Well, technically he is not ours yet. But he will be by next Saturday. We just met him today and totally fell in love. He is an almost 3 year old racing greyhound who was rescued and has been in foster care for about a month. His racing name is Clueless but he's been called Louis, Clouis, and various other nicknames. We've been told it's not a big deal to rename them so we probably will. The family who has been taking care of him has 2 kids almost the same ages and Noah and Lily and he does really well with them. He is very calm and very sweet.
We have been thinking about adopting a greyhound for a while now and when we asked the kids if they wanted a dog for Christmas they were all for it! We started the process thinking it would take a while to get approved and then to find the right dog for us. Apparently it's not so hard tho'.
Hopefully the kids will still be happy about getting a dog for Christmas by the time Christmas is actually here...
Once he comes home we will take some more pictures of him. These are just what I could copy of the foster mom's facebook page...
Lily has been doing a little bit of phonics work with me so she is learning how to sound out words--mostly in three letter blends. I often hear her trying to sound out more difficult things as well while she is looking at books on her own (it's one of my favorite things to listen to really). Today she decided she wanted to write her cousins a message. Check it out...
It sparked a very interesting debate and I thought I would post it here so that those of you who are not on facebook can benefit from it. So, here it is:
Angelina: BAH. This is a guy who peddles false hope for people with specious symptoms. I fail to see how his "medical credentials" make him an expert on infectious disease at all - even his own website doesn't make that claim.
The mercury "danger" has been repeatedly debunked by multiple scientific studies. The American public obviously has no trust in the scientific process, probably because the schools have failed so profoundly that they don't understand it. No, it's true that science doesn't have all of the answers - yet. Scientists won't be able to get them, either, if funding continues to be cut. And funding certainly isn't going to be increased in a society with such a profound mistrust in the goals of science. It's a terrible self-perpetuating cycle.
Furthermore, the risk of H1N1 flu isn't in its current state (although it HAS caused deaths already), but in the event of mutation - which the flu virus is known to do rapidly and unpredictably. This assessment of the H1N1 as "getting less virulent" isn't true at all. The goal of a public health mass-vaccination campaign is to attempt to prevent, or at least minimize, a catastrophic outbreak like the one that ravaged the entire world in 1917. If there is a vaccination available that will reduce my risk of drowning in bacterial fluid building up in my lungs, I'll take it. And so will my boys....
This kind of fear-mongering (pseudo)science reporting feeds nothing but paranoia - and that doctor's bank account.
Me: i don't know what this guys credentials are or anything else about him but i posted this b/c i haven't seen much else about the negative sides of this particular vaccine. i've only heard talk of how important it is to get it along w/ the regular flu vaccine. the fact is that this strain of flu hasn't been around for long and therefore there hasn't been enough time for any good science to be done w/ it.
there have been studies that show that the regular vaccine is worthless--the number of cases of flu have not gone down and the number of deaths have not decreased. and that vaccine certainly doesn't prevent mutations from occurring in the virus strains.
and i don't see how the dangers of mercury have been debunked. mercury is a poison. we are told to be careful about the kind and amount of fish we are eating b/c of the possibility of getting too much but we are supposed to shoot it directly into our blood stream in higher concentrations than we would get by eating it and assume that there aren't going to be any negative side effects? there have been scientific studies on both sides of this issue and they report opposite findings...
i just have read too much on both sides to just toss any of it out and think it is wise to be very careful about what we put in our bodies.
Jonathan: The problem is that the government has paid for 180 million of these vaccines to be made and they now need them to be used. Angelina, I fail to see how the doctor above will profit from discouraging people from taking the vaccine, but I do know that the government and drug company lobbyists will lose if there is mass rejection of these immunizations. For those who doubt the effects of vaccines on perfectly healthy people, there are as many naysayers as there are peddlers. I know kids that appear to have autism or seizures as a result of vaccines. The biggest problem is that this vaccine will not immunize against a future mutation which is what everyone is afraid of anyway.
Angelina: He profits from his fear-mongering appearances. Science can't argue with anecdotes - that just reinforces my whole point; as soon as anyone says "I know somebody who..." then it's no longer a scientific discussion. Nobody claims any vaccine will be a sure bet - but it's the best-guess weapon available against an unknowable enemy. The hope is that perhaps the immune response due to vaccine will at least lessen the symptoms of a more virulent form.
Jonathan: What creates more hysteria? Immunizing an entire nation for a disease which so far as killed fewer people than are killed by the typical 'flu season, or warning people about the dangers of immunizations which are not brought up in the government push to immunize a nation? I disagree with your statement that "'I know somebody who..."' then it is no longer a scientific discussion." The truth is we all know people who have been adversely affected by vaccines and if we add those numbers up they present a significant challenge to mass immunization when a life-and-death struggle is not imminent as the benefits are outweighed by the detriments. In science, the validity of any statement is only maintained until that statement can be questioned by empirical data. My saying that I know someone is empirical data that challenges the assertion of the benefits of immunizations and should stand until it is disproved.
Please look at the following links for another "kook's" opinion. Link 1 Link 2 Link 3
Angelina: So, basically, people who don't vaccinate don't approve of this vaccine? Stop the presses.
Jonathan: And people who vaccinate support vaccinations? Wow, you've made a point there. The question is why would people deliberately "endanger" their health by not getting vaccinated? Or why would the government allow constant tv ads to be run [that state that] the HPV vaccine reduces cancer risk when it really treats an STD? Isn't that using the fear of cancer to promote a vaccine and in some cases attempt to make it mandatory? (see here)
Me: i vacinate. but i will not get this vaccine or any other flu vaccine b/c the risk of the disease does not outweigh the risk of the vaccine. and the vaccines have not proven to be efficacious. but you don't hear anything about that in the media.
Jonathan: Jackie, I'm afraid Angelina's stance typifies those who accept the "facts" as presented to them by the government or medical researchers and refuse to listen to any dissenting viewpoints. Let's not forget that the medical community also supports abortion, euthanasia, eugenics, and Hitler's doctors and scientists were convinced that "the final solution" was the best way to erradicate disease and other abnormalities in the human condition. Also scientific "facts" are continually being proved spurious, but are still presented by the scientific community as proven fact.
Well, technically he is not ours yet. But he will be by next Saturday. We just met him today and totally fell in love. He is an almost 3 year old racing greyhound who was rescued and has been in foster care for about a month. His racing name is Clueless but he's been called Louis, Clouis, and various other nicknames. We've been told it's not a big deal to rename them so we probably will. The family who has been taking care of him has 2 kids almost the same ages and Noah and Lily and he does really well with them. He is very calm and very sweet.
Once he comes home we will take some more pictures of him. These are just what I could copy of the foster mom's facebook page...
