Sentences with phrase «very kind of harms»

They express, in other words, the very kind of harms that led the Supreme Court of Canada to strike down Canada's prostitution laws.

Not exact matches

Indeed, it will harm an industry dominated by smaller companies and startups, the very kind of industry the administration has said it wants to support.

Since most people rely on some kind of substance to help them escape pain, to relax, or to socialize, the moral question is whether the immediate good outweighs the possible harm» something very specific to each situation.

The Conservative MP goes on to say that strikes harm the economy and are «personally disruptive» to millions, «and it is not reasonable for that kind of vital labour to be withdrawn for wildcat strikes that are very often a bit political in their motivation».

this article is very helpful in knowing the benefits of certain fruits and herb and vegetable that we take for granted, it also helps us to know the healing process is always through the right food and not pharmacuticals, because i have been going to the philopinnes every year for a eight week holiday for almost nineteen years and my doctor kept insisting that i take malaria tablets for the mosquito's so about eight years ago i looked at what food the local people consumed that keeps the mosquito's away, and found that many of them eat a kind of vegatable called a bitter melon or gourd which is called karela in india, from the ampaylaya bush and it contains massive amounts of varying types of vitamin b so i started to eat a lot of it uncooked with a morning and evening salad, over the next month i noticed that was not beeing bitten by any insects, so i concluded that my body ferrymones and general odour had changed and acted as a reppelant, but it would only stay that way as long as i used very little deoderant.i also felt a lot better because most malaria tablets contain too much quinine and that can only do you a lot of harm.

You posted statements that economics doesn't account very well or objectively for various kinds of costs (e.g., damage to coral reefs, harm to tropical or poor countries, etc).

Maybe more facts of the case would make it sound more plausible, but for a case that would cost perhaps $ 75,000 of attorneys» fees and costs to litigate in the U.S. with no prospect of an award of those fees to you if you prevailed in the U.S. (except recovery of your filing fees, out of pocket costs and expert witness fees for things other than attorneys), and a risk of paying the other side's expert witness costs if you lost, the provable harm would have to be in the many hundreds of thousands of dollars and the mistake would have to be very glaring before that kind of case would make sense to seriously consider bringing.

Doesn't it seem strange that the very same common denominator, present or not, causes the same kind of harm?