1 posted on
02/22/2015 8:15:17 AM PST by
NOBO2012
To: NOBO2012
2 posted on
02/22/2015 8:24:23 AM PST by
9thLife
("Life is a military endeavor..." -- Pope Francis)
To: NOBO2012; 11B40; A Balrog of Morgoth; A message; ACelt; Aeronaut; AFPhys; AlexW; alrea; ...
3 posted on
02/22/2015 7:43:32 PM PST by
Tolerance Sucks Rocks
(Je suis Charlie, you miserable Islamist throwbacks!)
To: SheLion; Eric Blair 2084; -YYZ-; 31R1O; 383rr; AFreeBird; AGreatPer; Alamo-Girl; Alia; altura; ...
4 posted on
02/22/2015 7:44:03 PM PST by
Tolerance Sucks Rocks
(Je suis Charlie, you miserable Islamist throwbacks!)
To: NOBO2012
Salt, butter, potato: which is bad for you?It's missing sour cream! Chives and real bacon bits wouldn't hurt either.
6 posted on
02/22/2015 8:33:59 PM PST by
TigersEye
(ISIS is the tip of the spear. The spear is Islam.)
To: NOBO2012
My goodness, I hate that woman and her hubby!
Can't wait til they just go away.
9 posted on
02/22/2015 8:52:04 PM PST by
PROCON
(Always give 100%---unless you're donating blood.)
To: NOBO2012
But the primary problem is that nutrition policy has long relied on a very weak kind of science: epidemiological, or observational, studies in which researchers follow large groups of people over many years. But even the most rigorous epidemiological studies suffer from a fundamental limitation. At best they can show only association, not causation. Epidemiological data can be used to suggest hypotheses but not to prove them.
Hmmmmm, epidemiological studies? Like the kind scientists use for everything they wish to tax, control, outlaw or encourage through new laws, guidelines or regulations? (e.g. carbon dioxide)
Also includes many of the alleged harms of marijuana.
10 posted on
02/23/2015 8:33:48 AM PST by
ConservingFreedom
(A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson