Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site tove.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!tove!liz
From: liz@tove.UUCP (Liz Allen)
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Disposition of Aborted Fetuses
Message-ID: <221@tove.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 30-May-85 17:48:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: tove.221
Posted: Thu May 30 17:48:03 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Jun-85 12:37:46 EDT
References: <855@bunker.UUCP> <891@mhuxt.UUCP>
Reply-To: liz@tove.UUCP (Liz Allen)
Organization: U of Maryland, Laboratory for Parallel Computation, C.P., MD
Lines: 18
Keywords: collagen, cosmetics

In article <891@mhuxt.UUCP> js2j@mhuxt.UUCP (Jeff Sonntag) writes:
>     Uh, excuse me, but *why* would a comsmetics manufacturer pay
>$5+K/lb  for aborted fetuses when they could extract collagen just
>as easily from animal carcasses which can be had for $0.50/lb?  I
>find it hard to believe that a business would do something so
>expensive (and potentially disastrous PR-wise) for no apparent
>reason.

That's actually pretty easy to answer.  Supposedly, the collagen from
a human fetus has all sorts of special rejuvenating capabilities --
and we all know how important it is to have youthful looking skin!
Listen to the advertizing more carefully -- then check out the
products with the "special rejuvenating formulas"...  :-(
-- 
Liz Allen    U of Maryland   ...!seismo!umcp-cs!liz   liz@tove.ARPA

"This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you:  God
 is light; in him there is no darkness at all" -- 1 John 1:5