I cut my toenails this morning and commented to my wife that I didn't
understand why they grew faster on one foot than the other. She replied
that hers did as well. A little discussion established that mine grew
faster on my right foot and hers on her left foot - the opposite of each
of our predominant hands. IOW, left handed = right foot, right handed =
left foot.
So have we discovered a general principle? Have others noted the same
inverse relationship? Inquiring minds want to know :-).
On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 08:05:19 -0700 (PDT), Sonny <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 8:58:07 AM UTC-5, John McCoy wrote:
>
>> OK, so I guess I'm going to die...
>
>LOL. The hypochondriac approach: To narrow the scope to a single circumstance/condition/symptom and declare "no hope".
>
>There's been times, when in the woodshop, I go for a beer and discover there's none, hence I can no longer do any (viable!?) woodwork.
>
When I did drink, the fact of going for a beer meant that I was no
longer going to do any viable work (sweep the floor, maybe).
On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 8:58:07 AM UTC-5, John McCoy wrote:
> OK, so I guess I'm going to die...
LOL. The hypochondriac approach: To narrow the scope to a single circumstance/condition/symptom and declare "no hope".
There's been times, when in the woodshop, I go for a beer and discover there's none, hence I can no longer do any (viable!?) woodwork.
Sonny
On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 10:14:20 -0400, "J. Clarke"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>[email protected] says...
>>
>> krw <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>> > On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:06:00 -0700 (PDT), Sonny <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >>OT related info:
>> >>Specific abnormal nail growth is directly related to the efficiency
>> >>one's oxygen uptake by one's lungs. Poor sleeping, causation of
>> >>snoring, smoking, and other similar breathing/health related issues
>> >>contribute to the causes of poor breathing, poor oxygen uptake. Look
>> >>closely at COPD patients, their nails curl, claw-like, as well as
>> >>their fingers and toes will develope a curling posture. Many folks
>> >>with long term heart conditions have/develope similar "curling"
>> >>effects. Observation of curling of nails and digits are a diagnostic
>> >>tool, by physicians, for the onset of heart and COPD problems.
>>
>> OK, so I guess I'm going to die...
>>
>> > A government study to study government studies? Sounds like a career!
>>
>> You laugh, but the government does do this. I was reading of one
>> recently, which studied the annual reports mandated by Congress
>> (federal agencies are required to produce 4000-odd annual
>> reports, most of which no-one reads). That study led to the
>> elimination of 40 reports, altho during the study period Congress
>> passed legislation adding 70 new ones(*).
>>
>> John
>>
>> (* this part doesn't seem credible - it's hard to beleive the
>> current Congress did _anything_, let alone authorize as many
>> as 70 reports).
>
>So imagine how many a Congress that is going along at its _usual_ rate
>authorizes.
>
>Hmm--that's another provision that should be in the Constitution--all
>paper consumed or processed by the government _must_ be unloaded from
>the truck by members of congress, by hand, without any powered
>equipment, and without the use of any delegates, aides, or other
>proxies.
>
I think it would be far more productive if each were required to
actually *read* what they've authorized.
On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 12:13:45 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> > So have we discovered a general principle? Have others noted the same
> > inverse relationship? Inquiring minds want to know :-).
I don't know about nail growth, per se, but....
OT related info:
Specific abnormal nail growth is directly related to the efficiency one's o=
xygen uptake by one's lungs. Poor sleeping, causation of snoring, smoking=
, and other similar breathing/health related issues contribute to the cause=
s of poor breathing, poor oxygen uptake. Look closely at COPD patients, t=
heir nails curl, claw-like, as well as their fingers and toes will develope=
a curling posture. Many folks with long term heart conditions have/develo=
pe similar "curling" effects. Observation of curling of nails and digits =
are a diagnostic tool, by physicians, for the onset of heart and COPD probl=
ems.
Including, with the detection of curling of digits/nails, the nail surface =
and skin tend to develope a high glossy appearance, more so than normal ski=
n tone. Often, it's the glossy skin that is first noticed, leading the phy=
sician to look more closely at/for the other features/conditions, for furth=
er evaluating a patient. *A patient's initial complaint may not have been=
about their heart or their breathing problems, but some other "thing" that=
's bothering them. That other "thing" may well be a side effect of the ma=
in, hidden, issue, hence the further eval, beyond the shiny skin (suspect),=
etc.
Some, not all, long term asthma patients develope these curling conditions,=
also.
I'm not aware of these conditions primarily or predominantly on one side or=
the other. Maybe a govt study IS needed, after all!
> Y'all need to find a hobby.
LOL. Govt study hobby!?
Sonny
On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 15:38:24 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>krw wrote:
>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 22:35:25 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 12:31:58 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 10:14:20 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> krw <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:06:00 -0700 (PDT), Sonny
>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> OT related info:
>>>>>>>>>> Specific abnormal nail growth is directly related to the
>>>>>>>>>> efficiency one's oxygen uptake by one's lungs. Poor
>>>>>>>>>> sleeping, causation of snoring, smoking, and other similar
>>>>>>>>>> breathing/health related issues contribute to the causes of
>>>>>>>>>> poor breathing, poor oxygen uptake. Look closely at COPD
>>>>>>>>>> patients, their nails curl, claw-like, as well as their
>>>>>>>>>> fingers and toes will develope a curling posture. Many folks
>>>>>>>>>> with long term heart conditions have/develope similar
>>>>>>>>>> "curling" effects. Observation of curling of nails and
>>>>>>>>>> digits are a diagnostic tool, by physicians, for the onset of
>>>>>>>>>> heart and COPD problems.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OK, so I guess I'm going to die...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A government study to study government studies? Sounds like a
>>>>>>>>> career!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You laugh, but the government does do this. I was reading of
>>>>>>>> one recently, which studied the annual reports mandated by
>>>>>>>> Congress (federal agencies are required to produce 4000-odd
>>>>>>>> annual reports, most of which no-one reads). That study led to
>>>>>>>> the elimination of 40 reports, altho during the study period
>>>>>>>> Congress passed legislation adding 70 new ones(*).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> John
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (* this part doesn't seem credible - it's hard to beleive the
>>>>>>>> current Congress did _anything_, let alone authorize as many
>>>>>>>> as 70 reports).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So imagine how many a Congress that is going along at its
>>>>>>> _usual_ rate authorizes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hmm--that's another provision that should be in the
>>>>>>> Constitution--all paper consumed or processed by the government
>>>>>>> _must_ be unloaded from the truck by members of congress, by
>>>>>>> hand, without any powered equipment, and without the use of any
>>>>>>> delegates, aides, or other proxies.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think it would be far more productive if each were required to
>>>>>> actually *read* what they've authorized.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with that one as well. However you're going to get a big
>>>>> argumennt about how reading legislation is too important to be
>>>>> left to the legislators.
>>>>>
>>>> OK, but does that mean that they shouldn't read it?
>>>
>>> Some people seem to think so. I once suggested an amendment
>>> requiring that any legislator read any piece of legislation, aloud
>>> before witnesses, before being allowed to vote on it. It was like
>>> I'd suggested a ban on apple pie or something.
>>
>> Probably because they've never read anything aloud.
>>
>>> One part of the viewpoint was that it would "slow the pace of
>>> legislation".
>>
>> ...and that's a bad thing?
>>
>>> Since I am one who cannot understand why we need 500 new
>>> laws every year, or even 50, I do not find that argument compelling,
>>> but others, who seem to think that if we are not getting 500 new
>>> laws a year we are failing as a society, argue it vehemently.
>>
>> There's nothing wrong with gridlock. If it's so damned important,
>> both sides will get it done. If not, it wasn't so important and can
>> wait until it is. That was the whole point of our system.
>
>This is absolutely humorous, and I stand up and accuse Larry of
>intentionally starting something here. Look at this foolish thread! Larry
>posted something that could only have been created by a devious mind, about
>toenail length, and look at where this stupid thread has gone! Congress.
>Laws. What's next? Maybe the fate of trans-sexuals in Iran?
>
>This group can take threads off to the most crazy of places...
It's telling that you feel the need to read a thread that offends you
so.
krw wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 15:38:24 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> krw wrote:
>>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 22:35:25 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 12:31:58 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 10:14:20 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>>>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> krw <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>>>>>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:06:00 -0700 (PDT), Sonny
>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> OT related info:
>>>>>>>>>>> Specific abnormal nail growth is directly related to the
>>>>>>>>>>> efficiency one's oxygen uptake by one's lungs. Poor
>>>>>>>>>>> sleeping, causation of snoring, smoking, and other similar
>>>>>>>>>>> breathing/health related issues contribute to the causes of
>>>>>>>>>>> poor breathing, poor oxygen uptake. Look closely at COPD
>>>>>>>>>>> patients, their nails curl, claw-like, as well as their
>>>>>>>>>>> fingers and toes will develope a curling posture. Many
>>>>>>>>>>> folks with long term heart conditions have/develope similar
>>>>>>>>>>> "curling" effects. Observation of curling of nails and
>>>>>>>>>>> digits are a diagnostic tool, by physicians, for the onset
>>>>>>>>>>> of heart and COPD problems.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> OK, so I guess I'm going to die...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A government study to study government studies? Sounds like
>>>>>>>>>> a career!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You laugh, but the government does do this. I was reading of
>>>>>>>>> one recently, which studied the annual reports mandated by
>>>>>>>>> Congress (federal agencies are required to produce 4000-odd
>>>>>>>>> annual reports, most of which no-one reads). That study led
>>>>>>>>> to the elimination of 40 reports, altho during the study
>>>>>>>>> period Congress passed legislation adding 70 new ones(*).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> John
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (* this part doesn't seem credible - it's hard to beleive the
>>>>>>>>> current Congress did _anything_, let alone authorize as many
>>>>>>>>> as 70 reports).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So imagine how many a Congress that is going along at its
>>>>>>>> _usual_ rate authorizes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hmm--that's another provision that should be in the
>>>>>>>> Constitution--all paper consumed or processed by the government
>>>>>>>> _must_ be unloaded from the truck by members of congress, by
>>>>>>>> hand, without any powered equipment, and without the use of any
>>>>>>>> delegates, aides, or other proxies.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think it would be far more productive if each were required to
>>>>>>> actually *read* what they've authorized.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with that one as well. However you're going to get a big
>>>>>> argumennt about how reading legislation is too important to be
>>>>>> left to the legislators.
>>>>>>
>>>>> OK, but does that mean that they shouldn't read it?
>>>>
>>>> Some people seem to think so. I once suggested an amendment
>>>> requiring that any legislator read any piece of legislation, aloud
>>>> before witnesses, before being allowed to vote on it. It was like
>>>> I'd suggested a ban on apple pie or something.
>>>
>>> Probably because they've never read anything aloud.
>>>
>>>> One part of the viewpoint was that it would "slow the pace of
>>>> legislation".
>>>
>>> ...and that's a bad thing?
>>>
>>>> Since I am one who cannot understand why we need 500 new
>>>> laws every year, or even 50, I do not find that argument
>>>> compelling, but others, who seem to think that if we are not
>>>> getting 500 new laws a year we are failing as a society, argue it
>>>> vehemently.
>>>
>>> There's nothing wrong with gridlock. If it's so damned important,
>>> both sides will get it done. If not, it wasn't so important and can
>>> wait until it is. That was the whole point of our system.
>>
>> This is absolutely humorous, and I stand up and accuse Larry of
>> intentionally starting something here. Look at this foolish thread!
>> Larry posted something that could only have been created by a
>> devious mind, about toenail length, and look at where this stupid
>> thread has gone! Congress. Laws. What's next? Maybe the fate of
>> trans-sexuals in Iran?
>>
>> This group can take threads off to the most crazy of places...
>
> It's telling that you feel the need to read a thread that offends you
> so.
Huh? Did you read a different post, and then reply to mine? Read what I
posted again. No mention, nor any sign of offense. Pure humor. Geeze -
are you really serious with your comment?
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 12:08:33 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Leon wrote:
>
>>
>> Probably because, if you are picking with your finger nail vs using a
>> pick, you are keeping them worn down.
>
>Nope - I almost always use a pick. It's possible that we use our dominant
>hand more, and in more ways than we do our other hand, so there may be
>something to the notion of keeping nails worn down more on it.
If your dominant hand is your right hand and you went to Catholic
School you might be left handed.
On 8/1/2015 8:06 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Meanie wrote:
>> On 8/1/2015 1:00 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
>>> I cut my toenails this morning and commented to my wife that I didn't
>>> understand why they grew faster on one foot than the other. She
>>> replied that hers did as well. A little discussion established that
>>> mine grew faster on my right foot and hers on her left foot - the
>>> opposite of each of our predominant hands. IOW, left handed = right
>>> foot, right handed = left foot.
>>>
>>> So have we discovered a general principle? Have others noted the
>>> same inverse relationship? Inquiring minds want to know :-).
>>>
>>
>> It's the same as the nails on your fingers......the nails on the
>> predominant hand grow faster. At least what I have understood most of
>> my life.
>
> Well - that's weird as it relates to my life. I'm a guitar player and I
> find that even though I'm right handed, I have to clip my left hand nails a
> lot more than my right hand nails. Not because I have to keep them shorter,
> but because they seem to grow much faster than my right hand. I don't think
> there is anything to this dominant hand stuff at all.
>
Probably because, if you are picking with your finger nail vs using a
pick, you are keeping them worn down.
Now if you think that is interesting when I played golf in school my
left hand was very much lighter in color than my right hand. I'm
thinking the leather glove that I wore on my left hand might'a had
something to do with that. ;~)
On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 09:33:25 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>On 8/1/2015 8:06 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Meanie wrote:
>>> On 8/1/2015 1:00 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
>>>> I cut my toenails this morning and commented to my wife that I didn't
>>>> understand why they grew faster on one foot than the other. She
>>>> replied that hers did as well. A little discussion established that
>>>> mine grew faster on my right foot and hers on her left foot - the
>>>> opposite of each of our predominant hands. IOW, left handed = right
>>>> foot, right handed = left foot.
>>>>
>>>> So have we discovered a general principle? Have others noted the
>>>> same inverse relationship? Inquiring minds want to know :-).
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's the same as the nails on your fingers......the nails on the
>>> predominant hand grow faster. At least what I have understood most of
>>> my life.
>>
>> Well - that's weird as it relates to my life. I'm a guitar player and I
>> find that even though I'm right handed, I have to clip my left hand nails a
>> lot more than my right hand nails. Not because I have to keep them shorter,
>> but because they seem to grow much faster than my right hand. I don't think
>> there is anything to this dominant hand stuff at all.
>>
>
>
>Probably because, if you are picking with your finger nail vs using a
>pick, you are keeping them worn down.
>
>Now if you think that is interesting when I played golf in school my
>left hand was very much lighter in color than my right hand. I'm
>thinking the leather glove that I wore on my left hand might'a had
>something to do with that. ;~)
>
My left arm is generally darker than my right. I expect that if I
lived in the UK the situation would be reversed.
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> krw <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> > On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:06:00 -0700 (PDT), Sonny <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> >>OT related info:
> >>Specific abnormal nail growth is directly related to the efficiency
> >>one's oxygen uptake by one's lungs. Poor sleeping, causation of
> >>snoring, smoking, and other similar breathing/health related issues
> >>contribute to the causes of poor breathing, poor oxygen uptake. Look
> >>closely at COPD patients, their nails curl, claw-like, as well as
> >>their fingers and toes will develope a curling posture. Many folks
> >>with long term heart conditions have/develope similar "curling"
> >>effects. Observation of curling of nails and digits are a diagnostic
> >>tool, by physicians, for the onset of heart and COPD problems.
>
> OK, so I guess I'm going to die...
>
> > A government study to study government studies? Sounds like a career!
>
> You laugh, but the government does do this. I was reading of one
> recently, which studied the annual reports mandated by Congress
> (federal agencies are required to produce 4000-odd annual
> reports, most of which no-one reads). That study led to the
> elimination of 40 reports, altho during the study period Congress
> passed legislation adding 70 new ones(*).
>
> John
>
> (* this part doesn't seem credible - it's hard to beleive the
> current Congress did _anything_, let alone authorize as many
> as 70 reports).
So imagine how many a Congress that is going along at its _usual_ rate
authorizes.
Hmm--that's another provision that should be in the Constitution--all
paper consumed or processed by the government _must_ be unloaded from
the truck by members of congress, by hand, without any powered
equipment, and without the use of any delegates, aides, or other
proxies.
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
>
> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 10:14:20 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >In article <[email protected]>,
> >[email protected] says...
> >>
> >> krw <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> news:[email protected]:
> >>
> >> > On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:06:00 -0700 (PDT), Sonny <[email protected]>
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >>OT related info:
> >> >>Specific abnormal nail growth is directly related to the efficiency
> >> >>one's oxygen uptake by one's lungs. Poor sleeping, causation of
> >> >>snoring, smoking, and other similar breathing/health related issues
> >> >>contribute to the causes of poor breathing, poor oxygen uptake. Look
> >> >>closely at COPD patients, their nails curl, claw-like, as well as
> >> >>their fingers and toes will develope a curling posture. Many folks
> >> >>with long term heart conditions have/develope similar "curling"
> >> >>effects. Observation of curling of nails and digits are a diagnostic
> >> >>tool, by physicians, for the onset of heart and COPD problems.
> >>
> >> OK, so I guess I'm going to die...
> >>
> >> > A government study to study government studies? Sounds like a career!
> >>
> >> You laugh, but the government does do this. I was reading of one
> >> recently, which studied the annual reports mandated by Congress
> >> (federal agencies are required to produce 4000-odd annual
> >> reports, most of which no-one reads). That study led to the
> >> elimination of 40 reports, altho during the study period Congress
> >> passed legislation adding 70 new ones(*).
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >> (* this part doesn't seem credible - it's hard to beleive the
> >> current Congress did _anything_, let alone authorize as many
> >> as 70 reports).
> >
> >So imagine how many a Congress that is going along at its _usual_ rate
> >authorizes.
> >
> >Hmm--that's another provision that should be in the Constitution--all
> >paper consumed or processed by the government _must_ be unloaded from
> >the truck by members of congress, by hand, without any powered
> >equipment, and without the use of any delegates, aides, or other
> >proxies.
> >
> I think it would be far more productive if each were required to
> actually *read* what they've authorized.
I agree with that one as well. However you're going to get a big
argumennt about how reading legislation is too important to be left to
the legislators.
On Wed, 5 Aug 2015 17:55:43 +0000 (UTC), Larry Blanchard
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 20:46:34 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> Look, if you want people to trim their posts, ask them to trim their
>> posts. Going on about "highlighting" is an irrelevancy.
>
>Then it's a shame you brought it up!
Compltetly back on topic sort of..... but it is OT still.
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
>
> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 12:31:58 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
> >says...
> >>
> >> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 10:14:20 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <[email protected]>,
> >> >[email protected] says...
> >> >>
> >> >> krw <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> >> news:[email protected]:
> >> >>
> >> >> > On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:06:00 -0700 (PDT), Sonny <[email protected]>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >>OT related info:
> >> >> >>Specific abnormal nail growth is directly related to the efficiency
> >> >> >>one's oxygen uptake by one's lungs. Poor sleeping, causation of
> >> >> >>snoring, smoking, and other similar breathing/health related issues
> >> >> >>contribute to the causes of poor breathing, poor oxygen uptake. Look
> >> >> >>closely at COPD patients, their nails curl, claw-like, as well as
> >> >> >>their fingers and toes will develope a curling posture. Many folks
> >> >> >>with long term heart conditions have/develope similar "curling"
> >> >> >>effects. Observation of curling of nails and digits are a diagnostic
> >> >> >>tool, by physicians, for the onset of heart and COPD problems.
> >> >>
> >> >> OK, so I guess I'm going to die...
> >> >>
> >> >> > A government study to study government studies? Sounds like a career!
> >> >>
> >> >> You laugh, but the government does do this. I was reading of one
> >> >> recently, which studied the annual reports mandated by Congress
> >> >> (federal agencies are required to produce 4000-odd annual
> >> >> reports, most of which no-one reads). That study led to the
> >> >> elimination of 40 reports, altho during the study period Congress
> >> >> passed legislation adding 70 new ones(*).
> >> >>
> >> >> John
> >> >>
> >> >> (* this part doesn't seem credible - it's hard to beleive the
> >> >> current Congress did _anything_, let alone authorize as many
> >> >> as 70 reports).
> >> >
> >> >So imagine how many a Congress that is going along at its _usual_ rate
> >> >authorizes.
> >> >
> >> >Hmm--that's another provision that should be in the Constitution--all
> >> >paper consumed or processed by the government _must_ be unloaded from
> >> >the truck by members of congress, by hand, without any powered
> >> >equipment, and without the use of any delegates, aides, or other
> >> >proxies.
> >> >
> >> I think it would be far more productive if each were required to
> >> actually *read* what they've authorized.
> >
> >I agree with that one as well. However you're going to get a big
> >argumennt about how reading legislation is too important to be left to
> >the legislators.
> >
> OK, but does that mean that they shouldn't read it?
Some people seem to think so. I once suggested an amendment requiring
that any legislator read any piece of legislation, aloud before
witnesses, before being allowed to vote on it. It was like I'd
suggested a ban on apple pie or something.
One part of the viewpoint was that it would "slow the pace of
legislation". Since I am one who cannot understand why we need 500 new
laws every year, or even 50, I do not find that argument compelling, but
others, who seem to think that if we are not getting 500 new laws a year
we are failing as a society, argue it vehemently.
krw <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:06:00 -0700 (PDT), Sonny <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>>OT related info:
>>Specific abnormal nail growth is directly related to the efficiency
>>one's oxygen uptake by one's lungs. Poor sleeping, causation of
>>snoring, smoking, and other similar breathing/health related issues
>>contribute to the causes of poor breathing, poor oxygen uptake. Look
>>closely at COPD patients, their nails curl, claw-like, as well as
>>their fingers and toes will develope a curling posture. Many folks
>>with long term heart conditions have/develope similar "curling"
>>effects. Observation of curling of nails and digits are a diagnostic
>>tool, by physicians, for the onset of heart and COPD problems.
OK, so I guess I'm going to die...
> A government study to study government studies? Sounds like a career!
You laugh, but the government does do this. I was reading of one
recently, which studied the annual reports mandated by Congress
(federal agencies are required to produce 4000-odd annual
reports, most of which no-one reads). That study led to the
elimination of 40 reports, altho during the study period Congress
passed legislation adding 70 new ones(*).
John
(* this part doesn't seem credible - it's hard to beleive the
current Congress did _anything_, let alone authorize as many
as 70 reports).
On 8/1/2015 12:00 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
> I cut my toenails this morning and commented to my wife that I didn't
> understand why they grew faster on one foot than the other. She replied
> that hers did as well. A little discussion established that mine grew
> faster on my right foot and hers on her left foot - the opposite of each
> of our predominant hands. IOW, left handed = right foot, right handed =
> left foot.
>
> So have we discovered a general principle? Have others noted the same
> inverse relationship? Inquiring minds want to know :-).
>
Y'all need to find a hobby.
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
>
> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 22:35:25 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
> >says...
> >>
> >> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 12:31:58 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
> >> >says...
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 10:14:20 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >In article <[email protected]>,
> >> >> >[email protected] says...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> krw <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> >> >> news:[email protected]:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:06:00 -0700 (PDT), Sonny <[email protected]>
> >> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>OT related info:
> >> >> >> >>Specific abnormal nail growth is directly related to the efficiency
> >> >> >> >>one's oxygen uptake by one's lungs. Poor sleeping, causation of
> >> >> >> >>snoring, smoking, and other similar breathing/health related issues
> >> >> >> >>contribute to the causes of poor breathing, poor oxygen uptake. Look
> >> >> >> >>closely at COPD patients, their nails curl, claw-like, as well as
> >> >> >> >>their fingers and toes will develope a curling posture. Many folks
> >> >> >> >>with long term heart conditions have/develope similar "curling"
> >> >> >> >>effects. Observation of curling of nails and digits are a diagnostic
> >> >> >> >>tool, by physicians, for the onset of heart and COPD problems.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> OK, so I guess I'm going to die...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > A government study to study government studies? Sounds like a career!
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> You laugh, but the government does do this. I was reading of one
> >> >> >> recently, which studied the annual reports mandated by Congress
> >> >> >> (federal agencies are required to produce 4000-odd annual
> >> >> >> reports, most of which no-one reads). That study led to the
> >> >> >> elimination of 40 reports, altho during the study period Congress
> >> >> >> passed legislation adding 70 new ones(*).
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> John
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> (* this part doesn't seem credible - it's hard to beleive the
> >> >> >> current Congress did _anything_, let alone authorize as many
> >> >> >> as 70 reports).
> >> >> >
> >> >> >So imagine how many a Congress that is going along at its _usual_ rate
> >> >> >authorizes.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Hmm--that's another provision that should be in the Constitution--all
> >> >> >paper consumed or processed by the government _must_ be unloaded from
> >> >> >the truck by members of congress, by hand, without any powered
> >> >> >equipment, and without the use of any delegates, aides, or other
> >> >> >proxies.
> >> >> >
> >> >> I think it would be far more productive if each were required to
> >> >> actually *read* what they've authorized.
> >> >
> >> >I agree with that one as well. However you're going to get a big
> >> >argumennt about how reading legislation is too important to be left to
> >> >the legislators.
> >> >
> >> OK, but does that mean that they shouldn't read it?
> >
> >Some people seem to think so. I once suggested an amendment requiring
> >that any legislator read any piece of legislation, aloud before
> >witnesses, before being allowed to vote on it. It was like I'd
> >suggested a ban on apple pie or something.
>
> Probably because they've never read anything aloud.
>
> >One part of the viewpoint was that it would "slow the pace of
> >legislation".
>
> ...and that's a bad thing?
>
> >Since I am one who cannot understand why we need 500 new
> >laws every year, or even 50, I do not find that argument compelling, but
> >others, who seem to think that if we are not getting 500 new laws a year
> >we are failing as a society, argue it vehemently.
>
> There's nothing wrong with gridlock. If it's so damned important,
> both sides will get it done. If not, it wasn't so important and can
> wait until it is. That was the whole point of our system.
Bingo. But tell it to the damned news commentators and the like.
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 16:34:21 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
>
> Lines 91-94:
> .
> .
> .
> >> There's nothing wrong with gridlock. If it's so damned important, both
> >> sides will get it done. If not, it wasn't so important and can wait
> >> until it is. That was the whole point of our system.
> >
>
> Line 95:
>
> > Bingo. But tell it to the damned news commentators and the like.
>
>
> This is a general comment to all to kept building this message. Please
> highlight the part you're replying to and *then* reply. It's really
> *not* that difficult.
>
> Yes, I know someone will accuse me of being a "net nanny". Well, I
> wouldn't be if posters would just be considerate.
There is no means on USENET by which one can "highlight" anything. This
is a text-only medium.
In any case you seem to have figured it out without any difficulty.
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 20:28:02 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
>
> > There is no means on USENET by which one can "highlight" anything. This
> > is a text-only medium.
>
> I just pushed the left button on my mouse and, holding it down, passed it
> over the above sentence. That "selected" it and "highlighted" it. When
> I clicked on reply all that got transferred to the reply window was the
> highlighted text and the when and whom line.
>
> If you mean I didn't physically run a highlighter pen over the screen
> then you're correct :-).
>
> I'm using the Pan newsreader under Linux. Under Windows I would use Free
> Agent.
Look, if you want people to trim their posts, ask them to trim their
posts. Going on about "highlighting" is an irrelevancy.
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 20:46:34 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
>
> > Look, if you want people to trim their posts, ask them to trim their
> > posts. Going on about "highlighting" is an irrelevancy.
>
> Then it's a shame you brought it up!
You're the one who was going on about how I should "highlight"
something. Are you having a senior moment or just being a pain?
On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 22:35:25 -0400, "J. Clarke"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>says...
>>
>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 12:31:58 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>> >says...
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 10:14:20 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >In article <[email protected]>,
>> >> >[email protected] says...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> krw <[email protected]> wrote in
>> >> >> news:[email protected]:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:06:00 -0700 (PDT), Sonny <[email protected]>
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >>OT related info:
>> >> >> >>Specific abnormal nail growth is directly related to the efficiency
>> >> >> >>one's oxygen uptake by one's lungs. Poor sleeping, causation of
>> >> >> >>snoring, smoking, and other similar breathing/health related issues
>> >> >> >>contribute to the causes of poor breathing, poor oxygen uptake. Look
>> >> >> >>closely at COPD patients, their nails curl, claw-like, as well as
>> >> >> >>their fingers and toes will develope a curling posture. Many folks
>> >> >> >>with long term heart conditions have/develope similar "curling"
>> >> >> >>effects. Observation of curling of nails and digits are a diagnostic
>> >> >> >>tool, by physicians, for the onset of heart and COPD problems.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> OK, so I guess I'm going to die...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > A government study to study government studies? Sounds like a career!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You laugh, but the government does do this. I was reading of one
>> >> >> recently, which studied the annual reports mandated by Congress
>> >> >> (federal agencies are required to produce 4000-odd annual
>> >> >> reports, most of which no-one reads). That study led to the
>> >> >> elimination of 40 reports, altho during the study period Congress
>> >> >> passed legislation adding 70 new ones(*).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> John
>> >> >>
>> >> >> (* this part doesn't seem credible - it's hard to beleive the
>> >> >> current Congress did _anything_, let alone authorize as many
>> >> >> as 70 reports).
>> >> >
>> >> >So imagine how many a Congress that is going along at its _usual_ rate
>> >> >authorizes.
>> >> >
>> >> >Hmm--that's another provision that should be in the Constitution--all
>> >> >paper consumed or processed by the government _must_ be unloaded from
>> >> >the truck by members of congress, by hand, without any powered
>> >> >equipment, and without the use of any delegates, aides, or other
>> >> >proxies.
>> >> >
>> >> I think it would be far more productive if each were required to
>> >> actually *read* what they've authorized.
>> >
>> >I agree with that one as well. However you're going to get a big
>> >argumennt about how reading legislation is too important to be left to
>> >the legislators.
>> >
>> OK, but does that mean that they shouldn't read it?
>
>Some people seem to think so. I once suggested an amendment requiring
>that any legislator read any piece of legislation, aloud before
>witnesses, before being allowed to vote on it. It was like I'd
>suggested a ban on apple pie or something.
Probably because they've never read anything aloud.
>One part of the viewpoint was that it would "slow the pace of
>legislation".
...and that's a bad thing?
>Since I am one who cannot understand why we need 500 new
>laws every year, or even 50, I do not find that argument compelling, but
>others, who seem to think that if we are not getting 500 new laws a year
>we are failing as a society, argue it vehemently.
There's nothing wrong with gridlock. If it's so damned important,
both sides will get it done. If not, it wasn't so important and can
wait until it is. That was the whole point of our system.
krw wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 22:35:25 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> [email protected] says...
>>>
>>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 12:31:58 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 10:14:20 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> krw <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:06:00 -0700 (PDT), Sonny
>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> OT related info:
>>>>>>>>> Specific abnormal nail growth is directly related to the
>>>>>>>>> efficiency one's oxygen uptake by one's lungs. Poor
>>>>>>>>> sleeping, causation of snoring, smoking, and other similar
>>>>>>>>> breathing/health related issues contribute to the causes of
>>>>>>>>> poor breathing, poor oxygen uptake. Look closely at COPD
>>>>>>>>> patients, their nails curl, claw-like, as well as their
>>>>>>>>> fingers and toes will develope a curling posture. Many folks
>>>>>>>>> with long term heart conditions have/develope similar
>>>>>>>>> "curling" effects. Observation of curling of nails and
>>>>>>>>> digits are a diagnostic tool, by physicians, for the onset of
>>>>>>>>> heart and COPD problems.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OK, so I guess I'm going to die...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A government study to study government studies? Sounds like a
>>>>>>>> career!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You laugh, but the government does do this. I was reading of
>>>>>>> one recently, which studied the annual reports mandated by
>>>>>>> Congress (federal agencies are required to produce 4000-odd
>>>>>>> annual reports, most of which no-one reads). That study led to
>>>>>>> the elimination of 40 reports, altho during the study period
>>>>>>> Congress passed legislation adding 70 new ones(*).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> John
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (* this part doesn't seem credible - it's hard to beleive the
>>>>>>> current Congress did _anything_, let alone authorize as many
>>>>>>> as 70 reports).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So imagine how many a Congress that is going along at its
>>>>>> _usual_ rate authorizes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm--that's another provision that should be in the
>>>>>> Constitution--all paper consumed or processed by the government
>>>>>> _must_ be unloaded from the truck by members of congress, by
>>>>>> hand, without any powered equipment, and without the use of any
>>>>>> delegates, aides, or other proxies.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I think it would be far more productive if each were required to
>>>>> actually *read* what they've authorized.
>>>>
>>>> I agree with that one as well. However you're going to get a big
>>>> argumennt about how reading legislation is too important to be
>>>> left to the legislators.
>>>>
>>> OK, but does that mean that they shouldn't read it?
>>
>> Some people seem to think so. I once suggested an amendment
>> requiring that any legislator read any piece of legislation, aloud
>> before witnesses, before being allowed to vote on it. It was like
>> I'd suggested a ban on apple pie or something.
>
> Probably because they've never read anything aloud.
>
>> One part of the viewpoint was that it would "slow the pace of
>> legislation".
>
> ...and that's a bad thing?
>
>> Since I am one who cannot understand why we need 500 new
>> laws every year, or even 50, I do not find that argument compelling,
>> but others, who seem to think that if we are not getting 500 new
>> laws a year we are failing as a society, argue it vehemently.
>
> There's nothing wrong with gridlock. If it's so damned important,
> both sides will get it done. If not, it wasn't so important and can
> wait until it is. That was the whole point of our system.
This is absolutely humorous, and I stand up and accuse Larry of
intentionally starting something here. Look at this foolish thread! Larry
posted something that could only have been created by a devious mind, about
toenail length, and look at where this stupid thread has gone! Congress.
Laws. What's next? Maybe the fate of trans-sexuals in Iran?
This group can take threads off to the most crazy of places...
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 16:34:21 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
Lines 91-94:
.
.
.
>> There's nothing wrong with gridlock. If it's so damned important, both
>> sides will get it done. If not, it wasn't so important and can wait
>> until it is. That was the whole point of our system.
>
Line 95:
> Bingo. But tell it to the damned news commentators and the like.
This is a general comment to all to kept building this message. Please
highlight the part you're replying to and *then* reply. It's really
*not* that difficult.
Yes, I know someone will accuse me of being a "net nanny". Well, I
wouldn't be if posters would just be considerate.
On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 20:28:02 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
> There is no means on USENET by which one can "highlight" anything. This
> is a text-only medium.
I just pushed the left button on my mouse and, holding it down, passed it
over the above sentence. That "selected" it and "highlighted" it. When
I clicked on reply all that got transferred to the reply window was the
highlighted text and the when and whom line.
If you mean I didn't physically run a highlighter pen over the screen
then you're correct :-).
I'm using the Pan newsreader under Linux. Under Windows I would use Free
Agent.
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:06:00 -0700 (PDT), Sonny <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 12:13:45 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>
>> > So have we discovered a general principle? Have others noted the same
>> > inverse relationship? Inquiring minds want to know :-).
>
>I don't know about nail growth, per se, but....
>
>OT related info:
>Specific abnormal nail growth is directly related to the efficiency one's oxygen uptake by one's lungs. Poor sleeping, causation of snoring, smoking, and other similar breathing/health related issues contribute to the causes of poor breathing, poor oxygen uptake. Look closely at COPD patients, their nails curl, claw-like, as well as their fingers and toes will develope a curling posture. Many folks with long term heart conditions have/develope similar "curling" effects. Observation of curling of nails and digits are a diagnostic tool, by physicians, for the onset of heart and COPD problems.
>
>Including, with the detection of curling of digits/nails, the nail surface and skin tend to develope a high glossy appearance, more so than normal skin tone. Often, it's the glossy skin that is first noticed, leading the physician to look more closely at/for the other features/conditions, for further evaluating a patient. *A patient's initial complaint may not have been about their heart or their breathing problems, but some other "thing" that's bothering them. That other "thing" may well be a side effect of the main, hidden, issue, hence the further eval, beyond the shiny skin (suspect), etc.
>
>Some, not all, long term asthma patients develope these curling conditions, also.
>
>I'm not aware of these conditions primarily or predominantly on one side or the other. Maybe a govt study IS needed, after all!
>
>> Y'all need to find a hobby.
>
>LOL. Govt study hobby!?
>
A government study to study government studies? Sounds like a career!
On 8/1/2015 1:00 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
> I cut my toenails this morning and commented to my wife that I didn't
> understand why they grew faster on one foot than the other. She replied
> that hers did as well. A little discussion established that mine grew
> faster on my right foot and hers on her left foot - the opposite of each
> of our predominant hands. IOW, left handed = right foot, right handed =
> left foot.
>
> So have we discovered a general principle? Have others noted the same
> inverse relationship? Inquiring minds want to know :-).
>
It's the same as the nails on your fingers......the nails on the
predominant hand grow faster. At least what I have understood most of my
life.
Meanie wrote:
> On 8/1/2015 1:00 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
>> I cut my toenails this morning and commented to my wife that I didn't
>> understand why they grew faster on one foot than the other. She
>> replied that hers did as well. A little discussion established that
>> mine grew faster on my right foot and hers on her left foot - the
>> opposite of each of our predominant hands. IOW, left handed = right
>> foot, right handed = left foot.
>>
>> So have we discovered a general principle? Have others noted the
>> same inverse relationship? Inquiring minds want to know :-).
>>
>
> It's the same as the nails on your fingers......the nails on the
> predominant hand grow faster. At least what I have understood most of
> my life.
Well - that's weird as it relates to my life. I'm a guitar player and I
find that even though I'm right handed, I have to clip my left hand nails a
lot more than my right hand nails. Not because I have to keep them shorter,
but because they seem to grow much faster than my right hand. I don't think
there is anything to this dominant hand stuff at all.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Leon wrote:
>
> Probably because, if you are picking with your finger nail vs using a
> pick, you are keeping them worn down.
Nope - I almost always use a pick. It's possible that we use our dominant
hand more, and in more ways than we do our other hand, so there may be
something to the notion of keeping nails worn down more on it.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 20:54:23 -0400, Meanie wrote:
> It's the same as the nails on your fingers......the nails on the
> predominant hand grow faster. At least what I have understood most of my
> life.
Never noticed that. Now I'll have to keep an eye on it :-).
The only reason my right foot would be dominant would be kick starting
the motorcycle :-).
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 21:06:07 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Meanie wrote:
>> On 8/1/2015 1:00 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
>>> I cut my toenails this morning and commented to my wife that I didn't
>>> understand why they grew faster on one foot than the other. She
>>> replied that hers did as well. A little discussion established that
>>> mine grew faster on my right foot and hers on her left foot - the
>>> opposite of each of our predominant hands. IOW, left handed = right
>>> foot, right handed = left foot.
>>>
>>> So have we discovered a general principle? Have others noted the
>>> same inverse relationship? Inquiring minds want to know :-).
>>>
>>
>> It's the same as the nails on your fingers......the nails on the
>> predominant hand grow faster. At least what I have understood most of
>> my life.
>
>Well - that's weird as it relates to my life. I'm a guitar player and I
>find that even though I'm right handed, I have to clip my left hand nails a
>lot more than my right hand nails. Not because I have to keep them shorter,
>but because they seem to grow much faster than my right hand. I don't think
>there is anything to this dominant hand stuff at all.
Could it be that you wear (break?) the nails more on your dominant
hand?
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 17:00:23 +0000 (UTC), Larry Blanchard
<[email protected]> wrote:
>I cut my toenails this morning and commented to my wife that I didn't
>understand why they grew faster on one foot than the other. She replied
>that hers did as well. A little discussion established that mine grew
>faster on my right foot and hers on her left foot - the opposite of each
>of our predominant hands. IOW, left handed = right foot, right handed =
>left foot.
>
>So have we discovered a general principle? Have others noted the same
>inverse relationship? Inquiring minds want to know :-).
You should apply for a Fed Govt grant to research left- and
right-toenailedness. Probably need to hire people to do the dirty
work (measuring toenails on smelly feet). That should provide income
for several starving college students. If you include categories by
age, you could milk this for years as the subjects get older. Be sure
to include chiuldren of all ages so yoiur children can carry on the
research over time.
See how easy it is to get money from the Fed Govt? Aren't you glad
someone is watching your tax dollars so carefully?
On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 12:31:58 -0400, "J. Clarke"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>says...
>>
>> On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 10:14:20 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <[email protected]>,
>> >[email protected] says...
>> >>
>> >> krw <[email protected]> wrote in
>> >> news:[email protected]:
>> >>
>> >> > On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 16:06:00 -0700 (PDT), Sonny <[email protected]>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >>OT related info:
>> >> >>Specific abnormal nail growth is directly related to the efficiency
>> >> >>one's oxygen uptake by one's lungs. Poor sleeping, causation of
>> >> >>snoring, smoking, and other similar breathing/health related issues
>> >> >>contribute to the causes of poor breathing, poor oxygen uptake. Look
>> >> >>closely at COPD patients, their nails curl, claw-like, as well as
>> >> >>their fingers and toes will develope a curling posture. Many folks
>> >> >>with long term heart conditions have/develope similar "curling"
>> >> >>effects. Observation of curling of nails and digits are a diagnostic
>> >> >>tool, by physicians, for the onset of heart and COPD problems.
>> >>
>> >> OK, so I guess I'm going to die...
>> >>
>> >> > A government study to study government studies? Sounds like a career!
>> >>
>> >> You laugh, but the government does do this. I was reading of one
>> >> recently, which studied the annual reports mandated by Congress
>> >> (federal agencies are required to produce 4000-odd annual
>> >> reports, most of which no-one reads). That study led to the
>> >> elimination of 40 reports, altho during the study period Congress
>> >> passed legislation adding 70 new ones(*).
>> >>
>> >> John
>> >>
>> >> (* this part doesn't seem credible - it's hard to beleive the
>> >> current Congress did _anything_, let alone authorize as many
>> >> as 70 reports).
>> >
>> >So imagine how many a Congress that is going along at its _usual_ rate
>> >authorizes.
>> >
>> >Hmm--that's another provision that should be in the Constitution--all
>> >paper consumed or processed by the government _must_ be unloaded from
>> >the truck by members of congress, by hand, without any powered
>> >equipment, and without the use of any delegates, aides, or other
>> >proxies.
>> >
>> I think it would be far more productive if each were required to
>> actually *read* what they've authorized.
>
>I agree with that one as well. However you're going to get a big
>argumennt about how reading legislation is too important to be left to
>the legislators.
>
OK, but does that mean that they shouldn't read it?