Articles

331 thoughts on “Scaremongering to Sell Water Filters

  1. Narad says:

    I figured it was some sort of typographic chain to keep the smileys from floating away. The inability to use quotation marks, however, is absolutely maddening.

  2. Quill says:

    “I figured it was some sort of typographic chain to keep the smileys from floating away.”

    Brilliant!

  3. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

    And, forcefeeding all people some thing a few say they believe is necessary..against the will of those who don’t want it/believe it..is a WHOLE other issue.

    The substantial purpose of a state is to negotiate between individual and collective rights. A successful state (at least in my opinion) is one that achieves the greatest good for the most people rather than for one person (i.e. North Korea and other despotisms), one family (monarchies) or nobody (anarchy). One of the thing the state does is provide, at a relatively low cost, collective goods – like roads. In some cases, the collective good requires over-riding the objections of the individual. For instance, say someone wants to shoot you in the head and take your stuff – one of the tasks of the the state is to ensure you don’t have to deal with this kind of thing. Individually having to deal with threats of violence (dealt with via police), getting products to market (roads), ensuring people meet their side of contract obligations (the court system) and personal health (public health, vaccination, fluoridation) wastes tremendous time and realistically is impossible (we can’t all individually develop our own vaccines). Governments potentiate tremendous advances in a lot of areas by providing public goods. Pretending you are in any way able to meet those needs, or even are aware of most of them, is absurd.

    “You keep using a lot of periods in random parts of your sentence-like typings. Apparently your opinion is that they are ellipses, which is the plural of ellipsis. You could not be more wrong.”

    That has been bugging me for quite sometime as well

    THIS is what bothers you about rustie’s posts?!?!?!? :)

  4. @William: Don’t forget education.

  5. (( For instance, say someone wants to shoot you in the head and take your stuff – one of the tasks of the the state is to ensure you don’t have to deal with this kind of thing))

    Actually, it’s my responsibility to protect myself and my family as best I can, not being a dope thinking ‘the state’ will be there for me every minute of every day.

    (( In some cases, the collective good requires over-riding the objections of the individual.))

    Where is that in the Constitution?

    (( ensuring people meet their side of contract obligations ))

    Imaginary contracts? because I don’t remember signing any contract between me and “the state”. Especially not to get a dose of fluoridation or vaccination. Can you show me that contract? or is this another conventional scheme to once again enforce your toxic meds on everyone.

  6. Chris says:

    RH:

    ….dental fluorosis is not “just cosmetic.” It can also be an indication that other tissues, such as your bones and internal organs, including your brain, has been overexposed to fluoride as well.

    The funny thing is that folks who hate fluoride will often endorse consuming colloidal silver. A product that turns your skin blue. It is an amusing bit of hypocrisy.

  7. What’s amazing to me is, I’ve found a way to deal with asthma, allergies, and arthritis very very effectively, without any meds and toxic side effects, yet years and years of studies, and research, and billions of dollars, and conventional meds have not! See, you wonder why I don’t have ‘faith’ in your prestigious education! you guys, anyway, see you all. :)

  8. mousethatroared says:

    Oh hey, Don’t make fun of RH’s punctuation. I enjoy being a punctuation anarchist…rules are made to be broken and all that!

    :) :) :)

  9. mousethatroared says:

    It’s a happy anarchist army.

  10. Moebius says:

    What have the Romans ever done for us? Other than sanitation, the aqueducts, public order…….

  11. I’m just going to stop reading RH’s comments, since she doesn’t seem to understand the basic principles of civilization, grammar, history, science, the English language, or anything resembling knowledge. And I feel we’ve read everything she has to offer rhetorically (it starts with an accusation of socialism, then “Sandra Fluke is a slut,” even if the topic at hand is fluoridated water, then accusation of tyranny, followed by mention of Nazism). It was amusing the first three times, but at this point, it’s just too cruel to make fun of someone with such limited cognitive capacities.

  12. weing says:

    “What’s amazing to me is, I’ve found a way to deal with asthma, allergies, and arthritis very very effectively..”
    What’s amazing is that your asthma and allergies have remitted and you attribute that to your vitamins. Reminds of the turkey who is so convinced that the farmer is his benefactor who protects him and brings him food everyday. Everyday his experience tells him so. That is, until the day before Thanksgiving.

  13. Narad says:

    (( In some cases, the collective good requires over-riding the objections of the individual.))

    Where is that in the Constitution?

    I think it has something to do with promotion of “the general welfare.” Perhaps you’ve heard of this part.

  14. Narad.. that’s ‘cute’…but, perhaps it should be explained that ‘general welfare’ is not a Welfare State. A Welfare State is more the interpretation of the communist manifesto, where the State monitors, enforces, ‘ensures’ what kind of toothpaste you use (by imposing fluoride on all whether you want it or not) ‘for the general welfare’ “the State” will determine what ‘healthcare’ you get …what kind of light bulb you use, what kind of car you drive, what kind of house you live in, how much one should be paid …ummm wait..those are being determined now I understand.

  15. Francois, and you have that ‘freedom’ to do so..cool isn’t it…freedom.

  16. weing.. I’m not sure how my getting healthier means I’m getting sicker. One on Craigs List (maybe you? or one other here?) tried to tell me, my ‘almost colds’ were actually at the end of the cold, and I had them all along, I just didn’t know I had them in the last 4 years! It gets a little looney these ‘explanations’ :)

  17. mousethatroared says:

    FL – I continue to believe that the issue is not a limit of cognitive abilities. I know many people who are not very knowledgable and of average or below intelligence, yet they are not just open to learning, but curious about many things and are willing to change their minds if you give them new information. On the other hand I know people who are very knowledgable and intelligent, but can not seem to let go of a favored theory in spite of the evidence.

    I’m always curious what’s going on. In my mind what it come down to is this, ‘Do you want to know things or do you want to learn things?’ Sometime we are unwilling to take the risk of letting go of what we “know”. But learning is like the monkey bars, you have to be willing to let go and swing precariously by one hand to make progress.

    But, sure, when someone is hanging there with both hands clutched on those monkey bars and their eyes shut – shouting “I won’t let go.” it’s unlikely that shouting back or cajoling or trying to pry their fingers from the bars will make any difference. Doesn’t mean that the temptation to do just that will not be overwhelming sometimes.

  18. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

    Actually, it’s my responsibility to protect myself and my family as best I can, not being a dope thinking ‘the state’ will be there for me every minute of every day.

    Know what a blood fued is? Independent police forces act to end such cycles of violence. Incidentally, does one of your family members stay awake to guard the rest of you during your sleep? Or do you booby-trap your house? How very tribal.

    Also, your argument means that anybody who can hit you hard enough to knock you out deserves to take your stuff. Also, do you use money? Do you print it yourself? Do you drive on roads? Do you have an internet connection run by a company that is publicly traded? Do you have the time, energy and expertise to ensure that the water you drink is clean of real pollutants that are genuinely deadly (i.e. not fluoride)? Can you manufacture your own pharmaceuticals to treat infectious disease? All your precious, useless vitamins – do you produce them yourself from crops grown yourself? Do you barter to acquire them? The state has a role in all of these things – providing safety restraints and expertise in some cases, and providing public goods in others.

    So we can add to the list of things you fundamentally don’t understand – economics.

    Where is that in the Constitution?

    It’s a general statement about the role of the state, not the US specifically. Since I don’t live in the US, I don’t give a crap about the Constitution. But I don’t think the Constitution gives people the right to endanger others if it makes their lives easier. Would you prefer a world where a guy in a monster truck is free to drive over you if he gets to work five minutes faster? And in such a world, who manufactures said monster truck? Where do they acquire the capital to do so?

    Imaginary contracts? because I don’t remember signing any contract between me and “the state”. Especially not to get a dose of fluoridation or vaccination. Can you show me that contract? or is this another conventional scheme to once again enforce your toxic meds on everyone.

    Try googling “social contract”. First link should explain the concept, though I doubt you’ll be able to understand it. Vaccination and fluoridation are public goods with proven benefits that overwhelm the few, minor harms associated with them (i.e. localized inflammation and brown teeth). But feel free to pay for fillings and die of polio if you’d prefer.

    What’s amazing to me is, I’ve found a way to deal with asthma, allergies, and arthritis very very effectively, without any meds and toxic side effects, yet years and years of studies, and research, and billions of dollars, and conventional meds have not! See, you wonder why I don’t have ‘faith’ in your prestigious education! you guys, anyway, see you all.

    As many people have pointed out to you – you don’t understand the process to produce those years of studies, and you don’t understand the cognitive biases that lead you to attribute your “cures” to magical vitamins. Also, you don’t know what a social contract is, nor do you understand basic economics, and you make no effort to learn it. Frankly, you’re lucky you live in the US. If you lived in a country I ruled, you wouldn’t be allowed to vote (or operate any combination of the five simple machines).

    Moebius – Monty Python. Ha!

  19. WLU, you not living in America explains a little more now…that explains you’re assumption of a ‘social contract’…what you ascribe to is socialism, which is actually what 49% voted for this election here, 49% voted against it…but I know where it’s going.

    And, actually, I got cavities from the inhalers I was prescribed. I’m sure dentists are happy when no one gets cavities anymore! (but, wouldn’t that put them out of business?) hmmmm :) There are many other reasons for cavities, but teeth turning brown, is absolutely an indication it will affect other and all areas of the body too. It’s not for the greater good..it’s for the good of the chemical co’s…and dentists..and doctors… perhaps?… hmmmm :)

    WLU I do understand what works though, I experience it myself.

  20. Scott says:

    News flash – the idea of a social contract has nothing to do with socialism. Nor do Obama’s policies.

  21. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

    Literally the only way you can avoid political structure is by complete isolation. Even with just two people, power and influence, the realities of governance, begin to influence decision making. The smallest unit we think of as a society (a tribe) will still have a chief and decision-making process, and chiefs who want to stay chiefs expend considerable resources maintaining their social influence so they are protected from, and protected by, violence and threats of violence. As usual, you don’t know what you are talking about – but you try tp paper over your ignorance by projecting what you think is the solution to a problem you don’t even understand.

    One of the issues about modern dentistry is that there are fewer and fewer major problems because people take care of their teeth better. Dentists have begun offering services like teeth whitening to try and increase incomes. Overall, market forces in your capitalist society will kick in and reduce the number of new dentists. A well-governed country would include central incentives to anticipate and encourage this practice, so fewer dentists go bankrupt – a problem for individual dentists, their employees, their creditors, and society as a whole. A classic common good that can only be addressed by the state because there are no individual incentives and no other body with comparable information and foresight needs.

    It’s amazing how little you know about the society you presume to criticize and parasitically live in.

  22. The Dave says:

    Rusty, since strong, convincing arguments with good evidence seems to go right past you, perhaps Yahoo! Answers is more up your ally. This right here explains that the idea of social contract is right in the Constitution, (therefore has nothing to do with socialism, unless of course our founding fathers were socialists):

    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080913181130AAsWvw2

  23. Sorry, I know I said I wouldn’t reply to rustichealthy, but her line equating the social contract with socialism is just too laughable. RH, do you realize that your oh-so-cherished Constitution IS a social contract? That the notion of social contract predates socialism by about a hundred years? Have you heard of the Enlightenment? (because your notion of government seems pretty stuck in the Neanderthal age) Have you heard of guys like Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, or Jean-Jacques Rousseau ? Because you might want to. Those are the people who inspired your Saintly Founding Fathers when they wrote the Constitution.

    Now, I could go into a close reading of the Declaration of Independence and the Preamble to the United States Constitution (oh, that wouldn’t that be funny, a Frenchman lecturing an American on the Constitution) and point exactly where the Social Contract is mention explicitly (no postmodern tricks, I swear!), but I have other things to do.

  24. Just waiting for RusticHealthy to call Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams and the other Founding Fathers socialists.

  25. Scott says:

    RH’s view seems to be “the government should make everyone else do exactly what I want, but let me do whatever I want.” Depressingly common, especially in Tea Party circles. (A nice illustration of just how reality-averse that movement is.)

  26. The Dave..49% of the country agree with me also…this allegation of lack of intelligence simply because one does not hold to your socialist propensities and points of view is typical of most socialists actually. That’s the usual first attack, along with strings of other insults..that we ‘just don’t understand’ your argument..that we ‘just don’t have the intellect’ to do so, we’re greedy, racist, “insensitive” bleah… ‘mouth breathers’, hootenanny bearfoot and pregnant idiots…quite frankly tiring. I don’t see your point of view, because I like freedom better. That doesn’t mean anarchy. I have more than enough government rules/laws/edicts with town, city, county, state governments. This is not enough for liberal socialists. What you want is to micromanage and dictate from the Federal level to all States more and More and MORE..because no government is too much or too big, and no issue is too tiny for you to dictate/micromanage us all over. You’ll have the UN governing us all worldwide the first chance you get, I am absolutely certain of it…unfortunately, you’ll keep denying it all until it happens.

  27. Narad says:

    RH’s view seems to be “the government should make everyone else do exactly what I want, but let me do whatever I want.”

    Veruca Galt, as it were.

  28. I can honestly hear WLU’s thoughts now..”What’s wrong with the UN governing us??”

  29. weing says:

    “weing.. I’m not sure how my getting healthier means I’m getting sicker.”

    Huh? Where did you get that? I tried to tell you there was no relation. Get back to me in 90 years and tell my how your organics and vitamins have kept you getting healthier. Then we can document how you are now healthier than you were 90 years ago.

  30. Oic weing..sorry, well in that case, I choose to live healthy and happier in the meantime!

  31. Scott says:

    And just when I didn’t think RH could become any more clueless or arrogant, now EVERY SINGLE PERSON who happened to make the same choice (out of two possibilities) COMPLETELY agrees with EVERYTHING RH says, no matter how loony.

    Crank magnetism, anyone?

  32. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

    More accurately, you can’t understand, and certainly can’t refute, anything I’ve said. In addition, you can’t tolerate the cognitive dissonance that this causes you, so you’ve decided to ignore my posts rather than be forced to admit you are wrong.

    Which is fine, my comments aren’t aimed at you – they’re for anybody who might think your posts have a germ of a point. They don’t, as I and other commentors have demonstrated repeatedly.

  33. WLU apparently you didn’t understand what I just wrote…

    (((I don’t see your point of view, because I like freedom better. That doesn’t mean anarchy. I have more than enough government rules/laws/edicts with town, city, county, state governments. This is not enough for liberal socialists. What you want is to micromanage and dictate from the Federal level to all States more and More and MORE..because no government is too much or too big, and no issue is too tiny for you to dictate/micromanage us all over. You’ll have the UN governing us all worldwide the first chance you get, I am absolutely certain of it…unfortunately, you’ll keep denying it all until it happens.)))

  34. Did you call me a parasite? wow

  35. The Dave says:

    Rusty

    Once again you prove your total lack of comprehension. I have never once said I am a liberal or even agree with every political ideology expressed here. I am, in fact a moderate republican, as mentioned on another thread, that also agrees that smaller government is better, to a point. But this blog isn’t about politics. Its about science, which you continue and unceasingly demonstrate you have no basic knowledge of, and refuse to even learn basic principles. My last point was merely to point out that you don’t even understand the concept of social contract, and your views do not hold up to the majority opinion. Its people like you that give the GOP a bad name. But you’ll probably ignore everything I have said and either label me an ebil RINO or maybe even liberal in conservative’s clothing.

  36. Sorry The Dave again, I meant to say “et al” to all..but,

    We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

    I think I’ve stated this elsewhere also, “general Welfare” is not a Welfare State, Blessings of Liberty does not mean one has the “liberty” to take every and anyone else’s money, property to whatever extent they so decide..as in 16 trillion alone in last 4 years…as the liberal socialists squandered already…

    but, that’s great..glad you’re not a liberal socialist.

    Politics are incorporated here..especially now, with Political leaders now determining our healthcare..and what is ‘science’ I am supposing…so now it’s related..in particular in this thread where the politicians are deciding to put their belief of science and health in our water …against the will of many..perhaps even with the ignorance of most.

  37. @rustichealthy: You “choose to live healthy and happier (sic).” Really? Because it seems to me, from the frequency of your interventions, that you have a pathological need for attention.

    @Dave: I think RH has already labeled you a socialist. But hey, you’re in good company. She also called Bismarck and Thomas Hobbes socialists.

  38. mousethatroared says:

    wow – the UN gambit. well…a little bit of crazy Michigan Militia propaganda just makes me feel at home.

  39. lizditz says:

    Oh boy. Turns out that there is no effective treatment for tinnitus but I just discovered something.

    Reading RH…including the ….odd…punctuation….makes….my….tinnitus much, much worse.

  40. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

    You appear to have not read or not understood my posts. I advocate for state interventions based on a rational assessment of risks and benefits, costs and savings – not one based on rhetoric and ignorance. The United Nations advocate laudable goals of peace, tolerance, education and health. Happily would I live under a system that espouses those goals (and as a bonus, they are forced to achieve their goals through negotiation rather than war, a stance the United States notably has not been pursuing these days; even Obama, whom I greatly prefer over Bush, is undertaking a foolish, harmful and counterproductive action of drone strikes).

    It’s always bizarre to me that the application of well-studied health interventions are somehow equated to jackbooted thugs knocking down doors and takin’ yer freedumbs. Vaccination not only has medical exemptions, religious exemptions and in many states, plain ol’ “I don’t feel like it” exemptions, it’s not mandatory in the first place. Only if you want to attend public schools. Yes, that’s exactly like living under a socialist dictatorship.

    You’re right, parasitic isn’t the correct term – I should have said “hypocritical and ignorant”. My apologies. Though if you refuse vaccination for irrational and nonmedical reasons, then parasitic is again on the table.

  41. Narad says:

    That’s the usual first attack, along with strings of other insults..that we ‘just don’t understand’ your argument..that we ‘just don’t have the intellect’ to do so, we’re greedy, racist, “insensitive” bleah… ‘mouth breathers’, hootenanny bearfoot and pregnant idiots…quite frankly tiring.

    You might want to check into the actual history of the word ‘hootenanny’, as it has long been owned the The Menacing Socialist Songsters.

  42. Raise your hand if you think of Mel Gibson screaming “freedom” in Braveheart whenever you see rustichealthy invoke the same!

  43. lilady says:

    @ Francois Luong:

    “Raise your hand if you think of Mel Gibson screaming “freedom” in Braveheart whenever you see rustichealthy invoke the same!”

    (Raises both hands)

    BTW, for some reason my daughter recommended that movie as a “must see”. Forty-Five minutes into Braveheart, I contemplated getting into my car to confront her and slapping her silly.

  44. Quill says:

    Yes, the Braveheart reference applies, especially as rusty’s quack disclaimer on her website begins “This website is provided for entertainment and information only….” She’s an entertainer so any movie references are definitely germane.

    And if one reads her site for even five minutes then one experiences that same desire lilady did, that being to go slap someone silly.

    Although for movie references rustic healthy reminds me a bit of Harry Potter’s Dolores Umbridge, narad’s coining her as Veruca Galt wins the prize for originality in combining Roald Dahl and Rand in one swell foop.

  45. Narad says:

    I’m more inclined to think of the bogus Burke quote at the end of “Tears of the Sun.”

  46. FL “pathological need for attention”…I thought it was giving/sharing ideas and debate. :)

  47. @ Scott: And just when I didn’t think RH could become any more clueless or arrogant, now EVERY SINGLE PERSON who happened to make the same choice (out of two possibilities) COMPLETELY agrees with EVERYTHING RH says, no matter how loony.

    Not in all things, the biggest issue in this campaign (being healthcare) and against what “the state” from the Feds will be determining what healthcare is for everyone (2400 pages plus (to be filled in later), according to their ‘interpretation’ of it, and forced to pay for it and for everyone, whether we want it, like it, need it or not. Leaving actually the poor and middleclass (like myself) little ability to actually get ahead because it will cost much much more than they tried to put it off as..as if the $ will come off a tree somewhere…I do think the left actually believes that though.

  48. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

    This blog is about science-based medicine. Debates are based on rhetoric. You don’t understand science, you don’t understand why it is a superior form of learning, you don’t understand why your personal experiences are invalid for general recommendations, and you refuse to learn. So you’re on the wrong site.

  49. mousethatroared says:

    I don’t like to make fun of typos, since my posts are so wrought.

    But, if I had a band, I think I would call it Bearfoot Hootenanny…must learn to play a musical instrument now.

  50. I understand what your beliefs have caused: toxins in our food, air, water, and bodies. Someone else said “No Debate”!

    and it was the King of England who was rattled too whenever he heard “freedom”…I am sure :)

  51. Narad says:

    I understand what your beliefs have caused: toxins in our food, air, water, and bodies.

    “Our”? Awfully socialist of you.

  52. Narad…actually, it’s how ‘republican’ I am, taking into the consideration the Individual rights to them (food, water, air without toxins, own determination what one’s healthcare is), and as in this and recent issues, food (without gmos) water (without fluoride)

    I’m not a socialist..it may be difficult to understand the difference, but I’ll try again…

    Democracy: 2 wolves and a lamb voting on what’s for supper: “socialists” … i.e. we “socialists” determine what’s good for all (whether all like it or not). In that day when Ben Franklin said that, he was referring to the King of England determining what was good for all (whether all liked it or not).

    Republic: one well armed lamb who says “No, you don’t”

    Republic, “It’s a Republic, for as long as you can keep it”… I’m wondering if this is about as long as we could keep it (i.e. freedom! :) as Ben Franklin warned. :(

  53. and, teeth turning brown, that alone should be a flaming red flag that something’s wrong with it, in my ignorant uneducated opinion :)

  54. The Dave says:

    Who said anything about being rattled when hearing “freedom”? Correct me if I’m wrong, but that kind of sounds like a strawman argument.

    Can you name the specific “toxins” that have been introduced into the food, air, water, and bodies?

  55. Narad says:

    Who said anything about being rattled when hearing “freedom”? Correct me if I’m wrong, but that kind of sounds like a strawman argument.

    Not only that, it’s a really bad one. (Not that I expect Rusty to have bothered to figure out what the argument between Burke and Paine was about in the first place.)

  56. The Dave…

    Obesogens, DDT, toxaphene, dieldrin, aldrin Organophosphates Diazinon, glyphosate, malathion
    Carbamates Carbofuran, aldicarb, carbaryl Pyrethroids Fenpropanthrin, deltamethrin, cypermethrin
    estradiol, progesterone, testosterone, trenbolone acetate, melengestrol acetate and zeranol, a commercial form of zearalenone, a Fusarium fungal toxin benzene and toluene, and endocrine-disrupting compounds such as the phthalate DEHP Dioxins hormone-replacement therapy and oral contraceptives can make their way from people’s bodies into municipal wastewater systems. These chemicals are not fully removed during water treatment processes, and end up in household tap water and water used to irrigate lawns and gardens, toluene, methylene chloride, trichloroethylene and formaldehyde. 1,3-butadiene Vinyl chloride Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Benzene Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Triazine Herbicides: Atrazine Heptachlor Dieldrin and Aldrin chlordane, malathion and 2,4-D 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxypropionic acid (2,4,5-TP) dieldrin and captan Phytoestrogens Vinyl Chloride Styrene rBGH/rBST Zeranol Phthalates Bisphenol A (BPA) Mercury Ethylene Oxide Phthalates Diethylstilbestrol Oral Contraceptives Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) Ionizing RadiationPolycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)
    Sunscreen

    Many sunscreens contain chemicals that exert significant estrogenic activity, as measured by the increase in proliferation rates of human breast cancer cells in vitro. Studies show these chemicals are accumulating in wildlife and humans.
    Aluminum

    Aluminum is found in some underarm antiperspirants. Like cadmium, aluminum is a metal that mimics estrogen and can also cause direct damage to DNA. Studies have not shown a direct causal link to breast cancer risk, but breast tissue has been shown to concentrate aluminum in the same area where the highest proportion of breast cancers are originally diagnosed.

    Lead

    Lead may be a contaminant in over 650 cosmetic products, including sunscreens, foundation, nail colors, lipsticks and whitening toothpaste. Lead is a proven neurotoxin, linked to learning, language and behavioral problems. It has also been linked to miscarriage, reduced fertility in men and women, and delays in puberty onset in girls.

    Placental Extract

    Placental extract is derived from human or animal placentas and is used in hair conditioners, shampoos and other grooming aids, particularly those marketed to women of color. The National Toxicology Program (NTP) has identified progesterone, the major hormonal contaminant in placental extracts, as a reasonably anticipated carcinogen.
    http://www.breastcancerfund.org/clear-science/chemicals-linked-to-breast-cancer/cosmetics/

    Suspected endocrine disrupting chemicals are found in insecticides, herbicides, fumigants, and fungicides that are used in agriculture as well as in the home. Other endocrine disruptors are found in industrial chemicals such as detergents, resins, plasticizers, and monomers in many plastics. Exposure to these chemicals occurs through direct contact in the workplace or at home, or through ingestion of contaminated water, food, or air. Studies have found that some of these chemicals do leach out of plastics, such as the PVC plastics used to make IV bags. When these plastics, or other materials, are burned (as well as in their production) many unwanted byproducts that are endocrine disruptors or suspected endocrine disruptors are released into the air or water.

    Most endocrine disrupting chemicals are fat-soluble. This means that they do not get rapidly flushed out of the body, but rather are stored in fat. These chemicals bioaccumulate up the food chain. (An individual higher up on a food chain must consume many individuals of a lower level in order to obtain sufficient energy. In doing this, an organism not only acquires the energy it needs to live, but it also ingests and accumulates the sum of the chemicals stored in its food.) This means that very low levels of a chemical in the air, water, or soil result in higher levels in plant life, still higher levels in herbivores, and even higher levels in carnivores. An individual will accumulate more of these chemicals throughout his/her lifetime. The major routes of removing these chemicals involve transfer from mother to child, through the placenta and in breast milk.
    http://www.nrdc.org/health/effects/bendrep.asp

  57. And just an FYI..Thomas Jefferson is probably my favorite President…

    The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

    Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now.

    I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.

    “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” (Quoting Cesare Beccaria)

    The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.

    The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.

    No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.

    To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father’s has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association—the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.

    I think myself that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious. (Back then!)

    When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

    I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.

    http://jpetrie.myweb.uga.edu/TJ.html

  58. Sorry WLU..looks like TJ referred politicians and gov workers as parasites :)

  59. more from Thomas Jefferson…

    In matters of style, swim with the current;
    In matters of principle, stand like a rock.

    What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?

    The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all.

    The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society.

    When wrongs are pressed because it is believed they will be borne, resistance becomes morality.

    Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread.

    The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

    The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

    God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty…. And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.

    Of liberty I would say that, in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is unobstructed action according to our will. But rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add “within the limits of the law,” because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual.

    It is strangely absurd to suppose that a million of human beings, collected together, are not under the same moral laws which bind each of them separately.

    Liberty is the great parent of science and of virtue; and a nation will be great in both in proportion as it is free.

    He who knows nothing is closer to the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.

    I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.

    That last one is like..talk about foresight..genius..:)

  60. The Dave says:

    NRDC: About as legit as the EWG. But tell me, Rusty, how do you feel about Global Warming? http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/

    Also, I thought you were for small government (ie less laws) Wouldn’t the NRDC also be considered socialist since they push for laws for things that everyone might not believe in?

    “NRDC’s legislative team is dedicated to protecting and building upon America’s framework of environmental laws, including the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Endangered Species Act. Keep up to date with latest legislation affecting environmental issues through our biweekly Legislative Watch bulletin, which tracks all environmental bills moving through Congress.”

    Breast Cancer Fund:
    “The Breast Cancer Fund works to connect the dots between breast cancer and exposures to chemicals and radiation in our everyday environments.” (read: even if no dots are there, we will find them anyway, so give us money)

    How about instead of using biased, fund-raising activist groups for your information, try getting some real research from legitimate, peer-reviewed journals

  61. Harriet Hall says:

    @Rustichealthy,

    Nice list. Now make a similar list of all the natural toxins found in our foods. Here’s a start:
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2404325

    Research by Ames showed “About 99.9 percent of the chemicals humans ingest are natural. The amounts of synthetic pesticide residues in plant food are insignificant compared to the amount of natural pesticides produced by plants themselves. Of all dietary pesticides that humans eat, 99.99 percent are natural: they are chemicals produced by plants to defend themselves against fungi, insects, and other animal predators.
    We have estimated that on average Americans ingest roughly 5,000 to 10,000 different natural pesticides and their breakdown products. Americans eat about 1,500 mg of natural pesticides per person per day, which is about 10,000 times more than the 0.09 mg they consume of synthetic pesticide residues.” http://tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/06/06/synthetic-v-natural-pesticides/

  62. But are they carcinogens when ingested naturally in food and water..there are natural organic pesticides, fungicides and herbisides, some very ingestible actually, I used baking soda as a fungicide on my aloe plant and it worked perfectly..it’s amazing. There are a lot of organic organisms, but, not the same as manmade synthetic chemicals, not processed the same.

  63. @rustichealthy: Oh, the GMO argument. Now, tell me, do you eat strawberries, broccoli, apples or tomatoes? Because anyway you cut it, those three are all GMOs, the product of centuries of genetic manipulations. As are cows and dogs. Well, people don’t eat the latter in the United States. There are many others, of course.

    Speaking of broccoli, did you know they contain trace amounts of Selenium? How about bananas? Do you eat bananas? Well, those contain trace amounts of the radioactive isotope of Potassium. Water? Not safe either. Even the cleanest source from the pre-Industrial Age contains trace amounts of Deuterium and Tritium. As a matter of fact, my bones probably contain a detectable amount of Tritium. But this was caused by living underneath the Chernobyl radioactive cloud.

  64. Always Curious says:

    Sorry I’m late, I was busy reading up on the schedule 2 poisons list (UK)–nice scare tactic btw. The point of the list is simply to say that some compounds (including nicotine, ammonia, strong acids, strong bases, and pesticides) should not be generally available to the public. Naturally it includes a long list of exceptions to allow people to have omgdangerpoisonous (mundane) things like batteries, adhesives, cigarettes, fertilizers and fluorescent lights. Surprise, surprise, exceptions also exist for fluoride products too.

    http://www.solihull.gov.uk/Attachments/PoisonBooklet1.pdf

    Still waiting for for the discussion to come back around to food: it makes no sense to worry over fluoride in your water while everything that you eat might also contain fluoride anyways.

  65. Francois, GMO is not breeding different type apples with apples, or dogs with dogs, or cats with cats.. GMOs are taking genes from fish and interjecting them in corn or some such…Not the same. , even I know that :)

  66. Well..for some reason, I see the difference between traces of substances naturally in water as different from industrial, medical, agricultural overkill of 1000′s more chemicals. I’m not sure how I can explain that :)

  67. And, I would say anything in compact concentrated form…let’s say to field workers, yes, I can see as a problem. Something should be done about that. I am sure if technology would focus more on safe natural environmental and body friendly ways of doing things there would be less dangerous effects, instead of on more poisonous synthetics and chemicals it would be much less a problem for us and the environment.

    The Dave..this has all to do with regulating chemical industries and their influence and power with government “parasites” lol (for myself anyway), unfortunately, some take it too far also. There could/should easily be a very sane balance actually.

  68. Taking money out of Government parasite’s hands, would probably be the best way to do it..so they’d be less in a position to be influenced to be a government parasite in the first place, and be less ‘generous’ with the people’s own industrious labor and money who actually worked for and own it, that they so freely print more and more of and give out for votes in return. Actually, they need to be more monitored on their ‘investments’ and conflicts of interest…if anything. There were a few concerns with the “bailouts”, that the gov parasites made for instance.

  69. Quill says:

    “GMOs are taking genes from fish and interjecting them in corn or some such”

    That is a Pythonesque linguistic question: what on earth would fish genes have to say to corn?

  70. @rustichealthy:

    And, I would say anything in compact concentrated form…let’s say to field workers, yes, I can see as a problem. Something should be done about that. I am sure if technology would focus more on safe natural environmental and body friendly ways of doing things there would be less dangerous effects, instead of on more poisonous synthetics and chemicals it would be much less a problem for us and the environment.

    Do you mean what the OSHA and the EPA are already doing? Or do they not count because they are federal agencies?

    As for your comment regarding GMOs, once again, you are proving that you know nothing about genetics. What is the difference between selecting phenotype A (e.g.: a sweeter breed of strawberry) to crossbreed it with phenotype B (a more resilient but duller-tasting strawberry) to obtain phenotype A+B, and using plasmids or retroviruses to implant gene C into genotype D? None, except that method 2 is probably more efficient and more targeted, and that we might object to the selection of genes to be expressed by the target organism.

    Mind you, I am rather skeptical about the benefits of implanting an antibiotic-expressing gene into corn, but the entire opposition to GMOs strikes me as idiotic and ill-informed. Its definition of GMOs (in CA Proposition 37) is also too broad, in a way that would require strawberries, apples, broccoli, and tomatoes to lose their organic labeling (even if they were cultivated in such ways) and to be automatically be labeled GMOs.

  71. Francois..I don’t mean them coming to MY home to see how many mercury filled lightbulbs I have or don’t have..they’re barking up the wrong tree it seems to me. I don’t see one whit done about all the toxicity, chemicals, medicines, food additives, gmos, ge’s, pesticides, hormones, antibiotics..things like that..in industry (where they get paid to perhaps not to find).

  72. Narad says:

    I don’t mean them coming to MY home to see how many mercury filled lightbulbs I have or don’t have..

    Rusty, “they” don’t give a rat’s ass about you. You have advanced nothing whatever to suggest that you could even survive without “them.” You are here whining about not getting the light bulbs that you want. Can you fabricate a light bulb? Can you so much as tin a wire? I didn’t think so. You are merely an extremely whiny instantiation of everything that you rail against. In the Hobbesian paradise that you nominally espouse, you would likely carry value less than that of a light bulb.

  73. @rustichealthy:

    I don’t see one whit done about all the toxicity, chemicals, medicines, food additives, gmos, ge’s, pesticides, hormones, antibiotics..things like that..in industry (where they get paid to perhaps not to find).

    I guess the FDA didn’t ban the use of bisphenol-A (BPA) in baby bottles last July. This, of course, is only one example.

    To further Narad’s point, if even Soviet Russia didn’t care about what kind of lightbulb you used, what makes you think a socialist United States would care? It’s probably more likely you would encounter the scorn of your neighbors or relatives for not using CFL or LED lightbulbs.

  74. I would also like to mention that your constant attempts to cry wolf/socialism/tyranny cheapens the experiences of those who have actually lived under authoritarian regimes. I once knew a famous Polish poet who lived during the Communist era of Poland (before moving to France, then the United States in the 1980s). He was more afraid the authorities would decide that his reading and writing were considered subversive than he was of they discovering he didn’t use the proper lightbulbs or drive the proper car. His reading included Hegel, Bergson and Husserl (he was a philosophy student).

  75. Francois, if someone lives in a 4 X 6 jail cell all his life, then told he can come out now!..into a 10 X 14 cell!..of course he’ll think he’s got “freedom”! When you live in freedom all your life, and you keep hearing “well, you’ll have to “do as we say now” and live in this 10 X 14 cell. And, ..we’ll decide what kind of food you eat (gmos) (like it or not), and kind of water you drink (fluoridated) (like it or not), and (chemical) medicine you take (like it or not)….because we see things different (not better) than you do..there’s a difference Narad seems to be one of “them” claiming ” You have advanced nothing whatever to suggest that you could even survive without “them.” … my not knowing how to produce my own light bulb? means what exactly? in this? so therefore I shouldn’t have freedom? to choose what food, water, medicine I take…is that it? Narad, just curious, what country are you from? maybe you don’t know what’s going on here, or the difference..that may or may not help..as some in America are actually that far gone anyway…judging by the results of the last election.

  76. Yes..BPAs in baby bottles…that’s a ‘start’…like pushing a 2 ton truck one inch when you have to push it a 1000 miles. :) it’s a start

  77. mousethatroared says:

    “Do you mean what the OSHA and the EPA are already doing? Or do they not count because they are federal agencies?”

    Or what OSHA and the EPA are underfunded to do, because folks like RusticHealthy believe that less government regulation is always double plus good.

    How one can be concerned with the amount of pollutants in the environment AND be so adamently opposed to government intervention is a mystery to me. RusticHealthy worries about the mercury exposure from light bulbs. I worry about the mercury exposure from fish, which as a woman, I must limit eating. Does she have any idea what mercury levels would be in fish without government regulations?

    And as to an incandescent light ban, another myth that RusticHealthy has bought into.

    http://www.frumforum.com/there-is-no-light-bulb-ban/

  78. mousethatroared says:

    And the regulations that demands ALL lights (and appliances) be more energy efficient is meant to reduce our overall use of electricity, which will reduce our use of coal power, which will reduce coal emissions and help to reduce mercury and other pollutants in our environment.

  79. Maybe we need a little more Thomas Jefferson here…

    Most bad government has grown out of too much government.

    Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.

    The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.

    A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor and bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.

    Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others?

    A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.

    The right of self-government does not comprehend the government of others.

    An elective despotism was not the government we fought for.

    History, in general, only informs us what bad government is.

    The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.

  80. mousethatroared says:

    None of which suggests you have a basic human right to customized municipal water delivered to your kitchen.

  81. mouse..I believe that’s what you all want..your choice of customized dental treatment in everyone’s water ..and to me..this applies:

    which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement (i.e. healthcare and dental treatment).

  82. The Dave says:

    “.this has all to do with regulating chemical industries and their influence and power with government “parasites” lol (for myself anyway), unfortunately, some take it too far also. There could/should easily be a very sane balance actually.”

    Still not answering the question as asked, but you make a very blatantly contradictory point. you say government bad, government evil, government is corrupt and wants to control every aspect of our life, but then at the say time you want private industry to be “regulated”. Who does the regulating? The government. You can’t have it both ways.

  83. The Dave..it’s actually one of the government’s jobs ..(a wise government anyway)..”A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another” as Also in pouring toxic waste and poison into our food, water, air that is dangerous and injurious to Everyone. That’s the job they should have done all along..ensuring no dangerous medicines, foods, and chemicals in water, that are unleashed by chemical corporations, turning the other way rather. You can have it ‘both ways’ when what they’re doing is what they’re supposed to be doing…and yet not micromanaging each of our lives with healthcare now (a huge takeover of our lives).

  84. And, just to add, I am totally for solar and clean energy.. not having government in any way take anyone else’s money to pay for their supporters and their companies (some which have gone bankrupt anyway!?..hmmm). I have solar panels myself..for emergency in particular..it’s great! Just keep gov and tax dollars out of it and watch how it goes…everyone wants affordable clean energy, just not how it’s being done now, and nothing is affordable actually..especially healthcare because of how gov is handling anything. All those huge corporations could and should be investing their own dollars in clean energy…they’d be amazed at all the things they could come up with, and what the public would be more than happy to buy.

  85. The Dave says:

    ”A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another”. And to do that they need to, have have, listened to the best scientific evidence available to them, not the ignorant, fear-mongering rhetoric of the ill-informed (notice “ill”-informed, not “un”-informed, you think you are informed, but your information is incorrect). Science says the risk-benefit ratio of fluoridated water is tipped in favor of fluoridation. ignorant, fear-mongering rhetoric of the ill-informed says that it is dangerous. Which side should a “wise and frugal government” side with? And btw, “restrain men from injuring one another” doesn’t only apply to physical injuries. Monetary injuries apply as well, so perhaps a “wise and frugal government” should take a larger role in regulating/removing costly, ineffective devices and pills from the market to prevent Big AltMed/Supp/Herba from injuring the pocket books of the average citizen/consumer. But heaven forbid it do that, because that would be taking away peoples freedom. So which is it: the freedom to scam your fellow man, or the evil government restraining scammers from monetarily injuring their fellow man?

  86. And to do that they need to, have have, listened to the best scientific evidence available to them, (only according to your opinion)…

    not the ignorant, fear-mongering rhetoric of the ill-informed (notice “ill”-informed, not “un”-informed, you think you are informed, but your information is incorrect) (That’s your opinion, I believe quite the opposite).

    Science says the risk-benefit ratio of fluoridated water is tipped in favor of fluoridation. (Your science says that…not mine)

    ignorant, fear-mongering rhetoric of the ill-informed says that it is dangerous. (Freedom of the people to decide what they determine is dangerous or not…not what your science and opinion says..cut the b.s. about ‘fearmongering”..if there is anything to fear is people like you demanding what we all should fear or trust) You’re what everyone should fear, those who actually do believe they can/do think for everyone else.

    My science says turning teeth brown means it’s going through the system and effecting everything else. Your science says you don’t care. Your science tips in the favor of chemical companies needing to dispose their chemicals somewhere and have the taxpayer pay for it.

    And btw, “restrain men from injuring one another” doesn’t only apply to physical injuries.

    Yes, it does.

    Monetary injuries apply as well, (No..they’re covered in a Court of Law..certainly not by the Gov or the pols in D.C.)so perhaps a “wise and frugal government” should take a larger role in regulating/removing costly, ineffective devices and pills from the market to prevent Big AltMed/Supp/Herba from injuring the pocket books of the average citizen/consumer.

    No, it should spend their time answering to us what they’re doing with other people’s money not what others choose to do with their own in their own Freedom.

    Monetary injuries is the spending the fat cats spent in D.C. at their whim. According to you and half the country now, the “Gov” can decide anything it wants for any reason whatsoever, depending on how much money they get in their pockets to side with.

    But heaven forbid it do that, because that would be taking away peoples freedom. That’s the BEST thing I got from your diatribe.

    So which is it: the freedom to scam your fellow man, or the evil government restraining scammers from monetarily injuring their fellow man?

    Freedom to Not be scammed by the D.C. fat cats, and to be left alone. Scamming is left for a Court of Law..not by you or any of you ignorant idiots to determine for anyone else. That’s what we have Courts for.

    (The hugest scam is 16 Trillion dollars of croney spending in 4 years, I see you don’t care about that).

    In a Free country that is, that have MILLIONS of people with different views the Gov has No Right to determine anything of anyone’s healthcare.

    The Gov should be the last to monitor what people choose to spend their own money on for themselves and should in fact start answering to us what they’ve done with Our money not the other way around ..not what others choose to do in their own Freedom. The hubris of conventionals knows no bounds apparently. You’re so far out there and full of it..I doubt you even know you’re not a mod republican..or you know you lied..or you just lie to yourself.

    It’s Not the same. You can Choose to have whatever healthcare you want, as long as Your healthcare is not infringing on My healthcare and Rights…see? now you’re tyrannizing my freedom, threatening to take away my free will and choice. ..(like a 2400 page takeover) or causing toxins in my food, air and water out to poison Everyone actually is Infringing on Everyone’s rights. Why you would argue for it, actually demand it! makes me wonder what it has done already to your mind..or perhaps your pocketbook if you gain from it in someway actually, how much do you make in it or stand to lose? I wonder… I can understand the threat in that case, since it’s No business of yours what I or anyone choose to spend their $ on.

    The Dave…apparently you haven’t a clue what Freedom is, even when it’s spelled out right before your eyes. I wonder now what you do have a clue of. None of your arguments make sense, are actually damned dangerous in a Free country that is.

  87. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

    A ferociously anti-government republican who is also incredibly paranoid about toxins in the food, water and air. That’s HILARIOUS. So, in this ideal world of little to no government, who is protecting us from collective action problems like pollution? Should the industry police itself? That’s a great idea, industry never takes short cuts, pollutes ground water or dumps waste.

    Moron.

  88. No..WLU..the industry should be policed by the Gov, should I repeat it again? That’s what needs “policing”. Not what people choose to spend their money on, or what healthcare/dental treatment the Gov or YOU say we all should get. What is your position in U.N. WLU…just wondering.

  89. Narad says:

    Narad, just curious, what country are you from?

    Let’s just say that I’m a 15-minute stroll from a semipermanent Secret Service encampment.

  90. Narad says:

    And, just to add, I am totally for solar and clean energy.. not having government in any way take anyone else’s money to pay for their supporters and their companies (some which have gone bankrupt anyway!?..hmmm). I have solar panels myself..for emergency in particular..it’s great! Just keep gov and tax dollars out of it and watch how it goes…

    Rusty, photovoltaic technology as we know it is a direct result of a government-implemented monopoly.

  91. Narad says:

    Maybe we need a little more Thomas Jefferson here…

    This should be good.

    Most bad government has grown out of too much government.

    Spurious.

    Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.

    Letter to Mazzei of 1796 April 24, misquoted and out of context: “In place of that noble love of liberty and republican government which carried us triumphantly thro’ the war, an Anglican, monarchical and aristocratical party has sprung up, whose avowed object is to draw over us the substance as they have already done the forms of the British government. The main body of our citizens however remain true to their republican principles, the whole landed interest is with them [hand-interlined to "is republican"], and so is a great mass of talents. Against us are the Executive, the Judiciary, two out of three branches of the legislature, all the officers of the government, all who want to be officers, all timid men who prefer the calm of despotism to the boisterous sea of liberty.”

    The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.

    Really spurious.

    I’ll finish this in a bit, but I think it’s obvious where it’s going.

  92. Narad says:

    A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor and bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.

    Slightly misquoted, but close enough. First inaugural address. I doubt that Rusty has read the next paragraph: “[I]t is proper you should understand what I deem the essential principles of our Government, and consequently those which ought to shape its Administration. I will compress them within the narrowest compass they will bear … the support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against antirepublican tendencies; the preservation of the General Government in its whole constitutional vigor…; absolute acquiescence in the decisions of the majority, the vital principle of republics….”

    Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others?

    Same inaugural address, out of order. Still inexplicable, as it’s part of a defense of federalism and republicanism over monarchy, and Rusty has already established terminal assurt over the former two.

    A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.

    Same thing, with a sloppily suggestive paraphrasing. This is the version proffered by the “Natural Law Party,” in case anybody is wondering precisely where Rusty’s script is sourced. The actual quote is from A Summary View of the Rights of British America, which has bugger all to do with any of Rusty’s complaints. One might also note that “chief Magistrate” is not exactly a perjorative.

    The right of self-government does not comprehend the government of others.

    Um, OK. “Opinion on the Constitutionality of the Residence Bill.” Bizarrely out of context: “A consequence of this is, that the houses may by a joint resolution remove themselves from place to place; because it is a part of their right of self-government: but that as the right of self-government does not comprehend the government of others, the two houses cannot, by a joint resolution of their majorities only, remove the executive, and judiciary from place to place.”

  93. Narad says:

    Wrapping up this exercise in how not to remedy a hangover,

    An elective despotism was not the government we fought for.

    Notes on the State of Virginia. An argument for checks and balances. Rusty is, of course, dissatisfied with this very system.

    History, in general, only informs us what bad government is.

    Letter to Norvell, 1807 June 14. Of no discernible relevance to anything on its face, but a useful reminder that history certainly informs us about how Rusty’s plan for the universe works out in practice. “To your request of my opinion of the manner in which a newspaper should be conducted so as to be most useful, I should answer, ‘by restraining it to true facts and sound principles only.’” Oops.

    The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.

    Letter to Carrington, 1788 May 27. “The 1st. amendment proposed by Massachusets will in some degree answer this end, but not so well. It will do too much in some instances and too little in others. It will cripple the federal government in some cases where it ought to be free, and not restrain it in some others where restraint would be right.” I’m afraid that Jefferson’s tentative optimism regarding Little Rhody (“What do you do about a problem like Maria?”) probably wouldn’t extend to Little Rhusty.

  94. cloudskimmer says:

    to Quill: One variety of strawberries has been developed with a gene from the Arctic Flounder to produce berries that are resistant to cold; freezing weather can destroy a strawberry crop, and this could prevent that. (http://www.nytimes.com/2000/12/05/health/personal-health-gene-altered-foods-a-case-against-panic.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm)

    I’ve been reading rustichealthy’s posts and wondering where she goes off the rails, as this thread has done (Wasn’t it about water filters?) She talks about her science and “your” science as if there were two different kinds. If only we could get through to her that the truth is external to our belief systems, which often lead us astray, and science is the best method we have to find it… but that appears to be a forlorn hope. Especially now that her defensive fortress is firmly established. What we need are standards of discourse, preferably eliminating use of logical fallacies and pretending they are reasons for belief. I don’t hold out any hope for her realizing this and subjecting her beliefs to rational inquiry, or even agreeing on what constitutes rational inquiry. I find myself wishing she would take a course in logic and realize that all the rants in the world don’t amount to one iota of evidence.

    If personal anecdotes amount to evidence, and whatever you took just before you felt better constitutes a cure, then it is just as easy to say that Vitamin C causes colds, arthritis and asthma. It’s just as likely that something that makes you feel better could cause me extreme harm, and if so, she could be hurting as many people as she “helps” on her website. It gives me no comfort to say that unless she dies suddenly, eventually the futility of her methods could be revealed in all their horror. Of course, the real die-hards will say that without their supplements, it would’ve been even worse, and thus armed with their logical fallacy of shifting the goalposts, will remain forever impervious to rationality, logic, and facts. Even more sad, she could inflict this on her children, should they develop a medically-curable condition, but she refuses to allow it. If she’s unlucky enough, they could die and prosecution for child abuse could result. It’s unlikely, though, and she may be able to retain her delusions for a lifetime.

    Reading her posts has been interesting, but overall it makes me very sad that there are people out there who cannot change their minds, and are unable to learn anything outside their own self-constructed paradigm. The level of hatred and paranoia in those posts are seriously destructive of social well-being. I can only hope that she conducts her life away from this website in a more collegial manner, especially to those with different beliefs. Overall, I really feel sorry for her, and for the corner she’s painted herself into, and I am sorry as well for the unpleasant level of discourse which really detracts from the overall high standards upheld here.

  95. cloudskimmer says:

    Thank you, Narad, for the history lesson, and for looking up all those references.

  96. Narad says:

    (Wasn’t it about water filters?)

    I think it still is, but the entire edifice apparently “has” to be reconstructed from scratch, and it will bounce off of Rusty’s fivehead anyway, and so on and so forth.

  97. cloudskimmer… She talks about her science and “your” science as if there were two different kinds.

    There are all kinds of science studies, the problem is conventionals have accepted Only Theirs and in Their Opinion what Everyone should Heed to, and now want to Force Their Substances (i.e. Fluoride) on Everyone too…I read a dentist is against fluoride treatment in water ..is he and anyone else who disagrees with you ignorant, closed, unscientific? or do they have other information you don’t like, and you want to silence actually. You can accept whatever ‘science’ you wish (and stop thinking it’s the only kind)…just don’t Force your substances on anyone from it. I’m not sure how difficult that can be to understand. I’m not Forcing Vit. C on you ..i.e. putting it in your food, water..see? the difference? I can only afford buying it for myself for that matter…just don’t try to stop me or anyone else in your stupid closed idiocy, (or hinder my Freedom of Speech…that’s another good thing about America..though I can see that in grave danger..according to your post too) and, once again, turning teeth Brown does mean it goes throughout the body and affect everything else..as it’s going through the Blood

    http://www.consumerhealth.org/articles/display.cfm?ID=19990303222823

    see,you have Your science, and I have mine.

  98. :) and cloudskimmer…after years of not being interested, my adult son chose to take vit. C, organic food, and bee pollen, and is now healed of Years of allergies … and is worse than I am in his own zeal about their great effects. Of course you will not try any of it, and that’s your own closed minded freedom of choice… just don’t try to stop anyone else from experiencing good health Their way!…that’s not a good thing.

  99. “Freedom of Speech is dangerous only to those who wish to silence it.” :) Did someone say that already? if not…you can put that down as one of mine :)

  100. weing says:

    “She talks about her science and “your” science as if there were two different kinds.”
    There is science and there are old wives tales. They are different. She just calls the latter her science.

Comments are closed.