unicorn

I guess I wasn't clear in my original post. I'm talking about instances in which I'm in the middle of texting someone, back-and-forth, when I suggest an invitation or meeting, and then suddenly the person stops responding. That irritates me. As for simply calling someone out of the blue, I would never call someone without first texting "Is this a good time for me to call?", nor would I respond to a phone call unless someone has first texted me to ask if this is an appropriate time to call. I find it a bit rude to call someone (or be called) without first asking if it's an appropriate time. I only call first when it's a business, and it's their business to answer the phone, or with my nonagenarian step-mother, who seems to be technologically impaired when it comes to texting. She once face-time called me when I was having sex with my fiance. I give her a pass due to her highly advanced age.

Of course, since Mongolia is a land-locked country, they would have to fly over China to get him to the Hague (possibly via South Korea or Japan). One might wonder if China would block such a Mongolian plane, since China isn't a member of the ICC. Mongolia is in a tough spot, since either Russia or China could make things very difficult for them, no matter what they might really want.

There have been a number of times when I'm texting someone, and I invite him to an event, and it's silence. Rather than say "I'll check my calendar when I get home. I'll get back to you at 4," or something, it's no response. I must confess that I find that rather irritating. What's your experience? If you receive an invitation by text, do you usually respond to the invitation right away (even if it's to say you don't know yet), or, if you haven't decided, do you just go blank--pretending you didn't see the text or whatever? Or do others do that to you? I mean, my calendar is right on my phone, so for me it's not rocket science to figure out if I can come or not (assuming I'm not driving--I have hands-free texting), but at least I can text back and say I'll get back to you later. To make it clear, I'm talking about people I've been actively texting, who just stop the conversation when I extend the invitation--not an invitation text I send out of the blue, when I understand the person may be unable to respond due to a meal, movie, or business meeting. One time, I offered a friend, who needs money, to dog-sit our pooches while we went on vacation (for compensation). He just stopped texting when I sent the invitation, so I invited another friend who promptly accepted. The first friend texted the next day to say he'd love to do it, but I'd already offered the job to the 2nd friend. I told the first friend that I would have loved for him to do it, but someone had to take care of our dogs, so I invited the other friend. The first friend apologized said he was just "distracted" the prior day. I just don't understand that behavior. Or am I being unreasonable?

First, I must preface by saying that BPH (especially if symptomatic) would be a relative contra-indication for TRT. However, with respect to prostate cancer, multiple studies have shown no link. Therefore, if the decision not to take TRT were due to concerns of increasing the risk of prostate cancer, then the decision would, by its very nature, be uninformed, whether one has read the study or not. Ignoring science is extremely common, and I suspect practiced by most people. Billions believe the earth was created in 6 days, although science says that can't be the case. One can read something and ignore it--either for rational or irrational reasons. I have read parts of the Bible and ignore it, since I find much, if not most of it, completely nonsensical. Since you don't seem to have significant symptoms of BPH, I'm going to make an educated guess that your diagnosis was made from PSA screening, showing a level in the 4-10 range, and that you subsequently had a follow-up blood test showing high levels of free PSA, favoring BPH. May have also had an ultrasound to be extra cautious in ruling out a cancer. Hopefully you didn't get blind biopsies even after a comforting free PSA level and a negative ultrasound, though I've seen it happen.

There have been lots of rumors that he's quite ill. No way to know for sure.

Again, @readerand the Thai press cherry-picking stories in an attempt to malign a community.

I think the original poster forgot one exclamation point when making the title.

Everyone knows he's a piece of shit. Those voting for him also know, and don't care. 🙄

https://apnews.com/article/russia-putin-mongolia-visit-icc-arrest-warrant-0b97ffa2e76f0809264d3d4872484d0c# "Russian President Vladimir Putin will visit Mongolia next week, the Kremlin said Thursday, despite the country being a member of the International Criminal Court, which last year issued a warrant for his arrest. The visit, scheduled for Sept. 3, will be Putin’s first trip to an ICC member state since the warrant was issued in March 2023 over suspected war crimes in Ukraine. Under the court’s founding treaty, the Rome Statute, ICC members are bound to detain suspects for whom an arrest warrant has been issued by the court, if they set foot on their soil...". Putin is supposed to be arrested if he goes to any of the countries marked in green: I'm sure Mongolia told Putin they wouldn't arrest him. But it could be a trick. Once he gets there, who knows?

I guess you can do what most people do: use a VPN service.

I'm definitely not trying to convince anyone to start TRT, but there is nothing "cautious" about ignoring scientific studies. TRT does have its risks, and worsening of BPH is almost certainly one of them, so if you've had to take medication for BPH, I agree that you probably shouldn't take TRT. Incidentally, not ejaculating at least twice a week is associated with increased risk of both BPH and prostate cancer, so I'd encourage any man without an active sex life to jack off at least twice a week. However, I wouldn't want anyone reading this string to believe that it's still up in the air as to whether or not TRT increases the risk of prostate cancer. It does increase the risk of BPH, but not of cancer. Testosterone deficiency has its own risks, not just the obvious ones such as sex drive and mood, but also more serious ones such as loss of bone and muscle strength, with the concomitant increased fracture risk. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5376477/ "Testosterone has a clear direct effect on bone health. Testosterone signaling stimulates osteoblasts to form trabecular bone and helps osteocytes prevent trabecular bone loss. This leads to the decreased BMD and increased fracture risk seen in men with both primary and secondary hypogonadism....". The decision to treat testosterone deficiency is an individual one, which should be based on each person's individual risk profile. Since you have BPH, TRT is not for you. It may be a wise choice for others, though. Anyone with untreated testosterone deficiency for over 5 years may wish to have his bone density checked. If present, there are certainly medications which treat osteoporosis other than hormonal ones.

Or (for those of us maybe 10-15 years younger)...

Well, it's been pretty much settled scientifically that TRT does not cause prostate cancer. However, if you do develop prostate cancer, testosterone will make it grow more quickly. https://www.health.harvard.edu/mens-health/appropriate-use-of-testosterone-therapy-does-not-appear-to-raise-prostate-cancer-risk#:~:text=Appropriate use of testosterone therapy,prostate cancer risk - Harvard Health "A study published online Dec. 27, 2023, by JAMA Network Open confirms prior research showing that testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) in men with documented low testosterone levels does not increase their risk of prostate cancer compared to men not using TRT...". So while testosterone replacement doesn't increase one's risk of developing prostate cancer, it may be a good idea to screen for it if one is being prescribed TRT. This might be more the case if you have a significantly greater risk, particularly if you have an immediate relative who developed symptomatic prostate cancer (not just tested positive from PSA screening, but never developed a complication from the cancer). Testosterone gel is now generic, so there is little reason to pick injections over the gel. Gels provide a smoother delivery than injections. Unless you get a skin reaction from the gel, this is probably the preferred method. The only other theoretical disadvantage is that if you hug (or have sex) with someone shortly after application, you might transfer some of the testosterone (more of a theoretical disadvantage, and mainly if that other person is a child or woman). https://www.setforset.com/blogs/news/testosterone-gel-vs-injection

Yes, it is a repost (see jokes string in the Beer Bar).

That's an odd sum. Why not 4 million or 5 million? I guess that translates to about $130,000 (US). Not a lot of money for a life. What if he doesn't pay? Then he gets the death sentence? Otherwise, I don't see what his incentive is to pay up...

That's because it's always easier to wake up earlier than we're used to, rather than to be forced not to sleep in. Also, the daily circadian rhythm is a bit over 24 hours. https://www.sleepfoundation.org/circadian-rhythm#:~:text=“An adult's natural internal clock,shift our natural circadian rhythms.” “An adult’s natural internal clock is on average 24.2 hours. We use external stimuli to help entrain this rhythm daily to 24 hours. Changing the amount and times of sunlight exposure, or changing our routines, can send signals to our ‘master clock’ and shift our natural circadian rhythms.” That's why there's the saying "East is a beast, west is best." That being said, if I can take a nonstop flight to Europe leaving in the early evening, that'll usually get me to Europe in the late morning. Taking methylphenidate in the morning for 2 or 3 days helps keep me alert during the day, as well as a hypnotic in the evening on the flight over, and again for the next 2 or 3 days following arrival in Europe, and I'm good to go.

That was one of @Riobard's more readable posts (I agree that his writing can be barely comprehensible at times, but this was not one of those instances). To put it even more plainly, he said that your original post/insinuation was full of shit. 😉

Try leaving him a private message. He may not be following this string. Click on the envelope icon on the upper right of this page.

Wise words from TTC.

@Moses posted factually false information, and I simply did not let him get away with it. Whether it's better to retire in Thailand or the Philippines is a matter of opinion, but certain things are just factually incorrect, such as the presence of Nazis in the Ukrainian government. If someone states "I believe the earth is flat," there are only two possibilities. Either the man making that statement is a fool or a liar. To state that there are neo-Nazis with a significant influence in the government, and that there are members (plural) of a neo-Nazi party in the Ukrainian legislature, when there is only ONE, in a parliament (Rada) of 450 members is simply factually false. For what it's worth, I believe he's probably lying, and intentionally spreading misinformation, rather than simply being foolish, but I cannot, of course, know what's going on in his head. I don't have tolerance for the spread of factually false information.