And now there are even more weird ass chemicals in your water supply.....
(assuming your in a city that recycles the waste water).

@ChaosEngine

um...is your comment missing some parts that you forgot to type?
or was it a typo?

when did i deny that a chemical attack actually occurred?

my skepticism is in regards to american corporate media slavishly regurgitating the narrative coming out of the white house.

that the assad regime attacked his own people with sarin gas,and a complicit media which has uncritically jumped on board the "assad bad-america good" bullshit train.

or do i REALLY need to point to iraq,or even libya for that matter.

as for the rest of your comment.i see no reason to contradict a negative.i simply never made a claim against those organizations.

you are free to believe what you wish my friend,i will remain skeptical.

and i think history backs my skepticism.

I've yet to see any credible sources that it WASN'T a chemical attack.

Meanwhile, organisations like Amnesty and the WHO seem reasonably convinced it was a chemical attack, unless you think they're shills too.

i had read about that possibility.that a bomb had blown up a chemical warehouse.

either way,until i see some evidence,i remain skeptical.

Dont worry he'll go and spend weeks fiddling around with drills and chemicals and bungee cords instead of shooting at it from the ground.

Some people seem to think this was a false flag operation (the supposed chemical attack and the reasoning behind the US response)
Apparently its a very complicated sunni -shia - iran - saudi- yemen situation about an oil pipeline that will cut russia out of the loop. They also say Trump is more concerned about drawing attention away from his Russian treason and recklessly provoking the russians for his own domestic survival. A total all round shit show in other words.

@MilkmanDan

i do not want to speak for eric,so i will just explain why i downvoted.

this video attempts to explain the syrian crisis,with almost zero critical examination.the video practically regurgitates the current american political narrative and never mentions the conflicts of information.

let me explain:

1.the video states this all started due to the arab spring,but totally fails to mention that the MAIN reason for the continued conflict is not arab spring,but the fact the both qatar and saudi arabia have been pushing syria to allow them to build a pipeline through syria in order for those countries to sell oil and gas to europe.

which would be in direct competition with russia,which is the main provider of oil and gas to europe.

2.this video claims..twice..that assad has used chemical weapons against his own people.while convenient for a western power which may,or may not,wish to engage militarily.there was no evidence in 2013,and there is no evidence this time (mainly due to time.i mean come on,TWO days? and BOOM.assad did it,nothing to see here.move along).

the only journalist in 2013 that challenged the narrative was seymor hersh.who was ridiculed and chastised,and ultimately vindicated in 2014 by the UN securities commission,that assad was not the perpetrator,but rather the al qeada off shoot el nosra.

which was barely covered,if at all,in american corporate media.

it is also important to mention that the assad regime,in full compliance with the UN,handed over all materials that could be used in chemical warfare.i.e:sarin gas.

3.while the video DOES mention it,it does so in a very slick way,and if you are not following this situation,you will miss it.

america IS supporting and funding "rebels",but pay attention to who those rebels are:they are the offshoot of al qeada,el nosra.

so in effect,america sis funding and supporting al qeada to fight against the assad regime.

i will give you time to allow that to sink in a moment.

these are only a few of the glaring inconsistencies in this video,but i will agree that the situation in syria is complicated,but the reasons for that complication are not being mentioned in this video..at all.

and one final thing to chew about before i go,because i think it is an important aspect to ponder,and as of right now,thats all it really is:speculation.

assad was set to meet with a UN peace council in a week to discuss possible diplomatic solutions.add to this that trump had just recently (last week) backed off obama's "red line" approach,and stated quite clearly that america is ONLY interested in dealing with ISIS,and had NO interest in dealing with assad.

question:

why would assad,with only a week to go before peace negotiations,commit politicial suicide by gassing his own people?

who benefits from this attack?

because it sure is not assad.

we all know the situation in syria is dire,complicated and grotesque,but the current narrative being fed to americans simply does NOT add up.

2+2 does not = 5

and this video does nothing to clear that up,it simply regurgitates american corporate media's narrative.

and i refuse to upvote that.

This is soooooooooooooooooooooo much better than spray chemicals everywhere(especially onto crops/food). Very cool.

Of course there is also an easy solution - usually if there are mosquitos around it's hot. And well a simple fan keeps them away and keeps you cool at the same time.

Interesting video. Reminds me of something I saw when I lived in Nashville in 2014. I left work at 5 and found that my usual route to I-40 was gridlocked. I figured I would flank whatever was causing it by turning around and taking the perimeter road around Nashville airport. A million other people had that same idea so we are inching along that road and then I noticed that Interstate 40 next to me was completely deserted, not a single car in either direction. I'm thinking some chemical or nuclear spill closed the interstate, that's all I could think of.

Then out of nowhere this massive motorcade like you see in the video comes flying down the interstate, sirens and blue lights flashing off of every vehicle. It was so surreal to see that appear on this dark empty interstate. Then the light bulb went off, I had no idea President Obama was in town, much less giving a speech at a high school 3 miles from my office.

In Trump's mind, he is the BEST reader there is. That is why he can't read. If big Oil and gas wants a pipeline, that's all there is to know! Why read long reports from the EPA or environmental scientists? ("God dammit, they're trying to get me to read and comprehend these things again - lets get rid of em!") Big Oil needs a hand out, and that's what Trump does, he gives/receives handjobs from the nastiest of the nasty, or if he wants it and it is unwilling - he grabs it like a big ol' wild animal/monkey man that he is. TRUMP = ORANGE MONKEY that huffed too much corporate paint.

My dad was a CEO of a huge company - a self-made man (rip), he was dyslexic - but at least he learned about his disadvantage and figured out how to somewhat overcome it and use it to his advantage. What I'm saying is he tried to learn and overcome and succeeded. Trump is just a munchkin who was handed everything; an ego-maniac in great need of my favorite chemical for delivering pure ego-death to humble his ass down for the rest of his life and expand in understanding and awareness. I posted an animation video on here about Trump getting "it" but even then (as in the video the conclusion was): he may just be too stupid.

Chemical reaction, turns the orange into a battery. LEDs only need 1-3V to turn on so you don't need a very strong reaction. I noticed some of the pins are darker colors, Mr Glove probably dipped one leg in a dissimilar metal or another chemical so the electrons want to move from one pin to the other with the acidic juice as the electrolyte. Look up potato battery for similar experiments.

They should have less risk. They don't have carcinogenic chemicals added to make them stay lit or preserve them, and they aren't inhaled (by those who know how to smoke them).
That doesn't mean they're safe, as you mentioned. I think oral and throat cancers, while still a risk, are more likely with cigarettes because of the extra chemicals.
You are right, there's very little data about cigar risks. It would be silly to pretend they don't have risks, though.

I would note that I've seen people publicly harass cigarette smokers, then come tell me how good my cigar smells. I've also never had someone complain about my cigar smoke, but heard it often back when I smoked cigarettes.

If we are going to start pointing fingers at countries, almost every single country in the world has used immigrant labor to keep itself functional. You can't single out the USA for relying on it, and as I mentioned, the USA is far from being the only country starting to realize that illegal immigration has more negatives than positives.

I have never hired an illegal. It is possible that they US government should increase work visas, I would not care as long as people were here legally. This also isn't 'The Jungle', I am pretty sure that Upton Sinclair would laugh if you compared the living conditions and quality of life that our current immigrants have compared to then.

I disagree with your example, this is not a situation where the people did not have other options. They could have applied to come here legally, choosing not to do so because it is far easier to ignore the law does not make them addicts to a chemical substance.

At first I thought it was a waist high metal barrel and completely expected that FO to land closer to the foreground. Totally flipped my perspective when it turned out to be a humongous tank of chemicals that landed in the background by the emergency vehicles.

Umm. By far the biggest reason for the shift is the specialization factor, mainly spurred by NOT playing both sides of the ball (offense and defense). Which to be fair, the video did point out.

The video didn't come right out and directly say that was a bad thing, but heavily implied it. I disagree, and think that it is one of the coolest things about American Football. Different positions require (or at least reward) different skillsets and physical attributes. So at the highest level of play, yes, O linemen are going to be huge and stable on their feet. D linemen are going to be slightly less huge, but faster and more aggressive. D backs and receivers are going to be tall and fast. Running backs can excel by being smallish, elusive, and quick, OR large and resilient. And so on.

That specialization makes the game fascinating -- seeing how teams with different balances of specialists can compete with each other and be more or less effective in different situations or against different teams.

Are NFL linemen going to be more at-risk for conditions like heart disease? Of course -- any sample group made up of people that weigh as much as NFL linemen is going to have greater occurrence of heart disease. But that isn't something unique to football players / the NFL. In fact, if you compared rates of heart disease in current / former NFL linemen to a sample group with the same average weight who were NOT football players, they'd probably have a lower rate, because like the video said, those linemen generally still had to be in very good physical shape -- just heavy.

I guess what I'm saying is that it seems weird to insinuate that it is a bad thing for the NFL / football in general to "encourage" health issues directly or indirectly because they select for large / huge players. If you want to point out unique risks of playing in the NFL, there are way more pressing and direct issues -- like RBs having LOTS of mobility problems after they retire due to all the bone / joint damage from getting tackled all the time, or increased risk of chemical dependency in football players in general due to all of the pain and other meds that teams pump into players to keep them going.