In today's news, tragedy strikes bunny family.

In today's news tragedy strikes bunny family.

   Bunny foo foo tragically shot dead after he was caught in the act of thumping field mice with a hammer. Seen here flipping off reporters, just minutes after killing more than 44 field mice with a hammer he bought over-the-counter. Unfortunately after he was shot dead by police it was later discovered that the hammer was to blame. The hammer manufacturer is now being sued for the tragic deaths of countless field mice. Congress is pushing to ban all hammers in an effort to curb violence.

Tobacco versus marijuana

Tobacco Versus Marijuana

    Tobacco is a known carcinogen and has been proven to be responsible for the death of millions. Although lawsuits have been brought against the tobacco companies and won, no one has been prosecuted for murder, or done jail time. The government refuses to outlaw something that they know for sure is responsible for the death of millions of people, but marijuana on the other hand has been made illegal and millions of people have gone to jail and done jail time for producing it and selling it. Understand the question is not whether marijuana should be legalized. The question is whether justice is truly blind and whether certain people and corporations are being allowed to get away with murder? Are the laws of this country being distributed justly and equally if both products are equally bad for you should not the law be applied equally? Shouldn't tobacco farmers and smoke shops and anyone connected with the production of tobacco be doing prison time? If slapping a label on a product that says that this product may be hazardous to your health and may be a carcinogen, shouldn't the growers, sellers and producers of marijuana also be given that loophole? 

America has the highest number of prisons and prison inmates. Is it possible that the reason this is so, is because the laws are not being equally administered?  

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 I remember that the initial response was the FDA banning the product product from store shelves, but that idea was rescinded with the argument that there was no alternative for diabetics to use at the time.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.

Questions

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?

How do you cure the problems of the world?