Return-path: <57105-93744-396881-13372-llg+2Dboard=lojban.org@mail.neurozom.shop> Envelope-to: llg-board@lojban.org Delivery-date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 03:51:34 -0700 Received: from [23.247.102.73] (port=43075 helo=pool.neurozom.shop) by d7893716a6e6 with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <57105-93744-396881-13372-llg+2Dboard=lojban.org@mail.neurozom.shop>) id 1okNiS-006ItV-Sw for llg-board@lojban.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 03:51:32 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=k1; d=neurozom.shop; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Message-ID; i=RestoreMemoryFast@neurozom.shop; bh=P5t9AAToV34oI3vfcz+ZyZWQZdQ=; b=i1ugY6G1q9VRSxze5/GifvcuR5t0VtWZPvegydhG1jh60Gvi+IGbLzKXPUzeLs09qNL1jOQBa1RR v7FmpHXu5+gXTm74Ogp/tKhdZ2dKwi5wFrTVUbtjfUTsYPCqEyvmZFm59j/ra7jEj1HdVyt3n3R6 gPbtwSCnYoBDogHDFKg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; q=dns; s=k1; d=neurozom.shop; b=ClV25GOReMXigdAuo1XHj/4b5F+1bXUy/47UrDFdY2F4ymaIMbhb9pEmfVQScTFLWzUTKZOelPg2 9a5SKtfRFnv6WNkj+RFj+LEzsvxJYzQyGnSRpUp99VJkdutsoBmZhIoBQggcjNKD8OuNPcpyBSEL LhXUhuERyvQGdlwDuA4=; Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="117e34f30942bf295bba01fd3804e5d4_16e30_60e51" Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 06:38:58 -0400 From: "Restore Memory Fast" Reply-To: "Brain Surgery" Subject: [Harvard Discovery] Hopeless patient regained his lost memory To: Message-ID: X-Spam-Score: 2.3 (++) X-Spam_score: 2.3 X-Spam_score_int: 23 X-Spam_bar: ++ X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "f6db9eef8881", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: [Harvard Discovery] Hopeless patient regained his lost memory http://neurozom.shop/NLqbIlrSuUP-mfGL-hy5u_ft7SpUDdYndGcb8QDqHisfxO1Mbg http://neurozom.shop/-ffSGtrphvuki1HH1bpleD7_5QtndItKphxUmLjXRKjheu2Itw Content analysis details: (2.3 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.8 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60% [score: 0.5000] 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: neurozom.shop] 0.0 URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to dbl.spamhaus.org was blocked due to usage of an open resolver. See https://www.spamhaus.org/returnc/pub/ [URIs: neurozom.shop] 0.0 RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to zen.spamhaus.org was blocked due to usage of an open resolver. See https://www.spamhaus.org/returnc/pub/ [23.247.102.73 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] -5.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, high trust [23.247.102.73 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to zen.spamhaus.org was blocked due to usage of an open resolver. See https://www.spamhaus.org/returnc/pub/ [URIs: neurozom.shop] 2.7 RCVD_IN_PSBL RBL: Received via a relay in PSBL [23.247.102.73 listed in psbl.surriel.com] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record 0.0 HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST BODY: HTML font color similar or identical to background 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.4 PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT BODY: MIME text/plain claims to be ASCII but isn't 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID_EF Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 1.9 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% [cf: 100] 0.9 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) 0.8 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS --117e34f30942bf295bba01fd3804e5d4_16e30_60e51 Content-Type: text/plain; Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit [Harvard Discovery] Hopeless patient regained his lost memory http://neurozom.shop/NLqbIlrSuUP-mfGL-hy5u_ft7SpUDdYndGcb8QDqHisfxO1Mbg http://neurozom.shop/-ffSGtrphvuki1HH1bpleD7_5QtndItKphxUmLjXRKjheu2Itw ossils of Megalograptus were first described by Samuel Almond Miller in 1874. Miller mistakenly believed the fossil material, consisting of a postabdominal (segments 8–12) tergite and two fragments of an appendage, was the integument of a graptolite (a member of Graptolithina, an extinct group of colonial pterobranchs), and gave it the name Megalograptus, meaning "great writing" (deriving from the Greek megale, "great", and graptos, "writing", commonly used for graptolite fossils). One reason for Miller's mistaken identification is that the exact outline of the fossils was unclear because they were not properly cleaned yet. The fragmentary fossils of M. welchi were initially recovered by L. B. Welch, whom the species name welchi honours, near Liberty, Ohio, in rocks of Katian (Late Ordovician) age of the Elkhorn Formation. With the exception of the type material, M. welchi is only fragmentarily known. It is probable that more fossils could have been uncovered if it had been immediately recognized as a large eurypterid. By the time it was recognized as such and the fossils were deemed to be of interest, further work at the fossil site had irreversibly damaged what remained of the eurypterid fossils. The status of Megalograptus as a graptolite was first questioned in 1908 by Rudolf Ruedemann, who was researching Ordovician graptolites. Ruedemann instead recognized the remains of M. welchi as e --117e34f30942bf295bba01fd3804e5d4_16e30_60e51 Content-Type: text/html; Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Newsletter
Even his family doctor couldn’t believe his eyes…

When a man in his 70s, who in the last few years could barely remember his own name…

Suddenly “came back to life”.

He was able to remember appointments, birthdays, anniversaries with surprising ease...

Focus on conversations and tasks with laser-like concentration and more importantly… as his wife put it…

“Get back to his grumpy old self again”...

Without the use of medications, brain surgery or any dangerous medical procedures.

It’s all thanks to Harvard’s new memory loss breakthrough.

… which is so controversial, it goes against the entire conventional wisdom.

And it could mean billions in losses for the biggest drug companies.

So make sure you watch this video before Big Pharma’s lawyers succeed in taking it down.

>>> Harvard’s new memory loss breakthrough.



Sincerely,

Alan Walker

P.S. Of course, this is a unique one of a kind story and it’s not something you’ll hear on the news. But it’s backed by solid scientific proof, so if you’re suffering from occasional memory lapses, check it out!




 
ossils of Megalograptus were first described by Samuel Almond Miller in 1874. Miller mistakenly believed the fossil material, consisting of a postabdominal (segments 8–12) tergite and two fragments of an appendage, was the integument of a graptolite (a member of Graptolithina, an extinct group of colonial pterobranchs), and gave it the name Megalograptus, meaning "great writing" (deriving from the Greek megale, "great", and graptos, "writing", commonly used for graptolite fossils). One reason for Miller's mistaken identification is that the exact outline of the fossils was unclear because they were not properly cleaned yet. The fragmentary fossils of M. welchi were initially recovered by L. B. Welch, whom the species name welchi honours, near Liberty, Ohio, in rocks of Katian (Late Ordovician) age of the Elkhorn Formation. With the exception of the type material, M. welchi is only fragmentarily known. It is probable that more fossils could have been uncovered if it had been immediately recognized as a large eurypterid. By the time it was recognized as such and the fossils were deemed to be of interest, further work at the fossil site had irreversibly damaged what remained of the eurypterid fossils. The status of Megalograptus as a graptolite was first questioned in 1908 by Rudolf Ruedemann, who was researching Ordovician graptolites. Ruedemann instead recognized the remains of M. welchi as e









 
If you are unable to unsubscribe through our unsubscribe link then
kindly email us at :aboost@unsubscribe-optizmo.com


  --117e34f30942bf295bba01fd3804e5d4_16e30_60e51--