MollieTheMare
No bio...
User ID: 875
MollieTheMare
1yr ago
Unfortunately, I don't think it was that sensible. I've never bothered to dig down through all the references (you have to go back to actuarial tables from 100 years ago), but this review paper quotes a 1995 WHO report (internal citations omitted emphasis mine)
WHO Expert Committee on Physical Status referenced the meta-analysis ... presented the U-shape mortality rates that sharply increased when BMI <18.5 and >30.0 kg/m2 with the acceptable BMI range as 18.5–25.00. The WHO experts underscored that the cut-offs were chosen arbitrarily based on the “visual inspection of the relationship between BMI and mortality”...
I don't understand why you would set the low threshold at the point where the curve turns up sharply, but the high threshold at a point close to the minimum.
MollieTheMare
1yr ago
F) Healthy at more weights than you thought. IMO, people overstate the health risks of being overweight and don't sufficiently differentiate between overweight/obese and active/inactive.
I'd be interested in this if someone wanted to dig a bit deeper on the subject. In particular I'd be interested to know if some one could figure out how the original BMI based thresholds were set. I'm particularly interested in knowing why a BMI of 25 is considered unhealthy while a BMI of 18.5 is not. I've yet to see an all causes mortality chart where the point at 25 had a higher hazard ratio than the point at 18.5.
This was of particular interest to me when states were rationing COVID vaccine shots. In the state I was living in, having a BMI of 25 made you eligible for the full two shot sequence before people with a BMI 18.5 were even eligible for one. When I tried to figure out why, the state department of health website referenced the CDC. Clicking three or four times and past a circular reference on the CDC site reached a paper that showed minimum risk around 24, if i recall correctly. I don't think this is the same paper, but It seems to show something similar. With the identified minimums in Figure 2. between 23.7 and 25.9. I still can't fathom how the state health officials justified to themselves prioritizing otherwise healthy 18-39 year olds with a BMI of 25 over 49 year olds with a BMI of 18.5.
I'd also be very interested in high quality population level research that controls for body composition as well as BMI with respect to mortality. Surely for a male at 5'10" (178 cm) it healthier to be 175 lbs (80 kg), BMI of 25, with 15% body fat than 130 lbs (59kg), BMI of 18.6, with 20% body fat.
MollieTheMare
5mo ago
For general introduction maybe "set your back stiff like a board, not flat like a board."
If you're experiencing frequent back tweaks maybe this series. Much more advanced. For an intermidate level reference, I guess maybe this video.
MollieTheMare
5mo ago
Almost certainly a form issue. It's possible your anthropometry isn't great for deadlifits, but the vast majority of people should be able to perform the lift safely. Wearing a belt can help, but I don't recommend relying on it to save you if you are pulling from a less-safe position.
For a novice I would recommend only owning one belt for everything. If you are not planing on competing any time soon, I would prioritize adjustability and comfort. A uniform width is generally considered better for the type of bracing you should be using for deadlifts. That is, I would personally avoid the bodybuilding style belts that have the wide part "for you back". A good intra-abdominal pressure based brace is far superior to the proprioceptive benefit of a tapered style belt.
IMO the best overall pick for a training belt is a single or double ply, 3" or 4", leather single prong belt. Something like this can be nice because of the extra adjustment. Go for the 3" if you have a short torso, or if you have a hard time getting into deadlifit position with a belt on. Single ply can be more comfy but is less supportive if you get really strong. For sure single prong for ease of use. Lever belts can be nice, but entry level models are usually too annoying to adjust to be nice training belts. Having the extra holes can be nice, as most people can get a slightly better position deadlifting with a belt ~1" larger setting than their squat setup.
For general training, or if you plan on doing Olympic style lifts, a nylon velcro belt (never tried that brand, just an illustrative link) can be good. Cheaper and easier to deal with than a leather belt, but not quite a stiff or durable as a leather belt.
MollieTheMare
5mo ago
I've seen badass PT Marines who can do 20 pullups fail to deadlift their own bodyweight.
Like literally you've seen someone who you know can do 20 pullups fail to deadlift their own body weight? Or just like with poor form? I'm trying to understand how that's possible, like worst case they should be able to row that weight and stand up just pivoting around a bar that is already at waist height. I've seen people that can can do 20 pushups who cant deadlift their own bodyweight, but that's a totally different part of the kenetic chain.
All that being said, I do tend to agree, which is why I used fahves in my example below. I didn't want to be too dogmatic about it, because other stuff can work. My rough view of the literature is that somehow it even suggest that it 'should' work just a well or better. My not very well supported theory, on why the other stuff seems to work less well than the laboratories studies suggest is that normal people have no idea exactly how hard you have to go to reach true failure in rep ranges > 10. Like a 20 rep set of squats to total failure feels uncomfortable at rep 6, starts noticeably slowing down at 8, feels like your legs are going to explode at 12, feels like you're going to vomit at 15, feels like you're going to vomit blood at 18, and requires entering the shadow realm the last rep or two. The lab studies that indicate higher rep ranges work tend to at least have a undergraduate telling the participants to keep going if they obviously have reps left in the tank. From casual observation, I think unprompted most people stop at very uncomfortable which can be very far from failure in high rep ranges.
I do actually recommend the starting strength book as well as practical programing. The big advantage being the novice linear progression is pretty idiot proof, or more charitably novice proof. I was a little bit surprised that it's no longer on the fitness wiki, because it used to be the go to suggestion for beginners on their fitness journey.
MollieTheMare
8mo ago
I completely forgot not everyone has dumbbell hooks. It's a real game changer not to have to kick up heavy dumbbells.
I guess it must vary by gym? I would guess there are at least as many people in the average gym using the dumbbell rack vs the barbell benches.
I mentioned above that I think bench press is a sub-optimal exercise, I probably should have specified barbell bench press. I do think there is a place for both bilateral and unilateral exercises though. A lot of real world horizontal pressing involves using both arms. I also think the average gym has 100's as the heaviest dumbbells which is not really that much above the level of all the people you see barbell benching 225. You do see 120's in some gyms, but in most gyms big enough to have them you see people benching at least 315 on the barbell.
For overhead press I am actually pretty certain I see more people using dumbbell vs barbells.
Edit: Also, which muscle do actually get more engagement in dumbbell bench? If your lats are fully engaged aren't your scapula constrained by the bench anyway? Substantial loading of the rotator cuff during the bench press doesn't sound like a great idea.
MollieTheMare
11mo ago
I now get a weird pain in front of my hip joint
It's impossible to tell without a more detailed description, and probably seeing your squat in person. Sounds like it might be something getting pinched or impinged from your more narrow stance. If that's the case, in the words of the GOAT Ed Coan: "open your taint." The extra external rotation should relive pressure near the head of the femur as well as reduce twisting strain in the knees.
It can also be hard to tell whats going on while you are changing body weights. The angle the tendons pull at change as your body changes. Some very minor tendon related discomfort can go away as you move away from random highly disadvantageous leverages. Either because you fat leverages change, or muscle growth changes the angle of pull on the bones. Do not ignore acute or chronic tendon pain though, that's a recipe for a very long and sometimes irrecoverable setback to training.
MollieTheMare
1yr ago
It sounds like you are high bar squatting? If you are and are trying to keep a more vertical torso, I often find that ankle dorsiflexion is the limiting factor for people. If your knees are farther forward your hips will be less far back, and therefor your torso will have to be less far forward. Ankle dorsiflexion is pretty easy to improve if you just hang out in the bottom of a body weight squat with your knees as far forward as you can put them for a few minutes a day. With good ankle dorsiflexion and front squats you can get a nearly vertical back and almost pure quad isolation if that's your goal.
My personal preference is for less forward knee travel, but necessarily your hips will have to move farther back and your torso will have to lean over more to compensate. Resting the bar in a low bar position moves the moment arm of the barbell back in this case, leaving a more vertical bar path. I've found mysquatmechanics to be pretty good if you want to visualize the paths given changes to constraints in joint angles, anthropometry, bar position, etc.
MollieTheMare
11mo ago
I know expecting people to show empathy for a (presumed) member of the enemy tribe is too much, but ffs we don't even actually know if she is in fact a woke liberal BLM-supporting enemy tribeswoman, we're just doing some sort of pseudo-Bayesian reasoning where she probably is so fuck her.
The argument that you should show empathy even to an enemy is noble, and I wish I had the generosity of spirit to really do it in this situation. I'm impressed by the people who still have to fortitude at this point in the culture war to do it.
That being said I don't think it's correct to say people cannot correct infer likely tribal affiliation in this case. In the canonical formulation blue tribe and red tribe do not necessarily perfectly align with political affiliation. Being a professional class, urban, person who cycles to work is already enough to fully establish blue tribe. Even if someone does occasionally vote Republican. In addition to that, her official gofundme, which admittedly is managed by her uncle, says:
...She holds racial justice and equity dear, and has dedicated her life to serving NYC's most challenged individuals.
That's enough to move from probably to almost certain in my book.
MollieTheMare
5mo ago
This. We need way more information to understand what's going on here.
including copious amounts of SPF to block out the sun
Are you 100% sure you do not have eczema, psoriasis, acne, or atopic dermatitis? If you do one of the standard treatments is phototherapy. Specifically UV phototherapy. The dose and spectrum are carefully controlled, but blocking 100% of UV may not be doing yourself any favors, given you seem to have some sort of condition. Of course UV can also damage your skin and cause skin cancer, so finding a knowledgeable dermatologist is highly recommended over blasting yourself with sun.
If you want to add another random item to your list though, some people report good results with dandruff shampoo. Like regular 2-in-1 classic head and shoulders. Just using it as body and face wash 1-2 times a week. Lather up, let dwell for 30-90 seconds, and rinse.
MollieTheMare
6mo ago
For the definition used there, the terms are somewhat interchangeable. It's also not wrong to say real disposable income is below trend. On a cross-sectional basis, @Ben___Garrison cites the US as doing well, but vibes often have to do with expectations, which is along the time axis.
Failing to consider the longitudinal or integrated aspect of the indicators OP chose is the real fatal flaw with the analysis, and why there is such an incongruity with the claimed “goodness” of the indicators and the “badness” of vibes.
Addressing the four main points from the original post:
Unemployment is hovering near record lows
Being near record lows is very good for people desperately in need of any form of employment; it is not a sign of an overall healthy labor market. Unemployment being below the frictional rate means that people end up in positions that do not best utilize their talents.
Inflation has come way down and is now around 3.7%...
This is still 85% above the target rate. That means we’re continuing to move away from trend for long term price levels; might as well returning to trend.
GDP growth is surprisingly high for Q3 at 4.9%.
Yes, GDP growth has been surprisingly robust. Does anyone seriously take a single quarter as their landmark though? How many cheered 2023Q3 but also mourned the consecutive negative 2022Q1&2?
The stock market is also doing fairly well
It’s a bit odd to compare a forward-looking aggregation of people's outlooks and say it disproves another forward-looking aggregation of people's outlooks. That being said, the stock market must be greater than or equal to 10% of the previous high for the vast majority of its history; how is that an indicator of anything? If anything, the stock market being off its high but not cratered for a sustained period is an indicator of the opposite, that there are heterogeneous or uncertain outlooks for the future which lines up perfectly fine with vibes.
We then go into the fishing section. I have no idea why you would compare wages with inflation and not compare levels. No, wages have not caught up to prices, not even remotely close.
I personally am hopeful for a soft landing, for everyone’s quality of life, but it’s far too early to declare victory and say that inflation was tamed without any economic pain.
MollieTheMare
17d ago
- Lower IQ filter down to >120 (80thp) as opposed to ~135(99p).
- Attractive.. okay keep this one, but don't be a k-drama protagonist about this
- Politics - For the most part, drop this.
I do wonder about these filters.
For IQ it depends on how much you value producing high IQ children. I assume it's pretty hard to estimate the distribution for outcomes, but if you were to go down to 110 like @2D3D suggests, it might be unreasonably hard to relate to both your wife and your children... I suppose if you're willing to go down the embryo selection road, but then you would also have to find a partner who would also be into that.
Attractive—where does 1 in 3 here conditional on 25-34 and high IQ place them on absolute attractiveness? I would assume given youth, iq, and contentiousness the person would be well above average in attractiveness to start with. Even if only from the correlated likely socioeconomic advantages they enjoyed growing up. I mean, how many ugly people do you see walking around the campus of say Stanford?
For politics a 1 in 2 filter would be compatible, but not necessarily exactly aligned? Given how niche the politics of someone who posts regularly on the Mott probably are, I suppose it would be hard to filter any more generously without admitting intolerable incompatibility.
MollieTheMare
5mo ago
In some ways I think it's better they didn't make a millions sequel movies. Knowing how cinema developed now, there's a decent chance they would have ruined what is truly sublime source material.
With respect to your link, the score and sound were top notch. I'm still impressed how much justice they did to the role music plays in the books. Midshipmen Geoghegan appears something like three times in The Yellow Admiral, but I still think about
Looks like that 15% for bottom ash is what's expected, though from some reading it heavily depends on the composition of the waste that's being burned.
In a modern incineration plant (https://www.icevirtuallibrary.com/doi/full/10.1680/jcien.17.00042) it looks like they expect 150 kg/t or 15% (table 4) for bottom ash. The amount of fly ash is much less, did OP transpose the composition of fly and bottom ash? They reference 15–20 kg/t in the report. So I think OP of by ~ 100x on the fly ash particle count. Then did he include the 99% efficient scrubbers?
e.g. 1 ton of waste -> 20 kg of fly ash. 20 kg x 565 (n/kg) -> 11,300 high estimate of plastic particles in the fly ash. (1 - 0.99) x 11,300 -> 113 high estimate particles per tone waste after scrubbing? (decimal points, commas for 1000's separators)
Table 2 might also be of interest, contains expected emitted "Total organic carbon" and "dust." Though in mg/m^3.
Also, a modern multi-stage scrubber with electrostatic, wet, and filtration like in Amager Bakke should be much higher efficiency than 99% Also, I think @slothlikesamwise is correct you should be able to see appreciable plastic micro particle emissions counted as PM or dust in the flue gas monitoring, as well as environmental sensors around the plant.
Edit: I see OP did calculations in terms of waste tonnage. I converted my calculation to be the 565 n/kg from OP link 2.
MollieTheMare
6mo ago
Since your relative preference for those factors is probably somewhat subjective, I would argue there isn't really any advantage to a very complex model. Assuming the offers are somewhat similar, you can probably just use a linear model and assign coefficients to roughly match your preference. Kind of like a decision matrix or this example. I would just put everything in dollar units since that's probably the actual thing that's up for negotiation. Then negotiate for the highest dollar equivalent compensation. The whole exercise uses an absurdly simplistic model with made up numbers, but is probably more accurate than just winging it. It's not even very wrong, in the sense that you can expand most reasonable functions with a first order Taylor series in the relevant variables about the point of interest.
MollieTheMare
7mo ago
Sounds like your well on your way. Even if it was 12 years ago the muscle memory for riding a bike is very weirdly persistent... Still recommend the video for a very rough description of how the dynamics work, somewhere around the 2:20 mark. If you ever have trouble with the getting started part I recommend this page.
MollieTheMare
7mo ago
I do think this would be an interesting experiment to test on yourself. Not a medical doctor, but in case the capsules you use are different than @DuplexFields maybe shoot for 10,000 IU a day. Maybe split 50:50 between when you wake up and lunch time. Reduce by 30%-50% if you have GI problems.
Edit: Since OP might be European, I mean ten thousand IUs not 10.
MollieTheMare
7mo ago
I didn't get too much of a rant impression.
I have tracked macros when serious about training, so I know at least some of the pain that surrounds common prepared foods. I've always kept at least some carbs around workouts though, but was curious about potentially using Keto if I ever do a hard fat loss phase again.
The only person I have know personally that has for sure done Keto proper, with ketone strips and all, staid on for about 3 months. They seemed to get good results, but I don't think they thought it was sustainable to stay in ketosis for a longer period.
MollieTheMare
7mo ago
I do think the case of Taiwan is a pretty good example where using alternate terminology is just imprecise, and not more sophisticated.
Among the "main options" for positions to support:
- Status quo
- De facto separate self-governing
- Special administrative region
- De jure independence
- Unification under ROC (I would have thought implausible, but maybe people thought the same thing for Germany)
- Annexation under PRC
The term "Taiwan" is probably the most neutral term, though it could indicate support for options 1, 2, 3, or 4? The term "Formosa" alone could indicate support for options 1, 2, or 4?? Saying "A/The (New) Republic of Formosa" is probably unambiguously supportive of option 4. The term "Republic of China" could indicate support for options 1 or 5? Lastly, "Chinese Taipei" could indicate support for options 1, 3, or 6?
MollieTheMare
8mo ago
Are there hints as to why there should be cancer risk? I naively would have thought that cancer risk would be reduced from increased cell apoptosis coming from running a sustained caloric deficit.
MollieTheMare
11mo ago
I've never tried it overnight personally.
I did research it as a camping option at some point. Some of the advice I saw was to sleep diagonally across hammock, if it's appropriately shaped. I don't know if it applies if your hammock has spreaders. I guess it's supposed to reduce the effective curvature of the hang, mitigating the banana back issue people sometimes have with hammocks. Let us know how it goes.
MollieTheMare
1yr ago
This is good advice.
For an estimation of how slow is slow, you can find the equilibrium estimated BAC rate by inverting the formula here. Which gives (beta * Wt * weight in kg) / (.014 kg/std drink * 100%) as the approximate standard alcohol units per hour you can clear without getting progressively more drunk. For an average 70 kg male it's about 1/2 a unit per hour.
For me this equates to a drink or two start the night, then switching to soda trying to average a bit under that rate for the night. I like to leave a bit of buffer as depending on drinking culture of the event there may be rounds of shots, games, or toasts at various points, which is usually enough to keep near the tipsy/buzzed but not drunk sweet spot. You can always add another alcoholic drink in if your buzz is wearing off, but if there is any chance of a round you would feel socially obligated to partake in coming up, I would delay a bit.
MollieTheMare
1yr ago
This is more correct than cubic scaling when comparing individual people rather than across animals. This is why both FFMI and BMI use a square in the denominator despite the fact that the third power has been proposed for more than a century now. Tall people are not just linearly scaled up short people. A square simply describes the observed variation better. Using a square law The rock is the equivalent of a 202 pound, 5'7" guy, very lean, at 50 years old.
It's not clear to me what the reference to Joe Rogan is here. He is not nearly as lean, and I think is open about using exogenous anabolics in the form of "TRT" and HGH.
I don't think I disagree with any of this. I certainly recognize the importance, and do feel sympathy and sadness for the situation. I would say that I have "empathy" in the sense of an intellectual understanding of what the people in the scenario are experiencing, but not in the visceral sense. When I see the video I only see something I would absolutely never want to be involved in.
Just to be clear, I'm not the person @Amadan was responding to. My main objection was to the "don't even actually know." I thought it was clear that we do know, but that doesn't mean I endorse embracing tribal hatred.
I will say one of my guilty pleasures is novels like Sharpe's Revenge, where Sharpe teams up with with his long time battlefield enemy Calvet to defeat his nemesis the duplicitous Ducos. I realize its fiction, but I do think that kind of justice resonates with me strongly. That there is a right way and a wrong way to do battle with an enemy, and that in a just world those that do it in the wrong way would be the ones to suffer.
More options
Context Copy link