Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #93881 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-10-16 15:45 +0000 |
| Last post | 2026-10-20 14:26 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 158 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 15:45 +0000
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-10-16 16:56 +0100
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 17:08 +0000
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Cóilín Nioclásín Glostéir <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-10-16 19:13 +0000
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 13:29 +0000
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-17 13:51 +0000
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-17 14:19 +0000
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 19:37 +0200
Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:25 +0100
Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-18 11:57 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:20 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:25 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:31 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:23 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 13:35 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 18:45 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:41 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-19 00:57 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-10-19 09:26 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-19 14:17 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:11 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:38 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 03:52 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-19 03:56 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 05:58 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 02:41 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-19 03:03 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 02:49 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 11:49 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 02:29 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-20 01:59 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-20 13:20 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:29 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 18:10 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:19 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:22 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 18:05 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 20:15 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-19 00:44 -0400
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 11:54 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-19 20:27 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:38 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:26 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 18:59 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-19 20:36 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 09:08 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:35 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:21 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 18:55 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2026-10-18 19:05 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 20:41 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2026-10-19 00:15 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:02 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 02:18 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-20 01:52 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:37 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-10-20 11:39 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:22 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:11 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 17:45 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-20 18:28 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 01:05 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 11:48 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 02:42 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 02:20 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-10-20 08:39 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-20 07:53 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:38 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:23 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:13 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 23:18 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 03:09 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-21 03:22 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 11:19 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 13:44 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-21 13:54 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-10-21 15:33 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 15:19 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:44 +0000
Re: names of bats "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 12:04 +0200
Re: names of bats Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-10-22 11:15 +0100
Re: names of bats "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 12:20 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:24 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 03:16 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 02:31 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-21 03:22 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 11:21 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 14:00 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 19:56 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 19:04 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 22:02 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:22 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-20 20:29 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 02:12 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:22 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 13:57 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 15:18 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:51 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 19:58 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:58 +0000
Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 12:19 +0200
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-22 07:16 -0400
Re: Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 13:46 +0200
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:54 +0100
Re: Margarine rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-22 17:46 +0000
Re: Margarine Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-22 19:05 +0000
Re: Margarine rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-23 00:19 +0000
Re: Margarine Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-10-23 04:18 +0000
Re: Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:17 +0200
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-23 10:33 +0100
Re: Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-23 12:20 +0200
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:49 +0100
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-23 09:25 +0100
Re: Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:15 +0200
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-23 07:04 -0400
Re: Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-23 14:09 +0200
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-23 13:53 +0100
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-23 09:18 -0400
Re: Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-23 20:07 +0200
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-24 00:12 -0400
Re: Margarine rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-23 17:41 +0000
[OT] Oil "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-23 20:21 +0200
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:46 +0100
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:40 +0100
Re: Margarine Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-10-23 09:21 +0100
Re: Margarine Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-23 19:40 +0000
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-24 02:00 -0400
Re: Margarine Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-10-24 09:04 +0100
Re: Margarine rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-24 08:57 +0000
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-24 10:25 +0100
Re: Margarine Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-10-25 08:42 +0000
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-25 22:12 -0400
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-24 10:24 +0100
Re: Margarine Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-24 09:31 +0000
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-24 05:39 -0400
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-24 11:55 +0100
Re: Margarine Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-10-25 08:43 +0000
Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-25 09:53 +0000
Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-25 22:33 -0400
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:20 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 17:57 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-19 20:49 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:21 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 19:04 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-18 14:07 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-10-18 11:45 -0700
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-18 19:27 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 02:30 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:06 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 19:05 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-18 19:32 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-18 19:37 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 02:20 +0000
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 20:40 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-19 21:00 +0200
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 03:03 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-10-20 11:40 +0100
Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:26 +0100
Page 7 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 Next page →
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-23 17:41 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <nk1ki8F1rhjU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #94614 |
On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 14:09:09 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote: > Here, they don't always need to tell the percents (I don't know when > they have to, or not), but they must list ingredients in sorted order, > from greatest percent to lowest. I don't remember seeing percentages on anything only the sorted list. Some brands of peanut butter list 'peanuts, hydrogenated vegetable oil, etc'. Is that 51% peanuts, 48% Crisco, and some trace elements? I Prefer almond butter but I buy it from a couple of stores in town where you grind it yourself from a hopper full of almond pieces. There's a similar machine for peanuts and cashews. There isn't a DIY olive press so I have to believe the label on the bottle.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-23 20:21 +0200 |
| Subject | [OT] Oil |
| Message-ID | <46lsqmxa9f.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #94621 |
On 2026-10-23 19:41, rbowman wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 14:09:09 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
>> Here, they don't always need to tell the percents (I don't know when
>> they have to, or not), but they must list ingredients in sorted order,
>> from greatest percent to lowest.
>
> I don't remember seeing percentages on anything only the sorted list. Some
> brands of peanut butter list 'peanuts, hydrogenated vegetable oil, etc'.
> Is that 51% peanuts, 48% Crisco, and some trace elements? I Prefer almond
> butter but I buy it from a couple of stores in town where you grind it
> yourself from a hopper full of almond pieces. There's a similar machine
> for peanuts and cashews.
>
> There isn't a DIY olive press so I have to believe the label on the
> bottle.
>
Inside of Spain, labels are reliable. What happens to exports after
sale, depends on the merchants that buy them and their countries.
having olive oil here mixed with other oils, and still be labelled as
olive oil is unthinkable.
Shady merchants? Sure, somewhere. Not on reliable supermarkets.
Q: If someone in Spain mixes olive oil with other oils, can it be
labelled as olive oil? I think this happens in other countries (USA, AU)
A:
Vista creada con IA
No, in Spain and across the European Union, an edible oil containing a
mixture of olive oil and other vegetable oils (such as sunflower, soy,
or canola) cannot be labeled or sold as "olive oil".
Rules in Spain and the EU
Strict Purity Standards: Under EU regulations (including Regulation
(EU) No 1308/2013 and Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/2104), the term
"olive oil" is legally protected and restricted. It can only be applied
to products derived exclusively from olives.
Allowed Blends: The only legal blends permitted under the name
"olive oil" are combinations of refined olive oils and virgin olive oils
(labeled as "Olive oil composed exclusively of refined olive oils and
virgin olive oils" or simply "Olive oil" depending on the specific legal
tier). Mixing non-olive seed or vegetable oils into olive oil is illegal
for products sold as olive oil.
Separate Categories: If a manufacturer makes a culinary blend
containing olive oil and other vegetable oils, it must be sold and
labeled clearly as a generic vegetable oil or oil blend (e.g., cooking
oil or seasoning oil), never as olive oil.
What Happens in Other Countries (USA, Australia, etc.)
Terminology Differences: In countries outside the EU—such as the
United States or Australia—labeling laws for terms like "Pure Olive Oil"
or "Light Olive Oil" can sometimes confuse consumers. In the US/AU
markets, "light" olive oil refers to a refined, neutral-tasting olive
oil rather than a mix with seed oils, though fraudulent adulteration
with cheap seed oils (like soybean or sunflower oil) does occasionally
occur illegally.
Enforcement: Unlike in Spain where food safety and fraud agencies
(such as AECOSAN or regional authorities) strictly govern olive oil
designations and traceability from mill to bottle, oversight and
standards can vary by import regulations and state/national guidelines
outside the EU.
Would you like to know how to read a Spanish olive oil label to verify a
bottle's harvest year, origin, or Protected Designation of Origin (PDO)?
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olive_oil_regulation_and_adulteration>
<https://www.quora.com/Is-false-olive-oil-which-means-oil-that-is-not-100-olive-oil-common-in-Spain-Portugal-and-Greece>
<https://oikosantalis.com/en/blogs/nos-articles/etiquette-huile-olive-ce-que-dit-la-loi>
Q: What bout UK? It is no longer the EU.
Even though the United Kingdom has left the European Union, the rules
remain the same: you cannot mix olive oil with other vegetable oils
(like rapeseed or sunflower oil) and label the bottle simply as "olive oil".
The UK strictness stems from the following regulatory framework:
1. Retained EU Law
When Brexit occurred, the UK government adopted existing EU food
standards into domestic law as retained EU law (specifically assimilated
regulations like Regulation 29/2012). Under UK Olive Oil Regulations,
the term "olive oil" remains a legally protected description reserved
exclusively for pure products derived entirely from olives.
2. How Mixed Blends Must Be Labeled
If a manufacturer in Great Britain mixes olive oil with seed or
vegetable oils (in the UK, "vegetable oil" is usually 100% rapeseed
oil), the front label is heavily restricted:
• It cannot be called "olive oil".
• It must use a distinct trade description, such as "Blend of vegetable
oils and olive oil".
• It must prominently display the exact percentage of olive oil right
next to the description.
• To prevent deceptive marketing, the label cannot even display images
or graphics of olives unless the olive oil makes up more than 50% of the
total blend.
3. What Has Changed Post-Brexit
While the purity definitions haven't budged, the country-of-origin
labeling requirements have:
• Previously, a bottle containing olive oils from different European
nations could just say "Blend of EU olive oils".
• Now, labels for blends sold in Great Britain must state the specific
countries of origin or use the wording "blend of olive oils from more
than one country". They are no longer allowed to use generic "EU/non-EU"
terms.
The UK's Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) routinely inspects
bottling premises and takes retail samples to run chemical testing,
ensuring that no cheap seed oils have been illegally substituted into
pure bottles.
<https://www.gov.uk/guidance/olive-oil-regulations-and-inspections>
<https://www.customs-declarations.uk/importing-olive-oil-from-italy-to-the-united-kingdom-labelling-quality-and-organic-attestations-and-the-correct-customs-codes-for-oils/>
<https://labelservice.co.uk/deep-dive-olive-oil-labelling-packaging-regulations-in-the-uk-eu-explained/>
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-22 15:46 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <11bd7kl$u5du$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94539 |
On 22/10/2026 12:16, c186282 wrote:
> Oh, NOW we know, dairy fats really are not bad
> for you. The margarine made of mystery oils is
> more suspect.
^^^^ +100
--
"Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have
forgotten your aim."
George Santayana
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-22 15:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <11bd785$u5du$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94534 |
On 22/10/2026 11:19, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2026-10-21 21:58, rbowman wrote: >> On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 19:58:43 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> >>> Here butter used to came wrapped with metallised paper, and margarine in >>> plastic containers. And it was yellow. >> >> https://www.newyorkalmanack.com/2022/04/crimes-against-butter-the- >> oleomargarine-controversy/ >> >> According to that they could sell colorized margarine after 1953. My >> mother always baked butter cookies for Christmas and I can remember her >> kneading the dye in. She swore she would never do such a thing but she >> also said she never smoked. She had a very selective memory. >> >> Also, never assume a little kid isn't taking notes. > > So, margarine in the XIX? I had no idea is was that old. I only knew the > recent version of around 1975, maybe later. It was sold as healthier, > made from vegetable oil. > > I see in the wikipedia that they have evolved this century, but the > issue is so controversial that there is no reliable info. They try to > make a product that generates less cholesterol in blood, I guess. > Well originally it was to cope with less availability of dairy product. The BS about it lowering cholesterol has been completely debunked over the last decade. You neither get fat, not high lipids in the blood from eating fats. It is pretty much a starch and sugar that does that. And many priocesses oils are in fact quite bad for you health - most vegetable oils in fact 'Lo -fat' foods are usually crammed with sugar and are far worse than the full fat versions -- Microsoft : the best reason to go to Linux that ever existed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-23 09:21 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <11bf5e0$sli0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94534 |
On 10/22/26 11:19, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2026-10-21 21:58, rbowman wrote: >> On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 19:58:43 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> >>> Here butter used to came wrapped with metallised paper, and margarine in >>> plastic containers. And it was yellow. >> >> https://www.newyorkalmanack.com/2022/04/crimes-against-butter-the- >> oleomargarine-controversy/ >> >> According to that they could sell colorized margarine after 1953. My >> mother always baked butter cookies for Christmas and I can remember her >> kneading the dye in. She swore she would never do such a thing but she >> also said she never smoked. She had a very selective memory. >> >> Also, never assume a little kid isn't taking notes. > > So, margarine in the XIX? I had no idea is was that old. I only knew the > recent version of around 1975, maybe later. It was sold as healthier, > made from vegetable oil. > > I see in the wikipedia that they have evolved this century, but the > issue is so controversial that there is no reliable info. They try to > make a product that generates less cholesterol in blood, I guess. > There was an argument that saturated fat increased cholesterol production, and that unsaturated fats were better. I think that still exists but not quite as strongly as 30 years ago, as TNP indicates sugar/starch is also suspected now. 35 years ago I replaced fat with copious amounts of premium squeezed orange juice and other carbs. Which I don't think was good for me, especially before statins. I got the yellow xanthoma under my eyes etc. However, some margarines also include phytosterols, stanols and sterols which do reduce cholesterol 5-10%, and are good in co-administration with statins.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-23 19:40 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <11bgd79$23hkg$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94601 |
On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 09:21:19 +0100, Pancho wrote: > There was an argument that saturated fat increased cholesterol > production, and that unsaturated fats were better. There is also the issue that there are two kinds of cholesterol, the high-density lipoproteins (HDLs) and the low-density lipoproteins (LDLs). HDLs are “good” cholesterol, LDLs are “bad” cholesterol, so you want more of the former and less of the latter. Michael Mosley, in his documentary series on losing weight, did an experiment on himself where he spent one week getting all his fat intake from non-dairy sources, and the next week getting exactly the same amount of fat entirely from dairy products. He also tested daily stool samples to see how much of the fat was being excreted from his body (and, therefore, how much he was retaining). His conclusion was, your body finds it harder to retain dairy fat than non-dairy fat. Or, in other words, gram for gram, dairy fat is less fattening than non-dairy fat.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-24 02:00 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <RH-dnSvDp6Qf1EH3nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #94628 |
On 10/23/26 15:40, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 09:21:19 +0100, Pancho wrote: > >> There was an argument that saturated fat increased cholesterol >> production, and that unsaturated fats were better. > > There is also the issue that there are two kinds of cholesterol, the > high-density lipoproteins (HDLs) and the low-density lipoproteins > (LDLs). HDLs are “good” cholesterol, LDLs are “bad” cholesterol, so > you want more of the former and less of the latter. Even the HDL/LDL "truths" are now becoming questionable. We're mostly looking at "health FAD" shit here. Then a bunch of big-money people JUMP on the fad and squeeze it for every penny, invent 'truths'. > Michael Mosley, in his documentary series on losing weight, did an > experiment on himself where he spent one week getting all his fat > intake from non-dairy sources, and the next week getting exactly the > same amount of fat entirely from dairy products. He also tested daily > stool samples to see how much of the fat was being excreted from his > body (and, therefore, how much he was retaining). > > His conclusion was, your body finds it harder to retain dairy fat than > non-dairy fat. Or, in other words, gram for gram, dairy fat is less > fattening than non-dairy fat. Um, about 10 years ago it became imperative to lose a lot of weight. Was about 220, needed to get down to under 160. Only cure - a 600-cal no-carb diet for about a YEAR. Yep, painful. However the alt would have soon been much more painful. The needed vitamins ... you DO have to keep on top of that while shrinking. NOW everybody uses GLP drugs ... alas the SIDE EFFECT list is now rapidly growing - expect huge lawsuits pretty soon. Frankly I suspect it's going to get BAD within a decade. The stuff REALLY messes up your metabolism and more. Still avoid all the 'carb' shit - no breads or pastas or potato chips or lots of chocolate (MISS that !) and other such shit. Gained back to about 170, but holding there and with somewhat better nutrition than during the loss phase. Did what I had to do. The alt was insulin needles and such until I dropped dead at a too-young age. DO try to avoid excess fats/oils too - actually PEEL my KFC - 90% of the nasty stuff is in the skin/coating. STILL tasty though ! GOTTA have it maybe once a week :-) Had major dental a couple weeks ago - was stuck with just "protein drinks" like "OWin" for days. They 'work', but not what I'd call 'good for the soul'. Hmmmmm ... ever notice that the "medical advice" shit you get after any procedure is stuff that 99% of the pop CANNOT abide with ??? The smokers WILL continue to smoke, the fat boyz WILL continue to gobble chips and pasta and BBQ, the coffee-pot drainers WILL continue with 12 cups a day, the bar-flies WILL go straight to the bar, the dope- heads WILL get their pills/weed/etc ...... this is how humans are WIRED and there's really NO changing it. We are what we are. The Prohibition - grew massive massive criminal empires in the USA. EU tobacco rules, saw an article the other day about the massive black-markets. Ban dope/pot ... a dozen entities/cartels WILL emerge to work around all that puritan shit. Nothing new. Politics and Reality have little to do with each other. The docs ... "good medical advice" ... they're basically creating EXCUSES in case whatever procedure goes bad. Less 'medical' than LAWYERS. Heh heh ... when much younger ... the public schools would INVENT a "head-lice" crisis and the prescription was to buzz-cut everyone. Oh, NOT "everyone", just the MALES even though females were equally capable of hosting massive lice infestations. The REAL reason was "anti-HIPPIE". Eventually somebody got a GOOD lawyer and crushed all that shit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-24 09:04 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <11bhoq1$2loaq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94628 |
On 10/23/26 20:40, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 09:21:19 +0100, Pancho wrote: > >> There was an argument that saturated fat increased cholesterol >> production, and that unsaturated fats were better. > > There is also the issue that there are two kinds of cholesterol, the > high-density lipoproteins (HDLs) and the low-density lipoproteins > (LDLs). HDLs are “good” cholesterol, LDLs are “bad” cholesterol, so > you want more of the former and less of the latter. > > Michael Mosley, in his documentary series on losing weight, did an > experiment on himself where he spent one week getting all his fat > intake from non-dairy sources, and the next week getting exactly the > same amount of fat entirely from dairy products. He also tested daily > stool samples to see how much of the fat was being excreted from his > body (and, therefore, how much he was retaining). > > His conclusion was, your body finds it harder to retain dairy fat than > non-dairy fat. Or, in other words, gram for gram, dairy fat is less > fattening than non-dairy fat. I have done experiments over 30+ years. It is very hard to understand what affects my cholesterol, let alone understand enough for me to suggest what might affect someone else's. AIUI, proper scientific trials show that statins and phytosterols work in reducing cholesterol. Further more there is proper scientific evidence that statins do reduce mortality. As an anecdote my HDL was initially very high, when my total cholesterol was high. This reduced at about the same rate or faster than LDL, possibly due to stopping drinking alcohol. This is slightly contrary to the statins boost HDL story, but there are so many confounding factors that I wouldn't draw any conclusions. Michael Mosley appears to have been a stupid "look at me", BBC cunt, whose stupidity got him killed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-24 08:57 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <nk3a8gF1rhjU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #94639 |
On Sat, 24 Oct 2026 09:04:16 +0100, Pancho wrote: > AIUI, proper scientific trials show that statins and phytosterols work > in reducing cholesterol. Further more there is proper scientific > evidence that statins do reduce mortality. My doctor is skeptical about statins. There is a questionnaire that is part of the Medicare screening that she feels is heavily biased toward 'you need statins'. My HDL/LDL numbers are good so I'll pass.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-24 10:25 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <11bhti5$2ipmp$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94640 |
On 24/10/2026 09:57, rbowman wrote: > On Sat, 24 Oct 2026 09:04:16 +0100, Pancho wrote: > >> AIUI, proper scientific trials show that statins and phytosterols work >> in reducing cholesterol. Further more there is proper scientific >> evidence that statins do reduce mortality. > > My doctor is skeptical about statins. There is a questionnaire that is > part of the Medicare screening that she feels is heavily biased toward > 'you need statins'. My HDL/LDL numbers are good so I'll pass. good advice. -- If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State. Joseph Goebbels
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-25 08:42 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <11bkfei$104dd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94640 |
On 10/24/26 09:57, rbowman wrote: > On Sat, 24 Oct 2026 09:04:16 +0100, Pancho wrote: > >> AIUI, proper scientific trials show that statins and phytosterols work >> in reducing cholesterol. Further more there is proper scientific >> evidence that statins do reduce mortality. > > My doctor is skeptical about statins. There is a questionnaire that is > part of the Medicare screening that she feels is heavily biased toward > 'you need statins'. My HDL/LDL numbers are good so I'll pass. Statins are good. General population prescribing policy, I dunno. With Familial hypercholesterolaemia, I'm in an unambiguous category. I have a problem, statins solve it. Side effects, if any, are minor. 30 years ago, just before I started statins, I didn't expect I would be alive today.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-25 22:12 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <pLicnUCiRtuYKkP3nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #94671 |
On 10/25/26 04:42, Pancho wrote: > On 10/24/26 09:57, rbowman wrote: >> On Sat, 24 Oct 2026 09:04:16 +0100, Pancho wrote: >> >>> AIUI, proper scientific trials show that statins and phytosterols work >>> in reducing cholesterol. Further more there is proper scientific >>> evidence that statins do reduce mortality. >> >> My doctor is skeptical about statins. There is a questionnaire that is >> part of the Medicare screening that she feels is heavily biased toward >> 'you need statins'. My HDL/LDL numbers are good so I'll pass. > > Statins are good. General population prescribing policy, I dunno. With > Familial hypercholesterolaemia, I'm in an unambiguous category. I have a > problem, statins solve it. Side effects, if any, are minor. 30 years > ago, just before I started statins, I didn't expect I would be alive today. DO be aware of more recent research that says the HDL/LDL ratios are less important than once believed (and PROMOTED by those corps that sell statins). Seems there are a lot of little genetic factors that determine whether LDL actually does any damage. Since those are currently out of the reach of Big Pharma we don't HEAR about those. Yes ... 'reality' and MONEY/POWER motives do indeed intersect. Always been thus, kinda hard-wired into the organism it seems. Now I can provide some Magic Charms that will protect you from evils ... what's yer bid ??? Come on, you KNOW that demons and devils are behind all ills ... :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-24 10:24 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <11bhtfm$2ipmp$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94639 |
On 24/10/2026 09:04, Pancho wrote: > AIUI, proper scientific trials show that statins and phytosterols work > in reducing cholesterol. Further more there is proper scientific > evidence that statins do reduce mortality. i am on a bi annual injection after being in a fortnightly one. no statins. lipid levels never been better no muscle cramping statins for me -- “It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.” ― Voltaire, The Age of Louis XIV
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-24 09:31 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <11bhttm$2j074$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94639 |
On Sat, 24 Oct 2026 09:04:16 +0100, Pancho wrote: > Michael Mosley appears to have been a stupid "look at me", BBC cunt, > whose stupidity got him killed. Don’t judge him by his last day, or what his state of mind might have been that day. Look at the body of work he accumulated in his entire life before that. Have you done as much?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-24 05:39 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <RH-dnSHDp6RB4UH3nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #94639 |
On 10/24/26 04:04, Pancho wrote: > On 10/23/26 20:40, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >> On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 09:21:19 +0100, Pancho wrote: >> >>> There was an argument that saturated fat increased cholesterol >>> production, and that unsaturated fats were better. >> >> There is also the issue that there are two kinds of cholesterol, the >> high-density lipoproteins (HDLs) and the low-density lipoproteins >> (LDLs). HDLs are “good” cholesterol, LDLs are “bad” cholesterol, so >> you want more of the former and less of the latter. >> >> Michael Mosley, in his documentary series on losing weight, did an >> experiment on himself where he spent one week getting all his fat >> intake from non-dairy sources, and the next week getting exactly the >> same amount of fat entirely from dairy products. He also tested daily >> stool samples to see how much of the fat was being excreted from his >> body (and, therefore, how much he was retaining). >> >> His conclusion was, your body finds it harder to retain dairy fat than >> non-dairy fat. Or, in other words, gram for gram, dairy fat is less >> fattening than non-dairy fat. > > I have done experiments over 30+ years. It is very hard to understand > what affects my cholesterol, let alone understand enough for me to > suggest what might affect someone else's. > > AIUI, proper scientific trials show that statins and phytosterols work > in reducing cholesterol. Further more there is proper scientific > evidence that statins do reduce mortality. > > As an anecdote my HDL was initially very high, when my total cholesterol > was high. This reduced at about the same rate or faster than LDL, > possibly due to stopping drinking alcohol. This is slightly contrary to > the statins boost HDL story, but there are so many confounding factors > that I wouldn't draw any conclusions. > > Michael Mosley appears to have been a stupid "look at me", BBC cunt, > whose stupidity got him killed. Look ... media/popular/cult "heath" shit DOMINATES. Has NOTHING to do with any "science". The main goal is panic -> profit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-24 11:55 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <11bi2rg$2kkoq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94647 |
On 24/10/2026 10:39, c186282 wrote: >> >> Michael Mosley appears to have been a stupid "look at me", BBC cunt, >> whose stupidity got him killed. > > > Look ... media/popular/cult "heath" shit DOMINATES. > > Has NOTHING to do with any "science". The main > goal is panic -> profit. Mosley had medical qualifications and was intensely interested in researching dietary issues. Nothing he ever did was sponsored by any 'food company' - indeed his most notable 'diet' involved not eating at all. He was of course guilty of working for the BBC. However he managed to avoid getting arrested for paedophilia, anti-Semitism or groping his co-workers. His 'stupidity' didn't get him killed, It's unclear what actually did. -- “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire, Questions sur les Miracles à M. Claparede, Professeur de Théologie à Genève, par un Proposant: Ou Extrait de Diverses Lettres de M. de Voltaire
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-25 08:43 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <11bkffm$104dd$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94649 |
On 10/24/26 11:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 24/10/2026 10:39, c186282 wrote: >>> >>> Michael Mosley appears to have been a stupid "look at me", BBC cunt, >>> whose stupidity got him killed. >> >> >> Look ... media/popular/cult "heath" shit DOMINATES. >> >> Has NOTHING to do with any "science". The main >> goal is panic -> profit. > > Mosley had medical qualifications and was intensely interested in > researching dietary issues. > Interested is one thing, but medicine should be evidence based, as opposed to the latest old wives' tale. Evidence based is slow and boring. Unfortunately reputations are built on bets, pretending to know something before the evidence is in. Dr Spock is a classic, telling parents babies should front sleep. > Nothing he ever did was sponsored by any 'food company' - indeed his > most notable 'diet' involved not eating at all. > > He was of course guilty of working for the BBC. However he managed to > avoid getting arrested for paedophilia, anti-Semitism or groping his co- > workers. > > His 'stupidity' didn't get him killed, It's unclear what actually did. > I think an old man, going for a wilderness trek, without a phone, on a day when temperatures were reported to be up to 50 C, wasn't the smartest move.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-25 09:53 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <11bkjil$3g0do$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94672 |
On 25/10/2026 08:43, Pancho wrote: > On 10/24/26 11:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 24/10/2026 10:39, c186282 wrote: >>>> >>>> Michael Mosley appears to have been a stupid "look at me", BBC cunt, >>>> whose stupidity got him killed. >>> >>> >>> Look ... media/popular/cult "heath" shit DOMINATES. >>> >>> Has NOTHING to do with any "science". The main >>> goal is panic -> profit. >> >> Mosley had medical qualifications and was intensely interested in >> researching dietary issues. >> > > Interested is one thing, but medicine should be evidence based, as > opposed to the latest old wives' tale. Evidence based is slow and > boring. Unfortunately reputations are built on bets, pretending to know > something before the evidence is in. > He collected evidence -- All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is fully understood.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-25 22:33 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Margarine |
| Message-ID | <YqednV8C15mHIUP3nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #94672 |
On 10/25/26 04:43, Pancho wrote: > On 10/24/26 11:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 24/10/2026 10:39, c186282 wrote: >>>> >>>> Michael Mosley appears to have been a stupid "look at me", BBC cunt, >>>> whose stupidity got him killed. >>> >>> >>> Look ... media/popular/cult "heath" shit DOMINATES. >>> >>> Has NOTHING to do with any "science". The main >>> goal is panic -> profit. >> >> Mosley had medical qualifications and was intensely interested in >> researching dietary issues. >> > > Interested is one thing, but medicine should be evidence based, as > opposed to the latest old wives' tale. Evidence based is slow and > boring. Unfortunately reputations are built on bets, pretending to know > something before the evidence is in. Reputations - but especially PROFIT$ .... > Dr Spock is a classic, telling parents babies should front sleep. Well, at least that didn't hurt. (umm ... 'front sleep' did you mean face-UP or face-DOWN ??? Up IS probably better) SIDS, however, seems more related to a slight screw-up in the CO2/Oxygen internal sensor genetics. I don't suspect Spock's motives. However modern, for-profit, FIXES for every imagined ill heavily drive the collective 'reality' now just like 'witches' and 'demons' drove past 'reality'. 1599, just SAY witches and demons weren't responsible for every ill and misfortune and they'd BURN you. Witches and demon - the State/Church gained HUGE power from those threats. But, well, "Everybody KNEW" ..... >> Nothing he ever did was sponsored by any 'food company' - indeed his >> most notable 'diet' involved not eating at all. >> >> He was of course guilty of working for the BBC. However he managed to >> avoid getting arrested for paedophilia, anti-Semitism or groping his >> co- workers. >> >> His 'stupidity' didn't get him killed, It's unclear what actually did. >> > > I think an old man, going for a wilderness trek, without a phone, on a > day when temperatures were reported to be up to 50 C, wasn't the > smartest move. "Challenge" - very important to the psyche, even for old men.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-21 10:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial |
| Message-ID | <11ba05h$3p0ft$8@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94421 |
On 20/10/2026 20:04, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2026-10-20, Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> wrote: > >> Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote: >> >>> Do people in the USA use another numbering for CR2032 batteries? Or do >>> they just use the SI units there? >> >> 3,5 Inch Floppies are actually specced as 89 mm. In the 1990ies some >> german courts fined companied for not giving the floppy size in SI >> units, which prompty led to advertisements like "Diskette 8,89 cm". > > What amuses me is when I go to the grocery store for some butter > and it's marked "454 g". So how metric are we, really? > > Give a man 25.4 mm, and he'll take 1.609 km. > Theres always a man with a low coefficient of reflectivity in the wood pile -- “Some people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of a car with the cramped public exposure of an airplane.” Dennis Miller
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web