For $0 a month you can drink water from the tap. It's healthy and doesn't require installing an app.
(Psst. You should be finding ways to balance your diet, not contribute to its destruction.)
(Psst. You should be finding ways to balance your diet, not contribute to its destruction.)
Water from the tap is not free, it is a cost everyone pays in some way or another (built into rent or part of property taxes). Even if you still live with your parents, a dollar they spend on the water bill is a dollar less for you.
... also coffee is almost entirely water... so by your logic it's "almost free" as well.
No, not by my logic, not by anyone's logic. Almost the entire price of a cup of coffee covers the "bean" and "labour" part of it. The contribution of the cost of the water to the final cost of a cup of coffee is ... almost nothing at all.
The average 2013 annual water rates bill in England is £390, or $650.
> and free water fountains are indeed ubiquitous
I've just been on a day-trip to England, through two major regional airports. I paid about £12 in total for bottled water during the day, suffering inflated airport shop prices, because there was not a single water fountain ( I asked ). Average price of a 750 ml bottle was around £2.20 and I had to gulp-and-chuck frequently due to passing through security three times.
Coffee would have been cheaper...
Most of which is non-drinking uses of water, such as bathing, washing, dishwashing, cleaning, flushing, garden irrigation, filling the pool etc.
I just paid £170 (IIRC, I don't have the bill handy, but around that amount) for 65 m^3 of water. That's £.0026 per liter. The general recommendation is for an adult to drink 2 liters of water a day and let's say an average english family has four adults that get all their daily liquid intake from the home tap (safely overestimating, I think you'll agree), that's £7.60 a year. I'm sticking with "almost free".
Yes water costs. Jesus, point out the small things.
Anecdotally I've found I'm more alert [in the mornings particularly] without caffeine but cutting it out hasn't helped me normalise my sleeping patterns.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee#Health_risks
Seriously, my point was, whilst everyone ran around hyperventilating at the thought of saving money on coffee (oh my god oh my god oh my god cheaper coffee) they (possibly - I didn't perform any research) overlooked the quite probable (I'm actually not a mathematician) fact that they're already drinking too much, and such a scheme will cause them to drink even more (up 20% you say?).
I love sarcasm. I hope I didn't offend anyone. I'm in a weird mood today.
"Suggest" is not a very convincing word to me. Sounds more like a hypothesis than a conclusion. I highly doubt any ethics board would approve a double-blind clinical trial exploring how much coffee consumption is required to kill a human fetus in utero. Who are these monstrous Danish scientists!?
Fun fact about THC though: "[...] babies of women who used cannabis at least once per week before and throughout pregnancy were 216 g lighter than those of non-users, had significantly shorter birth lengths and smaller head circumferences."
It's right there in the conclusion "may be associated" = "they do not know if this is true at all".
Next step would be to run a double-blind clinical trial, and have an unknown-half of the subjects smoke pot and compare that to the control to test if their hypothesis is true or not. Until then, it's only conjecture.
What are you basing that claim on? None of the studies mentioned specifically in the wikipedia section specifically mention people in their 80's, and many of the studies look at total mortality.
>The coffee bean is actually a poison that the coffee plant uses to deter herbivores.
I prefer to base my decisions on epidemiological studies, than arbitrarily applying the label "poison" to things