As opposed to an award wing researcher such as yourself.

The article isn't about every single possible ink or combination. It is about the results of subcutaneous injection of various chemicals or substances. Where Macrophages transport those chemicals to the lymph nodes. Here's your challenge. Show point by point the inaccuracies in their work - you make the claim of scientific fraud - prove it. I'll even provide web space and will publish your analysis. You can end up on retraction watch, the researcher who pointed out actual fraud.

You mad bro? Or is this sarcastic?

She's well within her rights. I'm a big fan of the Wiccan Rede: "An' ye harm none, do what ye will." Now some might find that she is harming herself - especially in the context of the issues in this topic, that is a her decision to make. If she is comfortable with what many find intentional disfigurement, I'm fine with it as far as having the right.

But if I find it repulsive, I have the right as well. You might find my right as me being a piece of shit and disgusting. You have that right. I might note that your over the top reaction says more about you than me.

That is, if you are serious. If not, I'll take my whoosh and move on, considering the source.

It's the wrong question. Obviously you can set a barge out on the ocean and land a rocket on that. But the idea that you cn launch and land anywhere is a non-starter.

The landing spot must be related to the launch location, and where in orbit you are sending the payload. Sometimes the first stage has to be discarded. In principle, you could guide the first stage back to anywhere if you had enough fuel and ability to maneuver. Of course, that would make the booster much heavier and complex. In reality, not happening.

All related to orbital mechanics and the so-called "rocket problem" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... or https://www.astronomicalreturn...

And that is why even Spacex discards their boosters at times. No practical place to land them. Boosters not having the fuel and maneuverability to get them to a place where they can land.

I knew her sister, nice lady.

Whoosh! My point is Starship seems to be really good at rapid unplanned disassembly, so maybe the Chinese are using Starship technology secrets.

That is just bizarre. But before we go further - it's a flat-8, not a straight 8. https://www.cycleworld.com/mot...

This "years ahead" motorcycle is just a Honda Goldwing type motorcycle with a couple extra cylinders. Meh. No thanks. I'll settle for my big-twin Honda Shadow Spirit 1100 cc. It looks like a classic Fatboy Motorcycle. Stump pulling torque, gets 50 mpg, and comfortable enough I can ride 150 miles at a stretch, which is handy since it has a 3 gallon tank and is ready for fuel at that point.

Burgundy Chameleon paint. Un-branded, no rear seat.

Which is, good technology, by the way. Even Honda uses some of that olde stuff. My first motorcycle, a 60's era Honda trail 90, is remarkably similar to the Trail 125 they sell today.

In many countries, the paradigm is different.

Do you think they's stolen Starship technology?

Yeah, Landing rockets is old hat by now - Indeed, while Spacex is the ones we always think of, New Glenn is a lot better. Hovering, fixing itself to the deck. I have no doubt that the Chinese will succeed in landing their rockets.

New Glenn has one other very important advantage while we are at it. It's ability to hover, and fixing itself to the deck allows for a much expanded launch envelope. Easier to put that barge where you need it. Spacex doesn't seem to care for doing this all that often any more. Severely limiting the launch profile when you have to return to the launch site.

So give the Chinese time, they'll stick the landings soon.

You appear to be making a statement that sounds like "Until every combination of tattoo inks is proven to cause problems, none do." I'm sure you aren't saying that, right?

What this study has said is that the ink migrates within the body to lymph nodes causes inflammation, and oddly enough, causes different reactions to different vaccines. Also an induction of apoptosis in cells, including macrophages. The macrophages see the ink as an infection, and do what macrophages do.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.10... I reposted the study and experiments. If anyone thinks this is an okay thing, they need to research further,

Maoris's are susceptible to diabetes. I only mention that because I had a friend who developed an allergic reaction to a tattoo (the gold color in it specifically) and soon after came down with insulin dependent diabetes.

That's pure speculation at this point, the standard reason is that they eat the same food we do now.

And a remarkable lack of boundaries in so many cases - which might feed into the poor self image.

In the young groups I am around, Tattoos are considered passe', and not cool.

As one young lady said, "In 40 years, we'll hear "Tattoos? Ewwww, my Grandma has them, they look gross" "

A lot of Pop culture is still stuck in the idea that the more tats, the cooler. But that's how fads and social trends go. When the Tattoo craze ends - there might be a surge in laser removal, at least until the person having them removed ends up with a tattoo ghosting - the removal process removes skin pigments with the tattoo. But the question must be asked, if tats are cool, why would anyone have them removed?

Somewhere in these messages is my recounting of a friend who became allergic to his tattoo, had it removed. And while not certain, a 50 year old healthy and fit male developed diabetes that required insulin to control soon after. That was many years ago, when no one was seeing a potential correlation, much less causation.

In the end, people are welcome to do with their bodies as they will. The rest of us are allowed to have our opinions (and sometimes facts) about that.

You might enjoy https://engrish.com/ Some of it makes sense after a little thought. Some of the things on T-shirts will probably get you asked to change if you wear them in an English speaking country.

You're at 4 funny, but I hope it is true. I don't like tats on anyone, but it is especially sad on women. I will note that I've noticed that women around 21 are sporting less tattoos than many I see in public that are a bit older. At the restaurants My wife and I go to, there seems to be a correlation between tattoos and lack of a wedding ring.

This does not mean that they lack in male attention, but they are considered entertainment only, and the men who use them for entertainment are generally not good for them.