No Profile Found
May 17th 2010 9:41PM An interesting theory, Angela. But, since there are nearly equal numbers of "single" females/males in the U.S. population, how do you account for the relevance of your supposition... since it is likely that 'most' of the single males also prepare their own meals, rather than have a female show up for such chores... and a great percentage of those males also use non-stick surfaced pots? Overheated teflon surfaces are, indeed, a very scary and dangerous aspect of our present-day society. I once read of where pet birds were found to have been killed by the "gas" put off by such means... wherein, said birds where in relatively close proximity (same room?) of the offending overheated teflon coated pot. I guess it's back to salads and uncooked bologna sandwiches, for me, from here on in (and one sharp eye focus-ed upon that sacrificial parakeet residing in yon kitchen corner).
Jan 31st 2010 1:01PM "Rasool on 1/27/2010 7:07AMNeutral Why not go after the supplier instead of the user."********* BETTER YET... WHY NOT, "EVERYBODY JUST KEEP THEIR "F-ING" NOSE(S) IN THEIR OWN BUSINESS"? UNLESS HE STOLE SOMEONE'S PETS FOR PELTS... OR, HAD THE CREATURES SKINNED ALIVE... IT'S HIS BUSINESS, AND CHOICE, ALONE. PERSONALLY, I FIND HIM TO BE A PRETENTIOUS, NO-TALENTED, EGOTISTICAL, DELUSIONAL, FAGGY, LITTLE PUNK... WHO ISN'T FOOLING ANYONE BY DRAPING AMBER ROSE (OR ANY OTHER FEMALE) OVER HIS ARM WHEN APPEARING IN PUBLIC. PETA, SUCKS. WEST, SUCKS. 'NOUGH SAID.
Jan 22nd 2010 6:36PM WHAT A WASTE OF 'ELECTRONIC INK'. O'BRIEN SUCKS; ALWAYS HAS... ALWAYS WILL. GOOD RIDDANCE
Jan 22nd 2010 6:28PM "LST
at 1-22-2010Good, hit stupid NBC where it hurts the most; the wallet! Go Conan, very cool move."
YEAH, RIGHT! ABOUT AS "COOL" AS A MASTERBATING BEAR, IDIOT. 17.5 YRS. TO 'GET' FUNNY..... FAILED MISERABLY. THAT'S WHY HE'S GONE... AS IT SHOULD BE.
Jan 20th 2010 4:56PM IF YOU ONLY HAD A BRAIN...
O'BRIEN HAD 17 YRS. TO "PROVE" HIMSELF AS FUNNY, OR INTERESTING. HE HAS FAILED, MISERABLY. HE HAS ALSO FAILED, MISERABLY, IN THE 'HISTORIC' TONIGHT SHOW TIME-SLOT. ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT O'BRIEN, INSTEAD OF LENO, WOULD HAVE SUCCEEDED IN THE 10-PM, PRIMETIME SLOT? HA... WHAT RUBBISH.
LENO HAS "EARNED" THE RIGHT TO CHAIR THE TONIGHT SHOW... AT IT'S HISTORICAL TIME-SLOT. HE WAS #1 FOR 15 OUT OF 17 YRS., AND HAS MADE FAR MORE MONEY FOR THE NBC NETWORK THAN HAS O'BRIEN (WHO STILL REMAINS... "NOT FUNNY"). O'BRIEN IS THE CAUSE OF ALL THIS HULABALOO... BY INITIATING HIS UNWORTHY DEMAND THAT HE BE GIVEN JAY'S JOB... DESPITE THE FACT THAT LENO WAS, AND ALWAYS HAD BEEN, #1... AND KICKING LETTERMAN'S ASS. HOW MANY 'REGULAR PEOPLE' DO YOU KNOW WHO ARE GIVEN 17.5 YRS. TO "PROVE THEIR COMPETENCY" AT THEIR JOBS... NEVERMIND, BEING ALLOWED TO OCCUPY SAID JOB EVEN WHILE CONSISTANTLY DEMONSTRATING THEIR INCOMPETENCE TO 'PERFORM' THEIR ASSIGNED DUTIES? THAT IS PRECISELY WHAT O'BRIEN HAS GOTTEN AWAY WITH... FOR THE PAST 17.5 YRS.
Nov 27th 2009 11:53AM "WORD OF MOUTH", JOHNNY BOY... "WORD OF MOUTH".
AND, BY BUILDING A FAR-SUPERIOR PRODUCT AND BASICALLY TREATING THEIR CUSTOMERS RESPECTFULLY... WITHOUT DISDAIN... GOES A LONG WAY, TOO.
OH, WHEN... OH, WHEN... WILL THEY LEARN?
WAIT A MINUTE... WHO'S KIDDING WHO?
AS LONG AS THEY ARE PERMITTED TO 'FEED AT THE PUBLIC TROUGH', BY HAVING OUR TAX DOLLARS THROWN AT THEM... (REWARDING PISS-POOR PERFORMANCE AND MANAGEMENT), THEY HAVE "LEARNED" ALL THEY NEED TO KNOW, HAVEN'T THEY?
THE QUESTION SHOULD BE: " WHEN WILL "WE" LEARN?"
Nov 27th 2009 11:25AM om said...
we are the only country in the world that drugs can be advertised in television and other mass news. *********** UH, NOT TO QUIBBLE, "OM"... BUT, THAT'S NOT ENTIRELY CORRECT. IT IS ALSO ALLOWED IN NEW ZEALAND, WHERE IT IS PRACTISED QUITE COMMONLY.
Nov 27th 2009 11:09AM Oh, for Christ's sake... get your "facts" straight before engaging in any of your mis-informed rants. Just what in hell do you mean by, " It's only in the past several years that these companies could legally advertise their prescription drugs..."?
Absolutely "NOT TRUE". In point of fact, "pharmaceuticals", whether available 'over the counter' or by 'prescription only', have ALWAYS been able to be "legally advertised" to doctors and to the general population of consumers. In fact, prior to 1906 there was NO REGULATION regarding such 'adverts'. 1906, hardly equates to being "recently", now, does it?
In 1906 the advertising of drugs was first regulated by the Federal Food and Drug Act . The Act gave the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the power to regulate drug labeling to prevent companies from making false claims about the contents or effects of medicines.
On June 25, 1938, President Franklin Roosevelt signed the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (most recently amended on Dec. 31, 2004). This Act replaced the 1906 Act and brought the regulation of medication (in addition to the regulation of labeling) under the control of the FDA thereby spawning the prescription drug industry. The government restriction was imposed to protect consumers from drugs considered to be unsafe and to regulate drugs such as barbiturates and amphetamines.
On Oct. 10, 1962, the Kefauver Harris Amendments to the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act transferred regulatory authority of prescription drug advertising from the Federal Trade Commission to the FDA. The Amendments required drug companies to provide information about side effects, contraindications, and effectiveness in all advertisements, including print and broadcast ads.
The US Food and Drug Administration continues to regulate prescription drug advertisements to ensure that the ads are not false or misleading in any way.
In Aug. 1999 the FDA issued guidance on direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising of prescription drugs through broadcast media when it released its industry guidance document Consumer-Directed Broadcast Advertisements. The 1999 guidance document described how companies could make "adequate provision" of prescription drug packaging information in broadcast media advertisements without directly disclosing the more detailed risk information that must accompany print advertisements.
The United States and New Zealand are the only two countries where direct to consumer (DTC) advertising of prescription drugs is legal.
Since 1906, the Gov. has only 'tweaked' those 'regulations' and bolstered or transferred the 'legal authority and scope' of the various agencies tasked to mitigate potential public harm.
Nov 17th 2009 11:57AM SAY, WHA' ?
Nov 9th 2009 12:46PM YOU'RE RIGHT, MICK. YOU DO HAVE THE WAYS AND MEANS OF DEALING WITH POLITICIANS WHO FAIL TO FOLLOW THE WISHES OF THEIR CONSTITUANTS. IT'S CALLED, "YOUR VOTE". YOU AND EVERYONE ELSE WITH A GRIEVANCE NEEDS TO STEP UP AND EXERCISE THAT "VOTE"... AND PUT THEM OUT OF OFFICE... EACH AND EVERY SUCCEEDING FUTURE ELECTION, WHETHER, ON A LOCAL LEVEL OR NATIONAL STAGE. DON'T JUST PAY LIP-SERVICE TO YOUR COMPLAINTS... GET SERIOUSLY INVOLVED: VOTE YOUR CONVICTIONS. AND, THAT GOES FOR THE REST OF US, ALSO.
WE ALL NEED TO, "GET MAD AT THEM DAMN EGGS, LUKE!"... AND KEEP ON VOTING THE BASTARDS OUT OF OFFICE... FOR AS LONG AS IT TAKES TO GET WHAT WE REALLY WANT... AND DESERVE.