<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Eva Says &#187; Welcome</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.evasays.com/category/uncategorized/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.evasays.com</link>
	<description>Where has all the common sense gone...?</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 11:46:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Lies, damned lies, and statistics</title>
		<link>http://www.evasays.com/2011/02/19/organic-vs-non-organic/</link>
		<comments>http://www.evasays.com/2011/02/19/organic-vs-non-organic/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Feb 2011 03:45:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>eva</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[DUH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health and Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Welcome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chemicals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[discovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[people]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sohn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USDA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.evasays.com/?p=141</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Organic vs. Non-Organic is both a constant battle and a constant puzzle. Everyone wonders at some moment if &#8220;maybe, just maybe, organic might be better for me&#8221;. Sadly enough statistics were used recently to prove there is no difference. An article that appeared on Yahoo, written by Emily Sohn and posted at Discovery News boldly [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Organic vs. Non-Organic is both a constant battle and a constant puzzle.</p>
<p>Everyone wonders at some moment if &#8220;maybe, just maybe, organic might be better for me&#8221;.</p>
<p>Sadly enough statistics were used recently to prove there is no difference.  An article that appeared on Yahoo, written by Emily Sohn and posted at Discovery News boldly compared Organic and Non Organic foods and declared that &#8220;Organic is not more nutritious&#8221;, and went on to say not more healthful.  No reason to buy organic they stated.  Headline was &#8220;Organic Veggies Not More Nutritious&#8221; with a tag line of &#8220;Growing organic vegetables may be better for the environment, but eating them may not necessarily be more healthful&#8221;.  Huh??  </p>
<p>The headline makes sense, groups are constantly arguing about the nutrition level of chemically treated and organic foods &#8230; but to say that they &#8220;may not necessarily be more healthful&#8221; is just plain stupid.  Did Emily Sohn do that to get attention or is it Discovery that is lying to get market share?  What about pesticide, chemical fertilizer, chemical herbicide, growth hormone, genetic modification, medication or antibiotics.   Healthful?</p>
<p>Ironically, deeper in the article it quotes the source of the news, Pia Knuthsen, a senior research scientist at the Danish National Food Institute&#8217;s department of food chemistry, based at the University of Copenhagen, as saying &#8220;Still, there are many good reasons for the consumer to select organic food products, including absence of pesticide residues in foods, animal welfare, and environmental protections.&#8221;</p>
<p>If you can imagine the writers like Sohn, and scientists who try to trick people either with misleading statistics or by companies like Discovery doing headline marketing to the people that don&#8217;t have time to read the article.  A quick glance and you &#8220;know&#8221; that t first sight, for those, who don&#8217;t think about it, would mean that why to bother paying for organic then? The whole article was about comparing the nutrients in organic and non organic food.</p>
<p>When the reality is that we DO NOT buy organic food for more nutrition, we DO buy it for LESS pesticides, and LESS chemicals. It is a shame that we have to pay so much more for them, but if people would only buy those then big conglomerate farms wouldn&#8217;t have the choice anymore, and the prices would come down. </p>
<p>It just makes me sick when the government, the USDA comes out with their little ideas of how much poison is ok to have in each food item. Sure, maybe it&#8217;s ok to have a certain level of poison in a fish, or in a vegetable if you have only one of them, and you only have a little bit at once, or in a day. What if you didn&#8217;t read all their guidance, and you eat more than they suggest? What if you ate for breakfast, and lunch and dinner stuff that had the same poison in them, so it&#8217;s all added up??? Did they ever think about that when they suggested the poison levels in food? Why didn&#8217;t they just say no to poison in food? Why? Doesn&#8217;t the USDA work for the People? Don&#8217;t they receive the majority of their wages and benefits from the taxes of the People? Do they have conscience? </p>
<p>Here there are some links:<br />
The Mayo Clinic&#8217;s opinion about organic food and advice which is pretty good except for the first paragraph, which goes back to my original argument: <a href="http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/organic-food/NU00255/NSECTIONGROUP=2" target="_blank">http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/organic-food/NU00255/NSECTIONGROUP=2</a></p>
<p>Here&#8217;s some pesticides on your veggies for your pleasure: </p>
<p><a href="http://www.evasays.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/food.jpg"><img src="http://www.evasays.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/food-150x150.jpg" alt="" title="Pesticides in your food" width="150" height="150" class="alignnone size-thumbnail wp-image-145" /></a></p>
<p>Here is Sohn&#8217;s article and horribly inaccurate line.<br />
<a href="http://news.discovery.com/human/organic-vegetables-antioxidants.html" target="_blank">Discovery News Misleading Headlines</a></p>
<p>Discovery and Sohn should post a correction and an apology!  I&#8217;ll let you know if I get one.</p>
<p>By the way, the title is a quote used by Mark Twain and attributed by him to British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli (1804–1881): &#8220;There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.&#8221;  No one has been able to find it in any of Disraeli&#8217;s memoirs.  </p>
<div class="shr-publisher-141"></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.evasays.com/2011/02/19/organic-vs-non-organic/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Taco Bell Beef Saga Continues&#8230;.</title>
		<link>http://www.evasays.com/2011/02/01/the-taco-bell-beef-saga-continues/</link>
		<comments>http://www.evasays.com/2011/02/01/the-taco-bell-beef-saga-continues/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Feb 2011 01:13:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>eva</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Welcome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[beef]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FDA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taco filling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USDA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.evasays.com/?p=133</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Taco Bell has fought right back. They say their taco filling is actually 88 percent beef and the rest is seasoning, etc. The way how they write it doesn’t sound that bad. Especially on Youtube right from the president. What still boggles the mind is that USDA has a law about what taco filling is. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Taco Bell has fought right back. They say their taco filling is actually 88 percent beef and the rest is seasoning, etc. The way how they write it doesn’t sound that bad. Especially on <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ah05FEWcJWM" target="_blank">Youtube right from the president</a>.</p>
<p>What still boggles the mind is that <a href="http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/larc/Policies/Labeling_Policy_Book_082005.pdf" target=_"blank">USDA has a law about what taco filling is</a>. It has to be 40% beef. So that means, if you mix 60 pounds of oat meal (or dog crap?) and 40 pounds of fresh beef you have a 100 pounds of taco filling that you can call &#8220;Beef Taco Filling&#8221;!</p>
<p>And we pay the FDA with our taxes to do this to us?</p>
<div class="shr-publisher-133"></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.evasays.com/2011/02/01/the-taco-bell-beef-saga-continues/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Freedom Spill</title>
		<link>http://www.evasays.com/2010/06/16/freedom-spill/</link>
		<comments>http://www.evasays.com/2010/06/16/freedom-spill/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jun 2010 00:55:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>eva</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health and Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[In the News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Welcome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[america]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bp oil spill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democracy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[people]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.evasays.com/?p=115</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If the Federal Government doesn&#8217;t let journalists see the damage BP has caused&#8230; &#8220;&#8230; done little to curtail the obstacles, harassment and intimidation tactics journalists are facing by federal officials and local police, as well as BP employees and contractors, while covering the worst environmental catastrophe in U.S. history.&#8221; If the police are used to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the Federal Government doesn&#8217;t let journalists see the damage BP has caused&#8230; </p>
<p>&#8220;&#8230; done little to curtail the obstacles, harassment and intimidation tactics journalists are facing by federal officials and local police, as well as BP employees and contractors, while covering the worst environmental catastrophe in U.S. history.&#8221; </p>
<p>If the police are used to keep American people away from its land, then this is NOT democracy. We do NOT live in democracy.  </p>
<p>Read more about it <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100616/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill_media" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
<div class="shr-publisher-115"></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.evasays.com/2010/06/16/freedom-spill/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Earth Hour 2010</title>
		<link>http://www.evasays.com/2010/03/27/earth-hour-2010/</link>
		<comments>http://www.evasays.com/2010/03/27/earth-hour-2010/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Mar 2010 20:07:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>eva</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Welcome]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.evasays.com/?p=111</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It really should be Earth Year, and Earth Decade and Earth Century, etc. instead. After all, this is our planet, this is our home, right? So don&#8217;t forget Earth Hour. If nothing else it&#8217;s romantic, and maybe you will realize that some of those lights could be turned off for the entire year. Or maybe [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It really should be Earth Year, and Earth Decade and Earth Century, etc. instead. After all, this is our planet, this is our home, right? So don&#8217;t forget Earth Hour. If nothing else it&#8217;s romantic, and maybe you will realize that some of those lights could be turned off for the entire year. Or maybe it will make you remember where else you can save money for you and the Earth for the future. Show your support at: <a href="http://www.earthhour.org/SupportersMap.aspx" target="_blank">http://www.earthhour.org/SupportersMap.aspx</a> </p>
<div class="shr-publisher-111"></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.evasays.com/2010/03/27/earth-hour-2010/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Organic ironing board cover</title>
		<link>http://www.evasays.com/2010/03/20/organic-ironing-board-cover/</link>
		<comments>http://www.evasays.com/2010/03/20/organic-ironing-board-cover/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 19:33:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>eva</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Welcome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chemicals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organic]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.evasays.com/?p=107</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was just thinking about that if our beds are soaked with fire retardants that are anything but healthy, then the ironing board cover has to have some nasty chemicals too in order to not catch on fire. So&#8230; I was looking for some organic ironing board covers, and found some! This one is actually [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was just thinking about that if our beds are soaked with fire retardants that are anything but healthy, then the ironing board cover has to have some nasty chemicals too in order to not catch on fire. So&#8230; I was looking for some organic ironing board covers, and found some!<a href="http://www.greenboatstuff.com/heirboco.html" target="_blank"> This one is actually made in the USA!</a> Yeay! Rare find nowadays. i haven&#8217;t ordered it yet, but found the words on the site very insightful:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Hemp is extremely efficient from an environmental perspective. Hemp naturally suppresses weeds and enriches the soil it is grown in with nitrogen deposits. Hemp is grown without herbicides or pesticides and pound for pound hemp plants produce 250% more fiber than cotton. By contrast, non-organic industrial cotton uses more water and more pesticides than any other commercial crop, leaving the soil depleted.</p>
<p>In fact, over one quarter of all agricultural chemicals in the USA are used to grow cotton. The toxic runoff from these chemicals ultimately find their way into our waterways. The modern non-organic industrial cotton plant has been genetically engineered to the point where it is no longer a natural fiber, but rather a plant that is designed to withstand the strains of the chemical pesticides sprayed on it.</p>
<p>Think about that the next time you buy non-organic cotton. &#8220;</p></blockquote>
<blockquote></blockquote>
<div class="shr-publisher-107"></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.evasays.com/2010/03/20/organic-ironing-board-cover/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Land-O-Lakes or Land-O-Fakes?</title>
		<link>http://www.evasays.com/2009/06/20/land-o-lakes-or-land-o-fakes/</link>
		<comments>http://www.evasays.com/2009/06/20/land-o-lakes-or-land-o-fakes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 19:01:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>eva</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Welcome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[butter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chemicals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hungary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[land-o-lakes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[people]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rBGH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rBST]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USDA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.evasays.com/?p=91</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[All Natural Synthetic by Land-O-Lakes!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I dared to ask Land-O-Lakes if they approve rBGH in the milk that they use to make our daily butter. Guess the answer&#8230;</p>
<p>&#8220;All cows produce bST (Bovine Somatotropin) &#8211; also known as BGH (Bovine Growth Hormone) &#8211; naturally. Dairy producers may give their cows supplementary bST to increase their milk production. This supplementary, <strong>synthetic bST</strong> is one of the most thoroughly tested and researched products in history. This testing and research has demonstrated that milk from bST-treated cows is no different than milk from untreated cows. Because of these findings, numerous distinguished government, professional and health organizations &#8211; including the U.S. Food and Drug Admin., American Medical Assn., and the National Institutes of Health &#8211; support the use of bST.&#8221;</p>
<p>So Land-O-Lakes prints on its box that &#8220;ALL NATURAL&#8221;, but they allow &#8220;synthetic&#8221; hormones in it. Isn&#8217;t that false advertising?  I&#8217;m getting so sick and tired of everybody using synthetic stuff for more money. Do these companies and farmers only care about more money?  What about people?  Does anyone care about us? </p>
<p>If you buy this junk from Land-O-Lakes then you are encouraging them to pump more and more chemicals into us.  When a new mother is breast feeding her baby, her diet is important because whatever she eats is transferred to her baby in the milk.  Land-O-Lakes is putting bST into everyone that buys their product.  </p>
<p>These companies conduct tests that seem to always show that their HUGELY PROFITABLE chemical &#8216;cheating&#8217; doesn&#8217;t hurt people &#8230; do you think they might be lying?</p>
<p><H3>Eva Says: Avoid Land-O-Lakes! </H3><br /> Do not waste your money on Land-O-Lakes butter. If you care about those synthetic hormones, buy an organic butter, and if you don&#8217;t care about hormones, just buy a cheaper one. </p>
<p>Here is an excerpt  myprotein.co.uk  &#8230; you can read it all by <a href="http://www.myprotein.co.uk/?page=article&#038;id=222">clicking here</a></p>
<p><strong>Countries approving the use of BST</strong></p>
<p>Treatment of cows with BST was approved in February 1994 by the FDA in the USA and has been extensively used from that period. Regulatory agencies in 34 countries have reached similar conclusions with respect to food safety, 24 of which have actually given approval for use of BST, namely Algeria, Brazil, Bulgaria, Columbia, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Honduras, Hungary, Jamaica, Kenya, Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Namibia, Pakistan, Peru, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, South Africa, Turkey, UAE, Ukraine and Zimbabwe.</p>
<p><strong>Countries where the use of BST is not approved</strong></p>
<p>Treatment with BST is not permitted in the European Union where there had been a moratorium on its use since 1993. Re-assessment in 1999 came to the conclusions that it is harmful to animal health and this resulted in an extension of the prohibition of use according to the legislation 1999/879/EC which came into force on 1st January 2000 in the EU. The Canadians also prohibited the use of BST at this time on the grounds of animal welfare. </p>
<div class="shr-publisher-91"></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.evasays.com/2009/06/20/land-o-lakes-or-land-o-fakes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Coca-Cola &#8211; Bad for you more than one way</title>
		<link>http://www.evasays.com/2009/06/12/coca-cola-bad-for-you-more-than-one-way/</link>
		<comments>http://www.evasays.com/2009/06/12/coca-cola-bad-for-you-more-than-one-way/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2009 02:34:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>eva</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Welcome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[coca-cola]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[coke]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cola]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer benefits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HFCS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[high fructose corn syrup]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[people]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[soft drinks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.evasays.com/?p=78</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Coca-Cola says HFCS is good for the consumers.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unbelievable. They actually say on their <a href="http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/citizenship/challenges_opportunities.html" target="_blank">web site</a> that high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) has &#8220;numerous consumer benefits, such as sweetness, shelf stability and pourability.&#8221; Now who really benefits from these? The consumers? Are you kidding Coca-Cola? This is just too funny. </p>
<p><H3>Eva Says: Avoid Coke!</H3> <br />&#8220;if you are one of the people that keeps drinking Coke, rewarding them (PROFIT!) for making such stupid claims, it&#8217;s your fault that they won&#8217;t change.&#8221;</p>
<div class="shr-publisher-78"></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.evasays.com/2009/06/12/coca-cola-bad-for-you-more-than-one-way/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Earth Hour &#8211; Brings out the idiots</title>
		<link>http://www.evasays.com/2009/03/29/earth-hour-nonsense/</link>
		<comments>http://www.evasays.com/2009/03/29/earth-hour-nonsense/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Mar 2009 21:49:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>eva</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health and Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Welcome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Earth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ozone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[people]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.evasays.com/?p=48</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Idiot shows he can waste electricity!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am pro Earth. I am also pro &#8220;Earth Hour&#8221;.  I do not believe in destroying all our energy sources, or making our entire planet a dumpster. I believe that our children, and their children should be able to enjoy this planet, too. </p>
<p>Even if someone doubts Global Warming or the hole in the Ozone, is there any doubt that our planets resources are finite?    Read more about <a href="http://www.earthhour.org/home/" target="_blank">Earth Hour</a>.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t understand ignorant people, but can accept that they do exist. However, there is a line where ignorance becomes stupidity. This guy in New Hope, Pa. crosses that line and it&#8217;s just unbelievable. Even if he thinks that global warming is &#8220;nonsense&#8221; I am still stunned by his response:</p>
<p>&#8220;The resident of New Hope, Pa., and owner of Gerenser&#8217;s Exotic Ice Cream planned to illuminate his store with extra theatrical lighting. </p>
<p>&#8220;I&#8217;m going to get everyone I know in my neighborhood to turn on every light they possibly can to waste as much electricity as possible to underline the absurdity of this action &#8230; by being absurd,&#8221; he said.&#8221; &#8211; from <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090327/ap_on_re_us/earth_hour_2" target="_blank">Yahoo News</a> </p>
<p>Why is his extra lighting good? What does he want to accomplish or achieve? Does he prove anything beyond showing the world he is an idiot?  We are in the middle of a recession, too many people have lost their jobs and struggle with little or no money. Obviously he has too much. He enjoys wasting it and bragging about it. If he has so much money to waste, why doesn&#8217;t he help people in need instead? </p>
<p>What is his real goal? What does he want to prove? That he has the right to burn as much electricity as he can? He can waste with no limits? </p>
<p>Well, I wouldn&#8217;t waste a dime in his store that&#8217;s for sure&#8230;. </p>
<div class="shr-publisher-48"></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.evasays.com/2009/03/29/earth-hour-nonsense/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Welcome!</title>
		<link>http://www.evasays.com/2007/09/12/hello-world/</link>
		<comments>http://www.evasays.com/2007/09/12/hello-world/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2007 01:42:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Welcome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[common sense]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Some thoughts&#8230; some thoughts for food, maybe some food for thoughts&#8230;. No need to agree, just think about them! Do you remember the time when common sense was…well, common? When you tripped on the street because you were staring at something was your fault and you had to learn to look where you step? When [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some thoughts&#8230; some thoughts for food, maybe some food for thoughts&#8230;. No need to agree, just think about them!</p>
<p>Do you remember the time when common sense was…well, common? When you tripped on the street because you were staring at something was your fault and you had to learn to look where you step? When you had to be old enough to drink coffee and know that it is HOT? When you didn’t need special instructions on plastic pouches to take them off before you insert your pastry into the toaster? The time when you had common sense and you used it on a daily basis? What has happened? We figured out a great way to make money, sometimes less, sometimes disgustingly lot on suing everybody for everything. We have lawyers on every corner trained to help us to blame everybody else for everything. We don’t need to think anymore. We can be stupid as dirt. Even dirt’s IQ is getting higher!<br />
This blog is dedicated to the common sense. Wake up, and start thinking again! </p>
<p>I will also post some other issues that might help others.</p>
<div class="shr-publisher-1"></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.evasays.com/2007/09/12/hello-world/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

