About "less soap".

Post #44,839 by Ashton 7/8/02 10:06:06 PM Reply	About "less soap". You'll note, having encountered females - that often such persons 'rinse' most of their bodies (and.. frequently enough, generally - one might add). Reserve full soaping for either recreation areas or following an encounter with actual dirt. (As say.. after a shift in the mines?) Perspiration, unless allowed to accumulate, ripen and feed the trillions of bugs all over all of us - indeed 'rinses away' mostly. Ergo: French are perhaps Smarter than most folks (?) Note also the Ads showing.. toothpaste squeezed out of tube for a Whole Brush-length - when anyone with hi single-digit IQ realizes that 10% of that will do the job quite handily. You Are (whichever Ads You Fall-for) Ashton
Post #44,846 by Andrew Grygus 7/8/02 11:28:13 PM Reply	Well, I have taken to rinsing . . . . . for the most part in my evening shower, reserving soap for strategic areas, since I no longer exude buckets of oil as I did when I was younger. Nontheless, I am not French, And never will be, For the Gods have smiled upon me, And for that I am forever greatful. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #44,853 by Ashton 7/9/02 1:25:04 AM Reply	Alas then.. You could not truly love your Citr\ufffden, that uniquely French creation of an automobile of which the designer said, I was inspired by a waterfowl... Alas..
Post #44,915 by Andrew Grygus 7/9/02 1:16:28 PM Reply	Isn't that the car that . . . . . squats in the street? [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #44,918 by boxley 7/9/02 1:36:33 PM Reply	squats real well in sharp left hand turns TAM ARIS QUAM ARMIPOTENS
Post #44,935 by Ashton 7/9/02 2:45:16 PM Reply	Move the lever up and it also rises.. Above such cheeky disses. (while it also enables you to change a wheel, secured by only one bolt in the center, ditto remove rear fenders for access - with one bolt. No jacking required) Oh yeah: inboard disk-brakes from the first, when local stuff was all humm-drum. And all this starting in ~'56 while.. Muricans had to abide the likes of Tempos and Pintos and other just-post Stone Age ironmongery. :-\ufffd
Post #44,909 by wharris2 7/9/02 12:58:57 PM Reply	Speaking of toothpaste Whatever happened to the "pump toothpaste" that was so popular a couple years or four ago? I certainly liked it better than the squeeze toothpaste, or the dry Pepsodent-like toothpaste. Famous last RPG quotes: "I'll just shoot this fireball down the dungeon passageway..."
Post #44,983 by SpiceWare 7/9/02 11:21:33 PM Reply	still around I use [link\|http://www.mentadent.com/products/index.asp\|Mentadent], push down on the top and it squirts out the spout. It has two chambers so the "baking soda and peroxide mix together only when dispensed", but I buy it because of the no-mess dispensing. Darrell Spice, Jr. [link\|http://home.houston.rr.com/spiceware/\|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore
Post #45,602 by CRConrad 7/15/02 7:42:52 AM Reply	Pump needs 2 hands, ol'Squeezytube better-IF it's a fliptop!
Post #45,604 by CRConrad 7/15/02 8:05:04 AM Reply	"Quantity has a quality all its own" Ashton writes: Note also the Ads showing.. toothpaste squeezed out of tube for a Whole Brush-length - when anyone with hi single-digit IQ realizes that 10% of that will do the job quite handily. Ackcherly, I saw a dentist in a Swedish "Consumer Guide"-type TV show (that exposes "scandals" and goes for the "on the little guy's side" image, so probably not in cahoots w/ manufacturers) a couple months ago, who said that it works best if you DO use a whole brush-length of paste. I used to belong to the "10% school" too, but since seeing this I've tried to remember to use more; he seemed to know what he was talking about -- and, hey, the expense of buying six or eight tubes of toothpaste a year, in stead of two or three, won't kill my budget! Especially since I don't have to buy the most expensive name-brand stuff -- he also said they're all pretty much the same, "New Improved Formula" slogans notwithstanding; buy any kind you like or think you can afford (as long as it's fluoridated, he was pretty keen on that; and preferably not abrasive). Just make sure you use lots of toothpaste (if too much of it in your mouth makes you gag -- the host of the show asked, claiming this happens to him -- do just a part at a time, pasting your brush in between), use a soft brush, and (he stressed this too) don't rinse out your mouth perfectly; leaving some toothpaste-foam on your teeth, this expert claimed, is essential in order for the fluoride to have time to do its work. YMMV, etc, but it all seemed to make sense to me. Christian R. Conrad Microsoft is a true reflection of Bill Gates' personality - the sleaziest, most unethical, ugliest little rat's ass the world has seen unto this time. -- [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=42971\|Andrew Grygus]
Post #45,698 by Ashton 7/15/02 6:38:03 PM Reply	I don't see his logic. re the amount of this huge excess - as could ever contact the surface-area of all teeth. Y'know? I'm missing this point. But I do see the "time factor" - as would anyone who didn't sleep through chem 101. So I generally leave the "mouth not-quite-Full!" of foam, go on and do some other little chore, then final brushy brushy and.. onto the floss. (Which My A+type dentist maintained is the most important of all. Done like a CPA - before Enron). Hmmm.. would be interesting to see some actual #s re the deposition-rate of the fluoride-containing actual radicals in these nostrums: is 2 min. OK? what ya get for 10 then? I mean.. if it really mattered, we could.. develop different brushing habits like, Start brushing. Wash car, motorcycle, UAV Rinse a bit Dry ","," etc. Invention freebie: my great idea, discussed with above A+ kinda teaching-perfessor was - invent a device to fit in kids' mouths for a time. It should simulate the 'feel' of dentures! As in, nuff said about the "time wasted" in keeping your own teeth.. We weren't smart enough to devise such :(
Post #45,737 by CRConrad 7/16/02 4:49:09 AM Reply	I think I do. Ashton: re the amount of this huge excess - as could ever contact the surface-area of all teeth. Y'know? I'm missing this point. How do all detergents (soap, dish-washing stuff, laundry detergent, etc etc) work? I thought it was chemically -- the dirt (or, in this case, the bacteria) binds to the detergent, in stead of whatever surface it is presently adhering to, right? But... once that's happened, what good is that particular detergent molecule? Nothing, AFAICS; it's "spent", bound to the dirt it's picked up already. So I assumed he meant this is what happens; all the detergent in your tiny dollop of toothpaste is bound to just part of the bacteria: Brushing on after that does no good, except for pure mechanical abrasion; you could just as well brush with just pure water. It's not just about covering a surface (cf your "contact the surface-area"); it must also be about how thick the layer of dirt on that surface is. Then again, this is just my interpretation of his point; I'm not saying fersure that's how he meant it works. YMMV. (But mine's lower! :-) Christian R. Conrad Microsoft is a true reflection of Bill Gates' personality - the sleaziest, most unethical, ugliest little rat's ass the world has seen unto this time. -- [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=42971\|Andrew Grygus]
Post #45,747 by drewk 7/16/02 8:55:52 AM Reply	Not what I've heard My hazy unsubstantiated recollection of how detergents work is that they either reduce the viscosity of the water so it can penetrate the dirt, or it dissolves the non-water-soluble parts of the dirt so that the water can wash it away. Most detergents, when added to water, are just designed to let the water do its work more effectively. But then again, I can't point to any source for my recollection either. === Microsoft offers them the one thing most business people will pay any price for - the ability to say "we had no choice - everyone's doing it that way." -- [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=38978\|Andrew Grygus]
Post #45,785 by hnick 7/16/02 12:51:05 PM Reply	What I recall from high school... is that detergents are long molecules that are polar on one end and non-polar on the other. The polar end allows miscibility with water, while the non-polar end allows the same with grease/oils and other non-polar materials. It's been a while, so my memory could be faulty... Hugh
Post #45,825 by Ashton 7/16/02 8:28:16 PM Reply	Similar to that last Polarized fershure.. but the explanation for collecting 'dirt' seemed more a physical chemistry attraction and not an actual chemical (bonding) effect. Old too, so maybe by now someone actually Understands. I've used some Industrial detergents which acted as if they'd clean carburetors; in fact, they did! :-) (Hell it may be as subtle as the fact that, were there no hydronium molecule performing weirdly as it does: we wouldn't be having this conversation) Ashton PS another "long chain polymer" ~ like a detergent -- is the active ingredient in Tweek\ufffd 'contact enhancer' whose amazing property is that: under [sufficient] pressure it conducts electrons but is otherwise a good insulator! Sufficient turns out to be - most electrical contacts except the really 'soft' kind. And.. it's alcohol soluble, making application EZ. The first Cure for lots of kinds of intermittents, now proven in really tough environments.

Welcome to IWETHEY!