It doesn't matter WHY it affects them differently, except as trivia.
You haven't followed research into metabolic syndrome and the microbiome in the last decade and a half or so I presume? "Why" is the most important question when it comes to IBD and metabolic syndrome, because there doesn't appear to be a simple deterministic correlation. People react differently to the same kind of food intake while on the same activity level.
Unless you intend to specifically analyse, combat and treat individual microbiomes in the stomach of every patient, you're not going to be able to do much else.
That's exactly the point of this kind of research..
You're missing the point. This is about explaining why the same amount of food (or energy) intake affects people differently. Research into metabolic syndrome has shown that there is no simple relation: eat less -> lose weight -> get healthy. Once you know what influences weight gain or loss, given a certain amount of food intake you can adjust for other parameters.
This might explain why some recipients of FMT for treatment of C. diff. and CU have seen weight gain without changing their diets.
There was a poll a month or so back that showed that 97% of people in Britain were opposed to this, when they knew what it contained, but only around 5-10% were even aware that it was being passed.
That's why Brexit is such a beauty, even if it never happens a lot of bad legislation will pass unnoticed.
and for all those people who have such hate for systemd.... How many actually had used init.d?
You don't necessarily have to have experience with sysvinit to hate systemd. For many it is making such a compelling argument on its own that you don't need to compare it to other systems.
...give Apple a graceful way to say FU to the EU...
But what's that worth? Apple employs what, 5000 to 6000 people on their campus in Ireland, so losing those may impact the Dublin economy in the very short term but will do absolutely nothing to the EU. It's not like the company was paying any meaningful amount of taxes anyway. The economic loss on the whole would be short term and negligible.
*smack* "Where's the comma!" *smack*
So Bob self identifies as female now?
Difficult to know in a post-gender world....
They were suffering before the UK joined the EU, suffered through complete neglect by the central government during the past decades and will now keep suffering the hardship. And they will in all likelihood continue to think this is all the EU's fault, because that's what populist politicians tell them. They will believe it because they lack a proper education. It's not funny, it's thoroughly depressing and a trend I see spreading throughout the western world.
What's preventing the rich dude from paying a lawyer $5k over that $500 case?
Legal fees in Germany are based on the "Gerichtskostengesetz", a law that regulates the courts' official fees, and the "Gesetz ueber die Verguetung der Rechtsanwaeltinnen und Rechtsanwaelte", a law that regulates lawyers' fees. In cases where the losing party is ordered to pay the other side's fees, the winning party just receives a claim against the loser and remains the official debtor. So bankrupting the losing side won't help the party at all regarding legal fees. Everything one spends on lawyers above the official fees can not be reclaimed afaik.
Actually, economists have been saying for decades that a price on carbon is the most effective way to reduce emissions with least impact on the economy.
Yes and politicians have made certain that none of the market based mechanisms implemented so far can help reduce emissions in any meaningful way.
Really? I'm constantly seeing articles about how people made large amounts of money in their spare time, working from home on the internet.
I've read the same articles as well as a couple of others regarding the enhancement of male genitalia. I am currently working on both fronts, with the calluses to prove, and apparently neither work all the time. So I guess correlation rather than causation...
Seriously, it's not even an afterthought. I have worked on a publicly funded research project covering smart home and living crap. While some of it may be interesting from a tinkering with stuff point of view, most of it is creepy surveillance type of shit, like smart metering. When I raised the question of security people stared blankly at me for a second or two and suggested that it wasn't a problem at all and if ever will be fixed later, maybe.
My point is, CIOs do not make relevant security decisions when it comes to product design. No one does. It's all about marketability and cost efficiency, security is neither because it is complex and costs a lot of money. And who care? Honestly, who cares about security? It's not the vendors and it's definitely not the consumers who constantly carry their rarely-if-ever-security-updated-listening-in-and-tracking-devices and provide the world with current information about the vacancy of their homes. So again, who cares? Eventually the insurance companies might care, when some cracker remotely burned down a kitchen or flooded a bathroom or two or ten thousand.
Easy to find free housing when you kill or kick out the people who were living in said housing.
Whole countries were built following this model...
Dreams are free, but you get soaked on the connect time.