Chan-type sites very, very strongly encourage right-wing social behaviors by nature; it's a constant struggle for social dominance on a post-by-post basis. Survival of the wittiest. All interactions are throwaways, and there is no reputation to maintain. So of course as soon as anyone gets frustrated, the filter goes off and the prejudices come out. Ad hominem after slur after flamebait. It's a feedback loop from there. Heavy-handed moderation can make it slightly less bad, but only by so much.
It kind of sounded like it was a good idea your opinion, or some kind of proposal. Incentivizing physical activity is what we want for a healthy society, no? There are better ways to discourage getting fat than engraving a 2,000 kCal/day threshold into stone.
How exactly do you go about asking your doctor to try meth?
Even asking for D-amphetamine (superior to Adderall imo, because Adderall contains L-amphetamine which has unpleasant physical effects) is already a tall order. I've read of doctors getting "flagged" for prescribing it.
> So perhaps charging much more for food over 2,000 kCal/day per person makes a lot of sense.
Why financially penalize exercise? Even physical activity aside, why do you think everybody needs exactly 2,000 kCal/day to maintain their weight?
What about tall people or people with abnormal metabolisms? I require more than 2,000 kCal/day to maintain a normal weight, even when completely sedentary. Why should I suddenly have to start paying more per calorie past 2,000 kCal?
>New research finds ADHD medications like Adderall don’t improve cognition in healthy college students and may even impair the memory of those who abuse the drugs.
...
>But how do these drugs respond differently to the brains of people with and without ADHD? Weyandt said that she believes the human brain might need to be at a deficit of some kind for drugs like these to work. If not, they could have a detrimental effect.
>She said that neuroimaging research with people who have ADHD has found reduced activity — think blood flow — in parts of the brain associated with the condition’s symptoms when off medication.
>Once given the proper medication, the activity increases in these regions of the brain, and ADHD symptoms go down. So a person with ADHD has an improved ability to pay attention, and shows improved memory, planning, and response inhibition, she said.
>“Since we found the drug did not improve neurocognition and may negatively influence working memory, this may suggest a deficit is needed to benefit from the medication,” she added. “Furthermore, we have found in other studies that students who report significant ADHD symptoms are more likely to misuse stimulants.”
We are obviously not talking about being born into wealth. Middle-class people still need to accumulate capital first, generally by working, something that's not always possible (for an extreme example, take e.g. ~90% unemployment rate for autistic college grads).
Even if we were talking about wealthy families, that doesn't count out being disowned, etc. for being gay or transgender.
> It's important to state this because businesses exist primarily to create profits, not promote social movements.
Those at the top will often prioritize their feelings over profit potential. Corporations are not true profit maximizers, that's a total myth. It's one of the reasons why WFH wasn't more popular earlier, and why some companies are trying to force back-to-office to the point it causes some of their employees to quit.
> Especially as repeating "but there are Ukrainian Nazis!" only helps Russia, and why the fuck would you want to help Russia?
It's a fact. Saying "but stating the fact only helps the enemy!" doesn't change that it's a fact. You're suggesting we subscribe to a falsehood because you think the truth rhetorically helps the enemy.
It's not mentally performance-enhancing in any significant way if don't have ADHD. If you have a "normal" brain, you get a psychological illusion of increased productivity.
> I have personally witnessed psychedelics enlightening minds, but also destroying them.
As with any drug. Any drug that can heal can also hurt. All drugs are a risk. Compare the rare side effects of psychedelics to the horrible (and also rare) side effects like Stevens-Johnson syndrome that you'll see in pharmaceuticals, the same ones that save people's lives.
Methamphetamine is perfectly safe when used correctly. The problem, obviously, is trust and self-control. Because it's so potent and crosses the blood-brain barrier easier, IIRC it has less intense physical side effects compared to the equivalent (in terms of mental effects) D-amphetamine dose.
The issue with LSD/psilocybin and ADHD is you can't take it everyday or even every other day because tolerance builds extremely quickly. I don't think there's a way you can time the doses where you'll have the focus benefits daily, but I could be wrong.
I see they controlled for sexual activity level, but it looks like they didn't mention controlling for the cat ownership/likeliness to interact with cats/opinion on cats.