If telling them getting off the junk was going to work it would have worked. Same with smokers.

My comment was in response to people who did lose weight but gained it back. The point is that people can lose weight, but most can't handle ultra-processed food in moderation. Rebounding is not fatalistic, it is a consequence of returning to a previous diet. Saying 90% regain their weight doesn't tell the full story.

Child obesity is a a horrible byproduct of the collapse of social reproduction and advertising that affects the poorest and minorities first. Just calling it abuse is dangerous...

You can make the same argument for alcoholism and domestic violence. We can acknowledge societal factors of behavior while still calling a spade a spade. Childhood obesity is abuse, domestic violence is abuse, I don't care why people do it. The fact that you won't label this is just disgusting. Permanently fucking up a child's growth, hormones, and self-esteem would be considered the highest form of abusive if the method was anything but food.

To be clear, I'm not saying these parents should be arrested. But it is abuse, full stop.

Cancer, diabetes, stem cells

These are all incredibly complex problems that aren't easily solved even with massive investment. This is like comparing sending a rocket to the moon and building a self-sustaining moon base. Most effective medicine has been about boosting the body's ability to do its job or using naturally derived chemicals, vaccines, pain killers, penicillin, etc etc.

We can't really do that with cancer and stuff like aging. We've been using chemicals derived from millions of years of evolution to do delicate, effective work. Now we're trying to build our own but we're nowhere near as precise yet.

Obesity will probably be the biggest crisis of the future. We're watching the equivalent of 40% of a generation taking up smoking a pack a day.

I do have hope that Gen Z will be a better but even my formerly fit friends are starting to look a bit chubby after college and they're not slowing down.

Majority of people regain significant weight after losing it.

The majority of people also don't make meaningful dietary changes. They just eat the same things but less for 2-3 months and act surprised when going back to the old lifestyle results in weight gain. I've lost a significant amount of weight and have kept it off. It was very easy to lose the weight if you avoided ultra-processed stuff but maintaining while still occasionally eating that shit is nearly impossible.

Childhood obesity is abuse. Ultra-processed food should be illegal or severely regulated, institutional changes should make a good diet and exercise easier. But the fat acceptance movement is not our ally in this. Anymore than drunk driving acceptance or smoking acceptance should be.

I'll be honest, I don't think we should allow someone to be passive aggressive just to save them the stress. If they're going to rage over the internet they'll find something to be mad about eventually.

I've heard the pagers were used by their medics as well. It definitely wasn't at targeted attack on military members for sure though.

Also, you can't exactly detonate bombs in a public place without involving civilians in some form.

The worst thing about this is we're going to destroy the earth to make shitty pictures and stupid nonsense articles.

I can at least understand cars and industry as they're kinda necessary for the vast improvements to quality of life but AI is just making things more shit.

I believe in this context he quoted something Marx wrote about supporting "revolutionary parties in Bourgeoisie elections" and either missed the "revolutionary" part or he claimed the Democrats to be revolutionary.

He took a quote about Marx supporting Communists running in Bourgeoisie elections and twisted it to support voting for Bourgeoisie parties.

I wonder if the judge not allowing them to have a defense back fired on them. I feel a jury would be far more likely to convict a moral cause if the cause was able to make their own case. But by refusing to even entertain that idea, the jury saw the whole thing as illegitimate.

The reason why voting Green is productive(ish) is that if they get a high enough % than they get certain rights as a "legitimate" party. Certain federal funds and ballot access are the basic ones. I think if they get a certain amount then they'll also be included in the presidential debates. If they ever get that far it may just tip their legitimacy enough to make them a viable third-party.

Would Bernie getting heart-attack gunned be harm reduction at this point since he's going to continue having the shittiest possible opinion?