TaN: In a web article downloaded from NaturalNews.com titled “Broccoli-Sprouts-discovered-to-be-a-secret-weapon-against-diabetes” — http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-06-26-broccoli-sprouts-discovered-to-be-a-secret-weapon-against-diabetes.html — by a certain Tim Wesley and post dated June 26, 2017, an ever-clearer and obvious picture is increasingly emerging to showcase the different (plant) foods that are beneficial and very effective against lifestyle diseases — in this particularly instance, against diabetes mellitus.
Reading these reports and news items reveals that there is a pattern and it is the consumption of green leafy vegetables (and certain fruits, such as bittermelons and zucchinis; Note: Certain fruits are considered as vegetables because they have very low glycemic indices but they are nevertheless technically still fruits as they come from flowers).
In the particular case of diabetes, it is becoming obvious that the most effective are those that are extremely green (and their skins or outer covering can be eaten) and, most of all, in the cruciferous family. This is because of the high fiber content.
It is widely known, at least among natural food medicine enthusiasts and advocates, that fiber soaks up excess blood sugar. It is precisely that fibrous fruits and vegetables, especially leafy greens and those in the cruciferous family, with all the SOLUBLE fiber — because there are two types: soluble and insoluble — that is responsible for mopping or sopping up excess serum blood sugar that mitigates the risks of diabetes mellitus. [Btw, insoluble fiber is equally valuable and has a different function or role in our overall health.]
Moreover, sprouts are the young shoots or beginnings and they usually are “well-equipped”. They have to be, because they are just starting out and there may not be enough nutrients and essential compounds in the soil to provide for the initial growth spurt so the parent plant “packs” enough supplies to ensure survival until the young plant can grow enough of a root network to gather from the immediate surroundings what it needs to sustain the life and growth.
This is the same with animals that do not bear live young (but in eggs laid externally or in vitro) — with their egg yolks. Their young must have some kind of guaranteed provisional supply of food to sustain it in its first days of life while it searches for surrounding nutrients to augment its stock.
Given this, it is not surprising that crucifers like broccoli, whether sprouts or mature plants, have beneficial effects on the health, plus there are several other healthful benefits aside from against diabetes mellitus.
TaN: Especially today, any good deed is not necessary a good deed. I think (and posit) that it is for this very reason that the Ten Commandments (which is quantitative in nature) was scrapped by Jesus Christ when He changed it (for qualitative ones) — as it is written in the Holy Scriptures (in Hebrews 7:12,15-16): (12) “For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law” and (15-16) “And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest, Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.” — KJV.
Just as house rules pertaining to house members change over time — i.e., a different set for toddlers, for young kids, for teens, for young adults, and for the elders (like curfew and bedtime and duties and responsibilities — so did the commandments handed down to man change from the time of Moses to the time of Jesus.
In Moses’ time, life was simpler and people were more honest and obedient. However, as civilization evolved and Satan’s curse grew, people have become more and more cunning in their ways (especially when it comes to circumventing the law and common decency). It has become therefore necessary that people be more vigilant and critically analytical in their thinking to see through the multiple tiers of deception and glean the true intentions behind the acts of man.
The end all of certain tainted good deeds is debt of gratitude — or at least the common individual’s mis-understanding or misconception of the true application of the virtue of debt of gratitude.
Debt of gratitude is only valid or true under certain strict conditions:
(1) that the favor or good deed was done voluntarily and without the beneficiary asking and may even be without his/her (fore)knowledge;
(2) that the benefactor does not keep count nor has any intention of reciprocity of favor/s rendered;
(3) that the beneficiary voluntarily acknowledges the good deed and likewise neither keeps count of the frequency of favors and good deeds exchanged;
(4) that the good deed is really a good deed and not tainted, not part of a conspiracy or wrongful act (i.e., an act that results in something bad or detrimental to others or is illegal or unethical like trying to instill a sense of debt of gratitude on another); and,
(5) that the good deed is the end in itself, it is its own reward, it does not seek any reciprocity of any shape, form, or kind.
It used to be that, in ancient (or Biblical) times, people are honest, trusting, and cooperative. They knew it was for their mutual protection and benefit. Good deeds then were really good and without malice, no strings attached, nothing to suggest that there may be ulterior motives if someone voluntarily and good-heartedly performs a favor for another.
TaN: When a business decides to sell to or is taken over by — as in ownership of stocks shares has been transferred to — another entity, business or otherwise, personal data of employees should never be part of the transfer of ownership (unless the particular employee has explicitly granted permission). Personal information was given to the former or original employer and therefore should remain with them/it.
It is my understanding that, at the onset of employment where personal information (like marital status, address, photograph, fingerprints, etc) is being gathered by the employer via personnel/manpower/human resources, there is nothing, no stipulation, in the agreement (between employer and applicant) that personal information may be shared with others aside from the said employer. Ergo, when the transfer of ownership (or control or supervision or whatever that has the effect of giving access to an employee’s personal information) is being effected, personal information of employees must be excluded in the transfer.
In fact, should the prospective applicant to an employer not meet qualifications and subsequent employment does not push through, the personal information gathered should be destroyed. This is the ethical thing to do. Probably the only information that can (ethically and justifiably) retained is the name of the applicant, the date of application, and the reason for refusal of employment. Everything else is irrelevant to the employer (since employment was never consummated) and should therefore not be kept or retained.
Moreover, nowadays, there are so many irrelevant personal information are being requested or required that it appears that the prospective employer (and even banks and financial institutions) are also engaged in mass data gathering (on the side).
And such data gathering activity is not limited to employers and financial institutions, it is likewise rampant in cyberspace where certain web sites that entice surfers and browsers by providing free membership but it is not really free at all. It is only free in terms of monetary considerations. What they do not inform you is that the true (and precious) cost is in the personal information that you voluntarily give up (to them) to avail of the “free” membership.
Information trading is the biggest industry today and the proof is in the widespread hacking and identity theft going on.
But I digress again so to return to topic, this issue of personal information gathered by (prospective) employers has gone unnoticed for decades and has become a significant issue only with the emergence and development and advancement of the world wide web and information technology.
It is high time this issue be addressed to forestall further deterioration of people’s right to privacy and freedom from unwarranted scrutiny and from profiling.
TaN: News articles, let alone headlines, with titles (and contents) like “So-and-so now Mrs So-and-So-On” are not only pitiful but downright insulting. It is bad enough that media, especially those in the entertainment — more like gossip and rumor-mongering — industry talk and report on the lives and activities of publicly known figures as if they are of the utmost and monumental importance but to even entertain for a moment that such information is newsworthy is so sad.
What makes this couple so special that the public has to know about their wedding (at last). Why? How about the rest of us? Are the marriages of all other people less important as to warrant a news report? Just because they are wealthy? How pitifully lame and wretched!
But that is not the saddest part. The worst is that there are actually many people who swallow such trash and it only shows that there are many people with too much time on their hands and would even care about it, that there are so many people with small minds — as in the saying, Great minds talk about ideas; average minds talk about events, small minds talk about others. Such a terrible waste of resources (media space and time).
It only shows how low people stoop for the sake of trivial pursuits as money, fame, and power.