I don’t think these probabilities are correct. Every parent is told not to feed their under 1 year olds honey, many times.
In an extreme example… only 20 parents fed their kids honey and 20 kids contracted botulism.
That would be a 100% risk. Obviously in real life it’s not 100% of kids, but still could be a meaningful percentage and likely higher than 1 in 50,000 for babies that eat honey.
It is correct. They are considering the most extreme case; in the most extreme case, no non-botulism-infected infants eat honey, and honey was the cause of botulism for those 20 infants.
If that is so, then completely removing honey exposure for infants would mean that 80 rather than 100 infants get botulism poisoning.
So the new probability of contracting botulism is (80 / 100) * (old probability), and (80 / 100) * (1 / 40000) = 1 / 50000.
There are no errors in the calculation, but it's wrong anyways because it calculates the answer to the wrong question. "At best" suggests this is the largest possible effect, but it is the smallest possible. To get an upper bound estimate on the usefulness of avoiding honey, you would need to know how many parents of 1-year-olds are avoiding honey.
Yeah, and their infant mortality is on par with Sub-Saharan Africa.
"The second most common prelacteal feed is honey, a delicious natural sweetener. Numerous studies [29,30] have shown that the ingestion of honey under one year of age is linked with infant botulism, a disease that results in a blockade of voluntary motor and autonomic functions. Apart from this, other prelacteal feeds get contaminated due to unhygienic environment, especially in rural India and in urban slums, resulting in infantile diarrhea. Thus, a wide range of prelacteal feeds and the introduction of early supplements result in recurrent diarrhea with multiple illness finally ending lives because of inaccessibility and unaffordibility of treatment and delayed or inappropriate care seeking behavior."
The paper lists a bunch of other traditional practices that have deleterious effects on the infants' health, such as putting unsanitary herbal concoctions on the babies navel while it's still healing, etc.
"Diarrhoea is a leading killer of children, accounting for approximately 9 per cent of all deaths among children under age 5 worldwide in 2021. This translates to over 1,200 young children dying each day" - https://data.unicef.org/topic/child-health/diarrhoeal-diseas...
"OK, sister bees, now remember: this season we'll be feeding the hu-man's child, so wipe your feet before entering the hive, and if you feel the sniffles coming on, Don't Make Honey!"
It's more about the below minimum wage people harvesting, bottling for transport, transporting, then bottling for sale than the bees themselves. More intermediate steps to introduce contamination and more potentially contaminated sources all mixed together.
I tend to use a sentence along these lines:
"Give me a straightforward summary of what we discussed so far, someone who didn't read the above should understand the details. Don't be too verbose."
Then i just continue from there or simply use this as a seed in another fresh chat.
Multiple factors may lead to you paying more than the average:
1. Not all Americans have cars or drive.
2. Each state has different legislative structures which impact payouts and medical costs. Some states cost more than the average per accident, some cost less.
3. Your risk may be higher than average
4. You may drive more or less miles than average
5. Your choice of car makes you more or less risky
We bought one back in 2020 and I’d say it’s the single best purchase I have made in the last 10+ years. My wife and I use it or the app to work out almost every day and I’ll log 700+ hours this year which will be about 10% more than last year. 75% of which will be off bike in the other classes which you can pay a lower membership for.
Despite some really bad decisions by the management team on letting expenses get out of control, it’s an absolutely incredible product.
Let me offer a counterpoint: I got one as a gift, used it a few times, realized I like biking outside way more, and it was an easy way to get out of the house, and found that paying a subscription for something I can do, for free, is absolutely silly.
It only makes sense if you're a FinanceBro trapped in your mid-town NYC appt and can't get out, etc. There are bike clubs near me for big group rides -- that cost me $0 -- and my local gym offers spin classes when it rains.
I mean you could say the anti peloton (mirror lol?) shill bots are out hard based on your post. Just because lots of people find a system that works for them you have to tear it down and make fun of it?
The privilege of this is ridiculous. Not everyone has a safe place they can ride around outside for free at. I live in a big city in California and wouldn’t be caught dead riding outside from the terrible air quality to the horrible drivers that could kill me at seconds notice because the bike infrastructure around here is terrible. And if I wanted to get somewhere in the city where it’s better I need to pay for transit or drive, so not free.
I’m a software engineer who loves using it to get a workout in during my day that would otherwise require me as you say travel 15 min each way to closest gym, pay for a gym membership that’s way more than 44 bucks and includes a shitty spin bike that isn’t maintained well unless it’s in a class that I have follow their schedule for. Then head back home 15 min. Yessss so much easer then picking a class to start when I want to and not wasting 30 min driving.
It only makes sense if you're a FinanceBro trapped in your mid-town NYC appt and can't get out
This is a bit of a limited take, I'm an avid mountain biker and hit the trails 2-3 times a week. But I also want to exercise for fitness every day. Doing a ride on a bike is a 2-3 hour process and is fairly weather dependent. Doing a Peloton Ride is 45-60 minutes.
I do the Peloton "Power Zone" workouts they're great, I get slammed burn around 800 calories, maintain 230 Watts for that time and I don't "cheat" because of the power meter. It's a very different thing from an outdoor ride on road or trail. I'm a stronger rider on my bike because of these rides done on the Peloton. Heck most high-level road riders still do indoor rides for this reason - it's why things like the Wahoo Kickr and other trainers and spin setups exist for road bikes.
Finally there also a lot of people who because of their current physical condition or body image or a myriad of other reasons aren’t comfortable getting on a bike or working out in a group. A Peloton at home is a fantastic way for these people to start a fitness regimen.
Everyone's tackles fitness differently and it's odd to see anyone be so dismissive of something that is working for someone else.
I'm a self-admitted cardio addict. But stationary exercise equipment is something I find mind-numbingly boring. What is the peloton doing differently than others? Are the online classes really that motivating? Or is it something about the machine itself?
Red Alert 2. That was such a fun game. One thing that has been majorly lost in games now is the ability to create levels too. I loved the creation part
Creating a competent and usable level editor that you can publicly release is a lot of work, and unless you can somehow turn it into a major selling point for the game, you will be hard pressed to afford it. Dev time for games is expensive and if you're hacking together levels using a bunch of disparate tools including some third-party ones it might not really be worth it to make a tool that you can release.
Level editing tools are created to build the levels by the devs. They just don't want to give them to players because they want to sell you additional content.
Talking specifically about the usual suspects but hell, even some indie games are doing it now, in indie games it seems more popular to release a new game entirely which is basically 1.0 with new maps but thankfully there are tons of passion projects that get new content for years and years who really deserve more support.
> Level editing tools are created to build the levels by the devs. They just don't want to give them to players because they want to sell you additional content.
This is probably true as well, but the internet editor map editors use are often very different than what they would offer the community, requiring a lot of polish compared to what's used internally (and we all know that the 20% last polish takes 80% of the time) Although there are some games that offer the very same experience, like what Crysis had (with the CryEngine Editor) and ARMA series.
I don't disagree with your assessment and if anything it really opens the door for someone else to step in and offer these tools because if Skyrim, Minecraft, Gary's mod etc have shown us anything it's that these tools can create vast communities that will keep growing and supporting your work and any future releases.
Just a shame to see so many companies prioritise profits over gameplay / replayability and community these days.
There's a world of difference between making a new map/level and making a new game. The effort required for the former is measured in years, whereas the latter is mostly weeks to months (ignoring open world games where the level spans the whole game universe).
I’ve kind of solved this. You can snap windows but you need to add a shortcut in systems to do it. It’s not perfect, but it does work and overtime you miss it less and less
I have tinnitus and AirPod pros and haven’t noticed any difference. I do find that not drinking out of straws or especially camelpak style bottles with straws really minimizes it. Also, more sleep, less tinnitus
My son has multiple severe nut allergies so I’ve gone from having zero awareness to having too much.
Allergies are fascinating bc they are a continuum and random.
Continuum from…
zero symptoms if you eat the protein in the nut and just a positive blood test…
all the way to…
cannot be in same room as nuts if they will have a reaction that constricts their ability to breath.
They are also random in that your outcome can be wildly different each time.
The result imo is that drs who detect any food allergy, let’s say the child has a slightly swollen lip after eating sesame will run labs on blood and skin and get some real positives and some false positives.
Next they say not to eat anything the person is allergic to in order to prevent a life threatening allergy.
If no blood or skin tests existed this person may go through life mainly avoiding the food bc it’s uncomfortable, but never think of themselves as allergic to X.
Net result is that people with allergies are safer now, but the % of people we know have allergies has increased.
As a side note, if you are reading this as a parent with a kid with a recently discovered food allergy, please note… it totally sucks, but… you will adjust over time to the higher workload and constant label reading, hang in there.
Thank you for your reply and best wishes to your family! I know it can be a bit of an intrusive question, but how do people discover that children have a particular allergy? Do you get an epipen the same moment you have a newborn, just in case? Do you try some small amount or potentially cross contaminated food just to test? Do you discover it randomly and hope there is going to be enough time to get to ER? I have been lucky not to have it for myself, or a child, but how did you know?
Epipen? No. But if I didn't live around the corner from the hospital, I'd probably test peanuts and shellfish while parked next to one : - )
That wasn't common when/where I was born, but then again, the cuisine there/then was more limited so I'd be exposed to most allergens naturally within the first year. (And face "I've never seen a prawn and I'm 20 - am I allergic to them?" later)
Our son had skin issues (eczema) before he was old enough to eat solid foods. Eczema and food allergies are correlated so we fed him small amounts of peanuts and he had a crazy reaction. We were lucky he didn’t end up in er first time, but swollen lips, changed “voice” for weeks etc.
For anyone reading this, there are safer ways to test for peanut allergies than feeding someone peanuts, especially because peanut allergies can kill. I'm reminded of this: https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1986/11/26
It also means they don’t feel confident enough in their cleaning process and would prefer to add cost to their manufacturing process than to ensure clean machines
Or it could mean the conveyor next to it uses lots of sesame oil and they can’t guarantee every single particle stayed in that belt.
Or it could mean the conveyor on the other side of the factory is and they don’t want to risk it.
Nobody knows the specific reasoning a company has for adding it in unless they had insider info from the company itself. Everything else is pure speculation.
Have you ever cleaned up sesame seeds? The article's "remove all the sand" analogy is exactly on point - they're tiny and get stuck tight in every available crack. No normal cleaning process is going to remove all of them.
I'm pretty sure the producers involved understand their costs better than you or I and have concluded the optimal outcome is to add an epsilon of sesame cost than a multiple of that of additional decontamination cost.
