Mor

I didn't said it wasn't fun to watch, like in the Colosseum of ancient Rome we will watch anything and while million of likes seem like a lot, keep inmind that some puppies liking their balls get the same, all forgotten in the next day. Dying for our entertainment is stupid and make no mistake it is a question of when not if. This little game of Russian roulette, is becoming popular... and people will and already did die..

What I suggested is that (1) you should read what the WHO report actually says about "sugar", or at least looked up for secondary source before you jumped to dismiss it. Because the WHO was almost certainly familiar with your single 1997 article(assuming that it is actually notable) and other like it on the subject before they made their recommendation. (2) Since you are not an expert, making statements about a report you don't know about based on a single article from 1997, titled as "Metabolic and behavioral effects of a highsucrose diet during weight 1oss" claiming that it disprove the WHO recommendation or rather the two words about it that you picked from the bbc article, that you might want to look for secondary source. (3) That IMO your conclusion concerning this specific recommendation wasn't supported by that article. Btw, note that your article speaks about dietary fat, in fixed cal diet. While reduce soft drinks consumption will lower your cal intake(among other things). (4) Most importantly in your attempt to win, you quoted out the important part i.e. This basically one of the reason why I am against indirect taxes on food. Leave the food industry to their own devices and they will bury us in lobbying, bureaucracy and loopholes (i.e. through donations, sponsored researches or simply reclassifying their food products like nothing has changed) Which is why I am concerned with the bottom line, and leave the specifics to the medical experts... So while I don't mind discussing possible implementation and their cons/pros, we shouldn't let the trees get in the way of the forest... as I noted in my post above, first we make sure our basis are covered i.e. answer: 1. Is obesity a. preventable b. most serious public health problems? 2. Is the Government should address the most serious public health problem? 3. What is the most effective way to address this preventable issue and Who should pay for it?

I didn't said that it either A OR B kind of thing... and from the looks of it you made a huge mess of my comments(did you read older comments?) Anyway, the first stage of dealing with such a problem is by educational campaigns to encouraging people to change their lifestyles. Such campaigns are both costly and usually ineffective, because most hate change and being told how to live by some spam camping. For example with tobacco consumption, Words were like the wind, its not until prices came up that people started to feel it in their pocket that trend change came. However, like I pointed out before, tobacco abuse and obesity is like apples and oranges in this regard, best thing you can have is very minimal indirect taxes on something like softdrinks to bring awareness, otherwise it is not a matter of bureaucratic nightmare, but simply impossible to moderate consumption. I support direct taxes**, because I don't think that the government should tax food i.e. get into my dinner plate, and dictate what I should and shouldn't eat IMHO is a dangerous precedent, it take away my choice and impossible todo right, because it puts a manual labor who need more calories per day and some couch potato who can't shut his pie hole in the same spot. While direct taxes is the best way I can see to achieve the goal of Obese people bearing the full costs of their consumption and associated medical and social costs(think about as users fee), giving them an incentive to change(loose weight, feel better, gain money win win win) or continue as they want on their own dime. Al those mantras about correlation between obesity and whatever, for the most part are nothing but enabling people to get fat and shovel the responsibility to others. For example there is a correlation between poverty and bad teeth, so? Bottom line is that obesity ~similarly to bad teeth is preventable, it should be each person's responsibility to control himself(not to neglect himself), not wait for the government todo it for you with everyone's tax big money spending. Do you agree/disagree with the points I make, if so why and or what is your alternative? lets keep the discussion concerning specific implementation until after we can agree on that. ** 'direct tax' is another name for 'income tax', while 'indirect taxes' is'consumer tax' on products. I just thought that it might be useful to add this, just in case this terminology in previous posts confused anyone.

There is nothing wrong with having fun, unless you are having fun at the expenses of others. IMO trolls are usually guys who acting out on the internet, because they can't get "fun" anywhere usually reminding me of this old commercial:

That is tough, one of those situation where it is neither the road nor the detestation kind of things, but at least one day you might look at it and laugh.(or not) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TM2TAtOuM8U

That or I have a different point of view, in which discussion started several pages back and we have recycled several page loads of nay. The point was that he had no idea what the WHO suggested, jumping on quote from secondary source, written for casual reader, only so that he claim that he is backed by science. From what I read, the report never suggested that "sugar" is the culprit for obesity per se. It suggested that sugar consumption and obesity are related and called for discussion on how to encourage people to change their lifestyles, with tax on sugared drinks being suggested as one such solution, which is a long way from what that guy suggested this article bring.(which is pretty much accepted all around, other than some fringe) So yes I dismissed the way the article was used, as just another person on the interested fishing for things to reinforce his position. But if you wish me to further comment on it, I also dismiss the presented assumption of what the article means in regard to obesity, the syn used to link it to the WHO recommendations and the conclusion that was built on it. The are hundreds articles arguing which is the best method to loose weight, about nutritional aspects of various foods etc. Which is why I didn't bother with specifics, but the bottom line and speaking of changes in the past 50 years, today healthy diet becoming only more and more common recommendations by health professionals, even in seemingly unrelated orthopedics(e.g. for knees) As for this specific article, maybe to you it is important the sucrose content in diet, to me it was important that in all cases diet led to : "decreases in depression, hunger, and negative mood, and increases in vigilance and positive mood with time .. weight loss" Maybe I should have been more clear. The "it" part refers to the "issue" i.e. obesity, not "food". Maybe it contributed to your confusion concerning the poor (previous comment), other than this its all about personal responsibility. As for correlations between between poverty and obesity, it was never dismissed, it just doesn't change the bottom line. (previous comment)

That is a strawmen argument, no one think that 'tax it, is the answer to all problems, especially me. As far as I seen all the proposed solution require a lot of money(and of limited effectiveness). So either you think that money grow on trees or happy to chunk the cost/responsibility on everybody else. After all it is the easiest thing, instead of giving obese people a reason to work on themself, lets shovel it tax everyone. That not a 'positive' alternative, that is a spin on where the money should come from.

Yeah pretty much. I know it is silly of me to expect that 12+ hours book can be compressed into 1.5 hour + special effects, or that their version will look like or live up to my imagination(memory lane version is always better ). Still I always keep my hopes up. Usually the first clue that I am going to be sorely disappointed is when people feel they have to state up front that they have NOT read the book, I immediately brace myself for some bad news...(like in the movies when cops come to your house and ask you to sit down) Anyway, I finally seen the movie, knowing what I know it felt rushed/confusing/shallow, like a bullet points summary, missing all the details which made this story alive for me. So yeah, I didn't liked it. I guess you are lucky that you didn't read the book first.

The problem here is that instead of looking at this as the most serious public health problems of the 21st century, translating it into a discussion about what is the best possible solution, what we have is a lot of critics and nay sayers, which is always easier. Btw, not everyone think that taxing food is a good thing, including me (unless it suppose to be a very limited measure such taxing soft drinks). Because it is almost impossible to implement right, also IMHO few cents here and there are not as effective as the bottom line.(e.g. many obese are under the delusion that they don't eat that much, at least until they actually take a pen and paper and write down every little snack and look at the bottom line number) What I suggested before was: I'd recommend giving it a read. I wouldn't consider it to be written at too high of a level. I'd recommend paying attention to the context. It wasn't about the content of the link, but the cheap synthesis to the half assed quote from the opening post, make it seem like an attempt to say 'Hey science is behind me'... What, I implied is that further reading about what WHO recommendation actually were and understand their implication would be advisable. Also assuming that the world health organization are not made of bunch of clueless idiots, whose conclusion can be disproved by googling an article from 1997 is always a good idea...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zuSJ-Swu7g

Pretty much this. Perfect example how studios over milking ideas. I never seen Almost Human, what it is about? ( sound like another show about a group of people with superhuman abilities divided into two, good guys working for the government and bad guys who want to bring new world order.(or the opposite) -- p.s. in my previous post it suppose to be contamination not condemnation. I should really pay much much more attention to post and make sure I clicked the right option in the spell checker.

Tough night at the pub, any rude genital stories to share Also please tell me you are living in place where there no cloth donation "dumps"(like bottle recycling stations) or that you used one, otherwise I'd have to cough *Ass* into my virtual fist EDIT: I don't get the Sexy Putin meme He don't have the sexy looks, body, the smarts and or idolized for the roles played, lyrics preformed, etc.. Only thing I can thing of is the old rich and powerful dictator appeal :/

Quick summary: You can find list of events and the actual people behind those numbers/countries here.

ISIS seeks foothold along Jordanian-Iraqi border http://en.ammonnews.net/article.aspx?articleno=24137#.Uv39to29LCQ

pfft how many cynics... so what if it is commercialized, every holiday is, who cares? Its like "religious" holidays, I am atheist wtf do I care and yet I celebrate them all, in the end it is about the company and breaking the routine. Sure valentine can be about flowers purchase, just like birthdays can be another dinner. It can also be another opportunity to say or do something special, as long as it is about you and not some stupid contest it will be priceless. Think in retrospect how all the nerve racking crap at the start were so enjoyable Anyway here some wub wub for you guys and gals :wub:

outraged? no, I just found that Mars rovers and beluga caviar comparison amusing. Also the Olympics are about sportsmanship and flashing our differences to bring us closer, not some nationalistic hard on.. Some Russians problem is that they keep pointing finger all around, especially at the US(even though they stopped caring about you a long time ago). I think it is pointless to argue about this so I'd just leave this for your consideration (1) corruption list by country which is better then your coin analogy about "west vs east" (2) Censorship which might give a clue as to why journalist are upset with russia.(see the company in which you are in). Also I know that just like with those two ranks, by most Russia is almost a "third world" country, but do you really went so low as to compare yourself to Saudi Arabia?

I love climbing and like most I also made some stupid things, but those guys are just plain idiots.. Forget safety equipment, standing like that at the end, where one wind ghast and his mommy would have gotten a very different video.. I doubt that few likes on youtube would have consoled her. It reminds me those other "darefevils". The difference between a professional and teenage idiot is safety, sure couple might get few minutes of fame on youtube, but after that most will be remembered only if and when they make a big splash as they land.

I am pretty sure that couple of days is all you need, provided that you indeed rest and nourish yourself. During that time exercise is counter productive, your body is weak and poorelly adjust to various things such as heat changes, this is especially true if you get to the "sore" point(which is basically inflammation of the muscle) Also if you took anything to address your symptoms, as oppose to "riding it out", you might want to give it a couple of days more to make sure you are actually out of the woods. Btw, it goes beyond saying that this is the internet, and if you really want a medical professional advice just pick up your phone to your doc, don't trust someone you don't know.

uhh that road: "A report by opposition politicians Boris Nemtsov and Leonid Martynyuk calculated that the Russian state spent three times more on the road than NASA did for the delivery and operation of a new generation of Mars rovers. An article in Russian Esquire estimated that for the sum the government spent on the road, it could have been paved entirely with a centimeter-thick coating of beluga caviar." While every project has over costs, I think that a country in which a budget jumps from 12Billion to 51Billion, is in bad hands. Also you understand that the long list of things that you said they built with that money around sochi(5 hospitals?) is just a long list of things that haven't been built anywhere else..

Random link on the internet that I don't understand, thank god! I knew that World Health Organization was full of ****, my mama didn't raise no fool You understand that the linked BBC article about the WORLD health organization report was not written for medical professionals, it almost certainly focused on undeveloped countries that discover cancer as their life standards/expectancy go up(so no reason to get your panties in a bunch, The Man has bigger issue to worry about) and if it recommended anything concerning sugar it is very likely was the standard recommendation about surgery drinks(not news). Which is why I spoke in terms of general policy, after all there people who are far more qualified than me to define what exactly effects obesity.. Surely WHO has couple of them on staff..

yes!!!! that was the joke... that curling is so boring to me, that I can only imagine people like that ^ (who don't really care about the sports) enjoying it.. Honestly, I don't think I could have been more blunt about it. @Fighter, yeah I was referring to the banshee wailing..

so what?! this just a generic excuse not to do anything, that can be applied to anything with taxes in it or with little change to anything with crime in it... I don't know if you noticed, but through out this thread, I haven't mentioned cancer once. I discussed how to deal with obesity effects in general, not because one of its effects was now highlighted by the world health organization as well. The problem with obese people is like with some smokers, who think that it wont happen to them. After all they just smoke one cigarette not a whole pack, they have been at it for years and feel fine, all that stuff about erectile dysfunction is just to scare them, they can take the chance... Well Obesity health risk are not just for people who can't fit in a standard chair, some think that little abdominal fat is not a bigy, they are soo wrong. Also Obesity is not just cancer or heart attack(which is the most easy way to go), there is world of "fun" waiting for you...

Does it matter which sport seems more "manly"? last I checked I play for fun..

Tennis is hardly the biggest offender. uhm, I didn't said that tennis offended me.. only been grasping for reasons as to why would anyone like damn curling ( and that excessive grunting in tennis should be banned) if you think that this image is offending, you'd find a trip to the beach or most tv shows quite offending;)

In my book, there is only one reason why someone will highlight that he didn't read the book, and say it was mildly watchable and that he didn't regret watching it.... i.e. people who had read the book, felt very strongly about it being crap. ohh PLEASE say it isn't so !!!