Translate

Tuesday, March 7, 2017

Caged or free range which is better?

 Caged or free range which is the safer food source? 

     Animal rights activists and the food industry, would have you believe that the free range animal is happier and therefore healthier, but is that true?

    Free range poultry feed on various vegetation and are extremely fond of insects and small rodents. Turkeys, in particular have no qualms about eating small mice and anything else that is crawling on the ground. 
    As a result like most livestock (this includes goats, sheep, cattle, etc.) that is free range, poultry is exposed to various parasites because they are feeding on things that are on the ground. Poultry can have many different parasites living within them including tapeworms, eye worms, roundworms, cecal worms ect. Fortunately for the poultry (chickens, etc.) for the most part do not have a problem with these parasites unless the parasite infestation becomes excessive, which is rare. 
    In addition range free animals are exposed to wild animals which can carry more than just parasites, but also various diseases. 
    
Grasshopper represents one of thousands of different poultry food sources.
    Caged or cage free poultry is raised within a confined environment where their food and living environment are kept as sterile and disease free as possible. Their food is controlled and measured and in some cases treated with antibiotics and steroids. These factory farms have a great deal invested in these animals and as a result go to great lengths to keep their livestock healthy. The idea that these large farms are not interested in healthy animals is ludicrous. Unhealthy animals do not produce and jeopardize the entire operation. 
   Now don't get me wrong, I'm all in favor of range free, grass fed animals. I do not believe people should be eating any animal that has been treated with steroids, antibiotics or God knows what. I believe that if an animal food product is handled and processed properly, using food safety standards, it can be just as safe if not safer than any other food product. 

    So we come to the question at hand, which is better caged or range free?

  1. Is range free just another marketing ploy to get you pay more for a product that is not any safer to consume than a caged animal?
  2. If you raise a chicken inside a sterile bubble and feed it only sterile food will it produce a safer food product or will it produce a meat product that is devoid of anything nutritional?
  3. If the label says range free, grass fed, non-GMO, etc. how do you know you're getting what you're paying for?
  4. A recent survey of fish markets found as much as 85% of all fish in your local market is mislabeled and not what it says it is. So how do you know you're getting ground turkey as opposed to ground chicken or is it a mix of something else?
  5. In the old days poultry producers were required to leave the head on any butchered animal. This was to prevent farmers from selling a duck as a chicken etc. It was also done so that you could tell how fresh the meat was. Do we need to return to such methods?

    And as always keep asking questions

    

Monday, November 21, 2016

Is the election over?

Is the election over? 

    I was so looking forward to the election being over but to my surprise when I turned on the television it seemed as if the election campaigns were still going on. In the past couple weeks, I could not help but notice that the media was still going on about how the Democrats lost and how terrible the new president and his administration was. Now not really being in favor of one or the other it seems to raise certain questions that did not make sense.
  • The news media is supposed to be impartial and unbiased but how can you be reporting the real news if you openly support or oppose a candidate?
  • Is not the news media supposed to inform the public factually about events that take place and report those events as truthfully as possible without bias?
  • Can a news media be trusted if it is being openly biased about one candidate or another and if they are bias about their politics what other topics are they being bias about? Can we trust what they have to say when it comes to health, global warming, local news, world news etc.?
  • Is Pres. elect Trump right when he says we should not trust the media? 
  • If there is division within the country is it because of the politics or is it because of the media?
  • Who has more pool with the people of America, the media or the politicians?
  • Is the slogan "drain the swamp" indicative of our times and the real under line problem with America and the world?




Tuesday, November 1, 2016

Hillary Clinton and Dolores Umbridge

Is it just me or is it there is more than just a similarity between these two?



Is the universe trying to tell us something?
Or is it they just simply dress, talk and act alike?

Tuesday, October 11, 2016

Two Fallon, Nevada McDonald's were nearly forced to shut down after a new owner had to terminate 15 to 20 employees.

Why is citizenship so important?


    Recently I was made aware that two local McDonald's were sold and purchased by a gentlemen out of Reno Nevada who already owned several McDonald's. Upon completion of the transaction the two McDonald's located in Fallon Nevada were nearly shut down when the new owner was forced to immediately let go 15 to 20 employees. The reason for the terminations was quite simple, they could not provide proof of citizenship or a green card.

    So the questions are as as follows.

  1. Why hasn't anything been in the local news? Did I just simply miss it or was it hidden someplace in the back page?
  2. How could two McDonald's employ that many illegals without anyone finding out?
  3. What country these people were from does not matter and for all I know they came from Canada, but how much of an impact would that many employees have on our small local economy and is this the only business getting away with such practices?
  4. If they provided Social Security numbers to the previous owner, how many legal citizens got dinged on their tax return because of these illegals?
  5. These 15 to 20 people that are illegally in the country what happens to them? Did they get arrested or deported or did they just simply go find a new job?
  6. How many of them went on to collect unemployment or other social services or is that even possible?
  7. What was the incentive to the previous owner to hire that many illegals? Did he pay them less or did he simply turn a blind eye knowing that these employees would be less likely to file any kind of complaints against him for any employment violation?
  8. How can a law enforcement officer, enforce the law if he is forbidden to ask for proof of citizenship?
  9. What is the point in having a law if it is not going to be enforced?
  10. If the government is refusing to enforce a law, what is the benefit to the government?
    You really can't point fingers at the illegals without pointing another finger at the employer. There has to be an incentive to both parties. 
    In interviewing several people I was told there would be little to no consequence. The employer would deny having known that his employees were illegally in the country and the illegals will simply disappear once again into the background of our society. With no penalties being enforced there was nothing to discourage either party from breaking the law.

    It should be noted that in reporting this story, I was not looking for facts or details. This is not the first time such things have occurred in this country.The purpose of reporting the story was to simply raise questions that our society seems to be avoiding or complacent about. In order for a society to function properly there has to be law and order. Any law that is not enforced calls into question all the laws. After all the foundation of any good society is it's laws and justice system, without it we have nothing but chaos and some people thinking they are the exception to the law. And if one law is not enforced, how do you or I know any other law will be enforced equally and without prejudice? 

Friday, August 26, 2016

Did the government get rid of death panels or did they simply replace them with high drug prices?

Life or Death, you choose 

    So the news media is reporting the recent 400% price increase for EpiPen's and implying that only greed is behind it. Congress is investigating it but God only knows how long that will take or if any action will ever be taken. But what I find most interesting of all is the fact that the news media are not asking the right questions once again.
    When Obama care was first being discussed one of the major tripping blocks that came up was the death panels. Doctors deciding whether or not you get medical treatment based on the quality of life. The debate about these death panels did not last very long and supposedly one of the things that was removed from Obama care.

    So here are the questions that I don't think are being asked:

  • Did the death panels get simply replaced by the pharmaceuticals?
  • Are the poor and lower-class citizens being singled out for extermination?
  • If you had to choose between food and an EpiPen and you were seriously allergic to certain foods which would you choose if you could only afford one or the other?
  • How many other drugs on the market have been raised as much as 1000% in the last eight years of Obama care?
  • How can you call Obama care affordable if you cannot afford to use it?
  • Are over-the-counter drugs such as Benadryl next in line for price hikes?
  • Is raising the price of a drug that your life depends on, tantamount to blackmail?
  • Wouldn't you think the insurance companies would be the first to scream about the high prices of drugs and why aren't they?
  • During the Holocaust the Germans stripped Jews and others of everything they owned including their clothing and then killed them. What is the difference between that and what our government is doing now?

    Wake up America, if you don't start thinking for yourselves, your libel to have someone in the government decide not only how you live, but whether you live at all.


Wednesday, August 17, 2016

How do you get change if you vote the way you always have?

"If you always do what you've always done, you'll always be where you've always been." Samuel Clemens

Now this is a question about change and how everybody seems to want it, but everybody still votes the same. 
    My grandfather was one such person, he always voted Democratic no matter what. Yet at the same time he would bitch and gripe about how things never seem to change. The government is still corrupt, workers are still taken advantage of, and so on. Yet I still see the same old people playing the same old game they always have. You would think that in the past 200 years we would've learned our lesson and realize that the aristocrats are the only ones who are really playing the game. The rest of us who are actually only pawns in the game need to realize that our leaders have no qualms about sacrificing someone they consider expendable. 
   Over the last 50 years of my life I have realized that change is a good thing. As a child I didn't know what to expect and was extremely fearful of it. Later in life I began to realize that change was the only thing that gave me passion to move forward. And now later in life I have come to realize that it doesn't matter what the change is, so long as it's change. 
    A great general once said "That in the heat of battle should you find yourself in a stalemate, change is the only thing that will break it and it doesn't matter what it is, so long as you get a response from your enemy. Once your enemy responds to what you have done, then you will know what you need to do." 

  • So here's my questions: if you vote the way you always have, how can you expect things to change?
  • Are you voting the way you do because in all honesty your just a hypocrite? 
  • You want them to change the things you don't like and to leave the ones you do like, but are not willing to tell them which is which?
  • If you vote for the wrong guy, how will you know until after the election?
    So in this next election try something new. Close your eyes, push a button and hope for the best. You're still going to bitch about it no matter who gets voted into office.

Wednesday, August 10, 2016

What happen to the chemtrail's?

What happen to the chemtrail's?

So if your like me you pay attention to everything that goes on around you. And sometimes it's not what you see that is important but what you don't see. Over the past month or two if you have looked up into the skies you will notice that there have not been any chemtrail's. That's right the very thing that people say every aircraft at high altitude produces? I have had people tell me that seeing chemtrail's is normal, that they are just vapor trails . If that is the case where are they? If they were not spraying chemicals on us then we should still see these so-called vapor trails wouldn't you think? Should we be more worried that they stopped or that we no longer see these chemtrail's? Did they get tired of the media hype and switch to something else we can't see? Or are they getting ready to do something far more sinister than they were doing? If chemtrail's did not exist, if we were just seeing things, wouldn't we continue to be just seeing things?
And just because they have stopped, does that mean there is no evidence of their crime? Has anyone else noticed that your garden doesn't grow like it used to?
    These are all good questions but people should take notice of the things that they don't see just as much as they take notice of the things they do see, don't you think?