don't let tesla drivers merge into your lane btw
More you might like
HOW TO SWITCH BACK TO OLD TUMBLR LAYOUT.
YES, theres a fix, and sadly no, it isnt xkit. its a google extension called 'stylus' with this specific code
tutorial:
step 1 - install the stylus extension
step 2 - go to "Old Tumblr Dashboard (July 2023) by Pixiel" (already linked) and hit install on that. you will be met with a page that looks like this
copy and paste ALL OF IT, even the part that says "/*Dont touch this its needed*/ }}" (seems obvious but some people miss it! no judgement here!)
step 3 - in your extensions bar, click on stylus. you'll be met with these options
step 4 - select "manage"
then, you will meet a page like this.
from here, you're going to want to click on "write new styles". you'll be met with a box that looks like this.
go ahead an copy and paste the code into that box. when doing so, you'll be met with these options. go ahead and click "overwrite style"
in the top left hand corner where the red box is, go ahead and type "Tumblr" and hit "save"
and with these simple steps, you can turn this
into this!
happy blogging!
i don’t want to derail my own post but i just have to address
I’m sorry??????? You “KNOW” nobody on THIS hellsite
Watched
The
Fucking
Lorax????
my parents taught me from a very young age that telling the truth will you get you punished now, but lying will get you punished later
ALTWe celebrate the purported geniuses who discovered the cure--but we don't acknowledge that discovering a cure means nothing unless and until we get the cure to the people who need it--an enterprise we've failed at to a remarkable degree over the last 70 years.
[Text ID: A comment from @whisperingsoup. "I watched a video on YouTube yesterday about how we cured and eliminated smallpox, and how it took a concentrated group effort with many different countries working together. And I wonder why that sort of thing hasn't happened for tuberculosis? Is it not deadly enough?" End ID.]
This is actually a really good question! Why can't we eliminate infectious disease even when we have so many medical advancements?
So, I think the first thing to note is that smallpox is the exception, not the rule. Smallpox is the only human infectious disease that we have successfully eradicated. Here's some things smallpox had going for it to make it possible to be eradicated:
- Effective vaccines were available. As in, they existed, prevented disease in 95% of people, and it was possible to logistically move large numbers of vaccines to people who needed them. Also note that smallpox vaccines were around for over 200 years before we were able to eradicate it; a lot of moving parts had to come together.
- No non-human reservoirs. This means animals (which are harder to vaccinate/otherwise manage) can't carry smallpox and then re-infect humans. In counterexamples, despite most people thinking fo them as very old fashioned non-problems, both the plague and leprosy still circulate in animals in US and can re-infect humans.
- Detectability. Smallpox patients are only infectious when they're symptomatic, and the symptoms are fairly distinctive. That means patients could be easily identified and isolated to prevent transmission to other people.
- Wide scale, concurrent, and global "political willingness." A lot of countries are able to eliminate infectious disease within their own borders, or within specific areas. However, if there are populations still circulating the disease, the disease can always re-infect areas where it was eliminated. It takes an absurd amount of coordination, money, effort, and people to mount the sort of concerted, global effort it took to eliminate smallpox. It also took multiple different strategies: there is no one-size-fits-all approach to disease management and elimination, and some strategies didn't work at first and a new ones had to be implemented.
TB, on the other hand, has a lot of challenges to eradication just by its own biological traits. Even if every country moved at once to eliminate it, we might not yet be at place technologically to do it. Here's some challenges:
- We don't currently have an effective vaccine. The TB vaccine protects children against severe forms of the disease but does little to prevent infection in adults. That means even if you vaccinated every person on earth, infections would still occur.
- Detection of TB is tricky. TB can lay dormant in your lungs for years (a "latent" infection), meaning you carry the bacteria asymptomatically and risk it "waking up" and causing disease. The good news is, you can't pass it on it while it's latent! The bad news is that makes it difficult to find the bacteria and treat it. In fact, it's estimated at about 1 in 4 people have latent TB, including up to 13.2 million people in the US.
- The treatment is a very long course of drugs. Like, patients have to take drugs for months. Long courses of drugs increase problems with patient compliance, make treatment more susceptible to supply-chain disruptions, and allow a long period of time for the disease to be transmitted.
- More and more multidrug-resistant strains of TB are emerging. Even if new drugs are developed, without better tools for control (a better vaccine, better detection, better drugs, etc), TB will eventually evolve resistance to these drugs. More multidrug resistant strains means more people suffer and makes it harder to control transmission.
The good news is that the world is not apathetic to TB. The WHO has set a goal of eliminating it by 2035 (although whether or not this is realistic was questionable, even before the covid pandemic disruption). As of 2020, 16 different novel TB vaccines are in clinical trials. Advances in genomics mean we have a better understanding of how the bacteria that causes TB actually works, which will help up develop better tools to use against it.
If you're interested, I also wanted to include two more pieces of reading. First, this overview of "where we are" in terms of TB eradication. It's a little old (2018) but it's a good read. Secondly, this article on what it takes to eradicate an infectious disease.
the only reason #cottagecore is considered a gen z thing is bc its a hashtag. it used to be called transcendentalism when offline men did it
Henry David Thoreau having all of his meals sent to him and laundry done while patting himself on the back for being such a back-to-the-land individualist: #simpleliving #aesthetic #waldenpond #cottagecore
When tumblr collapses I will email you all a monthly newsletter with my diary entries and make collages to simulate my reblogs. and I will want you ladies to do the same and also possibly send back a heart to "like" it
yeah honestly the twitteresque vibe is like. genuinely ruining the mood. i cant use the site like this but i dont have the words for it so idk what to put in the feedback form. i guess i’m taking a break from tumblr for a while
My bf studied japanese in high school and often says "gambate!" (not sure of spelling) to be like. encouraging. I think it means roughly "let's get this bread." However, as someone who took spanish in high school, it always sounds like a command to me. And as near as I can tell, in spanish it would mean "go shrimp yourself."
ALT
ALTI'm definitely not a fluent speaker, so I could be wrong, but here's how I got there:
In Spanish, some (informal, I think?) commands are formed by dropping the "r" from the end of an infinitive verb. (Every infinitive verb in Spanish ends in r.) For example, "to run" is "correr." If you want to tell someone to run, it's "corre." If you want to tell someone to do something to something/someone, you append a little pronoun thing to the end. From "besar" (to kiss) we get "bésame" (kiss me). From "cocinar" (to cook) we get "cocínalo" (cook it). From "callar" (to silence) we get "cállate" (silence yourself/shut up).
So, "gambate" immediately reminds me of "cállate," which is a rude command. It would be formed from the verb "gambar" and the second person object "te" for "you/yourself." But "gambar" isn't a word in Spanish. However, "gamba" is a word. It means "shrimp." So while it isn't technically grammatically correct, in the same way we "verb" nouns in English, the noun "gamba" is being used in the place of a verb here. "Gambate" (or more properly "gámbate" to maintain the correct stress for both the Spanish and Japanese). "Go shrimp yourself."
Native spanish speaker. You're quite right about your linguistics here, and spanish speakers love to make up new words by conjugating existing words (at the very least, my parents do)
My confusion stemmed from never having heard the word gamba before. To my knowledge the word for shrimp is camarón
So i looked it up and apparently gamba actually means prawn. So it's actually go prawn yourself