Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History'

On Nov 16, 9:13 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
"Michael Press" wrote in message

...



The dairy industry may even be nastier than the beef industry in what
they'll do to raise production, and the big poultry factories are
pretty hideous.

I have always been against the organic tag.
Too precious, as if non-organic food is not nourishing.

Offering to people a picture of where their food
comes from is a worthy endeavor. Force-feeding
a new regime ain't.

Let me tell you a little story. Back quite a few score years ago someone got
curious about why most of the world suffers from stomach cancer in fairly
large percentages and why people in the USA seldom get stomach cancer.

After a great deal of research they discovered that the preservative in
breakfast cereal boxes was preventing stomach cancers. The rest of the world
began putting that into their packaging while the American weirdoes demanded
that their food be "organic".

dumbass,

show us a reference to what you're talking about.

you keep belabouring this, but if this were the case the prevention of
cancer was an unintended side effect. there are far more examples of
unintended harmful side effects - like melamine in pet food and anti-
freeze in toothpaste.

are you really that naive ? the sole intention of a business is to
make money and not to look after you, so you shouldn't expect it.

a business will do anything it can to make money if it isn't
legislated against.

i'm not against food additive or GM food in principle, but why would
you trustingly embrace modified food if the primary motivation is to
make a company more money and the actual improvement of the food is a
secondary concern ?

In article
,
" wrote:

On Nov 16, 9:13 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
"Michael Press" wrote in message

...



The dairy industry may even be nastier than the beef industry in what
they'll do to raise production, and the big poultry factories are
pretty hideous.

I have always been against the organic tag.
Too precious, as if non-organic food is not nourishing.

Offering to people a picture of where their food
comes from is a worthy endeavor. Force-feeding
a new regime ain't.

Let me tell you a little story. Back quite a few score years ago someone got
curious about why most of the world suffers from stomach cancer in fairly
large percentages and why people in the USA seldom get stomach cancer.

After a great deal of research they discovered that the preservative in
breakfast cereal boxes was preventing stomach cancers. The rest of the world
began putting that into their packaging while the American weirdoes demanded
that their food be "organic".

dumbass,

show us a reference to what you're talking about.

you keep belabouring this, but if this were the case the prevention of
cancer was an unintended side effect. there are far more examples of
unintended harmful side effects - like melamine in pet food and anti-
freeze in toothpaste.

are you really that naive ? the sole intention of a business is to
make money and not to look after you, so you shouldn't expect it.

a business will do anything it can to make money if it isn't
legislated against.

i'm not against food additive or GM food in principle, but why would
you trustingly embrace modified food if the primary motivation is to
make a company more money and the actual improvement of the food is a
secondary concern ?

Dumbass: because capitalism rocks.

You know what the primary motivation of the production of the MacBook
I'm using to type this at you right now is? To make Apple money. You
know what? That's _why_ it's a good product.

Try again,

--
Ryan Cousineau http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing

On Nov 18, 9:56 pm, Ryan Cousineau wrote:


Dumbass: because capitalism rocks.

You know what the primary motivation of the production of the MacBook
I'm using to type this at you right now is? To make Apple money. You
know what? That's _why_ it's a good product.


dumbass,

not everything that makes money is a good product.

In article ,
" wrote:

On Nov 16, 9:13 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

Let me tell you a little story. Back quite a few score years ago someone got
curious about why most of the world suffers from stomach cancer in fairly
large percentages and why people in the USA seldom get stomach cancer.

After a great deal of research they discovered that the preservative in
breakfast cereal boxes was preventing stomach cancers. The rest of the world
began putting that into their packaging while the American weirdoes demanded
that their food be "organic".

dumbass,

show us a reference to what you're talking about.

Amit, the first sentence Tom wrote there summed it up nicely. I asked a friend who
runs a lab at a cancer research center about this and she said that, "Most people
attribute the decreasing incidence of stomach cancer that occurred in the US over the
course of the 20th century to 2 things. One- decreasing infection rates of
Helicobacter pylori, the bacteria I study, and the advent of refrigeration and
increased access to fruits and vegetables which are thought to protect against
development of stomach cancer." One might think that she'd have heard about a study
that showed that a food preservative prevented stomach cancer, since she's been
studying H pylori for a fair few years. Particularly if it was such a strong study
that "the rest of the world began putting that [preservative] into their
packaging..." for the purpose of reducing stomach cancer rates, as the resident
engineer and scientist claims.

--
tanx,
Howard

Safe when used as directed...

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

In article
,
" wrote:

On Nov 18, 9:56 pm, Ryan Cousineau wrote:


Dumbass: because capitalism rocks.

You know what the primary motivation of the production of the MacBook
I'm using to type this at you right now is? To make Apple money. You
know what? That's _why_ it's a good product.


dumbass,

not everything that makes money is a good product.

And not everybody that smokes gets cancer.

Nonetheless, the system broadly achieves the expected result.

--
Ryan Cousineau http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
You know what the primary motivation of the production of the MacBook
I'm using to type this at you right now is? To make Apple money. You
know what? That's _why_ it's a good product.

wrote:
not everything that makes money is a good product.

Like Windoze.

BTW Mac OSX is based on the BSD Unix core which didn't have a
primary motivation of making anyone money. And Apple always has
been all about the OS.

On Nov 19, 2:17 am, Howard Kveck wrote:
In article ,

" wrote:
On Nov 16, 9:13 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
Let me tell you a little story. Back quite a few score years ago someone got
curious about why most of the world suffers from stomach cancer in fairly
large percentages and why people in the USA seldom get stomach cancer.

After a great deal of research they discovered that the preservative in
breakfast cereal boxes was preventing stomach cancers. The rest of the world
began putting that into their packaging while the American weirdoes demanded
that their food be "organic".

dumbass,

show us a reference to what you're talking about.

Amit, the first sentence Tom wrote there summed it up nicely. I asked a friend who
runs a lab at a cancer research center about this and she said that, "Most people
attribute the decreasing incidence of stomach cancer that occurred in the US over the
course of the 20th century to 2 things. One- decreasing infection rates of
Helicobacter pylori, the bacteria I study, and the advent of refrigeration and
increased access to fruits and vegetables which are thought to protect against
development of stomach cancer." One might think that she'd have heard about a study
that showed that a food preservative prevented stomach cancer, since she's been
studying H pylori for a fair few years.

dumbass,

that's not the same thing as a reference.

i know about the bacteria effect but i also found a study that
suggested that gastric cancer rates dropped mid-century in the US when
the use of nitrates and nitrites for curing meat became more closely
regulated.

" wrote in
:

On Nov 16, 9:13 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
snip

Let me tell you a little story. Back quite a few score years ago
someone got curious about why most of the world suffers from stomach
cancer in fairly large percentages and why people in the USA seldom
get stomach cancer.

After a great deal of research they discovered that the preservative
in breakfast cereal boxes was preventing stomach cancers. The rest of
the world began putting that into their packaging while the American
weirdoes demanded that their food be "organic".

show us a reference to what you're talking about.


He can't. The preservative nitrate in processed meats, mainly, is linked
to stomach cancer. However, that correlation is a positive one in that
nitrate leads to nitrite, and *that* is a risk factor for stomach cancer.
There is a preservative used in pet foods, mainly, to keep fat from going
rancid (I forget the name of it, it's something like BHAP or HBVA or BFD
or BBBW-bi-dom) and that also is linked to an increased risk for stomach
cancer (I am not sure if that fat preservative is also used in human
foods, it's been a while since I studied any of this). There is also a
correlation between high fiber diets and decreased risk of stomach
cancer. It is possible Tom got the nitrate/preservative/fiber risks all
jumbled up in his cranial Vegematic, got sliced and diced and made into
mountains of julienne facts, just as easy as that. shrug

--
Bill Asher

On Nov 19, 2:22 am, Ryan Cousineau wrote:
In article
,

" wrote:
On Nov 18, 9:56 pm, Ryan Cousineau wrote:

Dumbass: because capitalism rocks.

You know what the primary motivation of the production of the MacBook
I'm using to type this at you right now is? To make Apple money. You
know what? That's _why_ it's a good product.

dumbass,

not everything that makes money is a good product.

And not everybody that smokes gets cancer.

Nonetheless, the system broadly achieves the expected result.


dumbass,


buyer beware still applies.

you depend on laws and regulations (or the remote possibility of a
lawsuit) to protect you, but sometimes thats not even enough and
harmful products like vioxx or subprime mortgages are consumed by the
public.

Ryan Cousineau wrote in
]:


Nonetheless, the system broadly achieves the expected result.


Tell that to the kids in Bhopal.

http://tinyurl.com/37o8j8

--
Bill Asher