Background: Data on the long-term association between low-carbohydrate diets and mortality are sparse.
Objective: To examine the association of low-carbohydrate diets with mortality during 26 years of follow-up in women and 20 years in men.
Design: Prospective cohort study of women and men who were followed from 1980 (women) or 1986 (men) until 2006. Low-carbohydrate diets, either animal-based (emphasizing animal sources of fat and protein) or vegetable-based (emphasizing vegetable sources of fat and protein), were computed from several validated food-frequency questionnaires assessed during follow-up.
Setting: Nurses' Health Study and Health Professionals' Follow-up Study.
Participants: 85Â 168 women (aged 34 to 59 years at baseline) and 44Â 548 men (aged 40 to 75 years at baseline) without heart disease, cancer, or diabetes.
Measurements: Investigators documented 12Â 555 deaths (2458 cardiovascular-related and 5780 cancer-related) in women and 8678 deaths (2746 cardiovascular-related and 2960 cancer-related) in men.
Results: The overall low-carbohydrate score was associated with a modest increase in overall mortality in a pooled analysis (hazard ratio [HR] comparing extreme deciles, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.01 to 1.24]; P for trend = 0.136). The animal low-carbohydrate score was associated with higher all-cause mortality (pooled HR comparing extreme deciles, 1.23 [CI, 1.11 to 1.37]; P for trend = 0.051), cardiovascular mortality (corresponding HR, 1.14 [CI, 1.01 to 1.29]; P for trend = 0.029), and cancer mortality (corresponding HR, 1.28 [CI, 1.02 to 1.60]; P for trend = 0.089). In contrast, a higher vegetable low-carbohydrate score was associated with lower all-cause mortality (HR, 0.80 [CI, 0.75 to 0.85]; P for trend â 0.001) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.77 [CI, 0.68 to 0.87]; P for trend http://annals.org/article.aspx...
Your so-called 'shock therapy' seems to consist almost entirely of ad hominem and naive futurism. The GP is absolutely correct - our civilisation in its current form is by definition unsustainable, because we depend on burning vast quantities of oil, natural gas and coal on a daily basis. These are resources that will not be replaced on any timeframe that is meaningful to the current civilisation. It is not a foregone conclusion that we can maintain current societal complexity (read 'standard of living') without them.
You suggest the world needs only install solar panels over a single digit percentage of the Sahara desert. We'll be parsimonious and say that's 1% of the Sahara's 9,400,000 square kilometres, giving us 94,000 square kiometres of solar panels. Hmmm. I see your point though - there is certainly a vast amount of energy out there to be tapped... if only it will be economically (or energetically) viable:
"In 2008, total worldwide energy consumption was 474 exajoules (132,000 TWh). This is equivalent to an average power use of 15 terawatts (2.0×1010 hp).[7] The annual potential for renewable energy is: solar energy 1,575 EJ (438,000 TWh), wind power 640 EJ (180,000 TWh), geothermal energy 5,000 EJ (1,400,000 TWh), biomass 276 EJ (77,000 TWh), hydropower 50 EJ (14,000 TWh) and ocean energy 1 EJ (280 TWh).[8][9][10]"
Yes, that's a whole lot of potential. However, in your simplistic analaysis, you overlook that the fact of the world having such massive potential renewable energy to be harnessed is no assurance that we will have the energy or money to be able to do so. In fact, with Energy Return On Investment (EROI) declining, we are relying on continuous improvements in renewable tech for these energy sources to be competitive. Efficiency improvements are helping maintain affordability to some degree also, but remember that becoming more efficient with fossil fuels only maintains their affordability; people are able to continue to use them for many discretionary activities (a rephrasing of Jevon's Paradox). And for most uses renewables simply aren't there yet, even in spite of generous subsidies in many parts of the world (e.g. power companies paying 4x their own retail unit cost back to those 'feeding in' to the grid). The most overlooked subsidy of all, however, is all of the fossil fuels embedded in this renewable tech. As EROI continues to decline, it remains to be seen how affordability of renewables will keep pace. We may see a 'receding horizons' scenario, where increasingly expensive fossil fuel, embedded at every stage of producing renewable tech, renders said renewables increasingly unaffordable.
In short, there are many blind spots and a hell of a lot more doubt concerning this whole situation than you seem to think.
Sure, let's buy into Dvorak's false dichotomy and misapprehensions about the would be recipients of the OLPC units - otherwise they might learn to make their way in the modern global economy and feed themselves.
Dvorak is concerned with making controversial statements which he may, or more likely does not, believe.
disconnecting the battery for a few days to take care of any CMOS passwords.
Decent laptops don't use battery-backed CMOS to store the password etc. You can leave the battery unplugged for a year and the password will still be there.
That might reset the root password, but won't deal with the underlying issue that is the fact that the password of the first user (who has sudo access) is in the file.
No problem. We might choose to reject Goobuntu on account of the concerns you've raised, but perhaps our own preferred distros will benefit from the increased awareness and uptake of Linux.
On auto-sensing switches always lock ports to 100 MBps / full-duplex operation. Auto-negotiation just doesn't work reliably in my experience - monitor switchports running auto-negotiate and you'll see many errors especially when the interface has some load on it.
Many (but not all) of the Americans I've met (when they've visited my home country) have done weird things like play the American anthem and salute their flag every day. This was on a Christian camping weekend and I found it very bizarre.
And to the earlier poster who said everyone likes their own country best, I certainly don't - I don't even live there anymore.
It depends on your distro. If you're running Ubuntu or another Debian-based distro, just load up Synaptic (assuming you're running X) and click Mark All Upgrades, then Apply.
I was also seeing not BSODs but spontaneous reboots with XP - one moment you're using it and the next you're looking at the POST screen and the memory is counting up... no warning whatsoever!
Admittedly I picked up the PC off some guys who were putting it out for the trash (when I got it home it was BSOD on boot), but since changing to Linux I've not had any instability issues whatsoever (it's my webserver and guest Internet terminal, running a full desktop Ubuntu with Gnome, in fact).
I put the Windows probs down to some minor mainboard fault or a Win32 driver issue (Windows 2000 did the same thing).
Yes, but conversely, homosexual activity by animals might tend to indicate it was part of God's design, or at least it was within the functional parameters of the animal kingdom - a genetic artifact at least. This tends to disagree with the typical monotheist's attitude toward homosexuality.
Gnome & Nautilus support icons that preview the document they represent right out of the box; and of course hard links have been around a good few years on Unix-like OS too.
Slashdot Mirror
Background: Data on the long-term association between low-carbohydrate diets and mortality are sparse.
Objective: To examine the association of low-carbohydrate diets with mortality during 26 years of follow-up in women and 20 years in men.
Design: Prospective cohort study of women and men who were followed from 1980 (women) or 1986 (men) until 2006. Low-carbohydrate diets, either animal-based (emphasizing animal sources of fat and protein) or vegetable-based (emphasizing vegetable sources of fat and protein), were computed from several validated food-frequency questionnaires assessed during follow-up.
Setting: Nurses' Health Study and Health Professionals' Follow-up Study.
Participants: 85Â 168 women (aged 34 to 59 years at baseline) and 44Â 548 men (aged 40 to 75 years at baseline) without heart disease, cancer, or diabetes.
Measurements: Investigators documented 12Â 555 deaths (2458 cardiovascular-related and 5780 cancer-related) in women and 8678 deaths (2746 cardiovascular-related and 2960 cancer-related) in men.
Results: The overall low-carbohydrate score was associated with a modest increase in overall mortality in a pooled analysis (hazard ratio [HR] comparing extreme deciles, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.01 to 1.24]; P for trend = 0.136). The animal low-carbohydrate score was associated with higher all-cause mortality (pooled HR comparing extreme deciles, 1.23 [CI, 1.11 to 1.37]; P for trend = 0.051), cardiovascular mortality (corresponding HR, 1.14 [CI, 1.01 to 1.29]; P for trend = 0.029), and cancer mortality (corresponding HR, 1.28 [CI, 1.02 to 1.60]; P for trend = 0.089). In contrast, a higher vegetable low-carbohydrate score was associated with lower all-cause mortality (HR, 0.80 [CI, 0.75 to 0.85]; P for trend â 0.001) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.77 [CI, 0.68 to 0.87]; P for trend http://annals.org/article.aspx...
A recurring theme on The Hipcrime Vocab blog is the likely demographic effects of automation, AI and robots on future human employment.
Your so-called 'shock therapy' seems to consist almost entirely of ad hominem and naive futurism. The GP is absolutely correct - our civilisation in its current form is by definition unsustainable, because we depend on burning vast quantities of oil, natural gas and coal on a daily basis. These are resources that will not be replaced on any timeframe that is meaningful to the current civilisation. It is not a foregone conclusion that we can maintain current societal complexity (read 'standard of living') without them.
You suggest the world needs only install solar panels over a single digit percentage of the Sahara desert. We'll be parsimonious and say that's 1% of the Sahara's 9,400,000 square kilometres, giving us 94,000 square kiometres of solar panels. Hmmm. I see your point though - there is certainly a vast amount of energy out there to be tapped... if only it will be economically (or energetically) viable:
"In 2008, total worldwide energy consumption was 474 exajoules (132,000 TWh). This is equivalent to an average power use of 15 terawatts (2.0×1010 hp).[7] The annual potential for renewable energy is: solar energy 1,575 EJ (438,000 TWh), wind power 640 EJ (180,000 TWh), geothermal energy 5,000 EJ (1,400,000 TWh), biomass 276 EJ (77,000 TWh), hydropower 50 EJ (14,000 TWh) and ocean energy 1 EJ (280 TWh).[8][9][10]"
Yes, that's a whole lot of potential. However, in your simplistic analaysis, you overlook that the fact of the world having such massive potential renewable energy to be harnessed is no assurance that we will have the energy or money to be able to do so. In fact, with Energy Return On Investment (EROI) declining, we are relying on continuous improvements in renewable tech for these energy sources to be competitive. Efficiency improvements are helping maintain affordability to some degree also, but remember that becoming more efficient with fossil fuels only maintains their affordability; people are able to continue to use them for many discretionary activities (a rephrasing of Jevon's Paradox). And for most uses renewables simply aren't there yet, even in spite of generous subsidies in many parts of the world (e.g. power companies paying 4x their own retail unit cost back to those 'feeding in' to the grid). The most overlooked subsidy of all, however, is all of the fossil fuels embedded in this renewable tech. As EROI continues to decline, it remains to be seen how affordability of renewables will keep pace. We may see a 'receding horizons' scenario, where increasingly expensive fossil fuel, embedded at every stage of producing renewable tech, renders said renewables increasingly unaffordable.
In short, there are many blind spots and a hell of a lot more doubt concerning this whole situation than you seem to think.
Sure, let's buy into Dvorak's false dichotomy and misapprehensions about the would be recipients of the OLPC units - otherwise they might learn to make their way in the modern global economy and feed themselves.
Dvorak is concerned with making controversial statements which he may, or more likely does not, believe.
disconnecting the battery for a few days to take care of any CMOS passwords.
Decent laptops don't use battery-backed CMOS to store the password etc. You can leave the battery unplugged for a year and the password will still be there.
although no superuser.
Ah, this is simple - no need to change to a different operating system, simply log in to your computer with the username 'root'
man sudoers
/etc/sudoers to cause sudo to require the root password instead of the user's password.
You'll see that you can configure
Replacing Newtonian physics with quantum randomness does not free will make.
Heard of urxvt? That supports unicode.
You read my mind!
Just remember who saved your asses in the Battle of Independence buddy!
Vive les frogs!
That might reset the root password, but won't deal with the underlying issue that is the fact that the password of the first user (who has sudo access) is in the file.
Friend, you've summed up my thinking on these dubious DVD replacements to a tee!
No problem. We might choose to reject Goobuntu on account of the concerns you've raised, but perhaps our own preferred distros will benefit from the increased awareness and uptake of Linux.
Well look at what Bill's had to say about speech recognition over the years!!
On auto-sensing switches always lock ports to 100 MBps / full-duplex operation. Auto-negotiation just doesn't work reliably in my experience - monitor switchports running auto-negotiate and you'll see many errors especially when the interface has some load on it.
It's "per se".
Ubuntu recommendation seconded.
It. Just. Works.
Many (but not all) of the Americans I've met (when they've visited my home country) have done weird things like play the American anthem and salute their flag every day. This was on a Christian camping weekend and I found it very bizarre.
And to the earlier poster who said everyone likes their own country best, I certainly don't - I don't even live there anymore.
It depends on your distro. If you're running Ubuntu or another Debian-based distro, just load up Synaptic (assuming you're running X) and click Mark All Upgrades, then Apply.
Job done.
Absolutely!
Free advertising.
Face it, having to reboot when you patch your system is a load of arse!
It almost sounds like you are defending the practice.
I was also seeing not BSODs but spontaneous reboots with XP - one moment you're using it and the next you're looking at the POST screen and the memory is counting up... no warning whatsoever!
Admittedly I picked up the PC off some guys who were putting it out for the trash (when I got it home it was BSOD on boot), but since changing to Linux I've not had any instability issues whatsoever (it's my webserver and guest Internet terminal, running a full desktop Ubuntu with Gnome, in fact).
I put the Windows probs down to some minor mainboard fault or a Win32 driver issue (Windows 2000 did the same thing).
Yes, but conversely, homosexual activity by animals might tend to indicate it was part of God's design, or at least it was within the functional parameters of the animal kingdom - a genetic artifact at least. This tends to disagree with the typical monotheist's attitude toward homosexuality.
Gnome & Nautilus support icons that preview the document they represent right out of the box; and of course hard links have been around a good few years on Unix-like OS too.