Lucky

I didn't know there was an off button. Do I have to click it on every thread or once enough?

I thought so too...although in the US we spell it "pretty."

A website called the Language Log discusses the translation issues in the pope's statement on prostitutes. I will give you an excerpt and let you go to the site to read the whole thing: Some sources this Sunday morning are claiming that the morphosyntactically feminine word prostituta is sex-neutral; others (like the blog commenter Geremia on the National Catholic Register) say it means only "female prostitute". Yet the official translation of the Pope's remark translates it as "male prostitute". The three claims flatly contradict each other. Which is the most defensible, on the basis of linguistic facts? I do not know the answer (I know relatively little Italian). I ask merely for information. Here is the relevant passage from the forthcoming book-length interview that is the basis for all the stories: Vi possono essere singoli casi giustificati, ad esempio quando una prostituta utilizza un profilattico, e questo può essere il primo passo verso una moralizzazione, un primo atto di responsabilità per sviluppare di nuovo la consapevolezza del fatto che non tutto è permesso e che non si può far tutto ciò che si vuole. Tuttavia, questo non è il modo vero e proprio per vincere l'infezione dell'Hiv. È veramente necessaria una umanizzazione della sessualità. As translated in the forthcoming book itself (read it in the Catholic World Report here), the English equivalent is supposed to be this: There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants. But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality. This is Language Log, not Church Dogma And Sexual Repression Log, so we are not going to get into the moral or religious issues... http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2794

Here are the topics allegedly similar to this one: What's funny is Rex Reed's review What becomes of the GOP if it loses this election? Paul Krugman paints a dark picture Australian Hottie Caption This: What are these American Idol finalists doing? Sarah Palin Book signing in Columbus, Ohio From One of the Best Brands on the Market to Worst What a hun... What a Strange World "Is Your Baby Gay? What If You Could Know? What If You Could Do Something About It?" Anybody know what happened to GCN in NYC?

How do you know?

I read the article as the LA times now provides me the Sunday paper, delivered to my home for less than $10 a year. (Yes, a year!) It appears that many life insurance companies keep an out when they issue you a policy. Even after having your application accepted, if you die within a certain period, usually 2 years, they can withhold payment of your policy if they find any material misrepresentations in your application that would have caused them to deny you a policy in the first place. This happens even if you gave them complete access to your medical records. The gist of the story is that insurance companies withholding the money do so for reasons that did not have anything to do with your death. Say you die of a heart attack. If your application does not mention that you suffered from depression, then, bang, no money for your heirs. They go to ludicrous reasons for not paying. American General Life is the worst of them. "Material misrepresentation" becomes "any" misrepresentation or omission, even if it had nothing to do with your death. So, in short, the companies eagerly take your money. No matter how thorough their exam is, or how thorough your application is, they go to great lengths not to pay in those first two years. And they save million of dollars doing this. Granted, I have summarized a rather long article, so read it for yourself at the link TY provides.

From the website eldercareteam: FDA Slaps Aricept Ads The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recently chastized two television commercials for Aricept, the most popular medication for Alzheimer's Disease, as "misleading," "deceptive," and "not supported by the available research data." In a letter dated February 3, 2010 to Eisai Co., Ltd and to Pfizer, Inc., who co-market Aricept (donepezil hydrochloride), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) stated that the two commercials imply that as a result of taking Aricept a patient's cognitive abilities and daily functioning, including attention and focus, orientation, communication, and social interaction and engagement, will be restored to normal. They pointed out that respected clinical trials of the drug have indicated only a small degree of improvement in some subjects taking Aricept, and that some subjects have shown no measurable improvement at all. They requested that the advertisements in question be pulled from television. Commercials for Aricept Overstate It's Efficacy According to the FDA letter, promotional materials are misleading if they represent or suggest that a drug is more effective than has been demonstrated by substantial evidence or substantial clinical experience. They found that the two commercials described below fit the description of "misleading:" The "Beach" TV ad for Aricept presents an elderly man staring off into space, appearing distant, confused, and disinterested, while the rest of his family walks on the beach, and the man's daughter has a look of concern on her face. While this beach scene is taking place, the man's daughter makes the following statements: • "Dad had been repeating things and acting disoriented for a while, like something was stealing him away from us." • "We wanted to be there for him, to hold on to him." (While this statement is being made, a young boy clasps the man's hand.) The ad then shows the man and his daughter discussing Aricept with his doctor. Specifically, the daughter states: • "Dad's doctor said his symptoms were signs of Alzheimer's, a type of dementia, and that prescription Aricept could help." (While this statement is being made, the daughter poignantly clasps her father's hand.) After the patient and his daughter discuss Aricept with the doctor, the man's behavior changes dramatically. The man is shown happily interacting with his family members, moving more quickly and with greater focus. For example, he pats his grandson on the head while pouring cereal, winks while feeding the dog under the table, energetically cheers and points at a soccer game while following the plays, and clasps his daughter's hand. While these scenes are taking place, the ad makes the following statements: • "Studies showed Aricept slows the progression of Alzheimer's symptoms." • "It improves cognition and slows the decline of overall function." • "If it helps Dad be more like himself longer, that's everything to us." • "Don't wait. Talk to your doctor about Aricept." The "Garden" TV ad presents an elderly woman looking away from family members, appearing confused, aloof, and disoriented. While these scenes are taking place, the woman's daughter makes the following statements: • "We'd been noticing mom acting forgetful and confused, like she was drifting away." • "We wanted to be there for her, to hold on to her." (While this statement is being made, a young girl clasps the woman's hand.) Similar to the "Beach" ad, this ad then shows the woman and her daughter discussing Aricept with her doctor. After the woman and her daughter discuss Aricept with the doctor, the woman's behavior changes dramatically. The woman is shown interacting happily with her daughter and her grandchildren, trying on a hat, helping them plant seeds, and working with them in the garden. At the end of the ad, the daughter looks at her mother, smiling and hugging her, and the woman clasps her daughter's hand. According to the FDA letter, which was posted to their website on Friday, February 19, 2010 "...the totality of the above claims and presentations misleadingly overstates the efficacy of Aricept, implying a greater benefit than has been supported by substantial evidence or substantial clinical experience. As described above, the beginning segment of each ad presents patients with Alzheimer's disease looking blank, confused, distant, and walking off apart from their family members. However, after talking to their doctors about treatment with Aricept, the patients are seen interacting and communicating with their family members, happily and actively involved in activities with them. These presentations imply that, as a result of Aricept treatment, patients' cognitive and daily functioning, specifically aspects of attention and focus, orientation, communication, and social interaction and engagement, will be restored to normal. "The results from the Aricept efficacy trials in patients with mild to moderate and severe Alzheimer's disease do not support such a drastic improvement. "...the claims and presentations in both TV ads are not representative of the results from the clinical trials for Aricept, and misleadingly overstate the efficacy of the drug. The inclusion of the superimposed text, "Individual results may vary," does not mitigate these misleading presentations." The full text of the Aricept letter is available on the FDA website.

Not to make fun of folks with Alzheinmer's, a truly awful thing to have, but I see a big ad today in my favorite magazine, Parade, for those who have a moderate to severe form of the disease. A large pharmaceutical company has now issued a larger dose of their medicine designed to slow the progression of the disease. Previously only a 5 or 10 mg tablet was available, but the great news is that a 23 mg is now provided. The article claims that the pill, Aricept, has been proven to slow the progression of Alzheimer symptoms. Yet it is not for everybody, certainly not for those who don't have the disease. But it's also not for those allergic to Aricept or medicines containing piperidines, not that I know if any of my meds have those. It can also cause fainting and a slow heartbeat, and, you guessed it, this is more common in people with heart problems, which is probably a significant portion of Aricept's target market. Call the doctor right away if you faint, assuming you can use the phone. And, if you are one of those seniors with lung problems, you should know that Aricept may worsen them. But, if you are lucky enough at the onset of Alzheimers not to have lung or heart problems, and have a phone in case you faint, then this drug may be for you. Just be sure to watch out for trouble urinating. If you are of a light weight, say under 123 pounds, you might have increased nausea, vomiting, and decreasing weight when taking Aricept. Don't fret! Comfort yourself with the fact that you are one of those who can take the drug! Just be careful if you are having surgery, anesthesia,or dental procedures while on the drug, Now, for those off you over 123 pounds, you can still have the nausea, vomiting that the lighter folks have, and studies show those on the 23 mg version have more of that. (Sorry, the ad doesn't mention if all side effects get worse on the higher doses.) We didn't mention diarrhea, difficulty sleeping, or muscle cramps, but if you read our ad you'll see it there. Think about the tiredness you might feel, or the loss of appetite, but don't think too hard, because these things might get better after being on Aricept for awhile. (We also don't mention that a generic form of Aricept becomes available on December 11th.) Now, how did the drug studies show the effectiveness of Aricept? They were relatively short, 13 to 24 weeks from my quick inquiry. Aricept does stop working after a while even in the most favorable studies. You just don't know when. But, when seeing a loved one declining due to Alzheier's, the average son or daughter is going to want some help. Aricept may provide some, but the side effects are troubling, and the fact remains that even with Aricept there is no cure for the disease. To see worsening heart and lung problems, not to mention the other side effects, all for a nebulous gain against Alzheiers only indicates to me the eagerness of pharmaceutical companies to profit. (and, if you read this far, I am not picking on Aricept in particular. So many drugs are now advertised like cigarettes used to be, that it's a shame the side effects are also passed over pretty quickly.) Take out the words "Salem" and "taste' and substitute Aricept and mind:

In a related matter today, the pope announced that Viagra may be used only when the specific intent in using it is to create new life. One exception the pope allowed is for 83 year old men living in the Vatican,and then only when in the company of a male prostitute who is using a condom.

Do I need to dress up my post, as it received no interest> Wayne Virgo Wayne Virgo and Tom Bott Skin in the movie

That may have been true at one time in traditional war, but the attitude now among the Roberts Courts is full speed ahead on destroying personal freedom.

George Will in today's Washington Post: What the TSA is doing is mostly security theater, a pageant to reassure passengers that flying is safe. Reassurance is necessary if commerce is going to flourish and if we are going to get to grandma's house on Thursday to give thanks for the Pilgrims and for freedom. If grandma is coming to our house, she may be wanded while barefoot at the airport because democracy - or the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment; anyway, something - requires the amiable nonsense of pretending that no one has the foggiest idea what an actual potential terrorist might look like.

I apologize for my graceless answer. Not every post here is made with the intent to draw new posters, some are just meant to be fun for those who get a kick out of them.

Self-interest?

I'll give you the synopsis from Netflix, along with the recommendation of the bf and me. It's violent, with cute guys, full nudity, and, of course, true love: (Wayne Virgo and Tom Bott are the real hot ones in the movie.) 2009UR 89 minutes Though gang member Cal (Wayne Virgo) hides his sexuality, he secretly yearns for fellow thug Jonno (Tom Bott). But after Cal saves Olivier (Marc Laurent), the victim of a gay-bashing by the gang, he embarks on a tender romance with the gentle student. Now the gang's manipulative leader, Nessa (Alice Payne), is out for revenge. Simon Pearce makes his directorial debut with this gritty British drama. Cast: Wayne Virgo, Marc Laurent, Alice Payne, Tom Bott, Garry Summers, Bernie Hodges, Christian Martin, Louise Fearnside Director: Simon Pearce Genres: Drama, Gay & Lesbian Dramas, Indie Dramas, United Kingdom, Gay & Lesbian This movie is: Emotional, Dark, Gritty Format: DVD

Your question is one of those that cannot rally be answered with certainty, except perhaps by regular patrons of Thai massage parlors. Each escort/masseur must be allowed to decide for himself what risk he is willing to take in terms of disease when having sex with strangers. Face it- you walk in off the street, the guy knows nothing about you, he may have a family of his own dependent on him staying healthy and providing for them. Does he suck the client without a condom just because that's what the client wants? Or does he make the choice that sucking without a condom is a relatively safe activity, especially absent someone cuming in his mouth? I always let the masseur/escort make the decision as to what is safe, even if I think he is being too conservative. (Now, if I know he is being downright unsafe, I don't shut my mouth, I tell him. For example, he can believe that barebacking is safe, but we won't be doing it!)) So, I'd be interested in how others answer this, if they do. But I don't want to end without thanking you for your trip reports, which I enjoyed.

His intentions are certainly good.

I think BiBottom Boy should marry John, move to a quiet cottage in Southern France, and live happily ever after. just keep him away from the baths!

How do the Republicans here defend this policy? It was started under Bush, apparently legal by the "Patriot" Act. Elsewhere it is said that Oz had his laptop seized and spyware put on it by the government. is this true?

I don't think adding threads that are allegedly similar to the thread one just posted on makes any sense at all. They rarely co-relate, and they are just a nuisance making it hard for me to see the post I just put up. Apologies to whomever created this idea, but it is of no use to me.

FINALLY! It happened! RA1 and I agree on something. I, too, favor profiling. Why should all these people be searched just to uphold a pretense that we don't think it's the Muslims doing all the terrorists stuff. Search the Muslims, grab their junk, drop those burkas. Yes, really, I mean it. Why should some gramma be humiliated when she has no idea even how to be a terrorist. Why should pilots get searched when they can just crash the plane if they choose to.

I am fairly certain that I will get the Droid 2. However, you mentioned a Droid World so I will see what that is about. I only need it for two weeks in January, so the Droid 2 with a world plan might be best, then dropping the world plan when I return. My ATT contract expire at the end of December. Any other phones expected to be available soon? Smart ones, that is.

Yesterday Verizon cut the price of the Droid phones and the Samsung Fascinate in half.I am glad I waited!

One assumes that all readers know that The Cock is a New York bar in the lower East Side known for its raunchy back room and sexy go-go dancers. The assumption that such would make New York a dirty city also assumes that raunchy stuff is dirty! You couldn't pay me to live in Bakersfield or Fresno.

When did genitals become junk? I thought they were a particularly valued part of the body. So valued, in fact, that TSA agents can no longer retrain themselves and must touch everybody's "junk." I don't often agree with Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer...no relation to jackhammer...but his column today sums up all the absurdities we are now faced with at the airport: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/18/AR2010111804494.html?hpid=topnews