alpacas: 06/25/09

Re: [AlpacaTalk] not even a BEW topic

Ah, here we go. I think that you are very irresponsible for bringing a private matter to the group. Extremely poor form.. In fact, despicable.

I have no hint of what is going on?

Meagan, you are out of line and I think you're treading on dangerous ground.

Your mother's article is all opinion, with some science stuff anyone can get off the web. But, no sources cited, no details, no real substance. Cite your sources. Then it can be taken seriously.

You didn't want to trade breedings with me, fine, I have all the trade breedings I can handle. And then some.

Meagan, no one can prove anything until the science is in. And it is not in! In human cases of CHARGE syndrome, everything I have read, even recently (like two days ago) clearly states that the cause is unknown! How can you claim to know? Please stop your ranting at least until the ARF study is complete and published.

The offering of environmental causes for SOME CA cases is ridiculed by you, when I have shown studies, peer reviewed studies that a cleaning chemical is shown to cause fetal death, and skeletal and cardiovascular deformities in levels that are nonlethal to the mother. This is not my opinion. And I am not claiming for one second that this is likely to be the only cause of CA. In fact I say outright, quite the opposite!

You say Sire X has thrown CA offspring, therefore all of his offspring should be culled. Please tell me if I misunderstand. And say it in small words, in small paragraphs.

I think in the future you would be wise to keep private matters private. I think it's grand that you bring this up more than once. Shameful, really shameful.

So I wonder which of my sires carries CA, then?

Laughable.

Heather

On Jun 25, 2009, at 8:01 PM, cedargrovealpacas@comcast.net wrote:

Heather,

Think what you will, it is obvious that is the only way you are going to do things. Nothing anyone says unless it is what you think or say is going to fly with you. You would much rather sit here and try to get people to come up with stuff that agrees with your standpoint. I believe this really all stems from me declining your offer for trading breedings - I told you we were not interested because your bloodlines were not ones we wanted to integrate into our herd. Now, based on everything I had posted here, doesn't that give you a slightest hint on what is going on?

Everything we have done research on IS from science, based on research from all sources, including top universities here and abroad, top research medical facilities, veterinary research, not just camelid since mammals are mammals and all develop the same in the beginning.

Now, I have asked several times that if someone does not believe what our research and compilations had uncovered, they are to do their own research (e.g. comb the Internet, using all medical and research facilities, not just camelid), and prove our findings wrong. In the many years that our research has been out, we have yet to have one single person do the research and prove us wrong. Argue all you want, stick heads in the sand if it makes everyone feel better.... but it will all make everything worse - it is actually all past the point of no return, now sine money is more the goal that sound genetics.

I still stand on the grounds that it makes one wonder what is really going on with the research if back in 1996, OSU (Oregon) stated that only $36K was needed to complete the marker for CA. I have a hard time believing that $36K was not donated by now, or that research by any other organization could not pick up where OSU had left off if they did cease the research due to lack of funding. $36K is only the amount of one or two good breeding quality femals, and would have been a great donation for any large farm to boast they had donated to. But it is suspect that it was never done due to the consequences of knowing which bloodlines/animals possess the genetic as it would/will devastate to industry because breeders have bred to improve the pocketbook, not the specie.

Now, it all is what it is.... If you don't like what we had to say, then do the research and prove us wrong. But behaving this way toward us because we would not trade breedings due to the genetics of the boys offered us, is immature at best. Picking and choosing what you want to respond to in the posts just shows how this is all just going to keep going around in circles, especially as long as there is someone willing to cry out as a victim.

So, this is the last on this subject we will address here.....

----- Original Message -----
From: "Heather Zeleny" <alpacatalk@westwindalpacas.com>
To: AlpacaTalk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 6:52:20 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: [AlpacaTalk] not even a BEW topic

I don't think you're even really asking me any questions. I think you're throwing out as much as you possibly can for what real end I can't say.

You go on and on about a problem that is impossible for 99% of us to get any information about, regarding lines that produce it. I see little benefit of that.

You refute the SCIENCE that is offered, when all you have is your secret database and your opinions. You go on ad infinitum about this line and that, and how people really must not bred to or buy any animals in those un-named lines. Come on! Are you serious? What are you trying to do here? Give some substance or drop it. At the very least, real science, if you won't produce your list.

Put your money where your mouth is, as they say. Scare mongering isn't welcome here.

Heather

On Jun 25, 2009, at 6:42 PM, cedargrovealpacas@comcast.net wrote:

Heather;

I was in no way ragging on you, raking you over the coals, etc, etc, etc. It is becoming very obvious that you always have to be the victim somewhere, and it always seems to be with either Jim or myself.

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (72) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

Message posts are the opinion of individuals posting and are not necessarily endorsed or approved by Yahoo! or the moderator of this group. The purpose of this discussion group is to ensure that all points of view can be aired. It is the responsbilty of all individuals who post to treat others with respect and civility.

Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

.

__,_._,___

Re: [AlpacaTalk] not even a BEW topic

Heather,

Think what you will, it is obvious that is the only way you are going to do things. Nothing anyone says unless it is what you think or say is going to fly with you. You would much rather sit here and try to get people to come up with stuff that agrees with your standpoint. I believe this really all stems from me declining your offer for trading breedings - I told you we were not interested because your bloodlines were not ones we wanted to integrate into our herd. Now, based on everything I had posted here, doesn't that give you a slightest hint on what is going on?

Everything we have done research on IS from science, based on research from all sources, including top universities here and abroad, top research medical facilities, veterinary research, not just camelid since mammals are mammals and all develop the same in the beginning.

Now, I have asked several times that if someone does not believe what our research and compilations had uncovered, they are to do their own research (e.g. comb the Internet, using all medical and research facilities, not just camelid), and prove our findings wrong. In the many years that our research has been out, we have yet to have one single person do the research and prove us wrong. Argue all you want, stick heads in the sand if it makes everyone feel better.... but it will all make everything worse - it is actually all past the point of no return, now sine money is more the goal that sound genetics.

I still stand on the grounds that it makes one wonder what is really going on with the research if back in 1996, OSU (Oregon) stated that only $36K was needed to complete the marker for CA. I have a hard time believing that $36K was not donated by now, or that research by any other organization could not pick up where OSU had left off if they did cease the research due to lack of funding. $36K is only the amount of one or two good breeding quality femals, and would have been a great donation for any large farm to boast they had donated to. But it is suspect that it was never done due to the consequences of knowing which bloodlines/animals possess the genetic as it would/will devastate to industry because breeders have bred to improve the pocketbook, not the specie.

Now, it all is what it is.... If you don't like what we had to say, then do the research and prove us wrong. But behaving this way toward us because we would not trade breedings due to the genetics of the boys offered us, is immature at best. Picking and choosing what you want to respond to in the posts just shows how this is all just going to keep going around in circles, especially as long as there is someone willing to cry out as a victim.

So, this is the last on this subject we will address here.....

----- Original Message -----
From: "Heather Zeleny" <alpacatalk@westwindalpacas.com>
To: AlpacaTalk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 6:52:20 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: [AlpacaTalk] not even a BEW topic

I don't think you're even really asking me any questions. I think you're throwing out as much as you possibly can for what real end I can't say.

You go on and on about a problem that is impossible for 99% of us to get any information about, regarding lines that produce it. I see little benefit of that.

You refute the SCIENCE that is offered, when all you have is your secret database and your opinions. You go on ad infinitum about this line and that, and how people really must not bred to or buy any animals in those un-named lines. Come on! Are you serious? What are you trying to do here? Give some substance or drop it. At the very least, real science, if you won't produce your list.

Put your money where your mouth is, as they say. Scare mongering isn't welcome here.

Heather

On Jun 25, 2009, at 6:42 PM, cedargrovealpacas@comcast.net wrote:

Heather;

I was in no way ragging on you, raking you over the coals, etc, etc, etc. It is becoming very obvious that you always have to be the victim somewhere, and it always seems to be with either Jim or myself.

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (71) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

Message posts are the opinion of individuals posting and are not necessarily endorsed or approved by Yahoo! or the moderator of this group. The purpose of this discussion group is to ensure that all points of view can be aired. It is the responsbilty of all individuals who post to treat others with respect and civility.

Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

.

__,_._,___

Re: [AlpacaTalk] CA/BEW

You claimed ONE cria who had both. I"m very sorry, but this is not a clear link between the two. Not in anyone's eyes.

I did read it, and please correct me if this is not what you said. Frankly, your sources are nothing but anecdotes, coincidence, and opinion. I see no science at all.

Sorry.

Heather

On Jun 25, 2009, at 6:48 PM, cedargrovealpacas@comcast.net wrote:

There was clearly a link between them in the link I had sent out to the board. I never said they are the same, I said that they were linked due to, well, exactly what the article said. AGAIN, you obviously are not reading what I SAID when I had written the initial post. Way to bat a thousand, Heather. Thumbs up!

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (70) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

Message posts are the opinion of individuals posting and are not necessarily endorsed or approved by Yahoo! or the moderator of this group. The purpose of this discussion group is to ensure that all points of view can be aired. It is the responsbilty of all individuals who post to treat others with respect and civility.

MARKETPLACE

How Many Triangles? 92.6% of Americans Fail this Question!.

(1) New IQ Challenge. 92.6% of Americans get this question wrong!.

Mom Power: Discover the community of moms doing more for their families, for the world and for each other

Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

.

__,_._,___

Re: [AlpacaTalk] not even a BEW topic

I don't think you're even really asking me any questions. I think you're throwing out as much as you possibly can for what real end I can't say.

You go on and on about a problem that is impossible for 99% of us to get any information about, regarding lines that produce it. I see little benefit of that.

You refute the SCIENCE that is offered, when all you have is your secret database and your opinions. You go on ad infinitum about this line and that, and how people really must not bred to or buy any animals in those un-named lines. Come on! Are you serious? What are you trying to do here? Give some substance or drop it. At the very least, real science, if you won't produce your list.

Put your money where your mouth is, as they say. Scare mongering isn't welcome here.

Heather

On Jun 25, 2009, at 6:42 PM, cedargrovealpacas@comcast.net wrote:

Heather;

I was in no way ragging on you, raking you over the coals, etc, etc, etc. It is becoming very obvious that you always have to be the victim somewhere, and it always seems to be with either Jim or myself.

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (69) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

Message posts are the opinion of individuals posting and are not necessarily endorsed or approved by Yahoo! or the moderator of this group. The purpose of this discussion group is to ensure that all points of view can be aired. It is the responsbilty of all individuals who post to treat others with respect and civility.

Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

.

__,_._,___

Re: [AlpacaTalk] CA/BEW

There was clearly a link between them in the link I had sent out to the board. I never said they are the same, I said that they were linked due to, well, exactly what the article said. AGAIN, you obviously are not reading what I SAID when I had written the initial post. Way to bat a thousand, Heather. Thumbs up!

----- Original Message -----
From: "Heather Zeleny" <alpacatalk@westwindalpacas.com>
To: AlpacaTalk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 6:42:18 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: [AlpacaTalk] CA/BEW

Oh, I just remembered, you maintain that BEW and CA are one and the
same, or very closely linked. Well, no one with any science behind
them thinks that, so your opinion is your opinion.

Heather

On Jun 25, 2009, at 5:55 PM, cedargrovealpacas@comcast.net wrote:

> The names are there, and if I say I PERSONALLY would or would not
> buy or breed that lines, don't you think that would give you an idea??

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (68) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

Message posts are the opinion of individuals posting and are not necessarily endorsed or approved by Yahoo! or the moderator of this group. The purpose of this discussion group is to ensure that all points of view can be aired. It is the responsbilty of all individuals who post to treat others with respect and civility.

Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

.

__,_._,___

Re: [AlpacaTalk] CA/BEW

Oh, I just remembered, you maintain that BEW and CA are one and the
same, or very closely linked. Well, no one with any science behind
them thinks that, so your opinion is your opinion.

Heather

On Jun 25, 2009, at 5:55 PM, cedargrovealpacas@comcast.net wrote:

> The names are there, and if I say I PERSONALLY would or would not
> buy or breed that lines, don't you think that would give you an idea??

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (67) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

Message posts are the opinion of individuals posting and are not necessarily endorsed or approved by Yahoo! or the moderator of this group. The purpose of this discussion group is to ensure that all points of view can be aired. It is the responsbilty of all individuals who post to treat others with respect and civility.

Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

.

__,_._,___

Re: [AlpacaTalk] BEW

Heather;

I was in no way ragging on you, raking you over the coals, etc, etc, etc. It is becoming very obvious that you always have to be the victim somewhere, and it always seems to be with either Jim or myself. It is really necessary?? I was asking you a question, or anyone for that matter, and as a matter of fact, it was RETORICAL. You know, the questions that relly don't need answers since people have already said they doubt Formula 409 is the issue as it is...

I am finding it kinda funny that are becoming so short. I was merely asking questions and trying to get answers much like you would with someone else. There is no need to be nasty or snotty as I am sure this would not be tolerated by you on your board should someone else have done it to you. I am trying to show you aspects or ask questions that I am sure other people have as well. All I can say in regards to the way you reacted with this response, especially with certain people, is Wow. I thought this was supposed to be a board where people are supposed to ask questions and learn, not turn around and have their heads bitten off when trying to get information on things that are going to help other with their program. I think your response was out of line, and in fact, I don't think other people would have appreciated it either.... and you get all upset with Jim....

I never said THE animals in your breeding program, I said lines OF the animals in your breeding program, i.e. a Grandsire of one of your boys, or a great grandsire of one of your females.... You completely blew over that one obviously....

<<Oh good lord. I have to respond to this. Ok, so say you disclose that famous sire A has produced CA crias. Doesn't this mean every offspring of his ought to be culled? That is what it means, right? So say someone has a great grandson of his. Yes, according to your logic, all of the great grandson's aunts and uncles ought to be culled, too.>>

LOL. Well congrats Heather. You obviously didn't read that or get the point of that one, either especially since your response shows you didn't understand what I had said in the inital post.....

It is obvious you aren't going to pay attention to anything you read, especially when I write it, let alone give a valid response back. That is fine. At least this is very apparent and shows others as well.

Maegan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Heather Zeleny" <alpacatalk@westwindalpacas.com>
To: AlpacaTalk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 6:06:42 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: [AlpacaTalk] BEW

Meagan,

I'm only going to answer one point, that is regarding what would possess someone to use a certain product in their management? Well, they thought they were being thorough. They had no idea it would be harmful, otherwise it wouldn't on the shelves for use in human households, right? I don't know why you're ragging me over this, I don't use it, and probably have purchased it once in my entire lifetime, if that often. Unlike some people on this forum, I don't feel I can see into other's minds to see what they are or were thinking. I can only assume they thought they were providing the best care they could. And then some.

Ok, I'll also answer your 1st question: I don't know. I don't know.

And as far as producing proof that animals in my breeding program have produced CA, I say, I really doubt it. In fact, I'm pretty sure they haven't. I know I have never had one born while I owned any of them. If a parent of one of my 2 sires not born her has produced CA crias, well, please prove that my boys are carriers, since they have not produced CA crias.

Next?

Heather

On Jun 25, 2009, at 5:55 PM, cedargrovealpacas@comcast.net wrote:

Heather;

Let me first start by saying that none of the following is an anyway meant to slam or offend you. Just wanted to make that clear. Also, I hope you have time to read the following to your questions and/or statements

First... what colors were these crias? How many had full and how many had partial CA?

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (66) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

Message posts are the opinion of individuals posting and are not necessarily endorsed or approved by Yahoo! or the moderator of this group. The purpose of this discussion group is to ensure that all points of view can be aired. It is the responsbilty of all individuals who post to treat others with respect and civility.

Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

.

__,_._,___

Re: [AlpacaTalk] CA

Oh good lord. I have to respond to this. Ok, so say you disclose that famous sire A has produced CA crias. Doesn't this mean every offspring of his ought to be culled? That is what it means, right? So say someone has a great grandson of his. Yes, according to your logic, all of the great grandson's aunts and uncles ought to be culled, too.

On Jun 25, 2009, at 5:55 PM, cedargrovealpacas@comcast.net wrote:

<<So you see, this is not so easy to tell people "Your really should cull any animal that has had a relative with CA." Who knows where it came from, in the lineage?>>

It is culling the lines that have produced it, not culling the lines of their mother's father's aunt's uncle. If the problem line is in the background of an animal, pull it. Cut and dried, simple as that. An animal WITH CA never would have lived unless it is a partial. In that case, I would encourage someone to do something with that animal as this is a dead giveaway and if you are going to let it be known, be prepared to say the lines with. People are going to want to know.

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (65) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

Message posts are the opinion of individuals posting and are not necessarily endorsed or approved by Yahoo! or the moderator of this group. The purpose of this discussion group is to ensure that all points of view can be aired. It is the responsbilty of all individuals who post to treat others with respect and civility.

MARKETPLACE

You have 1 New Message: Someone Challenges your IQ!.

How Many Triangles? 92.6% of Americans Fail this Question!.

Mom Power: Discover the community of moms doing more for their families, for the world and for each other