No significant effect on behavior after 30 minutes a day over eight weeks for psychology healthy individuals? Amazing! I'm not going to send my autistic spectrum kids to play 10 hours a day for years in end! Excellent!
The most common form of HFCS is HFCS-55. It's 55% fructose rather than 50% for sucrose. So, a little bit worse for you, but not a lot. They're both awful.
The difference is not in the religion but the adherent. So far as I'm aware, this individual doesn't even claim to sincerely believe in FSMism. Instead he wants to adopt a phony religion, not sincerely held, as a protest against the perceived faults of other religions.
The key thing about religious beliefs, and about religious faith is that it's not arbitrary. I can't just change what I believe for no reason at all -- I can't just wake up one morning and say "oh, well, I guess I'll be Shinto today." This is why religion needs special protection. Through a bitter series of wars in Europe, we learned that it's best for everyone to let everyone follow their conscience, so that we don't start more wars by trying to restrict or enforce any sincerely held religious creed.
If this guy were actually sincere in believing in the FSM, then I'd say that believe deserves protection (even though FSM-ism was clearly created as satire.) He's not sincere, and that's pretty damn obvious.
Out of curiosity, do you have a source for any of this that has voted Democrat since Kennedy?
It's a lot of horseshit. The Dixiecrats, who favored segregation, largely became Republicans in the 70's. That's why Reagans first campaign speech after the convention was in Mississippi on the topic of "states' rights." This is code.
And the Dixiecrats abandoned the Democrats because they supported integration! You're engaged in a long winded and grossly distorted fallacy of guilt by association.
They're more likely to live up to constitutional controls than some corporation that doesn't even pretend to honor any principal but maximum profit for its shareholders!
Nope. Many studies have shown that it's possible to be overweight, active, and healthy. The key thing for health is activity... Granted, there is a correlation between overweight and inactive,but it's weak.
I'm a competitive weightlifter. And I coach others. (Not a body builder. It's not the same thing.) Most of my guys seem to do best with carb cycling -- ie only eating carbs in quantity on training days. (Oversimplified.)
Higher carbs work okay for people like distance runners who will burn off the resulting triglycerides. Even then, they're lousy for getting in shape and people tend to gain weight unless they're training at least ten hours a week. Your argument is way oversimplified.
In any case if you look at what science IS, one key point is that ten theories are worth less than one observation. I can tell you at when my guys need to cut for competition, they go zero carb and it works,and th can do it without losing muscle. The odd trainee who tris to do it high carb loses muscl and rarely succeeds.
Show me a common, chronic disease cause by not enough carbs and I might concede that we need some.
Until then, I'll enjoy my 4.6 a1c as a type 1 diabetic.
As a single dad, I've got to say that's by primary caregiver has these problems. It's not sexism, necessarily, except in the sense that women are still the most common primary caregivers.
Actually, there was a big movement towards "slow carbs" about 10-12 years ago, in a concept called the "glycemic index." However, most studies as well as clinical experience showed it wasn't an effective approach for most people.
Slashdot Mirror
Just make sure to do this last on your bucket list!
No significant effect on behavior after 30 minutes a day over eight weeks for psychology healthy individuals? Amazing! I'm not going to send my autistic spectrum kids to play 10 hours a day for years in end! Excellent!
The right... outraged whenever some kid in Macedonia wants a new bike.
Except the unsafe package gives access to traditional memory management without need for gC (in Go.)
Washington would like to have a word with you!!!
The most common form of HFCS is HFCS-55. It's 55% fructose rather than 50% for sucrose. So, a little bit worse for you, but not a lot. They're both awful.
The difference is not in the religion but the adherent. So far as I'm aware, this individual doesn't even claim to sincerely believe in FSMism. Instead he wants to adopt a phony religion, not sincerely held, as a protest against the perceived faults of other religions.
The key thing about religious beliefs, and about religious faith is that it's not arbitrary. I can't just change what I believe for no reason at all -- I can't just wake up one morning and say "oh, well, I guess I'll be Shinto today." This is why religion needs special protection. Through a bitter series of wars in Europe, we learned that it's best for everyone to let everyone follow their conscience, so that we don't start more wars by trying to restrict or enforce any sincerely held religious creed.
If this guy were actually sincere in believing in the FSM, then I'd say that believe deserves protection (even though FSM-ism was clearly created as satire.) He's not sincere, and that's pretty damn obvious.
No, transubstantiation is not the word.
Just not true. There is an active lithium mine in the US
When I was diagnosed with sleep apnea I went into the 60s
Clearly you've not had a child eho played football...
Must not have gone to my high school.
Out of curiosity, do you have a source for any of this that has voted Democrat since Kennedy? It's a lot of horseshit. The Dixiecrats, who favored segregation, largely became Republicans in the 70's. That's why Reagans first campaign speech after the convention was in Mississippi on the topic of "states' rights." This is code. And the Dixiecrats abandoned the Democrats because they supported integration! You're engaged in a long winded and grossly distorted fallacy of guilt by association.
Sounds like a great argument for rebalancing to a national sales tax to me. Also,maybe tariffs aren't so bad.
They're more likely to live up to constitutional controls than some corporation that doesn't even pretend to honor any principal but maximum profit for its shareholders!
Do you have any idea how easy it is to tap someone's phone? The cabinets aren't even locked! Internet isn't less secure, it's more.
What are the truly despicable texts from the New Testament?
But you can cut with only 3% of the loss bring lean mass IF you do it low carb.
Nope. Many studies have shown that it's possible to be overweight, active, and healthy. The key thing for health is activity... Granted, there is a correlation between overweight and inactive,but it's weak.
I'm a competitive weightlifter. And I coach others. (Not a body builder. It's not the same thing.) Most of my guys seem to do best with carb cycling -- ie only eating carbs in quantity on training days. (Oversimplified.) Higher carbs work okay for people like distance runners who will burn off the resulting triglycerides. Even then, they're lousy for getting in shape and people tend to gain weight unless they're training at least ten hours a week. Your argument is way oversimplified. In any case if you look at what science IS, one key point is that ten theories are worth less than one observation. I can tell you at when my guys need to cut for competition, they go zero carb and it works,and th can do it without losing muscle. The odd trainee who tris to do it high carb loses muscl and rarely succeeds.
Wrong. Your body converts protein to glucose just for those few cells of the nervous system that can't burn ketone bodies.
Show me a common, chronic disease cause by not enough carbs and I might concede that we need some. Until then, I'll enjoy my 4.6 a1c as a type 1 diabetic.
As a single dad, I've got to say that's by primary caregiver has these problems. It's not sexism, necessarily, except in the sense that women are still the most common primary caregivers.
Actually, there was a big movement towards "slow carbs" about 10-12 years ago, in a concept called the "glycemic index." However, most studies as well as clinical experience showed it wasn't an effective approach for most people.
Except last i looked blacks are 12% of the population, which means the incidence is 4 times what we would expect all else bein equal.