Trump 2nd term prediction thread
So, looks like Trump not only smashed the electoral college, but is looking on track to win the popular vote, which seems to be an unexpected turn of events, but a clear sign of the current temperature in the country and perhaps the wider world.
Would be interested to hear views on how his 2nd term will pan out from both sides of the aisle - major happenings, what he's going to get done, what he's not going to get done, the impact of his election on the current conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, whether his popularity will remain the same, wane, or increase, etc.
A bit of an anemic OP, I know, just interested to hear people's thoughts now that the election uncertainty is over.
The Dr. Oz thing is especially stupid because that position has basically nothing to do with the dyes, vaccines, food additives etc.
It’s being the CEO of a massive insurance company, budgeting, coverage decisions, coding rules, reimbursement rates and what not. Even if you think he knows stuff about health science he has zero idea what the job is or how to do it.
Linda McMahon dept of education
Maybe Vince comes and destroys it
why do you dislike hanania? he is to my left but I feel on my skin he actually believes what he says. he is trustworthy in the sense that I can trust he actually believes and is willing to defend his claims.
I wouldn't love him with power as he is too much to my left but I don't hate him as much as I do deeply hate a lot of leftists.
All you really have to do is google his name.
that sounds nice in theory but guaranteed 95%+ of the right would've lambasted it
i don't even think the right cares much today, but they are delighted it's triggering the left so much
in many ways rfk's rhetoric is the ghost of what democrats used to value as far as opposing corporate interests and environmental degradation, but now everyone's picked their teams and he's not us so we have to debunk literally everything he says
He always has been directionally correct about some things (e.g., disproportionate impact of environmental pollution on poor communities), but that isn't a much of a defense. A lot of people are directionally correct on those things without his conspiracy baggage and general nuttiness.
The idea that artificial = bad is simply an appeal to nature fallacy.
Fair point. If the numerator of our metric is "healthy people" and the denominator is "living people", increasing the numerator is just one way to increase the value of the metric.
There is that as well, but I read chezs comment as someone whos been dead for 60 years would be better for people’s health than RFK.
Perhaps I was giving chez too much credit for wit.
Dont spoil it. I'm still enjoying D2 understanding one of my posts
Was thinking about rfk Jr and his conspiracy mindset and specific predictions related to that.
I wonder what the odds of something like being able to buy raw milk at Walmart would be.
Eventually processed foods will be viewed the same way smoking is now. And oh yeah, doctors used to endorse cigarettes. Sometimes trusting the experts and following The Science can lead to cancer.
While this is true, in the end it was largely the scientific community that pushed back on the smoking industry and informed the public about the correlation of smoking to cancer and other health risks. Not random dopes like RFK throwing our their personal intuitions and half-baked nonsense.
As to the risks associated with processed foods, there's a wealth of research being done in nutritional science for those who actually care about what they put into their bodies. It requires one to invest a little more effort than clicking on "you won't believe how healthy these foods are!" clickbait. Granted there's no such thing as a perfect science, but you hardly need to be perfect to show better results over time than all the quack pseudoscience out there.
Nutritional literacy in the US might actually be worse than political literacy. Typically any casual conversation about ultra-processed foods I come across, you'll find someone with an understanding that sugars, sodium and "chemicals" are added, maybe with some general understanding of what foods tend to fall into this category. Try asking a few people what fiber actually does [beyond helping you take a ****].
While it's tempting to point the finger at the lazy American for their own lack of effort, a lot of people really don't have the capacity to evaluate this stuff and depend on a little guidance. There is a lot to sort through and some of it does conflict.
What I do know is putting a brain-addled imbecile like RFK Jr is this position is really just asking for trouble. A guy running a podcast saying whatever dumb **** he wanted is dangerous and unfortunate, but when we're talking someone responsible for policy there's not really any excuse here. It's just a bad decision by Trump, one of several with his appointments so far, and not really one he had to make.
All you really have to do is google his name.
Hm argh i see how the moderation was, so it was already risky (although you allowed it) to publish commentary without banned content from someone who elsewhere in the past had published racist commentary.
Anyway k he has a past you can't tolerate even if today he is a bit to the left of the republican party
While this is true, in the end it was largely the scientific community that pushed back on the smoking industry and informed the public about the correlation of smoking to cancer and other health risks. Not random dopes like RFK throwing our their personal intuitions and half-baked nonsense.
As to the risks associated with processed foods, there's a wealth of research being done in nutritional science for those who actually care about what they put into their bodies. It requires one to invest a
Yes doctors are both in bad faith, defending wrong claim, for as long as they feel comfortable doing s, and then become fascist crusaders banning behaviour when the evidence is excessively on the other side.
So they manage to be terrible in both timeframes, when the only proper way to deal with public health claims is with moderation, prudence, and adherence to the fact it's really hard to be sure of something, which is why almost nothing should be banned for adults, nor crusaded against.
Doctors attitude toward public policy is basically the worst possible. Authoritarian, paternalistic, and with no nuance on the truth-validity of claims which aren't scientific in the sense a physical claim can be (you cannot run real experiments in social sciences, only vauge proxies of real experiments)
Was thinking about rfk Jr and his conspiracy mindset and specific predictions related to that.
I wonder what the odds of something like being able to buy raw milk at Walmart would be.
All 50 states allow raw milk to be sold afaik, which is why it's completly absurd to have a federal law/regulation banning interstate sale of the same good, no matter what someone thinks of raw milk.
It's actually insane that the federal government can do that in the first place.
If anything under the commerce clause it could do the opposite, like forcing states to allow trade in that substance if most want to and a few don't. Not regulating it more than states want to , which has no constitutional basis at all.
I didn't say "states allow it" for a reason. I'm speaking specifically about if Walmart sells it. I'm glad I gave you the opportunity to go on another unrelated rant about federal government regulations though.
Actually, I just realised I totally misread it. I didn't realise you wrote "JFK", I read it as "RFK", so figured the joke was that if there was a pandemic he'd just end up killing off all the unhealthy people with his medical advice. Now that I've read it properly, I'm not so sure I do get it after all.
I didn't say "states allow it" for a reason. I'm speaking specifically about if Walmart sells it. I'm glad I gave you the opportunity to go on another unrelated rant about federal government regulations though.
Walmart doesn't sell it because of federal regulations. They have a nation-wide complex logistic setup which doesn't allow them to guarantee supplies are in-state, that's not how they operate. They need to be able to move things through their warehouse without beind saddled by regulations.
If the federal rule against interstate trade of raw milk gets removed, Walmart will sell raw milk where it's profitable to do so (and allowed by local rules).
It's not an "unrelated rant", your question/suggestion could have been translated as "i wonder if they manage to remove federal regulation of raw milk".
Actually, I just realised I totally misread it. I didn't realise you wrote "JFK", I read it as "RFK", so figured the joke was that if there was a pandemic he'd just end up killing off all the unhealthy people with his medical advice. Now that I've read it properly, I'm not so sure I do get it after all.
You misread it correctly
Walmart doesn't sell it because of federal regulations. They have a nation-wide complex logistic setup which doesn't allow them to guarantee supplies are in-state, that's not how they operate. They need to be able to move things through their warehouse without beind saddled by regulations.
If the federal rule against interstate trade of raw milk gets removed, Walmart will sell raw milk where it's profitable to do so (and allowed by local rules).
It's not an "unrelated rant", your question/suggesti
No it couldn't. They could remove any regulations and Walmart still might not sell it.
I said Walmart specifically for a reason. I was asking about more than just regulations.
It's crazy how you struggle with the simplest concepts.
peak tds here
going to go hard in the paint about the health benefits of cheezeits and hotpockets just because someone you don't like said they are bad while ignoring the obestity epidemic etc etc
Dumb post. It's a logical fallacy no matter who said it, df.
Show me where i said even a single word about "health benefits" liar, or do you just not know the difference between that and safety?
And I haven't brought up anything even tangentially related to obesity. This is just you not understanding the topic. As usual.
No it couldn't. They could remove any regulations and Walmart still might not sell it.
I said Walmart specifically for a reason. I was asking about more than just regulations.
It's crazy how you struggle with the simplest concepts.
Walmart sells everything that it can sell that it can make a profit upon, including stuff that republicans or democrats might find very offensive at times. Including stuff that is not very good for health at all.
So no i don't think there is something else other than federal (and local when applicable) regulations preventing them to sell raw milk.
