Oh well. I'll never give up dairy. I'll just need to start scheduling more bathroom time
Take Lactaid, or any of those dairy-intolerance pills. A friend of mine loves cheese but is extremely lactose intolerant, and the pills make it so he can have cheese.
Over time, you can build up more of a tolerance if you don't take those pills.
If you do take those pills, they just cause your body to produce less of the chemicals you need to digest dairy, which just makes you more intolerant.
This is on shaky footing at best. Lactase production in the gut does not seem to be influenced by the presence or absence of lactose in the diet. The only thing you can do is condition your gut fauna to break down lactose more efficiently, but that's basically what lactose intolerance is anyway: you don't break it down, your gut fauna does and there's a temporary population explosion as they pig out on the surplus of food they're getting.
EDIT: It also doesn't fit say, my experience, where I realized that the reason I was getting intestinal bloating and all the associated fun was because every morning I'd have cereal with a lot of milk. This is not an uncommon problem - it usually hits around age 18-19 for people.
Oh well. I'll never give up dairy. I'll just need to start scheduling more bathroom time
Take Lactaid, or any of those dairy-intolerance pills. A friend of mine loves cheese but is extremely lactose intolerant, and the pills make it so he can have cheese.
Over time, you can build up more of a tolerance if you don't take those pills.
If you do take those pills, they just cause your body to produce less of the chemicals you need to digest dairy, which just makes you more intolerant.
Of you could take the pills and skip the terrible "adjustment" phase. You know, unless society collapses.
JebusUD on
and I wonder about my neighbors even though I don't have them
but they're listening to every word I say
Atheism, again, etymologically, popularly is specific to gods. I have no idea why anyone would want to make the word worth less via inflating its definition in a way that makes it more confusing and less specific.
Because when people talk about belief, they are not referring to the belief in anything other than something theistic. People don''t say "do you believe in homeopathy" unless they already know that you don't believe in god. So you use the word atheist, meaning that you don't believe in any theism and it thereby implies anything that has some sort of dogma attached to it.
Do you know people who don't believe in god but do believe in astrology, homeopathy and other woo? If so then they are not really atheists they are merely "a-deists." Unfortunately the word isn't accepted or found in any dictionaries but it ought to be there because a non-belief in gods but a belief in other woo doesn't make you an atheist, because all the other woo carries its own forms of theism. Well in my opinion anyway, and I'm sure a lot of people will agree with me on that.
Atheism, again, etymologically, popularly is specific to gods. I have no idea why anyone would want to make the word worth less via inflating its definition in a way that makes it more confusing and less specific.
Because when people talk about belief, they are not referring to the belief in anything other than something theistic. People don''t say "do you believe in homeopathy" unless they already know that you don't believe in god. So you use the word atheist, meaning that you don't believe in any theism and it thereby implies anything that has some sort of dogma attached to it.
Do you know people who don't believe in god but do believe in astrology, homeopathy and other woo? If so then they are not really atheists they are merely "a-deists." Unfortunately the word isn't accepted or found in any dictionaries but it ought to be there because a non-belief in gods but a belief in other woo doesn't make you an atheist, because all the other woo carries its own forms of theism. Well in my opinion anyway, and I'm sure a lot of people will agree with me on that.
Atheism, again, etymologically, popularly is specific to gods. I have no idea why anyone would want to make the word worth less via inflating its definition in a way that makes it more confusing and less specific.
Because when people talk about belief, they are not referring to the belief in anything other than something theistic. People don''t say "do you believe in homeopathy" unless they already know that you don't believe in god. So you use the word atheist, meaning that you don't believe in any theism and it thereby implies anything that has some sort of dogma attached to it.
Do you know people who don't believe in god but do believe in astrology, homeopathy and other woo? If so then they are not really atheists they are merely "a-deists." Unfortunately the word isn't accepted or found in any dictionaries but it ought to be there because a non-belief in gods but a belief in other woo doesn't make you an atheist, because all the other woo carries its own forms of theism. Well in my opinion anyway, and I'm sure a lot of people will agree with me on that.
Today is day 2 of the diet for the prewife and I. I'm on a mission to lose at least 50 pounds, but would love 60+. She wants to lose 40.
This'll be fun.
Hell yeah. What's your exercise routine looking like?
As of right now, nothing. She doesn't have time to during the week and I don't like working out alone.
Last time I did this diet I lost 50 pounds and didn't work out at all. I'm not too worried this time, but I would like to work out.
I'll think of something. Right now I'm focusing on eating better.
How long did it take you to lose the weight?
About 4 1/2 months. Went from 240 - 190. And now since I got a girlfriend and engaged, I stopped eating healthy cause you can't date someone and eat healthy, and I gained it all back.
You can't just make up your own goddamn definitions of words. I mean, you can, but it's stupid and you're just going to sound incoherent to everyone else.
I wish there was a pithy way to say this, but it wouldn't help even if there were.
You can't just make up your own goddamn definitions of words. I mean, you can, but it's stupid and you're just going to sound incoherent to everyone else.
I wish there was a pithy way to say this, but it wouldn't help even if there were.
You can't just make up your own goddamn definitions of words. I mean, you can, but it's stupid and you're just going to sound incoherent to everyone else.
I wish there was a pithy way to say this, but it wouldn't help even if there were.
Yeah, and then when you point out that someone is failing to convey their point, they're just like "hey, man, I'm not here to hold hands."
Atheism, again, etymologically, popularly is specific to gods. I have no idea why anyone would want to make the word worth less via inflating its definition in a way that makes it more confusing and less specific.
Because when people talk about belief, they are not referring to the belief in anything other than something theistic. People don''t say "do you believe in homeopathy" unless they already know that you don't believe in god. So you use the word atheist, meaning that you don't believe in any theism and it thereby implies anything that has some sort of dogma attached to it.
Do you know people who don't believe in god but do believe in astrology, homeopathy and other woo? If so then they are not really atheists they are merely "a-deists." Unfortunately the word isn't accepted or found in any dictionaries but it ought to be there because a non-belief in gods but a belief in other woo doesn't make you an atheist, because all the other woo carries its own forms of theism. Well in my opinion anyway, and I'm sure a lot of people will agree with me on that.
You can't just make up your own goddamn definitions of words. I mean, you can, but it's stupid and you're just going to sound incoherent to everyone else.
I wish there was a pithy way to say this, but it wouldn't help even if there were.
The uncromulence of his argument has embiggened my headache
Senjutsu on
0
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
I don't know if Pods would help or hurt this situation.
He's like some kind of incalculable force of nature. It's like when you bring in your beserker all chained up to the fight because you know that when you let him go he's not necessarily only going to be killing the enemy troops.
it's from rationalskepticism.org, the forum that rose from the ashes of Richard Dawkins' site's forum after he closed it on account of there being too many assholes.
Loren Michael on
0
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
it's from rationalskepticism.org, the forum that rose from the ashes of Richard Dawkins' site's forum after he closed it on account of there being too many assholes.
A shame, that.
Maybe I'll make my own forum for atheists and skeptics. That'd be nice.
it's from rationalskepticism.org, the forum that rose from the ashes of Richard Dawkins' site's forum after he closed it on account of there being too many assholes.
My brother can never be allowed to find this site.
Posts
(by and large)
have we got a thread for this
NNID: Hakkekage
What are they up to now?
You know, besides child prostitution.
It looks like a pending coup or something like that.
But that's nothing unusual, it's Thailand!
they've been protesting in Bangkok for what has seemed like several days
NNID: Hakkekage
You know what they say
The road of puns is a Longstreet
This is on shaky footing at best. Lactase production in the gut does not seem to be influenced by the presence or absence of lactose in the diet. The only thing you can do is condition your gut fauna to break down lactose more efficiently, but that's basically what lactose intolerance is anyway: you don't break it down, your gut fauna does and there's a temporary population explosion as they pig out on the surplus of food they're getting.
EDIT: It also doesn't fit say, my experience, where I realized that the reason I was getting intestinal bloating and all the associated fun was because every morning I'd have cereal with a lot of milk. This is not an uncommon problem - it usually hits around age 18-19 for people.
Of you could take the pills and skip the terrible "adjustment" phase. You know, unless society collapses.
but they're listening to every word I say
It took me a specific search for "Thailand coup" to find anything about it.
I can't say I care what happens to that haven for pedos.
Hell yeah. What's your exercise routine looking like?
JustinSane: only slightly less thoughtful than a glue-huffing teenager
Slightly? This is twice now you've hurt me, Tim.
On the other hand, I do care about how fucked Mexico is.
As of right now, nothing. She doesn't have time to during the week and I don't like working out alone.
Last time I did this diet I lost 50 pounds and didn't work out at all. I'm not too worried this time, but I would like to work out.
I'll think of something. Right now I'm focusing on eating better.
How long did it take you to lose the weight?
ow
...What?
About 4 1/2 months. Went from 240 - 190. And now since I got a girlfriend and engaged, I stopped eating healthy cause you can't date someone and eat healthy, and I gained it all back.
I wish there was a pithy way to say this, but it wouldn't help even if there were.
Podly signal.... activated!
hundred-year old trees ripped up by their roots, basements up to the top of the stairs in water
one house on todt hill was cut practically in half
on the other hand, it's staten island, so aside from the damage to my grandpa's backyard i can't care very much
Yeah, and then when you point out that someone is failing to convey their point, they're just like "hey, man, I'm not here to hold hands."
What the what
The uncromulence of his argument has embiggened my headache
Kudos on changing your diet, but you'll really get much better results if you can take 20 minutes out of your day 3-4 times a week for exercise.
And really a diet isn't something you should do temporarily and then return to your gluttonous ways. Find a way of eating that's sustainable.
He's like some kind of incalculable force of nature. It's like when you bring in your beserker all chained up to the fight because you know that when you let him go he's not necessarily only going to be killing the enemy troops.
it's from rationalskepticism.org, the forum that rose from the ashes of Richard Dawkins' site's forum after he closed it on account of there being too many assholes.
What veggies did you use?
A shame, that.
Maybe I'll make my own forum for atheists and skeptics. That'd be nice.
My brother can never be allowed to find this site.