Science!
-
World's Air Pollution: Real-time Air Quality Index
How polluted is the air today? Check out the real-time air pollution map, for more than 80 countries.
Real time global air quality map.
I hope the measuring station in Faisalabad (currently showing 516) is malfunctioning!
Probably not. Hot dry plains with an industrial city.
Best not to go bowling in Blenheim today either.
-
-
-
-
-
-
World's Air Pollution: Real-time Air Quality Index
How polluted is the air today? Check out the real-time air pollution map, for more than 80 countries.
Real time global air quality map.
I hope the measuring station in Faisalabad (currently showing 516) is malfunctioning!
No, that would be correct. It's an industrial city in Pakistan. A polluted shithole.
-
Google tells me that Chaoyang is the fossil capital of China. Clearly they are trying to revitalise this for a new generation of paleontologists by turning their air into a tar pit.
Seriously if 300 is hazardous - don't go outside at all anyone unless you're dressed like Neil Armstrong going for a wander around the Sea of Tranquillity - WTF is 900??!!!!!
-
Chaoyang - Is that another bakery? Bao is a steamed stuffed bun. Delicious but dangerous it seems.
Winton needs to lift its game. They are so embarrassed the have "no data" today and have just turned the monitoring off.
Safe to go bowling around the country though.
-
There's an 895 in Jaipur, as well.
I was talking to a Mongolian guy earlier this year who is looking to shift to Canada and he reckoned the air quality in Ulanbaatar takes 10 years off the average lifespan - and they're at 175.
Didn't stop that guy smoking like a train!
-
There's an 895 in Jaipur, as well.
I was talking to a Mongolian guy earlier this year who is looking to shift to Canada and he reckoned the air quality in Ulanbaatar takes 10 years off the average lifespan - and they're at 175.
Didn't stop that guy smoking like a train!
He'd probably get smog withdrawal symptoms if he didn't
-
Ifuckinknewit!
EAT LESS RED MEAT, SCIENTISTS SAID. NOW SOME BELIEVE THAT WAS BAD ADVICE
The evidence is too weak to justify telling individuals to eat less beef and pork, according to new research. The findings “erode public trust,” critics said.
THE NEW YORK TIMES
Public health officials for years have urged Americans to limit consumption of red meat and processed meats because of concerns that these foods are linked to heart disease, cancer and other ills.
But on Monday, in a remarkable turnabout, an international collaboration of researchers produced a series of analyses concluding that the advice, a bedrock of almost all dietary guidelines, is not backed by good scientific evidence.
If there are health benefits from eating less beef and pork, they are small, the researchers concluded. Indeed, the advantages are so faint that they can be discerned only when looking at large populations, the scientists said, and are not sufficient to tell individuals to change their meat-eating habits.
[...]
-
@Salacious-Crumb 1st eggs, now bacon. It's a vegans worst nightmare :face_savouring_delicious_food:
