I'm very far from it but I saw many exchanges in my twitter timeline (because now when you click on a tweet to read it or interact, the algorithm thinks it's your only interest in life).
Do basically, they got 8 millions dollars of funding, they bragged and criticized others in linux and said some political stuff, they were also criticized by others including political stuff from the other side (not sure of the order). Finally it became viral enough for people looking at the security of the distro and found many issues.
Personally I like my Linux distro like my coffee: competently managed, with a minimum of drama and with having to hear the less assholes possible.
i doubt you have tried every distribution. at least you haven't tried the one i was part of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foresight_Linux a small, but independent distribution (not a spin-off of anything). i can assure you, it was drama and asshole free. (maybe it didn't live long enough to develop drama, that would be a fair counterpoint, but other than that, i reject your statement)
Yeah but it was also made to showcase GNOME, which was kind of its own huge drama at that time.
I mean I can't even believe you're seriously posting this. It was created intended to be a marketing tool and for something folks had long already made their decision either way about.
So yeah, I never used your extremely niche distribution and that's some sort of gotcha on my argument. Weirdly, I've used a ton of niche Linux distros even. Even was an early GoboLinux contributor.
If you're a niche distro you don't have the manpower to do anything more than already be downstream of larger communities with their own huge drama. That's kind of the point I'm making. You will not meaningfully find no-drama. This isn't even just a Linux or a FOSS thing -- it's group project dynamics. It's inevitable in any project not run by a benevolent dictator (and even then...).
yeah, but with that you are making the whole argument meaningless, because you are arguing that since you can't have life without drama, asking to minimize drama is useless. that's like saying that reducing pollution is useless because you can't eliminate pollution. yes, we can reduce pollution, and we can minimize drama. we can't entirely avoid it, but that was not being asked for.
But Omarchy has no internal drama. It's entirely external drama around how noninvolved parties feel about DHH. That's way different than internal drama or upstream drama affecting your project.
That's a reputation it had in the 90s to early 00s and has long since lost. Even in recent years the drama within Debian has been incredibly high.
A lot happened in debian-private, despite "We will not hide problems" being part of the project's social contract, and then leaks started happening and all hell broke loose. I didn't even mention the decade-long community censorship campaign yet. Or the Volunteer Day suicide. Or the "Please write a list of 5 Debian Developers you would like to kick out of the project." DPL election question. Or banning Linus from DebConf...
What collective human endeavour is devoid of politics?
Politics is how groups decide things, from what a code of conduct should be to where we should stop for coffee after lunch. It’s easy to not notice it, but we do politics dozens of times every day.
That OSS has become too entangled with political activism and ideological gatekeeping, when it should be about making great software, giving people control over their computers, and rediscovering the joy of computing.
I don't think Omarchy is anti-political so much as an attempt to revive the enthusiast/hacker ethos of the OSS community.
"Freedom to compute" cannot be separated from "Freedom to exist" as it explicitly depends on it. The authors of Omarchy pay lip service to the former while taking a stance against the latter.
Fully agreed. I have yet to encounter someone who is claiming something elss and is not privileged enough to just not need to worry about this. Ignorance doesn't reduce the political tech entanglement, it just... ignores it. Which is fine, do whatever. But don't claim it's not related.
No, it is definitely possible to make great software without inserting messaging on irrelevant issues into it. Whatever the quality of Omarchy, DHH is right about parts of the free software world becoming entangled worth various irrelevant causes.
This equivocation on the word "exist" doesn't work anymore. It's not 2018 anymore. Normal people with common sense understand that keeping politics separate from technology isn't the same thing as existential violence. Nobody, to "exist", needs to make software political.
I'm becoming really upset at people whom I otherwise align with for taking absolute statements that don't make sense.
DHH said some stuff you disagree with, incidentally while I have always identified with strong social systems, welfare, high taxes and things like free healthcare, I can't say I disagree with the core of what he tried to say, because there has been seizemic ethnic change within a single generation - and people not talking about it is actually fuelling the extreme position.
So when you say "has a right to exist", what do you mean exactly? Because if I was to stand in the lobby of a parliamentary building and was forcibly removed, would that mean I don't have the right to exist?
You have a right to exist, just not here, just like how White English people have no right to exist in India, and White Dutch people don't have a right to live in Zimbabwe.
Saying "Hey, this demographic and major cultural change in the last 20 years makes the environment different" is considered racism- which has the obvious consenquence of making the word "racist" have less power.. It's not racism to notice this, it's racist to think anyone else is lesser than natives or to group "them" and treat an ethnic group as a homogenous bloc.
I'm reminded of the phrase "if you don't respect me, I won't respect you" whereby respect can mean as an authority or as a person, and they mean "if you don't respect me as an authority, then I won't respect you as a person".
You're saying "if you don't let me do everything I want then you're denying that I have the right to exist at all" which is a type of hysteric language which permits any atrocity in response it can be framed as an act of self defence.
>Saying "Hey, this demographic and major cultural change in the last 20 years makes the environment different" is considered racism
perhaps if he said it like this, rather than comparing Roma to wolves that should be shot and comparing immigration as something to be survived like a bombing blitz, people wouldnt care as much
>it's racist to think anyone else is lesser than natives or to group "them" and treat an ethnic group as a homogenous bloc.
>there has been seizemic ethnic change within a single generation
There hasn't. Look at actual numbers, and what you see is the same hysteria that was directed against the Jews during the first half of the XXth century: foreign agents, traitors, parasites, nuisance... All for a tiny fraction of the population. All blown up by the same people who are the ones responsible for the misery of the majority of the population - yes, the "whites" are being screwed up by other "whites", not by the "brown" people.
>White English people have no right to exist in India, and White Dutch people don't have a right to live in Zimbabwe.
One: it was English people in Zimbabwe too, and two: they have the right to live there; the problem with them is that they took everything by force and decided the native people where subhuman. Pretending the situation is the same with brown-skinned low-wage immigrants coming in western countries is completely cuckoo crazy.
>it's racist to think anyone else is lesser than natives or to group "them" and treat an ethnic group as a homogenous bloc.
Which is exactly what DHH does. Thank you for agreeing that DHH is a racist.
This is why I don't like getting into online debates... most people seem wholly uninterested in the (seemingly to them) blasphemy that is "other perspectives that aren't mine." To me, continually stroking your confirmation bias just proves you're not really as smart as you think you are. And indeed I think the Dunning-Kruger effect still applies to "smart" people.
You don't stop when you are estimating your ability correctly; as you learn more, you gain more awareness of your ignorance and continue being conservative with your self-estimates.
What this behavior has led me to do is basically only challenge people who are actually asking a question, because then there's a chance they might be willing to entertain other perspectives than their own. But if I say something and get a matter-of-fact response by someone with an obvious god complex... it's like they're not interested in mutual understanding, they just want to "win" the argument by asserting things loud enough until they're believed.
But when I see people being straight up dogmatic and preaching walls of black-and-white opinions as if they're somehow infallible and that there can't be any other perspectives... I just see incompetence. But it is frustrating because you want to set the record straight, because you know others are going to believe the louder person... but there's really nothing you can do about it. One time someone tried to argue with me that "cloud storage does not exist." All I could do in that moment was just ignore them and move on.
"As a rule, strong feelings about issues do not emerge from deep understanding." -Sloman and Fernbach
I'm not seeing anywhere that he actually claims someone doesn't have a right to exist. I see lots of people using colorful, subjective interpretations of other things he said to try and push a narrative, but that's all.
He did. He claimed that the demographic has changed and he advocates for reverting this change. And it turns out that forcibly altering the demographic of an era is the literal definition of ethnic cleansing (and by the way the phrass has historicallt been coined with the specific meaning of removing Muslim people from Serbia, by the people who intended to perform that “cleansing”, so it's particularly apt here).
>> He did not call for forcibly altering the demographic.
> When wolves get out of control, you shoot them. When gypsies take over public spaces, you deport them.
And while I'm quoting:
MerriamWebster: Xenophobe
> one unduly fearful of what is foreign and especially of people of foreign origin
DHH:
> You can rest assured that I'd be in the streets waving a Danish flag if these were my conditions in my native country. I think that's a pretty universal sentiment. There's absolutely nothing racist or xenophobic in saying that Denmark is primarily a country for the Danes, Britain primarily a united kingdom for the Brits, and Japan primarily a set of islands for the Japanese.
I would say saying that is pretty much the definition of xenophobic.
Worse, in the context of DHHs rants, it comes off as racist - I don't get the sense he wants to throw out Norwegians from Denmark, for example.
Although shurly there are Norwegian migrants and foreign workers in Denmark.
> Supporting indigenous people and their rights to their native homelands is not xenophobic.
Xenophobia leads to the belief that white Danes need support for their rights to their native homeland.
It's not like this is some great battle to rise restitution for Native Americans, Maori or Aborigines.
It's about not having to see so many non-white faces in Copenhagen or London.
> Enforcing immigration laws is not ethnic cleansing.
That certainly depends on the law, and the enforcement.
More to the point: trampling nomadic sub- cultures, forcefully denying them access where they have lived for centuries, denying them their way of life - can certainly result in genocide ("the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group").
> Worse, in the context of DHHs rants, it comes off as racist - I don't get the sense he wants to throw out Norwegians from Denmark, for example.
I think "primarily" is doing some lifting in "Denmark is primarily a country for the Danes", along with his vagueness about what it means to be of "the Japanese" (Yamato/Zainichi/Ainu/Ryukyuan/Bonin) or "the Brits" (English/Scots/Welsh/Cornish/Irish/Manx/Jamaican/...).
DHH has the capacity to assess that going full on white supremacist is still relatively frowned upon, so he does only as much as he thinks he can get away with.
Sponsoring his badly made OSS and giving him any type of a limelight will only embolden him and the likes of him. I personally want nothing to do with him and anything he touches.
Take one glance at history, and you'll see that having a sovereign ethnic homeland is crucial to that "freedom to exist". So you're wrong on both counts - they are also taking a stance for the latter, and the two freedoms can be separated. Distributing FOSS does not require one takes a stance on every ethnic and political conflict on Earth. The GNU manifesto never once talks about the occupation of Tibet. This "cannot be separated" is nothing but a cheap attempt to attach your own cause to some other, more widely accepted cause.
FOSS never was about the right of the distributor. It’s been always about protecting the user. The way to do it is to give the users a set of rights that cannot be revoked.
Maybe DHH should live by his own ethos and "shut up and program" rather than continually making divisive political statements that alienate people who might otherwise use and contribute to his distro.
I don’t think he’ll refrain from using the political power he amassed by building a very popular web framework. We gave him a megaphone and a soapbox, and he’ll use it.
> That OSS has become too entangled with political activism
Wait is that really the spin that DHH is pushing? That'd be insane given he's among the most politically active open sources developers put there by a wiiide margin.
The fact that this is up for debate already says all. For anyone passing through, read the blog posts and his social media feeds, make up your own mind.
Just to explain because not everyone is necessarily a native English speaker or gets the reference.
This is a reference to a dog whistle. Above 25kHz are sounds that dogs can hear but humans generally can't.
The term dog whistle is used to refer to phrases that racists use to indicate their racism, while sounding plausibly deniable. The idea is that it's a phrase that will make other racists realize that you are one of them, while not sounding openly racist to others.
DHH himself has gone beyond dog whistles. He's directly compared what he considers undesirable ehtnic populations to wolves who need to be shot. He's just openly calling for ethnic cleansing by now.
But support for Omarchy itself can be seen as a dog whistle. It's widely known that DHH is a fascist, but you have some plausible deniability by donating to Omarchy because you're just politically neutral and think it's cool tech, or something like that.
> DHH himself has gone beyond dog whistles. He's directly compared what he considers undesirable ehtnic populations to wolves who need to be shot. He's just openly calling for ethnic cleansing by now.
Let me prefix this with that DHH's opinions suck, not sure what he's going through but clearly something, and that blog post you're referencing is terrible in lots of ways. But he's not openly calling for ethnic cleansing, you're doing speaking against him a disservice by not providing an accurate view of what shit thing he said. It's still terrible, the verbatim quotes (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49448148), but deporting isn't the same as "ethnic cleansing". Even people we disagree with vehemently should be disagreed with honestly.
Then that blog post is just one of many where he've essentially gone of the rails in terms of hardline authoritarianism and fascist ideas, which makes it kind of weird he's getting the financial support he's getting. But then some just don't care about what viewpoints others have, I suppose that's a valid stance too even if I disagree with it.
> but deporting isn't the same as "ethnic cleansing".
I’m sorry, but forcibly deporting people because of their ethnic background is the very definition of ethnic cleansing.
In general, if people use violence on the population as a way to either kill or forcibly expel them, there would be a strong case to call it a genocide.
> forcibly deporting people because of their ethnic background is the very definition of ethnic cleansing
I agree, but I think if this is what you think he's arguing for, you either need to re-read the blog post, or you're not discussing that post honestly, which again does us all a disservice, regardless of how much we disagree with him or not.
He uses a word that is a slur for the Romani, an ethnic minority in many European countries. He never discusses nationality.
He also compares deporting them (to where, you might ask) to shooting wolves.
It's also not his only post on the topic. He has previous ones where he complains of how horrible London is because white British people no longer constitute a majority. He calls for not just ends to immigration and closing borders, but "remigration".
It is very clear from these posts that he strongly believes that non white ethnic groups should be removed from European countries.
If that's not ethnic cleansing, I don't know what is.
I'm not just trying to score points about whether he sucks, but specifically point out the types of policies that he advocates for, and there are a number of people in this thread trying to claim somehow that he doesn't advocate for policies that he clearly has been.
So I'm curious, what makes you think that what he calls for isn't ethnic cleansing?
From Wikipedia (and please, fill me in if you have a better definition):
"Ethnic cleansing is the systematic forced removal of ethnic, racial, or religious groups from a given area, with the intent of making the society ethnically homogeneous."
From DHH:
Calling for the deportation (forced removal) of a specific ethnic group (also note the violent analogy to wolves): "When wolves get out of control, you shoot them. When gypsies take over public spaces, you deport them."
Calling for the forced removal of millions of people of various ethnic groups he considers undesirable from Europe: "Because the sacred cow here is not just that mass migration must stop going forward. It's also that millions who are already in Europe must go. Remigration has gone from a fringe concept to the mainstream discourse in record time on account of that realization. The Overton window is swinging wide open, but the cow is still there."
Talking about how much he wanted to move to London but that he no longer has that desire due to its ethnic diversity: "As soon as I was old enough to travel on my own, London was where I wanted to go.... That was then. Now, I wouldn't dream of it. London is no longer the city I was infatuated with in the late '90s and early 2000s. Chiefly because it's no longer full of native Brits. In 2000, more than sixty percent of the city were native Brits. By 2024, that had dropped to about a third. A statistic as evident as day when you walk the streets of London now.... Recently, a projection that Danes would be a minority in their own country by 2096 caused an enormous stir in Denmark. Politicians across the spectrum decried what a catastrophe that would be for this world's oldest continuous monarchy. But a demographic nightmare worse than that has already enveloped London!"
As you can see, DHH is explicitly calling for the force removal (deportation and "remigration") of ethnic groups, because he is afraid of the results of the population becoming less ethnically homogeneous. I don't know how you could argue that what he's calling for is anything other than ethnic cleansing.
Also, note that none of this is due to any actualy on the ground experience; he lives in LA, he's lived in the US for over 20 years. This is purely an exercise in ideology. In fact, LA has a smaller percentage of the population that is white Anglo-American than London does of white British people.
Anyhow: I have laid out in detail the arugment for calling what he calls for "ethnic cleansing". Do you have any argument that it isn't ethnic cleansing that he's calling for? It seems pretty clear to me, so I'm confused why you have kept on insisting "if this is what you think he's arguing for, you either need to re-read the blog post", because I've read all three of these posts of his and more, and it all points towards him advocating for ethnic cleansing.
Something like "mass expulsion and killing of one ethnic or religious group in an area by another ethnic or religious group in that area" I suppose, but also, I really don't have any energy left to discuss something I don't care about. I don't like that guy, I don't like his views, and I don't want to argue against others who also don't like him.
Hope your text helped someone, enjoy the rest of your day!
Of course it differs by the individual. I think there are three camps: Those who have read DHH's blog posts, and agree with them. Those who have read DHH's blog posts, but think "he couldn't possibly mean that". Those who haven't read DHH's blog posts, but know that he's on "their side" (right-leaning).
What about the people who have no idea who DHH is, what he stands for, and have heard about Omarchy for the first time just now and are trying to figure out what it even is and suddenly people are talking in circles about him being eccentric or problematic.
I switched to Omarchy 4.0 from CachyOS and is having an amazing experience so far, barely know anything about DHH other than that he made Rails, and now everybody is calling me a racist sympathizer.
What about "ignoring him, not knowing him, just using his product" is defending? Are you using Nestle products? Ah you do? You must be all for stealing people's water well and selling them bottled water from it.
Omarchy is just a pile of settings and a branding, you could have configured Cachy similarly and wouldn't have to associate yourself with the racists. Be careful of the company you keep.
Yes, if you're jumping on some hypetrain OSS distro built around a cult of personality and it has very few merits otherwise and that project's creator has racist views, absolutely yes. People's distro alignments are a little bit different than some small utilities or OSS libraries, nobody writes jokes like "how do you know someone uses libxml? They'll tell you" like they do for Gentoo, Arch, etc.
But keep defending it, we can see what you're ok associating with.
Come on, this is so dishonest, his personality has basically nothing to do with Omarchys popularity, and it has loads of merit. It's way more pleasant to use than all other distros I've tried.
To claim that it is super simple for everyone to transform Arch into Omarchy clones without reading the Omarchy repos and that everyone should just do that instead because of politics is beyond absurd.
His personality actually has everything to do with Omarchy’s popularity, because he gets funding based off of it.
Omarchy is a set of dotfiles. That’s it. We all know the only reason you, and everyone else, even knows about it is because DHH is behind it.
There’s, like, a million dot file repos on GitHub. Most probably higher quality than Omarchy. But somehow, Omarchy is popular. The actually dishonest view is to somehow think that DHH being DHH has nothing to do with Omarchy’s popularity.
Barely. Setting up a repo is next to nothing, and I would hardly call what they have "applications".
Omarchy is not an impressive, innovative, or exciting distro. Manjaro did what Omarchy did a decade ago, and better. Providing an out-of-the-box tolerable Arch Linux experience is very par for the course.
This is, at best, a weekend project. Not to mention I can find much more impressive, cohesive, and easier-to-use dotfile repos on GitHub.
I think the only people who think Omarchy is, well, anything, are either new to Linux or just like DHH. Which is fine. But if you're new to Linux, please, browse around. Arch Linux is really not the most cohesive and easy-to-use distro you can find.
You seem to be talking about users. They're talking about creators.
I don't think users know who DHH is, or care who DHH is. Probably like 0.01% of users have read a blog post, let alone a political one. (Maybe they all are, I haven't read any)
Disagree there; anyone who installs Omarchy does it because a social media creator they like suggested it, and there’s only a few degrees of separation between those creators. This isn’t like Slackware’s popularity in the 90s, peer to peer, this all top-down. I’d call it hype-driven, if they didnt have a neat product (which I’m not a customer of).
Also have to disagree with you there... there are other ways to find out about distros besides social media or people suggesting it. Back in the day, one of the only ways people even found out about new distros was through sites like Distrowatch who just reported on the facts of the distros and never tried to market them to people.
Ugh, gosh really? I looked at one of the videos of the... eh excentric developer of the distro where he was presenting 4.0 and I was wondering about that retro neon design of background images he seemed to adore so much. I was wondering why someone would still think this Fashwave design to be cool. It's been what? 10 years when this trope peaked?
Noticing that the waist circumference on average went down on the peppermint group (85.17 -> 84.61) while the placebo group it went up (88.33 -> 88.65)? Also the resting heart rate dropped for the peppermint group. My initial suspicion is that the peppermint group coincidentally was also the 'got in better shape' group. Maybe the peppermint helped, but for relatively small groups that also seem to be improving waist circumference and heart rates likely due to good diet and exercise, I'm not convinced the peppermint did jack shit. More investigation needed! Would be awesome if it helped though!
There has been some research on spearmint suggesting anti-androgen effects in PCOS, which is a bit unexpected to me as I wouldn't expect mint-family herbs to have much hormone modulating effect at all. I would imagine there to be similarities in profile between spearmint and peppermint so perhaps a related mechanism is involved, although I would probably expect the opposite outcome as a naive layperson. But I haven't closely evaluated the paper nor do I know whether there's been much else suggesting this
It is important to remember that herbs are difficult to study in this setting compared with isolated compounds -- likely because their pharmacological and chemical compositions are sensitive to many factors: hour and season of harvest, form consumed (raw powder, alcohol extract, cold water infusion, fat emulsion, hot water infusion, combustion, pyrolysis, essential oil), part consumed (leaf, root, flower, seed), among staggeringly many others. Anyone with experience consuming cannabis or coffee can probably testify to the above
Not to mention that the pharmacologically active compounds in many plants are far from being comprehensively understood, let alone their interactions and dynamics
This isn't to say that every claim about herbs is to be taken seriously. My point here is more that there is no good reason to dismiss the herb itself as a cause yet simply because it's an herb and a fairly mundane one at that. There are easy examples of herbs which have pronounced physiological effects, used for recreation, performance enhancement, as literal poison, to induce labor, to thin the blood -- among others.
So spearmint is not peppermint. Peppermint (mentha pipereta in this study) inhibits CYP3A4 and CYP1A2. CYP1A2 is in the liver and if that is inhibited then estrogen will route down the CYP1B1 path so the ratio of the two metabolites 2-OHE1 v.s 4-OHE1 would be altered. For the PCOS (renamed to PMOS btw) if they start with elevated 2-OHE1 after the peppermint this could result in improve estrogen signaling because the now raised 4-OHE1 has much higher affinity than the 2-OHE1 for ESR1 (Era). ESR1 in particular is known for lowering blood pressure.
This particular path isn't that crazy, but it would only be for a subset of folk. From the study there is something simpler: menthol acts as a natural calcium-channel blocker, triggering vasodilation to reduce blood pressure.
There is something to aromatherapy. Essential oils are full of molecules that look like drugs and bind to GPCR receptors in the nose that head to the brain and have all sorts of effects, even if these molecules don't transport well in the body or cross the blood-brain barrier.
Peppermint as a scent is usually thought of as stimulating, raising heart rate and blood pressure. The lore, with some research supporting it, is that other oils that are more sedating can bring down blood pressure if you use them, say, in a diffuser.
I find the sensuality of Ylang Ylang to be distracting so I mixed in Lavender and got this wonderful floral smell that filled my office but an hour later I notice the sedation and I am nodding off and can't concentrate on work at all. It was like the scene in the Wizard of Oz where the Wicked Witch of the West put (most of) the protagonists to sleep with a field of scarlet poppies.
I thought I wrote this are first! This is how I think through things as well with Nutritional Genomics. However, the pathway is probably not the cause for the lower blood pressure. The tea is very high in Epicatechin gallate which is most likely reason for the lower blood pressure.
"Menthol's [agonism of] the cold-sensitive Transient Receptor Potential cation channel subfamily M (melastatin) member 8 or TRPM8 receptors is responsible for the well-known cooling sensation it provokes.
Menthol's analgesic properties are mediated through a selective activation of κ-opioid receptors. Menthol blocks calcium channels and voltage-sensitive sodium channels, reducing neural activity that may stimulate muscles.
Some studies show that menthol acts as a GABAᴀ receptor positive allosteric modulator and increases GABAergic transmission in PAG neurons."
…and! Check this out:
"Menthol has anesthetic properties similar to though less potent than propofol, interacting with the same sites on the GABAᴀ receptor."
Propofol. PROPOFOL. The -ol in propofol is the -ol in menthol, haha.
"Menthol may also enhance the activity of glycine receptors and negatively modulate 5-HT3 receptors and nAChRs."
Aaaaand:
"Menthol also lowers blood pressure and antagonizes vasoconstriction through TRPM8 activation."
Peppermint is even more wild becasue while Menthol is a TRPM8 agonist (cold sensation), ECGC, also very high in peppermint, is a TRPV1 agonist (warm sensation), which has the opposite effect of TRPM8.
The EGCG is probably what is reducing the blood pressure.
Transient receptor potential vanilloid type 1 is vital for (−)-epigallocatechin-3-gallate mediated activation of endothelial nitric oxide synthase
Anything with EGCG in it causes me extreme bladder pain, even peppermint tea. While taking tons of Ricola cough drops (high in mentol) once when I had covid I found my bladder pain vanished. I then learned how the TRPV1 receptor is involved in my bladder pain.
I'm familiar with drug interaction monographs and enjoy reading them. And I am somewhat comfortable with the organ/body functional pathways (I think that's what it's called) -- where can someone view/look at different pathways of the body as a resource?
>I wouldn't expect mint-family herbs to have much hormone modulating effect at all
Mints are closely related to pennyroyal (Mentha pulegium), which was traditionally (and dangerously because of toxicity) used as an abortifacient. Its mechanism of action is still unknown, so hormone modulating effects seem plausible to me.
By "mints" I meant the family lamiaceae, so pretty broadly which contains sages, rosemaries, basils, teak, verbena, and in hindsight of course contains examples like this which straddle medicine (depending on dosage and circumstances -- I'm not advocating it be used as such) and poison. Even if just restricting to the genus mentha apparently. Anyway good call
Peppermint is now familiar to most people as the ubiquitous taste of toothpaste, even moreso than candy, food, or drink.
If we cue university student volunteers on Toothpaste -> Selfcare -> Weightloss I wonder what happens.
I also wonder what placebo was used, and to what effect. The typical flavoring agent to make something peppermint-flavored is peppermint essential oil (or cornmint, spearmint, etc), and I don't know how you'd make it convincing without also including a bunch of hypothetically active compounds. The paper lists Schweppes Peppermint Cordial, without mint on the ingredients label. "Peppermint cordial" used as flavoring was historically 10% peppermint oil, and today the Schweppes product they cite just lists "flavourings" as ingredient.
Alcoholic beverages are not required to list their flavoring ingredients, so "without mint on the ingredients label" says literally nothing.
Because the FDA regulates beverages separately from food (or at least alcoholic ones - not sure where the dividing line lies), you can sell booze flavored with things that you cannot put in snacks.
Lead and live tapeworm eggs are still out, though - for now.
But weight/mass didn't change one bit (okay exaggeration, but not by much), so maybe peppermint helps relieve gas. Who knows? There's a lot that this data could mean, and no simple way to figure it out.
i actually had heard it helps w/ bloating/stomach issues online and took for a while and def noticed a debloating effect and less gas... obviously 1 anecdote, but I'd assume any slight waistline reduction is due to that. Also sidenote: pooping often made it feel like I put a breathmint... up... "there" lol
Not surprising, it’s what happens to capsaicin too. Something has to happen to the molecules/compounds you consume. Either your body discards them, stores them, or transforms them.
The fascinating part is that your anal tissue has that level of sensitivity and insight.
I thought on similar lines. Because I use it often for ibs i noticeably feel much better and I suspect the bp and heart rate reduction could be due to reduced gi effect on body
In my culture, that's the goto herbal drink for when you have a stomach ache due to indigestion or gas by the way. I don't know how or why they work but some of these things do work. The footnote here is that it is for pain/discomfort that would also go away by itself if untreated. It just speeds up the process and provides some comfort. For different kinds of pain/discomfort, a doctor needs to be consulted of course.
Mint stimulates release of bile, which can help digestion, especially of fats. I have gallstones and unfortunately recently learned first hand how powerful the effect is after eating a couple of leaves (two kinds, but I forget which) from a neighbor's garden.
Peppermint oil has traditionally been used in India for digestion, so you may be on to something. I remember this particular brand growing up: https://www.amazon.com/clp/B001NQ7S9G (no relation).
Nothing but blood pressure and heart rate was significant, and heart rate only barely so. I wouldn't read anything into the other numbers. It was a 20 day study, you aren't going to get long term outcomes from that.
Yes, and looking at dietary data, the study says that there is no difference in their diets, but carbohydrate intake drop from 217g to 171g. I don’t see how that’s insignificant.
I'd think weight could be causal for hypertension result or sentiment over health measurement could have been causal for weight or the study could just be too small.
When you say weight, do you really mean obesity? And if you are talking about weight, is it likely that people who live in low gravity environments will have fewer hypertension problems?
I'm wondering if caffeine was accounted for in this. One thing I seem to recall is peppermint tea has some inhibition of CYP1A2. I notice it's missing from the wikipedia page now, so maybe this was a flawed study or something... figured I'd mention in case anyone else knows.
Wild-ass guess: maybe the aftertaste of peppermint oil twice daily leaves people who are already unhealthy wanting to snack less, leading to minor weight loss.
Of course, you would have to do a real study to see side effects versus current blood pressure medication, but if there is no real harm in peppermint, the 6% drop over an adult lifetime might make a large difference in vascular health.
They're the company that builds laptops people still use 5-10 years later. If anything they've set the standard for long lifespans when it comes to tech devices.
N=2. My Inspiron 9300 Dell laptop from 2005 still works fine, although 32bit Windows 7 with 2GB of ram without an SSD makes it painfully slow by today's standards. In addition, I got a Lenovo Z710 from 2014 (replace my 9300) that still performs great, recently put Linux Mint on it and it feels like a new laptop.
I say that to say this isn't exclusive to Apple and I think your sentiment is mostly good marketing by them. No Apple hate here, enjoying my company-supplied MBP too.
They also glued the short ribbon cable for the screen to the front of the iPod classic so that when the spinning HDD failed if you tried to open it and weren't very careful/aware of this it would rip off the motherboard.
There was a class action because they deliberately slowed down iPhones claiming it was for battery health (anecdotally, when I had iPhones I noticed they were always a a pain to use for a month before and after the new releases, but it could be in my head).
They solder in RAM so it's difficult or impossible to upgrade.
I have an M1 MBP and the battery life is half of what it used to be. However I also have Applecare so of course the battery health is stuck at 84% (fairly sure, but not totally sure, that it was at 82% a few months ago) because they won't replace the battery unless it's under 80%. A lot of people report the battery health getting stuck just above 80% if they have Applecare.
Their hardware is great, I agree with you, but let's not pretend they don't play that game.
Well you can still run Windows 11 rev 25H2 on a Intel/AMD 2016 hardware through easily forced upgrade or install (nocpu/notpm), did it this afternoon on an entry level Lenovo laptop i5-6200u based, while you can only upgrade up to MacOS Monterey (12.x) on a late 2016 macbook pro. So rather ~5 years than 10.
But thoses past "performances" might not reflect futures ones, yep.
Not to turn this into a Web fight or anything, but come on... Even my t420S from 2011 could be upgraded with ssd and more ram and is still used :). My daily driver is t480, 8 years old, my wive's x1 carbon 7 years old, with no intention of retiring either anytime soon.
The notion of Apple, of all companies, "setting standard for long span devices", is laughable to me as I look at my ipads no longer running old software I paid for and getting slower with every forced update.
Apple makes sexy devices that match many people's requirements. Good on them! But this continued notion they invented everything is grating.
Writing this on a 2010 pc bought cheap in 2012. Upgraded ram, ssd added, windows 7 to windows 10 with extended updates. Yes it's time to replace but they do last.
There's many stations that still do it just like the good old days. KEXP in Seattle is on my dial most of the time. I text the DJs most days to say thanks for the great show!
Is it just me or does all that* seem pretty tame by today’s standards? Not saying it’s right, but it barely raises eyebrows. Sounds like a pretty typical startup demo.
* Based on the first comment in the link that claims to summarize the video.
