First a post by ACE OF SPADES, with a large excerpt from the NY POST article:
Here is the NEW YORK POST:
(Originally posted in 2014) I know facts can be the killjoy to personal feelings and beliefs… trust me, I know. However, here and now I wish to tread on the “good feelings” one gets from the belief in silly things heard of but never checked out. Often this deals with things like political positions and religious beliefs… but here I wade into the pet-owner world.
Firstly I wish to deal with a myth I just recently heard that dogs saliva heal your wounds well. This is a myth! Here for instance is some great veterinary info on the topic… and after reading it I may actually shoo dogs away from doing this:
DOG SALIVA GOOD FOR HUMANS
It’s not likely that your dog will pass on any illnesses to you through its saliva. Many of the bacteria in your dog’s saliva is specific to canines, and won’t harm you. However, it’s a good idea to discourage licking to reduce any chances of becoming sick from germs. Here are some myths about dog saliva and their associated facts.
Myths About Dog Saliva
Because dog saliva contains a special enzyme which promotes healing of the dog’s wound, some pet owners think it will have the same effect on their own cuts. The enzymes in your dogs saliva only work on the wounds of dogs. Allowing your dog to lick your cuts could lead to infection from any germs the dog may have in its mouth.
Facts About Dog Saliva
One potential health risk associated with being licked by your dog is the transmission of roundworms. These intestinal parasites are commonly found in kittens and puppies and are passed through licking. Symptoms of roundworm are coughing, a fever and headaches. Of course if your dog has been given deworming medication, and is tested on a regular basis, your risk of contracting roundworm is slim. Leptospirosis, salmonella and E. coli are other illnesses that can be transmitted by your dog’s saliva; ….
One site even goes as far as to warn that “People with weakened immune systems and young children probably should not have direct contact with dog or cat saliva.” So, strike that ol’ wives tale, bottom line is this:
Here is an updated story for your purview via PJ-MEDIA:
Okay, let us move onto “hypoallergenic dogs.” This is another myth born from my wife going into sneezing/stuffy nose fits at a co-workers house with poodles. She mentioned that her dogs are “hypoaalergenic.” I too thought this was a breed that would in the least cut down on my wife’s reaction to the dog. Upon further study, I was wrong. Here is the Globe and Mail comments on a recent study:
And this from HuffPo, via Dr. Karen Becker (Proactive and integrative wellness veterinarian):
So these two oft repeated statements of fact by many are merely wives tales passed on by those that love animals so much that their critical thinking skills are suspended. And while I think the video below is cute as hell… is someone asked me the following: “My dog licks my babies in the face, should I make him/her stop?”
Morgan Spurlock admitted something that cast more doubt onto his lauded documentary entitled “Super Size Me” to which an excellent documentary response already noted the secrecy behind Spurlocks health records, “Fat Head.” Here are a couple article’s noting Phelim McAleer’s article in the Wall Street Journal entitled, “A Big Mac Attack, or a False Alarm?,” which Dennis Prager reads from:
Rush Limbaugh dismantles a lie from the Left expressed by Jimmy Kimmel’s monologue regarding Trump’s first few days in office and his rescinding an Obama era bill that was an Executive Order.
If the Left do not like this legal snafu of one President rescinding another’s E.O., pass laws through Congress dammit! U-n-l-e-s-s they just want to u-s-e the controversy to support their wild positions that have no reality in the real world. Here are the organizations who supported Trump’s action (via the WASHINGTON FREE BEACON):
The WASHINGTON EXAMINER also looks into the pressure from right and left organizations
The WASHINGTON TIMES also brings some historical clarity to the issue:
Tying this all together for us is THE CZAR OF MUSCOVY:
A lifelong Democrat at the DAILY JOURNAL LETTERS ties this all in a neat bow for us:
I will first post a serious challenge/worry that the MSM (mainstream media) will be using as “special cases.” BUT FIRST, why is this not a good way to write law? That is, write law using special cases. Being that I am “conservative” and lean towards this bias, I will use some examples from these similar thinking people. The first zeroes in on a separate issue, but in regards to writing laws, it is the same:
With the above in mind, here is my first response via Facebook to a thoughtful post:
The above Kellyanne Conway Tweeting of a WASHINGTON POST OP-ED by Cathy McMorris Rodgers:
She does state elsewhere that for two years premiums will still rise, but that this is a “PART 1” of a three-part “fix,” and from all I have read, they will not rise nearly as fast as under O-Care.
OTHER NATIONS OFFER HEALTH-CARE…
…EXCEPT THE FASCIST GOP…
Here is another challenge, albeit not so thoughtful:
Just a quick note… Hitler’s Germany offered single-payer health care… speaking of “fascists.” Here is my FB response, I will add something a bit later:
Here Is My Addition Here On My Site
One can read and listen/watch all the media on my main post about “
In an excellent Bloomberg article entitled, “Booming Sweden’s Free-Market Solution,” the myth is dismantled in toto by Anders Aslund. Here is a snippet:
A Challenge Directed At Me
In conversation about an audio upload to my YouTube Channel of Dennis Prager discussing Bernie Sanders, I was challenged with this:
To which I responded with a quote from an International Business Times article:
I also pointed out that this promise went back to the Cold War, and was not known about till a Swedish defense think-tank/security firm uncovered the agreements in 1994. The original story’s link has been lost, but it is here on FOI’s site. FOI’s “about us” page has this:
Here is the info from the old article via WIKI:
End Of Addition For This Posting
REPUBLICAN’S EXEMPTED THEMSELVES FROM THE BILL
After a friend posted something asbout the house passing the American Health Care Act (AHCA), his own flesh and blood… his mother… wrote:
American Health Care Act (AHCA),
NOW, to the last, and the worst of them all… and I will link to the many articles refuting it with a couple commentaries from a few.
RAPE AS A PREEXISTING CONDITION
It is the — yes crazy — understanding that RAPE is a pre-existing condition. Dumb! [<<< my commentary]. Here is the first “non-partisan” [left-leaning] POLITIFACT notes this claim is… WAIT FOR IT…
~ MOSTLY FALSE! ~
And the WASHINGTON POST gives it their MAXIMUM debunking rating of FOUR PINOCCHIOS
I know… crazy huh? Someone told my wife — roughly this:
I sent her this post from the not Trump friendly REASON.ORG website… to which yesterday the last article makes clear their bottom line:
Since yesterday the article has been updated substantially, which I will post a portion of:
What is also sad is that people do not read the bill outside it being put into political talking points outside the media or their organizations. I have already noted the following above:
The best non-partisan summary is this:
➤ States may opt-out of requiring premiums to be the same for all people of the same age, so while individuals with pre-existing conditions must be offered health insurance there is no limit on the cost of that insurance. A new $8 billion fund would help lower premiums for these individuals.
But here is more of a response to the broader challenge at hand:
One of the authors of the AHCA has a congenetital heart issue, he says this in an op-ed:
And finally, here are a repition of what is above, but for good measure:
1. The Upton Amendment: The Upton Amendment, named after Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mi.), adds another $8 billion on top of the aforementioned $100 billion to cover high-risk patients with chronic and/or pre-existing conditions. This amendment was put in place to help satisfy more moderate-leaning Republicans who felt the AHCA took too much away from their constituents.
Here is the final explanation to be clear:
Here are some other sources:
Claude Castonguay, the father of the Canadian Health Care system, and a model adopted by the NHS in Britain, has said his model is failing:
One person eventually wrote a book about their experience, noting in a CITY JOURNAL article:
One of David Gratzer’s books opened my eyes to what was going on up in Canada and gave me ammunition to respond to silly liberal emotive arguments. The book is “Code Blue: Reviving Canada’s Health Care System.” But, many people believe the Michael Moore’s of the World:
I have to get an implant to my #8 tooth… well, I could get a bridge, but that would ruin the teeth surrounding the removed #8 tooth. This procedure will take about 7-8-months (bone graft, healing, stud insert, healing, tooth) and cost me almost $4,000 dollars. An acquaintance my wife and I know said we should go to Europe to have the procedure done to save money. So I am taking this opportunity to explain why the American dental plans and payment options are still superior to the National Health Care options of Europe.
Some use to plane for vacations around such surgical options. Obviously I cannot afford either a ticket or being in Europe for the 7-months for all the steps to be completed. But there are other reasons behind this no longer being an option:
$3,000 down south of America is not too far off from my $3,800 I will pay here. But in Europe, the NHS [for instance in the UK] typically settles on the cheaper of the options, which is filling down the teeth on either side of the affected area and making a bridge. Not to mention the cost of a plane ticket!
Gloomy indeed. In one chat-room in the United Kingdom we see some exchanges about a dental emergency:
One practicing dentist in the UK responded:
Another person chimed in:
(source) Hidden waiting lists seem to be one way government health-care deals with controlling costs. Recently in our country this has come to light with the VA, and is not foreign to other European countries (Scotland, England, Canada, UK, etc.).
In yet another chat room this question was asked:
The two top responses are these:
Another answer to a similar question is found on a blog dealing with dental issues:
I think there is a misconception here about health-care abroad, and those that tout such systems as superior to our health care system. Many procedures here can be done for close to the same cost, without years of waiting, and often times, much more reliably performed. Why? Because unlike government positions, the American dentist relies on the free market. The free-market makes the dentist accountable to the customer and can be run out of business if doing a sub-par job. It is near impossible to hold government programs to any standard that truly threatens it “integrity.”
Here is a portion of the Wall Street Journal article by Nina Teicholz, entitled: “The Questionable Link Between Saturated Fat and Heart Disease“
John Cisna, a teacher, ate only McDonald’s to teach his class how to choose low caloric meals and how to embrace healthy choices, even at Mickey D’s.
The Government warned us strongly that we shouldn’t drink whole milk… but now that’s proving to be untrue. What else do they lie about?
Editor’s note: These story contains graphic descriptions
I just wish to point out the authorities refused to investigate… can anyone say I-S-L-A-M? Via the New York Post:
A 13-year-old girl has dug herself out of a muddy grave after being raped by two men who then buried her alive in Pakistan.
The teen was abducted from her local village in the Punjab province while she was walking to Koran lessons.
Her father Siddique Mughal told police his daughter had been taken, but they refused to cooperate, Outlook India reported.
The men took the young girl to an isolated place and raped her and then buried her alive as they believed she died during the brutal attack.
But the girl managed to dig her way out the muddy grave and caught the attention of passers-by who helped her to a local medical center.
After local police refused to investigate, the Lahore High Court Chief Justice’s Complaint Cell formally directed them to arrest the girl’s attackers and complete a report on the incident without delay.
A sessions judge for the local Toba Tek Singh region has also been asked to look into the matter.
Child rape remains a problem in Pakistan where local activist group Sahil said cultural myths persist such as HIV positive men believing they can be cured through sex with a virgin.
Statistic show cases of child rape have risen from 668 in 2002 to 2,788 last year, according to the International Business Times.
Other stories from the Middle-East that should outrage you, via The Blaze:
…. A 3-year-old girl in Saudi Arabia was reportedly raped by a group of men. After taking turns violating the toddler, the men dumped her near a hospital where she was classified in serious condition, the website Emirates 24/7 reported.
Though the attack reportedly occurred last month, police revealed the incident only this past Monday, saying they had arrested three suspects along with two women in connection with the attack.
Doctors at a hospital in Jeddah say the girl is still in a coma and fighting for her life, Gulf News reported.
“She has been raped violently by some men. She was found crying of excruciating pain as her body was full of bruises and her sensitive parts were ruptured,” hospital manager Mohammed Ali told the Saudi Arabia oulet Okaz, as reported by the English-language Emirates 24/7.
Ali said the girl’s clothes were torn and she was bleeding from the vagina.
Earlier this month, a Saudi preacher convicted of torturing his 5-year-old daughter with a cane and cables and beating her to death in 2011 was sentenced to eight years in prison and 600 lashes after paying blood money to the family of the girl’s mother. The killing was reportedly motivated by the father’s suspicions about the girl’s virginity.
Earlier this year, another Saudi cleric called on parents to dress their female babies in a burka, to reduce their chance of being molested.
From video description:
“How Food Regulations Make Us Less Healthy” by @LearnLiberty
► Get Learn Liberty updates in your inbox!
Why do we consume so much high fructose corn syrup? Why does America suffer from an obesity epidemic? And why are fruits and vegetables so expensive? Professor Dan D’Amico of Loyola University argues that special interests and government policy are at least partly to blame. According to Professor D’Amico, rent seeking and regulations — such as “organic” certification — results in lower costs for less healthy foods and higher costs for nutritional foods. When corn farmers dedicate their time and money to extracting exorbitant government subsidies, corn becomes cheaper, and more people demand it. When regulations mandate special certification in order to vend organic foods, smaller farmers cannot afford to cut through the red tape, putting them out of business, decreasing competition, and raising prices on healthy foods.
So why don’t we stop this madness? Concentrated benefits and dispersed costs of course! The cost to the individual consumer of these subsidies is so small and the price impact so marginal, that it isn’t worth it for people to organize and petition government. Until we can solve this collective action problem, we’re going to be consuming a lot more high fructose corn syrup.
► Like us on Facebook! http://facebook.com/LearnLiberty
► Follow us on Twitter! http://twitter.com/LearnLiberty
► Follow us again on Google+! http://bit.ly/10RJuDA
► Watch more videos: http://LearnLiberty.org
From video description:
Coke is made with corn syrup, not real sugar. Why is this? According to Professor Diana Thomas, part of the reason is because government policies artificially raise the price of sugar.
Although these government policies actually cost Americans approximately $3 billion each year, the laws remain. The law benefits one group of people (farmers) at the expense of another group (consumers). But because the cost to each American is so small, average Americans don’t have an incentive to combat the lobbying groups who fight to keep the laws in place.
This phenomenon is known as “dispersed costs and concentrated benefits,” and it applies in many cases when laws are passed that benefit a small group of citizens. Prof. Thomas says the only way to prevent or end this practice is to limit what government can do.
A defense of farm subsidies, by the Alabama Cooperative Extension System: http://lrnlbty.co/TdO6iS
Introduction to public choice, including the concept of concentrated benefits and dispersed costs: http://lrnlbty.co/SbNc57
An article focusing on the health and environmental impacts of American corn/sugar policies: http://lrnlbty.co/UFHUNA
A detailed piece on the allocation of agricultural subsidies to various plants: http://lrnlbty.co/TO0RNt
A timeline of the economic controls put on sugar from 1789 to 2011: http://lrnlbty.co/WtaHep
Many myths surround what causes heart disease/heart-attacks, and here to break through some of them are Dr.’s Jonny Bowden and Stephen Sinatra. In this frank discussion about their book, “The Great Cholesterol Myth: Why Lowering Your Cholesterol Won’t Prevent Heart Disease-and the Statin-Free Plan That Will,” you will learn how many of the cholesterol lowering drugs do more harm and have not been proven to lower harmful cholesterol at all.
This book combined with watching the presentation of Fat Head ([http://tinyurl.com/b2qnp9j] and other seminars by its author [http://www.fathead-movie.com/]) will fill in some blanks of missing or bad information in this debate.