For anyone who believes that it is all hype, or knows little about bird flu, I highly recommend this extremely informative discussion Charlie Rose had with 3 experts on the subject. It is by no means overly technical.
The truth is that it is not hype; just because we know about it well ahead of the time when it will actually affect us doesn't mean that it will not be a threat. The most interesting part of that discussion is the possibility that people with AIDS will be the least likely to be harmed by bird flu, since it is the overactive immune system--in response to the foreign disease--that ultimately kills you.
"The example that comes to mind was in their show on alcoholism. They compared it to some physical disease and NOT a mental disease."
Err... are you suggesting that the brain, or some part of it, is not a part of the physical reality? Until very recently, people thought ulcers were caused by this mysterious mental force called "stress", around which psychiatrists have built entire careers. It turns out that almost all ulcers are caused by a certain bacteria found in the stomach. Every disease is a physical disease, and the sooner we treat them that way, the sooner we'll have actual cures. The only way "mental" diseases are different is that they are a lot more complicated.
"I don't even understand why they bother using real numbers in these studies."
I can see it now...
The MPAA reports on a startling new study indicating that over 63 trillion gigawatts of elephants are being harvested anually as a result of DVD piracy. The study corrected for factors such as yellow, and the tootsie roll center of a Tootsie Pop, providing the first clear evidence of a connection between movie downlaods and the number 7.
"So please feel free to take two sentences from different paragraphs in my previous post, mash them together into 'quote', and demonstrate how completely illogical I am."
So I forgot to put a few line breaks between the sentences, what's your point? What does that have to do with the actual content of my reply? Or were you conveniently avoiding my 4 points by complaining about my poor quotation style?
"If you don't believe obesity is a precusor to a plethora of "diseases", please go talk to Any Medical Professional On Earth - traditional or otherwise."
Of course obesity leads to some diseases, but that has nothing to do with "organic" versus "man-made" foods, or the magic word "chemicals" to which you repeatedly refer. Skinny people get diseases that obese people don't, and vice versa. Everyone is susceptible to diseases, so stop kidding yourself. Your body mass index has little to do with how healthy you actually are (only in the 2 extremes).
"I did not claim that eating organic food caused the weight loss."
True, you did not state those exact words, but then, what the hell would have been the point of your original post? Or were you simply stringing words together to give yourself some attention?
"It's the food supply, stupid... I stopped eating man-made food on in January, when I weighed 215 pounds. I now weigh 185 pounds, and feel like I'm 35 instead off 75 (I'm actually 45)."
How dare I misinterpret your post as having anything to do with the story.
Oh, and e) just because you claim to have lost all that weight simply by eating "organic" food (it's more likely that you were just eating less fat, fewer calories, and exercising more) doesn't mean it will work for everybody. Saying that "it worked for me so it must be universal" is like saying "I won the lottery on my first try, so everyone else will too" or saying that "I lost 50 pounds using a diet pill, so everyone else will too." Pure nonsense.
"My PROOF comes from what happened to me when I stopped eating man-made food. Finally, Organically Grown fruits & veggies contain far fewer chemicals than the regular stuff. so organic is what I try to buy. When you become fat and sick and stuck on prescription medicine like I was, you too may decide this way of eating is vastly superior."
Thank you Captain Non Sequitur. It's nearly impossible to even debate your statement because your statement is so completely spurious and irrational. a) Fat != sick. b) Not all "chemicals" are bad, so you can't simply say "OMG CHEMICALS!!!" and expect people to take you seriously; it sounds utterly ridiculous to say "chemicals = making me fat = making me sick". c) Unless you are growing all of your food on your own land, you don't know for sure what you're eating. d) You are treating the situation as if nature follows the two categories into which you are blindly placing everything: Natural, Man-made. Nothing is that simple, and you'll only generate laughter if you try to use that reasoning (unless, of course, you only hang around other similarly nonsensical people).
My uncle nearly died from eating McDonald's once. Back when they had their nastification called the Arch Deluxe, he had eaten one, but unfortunately they forgot to tell him that the mayonnaise/special sauce had been baking on an unrefrigerated truck for its entire trip. Soon, he was in a hospital with tubes going every which way fighting for his life.
Somehow, "i'm lovin' it" just doesn't seem accurate.
"Marshall rocks as a computer/technical geek and is funny."
Jack Bauer used his PDA to set off a suicide bomber's jacket bomb. It doesn't get more awesome than that. And Jack Bauer doesn't need the crutch of humor to hide his ineptitude. While this Marshall guy is customizing the side margin in his xterm, Jack Buer is kicking in terrorist skull. Need I say more?
"And everyone pointing to the archaeology organization site naming him as a nutjob, guess what folks? It won't be debunked until they've fully excavated the site."
Actually, if you had bothered to read "the archaeology organization site", you'd see how it is already debunked:
"Between 27,000 and 12,000 years ago, the Balkans were locked in the last Glacial maximum, a period of very cold and dry climate with glaciers in some of the mountain ranges. The only occupants were Upper Paleolithic hunters and gatherers who left behind open-air camp sites and traces of occupation in caves. These remains consist of simple stone tools, hearths, and remains of animals and plants that were consumed for food. These people did not have the tools or skills to engage in the construction of monumental architecture."
You're telling me that small groups of hunter gatherers working out of their huts constructed pyramids larger than those in Egypt ON FRICKIN GLACIERS?!
Unless these commercials consist of little more than someone scrolling through a powerpoint, how could this not get expensive fast? Most commercials are recycled for months or years, not minutes...
"Yeah, we try to buy stuff for as little as possible. And we try to sell stuff (for example, our labor) for as much as possible. Meanwhile, the sellers and buyers on the other side are trying to do the opposite. I fail to understand why any of this should cause great moral outrage."
We are needlessly putting extreme pressure on the market to give us a lot for a little. It's not causing moral outrage so much as economic outrage.
It's not simply that we don't want to pay more, it's that we want to pay even less than what it would cost to sustain those who provide us with their products. The only way some manufacturers are surviving is to cut deals specifically with Wal-Mart, screwing over everyone in the chain of production so that they can simply meet the requirements set by Wal-Mart.
Feel free to continue to incorrectly characterize my view, and back it up with quotes from dead people.
Slashdot Mirror
Are we to trust a random person on /. to look for "credible evidence", or the opinion of several experts actively working on the subject:
8 689203314
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=234341498
And by "3 experts", I meant 5 or 6 experts...
For anyone who believes that it is all hype, or knows little about bird flu, I highly recommend this extremely informative discussion Charlie Rose had with 3 experts on the subject. It is by no means overly technical.
8 689203314
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=234341498
The truth is that it is not hype; just because we know about it well ahead of the time when it will actually affect us doesn't mean that it will not be a threat. The most interesting part of that discussion is the possibility that people with AIDS will be the least likely to be harmed by bird flu, since it is the overactive immune system--in response to the foreign disease--that ultimately kills you.
"That's just silly... the whole point of "shoting first" is to kill the other guy before he shots you."
It sounds like George W. Bush is a fan of the original theatrical release.
"The example that comes to mind was in their show on alcoholism. They compared it to some physical disease and NOT a mental disease."
Err... are you suggesting that the brain, or some part of it, is not a part of the physical reality? Until very recently, people thought ulcers were caused by this mysterious mental force called "stress", around which psychiatrists have built entire careers. It turns out that almost all ulcers are caused by a certain bacteria found in the stomach. Every disease is a physical disease, and the sooner we treat them that way, the sooner we'll have actual cures. The only way "mental" diseases are different is that they are a lot more complicated.
"so clearly since they were wrong once they can never ever possibly be right about anything?"
Unless their motivations have changed... yes. The motivations of corporations rarely (if ever) change.
"I don't even understand why they bother using real numbers in these studies."
I can see it now...
The MPAA reports on a startling new study indicating that over 63 trillion gigawatts of elephants are being harvested anually as a result of DVD piracy. The study corrected for factors such as yellow, and the tootsie roll center of a Tootsie Pop, providing the first clear evidence of a connection between movie downlaods and the number 7.
"So please feel free to take two sentences from different paragraphs in my previous post, mash them together into 'quote', and demonstrate how completely illogical I am."
So I forgot to put a few line breaks between the sentences, what's your point? What does that have to do with the actual content of my reply? Or were you conveniently avoiding my 4 points by complaining about my poor quotation style?
"If you don't believe obesity is a precusor to a plethora of "diseases", please go talk to Any Medical Professional On Earth - traditional or otherwise."
Of course obesity leads to some diseases, but that has nothing to do with "organic" versus "man-made" foods, or the magic word "chemicals" to which you repeatedly refer. Skinny people get diseases that obese people don't, and vice versa. Everyone is susceptible to diseases, so stop kidding yourself. Your body mass index has little to do with how healthy you actually are (only in the 2 extremes).
"...but then they started doing all the political shows. Made be lose all respect for the show and I can't watch it anymore."
Sounds like they did an episode that hit a little too close to home... Are you afraid to be introspective?
"I did not claim that eating organic food caused the weight loss."
True, you did not state those exact words, but then, what the hell would have been the point of your original post? Or were you simply stringing words together to give yourself some attention?
"It's the food supply, stupid... I stopped eating man-made food on in January, when I weighed 215 pounds. I now weigh 185 pounds, and feel like I'm 35 instead off 75 (I'm actually 45)."
How dare I misinterpret your post as having anything to do with the story.
"Do you consider yourself overweight?"
Sure I think I'm fat... I weigh just under one hundred pounds. Do you think I have any illnesses?
Oh, and e) just because you claim to have lost all that weight simply by eating "organic" food (it's more likely that you were just eating less fat, fewer calories, and exercising more) doesn't mean it will work for everybody. Saying that "it worked for me so it must be universal" is like saying "I won the lottery on my first try, so everyone else will too" or saying that "I lost 50 pounds using a diet pill, so everyone else will too." Pure nonsense.
"My PROOF comes from what happened to me when I stopped eating man-made food. Finally, Organically Grown fruits & veggies contain far fewer chemicals than the regular stuff. so organic is what I try to buy. When you become fat and sick and stuck on prescription medicine like I was, you too may decide this way of eating is vastly superior."
Thank you Captain Non Sequitur. It's nearly impossible to even debate your statement because your statement is so completely spurious and irrational. a) Fat != sick. b) Not all "chemicals" are bad, so you can't simply say "OMG CHEMICALS!!!" and expect people to take you seriously; it sounds utterly ridiculous to say "chemicals = making me fat = making me sick". c) Unless you are growing all of your food on your own land, you don't know for sure what you're eating. d) You are treating the situation as if nature follows the two categories into which you are blindly placing everything: Natural, Man-made. Nothing is that simple, and you'll only generate laughter if you try to use that reasoning (unless, of course, you only hang around other similarly nonsensical people).
hahahhaha
I see someone hasn't been keeping up on their episodes of Bullshit!
Enjoy pretending you're eating chemical-free foods.
My uncle nearly died from eating McDonald's once. Back when they had their nastification called the Arch Deluxe, he had eaten one, but unfortunately they forgot to tell him that the mayonnaise/special sauce had been baking on an unrefrigerated truck for its entire trip. Soon, he was in a hospital with tubes going every which way fighting for his life.
Somehow, "i'm lovin' it" just doesn't seem accurate.
Glad you did your research before making a moron out of yourself....
"yeah but jack also thinks 276 is a valid number in an IP address, pah! :-p"
:)
haha I noticed that too... what losers we are
"Marshall rocks as a computer/technical geek and is funny."
Jack Bauer used his PDA to set off a suicide bomber's jacket bomb. It doesn't get more awesome than that. And Jack Bauer doesn't need the crutch of humor to hide his ineptitude. While this Marshall guy is customizing the side margin in his xterm, Jack Buer is kicking in terrorist skull. Need I say more?
"Or, better yet, Trippin' the Rift."
I see I'm not the only one who wants some hot neked triple-boobed T'nuk action!
Now, all they need is something good to watch.
Reminds me of an MST3K: the scene is a bunch of fake-looking asteroids floating in space... "HONEY BUNCHES OF DEATH!"
"And everyone pointing to the archaeology organization site naming him as a nutjob, guess what folks? It won't be debunked until they've fully excavated the site."
Actually, if you had bothered to read "the archaeology organization site", you'd see how it is already debunked: "Between 27,000 and 12,000 years ago, the Balkans were locked in the last Glacial maximum, a period of very cold and dry climate with glaciers in some of the mountain ranges. The only occupants were Upper Paleolithic hunters and gatherers who left behind open-air camp sites and traces of occupation in caves. These remains consist of simple stone tools, hearths, and remains of animals and plants that were consumed for food. These people did not have the tools or skills to engage in the construction of monumental architecture."
You're telling me that small groups of hunter gatherers working out of their huts constructed pyramids larger than those in Egypt ON FRICKIN GLACIERS?!
Unless these commercials consist of little more than someone scrolling through a powerpoint, how could this not get expensive fast? Most commercials are recycled for months or years, not minutes...
"Yeah, we try to buy stuff for as little as possible. And we try to sell stuff (for example, our labor) for as much as possible. Meanwhile, the sellers and buyers on the other side are trying to do the opposite. I fail to understand why any of this should cause great moral outrage."
We are needlessly putting extreme pressure on the market to give us a lot for a little. It's not causing moral outrage so much as economic outrage.
It's not simply that we don't want to pay more, it's that we want to pay even less than what it would cost to sustain those who provide us with their products. The only way some manufacturers are surviving is to cut deals specifically with Wal-Mart, screwing over everyone in the chain of production so that they can simply meet the requirements set by Wal-Mart.
Feel free to continue to incorrectly characterize my view, and back it up with quotes from dead people.