I just turn it off.

My alcoholic dad died at 76 after a life of eating lots of hot dogs.

His parents lived to their late 80s, for context.

This is slashdot. Don't assume anybody read anything. Most of these people can only scan text up to the first keyword that makes their neckbeard twitch and then they start typing out a manifesto. They have nearly write-only interfaces.

For one thing, the headline is from a mainstream media source, not a science news source.
Second, it is not in any sort of science section; it's in the food section.
Third, just click on the author's name in the story for a list of their articles. They're not a science reporter. (Or a food reporter) Probably a freelancer.

It's only getting front-paged because of the misleading headline, though, so this is a big win for the writer.

The Inuit have short lifespans because they have a very high rate of what we call heart disease.

However, they do not consider heart disease to be a disease if it is caused by diet. To them, dying in your 50s because your heart stopped is simply a description of "dying of old age."

Doctors who work in these communities do not diagnose people with these beliefs with heart disease, because they'll lose their job. Patients have a right to refuse care, and the doctors respect that and refrain from making a diagnosis. Similarly with death certificates.

If it was really true they didn't get heart disease from eating lots of blubber wouldn't it be exceptionally odd that they have such low lifespans?

They didn't adapt to the diet, they simply have a low quality diet. I don't think there is a single example in the known record of an ancient tribe that died because it "tried to adapt to a weird diet and just couldn't."

Wait, you're using video in the bathroom, via a computer?

I guess I'll keep an eye out for you on the news in case you get arrested.

You should have recognized that the K added to the word American means he's agitating.

And given that the agitation is targeted at the people currently out of power, that implies that it is agitprop. He's most likely ruzzian, or employed as such.

Even after decades of pretending to be a nerd, you're still dumb enough to think that studies published in top-tier journals like Nature might not have accounted for even the most obvious confounding variables.

There are reasonable reasons to be skeptical about this study, or any individual study. However, you didn't identify one; you just spewed some recycled anti-intellectual claptrap.

If you can't fix the architecture all you've done is kicked the can.

Why would you pirate Windows 10, when MS gives the iso free for download, and if you don't register it just disables some of the MS malware?

Maybe I'll get my $3.50 in 2028 -- assuming the court doesn't find that I "agreed to the terms and conditions"

Sure one country can stop it! If we'd just nuke everybody we don't like, we'd have a nuclear winter instead.

No, it is for people whose concept of knowing things isn't limited to pretending.

You're decades too late to have rational doubts about the existence of global warming; that's true even if you're an idiot who knows nothing.

If you don't know anything... stfu about everything.

Great, now we have AI slop and Al slop in the same post.

And I just spilled my pill bottle into the merge window!

If a person is "crazy" or not is defined by dysfunction. Everybody has "some sort of physical neurological issue," that's what sentience is. Are you a rock? No? You have some sort of neurological issue.

If interacting with the tool causes a neurological issue to make the jump from not a source of dysfunction to being a source of dysfunction, then yes, it has made them crazy.

They would not be crazy but for use of the tool.