It’s extremely common for young kids to receive antibiotics. In some countries, antibiotics are over the counter and many parents will give their kids antibiotics for nearly any infection. Antibiotic misuse is rampant in some countries where they aren’t gated behind prescriptions.
Any such link with autism would therefore be an extremely rare side effect. The rate of antibiotic use in children is far higher than the rate of autism.
I don’t think this case supports the antibiotic theory by itself at all. I think it’s confirmation bias because antibiotics are one of the current trending theories among mainstream discussion.
This is not «extremely common».
This is a sensible statement assuming that the question is about the domain or system you’re an expert in. Not “what time is it” or anything like that.
> Take the chance to write the answer down
Perhaps the author should have qualified this advise with “take the chance to consider”, but I think the advise stands well on its own and I understand to apply common sense to it.
True, NodeJS runtime comes with its own «standard library» but npm has nothing to do with it.
Regarding carbon: "removal of livestock in the US would only lead to a net GHG reduction of 2.6% in national emissions. Similarly, removing all dairy would lead to a reduction of just 0.7%. At the same time, both transitions would create domestic deficiencies in critically limiting nutrients [White & Hall 2017; Liebe et al. 2020], which is not unexpected given that Animal Sourced Foods are valuable sources of essential nutrition [see elsewhere].
and methane: "As argued above, this is not wishful thinking as there is still ample potential for mitigation of biogenic methane in global food systems. Moreover, the global cattle population has not been increasing during the last decade, making its contribution to global warming debatable [Shahbandeh 2020]. It is, however, true that methane has nonetheless been suddenly increasing since 2007. Yet, this can be ascribed to a multitude of potential reasons, incl. geological and fossil fuel emissions, wetlands, rice farming, and landfills [Gramling 2016; Nisbet et al. 2016; Alvarez et al. 2018; Rasmussen 2018; Etiope & Schwietzke 2019; Malik 2021], or a decrease in hydroxyl radical levels, the main sink for atmospheric methane [Turner et al. 2017]
https://aleph-2020.blogspot.com/2019/06/greenhouse-gas-emiss...
Edit: Vote it down all you want. The statement isn’t getting any less idiotic