To whoever wrote the bottom bit of this message - I strongly believe that the research/evidence we already have does constitute proof in as much as 'proof' can ever be ascertained in these circumstances - (the tobacco companies have never accepted responsibility or liability for tobacco related illness, so despite the 'proof', no-one's ever been able to touch them.) I have used the word proof on many occasions, some would say unwisely! The point I was making (not sure whether Andy agrees or disagrees with this) is that having proof, and having proof accepted are two different things. Andy is a realist. I always live in hope - but accept that his pragmatic view of the situation is most probably the correct one - much to my sorrow, and to his, I suspect.

Jenny



From Mast Sanity