While we shouldnt be cruel to animals, just want to point out that Lamarckian evolution was proven false by Darwin already.
Sheep didn't evolve to require it by the constant shaving, farmers would have likely selected for highly producing animals if anything.
McKenzie followed up later with a similar statement to the one today, saying “we don’t like or condone bigotry in any form.
Condone:
verb accept and allow (behavior that is considered morally wrong or offensive) to continue
Ive been playing this non-stop. Why? Im not sure. But theres something just so satisfying about tearing down a spaceship in 0 gravity. Wish it had a VR option, would seriously consider investing in a VR headset to play it that way.
Except all morality and empathy
That's... just like your opinion man.
Then god isnt omnipotent, cause you know, it lacks the power of whats actually to come and is only good at knowing all the hypotheticals. Or may be lacks omnicience, but one could argue that knowing all the possibilities counts.
All that matters is that its lacking something, when it shouldnt
What are you trying to imply, that they should but wont, that they shouldn't but will, some other combination?
LOL, PCOS hirsutism has available pharmacological and non- pharmacological treatments. What is your point here?
Just because people can consume pure lard, and gain a tonne of weight, it doesnt mean theyre not malnutritioned. It also doesnt mean they dont experience hunger.
If you take a step back and consider the primary question that needs to be answered is it
a) What weight is a measure of hunger/poverty - people must be over x weight irrespective if health and were good. b) What food availability us a measure of hunger/poverty - people must have reasonable acess to a basic set of nutritional inputs and were good.
You seem to be following a - people are fat, so hunger doesnt exist
When it would be equally truthful, with a different conclusion to say - people are feeling hunger and experiencing malnutrition. When they can eat, what they can afford causes increased body mass without fulfilling their nutritional requirements. They also continue to feel hungry.
Treat food similar to medicine, the good benefit is the target, but there are also side effects. Cheaper food has a worse profile - fewer (not none) benefits, and higher side-effects.
Theres also more complexity to this - poverty isnt just $. Education, transportation, time, exhaustion, health. Many intersections and impacts that paint a persons life.
If only there was some way to confirm, short of only reading the headline, if theres more to this.
Oh, apparently theres further text in the article, for example 29% said their financial situation is precarious. 11% say they regularly dont eat enough, so they have enough food for their kids, 24% say theyre very concerned with coping with the increase in food prices. Oh and 12%, within the past 6 months, have skipped meals while hungry.
So the article sources survey data, you're basing your claims on better primary data I take it? Or maybe secondary public health database datasets? Something else?
33% is the easy one.... 1/3 of 6 is 2, 1/3 of 1 is 0.33... 2.33..
What? Unless I missed something, it gave access to individual accounts not master access?