Lyle's books - anyone read?

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 03:39:33 GMT, Joe Humble <joehumble RemoveThis @earthlink.net>
wrote:

>On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 12:49:21 -0500, "Steve Freides"
><steve RemoveThis @fridayscomputer.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>
>>> What are lyle's credentials and why should I trust anything he says?
>>
>>He's smart enough to have stopped frequenting mfw - 'nuff said 'cause,
>>right there, he's smarter than all of us here.
>>
>
>Eh, if you enjoy the drama it is actually rather amusing.

I entirely agree, but it is necessary to be fully involved in active
participation to fully appreciate this aspect.

>Was he one
>of those types who took it WAY too personally?

He was typically way over the top with his personal attacks, but took
great exception to all forms of retaliation. He was crude almost
beyond belief, particularly concerning 'porn' and masturbation. He has
some sort of fixation about monkeys, with whom he is morbidly
obsessed.

McDonald has an arrogant unshakeable belief in his own ability, in a
whole range of endeavours and activities. However, this only helped to
illuminate his inherent insecurity.

He dismissed violently others' 'modest' contributions on almost every
topic, but given that his raison d'être was pecuniary gain, this is
not really surprising as he wanted to be acknowledged as the resident
expert. He was particularly antagonistic to newcomers to the Group,
but then so were most of the then "regulars."

Given that most people are probably much nicer in real life than their
on-line persona, McDonald was part of a group of people at MFW who met
up regularly in real life, and as a consequence enjoyed the popularity
and support of those people. However, even here he transgressed and
made a notable enemy.

He has been running his own forum for some time now where, with his
faithful lieutenant, he is able to control input to his heart's
content, the better to take commercial advantage of his on-line
activities.
 >> Stay informed about: Lyle's books - anyone read? 

"Charles" <jrh.RemoveThis@msn.com> wrote in message
news:9d8ol21b4gk15d4rgb72lvjnkmg2t3lh14@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 03:39:33 GMT, Joe Humble <joehumble.RemoveThis@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 12:49:21 -0500, "Steve Freides"
>><steve.RemoveThis@fridayscomputer.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> What are lyle's credentials and why should I trust anything he says?
>>>
>>>He's smart enough to have stopped frequenting mfw - 'nuff said 'cause,
>>>right there, he's smarter than all of us here.
>>>
>>
>>Eh, if you enjoy the drama it is actually rather amusing.
>
> I entirely agree, but it is necessary to be fully involved in active
> participation to fully appreciate this aspect.
>
>>Was he one
>>of those types who took it WAY too personally?
>
> He was typically way over the top with his personal attacks, but took
> great exception to all forms of retaliation. He was crude almost
> beyond belief, particularly concerning 'porn' and masturbation. He has
> some sort of fixation about monkeys, with whom he is morbidly
> obsessed.
>
> McDonald has an arrogant unshakeable belief in his own ability, in a
> whole range of endeavours and activities. However, this only helped to
> illuminate his inherent insecurity.
>
> He dismissed violently others' 'modest' contributions on almost every
> topic, but given that his raison d'être was pecuniary gain, this is
> not really surprising as he wanted to be acknowledged as the resident
> expert. He was particularly antagonistic to newcomers to the Group,
> but then so were most of the then "regulars."
>
> Given that most people are probably much nicer in real life than their
> on-line persona, McDonald was part of a group of people at MFW who met
> up regularly in real life, and as a consequence enjoyed the popularity
> and support of those people. However, even here he transgressed and
> made a notable enemy.
>
> He has been running his own forum for some time now where, with his
> faithful lieutenant, he is able to control input to his heart's
> content, the better to take commercial advantage of his on-line
> activities.

And why shouldn't he? This is what he currently does for a living, AFAIK.
 >> Stay informed about: Lyle's books - anyone read? 

In article <10unl21pr5dl88h0qbmobcntspcg269of9.DeleteThis@4ax.com>, JMW
<jmwilliams.DeleteThis@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote:

> "Proctologically Violated©®" <entropic3.14decay.DeleteThis@optonline2.718.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >Actually, johnny, it's more like the inverse. sheeesh.....
> >Look up converse, inverse, obverse, reverse....
> >Consider:
> >John frees all the guilty and John jails all the innocent
> >The latter is actually the inverse of the obverse.
> >The converse of either of the above statements would in fact make a
> >competent lawyer.
>
> <yawn> I suppose you have a PhD in English, too? You still haven't
> mentioned where you got your BS in Physics, your BS in Chemistry, your
> MS in Nutrition, your MS in Biochemistry, and where you were studying
> for your PhD in Enzyme Kinetics. Perhaps you missed the question.
>
> BTW, are you related to Neal Fabian?

Neal Fabian can squat 900lbs for reps. He's the Chuck Norris of the 'net.
 >> Stay informed about: Lyle's books - anyone read? 

ATP* wrote:
> "Charles" <jrh.RemoveThis@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:9d8ol21b4gk15d4rgb72lvjnkmg2t3lh14@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 03:39:33 GMT, Joe Humble
>> <joehumble.RemoveThis@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 12:49:21 -0500, "Steve Freides"
>>> <steve.RemoveThis@fridayscomputer.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What are lyle's credentials and why should I trust anything he
>>>>> says?
>>>>
>>>> He's smart enough to have stopped frequenting mfw - 'nuff said
>>>> 'cause, right there, he's smarter than all of us here.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Eh, if you enjoy the drama it is actually rather amusing.
>>
>> I entirely agree, but it is necessary to be fully involved in active
>> participation to fully appreciate this aspect.
>>
>>> Was he one
>>> of those types who took it WAY too personally?
>>
>> He was typically way over the top with his personal attacks, but took
>> great exception to all forms of retaliation. He was crude almost
>> beyond belief, particularly concerning 'porn' and masturbation. He
>> has some sort of fixation about monkeys, with whom he is morbidly
>> obsessed.
>>
>> McDonald has an arrogant unshakeable belief in his own ability, in a
>> whole range of endeavours and activities. However, this only helped
>> to illuminate his inherent insecurity.
>>
>> He dismissed violently others' 'modest' contributions on almost every
>> topic, but given that his raison d'être was pecuniary gain, this is
>> not really surprising as he wanted to be acknowledged as the resident
>> expert. He was particularly antagonistic to newcomers to the Group,
>> but then so were most of the then "regulars."
>>
>> Given that most people are probably much nicer in real life than
>> their on-line persona, McDonald was part of a group of people at MFW
>> who met up regularly in real life, and as a consequence enjoyed the
>> popularity and support of those people. However, even here he
>> transgressed and made a notable enemy.
>>
>> He has been running his own forum for some time now where, with his
>> faithful lieutenant, he is able to control input to his heart's
>> content, the better to take commercial advantage of his on-line
>> activities.
>
> And why shouldn't he? This is what he currently does for a living,
> AFAIK.

<Charles on>

Listen mayt, dahn on me barrer like <sniff>, yus can come and go pretty much
howevers ya like rightt, BUUUT yus gotta remember that I is the gaffa and
you do as I says not as I does, capiche?

<Charles off>

--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss
 >> Stay informed about: Lyle's books - anyone read? 

Will Brink wrote:
> JMW <jmwilliams.TakeThisOut@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote:
> > "Proctologically Violated©®" <entropic3.14decay.TakeThisOut@optonline2.718.net>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >Actually, johnny, it's more like the inverse. sheeesh.....
> > >Look up converse, inverse, obverse, reverse....
> > >Consider:
> > >John frees all the guilty and John jails all the innocent
> > >The latter is actually the inverse of the obverse.
> > >The converse of either of the above statements would in fact make
> > >a competent lawyer.
> >
> > <yawn> I suppose you have a PhD in English, too? You still haven't
> > mentioned where you got your BS in Physics, your BS in Chemistry,
> > your MS in Nutrition, your MS in Biochemistry, and where you were
> > studying for your PhD in Enzyme Kinetics. Perhaps you missed the
> > question.
> >
> > BTW, are you related to Neal Fabian?
>
> Neal Fabian can squat 900lbs for reps. He's the Chuck Norris of
> the 'net.

Ah, but Mr. Hogg appears to be even more mysterious than Mr. Fabian.
In addition to the mystery of his many university degrees, I tried to
confirm that he is a registered dietitian in New York State. You see,
the State of New York Education Department, Office of the Professions,
now has all its professional licensures and certifications online. So
I went to this page ...

http://www.op.nysed.gov/opsearches.htm

.... brought up "Dietitian/Nutritionist, Certified" under the
"Professions" menu, and plugged in the name "Hogg Kristofer." Hmmm ...
no entry. Perhaps he is a Covert Dietetics Operative, providing
ultra-nutritious meals to Delta Force teams, and his certification is
maintained under seal in a high-security vault. Yeah, that must be
it.
 >> Stay informed about: Lyle's books - anyone read? 

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 07:42:19 -0500, "ATP*"
<waxwingslain.TakeThisOut@azurepane.com> wrote:

>
>"Charles" <jrh.TakeThisOut@msn.com> wrote in message
>news:9d8ol21b4gk15d4rgb72lvjnkmg2t3lh14@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 03:39:33 GMT, Joe Humble <joehumble.TakeThisOut@earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 12:49:21 -0500, "Steve Freides"
>>><steve.TakeThisOut@fridayscomputer.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What are lyle's credentials and why should I trust anything he says?
>>>>
>>>>He's smart enough to have stopped frequenting mfw - 'nuff said 'cause,
>>>>right there, he's smarter than all of us here.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Eh, if you enjoy the drama it is actually rather amusing.
>>
>> I entirely agree, but it is necessary to be fully involved in active
>> participation to fully appreciate this aspect.
>>
>>>Was he one
>>>of those types who took it WAY too personally?
>>
>> He was typically way over the top with his personal attacks, but took
>> great exception to all forms of retaliation. He was crude almost
>> beyond belief, particularly concerning 'porn' and masturbation. He has
>> some sort of fixation about monkeys, with whom he is morbidly
>> obsessed.
>>
>> McDonald has an arrogant unshakeable belief in his own ability, in a
>> whole range of endeavours and activities. However, this only helped to
>> illuminate his inherent insecurity.
>>
>> He dismissed violently others' 'modest' contributions on almost every
>> topic, but given that his raison d'être was pecuniary gain, this is
>> not really surprising as he wanted to be acknowledged as the resident
>> expert. He was particularly antagonistic to newcomers to the Group,
>> but then so were most of the then "regulars."
>>
>> Given that most people are probably much nicer in real life than their
>> on-line persona, McDonald was part of a group of people at MFW who met
>> up regularly in real life, and as a consequence enjoyed the popularity
>> and support of those people. However, even here he transgressed and
>> made a notable enemy.
>>
>> He has been running his own forum for some time now where, with his
>> faithful lieutenant, he is able to control input to his heart's
>> content, the better to take commercial advantage of his on-line
>> activities.
>
>And why shouldn't he?

No reason at all as far as I can see, unless you know something I
don't.

>This is what he currently does for a living, AFAIK.

I do believe it is and he is doing it correctly now, but he was busy
setting it all up while spamming at Usenet newsgroups, which is taboo
for some people!
 >> Stay informed about: Lyle's books - anyone read? 

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 00:36:47 -0500, JMW <jmwilliams.DeleteThis@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote:

>"Proctologically Violated©®" <entropic3.14decay.DeleteThis@optonline2.718.net>
>wrote:
>>
>>Actually, johnny, it's more like the inverse. sheeesh.....
>>Look up converse, inverse, obverse, reverse....
>>Consider:
>>John frees all the guilty and John jails all the innocent
>>The latter is actually the inverse of the obverse.
>>The converse of either of the above statements would in fact make a
>>competent lawyer.
>
><yawn> I suppose you have a PhD in English, too? You still haven't
>mentioned where you got your BS in Physics, your BS in Chemistry, your
>MS in Nutrition, your MS in Biochemistry, and where you were studying
>for your PhD in Enzyme Kinetics.

http://www.belforduniversity.org
 >> Stay informed about: Lyle's books - anyone read? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Lyle's books - anyone read? 

Well, I wasn't really attempting to draw any conclusions from the glutamine
stuff, rather just mentioning some of the phenoms that are known, to
illustrate some of the roles of amino acids, and that all is not
metabolically peachy.
To assert that just because glutamine is a primary messenger in the
cell-death response you shouldn't ingest glutamine is clearly a stretch.
But mega-ingestion should give one pause...

But note that your fav AMA is doing precisely the same thing w/ cholesterol:
cholesterol is found in plaques, therefore levels beyond X must be
dangerous.
The lipitor peeple conveniently neglect the etiology of plaque formation,
which has nothing to do w/ cholesterol.

That glutamine has a not-so-pretty metabolic role is interesting, as is its
metabolite glutamate, which, as a metabolic intermediary in glutamine
metabolism, is *therefore* OK, right?
Well, clearly wrong, for many people.

Which illustrates another point, and that is, almost w/o exception,
supplementing w/ *metabolic intermediaries* (metabolites), such as pyruvate,
creatine, and a few others, screws up the pathways designed to specifically
regulate concentrations of these things. Ditto, of course, hormones.
The effect of these regulatory bypasses varies of course.
Unlike vits and minerals, whose ebb and flow the body is designed to handle.
NAD, NADH are harmless--in fact useless as they are sold--because these are
cleaved right in stomach into niacin, adenine, and ribose, all dietary
stuff. Super expensive, as well.

In some cases, it might be worth messing w/ regulatory pathways visavis
outright deficiency, but even here you have to be careful. I fool around w/
stuff like CoQ10, carnitine, etc, but gingerly.

Great link, btw.
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY

Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!

entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs

"DZ" <18073 DeleteThis @563225034.1465021551.11688.16424.31134> wrote in message
news:25342@1642527046.65623652.27501.29565.30588...
> Proctologically Violated wrote:
>> If I talk about glutamine in the cell-death response, or the
>> pharmacologic effects of high protein, a degree isn't gonna make me
>> right or wrong, is it?
>
> I think there is leap of faith in your glutamine argument. Also, how
> does its plasma concentration depend on the amount of protein intake?
> A rough rule is that for "dispensable" amino acids it appears not to
> follow the same, intuitively expected, pattern as that for the
> essential (threonine being an exception) -
>
> "Glutamine, glycine, alanine, taurine, and threonine concentrations
> were distinctly higher (~30% or greater) throughout the 24-h period in
> subjects consuming the normal- vs. the high-protein diets."
>
> http://ajpendo.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/278/5/E857
>
 >> Stay informed about: Lyle's books - anyone read? 

DZ <18073.DeleteThis@563225034.1465021551.11688.16424.31134> wrote:

>Proctologically Violated wrote:
>> If I talk about glutamine in the cell-death response, or the
>> pharmacologic effects of high protein, a degree isn't gonna make me
>> right or wrong, is it?
>
>I think there is leap of faith in your glutamine argument. Also, how
>does its plasma concentration depend on the amount of protein intake?
>A rough rule is that for "dispensable" amino acids it appears not to
>follow the same, intuitively expected, pattern as that for the
>essential (threonine being an exception) -
>
>"Glutamine, glycine, alanine, taurine, and threonine concentrations
>were distinctly higher (~30% or greater) throughout the 24-h period in
>subjects consuming the normal- vs. the high-protein diets."
>
>http://ajpendo.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/278/5/E857

And as to "cell death response," a couple of in vitro studies showed
that glutamine actually inhibited apoptosis in colonic epithelial
cells and in neutrophils. (Sorry, Curt, you'll just have to Google
those.)
 >> Stay informed about: Lyle's books - anyone read? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Lyle's books - anyone read? 

Proctologically Violated©® wrote:
> Still reading abstracts from pubmed?

Nope. Full articles.

> Have a fukn clue as to what the studies were actually about?

Yes.

> Why did they
> pick glutamine, for example?

They noticed that glutamine deprivation led to reduction in intestinal
mucosa. They also noticed that neotrophils and other autoimmune cells
utilized a lot glutamine, in addition to glucose.

> Would you like to play a game, johnny, where you and me both read the study,
> and we compare notes?

Feel free to play all the games you wish. It's your nature. You'll
have to understand if I refuse to play along.

> you cain't provide
> the cites?

Find 'em yourself. I managed.
 >> Stay informed about: Lyle's books - anyone read? 

Still reading abstracts from pubmed?
Have a fukn clue as to what the studies were actually about? Why did they
pick glutamine, for example?
Would you like to play a game, johnny, where you and me both read the study,
and we compare notes?
Just how come, as a legal beagle, albeit a 3-legged one, you cain't provide
the cites? Too busy looking up people's credentials, I mean, non-existent
credentials?
Howzdat grafitti case goin?

Conversely yours,
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY

Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!

entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs

"JMW" <jmwilliams.TakeThisOut@enforcergraphics.f2s.com> wrote in message
news:2n1ql213q08v3prn4f057o1q3320jq6k58@4ax.com...
> DZ <18073.TakeThisOut@563225034.1465021551.11688.16424.31134> wrote:
>
>>Proctologically Violated wrote:
>>> If I talk about glutamine in the cell-death response, or the
>>> pharmacologic effects of high protein, a degree isn't gonna make me
>>> right or wrong, is it?
>>
>>I think there is leap of faith in your glutamine argument. Also, how
>>does its plasma concentration depend on the amount of protein intake?
>>A rough rule is that for "dispensable" amino acids it appears not to
>>follow the same, intuitively expected, pattern as that for the
>>essential (threonine being an exception) -
>>
>>"Glutamine, glycine, alanine, taurine, and threonine concentrations
>>were distinctly higher (~30% or greater) throughout the 24-h period in
>>subjects consuming the normal- vs. the high-protein diets."
>>
>>http://ajpendo.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/278/5/E857
>
> And as to "cell death response," a couple of in vitro studies showed
> that glutamine actually inhibited apoptosis in colonic epithelial
> cells and in neutrophils. (Sorry, Curt, you'll just have to Google
> those.)
>
 >> Stay informed about: Lyle's books - anyone read?