Comment Re: Low nutrition due to over farming wo restor (Score 1) 111
Nope, just old. Unused for well over a decade. Unlike you, I can't operate a poo-man-crew. Your class is the only one with the Animate Poo spell.
Nope, just old. Unused for well over a decade. Unlike you, I can't operate a poo-man-crew. Your class is the only one with the Animate Poo spell.
The share holders get to profit from selling cheap crappy foods and then profit again from selling expensive crappy medical care. What a time to be alive.
You're currently living in the must prosperous period in history, and we're all actually healthier than we've ever been. More than that, after you adjust for the fact that we live longer, completely natural causes like cancer are at the lowest rate they've ever been.
At the same time, all throughout history, and to the present day, most people, and even most religions, preach that the time they live in is the worst period in history. Extremist ideologies make it a point to push others to believe in it as well. Unless they can succeed in doing that, they don't get their revolutions. So that's why you get people like Drinkypoo I Lenin who look at data from Hans Rosling, which confirms what I'm saying, and call it capitalist propaganda simply because it doesn't affirm his authoritarian talking points, even though it's just data.
The only thing we've objectively regressed on that I can think of is most people not having straight teeth like we used to over 250 years ago. Especially the British.
These aren't risky. I just spoke to my endocrinologist about this very topic this morning, and apparently this is a known thing that occasionally results from weight loss. Doesn't matter whether you diet, exercise, use these, etc, you can still have this same form of blindness happen to you, exact same underlying cause.
And the way the FDA came to this fits what my endocrinologist said: They used AERS, which if you recall the pandemic days is similar to VAERS. This is all just self-reported, and until we study it in more detail, this is nothing more than correlation, because a known effect of this drug is, get this: Weight loss. It doesn't warrant a warning label, but remember, this is Robert Kennedy's FDA we're talking about.
I personally have been putting on weight little bits at a time ever since my kidney transplant, which is a known thing, and I've been on zepbound since April, shortly after watching the comments here dogging people who were on it, but I couldn't care less. Last month, my egfr came back at 80. This is almost 9 years post-transplant and it's never been that good. In fact that's within a typical range for somebody my age without even having a transplant. Transplants, especially cadaverous, typically don't work this well. This may be due to the hypothesized renal protective effect that these peptides may have for IgAN patients, of whom I am.
As far as we know, the only major side effect of these drugs is some people experience nausea. For me, I experienced a bout of it during my 6th week, which lasted all of three days. Well that, and if you don't have insurance, it will hurt your wallet pretty good. In my case only $25/month through my employer's plan. For rsilvergun, they prescribed Lizzo.
Hah hah, very funny. Sure, as a dragon I may leave a pretty big deuce, I will not deny that. But I still don't understand why you like to swim in it and then track it all over afterwards. But then you just wouldn't be drinkypoo if you didn't.
Besides, this isn't my first account here. And no, the previous ones aren't banned and they have max karma.
A lot of recent alarmist reporting in this regard has turned up to be bogus, like low sperm counts, and how much plastic is in a typical person's brain. In both cases it was an error in how they were being measured. It's not nothing, but very overstated.
But given you commented here, that does raise an eyebrow. In your experience, and only in terms of human fecal matter, how has the taste and consistency changed over the last 40 years?
I'll raise you
Where are you even getting this from? Foodbabe? Mercola? Your aunty? I think it's far more likely a result of the higher abundance of calories and less incentive to move. This isn't even remotely new. We've seen this in aristocrats for millennia. It turns out that if you consume more calories than you use, you get fat. In the past, that required wealth. These days, food is abundant enough to put downward pressure on food prices to the point that, even if you're rsilvergun, its easy to get enough cheeseburgers in a day to feed a horse.
The things you're talking about are far more likely to trigger effects like inflammation and high triglycerides than they are to make you overweight. I say this because it's already quite well known that, with all other things being equal, including calorie intake, this stuff isn't going to make a meaningful difference in your weight.
The OP did, Pootin.
Yes, that is what I feel, and that's exactly the message I gave you: What I described above is my lived experience. I didn't do a study on it, I didn't take a survey, I don't have any data. That's just what I've experienced and observed. That makes it a hypothesis.
And while you say that, I'm the one who has been writing everything in rust for the last 6 years. Not you. I believe, with good reason, that I understand it a lot better than you do. Many agree, and they pay me a hell of a lot more than you get paid, for your C++ slop, to architect and write code in rust. While that number isn't definitive, it makes a much more compelling argument than anything you'll ever have.
Oh I forgot, you're an old C++ developer incapable of learning how to use new tools. My condolences.
Whether that's the case or not, it's not going to cause a person to kill himself out of the blue, and comments like this probably make the situation worse.
The thing with suicide is nobody ever really knows exactly why any given person does it. Sometimes it's just a total mystery. Even if somebody says why they're going to do it before they did it, such as a suicide note, it's often not the truth. Look at the way some narcissists threaten to kill themselves if a person they're fixated on leaves them. The person leaving them isn't fundamentally why they'd do it, rather it's because they've got a bunch of other unresolved issues, and it may not have even taken much at all to just nudge them over the cliff. Events like this are the just the tip of what is often a very large iceberg.
I say this as a person who has had somebody close to me put two bullets in his head while I was within earshot. There was a major particular event surrounding that, but the truth is he had already made multiple attempts in the years prior, so blaming it all on that event or the people who caused it seems pointless.
This is easily the case with Aaron Schwartz given his past. I definitely think this is the case with David Ginder given what I'd already seen about his past long before that made slashdot. In the case of all three of the people I mentioned, I believe there may have been an acute martyr complex. Nobody can really say for sure. But news media and social media love martyrs. Which may encourage more martyrs. See also: Columbine effect.
This is the intellect of
No, that would be morons like you who love to shout "MAGA" or "fascist" damn near any time somebody doesn't see something exactly your way.
No, they're about much more than safety, and "shareholder value" doesn't (and shouldn't) factor into it. At all. Yet again, this is your ideological bent. Some regulations may have that effect, but it shouldn't matter one way or another. ALARA for example can and does get interpreted as "even though we're already well, well within a safe boundary, spend an extra 2 billion to do even better." It doesn't matter if you're a government entity, a nonprofit, a co-op, or whatever the hell it is your ideology tells you is the most virtuous or holier than thou, it's still 2 billion that you're required to spend in order to gain exactly nothing meaningful.
My question to you is and always has been: Who does this help, exactly? Because the one and only answer I can come up with is NIMBYs. That includes financial NIMBYs, such as yourself, who don't want the possibility of anybody in their backyard being able to make an extra dime, because profit is bad, especially in light of the fact that these same rules never say "you only get to spend less money on this extra guard rail your motive for doing so isn't for profit".
"It takes all sorts of in & out-door schooling to get adapted to my kind of fooling" - R. Frost