Wednesday, January 27, 2016

If planting an acre of hemp could save 1000 trees, why would you outlaw it?

If planting an acre of hemp could save 1000 trees, why would you outlaw it?

Keep in mind that hemp is not the same as cannabis, same family different plant. Hemp has thousands of uses and is used to make everything from paper, food, clothing and even plastics. Has low to no THC if any, so it can't be used as a drug. Paper pulp made from hemp can be recycled 10 times more than wood pulp and can out produce cotton. Finished products can be sold here in the US, which includes hemp seeds but it can't be grown here. Hemp seed can be made into milk, flour, protein powder etc. the amount of THC is negligible. The US is so fanatical about saving the environment, but is so adamant about not letting any type of hemp be grown in the United States, why? Does that make the US government hypocritical, or does it just mean there on the take from major corporations? What US companies have been pushing to keep hemp in the same category as cannabis, when they clearly know that these are two different plants? Our first flags and our Constitution and Declaration of Independence were written on paper made not from wood pulp, but from hemp. Did our founding fathers know something we don't, or were they just less corrupt?

Thursday, January 7, 2016

Artificial sweeteners, safe or unsafe?

    In the 1970s saccharin was found to be unsafe for human consumption as research studies indicated that it caused cancer in lab rats. I remember that the initial response was the FDA banning the product product from store shelves, but that idea was rescinded with the argument that there was no alternative for diabetics to use at the time. So it was kept on the shelves but every product containing saccharin was required to have a warning label letting people know that it may cause cancer. In 2000 warning labels were removed because supposedly cancer was only found in laboratory mice or rats because their biology was slightly different.
If there is a difference between the biology of the rats and humans, shouldn't there be questions about all other products that were tested using this method? Why are food products tested by the manufacturer and not an independent laboratory? Mice and rats are used for testing food and drugs because their biology is similar to ours, but if this is not the case then how can we trust anything that the FDA has to say? If this same method is used to test other artificial sweeteners, are exemptions being made for these products as well? If a product is found to be carcinogenic but can still be sold so long as it has a warning label on it, does that mean mass murder is okay so long as you have a warning label? Euthanasia is considered to be illegal in this country, but it's okay to buy a product that will kill you?