Know what is worse for our health? Watching CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS and NBC. Reading any MSM newspaper. Listening to NPR. Watching FJB stumble around trying to read the teleprompter. Listening to daily press briefings by the black, lesbian hero of a woman. Knowing who the real puppet masters are. Watching everything that was good about the USA go down the crapper. This is a whole lot worse for our health than a bowl of Lucky Charms.
It’s a smoother transition to communism if you take everything off the shelf first. It begins with health & safety concerns, but spreads to lack of available resources, in particular labor, because no one will work.
The only thing that really needs to be banned is government banning.
The cigarette situation is actually the better way: if something poses a health risk, warn the people of such potential health effects, and let them choose whether to heed it or not.
If a product poses an actual, provable, life-threatening danger to life, like say a potentially exploding Pinto, let lawyers and the courts go after the manufacturer directly themselves to fix it. (But apparently that doesn’t happen if you’re Boeing, whose plane’s doors and panels fall off in mid-air, and last I looked, are still flying around. Hmm, wonder why no one’s grounding them? Can you say “Military Industrial Complex” contracts? )
Government, particularly all the unconstitutional agencies like the EPA, have zero right to meddle in every minuscule aspect of human living, from lightbulbs to toilets to stoves, to you name it. They have gone off waaay off the rails. Government has become drunk on power and completely out of control.
No one should be allowed to serve in any governmental capacity until they have taken - and passed - a one year course at say, Hillsdale College, on the “Limits of State and Federal Governmental Power as outlined in the Constitution”.
That course should also be a part of every high school curriculum so the people are educated about and watchful of government intrusion and excess.
In Italy, most foods do not have GMO products and therefore most people can eat fully and not gain weight. The bastardizing of our food supply creates products our bodies can’t break down and process and we end up becoming heavy and have many health sequella.
Before we start banning foods let’s look at more serious concerns: vaccines. The rise in autism and gender issues along with the significant issues from the mRNA vaxs would make Joseph Mengele proud.
Did you ever stop to notice that nearly everything carries a warning that it is "known to the State of California" to be carcinogenic? I want to know how the State of California knows so much more than the rest of us. Or does it?
Today's comment is simple: The FDA are lying bastards so never trust your health to them.
As the article makes clear, the FDA is concerned about breakfast cereal and food dyes but restricted a life-saving medicine (Ivermectin) from being used in COVID despite many credentialed physicians saying it's repurposed application could save lives and was not a threat? They're a fraud.
How is it that our grocery store food supply is so toxic? Why are we always 20 to 50 years down the road before they notice a problem? Isn't the FDA the front door gatekeeper for what goes into our produced food? They're a fraud.
Below is a very recent article where the head honcho at the FDA is STILL saying Ivermectin has no value or benefit to fighting COVID. If you ask Dr. Pierre Kory (FLCCC), he'll give you extensive evidence that says the opposite. The FDA is a fraud.
My advice: start growing as much of your own food in a backyard garden as you are able. Get your milk, eggs, and meat from a local farmer.
Longevity is likely a product of genes and good luck. Steve Jobs was a fruitarian and died of cancer at 56. My dad ate mostly red meat, chips, cookies, and other junk foods, breathed my mother's second hand smoke for 65 years, never exercised, and lived to be 90. Whatever the government does to restrict our diets won't result in anyone living longer, it will just feel like it.
I ate tons of Lucky Charms growing up with zero ill effects. I’ve had it with this “medical” BS along time ago; I’m a proud pipe smoker & yes occasionally still enjoy a cigarette. As much as we’ve been lied to over the past 50+ yrs my takeaway is that the anti-smoking campaign was always more political than health centered, I.e. setting the public up for more incremental authoritarianism like Covid lockdowns/genetically-engineered jabs. Do I think smoking is good for you? No but I will say this; there was some study that came out during the covid mania that showed people who used tobacco were less likely to get covid. It may or may not be true but I never got sick with anything. Haven’t been sick in years, no cough & aside from perpetual sinusitis - which I’ve suffered from since I was a toddler (allergy induced) - I’m fit as a fiddle. FTR - @ the risk of sounding Clintonian I never have inhaled cigarettes or pipe smoke; in thru the mouth, out thru the nose. Moreover people like to hang around me when I’ve got my pipe lit since I always smoke aromatic tobaccos.
I have a serious issue with any governmental body that would enthusiastically encourage me to smoke marijuana (never have/no drugs) yet demonize me for smoking tobacco. Marijuana dulls the mind; nicotine sharpens it. Think therein lies the answer.
Excellent send-up on the deep hypocrisy of the nanny state(s). However, I strongly believe that phthalates should be banned because nobody knows how to pronounce it. Not only that, but whoever it is that give it that awful name should be taken out and shot. They're probably already dead, though, having been exposed to them there phthalates too much.
Just like gambling. It was outlawed in most states until governments realized they could make money from it if they called it a lottery and marketed the hell out of it (not to be outdone by Indian gaming casinos.) All of the reasons gambling was illegal disappeared. Another bureaucracy was born.
My father was an Air Force physician who said the Surgeon General held off announcing a link between cigarettes and cancer for many years to thin the herd.
Everyday new and seemingly innocuous laws and the subsequent regulations are passed by congress and the un-elected congress employees in a multitude of federal agencies. Each one of those seemingly tiny laws and regulations have the effect of reducing everyone's freedoms in some way and too some extent. Alone, they are irrelevant. But each day they keep coming and each day their combined power reduces our choices or our freedom to choose. It happens like this: congress passes a law called, let's say, the "Safety in Food Supply" or something similar. It may be targeted at controlling how produce is stored for shipment or warehoused. But by the time the un-elected congress employees in the FAA, FDA and Department of Agriculture and Department of Transportation and DOJ get done reviewing the law and start implementing regulations and policies, it has no semblance to the original intent of the law. Because now it regulates what kind of materials such as plastics can come in contact with food produce, what kind of temperatures have to be maintained and for how long, what kind of materials can be used for labeling the produce, what kind of documentation has to be maintained on the shipping process and for how long those records have to be available for inspection, what kind of safety clothing workers who handle the produce have to wear while in contact with the produce, what potential liability the shipper and growers have and on and on. You get the picture. This is why we have such a huge federal government, because every agency and department has to appear involved with each new law which leads to empire building in those same agencies. Each agency has to chop off on the new law and to assure they stay relevant, they make sure they add some restrictions or added policy to the implementation of the law. The new restrictions may not amount to much but, hey, they can't hurt, right? Remember, no one gets a raise because they figured out how to reduce the size of their agency as well as its cost while they are running it. Now multiply this scenario millions of times over the course of a congressional session and you start to see how the federal government, as currently driven, will never be smaller and if not stopped, how you and I will eventually have no real choices at all in our lives. That is a frightening thought and contrary to our very ideals of freedom. Conservatives see this as a plague on humanity. Democrats see it as Utopia. After they destroy Lucky Charms, what's next, Twinkies?
Nice effort today Mr Surber. I was going to take the day off, start the weekend, mow the lawn etcetera but your piece today fired me up. The gem is/was the taxe$ the states collect for cigarettes. Just across the line of contrarianism. I need to post something up as well going into the weekend. God has Blessed you.
My introduction to Lucky Charms was a nephew doing a technicolor yawn after eating a bowl of them. That stifled any urge I had to try them.
That said, I think the government should only be allowed to require a warning advising that a test funded by an agenda driven group has linked something to cancer.
AND all laws should contain a warning that they were written by a congress critter owned by followed by a list of their big ticket donors.
Frankly, that list should be required on all their campaign materials in big bold print.
Know what is worse for our health? Watching CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS and NBC. Reading any MSM newspaper. Listening to NPR. Watching FJB stumble around trying to read the teleprompter. Listening to daily press briefings by the black, lesbian hero of a woman. Knowing who the real puppet masters are. Watching everything that was good about the USA go down the crapper. This is a whole lot worse for our health than a bowl of Lucky Charms.
It’s a smoother transition to communism if you take everything off the shelf first. It begins with health & safety concerns, but spreads to lack of available resources, in particular labor, because no one will work.
The only thing that really needs to be banned is government banning.
The cigarette situation is actually the better way: if something poses a health risk, warn the people of such potential health effects, and let them choose whether to heed it or not.
If a product poses an actual, provable, life-threatening danger to life, like say a potentially exploding Pinto, let lawyers and the courts go after the manufacturer directly themselves to fix it. (But apparently that doesn’t happen if you’re Boeing, whose plane’s doors and panels fall off in mid-air, and last I looked, are still flying around. Hmm, wonder why no one’s grounding them? Can you say “Military Industrial Complex” contracts? )
Government, particularly all the unconstitutional agencies like the EPA, have zero right to meddle in every minuscule aspect of human living, from lightbulbs to toilets to stoves, to you name it. They have gone off waaay off the rails. Government has become drunk on power and completely out of control.
No one should be allowed to serve in any governmental capacity until they have taken - and passed - a one year course at say, Hillsdale College, on the “Limits of State and Federal Governmental Power as outlined in the Constitution”.
That course should also be a part of every high school curriculum so the people are educated about and watchful of government intrusion and excess.
You have Lucky Charms for breakfast and get indigestion. Of course it’s the Lucky Charms.
You get the Covid Jab and get myocarditis. Couldn’t be the Jab.
Correlation vs causation is a slippery slope.
In Italy, most foods do not have GMO products and therefore most people can eat fully and not gain weight. The bastardizing of our food supply creates products our bodies can’t break down and process and we end up becoming heavy and have many health sequella.
Before we start banning foods let’s look at more serious concerns: vaccines. The rise in autism and gender issues along with the significant issues from the mRNA vaxs would make Joseph Mengele proud.
It seems as if they want to ban all those chemicals and food additives but encourage sex hormones for children
Did you ever stop to notice that nearly everything carries a warning that it is "known to the State of California" to be carcinogenic? I want to know how the State of California knows so much more than the rest of us. Or does it?
Today's comment is simple: The FDA are lying bastards so never trust your health to them.
As the article makes clear, the FDA is concerned about breakfast cereal and food dyes but restricted a life-saving medicine (Ivermectin) from being used in COVID despite many credentialed physicians saying it's repurposed application could save lives and was not a threat? They're a fraud.
How is it that our grocery store food supply is so toxic? Why are we always 20 to 50 years down the road before they notice a problem? Isn't the FDA the front door gatekeeper for what goes into our produced food? They're a fraud.
Below is a very recent article where the head honcho at the FDA is STILL saying Ivermectin has no value or benefit to fighting COVID. If you ask Dr. Pierre Kory (FLCCC), he'll give you extensive evidence that says the opposite. The FDA is a fraud.
My advice: start growing as much of your own food in a backyard garden as you are able. Get your milk, eggs, and meat from a local farmer.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/fda-commissioner-ivermectin-has-no-benefit-against-covid-19-post-5627040
Longevity is likely a product of genes and good luck. Steve Jobs was a fruitarian and died of cancer at 56. My dad ate mostly red meat, chips, cookies, and other junk foods, breathed my mother's second hand smoke for 65 years, never exercised, and lived to be 90. Whatever the government does to restrict our diets won't result in anyone living longer, it will just feel like it.
I ate tons of Lucky Charms growing up with zero ill effects. I’ve had it with this “medical” BS along time ago; I’m a proud pipe smoker & yes occasionally still enjoy a cigarette. As much as we’ve been lied to over the past 50+ yrs my takeaway is that the anti-smoking campaign was always more political than health centered, I.e. setting the public up for more incremental authoritarianism like Covid lockdowns/genetically-engineered jabs. Do I think smoking is good for you? No but I will say this; there was some study that came out during the covid mania that showed people who used tobacco were less likely to get covid. It may or may not be true but I never got sick with anything. Haven’t been sick in years, no cough & aside from perpetual sinusitis - which I’ve suffered from since I was a toddler (allergy induced) - I’m fit as a fiddle. FTR - @ the risk of sounding Clintonian I never have inhaled cigarettes or pipe smoke; in thru the mouth, out thru the nose. Moreover people like to hang around me when I’ve got my pipe lit since I always smoke aromatic tobaccos.
I have a serious issue with any governmental body that would enthusiastically encourage me to smoke marijuana (never have/no drugs) yet demonize me for smoking tobacco. Marijuana dulls the mind; nicotine sharpens it. Think therein lies the answer.
From my cold dead hands.
Excellent send-up on the deep hypocrisy of the nanny state(s). However, I strongly believe that phthalates should be banned because nobody knows how to pronounce it. Not only that, but whoever it is that give it that awful name should be taken out and shot. They're probably already dead, though, having been exposed to them there phthalates too much.
Just like gambling. It was outlawed in most states until governments realized they could make money from it if they called it a lottery and marketed the hell out of it (not to be outdone by Indian gaming casinos.) All of the reasons gambling was illegal disappeared. Another bureaucracy was born.
My father was an Air Force physician who said the Surgeon General held off announcing a link between cigarettes and cancer for many years to thin the herd.
Everyday new and seemingly innocuous laws and the subsequent regulations are passed by congress and the un-elected congress employees in a multitude of federal agencies. Each one of those seemingly tiny laws and regulations have the effect of reducing everyone's freedoms in some way and too some extent. Alone, they are irrelevant. But each day they keep coming and each day their combined power reduces our choices or our freedom to choose. It happens like this: congress passes a law called, let's say, the "Safety in Food Supply" or something similar. It may be targeted at controlling how produce is stored for shipment or warehoused. But by the time the un-elected congress employees in the FAA, FDA and Department of Agriculture and Department of Transportation and DOJ get done reviewing the law and start implementing regulations and policies, it has no semblance to the original intent of the law. Because now it regulates what kind of materials such as plastics can come in contact with food produce, what kind of temperatures have to be maintained and for how long, what kind of materials can be used for labeling the produce, what kind of documentation has to be maintained on the shipping process and for how long those records have to be available for inspection, what kind of safety clothing workers who handle the produce have to wear while in contact with the produce, what potential liability the shipper and growers have and on and on. You get the picture. This is why we have such a huge federal government, because every agency and department has to appear involved with each new law which leads to empire building in those same agencies. Each agency has to chop off on the new law and to assure they stay relevant, they make sure they add some restrictions or added policy to the implementation of the law. The new restrictions may not amount to much but, hey, they can't hurt, right? Remember, no one gets a raise because they figured out how to reduce the size of their agency as well as its cost while they are running it. Now multiply this scenario millions of times over the course of a congressional session and you start to see how the federal government, as currently driven, will never be smaller and if not stopped, how you and I will eventually have no real choices at all in our lives. That is a frightening thought and contrary to our very ideals of freedom. Conservatives see this as a plague on humanity. Democrats see it as Utopia. After they destroy Lucky Charms, what's next, Twinkies?
Nice effort today Mr Surber. I was going to take the day off, start the weekend, mow the lawn etcetera but your piece today fired me up. The gem is/was the taxe$ the states collect for cigarettes. Just across the line of contrarianism. I need to post something up as well going into the weekend. God has Blessed you.
My introduction to Lucky Charms was a nephew doing a technicolor yawn after eating a bowl of them. That stifled any urge I had to try them.
That said, I think the government should only be allowed to require a warning advising that a test funded by an agenda driven group has linked something to cancer.
AND all laws should contain a warning that they were written by a congress critter owned by followed by a list of their big ticket donors.
Frankly, that list should be required on all their campaign materials in big bold print.