It isn't as good as teflon but it does get functionally close
Finally someone phrasing it right. Cast iron can't possibly get as good as Teflon because even a perfect layer of seasoning can't compete on a chemical level. It absolutely gets good enough, though.
"Acer" is the genus name for maples.
The way most beekeepers make money is not selling honey (or wax). The biggest money makers are actually selling bees (in a package, nucleus hive, or full hive), or selling queens (genetics of a queen dictate the temperament of the hive). This is not including the huge commercial beekeepers who make their money off of pollination contracts.
This means that beekeepers are incentivized to get new people into the hobby, so beekeeping is very apprenticeship focused. Local clubs can put you in contact with someone while will be happy to show you the ropes (and give you a bunch of honey in exchange for the help).
To get started learning, all you really need is a veil and gloves (about $50 new total), but you may be able to get used gear for way cheaper. When you start doing hive inspections on your own, you'll need a hive tool, smoker, and probably a bee brush (also about $50 total new).
If you want to get your own hives, the major costs are the bees themselves (which are way cheaper to buy through a club, like ~$100 last time i checked), and the boxes themselves, which can run a couple hundred for a hive. If you live somewhere with bears and/or skunks, you'll want an electric fence, too. Usually, it's better to have 2 hives, too, because if a hive dies in the winter, you can split the other hive and you are barely worse off.
If you are handy and have the tools, you can build your own hives to save money. Also, you can capture wild bee swarms by leaving swarm traps around during the right time of the year.
Lastly, there is specialized gear for harvesting honey, but usually you borrow it from a club.
Tl;dr, you can go all in to start by yourself for like $700, but you can get started as an apprentice for like $50 (or honestly just borrowing gear for free).
A whole article about right wingers being obsessed with having kids, and no mention of the quiverfull movement?
Ever do an acerglyn (maple/honey)?
The studies in that mini-review did not investigate different allergies. They each focused on different symptoms; either skin inflammation or mucosa inflammation (conjunctiva, nose, sinuses). The allergen responsible was not characterized.
The only paper that looked at a specific allergy is the one I cited.
I could also cite multiple studies showing that use of bee products can make allergies worse.
https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/26/24/12074
https://www.jacionline.org/article/0091-6749(79)90143-X/pdf
https://www.jabfm.org/content/jabfp/7/3/250.full.pdf
There are more, too.
Ignoring the fact that selling something fraudulently is automatically bad, I can think of a few reasons. First of all, they can't make it identical. They can beat certain tests, but that's why it's a cat and mouse game.
Second, even if it was 100% identical, there are still reasons to support the "real" thing. If I buy fake syrup, I'm probably getting something made from an industrial monocrop like sugar beets or corn grown far away. If I buy honey from a local beekeeper, I'm investing in more trees/flowers/etc. in my own area. I'm also investing against the widespread use of pesticides harming our whole ecosystem.
Read my response to them. If you can find more randomized, controlled, human trials, I'd love to see them.
Just read the paper (well, skimmed is more honest). They cite 5 human trials. The first study was not blind, and it also did not show a difference between the control group and the treatment group. The "mini-review" author made it seem like there was an improvement to the honey group over the control, but this was not the case.
The second study, I can't access. The conditions were a bit more complicated, so I can't fully assess, but the "mini-review" author notes that they were also treated with olive oil and corticosteroids. Also, the group sizes were tiny (11 people split into 3 groups), which makes me highly suspicious of any statistically relevant effects. There's also no placebo.
The third study seems legit from a quick skim. They placebo controlled with flavored corn syrup. At the end of the study, the treatment group does not have a significantly different symptom score than the placebo group. The fact that both groups improve is again misinterpreted by the "mini-review" author. In their defense, the authors of that third study really wordsmith their abstract to make it read that way.
The forth and fifth study both show no improvement due to the treatment.
So 4/5 studies show no improvement over control/placebo, and the 5th study i can't read.
I did find a randomized, controlled study on birch honey which seems good, and it shows an improvement over a regular honey control. That's not in the minireview.
Overall, if there's 4 studies saying no, 1 saying yes, and 1 inconclusive, I'm going to take that as a no.
I'm not even close to the type of person where this strategy is an option, but the magic is in the stepped-up basis from what I understand.
Let's say an asset is purchased for $1 million, held until it's worth $10 million, and used to secure a $5 million loan. If you sell the asset, you owe taxes on the $9 million capital gain. If you die, the asset's value "steps up" to the new baseline of $10 million. Your heir could then sell it with no capital gains tax, and pay off the loan and pocket the rest. If they hold onto the asset, and it appreciates to $11 million, they would only owe taxes on the gain of $1 million, not $10 million.
The whole scheme makes sense when it's applied to a random farmer inheriting land from his parents: you dont want to force him to sell the land to pay capital gains. It makes a lot less sense when it's someone inheriting stocks worth the GDP of a country.
From what I understand, they dont try to build syrup from scratch, it's more that they cut the real thing with sugar and water. According to wikipedia, maple syrup is basically 2/3rds sugar and 1/3rd water, with about 1% "other".
If you added the right proportion of sugar and water to real stuff in a 50:50 ratio, I'd have a really hard time distinguishing that from the natural variation in taste strength.
Luckily I have a steady supply from people I trust. I can't get enough of the stuff made over a wood fire.
I'm not making a moral statement on the rules. I was just pointing it out.
Also I believe "Parmigiano Reggiano" is a trademark name (i.e., protected) in the US and other non-EU countries, but other versions of the name, like "parmesan" are not. In the EU, you cannot call cheese "parmesan" unless it's parmigiano reggiano.
Despite the fact that grana padano is widely available in the US, the style is still just referred to as "parmesan" even if it's the notorious green cannister of pregrated "cheese".
The problem with parm is that "fake parm" can just be literally the exact same product, but just made outside the borders of the legally defined region, or even made within the region with the same methods, but not under the control of "big cheese". It can still be a high quality product.
Counterfeit honey is a big problem. Honey is mostly glucose and fructose, which you can just buy. You can detect a lack of the pollen you'd expect in real honey, but that only makes it so that you can thin out real stuff. There's other methods to detect it, but it's on ongoing arms race. Buy honey from local beekeepers you trust, if you can. P.s., there idea that local honey helps with allergies is bunk because allergies are typically caused by windborne pollen, which bees dont collect.
Maple syrup has similar issues.
Seafood and truffles are commonly "fake", as in substituted with cheaper stuff.
Not "counterfeit", but a similar problem in Mexico is that the cartels have gotten into the avocado industry.
Assuming you mean in the US, there is a national system called NICS that basically has the FBI run a background check. Some states have additional systems to augment that.
The conditions that get you put into the "no" list are things like committing a felony, domestic violence, drug use, etc. Being committed (against their will) to a mental institution is on that list. A mental institution would have to report you with evidence to get you added to the list. Potentially, he could ask his psychiatrist to do that for him. It may not be an option, but if you brother is worried himself, that is good evidence, I think.
When you buy a gun, you have to check boxes on a form to say you aren't a felon, addicted to drugs, a fugitive, etc. They can check the felon and fugitive part, so if you lie, you get in big trouble. Drugs, though, they obviously dont have a list, so really it's just a way to add penalties if they can later prove that you lied (e.g., hunter biden). You couldn't just do a drug and automatically pop onto a list.
They aren't necessarily asking the right question. It shouldn't be "who wants to live without a car?" It should be "who wants to live without needing a car?"
I dont want to have to drive every day. I dont want to need a car to get to work, or get groceries, or go to restaurants, or visit friends, etc. But, cars are handy for stuff. I like to use a car to go to random trailheads, or do a roadtrip, or do a big grocery day, or carpool with friends to an event, etc. Those things ultimately make the cost of owning a car worthwhile to me.
Not typically. Every other week is more common.
Yeah, I would extend that to basically any vehicle-based crimes. It's crazy how often people in cars blatantly break laws in dangerous ways, and the only thing preventing death is pedestrians, cyclists, and other drivers keeping their heads on swivels.
If a private corporation can take a picture of your license plate and send an automated ticket for speeding, why can't I submit dashcam footage of a car blowing through a stop sign in a residential neighborhood.
If i can report a truck driver for weaving through traffic to the DOT, why can't I report a Nissan altima?
I wouldn't even care if it was like a lower-level offense compared to being ticketed by a driver.
If you listen to what he says, the FBI redacted all the files before passing them to the DOJ. The DOJ was only able to release the versions of what they actually had.
Ro went to the FBI to see the originals, but it's not like he could comprehensively hunt through the 3 million files. It sounds like he just pulled out names of people that he found that were mentioned in particularly damaging documents that were redacted only to keep their own names clean.
It'll take a much larger effort to comprehensively go through with proper redactions of victim info, without hiding perps.
You might be applying more initial speed, but let's assume that you aren't.
The total delta_V (area under the acceleration-time curve) is the same in both cases. Placing padding under the jar squashes the curve so the maximum force isnt as high, but the impulse is longer.
Tomato paste is thixotropic, so it gets thinner under shear stress. At a certain threshold of shear stress, it essentially becomes liquid.
My guess is the quick spike ends up with less time above that threshold, so less time behaving as a liquid.
People are probably downvoting you because "lives lost" is not an effective metric for contribution in a war.
Also, let's be clear, "the US lost only 100,000" is only true if you are just counting mainlanders. Estimates of deaths in the Philippines, who were American, top 1,000,000.
If you are going to incorporate all the SSRs in the USSR casualty counts, you should be incorporating the Dutch east indies for the Netherlands, India for the UK, French Indochina for France, etc.
I think thats probably not a good thing to do, cause if you are a citizen of a current/former colony, you probably dont feel like your colonial masters should get to "claim" your death. This also holds for all the non-russian SSRs and internal minority groups in Russia, though.
You already have a lot of good responses, but one thing I haven't seen mentioned is that you can cook on parchment paper. It's obviously not a method for scrambled eggs, but something delicate like fish can just be put on parchment paper in a pan. Alternatively, you can fully wrap it in parchment.