birdog1960

yup. the merrell's and clogs just don't have the same effect. but seriously, i need to stop getting esquire: my current shoes just seem so inadequate...

our farmers market does. and plenty of folks use them. think it's a great idea...money back right to the small farmers, healthier food for everyone. win-win.

read the study from the annals. here's the conclusion: "the published literature lacks strong evidence that organic foods are significantly more nutritious than conventional foods. Consumption of organic foods may reduce exposure to pesticide residue and antibiotic resistant bacteria". that last sentence is enough for me but there's many other good reasons to buy local. the biggest to me is freshness and species of vegetables. almost everyone agrees that homegrown tomatoes (especially heirlooms) are incomparable to shipped green ones from walmart. same for many other products. i don't eat exclusively organic foods. but if i cut my exposure to pesticides (as evidenced by lower urine residues) and ingest less antibiotic resistant bacteria as a result of eating less nonorganic food, that's a good thing in my opinion. and don't discount the energy saved by not shipping across continents or the benefit of supporting your local farmer.

i haven't shopped at whole food but occasionally get some specialty foods at a similar local store. and the quality is definitely better. way better. i prefer getting stuff from the farmers market or my own garden but it's seasonal. and yes, i sometimes drive there in a subaru, dogs in the back, with comfortable shoes on. what of it? that's irrelevant - i like good quality, good tasting, healthy food. but i'm saddened to hear that local farmers are poorly treated by them. i think customers would complain if that was well known.

i've only had this once. walked outside barefoot and was sure i'd stepped on a nail...but nope. had worn tight, stylish but uncomfortable shoes for a few days at work prior. that's when i started my quest for the perfect shoe...and it made all the difference. but yours are chronically inflammed and will take more time and effort. hope you can see the link i gave but it might require a sign in to medscape which you may or may not be able to do - don't know. at any rate, the more aggressive treatment options dicussed there will need to be ordered and monitored by a doc.

http://emedicine.med...6143-medicationa nice detailed reference on the subject. maybe more than you need or want but lots of good info here.

i've see many more cases of this in the last 5 years and i'm pretty certain it's due to the obesity epidemic. usually try injections and anti-inflammatories and then refer to ortho or podiatry but honestly don't see their treatments being much more effective, unfortunately. people get very frustrated...again, i think much of the problem is the pounding the feet get from carrying around much more than they were designed to and treaments sometimes can't overcome this basic issue. besides weight loss a few other basics: good shoes. i started a thread on recommendations for them that garnered little interest but they're really important for foot and back health. i ended up with merrill's that look like birkenstocks with backs. some PT's recommend dansko clogs (too high an arch for me). the major thing is a rigid sole. avoid crocks and flip flops like the plague. and while you're healing, avoid running. try something else that doesn't pound your heels like swimming, rowing machine or spinning. from what i've read there's really no carefully conducted, large, impressive studies on treatment of this very common conditon so recommendations or mostly empirical. maybe the resident podiatrist can steer us towards some but i think, given it's prevelance, those studies are needed.

i votew for Mumford and Son for next year

hyundai sonata turbo, followed by audi. liked the movie references in the coke ad but i didn't think it was executed all that well... "priscilla" was a strange movie to start with, changing drag queens into models is even wierder.

my friend fired up his weber in the cold for cheeseburgers and brats. sweet potatoes, spinach and mozzarella dip, triscuits, cheddar and muenster, amstel light for the guys, wine for the ladies, and finally red rasperry pie with coffee... and no clean up after. doesn't get much better imo...

yup,that'll do it. add a rusted out truck with an nra sticker and gun rack parked in the driveway and your good to go adt would go out of business.

ok, but is any burglar likely to move on to the next house when he see's a sign "beware of cat"?

thanks for the advice. didn't know about the embalming thing....interesting. my last dogs killed a few rats (and birds) and always proudly dropped them in a conspicuous place but never mice. maybe they're too quick for dogs?

yup, i remember that. and real life mice are pretty smart, too (smarter than victor mouse traps, that's for sure). but cats are even smarter...

i have a mouse problem in my house and could use a rent a cat. unfortunately, my dogs run off any cat that comes within 20 yards of the property and would probably kill one if i actually brought one in. but they won't hunt mice/rats. wonder why that is? they chase just about anything else. anyway, conventional mousetraps have been an utter failure. ultrasonic devices have helped a bit but there still in my house. poison worries me as i don't want to have a dad rodent stinking up the house and have to fish it out from the ductwork etc (and i don't want my dogs getting into it). anybody here an expert on mouse killing?

whole foods are definitely more expensive. processed foods contain subsidized corn. (american agribusiness grows almost 4000 cal of food for every citizen - it has to go somewhere to be sold) i don't think he meant the end caps although it seems overweight people are more avid "enquirer" readers.

like george bush but without the powerful family.

he sure doesn't give the impression of being very bright but he's lasted a very long time in a very rough game. i think he has strengths similar to strom thurmond: crazy like a fox.

i agree. that tactic seems likely to be counterproductive. but the very unlikely resurrection of palin isn't going to move the parties closer to compromise either

seriously, i hope she regains her height of prominence within the party. that helps moderates and progressives and hurts conservatives. but it won't happen. her ship has sailed.

any resources spent by republicans (time,effort, money, emotions) on palin, are resources wasted and thus beneficial towards advancing progressive agendas and candidates because she is no real threat to win national office...well, that and because she's a living cartoon character. but i'd watch if she went on "dancing with the stars"!

in a way they are the same. these products are thrust on the populace by design for the purpose of profits. the sellers well know the health implications and go right on poisoning us and until fairly recently were aggressively advertising to kids (in the case of junk food, they obviously still are). the choice to smoke is made much more difficult by the inherent addictive nature of smoking...it's almost a perfect product for the producers/sellers. the costs to society are enormous.but i agree the food issue is the scarier of the 2. last night, i made shish kabob from some "premium choice" sirloin the wife picked up out of convenience at walmart. when i pulled it from the freezer, it was an unnatural purple color, like a bruise. thawed, it was bright red and tasty looking. grilled with vegetables, it was the consistency of sponge although the flavor was ok. should have thrown it away but we were hungry. doing some reading on ageing and preservation of meats last night spooked me. in short, we won't be buying any more meat from walmart and will shop only at stores with a butcher on premises or at a farmers market where they dry age and freeze meat. but that costs, as you said...

cool! congrats! the others here are absolutely correct: don't try to "cheat"...ever. you'll likely waste all the effort you've already given. good luck. man, that's hard core. you have way more self control and will than you give yourself credit for. i heard a review on a book about changing habits that talked about strength in making changes being almost exponential: the first small success (say, quit smoking for 3 days) gives more determination and strength, entirely quitting (say, a year), much more and from there you have a big sack of will and self control at your disposable to tackle more things, sometimes simultaneously (like diet and exercise). just a theory. don't know how it could be proven. but what you're doing is extraordinary.

guys, i'm not trying to make smokers out to be criminals and i know how hard it is to quit cuz i did it after many failed attempts. just pointing out that the survival instinct is one of the strongest in most people. that said, the quit success rate after a heart attack is only about 50% while its in the mid 30's for everyone else. i see the info in this study as a carrot and not a stick for smokers to quit.

i'm suggesting we didn't have data to support the contention of reversibility in regards to expected lifespan...now we do. if you're asking was it enough to know that your clothes, car and breath wouldn't stink, you'd get less colds and the ones you got would last 1/2 as long, you'd have more money, you wouldn't burn holes in your favorite clothes, good food would taste much better and you could ski a long hard run without coughing or being winded 1/3 of the way down, then yes, yes it was. but turning back the clock might motivate a few others that those things didn't.