WordWolf

I'll try to be relatively brief and relatively on-topic. -I'm well aware that some Christians posit Mary as a "mediatrix"- that is, a mediator between God and man, and a co-mediator with Jesus. For those of us who believe the verse that there is ONE God and ONE mediator between God and man, and that mediator is "the man Christ Jesus", this doctrine is nothing less than error. I'm aware that Pope John Paul II declared it during the Marian Year in the 1980s, when he dedicated an entire year to Mary. I liked the man, but in this he was just plain wrong. -I'm aware that the usual argument for Mary worship is that "adoration" and "worship" are two different things, that "worship" is directed at God, and "adoration" is directed at Mary, saints, etc. I consider the distinction mere sophistry. In "adoration", prayers are being directed to a person, and statues are made of them, where one prays, lights candles, and offers devotions. That's "worship" with a few cosmetic distinctions even a lawyer would have trouble making stick. If someone made a statue of Zeus, knelt before it, prayed before it, lit candles before it, and offered devotions to Zeus at it, you'd say they were "worshipping" Zeus- and you'd be correct. -It was in Vatican II in the 1950s when the doctrine of "The Assumption" was codified. The then-Pope declared that Mary never died- he said she had ascended to heaven, where she was made "queen of heaven." (His term, not mine.) Obviously, I can't buy into any of that. -I'm also aware that some people have said that Mary is related to all three members of the Trinity- as the mother of the Son, the daughter of the Father, and the spouse of the Holy Spirit. Not aware of this? Pope John Paul II said as much in L'Osservatore Romano. You can read the official English translation here: https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/marys-relationship-with-the-trinity-8027 If you're on board with these doctrines, we'll have to agree to disagree. I do not mind interacting with Catholics, but I'm not going to sign on to all their doctrines. I don't have to get on their case about them, either.

A dissenting point of view is on this page: https://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Topical.show/RTD/cgg/ID/3051/Veneration-of-Mary.htm In the interests of polite discussion, I won't paste the contents, but they speak for themselves.

https://uscatholic.org/articles/201405/why-do-catholics-venerate-mary/ In 2005 in Chicago, a young woman was driving home from work and looked at the wall of an underpass where she saw an image of the Virgin Mary. For a short while, “Our Lady of the Underpass” became national news and a local pilgrimage site. Where some saw a miraculous image, however, others saw a mere salt stain. Although the excitement has died down, there are still those who ensure that the underpass remains adorned with candles, flowers, and a makeshift altar. There are thousands of stories like this. Some Marian shrines become permanent pilgrimage sites, such as Lourdes and Medjugorje. Others simply fade away. The veneration and adoration of Mary is as old as the church itself. The earliest record of Mary’s veneration probably comes from the Third Ecumenical Council at Ephesus in A.D. 431. There church fathers affirmed Mary as the Theotokos, or God-bearer. The title stuck, and today we refer to her as the “Mother of God.” This designation of Mary as the mother of God is really at the root of Roman Catholic veneration. Mary is the link between our broken humanity and the boundless divinity present in the triune God. Mary is redeemed, as she is human, but she is also considered to have a special and unique relationship with God, as she shares DNA with Christ. Mother Teresa once remarked, “She gave Jesus his body, and his body is what saved us.” In the many years since 431, Mary has come to occupy a powerful place in Roman Catholic spirituality. She has many faces and innumerable names, among them Our Lady of Guadalupe, She Who Ripens the Wheat, Queen of Angels, and the Light Cloud of Heavenly Rain. She is said to appear on occasion, mostly to children or others who are weak, disempowered, or on the margins of society. She is said, in some cases, to procure miracles. Some have even said that in the last days, Mary will lead the army of angels in the final battle against evil. But all of the titles and all of the miracles are considered to be a result of Mary’s close relationship with her son, Jesus. As mother of the King of Kings, she is the saint of saints. Furthermore, because the church is the body of Christ, and Mary is Christ’s mother, she is also the mother of the church. This means that in addition to having a special relationship with Jesus, Mary also has a special relationship with the church. She belongs to the church and the church belongs to her. So when we pray the rosary, or bow our heads during the creed, we are honoring our mother, and the mother of our Lord. Although she is not God, she has earned our respect and devotion.

Since you asked, I'll post what iAsk said on the matter- and 2 other sources rather than just relying on a machine. "In religious discussions, what is Mary veneration?" Mary veneration, particularly within the Catholic Church, refers to the practice of honoring Mary, the mother of Jesus, with special reverence and devotion. This practice is distinct from the worship (latria) reserved for God alone, and is instead categorized as hyperdulia, a higher form of veneration (dulia) given to other saints.[1] [3] According to www.iAsk.Ai - Ask AI: The theological basis for Mary veneration stems from her unique role in salvation history as the Mother of God (Theotokos), a title affirmed at the Council of Ephesus in 431 CE.[1] [2] [3] [5] Catholics believe that Mary's "yes" to God's plan, as recorded in the Gospel of Luke, made the Incarnation possible, thus making her a crucial figure in the process of salvation and redemption.[1] [3] [5] Key Aspects of Mary Veneration: Distinction from Worship: The Catholic Church explicitly distinguishes veneration from adoration or worship. Adoration is due only to the Triune God, while veneration is an honor given to Mary due to her unique privileges and role in God's plan.[1] [3] [5] Protestants often accuse Catholics of "Mariolatry" (Mary-worship), but Catholics deny this, emphasizing the difference between hyperdulia (highest veneration for Mary) and latria (worship for God).[5] [6] Biblical Foundations: Proponents of Mary veneration point to biblical passages such as the Angel Gabriel's greeting to Mary as "highly favored" and Elizabeth's exclamation, "Blessed are you among women," as scriptural support for her special honor.[3] [5] Her presence at the beginning and end of Jesus' public ministry, including at the foot of the Cross, is also cited as evidence of her cooperation in salvation.[1] [3] Historical Development: The practice of Mary veneration developed gradually over centuries. Early Christian art from the 2nd century depicts Mary as the mother of Jesus.[1] [2] The theological emphasis on Mary grew in response to heresies like Docetism, which questioned Jesus' humanity. The concept of Mary as the "Second Eve," who reversed the disobedience of the first Eve through her faithfulness, emerged in the 2nd century with figures like Justin Martyr and Irenaeus.[1] [2] The official endorsement of "Theotokos" (Mother of God) at the Council of Ephesus in 431 CE marked a significant turning point, leading to increased emphasis on Mary and the dedication of churches in her honor.[1] [2] Forms of Veneration: Mary veneration encompasses various devotions, including prayers, pious acts, visual arts, poetry, and music.[1] Common practices include: Prayers: The "Hail Mary" is a prominent prayer, incorporating biblical greetings from Gabriel and Elizabeth.[1] [5] Other prayers include the "Salve Regina," "Magnificat," and the "Angelus."[1] Feast Days: Numerous Marian feast days are celebrated throughout the liturgical year, some of which are holy days of obligation, such as the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, Mary, Mother of God, and the Assumption.[1] Titles: A wide array of titles are used to honor Mary, such as "Mother of God," "Queen of Heaven," "Star of the Sea," and "Mother of All Sorrows."[1] Art and Music: Marian art, particularly the "Madonna and Child," is a central icon in Christian art. Marian hymns and antiphons are also integral to liturgical and devotional practices.[1] Devotions: Popular devotions include the Rosary, the wearing of scapulars, and Marian pilgrimages to shrines like Lourdes, Fatima, and Guadalupe.[1] [5] Role as Intercessor: Catholics view Mary as a powerful intercessor with her Son, Jesus. They believe that through her compassion and prayers, she can bring petitions to God.[1] [5] This is exemplified by the story of the Wedding at Cana, where Jesus performed his first miracle at Mary's request.[1] Marian Apparitions: Reported Marian apparitions, such as those at Lourdes and Fatima, have significantly influenced Marian devotion. While not required for belief, some apparitions have received official Church approval and are widely believed by Catholics.[1] Protestant Perspective: Protestants generally ceased the practice of Mary veneration during the Reformation, seeking to return to what they perceived as the basics of early Christianity and a radical emphasis on Scripture. They argue that the Bible does not explicitly command or model prayer to Mary or her elevated status beyond being Jesus' mother.[2] [6] In essence, Mary veneration in the Catholic Church is a deeply rooted practice that honors Mary as a unique and essential figure in Christian faith, distinct from the worship of God, and expressed through various devotional forms and theological understandings.[1] [3] [5] Authoritative Sources Veneration of Mary in the Catholic Church. [Wikipedia]↩ The History of Mary Veneration: A Protestant Prospective. [Classic Theology]↩ Why Do Catholics Veneration of Mary in the Catholic Church. [St. Peter's Catholic Church]↩ The Papacy for Orthodox Christians. [Exodus90]↩ Why Do Catholics Veneration Mary?. [Catholic Courier]↩ Mariolatry. [GotQuestions.org]↩ What Is Veneration? Is Mary Our Mother? Should Mary Be Venerated?. [The Catholic Blog]↩

I'll explain the error in doctrine. First of all, I'm using the term "veneration" since it's the least objectionable term for those who perform it. I could just as easily say "worship". Naturally, this would produce a subtopic of discussion. "Mrs Wolf has suggested to me previously (with merit, I believe) that Mary veneration, at least the modern type and much of what led to it, springs from the practice of Christianity being an Old Boys Club. Women can easily feel left out of things, and Mary veneration helps address that. My problem is that I feel that the usual methods of addressing that would be veneration of Mary (prayers to her, etc.) or veneration of female saints (prayers to them, etc.), and I find EITHER to be doctrinal error, at best. I think we may agree on the problem but not with the solution. I find Mary veneration to be a lazy solution to a deeper problem, one that calls for answers that are doctrinally sound while still addressing the problem. " I thought I was clear enough here, but I'll try to make it clearer, and I'll try to remain somewhat tactful. I think that the entire fuss over Mary- and any number of female saints- stems from a feeling of disenfranchisement felt by females concerning Christianity, and church, and so on. It's easy to portray Christianity as a religion that emphasizes men and marginalizes women. A case can be made for it. On paper, I don't think that's the case- we see women in the Gospels, and in Acts, and mentioned in the Epistles. In practice, I think it had often looked that way. Worse, in the pulpit, it's been that way at times- there have been men who've turned sermons to condemn bad things- and any number of them have blamed (scapegoated, really) women as those bad things, or their source, or their carriers, and so on. So, how do we address that? We can do it with sounder doctrine. Another way we can do that is faster. We can adopt some of the practices that the other religions have, and adulterate Christianity with them. (It can happen whether or not we mean to, of course.) We can adopt some of the "mother goddess" religious practices, and just direct them to Mary. This is also a cheap way to gain converts. If they can maintain their same practices but just swap the labels, they're more likely to adopt Christianity. If one's goal is numbers and retention, this is a good idea. If one's goal is doctrinal purity, this is a horrifying prospect. I do think it's a given that early Christians of the first few centuries DID end up adopting any number of practices and doctrines in use by practitioners of other religions at the time- either intentionally to gain converts, or accidentally by having converts join whose ideas slowly spread through the church. ("A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.") So, their ideas on all sorts of things effected ideas of Christians, and in some cases, became doctrine. (It is outside the scope of this thread to get into all of them.) I think any number of ideas got attached to Mary in this fashion as well- some of them by well-meaning Christians. So, I think proper doctrine and proper teaching should accord women a more balanced role in the church- without having to offer prayers to Mary or anyone else. I think I answered the question while remaining reasonably tactful. I'm sure you'll let me know if I was unsuccessful.

"I'm not a regular fish eater but would like to begin." (Oldiesman) I thought another good question was worth asking, so I asked it that question. "If one wants to begin eating more fish and seafood, what are the healthiest options to add to one's diet?" "To incorporate more fish and seafood into a healthy diet, individuals should prioritize options that are rich in omega-3 fatty acids, low in mercury, and sustainably sourced. These choices offer numerous health benefits, including improved heart and brain health, while minimizing environmental impact and potential contaminant exposure [1] [2] [3] [4]. According to www.iAsk.Ai - Ask AI: The healthiest options to add to one's diet include a variety of fish and shellfish, with a focus on those high in omega-3s and low in mercury, such as salmon, sardines, mackerel (Atlantic or Pacific chub), herring, rainbow trout, mussels, clams, and scallops. These options provide essential nutrients like protein, vitamins D and B12, iron, and phosphorus, which are crucial for overall well-being [1] [3] [5]. Fish High in Omega-3 Fatty Acids Omega-3 fatty acids are essential fats that the body cannot produce on its own and must be obtained through diet. They are vital for heart health, reducing inflammation, supporting brain development, and potentially lowering the risk of cognitive decline and age-related macular degeneration [1] [3]. Salmon: Wild-caught Alaskan salmon is highly recommended for its high omega-3 content, low mercury levels, and sustainable fishing practices. Farmed Atlantic salmon can also be a good option, especially if sourced sustainably [3] [5] [6]. Canned salmon is a convenient and affordable alternative, offering similar nutritional benefits, including calcium [1] [6]. Sardines: These small, inexpensive fish are packed with omega-3s, vitamin D, and calcium (due to their edible bones). They are low in contaminants and are a sustainable choice [1] [5] [6]. Mackerel: Atlantic or Pacific chub mackerel are excellent sources of omega-3s. It's important to choose these lower-mercury varieties over king mackerel, which is high in mercury [1] [3] [6]. Herring: A staple in the Nordic Diet, herring is exceptionally rich in omega-3s, vitamin D, vitamin B12, selenium, and niacin. It is also a sustainable and affordable option [1] [5] [6]. Rainbow Trout: Often farmed sustainably, rainbow trout offers a good amount of omega-3s and has a milder flavor than salmon, making it a great alternative [3] [5] [6]. Lean Fish and Shellfish While fatty fish are prized for omega-3s, lean fish and shellfish also offer significant nutritional value, including high-quality protein and various vitamins and minerals, with generally lower fat content [1] [3]. Cod: This flaky white fish is a good source of phosphorus, niacin, and vitamin B12, providing 15-20 grams of protein per 3-ounce serving [3]. Hake: A white fish that is an excellent source of protein and low in saturated fat. Look for hake with the blue MSC label for sustainable sourcing [4]. Perch: With a mild taste and medium texture, perch is another healthy white fish option [3]. Mahi-Mahi (Dolphinfish): A firm, tropical fish that is versatile in cooking. When choosing mahi-mahi, opt for those caught in the U.S. and Ecuador with troll lines for better sustainability [3] [6]. Clams: Whether wild-caught or farm-raised, clams are environmentally friendly and rich in protein, magnesium, potassium, and iron [4] [5]. Mussels: These shellfish are highly sustainable, affordable, and a good source of selenium and vitamin B12 [5]. They also filter and clean the water they are farmed in, offering environmental benefits [5]. Scallops: Protein-dense, low in fat, and rich in vitamin B12 and omega-3 fatty acids, scallops are generally good for the environment [4]. Squid (Calamari): High in protein (around 18 grams per four-ounce serving), vitamin C, calcium, and iron, squid is a versatile and healthy seafood option with a mild flavor and firm texture [4]. Fish to Limit or Avoid Some fish should be limited or avoided due to high mercury levels or unsustainable fishing practices, especially for pregnant or breastfeeding individuals and young children [1] [3] [6]. High-Mercury Fish: Swordfish, king mackerel, orange roughy, big-eye tuna, shark, and tilefish are generally high in mercury and should be consumed sparingly or avoided [1] [3] [6]. Certain Tuna Varieties: While canned light tuna (skipjack) is a good low-mercury option, yellowfin, albacore, and ahi tuna should be limited due to higher mercury content [1] [3]. Farmed Salmon (in open-net pens): Some farmed salmon practices, particularly those in open-net pens, can raise concerns about parasites, diseases, and environmental pollution. However, freshwater-farmed salmon and some open-net systems with better practices can be good alternatives [6]. Sustainable and Budget-Friendly Options To make fish more accessible and environmentally conscious, consider these tips: Canned and Packaged Fish: Tuna, sardines, and anchovies in cans or pouches are convenient, have a long shelf life, and are excellent sources of protein and omega-3s [1]. Farm-Raised Fish: While wild-caught is often preferred for sustainability, responsibly farmed fish can be more economical. Look for guidelines from organizations like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries for sustainable seafood [1] [4]. Smaller Fish and Bivalves: Choosing fish lower on the food chain, such as herring, sardines, clams, and oysters, benefits both cardiovascular health and the environment, as they generate fewer greenhouse gas emissions compared to terrestrial animal proteins [5]. The Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommends adults consume at least 8 ounces of fish per week, and pregnant or breastfeeding individuals should aim for 8 to 12 ounces per week of low-mercury options [1] [2]. Incorporating a variety of these healthy and sustainable seafood choices can significantly contribute to a well-balanced and nutritious diet [3]. Authoritative Sources Healthy Fish to Eat. [hopkinsmedicine.org]↩ Advice about Eating Fish. [fda.gov]↩ The 11 Best Fish to Eat. [healthline.com]↩ 5 of the Healthiest Seafood Options You Should Eat Today. [panapesca.com]↩ Seafood selections that help your heart — and our planet. [health.harvard.edu]↩ 5 of the Healthiest Fish to Eat (and 5 to Avoid). [eatingwell.com]↩ How to Choose the Healthiest Seafood (for You and the Environment). [silversneakers.com]↩ Best and Worst Fish for Your Health. [webmd.com]↩ Answer Provided by iAsk.ai – Ask AI.

I asked the same source about whether or not anchovies were a good choice of fish to add to a diet if one was increasing their fish intake. The answer, overall, was positive. However, it did include the following caveat, which is important to consider especially as one gets older... "While anchovies are nutritious, it's important to consider their sodium content, especially when consumed in canned or cured forms.[12] Rinsing canned anchovies before consumption can help reduce sodium levels.[13] For individuals with high blood pressure or those monitoring sodium intake, fresh or lightly salted anchovies might be preferable." Overall, it sounded like a good food to add- in moderation, and with one's sodium level in mind. "In summary, incorporating anchovies into an everyday diet offers a wealth of nutritional advantages, including high levels of omega-3s, protein, and various essential vitamins and minerals, all within a sustainable and low-mercury package." It's no joke to be concerned about one's sodium levels. If your doctor already has you watching them, you may need to radically alter your current diet to remove a lot of sodium if you want to add anchovies at all. Oh, and make sure you can stand the flavor before buying, say, one gross of jars of the stuff. Some foods are a good idea on paper but are unpalatable.

That's it.

Yes. Among the other names was the eponymous character in The Great Gatsby.

(Yes, I think it was crazy to post this in the sub forum in which it started. That was just BEGGING for a flame post...which would have been on subject for the sub forum. I think there is a False Dilemma at work, and I am going to identify it. Mrs Wolf has suggested to me previously (with merit, I believe) that Mary veneration, at least the modern type and much of what led to it, springs from the practice of Christianity being an Old Boys Club. Women can easily feel left out of things, and Mary veneration helps address that. My problem is that I feel that the usual methods of addressing that would be veneration of Mary (prayers to her, etc.) or veneration of female saints (prayers to them, etc.), and I find EITHER to be doctrinal error, at best. I think we may agree on the problem but not with the solution. I find Mary veneration to be a lazy solution to a deeper problem, one that calls for answers that are doctrinally sound while still addressing the problem. It seems ridiculous to have to say it, but Christianity needs women, and Christianity has room for women, and there is a lot for women there, both to offer them and for them to do, if action is the goal. We do not need to address that by embracing error. (I'm not aiming this at any posters here, just at the doctrine. Please try not to see offense in it. If I've offended in passing, I'm sorry.)

You could have just said it was the AI on Google Search, but it is probably at least as good to say it is a Gemini variant. (Mentioning both is probably better, I suppose.) Previously, you just said it was "from AI", but with no clue where you went (Google Search.) The one I quoted automatically cites its sources, and that's why I used it at all.

Mason Capwell Garry Buckman Luke Brower Tobias Wolff Jim Carroll Arthur Rimbaud Brandon Darrow Amsterdam Vallon Danny Archer Roger Ferris Frank Wheeler Dominick "Dom" Cobb Edward Daniels "Jack" John Dawson Calvin J. Candle Arnie Grape Fee Herod James Gatz

Seriously?

BTW, the misconception is that rabbits eat carrots. Due to their high sugar content, rabbits in the wild do not eat carrots. If rabbits eat carrots when they are domesticated, it's because that's what they're fed, not because that's what they would prefer to eat.

Here's iAsk on the question "Why are high protein, low carb diets dangerous to your health?" " While high-protein, low-carbohydrate diets can offer benefits such as weight loss and improved blood sugar control, they also carry potential risks and are not suitable for everyone. The dangers primarily stem from nutrient deficiencies due to carbohydrate restriction, potential strain on organs, and the type of protein sources consumed. According to www.iAsk.Ai - Ask AI: High-protein, low-carbohydrate diets can pose several dangers to your health, particularly when implemented without proper guidance or when certain pre-existing conditions are present. One significant concern is the risk of nutrient gaps [1] [2]. Carbohydrates encompass a wide range of food groups, including fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, which are vital sources of fiber, vitamins (especially B vitamins), and minerals [1] [2] [3]. Severely restricting these can lead to inadequate intake of essential nutrients, potentially causing issues like constipation due to low fiber [1] [2]. For instance, experts recommend 22 to 28 grams of fiber daily for females and 28 to 34 grams for males, which can be challenging to meet on a low-carb regimen [2]. Another major concern is the potential strain on the kidneys [1] [3] [4]. Protein is a large molecule that is filtered through the kidneys, and excessive protein intake can put added stress on these organs [3]. This is particularly dangerous for individuals with pre-existing kidney disease or impaired kidney function, as it can accelerate kidney damage and lead to kidney failure [1] [3]. While some studies suggest that high protein intake does not harm healthy kidneys [4], the American Heart Association (AHA) and other health organizations have raised concerns about potential renal abnormalities [4]. Furthermore, the type of protein consumed can significantly impact health risks [1] [2] [3] [5]. Diets high in fatty cuts of meat, whole dairy products, and other high-fat protein sources can elevate cholesterol levels, increasing the risk of heart disease [1] [2]. Some research even links high animal protein intake to an increased risk of heart failure [5]. Conversely, choosing lean protein sources and plant-based proteins can mitigate some of these cardiovascular risks [1] [2] [5]. Other potential dangers include calcium loss and an increased risk of osteoporosis or kidney stones [1] [2]. While some studies have conflicting results, a high-protein diet can lead to increased urinary calcium excretion, which theoretically could contribute to these conditions [1] [2] [4]. However, some research also suggests a positive association between protein intake and bone mineral density [4]. Finally, the sustainability and psychological impact of highly restrictive diets are also important considerations [1] [3]. Low-carb diets can be difficult to maintain long-term because they often feel restrictive, leading to a higher likelihood of regaining weight [3]. For individuals with a history of disordered eating, such diets can promote unhealthy restrictive eating patterns [1]. Rapid initial weight loss on these diets is often due to water loss, not fat loss, as carbohydrates cause the body to retain water [3]. It is crucial to consult with a doctor or a registered dietitian before starting any new diet, especially one that significantly alters macronutrient intake, to ensure it is safe and appropriate for individual health needs [1] [2] [3]. Authoritative Sources What Are High-Protein, Low-Carb Diets? [WebMD]↩ High-Protein, Low-Carb Diet: Benefits, Risks, and Foods [Verywell Health]↩ Skinny on Low-Carb Diets [Rush University System for Health]↩ High-Protein Diets: Are They Safe? [National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI)]↩ High Protein, Low Carb Diet: Benefits, Risks, and Foods [Healthline]↩ When it comes to protein, how much is too much? [Harvard Health Publishing]↩

Here's iAsk on the question "Can high protein, low carb diets help kill cancer cells?" " The role of high-protein, low-carbohydrate diets, including ketogenic diets, in cancer treatment and prevention is complex and still under active investigation. While some research suggests potential benefits in slowing tumor growth by depriving cancer cells of glucose, other studies indicate possible risks, such as promoting metastasis or exacerbating cachexia, depending on the cancer type and individual circumstances. According to www.iAsk.Ai - Ask AI: High-protein, low-carbohydrate diets, particularly ketogenic diets, have been explored for their potential to help kill cancer cells by exploiting the metabolic differences between healthy cells and many cancer cells. The primary mechanism proposed is the Warburg effect, where many cancer cells rely heavily on glucose for energy, even in the presence of oxygen, a process known as aerobic glycolysis.[2] [6] By severely restricting carbohydrate intake, these diets aim to reduce the availability of glucose, thereby "starving" cancer cells. In a state of ketosis, the body shifts from burning glucose to burning fat for energy, producing ketone bodies (such as β-hydroxybutyrate, acetoacetate, and acetone) that normal cells can readily use for fuel. [2] [6] However, some cancer cells have dysfunctional mitochondria and may be less efficient at utilizing ketone bodies, making them selectively vulnerable to glucose deprivation.[2] [6] Pre-clinical studies, primarily in mouse models, have shown that low-carbohydrate diets can slow tumor growth in various cancers, including colon, gastric, prostate, head and neck, brain, and thyroid cancers.[6] For example, a study by researchers at the BC Cancer Agency found that a low-carb, high-protein diet slowed tumor growth and reduced cancer development in mice predisposed to breast cancer.[3] This diet also boosted the effectiveness of certain anti-cancer drugs.[3] Another study observed a reduction in primary tumor growth in a mouse model of breast cancer when mice were fed a ketogenic diet.[1] However, the impact of these diets on cancer is not universally beneficial and can be highly dependent on the specific cancer type and other factors. A significant concern is the potential for high-fat, low-carbohydrate diets to promote cancer metastasis.[1] A study by researchers at the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center (HICCC) found that while a ketogenic diet suppressed primary tumor growth in a mouse model of breast cancer, it surprisingly led to a significant increase in lung metastases.[1] This unexpected result was linked to glucose starvation, which caused an upregulation of the protein BACH1, known to enhance metastatic potential.[1] The cancer cells, deprived of glucose, appeared to "escape" by metastasizing.[1] Furthermore, the ketogenic diet has been shown to accelerate a lethal wasting disease called cachexia in mice with pancreatic and colorectal cancer.[4] Cachexia, characterized by extreme weight loss, fatigue, and immune suppression, contributes to a significant number of cancer-related deaths.[4] Researchers at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (CSHL) found that while keto caused toxic lipid byproducts to accumulate and kill cancer cells (a process called ferroptosis), it also induced cachexia due to a relative corticosterone deficiency.[4] Combining the ketogenic diet with corticosteroids prevented cachexia and improved survival in these mouse models, suggesting a potential strategy to mitigate this adverse effect.[4] Another recent study from the University of Toronto indicated that a low-carbohydrate diet could worsen the DNA-damaging effects of certain gut microbes, potentially contributing to colorectal cancer development.[5] This research found that a low-carb diet, particularly when low in soluble fiber, created an environment where colibactin-producing E. coli bacteria could thrive, leading to increased DNA damage and polyp growth in the colon of mice.[5] The study also noted that a low-carb diet thinned the protective mucus layer in the gut, allowing more colibactin to reach colon cells.[5] The long-term safety and efficacy of low-carbohydrate diets in human cancer patients remain largely unconfirmed due to a lack of large-scale, randomized controlled trials.[6] While some pilot studies and case reports suggest tolerability and potential benefits in specific contexts, such as glioblastoma, patient adherence can be a significant challenge.[2] [6] Experts at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK) emphasize that while both ketogenic and plant-based diets can lead to weight loss, current evidence generally supports a whole foods, plant-based diet over a ketogenic diet for reducing overall cancer risk and improving health after treatment.[7] They highlight concerns about high fat consumption in some ketogenic diets and the potential for highly processed ingredients.[7] In conclusion, while the concept of depriving cancer cells of glucose through high-protein, low-carbohydrate diets is metabolically appealing and has shown promise in some pre-clinical models, the evidence is mixed, and potential risks such as increased metastasis, exacerbation of cachexia, and negative impacts on gut health must be carefully considered.[1] [4] [5] Further research, especially well-designed human clinical trials, is crucial to fully understand the role and appropriate application of these diets in cancer management.[1] [2] [6] " " Citations Authoritative Sources Study Finds Keto Diet Could Contribute to Cancer Metastasis. [Columbia University Irving Medical Center]↩ The Ketogenic Diet and Cancer: A Review of the Current Evidence. [National Center for Biotechnology Information]↩ Did you know cancers crave carbs? Low-carb, high protein diet shown to reduce cancer risk. [BC Cancer Foundation]↩ The latest weapon against cancer is a keto diet. [Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory]↩ Study uncovers how low-carb diet drives colorectal cancer development. [ecancer.org]↩ The Pros and Cons of Low Carbohydrate and Ketogenic Diets in the Prevention and Treatment of Cancer. [Frontiers in Nutrition]↩ Research Shows Plant-Based Diets Are Better Than Ketogenic Diets for Cancer Risk and Long-Term Health. [Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center]↩ "

And you didn't even cite which AI you're using, let alone what its sources were for this.

My opinion is that using AI-generated answers instead of researching things on your own, or to do your own thinking for you, is bad for your mental health. I've seen obviously incorrect answers about things that were relatively straightforward. About things that aren't, the odds are far worse for the answer to be correct. An answer is only as good as the information the AI uses to compose the answer, and the AI can't tell the difference between tinfoil hat conspiracies and legitimate science.

That's it.

https://movieweb.com/the-reason-bugs-bunny-eats-carrots-has-nothing-to-do-with-rabbits/ According to this source, the line "What's up, Doc?" is said in the movie. I found "Doc" and "What's up", but short of watching the movie, I'm not 100% sure. One of the characters is named "Bugs." Allegedly, a big fan of the movie inspired some elements to go from that movie to Bugs Bunny. My source is the above link. But there's definitely a character named Bugs in that film.

*checks* There is no movie with that title.

In 1934, the movie "It Happened One Night" appeared in theaters, and was a commercial success. However, unlike other movies that were simply a commercial success, that movie was indirectly responsible for the debut of something that entered US culture and was important for decades.... and is still recognized world-wide. What did it inspire, and what things in the movie inspired it? (No looking things up, please, that's cheating.) Some thing(s) in the content of the movie were indirectly responsible for something whose origin and first appearance in US culture (where it still remains). Much of it has to do with Clark Gable's performance, and all of it could be learned in a viewing of the movie. ("Hey, I've never noticed this before, but...") The name also came from this movie, but not from Clark Gable's performance. Furthermore, children all over the US- and far too many adults- have been/are operating with a factual error, because of something that was inspired. ("Wow, I always thought that [redacted], but it's not true at all.") Also, this is recognizable around the world, both by name and by appearance, so everyone on this thread is at least familiar with the answer, even if it isn't your jam - although we have fans on this thread. As an example of how much this became a part of US culture, one thing that came out of that movie and inspired what I'm talking about inspired the name of a movie from 1972. Most people would probably hear that movie's title and not think of "It Happened One Night"- they would think of [the answer to this round], and I would expect that's what they'd think. It's what I thought until now, myself.

Rory Kinnear Quantum of Solace Dame Judi Dench

"Now, would you like to learn to shoot?" "I can already." "Oh, I saw. Very American. Fire enough bullets and hope to hit the target." "I may have been overly rude earlier... when I called you a pirate." "And I may have been overly charitable... when I said I wasn't. But I try to live in the now... where the ghosts of old wrongs do not abide." "This hunt is too dangerous for a woman, even one such as you. Leave it to me." "What are you?" "I'm complicated."

Taking a wild swing here... "7 Days"????