The death of babies lowers life expectancy a lot more than the death of seniors. Since COVID predominantly kills the elderly, it means that if life expectancy is going down then COVID must still be really mowing seniors down, even though vaccines are available.
frostbiker
joined 1 year ago
Diatomaceous earth kills the little bastards and it is non-hazardous to humans, as long as you don't snort the stuff.
Apparently for them is like walking on broken glass and they bleed do death, so to speak.
My sister had an infestation long ago and it was very effective. You can find the stuff online easily.
The best time to start was two generations ago. The second best time is now.
Allow mixed-use 3-5 story buildings everywhere, remove parking minimums, and watch how transit corridors fill with liveable neighborhoods.
They are fighting for that right because they are intersex or trans
Where did you get that? The article indicates that they are non-binary. That is neither intersex nor trans.
That’s the crux of the issue here: someone does feel the need to not fill out the field (i.e. filling it in with an “X”), and the health authority is forcing them to use either “M” or “F”
But the person in question is non-binary, which is a gender identity unrelated to their sex. It is perfectly possible that this person feels perfectly okay with a health card that indicates that their gender identity is non-binary while their sex is binary. In that case, separating gender from biological sex in their health card would address the issue at hand, particularly since nothing would prevent both fields to be left empty if they so choose.
As for why it makes sense to specify the biological sex in their health card, it is a medically useful piece of information that 99% of the patients would have no problem recording. Don't forget that patients are not always able to communicate at the time they are in need to health care. So, again, if it is useful and non-controversial for 99% of the patients there's no reason to remove it, just provide a way for patients to opt out of a simple M/F choice if they wish to.
I’m not sure you fully understand the issue. This isn’t merely about catering to a patient’s preference to be addressed in a certain way
...which is why I suggested differentiating between the way the patient would like to be addressed from their biological sex, and storing both in the health card.
What is the process for assigning gender at birth anyway? People look at the baby’s genitals and make a guess. For 99% of babies, that heuristic works. But it turns out that some people are trans or intersex, and that wrong guess causes nothing but trouble.
You appear to be conflating gender an sex. Sex is biological, while gender is a social construct. We assign sex at birth, and infer gender from that sex.
In trans people, the two do not match, which sometimes leads to disphoria. The sex assigned at birth is still accurate, but the gender that was inferred from it is not.
In intersex people, their biological sex is difficult to determine and often doesn't fit a simple binary (e.g. XXY chromosomes or androgen insensitivity).
The same solution is to trust that people are whatever gender they say they are
There is nothing to trust about their gender, we can respect their self-identity or we don't. As for their biological sex, it's a significant piece of medical information. If somebody feels uncomfortable stating it clearly on their health card, they can choose not to fill it out, but for the immense majority of us it is a non-issue.
That's because their zoning laws are different.
They allow building walkable neighborhoods with mixed-use buildings that have retail businesses on the ground floor and residential units on the 3-5 floors above. Their daily errands can easily be done by foot, so there is less traffic.
You can't achieve that in a car-dependent suburb where you need to drive to get to the nearest grocery store, school or cafe.
You know, you are right. Since pressing beg buttons is not such an inconvenience, why don't we make car drivers press them instead and let pedestrians continue unimpeded like cars do today?
Maybe there should be two entries: the gender they identify with, and the sex assigned at birth. One would be used to address the patient, the other would be useful for medical diagnosis and treatment.
And while we are at it, a few people are born with undifferentiated sexual organs, so it could make sense even for medical purposes to include a third option beyond male and female, rare as it might be.
Some people can't afford to leave their jobs for extended amounts of time. The sort of people who can't afford formula, for example.
Nobody designed them the way they are, at least not with a grand design in mind. Traffic is shaped by planning for existing demand
That is not how it works, at all. They model future demand and they do make executive decisions to shape traffic in the way they want it to be, not just the way it is today.
as long as you don’t have a credible idea why millions of people should give up their homes to live in overpriced shoe boxes without a bit of green and quiet in the city, this will get you nowhere
That is happening because:
- The rest of us are subsidizing their lifestyle through our taxes. North American suburbs don't pay enough to cover their own infrastructure.
- They do not experience the externalities of their lifestyle. It is us living in denser areas that suffer from the increased motor vehicle traffic that suburbanites produce.
- Ever increasing car traffic has led to widening roads and culling of trees. Eliminate car lanes and plant trees, I say.
- Cities aren't loud, cars are loud. Reduce car traffic and our streets won't be noisy.
People love living in spaceous houses they own.
They don't love it so much when they have to pay for the cost of the infrastructure needed to support them. Stop subsidizing suburbs and suddenly people will be much more accepting of more modest accommodations, like most of us do.
Remember that those urban centers would and could simply not exist without people from the outskirts working and shopping in those urban centers.
Plainly false, as those suburbanites could simply move closer to where they work, if only zoning laws permitted them to do so, which is not the case in most of North America.
Again, and it is a point that no amount of mental yoga can get around: what we want is something that already happens in plenty of towns around Europe and Japan that existed before the advent of the car. It is not unrealistic, it is the historical norm.
What makes you think Canada will take half a million refugees? UNHCR indicates that we have welcomed a little over a million since 1980.