(biologist - artist - queer)
You’re the only magician that could make a falling horse turn into thirteen gerbils
That’s a good (and reassuring) observation!
Still, even if it’s a bot/troll/etc. post, if we don’t call it out when we see it, the culture of the community slowly shifts towards “bigotry is acceptable here”…
I’m gonna keep pointing this stuff out when I see it whether the user is acting in good faith or not :)
Aight you got me there
I, too, am down to clown tbh
Sure, notice that I included this possibility in the last paragraph.
Also notice that that possibility doesn’t reinforce the perspective that “women are sluts for clown daddies”
The fact this has 40 up votes right now makes me feel like lemmy is losing a diverse user base. Like, where are the women to down vote this obviously shitty take?
Let’s list some reasons why these women could have done this that aren’t “women are sluts for clown daddies”:
Like, yeah, some of them might be individuals who have bad taste in men or are shitty people themselves. I’m even certain that some of them are! But damn, can we take the perspective of the woman for one second? It’s not a good look to find yourself agreeing with incels on the internet
Why post this summary article from an obscure news group when you could have posted the actual report from the former official?
It’s written in accessible language, so it’s not like it’s too technical to understand or anything…
You say you don’t like poetry, yet you write a lovely free-form poem. Suspicious…
Oooh it’s even cooler than that!! You’re spot on, acid is the problem. And acid from food, candy, coffee, etc. is harmful for enamel for sure.
But sugary stuff that isn’t acidic also rots teeth. Why? Because the bacteria in your mouth do what’s called lactic acid fermentation. Basically, when they take a sugar molecule and want to make “usable” energy out of it (in the form of something called ATP, or adenosine triphosphate), they end up creating lactic acid as a byproduct. In essence, the stuff living in your mouth makes acid out of sugar.
We also need to break sugar down into ATP, but we do something called cellular respiration instead. It uses oxygen and creates CO2 as a byproduct! That’s why we need oxygen to breathe, and why we breathe out carbon dioxide. But, when you work your muscles hard (lifting weights, sprinting), you might use the ATP in your muscles faster than your body can make it with cellular respiration. In that case, your cells will also do lactic acid fermentation! That’s what we’re feeling when we “feel the burn” (well, that and micro-tears in the muscle, in some cases).
Source: I’m a biologist! And I love sharing weird facts like this! Thank you for the excuse to write this out :-)
Other commenters have good suggestions also, but one option I haven’t seen mentioned would be to buy a powdered acid and make your own dilutions
It’s easy to get citric acid in a dry form (like the crystal coating on sour candy), you can get 10 lbs (enough to make many gallons) of it for like $30-50 online. I put a small scoop in my dishwasher to keep my cups from getting foggy from our hard water, and I use it to descale our kettle and in our laundry, too.
Just be careful, acid dilutions are no joke. Whether you get the cleaning vinegar or make a citric acid solution for yourself:
use nitrile or latex gloves when working with the acid solutions
wear something to protect your eyes, glasses are probably good enough but goggles are better
if you have an acid solution and want to dilute it, pour the acid into the water, not the water into the acid!!!
flush your skin or eyes with water immediately if the acid gets on you or your clothes
These rules might seem like overkill but better safe than sorry!
Citric acid is slightly stronger than acetic acid so if I were you I’d make like a 20% solution to have a similar effect to the cleaning vinegar (so like 100 g powdered acid to 400 mL water). You might have to mix it on the stove so that the water is simmering to get the acid to dissolve.
Again, be careful! But as long as you’re smart about it, take your time, and prioritize safety, you can definitely use this for descaling and cleaning (and cooking!)
deleted by creator
Wikipedia link to radium girls
I think you got the right idea but that description is missing the big points.
They were painting watches and their employers told them to use their lips to make fine points on the brushes, meaning they ingested a ton of the paint. The employers told them it was harmless despite evidence to the contrary. They chose not to use other options because wiping the brush on their lips increased productivity and they were paid per watch.
I don’t think you meant to imply that they were doing it for trivial reasons, but I do think mentioning that they were doing it for a job and that their employers were intentionally deceiving them is important context!
OP asked what it means to not have faith in humanity, and the person who responded to your comment had a nuanced take on the answer. Is that really a tangent?
(btw your top comment is a very good answer)
Oh, good point! Yeah, in our old house (copper plumbing) plumbers usually did repairs with cpvc, not sure why.
Huge disclaimer that I’m not a plumber or even close to a plumber, but I did have a house and think about houses:
Isn’t the current “standard” plumbing PEX plumbing, which is basically just a bunch of hoses?
Like I think you’re on to something but the industry beat you to the punch 😉
You’re right and it’s still hard no matter what, but remember that most of that time you’re going to be sleeping.
If you get 8 hrs of sleep going to bed at 10pm and waking at 6 am, you could split the fast evenly in the morning and night (eat your first meal at 10 am and you’d stop eating at 6 pm) or you could stick it in the morning or evening (last meal at 2 pm, OR first meal at 2 pm) or some combo in between.
It’s even easier if you’re a lazy person like me who sleeps ~10 hrs a day!
Still, absolutely no judgment if it still sounds hard or impossible. Everyone’s eating styles are different :-)
What, in your opinion, is the semantic difference between the words plastic and polymer?
What is your word of choice to distinguish between naturally occurring and lab-made polymers?
It’s fine if you want to draw some conceptual comparisons between biological and synthetic polymers, but it’s 100% not true that “plastics” as defined as synthetic, organic polymers (I.e. acrylics, silicones, polyesters, polyurethanes, halogenated plastics, thermosets, thermoplastics et al.) are the same on a chemical basis as most biological polymers.
Like… where are you drawing the line? Are proteins a plastic? Is starch plastic? Is DNA plastic? RNA? Clearly not, by multiple definitions (bioavailability, reactivity, structure and function, persistence in the environment, etc.). Even biological compounds closer to synthetic polymers (cellulose, chitin, etc.) are definitively different, even if they do have longer persistence, lower reactivity, etc. And bioplastics (like what people mean when they say biodegradable plastics) are heat-modified biological polymers. They don’t come out of a living thing that way; they are fundamentally altered from their previous form.
I guess I just… disagree that the distinction is “arbitrary semantics”?
Yeah but like… not all polymers are plastics, right? Like… they aren’t synonyms?
Wikipedia says acrylics, polyesters, silicones, polyurethanes, thermoplastics, and thermosets are plastics. Do those exist in organic tissue? Am I missing an obvious group?
Where do you get the idea we are made of plastics? Not necessarily throwing shade, just… I’m a molecular biologist and at first pass that seems like a stretch. I’d be excited to be wrong
Thermosets and thermoplastics, right? Not sure that we have that going on in there…
I’m copying this comment I just wrote elsewhere because I think you might find it useful:
"I think there’s a lot of evidence that for most things (like “new tricks”) there isn’t any learning disadvantage for older dogs.
However, leash reactivity/aggression is not about teaching a dog a new trick (or even a new behavior) as much as it is trying to change an underlying emotional response to stimuli. I don’t know anything about your dog, and there are lots of reasons why dogs can react like that on leash (fear, intense desire to play and socialize, actual aggression), but usually if the dog is freaking out they are past the point where the “logical” part of their brain can make decisions for them.
The human analogy is that people of all ages can learn new skills, like how to cook a new recipe or build a cabinet or something. But if a person has a fear of heights, they can’t just learn the skill of not being scared of heights. That requires rewiring the base emotional response, which takes time and has a high rate of failure.
For dogs I worked with, we usually asked ourselves if we thought the dogs reactivity was lowering their quality of life. That is to say, does your dog need to be calm on leash to live a happy life? If you live in a city and she needs to navigate past dogs every time she goes to the bathroom, I’d say it’s worth trying to make that less stressful for her. If she lives in the suburbs or in a rural area, and she barely ever encounters other dogs anyway, why bother? The human analogy is: if a person works on skyscrapers for a living, they probably need to not be scared of heights, but many people are scared of heights and live totally fine and happy lives from the ground. Of course, a human can have some control over their environment and career, but dogs don’t have that luxury. We work with them where they are.
It’s also worth noting that even the best “rewiring methods” take a long time and usually only work to reduce the fear, not eliminate it. We do it because it will really improve the dog’s quality of life, not because we (selfishly) want a perfectly behaved dog to bring everywhere and do everything with.
A side note is that there are critical periods for dog socialization and development just like in humans. I haven’t looked into this in a while but me memory is that it occurs at like 8-12 weeks of age. Puppies in this period learn about how to interact and communicate with other other dogs in the same way we learn language early in life. If they aren’t socialized in this period, they usually struggle to effectively socialize for the rest of their lives. Still, this isn’t necessarily the cause of leash reactivity, so I’m just throwing it in as a side comment if you want to learn more.
AND lastly, if you do decide you need or want to work on your dog’s reactivity, I strongly recommend Grisha Stewart’s BAT 2.0. I am not affiliated with her in any way, but this is the technique recommended by reinforcement-based training organizations and has the most likelihood of reducing reactivity in my personal experience. The textbook is like literally hundreds of pages long and covers a ton of case-scenarios. It would take time to read and learn to do the protocol, and you need a BAT leash (a 15 ft leash) and lots of practice managing it, but I have seen dogs go from freaking out and screaming from seeing another dog >100 yrds away to being able to (tensely) stand to the side of a sidewalk and contain their panic as a dog passes. It won’t make a reactive dog confident and bomb proof, but it can make a huge difference when applied carefully and consistently, especially with other methods like look-at-that/counterconditioning, Karen Overall’s calmness protocol, and engage-disengage games."
Dude, there wasn’t any other option in the primaries. No one else was running. Seriously running against an incumbent in your own party is basically political suicide.
Palmer was the closest and I didn’t even know his name until after our primary. It was only a good move for him because he was already an outsider who just wanted some publicity.
Basically, you either voted for Biden because iTs ThE rIgHt ThInG tO dO, or because He’S tHe iNcUmBeNt…
…or you desperately, nihilistically voted uncommitted.