This is gonna be a fascinating study in watching the private insurance/market for healthcare sophistry line of arguments completely evaporate in the face of RealPathologik
It doesn’t matter if “fuck me, you got yours”, if you don’t help take care of the other who can much easier catch Covid, it will get around to you whether you like it/not, it lines up with your worldview or “philosphical” underpinnings, or you were completely responsible and did everything else right beside pure privilege in keeping yourself insulated from it otherwise.
We are all connected and we are inextricably bound on an economic as well as +socio-physico context
No arguments will evaporate because the rich dudes that make and listen to those arguments all have fancy private insurance. It’s a non-issue for them.
So you think it’s more important that they perform empty virtue signaling and lose. To a group that has stated they’ll make the Palestinian deaths worse. Than to actually do what it takes to get elected. And reduce Palestinian deaths.
But how could they even hope to do that without being elected. You’re literally saying that you would rather see them say they would cut off an ally like Israel and lose. Able to neither cut off Israel nor help the Palestinians. Than for them to be diplomatic and appeal to the largest group possible to actually win an election and possibly help the Palestinians. It seems pretty empty to me when it gives nothing of value in return. You can tell yourself that you’re morally Superior to other people but Palestinians still die. What good are your morals then?
They have shown that they will have to be dragged into stopping enabling genocide. If they get what they want and win the election, there is zero leverage to drag them anywhere; pressure must be applied before the election for the course to be changed.
It is pure cope to say “Oh just vote and like idk maybe they’ll totally stop being cool with genocide if you’re lucky”.
Absolutely you could. You can provide any clear evidence that that’s the case. There is no such clear evidence. It’s a shit take of a position. I mean it’s your prerogative if you want to imply that to Democrats like ilhan Omar or Bernie Sanders want to see Palestinians dead. They’ve clearly signaled otherwise. As have many others. You’re free to go on misrepresenting the situation and behaving childishly reductive. But I’m also free to keep pointing it out.
I guess. But if the parents just explained why doing that is bad and maybe prohibited her from doing it, it would not have gone this badly. Sure the cause is not the parents fault directly. But by their inaction they contributed more than tiktok.
Man have you ever worked with kids? They’re not some unreasoning automatons that treat “rebel against authority” with the same overriding obedience as “kill all humans”. If you explain things to them like rational actors, out of all demograpics, they are by far the most likely to treat what you’re saying with reasoned consideration.
The article does not mention what interventions the parents tried. But no, just doing something is not always better than being patient - especially with kids.
“Often the mothers are saying exactly what I am but need their child to hear it from an expert,” says Dr. Dendy Engelman, a Manhattan dermatologist. “They’re like, ‘Maybe she’ll listen to you because she certainly doesn’t listen to me.’”
While younger kids may be reasoned with, teenagers aren’t as easy to handle as some say. Puberty is a hell of a drug.
No sick of that shit. This 100% on her parents. No way a 10 year old was buying all that junk. Government doesn’t need to police every goddamm thing.
Darwinsim needs to make a come back. Probably why we have so many stupid fucking people in this world. Because we have to me warnings and Government over reach.
Who ever her Guardians are should have warned her or not provided these products.
Aww man, squiddy you know this argument is specious. Yes children have allowances, but popular beauty products are expensive even by adult standards. For a kid to have access to the beauty products in question in the referenced quantities suggests a serious lack of parental oversight coupled with an undue and unchecked influence from predatory apps like tiktok. While yeah it’s not toally in the realm of the X-Files for a child to develop a makeup addiction, I think it’s much more likely that this is a case of severe parental neglect being overblown for clickbait than a serious social epidemic.
A container of Hydramoist is $30 at my local Sephora, though you can get it cheaper (and more likely to be counterfiet!) online. Most of the other stuff referenced I couldn’t find the exact products (I didn’t try super hard) but they’re in the $10-$20 each range. It’s not bank breaking, but it’s certainly more money than the average ten year old has laying around.
I think this article raises very valid concerns about the extreme influence the beauty industry is having on younger and younger people, and I have no doubt the girls referenced here were subject to that influence, and I am not arguing that influence needs to be much more strictly regulated. In this case, it seems extremely sensationalized to claim that its common for ten year olds to have the resources needed to develop a serious addiction to popular skincare products. Really, it feels like something from the DARE era, but with “marajuana” replaced with “sephora”.
well there is always a cheap and crappy version of whatever beauty product you are looking for and those are even more likely to cause harm. But I imagine if a kid is trying to apply ten different skin care products a day, even a slightly attentive parent would notice in time.
Sure, and I won’t deny that there’s a problem to be addressed here. I just don’t think it’s the problem that’s being implied in the article. When I was in highschool, several classmates had severe skin problems caused by trying to use a homemade clorox paste to ‘erase’ their freckles. Another guy was hospitalized for trying to use ‘comet’ as a tooth whitening solution (my highschool also had a problem with cows from the neighboring pastures wandering in to eat the flowers in the planters, though, so maybe it’s not the best example to use here. They learned how to use the wheelchair buttons. The ranhers eventually dug a ditch to stop them, which didn’t stop the cows wandering but did provide a place for people to go and have sex during school hours. Yeah, it was a ‘sex ditch’ highschool. What was I talking about.)
My point is that children are idiots, have always been idiots and are always going to be idiots. I love them, and they’re much smarter than most people give them credit for, but still. The real issue here isn’t that they’re finding new and different ways in which to be idiots, but that parents aren’t willing (or more likely, aren’t able due to time, money or social pressures) to provide enough oversight to prevent said childhood dumbassery. The underlaying issues here are way more complex than ‘tiktok bad’, and those are what need addressing. Confiscating smartphones from kids (as some people here seem almost gleeful to advocate) is just a socially convenient way to not take responsibility for actually parenting your children, and denies them a vital tool for interacting with the modern world. It does far more harm than good. A fifteen minute conversation about the strategies tiktok uses to influence them will have more positive benefit on their lives than taking away their phones ever, ever would.
Not solely. Kids shouldn’t have such an unhealthy image and mindset pushed by the array of social media influencers out there. It’s always easier to blame the parents, and they certainly have some responsibility here and shouldn’t be absolved; but it’s a symptom of a much deeper problem in our society that lets this happen.
Kids will get things from other kids to do/try behind their parents back, tale as old as time. We need to fight against the portrayal of beauty standards being equated to the value of a woman.
After we do that, then it’s solely on the parents. But not until then.
I’ll settle for 186,000 to take the win, but who am I kidding, they’d just let the supreme Court void the close call again and try to give it to whom they wish
It depends on the Republican, and Democrat for that matter: a few Republicans are still pro-choice, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the odd Democrat might be anti-choice.
Do what some of the rich do and check out who in each office is running. Don’t vote for Trump. If your state is near-solid red or blue, such as California or Utah, you might as well vote 3rd party if thon is closer to your heart. Check out who’s running for governor, in your House district, Senate (if one is running), mayor, right down to dog catcher. When you’re in the voting booth, you should recognize every name of every candidate: after all, you might have had 2 years to study this.
The bitter truth for Palestine is that Israel/Palestine is not a security issue for USA.
What happens there will not have any influence on Americans in general.
Although Gaza is an obvious humanitarian problem, USA has obligated itself to protect Israel by law many years ago, when the exact same humanitarian issue was the case but with Israel as the victim.
AFAIK favorability for helping Palestine is about as high as for helping Israel, so this is not about which standpoint has the most votes, it’s simply not an important issue for the American election.
Ukraine is not mentioned much either, and that is an actual security issue for USA, and especially for its NATO allies, and has way higher support (AFAIK) than Palestine.
So it’s not because Democrats are afraid, it’s just not something they choose to become an important issue for the election. As heartbreaking as it may be, other issues are considered more important for Americans.
That said, I have no doubt that Harris will put way harder pressure on Israel, I think she recognizes the hardship of an oppressed minority.
You’re right that most Americans don’t care about this and, to the extent they do the pro-Israel group has more resources and have it as a higher political priority. On the other hand the pentagon and state dept definitely see it as a security issue. They see a highly militarized Israel as an asset as a detterent and an insurance policy if things pop off in the ME. This is the conventional wisdom, but it’s far from controversial if it’s the best policy given that Arab forces refuse to fight on the same side as the Israelis, and modern US war stategy calls for using local indigenous forces they prop up. Overall the US will never except not having a strong military presence in the ME (atleast until oil demand drops in the coming decades when renewables become very cheap) and Israel is one of the ways they achieve this.
Edit: for some reason I said far from controversial, but I meant it is controversial.
You may be right, this ME shit is so entangled I can’t make sense of it.
But if I understand you correctly, Gaza is even more fucked politically than what I described?
For now, pretty much unfortunately. Once oil demand drops the ME will be less of a priority for the US, but then will have to contend with the Israel lobby which won’t go down easy.
This stems back to the whole “unsinkable aircraft carrier in the Middle East” rhetoric from back in the 60s. It’s frankly outdated in the modern day, when the US has military bases of its own sprinkled throughout Iraq and Syria, as well as strong alliances with countries like Saudi Arabia.
Israel did not even participate in the fight against ISIS. The idea they’re some useful weapon in the ME is just inaccurate.
For the most part I agree that in the long term Israel has not been super helpful to US interests. The people running our society had their veiws of foriegn policy formed in the 70s and this is the result.
In general they only fight Hamas and Hezbollah, 2 groups that they created with their invasions. The only thing I can think of is their intelligence operations against Iran, but it’s not clear why they need to be the ones to do it.
I think that Israel’s habit of constantly fucking with its neighbors makes it more of a liability to the interests of the US. It leads to more local hostility towards US troops in other regions in the area and attacks on US people and interests both abroad and at home (9/11).
A better approach would be to ally with indigenous democracies and help them maintain stability. First, our allies should be at least mostly compatible with our own national values (not theocracies, monarchies, apartheid states, etc). Secondly, allying with an indigenous nation instead of a bunch of settler colonists is less likely to draw the ire of every common person in the region.
I think this is pretty accurate. It would also be understandable if the US wantt a very active partner in the very obvious crimes against humanity. The overall colonial land appropriation that Israel is built on, and the general apartheid system Palestinians are subjected to is one thing. The emergency transfer of munitions which will be used to commit war crimes within days is way more acute. It’s tough to watch.
He flip-flopped mid sentence in that NBC interview.
“I’m going to vote for more weeks. I’ve told them they need more weeks”
Which was a stupid, nonsense response to begin with (“more weeks” isn’t on the ballot)
Then: “…I believe in exceptions; life of the mother, incest, rape” wait, so are the weeks just for rape victims? Or do they get more weeks?
He’s a fucking liar and I HATE that the media at the time only came out with “Trump says he wants more weeks in Florida” which was a win for him with people who cherry pick his promises like they cherry pick which Bible verses they follow
“To play golf is to spoil an otherwise enjoyable walk” is found in H.S. Scrivener, “Memories of Men and Meetings”, in Arthur Wallis Myers (ed.) Lawn Tennis at Home and Abroad New York:Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1903, p. 47. Scrivener attributes the aphorism to “my good friends the Allens”. Reference from Quote Investigator.
So a supplier was sent valves that were made with metal full of impurities then. I wonder how many valves fell into the combustion chamber and seized the engine while people were doing 60 mph on the highway?
To preface this, I’m totally for vaccines and have convinced others to get the COVID shot…
Two things… I haven’t found anything from a white paper to read up on this new vaccine. Like I think the last thing I found was like ‘its the best we got but local variants will persist.’ And my hesitation is that when ever I got my COVID vax and boosters… It fucked me up bad. I was useless for three days each time. I don’t react well to medicine… I can’t take a full xyzal without loosing a day. I did catch COVID once and I realize most logical reason it wasn’t that bad was because of the shot, but in my past I never get the flu or any thing that bad. Like I get sniffles at worse … so I guess I’m wondering/hoping I don’t need the shot… I couldn’t move those three days from the vax and I’m wondering if it’s another medication I’m overly sensitive to. But I will likely put up with loosing a weekend to try to consider others around me as I’m not sure how to prove or test that.
I guess my point is I’m looking for more data to make a good decision here.
edit - I’m confused by the downvotes… I’m getting the shot, I just want more info and yet have been provided anything but downvote or general information about covid. I’m asking data on the new vaccine but I don’t want to seem to come off combative… like I’m for it lol shrugs
COVID has long lasting effects across your entire body, it impacts your immune and cardiovascular systems for years after you get it.
Risks of heart attack, stroke, etc are increased 2.5x in the year after infection, increasing exponentially with the number of times you have been infected. In fact, the risk of pretty much ANY health problem skyrockets following a COVID infection.
Some people legitimately have a bad immune reaction to vaccines, for a wide variety of reasons. It could be a specific allergy to some component of the shot, or a number of other factors. This isn’t unique to the COVID shot. It’s relatively rare, but everyone who is unlucky to be one of that minority goes online to talk about it, so there this inflated sense of it happening that far outstrips the real world occurrence of it. I’m sorry that you have had bad reactions in the past. That sucks. Thankfully that’s not the experience of most people.
Yeah, I keep up where i need to, but yeah medicine always wrecks me. It sucks, I really have to be careful and try stuff on days where I have a few days to burn if i react poorly. Fortunately, I haven’t needed much medications growing up. But, yeah I’ll probably just schedule a weekend where I don’t need to go anywhere
I am severely allergic to eggs so no annual flu shot for me but I have gotten multiple COVID shots without issue. I am a bit worried about a combo flu-covid shit in the future and will talk with my doctor about my options. I will say that it is possible to work with a physician or allergist and take half-shots of some vaccines. This is where you take half the shot in two spaced out doses to eventually get full coverage. I will admit that it didn’t work for me with the flu vaccine but it was definitely worth a try and the reaction I had wasn’t as bad as a full dose.
I haven’t found anything from a white paper to read up on this new vaccine. Like I think the last thing I found was like ‘its the best we got but local variants will persist.’
Would you be able to understand it if you did? Do you have the level of understanding of virology and vaccine research that would require for something on this level of complexity?
It’s part of my career to review white papers. Mostly from the FDA food guidelines but I do enjoy reading white papers. Cuts the bias if I can go through the methodology and data set. I have a chemistry degree with an interest in computational science, inorganic and polymer. I’m on some regulatory review team at work as well…
I really didn’t want to come off so anti vax… not my intent, like i’m going to get it I just wanted more info which I haven’t seen yet.
I don’t have a white paper on hand, but they work like the flu vaccine in that they are updated for new variants, that’s why we need to take boosters. I think this new version is for the KP2 variant.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.