Pork tenderloin, a good alternative to chicken?
Options
Replies
-
UltimateRBF wrote: »Good g-d I responded to this thread on like the 2nd page and then kept reading.
Now I wish I had never responded in here. I....need to bash my head against the wall now.
I can't even blame a previous response. But I have no idea why I came back here. I feel the same way but it messes up my tinfoil hat when I do and I just got it right.0 -
atypicalsmith wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »Yeah. I bet there would be no money to be made with a cure for cancer.
And a vaccination against the polio virus is super comparable to curing the myriad types and causes of cancer. I guess, in your world, there's some sinister reason for the lack of a bulletproof cure for the common cold because, hey, polio vaccine.
Read the income and expense statements of nonprofits. Horrendous.
So, you complain because a charity isn't giving free glasses, complain because a non-profit organisation with no "big pharma" backing hasn't found a cure yet, complain about the running costs of said non-profit charities who you expect to come up with a cure which won't be exploited by big pharma/gov for mega cash. You also complain that cures haven't been found for the gazillion types of cancer with a gazillion causes because "the govt figured out polio quick enough" - even though polio is a straight forward virus.
Does that about sum up your views?
0 -
christinev297 wrote: »Don't shoot me down for this... But there is a theory that the government does not want to cure cancer, they make millions from the medications people have to be on to keep them alive. Not to mention the astronomical amount of people who die everyday from cancer related illnesses keeps the population to a more manageable level..
I'm not saying this is true or not, it does seem pretty far out. It was just a heated discussion in the office the other week.
I have a feeling that the British government, the Canadian government, and pretty much any other government that funds their population's healthcare would probably respectfully disagree with that statement.
As for population control, I'm all for it.0 -
christinev297 wrote: »Don't shoot me down for this... But there is a theory that the government does not want to cure cancer, they make millions from the medications people have to be on to keep them alive. Not to mention the astronomical amount of people who die everyday from cancer related illnesses keeps the population to a more manageable level..
I'm not saying this is true or not, it does seem pretty far out. It was just a heated discussion in the office the other week.
0 -
christinev297 wrote: »Don't shoot me down for this... But there is a theory that the government does not want to cure cancer, they make millions from the medications people have to be on to keep them alive. Not to mention the astronomical amount of people who die everyday from cancer related illnesses keeps the population to a more manageable level..
I'm not saying this is true or not, it does seem pretty far out. It was just a heated discussion in the office the other week.
LOL I told y'all not to shoot me down for it
0 -
atypicalsmith wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »Don't shoot me down for this... But there is a theory that the government does not want to cure cancer, they make millions from the medications people have to be on to keep them alive. Not to mention the astronomical amount of people who die everyday from cancer related illnesses keeps the population to a more manageable level..
I'm not saying this is true or not, it does seem pretty far out. It was just a heated discussion in the office the other week.
It sounds sadistic, but it really does seem with all the millions of dollars that people contribute, that surely a cure could have been found for the diseases that are killing us now. When polio affected thousands of people, a cure was nearly immediately found and not by a nonprofit agency collecting donations.
0 -
christinev297 wrote: »Don't shoot me down for this... But there is a theory that the government does not want to cure cancer, they make millions from the medications people have to be on to keep them alive. Not to mention the astronomical amount of people who die everyday from cancer related illnesses keeps the population to a more manageable level..
I'm not saying this is true or not, it does seem pretty far out. It was just a heated discussion in the office the other week.
+10 -
MonsoonStorm wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »Yeah. I bet there would be no money to be made with a cure for cancer.
And a vaccination against the polio virus is super comparable to curing the myriad types and causes of cancer. I guess, in your world, there's some sinister reason for the lack of a bulletproof cure for the common cold because, hey, polio vaccine.
Read the income and expense statements of nonprofits. Horrendous.
So, you complain because a charity isn't giving free glasses, complain because a non-profit organisation with no "big pharma" backing hasn't found a cure yet, complain about the running costs of said non-profit charities who you expect to come up with a cure which won't be exploited by big pharma/gov for mega cash. You also complain that cures haven't been found for the gazillion types of cancer with a gazillion causes because "the govt figured out polio quick enough" - even though polio is a straight forward virus.
Does that about sum up your views?
I haven't complained about anything; just stated the facts.0 -
MonsoonStorm wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »Don't shoot me down for this... But there is a theory that the government does not want to cure cancer, they make millions from the medications people have to be on to keep them alive. Not to mention the astronomical amount of people who die everyday from cancer related illnesses keeps the population to a more manageable level..
I'm not saying this is true or not, it does seem pretty far out. It was just a heated discussion in the office the other week.
I have a feeling that the British government, the Canadian government, and pretty much any other government that funds their population's healthcare would probably respectfully disagree with that statement.
As for population control, I'm all for it.
Oh, good, isn't Planned Parenthood nonprofit?0 -
atypicalsmith wrote: »MonsoonStorm wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »Yeah. I bet there would be no money to be made with a cure for cancer.
And a vaccination against the polio virus is super comparable to curing the myriad types and causes of cancer. I guess, in your world, there's some sinister reason for the lack of a bulletproof cure for the common cold because, hey, polio vaccine.
Read the income and expense statements of nonprofits. Horrendous.
So, you complain because a charity isn't giving free glasses, complain because a non-profit organisation with no "big pharma" backing hasn't found a cure yet, complain about the running costs of said non-profit charities who you expect to come up with a cure which won't be exploited by big pharma/gov for mega cash. You also complain that cures haven't been found for the gazillion types of cancer with a gazillion causes because "the govt figured out polio quick enough" - even though polio is a straight forward virus.
Does that about sum up your views?
I haven't complained about anything; just stated the facts.
0 -
christinev297 wrote: »Don't shoot me down for this... But there is a theory that the government does not want to cure cancer, they make millions from the medications people have to be on to keep them alive. Not to mention the astronomical amount of people who die everyday from cancer related illnesses keeps the population to a more manageable level..
I'm not saying this is true or not, it does seem pretty far out. It was just a heated discussion in the office the other week.
They also manufacture AIDS to keep the gays and Africans from rising up and conquering the world dontcha know?-1 -
myfelinepal wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »Don't shoot me down for this... But there is a theory that the government does not want to cure cancer, they make millions from the medications people have to be on to keep them alive. Not to mention the astronomical amount of people who die everyday from cancer related illnesses keeps the population to a more manageable level..
I'm not saying this is true or not, it does seem pretty far out. It was just a heated discussion in the office the other week.
They also manufacture AIDS to keep the gays and Africans from rising up and conquering the world dontcha know?
Yowsas that's the first time I've heard that one!
0 -
UltimateRBF wrote: »Ooh look, flags!
Raise your flag (higher and higher!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4P5xSntVWQE0 -
ncboiler89 wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »ncboiler89 wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »ncboiler89 wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »ncboiler89 wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »ncboiler89 wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »ncboiler89 wrote: »christinev297 wrote: »
Red meat as often as possible
haha no. Red meat no more than twice a week
no
I'm not saying I agree with it. It is just the latest "recommendation " from the nutritional powers that be.
Don't they have a min/max amount for red meat in America?
I don't care if they do. You know what I mean? Who do you have in game two of State of Origin?
Indeed
Which team is indeed?
I was agreeing with your first sentence. State of origin... No idea. I don't follow it, it's played across the border.
what is it you're trying to say?
Thought you were Australian.
That I am. I'm in south Australia. They play Rugby in New South Wales/Sydney and Victoria/Melbourne. We don't have any horses in that race.
You would think that a country that small that you would all be on the same page.
Wow, this thread escalated quickly!! Just to lighten things up a bit, I am Australian and State of Origin is starting right now. Queensland versus New South Wales and they are playing at the Melbourne stadium...I am kind of surprised that another fellow Aussie didn't know which states actually competed in State of Origin!! Always been Queensland versus NSW...I live in Queensland and most people I know make a pretty big deal about it, my hubby's workplace allows them to wear their team's jersey's, hats etc on Origin days. I guess it wouldn't really interested the other states though.
Anyhow, back to the original topic at hand...I haven't had pork for ages (bacon is a regular though) but after reading this I might add it into our rotation of foods so we don't have so much chicken. I always overcook it though, sigh.0 -
christinev297 wrote: »Don't shoot me down for this... But there is a theory that the government does not want to cure cancer, they make millions from the medications people have to be on to keep them alive. Not to mention the astronomical amount of people who die everyday from cancer related illnesses keeps the population to a more manageable level..
I'm not saying this is true or not, it does seem pretty far out. It was just a heated discussion in the office the other week.
+ million
you can't say "Don't shoot me down for this" then post the most asinine comment ever written
what on earth are you thinking?0 -
0 -
I'd love to know who that guy is by the way ...0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 911 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions