Re: WhtGld: Additional Response on Testing

Joe Champion ( discpub@netzone.com )
Fri, 07 Jun 1996 23:10:22 -0700

At 11:27 PM 6/7/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Subj: Additional Response on Testing
>From: Simeon and Maia
> Crest In The Stone Mystery School
>
>Binga posted the synopsis of the personal communication between Joe Champion
>and Ian Kelley, which included information regarding the proposed testing of
>the naturally occurring powders being called EG, Isis WPG, Prima Matra
>depending on who you are talking to.
>
>We had posted our affirmative reponse to that (which we had proposed in the
>first place to Joe Champion in a private message) in the unmoderated forum,
>and repeat that here:
>
>Joe,
[snip.....]
>You did not post the rest of our proposal however, so we will do so here.
>
>>Secondly would be for someone who has ingested fairly large quantities for
>a >long enough period of time, to undergo a medical examination for levels
>of what >you find present that is of concern....We feel that perhaps for
>some reason the >content of heavy metals (at whatever concentration) may not
>be registering in >the human body as it normally would. Something like we
>have outlined may be a >step in the direction of knowing for sure.
>
[snip.....]
>We feel that this second part is important to the process, for to test and
>show something has an apparent content of toxic substances (if this turns
>out to be true) and not go the extra step to try and determine if what has
>been analyzed as toxic is indeed having an effect in lodging within the body
>would not be good science.
>
>

REPLY from Joe:

I purposely omitted the second part of your communication, for it would be
hard to validate. To explain, please allow the following:

1) What if this person's blood and urine tests were positive for heavy
metals? Does this mean that their contamination came from the powder?

2) What if the person tested in the normal range? Does this mean that the
powder does not have potential health problems?

Now if we were to have 25 people step forward, then we have a realistic
numbers game. And, let's face it, science is numbers. Demographics is the
only way that you can gain facts. In such a test (which by the way I would
love to see accomplished) you would need to have a cross section of people
from various geographical locations to gain anything of substaintial proof.

It is for this same reason that I requested powder from five different
sources to test.

_______________________________
Joe Champion discpub@netzone.com
http://www.netzone.com/~discpub