Which means that the problem is not that people are not as active as they have been in the past, it is the food and portions of food they are eating along with their genetic disposition to the kinds of food.
I don't see where this study compares current and past activity levels, it just compares the activity levels of the current generation of kids, both involved in sports and those not involved. It is quite possible that there is a difference between the activity level of children today and children from previous generations.
The only bullshit around here is in your post, and I'm calling it right now.
You mean to tell me that you pay about $100,000 a year in taxes,and yet you claim you can't afford premium medical insurance? Explain to me how that's possible.
Where do you live? Because where I am, the subject of those internment camps come up pretty regularly, usually in discussions about Guantanamo. But maybe that's just the East Coast.
Well, for starters, Morphine Sulfate in not the same as Morphine. Morphine sulfate has a molecular weight of 668.76, while morphine itself is 285.338 g/mol. Not to mention that ingestion is not the standard route for the adminstration of morphine.
Narcotic. Human lethal dose probably 120-250 mg. In addition to its analgesic action, morphine may cause gastric disturbance with nausea, vomiting and constipation. Large amounts may cause central nervous system depression, respiratory or cardiac collapse, coma and death.
It seems you're reading the NASA budget request wrong. The total NASA request for 2007 is 16.356 billion dollars, nearly eight times as much as the $2.156 billion requested by the National Park Service. You may have reached the wrong conclusion by reading the requests made by the individual "Themes", of which NASA has several. For instance, the Earth-Sun system theme, which is under the Science Mission Directorate, is requesting $2.210.6 billion alone, more than the NPS's total budget.
I'll avoid any commentary about which agency is getting the short end of the stick, they're both worthwhile programs and IMHO good uses of tax dollars. I just want to make the facts clear.
there's one thing you need to remember. Not everyone else is.
A lot of posts, yours included, seem to have this mythical concept that you can simply drop everything and gather your family to your side for all your remaining days. Well, guess what? You can't. Why? Because they have lives too. Your kids can't drop oiut of school, your wife is going to need to keep up with her job (she'll be the family's only source of income after you die) Hell, maybe your ass needs to put in a little more work to pay off those bills that the insurance doesn't cover. If you think they're all going to be covered, you must not have any familiarity with the system. You let them prepare for their future even as you prepare for your lack thereof. You do these things because you love your family, and in the little time you have left you need to make sure they are in the best position possible. I'm glad that the people in my own family who have died were never as selfish as you.
to tell you the truth, I was planning to give you a somewhat more civil response, but having seen how you've treated porcupine when she shared her, much more realistic, way of dealing with her cancer, I've come to the conclusion that you really don't deserve any respect. You seem put out that she made the mature decision to plan for her 80% chance of life as opposed to her 20% chance of death. Well, since she's alive and posting to/., it seems to me she made the right choice. I'm sorry for whoever must have died and left you with these angry feelings, but you need to get over them.
you seem to be confusing the study and the slashdot summary. The researchers in the study are well aware of the other research, according to TFA, and are in fact saying basically what you just said... that alzhiemers strikes the educated at the same time as noneducated, but that the educated are better at compensating for it, thus exhibit their first symptoms later. By that time the disease has progressed far enough that they can no longer compensate, and quickly reach levels of impairment comparable to their non-educated counterparts.
I hardly see how you can characterize something you seem to agree with as "lies, and damn lies."
The point of using emoticonsis that IM messages are not literature, letters, even notes. They are transcribed bits of conversation, conversation that in its normal form would have had nonverbal and verbal cues to its intent. You might think that your words give the proper tone to your statements, but in the average email or IM there simply arn't enough words to get the job done. An as an additional consideration, the ever more common use of sacasm has made this problem worse. Sarcasm has always run the risk of being taken seriously, no matter how well written. A Modest Proposal, anyone?
Find and read Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. The premise is essentially that television, our current medium of information, is simply not capable of supporting reason. I found it to be a compelling and frightning thesis.
Everyone seems to keep putting this on America, but RTFA, people. It's a worldwide problem, and it seems to be gro, ah, intensifying. Nobody was suprised that Americans were fat, but now it seems everyone's getting fat, whether they eat like Americans or not. Some countries have even exceeded the US obesity rates.
If you don't believe me, well look at this article. They got their information from these guys.
Re:Heat engines and the conservation of mass
on
Obesity Contagious?
·
· Score: 1
Thanks, I see the point better now, and you're absolutely right. All the calories used to make fat come in through the mouth, so though the how is pretty much accounted for even if the why is not.
The problem, though, I think we both can agree on is in a normal diet there are a lot of "discretionary" calories, calories the body could use to keep itself in good working order or could devote to storage. If you look at some of the disciples of those extremely low calorie diets, the ones that are hoping to extend their lifespans, they get by (poorly, from what I've heard) on a ridculously low caloric intake - something averaging around 1200/day. If your body decided only to use that amount from your diet for its metabolism and store the rest, you'd get in trouble pretty quick. A 2,400 cal/day diet would have you gaining about two pounds a week, and an "average" american diet four or more. It would take a while to figure it out, and before you disagree, think that even following recommended dieting plans (ie cutting 500-800 calories a day), you would still be gaining weight. At these rates, you could end up being obese very quickly, especially if your wern't so thin in the first place, and even if you were aware of your weight gain and took steps to prevent it.
Now, to be honest, most people I've seen who are overweight have terrible eating habits, so I am not convinced that their problem lies in their metabolism. The idea that something like a virus could could have this kind of effect isn't to farfetched, however, and it scares me. I'd hate to end up having to carefully count my calories just to avoid gaining weight.
Re:Heat engines and the conservation of mass
on
Obesity Contagious?
·
· Score: 1
Nobody's saying that the thin people magically whisked the carbon in those calories away. They burned them, and breathed it out, just not by doing anything resembling exercise. What you didn't seem to grasp from the parent poster is that a large part of human energy use goes into to filling resting metabolic requirements. These requirements are variable from person to person, but can be up to 70% of all caloric usage. For the most part, your basal metabolic rate is hormone regulated. Disorders can cause your body to go either way, either pushing your rate down, or doubling it, as in thyrotoxicosis.
Let's think about it as if the people involved were cars. If you had two cars idleing in the driveway, would you expect them to consume fuel at equal rates? Even if one was a four cylinder and the other an eight? How about if you kept one constantly revving at twice the rpm of the other? No? So how do you expect two humans, which are far more variable and complex than those cars, to process calories at the same predictable rate? No nutritionist would expect that.
In trying to find one easy explination, you've become ensnared in an overly simplistic fallicy.
I played Close Combat 2, on my mac, on another mac, and when it wouldn't play under System X I played it on someone else's PC. I've played some of the CC's that came later, but none seemed to have that perfect level of player control. There was real tension, "are my guys going to perform when the time comes, or will they crack and get everyone killed?" Making a backup plan was always more than just a good idea.
Munchman was the first game I was ever really good at. Just thinking about it, I can feel the controller in my hands, moving through the maze pattern that must be burned into my muscle memory. Some might think it was just a knockoff of Pac Man, but the speed of it made Pac Man look like a lethargic stroll in comparison. I broke about three controllers playing it.
Other games I have to mention are Myth, Quake III, and GoldenEye. The latter is still a favorite multiplayer game between some of my friends and I. Favorite mode? Slappers only.
It's been a while since I've posted, but this one brought me back. Many years ago, I did the same thing.
When I was in high school, as an inquisitive young lad I had heard about alternative sleep patterns. Upset at the wasteful 8.5 hours I was used to sleeping, I decided to try one. School forced to be awake from 7:30am - 2:45pm, so I decided to adopt a pattern of sleeping 3-6, both am and pm. I would get to stay up later, and get a whole 2.5 hours extra. I kept this up for nearly a year, as I recall. There was one major drawback, though, that forced me to stop.
It wasn't fatigue, weight loss, narcolepsy, or a steady erosion of mental faculties that forced me to stop though. In fact, I felt better than I had previosly. No it had nothing to do with the how much I was sleeping, but when.
See, the problem was I was sleeping through some of the more important hours of the day. That time after school was a prime time for socializing, running errands, keeping appointments, in short doing anything that involved interacting with the outside world. The time I got in return, roughly 10pm to 3 am, was next to useless. Due to curfew laws, it wasn't even technically legal for a 16 year old to be out for most of that time. If I did go out, who was I going to see? Who the hell is up at 2am on a Tuesday? Nobody I knew. So I had really nothing to do besides read and watch late night television. I was trading the prime hours of my day for late night infomercials. (Back then, there were no MMPOGs, and the internet was not much to look at, but the point remains salient today. Perhaps even more so.) That's why I stopped.
As a side note, after I stopped, it took a long time for me to completely shake the habit. Even in college, if I wasn't careful, I would fall asleep around 3 in the afternoon, whether I was tired or not.
Ok, as far as I know, I was the only one who brought up the battletech connection when the military intorduced the Stryker which I though looked familiar. I think it's obvious that someone in the pentagon has spent more than one late night checking off armor boxes. In order to convince everyone, though, I guess we'll just have to wait for the final proof to walk off the assembly line.
Editorial is good, I don't mean to criticise his posting, just the notion that slashdot is no more than Tacos's personal playground - maybe it was, once, but I think its time it grew up a little.
Actually, considering how this is one of the more popular threads I have ever seen, perhaps it's time it regressed.
My family has kept four rats in my life (Templeton, Terra, Anistasia, and Maize, 1 male and 3 females, respectively) All were lab rats previous to our owning them. I have only been bitten hard enough to draw blood (barely) once, and I suppose at the time I deserved it. I was young and was reaching under the couch intending to drag Terra out. None of them ever bit anyone else as far as I know.
domestic rats really are cute and playful, and can easily be allowed to run around with minimal supervision. One caveat: they chew. A lot. When we finally moved that couch that Terra liked to hide under, we discoved she had made a moonscape out of the carpeting, chewing big nestlike holes through both carpet and pad. They can chew a hole through thick cardboard in a couple of minutes, and thin wood in not much longer, provided they can get an angle to start at.
Our male rat outlived his female counterparts by a pretty wide margin (we sometimes wonder if it was due to his lab work). I would say our rats have lived an average of four years, and have all died of cancer. He is generally remebered a being more sociable, but I can't say whether this hold true for all males. I wouldn't get a breeding pair, as you would end up with a *lot* of rats in a fairly short order. However, you can get them neutered.
Slashdot Mirror
The only bullshit around here is in your post, and I'm calling it right now.
You mean to tell me that you pay about $100,000 a year in taxes,and yet you claim you can't afford premium medical insurance? Explain to me how that's possible.
Yeah, I had one of these, along with a bad habit of forgetting certain crucial resistors.
As a result, it mostly just taught me to recognize the smell of burning electronics.
The council will have some serious questions for Gaius Baltar about this.
Where do you live? Because where I am, the subject of those internment camps come up pretty regularly, usually in discussions about Guantanamo. But maybe that's just the East Coast.
Are you living in Alaska? If you are you might not be considering state income tax, which is a hazard of the lower 48.
Oh Gods yes. Especially these days.
Hmmm, and I'd also like to point out from the MSDS you referenced it states
Wow, you really didn't do your homework, did you?
I'll avoid any commentary about which agency is getting the short end of the stick, they're both worthwhile programs and IMHO good uses of tax dollars. I just want to make the facts clear.
Evidently your comments are modded so far down not even the spiders bother to read them.
Ummm, when?
A lot of posts, yours included, seem to have this mythical concept that you can simply drop everything and gather your family to your side for all your remaining days. Well, guess what? You can't. Why? Because they have lives too. Your kids can't drop oiut of school, your wife is going to need to keep up with her job (she'll be the family's only source of income after you die) Hell, maybe your ass needs to put in a little more work to pay off those bills that the insurance doesn't cover. If you think they're all going to be covered, you must not have any familiarity with the system. You let them prepare for their future even as you prepare for your lack thereof. You do these things because you love your family, and in the little time you have left you need to make sure they are in the best position possible. I'm glad that the people in my own family who have died were never as selfish as you.
to tell you the truth, I was planning to give you a somewhat more civil response, but having seen how you've treated porcupine when she shared her, much more realistic, way of dealing with her cancer, I've come to the conclusion that you really don't deserve any respect. You seem put out that she made the mature decision to plan for her 80% chance of life as opposed to her 20% chance of death. Well, since she's alive and posting to /., it seems to me she made the right choice. I'm sorry for whoever must have died and left you with these angry feelings, but you need to get over them.
Shoulod I laugh or cry? I just don't know.
I hardly see how you can characterize something you seem to agree with as "lies, and damn lies."
The point of using emoticonsis that IM messages are not literature, letters, even notes. They are transcribed bits of conversation, conversation that in its normal form would have had nonverbal and verbal cues to its intent. You might think that your words give the proper tone to your statements, but in the average email or IM there simply arn't enough words to get the job done. An as an additional consideration, the ever more common use of sacasm has made this problem worse. Sarcasm has always run the risk of being taken seriously, no matter how well written. A Modest Proposal, anyone?
Find and read Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. The premise is essentially that television, our current medium of information, is simply not capable of supporting reason. I found it to be a compelling and frightning thesis.
If you don't believe me, well look at this article. They got their information from these guys.
The problem, though, I think we both can agree on is in a normal diet there are a lot of "discretionary" calories, calories the body could use to keep itself in good working order or could devote to storage. If you look at some of the disciples of those extremely low calorie diets, the ones that are hoping to extend their lifespans, they get by (poorly, from what I've heard) on a ridculously low caloric intake - something averaging around 1200/day. If your body decided only to use that amount from your diet for its metabolism and store the rest, you'd get in trouble pretty quick. A 2,400 cal/day diet would have you gaining about two pounds a week, and an "average" american diet four or more. It would take a while to figure it out, and before you disagree, think that even following recommended dieting plans (ie cutting 500-800 calories a day), you would still be gaining weight. At these rates, you could end up being obese very quickly, especially if your wern't so thin in the first place, and even if you were aware of your weight gain and took steps to prevent it.
Now, to be honest, most people I've seen who are overweight have terrible eating habits, so I am not convinced that their problem lies in their metabolism. The idea that something like a virus could could have this kind of effect isn't to farfetched, however, and it scares me. I'd hate to end up having to carefully count my calories just to avoid gaining weight.
Let's think about it as if the people involved were cars. If you had two cars idleing in the driveway, would you expect them to consume fuel at equal rates? Even if one was a four cylinder and the other an eight? How about if you kept one constantly revving at twice the rpm of the other? No? So how do you expect two humans, which are far more variable and complex than those cars, to process calories at the same predictable rate? No nutritionist would expect that.
In trying to find one easy explination, you've become ensnared in an overly simplistic fallicy.
Thanks for nothing, science.
I played Close Combat 2, on my mac, on another mac, and when it wouldn't play under System X I played it on someone else's PC. I've played some of the CC's that came later, but none seemed to have that perfect level of player control. There was real tension, "are my guys going to perform when the time comes, or will they crack and get everyone killed?" Making a backup plan was always more than just a good idea.
Munchman was the first game I was ever really good at. Just thinking about it, I can feel the controller in my hands, moving through the maze pattern that must be burned into my muscle memory. Some might think it was just a knockoff of Pac Man, but the speed of it made Pac Man look like a lethargic stroll in comparison. I broke about three controllers playing it.
Other games I have to mention are Myth, Quake III, and GoldenEye. The latter is still a favorite multiplayer game between some of my friends and I. Favorite mode? Slappers only.
It's been a while since I've posted, but this one brought me back. Many years ago, I did the same thing.
When I was in high school, as an inquisitive young lad I had heard about alternative sleep patterns. Upset at the wasteful 8.5 hours I was used to sleeping, I decided to try one. School forced to be awake from 7:30am - 2:45pm, so I decided to adopt a pattern of sleeping 3-6, both am and pm. I would get to stay up later, and get a whole 2.5 hours extra. I kept this up for nearly a year, as I recall. There was one major drawback, though, that forced me to stop.
It wasn't fatigue, weight loss, narcolepsy, or a steady erosion of mental faculties that forced me to stop though. In fact, I felt better than I had previosly. No it had nothing to do with the how much I was sleeping, but when.
See, the problem was I was sleeping through some of the more important hours of the day. That time after school was a prime time for socializing, running errands, keeping appointments, in short doing anything that involved interacting with the outside world. The time I got in return, roughly 10pm to 3 am, was next to useless. Due to curfew laws, it wasn't even technically legal for a 16 year old to be out for most of that time. If I did go out, who was I going to see? Who the hell is up at 2am on a Tuesday? Nobody I knew. So I had really nothing to do besides read and watch late night television. I was trading the prime hours of my day for late night infomercials. (Back then, there were no MMPOGs, and the internet was not much to look at, but the point remains salient today. Perhaps even more so.) That's why I stopped.
As a side note, after I stopped, it took a long time for me to completely shake the habit. Even in college, if I wasn't careful, I would fall asleep around 3 in the afternoon, whether I was tired or not.
Ok, as far as I know, I was the only one who brought up the battletech connection when the military intorduced the Stryker which I though looked familiar. I think it's obvious that someone in the pentagon has spent more than one late night checking off armor boxes. In order to convince everyone, though, I guess we'll just have to wait for the final proof to walk off the assembly line.
Actually, considering how this is one of the more popular threads I have ever seen, perhaps it's time it regressed.
My family has kept four rats in my life (Templeton, Terra, Anistasia, and Maize, 1 male and 3 females, respectively) All were lab rats previous to our owning them. I have only been bitten hard enough to draw blood (barely) once, and I suppose at the time I deserved it. I was young and was reaching under the couch intending to drag Terra out. None of them ever bit anyone else as far as I know.
domestic rats really are cute and playful, and can easily be allowed to run around with minimal supervision. One caveat: they chew. A lot. When we finally moved that couch that Terra liked to hide under, we discoved she had made a moonscape out of the carpeting, chewing big nestlike holes through both carpet and pad. They can chew a hole through thick cardboard in a couple of minutes, and thin wood in not much longer, provided they can get an angle to start at.
Our male rat outlived his female counterparts by a pretty wide margin (we sometimes wonder if it was due to his lab work). I would say our rats have lived an average of four years, and have all died of cancer. He is generally remebered a being more sociable, but I can't say whether this hold true for all males. I wouldn't get a breeding pair, as you would end up with a *lot* of rats in a fairly short order. However, you can get them neutered.