Homestead mailing list

[Clansgian AT wmconnect.com]

> Or, does the statement mean anything at all since 
> there is no way to prove that if those very same people hadn't been active 
> they still wouldn't have gotten Alzheimer's

What it means is that there is always an absolutists example to throw in to 
avoid dealing with the issue.  When someone asserts that whole grains are 
healthier than refined flour, I've heard people say, "Well, what about rocks! 
 If 
those hard, crunchy whole grains are really better for you than refined white 
flour, then a bowl of rocks ought to be REALLY good for you!"  All this while 
they stuff another doughnut in their mouth.

Dyslexia is an excuse for being a lousy teacher (which in my estimation is 
redundant) or a lousy parent.  People screw up their lives, wreck their 
homes, 
focus their attention on anything and everything but their children ... and 
then they pitch about for an excuse for why things are not going well for 
their 
child.

I was there in the trenches in the thick of it.   As I've pointed out, it was 
odd that something over 90% of the children who were "dyslexic" (or any of 
the subsequent alphabet soup maladies) were from single parent homes, parents 
having marital trouble, children being raised by someone other than their 
parents, or parents who had farmed out their children to day care since they 
were 
six months old.  The number of children who were "dyslexic" from a family 
where 
one parent stayed at home was less than 2%.  Why would that be so if it were 
and organic problem?

It's a prebottled excuse for what we subject children to.