Propel and Zero (the first options) both contain sucralose, aka Splenda - I'd prefer to just drink salt water personally, or take the hit on a tablespoon of sugar mixed in and walk it off.
I maje my own electrolyte drink with water, spoonful of sugar and spoonful of "low sodium" salt: they add potassium to those, which completes the electrolyte menu.
Sometimes I add a dash of lime
Veeeey low cost and great. And you can pre-mix it in a zip lock bag to have it always available. And add some orange flavour kool-aid powder if you need flavour.
Commercial Rehydration drinks are overpriced and overhyped IMHO
The majority of Americans are overweight, as far as the science shows artificial sweeteners are the best choice for them vs full calorie.
If you look up the evidence for the downsides of artificial sweeteners anything that finds one is generally an observational study. So for example, the claim that they cause obesity is backed by the observation that obese people consume it in greater amounts than people who are not obese. That's like standing in front of a hospital and noticing everyone with a broken leg is on crutches and coming to the conclusion that crutches are the problem. Double blinded, placebo controlled studies don't find this effect. The best evidence we have indicates they are safer than the obesity that full calorie sweeteners cause in most people.
> The majority of Americans are overweight, as far as the science shows artificial sweeteners are the best choice for them vs full calorie.
This is a false choice and has nothing to do with the above commenter's preferences.
Many people just desperately long for convenient foods/drinks that aren't so sweet in the first place and feel frustrated that the largest brands don't want to bother with them.
Yeah, although worth noting that glucose is useful to promote absorption of the electrolytes, you may not need it in a sports drink but it's an integral part of the diarrhea med.
I'm in the same situation. She refuses any treatment.
I learned too late that mental illness may be a reason but it's never an excuse for behavior.
Make sure you keep your cup (and your childrens if applicable) full before you do anything to fill hers. Otherwise you will wake up one day miserable, fat and poor.
I am so sorry. I see you. My wife is bipolar, HSP, ADHD… it’s called severe mental illness for a reason.
I was eating blue pills for 20 years. I finally took the red pill and realized it wasn’t going to change, we weren’t going to find a magic cocktail, she isn’t going to find stability. Now I am stuck between a rock and a hard place with no option c. It is miserable.
The airlines have it right, ‘Put on your mask first.’ If you are hypoxic , you can’t help anyone. Care giving is all about self care.
Lucky I only ate the blue pills for ten so I'm 35 and have a chance to turn my life around.
The advice for men that you often see essentially boils down to, "work harder to make her happy" that doesn't work for mental illness, in my case it made her more entitled, adulterous and rude.
I need to save up money to defend myself against her lies, document her mental illness so I can prove to the court she isn't a fit mother and get me and my kid out of here. It's a long road but I'll get there eventually.
If you live in a western country, or even most developing nations (India in particular has a great culture around this) food is available to the homeless.
When you give them food they have to eat it on the cold wet ground often with filthy hands, not at a table with a knife and fork like they had gone to the shelter or soup kitchen. They don't get to feel human. They don't get to experience dignity.
The soup kitchens are strategically located, often in areas where begging won't net you much. This is intentional, its set up to drive the homeless into the arms of the social workers and help them stay sober so that they might have a moment of clarity whilst talking to them.
If you want to help volunteer, make the toast or wash dishes so the social workers can spend more time trying to reach their clients.
You aren't trained to help so don't try. Its a more complex problem than you are equipped to do anything about. Trust the people who dedicated their lives to this work.
Dignity is only available if they are forced by starvation to be at some place they don't want to be (evidenced by them not just going there in the first place)? Doesn't sound like dignity.
When I was younger, I once gave a homeless man some of my pocket money, and I was pleased to see him buy a hamburger with it.
> When you give them food they have to eat it on the cold wet ground often with filthy hands
Seriously? There is a wide range of packaged food available, ensuring that your hands never have to come into contact with the food, and they give you napkins and plastic utensils, too, if you want. You simply hand it over to them in the packaging.
I have volunteered for a decade, religious and non-religous organizations in the NYC and Philadelphia area. I have helped serve tens of thousands of meals. When the temperature drops I get called in for the code blue response.
Every single expert I have spoken to, people who have actually saved thousands of individuals from the cycle of mental health issues, addiction and homelessness shares this view. In fact, I used to think like you prior to meeting them. I have learned that I was wrong.
Your act allowed him to continue begging, this allowed him to obtain more of his drug of choice and only prolonged his battle with addiction. It did not help him, if he didn't get help like I previously described he is likely dead.
You meaned well, you aren't a bad person, I just ask you to understand what the experts in the field have to say and perhaps consider that they know more than you.
I am only arguing against "eat it on the cold wet ground often with filthy hands", as most food comes in their own packaging, not that giving them food does not benefit them long-term, I do realize it is sort of just a bandage.
It's funny, because here in Singapore the gold standard for rice would be Japanese and Korean restaurants. The various Chinese cuisines aren't really all that renowned for their rice. (Just like eg the English technically have bread in their cuisine, but it's nothing to write home about.)
I can't say I know the difference, but I imagine the Japanese and Korean rices aren't like the 'boil in a bag' stuff Americans eat at home that I'm comparing it too.
Oh, approximately no one uses boil-in-the-bag rice in Singapore. Neither at home nor in a restaurant, even at the low end.
The various Chinese cuisines have serviceable rice, it's just that the premium stuff tends to be Japanese and Korean. (But it's not just a single 'quality' dimension. They differ in kind, too.)
Btw, you should try Nasi Lemak. It's a dish that has its rice in coconut milk. Very tasty.
I find that unlikely. They are very publicly voting D this round. So that implies you are voting R, but that means you likely voted R with Bush. Did you vote against Bush but for Trump?
Yes. My family was heavily democrat during the Bush years. Attended protests and the whole thing against the war. Around the time of Obama the family kind of split, and some of us were skeptical (mainly due to illegal immigration and social issues) but some of us liked the health care stuff. Then with Trump, basically everyone got on board.
There are a lot of us. I don't really relate to the Bush GOP at all, and am not even sure what they have in common with the modern one other than some vague tax cuts (democrats do that too every once in a while though, so this is hardly some great conservative idea). I'm happy to see the Bush GOP completely gone. Today's GOP feels much more like the democrat party of the 2000s, which is what I grew up in. Much more working class. More 'rough' around the edges. Anti-corporate, etc (most fortune 500 companies and workers support the democrats, based on donation numbers)
For me the big national issue has always been a refusal to fight unnecessary wars. I admire that Trump started no new wars or engagements (he continued the existing ones, including some escalations, but I'm not a radical pacifist). For me, that alone seals the deal. I just don't believe in fighting stupid wars. I don't care about threats and I don't care about targeted military intervention. I'm not fighting forever wars, where they send boys my age to die (most of whom happen to lean conservative anyway). What a grift. If the Cheneys in the world want to fight wars, I recommend they grab their guns and go!
The first publisher to get a hold of one would have a massive advantage.
Publisher pays Charles Dickens to only provide his newest work to them. Many publishers want this privilege, there is a bidding war.
Publisher sells millions in the first week, eventually other publishers get in on the action but it takes time to typeset, print and ship the books. The book is the talk of the town, consumers want one now.
Publishing house doesn't make outsized profits years after the authors death and instead has to compete on the quailty of its publishing in the free market.
Rent seeker has to get a factory job or dies. The market is brimming with high quailty editions of each authors work available to everyone at a price point they can afford.
That’s not how it worked back in the 1800s, that’s not even how it works now.
In any case Charles Dickens would have earned less than he did and a larger proportion of surplus would have went to printers and publishers. How is that in any way a positive thing?
And of course without physical distribution your “business” model is even more absurd (being very absurd to begin with).
I’m not sure if you are aware (presumably not) but that’s how publishing worked in the 1500s. Cervantes got a lump sum for the Don Quixote (and his other books) and he was never able to sustain himself by writing and a had to have a daytime job.
His books were (relatively) extremely popular at the time and no publishers outside of Spain paid him anything. It seems rather absurd that even someone like him could never make a comfortable living by writing?
> Rent seeker has to get a factory job or dies
These bizarrely unhinged anti IP takes are truly something else..
I mean sure the “fair” duration of copyright is up for discussion, author’s life + 70 years is probably excessive.
> Why does that level of effort entitle someone to a "comfortable living"?
Because people enjoyed his books and were willing to pay for them? (But all the profits when to the printers in Belgium etc)
> That's on the order of a few words a day.
That irrelevant. It’s about the value/utility you provide and not the amount of labor.
Also you(or me) really have no clue how many words he wrote per day even if that were relevant. Maybe he wrote a dozen drafts for each book which he discarded, how would that change anything?
I mean… if you wrote down 500 words per day would you believe that you deserve to be paid more for that than Cervantes for e.g. 0.01 of his words?
> Shakespeare
Ran a theater (together with his partners) i.e. he was both the writer and the publisher.
His final theater troupe was sponsored directly by the King (previous one by the Lord Chamberlain) and had a royal patent and operated in a heavily regulated market. So surely not a very good example?
Or is patronage and a system heavily regulated by the government preferable to legal copyright? Because that the only realistic alternative besides having no content.
> entitle
What entitles you to the content of your bank account or retirement savings? Maybe even your house? What kind of a question was that even? (I don’t really get it)
reply