Fired cases do not reliably reflect the force with which the primer was struck. Because one print is deeper than another doesn’t necessarily mean the deeper print was caused by a harder hit. (The depth of print in a fired case is not a true indicator of the force of the hit, since on explosion the primer usually mushrooms around the firing pin. In actuality, if there were no explosion, the print would almost always appear much shallower. It will be noted there are exceptions where the primer is flattened out against the breech face by the explosion or does not mushroom around the pin ~ giving the impression of a comparatively light hit. The uniformity of Hornady prints has impressed me because it indicates uniformity in primer quality and consistency of powder charges.)
Which basically tells you that trying to make a vaccine out of all these tumor markers isolated from the urine is doomed to failure. In the slideshow that accompanies this woo babble, slide 6 shows a list of cancer vaccines in development by other companies without noting that the antigens being targeted are far more specific to the tumors being treated. The presentation also includes a slide about how whole cell extracts are good sources of cancer antigens, as though this justifies the approach of extracting the urine. In particular, I note that not a single scientific paper or clinical trial is presented to justify the treatment, which is called “Autologous Antigen Receptor Specific Oncogenic Target Acquisition” (AARSOTA).
Contact lens wear can be an inflammatory influence under normal circumstances, but an alreadysensitized cornea can show rebound inflammation if proper steps aren’t taken. It is imperative to use the immunosuppressive benefits of steroids with a slow taper as contact lens wear is resumed, or the patient will suffer setbacks and require multiple office visits. We typically restart limited contact lens wear when the rehabilitating cornea can tolerate a limited steroid dosage of once to twice daily.