Diabetic (alt.food.diabetic) This group is for the discussion of controlled-portion eating plans for the dietary management of diabetes.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #121 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-01-2012, 04:05 AM posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,614
Default For one who shall remain nameless.....



"BlueBrooke" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 11:24:56 +1000, "Ozgirl"
wrote:

Even after I have explained (many times) that the usage was correct
and
that it exists in American dictionaries and that the proper context
was
used I am still guilty of a shameful act. Its still the not what you
say
but who you are attitude that's rife in the diabetics groups.


The usage is not correct. The definitions you provided that related
to animals involved killing them. Unless you're wanting to argue that
a cat would feel better if they were told who won the tournament, or
if they were given the information they were waiting for.


The cat may feel better if "You could try probiotics. If you are going
to traumatise him by getting T4 blood tests why not have him sedated and
given a 5 minute ultrasound to see if there is something seriously
wrong? Trauma is trauma no matter what. Skittish or not, the cat needs
proper evaluation of his health not you playing around with his diet all
the time. You were obviously able to control him to have his blood test,
you can surely control him to have sedation."

The cat has a vomiting problem, the cat probably feels miserable, the
cat could (possibly) be put out of its misery if the cat were given
probiotics or given an ultrasound to see the true state of his guts. Is
that unacceptable to you? But I can't stop you from believing I am an
advocate for cat killing, just because... You are free to paint me
however you wish BlueBrooke. Its your right.

When you tell someone you're giving them "a buck," they know you're
not about to hand over a male deer. When you tell someone to "put the
animal out of its misery," they know you're not telling them to have a
meaningful, information-filled conversation with it.

I don't know if you're "guilty of a shameful act" or not. Only you
know that. All I know is you're wrong about the usage -- "in
context" -- and yet continue to argue that you're not. "In context,"
the animal is put down.


The context I am talking about is : "And how about putting that poor cat
out
of yours out of its misery. You could try probiotics. If you are going
to traumatise him by getting T4 blood tests why not have him sedated and
given a 5 minute ultrasound to see if there is something seriously
wrong? Trauma is trauma no matter what. Skittish or not, the cat needs
proper evaluation of his health not you playing around with his diet all
the time. You were obviously able to control him to have his blood test,
you can surely control him to have sedation."

Talking about putting the cat out of its misery as a stand alone
statement. i.e. ignoring what immediately follows in the paragraph is
talking out of context.
Not a hard thing to understand.
"con·text/'käntekst/
Noun:The
circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea,
and in terms of which it can be fully understood and assessed.
**********The parts of something written or spoken that immediately
precede and follow a word or passage and clarify its meaning."*********


  #122 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-01-2012, 04:07 AM posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 656
Default For one who shall remain nameless.....

On 1/10/2012 7:25 PM, Ozgirl wrote:
No but if someone told me it had another meaning then for sure I would
be not only checking but apologising



and then there was the day Ratty started a.s.d.uk

and someone spoke of a 'fanny pack'

giggle

i'll never forget THAT discussion, with NO ONE wanting to explain to the
OP what was 'heard'

countries divided by a common language

kate
  #123 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-01-2012, 04:10 AM posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 121
Default For one who shall remain nameless.....

x-o-archive: yes

On 1/10/2012 9:59 PM, Tiger Lily wrote:
I see someone who has a problem, may not be able to put words to it and
needs help.

My 'experience' with steroids doesn't go anywhere near what he's going
thru...... low dose for 5 days or the old 10 day step down method......
and every time it was very necessary and very effective with no side
affects (well, other than i had to test frequently and correct with
insulin as needed)


I'm sorry, maybe I'm being dense... I see discussion of metformin,
prednisone, don't know what the person is still taking or what kind of
problems he's having?

I can't find the posts on my reader... maybe give the person my email
addy if they think I can help? Depending on what their needs are, I can
direct them to weaning off threads, dosing information, other resources.

Susan
  #124 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-01-2012, 04:11 AM posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,614
Default For one who shall remain nameless.....



"BlueBrooke" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 10:09:13 +1000, "Ozgirl"
wrote:



"BlueBrooke" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 10:05:15 +1000, "Ozgirl"
wrote:

There are more ways than one one out of their misery without death.

Must be another one of those cultural things. That's exactly what
"putting them out of their misery" means to every vet I've ever been
to.


Doesn't anyone here have a dictionary? Or able to understand context?
If
you were "miserable" with the flu what would you like to have to rid
yourself of the misery?


Dictionary? Sure -- lots of dictionaries. Maybe you should pull
yours out again, because you don't seem to understand the word
"context." In the "context" of animals who are critically or
terminally ill, the phrase means to kill them.



And you don't seem to understand that the context you are talking about
isn't the context I am talking about.
Put the misery phrase back into the whole paragraph and might have an
inkling of what I mean by context.

  #125 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-01-2012, 04:15 AM posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 656
Default For one who shall remain nameless.....

On 1/10/2012 7:43 PM, Ozgirl wrote:
"And how about putting that poor cat out of yours out of its misery.
*****You could try probiotics. ******


i pretty much read "the probiotics will help put your cat out of the
misery it is suffering from......... and is an easy option to try"

there was other discussion on the probiotics leading up to this
statement to try to help Susan's cat

i was dismayed at the connoctations taken out of context..... i can see
where picking up one part of the sentence would skew your initial
intention, but reading the thread as it unfolded certainly gave a
different 'slant' on how folks read things

but, i happen to know you are an animal lover and would go to whatever
lengths to ease the misery the animal is suffering (no, i'm not
purporting euthenasia, and i know you know how to spell that word better
than i can)

kate


  #126 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-01-2012, 04:20 AM posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,614
Default For one who shall remain nameless.....



"Susan" wrote in message
...
x-o-archive: yes

On 1/10/2012 9:55 PM, BlueBrooke wrote:

Dictionary? Sure -- lots of dictionaries. Maybe you should pull
yours out again, because you don't seem to understand the word
"context." In the "context" of animals who are critically or
terminally ill, the phrase means to kill them.

But you already know that.


Yes.

Watching her try to lie her way to a plausible denial is quite an
extraordinary spectacle. Every time she does it.


Lie? If I had stopped at the sentence that said put your cat out of his
misery I may have been able to see where you are coming from. As to
lying their way out of plausible denial I have watched you do that
hundreds of times. Justify should be your middle name.

  #127 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-01-2012, 04:22 AM posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,614
Default For one who shall remain nameless.....



"Tiger Lily" wrote in message
...
On 1/10/2012 7:25 PM, Ozgirl wrote:
No but if someone told me it had another meaning then for sure I
would
be not only checking but apologising



and then there was the day Ratty started a.s.d.uk

and someone spoke of a 'fanny pack'

giggle

i'll never forget THAT discussion, with NO ONE wanting to explain to
the OP what was 'heard'

countries divided by a common language


Yet in this case it is not. Its a case of a few people not having heard
the phrase in any way other than meaning to put down an animal. So
therefore it can't mean anything else.

  #128 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-01-2012, 04:28 AM posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,614
Default For one who shall remain nameless.....



"Tiger Lily" wrote in message
...
On 1/10/2012 7:43 PM, Ozgirl wrote:
"And how about putting that poor cat out of yours out of its misery.
*****You could try probiotics. ******


i pretty much read "the probiotics will help put your cat out of the
misery it is suffering from......... and is an easy option to try"

there was other discussion on the probiotics leading up to this
statement to try to help Susan's cat

i was dismayed at the connoctations taken out of context..... i can
see where picking up one part of the sentence would skew your initial
intention, but reading the thread as it unfolded certainly gave a
different 'slant' on how folks read things

but, i happen to know you are an animal lover and would go to whatever
lengths to ease the misery the animal is suffering (no, i'm not
purporting euthenasia, and i know you know how to spell that word
better than i can)


Animals to me are family members. I have never ever understood why a
horse gets put down because of a broken leg. Anyone who knows me
personally would have an extremely hard time believing I would be
telling Susan to put her cat down. But my personal testimony means jack
shit amongst strangers. So be it.

  #129 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-01-2012, 04:32 AM posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 656
Default For one who shall remain nameless.....

On 1/10/2012 8:10 PM, Susan wrote:
x-o-archive: yes

On 1/10/2012 9:59 PM, Tiger Lily wrote:
I see someone who has a problem, may not be able to put words to it and
needs help.

My 'experience' with steroids doesn't go anywhere near what he's going
thru...... low dose for 5 days or the old 10 day step down method......
and every time it was very necessary and very effective with no side
affects (well, other than i had to test frequently and correct with
insulin as needed)


I'm sorry, maybe I'm being dense... I see discussion of metformin,
prednisone, don't know what the person is still taking or what kind of
problems he's having?

I can't find the posts on my reader... maybe give the person my email
addy if they think I can help? Depending on what their needs are, I can
direct them to weaning off threads, dosing information, other resources.

Susan


ok, i don't have his e-mail, i'll check on a new thread pinging the gent

he seemed floundering and looking for help, help i certainly am not
capable of giving

kate
  #130 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-01-2012, 04:45 AM posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 656
Default For one who shall remain nameless.....

On 1/10/2012 8:22 PM, Ozgirl wrote:
countries divided by a common language


Yet in this case it is not. Its a case of a few people not having heard
the phrase in any way other than meaning to put down an animal. So
therefore it can't mean anything else.


it's more than that Jan.......... i couldn't sleep when that whole
conversation was happening, so i saw the convo in real time

the thread links do NOT reflect that you had mentioned the probiotics
more than once before the thread that you are being 'called on' right now

not taking sides, just calling a spade a spade

had i come into the convo a week later, i would not have seen what lead
up to your statement, which i read as being frustrated at not being
heard when you have some valid points to make that may be helpful

i rely on my animal friends to tell me how to REALLY fix a problem that
the vet doesn't grasp

Susan has indicated the vet is 'by the book/cookbook' and that she takes
what the vet has to say only as a starting point (so do i, over and over
again)

One of my tibbies had skin tags......... many many skin tags........
these have caused me concern as she has a tumour in her mouth........ i
watch closely as if she appears to be in distress, that is MY
responsibility......... the skin tags are falling off now...... the vet
has NO idea how/why

kate


  #131 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-01-2012, 04:52 AM posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 656
Default For one who shall remain nameless.....

On 1/10/2012 8:36 PM, Susan wrote:
i pretty much read "the probiotics will help put your cat out of the
misery it is suffering from......... and is an easy option to try"


Then you are reading out of the original context and getting it wrong to
defend the indefensible. That's not what she was saying. And that's not
what the term means in the context of a very ill cat.


fair enough, i read things differently from how you read them, the AND
word being VERY important in the initial statement

now, where is the GA comment, as that is what i was trying to copy for
this message????

hubby is still laughing at me

i was extremely stressed before the surgery as NONE OF THE DOCTORS WERE
LISTENING TO ME

i have NO idea what i said under anaesthetic, but the surgeon INFORMED
me he followed the directions my former surgeon had told me to pass on
to ANYONE who wanted to touch this disaster i have

now for my follow up appt (will i have to wear a paper bag??)

kate
  #132 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-01-2012, 05:51 AM posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,614
Default For one who shall remain nameless.....



"Tiger Lily" wrote in message
...
On 1/10/2012 8:36 PM, Susan wrote:
i pretty much read "the probiotics will help put your cat out of the
misery it is suffering from......... and is an easy option to try"


Then you are reading out of the original context and getting it wrong
to
defend the indefensible. That's not what she was saying. And that's
not
what the term means in the context of a very ill cat.


fair enough, i read things differently from how you read them, the AND
word being VERY important in the initial statement

now, where is the GA comment, as that is what i was trying to copy for
this message????

hubby is still laughing at me

i was extremely stressed before the surgery as NONE OF THE DOCTORS
WERE LISTENING TO ME

i have NO idea what i said under anaesthetic, but the surgeon INFORMED
me he followed the directions my former surgeon had told me to pass on
to ANYONE who wanted to touch this disaster i have

now for my follow up appt (will i have to wear a paper bag??)


I have heard stories about what people say under anaesthetic but all
hear say (and your name was never mentioned...)

  #133 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-01-2012, 06:11 AM posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,614
Default For one who shall remain nameless.....



"Susan" wrote in message
...

No, though there may have been some attacks on me for not doing as
your friend apparently demanded I do.


They are in your head. I have posted in another message all my posts
where I recommended trying probiotics. Best of luck trying to maintain
the lies.

  #134 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-01-2012, 06:42 AM posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44,962
Default For one who shall remain nameless.....


"BlueBrooke" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 11:24:56 +1000, "Ozgirl"
wrote:

Even after I have explained (many times) that the usage was correct and
that it exists in American dictionaries and that the proper context was
used I am still guilty of a shameful act. Its still the not what you say
but who you are attitude that's rife in the diabetics groups.


The usage is not correct. The definitions you provided that related
to animals involved killing them. Unless you're wanting to argue that
a cat would feel better if they were told who won the tournament, or
if they were given the information they were waiting for.

When you tell someone you're giving them "a buck," they know you're
not about to hand over a male deer. When you tell someone to "put the
animal out of its misery," they know you're not telling them to have a
meaningful, information-filled conversation with it.

I don't know if you're "guilty of a shameful act" or not. Only you
know that. All I know is you're wrong about the usage -- "in
context" -- and yet continue to argue that you're not. "In context,"
the animal is put down.


She also mentioned tests and treatments. And it sounded from the way Susan
was posting that she wasn't going to have the tests done on the cat lest she
stress him out.


  #135 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-01-2012, 06:45 AM posted to alt.food.diabetic
external usenet poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 44,962
Default For one who shall remain nameless.....


"Ozgirl" wrote in message
...


"BlueBrooke" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 11:24:56 +1000, "Ozgirl"
wrote:

Even after I have explained (many times) that the usage was correct and
that it exists in American dictionaries and that the proper context was
used I am still guilty of a shameful act. Its still the not what you say
but who you are attitude that's rife in the diabetics groups.


The usage is not correct. The definitions you provided that related
to animals involved killing them. Unless you're wanting to argue that
a cat would feel better if they were told who won the tournament, or
if they were given the information they were waiting for.


The cat may feel better if "You could try probiotics. If you are going
to traumatise him by getting T4 blood tests why not have him sedated and
given a 5 minute ultrasound to see if there is something seriously
wrong? Trauma is trauma no matter what. Skittish or not, the cat needs
proper evaluation of his health not you playing around with his diet all
the time. You were obviously able to control him to have his blood test,
you can surely control him to have sedation."

The cat has a vomiting problem, the cat probably feels miserable, the cat
could (possibly) be put out of its misery if the cat were given probiotics
or given an ultrasound to see the true state of his guts. Is that
unacceptable to you? But I can't stop you from believing I am an advocate
for cat killing, just because... You are free to paint me however you wish
BlueBrooke. Its your right.

When you tell someone you're giving them "a buck," they know you're
not about to hand over a male deer. When you tell someone to "put the
animal out of its misery," they know you're not telling them to have a
meaningful, information-filled conversation with it.

I don't know if you're "guilty of a shameful act" or not. Only you
know that. All I know is you're wrong about the usage -- "in
context" -- and yet continue to argue that you're not. "In context,"
the animal is put down.


The context I am talking about is : "And how about putting that poor cat
out
of yours out of its misery. You could try probiotics. If you are going
to traumatise him by getting T4 blood tests why not have him sedated and
given a 5 minute ultrasound to see if there is something seriously
wrong? Trauma is trauma no matter what. Skittish or not, the cat needs
proper evaluation of his health not you playing around with his diet all
the time. You were obviously able to control him to have his blood test,
you can surely control him to have sedation."

Talking about putting the cat out of its misery as a stand alone
statement. i.e. ignoring what immediately follows in the paragraph is
talking out of context.
Not a hard thing to understand.
"con·text/'käntekst/
Noun:The circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or
idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood and assessed.
**********The parts of something written or spoken that immediately
precede and follow a word or passage and clarify its meaning."*********


I think she just wants to be another dogpiler.




Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Flavors fuel food industry, but remain a mystery Travis McGee General Cooking 4 10-10-2014 05:22 PM
Whole Wheat and/or Bagels (I remain confused) Robert of St Louis Diabetic 7 30-05-2009 09:50 PM
Russell Stover's chocolates remain a mystery to most people, but MarkFrame, werwiniskp General Cooking 5 06-04-2009 01:25 AM
Proofs by LORD Almighty GOD: RFC's Pastorio died on April Fool's day and ragin' satan's sockpuppets remain worthless. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD[_21_] General Cooking 6 02-06-2007 12:49 AM
$1.29 Google Collapse - I am holding what your looking for and forever I shall remain [email protected] General Cooking 0 18-03-2007 11:05 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:31 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"

 

Copyright © 2017