a. I am completely out of bread, because it seems to have decided to insta-rot
b. I am about to start a pot of rice
c. I am on a day off because I just can't deal anymore
d. My stomach is making "fuck off" noises
e. I have lost weight to the point where my roommates noticed, just looking at how my face has changed
-> Time to go buy a nice loaf of white bread and a container of milk, so I can have rice pudding and toast tonight, and a big wokful of fried rice tomorrow morning.
My mother would complain that that doesn't contain any strong sources of protein. Milk is very good, and contains a lot of well rounded nutrients. But it's pretty tricky to digest, and doesn't have err, "hardcore" protein content. For that you would generally go for meat. Generally you'd avoid red meat since it's unhealthy and actually a fairly crummy source of protein, so chicken or turkey are good options.
But, if you want really good protein fish is the best option. From what I've heard our digestive systems are actually better geared towards digesting fish than meat. Of course, you've got to keep the mercury issue in mind. There's toxins in everything you eat, and you can handle trace amounts of mercury, but don't go eating exclusively fish for protein, it's bad for you.
Failing that, tofu works but go for the chunky kind with the horrible texture, the fluid kind is watered down too much. But it doesn't contain iron like the others do, meat is the only good natural source of this for us.
So, if you're vegetarian, make sure you take your iron supplements.
Also you may want more sugar, that doesn't seem to contain very much.
Digestion and nutrition is complex, but in general carbohydrates + sugar = energy and/or fat. Which is why the two big diets say "cut carbohydrates", and "cut sugar".
If you're worried about being underweight, then you want to raise those two to get more energy into your system and make your body need to consume fat reserves less.
The healthy way to get more sugar would be fruit, but personally I'd just make sure I have some jam in that pudding or toast... That's probably unhealthy of me.
I
think this is all accurate, mostly this is coming memory of what my parents have always told me... I need to do less ranting.
Huh... Seems things may-or-may-not be able to go faster than the speed of light. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5in1T5nvGNckqh0WyG9Y3B_YI4VQg?docId=94691396d0b44f3aa8105740b51e9e9f
It's still awaiting confirmation from repeats of the experiments though, which is why I say it may or may not actually have been measured going faster than light. Assuming their results actually are correct (dubious though at this point), the measured it going about 0.00396%, plus or minus about .00066% faster than the speed of light.
Huh.
I was just coming to post about this one, too. Well, here's the BBC article on it anyway. I hope this is real, so much. Faster-than-light travel is a total game changer, even if it's only in particles.
This doesn't really surprise me very much, considering how fluid and relative the laws of physics are. I mean the speed of light changes according to what it's travelling through and what the influence of gravity is. Then there's the hanging question of "the speed of light relative to what?" It always struck me as an unreliable measuring stick to use when calculating everything else.
It seems very reasonable to me that some aspects of physics play by different rules.
Besides, doesn't quantum entanglement already travel faster than the speed of light?
Author
Topic: [MILK] There were 12 eggs here what did you do with them? (Happy thread?!) (Read 16198489 times)