I know 50 Hz has its place, and of course I don't have any objection to having those catalogs available at the same website. I'm just saying that they could organize the information better. It stinks to download a catalog, open it, and then realize that you're looking at the European version.
I'm an engineer (I design air conditioning systems), and as far as the manufacturers I deal with are concerned, this article is on the money. We've got an entire wall of catalogs of assorted types of equipment, and most of them almost never get updated. Even the common brands like Carrier & Trane that have dedicated reps in our area fall behind. I tend to specify the equipment that I can get the best support for, which includes giving me access to the newest catalogs, the most updated product selection software, etc.
Trane, for example, has most of their commercial equipment catalogs with all the technical data online in PDF format for me to download, which is great. One of the catalogs was corrupted, but I couldn't figure out anywhere to *tell* anyone that there was a problem so I could get the right version of the catalog. Unfortunately, Trane has almost none of the catalogs for residential-size equipment online. If I want those catalogs, I've got to call my rep, have him go onto their internal web server and download them, and email them to me. And as I scroll down through the lists of catalogs, a third of them are in Spanish, and a bunch more are for 50 Hz power which isn't very common.
In short, they could do a lot more to keep me happy with relatively little effort. How much trouble is it to make PDFs of the new catalogs as they are printed and put them online, with Spanish stuff and 50Hz stuff separated from the mainstream stuff? Is the residential unit info so top secret that it has to be stored away on an internal service?
This isn't about cutting edge technology, it's about having the information where I can get it and use it.
I seem to remember reading about how Italians are terrified of being inside a closed room with a runnnig fan. Something about how it would suck a persons breath out. It seems like the same article mentioned how they were also afraid of air conditioning, because it poisoned the air or something. I say let them stew in their own filth if they don't want AC...just so long as I don't have to sit next to them anywhere.
Not just sanitized daily - sanitized between patients, if the doctor touched the patient and then touched the pager before washing up for the next patient
Send in one of his CIA buddies and assasinate him, you say? Just how is this possible, you idiot? First off, there's nothing I've seen to convince me that Kennedy was killed by the CIA, but that's neither here nor there. Second, you just can't decide to kill somebody and make it happen. This isn't the X-Files, there is no cigarette smoking man who can walk in, pop a cap in Saddams head, and then walk out. People like him tend to take their security seriously, and not let new people get even somewhat close.
I wasn't aware that we got data from the Germans on human experiments. I'm pretty sure that we (Americans) did a lot of experiments on soldiers to find out stuff, but they were willing. I know we got dive tables this way. Could the hypoxia and hypothermia info have come from experiments on soldiers, too?
Hmmm, well my IE 6.0 sees it just fine. Though on one page I looked at, it looked like the background color painted first, and then the test overlaid it 0.5 seconds later. Maybe check your settings or something.
I'm going to have to disagree with you regarding the unconsciousness thing. The Straight Dope article you mentioned is here [sorry, I need to learn html].
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a5_262.html
Most of the article deals with anecdotal evidence from around the 19th century about people being conscious after decapitation by the guillotine. But the most convincing example was at the end of the article, quoted here:
"Then I received a note from a U.S. Army veteran who had been stationed in Korea. In June 1989 the taxi he and a friend were riding in collided with a truck. My correspondent was pinned in the wreckage. The friend was decapitated. Here's what happened:
My friend's head came to rest face up, and (from my angle) upside-down. As I watched, his mouth opened and closed no less than two times. The facial expressions he displayed were first of shock or confusion, followed by terror or grief. I cannot exaggerate and say that he was looking all around, but he did display ocular movement in that his eyes moved from me, to his body, and back to me. He had direct eye contact with me when his eyes took on a hazy, absent expression . . . and he was dead."
If you make a good cut with a sharp blade, I think there is a very good opportunity for continued consciousness. There was an article last week about a man in India whose head was 'nearly severed' and he drove himself 30 km to a hospital that could treat him. Evidently he was driving a vehicle, and the vehicle in front of him was carrying iron rods & pipes. That vehicle stopped, he couldn't stop quickly enough, so his neck was pierced by iron rods and such. So I'm not sure if it was truly 'nearly severed' as they say, but if anything, it seems to me that it would involve more blunt force trauma to the neck than the guillotine. That article is here
Our society seems to have always wanted a method of execution that was painless and quick. Of course, many would say that people who have committed heinous crimes should die painfully and slowly, but for whatever reason our society seems to like the most humane method of execution possible, so let's go forward with that idea.
Hanging and the firing squad both leave the condemned person to feel pain for some time after the act. The electric chair is supposed to instantaneously kill the brain, but some people have their doubts about how instantaneously that happens, especially if the equipment isn't set up correctly (see 'The Green Mile'). The guillotine and any other method of beheading sever the head, but the person is still conscious, at least in theory, until the oxygen supply in the brain runs out. Lethal injection puts the person to sleep first, but while you're going to sleep, you know you're dying, so it doesn't seem much better.
With the problems of these methods, it seems to me that the most humane way to execute a person is to end the existence of their brain in an instant. I think the best way to do this is with a shaped charge, sort of the same way nuclear bombs are designed, with a shell of explosives arranged around a center core (the head, in the place of uranium) with the charges directed inwards, fired nearly simultaneously. The device wouldn't have to be as precise in timing or arrangement of charges, or as powerful, and it would essentially vaporize the entire head in a millisecond or so (I'm not an explosives expert, but from what I've heard about modern explosives, it would be very quick). No worries about continued consciousness, though you might have to disinfect the chamber pretty well afterwards. And this would also be fairly ideal for harvesting organs (except for corneas and such, obviously). You'd just have a doctor on sight, put a blast shield around the neck to protect the torso, and then harvest immediately.
I've heard much the same thing about emergency room doctors not registering as organ donors. Seems that there is enough wiggle room in considering whether someone is "dead" that it bothers the people who know the most about it.
Ok, I went & read the FAQ you linked to, but you have misinterpreted what it says. It says that the "Lightweight" tank was used on the Columbia. Regarding the "Superlightweight" tanks, it says,
"Since 1998, however, a revised tank model - a 'Superlightweight' tank - has been in use."
The same FAQ says in the next paragraph,
"In addition to the development of the 'Superlightweight' tanks, Lockheed also began using a reformulated lighter version of the inch-thick, spray-on insulation used on all external tanks in the mid-1990s. The switch was made to comply with an EPA mandate to limit ozone-depleting chemicals."
So the new foam came into use on *ALL* tanks (doesn't say 'only superlightweight'), starting in the mid-1990s, whereas the "superlightweight" tank only came into service in 1998.
The FAQ also says that the use of the new "Superlightweight" tank started with STS-91. But the same FAQ talks about the extensive tile damage found on the return to earth of STS-87, and it mentions that the new, 'environmentally-friendly' foaming method was used on STS-87. It also refers to this new foaming method being one of a few possible reasons for the extensive tile damage. STS-87 comes before STS-91 (unless they have some weird numbering system I don't know about), so it couldn't have used one of the new 'Superlightweight' tanks with its 'environmentally-friendly' foam. So it is apparent from this evidence also, that the new foaming method was used with the Columbia tanks.
If you are going to try to refute somebody, and then post a link to your supposed evidence, please read your evidence carefully so I don't have to waste my time responding.
Now, if only you could swap out the sound source that the dB dragsters are using, substituting the "brown noise" instead of their 74 Hz. That would be a better form of justice than the pie eating contest from 'Stand By Me'.
I use the color screen on my Samsung SGH-S105 to move around the house late at night. I also use it to read at night, sometimes. It's a sweet phone, polyphonic sound, etc.
The only problem is that I want a phone with multiple numbers for each person, along with a text box. With this phone, it has three pre-named number slots (Home, Work, & Cell) and an email slot. The part that sucks is that the number that appears at the top of the list can't be modified by the user, and it mainly seems to depend on which number you entered last. So I can't just set my phone to call John Doe's Cell # by default, and then scroll to his name and hit talk twice and call his cell. If I entered his work # last, it's at the top of the list, so I scroll to his name, hit talk once, then have to look & see which # to scroll to, then hit talk.
It'd also be nice to have a physical address field, and the capability to add a text description to each number (to maybe hold an extension #) rather than just have icons for description.
What you're saying is right down my alley, but the dilemna for me is that there's too much to learn/do/build and not enough time. I *want* to do interesting things with computers, I *want* to learn iaido/aikido/etc., I think it'd be awesome to do metalworking, I want to read great books, I'd like to reload my own bullets, I'd love to go to the gun range once or twice a week, but where does the time come from??
I'm sort of a special case, I suppose, because my wife has chronic pain issues that shifts 98% of the housework/cooking/etc. over to me, but even if it was 50/50, I don't see how I could support more than two significant hobbies, and have much time left to do more than take care of the necessary stuff around the house. Martial arts or working out tends to erase three nights a week all by itself. Throw in another hobby that takes my Saturdays, and that's pretty much it. I just need more days in the week.
I'm trying to transcribe some tapes of lectures right now, and I'm looking for an easy way out. I know speech recognition programs are out there, but from what I know, they need significant training of the user with the program in order to work.
Unfortunately, my voice is not the one giving the lectures, and there are actually two or three different lecturers. Since training is impossible (AFAIK, at least), I'm wondering how far speech-to-text technology has come, especially in the open source community. Can I just pipe the output from the wav file into the input of a speech-to-text program, and if so, what sort of signal-to-noise ratio can I expect on the output without training? (graphical interface would be nice) Right now it's taking me about four hours to transcribe 50 minutes worth of lecture.
Only problem is that, while the air coming into the space may be bringing dust, it's also cooling the space. Pressurize the space to keep the dust out, and you've screwed yourself as far as cooling is concerned. Also, depending on the climate, you could be bringing in lots of humid air, making for humidity problems.
The people who designed the buildings A/C system designed it with proper building pressurization in mind (I am making an assumption here, but it'd be bad engineering not to keep pressurization in mind - I design HVAC systems BTW). You start bringing in lots of outside air and that just throws a huge wrench into everything. For the parent post's situation in the coal mine, though, I'd probably have to think for a while to come up with a better solution than they're using. Trying to actually filter all that coal dust out with filtration would be a nightmare, and you'd have to change filters every week or so.
Well, I had to go to a cached copy of the Cornell article, but it pretty much does describe ketosis (caused by low carbs & high protein) as being bad. It slows down your brain, it slows down your reaction times, it slows down your muscles used for fast movement, it makes you lose water weight (which, btw, is gained *back* as soon as your body comes out of ketosis when you go back to a typical diet).
Here is the article:
Dear Nutriquest,
Please tell me about ketosis and low carbohydrate diets.
Wondering
Dear Wondering,
Thanks for the opportunity to discuss what happens to your metabolism when you eat a low carbohydrate diet -- namely the development of a condition called ketosis. To understand how ketosis develops, you first need to understand how the liver converts the food you eat into fuels and how the body uses these fuels.
How does the liver convert the food you eat into fuels? The protein, complex carbohydrates, and fat that you eat -- and the protein, carbohydrate, and fat in your body -- can all be used to fuel your body functions. But first, the liver converts them into chemicals the body's tissues can use as fuel, as follows:
The liver converts the carbohydrates into a simple sugar, glucose, which can fuel most body functions. It converts any excess protein you eat, over and above what you need to replace the proteins in your body, into glucose as well. It converts the fats into chemicals called ketone bodies. Once these conversions are made, the liver exports the glucose and ketone bodies into the blood stream for distribution to the tissues for use as fuel.
How do you develop ketosis on a low carbohydrate diet? The amount of ketone bodies you make depends on how much glucose is available to your system. If you starve yourself, or if you eat a low to no carbohydrate diet, you will make large amounts of ketone bodies to compensate for the lack of carbohydrates. As a result, you will start to accumulate these ketone bodies in your blood stream. This accumulation is called ketosis, and the diet that causes this accumulation is called a ketogenic diet. Ketosis will give a distinctive taste in your mouth, and a distinct (and not very pleasant) breath odor -- it smells like a cross between apples and nail polish remover -- because some of these ketones can be exhaled from your lungs as as gas.
Can all tissues use ketone bodies as fuel? Most tissues can use ketone bodies as fuel, so when little glucose is available, they switch to using ketone bodies. But there are several tissues of the body which don't do very well when you have ketosis. These include your brain, the muscles you use for rapid movement, and your red blood cells.
Ketosis and your brain One tissue that cannot use ketone bodies very well as a fuel is the brain. The brain needs a certain amount of carbohydrate per day to function properly -- about 150 grams a day, or the equivalent of about 12 slices of bread, or 3 baked potatoes. The brain's need for carbohydrate is one of the reasons why the Food Guide Pyramid recommends that you eat 6-11 servings of the Bread, Cereal, Rice and Pasta Group a day.
If you eat a low carbohydrate diet for a while, or if you starve, you brain can start to use ketones for about 50% of its fuel needs. But when your brain uses ketones, it cannot function at its best -- thinking and reaction times tend to slow down. People tend not to notice these changes when they are on a low to no carbohydrate diet, because the brain changes make them slower to react to any stimulus, including the stimuli that come from self-awareness. So you may not be aware of this slowing down, but it may make a difference if you use machinery, such as a car, which requires quick thinking and quick reflexes.
Note that physicians have used ketogenic diets for people with epilepsy. Epilepsy is a kind of electric storm in the brain. Ketogenic diets slow down all brain functions, so if you are epi
From what I can tell, there's a lot of debate even within the bodybuilding community about low carb/high protein vs. a more balanced diet. Bodybuilders will definitely go into a cutting phase before a competition where they try to get cut down on the amount of water and fat they're carrying, but it's a temporary thing. For long term, though, people who lift weights and do any sort of serious physical exercise need decent carbs in order to fuel their activities (since carbohydrates are the primary fuel source in our bodies). The big debate I've seen is just how much protein they need to eat along with those carbs, and the estimates go from 1-1.5 g protein per kg body weight, to 1 g protein per lb of body weight, down to 10% calories from protein.
Personally, I'm just starting a cardio/weight training program, and I'm doing like 55-60% carb/20-25% protein/20% fat.
Ok, this is OT, but this is the umpteenth post where somebody uses "and" when they mean "an". Is this a common grammatical mistake that people make (and I've maybe never heard the 'd' pronounced, even though the speaker was including it?), or just a really common typo? I don't think it's non-native English speakers, because I've noticed this a lot on a separate forum that is definitely native English speakers.
I suppose I liked Barton Fink, but I've got to say it just sort of freaked me out. John Goodman is usually a happy fat guy in most of his movies, but in their movies he can be downright menacing (in Barton Fink & O Brother). I generally have loved the Coen brothers work, though. I'm just surprised that no one has mentioned "Raising Arizona" yet. That is one of the funniest movies I've ever seen.
Slashdot Mirror
I know 50 Hz has its place, and of course I don't have any objection to having those catalogs available at the same website. I'm just saying that they could organize the information better. It stinks to download a catalog, open it, and then realize that you're looking at the European version.
I'm an engineer (I design air conditioning systems), and as far as the manufacturers I deal with are concerned, this article is on the money. We've got an entire wall of catalogs of assorted types of equipment, and most of them almost never get updated. Even the common brands like Carrier & Trane that have dedicated reps in our area fall behind. I tend to specify the equipment that I can get the best support for, which includes giving me access to the newest catalogs, the most updated product selection software, etc.
Trane, for example, has most of their commercial equipment catalogs with all the technical data online in PDF format for me to download, which is great. One of the catalogs was corrupted, but I couldn't figure out anywhere to *tell* anyone that there was a problem so I could get the right version of the catalog. Unfortunately, Trane has almost none of the catalogs for residential-size equipment online. If I want those catalogs, I've got to call my rep, have him go onto their internal web server and download them, and email them to me. And as I scroll down through the lists of catalogs, a third of them are in Spanish, and a bunch more are for 50 Hz power which isn't very common.
In short, they could do a lot more to keep me happy with relatively little effort. How much trouble is it to make PDFs of the new catalogs as they are printed and put them online, with Spanish stuff and 50Hz stuff separated from the mainstream stuff? Is the residential unit info so top secret that it has to be stored away on an internal service?
This isn't about cutting edge technology, it's about having the information where I can get it and use it.
I seem to remember reading about how Italians are terrified of being inside a closed room with a runnnig fan. Something about how it would suck a persons breath out. It seems like the same article mentioned how they were also afraid of air conditioning, because it poisoned the air or something. I say let them stew in their own filth if they don't want AC...just so long as I don't have to sit next to them anywhere.
Not just sanitized daily - sanitized between patients, if the doctor touched the patient and then touched the pager before washing up for the next patient
Send in one of his CIA buddies and assasinate him, you say? Just how is this possible, you idiot? First off, there's nothing I've seen to convince me that Kennedy was killed by the CIA, but that's neither here nor there. Second, you just can't decide to kill somebody and make it happen. This isn't the X-Files, there is no cigarette smoking man who can walk in, pop a cap in Saddams head, and then walk out. People like him tend to take their security seriously, and not let new people get even somewhat close.
I wasn't aware that we got data from the Germans on human experiments. I'm pretty sure that we (Americans) did a lot of experiments on soldiers to find out stuff, but they were willing. I know we got dive tables this way. Could the hypoxia and hypothermia info have come from experiments on soldiers, too?
Hmmm, well my IE 6.0 sees it just fine. Though on one page I looked at, it looked like the background color painted first, and then the test overlaid it 0.5 seconds later. Maybe check your settings or something.
It's actually been done. Here is a link.
d /i ndex.htm
http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/bldg/active/zeh/lakelan
From what I can tell, the photovoltaic home was pretty efficient.
I'm going to have to disagree with you regarding the unconsciousness thing. The Straight Dope article you mentioned is here [sorry, I need to learn html].
l
2 00 30721133653&Title=States&rLink=0
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a5_262.htm
Most of the article deals with anecdotal evidence from around the 19th century about people being conscious after decapitation by the guillotine. But the most convincing example was at the end of the article, quoted here:
"Then I received a note from a U.S. Army veteran who had been stationed in Korea. In June 1989 the taxi he and a friend were riding in collided with a truck. My correspondent was pinned in the wreckage. The friend was decapitated. Here's what happened:
My friend's head came to rest face up, and (from my angle) upside-down. As I watched, his mouth opened and closed no less than two times. The facial expressions he displayed were first of shock or confusion, followed by terror or grief. I cannot exaggerate and say that he was looking all around, but he did display ocular movement in that his eyes moved from me, to his body, and back to me. He had direct eye contact with me when his eyes took on a hazy, absent expression . . . and he was dead."
If you make a good cut with a sharp blade, I think there is a very good opportunity for continued consciousness. There was an article last week about a man in India whose head was 'nearly severed' and he drove himself 30 km to a hospital that could treat him. Evidently he was driving a vehicle, and the vehicle in front of him was carrying iron rods & pipes. That vehicle stopped, he couldn't stop quickly enough, so his neck was pierced by iron rods and such. So I'm not sure if it was truly 'nearly severed' as they say, but if anything, it seems to me that it would involve more blunt force trauma to the neck than the guillotine. That article is here
http://www.newindpress.com/Newsitems.asp?ID=IEP
Our society seems to have always wanted a method of execution that was painless and quick. Of course, many would say that people who have committed heinous crimes should die painfully and slowly, but for whatever reason our society seems to like the most humane method of execution possible, so let's go forward with that idea.
Hanging and the firing squad both leave the condemned person to feel pain for some time after the act. The electric chair is supposed to instantaneously kill the brain, but some people have their doubts about how instantaneously that happens, especially if the equipment isn't set up correctly (see 'The Green Mile'). The guillotine and any other method of beheading sever the head, but the person is still conscious, at least in theory, until the oxygen supply in the brain runs out. Lethal injection puts the person to sleep first, but while you're going to sleep, you know you're dying, so it doesn't seem much better.
With the problems of these methods, it seems to me that the most humane way to execute a person is to end the existence of their brain in an instant. I think the best way to do this is with a shaped charge, sort of the same way nuclear bombs are designed, with a shell of explosives arranged around a center core (the head, in the place of uranium) with the charges directed inwards, fired nearly simultaneously. The device wouldn't have to be as precise in timing or arrangement of charges, or as powerful, and it would essentially vaporize the entire head in a millisecond or so (I'm not an explosives expert, but from what I've heard about modern explosives, it would be very quick). No worries about continued consciousness, though you might have to disinfect the chamber pretty well afterwards. And this would also be fairly ideal for harvesting organs (except for corneas and such, obviously). You'd just have a doctor on sight, put a blast shield around the neck to protect the torso, and then harvest immediately.
I've heard much the same thing about emergency room doctors not registering as organ donors. Seems that there is enough wiggle room in considering whether someone is "dead" that it bothers the people who know the most about it.
Ummm, if you're talking about that plunger going where I think you are, then *both* ends of the plunger are very wrong. ;)
That seems logical. Now I'm glad that I threw that caveat in there.
Ok, I went & read the FAQ you linked to, but you have misinterpreted what it says. It says that the "Lightweight" tank was used on the Columbia. Regarding the "Superlightweight" tanks, it says,
"Since 1998, however, a revised tank model - a 'Superlightweight' tank - has been in use."
The same FAQ says in the next paragraph,
"In addition to the development of the 'Superlightweight' tanks, Lockheed also began using a reformulated lighter version of the inch-thick, spray-on insulation used on all external tanks in the mid-1990s. The switch was made to comply with an EPA mandate to limit ozone-depleting chemicals."
So the new foam came into use on *ALL* tanks (doesn't say 'only superlightweight'), starting in the mid-1990s, whereas the "superlightweight" tank only came into service in 1998.
The FAQ also says that the use of the new "Superlightweight" tank started with STS-91. But the same FAQ talks about the extensive tile damage found on the return to earth of STS-87, and it mentions that the new, 'environmentally-friendly' foaming method was used on STS-87. It also refers to this new foaming method being one of a few possible reasons for the extensive tile damage. STS-87 comes before STS-91 (unless they have some weird numbering system I don't know about), so it couldn't have used one of the new 'Superlightweight' tanks with its 'environmentally-friendly' foam. So it is apparent from this evidence also, that the new foaming method was used with the Columbia tanks.
If you are going to try to refute somebody, and then post a link to your supposed evidence, please read your evidence carefully so I don't have to waste my time responding.
Now, if only you could swap out the sound source that the dB dragsters are using, substituting the "brown noise" instead of their 74 Hz. That would be a better form of justice than the pie eating contest from 'Stand By Me'.
I use the color screen on my Samsung SGH-S105 to move around the house late at night. I also use it to read at night, sometimes. It's a sweet phone, polyphonic sound, etc.
The only problem is that I want a phone with multiple numbers for each person, along with a text box. With this phone, it has three pre-named number slots (Home, Work, & Cell) and an email slot. The part that sucks is that the number that appears at the top of the list can't be modified by the user, and it mainly seems to depend on which number you entered last. So I can't just set my phone to call John Doe's Cell # by default, and then scroll to his name and hit talk twice and call his cell. If I entered his work # last, it's at the top of the list, so I scroll to his name, hit talk once, then have to look & see which # to scroll to, then hit talk.
It'd also be nice to have a physical address field, and the capability to add a text description to each number (to maybe hold an extension #) rather than just have icons for description.
What you're saying is right down my alley, but the dilemna for me is that there's too much to learn/do/build and not enough time. I *want* to do interesting things with computers, I *want* to learn iaido/aikido/etc., I think it'd be awesome to do metalworking, I want to read great books, I'd like to reload my own bullets, I'd love to go to the gun range once or twice a week, but where does the time come from??
I'm sort of a special case, I suppose, because my wife has chronic pain issues that shifts 98% of the housework/cooking/etc. over to me, but even if it was 50/50, I don't see how I could support more than two significant hobbies, and have much time left to do more than take care of the necessary stuff around the house. Martial arts or working out tends to erase three nights a week all by itself. Throw in another hobby that takes my Saturdays, and that's pretty much it. I just need more days in the week.
I'm trying to transcribe some tapes of lectures right now, and I'm looking for an easy way out. I know speech recognition programs are out there, but from what I know, they need significant training of the user with the program in order to work.
Unfortunately, my voice is not the one giving the lectures, and there are actually two or three different lecturers. Since training is impossible (AFAIK, at least), I'm wondering how far speech-to-text technology has come, especially in the open source community. Can I just pipe the output from the wav file into the input of a speech-to-text program, and if so, what sort of signal-to-noise ratio can I expect on the output without training? (graphical interface would be nice) Right now it's taking me about four hours to transcribe 50 minutes worth of lecture.
Only problem is that, while the air coming into the space may be bringing dust, it's also cooling the space. Pressurize the space to keep the dust out, and you've screwed yourself as far as cooling is concerned. Also, depending on the climate, you could be bringing in lots of humid air, making for humidity problems.
The people who designed the buildings A/C system designed it with proper building pressurization in mind (I am making an assumption here, but it'd be bad engineering not to keep pressurization in mind - I design HVAC systems BTW). You start bringing in lots of outside air and that just throws a huge wrench into everything. For the parent post's situation in the coal mine, though, I'd probably have to think for a while to come up with a better solution than they're using. Trying to actually filter all that coal dust out with filtration would be a nightmare, and you'd have to change filters every week or so.
If you were really dedicated, you would've sold your plasma, too, and seen the movie twice or more ;)
You could lose even more weight that way, too.
Well, I had to go to a cached copy of the Cornell article, but it pretty much does describe ketosis (caused by low carbs & high protein) as being bad. It slows down your brain, it slows down your reaction times, it slows down your muscles used for fast movement, it makes you lose water weight (which, btw, is gained *back* as soon as your body comes out of ketosis when you go back to a typical diet).
Here is the article:
Dear Nutriquest,
Please tell me about ketosis and low carbohydrate diets.
Wondering
Dear Wondering,
Thanks for the opportunity to discuss what happens to your metabolism when you eat a low carbohydrate diet -- namely the development of a condition called ketosis. To understand how ketosis develops, you first need to understand how the liver converts the food you eat into fuels and how the body uses these fuels.
How does the liver convert the food you eat into fuels?
The protein, complex carbohydrates, and fat that you eat -- and the protein, carbohydrate, and fat in your body -- can all be used to fuel your body functions. But first, the liver converts them into chemicals the body's tissues can use as fuel, as follows:
The liver converts the carbohydrates into a simple sugar, glucose, which can fuel most body functions.
It converts any excess protein you eat, over and above what you need to replace the proteins in your body, into glucose as well.
It converts the fats into chemicals called ketone bodies.
Once these conversions are made, the liver exports the glucose and ketone bodies into the blood stream for distribution to the tissues for use as fuel.
How do you develop ketosis on a low carbohydrate diet?
The amount of ketone bodies you make depends on how much glucose is available to your system. If you starve yourself, or if you eat a low to no carbohydrate diet, you will make large amounts of ketone bodies to compensate for the lack of carbohydrates. As a result, you will start to accumulate these ketone bodies in your blood stream. This accumulation is called ketosis, and the diet that causes this accumulation is called a ketogenic diet. Ketosis will give a distinctive taste in your mouth, and a distinct (and not very pleasant) breath odor -- it smells like a cross between apples and nail polish remover -- because some of these ketones can be exhaled from your lungs as as gas.
Can all tissues use ketone bodies as fuel?
Most tissues can use ketone bodies as fuel, so when little glucose is available, they switch to using ketone bodies. But there are several tissues of the body which don't do very well when you have ketosis. These include your brain, the muscles you use for rapid movement, and your red blood cells.
Ketosis and your brain
One tissue that cannot use ketone bodies very well as a fuel is the brain. The brain needs a certain amount of carbohydrate per day to function properly -- about 150 grams a day, or the equivalent of about 12 slices of bread, or 3 baked potatoes. The brain's need for carbohydrate is one of the reasons why the Food Guide Pyramid recommends that you eat 6-11 servings of the Bread, Cereal, Rice and Pasta Group a day.
If you eat a low carbohydrate diet for a while, or if you starve, you brain can start to use ketones for about 50% of its fuel needs. But when your brain uses ketones, it cannot function at its best -- thinking and reaction times tend to slow down. People tend not to notice these changes when they are on a low to no carbohydrate diet, because the brain changes make them slower to react to any stimulus, including the stimuli that come from self-awareness. So you may not be aware of this slowing down, but it may make a difference if you use machinery, such as a car, which requires quick thinking and quick reflexes.
Note that physicians have used ketogenic diets for people with epilepsy. Epilepsy is a kind of electric storm in the brain. Ketogenic diets slow down all brain functions, so if you are epi
From what I can tell, there's a lot of debate even within the bodybuilding community about low carb/high protein vs. a more balanced diet. Bodybuilders will definitely go into a cutting phase before a competition where they try to get cut down on the amount of water and fat they're carrying, but it's a temporary thing. For long term, though, people who lift weights and do any sort of serious physical exercise need decent carbs in order to fuel their activities (since carbohydrates are the primary fuel source in our bodies). The big debate I've seen is just how much protein they need to eat along with those carbs, and the estimates go from 1-1.5 g protein per kg body weight, to 1 g protein per lb of body weight, down to 10% calories from protein.
Personally, I'm just starting a cardio/weight training program, and I'm doing like 55-60% carb/20-25% protein/20% fat.
Ok, this is OT, but this is the umpteenth post where somebody uses "and" when they mean "an". Is this a common grammatical mistake that people make (and I've maybe never heard the 'd' pronounced, even though the speaker was including it?), or just a really common typo? I don't think it's non-native English speakers, because I've noticed this a lot on a separate forum that is definitely native English speakers.
I was waiting for someone to mention this movie. The bathing scene just killed me...one of the few movies that's made me cry (or tear up, at least).
I suppose I liked Barton Fink, but I've got to say it just sort of freaked me out. John Goodman is usually a happy fat guy in most of his movies, but in their movies he can be downright menacing (in Barton Fink & O Brother). I generally have loved the Coen brothers work, though. I'm just surprised that no one has mentioned "Raising Arizona" yet. That is one of the funniest movies I've ever seen.