Yellowtail

Hep c is diagnosed by a specific blood test and will not show up on a typical liver function test. Fatty liver is pretty common and is easily treatable is you do not have hep c.

My doctor did not test me for it, I had to ask.

Get a job in HR with a multinational company with operations in Thailand and relocate with them to Thailand when you get a chance. HR is good money, security and status and no accountability.

It is, what it is, isn't it?

The OP could have Hepatitis C or some other disease that is destroying his liver, but yeah, just diet and exercise and come back when you have cirrhosis.

I've had plenty of first-hand experience. Ask anyone at a Narcotics Anonymous meeting what they started on...

Not necessarily.

I don't think your liver hurts. Dr. Piyawat at Chula is great. Piyawat Komolmit - Chulalongkorn University

Have you been tested for hepatitis C? Fatty liver is still a ways from a transplant.

It's not just Russia, it's now Russia, China. Turkey and Iran. NATO, not Nato

And all old farts would have to have been a young poot at some point,,,

Do you think hotels should be in the habit of letting people into other people's rooms? If the cop raped her, I hope he is executed.

I had to google sealioning. Apparently, it is "...a disingenuous action by a commenter of making an ostensible effort to engage in sincere and serious civil debate, usually by asking persistent questions of the other commenter." All I am asking for are examples to support a false claim someone else made. You would have to clearly define what you mean by MMCC before I can say whether or not I accept it, but again, I believe the planet is warming, and that human activity is impacting that change. I do not see how demonizing industries provide great benefits that we will continue to need for at least the foreseeable future, and likely much longer makes any sense. All it does is promote hysteria and make energy more expensive, which anyone should know disproportionally hurts the poor. I think that if we truly want to reduce our CO2 output, there are a lot better ways of doing it than most of the silliness I see.

I'm not the one making the claim, yet I am supposed to do the research proving the claim is false? If I said that the Solar Industry continuously sends out propaganda material to cause hysteria about the danger of climate change, I believe I would have to provide examples. I don't believe that just posting links to others making the same claim would be sufficient, nor do I think claiming it's an indisputable fact proves anything. I read the artical you liked to, and it was ONLY people making the same claim, again, without providing examples. In the article, there were only two things that the author even claimed were examples and they were a few years old: 1. Unilever putting carbon labels on food. 2. Claiming they denied misleading the public. Again, if propaganda is being sent out continuously, it should be easy to provide a few examples.

Not that hard to sell a lease in a good location.

No, that sounds like it. You've already agreed, so go ahead with it.

TF, TC, DIA?

I don't blame you, but saying it's onerous I think is wrong-headed. Tedious, yes. I think the reasoning is that they do not want guys using the marriage to get a visa, and then abandoning their wives and continuing to live in the country. I'd like to change to the retirement visa, but the wife won't hear of it...

I just checked with my wife. No one ever came our home to check.

Exactly, you endorse the claim that "The oil industry continuously sends out propaganda material to undermine the danger of climate change.", yet you are not able to provide an example that supports it. I can't if that's true or not without a clear definition of "denialist", but is sounds like a regurgitated "fact" someone made up. If we define "denialists" as people that greatly and continuously benefit from the fossil fuel industry, the statement is false. The "Union of Concerned Scientists" appears to be a website that allows anyone to be a "Concerned Scientist" just by checking a box. In any event, even the mighty "Union of Concerned Scientists" was not able to provide an example of propaganda the oil industry continuously sends to undermine the danger of climate change. My position is that you are endorsing a false claim, and a claim that if true, would be very easy to substantiate. I agree we're beating a dead horse, as you will never be able to provide an example that supports the false claim that "The oil industry continuously sends out propaganda material to undermine the danger of climate change.".

I've had a few, and they're okay, not as good as an implant, but they're much cheaper.

That is correct. You do not have to provide any support for the claim "The oil industry continuously sends out propaganda material to undermine the danger of climate change." Three people have posted links attempting to support the claim, no one has provided an example. Now you claim you don't need to provide an example, because it's an "unrefutable" fact that the fossil fuel companies have been engaging in promoting such propaganda. The claim was not that the fossil fuel companies have been engaging in promoting such propaganda, but rather that: "The oil industry continuously sends out propaganda material to undermine the danger of climate change." This claim has gone unsubstantiated. If such propaganda is sent out continuously by the oil companies it should be easy to come up with something, but you can't. That you believe something is an "unrefutable" fact, does not make it so. I did not read them all the way through, but again, ads that oil companies run praising alternative energy projects they are involved with do not really qualify as "propaganda to undermine the danger of climate-change" do they? If anything, they highlight the danger and show what they are doing to "help". Nor can lawsuits against oil companies be considered "propaganda to undermine the danger of climate-change". You claim there are examples in the links, but you refuse to show them. But again, this is something you are claiming happens continuously, why post links to stuff that's years old? Again, please provide a few examples of the propaganda the oil industry is continuously sending out to undermine the danger of climate-change, surely you should be able to come up with a few.

So why are they not being built? What's stopping them?

As expected, you are not able to provide even a single example of to support the claim that the oil industry continuously sends out material to undermine the danger of climate change. That's what I thought. If the claim that: "The oil industry continuously sends out propaganda material to undermine the danger of climate change." were actually true, it would be pretty easy for you to come up with an example, but you can't.

Why is it his attitude that disabled people should just get out of way? His comments may actually be helpful to someone in a wheelchair. Why is it not your attitude that no expense should spared to make every accommodation such that a tiny percentage of the public is not inconvenienced? Should we turn off the lights so that the blind can see the same show everyone else sees?