Run a study of your approach and show good results over a cohort for 2+ years and you'll make an entire sub-field of medical scientists very happy.
[EDIT] It's not that your approach can't work, it's that if (for example) people had as hard a time following the directions for condoms as they do following diet & workout plans, we'd never allow condoms to be sold as contraceptives, they'd not even be close to being OK to promote as useful for that purpose. It wouldn't matter if a few people could follow the directions and it worked 100% of the time for them.
And they had 86% adherence for a year. If they'd studied this farther out and it went the same way as basically any study that's done that, adherence would be a lot worse in another couple years. And that's in a group that's exceptionally motivated vs. the general population—has an actual illness they're trying to treat, and has opted in to the study knowing what it's asking of them and for how long.
Pull out method is a less viable method of preventing pregnancy, and especially less viable at preventing STDs. However, it's still considered a contraceptive strategy.
For every 100 people who use pull out method perfectly, within a year, 4 will get pregnant. Since not everyone does a great job doing it, in reality 22 get pregnant every year.
For a going-steady couple that isn't worried about STDs, keeps an emergency contraceptive ('morning after pill') ready for oopsie mistakes, and live in a country that grants women bodily autonomy (or have discussed and accepted that a mistake might lead to a child), pullout is a perfectly valid contraceptive mechanism. There are better, but considering that basically every method except a condom/internal condom can cause extreme discomfort or bad side effects to the woman in the relationship, I think it's totally fine to choose pull-out.
The zeitgeist has pushed the idea carbs/grains and sugar are terrible over the last 40 years on and off, so that seems to say more about the medical industrial complex, than anything. That's fair, but if that message has been pushed so consistently, why didn't we see a real decrease in the consumption of those things and the associated weight loss?
I am on a GLP-1 level calorie restricted diet right now without a GLP-1 and of course it is just miserable.
I love eating a giant sandwich at night that is more calories than what I am eating all day now but it isn't the taste it is the brain chemical release.
It is an addiction like any other addiction. I have never felt that same craving for chicken breast.
I find that almost all doctors give useless advice. On multiple occasions I've been advised that there was nothing wrong but they can run a scan "if I insist" and then bam, the exact problem I expected shows up clear as day.
Doctors don’t get paid for writing prescriptions. They don’t get kickbacks for writing prescriptions. A small subset of doctors are paid by pharmaceutical companies to run trials or provide expertise, but you can look that up since it’s publicly available information, and it’s not based on them prescribing you anything.
At most a drug rep comes by and brings donuts or something to talk about their new drugs.
Now go drill down into what those payments are for. The vast majority is for running trials. Each payment is tracked, and you can drill down into each one.
If you don’t want a doctor who takes money to run clinical trials, use this database to avoid them. It’s not hard.
Increased reporting requirements and a cap on the value of these gifts that is far too low for box seats.
My wife's a physician, and I've seen these things change dramatically. Sometimes some food for the whole office will get dropped off. Or donuts. No one's getting box seats to a pro sports game anymore.
They get paid in lower risk deductibles. If a patient demands a drug they saw on commercials, the doctor can reduce liability by prescribing it in many cases.
Anti-shame culture is not what we’re talking about. What we were talking about was doctors prescribing pills that patients asked for to lower their liability, which is nonsense.
Doctors are humans though and if people repeatedly ask for a specific treatment some percentage of them will offer it. That’s how drug advertising impacts prescriptions. Nothing to do with liability.
Huh? Drug reps have scorecards for the doctors they call on and throw perks at the top performers or influencers. It also depends on the speciality - dermatologists working for price equity mills are almost evaluated like salespeople. Source: girlfriend is a rep.
Each one of those has to be reported and the information is publicly available.
Perks for prescriptions is illegal.
If your GF is really keeping score and rewarding doctors for performance, she’s breaking anti kickback laws. All that has to happen is for prosecutor to make the connection.
I know a guy who spent 3 years in prison for something very very close to what you just described. He was just a rep and he said he was just doing what his company told him to do, but they threw him under the bus and now he’s a felon.
I've been on here for 10+ years I think at this point. New throwaway, named throwaway to not even lie, every few months.
I tweet with Paul G every now and then positively, because I'm nicer on there. But sorry you dont think I provide value.
For someone as clever as you, I'm sure it's obvious why using a throwaway greatly diminishes the value of what you're saying.
To spell it out for you: there is value to having some notion of persistent identity even on pseudonymous forums. Anyone can use a throwaway and say anything - and valiantly admitting you're using a throwaway doesn't change this fact.
It should not be surprising as to why someone would be suspicious in 2025, if someone is insulting anyone who got success from a drug by saying "my dad's dirt worked for him" and then complaining about declining quality on the forums.
Use throwaway identity, pay the price.
I'm glad your dad is healthy and yes, carbs cause issues.
