This thing (Firman Bear report) does want to come around regularly. OEFFA's
website has the real report on their website, after they were tempted into
reporting on it in their newsletter, and having to retract in the next
issue. http://www.greenlink.org/oeffa/nutritivevalue/rutgersref.html
They also have another study, more to the point of nutritive value of
organic food, but very preliminary and not replicated that I can determine.
The Doctor's Data Study is on the same website.
In an attempt to find something more definitive on the nutritional value of
organic food, I was not successful. There are tantalizing reports from
Europe, but I am not qualified to judge their quality, and I have not seen
anything yet from folks who are. In our newsletter we are editorializing in
the summer issue on the subject with the conclusion that there are plenty of
known and knowable reasons to eat, buy and produce organic food and that the
nutritional value may be too complex an issue to make definitive statements
about.
Jim and Jo
The Community Farm Newsletter
http://www.mufn.org/public/tcf
----- Original Message -----
From: sanet-mg-digest <owner-sanet-mg-digest@cals.ncsu.edu>
To: <sanet-mg-digest@cals.ncsu.edu>
Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 6:10 PM
Subject: sanet-mg-digest V1 #1911
>
> sanet-mg-digest Monday, July 3 2000 Volume 01 : Number
1911
>
>
>
> In this issue:
>
> Farmers market numbers
> [Fwd: Re: Farmers market numbers]
> electrolyzed water- cost to make.... #1910
> Organic Does Pay Off
> RE: sanet-mg-digest V1 #1906
> Re: Organic Does Pay Off
> Re: Organic Does Pay Off
>
> See the end of the digest for information about sanet-mg-digest.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2000 09:39:32 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Allison Brown
> Subject: Farmers market numbers
>
> Dear SANET:
>
> I am a PhD student working on the history and
> distribution of farmers markets. I am trying to
> confirm the number of farmers markets in the USA in
> the years between 1946 and 1976 when the most reliable
> assessments were done by USDA. I am also interested
> in the growth in the number of retail farmers markets
> in the 1980s.
>
> The numbers which are available seem to indicate that
> there were roughly the same number of retail farmers
> markets in 1946 and 1976 but that in the interim
> numbers dropped sharply in most states. After 1976
> there was a peak in about 1980 and then another drop.
> Recently the numbers have been climbing in most
> regions, but at varied rates.
>
> Do you have in your files any reports confirming the
> number of retail farmers markets in your or any other
> state in any year? I am most interested in counting
> retail farmers markets but if you have reports of
> other types of farmers markets (farmers wholesale and
> shipping point markets) I would appreciate hearing
> about them as well. If you also have reports on the
> value of the produce or number of farmers
> participating in farmers markets, this information
> would enhance my report.
>
> If it should happen that you no longer need your files
> on farmers markets or farmer direct marketing, please
> do not throw them away as I am archiving these reports
> for future historical use.
>
> Thank you for you help.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Allison Brown
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
> http://invites.yahoo.com/
>
> To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
> All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
> http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2000 12:06:57 -0500
> From: Mary Hendrickson <HendricksonM@missouri.edu>
> Subject: [Fwd: Re: Farmers market numbers]
>
> - -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: Farmers market numbers
> Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2000 12:05:56 -0500
> From: Mary Hendrickson <HendricksonM@missouri.edu>
> To: Allison Brown
> References: <20000703163932.14578.qmail@web4204.mail.yahoo.com>
>
> Allison:
>
> > The numbers which are available seem to indicate that
> > there were roughly the same number of retail farmers
> > markets in 1946 and 1976 but that in the interim
> > numbers dropped sharply in most states. After 1976
> > there was a peak in about 1980 and then another drop.
> > Recently the numbers have been climbing in most
> > regions, but at varied rates.
>
> I heard a very good presentation looking at farmers' markets in three
> different states. Their statistics mirror what you have said. Contact
> Gail
> Feenstra, University of California-Davis, Sustainable Ag. Research and
> Education Program; or Gil Gillespie, Department of Rural Sociology,
> Cornell
> University; or Claire Hinrichs, Department of Sociology at Iowa State
> University. They have some preliminary data from a three state study
> that is
> absolutely fascinating.
>
> In Missouri, the number of farmers' markets has increased incredibly in
> the
> last 5 years -- up to around 80 from just 60-something a few years ago.
> For
> good stats, talk to Tammy Bruckerhoff, MO Dept. of Agriculture. Also
> check
> out their website at: http://agebb.missouri.edu/fmktdir/index.htm.
> Tammy's
> contact info is on that site.
>
> Mary
> - --
> Mary Hendrickson, Ph.D.
> Food Circles Networking Project
> University of Missouri Outreach and Extension
> 106 Sociology
> Columbia, MO 65211
>
> Website: http://www.foodcircles.missouri.edu
> Tele: 573-882-7463
> Fax: 573-882-1473
>
> To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
> All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
> http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2000 10:20:21 -0700
> From: William Evans <williamevans@home.com>
> Subject: electrolyzed water- cost to make.... #1910
>
> s
> >
> > what ? 20,000$ for 2 electrodes (30$ both incl. cables), a
> > current transformer (100$ for a stabilized! one), 2 fittings
> > (15$), a pipe (50 cent) and electronic parts worth 3 dollars ???
> > add 50$ for public relations, company internal administration,
> > another 40$ for taxes, 200$ for fedex and add up with a net gain
> > to a total of 2000$. so what are the other 18,000 for ?
>
> profit?
>
> a similar situation in Canada>>>>> Using RO - instead of boiling-for
> maple syrup production....
> units cost upwards of 30,000 Canadian... 300$ parts can make the same
> thing.
>
> To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
> All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
> http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2000 13:26:14 -0400
> From: Dave Miller <recycler@eclipse.net>
> Subject: Organic Does Pay Off
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> - --------------44CE634016F1
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>
> _______________________________________
> «¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> Recycler Dave
>
> A remodeler, drummer, Kindred Spirit...
>
> Put a pebble in your pocket and a penny in your shoe!
>
> - --------------44CE634016F1
> Content-Type: message/rfc822
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
> Received: by mail.eclipse.net (mbox recycler)
> (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31 1998/05/13) Tue Jun 27 00:28:38 2000)
> X-From_: andre@monmouth.com Sat Jun 24 11:29:56 2000
> Received: from mail.monmouth.com (mail.monmouth.com [209.191.58.1])
> by mx01.eclipse.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA14362
> for <recycler@eclipse.net>; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 11:29:55 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: from ufomusic.com (bg-tc-ppp291.monmouth.com [209.191.61.38])
> by mail.monmouth.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA11593;
> Sat, 24 Jun 2000 11:29:50 -0400 (EDT)
> Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20000624112916.0099c100@mail.monmouth.com>
> X-Sender: andre@mail.monmouth.com
> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32)
> Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 11:29:16 -0400
> To: jazzyjeffm@earthlink.net
> From: andre <andre@monmouth.com>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> hey
>
> here's where one can see ONE of the reasons for organic.... yep - costs
> more -- (sometimes) but look at how much MORE you get........without the
> shockingly increasing amount of toxicity you get in mainstream
agriculture....
>
>
> Friday, June 23
>
> Rutgers University (New Jersey) has an agricultural extension, and
> their scientists recently addressed the controversy surrounding
> organic vegetables. Is there really a difference between organically
> grown vegetables and factory-farmed supermarket produce that has been
> treated with with chemical fertilizers and pesticides?
>
> Many people believe that "organic food" is merely a label that
> achieves nothing more than to raise prices. In many cases, there is
> little or no taste differences between organically grown veggies and
> traditional supermarket vegetables.
>
> Scientists measured the amounts of key elements in five
> vegetables--beans, tomatoes, spinach, cabbage, and lettuce. Their
> numbers were published in milligrams per 100-gram portion. I have
> extrapolated the data and relate the levels of ten key elements in
> organic vegetables to the non-organic variety. In each case, the
> number reflects the TIMES (X) factor.
>
> EXAMPLES: Organic beans contain 2.59 times the amount of boron as
> non-organic beans. Organic cabbage contains 2.11 times the level of
> magnesium as non-organic cabbage.
>
> The results of this experiement were a surprise to me. Here are data
> from Firman Baer's report:
>
> Beans Cabbage Lettuce Tomatoes Spinach
>
> Phosphorous 2.59 1.70 3.54 2.34 2.31
> Magnesium 1.64 2.11 1.95 2.19 1.93
> Sodium 2.61 3.43 4.44 5.11 2.02
> Manganese 4.05 3.21 3.76 13.11 4.35
> Copper 3.43 4.40 3.29 2.52 2.80
> Ash 9.56 25.50 12.20 6.50 69.50
> Calcium 7.30 6.00 6.17 12.00 7.33
> Potassium 30.00 6.50 169.00 68.00 117.00
> Boron 22.70 4.70 57.33 1938.00 33.33
> Iron 23.00 120.00 20.00 53.00 106.67
> Cobalt 26.00 15.00 19.00 63.00 12.50
>
> It is clear that ORGANIC produce contains greater amounts of minerals
> than their non-organic alternatives.
>
> In the name of good health and nutrition, these data should end the
> debate as to whether ORGANIC makes a difference. Organically grown
> fruits and vegetables do cost more. Can one put a price on good
> health? Can one place a price upon cancer prevention?
>
> Robert Cohen
> http://www.notmilk.com
>
>
>
> Project Object -The Music of FRANK ZAPPA -Sat Jun 24 - The Lion's Den NYC
> August tour - 8/3 thru 8/19 with IKE WILLIS - details coming soon!
>
> details & effluvia -http://www.projectobject.com
>
> JFK's LSD UFO - RA, MP3s, upcoming dates at http://www.ufomusic.com
>
>
>
>
> - --------------44CE634016F1--
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
> All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
> http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2000 17:05:33 -0400
> From: "Butler, Scottie" <SButler@sfbcic.com>
> Subject: RE: sanet-mg-digest V1 #1906
>
> Mr. Kindberg,
>
> The info below is from the EPA web site:
> *******************************
> EPA - Office of Science Coordination and Policy
> <http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/permmbrs.htm>
>
>
> FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP)
> Permanent Panel Members
>
>
> Charles C. Capen, DVM
> Department of Veterinary Biosciences
> The Ohio State University
> Columbus, Ohio
>
> Ronald J. Kendall, Ph.D.
> Committee Chair
> The Institute of Environmental and Human Health
> Texas Tech University/
> Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center
> Lubbock, Texas
>
> Fumio Matsumura, Ph.D
> Institute of Toxicology and Environmental Health
> University of California at Davis
> Davis, California
>
> Herb Needleman, M.D.
> University of Pittsburgh
> School of Medicine
> Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
>
> Christopher Portier, Ph.D
> National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
> Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
>
>
> Mary Anna Thrall, DVM
> Department of Pathology
> College of Veterinary Medicine & Biomedical Sciences
> Colorado State University
> Fort Collins, Colorado
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - -----Original Message-----
> From: Erorganic@aol.com [mailto:Erorganic@aol.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 7:11 AM
> To: SButler@sfbcic.com; sanet-mg@shasta.ces.ncsu.edu
> Subject: RE: sanet-mg-digest V1 #1906
>
>
> Hello Mr. Butler,
>
> Could you direct me to information on members of the EPA's Scientific
> Advisory Panel and their affiliations in business or academic?
>
> Best, Eric Kindberg
>
> To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
> All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
> http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2000 16:19:20 -0500
> From: Katherine Keller <kkeller@chorus.net>
> Subject: Re: Organic Does Pay Off
>
> Would you please provide the URL or cite the study you referred to below?
> For those of us who want to read it or for those of us who may wish to
> forward it to our non-believer friends and colleagues (non-believers re:
> safety and virtues of organic systems and products), real data, such as
> authors, publication info ,etc. included in these posting about said
> study/studies would be most welcome.
>
> Katerina Keller
> >
> > hey
> >
> > here's where one can see ONE of the reasons for organic.... yep - costs
> > more -- (sometimes) but look at how much MORE you get........without the
> > shockingly increasing amount of toxicity you get in mainstream
agriculture....
> >
> >
> > Friday, June 23
> >
> > Rutgers University (New Jersey) has an agricultural extension, and
> > their scientists recently addressed the controversy surrounding
> > organic vegetables. Is there really a difference between organically
> > grown vegetables and factory-farmed supermarket produce that has been
> > treated with with chemical fertilizers and pesticides?
> >
> > Many people believe that "organic food" is merely a label that
> > achieves nothing more than to raise prices. In many cases, there is
> > little or no taste differences between organically grown veggies and
> > traditional supermarket vegetables.
> >
> > Scientists measured the amounts of key elements in five
> > vegetables--beans, tomatoes, spinach, cabbage, and lettuce. Their
> > numbers were published in milligrams per 100-gram portion. I have
> > extrapolated the data and relate the levels of ten key elements in
> > organic vegetables to the non-organic variety. In each case, the
> > number reflects the TIMES (X) factor.
> >
> > EXAMPLES: Organic beans contain 2.59 times the amount of boron as
> > non-organic beans. Organic cabbage contains 2.11 times the level of
> > magnesium as non-organic cabbage.
> >
> > The results of this experiement were a surprise to me. Here are data
> > from Firman Baer's report:
> >
> > Beans Cabbage Lettuce Tomatoes Spinach
> >
> > Phosphorous 2.59 1.70 3.54 2.34 2.31
> > Magnesium 1.64 2.11 1.95 2.19 1.93
> > Sodium 2.61 3.43 4.44 5.11 2.02
> > Manganese 4.05 3.21 3.76 13.11 4.35
> > Copper 3.43 4.40 3.29 2.52 2.80
> > Ash 9.56 25.50 12.20 6.50 69.50
> > Calcium 7.30 6.00 6.17 12.00 7.33
> > Potassium 30.00 6.50 169.00 68.00 117.00
> > Boron 22.70 4.70 57.33 1938.00 33.33
> > Iron 23.00 120.00 20.00 53.00 106.67
> > Cobalt 26.00 15.00 19.00 63.00 12.50
> >
> > It is clear that ORGANIC produce contains greater amounts of minerals
> > than their non-organic alternatives.
> >
> > In the name of good health and nutrition, these data should end the
> > debate as to whether ORGANIC makes a difference. Organically grown
> > fruits and vegetables do cost more. Can one put a price on good
> > health? Can one place a price upon cancer prevention?
> >
> > Robert Cohen
> > http://www.notmilk.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Project Object -The Music of FRANK ZAPPA -Sat Jun 24 - The Lion's Den
NYC
> > August tour - 8/3 thru 8/19 with IKE WILLIS - details coming soon!
> >
> > details & effluvia -http://www.projectobject.com
> >
> > JFK's LSD UFO - RA, MP3s, upcoming dates at http://www.ufomusic.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
> All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
> http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2000 16:42:00 -0600
> From: "Guy Ames" <guya@ncatark.uark.edu>
> Subject: Re: Organic Does Pay Off
>
> No, no, no! It's that damnable Firman Bear report again! PLEASE,
> before you send this out to your non-believer friends, we need to get
> it straight. The Firman Bear report did NOT compare organically vs.
> inorganically grown foods. It compared foods grown on what he called
> "mineral" soils (high in minerals) and soils not so high. Anyway,
> some possibly well-intentioned zealot (or maybe just a mischevious
> miscreant) changed the headings on some of the tables and started
> circulating this within organic circles. It comes around regularly
> and someone has to point out the truth again--before it is stretched
> well beyond the truth.
>
> PLEASE, someone who knows the proper citation, put it on SANET
> (again--hmm, should be in the archives) and let's see if we can't get
> this thing put to rest (again).
>
> > Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2000 16:19:20 -0500
> > Subject: Re: Organic Does Pay Off
> > From: Katherine Keller <kkeller@chorus.net>
> > To: <recycler@eclipse.net>, sanet <sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu>,
> > Organic Gardening List <OGL@lsv.uky.edu>, veg-NJ
<veg-nj@waste.org>,
> > Veg-NY <veg-nyc@waste.org>
>
> > Would you please provide the URL or cite the study you referred to
below?
> > For those of us who want to read it or for those of us who may wish to
> > forward it to our non-believer friends and colleagues (non-believers re:
> > safety and virtues of organic systems and products), real data, such as
> > authors, publication info ,etc. included in these posting about said
> > study/studies would be most welcome.
> >
> > Katerina Keller
> > >
> > > hey
> > >
> > > here's where one can see ONE of the reasons for organic.... yep -
costs
> > > more -- (sometimes) but look at how much MORE you get........without
the
> > > shockingly increasing amount of toxicity you get in mainstream
agriculture....
> > >
> > >
> > > Friday, June 23
> > >
> > > Rutgers University (New Jersey) has an agricultural extension, and
> > > their scientists recently addressed the controversy surrounding
> > > organic vegetables. Is there really a difference between organically
> > > grown vegetables and factory-farmed supermarket produce that has been
> > > treated with with chemical fertilizers and pesticides?
> > >
> > > Many people believe that "organic food" is merely a label that
> > > achieves nothing more than to raise prices. In many cases, there is
> > > little or no taste differences between organically grown veggies and
> > > traditional supermarket vegetables.
> > >
> > > Scientists measured the amounts of key elements in five
> > > vegetables--beans, tomatoes, spinach, cabbage, and lettuce. Their
> > > numbers were published in milligrams per 100-gram portion. I have
> > > extrapolated the data and relate the levels of ten key elements in
> > > organic vegetables to the non-organic variety. In each case, the
> > > number reflects the TIMES (X) factor.
> > >
> > > EXAMPLES: Organic beans contain 2.59 times the amount of boron as
> > > non-organic beans. Organic cabbage contains 2.11 times the level of
> > > magnesium as non-organic cabbage.
> > >
> > > The results of this experiement were a surprise to me. Here are data
> > > from Firman Baer's report:
> > >
> > > Beans Cabbage Lettuce Tomatoes Spinach
> > >
> > > Phosphorous 2.59 1.70 3.54 2.34 2.31
> > > Magnesium 1.64 2.11 1.95 2.19 1.93
> > > Sodium 2.61 3.43 4.44 5.11 2.02
> > > Manganese 4.05 3.21 3.76 13.11 4.35
> > > Copper 3.43 4.40 3.29 2.52 2.80
> > > Ash 9.56 25.50 12.20 6.50 69.50
> > > Calcium 7.30 6.00 6.17 12.00 7.33
> > > Potassium 30.00 6.50 169.00 68.00 117.00
> > > Boron 22.70 4.70 57.33 1938.00 33.33
> > > Iron 23.00 120.00 20.00 53.00 106.67
> > > Cobalt 26.00 15.00 19.00 63.00 12.50
> > >
> > > It is clear that ORGANIC produce contains greater amounts of minerals
> > > than their non-organic alternatives.
> > >
> > > In the name of good health and nutrition, these data should end the
> > > debate as to whether ORGANIC makes a difference. Organically grown
> > > fruits and vegetables do cost more. Can one put a price on good
> > > health? Can one place a price upon cancer prevention?
> > >
> > > Robert Cohen
> > > http://www.notmilk.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Project Object -The Music of FRANK ZAPPA -Sat Jun 24 - The Lion's Den
NYC
> > > August tour - 8/3 thru 8/19 with IKE WILLIS - details coming soon!
> > >
> > > details & effluvia -http://www.projectobject.com
> > >
> > > JFK's LSD UFO - RA, MP3s, upcoming dates at http://www.ufomusic.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> > "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the
command
> > "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> > To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> > "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> >
> > All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
> > http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
> >
>
> To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
> "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
> All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
> http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of sanet-mg-digest V1 #1911
> *******************************
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the comannd
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jul 21 2000 - 09:00:31 EDT