Results 1 to 18 of 18
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,044

    Concerned about BPA in your beer can??

    You should be.
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  2. #2
    Bannėd
    Reputation: Trevor Ochmonek's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    156
    Here's an article for anyone interested in more details.

    The Dangerous Chemical Lurking in Your Beer Can | Mother Jones

    I very rarely drink canned beer these days, bottles and kegs for me. Although some craft brews come in cans what I grab comes in bottles. Just got back into homebrewing too and all my buckets/carboys are BPA free.
    "Imagine being able to travel safely at incredibly fast speeds, and not having to go to the stupid fartface airports!"

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Trevor Ochmonek View Post
    Here's an article for anyone interested in more details.

    The Dangerous Chemical Lurking in Your Beer Can | Mother Jones

    I very rarely drink canned beer these days, bottles and kegs for me. Although some craft brews come in cans what I grab comes in bottles. Just got back into homebrewing too and all my buckets/carboys are BPA free.
    Yeah, I'm going to make a concerted effort to switch to bottles exclusively.
    I've recently switched to all BPA free canned goods for when I make stew or soup or whatever. There are MANY articles on the poison that is BPA and other chemicals that leach from plastics. Just watched a fantastic documentary that illustrates how sids and infant skull fractures are from off gassing of the plastic/vinyl of mattresses and antimony.
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  4. #4
    Bannėd
    Reputation: Trevor Ochmonek's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    156
    We just had a baby and bought him an all natural/organic mattress. We also make sure any toys/bottles etc are BPA free.
    "Imagine being able to travel safely at incredibly fast speeds, and not having to go to the stupid fartface airports!"

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Trevor Ochmonek View Post
    We just had a baby and bought him an all natural/organic mattress. We also make sure any toys/bottles etc are BPA free.
    That's good
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  6. #6
    Beer Please! SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,994
    I guess it depends on just how much canned beer one is drinking on a regular basis.

    I enjoy craft beer and drink it about 1-2 days a week, but in each sitting I cannot say I am drinking enough from cans to cause me any personal alarm. Usually I am sharing beers with friends and most of the beers we get to share come in 22oz or 750ml bottles, and on occasion we have a canned beer in there.

    It would be nice if BPA could be removed completely from the can lining process, it would also be nice to see that same study they did on canned Soy Milk be done with beer. I actually suffer from Hypertension and am currently on 3 different BP medications, i would be curious to know if my BP was affected by drinking beer out of a can.

    Until a study like that is done we can only make assumptions about how the BPA might be effecting people. My guess is that one would have to put down an entire six-pack of canned beer on their own to start seeing any problems.
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,044
    There are many qualitative studies on BPA. Including long term, large sample group, double blind studies. BPA is not safe in any quantity. There are studies showing the disruptive effects of BPA absorbed through the hands simply from hand washing out of a plastic soap bottle. BPA is VERY bioavailable. Your body has an extremely difficult time excreting BPA as it's reabsorbed in your intestine and bioaccumulates on a disruptive feedback cycle. Furthermore, BPA mimics harmful hormones in your body so it could certainly affect blood pressure...but so does alcohol.

    We need these chemicals out of our environment period. Not sure how much a brewer may profit from cans vs bottles but it's not worth it from my perspective. My understanding is 22 oz bottles have less dissolved oxygen & they always seem to taste better to me. Food for thought
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    603
    99% of the beer I drink is not available in cans so no worries for me.

  9. #9
    Beer Please! SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,994
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    There are many qualitative studies on BPA. Including long term, large sample group, double blind studies. BPA is not safe in any quantity. There are studies showing the disruptive effects of BPA absorbed through the hands simply from hand washing out of a plastic soap bottle. BPA is VERY bioavailable. Your body has an extremely difficult time excreting BPA as it's reabsorbed in your intestine and bioaccumulates on a disruptive feedback cycle. Furthermore, BPA mimics harmful hormones in your body so it could certainly affect blood pressure...but so does alcohol.

    We need these chemicals out of our environment period. Not sure how much a brewer may profit from cans vs bottles but it's not worth it from my perspective. My understanding is 22 oz bottles have less dissolved oxygen & they always seem to taste better to me. Food for thought
    My understanding is the jury is still out on some aspects of BPA, hence the reason all plastics have not been banned yet.

    Also, Alcohol has a positive benefit for those with Hypertension, in moderation alcohol reduces BP.

    If BPA is as bad as you think it is, why is there not more public awareness of the bad things it is doing to people? I do not care one way or the other, but many times when you see alarmist articles like this they are debunked by scientist a few months later..... That article is from February 2015, nearly 1 year old, do you have any further studies or articles since then to point to?

    I just don't see the point in jumping off a cliff based on one article.
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    My understanding is the jury is still out on some aspects of BPA, hence the reason all plastics have not been banned yet.

    Also, Alcohol has a positive benefit for those with Hypertension, in moderation alcohol reduces BP.

    If BPA is as bad as you think it is, why is there not more public awareness of the bad things it is doing to people? I do not care one way or the other, but many times when you see alarmist articles like this they are debunked by scientist a few months later..... That article is from February 2015, nearly 1 year old, do you have any further studies or articles since then to point to?

    I just don't see the point in jumping off a cliff based on one article.
    The articles and studies are certainly there for one to gather more information on the subject. I completely reject the idea that something doesn't exist or something isn't bad until science "discovers" it. Lab coats are the new demigods of our generation. Somebody somewhere needs to sound the alarm bells on a whole host of issues...the trajectory of the planet is not good. If I had children I would be very alarmed indeed. As to what dictates public awareness it's very simple, money.

    Acetate metabolized in the liver from alcohol most definitely has a negative affect on the cardio vascular system. I concur many excellent studies show benefits to alcohol consumption, and the longest lived populations on earth consume it (some of them a lot). However it's hard to tease out other lifestyle factors from said studies.

    Not suggesting anybody jump off a cliff (dialogue is good) but BPA in can liners seems completely unnecessary. Nothing wrong with glass.
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    603
    Plus most good beer is not available in cans anyway.
    14 - Redline D880
    15 - Redline Conquest
    14 - Breezer Thunder One
    14 - Moto Boris
    95 - GT Tequesta
    Nashbar Carbon Road Bike

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,044
    Quote Originally Posted by blkangel View Post
    Plus most good beer is not available in cans anyway.
    Oh man! I didn't intend this thread to be antagonistic, but now you've gawn & done it.
    2 of my all time fave IPA's only come in cans. Vortex from Ft. George and Heady Topper from The Alchemist. Both worth drinking BPA and all.
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    221
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    You should be.
    ----
    Seems you have answered your own question then !
    don't tell me, "Show Me " !

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,027
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    The articles and studies are certainly there for one to gather more information on the subject. I completely reject the idea that something doesn't exist or something isn't bad until science "discovers" it. Lab coats are the new demigods of our generation. Somebody somewhere needs to sound the alarm bells on a whole host of issues...the trajectory of the planet is not good. If I had children I would be very alarmed indeed. As to what dictates public awareness it's very simple, money.
    Yawn, another non-scientist who has seen too many films and believes that all science is BS, dangerous, and ill-intentioned. Science doesn't discover but seeks to understand and prove what is already there. Real science is without bias and seeks truth and knowledge based on evidence and to an extent interpretation of that evidence. As such some interpretations, assumptions, and conclusions are faulty because well we're human and don't already know everything. As with all journal articles, the reader needs to know how to interpret the results and also acknowledges the potential faults or assumptions being made. There have been numerous cases of articles being retracted after publication because the results and conclusions of those articles could not be verified by other labs in the public or private sector. The most obvious that comes to mind is the vaccines causing autism scandal which ultimately resulted in a lot public fervor and fear mongering over whether or not to vaccinate your child. So.... whooping cough makes a return. The scandal also resulted in the scientist/doctor being stripped of his credentials and lots of Jenny McCarthy jokes. There are many other plastics that do not contain BPA, Nalgene has been making bottles, and labeling them, BPA free. Why?, because there was public outcry at the conclusion based on chemical structure that BPA could mimic estrogen, they spoke with their money and Nalgene and other companies found other ways to make their products. Also, pthalates are everywhere. There are has been a lot of public interest in natural products as a blow back against much of the things on the back labels of everyday products. I don't think this movement is bad in any way, but it also shows me that some people are afraid of big words. Also, IUPAC doesn't always help with the rules of the naming system for various compounds. However, neither do the natural products or drug companies who just make up "cool" sounding words up for extracts or synthesized compounds. In some cases drugs go to trial with the intention of having a specific effect based on a chemical interaction assumption. Viagra (wtf does that mean anyway) was in trials as a BP medication I think (don't believe me please look it up, no really I'm not sure go check and I'll do the same after I write this response and make the appropriate correction) and some guys came back with an interesting side effect. Nobody's out there saying holy fruitcake what are you doing to your body. Nope, their all happy they got there dick back and they want to play with it too. Furthermore, there are all sorts of chemical compounds found in nature, sometimes not in large enough quantities, that are nasty and will kill you... not in a chronic way but in an acute fashion, as in immediately bad for you. Further, there have been cases where chemicals that were used to kill weeds or bugs and it turned out that (I think they used science) to prove we should stop using them, in certain cases no exposure level was acceptable. It's a process, be a part of it. Question, explore, seek knowledge and understanding. Leave the outcry at home and let the herd be calm.

    I wear a labcoat (sometimes) and I have a child who's vaccinations are up to date, not just for him but for all the other children in the world as well. My grandfather had polio and his legs haven't worked well for decades. Polio has nearly been eradicated from the globe because of a scientist working towards that goal, he may have given it away for free. My mother died of cancer, btw if you didn't know cancer sucks, maybe because she drank nothing but caffeine free diet coke. Numerous studies have looked into whether or not artificial sweeteners cause cancer because of the public outcry at the assumption. No studies that I am aware of show a causation of cancer from artificial sweeteners.

    I agree with you that we as a society need to be more aware of where our food comes from, how it is contained, and how it is prepared and preserved. We also need to be more sustainable in our practices in agriculture and industry. We need to have a better understanding of how our lives impact the world around us and act accordingly. It's a process, one that will continue after we leave this mortal coil. Participate.... don't fear monger, use your concerns as fuel to seek understanding and knowledge.

    I work with with very smart and talented individuals who are scientists and wear lab coats. None of us are demigods, in jest or truth, just humans trying to understand the world around us and make a positive difference. I say that with humility because they are all smarter than me so I know I'm in the right room. Are you?
    No fuss with my MUSS,... or my Rockies, but I'm ridin' a MN fatty.

  15. #15
    Bannėd
    Reputation: Trevor Ochmonek's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    156
    I guess my main concern is shit with "BPA" in it from China that my kid is gonna chew on. I'm by no means a nut about this stuff but I will buy my kid the natural mattress over a plastic one and will also vaccinate him on the regular schedule that the pediatrician suggests. I guess I'm traditional in one sense but conscious of the possible affects from cheap plastic from China as well.

    As for my homebrew, I am glad it sits in BPA free buckets/carboys for weeks on end but if I never even knew about BPA I'd still be brewing regardless.

    tl;dr version - I ain't losing sleep over it
    "Imagine being able to travel safely at incredibly fast speeds, and not having to go to the stupid fartface airports!"

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,122
    I don't drink much canned beer, but I've seen a big shift towards it recently here for craft breweries. It's better for the beer, lighter and less costly to transport, and far easier to recycle. Not sure on the BPA, might have to go check my fermenters...

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,044
    Quote Originally Posted by dbhammercycle View Post
    Yawn, another non-scientist who has seen too many films and believes that all science is BS, dangerous, and ill-intentioned. Science doesn't discover but seeks to understand and prove what is already there. Real science is without bias and seeks truth and knowledge based on evidence and to an extent interpretation of that evidence. As such some interpretations, assumptions, and conclusions are faulty because well we're human and don't already know everything. As with all journal articles, the reader needs to know how to interpret the results and also acknowledges the potential faults or assumptions being made. There have been numerous cases of articles being retracted after publication because the results and conclusions of those articles could not be verified by other labs in the public or private sector. The most obvious that comes to mind is the vaccines causing autism scandal which ultimately resulted in a lot public fervor and fear mongering over whether or not to vaccinate your child. So.... whooping cough makes a return. The scandal also resulted in the scientist/doctor being stripped of his credentials and lots of Jenny McCarthy jokes. There are many other plastics that do not contain BPA, Nalgene has been making bottles, and labeling them, BPA free. Why?, because there was public outcry at the conclusion based on chemical structure that BPA could mimic estrogen, they spoke with their money and Nalgene and other companies found other ways to make their products. Also, pthalates are everywhere. There are has been a lot of public interest in natural products as a blow back against much of the things on the back labels of everyday products. I don't think this movement is bad in any way, but it also shows me that some people are afraid of big words. Also, IUPAC doesn't always help with the rules of the naming system for various compounds. However, neither do the natural products or drug companies who just make up "cool" sounding words up for extracts or synthesized compounds. In some cases drugs go to trial with the intention of having a specific effect based on a chemical interaction assumption. Viagra (wtf does that mean anyway) was in trials as a BP medication I think (don't believe me please look it up, no really I'm not sure go check and I'll do the same after I write this response and make the appropriate correction) and some guys came back with an interesting side effect. Nobody's out there saying holy fruitcake what are you doing to your body. Nope, their all happy they got there dick back and they want to play with it too. Furthermore, there are all sorts of chemical compounds found in nature, sometimes not in large enough quantities, that are nasty and will kill you... not in a chronic way but in an acute fashion, as in immediately bad for you. Further, there have been cases where chemicals that were used to kill weeds or bugs and it turned out that (I think they used science) to prove we should stop using them, in certain cases no exposure level was acceptable. It's a process, be a part of it. Question, explore, seek knowledge and understanding. Leave the outcry at home and let the herd be calm.

    I wear a labcoat (sometimes) and I have a child who's vaccinations are up to date, not just for him but for all the other children in the world as well. My grandfather had polio and his legs haven't worked well for decades. Polio has nearly been eradicated from the globe because of a scientist working towards that goal, he may have given it away for free. My mother died of cancer, btw if you didn't know cancer sucks, maybe because she drank nothing but caffeine free diet coke. Numerous studies have looked into whether or not artificial sweeteners cause cancer because of the public outcry at the assumption. No studies that I am aware of show a causation of cancer from artificial sweeteners.

    I agree with you that we as a society need to be more aware of where our food comes from, how it is contained, and how it is prepared and preserved. We also need to be more sustainable in our practices in agriculture and industry. We need to have a better understanding of how our lives impact the world around us and act accordingly. It's a process, one that will continue after we leave this mortal coil. Participate.... don't fear monger, use your concerns as fuel to seek understanding and knowledge.

    I work with with very smart and talented individuals who are scientists and wear lab coats. None of us are demigods, in jest or truth, just humans trying to understand the world around us and make a positive difference. I say that with humility because they are all smarter than me so I know I'm in the right room. Are you?
    I figured a jacka$$ would come along sooner or later. There's simply to much nonsense here to address it point by point but I'll make some counter points. First lets not assume we know one another's background, education, or training. You simply don't, and to make derogatory extrapolations as such is week.

    Conventional doctor ascribed medicine is the #1 killer in America today. Prescription drugs kill more people than black market drugs & who knows how many become addicted. There are chemicals like antimony trioxide (completely unnecessary fire retardant) found in the deepest recesses of the arctic. West coast fog contains high levels monomethyl mercury. Radioactive isotopes 600x normal background levels off our coast. How would any off this be possible with out society's unwavering faith in the degreed lab coat? I'm well aware of the scientific method but what you clearly fail to see is that it is completely corrupted. You forgot to add invented and influenced studies being redacted from science journals courtesy of big pharma. Vioxx anyone?

    Are we really going to rationalize that because there are many lethal organic compounds it's okay to fill our environment with man made toxins? That's garbage logic. We are not simply humans trying to understand the world around us, we are humans trying to profit from the world around us at the peril of the greater good. Indigenous populations understood the world around them better then the scientific method has. That's plainly obvious.

    Vaccines are certainly a hot button issue and a great study in the power of propaganda. If you're interested in Polio maybe take a look at the work of Dr. Suzanne Humphries. She has over 12,000 hours in vaccine research which should make her a world authority. Speaking of Polio and cancer maybe just take a second and google SV40 cancer virus. But wait a minute that's to much science lets get back on track. How about the over 12,000 documented cases of mothers claiming there baby being perfectly normal until a couple hours after receiving their MMR vaccine? I guess the lab coat knows a baby better than it's own mother. There are MANY factors in disease and infection rate.

    Lets not confuse reality and facts with fear mongering. Believe it or not I'm an exceedingly happy well adjusted mountain biker that doesn't want BPA in his post ride beer. I don't think that makes me "another non-scientist who has seen too many films and believes that all science is BS, dangerous, and ill-intentioned"
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,027
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    I figured a jacka$$ would come along sooner or later. There's simply to much nonsense here to address it point by point but I'll make some counter points. First lets not assume we know one another's background, education, or training. You simply don't, and to make derogatory extrapolations as such is week.
    Fair enough, although I've already declared that I am a scientist and do research, not specifically related to food sciences but research in plant responses with some experience testing anti-microbial and anti-bacterial properties of resins against bee pathogens. I've said as much in other posts on this site. I'll try to stay away from the weak sauce. However, I will have to say that you should spell jackass with an s instead of the dollar sign because it may imply that you believe me bought, but the reality is that I'm paycheck to paycheck at a public institution. With declining funds for grants and intense competition there is not much money in science, at least in doing research for research's sake.


    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    Conventional doctor ascribed medicine is the #1 killer in America today. Prescription drugs kill more people than black market drugs & who knows how many become addicted. There are chemicals like antimony trioxide (completely unnecessary fire retardant) found in the deepest recesses of the arctic. West coast fog contains high levels monomethyl mercury. Radioactive isotopes 600x normal background levels off our coast. How would any off this be possible with out society's unwavering faith in the degreed lab coat? I'm well aware of the scientific method but what you clearly fail to see is that it is completely corrupted. You forgot to add invented and influenced studies being redacted from science journals courtesy of big pharma. Vioxx anyone?
    Prescription drugs are given to far more people than those who use illegal substances, some of which are less harmful than pharmaceuticals. The medical system is burdened with low manpower and long hours, people make honest mistakes and those being treated also may abuse prescriptions. Case in point, the current heroin epidemic may have come about with the apprehension and prosecution of pill mill doctors. Sure, you could blame the scientist who extracted opium from the poppy followed by the one who further refined the drug to heroin and then on to chemists who synthesize the compounds to be made into pills. Is the blame then lifted from those who put the pipe to their mouth, the needle to the skin, or the pill to the stomach? In closing, Merck acted terribly slow which certainly inspires hateful feelings. Especially so since those taking the drug were hoping for an improvement in life quality. I imagine Merck was also hoping for happy healthy people since that would continue to bring in funds for other drug development.
    The unfortunate reality of industry is that byproducts of industrial production on a mass scale find their way into the environment. It's obvious that smoke stacks simply deposit over a larger area to disperse potential harmful "soot". Anything that is water soluble has the potential to travel through the atmosphere across the globe. It's obvious that just burying waste materials is simply an out of sight out of mind mentality. I don't agree that it is the fault of science. I think the "perversion" you refer to lies on the shoulders of industry and the military. Honestly, I think most of the time the only people who listen to scientists are scientists. As far as big pharma, as mentioned previously, understanding the human body is still very much an art and not exact science. The application of scientific method for industrial, military, and medical purposes is a double edged sword, such is also the nature of knowledge. I also have hope that science can give the answers to problems we created. The only way to go is forward, none of us have as yet been able to change the past. Having said that, where does your hope lie for answers to the problems created?

    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    Are we really going to rationalize that because there are many lethal organic compounds it's okay to fill our environment with man made toxins? That's garbage logic. We are not simply humans trying to understand the world around us, we are humans trying to profit from the world around us at the peril of the greater good. Indigenous populations understood the world around them better then the scientific method has. That's plainly obvious.
    No amount of logic or rational absolves the mess makers from the responsibility of cleaning the mess. As I said, I'm a parent and I am doing my best to teach that lesson to my hope for the future. There is a lot of research being done to try to make amends and if possible to reverse the damage done to the environment. As stated earlier, it is a process.
    As far as indigenous peoples, there is much certainly that was learned from observation (the first and foremost tool of a scientist) of their environment but I am sure the process of trial and error was and remains time consuming and laborious and not without mistake.

    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    Vaccines are certainly a hot button issue and a great study in the power of propaganda. If you're interested in Polio maybe take a look at the work of Dr. Suzanne Humphries. She has over 12,000 hours in vaccine research which should make her a world authority. Speaking of Polio and cancer maybe just take a second and google SV40 cancer virus. But wait a minute that's to much science lets get back on track. How about the over 12,000 documented cases of mothers claiming there baby being perfectly normal until a couple hours after receiving their MMR vaccine? I guess the lab coat knows a baby better than it's own mother. There are MANY factors in disease and infection rate.
    I'll look into her as I have no knowledge of her work, as stated I'm involved in plant research. I'm good with too much science, carry on. SV40 from Rhesus monkeys (where it is dormant), was the carrier virus for the polio vaccine initially and there has been a lot of hot debate as to its effects in humans. Current consensus is that it has the potential like other similar viruses to initiate tumor growth, but although it has been shown in some animal models to cause cancer it is not likely in humans. However, there remains debate. That's my consensus from the afore proposed google searches, although perhaps I'll take a trip to the bio-med library and read some more.

    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    Lets not confuse reality and facts with fear mongering. Believe it or not I'm an exceedingly happy well adjusted mountain biker that doesn't want BPA in his post ride beer. I don't think that makes me "another non-scientist who has seen too many films and believes that all science is BS, dangerous, and ill-intentioned"
    Being "an exceedingly happy well adjusted mountain biker that doesn't want BPA in his post ride beer" doesn't make you "another non-scientist who has seen too many films and believes that all science is BS, dangerous, and ill-intentioned". However, comments like
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    . I completely reject the idea that something doesn't exist or something isn't bad until science "discovers" it. Lab coats are the new demigods of our generation. As to what dictates public awareness it's very simple, money.
    and
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    How would any off this be possible with out society's unwavering faith in the degreed lab coat? I'm well aware of the scientific method but what you clearly fail to see is that it is completely corrupted.
    as well as
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    We are not simply humans trying to understand the world around us, we are humans trying to profit from the world around us at the peril of the greater good.
    in addition to
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    But wait a minute that's to much science lets get back on track.
    and finally
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    I guess the lab coat knows a baby better than it's own mother.
    shows that you harbor a lot of anger at what you perceive is science, which I believe is misdirected and unfocused. One might say
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    That's plainly obvious.
    So, certainly show your preference for glass bottles by not purchasing cans. I have absolutely no problem with that, even though your title post is an invitation, but not for discussion.

    I don't like brewing in plastic either. Glass carboys and steel kegs for me.

    I sign off by saying in my most eloquent Gene Wilder impression...Good day to you sir. I said GOOD DAY.
    No fuss with my MUSS,... or my Rockies, but I'm ridin' a MN fatty.

Similar Threads

  1. New Rim Damaged - Should I be Concerned?
    By ilikefire in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-24-2015, 04:56 PM
  2. Should I be concerned about Airborne?
    By pattongb in forum Airborne
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 03-24-2015, 11:27 AM
  3. Should I Be Concerned?!?
    By mojoHD in forum Yeti
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-17-2014, 10:26 PM
  4. EBB creaking, how concerned should i be?
    By MrCrabby01 in forum Singlespeed
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-10-2011, 06:05 AM
  5. Is this a problem I should be concerned about?
    By 007 in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-18-2011, 01:47 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •