Hi Princess,
Excess phosphorus is normally excreted in the urine. Elevated blood phosphorus ( > 4.5 MG/DL ) can be indicative of something much more serious amiss ---
Posts by TD
-
87more stuff on diet sodas
by shera inthis is very interesting and i believe there is something in these sweeteners.. .
please read .
subject: all diet soda drinkers beware .
-
-
-
87
more stuff on diet sodas
by shera inthis is very interesting and i believe there is something in these sweeteners.. .
please read .
subject: all diet soda drinkers beware .
-
-
TD
True, aspartic acid and phenylalanine are found, for instance, in milk and other protein sources, it?s different when they are added to a product in high concentrations and then flooded into the bloodstream, as these two amino acids, now out of their natural environment, begin to break down into toxic products. Further, when aspartame breaks down in the body, it releases methanol, a gas that negatively affects optic nerve function and interferes with blood supply to the retina, resulting in vision loss. So given these concerns, is it any surprise that tens of thousands of complaints have been lodged, including reports of dizziness, epileptic-like seizures, insomnia, vertigo, rashes, and anxiety?
So the bloodstream is not the "natural environment" for these amino acids? Out of curiosity.......what exactly is their "natural environment?"The breakdown of proteins into their constituent amino acids and the subsequent release of same into the bloodstream is one of the principal functions of the human digestive system!
We are not talking about phosphorus or phosphoric acid??please read the contents.
Please read the thread in its entirety.....
-
87
more stuff on diet sodas
by shera inthis is very interesting and i believe there is something in these sweeteners.. .
please read .
subject: all diet soda drinkers beware .
-
-
TD
Let's not confuse phosphorus with phosphoric acid. You actually need phosphorus for calcium absorption and a number of other vital functions. Any good multi-vitamin + mineral supplement will contain phosphorus.
....it?s different when they are added to a product in high concentrations and then flooded into the bloodstream, as these two amino acids, now out of their natural environment, begin to break down into toxic products.
----What???
-
-
-
TD
Because it serves the purposes of the JW parent organization.
JW doctrine idealizes their organization, holding that it was not only an integral part of, but in many cases the target of scores of Biblical prophecies and "types."
In instances where events as they actually happened at the time don't really conform to the Biblical parallel they choose to apply today, the history of JW's gives way to an idealized history.
The situation then becomes humorous as JW's sometimes use what they imagine their organization to have done as a stick to beat others with.
For example, JW's through the pages of The Watchtower have often condemned both the clergy of Christendom and the rulership of all the nations of the world in 1914 for failing to submit to Earth's newly enthroned king. However, since JW's themselves didn't adopt the idea that God's kingdom had been born in heaven in 1914 with Christ as king until the year 1925, they create by natural corollary, a situation in which they themselves were the only ones that didn't know about Christ's supposed enthronement as king in 1914.
Acknowledging their history as it actually happened therefore carries a certain doctrinal cost.
-
15
The 4 Faces Of Capsicum:
by Englishman ini like green capsicums best.
they're particularly nice in chilli con carne.. how do you enjoy your capsicums?.
englishman.
-
-
TD
I favor the really really hot face. ---Pickled habeneros when I can get them.
The only drawback is the Missus won't kiss me if I eat them. She did once and complained about her lips burning for the next half hour.
-
63
scholar and 1914
by Marvin Shilmer inhello, scholar
can you name a single thing of significance that the watchtower society or charles russell taught about 1914 prior to 1914 that was accurate?
marvin shilmer
-
-
TD
End of the Gentile Times.
At this point, that claim is rather like being presented with an axe and being told that it belonged to George Washington.
You remark that the axe looks far too new for that and only then does the presenter reluctantly admit that both the handle and the head have been replaced at some point over the years.
Not only is the label "George Washington's Axe" therby rendered little more than a hollow shell, the honesty of the presenter is compromised as well.
The value of any label lies not in the label itself, but in what it means. JW's today assign a different meaning to the term "Gentile Times" than did CT Russell.
-
58
question: why are humans worth more than animals?
by Realist inok putting religious reasoning aside what is a rational reason why humans are viewed worth more than higher animals?
why is a human worth more than lets say a chimp, a pig or a cow?.
neurophysiological studies show that animals suffer probably just as much as humans....but similar to little children they cannot understand the pain and express it as human adults can.
-
-
TD
Realist,
but shouldn't we instead of discarding the concept expand it to include higher animals (or all animals that most likely feel suffering) as well?
i think suffering is the main issue here...lets say we kill an animal without letting it suffer...does this pose an ethical problem? i think it does not. what causes the ethical problem is suffering.
I think suffering is an ethical problem, but not quite the same issue as the value of life itself.
We had a case here in Arizona in the late 70?s where two brothers escaped from prison. Joined by their father and a family friend, they proceeded to flag down a car and execute an entire family, one by one, point blank in the face with a shotgun.
At their trial, the defense attempted to make an issue out of whether the victims suffered or not, arguing that there was likely little suffering involved in having your whole head instantly blown off. I thought at the time (and still believe) that this was little more than a red herring.
When the society in which you live recognizes that the life of your neighbor is of equal and identical value to your own life, he or she then has every bit as much of a right to live as do you. When the value of this life is also considered to be inestimable, then if you were to deliberately and unjustifiably take the life of your neighbor, then you have nothing of sufficient value to offer back to society in recompense save your own life. This is irregardless of whether the victim suffers or not.
When this concept is literally followed through, the result would be forfeiture of your life. (Capital punishment) Although many societies don?t take things this far anymore, the result is still a long-term forfeiture of your liberty. (Incarceration) Anything less than these two options and human society begins to fall apart.
Although the basic idea is often dressed up in fancy theological terms and appeals to higher authority, (Probably to get people, who are inherently selfish to accept it) it serves a very pragmatic purpose --- the continuation of human society.
As much as we may like animals I don?t see how they may legitimately be introduced into the picture here.
-
58
question: why are humans worth more than animals?
by Realist inok putting religious reasoning aside what is a rational reason why humans are viewed worth more than higher animals?
why is a human worth more than lets say a chimp, a pig or a cow?.
neurophysiological studies show that animals suffer probably just as much as humans....but similar to little children they cannot understand the pain and express it as human adults can.
-
-
TD
Realist,
If I understand you correctly, your question seems to ultimately boil down to one of ?fairness.? In other words, why do we consider human life of inestimable value when animal life is used and taken at will? Isn?t that arbitrary? Shouldn?t we have some logical, quantifiable system of gauging the relative value of different forms of life? (Sorry --- Not trying to put words in your mouth here?..)
I think you?re trying to logically quantify a situation that wasn?t really founded on logic ?at least, not this type of logic.
Respect for human life as a concept, was born out of necessity. Man started out as a social animal and human society originally consisted of family groups bound together largely by filial affection, which is pretty much instinctive.
As human society grew and evolved into clans and tribes and tribal alliances and ultimately into nations and national alliances, man has had to embrace an increasingly wide and diverse group as ?family.? Filial affection is not sufficient at this point. Successful human societies invariably adopt as a moral axiom, the innate value of human life.
If this concept were to be completely discarded, human societies would revert back to the size of family groups. However humans have often applied this concept selectively. Every single human nationality has as part of their history, shameful episodes in the past where they treated people deemed ?not completely human? only slightly better and sometimes far worse than most animals.
Chinese and Russians captured by the Japanese during World War II were referred to as ?maruta? (logs) and used as human guinea pigs. The Jews didn?t fair much better under Hitler. Blacks suffered in colonial America. The list of past wrongs is probably matched only by the list of different ways that have been devised to exclude other humans.
Animals are not peers within human society and likely never will be. It does not matter how closely related to us in terms of raw genetics a chimp may be, or how intelligent and loyal a dog may be, we do not view their lives as we view our own.
-
58
question: why are humans worth more than animals?
by Realist inok putting religious reasoning aside what is a rational reason why humans are viewed worth more than higher animals?
why is a human worth more than lets say a chimp, a pig or a cow?.
neurophysiological studies show that animals suffer probably just as much as humans....but similar to little children they cannot understand the pain and express it as human adults can.
-
-
TD
sorry i though it was clear that i mean worth to us......so the true question is...can we justify our laws towards animals if we cannot state objectively that we are worth more than them?
Like the question of "worth," when you speak of justifying something, I think an unspecified proposition and integral component of the answer is, "Justified to whom?"
If we as human beings are the authority assessing the "worth" of animal life, and it is under this rubric that we may justify our actions, (apparently to ourselves) then I don't think there is a dilemma
-
58
question: why are humans worth more than animals?
by Realist inok putting religious reasoning aside what is a rational reason why humans are viewed worth more than higher animals?
why is a human worth more than lets say a chimp, a pig or a cow?.
neurophysiological studies show that animals suffer probably just as much as humans....but similar to little children they cannot understand the pain and express it as human adults can.
-
-
TD
LIke "beauty," which is judged by the eyes of the beholder, I think "worth" is assesed by the eyes of the appraiser.
Therefore when we ask, "Why are humans worth more than animals?" I think an unpecified proposition and hence an important element of the answer would be "Worth more to whom?"
If the question were, "Why are humans worth more to other humans than animals?" we at least have a reference point upon which to base an answer, although it probably won't be a satisfying answer.
Of course it doesn't not have to be phrased exactly like this, but without some reference point, I don't think it's possible to frame a truly rational answer to a question built upon a subjective abstraction.