It could just be that they work in a kitchen.
I was sitting here thinking, "My god, all these people are boycotting these things? I'm not boycotting anything." And then I saw your comment and realized that I boycott things without really thinking about it as an active boycott. Vegetarian since 2013 myself, vegan for just about a month.
What I would be expecting is someone who gives a shit about how the patients feel at least enough to phrase it in a non terrifying way. She knew what she was doing. While what she said was true, the odds that the girl would die from it were staggeringly low. She was just basically an asshole and left that part out.
One of my first mentors as a nurse was this old battle axe who had been around in the ER for decades. Tough as nails, hard as a rock. She was pushing morphine in some young girl's IV. This girl was maybe 18 years old and having a good amount of pain, nothing crazy but needing medication. She was really anxious about it. She foolishly asked the question, "What's the worst that could happen?" The nurse answered, "You could die." No expression or sympathy or care. And she just kept on slowly pushing the morphine without another word as the patient visibly tried to suppress her terror.
It took me years to finally get a bidet. Now I'm a bidet enthusiast! The only bad thing about having a bidet is using a toilet without one.
If you get video of someone doing it, the police won't want to look at it though. Video of someone doing stuff might be used in civil court if you know who it is and you sue. Mostly you'll just get to watch someone vandalize your property and get angrier.
This is my experience also. Dentists are basically out to sell you stuff.
I really feel like this makes the most sense. It beats out all the other arguments.
Middle managers need more control? Big bosses never care that much about what middle managers say, why now? And across tons of companies? Seems silly. Middle managers are notoriously ineffective.
They want to retain control/keep you tired? Maybe, but it would take a large conspiracy coordinated between the execs, which seems like a stretch. There would need to be a massive Illuminati-esque organization like that Stonecutters episode from The Simpsons.
But as always, it comes back to "follow the money." The people making the decision will lose money somehow, so they are trying not to lose, or to minimize losses. All board of directors people have multiple investments and interests, so of course they are trying to make the best of their situation. They own part of the IT company renting the space, but also have investment in office retail space and some local businesses. If the office life drives an area to stay alive, its dying will shift the money away from all their investments. As usual, they are making those decisions without giving a shit about anything but money and their own interests.
This is what debunked the complete protein idea for me. You just have to balance proteins in the span of 24-48 hours, maybe longer.
I think it's worth noting that many of the "incomplete" proteins actually have all the amino acids, just one of them is relatively low. If you are varying your protein sources at all and eating more than the recommended quantity of protein from WHO studies, it would actually be hard to be protein deficient. Take pea protein for example. It's slightly short on methionine/cysteine, but not by much. If you just get some extra pea protein, you're good. You wouldn't need any other protein sources, but you'll pick those up with other foods incidentally anyway.
In the medical sense, the only time people are diagnosed with protein calorie deficiency is in the setting of starvation or chronic disease. If you are eating enough, you exercise, and you are under 60 years old, completeness of proteins isn't important in my opinion.
Does more protein help exercise recovery? Yeah maybe, but you won't be sick or feel bad without it.
I take the Buddhist view that what we call the self is a misconception or misunderstanding. While you do exist, there isn't a soul or some permanent entity that takes residence and jumps around before or after death.
Thus, you can ask questions like these and get a million different answers because the question is not valid. It's what the Buddha would call proliferation, or basically hot air. There isn't an answer, why ask the question?
Don't mistake this for a cynical view, though. A good Buddhist is very happy because even though the idea of a self is false, freeing yourself from all of these self-based concepts and desires leads to great peace. The obsession with self and self-based craving is what leads to any kind of unhappiness.
Mindfulness meditation, not the catchy popular kind your work teaches but the actual Buddhist mindfulness. It's whole purpose is to be able to see the arising and passing away of thoughts/feelings without getting involved.
That or she may have Raynaud's disease. Lots of people do. I have it and my body can be actually very hot but because of vasospasm my feet are ice cold. They go numb in wintertime.
It depends on the context and the tone. If I were to speak to someone about one of their hobbies in a lighthearted discussion and said, "Why do you say that?" It would just mean, "What do you mean, can you explain more?"
If it's a heavy topic like a patient talking to a psychiatrist and the patient says something only to get the response, "Why do you say that?" Well, it would make the patient defensive.
Tone accounts for most of that I suppose. When the tone goes down at the end, things are serious and it could make someone feel like they are being interrogated by the question. Tone goes up, it is a friendly request for more information to help understanding.
You could just do large batches of cold brew in a big container, basically with the powder loose in the liquid. Filtration would be a pain in the ass and may take a couple of rounds, but it would be just a "once in a while" pain in the ass vs every day.
Recent WHO recommendations say that artificial sweeteners are not useful for weight loss, but used in moderation they are not terribly unsafe as far as current studies indicate. All the stuff saying artificial sweeteners are super scary and bad is just that, scare tactics. Or it takes a gigantic amount to be bad for you, but if you replace that amount of artificial sweetener with sugar then the sugar is just as bad or worse. Better just to avoid both.
I try to avoid single studies or articles about anything, but rather look to larger recommendations from WHO or other agencies that are less likely to be influenced by $$$. Looking at a single article or study is basically meaningless. Unless you're Joe Rogan and you're paid to sell everyone a meat eater diet or Dr. Oz with whatever his garbage of the month is.
I have been scrolling through my feed and blocking all the weird Swedish communities that have popped up. It's exhausting work, and sometimes I wonder if Lemmy is still fun. And then this. This is the quality shit post that I needed! Thank you.