This is quite a depressing news item
Attachment 40773
I mean, I really though, being a god and all :rolleyes: that Obama could go back in time.
Printable View
This is quite a depressing news item
Attachment 40773
I mean, I really though, being a god and all :rolleyes: that Obama could go back in time.
nothing new here, but:
some wackos in Texas want to teach the Garden of Eden in science class
I would hope that even the most religious folks here would see the problem with that
My wife voted straight democrat in the 2012 election - except for the Governor's race. Our democratic guy wasn't strong at all, and she liked Pat McCrory, previously Charlotte mayor, who had done some work on public transit and some seemingly forward-thinking stuff. For a republican - especially in the south - this seemed worthy of a chance.
Well he's been terrible in office, trampling abortion rights, early voting, passing a strict voter ID law, and basically doing the normal 'screw the poor/women/minorities/schoolkids' thing that is making the Republican party so abhorrent today.
Well when he wasn't refusing to expand Medicaid or cutting teacher pay, apparently he was plotting $230,000 in upgrades to the governor's mansion. You know, super necessary stuff, like replacing the fireplaces with gas, and redoing everything in fancy marble.
The article points out that other governors have had expenditures on the mansion, but not while cutting funding for everything, which is especially hypocritical/slimy.
McCrory has been a major disappointment, and while I knew better and opted for the shitty Democrat over the Republican, my wife has had to see the fallout of her decision, and will probably never give a Republican another chance. And she voted for Dubya!
This sort of crap saddens me though, because it could be any politician - setting rules for the populace, and then spending taxpayer money lavishly on themselves. It's made me start looking into the governor's mansion laws, and if quotes are required, how approval is obtained, etc. There are so many ways we as a people should be keeping track of our elected officials and making sure they never step one bit out of line...but we don't, cause we're busy or apathetic or just expect terrible behavior by now. I think, instead of the stupid laws on the books about sodomy and making women go to 7 doctors and 6 counselors over a 4 week span when they seek out an abortion, we should have laws that restrict our elected officials from spending money without good reason, or redrawing districts to benefit their party, or making political decisions that hurt the people of their state.
Oh man you mean a person affiliated with the two major parties partakes in reprehensible behavior? Pardon me while I pick my jaw up off the floor.
Yet another reason behind Colony Collapse Disorder - insight into how we are killing the bee population so fast that it threatens our food supply in the near future.
Quote:
Quartz notes, "Bee populations are so low in the US that it now takes 60% of the country’s surviving colonies just to pollinate one California crop, almonds. And that’s not just a west coast problem—California supplies 80% of the world’s almonds, a market worth $4 billion."
Silly liberal, we don't eat beesQuote:
Originally Posted by Alloutwar
Do you take supplements? Trying to solve some issues without prescription medication, or just improve your body's health? Well, you may be spending your hard earned money on crap.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/05/sc...they-seem.html
A study shows that nearly a third of the nutritional supplements studied with new DNA testing contain none of the product indicated. St John's Wort, Ginko Biloba, etc - nope, not in the bottle. You'll find filler, rice, wheat, and other crap, but none of what you think you are buying.
About 60% of the products contained something not indicated on the label - often something that could cause allergic reaction (black walnut, ragweed, etc).
Why aren't these products more heavily scrutinized or regulated? Thank senator Orrin Hatch for his 1994 legislation, and his proud, staunch defense of the supplement industry since.
Is this a liberties issue? Do companies have the right to make crap and sell it to us as if it were a supplement to help us remember, lose weight, sleep, etc?
where did you get the 60%? The article states that of 44 reviewed, one-third of them did not have what was indicated on the label. Did I miss it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alloutwar
One-third did not have the main item on the label at all. 60% had filler, or something else not indicated on the label - posing a serious health or allergy risk. Some of those had the original item - and just a ton of other crap not listed.
the video at the 2min to 2:30 mark mentions this - 1/3rd had none of the product, 60% were 'adulterated' with unlabelled items. Obviously there's some crossover between the two.Quote:
Many were adulterated with ingredients not listed on the label, like rice, soybean and wheat, which are used as fillers.
So the results are like
<= 40% were 100% right
60% were adulterated in some way
~33% had none of the named/marketed item at all
Pretty scary if you are considering buying those supplements, or currently take them
agreed. and it doesn't go into some of the concerning side effects that the "healthy" items they have omitted are presumed by some to have. Many of these vitamins/herbs are genetically modified to enhance their performance. I had a cousin last week trying to get me to drink an energy drink which was supposedly the best thing since sliced break, did not have any caffeine or sugar, pretty much a large dose of B12 obtained from many of the "all natural" products. Unfortunately a little research showed some of the products used in that drink to give it taste and 'umph' were created while trying to perfect insecticides. Yeah, sounds yummy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alloutwar
So I've been taking food, exercise, and health as my first priority the past few weeks...I have a 7 pound drop to show for it, and I placed in the playoffs in tennis, so I was happy. Then I start reading up on the food angle, to improve that side as well. A few Netflix documentaries later, I saw this:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...s-exposure-bpa
So chemicals have been experimented with large scale since the '40s...a lot of these make it into our foods, some wrapping or packaging, others as preservatives, colors, etc. So in the span of a few generations, we've gone from pretty much naturally occurring things in our umbilical cords, to over 200 chemicals. That's chemicals like plastic and man-made stuff, going into our newborns' bodies and assaulting their weak, developing organs.
Allergies, autism, ADD and ADHD...it almost makes sense now, why these things have skyrocketed in 30-40 years. The unnatural crap we eat contains toxins...these toxins stick around in us, and we pass them on to the next generation, screwing them over exponentially more - before they're even born.
Ugh. Maybe when I adopt, I can adopt from a primitive culture that will only have minimal exposure to all this. Blech.
Your future child thanks you for taking them out of a non-toxic culture into a toxic one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alloutwar
Well, I'm sure they will think that not starving to death or being killed by Cholera will make up for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
Just what 'primitive culture' do you think AOW is adopting from?Quote:
Originally Posted by free2131
And why do you assume that an individual would prefer the risk of getting cancer to the risk of cholera?