Well said Kristin!
I wonder if the FDA will raise the "safe" level of arsenic again, to adjust for the ridiculous amounts of arsenic in the imported rice...
That didn't last long
- Thread starter FINNIX
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I wonder if the FDA will raise the "safe" level of arsenic again, to adjust for the ridiculous amounts of arsenic in the imported rice...
Another aspect.... my favorite toothpaste for a few years was crest pro-health 'night'. It's been discontinued - I scanned google quickly and osmosed ;-) that is was some chemical they no longer like or got some more info on. I don't keep up with that type of news but the product had been sold for years. I'm guessing it is not poisonous
but perhaps something that involved killing animals or plants in order to use 
Whatever, but within the four years I've been here - WE - have found things that didn't work well, might not have been the best material, etc. and pretty soon there's a better solution. We self-govern for those who want to be informed enough to visit our forum. Others obviously don't care enough to inquire - where one might invoke Darwinism 
But they TOO benefit from our efforts here, by the way we drive the products that are offered. I feel sorry for the few instances that we've seen here where harm was done - I won't list them BUT they were reported immediately by those concerned and 'solutions' were offered and data was gained that changed behavior - vendors and manufacturers were contacted - some responded well - if not they were shunned by this community.
No one has a better view of the effects of the industry than we do. And we do something about it when needed. Pre-emptive actions by gov't's far removed from our experience ends in less creative and pertinent solutions. And less harmful solutions to ourselves and this industry.
Well said, although that was my point about dosage earlier
Here's a good one by Rand where compromising is the poison.
There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil. The man who is wrong still retains some respect for truth, if only by accepting the responsibility of choice. But the man in the middle is the knave who blanks out the truth in order to pretend that no choice or values exist, who is willing to sit out the course of any battle, willing to cash in on the blood of the innocent or to crawl on his belly to the guilty, who dispenses justice by condemning both the robber and the robbed to jail, who solves conflicts by ordering the thinker and the fool to meet each other halfway. In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit. In that transfusion of blood which drains the good to feed the evil, the compromiser is the transmitting rubber tube . . .
I think you misunderstand. There's this:
A compromise is an adjustment of conflicting claims by mutual concessions. This means that both parties to a compromise have some valid claim and some value to offer each other. And this means that both parties agree upon some fundamental principle which serves as a base for their deal.
... where both parties agree on fundamental principles. Then there's where one is trying to suppress, harm or rob the other. For clarity - think Hitler and the Jews. There's no compromise there.
Or you have an intrusive gov't that knows what's best for you and where your actions harm no one (but perhaps yourself) - this gov't was created to protect the rights of individuals, not to protect individuals from themselves - that's more the job of yourself, family, friends, church perhaps....
The man in the middle says tax and regulate ecigarettes, but not too much. But the taxer and regulator, when they get their foot in the door, your house is theirs. It's the middle man that allows that, by appealing to the 'can't we all just get along' crowd. That's the true drivel.
Contrary to the fanatical belief of its advocates, compromise [on basic principles] does not satisfy, but dissatisfies everybody; it does not lead to general fulfillment, but to general frustration; those who try to be all things to all men, end up by not being anything to anyone. And more: the partial victory of an unjust claim, encourages the claimant to try further; the partial defeat of a just claim, discourages and paralyzes the victim.
Last edited:
Well said, although that was my point about dosage earlier
Yeah, I know. There were quite a few great explanations in the thread, but I thought maybe one of my famous analogies might help simplify them.
Yeah, I know. There were quite a few great explanations in the thread, but I thought maybe one of my famous analogies might help simplify them.
Analogies are good - hit different people differently
Ok. Perhaps I didn't make the context clear on the first passage. There's two basic scenarios:
1. In any conflict between two men (or two groups) who hold the same basic principles, it is the more consistent one who wins.
2. In any collaboration between two men (or two groups) who hold different basic principles, it is the more evil or irrational one who wins. (where a compromise with evil, evil wins)
I was speaking of the second scenario in relation to this thread and the current threat of regulation and taxes.
There are scenarios such as in #1, where you're right. A compromise is an adjustment of conflicting claims by mutual concessions.
I think it's just a more concentrated extract of tobacco. I'm sure it's a bit more than just the flavour molecules.
Thanks thats a good link. I'll glanced thought some of and will get back to it later when I have more time.
I read that a while back and came away more confused than before. In my opinion I don't think there's a difference between tobacco absolute and NET/tobacco extract, except for concentration and extraction method. I've asked a few times and even those that ONLY use/make NET's can't tell me the difference.
Last edited:
I think you're right or close to it. 'Absolute' has a specific meaning in essence/fragrance extraction - vs. essenial oil essence. It's in the method of extraction - basically solvent extraction vs. steam distillation. The difference for absolute is in what some call 'natural extraction' - the claim is that they use "natural" solvents, which in some cases may be BS or 'a secret'.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
