Just wanted to thank Coach and my CF colleagues for the great training the past few months. On Sunday I completed the Bataan Death March Memorial Marathon at White Sands Missile Range. Finished 5th in the Men's Civilian Heavyweight, age 40-49 (26.2 miles, high desert, trail run, with 40# ruck). Great opportunity to honor Bataan survivors, America's POWs, and our current Service men and women. Thanks to you all, God bless.

I know there were several other CFs at the event...Daniel Andrews, Dale Jansen , and at I think one other I saw in a CF t-shirt. Way to go CF team!

"Reason: What do you think of organic farming? A lot of people claim it's better for human health and the environment.

Borlaug: That's ridiculous. This shouldn't even be a debate. Even if you could use all the organic material that you have--the animal manures, the human waste, the plant residues--and get them back on the soil, you couldn't feed more than 4 billion people. In addition, if all agriculture were organic, you would have to increase cropland area dramatically, spreading out into marginal areas and cutting down millions of acres of forests."

This makes me feel better about not eating organic fruit and vegetables... because I can't afford them.

Brendan, great job!

Good article. The bits about the importance of Bio Tech are very true. Humanity has been altered by science, especially medical science. We need to alter the way we fuel humanity to keep up with these changes.

Here's some "food" for thought. In terms of influence, who has had a greater impact on humanity in the last 70 years, our Nobel laureate Norman Borlaug or Mikhail Timofeevich Kalashnikov?

"If people want to believe that the organic food has better nutritive value, it's up to them to make that foolish decision. But there's absolutely no research that shows that organic foods provide better nutrition. As far as plants are concerned, they can't tell whether that nitrate ion comes from artificial chemicals or from decomposed organic matter. If some consumers believe that it's better from the point of view of their health to have organic food, God bless them. Let them buy it. Let them pay a bit more. It's a free society. But don't tell the world that we can feed the present population without chemical fertilizer. That's when this misinformation becomes destructive."

re photo...that is a tender embrace in the breast of another man...feel the CF love...come here and guveusahug

re Brendan Smith - that is inspirational stuff. I wish I was there humping the pack with you. Im sure you did CF proud, and the men and woment you were honoring. Go hard dude! What sort of difference do you think it made (CF).

Any photos for us?

Organic is a phurphy - like natural medicines. Funnel web spider poison is natural...stick some of that fang juice in your breakfast. It should get you closer to mother nature.

We live in a golden age of prosperity and we should enjoy it. I hope it lasts until the sun goes nova.

It's an interesting reflection on society that doomsayers Ehrlick and Brown get rich peddling their dribble that ends up in a waste basket, while Borlaug is working at Texas A&M in a windowless office enriching the lives of countless millions.......

You can't get fish oil from eating fish. You have to buy it from a health food store in a bottle and it costs $2 a day.

Where I live the the fish will be the sole" survivor.The enviros want to save a fish and can the farmers.Lets see we can't cut trees (another renewable resoure)for our needs,nor can we fish for food because its catch and release here or you can only keep one, and it better not be the wrong size,farmers can't have water for growing crops the fish need it so I guess we will all be eating "Bird Flu Chickens" or a Mad Cow" hamberger.I remember a time we ate what the good lord gave us was thankful to have it and the men and women that grew it did so with everyones blessings,but Tofu is now the other "white meat.Bean curds anyone?

I farm a small acerage in western Manitoba, I really must remember some of those facts and figures the next time bio-tech comes up in conversation. There's always at least one hysterical Wonderbread-stuffed cheeseburger cemetary gut having mofo railing against seed development while people STARVE TO DEATH.

hardcore - http://www.bataanmarch.com/

Pete in Oz (Comment #6)
Phurphy? Guess I need to get out more.

lol - dont know where it came from...strange huh....

Don't know if you all ever watch "Penn and Teller's Bullshit"...but last season they actually did a show about food and covered Borlaugh during the episode. A great man.

One of the great things to come out of my rival school, Texas A&M.

I think organic is good to eat. Nonetheless, we can do more with biotech.

Very interesting article. Passing it on to others.

Stu

20:47 for yesterday's workout.

modified L pull-ups legs were bent at the waist but also at knees toward the end. all pull-ups broken.

I’ve got immense respect for Norman Borlaug. He’s contributed so much to the world—and he’s proof that being a great scientist and a great humanitarian aren’t as incompatible as some might think. His winning the Nobel Prize shows that at least some people understand the importance of the connection between food and peace.

A couple of comments on the article itself:

At one point, Borlaug alludes to the the banning of DDT. He believed that we shouldn’t have banned it in the US because that would “exert pressure on heads of government in Africa and Asia” and “DDT was important there.” Wow, I couldn’t disagree more. And extending the argument to the European ban on biotech is weak.

As I was reading, I was thinking to myself that my memories of Borlaug weren’t of him being so optimistic about the future of our ability to feed the world. Sure enough, this is him from an Atlantic Monthly article in 1997:

“Though I have no doubt yields will keep going up, whether they can go up enough to feed the population monster is another matter. Unless progress with agricultural yields remains very strong, the next century will experience sheer human misery that, on a numerical scale, will exceed the worst of everything that has come before.”

Of course, this mostly just shows that a given publication or website will pick & choose their quotes carefully to support the political agenda they want to promote. Nothing wrong with that. Except that this article is so overtly political: the “questions” are so ridiculously overloaded with political import that it frankly takes away from Borlaug’s achievements and opinions. I agree with a lot of it; it just seems so heavy-handed. My favorite part was when he said, “that’s how science gets politicized,” in reference to the Cornell study, in the middle of a clearly political article veiled (thinly) as a scientific interview.

I think the most compelling point, though, is underscoring the competing priorities of environmental protectionism and fighting world hunger. Thanks for the read.

Law enforcement in Chicago are gearing up for a bio-tech conference. Why? Because some nutjobs don't believe in bio-tech and "globalization". I should send their organizers this article...kind of hard to argue saving BILLIONS of people.

I agree biotech can be a good thing. I do wonder though, What are the effects in the long term? If eating less omega 3 is lessening the capacity of our brain (paleo book) and the general health is going down in the population world wide (exept for the medicine). ?I wonder if there were studies done on the long term effect. Just being the advocate of the devil:))

Happy healthy mind training

Crossfit,
I have been on this program for two months now, and I QUIT! I believe its getting boring, and my muscles are getting smaller. I worked so hard to get a bigger frame, and now, its just diminishing..........WTF! Thanks crossfit for taking my beach muscles and turning them into just an average looking body. Just like the rest.
from OZ
Rayz

Really enjoyed the article for the day. Only point of caution that someone else touched upon is be careful about noting when these things were published. 2000 is certainly not dated but views on a subject can evolve pretty heavily over 6 years. That said, definitely agreed with the need to develop new strategies through biotech.

This is was a great interview with a great man. One of the most brilliant agronomists in the world. I would like to point out though, this aricle corrilates to the last rest day article on overpopulation. I believe wholly in bio-tech, my ex wife was a U of I ag major, her father was a farmer. She educated me a great deal about how hard farmers work, and how much has been done for the advancement of bio-technology.I don't buy organic, not because it's expensive, but because I choose to support more farmers that use bio-tech and want to really push agriculture to the next level. Not to knock bio-tech, but I don't fully agree that the food shortages in Africa are wholly because of lack of production. I believe a lot of it has to do with the warlords keeping food from the mass population. Food production I don't think is completely responsible for the hunger problems the world faces, nor do I say that it's overpopulation. It's a dynamic combination of a lot of things. By dynamic, I mean ever-changing. We have the technology to feed billions, what we're missing is world where everyone agrees that everyone should be fed. Don't misconstrue that statement, I'm not saying that the Western view, or the US culture should be pushed on other societies, what I'm saying is that not enough people care about their fellow planetary inhabitants.

I NEED THIS REST DAY !!

While we are discussing agriculture; where is the love for Henry Wallace and his family?

Energy is neither created nor destroyed. Where do you think the extra capacity for food energy is coming from? Biotechnology is _part_ of the answer. However, sustainability and biodiversity are also important. Organic farmers in Virginia are small time farmers and this is the largest reason why their product is expensive. By contrast large-scale food production facilities have run a lot of our traditional agrarian people out of the industry because they cannot afford to compete. I think we are losing a lot of our rural agrarian values. These are values that our founding fathers treasured. They are values that come from living with the land, on the land, by the land. Thank god for environmentalists who did fight against DDT. Our country is healthier and so is the third world. This planet took care of its people long before anyone ever thought up biotechnology. There is more than one answer to the problem and the best answer involves a little bit of everything: breeding, crop rotation, large scale farms, small scale farms and even ladybugs an excellent natural pesticide. The interviewer makes the same ridiculous mistake he accuses environmentalists of: proselytizing about the evils of the other side while refusing to listen to anything that is said, or contributions that are made. Personally, I disagree with this gentlemen's goal to feed the world despite rapid population growth. There are more problems than just food. As a planet, it is my personal opinion that we should strive for quality of life for all peoples rather than quantity of human life on the planet. I appreciate his contributions in food production. But he is not the only great mind in agriculture and we've learned a lot about the way the world works since the 60s and 70s when he started on his life's work.

Raymond #21

I have been doing CF for 2 mo. as well. I have seen results in that short a period. Mass and strength. Are you sure you are eating enough and getting enough water to compensate what is burned each day. I spent time researching CF and CF's diet info prior to doing the WOD's. This is something you should look into soon BEFORE quitting.

THANK GOD FOR THE REST DAY!!!!!!!!!!

2 mile run

Great article. I've been reading Watson's book on DNA: The Secret of Life (Watson is one of the two gents who identified the double helix) and he talks much about biotech issues too. Highly recommend it.

But here's my negative thought. For a fixed land area, there is probably a fixed upper bound on just how efficiently we can produce food on it. I don't have any idea what that bound is or how close we've come to it, but I expect it's there.

And if population continues to undergo exponential growth (big if...million dollar question) we will reach that bound, as an exponential always overtakes any other growth rate, especially one that is bounded.

The flip, positive view comes from my reading of Ray Kurweil's The Singluarity Is Near. He points out that not only are we creating new paradigm-shifting technologies, but we are increasing the rate at which we create new technologies, i.e., exponential growth. For example, with nanomachines on the horizon, we'll have the potential to manufacture any molecule and material from raw components. Including food, I assume.

2 mile run

The article was excellent, thank you for the link Coach. Also very pleased to see my alma mater represented very well.

As someone who works in agriculture in a third world country I understand the tremendous contributions that genetics has. Practicality does not have to be synonimous with disregard for the environment. I am witness to the yearly devastation that slash and burn farming does. Fields are abandoned and new areas are cleared. This practice and its' enviromental impact cannot be justified while genetics is set aside. Geneticly modified varieties as well as correct agricultural practices would increase yields, reduce crop land and improve living conditions. A great step towards the erradication of hunger could be taken embracing the advantages of science. Along with the elimination of trade barriers and farm subsidies. If an honest solution to hunger is sought, not if it's just political pot banging.

Gig'em Aggies

"At the present time, approximately 80 million tons of nitrogen nutrients are utilized each year. If you tried to produce this nitrogen organically, you would require an additional 5 or 6 billion head of cattle to supply the manure. How much wild land would you have to sacrifice just to produce the forage for these cows? There's a lot of nonsense going on here."

This is an interesting point. Methane (from natural gas) and atmospheric nitrogen are used via the Haber-Bosch process to generate those nitrogen nutrients used in commercial fertilizers. We won't run out of nitrogen anytime soon. But what about methane, which WILL run out eventually, and whose global production is expected to peak and begin decline by mid-century? Where will the fertilizer come from, if not from renewable feedstocks (i.e. biomass- manure)?

No rest for the wicked. Did WOD from a few days and kicked its ass:

20 seconds on/ 10 second off 65-pound thrusters for 15 intervals

Scored as the least number of reps in any of the 15 intervals. Bar must stay racked for duration of each interval.

15 intervals x 10 reps each - total reps: 150.

Of course, now I can't walk.

Johan (#20)

No real long term studies of health consequences have been made for ag-biotech products - because they are considered "substantially equivalent", FDA only has voluntary submission of health information (done for Flavr Savr tomatoes).

The Monarch butterfly issue is an interesting one - the data comes from an experimental study, and those who work in the field know it is a whole lot messier out there - but the evidence presented by the National Academy of Sciences in 2003/2004 suggests there likely is an effect on Monarch butterflies in the field. This is due not to the idea that bt is not solely being expressed in the corn pollen (as one can infer from the interview), but also throughout the entire plant - which are being eaten as a secondary source. The primary source of food for the Monarch are in fields next to corn fields - within reach of corn pollen. Further, anecdotal reports suggest decline in Monarch butterfly populations - but this is only anecdotal, and there is not any strict causality suggesting that GE Bt is the cause.

Now, I'm not suggesting that GE plants aren't important or good - I've been on the fence concerning them for a long time. However, I am wary of transgenic manipulations (yes, they do occur in nature, but they are exceedingly rare - think Mad Cow disease, Bird Flu, etc. - these are organisms that move across "wide boundaries" from one target species to another - but rarely, thank god). However, they are solely a tool for farmers to reduce chemical inputs - if managed properly - and with herbicide tolerance and pest resistance (Bt corn and cotton mainly), their effectiveness is in the decline as weeds and insects evolve and adapt.

However - and in spite of my rambling (my apologies) - this is an incredibly important topic for the crossfit group - with every genetic modification, cellular energy is shunted away from different aspects of the plant - which might mean different levels of nutrients as a result. This, to my knowledge, is not being studied. The argument for organic (and more likely - and in my eyes more important) integrated pest management, is to alter farm level factors to manage pests, not the crop itself, thus maintaining the expression of the plant qualities.

If there is a problem that I have with GE plants, it is that large corporations control the seed - not the farmers and that furthermore, we, the public, do not have a choice as to whether we eat GE plants - the hallmark of the free market system.

To fan of the ban on DDT

Should millions die from malaria and other insect borne disease in the 3rd world so that we, who face no such threats, can console ourselves about being good to the environment based on falsified research implicating DDT in environmental damage? All environmental regulations are trade offs, you give up one thing to get another. And in the case of the DDT ban we have given up the best, cheapest weapon against malaria, and done so on the basis of lies.

That millions and millions more people now contract malaria since the DDT ban than before is very well established. In Latin America alone malaria cases are increased almost 2 million persons.
Google it, or read these
http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/000000005591.htm
http://www.cei.org/gencon/019,03078.cfm

That the "Silent Spring" scare of Rachel Carson was based on lies is also well documented in the scientific community. But you will never hear a word of it in the mainstream media. Google that or read this and follow up until you're satisfied.
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/summ02/Carson.html

Patrick,
Good point!
Johan

In my opinion, (Tying this in with the last interview on overpopulation) overpopulation is real and is evidenced by the fact that humans have to grow millions of tons of grains to survive. Corn and Soy? Please. There are not enough animals on the planet to feed everyone healthy meat, but the last two articles did not recognize the compromises that are made in order to sustain a world population of the current size. Quality or Quantity? The interviewee chose quantity.

Hi Dan (#35),

Thanks for the links.

My problem is not DDT use as such; it was the logic in the article that we in the U.S. shouldn't outlaw it here because that would "exert pressure on the heads of governement in Africa and Asia" to ban it there. I simply feel we need to do what is in our best interests and let them worry about their best interests. We shouldn't attempt to force other countries to use or not use it, either.

I read the articles you linked to. The one from Spiked I mostly agree with. The other one, though, begins with the sentence,

"Thirty years ago this month, the government launched an assault on a basic liberty - the liberty to protect one's own health using a pesticide."

Sorry, but in my opinion, that just doesn't qualify as a basic liberty.

Anyway, thanks for the articles. I'll read the Silent Spring one later.

Done after the OHS-FS WOD to start sorting my lack of endurance with bw exercises.

10 rounds for time of:
5 pull-ups
10 push-ups
15 squats

11:11
All reps full ROM
Pull-ups and squats stayed unbroken
Press-ups included some rest in the up position and were the weakest link.

Next time increase pull-ups to 6 reps per round

Cheers kempie

Thanks CF for an interesting and broadening interview. I find many of the rest day articles expose me to ideas and material I might not have otherwise found, not unlike some of the workouts. Think of it as wallball for the mind!

Interesting article and a noble cause. However, Im inclined to think the causes of world hunger have little to do with the amount of food on the planet.

#21 Raymond, condolences on the loss of your beach muscles.

Ben (#37), I think that's a great point. The planet has been sustaining people organically for a LOOONNNGGG time. Now we have to rely on commercial farming practices, pesticides, and such to feed everyone. Overpopulation? Depends on whether you think using manmade materials to make such food qualifies. If we could make enough food to feed 50 billion people in a lab the size of Rhode Island (or even Texas or Alaska), would that not be overpopulation? According to the logic of "less land to make the necessary food" and "higher yields", it seems that we wouldn't be overpopulated. What if that food merely allowed most to survive, not thrive (such as the high-grain diets of the poorest of the poor)?

As has been pointed out, hunger has little to do with the amount of food on the planet. It has to do with the politics of who gets fed.

All thought provoking points in the piece... but honestly?...
I have a wide variety of sources I go to for similar geopolitical perspective but only a few I respect for fitness......
I'd way prefer rest day topics to be theory and practice related issues regarding crossfit style physical fitness and technique.....
Just my 2 cents.

Judging from what is posted regularly on the front page, it looks like this place is becoming more and more of a place for right wingers and libertarians to read articles that help them feel good about their views and pat themselves on the back for their thinking and less of a place about fitness. Yes, keep on believing that there are no hidden costs to increasing population and its required increasing agricultural output. It has no negative impacts. Really... Just because someone wants to stick their head in the sand and deny that overpopulation, GMO, and related developments are at minimum potentially damaging to the environment doesn't qualify as rational analysis. At least the workouts are free.

- R

Okay, I have officially lifted my self-imposed ban on rest days to reply to you, Ryan. In your opinion, 1 article every fourth day on some topic of interest to Greg Glassman (or simply that he believes is worthy of a read, with no comment on whether he endorses or disagrees with the opinion) qualifies this site as "becoming more and more of a place for right-ringers and libertarians to read articles that help them feel good about their views and pat themselves on the back for their thinking[.]"
Is hyperbole the only form of rhetoric taught in schools anymore? Does anyone with a post-secondary education even learn how to effectively state an argument anymore - or is it simply all OVERstatement now? Just diatribe and rant, with no use for fact or refutation? And then a swipe at those who can't use "rational analysis"? Would that we were all as smart (and as smug) as you.

As noted by some of the thoughts above, a number of people disagreed (respectfully) about DDT. Some others pointed out the biased tone of the questioner/interviewer. Some people even used your "rational analysis" to make their points. But you didn't. Rather, you lumped everyone on this site into one category that YOU created out of whole cloth and then knocked over that straw man, without citing a single fact in support.
AWESOME WORK, DUDE!

Why did I bother reading this today? Ahh, it must be because I am a "right-winger or libertarian" looking for a pat on the back. But you were right about ONE thing - the workouts are still free.

Hi all,
Remove petroleum from the equation and the result...significantly less food production=decreased world population.

Workout as follows
{Ring push-upx20; Rope jumpx200; Ring rowx20; RJx200; DB curl and pressx20 (30#er's); and RJx200}x3. Just two glitches in the jumping.
Duration 22:24.
Rest...

Crossfit is starting to really piss me off.

The idea that these rest day articles are intended to simply promote civil discourse is looking more and more bogus each week. If that were the case, why is the subtext of virtually every article liberal bashing? It is disengenuous of coach to present these articles as merely thought-provoking: they are deliberately anger-provoking.

What we are seeing is one-sided propaganda presented by corporate-financed 'think tanks.'

From sourcewatch.org, here is where the Reason Foundation, publisher of Reason Magazine gets its funding:

Selected Corporate Supporters (2000)

* 3M
* American Forest & Paper Association
* American Petroleum Institute
* Bank of America
* Bayer Corporation
* California Association of Realtors
* California Water Service Company
* Ken and Colleen Butler, Capital Partnerships
* Chevron Corporation
* Coca-Cola Co.
* Consulting Engineers & Land Surveyors of California
* Council of New York State, Inc.
* Continental Airlines
* Corrections Corporation of America
* DaimlerChrysler Corp.
* Dart Container Corporation
* Delta Air Lines
* Dow Chemical USA
* Eastman Chemical Company
* Eberle & Associates, Inc.
* Edison Electric Institute
* ENRON
* ExxonMobil Corporation
* Ford Motor Company
* Freedom Communications
* General Motors Corporation
* LCOR Incorporated
* Lehman Brothers, Inc.
* Eli Lilly and Co.
* Microsoft Corporation
* National Air Transportation Association
* National Beer Wholesalers Association
* Nossaman, Guthner, Knox & Elliott
* Pfizer, Inc
* Philip Morris Companies
* PricewaterhouseCoopers
* Privatized Emergency Services Association
* Procter & Gamble
* Shell Oil Co.
* Southern California Water
* Techcentralstation.com
* Union Carbide Corporation
* Virco
* Wackenhut Corrections Co.
* Watson Land Company
* Western States Petroleum Association

... so is it any wonder that they present an anti-regulation, anti-environmentalist point of view?

Like all effective propaganda, there is a lot of truth in some of the articles. I'd even say this one today is mostly truth. But when the interviewer steers every question into bogus bashing of all environmentalism, and all liberals, it gets absurd. Anyone who studies these issues beyond Reason and Cato knows that these issues are much discussed and debated within the environmental movement ... so to present the environmental movement as a monolithic boogey-man is retarded. The real thought on these topics is going on elsewhere.

But I'm starting to realize that all of this rest day crap is consistent with crossfit in general.

This is what I think coach believes, and he can correct me if I'm wrong: the Iraq war is going great. Global warming is a myth. Socialism created the food pyramid that makes everyone eat too much bread. The Zone Diet is god's gift to humanity. Exercising until you puke is just what happens when you're really exercising in the right way.

There may or may not be germs of truth in these positions, but I no longer trust crossfit to give me reliable information on anything. I will seek my facts elsewhere.

The only really good thing about crossfit used to be the instructions on how to do exercises properly. Such lessons are becoming fewer and farther in between.

I know the WODS now. They are becoming boring. I could easily make them up myself at this point. Or I could move onto some of the many other websites that promote functional fitness and imcrease my "cross fitness" by adding more variety than this website now offers.

Pukey is stupid. Anyone who thinks that puking is a necessary or even acceptable by product of a good fitness program is really an idiot. It scares me to think of our police, firefighters, and soldiers exercising until they puke and then trying to do their very important jobs. Anyone who truly respects these service personnel would cut back on the macho self-congratulation and provide some more useful advice.

Which brings me to rhabdo. When the New York Times quoted Coach as saying that at least six people had been treated for rhabdo after doing crossfit exercises, what did Coach do? He criticized the NYT's 'effete politics.' Which is surely beside the point, right? If he ever corrected the facts inthe article, or explained how to avoid rhabdo, I missed it. And I visit this site fairly regularly.

Yes, marathoners get sick and die too sometimes. No exercise program is risk-free. But two wrongs don't make a right.

This "yuk yuk we survived pukey and rhabo" attitude is juvenile. I'm too old for it. Actually, it sounds like Coach is too old for it also, since he no longer does the WODS.

Crossfit could have been great.

But you can now count me out of this cult.

Hey Rocky,

Please don't talk about Pukey that way. And you sound really horizontally challenged (short guy).

Don't let the virtual door hit you in the ass on the way out.

Brent

Ran 4.25 miles for the first time in 4 months. I got really lazy over the holidays.
BW 266
32:00
my best 4 mile time in a year

Hey Rocky, no need to be an asshole just because you dissent from coach's viewpoint. I rarely agree with the rest day articles (at least not 100%) and rarely make a comment on rest days. However, on the rare occasions that I do, I go for thought provocation, not anger provocation.

WODs are free, so stop complaining about what Coach does with his site. I think we could do without the political discussions on a fitness site too, but respect is always warranted in someone else's house.

Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya.

Outstanding! From what I read, that's 2 or 3 assholes out the door today...good deal. The herd thins itself, I love it.

Rocky - perhaps I'm just easily impressed, but planning a WOD seems rather complicated to me. I see Coach as an expert at this. But if you got it all figured out, then good luck. Let me know if you set-up your own blog or website. If it's free and better than CF, I'll follow you. Until then, I must disagree with you.

Oh, I've never read a WOD or comment on the message board that instructed me to train so hard that I puke or sicken myself. Certainly, anyone is capable of crossing that line where the body's retch mechanism is activiated - but that's never been the goal. The point is to train with intensity! Right?

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."

Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1955

I have to agree with Rockky on the first one half of his post..then he just got stupid of course in the Crossfit bash.
Rockky.I don't usually get sucked into discourse with EITHER side of the polarized ends of the political spectrum.. because polarized views each have giant blind spots concerning any issues dear to them.... (that's the nature of polarization) such that meaningful dialogue just becomes alternating political spin.
The (very few ) friends I've found over the years that I've had illuminating discussion with about such matters are apolitical and look at these things as a political scientist might...... using intense scrutiny and impassioned thinking but passion that doesn't spring from political agenda.
Thus I steer clear of engaging in Crossfit commenting because it's agenda IS obvious..(which is OK.. it's they're site)
and instead enjoy and remain grateful for the unique fitness approach offered.
I DO think that the purity of the site would be preserved beautifully if a Forum were created for discussion on world affairs.....
And the WOD section 'topic day' be used for provocative fitness/nutrition topics.

Scott #50

... so you say "I go for thought provocation, not anger provocation" right after you say, "no need to be an asshole."

WTF is that?

I will agree with some of Rocky's comments:

Pukey IS stupid!
I’d still wear the shirt though. But then - I'm not so bright.
I’ve never actually come close to puking – I’m too close to 40 and I figure my heart would explode first.
I view Pukey as a mythical indicator of my level of exertion, a pushing of the personal limits as far as I safely can. I work out to have fun, keep fit and enjoy the other things and activities in my life – dying should not be fun I think… else everybody be doing it. Hmmm….

Doing pull-ups until your hands are completely shredded because you wouldn't "wuss-out" and put on gloves does not make you tough. It just makes your hands painful and bloody - so then you lie awake all night with you heart pulsating in your hands trying to figure out how you can manage them to do the next WOD. So that either puts you out of commission or you have to tape the hell out of ‘em - still you end up getting blood on the gym equipment and that pisses everyone else off. Actually, that part’s not so bad… Yeah - I've been that guy.

The site articles and commentary are biased - but what would expect given the nature of the site and the general demographic of the participants. I don’t care – they do provoke thought and discussion. Take it for what it is and move on.

But I do find it completely baffling that those people who so vehemently avow free speech, independent and critical thinking can be so quick to pile on anyone who might present questions, contrary opinions or concerns regarding site's content.

The zone is good?
How can anything that swears off pizza and beer be good?
This defies logic and I refuse to agree or entertain any thoughts otherwise. Here my critical thinking ends!

What does Rx'd mean? Anybody... anybody...Buhler... anybody!!

comment # 56:

"Rx'd" is a medical term meaning "as prescribed".

Usually used here to signify a person completing a workout as it was written ("as prescribed").

Chris (#55)...posts about the article go for thought provocation. Posts to people bashing for the sake of bashing...not so much. Disagreement = good. I learn more from 1 discussion with people I disagree with than from 10 discussions with like-minded people. Flying off the deep end = not good. Not only does it make you look like an idiot, your good points get lost in the shuffle of head-shaking.

As for Pukie, I think you've got it....Pukie is not a goal so much as an indicator of exertion. In fact, I would venture that most view Pukie as going just a step too far....the goal is to get close enough without meeting the ol' guy.

So - would eating genetically modified plants and animals still meet "Zone" requirements? Not that that is likely to happen, as most gm is based on the highly profitable grains (soy and corn) and very little research on fruits and vegetables has been carried out to date. But still - if there was a choice (and currently there isn't, unless you buy organic) - would crossfitters eat them?

Patrick (#59)...I think the point is that we (very) priveleged few have basically ZERO right to tell those in extremely poor countries what is/isn't right for them. None of us are starving.

You'll notice there's kind of a dearth of Sudanese (for example) hanging out here at CF, pursuing elite fitness. Eating Zone and doing Helen isn't a priority when you're starving to death.

It's incredibly presumptious of anyone living in the relative luxury of the West to dictate to the Third World what is/isn't a good diet.

I love how these REASON articles slice and dice these articles to politicize them. Just from the way it reads, it doesn't seem like Borlaug wanted his comments to be based around the political questions that were posted. It seems to me the interview was done in one way and the article presented in another. Good article though, I learned alot.

Libs, mods, and environmentalists who are jumping ship need to turn the page and not get so wrapped up in these articles. I'm a mod leaning lib myself, but there are just some things you have to accept: that for the benefits of this great sight (free not to mention) you are subjected to the occasional right-wing political banter. I have occasionally responded slightly angry to some of the articles but I realize it is best to check yourself and not get tied in knots over it.

Remember, this is Coach's sight. He can do what he wants with it. We do not have to agree with him and he does not have to agree with us.

Did this one at the gym with two buddies. They keep upping the ante on any workout I give the. OK. The onlookers were amused.

How many rounds can you complete in 20 minutes of:

Russ 6 rounds
10 40# assisted pullups
10 bench press 135#
10 shoulder presses 35# dbs.

Christian 3 rounds + 10 PU + 10 BP + 7 Presses
10 40# assisted pullups
10 bench press 135#
10 shoulder presses 35# dbs.

Laura 5 rounds + 10 pull ups
10 single kipped pullups
10 Push ups
10 shoulder presses 15# dbs.

As an English teacher, I find the lack of a sense of irony and absurdity in adults to be especially disturbing.

I expect it in my junior high students, but adults? C'mon.

Apply this statement to those you deem worthy.

Rocky--

So's your face.

Re: 47, 54, & 55...
Coach & I would never be friends.
Then again, the road crew guys who keep me out of the ditch all winter and I wouldn't be friends either.

I've learned to take what I want or need and leave the rest. Rest days are great for entertainment & some thought--I don't recall any articles that I've actually *agreed* with, and it doesn't bother me in the slightest. Coach has never demanded that I worship at his feet or leave.

I've never met Pukey and I'm not even Crossfitting regularly now. To each his/her own; if someone else likes to thrash their body worse than I do, fine.

I guess I just don't see the point in taking anything personally when no one on this site has ever met me or will ever get to know me. Just take what you can use and enjoy it for what it is.

Rocky,

Thanks for the interesting and entertaining comments.

I love it when they call CrossFit a cult on their way out. By the way, are we wearing the blue or the red Nike jumpsuit today?

Ya'll will not think it's so funny when the giant killer robots attack, aided by the giant killer bean-sprouts and giant killer carrots.

I'm just throwing that out there.

-D.

Here's what I believe:
The Iraq war isn't going that well but won't get better if we leave.
Global warming is bad, but not as bad as it is presented. (And is probably the only thing keeping us from the next Ice Age
Overpopulation is bad but not as bad as it is said to be.
Science appropriately applied is good
These types of posts don't appear on non rest days because Coach wants us to be too tired to type.

Blue today. Blue is every other day...Cult Order #52, article 3.

I thought it was blue every day but on rest day... that's the day we get to wear red, for all those who get fired up and leave crossfit only to come back a day or two later..... "buy low, sell high", words to live by.

The underlying message on this site is health and wellbeing. I'm proud to wear my CrossFit sweat, because it signifies what I value - that is simply bettering myself (not just for a team, or a sports event). That is fitness as a sport - bettering ones-self and using the power of community to share knowlege and motivation. Fair enough you might be offended by pukie and others, but be an adult and ignore it. Thats what I tell my 2.5 yo daughter to do at play group when some kid is messing with her - a basic strategy that she is mastering fast. That means she still gets to enjoy all the other wonderful stuff they do there - while rising above the crap.

I thing you are gutless though - it is easy to speak shit and burn your bridges on a page like this. It would be another thing to show up at CF HQ and say what you have written to the team of trainers and coach. Now that would consist of having some balls.

The Zone is actually in principle a brilliant idea. You obviously havent read it. Tell me whats wrong with a concept that suggests eating what your body and brain respond best too? Particularly in a culture like yours and ours that are plagued with obesity and heart disease?

Judging by the number of times you have used the words "me, I, I'm and myself"....you have some issues with yourself. Seeing we are being presumptuous and judgemental, you seem insecure. Is everything ok...do you need a hug?

It would be nice if a few more of us lightened up and cracked a few more jokes. laugh people!!!!!!!!!

ive got one for you...

what do you call a lepper in a hot bath?

porridge!!

Couldn't read all the article; will say I'm for anything that produces abundant food for people that need it, and I'm for anything that helps out the folks that produce it.

Raymond #21- My condolonces on your loss of beach muscles. Please bust out a few sets of forearm curls and calf raises for me next time you hit Gold's or 24.The laughing you hear as you wait for the leg curl machine will no doubt be someone from CF!

Massage, 50 minutes.

Great gardening article, I am going to the store to buy some genetically engineered corn seed to plant so I can spray it with Round Up and get double the yields without the weeds. About food production its almost April and spring (Northen Hemisphere) time to plant a garden does anyone have any suggestions besides corn?

Executed Sunday's WoD today @ ~ 35:00 (many breaks).
-20lb DB thrusters instead of wall ball shots.
-Jumping pull-ups.
-All sets broken (except the runs on a treadmill).
-Addiional 5 sets of deadlift for practice: 135, 185, 225, 275, 280 (PR), 225.
-Medball sit-ups.

Group Moffett completed "Tabata" today.

Raymond, I agree with Medic. Take a good look at your diet and rest habits. I have been with the program for about three months, and am, without a doubt, in the best shape of my life at 31, following the Zone pretty strictly. Bigger, stronger, faster, more cut, you name it. I think you get out of it what you put into it.
Rocky, a. If you don't enjoy the rest day articles, STOP READING THEM. I rarely do. b. Yes, working out to the point of vomiting is extreme, but as someone who competed on both the swim and lacrosse teams in college, I can tell you, serious athletes are extremists. Besides, nobody's got a gun to your head. You decide how hard you work. c. PUKIE IS A JOKE. Treat it as such. Where's your sense of humor? d. For every doomsday report on global warming there's another study that disproves it. The world has gotten warmer and cooler at intervals since the beginning of time, but that doesn't make sexy print. Lastly, to both of you: how about a little respect. I doubt if either of you were in the same room with Coach you would have the sack to tell him to his face how "stupid" and "boring" Crossfit is. And with that,gentlemen, us cult members bid you a fond farewell. Kool-aid anyone?
On another note, just wondering if there are any crossfitters in the south suburbs of Chicago (Joliet, Plainfield, etc.) who'd be interested in working out together, maybe a few times a month, nothing formal. Be nice to have someone local to at least bounce ideas off of.
John

Hey Guys

Here are a couple of links about the first independent non-industry sponsored study analyzing genetically engineered food and its effects on mammals

http://www.mercola.com/2001/jul/14/gm_foods.htm

Here is another on the basics of Bio tech for those who don't already know (I'm sure most here do.)

http://www.mercola.com/2001/jul/14/biotech.htm

missed squats the other day so did
135x3 155x3
175x2,195x2,215x2,245x2,265x2,285x2,305x2,315x2
325x1, 325x1
I love this site and these workouts. The wod's are motivational and goal oriented. Most people quit working out because they don't reach their goals or they lose motivation. I look forward to every WOD like its christmas year round. Every time I don't set a new pr or better my time is more motivation to work harder. With every time I do set a pr comes a good feeling that keeps me coming back. So thx coach and thx to all the outstanding individuals on this site who constantly push themselves. Thx coach for making a five lb pr or shaving 5 seconds off of my helen time important to me. it doesn't have to be fun to be fun.

Matt G. (60) - my apologies if I didn't clarify myself - the point was not whether we can feed people on the "Zone" in the underdeveloped world, it was, should we as individuals in the affluent U.S. (or whatever other country has the choice) choose to eat GM foods or not (if we have the choice - currently, in the U.S., we do not).

As to telling what other countries can and cannot do - that is a very interesting and important point that pertains directly to corporate control over the seed itself (currently Monsanto is trying to prevent the saving of seed and regrowth of it by farmers - not that they shouldn't - they are in business for a profit).

If I were to venture a concern beyond the above, it is that GE is being played up as the savior of Africa, whereas that is not really the case. For instance, through to the end of 2003 there had been 3959 field tests (according to USDA APHIS data) of corn, 573 of cotton, 708 of potato, 635 of soybean, 518 of tomato and 253 of wheat. On the other hand, those crops most important for smaller indigeonous farmers in Africa and other impoverished nations have not been focused on (likely due to lack of financial incentive): cassava 2, papaya 16, peanut 24, squash 40, and sweet potato 8 (if you like, I can send any information you want on this your way).

If indeed we were serious about fighting starvation abroad (and at home), there would be more focus on these types of crops (a la Borlaung's work) - especially by universities. Not to be combative, but we should also consider malnutrition as well as lack of food. Most of us, especially those of us in the midsouth region (I assume you are "the Matt G." from Memphis) see plenty of overfed, undernourished individuals.

Not easy stuff to deal with - and I mean no disrespect - it just seems to be an important issue to consider seeing as we Americans subsidize our grains to a great extent - and our fruits and vegetables not at all.

Tim #79...

What do the authors think of genetic engineering that has been done the old-fashioned way, by cross breeding and selection rather than gene splicing? I didn't see a reference to requirements for food testing for traditionally genetically engineered foods (aka everything we now eat).

Comment #41
"Interesting article and a noble cause. However, Im inclined to think the causes of world hunger have little to do with the amount of food on the planet.

#21 Raymond, condolences on the loss of your beach muscles."

I'm with you,

Please don't feed the trolls!

Right now there is more than enough food to go around but not enough ways to get it around.

Hunger is more a function of distribution than supply.

Fix the supply chains and/or encourage truly local growing.

to rocky
"Pukey is stupid. Anyone who thinks that puking is a necessary or even acceptable by product of a good fitness program is really an idiot. It scares me to think of our police, firefighters, and soldiers exercising until they puke and then trying to do their very important jobs. Anyone who truly respects these service personnel would cut back on the macho self-congratulation and provide some more useful advice."
1. Pukie is a fictional cartoon character.
2. No where is the WODs, CF exercices, FAQs, videos, or demos is puking mentioned. Coach has never put " reps until puke", "increase weight until puke". etc.. Don't confuse the overzelous post of a CF follower as the coaches words.
3. As a firefighter, I will go out on a limb and say that I am speaking for ALL firefighters, police officers and members of the armed services. We are capable of cognitive process and independent thinking. Just because we chose dangerous professions doesn't mean we are dumb. We are all educated and trained in our respective fields. We are not blindly following an edict to die in a fire, domestic dipute or shoot out. Nor are we dumb enough to work out so hard we cannot perform our jobs. We do have lives out side the uniform. If we feel the desire to cripple ourselves in a WOD we will do it off duty.
4. If you feelyou pressure to hit the WOD so hard you puke, you have a problem. Not coach.
Thanks for the vote of confidence. If you start a better work out site, email me the address.
I'll wait patiently.
Coach, Thanks for the WODs and the forum. I've never felt better in my life.

3X5 minute intervals on treadwall, 3-mile run with wife.

Mike Y (82) - good point on the testing issue. It is not done here in the U.S., but Canada is following a scheme based upon risk-assessment for all new plants, GE or not. In the past there have been problems with traditionally cross-bred plants - such as potato expressing too much aluminium (I believe that is the term) in its skin (a toxic protectant against insects) - which lead to a variety of individuals getting sick (I'll have to dig for the citation).

I guess the problem with GE (more accurately - transgenics) vs. cross-breeding is the cross-boundaries issue, and lack of knowledge of the effects that might occur. Such as Bt - a bacterium that leads to insects guts busting, leading to sepsis and starvation for the insects - as applied organically (topically), it deteriorates over a short period of time. Genetically engineered, it expresses throughout the plant (although that is being worked on) and at all times - a person can't avoid it. Also, one argument is that the Bt protein is quite close in structure to allergens. Many questions remain... and the many positions held here are valid positions, but likely need to be addressed through further research.

Why is it that the haters only post on rest days? Are you working out or just looking for an anonymous fight?

I caught-up today with Sunday's workout.

400 Meter Run
50 wall ball shots
30 pull ups
800 meter run
30 pull ups
50 wall ball shots
400 meter run

Subbed 15lb medicine ball...left my 20lb wall ball at home by accident.

Ran around the parking lot...close to 400m per lap...perhaps a little longer, but not enough to kill the results, especially with how broken my pull-up sets were.

Time: 20:24. Felt pretty good, but the broken pull-ups and indoor/outdoor transition killed my time.

For Kegger - HR averaged 164, peaked at 179.

"... so is it any wonder that they present an anti-regulation, anti-environmentalist point of view?"

Look...Rocky, there are plenty of pro-regulation, pro-environmentalist publications out there funded by public and private entities. It's OK. That is a by-product of the first amendment.

Even NPR has a several private benefactors.

Every TV news outlet sells advertising, and advertising money technically is support and sponsorship. Be happy that there is some level of disclosure for the people less intelligent than you who are not able to navigate this stuff on their own.

With the exception of the Pukie issue, your essay reads like a rant from a petulant child. It's like you've been planning a temper tantrum for quite some time.

It is though you know better and can do better, and you would like for everyone in the community to know that you are leaving the sandbox, taking your 20lb wall ball and going home. I'm sure that was not your intent...right?

Restraint is key here. Don't let your passion get in the way of your intelligence. Once you lash-out, or get emotional, you lose. It is true in debate, it is true in a fight, it is true in business, and it is true on an Internet message board.

You make a solid argument about pukie. Does one really need to hurl a stomach full of reasonably expensive, organic paleo lunch to know whether the proper exertion benchmark has been reached? Probably not. But then you lost me again with where you were trying to go with the military/public service athletes pushing themselves to puke.

Help me understand, were you giving real respect to their service or were you insulting their intelligence? Again, clarity and maturity (for lack of a better word) will help you focus your arguments and gain the support of likeminded people.

Focus on those points a little and I think the free work out site you create will be excellent.

Send us the link.

WOD @ CrossFit San Diego

5 rounds for time:

10 x squat clean
run 429m (perimeter of building) or row 500m

all cleans @ 135lbs
all rows

24:10

followed up with some brief work on triple extension form, some muscle-ups, and a rope climb.

Well Said Rob. Ok #86, El Capitan! Don't go ruining my vision of Pukie sparring with Frosty, or the tooth fairy , or any of my other heroes. A man has to have other heroes besides a good old US Marine....

Rayond & Rocky,

BOO-HOO!!! BOOO-FRICKIN-HOO!!! WAAAANHHHHH!!!! If you are going to leave, leave w/some respect and dignity. Not like a couple of B@*#HS. I think enough of my fellow Kool-Aid drinkers have pointed out the faults in your dribble, so I wont do it again. I agree w/Coach more times then not. I disagree w/most of the Left thinking people on the site. But I would not disrespect the site it's self. Go and work on whatever is in your panties causing you to whine like that. Raymond... Beach muscles bro? Your dismissed on principle alone!

Give me another cup of Grape Kool-Aid! Grape wont stain my blue jump suit. Arrrrggghhh!!!

Get some, Go again!

Mike Y #82

Here is an excerpt on Propaganda that states:

Now in the case of GM foods, the public is instinctively afraid of these experimental new creations which have suddenly popped up on our grocery shelves which are said to have DNA alterations. The IFIC wants to reassure the public of the safety of GM foods, so it avoids words like:

Frankenfoods
Hitler
biotech
chemical
DNA
experiments
manipulate
money
safety
scientists
radiation
roulette
gene-splicing
gene gun
random

Instead, good PR for GM foods contains words like:

hybrids
natural order
beauty
choice
bounty
cross-breeding
diversity
earth
farmer
organic
wholesome

It's basic Freudian/Tony Robbins word association.

"The fact that GM foods are not hybrids that have been subjected to the slow and careful scientific methods of real crossbreeding doesn't really matter. This is pseudoscience, not science. Form is everything and substance just a passing myth."

http://www.mercola.com/2001/aug/15/perception.htm

Did the 060310 WOD--
Complete as many rounds as you can in twenty minutes of:
65 pound push press, 12 reps
10 pull-ups

Results: 9.95 Rounds (short 5 pullups in last round)
split times-
rnd PPS PUs
1 :27 0:25
2 :38 0:38
3 :40 0:58
4 :42 1:55
5 :47 1:35
6 :47 2:03
7 :48 1:27
8 :42 1:33
9 :40 1:39
10 :37 0:58 (for 5 PUs)

Mike Y #82

"Genetic engineers argue that their creations are no different than crossbreeding. However, natural boundaries are violated by crossing animals with plants; strawberries with fish, grains, nuts, seeds; and legumes with bacteria, viruses, and fungi -- or human genes with swine. "

http://www.mercola.com/2002/nov/2/biotechnology4.htm

Tim #82, the fact that Reason magazine is sponsored by companies (some that I hold stock in most likely) that have a vested interest in GM foods does nothing to invalidate their argument. Using that as your argument is a logical fallacy, a "circumstantial ad hominem". http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/circumstantial-ad-hominem.html . It might hold water in the fever swamps of public opinion, but not otherwise. By your argument, every court defendant who pays for his own lawyer is automatically guilty.

I read the articles you point to. What they fail to do in any way is recognize that there is any sort of an ethical dilemma at all. Don't want Bt genes in cotton? Crank out the pesticides. Don't want bug resistant trees in forest? More pesticides or cut down more trees. Don't want to use genes to promote milk production? Place more cows into human servitude. Don't want rice with precursors of Vitamin A in them? Let more die of vitamin defiencies. And on and on. They are anecdotal in their argument. And when you argue with anecdotes, you can pretty much prove anything.

PM -

5 min 16kg kb snatch - alt arm = 80
5 min 16kg kb snatch - alt arm = 96

1.5 hour MT

Thanks!

raquetball. good competition

Mike Y#82 wrote>>"the fact that Reason magazine is sponsored by companies (some that I hold stock in most likely) that have a vested interest in GM foods does nothing to invalidate their argument"<<

Oh really? So you think sponsorship has nothing to do with what light certain issues are presented in? Are you familiar with or did you read the excerpts on propaganda? Here are a couple of excerpts:

In America, conventional wisdom that has mass acceptance is usually contrived: somebody paid for it.

Pharmaceuticals restore health

Vaccination brings immunity

The cure for cancer is just around the corner

When a child is sick, he needs immediate antibiotics

When a child has a fever he needs Tylenol

Hospitals are safe and clean.

America has the best health care in the world.

And many many more
This is a list of illusions, that have cost billions and billions to conjure up. Did you ever wonder why you never see the President speaking publicly unless he is reading? Or why most people in this country think generally the same about most of the issues listed? The best PR goes unnoticed.

For decades they have created the opinions that most of us were raised with, on virtually any issue which has the remotest commercial value, including:

pharmaceutical drugs
vaccines
medicine as a profession
alternative medicine
fluoridation of city water
chlorine
household cleaning products
tobacco
dioxin
global warming
leaded gasoline
cancer research and treatment
pollution of the oceans forests and lumber
images of celebrities, including damage control crisis and disaster management
genetically modified foods
aspartame
food additives;
processed foods dental
amalgams

Lesson #1

Edward Bernays learned early on that the most effective way to create credibility for a product or an image was by "independent third-party" endorsement.

For example, if General Motors were to come out and say that global warming is a hoax thought up by some liberal tree-huggers, people would suspect GM's motives, since GM's fortune is made by selling automobiles.

If however some independent research institute with a very credible sounding name like the Global Climate Coalition comes out with a scientific report that says global warming is really a fiction, people begin to get confused and to have doubts about the original issue.

So that's exactly what Bernays did. With a policy inspired by genius, he set up "more institutes and foundations than Rockefeller and Carnegie combined." (Stauber p 45)

Quietly financed by the industries whose products were being evaluated, these "independent" research agencies would churn out "scientific" studies and press materials that could create any image their handlers wanted. Such front groups are given high-sounding names like:

Temperature Research Foundation Manhattan Institute
International Food Information Council Center for Produce Quality
Consumer Alert Tobacco Institute Research Council
The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition Cato Institute
Air Hygiene Foundation
American Council on Science and Health
Industrial Health Federation Global Climate Coalition
International Food Information Council Alliance for Better Foods

Sound pretty legit don't they?

Another standard PR tactic is to use the rhetoric of the environmentalists themselves to defend a dangerous and untested product that poses an actual threat to the environment. This we see constantly in the PR smokescreen that surrounds genetically modified foods.

They talk about how GM foods are necessary to grow more food and to end world hunger, when the reality is that GM foods actually have lower yields per acre than natural crops. (Stauber p 173)

The grand design sort of comes into focus once you realize that almost all GM foods have been created by the sellers of herbicides and pesticides so that those plants can withstand greater amounts of herbicides and pesticides. (The Magic Bean)

Also let us not forgt that:

Despite industry rhetoric, very few countries are willing to ignore public opposition and allow the commercial cultivation of GE soybeans, corn, cotton, or canola, the only four crops currently being grown on any significant scale.

While farmers in 130 nations are currently producing certified organic crops, a grand total of three nations, (the US-with 68% of the world's GE crops, Canada-6%, and Argentina-22%) are still producing 96% of the world's GE crops.

Moreover the US, Canada, and Argentina are finding that that their major overseas customers such as Europe, Japan, and South Korea no longer want to buy GE crops, even for animal feed.

In Europe, the largest agricultural market in the world, grassroots market pressure has forced all of the supermarket chains and food companies to remove GE ingredients from their consumer products.Meanwhile on the regulatory front no new GE crops have been approvedfor commercialization in the EU since 1998.

http://www.mercola.com/2002/feb/23/ge_food.htm

http://www.mercola.com/2001/sep/15/manipulation.htm

Tim #100

You said..."Oh really? So you think sponsorship has nothing to do with what light certain issues are presented in?"

I didn't say that. I said that your using corporate sponsorship as the logical basis for your counterargument to genetic mod of foods is a logical fallacy. It is pure, bad logic. Go back and read...

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/circumstantial-ad-hominem.html

...if it is not clear to you.

Mike Y #101

I did not use corporate sponsorship as THE logical basis for my counterargument, the fact that sponsorship has everything to do with what light issues are presented in was only one of many points contained in the multiple posts.

Go back and read post #100 or

http://www.mercola.com/2001/sep/15/manipulation.htm

or post #82

...if it is not clear to you.

Also check this link:

http://www.vegsource.com/articles/gmo_forcefeed.htm

Also to answer one of your previous questions here is an article entitled:

Why Traditional Cross-Bred and Genetically Engineered Crops Are Completely Different

http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge/gmwatch120505.cfm

Also in response to your self contained question and "answer" session >>"Don't want Bt genes in cotton? Crank out the pesticides. Don't want bug resistant trees in forest? More pesticides or cut down more trees." << check out:

Despite Industry Claims, Insect Resistant GE Crops Will Not Reduce Toxic Pesticide Use

http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge/BTcrops021206.cfm

How to read Tim #100.

Tim says, “In America, conventional wisdom that has mass acceptance is usually contrived: somebody paid for it.” He doesn’t guide us as to which kind of contrived wisdom might be the worst – one paid for, one created to win a government grant, one designed to beef up the CV for life time tenure, or one repeated to pander to one’s constituency.

Two of Tim’s examples of contrived conventional wisdoms are that “Pharmaceuticals restore health” and “Vaccination brings immunity”. In his gloomy view pharmaceuticals never restore health, and vaccines never convey immunity.

Two more of Tim’s conventional beliefs foisted on us by corporations are “Hospitals are safe” and “America has the best health care in the world.” Does he recommend surgery in an alley or a sparkling abortion clinic? Does he have an explanation for Canadians and Saudis coming to the US for medical care instead of going to, say, Japan, France or Switzerland, where life expectancy is much higher? Tim is to medicine as a scientologist is to psychology.

Tim suggests we “never see the President speaking publicly unless he is reading”. As I am writing the President is speaking on TV without notes. Did anyone see his recent extemporaneous town hall meetings, or catch his press conferences in the last month or so? W’s PR failings may be his biggest shortcoming, but his frequent unscripted conversational style deliveries may be his strongest suit. And he’s cranking them up.

Tim’s analysis requires that his audience already believes commercial connections are evil and corporations are evil. So he doesn’t mention that corporations are a perennial, favorite target of the left. He just denies them any right to self-defense. This Marxist twist is reminiscent of Henry Waxman’s famous grilling of the tobacco CEOs. Each had to answer yes or no whether tobacco was addictive. They were vilified for saying tobacco was not addictive. In fact, it isn’t. Regardless, the video clip got as much play as the cops beating on Rodney King.

The Waxmans and the media silently assumed addictive meant habit forming. Previously one of the requirements for a substance to be classified as addictive was that it required more and more usage to get the same effect. That doesn’t happen with nicotine.

If you think nicotine is addictive, check the patches for a warning label. There isn’t one. That doesn’t prove the point, but does show a logical disconnect. What proves the point is that habituated smokers quickly level out at a fixed number of packs per day. The Waxmans have the power to ban tobacco but don’t. They are addicted to the tax revenue.

Tim doesn’t mention the contrived conventional wisdoms of the left, like “tobacco is addictive”, “global warming is man made”, or “blacks are forced to live in ghettos”.

A couple of times, Tim cites Stauber as his authority. Stauber is a co–author of such works as

>Weapons of Mass Deception: The Uses of Propaganda in Bush's War on Iraq

>Trust Us, We're Experts: How Industry Manipulates Science and Gambles with Your Future

Take a guess at Stauber's leanings! He writes for an Internet site called, “Center for Media and Democracy”.

Tim’s evidence of corporate skullduggery includes a list of eight “’independent’ research agencies” with “high sounding names”. He doesn’t include the Union of Concerned Scientists, or his own source’s “Center for Media and Democracy”.

Tim turns to Edward Bernays for an understanding of propaganda. Now Bernays is sometimes credited with being the father of PR. In fact, he was a self–promoting fraud, like his Uncle Freud, from whom he seems to boast he has genetic psychological skills. Wikipedia quotes Bernays:

>In Propaganda, his most important book, Bernays argued that the scientific manipulation of public opinion was necessary to overcome chaos and conflict in society:

>>The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ... We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. ... In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons ... who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.

Apply this democratic institution to the AGW campaign! Or tobacco addiction. Or affirmative action. Or the escalating war on evil Wal-mart. Or the Vietnamization of the War on Terror. Or Bush lied.

Read Bernays’ definition closely and you’ll see it’s propaganda only if you buy it.

A post script to my last at #104:

Tim relies on Joseph Mercola, an Osteopath and naturopath. Mercola has an interesting website where he posts all sorts of pseudoscientific stories.

Mercola posted cautionary stories on brain tumors from cell phones, leukemia from power lines, and carcinogens from irradiation of food.

But his postings don’t give the underlying science. The reader is not told the probability of the ill effects, or whether the chances of injury are significant compared to the background incidence. The reader is not told whether the ill effects outweigh the benefits.

For example, in the radiation of food, Mercola informs the reader that radiation creates benzene as a byproduct – and that’s sufficient. OK. Some benzene? – traces? – barely detectable? – lethal doses? – is the benzene more dangerous than the spoilage? – when starvation is the alternative, what's the acceptable level of benzene?

If you buy into naturopathy, you’re probably susceptible to these radical stories. A hallmark of a scientist is skepticism. It is notably missing here. Tim replaces it with naivety.

Jeff Glassman wrote "Two of Tim’s examples of contrived conventional wisdoms are that “Pharmaceuticals restore health” and “Vaccination brings immunity”. In his gloomy view pharmaceuticals never restore health, and vaccines never convey immunity."

Tim's response>>Let's see if there is much evidence to back up what you claim is "my gloomy view.">Lets see if "Tim is to medicine as a scientologist is to psychology.">Let's start with tobacco:

The Science Behind Nicotine

Tar and gases released during combustion (burning) cause most health problems related to smoking but nicotine is what makes tobacco addictive. Nicotine is inhaled into the smoker’s lungs as a mixture of smoke particles and gases containing thousands of toxic and carcinogenic chemicals. Nicotine is absorbed into the blood stream through the lungs, mouth and throat reaching the brain within 10 seconds.

Receptors in the brain are stimulated by nicotine to produce chemicals (dopamine and other neurotransmitters). These chemicals make the smoker feel the impact drug effect of nicotine. Over time, receptors in a smoker’s brain become conditioned to expect nicotine. When deprived of nicotine, the smoker experiences withdrawal. Withdrawal is an unpleasant and anxiety-producing experience and helps create dependency or addiction to tobacco products.

http://www.lsc.org/tobacco/manufacturing/cigarettes.html

Now for Global Warming:

Published on Saturday, February 19, 2005 by the lndependent/UK

The Final Proof: Global Warming is a Man-Made Disaster
by Steve Connor

Scientists have found the first unequivocal link between man-made greenhouse gases and a dramatic heating of the Earth's oceans. The researchers - many funded by the US government - have seen what they describe as a "stunning" correlation between a rise in ocean temperature over the past 40 years and pollution of the atmosphere.

The study destroys a central argument of global warming skeptics within the Bush administration - that climate change could be a natural phenomenon. It should convince George Bush to drop his objections to the Kyoto treaty on climate change, the scientists say.

Tim Barnett, a marine physicist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego and a leading member of the team, said: "We've got a serious problem. The debate is no longer: 'Is there a global warming signal?' The debate now is what are we going to do about it?"

America produces a quarter of the world's greenhouse gases, yet under President Bush it is one of the few developed nations not to have signed the Kyoto treaty to limit emissions. The President's advisers have argued that the science of global warming is full of uncertainties and change might be a natural phenomenon.

Dr Barnett said that position was untenable because it was now clear from the latest study, which is yet to be published, that man-made greenhouse gases had caused vast amounts of heat to be soaked up by the oceans. "It's a good time for nations that are not part of Kyoto to re-evaluate their positions and see if it would be to their advantage to join," he said.

The study involved scientists from the US Department of Energy, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, as well as the Met Office's Hadley Center.

They analyzed more than 7 million recordings of ocean temperature from around the world, along with about 2 million readings of sea salinity, and compared the rise in temperatures at different depths to predictions made by two computer simulations of global warming.

Now let's tackle the "Blacks are forced to live in Ghettoes" issue:

http://www.trinicenter.com/WorldNews/denial.htm

Mr. Glassman writes "Tim turns to Edward Bernays for an understanding of propaganda. Now Bernays is sometimes credited with being the father of PR. In fact, he was a self–promoting fraud, like his Uncle Freud, from whom he seems to boast he has genetic psychological skills."

Mr. Glassman also wrote " Read Bernays’ definition closely and you’ll see it’s propaganda only if you buy it."

Tim's response>> O.K. if you don't like Bernays let's look at some other sources on Propaganda and see if your statement of "it's only propaganda if you buy it" holds water.<<

Let's look at an excerpt from the book Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes by Jacques Ellul

"There is no chance of raising the intellectual level of Western populations sufficiently and rapidly enough to compensate for the progress of propaganda. Propaganda techniques have advanced so much faster than the reasoning capacity of the average man that to close this gap and shape this man intellectually outside the framework of propaganda is almost impossible. In fact, what happens and what we see all around us is the claim that propaganda itself is our culture and what the masses ought to learn. Only in and through propaganda have the masses access to political economy, politics, art, or literature. Primary education makes it possible to enter the realm of propaganda, in which people then receive their intellectual and cultural environment.

This need of a certain cultural level to make people susceptible to propaganda2 is best understood if one looks at one of propaganda’s most important devices, the manipulation of symbols. The more an individual participates in the society in which he lives, the more he will cling to stereotyped symbols expressing collective notions about the past and the future of his group. The more stereotypes in a culture, the easier it is to form public opinion, and the more an individual participates in that culture, the more susceptible he becomes to the manipulation of these symbols. The number of propaganda campaigns in the West which have first taken hold in cultured settings is remarkable.

This is not only true for doctrinaire propaganda, which is based on exact facts and acts on the level of the most highly developed people who have a sense of values and know a good deal about political realities, such as, for example, the propaganda on the injustice of capitalism, on economic crises, or on colonialism; it is only normal that the most educated people (intellectuals) are the first to be reached by such propaganda… All this runs counter to pat notions that only the public swallows propaganda.

Naturally, the educated man does not believe in propaganda; he shrugs and is convinced that propaganda has no effect on him. This is, in fact, one of his great weaknesses, and propagandists are well aware that in order to reach someone, one must first convince him that propaganda is ineffectual and not very clever. Because he is convinced of his own superiority, the intellectual is much more vulnerable than anybody else to this maneuver…

Jeff Glassman#104 wrote "If you buy into naturopathy, you’re probably susceptible to these radical stories"

Tim's response>> How bout if you buy into conventional medicine? Let's look at what that gets you.

Doctors Are The Third Leading Cause of Death in the US, Causing 225,000 Deaths Every Year

This article in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) is the best article I have ever seen written in the published literature documenting the tragedy of the traditional medical paradigm.

This information is a followup of the Institute of Medicine report which hit the papers in December of last year, but the data was hard to reference as it was not in peer-reviewed journal. Now it is published in JAMA which is the most widely circulated medical periodical in the world.

The author is Dr. Barbara Starfield of the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health and she desribes how the US health care system may contribute to poor health.

ALL THESE ARE DEATHS PER YEAR:

12,000 -- unnecessary surgery
7,000 -- medication errors in hospitals
20,000 -- other errors in hospitals
80,000 -- infections in hospitals
106,000 -- non-error, negative effects of drugs
These total to 225,000 deaths per year from iatrogenic causes!!

What does the word iatrogenic mean? This term is defined as induced in a patient by a physician's activity, manner, or therapy. Used especially of a complication of treatment.

Dr. Starfield offers several warnings in interpreting these numbers:

First, most of the data are derived from studies in hospitalized patients.
Second, these estimates are for deaths only and do not include negative effects that are associated with disability or discomfort.

Third, the estimates of death due to error are lower than those in the IOM report.

If the higher estimates are used, the deaths due to iatrogenic causes would range from 230,000 to 284,000. In any case, 225,000 deaths per year constitutes the third leading cause of death in the United States, after deaths from heart disease and cancer. Even if these figures are overestimated, there is a wide margin between these numbers of deaths and the next leading cause of death (cerebrovascular disease).

Another analysis concluded that between 4% and 18% of consecutive patients experience negative effects in outpatient settings,with:

116 million extra physician visits
77 million extra prescriptions
17 million emergency department visits
8 million hospitalizations
3 million long-term admissions
199,000 additional deaths
$77 billion in extra costs
The high cost of the health care system is considered to be a deficit, but seems to be tolerated under the assumption that better health results from more expensive care.

However, evidence from a few studies indicates that as many as 20% to 30% of patients receive inappropriate care.

An estimated 44,000 to 98,000 among them die each year as a result of medical errors.

This might be tolerated if it resulted in better health, but does it? Of 13 countries in a recent comparison, the United States ranks an average of 12th (second from the bottom) for 16 available health indicators. More specifically, the ranking of the US on several indicators was:

13th (last) for low-birth-weight percentages
13th for neonatal mortality and infant mortality overall
11th for postneonatal mortality
13th for years of potential life lost (excluding external causes)
11th for life expectancy at 1 year for females, 12th for males
10th for life expectancy at 15 years for females, 12th for males
10th for life expectancy at 40 years for females, 9th for males
7th for life expectancy at 65 years for females, 7th for males
3rd for life expectancy at 80 years for females, 3rd for males
10th for age-adjusted mortality

The poor performance of the US was recently confirmed by a World Health Organization study, which used different data and ranked the United States as 15th among 25 industrialized countries.

There is a perception that the American public "behaves badly" by smoking, drinking, and perpetrating violence." However the data does not support this assertion.

The proportion of females who smoke ranges from 14% in Japan to 41% in Denmark; in the United States, it is 24% (fifth best). For males, the range is from 26% in Sweden to 61% in Japan; it is 28% in the United States (third best).

The US ranks fifth best for alcoholic beverage consumption.

The US has relatively low consumption of animal fats (fifth lowest in men aged 55-64 years in 20 industrialized countries) and the third lowest mean cholesterol concentrations among men aged 50 to 70 years among 13 industrialized countries.

These estimates of death due to error are lower than those in a recent Institutes of Medicine report, and if the higher estimates are used, the deaths due to iatrogenic causes would range from 230,000 to 284,000.

Even at the lower estimate of 225,000 deaths per year, this constitutes the third leading cause of death in the US, following heart disease and cancer.

Lack of technology is certainly not a contributing factor to the US's low ranking.

Among 29 countries, the United States is second only to Japan in the availability of magnetic resonance imaging units and computed tomography scanners per million population. 17
Japan, however, ranks highest on health, whereas the US ranks among the lowest.

It is possible that the high use of technology in Japan is limited to diagnostic technology not matched by high rates of treatment, whereas in the US, high use of diagnostic technology may be linked to more treatment.
Supporting this possibility are data showing that the number of employees per bed (full-time equivalents) in the United States is highest among the countries ranked, whereas they are very low in Japan, far lower than can be accounted for by the common practice of having family members rather than hospital staff provide the amenities of hospital care.

Journal American Medical Association July 26, 2000;284(4):483-5References

1. Schuster M, McGlynn E, Brook R. How good is the quality of health care in the United States?
Milbank Q. 1998;76:517-563.

2. Kohn L, ed, Corrigan J, ed, Donaldson M, ed. To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1999.

3. Starfield B. Primary Care: Balancing Health Needs, Services, and Technology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1998.

4. World Health Report 2000. Accessed June 28, 2000.

5. Kunst A. Cross-national Comparisons of Socioeconomic Differences in Mortality. Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Erasmus University; 1997.

6. Law M, Wald N. Why heart disease mortality is low in France: the time lag explanation. BMJ. 1999;313:1471-1480.

7. Starfield B. Evaluating the State Children's Health Insurance Program: critical considerations.
Annu Rev Public Health. 2000;21:569-585.

8. Leape L.Unecessarsary surgery. Annu Rev Public Health. 1992;13:363-383.

9. Phillips D, Christenfeld N, Glynn L. Increase in US medication-error deaths between 1983 and 1993. Lancet. 1998;351:643-644.

10. Lazarou J, Pomeranz B, Corey P. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients. JAMA. 1998;279:1200-1205.

11. Weingart SN, Wilson RM, Gibberd RW, Harrison B. Epidemiology and medical error. BMJ. 2000;320:774-777.

12. Wilkinson R. Unhealthy Societies: The Afflictions of Inequality. London, England: Routledge; 1996.

13. Evans R, Roos N. What is right about the Canadian health system? Milbank Q. 1999;77:393-399.

14. Guyer B, Hoyert D, Martin J, Ventura S, MacDorman M, Strobino D. Annual summary of vital statistics1998. Pediatrics. 1999;104:1229-1246.

15. Harrold LR, Field TS, Gurwitz JH. Knowledge, patterns of care, and outcomes of care for generalists and specialists. J Gen Intern Med. 1999;14:499-511.

16. Donahoe MT. Comparing generalist and specialty care: discrepancies, deficiencies, and excesses. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:1596-1607.

17. Anderson G, Poullier J-P. Health Spending, Access, and Outcomes: Trends in Industrialized Countries. New York, NY: The Commonwealth Fund; 1999.

18. Mold J, Stein H. The cascade effect in the clinical care of patients. N Engl J Med. 1986;314:512-514.

19. Shi L, Starfield B. Income inequality, primary care, and health indicators. J Fam Pract.1999;48:275-284.

Mr. Glassman also wrote "Mercola posted cautionary stories on brain tumors from cell phones, leukemia from power lines, and carcinogens from irradiation of food."

Food Irradiation :http://www.organicconsumers.org/irrad/epsteinoped1.cfm

Food Irradiation Threatens Public Health, National Security

By Samuel Epstein, M.D. {Dr. Samuel Epstein is Professor Emeritus Environmental and Occupational Medicine, University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health, and Chairman, Cancer Prevention Coalition}

Distributed by Environmental News Service http://ens.lycos.com/ens/mar2002/2002L-03-08e.html

CHICAGO, Illinois, March 8, 2002 (ENS) - Iowa Senator Tom Harkin's last minute provisions in the Senate farm bill allowing irradiated beef to be labelled "pasteurized," instead of the Food and Drug Administration's small print "treated by irradiation" label, is a surprising denial of consumers' fundamental right-to-know.

Consumers are wary of irradiated food, and with good reason even if they don't understand the dangers involved. Irradiated meat is a very different product from cooked meat. Irrespective of whether radiated by radioactive cobalt pellets or rods, X-ray machines or electron beams, the current permissible radiation dosage is about 200 million times greater than a chest X-ray.

A technician removes bundles of cobalt-60 from shipping containers and dismantles them for storage until they are transferred to adjacent processing cells. (Photo courtesy Mechanical Engineering)

As well documented since the 1960s, these massive doses of ionizing radiation produce profound chemical changes in meat. These include elevated levels of the carcinogenic chemical benzene, and also the production of unique new chemicals, known as radiolytic products, some of which have been implicated as carcinogenic.

Additionally, irradiated food has been shown to induce genetic damage in a wide range of studies, including tests on malnourished children by India's National Institute of Nutrition.

Of particular concern in this regard, are a group of readily detectable unique chemicals known as cyclobutanones which have recently been shown to cause chromosomal damage in intestinal cells of rats and humans.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) have ignored the strong evidence on the cancer and genetic risks of irradiated food. Instead, they have relied on a group of five studies, selected from a total of over 400 studies prior to 1980, on which their current claims of safety are based.

The FDA has persisted in these claims even though its own expert Irradiated Food Committee warned that the tests are grossly flawed and inadequate.

Let's look at the "Leukemia from powerlines" issue and see how pseudoscientific Mercola's warning was:

Leukemia risk doubles for children living under high-voltage power lines

It's been a hotly-debated issue for decades: do high-voltage power lines cause leukemia?

Now a new study produced by the Childhood Research Group at Oxford University says these power lines double the risk of leukemia in children.

Original source:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3967073.stm

Also here is a study done in Japan

Abstract

Residential power-frequency magnetic fields (MFs) were labeled as a possible human carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer panel. In response to great public concern, the World Health Organization urged that further epidemiologic studies be conducted in high-exposure areas such as Japan. We conducted a population-based case-control study, which covered areas inhabited by 54% of Japanese children. We analyzed 312 case children (0-15 years old) newly diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) or acute myelocytic leukemia (AML) in 1999-2001 (2.3 years) and 603 controls matched for gender, age and residential area. Weekly mean MF level was determined for the child's bedroom. MF measurements in each set of a case and controls were carried out as closely in time as possible to control for seasonal variation. We evaluated the association using conditional logistic regression models. The odds ratios for children whose bedrooms had MF levels of 0.4 T or higher compared with the reference category (MF levels below 0.1 T) was 2.6 (95% CI = 0.76-8.6) for AML + ALL and 4.7 (1.15-19.0) for ALL only. Controlling for some possible confounding factors did not alter the results appreciably. Even an analysis in which selection bias was maximized did not fully explain the association. Most of the leukemia cases in the highest exposure category had MF levels far above 0.4 T. Our results provided additional evidence that high MF exposure was associated with a higher risk of childhood leukemia, particularly of ALL. © 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Received: 28 September 2004; Accepted: 31 May 2005
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/112466036

As for Cell phone dangers we have:

..."public health scientist George Carlo found that rare tumors on the outside of the brain are more than doubled among cell phone callers ­ particularly on the right side of the head where `phones are usually held...

See also:

Health effects associated with mobile base stations in communities: the need for health studies. By Cr. Neil Cherry, 8 June 2000, Environmental Managemnt and Design Division

Cellular Phones, Mobile and Base Station Antenna Radiation and Human Health

www.emfguru.org

www.ideaireland.org

Mobile Phone (Cell Phone) Base Stations and Human Health

Harvard Researchers Say Cell Towers Are A Hazard

The Truth About Cell Phones

Now what was that about naivety sir?

http://theedge.bostonherald.com/lifeNews/view.bg?articleid=133112

for today's news on conflicting studies regarding cell phones and cancer.

If you take this rest day article and the last one together, there seems to be a bit of circular reasoning. If we could have a face to face discussion, it might go something like this:

One: There is no overpopulation problem because genetically modified foods can feed everyone.

Two: But aren't there some concerns about the safety of gentically modified foods?

One: How dare you raise such questions when so many people are starving.

Two: Maybe there are too many people.

One: There is no overpopulation problem because genetically modified foods can feed everyone.

Two: But aren't there some concerns about the safety of modified foods?

One: How dare you raise such questions when so many people are starving.

... This is the problem with web discussions in general. If we were face to face we could probably get somewhere.

I feel like there used to be a good community here, before whoever is in charge of the website keeps throwing these Rest Day stinkbombs into the party.

Flog # 109 wrote "... This is the problem with web discussions in general. If we were face to face we could probably get somewhere.

I feel like there used to be a good community here, before whoever is in charge of the website keeps throwing these Rest Day stinkbombs into the party."

Tim's response>> I wholeheartedly agree, I've have debates with people online before and then when actually meeting them it took us about 5 minutes to appreciate each other's viewpoint.<<

By the way Mr. Glassman ,regarding the Bush speaking impromptu issue here is an interesting link for ya: http://www.diymedia.net/collage/gwb-bestof.htm

Also:http://www.diymedia.net/collage/gwb-fascist.htm