain of E. coli undoubtedly originated in animals, quite
possibly humans. No-one denies that. But vegetables still remain the
prime suspects as carriers.

Do please tell us then why the Precautionary Principle, which you
and your friends are so keen on promoting when it suits you,
shouldn't apply here. Surely all vegetables should be immediately
taken off the market throughout Europe until long term trials can
show that they're completely safe?

How many more deaths do vulnerable food users have to suffer as a
result of doing nothing in this regard?

You do go on don't you.

Me?!!!!

You overlook the fact that one precautionary principle can override
another. Hence starvation takes priority over infection.

Oh, I see. Who exactly decides this hierarchy of precautionary principles?

Where is it all set out? Can you give any evidence, especially a reliable
source and reference?

In this case
the precautionary principle should only be applied to foods which in
the recent past have been responsible for e-coli outbreaks and this
would of course include meat and other animal products as well as veg.

There would then remain sufficient foods to prevent starvation

Er, hang on. If you remove all the animal and plant kingdoms from
availability, what's left to eat?

No, the only sensible way of proceeding is to remove all veg. They're the
only things under suspicion in the current fatal outbreak, so they're the
only things that need to be dealt with. Removing them completely throughout
Europe wouldn't cause any starvation either. It's therefore a sensible and
proportionate response to the crisis.

Veg can return to the shelves when scientists can prove they're completely
safe. After all, we don't want any more infections, do we?

and properly cooked foods are completely safe anyway.

They always were. But, you see, you can't make people cook things properly.
There are freaks out there who think raw vegetable matter is appetising, and
whatever you say, you won't get them to boil their lettuce.

So, the only answer is to remove all vegetables before they fall into their
hands, isn't it?.

On Jun 8, 9:45*am, "Norman Wells" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 9:14 am, "Norman Wells" wrote:
The H4 strain of E. coli undoubtedly originated in animals, quite
possibly humans. No-one denies that. But vegetables still remain the
prime suspects as carriers.

Do please tell us then why the Precautionary Principle, which you
and your friends are so keen on promoting when it suits you,
shouldn't apply here. Surely all vegetables should be immediately
taken off the market throughout Europe until long term trials can
show that they're completely safe?

How many more deaths do vulnerable food users have to suffer as a
result of doing nothing in this regard?

You do go on don't you.

Me?!!!!

You overlook the fact that one precautionary principle can override
another. Hence starvation takes priority over infection.

Oh, I see. *Who exactly decides this hierarchy of precautionary principles?

Where is it all set out? *Can you give any evidence, especially a reliable
source and reference?

It is usually self-evident and involves stopping something which is
causing harm.

In this case
the precautionary principle should only be applied to foods which in
the recent past have been responsible for e-coli outbreaks and this
would of course include meat and other animal products as well as veg.
There would then remain sufficient foods to prevent starvation

Er, hang on. *If you remove all the animal and plant kingdoms from
availability, what's left to eat?

At last you have finally realised you do not remove ALL foods.

No, the only sensible way of proceeding is to remove all veg. *They're the
only things under suspicion in the current fatal outbreak, so they're the
only things that need to be dealt with. *Removing them completely throughout
Europe wouldn't cause any starvation either. *It's therefore a sensible and
proportionate response to the crisis.

Wrong. As I have already stated, you only remove foods which have been
implicated in e-coli outbreaks in the past, which is known to include
some meat as well as veg.

Veg can return to the shelves when scientists can prove they're completely
safe. *After all, we don't want any more infections, do we?

and properly cooked foods are completely safe anyway.

They always were. *But, you see, you can't make people cook things properly.
There are freaks out there who think raw vegetable matter is appetising, and
whatever you say, you won't get them to boil their lettuce.

What about fruit? Without some raw food people would be less healthy,
as you probably seem to be with your opposition to all veg..

So, the only answer is to remove all vegetables before they fall into their
hands, isn't it?.

You are still being persistently wrong. See above.

Doug.

Doug wrote:
On Jun 8, 9:45 am, "Norman Wells" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 9:14 am, "Norman Wells" wrote:

The H4 strain of E. coli undoubtedly originated in animals, quite
possibly humans. No-one denies that. But vegetables still remain
the prime suspects as carriers.

Do please tell us then why the Precautionary Principle, which you
and your friends are so keen on promoting when it suits you,
shouldn't apply here. Surely all vegetables should be immediately
taken off the market throughout Europe until long term trials can
show that they're completely safe?

How many more deaths do vulnerable food users have to suffer as a
result of doing nothing in this regard?

You overlook the fact that one precautionary principle can override
another. Hence starvation takes priority over infection.

Oh, I see. Who exactly decides this hierarchy of precautionary
principles?

Where is it all set out? Can you give any evidence, especially a
reliable source and reference?

It is usually self-evident and involves stopping something which is
causing harm.

Like protests causing damage then. And squatters, and animal rights
activists, and killer vegetable weapons?

Why don't any of those figure in your application of the precautionary
principle as you've defined it?

'Self-evident' is all a bit airy-fairy, isn't it? It means exactly what you
and your mates want it to mean. What I want is some hard and fast rule, not
some random evaluation made by unrepresentative, unidentified hippies.

So, tell us again about the precautionary principle, and the hierarchy of
precautionary principles that you say exists.


In this case
the precautionary principle should only be applied to foods which in
the recent past have been responsible for e-coli outbreaks and this
would of course include meat and other animal products as well as
veg. There would then remain sufficient foods to prevent starvation

Er, hang on. If you remove all the animal and plant kingdoms from
availability, what's left to eat?

At last you have finally realised you do not remove ALL foods.

It was you who said 'meat and other animal products as well as veg', not me.
I've only ever said that killer vegetables should be removed from the
shelves. Under the precautionary principle of course.

No, the only sensible way of proceeding is to remove all veg.
They're the only things under suspicion in the current fatal
outbreak, so they're the only things that need to be dealt with.
Removing them completely throughout Europe wouldn't cause any
starvation either. It's therefore a sensible and proportionate
response to the crisis.

Wrong. As I have already stated, you only remove foods which have been
implicated in e-coli outbreaks in the past, which is known to include
some meat as well as veg.

No, not the current strain which is "not found in the digestive track of
cows
but in that of humans" as I've quoted before from an article to which you
referred.

No justification for removing meat therefore.

Veg can return to the shelves when scientists can prove they're
completely safe. After all, we don't want any more infections, do we?

and properly cooked foods are completely safe anyway.

They always were. But, you see, you can't make people cook things
properly. There are freaks out there who think raw vegetable matter
is appetising, and whatever you say, you won't get them to boil
their lettuce.

What about fruit? Without some raw food people would be less healthy,
as you probably seem to be with your opposition to all veg..

The distinction between fruit and veg is very marginal, as rhubarb shows.
Besides, they are almost always sold together by the same people, so the
danger of cross-contamination is ever-present. The only safe way therefore
is to remove all killer veg _and_ fruit from the shelves immediately, isn't
it? Under the precautionary principle, of course.

So, the only answer is to remove all vegetables before they fall
into their hands, isn't it?.

You are still being persistently wrong. See above.

Do please explain the precautionary principle then, so that even I can
understand it properly.

On Jun 9, 10:30*am, "Norman Wells" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 8, 9:45 am, "Norman Wells" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On Jun 7, 9:14 am, "Norman Wells" wrote:
The H4 strain of E. coli undoubtedly originated in animals, quite
possibly humans. No-one denies that. But vegetables still remain
the prime suspects as carriers.

Do please tell us then why the Precautionary Principle, which you
and your friends are so keen on promoting when it suits you,
shouldn't apply here. Surely all vegetables should be immediately
taken off the market throughout Europe until long term trials can
show that they're completely safe?

How many more deaths do vulnerable food users have to suffer as a
result of doing nothing in this regard?
You overlook the fact that one precautionary principle can override
another. Hence starvation takes priority over infection.

Oh, I see. Who exactly decides this hierarchy of precautionary
principles?

Where is it all set out? Can you give any evidence, especially a
reliable source and reference?

It is usually self-evident and involves stopping something which is
causing harm.

Like protests causing damage then. *And squatters, and animal rights
activists, and killer vegetable weapons?

Why don't any of those figure in your application of the precautionary
principle as you've defined it?

Obviously they do, when they are prevented by the authorities and
assuming they are actually harmful.

'Self-evident' is all a bit airy-fairy, isn't it? *It means exactly what you
and your mates want it to mean. *What I want is some hard and fast rule, not
some random evaluation made by unrepresentative, unidentified hippies.

So, tell us again about the precautionary principle, and the hierarchy of
precautionary principles that you say exists.

Why is it you cannot understand the precautionary principle and how it
works?

In this case
the precautionary principle should only be applied to foods which in
the recent past have been responsible for e-coli outbreaks and this
would of course include meat and other animal products as well as
veg. There would then remain sufficient foods to prevent starvation

Er, hang on. If you remove all the animal and plant kingdoms from
availability, what's left to eat?

At last you have finally realised you do not remove ALL foods.

It was you who said 'meat and other animal products as well as veg', not me.
I've only ever said that killer vegetables should be removed from the
shelves. *Under the precautionary principle of course.

See above.

No, the only sensible way of proceeding is to remove all veg.
They're the only things under suspicion in the current fatal
outbreak, so they're the only things that need to be dealt with.
Removing them completely throughout Europe wouldn't cause any
starvation either. It's therefore a sensible and proportionate
response to the crisis.

Wrong. As I have already stated, you only remove foods which have been
implicated in e-coli outbreaks in the past, which is known to include
some meat as well as veg.

No, not the current strain which is "not found in the digestive track of
cows
but in that of humans" as I've quoted before from an article to which you
referred.

No justification for removing meat therefore.

You obviously have not been following the news again. Thus far
scientific tests carried out on the beansprouts have not revealed any
infection but they are banned circumstantially instead. It is quite
possible that the infection is actually due to, some other foodstuff
or has been transferred by human contact. The Germans also say that
the actual source may never be found..

Veg can return to the shelves when scientists can prove they're
completely safe. After all, we don't want any more infections, do we?

and properly cooked foods are completely safe anyway.

They always were. But, you see, you can't make people cook things
properly. There are freaks out there who think raw vegetable matter
is appetising, and whatever you say, you won't get them to boil
their lettuce.

What about fruit? Without some raw food people would be less healthy,
as you probably seem to be with your opposition to all veg..

The distinction between fruit and veg is very marginal, as rhubarb shows.
Besides, they are almost always sold together by the same people, so the
danger of cross-contamination is ever-present. *The only safe way therefore
is to remove all killer veg _and_ fruit from the shelves immediately, isn't
it? *Under the precautionary principle, of course.

See above.

So, the only answer is to remove all vegetables before they fall
into their hands, isn't it?.

You are still being persistently wrong. See above.

Do please explain the precautionary principle then, so that even I can
understand it properly.

You seem to be incapable of understanding despite the information
placed before you.

Why not give it a try?

"The precautionary principle or precautionary approach states that if
an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public
or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus that the
action or policy is harmful, the burden of proof that it is not
harmful falls on those taking the action.

This principle allows policy makers to make discretionary decisions in
situations where there is the possibility of harm from taking a
particular course or making a certain decision when extensive
scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. The principle implies
that there is a social responsibility to protect the public from
exposure to harm, when scientific investigation has found a plausible
risk. These protections can be relaxed only if further scientific
findings emerge that provide sound evidence that no harm will
result..."

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

So thus far the Germans have applied the precautionary principle to
beansprouts alone and from one source only and without scientific
evidence, which seems a little lax to say the least. They should be
out there testing all foods which the infected people have eaten in
common. I suspect that they have chosen beansprouts as an easy option
which is likely to cause a minimum of panic among the general public
and to the countries which are presently banning foods imported from
Germany.

BTW. What has this to do with cars crashing into houses and cycling?.
Who started to go OT?

Doug.