ChezGiven

Renton nails it. You cant argue with The Professionals.

selfish how ??? At the end of the day, ultimately, who do you think ends up compromising the most times on most things? By definition both people have to compromise? I know what you mean though. Aye, I know my use of language was sloppy there and my inner lawyer is hanging his head in shame. You still got my point though. and couldnt agree more.

selfish how ??? At the end of the day, ultimately, who do you think ends up compromising the most times on most things? By definition both people have to compromise? I know what you mean though.

Quite.

*saying nowt* I'm DESPERATE to argue with you about this but I'm not going to! You like Porn? Preferably lesbian oooh you've started it now .... see...Jimbos got his screenwipes out already Thought they were for me.

*saying nowt* I'm DESPERATE to argue with you about this but I'm not going to! You like Porn?

The call anything they want AIDS these days. As a diesease it is FINISHED IN EUROPE look at the stats... http://www.avert.org/eurosum.htm This part is still unproven Chex and you of all people should know that. HIV infections has so many contradictions. Clinical trials show what? That Azt kills t-cells faster than aids??!! What is one of the definitions for aids and I challenge you not to laugh? pneumonia = pneumonia pmeumonia + hiv presence = aids Bollocks. If HIV is present and the pneumonia is picked up by a patient who you wouldnt normally expect to get it, then that is probably a clinical symptom associated with immune deficiency. Its the start of the syndrome tbh. Causality Parky, its the cornerstone of medical research. So how does one account for the thousands with HIV presence and no illness of any kind ever? Causality my dear.....Poppycock. Getting back to your earlier point. Flooding a person with retro-virals which as you know are generally broad band in their targetting (not protein inhibitors) will stop all the viruses in their tracks not just HIV. The downside is you can't keep it up for more than a few years due to the side effects. The dissentors aren't arguing that AIDS is brought on by a virus of some kind, they are questioning whether it is the HIV virus. You see the differance. IMO the widespread over use of anti-biotics in the West is part of the picture. They are well know the fuck up the immune system as most people are well aware. Because 'protease' inhibitors (and the rest) suppress viral load so your immune system continues to work. The reason why you cant keep giving people the same drug is because the virus mutates and finds ways to replicate that the inhibition strategy cant stop. There is a section in 'Almost like a Whale' that describes the number of genetic mutations that the virus has gone through in 30 years is in fact more than the human genome has 'ever' gone through.

The call anything they want AIDS these days. As a diesease it is FINISHED IN EUROPE look at the stats... http://www.avert.org/eurosum.htm This part is still unproven Chex and you of all people should know that. HIV infections has so many contradictions. Clinical trials show what? That Azt kills t-cells faster than aids??!! What is one of the definitions for aids and I challenge you not to laugh? pneumonia = pneumonia pmeumonia + hiv presence = aids Bollocks. If HIV is present and the pneumonia is picked up by a patient who you wouldnt normally expect to get it, then that is probably a clinical symptom associated with immune deficiency. Its the start of the syndrome tbh. Causality Parky, its the cornerstone of medical research.

Utter cobblers Parky. This duesberg bloke might be good with a microscope but he doesnt understand evidence based medicine. If clinical trials show survival benefits from drugs designed to stop the virus spreading then thats good enough for me to end the debate. AIDS is just a failure of the immune system brought on a by a retrovirus. Its not really a seperate thing, the mark of the disease is defined by observable clinical symptoms which in turn is associated with higher viral loads. As Renton said

No there isnt.

London or Amsterdam for me.

Does he play no. 9? If he does he looked good last night.

I watched that shambles tonight too and yet again Duff was utter cack. How lucky though? 94.40 on the clock when they got that winner. I've seen blind peole with a better eye for goal. That team had no plan it seemed, Staunton must've just told them to just show up and we'll win. Everything about the FAI stinks, from the top right down to the current manager. BBC called him a 'livewire' Not sure Staunton is up to the job, certainly no more clue how to get the best out of Duff than Roeder.

Take away pizza in a box The clue was in Wacky's post like.

Scousers laptop

I watched that shambles tonight too and yet again Duff was utter cack. How lucky though? 94.40 on the clock when they got that winner.

Schwarz und Weiss by the 1954 world cup winning side is a highlight of the first page. Released in 1973 too, the year i was born.

As a regular reader of Brooker i find him a readable but contrary twat. He is right about Games on PC's but only children play games. I find the 'define yourself through technology' line retarded since billions of drivers all over the world either do that or would love to do that every day. He talks shit for the most part. I recently went back to PC too.

Looking like a pumpkin? Yep and feeling like a plum too.

Thats why its quite hard for us to write good CVs at this stage because we've just not had the life experience older people have had. I had an Assesment Centre thing the other week for a grad job and strangely I was the only person there still at Uni (spotted the talent tbh), everyone else was about 25 and had so much more to say about themselves simply because they'd had more time to build up experience etc. You look better as everyone knows the other s have been fucking about trying not to work. Use that to your advantage 'I just cant wait to start...' etc.

I was rushing to be home by midnight and lost a shoe once. Woke up in Patrokles flower thread.

I think that's pretty spot on, and even though stuff is more coursework-based than it used to be, it still just about passing. Re: your second chapter, I really don't know what I'm going to do if / when me and wor lass have kids for their schooling. Just send them to a good school. Hadn't thought of that, cheers I'm considering just owning dogs instead anyway. Less hassle. But where are you going to take them for obedience training? Most of the time nowadays, it's just about teaching the dogs to sit down, rather than teaching them why they should be sitting. I'll teach them myself. Or go on Dog Borstal. You need to send the dog not gan yerself.

If you don't look up googled quotes you're a moron tbh, 9 times out of 10 they are picked paragraphs that don't mean what people are implying they mean when read in context with the full text. And not surprisingly this was one of the NINE times out of 10 where that WAS the case. I resent that It referred to the exact meaning of the phrase. People who use it to mean sore loser do exist but they are not using the phrase correctly as backed up by wikipedia and yourself.

Meh I see people spell crack "craic" on here all the time which is a completely made up spelling of a pre-existing borrowed word which has recently been reborrowed. If you're that worried about it write to your MP, but I'm fairly sure what I mean by sour grapes would stand up in a grammar nazi court of law under fair use. (and indeed is very evident in this thread) That sounds like sour grapes to me.

No, but others seem to be obsessed by it. Not alex tbf. Mainly Gemmill, MancMag plus loads of randoms who've never met me! alex wouldnt have a leg to stand on anyway