Jump to content

Daily Randomness.........Back to Randomness........................................


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 25.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • VFR800

    2479

  • datzenmike

    2339

  • q-tip

    1360

  • hobospyder

    1255

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Cow milk isn't that good for you to begin with. Compare soy with breast milk.

 

Isn't the point of GMO to make something that needs less fertilizer and herbicides/insecticides????? Well someone is going to have to grind up some of this GMO corn and analyze it (in a meaningful way) and see how much worse it is that the regular corn. If it was that dangerous wouldn't some scientist start complaining. I mean a real scientist, in a real lab, that everyone can agree on. Not some whiny cunt with an axe to grind and a bunch parroted junk science. I'd like to know.

About scientists: They have spoken up. They are ostrisized and labeled quacks. But mainly, scientists are paid to conduct research/studies. The results and data are property of the financier. Financiers are largely not in it for much other than proving something that is profitable is good. The few independent research agencies and publications have been bought out in the last ten years. There is no longer any, not 1, publication that is not owned in part by corporate interest. Throughout history there have been reliable publications that refused corporate sponsorship in the interest of good science. No longer. This is likely not surprising, but I presume you haven't considered the ramifications of this simple change. No curious scientist can afford to conduct a study that can't be flipped on its back and raped for inaccurate data, or improper scientific method. In fact, the only ones interested in spending big bucks on those spear campaigns is $$$ industry. Who would put out thousands or more to prove a "Roundup is fine" study? ....... Only a competitor selling another herbicide. Question who the quacks are. Read about the leaded fuel "scientific proof". I've actually downloaded studies on GMO safety. The study was majorly torn apart. It sounded very well conducted to me. Evidence was presented in an open mannor and no bias was obvious. But the scientist was destroyed for years following. It's not an easy path for a would be good deed scientist.

 

The studies on glyphosphate in food has been done. It proves my point. The just claim it's totally safe at those levels. What it does is mildly puts your body into a state of reactivity where inflammatory foods or toxins are not able to be processed. Where normally they would be little to no issue.

 

Milk for babies? No cows milk. That will fuck a kid up. When I said organic baby milk, I presumed you would think of rice or hemp. Cows milk for infants is a whole other thing. Breast milk wins hands down, so not a fair comparison.

 

The point of GMOs was to reduce pest problems and use of pesticides. But that really wasn't profitable. University of Hawaii, folks I know actually, developed GMO Papaya. This was an effort to save our economy. A virus was affecting all of our papaya and we couldn't control it. The University started a research department specifically to apply some recent concepts in protein replacements to develop a plant that could fight it. Their success is a model of what GMO should be. But the idea, like any good idea, was expanded upon with profit in mind. A protein that is affected by glyphosphate was modified and plants that were done up this way were resistant to herbicides. This allowed farmers to spray all their fields with the shit in whatever quantity they needed to kill all the weeds. Consequently it kills a bunch of marcoorganisms in the soil as well. The solution was more fertilizer. Unhealthy soil means less bugs. Less bugs means more specific pest problems because the natural predators are gone. So, pesticide again.

 

Specific GMO mods are the issue. Not the idea. And the science about glyphosphate is all over if you look to European/Asian studies and disregard drones using words like "non-science" they've been fed by Facebook and Twitter.

Link to comment

Hey mister coconut milk guy,,,,,, i looked up what coconut milk was ............. It's about 23% saturated fat.. FUCK!! You might as well be drinking cups full of liquid pig fat mixed with butter,,, made sweet enough to drink by adding a shit ton of processed sugar..

 

 

Fuckin Greeners

Go back and read further. Saturated fat is essential for any diet. Coconut is one great source. If you eat steak for dinner every night, you will have problems with it. But coconut steak sucks...

  • Like 1
Link to comment

What the fuck is that song ( music video maybe ) that starts with a guy yelling    "You don't know,, you dont know nothin" ??  I think it's and 80s song

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiTyIjK9abKAhXMdD4KHZL4Af8Q3ywIHTAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fm.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dt2mU6USTBRE&usg=AFQjCNEiV-LCD3cpGZ5Eszk_UccS22McOQ

  • Like 1
Link to comment

I like how we have the thin greasy and barely eats über güber arguing health foods with the round and ponytailed bananhamuk.

I too have said ponytail...

 

 

And a fucking Migraine.... I'm fucked today!! Maybe if I had drinken more coconut milk...

 

 

Can can say it's been probably 5 year since my last migraine..

 

And then I could hardly move...

  • Like 1
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.