unicorn

Well, I don't see how unopened capsules of magnesium in your cupboard could do anything to help @donJ, or anyone else. 😉 But, seriously, vitamin D is rather unique in that it's really a hormone, not a vitamin, but most people in temperate climates simply don't make enough vitamin D to meet optimal requirements. Other vitamins, and minerals, which really are required in the diet, vary in how often people get recommended amounts. As discussed in a prior study I referenced higher, the RDA currently recommended in the US is far below one's needs if one doesn't have adequate skin-to-sunlight exposure (without sunblock). Many scientists in the field recommend that the RDA for Vitamin D be changed (if my recollection is correct, the recommendation dates to the late 1930s). Other than that, it depends on diet. The following article discusses which nutrients are most commonly lacking in the US diet, and magnesium is one of them: https://lpi.oregonstate.edu/mic/micronutrient-inadequacies/overview#:~:text=Specifically%2C 94.3% of the US,and 38.9% for vitamin C. "...A US national survey, NHANES 2007-2010, which surveyed 16,444 individuals four years and older, reported a high prevalence of inadequacies for multiple micronutrients (see Table 1). Specifically, 94.3% of the US population do not meet the daily requirement for vitamin D, 88.5% for vitamin E, 52.2% for magnesium, 44.1% for calcium, 43.0% for vitamin A, and 38.9% for vitamin C...". Most multivitamin/multimineral supplements have only a fraction of dietary requirements for vitamin D, calcium, and magnesium, but do have adequate amounts of other nutrients. So I personally take MVI/MMN, plus vitamin D, and a calcium/magnesium supplement. Most other supplements are unhelpful for most people. Of course, my diet is probably pretty adequate in magnesium, so I focus mainly on the calcium rather than the magnesium. Too much magnesium can give you the runs.

I was listening to the radio news channel on my way to the grocery store the other day. They played a brief blurb from someone whom they described as a "public health expert" (not a public health official, but rather a faculty member of the University of Southern California School of Public Health) who said "The current Covid variant presents a challenge because most infections are asymptomatic." This sounds to me more like the press trying to fan flames hysteria when in reality the news that infections have markedly dropped in severity should be a cause for celebration. Aren't there more important diseases to try to control at this point? This reminds me of a conversation I had with an acquaintance decades ago who lamented the fact that the pediatric AIDS unit at UCLA was closing down--because there were almost no new pediatric cases anymore. Yes, the university did find him a far more productive use of his time. I'd say there needs to be a point when we say "OK. Medical science has done its job (and the virus mutated to a more sustainable form). Time to redirect public health resources to more pressing issues."

I realize that most Aussies probably have other sources of income, but trying to live on that has got to be insane. It certainly would be in California. Or are seniors entitled to other benefits such as subsidized housing and/or food?

I think he's the one holding the ball:

He didn't medal, but did compete in the last Olympics, Hungarian gymnast stud Krisztofer Mészáros.

Interesting. That makes me wonder if the original post was fabricated. That's quite something that a person can collect from a fund to which they didn't contribute a dime. In the US, one must work at least 40 quarters (10 years) to start collecting, and you pretty much get your maximum benefit after working 120 quarters (30 years). My husband won't collect social security on his own earnings (since he didn't work 40 quarters), but if I die before he does (most likely), he can continue to collect my social security (as long as I don't start collecting before my full retirement age of 67): https://www.ssa.gov/survivor/amount#:~:text=Payments start at 71.5% of,Over 80% at age 63. "Spouses and ex-spouses Payments start at 71.5% of your spouse’s benefit and increase the longer you wait to apply. For example, you might get: Over 75% at age 61. Over 80% at age 63. Over 90% at age 65. You can get up to 100% when you reach your “Full Retirement Age for Survivor benefits” (between ages 66–67)."

If ever his career as an athlete doesn't pan out, I'm sure he can make a fortune on OnlyFans...

Félix Dolci, Canadian diver. Fortunately, he's not camera-shy. In fact, he seems quite (deservedly) proud of his body.

No, I'm not still working, but living off of my pension and, so far, non-retirement savings. I expect my non-retirement savings to last until I turn 70, at which point it will be replaced by social security and retirement account savings. The former room-mate of my best friend, who retired as a truck driver, was actually a trained chef, but quit because he didn't like to have to be told what to do, and took up truck driving instead, because it let him do his own thing. I cringed when he gave up his work as a sous-chef, but at least he lived his life under his own terms. Some people don't do well just serving the public. I trust that he didn't drink while driving a truck. I don't think I ever saw him sober. He did seem to live a content life. When not out on the road, he was always at home. He never joined us in any activities (hiking, travel, white-water rafting, etc.).

You forgot the most important part in determining the monthly benefit: when you start collecting. Those who choose to start payments early also choose a lifetime of low monthly payments. My best friend had a roommate who was a truck driver and an avid drinker. The winter after he turned 60, he cursed his job when he had to put on tire chains going over the mountain pass on I-5 between Redding, California and Oregon. At the time, the earliest one could collect Social Security was 60, and he didn't waste any time to hang up those tire chains and start getting those checks. His monthly check was around $1700, which, in addition to his cooking, was his contribution to the household. He was always drunk when he answered the phone. His decision to start collecting early ended up being a good one, since he died of pancreatic cancer before reaching his full retirement age (FRA) of 67. Of course, I expect to live into my 80s, so wouldn't think of starting to collect before my FRA of 67, and will probably wait until 70, when the benefit is the greatest. Also, if I wait until at least FRA to start collecting, my widower husband can keep collecting a good portion of those checks. Collecting early mainly benefits those with poor health habits. Social Security does not pay a higher benefit (for obvious reasons) to smokers, boozers, cough potatoes, etc., even though their life expectancy is quite a bit shorter.

It's a small, isolated town. I doubt you'll find much. Winters are long and very harsh.

Gold medal-worthy:

In California, fast food workers earn a minimum of $20 an hour. Everyone else gets a minimum of $16 an hour, or more depending on the city. https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/minimum_wage.htm#:~:text=Fast Food Minimum Wage Effective,at least %2420.00 per hour. Even the burger flipper at McDonald's has access to a 401(k) retirement plan: https://www.mccourtesy.com/content/careers/benefits-pay/employee-benefits I lived modestly during my working years so I could maximize my retirement plan contributions and live a care-free retirement.

It's probably fairly foolish to retire on social security alone, but in the US it comes up to $3822 if one starts collecting at 67. If one waits until one is 70 to collect (as I plan to do, assuming continued good health), then one can collect $4873 per month. Of course, these amounts usually increase each year, and I suspect it will be at least $5000 a month when I turn 70. https://www.bankrate.com/retirement/maximum-social-security-benefit/#:~:text=Here's an explanation for how,age is %243%2C822 per month. "Your maximum Social Security benefit depends significantly on the age you file for your benefit, among other factors such as your contributions to the program: Your maximum benefit if you file at age 62 – the youngest possible age – is $2,710 per month. Your maximum benefit if you file at full retirement age – between 66 and 67 – is $3,822 per month. Your maximum benefit if you file at age 70 – the age when extra benefits stop accruing – is $4,873 per month."

What kind of an idiot retires on a pension of US$18,000 a year? That looks more like my monthly pension payment (well, not quite). And that doesn't include the income from my retirement accounts. Nor does it include my social security, which, when I start collecting it, alone will be more than twice that. Did he go through his entire working life not saving anything for retirement? His plan was to retire first, then start saving money????