He will sit on it like this and you can pick it up with him on it, take him on a magic carpet ride, and set him down somewhere else. Best passenger ever, 5 stars

My little Sevvy making a loaf and giving me pretty eyes. People who say you can't take good pictures of black cats need to learn how to use their cameras better.

He super cute with his little harness on, waiting for a skink to make a move so that he can POUNCE!

Most people don't really budget for things that are large on a yearly or even monthly scale, but you can and probably should.

For example, I know that I use my headphones a lot and being without them would be really annoying. Budgeting based on buying them asap because I need them is a really painful way of managing that cost because I can't do anything else at the same time and it is expensive. If instead I set aside a smaller amount while I still have working headphones it is much easier.

My formula for working out the cost is fairly simple. How much does it cost for an item to fill the need? How long do I expect that item to last in the worst case? How much would I therefore need to save per week for that cost to be saved before the current item needs replacement.

My headphones cost around $100. I expect to need replacement not sooner than about 16 months. So I should save $75 per year which works out to less than $2 per week. If I just save $2 per week I will hit my goal of $100 within the year and of something goes wrong earlier I can make the difference up the normal way. If I end up not needing a replacement by the time I hit my goal I can keep saving for a higher cost option or move that saving to another goal to boost that.

This study is talking about two groups, one with a target INR of 2.0-2.5 and the other with a target INR of 2.5-3.5. The higher dose is the current standard dose.

The outcomes were extremely close group to group and it looks like the Confidence Interval was greater than 1.5%, so the study was not adequately powered to have confidence of non inferiority. Is that interpretation correct? Obviously the difference in the groups was not large, but it reads to me that they couldn't be sure it was close enough to not be worse with the lower dose, therefore they can't eliminate the possibility that low dose treatment is more dangerous than current dose? If so, would they do another study or would that basically amount to p-hacking? Further thoughts are appreciated.

So we're doing breams now?

My partner (36 XX) is two months in to very strict carnivore, eating exclusively beef mince and grass fed butter. Total intake is 1-1.5kg been mince and 200-300g butter per day. The only beverage is water or Powerade (sugar free, acesulfame K, sucralose).

Her ketones on a blood meter are consistently low, maxing out at 0.2 mmol/L today. She feels tired, fatigued, and has burning in muscles suggesting lactic acid being elevated.

Just looking to see if anyone has seen something similar and if so what the solution was? Thanks