a8da6b0c91d

> leaving excess sugar that will be converted into fat

De-novo lipogenisis from sugar in practice does not happen humans. If you do something goofy like keep dietary fat under 5 grams and eat hundreds of grams of carbohydrate some monounsaturated fats can be synthesized, but it's fair to say that it basically doesn't happen.

Any fat on your body came directly from fats you ate. Sugar and carbohydrate only matter with regard to weight loss to the extent they displace fat metabolism.

The report had a weird take that the caffeine must be tricking the bees, to their detriment. More likely is that the bees recognize that caffeine is good and healthy. The body of research on caffeine's vitamin like health benefits is enormous. It's simply not to be consider a vice or something to avoid.

The college admissions system has encouraged the arms race mentality. The SAT has been repeatedly reworked such that test prep works better. I really doubt involvement in the summer activities they apparently value indicates anything about qualification other than parental resources and involvement.

What Ebert did for the most part was accurately say whether or not the masses would find a film enjoyable. He was very good at his job.

A film critic should aspire to do more. He should be critical and hopeful educate the audience on some level. Ebert's reviews were more like restaurant reviews.

Ebert was an idiot and an idiot's reviewer.

The only way Rotten Tomatoes is useful is if you look only at the negative ratings. All kinds of horrible schlock that has mass appeal gets "certified fresh." But isolating negative reviews: If idiots dislike it then it's probably good; If the negative reviews sound cogent then it's probably bad.

The think to do is find a few reviewers who resonate with you and keep tabs on them. I mostly just see what Armond White tells me to see.

The pants are cut for squishy office drones. It's for guys carrying an extra 12 pounds who still want a modern tapered cut. The quality is pretty much standard disposable American clothing, that is to say a pair of pants will be visibly disintegrating after about ten washes.

You got a small fine. At no point were you at any risk of facing incarceration. You were also probably doing something stupid and very annoying like stinking up the floor in a dormitory. This illustrates how the drug laws in practice work.

You don't get it. Those people get hit with narcotics charges because the cops and D.A. know exactly who they are and the long list of other crimes they've committed.

People who simply use or sell some marijuana and that's the extent of their "illegal" activity, they don't wind up in prison. Doesn't happen.

Every time I ever got high on weed I felt lingering effects for about three days. I've never experienced this with anything else. It always seemed to me that people who smoke weed a couple times a week or more often might be slightly under the influence almost continuously and not even realize it.

That simply doesn't happen in America. Cannabis is de facto legal throughout the USA. I repeat: marijuana is in practice legal in America, and all these people talking about drug charges ruining lives don't know what they're talking about.

The only way you get serious charges or any jail time at all for marijuana in America is when you've been arrested for serious crimes, but a District Attorney goes with "possession" for the plea deal. It's just easier that way.

    Instead the DINKS (Dual Income No Kids) are running 
    minorities out of their neighborhoods by bidding up the 
    price of the land.

Uhh, that's pretty much the plan. The landowners in places like SF and DC want to watch their holdings achieve lower Manhattan valuations. The history of NYC through the 90s proved the way you do that is demographic transformation.