Because there's not much cell division going on with muscle damage and repair compared to esophageal tissue getting 1st and 2nd degree burns. Especially since esophageal tissue is being constantly renewed in the absence of damage - which is multiplied when there is damage.
Your risks of esophageal cancer are reduced by exercise for the same reasons.
Whether your immune system cleans up a mutation before it becomes cancerous is an entirely separate function, which as you said is dependent on exercise among other things. You can decrease your overall chances of getting cancer even while marginally increasing the chance of mutation. They're not incompatible concepts.
You're saying that exercise reduces the chance of cancer. I'm saying that it also increases the chance of mutation. Not every mutation becomes a persistent cancer, especially if your immune system is up to the task due to better overall health.
crl.geotrust.com canonical name = crl-ds.ws.symantec.com.edgekey.net. crl-ds.ws.symantec.com.edgekey.net canonical name = e6845.dscb1.akamaiedge.net. Name: e6845.dscb1.akamaiedge.net Address: 23.65.5.163
There's your proof that Symantec is involved in the distributed CRL system GeoTrust uses. Your results will vary slightly based on your geographic location, but it should be close enough.
The more times you attempt a clean copy, the more chances for a bad copy.
Yes, there is cell division involved in muscle repair. But NOT MUCH. Not enough that you're causing a significant amount of extra cell division. Meaning you're not significantly increasing your chances of a mutation during the replication process.
Only the satellite cells that connect the muscle fibers divide during muscle repair. And the "damage" from exercise does not destroy a significant number of cells, either.
Still a much smaller scale of repair, especially since these cells aren't already undergoing constant renewal.
The cell damage and repair isn't what lowers your chance of cancer with exercise. It's a systemic benefit wholly unrelated to the cellular damage. I doubt exercise could very often cause the extent of damage we are talking about here anyway.
Registrant Organization: Symantec Corporation Registrant Street: 350 Ellis Street Registrant City: Mountain View Registrant State/Province: CA
Yeah...I doubt Symantec is competent enough to be a threat. Or to protect against threats either, for that matter. Maybe before being paranoid, you should learn how the Internet works, and that when visiting an SSL-protected web site, your browser might compare the certificate against CRLs to make sure it's still valid.
This is the modern way of doing war and I prefer it to the horrible two world wars of the 20th century.
Sure you do. That's what they hope. It's not like it hasn't been foretold as leading to dystopian futures in science fiction novels dating back 50 years or more.
They were caused by HER spilling the coffee she knew to be hot. If you buy a knife and cut yourself like an idiot, can you sue for the knife being too sharp?
There's a difference. The purpose of the knife is to be sharp enough to cut things. The purpose of coffee is to be hot enough to drink, not cause 2nd and 3rd degree burns. If the temperature exceeds the purpose, there's no good reason - especially since cups and lids can fail (especially when you're a mass market chain who goes as cheap as they can on things like that).
You can say the verdict was absurd, but the medical bills were just as absurd.
within the temperature range recommended by the National Coffee Association [ncausa.org] and Bunn [bunn.com],
Two organizations that are far more concerned with the sale of coffee than safety. Whether there were dozens of other restaurants doing the same thing doesn't make it OK. It just means more companies are doing something unsafe. There is no reason to serve a drink just shy of boiling. Especially when cups can fail and nobody can drink it at that temperature anyway.
Forcing your body to replicate cells more often leads to a higher chance of a mutation - that couldn't be more obvious. The more times you attempt a clean copy, the more chances for a bad copy. I think this would apply to any case where cells are constantly being damaged and repaired (sunburn).
For one, a printer doesn't have to be wireless to support Airprint. It just has to be networked. And if you buy a non-consumer printer (business line) it's almost certain not to have it.
Slashdot Mirror
Are they affraid of things like slignbox or soemthing?
Yes. And CableCARD. And any attempt from the past 20 years to let consumers have some control over their TV viewing.
And the hardware is generally so underpowered that the UI latency is painful.
Because there's not much cell division going on with muscle damage and repair compared to esophageal tissue getting 1st and 2nd degree burns. Especially since esophageal tissue is being constantly renewed in the absence of damage - which is multiplied when there is damage.
Your risks of esophageal cancer are reduced by exercise for the same reasons.
Yes. That's correct.
Whether your immune system cleans up a mutation before it becomes cancerous is an entirely separate function, which as you said is dependent on exercise among other things. You can decrease your overall chances of getting cancer even while marginally increasing the chance of mutation. They're not incompatible concepts.
You're saying that exercise reduces the chance of cancer. I'm saying that it also increases the chance of mutation. Not every mutation becomes a persistent cancer, especially if your immune system is up to the task due to better overall health.
nslookup crl.geotrust.com
crl.geotrust.com canonical name = crl-ds.ws.symantec.com.edgekey.net.
crl-ds.ws.symantec.com.edgekey.net canonical name = e6845.dscb1.akamaiedge.net.
Name: e6845.dscb1.akamaiedge.net
Address: 23.65.5.163
There's your proof that Symantec is involved in the distributed CRL system GeoTrust uses. Your results will vary slightly based on your geographic location, but it should be close enough.
The more times you attempt a clean copy, the more chances for a bad copy.
Yes, there is cell division involved in muscle repair. But NOT MUCH. Not enough that you're causing a significant amount of extra cell division. Meaning you're not significantly increasing your chances of a mutation during the replication process.
Only the satellite cells that connect the muscle fibers divide during muscle repair. And the "damage" from exercise does not destroy a significant number of cells, either.
What part are you not getting?
It wasn't a missing word that made you incomprehensible.
Maybe you should research how muscle fibers are rebuilt following damage before you go any further. Hint: It's mostly NOT cell division.
You just wrote something completely incomprehensible.
You have a serious reading comprehension issue. I'm not going to handhold you.
In what sense is it insignificant?
In quantity.
No, that's really not a contradiction at all. The cell flux is still too small to be significant enough.
Still a much smaller scale of repair, especially since these cells aren't already undergoing constant renewal.
The cell damage and repair isn't what lowers your chance of cancer with exercise. It's a systemic benefit wholly unrelated to the cellular damage. I doubt exercise could very often cause the extent of damage we are talking about here anyway.
So does the original headline.
Registrant Organization: Symantec Corporation
Registrant Street: 350 Ellis Street
Registrant City: Mountain View
Registrant State/Province: CA
Yeah...I doubt Symantec is competent enough to be a threat. Or to protect against threats either, for that matter. Maybe before being paranoid, you should learn how the Internet works, and that when visiting an SSL-protected web site, your browser might compare the certificate against CRLs to make sure it's still valid.
word salad much?
This is the modern way of doing war and I prefer it to the horrible two world wars of the 20th century.
Sure you do. That's what they hope. It's not like it hasn't been foretold as leading to dystopian futures in science fiction novels dating back 50 years or more.
They were caused by HER spilling the coffee she knew to be hot. If you buy a knife and cut yourself like an idiot, can you sue for the knife being too sharp?
There's a difference. The purpose of the knife is to be sharp enough to cut things. The purpose of coffee is to be hot enough to drink, not cause 2nd and 3rd degree burns. If the temperature exceeds the purpose, there's no good reason - especially since cups and lids can fail (especially when you're a mass market chain who goes as cheap as they can on things like that).
You can say the verdict was absurd, but the medical bills were just as absurd.
within the temperature range recommended by the National Coffee Association [ncausa.org] and Bunn [bunn.com],
Two organizations that are far more concerned with the sale of coffee than safety. Whether there were dozens of other restaurants doing the same thing doesn't make it OK. It just means more companies are doing something unsafe. There is no reason to serve a drink just shy of boiling. Especially when cups can fail and nobody can drink it at that temperature anyway.
Or even more plain (and obvious): "More cell replication leads to higher chances of mutation."
Forcing your body to replicate cells more often leads to a higher chance of a mutation - that couldn't be more obvious. The more times you attempt a clean copy, the more chances for a bad copy. I think this would apply to any case where cells are constantly being damaged and repaired (sunburn).
You want more dupes?
Just download the free Adobe DNG converter
For one, a printer doesn't have to be wireless to support Airprint. It just has to be networked. And if you buy a non-consumer printer (business line) it's almost certain not to have it.
Reinstall the previous point release of OS X. It's better than things not working.
That depends on how you define "costs more money."
Even $2/mo. for 10 years is more than $199.