You last visited: Today at 08:56 PM
|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|02-04-2013 03:16 PM|
If they're dying because of the stupidity of their parents/guardians, then no.
Happy to help!
|02-04-2013 03:11 PM|
|02-03-2013 09:48 PM|
|Mr. Sparkles||The world could certainly use fewer meat eaters. I'm glad they are self-correcting their population.|
|01-28-2013 12:01 PM|
|01-28-2013 09:24 AM|
|01-27-2013 01:47 PM|
LOL, canvas bags. Silly OS hippy trash.
Any cool crunchy hippy kid that's worth his/her weight in a hemp necklace rock the Flip and Tumble's...http://www.flipandtumb
And I'm actually serious. Those bags are great. The Mrs has about nine of them. When they get all scuzzy, you just toss it in the wash...right after you barf blood and have non-stop hot liquid ejections from all the 0157:H7, of course.
|01-26-2013 06:17 PM|
|01-26-2013 06:09 PM|
|adr||I wonder how much bacteria is on the surface of the shopping carts, baskets or the rubber conveyor belt at the checkout stand.|
|01-26-2013 05:04 PM|
Tests find high levels of lead in reusable bags
The non-woven-polypropylene bags, sold by chains including Safeway, Walgreen's and Bloom, all had lead content above 100 parts per million — the highest level that many states allow in consumer packaging.
Other retailers and organizations with bags or bag inserts tested by CCF that had lead levels above 100 ppm include: Giant; Giant Eagle; KTA Super Stores; Staples; Piggly Wiggly; Brookshire Brothers; Gerbes; Stater Bros.; University of Oregon; the Defense Commissary Agency; Washington, D.C., Department of the Environment; and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
|01-26-2013 11:33 AM|
|01-26-2013 10:49 AM|
Also from the study: (and this is just for San Fran, not all the other cities/counties that have implemented similar bans).
"Our results suggest that the San Francisco ban led to, conservatively, 5.4 annual additional deaths. Using the EPA’s current estimated value of a statistical life, 8.4 million in current dollars, this suggests an annual loss of about $45 million without considering the additional hospital costs, either associated with these deaths or with the increased ER visits documented above, or the personal costs suffered by individuals who do not seek medical care."
"Despite these concerns, it could be argued that a simple solution exists, namely fastidious washing of the reusable bags. Such a solution is problematic, however. First, washing such bags will itself have negative environmental consequences through excess water use. Further, the detergents necessary to clean the bags add to the environmental costs, as does the use of water hot enough to kill the bacteria."
|01-26-2013 10:28 AM|
|01-26-2013 10:19 AM|
|01-26-2013 02:06 AM|
|01-25-2013 10:42 PM|
Those morons got rid of bags at the meat counter? They deserve to die.
I still remember having to get rid of paper because of how killing renewable trees to make recyclable paper for bags is bad for the environment.
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|