I was talking about toxins in general in reaction to yout toxin comment. I think it’s logical to research the possibility of alcohol having some beneficial effects, the world is not black and white.

When it comes to studies of health risks/benefits of alcohol, they unfortunately seem to suffer from the same shortcomings as other health studies: lots of important factors are often ignored, like the type of alcoholic beverage consumed, lifestyle connected to the type or amount of alcohol, previous history of alcohol use… I can, of course, give you a link to a study that finds benefits to moderate alcohol use (although they are far from recomending it). Here’s one example from 2023

Personally, I think alcohol probably does more damage than benefit even in moderate dosing, but the truth is we still don’t really know and we need much more in-depth studies to find out.

I’m pretty sure this is THE ONE blackface that is allowed. Or am I missing some joke in your comment?

I do get that, I was interested in the amount of milk and the name of the healthy things it blocks from being absorbed - there might be more than one, right?

Yes, but in case of this kind of nutrition/health studies the correlation=/=causation is often a big problem. There are usually so many things at play and the studies just look at a tiny subsetof them, making the results irrelevant or just plain wrong. I think this field would benefit greatly from a more ecological approach - in ecology, scientists often use methods for multidimensional analysis of a big number of factors that can or do influence the studied problem. This is rarely seen in medicine and nutrition, unfortunately.

I didn’t really understand the abstract, I’m affraid. Is CGA the same thing as chlorigenic acid and is that the antioxidant you’re talking about? Also, did they test coffee with a little milk? The abstract makes it sound like they tested coffee without milk and coffee made entirely of milk, which doesn’t happen in real life. I am confused.

Many toxins have medicinal uses.

Well, I don’t think we’re on the same page. I’m not really into OP’s design, but I also don’t think that school children use Fiskars scissors. Don’t know what’s wrong with cat scratchers. Cats love them, and if you use an environmentally friendly glue you can still compost them later. I do have good tools at home, but I trully appreciate your recomendations - that’s rather wholesome of you, thanks.

Cutting carboard with scissors? It can be done, but it’s a chore amd the results are poor. I wouldn’t wish it on school children.

At first I read it as “Sorry to be a brother…” It’s hard to be a sibling sometimes.

So the spittle is still authentic!

I like the way the OP in the picture wants to start a horror kind of discussion and it immediately turns wholesome and heartwarming.

You’re probably not a native speaker, so please be warned - the term “female” is reserved for animals, just like the term “male”. It can be viewed as rather disrespectful when talking about human beings. The right word to use is “woman”. You used the word “man” correctly there while using the derogatory word “female” at the same time, which can make you seem misogynistic.

Would watch

And now we’ve got two black female captains with great archs!

I was so disappointed when they introduced the Borg queen. The hive mind concept is so interesting and it suffered greatly afterwards. Just like when in Discovery they moved the interestingly widespread Control into a single body, so that it could be easily dealt with. I see it as lazy writing and not enough fantasy.

This is perfectly possible. But why worry about it? It wouldn’t make things less fun!

That wouldn’t explain gender differences.

So my eyes are the basic scope.

Looks like brutalism, but it’s really dysfunctionalism.