Funny events in anti-woke world

[Dirty Hipsters]

I eat when I'm hungry. On the days I do eat with friends late, I do hold off eating for a few hours as I'd prefer to eat somewhere around 3pm-6pm normally. The majority of people eat at not their most preferred time because food is eaten socially quite often (whether at work with co-workers or with family/friends). I don't find it a big deal to wait and it's not like I'm really starving or anything. I don't binge eat, I get a normal dinner from a restaurant, I don't even get a cheap "late night" appetizer. "Skinny fat" are those people that eat poorly and are skinny looking but have tons of visceral fat around their organs and will get diabetes and/or nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

"I eat when I'm hungry" is not a good metric by which to determine when someone should eat. Studies show that the vast majority of people are terrible at being "intuitive eaters"

Some people are hungry literally all the time because their brains are wired wrong and they either don't get the signal to stop eating or they're just addicted to food. Other people fast and their body gets used to not having enough nutrients, but that's not healthy either. Like I said before, your body is constantly burning energy, and that has to come from somewhere. If you don't have much fat to burn then your body is burning things like muscle to keep going until the next time you eat.

I also wouldn't bother comparing yourself to the "average person" to determine if you're healthy. The average person in the US is obese, so just being in better health than that doesn't mean much.

And if you're mostly eating out at restaurants you're probably eating a lot more sugar, butter, and oil than you think you are. There's a reason that a lot of people don't like the food they make at home, or don't think they're very good cooks. They don't realize how much sugar and butter is in everything they're eating when they eat out, because they would never put that much in their own food if they cooked for themselves. Just for context, there's 240 calories in 2 table spoons of olive oil. That's literally half a meal worth of calories, and people don't think twice about some olive oil on their salad or their pasta when they're eating out.

 

[Gergar12]

ChatGPT-4 > Therapist

 

[Gordon_4]

If you ever think you're going crazy, remember that this is considered "fat" by anti-woke standards.

Spoiler

View attachment 12559

There is no way that chump didn’t get roasted in the comments of that thread.

 

[Cicada 5]

Leading Report is an American website and Twitter account that describes itself as a "leading source for breaking news". It is known for promoting misinformation and conspiracy theories, including about United States politics and COVID-19.[1][2]

The Leading Report Twitter account was created in May 2022. A corresponding website was later created in February 2023. The fact-checking website Science Feedback traced the website's ownership to two individuals named Jacob Cabe and Patrick Webb. Cabe is a former baseball athlete, while Webb is a car wash owner who is an admin of the Facebook group "Patriots for Trump" and has a history of promoting misinformation on social media.[1]

Leading Report - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Silvanus]

The money is all going to the same company regardless of how its moved around its subsidiaries.

Firstly, this assumes the PBM and insurer dealing with a claim are under the same umbrella company. They're not always. Insurers frequently hire outside companies as I said.

Secondly, even if they were, PBMs are not subject to the 80/20 rule as far as I know. If they can keep a good chunk of that rebate, rather than passing the entirety of the discount onto the insurer, well-- free money.

The New York Times article alone provided 2 separate sources that came to the same numbers. You have the Novo Nordisk CEO testifying to how the whole thing works to Congress as well.

The Novo Nordisk CEO claiming the PBMs are 100% to blame for the pricing of his own company's drug is not credible. He has a motive to say that, to shift blame.

& the NYT was relying on the same external source i already responded to. It all came down to spending ÷ prescriptions. Possibly right, a good estimate, but an unavoidably imprecise measure.

So you think you can just tell hospitals that a colonoscopy costs only this much now?

!? No idea where this comes from.

Yes, why would they want healthcare spending to drop? To them diabetes costs X per year to cover, you have X million people with diabetes, they want diabetes to at least continue costing the same amount or more. If I told you that you can have 20% of a pizza, wouldn't you pick the largest pizza you could?

As I said: feasible. As I also said: PBMs have their own motive to keep prices high. So do pharmaceutical manufacturers.

 

[Casual Shinji]

There is no way that chump didn’t get roasted in the comments of that thread.

There's also no way a convicted rapist who tried to commit a coup was voted president of the United States, but here we are.

Any woman in a game that dares veer off slightly from the Square Enix doll format is now the roastee.

 

[BrawlMan]

There's also no way a convicted rapist who tried to commit a coup was voted president of the United States, but here we are.

Any woman in a game that dares veer off slightly from the Square Enix doll format is now the roastee.

And no actual woman would want to get near them. Sucks to be them and they will be forever lonely shit heads.

 

[Silvanus]

There's also no way a convicted rapist who tried to commit a coup was voted president of the United States, but here we are.

Well, he wasn't convicted of rape, remember. He was found liable for sexual abuse, and the judge said the description of it as rape was "substantially true" by the common definition of the term but not under NY law.

Doesn't change the core of your point of course.

 

[Casual Shinji]

And no actual woman would want to get near them.

Well, the majority of white women (voters) voted for Trump, so don't be so sure, I guess.

Also, many women will figure this is just how men are supposed to be and feel this is just what they'll have to settle for. And the way America certainly is going this sentiment is likely to spread.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Well, the majority of white women (voters) voted for Trump, so don't be so sure, I guess.

Also, many women will figure this is just how men are supposed to be and feel this is just what they'll have to settle for. And the way America certainly is going this sentiment is likely to spread.

Yeah, there's a lot of that around, unfortunately.

 

[BrawlMan]

Well, the majority of white women (voters) voted for Trump, so don't be so sure, I guess.

Also, many women will figure this is just how men are supposed to be and feel this is just what they'll have to settle for. And the way America certainly is going this sentiment is likely to spread.

Then they're just as stupid as their male counterparts. There are still plenty of women that don't like trump nor like people of his ilk either. Those women don't represent all of the women in america, nor speak for them, and they can fuck off too. They made their choice and they can't blame anybody but themselves.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Then they're just as stupid as their male counterparts. There are still plenty of women that don't like trump nor like people of his ilk either. Those women don't represent all of the women in america, nor speak for them, and they can fuck off too. They made their choice and they can't blame anybody but themselves.

Yeah, but they run the government now. They might not represent all women in America, maybe not even the majority, but they're definitely going to dictate their lives. And we know conservatives really have their sights squared on that no-fault divorce.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

"I eat when I'm hungry" is not a good metric by which to determine when someone should eat. Studies show that the vast majority of people are terrible at being "intuitive eaters"

Some people are hungry literally all the time because their brains are wired wrong and they either don't get the signal to stop eating or they're just addicted to food. Other people fast and their body gets used to not having enough nutrients, but that's not healthy either. Like I said before, your body is constantly burning energy, and that has to come from somewhere. If you don't have much fat to burn then your body is burning things like muscle to keep going until the next time you eat.

I also wouldn't bother comparing yourself to the "average person" to determine if you're healthy. The average person in the US is obese, so just being in better health than that doesn't mean much.

And if you're mostly eating out at restaurants you're probably eating a lot more sugar, butter, and oil than you think you are. There's a reason that a lot of people don't like the food they make at home, or don't think they're very good cooks. They don't realize how much sugar and butter is in everything they're eating when they eat out, because they would never put that much in their own food if they cooked for themselves. Just for context, there's 240 calories in 2 table spoons of olive oil. That's literally half a meal worth of calories, and people don't think twice about some olive oil on their salad or their pasta when they're eating out.

I'd be losing weight if I wasn't getting enough fuel/energy and my body was using muscle (since muscle weighs more). I used to be starving at lunch and then getting home after work as well. That's why I said you first have to break the sugar/carb/processed food addiction, that's the hard part. Once you break that, then you can eat when you're hungry since you're body won't be constantly running on simple carbs and then carving more constantly throughout the day.

I generally know what they add sugar to and avoid those foods; the bad stuff on pizza is the crust and sauce (because they add tons of sugar to the sauce), the cheese and toppings are healthy (most people think it's the cheese and toppings that are bad for you). Getting salmon over rice in lemon butter sauce (what I get quite often on Mondays) isn't gonna have much sugar added. I don't care about limiting good foods like butter or olive oil, not that I'm like eating butter by the stick or drinking olive oil either. I don't get pasta too often because the noodles are the main culprit and I'm not gonna ask exactly what the noodles are made of when ordering. Like I said, I do far more than just not eating fried foods and drinking water instead of soda (which I've done for about 20 years now, that alone probably saved me from so many health problems, I figured that was literally the least I could to try to be healthy).

Firstly, this assumes the PBM and insurer dealing with a claim are under the same umbrella company. They're not always. Insurers frequently hire outside companies as I said.

Secondly, even if they were, PBMs are not subject to the 80/20 rule as far as I know. If they can keep a good chunk of that rebate, rather than passing the entirety of the discount onto the insurer, well-- free money.



The Novo Nordisk CEO claiming the PBMs are 100% to blame for the pricing of his own company's drug is not credible. He has a motive to say that, to shift blame.

& the NYT was relying on the same external source i already responded to. It all came down to spending ÷ prescriptions. Possibly right, a good estimate, but an unavoidably imprecise measure.



!? No idea where this comes from.



As I said: feasible. As I also said: PBMs have their own motive to keep prices high. So do pharmaceutical manufacturers.

Aetna owns Caremark like UnitedHealth owns OptumRx like Cigna owns Express Scripts.

So you're saying the Novo Nordisk CEO perjured himself? And, what he said checks out logically with how we know the system does work.

Every player in the system is scratching each other's backs, they are all making tons of money. If you just flipped a switch that enabled M4A, you wouldn't be able to pay for it. You gotta change the system first. Public healthcare systems already pay a ton more for healthcare than an insurer and if you had everyone switch to that, what do you think would happen?

There's also no way a convicted rapist who tried to commit a coup was voted president of the United States, but here we are.

Trump just got $15 million from someone saying that on TV because, you know, that's not actually true.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Because that totally correlates.

 

[Silvanus]

Aetna owns Caremark like UnitedHealth owns OptumRx like Cigna owns Express Scripts.

Dude, I'm aware that parent companies often own both PBMs and insurers. But a claim can be managed by an insurer and a PBM that isn't affiliated. Insurers often hire outside PBMs.

So you're saying the Novo Nordisk CEO perjured himself? And, what he said checks out logically with how we know the system does work.

He didn't perjur himself, because a lot of what he said was vague, deflective, or lacking detail or actual figures. He blamed other entities without actually offering any detail that exonerated the role of his own company, and without any meaningful figures.

This is how weaselly businessmen shift blame without putting themselves in legal jeopardy. And it worked on you a treat!

Every player in the system is scratching each other's backs, they are all making tons of money. If you just flipped a switch that enabled M4A, you wouldn't be able to pay for it. You gotta change the system first. Public healthcare systems already pay a ton more for healthcare than an insurer and if you had everyone switch to that, what do you think would happen?

"You gotta change the system", you say, while simultaneously arguing we shouldn't change the system.

We have literal examples of public healthcare entities paying a tiny fraction of what insurers pay. The NHS. When they're able to negotiate, and the profit motive is excluded, that's what you get.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Dude, I'm aware that parent companies often own both PBMs and insurers. But a claim can be managed by an insurer and a PBM that isn't affiliated. Insurers often hire outside PBMs.



He didn't perjur himself, because a lot of what he said was vague, deflective, or lacking detail or actual figures. He blamed other entities without actually offering any detail that exonerated the role of his own company, and without any meaningful figures.

This is how weaselly businessmen shift blame without putting themselves in legal jeopardy. And it worked on you a treat!



"You gotta change the system", you say, while simultaneously arguing we shouldn't change the system.

We have literal examples of public healthcare entities paying a tiny fraction of what insurers pay. The NHS. When they're able to negotiate, and the profit motive is excluded, that's what you get.

Every major insurer owns their own PBM, why would they hire someone else unless is some even more ridiculous scheme to move money around?

He gave the exact numbers on the Levemir. Everything he said checks out with everything we know. If they were making what you claim they are making on ozempic, their profits would be way fucking higher.

US public healthcare pays more for the same stuff as health insurers. If you move everyone to public healthcare in the US, the cost of healthcare would jump massively. A state covering ozempic (just ozempic) would alone bankrupt the state.

 

[Silvanus]

Every major insurer owns their own PBM, why would they hire someone else unless is some even more ridiculous scheme to move money around?

Presumably it is a scheme to move money around and maximise profit.

He gave the exact numbers on the Levemir. Everything he said checks out with everything we know. If they were making what you claim they are making on ozempic, their profits would be way fucking higher.

You keep insisting that, but its simply not true. A single drug out of hundreds, with a relatively low target audience, would not make their profit margin "way higher than 35%". Its incredible that its as high as it is already, over three times the average margin.

US public healthcare pays more for the same stuff as health insurers. If you move everyone to public healthcare in the US, the cost of healthcare would jump massively. A state covering ozempic (just ozempic) would alone bankrupt the state.

Because US public healthcare cannot negotiate on Ozempic (and on countless other drugs). As I said many pages ago.

 

[Trunkage]

Trump just got $15 million from someone saying that on TV because, you know, that's not actually true.

Remember, Trump was only a sexual abuser. There is no possible way you could claim he was a rapist

 

[Trunkage]

View attachment 12564


View attachment 12565

Leading Report - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

This poll is very flawed. It should say that most American don't want to hear from celebrities who don't agree with them

 

[tstorm823]

Remember, Trump was only a sexual abuser. There is no possible way you could claim he was a rapist

Just in case anyone forgot or didn't know what that case was about:

A successful, long-time writer from New York, as both a television writer and an advice columnist, claims that when she and Trump were both wealthy, famous, and approximately 50 years old, they were both shopping alone in Bergdorf Goodman, recognized each other, and started shopping together, where she accompanied him voluntarily to the lingerie section, and consented to trying on lingerie with him in the changing room to watch her disrobe. He allegedly then tried to kiss and grope her, she fought him off and left quickly, she didn't claim his penis was involved until it became a court case and the New York definition of "rape" required her to. And prior to the case, she refused to call it "rape", choosing to call it "a fight", because "rape is sexy" (her words, not mine).

There are plenty of plausible accusations of sexual misconduct against Donald Trump, but if you can't laugh in the face of this one, you are hopeless. It's situationally implausible that nobody knew what either of these people was doing at that time, and that nobody was nearby in a popular store to witness the crime, it even involves an inexplicably unlocked door in a store that locks their dressing rooms and has employees unlock them as they attend to you. It's hard to imagine physically 50 year old Donald Trump managing to forcibly disrobe someone in a dressing room in 1 minute without either party being injured. But if you set all that aside, even in her story of events, the vast majority of the exchange was consensual (which we'd have to imagine Trump would be thinking the same thing), as she supposedly agreed to take her clothes off in front of him, and was surprised that he would try to have sex with her. Even if every word she said was true, it remains unclear if there's even a crime if she resisted and left as soon as she stopped consenting to everything that was happening. And then add to that her odd rape fetish comments, the only thing less believable than the claim she was raped is the idea that a jury actually believed the claim. I genuinely think it's more likely for the claim to be true than for any thinking person to believe it, it's just that silly. Which is to say that the judge and jury are completely full of crap with that verdict.

Every time I see someone bring this case up as the proof of Trump being terrible, they just look ridiculous. The man had dramatic fall outs with multiple ex-wives, and the thing you think is going to condemn him is a famous writer's Trump fanfiction? You can't possibly be that gullible, right?