I just read the article from the German consumer organisation “Stiftung Warentest” about that, they write (translated with deepl):

Some products say “without octocrylene”. What do we make of this?

Octocrylene is an approved UV filter that became the subject of debate some time ago: initially, critics feared that it could interfere with the hormone system. The EU’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) has reviewed the scientific studies. According to this, the maximum permitted concentration of octocrylene in cosmetics is still considered safe - it is 10 percent of the total product. It has not been exceeded by any sunscreen product in our tests since 2018.

Scientists have shown that sunscreens with octocrylene can also contain benzophenone - as an impurity or, over time, as a cleavage product of octocrylene. Benzophenone is considered a probable carcinogen. The SCCS demands that suppliers should strictly control their sunscreens and keep the benzophenone content at trace levels.

We test all products containing octocrylene for benzophenone and only found elevated levels once in 2025, in an already defective product. In our test tables, we indicate which products contain which UV filters. This allows consumers to decide for themselves whether they want to use a sunscreen containing octocrylene.

Important: Always dispose of products containing octocrylene after the season. The benzophenone content can increase during storage.

I don’t follow this topic regularly and I can’t say anything about the mechanisms. From a superficial search I would claim that there is good evidence that Tylenol use during pregnancy can make the development of asthma in the child more likely. There is also some indication (at least one large cohort study from Icahn medical school) that it may cause delayed language development.

That would be enough evidence for me to discourage use during pregnancy for treatment of discomfort or light pain, when safer options can be tried.

Yes, lots of sources. They’re easy to find if you start by thinking about who would know the most of a subject.

Angela Rasmussen has been a great bullshit-deflector during the pandemic, love what she’s doing

I’m telling you that if nothing is done about it, global warming, the extinction of species and other factors will raise the likelihood of humanity’s extinction to a higher level than it has been in tens of thousands of years, over the course of the next few hundred years. We can only speculate about how earth will be like in three hundred years and if there are places left that remain inhabitable for humans.

The inuit rely on fish, which are on track to become extinct in this century even. People survive in the Sahara by bringing lifestock/food and water with from elsewhere, but the desert grows from year to year.

Extinction doesn’t need to happen in seconds, like when a big space object collides with earth. It can also happen gradually. Major environmental alterations like weakened amoc and global warming will make many more regions of the earth uninhabitable, for example when the temperature rises over 46°C regularly or when there are regular droughts or floods. A lot of land where hundreds of millions of people currently live on, will be completely submerged, desertificated or barren. And these changes won’t just affect humans, but also whole ecosystems that we need to survive, for example fishing grounds, forests or, if you think about the extinction of species, especially insects, arable land in all parts of the world.

Our civilization as we know it right now can not survive catastrophes like these in the long term, and we cannot be certain that human life will remain possible on the planet without being completely dependent on artificial habitats, food, water sources etc.

Can someone explain to me who these people are? What were they doing before they’ve been ordered to DC? Are they a standing army, training while they’re not ordered somewhere? Or are they reservists? Or police from elsewhere?

Not american either, I think we others can care about US politics when it’s affecting the rest of the world, but we really dont have to understand or care about every shopping mall chain’s logo, even if their politicians fight about it. So please, go ahead while we’re waiting for results regarding Ukraine, Gaza, tariffs and that elite pedophile ring of yours.

There are many aspects to that question, I could for example say that what hundreds of people eat in a restaurant in a week has to be of consistent quality and perfectly hygienic. I could talk about how knowing when to add salt to a dish makes the difference between stale or juicy lentils. Or that a roux tastes so much better if you just sauté it for a few minutes, which anyone would always do if they just knew about it, and it’s the job of a recipe to tell them.

But in the end, I dont think cooks are more pompous about their craft than carpenters or painters are about their work. They wouldn’t use steel screws for wood or a broad brush for corners. It’s a craft and people get angry if someone gives wrong explanations.

The fact that milk is added as a binder/emulsifier + flavor-enhancer doesn’t suddenly turn it into a fucking “ragu”. Further, even if gravy was the wrong term for this sauce, the correct one certainly isn’t a ragu. This is much closer to a velouté […]

I think it’s much closer to a béchamel. The recipes I’ve found dont really create a roux first, but if they did, a Bechamel is exactly what you’re creating if you add milk instead of water or broth and mix it until your wrist falls off.

Sorry but that is a ridiculous source, they forgot to add yeast to their yeast dough and just went with it. If they dont care about doing things the way they believe it tastes best, why bother with recipes at all?

For the lazy:

• you want 65°C for three minutes
• 75°C is unnecessary
• dark meat will be at like 77°C