PDA

View Full Version : can you tell me if this sounds about right for a work out?


Rob Doran
April 14th 06, 03:26 AM
I am 49 yrs old and want to get some strength and perhaps even a little
muscle
definition.
I am 5 ft 7 and I weigh 215lb
My wife tries to hide the sugar bowl from me :-)
I do not belong to a gym nor can I afford to.
I have free weights ,a bench and an attatchment that I can do leg lifts
and leg curls with.
I do 1 set with the goal of 8 to 12 reps for each exercize.
I'm just getting started so the lack of poundage will make y'all yonguns
chuckle.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
This is my first week
Monday:
1)military press bar + 40Lb
2)bench press bar + 40Lb
3)incline press with dumbells each one 15 pounds
4)rows with bar + 40lb
5)shrugs bar + 40lb
6)flies with dumbells each one 15lb
7)what I call wing flaps
[I hold my arms out to the side with my hands raised and I bring them
together in
front of my nose dumbells each one 15lb]
8)Lateral dumbell raises dumbells each one 15lb
--------------------------------------
Tuesday:
1)bent rows with bar + 50 lbs
2)dead lift with bar + 50 lbs
3)Tricep press with bar + 25lb
4)lying tricep press bringing the bar up from the floor I call it 'nose
buster' with bar + 20lb
5)bicep curl bar + 25lb
6)alternate bicep curls with 10 lb dumbells 7)front wrist curls bar +
25lb
8)back wrist curls bar + 25lb
-------------------------------------------------
Thursday
1)leg extensions 60lb
2)leg curls 40lb
3)front bar squat bar + 40 which I only managed 5 reps:-p
4)squat bar + 40lb
5)sitting calf raise bar +40lb
6)15 lateral twists with just the bar
7)30 abd crunches
8)30 knee lift+abd crunch
------------------------------------------------
Saturday mean mix
1)Miltary press
2)incline dumbell press
3)lateral dumbell raise
4)dead lift
5)nose buster
6)alternate dumbell curls
7)back wrist curl
8)leg curl
9)squat
10)abd crunches

so whattya think too much
too little ?

allbpen
April 14th 06, 08:28 AM
Try losing the ab crunches and do pullups instead. Also try wanking off
50+ times a day .

April 14th 06, 10:26 AM
On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 22:26:14 -0400, (Rob Doran)
wrote:

>I am 5 ft 7 and I weigh 215lb

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLL OLOOLOOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL OLOLOLOL

April 14th 06, 10:27 AM
On 14 Apr 2006 00:28:41 -0700, "allbpen" >
wrote:

>Also try wanking off
>50+ times a day .

What makes you think he doesn't already do that?

April 14th 06, 05:44 PM
Rob Doran wrote:
> I am 49 yrs old and want to get some strength and perhaps even a little
> muscle
> definition.
> I am 5 ft 7 and I weigh 215lb
> My wife tries to hide the sugar bowl from me :-)
> I do not belong to a gym nor can I afford to.
> I have free weights ,a bench and an attatchment that I can do leg lifts
> and leg curls with.
> I do 1 set with the goal of 8 to 12 reps for each exercize.
> I'm just getting started so the lack of poundage will make y'all yonguns
> chuckle.
> /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> This is my first week
> Monday:
> 1)military press bar + 40Lb
> 2)bench press bar + 40Lb
> 3)incline press with dumbells each one 15 pounds
> 4)rows with bar + 40lb
> 5)shrugs bar + 40lb
> 6)flies with dumbells each one 15lb
> 7)what I call wing flaps
> [I hold my arms out to the side with my hands raised and I bring them
> together in
> front of my nose dumbells each one 15lb]
> 8)Lateral dumbell raises dumbells each one 15lb
> --------------------------------------
> Tuesday:
> 1)bent rows with bar + 50 lbs
> 2)dead lift with bar + 50 lbs
> 3)Tricep press with bar + 25lb
> 4)lying tricep press bringing the bar up from the floor I call it 'nose
> buster' with bar + 20lb
> 5)bicep curl bar + 25lb
> 6)alternate bicep curls with 10 lb dumbells 7)front wrist curls bar +
> 25lb
> 8)back wrist curls bar + 25lb
> -------------------------------------------------
> Thursday
> 1)leg extensions 60lb
> 2)leg curls 40lb
> 3)front bar squat bar + 40 which I only managed 5 reps:-p
> 4)squat bar + 40lb
> 5)sitting calf raise bar +40lb
> 6)15 lateral twists with just the bar
> 7)30 abd crunches
> 8)30 knee lift+abd crunch
> ------------------------------------------------
> Saturday mean mix
> 1)Miltary press
> 2)incline dumbell press
> 3)lateral dumbell raise
> 4)dead lift
> 5)nose buster
> 6)alternate dumbell curls
> 7)back wrist curl
> 8)leg curl
> 9)squat
> 10)abd crunches
>
> so whattya think too much
> too little ?

Don't worry about the douche bags here. I would stick with doing more
sets of the basic exercises. Focus on your back and legs, as these are
the largest muscle groups. Do many squats, dead lifts, leg curls,
bench, etc. But you really need to also change your diet. Working out
and eating bad will just make you a strong fat person. Stick with lean
meats, cut the bread/chips/sugar out, etc.

allbpen
April 14th 06, 07:21 PM
I ma not a douche bag! I am a ball bag

Myraide
April 14th 06, 07:28 PM
Rob Doran wrote:
> I am 49 yrs old and want to get some strength and perhaps even a little
> muscle
> definition.
> I am 5 ft 7 and I weigh 215lb
> My wife tries to hide the sugar bowl from me :-)

sugar from the sugar bowl is the least of it!

what you need to do is drop any and all processed foods from your diet.
this includes any packaged, canned, and frozen stuff that contains
additives, dyes, salt, and anything corn. (corn is for fattening pigs
for market)

eat primal and natural. eat complex carbs with mimimal processing like
whole wheat pasta and wild rice and steel cut oatmeal. eat lean meats
(organic without the additives) and wild caught fish. lots of fresh
fruit and veggies in season. fat free milk and yogurt. raw nuts.

when cooking, use only cold pressed olive oil, or a non-gmo
non-hydrogenated spread, and no need to cut back here a lot. your body
needs fat, but it needs the right kind of fat.

drop all sodas. diet sodas are worse than the ones with sugar.

once your body gets over the confusion of not having to process the
crap you have been eating, you will start to see a big difference in
how you feel and look, with the proper excercise. i would also
recommend power walking to get that heart rate up.

just my two cents. :) myraide

April 14th 06, 08:21 PM
On 14 Apr 2006 09:44:04 -0700, wrote:

>Don't worry about the douche bags here. I would stick with doing more
>sets of the basic exercises. Focus on your back and legs, as these are
>the largest muscle groups. Do many squats, dead lifts, leg curls,
>bench, etc. But you really need to also change your diet. Working out
>and eating bad will just make you a strong fat person. Stick with lean
>meats, cut the bread/chips/sugar out, etc.

AND get yourself a routine on paper, then concentrate on the exercises
that are very hard. For instance, if you can only do say 8 reps of a
certain movement, do 8, rest, then do 8 more. Follow this, and in 10
years you'll look like me.

April 14th 06, 09:22 PM
Myraide wrote:

> drop all sodas. diet sodas are worse than the ones with sugar.
>


How so?

JMW
April 14th 06, 11:43 PM
"Myraide" > wrote:
>Rob Doran wrote:
>> I am 49 yrs old and want to get some strength and perhaps even a little
>> muscle
>> definition.
>> I am 5 ft 7 and I weigh 215lb
>> My wife tries to hide the sugar bowl from me :-)
>
>sugar from the sugar bowl is the least of it!
>
>what you need to do is drop any and all processed foods from your diet.

No. What he needs to do is reduce his energy intake below his energy
expenditure. Whether the food is "processed" or "natural" (both of
which poor terms), calories are calories.

>this includes any packaged, canned, and frozen stuff that contains
>additives, dyes, salt, and anything corn. (corn is for fattening pigs
>for market)
>
>eat primal and natural. eat complex carbs with mimimal processing like
>whole wheat pasta and wild rice and steel cut oatmeal. eat lean meats
>(organic without the additives) and wild caught fish. lots of fresh
>fruit and veggies in season. fat free milk and yogurt. raw nuts.

No. There is nothing inherently wrong with foods solely because they
are "packaged," and in many cases, they are safer that way. In some
cases, canned foods, which are thoroughly cooked in the canning
process, are less likely to contain bacterial pathogens. Frozen foods
allow people to have foods that would not otherwise be available at a
reasonable cost in their region, and there is no significant
difference in nutritional value. Sorry to burst your bubble, but the
level of nutritional discussion in this newsgroup goes well beyond
"natural is best."

>when cooking, use only cold pressed olive oil, or a non-gmo
>non-hydrogenated spread, and no need to cut back here a lot. your body
>needs fat, but it needs the right kind of fat.

Olive oil, particularly extra-virgin, is not suitable for cooking at
high heat.

>drop all sodas. diet sodas are worse than the ones with sugar.

Why?

>once your body gets over the confusion of not having to process the
>crap you have been eating...

Would you please provide a physiological explanation as to how that
occurs?

Stephen N.
April 15th 06, 01:07 AM
JMW wrote:

> "Myraide" > wrote:

>>eat primal and natural. eat complex carbs with mimimal processing like
>>whole wheat pasta and wild rice and steel cut oatmeal. eat lean meats
>>(organic without the additives) and wild caught fish. lots of fresh
>>fruit and veggies in season. fat free milk and yogurt. raw nuts.
>
>
> No. There is nothing inherently wrong with foods solely because they
> are "packaged," and in many cases, they are safer that way.

It's amazing how we get sold on "natural" food and diets. How many
times do we hear about the good old days when food didn't have all those
additives blah, blah, blah...

Let's go back to the good old days people when people ate only organic
foods without any 'additives' and died at age 30 of natural causes.

Stephen N. ---> gonna have BBQ burgers and beer in about 1 hour...

April 15th 06, 02:14 AM
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 00:07:31 GMT, "Stephen N."
> wrote:

>Let's go back to the good old days people when people ate only organic
>foods without any 'additives' and died at age 30 of natural causes.

In your case it's a good idea. The worlds better off without dimwits
like you.

Brahma
April 15th 06, 06:45 AM
Hi Rob,

I'd second what some others said: stick with basics like deadlift,
squat, and overhead press, and *cut your calories*. Cutting the
calories will do more for you than lifting will, in your condition.

Regards

Ellis
April 15th 06, 08:05 AM
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 18:43:57 -0400, JMW
> wrote:

>>drop all sodas. diet sodas are worse than the ones with sugar.
>
>Why?

Tut. Aspartame turns you blind, gives you cancer and shrinks your
doodah. That's if you're LUCKY.

Everyone knows that.

Ellis

JMW
April 15th 06, 08:23 AM
Ellis > wrote:

>On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 18:43:57 -0400, JMW
> wrote:
>
>>>drop all sodas. diet sodas are worse than the ones with sugar.
>>
>>Why?
>
>Tut. Aspartame turns you blind, gives you cancer and shrinks your
>doodah. That's if you're LUCKY.
>
>Everyone knows that.

You'd better shut up before the Monsanto cabal sends some ninjas out
to snuff you.

Myraide
April 17th 06, 05:35 PM
wrote:
> Myraide wrote:
>
> > drop all sodas. diet sodas are worse than the ones with sugar.
> >
>
>
> How so?

do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
nothing but water and chemicals. the only redeaming thing about a real
soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar high. at
least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.

you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals. drink water. or a
pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide

Myraide
April 17th 06, 06:05 PM
JMW wrote:
> "Myraide" > wrote:
> >Rob Doran wrote:
> >> I am 49 yrs old and want to get some strength and perhaps even a little
> >> muscle
> >> definition.
> >> I am 5 ft 7 and I weigh 215lb
> >> My wife tries to hide the sugar bowl from me :-)
> >
> >sugar from the sugar bowl is the least of it!
> >
> >what you need to do is drop any and all processed foods from your diet.
>
> No. What he needs to do is reduce his energy intake below his energy
> expenditure. Whether the food is "processed" or "natural" (both of
> which poor terms), calories are calories.
>
> >this includes any packaged, canned, and frozen stuff that contains
> >additives, dyes, salt, and anything corn. (corn is for fattening pigs
> >for market)
> >
> >eat primal and natural. eat complex carbs with mimimal processing like
> >whole wheat pasta and wild rice and steel cut oatmeal. eat lean meats
> >(organic without the additives) and wild caught fish. lots of fresh
> >fruit and veggies in season. fat free milk and yogurt. raw nuts.
>
> No. There is nothing inherently wrong with foods solely because they
> are "packaged," and in many cases, they are safer that way. In some
> cases, canned foods, which are thoroughly cooked in the canning
> process, are less likely to contain bacterial pathogens. Frozen foods
> allow people to have foods that would not otherwise be available at a
> reasonable cost in their region, and there is no significant
> difference in nutritional value. Sorry to burst your bubble, but the
> level of nutritional discussion in this newsgroup goes well beyond
> "natural is best."

guess you didnt really read what i said. here it is again:
***this includes any packaged, canned, and frozen stuff that contains
additives, dyes, salt***

i have nothing against canned, jarred, packaged and frozen foods, i buy
them quite often. but i choose the product that has the least amount of
additives. take a can of chopped tomatoes for instance. i buy the one
that has *no salt added*. when i buy meat or milk, i do not want a
product that has been pumped full of hormones and antibiotics, before
it reaches me, the end consumer.

its all a matter of choice tho. and it depends where you live also, and
your food budget, and the availability of certain products.



>
> >when cooking, use only cold pressed olive oil, or a non-gmo
> >non-hydrogenated spread, and no need to cut back here a lot. your body
> >needs fat, but it needs the right kind of fat.
>
> Olive oil, particularly extra-virgin, is not suitable for cooking at
> high heat.

yeah, i agree, it is not suitible for the *frydaddy* deep fat fryer.
but for grilling and sauteing, it is fine.


>
> >drop all sodas. diet sodas are worse than the ones with sugar.
>
> Why?

sodas are nothing but chemicals. if you want to feed yourself
chemicals, go ahead.

>
> >once your body gets over the confusion of not having to process the
> >crap you have been eating...
>
> Would you please provide a physiological explanation as to how that
> occurs?

April 17th 06, 06:35 PM
Myraide wrote:
> wrote:
> > Myraide wrote:
> >
> > > drop all sodas. diet sodas are worse than the ones with sugar.
> > >
> >
> >
> > How so?
>
> do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
> nothing but water and chemicals. the only redeaming thing about a real
> soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar high. at
> least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.
>
> you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals. drink water. or a
> pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide

Well it doesn't even have real sugar anymore. Just high fructose corn
syrup. When high fructose corn syrup breaks down in the intestine, we
once again find near equal amounts of glucose and fructose entering the
bloodstream. As covered in recent newsletters, the fructose
short-circuits the glycolytic pathway for glucose. This leads to all
the problems associated with sucrose. In addition, HFCS seems to be
generating a few of its own problems, epidemic obesity being one of
them. Fructose does not stimulate insulin production and also fails to
increase "leptin" production, a hormone produced by the body's fat
cells. Both of these act to turn off the appetite and control body
weight. Also, fructose does not suppress ghrelin, a hormone that works
to increase hunger.

Myraide
April 17th 06, 06:45 PM
wrote:
> Myraide wrote:
> > wrote:
> > > Myraide wrote:
> > >
> > > > drop all sodas. diet sodas are worse than the ones with sugar.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > How so?
> >
> > do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
> > nothing but water and chemicals. the only redeaming thing about a real
> > soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar high. at
> > least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.
> >
> > you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals. drink water. or a
> > pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide
>
> Well it doesn't even have real sugar anymore. Just high fructose corn
> syrup. When high fructose corn syrup breaks down in the intestine, we
> once again find near equal amounts of glucose and fructose entering the
> bloodstream. As covered in recent newsletters, the fructose
> short-circuits the glycolytic pathway for glucose. This leads to all
> the problems associated with sucrose. In addition, HFCS seems to be
> generating a few of its own problems, epidemic obesity being one of
> them. Fructose does not stimulate insulin production and also fails to
> increase "leptin" production, a hormone produced by the body's fat
> cells. Both of these act to turn off the appetite and control body
> weight. Also, fructose does not suppress ghrelin, a hormone that works
> to increase hunger.

its been so long since i have bot soda i had to look at the ingredients
on a can this weekend. Hansens *natural soda* contained high frutcose
corn syrup. the diet Hansens contained sucralose (splenda). its all
junk. i found this article today and posted it in another ng. myraide
..........................
this whole thing is so sad. it used to be that seeing someone who was
really obese out in public was somewhat of a rarity. that is unless you
were in an all you can eat restaurant. but now i am just blown away by
all the REALLY big people you see, men and women and kids alike. i read
that size 14 is the average size for american women. and when you see
someone that is a size fourteen they are really not all that big now.

anyway, i see this as being a huge drain on an already overburdened
health system. along with all the illegals taking advantage of *free*
health care, and the insurance companies gouging the people who
actually pay for health insurance, it is a disaster in the making.
myraide

Posted on Sun, Apr. 16, 2006

Obesity finds niche in American marketing

DEBORAH HASTINGS
Associated Press

NEW YORK - From the cradle to the grave and most points between,
obesity has found its niche in American marketing. Make that a wide
berth.

Baby seats, doorways and caskets are but a few examples from a long
list of life's accouterments that are getting much bigger to
accommodate much bigger people. There are also vacation resorts for
those embarrassed to be seen in a bathing suit.

At Freedom Paradise on Mexico's Yucatan peninsula, the chairs are wider
and without arms, to prevent getting stuck; the beds are king-sized and
reinforced, to prevent collapsing; and the beach is private and
secluded, to prevent gawking and staring.

"You should not be embarrassed by how big you are," said William
Fabrey, whose online business "Amplestuff" offers larger versions of
everyday things from umbrellas to footstools. "You can't just yell at
someone and tell them to lose weight. You're already dealing with
people who think they have no worth.

"They still have to sit down on a chair that doesn't collapse," he
said.

Like others in this small but growing group of businesses, Fabrey
started his company after discussions with an overweight friend. "She
was a big woman, and she said, 'There's got to be an easier way to get
through the day.' "

To make living large a little easier, Fabrey sells lotion applicators
and sponges attached to handles - enabling the user to reach all parts
of the body; handbooks on hygiene with tips on dealing with odor
problems, chafing and irritations caused by skin folds. His business
also provides links to physicians and medical services.

"We don't take any position on whether someone should lose weight,"
Fabrey said. "That's up to the person."

Seemingly every day, another study appears that shows the United States
is becoming a country of fat people. According to the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, more than 71 percent of men weigh too
much, along with about 61 percent of women and 33 percent of children.

As Americans grow in weight, their life expectancy becomes shorter - by
as much as five years, according to the latest national statistics -
more than the impacts of heart disease and cancer. Obesity is fast
approaching tobacco as the No. 1 cause of preventable death.

The price tag to taxpayers, according to the CDC, is a whopping $117
billion a year, a figure that some health experts dispute, claiming the
government numbers are based on faulty data. Not disputed, according to
obesity specialists, is the amount Americans spend trying to get
thinner - $33 billion a year.

U.S. Surgeon General Richard Carmona sounded a dire warning last month,
telling university students in South Carolina "obesity is the terror
within," and that unless people start getting thinner, "the magnitude
of the dilemma will dwarf 9-11 or any other terrorist attempt."

Such pronouncements help fuel criticism that catering to bigger people
really means throwing wide the door to death by overeating.

But for those who are overweight, who know full well how it feels to be
sneered at, laughed at, pitied and scorned, having a simple tool such
as a sponge on a stick, or a sturdy footstool that can bear up to 500
pounds, makes one feel a little more human. And a little less
demonized.

Joan Borgos weighed 350 pounds for 28 years, until she had gastric
bypass surgery and lost 200 pounds. She began putting out
LargeDirectory.com because there was nothing available "that didn't
look like a muu muu from Lane Bryant's," she said.

>From her home in Massachusetts, she lists clothing catalogs, bridal

shops (for gowns up to size 32), plus-size dating services, counseling
services, seat belt extenders and lingerie. She recently added listings
for teens, after desperate mothers told her they couldn't find stylish
clothes for their overweight adolescents.

Even toddlers have joined the overweight ranks, with car seat
manufacturers offering the "Husky," which is 10 pounds heavier and four
inches wider than the standard size.

"There are all kinds of theories that abound about why people are
getting heavier," said Borgos. "People are more sedentary, people eat
more junk food and get less exercise. I don't know what it is.

"But it's a constant level of stress to live as an overweight person.
You're always scoping out the environment, looking if you're going to
be able to fit. "

Kelly Bliss, a self-described "chubby chick" in suburban Philadelphia
offers "plus-size fitness and lifestyle coaching."

Which means, she says, encouraging overweight clients to exercise as
best they can, to eat healthily and to not focus on losing pounds.

"People cannot just stop being fat," she says. "It's prejudice when you
say a fat person does not need things to make them comfortable," she
says. "People crumble when you given them even more pressure on top of
a life that's already not working."

To make caring for the overweight ill easier, and to make patients more
comfortable, there also are specialized medical products for an
ever-growing clientele.

Treating the obese is called bariatric care, from Greek root meaning
weight. Providing it means hospitals are paying for wider beds, wider
wheelchairs, wider doorways, longer needles and bigger CT scan
machines. As well as larger gowns and extra-sized slippers.

And for the end of life's road, coffin makers have introduced new lines
with higher-gauge steel and widths of up to 28 inches, from the
standard 24.

In Indiana, the Batesville Casket Co. calls it "a little extra room for
life's final journey."

JMW
April 17th 06, 06:50 PM
"Myraide" > wrote:
>JMW wrote:
>> "Myraide" > wrote:
>> >Rob Doran wrote:
>> >> I am 49 yrs old and want to get some strength and perhaps even a little
>> >> muscle
>> >> definition.
>> >> I am 5 ft 7 and I weigh 215lb
>> >> My wife tries to hide the sugar bowl from me :-)
>> >
>> >sugar from the sugar bowl is the least of it!
>> >
>> >what you need to do is drop any and all processed foods from your diet.
>>
>> No. What he needs to do is reduce his energy intake below his energy
>> expenditure. Whether the food is "processed" or "natural" (both of
>> which poor terms), calories are calories.
>>
>> >this includes any packaged, canned, and frozen stuff that contains
>> >additives, dyes, salt, and anything corn. (corn is for fattening pigs
>> >for market)
>> >
>> >eat primal and natural. eat complex carbs with mimimal processing like
>> >whole wheat pasta and wild rice and steel cut oatmeal. eat lean meats
>> >(organic without the additives) and wild caught fish. lots of fresh
>> >fruit and veggies in season. fat free milk and yogurt. raw nuts.
>>
>> No. There is nothing inherently wrong with foods solely because they
>> are "packaged," and in many cases, they are safer that way. In some
>> cases, canned foods, which are thoroughly cooked in the canning
>> process, are less likely to contain bacterial pathogens. Frozen foods
>> allow people to have foods that would not otherwise be available at a
>> reasonable cost in their region, and there is no significant
>> difference in nutritional value. Sorry to burst your bubble, but the
>> level of nutritional discussion in this newsgroup goes well beyond
>> "natural is best."
>
>guess you didnt really read what i said. here it is again:
>***this includes any packaged, canned, and frozen stuff that contains
>additives, dyes, salt***
>
>i have nothing against canned, jarred, packaged and frozen foods, i buy
>them quite often. but i choose the product that has the least amount of
>additives. take a can of chopped tomatoes for instance. i buy the one
>that has *no salt added*. when i buy meat or milk, i do not want a
>product that has been pumped full of hormones and antibiotics, before
>it reaches me, the end consumer.
>
>its all a matter of choice tho. and it depends where you live also, and
>your food budget, and the availability of certain products.

Keep in mind that some of those "additives" (including salt) prevent
the growth of bacteria and other pathogens that will cause you a lot
more harm than the "additives" ever will.

>> >when cooking, use only cold pressed olive oil, or a non-gmo
>> >non-hydrogenated spread, and no need to cut back here a lot. your body
>> >needs fat, but it needs the right kind of fat.
>>
>> Olive oil, particularly extra-virgin, is not suitable for cooking at
>> high heat.
>
>yeah, i agree, it is not suitible for the *frydaddy* deep fat fryer.
>but for grilling and sauteing, it is fine.
>
>
>>
>> >drop all sodas. diet sodas are worse than the ones with sugar.
>>
>> Why?
>
>sodas are nothing but chemicals. if you want to feed yourself
>chemicals, go ahead.

Everything is a chemical. Water is a chemical. Just because a label
uses a chemical name that you don't understand or that has caused some
unjustified hysteria doesn't mean that it's "evil" or unhealthy.

Here's an example. If I mentioned monosodium glutamate (MSG), you
would probably tell me what a horrible poison it is. Except that's
bull****. The truth is that the healthy, no-salt canned tomatoes you
buy have about half a gram of naturally-occurring glutamate in just
four ounces. That's more than you would normally find dumped into a
Chinese dinner. The glutamate in your tomatoes is certainly a
chemical, and it has plenty of hysteria attached to it, but because it
occurs naturally, you wouldn't give it a second thought.

The all-natural-no-chemicals-added label is a great promotional tool.
Just keep in mind that, in many cases, it's no more meaningful than
most of the other advertising crap that one reads.

JMW
April 17th 06, 07:17 PM
wrote:
>Myraide wrote:
>> wrote:
>> > Myraide wrote:
>> >
>> > > drop all sodas. diet sodas are worse than the ones with sugar.
>> >
>> > How so?
>>
>> do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
>> nothing but water and chemicals. the only redeaming thing about a real
>> soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar high. at
>> least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.
>>
>> you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals. drink water. or a
>> pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide
>
>Well it doesn't even have real sugar anymore. Just high fructose corn
>syrup. When high fructose corn syrup breaks down in the intestine, we
>once again find near equal amounts of glucose and fructose entering the
>bloodstream. As covered in recent newsletters, the fructose
>short-circuits the glycolytic pathway for glucose. This leads to all
>the problems associated with sucrose. In addition, HFCS seems to be
>generating a few of its own problems, epidemic obesity being one of
>them.

One of the "junk science" studies supporting these findings was one
which used HFCS90. That stuff is used almost solely for maximum
sweetness with minimum bulk in instant drink mixes. Most of the
consumer products containing high-fructose corn syrup use HFCS42 or
HFCS55, which have approximately a 1:1 glucose-fructose ratio, just
like sucrose.

>Fructose does not stimulate insulin production and also fails to
>increase "leptin" production, a hormone produced by the body's fat
>cells. Both of these act to turn off the appetite and control body
>weight. Also, fructose does not suppress ghrelin, a hormone that works
>to increase hunger.

The study used to support this finding used pure fructose as 30% of
the daily calorie intake. Don't you think that's bit unrealistic?

April 17th 06, 07:37 PM
On 17 Apr 2006 09:35:18 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:

>do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
>nothing but water and chemicals. the only redeaming thing about a real
>soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar high. at
>least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.
>
>you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals. drink water. or a
>pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide

You are the dumbest idiot that ever posted here.

April 17th 06, 07:41 PM
On 17 Apr 2006 10:45:23 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:

>
>its been so long since i have bot soda

You morons are responding to someone so ****ing stupid they spell
"bought" as "bot"? Ignore the idiot.

Myraide
April 17th 06, 08:37 PM
wrote:
> On 17 Apr 2006 10:45:23 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:
>
> >
> >its been so long since i have bot soda
>
> You morons are responding to someone so ****ing stupid they spell
> "bought" as "bot"? Ignore the idiot.

hi marcie! what are you doing with your nose up my ass again huh?
myraide

Myraide
April 17th 06, 08:40 PM
wrote:
> On 17 Apr 2006 09:35:18 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:
>
> >do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
> >nothing but water and chemicals. the only redeaming thing about a real
> >soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar high. at
> >least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.
> >
> >you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals. drink water. or a
> >pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide
>
> You are the dumbest idiot that ever posted here.

marcie marcie marcie. time to trim your gerbils toenails. myraide

April 17th 06, 09:12 PM
On 17 Apr 2006 12:37:19 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:

>hi marcie! what are you doing with your nose up my ass again huh?
>myraide

See? I told you he was a dumbass. And you idiots are just as stupid to
reply to him.
Sorry there pal, I have the wrong equipment to be a "Marcie", although
John Williams dresses as a "Marcie" on sat nights when he hits that
bar called "The Ram Rod Club".

April 17th 06, 09:15 PM
On 17 Apr 2006 12:40:55 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:

>marcie marcie marcie.

According to everyone here, I'm Bill Bill Bill. See the gorgeous face
that's first on this site.
http://www.rustyiron.net/trollist.htm

Now, see what an embecile(SP4U) you are?

Myraide
April 17th 06, 09:21 PM
wrote:
> On 17 Apr 2006 12:37:19 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:
>
> >hi marcie! what are you doing with your nose up my ass again huh?
> >myraide
>
> See? I told you he was a dumbass.

i'm not a him, i'm a her. myraide

> And you idiots are just as stupid to
> reply to him.
> Sorry there pal, I have the wrong equipment to be a "Marcie", although
> John Williams dresses as a "Marcie" on sat nights when he hits that
> bar called "The Ram Rod Club".

Myraide
April 17th 06, 09:24 PM
wrote:
> On 17 Apr 2006 12:40:55 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:
>
> >marcie marcie marcie.
>
> According to everyone here, I'm Bill Bill Bill. See the gorgeous face
> that's first on this site.
> http://www.rustyiron.net/trollist.htm

ahhhh.....ok. my mistake.


>
> Now, see what an embecile(SP4U) you are?

no, but you do look like you got a gerbil up your ass. <snort> myraide

April 17th 06, 09:55 PM
JMW wrote:
> wrote:
> >Myraide wrote:
> >> wrote:
> >> > Myraide wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > drop all sodas. diet sodas are worse than the ones with sugar.
> >> >
> >> > How so?
> >>
> >> do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
> >> nothing but water and chemicals. the only redeaming thing about a real
> >> soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar high. at
> >> least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.
> >>
> >> you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals. drink water. or a
> >> pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide
> >
> >Well it doesn't even have real sugar anymore. Just high fructose corn
> >syrup. When high fructose corn syrup breaks down in the intestine, we
> >once again find near equal amounts of glucose and fructose entering the
> >bloodstream. As covered in recent newsletters, the fructose
> >short-circuits the glycolytic pathway for glucose. This leads to all
> >the problems associated with sucrose. In addition, HFCS seems to be
> >generating a few of its own problems, epidemic obesity being one of
> >them.
>
> One of the "junk science" studies supporting these findings was one
> which used HFCS90. That stuff is used almost solely for maximum
> sweetness with minimum bulk in instant drink mixes. Most of the
> consumer products containing high-fructose corn syrup use HFCS42 or
> HFCS55, which have approximately a 1:1 glucose-fructose ratio, just
> like sucrose.
>
> >Fructose does not stimulate insulin production and also fails to
> >increase "leptin" production, a hormone produced by the body's fat
> >cells. Both of these act to turn off the appetite and control body
> >weight. Also, fructose does not suppress ghrelin, a hormone that works
> >to increase hunger.
>
> The study used to support this finding used pure fructose as 30% of
> the daily calorie intake. Don't you think that's bit unrealistic?

No. 30% is not unrealistic with the crap most people eat today.

Fructose appears to convert to fat more readily than glucose because of
the ease with which the carbon skeleton of fructose can form the
backbone for precursors of long-chain fatty acids

April 17th 06, 10:51 PM
On 17 Apr 2006 13:24:14 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:

>no, but you do look like you got a gerbil up your ass. <snort> myraide

And what is wrong with that? If you get the right one, it can be very
enlightening.

April 17th 06, 10:52 PM
On 17 Apr 2006 13:21:41 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:

>i'm not a him, i'm a her. myraide

Is that an "internet her" or like a "reality her"?

Hank
April 18th 06, 01:56 AM
Stephen N. wrote:

> Let's go back to the good old days people when people ate only organic
> foods without any 'additives' and died at age 30 of natural causes.

It was probably the clean air and water that killed 'em....



-

http://911research.wtc7.net
http://www.st911.org



Here's what happens to steel framed buildings exposed
to raging infernos for hours on end.

http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html

On 9-11-01, WTC7, a 47 story steel framed building, which
had only small, random fires, dropped in perfect symmetry
at near free fall speed as in a perfectly executed controlled
demolition.

http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/videos.html
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
http://wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm


"You're doin' a heckuva job, Brownie!" - bu$h, a few days
before his FEMA chief, Micheal Brown was forced to resign
because of his gross incompetence.

"The tools that enable Cuba to save lives and preserve
human dignity during hurricanes are socialist values
and organization." - Dr. W.T. Whitney Jr

Ever wonder who benefits from the 150 MILLION
U.S. taxpayer dollars spent each DAY in Iraq?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0223-08.htm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=21

"They are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And
there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to
take... men with blind hatred and armed with lethal weapons
who are capable of any atrocity... they respect no laws of
warfare or morality."
-bu$h describing his own illegal invasion of Iraq.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/
http://www.truthout.org/
http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
http://counterpunch.org/
http://responsiblewealth.org/

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things
that matter." -- Martin Luther King Jr.

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is
not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."
-- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)

Don't let bu$h do to the United States what his very close
friend and top campaign contributor, Ken Lay, did to Enron...

JMW
April 18th 06, 02:32 AM
wrote:
>JMW wrote:
>> wrote:
>> >Myraide wrote:
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Myraide wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > drop all sodas. diet sodas are worse than the ones with sugar.
>> >> >
>> >> > How so?
>> >>
>> >> do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
>> >> nothing but water and chemicals. the only redeaming thing about a real
>> >> soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar high. at
>> >> least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.
>> >>
>> >> you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals. drink water. or a
>> >> pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide
>> >
>> >Well it doesn't even have real sugar anymore. Just high fructose corn
>> >syrup. When high fructose corn syrup breaks down in the intestine, we
>> >once again find near equal amounts of glucose and fructose entering the
>> >bloodstream. As covered in recent newsletters, the fructose
>> >short-circuits the glycolytic pathway for glucose. This leads to all
>> >the problems associated with sucrose. In addition, HFCS seems to be
>> >generating a few of its own problems, epidemic obesity being one of
>> >them.
>>
>> One of the "junk science" studies supporting these findings was one
>> which used HFCS90. That stuff is used almost solely for maximum
>> sweetness with minimum bulk in instant drink mixes. Most of the
>> consumer products containing high-fructose corn syrup use HFCS42 or
>> HFCS55, which have approximately a 1:1 glucose-fructose ratio, just
>> like sucrose.
>>
>> >Fructose does not stimulate insulin production and also fails to
>> >increase "leptin" production, a hormone produced by the body's fat
>> >cells. Both of these act to turn off the appetite and control body
>> >weight. Also, fructose does not suppress ghrelin, a hormone that works
>> >to increase hunger.
>>
>> The study used to support this finding used pure fructose as 30% of
>> the daily calorie intake. Don't you think that's bit unrealistic?
>
>No. 30% is not unrealistic with the crap most people eat today.

That would be equivalent to a diet where 50-60% of energy comes from
pure sucrose or HFCS. Nobody would assume that's healthy. That's a
level of consumption well beyond the current hysteria being created
around fructose.

The point is that adding substantial portions of pure fructose or
HFCS90 to a diet, in a form that is very quickly absorbed, does not
reflect normal dietary intake, and it yields junk science, which may
well be the intent of the researchers in the first place.

>Fructose appears to convert to fat more readily than glucose because of
>the ease with which the carbon skeleton of fructose can form the
>backbone for precursors of long-chain fatty acids

And by the same token, fructose is much less insulinogenic than
glucose, so it is less likely to cause the signaling to store fat.

The bottom line is that the vast majority of HFCS products are not
different from products containing the same amount of sucrose, i.e.,
good old table sugar. The recent demonization of the word "fructose"
(as opposed to the 1970s and 1980s, when it was a good word, and much
preferable to sucrose), is just another popular hysteria. The same
cautions that have always applied to "sugar" are equally applicable to
HFCS. Nothing more, nothing less.

JMW
April 18th 06, 02:40 AM
"Myraide" > wrote:
wrote:
>> On 17 Apr 2006 09:35:18 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:
>>
>> >do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
>> >nothing but water and chemicals. the only redeaming thing about a real
>> >soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar high. at
>> >least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.
>> >
>> >you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals. drink water. or a
>> >pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide
>>
>> You are the dumbest idiot that ever posted here.
>
>marcie marcie marcie. time to trim your gerbils toenails. myraide

Sorry, princess, but that ain't Marcie. That's Bill. See him here:

http://www.rustyiron.net/trollist.htm

It also has hints on how to make him disappear, but as long as you're
posting through Google Groups, you're stuck with him.

JMW
April 18th 06, 03:15 AM
"Myraide" > wrote:
>
wrote:
>> On 17 Apr 2006 12:40:55 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:
>>
>> >marcie marcie marcie.
>>
>> According to everyone here, I'm Bill Bill Bill. See the gorgeous face
>> that's first on this site.
>> http://www.rustyiron.net/trollist.htm
>
>ahhhh.....ok. my mistake.
>
>> Now, see what an embecile(SP4U) you are?
>
>no, but you do look like you got a gerbil up your ass. <snort> myraide

Pretty soon he'll be graduating to ferrets.

Myraide
April 18th 06, 04:00 AM
wrote:
> On 17 Apr 2006 13:21:41 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:
>
> >i'm not a him, i'm a her. myraide
>
> Is that an "internet her" or like a "reality her"?

a reality her. a real girl. myraide

Myraide
April 18th 06, 04:04 AM
JMW wrote:
> "Myraide" > wrote:
> wrote:
> >> On 17 Apr 2006 09:35:18 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:
> >>
> >> >do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
> >> >nothing but water and chemicals. the only redeaming thing about a real
> >> >soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar high. at
> >> >least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.
> >> >
> >> >you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals. drink water. or a
> >> >pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide
> >>
> >> You are the dumbest idiot that ever posted here.
> >
> >marcie marcie marcie. time to trim your gerbils toenails. myraide
>
> Sorry, princess, but that ain't Marcie.

well marcie is really Mark, a guy. and i thought he was marcie cos
marcie faked my email before and posted as me also.

> That's Bill. See him here:

yes, he was quick to point out to me who he was and posted this link.

>
> http://www.rustyiron.net/trollist.htm
>
> It also has hints on how to make him disappear, but as long as you're
> posting through Google Groups, you're stuck with him.

i'll throw him a crumb now and then. :) myraide

David Cohen
April 18th 06, 07:24 AM
"Myraide" > wrote
> JMW wrote:
>> "Myraide" > wrote:
>> wrote:
>> >> On 17 Apr 2006 09:35:18 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
>> >> >nothing but water and chemicals. the only redeaming thing about a
>> >> >real
>> >> >soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar high.
>> >> >at
>> >> >least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.
>> >> >
>> >> >you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals. drink water. or a
>> >> >pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide
>> >>
>> >> You are the dumbest idiot that ever posted here.
>> >
>> >marcie marcie marcie. time to trim your gerbils toenails. myraide
>>
>> Sorry, princess, but that ain't Marcie.
>
> well marcie is really Mark, a guy. and i thought he was marcie cos
> marcie faked my email before and posted as me also.
>
>> That's Bill. See him here:
>
> yes, he was quick to point out to me who he was and posted this link.
>
>>
>> http://www.rustyiron.net/trollist.htm
>>
>> It also has hints on how to make him disappear, but as long as you're
>> posting through Google Groups, you're stuck with him.
>
> i'll throw him a crumb now and then. :)

Then you will be ignored or killfiled. Bye.

David
>

JMW
April 18th 06, 07:29 AM
"David Cohen" > wrote:
>"Myraide" > wrote
>> JMW wrote:
>>> "Myraide" > wrote:
>>> wrote:
>>> >> On 17 Apr 2006 09:35:18 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
>>> >> >nothing but water and chemicals. the only redeaming thing about a
>>> >> >real
>>> >> >soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar high.
>>> >> >at
>>> >> >least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals. drink water. or a
>>> >> >pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide
>>> >>
>>> >> You are the dumbest idiot that ever posted here.
>>> >
>>> >marcie marcie marcie. time to trim your gerbils toenails. myraide
>>>
>>> Sorry, princess, but that ain't Marcie.
>>
>> well marcie is really Mark, a guy. and i thought he was marcie cos
>> marcie faked my email before and posted as me also.
>>
>>> That's Bill. See him here:
>>
>> yes, he was quick to point out to me who he was and posted this link.
>>
>>>
>>> http://www.rustyiron.net/trollist.htm
>>>
>>> It also has hints on how to make him disappear, but as long as you're
>>> posting through Google Groups, you're stuck with him.
>>
>> i'll throw him a crumb now and then. :)
>
>Then you will be ignored or killfiled. Bye.

Good point. A few crumbs here and there is how cockroaches survive.

April 18th 06, 08:06 AM
On 17 Apr 2006 20:04:32 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:

>
>JMW wrote:
>> "Myraide" > wrote:
>> wrote:
>> >> On 17 Apr 2006 09:35:18 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
>> >> >nothing but water and chemicals. the only redeaming thing about a real
>> >> >soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar high. at
>> >> >least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.
>> >> >
>> >> >you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals. drink water. or a
>> >> >pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide
>> >>
>> >> You are the dumbest idiot that ever posted here.
>> >
>> >marcie marcie marcie. time to trim your gerbils toenails. myraide
>>
>> Sorry, princess, but that ain't Marcie.
>
>well marcie is really Mark, a guy. and i thought he was marcie cos
>marcie faked my email before and posted as me also.
>
>> That's Bill. See him here:
>
>yes, he was quick to point out to me who he was and posted this link.
>
>>
>> http://www.rustyiron.net/trollist.htm
>>
>> It also has hints on how to make him disappear, but as long as you're
>> posting through Google Groups, you're stuck with him.
>
>i'll throw him a crumb now and then. :) myraide

Now I'll throw you one: these dumbasses don't even know my real name,
where I live, or anything else aboiut me.

April 18th 06, 08:07 AM
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 22:15:00 -0400, JMW
> wrote:

>Pretty soon he'll be graduating to ferrets.

Oh Johhny, you old shirtcocker you...

April 18th 06, 08:08 AM
On 17 Apr 2006 20:00:06 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:

>a reality her. a real girl. myraide

Hmm, well pics will prove it. Naked of course, unless you are over
150lbs, in which case I'll take your word for it.

David Cohen
April 18th 06, 09:26 AM
"JMW" > wrote
> "David Cohen" > wrote:
>>"Myraide" > wrote
>>> JMW wrote:
>>>> "Myraide" > wrote:
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >> On 17 Apr 2006 09:35:18 -0700, "Myraide" > wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> >do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
>>>> >> >nothing but water and chemicals. the only redeaming thing about a
>>>> >> >real
>>>> >> >soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar
>>>> >> >high.
>>>> >> >at
>>>> >> >least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals. drink water. or a
>>>> >> >pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide
>>>> >>
>>>> >> You are the dumbest idiot that ever posted here.
>>>> >
>>>> >marcie marcie marcie. time to trim your gerbils toenails. myraide
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, princess, but that ain't Marcie.
>>>
>>> well marcie is really Mark, a guy. and i thought he was marcie cos
>>> marcie faked my email before and posted as me also.
>>>
>>>> That's Bill. See him here:
>>>
>>> yes, he was quick to point out to me who he was and posted this link.
>>>
>>>> http://www.rustyiron.net/trollist.htm
>>>>
>>>> It also has hints on how to make him disappear, but as long as you're
>>>> posting through Google Groups, you're stuck with him.
>>>
>>> i'll throw him a crumb now and then. :)
>>
>>Then you will be ignored or killfiled. Bye.
>
> Good point. A few crumbs here and there is how cockroaches survive.

As a former exterminator who made a pretty good living as the result of,
among other things, cochroaches, I would like to vehemently protest your
unfair comparison.

Cochroaches are valuable creatures who recycle organic matter, serve as a
food source for birds and other animals, and make exterminators a pretty
good living. There was no need to insult them.

David

spodosaurus
April 18th 06, 02:54 PM
Myraide wrote:
> wrote:
>
>>Myraide wrote:
>>
>>
>>>drop all sodas. diet sodas are worse than the ones with sugar.
>>>
>>
>>
>>How so?
>
>
> do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
> nothing but water and chemicals.

You are nothing but water and chemicals you ****tard. Dog give me
strength to put up with this ****wits that couldn't sit through their
high school chemistry class without being excused to go to the toilets
three times because all the ball and stick models got them hot and
bothered. Do you think a carbon atom in a molecule of a sweetener in a
can of diet soda is different from a carbon atom in the amino acid in
your body that that sweetener is made from?

> the only redeaming thing about a real
> soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar high. at
> least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.
>
> you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals.

No, you're a confused and ignorant ****stick that spews forth giz and
needs to wipe your snotty end. If you make an amino acid from building
blocks in the lab and extract that same amino acid from a plant that
used the same building blocks to make it that the one created by you is
somehow a 'chemical' and the one created by the plant isn't? Please buy
into the other BS out there and stop getting your tetanus boosters.
You'll do us all a favour.

> drink water. or a
> pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide
>

Oh **** no! Water is a chemical made of hydrogen and oxygen! Get those
two together and they make rocket fuel! How the hell can you advocate
drinking rocket fuel???? You're a ****ing psycho.
















PS- I held back for months now...months...I don't think I've used the
***** words in all that time...but really...REALLY - can you blame me on
this one?

spodosaurus
April 18th 06, 05:44 PM
Myraide wrote:
> spodosaurus wrote:
>
> (snip all the spewing)
>
> **** is water and chemicals too. did that toilet session feel good?
> myraide
>

Is that the best you can do? Run away and curl up with your festering
ignorance you shameful little git? Try addressing some of the points. I
would have made them more diplomatically if you weren't one of those
wastes of skin that CHOOSES ignorance and then tries to recruit others
into your stinking little suppurating anus of a life. It's cretins like
you that make me wonder why aliens would bother visiting this little
planet when there obviously is only intelligence in less than 2.5% of
the dominant species. (Hint: you're in the other 97.5%, so enjoy the
innovations and comfortable life brought to you by the organic chemists
whose icky chemical products you use every bloody day you weeping little
pustule)

JMW
April 18th 06, 06:21 PM
spodosaurus > wrote:
>Myraide wrote:
>> spodosaurus wrote:
>>
>> (snip all the spewing)
>>
>> **** is water and chemicals too. did that toilet session feel good?
>> myraide
>>
>
>Is that the best you can do? Run away and curl up with your festering
>ignorance you shameful little git? Try addressing some of the points. I
>would have made them more diplomatically if you weren't one of those
>wastes of skin that CHOOSES ignorance and then tries to recruit others
>into your stinking little suppurating anus of a life. It's cretins like
>you that make me wonder why aliens would bother visiting this little
>planet when there obviously is only intelligence in less than 2.5% of
>the dominant species. (Hint: you're in the other 97.5%, so enjoy the
>innovations and comfortable life brought to you by the organic chemists
>whose icky chemical products you use every bloody day you weeping little
>pustule)

Sounds like Ari's in a particularly bad mood today.

April 18th 06, 06:54 PM
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 13:21:53 -0400, JMW
> wrote:

>
>Sounds like Ari's in a particularly bad mood today.

When is that piece of turd going to croak? We're going to have a
"Croaking-off party" when the dickhead goes.

spodosaurus
April 18th 06, 07:09 PM
JMW wrote:
> spodosaurus > wrote:
>
>>Myraide wrote:
>>
>>>spodosaurus wrote:
>>>
>>>(snip all the spewing)
>>>
>>>**** is water and chemicals too. did that toilet session feel good?
>>>myraide
>>>
>>
>>Is that the best you can do? Run away and curl up with your festering
>>ignorance you shameful little git? Try addressing some of the points. I
>>would have made them more diplomatically if you weren't one of those
>>wastes of skin that CHOOSES ignorance and then tries to recruit others
>>into your stinking little suppurating anus of a life. It's cretins like
>>you that make me wonder why aliens would bother visiting this little
>>planet when there obviously is only intelligence in less than 2.5% of
>>the dominant species. (Hint: you're in the other 97.5%, so enjoy the
>>innovations and comfortable life brought to you by the organic chemists
>>whose icky chemical products you use every bloody day you weeping little
>>pustule)
>
>
> Sounds like Ari's in a particularly bad mood today.

Imagine being terminally ill in a world full of people trying to get you
to believe that they know the path to wellness and it lies in crystals
or faith healers or avoiding diet soda... Some days the acrid atmosphere
of MFW provides an almost perfect place to vent :-)


--
spammage trappage: remove the underscores to reply

I'm going to die rather sooner than I'd like. I tried to protect my
neighbours from crime, and became the victim of it. Complications in
hospital following this resulted in a serious illness. I now need a bone
marrow transplant. Many people around the world are waiting for a marrow
transplant, too. Please volunteer to be a marrow donor:
http://www.abmdr.org.au/
http://www.marrow.org/

April 18th 06, 07:30 PM
On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 02:09:08 +0800, spodosaurus
> wrote:

>Imagine being terminally ill in a world full of people trying to get you
>to believe that they know the path to wellness

Then you shouldn't have been taking it up the pooper.

April 18th 06, 09:49 PM
JMW wrote:
> wrote:
> >JMW wrote:
> >> wrote:
> >> >Myraide wrote:
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > Myraide wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > drop all sodas. diet sodas are worse than the ones with sugar.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > How so?
> >> >>
> >> >> do you ever read the labels on the products you buy? diet soda is
> >> >> nothing but water and chemicals. the only redeaming thing about a real
> >> >> soda is it has sugar in it, which does provide a natural sugar high. at
> >> >> least it has one *real* food source, but i don't drink either.
> >> >>
> >> >> you confuse your body when you feed it chemicals. drink water. or a
> >> >> pure juice product mixed with water. or beer. myraide
> >> >
> >> >Well it doesn't even have real sugar anymore. Just high fructose corn
> >> >syrup. When high fructose corn syrup breaks down in the intestine, we
> >> >once again find near equal amounts of glucose and fructose entering the
> >> >bloodstream. As covered in recent newsletters, the fructose
> >> >short-circuits the glycolytic pathway for glucose. This leads to all
> >> >the problems associated with sucrose. In addition, HFCS seems to be
> >> >generating a few of its own problems, epidemic obesity being one of
> >> >them.
> >>
> >> One of the "junk science" studies supporting these findings was one
> >> which used HFCS90. That stuff is used almost solely for maximum
> >> sweetness with minimum bulk in instant drink mixes. Most of the
> >> consumer products containing high-fructose corn syrup use HFCS42 or
> >> HFCS55, which have approximately a 1:1 glucose-fructose ratio, just
> >> like sucrose.
> >>
> >> >Fructose does not stimulate insulin production and also fails to
> >> >increase "leptin" production, a hormone produced by the body's fat
> >> >cells. Both of these act to turn off the appetite and control body
> >> >weight. Also, fructose does not suppress ghrelin, a hormone that works
> >> >to increase hunger.
> >>
> >> The study used to support this finding used pure fructose as 30% of
> >> the daily calorie intake. Don't you think that's bit unrealistic?
> >
> >No. 30% is not unrealistic with the crap most people eat today.
>
> That would be equivalent to a diet where 50-60% of energy comes from
> pure sucrose or HFCS. Nobody would assume that's healthy. That's a
> level of consumption well beyond the current hysteria being created
> around fructose.
>
> The point is that adding substantial portions of pure fructose or
> HFCS90 to a diet, in a form that is very quickly absorbed, does not
> reflect normal dietary intake, and it yields junk science, which may
> well be the intent of the researchers in the first place.
>
> >Fructose appears to convert to fat more readily than glucose because of
> >the ease with which the carbon skeleton of fructose can form the
> >backbone for precursors of long-chain fatty acids
>
> And by the same token, fructose is much less insulinogenic than
> glucose, so it is less likely to cause the signaling to store fat.
>
> The bottom line is that the vast majority of HFCS products are not
> different from products containing the same amount of sucrose, i.e.,
> good old table sugar. The recent demonization of the word "fructose"
> (as opposed to the 1970s and 1980s, when it was a good word, and much
> preferable to sucrose), is just another popular hysteria. The same
> cautions that have always applied to "sugar" are equally applicable to
> HFCS. Nothing more, nothing less.

Have you seen people lately? 50% of their calories from HFCS seems very
plausible.

And I still tend to agree that HFCS in someway allows the consumer to
eat a larger amount than they could good old granulated sugar. Maybe
its the GM natured of HFCS, who knows.