HoosierFaithful

Survive and advance. Just like Cincinnati did against us.

OL just atrocious

This is the same team from the cincinatti game that played them tough. We aren’t terrible, we are just mediocre. I’m also impressed by WKU. Offensive scheme that will give people trouble.

I’m using the game as a pregame before I go to a concert and I have to say, this team is very enjoyable with alcohol.

Feels like a lot of if’s and buts in that rebuttal.

I went through a VT winter one time for a week... boy, that stuff was COLD.

I mean, their methodology is clearly listed: https://adfontesmedia.com/how-ad-fontes-ranks-news-sources/ Outside of some big data analysis, it seems like a reasonable method.

it's for the best, save your brain.

I sadly report that Doritos are not, in fact, a whole food.

^^ this is also sound advice based on my frequent scoldings at home.

Honestly, the best thing I ever did was stop treating a diet as an absolute. I went from a standard meat and potatoes guy to a recreational vegan (vegan meals 50-60% of the time) by substituting single meals. I tried once to go vegan cold turkey (har har), I cracked in 3 days. I'll eat mostly vegetables and produce for one day and then the next day, if I'm craving BBQ, I'm hitting up my local BBQ joint. I feel more in control of my diet. The second thing I'd say: get someone who knows how to cook healthy meals to show you. I'm lucky that I'm marrying one, which gives me a big leg up. The old saying of 90% in the kitchen, 10% in the gym is pretty accurate.

Definitely seems like we're past the worst of Delta. Thank God. Also entirely agree, obesity in this country is unreal. That's not a shocking statement, I know, but I'm soon to be married to a nutritionist and I've learned more than I care to about nutrition. So much of what we're taught growing up, the cooking habits we grow into, and what mass media shows as normal is... really bad for our bodies.

I say this reading neither link fwiw

Dropping a quote into the thread that posits the wrong conclusion from the actual source material is kinda like dropping a turd in a punchbowl.

Thought this was interesting

This is just my local news - being admitted to the poison center of the hospital for ivermectin. It is dangerous and unproven for treating COVID, especially when compared to the vaccine. My larger question: why are folks so willing to trust things that are, on a comparative scale, significantly less proven to work than a simple vaccine? This has all just turned into a political punching bag, regrettably. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, I'm just a guy talking into the void.

It's funny to me that there is such resistance to a proven, wildly successful vaccine but we seem really eager to try unproven, wildly off-label, sometimes proven dangerous methods instead.

Yep, Vox definitely skews a bit to the left, but not overwhelmingly so IMO. I like it because of the production value/cadence in the way they share the information, not as much the content

There is a tremendous serious on Netflix called "explained" - they explore deep topics in a fun, informative 20-30 minute segment. They had one on Flags recently. Encourage folks to watch. I learned a lot.

Wonderful! Science is amazing

On this we can agree my friend!

It isn’t necessarily a carve out. That implies they were intentionally excluded. We have no evidence that they were. Again, USPS is included - we can move past that. Members of Congress and their staff (Legislative) and Court staffers (Judiciary) aren’t, per one of the articles earlier. The President likely has no power to compel actions of a separate branch of government. I agree, they should voluntarily abide by the same vaccine mandates. That seems logical.

So, first, USPS is mandated, despite earlier confusion: https://nypost.com/2021/09/09/usps-exempt-from-biden-vax-mandate-for-100m-workers/ Earlier, I outlined a logical example why Members of Congress are not included. Exempt is likely not the right way to look at it - "not legally possible to be included in the mandate" is probably more appropriate.

Caveat: I work in politics, so I will try to answer this with my insight in a perhaps informative way without sounding too political, but that is... kind of hard. Biden is currently negotiating with Congressional Republicans on a wide range of issues. Many of them are ardently opposed to vaccine mandates - which Biden probably doesn't appreciate, but that's not the point. At a time when issues like the debt ceiling are about to come around and need GOP votes, perhaps he doesn't want to poke them in the eye with a mandate when there are bigger fights that he desperately needs their help with on the horizon. Alternatively, he might just not legally be able to - the article mentions that Members of Congress and the federal judiciary aren't bound, and those are the other two branches of government, so it would make sense his powers don't extend there.

Echoing a point earlier: this thread has largely been very civil and, indeed, we clearly have quite a range of views here. Thank you - it makes our jobs easier. as a moderating team, we have had more than a few discussions about this thread. It’s almost been locked a few times. Maybe I’m naive, but I like to think that people can listen and engage in meaningful discussion about tough issues. Please continue to post in good faith, respect each other, and find opportunities to work in jokes about Purdue. Our OT board has quickly become my favorite in the off-season and I appreciate learning, especially those of you who I may disagree with.