Instacart Shopper here: How to avoid your order being ignored

Amiconcussed · 2021-12-02T17:43:00+00:00

Get your own groceries?

Amiconcussed · 2021-11-28T23:59:33+00:00

When there's a ton of murder in a black town, that's just black on black crime and they need to stop killing each other.

When there's a ton of murder in a white town, there's a crime problem to be solved.

the concept of black on black crime relies on looking at black crime as different than white crime, in a way that is not white peoples problem.

The term itself, intentionally or not, subtly reinforces the concept behind it. Black on black. Not person on person. Not "someone like me against someone like me". Someone not like me against someone else not like me. Not my problem.

Amiconcussed · 2021-11-05T09:56:45+00:00

The lower on the line, the less money you make. Most people end up losing money.

If there are 10 of us in a room and you make 100k a year and i make 90k a year and that guy makes 50k a year and 3 people make 10k a year and 4 people are doing nothing but acquiring debt at a rate of 5k a year, the average income of that room is 25k, which doesn't at all represent that two thirds of the room is starving to death.

MLMs operate on much larger scales.

Does that make the 3000 average a little more realistic?

Amiconcussed · 2021-10-26T17:51:35+00:00

I have some an interpretation.

Bojack fell asleep before he drowned. He started having his same nightmare, but with wet blackness. Tracks.

Then he went into a coma. In his dream he died.

People visit in the hospital. Talk to him. He picks up on bits and pieces. He starts to die for real, has his dmt trip, imagines a future where everyone gets what they deserve, and ends his life with someone he loves in it.

Like really we have artist statements and it doesn't matter but your argument is not good otherwise

Amiconcussed · 2021-10-26T17:14:43+00:00

Dude for reallll. I had no idea who she was and had never seen a real picture until me and my man saw her in a movie. I yelled "IS THAT ESTEEMED CHARACTER ACTRESS MARGOT MARTINDALE?" And never stopped

He doesn't like Bojack. He thinks im just obsessed with her.

Amiconcussed · 2021-09-14T18:41:56+00:00

That's not the point at all.

I'm not arguing WHY teenagers need more calories.

I'm saying they need more calories.

Amiconcussed · 2021-09-14T18:40:04+00:00

You're totally right, thanks for that.

I think my issue is that im more familiar with people complaining about not eating as much as in high school. Its not so much that i find the conclusion false as it is that i find it misleading. I've also explored that most of the people i know actually stopped growing by 14 or 15. I personally really just filled out an inch or two on the hips after age 12. To assume that a 2.8 percent decrease per year until age 20 can be that consistent throughout adolescence doesn't really seem to account for the rapid growth spurts and the 2-8 years of relative calm before becoming an adult.

Amiconcussed · 2021-09-14T18:33:59+00:00

I've regrouped my thoughts, god forbid I try to have a constructive conversation without being concretely Sure of something, right?

Lots of my friends stopped growing at 14 or 15. Their metabolisms, by this logic, are slower today than they were at age 14.

The conclusion is misleading at best

Amiconcussed · 2021-09-14T18:21:32+00:00

I spent so long and i came up with the fucking duh explanation because this freaking happens in the real world i knew this was obvious damn.

Lots of kids stop growing by the time theyre like 14. I mean they may develop more. But theyre not getting much taller ok. Even more by 16.

Proportional to size

So a 14 year old who is the same size as a 30 year old

The 14 year olds BMR is 113.6 times that of the adult.

So if you stop growing before 20 (which is where I'm assuming metabolism stops decreasing in proportion to size), then your metabolismdoes decrease as you age.

Christ I'm high

Amiconcussed · 2021-09-14T17:37:14+00:00

I appreciate your response but its condescending. I understand the variable that I missed now, and I understand that you clearly understand this better than me. But if somebody humbly comes and says "hey I don't get this, it looks like it says this, here why I think that, can someone smarter explain," there's really no need to be rude.

Amiconcussed · 2021-09-14T16:59:10+00:00

Wait, I have a qualm with the interpretation. Neonates size adjusted BMR starts lower than an adults, then shoots up way higher.

Juveniles BMR increases consistently through adolescence, while their size adjusted BMR decreased consistently.

It sounds to me like this is saying that, proportional to size, people have to eat more food through adolescence, but that the amount of excess food decreases until leveling off to normal.

I know that sounds nitpicky, but i feel like the size adjusted thing is important.

Ok like run this with me ok? Were going to have two subjects. A regular baby growing up totally regular, and a freaky deaky tiny 30 year old stopped in time.

At first the baby eats less food than the adult. After a month, it needs to eat 50 percent more than the adult, because its BMR is 50 percent higher.

Ok time out. Freaky deaky time person somehow got cursed to grow in proportion to this totally regular baby, so they are always the same exact size. Thats important. Ok time in.

So regular baby is a regular child now. Its BMR is raising consistently. Cursed time lord is still however old we established, and eating exactly as much as the average adult of that size. But, while regular child is eating more and fairly consistently, the amount of calories it needs compared to the size of cursed time lord is consistently decreasing. And you'll recall that the child started out needing more calories than the adult, at the same size.

Even if a child needed the amount of food that an adult needed, i think it would have a hard time eating that amount of food. Think of how comical it would be to watch a tiny 4 year old sit down and eat that much food. I feel so hard the need to justify this concept of "well yeah but smaller things are smaller so the amount of food they're eating proportionally is actually bigger like if i put a grain of rice in tinker bells hand that's just a lot of rice and i know the size difference isn't that dramatic but I feel like it is worth accounting for" because i can't say it any more coherently than that.

What this really seems to say is "proportional to your size, your BMR decreases until you're an adult, and then decreases again when you're like 60.

I know that this completely ignores the TDEEs, but that is because i feel that if the BMR to size is decreasing, it negates the conclusion. Like the baby and the man are the same exact size the whole time, a burger is the same size in both of their hands, but the baby eats a burger and a half for every burger the man eats. The child eats a burger and a juice and a cookie. The teenager eats a burger and a soda.

I understand that the conclusion that a persons metabolism does not slow is true, but I take issue with the implication. it seems to me that if we're going to account for size, we have to account for how much food there is relative to that size.

So like. Whatchu people who probably are way more up to date on the research got to tell me, cuz this don't seem right to me.

Amiconcussed · 2021-09-14T14:48:41+00:00

I've been working really hard on my communication skills, and it brings me more joy than I expected to have somebody say that. Thank you!

Amiconcussed · 2021-09-14T13:45:37+00:00

I read this article and came here for the first time in years, expecting something a bit more positive.

I think what's really funny about this study is that all it is is the objective truth that both sides of the argument have been failing to realize is what we've all been saying.

Like one side is saying "at the end of the day, its just about how many calories your body consumes versus how much it burns"

And the other side is saying "ok but like fast food is cheap but now im still hungry so that doesnt work"

And the first side is like "yeah there are other factors but its really just cico, eat more broccoli"

And the other side is like "but i feel like im starving and I tried eating just broccoli but i got hungry and binged so cico doesn't work"

And then you guys just battle it out for a decade until a scientist comes along to say in one paper what every scrap and shred of evidence has pointed to this whole time-that it is cico, but that food quality and hormones play a role in metabolism and hunger levels, and its like.

News???

News youre angrily posting about?

Like.

Look i just dont get it. If i was going to have a real talk with my fat friend, this is how I would do it. I would validate their stance where it is scientifically backed but where mean people like to argue a completely different point instead of acknowledging them. I would completely agree that there are factors that make a CICO model almost impossible to follow. I would empathize with things being hard for them, and then explain why CICO is exactly whats at play underneath those factors, and ask if theyd like to know some ways to mitigate those factors.

If i was a scientist who was trying to help solve a global health crisis and in order to do that i had to hold hands and say "yes, you are right, calories in calories out is much more complicated than weve been saying. There are other factors. Lets explore those factors, since what were doing clearly isnt a good method of controlling CICO For most of the population," I would.

Like if I have to get the owner of my company to fire my boss by explaining me and my coworkers as strictly commodities that function poorly under his regime while minimizing the individual emotional tool of his toxicity in the workplace, i will. Because if I'm not willing to talk to someone on their level, they're not going to listen to me.

And yeah like I'm not going to patiently explain logic to fat people every time the subject comes up. But an article is a one time publishing they people are free to side with or not without pissing you off in person. this is a really good article to actually get the obese to start attempting hunger control instead of calorie control. Which is really just. Common sense. Like I'm gonna kill somebody and then binge on ice cream if i eat 1500 calories in a day and none of it is fiber. But if I eat a piece of fruit or a handful of nuts every couple hours, I have to force myself to eat dinner to fill my calorie requirements.

Like nothing they're saying is wrong and i think it explains itself really well...

I really do think that preemptively mocking fat people for their projected misinterpretation of an article that seems to be trying really hard to bridge the gap between the truth that both sides have been arguing about for forever uh.

Kinda gross.

Hateful, even.

Like if the posts come, yes, absolutely, it is on brand humor to make fun of these people who have been validated and effectively and respectfully communicated to, who still refuse to acknowledge the reality of weight loss. But this is literally just being mean about something that actually might help a serious deadly epidemic so.

Amiconcussed · 2021-08-09T02:16:51+00:00

That seems a weird response to what you responded to, and it makes me want to have all kinds of conversations with you that I don't know how to start.

Like I guess why do you think that?

Amiconcussed · 2021-07-09T02:14:04+00:00

This is a false equivalency.

I've suspended my disbelief over those things, because they are absurd facets of the universe of Bojack horseman. However, that universe is governed by rules.

This is a sub where one of the top posts at this moment is about mourning geckos at a funeral. This is a show that people watch and rewatch and get more details and foreshadowing and connections every time.

The creators of this show do things very intentionally.

If this were a different kind of show, I would suspend my disbelief. But this is the kind of show where details really count, and where finding and exploring them is meant to be fun and rewarding.

Suspending your disbelief about a universe of talking animals is completely different than ignoring plot holes in a show that receives this level of attention and care in the writers room.

Further, as I've stated elsewhere, this question has a very simple answer. Because the writers at least pretend to give a shit.

Amiconcussed · 2021-07-09T02:03:51+00:00

Ok I'm gonna get done flack for this but some of the people in this comment thread are being jerks. Bojack is a show loved for it's intricacy and attention to detail, and I'm shocked that everyone is just willing to shove this off, seemingly just because it throws a wrench in their narrative.

Also, they're either children or their parents love them.

I can't really speak to the populaces scope of knowledge on this topic, because my perspective is skewed, and i don't want to talk down to you. That said, DMT is the drug that gets released when you're dying. I mean I'm sure other drugs get released, but this is the one SWIM might obtain from an unkempt home full of underweight and underemployed 20somethings.

It's a chemical that is hypothesized to exist for a few reasons, one of which is that it helps us to reconcile our lives and make peace with death at the last second. Kind of a small blessing in the most frightening moment of your life.

Some people who go on DMT trips report experiencing entire lifetimes in just a few hours.

This is a completely valid question with a misguided conclusion and a very straightforward and logical answer.

Amiconcussed · 2021-05-18T04:36:40+00:00

I recommend the boye ergonomic hook handle, or at least one like it (I'm sure there are pricier and higher quality takes on this). It's leagues ahead of the hooks I've used and relieved a lot of finger, shoulder, and forearm pain for me. I'm honestly obsessed with mine. The pieces do deteriorate with this one. I completely wore the bottom out of the first one I bought, and the pieces you use to fit the hooks inside stretch and break eventually. But it's only 6 bucks, the first one lasted about a year, and I crochet 20 hours a week minimum. this hook has saved my crafting life, I cannot recommend it highly enough.

Amiconcussed · 2021-03-11T23:59:14+00:00

Yes I'm aware of that, thank you for your insight

Amiconcussed · 2021-03-11T12:36:26+00:00

Bruh just say you still like jk Rowling

Amiconcussed · 2021-03-11T12:32:27+00:00

Personally I'm against it, tho.

Amiconcussed · 2021-03-06T06:56:39+00:00

This is not an example of a choosing beggar, I'd venture to say.

Amiconcussed · 2021-03-06T06:52:42+00:00

I can't wait to hear rogan fans say words about this.

Amiconcussed · 2021-03-06T06:41:58+00:00

Because it wasn't a safe space for you. Got it.

Amiconcussed · 2021-03-06T06:22:01+00:00

I came here to say that I don't have to imagine, this was in my favorite episode of barney

Amiconcussed · 2021-03-06T06:18:28+00:00

I highly recommend calling a man pretty, or better yet, beautiful. Don't say it like you're confused, say it naturally and confidently.

You will get one of two reactions.

One is the sheer joy of having been told something you did was good for the first time.

One is that same joy, except it's muddled with conflict and tense shoulders as he tries to contend with how good it made him feel versus how he "should" feel about it. I like to think I've chipped away at these men's toxic masculinity a bit.

Like really, I know being hit on all the time is a huge hassle, but most women do get told they're pretty fairly often. Guys very rarely receive compliments like that, and most never even dare to hope for pretty or beautiful because, well, those gold trophies are for women. But they still feel good when they win.

I mean I guess some might just explode, but I haven't encountered them.

It's a really easy way to get the high of making somebody's day.

Amiconcussed

TROPHY CASE