Threat of lawsuit over Church/State and Prop 2.

[Tacenda]

8 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Another idea:

Dr. Steven Masley, at http://drmasley.com/dr-masley/whats-scariest-disease-today/?inf_contact_key=f894ff3c63d60b5a7e36b5d831bc9c72b733be708d6bb51c57425d1401acf24f ,
“If you can’t treat Alzheimer’s disease, then how do you prevent it?  We have recently discovered that the most important intervention is to achieve optimal blood sugar and insulin control.  Your fasting blood sugar should be less than 95 mg/dL and your fasting insulin level less than 5 mIU/ml.”

Thanks Robert any advice is helpful and this looks pretty interesting.  But will have to figure out a way to find these levels I guess, lazy girl that I can be. 

[cdowis]

19 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Well, when 90% of the legislature are LDS then I think that means the LDS church will have control. Our governer even admitted to Utah having the majority be LDS during the press conference this month and it having that effect, watch at the 8:30 mark. https://demosite.utah.gov/governor/2018/11/15/governors-monthly-press-conference-with-kuer-11-15-2018/

It's called "community standard" == Utah is not California, and many states have a majority of certain religions.  Baptists are a majority in the Southern states and have been very influential in the laws that are passed.

[cdowis]

On 11/16/2018 at 10:39 PM, Tacenda said:

I'll just put this here. Even the government believes in this stuff, or why did they patent it? 

Hmmmmmm.... a patent  does not require FDA approval for its medicinal claims.

Quote

 

The DEA’s decision has nothing to do with the NIH’s cannabis-related patent, Rohrbaugh said. The patent doesn’t yet prove the chemical compound is effective in the stated treatment, he said, adding that the compound would have to be purified, synthesized in a lab setting, subjected to extensive testing in animals and humans, and ultimately require U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval to show that it’s safe and effective for the intended purpose.

The intent behind patenting and licensing NIH discoveries is to not have technology that could potentially benefit the public sit idle, he said.

 

https://www.thecannabist.co/2016/08/22/marijuana-patents-6630507-research-dea-nih-fda-kannalife/61255/

Edited November 19, 2018 by cdowis

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Thanks Robert any advice is helpful and this looks pretty interesting.  But will have to figure out a way to find these levels I guess, lazy girl that I can be. 

What Dr Masley is basically saying is always good advice:  Keep your sugar intake low, and avoid excessive carbohydrates.

[Calm]

7 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Thanks Robert any advice is helpful and this looks pretty interesting.  But will have to figure out a way to find these levels I guess, lazy girl that I can be. 

There are inexpensive blood sugar monitors available without a prescription.  My daughter uses Bayer Contour Next, but I think there is one even cheaper called Freestyle.  Ask your pharmacist or do some googling or check out Amazon.  Stay away from Walgreens  Amazon is the cheapest in my experience.  Walmart isn't bad.

[provoman]

5 hours ago, cdowis said:

It's called "community standard" == Utah is not California, and many states have a majority of certain religions.  Baptists are a majority in the Southern states and have been very influential in the laws that are passed.

That is the worst attempt at a justification, and I think ignores the concern that Rocky Anderson brings up

[pogi]

8 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Thanks Robert any advice is helpful and this looks pretty interesting.  But will have to figure out a way to find these levels I guess, lazy girl that I can be. 

Fasting blood glucose above 100 mg/dl (100-125) is considered pre-diabetic.  So, what Dr. Masley is saying is that pre-diabetes and diabetes is a risk factor for Alzheimer's.  I wouldn't worry about buying a blood glucose monitor unless you are pre-diabetic/diabetic.  If you don't know, get tested with your doctor, but I wouldn't recommend going and buying a monitor.  Non-diabetics fasting blood sugar is rarely above 95 mg/dl.  It is usually between 7-90 and in some can be as low as 60 and as high as 100. 

The point is, control your sugar intake so you don't become a diabetic - of course there are other potential contributing factors as well. 

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

There are inexpensive blood sugar monitors available without a prescription.  My daughter uses Bayer Contour Next, but I think there is one even cheaper called Freestyle.  Ask your pharmacist or do some googling or check out Amazon.  Stay away from Walgreens  Amazon is the cheapest in my experience.  Walmart isn't bad.

 

38 minutes ago, pogi said:

Fasting blood glucose above 100 mg/dl (100-125) is considered pre-diabetic.  So, what Dr. Masley is saying is that pre-diabetes and diabetes is a risk factor for Alzheimer's.  I wouldn't worry about buying a blood glucose monitor unless you are pre-diabetic/diabetic.  If you don't know, get tested with your doctor, but I wouldn't recommend going and buying a monitor.  Non-diabetics fasting blood sugar is rarely above 95 mg/dl.  It is usually between 7-90 and in some can be as low as 60 and as high as 100. 

The point is, control your sugar intake so you don't become a diabetic - of course there are other potential contributing factors as well. 

Thanks you two, I'll be sharing the info with my siblings!

[cdowis]

2 hours ago, provoman said:

That is the worst attempt at a justification, and I think ignores the concern that Rocky Anderson brings up

Methinks you do not understand "justification".  I am merely pointing out a fact, and make no attempt to justify anything.  The real world of cold, hard facts does not care what Rocky thinks or feels.

It appears you live in a world of labels, rather than the real world.

Edited November 20, 2018 by cdowis

[provoman]

3 hours ago, cdowis said:

Methinks you do not understand "justification".  I am merely pointing out a fact, and make no attempt to justify anything.  The real world of cold, hard facts does not care what Rocky thinks or feels.

It appears you live in a world of labels, rather than the real world.

Methinks you dont understand individual standards from a dominate religion calling for special sessions of State Legislature

 

Edited November 20, 2018 by provoman

[cdowis]

11 hours ago, provoman said:

Methinks you dont understand individual standards from a dominate religion calling for special sessions of State Legislature

 

OK, educate me, please, on why a  religious organization -- Baptist, Catholic, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints -- must keep silent, its mouth shut, regarding what it considers to be a moral issue, including an open public request for a special session.

This should be very interesting.  Just curious, does this exclusion of participating in the public arena include Planned Parenthood, NCAA, or other nonreligious organizations?

Edited November 20, 2018 by cdowis

[provoman]

1 hour ago, cdowis said:

OK, educate me, please, on why a  religious organization -- Baptist, Catholic, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints -- must keep silent, its mouth shut, regarding what it considers to be a moral issue, including an open public request for a special session.

This should be very interesting.  Just curious, does this exclusion of participating in the public arena include Planned Parenthood, NCAA, or other nonreligious organizations?

So you want to move the goal post away from  individual standards of a individual State Representative.

[cdowis]

3 hours ago, provoman said:

So you want to move the goal post away from  individual standards of a individual State Representative.

Huh?.........

I recognize that it is written in English, but the words seem to be randomly selected in what appears to be a sentence.

Edited November 20, 2018 by cdowis

[USU78]

2 hours ago, cdowis said:

Huh?.........

I recognize that it is written in English, but the words seem to be randomly selected in what appears to be a sentence.

Interesting deflection, wasn't it?

[cdowis]

del

Edited November 21, 2018 by cdowis

[provoman]

 

2 hours ago, USU78 said:

Interesting deflection, wasn't it?

I see you haven't addressed how the US Constitution protects stoning people to death.