Paradym is about: self care, philosophy, veganism + creating a world of ingenuous intellectualism + respect for truth, logic, & tech!Ⓥ
Check out my Linktree!
If you think that ganglia warrant the application the precautionary principle, do you:
A) Not shower, to spare the demodex on your skin?
B) Not vacuum or mop to spare the dust mites in your floors?
C) Believe that brain dead bodies should be kept on life support?
At this point, I think I'd actually rather date an open-minded carnist than an average vegan. So far, it seems like converting a reasonable omnivore is massively easier than convincing an average vegan that my approach to veganism is ethically defensible.
It's absolutely disgusting that lawmakers are actively blocking technologies that could end the animal holocaust. As the torture mills continue to churn out the corpses of the innocent by the billions, my uncertainty that we're not living in the most evil timeline only deepens.
I know it's ragebait, but I've encountered plenty of people who actually believe stuff like this. I don't think they understand just how infantilizing statements like this are to young adults. It comes across as insanely insulting, condescending bullshit.
Trump was 43 when his wife testified under oath that he ripped hair from her scalp and sexually assaulted her in 1989. She also described a marriage marked by physical abuse.
Trump was 46 when Jill Harth accused him of sexual assault at Mar-a-Lago in 1992.
Trump was 51 when he boasted, on the Howard Stern show, about watching Miss Teen USA contestants change their clothes.
Trump was 57 when he decided NOT to file a police report after being informed that Jeffrey Epstein had attempted to solicit sexual services from a spa employee in 2003.
Trump was 59 when he was recorded making statements in which he boasted about sexually assaulting women.
At some point, you have to be honest with yourself.
There is a pattern of behavior.
@Sirikamiloli Wonder no more.
There has, in fact, been two cases, and both were convicted.
United States v. Handley
United Kingdom (Robul Hoque, Middlesbrough, 2014)
In double-blind placebo-controlled trials, 'gluten-sensitive' people who *think* they're going to eat gluten have reactions.
But if they don't expect gluten, there's no reaction.
Expectancy has a bigger effect than actually eating gluten!
SaTiEtY™ has become such a diet meme. If manipulating it within normal physiological ranges reliably produced durable weight loss effects, the diet literature would look VERY different. At this point, pushing diet modification over GLP-1s is starting to seem unethical. 🤷♂️