The True Story of Cosmetics

By Rich Kozlovich

This link will take you to a publication called, The True Story of Cosmetics, Exposing the Risks of the Smear Campaign, from the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), which when told the information comes from CEI, the greenies all roll their eyes and snort say....oh...."now we see where you get your information",which is a way of demeaning someone without presenting information to justify their view.

The fact is they hate CEI for exposing them as they have done with these claims from the Environmental Working Group (EWG), which along with The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics as its partner;

"are on a crusade to scare consumers away from using cosmetics and hygiene products that contain preservatives and other useful chemicals. As part of their effort to ban the use of synthetic ingredients from skin products, these environmental extremist groups are working to incite fear among consumers, making outrageous and bogus claims that we are poisoning ourselves by using lipstick, makeup, deodorants, skin creams, and even baby products. Specifically, they claim that the additives can cause cancer, create neurological disorders, or cause hormone disruption even though they are present in trace amounts."

So, why do I care about this? The claims are the same kind of claims they make against pesticides!   Furthermore, the real science needed to refute these unfounded, unscientific claims are also the same. To understand one of these issues is to understand all of them.

As an example they point out;

The Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011 presented In June 2011, three legislators seized the opportunity in the heat of a controversy involving a product called Brazilian Blowout—a hair salon product that violated U.S. safety laws and caused short-term health effects—to go after chemicals in all cosmetic products. Although the problem was quickly resolved used it as justification to introduce legislation that, if passed, will needlessly create a mammoth, overreaching, and costly regulatory regime over the manufacturing of cosmetics….The bill establishes a new safety standard for cosmetics that is out of whack with any sensible understanding of toxicology. It defines “reasonable certainty of no harm” as not exceeding a “1 in a million risk for any adverse health effect.” That would apply to just about every ingredient since just about everything carries a risk of more than one in a million, including bottled drinking water.

It is the same standard used for the Food Quality Protection Act of 1994. When applied to pesticides, it has led to unwarranted bans on numerous and critically valuable products, leaving consumers with few defenses against a host of risks, from West Nile virus to Lyme disease, as well as the psychological stress and uncomfortable stress and itchy welts associated with emerging bedbug problems.

The media has failed to present the story in any way that represents true science. They will intone on the new....beware _________(fill in the blank) because it sells and makes them look as if they actually know what they are talking about.  They love these scare mongering tactics.  All that I ask of the media is that they do their job by doing the research to find out what really is the truth. They claim to serve the public, but I find this to be hollow. The fact is; the media are as agenda driven as are the activists. Should we be upset to find that the media drives agendas? I think not. What we should be upset about is their failure to find out what is factual versus what is emotional scare mongering. Especially when emotion wins out over facts every time.

Boy....is that a stupid thought or what? If all they were concerned with was facts then what would they do with all that empty space in the newspapers and magazines? Worse yet; what would they do about newscasters just sitting there smiling and not talking? Well...there is one upside to that. No one would call them talking heads any longer!

###

Ecotopia, Organoism, Locavorism and Other Eco Fads.

...

Debunking the Phony Beliefs of the Modern Green Movement
by Patrick J. Michaels

I would like to thank J. Johnson for sending this to me. RK

Since our halcyon times in Oregon I've been waiting for the definitive tome on the systematic errors of organoism, and I have finally found it in Todd Myers' new book Eco-fads.

…….sanctimony of the beans-and-rice crowd, and opine that "everything they knew was wrong." Passing the salad bar, he would mutter, "empty vitamins."….. Acid rain didn't kill the Black Forest........The Population Bomb never exploded.,….subsidize solar energy [will] cost in 2016…..an "astounding $396.10 per MWh"(Megawatt-hour) compared to about $79 for natural gas. …..Why did we allow horrendously bad science — see the spotted owl — destroy the livelihood (and some of the lives) of so many in the Pacific Northwest? …..it gets down, largely, to incentives, summarized by his PPP model: personal, popular and phony.…..the organo nostrum that forests left alone and protected from fires are healthy. In fact, they tend to be pretty sick, as the normal thinning from fires is suppressed, resulting in an unhealthy tree density, invasion and death from bark beetles, and then — surprise — a mega fire that takes down the entire woods.

John Plaza, CEO of the failed biofuel facility Imperium Renewables (you would think a better name would have helped) thinks it's all the government's fault. "What the industry needs," he said, "is a two-fold support, a mandated floor, and incentives and tax policy to get the outcomes we're trying for." In other words, more expensive energy subsidized by you and me, and the government rigging the market.

My Take - I really do believe that old entomologist who once said that "there is nothing like a good epidemic to get things started". This struggling worldwide economy, and the fact that developed parts of the world, such as the E.U., are going to see even more economic problems because of the insane actions of their governments in attempting to "go green" with their emissions, is forcing everyone to realize reality....dystopia follows green like Sancho Panza followed Don Quixote. In fact one of the major problems people in the U.K. will be facing this winter is energy delivery for heat. J. Johnson is from the U.K. so I am sure she is hoping that at some point some of those in decision making positions over there will be sent back into the asylums from which they escaped, and sane people who have read this book will take over. RK

Why do we listen to these people?

By Rich Kozlovich

The Environmental Working Group recently posted a news realease form the National Academies about how ethanol worsens greenhouse gases, which is fascinating. For years all I heard from the green left is that we had to turn to alternative energy sources because our traditional sources were either running out or were a disaster for the environment.

First: we are in no way running out of traditional energy sources such as coal, oil or natural gas. In spite of all the hyperbole many of us have known that for years. The tale is always in the history and historically we kept finding and using more oil than the last estimate of all known reserves. Now everyone knows it because so much natural gas and oil has been discovered lately. And the greenies look like fools, except the media doesn’t paint them in this light.

One of their pet programs was biofuels. Biofuels cannot compete financially with traditional sources, so it has to be subsidized in some fashion. We have known for some time that biofuels will do a number of detrimental things. As more and more biofuel replaces traditional sources more biofuel would be required than is sustainable, because biofuels aren’t as efficient in delivering energy. Therefore biofuels will take up huge amounts of land that would have been used for growing food, so the price of food is skyrocketing all over the world, including the U.S. We know this extra use of land will eliminate habitat for endangered species; which I don’t particularly care about, but the greenies are nutso over this issue.

We also know that the processing of biofuels is very detrimental to the environment; provided that you buy into anthropogenic climate change claptrap regarding emissions. And cellulosic biofuels are even worse because it takes so much more of everything to turn cellulose into ethanol. That cost is prohibitive without mandates or subsidies on all biofuels and it is worse for cellulosic biofuel.

Sheila Karpf, EWG’s legislative and policy analyst says that “This report highlights the severe damage to the environment from corn-based ethanol,” and that “It underscores just how misguided U.S. biofuels policy has become. It catalogs the environmentally damaging aspects of corn-based ethanol and also casts serious doubt on the future viability of so-called ‘advanced’ biofuels made from other sources.”

So now we have the Environmental Working Group telling everyone the truth. Great….but where did this “misguided” policy come from in the first place?  It came about because the greenies were the ones demanding this stuff, and everyone started running around crying; Go Green, Go Green , Go Green, without a clue as to what it would ultimately mean. It became the cause célèbre. Shouldn’t we at least start asking now; why didn’t they know this before everyone started passing legislation promoting it and others started investing in fields and plants to produce this stuff? Why was the green movement so hot on this in the first place if this was such a bad thing?

I believe the reason is (as far as I have been able to determine over the years) they don’t have a clue because they are like bureaucrats. They do activism….they don’t do work. They think that have all the answers when in reality they don’t even know the questions because they have no practical experience in the areas they are critiquing.

We need do to really get this. These people are clueless. They are great at finding fault, but they couldn’t find a solution if someone threw a bucket of it on them. If any of this stuff was worth doing some businessman would have done it. And he would have done it without government subsidies.

###

American Council on Science and Health, 2011: Week 41

The presence of linked articles here are merely a way of showing what is going on, whether I agree or disagree with the positions presented. Rich Kozlovich

AIDS

Time to rethink the MSM blood donation ban
Men who have had sex with another man on any occasion since 1977 are currently prohibited from donating blood in the U.S.

My Take – Over the years these assurances have turned out to be false comfort for those who contracted  this disease. RK

BLOOD PRESSURE

DIET Don’t underestimate risks associated with prehypertension
Classified as "the silent killer," hypertension is the underlying cause of many adverse health outcomes, including heart attacks, strokes, and kidney disease.

CANCER

A prostate cancer prophylaxis? Vitamin E pills are anything but
Yesterday we wrote about the potential ill effects of taking supplements, and today we continue in the same vein, as a new study has linked the use of vitamin E pills to prostate cancer.

Post-mastectomy radiotherapy effective for some cancer patients
At this year's annual meeting of the American Society for Radiation Oncology, Dr. Rahul Tendulkar of the Cleveland Clinic presented important data on the efficacy of radiation therapy following a mastectomy in breast cancer patients with only a few (one to three) positive lymph nodes.

DIET AND OBIESITY

Weighty concerns about teenage bariatric surgery
A commentary in the New England Journal of Medicine expresses concerns about the advisability of employing weight-loss surgery for teenagers who are severely obese.

For diabetics, the clock is ticking
A large study has found that the risk of ischemic stroke - the most common type - rises over time with diabetes, and may triple ten years after the diagnosis is made.

EPILEPCY

Grand news for epileptics
A new report published in The Lancet by researchers in London reveals promising news for epileptics: About half of epilepsy patients are able to remain entirely free of seizures for at least 10 years following brain surgery for the disorder.

GMO’S

GM salmon’s uphill swim may be near the end
Last time we checked on the status of the genetically-engineered salmon developed by AquaBounty Technologies, a number of Congressmen and Senators were clamoring to prohibit the FDA from approving the fish. Now, the FDA has submitted its support of the salmon's commercial production, leaving only the final step of approval from the White House's Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

PARMA

Old drugs, new tricks
Two existing drugs have recently been given FDA approval for new uses: One targets prostate enlargement, and the other is a combination diabetes and statin drug that is projected to prevent a wide range of complications commonly associated with diabetes, including cardiovascular disease (CVD).

SCARES AND CONSEQUENCES

More of the same ALAR-mist tripe from NRDC
We've reported on bad studies. We've reported on scare tactics. But a new screed from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) manages to combine both of these in one wildly unfounded toxic seafood threat.

STUDIES – TURE, FALSE AND MISLEADING

There are good studies, bad studies... and then this
Despite ACSH's efforts to promote sound scientific practices in public health research and journalism, there are always some researchers who seem to manipulate data and stretch them to limits unjustified by any rational interpretation.

SUPPLEMENTS

If supplements don't help, why bother?
New research is questioning the benefits of taking supplemental vitamins and minerals, suggesting that, for the general population, such supplements may actually pose more risks than benefits.

Young women need folate — and so do their progeny
This week, we haven't had much that's positive to say about dietary supplements. However, the results of a new Norwegian study have reminded us that, despite the questionable utility of most supplements, folic acid actually offers real benefits.

TB

Global toll of tuberculosis falling, yet still one of the leading killers
In its 2011 Global Tuberculosis Control Report, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced that last year, for the first time, the global incidence of tuberculosis (TB) declined, while deaths associated with the disease dropped to a record low for the past decade.

TOBACCCO

Hospital anti-smoking advice not up to snuff, nor snus
Are hospitals really doing enough to help smokers quit the dangerous habit?

Maybe new e-cigarette study will lower the heat
The clean nicotine delivery device known as the electronic cigarette has fared well in its first clinical trial.

If there is a health scare today, the American Council on Science and Health will most likely have the answer by tomorrow; and for members it will appear in your e-mail. No effort on your part, except to read the answer. All that the ACSH is interested in are the facts and they are prepared to follow them wherever they lead. Who can ask for more?  Please Donate Now!

###

Observations From the Back Row: 10-15-11

...

“De Omnibus Dubitandum”

Video with John Stossel and Richard Tren regarding DDT

A complete list of things caused by global warming

Battling Bad Science

New Video: Paul Ryan on Repealing Obamacare

Everthing we are told should bear some resemblance to what we see going on in reality!

______________________________________

Creation Myth - Governments are worse than no good at “creating jobs.”

A week before President Barack Obama was scheduled to deliver yet another big-think proposal to Get America Working Again, reality intervened with a well-timed smack upside the head: Solyndra, a California solar panel company, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Back in May 2010, as part of the run-up to what the administration was then touting as “Recovery Summer,” Obama used Solyndra as a poster child for both the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and his long-stated promise to create millions of “green jobs.”…. Agency numbers cited by Investor’s Business Daily in August, the Recovery Act’s $7.2 billion in “clean tech” money had “created or retained” a pathetic 7,140 jobs, at a cost of about $1 million each. According to the Department of Energy’s inspector general, one reason for this paltry payoff is the wage and regulatory provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the Buy American Act. In sum: The government scooped up hundreds of billions from taxpayers, redistributed it in the name of creating jobs, then attached a series of requirements that made job creation much more expensive and therefore unlikely……Contributing Editor Deirdre McCloskey highlights what may be the most salient point: “‘Jobs’ are deals between workers and employers, and so ‘creating’ them out of unwilling parties is impossible. The state, though, can outlaw deals, and has.” Until that insight sinks in, it will be a long time before America gets back to work.

SunPower: Twice As Bad As Solyndra, Twice As Bad For Obama -Congressman's son lobbied f
or failing solar panel company

How did a failing California solar company, buffeted by short sellers and shareholder lawsuits, receive a $1.2 billion federal loan guarantee for a photovoltaic electricity ranch project—three weeks after it announced it was building new manufacturing plant in Mexicali, Mexico, to build the panels for the project.

The company, SunPower (SPWR-NASDAQ), now carries $820 million in debt, an amount $20 million greater than its market capitalization. If SunPower was a bank, the feds would shut it down. Instead, it received a lifeline twice the size of the money sent down the Solyndra drain.

Green Jobs Brown Out - How to spend $157,000 per job.

The green jobs subsidy story gets more embarrassing by the day. Three years ago President Obama promised that by the end of the decade America would have five million green jobs, but so far some $90 billion in government spending has delivered very few.  A new report by the Labor Department's Office of Inspector General examined a $500 million grant under the stimulus program to the Employment and Training Administration to "train and prepare individuals for careers in 'green jobs.'" So far about $162.8 million has been spent. The program was supposed to train 125,000 workers, but only 53,000 have been "trained" so far, only 8,035 have found jobs, and only 1,033 were still in the job after six months.

Occupy Wall Street: Communism's Clueless Foot Soldiers

"The time has come," the Walrus said,

"To talk of many things:

Of shoes, and ships, and sealing wax -

Of cabbages and kings,

And why the sea is boiling hot,

And whether pigs have wings."

###

Europe’s Biotech Food Ban Must End

By Alan Caruba (January 25, 2006)

Since May 2003, the United States, joined by Canada and Argentina, has pursued a World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement process against the European Union (EU) regarding its de facto moratorium banning biogenetically altered food crops.

The main opponents of such crops include the usual "environmental" organizations for whom any progress toward eliminating famine and disease is regarded as an increase in the Earth’s human population. If you’re a member of the Earth Liberation Front, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, the Center for Food Safety, and the Organic Consumers Association, among others, the scientific advances of biotechnology are bad news.

If you are a member of the human race, however, genetically-modified foods (GMOs) means (1) an increase in agricultural productivity wherever such crops are grown; (2) crops that can resist the effects of drought, a common cause of crop failures; (3) the bioengineered increase of nutrients and a decrease of saturated fats in various food crops; and (4) the reduction of the use of insecticides and herbicides. Farmers will tell you GMOs, in addition to reducing the amount of water needed to grow certain crops, contribute to the reduction of soil erosion caused by agriculture.

So why is the European Union refusing to permit the importation and use of GMOs? Alex Avery of the Hudson Institute probably said it best when he described it as "technological apartheid." While the Europeans are well fed, the fate of people in Africa and other Third World nations are of little importance to them for purely economic reasons. Avery points out that, "More than half of the EU’s collective budget is gobbled up by farm subsidy costs, so Europe has done all that it can to avoid productivity-enhancing technologies for cost savings."

In the interest of keeping GMO crops from America and other nations out of Europe, the EU has declared that such crops may pose a health risk. They say that genetically modified crops, if grown in Europe, might "contaminate" organic crops. Baloney! For all the reasons stated above, GMO crops not only do not pose a threat to organic crops, except in terms of greater yields, they hold the potential for the virtual elimination of famines that cause the deaths of millions worldwide every year.

The EU represents the fourth largest market for U.S. agricultural exports. The earnings were projected by the U.S. Department of Agriculture at $7 billion for 2005, nearly 12% of all the U.S. agricultural exports. The main export products are soybeans, tobacco, and animal feed, including corn gluten.

To date, the EU has not offered a scintilla of scientific evidence to justify the market bans imposed by some member states. The whole point of the World Trade Organization is to end frivolous bans in order to facilitate, well, world trade! The WTO even has an Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures that requires "sufficient scientific evidence" to support trade-restrictive regulations on crops and food products."

Speaking in May 2003, President Bush said, "Our partners in Europe…have blocked all new bio-crops because of unfounded, unscientific fears. This has caused many African nations from investing in biotechnology for fear that their products will be shut out of European markets. European governments should join, not hinder, the great cause of ending hunger in Africa."

The opponents of GMOs will tell you this is about consumers versus agricultural corporations or they will continue to fear-monger about the safety of GMO foods. It’s a government-to-government confrontation over food exports and more than a dozen nations, including South Africa, Argentina, Chile, Canada, Australia, Columbia, El Salvador, Honduras, New Zealand, Peru, Uruguay, Mexico and Egypt, have expressed support for the U.S. initiative currently waiting a still-delayed decision by the EU.

Putting aside the financial aspects of the ban EU member states have imposed, the issue of GMO safety has long since been decided. In 2004, the National Research Council, a division of the National Academy of Sciences, issued a report in which it found that genetic engineering is "not an inherently hazardous process", calling the fears of the anti-biotech crowd "scientifically unjustified." The report in fact repeated findings that date back to 1987.

The United Kingdom-based Institute for Food Science and Technology found that "Genetic modification has the potential to offer very significant improvements in the quantity, quality and acceptability of the world’s food supply."

Not only is there no cause to fear GMO food products, since the WTO case was launched in 2003, the planting of biotech crops has increased around the world at unprecedented rates. In 2005 alone, more than 81 million hectares were sown with biotech crops by more than eight million farmers in 17 countries; a 20% increase over the previous year. They are even being planted in European nations where farmers in Spain, France, Portugal, Germany, the Czech Republic, and Romania are taking advantage of the benefits they represent.

While a favorable decision by the WTO opening European markets to GMO food choices will be good for consumers, the real winners will be the world’s farmers who have suffered the most under these de facto trade restrictions.

So now we wait for the EU to do, at last, the right thing, the moral thing, by ending the GMO ban it has imposed.

© 2006 Alan Caruba.

All rights reserved.

Alan’s work has a sense of timelessness about it, so anyone perusing these articles in the future will find them equally insightful as they were when originally written. For Alan's latest thoughts go to his blog, Warning Signs. For his past works go to The National Anxiety Center. I would also recommend reading his last book, Right Answers.

No One Can Warp Reality Like the Media

By Rich Kozlovich, Tags:

Over the years I have placed a great deal of the blame on the rise of the green movement and the outrageous regulations imposed on the nation because of them on the media. They have distorted the science, misreported the events and have generally favored these radical environmental groups for decades. This is just one more piece of evidence that everything you read in the newspapers, everything you see on the news is like looking through a warped lens of a telescope.  Describing what they do as propaganda is being kind. And much of what you see on the documentaries on the nature and science channels are nothing short of greenie propaganda also. 

So You Want to be Green Do You?

Rich Kozlovich

Do you really want to be green? I mean, do you really....really want to be green! I don't hear that said all that often here in Ohio. After all we are true Midwesterners with Midwestern common sense, intelligence and wisdom, and most of the people I talk to are suffering from green fatigue; but we have our enclaves of irrationality too.

There are those who just insist that they are green, or really want to be as green as possible, and there are those who would like to be green but aren’t quite sure what it takes. Quite frankly I don’t care either way if they choose to be green as long as they don’t ask me to join them on their psychedelic journey. I often wonder what green really means to them, because being green seems to mean different things to different people. I have spent years reading and writing about this subject so I think I can outline what it means to be green in a brief summary of twenty five points.

1. To understand what it means to be green is to understand what it means to lack honor, courage, intelligence, integrity, and above all, a love for truth.  All the while believing that you will stand at a higher level of social morality than the rest of humanity.
2. In order to be green you will be required to stand up for things which are unproven or un-provable.
3. You must be willing to accept speculation as fact.
4. You must be willing to promote policy based on speculation.
5. You must be willing to support things that aren't true.
6. You must be willing to refute or reject those things which are true!
7. You must refuse to hear any evidence contrary to the green litany.
8. Those in pest control must proclaim our unwavering resolve to support Integrated Pest Management (IPM), Deep IPM, True IPM, Green Pest Control, Organic Pest Control, or whatever is the latest “green” philosophical flavor of the day.
9. You must resolve to support the idea that pesticides cause a whole host of maladies and are destroying the environment.
10. To understand what it means to be green is to be able to swallow to most noxious misanthropic concepts and convince yourself that these vile reasonings are elegant intellectual thoughts.
11. You must ignore the evidence that pesticides have provided for longer, healthier and better fed lives than ever before in human history.
12. You must believe that living longer, healthier lives is bad for the planet.
13. You must believe that capitalism is the world’s greatest enemy because it is causing global warming and gives us better and longer lives.
14. You will have to believe that the billions of cases of sickness or death that has afflicted people as a result of greenie policies are acceptable.
15. Although we can’t predict tomorrow’s weather with any real degree of accuracy, you must believe that not only can we predict climate (which is far more complex) 100 years out, but you must believe that humanity can control it in spite of the fact we can’t control today’s rain.
16. You must believe we have to abandon all modern conveniences and return to nature and become one with the biosphere by living the primitive life.
17. You have to believe that all energy sources are evil.
18. You must accept the idea that the world is over populated and so it is acceptable to impose policies that will rid the world of a minimum of about four billion people.
19. It will not be acceptable for you to turn your nose up to people who believe that it is acceptable for humanity to be eliminated.
20. You will have to believe that humans are no more important than a worm.
21. You must accept fairy tales of people like Rachel Carson, the Mother of Junk Science, and her acolytes and call it science.
22. You must be willing to reject the evidence of history and our own eyes.
23. You must drink the Kool-Aid and breathe the fumes of the fever swamps of environmentalism.
24. You must believe that insanity is now sanity
25. You absolutely must be irrational, misanthropic, morally defective and be prepared to hallow that which is unholy!

There....that is all it takes to be truly green! Have a really good day!

Vitamin E increases prostate cancer risk?

By Steve Milloy

I would like to thank Steve for allowing me to publish his works. This article is a classic example of following the facts wherever they lead with a consistent set of values. I would like to recommend Steve Milloy's book Junk Science Judo, which I have read more than once in order to get a better understanding of how statistics, and those who misrepresent them, promote an agenda. I have read two books on the subject and I can honestly say that there is a reason for callling statistics the "arcane science". I would also like to draw everyone's attention to another of Steve's commentaries regarding supplements and this business of publishing studies with outrageous claims that are more inflamatory than illuminating called, Multivitamins kill older women? RK

Will a new study end vitamin E as a dietary supplement for men?

The study in the Journal of the American Medical Association reports that “dietary supplementation with vitamin E significantly increased the risk of prostate cancer among healthy men.”

The study would seem to have some merit as it is clinical trial-ish, involved 35,533 men who were followed for 7-12 years and produced statistically significant results. The researchers estimate that vitamin E supplementation increases prostate cancer risk by 1.6 extra cancers per 1000 person-years.

So what’s the problem?

Though statistically significant, the results were weak (i.e., a relative risk of 1.17) and only marginally (if not suspiciously) statistically significant (i.e., the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval was 1.004).

While clinical trials can conceivably get away with weaker statistics — i.e., they tend to be more highly-controlled than, say, case-control epidemiology — this one fails the mark for two reasons.

Although the study subjects were provided with vitamin supplements, no one knows how well study subjects adhered to the vitamin regiment. So intake of vitamin E is somewhat uncertain, a problem for weak statistical results.

Next and perhaps more importantly, it’s not at all clear that data were collected on potential confounding risk factors for prostate cancer. The study, if its omission of potential confounders from mention is any indication, dubiously pretends that vitamin E supplementation is the only risk factor for prostate cancer. [Note: The lead study author assures me that family history and other confounders were considered but we await confirmation of this.]

Finally, the researchers acknowledge that they have no idea how vitamin E supplementation could possibly alter prostate cancer risk:

A biological explanation for the observed increased risk of prostate cancer in the vitamin E arm [of the trial] is not apparent from these data.

So while it’s not clear that vitamin E supplementation does any good, this study does not constitute evidence that it causes any harm.

###

Logical Fallacy of the Week, Week 12: Fallacy of exclusive premises

...

Fallacy of exclusive premises

The fallacy of exclusive premises is a syllogistic fallacy committed in a categorical syllogism that is invalid because both of its premises are negative.

Example of an EOO-4 invalid proposition:

E Proposition: No mammals are fishes.
O Proposition: Some fishes are not whales.
O Proposition: Therefore, some whales are not mammals.

Please follow the link for additional information and links.  RK

###

With Our Own Values They Destroy Us: Part VIII

...

When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it. - Frédéric Bastiat

What You Can Do

This should all be considered a part of the Green and Problems of Democracy series.

Green and Problems of Democracy
Green and Problems of Democracy, Part I
Green and Problems of Democracy: Part II
Green and Problems of Democrcy, Part III
With Our Own Values They Destroy Us.
With Our Own Values They Destroy Us, Part II
With Our Own Values They Destroy Us, Part III
With Our Own Values They Destroy Us, Part III
With Our Own Values They Destroy Us; Part IV
With Our Own Values They Destroy Us; Part V
With Our Own Values They Destroy Us: Part VI
With Our Own Values They Destroy Us: Part VII

###

The Wall Street Parade: Loons, Liars and Demagogues!

To see a list of their demands please go to,
"They don't know what they want, but they want it now!

Oops! Occupy Wall Street slums step on big toes

Protesters trashing park with ties to powerful political, financial players - New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's girlfriend serves on the board of directors for the private company that owns the park where Occupy Wall Street protesters have set up their home base, WND has learned. The protesters have reportedly been making a mess of Zuccotti Park, a public space that's owned by a private financial giant, Brookfield Office Properties, Inc. The park, close to Wall Street, is named after Brookfield's co-chairman, John Zuccotti. According to the Wall Street Journal, Brookfield wanted the protesters removed, but Bloomberg's New York Police Department urged the private company to allow the protests to stay in the park.

Obama pastor: Occupiers on Wall Street 'stand with Jesus'

Suggests church members have 'potluck' at protests. A member of President Obama's controversial faith council has implied the Occupy Wall Street movement stands with Jesus, while asking church members to bring pizza and casseroles to the protesters.

Wall Street’s Disgruntled Utopians

How rhetoric about "income inequality" masks the protesters' true goal. - The Occupy Wall Street protesters are looking more and more like the shock troops of the Democratic Party’s electoral tactic of class warfare. Responding to a question about the protesters, the President gave an oblique endorsement when he said, “The American people understand that not everybody has been following the rules; that Wall Street is an example of that.” …… Certainly organized labor also thinks they can use the protesters, which is why some labor groups––particularly public employee unions hooked up to diminishing taxpayer-funded life support––are marching alongside them, in the hopes that they can exploit this movement to protect their Cadillac benefits.....[As for the rich paying their fair share] In 1981, the top 1% paid 17.58% of all federal income taxes; in 2005, this same cohort paid 39.38%. In 1981 the top 1% paid $94.84 billion (in 2005 dollars); in 2005 they paid $368.13, an increase of 288%. In the most progressive tax system among OECD economies, today the top 10% of American taxpayers pay 70% of all revenues, while the bottom 47% pay nothing. In other words, this increasing “income inequality” has led to the rich footing most of the tax bill for all the goodies the federal government dispenses. Contrary to the current class-warfare rhetoric, “If you want to get more tax revenues from the rich,” economist Arthur Laffer points out, “you’ve got to make the rich richer, and to make the rich richer, you’ve got to lower tax rates.” If the “anarchists for Big Government,” as Mark Steyn calls them, really want more federal money for their demands like “free college education,” “a $20 minimum wage,” and a trillion dollars for “ecological restoration,” they should be endorsing supply-side economics.

Cain steps up attacks on Wall Street occupiers

Herman calls protesters 'jealous' Americans who 'play the victim card' - Move protests to Obama's home, says Cain - Wall Street didn't write these failed economic policies. The White House did'

Pelosi Supports Occupy Wall Street Movement

House Democratic Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said she supports the growing nationwide Occupy Wall Street movement, which began on the streets of downtown New York City in mid-September.House

Meet the Obama link to Wall Street terror

Radical's plan involves strategy to collapse stock market - Stephen Lerner, a controversial anti-capitalist SEIU organizer, is one of the forces behind the protests on Wall Street and nationwide, according to quotes obtained by a socialist activist who doubles as a Washington Post columnist. WND was first to report Lerner was the brain behind some of the economic protest templates being used by the Occupy Wall Street campaign. Lerner recently laid out a mass economic protest plan intended to bring down the stock market, and boasted his plan could be used to cause a new financial crisis. His ideology prompted some conservative critics to go so far as to label him an economic terrorist.

Occupation of Wall Street—What Would Che Guevara Do?

Guevara would clear the occupation of Wall Street in a New York nanosecond. His colleagues of the time recall Che cheering the Soviet tanks slaughtering Hungarian freedom-fighters in the streets of Budapest. The youths they machine-gunned and blasted were all “fascists and CIA agents!” he raved……In a TV speech on June 26, 1961, when Che Guevara was Cuba’s “Minister of Industries,” he proclaimed: “Cuban workers must get used to live in a collectivist regimen, and by no means can they go on strike!” …………Che Guevara also denounced those who “choose their own path” (as in growing long hair and listening to “Yankee-Imperialist” rock & roll). These were vilified as worthless “roqueros,” “lumpen,” and “delinquents.” In his famous speech, Che Guevara even vowed “to make individualism disappear from Cuba! It is criminal to think of individuals!”

ACORN: Puppet Master of Occupy Wall Street

The Working Families Party, an infamous ACORN front group notorious for corruption, was instrumental in organizing the Occupy Wall Street protests, according to radical journalist Laura Flanders of Free Speech TV….. ACORN allies are also involved in protests aimed at destabilizing the nation’s financial system….. Last year George Goehl, executive director of Chicago-based National People’s Action, said that “the banking crisis” was “the next big thing,” and “the way to build a big economic justice movement in this country.” Meanwhile, ACORN’s new front groups are also deeply involved in the Occupy Wall Street movement.

###

Will Warmists Face Justice for their Deceptions?

By Alan Caruba

This originally appeared here. I recommend following the links, especially the link dealing with the Mann’s legal issues.  RK

When you murder someone the case is never closed. The same holds when you murder the truth. No matter how long it takes, truth is defended despite all the calumnies heaped on those who stand firm against the lies and the propaganda intended to persuade those who have been deceived.

Ultimately, truth is its own defense. There never was a shred of truth in the claim that humans were causing the Earth’s climate to heat up by using so-called “fossil fuels” and engaging in manufacturing and other activities. There was no dramatic “global warming” in the 1980s until the present.

The Earth’s climate has warmed very slightly since the end of the Little Ice Age, dated to around 1850. Five hundred years of extremely cold weather had gripped the northern hemisphere starting around 1300. The much heralded “climate change” is, unlike the weather, measured in terms of centuries, not days, weeks or years. It is used by politicians that do not know what they are talking about. It is also used by charlatans, but I repeat myself.

Under the direction of the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) a massive fraud was engineered. The object was to turn carbon dioxide (CO2), a common though minor atmospheric gas, into a commodity that could be traded in exchanges around the world that would issue “carbon credits” to utilities, industrial facilities, and others who would be required to pay for permission to produce energy and products. It was an audacious scheme.

It began with the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, otherwise known as the Kyoto Protocol. It set binding targets for the reduction of CO2 by 37 industrialized nations and the European community and was adopted on December 11, 1997 and entered into force on February 16, 2005. The U.S. never signed the Protocols. They were rejected by a unanimous vote in the Senate.

It was a complete lie without any basis in science. C02 plays no role in climate change and reducing whatever amount industry and other human activities might produce would be meaningless.

Surely the people behind the scheme knew this. The IPCC charged a small clique of climate scientists to come up with “proof” that global warming was happening. In England they were located at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit and, in America, they were led by Dr. Michael Mann working first at the University of Virginia and later at Penn State University.

Dr. Michael Mann's "Hockey Stick" Graph

Mann’s research, assisted by co-authors Bradley and Hughes, was published in 1998. “Northern Hemisphere Temperatures During the Past Millennium: Inferences, Uncertainties, and Limitations” became famous for a graph dubbed the “hockey stick”. Its sudden upward curve, intended to demonstrate a dramatic increase was based on tree ring reconstruction of climate over a thousand years.

To say it attracted attention is an understatement. It and other studies produced by the IPCC clique became the cornerstone of the “global warming” hoax. The problem for Dr. Mann was that Steve McIntyre, a Canadian mathematician in Toronto, along with Ross McKitrick of the University of Guelph concluded it was bogus science and published a paper in 2004 criticizing it.

In science, when a theory or hypothesis is put forward, the data supporting it is as well. Years went by before McIntyre could get access to it. The tree ring data had been provided by Keith Briffa of the Hadley UK Climate Research Unit. Neither Dr. Mann, nor Briffa made it available, but McIntyre was able to secure it from another source. When he plotted all the tree ring data, not just the parts cherry-picked by Mann, the “hockey stick” disappeared.

In November 2009, thousands of leaked emails between Dr. Mann and other "warmists"---scientists responsible for the global warming hoax, revealed nothing less than a massive fraud.  Flash forward to a freedom of information (FOI) request by Chris Horner on behalf of American Tradition Institute’s Environmental Law Center. Despite stonewalling for years, Dr. Mann’s former employer, the University of Virginia complied in May 2011, agreeing to release Dr. Mann’s computer files containing the data he had kept hidden for more than a decade.

Serendipitously, a similar FOI issued to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has revealed the level of financial gain received by another key player in the global warming hoax, Dr. James Hansen, a longtime NASA employee and the man credited with generating the hoax with testimony before a congressional committee in 1988. He has been the director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies since 1981

It turns out that in 2010 alone he received “between 236,000 and $1,232.500 in outside income”! When you add in all the awards and speech fees Dr. Hansen has received over the years it is a tidy sum while he exploited his taxpayer-funded position. The agency had resisted disclosing this information for years, but as a federal employee Dr. Hansen waives privacy interests as a condition of employment.

A former government employee, Vice President Al Gore, became the face and voice of the hoax, earning millions in the process.

What has the global warming cost Americans? Joanne Nova of the Science and Public Policy Institute has estimated that the U.S. government spent more than $32.5 billion on climate studies between 1989 and 2009, nor does that include about $79 billion more spent for related climate change technology research, foreign aid, and tax breaks for “green energy” (solar and wind).

For deception on that scale, one might think they will be punished at some point, but it will likely be years more before those responsible for the global warming fraud will stand before the bar of justice, if ever.

© Alan Caruba, 2011

As always I thank Alan for allowing me to publish his works.  Alan’s work has a sense of timelessness about it, so anyone perusing these articles in the future will find them equally insightful as they were when originally written. For Alan's latest thoughts go to his blog, Warning Signs. For his past works go to The National Anxiety Center. I would also recommend reading his last book, Right Answers.

EPA to Increase Tenfold

The Environmental Agency is planning to double its budget to $21 billion and expand its workforce of 18,000 to 230,000 regulators over the next four years. The Clean Air Act states that any stationary source that emits as little as 100 tons of pollutants per year must get permits from the EPA and state agencies. A typical restaurant or apartment house sends out 100 tons of carbon dioxide (CO2). Currently about 14,000 entities have to get permits. But by regulating CO2 through the Clean Air Act, the number of businesses requiring EPA permits will soar to more than 6 million.....Hayward noted in his article that the delegation of power to administrative agencies is “sorely abused.”..... This delegation of law-making power, can give any decision “the force of law.”.....

The Institute for Energy Research, a non-profit research group founded in 1989, warned EPA in 2009 that if the agency went forward, the Clean Air Act would require the agency to regulate large sources of carbon dioxide emissions, but also 260,000 office buildings, 150,000 warehouses, 100,000 schools, 92,000 health-care facilities, 58,000 food service buildings, 37,000 churches, 26,000 place of public assembly and 17,000 farms. It said that Congress never intended such regulations under the Clean Air Act.

###

They don’t know what they want, but they want it now!

By Rich Kozlovich

I am always amazed at the lack of clear thinking in so many, especially those who just can’t seem to stay out of the streets with an overwhelming need to protest something. The greenies and the lefties all are filled with a sense of self-righteous superiority. Yet, I don’t even think most of them have any idea why they are really there, and from the interviews it is abundantly clear that they don’t even know what they want done.

Greenies and lefties are great at finding fault, but they are clueless when it comes to finding solutions. Why? They have never owned businesses, never met a payroll, never had to worry about meeting their payments to the bank, and never worked for months without a paycheck so that the employee’s checks wouldn’t bounce. They have never done anything that has contributed to the nation’s riches for which they are demanding a share. And they want a voice in the management of those riches.

Recently we have seen a huge number of people picketing Wall Street demanding….. well…..wait…..let me think a minute….. hummm…. it turns out that I just don’t know what it is they are demanding! I really hate being ignorant, but actually in this case; I don’t feel so bad about my ignorance, because they are apparently as ignorant as I! For someone to be ignorant of someone else goals isn’t that big of a deal; but when they are ignorant as to what they want themselves (while spending so much energy to promote it - whatever “it” is) goes beyond stupid.

One of these protestors was interviewed on the radio Thursday saying that he didn’t know what change he wanted but he definitely wanted change. To what; he was asked? “I don’t know” was the answer, but he still definitely wanted it. What’s even more fascinating are the prominent, rich and important people who have been applauding them. Those who have benefited so much from this system are applauding them for doing……what? And promoting …..what? Well someone finally came up with a thirteen point list of demands and a fourteenth caveat.

Follow the link to see the original list. I have condensed these demands into 7 categories properly reorganizing them into some kind of logical order; a common problem when dealing with the ramblings of the greenies and the lefties; that and their unrelenting use of logical fallacies and outright lies to justify their positions.

1. Income and employment

a. Restoration of the living wage.
b. Minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.
c. Guarantee a living wage income regardless of employment
d. This demand can only be met by ending "Freetrade".
e. Re-impose trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market.
f. Free college education.
g. Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.
h. Open borders migration. Anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.
i. This was the 14th caveat - These demands will create so many jobs it will be completely impossible to fill them without an open borders policy

2. Debt.

a. Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all.
b. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans nowc. All debt must be stricken from the "Books." World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin
d. Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the "Books."
e. And I don't mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.
f. Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.

3. Health Care

a. Universal single payer healthcare system.
b. Ban all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market.

4. Environmental issues.

a. Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.
b. One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of America's nuclear power plants.

5. Public works

a. One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.

6. Civil Rights

a. Racial and gender equal rights amendment.

7. Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system. (I have no idea what this is about. RK)

Clearly they believe that capitalistic prosperity is a problem and they are looking for a ‘solution’ to end it. Well….this is it. The long and the short of this is they are insane. They are demanding that everything be given to them on demand and that all their demands be met without challenge. What will their contribution be to all of these expensive and unattainable and unsustainable demands? They will have to right to make more demands that no one will be allowed to say NO to.

Others of this group insist on a caveat to these demands clearly stating that;

“This is not an official list of demands. This is a forum post submitted by a single user and hyped by irresponsible news/commentary agencies like Fox News and Mises.org. This content was not published by the OccupyWallSt.org collective, nor was it ever proposed or agreed to on a consensus basis with the NYC General Assembly. There is NO official list of demands.”

In other words they really don’t have any idea what they want, and if someone should make statements to the contrary they can claim that anything anyone says is an individual view. Pretty good! That way they can be for and against everything at the same time….maybe…..or then again….maybe not….as the whim should strike them, which can also then be discounted. So that brings us back to; I don’t know what I want but I want it now, and I don’t want to be responsible for anything or pay for those things I want.

I remember when protests of this type were going on in Seattle a few years ago. NPR interviewed a young woman asking with what they would replace this system of international trade. She kept saying; “great minds are working on this”. After repeated questions with this same inane answer the interviewer eventually said, “So you don’t have an solution?” She emphatically stated that “great minds were working on this”.

Wow! Great minds are apparently still working on it. That must be a great gig for unending employment. That is if there is someone who is willing to pay these great minds. And who exactly are these ‘great minds’? And do they have any idea when they will have a working framework for this ‘great minds’ solution?

Since there are only two systems of economics in existence; central planning (socialism) which has been a failure everywhere in the world, and individual responsibility (modern capitalism) which has brought more people out of squalor, misery and suffering than any system in human history, I have to wonder what these “great minds” are working on? Has there actually been a successful socialist system that eventually didn’t self corrupt with mediocrity, sloth, waste, poverty, hunger and tyranny.

That leaves capitalism, and since that is what we already have, what is left out there for these “great minds” to work on? Since we have capitalism (sort of), their only alternative is socialism, or some form of feudalism, which is a crude form of socialism. Guess which one works? So what is there left to think about?

Everyone wants perfection, yet as one person said, “the best we can hope for is the most tolerable imperfection”. A man once noted some years back that, “if you find the perfect organization, join it! But remember, once you have joined it has now become somewhat less than perfect!” I find this to be one of the basic truths. No matter how well intentioned or well organized anything is, eventually corruption will set in simply because people will be people.

Sweden was probably the only socialist system to have a successful posture. Why? The Swedes believe in work! They were a monoculture with an intrinsic work ethic. They have now become a major multicultural country with the problems this brings. What is the number one health problem in Sweden now? Monday! More and more people are calling in sick because they are going to be rewarded whether they go to work or not. So Sweden is now abandoning their previous system of absolute socialism and moving toward capitalism.

Do we have economic injustice in our quasi-capitalist system? Yes, and it is generally caused by government interference. The only economic injustice in a true capitalist system is when someone lies, cheats or steals from others(or damanges their property)for financial gain. And we have laws to punish those who have done so. But we have adopted so much socialist thinking in our economic planning that we have a ton of economic injustice that has been imposed the government.

This goes back to 179o’s when the federal government passed the Whiskey Act. Who supported this bill? The whiskey distillers in the major metropolitan areas! Why? Because it would eliminate competition by preventing backwoods farmers from turning their corn into moonshine and then transporting it into the cities without added unnecessary costs.

Is that an example of economic injustice?

In his book, The Big Ripoff, Timothy P. Carney makes this observation about big business, big government and everyone’s perception about both. “And so it goes that every time a regulation is defeated, its proponents claim a victory for big business and a loss for the little gal. Every time commentators see a big business favoring higher taxes or greater regulation they note it as an oddity. The big myth is alive and well.” One commentator noted that the National Association of Manufacturers, “has broken with its old reputation as a bastion of laissez faire.” In 1993 John Boehner noted that, “the Chamber of Commerce, has refused to be what it had been in the past, a firebrand, principled organization.”

Big business loves higher taxes and more regulations because they are big enough to absorb them without much ado and they can pass the cost along to the customer, and this tactic keeps the competition down. The bigger they are the more they love it.

Is that an example of economic injustice?

Whether it is the sugar industry, airline industry, the tobacco industry, and even WalMart, you will find massive government involvement that enriches these large corporations at the expense of the American public. And I am talking billions and billions of dollars.

Is that an example of economic injustice?

So let me help these poor misguided and foolish people find a goal. End these socialist programs of corporate welfare, and end government involvement in business that has nothing to do with corruption, fraud or theft. Reduce the size of government and regulations by 80% at the federal level. This will seriously reduce the 1.75 trillion dollars regulations cost the consumer. This will automatically end so many unfunded mandates to the states, which will in turn reduce the size of local government. Everything else could be handled by common law. How’s that for a start?

Of course the people they support are demagogues who publically scream about the rich while at the same time they are the worst offenders of the economic injustice of these socialist policies, so I don’t expect to see much justice come out of their efforts. Economic or otherwise!

Of course the goals I have suggested should only be a start. Their ultimate end goal should be to go out and get a job instead of hanging around Wall Street being supported by someone else. Because staying in New York City isn’t cheap.

###

The American Council on Science and Health, 2011: Week 40

The presence of linked articles here are merely a way of showing what is going on, whether I agree or disagree with the positions presented. Rich Kozlovich

CANCER

Rise in HPV-related throat cancers: Another reason for vaccinating boys too The results of a new study published in The Journal of Clinical Oncology reveal a worrisome trend: Throat cancers caused by the human papillomavirus (HPV) are on the rise, especially among men.

LA Times resorts to scare tactics on breast cancer and chemicals  A recent Los Angeles Times headline reads, "Breast cancer: Pollution link remains hazy" - but upon reading the whole article, readers will soon realize that no actual link exists, says Dr. Ross.

DIET

Something is rotten in Denmark: New food tax In an article for The New York Times, columnist Mark Bittman lauds the Danish government for its most recent implementation: an excise tax on foods high in saturated fat.

Diet defects may lead to birth defects A healthful diet may actually lower a woman's risk of having a child with serious birth defects, reports a study now online in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine.

Debate over sugar not so sweet At last week's American Dietetic Association conference, two prominent professors of nutrition debated the link between consumption of sugary beverages and the rising obesity rate.

HIV

Unwanted surprise: Hormonal contraception facilitates HIV transmission
 Public health officials in sub-Saharan Africa, where HIV remains prevalent, may soon find themselves in another predicament: The results of a new study published in The Lancet Infectious Diseases warns that women who use injectable hormone contraceptives double their risk of becoming infected with HIV.

HEART

Coronary angioplasties might not require an overnight stay Typically, a patient who undergoes a coronary angioplasty is monitored overnight at the hospital - just in case of complications. However, a study just published in the Journal of the American Medical Association suggests that this may not be necessary for many low-risk patients.

JUNK SCIENCE

Louisiana hospital wages quixotic battle against “third-hand smoke”  Lisa R. Lauve is the new sheriff at Christus St. Frances Cabrini Hospital in Alexandria, Louisiana, and her first order of business is to cut down on "third-hand smoke."

MEN’S ISSUES

PSA to go away? You read it here years ago Screening healthy men for prostate cancer with a PSA blood test does more harm than good, a major government health panel has decided.

High testosterone may reflect better heart health Elderly men with naturally high levels of testosterone seem to be less likely to suffer a heart attack or stroke than their peers with lower levels of the hormone, reports a study just published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

PHARMA

A campaign against counterfeit drugs  Counterfeit prescription medications have become a major problem and, in response, Pfizer Inc. and a pharmacy standards group have joined forces to warn consumers of the risks.

RISKS

Drive, then drink — not the other way around About four million Americans admitted to operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol at least once in 2010, according to a study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Take good care of your brain while at play The number of children visiting the emergency room (ER) with a sports-related concussion has jumped by nearly 60 percent over the last decade, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports.

Childhood vaccination rates fall as unfounded fears rise To the dismay of ACSH and others devoted to public health, childhood vaccination rates fell significantly in 2009, and the latest National Public Radio-Thomson Reuters Health Poll indicates that unfounded fear is the major source of this decline.

STROKES

Victims of mild strokes need more attention New guidelines for follow-up to mild strokes may be needed, according to data presented by researchers at the Canadian Stroke Congress in Ottawa.

THIS AND THAT

NYC Department of Education fails PE If the New York City Department of Education were graded on its provision of proper physical education for city students, it would receive a big fat F.

A victory for harm reduction in Canada  North America's only safe-injection site for drug addicts will be allowed to continue its services, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled on Friday.

If there is a health scare today, the American Council on Science and Health will most likely have the answer by tomorrow; and for members it will appear in your e-mail. No effort on your part, except to read the answer. All that the ACSH is interested in are the facts and they are prepared to follow them wherever they lead. Who can ask for more?  Please Donate Now!

###

Observations From the Back Row: 10-7-11

...

“De Omnibus Dubitandum”

Video with John Stossel and Richard Tren regarding DDT

A complete list of things caused by global warming

Battling Bad Science

Everthing we are told should bear some resemblance to what we see going on in reality!

______________________________________

USDA threatens $60,000 fine, federal raid against woman in legal possession of indoor lemon tree

(NaturalNews) The US government's assault against innocent American citizens continues to get more aggressive and just plain strange, with new reports of harassment against honest owners of ordinary lemon trees. Health Freedom Alliance (HFA) reports that officials from the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) are now spying on people whom they suspect are in possession of ordinary lemon trees, and threatening them with excessive fines and even federal raids if they refuse to surrender the plants on demand……Be sure to read Donovan's entire shocking story here: http://healthfreedoms.org/2011/09/2...

Government makes us poor:

"Here's my fantasy: Libertarians are elected to the presidency and to majorities in Congress. What would happen next? Well, if libertarians were 'in charge,' you'd have more freedom and prosperity. Freedom frightens some people. ... If libertarians were 'in charge,' there would be laws to protect us from foreign enemies and those who would steal from us or injure us. Today, by contrast, under the rule of Democans and Republicrats, we're drowning in rules -- 160,000 pages' worth. Micromanagement kills opportunity and freedom"

My Take – Does anyone in government really believe there will ever be enough regulations? What in the world could have been left out after 160,000 pages.  A number which surprised me because the last time I looked the federal registry was at about 80,000 pages, so I’m not exactly sure where that number comes from, but the principle is the same….How darn many regulations do we need to function in life? How darn many regulations are left to write? How much freedom is left now and how much will be left after a couple more years of this kind of insanity? The big question is this. Who really benefits from all these regulations?

Cuccinelli says IG report on EPA supports his assertions -- blasts EPA denialism towards criticism

Virginia Attorney General Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II on Wednesday blasted the Environmental Protection Agency in the wake of a recent inspector general´s report that found it failed to follow federal rules in its process of using climate change data to conclude greenhouse gases are a threat to human health. Mr. Cuccinelli, a global warming skeptic, first petitioned the EPA in February 2010 to convene and reconsider its conclusion and filed a lawsuit in federal court in the wake of the "Climategate" scandal, in which researchers from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia were accused of manipulating climate data based on a number of stolen emails. A handful of investigations have cleared scientists of wrongdoing.

Nobel Prize winner rejects tyranny of consensus

When Israeli scientist Dan Shechtman claimed to have stumbled upon a new crystalline chemical structure that seemed to violate the laws of nature, colleagues mocked him, insulted him and exiled him from his research group, reports the Associated Press.

Congress (finally) asks: Is science driving EPA policy, or is policy driving science?
Seventeen years after Steve Milloy’s seminal and controversial investigation on behalf of the Department of Energy into whether EPA regulations are driven by science or politics, the House Energy and Commerce Committee gets around to exploring the issue.

Things You Won't See On The News

Dangerous lies about Herbert Hoover live on

The Hunger Hoax

The Fascist Threat

"The time has come," the Walrus said,

"To talk of many things:

Of shoes, and ships, and sealing wax -

Of cabbages and kings,

And why the sea is boiling hot,

And whether pigs have wings."

###

Petropoulos - Royals and the Reich

Petropoulos - Royals and the Reich

This is from the Environmentalism is Fascism Website and outlines much of the history of the green movement; who they are and who they have always been. I would like to thank Mr. Kay for sending this to me. RK

By William Kay

An important feature environmentalism shares with fascism is the centrality, within each movement, of the European aristocracy. However, while aristocrats flaunt their environmental credentials, they conceal their past involvement with fascism. This is why Jonathon Petropoulos’ Royals and the Reich (Oxford, 2006) is so useful.

Highlights:

270 German princes and princesses were Nazi Party members. A sampling of 312 “old aristocratic” families found 3,592 Party members. Every noble family east of the Elbe River had at least one member in the Party. A third of Nazi-aristocrats joined the Party before Hitler became Chancellor; a majority supported the Nazis, or like groups, before this date. Nobles were the most fascistic of any demographically identifiable cohort.

Royal Hohenzollern princes were high-profile Nazi campaigners during the Nazis’ struggle for power.  Aristocrats occupied thousands of top government posts during the Third Reich.

King Edward VIII was a Nazi. He was definitely guilty of treason and possibly guilty of attempted regicide. Edward did not abdicate in order to marry Wallis Simpson. He was forced from the throne by PM Baldwin because Edward was heading up a Nazi fifth column in the UK.   George V, George VI, the Duke of Kent and scores of British aristocrats promoted “appeasement.” This “peace movement” was an effort to steer Britain into the Axis.

Western Europe’s aristocracy, including most German princes, survived World War II. They retained, even supplemented, their land holdings. Over the past few decades they have engineered a remarkable renaissance.

My Take – It has been known for years that the Duke of Windsor AKA Edward VIII was involved in treasonous actions, even after he was removed from the throne. According to William Stephenson, the head of British Foreign Intelligence in the western hemisphere during WWII, this is why Churchill ordered him to the Bahamas. The claim was that they wanted to separate the royal family for security purposes, but treasonous support for Hitler by the Duke and Duchess was the real reason. This is why the royal family always shunned her for all of those years after the war, and not because she married Edward. Much of this came out in 1975 in the book, “A Man Called Intrepid” because the British Secrets Act thirty year embargo on that information ended and he wanted to explain why they made the decisions they did. It is unfortunate that the fifty year embargo has been extended indefinitely.

This will be linked permanently on the History of Environmentalism page.

###

With Our Own Values They Destroy Us: Part VII

By Rich Kozlovich

Without the right to own property there is no social stability.  Doug Hornig noted in a article )which I hadn't really thought out before this) about the dangers of E-Verify (second article down on the linked page),

He states: "Totalitarian states tend not to assume all power and hand it to a central authority all at once. More often, liberty is steadily chipped away, always with some “good” reason for prohibiting this or requiring that. And citizens go along because “it’s a small thing,” or because “I don’t mind cooperating with that if it makes us all safer,” or because they’re frozen by either fear or apathy… until one day they wake up and find themselves living in a cage – a totalitarian state.

The process has been on the move here in the US for decades now. Slowly, the police and politicians – backed by a shamefully spineless judiciary – have eviscerated a Bill of Rights that was once our crowning glory, a watershed document in human history that marked a turning away from the absolute rule of an elite and toward individual freedom."

Although this article deals with something else the principles are identical.  Property rights is the very foundation American democracy.  The green movement and their acolytes in government are aware of this and work unendingly to end these rights.  In Ohio we deal with the Great Lakes Compact.  Although there are worthwhile things in it, the Compact also turns ownership of every water source in the states that are part of this compact over to the public.....i.e. the government.  Without water rights there are no property rights.    Here is the next installment.

Why Property Rights Matter

This should all be considered a part of the Green and Problems of Democracy series.

Green and Problems of Democracy
Green and Problems of Democracy, Part I
Green and Problems of Democracy: Part II
Green and Problems of Democrcy, Part III
With Our Own Values They Destroy Us.
With Our Own Values They Destroy Us, Part II
With Our Own Values They Destroy Us, Part III With Our Own Values They Destroy Us, Part III
With Our Own Values They Destroy Us; Part IVWith Our Own Values They Destroy Us; Part VWith Our Own Values They Destroy Us: Part VI

###

Logical Fallacy of the Week, Week 11: Affirmative Conclusion From a Negative Premise

...

We will now explore formal syllogistic fallacies - Syllogistic fallacies are logical fallacies that occur in syllogisms, and we will state with:

• Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise (illicit negative): when a categorical syllogism has a positive conclusion, but at least one negative premise.
• Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise is a logical fallacy that is committed when a categorical syllogism has a positive conclusion, but one or two negative premises.
• For example:
• No fish are dogs, and no dogs can fly, therefore all fish can fly.
• The only thing that can be properly inferred from these premises is that some things that are not fish cannot fly, provided that dogs exist.
• Or:
• We don't read that trash. People who read that trash don't appreciate real literature. Therefore, we appreciate real literature.
• This could be illustrated mathematically as - If A ⊄ B and B ⊄ C then A ⊂ C.
• It is a fallacy because any valid forms of categorical syllogism that assert a negative premise must have a negative conclusion.

Please follow the link for more links and information.  RK

###