It's not your fault ;-)
View Full Version : It's not your fault ;-)
There you go. Any of you guys cycling but still retaing a beer belly... blame it on your genes :)
See http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_737457.html?menu=news.latestheadlines
Cheers, helen s (not able to use the same excuse...)
~~~~~~~~~~
Flush out that intestinal parasite and/or the waste product before sending a reply!
Any speeliong mistake$ aR the resiult of my cats sitting on the keyboaRRRDdd
~~~~~~~~~~
"wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter" <wafflycathcs@aol.comtapeworm> wrote in message
news:20030108085409.02003.00000111@mb-fh.aol.com...
> There you go. Any of you guys cycling but still retaing a beer belly...
blame
> it on your genes :)
>
> See
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_737457.html?menu=news.latestheadlines
>
Personally I blame it on not cycling enough & eating & drinking too much.
Of course there was that item on TV recently suggesting us tubbies have been infected with a virus.
Still -- all a good excuse to cycle more :)
T
In article <20030108085409.02003.00000111@mb-fh.aol.com>, one of infinite monkeys at the keyboard of
wafflycathcs@aol.comtapeworm (wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter) wrote:
> See http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_737457.html?menu=news.latestheadlines
Thanks for the kind thought. But aren't you just reiterating the old paunchist line by suggesting
there's something wrong with us?
--
Not me guv
> There you go. Any of you guys cycling but still retaing a beer belly... blame it on your genes :)
>
I assume that my genes think that by now I ought to be fully infested with a bunch of tapeworms and
such things, which doesn't seem to be the case for me.
I once read of somebody who was selling slimming pills that contained tapeworm eggs. They were the
only slimming pills that have ever worked, but they made him take the pills off the market.
Jeremy Parker
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 18:35:30 -0000, "Tony W" <awwCUT_OUT@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>Of course there was that item on TV recently suggesting us tubbies have been infected with a virus.
HFBV?[1] An excellent but unconvincing excuse. I was 15 stone and a 40" waist; I went to a gym for a
paltry hour or so a day seven days a week for three months, at the end of which I was 13 stone and a
32" waist. I now maintain that by cycling. Whatever your genetic makeup, if you exercise well and
eat sensibly you'll not get fat.
Talking of makeup, why have Clonaid hired Arabella Weir in her "no offence" persona to be their
spokesloony?
[1] Human Fat Bastard Virus - OK I made that up :-)
Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (http://www.chapmancentral.com/) (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <guy.chapman@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:7j662vg7s92d3dt4rj281n0pn04knc08p2@4ax.com...
>
> [1] Human Fat Bastard Virus - OK I made that up :-)
I thought it was FGLE virus -- fat git, lame excuse.
T
:)
>Of course there was that item on TV recently suggesting us tubbies have been infected with a virus.
>
No, it suggested *some* of us tubbies may have been infected with a virus. It said *some* obesity
may be as a result of Ad-36 infection. It certainly didn't use it as an "excuse" for all obseity. To
me, there was enough of a case to warrant further research. :)
Cheers, helen s
~~~~~~~~~~
Flush out that intestinal parasite and/or the waste product before sending a reply!
Any speeliong mistake$ aR the resiult of my cats sitting on the keyboaRRRDdd
~~~~~~~~~~
>Thanks for the kind thought. But aren't you just reiterating the old paunchist line by suggesting
>there's something wrong with us?
No more than suggesting there's something wrong with *everyone* - we all have different "defects" in
our DNA, to a greater or lesser extent, for example.
Cheers, helen s
~~~~~~~~~~
Flush out that intestinal parasite and/or the waste product before sending a reply!
Any speeliong mistake$ aR the resiult of my cats sitting on the keyboaRRRDdd
~~~~~~~~~~
In article <20030114052250.18733.00000604@mb-cq.aol.com>, one of infinite monkeys at the keyboard of
wafflycathcs@aol.comtapeworm (wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter) wrote:
>>Thanks for the kind thought. But aren't you just reiterating the old paunchist line by suggesting
>>there's something wrong with us?
>
> No more than suggesting there's something wrong with *everyone* - we all have different "defects"
> in our DNA, to a greater or lesser extent, for example.
Huh.
If you're rude about a coloured skin, you're considered highly offensive. If you're rude about
baldies, it's in bad taste.
So how come you can be rude about us paunchies?
--
Not me guv
In message <9eo10b.hb1.ln@jarl.webthing.com>, Nick Kew <nick@fenris.webthing.com> writes
>In article <20030114052250.18733.00000604@mb-cq.aol.com>, one of infinite monkeys at the keyboard
>of wafflycathcs@aol.comtapeworm (wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter) wrote:
>>>Thanks for the kind thought. But aren't you just reiterating the old paunchist line by suggesting
>>>there's something wrong with us?
>>
>> No more than suggesting there's something wrong with *everyone* - we all have different "defects"
>> in our DNA, to a greater or lesser extent, for example.
>
>Huh.
>
>If you're rude about a coloured skin, you're considered highly offensive. If you're rude about
>baldies, it's in bad taste.
>
>So how come you can be rude about us paunchies?
Because your paunch says "gross moral defect" to all observers. (Mine says "bonhomie, relaxation,
and good company".) (1)
We could both do something about our paunches, but we don't. Moral defects may originate in your
genes, but they still mark you out for the hatred and contempt of all right-thinking people.
--
Richard Keatinge
(1) It's lying.
In article <DuYHyeGkeIJ+EwK$@keatinge.demon.co.uk>, one of infinite monkeys at the keyboard of
Richard Keatinge <dr.richard@keatinge.net> wrote:
>>
>>So how come you can be rude about us paunchies?
>
> Because your paunch says "gross moral defect" to all observers. (Mine says "bonhomie, relaxation,
> and good company".) (1)
>
> (1) It's lying
ROTFL;-)
> We could both do something about our paunches, but we don't. Moral
Speak for yourself. I nurture mine, and it repays me by growing ever more ample as the years go by.
Bit of good natural insulation saves me being tempted to use heating, too.
--
Wear your paunch with pride!
Nick Kew wrote:
> In article <DuYHyeGkeIJ+EwK$@keatinge.demon.co.uk>, one of infinite monkeys at the keyboard of
> Richard Keatinge <dr.richard@keatinge.net> wrote:
>
>
> > We could both do something about our paunches, but we don't. Moral
>
> Speak for yourself. I nurture mine, and it repays me by growing ever more ample as the years go
> by. Bit of good natural insulation saves me being tempted to use heating, too.
There are also clear advantages on the bent. The rounded shape must aid aerodynamics.
John Buckley
In message <20030115092155.G27316-100000@mordor.maths.warwick.ac.uk>, Jose Marques
<noway@nohow.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>You think your paunch talks to you? You have bigger problems than being stout me thinks.
In message <1rfb2vg10bjljc34n35oefokl02i8s7in6@4ax.com>, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
<guy.chapman@spamcop.net> writes
>So, do you demand the banning of the word "ample?" :-)
No. No! NO!
I am well, I am healthy. The voices are good! They are good voices! They tell me good things. If
only I c'd twunderstand them! Who are they? Why do they tell me to eat chocolate? Are they my leg
muscles? Or do they come from my paunch? Or from the Dark Side? I am sane. And happy. My old MTB is
not calling me! Nor rusting to death, in tears. The lambs, the little lambs - so sweet, so juicy, so
tender. Chocolate, roasted chocolate. Coffee. Dunnykindiving is fun well seasoned. Ample... Oh God
I've said it, I've said it, it's banned, I'm damned uuurgh splash...
(burp)
(much better now)
thank you
--
the ample Richard Keatinge
http://www.keatinge.net (http://www.keatinge.net/)
"wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter" <wafflycathcs@aol.comtapeworm> wrote in message
news:20030113150934.02069.00000320@mb-cb.aol.com...
>
> No, it suggested *some* of us tubbies may have been infected with a virus.
It
> said *some* obesity may be as a result of Ad-36 infection. It certainly
didn't
> use it as an "excuse" for all obseity. To me, there was enough of a case
to
> warrant further research. :)
I stand corrected (NO not orthopaedic shoes!!). Yes, it may well warrant further research but the
standard equation of food in - work out must equal change in weight whether you have or have had a
virus or have specific genes or not. The laws of physics rule supreme. There are NO exceptions.
Eat less, exercise more must result in reduced weight.
T
On Tue, 14 Jan 2003, Richard Keatinge wrote:
> Because your paunch says "gross moral defect" to all observers. (Mine says "bonhomie, relaxation,
> and good company".) (1)
You think your paunch talks to you? You have bigger problems than being stout me thinks.
--
Jose Marques
"Tony W" <awwCUT_OUT@bigfoot.com> wrote in message news:avvb3k$j9l73$3@ID-161007.news.dfncis.de...
>
> "wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter" <wafflycathcs@aol.comtapeworm> wrote in
message
> news:20030113150934.02069.00000320@mb-cb.aol.com...
> >
> > No, it suggested *some* of us tubbies may have been infected with a
virus.
> It
> > said *some* obesity may be as a result of Ad-36 infection. It certainly
> didn't
> > use it as an "excuse" for all obseity. To me, there was enough of a case
> to
> > warrant further research. :)
>
>
> I stand corrected (NO not orthopaedic shoes!!). Yes, it may well warrant further research but the
> standard equation of food in - work out must
equal
> change in weight whether you have or have had a virus or have specific
genes
> or not. The laws of physics rule supreme. There are NO exceptions.
>
> Eat less, exercise more must result in reduced weight.
>
> T
>
>
Surely this is only as long as we *totally understand* all possible inputs/outputs/variations, i.e.
is our view of reality the only and correct one ??...not if the h*lm*ts threads are anything to go
by ;-) Dave.
On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 19:29:13 +0000, nick@fenris.webthing.com (Nick Kew) wrote:
>If you're rude about a coloured skin, you're considered highly offensive. If you're rude about
>baldies, it's in bad taste. So how come you can be rude about us paunchies?
Shut up, you whingeing fat bastard :-D
Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (http://www.chapmancentral.com/) (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.
"Tony W" <awwCUT_OUT@bigfoot.com> wrote in message news:<avvb3k$j9l73$3@ID-161007.news.dfncis.de>...
>
> Eat less, exercise more must result in reduced weight.
>
Actually not. Exercise may decrease fat and make you slimmer but it also creates more muscle and
muscle is much more dense than fat. So you can actually eat less, exercise more, become slimmer and
gain weight.
However I have long ago accepted the advice of a medical friend who reckons I've reached the age
where my broad mind and narrow waist swap places.
Tony
Nick Kew wrote:
> If you're rude about baldies, it's in bad taste.
Can you tell that to my MIL?
> So how come you can be rude about us paunchies?
Ah, well, I don't have a problem with that ;-)
--
Danny Colyer (remove safety to reply) ( http://www.juggler.net/danny ) Recumbent cycle page:
http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/recumbents/ "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." -
Thomas Paine
"Dave" <no-one@nowhere.org> wrote in message
news:ZRYU9.21267$bY5.12554@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> Surely this is only as long as we *totally understand* all possible inputs/outputs/variations,
> i.e. is our view of reality the only and
correct
> one ??...not if the h*lm*ts threads are anything to go by ;-)
Ahhhhhhhhhh --- slashes wrists :(
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by
vBSEO 3.3.0
