OK, it downpoured and... I'm noticing that the ditch has water backuped on the right and a little water on the left and I can see a little stream flowing to the left across a little gap in the driveway. Yes, I see, there /is/ water flow to this ditch AND going without a culvert would probably lead to flooding on the right side to cross, and if it didn't cross my driveway, it would cross my yard, lol. So, I see a culvert is well advised in this situation, lol. For water collection, all I have to do is clog the culvert and start tapping that dammed water. (No pun intended, lol)
I could go without a culvert, but I would have to dig a trench going around the driveway so that it could flow around the driveway.
Luckily, it's still pretty easy for me to put in a culvert at the moment. And I can afford it. And, I'm thinking a driveway trench probably would have a negative impact on the resale value unlike a culvert. That's one of those "Penny wise, pound foolish" kind of things in the event it gets resold.
And.
Cisco, once it's covered and the dirt packed around it, you'll be surprised at how much it would take to crush the pipe. My brother put two drainage pipes (4" schedule 40 PVC for one and now I've forgotten the name for the other black one of about the same thickness) under his driveway; no more than 3" deep and regularly drove an 18,000 pound truck over them with no problems.
Yes, I was having the same idea. Just buy some regular smaller sized diameter pipe from home depot. Looks like I'll need three 10 ft. 4" pipes and two 4" pipe connectors. The culvert needs to be like 14-15 ft. wide. near the entrance. Seems like it should be $75. And, to protect the pipes from clogging, put an appropriate screen before the pipes. Periodically clean the screen. Doing that, I could probably get away with 1x 4" 10ft. pipe and 1x 5ft. pipe . The reason why larger pipes are advised is due to leaf clogging, not flow rates. A lot of water can travel awfully fast through a 4" pipe given it's not clogged.
And... I'm starting to think that...
Eating an antibiotic food/liquid before bed might be advised; I'm thinking maybe... red wine,apple cider vinegar, cocoa, lemon/lime juice,etc.. I'm saying that because the meals throughout the day might have a tendency to build up bacteria colonies and if you go to sleep with those bacteria colonies, it might up the chances of night/morning issues. I'm saying this in light of doctors advising to take an aspirin before bed among those suggested to take one on a daily basis. So, I'm thinking a glass of red wine and aspirin before going to bed might not be a bad idea among those advised to take a daily aspirin.
I've just noticed how I start the morning kind of sluggish/not-quite-there and then the cocoa drink later in the day brought me back to normal (In the same way that pineapple did, which has /strong/ antibiotic properties), so I'm thinking that nightime antibiotic drink consumption might help to stave off morning issues. Red wine might be more advised than cocoa, since the latter tends to keep people awake. But... red wine is not without tradeoffs. Apple cider vinegar would probably be a good compromise, seemingly little in the way of tradeoffs. Then again, I could be wrong, maybe it increases the risk of cancer.
Well, searching for apple cider vinegar, the first paper I see is about apple cider vinega'rs antiglycemic effect. Isn't that interesting?
Because...
We already discovered that bacteria causes blood sugar levels to increase and apple cider vinegar is a known strong antibiotic, so by ingesting apple cider vinger, it is very plausible that blood sugar levels would go down as cortisol decreases reflecting the diminished bacteria populations. Isn't this relationship interesting?
bacteria->immune response->cortisol->blood-sugar
Or, in simpler terms...
bacteria->blood-sugar
It seems so /obvious/, but yet, it's so well unknown, lol.
Anyway, apple cider vinegar should also have the affect of keeping blood pressure numbers down, as well as any strong antibiotic foods/drinks/liquids.
Anyway... back to the cancer thing...
Don't see a lot of studies linking apple cider vinegar to cancer. It's plausible there's not much of a link, since apple cider vinegar are noticeably less acidic than grain vinegars. Grain vinegars, which were used extensively in pickling foods, were a large cause of stomach cancers during the Great Depression. People in the great depression ate a lot of pickled foods.
Based on that, i wonder if habitual consumption of green limes, as opposed to yellow limes, could increase cancer risk? Green limes, being unripe, are noticeably more acidic. But, maybe not, I've been told that limes have powerful anticancer "limoids".
I wonder... if bacteria has any relationship to cancer...
I known some viruses do.
But, I'm not entirely certain that bacteria can manipulate DNA like viruses can.
How would I go about discovering the associations here.
At first blush, it doesn't seem like there's a connection since red wine, a strong antibiotic, ups the risk of cancer. Or does it? Let's find out..
Seeing a lot of hypothesizing, not much data.
Well...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19521962
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20661834
Little to no association in these particular studies. (Small numbers affect)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2710299/ [Large group in this one]
In this large, multi-center, population-based case control study, alcohol was associated with an elevated risk of breast cancer, primarily because of increased risk in postmenopausal liquor drinkers. Neither red nor while wine was related to breast cancer.
Interesting, unlike the other alchohols, it has no affect on breast cancer risk. Perhaps the reservatol and other wine phytonutrients protects the body from the wines carcinogens?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15386436
Each additional glass of red wine consumed per week showed a statistically significant 6% decrease in relative risk (OR = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.90-0.98), and there was evidence for a decline in risk estimates across increasing categories of red wine intake (trend p = 0.02). No clear associations were seen for consumption of beer or liquor. Our present study suggests that consumption of beer or liquor is not associated with prostate cancer. There may be, however, a reduced relative risk associated with increasing level of red wine consumption. Further research is needed to evaluate the potential negative association between red wine intake and prostate cancer risk
.
Seems like there's either no association or a possible negative association, depending on the cancer. I guess that suggests that different cancers have different etiologies, which seems sensible. Which implies that if bacteria is a cause of some forms a cancer, there's many cancers where it isn't. I wonder which cancers bacteria might be associated with?
Colon cancer seems plausible. Any of the cancers in the digestive tract seems plausible (mouth, throat,stomach,small intestine, large intestine, colon, rectum). And, I suddenly lost the will to keep researching this, lol.
Okay... let's continue investigating the various antibiotic foods and their associated cancer associations to help answer the question does bacteria cause cancer.
--Eggs--
In the multivariable model with adjustment for age, sex (when applicable), residence, education, income, interviewer, smoking, alcohol intake, intake of fruits and vegetables, grains, dairy products, fatty foods, meat, energy intake and BMI, there was a significant increase in the odds of cancers of the oral cavity and pharynx (OR= 2.02, 95% CI: 1.19-3.44), upper aerodigestive tract (OR= 1.67, 95% CI: 1.17-2.37), colorectum (OR= 1.64, 95% CI: 1.02-2.63), lung (OR= 1.59, 95% CI: 1.10-2.29), breast (OR= 2.86, 95% CI: 1.66-4.92), prostate (OR= 1.89, 95% CI: 1.15-3.10), bladder (OR= 2.23, 95% CI: 1.30-3.83) and all cancer sites combined (OR= 1.71, 95% CI: 1.35-2.17) with a high vs low egg intake.
Wow.... eggs cause cancer? Did not know that. I wonder how? Is it because everyone is frying their egg subjecting it to high temperatures and thus producing carcinogens? What if people like... you know... boiled the egg... limiting it to the boil temperature? (I'm starting to think I need to get those raw peanuts and boil them. These peanuts I get from the mexican grocery have obviously been roasted, as well as the commercial peanuts. The carbonization tastes so good, but I do know... at least strongly think, lol.... that it causes cancer.).
More evidence showing high temperature preparation methods cause cancer.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3319155/Oh-spuds-Study-finds-crispy-roast-potatoes-crunchy-toast-contain-high-levels-cancer-causing-chemical-research-does-provide-tips-avoiding-toxin.html
Crispy roast potatoes, crunchy home-cooked chips and dark brown toast can give you cancer warns food watchdog
All have been prepared at high temperatures. Nothing should be baked, fried, roasted or toasted.
So, this leads me to strongly believe that the way eggs are typically prepared causes cancer, not that eggs in their natural state actually cause cancer. In fact, it looks like eggs in their natural should be possibly preventative.
Egg yolks are a significant source of choline, consumption of which has been found to be associated with lower risk of breast cancer in some studies.
Anyway, I typically consume fruits, veggies, nuts, cheese, fish and no bread products or other baked goods for the most part. The nuts I eat appear to be roasted (bad), the canned fish has been cooked but I'm not sure how (Baked? Boiled?),
Well...wiki...
Fish have a low acidity at levels where microbes can flourish. From a public safety point of view, foods with low acidity (a pH more than 4.6) need sterilization under high temperature (116-130 °C). To achieve temperatures above the boiling point requires a method of pressurized cooking which is provided by the containment within the can.
116-130C you say... Well, I think most browning starts at around 300F which is 150C so likely canned fish doesn't contain many high temperature carcinogens.
Well, I guess I should be concerned about my cancer risks or something; it's how the other half of American die. Anyway, I wonder why the virginia peanuts taste so tasteless compared to the mexican ones. Is it because they're prepared in soil that has been stripped of its magnesium and not been replaced? (Magnesium is not typically added back to the soil among most large farming operations in the USA. I will definitely be adding soil sources rich in magnesium.)
And cocoa powder is typically roasted. I guess I should do what the panamanian natives do, and boil the cocoa solids and filter them out. I'm not really sure what the "cocoa solids" are though? Is that like fragmented cocoa beans? Guess I need to get some fermented cocoa beans, start beating them with a hammer, boil them and strain them out. Might need to take a trip to the whole foods market to find something like that.
So, if I were to have a "avoid cancer" diet, I would...
-Avoid high temperature cooked foods (Roasting/baking/frying/toasting/etc.)
-Avoid chemicalized foods (much packaged meats, etc.)
-Don't eat red meat (I actually do wonder if boiled red meat has an association with colon cancer? Maybe it doesn't...)
-Eat all the lycopene (A bunch of different tropical fruits/veggies)
-Eat all the green leafy nitrates (spinach,kale,etc.)
Those last two should also be in the "avoid CVD" diet. I've been focusing a wee bit too much on the bacteria causes, and forgot to include the dietary factors that are known to reduce it.
-Lycopene
-Green leafy nitrates
-Vitamin D rich food (some fish, some mushrooms)
-What else... choline, I guess. I do know that choline consumption significantly improves the memory of ones offspring. Perhaps pregnant women should be eating egg yolks?
Actually, I think I'm roughly in the same class at the "upper half" of this neighborhood in terms of decorum, it's the "lower half" elements that have bad neigbhorhood habits. I'd probably opt to get this started when when starting the garden and/or chickens.
