Ooh, that's a good one. I'll have to remember that the next time someone claims The Bible is literally true, and ask if they think they're immune to deadly poison.
I see a bumper sticker in this. You recall the recent flap about the bumper sticker that refers a Psalm that advocates the assassination of Obama? How about "Pray for Pat Robertson -- Mark 16:17-18"?
Catholics are taught not to interpret the bible literally, and I believe it is only a small percentage of Christians who do. I never actually met one myself, but then I am from Boston, and maybe the madness is a localized one.
In any event, scientists have been used to suppport corporate contentions that stuff like lead, asbestos, SV-40 & mercury in vaccines, and tobacco do no harm.
Some said stuff like DDT which saved millions in Africa from malaria was unsafe, and CO2 which is food for many forms of life is bad.
And then there are these modern GM foods and nano particles in food packaging that we have no idea about except from the say so of the Monsantos of the world, since no 3rd party gets funding to actually research the safety, and even if they did they have to get past the hurdle of proprietory nature of the product to be investigated, a legal instrument to protect manufacturers secrets. Guess we will find out in 30 years or so what effects this stuff has on unwitting human test subjects.
Of course we know BSE is not good, yet USDA does not permit anyone to test 100% of their animals to better service foreign markets.
And those drugs we take to make us feel better. One Doctor supposedly said that 50% of the patients he see come to him with an illness that needs to be treated, the other 50% come in for him to treat the side effects of the drugs he prescribed. Of course, FDA says they are safe because the manufacturers tested them.
So while I am pretty sure that man has little divine protection for things which are unsafe, I am equally sure that trust in science and corporate governance is equally silly. Yet folks go out and have their kids vaccinated for a flu that is not too bad, or for HPV, and eat GM foods and BSE tainted beef, without much concern.
Ignorance and faith is bliss I guess, even for atheists.
@pft: Ignorance is bliss indeed! Especially when exaggerating the premise on corporate relations with science! Sure... the way you paint it, scientist are but borgs assimilated into corporation X.
Ignore if you want how DDT will persist in the food chain. Ignore if you want how excess CO2 leads to greenhouse effects.
Ignore if you want how hybridisation of plants, have been practised since humans took up farming - and GM foods is actually a very viable solution to solve world hunger.
Ignore if you want that what your "one doctor" said might not mean the same thing if you looked at the situation entirely, ie.) patient habits, dosage etc... besides, applying your "they're all about pr0fits!!!" mentality, wouldn't the doctor want side-effects so that at least 50% of treated patients would return?! LOL!
I'm not American, I don't know what your FDA has been doing - so I won't comment on that.
Ironically you've proven yourself correct, ignorance is bliss indeed!! And every single one of your arguments contains such obvious fallacies that I suspect you might just be trolling - if that's the case then BAH!
Ooh, that's a good one. I'll have to remember that the next time someone claims The Bible is literally true, and ask if they think they're immune to deadly poison.
I see a bumper sticker in this. You recall the recent flap about the bumper sticker that refers a Psalm that advocates the assassination of Obama? How about "Pray for Pat Robertson -- Mark 16:17-18"?
Revere
You had me going there for a minute. :)
Denise
Catholics are taught not to interpret the bible literally, and I believe it is only a small percentage of Christians who do. I never actually met one myself, but then I am from Boston, and maybe the madness is a localized one.
In any event, scientists have been used to suppport corporate contentions that stuff like lead, asbestos, SV-40 & mercury in vaccines, and tobacco do no harm.
Some said stuff like DDT which saved millions in Africa from malaria was unsafe, and CO2 which is food for many forms of life is bad.
And then there are these modern GM foods and nano particles in food packaging that we have no idea about except from the say so of the Monsantos of the world, since no 3rd party gets funding to actually research the safety, and even if they did they have to get past the hurdle of proprietory nature of the product to be investigated, a legal instrument to protect manufacturers secrets. Guess we will find out in 30 years or so what effects this stuff has on unwitting human test subjects.
Of course we know BSE is not good, yet USDA does not permit anyone to test 100% of their animals to better service foreign markets.
And those drugs we take to make us feel better. One Doctor supposedly said that 50% of the patients he see come to him with an illness that needs to be treated, the other 50% come in for him to treat the side effects of the drugs he prescribed. Of course, FDA says they are safe because the manufacturers tested them.
So while I am pretty sure that man has little divine protection for things which are unsafe, I am equally sure that trust in science and corporate governance is equally silly. Yet folks go out and have their kids vaccinated for a flu that is not too bad, or for HPV, and eat GM foods and BSE tainted beef, without much concern.
Ignorance and faith is bliss I guess, even for atheists.
@pft: Ignorance is bliss indeed! Especially when exaggerating the premise on corporate relations with science! Sure... the way you paint it, scientist are but borgs assimilated into corporation X.
Ignore if you want how DDT will persist in the food chain. Ignore if you want how excess CO2 leads to greenhouse effects.
Ignore if you want how hybridisation of plants, have been practised since humans took up farming - and GM foods is actually a very viable solution to solve world hunger.
Ignore if you want that what your "one doctor" said might not mean the same thing if you looked at the situation entirely, ie.) patient habits, dosage etc... besides, applying your "they're all about pr0fits!!!" mentality, wouldn't the doctor want side-effects so that at least 50% of treated patients would return?! LOL!
I'm not American, I don't know what your FDA has been doing - so I won't comment on that.
Ironically you've proven yourself correct, ignorance is bliss indeed!! And every single one of your arguments contains such obvious fallacies that I suspect you might just be trolling - if that's the case then BAH!