Cheaper by the gallon?
You think a gallon of gas is expensive? Well, I received the following list via e-mail and it certainly makes one think, and also puts things in perspective. Consider some of the costs per gallon below as compared to gasoline, and you’ll see what I mean:
- Diet Snapple
16 oz. $1.29
$10.32 per gallon
- Lipton Ice Tea
16 oz. $1.19
$9.52 per gallon
20 oz. $1.59
$10.17 per gallon
- Ocean Spray
16 oz. $1.25
$10.00 per gallon
- Brake Fluid
12 oz. $3.15
$33.60 per gallon
- Vick’s NyQuil
6 oz. $8.35
$178.10 per gallon
4 oz. $3.85
$123.20 per gallon
7 oz. $1.39
$25.42 per gallon
1.5 oz. $0.99
$84.48 per gallon
- Evian water
9 oz. $1.49
$21.19 per gallon
$21.19 a gallon for WATER-and the buyers don’t even know the source! No wonder the rest of the list is so expensive: Most of them are comprised of 95 percent water, alcohol, and sugar.
Anyway, the next time you’re at the pump, be glad your car doesn’t run on water, Scope, White-Out, or, God forbid, Pepto-Bismol or NyQuil.
Playing “hide and go smoke”
Junk science has taken such a hold on the imagination of the Western World that people will believe anything an investigator (qualified or not) says about the dangers of smoking. I thought the “smoking will make you blind” garbage I told you about last month was the height of absurdity and that it couldn’t get any more insane than that. I was wrong again.
Now they’re saying that if you are a smoker, you are endangering the health of your defenseless children even if you go outside to light up and enjoy your cig or your stogie.
Reuters News reports: “Children of parents who smoke face double the risk of passive-smoking-related diseases than children of non-smokers even if the smoking mom or dad lights up only outdoors, a Swedish study showed on Monday. The World Health Organization regards environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure as a health hazard which affects almost half of the world’s children.”
Please remember that this preposterous claim made by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) -”secondhand smoke is a health hazard”-is based on “research” that has been completely discredited. Yet, the pure-air perverts of the anti-tobacco crowd still use it as motivation to make life miserable for smokers. And now they’re fixating on this new piece of so-called research to support their non-existent case.
“Researchers at a university in central Sweden said they had detected double the levels of cotinine-a chemical created when the body processes nicotine-in the urine of children whose parents smoked only outdoors with the door closed than in a control group of children with non-smoking parents. Since nicotine is highly specific for tobacco smoke, cotinine levels track exposure to tobacco smoke and its toxic constituents.”
You need to know, just to keep a “level playing field,” that cotinine itself has no known toxic effect. The reader is not informed of that, though. And based on all the doublespeak surrounding it, you’d certainly think that it was. But it is only a convenient marker for nicotine exposure. Is it accurate? I don’t know. But I highly doubt it.
What I want to know is, if the parents are smoking outside, how in the world are the children getting the cotinine into their systems? Something just doesn’t add up.
“One can speculate that it’s from the smoker’s breath but we have not studied this and we can’t be sure,” AnnaKarin Johansson, one of the researchers at Linkoping University’s Faculty of Health Sciences, told Reuters. So smoker’s breath is murdering our children? That’s their explanation?!
Can cotinine even be transmitted in the breath? Since there is no evidence that continie or sidestream smoke have any toxic effect whatsoever, who cares?
How simplistic does science have to get before the average tax payer, beaten to a pulp by all this fake science, rises up and says: “Hey, maybe I should smoke a little. People have been smoking for hundreds of years, so it can’t possibly be as horrible as they say it is.”
“Kids at Risk Even If Parents Go Out to Smoke: Study,” Reuters Health News, 4/5/04