http://lovemustangs.com/ Mon, 01 Dec 2008 10:37:11 -0600 MyBB http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=323 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 00:52:43 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=323 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=321 Sat, 04 Oct 2008 10:41:47 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=321 Nutrition experts agree that people who eat breakfast generally weigh less, have better cognitive performance throughout the day, and have better overall nutrition than those who do not, but a disturbing trend in the breakfast cereal industry may be undermining the meal’s health benefits. A new analysis of cereals sold in the US found that many brands, especially those marketed to children, are actually more than 50% sugar by weight and contain as much sugar as a glazed doughnut. Many of these brands have also boosted the sugar and sodium content of formulations sold on US markets, while the same cereals in other countries contain less of these ingredients.

Post Golden Crisp made by Kraft Foods Inc and Kellogg's Honey Smacks are more than 50 percent sugar by weight, the group said, while nine brands are at least 40 percent sugar.

The most healthful brands are Cheerios with three grams of fiber per serving and one gram of sugar, Kix and Honey Nut Cheerios, all made by General Mills, and Life, made by Pepsico Inc's Quaker Oats unit.

"Be sure to read the product labels, and choose cereals that are high in fiber and low in sugar and sodium," Gayle Williams, deputy editor of Consumer Reports Health, said in a statement.

Honey Smacks has 15 grams of sugar and just one gram of fiber per serving while Kellogg's Corn Pops has 12 grams of sugar and no fiber.

Consumer Reports studied how 91 children aged 6 to 16 poured their cereal and found they served themselves about 50 to 65 percent more on average than the suggested serving size for three of the four tested cereals.

Consumers International, which publishes Consumer Reports, said it would ask the World Health Organization to develop international guidelines restricting advertising and marketing of foods high in sugar, fat or sodium to children.

However, the group noted that breakfast cereal can be a healthful meal and said adults and children alike who eat breakfast have better overall nutrition, fewer weight problems, and better cognitive performance throughout the day.

Kellogg said it was working to make its food more nutritious.

"Kellogg recently reformulated a number of our cereals including Froot Loops, Corn Pops, Rice Krispies, Cocoa Krispies and Apple Jacks in the U.S. with improved nutritional profiles," a company spokeswoman said by e-mail.

"To put Consumer Reports' information in perspective, yogurt contains more sugar and sodium than a serving of Honey Smacks cereal (25 grams of sugar vs. 15 grams of sugar in Honey Smacks)."

Consumer Reports, like other groups, compares the sugar content of food with its fiber, mineral and vitamin content. Many cereals are fortified with vitamins and minerals.]]> Nutrition experts agree that people who eat breakfast generally weigh less, have better cognitive performance throughout the day, and have better overall nutrition than those who do not, but a disturbing trend in the breakfast cereal industry may be undermining the meal’s health benefits. A new analysis of cereals sold in the US found that many brands, especially those marketed to children, are actually more than 50% sugar by weight and contain as much sugar as a glazed doughnut. Many of these brands have also boosted the sugar and sodium content of formulations sold on US markets, while the same cereals in other countries contain less of these ingredients.

Post Golden Crisp made by Kraft Foods Inc and Kellogg's Honey Smacks are more than 50 percent sugar by weight, the group said, while nine brands are at least 40 percent sugar.

The most healthful brands are Cheerios with three grams of fiber per serving and one gram of sugar, Kix and Honey Nut Cheerios, all made by General Mills, and Life, made by Pepsico Inc's Quaker Oats unit.

"Be sure to read the product labels, and choose cereals that are high in fiber and low in sugar and sodium," Gayle Williams, deputy editor of Consumer Reports Health, said in a statement.

Honey Smacks has 15 grams of sugar and just one gram of fiber per serving while Kellogg's Corn Pops has 12 grams of sugar and no fiber.

Consumer Reports studied how 91 children aged 6 to 16 poured their cereal and found they served themselves about 50 to 65 percent more on average than the suggested serving size for three of the four tested cereals.

Consumers International, which publishes Consumer Reports, said it would ask the World Health Organization to develop international guidelines restricting advertising and marketing of foods high in sugar, fat or sodium to children.

However, the group noted that breakfast cereal can be a healthful meal and said adults and children alike who eat breakfast have better overall nutrition, fewer weight problems, and better cognitive performance throughout the day.

Kellogg said it was working to make its food more nutritious.

"Kellogg recently reformulated a number of our cereals including Froot Loops, Corn Pops, Rice Krispies, Cocoa Krispies and Apple Jacks in the U.S. with improved nutritional profiles," a company spokeswoman said by e-mail.

"To put Consumer Reports' information in perspective, yogurt contains more sugar and sodium than a serving of Honey Smacks cereal (25 grams of sugar vs. 15 grams of sugar in Honey Smacks)."

Consumer Reports, like other groups, compares the sugar content of food with its fiber, mineral and vitamin content. Many cereals are fortified with vitamins and minerals.]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=320 Fri, 03 Oct 2008 00:26:22 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=320 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=319 Thu, 02 Oct 2008 03:46:06 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=319
Things You’ll Need:
Masking tape
Wax removal solution
Dry cloth
Liquid soap
Water
Bucket
Sandpaper
Wood block
Newspaper
Spray paint for cars
Spray paint primer for cars
Rubbing compound


Step1
Determine where you would like the stripes to be placed on the car. You may need to tape off specific areas to get a better idea of the final product before you start. After making your decision, wash the car as usual. Wipe the car down with a dry cloth. Apply wax removal solution to remove excess wax from the car. Make sure the car is completely dry before moving forward.

Step2
Create stripes using masking tape. Use two pieces of tape to create a stripe. The exposed area between the pieces of tape is where you will paint the stripe. Wrap sandpaper around a small-to-medium-sized block. Lightly sand the area between the pieces of tape to remove paint and wax residue. Try not to disturb the masking tape during the process.

Step3
Cover areas not being painted with newspaper to protect the paint underneath. Use spray paint primer that's specifically made for cars to create the stripes. Follow the instructions on the can. Spray in a single direction from top to bottom for an even coat. Allow primer to dry completely before applying colored paint.

Step4
Apply spray paint evenly from top to bottom over the area you've primed. You may need to apply three to five coats, depending on the color and how well the fiber glass absorbs the paint. Wait 5 to 10 minutes before applying another coat.

Step5
Check to see if the stripe is even before removing the tape and newspaper. Make any corrections using the paint. Allow the paint to dry. This may take several days, depending on the paint and weather conditions. Remove the tape and newspaper. Wash and apply wax to the entire car as you normally would.

Tips & Warnings
If stripes appear raised, use a rubbing compound to soften the edges. Use the rubbing compound before washing and waxing the car for best results.

DO NOT ATTEMPT THIS IF YOU HAVE NO CLUE!!! LOVEMUSTANGS.COM ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR INCOMPETENCE!!
WE SUGGEST PAINTING A FEW JUNKYARD HOODS TO GET THE FEEL BEFORE ATTEMPTING TO ADD PAINT TO ANY VEHICLE YOU CARE ABOUT.]]>
Things You’ll Need:
Masking tape
Wax removal solution
Dry cloth
Liquid soap
Water
Bucket
Sandpaper
Wood block
Newspaper
Spray paint for cars
Spray paint primer for cars
Rubbing compound


Step1
Determine where you would like the stripes to be placed on the car. You may need to tape off specific areas to get a better idea of the final product before you start. After making your decision, wash the car as usual. Wipe the car down with a dry cloth. Apply wax removal solution to remove excess wax from the car. Make sure the car is completely dry before moving forward.

Step2
Create stripes using masking tape. Use two pieces of tape to create a stripe. The exposed area between the pieces of tape is where you will paint the stripe. Wrap sandpaper around a small-to-medium-sized block. Lightly sand the area between the pieces of tape to remove paint and wax residue. Try not to disturb the masking tape during the process.

Step3
Cover areas not being painted with newspaper to protect the paint underneath. Use spray paint primer that's specifically made for cars to create the stripes. Follow the instructions on the can. Spray in a single direction from top to bottom for an even coat. Allow primer to dry completely before applying colored paint.

Step4
Apply spray paint evenly from top to bottom over the area you've primed. You may need to apply three to five coats, depending on the color and how well the fiber glass absorbs the paint. Wait 5 to 10 minutes before applying another coat.

Step5
Check to see if the stripe is even before removing the tape and newspaper. Make any corrections using the paint. Allow the paint to dry. This may take several days, depending on the paint and weather conditions. Remove the tape and newspaper. Wash and apply wax to the entire car as you normally would.

Tips & Warnings
If stripes appear raised, use a rubbing compound to soften the edges. Use the rubbing compound before washing and waxing the car for best results.

DO NOT ATTEMPT THIS IF YOU HAVE NO CLUE!!! LOVEMUSTANGS.COM ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR INCOMPETENCE!!
WE SUGGEST PAINTING A FEW JUNKYARD HOODS TO GET THE FEEL BEFORE ATTEMPTING TO ADD PAINT TO ANY VEHICLE YOU CARE ABOUT.]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=318 Sun, 28 Sep 2008 18:59:51 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=318
Mirror trick shows promise as stroke therapy
LONDON (Reuters) - Using a mirror to create the illusion that a person's paralyzed limb moves in tandem with a healthy one appears to speed recovery from stroke, a Japanese researcher said Friday.

The finding showed the optical illusion works faster than conventional treatment and suggests the mind plays a powerful role in the body's recovery, Kazu Amimoto of Tokyo Metropolitan University told the World Stroke Conference in Vienna.

"The mental aspect of rehabilitation, has far greater importance than previously understood and should be paid far more attention," Amimoto said in a statement.

Hemiplegia, a condition in which one half of a person's body is paralyzed, is one of the most common long-term consequences of stroke and one of the biggest challenges for rehabilitation.

Conventional therapy seeks to restore mobility and movement by concentrating directly on the paralyzed half of the body using physical exercises and stimulation.

In the new therapy, the researchers placed a mirror on the middle of a person's body so that movements from the healthy limbs made it appear as if the paralyzed arms and legs were moving in similar fashion.

This optical illusion had a far greater effect stimulating the brain and improving motor function in the paralyzed part of the body, Amimoto said.

The researchers compared the treatments by measuring the angle at which the foot joint could bend and the time it took people to perform a task with the paralyzed lower limb.

They found in the study of 14 stroke patients that direct treatment brought a 0.9 degree improvement in the angle of bending and no acceleration of movement while the mirror trick resulted in acceleration in movement of more than 12 percent, Amimoto said.]]>
Mirror trick shows promise as stroke therapy
LONDON (Reuters) - Using a mirror to create the illusion that a person's paralyzed limb moves in tandem with a healthy one appears to speed recovery from stroke, a Japanese researcher said Friday.

The finding showed the optical illusion works faster than conventional treatment and suggests the mind plays a powerful role in the body's recovery, Kazu Amimoto of Tokyo Metropolitan University told the World Stroke Conference in Vienna.

"The mental aspect of rehabilitation, has far greater importance than previously understood and should be paid far more attention," Amimoto said in a statement.

Hemiplegia, a condition in which one half of a person's body is paralyzed, is one of the most common long-term consequences of stroke and one of the biggest challenges for rehabilitation.

Conventional therapy seeks to restore mobility and movement by concentrating directly on the paralyzed half of the body using physical exercises and stimulation.

In the new therapy, the researchers placed a mirror on the middle of a person's body so that movements from the healthy limbs made it appear as if the paralyzed arms and legs were moving in similar fashion.

This optical illusion had a far greater effect stimulating the brain and improving motor function in the paralyzed part of the body, Amimoto said.

The researchers compared the treatments by measuring the angle at which the foot joint could bend and the time it took people to perform a task with the paralyzed lower limb.

They found in the study of 14 stroke patients that direct treatment brought a 0.9 degree improvement in the angle of bending and no acceleration of movement while the mirror trick resulted in acceleration in movement of more than 12 percent, Amimoto said.]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=317 Sat, 27 Sep 2008 02:48:22 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=317
http://bigspud.com/]]>
http://bigspud.com/]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=316 Mon, 22 Sep 2008 13:39:55 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=316
Heres a story from the BBC that proves it!

Texting More Dangerous than Drunk Driving
According to a recent study, drivers who text behind the wheel are more impaired than those under the influence of alcohol or drugs. This finding is particularly alarming given that nearly half of British drivers aged 18 to 24 admit to texting while driving. In a simulated driving test, the reaction times of people texting as they drove fell by 35%. In comparison, reaction times of drivers under the influence of cannabis or who had consumed the legal limit of alcohol fell just 21% and 12% respectively. Drivers who texted behind the wheel also drifted out of their lanes more, were less able to maintain a safe distance from other cars, and had poorer steering control.

More info here with videos]]>
Heres a story from the BBC that proves it!

Texting More Dangerous than Drunk Driving
According to a recent study, drivers who text behind the wheel are more impaired than those under the influence of alcohol or drugs. This finding is particularly alarming given that nearly half of British drivers aged 18 to 24 admit to texting while driving. In a simulated driving test, the reaction times of people texting as they drove fell by 35%. In comparison, reaction times of drivers under the influence of cannabis or who had consumed the legal limit of alcohol fell just 21% and 12% respectively. Drivers who texted behind the wheel also drifted out of their lanes more, were less able to maintain a safe distance from other cars, and had poorer steering control.

More info here with videos]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=315 Wed, 17 Sep 2008 19:17:11 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=315
Someday soon you may call Sacramento Mustang and talk to Jenny or James, or maybe speak to my wife Suzie. It is such a pleasure to have a family participate in the family business. Drive your Mustang often, drive safely.

LoveMustangs.com really tries to help promote the little guys, afterall we are a little site!
Sacramento Mustang

1965-1973 Mustang Parts

1979-2004 Mustang Parts

2005-2008 Mustang Parts]]>
Someday soon you may call Sacramento Mustang and talk to Jenny or James, or maybe speak to my wife Suzie. It is such a pleasure to have a family participate in the family business. Drive your Mustang often, drive safely.

LoveMustangs.com really tries to help promote the little guys, afterall we are a little site!
Sacramento Mustang

1965-1973 Mustang Parts

1979-2004 Mustang Parts

2005-2008 Mustang Parts]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=314 Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:57:09 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=314
Fireflies tend to be brown and soft-bodied, often with the elytra more leathery than in other beetles. Though the females of some species are similar in appearance to males, larviform females are found in many other firefly species. These females can often be distinguished from the larvae only because they have compound eyes.The most commonly known fireflies are nocturnal, though there are numerous species that are diurnal. Most diurnal species are non-luminescent, though some species that remain in shadowy areas can produce light.

A few days after mating, a female lays her fertilized eggs on or just below the surface of the ground. The eggs hatch 3-4 weeks later and the larva feed until the end of the summer. The larvae are commonly called glowworms, not to be confused with the distinct beetle family Phengodidae or fly genus Arachnocampa. Lampyrid larvae have simple eyes. The term glowworm is also used for both adults and larvae of species such as Lampyris noctiluca, the common European glowworm, in which only the non-flying adult females glow brightly and the flying males glow only very weakly and intermittently. Fireflies overwinter (some species for several years) during the larval stage. Some do this by burrowing underground, while others find places on or under the bark of trees. They emerge in the spring. After several weeks of feeding, they pupate for 1 to 2.5 weeks and emerge as adults. The larvae of most species are specialized predators and feed on other larvae, terrestrial snails, and slugs. Some are so specialized that they have grooved mandibles which deliver digestive fluids directly to their prey. The diet of adults is variable. It has been reported that some are predatory and some feed on plant pollen or nectar.

Light production in fireflies is due to a chemical reaction that occurs in specialized light-emitting organs, usually on the lower abdomen. The enzyme luciferase acts on luciferin in this organ to stimulate light emission. This reaction is of scientific interest. Genes coding for these substances have been inserted into many different organisms (see Luciferase - Applications). Luciferase is also used in forensics, and the enzyme has medical uses.

For adult beetles, it is primarily used to locate other individuals of the same species for reproduction. Many species, especially in the genus Photinus, are distinguished by the unique courtship flash patterns emitted by flying males in search of females. Photinus females generally do not fly, but give a flash response to males of their own species.

Bio luminescence is a very efficient process. Some 90% of the energy a firefly uses to create light is actually converted into visible light. By comparison, an incandescent electric bulb can convert only 10 percent of total energy used into visible light, and the remainder is emitted as heat.

Tropical fireflies, particularly in Southeast Asia (Thailand and Malaysia), routinely synchronize their flashes among large groups, a startling example of spontaneous biological order. This phenomenon occurs through the night along river banks in the Malaysian jungles every day of the year. Current hypotheses about the causes of this behavior involve diet, social interaction, and altitude. In the United States, one of the most famous sightings of fireflies blinking in unison occurs near Elkmont, Tennessee in the Great Smoky Mountains during the second week of June 2005[1]. Congaree National Park in South Carolina is host to the phenomenon [2].

Female Photuris fireflies are known for mimicking the mating flashes of other fireflies for the sole purpose of predation. Target males are attracted to what appears to be a suitable mate, and are then eaten. For this reason the Photuris female is sometimes referred to as "".

Many fireflies do not produce light. Usually these species are diurnal, or day-flying, such as those in the genus Ellychnia. A few diurnal fireflies that primarily inhabit shadowy places, such as beneath tall plants or trees, are luminescent. One such genus is Lucidota. All fireflies glow as larvae. Bio luminescence serves a different function in lampyrid larvae than it does in adults. It appears to be a warning signal to predators, since many firefly larvae contain chemicals that are distasteful or toxic.]]>
Fireflies tend to be brown and soft-bodied, often with the elytra more leathery than in other beetles. Though the females of some species are similar in appearance to males, larviform females are found in many other firefly species. These females can often be distinguished from the larvae only because they have compound eyes.The most commonly known fireflies are nocturnal, though there are numerous species that are diurnal. Most diurnal species are non-luminescent, though some species that remain in shadowy areas can produce light.

A few days after mating, a female lays her fertilized eggs on or just below the surface of the ground. The eggs hatch 3-4 weeks later and the larva feed until the end of the summer. The larvae are commonly called glowworms, not to be confused with the distinct beetle family Phengodidae or fly genus Arachnocampa. Lampyrid larvae have simple eyes. The term glowworm is also used for both adults and larvae of species such as Lampyris noctiluca, the common European glowworm, in which only the non-flying adult females glow brightly and the flying males glow only very weakly and intermittently. Fireflies overwinter (some species for several years) during the larval stage. Some do this by burrowing underground, while others find places on or under the bark of trees. They emerge in the spring. After several weeks of feeding, they pupate for 1 to 2.5 weeks and emerge as adults. The larvae of most species are specialized predators and feed on other larvae, terrestrial snails, and slugs. Some are so specialized that they have grooved mandibles which deliver digestive fluids directly to their prey. The diet of adults is variable. It has been reported that some are predatory and some feed on plant pollen or nectar.

Light production in fireflies is due to a chemical reaction that occurs in specialized light-emitting organs, usually on the lower abdomen. The enzyme luciferase acts on luciferin in this organ to stimulate light emission. This reaction is of scientific interest. Genes coding for these substances have been inserted into many different organisms (see Luciferase - Applications). Luciferase is also used in forensics, and the enzyme has medical uses.

For adult beetles, it is primarily used to locate other individuals of the same species for reproduction. Many species, especially in the genus Photinus, are distinguished by the unique courtship flash patterns emitted by flying males in search of females. Photinus females generally do not fly, but give a flash response to males of their own species.

Bio luminescence is a very efficient process. Some 90% of the energy a firefly uses to create light is actually converted into visible light. By comparison, an incandescent electric bulb can convert only 10 percent of total energy used into visible light, and the remainder is emitted as heat.

Tropical fireflies, particularly in Southeast Asia (Thailand and Malaysia), routinely synchronize their flashes among large groups, a startling example of spontaneous biological order. This phenomenon occurs through the night along river banks in the Malaysian jungles every day of the year. Current hypotheses about the causes of this behavior involve diet, social interaction, and altitude. In the United States, one of the most famous sightings of fireflies blinking in unison occurs near Elkmont, Tennessee in the Great Smoky Mountains during the second week of June 2005[1]. Congaree National Park in South Carolina is host to the phenomenon [2].

Female Photuris fireflies are known for mimicking the mating flashes of other fireflies for the sole purpose of predation. Target males are attracted to what appears to be a suitable mate, and are then eaten. For this reason the Photuris female is sometimes referred to as "".

Many fireflies do not produce light. Usually these species are diurnal, or day-flying, such as those in the genus Ellychnia. A few diurnal fireflies that primarily inhabit shadowy places, such as beneath tall plants or trees, are luminescent. One such genus is Lucidota. All fireflies glow as larvae. Bio luminescence serves a different function in lampyrid larvae than it does in adults. It appears to be a warning signal to predators, since many firefly larvae contain chemicals that are distasteful or toxic.]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=313 Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:33:16 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=313

CAUTION-
Photo follows.may be too frightening for some viewers

Scroll down









]]>

CAUTION-
Photo follows.may be too frightening for some viewers

Scroll down









]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=312 Wed, 03 Sep 2008 14:26:15 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=312
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Inv...eeCar.aspx]]>
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Inv...eeCar.aspx]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=311 Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:14:18 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=311
http://www.redstate.com/diaries/redstate...rack-obam/]]>
http://www.redstate.com/diaries/redstate...rack-obam/]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=310 Tue, 05 Aug 2008 23:17:53 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=310
NASA's Phoenix lander has discovered a toxic chemical in soil near Mars' north pole, dimming hopes for finding life on the Red Planet, the probe's operators said Monday.

The chemical, perchlorate, is an oxidant widely used in solid rocket fuel. Researchers are still puzzled over the results and checking to make sure the perchlorate wasn't carried to Mars from Earth, the University of Arizona-based science team said.

"While we have not completed our process on these soil samples, we have very interesting intermediate results," Peter Smith, the principal investigator for the project, said in a written statement.

Early readings from a device aboard Phoenix called the Microscopy, Electrochemistry and Conductivity Analyzer, or MECA, "suggested Earth-like soil," Smith said.

"Further analysis has revealed un-Earth like aspects of the soil chemistry," he said.

The Phoenix team has scheduled a teleconference for Tuesday to discuss the findings.

"Oxidizing" soil conditions also were found at the Viking 1 and 2 landing sites in the 1970s, leading most scientists to conclude that there could be no life there.

NASA's Odyssey orbiter first reported in 2001 that the planet's arctic plain was rich in water ice, mostly in the form of permafrost. Since the Phoenix lander touched down in May, robotic instruments on the craft have been collecting and analyzing soil samples, looking for organic compounds that would indicate Mars is or was able to support life.

The new findings from Phoenix cast into further doubt the possibility that life exists on Mars' surface. But they do not rule out the possibility that life once existed, nor do they necessarily rule out the possibility of life existing now, perhaps in a deep underground aquifer.

Phoenix's MECA instrument was designed to run four experiments on Mars' soil, testing for such characteristics as acidity and the presence of various compounds, minerals and salts. The science team has completed two MECA runs on soil, and perchlorate did not turn up in the first experiment.

The Phoenix team are continuing to use MECA and another instrument called the Thermal and Evolved-Gas Analyzer, or TEGA, to look for organic chemicals. TEGA can also detect the presence of perchlorate, but so far has not done so.

NASA also announced last week that the Phoenix mission has been extended to the end of September. The mission could be extended again if it is operational then, but the harsh Martian winter will bring it to an end if nothing else does, probably around November.]]>
NASA's Phoenix lander has discovered a toxic chemical in soil near Mars' north pole, dimming hopes for finding life on the Red Planet, the probe's operators said Monday.

The chemical, perchlorate, is an oxidant widely used in solid rocket fuel. Researchers are still puzzled over the results and checking to make sure the perchlorate wasn't carried to Mars from Earth, the University of Arizona-based science team said.

"While we have not completed our process on these soil samples, we have very interesting intermediate results," Peter Smith, the principal investigator for the project, said in a written statement.

Early readings from a device aboard Phoenix called the Microscopy, Electrochemistry and Conductivity Analyzer, or MECA, "suggested Earth-like soil," Smith said.

"Further analysis has revealed un-Earth like aspects of the soil chemistry," he said.

The Phoenix team has scheduled a teleconference for Tuesday to discuss the findings.

"Oxidizing" soil conditions also were found at the Viking 1 and 2 landing sites in the 1970s, leading most scientists to conclude that there could be no life there.

NASA's Odyssey orbiter first reported in 2001 that the planet's arctic plain was rich in water ice, mostly in the form of permafrost. Since the Phoenix lander touched down in May, robotic instruments on the craft have been collecting and analyzing soil samples, looking for organic compounds that would indicate Mars is or was able to support life.

The new findings from Phoenix cast into further doubt the possibility that life exists on Mars' surface. But they do not rule out the possibility that life once existed, nor do they necessarily rule out the possibility of life existing now, perhaps in a deep underground aquifer.

Phoenix's MECA instrument was designed to run four experiments on Mars' soil, testing for such characteristics as acidity and the presence of various compounds, minerals and salts. The science team has completed two MECA runs on soil, and perchlorate did not turn up in the first experiment.

The Phoenix team are continuing to use MECA and another instrument called the Thermal and Evolved-Gas Analyzer, or TEGA, to look for organic chemicals. TEGA can also detect the presence of perchlorate, but so far has not done so.

NASA also announced last week that the Phoenix mission has been extended to the end of September. The mission could be extended again if it is operational then, but the harsh Martian winter will bring it to an end if nothing else does, probably around November.]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=309 Tue, 05 Aug 2008 23:13:20 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=309


During his life at the zoo, he fathered 22 offspring (6 survived to adulthood) with three females, and lived to see his grandchildren. None of his offspring were albino. His last son, Urko, died in August 2003.

He was thought to be between 38 and 40 years old; the average lifespan of a wild gorilla is 25. He had suffered since 2001 from an unusual form of skin cancer, possibly relating to his albinism, and it was announced in September 2003 that he was dying. Thousands visited the zoo to say goodbye before he was euthanized in November 2003.]]>


During his life at the zoo, he fathered 22 offspring (6 survived to adulthood) with three females, and lived to see his grandchildren. None of his offspring were albino. His last son, Urko, died in August 2003.

He was thought to be between 38 and 40 years old; the average lifespan of a wild gorilla is 25. He had suffered since 2001 from an unusual form of skin cancer, possibly relating to his albinism, and it was announced in September 2003 that he was dying. Thousands visited the zoo to say goodbye before he was euthanized in November 2003.]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=308 Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:22:33 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=308 This is hysterical! Look at it closely.



Now I ask you...
Who but a redneck... stands and looks at a pair of men's briefs and says hummmm...I can make a nice summer top from these!!



On the other hand...$6 for a three pack is a good price!! :smilie_grin:]]> This is hysterical! Look at it closely.



Now I ask you...
Who but a redneck... stands and looks at a pair of men's briefs and says hummmm...I can make a nice summer top from these!!



On the other hand...$6 for a three pack is a good price!! :smilie_grin:]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=307 Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:50:08 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=307 While a number of scientific studies have found no evidence of a link between cell phone use and cancer risk, the head of a prominent US cancer research institute is warning people not to rule out the possibility that long-term cell phone use can lead to increased risk of brain tumors. The doctor’s recent memo to staffers, which recommends that adults try to keep cell phones away from their heads and that cell phone use among children be kept to a minimum, was based on early findings from unpublished data suggesting that exposure to the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the devices may be linked to a number of adverse health effects, including cancer.

The head of a prominent cancer research institute issued an unprecedented warning to his faculty and staff Wednesday: Limit cell phone use because of the possible risk of cancer.

The warning from Dr. Ronald B. Herberman, director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, is contrary to numerous studies that don't find a link between cancer and cell phone use, and a public lack of worry by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Herberman is basing his alarm on early unpublished data. He says it takes too long to get answers from science and he believes people should take action now — especially when it comes to children.

"Really at the heart of my concern is that we shouldn't wait for a definitive study to come out, but err on the side of being safe rather than sorry later," Herberman said.

No other major academic cancer research institutions have sounded such an alarm about cell phone use. But Herberman's advice is sure to raise concern among many cell phone users and especially parents.

In the memo he sent to about 3,000 faculty and staff Wednesday, he says children should use cell phones only for emergencies because their brains are still developing.

Adults should keep the phone away from the head and use the speakerphone or a wireless headset, he says. He even warns against using cell phones in public places like a bus because it exposes others to the phone's electromagnetic fields.

The issue that concerns some scientists — though nowhere near a consensus — is electromagnetic radiation, especially its possible effects on children. It is not a major topic in conferences of brain specialists.

A 2008 University of Utah analysis looked at nine studies — including some Herberman cites — with thousands of brain tumor patients and concludes "we found no overall increased risk of brain tumors among cellular phone users. The potential elevated risk of brain tumors after long-term cellular phone use awaits confirmation by future studies."

Studies last year in France and Norway concluded the same thing.

"If there is a risk from these products — and at this point we do not know that there is — it is probably very small," the Food and Drug Administration says on an agency Web site.

Still, Herberman cites a "growing body of literature linking long-term cell phone use to possible adverse health effects including cancer."

"Although the evidence is still controversial, I am convinced that there are sufficient data to warrant issuing an advisory to share some precautionary advice on cell phone use," he wrote in his memo.

A driving force behind the memo was Devra Lee Davis, the director of the university's center for environmental oncology.

"The question is do you want to play Russian roulette with your brain," she said in an interview from her cell phone while using the hands-free speaker phone as recommended. "I don't know that cell phones are dangerous. But I don't know that they are safe."

Of concern are the still unknown effects of more than a decade of cell phone use, with some studies raising alarms, said Davis, a former health adviser in the Clinton Administration.

She said 20 different groups have endorsed the advice the Pittsburgh cancer institute gave, and authorities in England, France and India have cautioned children's use of cell phones.

Herberman and Davis point to a massive ongoing research project known as Interphone, involving scientists in 13 nations, mostly in Europe. Results already published in peer-reviewed journals from this project aren't so alarming, but Herberman is citing work not yet published.

The published research focuses on more than 5,000 cases of brain tumors. The National Research Council in the U.S., which isn't participating in the Interphone project, reported in January that the brain tumor research had "selection bias." That means it relied on people with cancer to remember how often they used cell phones. It is not considered the most accurate research approach.

The largest published study, which appeared in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute in 2006, tracked 420,000 Danish cell phone users, including thousands that had used the phones for more than 10 years. It found no increased risk of cancer among those using cell phones.

A French study based on Interphone research and published in 2007 concluded that regular cell phone users had "no significant increased risk" for three major types of nervous system tumors. It did note, however, that there was "the possibility of an increased risk among the heaviest users" for one type of brain tumor, but that needs to be verified in future research.

Earlier research also has found no connection.

Joshua E. Muscat of Penn State University, who has studied cancer and cell phones in other research projects partly funded by the cell phone industry, said there are at least a dozen studies that have found no cancer-cell phone link. He said a Swedish study cited by Herberman as support for his warning was biased and flawed.

"We certainly don't know of any mechanism by which radiofrequency exposure would cause a cancerous effect in cells. We just don't know this might possibly occur," Muscat said.

Cell phones emit radiofrequency energy, a type of radiation that is a form of electromagnetic radiation, according to the National Cancer Institute. Though studies are being done to see if there is a link between it and tumors of the brain and central nervous system, there is no definitive link between the two, the institute says on its Web site.

"By all means, if a person feels compelled that they should take precautions in reducing the amount of electromagnetic radio waves through their bodies, by all means they should do so," said Dan Catena, a spokesman for the American Cancer Society. "But at the same time, we have to remember there's no conclusive evidence that links cell phones to cancer, whether it's brain tumors or other forms of cancer."

Joe Farren, a spokesman for the CTIA-The Wireless Association, a trade group for the wireless industry, said the group believes there is a risk of misinforming the public if science isn't used as the ultimate guide on the issue.

"When you look at the overwhelming majority of studies that have been peer reviewed and published in scientific journals around the world, you'll find no relationship between wireless usage and adverse health affects," Farren said.

Frank Barnes, who chaired the January report from the National Research Council, said Wednesday that "the jury is out" on how hazardous long-term cell phone use might be.

Speaking from his cell phone, the professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of Colorado at Boulder said he takes no special precautions in his own phone use. And he offered no specific advice to people worried about the matter.

It's up to each individual to decide what if anything to do. If people use a cell phone instead of having a land line, "that may very well be reasonable for them," he said.

Susan Juffe, a 58-year-old Pittsburgh special education teacher, heard about Herberman's cell phone advice on the radio earlier in the day.

"Now, I'm worried. It's scary," she said.

She says she'll think twice about allowing her 10-year-old daughter Jayne to use the cell phone.

"I don't want to get it (brain cancer) and I certainly don't want you to get it," she explained to her daughter.

Sara Loughran, a 24-year-old doctoral student at the University of Pittsburgh, sat in a bus stop Wednesday chatting on her cell phone with her mother. She also had heard the news earlier in the day, but was not as concerned.

"I think if they gave me specific numbers and specific information and it was scary enough, I would be concerned," Loughran said, planning to call her mother again in a matter of minutes. "Without specific numbers, it's too vague to get me worked up."]]> While a number of scientific studies have found no evidence of a link between cell phone use and cancer risk, the head of a prominent US cancer research institute is warning people not to rule out the possibility that long-term cell phone use can lead to increased risk of brain tumors. The doctor’s recent memo to staffers, which recommends that adults try to keep cell phones away from their heads and that cell phone use among children be kept to a minimum, was based on early findings from unpublished data suggesting that exposure to the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the devices may be linked to a number of adverse health effects, including cancer.

The head of a prominent cancer research institute issued an unprecedented warning to his faculty and staff Wednesday: Limit cell phone use because of the possible risk of cancer.

The warning from Dr. Ronald B. Herberman, director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, is contrary to numerous studies that don't find a link between cancer and cell phone use, and a public lack of worry by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Herberman is basing his alarm on early unpublished data. He says it takes too long to get answers from science and he believes people should take action now — especially when it comes to children.

"Really at the heart of my concern is that we shouldn't wait for a definitive study to come out, but err on the side of being safe rather than sorry later," Herberman said.

No other major academic cancer research institutions have sounded such an alarm about cell phone use. But Herberman's advice is sure to raise concern among many cell phone users and especially parents.

In the memo he sent to about 3,000 faculty and staff Wednesday, he says children should use cell phones only for emergencies because their brains are still developing.

Adults should keep the phone away from the head and use the speakerphone or a wireless headset, he says. He even warns against using cell phones in public places like a bus because it exposes others to the phone's electromagnetic fields.

The issue that concerns some scientists — though nowhere near a consensus — is electromagnetic radiation, especially its possible effects on children. It is not a major topic in conferences of brain specialists.

A 2008 University of Utah analysis looked at nine studies — including some Herberman cites — with thousands of brain tumor patients and concludes "we found no overall increased risk of brain tumors among cellular phone users. The potential elevated risk of brain tumors after long-term cellular phone use awaits confirmation by future studies."

Studies last year in France and Norway concluded the same thing.

"If there is a risk from these products — and at this point we do not know that there is — it is probably very small," the Food and Drug Administration says on an agency Web site.

Still, Herberman cites a "growing body of literature linking long-term cell phone use to possible adverse health effects including cancer."

"Although the evidence is still controversial, I am convinced that there are sufficient data to warrant issuing an advisory to share some precautionary advice on cell phone use," he wrote in his memo.

A driving force behind the memo was Devra Lee Davis, the director of the university's center for environmental oncology.

"The question is do you want to play Russian roulette with your brain," she said in an interview from her cell phone while using the hands-free speaker phone as recommended. "I don't know that cell phones are dangerous. But I don't know that they are safe."

Of concern are the still unknown effects of more than a decade of cell phone use, with some studies raising alarms, said Davis, a former health adviser in the Clinton Administration.

She said 20 different groups have endorsed the advice the Pittsburgh cancer institute gave, and authorities in England, France and India have cautioned children's use of cell phones.

Herberman and Davis point to a massive ongoing research project known as Interphone, involving scientists in 13 nations, mostly in Europe. Results already published in peer-reviewed journals from this project aren't so alarming, but Herberman is citing work not yet published.

The published research focuses on more than 5,000 cases of brain tumors. The National Research Council in the U.S., which isn't participating in the Interphone project, reported in January that the brain tumor research had "selection bias." That means it relied on people with cancer to remember how often they used cell phones. It is not considered the most accurate research approach.

The largest published study, which appeared in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute in 2006, tracked 420,000 Danish cell phone users, including thousands that had used the phones for more than 10 years. It found no increased risk of cancer among those using cell phones.

A French study based on Interphone research and published in 2007 concluded that regular cell phone users had "no significant increased risk" for three major types of nervous system tumors. It did note, however, that there was "the possibility of an increased risk among the heaviest users" for one type of brain tumor, but that needs to be verified in future research.

Earlier research also has found no connection.

Joshua E. Muscat of Penn State University, who has studied cancer and cell phones in other research projects partly funded by the cell phone industry, said there are at least a dozen studies that have found no cancer-cell phone link. He said a Swedish study cited by Herberman as support for his warning was biased and flawed.

"We certainly don't know of any mechanism by which radiofrequency exposure would cause a cancerous effect in cells. We just don't know this might possibly occur," Muscat said.

Cell phones emit radiofrequency energy, a type of radiation that is a form of electromagnetic radiation, according to the National Cancer Institute. Though studies are being done to see if there is a link between it and tumors of the brain and central nervous system, there is no definitive link between the two, the institute says on its Web site.

"By all means, if a person feels compelled that they should take precautions in reducing the amount of electromagnetic radio waves through their bodies, by all means they should do so," said Dan Catena, a spokesman for the American Cancer Society. "But at the same time, we have to remember there's no conclusive evidence that links cell phones to cancer, whether it's brain tumors or other forms of cancer."

Joe Farren, a spokesman for the CTIA-The Wireless Association, a trade group for the wireless industry, said the group believes there is a risk of misinforming the public if science isn't used as the ultimate guide on the issue.

"When you look at the overwhelming majority of studies that have been peer reviewed and published in scientific journals around the world, you'll find no relationship between wireless usage and adverse health affects," Farren said.

Frank Barnes, who chaired the January report from the National Research Council, said Wednesday that "the jury is out" on how hazardous long-term cell phone use might be.

Speaking from his cell phone, the professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of Colorado at Boulder said he takes no special precautions in his own phone use. And he offered no specific advice to people worried about the matter.

It's up to each individual to decide what if anything to do. If people use a cell phone instead of having a land line, "that may very well be reasonable for them," he said.

Susan Juffe, a 58-year-old Pittsburgh special education teacher, heard about Herberman's cell phone advice on the radio earlier in the day.

"Now, I'm worried. It's scary," she said.

She says she'll think twice about allowing her 10-year-old daughter Jayne to use the cell phone.

"I don't want to get it (brain cancer) and I certainly don't want you to get it," she explained to her daughter.

Sara Loughran, a 24-year-old doctoral student at the University of Pittsburgh, sat in a bus stop Wednesday chatting on her cell phone with her mother. She also had heard the news earlier in the day, but was not as concerned.

"I think if they gave me specific numbers and specific information and it was scary enough, I would be concerned," Loughran said, planning to call her mother again in a matter of minutes. "Without specific numbers, it's too vague to get me worked up."]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=306 Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:32:41 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=306 By Martin Hutchinson

After two decades of research into an HIV vaccine, there comes a bleak message from one of those leading the hunt.

Professor David Baltimore, president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, said that while efforts are continuing, there is "little hope" of success.

"In 1984, we were told that as the virus had been found, a vaccine should be just around the corner," he said.

"But we are no closer to a vaccine now than we were then."

This plunge in scientific morale follows the collapse, last year, of a massive vaccine experimental vaccine project.

It quickly became obvious that, despite 10 years of hard work, and millions of dollars spent, the jab offered zero protection in the real world.

Elsewhere, however, the mood is far less downbeat.

Professor Quentin Sattentau, working on a vaccine at Oxford University, said that while realism was important, a breakthrough could still come quickly.

It's possible that we will never find a vaccine for HIV. But that doesn't mean that we should stop looking Professor Quentin Sattentau HIV vaccine researcher, Oxford University.

"We are making small steps all the time, and we can never predict what science will discover at any moment."

HIV is quite unlike other viruses which have fallen to the vaccine-makers over the past two centuries.

It has a remarkable ability to disguise itself against the body's defenses, constantly changing to avoid detection.

This means that vaccines which rely on using a recognisable part of the virus to prime the immune system can be ineffective almost as fast as they enter the body.

"This variability is the biggest problem - it's much faster, for example, than influenza," said Professor Sattentau.

Another problem is its lethal nature. Normally science can learn from the survivors of a viral infection, but in HIV, although some live with the virus for decades, there are no reliable reports of anyone managing to clear it from their bodies entirely.

To focus entirely on vaccine would ignore the massive strides made in HIV treatments - the latest crop of antiretroviral drugs offer the prospect of almost normal lifespan for some patients.

However, as research published only this week showed, they cannot fully purge the virus from the body.

Simple method

Despite the remaining glimmers of hope from other vaccine projects, some HIV experts have welcomed Professor Baltimore's comments.

Deborah Jack, the chief executive of the National Aids Trust, which lobbies governments for more research funding into HIV vaccines, said that there was no reason to give up hope.

"What we have to remember is that it took 47 years to produce a polio vaccine, and 42 years to make one for chickenpox.

"There are currently 30 trials into vaccines running at the moment around the world, and even if they fail, we will learn more about HIV from them."

And Lisa Power, from the Terrence Higgins Trust, said that hype from pharmaceutical companies and other about the prospects for a vaccines risked drawing attention away from the only practical methods available today to those at risk of infection.

"I would commend him on his comments," she said. "We need to balance the hopes for the future with what we can do now.

"Many people would welcome an injection which would allow them to have unprotected sex for the rest of their lives, but unfortunately it's not happening in the real world.

"Safe sex, testing and treatment - these are the ways to prevent its spread," she said.

"The good news is that HIV is starting to lose - but it's going to be trench warfare, taking ground patient by patient."]]> By Martin Hutchinson

After two decades of research into an HIV vaccine, there comes a bleak message from one of those leading the hunt.

Professor David Baltimore, president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, said that while efforts are continuing, there is "little hope" of success.

"In 1984, we were told that as the virus had been found, a vaccine should be just around the corner," he said.

"But we are no closer to a vaccine now than we were then."

This plunge in scientific morale follows the collapse, last year, of a massive vaccine experimental vaccine project.

It quickly became obvious that, despite 10 years of hard work, and millions of dollars spent, the jab offered zero protection in the real world.

Elsewhere, however, the mood is far less downbeat.

Professor Quentin Sattentau, working on a vaccine at Oxford University, said that while realism was important, a breakthrough could still come quickly.

It's possible that we will never find a vaccine for HIV. But that doesn't mean that we should stop looking Professor Quentin Sattentau HIV vaccine researcher, Oxford University.

"We are making small steps all the time, and we can never predict what science will discover at any moment."

HIV is quite unlike other viruses which have fallen to the vaccine-makers over the past two centuries.

It has a remarkable ability to disguise itself against the body's defenses, constantly changing to avoid detection.

This means that vaccines which rely on using a recognisable part of the virus to prime the immune system can be ineffective almost as fast as they enter the body.

"This variability is the biggest problem - it's much faster, for example, than influenza," said Professor Sattentau.

Another problem is its lethal nature. Normally science can learn from the survivors of a viral infection, but in HIV, although some live with the virus for decades, there are no reliable reports of anyone managing to clear it from their bodies entirely.

To focus entirely on vaccine would ignore the massive strides made in HIV treatments - the latest crop of antiretroviral drugs offer the prospect of almost normal lifespan for some patients.

However, as research published only this week showed, they cannot fully purge the virus from the body.

Simple method

Despite the remaining glimmers of hope from other vaccine projects, some HIV experts have welcomed Professor Baltimore's comments.

Deborah Jack, the chief executive of the National Aids Trust, which lobbies governments for more research funding into HIV vaccines, said that there was no reason to give up hope.

"What we have to remember is that it took 47 years to produce a polio vaccine, and 42 years to make one for chickenpox.

"There are currently 30 trials into vaccines running at the moment around the world, and even if they fail, we will learn more about HIV from them."

And Lisa Power, from the Terrence Higgins Trust, said that hype from pharmaceutical companies and other about the prospects for a vaccines risked drawing attention away from the only practical methods available today to those at risk of infection.

"I would commend him on his comments," she said. "We need to balance the hopes for the future with what we can do now.

"Many people would welcome an injection which would allow them to have unprotected sex for the rest of their lives, but unfortunately it's not happening in the real world.

"Safe sex, testing and treatment - these are the ways to prevent its spread," she said.

"The good news is that HIV is starting to lose - but it's going to be trench warfare, taking ground patient by patient."]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=305 Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:26:33 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=305 By Martin Hutchinson

A woman was left disabled after following a "detox" diet which involved drinking large quantities of water.

Although doctors stress the need to avoid dehydration by drinking enough fluids, drinking more than enough is a different matter.

The human body may be mostly water, but you can have too much of a good thing.

In the most serious cases, "water intoxication" can kill, and there is, say experts, scant evidence that drinking even slightly more water than usual can improve your health.

The current popularity of detox diets which recommend drinking many litres of water a day, and drinking even when not thirsty, could cause problems if taken to extremes, they say.

The claim is that drinking more than usual can do everything from improving your skin tone to "flushing out" toxins from your body.


You shouldn't be drinking massively over and above what you feel with comfortable.

However, the amount of water actually needed in a day varies from person to person, and depends on other factors such as climate, and exercise, says the British Dietetic Association.

Flawed industry

Ursula Arens, a dietician, said that there was a difference between normal consumption of one or two litres a day, not just in the form of water, but also from coffee, tea, and juice, and constant, ritualistic consumption of water throughout the day.

"You shouldn't be drinking massively over and above what you feel with comfortable, when you're not thirsty, in a mechanical way."

She said that the evidence supporting the whole "hydration industry" was flawed.

"If you're a top sportsman, earning £10,000 for a single game, I can understand the need to focus intensely on your hydration, but not if you're someone just doing a couple of lengths at the swimming pool.

"It's just a great marketing opportunity, nothing more."

She said that the science of detoxing was unsupported by evidence, partly because its precise effects on the body had never been defined.

She added: "The body already has perfectly good ways of getting rid of toxins - mainly in the liver, and it's hard to see how consuming more water would affect these."

'No evidence'

Others are more scathing about the fashion for both detoxing and taking frequent sips from an ever-present bottle of mineral water.

Kidney specialist Professor Graham MacGregor said there was no evidence that either had any benefit.


People should drink when their body tells them to - when they get thirsty
Prof Graham MacGregor
St George's University of London

He described how too much water could "overwhelm" the body's natural mechanisms for keeping levels in balance.

"The body already has a brilliant system for doing this, but if water levels in the blood rise too high, it just can't cope."

If vast quantities of water are taken, salt in the blood gets too dilute, he explained. When the salt solution in the blood is weaker than the solution in the cells and organs it supplies, water passes into those cells and organs.

In extreme cases, this causes organs such as the brain to swell up, and can stop it working properly, putting the drinker in serious danger.

Professor MacGregor said: "This isn't just a problem with water - we used to see patients who had been diagnosed with 'water intoxication' after drinking 20 pints of beer."

"In normal circumstances, then people should drink when their body tells them to - when they get thirsty.

"Anything else is completely unnecessary, and will just leave you standing in the queue for the toilet.

"Detox diets are a complete con in that respect."]]> By Martin Hutchinson

A woman was left disabled after following a "detox" diet which involved drinking large quantities of water.

Although doctors stress the need to avoid dehydration by drinking enough fluids, drinking more than enough is a different matter.

The human body may be mostly water, but you can have too much of a good thing.

In the most serious cases, "water intoxication" can kill, and there is, say experts, scant evidence that drinking even slightly more water than usual can improve your health.

The current popularity of detox diets which recommend drinking many litres of water a day, and drinking even when not thirsty, could cause problems if taken to extremes, they say.

The claim is that drinking more than usual can do everything from improving your skin tone to "flushing out" toxins from your body.


You shouldn't be drinking massively over and above what you feel with comfortable.

However, the amount of water actually needed in a day varies from person to person, and depends on other factors such as climate, and exercise, says the British Dietetic Association.

Flawed industry

Ursula Arens, a dietician, said that there was a difference between normal consumption of one or two litres a day, not just in the form of water, but also from coffee, tea, and juice, and constant, ritualistic consumption of water throughout the day.

"You shouldn't be drinking massively over and above what you feel with comfortable, when you're not thirsty, in a mechanical way."

She said that the evidence supporting the whole "hydration industry" was flawed.

"If you're a top sportsman, earning £10,000 for a single game, I can understand the need to focus intensely on your hydration, but not if you're someone just doing a couple of lengths at the swimming pool.

"It's just a great marketing opportunity, nothing more."

She said that the science of detoxing was unsupported by evidence, partly because its precise effects on the body had never been defined.

She added: "The body already has perfectly good ways of getting rid of toxins - mainly in the liver, and it's hard to see how consuming more water would affect these."

'No evidence'

Others are more scathing about the fashion for both detoxing and taking frequent sips from an ever-present bottle of mineral water.

Kidney specialist Professor Graham MacGregor said there was no evidence that either had any benefit.


People should drink when their body tells them to - when they get thirsty
Prof Graham MacGregor
St George's University of London

He described how too much water could "overwhelm" the body's natural mechanisms for keeping levels in balance.

"The body already has a brilliant system for doing this, but if water levels in the blood rise too high, it just can't cope."

If vast quantities of water are taken, salt in the blood gets too dilute, he explained. When the salt solution in the blood is weaker than the solution in the cells and organs it supplies, water passes into those cells and organs.

In extreme cases, this causes organs such as the brain to swell up, and can stop it working properly, putting the drinker in serious danger.

Professor MacGregor said: "This isn't just a problem with water - we used to see patients who had been diagnosed with 'water intoxication' after drinking 20 pints of beer."

"In normal circumstances, then people should drink when their body tells them to - when they get thirsty.

"Anything else is completely unnecessary, and will just leave you standing in the queue for the toilet.

"Detox diets are a complete con in that respect."]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=304 Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:05:11 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=304 ALL YOU NEED IS TO ADD YOUR ZIP CODE (NOT FULL ADDRESS) TO FIND MOST RESTUARANTS IN YOUR AREA!

Satisfy customers' cravings with Healthy Dining!
More health-conscious consumers want restaurant meals that taste fantastic but won't undo their diets. Nearly three of four adults are trying to eat more healthy at restaurants than two years ago. At HealthyDiningFinder.com, consumers "search" for restaurants that provide a selection of nutritious options, based on ZIP code, price range and other criteria. Visit Healthy Dining to learn to maximize this health-conscious trend.

The HEALTHY DINING Program and its signature website HealthyDiningFinder.com constitute a groundbreaking effort to provide consumers with a centralized resource for identifying the healthier choices and corresponding nutrition information from restaurants nationwide. Developed in collaboration with the National Restaurant Association (NRA) and with partial funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), HealthyDiningFinder.com provides American diners with information that, in many cases, is not available anywhere else.

Equally important, the Program serves as a vehicle for motivating and inspiring chefs and restaurateurs to create and serve a selection of healthier dishes that emphasize lean protein, fruits and vegetables, and whole grains. HEALTHY DINING ’s registered dietitians work with participating restaurants to identify their healthier dishes, analyze the nutrition content, and suggest “special request” modifications – noted on HealthyDiningFinder.com – that improve the healthfulness of their featured dishes.

The private company, headquartered in San Diego, California, has been at the forefront of restaurant nutrition since 1990. The team has worked with hundreds of restaurants and has analyzed more than 12,000 menu items for nutrition content.]]> ALL YOU NEED IS TO ADD YOUR ZIP CODE (NOT FULL ADDRESS) TO FIND MOST RESTUARANTS IN YOUR AREA!

Satisfy customers' cravings with Healthy Dining!
More health-conscious consumers want restaurant meals that taste fantastic but won't undo their diets. Nearly three of four adults are trying to eat more healthy at restaurants than two years ago. At HealthyDiningFinder.com, consumers "search" for restaurants that provide a selection of nutritious options, based on ZIP code, price range and other criteria. Visit Healthy Dining to learn to maximize this health-conscious trend.

The HEALTHY DINING Program and its signature website HealthyDiningFinder.com constitute a groundbreaking effort to provide consumers with a centralized resource for identifying the healthier choices and corresponding nutrition information from restaurants nationwide. Developed in collaboration with the National Restaurant Association (NRA) and with partial funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), HealthyDiningFinder.com provides American diners with information that, in many cases, is not available anywhere else.

Equally important, the Program serves as a vehicle for motivating and inspiring chefs and restaurateurs to create and serve a selection of healthier dishes that emphasize lean protein, fruits and vegetables, and whole grains. HEALTHY DINING ’s registered dietitians work with participating restaurants to identify their healthier dishes, analyze the nutrition content, and suggest “special request” modifications – noted on HealthyDiningFinder.com – that improve the healthfulness of their featured dishes.

The private company, headquartered in San Diego, California, has been at the forefront of restaurant nutrition since 1990. The team has worked with hundreds of restaurants and has analyzed more than 12,000 menu items for nutrition content.]]> http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=303 Tue, 22 Jul 2008 21:01:27 -0500 http://lovemustangs.com/showthread.php?tid=303
The helicopter pilot and the game warden were in communication via radio's here is a transcript of their conversation.

'Air1 have you a visual on the gator, over'

'Approaching inlet now, over'

'Roger Air1'

'Gator sighted.... Looks like it has a small animal in its mouth.. Moving in, over'

'Roger Air1'

'It's a Deer!'

'confirm Air1.. Did you say Deer?, Over'

'Roger.. A Deer in its mouth.. Looks like a full sized buck.. that's a big gator, were gonna need more men, Over'

'Roger Air1..can you give me a idea on size of animal, over'

'Its big 25 feet at least, please advise Gator is heading to inlet. Do I pursue?, over'



That has to be a HUGE gator to have a whole deer in its mouth!

The deer was later found to be a mature Stag and was measured at 11 feet!

Are you ready to go skiing on Lake Wiess ?!

If you ski at the west end of the lake -- try not to fall.



This alligator was found between Centre and Leesburg , Alabama near a house! Game wardens were forced to shoot the alligator guess he wouldn't cooperate...

Anita and Charlie Rogers could hear the bellowing in the night. Their neighbors had been telling them that they had seen a mammoth alligator in the waterway that runs behind their house, but they dismissed the stories as exaggerations.

'I didn't believe it,' Charles Rogers said, but they realized the stories were, if anything, understated.

Alabama Parks and Wildlife game wardens had to shoot the beast. Joe Goff, 6'5' tall, a game warden, walks past the 28-foot, 1-inch alligator 8.5 metres he shot and killed in their back yard.

]]>
The helicopter pilot and the game warden were in communication via radio's here is a transcript of their conversation.

'Air1 have you a visual on the gator, over'

'Approaching inlet now, over'

'Roger Air1'

'Gator sighted.... Looks like it has a small animal in its mouth.. Moving in, over'

'Roger Air1'

'It's a Deer!'

'confirm Air1.. Did you say Deer?, Over'

'Roger.. A Deer in its mouth.. Looks like a full sized buck.. that's a big gator, were gonna need more men, Over'

'Roger Air1..can you give me a idea on size of animal, over'

'Its big 25 feet at least, please advise Gator is heading to inlet. Do I pursue?, over'



That has to be a HUGE gator to have a whole deer in its mouth!

The deer was later found to be a mature Stag and was measured at 11 feet!

Are you ready to go skiing on Lake Wiess ?!

If you ski at the west end of the lake -- try not to fall.



This alligator was found between Centre and Leesburg , Alabama near a house! Game wardens were forced to shoot the alligator guess he wouldn't cooperate...

Anita and Charlie Rogers could hear the bellowing in the night. Their neighbors had been telling them that they had seen a mammoth alligator in the waterway that runs behind their house, but they dismissed the stories as exaggerations.

'I didn't believe it,' Charles Rogers said, but they realized the stories were, if anything, understated.

Alabama Parks and Wildlife game wardens had to shoot the beast. Joe Goff, 6'5' tall, a game warden, walks past the 28-foot, 1-inch alligator 8.5 metres he shot and killed in their back yard.

]]>