- Don’t feed your kids crap, even before they’re old enough to tell you about it. That’s the lesson imparted by a new study suggesting that a toddler's diet may have some impact on his future cognitive abilities, with diets high in processed food at age 3 leading to lower IQ by age 8. In other words, start giving your kid nothing but canned, packaged foods when they’re young and Junior might just be a dunce before he gets out of grade school. Thank researchers from the University of Bristol for those findings because it was they who looked at data on 3,966 children born between 1991 and 1992, who were part of the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, and found that diet at an early age can have a massive impact on future cognitive skills. It was already known that the human brain develops rapidly in early life as infants turn into walking, talking, thinking little people. In the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) parents completed surveys on their kids' diets at ages 3, 4, 7 and 8.5, and the children's IQs were measured at age 8.5. Eating and drinking habits were recorded in excruciating detail, including details like the fat content of milk, whether breads were refined or whole grain and how much soda or coffee children consumed. Yes, you read that right. Coffee at age 8 or younger. Solid parenting there, I must say. Researchers placed children into one of three three diet categories based on those responses: a "processed" diet, high in fat, sugar and calories; a "traditional" diet of meat, potatoes, bread and vegetables; and a "health-conscious" diet of whole grains, fresh fruits and vegetables, rice, pasta and lean proteins like fish. What they found was that kids who ate fast-food-heavy diets at age 3 had a small drop in IQ at age 8.5, compared with kids eating healthy foods. Even after factoring in parental education level, maternal diet in pregnancy, socioeconomic status and stressful life events, the difference remained and for each unit increase in processed food diets, children lost 1.67 points in IQ. On the flip side, for each unit increase in healthy diets, children gained 1.2 IQ points. The message, obviously, is that parents now have one more reason not to make a drive-thru run on the way home from the store and shovel a burger and fries down their kids’ pie holes. Not only will it make the kids FAT, but it will also make them stupid and FAT and dumb is no way to go through life………..
- What’s the difference between David Beckham stopping to help a stranded family whose car broke down on the side of the road in England versus between David Beckham stopping to help a stranded family whose car broke down on the side of the road in the United States? Aside from it being on the opposite side of the road, the real difference is that in England, the family he stopped to help knew exactly who he was and it probably made their day. When photographer Paul Long and his two children found themselves in a broken-down car near a roundabout in the town of Ware during morning rush hour, the reaction of other motorists was predictable: no reaction at all. Just like in the U.S., people went on their way, too hurried to be bothered with any good Samaritan gestures. But when you make millions of dollars to play soccer and endorse products, every now and then you might have a bit of free time, especially during the offseason. So Beckham, who is training with Premier League club Tottenham until Feb. 22 and will soon return to the Los Angeles Galaxy for the MLS season, drove to the rescue. According to Long, the soccer star asked if they were OK, and Long said he asked for a push to the side of the road. Long later did an interview with BBC radio and recalled saying, "Thanks David, I love you" as the former England captain returned to his car. Hmm, I’m sure that wasn’t awkward at all. Of course, had this happened in the U.S. during rush hour, Beckham would probably have heard a very different word in front of “you” from other motorists for getting in their way and the person he helped would have thought he was just some hair-bleaching, SoCal beach bum with plenty of time on his hands. Having said that, props to Becks for doing something nice for a stranger after subjecting the world to years of soccer…………
- The free ride may soon be over, ladies of Massachusetts. Gravy-training off your ex-husband might be how you’ve gotten along the past few years(and the divorce statistics in the United States would suggest as much), but what has long been a life-long financial obligation for men could change drastically. A new legislative proposal could succeed where previous attempts to change Massachusetts' alimony laws have failed. The stars see to be aligning for a change and proposal advocate/alimony sufferer Steve Hitner believes the winds of change are a-blowin’. “You've had the nightmare of alimony for life with no chance of parole," he says. "The new bill takes away from it being an entitlement to a need.” If approved, the new law would end lifetime alimony in most cases by determining alimony payments based on the length of the marriage and ending alimony at retirement age. If you marry someone and it becomes the five worst years of your life, then you’re not stuck supporting them for the next 50 years. Better still, the new law would determine payments based on need, and if the person paying alimony remarries, it would exclude their new spouse's assets. That would avoid the potentially awkward arrangement of your new wife having to help support your former wife. The bill has a great chance of success, it would seem, because it has the support of the Womens' Bar Association. WBA member Rachel Biscardi helped craft the new bill and if she feels like her greatest concern, ensuring that women, who receive 96 percent of alimony payments, were treated fairly, has been met then I’d say the bill has cleared a major hurdle. "Fifty percent of all women take off some time to care for children, as opposed to 1 percent of men," Biscardi explains. Advocates of the bill believe the bill would alleviate alimony’s often-crippling effect on parties saddled with huge payments when they themselves are struggling financially in tough economic times. They also point out that the current law mandating alimony for life is an outdated law from a time gone by, a time when women were not treated as well and had much less chance to support themselves in the manner they had grown accustomed to as a married woman. Now? The times, they are a-changin’…………
- Celebrities need to find their niche, know their target demographic and stick with it, even pander to it. For Matthew McConaughey, it’s women ages….well, just about any age, as long as they like shirtless actors hanging out at the beach. For Chris Rock, it’s people who think that comedy centered entirely around the black, angry perspective on life is hilarious. And for Charlie Sheen, it’s men and women who find it endearing when a celebrity goes on regular coke benders with porn stars and derails production of his mildly successful/crappy sitcom with said benders. Believe it or not, Sheen has identified and appealed to his target demographic so well that despite his most recent coke/porn star bender, a recent survey done by polling firm Penn Schoen Berland shows that respondents actually like Sheen more now than they ever have. According to the poll of 700 Americans ages 13 to 59-years-old, 90 percent of those describing themselves as "avid fans" don't think Sheen's drug and alcohol problems matter as long as he shows up for work – which he isn't doing now. Furthermore, 26 percent of those questioned view Sheen "much more" or "somewhat more" favorably after his recent drama. Perhaps it’s the sympathy he’s drawing from his stint in home rehab or maybe being in rehab for the third time in 12 months, but even fans of "Two and A Half Men" aren’t seeking to vilify Sheen. Among all viewers, only 28 percent of men and 42 percent of women said CBS and Warner Bros. Television, which produces "Two and A Half Men,” should remove Sheen. More than half (56 percent) feel the show should work his real-life issues into a future episode (hard to do in the very restrictive half-hour comedy format and part of the reason sitcoms suck), 96 percent want Sheen to return to the show and 82 percent of women say they will still watch "Two and a Half Men" despite Sheen's personal problems compared to 76 percent of men. For a show that inexplicably draws some 15 million regular viewers, that’s a significant number. Whether those polled live up to their words after Sheen bounces back from the 36-hour coke/porn star orgy at his home, the show resumes production and episodes begin airing once again, remains to be seen……….
- What else would we expect from the tyrannical, fascist regime of Iranian dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? Of course this a-hole is going to threaten his people that any attempt to hold a rally in support of the popular uprisings in the Middle East is forbidden and will be met with force. "We definitely see them as enemies of the revolution and spies, and we will confront them with force," said Revolutionary Guard Cmdr. Hossein Hamedani. Of course you do, Cmdr. Hossein. The Revolutionary Guard, of course, is the, um, enforcing group for some of Iran’s most brutal and violent tactics for controlling its people. The threat against rallies came one week after Iran's two leading opposition figures, Mir Hossein Moussavi and Mehdi Karrubi, requested permission to hold a rally on February 14. Nothing says Valentine’s Day quite like a protest, something clearly lost on Ahmadinejad’s regime. Ironically enough, Iran’s hard-line leadership has done its best to co-opt the protests in Egypt, calling them an "Islamic awakening" and trying to take credit for inspiring them. In an ideal, non-dictatorial world, the request to protest would have been a no-brainer for approval. Moussavi and Karrubi penned a letter to Iran's interior minister, saying the demonstration was intended to show solidarity with the people of Egypt and Tunisia. "In order to declare support for the popular movements in the region, particularly with those of the freedom seeking movements of the people of Egypt and Tunisia against dictatorships, we request a permit to invite the people for a rally," said the letter, which was dated Saturday. It’s a nice letter and no one is naïve enough to believe that a protest in Iran can soar as high and create as much havoc as what has gone down in Egypt or Tunisia of late. But instead of approving the request, on Wednesday, Iran's top prosecutor mocked the call for the rally as a ploy by the opposition movement to undermine the regime. Gholam Hossein Mohseni-Ejei said if Iranians truly want to support the people of Egypt and Tunisia, they will attend the government-sanctioned rally on Friday to commemorate the 32nd anniversary of the Islamic Revolution. "Setting another date means these folks have separated themselves from the people and that is what causes splits and divisions. This is a political act, but the people of Iran are vigilant, and if it is necessary they will respond," said Mohseni-Ejei. Right, because the only way to make your voice heard is by agreeing with the government and doing it their way. Sounds like freedom and fairness to me……….
No comments:
Post a Comment