I am now cynical about all dietary advice. In Western countries the sort of people who eat bacon and burgers tend to have very different lifestyles from those who eat sushi. They are more likely to smoke and less likely to exercise. They are also likely to be less well educated and more likely to be poor and work at unhealthy jobs. Are all these factors taken account of in this study?
For example, as I understand it, black people in America eat a lot of white meat (chicken which is supposed to be healthier than red meat) and yet their health tends to be poorer than average.
The cure today, which is the enforcement of a set of beliefs on pain of shunning or job loss, is worse than the disease. For example the Connie St Louis fiasco
That's it, exactly. I wouldn't read an American paper too often but I'd like to have the option when there's a big American story. Ditto Australia or even foreign language papers. I'm never going to take out a sub to them but this way they'd make a little from me sometimes.
It was worth a try but I hated the model. I want to pay a Netflix/Spotify ballpark figure per month and be able read all newspapers. Until then I am very happy to pay the €5 a month I currently pay for one good paper (way less than the rate they show on their site btw)
I don't get people's enthusiasm for the settings app, I find control panel the faster way of achieving almost everything. Settings is slow and sometimes you circuitously end up where control panel world have sent you directly, e.g. when you want to change network adapter settings.
The first time I came across password expiration was on a login I was given to someone else's windows server. I only needed to log in once a month or less and every single time I got the message, your password has expired and must be changed, it was laughably pathetic how they ever expected people to remember a new hard to guess password every month. So of course I did what others have said and tagged on a 1 each time to the end.
Are there many people who go to medium directly? I've only ever gone there because someone's linked to a post here or on Reddit. Which is something you could do for your own blog's post.
I like this way of thinking about things. Another one I heard recently is that whatever you do you'll regret it. Get married, you'll regret it, don't get married, the same, etc. So regret is a constant, which is comforting in its way
I have that exact phone, the Moto G6, I love it, about one third the price of an iPhone. I turned off the sound on the intro, I only turn the thing off and on every few weeks anyway. The security updates install when you let them.
I doubt there's anything you can do on the iPhone that you can't do on this.
No. You see it in sport all the time. Some people just have it from an early age. Obviously they need to work as well and not all do but lots of sports greats are spotted at an early age.
Some people can take decades at a job to acquire the competency that others almost start out with. It's no way to spend a life especially if it's in a job like surgery.
The worst thing is that you maybe only truly realise your predicament when you're already in golden handcuffs.
It's a recipe for stress depression and even suicide
I'd argue that the actual value of teaching needlework to kids is not to produce great surgeons but to identify who might make a great surgeon and who probably shouldn't even bother trying.
Great hand eye coordination is an innate ability
Yes I know he says that but in general if they're are no real incentives to achieve delivery and no consequences for non delivery, as is usually the case for public servants, then the results tend to be not very good.
But you don't work for a business, you work for the government. I think that makes a big difference in terms of what's expected and also what the consequences of non delivery are.
A pup in the same litter we got our dog from had a really broad head and the mother looked just like the dog in the photo. They are lovely dogs, no one can drive in unnoticed but you never have to worry about then biting anyone.
I'd be betting that they are going after huge blocks of fake accounts that they can link together somehow. Someone like you with a single fake account, they'll live with. They probably know that's so and so's other account. He likes to use that one on his PC. ;-)
I haven't got a Facebook account. If I did set one up it would probably be with a fake identity.
I've sometimes been tempted because it would help with signing up in lots of other places.
But Facebook (or Gavin as the Swype on my phone keeps calling it!) would probably figure out who I was anyway.
And the thought of that creeps me out.
I am saying there is no consensus because there are different conclusions about the situation drawn by different scholars. You are saying that's not a convincing approach to take, that you could do the same about tobacco, which I don't believe, actually. You then proceed to state your opinion as fact despite it being most likely the result of a, relatively speaking, cursory reading of others' writings on the topic. What leads you to dismiss the views of other scholars who happen to have come to a different conclusion on the Bengal famine?
You can but neglect of duty can doubtless happen when you are overwhelmed with just trying to survive yourself fending off an invasion from the adjacent territory.
Consensus as in agreement and no, you cannot easily dismiss smoking causing cancer in that way. There is a scientific basis for the latter. For the former, some commentators are attributing the famine to a malicious intent whereas others attribute it to a policy failure.
British policy at that time in that place was focused on preventing a Japanese invasion of India. If that policy had failed and Bengal had been invaded, the fate of the people there would very likely have been worse. Britain was in a tight spot at that time, doubtless things could have been handled better but there were a lot of mitigating factors. Referring to it as a deliberate killing millions of people to win the war is just plain wrong
You are very certain about something about which they're is no consensus amongst even Indian commentators. Some refer to policy failures. No one apart from you is call it a deliberate killing of millions. I'm not sure why you feel the need to be so vehement about it.
The person I was responding to said words to the effect that they killed millions of people in India in order to win the war. That simply isn't true. An inadequate attempt to provide relief is not the same thing as actively killing people.
Europe has not given itself a free pass when it comes to colonialism.
For example, at the moment they're hiding a bell in Cambridge University lest it turns out to have formerly been used on a slave plantation.
There was no government organised genocide in British colonial history that I know of, not even in Ireland in the 17th century where arguably the worst atrocities were carried out.
Saying Britain killed millions in India in WW2 is complete hyperbole.