I cut my toenails this morning and commented to my wife that I didn't
understand why they grew faster on one foot than the other. She replied
that hers did as well. A little discussion established that mine grew
faster on my right foot and hers on her left foot - the opposite of each
of our predominant hands. IOW, left handed = right foot, right handed left foot.
So have we discovered a general principle? Have others noted the same
inverse relationship? Inquiring minds want to know :-).
On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 17:00:23 +0000 (UTC), Larry Blanchard
You should apply for a Fed Govt grant to research left- and
right-toenailedness. Probably need to hire people to do the dirty
work (measuring toenails on smelly feet). That should provide income
for several starving college students. If you include categories by
age, you could milk this for years as the subjects get older. Be sure
to include chiuldren of all ages so yoiur children can carry on the
research over time.
See how easy it is to get money from the Fed Govt? Aren't you glad
someone is watching your tax dollars so carefully?
On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 12:13:45 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
I don't know about nail growth, per se, but....
OT related info:
Specific abnormal nail growth is directly related to the efficiency one's o
xygen uptake by one's lungs. Poor sleeping, causation of snoring, smoking
, and other similar breathing/health related issues contribute to the cause
s of poor breathing, poor oxygen uptake. Look closely at COPD patients, t
heir nails curl, claw-like, as well as their fingers and toes will develope
a curling posture. Many folks with long term heart conditions have/develo
pe similar "curling" effects. Observation of curling of nails and digits
are a diagnostic tool, by physicians, for the onset of heart and COPD probl
Including, with the detection of curling of digits/nails, the nail surface
and skin tend to develope a high glossy appearance, more so than normal ski
n tone. Often, it's the glossy skin that is first noticed, leading the phy
sician to look more closely at/for the other features/conditions, for furth
er evaluating a patient. *A patient's initial complaint may not have been
about their heart or their breathing problems, but some other "thing" that
's bothering them. That other "thing" may well be a side effect of the ma
in, hidden, issue, hence the further eval, beyond the shiny skin (suspect),
Some, not all, long term asthma patients develope these curling conditions,
I'm not aware of these conditions primarily or predominantly on one side or
the other. Maybe a govt study IS needed, after all!
You laugh, but the government does do this. I was reading of one
recently, which studied the annual reports mandated by Congress
(federal agencies are required to produce 4000-odd annual
reports, most of which no-one reads). That study led to the
elimination of 40 reports, altho during the study period Congress
passed legislation adding 70 new ones(*).
(* this part doesn't seem credible - it's hard to beleive the
current Congress did _anything_, let alone authorize as many
as 70 reports).
So imagine how many a Congress that is going along at its _usual_ rate
Hmm--that's another provision that should be in the Constitution--all
paper consumed or processed by the government _must_ be unloaded from
the truck by members of congress, by hand, without any powered
equipment, and without the use of any delegates, aides, or other
Some people seem to think so. I once suggested an amendment requiring
that any legislator read any piece of legislation, aloud before
witnesses, before being allowed to vote on it. It was like I'd
suggested a ban on apple pie or something.
One part of the viewpoint was that it would "slow the pace of
legislation". Since I am one who cannot understand why we need 500 new
laws every year, or even 50, I do not find that argument compelling, but
others, who seem to think that if we are not getting 500 new laws a year
we are failing as a society, argue it vehemently.
On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 16:34:21 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
This is a general comment to all to kept building this message. Please
highlight the part you're replying to and *then* reply. It's really
*not* that difficult.
Yes, I know someone will accuse me of being a "net nanny". Well, I
wouldn't be if posters would just be considerate.
On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 20:28:02 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
I just pushed the left button on my mouse and, holding it down, passed it
over the above sentence. That "selected" it and "highlighted" it. When
I clicked on reply all that got transferred to the reply window was the
highlighted text and the when and whom line.
If you mean I didn't physically run a highlighter pen over the screen
then you're correct :-).
I'm using the Pan newsreader under Linux. Under Windows I would use Free
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.