"Freedom" thread or something

I do listen to NPR a lot in the car because I hate music so it's either that or Cspan, but I wish they would spend less time on things that are pointless or stupid. They had one guy on for a long time the other day saying that we needed to regulate airlines again because the evil financiers were killing cities for no reason by removing their airline routes. And the approach of here is a controversial issue: listen to some douche from the Heritage Foundation and some douche from Huffington Post argue about it while the host moderates is inherently flawed. Or when they talk to some actor that nobody cares about for like an hour on Fresh Air.

Mini-rant.

This blog article just really pissed me off.

The author talks about Bisphenol A. It's a rather important chemical to prevent botulism from consumption of canned products. Canned food also tends to be very important for many people, especially poorer family (speaking from experience here, maybe that's not actually true). So just whipping out the industry is not desirable. However, animal tests have suggested the stuff is absolutely horrible. Ovarian cysts, enlarged prostates, massive reduction in testosterone, inverted sexual differentiation, and complete retardation of synapse formation. Most trials I've seen used either normal or below normal occurrences of the chemical.

Long story short, I cut it out of my diet even though most risks only manifest during puberty or other important developmental stages. It's not something I want to be recklessly consuming at the moment. Full disclosure now complete. I don't like the stuff.

Here's a quote from the link article which set me off.

The FDA has the power to finally put a stop to BPA in our food. It needs to stand up to industry pressure and protect us from this dangerous chemical.

What? It needs to protect us? This is the attitude I don't understand. It's sickening actually. Protect yourselves. You know the science. You know it's bad. Stop eating it. Protect other people. Tell your friends and your families about it. Get them to stop consuming it. You don't need a highly flawed bureaucracy which exists a puppet arm of huge drug and food manufacturers to validate or invalidate health choices for you. That's what leads to a nation of overweight diabetics with the standard of living of a 16th century English peasant.


Edited by Equality 7-2521 - March 21 2012 at 12:54

Equality 7-2521 wrote: Mini-rant. This blog article just really pissed me off. The author talks about Bisphenol A. It's a rather important chemical to prevent botulism from consumption of canned products. Canned food also tends to be very important for many people, especially poorer family (speaking from experience here, maybe that's not actually true). So just whipping out the industry is not desirable. However, animal tests have suggested the stuff is absolutely horrible. Ovarian cysts, enlarged prostates, massive reduction in testosterone, inverted sexual differentiation, and complete retardation of synapse formation. Most trials I've seen used either normal or below normal occurrences of the chemical. Long story short, I cut it out of my diet even though most risks only manifest during puberty or other important developmental stages. It's not something I want to be recklessly consuming at the moment. Full disclosure now complete. I don't like the stuff. Here's a quote from the link article which set me off. The FDA has the power to finally put a stop to BPA in our food. It needs to stand up to industry pressure and protect us from this dangerous chemical. What? It needs to protect us? This is the attitude I don't understand. It's sickening actually. Protect yourselves. You know the science. You know it's bad. Stop eating it. Protect other people. Tell your friends and your families about it. Get them to stop consuming it. You don't need a highly flawed bureaucracy which exists a puppet arm of huge drug and food manufacturers to validate or invalidate health choices for you. That's what leads to a nation of overweight diabetics with the standard of living of a 16th century English peasant.

I agree with your point but I think you gave the reason yourself in the previous post with the Carl Sagan interview. Either people only listen to high and mighty advisers, however wrong they might be, or they need to be forced to avoid something in order to, well, avoid it. It's the easy, lazy way out. 

Does anybody haw an opinion on this Trayvon killing that is so over the media ?

The T wrote: Does anybody haw an opinion on this Trayvon killing that is so over the media ?

OK, I think you didn't mean to write haw instead of have.  My wife and I have discussed this and it took some interesting turns.  Is Zimmerman "white"?   If he had been "black" would he not have been arrested?  It's really hard not to take "race" out of the equation.  In any event, they guy was apparently not "standing his ground".  He was a mentally disturbed individual and actively went after someone and gunned him down.  I've seen the photos of the guy and if I'm not mistaken he is a hispanic guy with a jewish last name.  Nevertheless an unarmed black kid was gunned down who apparently wasn't doing anything wron.


Edited by Slartibartfast - March 26 2012 at 13:22

The T wrote: What the hell does "haw" mean ?

It's a laugh.  Hee haw.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hee_Haw
Saw the show a lot as a kid.
Buck Owens and Roy Clark, dude.
If it has any relation to the incident then I am a monkey's uncle.




Edited by Slartibartfast - March 26 2012 at 13:40

That's fine. And I told you my opinion of the matter. That's how forums work. You don't need to take it personally. 

So anyway, my girlfriend made me go see the Hunger Games with her. It actually has a nice little dystopian, totalitarian central government current going through it. 

Ha! I was waiting for that. 

Edited by Equality 7-2521 - March 26 2012 at 15:55