Which bit were you not able to google?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I was being lazy. It stands for Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Queer Intersex Asexual Pansexual (or Polyamorous/Polygamous) Kinky.
This explains it: http://www.mtv.co.uk/pride/news/lgbtq-acronym-guide but I don't get the distinction between bisexual and pansexual. I'm also lost on why asexual, polyamorous and kinky are included with the gender terms. And what would an asexual activist be campaigning for?
Hmm...not sure after learning all that, that it's really helping make people take gender issues seriously.
You have a made a fair point about it being difficult to measure neurotransmitters, but it is possible, and a lot of the latest theories and diets are based around this. Rather than quote a lot of links to dry research studies, which I don't think would further the discussion, please see this link to an article by Robb Wolf, one of the leading lights of the Paleo / Ancestral lifestyle movement.
https://robbwolf.com/2012/09/14/12377/
This is not about arcane point-scoring. I passionately believe that the latest research into these topics is giving us insight into our biochemistry in a way that science and medicine hasn't been able to do so far.
With regards to your point about calories, there is some truth to that, but it does not hold 100% true. Dave Asprey (aka The Bullet Proof Executive) lost tons of weight eating 4,000 calories a day of a high-fat, low carb diet.
There is other research if you are interested showing that vitamin and mineral deficiencies could be linked to criminal behaviour due to the effect they exert on neurotransmitters.
I will not now spoil my post by hinting at the conclusion that any "Corbynista" must suffer from a mental imbalance.
Best own goal this month was the leadership of Britain First behaving like nitwits, and harassing the wrong people, and now in Jail. Golding reportedly already has a broken nose. THAT'S an own goal
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-43320121
another one who ljkes a bit of violence by proxy due to lacking tbe balls to actually carry it out.
Couldn't it equally be stated as "fascists/islamaphobes hijack social media poll"
But it does show how inherently easily manipulated and therefore statistically unreliable social media is.
An article which itself does not provide references to primary research articles for claims made is not a credible source of information within the science world. Further, the article does not support all the claims you made. I need to see direct research articles from peer-reviewed journals.
There may be some findings around that show certain things, but don't be so quick to apply these to the entire morbidly obese population. There are so, so many confounds and differences in individual variation.
My point about energy intake is 100% true. It is by far the biggest predictor of weight loss. That doesn't mean other things cannot also allow you to lose weight.
There is some really interesting studies out there. Our understanding of epigenetics, and possibly transgenerational epigenetics, is increasing all the time, and sounds like something you'd be interested in reading up on. But...
... ess complicated.
Why use the term hijack? She asked people to vote, they did.
I bet she has a cat.
Asexual is without sexual feelings, like Stephen Fry or Kenneth Williams claimed they were at one point or another.
You may be thinking of cell division.
Meanwhile worms are hermaphrodites who have both sets and use both sets during copulation in the hope both will get pregnant. The human equivalent can allegedly be found in a live demo on [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION] ‘s DVD collection.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I bet she has a cat.
If that amount of calories is a regular dinner for her, she will quickly lose weight, and will become much healthier. There's all these different diets and fads but in the end, by far the biggest predictor of weight loss is energy intake.
You've made a very complex statement with lots of buzzwords, but generally speaking I'm unaware of research that indicates all 'morbidly' obese people have hormone and neurotransmitter imbalances directly resulting from obesity that directly results in abnormal character traits. In fact, this would be extremely challenging to test in humans. It's very complicated, with lots of confounds. How are you meant to separate cause and effect? That's before even mentioning the limited equipment available to assess neurotransmitter activity in the brain, let alone imbalances. Do you know of any primary research articles that act as a source for this information?
It's double carbs FFS, beans on toast isn't a healthy dinner. Where are the other nutrients? A few slices of cucumber don't cancel out all the refined carbs and sugar.
Grilled fish and vegetables is a healthy dinner.