I've never traveled anywhere in which people didn't use SOMETHING to wipe. If you live ina rural area of the Third World, it might be leaves, and you'll probably be going over a pit with a couple of boards across it. If you live in a city in Kenya, India, or China, then you use toilet paper. You might not be able to flush it down the toilet, but you use it.
I'm always suspicious when people say "the studies say.." I'd like to know where all these studies and surveys come come. Without the doctors/professors/labs names, I will say, and you will believe me just a much as this article, that "a HUGE study came out and stated that fresh veggies and fruits made with out processing was killing people at an earlier age. When asked why, the random man replied that people 200 years ago only lived until their 50's, now people live past 80, duh."
Also, you think that the milk poisoning was bad? Let's see how many cats and dogs we kill this week!!!
breathing causes a major impact on the environment..(draw your own conclusion). Also, isn't having a compost inside the apartment unhealthy? Shouldn't CPS be called to save that child?
...that Sally's article has passion that does not always translate as complete objectivity, I firmly believe that there is cause for concern here. The indutrial food-processing techniques and factory farming are doing us all damage. For instance, BSE - that came directly from factory-farming methods. I can't tell you what or how to eat though. This is merely a topic for deabte. I think calling it shenaningans is underplaying the serious nature of the topic though.
what Keith said. As an exercise simply use the same presentation & arguement method as this essay does with some topic that you disagree with and the flaws become obvious.
For example the claim that 25% of couples are infertile & the implication it is due to the food they eat simply ignores all sorts of evidence (such as the fact that venereal disease is a major cause of infertility...it appears that about 10% to 20% of all infertily is unexplained at best) to hype up the "danger" and of course to get one to buy the book and the food (and no doubt suppliments are offered) etc.
Reasons why couples are infertile: In addition to age-related factors, increased risk for infertility is associated with the following: Multiple sexual partners (increases risk for sexually transmitted diseases) Sexually transmitted diseases History of PID (pelvic inflammatory disease) History of orchitis or epididymitis in men Mumps (men) Varicocele (men) A past medical history that includes DES exposure (men or women) Eating disorders (women) Anovulatory menstrual cycles Endometriosis Defects of the uterus (myomas) or cervical obstruction Long-term (chronic) disease such as diabetes link: http://www.healthline.com/adamcontent/infertility#causesincidenceandrisk...
what Keith said. As an exercise simply use the same presentation & arguement method as this essay does with some topic that you disagree with and the flaws become obvious.
For example the claim that 25% of couples are infertile & the implication it is due to the food they eat simply ignores all sorts of evidence (such as the fact that venereal disease is a major cause of infertility...it appears that about 10% to 20% of all infertily is unexplained at best) to hype up the "danger" and of course to get one to buy the book and the food (and no doubt suppliments are offered) etc.
Reasons why couples are infertile:
In addition to age-related factors, increased risk for infertility is associated with the following:
Multiple sexual partners (increases risk for sexually transmitted diseases)
Sexually transmitted diseases
History of PID (pelvic inflammatory disease)
History of orchitis or epididymitis in men
Mumps (men)
Varicocele (men)
A past medical history that includes DES exposure (men or women)
Eating disorders (women)
Anovulatory menstrual cycles
Endometriosis
Defects of the uterus (myomas) or cervical obstruction
Long-term (chronic) disease such as diabetes
Ok what is below is long but the above makes my point that the essay ignores other causes and hypes what numbers are provided. For that reason alone I do NOT trust the other items (e.g., pestisides in OJ....hmmmm if true would not there be a slew of court cases with sick/dead children? At least children who were hyper allergic?)
See Below for a little google searching:
Even a quick google search points out that the 25% couple figure itself is probably wrong.
While I can not access the 1985 actual paper at this link
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-3370(198508)22%3A3%3C415%3ARIITUS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Z#abstract
...the title says 1 in 5 (20%) couples and that is for a host of reasons not because of the food and that, "Since 1965, infertility was unchanged overall and in most age groups, but increased among wives aged 20-24." Why would it only change in slightly younger (but not the youngest!) catagory as opposed to those who have been exposed for a longer time?
Paper title & cite: One-Fifth of U.S. Couples Infertile; One-Quarter of Contraceptively Sterilized Want More Children Family Planning Perspectives, Vol. 17, No. 6 (Nov. - Dec., 1985), pp. 268-269
Does point out the increase (in females) but explains it otherwise:
"The proportion of U.S. women aged 15-44 who reported some form of fecundity impairment rose from 8% in 1982 and 1988 to 10% in 1995, an increase in absolute numbers from 4.6 million to 6.2 million women. Although the proportion of fecundity-impaired women who had ever sought medical help did not change between 1988 and 1995 (44%), the absolute numbers of such women grew by nearly 30%, from 2.1 million to 2.7 million. Women who had ever sought help for fertility problems were older and had a higher income than those who had not, and were more likely to be married.
Conclusion: The dramatic increase in the numbers of U.S. women with impaired fecundity occurred because the large baby-boom cohort, many of whom delayed childbearing, had reached their later and less fecund reproductive years. This increase in both rates and numbers occurred across almost all age, parity, marital status, education, income, and race and ethnicity subgroups."
Family Planning Perspectives, 1998, 30(1):34-42
1st paragraph, "The most substantial change in infertility in the United States during the 1970s and 1980s was not in age-specific infertility rates, but in the numbers of women who reported infertility problems and sought medical help to have a baby. Though nationally representative surveys through 1988 provide no evidence of such rising rates,1 the popular press reported that rates of infertility themselves increased. Baby boomers' patterns of late marriage and delayed childbearing within marriage are chiefly responsible for this perception."
There's a hysterical gloom-and-doom tone to all of this, and not a lot of citation. (The few citations seem to be pointing at other natural foods proponents, which seems a bit incestuous.)
There are also lots of appeals to emotion, such as, "In fact, the USDA is gloating over the fact that children today get the vast majority of their important nutrients from the nutrients added to these boxed cereals." An emotional portrayal, rather than a scientific discussion. (The government is a bloated menace! Think of the Children! We're all going to die!)
While this article is good for promoting critical thinking about food choices, I think I'll look for independent verification before I believe everything that Sally Fallon says.
there is all kinds of meat replacers, and not all are made from soy. TVP may or may not include soy products. Seitan is made from wheat gluten and Quorn, which is a mycoprotein (sort of like a mushroom) Those last two are great, but seitan that squeaks when you chew it skeeves me out.
So let's see:
beef = mad cow & hormone poisoning
poultry = bird flu & salmonella
seafood = mercury & contaminated water toxicity
peanut butter = salmonella
spinach & lettuce = e-coli
Hell, even dogfood is contaminated now.
i highly recommend Omnivore's Delimma. it's a fascinating read about how corn is taking over our bodies, and how organic and self-sufficient farming can actually be more efficient than mass producing and specializing farms. i stopped eating fast food after fast food nation. i stopped eating high fructose corn syrup after reading Omnivore's Delimma.
The above site tells about the grooming costs for dogs i have gone through the similar site which gives a very good description of effective grooming costs
You all are getting way to fancy. The timer I use is a $4.99 jobby at Walmart, it counts up and down. Has a 10 and a 5 minute warning. This is an awesome way to work when you are on a strict time budget! And it has nothing to do with a computer, so I can easily carry it around and use it in other places.
But the article mentions the sour smell in their apartment. I can imagine doing it if I had a spare closet with killer ventilation that I kept my sports equipment in. If I had sports equipment, which I don't.
I do admire that they are trying so hard to make this experiment work.
I changed my comment, but yeah, I had mentioned fake meats. And I meant the ones made out of soy (is there another kind of fake meat?). I actually quite like these, but when I see the list of ingredients, I get worried.
I don't really eat much meat, mostly seafood and veggies. I read Fast Food Nation, too, and probably spend a week crying over the cows. But I'm a wuss. Or so says Will.
You mean the 'meats' made out of soy proteins? Or the nasty, hormone-injected, water-solution filled meats? I've read Fast-Food Nation and Don't Eat This Book. Meat scares me. Plus, I come from England. I could already have Mad Cow Disease and not know it, which is why I can't give blood here (I was a blood donor in the UK).
That part is especially depressing. We've always been told that juice is good for us. Some articles even say frequent consumption of juice can lower your Alzheimer's risk by 76%.
But those studies don't take the pesticides into account. It is a confusing time to be a consumer. =(
...that as Will, Greg and my good self are the judges, Will is out of the running. Very sorry. But someone as smart as Will could easily conjure up a fake name and email and produce a splendid answer. If he really wants the car that bad!
I've never traveled anywhere in which people didn't use SOMETHING to wipe. If you live ina rural area of the Third World, it might be leaves, and you'll probably be going over a pit with a couple of boards across it. If you live in a city in Kenya, India, or China, then you use toilet paper. You might not be able to flush it down the toilet, but you use it.
I'm always suspicious when people say "the studies say.." I'd like to know where all these studies and surveys come come. Without the doctors/professors/labs names, I will say, and you will believe me just a much as this article, that "a HUGE study came out and stated that fresh veggies and fruits made with out processing was killing people at an earlier age. When asked why, the random man replied that people 200 years ago only lived until their 50's, now people live past 80, duh."
Also, you think that the milk poisoning was bad? Let's see how many cats and dogs we kill this week!!!
breathing causes a major impact on the environment..(draw your own conclusion). Also, isn't having a compost inside the apartment unhealthy? Shouldn't CPS be called to save that child?
it's squishy?!
...that Sally's article has passion that does not always translate as complete objectivity, I firmly believe that there is cause for concern here. The indutrial food-processing techniques and factory farming are doing us all damage. For instance, BSE - that came directly from factory-farming methods. I can't tell you what or how to eat though. This is merely a topic for deabte. I think calling it shenaningans is underplaying the serious nature of the topic though.
OK, I can not format
what Keith said. As an exercise simply use the same presentation & arguement method as this essay does with some topic that you disagree with and the flaws become obvious.
For example the claim that 25% of couples are infertile & the implication it is due to the food they eat simply ignores all sorts of evidence (such as the fact that venereal disease is a major cause of infertility...it appears that about 10% to 20% of all infertily is unexplained at best) to hype up the "danger" and of course to get one to buy the book and the food (and no doubt suppliments are offered) etc.
Reasons why couples are infertile: In addition to age-related factors, increased risk for infertility is associated with the following: Multiple sexual partners (increases risk for sexually transmitted diseases) Sexually transmitted diseases History of PID (pelvic inflammatory disease) History of orchitis or epididymitis in men Mumps (men) Varicocele (men) A past medical history that includes DES exposure (men or women) Eating disorders (women) Anovulatory menstrual cycles Endometriosis Defects of the uterus (myomas) or cervical obstruction Long-term (chronic) disease such as diabetes link: http://www.healthline.com/adamcontent/infertility#causesincidenceandrisk...
what Keith said. As an exercise simply use the same presentation & arguement method as this essay does with some topic that you disagree with and the flaws become obvious.
For example the claim that 25% of couples are infertile & the implication it is due to the food they eat simply ignores all sorts of evidence (such as the fact that venereal disease is a major cause of infertility...it appears that about 10% to 20% of all infertily is unexplained at best) to hype up the "danger" and of course to get one to buy the book and the food (and no doubt suppliments are offered) etc.
Reasons why couples are infertile:
In addition to age-related factors, increased risk for infertility is associated with the following:
Multiple sexual partners (increases risk for sexually transmitted diseases)
Sexually transmitted diseases
History of PID (pelvic inflammatory disease)
History of orchitis or epididymitis in men
Mumps (men)
Varicocele (men)
A past medical history that includes DES exposure (men or women)
Eating disorders (women)
Anovulatory menstrual cycles
Endometriosis
Defects of the uterus (myomas) or cervical obstruction
Long-term (chronic) disease such as diabetes
link: http://www.healthline.com/adamcontent/infertility#causesincidenceandrisk...
Ok what is below is long but the above makes my point that the essay ignores other causes and hypes what numbers are provided. For that reason alone I do NOT trust the other items (e.g., pestisides in OJ....hmmmm if true would not there be a slew of court cases with sick/dead children? At least children who were hyper allergic?)
See Below for a little google searching:
Even a quick google search points out that the 25% couple figure itself is probably wrong.
While I can not access the 1985 actual paper at this link
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-3370(198508)22%3A3%3C415%3ARIITUS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Z#abstract
...the title says 1 in 5 (20%) couples and that is for a host of reasons not because of the food and that, "Since 1965, infertility was unchanged overall and in most age groups, but increased among wives aged 20-24." Why would it only change in slightly younger (but not the youngest!) catagory as opposed to those who have been exposed for a longer time?
Paper title & cite: One-Fifth of U.S. Couples Infertile; One-Quarter of Contraceptively Sterilized Want More Children Family Planning Perspectives, Vol. 17, No. 6 (Nov. - Dec., 1985), pp. 268-269
Another example with more recent data
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3003498.html
Does point out the increase (in females) but explains it otherwise:
"The proportion of U.S. women aged 15-44 who reported some form of fecundity impairment rose from 8% in 1982 and 1988 to 10% in 1995, an increase in absolute numbers from 4.6 million to 6.2 million women. Although the proportion of fecundity-impaired women who had ever sought medical help did not change between 1988 and 1995 (44%), the absolute numbers of such women grew by nearly 30%, from 2.1 million to 2.7 million. Women who had ever sought help for fertility problems were older and had a higher income than those who had not, and were more likely to be married.
Conclusion: The dramatic increase in the numbers of U.S. women with impaired fecundity occurred because the large baby-boom cohort, many of whom delayed childbearing, had reached their later and less fecund reproductive years. This increase in both rates and numbers occurred across almost all age, parity, marital status, education, income, and race and ethnicity subgroups."
Family Planning Perspectives, 1998, 30(1):34-42
1st paragraph, "The most substantial change in infertility in the United States during the 1970s and 1980s was not in age-specific infertility rates, but in the numbers of women who reported infertility problems and sought medical help to have a baby. Though nationally representative surveys through 1988 provide no evidence of such rising rates,1 the popular press reported that rates of infertility themselves increased. Baby boomers' patterns of late marriage and delayed childbearing within marriage are chiefly responsible for this perception."
And on and on....
It reads like marketing hype.....
I call shenanigans.
There's a hysterical gloom-and-doom tone to all of this, and not a lot of citation. (The few citations seem to be pointing at other natural foods proponents, which seems a bit incestuous.)
There are also lots of appeals to emotion, such as, "In fact, the USDA is gloating over the fact that children today get the vast majority of their important nutrients from the nutrients added to these boxed cereals." An emotional portrayal, rather than a scientific discussion. (The government is a bloated menace! Think of the Children! We're all going to die!)
While this article is good for promoting critical thinking about food choices, I think I'll look for independent verification before I believe everything that Sally Fallon says.
But thedealsplace is a complete rip of junglecrazy?
about 4 billion people don't use toilet paper. big whup.
there is all kinds of meat replacers, and not all are made from soy. TVP may or may not include soy products. Seitan is made from wheat gluten and Quorn, which is a mycoprotein (sort of like a mushroom) Those last two are great, but seitan that squeaks when you chew it skeeves me out.
So let's see:
beef = mad cow & hormone poisoning
poultry = bird flu & salmonella
seafood = mercury & contaminated water toxicity
peanut butter = salmonella
spinach & lettuce = e-coli
Hell, even dogfood is contaminated now.
What's left? Chocolate cake!!! :-)
Sold! You're right, it is much better to have something you can carry around. I'll give it a try, thanks Dave!
i highly recommend Omnivore's Delimma. it's a fascinating read about how corn is taking over our bodies, and how organic and self-sufficient farming can actually be more efficient than mass producing and specializing farms. i stopped eating fast food after fast food nation. i stopped eating high fructose corn syrup after reading Omnivore's Delimma.
The above site tells about the grooming costs for dogs i have gone through the similar site which gives a very good description of effective grooming costs
Will,
You all are getting way to fancy. The timer I use is a $4.99 jobby at Walmart, it counts up and down. Has a 10 and a 5 minute warning. This is an awesome way to work when you are on a strict time budget! And it has nothing to do with a computer, so I can easily carry it around and use it in other places.
Dave
http://www.BusinessAdviceDaily.com/
HA HA HA HA
Best stuff I've read in ages. Thanks for the post! I'll link to it from my site.
Hey, I have that squishy house from the picture!
But the article mentions the sour smell in their apartment. I can imagine doing it if I had a spare closet with killer ventilation that I kept my sports equipment in. If I had sports equipment, which I don't.
I do admire that they are trying so hard to make this experiment work.
I changed my comment, but yeah, I had mentioned fake meats. And I meant the ones made out of soy (is there another kind of fake meat?). I actually quite like these, but when I see the list of ingredients, I get worried.
I don't really eat much meat, mostly seafood and veggies. I read Fast Food Nation, too, and probably spend a week crying over the cows. But I'm a wuss. Or so says Will.
You mean the 'meats' made out of soy proteins? Or the nasty, hormone-injected, water-solution filled meats? I've read Fast-Food Nation and Don't Eat This Book. Meat scares me. Plus, I come from England. I could already have Mad Cow Disease and not know it, which is why I can't give blood here (I was a blood donor in the UK).
Well, I'll just stick to coffee and a cigarette for brekky, then. (Note to self: start smoking)
I've purchased shirts from them before and their quality is excellent. Thanks for the tip on the other stores!
"Now I have $300.00 in items I just couldn't live with out"
I know how you feel, unfortunately. =)
That part is especially depressing. We've always been told that juice is good for us. Some articles even say frequent consumption of juice can lower your Alzheimer's risk by 76%.
But those studies don't take the pesticides into account. It is a confusing time to be a consumer. =(
...that as Will, Greg and my good self are the judges, Will is out of the running. Very sorry. But someone as smart as Will could easily conjure up a fake name and email and produce a splendid answer. If he really wants the car that bad!
But then Consumerist beat me to it. I was going to call it "McStupid".