Do you have a reason to question it? Salmonella is a contaminate by definition. Parasites in raw meat can be a concern but adequate freezing will kill them. I'm not sure what your other concerns might be with regard to raw animal products.
Taubes book isn't recommending a diet. He is simply examining the science behind dietary recommendations. Also, anyone can call themselves a nutritionist because it is not a legally protected term.
Who considers him a quack and on what science do they base it?
Also, if you eat vegetables and especially carrots you should improve their nutritional value by adding real butter. The saturated fat will allow you to actually absorb the nutrients like vitamin A. You can't absorb vitamin A without fat.
You may think ill of me all that you want. But "reality television" as it is defined today is NOT something I think any intelligent person should see as "entertainment". And I am highly suspect of anyone who claims otherwise. If anything, they are likely to be faux intellectuals who would rather put on a show of intelligence than actually make an effort to *be* intelligent.
I am highly suspect of anyone who claims to be an intellectual authority such as yourself.
Yes! I was thinking about this the other day. My idea was that people could tag stuff in real life with messages. They could be private or public messages. Then you bring up the camera/display interface and it shows you what messages are attached to whatever object you are pointing it at. Your glasses + HUD idea would be awesome.
The suit was not legitimate. If it were, do you think companies today would still be serving coffee at the same scalding temperature? No, they would not.
I have looked into this case a lot and I once shared your view. Check out overlawyered.com if you genuinely want more insight. http://overlawyered.com/2005/10/urban-legends-and-stella-liebeck-and-the-mcdonalds-coffee-case/ It is alluring to think the common sense answer is wrong but in this case it is not. Keep in mind that trial lawyers have a vested interest in making you think this case was legit.
and no, you are not smart for regurgitating what the fast food lobby has fed you.
I think you mean the tort reform lobby. Anyways look at each side and what they stand to gain. Those in support of the current tort system want to continue to earn buttloads of money from stupid cases. Tort reform folks want to reduce the amount of money sucked from stupid lawsuits which gets passed on to the consumer.
It's estimated that ladders cost $25 more than they should because of the tort tax.
I only ask because I have done a great deal of research into this case and then people spout off about stuff they have no clue about. Take the grand parent who started this topic. He provided as a supporting document an article whose 13 talking points were provided by the old womans lawyer; it's essentially a press release.
This case was total BS. It didn't set a precedent, it didn't change the way coffee is served; it was a fluke.
In this particular case, the FTC (not the FDA AFAIK) warned McD's that their coffee was being served at too high of a temp. Source? Or do they not teach that in pre-law?
Obviously, this woman's lawyers did a hell of a job, if they've still got people believing that this lawsuit wasn't complete bullshit. Because it was. If it wasn't, you wouldn't still be able to get a cup of coffee at the same temperature. It's not really her lawyers but the litigation lobby. They have a vested interest in making people believe that this case was legit. They even have some law professors teaching it as a shining example. Sad.
http://overlawyered.com/2005/10/urban-legends-and-stella-liebeck-and-the-mcdonalds-coffee-case/ has a good perspective on the case:
Amazingly, rather than argue that the tort system shouldn't be judged by the occasional outlier, the litigation lobby has succeeded in persuading some in the media and on the left that the Liebeck case is actually an aspirational result for the tort system, and, not only that, but that anyone who says otherwise is just a foolish right-winger buying into "urban legends" (Aug. 14, Aug. 16, and links therein). Even the Mikkelsons at snopes.com have made the mistake of buying into the trial lawyer hype, calling the case "perfectly legitimate" and effectively classifying the common-sense understanding of the case as an urban legend.
It's a problem for both. Web browser support is poor. Once the support is there then web designers would need to invest a lot of time to adapt their content. Also, photographs and videos will be a problem because of bandwidth. If everyone has high-dpi screens then photos and video will need high-dpi as well (in order to look good).
I am thinking the web is actually the limiting factor to adoption of high resolution screens. How many websites can scale to arbitrary dpi and look the same at each level? This is not just a windows problem.
Some dogs are excellent apartment dogs. Surprisingly, greyhounds are very good apartment dogs as they are basically couch potatoes. Same thing with Mastiffs and Great Danes, some of the largest dog breeds.
It's all about the breed of dog. A golden retriever would be a bad apartment dog because of their energy level.
No. You cannot get a full set of T6 quality gear from badges. You can get maybe 5 pieces that are sub optimal but near T6 quality. 5 pieces out of the 17 you earned doing 25-man raids.
I'm sorry but if you compare a 'lolheroic' person with all badge gear to a full T6 raider it won't even be close.
He's saying that in order to do something new or something that you enjoy within the game you are forced to grind first. It would be like if Tetris required you to get 100,000 points in single player everytime you wanted to do multiplayer.
What exactly should we be doing and what exactly are you doing? And are you concluding that the US as a whole does not care because of comments on Slashdot?
This is a leisure site. Did you expect the comments to be a collaborative discussion drafting an action plan to aid those affected in China.
It doesn't really matter. They still serve coffee that hot today, and so does Starbucks. This case was a fluke; if it truly were a legitimate case then it would set a precedent, but it didn't.
1 in 24 million is not low? Besides the point, serving coffee at the temperature McDonald's did remains legal. So what was gained from this lawsuit? It was a fluke and nothing else.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you have a reason to question it? Salmonella is a contaminate by definition. Parasites in raw meat can be a concern but adequate freezing will kill them. I'm not sure what your other concerns might be with regard to raw animal products.
Taubes book isn't recommending a diet. He is simply examining the science behind dietary recommendations. Also, anyone can call themselves a nutritionist because it is not a legally protected term.
Who considers him a quack and on what science do they base it?
Also, if you eat vegetables and especially carrots you should improve their nutritional value by adding real butter. The saturated fat will allow you to actually absorb the nutrients like vitamin A. You can't absorb vitamin A without fat.
You may think ill of me all that you want. But "reality television" as it is defined today is NOT something I think any intelligent person should see as "entertainment". And I am highly suspect of anyone who claims otherwise. If anything, they are likely to be faux intellectuals who would rather put on a show of intelligence than actually make an effort to *be* intelligent.
I am highly suspect of anyone who claims to be an intellectual authority such as yourself.
Yes, it's new system for Diablo. It's not like they are claiming they invented it.
My flagpole; you can run up it.
Yes! I was thinking about this the other day. My idea was that people could tag stuff in real life with messages. They could be private or public messages. Then you bring up the camera/display interface and it shows you what messages are attached to whatever object you are pointing it at. Your glasses + HUD idea would be awesome.
The suit was not legitimate. If it were, do you think companies today would still be serving coffee at the same scalding temperature? No, they would not.
I have looked into this case a lot and I once shared your view. Check out overlawyered.com if you genuinely want more insight. http://overlawyered.com/2005/10/urban-legends-and-stella-liebeck-and-the-mcdonalds-coffee-case/ It is alluring to think the common sense answer is wrong but in this case it is not. Keep in mind that trial lawyers have a vested interest in making you think this case was legit.
Thanks for your time.
and no, you are not smart for regurgitating what the fast food lobby has fed you.
I think you mean the tort reform lobby. Anyways look at each side and what they stand to gain. Those in support of the current tort system want to continue to earn buttloads of money from stupid cases. Tort reform folks want to reduce the amount of money sucked from stupid lawsuits which gets passed on to the consumer.It's estimated that ladders cost $25 more than they should because of the tort tax.
And yea, I am biased, I am for tort reform.
yet they still make the same product today (e.g. Starbucks)
and normal use is to not spill it.
I only ask because I have done a great deal of research into this case and then people spout off about stuff they have no clue about. Take the grand parent who started this topic. He provided as a supporting document an article whose 13 talking points were provided by the old womans lawyer; it's essentially a press release.
This case was total BS. It didn't set a precedent, it didn't change the way coffee is served; it was a fluke.
Nope, nothing in TFA. Thanks though.
Check your site again. It probably says 90 celsius. 90 fahrenheit would be awfully cold for a warm drink.
http://overlawyered.com/2005/10/urban-legends-and-stella-liebeck-and-the-mcdonalds-coffee-case/ has a good perspective on the case: Amazingly, rather than argue that the tort system shouldn't be judged by the occasional outlier, the litigation lobby has succeeded in persuading some in the media and on the left that the Liebeck case is actually an aspirational result for the tort system, and, not only that, but that anyone who says otherwise is just a foolish right-winger buying into "urban legends" (Aug. 14, Aug. 16, and links therein). Even the Mikkelsons at snopes.com have made the mistake of buying into the trial lawyer hype, calling the case "perfectly legitimate" and effectively classifying the common-sense understanding of the case as an urban legend.
Taxing unhealthy food is not a simple thing to implement. What qualifies as unhealthy? Maple Syrup? Bagels?
Cigarettes are easy to classify and food is not. Can you imaging the oversight needed to tax unhealthy food?
It's a problem for both. Web browser support is poor. Once the support is there then web designers would need to invest a lot of time to adapt their content. Also, photographs and videos will be a problem because of bandwidth. If everyone has high-dpi screens then photos and video will need high-dpi as well (in order to look good).
I am thinking the web is actually the limiting factor to adoption of high resolution screens. How many websites can scale to arbitrary dpi and look the same at each level? This is not just a windows problem.
Some dogs are excellent apartment dogs. Surprisingly, greyhounds are very good apartment dogs as they are basically couch potatoes. Same thing with Mastiffs and Great Danes, some of the largest dog breeds.
It's all about the breed of dog. A golden retriever would be a bad apartment dog because of their energy level.
No. You cannot get a full set of T6 quality gear from badges. You can get maybe 5 pieces that are sub optimal but near T6 quality. 5 pieces out of the 17 you earned doing 25-man raids.
I'm sorry but if you compare a 'lolheroic' person with all badge gear to a full T6 raider it won't even be close.
He's saying that in order to do something new or something that you enjoy within the game you are forced to grind first. It would be like if Tetris required you to get 100,000 points in single player everytime you wanted to do multiplayer.
What exactly should we be doing and what exactly are you doing? And are you concluding that the US as a whole does not care because of comments on Slashdot?
This is a leisure site. Did you expect the comments to be a collaborative discussion drafting an action plan to aid those affected in China.
It doesn't really matter. They still serve coffee that hot today, and so does Starbucks. This case was a fluke; if it truly were a legitimate case then it would set a precedent, but it didn't.
1 in 24 million is not low? Besides the point, serving coffee at the temperature McDonald's did remains legal. So what was gained from this lawsuit? It was a fluke and nothing else.