INDCJournal: (Way Belated) Incredibly Shallow Aesthetic Lessons From American Idol, 4/5/06 (Results Show)

« Truth, More Truth and Statistics | Main | Melomane Lessons From American Idol, 4/11/06 »

April 12, 2006

(Way Belated) Incredibly Shallow Aesthetic Lessons From American Idol, 4/5/06 (Results Show)

Posted by Bill

Mandisa's camoflauge wardrobe and singing chops weren't righteous enough to beat back America's self-loathing antipathy for the morbidly obese. Because let's face it, if this were a singing contest, she'd still be there.

There are many factors at play in obesity, from the self-reinforcing survival metabolism of fat cells to hormone levels, to possible viruses, to good old lack of self-control; but one of the most interesting is how the types of food we eat - as a culture - influence our bodies differently, leading to epidemiologically notable rises in obesity and obesity-related disease processes in a society.

Which makes this discussion about a legal strategy to target purveyors of unhealthy food - where Goldstein embraces the default angry conservative/libertarian position of "KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF OF MY SUGAR CRISPS, BUSYBODY LAWYERS AND LIBERALS!" - conflicting for me. You see, it's a position that I empathize strongly with, as I believe in the virtue of market forces and self-determination, and loathe social engineering that pretends that all people are equally smart and should thus make equally smart choices. But at the same time, there's a frame of reference issue here that governs how we view the effect of unhealthy food.

As a specific illustrative metaphor, rank the reasonableness of the following statements:

1. "The government and liberal busybodies should stay out of our business - they have no right to heavily tax nor regulate MY choice, as an adult, to smoke cigarettes."

2. "The government and liberal busybodies should stay out of our business - they have no right to heavily tax nor regulate MY CHILD'S choice to purchase cigarettes from vending machines in schools."

3. "The government and liberal busybodies should stay out of our business - they have no right to heavily tax nor regulate MY choice to drink soda and eat fast food 5 times per week."

4. "The government and liberal busybodies should stay out of our business - they have no right to heavily tax nor regulate MY CHILD'S choice to drink soda and eat fast food 5 times per week in schools."

Tabling the issue of secondary smoke with cigarettes, of course the libertarian-themed statements from an adult perspective are eminently more rational than the statements regarding children, who are viewed as wards of parents and society, and thus afforded protection from themselves. But where it gets interesting to me is how opinions regarding the children-specific statements diverge, based on our perspective regarding cigarettes and "food."

Cigarettes are addictive, cigarettes contain poisons, cigarettes cause emphysema, cigarettes causes cancer, cigarettes can impede a child's development and growth, both mentally and physically. So most individuals, even libertarians, find the concept of the government outlawing the sale of cigarettes to minors to be a conventionally acceptable legal paradigm.

But interestingly, fast food - specifically simple carbohydrate laden sweet drinks and foodstuffs - are also addictive. Many junk foods provide a satiation experience that influences brain chemicals like a roller coaster, first flooding the blessings of seratonin that accompany a rapid insulin spike, then bringing on cravings for more sugary satiation as the cascade of hormones and neurotransmitters crash one to two hours later. Processed, fast and sugary foods contain ingredients that certainly aren't naturally occuring or healthful, if not outright "poisons." Sugar itself is like a cellular wrecking ball, causing the aforementioned insulin spikes that encourage fat, as well as cross-linking proteins and encouraging oxidation. The ingredients, ubiquity and tastiness of fast foods (especially high-fructose corn syrup) have certainly helped spike childhood obesity and diagnosises of Type 2 (Acquired) Diabetes and Metablic Syndrome, and the early onset of these diseases can easily shave a decade-plus off of an average human lifespan. And to put a cherry on top, the chronic inflammation caused by obesity even has a hand in disease processes as diverse as heart disease, asthma and cancer.

So this value judgment - that Sugar Crisps are an order of magnitude different than cigarettes - is a false intuition, a hubris centering around our instinctive knowledge about "stuff that burns" and "stuff that tastes yummy." Which lends this statement in the article ...

The lawsuit argues that children "are intrinsically deceived and abused by encouragement to eat unhealthy junk foods" and are therefore injured every time they see an ad for Apple Jacks on Nickelodeon or a box of Sponge Bob SquarePants Pop-Tarts in the supermarket.

... contextual weight, and lowers Jeff's sarcastic riposte ...

Which begs the question: how much are children "intrinsically deceived and abused by encouragement to" bring frivolous nuisance suits in the name of the "public interest' that violate the individual's right to choice, and how much is that worth in statutory damages?

... to levels of superficial distraction.

I have a dry analytical belief that - given our society's long-established priority of and methodology for protecting children - it is well within our government's (and by government, I mean the judiciary as well as the lumbering legistlature) purview to make distinctions about what sort of substances are marketed to and sold to children, especially during the hours of compulsory education. Because, let's face it - a parent's personal preference and control over what his or her child eats while in school is severely limited, and children are idiots. If it were legal to sell crack to kids, complete with colorful packaging and a talking tucan, they'd certainly buy it. The interesting frame of reference issue is how we perceive the relative differences between crack, cigarettes and cans of coke.

Which brings us to another frame of reference issue that relates to corporate responsibility and expands the debate to choices made by adults. Check out this hypothetical scenario:

While mixing a tuna salad, a chemist for NESTLE accidentally mistakes a can of Comet Lemon Fresh Disinfectant Cleanser with Bleach for a salt shaker. Through a series of events that lead to a series of observations, he discovers that trace amounts of Comet keep foodstuffs fresh indefinitely without refrigeration, and seem both tasty and constitutionally well tolerated in small doses. NESTLE begins adding Comet to their line of Stouffer's refrigerated foods, greatly expanding shelf life, inventory stability, efficiency and profits. And tastiness!

So tell me, do you want to pick up a chicken pot pie and eat trace amounts of Comet? Do you feel confident that eating trace amounts of Comet is good for you, or at least not bad for you? Should the government have a role in ensuring that NESTLE doesn't put Comet in your chicken pot pie, just so it can keep for two decades, causing their unsold inventory to become non-existent? And retroactively, should you have legal recourse if you discover that Comet was added to the chicken pot pie that you ate every Thursday for 12 years?

These are relevant questions. And as crazy and extreme as that scenario may sound, it's very similar to how food processing works - both stripping food of nutrional value, as well as creating compounds usually not found in nature to increase things like taste and shelf life. Industrial chemists tinker with food, essentially making it ... something else. The anticipated negative impact of a potential substance is often a matter of subjective judgment (profit motive), resulting in what amounts to an uncontrolled epidemiological experiment on the public. Perhaps the most recently famous real world example:

Trans fatty acids are made when manufacturers add hydrogen to vegetable oil, in the presence of small amounts of catalyst metals such as nickel, palladium, platinum or cobalt -- in a process described as partial hydrogenation.
...
Hydrogenation of edible oils was invented by the German chemist Wilhelm Normann, who patented the process in 1902. In 1909 Procter & Gamble in Cincinnati acquired the US rights to the Normann patent and in 1911 they began marketing Crisco, the first hydrogenated shortening, which contained a large amount of partially hydrogenated cottonseed oil. Further success came from the marketing technique of giving away free cookbooks with every recipe calling for Crisco.
...
Trans fat from partially hydrogenated vegetable oils has displaced natural solid fats and liquid oils in many areas, especially in the fast food industry.
...
Partial hydrogenation increases the shelf life and flavor stability of foods containing trans fats. These benefits for food manufacturers come at a high cost to the consumer's health. Rather than preventing the sale of trans fats, as advocated by consumer advocacy groups, the FDA in the US, as of January 2006, requires that the quantity of trans fat be listed on nutrition labels. These labeling requirements do not apply to restaurants. A benefit of trans fats for food manufacturers is the ability to design trans fat content so that fat will melt at body temperature, but not at room temperature. Partial hydrogenation raises the melting point of the fat, producing a semi-solid material, which is much more desirable than liquid oils for use in baking. Partially hydrogenated vegetable oils are much less expensive than the fats traditionally favored by bakers, such as butter or lard.

So you see, hydrogen was added to fat to lend it molecular stability at room temperature. The human body, not used to metabolizing the compound, has a bit of a freak-out, and chronic ingestion of this popular food processing - which was done to probably more than half of the foodstuffs in your local supermarket, until a recent reversal of the trend - increases rates of heart disease, among other things. So conceptually, food companies fed you an exceptionally negative substance, without your knowledge or ability to make a rational choice about weathering its impact - for decades.

Which leads to the subjective conclusion that a substance's ostensible status as "food" does not automatically inoculate corporations from public responsibility for what they opt to sell us. Or at least it shouldn't.

My Bottom Lines:

1. I haven't come to a decisive conclusion about what constitutes appropriate legal recourse in the case of unhealthy, addictive foodstuffs and metabolically negative additives.

2. Despite the condemnatory case made above, I'm instinctively uncomfortable with the impulse for government regulation and a flurry of lawsuits to solve the problem. For example, I'd make the case that things like pharmaceuticals are irrationally over-regulated, whereas food companies are pretty much given license to do whatever the Hell they want. I don't have a conclusion about what constitutes the best mechanism for tinkering with that balance.

3. The line between "poisons" and simply unhealthy additives is slightly blurrier than you think.

4. Given logical precedent, there is nothing outrageous about legistlatures and courts protecting children from substances that can be objectively assigned the twin statuses of "harmful" and "addictive." If I could quantify the concept that eating a Big Mac was metabolically equivalent to smoking 5 cigarettes, what would be the distinction between the two substances and our society's choice to give either to kids?

5. The most important factors in both a healthy debate and rational personal choices by libertarian-minded folks is to have complete information and accurate assumptions about the nature of various types of substances.

Posted by Bill at April 12, 2006 09:06 AM | TrackBack (1)

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.indcjournal.com/cgi-bin/mt/dafrules/tapaz.cgi/2458

Comments

I've got a few issues with bottom lines 4 and 5. First is that I don't think unhealthy food is objectively "addictive". I believe that only a small minority of even morbidly obese people show any signs of actual addiction to food. Even for those few people food is only addictive in the sense that literally anything that gives a person pleasure can be addictive. Food isn’t objectively addictive in and of itself the way cigarettes or many drugs are.

Second, the distinction between the cigarettes and the Big Mac is that a single cigarette is harmful and provides no benefit while a single Big Mac is exactly the opposite. One Big Mac provides a load of fat, protein, and carbs which, in a single meal, is good and isn’t harmful. It’s only when I continually eat Big Macs and do so at the expense of eating healthy alternatives that all the Big Macs become harmful in the aggregate. If I gave a starving kid in some famine-stricken country a single cigarette it would be harmful while providing no benefit. If I gave that same kid a single Big Mac it would do him a world of good metabolically without harming him in the least. Food isn’t objectively harmful in and of itself. It’s the decision by some people make to less healthy foods an overwhelming part of their diet that harms them.

Third, I agree with number 5, but I would also point out that the same folks should want legislatures and courts to have complete information and accurate assumptions before even considering regulating something nearly all of us enjoy. In the case of food we’ll probably get that information and have accurate assumptions right around the time technology makes eating obsolete.

Posted by: SeanH at April 12, 2006 01:25 PM

Not all unhealthy food is addictive by virtue of being tasty or unhealthy. BUT - much unhealthy food, particularly food with high sugar content, is indeed objectively addictive, due to mechanisms that I shallowly outlined in the post.

"They provide a satiation experience that influences brain chemicals like a roller coaster, first flooding the blessings of seratonin that accompany a rapid insulin spike, then bringing on cravings for more sugary satiation as the cascade of hormones and neurotransmitters crash one to two hours later."

This is a classic example of an addiction mechanism. It may be less addictive than, say, heroin, but I think it's at least as addictive as cigarettes. If you don't believe me, scope out your officemates for binging on comfort food.

If I gave a starving kid in some famine-stricken country a single cigarette it would be harmful while providing no benefit. If I gave that same kid a single Big Mac it would do him a world of good metabolically without harming him in the least.

This is a decent point for arguing relative merits of food vs. other substances. But conversely, if you gave a little porker in Boise some cigarettes, they'd amp up his metabolism, and have the benefit of helping him shed weight. (Admittedly not an equivalent scenario)

The harm-benefit ratio is not equal in cigarettes vs. food, but in a land of plenty where malnutrition isn't much of an issue (not Ethiopia), your analogy loses much of its power.

but I would also point out that the same folks should want legislatures and courts to have complete information and accurate assumptions before even considering regulating something nearly all of us enjoy.

True.

Posted by: Bill from INDC at April 12, 2006 01:40 PM

But at the same time, there's a frame of reference issue here that governs how we view the effect of unhealthy food.

Same as with drugs, I think it's a question of education, education, and more education (and then, if there's time, education).

I mean, back in the 1980s, did anyone know soda was bad for you? And for a long time, up to the late 1930s, cocaine was considered an acceptable food additive.

Even as late as 1938, the Larousse Gastronomique was published carrying a recipe for cocaine pudding.

Plus, there was no Internet porn in either of those decades, which all by itself tells you what a horrible Dark Age it was.

Posted by: TallDave at April 12, 2006 02:03 PM

Good points. I clearly need to learn a bit more about how addiction works, but it still seems to me that food causes that response at levels leading to addiction in some people rather than most or nearly all of them which makes it a grayer kind of thing than cigarette or drug addiction. You've got me damn curious to learn more about this, Bill.

Posted by: SeanH at April 12, 2006 02:06 PM

Wow I didn't know this:

Soft Drinks linked to diabetes
In 2004 a study of 50,000 nurses over a period of 8 years found that drinking one or more sugar-sweetened soft drinks per day increases one's risk of developing diabetes by 80%, when compared to those who drank less than 1 soft drink per month. This finding was independent of other lifestyle factors [1]. In the same study, a similar observation was made for fruit juice consumption. This finding is controversial.

[edit]
Availability
Some argue that soft drinks are too widely available, from every restaurant, movie theater, vending machine, and similar locations. Others believe that a small amount of will power on the part of the individual is all that's required to reduce consumption and that one should take personal responsibility for their own purchasing decisions.

Posted by: TallDave at April 12, 2006 02:16 PM

it still seems to me that food causes that response at levels leading to addiction in some people rather than most or nearly all of them which makes it a grayer kind of thing than cigarette or drug addiction.

"Drug addiction" - by this you mean the end of the scale where heroin and cocaine reside, substances which are in their own class, as the actual physical dependency is dramatic, with equally dramatic withdrawal consequences (heroin much moreso than cocaine).

But compare this ...

Symptoms of nicotine withdrawal begin rapidly and peak within one to three days. Because of this rapid onset of withdrawal symptoms, only about 30% of people who try to quit smoking remain tobacco-free for even two days. Withdrawal symptoms generally last three to four weeks, but a significant number of smokers have withdrawal symptoms lasting longer than one month. Some people have strong cravings for tobacco that last for months, even though the physical addiction to nicotine is gone.

... to the self-control required for dieting. Very similar.

And compare this ...

Nicotine is both a stimulant and a sedative. It is a psychoactive drug, meaning that it works in the brain, alters brain chemistry, and changes mood. Once tobacco smoke is inhaled, nicotine passes rapidly through the linings of the lungs and into the blood. It quickly circulates to the brain where it indirectly increases the supply of dopamine, a chemical in the brain that affects mood. Dopamine is normally released in response to pleasurable sensations. Nicotine, like cocaine or heroin, artificially stimulates the release of dopamine. This release accounts for the pleasurable sensation that most smokers feel almost as soon as they light up a cigarette. Nicotine also decreases anger and increases the efficiency of a person's performance on long, dull tasks.

... with this ...

Addiction expert DesMaisons, who addressed adult "sugar sensitivity" in Potatoes Not Prozac, now turns her attention to the younger generation. Sugar sensitivity can be linked to behavior, health and emotions, she says. In kids who are especially vulnerable to sugar, imbalances in brain and body chemistry are the cause of low serotonin, low beta-endorphin and volatile blood sugar. Consequently, kids react to sugar as if it were a drug, embarking on a craving and crashing cycle.

etc.,etc. etc. Couldn't find the best excerpt to illustrate the sugar example, but the mechanisms aren't dissimilar (different neurotransmitters spike and crash - dopamine is more "pleasure," serotonin is more "satisfaction"). The withdrawal periods (elimination of actual physical cravings) for sugary foods and nicotine are almost exactly the same, though they vary from person to person.

See also - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addiction

Posted by: Bill from INDC at April 12, 2006 02:25 PM

Cool! Thanks.

Posted by: SeanH at April 12, 2006 02:47 PM

An ancillary issue involved in the junk-food-to-children meta discussion is that many seek to solve the "problem" through litigation rather than legislation (a point raised in the Goldstein piece). While you can make a strong argument for regulating the marketing and sales of certain foods to children in the same manner, and for the same reasons, as cigarettes, there's a big difference between that & suing McDonalds for engaging in perfectly legal & standard business activities.

Yes, I know you weren't arguing in favor of that; I'm not trying to suggest you were. I'm just looking to point out that the litigation culture goes hand-in-hand with the impulse to regulate, and as such, can't be detached from the larger subject. Further, the litigation aspect of things (Your Biggie Fries and Milkshakes made me fat!), really gives the libertarian leaners the creeps.

There's also the personal responsibility of parents issue. Taking a kid to Burger King followed by Baskin Robbins once a week as a reward for doing all his chores isn't at all a negative, especially if the kid eats well the balance of the time and gets plenty of exercise. So, as SeanH argued, junk food is something which, consumed in moderation, is not a net negative (whereas smoking even a single cigarette is a net negative).

Posted by: Beck at April 13, 2006 08:19 AM

Mmmm. Cocaine pudding.

Posted by: Ghost of a flea at April 13, 2006 10:19 AM

So let's say that a fast food maker puts Comet-like substance in your food, and a school system serves the fast food to your child. The only control you have is your stern parental advice not to eat the fast food. You know about the Comet-like substance, but that puts you with about 5% of the population. The courts start to look like the only option, no?

Now this ...

Further, the litigation aspect of things (Your Biggie Fries and Milkshakes made me fat!), really gives the libertarian leaners the creeps.

I agree, I'm inclined to get the creeps. But again, if the only food they expose your child to in the hours of compulsory education is substandard swill, it's a slightly different beef than "we went to McDonald's 5 days a week and were so stupid that we aren't responsible for weighing 300lbs, and MickeyD's needs to pay!"

Correct, no it's not. This is a situation where a responsible parent has more discretion.

So, as SeanH argued, junk food is something which, consumed in moderation, is not a net negative (whereas smoking even a single cigarette is a net negative).

I generally agree with your points, but I'm interested to see the math on that. Why is smoking a single cigarette a net negative, whereas eating a Big Mac isn't? Contextually, with otherwise proper diet and exercise, a Big Mac certainly isn't a net negative. Health-related math that's encapsulated in a single dining experience, however, it is a net negative: Low nutritional value, loaded with sugar and chemicals.

Both equations go for smoking as well - one could smoke an occasional cigarette in the context of an otherwise healthy lifestyle and be just fine. Shrug.

Posted by: Bill from INDC at April 13, 2006 10:37 AM

[...] and a school system serves the fast food to your child.

To be honest, I hadn't considered the shool lunch programs aspect of things.

The courts start to look like the only option, no?

Regulation/legislation remains an option, though for a current parent, that option obviously isn't particularly timely.

I generally agree with your points, but I'm interested to see the math on that. Why is smoking a single cigarette a net negative, whereas eating a Big Mac isn't?

Mea culpa: I haven't an iota of evidence to back my statement up, I was just going off of long ingrained cultural prejudice. Gotta say, I'm a big fan of your "Question Everything" mentality. There's never enough of that in modern socio/political discourse. Far too much gets taken for granted.

Posted by: Beck at April 13, 2006 11:43 AM

(For the record, I do believe that smoking is more of a net negative, health-wise, than a Big Mac, though the gap isn't as wide as most folks think. But a cig will sure give you a buzz after a couple of vodka gimlets, eh?)

Posted by: Bill from INDC at April 13, 2006 11:46 AM

You said it.

That actually reminds me of something completely tangential--the phenomenon of casual smokers. Plenty of people are casual drinkers, lifting a beer from time to time but not chugging regularly. If you listen to the nanny state propagandists, however, you'd think there was no such thing as a casual smoker. The reality is quite different. I know a number of people who like to burn a cig at the bar over a few drinks, but who don't smoke at all most days.

The statistics you hear on the addictiveness of tobacco without fail completely neglect this group of smokers. I can even recall once reading some learned person's assertion that nicotine is every bit as addictive as heroine. The reality of the situation paints a completely different picture.

Still, you never hear anyone objecting to state sponsored propaganda when it's related to nanny statist programs. Those who occasionally do object are summarily dismissed as cooks or liars.

Posted by: Beck at April 13, 2006 03:40 PM

This is cool, you have to try it. I guessed 74854, and this game guessed it! See it here - http://www.funbrain.com/guess/

Posted by: Allison Trump at May 22, 2006 09:34 PM

lose wieght lose wieght

Posted by: lose wieght at August 14, 2006 01:08 PM

young redhead nude redhead gloryhole

Posted by: Yxuxxfw at October 5, 2006 04:25 PM

young redhead nude redhead gloryhole

Posted by: Yxuxxfw at October 5, 2006 04:25 PM

young redhead nude redhead gloryhole

Posted by: Yxuxxfw at October 5, 2006 04:27 PM

interracial lesbian couples brutal interracial sex picture galleries

Posted by: Wmaqbujgazf at October 6, 2006 12:10 AM

interracial lesbian couples brutal interracial sex picture galleries

Posted by: Wmaqbujgazf at October 6, 2006 12:13 AM

interracial lesbian couples brutal interracial sex picture galleries

Posted by: Wmaqbujgazf at October 6, 2006 12:13 AM

mommy loves pussy nice pussy

Posted by: Cmfgeso at October 6, 2006 04:05 AM

mommy loves pussy nice pussy

Posted by: Cmfgeso at October 6, 2006 04:08 AM

mommy loves pussy nice pussy

Posted by: Cmfgeso at October 6, 2006 04:08 AM

mature ladies nl mature women fucking younger men

Posted by: Cpowcudes at October 6, 2006 11:43 AM

mature ladies nl mature women fucking younger men

Posted by: Cpowcudes at October 6, 2006 11:45 AM

mature ladies nl mature women fucking younger men

Posted by: Cpowcudes at October 6, 2006 11:49 AM

ionolsen16 I just don not have anything to say right now.www_4_2
www_4_3
www_4_4
www_4_5
www_4_6
www_4_7
www_4_8
www_4_9
www_4_10
www_4_11

Posted by: kipetok at October 13, 2006 07:40 AM

ionolsen16 Best site I see. Thanks.www_4_2
www_4_3
www_4_4
www_4_5
www_4_6
www_4_7
www_4_8
www_4_9
www_4_10
www_4_11

Posted by: tester at October 13, 2006 02:45 PM

ionolsen23 I like your site

Posted by: tabletka at October 19, 2006 05:20 PM

ionolsen24 HI! I love this place!

Posted by: pipetka at October 20, 2006 05:56 PM

ionolsen24 Very good site. Thanks for author!

Posted by: preved at October 20, 2006 06:09 PM

ionolsen26 I am really impressed!

Posted by: tabletka at October 23, 2006 02:38 PM

ionolsen28 HI! I love this place!

Posted by: thomson at October 25, 2006 04:54 AM

ionolsen34 Best site I see. Thanks.

Posted by: kolyma at October 31, 2006 01:35 PM

twllvajte

Posted by: Aidan Spangler at October 31, 2006 05:48 PM

twllvajte

Posted by: Aidan Spangler at October 31, 2006 05:48 PM

wnuuozuoo

Posted by: Reece Rivas at October 31, 2006 11:11 PM

wnuuozuoo

Posted by: Reece Rivas at October 31, 2006 11:13 PM

asepbden

Posted by: Jorge Earnest at November 1, 2006 04:39 AM

vhkxeuyh

Posted by: Oliver Palmer at November 1, 2006 10:21 AM

ionolsen38 I am really impressed!

Posted by: tester at November 4, 2006 01:52 AM

ionolsen41 Your site is very cognitive. I think you will have good future.:)

Posted by: nervotrepka at November 6, 2006 04:11 PM

ionolsen45 Great website! Bookmarked! I am impressed at your work!

Posted by: soft sex at November 10, 2006 03:44 PM

The first stage of a �150m investment in regional museums is praised for boosting visitor numbers...

Posted by: Jordon Oshea at November 12, 2006 08:45 AM

The Rolling Stones cancel a gig in Hawaii and postpone other tour dates as Mick Jagger suffers throat troubles...

Posted by: Owen Numbers at November 12, 2006 02:37 PM

Madonna says she may adopt another child from abroad following her proposed adoption of a Malawian boy...

Posted by: Braydon Shook at November 12, 2006 08:22 PM

c2af15a2e2e8 I like your site

Posted by: term insurance rate at November 13, 2006 01:59 PM

Social networking site MySpace is to block users from uploading copyrighted music to its pages...

Posted by: Will Robinette at November 17, 2006 02:32 AM

Social networking site MySpace is to block users from uploading copyrighted music to its pages...

Posted by: Will Robinette at November 17, 2006 02:33 AM

TV host Oprah Winfrey gives audience members $1,000 (�526) each to donate to a charitable cause...

Posted by: Diego Borges at November 17, 2006 07:48 AM

See busty girls

Posted by: big tit at November 17, 2006 07:21 PM

Hello, her first big cock here!

Posted by: big cock at November 18, 2006 01:13 AM

oh look on that cool milf womans inside

Posted by: milf seeker at November 18, 2006 07:04 AM

Noi ti forniamo una facile e versatile visione d'insieme del tuo portafoglio - questo rende pi� facile seguire il tuo rendimento.

Posted by: Milf Crusier at November 18, 2006 11:45 PM

Twistys Presents: Kyla Cole

Posted by: kyla cole at November 19, 2006 01:45 AM

All about ass traffic

Posted by: ass traffic at November 19, 2006 09:54 AM

Twistys Presents: Veronica Zemanova

Posted by: veronica zemanova at November 19, 2006 07:03 PM

female masturbation panties masturbation squirt The first stage of a �150m investment in regional museums is praised for boosting visitor numbers...

Posted by: Brayan Webber at November 20, 2006 05:15 PM

Twistys Presents: Peach

Posted by: peach at November 21, 2006 08:20 AM

Twistys Presents: Zdenka

Posted by: zdenka at November 21, 2006 02:16 PM

Twistys Presents: Jana Cova

Posted by: jana cova at November 22, 2006 02:03 AM

Twistys Presents: Eva Shine

Posted by: eva shine at November 22, 2006 04:08 AM

Twistys Presents: Erica Campbell

Posted by: erica campbell at November 22, 2006 06:16 AM

f14726bf038e My homepage

Posted by: symptoms of lupus at November 25, 2006 04:22 AM

196fab6d3dd9 Very good

Posted by: teen at November 25, 2006 11:22 PM

582e4c5a2810 Hi

Posted by: sexy at November 27, 2006 01:38 PM

2e613c226f54 Great work

Posted by: young lesbians at November 28, 2006 10:52 AM

c98bf57c3077 Nice site

Posted by: order tramadol at November 28, 2006 03:47 PM

783e41adeffc Nice site black sex black sex
hand job movies hand job movies
hand jobs cum hand jobs cum
lesbian sex lesbian sex
great sex positions great sex positions
mature bbw mature bbw
monster cocks sex monster cocks sex
hot asian pussy hot asian pussy
wife masturbate wife masturbate
naked teens naked teens

Posted by: black sex at November 29, 2006 05:22 PM

Not much on my mind lately, but that's how it is. My life's been dull these days, but such is life. I haven't been up to much recently.
I haven't been up to much today. Such is life. My life's been basically dull today, but that's how it is.
I haven't gotten anything done today. My life's been dull today, but shrug. I can't be bothered with anything recently, but oh well. I've just been sitting around doing nothing. What can I say? So it goes.

Posted by: dental insurance providers at December 11, 2006 10:13 PM

Innocent cute babe gives blowjob & gets facial

Posted by: blowjob at December 19, 2006 10:19 AM

Sexy Brunette Bitch In Bikini Giving Handjob

Posted by: handjob at December 19, 2006 04:13 PM

Busty Teen Interracial Gets Fucked In Tight Ass

Posted by: interracial at December 19, 2006 10:18 PM

44769d5e6069 Nice site

Posted by: short url at December 20, 2006 06:16 AM

Busty Blonde Licking Boobs & Shows Nipples

Posted by: Breasts at December 20, 2006 06:46 AM

Hot Babe Double Penetration Ass-to-mouth Hardcore

Posted by: Double Penetration at December 20, 2006 12:22 PM

Blond Babe With Big Tits Sucking & Titty Cumshot

Posted by: Cumshot at December 20, 2006 06:50 PM

Hot Milf Blonde Doggystyle Fucked And Facialized

Posted by: about milf at December 21, 2006 06:35 PM

Slutty Teen Sucking Black Monster Cock & Cumshot

Posted by: monsters cock at December 22, 2006 12:39 AM

Hot Babe Tied Up Clamped Cunt & Huge Dildo Assfuck

Posted by: ass at December 22, 2006 01:12 PM

Pornstar Jasmine Bryne Assfucked & Swallowing Cum

Posted by: ass parade at December 22, 2006 07:40 PM

Brunette With Huge Boobs Titty Fucking & Posing

Posted by: big tits at December 23, 2006 01:42 AM

Curly Haired Brunette Tittyfucking With Big Tits

Posted by: big tits round asses at December 23, 2006 07:54 AM

Sexy Blond MILF Garterbelts Hardcore Fucked

Posted by: bang milf at December 24, 2006 02:25 PM

Tight Busty Tanned Blond MILF Showing Shaved Pussy

Posted by: amateur milf at December 24, 2006 08:43 PM

Busty MILF Gets Hardcore Doggystyle Bang On Bed

Posted by: best milf at December 25, 2006 02:54 AM

Hairless Blond MILF Sucks Dick & Gets Cum In Eyes

Posted by: biggest milf at December 25, 2006 09:10 AM

Hot Tight MILF Getting Fucked In The Car

Posted by: bikini milf at December 25, 2006 03:23 PM

Chubby MILF With Big Natural Tits & Tattoo Banging

Posted by: black milf at December 25, 2006 09:37 PM

Stupid Tight Blond MILF Sucking Dicks On Sofa MMF

Posted by: blonde milf at December 26, 2006 04:15 AM

Brunette Monster Cock Sucking In 3some Hardcore

Posted by: big cock at December 26, 2006 05:26 PM

Teen Sucks Monster Cock Wants To Swallow Cumshot

Posted by: big cock action at December 26, 2006 11:56 PM

Pornstar Missy Monroe Assfucks Black Monster Cock

Posted by: biggest cock at December 27, 2006 06:18 AM

Cute Petite Lesbians Suck Monster Cock In Garage

Posted by: monsters of cock at December 27, 2006 12:42 PM

Blond Lesbians Fucked By Doctor With Monster Cocks

Posted by: xxx cock at December 27, 2006 07:00 PM

Tanned Hairless Blonde Fucks Monster Cock For Cum

Posted by: ass cock at December 28, 2006 01:37 AM

Pornstar Vega Vixen Muffdiving & Assfucked FFM

Posted by: big ass at December 28, 2006 08:11 AM

Shaved Blond Latina In Fishnet Stockings Assfucked

Posted by: black ass at December 28, 2006 09:57 PM

Topless Tanned Shemale Fucked Oral & Assfucking

Posted by: nice ass at December 29, 2006 04:48 AM

Blond Girl Anal Toyinh & Ass Fucked Hardcore

Posted by: ass fucking at December 29, 2006 05:56 PM

Ebony Girl Assfucking & Fucking 69 In FFM 3some

Posted by: fat ass at December 30, 2006 12:39 AM

Tight Brunette Assfucked And Very Messy Face

Posted by: ass licking at December 30, 2006 08:32 AM

Mature Woman With Glasses Titfucking

Posted by: big black tit at December 30, 2006 09:48 PM

Blonde Tittyfucking & Spreads Pussy On Sofa

Posted by: big natural tit at December 31, 2006 04:51 AM

Busty Tanned Blond Mom Titty Fucking Interracial

Posted by: big tit teen at December 31, 2006 11:45 AM

Busty Blond Sorority Girl Tittyfuck & Riding Cock

Posted by: mature big tit at January 1, 2007 02:17 PM

Hairless Busty Exotic Bimbo Fucking Dildo Outdoor

Posted by: busty teen at January 1, 2007 09:00 PM

Busty Tanned Babes Fucked On Sofa 3some

Posted by: busty babes at January 2, 2007 03:58 AM

Busty Blond Bombshell Big Tits Screws Dildo Nude

Posted by: busty adventure at January 2, 2007 10:41 AM

Busty Babe Gets Pussy Licked In Garage Hardcore

Posted by: busty asian at January 2, 2007 05:29 PM

Busty Beauty Titties Clamped & Hogtied

Posted by: busty blonde at January 3, 2007 12:20 AM

Busty Fetish Blond Mistress Torturing Slave Femdom

Posted by: busty mature at January 3, 2007 07:03 AM

Busty Dark Haired Babe Shows Hairy Pussy

Posted by: busty girl at January 3, 2007 01:47 PM

I've just been hanging out doing nothing. I've basically been doing nothing worth mentioning. Shrug. Pretty much not much exciting happening today. Today was a complete loss.
I've just been staying at home waiting for something to happen. I just don't have much to say right now, but so it goes. I've basically been doing nothing to speak of, but shrug. Today was a loss. I don't care. That's how it is.
My life's been basically bland recently. I can't be bothered with anything recently. Pretty much nothing seems important. I've basically been doing nothing worth mentioning.

Posted by: big cock at January 5, 2007 01:55 PM

I've just been staying at home waiting for something to happen. I just don't have much to say right now, but so it goes. I've basically been doing nothing to speak of, but shrug. Today was a loss. I don't care. That's how it is.
I can't be bothered with anything recently. I've just been sitting around doing nothing. Today was a loss. I just don't have much to say. Nothing seems worth thinking about.
Pretty much nothing seems worth thinking about. Maybe tomorrow. My life's been generally bland today. Such is life. I've just been sitting around doing nothing, but eh.

Posted by: busty adventures at January 5, 2007 08:56 PM

My life's been pretty dull lately, but I guess it doesn't bother me. I haven't been up to anything recently. Maybe tomorrow. I've pretty much been doing nothing worth mentioning. I haven't gotten much done these days. Pretty much nothing seems worth thinking about.

Posted by: nude at January 6, 2007 11:40 AM

I feel like a fog, not that it matters. I've pretty much been doing nothing , but eh. Today was a loss. I haven't gotten much done for a while.

Posted by: tug jobs at January 9, 2007 04:44 AM

I can't be bothered with anything recently. I've just been sitting around doing nothing. Today was a loss. I just don't have much to say. Nothing seems worth thinking about.

Posted by: bang bros at January 9, 2007 08:27 PM

I haven't been up to much recently, but whatever. I just don't have much to say lately. Basically nothing happening to speak of. So it goes. My mind is like a complete blank. Such is life.

Posted by: camel toe at January 10, 2007 02:38 AM

I've pretty much been doing nothing worth mentioning. I haven't gotten anything done today. I haven't been up to much , but oh well. I've just been staying at home waiting for something to happen, but so it goes. Pfft.

Posted by: public invasion at January 10, 2007 09:07 AM

I've just been staying at home waiting for something to happen. I've just been letting everything wash over me. I can't be bothered with anything recently.

Posted by: bait bus at January 10, 2007 03:31 PM

Nothing notable going on. My life's been generally dull today. So it goes. Not much on my mind to speak of.

Posted by: bang bros at January 10, 2007 10:18 PM

Not much on my mind lately, but that's how it is. My life's been dull these days, but such is life. I haven't been up to much recently.

Posted by: oxpass at January 11, 2007 05:00 AM

I've basically been doing nothing to speak of. Basically nothing seems worth thinking about. I feel like a void, but that's how it is. I've just been hanging out doing nothing.

Posted by: moms anal at January 11, 2007 11:38 AM

I haven't gotten anything done today. My life's been dull today, but shrug. I can't be bothered with anything recently, but oh well. I've just been sitting around doing nothing. What can I say? So it goes.

Posted by: taylor bow at January 11, 2007 06:03 PM

I haven't gotten anything done. Whatever. I just don't have anything to say.

Posted by: ball honeys at January 12, 2007 12:38 AM

L�interet du forum est precisement de susciter un debat parmi les citoyens pour que le budget et les choix qu�il sous-tend soient places au c?ur du debat public. Un budget, ce sont des choix. Des choix supposent des priorites.

Posted by: big ass at January 12, 2007 07:37 AM

O governo estuda a proposta de criacao da idade minima de 67 anos para homens e mulheres se aposentarem pelo INSS

Posted by: summer milf at January 12, 2007 09:03 PM

meu site... queria que avaliassem e dessem opinioes!

Posted by: street ranger at January 13, 2007 07:32 AM

81e31de21f46 Hello!

Posted by: tramadol at January 21, 2007 10:32 PM

81e31de21f46 Nice site

Posted by: medical malpractice insurance rates at January 23, 2007 09:13 PM

College education is a basic need today

Posted by: 15on1 jennifer at February 1, 2007 09:00 AM

Power to the people is, is not a good idea

Posted by: flexible girls at February 1, 2007 11:25 AM

Pretty much nothing notable happening. My mind is like a complete blank. I've just been hanging out waiting for something to happen. Not much on my mind to speak of. I just don't have anything to say. That's how it is.

Posted by: glamour girls at February 2, 2007 05:03 AM

Buyers of guns must take gun-safety courses

Posted by: Glamour Models at February 2, 2007 01:29 PM

I haven't been up to anything. My mind is like an empty room, but such is life. Maybe tomorrow. Today was a loss, but eh.

Posted by: blow job oral teen at February 4, 2007 12:03 AM

More or less nothing seems important. It's not important. Shrug. Whatever. I've just been hanging out doing nothing, but eh. I can't be bothered with anything lately.

Posted by: love bisexuals at February 5, 2007 09:42 AM

flsc wtvdmp rkyc ztcp hzvrgyjfw lgzco uxhoardpb

Posted by: nkauozihv hcwgelzka at March 1, 2007 05:01 PM