unicorn

You're the one making the claim that trans women are "frequent perpetrators," not me. Therefore, you're the one with the burden of proof (and reporting about a single individual certainly does not meet that burden of proof), not me. That being said, @Riobard's prior post seems to refute your claim. Posting statistics showing a heightened danger regarding trans women could be helpful (if it were truthful, of course). Reporting a single incident involving a faceless trans woman is not. I agree with being cautious regarding "being aware of unsolicited physical advances leading to theft," in general. However, your original post is not helpful in distinguishing the more from the less dangerous. It might be helpful with respect to the one person were the photo displayed, but your post did not. Maligning an entire community based on one person simply constitutes stereotyping. Trump would be proud.

I still don't get how posting the name, but not the photo, of the suspect is at all helpful. Even if a member were to click the link to the article, the photo of the suspect is blurred and therefore unrecognizable. Or are you saying that trans women should be under increased suspicion? You certainly don't provide any statistics to back up that assertion.

Why are you reporting crimes by trans individuals and not those crimes by cis individuals?

Australian boomer

Although @Riobard can certainly be nutty on this forum, in this instance he's right. This, and other of your posts, @reader, unnecessarily impugns criminality on the trans community, while entirely failing to show a factual (statistical) link. I find it rather offensive.

I must commend Dustin Lance Black for not feeling jealous or protective...

Daniel Goodfellow

Some photos with Uber-stud Tom Daley:

Beautiful diver Matty Lee:

The prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in the US (and this doesn't even count those with vitamin D insufficiency) has been measured at 41.6%. Obviously, for places with less sunlight, such as Canada, Russia, and most of Europe, it's likely to be significantly higher. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21310306/#:~:text=The overall prevalence rate of,followed by Hispanics (69.2%). "...The overall prevalence rate of vitamin D deficiency [in the US] was 41.6%, with the highest rate seen in blacks (82.1%), followed by Hispanics (69.2%)...". https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34004105/ "...In regions that represent a geographically representative sample of regions of the Russian Federation with a high risk of developing low levels of vitamin D, it's deficiency was noted in 55.96%, and the level of deficiency and insufficiency was recorded in 84.01%...". https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/scheer/docs/sunbeds_co7a_en.pdf "...Between 70% and 97% of Canadians demonstrate vitamin D insufficiency. Furthermore, studies assessing 25(OH)D levels of vitamin D at 25–40 nmol/l reveal that many Canadians have profoundly deficient levels...".

You're the one who made the wacky claim, so you have the onus of finding such a study, not me. The best you could come up with was an observational study which looked at people who took massive, long-term overdoses of both vitamins A and D, orders of magnitude above recommended doses (even then, it couldn't even establish an association, since only two people developed completely unrelated cancers during the study period). On this forum, posting bogus, unscientific statements, based on lack of understanding of how to interpret studies, has the potential to harm people. In particular, scaring people away from safe and effective supplementation of vitamin D, the most common vitamin deficiency in most temperate countries, has the potential to increase the risk of serious fractures. Your misstatements regarding vitamin D and supplementation are Trumponian in magnitude. Statements don't become real because of fanciful imaginations. This issue has been studied. While, ideally, one will direct therapy according to the results of lab tests, the addition of 2000-3000 IU of vitamin D will not lead to vitamin D toxicity. In the absence of sun exposure, one will not get the vitamin D from one's diet, even if one ate rainbow trout and/or salmon daily--and certainly not from caviar, which adds negligible quantities. You have no idea what you're talking about, and should not be dispensing medical advice. Amazing that people believe Trump's outright lies. Hopefully, readers on this site won't believe yours.

I don't know about Russia, but what makes you think that vitamin D capsules have "questionable efficacy"? Vitamin D deficiency was one of the most common conditions I treated as a physician, and, of those who started off with levels of 10 ng/ml or less, I was able to get ALL of my patients to over 30 ng/ml (recommended range) with supplements. The study you referenced in no shape or form was designed to show that vitamin D causes cancer (and certainly the authors didn't even suggest that). If you had actually read the study, you would have noted that the study looked at a group of people from the Dominican Republic who took a supplement (only available there) which the study itself described as containing "massive" amounts of vitamins D and A: "...Laboratory analysis by HPLC revealed that the supplement actually contained vitamin D(3) (864,000 IU) and vitamin A (predominantly retinyl palmitate 123,500 IU) per vial..." (Note that most supplements have 2000 or 3000 IU). To conclude from the fact that one of the participants (who took 40 times the recommended dose) had squamous cell cancer and one had lymphoma, that normal vitamin D supplements can cause cancer is so preposterous it leaves me breathless. You obviously have zero understanding of biostatistics, or how to interpret scientific studies. You even show a complete lack of basic common sense. Really, now. The one hint of truth in your post, is that I think you might have been referring to rainbow trout, or радужная форель, which sometimes could be translated to salmon. Indeed, this is the food with the highest amount of dietary vitamin D (salmon itself is also relatively high in vitamin D). Yet even if you ate this every day, it has only 645 IU's per 3 ounce serving, which would not get you to the recommended range, unless you go suntanning along the Black Sea coast, and are measuring your levels in August (I don't know where in Russia you live). Even if you ate a whole tablespoon of sturgeon caviar daily, that adds only a paltry 37 IU of vitamin D (though I do envy you if you can eat that much Osetra caviar a day, which would be horrifically expensive in the US). I would find it incredible if you told me you had your 25-OH Vitamin D levels checked in February, with levels over 30, from simply daily consumption of salmon and rainbow trout.

Another Olympian diving stud Magnus Alexander:

Another Olympian hunk is Mexican Diver Osmar Olvera:

I can see him on my bed right now: