Many people who compete in sports look for “that extra edge”,whether it be cycling,running,swimming or any other sport where that little extra bit of stamina could be the factor between winning and losing.Unfortunately some people turn to illegal substances to gain that edge,because they don`t know that their are very good natural legal alternatives.One such supplement that can help you with your endurance is optygen HP.
Now if you don`t know what optygen HP is I will quickly explain to you.According to the first endurance (manufactures of optygen HP) website optygen HP is a legal, safe and stimulant-free formula designed specifically to optimize performance for endurance athletes. This revolutionary formula is based on human clinical trials and the latest scientific research on increasing endurance.
Now I was very sceptical before I used the supplement,mainly because I was not a person who used supplements and because there are many banned substances,but I took the plunge after reading that Alberto Contador Velasco (2007 tour de france winner) and Levi Leipheimer (2008 tour of California 1st overall) uses optygen HP and after doing long hours of research on the product.After taking the supplement for about two weeks I had improved my running times by quite a lot of time and I was very pleased with the results that I got.While training it felt as if I had more oxygen and I had a lot more endurance as well.I also experienced less fatigue and less lactic acid after training,which is always a plus.I have been using the product now for several months and my running times has never been better and I am glad I tried this product.
If you are in the market for a supplement that will increase your endurance and performance I would suggest you first do your research.Make sure that the product you intend to use is legal ans stimulant free.I have spent hours researching different products before using optygen HP.
If you want a good review on optygen HP you can also have a look at http://optygenhpreview.blogspot.com/
The Islamic dress code has helped Muslims stand out among others, yet it has also lead to controversial debates all over the secular world. All Muslim women must wear hijab to cover themselves in public but do all societies accept this mode of dressing easily? Hijab controversy in France refers to the wearing of hijab in public schools in France in 1990s. In 1989 three Muslim female students were expelled from Gabriel Havez Middle School for wearing head scarf inside the school premises. The school authorities objected to it because they believed that essentially religious nature of this head gear influences the rule of secularity in the school. In January 1990 same incident repeated itself when three girls got suspended from Pasteur Middle School when they insisted on wearing hijab in school. In the years between 1994 and 2003 approximately a hundred female students at different schools were expelled for wearing hijab. Many students raised their voices in protest.
The school authorities believed that students who wear hijab not only pose threat to the principle of secularism but they also lead to peer pressure for those Muslim female students who do not want to wear hijab. They insisted hijab being an ostentatious religious symbol should not be there at public schools. If we peep into the French history they have considered faith as a personal matter of individual citizens rather than a matter for a nation, this renders schools as neutral places where students must learn regardless of political and religious controversies. Hence, wearing hijab at school becomes questionable. French government forbids any symbols, religious or political, that will harm or compromise freedom or dignity of the educative community.
In the year 2003, an investigative committee was engaged to check the application of the principle of secularity in the state schools. The committee was selected by the French President Jacques Chirac and was named commission Stasi. A few months later this commission reported that religious symbols and practices in public negatively affected the French law of secularity and should be kept in check. They suggested that students should not wear religious signs such as crosses, Stars of David, turbans for sikh boys and hijabs for Muslim girls. The commission insisted that Muslim hijab poses intolerable negative pressure on young women who are not wearing it. It indicates constraint.
Religious representatives opposed the banning of religious symbols. They believed that this report projected a state that restricted personal freedom of people. The girls who were dropped out of schools were in a way forced to make a choice between education and their faith.
In 2004 the law banning hijab and other ostentatious religious symbols was passed. It was to be applied in France. The law targeted hijab and the veil more forcefully. It prevented Muslim community from asserting its real identity which raised displeasure among many religious and political working bodies. In February 2004 a march on streets was carried out by many hijab wearing Muslim women to protest against the law banning Hijab and other religious gear in public schools. The law was an infringement on religious obligations. In political context the ban has even been considered racist although a wide majority of the French approved of it.
After the enforcement of this law the number of hijab wearing students decreased in school. Many of them were forced to undertake distant learning courses; some migrated to other countries for education. Consequently many Islamic secondary schools were established where female Muslim students could have quality education while they could freely observe and carry out their religious obligations.
According to a poll released last Thursday, Canadian attitudes toward immigration are hardening but Canada still remains more positive attitude as compared to other Western nations including the US and Europe.
The annual survey, done by a Washington-based think-tank, looked at public perception of a wide variety of immigration issues in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain. And it maintains that Canada is the most welcoming nation to the immigrants who want to live and work in Canada.
Around two-thirds of Canadians agreed that people immigrating to Canada have been successfully integrated into their society. The statistics show that respondents who felt in 2010 that immigrants helped create jobs by establishing new businesses down is down from 75 per cent in 2009 to 67 per cent in 2010. And the proportion of Canadians who thought immigration “enriches” culture by bringing in new customs and ideas slipped from 65 to 60 per cent. However in both cases, the numbers were significantly higher than those from the US and Europe.
The majority of the survey respondents from the US (73%), the UK (70%), Spain (61%), France (58%), and the Netherlands (54%) believed that their government was doing a poor job in managing immigration. Only Canadians were split, with 48% feeling positive and 43% responding negatively about their government’s handling of immigration to Canada.
Delancey Gustin – the author of the 2010 Immigration Public Opinion Survey said that Canadians are quite positive about immigration and they seem to be less bothered by issues of immigrants taking away their jobs leading to lower wages. She also stated that Canadian government policies and more importantly Canadian geography drive public attitudes.
For further information and advice on obtaining a Canadian visa, contact Migration Expert by visiting Migration Expert is an online provider of visa and immigration advice and services. The Company has been operating since 2002 when it began its Australian visa services and has since helped people from all over the world apply for visas to Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States.