kagoscuba

the nutritionist at my gym and why I rated one part of my hospital stay so poorly in their survey. The nutritonist started off by saying, "So when will you get this removed?" Then the a-hole continued with "My girlfriend is overweight and wanted to get surgery, but I told her I would leave her if she did." Nice. The part of the survey the hospital got dinged on was how professional their nurses were. When I was in recovery, one of the nurses asked me what surgery I had done; I told her and she said, "What? You don't look big enough for that surgery. Didn't you try exercise and dieting?" I felt like saying, "No, you stupid bit@h, I decided to self-pay $22k for $hits and giggles and have a fun time." I refrained however, used my passive aggressive side and eviscerated her on the survey...not that anybody reads those things anyway, but it made me feel better.

I was denied coverage by Horizon. The denial was because I could not produce five years of written proof I have been overweight. I ignored their denial and went ahead and had the surgery as a self pay. So far they have paid 80% of my doctor's fee ($6k), 100% of my anesthesiologist's fee ($2.4k), 100% of my fill fees, and lastly they are giving me some grief on the hospital bill. It was $13k, and they have paid $2k so far. They are saying something about the hospital benig out of network, but I'm making sure today that means I have to pay that much (I know out-of-network means extra costs, but I have a PPO and the insurance usually covers at least 50%). Anyway, I went from 100% denied to so far getting paid back a little over $8k. Just don't take no for an answer!! :scared:

This goes into the "No $hit" category I'm sure the researchers could haev saved a lot of time and money by coming here and asking a couple of questions: <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">LONDON</st1:City>, <st1:country-region w:st="on">England</st1:country-region></st1:place> (AP) -- Three diet drugs recommended for long-term use result in minimal weight loss and carry some serious side effects, a review of research found.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p> <!--startclickprintexclude--><!--===========IMAGE============-->Though most users of the drugs remained overweight, experts said the drugs could help curb the dangers of obesity by reducing rates of heart disease, diabetes and other health problems.<o:p></o:p> In a paper published Friday in the British Medical Journal, researchers in Canada and Brazil analyzed existing data on three popular weight-loss drugs: orlistat, or Xenical; sibutramine, known as Meridia in the United States and Reductil in Europe; and rimonabant, or Accomplia.<o:p></o:p> Scientists found that patients on the drugs -- men and women between 45 and 50 years old who weighed about 220 pounds and had a body mass index of about 35 -- lost less than 11 pounds on average. The study participants used the drugs for periods of between one and four years.<o:p></o:p> "Drugs are not the magic cure and are not for everybody," said Dr. Raj Padwal, an assistant professor at the <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">University</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Alberta</st1:PlaceName> in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Canada</st1:place></st1:country-region>, one of the paper's authors. "But in specific patients, they have great benefits."<o:p></o:p> Padwal and colleagues considered 16 trials that tested orlistat, which involved 10,631 people. Orlistat, which works by preventing fat digestion, helped people lose about 6.6 pounds on average. But it also reduced diabetes and improved their cholesterol levels and blood pressure. Up to 30 percent of patients had unpleasant digestive and intestinal side effects, such as incontinence.<o:p></o:p> Of the 10 trials on sibutramine, which involved 2,623 people, study participants lost about 9 pounds on average and had improved cholesterol levels. In up to 20 percent of patients, sibutramine caused side effects including raised blood pressure and pulse rates, insomnia and nausea.<o:p></o:p> And in the four rimonabant studies involving 6,365 people, scientists found that users lost on average about 11 pounds. Rimonabant also improved their blood pressure and cholesterol levels. The risk of mood disorders increased in 6 percent of patients.<o:p></o:p> Both sibutramine and rimonabant work by interrupting nerve signals in the brain.<o:p></o:p> Another study published Friday in The Lancet also showed rimonabant raised the risk of psychiatric problems such as depression and anxiety.<o:p></o:p> A report from the food and Drug Administration in June found that 26 percent of people on rimonabant -- versus 14 percent of those given a placebo -- developed symptoms that included depression, anxiety and, in severe cases, suicidal tendencies. The FDA refused to authorize the drug.<o:p></o:p> Modest help is worthwhile<o:p></o:p> Rimonabant has been approved by the European Drug Agency, and is available in countries including <st1:country-region w:st="on">Austria</st1:country-region>, <st1:country-region w:st="on">Denmark</st1:country-region>, <st1:country-region w:st="on">Germany</st1:country-region>, <st1:country-region w:st="on">Greece</st1:country-region> and the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">United Kingdom</st1:place></st1:country-region>.<o:p></o:p> Sibutramine and orlistat are licensed for sale in the <st1:country-region w:st="on">U.S.</st1:country-region> and <st1:place w:st="on">Europe</st1:place>. Another version of orlistat known as Alli is sold over the counter in the <st1:country-region w:st="on">U.S.</st1:country-region>, and its maker, GlaxoSmithKline PLC, is seeking approval for sales in <st1:place w:st="on">Europe</st1:place>.<o:p></o:p> Some experts say that the few pounds the drugs help people to shed are worth it. "Modest weight loss brings surprisingly big health gains," said Susan Jebb, head of nutrition and health at <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Britain</st1:place></st1:country-region>'s Medical Research Council. Jebb was not tied to either study.<o:p></o:p> "We are not just fighting obesity, but the things that come along with it," Jebb said. Losing as little as 5 pounds can help reduce the risk of heart disease and diabetes.<o:p></o:p> But other experts worry that easy access to diet drugs give people a false sense of security.<o:p></o:p> "Selling anti-obesity drugs over the counter will perpetuate the myth that obesity can be fixed simply by popping a pill," wrote Dr. Gareth Williams, dean and professor of medicine at the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceType w:st="on">University</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Bristol</st1:PlaceName></st1:place>, in an editorial in the British Medical Journal.<o:p></o:p> <!--startclickprintexclude-->Padwal said the biggest caveat about the drugs is that their long-term effects are unknown. In 2005, global sales of the drugs were estimated at $1.2 billion.<o:p></o:p> Faced with an increasing global obesity epidemic -- the World Health Organization estimates that 3 billion adults will be overweight or obese by 2015 -- many experts think the drugs could be used more widely.<o:p></o:p> "Diet and lifestyle interventions on their own have been stunningly poor," Jebb said. "We've got to be realistic," she said. "Even though the weight losses from the drugs are modest, they're better than most other things we've got."<o:p></o:p>

<p>Everyone goes to Russia and China, because it is easier than getting an adopted child here in the States. I am adopted, and when my wife could not stay pregnant, we considered adoption (finally went with gestational carrier) and the laws and wait here in the States were ridiculous. It wasn't for the lack of children...there were plenty waiting to get adopted here in the US</p>

I've got a better way. 1. If you are on welfare, then you need to work for the government in any capacity they see fit that is not illegal. If that means picking tomatos, in order to alleviate the dependence on illegal aliens, then *poof* you can add "tomato picker" to your resume. If you refuse to work, then you lose your right to welfare. If you are unable to work, then you'd better have a nice family to support you. Excuses do not pay the bills and tax-payers should not have to give free rides. 2. However many children you have when you start welfare for the first time is the number of children you can claim for a lifetime. If you have 20 more kids, more power to you, but you aren't getting more money. The country will kust be gaining more ditch-diggers and tomato pickers. 3. Children of welfare parents get some kind of preferential treatment for college. We don't need multiple generations of under-achievers. 4. People on Welfare can ask for but will not be mandated to have free surgery for sterilization. If they choose not to and have more kids, please see rule #2.

I did not mean to be interpreted as high and mighty in my response. I apologize if it read that way. As far as alcohol being fattening, no matter the calories, I would contend that's bogus. Let's use the Wine/Big-Mac example again. Let's say I drank 576 calories of wine and my best friend ate the Big Mac. Who just creamed their saturated fat, sodium, and cholesterol for the day and who did not? Same calories; different nutritional results; same exact weight loss, if both of us stay the same below our BMR. What someone eats affects their overall health. How much they eat (caloric intake) affects their weight.

"My dr told me that 2 glasses of red wine are equivalent to one big mac" You may have a wonderful doctor, but he is seriously misinformed about calories in certain foods, and I won't even go into the other values of the two foods mentioned. A 3.5 oz glass of red wine was 75 calories. A Big Mac has 576 calories. You'd have to drink 26.88 oz of red wine to equal a Big Mac. That's a big red plastic party cup full and a little over half another one. If someone is drinking wine like that on a normal basis, then they've got more problems than nutritional ones.

"Well, that's not what I said, now, is it? We don't MEAN to sin, but we're human and humans are sinners by nature. There is no such thing as a sinless human being. " Good points, but my original intent was to point out that waiting on God to judge those who trespass against you and forgiving those without reaction on your part is going to lead to your eventual demise. The meek may inherit the earth, but meanwhile, the strong are making a pretty good living. (knowing that is short-sighted as infinity is longer than a possible 120 years). Oh, and every sin I've ever done has been done with my full knowledge and consent. It doesn't make me proud that I did them, but as you said, we are just human after all.

"How so? We are given free will and the chance to repent. How does that make me dead and buried?" You cannot intentionally do an act with the intent to ask for forgiveness or the ability to repent. That's like trying to coerce God. Forgiving and "turning the other cheek" in a purely hardcore Christian way would be akin to inviting every other society not willing to follow social norms to dominate and kill Christians (it would happen...social Darwinism expects it). Pure forgiveness would be like having 9/11 happen and we do nothing about it in Afghanistan. No war, no tirades, just a dialogue of understanding. I would prefer the dialogue of MIRV (Multiple Independent Re-Entry Vehicle).

"Our Heavenly Father is the one who ultimately has the solitary right to vengeance. Give THAT to him, and find peace." If that were truly adhered to, then there would be no Christians. They'd all be dead and buried. That's why, in only my maybe silly opinion, that statement is a crock. A couple of issues there. A vengeful God. Spooky themes...scary language...designed to keep people in check. Doing so would actually be a sin...wrath. Being judged is not the same as having vengeance thrust upon you. It is also not his solitary right...ask Sampson or Joshua or myriad of others I just happen to be forgetting right now. Damned or not, I will die with a clear mind is my view. That's just my eastern philosophy edging in there.

"The difference is that speaking generally Catholics are not victimised, reviled and hated on the basis of the actions of a minority of their population the way Muslims are today." They once were south of the Mason-Dixon line. There is a reason only one US President was a Catholic (JFK was and is the only non-Protestant elected), and he got shot in the head. Granted, today, that pejorative view is 99% less than in years past, but it did once raise its ugly head. The US is the land of equal opportunity hatred, but we have grown from it for the most part. We once hated Italians, Irishmen, Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Vietnamese and many others, but for the most part, except in isolated pockets of the US, they are mostly accepted. Muslims are the latest group to try for inclusion, and based on a few minority actions, it's going to take them awhile to gain acceptance.

It's simple biology. You could eat nothing but chocolate cake and wash it down with a glass of wine, and as long as the calories were below your Basal Metabolic Rate, you will lose weight in the long run. You'd die from malnutrition, but that's another issue. Short-term lack of weight loss can be body adjusting or water retention. Either one of these typically won't last more than a couple of weeks. I'm getting about 1200-1500 calories a day, I am losing slowly (now, after a tremendous start), and my nutritionist is asking me to try and get more calories into me, since I am exercising so much. I am averaging about -1200 calories than my BMR per day. I am losing between 2-4 pounds a week, which is right on schedule for my caloric intake but twice what is considered healthy and sustainable weight loss. We just have to keep on reminding ourselves that this is a marathon and not a sprint.

I was taught, in my Methodist upbringing, that God does not consider you to have forgiven someone until you forget the act you are forgiving. That's one of the reasons why I'm a Unitarian now. Forgetting a transgression is repression of thought. Repression of thought is stagnation of the spirit. Too many rules made up by man. There is a God, and he will judge us all on how we lived our lives and affected those around us. He's not going to give a rats-a$$ what religion you were, if you believed in Jesus, a cow, a fat guy, gefilte fish, or some guy who had a lot of sand in his hair. Religion is not the truth - God is.

If I was getting bombed during weddings, standing in line to go dancing, or sitting down for a nice holiday dinner in a public hotel, I might just want to shoot someone for no other reason than walking down the street. 1940's is not where it all started by the way, but if you want to start from there, chew on this awhile: The Palestinians want their own country. There's just one thing about that: There are no Palestinians. It's a made up word. Israel was called Palestine for two thousand years. Like "Wiccan," "Palestinian" sounds ancient but is really a modern invention. Before the Israelis won the land in war, Gaza was owned by Egypt, and there were no "Palestinians" then, and the West Bank was owned by Jordan, and there were no "Palestinians" then. As soon as the Jews took over and started growing oranges as big as basketballs, what do you know, say hello to the "Palestinians," weeping for their deep bond with their lost "land" and "nation." So for the sake of honesty, let's not use the word "Palestinian" any more to describe these delightful folks, who dance for joy at our deaths until someone points out they're being taped. Instead, let's call them what they are: "Other Arabs From The Same General Area Who Are In Deep Denial About Never Being Able To Accomplish Anything In Life And Would Rather Wrap Themselves In The Seductive Melodrama Of Eternal Struggle And Death." I know that's a bit unwieldy to expect to see on CNN. How about this, then: "Adjacent Jew-Haters." Okay, so the Adjacent Jew-Haters want their own country. Oops, just one more thing. No, they don't. They could've had their own country any time in the last thirty years, especially two years ago at Camp David. But if you have your own country, you have to have traffic lights and garbage trucks and Chambers of Commerce, and, worse, you actually have to figure out some way to make a living. That's no fun. No, they want what all the other Jew-Haters in the region want: Israel. They also want a big pile of dead Jews, of course-that's where the real fun is-but mostly they want Israel. Why? For one thing, trying to destroy Israel-or "The Zionist Entity" as their textbooks call it-for the last fifty years has allowed the rulers of Arab countries to divert the attention of their own people away from the fact that they're the blue-ribbon most illiterate, poorest, and tribally backward on God's Earth, and if you've ever been around God's Earth, you know that's really saying something. It makes me roll my eyes every time one of our pundits waxes poetic about the great history and culture of the Muslim Mideast. Unless I'm missing something, the Arabs haven't given anything to the world since Algebra, and, by the way, thanks a hell of a lot for that one. Chew this around and spit it out: Five hundred million Arabs; five million Jews. Think of all the Arab countries as a football field, and Israel as a pack of matches sitting in the middle of it. And now these same folks swear that if Israel gives them half of that pack of matches, everyone will be pals. Really? Wow, what neat news. Hey, but what about the string of wars to obliterate the tiny country and the constant din of rabid blood oaths to drive every Jew into the sea? Oh, that? We were just kidding. My friend Kevin Rooney made a gorgeous point the other day: Just reverse the numbers. Imagine five hundred million Jews and five million Arabs. I was stunned at the simple brilliance of it. Can anyone picture the Jews strapping belts of razor blades and dynamite to themselves? Of course not. Or marshaling every fiber and force at their disposal for generations to drive a tiny Arab state into the sea? Nonsense. Or dancing for joy at the murder of innocents? Impossible. Or spreading and believing horrible lies about the Arabs baking their bread with the blood of children? Disgusting. No, as you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death.

hijab, you are right about Iraq, and I consider you wrong about Israel. Innocent Palestinians? Please. I think Israel has shown enormous restraint, considering the wars and terrorism they've beenput through.

To be honest, I use it the same way I'd use "White Trash." Ignorant black people who break the law, think the government is their "lifeline," and think white people today should somehow be responsible for their shortcomings. You notice I say black and not African-American too. I have a German heritage,can hold a basic conversation in German, and I do not consider myself a German-American. I'm an American. I'd guess 98%+ of so-called "African-Americans" would be hard-pressed to speak one sentence of any of the languages used in Africa. It's not a racist thing; it's a realist thing. I have nothing against black people. If Colin Powell ran for president, I'd vote for him in a second (over any of the present candidates, Republican or Democrat). If Al Sharpton ran, I might vote for Hugo Chavez first. It'd be a hard choice. The "N" word is hateful and demeaning-so are the people deserving of the moniker.

Wearing a raincoat also helps ensure you have something to wear one on, when you get married. You don't need it dropping off somewhere.

Horizon BCBS got my bill for my hospital stay two days ago and already made their decision. I was denied coverage and was a self-pay, so anything would be appreciated. I'm glad I kept my expectations low. They paid $1900 out of $13k. Not great, but it could have been zero. At least they are paying for the fills in full.

"Do your children believe in Santa Claus?" Mine believe in the Holiday Armadillo and that Superman flew all of the Jews out of Egypt...well at least according to Joey Tribbiani.

Are you saying you have a body-fat percentage of 30%? How on earth is that even possible, considering what you look like and the exercise you do? I just got measured yesterday at 29% bodyfat, and I've got a considerable way to go. I know men and women have different fat contents, but I'm shocked to see you might be at 30%.

Oy! You should see the greed when they get gifts for eight days. I bought my oldest a bike last year, and 10 seconds after he got it he asked "are there any more presents tonight?" I almost channeled my father and chucked the bike into the garbage. My wife pulled me out of the room and gave my son "the speech on why he should be thankful."

I haven't tried bread or pasta yet. Last night I had rice with my Thai Curry and Basil Chicken, and it went down WAY TOO EASY. In fact, I was able to eat an entire portion, which really surprised me. I stick to liquids during the day and typically only eat solids at night, so I was shocked I was able to eat so much. I definitely need to ask for another plate, when I go out, so I can portion my meal and ask for leftovers. Last night was the first time I've had that much food in front of me, and unfortunately I ate it all (with zero pain and band filled once). Baked chicken is hard for me to get down though, so those portions stay pretty small. Tuna is easy, as are boiled eggs on most mornings (yesterday the egg turned into a golf-ball).

...and to think, some people think socialized medicine is a good thing. I think everyone who wants socialized medicine should read your post, because Medicaid is the closest thing we have to it now, and the system is not very optimal.

Hell, child-support for a child that is your is a nothing story. How about the thousands of fathers per year who have to pay for children that aren't theirs? That's right, in many states, if you ever agree the child is yours, then a couple of years later find out through DNA the child is some other man's, you STILL have to pay child support. Nice. That being said, any man who refuses to pay child-support because he wanted the woman to have an abortion and she didn't is an a-hole who should be forced to be sterilized.

I'd love my hot neighbor, but I can't afford the divorce. :confused: