How can you dispute what you've obviously not read? Simply search the article like any individual with internet access and reference the citations for yourself, as I have left them in the quote for your use. And as far as your reference of 'these kinds of studies' I hope you don't mean science in general, as these results have been confirmed by peer review and are currently part of Genetics and Cell Biology class curriculum.

Will smith, we know your secret.

"Numerous studies have demonstrated a role for free radicals in the aging process and thus tentatively support the free radical theory of aging. Studies have shown a significant increase in superoxide radical (SOR) formation and lipid peroxidation in aging rats.[31] Chung et al. suggest ROS production increases with age and indicated the conversion of XDH to XOD may be an important contributing factor.[32] This was supported by a study that showed superoxide production by xanthine oxidase and NO synthase in mesenteric arteries was higher in older rats than young ones.[33]

Hamilton et al. examined the similarities in impaired endothelial function in hypertension and aging in humans and found a significant overproduction of superoxide in both.[34] This finding is supported by a 2007 study which found that endothelial oxidative stress develops with aging in healthy men and is related to reductions in endothelium-dependant dilation.[35] Furthermore, a study using cultured smooth muscle cells displayed increased reactive oxygen species (ROS) in cells derived from older mice.[36] These findings were supported by a second study using Leydig cells isolated from the testes of young and old rats.[37]

The Choksi et al. experiment with Ames dwarf (DW) mice suggests the lower levels of endogenous ROS production in DW mice may be a factor in their resistance to oxidative stress and long life.[38] Lener et al. suggest Nox4 activity increases oxidative damage in human umbilical vein endothelial cells via superoxide overproduction.[39] Furthermore, Rodriguez-Manas et al. found endothelial dysfunction in human vessels is due to the collective effect of vascular inflammation and oxidative stress.[40]"


Source: wikipedia.com
Alt Source: I'm a Biograd via IU, and can cite the works of Dr. Martin Bard, B.S. City College of New York, 1965; Ph.D. University of California (Berkeley), 1971

How can you dispute what you've obviously not read? Simply search the article like any individual with internet access and reference the citations for yourself, as I have left them in the quote for your use. And as far as your reference of 'these kinds of studies' I hope you don't mean science in general, as these results have been confirmed by peer review and are currently part of Genetics and Cell Biology class curriculum.

The last slide is referring to the present day prosperity of Switzerland in relation to all of it's neighboring nations which is supposedly, and may be, a result of it's lack of involvement in wars of the region. The absence of America wasn't meant as any deep meaning of them losing power, rather they simply aren't anywhere near Switzerland. You don't see Japan or Canada in the final slide either.

The comic is referencing specifically European issues, because you'll notice 1. Japan is not in WWII. 2. China is not in the last panel (and if it was truly referring to global issues/world economy, China would fucking be there).

It only involves wars that were in that geographical region. America was there for World War 2 fighting, and now isn't because we are no longer involved there

So there's a war occurring in the last frame (present day), that no American is privy to?

The last slide is referring to the present day prosperity of Switzerland in relation to all of it's neighboring nations which is supposedly, and may be, a result of it's lack of involvement in wars of the region. The absence of America wasn't meant as any deep meaning of them losing power, rather they simply aren't anywhere near Switzerland. You don't see Japan or Canada in the final slide either.

So we have stayed out of European affairs? That is what the founding fathers advised and we probably should have sticked to that.

at first because we were too small and didn't have any world power. As we got bigger it was either we go in on our own accord or we get thrown into it by someone else.

because the US is not in Europe?

The comic refers to global issues, and in this world-wide economy of ours, we're all connected. But America is losing her place in the world.

The comic is referencing specifically European issues, because you'll notice 1. Japan is not in WWII. 2. China is not in the last panel (and if it was truly referring to global issues/world economy, China would fucking be there).

It only involves wars that were in that geographical region. America was there for World War 2 fighting, and now isn't because we are no longer involved there

So there's a war occurring in the last frame (present day), that no American is privy to?

The last slide is referring to the present day prosperity of Switzerland in relation to all of it's neighboring nations which is supposedly, and may be, a result of it's lack of involvement in wars of the region. The absence of America wasn't meant as any deep meaning of them losing power, rather they simply aren't anywhere near Switzerland. You don't see Japan or Canada in the final slide either.

Yet it's in all the other ones excluding the first which looks like the thirty years war, which was before the USA.

because that's when we had to help the rest of the world. Before they were jealous and started hatin' on us. like I say "Haters gonna hate."