As I vaguely recall, toxicity will result from eating a diet comprised primarily of seal liver. I don't know how many IU that comes to per day -- how much is in a pound or so of seal liver?
Has anyone tracked utilization of Vit.D that's self-generated vs consumed as a supplement?? I wonder how much difference that might make.
Since I spent 2 to 5 hours a day in the morning and late-afternoon sun, I doubt I'm in any serious deficit.:)
Calcium cycle is also dependent on Vit.C -- excess causes Ca to be leached out of the bones and deposited in soft tissues, and can cause blood calcium to fluctuate beyond what's safe (causing heart arrythmia, etc).
I saw those, thanks. I suspect when there is NOT a daily intake of Vit.D, then megadoses aren't really a problem, because you're covering for an ongoing and future deficit. In short, it'll get stored, but it will also eventually get used up.
But I recall that there can be problems with liver toxicity if Vit.D builds up beyond a certain point. One does wonder if that might itself be symptomatic of some other imbalance. Vit.A/D/E *do* have to be in the correct proportions for any of them to work right. (About 100/10/1, if I remember the ratio correctly. I haven't actually had to look up the numbers in decades.)
Usually the balance among such nutrients gets handled well enough by our normal healthy-omnivore's tendency to eat just about anything that doesn't eat us first. "Modern" diets may vary.:/
Which reminds me, I've got a chunk of beef thawing in the microwave. Scare it a bit with the hot frypan, and it's ready to chow down!
Give me a few multi-generation pedigrees, and I'll work it out, right down to the foundation carriers. I do this all the time as a professional dog breeder and pedigree consultant -- but I always have a minimum of 5 generations of data to work with.
See, there's the problem, we don't HAVE extended pedigrees (including littermates) for humans, the way we have for other domestic animals. So stuff that's actually hereditary gets blamed on anything else, and when something IS finally pegged as genetic, the usual reaction is a wildly emotional "OMG genocide!" or "I'll take the risk that my kids have these defects, because I want to breed regardless!"
My dad had MS; I apparently don't (no symptoms at age 51; my dad died at 50), but judging from my experience in tracking canine genes, the probability is that the root cause is a single recessive gene, and I do regard myself as an obligate carrier. Unlike some folk, I don't find this to be a personal attack. We all carry lethal genes, some more detrimental than others. But for the sake of your kids, it's wise to do a little risk management, and improve your kids' chances by not knowingly doubling up on a defect.
Interesting... As I recall, my grandmother didn't get osteoporosis until she was in her late 80s, and stopped doing outdoor activities like gardening and berry-picking. When I think about it, ISTM that correlated with her moving to an apartment where for the first time in her life, she did not have a garden space, so lacked a reason to spend time outdoors. Hmm.....
Myself, I have a strong natural desire to see the sun come up, and to spend the next hour or so out in the sunlight. You gotta wonder if how a lot of old folks want to spend an hour every day rocking on the porch is actually an instinct to seek sun, driven by their bodily needs.
Dogs have a similar vit.D metabolism, and have a very definite instinct to seek sun.
Anyone who says we have "flat herbivore teeth" has never looked at a cow's teeth. The structure is completely different in every way; it's clear that obligate-herbivore teeth evolved along another route entirely. Conversely, human teeth differ from a dog's or bear's teeth only as a matter of degree. Ours are less pointy, but we have the same basic set (plus or minus a few bicuspids) and the tooth itself has the same general structure -- NOT the layered structure of the ever-growing herbivore tooth.
Herbivores' teeth need to grow throughout their lifetimes because otherwise the dirt in their food grinds 'em down to nothing. Teeth ground down to the gumline has been observed in humans eating a diet high in root veggies and/or grains ground by primitive methods.
Some folk will point at rodents as their "humans are vegetarians like that" example, forgetting that rodents have ever-growing incisors, AND that some (frex, rats) will readily eat flesh, often by preference.
IMO herbivores are a form of degenerate carnivore -- witness that even horses will eat flesh on occasion (leave a bag of meat meal in the back of your truck and see how long it takes range horses to rip it open and chow down) and that stallions come equipped with fangs.:)
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go find me a vegan for lunch.;)
Interesting. I'm of Norwegian and British extraction, and I've spent a good deal of my life outdoors (2 to 5 hours every day, mostly morning and evening). When I was a kid in Montana I got the occasional moderate sunburn, but never more than once per summer -- after that I was completely "immune" for the year.
As an adult, I neither burn nor tan easily, but after 22 years in the SoCal desert, I've got a permanent tan everywhere that's regularly exposed to the sun, and it only fades a little during the winter. (I also have thick skin, about double the thickness of most folks.) I only use sunscreen when I'm out during the height of the day -- if you're paying attention you can tell when you really need it, by the sensation of "heat" in your skin.
Dark skin in Italy wasn't native. It was the result of the Romans bringing in dark-skinned Africans, which mingled with the light-skinned Romans to produce the darker tones (and the often-curly hair) of modern Italy.
Similarly, the early "pure" Spaniards were typically blonde and blue-eyed; the dark-skinned, dark-eyed Spaniards of today are the descendants of Moorish invaders.
However, per the Wikipedia article, Inuits have not lost their dark skin because their diet is rich in Vit.D (by way of seal liver) thus there has been no selection pressure toward lighter skins.
I think he means where when standing at rest, the knees are together but the feet are out at an angle, so there's a visible inverted-V from knees to ground, rather than the feet being directly under the knees per a normal skeleton.
I've mostly seen these "X-legs" in obese children, and in adults who have been heavy to obese their entire lives. Interesting to now read that vit.D deficiency and obesity are connected -- most of the people I've seen with "X-legs" clearly never go outdoors unless they have to.
Interesting, and word-for-word what a mostly-housebound friend is experiencing. I've pointed him at it, maybe it'll help him out.
I was also struck by how the description re direct effects on bone/collagen are similar to panosteitis ("growing pains") in dogs. Pano has no lasting effects (indeed, dogs that go thru pano are MORE likely than average to be sound as adults) but given that it's seen mostly in the fastest-growing specimens, I begin to wonder if the cause of *symptoms* is that they wind up short on some nutrients, because they simply can't ingest as much as they need during rapid growth.
However, excess vitamin D also has bad effects, like screwing up your calcium metabolism (the effect is similar to rickets) and IIRC, can also result in liver damage.
Point being, good nutrition is all about BALANCE, *not* about consuming megadoses of $nutrient on the off chance that it might prevent $disease.
Thanks for the explanation. As the other reply says, most of us here aren't lawyers, and have no more legal grok than the average non-geek. Consider yourself the lawyer equivalent of a programmer explaining a function in a compiler.:)
That said, and reasonably assuming your info is exact and correct, ISTM that "precedent" must have been stretched a bit, since I've occasionally heard of some local judge relying on a previous local decision to guide his own actions in a similar case, *as if* he had no other choice. Or is there another term for that? (Besides "judge not bothering to think for himself".)
Remember that this isn't the RIAA, it's the... ah, hell, the name of the agency escapes me, but it is empowered to collect royalties for ANY copyrighted music, WITHOUT consulting the artist first. (And remember that under current law, copyright is automatic.) So being independent doesn't help -- the royalty is STILL due, unless *that artist* and *that station* contractually agree to some other (or no) payment arrangement.
Obviously this is impractical to do on any scale, given that there are hundreds (at least!) of internet radio stations, and tens of thousands of artists. So last time this came up, I suggested that instead some outfit like CDBaby (since they are already set up to collect money for and pay to artists) could become a broker to handle those artists who don't want their work covered by the new royalty rules.
I also really like seeing the artist and title in WinAmp -- otherwise I'd never find out who most of 'em are at all, since you never see/hear 'em anywhere else.
Yeah, the next closest example I could think of was SCO, hence the related descriptive phrase.
I like your Open Letter, I think it lays out the situation and best response in solid layman's terms that a non-lawyer can readily understand. The one point where I think people could become confused, is that it needs a quick definition of "ex parte" -- especially since the vast majority of people who will use this advice are non-lawyers, and may not have a lawyer instantly handy, either.
I read through a big chunk of the technical comments re Dr.Doug. Igor's information about logfiles is particularly interesting. Likewise an anonymous post about IP addresses not getting released properly, and subsequently colliding. Also the remarks about ensuring that the alleged file really IS the "correct" infringement, and not merely a mislabeled irrelevant file (given that there are a lot of bogus files out there).
Good to see that you're attracting your own potential expert witnesses.:)
Does this set any *generally-useful* precedent that other judges might be inclined or required to follow? Surely the RIAA can't be the *only* underhanded "litigious bastards" out there!
Just curious, what do you consider a reasonable bitrate cap?
The stations I listen to are 64 to 128 kbit, which is usually good enough for most stuff, but sucks for classical. I can easily imagine TPTB imposing a 32kbit cap.:(
Probably not so mysterious. Those hosts that died on higher ground gave the fungus spores a better chance to catch the wind or a fresh passing host, while those hosts that died in a low spot were out of the wind and less likely to get tripped over. So natural selection selected for parasites that affected their hosts that way.
Conversely, in the host critter, this might also have selected for individuals that prefer areas unlike those where infected hosts tend to die. This doubtless helped keep the parasite in balance, rather than letting it exterminate the host.
I had a related thought... that regardless of the merit (or lack of same) of any case against Cheney, the timing is far from coincidental. There's no need to win an impeachment; whether it's valid or not, it's an opportunity for the Democrats to make the Republicans look bad by association with the accused, and very handily timed to maximize the media circus just before the primaries get into full swing.
Not only that, but it's yet more indication that the sheer size of gov't needs to be reduced. As it is now, it's a few elected officials and a horde of staff and other "civil servants" who each have pretty near total power within their own little domains and subdomains.
Since elected officials helped generate this bureaucracy, they should help reduce it, by firing all their staff and doing all the work themselves. Then maybe they'd have more of a clue about the monster they've created.
"The young women on the basketball team Mr. Imus insulted are over 18 and can speak for themselves. It's disconcerting to see third parties become involved and presume to speak collectively for minority groups. It is precisely this collectivist mindset that is at the heart of racism."
Slashdot Mirror
My main work is outdoors, usually the first two hours after dawn and another hour or more before dusk... so yeah, I get the real thing :)
:)
If I were indoors all the time, that'd be another story... people always complain that my house was designed for vampires.
As I vaguely recall, toxicity will result from eating a diet comprised primarily of seal liver. I don't know how many IU that comes to per day -- how much is in a pound or so of seal liver?
:)
Has anyone tracked utilization of Vit.D that's self-generated vs consumed as a supplement?? I wonder how much difference that might make.
Since I spent 2 to 5 hours a day in the morning and late-afternoon sun, I doubt I'm in any serious deficit.
Calcium cycle is also dependent on Vit.C -- excess causes Ca to be leached out of the bones and deposited in soft tissues, and can cause blood calcium to fluctuate beyond what's safe (causing heart arrythmia, etc).
I saw those, thanks. I suspect when there is NOT a daily intake of Vit.D, then megadoses aren't really a problem, because you're covering for an ongoing and future deficit. In short, it'll get stored, but it will also eventually get used up.
:/
But I recall that there can be problems with liver toxicity if Vit.D builds up beyond a certain point. One does wonder if that might itself be symptomatic of some other imbalance. Vit.A/D/E *do* have to be in the correct proportions for any of them to work right. (About 100/10/1, if I remember the ratio correctly. I haven't actually had to look up the numbers in decades.)
Usually the balance among such nutrients gets handled well enough by our normal healthy-omnivore's tendency to eat just about anything that doesn't eat us first. "Modern" diets may vary.
Which reminds me, I've got a chunk of beef thawing in the microwave. Scare it a bit with the hot frypan, and it's ready to chow down!
Give me a few multi-generation pedigrees, and I'll work it out, right down to the foundation carriers. I do this all the time as a professional dog breeder and pedigree consultant -- but I always have a minimum of 5 generations of data to work with.
See, there's the problem, we don't HAVE extended pedigrees (including littermates) for humans, the way we have for other domestic animals. So stuff that's actually hereditary gets blamed on anything else, and when something IS finally pegged as genetic, the usual reaction is a wildly emotional "OMG genocide!" or "I'll take the risk that my kids have these defects, because I want to breed regardless!"
My dad had MS; I apparently don't (no symptoms at age 51; my dad died at 50), but judging from my experience in tracking canine genes, the probability is that the root cause is a single recessive gene, and I do regard myself as an obligate carrier. Unlike some folk, I don't find this to be a personal attack. We all carry lethal genes, some more detrimental than others. But for the sake of your kids, it's wise to do a little risk management, and improve your kids' chances by not knowingly doubling up on a defect.
Interesting... As I recall, my grandmother didn't get osteoporosis until she was in her late 80s, and stopped doing outdoor activities like gardening and berry-picking. When I think about it, ISTM that correlated with her moving to an apartment where for the first time in her life, she did not have a garden space, so lacked a reason to spend time outdoors. Hmm.....
Myself, I have a strong natural desire to see the sun come up, and to spend the next hour or so out in the sunlight. You gotta wonder if how a lot of old folks want to spend an hour every day rocking on the porch is actually an instinct to seek sun, driven by their bodily needs.
Dogs have a similar vit.D metabolism, and have a very definite instinct to seek sun.
Anyone who says we have "flat herbivore teeth" has never looked at a cow's teeth. The structure is completely different in every way; it's clear that obligate-herbivore teeth evolved along another route entirely. Conversely, human teeth differ from a dog's or bear's teeth only as a matter of degree. Ours are less pointy, but we have the same basic set (plus or minus a few bicuspids) and the tooth itself has the same general structure -- NOT the layered structure of the ever-growing herbivore tooth.
:)
;)
Herbivores' teeth need to grow throughout their lifetimes because otherwise the dirt in their food grinds 'em down to nothing. Teeth ground down to the gumline has been observed in humans eating a diet high in root veggies and/or grains ground by primitive methods.
Some folk will point at rodents as their "humans are vegetarians like that" example, forgetting that rodents have ever-growing incisors, AND that some (frex, rats) will readily eat flesh, often by preference.
IMO herbivores are a form of degenerate carnivore -- witness that even horses will eat flesh on occasion (leave a bag of meat meal in the back of your truck and see how long it takes range horses to rip it open and chow down) and that stallions come equipped with fangs.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go find me a vegan for lunch.
Interesting. I'm of Norwegian and British extraction, and I've spent a good deal of my life outdoors (2 to 5 hours every day, mostly morning and evening). When I was a kid in Montana I got the occasional moderate sunburn, but never more than once per summer -- after that I was completely "immune" for the year.
As an adult, I neither burn nor tan easily, but after 22 years in the SoCal desert, I've got a permanent tan everywhere that's regularly exposed to the sun, and it only fades a little during the winter. (I also have thick skin, about double the thickness of most folks.) I only use sunscreen when I'm out during the height of the day -- if you're paying attention you can tell when you really need it, by the sensation of "heat" in your skin.
Dark skin in Italy wasn't native. It was the result of the Romans bringing in dark-skinned Africans, which mingled with the light-skinned Romans to produce the darker tones (and the often-curly hair) of modern Italy.
Similarly, the early "pure" Spaniards were typically blonde and blue-eyed; the dark-skinned, dark-eyed Spaniards of today are the descendants of Moorish invaders.
However, per the Wikipedia article, Inuits have not lost their dark skin because their diet is rich in Vit.D (by way of seal liver) thus there has been no selection pressure toward lighter skins.
I think he means where when standing at rest, the knees are together but the feet are out at an angle, so there's a visible inverted-V from knees to ground, rather than the feet being directly under the knees per a normal skeleton.
I've mostly seen these "X-legs" in obese children, and in adults who have been heavy to obese their entire lives. Interesting to now read that vit.D deficiency and obesity are connected -- most of the people I've seen with "X-legs" clearly never go outdoors unless they have to.
[reads article]
Interesting, and word-for-word what a mostly-housebound friend is experiencing. I've pointed him at it, maybe it'll help him out.
I was also struck by how the description re direct effects on bone/collagen are similar to panosteitis ("growing pains") in dogs. Pano has no lasting effects (indeed, dogs that go thru pano are MORE likely than average to be sound as adults) but given that it's seen mostly in the fastest-growing specimens, I begin to wonder if the cause of *symptoms* is that they wind up short on some nutrients, because they simply can't ingest as much as they need during rapid growth.
From the only reference I could find, he appears to be a chiropractor. 'Nuf said.
However, excess vitamin D also has bad effects, like screwing up your calcium metabolism (the effect is similar to rickets) and IIRC, can also result in liver damage.
Point being, good nutrition is all about BALANCE, *not* about consuming megadoses of $nutrient on the off chance that it might prevent $disease.
Tell that to my dad, who spent his whole life thoroughly suntanned, yet died of MS.
99 drivers there on the wall...
Take one down, pass it around!!
Thanks for the explanation. As the other reply says, most of us here aren't lawyers, and have no more legal grok than the average non-geek. Consider yourself the lawyer equivalent of a programmer explaining a function in a compiler. :)
That said, and reasonably assuming your info is exact and correct, ISTM that "precedent" must have been stretched a bit, since I've occasionally heard of some local judge relying on a previous local decision to guide his own actions in a similar case, *as if* he had no other choice. Or is there another term for that? (Besides "judge not bothering to think for himself".)
Remember that this isn't the RIAA, it's the... ah, hell, the name of the agency escapes me, but it is empowered to collect royalties for ANY copyrighted music, WITHOUT consulting the artist first. (And remember that under current law, copyright is automatic.) So being independent doesn't help -- the royalty is STILL due, unless *that artist* and *that station* contractually agree to some other (or no) payment arrangement.
Obviously this is impractical to do on any scale, given that there are hundreds (at least!) of internet radio stations, and tens of thousands of artists. So last time this came up, I suggested that instead some outfit like CDBaby (since they are already set up to collect money for and pay to artists) could become a broker to handle those artists who don't want their work covered by the new royalty rules.
I also really like seeing the artist and title in WinAmp -- otherwise I'd never find out who most of 'em are at all, since you never see/hear 'em anywhere else.
Yeah, the next closest example I could think of was SCO, hence the related descriptive phrase.
:)
I like your Open Letter, I think it lays out the situation and best response in solid layman's terms that a non-lawyer can readily understand. The one point where I think people could become confused, is that it needs a quick definition of "ex parte" -- especially since the vast majority of people who will use this advice are non-lawyers, and may not have a lawyer instantly handy, either.
I read through a big chunk of the technical comments re Dr.Doug. Igor's information about logfiles is particularly interesting. Likewise an anonymous post about IP addresses not getting released properly, and subsequently colliding. Also the remarks about ensuring that the alleged file really IS the "correct" infringement, and not merely a mislabeled irrelevant file (given that there are a lot of bogus files out there).
Good to see that you're attracting your own potential expert witnesses.
Does this set any *generally-useful* precedent that other judges might be inclined or required to follow? Surely the RIAA can't be the *only* underhanded "litigious bastards" out there!
Just curious, what do you consider a reasonable bitrate cap?
:(
The stations I listen to are 64 to 128 kbit, which is usually good enough for most stuff, but sucks for classical. I can easily imagine TPTB imposing a 32kbit cap.
"And what of the DRM on XP and Vista?"
"Funny, I wasn't aware that they were albums or movies."
Crap, and here I was all set to sit down and watch their computer-generated special effects!!
Probably not so mysterious. Those hosts that died on higher ground gave the fungus spores a better chance to catch the wind or a fresh passing host, while those hosts that died in a low spot were out of the wind and less likely to get tripped over. So natural selection selected for parasites that affected their hosts that way.
Conversely, in the host critter, this might also have selected for individuals that prefer areas unlike those where infected hosts tend to die. This doubtless helped keep the parasite in balance, rather than letting it exterminate the host.
I had a related thought... that regardless of the merit (or lack of same) of any case against Cheney, the timing is far from coincidental. There's no need to win an impeachment; whether it's valid or not, it's an opportunity for the Democrats to make the Republicans look bad by association with the accused, and very handily timed to maximize the media circus just before the primaries get into full swing.
Not only that, but it's yet more indication that the sheer size of gov't needs to be reduced. As it is now, it's a few elected officials and a horde of staff and other "civil servants" who each have pretty near total power within their own little domains and subdomains.
Since elected officials helped generate this bureaucracy, they should help reduce it, by firing all their staff and doing all the work themselves. Then maybe they'd have more of a clue about the monster they've created.
"Society does not benefit when decisions are made based on the ignorance of the majority."
Best quotable I've seen all day.
"The young women on the basketball team Mr. Imus insulted are over 18 and can speak for themselves. It's disconcerting to see third parties become involved and presume to speak collectively for minority groups. It is precisely this collectivist mindset that is at the heart of racism."
t m
From http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst041607.h