Recent Comments

1. over 3 years ago on Frazz

   Worse than what? Cane sugar? Cane sugar is 50% glucose and 50% fructose bound together into a sucrose molecule. HFCS-55 is the most commonly used food additive, and it is 55% fructose and about 42% glucose. In HFCS, the two molecules (monosaccharides) are not combined into sucrose. There really is no difference. Indeed, your body converts the glucose molecule into a fructose molecule as part of the breakdown and metabolism of (either) cane or corn sugar. There is no inherent badness in either sugar. What is bad is the amount that is used in processed foods.

2. almost 5 years ago on PreTeena

   Tapeworm

3. over 5 years ago on PreTeena

   The original strips ran from April 23, 2001, through May 18, 2008

4. almost 6 years ago on Luann

   Great point, but I was just trying to be sure that noone felt that it DID reflect the way faculty ignore this kind of thing in our classes. Some do, but most no – and I am loving this arc just for the reason you say.

5. almost 6 years ago on Luann

   The behavior displayed by Luann and Jack gets students ejected from my classroom. A laser pointer is a great way to get their attention seconds before they are asked to leave. It only happens once in a semester. After that – there are no more problems.

6. over 6 years ago on Frazz

   Yeah. Things in the states DON’T work like that. My (State) university gets less than 10%of its operating budget from tax dollars. We live on donations just to keep the doors open, much less do anything actually creative. Most of us here now consider ourselves to be working at a State-located university.

7. over 6 years ago on Frazz

   Yeah. Things in the states DON’T work like that. My (State) university gets less than 10%of its operating budget from tax dollars. We live on donations just to keep the doors open, much less do anything actually creative. Most of us here now consider ourselves to be working at a State-located university.

8. almost 12 years ago on Luann

   In the CDC article which I mentioned at some length yesterday, there is a map of the US showing the decline in teen pregnancies in each state. The states with the smallest declines – and one must therefore assume the least successful programs – were the bible-belt states. One also presumes that those states would be the ones leading in the proportion of abstinence-based education programs. The statistics imply strongly that those programs are the least effective in reducing teen pregnancy. Obviously, abstinence is a fool proof way to prevent pregnancy, but only if one practices it. In areas where abstinence is pushed as the ONLY way, the use of contraceptives is obviously lower; ergo, given the hormone levels in 13-19 year olds, their sexual activity is the highest risk. The numbers bear me out. Once again, the link to the CDC report is: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db89.pdf (at the time of this writing, the CDC server seems to be down.)

9. almost 12 years ago on Luann

   Always happy to illuminate! The CDC report is actually VERY interesting. I encourage folks to have a look. It debunks both Fox News and MSNBC with respect to this important topic.

10. almost 12 years ago on [Deleted]

    @VegasgirlThe highest teen pregnancy rates in the record occurred between 1960 and 1980, in the exact period of which you speak. You may have developed a perception based on personal observation of a local situation. That’s something we all do, and that’s why it is important to gather national statistics and share them. In fact that period that you seem to think was much less of a problem (maybe it was in your immediate surroundings) was the worst time of all. The programs that have been put in place to reduce teen pregnancy are working. I have no stats at hand to say one way or the other whether there is a difference between standard sex education and abstinence based programs, but given the preponderance of the former, it is clear that they are having an effect.