herb sales online (and OTC): boycott offending brands

[Guest guest]

i'm with Mike. personally, I won't use brands like plum flower that sell in

health food stores. i'm a supporter of boycotts. i'm sure practitioners

comprise 99% of health concerns mkt. if they saw a serious drop in sales,

they would take note.

 

patient edu is also imp. word is beginning to filter to patients re: the

inferior chiro/med acu training. we need to apply the pressure and keep it

on.

 

kb

 

 

On 3/7/07, mike Bowser <naturaldoc1 wrote:

>

>

> It sounds like better patient education combined with a more responsible

> herbal corp policy of sale are needed. If enough pracitioners decide to

> lobby and protest a company policy of direct sale of product to patients,

> then we create an ethical listing of those who will not participate. We use

> only these and let our economic dollars and politics to let them know. If

> they want to go it along, then they have that right. Their decision will

> decide our support and their future.

>

> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>

> ________________________________

> > To:

Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\

ogroups.com>

> > anne.crowley <anne.crowley%40comcast.net>

> > Wed, 7 Mar 2007 13:45:23 +0000

> > Re: Re: herb sales online (and OTC)

> >

> > Thanks for your explanation Chris. Health Concerns is the product my

> patient ordered on line.

> > Vitamin Pharamacy are doing this all the time (with a licensed

> practioner somewhere on staff)

> > My largest concern with Chinese herbs (because I can retail all kinds of

> products from Vitamins to Facial products), is that they will take something

> inappropriate and potentially harmful is taken over a long term. I prefer to

> sell Chinese Herbs in my practice because it complements my acupuncture

> treatments.

> > Anne

> > -------------- Original message ----------------------

> > " chris_macie " < <%40well.com>>

> > > I recently discovered that, for instance, Health Concerns products

> > > were available on-line. In the context of my search that didn't bother

> > > me, in that the on-line prices were in line with standard usage. That

> > > is ca. 100% markup over cost to practitioners, as per Health Concerns

> > > own marketing advice in their " handbook " , i.e. cost ca. $10/bottle, to

> > > patients ca. $20. (That's more or less in line with prices for

> > > supplements in general.)

> > >

> > > What was irking me is that a new, agressively marketed chain out here

> > > in California, called " Elephant Pharm " , is selling Health Concerns

> > > bottles from open shelves AT A DISCOUNT, i.e. standard priced bottle

> > > at ca. $20 they're selling at ca. $15. Not only is Health Concerns

> > > allowing practitioners be bypassed, but also under selling them. (I

> > > suspect that Elephant Pharm gets a healthy volume discount also.)

> > >

> > > Health Concerns reply (I complained) is that they sell only to

> > > practitioners, and Elephant Pharm has practitioners working for them

> > > in each store. But the stuff is ordered on the coorporate level -- the

> > > " practitioner " at the local franchise new nothing about how the stuff

> > > was ordered, or the pricing strategy, and certainly that she didn't

> > > order.

> > >

> > > Health Concerns also justifies the retail sales in terms of

> > > practitioners who work for, say HMOs, who can't order/sell herbs, so

> > > their patients can have access.

> > >

> > > My suspicion is still tinged with paranoia, as the prices at Elephant

> > > Pharm are generally quite up-market, e.g. $8 for a bottle of

> > > GanMaoLing (which I get wholesale, in relative small quantities, for

> > > $1.80/bottle), or $6 for a box of YinQiao; $5.75 for TianWangBuXinDan

> > > (not to mention $24/lb for ShanYao, or $15/lb for (inferior quality)

> > > zhigancao). Why then sell Health Concerns products (say Quiet

> > > Digestion, an effective favorite), at a discount? (My paranoid guess:

> > > to lure the public away from practices like mine.)

> > >

> > > On another note, Paul Unschuld points out that medicine (herb)

> > > producers trying to cut out the practitioner middle man is actually a

> > > part of " traditional Chinese medicine " . I.e. in the late Song-Jin-Yuan

> > > into Ming times, standardization of formulas by the Imperial Academy

> > > fostered a proliferation of OTC patents. Unschuld's hypothesis is that

> > > the diagnostic theoretical refinements of the " 4 great masters " (as

> > > examples) was in part at least a reaction on the part of medical

> > > practitioners to assert the importance of professional diagnosis in

> > > achieving optimum treatment.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

[Guest guest]

I agree with boycotting too; I am switching all my

patent stuff to blue poppy for this reason...

 

 

--- " "

wrote:

 

> i'm with Mike. personally, I won't use brands like

> plum flower that sell in

> health food stores. i'm a supporter of boycotts.

> i'm sure practitioners

> comprise 99% of health concerns mkt. if they saw a

> serious drop in sales,

> they would take note.

>

> patient edu is also imp. word is beginning to

> filter to patients re: the

> inferior chiro/med acu training. we need to apply

> the pressure and keep it

> on.

>

> kb

>

>

> On 3/7/07, mike Bowser <naturaldoc1

> wrote:

> >

> >

> > It sounds like better patient education combined

> with a more responsible

> > herbal corp policy of sale are needed. If enough

> pracitioners decide to

> > lobby and protest a company policy of direct sale

> of product to patients,

> > then we create an ethical listing of those who

> will not participate. We use

> > only these and let our economic dollars and

> politics to let them know. If

> > they want to go it along, then they have that

> right. Their decision will

> > decide our support and their future.

> >

> > Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

> >

> > ________________________________

> > > To:

>

Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\

ogroups.com>

> > > anne.crowley

> <anne.crowley%40comcast.net>

> > > Wed, 7 Mar 2007 13:45:23 +0000

> > > Re: Re: herb sales online (and

> OTC)

> > >

> > > Thanks for your explanation Chris. Health

> Concerns is the product my

> > patient ordered on line.

> > > Vitamin Pharamacy are doing this all the time

> (with a licensed

> > practioner somewhere on staff)

> > > My largest concern with Chinese herbs (because I

> can retail all kinds of

> > products from Vitamins to Facial products), is

> that they will take something

> > inappropriate and potentially harmful is taken

> over a long term. I prefer to

> > sell Chinese Herbs in my practice because it

> complements my acupuncture

> > treatments.

> > > Anne

> > > -------------- Original message

> ----------------------

> > > " chris_macie " <

> <%40well.com>>

> > > > I recently discovered that, for instance,

> Health Concerns products

> > > > were available on-line. In the context of my

> search that didn't bother

> > > > me, in that the on-line prices were in line

> with standard usage. That

> > > > is ca. 100% markup over cost to practitioners,

> as per Health Concerns

> > > > own marketing advice in their " handbook " , i.e.

> cost ca. $10/bottle, to

> > > > patients ca. $20. (That's more or less in line

> with prices for

> > > > supplements in general.)

> > > >

> > > > What was irking me is that a new, agressively

> marketed chain out here

> > > > in California, called " Elephant Pharm " , is

> selling Health Concerns

> > > > bottles from open shelves AT A DISCOUNT, i.e.

> standard priced bottle

> > > > at ca. $20 they're selling at ca. $15. Not

> only is Health Concerns

> > > > allowing practitioners be bypassed, but also

> under selling them. (I

> > > > suspect that Elephant Pharm gets a healthy

> volume discount also.)

> > > >

> > > > Health Concerns reply (I complained) is that

> they sell only to

> > > > practitioners, and Elephant Pharm has

> practitioners working for them

> > > > in each store. But the stuff is ordered on the

> coorporate level -- the

> > > > " practitioner " at the local franchise new

> nothing about how the stuff

> > > > was ordered, or the pricing strategy, and

> certainly that she didn't

> > > > order.

> > > >

> > > > Health Concerns also justifies the retail

> sales in terms of

> > > > practitioners who work for, say HMOs, who

> can't order/sell herbs, so

> > > > their patients can have access.

> > > >

> > > > My suspicion is still tinged with paranoia, as

> the prices at Elephant

> > > > Pharm are generally quite up-market, e.g. $8

> for a bottle of

> > > > GanMaoLing (which I get wholesale, in relative

> small quantities, for

> > > > $1.80/bottle), or $6 for a box of YinQiao;

> $5.75 for TianWangBuXinDan

> > > > (not to mention $24/lb for ShanYao, or $15/lb

> for (inferior quality)

> > > > zhigancao). Why then sell Health Concerns

> products (say Quiet

> > > > Digestion, an effective favorite), at a

> discount? (My paranoid guess:

> > > > to lure the public away from practices like

> mine.)

> > > >

> > > > On another note, Paul Unschuld points out that

> medicine (herb)

> > > > producers trying to cut out the practitioner

> middle man is actually a

> > > > part of " traditional Chinese medicine " . I.e.

> in the late Song-Jin-Yuan

> > > > into Ming times, standardization of formulas

> by the Imperial Academy

> > > > fostered a proliferation of OTC patents.

> Unschuld's hypothesis is that

> > > > the diagnostic theoretical refinements of the

> " 4 great masters " (as

> > > > examples) was in part at least a reaction on

> the part of medical

> > > > practitioners to assert the importance of

> professional diagnosis in

> > > > achieving optimum treatment.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> removed]

> > >

> >

> >

>

________

> > Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger

> >

> >

>

http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us & source=wlmai\

ltagline

> >

> >

> >

>

>

>

> --

> Kath Bartlett, LAc, MS, BA UCLA

> Oriental Medicine

> Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

>

> Asheville Center For

> 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

> Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

> kbartlett

> www.AcupunctureAsheville.com

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been

> removed]

>

>

 

 

 

 

______________________________\

____

Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate

in the Answers Food & Drink Q & A.

http://answers./dir/?link=list & sid=396545367

[Guest guest]

Does Health Concerns know this happening? When I was looking at vitamin lines,

I couldn't believe how many discount pharmacies were selling practiioner only

brands. Maybe there is just one practiitioner and other staff who is running

the online pharmacy and reselling the herbs. So this practiioner Joe Schmo

orders herbs from various companies at a volume discount and then resells them.

Sounds like house flippping, very free market, very entrepreneurial. Do I agree

with it. No. I am not sure Health Concerns has control over that.

 

Anne

-------------- Original message ----------------------

david appleton <acuapple

> I agree with boycotting too; I am switching all my

> patent stuff to blue poppy for this reason...

>

>

> --- " "

> wrote:

>

> > i'm with Mike. personally, I won't use brands like

> > plum flower that sell in

> > health food stores. i'm a supporter of boycotts.

> > i'm sure practitioners

> > comprise 99% of health concerns mkt. if they saw a

> > serious drop in sales,

> > they would take note.

> >

> > patient edu is also imp. word is beginning to

> > filter to patients re: the

> > inferior chiro/med acu training. we need to apply

> > the pressure and keep it

> > on.

> >

> > kb

> >

> >

> > On 3/7/07, mike Bowser <naturaldoc1

> > wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > It sounds like better patient education combined

> > with a more responsible

> > > herbal corp policy of sale are needed. If enough

> > pracitioners decide to

> > > lobby and protest a company policy of direct sale

> > of product to patients,

> > > then we create an ethical listing of those who

> > will not participate. We use

> > > only these and let our economic dollars and

> > politics to let them know. If

> > > they want to go it along, then they have that

> > right. Their decision will

> > > decide our support and their future.

> > >

> > > Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

> > >

> > > ________________________________

> > > > To:

> >

>

Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho

> ogroups.com>

> > > > anne.crowley

> > <anne.crowley%40comcast.net>

> > > > Wed, 7 Mar 2007 13:45:23 +0000

> > > > Re: Re: herb sales online (and

> > OTC)

> > > >

> > > > Thanks for your explanation Chris. Health

> > Concerns is the product my

> > > patient ordered on line.

> > > > Vitamin Pharamacy are doing this all the time

> > (with a licensed

> > > practioner somewhere on staff)

> > > > My largest concern with Chinese herbs (because I

> > can retail all kinds of

> > > products from Vitamins to Facial products), is

> > that they will take something

> > > inappropriate and potentially harmful is taken

> > over a long term. I prefer to

> > > sell Chinese Herbs in my practice because it

> > complements my acupuncture

> > > treatments.

> > > > Anne

> > > > -------------- Original message

> > ----------------------

> > > > " chris_macie " <

> > <%40well.com>>

> > > > > I recently discovered that, for instance,

> > Health Concerns products

> > > > > were available on-line. In the context of my

> > search that didn't bother

> > > > > me, in that the on-line prices were in line

> > with standard usage. That

> > > > > is ca. 100% markup over cost to practitioners,

> > as per Health Concerns

> > > > > own marketing advice in their " handbook " , i.e.

> > cost ca. $10/bottle, to

> > > > > patients ca. $20. (That's more or less in line

> > with prices for

> > > > > supplements in general.)

> > > > >

> > > > > What was irking me is that a new, agressively

> > marketed chain out here

> > > > > in California, called " Elephant Pharm " , is

> > selling Health Concerns

> > > > > bottles from open shelves AT A DISCOUNT, i.e.

> > standard priced bottle

> > > > > at ca. $20 they're selling at ca. $15. Not

> > only is Health Concerns

> > > > > allowing practitioners be bypassed, but also

> > under selling them. (I

> > > > > suspect that Elephant Pharm gets a healthy

> > volume discount also.)

> > > > >

> > > > > Health Concerns reply (I complained) is that

> > they sell only to

> > > > > practitioners, and Elephant Pharm has

> > practitioners working for them

> > > > > in each store. But the stuff is ordered on the

> > coorporate level -- the

> > > > > " practitioner " at the local franchise new

> > nothing about how the stuff

> > > > > was ordered, or the pricing strategy, and

> > certainly that she didn't

> > > > > order.

> > > > >

> > > > > Health Concerns also justifies the retail

> > sales in terms of

> > > > > practitioners who work for, say HMOs, who

> > can't order/sell herbs, so

> > > > > their patients can have access.

> > > > >

> > > > > My suspicion is still tinged with paranoia, as

> > the prices at Elephant

> > > > > Pharm are generally quite up-market, e.g. $8

> > for a bottle of

> > > > > GanMaoLing (which I get wholesale, in relative

> > small quantities, for

> > > > > $1.80/bottle), or $6 for a box of YinQiao;

> > $5.75 for TianWangBuXinDan

> > > > > (not to mention $24/lb for ShanYao, or $15/lb

> > for (inferior quality)

> > > > > zhigancao). Why then sell Health Concerns

> > products (say Quiet

> > > > > Digestion, an effective favorite), at a

> > discount? (My paranoid guess:

> > > > > to lure the public away from practices like

> > mine.)

> > > > >

> > > > > On another note, Paul Unschuld points out that

> > medicine (herb)

> > > > > producers trying to cut out the practitioner

> > middle man is actually a

> > > > > part of " traditional Chinese medicine " . I.e.

> > in the late Song-Jin-Yuan

> > > > > into Ming times, standardization of formulas

> > by the Imperial Academy

> > > > > fostered a proliferation of OTC patents.

> > Unschuld's hypothesis is that

> > > > > the diagnostic theoretical refinements of the

> > " 4 great masters " (as

> > > > > examples) was in part at least a reaction on

> > the part of medical

> > > > > practitioners to assert the importance of

> > professional diagnosis in

> > > > > achieving optimum treatment.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> > removed]

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> ________

> > > Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger

> > >

> > >

> >

>

http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us & source=wlmai

> ltagline

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> > --

> > Kath Bartlett, LAc, MS, BA UCLA

> > Oriental Medicine

> > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective

> >

> > Asheville Center For

> > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two

> > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777

> > kbartlett

> > www.AcupunctureAsheville.com

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> > removed]

> >

> >

>

>

>

>

>

______________________________

> ____

> Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate

> in the Answers Food & Drink Q & A.

> http://answers./dir/?link=list & sid=396545367

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I sell herbs online. Not a lot. I also sell herbs in my acupuncture office.

However even if I stopped completely and joined will all licensed

acupuncturist in a boycott that would not be noticed at all. There are

massage practioners, chiros, even MD's and a host of you name it alternative

types plus the store clerk at the health food stores and COSTCO, etc that

sell more herbs than our profession does.

 

In California Chiro's do not even have to charge or collect sales tax, but I

do and I'm certified by the state as knowledgeable in herbs and they do not

have to be.

 

I think the thing to do is to get the people in your office and cure them.

 

Have a joyous and prosperous new year

 

Peace

 

Ed Kasper LAc. & family

www.HappyHerbalist.com

[Guest guest]

An important word on boycotts...

 

Any time that members of the same industry act together in a boycott,

there are potentially serious federal antitrust liabilities. Fines

can be huge, but even the cost of legal defense alone can be enough

to force most of us into bankruptcy.

 

This thread is skating on very thin ice.

 

One of the primary things that FTC looks at during these

investigations is whether the boycott has the effect of

disadvantaging a competitor. Any boycott of an herb company with the

objective of taking retailers out of the distribution loop would

clearly disadvantage retailers and have a fair shot at being deemed

" anticompetitive. "

 

This is not the venue for boycott discussions. If anyone wants to

organize a boycott, please do it off list so as to not expose the

entire list to potential antitrust problems. I would also suggest

that you retain an attorney specializing in antitrust law before you

initiate anything of this nature.

 

Regards,

Bill Mosca, LAc

 

 

 

 

On Mar 9, 2007, at 5:41 PM, wrote:

 

> i'm with Mike. personally, I won't use brands like plum flower

> that sell in

> health food stores. i'm a supporter of boycotts. i'm sure

> practitioners

> comprise 99% of health concerns mkt. if they saw a serious drop in

> sales,

> they would take note.

>

> patient edu is also imp. word is beginning to filter to patients

> re: the

> inferior chiro/med acu training. we need to apply the pressure and

> keep it

> on.

>

> kb

>

>

> On 3/7/07, mike Bowser <naturaldoc1 wrote:

>>

>>

>> It sounds like better patient education combined with a more

>> responsible

>> herbal corp policy of sale are needed. If enough pracitioners

>> decide to

>> lobby and protest a company policy of direct sale of product to

>> patients,

>> then we create an ethical listing of those who will not

>> participate. We use

>> only these and let our economic dollars and politics to let them

>> know. If

>> they want to go it along, then they have that right. Their

>> decision will

>> decide our support and their future.

>>

>> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>>

>> ________________________________

>>> To:

>>> Chinese Medicine <Traditional_Chinese_Med

>>> icine%40>

>>> anne.crowley <anne.crowley%40comcast.net>

>>> Wed, 7 Mar 2007 13:45:23 +0000

>>> Re: Re: herb sales online (and OTC)

>>>

>>> Thanks for your explanation Chris. Health Concerns is the product my

>> patient ordered on line.

>>> Vitamin Pharamacy are doing this all the time (with a licensed

>> practioner somewhere on staff)

>>> My largest concern with Chinese herbs (because I can retail all

>>> kinds of

>> products from Vitamins to Facial products), is that they will take

>> something

>> inappropriate and potentially harmful is taken over a long term. I

>> prefer to

>> sell Chinese Herbs in my practice because it complements my

>> acupuncture

>> treatments.

>>> Anne

>>> -------------- Original message ----------------------

>>> " chris_macie " < <%40well.com>>

>>>> I recently discovered that, for instance, Health Concerns products

>>>> were available on-line. In the context of my search that didn't

>>>> bother

>>>> me, in that the on-line prices were in line with standard usage.

>>>> That

>>>> is ca. 100% markup over cost to practitioners, as per Health

>>>> Concerns

>>>> own marketing advice in their " handbook " , i.e. cost ca. $10/

>>>> bottle, to

>>>> patients ca. $20. (That's more or less in line with prices for

>>>> supplements in general.)

>>>>

>>>> What was irking me is that a new, agressively marketed chain out

>>>> here

>>>> in California, called " Elephant Pharm " , is selling Health Concerns

>>>> bottles from open shelves AT A DISCOUNT, i.e. standard priced

>>>> bottle

>>>> at ca. $20 they're selling at ca. $15. Not only is Health Concerns

>>>> allowing practitioners be bypassed, but also under selling them. (I

>>>> suspect that Elephant Pharm gets a healthy volume discount also.)

>>>>

>>>> Health Concerns reply (I complained) is that they sell only to

>>>> practitioners, and Elephant Pharm has practitioners working for

>>>> them

>>>> in each store. But the stuff is ordered on the coorporate level

>>>> -- the

>>>> " practitioner " at the local franchise new nothing about how the

>>>> stuff

>>>> was ordered, or the pricing strategy, and certainly that she didn't

>>>> order.

>>>>

>>>> Health Concerns also justifies the retail sales in terms of

>>>> practitioners who work for, say HMOs, who can't order/sell

>>>> herbs, so

>>>> their patients can have access.

>>>>

>>>> My suspicion is still tinged with paranoia, as the prices at

>>>> Elephant

>>>> Pharm are generally quite up-market, e.g. $8 for a bottle of

>>>> GanMaoLing (which I get wholesale, in relative small quantities,

>>>> for

>>>> $1.80/bottle), or $6 for a box of YinQiao; $5.75 for

>>>> TianWangBuXinDan

>>>> (not to mention $24/lb for ShanYao, or $15/lb for (inferior

>>>> quality)

>>>> zhigancao). Why then sell Health Concerns products (say Quiet

>>>> Digestion, an effective favorite), at a discount? (My paranoid

>>>> guess:

>>>> to lure the public away from practices like mine.)

>>>>

>>>> On another note, Paul Unschuld points out that medicine (herb)

>>>> producers trying to cut out the practitioner middle man is

>>>> actually a

>>>> part of " traditional Chinese medicine " . I.e. in the late Song-

>>>> Jin-Yuan

>>>> into Ming times, standardization of formulas by the Imperial

>>>> Academy

>>>> fostered a proliferation of OTC patents. Unschuld's hypothesis

>>>> is that

>>>> the diagnostic theoretical refinements of the " 4 great masters " (as

>>>> examples) was in part at least a reaction on the part of medical

>>>> practitioners to assert the importance of professional diagnosis in

>>>> achieving optimum treatment.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

[Guest guest]

I think you're over reacting on this. Firstly, the companies won't

know who's participating in the boycott. Secondly, even if they want

to take people to court, which i very much doubt, it will cause so

much bad publicity like it will rally other practitioners to carry on

the boycott and will make their situation worse.

 

I say if you want to show that you disapprove of those companies

selling patents online, don't buy them and tell others not to but

them to.

 

Attilio

www.chinesemedicinetimes.com

 

 

Chinese Medicine , Bill Mosca

<mosca wrote:

>

> An important word on boycotts...

>

> Any time that members of the same industry act together in a

boycott,

> there are potentially serious federal antitrust liabilities.

Fines

> can be huge, but even the cost of legal defense alone can be

enough

> to force most of us into bankruptcy.

>

> This thread is skating on very thin ice.

>

> One of the primary things that FTC looks at during these

> investigations is whether the boycott has the effect of

> disadvantaging a competitor. Any boycott of an herb company with

the

> objective of taking retailers out of the distribution loop would

> clearly disadvantage retailers and have a fair shot at being

deemed

> " anticompetitive. "

>

> This is not the venue for boycott discussions. If anyone wants to

> organize a boycott, please do it off list so as to not expose the

> entire list to potential antitrust problems. I would also suggest

> that you retain an attorney specializing in antitrust law before

you

> initiate anything of this nature.

>

> Regards,

> Bill Mosca, LAc

>

>

>

>

> On Mar 9, 2007, at 5:41 PM, wrote:

>

> > i'm with Mike. personally, I won't use brands like plum flower

> > that sell in

> > health food stores. i'm a supporter of boycotts. i'm sure

> > practitioners

> > comprise 99% of health concerns mkt. if they saw a serious drop

in

> > sales,

> > they would take note.

> >

> > patient edu is also imp. word is beginning to filter to

patients

> > re: the

> > inferior chiro/med acu training. we need to apply the pressure

and

> > keep it

> > on.

> >

> > kb

> >

> >

> > On 3/7/07, mike Bowser <naturaldoc1 wrote:

> >>

> >>

> >> It sounds like better patient education combined with a more

> >> responsible

> >> herbal corp policy of sale are needed. If enough pracitioners

> >> decide to

> >> lobby and protest a company policy of direct sale of product to

> >> patients,

> >> then we create an ethical listing of those who will not

> >> participate. We use

> >> only these and let our economic dollars and politics to let

them

> >> know. If

> >> they want to go it along, then they have that right. Their

> >> decision will

> >> decide our support and their future.

> >>

> >> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

> >>

> >> ________________________________

> >>> To:

> >>>

Chinese Medicine <Traditional_Chinese_Med

> >>> icine%40>

> >>> anne.crowley <anne.crowley%40comcast.net>

> >>> Wed, 7 Mar 2007 13:45:23 +0000

> >>> Re: Re: herb sales online (and OTC)

> >>>

> >>> Thanks for your explanation Chris. Health Concerns is the

product my

> >> patient ordered on line.

> >>> Vitamin Pharamacy are doing this all the time (with a licensed

> >> practioner somewhere on staff)

> >>> My largest concern with Chinese herbs (because I can retail

all

> >>> kinds of

> >> products from Vitamins to Facial products), is that they will

take

> >> something

> >> inappropriate and potentially harmful is taken over a long term.

I

> >> prefer to

> >> sell Chinese Herbs in my practice because it complements my

> >> acupuncture

> >> treatments.

> >>> Anne

> >>> -------------- Original message ----------------------

> >>> " chris_macie " < <%40well.com>>

> >>>> I recently discovered that, for instance, Health Concerns

products

> >>>> were available on-line. In the context of my search that

didn't

> >>>> bother

> >>>> me, in that the on-line prices were in line with standard

usage.

> >>>> That

> >>>> is ca. 100% markup over cost to practitioners, as per Health

> >>>> Concerns

> >>>> own marketing advice in their " handbook " , i.e. cost ca. $10/

> >>>> bottle, to

> >>>> patients ca. $20. (That's more or less in line with prices for

> >>>> supplements in general.)

> >>>>

> >>>> What was irking me is that a new, agressively marketed chain

out

> >>>> here

> >>>> in California, called " Elephant Pharm " , is selling Health

Concerns

> >>>> bottles from open shelves AT A DISCOUNT, i.e. standard priced

> >>>> bottle

> >>>> at ca. $20 they're selling at ca. $15. Not only is Health

Concerns

> >>>> allowing practitioners be bypassed, but also under selling

them. (I

> >>>> suspect that Elephant Pharm gets a healthy volume discount

also.)

> >>>>

> >>>> Health Concerns reply (I complained) is that they sell only to

> >>>> practitioners, and Elephant Pharm has practitioners working

for

> >>>> them

> >>>> in each store. But the stuff is ordered on the coorporate

level

> >>>> -- the

> >>>> " practitioner " at the local franchise new nothing about how

the

> >>>> stuff

> >>>> was ordered, or the pricing strategy, and certainly that she

didn't

> >>>> order.

> >>>>

> >>>> Health Concerns also justifies the retail sales in terms of

> >>>> practitioners who work for, say HMOs, who can't order/sell

> >>>> herbs, so

> >>>> their patients can have access.

> >>>>

> >>>> My suspicion is still tinged with paranoia, as the prices at

> >>>> Elephant

> >>>> Pharm are generally quite up-market, e.g. $8 for a bottle of

> >>>> GanMaoLing (which I get wholesale, in relative small

quantities,

> >>>> for

> >>>> $1.80/bottle), or $6 for a box of YinQiao; $5.75 for

> >>>> TianWangBuXinDan

> >>>> (not to mention $24/lb for ShanYao, or $15/lb for (inferior

> >>>> quality)

> >>>> zhigancao). Why then sell Health Concerns products (say Quiet

> >>>> Digestion, an effective favorite), at a discount? (My

paranoid

> >>>> guess:

> >>>> to lure the public away from practices like mine.)

> >>>>

> >>>> On another note, Paul Unschuld points out that medicine (herb)

> >>>> producers trying to cut out the practitioner middle man is

> >>>> actually a

> >>>> part of " traditional Chinese medicine " . I.e. in the late Song-

> >>>> Jin-Yuan

> >>>> into Ming times, standardization of formulas by the Imperial

> >>>> Academy

> >>>> fostered a proliferation of OTC patents. Unschuld's

hypothesis

> >>>> is that

> >>>> the diagnostic theoretical refinements of the " 4 great

masters " (as

> >>>> examples) was in part at least a reaction on the part of

medical

> >>>> practitioners to assert the importance of professional

diagnosis in

> >>>> achieving optimum treatment.

> >>>>

> >>>>

> >>>>

> >>>>

> >>>

[Guest guest]

My opinion on this matter is that like Bill Mosca pointed to...

if you have any special interest in setting up a boycott of companies within

your own industry,

there are legal backfirings that can happen.

Anyone should be prepared.

As Attilio stated, if this is a personal boycott, more power to you.

Everyone does it anyway. When you choose to go with one supplier over

another,

you vote with your dollars. We do this all the time.

I think the word " boycott " is kind of loaded depending on how one uses it.

Maybe a better way of putting it, would be : send some letters to the

company if you're dissatisfied about something that they do

or get others educated about this, in order for them to make their own

conscious decisions about this matter.

 

There are a lot of parameters to look at in a company:

purity of product, ethics and honesty about what they sell, and how they use

their money in giving back to the community.

 

I agree that " boycotting " is actually over-reaction to a personal

disagreement that may be taking place.

We should all use caution and conscious consideration in our actions, so

that we assist the Practice and the Oriental Medicine community at large.

There's an old saying, " When Pulling the boat, don't push the water " .

It's more useful in the long run.

 

 

 

On 3/12/07, <attiliodalberto wrote:

>

> I think you're over reacting on this. Firstly, the companies won't

> know who's participating in the boycott. Secondly, even if they want

> to take people to court, which i very much doubt, it will cause so

> much bad publicity like it will rally other practitioners to carry on

> the boycott and will make their situation worse.

>

> I say if you want to show that you disapprove of those companies

> selling patents online, don't buy them and tell others not to but

> them to.

>

> Attilio

> www.chinesemedicinetimes.com

>

> --- In

Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\

ogroups.com>,

> Bill Mosca

> <mosca wrote:

> >

> > An important word on boycotts...

> >

> > Any time that members of the same industry act together in a

> boycott,

> > there are potentially serious federal antitrust liabilities.

> Fines

> > can be huge, but even the cost of legal defense alone can be

> enough

> > to force most of us into bankruptcy.

> >

> > This thread is skating on very thin ice.

> >

> > One of the primary things that FTC looks at during these

> > investigations is whether the boycott has the effect of

> > disadvantaging a competitor. Any boycott of an herb company with

> the

> > objective of taking retailers out of the distribution loop would

> > clearly disadvantage retailers and have a fair shot at being

> deemed

> > " anticompetitive. "

> >

> > This is not the venue for boycott discussions. If anyone wants to

> > organize a boycott, please do it off list so as to not expose the

> > entire list to potential antitrust problems. I would also suggest

> > that you retain an attorney specializing in antitrust law before

> you

> > initiate anything of this nature.

> >

> > Regards,

> > Bill Mosca, LAc

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > On Mar 9, 2007, at 5:41 PM, wrote:

> >

> > > i'm with Mike. personally, I won't use brands like plum flower

> > > that sell in

> > > health food stores. i'm a supporter of boycotts. i'm sure

> > > practitioners

> > > comprise 99% of health concerns mkt. if they saw a serious drop

> in

> > > sales,

> > > they would take note.

> > >

> > > patient edu is also imp. word is beginning to filter to

> patients

> > > re: the

> > > inferior chiro/med acu training. we need to apply the pressure

> and

> > > keep it

> > > on.

> > >

> > > kb

> > >

> > >

> > > On 3/7/07, mike Bowser <naturaldoc1 wrote:

> > >>

> > >>

> > >> It sounds like better patient education combined with a more

> > >> responsible

> > >> herbal corp policy of sale are needed. If enough pracitioners

> > >> decide to

> > >> lobby and protest a company policy of direct sale of product to

> > >> patients,

> > >> then we create an ethical listing of those who will not

> > >> participate. We use

> > >> only these and let our economic dollars and politics to let

> them

> > >> know. If

> > >> they want to go it along, then they have that right. Their

> > >> decision will

> > >> decide our support and their future.

> > >>

> > >> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

> > >>

> > >> ________________________________

> > >>> To:

> > >>>

>

Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\

ogroups.com><Traditional_Chinese_Med

>

> > >>> icine%40>

> > >>> anne.crowley <anne.crowley%40comcast.net>

> > >>> Wed, 7 Mar 2007 13:45:23 +0000

> > >>> Re: Re: herb sales online (and OTC)

> > >>>

> > >>> Thanks for your explanation Chris. Health Concerns is the

> product my

> > >> patient ordered on line.

> > >>> Vitamin Pharamacy are doing this all the time (with a licensed

> > >> practioner somewhere on staff)

> > >>> My largest concern with Chinese herbs (because I can retail

> all

> > >>> kinds of

> > >> products from Vitamins to Facial products), is that they will

> take

> > >> something

> > >> inappropriate and potentially harmful is taken over a long term.

> I

> > >> prefer to

> > >> sell Chinese Herbs in my practice because it complements my

> > >> acupuncture

> > >> treatments.

> > >>> Anne

> > >>> -------------- Original message ----------------------

> > >>> " chris_macie " < <%40well.com>>

> > >>>> I recently discovered that, for instance, Health Concerns

> products

> > >>>> were available on-line. In the context of my search that

> didn't

> > >>>> bother

> > >>>> me, in that the on-line prices were in line with standard

> usage.

> > >>>> That

> > >>>> is ca. 100% markup over cost to practitioners, as per Health

> > >>>> Concerns

> > >>>> own marketing advice in their " handbook " , i.e. cost ca. $10/

> > >>>> bottle, to

> > >>>> patients ca. $20. (That's more or less in line with prices for

> > >>>> supplements in general.)

> > >>>>

> > >>>> What was irking me is that a new, agressively marketed chain

> out

> > >>>> here

> > >>>> in California, called " Elephant Pharm " , is selling Health

> Concerns

> > >>>> bottles from open shelves AT A DISCOUNT, i.e. standard priced

> > >>>> bottle

> > >>>> at ca. $20 they're selling at ca. $15. Not only is Health

> Concerns

> > >>>> allowing practitioners be bypassed, but also under selling

> them. (I

> > >>>> suspect that Elephant Pharm gets a healthy volume discount

> also.)

> > >>>>

> > >>>> Health Concerns reply (I complained) is that they sell only to

> > >>>> practitioners, and Elephant Pharm has practitioners working

> for

> > >>>> them

> > >>>> in each store. But the stuff is ordered on the coorporate

> level

> > >>>> -- the

> > >>>> " practitioner " at the local franchise new nothing about how

> the

> > >>>> stuff

> > >>>> was ordered, or the pricing strategy, and certainly that she

> didn't

> > >>>> order.

> > >>>>

> > >>>> Health Concerns also justifies the retail sales in terms of

> > >>>> practitioners who work for, say HMOs, who can't order/sell

> > >>>> herbs, so

> > >>>> their patients can have access.

> > >>>>

> > >>>> My suspicion is still tinged with paranoia, as the prices at

> > >>>> Elephant

> > >>>> Pharm are generally quite up-market, e.g. $8 for a bottle of

> > >>>> GanMaoLing (which I get wholesale, in relative small

> quantities,

> > >>>> for

> > >>>> $1.80/bottle), or $6 for a box of YinQiao; $5.75 for

> > >>>> TianWangBuXinDan

> > >>>> (not to mention $24/lb for ShanYao, or $15/lb for (inferior

> > >>>> quality)

> > >>>> zhigancao). Why then sell Health Concerns products (say Quiet

> > >>>> Digestion, an effective favorite), at a discount? (My

> paranoid

> > >>>> guess:

> > >>>> to lure the public away from practices like mine.)

> > >>>>

> > >>>> On another note, Paul Unschuld points out that medicine (herb)

> > >>>> producers trying to cut out the practitioner middle man is

> > >>>> actually a

> > >>>> part of " traditional Chinese medicine " . I.e. in the late Song-

> > >>>> Jin-Yuan

> > >>>> into Ming times, standardization of formulas by the Imperial

> > >>>> Academy

> > >>>> fostered a proliferation of OTC patents. Unschuld's

> hypothesis

> > >>>> is that

> > >>>> the diagnostic theoretical refinements of the " 4 great

> masters " (as

> > >>>> examples) was in part at least a reaction on the part of

> medical

> > >>>> practitioners to assert the importance of professional

> diagnosis in

> > >>>> achieving optimum treatment.

> > >>>>

> > >>>>

> > >>>>

> > >>>>

> > >>>

[Guest guest]

So boycotting one company to make their products less available to non

practitioners is

some how going to stop the other companies from selling their inferior and

sometimes

dangerous products (ie. chinese products with impurities) to consumers.... You

will just be

locking people in to you as a supplier for that brand.. business.

 

Your boycott would harm more than help the consumers and the profession.

 

Being a better practitioner, using custom formulas, combinations and packaging,

better

educating your patients, and various other solutions though will make a positive

difference

for those consumers you encounter, help your personal practice, help the field

as a whole

and keep you competitive with other practitioners who are not thinking " in the

box " .

 

There are many other reasons to think beyond " boycotts " and other market

terrorism

tactics. It won't solve anything in the end... never has in history. Only

education and rising

to the challenges does.

 

David Botton

 

Chinese Medicine , " "

wrote:

>

> i'm with Mike. personally, I won't use brands like plum flower that sell in

> health food stores. i'm a supporter of boycotts.

[Guest guest]

Just reading this David, I believe you are right. I have had Oriental

patients come into my room and say, they gave me this to boost my energy, I take

it every day. I don't know if it it a pure product. I don't even know if it's

right for her. It's her culture and she trusts the people that say it.

However, she is in my office, so not every thing is working properly.

 

There are Americans who are scared to death to take herbs because they read a

report of one herb harming someone. There is something behind it in all cases

that I can recall, e.g. herb laced by manufacturer, patient takes in wrong doses

(like ephedra), for wrong reason. Things go awry every day with prescription

drugs, e.g. Anna Nicole Smith (yes, I said the name). If that had been a

Chinese herb, the herb would have had the headline.

 

So we are trying to be cautious, but let's face it, consumers have to use

prudence in what they do. I have found most people to be very cautious about

herbs.

 

Anne

-------------- Original message ----------------------

" David Botton " <david

> So boycotting one company to make their products less available to non

> practitioners is

> some how going to stop the other companies from selling their inferior and

> sometimes

> dangerous products (ie. chinese products with impurities) to consumers.... You

> will just be

> locking people in to you as a supplier for that brand.. business.

>

> Your boycott would harm more than help the consumers and the profession.

>

> Being a better practitioner, using custom formulas, combinations and

packaging,

> better

> educating your patients, and various other solutions though will make a

positive

> difference

> for those consumers you encounter, help your personal practice, help the field

> as a whole

> and keep you competitive with other practitioners who are not thinking " in the

> box " .

>

> There are many other reasons to think beyond " boycotts " and other market

> terrorism

> tactics. It won't solve anything in the end... never has in history. Only

> education and rising

> to the challenges does.

>

> David Botton

>

> Chinese Medicine , " "

> wrote:

> >

> > i'm with Mike. personally, I won't use brands like plum flower that sell in

> > health food stores. i'm a supporter of boycotts.

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Attilio,

 

I respectfully but strongly disagree.

 

There are practitioners affiliated with various herb companies on

this list. So these companies likely already know that this list is

being used to initiate a boycott.

 

None of these companies (herb companies or herb retailers) need to

initiate a law suit. Legal action in antitrust cases is initiated by

the Federal Trade Commission and the US Dept of Justice Antitrust

Division based only on whether they feel that a case might exist.

These agencies may initiate an investigation with or without a

complaint from one of the affected companies.

 

This list leaves a permanent electronic record that can be subpoenaed

in any future investigation. Anyone calling for a boycott could be

individually named in the investigation. List moderators and owners

could also be vulnerable if they allowed such discussions to take place.

 

Finally, I used to have a " this can't happen to me " attitude on these

things. But these investigations do happen in this profession. Just

five years ago there was an FTC boycott investigation that alleged

that members of this profession were illegally boycotting certain

insurance companies. Currently, there is at least one active (or

recently active) antitrust investigation of an AOM organization in

the US. It can happen to us.

 

It's just not worth the risk. That simple.

 

--Bill.

 

 

 

 

On Mar 12, 2007, at 1:23 PM, wrote:

 

> I think you're over reacting on this. Firstly, the companies won't

> know who's participating in the boycott. Secondly, even if they want

> to take people to court, which i very much doubt, it will cause so

> much bad publicity like it will rally other practitioners to carry on

> the boycott and will make their situation worse.

>

> I say if you want to show that you disapprove of those companies

> selling patents online, don't buy them and tell others not to but

> them to.

>

> Attilio

> www.chinesemedicinetimes.com

>

>

> Chinese Medicine , Bill Mosca

> <mosca wrote:

>>

>> An important word on boycotts...

>>

>> Any time that members of the same industry act together in a

> boycott,

>> there are potentially serious federal antitrust liabilities.

> Fines

>> can be huge, but even the cost of legal defense alone can be

> enough

>> to force most of us into bankruptcy.

>>

>> This thread is skating on very thin ice.

>>

>> One of the primary things that FTC looks at during these

>> investigations is whether the boycott has the effect of

>> disadvantaging a competitor. Any boycott of an herb company with

> the

>> objective of taking retailers out of the distribution loop would

>> clearly disadvantage retailers and have a fair shot at being

> deemed

>> " anticompetitive. "

>>

>> This is not the venue for boycott discussions. If anyone wants to

>> organize a boycott, please do it off list so as to not expose the

>> entire list to potential antitrust problems. I would also suggest

>> that you retain an attorney specializing in antitrust law before

> you

>> initiate anything of this nature.

>>

>> Regards,

>> Bill Mosca, LAc

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> On Mar 9, 2007, at 5:41 PM, wrote:

>>

>>> i'm with Mike. personally, I won't use brands like plum flower

>>> that sell in

>>> health food stores. i'm a supporter of boycotts. i'm sure

>>> practitioners

>>> comprise 99% of health concerns mkt. if they saw a serious drop

> in

>>> sales,

>>> they would take note.

>>>

>>> patient edu is also imp. word is beginning to filter to

> patients

>>> re: the

>>> inferior chiro/med acu training. we need to apply the pressure

> and

>>> keep it

>>> on.

>>>

>>> kb

>>>

>>>

>>> On 3/7/07, mike Bowser <naturaldoc1 wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> It sounds like better patient education combined with a more

>>>> responsible

>>>> herbal corp policy of sale are needed. If enough pracitioners

>>>> decide to

>>>> lobby and protest a company policy of direct sale of product to

>>>> patients,

>>>> then we create an ethical listing of those who will not

>>>> participate. We use

>>>> only these and let our economic dollars and politics to let

> them

>>>> know. If

>>>> they want to go it along, then they have that right. Their

>>>> decision will

>>>> decide our support and their future.

>>>>

>>>> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>>>>

>>>> ________________________________

>>>>> To:

>>>>>

> Chinese Medicine <Traditional_Chinese_Med

>>>>> icine%40>

>>>>> anne.crowley <anne.crowley%40comcast.net>

>>>>> Wed, 7 Mar 2007 13:45:23 +0000

>>>>> Re: Re: herb sales online (and OTC)

>>>>>

>>>>> Thanks for your explanation Chris. Health Concerns is the

> product my

>>>> patient ordered on line.

>>>>> Vitamin Pharamacy are doing this all the time (with a licensed

>>>> practioner somewhere on staff)

>>>>> My largest concern with Chinese herbs (because I can retail

> all

>>>>> kinds of

>>>> products from Vitamins to Facial products), is that they will

> take

>>>> something

>>>> inappropriate and potentially harmful is taken over a long term.

> I

>>>> prefer to

>>>> sell Chinese Herbs in my practice because it complements my

>>>> acupuncture

>>>> treatments.

>>>>> Anne

>>>>> -------------- Original message ----------------------

>>>>> " chris_macie " < <%40well.com>>

>>>>>> I recently discovered that, for instance, Health Concerns

> products

>>>>>> were available on-line. In the context of my search that

> didn't

>>>>>> bother

>>>>>> me, in that the on-line prices were in line with standard

> usage.

>>>>>> That

>>>>>> is ca. 100% markup over cost to practitioners, as per Health

>>>>>> Concerns

>>>>>> own marketing advice in their " handbook " , i.e. cost ca. $10/

>>>>>> bottle, to

>>>>>> patients ca. $20. (That's more or less in line with prices for

>>>>>> supplements in general.)

>>>>>>

>>>>>> What was irking me is that a new, agressively marketed chain

> out

>>>>>> here

>>>>>> in California, called " Elephant Pharm " , is selling Health

> Concerns

>>>>>> bottles from open shelves AT A DISCOUNT, i.e. standard priced

>>>>>> bottle

>>>>>> at ca. $20 they're selling at ca. $15. Not only is Health

> Concerns

>>>>>> allowing practitioners be bypassed, but also under selling

> them. (I

>>>>>> suspect that Elephant Pharm gets a healthy volume discount

> also.)

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Health Concerns reply (I complained) is that they sell only to

>>>>>> practitioners, and Elephant Pharm has practitioners working

> for

>>>>>> them

>>>>>> in each store. But the stuff is ordered on the coorporate

> level

>>>>>> -- the

>>>>>> " practitioner " at the local franchise new nothing about how

> the

>>>>>> stuff

>>>>>> was ordered, or the pricing strategy, and certainly that she

> didn't

>>>>>> order.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Health Concerns also justifies the retail sales in terms of

>>>>>> practitioners who work for, say HMOs, who can't order/sell

>>>>>> herbs, so

>>>>>> their patients can have access.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> My suspicion is still tinged with paranoia, as the prices at

>>>>>> Elephant

>>>>>> Pharm are generally quite up-market, e.g. $8 for a bottle of

>>>>>> GanMaoLing (which I get wholesale, in relative small

> quantities,

>>>>>> for

>>>>>> $1.80/bottle), or $6 for a box of YinQiao; $5.75 for

>>>>>> TianWangBuXinDan

>>>>>> (not to mention $24/lb for ShanYao, or $15/lb for (inferior

>>>>>> quality)

>>>>>> zhigancao). Why then sell Health Concerns products (say Quiet

>>>>>> Digestion, an effective favorite), at a discount? (My

> paranoid

>>>>>> guess:

>>>>>> to lure the public away from practices like mine.)

>>>>>>

>>>>>> On another note, Paul Unschuld points out that medicine (herb)

>>>>>> producers trying to cut out the practitioner middle man is

>>>>>> actually a

>>>>>> part of " traditional Chinese medicine " . I.e. in the late Song-

>>>>>> Jin-Yuan

>>>>>> into Ming times, standardization of formulas by the Imperial

>>>>>> Academy

>>>>>> fostered a proliferation of OTC patents. Unschuld's

> hypothesis

>>>>>> is that

>>>>>> the diagnostic theoretical refinements of the " 4 great

> masters " (as

>>>>>> examples) was in part at least a reaction on the part of

> medical

>>>>>> practitioners to assert the importance of professional

> diagnosis in

>>>>>> achieving optimum treatment.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>

[Guest guest]

Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:58:21 0700, Bill Mosca <mosca wrote:

>> I used to have a " this can't happen to me " attitude on these

things. But these investigations do happen in this profession. Just

five years ago there was an FTC boycott investigation that alleged

that members of this profession were illegally boycotting certain

insurance companies. Currently, there is at least one active (or

recently active) antitrust investigation of an AOM organization in

the US. It can happen to us.

 

What you've said is true, and to be taken into account. On the other

hand, we needn't turn our back on possible forms of action. In an MD

publication recently I read of legal action being taken against

several large insurance companies on grounds of " racketeering " ; I

think it was by several State medical associations. The charge was

something like systematically conspiring to deny claims.

 

At some point, as we garner more and stronger State laws, and as our

professional organizations grow out of the provincial turf-wars (as

in the recent national merger), and we all get around to joining and

supporting them, the unity and resources will be there to take

actions, legally and politically. A form of creativity, as David

Botton suggests, on another level.

 

You, Bill, should be able to offer some helpful hints on legitimate

ways of approaching activism.

 

 

 

 

--

 

 

Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.13/725 - Release 3/17/2007 12:33

PM