Paulo's thoughts about this and that

People need bailing out, not banks

Paulo Quadros — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 17:50:45 +0000

I’m sure that it’s a little bit more complicated than this but would it not make more sense that the government bailed out individuals by paying off their outstanding credit card debts or at least a large proportion? Perhaps this is the reason why financial recovery initiatives are not working (and are not making much sense!). Perhaps we are trying to address the wrong problem by asking the wrong questions.

There are many choices of how to bail out people but it is the principle that is important.

From paying all personal unsecured debts outright to perhaps only paying the debts of people who choose to accept certain conditions to avoid getting into debt again or no option to refuse bailing out for people in default, paying a percentage of mortgages as well, or any other ideas following the same principle of bailing out individuals.

In this way banks would not have to write off debt, they would still have some of their bail out money but through individuals rather than the government, people would become more affluent and more money would flow into the economy. This in turn would reinvigorate businesses and encourage them to employ more people and so on, allowing the economy to spiral in a positive direction.

And then imagine if this could be applied throughout Europe. It seems to make sense! Or is it too simple?!

Strathaven Fairtrade Group member – Irresponsible behaviour

Paulo Quadros — Sat, 30 Oct 2010 13:07:08 +0000

I have very reluctantly been forced to publicly try to obtain a response from the secretary of the Strathaven Fairtrade Group to a letter that I wrote to her, demanding an explanation to her disgraceful and insensitive behaviour at the Scotmid car park on the occasion of the Fairtrade cycling event on the 23rd/October.

While I was standing on the opposite side of what seemed to be the reception party, waiting for the arrival of the cyclists , the group secretary interrupted a private conversation I was having with another spectator, to announce that I had to leave the public event because of “all the trouble [ I ] have caused the [Fairtrade] committee through the years“.

As I was the first chairperson of the group, wrote the original constitution which, for the first time in Britain, promoted support for local farmers and was responsible for making Strathaven the First Fairtrade Town in Scotland (jointly with Aberfeldy) working through the nights for a year before there was even a Fairtrade Group, I am at a loss to understand why I cannot have the courtesy of a reply letter of explanation. I am even more puzzled by her actions (this has not been the first time she slanders me) as she was a member of the original team who worked so hard with me to achieve our goals.

I am more concerned about the unhealthy feelings that seem to have been festering through the years than with the actual incident itself. If they remain unresolved it means that situations like this will most certainly occur again, with more talking behind my back and further acts of public show down. I wonder why Margaret waited until I was talking to someone in public to announce that I was not welcome when she and I had spent a considerable time together during the same day at the Fairtrade event held at the Strathaven Academy as I spent a lot of time buying raffle tickets from her while we chatted (did I really have any chance of winning that raffle?).

It may even be that I have really done something that the Group or the Group secretary didn’t like but this is not the way to deal with it. Has it crossed your mind Margaret that it may have been you who have created any of the alleged trouble and all that I may have done was in response to your actions – like having to write this public letter?

To make it absolutely clear, my commitment is with the Fairtrade cause, not the Group and not individuals. This is why I left the car park instead of spoiling the day for Fairtrade and the proud cyclists as they arrived from their 106-mile journey from Aberfeldy. The fact is, when personal issues are allowed to be more important than the cause, it is time for the person or the organisation to re-think their position.

Would the Fairtrade Group not agree that it is time to stop the bickering and personal vendettas and focus on the promotion of the Fairtrade principle and Strathaven’s important position in the global Fairtrade movement?

MPs want homoeopathy funding stopped – some comments

Paulo Quadros — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 17:48:46 +0000

This refers to an article published by the New Scientist on 23rd/Feb/2010 by Andy Coghlan
( http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18559-stop-funding-homeopathy-say-british-mps.html )

Brief points:

1- “Homeopathic remedies work no better than placebos, and so should no longer be paid for by the UK National Health Service, a committee of British members of parliament has concluded”:

I can think of at least one double blind placebo controlled research which showed that homoeopathy is effective for rhinitis (led by Dr David Reilly and published in the Lancet quite a long time ago. I remember the Lancet dedicating the editorial to this piece of research – if you know details please let me know)

2- “The committee also says that prescribing of placebos, which have an effect because a patient believes they will, involves a “degree of patient deception” and so is “not consistent with informed patient choice”.”

Many vets treat animals with homoeopathy (pets and farm animals). I can’t work out how they can be subject to the placebo effect

3- It is quite a well-known fact that GPs routinely prescribe placebos (which are not homoeopathic remedies). So, in this respect, there has always been a “degree of patient deception”. As far as “informed patient choice”, it is very limited in practical terms, especially if we consider that a great proportion of medicines prescriptions are not based on evidence.

4- “The committee failed to identify any plausible explanation for how such remedies might work”:

Because we cannot have an explanation, it does not mean it does not exist. This is the equivalent as saying that one thing cannot be in two places at the same time or that matter cannot also be a wave or even less believable, matter can change how it behaves when/if it gets observed. But that happens in the quantum ‘world’

Some time ago, Dr Jacques Benveniste, a highly regarded scientist at INSERN (the French equivalent of the British Research Council) demonstrated that water has memory and that this memory is electromagnetic. I saw his demonstration using a biting heart of a chicken. He got the heart to beat faster when he dropped a homoeopathic preparation on it (can’t remember what it was) and later he submitted the homoeopathic remedy to a strong magnetic field. After that, the homoeopathic remedy did not affect the heart – it was just water. The water memory had been deleted by the electromagnetic field just like a cassette tape would. That experiment was repeated a few times.

Physicists have since demonstrated that water molecules change according to environment and thought.

5- “The Prince’s Foundation for Integrated Health, which backs complementary therapies, including homeopathy, acknowledges that homeopathy is “scientifically implausible”, but defends the use of such remedies nonetheless.”

I’m surprised at the FIH’s comment that homoeopathy is “scientifically implausible”. It may be implausible to current limited scientific knowledge WITHIN medicine. And so is Quantum.

To quote part of Dr Vera Madzarevic reply to the article:

“My personal and humble opinion is, as a scientist, that I cannot answer all the questions of how allopathic drugs work, I can propose mechanisms of action, but hardly demonstrate them in some cases, but they work………….and they are approved and used….. Sometimes the best answer to a complicated medical problem is simple. I understand that we are not the holders of the absolute truth, and we have to leave doors open to other opinions”

Poverty and disempowerment as reasons for terror

Paulo Quadros — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:45:03 +0000

I’ve lived and worked in various countries in South America, Africa and Europe and have become acutely aware of conditions caused by social-economic inequality. I have also experienced the self-pride that exists in people with disadvantaged backgrounds in the poorest countries that I have visited.

One thing is very clear to me: in general, people do not want to rely on charity. They need to be given fair opportunities to grow through their own efforts. This is the reason why I’ve become so passionate about Fairtrade. It ensures that farmers and growers of produce bearing the Fairtrade mark a FAIRLY paid for their work so that they can build their communities, live healthier lives, have better education and, at the same time, be encouraged to produce environmentally sustainable food, which is good for all of us.

We live in a dual world where the might of multinational corporations and commercial priorities rule. At the same time, there are movements and organisations which seek to give the power back to people, which campaign for the right for a peaceful, fulfilling life. At a time when the ‘developed’ world talks about war, there are organisations such as Oxfam, Christian Aid, CAFOD, World Development Movement, Fairtrade and many others whose principles and ethics have the potential to change human condition in the whole world.

I believe that, on the whole, human beings who are contented with their lives, who have enough work and are fairly paid for it, who can provide education for their children and shelter for their families, have no interest in killing their neighbours.

To change this balance, I believe that all that it’s needed is to make people aware of the issues and choices; to make them aware of how powerful they are to make changes (and to believe in it) and help them realise how much they are personally and individually responsible for human welfare across the globe.

“Once we become aware of the issues, we have to chose between either personally sponsoring poverty, child labour and ill-health or to personally support empowerment of producers and farmers of all nations by paying a FAIR price for their work. We have to make a choice.”

Paulo Quadros – leader of Strathaven Fairtrade Group (Scotland’s First Fairtrade Town) 2003

Scientists say a natural supplement made from tomatoes, taken daily, can stave off heart disease and strokes

Paulo Quadros — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 21:24:33 +0000

Breakthrough?
A new ‘natural’ pill to stave off heart disease and stroke was announced today made of ‘lycopene’, a compound found in tomatoes and other kinds of food! Don’t see why people can’t just eat cooked tomatoes, carrots,red peppers and asparagus instead just like the Mediterraneans do as the pill is based on research of Mediterranean diet.
The BBC has the story on http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8076556.stm (a ‘breakthrough’ indeed!)

Homosexuality and the Church – Open letter to David Randall

Paulo Quadros — Mon, 25 May 2009 12:55:00 +0000

Homosexuality and the Church – Open letter to David Randall – minister of Loudoun parish church

Dear Rev(?) Randall

Thank you very much for your efforts to teach us the laws of God.

I myself have learned a lot listening to and reading your comments on the newspapers, radio and TV (such as

“What the Bible teaches on sexuality is perfectly clear and the church has always taught that homosexual activity is sinful”)

I wish to share what I have learned from you with the largest possible number of people.

For example, when someone starts to defend homosexuality, now I limit myself to reminding them that the Book of Leviticus, chapter 18, verse 22, clearly establishes that homosexuality is an abomination. Full stop.

But, I need some additional concrete advice from you concerning other biblical laws and how to best adhere to them:

1) I would like to sell my daughter as a maid or servant, just as mentioned in the Book of Exodus, 21:7. Taking into consideration the though economic climate of our times, in your opinion, what would be an adequate price for her?

2) Also, the Book of Leviticus 25:44 establishes that I can own slaves, either men or women, as long as I acquire them from neighbouring countries.

A friend of mine is adamant that this law only applies to Europeans and not to other British nations such as England and Wales (I live in Scotland). Would you please clarify that point? Why can I not have English slaves?

3) I know that I’m not allowed to have any contact with women during their period of menstrual impurity ( Leviticus 18:19, 20:18 etc.)

The problem that I have is the following: How can I find out whether the women around me are menstruating or not? I have tried to ask them, but many women are shy and others get very offended if asked!

4) I have a neighbour who insists on working on Saturdays. The Book of Exodus 35:2 clearly establishes that anyone working on Saturdays ought to receive capital punishment. Does it mean that I have to kill him personally? Or would you (or any of your followers) be able to help me with this dreary task?

5) In Leviticus Book 21:18-21 it is established that no one is to approach God’s altar if he/she has poor eyesight. I must confess that I need glasses to see. Does my sight acuity need to be 100% before I can approach God’s altar?: Is there a way to soften a little this requirement?

6) Most of my male friends have very well trimmed hair although this is clearly forbidden in Leviticus 19:27. How should they be killed?

7) I know, thanks to Leviticus 11:6-8, that those people who touch the skin of a dead pig become impure. I happen to play American soccer, which uses balls made with pig skin. Would I be allowed to continue playing the game if I wore gloves?

8) One of my uncles has a farm. He doesn’t comply with Leviticus 19:19, because he plants two different kinds of seeds on the same field. His wife is also guilty as she wears clothes made with fabric woven using two different fibres, namely, cotton and polyester.

Moreover, she spends the day pronouncing blasphemies and cursing herself. Will it be necessary to carry out the complicated procedure of gathering all the people in our town to stone him? Or could we adopt a simpler procedure such as burning him at a private gathering, as it is done to a man who sleeps with his mother-in-law, or a woman who sleeps with her father-in-law (Leviticus 20:14)?

I know that you have studied this subject in great depth and entirely trust your advice.

Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unalterable.

(Adapted from a Brazilian email)

Share this post :