Usually there is no agenda at all but there may be some sort of uncertainty
and uneasiness instead how one's otherwise personal opinion may be
construed by others if signed along with the name of somebody's affiliated
organization even if a typical disclaimer follows. To some of us the
presence of the disclaimer may appear almost indicative of a potential
dissent on the subject existing between the person and the employer and
possibly there are people very conscious of that. I am afraid that through
insisting too much on signing with our current affiliation in many instances
we may actually stiifle our discusion instead of keeping it open, honest and
alive.
Andrew Strak
Canadian Fishery Consultants Limited
www.canfish.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul G. Taylor" <pault@everfoodingr.com>
To: <pdtom@ucdavis.edu>; "Seafood Internet" <seafood@ucdavis.edu>
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2000 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: Posting messages on the HACCP Mailing List Reminder
> Thanks, Pam. When people refuse to do this, it makes one wonder about
their
> agenda. (I really don't like the way that word "agenda" is used any more,
> and I just used it that way! Darn!) This is a professional group, and
> professionals should not be afraid to identify themselves.
>
> Also, Dr. LaBudde's comments are appreciated. There is nothing wrong with
> examining evidence and then deciding whether or not it is relevant to
> consumer health, but let's avoid "Chemophobic Schizophrenia"! (Thanks to
Dr
> Jack Francis for that term.)
>
> It reminds me of the cyclamate scare where they pumped five pounds of
> cyclamate into the bladder of a one-pound rat and found that that was
> harmful. So what did we keep to replace it? Saccharin. (Causes cancer!)
> And then aspartame (PKU problem, at least!)
>
> Keep smiling!
>
> Paul
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 24 2000 - 12:54:01 PDT