That’s a great idea. Have you compared the effects of your product with non-modified soluble fibers? Afaik, soluble fibers not only from oats but also from vegetables and beans already have solid effects on toxin-binding in their natural state.
That does not make sense statistically. A decrease in total HFCS consumption would lead to a decrease in new diabetes cases if it was the actual root cause.
Several vegan influencers have been caught eating meat and fish secretly. Conversely the same - some carnivore influencers have been caught eating fruit and other plant products.
Only 2% of US-Americans are truly vegan or vegetarian (and even those tend to cheat here and there).
Wind turbines do not produce a lot of energy in total so you need a lot of them.
Thousands of tons of concrete are poured into the soil for the foundation of one wind turbine, and the foundation is likely never removed, creating ecological implications.
And wind turbines also can not be recycled and go to landfills.
With nuclear energy, the newest 4th generation reactors are closed systems that consume their own nuclear waste, so there is no final disposal problem.
Yes, technically there is nothing that is 100% clean. But with nuclear and water, you more or less control the area of contamination and you don't have a permanent production of toxic waste that goes everywhere and is impossible to get out of the environment again.
I have heard 4th generation nuclear is pretty clean.
How can he be sure he's a theoretical physicist if he doesn't know reality exists at all?
The truth is, instead of reality, he would be better off questioning theoretical physics, which indeed does not exist outside the heads of academia.
His "questioning of reality" only happens philosophically (in other words, it is an academic farce), once he gets up to do some grocery shopping he sure knows what to buy so he can eat in order to survive. There is your objective reality.
Humans understand reality if they do not bury their heads in the sand. But academia can get in the way.
Librewolf does #1 and #2 already. But generally, there's no market for that.
Most of those who say "I would pay for that" would indeed never do it. Because those people want something very specific - something you can only have via extensions and personal modifications. What you want is very specific to what you personally want and it is different to what everyone else wants.
And no one can create a browser project for your personal preferences.
Just like you will probably say "Librewolf doesn't stay up to date the way I want them to... and they don't turn off all the stupid ideas the way I want them to."
Librewolf is everything one can ask from an open-source Firefox fork.
People always complained when Firefox moved to a more efficient extension system but practically no one cared about Waterfox keeping the old firefox extensions alive. That's because those people are the absolute minority and do not represent the common user.
And what they complain about is not actually the technical change - it is about the overall change in society and what a move away from the more technical approach that allows user modification symbolizes - the dumbing down of software in general. For example, RSS symbolizes the old internet, but the old internet is gone.
It's not at all funny. It's dumb, and from the headline alone - "A dairy delight" - I already knew it was the lame and predictable ChatGPT language model with all it's repetitiveness, puns and consciously designed idiocy.
"dairy-inspired exploration" - word salad garbage
"we will humorously consider" - good to be reminded again, I was already falling for it
"the implications of a lactose-laden lunar surface" with acutely annoying aliterations.
I think ads should not be allowed for anything at all in the digital world, including TV. In a world without ads, products would be known due to reputation. Ads are an assault on the limited resource of attention.
People say how can new products reach people, but the solution to that problem isn't ads but platforms/websites that catalog new products and allow for easy discovery.
Ads actually make the problem of finding new products worse because you only see a fraction of new products if you consume ads, primarily those from companies that already have lots of money to invest into ads.
> A single cow produces around 220 pounds of methane and around 200 pounds of ammonia per year. That's equivalent to 5ish gigatons of CO2, again per cow per year, so this really makes no sense.
Ignoring the myth of harmful CO2 for a moment - Ammonia is an important nutrient, maybe one of the most important chemicals that make it possible to feed humanity. Another example of environmentalist ideology trying to destroy the foundation of modern civilization. Ammonia is so important that it's produced synthetically in large amounts.
Your ammonia calculation is also merely copy-pasted and comes from factory farming and can't even be used to judge freely grazing cattle. Additionally, the naturally present ammonia goes right back into the soil as fertilizer for the gras. There is no "CO2 equivalency", this is another naive fallacy of the environmentalists. It's just theoretical statistics used for political propaganda purposes.
Near me is a conservation area where agriculture is not allowed, but cattle grazes there all year round. It is sold locally. Plant-based food is often farmed on an industrial scale which pollutes the environment with glyphosate for example.
It is not about food type, it is about how it's produced.
> And if you really want that hamburger, enjoy it without any guilt!