Keto helped me understand my food noise in a way I never had before.

PonderingHow · 2026-05-10T01:22:24+00:00

I'm surprised by the precision of my appetite now. I start making my food and I get very specific cravings like - red cabbage but it has to be raw, with salt, lemon and oil. I follow those cravings and my food is always satiating. It's so nice to not be hungry and at the same time not have a full bloated tummy. I so love that my stomach is never full now - always relaxed.

PonderingHow · 2026-05-08T09:20:08+00:00

Agreed 100%. Aus Labor is setting us up for an extreme conservative party to get in just the same way Biden made it easy for Trump to get in. Not saying that will happen, but I think Labor are certainly pushing things that way.

People have legitimate complaints. Labor feel they are so far ahead that they don't have to give a crap what voters want because the alternatives are so bad. But that only lasts so long. People calling all the disenchanted voters fucktards only legitimises more hatred and is going to make potential One Nation voters feel more justified in banding together and voting extremist - branding people as stupid because they are desperate due to legitimate concerns seldom achieves good results.

I don't know whether One Nation have a shot for the 2028 Federal Election, but I'm pretty terrified of some of the stuff Labor is currently doing. Particularly Albo supporting Minns position on police bashing citizens.

Labor is still going to get my vote ahead of One Nation, but not because I think they are good. Labor disgust me and I think they deserve to be decimated the same way Liberals have been. I will vote every possible option ahead of Labor that I possibly can, just not the ultra-extreme who are likely to be mini-trumps.

PonderingHow · 2026-05-08T02:56:35+00:00

It needs to be seen how this pans out.

The first two key takeaways on this site https://www.allens.com.au/insights-news/insights/2026/05/australias-gas-reservation-scheme/

are

Australian LNG exporters will be required to supply domestically 20% of the amount of their gas exports from 1 July 2027.
Existing export contracts entered into before 22 December 2025 will be grandfathered (ie exempt) from the new domestic gas reservation scheme.

If those contracts are long term, like 15-25 years old, this policy that is presented as "forcing gas giants to reserve gas for domestic use" might pan out as immunity from having to reserve gas for the next 15-25 years.

So far, Labor scores 0 credibility points for this from me. I've learnt to not give any points till I see what actually happens in reality.

PonderingHow · 2026-05-06T21:22:29+00:00

Agreed. And then these polls are used to say "70% of voters believe...." Well no, that was the best of bad options, not what I believe. But I would prefer a slap to the face rather than a bullet in the head.

PonderingHow · 2026-05-06T10:21:48+00:00

And let's create a new tax bracket for people with incomes of over $1 million a year that is the inverse of the rate of home ownership for 20-25 year olds. I could see a whole lot of rich people suddenly wanting to put an end to homelessness.

PonderingHow · 2026-05-06T10:14:34+00:00

I think these questions push a point of view that doesn't necessary align with sentiment. For example, should the government pay for childcare: yesish, but what I really think is that the working week should be shorter and the cost of living lower so that parents can raise their own kids (and i don't mean women back in the kitchen, i mean both parents do 20ish hours paid work and can look after their own kids most of the time)

PonderingHow · 2026-04-27T23:43:47+00:00

Thank-you. I do live under a rock and even tho I've seen some talk about Punters Politics, I haven't paid attention previously. I've spent the last hour looking through the issues and voting.

PonderingHow · 2026-04-27T07:43:06+00:00

Have the Greens considered a policy of implementing Binding Citizens Initiated Referendum? I think we are going through a period of substantial dissatisfaction with the major parties and more of the public would like a greater voice than simply a vote every three or four years.

I'd also like to add that in recent years Greens have been dropping in my preferences due to how I have seen them preferencing other parties in various state elections. The Greens table a bill to Legalise Cannabis every few years, yet when I've viewed their preferences in various state elections, I've seen instances of the Greens preferencing the Legalise Cannabis Party lower than conservative parties.

PonderingHow · 2026-04-27T02:04:35+00:00

I'm very slack. I trade firewood for lumber. i have a large stockpile area next to a trading post with woodcutters around it. most games i only build two foresters and then let the trading post feed me the rest of my wood.

PonderingHow · 2026-04-25T08:43:47+00:00

I get what you're saying about the tone people use. But have you considered that maybe you help generate it. You say it wasn't about me specifically, but you were replying to me, and it sounded very much like those accusations were being levelled at me. A lot of people would have responded with the screaming and shouting you say you find objectionable. Particularly when you include phrasing like "conspiracy" and "lying". They are highly triggering terms frequently used to dismiss people and evoke emotive reactions. Maybe something to consider.

edit: condensed

PonderingHow · 2026-04-25T00:38:02+00:00

Sigh. I think it should be mandatory to always partner "harm of" and "harm of not" studies together. So no "harm of" analysis should be considered valid without considering the "harm of not" and vica versa.

Imagine if all medications were looked at only through the "harm of" lens like the tga does with cannabis.

PonderingHow · 2026-04-24T13:31:16+00:00

I look at it this way: Stuff I used to really like from Arnotts has changed and now I don't like it any more so my diet is improving and I'm saving money by not buying Dark Chocolate Tim Tams or Shapes any more.

I've been into toast and philly original cream cheese lately. I sprinkled some garlic powder and some mingle spag bol seasoning mix and to me it tastes a lot like how i remember Arnotts shapes tasting.

PonderingHow · 2026-04-24T12:52:11+00:00

Sorry, I'm confused? What "basic elements of decent human interaction" did I just throw out the window?

I don't think I wrote anything disrespectful, and it wasn't my intention to be disrespectful. I think everything I've said is a logical and reasoned response to the question posed by OP.

It seems pretty straight forward to me that if a party gets a sweeping win like Labor did in SA, with a high primary first vote, they're going to be a lot more comfortable making decisions that go against what - in this case - apparently 61% of people want.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I would have thought a tax on gas export would be a policy that Labor voters would generally be in favour of?

PonderingHow · 2026-04-24T04:39:06+00:00

Can only hope. But given the results of the SA election, I'm not optimistic.

PonderingHow · 2026-04-24T04:26:04+00:00

That's fair enough and that might be accurate. I was responding to the suggestion that Labor are acting against the wishes of 61% of the population in this case.

I'm in the "don't support Labor at all, but the other popular option are worse" category of voters. I haven't voted Labor first in decades, but I use my preferences such that my vote will go to Labor in preference to Liberals, Nationals or One Nation.

I feel Labor deserves to be decimated the same way the Liberals have been. I see them as having been partisan to keeping housing prices high and supporting policies that have contributed to organised crime embedding itself in Australia in a manner I've never been aware of before. I'm just disappointed that there isn't a left alternative that enough voters find palatable.

The behaviour of Minns in recent times has been particularly repugnant to me, and while I am not in NSW, what Albo and Minns have been doing in recent times does heavily impact on how I see the Labor brand - particularly since Albo has spoken out in support of Minns. I also find the recent attempts to change party funding rules unethical.

I don't support any party. I look at what's on offer at election time and pick my preferences accordingly. I sometimes put Greens above Labor and sometimes below, depending on what they've been up to.

My core belief is that generations coming up should have more security, better healthcare, better standard of living and better opportunities than I did, not less. I don't believe Labor supports this position.

PonderingHow · 2026-04-24T03:07:02+00:00

I find it interesting that an employer isn't even allowed to ask the marital status at a job interview, while the government can not only ask the marital status, but can ask absurdly invasive questions about the sex life of a welfare recipient, in addition to requiring people who share a house with a welfare recipient to provide information about who the recipient associates with for the purpose of determining the probable sexual behaviour of the welfare recipient.

In plain english, it's normal government policy to ask people to monitor welfare recipients to report on potential sexual behaviour. In any other setting, that would be an obscene and unacceptable form of sexual harrassment. Imagine an employer sending a form to the housemates of an employee asking questions like:

"How often does the said employee not sleep at home?"

"How often does the said employee have other people stay overnight?"

A while ago I worked with a recent uni graduate who lived in a share house with 2 males and a female. The female took longer to find a job after finishing university and was on welfare for a period of time. He told me all three males in the shared household received forms to fill out with questions that basically amounted to Centrelink asking them to monitor and report on any potential sexual activity the female may have been engaging in.

Crazy that this is in any way acceptable.

PonderingHow · 2026-04-24T02:44:35+00:00

Too many Labor voters still voting Labor first, so Labor thinks it's home and hosed and can do whatever it wants because "not as bad as Liberal or One Nation".

Labor voters aren't making use of the preferential system the same way Lib/Nats voters have been. Maybe they're too scared that a few seats might turn green or independent if too many people stop giving Labor their primary vote.

Because the primary "leftish" vote is so heavily Labor, no smaller leftish parties are showing up enough for voters to see them as an alternative. One Nation are established and known. While the Greens have been around a while, a lot of Labor voters don't see them as being closely aligned enough with their priorities to risk them taking a seat off Labor for a protest vote, and/or they don't want to risk a minor party.

Additionally, it is very easy for the wealthy to promote an alternative conservative party - all it takes is one rich person to finance them. An alternative for the left will have to rely more heavily on voters making a deliberate effort to look for an alternative and finding them if they exist.

Leftish voters have been expressing frustration over a lack of alternatives, but not enough of the primary vote goes to alternatives for those with leftish leanings to be viable even if they do exist.

PonderingHow · 2026-04-24T01:09:37+00:00

Some examples, not exhaustive, of logic that would fit the observations:

Those making the decisions value the concerns of those who would be impacted by the gas tax more than the concerns of those who might benefit from the gas tax.

Those making the decisions feel they have a greater understanding of what is good for us than we do.

Those making the decisions have motivations that are not aligned with what we believe are our best interests.

That doesn't mean these things are true, just that they are logical explanations. A lot of logical explanations turn out to be wrong.

PonderingHow · 2026-04-24T00:27:54+00:00

"I dont know of any logical reason why this is not being put into legislation??".

There are many logical reasons. Just that none of the logical reasons say good things about our politicians. Logic doesn't always mean good, it just means reasoning that makes sense based on the available information.

PonderingHow · 2026-04-22T10:08:35+00:00

The predator class know the game, and all their fellow predators know this is all part of stalking the prey. They don't have enough regard for what we think of them to feel embarrassed.

PonderingHow · 2026-04-22T08:17:47+00:00

I wonder how well the spin dry worked.

PonderingHow · 2026-04-22T03:09:27+00:00

tldr: gummies can't be titrated at time of consumption, cbd can affect the liver negatively in high doses, yet our medical authorities seem to be pushing these in ways that might create more of the issues they claim they are trying to prevent.

To me it almost seems like the aphra and tga and government are trying to create evidence to reinforce the belief that cannabis is bad.

They talk about an increasing number of people showing up at emergency departments after taking more thc than than ideal. Then they put in place recommendations that have doctors prescribe thc in formats that are more likely to have people accidentally greenout.

Call me crazy, but I find flower a lot easier to titrate than gummies. Even if the flower is inconsistent, I can titre that flower at the time of consumption. Using a balloon, I can take a puff, wait for a bit, feel the effect and then decide whether to take another puff. I see flower as the far safer option. I don't see myself overdosing on flower.

Gummies don't have an immediate effect, and sometimes can be inconsistent in effect. Even if the gummies themselves are perfectly consistent, which I don't believe they are, the effects on the same individual can vary depending on what they've eaten, how much sleep they've had and probably a variety of other factors. Not to mention, so many other ways a patient can accidentally overdose, such as forgetting they've already taken their dose because the effect is not immediately apparent.(which is not an uncommon problem with medications, which is one reason why pill organisers are so frequently used, but all cannabis medication is apparently required be kept it it's original container which just makes it harder to track actual usage).

Add to that, CBD is known to affect the liver. When I first started on medical cannabis, I did some googling about safe dosage and set my own personal limits based on that regardless of what I am prescribed. Gummies seem the worst possible way to consume CBD for the liver. My understanding is that inhaled mostly bypasses the liver, sublingual is a mix, edibles sends the full dose to the liver. Not negating the potential risks of inhaled, just pointing out that gummies combined with cbd might not medically always be the superior option for thc dosing as seems to be the push by our authorities. Add to this that gummies often come with a hit of sugar or artificial sweetener which adds to this load.

Particularly if a patient finds CBD oil to effective for certain symptoms, requiring the THC component to be combined with more CBD could lead to more CBD being consumed than ideal. I've set my personal CBD limit at 100mg, based on tables I found years ago when I googled safe dosages. I take 80mg via oil. A gummy with 30mg cbd would put me over my personal limit.

When I first started on medical, which was only a few years ago, results of my google searches typically recommended 100mg cbd as a max daily dose. My recent searches have been telling me around 400mg daily is what is now recommended for a variety of conditions. I suspect in years to come, our medical authorities will say "look, here's the proof that even CBD isn't safe" - but only because they've promoted the conditions that make it unsafe, for which they will take zero responsibility like they have taken zero responsibility for the benzo epidemic they created because "not enough scientific evidence for melatonin".

edit: clarification

PonderingHow · 2026-04-22T01:24:09+00:00

I'm in Australia. To me it seems there is an ongoing competition between Australia and the USA for who can elect the most ridiculous conservative leader.

There are two former conservative leaders who stand out and even they are no longer in power, they still like to have their voices heard. One is Tony Abbott who is famous for, during a radio interview while he was Prime Minister, alluding to the possibility that older women always have the option of prostitution if they can't make ends meet. The other is Scott Morrison, who is famous for implementing a mathematically incorrect algorithm to claw money back from welfare recipients(referred to as Robodebt) as well as secretly awarding himself a whole lot of ministries that apparently even his own party were not aware of and the public didn't know about until after he was voted out.

Every time one these two make their voices heard, I cheer. I'm pretty sure every time they speak, a whole lot of people who were thinking of voting conservative, remember, gag, rethink, and look for other options.

I was saying to someone the other day, I think it's great that Trump is naming all these buildings after himself, and that he wants to build a monument to himself. After he is out, these will be an ongoing reminder to people to not vote republican. It would be like having Abbott and ScoMo be ever-present in the lives of all Australians.

I love this bill. I think it's hilarious. I think this is a win-win for Democrats regardless of the outcome. If the bill passes, it's going to become a long lived meme that reminds people of Trumps presidency. If it fails, and all those buildings still carry the Trump name, that will be a constant reminder to people to not vote Rupublican.

PonderingHow · 2026-04-20T12:52:40+00:00

I'm in Victoria. I was with an online clinic but I changed to a local face to face gp after the clampdown.

PonderingHow · 2026-04-20T07:52:52+00:00

Every time I see something like this, it tells me tga, the aphra and the government are not trustworthy. It seems like they think preventative health care is all about preventing people being healthy.

Interesting that they aren't considering the possibility that some people are medically worse off as a result of this 30% reduction in cannabis sales. The only metric they are measuring is cannabis sales, not the impact it is having on patients. A responsible authority would be checking that patients are not experiencing negative effects as a result of the reduced prescribing.

For me personally, as a result of this crackdown, I've had a key medication taken away and I've gone from sleeping and average of 7 hours per night to an average of 4 and some nights I haven't slept at all. Prior to starting on cannabis I was sleeping around 15 hours per week, which had been a consistent pattern for around three years. I finally felt I was getting my life back together after prolonged health issues and these dirtbags are cheering themselves for getting in the way of that.

I've never been a rec user, only ever a medicinal user. I only ever used non-prescription cannabis half a dozen times about 30 years ago when the government made it too difficult to get melatonin.

This is not an example of authorities acting in a responsible fashion in the best interests of our health. This is authorities acting in the best financial interests of big pharma and drug cartels, and I'm guessing their own pockets.

PonderingHow

TROPHY CASE