michalu

about 150g

0.82g/lb is a lot of protein. That's basically what what bro science was saying for years (2g per kg) and it's not easy to hit if you count quality protein that's bioavailable so I don't know what the point is here.

For averge Joe to hit 0.82g/lb he would need to eat 600g of lean beef every day. Or 33 eggs.

... also Menno Henselmans while he does a lot of great work that outweights everything he posts tons pseudo-scientific where's often clear he just did a basic Google Scholar search. Plus he seems too eaeger to "debunk" but often barely even understands deficiencies of many of the studies he references. A lot of people take his website for some holy grail of "scientific bodybuilding" because he's trying too hard to market it that way and he's been wrong many times and built arguments on foundations he barely understands.

Examine.com for example has different figures and it's a website where studies are reviewed by actual PHDs and graded by their strength not just simple Google Scholar search.

https://examine.com/guides/protein-intake/

Writers are not "fleeing Substack" that's just legacy media trying to insinuate ways to hurt Substack's revenue by creating a false perception of "hm maybe I should consider switching" in classic divide and conquer.

A quick google search "substack site:theverge.com" will reveal that theverge hasn't written a single positive article about substack. Most posts are implying you should avoid substack.

The whole article is based on "this one guy switched to ghost" type of evidence ... no data, no stats.

Very typical arrogance of the so-called modern "artist" mind - "it was an adventure for me", getting an assignment to complement a great work of art and making it about herself.

The problem with these modern artists is they're not working hard to improve a skill, but rather keep doing more of what comes easy hoping the world maybe recognizes their "natural genius" ... as a result they go hard on pushing that one thing unique to them (whatever it is, scriblles, splashes, infantile characters) ...

And yeah let's not forget the "you just don't understand modern art" shaming.

I'm surprised such news and we have to read it from "dropsitenews.com"

I know so many "artists" in Paris, London, Barcelona and Berlin and I can't name a single one who deserves this. In my opinion any other demographic is more deserving. But as long as we're going to pretend anyone who says they do art is an artist or "you just a lowly pleb who doesn't understand art" we're going to have to play this game and pay for it.

Open Source Seeds.

You buy fashion item precisely for what it is - a fashion item. To look good, to have a nice style - to make a better social impression when you go out, to social events, business meetings, etc. This is a reality of life, clothes make a human and watch is pretty much only jewel you can wear as aman that doesn't make you look like a teenager. Obviously depends on where you hang out, how old are you and what are your priorities but this is a reality of life in some places.

Now if I have to choose a watch and I can make a choice between a losing item and likely winning item I'll take the likely wionning one. Perhaps it's like crypto or mutual funds but I'd rather buy crypto than flush money down the toilet.

So no you don't buy a watch for investment, there are better investments. No you don't buy it a fashion item to get time - I already have precise time on my phone. Not into wathches - all good. You don't like to dress nice, perhaps you live in a big city where nobody cares - no problem.

But let's not argue I'm not wise for not buying "precise time" Casio over Rolex because I have 8k on my wrist I paid 4.5k for and I've been wearing beautiful watch for 7 years now :) And yes there are better investments and million better things to buy - I could drive $2k car, I could make best investments and so on and end up like this guy: https://www.reddit.com/r/Frugal/comments/10ec45k/i_think_i_r...

It's all simply a point of view + making the best out of your money. At the end of the day it's just paper.

You really believe anyone buys rolex to keep a good time? This argument I hear over and over. Buy $20 Casio sell it wear cheap watch, sell for $2 5 years later. If you bought datejust rolex for 4.5k in 2018 you'd sell it for 8k today minimum.

You made money and you've been wearing rolex all the time.

Being paid €500 per year for wearing rolex vs. speding money for wearing casio easy choice if you can afford it ... btw. I do wear casio too and I love it - because yeah to keep time you buy casio.

This looks like every other metro station in Paris.

is it really that hard to put "diet soda age demographics europe" into google these are consumer data not some studies from MIT published in paid journals.

DIY at least you'll know I'm not referencing selectively.

yeah age smoking drinking income what a complete picture

I read the paper. Have you ever done a study like that? How would you feel if after 14 years it found no surprising result that would warrant some media attention? You adjust then you adjust, Spearman let's try Pearson instead etc.

Actually show me a 10+ year study that found no surprising result.

If the fact that bunch of foundational Alzheimer's studies were found to be faked recently by a guy who profited from them for 20 years and many such cases doesn't make you more realistic then well ... you must have an exceptionally good heart :)

It's a common thing but not 40-60 age group. The demographics of diet soda consumers in Europe is 25-44. The old guys drink it because they have to.

Typical bogus study. This shows exactly what's the problem with most of these studies.

So if you look at the participants in the study, it's 40,000 people between 40 to 60.

The only thing we know about them is some of them drink some artificially sweetened drinks. We don't know anything else about their diet or their lifestyle age 20-40.

So first, people who don't have a problem with sugar or their health, they don't drink artificially sweetened drinks.

People who are 40 years old and they drink diet soda, a great deal of them, not all, do it because they already have a problem.

Nobody drinks artificially sweetened soda unless they have a problem because it just tastes bad. A healthy person would just pick soda sweetened by sugar.

And health councious people don't even drink soda because they've never built an addiction to that type of drink in first place - mind that this study is not in the US.

So the fact that this group is more likely to end up with diabetes, there might be a million factors that lead to that result.

Maybe because drinking diet soda already makes a chunk of them preselected to be more likely to develop some kind of metabolic disease.

Again, I don't generalize this study returns some kibd of arithmetic average. You only need 10% of participants to be off limits and you get very different result vs. general population. Because if you look at diabetes 2 rates, out of 40k people maybe 4k max gets it (edit. 1.7k in the study) that's a sample that can show wild variation.

Edit. people seem to have problem with the verbiage. "Nobody drinks artific..." ok that's a way to make a point what I wanted to say "you're more likely to pick diet soda if you already habe a problem" especially for 40-60 demographic who probably includes 100% of people ordered to drink diet soda by their doctor. Also yes people drink soda outside the US. But not people 40-60 where a chunk of them comes from generation that weren't subject to heavy advertising by american sugar soda companies. This is Europe New Zeland and just do a wuick search on the demographics of diet soda consumers in the Europe - it's 25-44 age group.

The hypocrisy :)

Solomon Friedman, a partner at Ethical Capital Partners, which owns Aylo, told reporters on Tuesday that the French law was “dangerous”, “potentially privacy infringing” and “ineffective”.

It's not about my profit, it's about "your rights" which somewhat equals to unrestricted access for children :)

No matter the already existing surveillance laws in the EU ...

Lived there for a while. Inside those buildings. It's one ugly place that hurts an eye and the skyline of beautiful city of London. Those photos do it a great favor. But it has its charm if you're into that sort of thing.

There used to be an iconic club Fabric it was called. Nearby Farringdon is my favourite place in London. Most underrated area.

For B2B I manually research ideal customers and manually reach out via cold email. I'd send a few hundred. If you don't get any buys from 200 emails sent to your target market you probably don't have a business.

Once I validate and start getting traction only then I start automating cold email, ads etc. Do not validate with automated cold email agency. You can't automate something well what aren't doing with success already manually. Nothing beats manually researching your prospects and writing up personalized email - only when you understand this process and you know how, where and when to find your ICP and what to look for and what to tell them only then you can automate this process.

You want to automate processes that work already. Not the other way around.

Built a few businesses with this approach and still works today in 2025.

That's better than all SEO tools and probably most analytics imo (only measured SEO tools myself) ... the value in tracking is mainly in spotting trends.

If you want to solve a serious generational problem you should look into dry eye syndrome.

There you go, you just called it "hypothesis" which is what it is.

Hello fellow scientism fan. Happy to meet a person who is surely using the word "asinine" in every day conversations. I wonder how many of the "many steps" were imaginations turned "evidence" such as this one. I would go ahead and examine like I did in the past but I'm saving it for a rainy day, when I'm in the need of good entertainment.

For a test to be effective it doesn't have to be 100% effective every time. Just because it doesn't filter out rare individuums like yourself it doesn't mean it doesn't filter out 90% of them. If someone asks a question it's not unwise to assume they'll have a comment on that.

OK seems like things changed a bit. Back in the day AE was someone who would work in lower level, less aggressive sales (fewer deals, bigger size) doing a mix of business dev and customer support - or it would be companies trying to add "manager" to the job title back when word manager carried some weight. Been talking from my own experience from basically 15-18 years ago from London and Europe.

There's telesales and telemarketing. In sales you close deals which requires skills. There's very few actual sales people in the market today, most just end up in this role because they can't get another job and then simply do manual marketing (adding people on linkedin, sending out cold emails, talking to non decision makers). Some are lucky to work in a company with great product and even there I see them slow down momentum. In fact I've seen a few startups miss their chance because they hired fake sales people early on.

This is not the actual sales script. It's a script for the so-called canvassing call. Or so it was called back when I worked in boiler rooms cca. 2007. You hire a bunch of losers pay them no wage and all they do is telemarketing "can I call you with an opportunity?" i.e. you simply pre-qualify people for the real call. You show off some fake credibility, present yourself like a real business and says stuff like 'we only send couple of trade recommendations a year'. Then a week later the real sales guy give the prospect a hyped up call about this once in a lifetime opportunity.

Most people, about 95% making these first calls never make it higher. Either they quickly gather this job is a BS scam or they're too stupid to realize that and that stupidity often prevents them from going higher up. A few cynical ones like the manipulative aspects of it.

The job of a firm is to create illusion of excessive wealth and rockstar lifestyle of these "brokers" (strippers, cocaine, etc.) to attract some kind of talent. Most of the directors are faking the size of their wealth. E.g. coming to job on rented Bentley. They also lie about the nature of the job to hire people for "canvassing" as it doesn't matter how long you stay, if you only deliver 20 leads per first day and quit that's still a win. A bulk of the leads come from people who were tricked into the job and quit asap.

Most people who make it through are the ones cynical enough to stay around, then they harvest work of the ones who quit earlier. E.g. you collect leads, small clients etc. I have a friend who made it far, his lifestyle was just like Wolf of Wallstreet but more excessive. That movie btw. it's watered down - which is hard to believe for most as you'd expect Hollywood to overblow things.

Thank you for this.

> You are not a big fan of the EU after this? Downloading apps from internet is a very cheap price for becoming a "big fan of EU" :D

Beowulf is not among "foundations of Western Civilization" that's a wild statement.

I regret posting it.