Too much water is bad for you, period. See also water intoxication. See, there, for all you who think alcohol is evil, you can get drunk on water, too.
Distilled water is worse as a thirst quencher after heavy exercise because it contains no electrolytes to replenish what you lost in sweat. No big deal, as most of us get way too much salt in the rest of our diets anyway, but it is worth noting in case you are one of the three people on Earth who doesn't over-salt everything.
As for the taste, it depends on what you're comparing it against. There's not a huge difference between well-filtered water (e.g. Aquafina) and distilled water (e.g. the grocery store jugs). There is, however, a huge difference between unfiltered or coarsely filtered water and distilled water. For example, to me, Arrowhead water tastes noticeably worse than more filtered brands, presumably because of the dissolved minerals. Other people prefer that taste. And there are many varieties that are somewhere in the middle. For example, Dasani uses filtration and then adds certain minerals back in. SmartWater distills the water and then adds salts back in. And so on. Everybody has their own preference, and as far as health goes, it makes little difference given that the vast majority of the minerals you consume come from the foods you eat rather than from the water you drink or cook foods in.
If you can, ask a friend to capture videos and photos some of the time so that you can spend the time you have left without being too busy documenting things.
Also, if you have the opportunity, you should consider clinical trials of experimental treatments. Even if they don't help, she'll be providing a lasting legacy by helping improve medicine so that others---maybe even your daughters---won't have to suffer the same fate someday. And if you can, consider a complete gene sequencing. It could provide useful information in the future for genomics studies related to certain types of cancers, again, potentially helping save your daughters from going through what your wife is going through. It's not much, but it's a legacy that might just have a huge impact on your kids someday.
And consider having her record some personal messages for each of the kids at various stages of their lives. Maybe a message for when they have their first dates, for when they lose their first boyfriends, for when they get married, for when they get divorced and remarried (okay, maybe not that last one)... you get the idea. And, of course, one message telling them goodbye. That's the hardest one of all, but it's also the most important.
One final piece of advice: leave nothing unsaid. Live life with no regrets.
Matters not. The IMEI is typically controlled by the radio firmware, not hardware, AFAIK. If you're writing your own firmware stack, it should be trivial to lie and claim to be supported hardware, and there's really very little the carrier can do about it (except in countries where doing so is illegal, of course).
My guess would be a separate power management controller somewhere that was wedged with everything in a powered down state. They couldn't talk to the main computer (ECU, maybe?) to reset it, which probably means that the main computer itself wasn't getting properly powered up by the power button. You wouldn't typically leave a computer system running off the car battery (even with the displays powered down) while the car is shut off. It would consume too much power.
Either way, I agree that it probably can't have been the button itself, or else the power cycle wouldn't have fixed it. Well, I suppose it could be a self-resetting fuse somewhere, or (maybe) a stuck latching relay, but odds are, it's a power management controller or similar.
In the grand scheme of things, this probably calls for the addition of a power management reset feature, e.g. two extra sets of switch contacts and a 555 timer IC wired up as a pulse delay circuit so that if you hold the power button down for ten seconds, the chip's power gets momentarily interrupted by a depletion-mode MOSFET. You know, something so simple that it is almost guaranteed not to fail in the lifetime of the vehicle.
Nope. RedHat, Canonical, and SuSE all basically bundle open source software together. Sure, they have developers on staff, but they produce a single or maybe very low double digit percentage of the work that goes into the product. They create packaging tools, installers, custom skins, custom admin tools, etc., and they contribute patches for other things back upstream, but the fundamental core of the OS was created by others, and is largely maintained by others.
Compare that with a true commercial OS developer like Sun/Oracle, Apple, IBM, etc. and the difference is blindingly obvious. Those companies have developers that create most of the code that goes into their products. Sure, the commercial vendors use Open Source as add-ons in some cases (e.g. Apple bundling Apache), but those companies are almost solely responsible for the bulk of the core code in Solaris, Mac OS X, and AIX, respectively. It's not at all the same development model, and the difference has nothing to do with whether the end result is shipped as open source or as proprietary code. The key difference is whether most of their code is developed in-house, and thus on how much of their own IP they have in the code.
To give a more graphical illustration, the Linux vendors are content to stand on the shoulders of giants. The commercial UNIX vendors prefer to kill the giants, grind up their bones to make mortar, and use that to build a stone and giant-mortar dais to stand on outside their stone and giant-mortar castle. The Linux vendors usually stand to lose little if a particular GPLed work proved to be toxic. The commercial UNIX vendors stand to lose a great deal more.
Your post said "Open Source BSD or commercial operating system" - that implies there is a difference. Largely, there is not.
Sure, there is. OpenSolaris isn't BSD-based. It's AT&T UNIX based. AIX, same. Heck, even Mac OS X basically conforms to AT&T at this point. There basically aren't any commercial BSDs (except maybe in the embedded space) because you can't call yourself UNIX if you conform to the BSD conventions, and all the commercial UNIX vendors want to be able to call themselves UNIX.
There are open source BSD OSes, there are commercial OSes, and there are Linux-based OSes. These are three fundamentally different camps in terms of development methodology that sometimes overlap and sometimes have common interests. Never fool yourself into believing that any two of the camps are the same.
You're talking about spending $100-200 on an Android phone, and you can get a real dedicated GPS receiver for $90 that requires no effort to set up, no purchase of an additional flash card, has a warranty, etc.
Critical, no, but highly desirable. That's what made ZFS so interesting---the promise of broad availability. Sadly, it isn't working out that way, due almost entirely to Oracle's inept handling of it at every turn, but on the other hand, I can't imagine that anybody actually expected Oracle to be a good citizen of the open source community.... ZFS was doomed the moment they announced their acquisition plans. That's why a BSD license is such a good thing. It means that the technology can't be held hostage by any one company or group.
No, I meant commercial. A commercial OS, at least by my definition, is an OS principally developed and backed by a company. Although Linux distributions are assembled by companies, the vast majority of the development work is done by third parties, and is not done principally for commercial gain, so Linux distros are generally not what I would call commercial OSes.
Further, I did not mean proprietary. Not all commercial OSes are proprietary. Some examples of nonproprietary commercial OSes are OpenSolaris (defunct) and Darwin OS (also defunct). Admittedly, most nonproprietary commercial OSes don't stick around very long, but they do exist....
That said, I don't think ZFS was going anywhere anyways. It's incompatible license meant it wasn't ever going to get going in Linux, and Linux has far too much momentum for OpenSolaris to have dethroned it as the open source world's golden boy.
And in the same vein, Btrfs isn't going anywhere, either. Its incompatible license means that it won't ever appear in any Open Source BSD or commercial operating system. Until we get a comparable filesystem under a BSD-style license, no new filesystem is can truly take off. That's the only license that everyone can accept without reservation.
There's an easy fix for this. Make the following change to the Constitution:
I have an even better one. It only takes a handful of members of Congress conspiring. First, you create a bill like this. You make its purpose completely opaque. You change the entire body of the bill several times. The final version includes the text "Henceforth, Congress shall be paid only in peanuts or bags of manure, at the President's discretion. Similarly, the the President shall henceforth be referred to as 'The Village Idiot of the United States'."
After the bill passes with near-unanimous consent and is signed by the President, I can pretty much guarantee that no one will pass a bill without reading it again. At least for fifty years or so until Congress forgets the object lesson.
And in that context, assuming they understand the material, it really doesn't matter much if the people commenting are experts or celebrities, so long as the people they're linking to are the former and not the latter.
Unfortunately, when used in this manner, Twitter becomes little more than an RSS aggregator, but without the consistency of the feed being provided by the same people who created the original stories, often with summaries written by people who don't fully comprehend the subject.
Any limit that makes it impractical to communicate complex information is a hindrance to communication even if there are ways to work around it. There's a reason FaceBook allows you to post "notes"---longer works that you summarize yourself in a normal wall posting, accompanied by a link to the real content. As far as the user is concerned, they're using the same service, posting larger pieces of content. It's seamless. Sure, there are services on top of Twitter that can do the same thing, but used purely as designed, Twitter doesn't lend itself to any sort of serious content.
The difference between a virus and a parasite is that a virus attaches itself to a cell and alters the cell so that the cell produces more viruses. Parasites are living organisms in their own right and reproduce in various ways on their own. The difference has nothing to do with whether the disease kills.
In fact, viruses that kill rapidly don't stay around in the population for very long because dead people don't generally walk around and pass the disease to other people. Pathogenicity beyond a certain point is counterproductive. Thus, although most viruses would kill in the absence of an immune system. They also wouldn't spread very far, and the ones that survived would presumably be weakened strains that were not as virulent. Thus, in the long term, you'd probably end up with a similar case fatality rate as you have with viruses now.
Yeah, floating-point division problems will take on a whole new meaning. Not to mention that if this becomes popular, we may have to start worrying about multiplication.
Well, I have seen some studies that suggest that consuming peanuts and shellfish and things while pregnant/lactating reduces the risk. I would point out, however, that during that period of time, a child's immune system is being significantly bolstered by that of the parent. During that time, exposure might have a positive effect by getting the child used to it during a time when the child's immune system is not in high gear yet. I would expect the opposite to be true after that period, up until some other magic limit where it starts to be less problematic again.
This is, of course, all pure speculation until somebody does a controlled study.:-)
Why would you bother to fake data on the output side of the device when you can lie to the device itself? The whole point was that you can take it off your car temporarily (and leave it in your garage or whatever when you're doing something bad, then put it back on, and that further, if you really wanted to, you could spoof completely absurd data to make them think the device is malfunctioning, none of which would require attacking any of the outgoing crypto at all.
I send you a cleartext email. You encrypt it and send it to the government. The government knows it was not modified in transit between you and them, but has no way to know if somebody modified the data between me and you. It's the same deal with GPS. If I can fake the GPS stream itself, I can make that GPS device fully believe it is in Siberia, and it will dutifully report through whatever SSL-wrapped TCP connection over 3G or whatever it uses that it is in Siberia. If it were transmitting data continuously, then yes, you might have a hard time, but because it sends the data out periodically (and presumably retries later if it fails to send out the data), the unencrypted GPS input represents a security vulnerability the size of a small planet.
I didn't say that they did. I didn't even imply that. Longer breast feeding has two benefits. First, it boosts the child's immune system. Second, it is a good indicator for how late the child will begin consuming solid food, for two reasons:
There is a tendency to stop breast feeding when teeth come in (correlative, but not causative).
Kids with teeth are more likely to eat a portion of solid foods that their parents consume.
Admittedly, that's more correlative, not causative; the causative factor is the consumption of solid food at too young an age. Breast feeding for a longer period of time tends to stave that off due to lack of demand from the child, but it's not strict causation.
Either way, the point was that parents who are quick to use formula instead of breast feeding are also more likely to be in a rush to get away from having to give their kids special foods, and the long term effect of this is that they end up eating foods that do contain gluten (e.g. taking a bite of their parents' burgers) at an earlier age than kids who breast feed for longer periods of time. It's not that the use of formula causes gluten sensitivity, but rather that formula is symptomatic of a societally driven rush back into the workforce that also tends to cause other poor nutritional choices for those infants, which in turn, increase the risk of gluten sensitivity. It's an indicator, not a causative factor.
Actually, a significant group of Democrats were strong supporters of Lincoln's position in the war. No surprise since even back at that time, both political parties shared some significant common roots, having both been formed by pulling together members from the same basic set of defunct parties that existed previously. The party divisions were (and to an extent, still are) largely arbitrary.
As for the "pro-slavery" Democrats, one could reasonably argue that this was the last time in the history of our country when politicians actually represented the views of their constituents.... Not that their constituents weren't wrong, but it's hardly fair to blame the politicians for actually doing their jobs (for once)....
And to be fair, it was never about keeping their slaves, but rather to protect states' rights to decide whether or not to allow slavery. You know, the same sort of states' rights agenda that Republicans are pushing at the moment. Humorously, even in the Civil War era, the Republicans' view on states' rights depended solely on which party held the most power in the Federal Government. When Federalists were in power, they screamed "States' Rights!" at the top of their lungs, claimed to be for a smaller (federal) government, and generally tried to impede the Federalists' progress. The moment Republicans came into power, they took as much power as they could get and no longer cared about anyone's rights. Sound familiar? It should. It still happens in both the Democratic and Republican parties today, with just as much vigor.
And like most governmental issues today, there was a lot of money involved in the slavery debate. No surprise, again, that at least initially, the wealthy slave owners won, keeping their power, up to the point of splitting off into a separate country. It would have remained that way, were it not for somebody standing up, saying "No, this is wrong", and being willing to take the country to war to make the point.
But in the end, they shot him for it. Who is standing up now? Certainly not the Republicans, and certainly not the Democrats. Today, the people with the money win, because everyone is looking for the next big handout and no one wants to take a bullet.
These days, neither party cares in the slightest about states' rights except when they can use it to their political advantage. It's all just a charade to ensure that neither party every truly has to answer to the public as a whole. Don't blame me. I Voted for Kodos. At least a cartoon character is a real change from what we have now.
A 2005 prospective and observational study found that timing of the exposure to gluten in childhood was an important risk modifier. People exposed to wheat, barley, or rye before the gut barrier has fully developed (within the first three months after birth) had five times the risk of developing coeliac disease relative to those exposed at four to six months after birth. Those exposed even later than six months after birth were found to have only a slightly increased risk relative to those exposed at four to six months after birth.
Women don't breast feed their kids long enough. They put them on formula a week out of the womb, then try to get them to eat solid foods as soon as they can because breast feeding and formula are a hassle. The result is a huge increase in food allergies.
The effect is cumulative and tends not to cause serious problems until well after the start of breeding age.
It seldom would be bad enough to kill you anyway.
Thus, it is neither a significant positive nor negative evolutionary pressure, so the percentage of expression should rise and fall almost randomly through history.
If you want to know the actual reason for the increase in gluten and peanut allergies lately, we have a pretty good idea:
The human body has historically not consumed such large quantities of wheat as we do today, thanks in part to better transportation and storage.
In countries that have historically consumed large amounts of wheat (e.g. parts of Europe that consume wheat-based pastas), the varieties of wheat grown in those areas contain significantly less gluten than the red wheat that is popular in the United States (which I think was originally indigenous to Russia).
Modern society has gotten so busy that few women breast feed infants as long as they should. As a result, children are exposed to real foods at an earlier time than ever before in the history of the human race. There is evidence that children exposed to gluten, peanuts, etc. too early in life are significantly more likely to develop an allergy to them.
Nothing evolutionary about it. It's predominantly societal and geographical.
Do you really think they allow encrypted GPS receivers to be used by civilian authorities? I don't even think they give encrypted GPS receivers to military personnel. It's pretty much exclusively used internally inside things like smart bombs, AFAIK.
Slashdot Mirror
Too much water is bad for you, period. See also water intoxication. See, there, for all you who think alcohol is evil, you can get drunk on water, too.
Distilled water is worse as a thirst quencher after heavy exercise because it contains no electrolytes to replenish what you lost in sweat. No big deal, as most of us get way too much salt in the rest of our diets anyway, but it is worth noting in case you are one of the three people on Earth who doesn't over-salt everything.
As for the taste, it depends on what you're comparing it against. There's not a huge difference between well-filtered water (e.g. Aquafina) and distilled water (e.g. the grocery store jugs). There is, however, a huge difference between unfiltered or coarsely filtered water and distilled water. For example, to me, Arrowhead water tastes noticeably worse than more filtered brands, presumably because of the dissolved minerals. Other people prefer that taste. And there are many varieties that are somewhere in the middle. For example, Dasani uses filtration and then adds certain minerals back in. SmartWater distills the water and then adds salts back in. And so on. Everybody has their own preference, and as far as health goes, it makes little difference given that the vast majority of the minerals you consume come from the foods you eat rather than from the water you drink or cook foods in.
If you can, ask a friend to capture videos and photos some of the time so that you can spend the time you have left without being too busy documenting things.
Also, if you have the opportunity, you should consider clinical trials of experimental treatments. Even if they don't help, she'll be providing a lasting legacy by helping improve medicine so that others---maybe even your daughters---won't have to suffer the same fate someday. And if you can, consider a complete gene sequencing. It could provide useful information in the future for genomics studies related to certain types of cancers, again, potentially helping save your daughters from going through what your wife is going through. It's not much, but it's a legacy that might just have a huge impact on your kids someday.
And consider having her record some personal messages for each of the kids at various stages of their lives. Maybe a message for when they have their first dates, for when they lose their first boyfriends, for when they get married, for when they get divorced and remarried (okay, maybe not that last one)... you get the idea. And, of course, one message telling them goodbye. That's the hardest one of all, but it's also the most important.
One final piece of advice: leave nothing unsaid. Live life with no regrets.
Matters not. The IMEI is typically controlled by the radio firmware, not hardware, AFAIK. If you're writing your own firmware stack, it should be trivial to lie and claim to be supported hardware, and there's really very little the carrier can do about it (except in countries where doing so is illegal, of course).
My guess would be a separate power management controller somewhere that was wedged with everything in a powered down state. They couldn't talk to the main computer (ECU, maybe?) to reset it, which probably means that the main computer itself wasn't getting properly powered up by the power button. You wouldn't typically leave a computer system running off the car battery (even with the displays powered down) while the car is shut off. It would consume too much power.
Either way, I agree that it probably can't have been the button itself, or else the power cycle wouldn't have fixed it. Well, I suppose it could be a self-resetting fuse somewhere, or (maybe) a stuck latching relay, but odds are, it's a power management controller or similar.
In the grand scheme of things, this probably calls for the addition of a power management reset feature, e.g. two extra sets of switch contacts and a 555 timer IC wired up as a pulse delay circuit so that if you hold the power button down for ten seconds, the chip's power gets momentarily interrupted by a depletion-mode MOSFET. You know, something so simple that it is almost guaranteed not to fail in the lifetime of the vehicle.
Nope. RedHat, Canonical, and SuSE all basically bundle open source software together. Sure, they have developers on staff, but they produce a single or maybe very low double digit percentage of the work that goes into the product. They create packaging tools, installers, custom skins, custom admin tools, etc., and they contribute patches for other things back upstream, but the fundamental core of the OS was created by others, and is largely maintained by others.
Compare that with a true commercial OS developer like Sun/Oracle, Apple, IBM, etc. and the difference is blindingly obvious. Those companies have developers that create most of the code that goes into their products. Sure, the commercial vendors use Open Source as add-ons in some cases (e.g. Apple bundling Apache), but those companies are almost solely responsible for the bulk of the core code in Solaris, Mac OS X, and AIX, respectively. It's not at all the same development model, and the difference has nothing to do with whether the end result is shipped as open source or as proprietary code. The key difference is whether most of their code is developed in-house, and thus on how much of their own IP they have in the code.
To give a more graphical illustration, the Linux vendors are content to stand on the shoulders of giants. The commercial UNIX vendors prefer to kill the giants, grind up their bones to make mortar, and use that to build a stone and giant-mortar dais to stand on outside their stone and giant-mortar castle. The Linux vendors usually stand to lose little if a particular GPLed work proved to be toxic. The commercial UNIX vendors stand to lose a great deal more.
Sure, there is. OpenSolaris isn't BSD-based. It's AT&T UNIX based. AIX, same. Heck, even Mac OS X basically conforms to AT&T at this point. There basically aren't any commercial BSDs (except maybe in the embedded space) because you can't call yourself UNIX if you conform to the BSD conventions, and all the commercial UNIX vendors want to be able to call themselves UNIX.
There are open source BSD OSes, there are commercial OSes, and there are Linux-based OSes. These are three fundamentally different camps in terms of development methodology that sometimes overlap and sometimes have common interests. Never fool yourself into believing that any two of the camps are the same.
You're talking about spending $100-200 on an Android phone, and you can get a real dedicated GPS receiver for $90 that requires no effort to set up, no purchase of an additional flash card, has a warranty, etc.
Critical, no, but highly desirable. That's what made ZFS so interesting---the promise of broad availability. Sadly, it isn't working out that way, due almost entirely to Oracle's inept handling of it at every turn, but on the other hand, I can't imagine that anybody actually expected Oracle to be a good citizen of the open source community.... ZFS was doomed the moment they announced their acquisition plans. That's why a BSD license is such a good thing. It means that the technology can't be held hostage by any one company or group.
No, I meant commercial. A commercial OS, at least by my definition, is an OS principally developed and backed by a company. Although Linux distributions are assembled by companies, the vast majority of the development work is done by third parties, and is not done principally for commercial gain, so Linux distros are generally not what I would call commercial OSes.
Further, I did not mean proprietary. Not all commercial OSes are proprietary. Some examples of nonproprietary commercial OSes are OpenSolaris (defunct) and Darwin OS (also defunct). Admittedly, most nonproprietary commercial OSes don't stick around very long, but they do exist....
And in the same vein, Btrfs isn't going anywhere, either. Its incompatible license means that it won't ever appear in any Open Source BSD or commercial operating system. Until we get a comparable filesystem under a BSD-style license, no new filesystem is can truly take off. That's the only license that everyone can accept without reservation.
It's not that it's ridiculous, it's that until they repealed it, they would have no salary. Kick them where it counts.
Wow. What is this country coming to? Now even the lawyers don't speak English.... :-D
(For anyone who doesn't get it, "An" comes before a vowel sound.)
I have an even better one. It only takes a handful of members of Congress conspiring. First, you create a bill like this. You make its purpose completely opaque. You change the entire body of the bill several times. The final version includes the text "Henceforth, Congress shall be paid only in peanuts or bags of manure, at the President's discretion. Similarly, the the President shall henceforth be referred to as 'The Village Idiot of the United States'."
After the bill passes with near-unanimous consent and is signed by the President, I can pretty much guarantee that no one will pass a bill without reading it again. At least for fifty years or so until Congress forgets the object lesson.
You're saying that Slashdot users are neither capable of following nor of being followed? A bit of a drama queen, are we?
And in that context, assuming they understand the material, it really doesn't matter much if the people commenting are experts or celebrities, so long as the people they're linking to are the former and not the latter.
Unfortunately, when used in this manner, Twitter becomes little more than an RSS aggregator, but without the consistency of the feed being provided by the same people who created the original stories, often with summaries written by people who don't fully comprehend the subject.
Any limit that makes it impractical to communicate complex information is a hindrance to communication even if there are ways to work around it. There's a reason FaceBook allows you to post "notes"---longer works that you summarize yourself in a normal wall posting, accompanied by a link to the real content. As far as the user is concerned, they're using the same service, posting larger pieces of content. It's seamless. Sure, there are services on top of Twitter that can do the same thing, but used purely as designed, Twitter doesn't lend itself to any sort of serious content.
Uh... Twitter doesn't have friends. It has followers. There's a difference.
The difference between a virus and a parasite is that a virus attaches itself to a cell and alters the cell so that the cell produces more viruses. Parasites are living organisms in their own right and reproduce in various ways on their own. The difference has nothing to do with whether the disease kills.
In fact, viruses that kill rapidly don't stay around in the population for very long because dead people don't generally walk around and pass the disease to other people. Pathogenicity beyond a certain point is counterproductive. Thus, although most viruses would kill in the absence of an immune system. They also wouldn't spread very far, and the ones that survived would presumably be weakened strains that were not as virulent. Thus, in the long term, you'd probably end up with a similar case fatality rate as you have with viruses now.
Yeah, floating-point division problems will take on a whole new meaning. Not to mention that if this becomes popular, we may have to start worrying about multiplication.
Well, I have seen some studies that suggest that consuming peanuts and shellfish and things while pregnant/lactating reduces the risk. I would point out, however, that during that period of time, a child's immune system is being significantly bolstered by that of the parent. During that time, exposure might have a positive effect by getting the child used to it during a time when the child's immune system is not in high gear yet. I would expect the opposite to be true after that period, up until some other magic limit where it starts to be less problematic again.
This is, of course, all pure speculation until somebody does a controlled study. :-)
Why would you bother to fake data on the output side of the device when you can lie to the device itself? The whole point was that you can take it off your car temporarily (and leave it in your garage or whatever when you're doing something bad, then put it back on, and that further, if you really wanted to, you could spoof completely absurd data to make them think the device is malfunctioning, none of which would require attacking any of the outgoing crypto at all.
I send you a cleartext email. You encrypt it and send it to the government. The government knows it was not modified in transit between you and them, but has no way to know if somebody modified the data between me and you. It's the same deal with GPS. If I can fake the GPS stream itself, I can make that GPS device fully believe it is in Siberia, and it will dutifully report through whatever SSL-wrapped TCP connection over 3G or whatever it uses that it is in Siberia. If it were transmitting data continuously, then yes, you might have a hard time, but because it sends the data out periodically (and presumably retries later if it fails to send out the data), the unencrypted GPS input represents a security vulnerability the size of a small planet.
I didn't say that they did. I didn't even imply that. Longer breast feeding has two benefits. First, it boosts the child's immune system. Second, it is a good indicator for how late the child will begin consuming solid food, for two reasons:
Admittedly, that's more correlative, not causative; the causative factor is the consumption of solid food at too young an age. Breast feeding for a longer period of time tends to stave that off due to lack of demand from the child, but it's not strict causation.
Either way, the point was that parents who are quick to use formula instead of breast feeding are also more likely to be in a rush to get away from having to give their kids special foods, and the long term effect of this is that they end up eating foods that do contain gluten (e.g. taking a bite of their parents' burgers) at an earlier age than kids who breast feed for longer periods of time. It's not that the use of formula causes gluten sensitivity, but rather that formula is symptomatic of a societally driven rush back into the workforce that also tends to cause other poor nutritional choices for those infants, which in turn, increase the risk of gluten sensitivity. It's an indicator, not a causative factor.
Actually, a significant group of Democrats were strong supporters of Lincoln's position in the war. No surprise since even back at that time, both political parties shared some significant common roots, having both been formed by pulling together members from the same basic set of defunct parties that existed previously. The party divisions were (and to an extent, still are) largely arbitrary.
As for the "pro-slavery" Democrats, one could reasonably argue that this was the last time in the history of our country when politicians actually represented the views of their constituents.... Not that their constituents weren't wrong, but it's hardly fair to blame the politicians for actually doing their jobs (for once)....
And to be fair, it was never about keeping their slaves, but rather to protect states' rights to decide whether or not to allow slavery. You know, the same sort of states' rights agenda that Republicans are pushing at the moment. Humorously, even in the Civil War era, the Republicans' view on states' rights depended solely on which party held the most power in the Federal Government. When Federalists were in power, they screamed "States' Rights!" at the top of their lungs, claimed to be for a smaller (federal) government, and generally tried to impede the Federalists' progress. The moment Republicans came into power, they took as much power as they could get and no longer cared about anyone's rights. Sound familiar? It should. It still happens in both the Democratic and Republican parties today, with just as much vigor.
And like most governmental issues today, there was a lot of money involved in the slavery debate. No surprise, again, that at least initially, the wealthy slave owners won, keeping their power, up to the point of splitting off into a separate country. It would have remained that way, were it not for somebody standing up, saying "No, this is wrong", and being willing to take the country to war to make the point.
But in the end, they shot him for it. Who is standing up now? Certainly not the Republicans, and certainly not the Democrats. Today, the people with the money win, because everyone is looking for the next big handout and no one wants to take a bullet.
These days, neither party cares in the slightest about states' rights except when they can use it to their political advantage. It's all just a charade to ensure that neither party every truly has to answer to the public as a whole. Don't blame me. I Voted for Kodos. At least a cartoon character is a real change from what we have now.
Oh, forgot to link to the relevant article.
Age of first exposure. From Wikipedia:
Women don't breast feed their kids long enough. They put them on formula a week out of the womb, then try to get them to eat solid foods as soon as they can because breast feeding and formula are a hassle. The result is a huge increase in food allergies.
In the case of gluten allergies, two reasons:
Thus, it is neither a significant positive nor negative evolutionary pressure, so the percentage of expression should rise and fall almost randomly through history.
If you want to know the actual reason for the increase in gluten and peanut allergies lately, we have a pretty good idea:
Nothing evolutionary about it. It's predominantly societal and geographical.
Do you really think they allow encrypted GPS receivers to be used by civilian authorities? I don't even think they give encrypted GPS receivers to military personnel. It's pretty much exclusively used internally inside things like smart bombs, AFAIK.