drinkwaterkin

Anybody can cherry pick isolated studies to support any argument they want. I'm not giving you the time of day on this because it never ends. That's the point. It's the same playbook as the tobacco industry, same as the oil companies. Corporate-backed pseudoscience that appears just about legitimate-enough to create distractions and confusions.

You already admitted to being anti-epidemiology and "respecting" people like Taubes, as well as name-dropping the carnivore diet. That's all I need to know, to know that you're full of nonsense.

Called it. Get your pseudoscience crackpot cheesehands diet nonsense out of here.

Is "associative studies and relative risk" another way of saying, "correlation can't establish causation"? Does that mean we actually don't know if smoking is bad for us? Sorry, but if you're going to read from the same playbooks as idiots like Gary Taubes and Nina Teicholz then you're not going to have any credibility. Nutritional epidemiology is rock solid and the cornerstone of sound nutritional science. If your views depend on undermining an entire field of science, you're already cut from the same cloth as climate deniers.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JJeoYQ6FaAw

I'm sorry, but while it might feel good to adopt a "different things work for different people," view, elimination diet is only a necessary tool for rare edge cases at most. There is plenty of foundational research at this point, and for the real nutritional scientists who do the real science, there is a consensus that the Mediterranean dietary pattern is the preferred choice for the general population. That is why this diet is pretty much always the backbone of government dietary recommendations (with deviations in those recommendations usually being the result of capitulation to corporations).

And the more plant-centric your diet gets, the better your outcomes.

I've already gone through and toggled on virtually all of the filter lists.

I got a set of grips for it, but I'm not going to use them unless I'm playing a game using the analog sticks. That's the only part that's uncomfortable for me. On dpad-centric games I'm finding it very comfortable on it's own. Also just want to add that it has probably one of the best dpads I've ever used. Very accurate inputs, and just the right amount of tactile feedback without being quite as loud as the Xbox controller.

It's growing on me very quickly. Been playing a lot of Chrono Trigger on it right now. It's a lot more comfortable to hold than the Steam Deck too. Plus, it supports both Android and Linux. There are already versions of Rocknix and Batocera available for it. It has one of the best looking displays I've ever seen as well.

That said, Steam Deck is still my main go to, because at the end of the day it is a full fledged PC.

Please no Google. 🙁

But this makes me happy that there's a conlang community in the fediverse now.

Do you have any thoughts on what your lingua franca would be like? My understanding is that so far Toki Pona, Lojban, and Esperanto are the most popular contenders. But I've heard people make the criticism that at least two of these are too Eurocentric.

I had this thought-process back in December before ordering a Retroid Pocket 5, which was evidently the right call. At this point things are so turbulent that it might be too late. I mean you probably could order right now and the price probably won't suddenly go up - but more important is that everything is so up in the air that you might need that money in the near future for other necessities.

And when the Cathars, or the Templars were eradicated, or when Protestants and Catholics went to war, do you really think it's because of sincerely held beliefs regarding their God, or because one group threatened the hegemony and material wealth of the other? In the case of the Protestants, the single most critical doctrine they went after was the Catholic belief that doctrinal authority came in part from the Bible, and in part from the Church; whereas Protestants argued for Sola Scriptura - the belief that doctrinal authority came from the Bible alone. And even the 95 theses clearly had the goal of ending a system of exploitation and financial parasitism by the Catholic church. Welcome to real politics.

None of this does anything to change that cases of church authority are still functionally the same as those of state atheism and anti-theism. In the case of Christian churches, you have the view that only Christianity is the truth and everything else is both the result of the devil, and leads to evil, and therefore all other beliefs are invalid and ultimately must be eradicated.

In the case of these varying state atheist groups you have governments expressing that atheism is the only valid belief system, and again, all others must cease. And anti-theists are explicit about their view of all other religious beliefs being invalid and needing to be eradicated.

If persecutions and executions against religious people by governments that are saying everyone has to be atheist isn't killing in the name of atheism, then what the fuck is?

Yes, allergies and rare conditions are a thing sometimes. In your own example that doesn't change the principle that whole grains are still the cornerstone of even this hypothetical person's diet - they just have to avoid gluten.