I’d feel safer with Chinese electronics in all honesty.

Don’t let recency bias cloud over your judgement.

Yep and that’s not a good thing. Makes idiots such as Doug look good and people are more likely to overlook his past actions because we have a new idiot in town.

Actually forgot to link it 🤦

Niche content that either is hard to find elsewhere or you will be using something like TikTok which is in no way better.

I even excluded it from my search engines results.

the article

Eye roll 🙄

In fucked up places, people just live day to day and are in survival mode. I believe I have once read something that goes along the lines of “poorer demographics generally have tendency to make more children because they think that more children is the most sure way to secure their near future for when they get older”

I think it’s simpler than that. Nothing to do when you’re poor and overworked so you just fuck. Oh, and less caring about the consequences.

This is WILD. They’re not even discussing that “children” may have the same kind of right to privacy as adults.

And by “children” it’s everyone under 18. So 17, 16 ,15 yr olds will all get their photos scanned and they will do their best to prevent them from watching porn 🤣

Self-questionnaires

How else do you plan on tracking 34000’s peoples diet for 12 years? Lock them in a lab?

40 years ago

How else would you measure life expectancy accurately? You you must track people until a statistically significant portion of them die.

and did not check if the Adventist do continue the healthy habits

I don’t really understand how statistically this would matter. They had a large enough study group , tracked them for 12 years and isolated the variables.

each of life expectancy markers yield statistically same result 1.5-2.5 years: not smoking, medium bmi, exercise, eating nuts, being vegetarian.

Yeah and I never claimed it was only cuz of not eating meat.

I am very careful about proclaiming that meat is unhealthy in any dose, because that’s not how humans evolved for the past 300 000 years.

Why do you think natural selection optimizes humans for longevity? (living 85 years free of chronic disease). Evolution just optimizes for survival to reproductive age and successful child bearing.

Just because humans can digest meat and relied on it for survival in harsh conditions does not biologically mean a meat-heavy diet is the optimal fuel for a 90-year lifespan in a modern environment with caloric abundance.

There have been cultures in certain blue zones like in Okinawa where people traditionally ate very little meat.

Less than 1% of their diet was fish; less than 1% of their diet was meat, and same with dairy and eggs, so it was more than 96% plant-based, and more than 90% whole food plant based—very few processed foods either. And, not just whole food plant-based, but most of their diet was vegetables, and one vegetable in particular—sweet potatoes. The Okinawan diet was centered around purple and orange sweet potatoes

Also adventist vegetarians in California:

The plant-based nature of the diet may trump the caloric restriction, though, since the one population that lives even longer than the Okinawa Japanese don’t just eat a 98% meat-free diet, they eat 100% meat-free. The Adventist vegetarians in California, with perhaps the highest life expectancy of any formally described population.

Adventist vegetarian men and women live to be about 83 and 86, comparable to Okinawan women, but better than Okinawan men. The best of the best were Adventist vegetarians who had healthy lifestyles too, like being exercising nonsmokers, 87 and nearly 90, on average. That’s like 10 to 14 years longer than the general population. Ten to 14 extra years on this Earth from simple lifestyle choices. And, this is happening now, in modern times, whereas Okinawan longevity is now a thing of the past. Okinawa now hosts more than a dozen KFCs. Their saturated fat tripled. They went from eating essentially no cholesterol to a few Big Macs’ worth, tripled their sodium, and are now just as potassium deficient as Americans, getting less than half of the recommended minimum daily intake of 4,700 mg a day. In two generations, Okinawans have gone from the leanest Japanese to the fattest

Source : https://youtu.be/mryzkO5QWWY

Out from one fire into another…

Yeah it’s a bit confusing. When I hear “battery capacity” I think about GWh not GW but I suppose it isn’t “wrong” as it can mean output “capacity” and they did mention “in GW”

Not sure where you’re getting the numbers from but I think @DarthFrodo@lemmy.world is right here as in the differences in numbers are probably explained by the fact that the first number is only for batteries used to balance the grid and the other one is more general.

But yeah you do make a good point that we have no clue about actual storage capacity. Still, really strange that EU numbers are so low. I expected way more.

I don’t really get it, in the chart “Installed grid-scale battery capacity in gigawatts, 2025”

Europe barely has like 17GW in total but later on below they say:

In Europe, it sees batteries that are already online or nearing completion as likely to benefit most, with capacity seen rising from about 50 gigawatts in 2025 to 75 gigawatts by year-end.

What is this big discrepancy? Is the second part talking about batteries not connected to the grid or something (not grid-scale?)