mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Feb 21, 2014 20:56:25 GMT -5
Yep. Looks a lot like what I recall as "fatback". If they're not the same thing, they're pretty darned close.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Feb 21, 2014 21:01:02 GMT -5
What's good about the burnt ones? Do they taste different? Do they taste different? DO THEY TASTE DIFFERENT?!?!!! I can't even begin to explain the sheer awesomeness of burnt hot dogs.... Mmmm! Nom, nom, nom! Crispy casing with juicy insides! Love 'em!
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on Feb 21, 2014 21:14:27 GMT -5
Lena is not going to tell Swamp that she can eat a hot dog plain raw and enjoy it.... I'm sorry, but you just ain't right. I've been posting for years and it was the raw hot dog that gave it away?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 8, 2024 18:25:04 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2014 9:36:27 GMT -5
I'm cheap so I won't spend the money to buy so little food just so they can get lunchables. But my kids have had them and they didn't drop dead I guess I don't know what is in the lunchables that is worse than me packing them ham or turkey (deli meat) sandwhiches for lunch. Well, again, nobody is going to die from eating one Lunchable, so there's that. But - and I'm not trying to sound condescending - the nutrition profile is a lot worse than most simple sandwiches. Partly because they use low quality, fatty meats, crackers and cheeses but also because they add all sorts of preservatives.
well yeah, but that's what makes it taste good.....just like cheese puffs (NOT cheetos!)
|
|
raeoflyte
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 15:43:53 GMT -5
Posts: 15,011
|
Post by raeoflyte on Feb 22, 2014 10:11:28 GMT -5
My 96 year old grandmother goes through 9-12 pounds of M&M's a month... To be fair I don't police ds when we visit and she shares them with residents and staff, but the staff joke that they can always find her by the trail of m&m's she leaves which is more true than funny.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Feb 22, 2014 10:29:07 GMT -5
It's interesting that most of us know at least one person that lived to an unusually old age despite some health habits that don't fit conventional recommendations. Hopefully, there's some research being done to see what helps these select, lucky few avoid the complications that other people seem to experience from doing the same thing. It would also be interesting to do some work to see how many of them were consistent in their habits their whole life vs. just decided to live it up once they got to be a certain age. While the older people I know with really unhealthy habits had those habits their entire lives (so would be one of the first group that has some sort of natural protection) I'm pretty sure I'm going to fall into the category of one who was mostly healthy but then decided at age 85 I was going to eat and drink whatever I darn well pleased. So the people who meet me at age 86 will be wondering how someone who lives on mostly ice cream and alcohol lived so long, not knowing that for the first 85 years ice cream and alcohol were only a small part of the overall diet, not 90%.
My guess is that many of these older outliers have a combination of some genetic protection that helps them not experience the bad effects of the ________ (fill in the blank with the appropriate vice) and that they had other strong environmental factors that also served to provide protective benefits. It's tough to do good studies on that, though, since for so much of it you're relying on self-reported memories from a person who has decades worth of memories to sort through.
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on Feb 22, 2014 10:57:43 GMT -5
It's interesting that most of us know at least one person that lived to an unusually old age despite some health habits that don't fit conventional recommendations. Hopefully, there's some research being done to see what helps these select, lucky few avoid the complications that other people seem to experience from doing the same thing. It would also be interesting to do some work to see how many of them were consistent in their habits their whole life vs. just decided to live it up once they got to be a certain age. While the older people I know with really unhealthy habits had those habits their entire lives (so would be one of the first group that has some sort of natural protection) I'm pretty sure I'm going to fall into the category of one who was mostly healthy but then decided at age 85 I was going to eat and drink whatever I darn well pleased. So the people who meet me at age 86 will be wondering how someone who lives on mostly ice cream and alcohol lived so long, not knowing that for the first 85 years ice cream and alcohol were only a small part of the overall diet, not 90%.
My guess is that many of these older outliers have a combination of some genetic protection that helps them not experience the bad effects of the ________ (fill in the blank with the appropriate vice) and that they had other strong environmental factors that also served to provide protective benefits. It's tough to do good studies on that, though, since for so much of it you're relying on self-reported memories from a person who has decades worth of memories to sort through. Can only give you anecdotal evidence of personal experience - everyone in my family has done the same things as long as I've known them. EVERYONE lived into the 90's. My only guess is that lifestyle was quite different and so was food. Don't know about US, but where I am from FOR SURE there were no additives and all other things that are so common now. Then there are my IL's who are 76, take about 100 pills daily and have ALWAYS had horrible eating habits, but yet still kicking. Go figure.....
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Feb 22, 2014 11:17:35 GMT -5
Yeah, my family had a large group that lived to insanely old age despite awful habits. Like yours, most of them had a more active lifestyle which I think provided some benefit and also although they ate large quantities of fattening foods, the food didn't have preservatives, additives or certain pesticides. They also tended to live "rural" lives in houses they'd built (so the building materials didn't offgas chemicals for years) drinking well water that although wasn't fortified with fluoride or sanitized with chlorine, didn't have all the residues and runoff that so much of the water has now.
Also, even though they lived to old ages, many of them had bodies that lived a lot longer than their brains. Lots of Alzheimer's and dementia.
I'm probably overthinking it because it's an issue that worries me, but I think it's really hard to make good choices with health in our current society. There's so much that we don't know, so much partial information and a huge amount of regular exposure to thousands of things we're not even aware of, much less know the long term effects of. The same complexity that has improved our lives has also introduced a huge amount of potential issues that we have very little way of comprehending because there's not enough data.
We're at the beginning of things where we know just a little bit. We have medical advances that prolong quantity of life for so many that would have died in the past. But we don't know enough and don't yet seem to be focused on how to improve the quality of life. So for the next few decades, we're going to struggle as a society with millions like your inlaws who take 100 pills a day, have increasing medical interventions and live a long, long time, but the last 25 years are pretty miserable.
If it were up to me, I'd trade living to 100 and having the last 25 years being ones of pills, medical interventions and poor mobility/pain for only living to 80, but up to the day before I died being active, happy and alert.
|
|
raeoflyte
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 15:43:53 GMT -5
Posts: 15,011
|
Post by raeoflyte on Feb 22, 2014 11:32:57 GMT -5
My money is on the additives and genetic mutations we've done to our food. My mom talks a lot about how easy it used to be to lose an entire crop because of weather and now they never lose an entire crop. (Same farm).
Sent from my ADR6410LVW using proboards
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
THEY’RE EATING THE DOGS!!!!!!!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,617
|
Post by swamp on Feb 22, 2014 11:59:12 GMT -5
I think.its the activity level that allowed for thelonlongevity, since my 3 grandparents thatlived pretty llong despite craptacular diets all had very physical jobs and remained as active as their arthritis would let them, long into retirement.
|
|
8 Bit WWBG
Administrator
Your Money admin
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 8:57:29 GMT -5
Posts: 9,322
Today's Mood: Mega
|
Post by 8 Bit WWBG on Feb 22, 2014 12:24:56 GMT -5
At least kids don't have claws or fangs... (most don't).
We've taken to using liquids and a plastic syringe to shoot medicine down the throat.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
THEY’RE EATING THE DOGS!!!!!!!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,617
|
Post by swamp on Feb 22, 2014 12:26:36 GMT -5
At least kids don't have claws or fangs... (most don't). We've taken to using liquids and a plastic syringe to shoot medicine down the throat. They bite.
|
|
8 Bit WWBG
Administrator
Your Money admin
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 8:57:29 GMT -5
Posts: 9,322
Today's Mood: Mega
|
Post by 8 Bit WWBG on Feb 22, 2014 12:32:23 GMT -5
...:::"They bite.":::...
Sure, but they don't have toxins in their teeth that cause swelling like cats do.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Feb 22, 2014 14:04:16 GMT -5
I'm afraid to watch the link.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 8, 2024 18:25:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2014 18:19:22 GMT -5
Yeah, my family had a large group that lived to insanely old age despite awful habits. Like yours, most of them had a more active lifestyle which I think provided some benefit and also although they ate large quantities of fattening foods, the food didn't have preservatives, additives or certain pesticides. They also tended to live "rural" lives in houses they'd built (so the building materials didn't offgas chemicals for years) drinking well water that although wasn't fortified with fluoride or sanitized with chlorine, didn't have all the residues and runoff that so much of the water has now.
Also, even though they lived to old ages, many of them had bodies that lived a lot longer than their brains. Lots of Alzheimer's and dementia.
I'm probably overthinking it because it's an issue that worries me, but I think it's really hard to make good choices with health in our current society. There's so much that we don't know, so much partial information and a huge amount of regular exposure to thousands of things we're not even aware of, much less know the long term effects of. The same complexity that has improved our lives has also introduced a huge amount of potential issues that we have very little way of comprehending because there's not enough data.
We're at the beginning of things where we know just a little bit. We have medical advances that prolong quantity of life for so many that would have died in the past. But we don't know enough and don't yet seem to be focused on how to improve the quality of life. So for the next few decades, we're going to struggle as a society with millions like your inlaws who take 100 pills a day, have increasing medical interventions and live a long, long time, but the last 25 years are pretty miserable.
If it were up to me, I'd trade living to 100 and having the last 25 years being ones of pills, medical interventions and poor mobility/pain for only living to 80, but up to the day before I died being active, happy and alert.
I've wondered about this myself. The older people in my family didn't seem to be plagued with all the illnesses that younger generations suffer through and they live a long time. I came to the conclusion that people were made of stronger stuff way back when. My grandmother and great-grandmother lived to 85 and 94. They were both physically pretty healthy into their 80's. I remember my great-grandmother dipping snuff from the time I was a little girl. Meals were home cooked, dough made from scratch and all that, but by today's standards, it wasn't a good diet. A meal was a meat and 2 vegetables, one had to be green, some kind of bread (to help fill you up) and a homemade dessert. The vegetables were often fresh from gardens, and the meat was sometimes freshly slaughtered hogs (don't get me started on the hog stories ) or whatever from the country, but the meat was often fried, the vegetables were cooked with pork fat for flavor, and the desserts had lots of butter and sugar in them. They are also 2 examples of the bodies holding up better than the mind in old age. They both had dementia in their 80's. The men in my family don't seem to have the longevity the women do, but that's statistically how it goes I believe.
|
|
KaraBoo
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 17:14:51 GMT -5
Posts: 3,076
|
Post by KaraBoo on Feb 22, 2014 22:43:16 GMT -5
1. DS had the flu last week and was prescribed Tamiflu. It was some kind of white, chalky liquid suspension that was "bubble gum flavored". DS HATES bubble gum flavored things, so it's always been hard to get him to take medicine. I don't think we managed to give him more than a full dose (5mL) over the entire course of 5 days. We BOTH held him down, but he would just start spitting so much that he was basically foaming at the mouth. We would try and try but then when it was obvious he wasn't taking any, we stopped. Needless to say it made him EXTREMELY upset each time we tried to give it to him to the point where we just stopped. I even tried sneaking it in his food/drink, but he knew and wouldn't take it. He's better now. How do you handle giving your kids medicine that you know they won't take?2. DS is getting to be a more adventurous eater but he's still kinda picky. He goes to daycare 3 days a week where he gets 2 snacks and a lunch. He used to skip lunch sometimes because I guess he didn't like what they served. Last night he had a super tantrum when he got home. Then I found out that he ate none of his lunch. I looked at the school menu - it was something I knew he wouldn't eat. I believe in natural consequences and I know skipping meal isn't going to kill him, but I'm uncomfortable with my toddler going without a meal. Should I ask about maybe packing a back-up option in case he doesn't eat, or should I do nothing and maybe he'll learn to eat what he's given? I know you guys have moved on to other things, but I wanted to post about this when I saw it before, just didn't have the time. I left my ex when our son was almost 2 years old. Due to his allergies, he was always coming down with sinus infections. As a single mom, I had no one else to help me give him the medicine he needed to get better. He HATED taking meds and would spit it out - no matter the flavor or type (liquid at the time). I'll probably get flamed for this - but I figured out how to give him where he actually swallowed all of it and it was only slightly traumatizing for us both. As soon as he'd see me pull the medicine out, he'd run away screaming and I'd have to chase him down (after I got the syringe of medicine ready). I'd hold the syringe in my mouth, while I got him into position - which meant getting him flat on his back, arms to his sides, me straddling him with just enough pressure to pin his arms to his sides and me "sitting" on him to keep him from wiggling away. While he screamed, I'd shoot the meds into the back of his mouth/throat and hold his head until he had to take a breath - which meant him closing his mouth and swallowing. I'd then let him up, give him a big hug and get him a treat/snack if he wanted one. It sounds horrible - even to me typing this out - but in reality, the first time took the longest (probably a minute - max). After that, I got the system down and I'd get his meds into him in about 10-15 seconds. It took him about 2 (maybe 3) series of meds - around 6 months apart - to realize Momma was serious and he quit fighting me about taking the medicine. I figure I can't get much worse than "sitting" on your kid to give them meds!!
|
|
KaraBoo
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 17:14:51 GMT -5
Posts: 3,076
|
Post by KaraBoo on Feb 22, 2014 22:44:14 GMT -5
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on Feb 22, 2014 23:10:36 GMT -5
1. DS had the flu last week and was prescribed Tamiflu. It was some kind of white, chalky liquid suspension that was "bubble gum flavored". DS HATES bubble gum flavored things, so it's always been hard to get him to take medicine. I don't think we managed to give him more than a full dose (5mL) over the entire course of 5 days. We BOTH held him down, but he would just start spitting so much that he was basically foaming at the mouth. We would try and try but then when it was obvious he wasn't taking any, we stopped. Needless to say it made him EXTREMELY upset each time we tried to give it to him to the point where we just stopped. I even tried sneaking it in his food/drink, but he knew and wouldn't take it. He's better now. How do you handle giving your kids medicine that you know they won't take?2. DS is getting to be a more adventurous eater but he's still kinda picky. He goes to daycare 3 days a week where he gets 2 snacks and a lunch. He used to skip lunch sometimes because I guess he didn't like what they served. Last night he had a super tantrum when he got home. Then I found out that he ate none of his lunch. I looked at the school menu - it was something I knew he wouldn't eat. I believe in natural consequences and I know skipping meal isn't going to kill him, but I'm uncomfortable with my toddler going without a meal. Should I ask about maybe packing a back-up option in case he doesn't eat, or should I do nothing and maybe he'll learn to eat what he's given? I know you guys have moved on to other things, but I wanted to post about this when I saw it before, just didn't have the time. I left my ex when our son was almost 2 years old. Due to his allergies, he was always coming down with sinus infections. As a single mom, I had no one else to help me give him the medicine he needed to get better. He HATED taking meds and would spit it out - no matter the flavor or type (liquid at the time). I'll probably get flamed for this - but I figured out how to give him where he actually swallowed all of it and it was only slightly traumatizing for us both. As soon as he'd see me pull the medicine out, he'd run away screaming and I'd have to chase him down (after I got the syringe of medicine ready). I'd hold the syringe in my mouth, while I got him into position - which meant getting him flat on his back, arms to his sides, me straddling him with just enough pressure to pin his arms to his sides and me "sitting" on him to keep him from wiggling away. While he screamed, I'd shoot the meds into the back of his mouth/throat and hold his head until he had to take a breath - which meant him closing his mouth and swallowing. I'd then let him up, give him a big hug and get him a treat/snack if he wanted one. It sounds horrible - even to me typing this out - but in reality, the first time took the longest (probably a minute - max). After that, I got the system down and I'd get his meds into him in about 10-15 seconds. It took him about 2 (maybe 3) series of meds - around 6 months apart - to realize Momma was serious and he quit fighting me about taking the medicine. I figure I can't get much worse than "sitting" on your kid to give them meds!! Ummm.....well......you could bring him to ER, where your copay is $125 and let the nurse pretty much do the same thing (minus the hug and treat)....not that I would personally know anything about it, of course.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Feb 23, 2014 7:47:22 GMT -5
Kara, how you doing?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 8, 2024 18:25:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2014 14:00:44 GMT -5
I know you guys have moved on to other things, but I wanted to post about this when I saw it before, just didn't have the time. I left my ex when our son was almost 2 years old. Due to his allergies, he was always coming down with sinus infections. As a single mom, I had no one else to help me give him the medicine he needed to get better. He HATED taking meds and would spit it out - no matter the flavor or type (liquid at the time). I'll probably get flamed for this - but I figured out how to give him where he actually swallowed all of it and it was only slightly traumatizing for us both. As soon as he'd see me pull the medicine out, he'd run away screaming and I'd have to chase him down (after I got the syringe of medicine ready). I'd hold the syringe in my mouth, while I got him into position - which meant getting him flat on his back, arms to his sides, me straddling him with just enough pressure to pin his arms to his sides and me "sitting" on him to keep him from wiggling away. While he screamed, I'd shoot the meds into the back of his mouth/throat and hold his head until he had to take a breath - which meant him closing his mouth and swallowing. I'd then let him up, give him a big hug and get him a treat/snack if he wanted one. It sounds horrible - even to me typing this out - but in reality, the first time took the longest (probably a minute - max). After that, I got the system down and I'd get his meds into him in about 10-15 seconds. It took him about 2 (maybe 3) series of meds - around 6 months apart - to realize Momma was serious and he quit fighting me about taking the medicine. I figure I can't get much worse than "sitting" on your kid to give them meds!! Ummm.....well......you could bring him to ER, where your copay is $125 and let the nurse pretty much do the same thing (minus the hug and treat)....not that I would personally know anything about it, of course. I'm not paying a copay each time DS needs to take medication.
|
|
Sunnyday
Well-Known Member
Joined: Aug 3, 2013 0:36:39 GMT -5
Posts: 1,425
|
Post by Sunnyday on Feb 23, 2014 14:54:14 GMT -5
Yeah, my family had a large group that lived to insanely old age despite awful habits. Like yours, most of them had a more active lifestyle which I think provided some benefit and also although they ate large quantities of fattening foods, the food didn't have preservatives, additives or certain pesticides. They also tended to live "rural" lives in houses they'd built (so the building materials didn't offgas chemicals for years) drinking well water that although wasn't fortified with fluoride or sanitized with chlorine, didn't have all the residues and runoff that so much of the water has now.
Also, even though they lived to old ages, many of them had bodies that lived a lot longer than their brains. Lots of Alzheimer's and dementia.
I'm probably overthinking it because it's an issue that worries me, but I think it's really hard to make good choices with health in our current society. There's so much that we don't know, so much partial information and a huge amount of regular exposure to thousands of things we're not even aware of, much less know the long term effects of. The same complexity that has improved our lives has also introduced a huge amount of potential issues that we have very little way of comprehending because there's not enough data.
We're at the beginning of things where we know just a little bit. We have medical advances that prolong quantity of life for so many that would have died in the past. But we don't know enough and don't yet seem to be focused on how to improve the quality of life. So for the next few decades, we're going to struggle as a society with millions like your inlaws who take 100 pills a day, have increasing medical interventions and live a long, long time, but the last 25 years are pretty miserable.
If it were up to me, I'd trade living to 100 and having the last 25 years being ones of pills, medical interventions and poor mobility/pain for only living to 80, but up to the day before I died being active, happy and alert.
I've wondered about this myself. The older people in my family didn't seem to be plagued with all the illnesses that younger generations suffer through and they live a long time. I came to the conclusion that people were made of stronger stuff way back when. My grandmother and great-grandmother lived to 85 and 94. They were both physically pretty healthy into their 80's. I remember my great-grandmother dipping snuff from the time I was a little girl. Meals were home cooked, dough made from scratch and all that, but by today's standards, it wasn't a good diet. A meal was a meat and 2 vegetables, one had to be green, some kind of bread (to help fill you up) and a homemade dessert. The vegetables were often fresh from gardens, and the meat was sometimes freshly slaughtered hogs (don't get me started on the hog stories ) or whatever from the country, but the meat was often fried, the vegetables were cooked with pork fat for flavor, and the desserts had lots of butter and sugar in them. They are also 2 examples of the bodies holding up better than the mind in old age. They both had dementia in their 80's. The men in my family don't seem to have the longevity the women do, but that's statistically how it goes I believe. I really doubt that humans have evolved (or is it devolved?)in one generation to become weaker. Humans are exactly the same from a physiology perspective. That is just basic science. However, I think if people seem weaker or sicker now, it's probably because there are weaker people who were saved by modern medicine, but who probably would have died in the time of our ancestors. Our ancestors were the strong bunch of their cohort. Now, we are able save even the most sickliest child, who will then go on to being sickly adults and have sickly children. This logic is just as faulty as people saying that they don't make things as well as they use to. Nope, there have always been things cheaply made with shoddy construction as well as things that were made well. It's just that the well made things lasted, so now we say, hey look, all old things were made so well.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 8, 2024 18:25:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2014 17:59:29 GMT -5
I've wondered about this myself. The older people in my family didn't seem to be plagued with all the illnesses that younger generations suffer through and they live a long time. I came to the conclusion that people were made of stronger stuff way back when. My grandmother and great-grandmother lived to 85 and 94. They were both physically pretty healthy into their 80's. I remember my great-grandmother dipping snuff from the time I was a little girl. Meals were home cooked, dough made from scratch and all that, but by today's standards, it wasn't a good diet. A meal was a meat and 2 vegetables, one had to be green, some kind of bread (to help fill you up) and a homemade dessert. The vegetables were often fresh from gardens, and the meat was sometimes freshly slaughtered hogs (don't get me started on the hog stories ) or whatever from the country, but the meat was often fried, the vegetables were cooked with pork fat for flavor, and the desserts had lots of butter and sugar in them. They are also 2 examples of the bodies holding up better than the mind in old age. They both had dementia in their 80's. The men in my family don't seem to have the longevity the women do, but that's statistically how it goes I believe. I really doubt that humans have evolved (or is it devolved?)in one generation to become weaker. Humans are exactly the same from a physiology perspective. That is just basic science. However, I think if people seem weaker or sicker now, it's probably because there are weaker people who were saved by modern medicine, but who probably would have died in the time of our ancestors. Our ancestors were the strong bunch of their cohort. Now, we are able save even the most sickliest child, who will then go on to being sickly adults and have sickly children. This logic is just as faulty as people saying that they don't make things as well as they use to. Nope, there have always been things cheaply made with shoddy construction as well as things that were made well. It's just that the well made things lasted, so now we say, hey look, all old things were made so well. Ummm..... I wasn't serious about my conclusion that "people were made of stronger stuff way back when".
|
|