Comment history

Meat costs


Albert Einstein
Leonardo Da Vinci
Albert Schweitzer
Louisa May Alcott
Paul McCartney
George Bernard Shaw
Isaac Beshevis Singer
Henry Heimlich
Nikola Tessla

In fact it wasn't just beef these poeple passed on -- it was MEAT of any kind -- all of them are well known as famous vegetarians.

But perhaps an even more compelling rebuttle to ND Rancher's assertion that not eating meat negatively impacts cognitive skills, is to just read back through all the posts above -- it is pretty obvious which posters are diehard meat eaters. Compare the posting of the two groups and how each attempts to make their points. Can their statements be factually supported? It is pretty clear which group has the deficiency in cognitive skills!

However I will grant you that it is possible that eating meat has not caused the above meat eater's to have lower intelligence -- it may simply be (as this study below suggests) that those who are more intelligent as children have an increased chance of becoming vegetarian by adulthood.

April 17, 2009 at 3:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Dow industrials fall over 600 points, below 9,000

I just saw a chilling video on youtube. It connects the dots in everything that has been happening. It is by Naomi Wolf and it's titled, "Give me Liberty." Wolf makes a very compelling case that this whole bail out was part of a coup. Did I just say, "Coup?!!" Could that actually happen right here in the US at this time? Did you all realize that for the first time since the 1800's we have American military forces deployed inside the US for the purpose of "crowd control"? They are accountable, NOT to congress, but only to the president.Has anyone else seen this video?

October 9, 2008 at 10:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

2 sales tax questions approved

There is a lot more to all of this that the papers haven't adequately

August 6, 2008 at 11:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Sebelius' coal veto stands

Thank you so much to the governor and all the senators and representatives who have done the right thing here! Investing more in coal is short sighted and merely postpones development of sensible energy policy. If this thing does go through, it will become uneconomic in a very short time -- the writing is on the wall and it will be all of us (who didn't make a fortune up front when it got approved) whose taxes will increase to bail out the financial institutions who loaned money for the construction. WAKE up fiscal conservatives -- the time to address egregiious spending is NOWTo the brave representatives and senators who did not follow the pack -- we will be voting for you in the next elections. We need more like you who are willing to stand up to the monied interrests and do what is right! Thank YOU!

May 2, 2008 at 8:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Local Voices: Annexation not neighborly

Great article Mike! Thank you for bringing this to everyone's attention.People should realize there is much more to this then meets the eye -- the real point here is that if the developer can get this 155 acres rezoned to Industrial 2 (that is the reason for the annexation -- they couldn't get it through the county --so now want to try to pro-developement city council) then it will be much easier to argue that the entire area (now outside of the planned urban growth area) North of Farmer's turnpike all the way east to Kasold should be rezoned industrial. This of course will cost Douglas County taxpayers a bundle to build new infrastructure -- but hey we can all pay for that, since it will allow some of the weathiest folks in Lawrence to prosper even more.. While the developer's land (once rezoned) will increase in value -- (and yes they already own most of it all the way to Kasold) -those who just live near this land will find their property values decreasing. Further many believe that the secret plan on this 155 acres is to put in a truck stop -- imagine the lights, the sound, the diesel smells -- that would pretty much ruin the rural residential nature of the area. Of course since the developer is asking for Industrial -2 zoning here (as opposed to industrial -1 zoning which would be more resistrictive and not allow things like truck stops, and confinement animal feeding operations --think 100,000 pigs with more excrement then the city of Lawrence) These and many other objectionable uses could be set up here, and would be legally allowed with I-2 zoning. If you don't want your taxes to go up -- NOW is the time to make your voice heard.

April 27, 2008 at 12:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Demonstrators mark 5th anniversary of Iraq war with Louisiana St. march

I just heard a very thought provoking quote today. It is from Peter Ustinov, and the more I have thought about it and examined it, the more profound I realize it is.

We all think that terrorism is such an evil (and it is) but I'll bet most of us without thinking consider it more of an evil then war. But I no longer think that is true.

Consider our reaction when shown newsclips of radicals cheering at some successful terrorist attack. Now, there are times when doing the right thing might involve going to war, (but this would be WAY less then what the US has been doing) I think the way our culture celebrates and promotes war is just as unconscionable as the behavior of radicals who celebrate when a terrorist is successful.

If you don't agree that our cutlure celebrates and promotes war, consider the war toys, we give our children, the war games that they play, the way war and fighting is glorified in our art, movies and media, and the fact that most of our history education is overfocused upon a chronology of our wars and the events that led to them.

Now read that quote again...

"Terrorism is the war of the poor, and war is the terrorism of the rich."

March 20, 2008 at 11:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Infrastructure for proposed biosecurity lab could cost Kansans $164 million

I am opposed to this facility. First off, the idea of living in close proximity to a place like this, no matter how much we are assured it is safe, places us at risk. Have you read, The Hot Zone?

Second I don't think it is right that taxpayers cover so many of the costs of research, when ultimately private entities control the fruits of that labor which may then be patented to enrich them, or alternatively the data (that taxpayers paid for) is then not freely available to all who might have an interest in learning from it.

Third, I am not surprised that a farmer would support this -- however the "welfare ranching" mentality has gotten way out of hand. Taxpayers already subsidize ranchers destroying national forests, who graze their cattle their for a fraction of the going market rate, while taxpayers cover the cost of fences, water and more. Taxpayers also cover the cost of an assault on wildlife species that either compete with cows or are percieved as a threat to cows.

Just say "NO." to this project.

(And as a side note -- I LOVE the library, I am all for expanding it, I am happy to have my tax dollars go for it. I think the staff are terrific. Nowhere else these days can I get such wonderful customer service, while getting a terrific free education. Any project I want to do, any subject I want to explore, anything I want to know, have, create, understand -- I go to the library, and I am grateful for the chance to do so. More then any other city service, I feel that the library has contributed more to my having a wonderful life then any other. Thank you to all who make it such a great place!!!!)

March 20, 2008 at 11:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Straying from the flock

This article makes me SAD -- to see those beautiful sheep, knowing that soon their lives will be prematurely and violently ended for no other reason then to satisfy someone's palate.

If this paper had published a picture of a litter of kittens or puppies, and then followed that with recipes that would necessitate their violent deaths and dismemberment, readers would be outraged. Why consideration for one species and not another? Do sheep suffer any less then cats or dogs?

Where is our humanity? It's not like we humans even need meat to survive -- in fact the best science out there shows that most of our chronic disease (cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis, kidney disease and diabetes) is more likely the more meat one eats. The China study for example ( read the book by T Colin Campbell) the largest health and nutrition study ever conducted, found that for optimum health the ideal amount of animal protein (and this includes dairy and eggs) was ZERO.

Then there is the environmental issue-- animal agriculture produces way more greenhouse gasses (and sheep and cows burp and fart a lot of methane) uses way more land, and way more water (for the usuable protein produced) then a plant-foods diet.

March 19, 2008 at 9:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Main events

Catbacker -- I think you might have confused "essential fatty acids" (the building blocks of fats) with "amino acids" (the building blocks of protein) DHA and EPA are types of essential fatty acids, and you are right that our bodies manufacture these from ALA -- (an omega 3 fatty acid) but you are wrong to imply that this process is contingent upon the source of amino acids.

You are also mistaken about plant protein in general. If by chance you are interested in looking at the best science on this topic I suggest that you read either of these books:

The China Study by T Colin Campbell
The 80/10/10 Diet by Douglass Graham

Sadly, your post stands as clear evidence of the down side of allowing agricultural special interests (like the Dairy Council) unfettered access to our schools for several generations. You are not alone in thinking as you do, but the preponderance of science (especially if you don't count the biased studies funded by big food interests) suggests that getting all one's protein from plants, is not only sufficient, but has many advantages -- For example plant protein is not as acidifying to the body and so you don't lose as much calcium from your bones trying to neutralize it. (A major cause of osteoporisis is overconsumption of animal protein)

Both the books above are well referenced to the peer-reviewed scientific journals.

February 20, 2008 at 10:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal )