LavaPlanet @ LavaPlanet @lemm.ee

Posts

0

Comments

60

Joined

4 mo. ago

Of course! They're super simple but they actually worked.

Standing at the sink, (or wherever) leg straight, lift leg backwards (keep straight). (Do a billion times, (I forget the number, 30 odd? I can look for the exact sheet I was given) but work up to a billion times slowly)

On floor, on all fours keep leg in bent position, but lift upwards (keeping knee at 90° angle) bend only at hip, till back and thigh are a straight line. Both legs. I forget how often, I'll look for the sheet, but it was a solid block of time, 10 minutes, go easy though, work within your comfort levels and work up to more.

Both those above 3x a day for a good month to 6 weeks.

This one I found super hard, walking backwards for at least 10 minutes a day. And it has to be vigorous, I was told walking around my coffee table wasn't enough. Be very careful. Do whatever you can that's safe.

I also just worked on strengthening my lower back and core, too, after I got to a place where the pain stopped and I had good muscle tone to support it.

The physio person also focused on my walking pattern, you might also be able to find some info on that online. I know tiktok isn't loved much but it is great for people sharing medical information similar to this, also. You could see what the algorithm there spits out.

Are the coffee grounds blowing up into the machine? If they aren't cleaned from there after each coffee is made, it can cause a bitter burnt taste, could be that?

Sounds like your sacroiliac joint is gone. I did mine in by moving house and having bad posture, specifically the deep curve in my lower spine. I went to a physio they taught me some exercises that strengthen specific muscles that support the joint, to take the weight of the joint, off the joint. Sacroiliac is the joint of the spine and hip bones. Does it kinda shoot through the centre of one butt cheek, and lower back and seems to hurt no matter what position you lay or sit or stand?

Fool and his money.

After hearing from Robs daughter how she was treated and what he was / is like as a person, I can't like anything he did, and it all comes across narcissistic and creepy from that viewpoint. It's like a game of power but with a curse. (whatever that game is really called,)

He knows he's too rich to ever be convicted of anything. He just bought a president and a whole country of his own. He's drunk with power and thinks he's invincible.

Yeah, not only that, people who pirate wouldn't have consumed the product, if pirating weren't available as an option. They've priced cost of living so high, and reduced access to content availability. When Netflix first came out, especially the streaming version, I bet there was a noticible drop in piracy, now they've made content access to hard, more piracy. They control the levels of piracy. It's not a choice to pay for everything we want to watch, or pirate. It's pirate or don't watch. And they created that situation, and then try and brainwash / gaslight us into feeling guilty and feeling like it's our fault. And then add in the moral clause, these companies are committing or contributing to atrocities. Some piracy is an attempt to avoid supporting companies that cause harm to people. If "wrong" is condemned, what about the wrongs that have caused them to be listed on boycott lists. Underpaying employees and writers, who should own the content. I think writers should be as famous, and focused on as the actors. The content being created currently has a heaping of "conform, don't think" built in, too, I could rant about that, annoyingly, for a bit, too! So many things.

I think they're just setting up a defense for all the illegal activity, so when they investigate, they've got a get out of jail free, card. Not that he would go to jail with the amount of money he has.

This whole Gen vs Gen bullcrap is a bourgeois distraction attempt. Don't buy into any of it. There is no Gen vs Gen, it's bourgeois vs proletariat.

I bet Zelensky actually got some sense into trump at the funeral. It's been since that conversation he's flipped his usual script.

All that 50's "advertising" that was essentially social conditioning and oppression, hear me out, because all the women had to do all the jobs while the men were gone. They got a taste of freedom, their own money and skills. They were all like, how hard can it be, boys do it. But when the men came back they had to shove them back in the box, they had to effectively put the cat back in the bag, it required a huge effort of bullying from the government and all. Like they hit hard with this kinda pervasive stuff, everywhere. That's when women were forced into the "get in the kitchen" role. Now we get to have both! Work AND be predominantly responsible for the majority of the house labor and child raising, yay!

I didn't think about all the spiders that'd be in flood waters...

Sorry for some reason my rely appeared here rather than where I aimed it.

I'm so sad he rests on Sundays, cos sundick has such a great ring to it.

I want the artist to make tshirts and I can buy them. Is that a thing?

Thank you for sharing, it's an important question, but it's not ok to expect this from women's sport. It's taken so long to reach the top, we live in a capitalist society and it's not ok to expect women's sport and participants to be political first and women's sport secondary, even at the risk of destroying the thing that they are, women's sport, by nit picking who sponsors them. Why is it OK to so hugely police women's behaviour and actions, especially when they are not in any way in a stable position to choose. But men skate by completely unmentioned. Because men will be men? This entire line of thinking ties into the socialisation of women to hugely police their own behaviour and be policed from birth, and plays into the oppression of women as a class. You can not start with the underdog, and expect them to take down capitalism. That's our job as consumers. And our job to put pressure on the bigger fish, the men, to start questioning their sponsorship choices. Push hard on the men and that will by default make choices for women's sport and sponsorship easier. Because currently they can't be picky, they're still fighting against decades / centuries of oppression. Women used to be predominant in sports, until they started beating the men, then they segregated the sports and banned women from participating. Your fight is with capitalism, and what people who aren't in a position to choose have to do under capitalism isn't right to police, because the stakes are too high for them and they have no power to weild. Similarly people who are wage oppressed may want to participate in the boycott, but have been forced into a corner of "buy the things on the boycott list, or starve". You are furthering capitalism to further its oppression, by raging at or taking down its already oppressed components, you aren't fighting against capitalism in this method. Capitalism relies on oppression and racism, sexism, othering and punching down, poor, homeless, segregation and war, all feed capitalism / are the core root of capitalism. It doesn't survive without these things. These things are artificially created by capitalism, if you force oppression or oppress, you may feel like you're fighting against it, but you are not, you're feeding it.

This could be taken out of context and twisted to an extreme version, it doesn't mean oppressed people are without judgment of their actions, it means if you have an argument like this, you take it to the top dog, first. And by default, the choice you create then rolls down the hill to the oppressed. If you want to make space for this choice for oppressed people, stop the biggest most privileged, first, set a precedent they can easily apply. Put pressure on the boycott list, pick one and as a large group attack that one brand at a time, finding its largest source and take it down from there.

Like coke, they opened a factory in occupied Palestine and tried to say it wasn't. Nestle who starved babies to death in head spinning numbers. All businesses operate under these motives and possibilities, under capitalism. There are no morals to capitalism, without regulation it goes unchecked, it's main operandi is to keep making more money, even if that pathway leads to the deaths of the consumers, if that happens, unchecked, they just rebrand.

If your fight is the boycott list or capitalism, trying to take it down from the lowest, least powerful rung, isn't effectual at all. To have the best effect, you aim for the top, you take down the biggest source and you do it en masse. If it becomes not ok, for the biggest sports icon to have that particular sponsor, then by default that choice is afforded women and minorities. If top sports (that currently still being men with the most power and privilege) are shamed into dumping a sponsor, that has hugely more effect to your cause. That has more power to be noticed. If women ignore a sponsor, it's not noticed nearly as much. It has much less effect overall. So I suppose you have to ask yourself, are you mainly aiming to strategically take down the boycott list and capitalism or just only police women's behaviour and choices.

I know they both (Coles + ww) did some sketchy stuff to kill off all stores around them, they set up contracts with premises not to let competitors in the buildings, those contracts have been made illegal, but they still existhow are you going to know they exist to eradicate them. Plus high rents that are killing for profit businesses, that combined with Coles + ww buying power, (bulk buying in truckloads) mean they can acquire a product at a ridiculously lowered price and can therefore lower the price to much lower than a side seller can, until those go out of business and then they start the aggressive price rises, once they've killed off competition. They also sign contracts with producers that don't allow them to sell to anyone else. They do heaps of other, really aggressive anti competition stuff, that should be illegal, but they probably lobby to skate by unregulated. I would suggest there's reasons politicians aren't doing anything about the monopoly or the practices they've utilised to become a monopoly, in tandem. So those practices would keep anything like what you're talking about out.

Oooh. I love medical dramas, I seem to love to ruin them for myself by finding out what's real and what's not. That said I desperately want to know the details behind a real organ transplant, now that you've mentioned it in that way. Are you able to elaborate?

I'm experimenting with a similar thing, but with Lentils. Kind of a Dahl. I've recently learned about a mirepoix and I'm trying to meld it into as many things as I can. I threw blitzed carrot, onion, garlic, celery, and broccoli stems, in pot until softened, added tomato paste, a red chilli meal base I had laying around, seared the spices a little then, tin tomatoes, Lentils, split peas, (yellow and green), cooked till it tasted cooked, I have no idea. Added a tin of coconut cream at end, cooked a few more minutes. Turned out great, needed lemon, but I didn't add that because a kid hates it. I also added Greek yogurt. Bloody lovely, needed more spice, but I have the spice tolerance to kill a buffalo, so if I'm cooking for other people, I try not to do that.

I'm determined to keep a container with roughly chopped carrot, onion, celery, to blitz and add to stuff. It's been super useful. Seared it and Added it to a pumpkin soup the week before.