Disenchanted with Liberals, Conservatives & NDP?

[Smallc]

You seem to be a person capable of critical thought and independent analysis.

Isn't it obvious that big Pharma today is profiteering by treating the symptoms of the sickness rather than adressing the root of the problem?

Have you considered the fact that for many diseases the root cause is simply unreacheable by modern medicine and pharmaceutics?

Are they not trying to make you dependent on their "fix", so you consume more of it and cannot live without their product?

Are they not trying to discredit and prevent the widespread use of natural and homeopatic solutions which cut into their profit?

Every day Medical science moves forward. If you look back at what we can do today versus what we could do 10 years ago, you can see that. Examples of this are heart disease, prostate cancer testicular cancer, and breast cancer (there are many others). These things used to be almost completely fatal not long after onset. That's not the case anymore. The three cancers I noted, often even in advances cases have survival rates of over 90%, over 95%, and nearly 100% respectively (I heard the numbers not long ago, though I can't remember the source. When it comes to sickness, we are far better off today than ever before.

[TCCK]

But then the title of the thread clearly sais disenchanted - are you having second thoughts?

NEVER but I know a lot of Liberal , NDP and Green supporters are so I am here to remind them of the crap we got from the Liberals, the lack of experience in the NDP and Green.

Conservative party is rolling to do good after the election, are you there to help it happen or be like the Liberals in Parliament and be a road block just like a stubborn 3 year old holding his breath to get his way. (By the way a 3 year old should not get the keys to your Corvette because he wants them and holds his breath until you cave in.)

[independent]

NEVER but I know a lot of Liberal , NDP and Green supporters are so I am here to remind them of the crap we got from the Liberals, the lack of experience in the NDP and Green.

Conservative party is rolling to do good after the election, are you there to help it happen or be like the Liberals in Parliament and be a road block just like a stubborn 3 year old holding his breath to get his way. (By the way a 3 year old should not get the keys to your Corvette because he wants them and holds his breath until you cave in.)

The Conservatives did not lose a vote of non confidence. No one stopped the Conservatives from governing. The Conservatives have been afraid to step forward with there real ideas. We really do not know what they stand for. The Progressive Conservatives are dead. I was a big supporter of Joe Clark. Harper in no way comes close to being the quality individual that Joe was. Most of the Conservatives come from the ashes of the Alliance and reform parties. Seems to me we were getting a lot of crap from them. Harper acted cowardly by not stepping forward with his real agenda and then the Liberals would have been forced to vote against the government. Then we would have had a reason for this election.

[Bryan]

The Conservatives did not lose a vote of non confidence. No one stopped the Conservatives from governing. The Conservatives have been afraid to step forward with there real ideas. We really do not know what they stand for. The Progressive Conservatives are dead. I was a big supporter of Joe Clark. Harper in no way comes close to being the quality individual that Joe was. Most of the Conservatives come from the ashes of the Alliance and reform parties. Seems to me we were getting a lot of crap from them. Harper acted cowardly by not stepping forward with his real agenda and then the Liberals would have been forced to vote against the government. Then we would have had a reason for this election.

I find it curious that I (as a hardcore member of the Reform for its entire existence and strong supporter of the CPC) have no knowledge of any kind of any such "hidden agenda", yet some how you do. Where can I get a copy of this secret manifesto?

If anything, the CPC's main problem is they have basically abandoned everything the Reformers fought so hard for, and moved far too much towards what the old PCs were. There is barely any resemblance (public or private) to The Reform Party.

[independent]

I find it curious that I (as a hardcore member of the Reform for its entire existence and strong supporter of the CPC) have no knowledge of any kind of any such "hidden agenda", yet some how you do. Where can I get a copy of this secret manifesto?

If anything, the CPC's main problem is they have basically abandoned everything the Reformers fought so hard for, and moved far too much towards what the old PCs were. There is barely any resemblance (public or private) to The Reform Party.

That is because the conservatives would not being able to sell it to public. I do not think there is any secret manifesto. Just right wing leanings that they are afraid to put forward to the public. You must know some of the Conservatives that used to be members of the Reform party. Do you not think they would like to implement some of those ideas if they could? Every politition not just the conservatives have ideas that they do not bring foward because they cannot sell it to the public. So in that way everybody has a hidden agenda.

[PoliticalCitizen]

NEVER but I know a lot of Liberal , NDP and Green supporters are so I am here to remind them of the crap we got from the Liberals, the lack of experience in the NDP and Green.

Conservative party is rolling to do good after the election, are you there to help it happen or be like the Liberals in Parliament and be a road block just like a stubborn 3 year old holding his breath to get his way. (By the way a 3 year old should not get the keys to your Corvette because he wants them and holds his breath until you cave in.)

The Greens are not attempting to run the country (yet, anyway).

But they are in an excellent position to be part of the opposition thus ensuring the Environment won't be forgotten in the endless Con - Lib power struggle.

[DrGreenthumb]

I'm an athiest. I have been for a while. I think all religions are moronic (although some more than others).

Yet I'm not willing to vote Green OR NDP. It has nothing to do with religion. It has to do with actually applying logic and reason to my choice. I have Libertarian views, and while all parties have elements and policies that are 'anti-freedom', the NDP and Greens are more anti-freedom than the others.

Not everyone who disagrees with the Greens or NDP does so because they're a religious nut. Many of us do so because we want to build a better country and see the 'left wing' parties as being contrary to that.

Libertarian views, my ass! Harper is the biggest threat to civil liberties this country has ever faced. I didn't say that anyone who doesn't vote green or NDP is a religious nut. Non -religious nuts can also vote Liberal!

The conservative base are religious nuts who want to force their moral views on the rest of us. Sure there are some non-religious conservatives because conservative policies also are designed to protect and serve established wealth. So greed makes up for the rest of the conservative base that aren't religious whackos with a cross to grind.

[Bryan]

Libertarian views, my ass! Harper is the biggest threat to civil liberties this country has ever faced. I didn't say that anyone who doesn't vote green or NDP is a religious nut. Non -religious nuts can also vote Liberal!

The conservative base are religious nuts who want to force their moral views on the rest of us. Sure there are some non-religious conservatives because conservative policies also are designed to protect and serve established wealth. So greed makes up for the rest of the conservative base that aren't religious whackos with a cross to grind.

And yet, their so called "base" is significantly larger than those who follow your opinion. Seems to me, if you are going to call anyone a "whacko", you look to the fringes, not the mainstream.

The only people with an axe to grind, and a desire to force their beliefs on others are the ones actively campaigning to impose carbon taxes on everyone. I don't subscribe to their doomsday cult, so why don't they stop trying to impose their religion on me?

[capricorn]

And yet, their so called "base" is significantly larger than those who follow your opinion.

Plus, the Conservative base supports the party not just with their vote, but with their wallet. Give a little, get a lot.

[PoliticalCitizen]

Plus, the Conservative base supports the party not just with their vote, but with their wallet. Give a little, get a lot.

That's true, dont the Conservatives help the rich get richer

I'm sure all Green campaigns are run at a small fraction of Conservative ones...

[TCCK]

And yet, their so called "base" is significantly larger than those who follow your opinion. Seems to me, if you are going to call anyone a "whacko", you look to the fringes, not the mainstream.

The only people with an axe to grind, and a desire to force their beliefs on others are the ones actively campaigning to impose carbon taxes on everyone. I don't subscribe to their doomsday cult, so why don't they stop trying to impose their religion on me?

Both these 2 sentences have such truth to them I must give you a standing ovation. The fringes get too much attention in this country as I said in another post when was the last time you saw a Hetrosexual Parade and people flaunting their hetrosexuality to get attention?

And as for the Carbon Tax, what a pile of crap, even I HATE THAT IDEA FROM HARPER and anyone else that wants to shove more of it down my throat. Do the research, are we polluting so much on Earth here that we have caused drastic enviromental changes on Jupiter, Mars and Mecury too???? Could the sun be the real one to blame?? Look deeply you will see the scientific evidence to prove this but all the companies that profit from Climate Change and ECO.... are the ones that continue to fear monger us that we need to make drastic changes and buy our widget for $1000 and it will help save the world. That is another Kool Aid jar I won't be convinced to drink from just like you Bryan.

Great points Bryan, thanks for posting them!

edited because I suck at typing late at night, this is my warning to goto bed before I type something not even a martian could read, lol.

Edited September 28, 2008 by TCCK

[PoliticalCitizen]

And as for the Carbon Tax, what a pile of crap, even I HATE THAT IDEA FROM HARPER and anyone else that wants to shove more of it down my throat. Do the research, are we polluting so much on Earth here that we have caused drastic enviromental changes on Jupiter, Mars and Mecury too???? Could the sun be the real one to blame?? Look deeply you will see the scientific evidence to prove this but all the companies that profit from Climate Change and ECO.... are the ones that continue to fear monger us that we need to make drastic changes and buy our widget for $1000 and it will help save the world. That is another Kool Aid jar I won't be convinced to drink from just like you Bryan.

To think that we do NOT change our world by polluting it is to show the mental capacity of bacteria that multiplies and excretes until the substrate cannot sustain life and the whole colony dies.

Carbon Tax is just one of the ways of addressing the issue. It has been employed by some European countries for many years and resulted in companies actually caring and reducing the amount of CO2 they emanate.

[segnosaur]

Don't forget that the stuff they come up with was not invented by them and the ideas didn't pop into their heads out of nowhere after a joint or two... The Greens are international and they have a Global Charter:

Hey, I never denied that the "Green Party" concept wasn't international. But an incorrect view of science is still incorrect, even if its believed by people in more than 1 country.

Yeah, pharmacy companies do profit by doing research into new drugs, but we as a society benefit.

Ummm... you do realize that MOST of the 'natural remedies' have never actually been proven to function as advertized? Think of Smilin' Bob. Think of Homeopathy (usually nothing but water).

Even when 'natural remedies' do work, they can have very nasty side effects, or can work in unpredictable ways.

In the worst case scenario, a medicine might not work, but may either have nasty side effects, or may prevent someone from getting proper treatment.

Because that $20 pill A: is tested to ensure consistency (unlike 'natural medicines', where potency/quality may vary widely, on a seasonal basis or on preparation methods), and B: has actually been tested to work (i.e. the product has gone multiple double blind studies to ensure that it acutually provides the stated effect).

I'd gladly have a $20 pill that can actually, you know, cure me, over a $10 pill that will do absolutely nothing except drain my bank account.

Do you honestly think that the society benefits from pharmaceutics?

Yes, they do. We have an average life expectancy that is rising. Heck, we have wiped smallpox off the face of the earth. A disease that once killed or disfigured hundreds of thousands of people every year, now gone, thanks to vaccines manufactured by drug companies.

Think of antibiotics.

You mean the antibiotics that cured my friend's case of Strep throat?

Think of chemotherapy (which is nothing but poison).

You mean the chemotherapy that was used to send the cancer that my grandmother had into remission?

Even when 'pharmaceutics' do work, they can have very nasty side effects, or can work in unpredictable ways.

Actually, just the opposite: yes, pharaceuticals can have side effects, but those side effects are actually quite predictable. That's why they are usually given with various warnings.

There is an even bigger danger with so called 'natural' treatments, which are often much more random due to the fact that the potency of various treatments can vary according to practictioner, time of year, etc.

Because that $20 pill A: cost at most 20 cents

Except of course that that 20 cent pill required a billion dollars or so to A: develop, and B: test to ensure it was effective, and C: determine what, if any, side effects the drug had.

(unlike 'natural medicines', which cost much less),

And often don't work.

and B: has been sold at speculative prices to the health system that we all supprot through taxes (i.e. lobbyists have bribed the health officials into adopting their rip-off invention).

You see, your post is a very good illustration of the lack of skepticism and scientific knowlege endemic in society. (And I assume that you're a supporter of the 'green party', so your post demonstrates my point exactly.)

I have a fairly strong scientific background. Scientific progress (especially in medicine) requires the use of several techniques... double blind studies (which actually prove that some substance actually cures, and is not just a pacebo), and peer-review/reproducability (which attempts to eliminate any obvious flaws done during the course of research. When the issue of 'scientific knowledge' and C-51 was brought up, instead of dealing with peer review/double blind studies, you saw fit to attack any such scientific techniques as the tool of "Big Pharma", as if painting the need for actual evidence of effectiveness is somehow wrong. It seems as if in your case, anti-corpratism has trumped logic.

And if you are a supporter of the Green Party, I do have to wonder if your lack of scientific knowlege extends beyond medicine into other areas (in particular, environmental science).

[segnosaur]

Isn't it obvious that big Pharma today is profiteering...

Yes, they are.

Of course, there are hundreds of drug companies throughout the world. Its a profitiable business, but its also very competitive. AND drug companies are required to do extensive research to show that their drugs are safe and effective. A company could easily spend hundreds of millions of dollars on researching a drug which turns out to simply not work. So, its a high risk/high rewards situation.

... by treating the symptoms of the sickness rather than adressing the root of the problem?

Well, lets see...

Antibiotics and vaccines typically do address the 'root' of the problem... bacteria and viruses taking up residence inside the human body.

It is true that there are some diseases for which medicine does not have a 'cure'. But then, neither do 'alternatives'. However, by treating the symptoms, you A: provide comfort to the patient, and B: avoid cascading effects where one symptom causes other problems to appear.

Are they not trying to make you dependent on their "fix", so you consume more of it and cannot live without their product?

If the choice is having to live with their product, or not having their product and dying as a result, I think most people would choose to actually live while taking the product.

Take Diabetes for example. Or thyroid disease. Yeah, medicine hasn't progressed to the stage where such problems can be 'cured' with a pill. So, people have to take insulin or synthroid regularly. But without those medications, the result would be death.

Are they not trying to discredit and prevent the widespread use of natural and homeopatic solutions which cut into their profit?

Actually, homeopathic solutions already discredit themselves.

Let me put this in clear terms: there is absolutely no scientific evidence that "homeopathic solutions" do anthing at all to eather cure disease or provide any sort of releaf. None. Nada. Zip. Ziltch. Doesn't matter if the drug companies are worried about such things cutting itno their profits. Science itself says that stuff doesn't work.

Here's a suggestion.... go and read up on the concept of 'double blind studies'. After that, read up on the concept of 'peer review'. Then, go and hang around a few skeptics forums.

[Oleg Bach]

When all material comforts begin to fail (money) - people become depressed emotionally and spiritually..not to mention intellectually. Naturally following emotional depression in a populace comes an economic depression..people are the money and the money is the people. There is no longer confidence in America - and confidence in Canada as far as leadership is waining.

Look at Layton...Trotskyism does not work...Look at Dion..he stands at a photo op surrounded by square chinned feminist eccentric former females. He states that his party has the most woman as candidates - GREAT western consumerism and materialism flowers in the hearts of woman - so the former nest builders are interested in shopping and careers that produce no wealth - and a place to drink wine and act like 1950s male executive dorks.

And back to Layton who promises more female slavery in the form of thousands of new day care spots - soviet style day care that creates "socialized" children that have grow to be morally neutral..and perhaps gun totting cowards.

Now Harper is at a turning point - his goal is to form a benevolent dictatorship run by a well focused committee of establish money men - wise guys - I say Harper is the man - benevolent and orderly dictatorial rule is a good thing at this point..Men will be allowed to be men and honourable - and woman will be allowed to be woman again - and family will be real family not two woman and a dog.

[segnosaur]

Libertarian views, my ass! Harper is the biggest threat to civil liberties this country has ever faced.

You do realize that some of us do believe that the concept of 'civil liberties' extends a lot further than simply the right to put drugs in your body. Some of us actually do hold the concept of economic freedom and property rights to be equally as important. It should also be pointed out that the 'left wing' is in favour of stricter gun control laws, and human rights commissions (which many see as having a negative effect on the right of free speech).

I've challenged you before, but you always ignore the challenge (likely because your postion is so weak as to be undefendable). But, let me repeat the challenge so that others may once again see you squirm away:

How exactly does the NDP's policies of taking my money away actually enhance my freedom.

I rather expect that you'll be ignoring the above question pretty soon now.

So greed makes up for the rest of the conservative base that aren't religious whackos with a cross to grind.

I see..

And if a poor person votes NDP, how do we know that they're not doing so because they're being 'greedy' and see the chance to obtain more wealth for themselves without having to do extra work?

[PoliticalCitizen]

Hey, I never denied that the "Green Party" concept wasn't international. But an incorrect view of science is still incorrect, even if its believed by people in more than 1 country.

Substantiate your argument.

Carbon tax and policies have worked for Sweden and Denmark.

Yes, they do. We have an average life expectancy that is rising. Heck, we have wiped smallpox off the face of the earth. A disease that once killed or disfigured hundreds of thousands of people every year, now gone, thanks to vaccines manufactured by drug companies.

You mean the antibiotics that cured my friend's case of Strep throat?

You mean the chemotherapy that was used to send the cancer that my grandmother had into remission?

The rise of average life expectancy is due to a higher standard of living and lack of wars.

Smallpox may come back with a vengeance as a drug-resistant strain.

If you are indeed informed in pharmaceutics as you claim you are you would know how many drug-resistant bacteria strains were discovered recently and how pharma companies have run out of new antibiotics that could cure them.

Good examples do not redeem bad examples, especially if the majority are bad. Try reading about the effectiveness of chemo-therapy. You may also find that doctors themselves are saying that they'd rather die than go through it. Not to mention how much it costs...

Actually, just the opposite: yes, pharaceuticals can have side effects, but those side effects are actually quite predictable. That's why they are usually given with various warnings.

There is an even bigger danger with so called 'natural' treatments, which are often much more random due to the fact that the potency of various treatments can vary according to practictioner, time of year, etc.

Except of course that that 20 cent pill required a billion dollars or so to A: develop, and B: test to ensure it was effective, and C: determine what, if any, side effects the drug had.

And often don't work.

You see, your post is a very good illustration of the lack of skepticism and scientific knowlege endemic in society. (And I assume that you're a supporter of the 'green party', so your post demonstrates my point exactly.)

I have a fairly strong scientific background. Scientific progress (especially in medicine) requires the use of several techniques... double blind studies (which actually prove that some substance actually cures, and is not just a pacebo), and peer-review/reproducability (which attempts to eliminate any obvious flaws done during the course of research. When the issue of 'scientific knowledge' and C-51 was brought up, instead of dealing with peer review/double blind studies, you saw fit to attack any such scientific techniques as the tool of "Big Pharma", as if painting the need for actual evidence of effectiveness is somehow wrong. It seems as if in your case, anti-corpratism has trumped logic.

And if you are a supporter of the Green Party, I do have to wonder if your lack of scientific knowlege extends beyond medicine into other areas (in particular, environmental science).

Your post is a very good example of how a person with some knowledge can discredit themselves by assuming their counterpart has even less knowledge...

I have worked for a big pharma company for 2.5 years. I am VERY familiar with their inernal policies and have been privy to things that never reach the press.

There ARE unexpected side-effects after all the studies are conducted. Sometimes they bring down entire Pharma companies. These companies have mandatory trainings for all employees and contractors that tell them how to deal with the press and even their friends and family when asked unfavourable questions about a certain product.

And if you want to tell me that "double-blind" studes are better than thousands of years of practicing natural medicine - that will not compliment your ability to think rationally.

As to your claims on knowing more and better - come up with real arguments and we'll discuss

[Oleg Bach]

So he or she has worked for big Pharma and are "privy" to things that never reach the press.. big deal. Big Pharma are nasty...I know a woman that is dying from kidney failure and one of her perscriptions is worth 2300 dollars - chemical compounds that cost 5 bucks to produce. This poor dying woman is kept alive NOT out of love and kindness but out of the fact that she generates a lot of money and the slower she dies the better for Pharma and some of the medical industry.

What I saw as far as welfare clients is that most were on Pharma product - either anti-depressants or synthetic forms of opiate products. MOST are not ill - just addicted - most are not depressed just broke! So when you look at the system and watch the cash flow in this instance you will see - millions upon millions of tax dollars being sent to wards of the state in the form of Pharma product - Payed for by the common working tax payer..then you see big Pharma absorb this money...welfare is an industry and a money laundering operation for big Pharma...what a joke - and how do they expect welfare types to get off when they are so confused and intoxicated by Pharma product?

[segnosaur]

Substantiate your argument.

Carbon tax and policies have worked for Sweden and Denmark.

Sweden generates a substantial amount of their electricity via nuclear power (approximately 45%). They likely would not have had the success of cutting greenhouse gas emissions had they decided to eliminate nuclear plants. Yet the Green Party of Canada has a policy to eliminate nuclear power.

Denmark still uses fossil fuel to generate a significant amount of its electricty (83%)

I could also point out that while Denmark has greatly reduced its CO2 emissions, other counties that also have carbon taxes (e.g. Norway) have actually seen its carbon emissions increase. So it seems that carbon taxes may not be the primary driver for decreased carbon emissions.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf42.html

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/th...k/print/da.html

http://www.ssb.no/klimagassn_en/

Smallpox may come back with a vengeance as a drug-resistant strain.

Ummmm... do you even know anythign about small pox?

First of all, smallpox is a virus; the issue of drug-resistance is not an issue.

Secondly, there is no more Small Pox virus out there. (Well, I think maybe 2 labs in the world have a copy of the virus, and its definitly under heavy security.) There is no chance for the virus to make a come back.

Heck, even if the virus WAS out there somewhere in the world, we've had almost 3 decades since the disease was declared eraticated. Given the fact that approximately 2 million people were dying from it per year in the 60s, the programs to eradicate it have saved approximately 60 million lives. Pretty darn good for modern medicine and 'Pharma'.

If you are indeed informed in pharmaceutics as you claim you are you would know how many drug-resistant bacteria strains were discovered recently and how pharma companies have run out of new antibiotics that could cure them.

I am quite familiar with the problem of drug-resistant bacteria. The fact is, people are still getting cured at pretty much the same rate as before (its just that doctors may have to use stronger or multiple anti-biotics).

Good examples do not redeem bad examples, especially if the majority are bad. Try reading about the effectiveness of chemo-therapy.

I have.

Here's a study that shows that the life expectancy for patients with ovarian cancer doubles when Chemotherapy is used: http://www.nci.nih.gov/clinicaltrials/resu...ta-analysis1206

Oh, and here is an article on the improvement of life for patients with gastric or colorectal cancer when they undergo chemotherapy (another approximate doubling). http://annonc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/conte...bstract/6/3/267

You may also find that doctors themselves are saying that they'd rather die than go through it.

Hey, I never said Chemo was pleasant. But at least it provides an option for people who do wish to prolong their life, and in many cases the patient will be symtom (and side effect) free for a significant period of time following the treatments. (One of the references I provided goes into quality of life issues.)

Compare that to, lets say, homeopathy... where it gives absolutely no benefit.

Not to mention how much it costs...

So now you're saying saving lives is too expensive?

Your post is a very good example of how a person with some knowledge can discredit themselves by assuming their counterpart has even less knowledge...

Well, if you have any knowledge, I'd like to hear you use it. So far I haven't seen any demonstration of that.

I have worked for a big pharma company for 2.5 years. I am VERY familiar with their inernal policies and have been privy to things that never reach the press.

Working for a 'big pharma' company does not necessarily mean that you are competent in assessing the quality of double blind studies.

There ARE unexpected side-effects after all the studies are conducted.

Yes there are. And I've already acknowledged that in other threads.

But at least the drugs themselves DO have a beneficial effect. Most people would accept a small risk of serious side effects if they realized that it would lead to an even better chance at a cure or improved life.

And if you want to tell me that "double-blind" studes are better than thousands of years of practicing natural medicine - that will not compliment your ability to think rationally.

You see, that's the difference between you and me... I do recognize that double blind studies ARE better than 'thousands of years' of practice. Becuase I recognize what the Placebo effect is.

[PoliticalCitizen]

Segnosaur,

I have to recognize you can bring informed arguments to the table.

Now that we know each other's positions AND respect them, we can stop arguing and share.

Here's my understanding of human health:

Energy is life. A person with high energy levels ususally doesn't get sick. A person with very low energy levels can take 10 different prescription drugs and still be sick.

There are many commonly accepted ways to increase your energy levels: healthy diet and lifestyle, exercise, outdoor activites etc.

There are some less common ways to increase your energy levels: food supplements, natural remedies, meditation etc.

Ginseng doesn't require "double-blind" studies to prove its beneficial effects in almost every way. Ginco Biloba is almost in the same category. These supplements sold in the stores have the dosages of active ingredients in the plants regulated. They can do no more harm than salt or sugar.

Now about the "environmental science" - there are many opinions and methods. But a quite unambiguous approach would be to say that doing something is better than doing nothing.

So far we haven't done much. The Greens have an action plan that they will stick to.

[Bryan]

Ginseng doesn't require "double-blind" studies to prove its beneficial effects in almost every way. Ginco Biloba is almost in the same category. These supplements sold in the stores have the dosages of active ingredients in the plants regulated. They can do no more harm than salt or sugar.

Of course it requires double blind placebo controlled studies to prove it works. If a placebo gets the same results, then obviously the difference had nothing to do with the herb. How do you determine what that effective dose even is, if the studies can't even show it works at all?

I'm not totally anti natural remedies. I use some. But I'm very carefull to keep abreast of the scientific data. If the data doesn't support effectiveness, I'm not spending dime one.

Now about the "environmental science" - there are many opinions and methods. But a quite unambiguous approach would be to say that doing something is better than doing nothing.

This is not true either. Doing "something" is not better if there are more cost effective ways. It also requires that there actually is ""something that can be fixed, and that "something" does anything to specifically address it. Carbon tax does nothing to specifically address pollution. It's nebulous.

The funny part is, While people complain that the CPC are not doing enough to address the environment, they are the only party with actual specific pollution controls in their plan. The amount is small, but it's an actual figure, in legislation, not an ethereal projection based on potential tax income vs tax cuts.

[WIP]

Segnosaur,

I have to recognize you can bring informed arguments to the table.

Now that we know each other's positions AND respect them, we can stop arguing and share.

Here's my understanding of human health:

Energy is life. A person with high energy levels ususally doesn't get sick. A person with very low energy levels can take 10 different prescription drugs and still be sick.

There are many commonly accepted ways to increase your energy levels: healthy diet and lifestyle, exercise, outdoor activites etc.

There are some less common ways to increase your energy levels: food supplements, natural remedies, meditation etc.

Ginseng doesn't require "double-blind" studies to prove its beneficial effects in almost every way. Ginco Biloba is almost in the same category. These supplements sold in the stores have the dosages of active ingredients in the plants regulated. They can do no more harm than salt or sugar.

Sad to hear that you've bought all of this "natural medicine" quackery. Ginseng and Ginkgo Biloba can cause harmful side effects in some users, and some natural cures, like St. John's Wort, can have adverse side effects; the difference is that these "Natural" medicines are unregulated drugs with no warning labels. And since they are in their natural form, they contain many other chemicals besides the active ingredient that is supposed to have some health benefits. And they are classified as food products, so there is little, if any product testing or analysis of contents.

The suppliers have been known to spike their wonder elixirs with caffeine, codeine and as a personal anecdote: my older brother was taking a "natural" hair growth tonic, which was later discovered to have been fraudulently spiked with minoxidil -- some natural remedy! If he just picked up a bottle of Rogaine, he would have got the same drug with the appropriate medical warnings.

[marksman]

Look deeply you will see the scientific evidence to prove this but all the companies that profit from Climate Change and ECO.... are the ones that continue to fear monger us that we need to make drastic changes and buy our widget for $1000 and it will help save the world.

Don't you just hate those huge multinational environmentally friendly companies. They're everywhere throwing around their huge bags of money and influence. Look what they've already done to us! They've forced us to do stuff. And with the economy. Or something. I'm sure we'll come up with an example soon.

Well I just hope those poor little fossil fuel companies can somehow find a way to get together and maybe have their voice heard. They're so hard done by. Barely eking out a living. It's no wonder we never hear anything from them about things like gasoline prices or climate change or where to drill.

[TCCK]

Don't you just hate those huge multinational environmentally friendly companies. They're everywhere throwing around their huge bags of money and influence. Look what they've already done to us! They've forced us to do stuff. And with the economy. Or something. I'm sure we'll come up with an example soon.

Well I just hope those poor little fossil fuel companies can somehow find a way to get together and maybe have their voice heard. They're so hard done by. Barely eking out a living. It's no wonder we never hear anything from them about things like gasoline prices or climate change or where to drill.

Yes the gas companies are draining our wallets the worst I agree BUT your sarcasm quite frankly sucked. Considering Climate Change is all a bunch of BS becasue it is not us doing it BUT the SUN!!! That is why Mars, Mercury and Jupiter are having the same issues.

So in short I AGREE we need to be good stewards of our planet. (All my corporate offices recycle, I buy recycled paper and even some recycled plastic products like Staples line of recycled office supplies like staplers, pens, etc. I believe in being "Eco-friendly"

BUT to tax us permanently because supposedly we are causing CLIMATE CHANGE what BS!!!! And if you think all the big multi-national companies are paying the bulk of the Carbon Tax you are wrong! That gets off loaded onto the shoulders of the consumers and the common tax payer, the corporations have loop holes and tax accountants to avoid that. I know because I have one for my company and he will be put hard at work to save my firm as much as possible and yes my clients will end up paying more in the end.

Any tax because of the "CLIMATE CHANGE" or "ECO-FRIENDLY" is just a disguise for the governments hand in our wallet pocket!!! COnservative idea or not IT SUCKS!!!!

[independent]

Yes the gas companies are draining our wallets the worst I agree BUT your sarcasm quite frankly sucked. Considering Climate Change is all a bunch of BS becasue it is not us doing it BUT the SUN!!! That is why Mars, Mercury and Jupiter are having the same issues.

So in short I AGREE we need to be good stewards of our planet. (All my corporate offices recycle, I buy recycled paper and even some recycled plastic products like Staples line of recycled office supplies like staplers, pens, etc. I believe in being "Eco-friendly"

BUT to tax us permanently because supposedly we are causing CLIMATE CHANGE what BS!!!! And if you think all the big multi-national companies are paying the bulk of the Carbon Tax you are wrong! That gets off loaded onto the shoulders of the consumers and the common tax payer, the corporations have loop holes and tax accountants to avoid that. I know because I have one for my company and he will be put hard at work to save my firm as much as possible and yes my clients will end up paying more in the end.

Any tax because of the "CLIMATE CHANGE" or "ECO-FRIENDLY" is just a disguise for the governments hand in our wallet pocket!!! COnservative idea or not IT SUCKS!!!!

What you charge for your services would depend on what the market can stand. I am sure you have already tried to fill your wallet up as much as you can. You must think people on this board are really stupid. You do not want to pay taxes because you want more money in your pocket. Companies that want to make money will find more fuel efficient ways of running their business. If they try passing on costs too the customer they will lose market share to more efficient companies. That how free enterprise works.