This. I had these a while back and I had forgotten the name. I had tried a few different kettle cooked brands and somehow never Grandma Utz. Wife bought them 2 days ago and these were them. By farrrr my favorite kettle cooked chips.

As someone who is not in the field but knows some teachers personally:

1. Increase/ even out pay. Meaning fix pay scales in underfunded schools and re evaluate 'overfunded' school pay.
2. Going hand in hand with pay; create a teacher fund for classroom supplies. My son's teacher pays for her students in class crafts (2nd grade) and we live in a respectable tax bracket district.
3. To combat the 'throw money at it' belief that can creep into education, use evidence-based approaches to addressing educational shortcomings. Make sure they are tailored to the community and student body.
4. Don't allow politics to dictate policy. There is an unfortunate grassroots attempt to restrict education based on religious belief or hyped up fake news. This is spilling over into parents acting like children at board meetings, shouting, and some trying to 'infiltrate' boards in order to enact restrictive and damaging policies. Please stop. No person looking at the teaching profession wants to see this sort of crap spill over into their classroom eventually.
5. Hire actual teachers to lead the department of education, and make sure those in leadership roles actually understand the battles teachers at all levels face.

I am sure actual teachers will be able to speak more to this than I will, but this is some of the stuff I've seen friends in the profession rail against. There is no black and white approach to education.

A prime example of why certain people pushed so hard to get charter school vouchers covered by state funds. It's a financial scheme disguised as education. It's in the same vein as most for profit prisons; your population is always there legally, and it makes it so easy to make 'legal' kickbacks especially when everyone involved is looking out for each other's backs instead of those populations they serve.

That looks like a good option. I'll reach out to them and see how well they've documented their security. Thanks!

Thays a good idea. Our EMR is global so they may very well have a solution for this. Thanks!

Selfish post here - I work for a homecare/hospice/rehab department who has recently picked up ALS patients. I was asked to see if there was some sort of secure encrypted messenger service that would go between a patients device and our clinical secured domain. We have an EMR based communication tool, but the family members also use it to coordinated care so they see everything that is sent by the patient. The problem is, the patients caretaker is not a great person and so the patient wants a personal communication tool.

Anyone know of something like this that is aimed toward security and business, rather than social media crowd?

Or better yet, maybe a contact at an ALS foundation I could poke to see about this?

Lititz would like a word.

I suppose, but I'm in a purple neighborhood and I see many Dem candidates. Along rural highways it lean Republican, but more Dem than in previous years for sure. And in high traffic areas, people can get a general impression, and unfortunately we are a 'pack' social species and we tend to get impressions from what we see subconsciously.

It may not matter in your neighborhood, but there are thousands of neighborhoods and areas it does matter :)

It does still matter though, something I think Dems made a mistake on in past cycles, but seem to have right this cycle.

https://www.npr.org/2022/10/01/1124484573/midterm-elections-political-signs

https://fenwayhealth.org/new-study-shows-transgender-people-who-receive-gender-affirming-surgery-are-significantly-less-likely-to-experience-psychological-distress-or-suicidal-ideation/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7317390/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1122101

I read through most of the Reuters link, as I trust them. You painted their coverage as negative, or so it felt like you did, but it was just being informative and cautionary, while not calling a negative light to the procedure. What a story should do, to be honest. It does raise good points that there is no long term studies available, but it is also a newer procedure with little chance for long term studies. That should change over time. If the long term data points to more harm then good, than I'd say it should remain a restricted procedure. The article also states that because the demand far outpaces the supply of caretakers, critical steps are being missed in order to try and care for more patients. That is wrong, and that is why regulations and laws are in place. If a for profit place pops up and abuses patients by not implementing proper steps, that facility should come under scruity by government and lawsuits.

I'd also like to clear up some misconceptions you may have about the medical field.

1. One thing you stated seemed to indicate you felt the medical professionals were 'fear selling' families into procedures to make money. That is false. It is legally required for a provider to be up front about the risks of a procedure, and the risks that could happen if you hold off on the procedure. It is no secret that those affected by dysphoria have a greater chance of suicide than the general population. So telling a parent the risk of NOT doing the procedure is suicide, is factually correct. If the child or person is mentally distressed by their orientation, and they become mentally fatigued, they can get to a low point and commit suicide. The same for standard depression, and common for those physically and mentally abused.

2. Along the lines above, a provider must provide the patient a clear picture of the risks and possibilities of a procedure within reason. The Twitter thread trans woman is an example. Neither you nor me can confirm her providers let her and her family know of the risks. If they did not, there is legal recourse and they should enact it. While not perfect, the laws and regulations in our healthcare industry are pretty robust. The penalties for breaking patient/provider trust is generally high as well, as in losing license to practice, hundreds of thousand dollar fines, and jail time.

3. Patients and families are always encouraged to get second opinions by quality Healthcare facilities, especially for large decisions such as this. I am not sure if the same can be said for 'at profit' hospitals.

All of this still does not mean a SCHOOL should interfere with any of this, and it should not be used for culture war political crap, and should not care what is in a child's pants. It should care about education, and creating a warm welcoming environment so kids can relax and learn.

You are making assumptions off a single video. I could extrapolate that all Republicans are seditionists because I have videos of Republicans storming our government on January 6th. It is not fair to paint with a broad brush on one situation.

On top of that, I do work for a Healthcare facility , a large non-profit at that. I can assure you any evidence that would implicate our network in anyway would immediately be resolved with internal investigations and definite firings. By and large Healthcare facilities want to care for patients properly, it is literally beaten into our heads year after year after year, and we are educated deeply on the various government regulations that we can lose our freedoms over.

As for who is taking care of the kids, you have demos tatted you believe no one is. As such, I must conclude there is no reasoning on this topic with you. Parents, Healthcare workers, psychiatrists, etc do care for these kids. I feel you are of the belief that clinicians are out to make money and scare people into expensive procedures. I've no doubt those people exist, and it is unfortunate, in the same way that a few really shitty cops make it bad for the good ones. The goal is to weed these people out to restore faith in the system. If you are beyond faith being restored, you should state that in the first responses you have so as to not waste anyone's time.

I like how you, a stranger, has taken a small few sentences on reddit, and decided that person was 'just gay' as if your own personal bias isn't the biggest, heaviest weight that caused you to say something so lazy and convenient. It is not that easy, no matter how convinced you are that it is.

Also, you've said it several times, that 'this is the reddit response anymore'. Just because it may be annoying to read for whatever your reason is, does not mean that it is the wrong response. Most likely you feel it is a response of dismissal, and sometimes it may be. However it can still be overall correct. Once upon a time cancer was just 'the sickness' and there was little to no reports of cancer. Now cancer is known, established, and unfortunately many report having it. It's not wrong to say that because it is more accepted and known, that this is the reason why more cancer cases are showing up in reports. I know that isn't an apples to apples example, but you should be able to understand the underlying point.

Finally, I cannot comment to dysphoria rates, and numbers of the such. I only have personal experience and a desire to see others happy regardless of my beliefs. This subject has way more nuances than a set of statistics is going to explain, and requires the response of the parents, and working with their kids through the situation and coming to a proper response. That response may require gender affirmation steps, which you would dislike, or it may be determined that the child does not need these steps, and that it is either not the time, or that the child is indeed confused based on something heard from school. Again, extremely nuanced, and very hard for you or I to determine. It would require the parents and providers to determine that the correct and proper way, not the school to make that decision in any way.

I disagree. I grew up with people who thought they were not the rigut sex but had no realistic options. Instead they suffered mentally and were out casted by all their peers because they were different to these kids, and not the right way inside. They stayed the same gender they were born with, but to this day they've had several failed marriages and other issues. In the same way I can't prove it is because of their own internal confusion, you cannot prove it WASN'T from that confusion. It is NOT the school's place to make this decision or try to politico this. Period. They are there for education, not seeing what is in the kids pants.

As for 'up to' xyz amount of kids. Could it be that kids are just more free to express themselves now? If a kid used to say 'I think I might not be a boy inside' and all their parents, teachers, and peers chastised them and embarrassed or harassed them, they'd stop saying it, but still suffer internally. With less of this 'hushing' there are more who can be accounted for.

I have a young son. I am not sure how I'd react if he decided he was a girl. I'd try to talk it through with him and figure out why he thinks that way. It's me and his decision however, and not a school's or your decision to make. Ultimately, a belief I have is suppressed gender identity leads to mental health issues from a sort of internal 'gas lighting', and down the line these people will become part of LGBTQ community anyways.

I'm not against debate that kids are too young to make that decision on their own. I agree to an extent actually. However, that's when the parents need to step in and work with their kids to figure out if the internal conflict is real, or just a misguided game or thought the kid is having. There is no real right or wrong answer here as long as the kids well being is the ultimate goal. You may not agree with trans procedures, but if it really helps the kid long term, it should be the goal. At the same time if keeping them out of it feels like the best option for the kid long term, and it is not some selfish cultural adult reason preventing the procedure and choices, then that should also be the goal. There is no true book or guide on how to parent. You do the best you can for your kid, regardless of your own self interests or political beliefs.

I would rephrase it. It's not the new norm for kids. What it is though, is a normal thing for people to accept and live with this community. Literally no harm is being done by these people other than being different than the Christian definition of a person and family. People need to get over it, and just let people be people. Do some take it too far? Yes. Are they the majority of the community? No, they aren't despite 'psychoconservativewebsite.ca' polls or articles saying so.

You'll need to specify what you mean by 'worse'. There is CONSIDERABLY more mining and extraction of fossil fuels across the entire globe, both in developed and undeveloped countries. This leads to considerably more emissions and environmental damage than rare earth materials. There is also all the pipeline leaks, ocean platform leaks, etc to weigh in.

I am also led to believe that rare earth material mining is more polluting on an individual mining/operation scale, but because there is farrrrrr less of these mines in operation, it does considerably less global damage. It does more damage locally than globally.

This is why, depending on which side of the fence you are on, there are ways to twist a discussion to make one side sound so much better than the other. Ultimately, both have negative impacts on environment and in many cases the employees and communities they exist in or near. Recycling can be an answer to try and prevent the impacts of either scenario above. We just need the infrastructure and political willpower to make it happen.

Mining is only a piece of the puzzle, but it is dirty for all industries, and many industries employ or buy from mines with questionable practices and human rights records. In many cases, the issue is that the materials and thus the mines are in undeveloped countries, or countries that are looking for money over treating their populace properly. Think/research stuff like blood diamonds.

What makes these mines dirty is the lack of regulation, so companies are free to run it as dangerously and cheaply as possible at the expense of environmental impacts and human suffering. These mines, usually in countries with questionable to terrible records, are not controlled by the developed countries who need those resources. An example is if America told China to clean up it's mining. China would laugh at America, who has no jurisdiction or path for reprisal, and continue to do as it pleased. There simply is no reasonable way to force a mine in another country to clean up.

That's why it is insanely important to research and develop recycling, and to enact incentives for it at the government level. Since we cannot clean up the mining in other countries, and we cannot legally, or reasonably force a company in our own country to source from more expensive but cleaner sources, we need to try a different approach. If you can recover 85% of rare materials from existing batteries/items inside our country, that is 85% less you need to source from the terrible mine in the Congo. The trick is incentivizing companies to use the recycled materials, or to develop processes to make the recycling processes cheaper and that way you can sell the recycled materials for competitive prices. Look up how incentivizing recycling of Lead Acid batteries got us to something like 97% recycle rate.

Join the solar sub. Most are doing exactly that. It might be my first larger size pet project for my home as well.

That ship is starting to sail. Advances have shown we can use much more environment friendly materials, and we can recycle many existing batteries. We can take the dirty recycled batteries and use the recovered materials to build cleaner and easier to recycle versions.

And to be frank, it's not like all the mining for coal, fracking, oil refining, etc are any more cleaner. If we can invest in 'not perfect' forms of energy storage to transition away from an energy system that is environmentally damaging from start to finish, we can move towards dramatically less damaging energy production.

It's not that we should be okay lithium ion is dirty during production and recycling, it's that we need to weight the pros and cons of staying the course on an environmentally damaging fossil fuel system, or working towards a system that in the LONG RUN will be much cleaner in most aspects.