|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:It seems wild. But, the NAACP, local residents, and city council/mayor all say they are definitely feeling it. It's also pretty hard to fake a bunch of dead bodies and shootings for an 80% increase in homicide. Oakland has a weird situation where all the municipalities immediately adjacent sort of offload their problems into Oakland, which taxes and exacerbates their already beleaguered situation that itself is rooted in lots of causes/history. I know when I lived there in the mid 2010’s you would see active anti-homeless efforts from across the bay and just north in Berkeley to squeeze their own homeless populations out, clear out their camps and sort of criminalize homelessness which doesn’t make it disappear, it largely just got pushed to Oakland. In conjunction with this the Oakland police department at the time was embroiled in scandal over incidents with prostitution (https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/01/531056653/oakland-to-pay-19-year-old-nearly-1-million-in-police-scandal-settlement). Small context, at the time at least in the mid 2010’s (not sure how trends have been since) international boulevard in Oakland was the number three prostitution track in terms of traffic in the United States, it’s pervasive and for a few years I lived on international boulevard. You would always see squad cars sort of a block off international kind of keeping a supervising eye on things but not really getting involved ever. Then after that scandal broke and there was other stories in the news of not just sex scandals and exploitation of invidual sex workers but police involvement in prostitution rings they caught a lot of heat and attention, and then police presence completely disappeared. You never saw the squad cars around at all after that. And so a pullback and strained department were in place BEFORE covid and George Floyd and the roil of the past eight years. Oakland was hurting before and probably suffered the worse for it when things got worse for the whole planet.
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 20:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 21:08 |
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Those aren't really minor statistical differences, though. The difference between 24% and 80% is well beyond the range of statistically significant. Especially, when San Francisco - which is geographically right next door - had a huge drop in crime after spiking in 2020-2022. I'm not sure where that 24% is coming from, but if crime rates in some cities rise for three years and then drop for one, and crime rates in another city rise for four years, that's not some wild divergence. Maybe the crime rate will drop there too in year five, and maybe whatever drove crime rates down in the other cities is just taking a little longer to come into effect. We're talking about some pretty short time periods here, and the increase in crime is still quite small compared to the massive decrease in crime Oakland saw in the mid-2010. Besides, just because the cities are geographically close together doesn't mean they're similar. For example, demographics. The article even hints at that itself, mentioning the Bay Area's "dramatic gentrification" in recent years. And sure enough, San Francisco (per capita income $77k, 77% of the population white or Asian) is substantially wealthier and more elite than Oakland (per capita income $50k, 49% of the population white or Asian). And it's not like Oakland's crime rate has ever really tracked SF's all that well either. The chart in the article shows that Oakland has had a drastically higher crime rate than SF since the 90s, and also that ever since 2000 SF's crime rate has been far more stable than Sacramento's and Oakland's, prone to far smaller changes (particularly in the upward direction). Moreover, SF had a sudden substantial drop in crime in the late-2010s, while Sacramento and Oakland didn't.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 20:26
|
|
|
Zotix posted:It's wild that so many Americans need a pill or injectable or some pharma solution for weight loss. I understand *some* people really need solutions like this. But weight loss for most people isn't some obscure process. It's a matter of eating less and moving more, period. Too many Americans are just outright lazy. Lots of things are conceptually easy, but difficult to practically execute. You can fix your budget by spending less money than you take in. You can get more sleep by going to bed earlier and waking up later. You can lose weight by eating less and moving more. - Some people really do have no other option. - Some people could do it normally, but would much rather have a solution that requires less effort. - Some people might not be willing/inspired to try unless they have an outside source they think will help them. When 2/3 of Americans are obese or overweight, you are going to have a huge number of people in just those three categories. We also fortify all of our food with vitamins and minerals and our water with fluoride, but that would be completely unnecessary if everyone just ate a balanced diet, flossed, used mouth wash, and brushed their teeth all the time. It still makes sense to do because the benefits are significant when everyone isn't acting optimally. If we stopped fortifying food or fluoridating water, then some people might be more judicious about their vitamin intake or dental care, but a lot wouldn't and it would have negative consequences. The big downsides to these drugs is that they are brand new, very expensive, and you have to take them for life. The side-effects appear to be minimal and at some point in the future they will get cheaper. If they can improve outcomes, even when people could theoretically reach those outcomes themselves without it, then it would be a net good. In a perfect world? Yeah, it would be best if everyone just stayed physically fit and ate healthy. But, that isn't going to happen for various reasons.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 20:28
|
|
|
Zotix posted:It's wild that so many Americans need a pill or injectable or some pharma solution for weight loss. I understand *some* people really need solutions like this. But weight loss for most people isn't some obscure process. It's a matter of eating less and moving more, period. Too many Americans are just outright lazy. Basically, the drugs make an obese person experience hunger the same way your privileged skinny rear end does. E: granted there is some environmental issue in play that is making these signals misfire in so many more people than in the past. But for most people it’s locked in when they’re children, which doesn’t stop people from judging them for their whole lives. Mellow Seas fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Aug 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 20:31
|
|
|
Also, healthy food is expensive. For many americans dinner of Wendy'/McDs or Taco Bell is pretty loving common, and those foods are loaded with fats, oils, sugars and salts
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 20:31
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:To be clear to all involved, most coverage of the study is basically press materials from Novo Nordisk. They're looking for full blockbuster. It's already a blockbuster - these results could put it on an approvals path to rival Humira/Lipitor
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 20:33
|
|
|
Sure, cur.e obesity, stroke and heart attacks, when will they cure baldness?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 20:33
|
|
|
Cimber posted:Also, healthy food is expensive. For many americans dinner of Wendy'/McDs or Taco Bell is pretty loving common, and those foods are loaded with fats, oils, sugars and salts Overeating garbage food on WeGovy, Ozempic, or Monjourno will still result in you gaining weight. The drugs don't stimulate your metabolism (like stimulants) or inhibit your absorbtion of fats (like olestra). They basically slowly tell your brain to stop sending hunger signals to your body. So, you should stop getting them around 1,800 to 2,000 calories. But, you can still eat even when you aren't super hungry or you can gorge yourself on a ton all at once. It is significantly easier to not do that if you don't have hunger cravings or pangs, though. It helps you want to eat less, but doesn't burn fat or prevent you from overeating willingly. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Aug 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 20:35
|
|
|
Jesus III posted:Sure, cur.e obesity, stroke and heart attacks, when will they cure baldness? They already have - you just need the money for good plugs, then constant maintenance with Minoxidil and Finasteride See: the Elongated Muskrat
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 20:36
|
|
|
Yeah the 1200 calorie burger isn’t any less bad for you on Ozempic. You’re just extremely unlikely to finish it. The idea of finishing it would probably seem actively gross to you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 20:37
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Yeah the 1200 calorie burger isn’t any less bad for you on Ozempic. You’re just extremely unlikely to finish it. The idea of finishing it would probably seem actively gross to you. It does, can confirm.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 20:39
|
|
|
If our institutions and culture are such that significant amounts of people can't manage their weight by being more active and eating less garbage, it's objectively bad. Calling everybody lazy seems like mean victim blaming, but our world makes us lazy. We are participants, but we do not any control over the situation (beyond personal will, ane I don't credit Americans with much will to do what it takes to be healthy and fit). Being healthy and strong is objectively better for every aspect of your life. It's like we don't want to stick around on some subconscious level. I know the whole "reverence for what's natural" isn't popular here, but it seems to me every step we take away from a more natural lifestyle dooms us and our home. No effort to improve lives on a large scale can measure up to the desire to make a profit, to make us willing consumers or even dependants.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 20:45
|
|
|
If every change to society is driven by a desire to increase profits, all other considerations are ancillary. That’s why we’re fat, unhappy and paranoid. Skinny, happy and empathetic don’t make any money, so they’re not in the recipe. The recipe calls for fat, unhappy paranoid people, who are easier to sell stuff to, and it shouldn’t be shocking that that’s what we’re becoming. Capitalism is an algorithm that doesn’t care if you’re happy, healthy, or anything else, so long as you’re spending. So if you being overweight, unhappy and desperate earns more money, that’s what you’ll be unless you actively work to undermine the perniciousness of capital within your own life. The primary driving force of our society is an algorithm that doesn’t care about you being anything but a leaky wallet, so if you want to be content, you’re going to have to acknowledge that and react accordingly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 20:52
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Basically, the drugs make an obese person experience hunger the same way your privileged skinny rear end does. When I tell people that I am literally hungry all the time they tend to think that I must be doing it wrong. Salads, drinking lots of water, etc. Still hungry. Losing weight at the moment. Drinking water and eating calorie-efficient dense foods. Still hungry all the time. Have to go to sleep hungry. It sucks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 20:59
|
|
|
selec posted:If every change to society is driven by a desire to increase profits, all other considerations are ancillary. That’s why we’re fat, unhappy and paranoid. But, anti-depressants are really cheap. Also, who wins if the fitness, beauty, and food industry are against the pharmaceutical industry for the obesity wars?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 20:59
|
|
|
selec posted:If every change to society is driven by a desire to increase profits, all other considerations are ancillary. That’s why we’re fat, unhappy and paranoid.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 21:02
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:But, anti-depressants are really cheap. I can tell you who the losers will be—same folks losing nowadays.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 21:02
|
|
|
Zotix posted:It's wild that so many Americans need a pill or injectable or some pharma solution for weight loss. I understand *some* people really need solutions like this. But weight loss for most people isn't some obscure process. It's a matter of eating less and moving more, period. Too many Americans are just outright lazy. I mean if that's true, it seems like there are a lot of people who are lazy and don't want to be, and we just invented a drug to treat laziness.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 21:09
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Yeah the 1200 calorie burger isn’t any less bad for you on Ozempic. You’re just extremely unlikely to finish it. The idea of finishing it would probably seem actively gross to you. I wasn't on Ozempic, but took Naltrexone and for one glorious week this was the case. It was awesome. And then my brain adapted and that went away.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 21:18
|
|
|
If one person out of 100 is obese, then maybe it's their fault. If 50 out of 100 are obese, maybe there's some systemic problem that all these people are dealing with and it isn't their fault so we shouldn't poor- or health-shame them. Hopefully we'll eventually have a better solution than weight loss drugs, and also more research that isn't company funded on the health effects, but what I read in the press release is encouraging.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 21:25
|
|
|
As somebody who has to take an array of crazy pills to function in society I think that if the drug works, and doesn’t have significant side effects, then gently caress it. Take the pill. There’s nothing wrong with that. I can assure everybody that relying on medication doesn’t spiritually impoverish you or whatever. There’s a question of, can we go back to the way things used to be, but also, would we want to? Yes, obesity is a result of our food culture, but that food culture is also partially a result of mind-bogglingly productive agriculture that has created a gigantic food surplus, something that, until very recent history, was considered to be about the best thing possible. There is some ideal “natural state” where people don’t need weight loss drugs but we are so preposterously far from a natural state in 2023 - mostly for reasons people are very much in favor of - and the “natural” processes that made our caveman ancestors so theoretically fit and sexy isn’t coming back. And we certainly don’t want a return to the shortcomings of 10,000 BC-1950 AD agriculture that stunted everyone’s growth and would lead to massive famines every now and again. Obesity may be a side effect of an incredibly beneficial thing. If that side effect can be treated with some cleverly-arranged plant extracts, bully. We’ve basically solved food production*, and that’s an amazing accomplishment for the species, that we overlook because we’re too sad about being less sexy. Now if only we can solve the political bullshit in the US and around the world that keeps our Infinity Food away from mouths of people who need it. Long-term, obesity prevention is much more feasible than “fixing” the existing obese people. These drugs can be a bridge that gets us to a place where people can be more naturally fit, while us poor fatties born 1950-2000 take our weight loss drugs. * obviously climate change is going to be a major threat to this condition Mellow Seas fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Aug 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 21:37
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:As somebody who has to take an array of crazy pills to function in society I think that if the drug works, and doesn’t have significant side effects, then gently caress it. Take the pill. There’s nothing wrong with that. I can assure everybody that relying on medication doesn’t spiritually impoverish you or whatever. quote:There’s a question of, can we go back to the way things used to be, but also, would we want to? Yes, obesity is a result of our food culture, but that food culture is also partially a result of mind-bogglingly productive agriculture that has created a gigantic food surplus, something that, until very recent history, was considered to be about the best thing possible. There are other looming problems with the way we grow food besides climate change, and the inequitable distribution is bigger than the US political problems. Funnily (or tragically) we can't go back to caveman life because the damage we've done to our only world (and the population that relies on those systems) means we can no longer sustain ourselves in harmony with our environment. And less sexy? Is that what anybody here is saying? Our obsession with how we look is fostered and encouraged by the market systems I'm arguing against, as Selec said. quote:Long-term, obesity prevention is much more feasible than “fixing” the existing obese people. These drugs can be a bridge that gets us to a place where people can be more naturally fit, while us poor fatties born 1950-2000 take our weight loss drugs. Any "progress" we make is sure to be within, and allowed by, the powerful forces that ensure stable profits. And we as a mass of individual actors seem to largely go along with it. "Solved food production"? We've solved "life on earth", but I don't think you'll like where this particular equation goes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:10
|
|
|
Okay well if your response to the idea that society could make adjustments to reduce obesity among children, in a way that is sustainable for their entire lives, is “Lol. Lmao” then yeah fine, let’s all take the pill and get on our way. Put it in the tap water. E: also lol at the idea that capitalism invented vanity e2: okay that is probably an unfair paraphrase. But yes, people’s main concern with obesity has been aggregate sexiness, not health. That’s just what people say, and may think it’s about. But if you run an exercise akin to “is being pro-life about fetuses or punishing women” then you’ll find it’s because people don’t like what they see. Lifespan was rising right alongside obesity until very recently in the US - where poor Covid response and drugs are more responsible than waistlines - and that’s still the case in most of the world. Mellow Seas fucked around with this message at 22:29 on Aug 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:17
|
|
|
Bellmaker posted:The abuse coverups in the Catholic Church coming to light are also a significant factor. Over $3 billion of parishoners' donations spent to settle abuse lawsuits and counting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:24
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Okay well if your response to the idea that society could make adjustments to reduce obesity among children, in a way that is sustainable for their entire lives, is “Lol. Lmao” then yeah fine, let’s all take the pill and get on our way. Put it in the tap water. I posted:And less sexy? Is that what anybody here is saying? Our obsession with how we look is fostered and encouraged by the market systems I'm arguing against, as Selec said.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:26
|
|
|
I regularly fast like 18 hours a day and some days I just don’t eat at all. There’s a difference between being hungry and a difference between your stomach/brain saying you normally eat something around now so go eat. That latter feeling goes away when you stop indulging it. I’m lucky and fortunate to never have felt the former feeling. But my point is a lot of people equate the feeling of needing food with hunger and that’s just not the case. If people would learn that difference im positive they could lose weight by eating less. But they don’t because food is everywhere and everyone is full of pro health tips like “eat 20 small meals a day” and whatnot. E: your body only needs like 2500 or whatever kcal. If you’re getting that amount then you are not hungry no matter what you think Boris Galerkin fucked around with this message at 22:32 on Aug 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:28
|
|
|
There are so many tips and tricks for losing weight exactly because it is very difficult and most people aren't successful at it in the long term.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:32
|
|
|
Food is engineered to make you want to consume it. If Pringle’s could invent a chip that caused people to become so addicted it killed them they’d have their name on every sports arena in the country. Luckily, no one food can do that, so they just packed everything with the same things that make you crave it, and the shotgun approach works. If this much of the country is suffering from obesity-related illnesses and you’re still approaching this as something individuals solve for themselves you might be too lost to reach. It’s like deciding that Ralph Nader was wrong and individual responsibility, not seat belts, are what were called for. It is a blinkered approach to think you can educate or inform your way past what is obviously a systemic issue. You can only regulate your way out of a situation that arose because of the free market. It’s the only meaningful solution, because what’s the alternate? Teach people to ignore all the stress and bullshit and appreciate things that, to their palate, simply don’t taste as good? Let them Freely Decide that their longterm goals demand sacrifice, something most humans absolutely suck at?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:36
|
|
|
Zotix posted:It's wild that so many Americans need a pill or injectable or some pharma solution for weight loss. I understand *some* people really need solutions like this. But weight loss for most people isn't some obscure process. It's a matter of eating less and moving more, period. Too many Americans are just outright lazy. If it were simply a matter of moving more and eating less, obesity would not be as prevalent as it is. The causes are much more varied, but often psychological and therapy is a bitch to obtain even when you have decent insurance and aren't eating yourself to death as a passive form of suicide by self neglect.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:36
|
|
|
Adenoid Dan posted:There are so many tips and tricks for losing weight exactly because it is very difficult and most people aren't successful at it in the long term. It really isn't. There are nutrition labels on nearly everything, even if they are 20% off, it's not hard to add 20% to the calories, log it in an app(by scanning), and then eating less calories than you should. People act like losing weight is hard, it's not. If people can go to work and be a doctor, lawyer, IT professional, they can lose weight. I'd even go as far as saying if you can run a cash register, you have the ability to do the math needed to lose weight. America just isn't a healthy country, both nutritionally and mentally. The general public just isn't read to accept that fact. Liquid Communism posted:If it were simply a matter of moving more and eating less, obesity would not be as prevalent as it is. The causes are much more varied, but often psychological and therapy is a bitch to obtain even when you have decent insurance and aren't eating yourself to death as a passive form of suicide by self neglect. It absolutely is. Weight loss is 100% calories in vs calories out. You will not find someone who eats less calories than they burn, and adding weight.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:37
|
|
|
Zotix posted:It really isn't. There are nutrition labels on nearly everything, even if they are 20% off, it's not hard to add 20% to the calories, log it in an app(by scanning), and then eating less calories than you should. People act like losing weight is hard, it's not. If people can go to work and be a doctor, lawyer, IT professional, they can lose weight. I'd even go as far as saying if you can run a cash register, you have the ability to do the math needed to lose weight. You are objectively wrong.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:39
|
|
|
Zotix posted:It really isn't. There are nutrition labels on nearly everything, even if they are 20% off, it's not hard to add 20% to the calories, log it in an app(by scanning), and then eating less calories than you should. People act like losing weight is hard, it's not. If people can go to work and be a doctor, lawyer, IT professional, they can lose weight. I'd even go as far as saying if you can run a cash register, you have the ability to do the math needed to lose weight. Why do I see so many fat doctors and lawyers then?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:39
|
|
|
Adenoid Dan posted:You are objectively wrong. Not only is it objectively wrong, it's outright dumb and ignoring dysfunction in the body. There are ways for your body to be forced into starvation mode independent of someone doing something wrong. You'll end up easily putting on weight (and find it nearly impossible to lose it) even if you were to eat nothing but meat and water with a side order of bread for a sandwich every day. As an example, things like extreme gall bladder dysfunction can trigger this and even when it's fixed it usually leads to life long problems losing weight after that too since the fix is to take out the gall bladder removing your ability to properly process things like fat while forcing you to restrict the availability of your diet even further if you don't want an upset gut. Good luck losing weight when the only thing that won't drive your lower intestine into a frenzy of farting and diarrhea is processed foods due to the low availability of tasty low fat foods in the US. Otherwise you have to deal with constant discomfort or eating like a monk. Archonex fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Aug 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:46
|
|
|
Zotix posted:
One caviat to this, your body requires a base amount of calories to simply exist each day. Eat up to that amount, then burn extra by working out or something. That caloric gap between what you added and what you used will cause you to compensate by burning fat for energy. If you need 2000 calories to function, and you eat 1000, your body will go into crisis and preservation mode.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:48
|
|
|
Yeah we're flawed biological machines adapted for a different world. We destroyed ours in order to build this. Little wonder we don't want to face how poorly things seem to be going. Weight loss is just calories in calories burned like sobriety is just not drinking. I don't have what it takes to not make myself a drink after work, maybe I don't want sobriety enough, or maybe I'm just flawed and weak. But say a large chunk of the population is in the same boat, that's a problem that begs a bigger response. So let's get a drug that makes alcohol induce immediate vomiting, and put it in the water. While we also sell alcohol. Freedom.. Also can somebody gimme a small capital boost to invest in the company that gets contracted to? When they charge uncle Sam for it we'll both be rich.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:49
|
|
|
I assume all the weight-loss-is-willpower advocates ITT also support abstinence-only contraception
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:51
|
|
|
haveblue posted:I assume all the weight-loss-is-willpower advocates ITT also support abstinence-only contraception Also the straight edge lifestyle, since clearly all they need to do is decide to be content like good stoics.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:56
|
|
|
Zotix posted:It really isn't. There are nutrition labels on nearly everything, even if they are 20% off, it's not hard to add 20% to the calories, log it in an app(by scanning), and then eating less calories than you should. People act like losing weight is hard, it's not. If people can go to work and be a doctor, lawyer, IT professional, they can lose weight. I'd even go as far as saying if you can run a cash register, you have the ability to do the math needed to lose weight. Even if all of this is true, why isn't that something you can't treat with medicine? Like if 100% of obese people could lose weight with better self control, and there's an FDA approved pill that gives you better self control, why is it bad to let people take the pill?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:56
|
|
|
if you live in Ohio please go vote down Issue 1 today so the state doesn't get even worse. thanks
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 21:08 |
|
|
Man just before I left the state they went Obama. What happened?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2023 22:59
|
|