Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Submission + - The Evidence Supports Artificial Sweeteners Over Sugar->

schwit1 writes: In the last few years, I've watched a continuing battle among my friends about which is worse for you: artificial sweeteners or sugar. Unless you want to forgo all beverages that are sweet, you're going to run into one of these. Rather than rely on anecdote or myth, we can inform this debate with research.

The available evidence points to the fact that there appears to be a correlation between sugar consumption and health problems; none can be detected with artificial sweeteners.

Link to Original Source

Comment Re: Under what authority? (Score 2) 298 298

It it was private event, then the police should not have been responding unless the people in charge of the "private" event called and told them to. When the police enter a "private" event without being summoned and do what they did, then they are even more at fault than if they entered a "public" event. The rules of free speech have no connection to public vs. private and any time the government attempts to limit your right to free speech, it is a violation of the 1st Amendment.

Comment Re:Bring back the Law of Jante (Score 1) 429 429

I'm not talking about myself moron...thanks for playing jackass. This is human nature. Get your head out of fucking Utopia, because it's not real. Few people work for altruistic reasons, they're in it for themselves. They need incentives to push themselves, or else they're going to do the minimum.

Comment Re:I foresee a sudden demand for raises (Score 1) 429 429

Bob, Charlie, and Dave make 50k a year and Alice makes 35k, despite all of them performing the same. Alice cannot get a raise because she's female and every other business out there is only going to offer 35k because that's the going rate for female employees.

Oh Bullshit. http://www.payscale.com/career...

Comment Re:This NOT about a Private Call (Score 1) 179 179

Thanks for the summary. This sounds similar to an incident where I received email from a small bank that shares my own last name. Apparently, one of the bank officers thought he was sending it to one of the owners. So, I received confidential information, which I did not divulge, and informed them of their mistake. That said, could I have shared that information with whomever I pleased? It seems like a the same philosophy.

Frankly, Scarlett, I don't have a fix. -- Rhett Buggler

Working...