Leaderboard

5 Reasons Potatoes Don't Deserve Their Bad Reputation The Huffington Post | By Sarah Klein Adam Gault via Getty Images The potato isn't inherently bad, and, really, it shouldn't be treated as such. Yes, it's often smothered in cheese, mixed up with mayo, doused in sour cream or deep-fried -- but when it isn't is when the potato truly shines. In its purest, most potato-y (and perhaps organic) form, it actually packs some very real health perks. Here are five very good reasons to love potatoes. They're loaded with potassium. One large spud baked with the skin on contains a whopping 1,600 milligrams of potassium, nearly half the recommended amount for an entire day and almost four times as much as a medium banana, famed for its potassium count. Not only is it an essential electrolyte key to hydration and athletic performance, potassium may also play a role in lowering blood pressure. Potatoes are packed with fiber. If you eat the skin, at least. That same large spud contains 7 grams of dietary fiber, about a quarter of what you should aim for in a day -- but without the skin that fiber count drops to just 1 gram. A diet rich in fiber will not only help you stay fuller for longer (thereby leading to less snacking), it's also been shown to reduce heart attack risk, lower cholesterol and help prevent diabetes. They've got a hearty dose of vitamin C. Also in the skin of your potato is a solid amount of vitamin C -- you'll nab nearly 29 milligrams of the stuff in a large tater, to be exact, nearly half of your goal for the day, and more than a third of the amount found in famed vitamin C deliverer, the orange. While getting enough C probably won't nip a cold in the bud, it plays an important role as an antioxidant and helps heal wounds. Potatoes are a good source of manganese.You might be less familiar with this nutrient, but that doesn't mean you don't need it.Manganese plays an essential role in processing protein, carbs and cholesterol and may also be involved in bone formation, according to WebMD. One large potato with the skin on contains 33 percent of your recommended daily amount of manganese. And they're rich in vitamin B6. This vitamin does much of its work "behind the scenes," American Dietetic Association spokesperson Dee Sandquist, MS, RD, CD, told Everyday Health, but it's working hard, in the cardiovascular, digestive, immune, muscular and nervous systems. It also produces essential brain hormones, the website reported. With 46 percent of your daily recommended B6, a potato (with the skin!) is a good place to start.

Here comes the Americano with all those boys. Must be versàtil. I never saw so many revolutions.

Damn near every thing except water and proteins are broken down to sugars at some point in the process. Even proteins can be converted in a pinch but that process is much less energy efficient. Carbohydrates like starch are mostly long chains of simple sugars. '(Fibers' are extra long carb chains difficult for the digestive process to break down.) The problem with sugars in food is that they are absorbed so easily that they can cause a spike in blood glucose. Carbs are broken down over a period of hours, resulting in a much more level blood glucose level. A calorie is just a measure of energy.

Does not the starch in a potato convert to sugar in the body, thus causing calories and problems for diabetics?

I believe that is a language understood only by men.

The Coming Climate Crash Lessons for Climate Change in the 2008 Recession By HENRY M. PAULSON Jr. JUNE 21, 2014 The New York Times THERE is a time for weighing evidence and a time for acting. And if there's one thing I've learned throughout my work in finance, government and conservation, it is to act before problems become too big to manage. For too many years, we failed to rein in the excesses building up in the nations financial markets. When the credit bubble burst in 2008, the damage was devastating. Millions suffered. Many still do. We're making the same mistake today with climate change. We're staring down a climate bubble that poses enormous risks to both our environment and economy. The warning signs are clear and growing more urgent as the risks go unchecked. This is a crisis we cant afford to ignore. I feel as if Im watching as we fly in slow motion on a collision course toward a giant mountain. We can see the crash coming, and yet were sitting on our hands rather than altering course. We need to act now, even though there is much disagreement, including from members of my own Republican Party, on how to address this issue while remaining economically competitive. Theyre right to consider the economic implications. But we must not lose sight of the profound economic risks of doing nothing. The solution can be a fundamentally conservative one that will empower the marketplace to find the most efficient response. We can do this by putting a price on emissions of carbon dioxide a carbon tax. Few in the United States now pay to emit this potent greenhouse gas into the atmosphere we all share. Putting a price on emissions will create incentives to develop new, cleaner energy technologies. Its true that the United States cant solve this problem alone. But were not going to be able to persuade other big carbon polluters to take the urgent action thats needed if were not doing everything we can do to slow our carbon emissions and mitigate our risks. I was secretary of the Treasury when the credit bubble burst, so I think its fair to say that I know a little bit about risk, assessing outcomes and problem-solving. Looking back at the dark days of the financial crisis in 2008, it is easy to see the similarities between the financial crisis and the climate challenge we now face. We are building up excesses (debt in 2008, greenhouse gas emissions that are trapping heat now). Our government policies are flawed (incentivizing us to borrow too much to finance homes then, and encouraging the overuse of carbon-based fuels now). Our experts (financial experts then, climate scientists now) try to understand what they see and to model possible futures. And the outsize risks have the potential to be tremendously damaging (to a globalized economy then, and the global climate now). Back then, we narrowly avoided an economic catastrophe at the last minute by rescuing a collapsing financial system through government action. But climate change is a more intractable problem. The carbon dioxide were sending into the atmosphere remains there for centuries, heating up the planet. That means the decisions were making today to continue along a path thats almost entirely carbon-dependent are locking us in for long-term consequences that we will not be able to change but only adapt to, at enormous cost. To protect New York City from rising seas and storm surges is expected to cost at least $20 billion initially, and eventually far more. And thats just one coastal city. New York can reasonably predict those obvious risks. When I worry about risks, I worry about the biggest ones, particularly those that are difficult to predict the ones I call small but deep holes. While odds are you will avoid them, if you do fall in one, its a long way down and nearly impossible to claw your way out. Scientists have identified a number of these holes potential thresholds that, once crossed, could cause sweeping, irreversible changes. They dont know exactly when we would reach them. But they know we should do everything we can to avoid them. Already, observations are catching up with years of scientific models, and the trends are not in our favor. Fewer than 10 years ago, the best analysis projected that melting Arctic sea ice would mean nearly ice-free summers by the end of the 21st century. Now the ice is melting so rapidly that virtually ice-free Arctic summers could be here in the next decade or two. The lack of reflective ice will mean that more of the suns heat will be absorbed by the oceans, accelerating warming of both the oceans and the atmosphere, and ultimately raising sea levels. Even worse, in May, two separate studies discovered that one of the biggest thresholds has already been reached. The West Antarctic ice sheet has begun to melt, a process that scientists estimate may take centuries but that could eventually raise sea levels by as much as 14 feet. Now that this process has begun, there is nothing we can do to undo the underlying dynamics, which scientists say are baked in. And 10 years from now, will other thresholds be crossed that scientists are only now contemplating? It is true that there is uncertainty about the timing and magnitude of these risks and many others. But those who claim the science is unsettled or action is too costly are simply trying to ignore the problem. We must see the bigger picture. The nature of a crisis is its unpredictability. And as we all witnessed during the financial crisis, a chain reaction of cascading failures ensued from one intertwined part of the system to the next. Its easy to see a single part in motion. Its not so easy to calculate the resulting domino effect. That sort of contagion nearly took down the global financial system. With that experience indelibly affecting my perspective, viewing climate change in terms of risk assessment and risk management makes clear to me that taking a cautiously conservative stance that is, waiting for more information before acting is actually taking a very radical risk. Well never know enough to resolve all of the uncertainties. But we know enough to recognize that we must act now. Im a businessman, not a climatologist. But Ive spent a considerable amount of time with climate scientists and economists who have devoted their careers to this issue. There is virtually no debate among them that the planet is warming and that the burning of fossil fuels is largely responsible. Farseeing business leaders are already involved in this issue. Its time for more to weigh in. To add reliable financial data to the science, Ive joined with the former mayor of New York City, Michael R. Bloomberg, and the retired hedge fund manager Tom Steyer on an economic analysis of the costs of inaction across key regions and economic sectors. Our goal for the Risky Business project starting with a new study that will be released this week is to influence business and investor decision making worldwide. We need to craft national policy that uses market forces to provide incentives for the technological advances required to address climate change. As Ive said, we can do this by placing a tax on carbon dioxide emissions. Many respected economists, of all ideological persuasions, support this approach. We can debate the appropriate pricing and policy design and how to use the money generated. But a price on carbon would change the behavior of both individuals and businesses. At the same time, all fossil fuel and renewable energy subsidies should be phased out. Renewable energy can outcompete dirty fuels once pollution costs are accounted for. Some members of my political party worry that pricing carbon is a big government intervention. In fact, it will reduce the role of government, which, on our present course, increasingly will be called on to help communities and regions affected by climate-related disasters like floods, drought-related crop failures and extreme weather like tornadoes, hurricanes and other violent storms. Well all be paying those costs. Not once, but many times over. This is already happening, with taxpayer dollars rebuilding homes damaged by Hurricane Sandy and the deadly Oklahoma tornadoes. This is a proper role of government. But our failure to act on the underlying problem is deeply misguided, financially and logically. In a future with more severe storms, deeper droughts, longer fire seasons and rising seas that imperil coastal cities, public funding to pay for adaptations and disaster relief will add significantly to our fiscal deficit and threaten our long-term economic security. So it is perverse that those who want limited government and rail against bailouts would put the economy at risk by ignoring climate change. This is short-termism. There is a tendency, particularly in government and politics, to avoid focusing on difficult problems until they balloon into crisis. We would be fools to wait for that to happen to our climate. When you run a company, you want to hand it off in better shape than you found it. In the same way, just as we shouldnt leave our children or grandchildren with mountains of national debt and unsustainable entitlement programs, we shouldnt leave them with the economic and environmental costs of climate change. Republicans must not shrink from this issue. Risk management is a conservative principle, as is preserving our natural environment for future generations. We are, after all, the party of Teddy Roosevelt. THIS problem cant be solved without strong leadership from the developing world. The key is cooperation between the United States and China the two biggest economies, the two biggest emitters of carbon dioxide and the two biggest consumers of energy. When it comes to developing new technologies, no country can innovate like America. And no country can test new technologies and roll them out at scale quicker than China. The two nations must come together on climate. The Paulson Institute at the University of Chicago, a think-and-do tank I founded to help strengthen the economic and environmental relationship between these two countries, is focused on bridging this gap. We already have a head start on the technologies we need. The costs of the policies necessary to make the transition to an economy powered by clean energy are real, but modest relative to the risks. A tax on carbon emissions will unleash a wave of innovation to develop technologies, lower the costs of clean energy and create jobs as we and other nations develop new energy products and infrastructure. This would strengthen national security by reducing the worlds dependence on governments like Russia and Iran. Climate change is the challenge of our time. Each of us must recognize that the risks are personal. Weve seen and felt the costs of underestimating the financial bubble. Lets not ignore the climate bubble. Henry M. Paulson Jr. is the chairman of the Paulson Institute at the University of Chicago and served as secretary of the Treasury from July 2006 to January 2009. http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/22/opinion/sunday/lessons-for-climate-change-in-the-2008-recession.html?referrer=&_r=0

RA1 discovers his house suddenly elevated to an even safer height. "Oh hi, Granny Jones..." "When did you get your pilot's licence?"

I miss Chrjstopher Atkins

Judith Light's character is inspired. Spawn of Satan...I love it!

I have posted links on Daddy's forum to this forum over the years, and those posts have never been deleted or tampered with.

I agree. But, I loved Justin Beiber's 2nd one as well. wonder why?

The new theme is great. I think it fits perfectly with the site. Shout out for a great job to Boytoy and his team of designers. I remember back way before I met Hooboy. I had a chance to make this site called MaleEscortReview. It was going to compete with Hoo's site. Until I met Hoo and feel in love. Well, now that kind of love but we became great friends and the site I had that was ready to go live, I scratched and did not build for many years later until after his death. The first foray into the escort world was an escort service in NYC. The 2nd was a site called Male Nation. It was kind of like an Executive Male Escorts site (old timers will remember that site). It kept running for a long time. But, after Hoo died, we built the Male Escort Review based on the old Male Exotics Review I had wanted many years before. I had purchased Hooboy.com and was going to name it that but a few members got really insulted and I gave in and relented (mistake). After the Male Escort Review site was live for a bit, we decided to change the name again and for the last time to Boytoy.com I am glad we did. The same members got upset with the name but sometimes you just have to go with your gut. I love the name. I love the site. I love the members and I love the community. For those that don't know, I own hundreds of sites but this one is the only one I am so active in. I guess deep down, I am still just that ho that went to the Gaiety back in 1994 for the first time and said, Holy Shit. I am in Heaven! Before all of that, there was the idea for a Male Exotics Review. I found some of the old material and not sure if I have shared in the past so I thought you might like to see what the original site design looked like months before I met Hooboy as well as the old Male Nation ad we ran in Cybersocket. I bring all this us to show you how much the site had changed over the years. From Male Exotics Review to Male Nation to Male Escort Review to Boytoy and now another new design! I can't wait to see what is in the future for this site and the industry!

A company that can't cover the actual costs of its emissions should be out of business. To stay in business, it will either have to raise the price of its presently 'low-cost' toxic energy and/or it will have to transition to 'more expensive' cleaner energy. Paulsen is merely recommending that costs be more accurately assigned. If that doesn't happen, and soon, we'll all pay much higher costs to repair the damage. Assuming that's even possible.

Interesting set of photos from gay guys in Cuba. I have wanted to go there for years. I loved the pictures and the sweetness and toughness of the men in the photos! http://www.queerty.com/photos-the-secret-homoerotic-lives-of-cuban-men-20140818

There is a bit of info on Belo Horizonte here. http://www.boytoy.com/forums/index.php?/topic/13318-totally-oz-visits-brazil-for-the-month-of-march/ When I was there, I did spent a great deal of time sick and did not get to visit as much as I wanted to but I made friends with several guys that I have kept in touch with on facebook and they are beautiful and their friends are beautiful and the boys on the beach are beautiful. I loved the city!

P.S. Said by the guy who noticed such a detail.

WHOA!! Is this thread a subtle hint at the destination of your safari to the ass end of the internet? Oz spotted quaffing a cool beverage somewhere outside Havana. Cautious cabana boys hover off camera, just out of reach. (Once bitten, twice shy. )

I'll let you kiss me on the heath, But not until you brush your teeth.

I was last weekend in Praha: 1. dont waste your time in Villa, it was boring, no cute boys 2. CT was full on friday, some nice boys 3. Escape is coming better and better by the new management (Brian) some nice GAY boys had a boy fom USA; the very best I ever had!!!

When I sleep alone, I sleep with shorts. When I have the boyfriend with me, I sleep naked. When the boyfriend sleeps alone, he sleeps naked. When he sleeps with me, he wears full winter gear.