Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: "Carlos E. R." Newsgroups: alt.comp.os.windows-11,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: OT - TV (now radio) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2026 21:55:21 +0200 Lines: 48 Message-ID: References: <118cshs$2v7m0$1@dont-email.me> <118ritl$3itb$2@dont-email.me> <118s4ub.1130.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> <118s7it$bikd$1@dont-email.me> <118t6mg$k4sv$1@dont-email.me> <6ab2a761$0$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> <11903in$1iec7$8@dont-email.me> <6ab3e515$0$4084717$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> <11930dh$2hl7b$16@dont-email.me> <1198cmt$f7bj$1@dont-email.me> <119ala6$16att$1@dont-email.me> <119bcr5$1er7u$1@dont-email.me> <119bgms$1glpo$5@dont-email.me> <119e2lr$2fsmi$1@dont-email.me> <119e3i8$2ffih$1@dont-email.me> <119el1q$2ndhc$1@dont-email.me> <119g1cm$34jdi$5@dont-email.me> <133vomxfqp.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <119kdnj$oq6h$2@dont-email.me> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net SE92qvMG4OyvvOUhZ9HEgAyFDRJERIxsn/4OoXTpehLcHExL5g Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZP1VqVqxCoDhNUYGfLXLFolfemE= sha256:5FTNvEzlF8kL4Vv80pm4wUcJxTm/+px9yiiOnZPlO+0= User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-GB In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com alt.comp.os.windows-11:35566 alt.comp.os.windows-10:196463 comp.os.linux.advocacy:723105 comp.os.linux.misc:92600 On 2026-10-01 04:27, c186282 wrote: > On 9/30/26 21:41, J. P. Gilliver wrote: >> On 2026/10/1 0:7:51, Carlos E. R. wrote: >   Film works, but requires much more exposure. > >   Back when film was used I had a standing order to >   limit x-rays to "just essential". Now, not so >   worried about it. > >   Wonder if 'cold neutrons' might yield superior >   dental results. NOT sure they can be made using >   cheap equipment however. Some 'hybrid' tech ... >   low-energy x-rays plus low-field MRI plus some >   ultrasound - smartly merged - would likely >   produce THE best results and not just for dental. >   Have seen a few articles/experiments with this. > >   Need med scans these days ? First you get the >   ultra-high-dose CAT scan, then a very expensive >   MRI. Ultrasound can be of use but the results >   are mostly low-tech low-rez. Anyway, all designed >   to totally DRAIN your insurance/wallet. low rez because the frequencies are low. > >   I don't have med insurance - except MediCare. >   Too expensive/intrusive AND, as I saw with my >   poor dead brother, the whole GOAL is to DRAIN >   EVERY DIME with pointless tests/procedures/scans >   and destructive CRAP "treatments". > >   So, I limit the cash supply. MUCH better ! >   Despite a few probs, I've SAVED a huge amount >   of money over what I'd have paid insurers AND >   kept the docs from going just nuts and 'helping' >   me to a painful (but profitable) death. > >   Cynic ? HELL YES !!! > -- Cheers, Carlos E.R. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺.