Leaderboard

That depends on what you are eating besides of soup. Whether it's complete source of vegetables and fruits (and produced by them nutrients). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicobacter_pylori "Helicobacter pylori, previously known as Campylobacter pylori, is a gram-negative, microaerophilic bacterium usually found in the stomach. It was identified in 1982 by Australian scientists Barry Marshall and Robin Warren, who found that it was present in a person with chronic gastritis and gastric ulcers, conditions not previously believed to have a microbial cause. It is also linked to the development of duodenal ulcers and stomach cancer. However, over 80% of individuals infected with the bacterium are asymptomatic, and it may play an important role in the natural stomach ecology.[7] More than 50% of the world's population have H. pylori in their upper gastrointestinal tract.[6] Infection is more common in developing countries than Western countries.[4] H. pylori's helical shape (from which the genus name derives) is thought to have evolved to penetrate the mucoid lining of the stomach.[8][9]" If you will search for articles about diets when somebody is infected by Helicobacter pylori bacteria, you can get conclusion (simplification) that certain soups might help. e.g. "Diet principles for Helicobacter pylori infection People struggling with H. pylori should regularly eat meals. Under no circumstances can you let the feeling of hunger (an empty stomach produces large amounts of hydrochloric acid), or for over-eating, which also results in overproduction of irritating stomach acid. Therefore, breaks between meals should be 2-3 hours. You should eat min. 4-6 small meals a day, so as not to burden the stomach. Meals should be eaten slowly, thoroughly chewing each bite (preferably all meals should be well cooked and shredded, preferably rubbed). The first meal should be eaten shortly after waking up, and the last one should be eaten shortly after 2-3 hours before bedtime. It is best to have the meals cooked in water and steaming, stewed without frying and baked in foil. You should take 2-3 l of fluids during the day, preferably between meals. Do not drink during meals and half an hour before and an hour after eating (in the latter case, this may cause the back of the stomach contents into the esophagus). You can drink not only mineral water, but also green tea (but only weak) or herbal teas (from chamomile and St. John's wort) and cereal milk with milk, as well as vegetable soups. It is recommended that the drinks have a moderate temperature." (Translated by Google) Ukrainian recipe for red beet soup contains raw minced garlic and onions, which can help in killing the infection.

Its „Body of Christ” holliday here today (Corpus Christi) I was thinking of going to church with my family but we couldn’t decide whether we want ribs or liver for lunch so instead we went to a swimming pool.

That is more in line what I was suggesting earlier. A means to leverage funds rather than a "get rich scheme". As a side note, I found a few papers that reviewed cases in states which already have right to try laws. As of 2017 there has not been a documented case where access was granted under these laws which were not already under the FDA's Expanded Access Program (some of which, such as Texas, have provisions that would prohibit manufacturers to charge patients). I.e. there is no indication that in practice these laws were little more than feel good laws with little to no actual impact. The bigger issue is, as I stated before, the intention to limit FDA's influence and, (perhaps to a lesser degree) potential endangerment of patients as the individualized oversight by the FDA is missing. Also between 2010 and 2014 5000 requests were made, so the pool for a given medication might be fairly low. Some more of the provisions of the federal act: - drug has to pass phase I trials - physician has to certify that no other options are feasible and patients is unable to participate in regular trial - access requires prescriber, manufacturer and patient's informed consent (i.e. FDA as check is eliminated) - FDA cannot use data on negative outcomes to delay or deny approval, unless the results are critical for safety reasons (a bit vague on that end) - manufacturers are protected from liability - does not create any form of entitlement for the patients There are many concerns including, but not limited to: - safety - possible diversion of patients and resources away from "proper" trials - the fact that expanded access under the FDA already works (almost all requests are approved, but FDA does provide safety suggestions that are helpful to the patients) -manufacturer's generally are already protected from liability under expanded access (historically there is a lack of legal action against them in those cases) - manufacturer would still need to divert resources and if they are indeed on track to regular approval, there is little incentive to do so (which is why I mentioned small and sketchy companies) The overall opinion in the public health community seems to range from, useless and inconsequential, a threat FDA's mission to potentially endangering. The the latter is mostly speculative at this point. Nope, it would even be bad in the short run. Here is the thing, unless they went to phase II they won't know that it won't work. If it is already there and shown to be inefficient, they would have hard time to find buyers. So that leaves mostly those that are still hopeful and also note that again, under the current rules folks can already request them and it does include investigational drugs. About 30% of them were, in fact approved later. You also forget that actually providing and administrating investigational drugs is a significant expense, which includes production and, depending on the treatment, also administration and supervision. Considering that on average per drug only ~12 request were made between 2010 and 2014, each treatment would need to be at a tremendous cost to be anywhere near profitable. Perhaps more importantly, it does divert resources from the actual trials which are run on a tight timeline and budget. That is one of the main reasons (aside from negative outcomes) why manufacturers usually limit access to their drugs, rather than expanding it. Under certain circumstances it could be more likely to happen (i.e. if the production cost is very low). Overall, I would think that it would be difficult not to run at a loss.

Omg that’s so true

My wife's father used to joke that Slavic culture is pessimistic by design. He was told all kinds of dire things would happen if he didn't do X. When he was "moved" to Germany during WWII, it was the first time he was exposed to optimism. "If you eat this good soup, you'll grow up big and strong!" I'd like to think being positive is more effective, but I honestly can't say for sure.

I did indeed

Who's crying? You're the one throwing a tantrum because you're not getting your way... That wouldn't be a little secret - if it were true. In reality, however, as the speed of light is actually the speed of causality (Wikipedia Link): It's not only the maximum speed for any particle, it is also the maximum speed with which anything can affect anything else, and since this happens via forces, a force or change in a field can't propagate faster than the speed of light. Why don't you tell us what premises you base your claims on, and how you come by your calculations? Not that I'm particularly interested in what you're saying, just in the interest of having a good discussion

Ah yes, "certain facts". Of course. Would they be "certain facts" that you know but you aren't going to explain? There is no scientific knowledge there. Unless you can show how it is empirically measurable and testable... How would you experimentally attempt to falsify the myth of creation in 6 days? But, of course, I assume you consider yourself to be one of "those that can see"?

or this, skf make bearings, no personal experience though. http://www.skf.com/group/products/lubrication-solutions/lubricants/lubricant-selection/index.html and http://www.skf.com/binary/21-99598/13238EN_GreaseSelectionChart.pdf

Maybe this? https://eurovacuum.eu/oil-grease/turbo-pump-oil/

The first compilers were written in assembler. These were then able to translate the high level language, for example C, into assembler/machine code. Once you have that first compiler, you can then write a compiler in C and compile it using the old compiler. Now you have a compiler written in C that is able to compile itself. This process is known as bootstrapping. But once you have any high level language compiler (whatever language it is written in) you can use it to write any program, including compilers for other languages. So you can write a Fortran or Basic compiler in C. Or a C compiler in Basic (if you are mad enough to attempt such a thing). The first versions of Basic were interpreted rather than compiled. Some modern version are either compiled into an intermediate code that is interpreted or a fully compiled. Even modern versions are pretty crude languages that no one should learn unless they have no choice.

Just to add information: there are ways to for individuals to request access, but the regulation is that the FDA has to sign off of them. Nonetheless, quite often they are denied by manufacturers for a number of reasons including a) it may jeopardize the approval of the drug (e.g. if the terminal ill have some adverse effects not found in healthy), b) they have limited availability, c) it would disrupt their development pipeline. One of the biggest thing that folks are wary about the bill is that it basically cuts the FDA off from that process. To be clear, there are pathways to access drugs prior to approval, it is not that they become available for the first time. However, limiting liability of the manufacturer and hiding the data from the approval process could make it more attractive for the manufacturer to agree. However many may still decline on grounds of cost and time investment, for example.

As my post says I just wanted to give a sense of perspective to what the odds of "unlikely" chemistry look like at the scale of a planetary ocean and hundreds of millions of years - take that view and it looks not all so unlikely after all. Not anywhere near so unlikely as to be impossible - which is what is suggested by the "but it's so unlikely it must need godly intervention" arguments. I don't claim any expertise, so I don't know what specific chemical precursors. From my reading, a lot of what I would call complex organic chemicals are formed in vast quantities from non-biological processes - in space (precursor material to the Earth) and the waters of this planet - and these can and will react and interact in various ways under conditions that, whilst not universal, are still widespread and of long duration. Those conditions won't all apply to every ml of water (and when they do reactions may be occurring at much higher frequencies) but take a dozen zeros off my numbers and they are still enormous numbers. Wikipedia is always a good start, for a general overview, with attention to the sources listed recommended if you are serious about it.

They used to eat mice and rats ... The same could be said about ants which have livestock aphids or fungi..

Speaking of for the record... you did a far better job of supporting your positions than me, you introduced extremely valid criticisms of my posts and new concepts I'd not previously considered, and highlighted some of my blindspots. I haven't entirely changed my stance on the subject we discussed, but I respect you for it and greatly appreciate the exchanges we've shared. I like that you've in some small way helped to make me better and that you illuminated topics that were previously for me lit only dimly, if at all. Gees - Any "power" I wield in this forum comes from consistently high quality posts, an ability to challenge sensitive topics in a forceful way, while also remaining respectful of others. I speak out forcefully for what is right, and most of my reputation comes from battles on hot topics like gay marriage, climate change, and similar culturally important circumstances. Now, admittedly there are countless times I've failed badly, have not even begun to closely live up to the ideals highlighted above, and there were even many years when I was probably far more brutal and eviscerating with my posts than respectful, but I've improved over time and have a history of defending ideas and people. I assure you, though, I can be and have been multiple times been censored, warned, and even banned just like any other member. What is god? An ill-defined 3-letter word that matches remarkably each of our own individual self-images. It's a broadly ambiguous placeholder that we often use until better and more accurate descriptions of nature are realized.

What!? Technically, this is nonsense. Humans are conscious and yet we still continue to need a regular source of energy.

There are nearly 10000 posts since 2004 under your current alias. Don't take this as an insult or trolling or flaming as it's not meant to be, but as I look through the forums and see staff holding one set of rules about what they can do and another set of rules for non staff members I can sincerely only ask, Are you blind?

! Moderator Note Too many personal attacks from you. Others attack your ideas, and you attack them instead of defending your woo. If you can't obey our civility rules, you aren't welcome, Ant Sinclair. Please do better when discussing science with the rest of the members.

I think we're beyond the point where this thread should be shut down. Attacks ad hominem are against forum rules

Jeeze luoise papa cheeze I may be snarky but I don't outright insult people... -1 What I should have written from the start +1

A ridiculous combination of numerology and religion, it doesn’t get much more nonsensical than that. You can come up with any result desired with this line of thinking, it is equally asinine as baseless.

Souds like a great basis to form a cult. Maybe you can sell this idea to people looking for a purpouse in life. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who will just eat thatup. I for myself can say that I am not hungry for a higher meaning. I'd prefer something more tangible. Like evidence or a clear line of reasoning that I can attack

dear it is very simple but do you know how this formula came into existence if not in the next quote i will define you i have already proved through points .o.k wait for....... dear it is very simple but do you know how this formula came into existence if not in the next quote i will define you i have already proved through points .o.k wait for.......i have done lot work on (more then 20 years).

Obviously your logic is lacking to do so with my last post. Would you like to know where some serious physics comes into this(Are you watching from beyond the grave Mr Maxwell)?

Get out of here - is that all you've got - shameful from a Man of "learning". Would you Coyote, like to know where the real physics kick in???

Didn't your folks explain sticks and stones to you when you were little, and Cry Baby is such a terrible thing to say to somebody, my autotext must have remembered Koti from our last discussion - Oh My God

Well, I was going to explain the Loaves and Fish feeding the 5,000 but, you just bored me so much that I can't be 'arsed' any longer, Physics Lesson is over for today, nighty night kiddies.

Good day Moontannman, this shows us that different places have different day lengths. If one of the Creator's Days is equivalent to 13,000 Earth years, then the Six Days of Creation would have taken 6(Lord's days) multiplied by 13,000 Earth Years equalling 78,000 years. How far back after the "Big Bang" can we see to before what some have called "Hitting the Wall" ie the CMBR - 100,000 years, 90,000 years? Maybe one day our instrumentation shall allow that to be whittled down to around 80,000 years. Some interpretations of Prophecy claim that after Judgement Day The Lord Shall spend 1,000 years on Earth with Man; 1,000(Lord's years) multiplied by 365.24(Lord's days) multiplied by 13,000 Earth years equals 4.74 Billion years - how long until our Star begins to expand and engulf the Inner Solar System???

I'll be generous and let you in on a little secret about Magnetism; Length of Verse = 14.65 billion light years Time until our Magnetic Cage fully formed = 78,000 years(Earth Years) 14.65^9 x 9.461^15 = 1.386^26 metres 78,000 x 365.24 x 24 x 60 x 60 = 2.461^12 seconds 1.386^26metres / 2.461^12 seconds = 5.631^13 m/s 5.631^13 m/S / C(speed of light) = approx 187,700C Magnetic fields propagate at over 187,000 times the speed of light Mordred!!! Spooky Action at a Distance' Speed Cry baby, oh dear