Leaderboard

Hopefully when the elderly die off, the young will choose better, smarter, less lethal social necessities for their future.

Cow manure. Seriously- The farmers used crushed old plasterboard as "bedding" for cattle. (It was cheap) That led to a dangerous enhanced production of hydrogen sulphide in slurry pits.

The first thing that has attracted my attention to this newly posted study was the long list of authors. 165 authors! From 103 different institutions! From dozens different countries! When you see what they did, you understand, why it is so. Big job. Here is quite detailed summary: The transitions from foraging to farming and later to pastoralism in Stone Age Eurasia (c. 11- 3 thousand years before present, BP) represent some of the most dramatic lifestyle changes in human evolution. We sequenced 317 genomes of primarily Mesolithic and Neolithic individuals from across Eurasia combined with radiocarbon dates, stable isotope data, and pollen records. Genome imputation and co-analysis with previously published shotgun sequencing data resulted in >1600 complete ancient genome sequences offering fine-grained resolution into the Stone Age populations. We observe that: 1) Hunter-gatherer groups were more genetically diverse than previously known, and deeply divergent between western and eastern Eurasia. 2) We identify hitherto genetically undescribed hunter-gatherers from the Middle Don region that contributed ancestry to the later Yamnaya steppe pastoralists; 3) The genetic impact of the Neolithic transition was highly distinct, east and west of a boundary zone extending from the Black Sea to the Baltic. Large-scale shifts in genetic ancestry occurred to the west of this “Great Divide”, including an almost complete replacement of hunter-gatherers in Denmark, while no substantial ancestry shifts took place during the same period to the east. This difference is also reflected in genetic relatedness within the populations, decreasing substantially in the west but not in the east where it remained high until c. 4,000 BP; 4) The second major genetic transformation around 5,000 BP happened at a much faster pace with Steppe-related ancestry reaching most parts of Europe within 1,000- years. Local Neolithic farmers admixed with incoming pastoralists in eastern, western, and southern Europe whereas Scandinavia experienced another near-complete population replacement. Similar dramatic turnover-patterns are evident in western Siberia; 5) Extensive regional differences in the ancestry components involved in these early events remain visible to this day, even within countries. Neolithic farmer ancestry is highest in southern and eastern England while Steppe-related ancestry is highest in the Celtic populations of Scotland, Wales, and Cornwall (this research has been conducted using the UK Biobank resource); 6) Shifts in diet, lifestyle and environment introduced new selection pressures involving at least 21 genomic regions. Most such variants were not universally selected across populations but were only advantageous in particular ancestral backgrounds. Contrary to previous claims, we find that selection on the FADS regions, associated with fatty acid metabolism, began before the Neolithisation of Europe. Similarly, the lactase persistence allele started increasing in frequency before the expansion of Steppe-related groups into Europe and has continued to increase up to the present. Along the genetic cline separating Mesolithic hunter-gatherers from Neolithic farmers, we find significant correlations with trait associations related to skin disorders, diet and lifestyle and mental health status, suggesting marked phenotypic differences between these groups with very different lifestyles. This work provides new insights into major transformations in recent human evolution, elucidating the complex interplay between selection and admixture that shaped patterns of genetic variation in modern populations. Population Genomics of Stone Age Eurasia (biorxiv.org)

I can address those and in fact may have so already in an earlier thread. Fundamentally there are risks associated with cannabis use, but those are generally speaking not higher than alcohol. Some of the associations are in fact correlated with other drug use. In fact, substance used disorders, including alcohol, are highly associated with each other. I.e. folks that drink are more likely to use cannabis, or other drugs (see for example https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-0277.1996.tb01953.x). The thinking is that folks who are more likely to have substance use disorders have similar risk factors. As similar theme can be seen when it comes to psychoses and schizophrenia. There are many studies out there that show that in shizophrenic patients or patients with psychotic episodes drug use, including alcohol, is very prevalent. A cause and effect relationship is very difficult to establish, though cannabis as well as alcohol are known to create worse outcomes for psychotic events, and in case of alcohol, they are also more likely to become violent (for cannabis it is still under discussion, but the association, if it exists, is apparently less robust). One of these cohorts looked in Canada for increases in cannabis-induced psychoses post-legalization and basically found none. The same paper also referenced alcohol-induced psychoses. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F07067437211070650 The other combustion related injuries have been somewhat addressed in relation with tobacco smoking and the literature had a bit of a back and forth whether cannabis is equally bad as tobacco or not. Things are further muddled by the fact that many cannabis smokers also smoke tobacco. At this point I think the jury is still a bit out, but I as precaution I would think that covering it under similar rules (also including e-cigarettes even if health effects might be milder) could be overall beneficial. None of those described risks have demonstrated an overall higher risk (legal or not) compared to alcohol (or tobacco), as far as I can see.

"Full spectrum" is a bit of a lie, it's also called "broad spectrum". Ideally, plants get their light from the sun, and different parts of the spectrum are used at different times. What works best for growth isn't the best for flowering or fruiting, and there are helpful parts of the spectrum that aren't helpful during photosynthesis. The LED growth lights are aiming for light at wavelengths of 400-700nm, the photosynthetically active radiation range. They appear as a sort of fuchsia color rather than the white you'd see if it really was "full spectrum". I don't know if the industry has changed much, but I used to tell customers to buy LEDs that are high on the Color Rendering Index (CRI) if they want light that's more like natural sunlight. They were more expensive, since they're also used for better visual effects as well (you know exactly how colors on fabric or paint will look outdoors). Lights with a CRI of 95+ should work well with plants (sunlight is 100 on the CRI scale, and I think they have LEDs now with a 99 CRI). I think the key is the intensity of light. You need to bring a LOT of photons to the plants in order to mimic natural conditions.

So, on the whole, I would rather be allowed to make my own mistakes than have someone else's mistaken notion forced upon me - especially if their idea of what's righteous condemns me to years of helpless suffering. And I'm equally willing to trust other people with their own lives. So, on the whole, I would rather be allowed to make my own mistakes than have someone else's mistaken notion forced upon me - especially if their idea of what's righteous condemns me to years of helpless suffering. And I'm equally willing to let other people make their own decisions about their own lives.

The precedent from the previous ruling would have to be ignored, and the notion that rights don't exist unless enumerated, unless strongly rooted in U.S. history and tradition, ignores the 9th amendment. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. I don't see his caveat listed. For a long time only white men had rights, so this skews things. He's stating that if, long ago, you could deny people rights, you still can, because it's tradition.

OK I see what you mean. These nodules contain transition metal ions in low oxidation states, apparently, e.g. Mn (II).

Why not? Alkali or earth alkali sulfates can only reduced with aluminium, calcium, sodium and others.

You got four equations with four unknowns. Try to substitute one into another to eliminate the unknowns one by one. BTW, notice that your x, y, z in f() and in g() are not exactly the same. You'll need to fix this mistake to get the answer correctly.

I said as sure "as any parent can be" Perhaps you need to address the author of the article. This discussion also seems to have shown that when one crosses a certain "political line" or have themselves shown weakness in dabbling in illegal drugs, that it will draw their wrath and a hoarde of neg votes. That's sad, and a poor refelction on some. Thankfully the general moral standards of my society, will never see the ignorant banning of alcohol, nor the legitimising of any other drug already on the illegal list, for the reasons given. Yet sadly again, the majority of five or so articles I posted remain unaddressed. I see you got a like rep for that discriminatory comment. Sort of supports what I have said previously about some members here and crossing a certain political line. While at the age of 77 I may be classed as elderly, at least thankfully I am there and thankfully health wise should be around for a while yet. You have yet to get there.