bennydict-cabbagepatch:

This little section at the end of the book? That is the third Hobbit movie.

Ayy my congresswoman responded!

Ayy my congresswoman responded!

drtanner-sfw:

rikakuuma:

vulnerate:

the-exercist:

dreamofunconsciousness:

the-exercist:

my-way-to-get-skinny:

Still hungry?

Absolutely!
The average active adult needs 2,000 calories per day in order to function in a safe and healthy manner. If I’m active to the point where I consistently run 1+ hour every day, then it is far more likely that my caloric needs are around 2,400-2,500.
Considering that, a meal of 1,200 calories would perfectly suit my needs. It would supply roughly half of my calorie requirements, which is a God-send since a fast food meal is relatively cheap. It’s a great value, especially if I don’t have much time to cook or have the resources to prepare my own meals!
The average burger is going to supply me with significant protein and carbs. That’s exactly what I’d need in order to build more muscle and have enough energy to make it through a workout. Even the sugar within the meal can be beneficial in supplying me with a boost of energy and can stop me from feeling hungry for a prolonged period of time. Not half bad.
Is this the most healthy meal known to man? Of course not. But it’s still a very reasonable deal and the calorie count is well within the average adult’s daily needs. 
Don’t let calories scare you! You need them. If you were capable of burning off an entire meal within the hour, you’d probably be dead by now.

1200 empty calories in a meal
next to no nutrition. all the calories are sugar and fat. that’s it. you’ll have no energy and have glucose spikes in your blood because the lack of fiber because of the lack of complex carbs. this is diabetes in a meal. 
so no, you should not be hungry for diabetes

Nutritionally, this BK meal contains roughly 28g of protein and 3g of dietary fiber. It potentially also includes 35% of our Vitamin C daily requirements, 2% Vitamin A, 12% calcium, and 27% iron. Of the 1,010 calories (that I could verify directly from the company’s nutritional information guide), only 410 are from fat. That isn’t a terribly significant amount of fat, in the long run, nor are the nutrients small enough to be viewed as negligible.
Eating this will not cause you to get diabetes. Eating this meal is perfectly fine if you do have diabetes, as long as you are able to adjust your insulin intake accordingly. So don’t use an illness as your debate point - Diabetic people are not a prop.

"So don’t use an illness as your debate point - Diabetic people are not a prop." I want that and variations of that on t shirts.

damn, man. Someone just got completely schooled by a nutritionist.

THIS A GOOD POST

drtanner-sfw:

rikakuuma:

vulnerate:

the-exercist:

dreamofunconsciousness:

the-exercist:

my-way-to-get-skinny:

Still hungry?

Absolutely!

The average active adult needs 2,000 calories per day in order to function in a safe and healthy manner. If I’m active to the point where I consistently run 1+ hour every day, then it is far more likely that my caloric needs are around 2,400-2,500.

Considering that, a meal of 1,200 calories would perfectly suit my needs. It would supply roughly half of my calorie requirements, which is a God-send since a fast food meal is relatively cheap. It’s a great value, especially if I don’t have much time to cook or have the resources to prepare my own meals!

The average burger is going to supply me with significant protein and carbs. That’s exactly what I’d need in order to build more muscle and have enough energy to make it through a workout. Even the sugar within the meal can be beneficial in supplying me with a boost of energy and can stop me from feeling hungry for a prolonged period of time. Not half bad.

Is this the most healthy meal known to man? Of course not. But it’s still a very reasonable deal and the calorie count is well within the average adult’s daily needs. 

Don’t let calories scare you! You need them. If you were capable of burning off an entire meal within the hour, you’d probably be dead by now.

1200 empty calories in a meal

next to no nutrition. all the calories are sugar and fat. that’s it. you’ll have no energy and have glucose spikes in your blood because the lack of fiber because of the lack of complex carbs. this is diabetes in a meal. 

so no, you should not be hungry for diabetes

Nutritionally, this BK meal contains roughly 28g of protein and 3g of dietary fiber. It potentially also includes 35% of our Vitamin C daily requirements, 2% Vitamin A, 12% calcium, and 27% iron. Of the 1,010 calories (that I could verify directly from the company’s nutritional information guide), only 410 are from fat. That isn’t a terribly significant amount of fat, in the long run, nor are the nutrients small enough to be viewed as negligible.

Eating this will not cause you to get diabetes. Eating this meal is perfectly fine if you do have diabetes, as long as you are able to adjust your insulin intake accordingly. So don’t use an illness as your debate point - Diabetic people are not a prop.

"So don’t use an illness as your debate point - Diabetic people are not a prop." I want that and variations of that on t shirts.

damn, man. Someone just got completely schooled by a nutritionist.

THIS A GOOD POST

Marvel’s Star Wars

"Should parents read their daughter's texts or monitor her online activity for bad language and inappropriate content?" →

youbestnotmiss:

katthekonqueror:

etherealzephyr:

daeranilen:

daeranilen:

daeranilen:

Earlier today, I served as the “young woman’s voice” in a panel of local experts at a Girl Scouts speaking event. One question for the panel was something to the effect of, "Should parents read their daughter’s texts or monitor her online activity for bad language and inappropriate content?"

I was surprised when the first panelist answered the question as if it were about cyberbullying. The adult audience nodded sagely as she spoke about the importance of protecting children online.

I reached for the microphone next. I said, “As far as reading your child’s texts or logging into their social media profiles, I would say 99.9% of the time, do not do that.”

Looks of total shock answered me. I actually saw heads jerk back in surprise. Even some of my fellow panelists blinked.

Everyone stared as I explained that going behind a child’s back in such a way severs the bond of trust with the parent. When I said, “This is the most effective way to ensure that your child never tells you anything,” it was like I’d delivered a revelation.

It’s easy to talk about the disconnect between the old and the young, but I don’t think I’d ever been so slapped in the face by the reality of it. It was clear that for most of the parents I spoke to, the idea of such actions as a violation had never occurred to them at all.

It alarms me how quickly adults forget that children are people.

Apparently people are rediscovering this post somehow and I think that’s pretty cool! Having experienced similar violations of trust in my youth, this is an important issue to me, so I want to add my personal story:

Around age 13, I tried to express to my mother that I thought I might have clinical depression, and she snapped at me “not to joke about things like that.” I stopped telling my mother when I felt depressed.

Around age 15, I caught my mother reading my diary. She confessed that any time she saw me write in my diary, she would sneak into my room and read it, because I only wrote when I was upset. I stopped keeping a diary.

Around age 18, I had an emotional breakdown while on vacation because I didn’t want to go to college. I ended up seeing a therapist for - surprise surprise - depression.

Around age 21, I spoke on this panel with my mother in the audience, and afterwards I mentioned the diary incident to her with respect to this particular Q&A. Her eyes welled up, and she said, “You know I read those because I was worried you were depressed and going to hurt yourself, right?”

TL;DR: When you invade your child’s privacy, you communicate three things:

  1. You do not respect their rights as an individual.
  2. You do not trust them to navigate problems or seek help on their own.
  3. You probably haven’t been listening to them.

Information about almost every issue that you think you have to snoop for can probably be obtained by communicating with and listening to your child.

Part of me is really excited to see that the original post got 200 notes because holy crap 200 notes, and part of me is really saddened that something so negative has resonated with so many people.

"I tried to express to my mother that I thought I might have clinical depression, and she snapped at me "

“’You know I read those because I was worried you were depressed and going to hurt yourself, right?’”

I found these quotes particularly interesting. OP’s mother refused to listen when she tried to talk about her depression, but snooped through her things to see if she was depressed.

It’s amazing to me that parents need to be told something that I GUARANTEE they experienced themselves. This is something that predates text messaging. You search your child’s room for drugs, and they will find a better hiding place for anything they may be worried about you finding - even if it’s as innocuous as candy. You try to snoop on their phone conversations with their boyfriend, and they will 1) Find a different way to communicate with him, and 2) Never communicate with YOU about their boyfriend.

My parents doing this shit to me didn’t make me stop doing it and didn’t make me respect them any more. All it did was make me better at sneaking around.

bennydict-cabbagepatch:

What are the fucking chances.

bennydict-cabbagepatch:

This little section at the end of the book? That is the third Hobbit movie.

flutterwhat:

~*~*gray wardens and grunge grunge grunge*~*~

i-consult-benedict:

jazzycupcakes:

Forever Reblog! 

this needs like 3,000,000 more reblogs. if you follow me just reblog this now.

i-consult-benedict:

jazzycupcakes:

Forever Reblog! 

this needs like 3,000,000 more reblogs. if you follow me just reblog this now.