Yeah that can be a valid context from my POV, especially in a farm or sth similar.
But at least in my country the majority of outside cats are in suburbs or similar family homes with no agriculture around that is threatened by vermin.
On the other hand now I am wondering on the efficiency of cats as pest control.
Please dont tell me you mean the US with the great Satan?
The point I am standing by is: The US is bad, especially und the current administration it is on the brink of authocraty - but dare I say the Mullah regime was, is and will be worse.
The other week I saw Iranians in exile celebrating trump and even fucking Netanyahu on a demonstration. Now I don’t think they are idiots for swinging Israeli and USA flags along with the flag of their former kings heir. I think they bet on the tiniest potential for change and hope that it will come true - no matter who aids them in the fight against their torturer, their mourderer.
I sincerely hope the people of iran will be free one day, I think they will have to fight for this freedom themselves as the US won’t succeed in that if it is even their aim.
Dont forget that cats also are invasive in a lot of places. Now get that rooftop chicken before it gets an actual bird.
on a serious note: the good PR that cats have is INSANE they are dangerous for avifauna but saying that ones cat is an “outside cat” who needs to roam around freely is somehow considered a valid statement - it is a pet ffs. But doing the same with a dog usually is not.
Wouldnt it be smarter to test for cancer risk with microplastics in blood as the explaining variable.
Because all that gives you is saying “wow Theres a tumor, and it contains microplastics”.
Native support for e/OS/
Had not such a good experience with mine tho. Everything worked but I had a fried camera :(
(Fried as in couldnt See shit not as in actually broken)
I did but that turned out to be yet another stats course in R.
At least in Germany I have not Seen one in a while.
DISGUSTING
Actually I like it Its fun if it works ;P
While people like to dramatize their own Situation, wouldnt it be pretty easy to define it AS people who have as much spending as they have income without being able to save [amount].
If we want to exclude people who just dont save their money: people who have as much fixed spending as they have income
If you want to reach people you cant just limit yourself to Mastodon, Peertube and Lemmy. At least not for now.
Oy, don’t shit on clippy.
He only ever wanted to help >:(
Same here. Sadly the subscription box broke for me recently gon a habe to troubleshoot a bit it seems.
Because it is not relevant for the conversation, isnt it?
Investors be like: Fuck this place, let’s put up a parking lot
However, I use it to try to poison scraped LLM training data.
Noice that was my bet.
Sorry gotta ask: Ive seen it a lot on here that people replace the “th” with " þ" is there a reason behind that?
And the introduction is rather short. I will post it Here as well.
The observation that subjects with specific phenotypic traits are prone to the development of particular organic or psychiatric disor- ders is an old medical tenet. Nowadays, these relationships tend to be explained based on genotype-phenotype associa- tions, which have been suggested for over one hundred disorders, including diabetes, obesity, Crohn’s disease, and hypertension (1, 2). Along this line, some recent advances in endometriosis research fit this view, as multiple studies have contributed to the definition of a general phenotype associated with the disease (3–12). Intriguingly, such an emerging phenotype appears to be indirectly linked with attractiveness, because several of the physical characteristics studied, including body size, body mass index (BMI), and pigmentary traits (4, 5, 7, 8, 11–13), have an impact on perception of beauty (14, 15). A biological gradient between the degree of expression of these traits and the degree of severity of endometriosis has also emerged. As an example, with regard to body size and figure, an inverse relationship has been observed between BMI and severity of the disease in general (8), and in particular in patients with deep endometriosis (12). Despite this growing body of evidence, studies formally investigating attractiveness in women with endo- metriosis are lacking. To verify the potential relationship between endometriosis and attrac- tiveness, and to substantiate a pos- sible biological gradient between aggressiveness of the disease and de- gree of attractiveness, we designed a case-control study recruiting three groups of subjects, that are, women with deep rectovaginal forms, women with peri- toneal implants and/or ovarian cysts but without rectovaginal lesions, and women without endometriosis. The degree of physical attractiveness, the main study outcome, was assessed by independent female and male observers. Secondary out- comes were definition of selected morphological characteris- tics and sexual habits. Information on pain at intercourse and on sexual functioning in the three study groups is reported elsewhere.
I dont See how this study aides the body of research but I am also not in that field.
From the studies abstract.
[…] Patient(s): Three hundred nulliparous women. Intervention(s): Assessment of attractiveness by four independent female and male observers. Main Outcome Measure(s): A graded attractiveness rating scale. Result(s): A total of 31 of 100 women in the rectovaginal endometriosis group (cases) were judged as attractive or very attractive, compared with 8 of 100 in the peritoneal and ovarian endometriosis group and 9 of 100 in the group of subjects without endometriosis. A higher proportion of cases first had intercourse before age 18 (53%, 39%, and 30%, respectively). The mean SD body mass index in women with rectovaginal endometriosis, in those with other disease forms, and in those without endometriosis was, respectively, 21.0 2.5, 21.3 3.3, and 22.1 3.6. The median (interquartile range) waist-to-hip ratio and breast-to-underbreast ratio were, respectively, 0.75 (0.71–0.81), 0.76 (0.71–0.81), and 0.78 (0.73–0.83), and 1.15 (1.12–1.20), 1.14 (1.10–1.17), and 1.15 (1.11–1.18). Conclusion(s): Women with rectovaginal endometriosis were judged to be more attractive than those in the two control groups. Moreover, they had a leaner silhouette, larger breasts, and an earlier coitarche. (Fertil Steril 2013;99:212–8. 2013 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)
Not sure how effective of a pest control cats are. And don’t be mistaken on the role of cities as ecosystems. They can harbour birds a lot, especially with greenspaces.