It depends on the populations.

Steppe populations from modern Ukraine easy through to the Urals lived mainly on meat and dairy 5000 years ago (even if they didn’t yet have the lactose tolerance adaptation).

At a certain point, I realized that from another perspective, the big divide seems to be between those who see continuous distributions as just an abstraction of a world that is inherently finite vs those who see finite steps as the approximation of an inherently continuous and infinitely divisible reality.

Since I’m someone who sees math as a way to tell internally-consistent stories that may or may not represent reality, I tend to have a certain exasperation with what seems to be the need of most engineers to anchor everything in Euclidean topography.

But it’s my spouse who had to help our kids with high school math. A parent who thinks non Euclidean geometry is fun is not helpful at that point.

The reason WHO frames common risk factors and common chronic diseases is because persons with these risks, conditions and diseases often end up with more than one of these diseases.

e.g., WHO now considers obesity a disease in itself, but obesity is also a biological risk factor for cancer and diabetes.

There are a lot of interrelationships in the risks.

More, with these conditions, they are also more vulnerable to infectious diseases.

It’s important though to keep in mind that, as I note in another reply, these kinds of studies aren’t just about informing individuals’ choices.

They’re not about ‘blaming’ or ‘shaming’ individuals choices.

They are about understanding what are the underlying determinants of health and risk factors that are shaping health outcomes.

Back to the study in question, and the OP’s remark that they were surprised that people were eating that much processed meat daily…

If the protein sources that are most available and affordable are the most unhealthy, preprocessed ones, then consumers will buy and consume more of these than healthier ones.

And their preferences and consumption habits will be shaped by these experiences.

And that will affect overall health and life expectancy of the population.

I would argue that this is missing the point - and so, in fact, is the article reporting on the study.

What is important to keep in mind is that the benefit of this research is not primarily about ‘telling’ or ‘informing’ individuals so that they can make different food consumption decisions.

It’s more about how food environments are shaped to encourage healthy or unhealthy choices.

If eating that much processed meat daily or weekly increases cancer risks, what’s driving or nudging people towards that.

Is it barriers to availability, accessibility or affordability of healthier and palatable choices?

My point is that raising risks of getting hit by a car, or other accidental causes of injury and death beyond the individual’s control, is a deflection.

Cancer is the leading cause of death in Canada.

Full stop.

No one single risk factor is responsible for that. Building the evidence base to be able to both inform individual behaviour but also to inform food safety regulations is important.

Cancer is the leading cause of premature mortality and morbidity (death and disability) in Canada.

So, an accumulation of small risks, and avoidance of risks, have significant benefits at both the individual and population levels.

The general population needs to be aware that unhealthy eating is impacting their lives and quality of life.

Let’s stick to the peer reviewed science and evidence consensus.

WHO established the four behavioural common risk factors for the four major chronic noncommunicable diseases decades ago.

The kind of research synthesis in this article is about continuing to build the evidence on relative and absolute risks, and in some cases look at how these differences impact different populations more or less due to intersecting determinants.

Common risk factors

• unhealthy diet
• physical inactivity
• tobacco use
• harmful use of alcohol
• air pollution added more recently

Major chronic noncommunicable diseases

• cancer
• cardiovascular diseases
• diabetes
• chronic respiratory diseases

The show clearly shows Murderbot as being ACE and uncomfortable with the sexual and gendered reactions of others towards them — which is as important in my view the outward and physical apparent gender.

And yet, you’ll see many people posting elsewhere on social media that it shouldn’t be relevant.

Can’t imagine trying to share a life with someone who didn’t share my values, but there seems to be a contingent that think that other things should be more important.

I would argue that a lot of the computational based problem solving , from middle school through early undergraduate years, focused on topics historically oriented to boys’ interests, aren’t a good measure of innate math talent either.

But those have historically left a lot of female students behind.

Male or female, most students are really looking to get through math requirements with plug-and-chug replication of algorithms to get to an answer - not genuine problem solving or abstraction. However, being able to reproduce an answer on a very slightly different problem, or just one with different numbers to plug in, does very little towards using mathematical as a means to model problems independently and find solutions.

There’s absolutely no incentive to log in to YouTube now that subscriptions and bells do nothing to control your feed. End stage enshittification.

There’s currently an Redexit of Canadians who are looking to get off US-controlled social media.

Lemmy.ca has had a huge spike in enrolment as it’s the one that was most prominently promoted in r/BuyCanadian. Apparently, it’s had over 9k signups in the past day.

This is also raising questions of foreign interference/influence in democratic process.

In Canada, the federal Elections Commissioner has been called on to investigate the source of bot campaigns for the leading opposition party: Online bot campaign backing Pierre Pollievre prompts call for probe.

The article suggests that the environment plays a significant role in gasturlation, especially the chemistry.

If identical twins develop in the same uterine environment, there would be greater likelihood of the same genes expressing.

So the childhood favourite ‘Mrs Frisby and the Rats of Nimh’ was onto something.

You are so missing out on the wonder that is Sam Kirk.

SNW has a lot delightful surprises, but adding the insouciance of Sam Kirk, but having brothers Kirk spar when Jim shows up on occasion, is truly inspired writing.

Not to mention he really gets under Spock’s skin.

Startide Rising is the best of them all.

Sundiver is quite good too.

The later books were deeply marred by Brin’s giving into pressure from his editors to centre them on a group of adolescent males of diverse species because his publisher was of the view that the average scientific fiction reader was a 14 year old male. Brin has written about this and how difficult it was for him to write outside his natural quite adult style. His fantastic characters from Startide Rising are pushed into the background and only get to step forward and shine again at the very end.

Yoon Ha Lee really plays with fun math concepts. Great stuff. The Ninefox trilogy was a real entry point for me to begin to appreciate Korean mythology.

Yup, lack of advanced science concepts and an accumulation of errors despite a pretension to working problems for the audience.

Even some basic geography errors - early in the book, he claims that the sample had to be landed in Saskatchewan for a high latitude to match the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan. Baikonur is at 45 N latitude, about the same as the border between North and South Dakota. Everywhere in Saskatchewan is North of the 49th parallel and south of 60. Sigh.

I have to say that I just don’t get the hype about this book.

Project Hail Mary is really targeted at a middle grade reading and maturity level. I would have happily given it to our kids to read in middle grade (as I did The Martian).

It’s a Robinson Crusoe meets a buddy in space boys-own-adventure tale (although Weir insists on male gendering a hermaphrodite when ‘they/them’ is well understood). There are clear indications that the story was told to pull in immature readers - starting with the ludicrous scene where Grace has spent days waiting for zero G without stowing any of his lab equipment or supplies.

It’s a compellingly written ‘work the problem’ read but anything beyond high school science concepts isn’t really there. Once again, I feel like we’re seeing more overhyped STEM based on concepts that haven’t advanced beyond what a mid 20th century bachelors degree would cover.

It held my attention as an easy read while fighting a bug, I can’t see picking up another of his books for myself.

There are a few very odd ‘too much information’ references to sexual relationships and use of alcohol that seem almost awkwardly placed to bump up the level, but there’s not really enough in there to even warrant the ‘school edition’ treatment that ‘The Martian’ got. Otherwise nothing stretches past middle grade emotional maturity.

All told, I was expecting more.

It’s important to consider the impact and total volume of ultra processed foods, and the chemicals they contribute to the diet.

There’s increasing evidence that it’s not just a a matter of calorie equations or carb restriction overall that has effects.

Decades ago, research established that managing the glycemic load was more effective than just calorie counting for persons with diabetes.

15 years ago there was evidence building that diet drinks actually could contribute to metabolic problems.

Now studies looking at overall impacts of ultra processed foods suggest they mess up the gut micro biome or at best get taken up into energy much faster than expected.

The items listed in the article fall into the ultra processed category. The ‘everything in moderation’ approach may not be that successful when too much of the diet flips into the ultra processed categories.