51–60 of 508 posts
It makes me angry to think of how wreckless the generations before millenials were. Lead's risks and damages were well-known long before 1996. And they still didn't ban it until then.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree that people have been reckless with population safety in past, but your comment seems to imply that the Millenial generation are somehow flawless with regards with this subject. While safety is now more stringent than in the past, I very much doubt that this is the case.
Compared to ignoring global warming - ignoring lead exposure is a minor negligence.
And yes, I'm aware that said commodity production produces wealth which also improves well-being. But there's a contradiction there in our economic model that is not serving us well.
EDIT: I should add to my point above that what's common with both these is one overarching world altering product that has completely transformed the world: the automobile.
Ribbons of tarmac lace the earth (it wouldn't surprise me if this is a long term environmental problem, too), even in some of the most remote sections of the planet.
Cities are built around them, privileging automobile use above a bunch of other aspects of quality of life.
Road transport is 75ish% of global CO2 emissions.
And, yeah, leaded fuel poisoned our bodies, minds, and the environment for decades.
IQ doesn’t measure intelligence so for all we know this just shows that IQ tests measure how little lead you’ve been exposed to
1) school performance
2) job performance
3) income
4) crime rate
5) health and mortality
6) quantity of lead exposed to
7) NOT intelligence
It makes me angry to think of how wreckless the generations before millenials were. Lead's risks and damages were well-known long before 1996. And they still didn't ban it until then.
Lead still isn't banned in the US. You can go buy 100LL and burn it in your plane all day long showering it over the land below. Completely legal.
It makes me angry to think of how wreckless the generations before millenials were. Lead's risks and damages were well-known long before 1996. And they still didn't ban it until then.
It makes me angry to think of how wreckless the generations before millenials were. Lead's risks and damages were well-known long before 1996. And they still didn't ban it until then.
Same goes for sugar. We know the dangers it poses, we are also seeing how much it increases risk of death due to covid. I don't think we should be surpsied, as much as pushing to regulate this garbage. As an aside, Michelle Obama's campaign when Obama was in office was about improvement children's health. Her focus was going to be on nutrition (lunch food). Shortly thereafter Coke and Pepsi came in with "donations" a…
You know, I wouldn't mind this as long as the scale of the donation was big enough. If they donated $1000 per american to the US government, who could use it to reduce taxes or improve life for americans more than the sugar decreases quality of life through illness and poor health, that would be great.
But they didn't. I bet their donation was $100k or so, or less than 1 cent per american.
Didn't we have a previous study debunking this research on statistical grounds?
there's this thing about the modern internet era which makes it possible to find a study to debunk (or support) pretty much any idea/theory you want. specially in the midst of an information/propaganda war all I'm trying to say is that I have decided not to think in the way you just did e.g. "where's that study which supports what I already believe?". It doesn't seem like a good tactic anymore
Hmm.
It looks like you're ascribing to the above comment the thought process: "I'm only looking for studies which only tell me that which I believe." However, the above comment doesn't seem to be saying this. They thought there was more to the story and are querying for the rest of the story.
Meanwhile, you seem to ascribe to yourself the quality of not searching for data that supports what you already believe.
However, it seems to me that searching for more studies (even if you're only looking for data that confirms your bias) is a better outcome than assuming (without more proof) that people who aren't you are thinking "the bad way"TM.
I mean, if you had searched for additional proof to discover that what you already thought was true about above commenter (ie they were thinking the bad way) you might have discovered that they in fact were simply looking for additional context due to recalling past events that indicated that there might have been additional context.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same goes for sugar. We know the dangers it poses, we are also seeing how much it increases risk of death due to covid. I don't think we should be surpsied, as much as pushing to regulate this garbage. As an aside, Michelle Obama's campaign when Obama was in office was about improvement children's health. Her focus was going to be on nutrition (lunch food). Shortly thereafter Coke and Pepsi came in with "donations" a…
Sugar is at least a substance that one can choose not to eat. Lead poisoning and pollution aren’t choices.
It makes me angry to think of how wreckless the generations before millenials were. Lead's risks and damages were well-known long before 1996. And they still didn't ban it until then.
Speaking as a millennial, don't praise us too soon. We haven't really gotten the reins of power yet, so it's easy to claim that we'd do it better. In reality I imagine we'll still succumb to various corrupting forces just like every other generation. Granted I still think we have a more enlightened perspective on some issues as a generation just due to better education overall, but at best we might manage a marginal…
One thing that already gets me thinking of future generations looking down on us will be this quest for travel and high living especially for social media glamor and the new keeping up with Jones'. This increases more flights, polluting untouched places and how bad it is for the climate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same goes for sugar. We know the dangers it poses, we are also seeing how much it increases risk of death due to covid. I don't think we should be surpsied, as much as pushing to regulate this garbage. As an aside, Michelle Obama's campaign when Obama was in office was about improvement children's health. Her focus was going to be on nutrition (lunch food). Shortly thereafter Coke and Pepsi came in with "donations" a…
Sugar is at least a substance that one can choose not to eat. Lead poisoning and pollution aren’t choices.
The problem is there are far too many pollutants for everyone to be able to educate themselves about every one, and take steps to avoid them. Instead, it's the role of government to decide in each case whether to allow, ban, tax, inform or restrict each type of pollutant.