Congratulations! Your comment on Taking Personal Responsibility for Your Health has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Technically, a 'redneck' is any person who works outside and gets sunburnt on their neck...but it is clearly most often associated with rural farming southerners.
The American Cancer Society had a great campaign for a while in the south with a picture of a man from behind with a sunburnt neck and cowboy hat and a caption "rednecks can be hazardous to your health".

But musicians or movie stars aren't the ones cutting your health care while politicians are personally responsible for things that affect your everyday life.

Go vegan instead https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9nNa81dSoY
IT'S EASY! Just take a few weeks to get informed, don't jump into it. Read the books suggested below.

Vegetarian is a nice thing to do, but it should be really be only a stepping stone on your path to fully plant based diet. Plant foods are hearty delicious foods like pizza, burgers, lentil shepherds pies, pastas. You just swap out one or two ingredients that are from an animal origin, add more spices/herbs and you have a filling & healthy meal. You can stuff your face, and lose weight, lose the type 2 diabetes and heart disease as well. It's win win.

What many vegetarians don't know is that the milk and dairy industries are often more cruel, than farms that just use animals for meat, and often they are also intertwined. For example, for a cow to produce milk, it must be pregnant. Where do all of the offspring go? Veal if they are male. Or they become milking cows if they are female - destined to be constantly impregnated for their short 4-5 year lives until they die of exhaustion, or can no longer produce milk from exhaustion, and turned then eventually into meat. There are plenty of videos online where a cow gives birth and the calf is dragged away by it's hind legs. They both cry out to each other for days until they're voices give out.
Also cows milk GIVES people osteoporosis because it siphons out calcium from your bones, since it is so acidic. If you measure the amount of calcium in a glass of milk, let someone drink it, and then measure the calcium in their urine, then the urine contains more calcium than what went in. And it's being leeched from the bones.

It's a similar story for chickens. Male chicks get thrown into a grinder ALIVE. Because they're no use if they can't lay eggs.


The toxic waste produced the by milk and egg industries (animal poo etc) destroys environments.

The antibiotics used to keep all of those animals of course ends up in the environment and it will eventually make a super bug which medicine cannot kill.

The job loss portion seems silly, since anyone farming animals is capable of farming plants like rice, potatoes, wheat and grains etc. Those are some seriously nutrient and energy dense foods, and very efficiently produced, and very healthy. Carbs have just gotten a bad reputation thanks the Atkins people. And well we know that Atkins died of a heart attack, he had a history of heart attacks infact. He died overweight.

It is much easier just to go "cold turkey" for 3 or 4 weeks, and become completely plant based since it means your taste buds will adjust and you'll never crave animal products again. Everyone wins, the planet, your health both physical and mental, and of course the animals.

There are plenty off great books with recipes that are familiar and hearty that can help people get started, it's easier than you think. Books such as:
The Starch Solution, Dr. John McDougall.
Negative Calorie Effect, Dr Neal Barnard.
Power Foods for the Brain, Dr Neal Barnard.
Engine #2 Diet, Rip Esselstyn.

Your statement that other forms of preventable death have no bearing on the argument may be correct for your interpretation of that argument, but you are clearly missing the point of the comparison. Nobody is saying that we shouldn't regulate guns because people smoke. The comparison is that if society can sit by and watch people die from totally preventable deaths due to cigarettes and alcohol, at a rate 35x higher than gun related deaths, then why not start there, or even include guns, alcohol and cigs in the same crackdown? In the hands of responsible people, who are the majority of owners, guns are a very low threat and can serve a purpose other than killing people. Cigarettes, in contrast, are perfect killing machines, and 100% of the time are harmful to anyone who sticks them in their mouth and serve one purpose and one purpose only - to degrade your health. If you're fortunate enough to be stuck near someone who smokes, they are harming your health as well. If those who wish to start imposing limits or controls on peoples personal freedoms by controlling access to things that kill people, why not start with something that affects 35x more people than guns do? And if anyone tells you death by gunshot is a gruesome horrible death that nobody should have to endure (and hyped to be so by media and anti-gun activists), go spend some time in a cancer ward to experience what these poor bastards go through during a prolonged death from lung cancer. Give me a bullet any time over that.

Yep, and they do a workout immediately before filming a scene so that they have what bodybuilders refer to as 'the pump' or the bulky, swollen and/or vasculated vein look. Unrepresentative of the normal human body.

In fact, muscles like that do happen naturally, but usually only for a short amount of time and usually only from the world's top athletes. For example Jessica Ennis one of our sporting greats with cobblestones for abdominals. No one stays in that shape for very long and it's not certain to be good for your health to do that.

On top of that, due to the varied gene pool, people in peak physical fitness can take on all sorts of shapes and sizes.

The 'good' doctor stated that drinking it wouldn't harm him. In that much the science says he is correct, the toxicity tests on the concentrations used for application say that. The toxicity of the concentrated form is way higher, but even then the cases of deliberate attempted suicide by drinking it often fail. The maximum concentration for application is 10%, but ranges all the way down to 0.1%.

When one guy talks about the effects of 0.1% concentrated substance, and the other talks about the effects of nearly 100% concentration, you get different results. That's because you are talking apples to oranges. That IMHO makes you both fools, but I have to tip a bit of the hand to the guy that is at least talking about the real world application levels rather than the one that makes the story he wants.

You could make a similar story out of vinegar and how the food industry is pouring a poison into our food chain. After all, highly concentrated form of the acid will even burn your skin, never mind trying to drink it. The reality in application of the low concentration vinegar most of us regular consume though is fine, with the recommendation that pouring it in your eyes won't be fun, and if you were asked to drink a glass you'd likely refuse despite the knowledge it wouldn't be so bad for your health.

I knew this would happen. Talking to you, too, @oritteropo:

I'm leaving it with just this, because people are attached to their bacon and steaks as tightly as they are tied to religion. Perhaps it's again apples to oranges, but I'm guessing a lot of you are the same folks who rant against religion and wonder why people are so stupid and don't look at logic and science, blah blah blah. This is the perfect time to look in the mirror and see a touch of what you're up against. When you've been indoctrinated with something since you were literally born, you fight against being wrong so hard. So, so hard. Seriously. Take a moment, take a deep breath, and take a little search inside looking at how much of you knows for a fact that eating meat is just fine, and how much of it is cognitive dissonance. How much of it is emotional and how much of it is logical. Look at a video of people going on and on about how Jesus Christ is Lord and another video of people going on and on about how much they love bacon. It's kind of disturbing how zealous bacon-lovers get. Try it. It's fun. It's why I became vegetarian only about 4 or 5 years ago. And I gotta say, getting rid of that cognitive dissonance is very, very relieving and satisfying.

Yes, yes, yes. Loads and loads of vegetarians and vegans are unhealthy. Actually, I would argue that most vegetarians and vegans are wholly less healthy than omnivores since most of them have a high-and-mighty "I'm vegetarians/vegan so I'm automatically healthy" and eat some of the most disgusting, heart-disease-inducing, oily, fatty, un-nutririous, processed shit that's ever been made. Look at some of the fake meat stuff to just have a peek.

No. If you actually watched any of the videos you will see that it's not just being vegan that is important. It's to be a healthy vegan. You know, all that shit you can't ever, ever argue is bad for you. Fruits. Leafy greens. Beans. Lentils. Whole grains, occasionally. But mostly leafy greens and fruit.

And there are loads of studies that control exercise and all sorts of other arguments for "NO NO NO! IT'S NOT MY MEAT! STAY AWAY FROM IT IT'S ANYTHING BUT MY MEAT!". I can think of a specific one that I read/watched about controlling for exercise, and I can find it for you if you'd like, but I'm guessing you aren't really interested. They discovered that very aerobic, exercising, running omnivores were as healthy as lightly walking vegans. He even had a cute graphic for it.

And it's not just this guy, either. Head over to Dr. Fuhrman's website for more of the same. Except Dr. Fuhrman is toting stuff to sell, so that unnerves some people. They claim he's just trying to make a buck. But all the money he makes goes to nutritional research.

The last thing I'll say is this:

I honestly don't give a flying shit about what you eat. I don't really care about the environment at all. I'm not planning on having kids, and I'm sure I'll kick the ol' bucket before antibiotics stop working, water is scarce, the waters rise above NYC, and all the other possible doomsday things that'll probably happen within the next 100 or so years. It's true that I also enjoy not feeling guilty for eating animals who live. It'd make me happy if you stopped eating them because the main thing I believe I'm around for is to minimize suffering in the world. So, that'd be nice if more people didn't eat them.

But if you want to live a nice, long, healthy life where you don't die of a stroke, heart attack, or diabetes by the time you're 65, eat better.

There's a reason why the milk, sugar, meat and pharmaceutical companies pump out study after study about how it's totally fine to eat their shit. They spend so much money on it, it's ridiculous.

Cheers to your health, either way.

Who needs a job when you have your health? According to Nancy pelosi, no job means you can spend more time with your family, chill, and develop your artistic side.

win/win

My point is that even with regulation, alcohol and cigarettes are causing plenty of harm to society. Check the statistics for drunk driving incidents and health issues caused by smoking. If alcohol and cigarettes were banned, they would be harder to obtain and therefore the harm they cause would be decreased.

Conversely, if you legalize hard drugs like cocaine and heroin (which are scientifically proven to be detrimental to your health and livelihood in general), the usage of said drugs and their destructive effects will only increase. Marijuana is irrelevant to this argument, as it isn't addictive and its effects aren't harmful. If you only want to legalize marijuana and not heroin, cocaine, PCP, meth, LSD, etc, I'm in full agreement.

Regulation will never be completely effective, as people will often ignore laws if they really want something (see the current drug situation). But by banning something, you at least make it slightly harder to obtain. It's a tricky situation with no perfect solution. By banning something, you are empowering the criminals who can supply it. But by making something legal and easily obtained, you are also promoting its use. Sure, the government makes a lot of money from liquor and cigarette taxes but those two products have ruined many lives in the process.

Yeah, I've seen references like this. It's crap. A quick Google search turned up articles where fat people were motivated to lose their weight because of fat shaming. There was a recent article in our local paper that made a similar point. You can always find a study to support your view. I prefer the evidence of my own eyes.
Obesity has soared in one generation because we now refer to fat women as BBW. Manufacturers of planes and cars, clothing are now designing for heavier people.
Acceptance of fat has led to the current crisis (and I do acknowledge the role of the fast food industry which I compare to the tobacco industry).
Remember how cigarette smoking was once seen as glamourous? Not any more... it was re-branded as a disgusting vice that took its toll on your health, your looks, your breath and people (like me) dropped the habit so that in one generation it's the exception rather than the rule.
Sure, there are hardcore smokers who will never be cured. And some fat people are always going to stay fat rather than develop some willpower. But it should never be accepted or promoted somehow.

That is a valid concern, and it's very difficult to address.

Certainly, bionics for injury victims should be made available through your health system. I'd agree with the speaker here when he says that is a human right.

But voluntary augmentation is a much harder sell. On one hand, the situation you describe (where we have an augmented "caste" and a baseline caste) is certainly undesirable. But equally, it's not really practicable to fund everyone for every augmentation they want.

Tricky question.

Although as Yahtzee says "if there's a conflict between people who have ocean liner pistons for forearms and people who insist that everyone be as shit as they, I know which side I'm on!"

I've just been reading up on this a bit and it's sort of interesting. I don't think anyone is doing serious investigative work on this whole thing because I keep reading that these are either just local families who own cattle, or they're corporate entities.

Also the disturbing thing is that apparently these people owe the government a lot of money and they refuse to pay. In order to get out of being harassed they got a lot of Militia friends from other states to come armed and stand with them. So this doesn't seem to me like it's being handled very well at all, and it probably is something to do with local law enforcement not interested in causing trouble on a big local name.

Either way this hasn't become all that clear, and it always annoys me that I have to wait a long time before someone gets to the bottom of these things.

EDIT: I totally forgot to talk about the video which I couldn't get through because this guy is a moron. He cites the Federal Government not caring about a tortoise because we detonated tons of nuclear bombs in the desert. That was before the environment and conservation because a large issue, now it is and it isn't just about tortoises it's about the land as a whole. Land that if we destroy we don't get back for generations.

Also imagine if this became violent...just imagine how quickly helicopters would've destroyed everyone and everything in the desert. You cite that we test nuclear weapons yet you don't think we can take on a bunch of fat useless farmers that have AR-15s?

I can hardly listen to this idiot, I can certainly see how the federal government acted inappropriately (although I think I need more information) it's pretty much a common occurrence. But my god this smug little cunt just pisses me off the way he presents his arguments. I would take great pleasure beating him with a pipe until he drowned in his own blood.

My last thought on this is I hope it doesn't come of like I'm defending the government or their idiocy. If they're idiots which they usually are they don't get what they want. However I can't take stupid attacks on the government when there are so much better ones to be had. I love steak but there's too much of it, too many cows and our environment is being wrecked because of it. Red meat feeds cancer and destroys your health if you have too much of it, take it easy on the red meat. Global Warming is a serious issue, and apparently not one that InfoWars agrees with so as far as I'm concerned they're anti-science and anti-humanity. Fuck them.

I don't get the wait times argument from those who oppose a single payer system. They clearly never went to an emergency room in the US. I've never had a short wait time in a US ER/Stat Care/Ultra Care type facility. Even when they seem empty it seems like an hour wait before you finally see a doctor. Oh your 2 year old is having a hard time breathing, wait an hour and a half. Your one year old is running a high fever and vomiting, wait two hours. Heck, the wait times to find a doctor if you don't already have a family doctor can be weeks or months, forcing you to go to the ER for stuff you'd probably normally see a doctor for. That isn't an efficient medical system. They anti-single payer people then will say they don't trust the government to make decisions about their health insurance... but they trust the one of the most profitable, per dollar earned, business in the US? (I vaguely recall insurance being number 3 in per dollar earned profits, right behind banks and pharmaceuticals, with a rather large gap to get to number four.) They don't get those huge profits by making decisions in the best interest of the patients and consumers. Walmart could pay $3 more per hour to every employee, give them benefits, increase the work force, and still make profits without raising prices, meaning that while half the work force there needs food stamps now, none would if the company would do the right thing and pay a living wage, but instead we have people mad at the people who work there for not making enough rather than the people who run it... anyhow the point is people like that, who run the business, can't be trusted to make decisions about your health insurance as they only care about their bottom line and their paycheck. Getting you the proper health care costs them money and they will gladly sacrifice you and your family for a better paycheck for them.

Economic analysis from a marxist perspective can be dangerous to your health. You might develop an untamable urge to urinate on any Tories you might run across in the streets, after which you'll have your spinal curvature readjusted by a bunch of rozzers with nightsticks.

Imagine what it's like over here: a leading figure of our opposition is an outspoken communist of Iranian heritage, who also happens to be just about the only macroeconomist in parliament. You can literally see the cognitive dissonance in peoples' heads when she's presenting her case.