<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	  <title>Ask MetaFilter questions tagged with oldwivestale</title>
      <link>http://ask.metafilter.com/tags/oldwivestale</link>
      <description>Questions tagged with 'oldwivestale' at Ask MetaFilter.</description>
	  <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:44:35 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:44:35 -0800</lastBuildDate>

      <language>en-us</language>
	  <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	  <ttl>60</ttl>	  
	<item>
	<title>Do bedtime times really matter?</title>
	<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/132512/Do%2Dbedtime%2Dtimes%2Dreally%2Dmatter</link>	
	<description>&quot;An hour of sleep before midnight is worth two hours after&quot;. Is there any science to back this up, or is it just an old wives&apos; tale? My sister believes that &quot;an hour of sleep before midnight is worth two hours after&quot;, having read it in a book by a religious writer she follows. I think it&apos;s an old wives&apos; tale that goes back a long, long time, before people had much knowlege of REM cycles, circadian rhythms, etc, in the same vein as &quot;early to bed, early to rise, makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise&quot;. She&apos;s naturally an early bird, I&apos;m more of a night owl. We&apos;re not talking completely opposite sleep times here - more like the difference between a 9 pm bedtime, or staying up until midnight. Anyone have some actual science to add to the discussion?</description>
	<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:ask.metafilter.com,2009:site.132512</guid>
	<pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:44:35 -0800</pubDate>
	<category>oldwivestale</category>
	<category>resolved</category>
	<category>sleep</category>
	<dc:creator>dorey_oh</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
	<title>Is it ok to put still-warm food in the fridge or freezer?</title>
	<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/31450/Is%2Dit%2Dok%2Dto%2Dput%2Dstillwarm%2Dfood%2Din%2Dthe%2Dfridge%2Dor%2Dfreezer</link>	
	<description>Is it ok to put still-warm leftovers in the fridge or freezer? My girlfriend and I constantly disagree about this.  She was always told, growing up, that you have to wait until recently-cooked food has cooled to room temperature before you can put it in the fridge.  If you don&apos;t, she says, bacteria will grow on it much more easily and you will get sick.  &lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
I&apos;ve ALWAYS just put the warm leftovers right into the fridge/freezer, and never had any problems with it, and in fact I find that the &quot;leaving it till it cools down&quot; often leads to food forgotten on the counter overnight, which in my opinion would be more likely to lead to spoilage.  (Sweet mother of god that was a horrible runon sentence!)&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
My google-fu has led to little in the way of answers, does anybody have any concrete facts one way or the other?  As far as I&apos;m concerned, it just seems like common sense that bacteria is less likely (or at worst, just as likely) to grow on warm-food-in-the-cold-fridge as it is in warm-food-on-the-kitchen-counter.  My girlfriend refuses to believe me, as it was SO ingrained into her brain in a child.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Help me, AskMe, you&apos;re my only hope!</description>
	<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:ask.metafilter.com,2006:site.31450</guid>
	<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:44:20 -0800</pubDate>
	<category>bacteria</category>
	<category>food</category>
	<category>freezer</category>
	<category>microbes</category>
	<category>oldwivestale</category>
	<dc:creator>antifuse</dc:creator>
	</item>
	
	</channel>
</rss>

