Re-conceptualizing menstruation as a disease in need of treatment

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/op...agewanted=all#
Final Period

The New York Times
July 17, 2007
Op-Ed Contributor
By KAREN HOUPPERT

Baltimore

IN May the Food and Drug Administration approved a new birth control
pill, Lybrel. It is as effective at preventing pregnancy as the other
pills already out there (about 98 percent) but boasts one advantage:
Women who take it will never get their periods.

Lybrel is landing on pharmacy shelves this month. And now war has been
declared on menstruation.

Already the first few volleys in this battle have been exchanged. Gird
yourselves, women, for a barrage of advertising and research
highlighting the debilitating effects of periods and the joys of
menstrual suppression.

After all, periods and their mood swings are bad for family values
(who wants to have a stay-at-home mom when she's so darn cranky?), bad
for women's health (women were never meant to menstruate so much;
natural selection designed their bodies for back-to-back pregnancies
and breast-feeding), bad for the fashion industry (how can beige be
the new black if women won't wear it all month?) and bad for the
economy (everybody knows women take to their beds at the merest
whisper of "cramps," fueling the nation's employee-absentee rate).
Western civilization, it seems, hinges on our ability to wrangle our
messy cycles to the ground and stomp 'em out once and for all.

Sound absurd?

In a presentation by Lybrel's maker, Wyeth, to investors and analysts
last October, Dr. Ginger D. Constantine, the company's therapeutic
director for women's health, laid the groundwork. Citing company-
backed studies, she reported that menstruating women feel less
effective at work and take more sick days. Not only that, but they
don't exercise and they wear dark clothes more often, she said.

Suddenly, news articles are weighing the pros and cons of our monthly
cycles. And while it's great that the American news media are, for a
moment, challenging the culture of concealment that typically
surrounds the topic of menstruation, history shows that such debates
are, well, cyclical.

It seems every time women start demanding access to this or that,
there is a rash of studies "proving" that menstrual cycles render them
unsuitable. In the 1870s and 1880s, when Americans were debating the
value of higher education for women, a flurry of research asserted
that women's cycling constitutions made them unfit for sustained
mental and physical labor. Henry Maudsley, a British doctor, reflected
popular opinion - dressed up as "scientific truth" - when he observed
that menstruation doomed girls to failure in college.

Comparing boys and girls, Maudsley insisted in an article, was "not a
question of two bodies and minds that are in equal physical condition,
but of one body and mind capable of sustained and regular hard labor,
and of another body and mind which one quarter of each month, during
the best years of life, is more or less sick and unfit for hard work."
Maudsley's definition of "hard work" was unclear: no one worried that
the fragile cook, servant girl or farmer's wife was being overtaxed
during any time of the month.

After women pressed ahead, attended college and excelled in the halls
of learning, the debate about menstrual cycles shifted from their
suitability for higher education to their suitability for public life
in general. When the suffragists asked to participate in the political
process, experts retaliated with more research proving that women
belonged in the domestic sphere; menstruation figured prominently
among the reasons.

Once women won the right to vote in 1920, the menstruation-equals-
inadequacy debate ebbed for a while. In fact, two decades later, new
proof arrived that women were perfectly fit and capable - even when
bleeding - and therefore should step right up and join the war effort.
When Rosie the Riveter was needed in American factories and recruits
in the Women's Army Corps, the War Department produced films telling
women of the abundance of scientific evidence proving periods are no
big deal.

A 1942 American propaganda film, "Strictly Personal," for example,
coached novice Wacs on nutrition, rest and exercise. In one scene, a
soldier lies listlessly on her cot - "I can't drill today, I feel
unwell," she whines - but a fellow Wac tells her to buck up. And a
voiceover "doctor" explains: "That's Victorian stuff. And so is that
trash about nerves and sensibility during this period." Menstruation,
he says, "is no excuse for absenteeism and self-coddling."

But then the war ended, and Rosie and the Wacs were retired - and
shown a fresh batch of studies proving that children need their moms
at home, that the workplace is potentially hazardous to women's unborn
children and that women's cycles make them less efficient workers than
men. By 1953, the affliction premenstrual syndrome turned up in the
medical literature.

Someone cynical might suggest that research highlighting
menstruation's distressing consequences bubbles to the surface every
time the public feels anxious over women's expanding roles. (Say, the
possibility that there might be a menopausal woman in the White House
- and yes, you can't win for losing here, given that our periods
allegedly drive us to distraction and their cessation does the same.)
So take today's hoopla over menstrual suppression with a grain of
ibuprofen.

While it may be good news for the 8 percent of women who have
debilitating periods (a constellation of symptoms known as
premenstrual dysphoric disorder), the rest of us may be puzzled by the
fuss. Sure, getting our periods can be a bother sometimes, but after
the traumatic moment of menarche - "How can this be happening to me
when the sixth-grade pool party is tomorrow and I have no idea where
that tampon goes?" - most of us get used to it.

It just is.

This is not a particularly profitable attitude for Wyeth, angling for
its share of the $1.7 billion annual American market for birth control
pills. It's also not terribly useful for Barr, which makes Seasonale,
an oral contraceptive that reduces women's periods to once every three
months. Nor for Watson, which sells a generic equivalent.

So what's a poor company to do? Re-conceptualize menstruation as a
disease in need of treatment.

And what's a poor menstruating woman to do? Get cranky with the
prophets who offer to cure us of menstruation; who minimize the
complex interplay of hormones and their many roles in our bodies; who
gloss over the still unknown long-term effects of menstrual
suppression; who promise that cycle-free women are better lovers,
mothers, workers.

Or just don't buy it.

Karen Houppert is the author of "The Curse: Confronting the Last
Unmentionable Taboo, Menstruation."

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

JustGB <gettingbttr@gmail.com> wrote:

> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/op...agewanted=all#
> Final Period
>
> The New York Times
> July 17, 2007
> Op-Ed Contributor
> By KAREN HOUPPERT
>
> Baltimore
>
-snip-

> So what's a poor company to do? Re-conceptualize menstruation as a
> disease in need of treatment.

I have been away on vacation. 3 weeks in Alaska, Nevada and California.
And watching American TV with its plethora of "health" ads was
eye-opening. So many ads touting some pill or other for just about
anything a body can possibly experience while quickly listing all the
side-effects and cautions just has to influence people's view on what's
normal (i.e. perfect = normal) and whether or not to take a pill to
achieve it.

And I was reminded of my surprise at discovering here in one thread that
so few of you thought anyone could be still drug-free at middle-age. But
after seeing all the pharma ads, I understand better the assumption that
everybody takes something.

Me, I'm still having my periods. They have never been a problem. Ever.

--
Keera in Norway * Think big. Shrink to fit.
http://home.online.no/~kafox/

"Keera Ann Fox" <thinkbig.shrinktofit@online.no> wrote in message
news:1i2nlkw.ckojvb16j3aw9N%thinkbig.shrinktofit@o nline.no...
> JustGB <gettingbttr@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/op...agewanted=all#
>> Final Period
>>
>> The New York Times
>> July 17, 2007
>> Op-Ed Contributor
>> By KAREN HOUPPERT
>>
>> Baltimore
>>
> -snip-
>
>> So what's a poor company to do? Re-conceptualize menstruation as a
>> disease in need of treatment.
>
> I have been away on vacation. 3 weeks in Alaska, Nevada and California.

Wow - that was a huge vacation!

> And watching American TV with its plethora of "health" ads was
> eye-opening. So many ads touting some pill or other for just about
> anything a body can possibly experience while quickly listing all the
> side-effects and cautions just has to influence people's view on what's
> normal (i.e. perfect = normal) and whether or not to take a pill to
> achieve it.
>
> And I was reminded of my surprise at discovering here in one thread that
> so few of you thought anyone could be still drug-free at middle-age.

If I didn't have hyperthyroidism - prob. the biggest player of the lot,
hypertension (might be thyroid-related - is otherwise out-of-the-blue), or
umpteen allergies, that might be a possibility. I'd prefer to not have
prescription drugs. But with those consitions...

But
> after seeing all the pharma ads, I understand better the assumption that
> everybody takes something.
>
> Me, I'm still having my periods. They have never been a problem. Ever.

I never considered periods, by themselves, to be a problem. They were,
luckily, pretty run-of-the-mill for me. (Well, until peri, when they got
obnoxious for a few years - the heavy, clotty ones, w/some floods thrown in
the mix.) The killer cramps that accompanied the periods were the problem.

Cathy

Keera Ann Fox wrote:
> JustGB <gettingbttr@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/op...agewanted=all#
>> Final Period
>>
>> The New York Times
>> July 17, 2007
>> Op-Ed Contributor
>> By KAREN HOUPPERT
>>
>> Baltimore
>>
> -snip-
>
>> So what's a poor company to do? Re-conceptualize menstruation as a
>> disease in need of treatment.

Menstruation has long been viewed as a taboo state, or unclean
state, in many cultures. The article points out the checkered
history of attempts of the "male establishment" to make it into
an untreatable disease state over that past century+ in the US.
(What has the historical view and treatment of it been in
Europe?) And the drug companies have been promoting remedies for
some portions of it - painkillers, mostly - ever since the
aspirin and its successors came on the market. Most teenage
girls in my HS carried a little box of Midol in their purses. (I
suspect that laudanum was promoted for the same purpose before
opiates were restricted 100 years or so ago.) But now the drug
companies have a real opportunity - turn it off completely! And
to do so, they have to convince women that it is a state of
sickness - although some don't take much convincing, and if I
suffered from debilitating cramps, frex, I probably wouldn't either.

> I have been away on vacation. 3 weeks in Alaska, Nevada and California.

Wow! What parts did you visit? Got pictures?

> And watching American TV with its plethora of "health" ads was
> eye-opening. So many ads touting some pill or other for just about
> anything a body can possibly experience while quickly listing all the
> side-effects and cautions just has to influence people's view on what's
> normal (i.e. perfect = normal) and whether or not to take a pill to
> achieve it.

I guess I'm numbed by it all... that, and because I mute or
switch channels or fast forward when the commercials come up.
But you're right that it's excessive. The FTC's decision to
allow big pharm to advertise prescription meds was a bad one,
IMO. There were already plenty of ads for OTC meds... some
pretty funny (Were you in the US when the campaign for "Mama Mia,
what a spicy meatball!" was on? ) The prescription med ads that
really get me are the ones that don't specify the condition they
are supposed to treat, like the one that showed people on a
relaxing vacation and suggested that you talk with your doctor,
implying that Xanax would make you feel so much better.

> And I was reminded of my surprise at discovering here in one thread that
> so few of you thought anyone could be still drug-free at middle-age. But
> after seeing all the pharma ads, I understand better the assumption that
> everybody takes something.

I'm down to two prescription meds, one because my gut doesn't
absorb bile properly, and the other for GERD. I'd be happy to go
off them if I could figure out a behavioral means of controlling
the conditions - that worked (I've tried).

> Me, I'm still having my periods. They have never been a problem. Ever.

You're lucky in that respect! I had bad cramps when I was a
teenager, but they mostly diminished over time. For a while I
got bad intestinal cramps (IBD) on the first day or two of my
periods, but that also went away on its own. And wearing a pad
and belt, before I started using tampons, was the pits! Other
than that, menstruation was just an annoyance. Later,
endometrial cancer... that was a whole 'nuther thing!

FurPaw

--
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched,
every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense
a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

To reply, unleash the dog.

"FurPaw" <furrealpawdog@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:sK6dncU5a-iWZCHbnZ2dnUVZ_s6mnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Keera Ann Fox wrote:
>> JustGB <gettingbttr@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/op...agewanted=all#
>>> Final Period
>>>
>>> The New York Times
>>> July 17, 2007
>>> Op-Ed Contributor
>>> By KAREN HOUPPERT
>>>
>>> Baltimore
>>>
>> -snip-
>>
>>> So what's a poor company to do? Re-conceptualize menstruation as a
>>> disease in need of treatment.
>
> Menstruation has long been viewed as a taboo state, or unclean state, in
> many cultures. The article points out the checkered history of attempts
> of the "male establishment" to make it into an untreatable disease state
> over that past century+ in the US. (What has the historical view and
> treatment of it been in Europe?) And the drug companies have been
> promoting remedies for some portions of it - painkillers, mostly - ever
> since the aspirin and its successors came on the market. Most teenage
> girls in my HS carried a little box of Midol in their purses. (I suspect
> that laudanum was promoted for the same purpose before opiates were
> restricted 100 years or so ago.) But now the drug companies have a real
> opportunity - turn it off completely! And to do so, they have to convince
> women that it is a state of sickness - although some don't take much
> convincing, and if I suffered from debilitating cramps, frex, I probably
> wouldn't either.

Well... I actually never viewed it as an illness (illness/disease = state of
sickness?); in fact, that was one thing I found so irking about those killer
cramps: that a perfectly normal state of being, without being ill, could
produce such incredible pain! IOW, I sure as hell *felt* ill, but wasn't.

>> I have been away on vacation. 3 weeks in Alaska, Nevada and California.
>
> Wow! What parts did you visit? Got pictures?
>
>> And watching American TV with its plethora of "health" ads was
>> eye-opening. So many ads touting some pill or other for just about
>> anything a body can possibly experience while quickly listing all the
>> side-effects and cautions just has to influence people's view on what's
>> normal (i.e. perfect = normal) and whether or not to take a pill to
>> achieve it.
>
> I guess I'm numbed by it all...

Yeah, it pretty much just slides by me at this point - sort of a background
noise which I no longer take much notice of, if at all.

that, and because I mute or
> switch channels or fast forward when the commercials come up. But you're
> right that it's excessive.

Hence becoming background baloney...

The FTC's decision to
> allow big pharm to advertise prescription meds was a bad one, IMO. There
> were already plenty of ads for OTC meds... some pretty funny (Were you in
> the US when the campaign for "Mama Mia, what a spicy meatball!" was on? )

My 'favorite' one was in the 60's, for Excedrin (aspirin, acetaminophen, &
caffeine combo OTC painkiller for those not familiar w/it). Featured
someone pounding loudly on a piano, IIRC, & recommended taking Excdrin for a
pounding headache. I figured one'd possibly wind up a headache just from
listening to that ad & then of course need an Excedrin to get rid of it. ;-)

Cathy



The prescription med ads that
> really get me are the ones that don't specify the condition they are
> supposed to treat, like the one that showed people on a relaxing vacation
> and suggested that you talk with your doctor, implying that Xanax would
> make you feel so much better.
>
>> And I was reminded of my surprise at discovering here in one thread that
>> so few of you thought anyone could be still drug-free at middle-age. But
>> after seeing all the pharma ads, I understand better the assumption that
>> everybody takes something.
>
> I'm down to two prescription meds, one because my gut doesn't absorb bile
> properly, and the other for GERD. I'd be happy to go off them if I could
> figure out a behavioral means of controlling the conditions - that worked
> (I've tried).
>
>> Me, I'm still having my periods. They have never been a problem. Ever.
>
> You're lucky in that respect! I had bad cramps when I was a teenager, but
> they mostly diminished over time. For a while I got bad intestinal cramps
> (IBD) on the first day or two of my periods, but that also went away on
> its own. And wearing a pad and belt, before I started using tampons, was
> the pits! Other than that, menstruation was just an annoyance. Later,
> endometrial cancer... that was a whole 'nuther thing!
>
> FurPaw
>
> --
> "Every gun that is made, every warship launched,
> every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense
> a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
> those who are cold and are not clothed."
> - Dwight D. Eisenhower
>
> To reply, unleash the dog.

FurPaw <furrealpawdog@gmail.com> wrote:

> Keera Ann Fox wrote:
> > JustGB <gettingbttr@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/op...agewanted=all#
> >> Final Period
> >>
> >> The New York Times
> >> July 17, 2007
> >> Op-Ed Contributor
> >> By KAREN HOUPPERT
> >>
> >> Baltimore
> >>
> > -snip-
> >
> >> So what's a poor company to do? Re-conceptualize menstruation as a
> >> disease in need of treatment.
>
> Menstruation has long been viewed as a taboo state, or unclean
> state, in many cultures. The article points out the checkered
> history of attempts of the "male establishment" to make it into
> an untreatable disease state over that past century+ in the US.
> (What has the historical view and treatment of it been in
> Europe?) And the drug companies have been promoting remedies for
> some portions of it - painkillers, mostly - ever since the
> aspirin and its successors came on the market. Most teenage
> girls in my HS carried a little box of Midol in their purses. (I
> suspect that laudanum was promoted for the same purpose before
> opiates were restricted 100 years or so ago.) But now the drug
> companies have a real opportunity - turn it off completely! And
> to do so, they have to convince women that it is a state of
> sickness - although some don't take much convincing, and if I
> suffered from debilitating cramps, frex, I probably wouldn't either.

Fortunately, I didn't grow up in a culture where it was taboo. Quite the
contrary: "Menstruation is no excuse for missing PE!!!" Darn it. :-)

> > I have been away on vacation. 3 weeks in Alaska, Nevada and California.
>
> Wow! What parts did you visit?

1 week's cruise in SE Alaska; mom in northern Nevada; childhood friend
in northern California.

> Got pictures?

Oh, yes. Almost 3 GB's worth. It'll be a while before I get it all
sorted and published online. :-)

> > And watching American TV with its plethora of "health" ads was
> > eye-opening. So many ads touting some pill or other for just about
> > anything a body can possibly experience while quickly listing all the
> > side-effects and cautions just has to influence people's view on what's
> > normal (i.e. perfect = normal) and whether or not to take a pill to
> > achieve it.
>
> I guess I'm numbed by it all... that, and because I mute or
> switch channels or fast forward when the commercials come up.
> But you're right that it's excessive.

I was amused by the names they give these products, like Exubera.

The other thing that fascinated me, was the American focus on smells.
:-) But Norway's catching up in that area. Soon, every home here will
smell like Glade.

> The FTC's decision to allow big pharm to advertise prescription meds was a
> bad one, IMO. There were already plenty of ads for OTC meds... some
> pretty funny (Were you in the US when the campaign for "Mama Mia, what a
> spicy meatball!" was on? )

Maybe. Few ads stick in my brain. Nobody in my family had indigestion,
so it wouldn't be a product that required attention.

> The prescription med ads that really get me are the ones that don't
> specify the condition they are supposed to treat, like the one that showed
> people on a relaxing vacation and suggested that you talk with your
> doctor, implying that Xanax would make you feel so much better.

I think I saw something like that. They'll sell you anything, for any
reason.

> > And I was reminded of my surprise at discovering here in one thread that
> > so few of you thought anyone could be still drug-free at middle-age. But
> > after seeing all the pharma ads, I understand better the assumption that
> > everybody takes something.
>
> I'm down to two prescription meds, one because my gut doesn't
> absorb bile properly, and the other for GERD. I'd be happy to go
> off them if I could figure out a behavioral means of controlling
> the conditions - that worked (I've tried).

Out of curiosity: Have you tried EFT or acupuncture? Me, I find that acv
in a glass of water helps when I (occassionally) experience GERD.

> > Me, I'm still having my periods. They have never been a problem. Ever.
>
> You're lucky in that respect! I had bad cramps when I was a
> teenager, but they mostly diminished over time. For a while I
> got bad intestinal cramps (IBD) on the first day or two of my
> periods, but that also went away on its own. And wearing a pad
> and belt, before I started using tampons, was the pits!

I remember those. The worst part about menstruation was the stuff you
had to have in your panties (and the stains on said panties). Girls
today have it good!

> Other than that, menstruation was just an annoyance. Later, endometrial
> cancer... that was a whole 'nuther thing!

And a real disease.

--
Keera in Norway * Think big. Shrink to fit.
http://home.online.no/~kafox/

Cathy F. <clfrclfr@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote:

> "Keera Ann Fox" <thinkbig.shrinktofit@online.no> wrote in message
> news:1i2nlkw.ckojvb16j3aw9N%thinkbig.shrinktofit@o nline.no...
> > JustGB <gettingbttr@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/op...agewanted=all#
> >> Final Period
> >>
> >> The New York Times
> >> July 17, 2007
> >> Op-Ed Contributor
> >> By KAREN HOUPPERT
> >>
> >> Baltimore
> >>
> > -snip-
> >
> >> So what's a poor company to do? Re-conceptualize menstruation as a
> >> disease in need of treatment.
> >
> > I have been away on vacation. 3 weeks in Alaska, Nevada and California.
>
> Wow - that was a huge vacation!

Not by Norwegian/European standards. :-) 1 week cruise, 2 weeks staying
with mother, then friend.

> > And watching American TV with its plethora of "health" ads was
> > eye-opening. So many ads touting some pill or other for just about
> > anything a body can possibly experience while quickly listing all the
> > side-effects and cautions just has to influence people's view on what's
> > normal (i.e. perfect = normal) and whether or not to take a pill to
> > achieve it.
> >
> > And I was reminded of my surprise at discovering here in one thread that
> > so few of you thought anyone could be still drug-free at middle-age.
>
> If I didn't have hyperthyroidism - prob. the biggest player of the lot,
> hypertension (might be thyroid-related - is otherwise out-of-the-blue), or
> umpteen allergies, that might be a possibility. I'd prefer to not have
> prescription drugs. But with those consitions...

Well, I'm not talking about people having real diseases. Nor were many
of the pharma ads. They were targeted at body parts not working as well
as they should. But what got me wasn't that people can have umpteen
things wrong with them, but all the _advertising_ related to it! Just
like all the cold cereal and toy ads targeted at kids (and you know the
effect those have).

Note: Norway bans all advertising of prescription drugs. The only ads
you'll see are discrete magazine ads for OTC stuff. So I was having a
bit of a culture shock. Still, I can't imagine that seeing so many ads
doesn't have some kind of (subliminal) impact.

> > But after seeing all the pharma ads, I understand better the assumption
> > that everybody takes something.
> >
> > Me, I'm still having my periods. They have never been a problem. Ever.
>
> I never considered periods, by themselves, to be a problem. They were,
> luckily, pretty run-of-the-mill for me. (Well, until peri, when they got
> obnoxious for a few years - the heavy, clotty ones, w/some floods thrown in
> the mix.) The killer cramps that accompanied the periods were the problem.

Never had cramps, either.

--
Keera in Norway * Think big. Shrink to fit.
http://home.online.no/~kafox/

"Keera Ann Fox" <thinkbig.shrinktofit@online.no> wrote in message
news:1i2onzg.vj8j28x02ouyN%thinkbig.shrinktofit@on line.no...
> Cathy F. <clfrclfr@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote:
>
>> "Keera Ann Fox" <thinkbig.shrinktofit@online.no> wrote in message
>> news:1i2nlkw.ckojvb16j3aw9N%thinkbig.shrinktofit@o nline.no...
>> > JustGB <gettingbttr@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/op...agewanted=all#
>> >> Final Period
>> >>
>> >> The New York Times
>> >> July 17, 2007
>> >> Op-Ed Contributor
>> >> By KAREN HOUPPERT
>> >>
>> >> Baltimore
>> >>
>> > -snip-
>> >
>> >> So what's a poor company to do? Re-conceptualize menstruation as a
>> >> disease in need of treatment.
>> >
>> > I have been away on vacation. 3 weeks in Alaska, Nevada and California.
>>
>> Wow - that was a huge vacation!
>
> Not by Norwegian/European standards. :-) 1 week cruise, 2 weeks staying
> with mother, then friend.
>
>> > And watching American TV with its plethora of "health" ads was
>> > eye-opening. So many ads touting some pill or other for just about
>> > anything a body can possibly experience while quickly listing all the
>> > side-effects and cautions just has to influence people's view on what's
>> > normal (i.e. perfect = normal) and whether or not to take a pill to
>> > achieve it.
>> >
>> > And I was reminded of my surprise at discovering here in one thread
>> > that
>> > so few of you thought anyone could be still drug-free at middle-age.
>>
>> If I didn't have hyperthyroidism - prob. the biggest player of the lot,
>> hypertension (might be thyroid-related - is otherwise out-of-the-blue),
>> or
>> umpteen allergies, that might be a possibility. I'd prefer to not have
>> prescription drugs. But with those consitions...
>
> Well, I'm not talking about people having real diseases.

I assumed you were incl. those in there. Prob. because the ads for Procrit
seem to make it to my brain the most. (And maybe because I used to have a
cat to whom I gave Procrit injections for her CFR-related anemia.)

Nor were many
> of the pharma ads. They were targeted at body parts not working as well
> as they should. But what got me wasn't that people can have umpteen
> things wrong with them, but all the _advertising_ related to it!Just
> like all the cold cereal and toy ads targeted at kids (and you know the
> effect those have).
>
> Note: Norway bans all advertising of prescription drugs. The only ads
> you'll see are discrete magazine ads for OTC stuff. So I was having a
> bit of a culture shock. Still, I can't imagine that seeing so many ads
> doesn't have some kind of (subliminal) impact.
>
>> > But after seeing all the pharma ads, I understand better the assumption
>> > that everybody takes something.
>> >
>> > Me, I'm still having my periods. They have never been a problem. Ever.
>>
>> I never considered periods, by themselves, to be a problem. They were,
>> luckily, pretty run-of-the-mill for me. (Well, until peri, when they got
>> obnoxious for a few years - the heavy, clotty ones, w/some floods thrown
>> in
>> the mix.) The killer cramps that accompanied the periods were the
>> problem.
>
> Never had cramps, either.

Then consider yourself to be ultra-lucky in that regard.

Cathy

>
> --
> Keera in Norway * Think big. Shrink to fit.
> http://home.online.no/~kafox/

On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:46:04 +0200, thinkbig.shrinktofit@online.no
(Keera Ann Fox) wrote:

>Cathy F. <clfrclfr@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote:
>
>> > I have been away on vacation. 3 weeks in Alaska, Nevada and California.
>>
>> Wow - that was a huge vacation!
>
>Not by Norwegian/European standards. :-) 1 week cruise, 2 weeks staying
>with mother, then friend.
>
Indeed European I think, we usually get 25 working days off in a year,
mostly taken as 3 weeks in summer (15 days), another week with
christmas or in spring, and a few days just when you want or need a
day off. All this apart from religious holidays of course, or the paid
days off in case you need them for certain family affairs.
--
Evolution is a harsh mistress.

"Tonnie" <tonnnie@NOgmail.com> wrote in message
news:ravrb31lrq1chr3f7sjouu6l4o4i6ln9hk@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:46:04 +0200, thinkbig.shrinktofit@online.no
> (Keera Ann Fox) wrote:
>
>>Cathy F. <clfrclfr@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote:
>>
>>> > I have been away on vacation. 3 weeks in Alaska, Nevada and
>>> > California.
>>>
>>> Wow - that was a huge vacation!
>>
>>Not by Norwegian/European standards. :-) 1 week cruise, 2 weeks staying
>>with mother, then friend.
>>
> Indeed European I think, we usually get 25 working days off in a year,
> mostly taken as 3 weeks in summer (15 days), another week with
> christmas or in spring, and a few days just when you want or need a
> day off. All this apart from religious holidays of course, or the paid
> days off in case you need them for certain family affairs.

I meant as a *going away* vacation I think it's a really big one - vs. going
away for 5 - 10 days, for ex., & staying at (or around) home for the balance
of the time one's off work.

Cathy


> --
> Evolution is a harsh mistress.
>

Cathy F. <clfrclfr@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote:

> "Keera Ann Fox" <thinkbig.shrinktofit@online.no> wrote in message
> news:1i2onzg.vj8j28x02ouyN%thinkbig.shrinktofit@on line.no...
> > Cathy F. <clfrclfr@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote:
> >
> >> "Keera Ann Fox" <thinkbig.shrinktofit@online.no> wrote in message
> >> news:1i2nlkw.ckojvb16j3aw9N%thinkbig.shrinktofit@o nline.no...
> >> > JustGB <gettingbttr@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/op...pagewanted=all
#
> >> >> Final Period
> >> >>
> >> >> The New York Times
> >> >> July 17, 2007
> >> >> Op-Ed Contributor
> >> >> By KAREN HOUPPERT
> >> >>
> >> >> Baltimore
> >> >>
> >> > -snip-
> >> >
> >> >> So what's a poor company to do? Re-conceptualize menstruation as a
> >> >> disease in need of treatment.
> >> >
> >> > I have been away on vacation. 3 weeks in Alaska, Nevada and California.
> >>
> >> Wow - that was a huge vacation!
> >
> > Not by Norwegian/European standards. :-) 1 week cruise, 2 weeks staying
> > with mother, then friend.
> >
> >> > And watching American TV with its plethora of "health" ads was
> >> > eye-opening. So many ads touting some pill or other for just about
> >> > anything a body can possibly experience while quickly listing all the
> >> > side-effects and cautions just has to influence people's view on what's
> >> > normal (i.e. perfect = normal) and whether or not to take a pill to
> >> > achieve it.
> >> >
> >> > And I was reminded of my surprise at discovering here in one thread
> >> > that
> >> > so few of you thought anyone could be still drug-free at middle-age.
> >>
> >> If I didn't have hyperthyroidism - prob. the biggest player of the lot,
> >> hypertension (might be thyroid-related - is otherwise out-of-the-blue),
> >> or
> >> umpteen allergies, that might be a possibility. I'd prefer to not have
> >> prescription drugs. But with those consitions...
> >
> > Well, I'm not talking about people having real diseases.
>
> I assumed you were incl. those in there.

I don't mind ads for necessary medication. I was reacting to a) the
amount of ads and b) the types of "ailments" (not actual diseases)
deemed worthy of some drug with a heap of side-effects.

> Prob. because the ads for Procrit
> seem to make it to my brain the most. (And maybe because I used to have a
> cat to whom I gave Procrit injections for her CFR-related anemia.)
>
> > Nor were many
> > of the pharma ads. They were targeted at body parts not working as well
> > as they should. But what got me wasn't that people can have umpteen
> > things wrong with them, but all the _advertising_ related to it!Just
> > like all the cold cereal and toy ads targeted at kids (and you know the
> > effect those have).
> >
> > Note: Norway bans all advertising of prescription drugs. The only ads
> > you'll see are discrete magazine ads for OTC stuff. So I was having a
> > bit of a culture shock. Still, I can't imagine that seeing so many ads
> > doesn't have some kind of (subliminal) impact.
> >
> >> > But after seeing all the pharma ads, I understand better the assumption
> >> > that everybody takes something.
> >> >
> >> > Me, I'm still having my periods. They have never been a problem. Ever.
> >>
> >> I never considered periods, by themselves, to be a problem. They were,
> >> luckily, pretty run-of-the-mill for me. (Well, until peri, when they got
> >> obnoxious for a few years - the heavy, clotty ones, w/some floods thrown
> >> in
> >> the mix.) The killer cramps that accompanied the periods were the
> >> problem.
> >
> > Never had cramps, either.
>
> Then consider yourself to be ultra-lucky in that regard.

I always have been grateful for my body. It has always served me well.

--
Keera in Norway * Think big. Shrink to fit.
http://home.online.no/~kafox/

Cathy F. <clfrclfr@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote:

> "Tonnie" <tonnnie@NOgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ravrb31lrq1chr3f7sjouu6l4o4i6ln9hk@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:46:04 +0200, thinkbig.shrinktofit@online.no
> > (Keera Ann Fox) wrote:
> >
> >>Cathy F. <clfrclfr@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> > I have been away on vacation. 3 weeks in Alaska, Nevada and
> >>> > California.
> >>>
> >>> Wow - that was a huge vacation!
> >>
> >>Not by Norwegian/European standards. :-) 1 week cruise, 2 weeks staying
> >>with mother, then friend.
> >>
> > Indeed European I think, we usually get 25 working days off in a year,
> > mostly taken as 3 weeks in summer (15 days), another week with
> > christmas or in spring, and a few days just when you want or need a
> > day off. All this apart from religious holidays of course, or the paid
> > days off in case you need them for certain family affairs.
>
> I meant as a *going away* vacation I think it's a really big one - vs. going
> away for 5 - 10 days, for ex., & staying at (or around) home for the balance
> of the time one's off work.

Well, I usually go away for anywhere from 10 to 21 days, though 21 is
stretching it for me (and my time off). It's what we do, we who get
three weeks in a row every year. :-)

--
Keera in Norway * Think big. Shrink to fit.
http://home.online.no/~kafox/

Keera Ann Fox wrote:

> But what got me wasn't that people can have umpteen
> things wrong with them, but all the _advertising_ related to it! Just
> like all the cold cereal and toy ads targeted at kids (and you know the
> effect those have).

Of course all that _advertising_ has nothing to do with the
_obscenely_ high prices of drugs here. No' ma'am... that's the
drug companies trying to recoup their R&D expenses. Uh huh.

> Note: Norway bans all advertising of prescription drugs. The only ads
> you'll see are discrete magazine ads for OTC stuff. So I was having a
> bit of a culture shock. Still, I can't imagine that seeing so many ads
> doesn't have some kind of (subliminal) impact.

The drug companies (and everyone else who advertises) certainly
hope it does!

> Never had cramps, either.

Wow - that IS luck!

FurPaw

--
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched,
every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense
a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

To reply, unleash the dog.

Keera Ann Fox wrote:

> I was amused by the names they give these products, like Exubera.

I get a chuckle out of the so-called "male enhancers" - both
prescription and OTC. Some of their ads border on soft-core porn.

> The other thing that fascinated me, was the American focus on smells.
> :-) But Norway's catching up in that area. Soon, every home here will
> smell like Glade.

I can't say I never use the aerosols in certain rooms, but mostly
our house smells like ... dog. I've never been tempted to try the
plug-in types, particularly not those with the built-in fans.
I'll stick with old-fashioned incense.

>> The FTC's decision to allow big pharm to advertise prescription meds was a
>> bad one, IMO. There were already plenty of ads for OTC meds... some
>> pretty funny (Were you in the US when the campaign for "Mama Mia, what a
>> spicy meatball!" was on? )
>
> Maybe. Few ads stick in my brain. Nobody in my family had indigestion,
> so it wouldn't be a product that required attention.

That one won all kinds of awards - it really was funny. I
_think_ it was for Alka-Seltzer, which after trying once or twice
I was never tempted to use again. That's the problem with an
amusing ad - you often can't remember what it's advertising.

> Out of curiosity: Have you tried EFT

What is that?

> or acupuncture?

For a neck muscle spasm, but not for GERD.

> Me, I find that acv
> in a glass of water helps when I (occassionally) experience GERD.

It does provide momentary relief, but without Prilosec, I would
get several episodes a day. I've been experiencing it since my
20s. And frankly, I'll admit - I like spicy foods too well to
forgo them, so I eat them and pop my pill.

FurPaw
--
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched,
every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense
a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

To reply, unleash the dog.

FurPaw <furrealpawdog@gmail.com> wrote:

> Keera Ann Fox wrote:
>
> > But what got me wasn't that people can have umpteen
> > things wrong with them, but all the _advertising_ related to it! Just
> > like all the cold cereal and toy ads targeted at kids (and you know the
> > effect those have).
>
> Of course all that _advertising_ has nothing to do with the
> _obscenely_ high prices of drugs here. No' ma'am... that's the
> drug companies trying to recoup their R&D expenses. Uh huh.

Advertisement to a company is like housework to an individual: Nothing
financial to be gained but it is a routine that must be done to avoid
problems later.

> > Note: Norway bans all advertising of prescription drugs. The only ads
> > you'll see are discrete magazine ads for OTC stuff. So I was having a
> > bit of a culture shock. Still, I can't imagine that seeing so many ads
> > doesn't have some kind of (subliminal) impact.
>
> The drug companies (and everyone else who advertises) certainly
> hope it does!

I can't help but think they're right. Healthcare certainly isn't in the
hands of the individual whose health it is. (One could make the same
argument in Norway, but for other reasons.)

> > Never had cramps, either.
>
> Wow - that IS luck!

Now I feel weird. :-) I should have said, "Never had those kind of
cramps, either" because I never had the "killer cramps" Cathy was
talking about. Any discomfort I had, lasted mere hours and never
debilitated me. I remember seeing the ads for Midol as a teen, and
noting that I didn't cramp enough to justify buying a separate pain
reliever for my periods. My mother didn't need the stuff, either.

--
Keera in Norway * Think big. Shrink to fit.
http://home.online.no/~kafox/

On Aug 11, 2:20 pm, Tonnie <tonn...@NOgmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:46:04 +0200, thinkbig.shrinkto...@online.no
>
> (Keera Ann Fox) wrote:
> >Cathy F. <clfrc...@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote:
>
> >> > I have been away on vacation. 3 weeks in Alaska, Nevada and California.
>
> >> Wow - that was a huge vacation!
>
> >Not by Norwegian/European standards. :-) 1 week cruise, 2 weeks staying
> >with mother, then friend.
>
> Indeed European I think, we usually get 25 working days off in a year,
> mostly taken as 3 weeks in summer (15 days), another week with
> christmas or in spring, and a few days just when you want or need a
> day off. All this apart from religious holidays of course, or the paid
> days off in case you need them for certain family affairs.
> --
> Evolution is a harsh mistress.


way more civilized than the approach in the u.s., though i here that
it is changing somewhat in europe. hope that is not true.

ellen

On Aug 11, 9:51 pm, thinkbig.shrinkto...@online.no (Keera Ann Fox)
wrote:
> FurPaw <furrealpaw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Keera Ann Fox wrote:
>
> > > But what got me wasn't that people can have umpteen
> > > things wrong with them, but all the _advertising_ related to it! Just
> > > like all the cold cereal and toy ads targeted at kids (and you know the
> > > effect those have).
>
> > Of course all that _advertising_ has nothing to do with the
> > _obscenely_ high prices of drugs here. No' ma'am... that's the
> > drug companies trying to recoup their R&D expenses. Uh huh.
>
> Advertisement to a company is like housework to an individual: Nothing
> financial to be gained but it is a routine that must be done to avoid
> problems later.
>
> > > Note: Norway bans all advertising of prescription drugs. The only ads
> > > you'll see are discrete magazine ads for OTC stuff. So I was having a
> > > bit of a culture shock. Still, I can't imagine that seeing so many ads
> > > doesn't have some kind of (subliminal) impact.
>
> > The drug companies (and everyone else who advertises) certainly
> > hope it does!
>
> I can't help but think they're right. Healthcare certainly isn't in the
> hands of the individual whose health it is. (One could make the same
> argument in Norway, but for other reasons.)
>
> > > Never had cramps, either.
>
> > Wow - that IS luck!
>
> Now I feel weird. :-) I should have said, "Never had those kind of
> cramps, either" because I never had the "killer cramps" Cathy was
> talking about. Any discomfort I had, lasted mere hours and never
> debilitated me. I remember seeing the ads for Midol as a teen, and
> noting that I didn't cramp enough to justify buying a separate pain
> reliever for my periods. My mother didn't need the stuff, either.
>
> --
> Keera in Norway * Think big. Shrink to fit.http://home.online.no/~kafox/



wow, so much to comment on in this thread...
glad, keera, that you had a good vacation. yes, i am jealous. will
norway take me in, pimples & bad moods & all?

& i am really intrigued by everyone who has had a slightly easier time
with their monthly cycles. i've always had some interesting pms &
always debilitating cramps regardless of the pill or other 'immoral'
treatment attempts. i just tried not to schedule hikes of the grand
canyon while cramping or make major life decisions while pmsing.

looking forward to trip highlights, in addition to the drug
commercials & glade (my neighbor has one that periodically sprays the
awful content into the air on its own - & she should know better,
since she is a recent european immigrant).

ellen

On Aug 12, 12:28 am, ellen <epdps...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 11, 2:20 pm, Tonnie <tonn...@NOgmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:46:04 +0200, thinkbig.shrinkto...@online.no
>
> > (Keera Ann Fox) wrote:
> > >Cathy F. <clfrc...@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote:
>
> > >> > I have been away on vacation. 3 weeks in Alaska, Nevada and California.
>
> > >> Wow - that was a huge vacation!
>
> > >Not by Norwegian/European standards. :-) 1 week cruise, 2 weeks staying
> > >with mother, then friend.
>
> > Indeed European I think, we usually get 25 working days off in a year,
> > mostly taken as 3 weeks in summer (15 days), another week with
> > christmas or in spring, and a few days just when you want or need a
> > day off. All this apart from religious holidays of course, or the paid
> > days off in case you need them for certain family affairs.
> > --
> > Evolution is a harsh mistress.
>
> way more civilized than the approach in the u.s., though i here that
> it is changing somewhat in europe. hope that is not true.
>
> ellen


actually, i HEAR that it is changing somewhat in europe. i am going
to bed. or on vacation.

FurPaw <furrealpawdog@gmail.com> wrote:

> Keera Ann Fox wrote:
>
-snip-

> > The other thing that fascinated me, was the American focus on smells.
> > :-) But Norway's catching up in that area. Soon, every home here will
> > smell like Glade.
>
> I can't say I never use the aerosols in certain rooms, but mostly
> our house smells like ... dog. I've never been tempted to try the
> plug-in types, particularly not those with the built-in fans.
> I'll stick with old-fashioned incense.

That's what I do, too, if airing the room doesn't help. Usually, an odor
suggests a rug needs washing or I left something out. A friend of my
mother's gave me a scented soy candle, and I've been burning that.

-snip-

> > Out of curiosity: Have you tried EFT
>
> What is that?

Emotional Freedom Technique. It may or may not be appropriate for your
condition(s), but certainly can't hurt.

> > or acupuncture?
>
> For a neck muscle spasm, but not for GERD.

I have a friend who is trained in Oriental medicine, and digestive
disorders are associated with an imbalance in the body. Find the right
meridian, stick a needle in it, and the problem may right itself.

> > Me, I find that acv
> > in a glass of water helps when I (occassionally) experience GERD.
>
> It does provide momentary relief, but without Prilosec, I would
> get several episodes a day. I've been experiencing it since my
> 20s. And frankly, I'll admit - I like spicy foods too well to
> forgo them, so I eat them and pop my pill.

Spicy foods are tasty, though I can't handle much heat. Never trained my
mouth to and now my gut won't have it.

--
Keera in Norway * Think big. Shrink to fit.
http://home.online.no/~kafox/

ellen <epdpster@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Aug 11, 9:51 pm, thinkbig.shrinkto...@online.no (Keera Ann Fox)
> wrote:
> > FurPaw <furrealpaw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Keera Ann Fox wrote:
> >
> > > > But what got me wasn't that people can have umpteen
> > > > things wrong with them, but all the _advertising_ related to it! Just
> > > > like all the cold cereal and toy ads targeted at kids (and you know the
> > > > effect those have).
> >
> > > Of course all that _advertising_ has nothing to do with the
> > > _obscenely_ high prices of drugs here. No' ma'am... that's the
> > > drug companies trying to recoup their R&D expenses. Uh huh.
> >
> > Advertisement to a company is like housework to an individual: Nothing
> > financial to be gained but it is a routine that must be done to avoid
> > problems later.
> >
> > > > Note: Norway bans all advertising of prescription drugs. The only ads
> > > > you'll see are discrete magazine ads for OTC stuff. So I was having a
> > > > bit of a culture shock. Still, I can't imagine that seeing so many ads
> > > > doesn't have some kind of (subliminal) impact.
> >
> > > The drug companies (and everyone else who advertises) certainly
> > > hope it does!
> >
> > I can't help but think they're right. Healthcare certainly isn't in the
> > hands of the individual whose health it is. (One could make the same
> > argument in Norway, but for other reasons.)
> >
> > > > Never had cramps, either.
> >
> > > Wow - that IS luck!
> >
> > Now I feel weird. :-) I should have said, "Never had those kind of
> > cramps, either" because I never had the "killer cramps" Cathy was
> > talking about. Any discomfort I had, lasted mere hours and never
> > debilitated me. I remember seeing the ads for Midol as a teen, and
> > noting that I didn't cramp enough to justify buying a separate pain
> > reliever for my periods. My mother didn't need the stuff, either.
>
> wow, so much to comment on in this thread...
> glad, keera, that you had a good vacation. yes, i am jealous. will
> norway take me in, pimples & bad moods & all?

Get in line behind my lupus-stricken friend who is fortunate enough to
live in California, as its Medicare hell seems to be one of the lesser
hells on Healthcare Earth.

> & i am really intrigued by everyone who has had a slightly easier time
> with their monthly cycles. i've always had some interesting pms &
> always debilitating cramps regardless of the pill or other 'immoral'
> treatment attempts. i just tried not to schedule hikes of the grand
> canyon while cramping or make major life decisions while pmsing.

Never had to schedule around my period. Luckily (!), I don't swim very
well, so missing a day in the pool has never left me feeling like I was
missing out.

> looking forward to trip highlights,

I'll eventually get a photo album online and let you gals know the llink
to it.

> in addition to the drug
> commercials & glade (my neighbor has one that periodically sprays the
> awful content into the air on its own - & she should know better,
> since she is a recent european immigrant).

Or maybe she's realized - from watching all those commercials - that
America stinks. *ducking and running*

--
Keera in Norway * Think big. Shrink to fit.
http://home.online.no/~kafox/

On Aug 12, 9:23 am, thinkbig.shrinkto...@online.no (Keera Ann Fox)
wrote:
> ellen <epdps...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Aug 11, 9:51 pm, thinkbig.shrinkto...@online.no (Keera Ann Fox)
> > wrote:
> > > FurPaw <furrealpaw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Keera Ann Fox wrote:
>
> > > > > But what got me wasn't that people can have umpteen
> > > > > things wrong with them, but all the _advertising_ related to it! Just
> > > > > like all the cold cereal and toy ads targeted at kids (and you know the
> > > > > effect those have).
>
> > > > Of course all that _advertising_ has nothing to do with the
> > > > _obscenely_ high prices of drugs here. No' ma'am... that's the
> > > > drug companies trying to recoup their R&D expenses. Uh huh.
>
> > > Advertisement to a company is like housework to an individual: Nothing
> > > financial to be gained but it is a routine that must be done to avoid
> > > problems later.
>
> > > > > Note: Norway bans all advertising of prescription drugs. The only ads
> > > > > you'll see are discrete magazine ads for OTC stuff. So I was having a
> > > > > bit of a culture shock. Still, I can't imagine that seeing so many ads
> > > > > doesn't have some kind of (subliminal) impact.
>
> > > > The drug companies (and everyone else who advertises) certainly
> > > > hope it does!
>
> > > I can't help but think they're right. Healthcare certainly isn't in the
> > > hands of the individual whose health it is. (One could make the same
> > > argument in Norway, but for other reasons.)
>
> > > > > Never had cramps, either.
>
> > > > Wow - that IS luck!
>
> > > Now I feel weird. :-) I should have said, "Never had those kind of
> > > cramps, either" because I never had the "killer cramps" Cathy was
> > > talking about. Any discomfort I had, lasted mere hours and never
> > > debilitated me. I remember seeing the ads for Midol as a teen, and
> > > noting that I didn't cramp enough to justify buying a separate pain
> > > reliever for my periods. My mother didn't need the stuff, either.
>
> > wow, so much to comment on in this thread...
> > glad, keera, that you had a good vacation. yes, i am jealous. will
> > norway take me in, pimples & bad moods & all?
>
> Get in line behind my lupus-stricken friend who is fortunate enough to
> live in California, as its Medicare hell seems to be one of the lesser
> hells on Healthcare Earth.
>
> > & i am really intrigued by everyone who has had a slightly easier time
> > with their monthly cycles. i've always had some interesting pms &
> > always debilitating cramps regardless of the pill or other 'immoral'
> > treatment attempts. i just tried not to schedule hikes of the grand
> > canyon while cramping or make major life decisions while pmsing.
>
> Never had to schedule around my period. Luckily (!), I don't swim very
> well, so missing a day in the pool has never left me feeling like I was
> missing out.
>
> > looking forward to trip highlights,
>
> I'll eventually get a photo album online and let you gals know the llink
> to it.
>
> > in addition to the drug
> > commercials & glade (my neighbor has one that periodically sprays the
> > awful content into the air on its own - & she should know better,
> > since she is a recent european immigrant).
>
> Or maybe she's realized - from watching all those commercials - that
> America stinks. *ducking and running*
>
> --
> Keera in Norway * Think big. Shrink to fit.http://home.online.no/~kafox/


just so the record reflects this: the only time that i ever used my
period as an excuse was to get out of swimming in high school.

as for your ducking & running, i won't be swinging. but i will say
that perhaps many of us in the states are looking for the wrong
source(s) of what truly stinks.

ellen