-Because the Facts Have a Liberal Bias! (and I'm too fat to fit on a soapbox).
Did you read the article you linked to? Nothing is happening. The article tries to imply that “risks of food contamination” are rising as a result of fewer FDA inspections. No evidence of any increased risk is presented.
I read the article, but you must not have. As the article states: food borne illness is up over 200 percent during the past two years.Once again, the facts have a liberal bias.-Steve Fine
I didn't read the article, so I wouldn't comment. But then maybe I should, na, shucks, forget it.
Are you making that up? I don't see it anywhere.
Its right there in the graphic showing that hospitalizations for food borne illness increased from less than 1000 in 2002 to over 3000 in 2004. Right there in plain view. Only a conservative intent on reamining in denial could miss it! ;-)
Post a Comment
5 comments:
Did you read the article you linked to? Nothing is happening. The article tries to imply that “risks of food contamination” are rising as a result of fewer FDA inspections. No evidence of any increased risk is presented.
I read the article, but you must not have. As the article states: food borne illness is up over 200 percent during the past two years.
Once again, the facts have a liberal bias.
-Steve Fine
I didn't read the article, so I wouldn't comment. But then maybe I should, na, shucks, forget it.
Are you making that up? I don't see it anywhere.
Its right there in the graphic showing that hospitalizations for food borne illness increased from less than 1000 in 2002 to over 3000 in 2004.
Right there in plain view. Only a conservative intent on reamining in denial could miss it! ;-)
Post a Comment