Thursday, May 13, 2010

Let's give the Neandertal's their own Easter

Dear Students,

Hopefully the Brentwood Bubble hasn't prevented you from hearing about the sequencing of Neandertal DNA, and the discovery that some modern human lineages contain some Neandertal DNA. (Image courtesy of Anthropological Institute, University of Zürich).

Carl Zimmer has a great piece on it: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2010/05/06/skull-caps-and-genomes/ . PZ Meyers has a good article on what this means in genetics: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/05/neandertal.php (note: PZ Meyers is a very popular Science blog, but he also writes from an anti-theistic perspective. If this would offend you, don't click.)

At some point in our human history, there was successful cross-species mating: we shared the planet, and apparently our beds, with another intelligent human species. Not us, but apparently close enough.

What were they like? What did they do better? Worse? Say we could get a whole Neandertal genomes, with enough for sufficient genetic variability. Unlikely, but I never thought we'd get this either. This is another intelligent species - wiped out by accidents of history. Could we use a human egg, and create a Neandertal baby/family? Are we obligated to? Are we obligated not to?

We are still discovering what it means to be human - what does it mean to be Neandertal? They may represent a completely new point of view - we talk of finding intelligent 'out there' through programs such as SETI - could we find it here, right here, buried in our past.

The Neandertals are our brothers and sisters in humanity, but our record in accepting 'different' members of our own species isn't terribly good. Should we refrain to protect them from us? Is that even fair?

What if we found out our ancestors wiped them out, either directly or through disease? We know we're certainly capable of genocide both deliberately and accidentally.

Can we do it just for fun? Intelligence appears to be rare in the universe - should we protect whatever sparks arose?

We've often asked where we've come from, and where we're going - perhaps with a larger human 'family' we could find better answers. What an Easter story that would be - a literal resurrection of another human intelligence.

Regards,

Ron Neufeld
Canada's Best Boarding School

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Easier password security

Dear Students,

I am frequently amazed at how trusting students are when it comes to computer security. I find computers unlocked, and running. Frequently. It would be trivial (to pick a completely random example) to quickly install a program from a USB stick that would allow access to the computer remotely. Or to downgrade the account so that the student couldn't play games, install programs, change their own security settings, and ensure that the computer only worked between the hours of 1PM to 2PM each day. That would be horribly, horribly inconvenient, but at least the damage is confined to you. The more likely possibility is that somebody would think it was hilarious, cyber-bulling consequences not withstanding, to email all of your friends and family some embarrassing comments, or even rummage around your hard drive looking for some embarrassing photos to attach and send off to your entire address book. Brentwood takes cyber-bullying extremely seriously - schools that don't aren't nice places. If the hacker is evil and clever, they'll just ensure they have access to your computer later, and access your accounts the next time you're traveling (and it would be trivial to determine where you are with access to your email, your Facebook account, etc). Then, when the time is exactly right, email your friends and family with a plea to send emergency money because you've been mugged and are stuck in a foreign country, or whatever other lie they think will convince your loved ones to give them cash. It's important to protect yourself - you wouldn't fail to lock your car, why fail to lock your computer?

So, to be clear:

LOCK YOUR COMPUTER WHEN ABSENT.

Secondly, don't tell anyone your password. If you wish your friends to have access to your computer, give them their own (limited) account, with their own password. Yes, giving out your password is a remarkable display of trust - so's giving out your house keys, car keys, and diary. Friends can become ex-friends extremely quickly - and do you really want your ex-friend in charge of your status updates and photos online?

I work in a large high school and in the past few weeks the same student walks in and mentions his work gets deleted from his area and he has to get his password changed as it no longer works.
Every week the techs restore the work and change the password to something random and complex.

On the fourth time I manage to meet this unlucky chap and ask "when we restore your files and change your password, what do you do?"

Student - "oh I change it back to the original one of my name and date of birth so I can remember it and then tell my best friend as we all use mine because they dont remember theirs


There are, of course, two mistakes in the example - telling other people the password, and making the password ridiculously easy to guess. Using normal words for passwords is also a problematic - remember that unlike T.V. people don't guess passwords individually, they set up a computer to guess thousands of times per second using dictionaries and other common passwords. Other problems include using the same password for all sites, as well as writing passwords on a piece of paper...and then sticking it on your monitor. (Or putting it in a desk drawer - oh, clever. It will take a whole extra second to find...) The difficulty with one password for all sites is the if one becomes compromised, they all do. It may not matter of someone hacks into your account for leaving comments on a blog, but if they can use that to get into your bank account, Facebook friends, or online email it's quite another.


It often seems, however, that it's a catch-22. If I don't write a password down, I need it to be something I can remember, which means someone might be able to crack it. If I do make it complicated enough (i.e. minimum 8 characters of a mixture of letters, numbers, and/or symbols), then I need to write it down somewhere so that I can refer to it often - which opens up the possibility that someone would find my note.

The neatest solution I've seen to this problem in awhile is http://passwordcard.org/ . The website will generate a unique set of random numbers and digits that look like so:



And I know you're saying "Thanks Mr. Neufeld, just what I needed - another set of incomprehensible letters and numbers". Actually, you're probably not saying that, but it's my imagination and I'll do what I want with it.

The usefulness of the card is that the card itself allows one to meet the duel purpose of having passwords that are hard to crack by people 'out there', and have something that can be taped to your monitor, put in your wallet, etc, to refer to. As an example how it works, let's say you are going to use an 8-digit combination for your online bank password. Rather than memorizing a complex string, I remember "green happy face". Going down from the happy face symbol at the top, and the green line, my new password is "RVffH3y8" which is more than sufficient to meet security requirements, and difficult to hack.


Even better, I can print out this card, have it laminated, and put it in my wallet in case I forget the password. I can tape it to my computer, keep copies in my desk, etc. It doesn't matter if someone sees the card - there are literally thousands of combinations that are possible, running the combinations forwards, backwards,


up, down or any other easy-to-remember pattern:


I can use it and not even worry if someone is reading it over my shoulder, I lose my wallet, etc. I have the convenience of keeping my password written down when I need it, but without the added worry that it could be found and used by someone else. The website also gives the option to include a few rows of only numbers (for things like PINs) and can include symbols (just to take security up that extra notch).

As well, don't have the same security password for different purposes - the password I use for my blogs should be different from the password I use for my bank. The security of some websites varies in quality. I've even had one website directly email me my password when I successfully convinced them that I didn't remember it - if something is sent in a plain email then that password has been compromised, and was never secure to begin with. Websites with proper security and encryption would either reset your password and email you a random temporary one, or a link to reset your own password. If you can read it in your email, then you can assume anybody else between you and the servers could have read it too.

So I use the card to generate multiple passwords:


In this particular example I just remember "Green Happy face down" for RKbUzQL6, and "Red Umbrella Up" for FbtECqL9. Both are difficult to hack, but I can carry both with me at all times.

If this appeals to you, I'd recommend generating a unique version at http://passwordcard.org/ and then copying that picture and printing off several colour copies. Laminate one for your wallet, put another in your safe or file cabinet as a back up.

Passwords are your first, second, and last line of defense for your personal identity - if you spend a little time creating a secure system, you will have much less to worry about later on.

Regards,

Ron Neufeld
Canada's Best Boarding School

Saturday, April 17, 2010

Better Google search, Socials resources, Twitter

Dear Students,

Given the short supply of that most precious of all resources (time), I will start with a summary of links to tools and discussion items for those that would like to explore without reading through the explanations and context that I've embedded them with. Besides, if it's not relevant in the first few sentences Andrew told me he deletes the email.
  1. Searching within a domain such as education (.edu) or government (.gov) - using the "site:" search function.
  2. Using Google for definitions.
  3. Google Scholar
  4. There is no 4.
  5. Google Earth
  6. World War Battle sites for Google Earth
  7. CBC Archives
  8. Searching Canadian government sites with site:gc.ca
  9.  Demonstrating scale.
  10. Teaching About Web Includes Troublesome Parts
  11.  Oh my! Twitter makes history for Google search
  12.  Library of Congress archiving Twitter
  13. Google making Twitter searchable
I was recently reminded of the importance of proper searching in Google. As I move through the day with my CDS (Caffeine Delivery System), occasionally someone will make the mistake of trying to claim that aspartame is dangerous, on the basis of some questionable website that informed them that aspartame is a 'chemical' and there exists a vast conspiracy to hide its toxic effects.

The problem is that when people (and of course I) search with something like Google, the most common way to use it is with simple search terms, i.e. "aspartame toxicity". The first page to pop up after such a simple search is one selling a book, and is a well-known contributor to conspiracy theories about aspartame toxicity. When distinguishing between fact and fiction, the most popular sites given by a simple search are often the least reliable.

Alan November mentioned using the "site:" command on Google to help eliminate unreliable search results. For example typing "site:.gov OR site:.edu aspartame" selects only websites that contain the word "aspartame" from either U.S. government sites (such as the U.S. National Institutes of Health) and educational sites from universities and schools (also in the U.S. - Canadian universities don't have a similar URL that can be used as a search criteria). The results give a completely different picture of aspartame. One the first page there is a link to the chemical formula and its history, several sites mentioning, and then debunking, the aspartame conspiracy/toxicity myth. Since using this method removes the .com's, the .net's and the .org's - all of which can be bought by anybody, for any reason. Lots of good sites are removed as well, but using this as a 'first search' helps pinpoint the reliable information first, before going to a more general search. Such search techniques save valuable time, as less time is spend sorting through credible and non-credible information. This search example uses the "OR" command, which means it retrieves resources from either government or education sites - for a narrower search (such as only searching educational site) the "OR" command and the other search criteria can be omitted.

Google has a lot of useful methods to distinguish and refine the information you're looking for. In Biology 12 class some students forgot their textbooks and needed definitions while working on a worksheet. Rather than retrieving their textbook, they used the "define:" command in Google. Typing "define: androgens" returns a list of possible definitions from multiple sources - a quick read reveals to the student that this is a general term referring to male steroid sex hormones. I think I prefer this method over the "The Textbook" gives multiple definitions, different nuances, and highlights that it's the concept, and not the exact sequence of words, that's important.

In the same class a comment arose about sugar intake in children and its positive correlation to hyperactivity - a belief long held by teachers and tired parents everywhere. Rather than using the previously mentioned "site:" command, we checked directly using "Google Scholar". Typing "sugar behavior children" into Google Scholar immediately returns relevant results, with the most recent studies first. The first link is a meta-study debunking the sugar-hyperactivity myth. Of course not everyone is trained to know the difference between good studies and bad studies, double-blind and proper controls, but at least with this search you're in the right ballpark for seeking truth, even if it ends up in left field somewhere. Compared with a general Google search for "sugar behavior children", which does have both good and bad results on the first page, but the very first result is an author selling a book and a disease model of 'sugar sensitivity' to worried parents. Google Scholar is an excellent resource for research project, again saving time that would be otherwise spent trying to determine if a website is a reliable source of information or not.

If you're doing a project or presentation that involves a particular location, say for Social Studies or history, Google Earth has some nice tricks. Google Earth has the capability to put an overlay of a battle, building, or historical map. Being able to zoom in to a current location, and then overlay older images to give context to historical events would make any presentation much more relevant. You can download and install Google Earth here : http://earth.google.com/intl/en/download-earth-advanced.html , and you can download world war battle sites here : http://www.gearthhacks.com/userfiles.php?user=1698 .

Another resource to impress your Socials teacher - the CBC archives : http://archives.cbc.ca/ . Keeping with the world war theme, I listened to a radio broadcast from April 7, 1945, a Canadian reporter gives an account of the atrocities from a camp Canadian troops captured the day before.

Pausing before a brick wall splattered with blood and brains, the CBC's Matthew Halton tells Canadians back home about the atrocities committed by the Nazis. A day after Canadian troops capture a Nazi camp near Zutphen, Netherlands, Halton visits the site. He describes a trail of "slime and abominable crime," reporting that the worst thing you've ever read in any account of Nazi atrocities was there: "I saw and I was sick."


Serendipitously four other possible Social Studies sites were tweeted in the past week. The history site for Veterans Affairs Canada (http://www.vac-acc.gc.ca/remembers/sub.cfm?source=history), the history of federal ridings (http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Sites/LOP/HFER/HFER.asp) the Canadian Military History gateway (http://www.cmhg-phmc.gc.ca/html/index-eng.asp) and the Aboriginal Canada Portal (http://www.aboriginalcanada.gc.ca/acp/site.nsf/eng/ao04588.html). All are great resources, but similarly to the first topic I notice that the Canadian government seems to have settled on a site URL: ".gc.ca".
This brings up the possibility of directing students to include searches that specifically search the Canadian government's website for information using the "site:gc.ca" command on Google.

For example, what reliable information does our government provide on the Vietnam war? Google search site:.gc.ca vietnam war . I've found both the Canadian and American government site searches (.gc.ca & .gov respectively) give a lot of excellent scholarly and reliable information. Stuck looking for a Canadian perspective that you can't find on the web? I'd try this first.

I couldn't leave without at least one technology tool devoted to science: http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/begin/cells/scale/. This is a wonderful flash demonstration showing relative sizes from a coffee bean to a carbon atom - scale is hard to grasp and this little tool does a great job of getting it across. Thanks to Andrew in Bio12 for bringing it to my attention.

For discussion there is a NYT article titled "Teaching About Web Includes Troublesome Parts" suggests rather than shielding students from the Internet teachers should be educating.  As well a blog article "Oh my! Twitter makes history for Google search" commenting on the fact that the Library of Congress is going to archive every public Twitter comment made, right back to its inception in 2006, and Google is also going to make all comments searchable. As an archive for history and posterity, there is a wealth of data.

I remember when it was announced that ice was found on Mars. How was this news first announced? TV, Newspaper, or blog? None of the above - it was tweeted from the Twitter account of the Mars Phoenix Lander directly (sadly, the little guy seems to have died). From breaking news to marriage proposals, our collective Tweets are being saved for posterity. It's likely that when your kids are in school they will study 'famous tweets' in much the same way we study 'famous speeches' today.

Regards,

Ron Neufeld

Canada's Best Boarding School

Thursday, April 8, 2010

Tool for video projects, Margaret Atwood, homework help, and some crazy.

Dear Students,

First a new tool for student video projects, Margaret Atwood, some helpful science / math video prep links, and some crazy.
The neat new tool is JayCut, a free online video editor that offers the ability to export the videos to YouTube or download directly in different formats. Something like JayCut gives everyone, from teacher to student, a common platform to work and edit their projects. Working on a group video project where members have a mixture of Macs and PC's? Share an account to collaborate during prep or otherwise separated by time and space. Oh, and speaking of Macs, here's a completely unrelated vid on how to make an iPad float.

I noticed that Margaret Atwood has become Twitterfied. There's a recent article "How I learned to love Twitter" which helps explain how being part of Twitter is about being part of and developing a community. I remember reading Margaret Atwood when I was in school. At the time I thought she was one of those dead Canadian authors. Apparently I was wrong. The ability to observe (and possibly interact with) the authors of books under discussion seems an intriguing development.

For those in Math or Science I would recommend checking out Khan Academy; a comprehensive set of YouTube videos on Math, Chemistry, Physics, Biology, arranged by topic. If you need a quick tutorial, they seem quite good. The final link is to the blog "Bad Astronomy", the author has been updating his site with some pictures from the HiRISE camera and has caught some martian avalanches (click to get a massively enlarged picture).

Lastly, some newsyish items that are related to education and to technology. (By technology, I mean I read about it online and it caught my outrage long enough to pay attention. That's a significant selection bias.)

A student in Mississippi (Constance McMillen of Itawamba Agricultural High School) wished to take her date to the prom, but there was a little snag. Her date was of the same gender, which was against school policy. This request was denied, and Constance was also told that if they arrived separately but danced together they'd be thrown out. Oh, and girls aren't allowed to wear a tuxedo either. You can check out the story here, and a Facebook fan page here. But wait! It doesn't end there. Apparently, feeling pressure afterwards, the school did decide to hold the prom. Except that it is looking like it was a decoy prom, that only Constance and a few other (presumably also less popular) students were invited to, while the 'real prom' was held somewhere else. It's not confirmed that the school officials were involved in the deception...but knowing what's involved in planning any event with students it would be difficult to defend the position that they did not. And the historical parallels alone...

Secondly item - I made the mistake of going to the Fox News 'health' section (in my defense I found that the health section of USA Today was blocked by our proxy, and I wanted to check if it was all news sites, or just some), and I found this: Sex Education Could Mean Charges for Teachers. The logic is thus: teaching about contraception encourages sex, minors are not allowed to have sex, therefore teachers who teach about contraception are guilty of sexual assault. This is the opinion of a district attorney (in the U.S.). Despite the fact we're studying the reproductive system in Bio12, class will not be canceled. Sorry.

Regards,

Ron Neufeld
Canada's Best Boarding School

Monday, April 5, 2010

eLearning tools and news for April 5, 2010

Dear Students,

You've probably already heard about the school that's facing some criticism for 'the ultimate spyware' (spying on its students while said students were in the privacy of their own home). If you hadn't, apparently the school had the ability to remotely turn the webcam on and off  - http://education.change.org/blog/view/school_uses_laptops_to_peer_into_students_bedrooms. (Here we just walk to your room and ask you what you're doing .)

A new "Did You Know 4.0" for Sept 2009 (numbers and references are to the U.S.) - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ILQrUrEWe8, as well there is "An Open Letter to Educators" from YouTube - A rant about institutionalized education that's been pinging around the blogosphere - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-P2PGGeTOA4 . Interesting for a discussion on what you need to get out of a class.

For those of you with an iPhone or iPod Touch - Top educational apps for iPhone / iPod Touch  - http://www.speedofcreativity.org/2010/03/01/top-10-education-apps-for-ipod-touch-and-iphone/ .

An article on why teachers should blog - http://teachpaperless.blogspot.com/2009/09/why-teachers-should-blog.html. I would add that it indirectly presents an excellent case of why students should blog as well, and the last article is "Is Internet access a civil right" - http://teachpaperless.blogspot.com/2010/02/yes-internet-access-is-civil-right.html.

For a 'last resource', a video from TED. If you have not, investigated TED, you should. TED is a small nonprofit devoted to "Ideas Worth Spreading", and invites interesting speakers to conferences and makes these speeches available online. The topics and ideas may be controversial, but always thought provoking and interesting. My latest favorite directly addresses the interplay of science and ethics and defends the idea of objective moral standards - http://www.ted.com/talks/sam_harris_science_can_show_what_s_right.html - worth the 23min (although disclosure of all bias, I teach Science & Ethics and find it fascinating in and of itself). I will arbitrarily assign this to my Science & Ethics 11 class for later discussion. If your classes include any kind of discussion component, check out TED if you haven't already.

Cheers,

Mr. "if you can't do it on a computer, it's not worth doing" Neufeld
Canada's Best Boarding School

Sunday, November 22, 2009

Vaccines, the good kind of chemicals!

This blog is a classroom extension on an extra topic requested b an inquisitive and curious student who forwarded me an email outlining some possible problems with the swine flu vaccine.

First, the email.

Dear Friends

Just in case any of you may be contemplating having the swine flu vaccination, I thought you may like to see a list of its ingredients so you can make an informed choice.
LIST OF VACCINE FILLERS & ADJUVENTSL This list, officially administered by design with every vaccine provided to the public, in addition to the squalene that appears to be in this upcoming swine flu vaccine, is of great concern to many parents and grandparents, with the announcement that they will start vaccinating children and pregnant women first and then "wait to see if there are too many adverse events" (including seizures, neurological problems, and death).
This is not an auspicious start. Although not a logical argument, I find any email that contains SHOUTING IN ALL CAPS to be a warning sign that the author may not have done his or her homework.

So, the first point appears to be some concern about squalene. Squalene, a natural chemical that is made in many organisms (including humans), has been given to 22 million people with no safety problems according to the world health organisation. So, if you get an email that lists squalene as a potential harm, you can stop reading and delete the email. The person writing it hasn't done their homework.

That last bit, claiming that they're going to vaccinate pregnant women and children and then 'wait and see' if there are too many adverse side effects is a wonderful bit of fear mongering. Pregnant women and children get the vaccine first because they're a high risk group. No evidence is given in the article that pregnant women and children are being treated so callously, it's just a nice little gem of fear to cap off everything else.
In addition to the viral and bacterial RNA or DNA that is part of the vaccines, here are the fillers:
? Aluminum hydroxide - directly linked to causing Alzheimer's disease ? Aluminum phosphate - directly linked to causing Alzheimer's disease ? Ammonium sulfate - an inorganic chemical compound used as fertilizer and "protein purifier"; known to cause kidney & liver damage, gastrointestinal dysfunctions ? Amphotericin B - an "antifungal disinfectant" and anti-biotic, which damages the urinary tract, bowels, and heart functions ? Animal tissues (a causal element for all the various auto-immune diseases associated with vaccination) : horse blood, rabbit brain, dog kidney, monkey kidney, chick embryo, chicken egg, duck egg, pig blood, Porcine (pig) pancreatic hydrolysate of casein (the pig protein/tissue is an additional objectionable issue for Jewish and Muslim people) ? Calf (bovine) serum & fetal bovine serum (cow blood is recognized as a significant transmitter of Mad Cow Disease) ? Betapropiolactone? Formaldehyde - used as "a preservative & disinfectant" , known to cause cancer, chronic bronchitis, eye irritation when exposed to thebody's immune system? Formalin ? Gelatin ? Glycerol ? Human diploid cells (originating from human aborted fetal tissue) ? Hydrolyzed gelatin ? Monosodium glutamate (MSG) - now known to cause cancer in humans, also linked to obesity ? Neomycin (anti-biotic) ? Neomycin sulf ate (anti-biotic) ? Phenol red indicator - a highly toxic disinfectant dye, attributed to liver, kidney, heart & respiratory damage ? Phenoxyethanol (antifreeze) - proven to have extreme neurotoxic side effects ? Potassium diphosphate ? Potassium monophosphate ? Polymyxin B ? Polysorbate 20 ? Polysorbate 80 ? associated with infertility when injected ? Residual MRC5 proteins ? Sorbitol ? Sucrose ? Thimerosal (mercury) - a neurotoxin linked to psychological,neurological, & immunological problems?especially autism. Nervous system damage (such as sub-acute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE), brachial plexitis, post-vaccinal encephalitis, transverse myelitis and peripheral neuropathies) , kidney disease, birth defects, dental problems, mood swings, mental changes, hallucinations, memory loss, and inability to concentrate can occur. Symptoms also include tremors, loss of dermal sensitivity, slurred speech, and?in rare cases?even death and paralysis. This additive alone was the catalyst for another recent Class Action Lawsuit organized by mothers of children born with autism & the many related behavioral disorders associated with it. Autism is now occurring at levels never seen before in history; depending on the state, its rate is now 1 in 67 to 1 in 150. The autism rates used to be 1 in 20,000. Mercury may also be associated with the significantly increased rates of senility and Alzheimer's, which is associated with five or more successive flu vaccinations. Although most mercury (thimerosal) has been removed from children's vaccines, it is still in all flu vaccines at toxic doses. ? Tri(n)butylphosphat e, ? VERO cells, a continuous line of monkey kidney cells - linked to the SV-40 virus known to cause leukemia ? Washed sheep red blood cells
Well, that's quite the grab-bag of ingredients and scary consequences. Let's put it in perspective. Dihydrogen monoxide (DHMO) is a chemical. I've made it from caustic acids and bases in a lab. It is the primary ingredient in acid rain. It's so toxic it corrodes metal, and it's even used by elite athletes as a performance enhancer. Check the facts for yourself. The point being, of course, is even if you limit yourself to the truth, you can create completely irrelevant claims. DHMO, or dihydrogen monoxide is (of course) H2O, or water.

It's not just the chemical that makes something dangerous, it's the amount and context. Water is deadly if you're exposed to the solid form for long periods of time without protection. If you really want to show that the vaccine ingredients are actually harmful, link to the study studying the vaccine ingredient given in the dose expected. All this list essentially says is "DIS VACCINE CONTAINS LOTZ DA CHEMICALS. CHEMICALS VRY BAD." If I can make a list of true dangers about water, just imagine what I could do with a list of chemicals in spinach.

If you wish to know exactly what really is in the vaccine, here's the list:

Non-medicinal ingredients:

Antigen suspension vial: Thimerosal, sodium chloride, disodium hydrogen phosphate, potassium dihydrogen phosphate, potassium chloride, water for injections. The drug substance contains trace residual amounts of egg proteins, formaldehyde, sodium deoxycholate and sucrose.

Adjuvant emulsion vial: sodium chloride, disodium hydrogen phosphate, potassium dihydrogen phosphate, potassium chloride, water for injections.

Medicinal ingredients:

H1N1 influenza antigen from A/California/7/2009, NYMC X-179A (H1N1)v strain and AS03 adjuvant.

I won't bother defending each chemical, other than to note that the vaccine has undergone extensive testing without a single safety concern appearing. Moreover, the vaccine was made in a 'standard' way, and isn't different from how they make other vaccines, so if there was a health problem with one of the non-medicinal ingredients we'd already know from previous studies on previous vaccines.

I will, however, make a special mention of thimerosal. Thimerosal is a mercury compound that's wonderful - it helps prevent an infection due to the injection of the vaccine. As people know mercury is toxic, they often assume that anything containing mercury is toxic. There are a couple of problems with this. First, they are forgetting dose - I wouldn't recommend bathing in thimerosal, but the tiny amount in a vaccine is harmless. Secondly, mercury and different compounds of mercury are all different. For example, sodium is a highly reactive metal that explodes when thrown in water but sodium chloride is a tasty condiment we put on french fries. If you wish to know more about thimerosal and toxicity, read the World Health Organization statement that the research shows there is no evidence of toxicity.

So that very long list of possible ingredients is, in many instances, a fabrication, and where it's not a fabrication it's an attempt at scare tactics.

THESE ADDITIVES ARE GIVEN TO OUR CHILDREN WITHOUT PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT.
Sue Collins
Co-Founder
New Jersey Alliance for Informed Choice in Vaccination, NJAICV
"Parents and Individuals Concerned about Vaccine Safety and the Right to Informed Consent"
NJ-AICV is a completely volunteer organization. 1-800-613-9925
www.NJAICV.org (201-651-1142- Fax) PO Box 243
, Gillette , NJ 07933http://www.facebook .com/pages/ New-Jersey-
Alliance- for-Informed- Choice-in- Vaccination/ 57253034250
All information, data, and material contained, presented, or provided here is for general information purposes only and is not to be construed as reflecting the knowledge or opinions of the publisher, and is not to be construed or intended as providing medical or legal advice. The decision to vaccinate and how you implement that decision is yours and yours alone.

So, what's the real information?

The real information is that the vaccine does have a risk. A serious life-threatening event from any immunization campaign is roughly 1 in 100,000. The death rate for the regular seasonal flu (which H1N1 may or may not match) is 1 in 1000 to 1 in 2000. Or, assuming the lowest risk for the flu:



Be careful about email and the Internet - choose your sources wisely.

Regards,

Mr. Neufeld

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Don't Panic

Several students have started to ask about 2012. I hope this email addresses some questions.

Science has not only made us safer - it can help us feel safer too.

Vaccines? Perfectly safe. Aspertame in diet soda? Not a worry. Cell phones? People panic, but there's little to worry about. Homeopathy? You can save your money.

Tragically, pseudoscience and fear-mongering has consequences. Fearing the end of the world when the LHC started up, a teen took her own life. The anti-vaccination movement, now seemingly lead by Jenny McCarthy, has a body count. Children die because their parents refuse real medicine on their behalf.

Like the LHC, 2012 is not going to result in the end of the world. I'm sure it will be a great movie (any by any reasonable definition, the movie with the best special effects is the best) but it's just a movie.

Really.

The number of people who have jumped from "internet rumor + movie = it must be true" has reached such epic heights that in the U.S. NASA has actually created a special page to dispel the myth.

Think about that for a moment. This has nothing to do with NASA. NASA, as a scientific community, does not deal with (or really is equipped to understand) popular psychology and internet fads. When enough people become scared, though, it becomes a public menace.

"End of the World" predictions have a long (and failed) history. Be a little skeptical. The number of articles that end a story with "there is no evidence, so the debate continues to rage" misses the point - without evidence there is no debate. In science facts, rather than public opinion, determines whether or not there is a real debate.

And every time you accept pseoduscience as science, you make Carl Sagan Richard Feynman, Neil deGrasse Tyson & Bill Nye cry.



Cheers,

Mr. "the Earth is still flat" Neufeld
Canada's Best Boarding School