it's funny that the westboro baptist church viewed as so outrageous and obviously stupid as to not even be worth mocking and now, over a decade later, bob is like "no, no, they have a point".

why does this community continue to tolerate this level of bigotry as if it was a disagreement over ice cream flavours?

I'm not suggesting you do it for your own benefit, but rather to see if the methodology in the study works, as I figured this would be much more productive than splitting hairs about the study details :-)

I think you may have also misunderstood the methodology, as it doesn't require non-exercise, it just says it doesn't play an important part of the weight loss. If you were to try this for a few weeks, you could still exercise, and you should still see your results mirror those of the study.

There's also nothing restrictive about it, you can eat any cuisine you want, it's just a matter of replacing a couple of ingredients to minimize the processed ingredients and animal foods.

E.g. beef burrito turns into a bean burrito. All the flavours are still there :-)

If your potatoes don't have flavour you're shopping at the wrong stores. Same if your potatoes have no colour like this.

A good potato should be a nice shade of yellow, and taste creamy.

Except that's not food, so actually no one ate food

Cereal Grains (Whole Grain Wheat (35.0%), Maize Semolina (28.6%), Wheat Flour), Sugar,
Glucose Syrup, Wheat Starch, Brown Sugar, Sunflower Oil, Vitamins and Minerals (Calcium, Niacin, Pantothenic Acid, Iron, Vitamin D, Folic Acid, Vitamin B6, Riboflavin), Fat-Reduced Cocoa Powder (1.2%), Salt, Icing Sugar, Cocoa Powder (0.5%), Natural Flavouring, Raising Agent: Sodium Bicarbonate, Acidity Regulator: Tripotassium Phosphate, Maize Starch.
https://www.nestle-cereals.com/uk/en/products-promotions/brands/cookie-crisp-brand/cookie-crisp

Rogue One was a different.... flavour... of trainwreck, with different problems. But yeah. It was pretty weak.

I'm not going to get into a fight about which flavour of trainwreck is the worst. R1 and TLJ both had a couple of cool scenes, but were both pretty terrible movies.

Clearly the next step for this system is to instantly determine each person's age, occupation and annual income, along with with a quick factoid or two to add flavour:

https://www.ubisoft.com/en-us/game/watch-dogs/

this must be BS? How about technical details. Does it grind the salt? can you put different salt in it (pink, sea salt etc).
As a cook this would be infuriating since you often keep adding pinches of salt until the flavour is right.
Also - monitor sodium intake. Again from a health point of view this is limited since it will only be salt that you added yourself to an individual portion. E.g if you make a family meal then your not eating all the salt that was dispensed.

Theres the media logos at the bottom of the page which shows A.V club. But if you search for it you get a hardly complimentary article http://www.avclub.com/article/goddamn-it-they-made-smart-salt-shaker-called-smal-254969

It must be one of these 'how far can we go with this' products

Your taste buds adjust within about a week, and things actually begin to taste better, because you can taste the flavours of the actual ingredients instead of just salt.

If you gradually ease off the salt, you never even notice (until you eat something that isn't salt reduced, and it will taste way too salty).


It's a lot easier than using a penis pump or popping viagra's later in life ;-)

I think a lot of people are down on American cheese based on its worst, cheapest variants. *Good* American cheese is, hands down, the best cheese for a cheeseburger. I mean, there's no debate there. It has a mild -- but not overwhelming -- cheesy flavour, and it has the perfect gooey consistency that melds with the beef in the best way possible.

http://www.seriouseats.com/2016/07/whats-really-in-american-cheese.html

"Really, Hillary is evil?"

Well, Bill, I suppose it depends on your definition of evil, doesn't it.

To me, voting for both the invasion of Iraq and the Patriot Act (twice!) is an absolute disqualifier. Like it used to be in '08 when HRC ran against Obama. Remember that one, Bill?

Now, looking at it from a country that had its leaders punished for waging a war of aggression, and rightfully so, Hillary meets my definition of evil. Her push for war in Libya, her immoral comments on the ghastly death of Gaddafi, her militaristic calls for a more robust foreign policy (aka war), her calls for a no-fly zone in Syria (aka war with Syria & Russia)... Bill, that shit is evil. And it's only the lesser of two evils because her opposition is Trump.

So spare me the horseshit. I don't even have to judge her economic policies which basically are the same flavour of neoliberalism as always, her hawkishness is enough evil for several lifetimes.

Ugh. Look, I don't like Trump. But however bad he is, comparing him to Hillary in terms of better/worse is like being forced to eat a sandwich made of pigeon turds or rat feces. They're both terrible. They're both sandwiches made of shit.

Being a better tasting shit sandwich doesn't change the shit sandwich from being a shit sandwich. You can try to mask the flavor with hot sauce or swiss cheese, but it's still a shit sandwich.

Hillary is an awful candidate. The only way she'd ever have a chance at winning it to be put up against someone as weak as Trump.

And vice-versa. Trump could never stand a chance unless his opponent was as disliked as Hillary.

But here we are. Shit sandwich vs. Shit sandwich.

Now, I'm not going to sit here and list reasons why Hillary is terrible. Google can offer plenty of criticisms of her---and to be clear, don't think I'm coming at this by suggesting that Trump is some kind of saint. I. Don't. Like. Him. But Trump is doing one thing right, that I don't see Hillary doing. He's engaging with the "deplorables" of the nation.

This doesn't make Trump less of a shit sandwich (Did I mention that I don't like Trump? I don't like Trump.) but it could be the difference between Shit Sandwich, and President Shit Sandwich. (Sorry!)

To explain where I'm coming from on this, see Johnathan Pie's rant on Brexit. Basically, the "Keep things as they are" campaign was dismissive of the "deplorables" of the nation. Look how that vote turned out.

The thesis of that rant is basically that for many people the Brexit vote boiled down to:

"If you've got nothing, why would you vote for things to stay as they are? At least with uncertainty, there's some hope that things might change."

Hillary, for many people, means "Maintaining the status quo." For this group, Trump is at least a different flavour of shit sandwich--which might just put him in the White House. (Sorry.)

...

Here's the link to J. Pie's rant:

http://videosift.com/video/Jonathan-Pie-on-Brexit

BULLSHIT. *waits for the jesus bomb* Oh, it was bullshit. Funny. Freaking Penn, you dick. lol!!!

Anyway, his first statement aside, isn't this how legit atheists have always thought? And by that I mean, atheists who practice what they preach and love other humans, as every mammal should. Shitting on belief systems but NEVER NEVER hating the actual person? That's how I function.

I always imagined it was simply the projections of the insecure haters of atheists that projected this perception that we hate Muslims. I never understood how atheism could mean anything other than love. That's why I became an atheist in the frickin' first place, because I realized God isn't loving if he could send people to hell. And from there it simply followed logically towards the absence of God.

I have friends from Malaysia and Iran who clearly CLEARLY have Islamic backgrounds -- but they're badass Americans and beyond that they're human goddamnit -- and I love them as much as I love my Jewish, Atheist, and Christian friends. I can't say that they aren't Muslim, because I don't want to assume anything and I don't want them to be in trouble if they aren't. But yeah, I love all my friends.

And you know what, I love bobknight and that piss flavoured cotton candy Trump thing, even though they both project hate onto us for being liberal. Honestly, I love you bob, and we aren't terrorists and neither is every Muslim. I love you -- even though you support America's terrorists, the police. And I love the police, despite my dislike of SOME (well, maybe MOST) of their views about the world. <3

Eat all of the cake you want, provided it's got little fat in it, it's made from wholemeal flour or oats, and most of the sweetness is from fruits/veges

Such as http://support.pcrm.org/site/MessageViewer?em_id=108396.0&dlv_id=122422

Even though the carrots and raisins will do a lot to suppress the insulin response from the added sugar, I'd still look at putting in less and less each time as it helps bring out the other flavours, and of course refined sugar has no nutritional value.


And I nearly forgot: BANANA NICECREAM! The more you eat the better.

@transmorpher

It's a little difficult to 'debate' your comment, because the points that you address to me are numbered but don't reference to specific parts of my post. That's probably my fault as i was releasing frustration haphazardly and sarcastically, and that sarcasm wasn't aimed at you. All i can do is try and sum up whether i think we agree or disagree overall.

Essentially everything is a question of 'taste', even for you. There's no escaping our nature, most of us don't drink our own piss, many of us won't swallow our own blood, almost all of us have a flavour that we can't abide because we were fed it as a child. So yes, our decisions are defined by taste. But taste is decided by the food that is available to people, within reasonable distance of their house, at a price they find affordable according to the society around them, from a range of food that is decided by society around them. Your average person does not have the luxury to walk around a high street supermarket selecting the most humane and delicious foods. People get what they can afford, what they understand, what they can prepare and what is available. Our ancestors ate chicken because of necessity of their own kind, their children are exposed to chicken through no fault of their own, fast forward a few generations, and thus chicken becomes an affordable, accessible staple. Can we reach a compromise here? It may not be necessary for chickens to die to feed the human race, but it may be necessary for some people to eat chicken today because of their particular life.

I don't like the use of the phrase 'if i can do it, i know anyone can'. I think it's a mistake to deal in certainties, especially pertaining to lifestyles that you can't possibly know about without having lived them. Are you one of the many homeless people accepting chicken soup from a stranger because it's nourishing, cheap and easy for a stranger to buy, and keeps you warm on the streets? Are you a single mother with coeliac disease, a grumpy teenager and picky toddler who has 20 minutes to get to the supermarket and get something cooking? Or one of the millions using foodbanks in the UK (to our shame) now? I don't think you're willfully turning a blind eye to those people, i'm not tugging heart strings to do you a disservice. Maybe you're just fortunate you not only have the choice, but you have such choice that you can't imagine a life without it. I won't budge an inch on this one, you can't know what people have to do, and we have to accept life is not ideal.

And within that idealism and choice problem we can include illnesses that once again in IDEAL situations could survive without dead animals, nevertheless find it necessary to eat what they can identify and feel safe with.

Yes, those damn gluten hipsters drive me round the bend but only because they make people think that a LITTLE gluten is ok, it makes people take the problem less seriously (see Tumblr feminism... JOKE).

I agree that we must look at what action we can take now - and that is why i keep reminding you that we are not in an ideal world. If the veganism argument is to succeed then you must suggest a reasonable pathway to go from how we are now to whatever situation you would prefer. My "ideal farm" description was just me demonstrating the problem - that you need to show us your blueprint for how we start again without killing animals and feeding everyone we have.

And on that subject, your suggestions need to be backed by real research, otherwise you don't have any real plan. "It's fair to say there is very little risk" is a nice bit of illustrative language but it is not backed by any fact or figure and so i'm compelled to do my Penn and Teller impression and call bullshit. As of right now, the life expectancy of humans is better than it has ever been. It is up to you to prove that changing the diet of 7 billion people will result in neutrality or improvement of health and longevity. That proof must come in the form of large statistical analyses and thorough science. I don't want to sound like i'm being a dick, but any time you state something like that as a fact or with certainty, it needs to be backed up by something. I'm not nit picking and asking for common knowledge to have a citation, but things like this do:

-- 70% of farmland claim
-- 'fair to say very little risk' claim
-- meat gives you cancer claim - i accept it may have a carcinogenic effect but i'll remind you so does breathing, joss-sticks, broccoli, apples and water
-- 'the impact to the planet would be immense' claim - in what way, and what would be the downsides in terms of economy, productivity, health, animal welfare (where are all the animals going to be sent to retire as of day 1?)
-- etc. etc.

Oh, and a cow might get its protein from plants, but it walks around a field all day eating grass, chewing the cud and having sloppy shits with 4 stomachs and enzymes that i don't have................. I'm a bit puzzled by this one... I probably can't survive on what an alligator or a goldfish eats, but i can survive on parts of an alligator or fish. I can't eat enough krill in a day to keep me going, but i can let a whale do it for me...?

Feminist icon? The superhero whose weakness is mild bondage sessions with men?

And regarding Gal Gadot and her "wrong body type", in today's world, the closest to an Amazon would be an MMA fighter like Gina Carano. I'd be fine with that but I also like Pretzel-flavoured ice cream.