Health Buzz: A Nalgene Lawsuit and Other Health News
Reader Comments
Social Security
I think that one way to reduce the burden on the Social Security trust fund and thus allow the Congress to continue taxing people who make $100,000 a year and less for social security taxes that are then used for general tax fund purposes is to shorten American lifespans. Right now the truly productive people who are able to meet personally with their Congressional representatives and who direct the production of goods and services throughout the United States are able to keep more of what they earn because ordinary working people who produce quite little pay social security taxes that have been used for general tax fund purposes. The total amount used over the past twenty years is about $3 trillion. Obviously we can't put that money back. It's money that people making $100,000 a year and less paid for general tax fund purposes to keep the truly productive owners of our society from having to pay heavy taxes to fund government operations.
Right now it looks like American lifespans will start falling by just a few years due to rampant diabetes and cancer and heart disease. Something like one third of Americans have diabetes mostly due to the use of high fructose corn syrup in most food products in the American diet. Likewise, the widespread use of partially hydrogenated oil is almost exclusively responsible for the rampant rise in heart disease in the United States. Working people can live comfortable lives and we can afford to feed them for very small sums of money and craft their food to taste sweet and fatty even though it is produced with unnatural substances. This accomplishes the dual purpose of keeping them fed during their useful working lives and then also making sure that they don't live too long beyond their useful working lives when they will draw on an imaginary fund that doesn't really exist.
I see managing working people in America who make less than $100,000 a year sort of like managing livestock. You keep them productive, you feed them the lowest cost feed stocks possible, you keep them happy within the realm of what is affordable and then you try to remove them from the population when it's their time to die.
Obviously people who are well informed and wealthy don't have to eat that food or expose themselves to as much toxic stuff, live near gas stations, etc. But if we extend that sort of toxin free life to every American, who will pay for them to live beyond their productive working life? This isn't Europe or Japan. This is America. People don't come here because they like the scenery, people come here to make money. The place is like a factory.
A final note. Healthy people are dangerous. Weak people who are obese, taking multiple medications and who constantly fear sickness are much easier to manage. Americans know that if they mouth off, they can lose their jobs and even five years of salary won't cover a two week hospital stay. They are scared and so they don't complain. Healthy workers are dangerous.
BPA in plastics
This is not the first time these warnings have come up. In as early as the mid 1990's studies had been conducted warning of the problems that may occur from BPA. This has also cropped up every few years since but recieved much less press. Not too long ago, in July or August of last year this came up again in Texas forcing a small scale recall. Because of this my wife and I researched the subject since we both regularly drank from nalgene and camelbak polycarbonate bottles. We learned that there were no adverse effects for adults (according to multiple studies) but the BPA still could harm developing children. At the time we switched to polyethylene drinking bottles for everyone in the house. Nalgene produces the polyethylene bottles as well so since we were used to their products simply swithed the models we were using.
In a perfect world...
The woman suing Nalgene is only attempting to coerce something for nothing from someone else. In the English language, that's called "Robbery". In a perfect world, she would be treated as a robber and cast into prison, losing the value of property she's attempting to sue Nalgene for. After all, the findings were released less than a week ago, and are still contested by most of the peer reviews.
However, in our world, the judge will see it as a chance to be "progressive" during his 4 minutes in the spotlight, and an amount that could have paid hundreds of Nalgene's employees' wages for years during this coming recession will go to someone who never deserved it.
WoW
what are you guys talking about . You are encouraging the men to get on with this. It's so wrong; you are all so wrong about the mustabating and ejaculating -----nbs
WoW
what are you guys talking about . You are encouraging the men to get on with this. It's so wrong; you are all so wrong
