Mohamed

joined 3 years ago
[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 34 points 2 days ago (6 children)

It is true, it seems, that Nicotine treats ADHD. There is at least one study that showed nicotine patches (18h and 24h ones) provide a mild to moderate relief for ADHD in people that do not use nicotine otherwise (e.g. nonsmokers). So, it doesn't just treat the symptoms of nicotine withdrawal.

Cigarette smoke is known to contain a clinically significant amount of MAO inhibiters that are not nicotine. MAO inhibiters are regularly used to treat depression and anxiety, and theoretically could treat ADHD since MAOI's generally prevent breakdown of dopamine. There is some nuance here.*

  • For example, there are different types of MAO (monoamine oxidase - an enzyme that breaks down monoamines. Dopamine is an example of a monoamine), like MAO-A vs MAO-B, which break down different monoamines, and MAOI's (MAO Inhibitors) differ on whether they inhibit A, B or both. Furthermore, there are reversible vs irreversible MAOI.
[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 9 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Aside from the deputy's fucked up actions, this man had to save $3500 for dental work, money that could have helped in many other crucial ways, like renting a home. It is fucked up that urgent dental care is not free or at least much cheaper.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago

It is accessible, but it is made for people with accessibility issues?

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I assume the Saudi plant will be staffed with grossly underpaid labourers.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Hindutva... is that India's Modi's brand?

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 weeks ago

Oooh coffee!!

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I think this misrepresents the conversation that actually happened. Paraphrasing, it was something like this:

R: The constitution says you cannot deport people without due process. Do you agree? Trump: No, I'm not sure... R: It says so in the Fifth. Trump: I don't know, I'm not a lawyer. R: Do you agree that you have to follow the constitution? Trump: I don't know, I'm not a lawyer. Due process for millions of people does not sound possible.

While it could be taken from that convo that Trump did say he doesn't know if he should follow the constitution, I think that it is clear that he was probably saying something like "I don't know where the Constitution stands on due process."

I'll say though, it is crazy for him to say he doesn't know what the Constitution says. I know he probably does that for legal reasons. Anyway, for a president who swore to follow the constitution seemingly not knowing anything about the constitution is preposterous, to say the least.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 18 points 2 weeks ago

I think it's more that placebo studies of vaccines could be unethical. Vaccines are preventative treatment. A placebo study would mean that, say, we give the vaccine to 50, and a placebo to 50, and then wait some time (or, for much more unethical, deliberately inject people with the virus), and compare the results.

For something like the common flu, this might be fine, but for something as dangerous as measles, this can be deadly.

I am interested to hear from someone knowlesgeable how vaccines are supposed to be tested.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 weeks ago

Or what "most popular" means

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago

The extremism is from one side, but there is a risk that, to protect against that extremism, a polar opposite comes (Liberals most probably). Also, maybe im misunserstanding the word "polarisation", but i understand it to mean "two polar opposites", neither of which is necessarily extremist. For instance, I would argue that the US is polarised, but only the Republicans are the extremists, while Democrats are a defensive response to the Republicans.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 11 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Omg thats hilarious.

"“We should have expected something like this,” said one Trump ally who would only speak off the record as she’s currently the premier of a western Canadian province."

Hahaha

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 8 points 3 weeks ago

Yep, it was really perfect for the liberals. I wonder if choosing Carney was a calculated choice to benefit from the turmoil in the US, or if it is just ridiculously good luck.

 

This survey is nuts. Here are some quotes:

  1. Pierre Poilievre will lock up the worst criminals for life. Do you want safer streets?* Yes – Jail, not bail! No – I want dangerous criminals terrorizing my streets
  1. The Carney Trudeau Liberals have FAILED our military. Pierre Poilievre and Canada First Conservatives will strengthen it. Do you want a stronger military?* Yes - Warrior culture—NOT woke culture. No – Woke culture is more important

The * just means its a required field, if you are wondering.

 

I am genuinely curious. Some of my passing thoughts are below, if some context is needed.

I strongly believe that PR is a much better and fairer system than FPTP, and I hope it passes in Canada at least at the federal level.

The question. Are there any real disadvantages to PR compared to FPTP?

PR is obviously not a peefect system, and it has downsides compared to other forms of representation, such as Direct Democracy. But i cant find any real downsides when compared to FPTP.

I heard about:

  1. PR allows extremist ideas to be represented. This is maybe true, but I think it is blown out of proportion It is also probably not a negative. Allowing their representation means that these ideas can be challenged in public, rather than simply censored. It also could reduce feelings of not being represented among the public, feelings which might be a strong contributing force to the rise of authoritarianism.

  2. PR could effectively freeze government by not allowing anything to pass. This could be a negative, but in many cases it isn't. In case the majority is the extremist party, PR allows a sort of damage control.

view more: next ›