Pat's Note: I'm wondering just how this statement can be true.

"He said the pigs used in the experiments were proven to have no
viruses - and that the research did not put human health in danger."

Circoviruses are very difficult to diagnose, which is one of the
reasons why export of live pigs should be banned.

The Swedes (see thread below) say "According to
Swedish Animal Health's CEO Jan-Åke Robertsson bear 90 percent of pigs
in the country in the virus that causes the disease."

Now Britain is not better. We don't know the figures because the
disease is not notifiable, no doubt so we don't  know the figures.

So, how come Winston knows his pigs are virus free?

It's not a retorical question. I'm serious. How does he know?

The claim, if not misreported, is quite extraordinary coming as it
does from one of Britain's best known and publicised scientists.

It will have to be explained.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23552558-details/Lord+Winston's+fury+as+red+tape+drives+British+GM+pig+transplant+experiments+to+the+U.S./article.do

Lord Winston's fury as red tape drives British GM pig transplant
experiments to the U.S. 
Last updated at 01:43am on 09.09.08 

Lord Winston: Moving his research to the U.S.

A furious Robert Winston has condemned the red tape that has killed
off pioneering British experiments that could solve the shortage of
transplant organs.

The TV presenter and fertility expert has been forced to transfer
life-saving research using 'designer pigs' to America, where
regulations are less strict.

The move has robbed Britain of a potential breakthrough that could
also have earned it millions of pounds.

Lord Winston said: 'Our U.S. friends will benefit from our technology
and yet another British innovation will be jeopardized. 

'The income we might have generated for Britain will be lost.'

Lord Winston, best known as the presenter of TV programmes such as
Child Of Our Time, will start breeding the first genetically modified
pigs for transplant in California in three months' time.

The experiments aim to create GM animals with organs that will not be
rejected when transplanted into humans.

Although the use of pigs is controversial, the Imperial College London
professor believes they could solve the desperate shortage of organs
for transplant within 15 years.

More than 9,000 Britons are waiting for a transplant. Around 100 need
a new heart, 300 are desperate for a liver while 6,500 need kidneys.

Pig organs are the perfect size for transplant and work in a similar
way to the human variety.


Breeding programme: Pig organs are the perfect size for human
transplants


However, before pig organs can be used in people, their genetic
make-up must be altered so that they are not rejected.

Lord Winston's team has been working on GM pigs in London for years.
They have already created pigs with genetically modified sperm.

However, under Government and EU rules the scientists have been banned
from mating the pigs - the crucial next stage of their work.

Lord Winston said: 'When one of the animals escaped on Home Office
premises and mated by accident, the sow was killed under instructions
from Defra (the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs).

'And we were not allowed to do a post-mortem on the piglets to find
out whether or not the piglets were transgenic.

'That is a shocking waste of research resources.'

He said the pigs used in the experiments were proven to have no
viruses - and that the research did not put human health in danger.

Lord Winston added: 'Years of work and investment have been mostly
wasted. And we have had to say a sad goodbye to our committed
scientific team.'

Even before the EU ban, it took the team two years to get a Home
Office licence to experiment on six pigs.

The red tape, and a shortage of funding, means the work is now taking
place at the California Institute of Technology.

The work involves tricking the body's immune system into believing
that pig organs are human.

Lord Winston's team has developed a way of giving pigs genes which
alter key molecules on the surface of hearts, kidneys and livers -
disguising their animal origin  - without changing the way the organs
behave.

The gene product is injected into the testes of a piglet under a local
anaesthetic. Once the pig has grown up, any sperm it produces will
carry the human genes.

By mating the pig with ordinary sows, scientists can produce
'humanised' pigs whose organs could be used safely for transplant once
they were one year old.

Patients would still need to take drugs to prevent rejection, but the
organs should survive the operation.

Lord Winston, who will speak at the British Association science
festival in Liverpool today, believes that organs grown in pigs could
be used in humans within a decade.

Although the work may meet with some public revulsion, he believes it
is more ethical to use a pig to save a life than for 'relatively
unnecessary meat eating'.

-- 
Regards
Pat Gardiner
Release the results of testing British pigs for MRSA and C.Diff now!
www.go-self-sufficient.com  and http://animal-epidemics.blogspot.com/

In article , Pat Gardiner 
 writes
>
>
>Pat's Note: I'm wondering just how this statement can be true.
>
>"He said the pigs used in the experiments were proven to have no
>viruses - and that the research did not put human health in danger."
>
>Circoviruses are very difficult to diagnose, which is one of the
>reasons why export of live pigs should be banned.
>
>The Swedes (see thread below) say "According to
>Swedish Animal Health's CEO Jan-Åke Robertsson bear 90 percent of pigs
>in the country in the virus that causes the disease."
>
>Now Britain is not better. We don't know the figures because the
>disease is not notifiable, no doubt so we don't  know the figures.
>
>So, how come Winston knows his pigs are virus free?
>
>It's not a retorical question. I'm serious. How does he know?
>
>The claim, if not misreported, is quite extraordinary coming as it
>does from one of Britain's best known and publicised scientists.
>
Why on earth is it "extraordinary"?

It is just possible that he knows rather more about the subject than you 
do. If you are really and truly baffled by his statement, perhaps you 
should consider that you don't know as much as Winston does on the 
subject. Alternatively, why not write and ask him?

-- 
Malcolm

On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 15:11:03 +0100, Malcolm
 wrote:

>
>In article , Pat Gardiner 
> writes
>>
>>
>>Pat's Note: I'm wondering just how this statement can be true.
>>
>>"He said the pigs used in the experiments were proven to have no
>>viruses - and that the research did not put human health in danger."
>>
>>Circoviruses are very difficult to diagnose, which is one of the
>>reasons why export of live pigs should be banned.
>>
>>The Swedes (see thread below) say "According to
>>Swedish Animal Health's CEO Jan-Åke Robertsson bear 90 percent of pigs
>>in the country in the virus that causes the disease."
>>
>>Now Britain is not better. We don't know the figures because the
>>disease is not notifiable, no doubt so we don't  know the figures.
>>
>>So, how come Winston knows his pigs are virus free?
>>
>>It's not a retorical question. I'm serious. How does he know?
>>
>>The claim, if not misreported, is quite extraordinary coming as it
>>does from one of Britain's best known and publicised scientists.
>>
>Why on earth is it "extraordinary"?
>
>It is just possible that he knows rather more about the subject than you 
>do. If you are really and truly baffled by his statement, perhaps you 
>should consider that you don't know as much as Winston does on the 
>subject. Alternatively, why not write and ask him?

As you obviously don't know the answer, would you please stop
stalking.

You have a terrible habit. 

As a  little self control seems beyond you perhaps joining a self help
group might be the answer.

-- 
Regards
Pat Gardiner
Release the results of testing British pigs for MRSA and C.Diff now!
www.go-self-sufficient.com  and http://animal-epidemics.blogspot.com/

On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 12:29:48 +0100, Pat Gardiner
 wrote:

>
>So, how come Winston knows his pigs are virus free?
>
>It's not a retorical question. I'm serious. How does he know?
>
Let me make an intelligent guess.

Lord Winston knows the pigs are virus free because they have been tested.

-- 
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in uk.business.agriculture)

On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 20:22:35 +0100, Peter Duncanson
 wrote:

>On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 12:29:48 +0100, Pat Gardiner
> wrote:
>
>>
>>So, how come Winston knows his pigs are virus free?
>>
>>It's not a retorical question. I'm serious. How does he know?
>>
>Let me make an intelligent guess.
>
>Lord Winston knows the pigs are virus free because they have been tested.

There is no such test.

More specifically there is no such test, as far as I know, for
circoviruses on live pigs.

There have been developments and even more claims for farm gate tests
for various diseases in the last eight years, but I have never seen
any such test for a circovirus mentioned in the literature.

Therein lay the problem in 2000 and 2001 with pigs. Circoviruses can
mask both and the symptoms can imitate both CSF and FMD.

I keep waiting for a vet to correct me on any material fact. To date,
none has ever done so.

Mike Meredith occasionally gives an opinion on matters of fact and
even, on occasion, as he is at the moment elsewhere, sticks up for his
veterinary colleagues, but there is never any significant refutation
of anything I have said.

If I was seriously in error it would be appropriate to correct me in
an appropriate way, either publicly or privately and I would accept.
correction.

That is what I find so unnerving.

-- 
Regards
Pat Gardiner
Release the results of testing British pigs for MRSA and C.Diff now!
www.go-self-sufficient.com  and http://animal-epidemics.blogspot.com/

In article , Pat Gardiner 
 writes
>On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 15:11:03 +0100, Malcolm
> wrote:
>
>>
>>In article , Pat Gardiner
>> writes
>>>
>>>
>>>Pat's Note: I'm wondering just how this statement can be true.
>>>
>>>"He said the pigs used in the experiments were proven to have no
>>>viruses - and that the research did not put human health in danger."
>>>
>>>Circoviruses are very difficult to diagnose, which is one of the
>>>reasons why export of live pigs should be banned.
>>>
>>>The Swedes (see thread below) say "According to
>>>Swedish Animal Health's CEO Jan-Åke Robertsson bear 90 percent of pigs
>>>in the country in the virus that causes the disease."
>>>
>>>Now Britain is not better. We don't know the figures because the
>>>disease is not notifiable, no doubt so we don't  know the figures.
>>>
>>>So, how come Winston knows his pigs are virus free?
>>>
>>>It's not a retorical question. I'm serious. How does he know?
>>>
>>>The claim, if not misreported, is quite extraordinary coming as it
>>>does from one of Britain's best known and publicised scientists.
>>>
>>Why on earth is it "extraordinary"?
>>
>>It is just possible that he knows rather more about the subject than you
>>do. If you are really and truly baffled by his statement, perhaps you
>>should consider that you don't know as much as Winston does on the
>>subject. Alternatively, why not write and ask him?
>
>As you obviously don't know the answer,

No, Pat, *you* obviously don't know the answer because you have no 
understanding of science, something which has been made abundantly clear 
by post after post of yours, making ludicrously speculative comments 
about reports in newspapers that you clearly don't comprehend. I told 
you a long time ago to find a scientist to explain things to you. Your 
refusal to do so has made you a laughing stock.

You never even stopped to consider that the pigs Professor Winston is 
referring to have been tested and found to be virus free, did you? Yet 
it was the conclusion that anyone with the slightest knowledge of the 
subject would have instantly regarded as the most obvious. Now sit and 
down and work out why you didn't come to that obvious conclusion.

>would you please stop
>stalking.
>
What a predictable and fatuous comment.

>You have a terrible habit.
>
And now you get personal. How very, very, silly of you.

>As a  little self control seems beyond you perhaps joining a self help
>group might be the answer.
>
Your opinions on this, as on everything else, are worthless because 
wrong.

-- 
Malcolm

On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 21:52:37 +0100, Pat Gardiner
 wrote:

>On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 20:22:35 +0100, Peter Duncanson
> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 12:29:48 +0100, Pat Gardiner
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>So, how come Winston knows his pigs are virus free?
>>>
>>>It's not a retorical question. I'm serious. How does he know?
>>>
>>Let me make an intelligent guess.
>>
>>Lord Winston knows the pigs are virus free because they have been tested.
>
>There is no such test.
>
>More specifically there is no such test, as far as I know, for
>circoviruses on live pigs.
>
>There have been developments and even more claims for farm gate tests
>for various diseases in the last eight years, but I have never seen
>any such test for a circovirus mentioned in the literature.

I Googled for "circovirus test". This found many hits. 
There seem to be many kits available for testing for porcine circovirus. There
is no suggestion that the pigs need to be dead before they can be tested.

Perhaps there is a difficulty in detecting a particular circovirus.
However, the laboratory tests available to Winston's colleagues are likely to
be more sensitive and thorough, and expensive to perform, than those designed
for routine testing in the field.

The first Google result was:
http://www.alibaba.com/product-free/100609489/Porcine_Circovirus_Elisa_Test_Kit.html
    
    Features Specifications: Porcine Circovirus Elisa Test Kit
         
    Usage
    
    The porcine circovirous (PCV) ELISA Test kit is used for detection porcine
    circovirus antibodies in the serum; assessment immunity conditions against
    porcine circovirus in the pig farm; investigation of the epidemiology of
    the porcine circovirus.
    
    Brief Introduction
    
    The test kit is made from the antigen coated microplate, enzyme conjugate
    (HRP goat-anti-pig IgG), and other reagents. It applies the indirect ELISA
    principle to test the anti--ORF2 type antibodies of porcine circovirus in
    the serum.
    
    Principle
    
    The test kit is the antigen(-ORF2) coated microplate made from the
    inactivated, purified and concentrated porcine circovirus. In the test,
    the diluted control serum and sample are added, then incubate. If the
    sample exists porcine circovirus specific antibodies, they will be bound
    with the antigens of the microplate, then the unbound antibodies and other
    components are removed by washing. Next, add enzyme conjugates (anti-pig
    IgG-HRP) to specifically bind to the compound of antibodies and antigens
    of the microplate, the unbound conjugate will be removed by washing, add
    the TMB substrate to the wells, react to a blue product. At last, end the
    reaction by adding stop solution.


-- 
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in uk.business.agriculture)

On Sep 9, 9:11 am, Malcolm  wrote:
> In article , Pat Gardiner
>  writes
>
>
>
> >Pat's Note: I'm wondering just how this statement can be true.
>
> >"He said the pigs used in the experiments were proven to have no
> >viruses - and that the research did not put human health in danger."
>
> >Circoviruses are very difficult to diagnose, which is one of the
> >reasons why export of live pigs should be banned.
>
> >The Swedes (see thread below) say "According to
> >Swedish Animal Health's CEO Jan-Åke Robertsson bear 90 percent of pigs
> >in the country in the virus that causes the disease."
>
> >Now Britain is not better. We don't know the figures because the
> >disease is not notifiable, no doubt so we don't  know the figures.
>
> >So, how come Winston knows his pigs are virus free?
>
> >It's not a retorical question. I'm serious. How does he know?
>
> >The claim, if not misreported, is quite extraordinary coming as it
> >does from one of Britain's best known and publicised scientists.
>
> Why on earth is it "extraordinary"?
>
> It is just possible that he knows rather more about the subject than you
> do. If you are really and truly baffled by his statement, perhaps you
> should consider that you don't know as much as Winston does on the
> subject. Alternatively, why not write and ask him?
>
> --
> Malcolm

I think that would be advisable, too, Sir Malcolm.   Especially after
reading your subsequent comments today.
Pat should contact Sir Winston and ask where these virus-free pigs are
in Missouri and how the process has been established as to how they
are "virus-free."     Pat's the one who's made the original comment,
so it's his responsibility to back it up.   I'd like to know where
there are "virus-free" pigs in the USA, myself.   A lot of other
producers would like to know that, too.

Burkie
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 01:06:11 +0100, Peter Duncanson
 wrote:

>On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 21:52:37 +0100, Pat Gardiner
> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 20:22:35 +0100, Peter Duncanson
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 12:29:48 +0100, Pat Gardiner
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>So, how come Winston knows his pigs are virus free?
>>>>
>>>>It's not a retorical question. I'm serious. How does he know?
>>>>
>>>Let me make an intelligent guess.
>>>
>>>Lord Winston knows the pigs are virus free because they have been tested.
>>
>>There is no such test.
>>
>>More specifically there is no such test, as far as I know, for
>>circoviruses on live pigs.
>>
>>There have been developments and even more claims for farm gate tests
>>for various diseases in the last eight years, but I have never seen
>>any such test for a circovirus mentioned in the literature.
>
>I Googled for "circovirus test". This found many hits. 
>There seem to be many kits available for testing for porcine circovirus. There
>is no suggestion that the pigs need to be dead before they can be tested.
>
>Perhaps there is a difficulty in detecting a particular circovirus.
>However, the laboratory tests available to Winston's colleagues are likely to
>be more sensitive and thorough, and expensive to perform, than those designed
>for routine testing in the field.
>
>The first Google result was:
>http://www.alibaba.com/product-free/100609489/Porcine_Circovirus_Elisa_Test_Kit.html
>    
>    Features Specifications: Porcine Circovirus Elisa Test Kit
>         
>    Usage
>    
>    The porcine circovirous (PCV) ELISA Test kit is used for detection porcine
>    circovirus antibodies in the serum; assessment immunity conditions against
>    porcine circovirus in the pig farm; investigation of the epidemiology of
>    the porcine circovirus.
>    
>    Brief Introduction
>    
>    The test kit is made from the antigen coated microplate, enzyme conjugate
>    (HRP goat-anti-pig IgG), and other reagents. It applies the indirect ELISA
>    principle to test the anti--ORF2 type antibodies of porcine circovirus in
>    the serum.
>    
>    Principle
>    
>    The test kit is the antigen(-ORF2) coated microplate made from the
>    inactivated, purified and concentrated porcine circovirus. In the test,
>    the diluted control serum and sample are added, then incubate. If the
>    sample exists porcine circovirus specific antibodies, they will be bound
>    with the antigens of the microplate, then the unbound antibodies and other
>    components are removed by washing. Next, add enzyme conjugates (anti-pig
>    IgG-HRP) to specifically bind to the compound of antibodies and antigens
>    of the microplate, the unbound conjugate will be removed by washing, add
>    the TMB substrate to the wells, react to a blue product. At last, end the
>    reaction by adding stop solution.

I can't answer. My science is not up to dealing with the claims and
counter claims for various vaccines and tests. So the simple approach
of searching for claims does not help. It merely raises a fresh set of
unanswerable questions. Like why aren't they in use?

Long ago I noticed that, rather like the present government, reality
in the pig veterinary industry, did not match the claims.

If there was any test that was efficient and cost effective, the
outbreak would not have continued so long or spread so widely.

 A process of testing and culling would have been in operation long
ago. It isn't and hasn't been used and the Swedes have given up trying
to eliminate the disease.

They would not have done that if there was a workable test.

If you recall there was only one testing station in the British Isles
- that in Northern Ireland and it had to be closed because of
circovirus contamination. It is still closed as far as I know.

 I think I'm right in saying that the testing was basically for
Aujeszky’s disease (Pseudorabies) , which had been a serious problem
in Northern Ireland.

I think  the problem is that circoviruses are universal and that
currently no workable test can distinguish the difference. Indeed
circoviruses are not well understood anyway and you will frequently
see this admitted.

However, I'm not anxious to stray into an area where even the
professionals are uncertain and simply prefer to concentrate on the
empirical evidence of usage and results.

There can't be a workable test otherwise we would not have continued
with the problems. Ther has been no chatter outside veterinary
circles.

Mike Meredith is the expert in the area. It was a pity he was driven
away by abuse. I would have enjoyed slowly and politely interrogating
him.

His site carries reports from all over the world. He can't believe in
all of them and a little light public prodding would have produced
much information.

But he will not return, and I do not blame him, but that is water
under the bridge.

-- 
Regards
Pat Gardiner
Release the results of testing British pigs for MRSA and C.Diff now!
www.go-self-sufficient.com  and http://animal-epidemics.blogspot.com/

On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 20:18:41 -0700 (PDT), Burkie 
wrote:

>On Sep 9, 9:11 am, Malcolm  wrote:
>> In article , Pat Gardiner
>>  writes
>>
>>
>>
>> >Pat's Note: I'm wondering just how this statement can be true.
>>
>> >"He said the pigs used in the experiments were proven to have no
>> >viruses - and that the research did not put human health in danger."
>>
>> >Circoviruses are very difficult to diagnose, which is one of the
>> >reasons why export of live pigs should be banned.
>>
>> >The Swedes (see thread below) say "According to
>> >Swedish Animal Health's CEO Jan-Åke Robertsson bear 90 percent of pigs
>> >in the country in the virus that causes the disease."
>>
>> >Now Britain is not better. We don't know the figures because the
>> >disease is not notifiable, no doubt so we don't  know the figures.
>>
>> >So, how come Winston knows his pigs are virus free?
>>
>> >It's not a retorical question. I'm serious. How does he know?
>>
>> >The claim, if not misreported, is quite extraordinary coming as it
>> >does from one of Britain's best known and publicised scientists.
>>
>> Why on earth is it "extraordinary"?
>>
>> It is just possible that he knows rather more about the subject than you
>> do. If you are really and truly baffled by his statement, perhaps you
>> should consider that you don't know as much as Winston does on the
>> subject. Alternatively, why not write and ask him?
>>
>> --
>> Malcolm
>
>I think that would be advisable, too, Sir Malcolm.   Especially after
>reading your subsequent comments today.
>Pat should contact Sir Winston and ask where these virus-free pigs are
>in Missouri and how the process has been established as to how they
>are "virus-free."     Pat's the one who's made the original comment,
>so it's his responsibility to back it up.   I'd like to know where
>there are "virus-free" pigs in the USA, myself.   A lot of other
>producers would like to know that, too.
>
>Burkie
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would be as likely to get a sensible reply as you were when you
wrote to Marilyn Monroe.

You had the excuse of being only 13 and a bit precautious. I'm world
weary and don't look for brick walls anymore.

It's "Lord" Winston and he has already abandoned Missouri for
California according to the media coverage.

-- 
Regards
Pat Gardiner
Release the results of testing British pigs for MRSA and C.Diff now!
www.go-self-sufficient.com  and http://animal-epidemics.blogspot.com/

On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 10:37:01 +0100, Pat Gardiner
 wrote:

>On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 01:06:11 +0100, Peter Duncanson
> wrote:
>
>snip<
>
>There can't be a workable test otherwise we would not have continued
>with the problems. Ther has been no chatter outside veterinary
>circles.
>
Unexpectedly, I can add something to this remark from a discussion
with Mike elsewhere this morning.

I'm sure he won't mind me quoting him:

"Making it notifiable was difficult because there was initially no 
diagnostic test."

Which, of course, confirms the historical situation, and implies that
the situation may have changed.

I will try to find out what the current situation is, although as a
publisher of veterinary news, Mike would find it more difficult to
comment on current claims and counter claims. So I do not expect a
very useful answer.

There is also the point that any successful diagnostic test still may
only be useable, reliable and useful on dead pigs.

-- 
Regards
Pat Gardiner
Release the results of testing British pigs for MRSA and C.Diff now!
www.go-self-sufficient.com  and http://animal-epidemics.blogspot.com/

On Sep 10, 5:04 am, Pat Gardiner 
wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 10:37:01 +0100, Pat Gardiner
>
>  wrote:
> >On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 01:06:11 +0100, Peter Duncanson
> > wrote:
>
> >snip<
>
> >There can't be a workable test otherwise we would not have continued
> >with the problems. Ther has been no chatter outside veterinary
> >circles.
>
> Unexpectedly, I can add something to this remark from a discussion
> with Mike elsewhere this morning.
>
> I'm sure he won't mind me quoting him:
>
> "Making it notifiable was difficult because there was initially no
> diagnostic test."
>
> Which, of course, confirms the historical situation, and implies that
> the situation may have changed.
>
> I will try to find out what the current situation is, although as a
> publisher of veterinary news, Mike would find it more difficult to
> comment on current claims and counter claims. So I do not expect a
> very useful answer.
>
> There is also the point that any successful diagnostic test still may
> only be useable, reliable and useful on dead pigs.
>
> --
> Regards
> Pat Gardiner
> Release the results of testing British pigs for MRSA and C.Diff now!www.go-self-sufficient.com andhttp://animal-epidemics.blogspot.com/

Pat:   You've been the Commander and Chief on these issues, and that's
a credit to you for your effort.   It's all very simple.   Call the
man.   Introduce yourself and start asking questions of his
statements.   Become a news reporter.
You know what answers you want.......go find them from the mouth of
Sir Winston, himself.   Malcolm is just asking that of you, too.
Then you can pipeline your findings back on here, without being
accused of making, "your own opinions."   I was surprised to see your
interaction with Mike Meredith.   It was very good information.   He's
another one that knows the score.   There's no harm in asking, and no
harm in getting this information now.   Actually, the sooner, the
better.

Burkie

On Sep 10, 8:59 am, Burkie  wrote:
> On Sep 10, 5:04 am, Pat Gardiner 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 10:37:01 +0100, Pat Gardiner
>
> >  wrote:
> > >On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 01:06:11 +0100, Peter Duncanson
> > > wrote:
>
> > >snip<
>
> > >There can't be a workable test otherwise we would not have continued
> > >with the problems. Ther has been no chatter outside veterinary
> > >circles.
>
> > Unexpectedly, I can add something to this remark from a discussion
> > with Mike elsewhere this morning.
>
> > I'm sure he won't mind me quoting him:
>
> > "Making it notifiable was difficult because there was initially no
> > diagnostic test."
>
> > Which, of course, confirms the historical situation, and implies that
> > the situation may have changed.
>
> > I will try to find out what the current situation is, although as a
> > publisher of veterinary news, Mike would find it more difficult to
> > comment on current claims and counter claims. So I do not expect a
> > very useful answer.
>
> > There is also the point that any successful diagnostic test still may
> > only be useable, reliable and useful on dead pigs.
>
> > --
> > Regards
> > Pat Gardiner
> > Release the results of testing British pigs for MRSA and C.Diff now!www.go-self-sufficient.comandhttp://animal-epidemics.blogspot.com/
>
> Pat:   You've been the Commander and Chief on these issues, and that's
> a credit to you for your effort.   It's all very simple.   Call the
> man.   Introduce yourself and start asking questions of his
> statements.   Become a news reporter.
> You know what answers you want.......go find them from the mouth of
> Sir Winston, himself.   Malcolm is just asking that of you, too.
> Then you can pipeline your findings back on here, without being
> accused of making, "your own opinions."   I was surprised to see your
> interaction with Mike Meredith.   It was very good information.   He's
> another one that knows the score.   There's no harm in asking, and no
> harm in getting this information now.   Actually, the sooner, the
> better.
>
> Burkie

Dear Pat:   You've been keeping us all informed of these
developments.   You live in the UK.   You can go to an outside phone
and make a call to Sir Winston and get your notes taken.

Do it, please.

Burkie

Pat Gardiner wrote:
> 
> I keep waiting for a vet to correct me on any material fact. To date,
> none has ever done so.

Perhaps, like so many others, they cannot be bothered to rifle through 
all the rubbish you post in the vain hope of finding the odd gem. 
Alternatively, of course, it may be that they have noted your strong 
adverse opinions of all things veterinary and decided it would be a 
waste of time trying to correct anything you post.

> If I was seriously in error it would be appropriate to correct me in
> an appropriate way, either publicly or privately and I would accept.
> correction.

Really!

That statement is not supported by the evidence of your posts to this 
group.


-- 
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make 
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

Pat Gardiner wrote:

> Mike Meredith is the expert in the area. It was a pity he was driven
> away by abuse. I would have enjoyed slowly and politely interrogating
> him.

I don't think he likes that, unless the result is to agree with him. 
That is why he went away.

> But he will not return, 

Because he doesn't like to be questioned.

> and I do not blame him,

Because you do not like to be questioned either and cannot accept views 
that differ from your own.

-- 
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make 
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

In article , Pat Gardiner 
 writes
>
>If I was seriously in error it would be appropriate to correct me in
>an appropriate way, either publicly or privately and I would accept.
>correction.
>
>That is what I find so unnerving.
>
LOL!!

I find it totally unnerving that you can make such a statement :-)))

Is this a new Pat we see before us???

So, Pat, in your new state of willingness to accept correction, perhaps 
you would like to accept the correction of your claim, which was not 
just "seriously in error" but totally in error, that you can close this 
newsgroup down in 10 minutes.

I look forward to your acceptance.

-- 
Malcolm