Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | buellerbueller's commentslogin

Hypothesis: The American diet contains more carcinogens (dyes, additives, pesticides, supplements in poultry/beef/pork) and therefore USA is is more need of CRC screening.

USA generally has higher CRC rates than other developed nations:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2796096/

the screenings may make sense, here


I think that article is from 2009. Need something more recent. Also it mentions that as countries become high-income economies, the incidence rate increases.

[flagged]


Based on 2022 data, rates are lower is US compared Japan, Russia, Italy, France and UK.

https://www.wcrf.org/preventing-cancer/cancer-statistics/col...

Maybe that implies more dyes, additives, pesticides, supplements in poultry/beef/pork in those other countries?


I agree with much of your sentiment, but if the lack of bailout (which let me reiterate, I agree with) leads to a recession, it will kill the D chances in 2028. They will apply this calculus to their political behavior, and (as is typical for the Ds) will do nothing.

Promises in the wind.



HRC was also given the power to effectively run the DNC (while a candidate in the primaries!) in exchange for some funraising. There were bunches of other shenanigans.

To me, it all seems to boil down to the notion that Bernie would credibly have "drained the swamp," which would have effectively tanked the careers of a lot of long-serving Democratic folks who were not aligned with his populist/progressive agenda. Simply by hiring people that would have aligned with his vision, this was such a threat to existing power, it had to be stopped. Yes, the Rs are worse (in my opinion), but this gives me plenty of distrust for the Ds. Institutions eventually become more about institutional survival than about their "core mission."


Remember also that it turned out that the chair of the DNC (Donna Brazile) was able to let Hillary (or at least Hilary's campaign) have access to the CNN debate questions in advance

Yeah, that was part of the other shenanigans I was referring to!

Why is the paper not available?

The OPs point stands; why would anti-tyranny types want to stand with people who are (in their example) linguistic tyrants and thought police?

Previously, they claimed they stand with nazi solely for free speech of everyone purposes, not because they would share the oppressive authoritarian ideology of nazi.

If that was true, that is why.

Now in reality, that was not true, they stood with nazi cause they themselves are nazi who want to bully others.


You keep using the term Nazi but I don't think you actually know what it means.

I can gauge how much of an authoritarian you are with one simple question, is it immoral to privately own the means of production?


>I can gauge how much of an authoritarian you are with one simple question, is it immoral to privately own the means of production?

You keep using the term authoritarian but I don't think you actually know what it means.


I meant nazi. Yes I know what it means. Yes they exist and even on the rise.

And they were go to example of important free speech for years. The gauge was always defending nazi free speech, never defending communist free speech, radical feminists free speech or whoever else free speech.

Your question supposed to determine authoritanianism shows the same fallacy - nazi and other fascists wont count as an authoritarian. If I think all women should be locked at home and be under control of husbands, you wont count me as authoritarian either.


But you didn't actually answer the quesion.

There are plenty of open borders folks among the woke.

No, there really aren't.


Yes, if it truly all data, available to all.

Give data, please. Without it, this assertion is useless:

> There’s still a sizable portion of the [Democratic] party as of right now that is against surveillance powers in a way that doesn’t really exist on the [Republican] side.


H. Res. 1175, 119th Congress

Majority of Democrats voted not to extend FISA, only a small handful of Republicans joined them to block debate on the bill.


And what was the vote on the same issue when democrats were in power?

No, they voted to not bring the extension bill to the floor. This was a vote on a house rule, which is necessary to affirm before debating and voting on the bill itself.

Consider applying for YC's Winter 2027 batch! Applications are open till November 2.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: