It has happened for many years, and is all part of a marketing strategy (and every time I hear the phrase 'marketing strategy' I immediatly think 'scam'. 20 years ago I bought an external hard drive for my BBC micro. Cost of a single sided drive was about £120, or I could upgrade to double sided for £150. Could not justify the extra price so went for the single sided. Being electronic students, the very first thing we did when it arrived was to take it apart. We found a disconnected wire, so we plugged it in to see what happened. Hey Presto - a double sided drive magically appeared. So £30 of the cost of a double sided drive was purely marketing hipe and setting different price points - and was also a con that put £30 straight onto their profit margin. Yes I know it is not illegal at all, but was the first time I realised that business had a set of morals that differed from mine. As to 'not doing business with them', they probably got a lot more business because of me because the word soon got around (with the help of a instructiion manual) of how to buy the very cheapest double sided drive around. Why did I send busness their way? Because I reasoned that I did not care what their business practice morality was, I got a bargan for my money, and so did everyone else who bought it. What do I get for my money is the only question.

".......discussion here about h. pylori and ulcers. The first studies done by the Australian researchers came up inconclusive......." Er No. http://nyp.org/health/helicobacter-pylori.html "In 1982, Australian researchers Barry Marshall and Robin Warren discovered spiral-shaped bacteria in the stomach, later named Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori). After closely studying H. pylori's effect on the stomach, they proposed that the bacteria were the underlying cause of gastritis and peptic ulcers. In their studies, all patients with duodenal ulcers and 80 percent of patients with stomach ulcers had the bacteria. The 20 percent of patients with stomach ulcers who did not have H. pylori were those who had taken NSAIDs (such as aspirin and ibuprofen) which are a common cause of stomach ulcers. Although the findings seem conclusive, Marshall and Warren's theory was debated and disputed for some time. However, further evidence linking H. pylori to ulcers mounted over the next 10 years as numerous studies from around the world confirmed its presence in most people with ulcers. Researchers from the United States and Europe proved that using antibiotics to eliminate H. pylori healed ulcers and prevented recurrence in about 90 percent of cases. To further investigate these findings, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) established a panel to closely review the link between H. pylori and peptic ulcer disease. At the February 1994 Consensus Development Conference, the panel concluded that H. pylori plays a significant role in the development of ulcers and that antibiotics, with other medications, can successfully treat peptic ulcer disease." A single study that came up with a result that 'seemed conclusive' is somewhat different from the numerous studies (of which this is only the latest) covering many hundreds of thousands of people which showed no correlation (or possibly very small) between cell phone use and increased cancer. (I know it then tok a further 10 years for the result to be 'proven', but those 10 years were spent gathering further data to prove the link)

And I to knew people who, in their private lives, were utterly decent people and would feel utterly ashamed by being associated with anything illegal or amoral. ......but in their business life they would lie, manipulate and cheat. Their justification was basically beaten into them by their company that anything was justified in the name of profit. Their only creed was 'don't get caught'.

I have actually taken part in a 'trial' when we put up a temporary Tetra mast. We sent round health surveys before and after the transmitter was switched on, and then again several months later. Anyone like to predict what the outcome of the trial was? Before switch on - low incidence of people feeling unwell. After the switch on - high incidence of people feeling unwell. After several months - reduced numbers of people feeling unwell. Several months later we still had people complaining about the severe effect on their health and included the start of one lawsuit for compenstation for the severe health effects suffered by one person (headaches, cronic fatigue, warm skin, dizzyness, and unfocused eyes from what I can remember.) Thing was, we never actually switched on the transmitter, and came clean . The results of the 'trial' made the lawsuit go away and were apparenty used several more times as a counter to make other lawsuits go away as well (but I had left by then so did not know any details). Conclusion is simple. People believe what they want to be true.

If you do not trust your benificaries when you are alive, they should not be your benificaries when you are dead.