I've heard this claim repeated a lot, in the case of soy "very poor" just doesn't seem supported by the data and more importantly in a real world setting one particular protein source lacking a specific amino acid doesn't matter as much because it is mostly not consumed in isolation.
I hope this does not come across as antagonistic but isn’t this then another form of mental math again? "I’m actually not allowed to drive the number on the sign but I’m also not allowed to drive a speed within the margin of error so I could be falsely accused of speeding."
The other way around seems more clear in a legal sense to me because we want to prove with as little doubt as possible that the person actually went above the speed limit. Innocent until proven guilty and all that. So we accept people speeding a little to not falsely convict someone.
It’s not dumb, it’s accounting for real world variance in car speedometer accuracy and possible inaccuracies in the measurement process, just because your car is telling you you went 98 or the speed camera is telling you you went 101 doesn’t mean that was the actual speed of your car at the moment.
This time around it seems less targeted, which gives the perception that it is not really about streamlining, feel free to prove me wrong though.
From the document you linked:
> The buyouts were not offered in a random fashion, however. We targeted them to reduce the layers of bureaucracy and micro-management that were tying Government in knots. We made sure that departments and agencies tied their buyout strategies to their overall plans to streamline their bureaucracies. As a result, almost 70 percent of our buyouts in the non-Defense agencies have gone to people at higher grade levels, such as managers.
Nobody is saying that but the quality of your argument is certainly diminished if you present these articles as evidence when they are written by a non neutral party with an agenda and at best confusing if not purposefully misleading.
To clear this up a bit, you are most likely referring to a mutation in the ABCC11 gene often associated with and common in east asian demographics.
The gene mutation causes earwax to be dry instead of sticky and seems to inhibit production of certain proteins in the sweat glands:
"To learn the reason behind why this gene affects body odor, the origin of body odor itself will also have to be examined. To learn why, it must be noted that sweat itself is odorless. Body odor comes from the apocrine glands in areas such as the armpits and genital regions, and is caused by bacteria feeding on proteins produced by the apocrine sweat glands. However, with the gene mutation in ABCC11 gene, these proteins are not made, causing sweat to remain odorless."
It feels weird to go from “we call the fruiting body a different word from the spice that is made from it” to “this plant doesn’t exist”
I feel a more accurate wording would be “I learned that paprika and bell peppers are actually words for different forms of the same fruit originating from one plant opposed to two totally different plants”.
to defend my crazy rambling at least a bit, in german bell peppers and the spice made from them are both called ‘Paprika’ which, as a native speaker, could be where this sense of “this feels wrong” stems for me.
While true that an iPhone is still needed somewhere in the process, Apple now lets you set up an Apple Watch for family members that don't have an iPhone.
I would recommend N-acetylcysteine (NAC) to reduce mucus and help with inflammation of the respiratory system among other things.
My mother had chronic bronchitis and asthma for years and was dependent on daily inhaled corticosteroids to be able to breathe normally, after having her on 800-1600mg of NAC for a year now she only has to use her inhaler once every few months.
I use it for my permanently clogged nose (allergies from spring to fall, a persistent low level cold in the winter). It’s so freeing to not be an eternal mouth breather.
But don’t be swayed by my n of 2 sales pitch, do your own research!
(The linked healthline article isn’t of the highest quality but at least it cites it’s sources)
I’m not going to try to argue about which experience is worse because that’s difficult to quantify and I don’t actually think it achieves a lot.
If we can agree that ignoring nature, factory farmed animals don’t lead what we would call a fulfilling life, how can we justify bringing trillions of them into existence if we have alternatives? We don‘t have to go too deep into utilitarian rhetoric here, maybe it is better than nature, maybe if you follow that line of reasoning it wouldn’t be right to let animals suffer in nature or have children either. Anyway, I haven’t been able to justify eating meat to myself for as long as I was able to think along these lines.