It’s not a bad measure but I don’t think it’s the best, I’m currently working my way through Spirit Level and so I think some measure like the Gini coefficient would be important.

I think that median income, Gini coefficient, poverty rate and something like the human development index would give a decent overall picture. I don’t think a single metric really does the job.

In much the same way that almost no one has perfect physical health, almost no one has perfect mental health.

You don’t need to be a complete wreck to be able to benefit from paying attention to your mental wellness.

Eating well, regular exercise, mindfulness, forgiveness, good sleep practices are all worth practicing whether you feel unwell or not.

I’m a huge advocate of gardening. It gets you outdoors and active, gives a sense of achievement, you learn and improve over time, it’s popular enough that you can get involved in a community, if you’re growing veg it promotes healthy eating.

It should be mandatory.

I’m lucky to have been able to experiment a bit with this as my work is flexible and I’m in a pretty good bargaining position. I also do a fair bit of unpaid work out of hours.

Having either Friday or Monday I’ve found to be little different. Having alternating Fridays and Mondays is pretty awesome, 4 days on, 2 off, 4 on, 4 off.

There’s a lot to be said for a mid week day off too. I’m looking at moving to a new employer and hoping to go negotiate a 3 day week, maybe Mon-Tues-Thur for example which will be heaven if I can pull it off.

I call myself ‘functionally atheist’. I’m philosophically agnostic in that I hold no strong opinion on the existence of a god/gods as that is fundamentally unknowable but for all practical purposes I act as though there is no god.

I can’t say that I’m very familiar with the UK laws in depth other than that they have been in operation for many years and are generally considered effective.

For referenda there’s no reason you can’t have a publicly funded campaign for yes and no and limit private advertising, we have something like that here in Australia.

Sortition, random selection, when combined with an elected body has a lot of benefits. It has the advantage of having professional politicians with institutional knowledge and relationships while also having a body the that is actually representative of the larger population.

100% agree!

As an addition to this I firmly believe medical marijuana is a phase.

Now I’ve made people angry here’s the nuance.

CBD/THC combinations certainly have a role in some patients with chronic pain, especially where it’s use can avoid or reduce the use of opioids.

There are clear specific uses such as intractable epilepsy where it is clearly the best treatment. It is effective for glaucoma but there are better treatments available.

I’m highly suspicious of marijuana having any role in mental health and there are, in my opinion, no convincing studies published showing that it is useful at all despite the fact that large studies have been done and presumably file-drawed.

The idea that smoking is an appropriate delivery method for a medication when other methods are available is insane. Very few things are as bad as tobacco smoke but inhaling smoke is bad for you.

My prediction is that in 20 years we will have cannabis derivatives in capsules that fulfil the specific purposes and the idea that any doctor prescribed marijuana to smoke will seem insane to younger doctors.

A bicameral legislature, one house elected by mixed member proportional system and the other selected at random from the voting age population. Legislation must pass both houses, if it passed one house but not the other it can go to referendum at the same time as the next general election.

You can also have things like citizen initiated referenda. Campaign finance laws similar to those in the UK are also desirable.

No. This sort of arrogant rubbish needs to be shut down.

In my job - a doctor - I routinely discuss difficult and complex topics with people of all backgrounds and education levels. With very few exceptions people are able to understand difficult topics.

It is my experience that the most difficult people to work with are not ordinary people but those who hold the opinion that everyone else is stupid.

With very few exceptions sortition and participatory democracy have worked well whenever they’ve been tried.

I’m a doctor and my partner is a nurse and the size of the difference is straight up injustice. Join your union and vote for militant leaders that will push for better conditions and salaries. If you don’t fight you lose

I have an idee fixe that I could set up a non profit that bought homes and rented them at a price somewhere between the maintenance cost and the market price. It would make a profit and slowly expand providing more and more affordable housing. Ideally it would start with more than 1 million but doesn’t need to.

Also anything potentially breakable. Crockery, glassware etc. Best to have something that’s already been stress tested in someone else’s home.

Australian doctor here, certainly in Australia There are dozens of jobs for nurses that require minimal or no patient contact.

Things like administration and management would usually require at least a reasonable amount of experience but clinic work is very different to hospital work.

My own fiance works in infection control which is a lot of reviewing charts, advising ward staff on isolation protocol, ensuring staff vaccinations are up to date.

Just quit nursing is a little otp.

I know some nurses that know them pretty good, it’s not that outrageous to know the schedule by heart if you use it most days. I don’t use it most months though.

Nearest thing I can think of is a running file with medical guidelines I use occasionally but not often enough to want to learn, childhood vaccination schedules, colonoscopy follow up timelines, lots of imaging follow up guidelines.

deleted by creator

I agree and I’d like to add that education systems that treat WW2 as the war to understand is actively harmful.

In part due to characteristics of the war and in part due to how it is taught and remembered.

Just 2 examples

• WW2 can be quite easily presented as having clear good guys and bad guys which makes it fairly unhelpful to study to understand modern conflicts.
• Chamberlain is consistently painted as a naive idiot for trying to prevent a war through diplomacy. Whether or not it was futile in that case isn’t really relevant, when WW2 is the only war most people study in any depth then all attempts at avoiding conflict get characterised as naive appeasement.

I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt here but both Suetonius and Pliny are talking about Christians in the 2nd century, Tacitus speaks about Christ only in the context of Nero blaming Christians for the great fire. These are literary evidence for the existence of Christians in the second century but are not direct literary evidence of the existence of Christ as an individual which was the question I was addressing.

I’d be delighted to be shown to be wrong but I believe my original post stands.

I’m by no means an expert but I was briefly obsessed with comparative religion over a decade ago and I don’t think anyone has given a great answer, I believe my answer is correct but I don’t have time for research beyond checking a couple of details.

As a few people have mentioned there is little physical evidence for even the most notable individuals from that time period and it’s not reasonable to expect any for Jesus.

In terms of literary evidence there is exactly 1 historian who is roughly contemporary and mentions Jesus. Antiquities of the Jews by Josephus mentions him twice, once briefly telling the story of his crucifixion and resurrection. The second is a mention in passing when discussing the brother of Jesus delivering criminals to be stoned.

I think it is reasonable to conclude that a Jewish spiritual leader with a name something like Jesus Christ probably existed and that not long after his death miracles are being attributed to him.

It is also worth noting the historical context of the recent emergence of Rabbinical Judaism and the overabundance of other leaders who were claimed to be Messiahs, many of whom we also know about primarily(actually I think only) from Josephus.

This is the correct answer. At some point paediatricians and other folks interested in child development standardised the meaning of infant as above but unless you’re a paediatrician they are completely interchangeable.