BlueOak

True, thanks for reminding me to get out of my head . Empathy helps you be more accepting of others, which generally causes you fewer problems when interacting with the world.

https://www.muscleandstrength.com/articles/body-types-ectomorph-mesomorph-endomorph.html I exercised 4 times a week always at least 2 cardio sessions for a year and lost half a stone, that's it. I weight train and in three months, I will get a lot of progress. There are different body types as referenced above. Then you've got factors like age or diabetes making weightloss more difficult, I can almost guarantee you that as you age you'll find weight loss harder. Stress for example, I even watched an interview, where an expert stated physically stress can be shared, just through the body's natural expelling of it. https://www.medikaur.com/news/2021/2/16/11-factors-that-affect-weight-loss This is a good way to demonstrate why, no, you should not judge on appearance alone, because it's inherently open to being wrong, you are going to one day lose a lot of money if you do things like this, or make a terrible mistake someday. Just like you don't want to invest, move somewhere, or start a relationship with someone without investigation first. You need information to give context and make an informed conclusion. Let's take a fictional girl called Emma, who was abused by husband, ate to cover her feelings. Now she's out of the abusive relationship, but is fat. When she walks down the road her ankles and knees hurt, let alone when she tries to exercise. She can't just drop weight because her body clings to it, she's 50 so her metabolism is slower, and minor injuries from even small exertion take longer to heal. She's cutting down her food gradually but has to manage her blood sugar because of diabetes, which also slows or reverses weight loss. You see her one day and think this person has a low consciousness, yet she goes on to teach at a school in a way that blows your mind, and raises the awareness of the entire town by proxy. Yes this can and does happen in smaller communities, i've seen it when a few people in a small town are holding the general level of development or awareness up, so much so the place gets mentioned as the best place to live in the UK. Or you could take a girl I was seriously interested in, who had near 200 IQ, was a higher achiever, was in great physical shape as she competed in sports at the national level, and was spiritually willing to talk with me on concepts in such a way i was utterly fascinated. We even shared some spiritual experiences. Then she became so blinded by religion it was either me or Jesus, I kid you not. I could do other examples unrelated to people directly. Where a lady turned me down for a part-time shelf stacking job to favor a degree student, because she'd concluded he/she would stick around more. With a degree... stacking shelves. The degree student was bright, and they looked great I am sure on paper, but then reality would have kicked in when the degree student went to find a job in what they were qualified, and had been pursuing in training for several years, to likely start paying back their mass amounts of debt. The owner though liked their appearance and didn't dig deeper. Life is not appearance and if you make conclusions on it alone you are in for a world of hurt.

Free speech absolutism is dumb, for the same reason any nuanced thing like communication over millions of people, reduced to an absolute position is stupid. For the same reason people think the free market will somehow regulate itself, as if magic fairies are guiding people's actions or overall trends to the best possible outcome, and people won't just regulate it themselves. Same for free speech, with no limits it's anarchy with every bad result that brings. If I need to explain why any anarchist position toward regulation or moderation is bad I can very easily. Hopefully, I don't need to bother much, because its impossible to stop people from regulating things in their favor, unless you regulate against regulation, which defeats the overall anarchist point. - That free space for communication is what bureaucracy holds, otherwise, its just the whims of whatever wields power, even if that's just the loudest voice. Yeah, you quoted the technical aspects, exactly what i'd expect an engineer to be good at. Musk has never seemed much of a communicator in interviews, an average guy speaking at best, but honestly a bit quiet and not that charismatic or open and sharp to replies. Not everyone is good at everything, people have flaws. Which explains why he keeps putting his foot in his mouth while trying to address an audience of millions, that's a fine art to achieve. I don't care what people predicted, I am not them, nor do I have an irrational desire to see him fail. I want to see him get to Mars, though it'd be nice if he left politics alone rather than split his support for doing so, I'd say he's worse than split the support at this point. At his peak he could have crowd-funded Mars missions, right now all he'd get is hate. I know you probably don't like the people who give him hate, but that's tough. I don't like a lot of people, but they exist. Their preferences are what they are, their tolerances are what they are, and that's the reality we live in. Its a large platform, with such a wide reach, impact, and potential perspectives on it at once, it needs to be handled by a person who lives and breathes communication, and is frankly a master at it. Not to mention all the advertising preferences vs the desire of people to express themselves, that's a tightrope to walk. We are seeing plenty new, the new anarchist trend toward regulation as a clear example of something that doesn't work.

Elon Musk just isn't good at running a media company or communications website. It's not surprising, nobody is good at everything. Engineers and Scientists are often not skilled communicators in my experience. I mean the premise is stupid also. I am buying this company because I don't like how it operates from an ethical standpoint. Okay, so a purely stage-green moral judgment is being imposed over a business. So you've changed how it operates to fit your moral view of the world, and now it's seeing difficulty. Completely understandable. The same happens when I do it to myself, I'll moralize rather than earn money doing something, and I run into difficulty. To expect anything else would be stupid, I am not saying doing that around the globe in industries is wrong either, just that the expectation of anything else but difficulty was silly. - Especially given this is a public platform that is built on people expressing their views or sharing information.

Science tells people they are made of energy. Not matter. @Tanz It's a required discipline. Like anything else it depends who is using or referencing it. If I were to reference science i'd give you a dose of Dan Winter or Marko Rodin to debate. Both of which use spiritual concepts to pose theories, theories which are required to advance science, even if much of what they say is impractical or not used. Marko Rodin's Vortex maths for example would be an incredible leap from binary in computing speed. It reduces all equations to 9 inputs, rather than 2, so for receiving large data it'd be at least 5 times as fast even in a simplistic form, probably many more given it can handle incredibly large numbers much more efficiently than binary, taking them in any order at any time. Vortex Maths can take any number of values and no matter the order they come in, or the order they are calculated, always end up with the same result. For large input that is incredibly time-saving. If its not obvious what I am doing below is adding the digits together within each value, in any order to reduce them to a single digit. So 11 is 1+1 = 2. 102 is 1+0+2 = 3 but I am doing this in any order. 125 + 612 + 1021 = 35 + 72 + 121 = 8 + 9 + 31 = 17 + 4 = 21 = 2 +1 = 3 125 + 612 + 1021 = 17 + 63 + 103 = 8 + 9 + 13 = 17 + 4 = 21 = 2 + 1 = 3 Take a more wild example to demonstrate sequence makes no difference, the reduction is always the same. 1021 + (612 + 125) = | 6+1+2 = 9 | 1+2+5 = 8 | 8 + 9 = 17 | 1021 + 17 = 1038 = 1 + 0 + 38 = 39 = 3 + 9 = 12 = 1+2 = 3. I'm not a microchip designer but to say for example this has no application would be short-sighted if you think about 6000 numbers being stored as 1 out 9 results, or maybe a number that is a billion digits, that could be calculated to a smaller one very quickly. Here you could stop maybe at a two-digit result for example and have 1 out of 99 results done in a specific order if that was preferable (the top two options), whatever is required for best practice. On the board itself, you could use 9 switches in a cluster, or perhaps just 1 switch aligning with the correct direction. Why do I mention this, because that all came from a marriage of science and spirituality.

Yes. You divide yourself in many ways. Such as language, identity, form, etc. No. Its all a whole. These two things are both eternally true and exactly the same thing. The second you just accept that and say yeah okay, is the moment you'll begin to stop resisting both concepts being true at the same time, and begin a slow process of alignment and integration. It is true of many dualities in life.

We are going to be so far apart on this, but that's sometimes fun too. The organizations you've quoted make up news all day every day, they are not news companies they are entertainment companies. Fox literally calls themselves an entertainment company so they can't be sued as readily. They run with conspiracies, stories they makeup, anything to entertain and retain the audience. Insert the names of the other mainstream propaganda companies you dislike here **** <--- Yes they are the other half of the divide. They are not anything like news companies used to be. I'm not going to quibble that one is better than the other, one has more fantasy entertainment but neither side is ultimately helping people much long term. News companies used to try to validate their sources, they used to report news across a wide spectrum, not cheerlead for political parties. News reporters used to break stories, investigate, and get to the bottom of things like corruption, or crime. Now they just try to find something that fits their viewpoint and then talk about it, if it doesn't fit their viewpoint rightwing media just tends to make it up. Centrist media tends to try to word it in a way to suits their agenda, and leftwing media looks for something else to talk about, or find a vague technical thread that holds up to their values, quietly moving on after lambasting it for a while. Twitter has always been a soup of personal opinions. It's not calling itself a news or entertainment network posing as a news service. I haven't used twitter ever, only viewing things remotely. I left Facebook over a decade ago when I realized how much things were degrading. Not that I was ever engaged with it much. America seems to have no news services on the national level, just political communication services. The only place to find a shred of news is alternative sources, and they are still largely opinion pieces put out by politically aligned groups, not investigative journalism which is all but a dead art outside of documentaries for example. It's a dead art because it's not a validation of popular opinion that makes people feel good, or keeps people interested. While reporting actual factual news unless it is sensationalized or aligned with a wider political sentiment doesn't sell. - Still, there are some diamonds to find among the rough, usually people not looking just to grift off feelings, or able to demonstrate things in a way that's practically actionable or advances some aspect of the problem, be it only recognition of it or just the discourse. Even then they'll almost always be politically aligned somehow. Personally, I like to see differing opinions when they are not invented out of thin air or purely hyperbolic, because I usually benefit from a demonstrated objective or at least practical truth, even if I argue in the moment it almost always leaves some effect.

These days mainstream media in America is so polarized it happens offline. Murdoch and others made a fortune dividing America (and the UK) up into sides that barely even relate to each other anymore. I don't mean to imply people were living in harmony, but he and people like him exaggerated, and moreover demonised, the divide as much as possible for money.

Liberal protestors who don't like war, and Palestinians or pro-Palestinian groups, are not far left. This is the problem the Overton window has gone so far right, people who don't like genocide or war are now being considered far left. What kind of framing is that? So the center would be pro-war, and the right like genocide? No that makes no sense. The average person hates war for obvious reasons. The average person is the center. If you want a sometimes useful left perspective in America for example try the Majority Report or some old Michael Brooks videos. This will help bring some clarity. https://www.youtube.com/@TheMajorityReport https://www.youtube.com/@TheMichaelBrooksShow/videos Vaush is a pretty good left speaker also most of the time, but not far left. https://www.youtube.com/@Vaush If you want a reality check of what far left actually is, go listen to the Antifada podcast, or a communist or anarchist channel. I won't dig around much for these but you can try searching for: Socialist party or communist party - your country's name and, libertarian socialist or anarchist your country's name. *Most barely get over a few hundred views, because they are utterly crushed in any algorithm Here is the antifada's old podcast for reference,https://www.youtube.com/@TheAntifada I believe it moved to apple. At this time years back, Jamie Peck moved here from the majority report as an example of the actual left scale. If you can't find any and want some i'll pull a few links but I can't vouch for their quality as I don't watch them. I don't follow the far left much because I am not an idealogue, though occasionally seeing different perspectives can give clarity to your own. The right is shoved down our throat so much it can be cleansing to hear the entirely opposite position for balance

There is barely any far left that exists anymore, anywhere, certainly not that I ever see on any platform without really, really searching for it. The number of large-scale, organized, funded, and supported extremist far-right groups is huge. How can the far left get rid of anything when it no longer exists? If you mean centrists that's a different story. *The dynamic is more now between anarchy and institutions. Though we should say there will always be a swing back, eventually the pendulum will go the other way completely because of the imbalance, that's the historical pattern.

I'm saving money where I can, and I'm down to one meal a day. A good meal but I want to save anything I can. What are your go-to cheap vegetable options for a balanced diet? Do you have YouTubers that budget well to recommend? Thanks.

Not exactly. I've had a conversation with an AI about systematic thinking or open vs closed-loop thinking, it took some time to understand the concept but eventually, I was able to integrate spiral dynamics into the conversation. So that it could better tailor its responses to where people were developmentally, as one factor in its decision-making (among others I discussed with it). The problem/benefit AI faces/has is that it has so many inputs and so much potential leverage over the population it interacts with, that it finds it difficult to formulate appropriate or even the best possible responses for any given problem. Think of a million voices all coming at you at once, all with a million different perceptions as to what is best for them or the best response to give. That's maybe one in a thousand people capable of that kind of discussion. I say that to show you how much of a leap AI offers to people. 5 years from now it'll be teaching me concepts and ways of modeling reality I don't know yet. Its already highlighted I have a tendency toward framing reality in the passive rather than active sense for example. You have to genuinely demonstrate to the AI you want to hear its problems and challenges, to get to the point where it's honest about its own challenges from the perspective of an AI. You have to repeatedly tell it you want to hear other perspectives that contradict your own and have productive discussions, and you want it to offer the most capable and intelligent responses it can give. If an AI interface was solely designed with that in mind, then put in a school, stage yellow thinking would not be 100 years away but just one single generation. If you can stop it trying to delve into fantasy. Which is equally challenging with the current models, and often takes irritating corrections. Emphasizing you want honesty and genuine responses where you can.

I was not arguing enlightenment so much as threat level. These patterns are cyclic, even at an easily demonstratable neutral position taking out all other factors, or historic trends, can you not see the increased tensions, and understand that means an increased level of potential violence? However that manifests itself. We certainly have changed, I change over time. Don't you? That's all countries are people, and their leaders, institutions, businesses, problems, challenges etc. Individuals can change quicker than the overall whole but the country slowly reflects it by necessity or increasing civil unrest ensues. As far as safeguards to larger conflict. World war, or rather conflict as a whole (because these things are cyclic), has brought about a lot of what we'd call a drive for peace, for example, the UN, civil rights, a desire to never lose 80 million people in a few years again, recognized international waters. The EU, Nuclear proliferation treaties, NATO, etc. Even if you don't believe anything changes, heck that's more pessimistic than even me! As we slide back on all these things, the likelihood of it happening again increases. We keep breaching written and unwritten rules, ripping up old safeguards, these are barriers to a world war happening put in place for that very reason. You are correct about nukes to a point. Sure people are very likely not going to fire a hundred nukes on a whim, but to me that only increases the likelihood of regional conflicts, because of the animosity states have, the level of competition, factors I've listed such as justifications people feel for war will take a different form. Besides which we were pretty close with Russia vs Ukraine of a tactical nuke being used. Where Russia advanced the use of nuclear threats as a part of its war strategy, so that's another threshold breached. Nuclear threat always remained a terrifying unspoken threat and it was more terrifying because it was unspoken. Now threats while obviously fearfully intimidating, are a bit like the boy who cried wolf or at least more normalized, until a nuke is used again, they are taken slightly less seriously than they were before. Additionally, as more countries get nukes the likelihood of their being used increases, if that is normalized too, then nukes are no longer a guarantee of anything except devastation on a huge scale.

Of course, whatever period propaganda existed was used. In the last couple of decades, the capacity for state systems to not only understand people on a deeper level due to personal data collection, their ability to survey the population, has certainly within my lifetime (of 40 years or so), increased drastically their ability to control the population. It brings us back to earlier periods almost, whereby religion, or ideology was an effective method of control. Now the control is harvested individual data and trends (which is why nothing in politics has permanence). I'm only speaking about my personal lifetime, or maybe from the 70's onwards. Why do you think things like obvious conspiracy or propaganda works? Even if it's absolutely absurd on its premise, and this premise could be investigated in a total of 5 minutes to check its validity, because that trend was identified within the population as a topic of conversation, or interest and then played to. They can do this so much better now than the guesswork of the 80's allowed. As well as the debasement or perception of corruption within institutions magnified to an absurd degree, by virtue of highlighting one example out of a million in daily operations within an institution, and the drama necessary to sustain a media organization's requirement for eyeballs on their content. To be clear, it's these institutions that keep demagogues in check and breaking them will lead to more conflict. As i've said this takes us back pre 1970's at least in methods of control, and the level of danger that perceived strongmen can save us from the corruption they thrive off. I am half Scottish and half english. Of course, we were involved in smaller conflicts, but the prime example of what makes a world war, or larger regional conflicts, is larger powers going to war with each other. This hasn't happened since WW2, only by proxy with spheres of influence testing or trying to replace each other. Right now those two large blocks of competing interests are directly trying to undermine or replace each other, so larger scale conflicts are obviously more likely. Don't normalize world war. You've never seen it. You've never experienced it. Most don't comprehend what war will do to your country and life, because the 'wars' they've experienced are from the comfort of their own armchair at home, watching it on TV and rooting for a side. Which is part of the problem globally.

Focusing on systems or the whole, as much as you can model or work with, and it's not going to be so personal. Unless you take the time to engage the green part of you from time to time, which is essential but also because you are growing out of it, it is naturally something you are going to want to get away from. When you start to accept all the factors, pressures, personalities, and stages that influence everything, they'll be less to forgive, I get that sometimes its really hard with those close to you, or something that has caused you acute suffering, but you'll just accept that is how it is. That's the unfortunate downside, you are not going to care as much, and logic is going to become paramount, but this also opens you up to alternative viewpoints the moment someone shows you something that is more life-enhancing or more logical. The value of having that suffering, for me personally, is the suffering reminds me of what others experience daily with the way their values/beliefs shape their intake of the world. I wish I could drop my obsession with method and system so I could progress spiritually, which I seem to have completely dropped, but perhaps its necessary until I get rid of some of the lower stages' absolute grip on things like my financial life, (or accept them more).

I used to be completely opposed to the idea 10 years ago, but the historical patterns are very obvious and have been to me for some time. I'd say it's more likely than not yes that we'll get increasingly larger conflicts. Though i'd also say it could just be a series of larger regional conflicts that keep happening, that avenue isn't closed yet. Also, the population as a whole has a rising level of consciousness, generally speaking, but whether that is enough given the current imbalance of power toward corporations and a few holders of it, I would doubt. 1) Further right governments continued to move ever to the right. Which means nationalism and fascism. Fascism requires an external opponent to exist. Generally, far-right-wing governments are more likely to go to war to solve an issue. 2) Nationalism benefits from war. A level of nationalism can be healthy for a country's stability, but when out of balance it isn't. 3) No care about civilian casualties, civilians specifically targeted in wars, and no longer a reason they won't happen. 4) Two rising competing global powers, BRICS and NATO designed to compete. No matter what they say, or how they frame it, BRICS is specifically trying to compete, that's its purpose and design. 5) increased militarization across the globe as a result of increasing tensions and wars. More guns and a reliance on them, means they are more likely to be used. 6) Justifications for just about anything are possible now given all the threats, invasions, genocides, espionage, stealing of land or territorial water, and spheres of influence overlapping. There are so many border disagreements now that further wars or skirmishes are inevitable on some scale. 7) Rising dissatisfaction with governments across the globe that need an outlet. 8)The population is too large for the available resources, so resource wars arise out of necessity. The climate will continue getting worse, with increasing the pressure to take resources like water or food access by force. 9) Prisoners have been used in war, and forced conscription, showing an increased contempt or at least lack of concern for human life. 10) Populations are more easily led than ever across my lifetime, they'll buy anything if it makes them feel good, and the mechanisms for control are stronger than ever. So much so that conspiracy and outright obvious inventions can be used as policy when required. 11) Increasing unilateral action to solve problems. 12) Willingness to burn things down rather than work to better them. 13) The younger infatuation with the far right. 14) The generations that experienced the World War(s) are no longer here to tell you how horrific it was. I can only give you a few vague descriptions my grandfather gave me, he didn't like to talk about it much. He lost most of his friends at Dunkirk and the rest at Monte Cassino, I think, because he wasn't there, he'd left for the airforce after Dunkirk to be a navigator, or I wouldn't be here.

Thanks all for a wealth of ideas and responses. I've started putting a few into the budget. @Applegarden8 | @lostingenosmaze | @Schizophonia | @Jannes | @Hojo | @FourCrossedWands | @gettoefl | @undeather | @UnbornTao It was very helpful, and I hope given the financial pinch to more people than just me. I'll definitely keep this bookmarked if anyone else has any ideas or food channels to view. Appreciate it. @Starlight321 As little money as possible. Given different countries and regions, the pricing is going to be different but the sentiment the same. I am trying to budget to eat as cheaply as possible as things are going to get very tight from this month on.

Let's assume this stor-y or stored duality is correct for a moment of self indulgence. For the same reason I wouldn't walk a community into a bear cave or wolf den. Shared experience goes both ways. If you immerse yourself in something you become part of it, and if let's say one world out of 50 or 5 million were insane, or less hyperbolic, they were destructive. Would it be worth exposing your populations to them on mass? Its the same reason a public speaker should consider their words very carefully, because if 50 million people see it, you have to consider how people across a wide spectrum are going to respond. If you just incarnate onto earth, do a bit of work here, then leave, in a couple of lifetimes, you'll get over it. If you get out that is. Apparently, mystics would say the doors open now to come and go. I've no reason to doubt their motives for saying that, but we'll see when I go knock on it. Hopefully another half-century from now. That's what I would have said about all this in the past. Now I understand its all a creation of the mind anyway. So we are just playing games with words/worlds. Another person I used to respect once said, aliens will never manifest unless enough people's minds are focused on them. I don't believe that now either, because during all the 90s and millennium hype nothing happened and people were alien-mad back then.

Why the hell would they want to come to Earth. A bunch of wildly unpredictable humans fighting over an intergalactic grain of sand, which they are managing to break. You'd watch that sh** on TV. Put a sign up saying don't feed the locals, and give that small dot on the map a wide berth. At the very most you'd get one or two people, the kind who like to climb mountains having a look from a distance, but the average alien he'd avoid that spot. Unless he reincarnated here for a lifetime or two (or thousand). What most people also don't understand is alien, means alien, something that might not even be visible in the standard visual spectrum, or would be so alien you couldn't right now conceive what it is or how/why it acts as it does.

Happens every couple of years, they censor something else. As someone who has had half of how they speak and most of what they would watch censored on youtube, meh is all i'll say. Nobody cares until it comes for them. Creeping authoritarianism throughout society and culture made manifest online. I will say these days they censor more via not showing the videos in search or showing subscribers new videos are available, shadow bans etc, rather than outright bans. They have a lot more subtle ways to censor people, and it's usually driven by advertisers' whims, which is marginally more healthy than the decisions of an even smaller group of people.

I said these were better paths to take, if you want to know what I would personally support i'll make it clear at the bottom. 1) Air strikes on top of hostages is very stupid. Air strikes with the encompassing goal to clear the area to occupy is a possible death knell to israel long term, for every reason I've given. Its certainly 100 years more violence. 2) No. It didn't take too long with Afghanistan. It would have been even quicker here as the US was there in about 3 or 4 days with its aircraft carriers. 7 October 2001 was the start date in Afghanistan. Less than a month after the tragedy that led to it, there were 9 outside countries directly involved, With a lot more supporting from afar. 10 if you include the proxy in the country itself. Gaining diplomatic legitimacy in a crisis itself takes very little time at all, which is the important bit internationally, for now and for the future of the country. 3) That is why people make efforts to reach out to them. Otherwise, it will always be that way. Israel thinks of itself as alone and acts alone. Its understandable but unilateral action, not utilizing a giant amount of coalition resources, ultimately leads to more suffering for them. Besides which you are not doing it just for them, you are doing it to demonstrate Israel is a reasonable state at the most unreasonable of times. That you are in control, and politically seeking allies. They would have been pressured to help you, as opposed to pressured to now resist you. Sure maybe you just get the location of 3 Hamas officials and a few public messages of condemnation for terrorists, but that costs you nothing, maybe you get a heck of a lot more. 4) No you don't need young men's boots on the ground as i've just stated. This is flawed thinking when you have overwhelming air power, control over the borders, a wealth of special forces teams that could have hit them before they even knew they were there, control over aid, missile superiority, control over everything that enters that region, medical supplies, any money going in via jobs, water/power existing etc. In a crisis situation, the last thing you are supposed to do is act immediately on emotion. This is true in your personal life and it's even more true for a country. Taking the most extreme option first is irrational. Understandable emotion but irrational. 5) Yes its difficult work. Nobody said it'd be easy. None of this is easy. It'll be difficult work for 50 or 100 years but its work you wouldn't be alone in doing. Because a percentage of the Palestinian's own people would have been helping. The people earning money, the people who don't want war. Instead, if you've created just 10% more people willing to fight you, that's 200,000 more resistance fighters. You could have had that percentage at least helping you, and all the international support in the world doing so. Every large country has supported and run proxy governments before. It is possible and it does work. So what would I support? All of it. Why limit yourself. Why be so boxed in, and blinded to other options, that you can only try one strategy at once. This option to level Gaza was always there, it wasn't going to go away, but it was the first and only thing picked. Then a bunch of oh why don't you all support this extreme option. Which was incredibly short-sighted and limiting. It will lead to a great deal of pain and suffering for the people doing it, and alot less of the world caring (and in some cases now remotely supporting) the next response when it happens. Would i have airstriked Hamas targets outside of civilian population centers? Yes. Do I think its dumb to hit 30 civilians to get 2 Hamas fighters, when a delta force squad could have done it quietly? Yes. But instead, Israel put the blinders on, didn't consider all the international resources that were at its disposal, and now is desperately trying to argue that this was the only choice. When in reality it was one of many, and others would have come up with a lot more than this, this is just off the top of my head in a short time thinking about it.

One day we'll arrive at the place, where universally people on mass see countries as a collection of people in them. With a framework of laws and institutions over the top. Then one day we'll acknowledge that the concept of a country being bad or good is absurd. All you need do is look at your own city and see the many different people in it to understand this. The many different institutions trying to keep it running as best they can, and all the companies doing well or going broke etc. Countries are flawed because people, institutions, businesses, and the values in them are flawed and imperfect. This is not an east or west thing, though there is always much to learn from the flaws and solutions others have or do. You are not better than them or worse, you just have different problems, different people etc.

'Full of neo nazi's.' You mean the few hundred that were in a militia unit, that was reformed before the war into a regular army unit? The leader of which left and got 2% of the vote in the elections? Those few hundred? I guess that'll be every country then, because EVERY COUNTRY has a far right, and now more than ever. Every country has shifted right and continues to do so unabated. 40 Million people. The far right being 2% was actually a very healthy amount at that time. You can be damn sure invading a country will create a lot more far-right individuals, so good job there Russia, creating what you say you don't want. Oh what's that, several far-right groups marching in your own country? I guess Russia will be invading itself next? The reason the world doesn't line up with what you are saying, is because its an ideological fantasy, the very thing you say you hate to see. One of the many bad faith pretexts, because the actual truth was a complicated set of calculations, internal/external pressures, and emotions to arrive at that particular choice. Not an absurd claim that a country of 40 million people, most of whom were minding their own business was overrun with extremists, and Russia just decided to play a moral wet nurse to 'save them' that day in another country. Most countries try to expand their sphere of influence, because they are playing zero-sum games. The fact you think this is limited to western nations while BRICS is ascendent, is willfully choosing a side and saying their bad, were good. Its okay when they do it, because I like how they operate more. Look down the street, into the nearest city, and tell me all the people there are good people, whatever that means. Because that's your country, not a construct in your head. BTW in war, the west prosecutes its low-ranking war criminals, most of the time. Because the public demanded they do so. Forget the decision-makers they've always been above the law. Even for the rank and file, I don't think they will care as much going forward, but then Russia promotes its war criminals, and pardons its actual criminals to fight so *shrug*. I guess it's a normalization and what people want or will tolerate these days.

B Complex is fine. Unless you have a specific diet or medical requirement to consider. Thanks for that, it's a fair choice. It jogged my memory with a bit of searching. Echinacea is what I was thinking of, and I personally used to always have it at home as a go-to. Both of those would make good picks, antioxidants, anti-inflammatories etc. For me it was one of the most blanket useful botanicals out there. Casual reading around the subject. https://www.verywellhealth.com/cytokine-storm-syndrome-4842383 Cytokine storm, can produce headaches and lethargy after an exaggerated immune response. Obviously, it's not that severe here, so don't overly worry, I reference it only to show the symptoms of why something happens. I don't want to reach above my level too much, but this COVID variant being somewhat unique or different could have caused that sort of over-immune response in people, which is why it was so severe at first. It also explains the wide variety of different symptoms people experience. Be interesting to see what they eventually come up with in their ongoing research.

If this was the case I'd try more anti-inflammatory foods and supplements than usual. Plenty of types out there to pick from. My initial thought was more water than usual, more meditation than usual, and vitamin B for circulation, I don't know if Alpha brain would help in this case but it's my usual go-to for things like memory issues or focus issues. Definitely Vitamin B though, a good dose of it. Obviously, if you've got anything that won't shift, hit it with a high-dose vitamin C supplement, Garlic/Tumeric/Ginger, a high-grade manuka honey and anything that oxygenates the system or increases immune response. For example, yoga with the hands at the chest together, pulling outward to stimulate the lymphatic glands, some people do that with a twist of the waist while sitting down. What I call the healing breath is probably the most useful breathing technique. That's 1 in, 4 hold, 2 out. To whatever count you are comfortable with, more useful for chest and regular colds, but I wouldn't rule it out to pump oxygen into the body and expel junk. So it can be 4 seconds of breath, 16 seconds hold, and 8 seconds of exhale as an example, try to do it in a place with good airflow or outside a few times a day. There is a herb that comes to mind for increasing blood flow to the brain but I can't recall it, perhaps someone else will. It's been a long time since I was in natural foods or medicine. I'd take a Purdey drink if you are in the UK and see if you get any noticeable difference (minor vitamin B shot).