The refined carbohydrates you believe are the cause of Type II diabetes have been consumed now for over 5000 years. This is a disorder that did not even exist 100 years ago, and barely existed 40 years ago. What has changed? Until you explain THAT, everything you think you know is completely irrelevent.
Actually... We've been aware of diabetes at least since the time of the Roman Empire. "Diabetes mellitus" is actually latin for "sweet urine", which was the diagnostic test (yuk!) for the disease back then. In the past, type 1 diabetics didn't survive to adulthood. Type 2 complications take decades to develop, and may be mistaken for other things. Either way, since the average life expectancy was less than 40 5000 years ago, your point is hardly relevant. Most people didn't live long enough for the disease to develop.
I have to live with the disease. Funny... I can eat more rice than I can bread. It doesn't get digested as fast.
I'd love to see your 50 claimed references. You've done a lot of spouting off bullshit in this topic. You have your preconceived position, and you aren't going to let go of it. You're not helping anyone, and we really don't care if you want to feel smarter than everyone else.
But I'd recommend not trying it if you're a Type I diabetic (like myself).
Agreed, though a diabetic never gets back to "eating whatever you want again". That would lead to the loss of blood glucose (BG) control, BG swings, cravings, followed by more insulin resistance and islet cell damage.
But most type 1 diabetics require some form of insulin and drugs to manage their BG. As a type 2, I'm drug & insulin free as a result of Atkins. The diseases are similar in symptoms, but the causes of T1 and T2 are quite different.
I'll take type 2 over type 1 anyday. I hope you have good BG control, and a responsive proactive management team backing you up. Take care of your heart and feet, and whatever you do, don't smoke!
I have trouble with the word "abuse", since insulin production and sensativity varies widely from person to person. The symptoms of "insulin abuse" creep up on you. You don't recognize it when it happens, and it's not very different from what a "normal non-abusing person" is doing.
The biggest clue for me was ravenous hunger 4 to 6 hours after a high carb meal. Even then I only found out due to a presurgical screen after an accident. As it progresses, its easier to "abuse". I can "abuse" my insulin right now by eating two slices of wonder bread. 99% of the people on the planet would have no problem with this.
I'm not disagreeing with you, but your nomenclature tends to imply blame. It's not like Type 2 diabetics spent their younger years in back alleys with belts around their arms shooting glucose in their veins. Although, thanks to our modern high carb processed food diets, the net effect was the same.
Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease. The body's immune system destroys the insulin producing cells during childhood. Nobody has proven it has anything to do with diet.
Type 2 diabetics are insulin resistant, or have pancreatic damage. Eating bread and pasta will kill them faster than eating meat.
Bread and pasta will cause blood glucose swings in pre-diabetics that will lead to food cravings followed by the full blown disease. Your dietary religion is actually harmful to some people!
Cut the sugar! Within a few weeks your natural ability to taste the inherent sweetness of natural foods will return and you'll wonder (and be sickened) by how *SWEET* everything around you is. Seriously.
No kidding! After a couple months on Atkins, unbuttered unsalted popcorn will taste sweet!
You're taking the "blame the patient" position. It's been debunked.
One notable characteristic of type II diabetes is the loss of the post meal insulin pulse. This pulse of insulin keeps blood glucose in check immediately after a meal. Without it, your blood glucose rises sharply after a meal and then falls. Swinging blood sugar levels lead to sugar & carbohydrate cravings. You can have these, and not be fat. The disease can actually induce the vice. Cause and effect are not always what they seem. You might find my other posts in this topic interesting.
Athletes, having more muscle tissue, have more GLUT4 transporters to carry glucose in to their cells. This makes it more difficult to become insulin resistant.
But cause and effect is not what it seems with diabetes. You seem to be taking the "blame the patient" position, which has been completely debunked. People with swinging blood glucose will crave sugar. Pancreatic disease aside, there are two ways to become type II diabetic, one is to become insulin resistant, and the other is to burn out the insulin producing cells in the pancreas. Any time your blood glucose is above 120 mg/dL, you're exausting cells in your pancreas. So the question becomes, did someone burn out their pancreas and get fat because of poor blood sugar control, or did they get fat and become insulin resistant resulting in poor blood sugar control followed by pancreas damage. Kind of difficult to figure out after the fact.
I have type II diabetes. I got fat. I found out, I got skinny again. I still have diabetes. Looking back, I now realize I exhibited signs of diabetes when I was much younger, and was still skinny and in good shape.
Some info for you to muse over:
1 baked potato averages about 10 grams of carbohydrates
1 12 oz can of soda usually runs 40 grams of carbs.
So drinking a can of soda is like eating 4 baked potatos! How many people here claim to drink liters of soda a day?!?!
Make fun of Atkins all you like, but for those of us that have type II diabetes, it's a powerful tool to control our blood sugar. I've lost enough weight on Atkins that my sugar readings are "normal" as long as I stick to the diet. If I eat more than about 20 grams of carbs at one sitting, or about 45 - 50 grams a day, my blood sugar goes way up. Studies have shown that good sugar control postpones and reduces the onset of diabetic complications. Basicly, the carbs kill diabetics faster than the fat & cholesterol.
Many people mistake Atkins induction level with the "atkins diet". Induction is a 2 week phase. It is not a balanced diet, and you're not supposed to stay on it forever. Atkins at maintenance levels resembles The Zone diet.
Most people don't realize that a can of soda has the carbohydrate equivalent of roughly 3 baked potatos! Drinking a 2 liter jug of soda every day will burn out the isulin producing cells in some people's pancreas, and make them diabetic.
In the US, it's called the Magnuson-Moss Act of 1975. Google for it. It specifically prohibits product tying for warranty claims. They cannot deny your claim because you used an unapproved cell phone. There's a number of other provisions in MM that BMW seems to be trying to ignore.
Actually... They would have to grab it all at once. Once you power it down, it will start to spin and tumble. Once that happens, you can't grab ahold of it again.
Some micro sats are spin stabilized. The have a bar magnet mounted in them to align one axis with earths magnetic field, and a smaller cross magnet to limit the spin rate... The source of the spin? They paint one side of the antenna radials black. Sunlight then spins 'em like a radiometer globe you might find on someone's desk. That's all it takes to start something tumbling up there!
Re:Analyst's Perception is usually distored
on
Merrill Lynch Rips Sun
·
· Score: 2, Funny
I've worked for Sun in the late 70s and again in the mid-80s as a contractor.
Interesting... Since they didn't exist until 1983.
Even though Sun may have lost their chief scientist, Bruce Perens
My Dad owns a coin-op laundrymat. It cost him over $1000 back in 1996 to upgrade the scanners on his change machines for the then "new" $20 bill. Hopefully, they'll sell an upgrade for this one. Otherwise, he'll be out big $$ for new change machines.
Re:Ham radio swap meets are so over
on
Hamvention
·
· Score: 1
The Livermore swap is certainly not dead. In fact, I'd say it's doing a booming business. 1st Sunday of the month (tomorrow!) at Las Positas College, Airway exit off I580.
I've been buying Beige G3's for $60 to $150, depending on model. Cheap OS X ready toys. A couple months back, I picked up a SPARCstation 5 with a 2gb disk, 128mb ram, and a 170Mhz CPU for $10. I could sell the parts on eBay for more than that.
Ok... So what if the communication provider expressly allows NAT, VPN, etc... It seems to me this will just lead to a migration to ISP's that are less draconian. Failing that, Geeks will start new ISP's or even new "internets".
Sparc performance has always been and still is a laggard compared to the rest of the industry.
Not true. When the SPARC first came out in 1987, Sun enjoyed roughly a 4 to 1 performance advantage. Most PC's at the time were 16-bit CISC, and running between 4.77 and 12 Mhz. The Sun 4/110 was 32-bit RISC, and running at 20Mhz. The 386 came out shortly afterwards, and ran at a blistering 16Mhz. Intel PC's didn't take the lead until the Pentium rolled out. Even then, Sun's are optimized for different uses. A PC is like an F-16. It's really good at taking one person somewhere really fast. A Sun server is more like an airliner. It's really good at taking 300 people somewhere reasonably fast, and effeciently.
>But they use thruster rockets right down to the point they drop subsonic, and these thrusters use hypergolic (self igniting) fuels.
This sounds suprising, considering that the shuttle has a full set of flight controls.
True, but it's a delta wing with simple trailing edge controls. Low drag when clean, but not highly manuverable. Drag on a delta wing rises faster than lift with a change in angle of attack. In flight, pulling the nose up is as much shoving the tail down as it is lifting the nose. Just a side effect of the design. Using the RCS rockets to complement aerodynamic controls makes sense where you don't need to worry about exaust products.
Energy management becomes critical in reentry. There are points where you need to make S turns to shed energy, but once you give it up, you can't get it back. Lifting or dropping the nose using aerodynamic controls costs forward speed either way. Using the RCS thrusters is free, and gets rid of stuff you don't want to land with (toxic fuel) anyway.
1. No Surface to Air missile can reach above 100k feet.
True of shoulder launched missiles, but I'm not so sure about things like the Aegis SM2's, or fighter launched air-to-air missiles. However, it's safe to say, it's very very unlikely it's a missile.
2. There is almost no fuel on the space shuttle during reentry.
Compared to the main tank, true. But they use thruster rockets right down to the point they drop subsonic, and these thrusters use hypergolic (self igniting) fuels.
4. Survival is possible... space shuttle was relatively slow, already mostly throught the atmosphere the crew may have been able to bail out, and they do have parachutes.
Not at 200,000 feet. Entry interface is at 400,000 feet. Region of maxiumum heating is at 43 miles up, or 227,040 feet. At that point, they're still doing 15,000 miles per hour. They exit ionization blackout 12 minutes before touchdown, still doing 8200 miles per hour. Surviving egress from an aircraft above Mach 1 is dangerous. Above Mach 3, pretty much not surviveable, unless you have some kind of armored escape pod.
5. This does not bode well for manned space exploration
Agreed. I think we need to replace the shuttle system. It's 30 year old technology.
The Saudis thank you profusely, I am sure they will spend the money is the best possible way.
Ahhh how the PC pendulum swings... A year and a half ago, you would have been villified for making a "racist" statement. Prejudging another society, culture and all that...
Both my vehicles are biodiesel ready. The Saudi's can shut off the pumps tomorrow, and all I do is start buying fuel from ADM. Can you say the same?
Besides... Most of my state's oil comes from Alaska. I'm the guy hell bent on destroying the frozen tundra around ANWR.
If it's any consolation... I ride the train to work.
If Oregon was really interested in going after the real source of wear and tear on the highways, they'd be taxing the hell out of large trucks
They do tax the hell out of large trucks. Every state does. In California, anything bigger than a 3/4-ton pickup truck has to pay special fee's based on GVWR every year, and they can go into the $1000's for even small "large trucks" like an F-450. But they're taxing the crap out of you too, you just don't notice it as much because it's folded into the price of gas. As cars get more effecient, they won't generate as much revenue.
Seems to me people need to stop flailing around for ways to generate revenue from "anyone but me" and get used to the idea that they have to pay for govenment services. This is what has so many state's budgets underwater these days. Everyone said "tax the rich, they can afford it" and last year "the rich" didn't do so well. "Doh! Now what do we do?" It's all too easy to label and villify a group, and use it as an excuse to single them out for special treatment while smugly excluding yourself.
there are also plenty of service vehicles that aren't high-performance and probably don't have engines that are pushing the limits of diesel.
Actually... He's talking about just about all of the current crop of diesel engines, including the "powerstroke diesel" in farmer john's pickup truck. VW actually makes two very nice TDI engines that are not available in the US because our diesel doesn't meet their requirements.
Nobody makes the old indirect injection diesels anymore. They can't get them to meet smog requirements. All the newer engines, with the possible exception of the Dodge/Cummins combination (I'm not sure), are common rail direct injection, controlled by computer. All those "powerstroke diesel" pickups you see running around these days... are fly-by-wire. There's no throttle cable connecting the engine to famer john's foot.
Slashdot Mirror
The refined carbohydrates you believe are the cause of Type II diabetes have been consumed now for over 5000 years. This is a disorder that did not even exist 100 years ago, and barely existed 40 years ago. What has changed? Until you explain THAT, everything you think you know is completely irrelevent.
Actually... We've been aware of diabetes at least since the time of the Roman Empire. "Diabetes mellitus" is actually latin for "sweet urine", which was the diagnostic test (yuk!) for the disease back then. In the past, type 1 diabetics didn't survive to adulthood. Type 2 complications take decades to develop, and may be mistaken for other things. Either way, since the average life expectancy was less than 40 5000 years ago, your point is hardly relevant. Most people didn't live long enough for the disease to develop.
I have to live with the disease. Funny... I can eat more rice than I can bread. It doesn't get digested as fast.
I'd love to see your 50 claimed references. You've done a lot of spouting off bullshit in this topic. You have your preconceived position, and you aren't going to let go of it. You're not helping anyone, and we really don't care if you want to feel smarter than everyone else.
But I'd recommend not trying it if you're a Type I diabetic (like myself).
Agreed, though a diabetic never gets back to "eating whatever you want again". That would lead to the loss of blood glucose (BG) control, BG swings, cravings, followed by more insulin resistance and islet cell damage.
But most type 1 diabetics require some form of insulin and drugs to manage their BG. As a type 2, I'm drug & insulin free as a result of Atkins. The diseases are similar in symptoms, but the causes of T1 and T2 are quite different.
I'll take type 2 over type 1 anyday. I hope you have good BG control, and a responsive proactive management team backing you up. Take care of your heart and feet, and whatever you do, don't smoke!
I have trouble with the word "abuse", since insulin production and sensativity varies widely from person to person. The symptoms of "insulin abuse" creep up on you. You don't recognize it when it happens, and it's not very different from what a "normal non-abusing person" is doing.
The biggest clue for me was ravenous hunger 4 to 6 hours after a high carb meal. Even then I only found out due to a presurgical screen after an accident. As it progresses, its easier to "abuse". I can "abuse" my insulin right now by eating two slices of wonder bread. 99% of the people on the planet would have no problem with this.
I'm not disagreeing with you, but your nomenclature tends to imply blame. It's not like Type 2 diabetics spent their younger years in back alleys with belts around their arms shooting glucose in their veins. Although, thanks to our modern high carb processed food diets, the net effect was the same.
Idealistic Bullshit!
Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease. The body's immune system destroys the insulin producing cells during childhood. Nobody has proven it has anything to do with diet.
Type 2 diabetics are insulin resistant, or have pancreatic damage. Eating bread and pasta will kill them faster than eating meat.
Bread and pasta will cause blood glucose swings in pre-diabetics that will lead to food cravings followed by the full blown disease. Your dietary religion is actually harmful to some people!
Cut the sugar! Within a few weeks your natural ability to taste the inherent sweetness of natural foods will return and you'll wonder (and be sickened) by how *SWEET* everything around you is. Seriously.
No kidding! After a couple months on Atkins, unbuttered unsalted popcorn will taste sweet!
You're taking the "blame the patient" position. It's been debunked.
One notable characteristic of type II diabetes is the loss of the post meal insulin pulse. This pulse of insulin keeps blood glucose in check immediately after a meal. Without it, your blood glucose rises sharply after a meal and then falls. Swinging blood sugar levels lead to sugar & carbohydrate cravings. You can have these, and not be fat. The disease can actually induce the vice. Cause and effect are not always what they seem. You might find my other posts in this topic interesting.
Athletes, having more muscle tissue, have more GLUT4 transporters to carry glucose in to their cells. This makes it more difficult to become insulin resistant.
But cause and effect is not what it seems with diabetes. You seem to be taking the "blame the patient" position, which has been completely debunked. People with swinging blood glucose will crave sugar. Pancreatic disease aside, there are two ways to become type II diabetic, one is to become insulin resistant, and the other is to burn out the insulin producing cells in the pancreas. Any time your blood glucose is above 120 mg/dL, you're exausting cells in your pancreas. So the question becomes, did someone burn out their pancreas and get fat because of poor blood sugar control, or did they get fat and become insulin resistant resulting in poor blood sugar control followed by pancreas damage. Kind of difficult to figure out after the fact.
I have type II diabetes. I got fat. I found out, I got skinny again. I still have diabetes. Looking back, I now realize I exhibited signs of diabetes when I was much younger, and was still skinny and in good shape.
Some info for you to muse over:
1 baked potato averages about 10 grams of carbohydrates
1 12 oz can of soda usually runs 40 grams of carbs.
So drinking a can of soda is like eating 4 baked potatos! How many people here claim to drink liters of soda a day?!?!
Make fun of Atkins all you like, but for those of us that have type II diabetes, it's a powerful tool to control our blood sugar. I've lost enough weight on Atkins that my sugar readings are "normal" as long as I stick to the diet. If I eat more than about 20 grams of carbs at one sitting, or about 45 - 50 grams a day, my blood sugar goes way up. Studies have shown that good sugar control postpones and reduces the onset of diabetic complications. Basicly, the carbs kill diabetics faster than the fat & cholesterol.
Many people mistake Atkins induction level with the "atkins diet". Induction is a 2 week phase. It is not a balanced diet, and you're not supposed to stay on it forever. Atkins at maintenance levels resembles The Zone diet.
Most people don't realize that a can of soda has the carbohydrate equivalent of roughly 3 baked potatos! Drinking a 2 liter jug of soda every day will burn out the isulin producing cells in some people's pancreas, and make them diabetic.
In the US, it's called the Magnuson-Moss Act of 1975. Google for it. It specifically prohibits product tying for warranty claims. They cannot deny your claim because you used an unapproved cell phone. There's a number of other provisions in MM that BMW seems to be trying to ignore.
Temkin
Actually... They would have to grab it all at once. Once you power it down, it will start to spin and tumble. Once that happens, you can't grab ahold of it again.
Some micro sats are spin stabilized. The have a bar magnet mounted in them to align one axis with earths magnetic field, and a smaller cross magnet to limit the spin rate... The source of the spin? They paint one side of the antenna radials black. Sunlight then spins 'em like a radiometer globe you might find on someone's desk. That's all it takes to start something tumbling up there!
I've worked for Sun in the late 70s and again in the mid-80s as a contractor.
Interesting... Since they didn't exist until 1983.
Even though Sun may have lost their chief scientist, Bruce Perens
You mean Bill Joy?
I'm not going to listen to the radio since all of the radio stations I get are the same 30 songs in rotation, some at the same time
You forgot the bit about 10 minute long blocs of commercials.... Syncronized with all the other stations in town of course...
My Dad owns a coin-op laundrymat. It cost him over $1000 back in 1996 to upgrade the scanners on his change machines for the then "new" $20 bill. Hopefully, they'll sell an upgrade for this one. Otherwise, he'll be out big $$ for new change machines.
The Livermore swap is certainly not dead. In fact, I'd say it's doing a booming business. 1st Sunday of the month (tomorrow!) at Las Positas College, Airway exit off I580.
I've been buying Beige G3's for $60 to $150, depending on model. Cheap OS X ready toys. A couple months back, I picked up a SPARCstation 5 with a 2gb disk, 128mb ram, and a 170Mhz CPU for $10. I could sell the parts on eBay for more than that.
Temkin
So.... Why aren't you starting up some competition?
Temkin
Ok... So what if the communication provider expressly allows NAT, VPN, etc... It seems to me this will just lead to a migration to ISP's that are less draconian. Failing that, Geeks will start new ISP's or even new "internets".
Temkin
Sparc performance has always been and still is a laggard compared to the rest of the industry.
Not true. When the SPARC first came out in 1987, Sun enjoyed roughly a 4 to 1 performance advantage. Most PC's at the time were 16-bit CISC, and running between 4.77 and 12 Mhz. The Sun 4/110 was 32-bit RISC, and running at 20Mhz. The 386 came out shortly afterwards, and ran at a blistering 16Mhz. Intel PC's didn't take the lead until the Pentium rolled out. Even then, Sun's are optimized for different uses. A PC is like an F-16. It's really good at taking one person somewhere really fast. A Sun server is more like an airliner. It's really good at taking 300 people somewhere reasonably fast, and effeciently.
Temkin
Mike Quinn's provisioned many of my high school electronics projects in the mid-80's. You forgot to mention Willie!
They moved recently from their old Oakland Airport WW2 barracks building to a new facility nearby. I need to go find the new place.
Temkin
>But they use thruster rockets right down to the point they drop subsonic, and these thrusters use hypergolic (self igniting) fuels.
This sounds suprising, considering that the shuttle has a full set of flight controls.
True, but it's a delta wing with simple trailing edge controls. Low drag when clean, but not highly manuverable. Drag on a delta wing rises faster than lift with a change in angle of attack. In flight, pulling the nose up is as much shoving the tail down as it is lifting the nose. Just a side effect of the design. Using the RCS rockets to complement aerodynamic controls makes sense where you don't need to worry about exaust products.
Energy management becomes critical in reentry. There are points where you need to make S turns to shed energy, but once you give it up, you can't get it back. Lifting or dropping the nose using aerodynamic controls costs forward speed either way. Using the RCS thrusters is free, and gets rid of stuff you don't want to land with (toxic fuel) anyway.
Temkin
1. No Surface to Air missile can reach above 100k feet.
True of shoulder launched missiles, but I'm not so sure about things like the Aegis SM2's, or fighter launched air-to-air missiles. However, it's safe to say, it's very very unlikely it's a missile.
2. There is almost no fuel on the space shuttle during reentry.
Compared to the main tank, true. But they use thruster rockets right down to the point they drop subsonic, and these thrusters use hypergolic (self igniting) fuels.
4. Survival is possible... space shuttle was relatively slow, already mostly throught the atmosphere the crew may have been able to bail out, and they do have parachutes.
Not at 200,000 feet. Entry interface is at 400,000 feet. Region of maxiumum heating is at 43 miles up, or 227,040 feet. At that point, they're still doing 15,000 miles per hour. They exit ionization blackout 12 minutes before touchdown, still doing 8200 miles per hour. Surviving egress from an aircraft above Mach 1 is dangerous. Above Mach 3, pretty much not surviveable, unless you have some kind of armored escape pod.
5. This does not bode well for manned space exploration
Agreed. I think we need to replace the shuttle system. It's 30 year old technology.
Temkin
The Saudis thank you profusely, I am sure they will spend the money is the best possible way.
Ahhh how the PC pendulum swings... A year and a half ago, you would have been villified for making a "racist" statement. Prejudging another society, culture and all that...
Both my vehicles are biodiesel ready. The Saudi's can shut off the pumps tomorrow, and all I do is start buying fuel from ADM. Can you say the same?
Besides... Most of my state's oil comes from Alaska. I'm the guy hell bent on destroying the frozen tundra around ANWR.
If it's any consolation... I ride the train to work.
Temkin
If Oregon was really interested in going after the real source of wear and tear on the highways, they'd be taxing the hell out of large trucks
They do tax the hell out of large trucks. Every state does. In California, anything bigger than a 3/4-ton pickup truck has to pay special fee's based on GVWR every year, and they can go into the $1000's for even small "large trucks" like an F-450. But they're taxing the crap out of you too, you just don't notice it as much because it's folded into the price of gas. As cars get more effecient, they won't generate as much revenue.
Seems to me people need to stop flailing around for ways to generate revenue from "anyone but me" and get used to the idea that they have to pay for govenment services. This is what has so many state's budgets underwater these days. Everyone said "tax the rich, they can afford it" and last year "the rich" didn't do so well. "Doh! Now what do we do?" It's all too easy to label and villify a group, and use it as an excuse to single them out for special treatment while smugly excluding yourself.
Using GPS is a dumb idea.
Temkin
Evil 20mpg diesel Excursion owner...
They don't own all the code. Some of it belongs to whomever owns "real Unix" this week. Other bits are licensed from various other parties.
Temkin
there are also plenty of service vehicles that aren't high-performance and probably don't have engines that are pushing the limits of diesel.
Actually... He's talking about just about all of the current crop of diesel engines, including the "powerstroke diesel" in farmer john's pickup truck. VW actually makes two very nice TDI engines that are not available in the US because our diesel doesn't meet their requirements.Nobody makes the old indirect injection diesels anymore. They can't get them to meet smog requirements. All the newer engines, with the possible exception of the Dodge/Cummins combination (I'm not sure), are common rail direct injection, controlled by computer. All those "powerstroke diesel" pickups you see running around these days... are fly-by-wire. There's no throttle cable connecting the engine to famer john's foot.
Temkin