I’m from the colonies.

Sure is an embarrassment. Shameful.

Oh well. That’s it then I guess.

I don’t think Robinson really fits neatly into a categorisation.

Its hard to know what reporting I’ve read is accurate, and which isn’t, but he seems like a person with a complex story.

I’m looking forward to reading the “proof” you’ll undoubtedly provide any moment now.

I’m sorry if you’re offended by being called a quack.

It’s a term often applied to those making bold medical claims without sufficient evidence.

Sadly, if you want to make a claim contrary to settled medical science generally accepted the world over and applied in literally billions of cases each year, a study you found on google with 120 volunteers is… insufficient.

Sorry, if you want to make a claim contrary to well established and generally accepted medical advice then you’ll need much better evidence.

The study you linked has a pathetically small scale of 120 individuals, is not randomised or placebo-controlled. Classic P-hacking. The result literally states that a better study is required.

This meta study, which includes the one you linked, concludes that there is no effect on the duration of an infection.

Out of the 1466 references found, 25 RCTs were included. There were two studies assessing mean fever clearance time, and five studies examining the duration of symptoms associated with the illness studied. No statistically significant differences were found when pooling the results of the different studies.

Your advice is anything but “sound”. The only sensible advice is to follow the advice of your health care professional, and we both know what that will be.

Taking medicine to reduce symptoms when you’re sick, actually increases the amount of time that you’re sick. You reducing the effectiveness of your body’s fight.

Sorry I think this is unfounded quackery, and by making this assertion you risk increasing the suffering of others.

It makes sense in a logical kind of way… like if a fever helps fight an infection then taking paracetamol to avoid the fever must prevent you fighting the infection.

The thing is, there’s no evidence that infections work that way in practice. If taking paracetamol helps you get a good night sleep, maybe that is more effective than a fever.

A lot of your body’s natural defenses just aren’t really very effective at all. Like goose bumps, or shivering… obviously putting a jacket on is far more effective.

Sushila Karki said the government must heed protesters’ demands for “an end to corruption, good governance and economic equality”.

Nope. An interim PM with no mandate is not going to solve corruption in 6 months. Sorry.

Are they though?

I genuinely don’t know. I only have anecdotal observations.

Certainly in my own case when I was smoking weed every day I was clinically underweight. Not for any real reason other than just not having much appetite. Daily smokers don’t really get the munchies as such.

It’s certainly not true for other amphetamines et cetera.

Sugar consumption doesn’t directly cause diabetes.

Being overweight is one of several primary causes, and yes consuming too many calories will make you overweight.

Once you have diabetes consuming sugar / carbohydrates contributes to a whole host of issues.

the protests and riots exhibited that people aren’t just going sit by and take corruption lightly anymore.

Not really, they exhibited that the participants were frustrated, had enough, and had no other way to address the problems before them.

In this type of situation marginal improvements are usually enough to placate the populace.

Obviously, there isn’t enough vegetable oil to run every tractor and every truck.

In Australia, bio diesel is subsidised in the same way regular diesel is.

Even if that were true they’re not presently in common use. Agriculture presently runs on diesel.

I wish them the best but sadly these arrangements never seem to go well.

Ending corruption is not so easy.

I just posted this in response to another idiot, but it works here too:

I’m not sure that’s true.

The supply chain for food is heavily dependent on diesel. All machinery on farms is diesel, and the trucks that move the food to silos then mills then factories and then shops are all diesel.

Presently there’s no real substitute for that machinery. Sure it might be technically possible to construct an electric tractor or truck but it’s not economically viable at this time.

The subsidies don’t really serve to make fossil fuels continue to be viable, it’s more like a measure to avoid sudden inflation due to fluctuations in the price of diesel.

I’m not sure that’s true.

The supply chain for food is heavily dependent on diesel. All machinery on farms is diesel, and the trucks that move the food to silos then mills then factories and then shops are all diesel.

Presently there’s no real substitute for that machinery. Sure it might be technically possible to construct an electric tractor or truck but it’s not economically viable at this time.

The subsidies don’t really serve to make fossil fuels continue to be viable, it’s more like a measure to avoid sudden inflation due to fluctuations in the price of diesel.

Political violence is always the last, worst option. Sometimes it’s the only option but that wasn’t the case here.

Kirk was a pretty awful person, who profited from spreading hatred. He didn’t just have an opinion, he had an agenda.

This is straight from the Pseudo Scientist playbook, well established Graham Hancock shtick.

The Experts claim to have an answer to every question

That’s not my experience at all. “The Experts” are extraordinarily cautious to make assertions even when they’re well supported. They talk about “models” and are happy to revise and update their positions when contrary evidence emerges.

Pseudo scientists have answers for everything.