In Europe and South East Asia you’re mostly good? It’s not hard to think of countries that do better than the US regarding access to healthcare and reasonably affordable living.
Don’t know about migrants from the US though… We worked hard for this. We don’t want these slackers leeching off what we built. Maybe they should just get off the couch and get to work and build their own functional society. /s
Or if you live in a functional society, not under a dictator
Tobacco is also plant-based and I’m sure chickens are made of the vegetables they eat as well.
And this is one of those things where you can’t be sure but you do it anyway
I can confirm kimchi helps me poop, so I guess if I just got administered some nanoplastics there would be more nanoplastics in my poop.
Wait. Lab mice injected with the lactic acid bacteria isolated from kimchi had nanoplastic levels twice as high than those not injected… That’s the opposite of the claim in the title.
I had to read this a couple of times.
You won’t live forever if you don’t do drugs either, so no worries.
I don’t know, but when I started recognizing birds by sound I noticed it was working as a constant mindfulness exercise whenever I went outside. I suppose mindfulness has similar positive effects on the brain?
Then I’d say any hobby that encourages mindfulness could have a positive effect on your brain?
What even was this article about? It reads like it is building up to something but then fails to deliver.
Studies conclude that set and setting is key in psychedelic therapy. So yes, priming is crucial and success depends on a lot of factors. But we already knew this. No one serious suggests psychedelics always work and always create a mystical experience in which all problems are solved.
This article does not add any more info on the question in the title “Can Psychedelic Experiences Really Improve Your Mental Health?”. That’s just clickbait.
In lowering sperm counts they’re very effective at combating climate change.
Too bad about the insects though.
What? This is getting confusing.
Yes probably all cultures had slaves or stole land at some point in time. (This is true, depending on whether you see cultures as fixed in time: are current day Egyptians of the same culture as ancient Egyptians? When does culture “restart”? Who decides this?)
Let me ask you: is there no difference between let’s say a Native American claiming his land was stolen (hundreds of years ago and his people massacred, and he’s now a second rank citizen on his own land), and for instance a white European claiming his land was stolen (by the Romans? During WW2? I would not know what he means honestly, especially because he is now part of a nation state, a first class citizen).
Yes all land was stolen. But this is not an absolute. You wouldn’t agree the Native American had his land quite a bit more relatively stolen?
My point is you can’t invalidate the claim of native peoples just by going “meh, so what? All land was technically stolen at some point”. Some people can make a more legitimate claim their land was stolen than others.
Can’t really rank it, it’s a subjective statement. My gut tells me there’s a difference between for instance a Native American stating his land is stolen and a, just an example, white European stating his land is stolen.
My gut thinks there IS a way to rank these statements, even though it’s technically true all land was stolen at some point and the whole nation state fairy tale is completely arbitrary.
That’s just my gut though, it doesn’t agree with genocide
True, but still some land is significantly more stolen than others.
Becoming a Buddhist cat does not seem like a bad life choice at all