Yeah but does the one on the left fit a rack server? I think not!

It’s a bit late to worry about internal mics when everyone has their phone on them at all times.

Probably stuck on an older os which doesn’t support the newest browser updates.

Yeah, basically ecstacy is MDMA plus fillers. The former is in pill form, the latter generally as crystals.

No.

“There is no hard evidence linking Bin Laden to the attacks of 9/11”. -FBI

Of course, there is no evidence for KSM’s involvement either. He was tortured more than 100 times over the course of a month. The 9/11 commission had no access to him, not even his “interview” transcripts. Everything we know is from the mouths of the CIA agents who interrogated him, who admitted that he was completely unreliable.

Oh look, you’re smart enough to understand that reasoning about your ridiculous statement would undermine it. Maybe there is hope.

Sorry what exactly is it that you don’t get? That people would show empathy and help this guy out?

I mean that you’re probably confusing Delta 8 and 9. Delta 9 is the main cannabinoid in regular cannabis, it’s just regular THC.

Just to be clear “Delta 9 THC” is the “real thing”.

Delta 8 is also real but a minor cannabinoid with a milder effect.

Crap I’ll never be able to slide that into a casual conversation.

That’s like blaming Jews during world war 2 for putting up resistance against their fascist rulers. It is such a mischaracterization of the situation that it is damaging to the Palestinian people.

Of course, but if you cut funds to your social healthcare system towards drug prevention and then point to drug decriminalization as the cause of a worsening situation, you’re not being truthful. That’s why I mentioned the logical fallacy.

It’s easy to fall in the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy though. The article goes on insinuating cause and effect, and tucks away the most likely reason at the end of the article, cutting funds of drug prevention to a quarter of what it was.

I’m pretty sure they’re saying the same thing.

Not in my opinion, because the underlying implication is that a mere change in the legality of a substance would lead to a major rise in its use that we need to counter with an improvement of social care. I’m of the opinion that we would be in a far better situation if we had never intercepted a single gram of any illegal substance or put a single person behind bars for their drug use. Of course we need better social care, but a reduction of repressive approaches to counter the drug issues alone would improve the situation and we don’t need to wait for “socialism” to take off in the US.

The idea that legalization or something similar would lead to more issues is completely unfounded and rests on the idea that the approach we take right now solves anything and stops people from using drugs. You legalize drugs to IMPROVE the situation, not to make it worse. The repressive approach towards drugs has made all drug issues worse, it is not some sort of dam that is holding back the tide of run-away drug problems, we already have that while they are all illegal.

People by and large do not end up with mental health issues because of drug use, they have mental health issues, or medical issues, or financial issues, which leads them towards drug use, which, with our current approach towards them, puts them into a downwards spiral. A more sane approach centered around harm reduction would be a means to help people in those situations, instead of turning people, who often ended up in that situation through nothing more than an accident or medical issue requiring pain relief medication, into criminals.

All the other comments are tips to get you to sleep, putting yet more pressure on trying to actually sleep, which then makes it even harder. Then all the stuff you put in your body tires you even more and all the worry exhausts you, making things worse.

Instead of needing to sleep, just tell yourself that it’s fine if you don’t sleep at all, you’re in bed, you’re resting, and if that’s all you get to do for the entire night, you’ll do fine and have had enough rest to get through the day.

The act of letting go of having to sleep puts you in a state where you will most likely fall asleep anyway, and if you don’t, that’s fine too.

the link was to a meta study that concludes that artificial sweeteners have no evidence that they cause harm.

This is how the meta study concludes:

Results from prospective cohort studies suggest the possibility of long-term harm in the form of increased risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and mortality. Further research is needed to determine whether the observed associations are genuine or a result of reverse causation and/or residual confounding. Further research is also needed in children and pregnant women, the latter for which prospective cohort studies currently suggest possible unfavourable effects of NSS consumption on birthweight and adiposity in offspring later in life.

The scientists who produced the study seem a lot less convinced than you.

Ten-Week Sucralose Consumption Induces Gut Dysbiosis and Altered Glucose and Insulin Levels in Healthy Young Adults

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8880058/

So let me get this straight, someone asks for a study, I provide the study of studies, which you misjudge originally for being only an abstract, and then when I correct you and tell you it’s a study, suddenly it’s not good enough. What do you actually want?

It’s the equivalent of the human daily dose. So adjusted for body weight. Loosely translated, it would be 15% of the daily recommended dose for mice.