It's not a matter of disrespect as much as of disobeyance. If there isn't (or shouldn't be) any subordination, disobeyance may not imply disrespect. The problem arises when people differ about whether there's subordination.
I disagree. Being rude is about being offensive; this is different from someone being offended.
For example, I was mugged at gunpoint once. The person very politely asked for my walled (it turns out when you have a gun pointed at someone you can afford to be polite). When I asked if I could keep my wallet and just hand over the cash, he responded (again surprisingly politely) in the negative.
If I had just ignored his request, would that have been "pretty rude"? [Ignoring whether or not this course of action would be advisable.]
And for a second hypothetical example. If I asked you to respond to me agreeing with everything I said, would it be "pretty rude" for you to ignore it?
In both cases the answer has to be no. The nature and intent of the request have to be considered when determining whether or not ignoring it is rude. And in this context (recording a medical event), they almost certainly want you to not record in case they do something wrong and the recording is used to prove it. It's a self serving request and it potentially works against the best interest of the patient in events where they believe their care is not sufficient.
You can’t be rude ignoring a request that is both dumb and wholly a product of bureaucracy. Such requests are themselves rude, in a kind of weird impersonal way.
Of course you can. For instance, if you would reply to the request by insulting the physical appearance of the one making the request, that would be rude.
To make it explicit for those who haven't tasted it, mother's milk tastes distinctly sweet (literally), in a way cow milk does not.
So yeah, there's a probable purpose for sweet receptors. An interesting question is whether seeking sweet foods in modern adult life, which would probably not have been available in our evolution, guides us to a healthy diet.
I wanted to avoid that much red meat since it also caused problems for me, but not as obviously, so I didn't go with this. I still eat vegetables and other things, and avoid red meats about 90% of my meals, so probably not the same.
Different things work for different people though, so this thing that I came up with may only work well enough for me but not for others, and carnivore for others.
Interesting but you're going in the exact wrong direction. "There's evidence that diets high in red meat and processed meats may contribute to inflammation."
I know. It may well be so, but I'm willing to try it because I don't find "may contribute" to be a strong deterrent, even supposing it's not wrong. There are many people with various inflammations that have found the carnivore diet to be very effective, (e.g., see Mikhaila Peterson). It may be that red meat is bad, or not entirely healthy, and the diet could still work because it's a very extreme keto and elimination diet. Elimination diets are known to work, see the Autoimmune Protocol (AIP) diet. Leaving out all processed food or some vegetables could mean excluding some unknown allergenic or noxious substance to which some of us may be too sensitive to. There's also an interesting argument about it being the diet we evolved with for millions of years.
Is that true for unprocessed meats like steak, too? Stats predominantly reflecting a diet consisting of pizza, sandwiches, burgers (chased down with soda and/or beer) are irrelevant, if we’re talking about carnivore.
And yet you can find thousand of videos online of people who healed their lifelong health issues on carnivore eating beef and all of their inflamation is gone, so doing a reality check would be wise first.
The traditional TradingView black Friday discount always deserves a mention. Although this year it's only 40% off the Plus plan, the Premium one costs only one dollar more so there's that.
The collective "intelligence and character of the masses" was a topic of the highest relevance back in 1939, particularly to a Jew like Einstein, while the average of its individuals less so (and of more interest to the racist ideologies he opposed). And this is not a metaphor: it is literally what is said in the note. On the contrary, it's a stretch to interpret it as a reference to the individuals in the masses instead of the masses themselves.
