*related= http://videosift.com/video/Natural-hypothyroidism-remedies
* ban2.0
Natural Thyroid Health
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_1C58UaO2A

*related= http://videosift.com/video/Natural-Remedies-for-Hypothyroidism
* ban1.0
Natural Thyroid Health
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_1C58UaO2A

*ban2.0
Natural Thyroid Health
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_1C58UaO2A

*related= http://videosift.com/video/Natural-Remedies-for-Hypothyroidism
*ban1.0
Natural Thyroid Health
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_1C58UaO2A

*ban
Natural Thyroid Health
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_1C58UaO2A

We've been on a bunch of dates
I weigh debates that this creates
And hate that state of forced introspection
We traded wit, we swapped some spit,
You fingered me a little bit
But we never really had a connection

You did nothing wrong, I have no excuse
Just my intuition telling me we shouldn't reproduce

I know I have to end it
But pretend to just suspend it
By contending that I'm busy all week
I let the foregone linger on
Text back with an emoticon
Withdraw from you by being oblique

Inside I know my tactics just delay it
But I'd do anything so I don't have to say it

I'll draw this out forever like it's Vietnam
Then one day I'll be gone like Bambi's mom Awww

Cause there's the right thing to do
Then there's what I'm gonna do
There's so much I should say
But instead... I do the fade away

Now I'm fading like chalk on a sidewalk
Or the polio virus after Jonas Salk
Like a Jewish guy at Sizzler on Yom Kippur
The Whig party post Millard Fillmore

The erection of a man on antidepressants
The cast of Diff'rent Strokes after adolescence
Reproductive rights below the Mason Dixon
Native Americans after the barter systems
Your thyroid gland after Hashimoto
The family in the Back to the Future photo
Yeah I fade away

We say that men are asshole who don't communicate
We revel in our victimhood and amplify our hate
We find ways to be indignant like it's a sport
Then dissect their malignance with the views we distort

The way men break up may be sloppy and terse
What they do is bad, but what we do is worse

We pretend to ourselves it's the nice thing to do
To let you down gently by just not ever telling you
And deep down we know it's the worst way to play it
But we are what we have... huge pussies

And women are hypocrites
Especially ones in comedy bands
We see your faults but not our own
Then we wonder why we're all alone

We fill you up with maybe's, excuses and stalls
But like a baby in China... it's better to have balls

Not the Good Wife type like Christine Baranski
So I'll pull out and leave like I'm Roman Polanski

Cause there's the right thing to do
Then there's what I'm gonna do
There's so much I should say
But instead... I do the fade away

Like Verbal Kint fading into Kaiser Soze
The rights in Arizona for a guy named Jose
Opportunities for a college grad
The love between your mom and dad
Gonna Peter out like a gay Cetera
Iranian relations since the Regan era
Black Nike sales after Heaven's Gate
Summer Camp attendance at Penn State
The name Adolph after World War Two
Like Debbie Gibson's pop career, Out of the Blue
Yeah I fade away

Cause I don't wanna get to know you
I just want to blow you... off

"Everything I've said about you can be covered by make-up and a lie about a thyroid problem."

*wtf boiling urine?

Also, Tc99m has a short half life so in a few days she'll just have a vial of "normal" concentrated urine.

No gloves for IV injection in Germany eh? Pertechnetate isn't specific for the thyroid, it also goes to kidneys, bladder, parathyroids, salivary glands. Presumably this test was for a thyroid nodule? In the US we would go for an iodine study because it's more specific.

Radioactive Thyroid has been added as a related post - related requested by deathcow on that post.

>> ^hpqp:

Not comparable; models are starved by the fashion industry ("either you're a twig or you're fired/not hired" starved), whereas I doubt the network is pressuring this woman to be overweight. It would still be totally wrong to send an email to a model telling her she shouldn't be on tv/a podium because she's unhealthily skinny; that's still a personal attack.
>> ^SDGundamX:
[...] I'm a bit disturbed at the idea that pointing out that someone is overweight is somehow now "bullying." Is pointing out that so-called "supermodels" are too skinny also bullying? [...]


Seriously? You'd be against someone telling a clearly underweight supermodel that she's a role model for millions of young girls who are dangerously trying to emulate her--some through purging and others through diet pill abuse? That's bullying the supermodel? How about when a sports athlete gets caught driving drunk or engaging in other unethical behaviors (say, sending unsolicited pics of his private parts to females). Am I bullying him by sending him an email telling him how millions of kids look up to him and he needs to think about how his behavior affects them?

As others have already aptly pointed out, this was a private email. His concern seems to be with the message she's sending young female viewers. The proper response would have been the one I mentioned above--replying to his email and smacking him down about how his conception of being a proper role model only considers appearance and nothing else. Instead she went all hysterical publicly. Over one email. If this guy was sending emails every week, or if she were getting these kinds of emails from a host of people regularly, I'd see the need to do what she did.

Now, you're right--some people's obesity is medically-induced (blood-sugar issues, thyroid problems, etc.) but for the vast majority of Americans it is a lifestyle problem--too many calories and not enough exercise. Just to be clear, I'm not saying these people (of which I am one) are lazy--I'm saying they've made a choice to prioritize things other than their health. That is indeed their right and they shouldn't be disparaged for that, but at the same time we shouldn't pretend that there aren't any consequences (both to the individual and society) to that choice. And we certainly shouldn't call people who point out those consequences "bullies."

Again, just my 2 cents though. You and I don't see eye-to-eye on lots of issues (Islam, male circumcision, etc.) so I don't really expect us to agree on this issue either.

>> ^scannex:

So your counter to the point of it being a behavior, is that it is term applied as the result of a series of behaviors which is a combination of over-eating and lack of exercise?
You must be kidding.
And sorry I have to put words in your mouth above, because aside from divine intervention I am not sure what mysterious factors cause one to be obese unless you are referring to genetic disorders/thyroid problems. Have fun finding a source on what % of obese Americans that covers.
It is behavioral, and its remedy is behavioral. I certainly will not say its an EASY behavior to modify (see previous arguments on leptin/dopamine), but you need to deal with it.
Also regarding what is impressionable you are simply incorrect. If you believe a child with two overweight parents that is the result of those parents having an idle lifestyle and providing garbage food for their kids isnt impactful youre dead wrong.
But here you go, some backup for that concept. From the AACAP
No one is advocating mocking is the right thing to do. And if you think this guys letter came from a place of hate or mockery I suggest you reread it. There really is no indication of that to me. It comes from a place of concern, even if that is misguided. You want to crucify this guy for trying to (perhaps poorly) encourage this woman to lose weight and that really isn't the right ethic either.

_{I realised why your comments annoyed me so much: they remind me of those MRA-holes who try to defend the missteps and/or bile of privileged/sexist people and then see them as being persecuted or "witchhunted". I can only hope I am wrong in seeing a connection.}

To the substance: you completely miss my point, go after strawmen, and then try to defend the unethical while falsely accusing the anchor and myself of persecuting a person (instead of criticising a... you guessed it, behaviour).

Yes, certain behaviour causes and/or aggravates obesity, but do you see her glamourously binge-eating junkfood while telling the news? Unlike a meth addict, there are plenty of overweight people who are overweight of no fault of their own. In fact, the example you give about obese parents having a higher chance of having obese children supports my point, not yours. Children of obese parents have a higher risk of being obese genetically, as well as environmentally, and that has nothing to do with imitating the parents' behaviour (but it's their fault, right? They should just exercise and not eat what their parents feed them, right?). Of course the parents who feed their children junkfood are responsible for their child's obesity, but what does that have to do with an overweight woman being on TV? Not to mention that even that can be more complex, since there are socio-economic factors, what with the US's terrible education system and the fact that its cheapest high-calorie food (i.e. what poor/hungry people will buy) is 98% corn-syrup (yes, I made that stat up, but the point remains). Finally, obesity can be a side-product of mental health issues / eating disorders (but then maybe you're the kind of ignorant douche who'd tell people with depression to just stop wallowing in self-pity and be happy; I hope not).

You go on in your second comment to, on your own admission, redefine what a behaviour is so it can suit your argument. Say the following phrase, out loud if need be, to realise how ridiculous your argument is:

"The woman on the TV is behaving/being overweight/fat/obese". See what I mean?

Finally, you accuse her of "wanting to crucify the guy". Did you even read my points 1) & 2) above (you know, the ones you ignored in your answer)? The "guy" is not being attacked (you'll note he has been left anonymous), what he is saying/doing is. His letter is being taken as an example to call out a certain kind of behaviour, one which is rampant in our society, and doing much harm. Whether his letter is a well-intentioned yet ignorant expression of misplaced concern (at best, and highly unlikely) or a surreptitious piece of condescending shaming (much more likely*) is irrelevant. It's anti-bullying month, and she's saying "people, don't do this, and here's why".

Your more recent comment is a perfect example of why what she's doing is of utmost importance:

the spectacle this woman made of herself for someone writing her a private communique over the internet does not warrant ANYWHERE near this attention.
She chose to shine a spotlight on something perfectly hidden, for the purpose of, I don't know... you tell me? To stop imaginary bullying (in her case explicitly here)? To not feel bad about being overweight? I really don't know anymore. Its a bizarre reaction to wantonly make a spectacle of someone suggesting you lose weight.

If what he said was not reprehensible, who cares if it's made public (note once again that no names are named)? Shaming people or projecting one's narrowmindedness on them is all fine, but shhh, don't shed light on it! It's just a private message on the internet, it does no harm! (because we all know that there is no bullying, shaming, sexism, etc. on the internet. Nuh-uh)

When only one side of an exchange says "shhh, don't tell anyone about this, it's private" you usually have a bad situation; and the fact that you would defend the letter-writer and his "right" to not have his error called out does not suggest anything good about your own mindset, either.

In conclusion, it is all the more to this woman's (and her husband's/colleagues') credit that she/they took a "seemingly" (to the thickest out there) innocent letter to expose this form of abuse; a harmful remark need not be shocking or particularly vulgar to leave its mark, and it can even come from good intentions. Maybe some people watching will realise that the words they themselves speak/write are harmful, even if not intentionally, and will be more aware of it in future, while others might realise that the words they heard/read were not so innocent after all, and that they should stop beating themselves up for feeling guilt/shame/self-hate when in fact they've been being worn down by ignorant and/or hurtful attacks.

_{*It would be quite easy to analyse just how ignorant and condescending this letter is, not to mention borderline sexist (try imagining this person writing the same letter to Chris Christie, for example, replacing "girls" with "boys"). Analysis starter kit for you: "choice/habit/lifestyle", and the cornerstone phrase "Surely you don't..."}

>> ^hpqp:


3) Obesity is not like smoking. Yes, they are both health problems, but unlike smoking, being obese is not a behaviour. It can be caused/aggravated by certain behaviour, among many other factors. But while a behaviour can be inhibited while in front of others (e.g. not smoking in front of kids/a camera), you cannot "stop being obese". This brings out another distinction, namely that, while seeing people smoke can entice impressionable minds to do the same, seeing someone who is fat will not make one want to be fat as well. Seeing an overweight person on TV having a job or living a normal life might, on the other hand, give hope to people who are mocked and discriminated against for their weight issues, something which does not undermine in the slightest the struggle against obesity.
/rant


So your counter to the point of it being a behavior, is that it is term applied as the result of a series of behaviors which is a combination of over-eating and lack of exercise?
You must be kidding.

And sorry I have to put words in your mouth above, because aside from divine intervention I am not sure what mysterious factors cause one to be obese unless you are referring to genetic disorders/thyroid problems. Have fun finding a source on what % of obese Americans that covers.

It is behavioral, and its remedy is behavioral. I certainly will not say its an EASY behavior to modify (see previous arguments on leptin/dopamine), but you need to deal with it.

Also regarding what is impressionable you are simply incorrect. If you believe a child with two overweight parents that is the result of those parents having an idle lifestyle and providing garbage food for their kids isnt impactful youre dead wrong.
But here you go, some backup for that concept. From the AACAP

No one is advocating mocking is the right thing to do. And if you think this guys letter came from a place of hate or mockery I suggest you reread it. There really is no indication of that to me. It comes from a place of concern, even if that is misguided. You want to crucify this guy for trying to (perhaps poorly) encourage this woman to lose weight and that really isn't the right ethic either.

Then we got thyroid lymphoma and that was a real hoot.

From Wiki. Plumbbob was a series of tests; this vid documents one of them. The only hard numbers about actual human disease rates in the Wiki entry needs a citation:

Plumbbob released 58,300 kilocuries (2.16 EBq) of radioiodine (I-131) into the atmosphere. This produced total civilian radiation exposures amounting to 120 million person-rads of thyroid tissue exposure (about 32% of all exposure due to continental nuclear tests).

Statistically speaking, this level of exposure would be expected to eventually cause between 11,000 and 212,000 excess cases of thyroid cancer, leading to between 1,000 and 20,000 deaths.[3]

In addition to civilian exposure, troop exercises conducted near the ground near shot "Smoky" exposed over three thousand servicemen to relatively high levels of radiation. A survey of these servicemen in 1980 found significantly elevated rates of leukemia: ten cases, instead of the baseline expected four.[citation needed]

holy smokes, this was one of the pathways I investigated last year in my papillary thyroid carcinoma research (the MAPK-ERK pathway), very interesting to see it in all in flashy 3D.

I must first say that my comments are not intended to Troll or invoke an "emotional" debate. (not that I was accused).

In no way do I deny stereotypes don't exist.
I also don't think statistics tell the whole story.

Things that can skew statistics:
1). Women almost always get the kids in a breakup - something men have had to fight for years and almost always loose. This leads to (plus) 1 woman doing domestic work and (minus) 1 men doing domestic work. (a factor of 2)
According to U.S. Census Bureau in November, 2009
* Approximately 84% of custodial parents are mothers, and
* 16% of custodial parents are fathers
So this means more women than men (by a large margin) can lay claim to domestic chores in the home over men. Not factoring in how many of those men fought for the right of custody that was never granted to them.

This same report states that 34.2% of custodial mothers have never been married while 20.9% of custodial fathers have never married. Why they were not married needs further study here but many young mothers never inform or notify the fathers or just never put the father's name on the birth certificate so the father has limited legal rights to the child.

2). There is often a job sharing practice in the home. One member (ofter the woman) stays inside and cleans the house while the other (often the man), does other chores such as yard work, car maintenance, household maintenance ect. These things makes it look like the women do all the chores while the men just "hang out" when actually they can balance out. Sometimes the roles can be reversed to the stereotypical roles - In my house, I do the dishes and the cooking while my wife takes out the garbage. A friend of stays away from his wife's power-tools and lets her do the yardwork while he takes care of the kids and their education needs.

3). Men are groomed to be (from a young age) that working is the only option. Period. Women have always been raised knowing there is an option of staying home or going to work (just find the right man). So that means a percentage grows up already deciding they will stay home. As such, they never pursue a proper education to to enable themselves to start "Climbing the ladder" from day one.

4). About 13 percent of women suffer from depression after childbirth often making work outside he home or at full capacity not possible. This depression can be caused due to "changes in brain chemistry" during pregnancy and "hormonal factors unique to women". "women are at greater risk of depression at certain times in their lives, such as puberty, during and after pregnancy, and during perimenopause." Levels of thyroid hormones may also drop after giving birth." As well, the common treatments for depression often cause an increases drop in ambition as the drugs used often remove both highs and lows.

I must make note here that this is not an opinion or a jab at woman - it's a fact and I have great respect for anyone trying to cope with depression, anxiety or related mood disorders.
Womanshealth.gov
Postpartum Support International

---
I'm just trying to illustrate how nothing is as cut and dry as, "the women have to do all the work at home and work full time while never getting paid what they are worth - while the men never do anything, goof off all the time and get paid more... " I'm at work and can't write any more at the moment but I may be back

I know this is dipping into conspiracy theory here, but the thing that stuck out in my mind after reading that article was "...Risks of ingesting fluoride include Chronic Kidney Disease, Thyroid Disease, reduced brain development in children, reduced IQs, dental fluorosis, skeletal fluorosis, and increases in hip and other bone fractures. ..."

Paired with the fact that 'They' want us to drink more and more water per day under the guise of 'General Health and Wellbeing' just adds more fuel.

>> ^Sagemind:

"ANOTHER LOOK AT FLUORIDE IN THE WATER SUPPLY"
http://www.ecomall.com/greenshopping/fluoride.htm


--


The water-table-effect is scary as well, guaranteeing that humankind as a whole is affected, rather than just civilized/urban areas. Why stupify 50% of the population when you can get 100%?

</tinfoil_hat>

Seriously though, potentially scary stuff... Pharmaceuticals in the water table are cause for a lot of *fear as well. I can't wait until literally everyone with a penis is walking around with a permanent hardon due to the massive amounts of Cialis, Viagra, and Levitra being dumped into the world-water-supply. Funny shit.

And no one will be depressed, but they may all be potentially suicidal.

I wonder about birth control as well. Surely 100% of the medication isn't being metabolized, so it would gather in waste water also. Population decrease, lower IQ, and perma-stiffy's the world 'round.