Sock Hop (by Meals on Wheels - 3 Oct 2014)

Mark your calendar, get out your dancing shoes and best 50's attire

Lets Support Meals on Wheels!!

When:  3 Oct 2014

Where:  Lake Ashton Club House

Only in America

Canadian's Version of David Letterman's Top 10… Just makes you wanna shake your head in disbelief.
This is Canada 's Top Ten List of America 's Stupidity.
Of course we look like idiots .... because we are.


Number 10)  Only in America ...could politicians talk about the greed of the rich at a $35,000.00 per plate campaign fund-raising event.

Number 9)  Only in America ...could people claim that the government still discriminates against black Americans when they have a black President, a black Attorney General and roughly 20% of the federal workforce is black while only 14% of the population is black 40+% of all federal entitlements goes to black Americans - 3X the rate that go to whites, 5X the rate that go to Hispanics!

Number 8)  Only in America...could they have had the two people most responsible for our tax code, Timothy Geithner (the head of the Treasury Department) and Charles Rangel (who once ran the Ways and Means Committee), BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.

Number 7)  Only in America...can they have terrorists kill people in the name of Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims might be harmed by the backlash.

Number 6)  Only in America...would they make people who want to legally become American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege, while they discuss letting anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just 'magically' become American citizens (probably should be number one).

Number 5)  Only in America ....could the people who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country's Constitution be thought of as "extremists."

Number 4)  Only in America ...could you need to present a driver's license to cash a check or buy alcohol, but not to vote.

Number 3)  Only in America ...could people demand the government investigate whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas went up when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. Oil company(Marathon Oil) is less than half of a company making tennis shoes (Nike).

Number 2)  Only in America....could the government collect more tax dollars from the people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a Trillion dollars more than it has per year - for total spending of $7-Million PER MINUTE, and complain that it doesn't have nearly enough money.

And Number 1)   Only in America...could the rich people - who pay 86% of all income taxes - be accused of not paying their "fair share" by people who don't pay any income taxes at all.


DON'T KEEP THIS - SEND IT OUT TO YOUR LIST.
DO YOU WANT MORE OF THE SAME?

Van T. Barfoot died

Van T. Barfoot died

 

Remember the guy who wouldn't take

the flag pole down on his Virginia

property a while back?

You might remember the news story several

months ago about a crotchety old man in

Virginia who defied his local Homeowners

Association, and refused to take down the

flag pole on his property along with the large

American flag he flew on it.

Now we learn who that old man was.

On June 15, 1919, Van T. Barfoot was born in

Edinburg , Texas . That probably didn't make

news back then. 

But twenty-five years later, on May 23, 1944,

near Carano , Italy , that same Van T. Barfoot,

who had in 1940 enlisted in the U.S. Army, set

out alone to flank German machine gun

positions from which gunfire was raining

down on his fellow soldiers.

His advance took him through a minefield but

having done so, he proceeded to single-handedly

take out three enemy machine gun positions,

returning with 17 prisoners of war.

And if that weren't enough for a day's work, he later

took on and destroyed three German tanks

sent to retake the machine gun positions.

That probably didn't make much news either,

given the scope of the war, but it did earn

Van T. Barfoot, who retired as a Colonel after

also serving in Korea and Vietnam , a well

deserved Congressional Medal of Honor.

 

What did make news...Was his Neighborhood

Association's quibble with how the 90-year-old

veteran chose to fly the American flag outside

his suburban Virginia home. Seems the HOA rules

said it was OK to fly a flag on a house-mounted

bracket, but, for decorum, items such as

Barfoot's 21-foot flagpole was "unsuitable".

 

 

Van Barfoot had been denied a permit for

the pole, but erected it anyway and was facing

court action unless he agreed to take it down.

Then the HOA story made national TV,

and the Neighborhood Association rethought

its position and agreed to indulge this

aging hero who dwelt among them.

 

"In the time I have left", he said to the

Associated Press, "I plan to continue

to fly the American flag without interference."

As well he should.

And if any of his neighbors had taken a notion to

contest him further, they might have done well to

read his Medal of Honor citation first. Seems it

indicates Mr. Van Barfoot wasn't particularly

good at backing down.

 

Van T. Barfoot's Medal of Honor citation:

This 1944 Medal of Honor citation, listed with the

National Medal of Honor Society,

is for Second Lieutenant Van T. Barfoot,

157th Infantry, 45th Infantry:

 

If you got this email and didn't pass it on -

guess what - you need your butt kicked!

I sent this to you, because I didn't want MY butt kicked!

Do the right thing!

WE ONLY LIVE IN THE LAND OF THE FREE BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE! 

Fed Up - the movie trailer - a MUST see movie

If you were outraged by how the tobacco industry mislead us about how they designed cigarettes in order to cause addiction, then you will be beyond outraged to learn how the food industry is doing similar things regarding sugar.

Look for the movie, FED UP and click to see the movie trailer -

http://drhyman.com/blog/2014/04/11/fed-official-trailer/

See the  Rolling Stones movie review http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/reviews/fed-up-20140508 

Big Food is hell bent on confusing us with misinformation, propaganda and lies. Even before the new movie, FED UP—which finally tells the truth about food and obesity—hit theaters on May 9, the food industry was hard at work and running fast to confuse the issue.
The Grocery Manufacturers of America (GMA) put up a website a few days before the movie launched that seemingly sets the record straight. For the average reader, their "facts" seem reasonable and refute many of the arguments in the film that make Big Food complicit in the obesity epidemic.

But let's really look at the facts underneath their "true or false" quiz. Click here to read my analysis, comparing food industry lies with the FED UP truth.

And if you haven't yet seen FED UP, see it now at a theater near you and decide for yourself. Don't believe the food industry propaganda.

Wishing you health and happiness,
Mark Hyman, MD
---------------------
55 Pittsfield Road, Suite 9
Lenox, MA 01240

Trying to lose weight? See Why calories don't matter

Why calories do not matter ...http://drhyman.com/blog/2014/04/10/calories-dont-matter/

The vast majority of conventional nutritionists and doctors have it mostly wrong when it comes toweight loss. Let’s face it: If their advice were good and doable, we would all be thin and healthy by now. But as a general rule, it’s not. And the mainstream media messages often confuse things even more. It is based on many “food lies”.

And the biggest lie of them all is this: All calories are created equal.

Is this really true? Not really. Let us explore why.

Take a class of sixth graders. Show them a picture of 1,000 calories of broccoli and 1,000 calories of soda. Ask them if they have the same effect on our bodies. Their unanimous response will be “NO!” We all intuitively know that equal caloric amounts of soda and broccoli can’t be the same nutritionally. But as Mark Twain said, “The problem with common sense is that it is not too common.”

I guess that is why the medical profession, nutritionists, our government, the food industry, and the media are all still actively promoting the outdated, scientifically disproven idea that all calories are created equal. Yes, that well-worn notion—that as long as you burn more calories than you consume, you will lose weight—is simply dead wrong.

Newton’s first law of thermodynamics states that the energy of an isolated system is constant. In other words, in a laboratory, or “isolated system,” 1,000 calories of broccoli and 1,000 calories of soda are, in fact, the same. I’m not saying Newton was wrong about that. It’s true that when burned in a laboratory setting, 1,000 calories of broccoli and 1,000 calories of soda would indeed release the same amount of energy.

But sorry, Mr. Newton; your law of thermodynamics doesn’t apply in living, breathing, digesting systems. When you eat food, the “isolated system” part of the equation goes out the window. The food interacts with your biology, a complex adaptive system that instantly transforms every bite.

To illustrate how this works, let’s follow 750 calories of soda and 750 calories of broccoli once they enter your body. First, soda: 750 calories is the amount in a Double Gulp from 7-Eleven, which is 100 percent sugar and contains 186 grams, or 46 teaspoons, of sugar. Many people actually do consume this amount of soda. They are considered the “heavy users.”

Your gut quickly absorbs the fiber-free sugars in the soda, fructose, and glucose. The glucose spikes your blood sugar, starting a domino effect of high insulin and a cascade of hormonal responses that kicks bad biochemistry into gear. The high insulin increases storage of belly fat, increases inflammation, raises triglycerides and lowers HDL, raises blood pressure, lowers testosterone in men, and contributes to infertility in women.

Your appetite is increased because of insulin’s effect on your brain chemistry. The insulin blocks your appetite-control hormone leptin. You become more leptin resistant, so the brain never gets the “I’m full” signal. Instead, it thinks you are starving. Your pleasure-based reward center is triggered, driving you to consume more sugar and fueling your addiction.

The fructose makes things worse. It goes right to your liver, where it starts manufacturing fat, which triggers more insulin resistance and causes chronically elevated blood insulin levels, driving your body to store everything you eat as dangerous belly fat. You also get a fatty liver, which generates more inflammation. Chronic inflammation causes more weight gain and diabesity. Anything that causes inflammation will worsen insulin resistance. Another problem with fructose is that it doesn’t send informational feedback to the brain, signaling that a load of calories just hit the body. Nor does it reduce ghrelin, the appetite hormone that is usually reduced when you eat real food.

Now you can see just how easily 750 calories of soda can create biochemical chaos. In addition, the soda contains no fiber, vitamins, minerals, or phytonutrients to help you process the calories you are consuming. These are “empty” calories devoid of any nutritional value. But they are “full” of trouble. Your body doesn’t register soda as food, so you eat more all day long. Plus, your taste buds get hijacked, so anything that is not super-sweet doesn’t taste very good to you.

Think I’m exaggerating? Cut out all sugar for a week, then have a cup of blueberries. Super-sweet. But eat those same blueberries after bingeing on soda and they will taste like bland and boring.

Now let’s look at the 750 calories of broccoli. As with the soda, these calories are made up primarily (although not entirely) of carbohydrates—but let’s clarify just what that means, because the varying characteristics of carbs will factor significantly into the contrast I’m about to illustrate.

Carbohydrates are plant-based compounds comprised of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen. They come in many varieties, but they are all technically sugars or starches, which convert to sugar in the body. The important difference is in how they affect your blood sugar. High-fiber, low-sugar carbohydrates such as broccoli are slowly digested and don’t lead to blood sugar and insulin spikes, while table sugar and bread are quickly digested carbs that spike your blood sugar. Therein lies the difference. Slow carbs like broccoli heal rather than harm.

Those 750 calories of broccoli make up 21 cups and contain 67 grams of fiber (the average American consumes 10 to 15 grams of fiber a day). Broccoli is 23 percent protein, 9 percent fat, and 68 percent carbohydrate, or 510 calories from carbs. The “sugar” in 21 cups of broccoli is the equivalent of only 1.5 teaspoons; the rest of the carbohydrates are the low-glycemic type found in all nonstarchy vegetables, which are very slowly absorbed.

Still, are the 750 calories in broccoli really the same as the 750 calories in soda? Kindergarten class response: “No way!” So why do we all think that’s true, and why has every major governmental and independent organization bought into this nonsense?

Let’s take a closer look at just how different these two sets of calories really are.

First, you wouldn’t be able to eat twenty-one cups of broccoli, because it wouldn’t fit in your stomach. But assuming you could, what would happen? They contain so much fiber that very few of the calories would actually get absorbed. Those that did would get absorbed very slowly. There’d be no blood sugar or insulin spike, no fatty liver, no hormonal chaos. Your stomach would distend (which it doesn’t with soda; bloat from carbonation doesn’t count!), sending signals to your brain that you were full. There would be no triggering of the addiction reward center in the brain. You’d also get many extra benefits that optimize metabolism, lower cholesterol, reduce inflammation, and boost detoxification. The phytonutrients in broccoli (glucosinolates) boost your liver’s ability to detoxify environmental chemicals, and the flavonoid kaempferol is a powerful anti-inflammatory. Broccoli also contains high levels of vitamin C and folate, which protect against cancer and heart disease. The glucosinolates and sulphorophanes in broccoli change the expression of your genes to help balance your sex hormones, reducing breast and other cancers.

What I’m trying to illustrate here (and this is probably the single most important idea in this book) is that all calories are NOT created equal. The same number of calories from different types of food can have very different biological effects.

If you still think a calorie is just a calorie, maybe this study will convince you otherwise. In a study of 154 countries that looked at the correlation of calories, sugar, and diabetes, scientists found that adding 150 calories a day to the diet barely raised the risk of diabetes in the population, but if those 150 calories came from soda, the risk of diabetes went up by 700 percent.

Some calories are addictive, others healing, some fattening, some metabolism-boosting. That’s because food doesn’t just contain calories, it contains information. Every bite of food you eat broadcasts a set of coded instructions to your body—instructions that can create either health or disease.

So what will it be, a Double Gulp or a big bunch of broccoli?

If you’re inspired to detox, to end your food addiction and your sugar and carb cravings and renew and reboot your health, check out my #1 best-selling book The Blood Sugar Solution 10-Day Detox Diet! Plus, get these great bonus gifts right away to jump-start your program:

• In the Kitchen with Dr. Mark Hyman – In this three-part online video series, I teach you how to cook amazingly delicious healing foods quickly.
• The Missing Ingredient Report – Why we get stuck and how we can sustain our weight loss goals.
• Dieting 101 Guide – My review of the top 10 weight loss programs, in which I share what works and what doesn’t and WHY?

Wishing you health and happiness,
Mark Hyman, MD

This needs repeating - Classroom Socialism

CLASSROOM SOCIALISM

CLASSROOM SOCIALISM


Is this man truly a genius?
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan". All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an “A”.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a “B”. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.

As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride
too so they studied little. The second test average was a “D”! No one was happy.

When the 3rd test rolled around, the new average was an “F”.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.

Human nature will always cause socialism's style of government to fail because the world has producers and non-producers (makers and takers).

It could not be any simpler than that.

(Please pass this on)

These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read and all applicable to this experiment:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

Benefits of Legalizing Marijuana Outweigh Arguments Against It

The Ledger

Published: Sunday, March 30, 2014 at 12:32 a.m.

Last Modified: Sunday, March 30, 2014 at 12:32 a.m.

As the November election nears we can expect the debate over legalizing marijuana for medical purposes to become more intense.

I have never used marijuana, nor any other illegal drugs, and do not expect to.

Opponents of the amendment claim that many major medical organizations feel that marijuana has not been proved to be a safe or effective form of medicine. However, the evidence that in many cases marijuana is beneficial is overwhelming.

Others argue that legalizing marijuana for medical purposes will lead to more traffic accidents. It is no secret that marijuana usage, although illegal, is widespread.

Yet, I have seen no statistics that indicate marijuana causes traffic accidents. On the other hand, no day goes by without the media reporting some fatalities caused by drunken drivers. Does anyone advocate that we bring back Prohibition?

Another concern is that legalizing marijuana for medical purposes will give people with no legitimate need easy access to the drug. This is probably true, but it seems that people who want marijuana have no difficulty obtaining it despite the best efforts of law enforcement to block it. Much better that they get the their marijuana from government-controlled sources than by enriching criminal drug dealers.

Sadly, it seems that people who want marijuana for recreational purposes have no trouble getting it while all too many who could benefit from its use are unable to obtain it.

There are many valid reasons for opposing the legalization of medical marijuana but on balance the arguments in favor of approving the amendment are much stronger. Therefore, I will vote in favor.

FRED PICUS

Lake Wales