Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)PO
Posts
20
Comments
3,714
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • If people are still building fossil fuel plants, it's preferable that they build nuclear instead. Nuclear has the downsides of what to do with the waste (modern reactors produce much less than older designs, and some actually use the waste from older designs as fuel), expansion of fossil fuels have the downside that we won't live long enough for nuclear waste to become any kind of real problem

    Obviously renewables are best, but whilst we've not got the battery tech ready for 100% renewable base load, it's not enough on its own.

    Don't let perfect be the enemy of good

  • Yeah that's a good call, definitely don't smash the ibuprofen, but I think one dose is generally pretty low risk, given I believe you still need to be overdosing on the ibuprofen to get problems, at least that's what a doctor told me when I asked a number of years ago.

    The thing with alcohol and paracetamol/acetaminophen is it causes your liver to do something different than if you had the two separately. I'm not 100% I'm getting the terminology exactly right here but, If alcohol is taking up all of the "usual" enzyme a less efficient enzyme processes the paracetamol that's less efficient at metabolising it, that enzyme produces a toxic by-product that normally isn't created. That toxic by-product is what causes the liver failure if it can't subsequently be metabolised again quick enough.

  • And don't take it the morning after a heavy night of drinking, it's like 10x more toxic in that scenario.

    If you need a pain killer go for ibuprofen until like 24h after you finished your last drink

  • Lol never wealth inequality in these things.

    On our current trajectory, there's 1 generation left where 99% of people stand any chance in hell of owning any kind of property, 2 generations until 99% can afford to do anything but survive.

    The ultra rich are buying everything, because that's all they can do with all their wealth, any of their personal wants and needs are addressed with a fraction of the income from their wealth.

    Everything will keep getting more expensive as just the ultra rich compete for assets, driving their prices up. (Not just houses, e.g. farms get more expensive to buy? Food prices go up)

    You will keep taking a pay cut in real terms every year, as even if you get a pay rise, odds are it's not beating inflation.

    Fewer people will be able to afford to even take a mortgage, working people who already have assets will be forced to take asset release in order to afford to continue to live.

    Before long 100% of all assets on earth will be owned by the 0.1%, and anything you enjoy in life will be either gone or reconfigured to only serve the people who still have any money.

    Odds are, you or your children will be living in a slum

    There is the tiniest chance the people with all the money will put some of that towards resolving climate change, as they have to live on this planet too, however there is zero chance they will make any moves to reduce their wealth willingly. In fact we see them funding anti-immigration parties instead as that's a nice easy enemy to misdirect the rubes with. We need to take their assets from them, and wealth tax is pretty much the only way we can do that before we get full fat oligarchy

  • Obesity is a disease. That's entirely non controversial.

    Now, regarding the rest of your post, I believe a person with a disease deserves compassion and support to help remedy the disease.

    Obesity typically correlates with poverty and/or depression.

    Generally the obesity is very much secondary to a failing economy and its safety nets. Very few people are out there wanting to be obese, and even fewer will prefer to stay that way when they get there.

    People who aren't struggling have the financial, mental and physical capacity to do things to improve their life. If even one of those gets compromised, a person is going to be less able to make good choices. If a person is ground down into being depressed, famously even getting up and brushing their teeth can be an insurmountable task; for people like that coming up with a healthy meal is likely going to be pretty out of reach.

    Take Rob McElhenney as a great example, he got obese for a gag in always sunny and then lost the weight after that season. He posted this after: https://www.instagram.com/share/p/BANl58Bih7

    Look, it's not that hard. All you need to do is lift weights six daysa week, stop drinking alcohol, don't eat anything after 7pm, don't eat any carbs or sugar at al, in fact just don't eat anything you like, get the personal trainer from Magic Mike, sleep nine hours a night, run three miles a day, and have a studio pay for the whole thing over a six to seven month span. don't know why everyone's not doing this. It's a super realistic lifestyle and an appropriate body image to compare oneself to.

    Normal people have to work (sometimes multiple jobs) and don't have much disposable income or energy left at the end of the day (particularly if they're already unhealthy).

    If you're seeing a lot of obese people around, there's much bigger structural problems in your society than someone that's probably having a shitty time deciding to eat an ice cream.

  • I mean they've played a bit of a stupid game with this one

    All the wacko gun nuts are on the right, just like the shooter

    They've demonstrated that if a right wing gun nut shoots a high profile right wing personality, the establishment will blame & target left wing people whilst making excuses and "prayers" for the shooter.

    Strategically speaking they have to be really really banking on that guy being the only crazy guy out there with a gun.

  • Do these people ever look at what they're doing and think "are we the bad guys?"

    I don't get how a remotely rational, non-malicious person supports something like this.

    "Scientists specialising in forests should make sure they check the forests aren't going to die off from time to time" is such an absurd thing to be against

    And yes I know it's lobbying

  • United Kingdom @feddit.uk

    Senior Labour figures tell Keir Starmer to stop making mistakes

    Crows @lemmy.ml

    If we're doing crows on signs...

    Glastonbury Festival @feddit.uk

    Glastonbury 2025 Highlights

    dailygames @lemmy.zip

    NYT Mini - 25th June 2025

    [Migrated, see pinned post] Casual Conversation @lemm.ee

    How's Friday treating you?

    United Kingdom @feddit.uk

    End of an era as Radio City tower hosts final live broadcast on Christmas Eve | Liverpool

    Cocktails, the libationary art! @lemmy.world

    Negroni station

    Football (migrated to football@sopuli.xyz) @lemmy.world

    Uefa warns England could be banned from Euro 2028 over regulator concerns - BBC Sport

    Gunners @lemmy.world

    Pots for today‘s UEFA Champions League‘s league phase draw

    Gunners @lemmy.world

    Premier League predictions 2024-25: BBC Sport pundits pick their top four

    Gunners @lemmy.world

    Canvas

    [Migrated, see pinned post] Casual Conversation @lemm.ee

    Why aren't there adult only flights?

    BestOfLemmy @lemmy.world

    @sempiro@lemmy.world's Comprehensive guide to drum & bass and jungle styles and subgenres

    UK Politics @feddit.uk

    Labour "change" election campaign video posted

    AI Generated Images @sh.itjust.works

    Turtleduck

    Rugby Union @sh.itjust.works

    Wasps: One Year On. Getting There

    Indie Gaming @lemmy.world

    What's everyone played this week?

    Command & Conquer @lemmy.ml

    Which is the best entry in the series?

    Lemmy.world Support @lemmy.world

    Can't subscribe to a lemmit.online community

    Lemmy Plugins and Userscripts @sh.itjust.works

    Simple old Lemmy community bar customisation (updated again)