Today is spelling optional day. Besides, the PDP-11 that runs Slashdot doesn't have a spell checker (or Unicode).
Anyway, I'm wondering when the Air Force plans on putting people in that thing. There are drawings floating around that have seating for, IIRC, up to five astronauts. They've got to be considering it.
You do realize that Big Pharma doesn't cover the entire planet and that other countries, including some of those weird little places that have SOCIALIZED MEDICINE have perfectly capable research and drug production facilities. Some of those countries would be quite happy with a permanent cure or even long term suppression of the disease. It would save them money and help their constituents.
The key to diabetes reversal is superior nutrition and exercise. It may take a little extra effort,
I just love phrases like this. "A little extra effort' indeed. Pretty much every diabetic patient gets counseled to lose weight. They get sent to dieticians. They get nagged at by their insurance company hot line. They don't lose weight.
Hence the drugs which do pretty much what you say they do and have some real, but hardly earthshattering, effect on the disease. If it were 'just' a matter of losing weight then we would 1) not be in the middle of an obesity and diabetes epidemic and 2) not having this conversation. But long term weight loss IS a big deal. So much so that the first person or persons to come up with a method that doesn't involve the usual suspects (changing one's diet and exercising more) gets booted into the top 0.1% instantly.
And yes, we have all seen the anecdotal stories of brave Slashdotters who have gone from next week's heart attack candidate to a lean macho machine by some combination of willpower, Doritos avoidance and free weights. But as we've all seen, the group of people that is the Slashdot community has little in common with the Rest of Them.
Weight loss is hard. Very hard. Especially in a population of random people.
And, BTW, Vitamin D is the current wonderthing. The vast majority of claims will undoubtedly be found to be spurious for reasons that we have amply documented in other threads.
but avoiding the tragic complications of diabetes and a premature death is well worth it.
Why wouldn't we treat them as we (should) treat any animal? With respect for living conditions, pain control, anxiety, food, water and shelter? With that set of guidelines, they would be treated better than we treat most humans.
Certainly in many places, animal abuse is prosecuted with more vigor than human - human abuse.
I have a 10 year old fridge, costs us about.05 / day. A brand new, super efficient version cuts it down to.02 / day. But you have to take the financial and carbon hit of the new item. Yes, it will even out over a couple of years, but no it's not that big of a deal.
Reinsulating the house cost us about $15,000 and requires a ten year payback period.
A new truck would cost me $30K and up to jump from 12 mpg to 18 mpg - again, a multi year payback.
So these new energy efficient things will help slow down overall energy use, but it's not going to change the long term outlook. The real reason: China and India wanting to get on the train. They want a car, any car. A house with something other than a coal stove. Electricity. All perfectly reasonable things but ones that take a huge energy hit. This increase in standard of living is going to dwarf incremental savings.
Why can't the government fail, just like a 'regular' investor? While I actually don't disagree - I think the role of government is in basic research, but the analogy holds. Both basic research and applied investing can fail. The former might result in an idea that didn't pan out, the latter results in an investment that didn't pan out. Investments are never guaranteed.
This doesn't mean that Solyndra wasn't screwed up for reasons that you mention, but I have no real beef about the government losing money on investments. It is something they're good at (losing money, that is). Always work to your strengths.
Why do people want to write medical applications for browsers? Because it's easy, everybody 'understands' javascript (well, sort of). Personally, I think web browsers should be banned from medical areas until it grows up.
Why? Well, our PACS (program to view X-ray images) works on IE9, our EHR works (when it works at all) best on IE 10 with the IE6 compatibility switch. Our patient education web app works on IE 9 and 10 with IE 8 compatibility. Browsers really limit the UI and waste white space. You have both the web app AND the browser to worry about for security and updates. And what a surprise, updates to the browser trash the application.
It's fine for Facebook and browsing you favorite adult website. For real work, it sucks.
Slashdot Mirror
Today is spelling optional day. Besides, the PDP-11 that runs Slashdot doesn't have a spell checker (or Unicode).
Anyway, I'm wondering when the Air Force plans on putting people in that thing. There are drawings floating around that have seating for, IIRC, up to five astronauts. They've got to be considering it.
You do realize that Big Pharma doesn't cover the entire planet and that other countries, including some of those weird little places that have SOCIALIZED MEDICINE have perfectly capable research and drug production facilities. Some of those countries would be quite happy with a permanent cure or even long term suppression of the disease. It would save them money and help their constituents.
So loosen that ol tin foil. Breathe deep.
4Chan is thataway (points downward).
The key to diabetes reversal is superior nutrition and exercise. It may take a little extra effort,
I just love phrases like this. "A little extra effort' indeed. Pretty much every diabetic patient gets counseled to lose weight. They get sent to dieticians. They get nagged at by their insurance company hot line. They don't lose weight.
Hence the drugs which do pretty much what you say they do and have some real, but hardly earthshattering, effect on the disease. If it were 'just' a matter of losing weight then we would 1) not be in the middle of an obesity and diabetes epidemic and 2) not having this conversation. But long term weight loss IS a big deal. So much so that the first person or persons to come up with a method that doesn't involve the usual suspects (changing one's diet and exercising more) gets booted into the top 0.1% instantly.
And yes, we have all seen the anecdotal stories of brave Slashdotters who have gone from next week's heart attack candidate to a lean macho machine by some combination of willpower, Doritos avoidance and free weights. But as we've all seen, the group of people that is the Slashdot community has little in common with the Rest of Them.
Weight loss is hard. Very hard. Especially in a population of random people.
And, BTW, Vitamin D is the current wonderthing. The vast majority of claims will undoubtedly be found to be spurious for reasons that we have amply documented in other threads.
but avoiding the tragic complications of diabetes and a premature death is well worth it.
We're doomed.
All right. Just who woke him up this time? Whoever it is, you need to put him back down in his bunker and this time LOCK THE DOOR.
Show us your Emmy or Oscar, then we'll talk.
Romanes eunt domus
Why wouldn't we treat them as we (should) treat any animal? With respect for living conditions, pain control, anxiety, food, water and shelter? With that set of guidelines, they would be treated better than we treat most humans.
Certainly in many places, animal abuse is prosecuted with more vigor than human - human abuse.
I never thought that Howard the Duck was meant as an instruction manual, but who knows?
Neighbors of mine had a cockatoo that would imitate a smoke detector. Had the volume and pitch down quite closely.
That was pretty irritating.
You might want to check your temperature. You're clearly delirious.
Travel much?
Bring out your dead!
Bring out your dead!
We could call this document a "Passport".
Didn't Microsoft trademark that a while ago?
The incredibly high case fatality rate.
That tends to get one's attention, it does.
The sound of typing on them aggravates me, worse than nails on chalkboard.
You should never, ever say that. It only encourages them.
Whoa buddy! Back off on the bath salts.
They're frying your brain.
You fucking dumbass.
The only difference between Obama and Bush is that the former is a better public speaker.
To the dismay of comedians everywhere.
Don't you just love couch terrorists?
How about a Renault currency? Or a Datsun dollar?
Kongbucks anyone?
We actually let these people in here?
Amazing.
I don't think it adds up.
I have a 10 year old fridge, costs us about .05 / day. A brand new, super efficient version cuts it down to .02 / day. But you have to take the financial and carbon hit of the new item. Yes, it will even out over a couple of years, but no it's not that big of a deal.
Reinsulating the house cost us about $15,000 and requires a ten year payback period.
A new truck would cost me $30K and up to jump from 12 mpg to 18 mpg - again, a multi year payback.
So these new energy efficient things will help slow down overall energy use, but it's not going to change the long term outlook. The real reason: China and India wanting to get on the train. They want a car, any car. A house with something other than a coal stove. Electricity. All perfectly reasonable things but ones that take a huge energy hit. This increase in standard of living is going to dwarf incremental savings.
Why can't the government fail, just like a 'regular' investor? While I actually don't disagree - I think the role of government is in basic research, but the analogy holds. Both basic research and applied investing can fail. The former might result in an idea that didn't pan out, the latter results in an investment that didn't pan out. Investments are never guaranteed.
This doesn't mean that Solyndra wasn't screwed up for reasons that you mention, but I have no real beef about the government losing money on investments. It is something they're good at (losing money, that is). Always work to your strengths.
Why do people want to write medical applications for browsers? Because it's easy, everybody 'understands' javascript (well, sort of). Personally, I think web browsers should be banned from medical areas until it grows up.
Why? Well, our PACS (program to view X-ray images) works on IE9, our EHR works (when it works at all) best on IE 10 with the IE6 compatibility switch. Our patient education web app works on IE 9 and 10 with IE 8 compatibility. Browsers really limit the UI and waste white space. You have both the web app AND the browser to worry about for security and updates. And what a surprise, updates to the browser trash the application.
It's fine for Facebook and browsing you favorite adult website. For real work, it sucks.
You forgot the germs.
Always wash your hands.
OTOH, Columbus couldn't even find the friggin continent he was trying to get to (even if it was the wrong one entirely).
The only thing he did right was to find gold. And that, my friend, covers a whole bunch of ills.