from http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:fSOhOHdom7QJ: www.religioustolerance.org/res_stem.htm+ama+stem+c ells+%22existing+lines%22&hl=en
"Research using embryo stem cells had been authorized in Britain, but was initially halted in the U.S. by President George W. Bush. He decided on 2001-AUG-9 to allow research to resume in government labs, but restricted researchers to use only 72 existing lines of stem cells. By 2003-MAY, most of these lines had become useless; some of the lines are genetically identical to others; only 11 remain available for research. "
Just one of many google links that will tell you about the capabilities of the limited existing lines.
There are not miracle cures available, because you have to RESEARCH them first before you can make anything. The funding for this research is what is at stake, and it is what Bush has denied.
Drug companies are not focused on curing anything. Treatments, yes. They would very much like to keep people alive and paying them for the rest of their lives. Merck & Vioxx has made it clear to the average person that these mega corporations value profits above their health. That is a whole different conspiracy/argument.
Where did you get your PHD in microbiology? Obviously there are still scientists interested in researching them, perhaps looking into WHY they mutate, and if there is a way to control them. You don't give up on research that is hardly started.
Animal research. We can avoid controversy (except for PETA and ALF and ELF) by figuring out if this actually CAN work before trying to make it work on humans.
That is a start. Sooner or later you have to involve humans. If it is proven that embryonic stem cells work for cures in animals, you still have the christian right blocking it's use in humans.
As for cali, many independent researchers are still making advancements (like this one here we're talking about!) in Adult Stem Cell research. Why isn't cali funding them $3B? That seems to be a fairly huge return on investment, and if the trends hold out is guaranteed to have more immediate, life-saving and -enhancing results.
There wouldn't BE $3 billion to research in cali if the dubya government hadn't denied that funding to the research. California stepped in where the federal government has failed us.
The way I see it, we've never had success with embreyonic stem cells; and the greater risks that they pose (again, I've said this 10 times today, they DO cause tumors in many cases!) make it more valuable to find an adult stem cell based equivalent to replace anything we DO find embreyonic stem cells useful for (aside from cloning). How about we take the short path and try to find the adult stem cell based cures first, since that's been proven to be relatively easy both politically and scientifically?
How about you let the scientists do simultaneous research on both lines, instead of letting politicians and the church get in the way?
We do farm organs. It's called organ donation. Dumbass.
We do research on life all the time. Drug tests. Experimental procedures.
Did you know that embryos are destroyed every day with no benefit to society? No benefit except to the family who was using them for fertility treatments. We could use those for research without doing any kind of "harvesting" as you put it.
I think it's funny that Bush promotes a "culture of life". All he does is promote death. Death in a war in a country with no WMD. Death by denying research funding. Death via the death penalty. He was governor of the state of Texas, leading the nation in executions. What a hypocrit.
this development bolsters the claim that we do not need embroynic steam cells for the type of treatments and remedies that would help so many people
No, it does nothing of the sort. Cord cells do not have the same capabilites as embryonic cells. Unless we research them, we won't know what else can be accomplished with embryonic cells.
Also, while your point #1 is correct, a federal ban on FUNDING is essentially a ban. Someone earlier stated that you could put a $1000 tax on a pack of cigarettes, and while it is true that you haven't BANNED cigarettes, they are effectively banned for economic reasons.
"The otherwise of the issue"? What are you talking about?
A more accurate analogy would be to say that banning federal funding of embryonic stem cells is like the king of spain never giving money to Columbus, and thus, Spain never FINDING OUT that the world isn't flat.
You are basically saying that because RESEARCH has so far not panned out, that POLITICIANS should be the ones to say it is pointless.
Research is just that, research. It doesn't always work. You aren't injecting the populace and killing off the human race. You are learning about something. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't. The Bush Regime is at fault for not allowing basic research into something that could one day save lives. Yes, I know they didn't ban the research, but denying federal funding is essentially a ban.
It's nice to know that for all it's faults (lol! I made a pun), California is still using it's brains on this. Stupid neo-cons.
No one is proposing that we ONLY fund Embryonic stem cells. The real problem is that we are NOT funding something that be be life saving and useful.
You can spin this however you want, but if anything, I think this PROMOTES lifting the ban on federally funded embryonic stem cell research, because it shows that they are useful, and can be made to heal people. What can be done with Embryonic cells that can't be done with the umbilical ones?? The US may never know with right wing crazies in the white house.
Hmmm. "Never been successully used in any therapies". Maybe that is BECAUSE there is no federal funding for this. It's a self fulfilling prohpecy. Brought to use by the self-fulfilling prophecy president.
He said Iraq was dangerous, and harborred terrorists. Sure enough, we attack them and they start bombing us! Yeehaw!
If you read the article, you'll note that they state the umbilical cells are not as useful as the embryonic cells. Who knows what could be accomplished if we didn't have such archaic faith-based policy?
I'm sure this has been discussed to death up until now, but how does open-sourcing an API work?
If there is a fork, doesn't that present huge problems for the development community?
And since Java is an interpretted (kind of) language, doesn't that pose a problem with compatibility?
At least with C, you have the benefit of compiling. With Java, you are compiling to java bytecode, which is still interpretted, and still prone to problems between the forks.
I guess you kind of experience this problem with shared libraries under *NIX, but at least you have the possibility for static compiling. You are stuck with the JRE for Java, no?
Lot of people joking about bots on here. Honestly, why run a bot in every room when you can just partner with the university, institution, or company that hosts the server.
Shady CIA type: We have some evidence of terrorists using your services for communications. Mind if we tap in? We'll pull your funding if you do not comply or let the public know University: sure. No prob.
And yet this does NOTHING for security. No one in their right mind would use IRC or a publicly accessible server for secure communications.
Just as long as they don't shut down my anime channels. I'd have to go get a membership with netflix and warm up the DVD burner.
I would say the odds of being caught as a small business are BETTER than being caught as a private individual.
Businesses have employees and customers that can be disgruntled. Home users are one fish in an ocean, and the lawsuits are just the RIAA out of a boat, casting a net.
What are the chances that 2 trial lawyers (who's biggest contributors are the trial lawyers associations) giving us the litigation reforms so crucial to getting escalating health care and pharm costs under control for the long term viability of our economy?
That is a myth pushed by the Bush administration. Litigation costs are a very low percentage of the total cost of healthcare.
You need to stop reading that right-wing trash rag and get your news from some other sources.
He sure didn't look like a scared little girl on that video he just put out. He is healthy. He is still alive, despite Bush's promise to catch him dead or alive, and oh yeah, he is still running free.
The NYPost does not qualify as journalism, and you do not qualify as an independant, thinking human being.
Do you think Osama Bin laden is so politically naive that he doesn't know that showing support for one candidate will end up giving votes to the other?
Well, not exactly. Think of the poison scene from "The Princess Bride". Reverse psychology and such. But he didn't do that either, he didn't lean one way or the other, which leads me to believe the part where he said he really didn't care either way.
disclaimer to right-wing nutjobs: OBL is a scumbag, don't attack my patriotism.
I'll tell you who we will be voting for when we vote for Kerry. Definately not a man connected to terrorism, like you so ignorantly accuse him of. We will be voting for a man who already served his country in one war, rather than an administration filled with losers who never served. The following comes from http://www.awolbush.com/whoserved.html
Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert - avoided the draft, did not serve. Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey - avoided the draft, did not serve. House Majority Leader Tom Delay - avoided the draft, did not serve (1). "So many minority youths had volunteered... that there was literally no room for patriotic folks like himself." House Majority Whip Roy Blunt - did not serve Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist - did not serve. (An impressive medical resume, but not such a friend to cats in Boston.) Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, R-KY - did not serve (1) Rick Santorum, R-PA, third ranking Republican in the Senate - did not serve. (1) Former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott - avoided the draft, did not serve.
Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld - served in the U.S. Navy (1954-57) as an aviator and flight instructor. (1) Served as President Reagan's Special Envoy to the Middle East and met with Saddam Hussein twice in 1983 and 1984. GW Bush - decided that a six-year Nat'l Guard commitment really means four years. Still says that he's "been to war." Huh? VP Cheney - several deferments (1, 2), the last by marriage (in his own words, "had other priorities than military service") (1) Att'y Gen. John Ashcroft - did not serve (1, 2); received seven deferment to teach business ed at SW Missouri State
Jeb Bush, Florida Governor - did not serve. (1)
Karl Rove - avoided the draft, did not serve (1), too busy being a Republican.
Former Speaker Newt Gingrich - avoided the draft, did not serve (1, 2) Former President Ronald Reagan - due to poor eyesight, served in a noncombat role making movies for the Army in southern California during WWII. He later seems to have confused his role as an actor playing a tail gunner with the real thing. "B-1" Bob Dornan - avoided Korean War combat duty by enrolling in college acting classes (Orange County Weekly article). Enlisted only after the fighting was over in Korea. Phil Gramm - avoided the draft, did not serve, four (?) student deferments Senator John McCain - McCain's naval honors include the Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross. Why did the Bush campaign smear him so? At least Senators Cleland (D-GA), Kerry (D-MA), Kerrey (D-NE), Robb (D-VA) and Hagel (R-NE) defended him. Former Senator Bob Dole - an honorable man. http://www.bobdole.org/bio/wwII.php Chuck Hagel - two Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star, Vietnam. http://www.senate.gov/~hagel/Information/bio.htm Duke Cunningham - nominated for the Medal of Honor, received the Navy Cross, two Silver Stars, fifteen Air Medals, the Purple Heart, and several other decorations http://www.house.gov/cunningham/about_duke.htm#Bio graphy Senator Jeff Sessions U.S. Army Reserves, 1973-1986 Colin Powell. What are we to make of Powell? On the one hand, a long career as a military manager. On the other hand, accused of covering up the My Lai massacre. Back on that first hand, one of the seemingly sane voices in this administration when it comes to Iraq (or at least he used to be). On the other hand, a clear hypocrite ("I am angry that so many of the sons of the powerful and well-placed... managed to wangle slots in Reserve and National Guard units...") Representative Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD), served in USMC in Vietnam; wounded in action.
Your party and your president are too busy selling lies than to take care of this country. Get a clue, and come back with some actual answers instead of propoganda.
I said it before and I'll say it again, you are a moron.
It can go either way. Something like over 60% of republicans still think Iraq was involved in 9/11, even after the latest report from the Bush camp.
People are stupid. Some will just blindly vote along party lines. Some vote because their church tells them to. Some because of friends. Some people may just be pissed off at the status quo and vote for change.
Some of these reasons are bad, and some are not. I happen to believe that if you are christian, and you are voting for Bush for his christian beliefs, or his smile, or the illusion taht he is "tough on terror", you should go crawl in a hole and die. The man is a president. Our troops and our intelligence protect us from terrorists. Not acting like a cowboy and making most of the world hate us. Thanks for reading.
You should not be running stuff like this on public computers to begin with. And I don't envy you a bit if you are in charge of securing public computers. It's an impossible, thankless job.
This is (almost) like saying "NEWSFLASH! User installs crappy spyware program called gator to remember passwords and logins. Idiot installs it on public computer. Hilarity ensues, dumb journalists portend that the sky is falling, and people with no concept of change say that the internet will be dead in two years."
Seriously, there are problems with stuff like this, but this isn't news.
Well, technically, grabbing a CD off the assembly line is worse, because there is physical theft involved. But according to the wonderful US system, if you get it from a P2P network, you are contributing to others infringement, and should thus pay for every crime they have committed as well. Expect the death penalty.
I for one, welcome our early-release-toting, dodge-the-death-penalty Halo 2 overlords.
What do you mean, before the asteroid hits. For a recent graduate with little or no actual work experience in programming, the asteroid hit a while ago. There are too many unemployed or under-employed people to get a foot in the door.
I'm going to call BS on you. After getting my B.S. I stopped riding my bike to school every day, and I put on some extra pounds (about 20-30). For the last year I have been doing some intermediate mountain biking every weekend, usually 5-9 miles offroad. My legs are like iron now, but I still have some flab on the belly. I'm starting to add situps to my routine in hopes that it will get rid of the flab there.
Oh, and most of the effort you exert in biking builds muscles on your calves, not your thighs and ass. Unless you do a lot of standup/sitdown riding for hills, but if I was doing that much sitdown/standup I wouldn't be able to average 7 miles a trip. I live in florida, there aren't many hills.
This is where I ride. The part by the river is mostly underwater and impassable until they get out there with chainsaws. (thank to hurricanes Charley Frances and Jeane)
Oh, and one of the child posters mentioned that he never thought of weight-lifting as a weight loss exercise. It DOES convert fat into muscle, maybe not directly, but you DO burn the fat to make energy for the muscles to consume, and with enough of a workout, you will build muscle over time, so yes, you DO convert fat to muscle.
Slashdot Mirror
from http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:fSOhOHdom7QJ: www.religioustolerance.org/res_stem.htm+ama+stem+c ells+%22existing+lines%22&hl=en
"Research using embryo stem cells had been authorized in Britain, but was initially halted in the U.S. by President George W. Bush. He decided on 2001-AUG-9 to allow research to resume in government labs, but restricted researchers to use only 72 existing lines of stem cells. By 2003-MAY, most of these lines had become useless; some of the lines are genetically identical to others; only 11 remain available for research. "
Just one of many google links that will tell you about the capabilities of the limited existing lines.
There are not miracle cures available, because you have to RESEARCH them first before you can make anything. The funding for this research is what is at stake, and it is what Bush has denied.
Drug companies are not focused on curing anything. Treatments, yes. They would very much like to keep people alive and paying them for the rest of their lives. Merck & Vioxx has made it clear to the average person that these mega corporations value profits above their health. That is a whole different conspiracy/argument.
They have failed in all experiments, 100%.
Where did you get your PHD in microbiology? Obviously there are still scientists interested in researching them, perhaps looking into WHY they mutate, and if there is a way to control them. You don't give up on research that is hardly started.
Animal research. We can avoid controversy (except for PETA and ALF and ELF) by figuring out if this actually CAN work before trying to make it work on humans.
That is a start. Sooner or later you have to involve humans. If it is proven that embryonic stem cells work for cures in animals, you still have the christian right blocking it's use in humans.
As for cali, many independent researchers are still making advancements (like this one here we're talking about!) in Adult Stem Cell research. Why isn't cali funding them $3B? That seems to be a fairly huge return on investment, and if the trends hold out is guaranteed to have more immediate, life-saving and -enhancing results.
There wouldn't BE $3 billion to research in cali if the dubya government hadn't denied that funding to the research. California stepped in where the federal government has failed us.
The way I see it, we've never had success with embreyonic stem cells; and the greater risks that they pose (again, I've said this 10 times today, they DO cause tumors in many cases!) make it more valuable to find an adult stem cell based equivalent to replace anything we DO find embreyonic stem cells useful for (aside from cloning). How about we take the short path and try to find the adult stem cell based cures first, since that's been proven to be relatively easy both politically and scientifically?
How about you let the scientists do simultaneous research on both lines, instead of letting politicians and the church get in the way?
We do farm organs. It's called organ donation. Dumbass.
We do research on life all the time. Drug tests. Experimental procedures.
Did you know that embryos are destroyed every day with no benefit to society? No benefit except to the family who was using them for fertility treatments. We could use those for research without doing any kind of "harvesting" as you put it.
I think it's funny that Bush promotes a "culture of life". All he does is promote death. Death in a war in a country with no WMD. Death by denying research funding. Death via the death penalty. He was governor of the state of Texas, leading the nation in executions. What a hypocrit.
this development bolsters the claim that we do not need embroynic steam cells for the type of treatments and remedies that would help so many people
No, it does nothing of the sort. Cord cells do not have the same capabilites as embryonic cells. Unless we research them, we won't know what else can be accomplished with embryonic cells.
Also, while your point #1 is correct, a federal ban on FUNDING is essentially a ban. Someone earlier stated that you could put a $1000 tax on a pack of cigarettes, and while it is true that you haven't BANNED cigarettes, they are effectively banned for economic reasons.
"The otherwise of the issue"? What are you talking about?
A more accurate analogy would be to say that banning federal funding of embryonic stem cells is like the king of spain never giving money to Columbus, and thus, Spain never FINDING OUT that the world isn't flat.
it shows that maybe the Republicans stance woun't kill stem cells from doing good
No, it just keeps them from doing better. Denying research funding to embryonic stem cell research could be denying even better cures.
Assuming this story is verified, it just proves that stem cells can be used.
Wow. Spin city.
You are basically saying that because RESEARCH has so far not panned out, that POLITICIANS should be the ones to say it is pointless.
Research is just that, research. It doesn't always work. You aren't injecting the populace and killing off the human race. You are learning about something. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't. The Bush Regime is at fault for not allowing basic research into something that could one day save lives. Yes, I know they didn't ban the research, but denying federal funding is essentially a ban.
It's nice to know that for all it's faults (lol! I made a pun), California is still using it's brains on this. Stupid neo-cons.
No one is proposing that we ONLY fund Embryonic stem cells. The real problem is that we are NOT funding something that be be life saving and useful.
You can spin this however you want, but if anything, I think this PROMOTES lifting the ban on federally funded embryonic stem cell research, because it shows that they are useful, and can be made to heal people. What can be done with Embryonic cells that can't be done with the umbilical ones?? The US may never know with right wing crazies in the white house.
Hmmm. "Never been successully used in any therapies". Maybe that is BECAUSE there is no federal funding for this. It's a self fulfilling prohpecy. Brought to use by the self-fulfilling prophecy president.
He said Iraq was dangerous, and harborred terrorists. Sure enough, we attack them and they start bombing us! Yeehaw!
If you read the article, you'll note that they state the umbilical cells are not as useful as the embryonic cells. Who knows what could be accomplished if we didn't have such archaic faith-based policy?
I'm sure this has been discussed to death up until now, but how does open-sourcing an API work?
If there is a fork, doesn't that present huge problems for the development community?
And since Java is an interpretted (kind of) language, doesn't that pose a problem with compatibility?
At least with C, you have the benefit of compiling. With Java, you are compiling to java bytecode, which is still interpretted, and still prone to problems between the forks.
I guess you kind of experience this problem with shared libraries under *NIX, but at least you have the possibility for static compiling. You are stuck with the JRE for Java, no?
Lot of people joking about bots on here. Honestly, why run a bot in every room when you can just partner with the university, institution, or company that hosts the server.
Shady CIA type: We have some evidence of terrorists using your services for communications. Mind if we tap in? We'll pull your funding if you do not comply or let the public know
University: sure. No prob.
And yet this does NOTHING for security. No one in their right mind would use IRC or a publicly accessible server for secure communications.
Just as long as they don't shut down my anime channels. I'd have to go get a membership with netflix and warm up the DVD burner.
I would say the odds of being caught as a small business are BETTER than being caught as a private individual.
Businesses have employees and customers that can be disgruntled. Home users are one fish in an ocean, and the lawsuits are just the RIAA out of a boat, casting a net.
From an ex-christian, I thank you for providing a reasonable christian argument. Where were all the reasonable christians when I was growing up?
You need to stop reading that right-wing trash rag and get your news from some other sources.
He sure didn't look like a scared little girl on that video he just put out. He is healthy. He is still alive, despite Bush's promise to catch him dead or alive, and oh yeah, he is still running free.
The NYPost does not qualify as journalism, and you do not qualify as an independant, thinking human being.
Well, not exactly. Think of the poison scene from "The Princess Bride". Reverse psychology and such. But he didn't do that either, he didn't lean one way or the other, which leads me to believe the part where he said he really didn't care either way.
disclaimer to right-wing nutjobs: OBL is a scumbag, don't attack my patriotism.
I'll tell you who we will be voting for when we vote for Kerry. Definately not a man connected to terrorism, like you so ignorantly accuse him of. We will be voting for a man who already served his country in one war, rather than an administration filled with losers who never served. The following comes from http://www.awolbush.com/whoserved.html
... that there was literally no room for patriotic folks like himself."
Duke Cunningham - nominated for the Medal of Honor, received the Navy Cross, two Silver Stars, fifteen Air Medals, the Purple Heart, and several other decorations http://www.house.gov/cunningham/about_duke.htm#Bio graphy
Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert - avoided the draft, did not serve.
Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey - avoided the draft, did not serve.
House Majority Leader Tom Delay - avoided the draft, did not serve (1). "So many minority youths had volunteered
House Majority Whip Roy Blunt - did not serve
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist - did not serve. (An impressive medical resume, but not such a friend to cats in Boston.)
Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, R-KY - did not serve (1)
Rick Santorum, R-PA, third ranking Republican in the Senate - did not serve. (1)
Former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott - avoided the draft, did not serve.
Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld - served in the U.S. Navy (1954-57) as an aviator and flight instructor. (1) Served as President Reagan's Special Envoy to the Middle East and met with Saddam Hussein twice in 1983 and 1984.
GW Bush - decided that a six-year Nat'l Guard commitment really means four years. Still says that he's "been to war." Huh?
VP Cheney - several deferments (1, 2), the last by marriage (in his own words, "had other priorities than military service") (1)
Att'y Gen. John Ashcroft - did not serve (1, 2); received seven deferment to teach business ed at SW Missouri State
Jeb Bush, Florida Governor - did not serve. (1)
Karl Rove - avoided the draft, did not serve (1), too busy being a Republican.
Former Speaker Newt Gingrich - avoided the draft, did not serve (1, 2)
Former President Ronald Reagan - due to poor eyesight, served in a noncombat role making movies for the Army in southern California during WWII. He later seems to have confused his role as an actor playing a tail gunner with the real thing.
"B-1" Bob Dornan - avoided Korean War combat duty by enrolling in college acting classes (Orange County Weekly article). Enlisted only after the fighting was over in Korea.
Phil Gramm - avoided the draft, did not serve, four (?) student deferments
Senator John McCain - McCain's naval honors include the Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross. Why did the Bush campaign smear him so? At least Senators Cleland (D-GA), Kerry (D-MA), Kerrey (D-NE), Robb (D-VA) and Hagel (R-NE) defended him.
Former Senator Bob Dole - an honorable man. http://www.bobdole.org/bio/wwII.php
Chuck Hagel - two Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star, Vietnam. http://www.senate.gov/~hagel/Information/bio.htm
Senator Jeff Sessions U.S. Army Reserves, 1973-1986
Colin Powell. What are we to make of Powell? On the one hand, a long career as a military manager. On the other hand, accused of covering up the My Lai massacre. Back on that first hand, one of the seemingly sane voices in this administration when it comes to Iraq (or at least he used to be). On the other hand, a clear hypocrite ("I am angry that so many of the sons of the powerful and well-placed... managed to wangle slots in Reserve and National Guard units...")
Representative Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD), served in USMC in Vietnam; wounded in action.
Your party and your president are too busy selling lies than to take care of this country. Get a clue, and come back with some actual answers instead of propoganda.
I said it before and I'll say it again, you are a moron.
It can go either way. Something like over 60% of republicans still think Iraq was involved in 9/11, even after the latest report from the Bush camp.
People are stupid. Some will just blindly vote along party lines. Some vote because their church tells them to. Some because of friends. Some people may just be pissed off at the status quo and vote for change.
Some of these reasons are bad, and some are not. I happen to believe that if you are christian, and you are voting for Bush for his christian beliefs, or his smile, or the illusion taht he is "tough on terror", you should go crawl in a hole and die. The man is a president. Our troops and our intelligence protect us from terrorists. Not acting like a cowboy and making most of the world hate us. Thanks for reading.
You should not be running stuff like this on public computers to begin with. And I don't envy you a bit if you are in charge of securing public computers. It's an impossible, thankless job.
This is (almost) like saying
"NEWSFLASH! User installs crappy spyware program called gator to remember passwords and logins. Idiot installs it on public computer. Hilarity ensues, dumb journalists portend that the sky is falling, and people with no concept of change say that the internet will be dead in two years."
Seriously, there are problems with stuff like this, but this isn't news.
Not silenced. Dismissed as a handful of naysayers and die hards. People of no consequence. To Lucas, extras in the background.
Well, technically, grabbing a CD off the assembly line is worse, because there is physical theft involved. But according to the wonderful US system, if you get it from a P2P network, you are contributing to others infringement, and should thus pay for every crime they have committed as well. Expect the death penalty.
I for one, welcome our early-release-toting, dodge-the-death-penalty Halo 2 overlords.
What do you mean, before the asteroid hits. For a recent graduate with little or no actual work experience in programming, the asteroid hit a while ago. There are too many unemployed or under-employed people to get a foot in the door.
activewebhosting.com decided to pull my site just because there were MP3's on it. MP3's that I had permission to store.
I'm going to call BS on you. After getting my B.S. I stopped riding my bike to school every day, and I put on some extra pounds (about 20-30). For the last year I have been doing some intermediate mountain biking every weekend, usually 5-9 miles offroad. My legs are like iron now, but I still have some flab on the belly. I'm starting to add situps to my routine in hopes that it will get rid of the flab there.
Oh, and most of the effort you exert in biking builds muscles on your calves, not your thighs and ass. Unless you do a lot of standup/sitdown riding for hills, but if I was doing that much sitdown/standup I wouldn't be able to average 7 miles a trip. I live in florida, there aren't many hills.
This is where I ride. The part by the river is mostly underwater and impassable until they get out there with chainsaws. (thank to hurricanes Charley Frances and Jeane)
Oh, and one of the child posters mentioned that he never thought of weight-lifting as a weight loss exercise. It DOES convert fat into muscle, maybe not directly, but you DO burn the fat to make energy for the muscles to consume, and with enough of a workout, you will build muscle over time, so yes, you DO convert fat to muscle.