Anti-perspirant causes breast cancer. You look at data for Japan back in the 90's-2000s and breast cancer was like 80 times less prevalent in Japan vs the US. Now Japanese are starting to use it more and breast cancer instances are raising to be more on-par with the US. The NIH did a study that was inconclusive so everyone assumes its not true. However, if you read the study you realize exactly how inconclusive it is, and that the answer was truly more along the lines of: "We don't know".
this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2024
246 points (94.2% liked)
Ask Lemmy
27240 readers
2429 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The RTO push is designed to keep the commercial real-estate market from crashing. I've never seen any good proof of this, but believe it. I don't exactly know why CEOs of big companies would really care that much about commercial real-estate. Perhaps their large shareholders (hedge fund managers?) also own commercial real-estate and are putting pressure on CEOs? Perhaps at that level it's just a big club, and all the wealthy just help eachother out, out of solidarity? Dunno.
If the value of corporate real estate falls then that had a material impact on the balance sheet of companies owning their own offices. It's in their own best interests to keep demand high.
Companies that rent don't enforce RTO.
Perhaps. I guess the companies could use their campus equity in a beneficial way. Not sure how beneficial this is to most companies though. With the companies I'm thinking of, I'd guess campus equity is pretty minor (compared to their "human resources"). I may be wrong though.
Yes, offices will be a small proportion of total assets. But there is still profit to be made.
Kary Mullis didn't invent PCR, his then-gf Jenny did. Matilda effect
Other theory: a staff member at Neopets is messing with in game economy to sell digital items irl on ebay
load more comments
(2 replies)
I think there are secret grades of retail products and stores get these differently graded products based on the "tier" of store they are. So Dollar General candy maybe didn't pass QA to be sold at, say, Harris Teeter. I'm not talking about selling a package with less candy in it. I mean, for example, that the candy at the Dollar General may inexplicably have a higher percentage of adulterants or slightly off on flavor so it gets assigned C grade so it goes into packages of candy sold at C grade markets.
It's probably not a conspiracy so much as I don't know what industry jargon to search for to find out more information.
I know that some of them have their own in-house brands, which can actually be pretty good especially given the price. But like, they've also got national brands in there, like say M&Ms, you think the Mars company sells the M&Ms with off-center Ms to the dollar stores and the centered Ms to Whole Foods?
Or maybe it has more rat parts in the chocolate, but yes that's the gist of my theory.