From: jim on


Obveeus wrote:
>
> "Tegger" <invalid(a)invalid.inv> wrote in message
> news:Xns9D4A50DF3DBA0tegger(a)208.90.168.18...
> > "C. E. White" <cewhite3remove(a)mindspring.com> wrote in
> > news:JbednSC0l5uZXTLWnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com:
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Unfortunatley, it only matters what a jury of untrained people can be
> >> convinced of...
> >>
> >
> >
> > Just like the Vioxx trial.
> >
> > I remember what the jury foreman said after the Vioxx trial, that the jury
> > understood the defense's arguments no better than, "Mwa, mwa, mwa", like
> > how the adults sound in a Charlie Brown cartoon. And then they voted to
> > convict anyway. Very scary.
>
> An even better example would be Dow Corning and the 'Silicone Breast
> Implant'.

That would be a better example of what?

> The entire company was run into bankruptcy for a decade as the
> result of nothing more than incorrect speculation not backed up by
> scientific research.

Sounds like you like speculating without the benefit of any scientific
research or facts. There has been little scientific research that shows
the implants are harmless. And that was why Dow eventually lost
lawsuits. They lied - claiming they had done the research that showed it
was safe when they hadn't.

-jim
From: C. E. White on

"Tegger" <invalid(a)invalid.inv> wrote in message
news:Xns9D4A50DF3DBA0tegger(a)208.90.168.18...
> "C. E. White" <cewhite3remove(a)mindspring.com> wrote in
> news:JbednSC0l5uZXTLWnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com:
>
>
>>
>> Unfortunatley, it only matters what a jury of untrained people can
>> be
>> convinced of...
>>
>
>
> Just like the Vioxx trial.
>
> I remember what the jury foreman said after the Vioxx trial, that
> the jury
> understood the defense's arguments no better than, "Mwa, mwa, mwa",
> like
> how the adults sound in a Charlie Brown cartoon. And then they voted
> to
> convict anyway. Very scary.
>
>
> --
> Tegger


I saw this on Autonews today:

Seminar turns to rally; lawyers fire at Toyota
At first, the 150 lawyers who gathered here last week to talk about
how to sue the pants off Toyota quietly listened to a lecture on legal
strategy..

Ed


From: Obveeus on

"jim" <"sjedgingN0Sp"@m(a)mwt,net> wrote in message
news:__CdnXr864OGOS3WnZ2dnUVZ_h2dnZ2d(a)bright.net...
>
>
> Obveeus wrote:
>>
>> "Tegger" <invalid(a)invalid.inv> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9D4A50DF3DBA0tegger(a)208.90.168.18...
>> > "C. E. White" <cewhite3remove(a)mindspring.com> wrote in
>> > news:JbednSC0l5uZXTLWnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com:
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Unfortunatley, it only matters what a jury of untrained people can be
>> >> convinced of...
>> >
>> > Just like the Vioxx trial.
>> >
>> > I remember what the jury foreman said after the Vioxx trial, that the
>> > jury
>> > understood the defense's arguments no better than, "Mwa, mwa, mwa",
>> > like
>> > how the adults sound in a Charlie Brown cartoon. And then they voted to
>> > convict anyway. Very scary.
>>
>> An even better example would be Dow Corning and the 'Silicone Breast
>> Implant'.
>
> That would be a better example of what?

Lawsuits propelling a company into bankruptcy even though there was nothing
wrong with the product?

>> The entire company was run into bankruptcy for a decade as the
>> result of nothing more than incorrect speculation not backed up by
>> scientific research.
>
> Sounds like you like speculating without the benefit of any scientific
> research or facts. There has been little scientific research that shows
> the implants are harmless. And that was why Dow eventually lost
> lawsuits. They lied - claiming they had done the research that showed it
> was safe when they hadn't.

You apparently are uninformed. Numerous studies arouhnd the world have show
Silicone breast implants were not responsible for the problems claimed.


From: jim on


Obveeus wrote:
>
> "jim" <"sjedgingN0Sp"@m(a)mwt,net> wrote in message
> news:__CdnXr864OGOS3WnZ2dnUVZ_h2dnZ2d(a)bright.net...
> >
> >
> > Obveeus wrote:
> >>
> >> "Tegger" <invalid(a)invalid.inv> wrote in message
> >> news:Xns9D4A50DF3DBA0tegger(a)208.90.168.18...
> >> > "C. E. White" <cewhite3remove(a)mindspring.com> wrote in
> >> > news:JbednSC0l5uZXTLWnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Unfortunatley, it only matters what a jury of untrained people can be
> >> >> convinced of...
> >> >
> >> > Just like the Vioxx trial.
> >> >
> >> > I remember what the jury foreman said after the Vioxx trial, that the
> >> > jury
> >> > understood the defense's arguments no better than, "Mwa, mwa, mwa",
> >> > like
> >> > how the adults sound in a Charlie Brown cartoon. And then they voted to
> >> > convict anyway. Very scary.
> >>
> >> An even better example would be Dow Corning and the 'Silicone Breast
> >> Implant'.
> >
> > That would be a better example of what?
>
> Lawsuits propelling a company into bankruptcy even though there was nothing
> wrong with the product?

Well that is hardly the case. There is still significant risks and
precautions involved with breast implants. A trip to the FDA web site
and see what they say about the risk:


[Quote]
Some of the risks of breast implants include:

* reoperations (additional surgeries), with or without removal of
the device
* capsular contracture (hardening of the area around the implant)
* breast pain
* changes in nipple and breast sensation
* rupture with deflation for saline-filled implants
* rupture with or without symptoms for silicone gel-filled implants
* migration of silicone gel for silicone gel-filled breast implants.

For a more complete description of the possible risks and complications
of breast implants, see Breast Implant Consumer Handbook: Local
Complications and Reoperations3.

You can also find a list of complications for each approved breast
implant in the patient labeling; see Labeling for Approved Breast
Implants.

[End quote]

>
> >> The entire company was run into bankruptcy for a decade as the
> >> result of nothing more than incorrect speculation not backed up by
> >> scientific research.
> >
> > Sounds like you like speculating without the benefit of any scientific
> > research or facts. There has been little scientific research that shows
> > the implants are harmless. And that was why Dow eventually lost
> > lawsuits. They lied - claiming they had done the research that showed it
> > was safe when they hadn't.
>
> You apparently are uninformed. Numerous studies arouhnd the world have show
> Silicone breast implants were not responsible for the problems claimed.

Maybe although it is still quite controversial. And maybe if the studies
had been done before litigation instead of as a consequence of
litigation everyone would have been better off. But whether the problems
claimed could be proven to be directly caused by breast implants wasn't
the central issue at trial. The issue that convinced the jury was that
Dow was not truthful about revealing risks they knew about and what they
knew and didn't know about the safety of the product.


-jim
From: Mark on

>
> The AM limit is measured as carrier power, so if you're doing a nice 100%
> modulation then the peak envelope power is actually eight watts because the
> positive signal peaks are twice the carrier level and the negative peaks
> are zero.
>
>
Hi Scott,

Drifting a bit OT, but at 100% AM modulation the PEP is actually 4x
the unmodulated carrier power. A 100 Watt AM tranamitter at 100%
modulation hits 400 Watts PEP.

Mark