mikwcas
3 hours ago edited
All I saw [in these videos] was, well, you're fired you're fired you are too, and you and you and you. And so on and so forth.

And I'm not talking about Milley, Yellen or Garland. Talking about all the clapping seals. See ya'.

There's an old joke that goes, "How can you tell if there's a vegan at your party?" The answer: "They'll tell you."

The entire issue of health factors and ethical matters around diet has been battered endlessly. "Ethical vegans," the most strident of the lot — and the most fact-challenged — make all kinds of outrageous claims about animals, their nature, the biology of humans, and how a "vegan" diet somehow causes "less harm" to animals than a diet that includes meat — a claim that they cannot back up.

That's the extreme end of the spectrum, though. There are plenty of people who forgo meat for reasons of their own without being self-righteous about it, and that's fine; live and let live. But there are matters of science involved, especially where pregnant women are concerned. We've known for some time now that excessive alcohol use by pregnant women can damage a developing fetus; this is what Fetal Alcohol Syndrome is. However, a recent study indicates that forgoing animal protein in the diet may be more damaging than moderate alcohol use. //

Realistically, while any cell mutation can happen any time, you are unlikely to get cancer caused by an occasional drink, but US culture always has pregnant women and new mothers on blast, so they are told to abstain from alcohol, coffee, too many foods to count, etc.

What we should really be cautioning pregnant women about is vegetarian diets. While some epidemiological data on alcohol can be critiqued on merit, people who believe claims about PFAS in water, GMOs, pasteurized milk, vaccinated chickens, Scotchguard, or cancer-causing spatulas absolutely cannot deny the risks of a vegetarian diet. This is far more rigorous than any of the epidemiology in those claims. //

It's important to note that the paper cited is not original work; it's what is called a "meta-analysis," an examination of previous peer-reviewed studies. That doesn't make the study any less credible, especially given the size of the data sets that were examined; eight studies, taking in 72,284 participants.

If you understand biology and the human digestive tract, though, the study isn't necessary. This isn't new information. It's been known for literally all of the history of humankind; that women who have a well-balanced diet have healthier babies. //

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589936824000707 //

Eeyore1953
4 hours ago
How is it possible that Baby Boomers were born, with their mothers smoking and drinking through the pregnancy? And how is it that the French even exist?