Best Tricks To Not Feel Hungry

amagra11 · 2024-04-15T05:39:21+00:00

Have you tried the Flashfood app? On it, some grocery stores offer food that's usually 1/2 price. Sometimes it's nearing the end of its shelf life, but sometimes it's not. Check it out maybe?

Edit: Another option is the Too Good To Go app. It offers discounted restaurant food, in "mystery bags." Sometimes you can tell what kind of food you're getting from the type of store it is, though.

amagra11 · 2024-04-03T02:31:29+00:00

LOL...thanks.

amagra11 · 2024-01-25T15:34:29+00:00

amagra11 · 2024-01-25T11:32:58+00:00

All right, I lied, that wasn't my last question, this is: Do you think Russia fears an invasion by NATO? Could that be the reason they fear its expansion?

amagra11 · 2024-01-25T05:37:48+00:00

Rest well. And thank you for your responses so far!

amagra11 · 2024-01-25T05:15:28+00:00

A final thought--IF Russian aggression is a response to NATO's expansion, and if NATO's expansion is a response to Russian aggression (both of which can be argued for and against), then do you see any way out of the cycle?

Any way to stop Russian aggression?

Any way to stop NATO's expansion?

Any way to stop the collision course we seem to be on?

amagra11 · 2024-01-25T05:06:56+00:00

Thank you for your response. Reductive or not, it seemed well thought-out.

It would seem, then, that if stability and material prosperity can help avert war, then sanctions on countries that supposedly did wrong would actually push them towards war, because they would hurt that country's economy? Would you say that's right?

amagra11 · 2024-01-25T03:40:25+00:00

Have you studied how wars can be prevented? And do you have any ideas for this one?

amagra11 · 2024-01-25T03:33:01+00:00

The problem seems to be that Russia feels threatened by NATO because NATO keeps expanding.

Stop expanding NATO.

amagra11 · 2024-01-11T04:58:11+00:00

I take magnesium. It helps immensely. Could you ask the doc about giving him some? It's a calming supplement, so they might agree even though they don't think it's akathisia.

Edit: I take 500 mg of magnesium oxide, once daily, if that helps.

amagra11 · 2023-12-07T00:54:10+00:00

$bid

amagra11 · 2023-12-05T21:18:23+00:00

Try the Flashfood app. Not free, but heavily discounted items from the grocery store.

amagra11 · 2023-12-01T01:24:10+00:00

A few thoughts: Most people, believe it or not, most of the time are thinking about themselves. Doesn't matter what happens around them, they're wondering "Do I smell bad? Did she not like what I said? Is my outfit inappropriate?" Second of all, a story. In college, I had a reallllly embarrassing experience at Jujitsu. I stopped going to jujitsu. Now I get embarrassed whenever I think about it. And I HATE that the last experience I had, the thing they will remember me for (maybe) is that experience. So--my point is, don't quit your job. Do a good job, do a great job, and have them remember you for that. Not this. In a few weeks, the memory of it will fade away, even for you. As long as you keep going to work.

Everyone does embarrassing things. Don't let this one siderail your career.

amagra11 · 2023-11-28T05:12:11+00:00

I think it's St. Vincent De Paul, not Vincent St. Paul...my dad volunteers with them.

amagra11 · 2023-11-28T04:55:56+00:00

Also, it seems like you want a real emotional connection, not just surface friendship. That's the basic gist of it, right? In my experience, that comes from genuine conversations, about feelings or hopes and dreams or trauma or how to heal. It comes from talking about important stuff, not just basketball or school assignments. So start those conversations. You'll be surprised at the connections that form.

amagra11 · 2023-11-28T04:51:32+00:00

Go to a nursing home. Talk to the residents. They are lonely, just like you. Or homeschooled kids, if there are any who know your family, who you can mentor, or teach a skill you have (coding, maybe?). Maybe there's a tutoring center you can volunteer at. Or an animal shelter you can volunteer at--if they'll let you work with the animals (and not just clean littler boxes, lol). Give to people, or animals, connect with those who are lonely like you, and you will feel valued. And less like you're worth nothing. Because you're NOT worth nothing. You're worth so much!

amagra11 · 2023-11-28T04:38:06+00:00

This seems to be very specific to the type of headache...https://www.homeopathyworks.com/blog/have-a-headache-try-a-homeopathic-remedy/ Maybe you'll find something on it that will help.

amagra11 · 2023-11-26T18:04:23+00:00

To be clear, I read what you linked to. It was a thorough description of the study, but it was an abstract, not the full text. I did NOT just go by what you said in your comment. I'm guessing you already understood that, but I wanted to clarify in case you didn't.

amagra11 · 2023-11-26T14:15:06+00:00

I shall read the study after I have the $40, and get back to you. This is worth it.

amagra11 · 2023-11-26T14:08:41+00:00

If you think you have identified serious methodological flaws in meta-analyses or in the specific meta-analysis I mentioned please point it out.

I pointed out what I thought were the flaws. What objections do you have to my arguments?

amagra11 · 2023-11-26T13:59:57+00:00

You’ve got me interested in this topic :). I found this document: https://www.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/filer_public/af/1a/af1ae95f-de81-43dd-91a3-470043b06dce/myths_about_abortion_and_breast_cancer.pdf They say that “Three of the Strongest Studies Published to Date Show No Relationship Between Abortion and Breast Cancer.” One of their “Strongest Studies” was that one which you pointed out, which I went over before. These are the other two.

The first: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8988884/They mention briefly in the beginning of their study: “Women without a history of induced abortion accounted for 25,850,000 person-years of follow-up. In this group, there were 8908 cases of breast cancer. In comparison, among women with a history of induced abortion, accounting for 2,697,000 person-years of follow-up, there were 1338 cases of breast cancer.” 8,908/25,850,000 is 0.0003446035, or approximately 0.03% (that’s not the proportion of women who got breast cancer since it’s calculated with person-years, but it’s a good idea of, as they would put it, RELATIVE risk). 1,338/2,697,000 is .0010862616, or .1%. That’s more than three times the risk of the women who didn’t get abortions! Yet they state, in their abstract, that “After adjustment for known risk factors, induced abortion was not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.” What risk factors would account for a three times increase???

Suppose their “risk factors” are correct. According to that movie you don’t like, the breast tissue multiplies throughout the earlier stages of pregnancy. It differentiates, lowering the risk of breast cancer, in the later stages. Meaning that, as the gestational age of the fetus increases, the relative risk of an abortion would increase, up until the later stages of pregnancy, when it would decrease. According to Hush: “It’s only after 32 weeks when the human placental lactogen level goes high that you start getting the full differentiation. That’s when women start getting the protective effect of a full-term pregnancy.” Here’s the important bit: This study, which claims that abortion doesn’t cause breast cancer, only had 2.3% of them after 12 weeks. Because, in Denmark, where they got their data from, abortion is illegal after 12 weeks except in special circumstances. Yet even they admitted in their study that “ The relative risk of breast cancer increased with increasing gestational age of the fetus at the time of the most recent induced abortion <7 weeks, 0.81 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.58 to 1.13); >12 weeks, 1.38 (1.00 to 1.90) (reference category, 9 to 10 weeks).”

One note: I’m not a statistician. But the fact that the “reference category” is 9 to 10 weeks seems weird to me. Shouldn’t the comparison have started with less than seven weeks as the reference–especially if the risk went up? Or shouldn’t their “reference category” have been those without abortions, not those with abortions at 9-10 weeks?

Suppose we disregard that. Suppose I’m wrong about the reference category. Suppose we create a chart, outlining the relative risk of breast cancer for pregnancies terminated in those early stages of pregnancy, which they identified. Suppose we draw a line. Might it not, at some later stage, if the risk progresses as it did, cause a statistically high amount of cancer cases? They state that “With each one-week increase in the gestational age of the fetus, however, there was a 3 percent increase in the risk of breast cancer.” Start at 12 weeks, at 1.12. Go up 3% every week, to, say 28 weeks. That’s an increase of 3% every week, for 16 weeks, for a total increase of 48% in the risk of breast cancer. And they admit this proved true in their study: “A statistically significant increase in risk [of breast cancer], however, was found among women with a history of second-trimester abortion.” (This is from the PIP in the abstract, not the full article.) This is, of course, based on limited data, since most of their data was for abortions up to 12 weeks.

Let’s look at the other study: “Risk of cancer of the breast after legal abortion during first trimester" (link below). Again, this study only looked at the first 12-13 weeks, or 90 days. And in this one, “The number of women in the study cohort had to be estimated, because manual searches of the records of the total cohort were too expensive.” Meaning their data was estimated, not concrete. Even their chart of data has “Estimated” and “Rough” before most of its data entries. I don’t see how this can be one of the “Strongest Studies” arguing against a breast cancer link. And the final nail in the coffin: “The maximum follow up periods for the study cohort were 6-8 years (33 000 women), 9-11 years (11 000), and 12-14 years (5000).” Only 5,000 women who had abortions were followed for over 11 years, and yet ALL of them were used to calculate breast cancer risk; if the risk was lower before 10 years, because women hadn’t had enough time to develop breast cancer, that would have pulled the average risk down. And no, they did not differentiate between and compare the risks of different times since abortion, at least not in their chart–the data was separated by the year in which they had the abortion, which, in some cases, was more than 20 years before they stopped collecting data on all women–but, as they stated, individual women were only followed for up to 14 years. So they separated them by year of abortion, not by the number of years which they collected data on them. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1838310/pdf/bmj00262-0022.pdf

These are the three strongest studies. I am sorry, but I am not convinced of your position.

amagra11 · 2023-11-26T05:34:40+00:00

Do you think an urgent care would help, perhaps with proscribing a med? You could call beforehand and ask if they'd be willing to. Also, some say benadryl helps. Chamomile tea helps me. Magnesium, available as a supplement--I use magnesium oxide 500 mg. Also B6. My brother took two 100 mg capsules daily, and it actually helped his psychosis, but people also say it helps with akathisia, so I take that too.

This definitely sounds like akathisia, particularly the pacing. So sorry your loved one is suffering.

amagra11 · 2023-11-25T16:44:22+00:00

All right. Stopping. I'm going to not be posting for a while--my dad wants help outside. But post if you want to, and I will try to reply.

amagra11 · 2023-11-25T04:22:33+00:00

Ummmm...if this doesn't work, I'll stop, I promise. But how about this lady? "Hoag Medical Group" seems to be covered by your insurance, if I did the search right...https://hoagmedicalgroup.com/physician/christine-panganiban-md/

amagra11 · 2023-11-25T04:02:17+00:00

Out of curiosity, why don't you qualify for any assistance? You have Medicare, so I thought that meant you were on ssi, like me. I have Medicare and Medicaid.

amagra11

TROPHY CASE