I get one to two stones per year because my kidneys are over efficient. I'm fairly used to it now and can usually pass one with minimal discomfort, but every now and then it destroys me. The only beautiful thing about them is when they exit.
Can you please elaborate? I am 33, still getting those, precisely 12-18 months apart. Left and right kidneys. My father has them too.
I changed my lifestyle a bit - gettnig mode vitamin d3 + vitamin k2 - supposedly that way you get the calcium where it is supposed to be - in the bones and not in the kidneys. I am pretty clean now, maybe for the first time in my life - regular check did not show any stones.
But interested in finding what exactly do you mean by over-efficient.
edits: Changed my age. Can't believe I was thinking 32, when I am 33 in fact. Duh.
Sorry, I missed this - Quite simply my kidneys filter more than they're meant to, it's hereditary, as you've discovered. I've found that a cup of stone breaker tea once or twice a week keeps them at bay so that's well worth looking into. Look it up on Amazon.
I grew up with the ZX Spectrum, initially starting out with the ZX80 and 81 which I soldered together myself with the help of my equally clueless father.
One of the most enduring and engaging aspects of the old micros is the inherent limitation of the hardware. You're constantly battling with extreme optimisation and utilising often quite hacky hardware tricks to do things that would otherwise be impossible to achieve while mastering the arcane arts of assembler. I think above all that's the beauty of them and why people are still supporting these projects.
I'm very sad about missing out on the Spectrum Next which is nearly due to ship their completed cased model after a successful release of only the board. Complete with keyboard and design from the recently late original designer of those same machines I had in the 80s, Rick Dickinson.
I moved to the US a few years ago and have already lost count of how many cyclists wearing dark clothing and no lights on poorly lit roads I've nearly hit at night.
I had to take a cycling proficiency test in the UK, here no one seems to have a clue, they don't even always ride on the right side of the road.
This woman neglected any due care and her death, while tragic, is entirely her own fault.
Why does the entire Internet feel the need to apportion blame in this case?
There are four entities who could have and should have relatively straightforwardly avoided this death.
1. The woman shouldn't have crossed the street there and then.
2. The safety driver shouldn't have been looking at her phone.
3. Uber's automation should have caused the vehicle to brake much sooner.
4. That street should have been designed much safer. The design of a lit crosswalk on the median encourages people to cross there, so much stronger discouragement is required. Furthermore, a 35mph limit in an area with pedestrians is going to regularly cause pedestrian fatalities. That's a trade-off most people seem willing to make, but if you make that trade-off you have to own it. If the speed limit was 20mph that woman would be alive today.
As far as I can see it, all 4 entities are 100% responsible for the death of the pedestrian.
None of those 4 entities passed the "reasonable person" test with their actions, therefore all 4 are fully responsible.
Sure you can argue all you want on whether one entity's misbehaviour is more egregious than the others. It doesn't matter; all 4 engaged in behaviour that regularly kills people at a rate much higher than acceptable.
You can continue to cast the blame for frankly abysmal state of cyclist safety in this country, meanwhile cyclists die with alarming regularity however many of those factors are in play.
> To be clear, while the car had the right-of-way and the victim was clearly unwise to cross there, especially without checking regularly in the direction of traffic, this is a situation where any properly operating robocar should have avoided the accident anyway.
I'm not assuming you haven't read it, but I think this is the best answer I can give you.
You can slaughter a lamb painlessly and still serve its head. It's nothing more than making more visible what's been going on behind the scenes every time you eat meat. Yes, you're eating a dead animal. It was raised and murdered just so you could eat it.
But to me that video with the frog being skinned alive is just needless sadism and nothing else.
If improving stability was the intention, why haven't they ever warned anyone that it would make their expensive, perfectly functioning phone relatively useless?
Nothing about their reason rings true. If it were the case then why didn't the previous IOS installation have limited performance before the update?
