Jump to content

official off topic thread.


pumpkin cutter
 Share

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

Our neighborhood did not get cable until late in the process, and my parents didn't sign up until a couple years after that. I believe it was somewhere around 1988 or 1989. 

I still knew #1 on the list. 

My family first got cable I would say around 1989-90ish.  Back then the local provider was TKR (was bought by Cablevision in the 95-97 timeframe) and the "basic" cable package was about 38 channels.  That was huge compared to the 8-10 channels we got via antenna (I remember when my dad took down the antenna from our roof right when we got cable).  Naturally I had a friend in school whose family got satellite TV around that time which back then meant that they had to install a TV satellite in their backyard that was a solid 5-7 feet in diameter.  They got about 200ish channels which completely blew me away.  I thought that with that many channels there would always be something on and no need to leave the house lol.

A couple years back my brother and I were telling my nephew (he was about 12 at the time) about how before PPV on TV, in order to watch live events like Wrestlemania you had to go to a place that was showing it via closed circuit TV.  I remember going to one and that was at the very tail end of when that was popular and my nephew was blown away by the fact that you actually had to literally find a place that had it, travel to it, pay to get in and watch with other people a live event on PPV (one local theater had it IIRC).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to get a legitimate golf fitting this week. Place is called TrueSpec Golf. Has anyone done something like this before? Not just a Dick's / Golf Superstore type of a fitting, but a total brand agnostic, track-man based full bag fitting.

I'm stoked,

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MB3 said:

I'm going to get a legitimate golf fitting this week. Place is called TrueSpec Golf. Has anyone done something like this before? Not just a Dick's / Golf Superstore type of a fitting, but a total brand agnostic, track-man based full bag fitting.

I'm stoked,

How much is that going to run you?

I recently changed my grip because everything I've been hitting is drawing hard and I feel like an absolute buffoon trying to swing the club now.  Not even like, this feels weird, just do it 30 times, but I just can't swing it anymore.  I'm too in tune with the feeling of where the club face is during my "comfortable" swing. I feel like I've completely lost everything about my swing this season.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, RunninWithTheDevil said:

Been there done that, but that was way back during my weird experimental phase

Hehehe full bag. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Crisis said:

How much is that going to run you?

I recently changed my grip because everything I've been hitting is drawing hard and I feel like an absolute buffoon trying to swing the club now.  Not even like, this feels weird, just do it 30 times, but I just can't swing it anymore.  I'm too in tune with the feeling of where the club face is during my "comfortable" swing. I feel like I've completely lost everything about my swing this season.

It’s expensive. $350. But they give you all the information when you’re done, so you can buy the clubs independently if you’d prefer to do that. 

They told me to expect a 4-5 hour session. An hour-ish at the beginning hitting your current bag, establishing baselines for everything you already own. Distance, club head speed, spin rate, angle of attack, launch angle, etc etc etc. They start with irons and change heads until they find the best numbers based on my swing speed. Then they move to shafts. Then shaft length. Then lie angle of the face. And then the same process for drivers, woods, and wedges. They said that there’s close to 10,000 combinations, or something nuts like that lol. 

Definitely not a thing to do until you feel like your swing is dialed in. I’ve been taking lessons this year and my game has never, ever been better. I know that feeling of the yips when you’re standing over a ball thinking “ah jeez this is gonna suck.” The worst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MB3 said:

It’s expensive. $350.
 

An hour-ish at the beginning hitting your current bag. 

Sounds like a kinky dominatrix filled Friday night. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MB3 said:

I'm going to get a legitimate golf fitting this week. Place is called TrueSpec Golf. Has anyone done something like this before? Not just a Dick's / Golf Superstore type of a fitting, but a total brand agnostic, track-man based full bag fitting.

I'm stoked,

Yeah there used to be a golf shop right up the road from me here called Jeff’s Golf Shop. The last time I bought a full set of irons about 10 years ago, I got fitted there. It’s the best way to go when buying clubs for sure. Posted my bag below with my trusty Callaway Diablo irons and wedges.  

B59C4F83-66F1-443C-8729-695321C25F52.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, DevsMan84 said:

#5 was the first song where I had no clue as to what it was.  It was my first time hearing it and it seemed to be one of those novelty songs like Fish Heads.

The VJ's on the show repeatedly said early on they had the issue with actually finding enough videos to play.  That's why a lot of garbage got played in the first 1-3 years on MTV until the labels could catch up to producing them.  A lot of the early videos were glorified "live" performances that were recorded that were used to air at random times as filler on TV to promote bands pre-MTV.

Yeah I remember the early days very well…you saw a lot of the same videos if you watched more than a couple of hours…there just wasn’t many of them in the beginning.  There were some “instrumental” filler videos with what felt like random images, with the MTV logo in the corner, just to help fill the time.  There were some artists who really detested making videos…Joe Jackson (“Steppin’ Out”) was one of them, and he later admitted that he wished he’d embraced the medium much more than he was willing to at the time.

Stevie Nicks’ first video for “Stand Back” actually tried to tell a story, set in the Old West (edit…in the South, Civil War era)…she scrapped it, more or less saying “I’m not a friggin’ actress, I’m a singer!”  She then happily went with a simple performance video, full of a bunch of 80s dancers.  But that’s what some musicians didn’t like about making videos…once the concepts evolved beyond simple lip-syncing and pretend-playing, and became more like mini-movies with acting and even occasional dialogue, some bands were far less comfortable being in front of the cameras.  

The video shoot for #2 on the list ("You Better Run" by Pat Benatar) was rather contentious...another issue was that some bands had not yet become accustomed to "performing under direction while being shot on camera"...a much different experience than jamming out, or playing out in clubs, stadiums, and arenas.  Benatar and the band was used to performing in their own style, while the director was telling her "No, do this, now do that..."  Finally she decided "Well, I'm pissed off anyway now, so I'll play it pissed."  And being that it's an angrier song to begin with, it wound up working.  But some bands who were used to performing "their way" (in some cases for several years) in front of fans quickly found video shoots (where most of the time they were only pretending to perform anyway, and depending on the director were not truly allowed to be themselves) very tedious...especially since of course, each video shoot requires shooting the song again and again and again, for close-ups, different camera angles, etc.  Some bands even took a "All right, if we're gonna do this, let's just shoot 2-3 songs using the same set, on the same day" approach, just to get it over with.

Some artists had absolute nightmare experiences with videos...one of the best-known disasters is Billy Squier's "Rock Me Tonite".  Squire had a look and vibe that was considered pretty cool at the time...had the whole T-shirt and jeans, tough-guy thing going.  "Rock Me Tonite" saw him prancing around in very cheesy 80s attire (made even worse by the fact that Squier wasn't exactly known for finger-snappin dance skills), and some of his fans found the whole concept way too homoerotic for their tastes, and the fallout was swift and immediate...he was on tour at the time, and suddenly his shows were only selling about half the available seats.  He fired both of his managers, and has long held a grudge against the individual who directed the video (Kenny Ortega).  Squier's career never fully recovered...of course, some have wondered aloud why he didn't just kill the video before it could be released, and one of Squier's managers (before being sacked later) apparently tried to do just that, but it was Squier's label (Capitol) that had final say, and they simply refused.  No winners in that one.   

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Satans Hockey said:

I think it's only a matter of time now before the rest or the NJ arenas/stadiums will end up doing the same... 

 

I really don’t know how this wasn’t common sense. Every aspect of this virus has been initially mishandled.

The numbers go down because everyone was wearing masks and some people got vaccinated.

How is the response to that “no more masks, but only if you are vaccinated, but nobody will ever ask you if you are or not, so really just do whatever the fvck you want and hope for the best” ? That was the official policy of New York and a bunch of other places. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

I really don’t know how this wasn’t common sense. Every aspect of this virus has been initially mishandled.

The numbers go down because everyone was wearing masks and some people got vaccinated.

How is the response to that “no more masks, but only if you are vaccinated, but nobody will ever ask you if you are or not, so really just do whatever the fvck you want and hope for the best” ? That was the official policy of New York and a bunch of other places. 

Winnipeg Jets are requiring it, sometimes I don't know where to post this stuff so this thread seems more suited for it cause it's more of a world topic than related to hockey... 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

Yeah I remember the early days very well…you saw a lot of the same videos if you watched more than a couple of hours…there just wasn’t many of them in the beginning.  There were some “instrumental” filler videos with what felt like random images, with the MTV logo in the corner, just to help fill the time.  There were some artists who really detested making videos…Joe Jackson (“Steppin’ Out”) was one of them, and he later admitted that he wished he’d embraced the medium much more than he was willing to at the time.

Stevie Nicks’ first video for “Stand Back” actually tried to tell a story, set in the Old West (edit…in the South, Civil War era)…she scrapped it, more or less saying “I’m not a friggin’ actress, I’m a singer!”  She then happily went with a simple performance video, full of a bunch of 80s dancers.  But that’s what some musicians didn’t like about making videos…once the concepts evolved beyond simple lip-syncing and pretend-playing, and became more like mini-movies with acting and even occasional dialogue, some bands were far less comfortable being in front of the cameras.  

The video shoot for #2 on the list ("You Better Run" by Pat Benatar) was rather contentious...another issue was that some bands had to become accustomed to "performing under direction while being shot on camera"...a much different experience than jamming out, or playing out in clubs, stadiums, and arenas.  Benatar and the band was used to performing in their own style, while the director was telling her "No, do this, now do that..."  Finally she decided "Well, I'm pissed off anyway now, so I'll play it pissed."  And being that it's an angrier song to begin with, it wound up working.  But some bands who were used to performing "their way" (in some cases for several years) in front of fans quickly found video shoots (where most of the time they were only pretending to perform anyway, and depending on the director were not truly allowed to be themselves) very tedious...especially since of course, each video shoot requires shooting the song again and again and again, for close-ups, different camera angles, etc.  Some bands even took a "All right, if we're gonna do this, let's just shoot 2-3 songs using the same set, on the same day" approach, just to get it over with.

Some artists had absolute nightmare experiences with videos...one of the best-known disasters is Billy Squier's "Rock Me Tonite".  Squire had a look and vibe that was considered pretty cool at the time...had the whole T-shirt and jeans, tough-guy thing going.  "Rock Me Tonite" saw him prancing around in very cheesy 80s attire (made even worse by the fact that Squier wasn't exactly known for finger-snappin dance skills), and some of his fans found the whole concept way too homoerotic for their tastes, and the fallout was swift and immediate...he was on tour at the time, and suddenly his shows were only selling about half the available seats.  He fired both of his managers, and has long held a grudge against the individual who directed the video (Kenny Ortega).  Squier's career never fully recovered...of course, some have wondered aloud why he didn't just kill the video before it could be released, and one of Squier's managers (before being sacked later) apparently tried to do just that, but it was Squier's label (Capitol) that had final say, and they simply refused.  No winners in that one.   

It also revolutionized the music industry where now rock singers had to look a certain way.  For example, Christopher Cross has said many times over the years that the minute MTV launched he knew his career was over.  He said the worst thing that could have happened to him was to find that the voice behind his music belonged to a guy who looked like him.  Unfortunately, he was right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DevsMan84 said:

It also revolutionized the music industry where now rock singers had to look a certain way.  For example, Christopher Cross has said many times over the years that the minute MTV launched he knew his career was over.  He said the worst thing that could have happened to him was to find that the voice behind his music belonged to a guy who looked like him.  Unfortunately, he was right.

Yeah I was going to mention that too (I was thinking of him specifically in fact)...suddenly (for the most part) you had to have looks and some kind of fashion sense to go along with your talent, because now everyone could see you...and as we well know, sometimes the "talent" (or obvious lack thereof) took a clear backseat to actual singing ability.

Martha Wash might be one of the best singers that not nearly enough people have heard of...mostly because of her looks (she's a big gal and not, well, "hot")...her first hit "It's Raining Men" came as one of the Weather Girls.  If you've ever heard Rebbie Jackson's "Centipede" (from the 80s, written for her by her brother Michael, who also provided some backup vocals), the woman hitting the big notes at the end is Wash.  Black Box's "Everybody Everybody" and "Strike It Up" (among others) are also sung by her...but in using some Milli Vanilli chicanery, Black Box's label hired French model Katrin Quinol for album covers, music videos, and to lip-sync during concerts...fans were clearly being led to believe that Quinol was the one actually singing Black Box songs.  The same thing happened when she provided the "Everybody Dance Now!" vocals for C+C Music Factory...Zelma Davis was brought in to fake it for the cameras, and make the "band" easier on the eyes.

I admit it, I hate that sh!t...I can't say I'm some huge fan of that style of music, but the woman can friggin' belt it out, and has tons of ability...is it really so bad for people to see who's actually doing the heavy lifting?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, RunninWithTheDevil said:

I know it gets a lot of sh!t, but Back to the Future Pt. 3 is an awesome movie

It doesn't hold a candle to the first one (the second one doesn't either, to be fair).  The third one is kind of a...decent western I guess?  The funny thing is Hill Valley didn't feel remotely like a desert area in the first two movies, which made BTTF3 feel a little forced.  And the whole Clara - Doc romance was played a bit too goofy...also seemed odd that Clara would go for someone SO much older...sure, she was a bit awkward to begin with, but still.

I love the first one and like the others for what they are, but all three films become very easy to pick apart (the sequels are part of the problem).  How is it that no one from the 50s ever recognizes Marty in later years (especially since he didn't exactly go unnoticed in 1955)?  Wouldn't his parents at some point say "Man, our kid sure looks a lot like that guy who was in high school with us for about a week...even sounds just like him!"  Biff also had his run-ins with him...wouldn't HE remember him too?

When Marty goes back to the "New Improved" version of 1985 (BTTF1), would his now much-more-successful parents still live in the same exact house in Lyon Estates?  The beginning of the movie makes Lyons Estates look kinda lower middle class...if his parents' life is on a better trajectory, in terms of finances, wouldn't they be living in a fancier neighborhood?  And of course, what are they chances that they have the exact same children at the same times?  I know these movies aren't meant to be looked into too too deeply (and time travel movies are always filled with paradoxes), but that's why BTTF1 might have been better off without any sequels.

And of course, the ultimate contradiction, right at the end of BTTF1...multiple times Doc warns Marty about knowing too much about his own future...so what does he do?  Come back to 1985 from 2015, where he immediately tells Marty that he's going to be married to his current girlfriend and that they'll have kids sometime in the future.  That's a hell of a lot to know about your own future I'd say, especially for a couple of high schoolers, heh heh.    

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

It doesn't hold a candle to the first one (the second one doesn't either, to be fair).  The third one is kind of a...decent western I guess?  The funny thing is Hill Valley didn't feel remotely like a desert area in the first two movies, which made BTTF3 feel a little forced.  And the whole Clara - Doc romance was played a bit too goofy...also seemed odd that Clara would go for someone SO much older...sure, she was a bit awkward to begin with, but still.

I love the first one and like the others for what they are, but all three films become very easy to pick apart (the sequels are part of the problem).  How is it that no one from the 50s ever recognizes Marty in later years (especially since he didn't exactly go unnoticed in 1955)?  Wouldn't his parents at some point say "Man, our kid sure looks a lot like that guy who was in high school with us for about a week...even sounds just like him!"  Biff also had his run-ins with him...wouldn't HE remember him too?

When Marty goes back to the "New Improved" version of 1985 (BTTF1), would his now much-more-successful parents still live in the same exact house in Lyon Estates?  The beginning of the movie makes Lyons Estates look kinda lower middle class...if his parents' life is on a better trajectory, in terms of finances, wouldn't they be living in a fancier neighborhood?  And of course, what are they chances that they have the exact same children at the same times?  I know these movies aren't meant to be looked into too too deeply (and time travel movies are always filled with paradoxes), but that's why BTTF1 might have been better off without any sequels.

And of course, the ultimate contradiction, right at the end of BTTF1...multiple times Doc warns Marty about knowing too much about his own future...so what does he do?  Come back to 1985 from 2015, where he immediately tells Marty that he's going to be married to his current girlfriend and that they'll have kids sometime in the future.  That's a hell of a lot to know about your own future I'd say, especially for a couple of high schoolers, heh heh.    

I like that the fact that a weirdo scientist built a time machine into a DeLorean after hitting his head on the sink is a perfectly acceptable notion to you, but you have all of these other issues with likelihood and continuity. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

I like that the fact that a weirdo scientist built a time machine into a DeLorean after hitting his head on the sink is a perfectly acceptable notion to you, but you have all of these other issues with likelihood and continuity. 

Not even gonna try to defend myself on this one.  Cause it's kinda impossible.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

Not even gonna try to defend myself on this one.  Cause it's kinda impossible.  

It’s fine, I can’t get past the first 10 minutes of Home Alone without questioning why they ordered 10 pizzas for 15 people the night before leaving for Paris. A pizza has 8 slices , that means 5.33 slices for each person, including the youngest of the children. 

I can eat, and I top out at 3, maybe 4 if they were cut small. More likely, it’s 2 or 3, especially if I am flying to Paris the following morning, I’m not going to overeat and make myself sick. 
 

None of the girl children nor the adult women are eating 5 slices of pizza. Kevin is 8 and only eats plain cheese pizza, he isn’t eating more than 3, more likely 2. Same for Fuller. 

Even if the dad, Uncle Frank, and the two oldest boys ate 5 slices each, which is incredibly unlikely, there still would have been a sh!t ton of pizza left over, and they were leaving in the morning. 

Any reasonable family would not have spent $122.50 plus tip on 10 pizzas the night before going to Paris. They could have ordered 6 pies and been done, and they still would have been throwing some away. 

But yeah, an 8 year old can totally defend his house from a couple of seasoned criminals by setting booby traps. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

It’s fine, I can’t get past the first 10 minutes of Home Alone without questioning why they ordered 10 pizzas for 15 people the night before leaving for Paris. A pizza has 8 slices , that means 5.33 slices for each person, including the youngest of the children. 

I can eat, and I top out at 3, maybe 4 if they were cut small. More likely, it’s 2 or 3, especially if I am flying to Paris the following morning, I’m not going to overeat and make myself sick. 
 

None of the girl children nor the adult women are eating 5 slices of pizza. Kevin is 8 and only eats plain cheese pizza, he isn’t eating more than 3, more likely 2. Same for Fuller. 

Even if the dad, Uncle Frank, and the two oldest boys ate 5 slices each, which is incredibly unlikely, there still would have been a sh!t ton of pizza left over, and they were leaving in the morning. 

Any reasonable family would not have spent $122.50 plus tip on 10 pizzas the night before going to Paris. They could have ordered 6 pies and been done, and they still would have been throwing some away. 

But yeah, an 8 year old can totally defend his house from a couple of seasoned criminals by setting booby traps. 

Even though I'm a Type 2 diabetic, I will still put down pizza like I'm on death row, on the occasions there's enough of it around...I'm usually good for 6+ slices...if the pizza's thin enough (I prefer as thin as possible), I'll kill a whole 16" pie, no problem.  I make sure to get in a nice long walk after eating it...and of course, no additional carbs (only diet or "zero"-type drinks for me, but most of the time I'll just have water).

Funny, I never thought about that whole thing before, re:  Home Alone...yeah that's friggin' beyond pizza overkill, heh heh.  You figure that crowd would've topped out at about 50 slices, absolute tops (3.33 per person).  You are right, 6 pies (48 slices) would've likely been just enough.  You can make the argument that the family was clearly so well-to-do that when they were discussing what to order, someone probably just said "Ah the hell with it, let's just order 10 pies!" without thinking it through, or being worried about saving some cash.

And yeah, funny that it's not the main premise we'll pick apart, but the "mini-premises" within that get our attention.          

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

Even though I'm a Type 2 diabetic, I will still put down pizza like I'm on death row, on the occasions there's enough of it around...I'm usually good for 6+ slices...if the pizza's thin enough (I prefer as thin as possible), I'll kill a whole 16" pie, no problem.  I make sure to get in a nice long walk after eating it...and of course, no additional carbs (only diet or "zero"-type drinks for me, but most of the time I'll just have water).

Funny, I never thought about that whole thing before, re:  Home Alone...yeah that's friggin' beyond pizza overkill, heh heh.  You figure that crowd would've topped out at about 50 slices, absolute tops (3.33 per person).  You are right, 6 pies (48 slices) would've likely been just enough.  You can make the argument that the family was clearly so well-to-do that when they were discussing what to order, someone probably just said "Ah the hell with it, let's just order 10 pies!" without thinking it through, or being worried about saving some cash.

I'm not saying I CAN'T eat 6 slices, but I just don't. And certainly, not every man, woman and child in that house was going to do that right before going to bed to go to Paris the next day!!!

9 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

And yeah, funny that it's not the main premise we'll pick apart, but the "mini-premises" within that get our attention.          

Yup. 8 year old installed a zipline using a rope and bike handlebars sufficient not only to hold his weight, but that of two grown adults. No issues with that. But that's too much fvcking pizza. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

I'm not saying I CAN'T eat 6 slices, but I just don't. And certainly, not every man, woman and child in that house was going to do that right before going to bed to go to Paris the next day!!!

Yup. 8 year old installed a zipline using a rope and bike handlebars sufficient not only to hold his weight, but that of two grown adults. No issues with that. But that's too much fvcking pizza. 

On a side note, on the top of my "food weakness" pyramid stands a house of pizza.  I can't ever say no to it.  And for some reason, more than any other food, I can't just eat it slowly and intelligently...I have to eat as much of it as possible in the shortest amount of time...like someone is going to take it away from me within 10 minutes.  Every now and then (say once or twice a month) we have pizza here at work...there's a killer pizza place called Pizza and Pasta a few miles from here that makes awesome thin-crust pizza...my go-to is plain, with pesto added.  The pies are 14", so their "large" is more like a medium...but I'm usually good for 12-15 slices (8 slices to a pie...I call 'em "three-bite-slices").  And I'm not gonna lie...for the rest of the afternoon, I feel like complete and total ass.  I offset some of that by first walking to the restaurant (and then meeting up with whoever from my building is picking up the pizza), and then speed-walking a few more miles right after...I basically eat all of the pizza that I'm going to eat within 15 minutes.  Then after work, another 3-4 miles.  That's the only way I can eat that much and not wake up in the middle of the night having to pee every 20-40 minutes due to blood sugar spiking.  My A1C has been at prediabetes levels for the last 5 years or so, so I CAN get way with this every so often, but it definitely comes with a price.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

On a side note, on the top of my "food weakness" pyramid stands a house of pizza.  I can't ever say no to it.  And for some reason, more than any other food, I can't just eat it slowly and intelligently...I have to eat as much of it as possible in the shortest amount of time...like someone is going to take it away from me within 10 minutes.  Every now and then (say once or twice a month) we have pizza here at work...there's a killer pizza place called Pizza and Pasta a few miles from here that makes awesome thin-crust pizza...my go-to is plain, with pesto added.  The pies are 14", so their "large" is more like a medium...but I'm usually good for 12-15 slices (8 slices to a pie...I call 'em "three-bite-slices").  And I'm not gonna lie...for the rest of the afternoon, I feel like complete and total ass.  I offset some of that by first walking to the restaurant (and then meeting up with whoever from my building is picking up the pizza), and then speed-walking a few more miles right after...I basically eat all of the pizza that I'm going to eat within 15 minutes.  Then after work, another 3-4 miles.  That's the only way I can eat that much and not wake up in the middle of the night having to pee every 20-40 minutes due to blood sugar spiking.  My A1C has been at prediabetes levels for the last 5 years or so, so I CAN get way with this every so often, but it definitely comes with a price.  

I definitely understand where you are coming from, 100%. Just this thread is enough that I will have to eat pizza sometime this weekend, and by sometime, I probably mean on the way home from work before my daughter's latest show (Shrek the Musical). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.