Have you tried carnivore diet and anti fungal meds both oral and tropical. Look up Candida and cross reference common symptoms and work from there. Might need b1 shots too. Look up beriberi and wernicks
They're not exactly burdened by extreme sports injuries, most surfers, for example, are injured crossing roads, in car accidents, or at work falling off roofs, etc.
Citizens have an obligation to act responsibly when they partake in broad social contracts such as shared health care and insurance. Such a society must regulate access to areas of extreme danger (disused mines) to stop mentally unwell citizens from endangering themselves but more importantly endangering their fellow contract holders.
The whole inland gold belt region is filled with abandoned shafts and it's rare anyone falls down them.
What's the cost benefit in fencing off tens of thousands of individual pre existing shafts and to what degree of robust security construstion do you recommend? More to the point, what's the tax payer out of pocket cost for that?
You don't appear to have actually thought this through in any pragmatic sense.
Growing up in the Kimberley it was all Bull Buggies, Broomstick choppers, Quarter Horses and dirt bikes, all intrinsically a wee bit risky - but good practice for "grown up" geophys surveying in custom STOL crop dusters.
3:54 B taurus indicus begs to differ! (no oysters on the menu plz?)
The guy who taught me to swing a Brunton was over four times my age, and whenever we were hiking in to a site he led us in: this basically meant we young vegetables would be frantically scrambling up to a nearby ridge so we could spot where he'd got to, only to eventually notice him waving cheerfully at us from the next ridge line over.
'Wee bit risky" is right, keep your head on a swivel and don't be on the quad bike when the irate bull flips it and all is okay.
Your leading surveyor was very much our father when we were in single digits .. four hour long walks across rugged landscapes and down gorges with him as a barely visible dot waaaay up ahead.
He's a lot slower now approaching 90 .. but can still split wood and shovel a tonne or two.
Those are not eyes though. Animals eyes always come in a pair and whether it’s a human, dog, cat, mouse etc they are Gods gateway to the soul. It’s self evident.
Nobody fucking cares about politics mate. People can’t breath with them on hot crowded city buses or for 9 hours straight when working. Your just a cuck who wore his face happy trying to justify his cowardice now to himself. Nobody else is interested in your shit ideas and theories
See, this is what I mean. People who take a skeptical approach to masks aren't doing it for scientific reasoning, they're doing it to avoid being a "cuck".
This type of mentality actively discredits skeptics, because nobody wants to be lumped in with that. There're genuinely very smart people who were/are skeptical of many Covid policies, but unfortunately, they have to stand next to you. Which, of course, makes them look very stupid. It's a tough problem.
Yes, if you don't believe in Global Warming, you are just stupid. I'm not gonna hold your hand when I make you aware of your intellectual insufficiencies - you are stupid.
Now that you know you're stupid, you can either choose to reinforce your stupidity by living in a delusion or you can do a bit of research and catch up to the average human. I don't care either way, but you're passed the point of claiming ignorance. Eventually the stupidity is self-enforced, meaning you and others will go out of your way to ensure you are stupid.
There are, and they've been in practice for many decades.
However, I give people the benefit of the doubt and assume they have a functional brain. Therefore, I conclude if someone "doesn't believe" in climate change, that is a choice. Not a matter of ignorance.
I do not pity you enough to spit in your face with hand-holding and euphemisms. There is a deliberate choice and I'll treat you as such.
Is imagining shortcomings on my behalf and then categorizing them as factual to use as evidence in an argument a part of these superior approaches you mention?
If I was to do the same to you, would you not protest?
I'm not imagining a shortcoming, rather I'm doing the opposite. I'm assuming you've done the proper research around climate change so I'm not going to patronize you with it. Therefore, I conclude you are not ignorant, you're willfully contrarian.
If you interpret that as a worse outcome, here's a thought: stop being willfully contrarian. Sometimes the most popular and most researched opinion is correct. You gain nothing by being contrarian.
Being skeptical is good. Being skeptical means you require a wealth of evidence to believe something. Well, if you don't believe in climate change, you're NOT skeptical - you're just an obnoxious contrarian. Because we have a wealth of evidence and I'm assuming you've reviewed it.
The virus is just going to go into people’s eyes dumbass. There are millions of cucks and weak men in western societies that didn’t exist 50 years ago. These men would have had deeper voices, excellent eye sight, thick heads of hair, followed logic, been brave ... now we have porn addicted gamer simps with nasally voices pretending to be scared of catching a head cold because they’re only too happy to bow down and be submissive with the added bonus that they can hide their disgusting eyes and faces in public , essentially enforcing mass cardboard box over head wearing with these “face nappies”.
> There are millions of cucks and weak men in western societies that didn’t exist 50 years ago
Yes, go back 50 years ago then. When we had so much more racism, when homosexuals were treated like dogs, when women were beaten for sport and nobody cared.
Those types of people died off not by some conspiracy. They died off because they were a cancer on society, a tumor on mankind. They died off because nobody liked them, except others of their ilk.
What you call "weak" I consider strong. We have the strength today to solve problems. We don't lynch black people anymore, we don't beat women anymore. Men are no longer scared to be themselves. I mean, people like you shiver in your timbers when you see a slightly feminine man - do you not understand the irony in that? How pathetic that makes you? Are you really so stupid that it's right in front of your eyes and you can't see it?
If it's the past you crave, I have doubts about your character. Go talk to an older gentleman and see what they've seen. We've moved on, either figure it out or die in the past. We're not gonna wait around and hold the hands of the weakest of our kind to catch up - you will be left behind.
The seaweed pellets they add to cows food that eliminated most of their emissions must be the most ingenious climate policy and breakthrough. Before these were invented we were looking at a situation where meat consumption (or at least beef) may have to be phased out.
The rapid development of battery technology must be a close second. I remember as a kid in the 1990s it was difficult to get good rechargeable batteries to power a RC toy car. They were often huge battery packs that would over heat, last a few minutes per charge and takes ages to power up. Now we have people carrying cars driving hundreds of kilometres on quick charging batteries.
The Asparagopsis supplements I think you are referring to are arguably clever, but
> Before these were invented we were looking at a situation where meat consumption (or at least beef) may have to be phased out.
They haven't really changed the game, at least not yet. But assuming optimistically they can reduce cow methane emissions and downsides can be avoided [1], the magnitude of the reduction [2] probably will not make or break the continuation of the cattle industry.
It should be said that, whether these are really problems depends heavily on how animal agriculture is done.
In many cases animals graze on marginal land that can’t be used to grow human food directly. In these cases the alternative ways to get the same protein production could imply cutting down land in other countries to grow protein rich crops for humans.
Water use doesn’t have to be high. In the US it’s a product of industrialised animal agriculture, bad subsidies and free water rights that farmers are forced to use unless they want to use those rights.
Animals can convert food that humans can’t eat into food that we can eat. In some cases they eat the part of the plant that we don’t.
EU has prohibited all routine use of antibiotics in farming. Other countries should follow.
And there are upsides of animal agriculture as well. They are often a critical to do regenerative agriculture. In the best case they eat grass from land that we can’t grow stuff on, eat parts of the plants that we can’t eat ourselves, and give us high quality fertiliser that greatly improves soil quality. There’s a reason farm animals have been with us for millennia.
That said we should absolutely eliminate all heavily industrialised animal agriculture, which means we have to reduce meat consumption. It would be interesting to know how much meat we could eat if all meat production was sustainable.
> In many cases animals graze on marginal land that can’t be used to grow human food directly. In these cases the alternative ways to get the same protein production could imply cutting down land in other countries to grow protein rich crops for humans.
Just to make the implicit explicit: the current reality of meat production is feeding livestock with protein rich crops grown on cut down land in other countries. An alternative’s model scalability and economic viability has not been shown yet.
So the hope of such a thing existing in the future should probably not influence how you choose to nourished yourself today
Agree broadly with what you're saying, especially ending industrial animal agriculture and reducing meat consumption.
As you implied, continuing current levels of meat consumption for 8 billion humans, even with regenerative techniques, will still result in substantial increases in land/water use and other negative impacts. We should be sceptical of regenerative grazing claims as well, as they are often pushed by the industry, without sufficient evidence.
I'm hesitant to say just because we've been farming animals for thousands of years is good justification for continuing it (at least at this scale on non-marginal lands). After all, it did lead directly to the problems we face today, as people clung on to traditional methods without thinking even as they migrated and new technologies/knowledge became available. For example, European colonists brought hard-hoofed cows, sheep, goats, horses, and deer to Australia, despite the country's native fauna all being soft-footed, leading to soil compaction and many resultant ecological issues. Now almost 50% of Australia's land surface area is used for red meat farming, and it is the leading cause of deforestation in many parts of the country.
On plant parts that humans can't eat, perhaps it's fine to let wild animals eat them, further improving biodiversity (after all we need a healthy biosphere of many species providing ecosystem services for long-term human survival), or we can compost or process into other products. I'd be looking into stock-free organic farming and precision fermentation as new promising approaches as well.
>meat consumption (or at least beef) may have to be phased out.
Subject to the realities of global politics, it's the habitability of the equator and the low incidence of tropical diseases in the Southern US that would have been phased out.
Thanks for that. However, I would agree with those against that labelling. "beef producers to market their meat as low-carbon. Producers who can prove that their cattle are raised in a way that emits 10 percent less greenhouse gases than an industry baseline"
Me as well. There is a lot of hype around 'regenerative' agriculture and livestock now as well, but one really needs to see detailed life cycle analyses to know the full footprint of a food choice
You will next be parroting from a book that the Russian and French revolutions were genuine uprisings by the people of those two countries. It is quite obvious both revolutions were set ups by external powers and attempts to genocide the populations of those countries. Lenin was just an actor. Lol “rejoin the struggle” you are such a brainlet
“ Anecdotally, my psoriasis disappeared after I switched to a strict vegetarian diet. I can't prove it, though, so I don't go on Reddit making unscientific claims I can't back up with evidence.”
There will always be exceptions like your case. However it is clearly the case that there aren’t hundreds of different types of gut fungi which grow out of control over a dysbiosis occurs in the guts microbiome. There is generally one type and it is called Candida. The problem is called a Candida overgrowth. Candida generally eats carbohydrates and sugar. A carnivore diet will generally starve it and cause a die off. The Candida generally released toxins that cause auto immune disorders.
Now I’m speaking in the cases of most not all people who experience auto immune disorders and where those disorders are caused by the guts microbiome.
There are also the cases where the gut has been damaged by gluten and other plant materials and is leaking food into the blood.
As far as I’m aware no animal flesh of any type does such damage to the gut. No fungi eats animal flesh.
You seem to think gut dysbiosis is one bacteria dominating others. No. It is a fungus in most cases. A single called yeast that rapidly duplicates called Candida and eats plants.
they aren’t cell diseases. It is plant toxins either leaking into the blood stream through intestinal permeability or a problem with peoples livers being fatty and not able to do their job anymore resulting in the bodies inability to remove plant toxins. The toxins cause an immune reaction wherever they build up , rheumatoid arthritis if it’s the joints of the legs and arms etc.
Plant toxins include pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, both human created and sprayed on and natural ones to stop animals and bugs eating them. They also include glysophate
Thousands of people on Reddit have put Rheumatoid arthritis and other Auto immune diseases into remission using the carnivore diet. Ie manually removing Plant toxins from their food and not letting the toxins enter their damaged bodies
Funnily enough you have another poster [1] saying the exact opposite, that meat makes their symptoms worse, and eating plant foods makes their symptoms go away.
Whenever the carnivore diet comes up as a panacea (which it does, a lot), I wonder if people tried anything else. Did they try reintroducing plant foods to test their hypothesis?
Personally, I bet that it's not the diet itself that helps in most cases, but that the very act of changing one's diet radically alters the gut microbiome. People with autoimmune diseases usually have a dysbiotic gut flora, so it makes sense that a radical change would "reset" it. However, this would suggest that reintroducing foods should work, unless you reintroduce things that bring back the imbalance.
Anecdotally, my psoriasis disappeared after I switched to a strict vegetarian diet. I can't prove it, though, so I don't go on Reddit making unscientific claims I can't back up with evidence.
If these toxins build up in animal cells - why would you eating meat (that must then have a much higher concentration) not expose you to the same toxins?
For me, it was the opposite. Cutting out meat and eating a lot of organic greens helped calm my immune system and reduce inflammation. In my experience, meat increased my inflammation, while greens decreased it. I think everyone is different, and it's not hard to test on yourself if you have noticeable symptoms like joint pain, as I did.
This idea that plants are toxic and meat is healthy is absurd in the extreme. Historical evidence shows humans at mostly a plant based diet for most of our evolution. And the various large and strong herbivores are completely contradictory to your thesis. It's similar to flat-earth in how easy it is to debunk.
the reason that this bro science works for people is that change can effectuate change EG what you’re doing isn’t working change what you are doing and that can have affect with anything, mind, immune system, you name it, I had RA and it went into remission when I just changed my diet and started eating totally different foods. Now we can say that those foods were the cure all and that everyone eat them, but maybe just change your life a bit You’re doing right now ain’t working
Wouldn't then the cure just be to eat organic food, rather than meat of animals that were fed way worse crap than the average person? The whole premise makes no sense...
Some meats like chicken do cause flare ups for auto immune people because the chickens diets are full of crap food yes. Pork also causes a lot of people in these communities issues.
Cows on the other hand just eat grass or plain grains ... and have 7 stomachs filtering and cleaning their food.
I believe no one diet works equally for every single individual with Autoimmune conditions. For some, a plant-based diet reduces symptoms, for others like Jordan B. Peterson, and his daughter (I believe she suffered from RA) a purely meat-based diet reduced all of their symptoms. Personally, I struggle with Hashimotos, Ankylosing Spondylitis and Crohn's Disease and have to stay away from sugary foods, alcohol and caffeine or else one of the conditions will flare up. Any type of meat is fine for me however.
