http://braunshavers.org/braun-series-5-shavers Braun Series 5 Shavers. Braun Series shavers provide you with a particularly close and thorough shave, which you cannot only see, but also feel. My blog   more...can show you where to get the best deals.  less

http://braunshavers.org/braun-shavers Braun Shavers. Braun Series shavers provide you with a particularly close and thorough shave, which you cannot only see, but also feel. My blog can show you where   more...to get the best deals.  less

http://www.cell2get.com Motorola RAZR V3 Cellular Phone. Great camera display and interactive features. The biggest selling phone of all time. Check it out at Cell2Get.com !

Warriors- Better quality then on Youtube I OWN NOTHING

A BSG video with the song New Beginnings by Future Worlds Music. This is in my opinion my best video ever. At least for Battlestar Galactica. The words were the hardest part for me. Some of them I got   more...from Cain's speech, including the Imperative part and the revenge/payback. Hope you enjoy! =D
Time: Time: Idk. Spent over 4 hours for about a week.
Disclaimer: I do not own anything in this except my own creativity. And this video toook a lot of that!  less

A Battlestar Galactica video with the song New Beginnigns by Future World Music. This is a preview and not the entire song. This took a ton of time and I hope you enjoy! I would also like any advice anybody   more...might have. =D
Time: Idk....6 hours? Probably more.
Disclaimer: I do not own anything is this except for my own creativity.  less

A Battlestar Galactica video with the song Dethroned by X- RayDog. I also used the beginning of Ascension by Future World Music. I mostly used scenes from the first battle, The Ionic Nebula Battle, and   more...Razor. This video mostly goes over how the Galactica's journey was full of difficulties and challenges, and it shows a couple of those. Hope you enjoy!
Disclaimer: I do not own anything used in this except for my creativity.  less

http://www.electricbikeonline.com
http://www.flixya.com/user/electricbikekits

KINCARE, ECZEMA,PSORIASIS, ACNE,PIMPLES, BLEMISHES, BODY ACNE, HEAT RASHES,BALDING, THINNING , RAZOR BURNS, RAZOR PUMPS, ASHY SKIN,DANDRUFF, ARTHRITIS,ITCHY SKIN,SHEA BUTTER, COCOA BUTTER,

CallMeiPhone.com listings of some of the most popular cell phones being offered on net. Many of these eBay listings will save you money on the most popular name brand cell phones, and you will probably   more...get a better deal than everyday retail.  less

Quick tutorial on how to remove old bubbled window tinting from your car windows.

George Carlin, doing some fresh stand-up material, followed by an interview hosted by Jon Stewart. Admiration.

George Carlin, going through some old material along with some new.

<a href="http://autogofast.com/search.php?q=Snap+N+Slice&c=0"> Slice, dice, wedge, mince & chop, in just a snap! Inside the cutting chamber are eleven, never dull-precision engineered   more...cutting blades, that are soft to the touch on the outside, but laser honed & razor sharp on the inside - for a perfect slice every time! For thicker slices, just remove the 2-blade insert, & in a snap, you've got thick slices. Slice potatoes, au gratin or julienne, right in the pan. Slice cheese once for strips & again for perfect cubes. You snap right on the plate, in the bowl, or in the skillet, so theres no more messy cutting boards or countertops to clean. Save a fortune on bulky, messy countertop processors or slicers Stop slow slicing one slice at a time! Take the hard prep work out of cooking With eleven, never dull-precision engineered cutting blades Dishwasher friendly Visit http://www.AutoGoFast.com/search.php?q=Snap+N+Slice&c=0</a>  less

On my way to Stafford I talk about haircuts and pay a visit to Izaak Walton's 17th Century thatched cottage. Info about Izaak Walton can be found <a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Izaak_Walton">   more...here</a>  less

http://millionairemarketingsystem.com FREE Report '5 Tips for Staying Razor Sharp When Starting Your Home Business Enterprise' Starting a Home Business? Tips & Tricks to Stay Sharp. Use a Marketing   more...System.  less

Red Wolf and Blue Razor kick ass (as usual)!

The trailer to the feature film.

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell   more...Tower Protection</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/cell-phone-radiation-book.html">Educational
Cell Phone Ebook</a>

Is having a cell phone pressed to your ear while behind the wheel the equivalent of driving while intoxicated? According to a study by University of Utah psychologists, the answer is, unfortunately, yes.

"Just like you put yourself and other people at risk when you drive drunk, you put yourself and others at risk when you use a cell phone and drive," writes David Strayer, a psychology professor and the study's lead author. "The level of impairment is very similar."

The study, published in the June 29 issue of Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, found that drivers talking on cell phones, either handheld or hands-free, are more likely to crash because they are distracted by conversation.

Using a driving simulator under four different conditions: with no distractions, using a handheld cell phone, talking on a hands-free cell phone, and while intoxicated to the 0.08 percent blood-alcohol level, 40 participants followed a simulated pace car that braked intermittently.

Researchers found that the drivers on cell phones drove more slowly, braked more slowly and were more likely to crash. In fact, the three participants who collided into the pace car were chatting away. None of the drunken drivers crashed.

"This study does not mean people should start driving drunk," said co-author Frank Drews. "It means that driving while talking on a cell phone is as bad as or maybe worse than driving drunk, which is completely unacceptable and cannot be tolerated by society."

Preliminary results from the study were announced three years ago.

http://www.Cellphonelies.com  less

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell   more...Tower Protection</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/cell-phone-radiation-book.html">Educational
Cell Phone Ebook</a>EMF pollution causes a different type of environmental pollution which can be more risky to ones health than the usual air pollution we can easily detect and protect ourselves from. EMF radiation is a major stressor of the body and we get a fair amount of it every day, everywhere. Yet, we cant see it, we cant hear it, we cant smell it.
Conflicting results

Some researches seem to suggest that the increased incidence of brain tumors during the last decade or so is attributable to cell phone use. Preliminary data would show that the brain tumor is usually located on the side where the patient would use his/her cell phone.

But results from studies have been conflicting. Last year, the Dutch Health Council, reviewing all available data from all over the world, found no conclusive evidence that radiation from mobile phones and TV towers was harmful. A four-year British survey released early this year also showed no link between regular, long-term use of cell phones and brain tumor.

These earlier publications seemed reassuring to cell phone users until researchers at the Swedish National Institute for Working Life observed in their study that the use of mobile phones over a long period of time can raise the risk for brain tumors, contradicting the conclusions of earlier researches.

The Swedish researchers looked at the mobile phone use of 905 people between the age of 20 and 80 who had been diagnosed with a cancerous brain tumor, and they found a link with their cell phone use.
The study noted that 85 of these 905 cases were so-called high users of mobile phones, that is they began early to use mobile and/or wireless telephones and used them a lot. Similar to the observations of previous studies, the tumors were more prevalent on the side of the head where the phone was said to be used.
Increased risk
Dr. Kjell Mild, head investigator of the study, said the figures meant that heavy users of mobile phones, accumulating 2,000 hours or more of cell phone use in their life, had a 240 percent increased risk for a malignant tumor on the side of the head the phone is used. In practical terms, if one uses cell phones an average of one hour a day (total daily use), he would have a 240 percent risk of developing a brain tumor in 5.4 years compared to nonusers of cell phones.
Dr. Mild suggested that to get the risk down, one should use hands-free phones but other experts dont seem to agree. They hypothesize that hands-free devices even serve as an antenna that attract more EMF radiation.
Another important observation in some of these studies is that children and younger people are more vulnerable to EMF waves due to their relatively thinner skulls, which are still maturing and growing. With the unlimited text and call promos available in our country, many youngsters spend minutes and sometimes hours making telebabad on their cell phones. This can pose a potential problem later on. Inadequate disclosure

Since hands-free devices dont seem to offer any protection, the only safeguard I can think of at this point to minimize EMF radiation from cell phones is to use it only when its necessary. If a landline is available, then we should use it instead of the cell phone.

And just like the cigarette manufacturers, the network providers (Globe, Smart, and Sun) should also have a line at the bottom of their advertisements stating something like: Preliminary evidence suggests that accumulated exposure to cell phone radiation might increase the risk of brain tumors. This should free them from any liability of inadequate disclosure which cell phone users who eventually develop brain tumors might file against them.
http  less

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell   more...Tower Protection</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/cell-phone-radiation-book.html">Educational
Cell Phone Ebook</a> The Ossining School Board voted to allow placement of a PCS Base Station atop the Ossining High School on the basis of a "Safety Analysis" which claimed to report the health effects of the radiation emitted from such antennas.(1) Instead, it suppressed current areas of controversy and uncertainty and claimed falsely that this technology is, in effect, universally considered safe.
Critical questions concerning the health effects and safety of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF) remain! Should we expose our children and ourselves to this radiation for the next twenty years when so much uncertainty exists?
Our School Board was told that concerns about health effects from exposure to magnetic fields from electric power distribution lines or the use of hand held cell phones are based on fear, not fact. The Board was not told that a National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences panel this year designated power frequency electromagnetic fields (EMF) as "possible human carcinogens."(2)
There is a robust and ongoing controversy over many aspects of RF health effects. While no one disagrees that serious health hazards occur when living cells in the body are heated, as happens with high intensity RF exposure (just like in a microwave oven), scientists are currently still investigating the health hazards of low intensity exposure. Low intensity exposure is exposure which does not raise the temperature of the living cells in the body.
The telecommunications industry claims cellular antennas are safe because the radiation they produce is too weak to cause heating, a "thermal effect." They point to "safety standards" from groups such as ANSI/IEEE or ICNIRP to support their claims. But these groups have explicitly stated that their claims of "safe levels of exposure" are based on thermal levels.(3) Thus the claim that the RF exposure is harmless rests on the fact that it is too weak to produce a rise in temperature, a "thermal effect."
There is a large body of internationally accepted scientific evidence which points to the existence of nonthermal effects of microwave radiation. The issue at the present time is not whether such evidence exists, but rather what weight to give it.
Internationally acknowledged experts in the field of RF research have shown that RF of the type used in digital cellular antennas and phones can have critical effects on cell cultures, animals, and people in laboratories and have also found epidemiological evidence (studies of communities, not in the laboratory) of serious health effects at "non-thermal levels," where the intensity of the radiation was too low to cause heating. They have found:
Increased cell growth of brain cancer cells(4)
A doubling of the rate of lymphoma in mice(5)
Changes in tumor growth in rats(6)
An increased number of tumors in rats(7)
Increased breaks in double and single stranded DNA, our genetic material(8)
2 to 4 times as many cancers in Polish soldiers exposed to RF(9) More childhood leukemia in children exposed to RF(10) Changes in sleep patterns and REM type sleep(11)
Headaches caused by RF exposure(12)
Neurologic changes(13) including
Changes in the blood-brain-barrier(14)
Changes in cellular morphology (including cell death)(15) Changes in neural electrophysiology (EEG)(16) Changes in neurotransmitters (which affect motivation and pain perception)(17)
Metabolic changes (of calcium ions, for instance)(18) Cytogenetic effects (which can affect cancer, Alzheimer's, neurodegenerative diseases)(19)
Decreased memory, attention, and slower reaction time in school children(20)
Retarded learning in rats indicating a defic  less

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell   more...Tower Protection</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/cell-phone-radiation-book.html">Educational
Cell Phone Ebook</a> Can electromagnetic fields (EMF) from power lines, home wiring, airport and military radar, substations, transformers, computers and appliances cause brain tumors, leukemia, birth defects, miscarriages, chronic fatigue, headaches, cataracts, heart problems, stress. nausea, chest pain, forgetfulness, cancer and other health problems?
Numerous studies have produced contradictory results, yet some experts are convinced that the threat is real.
Dr. David Carpenter, Dean at the School of Public Health, State University of New York believes it is likely that up to 30% of all childhood cancers come from exposure to EMFs. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) warns "There is reason for concern" and advises prudent avoidance".
Martin Halper, the EPA's Director of Analysis and Support says "I have never seen a set of epidemiological studies that remotely approached the weight of evidence that we're seeing with EMFs. Clearly there is something here."
Concern over EMFs exploded after Paul Brodeur wrote a series of articles in the New Yorker Magazine in June 1989. Because of Paul Brodeur's reputation. his articles had a catalytic effect on scientists, reporters and concerned people throughout the world.
In November 1989, the Department of Energy reported that "It has now become generally accepted that there are, indeed, biological effects due to field exposure."
The EMF issue gained more publicity in 1990 when alarming reports appeared in Time, the Wall Street Journal, Business Week and popular computer publications. ABC's Ted Koppel and CBS's Dan Rather both aired special segments on EMFs.
In addition to the long-term health concerns, buying a house with high fields will be an economic disaster. In a few years, when power line radiation is as well known as asbestos and radon, a house with high fields will be practically impossible to sell. Already there are hundreds of lawsuits regarding EMFs and property devaluation.
EPA Says the Threat Is Real
By 1990, over one hundred studies had been conducted worldwide. Of these, at least two dozen epidemiological studies on humans indicated a link between EMFs and serious health problems. In response to public pressure, the Environmental Protection Agency IEPA) began reviewing and evaluating the available literature.
In a draft report issued in March 1990, the EPA recommended that EMFs be classified as a Class B carcinogen -- -a "probable human carcinogen and joined the ranks of formaldehyde, DDT, dioxins and PCBs.
After the EPA draft report was released, utility, military and computer lobbyists came down hard on the EPA. The EPA's final revision did NOT classify EMFs as a Class B carcinogen Rather, the following explanation was added:"
At this time such a characterization regarding the link between cancer and exposure to EMFs is not appropriate because the basic nature of the interaction between EMFs and biological processes leading to cancer is not understood."
Curiously, this rather unusual logic appears on the same page as the following: "In conclusion, several studies showing leukemia, Iymphoma and cancer of the nervous system in children exposed to supported by similar findings in adults in several/ occupational studies also involving electrical power frequency exposures, show a consistent pattern of response that suggest a causal link. "
When questioned about the contradictory nature of these statements, the EPA responded that it was "not appropriate" to use the probable carcinogen label until it could demonstrate how EMFs caused cancer and exactly how much EMF is harmful.
This explanation does not satisfy many critics who claim that the EPAs upp  less

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell   more...Tower Protection</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/cell-phone-radiation-book.html">Educational
Cell Phone Ebook</a> Electrohypersensitivity: Observations in the Human Skin of a Physical Impairment
by Olle Johansson, associate professor The Experimental Dermatology Unit Department of Neuroscience Karolinska Institute 171 77 Stockholm Sweden.

An ever increasing number of studies have clearly shown various biological effects at the cellular level of electromagnetic fields, including powerfrequency and radiofrequency ones as well as microwaves. Such electromagnetic fields are present in your everyday life, at the workplace, in your home and at places of leisure.

Recently, a new category of persons with a physical impairment (electrohypersensitivity; EHS) has been described in the literature, namely those that claim to suffer from subjective and objective skin- and mucosa-related symptoms, such as itch, smarting, pain, heat sensation, redness, papules, pustules, etc., after exposure to visual display terminals (VDTs), mobile phones, DECT telephones, as well as other electromagnetic devices. Frequently, symptoms from internal organ systems, such as the heart and the central nervous system, are also encountered.

Persons claiming such adverse skin reactions after having been exposed to computer screens or mobile phones very well could be reacting in a highly specific way and with a completely correct avoidance reaction, especially if the provocative agent was radiation and/or chemical emissions -- just as you would do if you had been exposed to e.g. sun rays, X-rays, radioactivity or chemical odours. The working hypothesis, thus, early became that they react in a cellularly correct way to the electromagnetic radiation, maybe in concert with chemical emissions such as plastic components, flame retardants, etc., something later focussed upon by Professor Denis L. Henshaw and his collaborators at Bristol University [This is also covered in great depth in Gunni Nordstr?m's new book "The Invisible Disease - The Dangers of Environmental Illnesses caused by Electromagnetic Fields and Chemical Emissions" (O Books, 2004, ISBN 1-903816-71-8).]

Very soon, however, from different clinical colleagues, and in parallel to the above, a large number of other 'explanations' became fashionable, e.g. that the persons claiming EHS only were imagining this, or they were suffering from post-menopausal psychological abberations, or they were old, or having a short school education, or were the victims of classical Pavlovian conditioning or a journalist-driven mass media psychosis. Strangely enough, most of the, often self-made, 'experts' who proposed these explanations had themselves never met anyone claiming EHS and these 'experts' had never done any investigations of the proposed explanatory models.

The aim of our own studies has been to investigate possible alterations, in the cellular and neuronal systems of these persons' skin. As controls, age- and sex-matched persons without any subjective or clinical symptoms or dermatological history, have served. Immunohistochemistry using antisera to the previously characterized marker substances of interest has been utilized. Among many discoveries, the following may be mentioned:

We have investigated the presence of intraepidermal nerve fibers in normal human skin from healthy volunteers using the new marker PGP 9.5 (Wang et al., 1990; Hilliges et al., 1995; Johansson et al. 1999). The intraepidermal nerve fibers are found as close as 20-40 ?m from the surface, which makes it highly possible that weak electromagnetic fields may affect them.

In facial skin samples of electrohypersensitive persons, the most common finding is a profound increase of mast cells. Nowadays we do not only use hista  less

Video montage of BSG-75