chucK

Where did you get it that the rates of cancer in this country are unheard of in all other areas of the world? You can check out the cancer death rates for 50 countries throughout the world here table (pt 1) table (pt 2) You'll see that the death rates in the US are by no means "unheard" of elsewhere. I think carcinogens in the air and water due to pollution are a lot more worrisome than fluoridation (check out the liver cancer rate in China in that table!) I don't think fluoride in toothpaste is sufficient for children. Children do not do a good job of brushing their teeth. If you are a parent you'll know how difficult it is to brush your children's teeth twice a day from age 0 to age 5. Holy crap! Can anybody actually do that? Systemic fluoride is thought to be beneficial by strengthening teeth prior to eruption. When I was a kid there used to be Crest ads with kids returning from the dentist and celebrating magnificently because they only had ONE cavity. Nowadays, if you have one cavity in your mouth you are considered to be in the high-risk group and a candidate for more extensive treatments (like fluoride varnish, i.e. painting your teeth fluoride!).

With respect to Seattle Public Schools, you don't need to do anything but sign a form saying you don't want your child vaccinated and you might be asked to fill in the reason why. And even if you don't, it's not like they've got anyone with time enough to track you down and boot your kid out of school. They are so strapped for workers/money that they've got enough to do just getting the floors swept. Our daughter had a bad reaction to one of the two-part vaccines so we didn't get the second one. But other than a situation like that (where you have good reason to believe that your child in particular may be injured by the vaccination), I'd advocate getting the recommended vaccines. You'll be doing your part for society and you and your child may even directly benefit from it.

shappdude, I took that picture. I know where I was. You wrote in a post that you have never been there. Funny that you think I am the one mistaken. Are you drunk? The pictured "gully" is the first depression climber's right of Solar Slab. You can exit onto the terrace below Solar Slab (which we did) and then descend the Solar Slab Gully to which you refer (which we did). Though some places in the Solar Slab Gully are similar, that picture is not from there. I do admit that my memory is not what it used to be; however, I remember the pictured spot well, with a certain regret, as I shredded my beloved Geni pack in that chimney.

picture from the "gully" to the right of Solar Slab

Your giant-sized pictures are next to worthless for viewing on a computer screen and making a mockery of my wonderful thread. (they do look like some sweet granite though)

If you use crampons with the quick release bindings it's pretty safe to do.

Why would you carry rock shoes if you did your climbing in boots? Are you talking "CNR" as in not using the glacier at all; i.e. ~3000 feet of pitched out climbing? How long did that take you (that is, can you be more specific than "casual day", did you bivy at the top)? How many pitches? I am obviously having trouble wrapping my brain around pitching out the Complete North Ridge in a casual day. Please elaborate! Thank you.

It's always the guidebook's fault with you chestbeaters

Nice touch! A true chestbeater would have listed the grades as 5.6 and 5.5 . Solar Slab in 35 minutes (was that from the base or the terrace) is some serious speed climbing. Did you use track spikes?

Simuling on Stuart can suck ass due to rope drag. But it definitely is a nice place. Infinite Bliss is pretty damn good for simuling. There's long runs between the more difficult sections. The bolt density keeps the danger at whatever level you choose and the direct and slabby nature keep rope drag to a minimum. You don't even need to double up the 60.

Yeah and who makes money doing what you propose continually on this forum on a myriad of topics? Scum-bag, POS lawyers. KK, I used to reasonably value your posts on these topics and carefully consider what you had to say. But lately you've turned into a real asshole. Just thought you'd like to know .

I've got a climbing partner who said he experienced a simul-climbing fall on the East Ridge of Forbidden. IIRC, both he and his partner ended up dangling over the East side from a single piece! Holy crap! MVS has got a good point. Letting the weaker climber go first makes a ton of sense because if the climb is not too traversing (a la Forbidden E Ridge!) a fall by the leader may not be any worse than a regular belayed lead fall (provided good pro, etc.). Unfortunately, the whole reason you're simuling is because you've got a lot of convoluted ground to cover. Route-finding is key. If you take a lot of wrong turns you're going to lose all the time you saved and more. If the weaker climber is also weaker at alpine route-finding, then that might be problematic. Basically, when simuling BOTH climbers should be very competent and well within their abilities on the route.

That's quite an understatement. 7 percent is a long way off from "every cent". I guess that your point is that this was never supposed to be budget neutral. You're saying that our govt. is buying something and only paying 93 cents on the dollar. That sounds pretty good from that respect. So I guess my next question is, what are we buying for our $1.1 trillion? (other than financial security for the people who loan money to the US government) (That wasn't a rhetorical question, by the way)

Peter Puget, JayB, any other trickle down supporters, You guys seem much more confident in your knowledge of in-depth economics than I. The statements below seemd pretty clear-cut and damning of the Bush tax cuts. Do you basically agree with the statements (bolded ones especially) or are they closer to more of that terrible liberal media bias? or other? Just wondering. From Washington Post: "According to Alan D. Viard, a former Bush White House economist who joined the American Enterprise Institute, "Federal revenue is lower today than it would have been without the tax cuts. There's really no dispute among economists about that." Viard said in October there was "no evidence" that Bush's tax cuts come anywhere close to paying for themselves, a conclusion shared by economists at the Treasury Department and the nonpartisan CBO, Washington Post staff writer Lori Montgomery reported. The Congressional Research Service has estimated that economic growth fueled by the tax cuts is likely to generate revenue worth about 7 percent of their total cost, which amounts to about $1.1 trillion since 2001."

Aren't those two contradictory? Your climbing strategy is basicallly saying always stay well within your limits. Whereas your skiing sentence advocates pushing your limits.

One more bailing tip: If you unilaterally decide that it's time to turn around and your partner grudgingly acquiesces, do NOT continually justify your reasons aloud all the freaking way down. "If you say 'live to summit another day' or 'the mountain will always be there' ONE ... MORE ... TIME ..."

It just came to me why the Bushies are pushing this troop "surge". It is merely setting up their next move, which is to propose to "stay the course". But they'll change the words a bit, and sell it as bipartisan compromise. You just watch.

Two points! 1. They are not yet officially the majority party! You're getting a little ahead of yourself here. 2. What the hell are they supposed to do next month when they receive their power? Make a "state of the senate" resolution? Your stupid ass prez is the commander in chief, remember? The only really forceful thing the dems can do is threaten to cut off military funding, and I doubt anyone (except maybe the evil, baby-eating, use-your-kid-as-cannon-fodder Neocons) wants to play that game of chicken, when the losers are the troops, and the game is played with an idiot at the other wheel.

It sounds like this new thought fits right in there. That these bacteria increase the caloric input for the same amount of food, right? Bottom line though, is that it's not their fault. We all owe obese people lots of sympathy and should help them out with free medical treatment paid for with our insurance premiums and tax dollars.

gut bacteria associated with obesity?

Yep. It's all the stoopid Democrats' fault