oldNbusted

You Can't Get What You Want (Till You Know What You Want)

Big Sugar gets no love from me, but there was a guy named Ancel Keys who made his career putting forward the dietary fat = body fat hypothesis and Big Sugar was just happy to help suppress any evidence to the contrary. Ancel Keys: The Sugar Controversy In 1972, Pure, White and Deadly was published, written by John Yudkin for a lay readership. Its intention was to summarize the evidence that the over-consumption of sugar was leading to a greatly increased incidence of coronary thrombosis, and that in addition it was certainly involved in dental caries, probably involved in obesity, diabetes and liver disease, and possibly involved in gout, dyspepsia and some cancers. Yudkin ended the first Chapter: "I hope that when you have read this book I shall have convinced you that sugar is really dangerous." This message was extremely unwelcome to the sugar industry and manufacturers of processed foods. The final Chapter of Pure, White and Deadly lists several examples of attempts to interfere with the funding of his research and to prevent its publication. It also refers to the rancorous language and personal smears used by Ancel Keys to dismiss the evidence that sugar was the true culprit. ... The efforts to discredit the case against sugar were largely successful, and by the time of Yudkin's death in 1995 his warnings were, for the most part, no longer being taken seriously. Yudkin's arguments and evidence for the dangers of sugar were the focus of several articles in the British Medical Journal of 19 January 2013. In 2009, Robert Lustig, a pediatric endocrinologist of the University of California, San Francisco, Medical School who has a special interest in childhood obesity, made a video called Sugar: The Bitter Truth. Lustig had independently re-discovered and confirmed Yudkin's findings and, taking aim at Keys, asked his audience, "Am I debunking?"

Aron was the subject of a thread last year... Blast From The Past

Welcome back!

Did you see this thread and its linked threads? Any 411 on KingMont

What I love about this (aside from "y'our") is it took the guy on the right almost an hour to come back with his lame reply.

This is how these posts appear to me also.

FYI, I don't see this anywhere so I can't tell if no one I checked is on time-out or something else.

I'll be honest and admit that while I have read the rules, I missed this nuance about what is actionable for the administration. It certainly could explain the perception the rules were not being enforced equally. Regardless, I think this rule should be changed, it makes the rules situational, which I believe is not a recipe for success. Additionally, this has not been my experience here, as I have never reported anyone for attacking me (I prefer to deal with that myself, if I even feel it's needed) but when another member had a total meltdown and changed his thread title to attack me and continued the attack me in a series of posts in that thread, while I was deciding if I wanted to reply (he was doing a pretty good of incinerating his credibility, so I wasn't sure I needed to interrupt him) the entire thread went away. I realize now that anyone with an understanding of the rules would have concluded that I reported him, which I did not, and I think that's a little unfair to me (I'll live). I have seen this happen myself, so moderators have done this. And actually I think we need more of it, not less. I don't believe moderators publicly commenting why a member's public comment is being moderated is a privacy issue. I will say this, most other boards I've been on have a zero-tolerance policy toward forum members publicly commenting on moderation, members are expected make comments about the administration privately to the administration. This is mostly due to these conversations quickly breaking down to arguments about semantics, which are only a distraction. So in the end, I think clear rules, enforced consistently, regardless of how violations are reported, would be helpful. On the topic of forum reputation system, like the one I linked in post #35, this is an attempt to somewhat automate a process. Just like the other rules, it shouldn't be used to shut out different opinions and the people who abuse such a system should be sanctioned in some way. Not perfect, but it's something. It certainly could be run for a bit without any enforcement, just to see if people can get the hang of it. Maybe this would be coupled with some restrictions on new accounts, so new members would have a chance to see how the system works before they can use it. I want to think a reputation system already exists for the forum software, this is far from the first forum to wrestle with the issue.

I'm making this next year for sure.

Oh yeah, I guess I was assuming that I would have sent an immediate reply, to say something like 'I understand, I hope everything works out and I'll be here when you get back to me", so an additional text would be on top of that.

'Scuse me while I kiss this guy...

How would you feel if you told a guy you had a family situation and you would get back in touch with them and they kept messaging you? I say be cool and do nothing.

Here are some rules: http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?help/terms I don't really care for the exception for famous people in section 2. Not that I care that much about the dignity of famous people (who will never see the comments anyway), but posters pitching in yet again things like 'crooked Hillary/dumb Donald swindled all y'all' adds nothing to the discussion and just creates a slippery slope about when it is ok to disparage people. I think it's much better if the answer to that is simply 'never'. But for me, when the time-outs end, if the incessant non sequiturs return to the previous volume, I'm not going to care much if PRW exists or not, as I'm mostly just going to not bother to try to make sense of threads that have been spammed, which it was appearing was just about all of them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7_Te7iDojA David Bowie with Nine Inch Nails was staggering.

Still the best pop concert I've ever seen. Supposedly they lost buckets of money staging this.

@sync @Nvr2Thick We need a link to a good recipe for creamed onions!

Home made ice cream, I didn't think it was that big a deal until I didn't bring it one year and there was nearly a revolution. But I guess that's not really a side dish. I did take over making the mashed potatoes as apparently I was the only person who owned a ricer and I was tired of being served a bucket of paste glue.

Ah, Thanksgiving in DC, a magical time with a lot of transplanted fedheads who didn't go home for the holiday. In the old days of hooking up via AOL chatrooms, it was a regular thing to hook up with at least one guy every day of the long weekend, sometimes more, with my sure fire pick up line "who wants stuffing?" One guy had me come over before his Thanksgiving dinner and liked the experience so much he made me stay through dinner so we could have a second round afterwards. I let him do all the explaining to his friends who the hell I was. @latbear4blk Do you know if Marq is planning to be at MeatLoaf?

It would be helpful if this applied to everyone, not just other members. I worked hard to resist the temptation to name call famous people, which is usually deemed ok because they have chosen to be public figures, but it really doesn't help an argument.

This sounds like a variation of some forum reputation systems, here is a pretty good description of one such system: https://forum.bodybuilding.com/faq.php?faq=repuationsystem_faq

I appreciate it! The tall size thing is also probably a killer.

If there was any money to be made off this, I'm sure RM would have already jumped all over it.

A shopping themed post for peak shopping season. When I wore a younger man's clothes, one could buy shirts with turtlenecks that didn't have a seam in the neck. I know, I have some, but they seem to have shrunk or something, they don't fit anymore. To be clear, I don't mean the seam where the neck is attached to the body, but that the neck is a seamless tube that is then sewn onto the body. These days, all I can find are turtlenecks with seams, usually right up the back of the neck, to be as inconspicuous as possible, but still there. The story I was told one time was that knitting a continuous fabric tube requires a special loom built for just that purpose and when fabric production moved overseas, those looms didn't make the trip. That's why many turtlenecks are now made of a flat piece of fabric that is sewn to form a tube. Maybe I'm missing something, I have looked and written to many places but no luck for men's. I have seen women's, but needing a men's large tall size. So I turn to the forum, perhaps someone has a lead. Mock turtlenecks would be acceptable also.