torn asunder

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.

it's cool, i was just trying to make a point - people are quick to defend the politicians (or anyone, really) they like or are for, but also are just as quick to slam the ones they aren't, regarding the same issues. people blamed bush for a lot of shit that wasn't his direct fault and i seem to recall (i hope i'm not remembering incorrectly) you defending him, and yet now that a president/party you don't like is in office, you seem to be turning around and doing the same thing. i'm not condemning in any way, just pointing out that it happens, and "what's good for the goose..." & all...

heh, cuz bush *never* did that...

i'm sorry, but that's just an asinine statement (the statement in red, not you, gaf...) - obama isn't the one running the screening, or checking the lists, etc. he didn't fail to prevent it, the system did. i haven't researched it, but i'm willing to bet he didn't even set the system/department up. i'll bet he appointed someone to do it, how about you/people blame that guy, or the screeners, or the airline security, or any number of people who truly *did* fail. obama had nothing to do with the actual failure to notice/stop this guy. why the hell does everyone think that the guy who's president is capable of doing every single thing they accuse him of doing, or not doing? it's called delegation of authority... and aside from all that, there was a lot of investigation to be done regarding the security shortcomings... how much research does anyone think was really needed to see that an earthquake of that magnitude is devastating? it's two entirely different scenarios... sorry, i'm a bit irritated today.

first off, is this a copy of an article from somewhere? The most widely used varieties of high-fructose corn syrup are: HFCS 55 (mostly used in soft drinks), approximately 55% fructose and 45% glucose; Honey is a mixture of different types of sugars, water, and small amounts of other compounds. Honey typically has a fructose/glucose ratio similar to HFCS 55; sucrose is a disaccharide composed of glucose and fructose linked together with a relatively weak glycosidic bond; Cane sugar and beet sugar are both relatively pure sucrose. Sucrose is broken down during digestion into fructose and glucose. (wikipedia) i get really tired of the whole HFCS argument - honestly, there's very little difference between HFCS and table sugar. Mountain Dew 355 mL (12 U.S. fl oz) 54.5mg caffeine Drip coffee 207 mL (7 U.S. fl oz) 115–175mg caffeine Caffeine tolerance develops very quickly, especially among heavy coffee and energy drink consumers. Complete tolerance to sleep disruption effects of caffeine develops after consuming 400 mg of caffeine 3 times a day for 7 days. The LD50 (median lethal dose) of caffeine in humans is dependent on weight and individual sensitivity and estimated to be about 150 to 200 milligrams per kilogram of body mass, roughly 80 to 100 cups of coffee for an average adult taken within a limited time frame that is dependent on half-life. (wikipedia) overdose on caffeine!? did anyone really research this article? Like many other peptides, aspartame may hydrolyze (break down) into its constituent amino acids under conditions of elevated temperature or high pH. (Aspartame is the methyl ester of the dipeptide of the natural amino acids L-aspartic acid and L-phenylalanine. Under strongly acidic or alkaline conditions, aspartame may generate methanol by hydrolysis. Under more severe conditions, the peptide bonds are also hydrolyzed, resulting in the free amino acids.[7]) The stability when dissolved in water depends markedly on pH. At room temperature, it is most stable at pH 4.3, where its half-life is nearly 300 days. At pH 7, however, its half-life is only a few days. Most soft-drinks have a pH between 3 and 5, where aspartame is reasonably stable. In products that may require a longer shelf life, such as syrups for fountain beverages, aspartame is sometimes blended with a more stable sweetener, such as saccharin.[10] The metabolism of aspartame does not damage the body because: (a) the quantity of methanol produced is too small to disrupt normal physiological processes;[61] (b) methanol and formaldehyde are natural by-products of human metabolism and are safely processed by various enzymes;[61] © there is more methanol in some natural fruit juices and alcoholic beverages than is derived from aspartame ingestion;[61][64] and (d) even large doses of pure methanol have been shown in non-human primate studies to lead to ample accumulation of formic acid (as formate), while no formaldehyde was detected.[65] (wikipedia) btw, this article can't even name the additive correctly? "ascertain" is most certainly not "aspartame", unless i'm misunderstanding the section title purpose... Caramel color is one of the oldest and most widely-used food colorings, and is found in almost every kind of industrially produced food, including: batters, beer, brown bread, buns, chocolate, cookies, cough drops, dark liquor such as brandy rum, beer and whisky, chocolate-flavored flour-based confectionery, coatings, custards, decorations, fillings and toppings, potato chips, dessert mixes, doughnuts, fish and shellfish spreads, frozen desserts, Fruit preserves, glucose tablets, gravy browning, ice cream, pickles, sauces and dressings, soft drinks (especially colas), sweets, vinegar, and wines. Soft drinks: These account for the largest portion of caramel color usage in the world. Single-strength caramel colors are used in colas, generally in concentrations of less than four grams per liter. Double-strength caramel color, which adds less than one calorie per liter of beverage (making it the industry preference for diet drinks), is used in concentrations of less than two grams per liter. what kind of scare-tactic propaganda is this?? cancer, MS, and bizarre behavior is due to *caffeine*? i've already addressed the caffeine issue above... However, a well-controlled clinical study by Heaney and Rafferty using calcium-balance methods found no impact of carbonated soft drinks containing phosphoric acid on calcium excretion.[4] The study compared the impact of water, milk, and various soft drinks (two with caffeine and two without; two with phosphoric acid and two with citric acid) on the calcium balance of 20- to 40-year-old women who customarily consumed ~3 or more cups (680 ml) of a carbonated soft drink per day. They found that, relative to water, only milk and the two caffeine-containing soft drinks increased urinary calcium, and that the calcium loss associated with the caffeinated soft drink consumption was about equal to that previously found for caffeine alone. Phosphoric acid without caffeine had no impact on urine calcium, nor did it augment the urinary calcium loss related to caffeine. (wikipedia) ...Coca-Cola contains less citric acid than does orange juice, and the concentration of phosphoric acid in Coke is far too small (a mere 11 to 13 grams per gallon of syrup, or about 0.20 to 0.30 per cent of the total formula) (snopes) 0.3% of 20oz soda = 0.06oz of phosphoric acid, which is hardly enough to do anything - the gastric acid in your stomach is far stronger than a soda... c'mon... not good for digestion? fructose and glucose are naturally occurring sugars, and sucrose is a combination of both fructose and glucose. it's not a good idea to have a high intake of either, but that's not because they're inherently bad... sorry, but this is a "no-shit-sherlock" moment for me. you mean that consuming sugar will increase my weight? see above... of course, pop is a nutritionally empty food. that doesn't necessarily mean it's is evil incarnate. sorry if i'm coming across poorly on this, but i get really irritated with the scare tactics posts/articles like this use. don't take everything you read at face-value - do some research & find out what's really going on, everyone!!

you might split this thread into two topics - it's an ideal candidate for it!

i'm thinking i should have been home 15 minutes earlier so i could have answered a phone call... :(

oooh! i know what it is!! it's...

worried - i got a very upsetting voicemail tonight, and got no answer when i tried to return the call. makes for a very difficult night of sleep...

why, yes... yes i do!!