(IMO) It's all about the rate at which dietary sugars are found to be present in blood and thus generally available.
I like to eat meals which have a combination of high-, medium- and low-GI basic ingredients.
The high-GI will give you a quick hit of energy and keep going until the energy from the medium-GI ingredients comes online; a similar combined-effect for the medium/low pair. Then try to eat every three hours or so and you're good - a nice smoothed-wave appearance to the graph of your blood sugar.
What? A farm had eats two eggs? Maybe for one of those farms with little plastic animals:P
I work in IT and eat as much a two / three / four farm hands by your definition and am stuck at 12st4 for a 6'0" male. Have you heard of 'starvation mode' ? The idea is that the traditional 'eat less to lose weight' makes sense only in a situation where the body plods on in exactly the same manner despite conditions; which isn't the case - when it experiences lower dietary energy, it responds by slowing metabolism thus negating the effect of eating less - so you eat less, possibly feeling hard done by and sluggish at the same time/o\ low five!:-(
I'm a firm believer in eating regularly in response to your body's demands - that way it will not need to take matters into its own hands and store fat whenever you eat something because it will always have a ready supply of energy.
An alternative is to declare open season on IP attorneys, stripping them of civil liberties and allowing people to roast them alive and eat their juicy livers,
What? I'm pretty sure I read that this was already legalized last year before I... shit, my bad.
If the Government were required to provide full notice of its reasons for placing an individual on the No Fly List and to turn over all evidence (both incriminating and exculpatory) supporting the No Fly determination, the No Fly redress process would place highly sensitive national security information directly in the hands of terrorist organizations and other adversaries," says the assistant director of the FBI's counterterrorism division
If <something-we-dont-want> were to happen then <something-that-no-right-thinking-individual-should-want< would happen.
Nice packaging.
Sure, why should your decisions which affects others' lives be held up for scrutiny ?
I think your being unreasonable. There government actively encourages low standards in education. Jeez, just look at the Burger State where they mandate the teaching of something that is blatant nonsense. In such a climate, how would you're spelling rate?
Duh; go to the bottom of the class; it means it's time to reset the bug counter and start another cycle of shooting for bug-free via regular updates. Yay \o/
[apologies for my verbosity in a culture where many are reticent to acknowledge that it is possible and even desirable to use more than 160 characters to communicate.]
So would those calling him a traitor today, still be calling him a traitor tomorrow if he disclosed something along the lines of the aforementioned " darker secrets " ?
Yep; people like to feel warm and fuzzy about their country / government; anyone making that position less tenable is to be demonized.
After that, may I suggest you pay attention to the principles behind the positions of each of the candidates and pick the one that most matches what you actually agree with.
It's so difficult to choose as my preference is to support whichever stance polls as most popular with 'ordinary people ®', no matter how horrific or poorly thought-out.
Any tips on which candidate most closely matches my ideals?
if he's well-employed over there, I imagine he has beautiful women lining up to date him.
Probably less appealing than it first appears once the dating equivalent of a food-taster has waved each potential partner through the US-agent checkpoint.
I wonder if the irony of "authoritarian regime" is lost on these clowns.
Of course not, well-crafted phrase which can simultaneously rally support amongst the n00bs whilst enraging non-n00bs by flagrant use of hypocrisy. Double-win, woohoo \o/. High-fives all the way back to the speech-writers' office \o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/
There's only so many more times they can play the land-of-the-free card once the whole thing has been shown to be a cesspool of corruption. From there, where else is there but the police state which has been in dress-rehearsal for the last few years?
I'm sure there are those who are willing. How about starting the ball rolling with some suggestions which fit together into a medium-to-long term plan?
(IMO)
It's all about the rate at which dietary sugars are found to be present in blood and thus generally available.
I like to eat meals which have a combination of high-, medium- and low-GI basic ingredients.
The high-GI will give you a quick hit of energy and keep going until the energy from the medium-GI ingredients comes online; a similar combined-effect for the medium/low pair. Then try to eat every three hours or so and you're good - a nice smoothed-wave appearance to the graph of your blood sugar.
Nuh-uh, zombies are way more friendly :P
Only last week, my good friend Dave, a relatively recent zombie, mentioned that within his clique, Vegans are seen as a danger and to be avoided.
What? A farm had eats two eggs? Maybe for one of those farms with little plastic animals :P
I work in IT and eat as much a two / three / four farm hands by your definition and am stuck at 12st4 for a 6'0" male. Have you heard of 'starvation mode' ? The idea is that the traditional 'eat less to lose weight' makes sense only in a situation where the body plods on in exactly the same manner despite conditions; which isn't the case - when it experiences lower dietary energy, it responds by slowing metabolism thus negating the effect of eating less - so you eat less, possibly feeling hard done by and sluggish at the same time /o\ low five! :-(
I'm a firm believer in eating regularly in response to your body's demands - that way it will not need to take matters into its own hands and store fat whenever you eat something because it will always have a ready supply of energy.
Anyway, works for me, your mileage may vary :D
Really, who cares what they think? *pauses for reflection*
"I believe this and therefore you should too!" - is that persuading you? Well then... I rest my case.
Just stop listening to all the talking heads and the world becomes a much nice place ;D
ProTip: there is no ignore. Once it's in ur brain, it's in...
What? I'm pretty sure I read that this was already legalized last year before I... shit, my bad.
Wtf? TPDR = Too Partisan Didn't Read.
The text was dripping with digital spittle. Feel free to get a tetanus shot at your earliest opportunity.
If <something-we-dont-want> were to happen then <something-that-no-right-thinking-individual-should-want< would happen.
Nice packaging.
Sure, why should your decisions which affects others' lives be held up for scrutiny ?
Apparently there are no second world concerns, slashdot.ru returns 'Nothing here.'
Meds. Muh eh duh ssss.
Get some soon...
I think your being unreasonable. There government actively encourages low standards in education. Jeez, just look at the Burger State where they mandate the teaching of something that is blatant nonsense.
In such a climate, how would you're spelling rate?
Good news everyone! There's still hope that the status quo may survive!!
Duh; go to the bottom of the class; it means it's time to reset the bug counter and start another cycle of shooting for bug-free via regular updates. Yay \o/
Finally, a car analogy.
+1 !!
Really though, how is it dangerous? There are no disincentives.
TL;DR
Rationality is not a factor.
Seriously? That's what you're going to post?
Yep; people like to feel warm and fuzzy about their country / government; anyone making that position less tenable is to be demonized.
It's so difficult to choose as my preference is to support whichever stance polls as most popular with 'ordinary people ®', no matter how horrific or poorly thought-out.
Any tips on which candidate most closely matches my ideals?
Probably less appealing than it first appears once the dating equivalent of a food-taster has waved each potential partner through the US-agent checkpoint.
Of course not, well-crafted phrase which can simultaneously rally support amongst the n00bs whilst enraging non-n00bs by flagrant use of hypocrisy. Double-win, woohoo \o/. High-fives all the way back to the speech-writers' office \o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/\o/
There's only so many more times they can play the land-of-the-free card once the whole thing has been shown to be a cesspool of corruption. From there, where else is there but the police state which has been in dress-rehearsal for the last few years?
I'm sure there are those who are willing. How about starting the ball rolling with some suggestions which fit together into a medium-to-long term plan?
Waiting for the spin-machine to reach full speed?