Joshi

Despite their traitorous turn towards neiliberalism in the 80s the ALP remains a competent liberal party, whereas the Liberals are an incompetent boys club only interested in protecting the class interests of their corporate masters.

Okay, I've been happily ignoring your little idee fixee on LDL aside from one gentle comment but I feel the need to comment here again.

This article is utterly disingenuous and sets up a complete strawman to knock down. It sets out to disprove a notion of cholesterol that was last current decades ago. Right in the first paragraph and throughout the article LDL is referred to as “the” major cause of atherosclerosis which to my knowledge even the Framingham authors wouldn't have been comfortable with, it is however a significant contributing factor.

It is well known that some people with elevated LDL or total cholesterol are at low risk(this is the reason for weak or negative results in whole population studies), atherosclerosis is a complex disease with multifactorial causes, no practising doctor I know thinks it is “the” major cause, or even the most important contributing factor.

That being said it is thoroughly established that statin use in select patients reduces the risk of MI and CVA, especially in those with established atherosclerosis, but also those with other substantial risk factors (high BP, family history, smoking, diabetes etc.). This is totally uncontroversial and the pathogenic mechanisms, while complex, are increasingly well understood.

I have been a doctor for over a decade and I consider myself diligent in keeping up with research, and although the selection of patients for statin therapy is an ongoing and regularly changing area of research on which experts can disagree, the fact that select patients will have substantially lower risk of coronary events due to statin therapy is uncontroversial.

Here is an article written by people who payed attention in stats class and have bothered to make their case with evidence rather than knocking down strawmen

Efficacy and safety of long-term treatment with statins for coronary heart disease: A Bayesian network meta-analysis (2016)

Or for a more succinct and easy to read summary here is the Cochrane conclusion

"Of 1000 people treated with a statin for five years, 18 would avoid a major CVD event which compares well with other treatments used for preventing cardiovascular disease."

Statins for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease

Ugh, that one and the cook one of everything have been staring at me for years. Maybe I'll try for those on my current playthrough

In the recent WA state election we saw a pretty substantial shift towards greens and independents especially in rural seats away from nationals and libs. This is in part due seachangers and treechangers but interesting none the less.

I keep seeing commentary saying that we shouldn't use the ADF for disaster relief.

We have an organisation full of people with exactly the skills and organisation required that we maintain at great expense and barely use. Can someone give me a sensible explanation why it's not a good idea to use them for disaster response.

On a second note I know for a fact that small scale politics and wasteful spending are endemic in volunteer emergency services. I'm not sure what reform is needed but something certainly is. I'm about to re-enter a volunteer fire brigade for the first time in years so I'm sure I'll be full of opinions in a few months.

Good work comrade, this is the way to live.

The budget deficit has been reducing over time under the current government, the man promoting nuclear is Dutton the opposition leader, his plans for nuclear power are being criticized as expensive, he is being portrayed as stupid in promoting nuclear which would reverse the trend of reducing deficits.

It's a bit convoluted and not particularly funny but it does make sense.

Modern guns a extremely precisely engineered devices that are incredibly easy to use, for better or worse. I know modern sporting bows are also but it's no contest in my opinion.

I've shot both, bows as a complete amateur and relatively competent with a rifle. There is no question that a modern gun is way easier to pick up as an amateur and hit what you want to hit and I cannot possibly believe there are anything other than extremely niche uses where a bow is superior.

4 player map can be good to have segments of your farm for different uses. Although I've found it annoying as I found it hard to have a good flow to the morning.

Spoiler: The fact that the ALP is Neoliberal is kind of the point of the article.

You've laid out the RBA position fairly enough.

Part of the subtext of this piece is an ongoing debate, historically through the second half of the 20th century and into the GFC it seems that countries that adopt excessively tight monetary and fiscal policy have a lower quality of life long term in a way that is difficult to reverse, whereas the long term consequences of a slower, or even labile, return to target levels of inflation is likely nothing.

This is something that professional economists disagree on and I abandoned economics the second I got my bachelor's but the historical evidence is compelling.

Because the interest rate has a direct impact on quality of life. Everything else being equal a lower interest rate is better.