Throat used in a sentence

Throat in a sentence as a noun

For a bad case of Strep throat? There's some serious clinical trials that need to be done.

And man, it gets cut-throat. You know, when I traded, I used to think that was the most cut-throat work environment.

Much complication starts when stuff like pointers is pushed down their throat. Or something like bit shifting.

He gagged and frantically gasped for breath as water filled his throat. His stomach began to swell.

I've had to become more cut-throat now. I don't buy something unless it actually works and does what I want it to at the time I buy it.

And you just know that if you won't accept willingly, they'll just shove it down your throat sooner or later. Right now my trust in them is being eroded and fast.

It's the most scalable way for them to generate revenue without shoving ads down your throat. 2.

I tolerate their products because I have to, but whenever I have the chance to slit the throat of their technologies in the workplace, I do so without remorse. Do I sound angry?

Over its lifetime, UO did a lot of things to make the game world less cut-throat, which will always be controversial. Some realms rules stayed more "hardcore" than others as a compromise.

Stuff like this seriously makes my throat clench a little bit. Half the complaints cover things that help your subconscious have a better idea of what's going on, from z-order to spatial changes in windows.

Microsoft's interest is to ram their touch interface down your throat so that you'd get used to it, and your next phone may possibly run Windows - regardless of what's good for you. Your interest is a usable system that just works.

Maybe you should focus more on originality and evaluate merit of these ideas instead of only craving for more stuff to be fed down your throat by current status Quo holders. And I believe that this is what HN is about.

Furthermore, it allows a 3rd party who hears the discourse more freedom to make up their mind, whereas they might naturally go against your point of view because it's being pushed down their throat.

People only care about how they will survive tomorrow, and who can blame them, as the world economy gets ever more competitive and cut-throat. Increasingly, it has become clear that our society does not reflect one designed with its own best interests at heart.

The use cases I can think of and commentary: -Hemostasis after non-emergent ear/nose/throat procedures. -Packing of the wound + local epinephrine administration is currently used.

My brother went six years behind me and he definitely disliked the cultural change: it became much more serious, much less laid-back, much more competitive and cut-throat. The alumni rant constantly about how the place has gone downhill, even though by the objective measures it is doing better than ever.

They're going straight for Facebook's throat, but they're doing it in a way that bridges the flaws in Facebook that have made room for products like LinkedIn. I have Circles set up for groups of work colleagues, professional contacts, family, and friends who I like to share fart jokes with. In each case, I can interact with those people in a manner appropriate to the nature of my relationship with them.

When Obama and Romney got on stage during the last debate to see who could get the coal industry's dick the deepest down their throat, they didn't do it because of the money the coal industry donated to their campaigns. [1] They did it because ordinary Pennsylvanians,[2] treat attacks on the coal industry as an attack on their livelihoods and their way of life.

I really don't feel bad about it until I run into people like this who ram it down my throat that not having the stuff I really want is supposed to make me feel cheap and unworthy compared to the people who can afford it. And finally, not that anybody gives a **** anymore, it's just morally wrong to equate possession of higher quality stuff with a higher level of worthiness.

Knowing that your co-founder is in exactly the same situation as you and that things are perfectly symmetrical can force you to actually resolve conflicts, because it takes away the option of one person shoving a decision down the other's throat.

Joining say 3 co-founders with 33% each against my 1% as the first senior engineering hire would really stick in the throat unless they had monster traction or funding [in which case they'd already probably be bigger then 3]. I just do not understand who takes these roles with very early stage startups as the entrepreneurial 'rockstars' that they are asking for can easily have a go themselves with not much less chance of success, pretty limited downside if it fails, and high opportunity costs either way.