if you have in mind
that you will hate something
then it will be hated
if you have in mind
that you will like something
then it will be liked or hated
difficult to impress
what do you have in your mind?
Forget everything you thought you knew about calories and weight gain. Turns out fat or thin is determined by the human microbiome, the community of microbes (bacteria) living in your digestive tract.
So that explains why simple low calorie diets don’t work or work well, and why weight gain can happen with medications even though diet has not changed.
Perhaps America is “getting fat” due to a spread of certain types of bacteria present in the food supply, and then that can correlate to amounts of food in some ways. It would make sense.
Then health and weight would hinge on what you eat, not necessarily how much. It’s why families will be fat families or thin families, because they are sharing habits that are favorable to the particular combination of bacteria that make up the human microbiome.
More study will have to go into the theory, but certainly makes more sense than the calorie theory. A calorie, after all, is only how hot something burns when you set it on fire. Of course fats or oils will burn hotter, and anyone who has made syrup knows sugar burns hot. But your body is not lighting food on fire, and it is the types of microbes in certain foods that are the greater factor for determining if a human being is fat or thin.
For now, it looks like there is a correlation to amounts of bacteria, and thinner people have more microbes and a greater diversity of bacterium in their digestive tract than fatter people. And also, it seems that health in general is improved when there are greater amounts and greater diversity to all those little critters making a home in the human gut.
this is one of those things, where if someone has a service-based business, don’t they already get to pick and choose who they work-for? that’s what i don’t understand. doctors say they are taking no new patients all the time. even hairstylists will go on break or pass off clients to others in the salon. mostly it depends if you work for yourself or work for the state or a corporation. if working for others, then have to go by their stipulation on who is or is not served.
so i could understand a bill requiring a “necessary” service to not discriminate. but one to enforce rights to discriminate doesn’t make sense. i can’t see the need. all anyone in a service industry does if they feel forced to have a client they don’t like for ANY reason– is to perform a very poor service and that client then does not come back. there is already a check and balance there, and no necessity for a law to shore up rights for discrimination.
i guess if they want to post “no gays allowed” — same as in days gone by they had signs “no negros allowed” — then are looking at an inverted application of law, where law is not necessary. a business can put up a sign of any sort, and then it is the social reaction to that posting that will determine outcome. you cannot legislate the populace to NOT react to YOUR acts of discrimination. not only is it not possible, it’s foolish.
“rights of religious expression” are already in effect. otherwise we would have no mormons knocking on doors, no christian based holiday songs played at malls…. the list goes on. and religions themselves discriminate ALL the time. that’s kind of part of their thing — inner circles and outer circles. rights of religious expression are already in effect, and could be taken away by legislation. but they can’t be GIVEN by legislation. for instance, IF salt lake city felt the need to LEGISLATE that mormons are ALLOWED to knock on the door and you must answer and give them at least 10 minutes of your time…… then we could determine that THAT particular religious body is ITSELF in complete charge of the legislative process. which then of course, is a conclusion that democracy no longer rules, and you have a THEOCRACY in its stead.
regardless … there is absolutely no way to legislate people to not react to actions of discrimination. i don’t know what they think they are going to be able to do with that. because just as someone offering a service has inherent rights to render good or bad service — those who are offended by practices of discrimination, have the rights to blackball that service provider. no legislation is going to send you new clients. i mean how stupid would you have to be, to say “oh they have a right to be assholes, so i’m going to use that service anyway.”
it doesn’t happen. or can’t, no matter how you dress it up in a legislative form. what am saying, is there is no such thing as legislating rights for religious expression. it’s an all or nothing proposal. IF you decide religion trumps every other god-given sensibility — then it’s for EVERY religion. and we can make up our own. say i have the “i’m allowed to walk down the street naked” religion. IAWDSN for short. then my rights to practice my religion become something that BREAKS other legislation. and it becomes a domino effect. i have the i get to hit you on the head religion. so assault is no longer illegal. i know that’s simplified. and a rhetorical criticism involving reductio ad absurdum.
the point is, there is absolutely no way to legislate “religious expression” into a democratic right. because you cannot legislate people to not react to me walking down the street naked. you cannot legislate people to not react and hit me over the head back, if i hit them over the head.
then choosing one particular religion or one particular right equates to theocracy. it’s pretty cut and dry.
it’s not difficult to overturn at higher levels, i would think. i know where they are coming-from, and is trying to micromanage employee relations from a government seat. we have that one clerk, who wanted to have the right to not “serve” those who “offended” her according to her religion. but she ALWAYS had the right to quit. ALWAYS. if we had a slave based situation or something, i guess. now IF the government decides those workers have rights to refuse service, and those government services involve necessary services — then would counter that legislation with ANOTHER legislation requiring that ESSENTIAL services are not allowed to discriminate. and then what we HAVE — is a lot of wasted time, creating and structuring legislation that cancels each other out….. and that goes under the heading of “too dumb to be in office.”
there is plenty of clandestine theocracy going on, and it’s a constant battle. if i had my way, would outlaw religious knocking on doors of any type, and would outlaw public renditions of music involving religious preference. but as i found in 4-H when in charge of the christmas music selection — is a little impossible to stop people from breaking out in song when you want them to do or see the right way to BE in areas not governed solely by christian mores or norms. it’s very difficult to make that “rule” — turns out you can only make it for yourself.
here in utah, when i noted — it was reported in the local paper — that the state legislature was waiting to first meet privately WITH the lds church elders before they would begin their session …..that is theocracy. point blank, no doubt or way to defend that it is NOT. so……then becomes a matter of damage control.
you are already under the thumb of theocratic rule, and all the wishing in the world cannot reverse the ever tightening spiral of a theocratic nation conquering your democracy. and the biggest problem or issue with that, is theocratic rule tends to be fascist in nature. for instance, the lds church can state they “officially” allow blacks into the church now. but you look at the leadership — it’s all white male. ALL….. there is not any actual showing of tolerance. say one thing, do another. women are kept in their “place” and then we have issues plaguing the state such as the shutdown of women’s health clinics. in theocratic rule, those with the most money make the rules. a theocracy has no ability to counter social class divides. the gaps are unbelievably horrendous. equality not only does not come into the picture, but INEQUALITY is a backbone of the theocracy itself.
and i sympathize with those who are simple? enough to believe that they are not realizing the full expression of their religious convictions. i would recommend they come to utah, to enjoy a full theocracy in progress. and leave the rest of the nation alone. because they have no idea what path they are on. no idea whatsoever. there is a reason the catholic church was removed from its seat as a world power, or at least at some levels. they have no idea.
sit in metal chair
wonder how much longer
tap a pen
ask a question or two
hair never done right
coffee and more coffee
better by far
sit at home
going over budget
sitcoms and games
on save the world first
then have ice cream
don’t ask me to rescue myself
it’s easy to always do the right thing
calculating how much wrong
can be allotted to increase options
that’s the trick
do you ever try to look at yourself
like you’re a stranger?
my type cannot see its own type
queen of the dirtslides
shoring superfluous anthills
bled for every single one
hands can still feel the wet sand
talent means talent to return
that is why
everyone could jump in the lake
and i’d say, “gee, the lake is full.”
what do you have en-grained?
forever and one long-forgotten day
on the edges of time
of striking infinity has no keys
life IS causality
have their effect, too
install a new version of a familiar program — and the controls are so simplified, you wonder if it even does as much as the old one. turns out, no, they just hide the functions under new, simplified buttons. i don’t want to pay $120 a year for the “pro” creative cloud version of photoshop.
far as i could tell, the only difference is a 3D renderer in the pro version. i used it a few times, but really not something i needed that much. very complicated, anyway — and employed it mostly for 3D lettering. so the majority of what i do with photoshop, can be done with photoshop elements version.
interesting that they make you sign in to your adobe account, just to install. i found that annoying. if i’m installing a paid-for free-standing program, it should not require an account sign in. what if adobe goes belly-up? there goes any future installs you might have otherwise had.
as much as i like adobe software in general, i pretty much dislike the new set up where you pay each month. pay and pay and pay …while that is based on not actual usage. and they could probably base payment on usage – a per hour rate or something, rather than a monthly payment when you might not even need or use the software for months at a time!
it can be horrifying when you do the math, realize you spent $50 a month for a year, and the actual time spent using the program(s) was 20 hours or so during course of the year. so that’s $15/hour cost, and outrageous if compared to a program you pay for once and use indefinitely.
is an awful feeling, to FEEL so screwed over…. it’s like the first time i signed up to get 10 cassette tapes for one penny. or the credit card where you didn’t read the fine print on annual fees. it’s not the money that bothers me so much, as it is that FEELING of being a sucker, a rube. just a typical consumer idiot falling into a typical consumer trap.
for some reason i have this need to investigate the steps where the average person will fall. it’s as if i’m programmed to fully experience the many ways businesses work to unfairly fleece consumers. i DO pay for the microsoft office software on a monthly basis, but it’s a smaller amount and i feel like i get more from it. adobe is expensive, and i just don’t know that it’s worth a monthly payment. it feels like extortion.
like they are shaking you down just because they have something you need. month after month of shakedowns. so i’m not going to do that anymore, at least not with adobe if i can help it. i want programs that go the distance.