ilovefuzz.com

amorphous wrote: It's all good, Nick.

You are correct, I do not understand how things get published in scientific journals. I'm positive our politicians are paid off. And i'm sure they cover their asses pretty good, but i also feel the smoke screen is getting thing.

There comes a point where one can continue to put garbage in one's body and wonder why they feel like crap - or make a change. That's what i did. It's really a personal decision, like drinking alcohol or smoking weed.

YYMV, er, something!

i hope i am not coming off as dismissive. I know we are good to one and another in DR so if I am being rude let me know. I do tho have strong thoughts on this.

Of course I do support full legalization if that is any common ground we might have.

vidret, are you in sweden?

new05002 wrote: Skip, do you have evidence that the government is able to control how peer reviewed publications or is that merely speculation? I do not want to come off as dismissive as we are friends but I dont find that idea credible.

I have no direct evidence on them controlling peer reviewed publications, but there is no contest anymore that they have control over every bit of digital information if they so desire. They can block or delete anything that doesn't fit their agenda, and it doesn't matter who is in control of the White House or senate. They all do it and for their contributors as well. Which Monsanto is one of the largest. My main concern is Monsantos GMO modified food (not everyone's) did not have to be FDA tested, they are the only known agricultural business that is self regulating and self researching. And with the Monsanto Protection Act (while it was effective) it was basically illegal to double check their researc, even for the FDA which had to just take their word that it was safe.

vidret wrote:why you think i don't put myself on your wait-list, or come meet up with ya'll or go to all the shows you guys go to - i'm way the fuck over here with that velociraptor guy

oh boy. Yea I didnt know. Maybe you just hate my guts.

Ancient Astronaught wrote: I have no direct evidence on them controlling peer reviewed publications, but there is no contest anymore that they have control over every bit of digital information if they so desire. They can block or delete anything that doesn't fit their agenda, and it doesn't matter who is in control of the White House or senate. They all do it and for their contributors as well. Which Monsanto is one of the largest. My main concern is Monsantos GMO modified food (not everyone's) did not have to be FDA tested, they are the only known agricultural business that is self regulating and self researching. And with the Monsanto Protection Act (while it was effective) it was basically illegal to double check their researc, even for the FDA which had to just take their word that it was safe.

Sure, they can be that iron-fisted, does not mean they are actively doing that.

Concerning the MPA, from wiki

"The Farmer Assurance Provision (known as Monsanto Protection Act by critics) was part of a bill to provide continued funding to the federal government in the ongoing US budget stalemate, and was signed into law by President Barack Obama on March 26, 2013.[295] It expires at the end of the federal fiscal year, on September 20, 2013.[296] NPR stated that "the provision authorizes the USDA to grant "temporary" permission for GMO crops to be planted, even if a judge has ruled that such crops were not properly approved, only while the necessary environmental reviews are completed. That's an authority that the USDA has, in fact, already exercised in the past."[297] It was originally included as Section 733 in the June 2012 initial draft of the FY2013 Agriculture Appropriations bill.[298]:86–87[296] Politico reported that Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) authored the provision, and "said he worked with the company (Monsanto) and had a valuable partner in the late chairman, Inouye, who was sympathetic given Monsanto’s large seed operations in Hawaii."[299] The bill's sole dissenter, Senator John Tester (D-MT), proposed an amendment to remove it from the bill, but it never went to a vote.[297] Before the provision was passed, supporters said that "opponents of agricultural biotechnology have repeatedly filed suits against USDA on procedural grounds in order to disrupt the regulatory process and undermine the science‐based regulation of such products... Activist groups have made it clear they will continue to use the court system to challenge regulatory approvals of corn, soybean and other biotechnology‐derived crops, and have openly stated their intention to use litigation as a way to impede the availability of new technology to growers and consumers....If enacted, growers would be assured that the crops they plant could continue to be grown, subject to appropriate interim conditions, even after a judicial ruling against USDA. Moreover, the language would apply only to products that have already satisfactorily completed the U.S. regulatory review process and does not remove or restrict anyone’s right to challenge USDA once a determination of no plant pest risk has been made.[300] Opponents described it as" hidden backroom deal"[301] and after it passed the Senate, more than 250,000 petitioners signed a petition for President Obama to veto the bill on the premise that it "effectively bars federal courts from being able to halt the sale or planting of controversial genetically modified... seeds, no matter what health issues may arise concerning GMOs in the future".[296] In September 2013, the controversial provision was removed from the Senate version of the bill.[302]"

So that existed from March to Sept 2013. Not currently in effect. But either way, still just Monsanto business. It is not an indictment against GMOs.

vidret wrote:

new05002 wrote:

vidret wrote:why you think i don't put myself on your wait-list, or come meet up with ya'll or go to all the shows you guys go to - i'm way the fuck over here with that velociraptor guy

oh boy. Yea I didnt know. Maybe you just hate my guts.

or that and i live in cali yeah

lulz

At least everybody agrees on Fuck Monsanto

new05002 wrote: lol ask New Yorkers about cig tax, that shit sucks for them.

Holy fuck dude I was down there this weekend and it's no joke. Fuck paying $12 a pack. Not a fan of "quit by poverty."

Montesano's no good, Jerry. They threatened to sue us when we tried to make them tell us what was in their food.

http://rt.com/usa/monsanto-sue-gmo-vermont-478/

12$ a pack? Sounds like Canada.

Also 12$ for a 6 pack of shitty beer. Seriously I almost burst into tears when I went to a Safeway in Portland and saw how cheap shit was.

regarding the GMO labeling initiative started in several places. I think there is a much better approach to this. Right now a majority of food products are GMO, that is a fact. They are in the majority. It does not make sense to label GMO foods given that. If its not labelled non-GMO you should just assume it has GMO in it. Thus a non-GMO certification (with means of testing) should be implemented such that people who want to buy non-GMO foods can with some level of certainty know they are not consuming GMOs. An easy selling point for companies who pride themselves as anti-GMO in their products. Also a compromise between food businesses who do not want to shoulder the cost of relabeling food products.

new05002 wrote:

Ancient Astronaught wrote: I have no direct evidence on them controlling peer reviewed publications, but there is no contest anymore that they have control over every bit of digital information if they so desire. They can block or delete anything that doesn't fit their agenda, and it doesn't matter who is in control of the White House or senate. They all do it and for their contributors as well. Which Monsanto is one of the largest. My main concern is Monsantos GMO modified food (not everyone's) did not have to be FDA tested, they are the only known agricultural business that is self regulating and self researching. And with the Monsanto Protection Act (while it was effective) it was basically illegal to double check their researc, even for the FDA which had to just take their word that it was safe.

Sure, they can be that iron-fisted, does not mean they are actively doing that.

Concerning the MPA, from wiki

"The Farmer Assurance Provision (known as Monsanto Protection Act by critics) was part of a bill to provide continued funding to the federal government in the ongoing US budget stalemate, and was signed into law by President Barack Obama on March 26, 2013.[295] It expires at the end of the federal fiscal year, on September 20, 2013.[296] NPR stated that "the provision authorizes the USDA to grant "temporary" permission for GMO crops to be planted, even if a judge has ruled that such crops were not properly approved, only while the necessary environmental reviews are completed. That's an authority that the USDA has, in fact, already exercised in the past."[297] It was originally included as Section 733 in the June 2012 initial draft of the FY2013 Agriculture Appropriations bill.[298]:86–87[296] Politico reported that Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) authored the provision, and "said he worked with the company (Monsanto) and had a valuable partner in the late chairman, Inouye, who was sympathetic given Monsanto’s large seed operations in Hawaii."[299] The bill's sole dissenter, Senator John Tester (D-MT), proposed an amendment to remove it from the bill, but it never went to a vote.[297] Before the provision was passed, supporters said that "opponents of agricultural biotechnology have repeatedly filed suits against USDA on procedural grounds in order to disrupt the regulatory process and undermine the science‐based regulation of such products... Activist groups have made it clear they will continue to use the court system to challenge regulatory approvals of corn, soybean and other biotechnology‐derived crops, and have openly stated their intention to use litigation as a way to impede the availability of new technology to growers and consumers....If enacted, growers would be assured that the crops they plant could continue to be grown, subject to appropriate interim conditions, even after a judicial ruling against USDA. Moreover, the language would apply only to products that have already satisfactorily completed the U.S. regulatory review process and does not remove or restrict anyone’s right to challenge USDA once a determination of no plant pest risk has been made.[300] Opponents described it as" hidden backroom deal"[301] and after it passed the Senate, more than 250,000 petitioners signed a petition for President Obama to veto the bill on the premise that it "effectively bars federal courts from being able to halt the sale or planting of controversial genetically modified... seeds, no matter what health issues may arise concerning GMOs in the future".[296] In September 2013, the controversial provision was removed from the Senate version of the bill.[302]"

So that existed from March to Sept 2013. Not currently in effect. But either way, still just Monsanto business. It is not an indictment against GMOs.

They ARE being that iron fisted about a lot of other things so I personally would venture to say they would still be watching this especially with the international uproar they're causing this year.

And yes it did get repealed (which is why I said "while it was in effect" earlier) due to vast political pressure as it gave them free range to plant what ever they wanted while they studied it, and reported back to the FDA who then used it as their own research.

AngryGoldfish wrote:I'll see if I can find a UK distributor of Heady Trooper.

Sadly, they do not even distribute outside of Vermont because they can't even keep up with demand in about a 30 mile radius of the brewery. They've begun expanding but it's hard for them to produce enough beer not to sell out within hours.

whoa 5 page DR day
few thangs
1.wow whores rule,huh.thanks guys
2.alkaholiks are the shit.xzibit at hiz best
3.if you wanna smoke or have guns NY sucks.
$14 a pack some spots in manhattan.$9 here upstate
4.dont you thnk monsanto is mostlikey sellin weed already
probly that garbage people are smokin in massachusets still

holy fuck
tell me something scientific is the jam

ryan summit wrote:holy fuck
tell me something scientific is the jam

Yeah man. Whores is serious business and Christian is an awesome dude. The new track Cougars, not Kittens or whatever is sweet. He gets the heaviest sounds with a kind of unconventional setup. Love their style.

Also, purple walls WTF.