You may have heard about our premium Patreon/Discord from the LGBT Facebook page, look no further! You can subscribe to our page by following:
You may have heard about our premium Patreon/Discord from the LGBT Facebook page, look no further! You can subscribe to our page by following:
So how does this beer taste? Beats me I’ve never had it and probably never will. I personally just thought it was pretty awesome that this craft beer costs twenty grand, and on top of that is the fact that it comes bottled in a squirrel. The “End Of History” is the strongest and most expensive beer in the world. Apparently this has something to do with BrewDogs trying to build a new brewery and this is a promotion which includes equity in the company. You can read WAY more about this here. Check out BrewDogs on Facebook.
If money was no object would you buy this beer? Would you drink it?
The Nitrite Myth has been debunked. Bacon lovers rejoice and be merry. Beyond just being loaded with “artery-clogging saturated fat” and sodium, bacon has been long considered unhealthy due to the use of nitrates and nitrites in the curing process. Many conventional doctors, and well-meaning friends and relatives, will say you’re basically asking for a heart attack or cancer by eating the food many Paleo enthusiasts lovingly refer to as “meat candy”.
The belief that nitrates and nitrates cause serious health problems has been entrenched in popular consciousness and media. Watch this video clip to see Steven Colbert explain how the coming bacon shortage will prolong our lives thanks to reduced nitrates in our diets.
In fact, the study that originally connected nitrates with cancer risk and caused the scare in the first place has since been discredited after being subjected to a peer review. There have been major reviews of the scientific literature that found no link between nitrates or nitrites and human cancers, or even evidence to suggest that they may be carcinogenic. Further, recent research suggests that nitrates and nitrites may not only be harmless, they may be beneficial, especially for immunity and heart health. Confused yet? Let’s explore this issue further.
It may surprise you to learn that the vast majority of nitrate/nitrite exposure comes not from food, but from endogenous sources within the body. (1) In fact, nitrites are produced by your own body in greater amounts than can be obtained from food, and salivary nitrite accounts for 70-90% of our total nitrite exposure. In other words, your spit contains far more nitrites than anything you could ever eat.
When it comes to food, vegetables are the primary source of nitrites. On average, about 93% of nitrites we get from food come from vegetables. It may shock you to learn that one serving of arugula, two servings of butter lettuce, and four servings of celery or beets all have more nitrite than 467 hot dogs. (2) And your own saliva has more nitrites than all of them! So before you eliminate cured meats from your diet, you might want to address your celery intake. And try not to swallow so frequently.
All humor aside, there’s no reason to fear nitrites in your food, or saliva. Recent evidence suggests that nitrites are beneficial for immune and cardiovascular function; they are being studied as a potential treatment for hypertension, heart attacks, sickle cell and circulatory disorders. Even if nitrites were harmful, cured meats are not a significant source, as the USDA only allows 120 parts per million in hot dogs and bacon. Also, during the curing process, most of the nitrite forms nitric oxide, which binds to iron and gives hot dogs and bacon their characteristic pink color. Afterwards, the amount of nitrite left is only about 10 parts per million.
And if you think you can avoid nitrates and nitrites by eating so-called “nitrite- and nitrate-free” hot dogs and bacon, don’t be fooled. These products use “natural” sources of the same chemical like celery and beet juice and sea salt, and are no more free from nitrates and nitrites than standard cured meats. In fact, they may even contain more nitrates and nitrites when cured using “natural” preservatives.
It’s important to understand that neither nitrate nor nitrite accumulate in body. Ingested nitrate from food is converted into nitrite when it contacts our saliva, and of the nitrate we eat, 25% is converted into salivary nitrite, 20% converted into nitrite, and the rest is excreted in the urine within 5 hours of ingestion. (3) Any nitrate that is absorbed has a very short half-life, disappearing from our blood in under five minutes. (4) Some nitrite in our stomach reacts with gastric contents, forming nitric oxide which may have many beneficial effects. (5, 6) You can listen to my podcast “Does Red Meat Increase Your Risk of Death?” for more information on this topic.
In general, the bulk of the science suggests that nitrates and nitrites are not problematic and may even be beneficial to health. Critical reviews of the original evidence suggesting that nitrates/nitrites are carcinogenic reveals that in the absence of co-administration of a carcinogenic nitrosamine precursor, there is no evidence for carcinogenesis. (7) Newly published prospective studies show no association between estimated intake of nitrite and nitrite in the diet and stomach cancer. (8) Nitric oxide, formed by nitrite, has been shown to have vasodilator properties and may modulate platelet function in the human body, improving blood pressure and reducing heart attack risk. (9, 10, 11) Nitrates may also help boost the immune system and protect against pathogenic bacteria (12, 13, 14)
So what do we take from this? There’s no reason to fear nitrates and nitrites in food. No reason to buy nitrate-free, uncured bacon. No reason to strictly avoid cured meats, particularly those from high quality sources (though it may make sense to limit consumption of them for other reasons). In fact, because of concerns about trichinosis from pork, it makes a lot more sense in my opinion to buy cured bacon and other pork products.
Here are a few of the best banned commercials in recent months. Political correctness and revulsion against patriarchy are responsible for keeping these commercials off the air. But don’t worry folks you can see them right here:
Such a shame that the politically correct crowd do not fully embrace the LGBT: Liquor Guns Bacon and Tits Lifestyle.
Bacon Milkshake? YES….Most people are fans of bacon. And of beer. And of ice cream. But how many are fans of all three put together? The Texas Motor Speedway, in conjunction with Levy Restaurants, recently decided to put this to the test. Their “Shake ‘n Bacon” Brew beer milkshake was available to lucky NASCAR fans for a short stint in early November.
6 oz. Guinness Black Lager
10 oz. vanilla ice cream
2 tbsp. Maple syrup
In a blender, combine beer, ice cream, and maple syrup. Blend until combined. Add more beer or ice cream to reach your desired consistency. Add bacon bits and pulse a few times to combine. Pour into a glass, top with whipped cream and more bacon. Enjoy!
Five Guys Burgers and Fries have also just launched a new Bacon milkshake in limited markets. As soon as I can track one down I will do a review of it and post it here.
Tuesday a federal appeals court upheld Maryland’s ban on AR15, AR 10 and other semi automatic sporting rifles as well as assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, ruling that Second Amendment protections do not extend to what it called “weapons of war.”
Writing for the 10-4 majority, Judge Robert King of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, said that the landmark Heller v. District of Columbia decision rendered in 2008 explicitly allows governments to regulate firearms similar in design and function to those issued to members of the military.
“We are convinced that the banned assault weapons and large-capacity magazines are among those arms that are ‘like’ M-16 rifles — ‘weapons that are most useful in military service’ — which the Heller Court singled out as being beyond the Second Amendment’s reach,” the decision reads. “Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war that the Heller decision explicitly excluded from such coverage.”
The decision marks the fifth time that a federal appeals court has upheld a state assault weapons law, but it goes further than those previous decisions. It is the first to exclude AR-15s and other similar guns from Second Amendment protection on the grounds that they are virtually indistinguishable from weapons of war. The court found that such designation overrides considerations of the common usage or suitability for home self-defense of a gun like the AR-15.
The ruling is a resounding defeat for the National Sports Shooting Foundation, the gun manufacturers’ trade group which, along with two Maryland gun owners, had sued to overturn the state’s sweeping assault weapons ban, which prohibits the possession, sale, transfer, or transportation into the state of certain weapons, including all variants of the AR-15 and AK-47 rifle platforms, along with certain kinds of pistols, including semiautomatic versions of the Uzi.
More broadly, Maryland’s law applies to all center-fired semiautomatic rifles that can accept detachable magazines and have two or more features like a flash suppressor or a pistol grip. After the expiration of the federal assault weapons ban in 2004, millions of such guns have been manufactured for civilians and remain unregulated in much of the country. Maryland’s assault weapons law is similar to California’s, requiring registration of those weapons lawfully possessed before the passage of the ban.
The Maryland law also prohibits the sale and transfer of magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds. Maryland residents who owned magazines affected by the law before its passage may keep them. In comparison, California gun owners must surrender their large-capacity magazines to authorities by July 1.
“It’s a huge victory,” said appellate attorney Deepak Gupta, who submitted a brief on behalf of the defendants. “It shows that a Second Amendment right to bear arms can coexist with common-sense gun legislation.”
John Parker Sweeney, who represented the plaintiffs, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Judge William Traxler, a President Bill Clinton appointee, was joined by three colleagues in a dissenting opinion. Traxler argued that “the majority has gone to greater lengths than any other court to eviscerate the constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms.”
The majority opinion extensively describes the history of assault-style weapons, and the extent to which they are created to mimic the functionality of military-grade guns.
“The banned assault weapons ‘are firearms designed for the battlefield, for the soldier to be able to shoot a large number of rounds across a battlefield at a high rate of speed,’” the opinion reads, citing filings in the case. “Their design results in ‘a capability for lethality — more wounds, more serious, in more victims — far beyond that of other firearms in general, including other semiautomatic guns.’”
The opinion cites a 1994 Treasury Department study that found the technical features singled out by assault weapons bans — flash suppressors, barrel shrouds, folding and telescoping stocks, pistol grips, grenade launchers, night sights, and the ability to accept bayonets and large-capacity magazines — “serve specific, combat-functional ends.”
Significantly, Judge James Harvie Wilkinson III, a conservative appointed by President Ronald Reagan, wrote in a separate concurring opinion that assault weapon laws are a “wholly separate subject” from constitutionally protected handgun ownership for self defense. He wrote that judicial decisions to reject assault weapons bans would be “disenfranchising.”
“To say in the wake of so many mass shootings in so many localities across this country that the people themselves are now to be rendered newly powerless, that all they can do is stand by and watch as federal courts design their destiny — this would deliver a body blow to democracy as we have known it since the very founding of this nation,” Wilkinson wrote.
The absurdity of this court is evidenced by their lack of knowledge as to what an “assault rifle”actually is.
An assault rifle is a select fire machine gun that shoots multiple rounds with one pull of the trigger. The very first “Assault Rifle” was the Sturmgewehr 44, “assault rifle 44”.
True weapons of war such as this are already banned under the 1986 Machine Gun Ban which was surreptitious added at the last minute to the Firearm Owners Protection Act under the Hughes Amendment. The amendment was a parliamentary scam as evidenced in the following video.
It’s clear that the Speaker disregarded both the voice vote AND the electronic roll call vote to insert the Hughes Amendment (banning private ownership machine guns) into the wider Firearms Owners Protection Act, based on the voice vote he gaveled as passed. Since ’86, some 1300 people have been jailed for violation of the Hughes amendment.
Recently a petition to the White House to repeal the NFA garnered enough signatures to warrant the attention of the current administration.
When the government wants to ensure that it’s people cannot defend themselves from tyranny is exactly when the 2nd Amendment is critical. The 2nd Amendment was not related to sport shooting and hunting. The 2nd Amendment was SPECIFICALLY INTENDED for “We the People” to be able to retake control of our government if the need was to ever arise.
Just because the treasonous marxist Obama is no longer in power and the Clintons are not occupying the Oval Office does not mean that we can allow these true “Domestic Enemies” of the Constitution to continue to slowly strip us of our Natural and God given right to secure our Lives, Liberties and the Pursuit of Happiness.
Joanna Palani the drop dead gorgeous Danish student who gave up her studies to fight ISIS has a $1million bounty on her head and claims she is being treated as “a terrorist” back home.
Joanna Palani, 22, claims to have killed over 100 militants during battles in Iraq and Syria as a YPG sniper. This brave young lady war fighter gives new meaning to the term drop dead gorgeous.
Palani is of Iranian-Kurdish ancestry and her father and grandfather were both Peshmerga fighters.
She was born in a UN refugee camp before moving to Copenhagen as a toddler and learned to fire a gun at nine-years-old.
But she says life has been a struggle since she returned home from her heroics.
She said: “I was willing to give up my life and my freedom to stop ISIS advancing, so that everyone in Europe can be safe.
“This was my choice.
“But I am seen as a terrorist by my own country.”
Joanna added: “I live in one of the best countries in the world but I am hungry and homeless and freezing cold in bed at night, even though I am working full time. I don’t trust anyone.”
Speaking about her battles with ISIS, the former student had boasted of her success.
“ISIS fighters are very easy to kill,” she previously told Vice .
“ISIS fighters are very good at sacrificing their own lives, but Assad’s soldiers are very well-trained and they are specialist killing machines.”
“Those I risked my life for, are now taking away my freedom”. Born in a UN refugee camp in Iraq, Joanna Palani moved to Copenhagen at 3 years old, and at 22, she gave up her education while she was a teen in 2014 to stop the spread of ISIS to Europe, and help free and protect persecuted minorities back in the Middle East. She joined the Peshmerga (that her father and grandfather were both soldiers of) and the YPG as a sniper.
She fought against Assad, Islamist Syrian rebel groups, ISIS in Kurdistan, and helped free a group of Yazidi and Syrian Christian sex slaves, then taught them how to use fight like soldiers. After returning home to Denmark, they confiscated her passport, prohibiting her from traveling for 12 months, and called her a threat to society.
A new type of synthetic alcohol has been discovered which could allow people to enjoy the sociable effects of a few pints, but skip the hangover that usually follows.
The new drink, known as ‘alcosynth’, is designed to mimic the positive effects of alcohol but doesn’t cause a dry mouth, nausea and a throbbing head, according to its creator Professor David Nutt.
The Imperial College Professor and former government drugs advisor told LGBT he has patented around 90 different alcosynth compounds.
Two of them are now being rigorously tested for widespread use, he said – and by 2050, he hopes alcosynth could completely replace normal alcohol.
“It will be there alongside the scotch and the gin, they’ll dispense the alcosynth into your cocktail and then you’ll have the pleasure without damaging your liver and your heart,” he said.
“They go very nicely into mojitos. They even go into something as clear as a Tom Collins. One is pretty tasteless, the other has a bitter taste.”
By researching substances that work on the brain in a similar way to alcohol, Professor Nutt and his team have been able to design a drug which they say is non-toxic and replicates the positive effects of alcohol.
“We know a lot about the brain science of alcohol; it’s become very well understood in the last 30 years,” said Professor Nutt.
“So we know where the good effects of alcohol are mediated in the brain, and can mimic them. And by not touching the bad areas, we don’t have the bad effects.”
Advocates of alcosynth believe it could revolutionise public health by relieving the burden of alcohol on the health service.
According to Alcohol Concern, drinking is the third biggest risk factor for disease and death in the UK, after smoking and obesity.
“People want healthier drinks,” said Professor Nutt. “The drinks industry knows that by 2050 alcohol will be gone.”
“They know that and have been planning for this for at least 10 years. But they don’t want to rush into it, because they’re making so much money from conventional alcohol.”
Early experiments into alcosynth, such as those reported on by BBC’s Horizon in 2011, used a derivative of benzodiazepine – the same class of drugs as .
Mr Nutt said his new drinks did not contain benzodiazepine, and their formulas would remain a closely guarded, patented secret.
However, the huge cost of funding research into the drug and regulatory concerns mean it could be a long time before people can order an alcosynth cocktail at their local pub.
Professor Nutt, who was sacked from his position as the government drugs tsar in 2009 after he claimed taking ecstasy was less dangerous than riding a horse, said he was unsure if the use of synthetic alcohol would be restricted by the new Psychoactive Substances Act, which came into force in May.
“It’s an interesting idea, but too much in its infancy at the moment for us to comment on,” a Department of Health spokesperson told LGBT.
“I don’t think we’d give money to it until it was a little further along,” said the spokesperson. “If [Professor Nutt] were to apply for funding, it would go through the process of everything else and would be judged on its merits.”
“It would be great for producing better workforce efficiency if no one was hungover,” they added.
According to Professor Nutt, the effects of alcosynth last around a couple of hours – the same as traditional alcohol.
He said he and his team have also managed to limit the effects of drinking a lot of alcosynth, so in theory it would be impossible to ever feel too ‘drunk’.
“We think the effects round out at about four or five ‘drinks’, then the effect would max out,” he said.
“We haven’t tested it to destruction yet, but it’s safer than drinking too much alcohol. With clever pharmacology, you can limit and put a ceiling on the effects, so you can’t ever get as ill or kill yourself, unlike with drinking a lot of vodka.”
Researcher Guy Bentley worked with Professor Nutt on a new report by the liberal think tank the Adam Smith Institute into alcosynth regulation.
Mr Bentley told LGBT he hoped to persuade the government to accept the drug as a way of reducing the harm caused by alcohol.
“[The report] is trying to spark what happened with e-cigarettes and tobacco, but with alcohol,” he said. “Professor Nutt has been experimenting on this for a long time, but I thought to myself – ‘where is it?’ I wanted my hangover-free booze.”
However, not everyone was as keen on the new discovery.
Neil Williams, from the British Beer and Pub Association, said alcosynth was not necessary, as “there are other ways of avoiding a hangover”.
“There are plenty of low-strength drinks, particularly beers,” he told LGBT. “We should all drink in moderation so we shouldn’t need to have a hangover anyway.”
“I’d want to know more about it before I tried it myself,” he said.
You’ve probably never had tots quite like this before. Not only are these spuds one of the most fun and unique recipes we’ve ever made, they’re exploding with tons of flavor! They’re similar to twice baked potatoes, but instead of slicing them in half, you hollow them out, stand them up, wrap them in bacon, and smother them in barbecue sauce and cheese. Top them off with a lava flow of spiced sour cream and you’ve got a delightful dinner the whole family will enjoy!