torn asunder

i don't know how closely you track calories, or even if you do, but sometimes when people hit a plateau in wieght loss, they need to do something that's really counter-intuitive - for a couple weeks or so, you might want to try increasing your calorie intake by approx. 250 cal/day. if the plateau lasts for a while, you may want to try this, it can help to stimulate your metabolism!

precisely!!

lifting weights, and watching NCIS!

even selfish bastards who are only out for themselves are honoring their own personal belief that they're the most important thing in the world... personal honor in no way indicates altruism. i believe that "altruism" should be one of the main goals towards which people strive. working towards the betterment of all with the best intentions one can have. one can't control the outcome of one's actions, so one must strive to control *intent*.

as iv'e been saying all along, you can't make projections based on a dataset that's smaller than the time frame of the natural cycles involved. i'm glad to see things falling apart on this...

it would be involved, but i'm pretty sure you could!

(i didn't know anyone saw that post! i deleted it rather quickly...) anyway, as you can see if you peruse this thread in its entirety, i might as well live states away, as i'm not crushed on anywhere in it, hence *my* comment!

i'm still laughing at the "omg - shoes!" video someone posted in the "awful songs" thread...

just remember, if this happens and you can't find another way to get your meds, start to taper off early - you don't want to quit meds cold turkey if you can help it... as for me, i'm thinking today is going to be a *really* long day online...

i just ate three donuts - it's no wonder i'm still a chunk-ass...

i'm feeling irritated by people who think internet anonymizers actually make them anonymous...

< chris voice > that's AWESOME!! </ chris voice >

what are you inferring by that statement!?

HA!!!

you know, even if i did have crushes (and i just might have a few!), i would never say anything about them on the board, due to things like the "dirty old man harassment thread". just not my style... (not that there's anything wrong with that!)

i'm thinking that, due to a converstion i had earlier this evening, i'm now going to have to go out tonight...

this kinda bugs me, and makes me a bit suspicious - if this election was so important, why not wait for all votes to be in? a 3% swing in votes could have given a different result, and there was still 11% of the precincts uncounted. anyone think she got paid to concede!? (just a thought, i personally don't know enough to say. just seems odd to me)

i'll say this - if i wanted kids, i wouldn't care whose kids they were. as i don't want anything to do with kids in a parental role, i wouldn't date someone who had them, unless it was understood that there would be no *long-term* future. there's nothing wrong with enjoying one another's company for a time, but when two people's life goals are so diametrically opposed, there's really no sense in starting a relationship. (unless, as i said, it's discussed and well understood beforehand.)

eh, they did the same thing with obama's seat - it's just a way to refer to it in terms people will immediately get.

i'm feeling: 1) relieved - finally got a hold of my friend, and although things aren't good, they're ok, if that makes sense... 2) confused - i've no idea what's going on with a couple of derby bouts this weekend, and no idea how i can see both, if they're actually on the same day!? 3) hungry - i've been up for 3 hrs & haven't eaten yet!

here's a quick example - the caramel color used in soft drinks is either E150c or E150d, from what i could find. the caloric value of it ranges from 0.6 cal/g to 1.6 cal/g. using this approximation, you'll notice that there are roughly 2g/tsp. there are approx. 48 tsp/cup. 48tsp * 2g = 96g/cup. 96g * 1.5cal. = 144cal/cup... ...144 calories per cup!! not 1,000,000 calories - 144! this is the kind of sh*t that drives me up a wall!! i mean, if someone's going to write an article, they should at least do the research, you know?

well, as far as my post is concerned, my irritation was in no way intended to be pointed at the original poster, but at the author of the article - my apologies if it came across poorly. thing is, though, calling those things listed in the article as "facts" is giving them a lot of credit... there is so much misinformation out there, this article included, and not only am i tired of reading this online, i didn't want something based in misinformation and blatant fear-mongering to gain any kind of credibility here, so i took the time to find refuting information to post. once i started, i felt it would be irresponsible to not address everything in the post. sorry again, if it came across harshly towards the original poster - was not my intent.