I`ve lived 63 years and have found little truth when we trust anything blindly as the spin that GMO is good for us when enough studies have shown that it is not good for animals,humans or the farmers that use the pricy chemicals required by the banks or they don`t get any money to operate if the farmer needs credit. GMO`s are not any better and are really toxic to anything consuming them in any quantity. It`s a good thing that europe including england has not allowed them until now, when huge amounts of lies from sources funded by the very profiteers seem to have funneled money to influence further lies in england. america is a lost cause as the citizens are so dumbed down that it is truly difficult to fins any intelligence about anything so important like healthy foods.Our education field has failed the homeland and there is more pressure to further destroy any intelligence and substitute more idiocy in the place of sense as I see it.
This reads like the rant of someone disassociated with reality, or covering up illegal or immoral activities. Obviously, how animals are treated is important to consumers. Why do we know that? Because Eggland's has done the market research and made it a big marketing point of their campaign. They wouldn't be lying to the public about conditions if it wasn't a factor in the consumer buying process. So, stop the whining about left wing politics. You don't get it. The consumer has spoken, which is far more powerful than dems or reps.
What Eggland's needs to do is stop lying, and don't lobby state legislatures for ag gag laws so that consumers can get the proper information they need to make good purchasing decisions. Personally, I'll pay more for eggs from a hen that is free range just because the egg is less toxic to humans. Yes, I used the word toxic. Factory farms are slowly killing humans with their chemicals. I don't eat beef at all anymore except from the local farm where I can see the buffalo and cattle roaming the fields. And, we're starting to get eggs from a friend who is raising chickens, so eventually, companies will either have to clean up their act, or face a loss of profits.
So Heartland goes to the tobacco industry for funds, not the other way around? How is that doing the bidding for the industry? It's clear as day from the letter that Heartland had its own views and were then looking for funding from the industry that merely shares the same view.
JOINT STATEMENT ON THE RE-ASSESSMENT OF THE TOXICOLOGICAL TESTING OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS"
7 October, the COT meeting on 26 October and the COC meeting on 18
November 2004.
http://cot.food.gov.uk/pdfs/cotstatementtobacco0409
"5. The Committees commented that tobacco smoke was a highly complex chemical mixture and that the causative agents for smoke induced diseases (such as cardiovascular disease, cancer, effects on reproduction and on offspring) was unknown. The mechanisms by which tobacco induced adverse effects were not established. The best information related to tobacco smoke - induced lung cancer, but even in this instance a detailed mechanism was not available. The Committees therefore agreed that on the basis of current knowledge it would be very difficult to identify a toxicological testing strategy or a biomonitoring approach for use in volunteer studies with smokers where the end-points determined or biomarkers measured were predictive of the overall burden of tobacco-induced adverse disease."
In other words ... our first hand smoke theory is so lame we can't even design a bogus lab experiment to prove it. In fact ... we don't even know how tobacco does all of the magical things we claim it does.
The greatest threat to the second hand theory is the weakness of the first hand theory.
This reads like the rant of someone disassociated with reality, or covering up illegal or immoral activities. Obviously, how animals are treated is important to consumers. Why do we know that? Because Eggland's has done the market research and made it a big marketing point of their campaign. They wouldn't be lying to the public about conditions if it wasn't a factor in the consumer buying process. So, stop the whining about left wing politics. You don't get it. The consumer has spoken, which is far more powerful than dems or reps.
What Eggland's needs to do is stop lying, and don't lobby state legislatures for ag gag laws so that consumers can get the proper information they need to make good purchasing decisions. Personally, I'll pay more for eggs from a hen that is free range just because the egg is less toxic to humans. Yes, I used the word toxic. Factory farms are slowly killing humans with their chemicals. I don't eat beef at all anymore except from the local farm where I can see the buffalo and cattle roaming the fields. And, we're starting to get eggs from a friend who is raising chickens, so eventually, companies will either have to clean up their act, or face a loss of profits.
Pages