-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
R
Robrites
Aramco Opens Its Books: Reveals Higher Profit Than Apple, Google & Exxon Combined
Aramco Opens Its Books: Reveals Higher Profit Than Apple, Google & Exxon Combined
Long the subject of guesswork and speculation, Saudi Aramco, the state-controlled oil giant that's responsible for roughly 10% of the world's oil production, has for the first time ever opened its book to investors as it prepares to launch a $10 billion bond offering.
And the three years' of financials confirmed what many have long suspected: Aramco's profits beat out tech giants like Apple and publicly-traded rivals in the energy space like Exxon-Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell, establishing the energy behemoth as by far the world's most profitable company. In 2018 alone, Aramco's profits exceeded $110 billion on $360 billion in revenue. That's nearly double Apple's $60 billion profit, and five times Shell's ($23.9 billion). Thanks to the surge in oil prices last year, Aramco's net income climbed by 50% from $75.9 billion in 2017.
Last year, the company earned more than Alphabet, Apple and Exxon combined.
One key takeaway from the prospectus is just how dependent Aramco's profits are on oil price swings (though that shouldn't come as much of a surprise). It's net profit in 2016, when oil prices were mired near their lowest levels in more than a decade, was just $13.6 billion.
Aramco has hired JPMorgan and Morgan Stanley to manage its first debt offering, with its pre-offering roadshow beginning n Monday in at least eight cities across the US, Europe and Asia, according to WSJ. Investment bank Lazard has also been hired as an independent adviser on the bond sale.
Despite the company's immense profitability, ratings agencies were reluctant to give it one of the top two ratings because of the control of the Saudi state, which heavily taxes the company. As the Financial Times pointed out, Aramco doesn't generate as much cash per barrel as its publicly traded rivals.
Rating agencies Moody’s and Fitch assigned the state oil company ratings of A1 and A+ respectively in line with the Saudi state, reflecting its close ties to the kingdom that has long relied on the world’s largest oil producer to fuel its public funds. But Saudi Aramco’s finances also show the state’s reliance on the company means it does not generate as much cash per barrel as non-state peers, with the tax take from the kingdom meaning it generated approximately $26 a barrel last year compared to $38 a barrel for Royal Dutch Shell and $31 a barrel for France’s Total. In 2018 Saudi Aramco generated $224bn of earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation.
Fitch noted its "high production, vast reserves, low production costs and very conservative financial profile" would give it a standalone rating of AA+, but said it would cap its rating at A+ due to the links between the company and the sovereign and the influence the state has on the company through regulating the level of production, taxation and dividend. Similarly, Moody’s said that while Saudi Aramco has many characteristics of a Aaa-rated corporate - such as minimal debt relative to cash flows, large scale of production, market leadership and access in Saudi Arabia to one of the world’s largest hydrocarbon reserves - its final rating was restrained to A1 "because of the close interlinkages between the sovereign and the company."
The proceeds from Aramco's first bond offering in international markets will be used to finance its planned acquisition of Sabic, the Saudi state-held industrial chemicals giant. Incidentally, the publication of Aramco's financials could help whet investors' appetite for shelved stock offering, where the kingdom had planned to float 5% - or some $100 billion, depending on the exact valuation - of the company's shares.
RMS
Aramco Opens Its Books: Reveals Higher Profit Than Apple, Google & Exxon Combined
Long the subject of guesswork and speculation, Saudi Aramco, the state-controlled oil giant that's responsible for roughly 10% of the world's oil production, has for the first time ever opened its book to investors as it prepares to launch a $10 billion bond offering.
And the three years' of financials confirmed what many have long suspected: Aramco's profits beat out tech giants like Apple and publicly-traded rivals in the energy space like Exxon-Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell, establishing the energy behemoth as by far the world's most profitable company. In 2018 alone, Aramco's profits exceeded $110 billion on $360 billion in revenue. That's nearly double Apple's $60 billion profit, and five times Shell's ($23.9 billion). Thanks to the surge in oil prices last year, Aramco's net income climbed by 50% from $75.9 billion in 2017.
Last year, the company earned more than Alphabet, Apple and Exxon combined.
One key takeaway from the prospectus is just how dependent Aramco's profits are on oil price swings (though that shouldn't come as much of a surprise). It's net profit in 2016, when oil prices were mired near their lowest levels in more than a decade, was just $13.6 billion.
Aramco has hired JPMorgan and Morgan Stanley to manage its first debt offering, with its pre-offering roadshow beginning n Monday in at least eight cities across the US, Europe and Asia, according to WSJ. Investment bank Lazard has also been hired as an independent adviser on the bond sale.
Despite the company's immense profitability, ratings agencies were reluctant to give it one of the top two ratings because of the control of the Saudi state, which heavily taxes the company. As the Financial Times pointed out, Aramco doesn't generate as much cash per barrel as its publicly traded rivals.
Rating agencies Moody’s and Fitch assigned the state oil company ratings of A1 and A+ respectively in line with the Saudi state, reflecting its close ties to the kingdom that has long relied on the world’s largest oil producer to fuel its public funds. But Saudi Aramco’s finances also show the state’s reliance on the company means it does not generate as much cash per barrel as non-state peers, with the tax take from the kingdom meaning it generated approximately $26 a barrel last year compared to $38 a barrel for Royal Dutch Shell and $31 a barrel for France’s Total. In 2018 Saudi Aramco generated $224bn of earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation.
Fitch noted its "high production, vast reserves, low production costs and very conservative financial profile" would give it a standalone rating of AA+, but said it would cap its rating at A+ due to the links between the company and the sovereign and the influence the state has on the company through regulating the level of production, taxation and dividend. Similarly, Moody’s said that while Saudi Aramco has many characteristics of a Aaa-rated corporate - such as minimal debt relative to cash flows, large scale of production, market leadership and access in Saudi Arabia to one of the world’s largest hydrocarbon reserves - its final rating was restrained to A1 "because of the close interlinkages between the sovereign and the company."
The proceeds from Aramco's first bond offering in international markets will be used to finance its planned acquisition of Sabic, the Saudi state-held industrial chemicals giant. Incidentally, the publication of Aramco's financials could help whet investors' appetite for shelved stock offering, where the kingdom had planned to float 5% - or some $100 billion, depending on the exact valuation - of the company's shares.
RMS
brickweeder
Well-known member
I hear production from ghawar has a water cut of over 95% and is increasing. If true, doesn't bode well. I'd rather take a look at their true oil reserves than their current profit level.
I
IndicaIsland
when someone asks why you smell like weed
when someone asks why you smell like weed
when someone asks why you smell like weed
R
Robrites
R
Robrites
Two Rogers men accused of shooting each other
ROGERS, Ark. — Deputies arrested two Rogers men accused of putting on bulletproof vests and shooting each other.
Charles Eugene Ferris, age 50, was on his back deck drinking with his neighbor, Christopher Hicks, age 36, on Sunday, according to an affidavit of probable cause.
Ferris was wearing a bulletproof vest and told Hicks to shoot him with the vest on.
Hicks shot Ferris in the chest one time with a .22 caliber semi-automatic rifle, according to the report. The bullet hit him the top left corner of the chest, and the vest stopped the bullet. The shot still hurt Ferris and left him with a red mark on the chest.
Ferris then took the vest off, and Hicks put it on.
Charles Ferris was "pissed" about getting shot and how much it hurt, so he "unloaded the clip into Christopher's back," according to the report.
None of the rounds penetrated the vest, but Christopher Hicks suffered bruises.
Ferris went to Mercy Hospital, which notified law enforcement.
Ferris initially told deputies a story about being paid $200 to protect an "asset" and that he was shot guarding the "asset" from a man wearing a white suit near at the Wan Winkle trailhead.
Ferris later told deputies about drinking with Hicks and how they shot each other with bulletproof vests on after deputies spoke with Ferris' wife.
Both Charles Ferris and Christopher Hicks were arrested on suspicion of Aggravated Assault. They were given a court date of May 13, 2019 at 8 a.m.
ROGERS, Ark. — Deputies arrested two Rogers men accused of putting on bulletproof vests and shooting each other.
Charles Eugene Ferris, age 50, was on his back deck drinking with his neighbor, Christopher Hicks, age 36, on Sunday, according to an affidavit of probable cause.
Ferris was wearing a bulletproof vest and told Hicks to shoot him with the vest on.
Hicks shot Ferris in the chest one time with a .22 caliber semi-automatic rifle, according to the report. The bullet hit him the top left corner of the chest, and the vest stopped the bullet. The shot still hurt Ferris and left him with a red mark on the chest.
Ferris then took the vest off, and Hicks put it on.
Charles Ferris was "pissed" about getting shot and how much it hurt, so he "unloaded the clip into Christopher's back," according to the report.
None of the rounds penetrated the vest, but Christopher Hicks suffered bruises.
Ferris went to Mercy Hospital, which notified law enforcement.
Ferris initially told deputies a story about being paid $200 to protect an "asset" and that he was shot guarding the "asset" from a man wearing a white suit near at the Wan Winkle trailhead.
Ferris later told deputies about drinking with Hicks and how they shot each other with bulletproof vests on after deputies spoke with Ferris' wife.
Both Charles Ferris and Christopher Hicks were arrested on suspicion of Aggravated Assault. They were given a court date of May 13, 2019 at 8 a.m.
‘What kind of a dictatorship is this?’ Blumenthal- Venezuela Coup Leader Protected
‘What kind of a dictatorship is this?’ Blumenthal- Venezuela Coup Leader Protected
‘What kind of a dictatorship is this?’ Max Blumenthal on Venezuela cops protecting coup leader
[YOUTUBEIF]QDDZ8BMKfoU[/YOUTUBEIF]
A supporter of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro attempts to kick a car which is part of a convoy transporting opposition leader Juan Guaido. © Reuters / Carlos Garcia Rawlins
US-backed Venezuelan opposition leader, Juan Guaido, came to Caracas seeking to be arrested, but the provocation failed and he ended up being guarded by police from an angry mob, investigative journalist Max Blumenthal told RT.
“It’s ironic to see government security forces actually protecting Guaido, a figure who is calling for the government to be toppled and attempting to fragment the security services from within,” Blumenthal, editor of the Grayzone Project, said, commenting on the video recently uploaded to social media.
The clip showed people in the working-class neighborhood of El Valle in Caracas hurling insults and trying to make their way to a black SUV, which was reportedly transporting Guaido to a rally. Only the police officers, loyal to President Nicolas Maduro, were there to protect the opposition figure.
“It’s also ironic because we constantly hear about Venezuela as some kind of ruthless Communist dictatorship. But here you have a situation that will certainly not be tolerated in the US or other countries, like Russia, China or Germany… What kind of dictatorship is this? Well, apparently it’s not a very effective one,” the journalist said.
The choice of “El Valle where Maduro’s base is” for the opposition gathering was no coincidence, as Guaido came there “because the US wanted him to get arrested to create a provocation,” Blumenthal said. The opposition leader wasn’t visible in the video, but he said that “the rally actually did take place. Guaido got out of his armored car and very few people attended it.”
The “pathetic” rally had a reverse effect and actually showed “how irrelevant Guaido is becoming,” the journalist pointed out. Despite a dire economic situation and constant blackouts, he “mustered very small numbers in the streets so far. Most people are staying at home,” Blumenthal said, adding that it’s the heavy US backing which is actually “harming the opposition’s cause.”
President Maduro is, of course, not without blame, as “mistakes were made by the government… but now they’re in a position when the US is trying to prevent them from getting out of the hyperinflation… and preventing them from importing food and medicine,” the journalist explained.
The harsh sanctions imposed by the Trump administration on Venezuela constitute “financial terrorism and it’s an attack on everyone, regardless of their political affiliation. I think Venezuelans recognized that,” and therefore have no desire to back Washington’s man, Guaido, Blumenthal believes.
Source: https://www.rt.com/news/455308-guaido-police-caracas-rally-venezuela/
As always, truth is stranger than fiction.
RMS
‘What kind of a dictatorship is this?’ Blumenthal- Venezuela Coup Leader Protected
‘What kind of a dictatorship is this?’ Max Blumenthal on Venezuela cops protecting coup leader
[YOUTUBEIF]QDDZ8BMKfoU[/YOUTUBEIF]
A supporter of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro attempts to kick a car which is part of a convoy transporting opposition leader Juan Guaido. © Reuters / Carlos Garcia Rawlins
US-backed Venezuelan opposition leader, Juan Guaido, came to Caracas seeking to be arrested, but the provocation failed and he ended up being guarded by police from an angry mob, investigative journalist Max Blumenthal told RT.
“It’s ironic to see government security forces actually protecting Guaido, a figure who is calling for the government to be toppled and attempting to fragment the security services from within,” Blumenthal, editor of the Grayzone Project, said, commenting on the video recently uploaded to social media.
The clip showed people in the working-class neighborhood of El Valle in Caracas hurling insults and trying to make their way to a black SUV, which was reportedly transporting Guaido to a rally. Only the police officers, loyal to President Nicolas Maduro, were there to protect the opposition figure.
“It’s also ironic because we constantly hear about Venezuela as some kind of ruthless Communist dictatorship. But here you have a situation that will certainly not be tolerated in the US or other countries, like Russia, China or Germany… What kind of dictatorship is this? Well, apparently it’s not a very effective one,” the journalist said.
The choice of “El Valle where Maduro’s base is” for the opposition gathering was no coincidence, as Guaido came there “because the US wanted him to get arrested to create a provocation,” Blumenthal said. The opposition leader wasn’t visible in the video, but he said that “the rally actually did take place. Guaido got out of his armored car and very few people attended it.”
The “pathetic” rally had a reverse effect and actually showed “how irrelevant Guaido is becoming,” the journalist pointed out. Despite a dire economic situation and constant blackouts, he “mustered very small numbers in the streets so far. Most people are staying at home,” Blumenthal said, adding that it’s the heavy US backing which is actually “harming the opposition’s cause.”
President Maduro is, of course, not without blame, as “mistakes were made by the government… but now they’re in a position when the US is trying to prevent them from getting out of the hyperinflation… and preventing them from importing food and medicine,” the journalist explained.
The harsh sanctions imposed by the Trump administration on Venezuela constitute “financial terrorism and it’s an attack on everyone, regardless of their political affiliation. I think Venezuelans recognized that,” and therefore have no desire to back Washington’s man, Guaido, Blumenthal believes.
Source: https://www.rt.com/news/455308-guaido-police-caracas-rally-venezuela/
As always, truth is stranger than fiction.
RMS
I
IndicaIsland
Anticancer food: Jalapeños strip away the defenses of cancer cells
Anticancer food: Jalapeños strip away the defenses of cancer cells
The chemical that gives jalapeños and other hot peppers their burn may have powerful anticancer effects, research continues to show.
While research has shown that the chemical capsaicin is effective at shrinking tumors in a variety of cancer types, some of the most detailed research has been performed on prostate cancer. In this cancer, capsaicin appears to strip away some of the defenses that cancer cells use to prevent themselves from dying. It also regulates the activity of androgen receptors in prostate tumors, preventing cancers from using male sex hormones to fuel their growth.
Reminding cancer cells to die
Some of the most remarkable effects were seen in a study conducted by researchers from Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and the University of California-Los Angeles, and published in the journal Cancer Research in 2006. The researchers found that when mice with prostate cancer were treated with capsaicin, programmed cell death was triggered in 80 percent of their cancer cells.
Programmed cell death, or apoptosis, is the process that the body uses to maintain an appropriate balance between older and newer cells. It is also an important mechanism for making sure that the DNA defects that naturally develop as cells age do not continue to be passed on indefinitely. Part of what defines cancer cells is the ability to shut off apoptosis and continue surviving and replicating indefinitely.
Cancer cells disable apoptosis by mutating or shutting off the genes that regulate the process. In the 2006 study, capsaicin appeared to switch those genes back on.
The power of the elements: Discover Colloidal Silver Mouthwash with quality, natural ingredients like Sangre de Drago sap, black walnut hulls, menthol crystals and more. Zero artificial sweeteners, colors or alcohol. Learn more at the Health Ranger Store and help support this news site.
The dose used in the study was roughly equivalent to a 200-pound human adult eating three to eight fresh Habanero peppers three times a week. Habaneros contain roughly 50 times the capsaicin concentration of jalapeños. Under the Scoville heat index, they are ranked at a burn of 300,000 Scoville units, compared with “only” 2,500 to 5,000 for a jalapeño.
A 2008 study by Spanish researchers identified 15 separate genes in human prostate cancer cells whose activity changed when the genes were exposed to capsaicin. They then confirmed that one of the genes whose activity increased was involved in causing apoptosis.
Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men in the United States, but only one out of 10 cases detected is life-threatening. Nevertheless, about 30,000 men are killed by the disease each year.
Peppers, not pills
Studies have also shown the effectiveness of capsaicin against other cancer types. For example, one study found that capsaicin prevents the lysomal damage that plays a key role in lung cancer development. Another study found that highly malignant human breast cancer cells treated with capsaicin for 24 hours died. The higher the dose, the more cancer cells killed.
With other cancers, the evidence has been more mixed. Thus, one study found that most skin cancer cells exposed to capsaicin die, seemingly due to damage to their cell membranes. Another study found that highly metastatic melanoma cells, in the presence of capsaicin, are less likely to migrate to other parts of the body. In that study, however, capsaicin seemed to have no impact on cancer cell survival. And a 2010 study in Cancer Research suggested that regular capsaicin exposure directly on the skin (such as might occur with regular use of capsaicin-containing analgesic creams) caused changes associated with skin cancer formation.
Likewise, some studies have linked diets high in capsaicin to a reduced risk of stomach cancer, while other studies suggest an increased risk. One recent study found that when capsaicin was mixed with gingerol (found in ginger), the cancer-fighting effect was particularly potent.
One major flaw of the studies, of course, is their focus on the isolated chemical capsaicin. Whole foods such as chili peppers always contain many more health-boosting nutrients than can be found in any single component chemical.
Source: https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-03-27-jalapenos-strip-away-cancer-cells-defenses.html
RMS
Anticancer food: Jalapeños strip away the defenses of cancer cells
The chemical that gives jalapeños and other hot peppers their burn may have powerful anticancer effects, research continues to show.
While research has shown that the chemical capsaicin is effective at shrinking tumors in a variety of cancer types, some of the most detailed research has been performed on prostate cancer. In this cancer, capsaicin appears to strip away some of the defenses that cancer cells use to prevent themselves from dying. It also regulates the activity of androgen receptors in prostate tumors, preventing cancers from using male sex hormones to fuel their growth.
Reminding cancer cells to die
Some of the most remarkable effects were seen in a study conducted by researchers from Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and the University of California-Los Angeles, and published in the journal Cancer Research in 2006. The researchers found that when mice with prostate cancer were treated with capsaicin, programmed cell death was triggered in 80 percent of their cancer cells.
Programmed cell death, or apoptosis, is the process that the body uses to maintain an appropriate balance between older and newer cells. It is also an important mechanism for making sure that the DNA defects that naturally develop as cells age do not continue to be passed on indefinitely. Part of what defines cancer cells is the ability to shut off apoptosis and continue surviving and replicating indefinitely.
Cancer cells disable apoptosis by mutating or shutting off the genes that regulate the process. In the 2006 study, capsaicin appeared to switch those genes back on.
The power of the elements: Discover Colloidal Silver Mouthwash with quality, natural ingredients like Sangre de Drago sap, black walnut hulls, menthol crystals and more. Zero artificial sweeteners, colors or alcohol. Learn more at the Health Ranger Store and help support this news site.
The dose used in the study was roughly equivalent to a 200-pound human adult eating three to eight fresh Habanero peppers three times a week. Habaneros contain roughly 50 times the capsaicin concentration of jalapeños. Under the Scoville heat index, they are ranked at a burn of 300,000 Scoville units, compared with “only” 2,500 to 5,000 for a jalapeño.
A 2008 study by Spanish researchers identified 15 separate genes in human prostate cancer cells whose activity changed when the genes were exposed to capsaicin. They then confirmed that one of the genes whose activity increased was involved in causing apoptosis.
Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men in the United States, but only one out of 10 cases detected is life-threatening. Nevertheless, about 30,000 men are killed by the disease each year.
Peppers, not pills
Studies have also shown the effectiveness of capsaicin against other cancer types. For example, one study found that capsaicin prevents the lysomal damage that plays a key role in lung cancer development. Another study found that highly malignant human breast cancer cells treated with capsaicin for 24 hours died. The higher the dose, the more cancer cells killed.
With other cancers, the evidence has been more mixed. Thus, one study found that most skin cancer cells exposed to capsaicin die, seemingly due to damage to their cell membranes. Another study found that highly metastatic melanoma cells, in the presence of capsaicin, are less likely to migrate to other parts of the body. In that study, however, capsaicin seemed to have no impact on cancer cell survival. And a 2010 study in Cancer Research suggested that regular capsaicin exposure directly on the skin (such as might occur with regular use of capsaicin-containing analgesic creams) caused changes associated with skin cancer formation.
Likewise, some studies have linked diets high in capsaicin to a reduced risk of stomach cancer, while other studies suggest an increased risk. One recent study found that when capsaicin was mixed with gingerol (found in ginger), the cancer-fighting effect was particularly potent.
One major flaw of the studies, of course, is their focus on the isolated chemical capsaicin. Whole foods such as chili peppers always contain many more health-boosting nutrients than can be found in any single component chemical.
Source: https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-03-27-jalapenos-strip-away-cancer-cells-defenses.html
RMS
Brother Nature
Well-known member
Hahaha, this is quite funny, when I was younger (and stupider) a friend and I did pretty much the same thing, only we both ended up with broken ribs and major bruising, we weren't using .22's. Went to the hospital the next day, said it was a skateboarding accident. Ah, the good old days....
Cocaine is a hell of a drug and I'm glad I don't do it anymore.
I expected to see a lot more stories about Florida Man here.
Hahaha, this is quite funny, when I was younger (and stupider) a friend and I did pretty much the same thing, only we both ended up with broken ribs and major bruising, we weren't using .22's. Went to the hospital the next day, said it was a skateboarding accident. Ah, the good old days....
Cocaine is a hell of a drug and I'm glad I don't do it anymore.
I expected to see a lot more stories about Florida Man here.
Jesus, we did this with B.B. guns as kids, took turns shooting each other in the back with winter coats on usually no big deal.
Caught one in the face that went just under the skin was the worst one.
Real bullets, fuck that, familiar with the cola but never thought getting shot sounded good while doing it. I’d guess alcohol or scripts were added to the mix on that one.
Brother Nature
Well-known member
Yes, definitely alcohol, the biggest stupifer of all drugs. Not one of my shining moments, but a funny story looking back, none the less.
six killer orcas slaughter and eat a rare 60ft blue whale off the coast of Australia
six killer orcas slaughter and eat a rare 60ft blue whale off the coast of Australia
This is the incredible moment a pod of killer whales slaughtered and ate a blue whale off the coast of Australia.
Six orcas, notorious for preying on mammals including seals, dolphins and other whales, attacked and drowned the 60ft (18metre) beast 12 miles (20km) south of Western Australia.
Dramatic pictures showed blood and flesh gushing into the water as the orcas made their kill before 50 others joined to feast on the enormous carcass.
Experts from the Cetacean Research Centre and Project Orca witnessed the incredible event at about 8.45am on March 21.
CETREC founder and orca researcher, John Totterdell, said: 'In the middle of an intense lightning storm with visibility less than 200m, the team - on route to their offshore study area - stumbled across this colossal event.
'The blue whale had already been wounded with bites and blood visible around the head area, though it actively fought on for about half an hour before succumbing to the onslaught.
It was then held under long enough to drown and bleed out.
'In awe, we then witnessed about 50 killer whales feed, sharing their prize for the next six hours.'
Blue whales are the world's biggest mammal and are endangered. They can reach 100ft (30 metres) in length and weigh over 170 tonnes.
Killer whales, aka orcas, are the ocean's apex predator and males can reach 26ft (eight metres) and weigh around six tonnes.
They are the biggest member of the dolphin family and have been recorded hunting large whales and even great white sharks.
Mr Totterdell said: 'Even with a sometimes playful nature, and a sophisticated family orientated social structure, killer whales are the ocean's top predator and so we bear witness to some intense and powerful encounters.
'In recent years, observations and accounts of killer whales preying on the calves of large whales and other smaller cetaceans have been on the increase.
'Off WA, smaller whales have shown to be a regular annual prey source for the orca.
'Even though this is the first recorded attack of a large baleen whale in Australia, large whales including blues often face the risk being hunted by killer whales.
'A small number of at most six orcas were responsible for the actual killing - though the whole group of approximately 50 orcas fed on the carcass for over six hours.'
Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6884293/Incredible-pictures-blue-whale-killed-eaten-killer-whales.html
RMS
six killer orcas slaughter and eat a rare 60ft blue whale off the coast of Australia
This is the incredible moment a pod of killer whales slaughtered and ate a blue whale off the coast of Australia.
Six orcas, notorious for preying on mammals including seals, dolphins and other whales, attacked and drowned the 60ft (18metre) beast 12 miles (20km) south of Western Australia.
Dramatic pictures showed blood and flesh gushing into the water as the orcas made their kill before 50 others joined to feast on the enormous carcass.
Experts from the Cetacean Research Centre and Project Orca witnessed the incredible event at about 8.45am on March 21.
CETREC founder and orca researcher, John Totterdell, said: 'In the middle of an intense lightning storm with visibility less than 200m, the team - on route to their offshore study area - stumbled across this colossal event.
'The blue whale had already been wounded with bites and blood visible around the head area, though it actively fought on for about half an hour before succumbing to the onslaught.
It was then held under long enough to drown and bleed out.
'In awe, we then witnessed about 50 killer whales feed, sharing their prize for the next six hours.'
Blue whales are the world's biggest mammal and are endangered. They can reach 100ft (30 metres) in length and weigh over 170 tonnes.
Killer whales, aka orcas, are the ocean's apex predator and males can reach 26ft (eight metres) and weigh around six tonnes.
They are the biggest member of the dolphin family and have been recorded hunting large whales and even great white sharks.
Mr Totterdell said: 'Even with a sometimes playful nature, and a sophisticated family orientated social structure, killer whales are the ocean's top predator and so we bear witness to some intense and powerful encounters.
'In recent years, observations and accounts of killer whales preying on the calves of large whales and other smaller cetaceans have been on the increase.
'Off WA, smaller whales have shown to be a regular annual prey source for the orca.
'Even though this is the first recorded attack of a large baleen whale in Australia, large whales including blues often face the risk being hunted by killer whales.
'A small number of at most six orcas were responsible for the actual killing - though the whole group of approximately 50 orcas fed on the carcass for over six hours.'
Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6884293/Incredible-pictures-blue-whale-killed-eaten-killer-whales.html
RMS
R
Robrites
I
IndicaIsland
R
Robrites
Scientists paid off to suppress the truth about harmful effects of SUGAR
Scientists paid off to suppress the truth about harmful effects of SUGAR
Sugar is what makes food sweet, and your body uses it as a source of energy. But too much sugar is a major problem, and excessive consumption is now known to be a driving force in the epidemic of obesity and diet-related disease plaguing the Western world. Indeed, the true nature of sugar has long been suppressed by a greedy, profit-driven industry. For the last several decades, dietary fat has been the scapegoat for conditions like heart disease and diabetes. Dietary fat has been wrongly demonized for long enough.
“Fat free” and “low fat” foods line supermarket shelves, and consumers have been told these are the “healthier” alternatives to fat-containing foods. But what the food industry doesn’t want you to know is that these products are typically loaded up with sugar, high-fructose corn syrup, or some other alternative that is far worse than fat. Reduced fat peanut butter, for example, typically contains about the same number of calories as regular peanut butter — and all the fat (and nutrients) that’s been taken out is replaced with corn starch and sugar. But the deception of the sugar industry didn’t start with clever marketing; it started with fraud.
Sugar industry fakes the science
The sugar industry has been trying to keep the truth about what excessive sugar consumption does to the human body quiet since the 1960s, when industry leaders paid off scientists to produce studies with certain results in mind. Specifically, the industry wanted to ensure that fat, and not sugar, was identified as a key contributor to the onset of heart disease. As Natural Health 365 reports:
A group called the Sugar Research Foundation (today known as the Sugar Association) paid off three Harvard scientists around $50,000 (adjusted for inflation) in 1967 to skew their research about fat, sugar and heart disease.
The resultant article, published in New England Journal of Medicine, minimized sugar’s negative health impacts and cast saturated fat as the main villain.
An article recently published in JAMA Internal Medicine unveils the sordid truth of times past: The Sugar Research Foundation (SRF) was used by the industry to quietly sponsor research on sugar for decades. And as the study authors note, industry-funded research should not be given much (if any) credence in policy-making decisions on the sugar frontier.
The sugar industry first became aware of how profitable the “right” science could be in 1954: The then-president of SRF gave a speech, declaring that Americans could be convinced to follow a low-fat diet, and those lost calories would have to come from something else. And if those calories came from sugar, consumption (and presumably, profits) of sugar could go up by about 30 percent.
Then the bad news came: Sugar wasn’t actually good for people. As one SRF document notes, “flowing reports that sugar is a less desirable dietary source of calories than other carbohydrates,” were suddenly on the horizon. Today, we know that sugar is actually a primary cause of disease.
So, SRF set out to make sure that sugar secured its place at the top of the food chain, armed with fake science and propaganda to push. Not only did SRF encourage the Harvard scientists produce the results they wanted to see, data that conflicted with the desired outcome was dismissed for any number of arbitrary reasons.
As NPR notes, a study “that found a health benefit when people ate less sugar and more vegetables was dismissed because that dietary change was not feasible.”
Unsurprisingly, the Sugar Association of today has been reluctant to denounce the activities of SRF from decades ago. Instead, Sugar Association has merely stated that the “standards” of the 1960s were different than they are today — which is really just another way of saying it was easier to get away with fraud fifty years ago than it is today.
Source: https://fakescience.news/2018-12-05-scientists-paid-suppress-truth-harmful-sugar.html
RMS
Scientists paid off to suppress the truth about harmful effects of SUGAR
Sugar is what makes food sweet, and your body uses it as a source of energy. But too much sugar is a major problem, and excessive consumption is now known to be a driving force in the epidemic of obesity and diet-related disease plaguing the Western world. Indeed, the true nature of sugar has long been suppressed by a greedy, profit-driven industry. For the last several decades, dietary fat has been the scapegoat for conditions like heart disease and diabetes. Dietary fat has been wrongly demonized for long enough.
“Fat free” and “low fat” foods line supermarket shelves, and consumers have been told these are the “healthier” alternatives to fat-containing foods. But what the food industry doesn’t want you to know is that these products are typically loaded up with sugar, high-fructose corn syrup, or some other alternative that is far worse than fat. Reduced fat peanut butter, for example, typically contains about the same number of calories as regular peanut butter — and all the fat (and nutrients) that’s been taken out is replaced with corn starch and sugar. But the deception of the sugar industry didn’t start with clever marketing; it started with fraud.
Sugar industry fakes the science
The sugar industry has been trying to keep the truth about what excessive sugar consumption does to the human body quiet since the 1960s, when industry leaders paid off scientists to produce studies with certain results in mind. Specifically, the industry wanted to ensure that fat, and not sugar, was identified as a key contributor to the onset of heart disease. As Natural Health 365 reports:
A group called the Sugar Research Foundation (today known as the Sugar Association) paid off three Harvard scientists around $50,000 (adjusted for inflation) in 1967 to skew their research about fat, sugar and heart disease.
The resultant article, published in New England Journal of Medicine, minimized sugar’s negative health impacts and cast saturated fat as the main villain.
An article recently published in JAMA Internal Medicine unveils the sordid truth of times past: The Sugar Research Foundation (SRF) was used by the industry to quietly sponsor research on sugar for decades. And as the study authors note, industry-funded research should not be given much (if any) credence in policy-making decisions on the sugar frontier.
The sugar industry first became aware of how profitable the “right” science could be in 1954: The then-president of SRF gave a speech, declaring that Americans could be convinced to follow a low-fat diet, and those lost calories would have to come from something else. And if those calories came from sugar, consumption (and presumably, profits) of sugar could go up by about 30 percent.
Then the bad news came: Sugar wasn’t actually good for people. As one SRF document notes, “flowing reports that sugar is a less desirable dietary source of calories than other carbohydrates,” were suddenly on the horizon. Today, we know that sugar is actually a primary cause of disease.
So, SRF set out to make sure that sugar secured its place at the top of the food chain, armed with fake science and propaganda to push. Not only did SRF encourage the Harvard scientists produce the results they wanted to see, data that conflicted with the desired outcome was dismissed for any number of arbitrary reasons.
As NPR notes, a study “that found a health benefit when people ate less sugar and more vegetables was dismissed because that dietary change was not feasible.”
Unsurprisingly, the Sugar Association of today has been reluctant to denounce the activities of SRF from decades ago. Instead, Sugar Association has merely stated that the “standards” of the 1960s were different than they are today — which is really just another way of saying it was easier to get away with fraud fifty years ago than it is today.
Source: https://fakescience.news/2018-12-05-scientists-paid-suppress-truth-harmful-sugar.html
RMS
Can Beer Prevent Cancer?
Can Beer Prevent Cancer?
The chemical properties of beer may help in the battle against cancer, due to acids in hops that may have both anti-cancer and anti-inflammatory properties.
The plant that adds flavor, color and bitterness to beer also produces a primary compound that thwarts cancer cells, and two important derivatives of the compound do as well, new research at Oregon State University shows.
Reporting on a number of studies, the Telegraph points out that beer has been found to reduce the risk of kidney stones, heart attacks, strokes, diabetes and Alzheimer's, while also strengthening bones, treating cataracts and curing insomnia.
Some studies have shown that hops would be particularly effective to ward off breast cancer in women undergoing hormone replacement treatment (HRT) during menopause.
One study from the Indiana University School of Medicine exploring the effects of beer on insomnia showed that a tablespoon of beer is all it takes to release dopamine in the human brain, which can help a person feel more relaxed and therefore more able to fall asleep.
Hops have been used in folk medicine as sedatives and as anti-bacterial functions for thousands of years. According to a recent study, hops also work well for their anti-inflammatory properties. They compared the anti-inflammatory effect of different hops and found that the consumption of hops (in beer) helped stop inflammation because they interfere with inflammation causing compounds.
Unlike the primary compound, xanthohumol, known as XN, the derivatives don't metabolize into phytoestrogens. Phytoestrogens are plant-based chemicals similar to female sex hormones that help some types of tumors grow and can cause other health problems as well.
The research showed, for the first time, that the derivatives have cancer-fighting effectiveness similar to that of XN in liver and colon carcinomas. That means the two non-estrogenic derivatives are attractive alternatives for testing, along with XN, in future preclinical studies.
The study was published in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences.
Xanthohumol is produced by humulus lupulus, the common hop plant. More than 20 years ago, researchers discovered that XN inhibits cell growth in a variety of cancer cell lines.
"But a potential problem with XN is that enzymes in the liver and the gut microbiota metabolize it into 8- prenylnaringenin, or 8-PN, the most potent phytoestrogen known," said the study's corresponding author, Adrian Gombart, professor of biochemistry and biophysics in the College of Science at Oregon State University and principal investigator at OSU's Linus Pauling Institute.
The derivatives that don't metabolize into 8-PN are DXN, short for dihydroxanthohumol, and TXN, which refers to tetrahydroxanthohumol.
Earlier, Gombart's Linus Pauling Institute colleague and co-author Fred Stevens led a study into DXN and TXN's effects on metabolic syndrome.
"In that previous research we showed that the two derivatives reduced weight gain and improved biomarkers of metabolic syndrome," Gombart said. "XN had been shown to inhibit proliferation of a variety of cancer cell lines, and in this study, we demonstrated XN's ability to halt cell growth and kill two liver cancer cell lines and two colon cancer cell lines. We tested liver and colon cancer cell lines because oral consumption of XN and its derivatives can lead to high concentrations in the gut and liver."
Colorectal cancer is the third most common cause of cancer-related death in the United States, and liver cancer ranks fifth. The incidence of liver cancer, though, has tripled in the last four decades.
"For both of those cancers, discovering new compounds for prevention and treatment is imperative," Gombart said. "In all the cell lines tested, DXN and TXN inhibited cell growth and caused cell death, as did XN. And for most cell types, DXN and TXN were slightly more potent."
Source: https://preventdisease.com/news/19/040319_Can-Beer-Prevent-Cancer.shtml
:friends:
RMS
Can Beer Prevent Cancer?
The chemical properties of beer may help in the battle against cancer, due to acids in hops that may have both anti-cancer and anti-inflammatory properties.
The plant that adds flavor, color and bitterness to beer also produces a primary compound that thwarts cancer cells, and two important derivatives of the compound do as well, new research at Oregon State University shows.
Reporting on a number of studies, the Telegraph points out that beer has been found to reduce the risk of kidney stones, heart attacks, strokes, diabetes and Alzheimer's, while also strengthening bones, treating cataracts and curing insomnia.
Some studies have shown that hops would be particularly effective to ward off breast cancer in women undergoing hormone replacement treatment (HRT) during menopause.
One study from the Indiana University School of Medicine exploring the effects of beer on insomnia showed that a tablespoon of beer is all it takes to release dopamine in the human brain, which can help a person feel more relaxed and therefore more able to fall asleep.
Hops have been used in folk medicine as sedatives and as anti-bacterial functions for thousands of years. According to a recent study, hops also work well for their anti-inflammatory properties. They compared the anti-inflammatory effect of different hops and found that the consumption of hops (in beer) helped stop inflammation because they interfere with inflammation causing compounds.
Unlike the primary compound, xanthohumol, known as XN, the derivatives don't metabolize into phytoestrogens. Phytoestrogens are plant-based chemicals similar to female sex hormones that help some types of tumors grow and can cause other health problems as well.
The research showed, for the first time, that the derivatives have cancer-fighting effectiveness similar to that of XN in liver and colon carcinomas. That means the two non-estrogenic derivatives are attractive alternatives for testing, along with XN, in future preclinical studies.
The study was published in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences.
Xanthohumol is produced by humulus lupulus, the common hop plant. More than 20 years ago, researchers discovered that XN inhibits cell growth in a variety of cancer cell lines.
"But a potential problem with XN is that enzymes in the liver and the gut microbiota metabolize it into 8- prenylnaringenin, or 8-PN, the most potent phytoestrogen known," said the study's corresponding author, Adrian Gombart, professor of biochemistry and biophysics in the College of Science at Oregon State University and principal investigator at OSU's Linus Pauling Institute.
The derivatives that don't metabolize into 8-PN are DXN, short for dihydroxanthohumol, and TXN, which refers to tetrahydroxanthohumol.
Earlier, Gombart's Linus Pauling Institute colleague and co-author Fred Stevens led a study into DXN and TXN's effects on metabolic syndrome.
"In that previous research we showed that the two derivatives reduced weight gain and improved biomarkers of metabolic syndrome," Gombart said. "XN had been shown to inhibit proliferation of a variety of cancer cell lines, and in this study, we demonstrated XN's ability to halt cell growth and kill two liver cancer cell lines and two colon cancer cell lines. We tested liver and colon cancer cell lines because oral consumption of XN and its derivatives can lead to high concentrations in the gut and liver."
Colorectal cancer is the third most common cause of cancer-related death in the United States, and liver cancer ranks fifth. The incidence of liver cancer, though, has tripled in the last four decades.
"For both of those cancers, discovering new compounds for prevention and treatment is imperative," Gombart said. "In all the cell lines tested, DXN and TXN inhibited cell growth and caused cell death, as did XN. And for most cell types, DXN and TXN were slightly more potent."
Source: https://preventdisease.com/news/19/040319_Can-Beer-Prevent-Cancer.shtml
:friends:
RMS
R
Robrites
Utah woman asks to 'smoke a bowl' before going to jail for being drunk on mouthwash
Utah woman asks to 'smoke a bowl' before going to jail for being drunk on mouthwash
(KUTV) -- A Provo woman asked police officers if she could smoke a bowl of marijuana before they took her to jail for kicking the windows of her boyfriend's car, all while being drunk on mouthwash.
That's according to a probable cause statement from the Utah County Sheriff's Office.
Police say 20-year-old Francesca Delfina Farias-Swenson was drinking mouthwash to get drunk when she called her boyfriend to pick her up and take her up Provo Canyon.
While driving, police say Farias-Swenson got angry with her boyfriend and started kicking the windows of his car, damaging at least one window.
Farias-Swenson's boyfriend decided to take Farias-Swenson to her parent's house, but when they arrived, police say she started kicking the windows again, and her parents would not let her inside.
Police were called and found Farias-Swenson walking down a road with her feet bleeding from the broken window glass.
She had a bottle of mouthwash with her and told cops she had been drinking it.
Before police took her to jail, they say Farias-Swenson asked them if she could smoke a bowl of marijuana, telling cops she had a pill bottle with weed in it in her pocket.
Farias-Swenson is facing one count of each of the following misdemeanors:
Utah woman asks to 'smoke a bowl' before going to jail for being drunk on mouthwash
(KUTV) -- A Provo woman asked police officers if she could smoke a bowl of marijuana before they took her to jail for kicking the windows of her boyfriend's car, all while being drunk on mouthwash.
That's according to a probable cause statement from the Utah County Sheriff's Office.
Police say 20-year-old Francesca Delfina Farias-Swenson was drinking mouthwash to get drunk when she called her boyfriend to pick her up and take her up Provo Canyon.
While driving, police say Farias-Swenson got angry with her boyfriend and started kicking the windows of his car, damaging at least one window.
Farias-Swenson's boyfriend decided to take Farias-Swenson to her parent's house, but when they arrived, police say she started kicking the windows again, and her parents would not let her inside.
Police were called and found Farias-Swenson walking down a road with her feet bleeding from the broken window glass.
She had a bottle of mouthwash with her and told cops she had been drinking it.
Before police took her to jail, they say Farias-Swenson asked them if she could smoke a bowl of marijuana, telling cops she had a pill bottle with weed in it in her pocket.
Farias-Swenson is facing one count of each of the following misdemeanors:
- Purchase, possession, consume of alcohol by a minor
- Possession or use of a controlled substance
- Criminal mischief
