data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/11277/11277a31b97afeef67259ec7c53f1d55b1d3ae4f" alt="halp"
moar funny pictures
Daily Mail | Meet the women who won't have babies - because they're not eco friendlyI'm all for it when people with little to no parental inclinations decide not to reproduce. The "reporters," though, make no attempt to hide their disgust and horror. They barely manage not to chortle when the woman admits that she and her husband "have a much nicer lifestyle as a result of not having children," which they describe at some length.
At the age of 27 this young woman at the height of her reproductive years was sterilised to "protect the planet".
"Having children is selfish. It's all about maintaining your genetic line at the expense of the planet," says Toni [Vermelli], 35.
"Every person who is born uses more food, more water, more land, more fossil fuels, more trees and produces more rubbish, more pollution, more greenhouse gases, and adds to the problem of over-population."
Daily Mail | Woman told she'd had a miscarriage - then has triplets insteadThe story tries to present this as a feel-good story of a woman's triumph over a medical setback, having long-desired children despite the odds. The detail that these are children number five, six and seven glides by almost unnoticed.
When she was told she had suffered a miscarriage, Beverley Cunningham was devastated.
At the age of 40, she feared her last chance to have another baby had slipped away.
But only 24 hours later, after a scan to confirm the miscarriage, she and her husband Andrew were given the most incredible news.
Mrs Cunningham was still pregnant - with triplets.
At odds of nearly a million to one, she had conceived quads naturally, but had miscarried one of them at 12 weeks.
Santa Rosa Press Democrat | Study ties time shift, pedestrian deathsThe answer to the number of lives, and the amount of money, that might be saved if we just leave the clocks the f**k alone awaits another study.
Fischbeck and Gerard conducted a preliminary study of seven years of federal traffic fatalities and calculated risk per mile walked for pedestrians. They found that per-mile risk jumps 186 percent from October to November, but then drops 21 percent in December.
They said the drop-off by December indicates the risk is caused by the trouble both drivers and pedestrians have adjusting when darkness suddenly comes an hour earlier.
The reverse happens in the morning when clocks are set back and daylight comes earlier. Pedestrian risk plummets, but there are fewer walkers then, too. The 13 lives saved at 6 a.m. don't offset the 37 lost at 6 p.m., the researchers found.
...The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety of Arlington, Va., in earlier studies found the switch from daylight saving time to standard time increased pedestrian deaths. Going to a year-round daylight saving time would save about 200 deaths a year, the institute calculated, said spokesman Russ Rader.