WHAT THE FUCK. it doesn't even fit my screen properly when maximised, and doesn't show all the music if it needs a scroll.PrivateVendetta wrote:
New iTunes can go suck a dick.
I download it and it can't locate any of the songs i bought USING iTunes because it uses a crappy new filing system.
I have to point it to the bought stuff individually. Fuck. That.
Never buying a non Android phone ever again. Ipads on the other hand are mint.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
in my opinion, WMP > itunes > winamp
Itunes is so so shitty. So happy I got a nexus 7 so I can bypass that shit.
Snapper is an expensive fish!? I caught 17 with my brother one time on a dock inside of an hour. Should've airmailed them to Oz instead of letting my Polish grandmother bury them under a bush in the garden.Dilbert_X wrote:
OK but I feed the cat the best catfood, fry him the most expensive fish - snapper etc.Superior Mind wrote:
You can't and shouldn't prevent your children from making their own food choices outside the home. As long as you have a solid diet at home you ensure your child's normal and sane behavior.
Feeding your child is not over protecting it. From birth to at least 14 you're likely to have near complete control over your child's diet. Just feed them at each meal time and they will be much less likely to have the desire to eat shitty foods. People think going to mcds is easier and cheaper than buying groceries and cooking food. Then they get diabeetus and a erectile dysfunction. This shit isn't complicated. People are just brain washed and pumped full of otherwise unnecessary pharmaceuticals. Eating a real diet includes the use of medicinal herbs. Which, except for those extreme cases, eliminate the need for industry drugs. But it's all because of media brainwashing and scientific plots against us.
I let him out and he eats lizards.
Explain that.
Last edited by Jay (2012-12-28 09:04:39)
You do understand that having 0% body fat isn't healthy, right? We evolved to carry some fat on us in case we get sick or had to go hungry for a while. For as much as you've given me shit here about being unhealthy, I bet I end up living a longer happier life than you do.Frank Reynolds wrote:
you two fucking mensa members understand fructose from fruit and sweeteners and sucrose increase fat production? your body does not care where the sugar came from...all it knows is it is sugar.FFLink wrote:
He'd fail his own test.tuckergustav wrote:
So, you are saying all sugar is bad?
Are you saying that fruit is bad because it has sugar in it?
I am so glad you came back to have a nice discussion.
srsly
its amazing how terribly bad some of you are at reading. I never said anything about fat ratios.Jay wrote:
You do understand that having 0% body fat isn't healthy, right? We evolved to carry some fat on us in case we get sick or had to go hungry for a while. For as much as you've given me shit here about being unhealthy, I bet I end up living a longer happier life than you do.Frank Reynolds wrote:
you two fucking mensa members understand fructose from fruit and sweeteners and sucrose increase fat production? your body does not care where the sugar came from...all it knows is it is sugar.FFLink wrote:
He'd fail his own test.
You didn't have to. Over the years, you've made it abundantly clear how obsessed you are with your own body image. If sugar is bad because it aids fat creation, then one can easily assume that you think fat is bad as well. Logic.Frank Reynolds wrote:
its amazing how terribly bad some of you are at reading. I never said anything about fat ratios.Jay wrote:
You do understand that having 0% body fat isn't healthy, right? We evolved to carry some fat on us in case we get sick or had to go hungry for a while. For as much as you've given me shit here about being unhealthy, I bet I end up living a longer happier life than you do.Frank Reynolds wrote:
you two fucking mensa members understand fructose from fruit and sweeteners and sucrose increase fat production? your body does not care where the sugar came from...all it knows is it is sugar.
Frank Reynolds wrote:
.. and yes Supmind the same can be said about any calorie.
Err no. He just talks about eating right. He doesn't post pictures of himself in front of mirrors in that stupid bodybuilding thread.Over the years, you've made it abundantly clear how obsessed you are with your own body image.
ok smart guy. just cuz you are a massive fatty doesnt mean you have to be a dolt. tucker said there is good and bad sugar and that is simply not true. that is all i said. there is no need for you people to go off in a million different directions with your own stupid ass agendas and logic.Jay wrote:
You didn't have to. Over the years, you've made it abundantly clear how obsessed you are with your own body image. If sugar is bad because it aids fat creation, then one can easily assume that you think fat is bad as well. Logic.Frank Reynolds wrote:
its amazing how terribly bad some of you are at reading. I never said anything about fat ratios.Jay wrote:
You do understand that having 0% body fat isn't healthy, right? We evolved to carry some fat on us in case we get sick or had to go hungry for a while. For as much as you've given me shit here about being unhealthy, I bet I end up living a longer happier life than you do.
Oh, I suppose I should have said sugar sources...Frank Reynolds wrote:
you two fucking mensa members understand fructose from fruit and sweeteners and sucrose increase fat production? your body does not care where the sugar came from...all it knows is it is sugar.FFLink wrote:
He'd fail his own test.tuckergustav wrote:
So, you are saying all sugar is bad?
Are you saying that fruit is bad because it has sugar in it?
I am so glad you came back to have a nice discussion.
srsly
WRONG, true, an intake of a certain types of sugar will give you an insulin spike which can result in fat gain however, the different varieties of sugar have a different effect, it's glucose and sucrose that contribute to the raising of blood sugar levels and should be generally avoided. Fructose does not have this effect and is sent to the liver to be metablolised. FYI This is a well known fact and should have been covered in high school biology classes.Frank Reynolds wrote:
you two fucking mensa members understand fructose from fruit and sweeteners and sucrose increase fat production? your body does not care where the sugar came from...all it knows is it is sugar.FFLink wrote:
He'd fail his own test.tuckergustav wrote:
So, you are saying all sugar is bad?
Are you saying that fruit is bad because it has sugar in it?
I am so glad you came back to have a nice discussion.
srsly
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2394949Nerds wrote:
Differential effects of honey, sucrose, and fructose on blood sugar levels.
Shambaugh P, Worthington V, Herbert JH.
Abstract
It is now recognized that dietary carbohydrate components influence the prevalence and severity of common degenerative diseases such as dental problems, diabetes, heart disease and obesity. Fructose and sucrose have been evaluated and compared to glucose using glucose tolerance tests, but few such comparisons have been performed for a "natural" sugar source such as honey. In this study, 33 upper trimester chiropractic students volunteered for oral glucose tolerance testing comparing sucrose, fructose and honey during successive weeks. A 75-gm carbohydrate load in 250 ml of water was ingested and blood sugar readings were taken at 0, 30, 60, 90, 120 and 240 minutes. Fructose showed minimal changes in blood sugar levels, consistent with other studies. Sucrose gave higher blood sugar readings than honey at every measurement, producing significantly (p less than .05) greater glucose intolerance. Honey provided the fewest subjective symptoms of discomfort. Given that honey has a gentler effect on blood sugar levels on a per gram basis, and tastes sweeter than sucrose so that fewer grams would be consumed, it would seem prudent to recommend honey over sucrose.
Last edited by Frank Reynolds (2012-12-28 10:16:23)
tuckergustav wrote:
rip in piece Rodney King
Even better I can give you a study from 1974 demonstrating the demonic effect of glucose as opposed to fructose. So lets circle jerk a little more here is a 2012 studyKEN-JENNINGS wrote:
your blurb cites a 20 year old study. The JCI seems to think fructose is at least as bad as glucose, if not worse.
Last edited by m3thod (2012-12-28 11:09:23)
