Recent comments in /f/explainlikeimfive
Flair_Helper t1_iy175ss wrote
Reply to ELI5 If fevers are the body’s defense against viruses, and the body’s top most interest is the preservation of life, then why does the body allow fever temperature to get life threatening high (104+)? by TheFaytalist
Please read this entire message
Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):
- ELI5 requires that you search the ELI5 subreddit for your topic before posting. Users will often either find a thread that meets their needs or find that their question might qualify for an exception to rule 7. Please see this wiki entry for more details (Rule 7).
If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe this submission was removed erroneously, please use this form and we will review your submission.
Ndvorsky t1_iy15oa8 wrote
Reply to comment by HereticBatman in ELI5 how automatic cars avoid chewing up first gear by neonpablo
No, that wouldn’t be necessary.
Certain-Definition51 t1_iy14d2j wrote
Reply to comment by Interesting-Peak1994 in ELI5: How does buffalos get so big while being herbivores? by Kay1636
My brother in Christ. Prairies.
86tuning t1_iy11ncl wrote
there is a slip mechanism called a torque converter, that at low speeds, works like a fluid coupling. that's why the vehicle creeps forwards when you ease off the brake.
think of a fluid filled donut with an impeller driven by the engine, and another impeller driving the transmission. at idle speeds the system has some slip. at higher speed differential there is torque multiplication due to a stator inside redirecting fluid flow. but that's well beyond ELI5 without diagrams and videos.
manual transmission cars don't have a fluid coupling, but rely on a friction clutch that works much like a brake pedal but inversely. stepping on the pedal releases the clutch into false neutral. and releasing the pedal engages the clutch and lets you bark the tires and get going.
idontchooseanid t1_iy10e42 wrote
Reply to ELI5: Why is it bad to turn off your computer by the button, if windows goes through the shutdown process anyway? by tjiosse
It comes from the old era where computers didn't have tactile push buttons with proper signalling in the motherboard to initiate a shutdown and eventually cut the power. They had a good old switch. When you opened the switch it opened the power circuit which caused an immediate shutdown. When you closed the switch you got power. Just like a light bulb.
With DOS or Commodore systems this wasn't a huge deal. The only possible scenario to lose data is when you deliberately shut your computer immediately after commanding to write data. You would know you lose data because you knew the command hasn't completed the operation yet. With old consumer systems like those there could only be a single application running which took over the entire computer for itself. So the only way to lose it would be your deliberate action by closing the switch while it is saving.
Nowadays we don't have computers with a switch but when they introduced the first versions of OS/2, Windows etc. people still had computers with a switch. This is a big deal since those OSes introduced multitasking. Now there is always a supervisor program, i.e. the OS, running the other programs by switching them around really really fast. Moreover they started to do things at the background for efficiency reasons. Therefore user's ability to guess when a disk write happens has been disappeared. So suddenly shutting down a computer with a modern OS started to carry a risk. Since people gain habits while using machinery, they have to be reminded of the new behavior. Many people were using DOS systems and it was normal / habitual to just turn the computer off from the switch.
Due to those reasons early Windows versions displayed a message after a proper shutdown to inform the user to switch the computer off: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20160419-00/?p=93315
ADDeviant-again t1_iy108ff wrote
You aren't annoying anyone, this isn't a terrible question.
But, the answer is, why wouldn't they? You cannot apply the rules of human nutrition to other animals. Let me flip your logic for a second.....
There are jungle cockroaches that can run 150 times their body length in one second, and can lift 20 times their body weight, that eat nothing but rotting wood. OBVIOUSLY, if you go out and eat a straight diet of rotting wood, you won't et that strong or fast.
Humans are not good at digesting grass. We lack the enzymes, physical structures (like multi-chambered stomachs and grinding teeth), gut microbes, and lifestyle to get the most out of grass and other tough plants, unlocking the nutrition.
We lack the DNA, growth hormones, sex hormones, bone structure, and life cycle (ontogeny: the study of development and life cycle) to turn into giant muscular tanks, in the same way buffalo lack our ability to live to 60-70 years.
lemoinem t1_iy0ymjn wrote
Reply to ELI5: If allergies, and especially anaphylaxis, are so common, why do we still need prescriptions for epi pens and such? by boomokasharoomo
We don't. Bought one two weeks ago, just need to ask the pharmacist (OTC, not free service).
I'm not sure where you live, but not all countries require a prescription to buy EpiPen...
Folsomdsf t1_iy0xexd wrote
Reply to comment by ShalmaneserIII in ELI5: If allergies, and especially anaphylaxis, are so common, why do we still need prescriptions for epi pens and such? by boomokasharoomo
>Dude...that's a case report.
And? It was the first obvious one, and also showing it's already available OTC and has been abused rofl.
>Do you think that someone's going to replace their morning pick-me-up by stabbing themselves with an expensive auto-injector every ten minutes?
.... Have you ever actually met another human being with a bad habit? Like seriously, how can you ask this question? Yes they absolutely fucking would rofl. People do stupid shit for way less.
police-ical t1_iy0x02l wrote
It's called postprandial somnolence, and it's not perfectly understood, partly because there's a lot of stuff potentially going on. We know there's a big shift with eating from the "fight or flight" sympathetic nervous system to the "rest and digest" parasympathetic nervous system, and this shift means overall low energy and a drive to reduce muscle use and send blood to the gut instead. There are probably a bunch of other shifts in the brain that contribute, though. Interestingly, chemicals like histamine and orexin that regulate appetite also strongly regulate sleep (i.e. blocking histamine makes you sleepy and hungry.)
EpiHackr t1_iy0wm1d wrote
Reply to comment by readitreaddit in ELI5: How does buffalos get so big while being herbivores? by Kay1636
Well they have enzymes, and special bacteria ... as well as multiple stomachs and have to rechew their food over and over after its been in this stomachs. AND if we had that ability, we'd have no fiber in our diets, which would lead to high cholesterol and high rates of colon cancer.
Besides, do you want to be chewing 13 hours a day?
T0xicalGr33k OP t1_iy0wivd wrote
Reply to comment by lohborn in Eli5 why we feel sleepy after eating food by T0xicalGr33k
Wow that's actually insane. I have never thought about this. Thank you!
Clewin t1_iy0wcl0 wrote
Reply to comment by ShalmaneserIII in ELI5: If allergies, and especially anaphylaxis, are so common, why do we still need prescriptions for epi pens and such? by boomokasharoomo
The same thing happened for a while with asthma inhalers. HFA propellant requirements took the OTC Primatine Mist off the shelves and despite promises that cheap inhalers and OTC HFA inhalers would appear in a couple of years, big pharma reformulated the propellant every 10 years to keep it perpetually under patent. Primatine had to develop and patent their own HFA to return to the OTC market.
Incidentally, asthma inhalers are kind of a directed epi and do help with anaphylaxis in the lungs. For example, Fel-D-1 is a common protein in cat saliva that can trigger anaphylaxis in asthmatics. For me, I also get red eyes and congestion with sneezing along with gasping for breath. Dogs produce less allergens for me, but I definitely notice when they haven't been bathed in a while. Dogs may be more of a fur allergy than saliva, cats are definitely saliva.
shortyninja t1_iy0wamt wrote
Reply to comment by pupae in ELI5: If allergies, and especially anaphylaxis, are so common, why do we still need prescriptions for epi pens and such? by boomokasharoomo
I’m not sure tbh. But a lot of suicides are spur of the moment things, so if you do something that makes it take time and effort to acquire the means to do it, people are more likely to talk themselves out of it.
ShalmaneserIII t1_iy0w6u5 wrote
Reply to comment by Folsomdsf in ELI5: If allergies, and especially anaphylaxis, are so common, why do we still need prescriptions for epi pens and such? by boomokasharoomo
Dude...that's a case report.
And epinephrine has a half life in plasma of about two to three minutes. Do you think that someone's going to replace their morning pick-me-up by stabbing themselves with an expensive auto-injector every ten minutes?
shockingdevelopment OP t1_iy0vq81 wrote
Reply to comment by DarkAlman in ELI5: Why did geopolitics become focused on West vs East alliances? by shockingdevelopment
What do you mean by morally opposed and doing anything about it?
Folsomdsf t1_iy0vj8w wrote
Reply to comment by ShalmaneserIII in ELI5: If allergies, and especially anaphylaxis, are so common, why do we still need prescriptions for epi pens and such? by boomokasharoomo
>than would do so with epi pens.
If OTC it would be abused very heavily actually. Epinephrine would be manufactured on a scale you don't understand if allowed otc or into other sources. Caffeine specifically causes your adrenal glands to release epinephrine and cortisol. Imagine how quickly our most abused drug in the world would be supplanted by skipping that step and just taking actual doses of what we're trying to get.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3814285/
People already abuse otc sources of epinephrine when the opportunity presents.
DarkAlman t1_iy0uvty wrote
Reply to comment by shockingdevelopment in ELI5: Why did geopolitics become focused on West vs East alliances? by shockingdevelopment
It still all leads back to WW2
China was in the midst of a Civil War during WW2 while also under occupation by the Japanese and being a British colony.
The Capitalist and Western aligned Kuomintang were fighting against the Chinese Communists.
Afterwards the Communist faction took over and it became a State loosely allied with the Eastern Bloc. While the remains of the Kuomintang ran off to Taiwan.
During the 80s while the Soviet Union collapsed China started becoming more capitalist while maintaining state control of everything. It's economic prosperity is what caused to be reach it's current near super power status.
The new Cold War is economics. The Chinese are doing a bunch of stuff that is Morally and Politically counter to the West but the West doesn't want to do anything about it because they are so economically dependent on China at the moment.
Clewin t1_iy0ueu4 wrote
Reply to comment by TyrconnellFL in ELI5: If allergies, and especially anaphylaxis, are so common, why do we still need prescriptions for epi pens and such? by boomokasharoomo
There are several charities in the US that provide doses; I used to volunteer for one and packaged "overdose kits" that were given to first responders and homeless encampments. I am no longer involved, however - ex-wife's best friend ran the charity, a bit awkward now. The weird thing is it still requires a prescription but charities can give out for free due to the way a later law was written ..
lohborn t1_iy0ucok wrote
Digesting food takes a lot of energy. Your body literally changes where blood is flowing after you eat to send more to your digestive system. That means there is less blood for other things like your muscles.
Your body tells you to slow down.
reverseswede t1_iy0tmbh wrote
Reply to ELI5: If allergies, and especially anaphylaxis, are so common, why do we still need prescriptions for epi pens and such? by boomokasharoomo
Epipens can be dangerous, even when administered correctly.
People need to know that even though the symptoms should improve when they take the epipen they still need to go to hospital because other treatment and often additional adrenalin may be required- epipen is kinda a first aid move.
Diagnosis of who needs an epipen can be complex - its not always clear to people if what they had was anaphylaxis or not (severe episodes are generally fairly identifiable, but milder episodes can be tricky - a combo of rash and vomiting might need someone to have access to an epipen even though thats not what most people think of when they think anaphylaxis).
YardageSardage t1_iy0t6yh wrote
Reply to comment by readitreaddit in ELI5: How does buffalos get so big while being herbivores? by Kay1636
Basically, because those special enzymes (and the gut mechanisms to make use of them) are a trade-off. It takes a long time and a lot of digestion to break down tough plant materials like cellulose into stuff an animal body can use. Herbivorous animals have long, complicated digestive tracts, especially the ruminant (four-stomached) ones like cattle and buffaloes, and they spend all day long grazing, chewing, fermenting, and re-chewing stuff like grass to make it useable. (Some don't have these long digestive systems and instead rely on easier plantstuffs like fruits and leaves, but then, those are the kinds of things that we can eat too.) This is worth it for them, evolutionarily, because it gives them access to a semi-exclusive food source.
Humans, along with other omnivore/carbivore species, have opted for a different strategy. Instead of investing a bunch of our time, energy, and body mass into specialized plant-digesting equipment, we developed stuff that makes us better hunters and more discerning gatherers. We can't eat grass, but we don't have to spend 12-18 hours a day doing it, because we can just climb a tree and eat a banana or catch a squirrel instead and get the same amount of nutrients. Obligate carnivores like cats have really simple digestion and can't digest any plant material, but they can sleep 18 hours a day instead. Dogs are slightly more carnivorous than us, and will supplement their diets with plants where necessary, but still mostly need meat. We humans are juuust about herbivorous enough to get by on plants alone if we choose to, but we have to be careful about it, and usually fare best with some animal product supplementation.
Djeng726cgk t1_iy0sqr3 wrote
Reply to comment by Snaggmaw in ELI5: Why do we have an INTENSE love for animals? by [deleted]
I think this is a bit stretched. There may be some truth in it, but the bonding that happens between people and animals often appears to be a lot deeper than the superficial factors you mentioned
86tuning t1_iy0roju wrote
Reply to comment by pupae in ELI5: If allergies, and especially anaphylaxis, are so common, why do we still need prescriptions for epi pens and such? by boomokasharoomo
i guess i'm more paranoid than your friends are lol
[deleted] t1_iy0r82o wrote
[removed]
DarkAlman t1_iy177vj wrote
Reply to comment by shockingdevelopment in ELI5: Why did geopolitics become focused on West vs East alliances? by shockingdevelopment
The Chinese regime is extremely authoritarian, spies on it's own citizens, implemented a social credit system, arrests people without warrants, makes people disappear for going against the government, and there's a possible active genocide happening against the Uyghurs right now just to name a few.
The West typically wouldn't want to do business with a country like that but tolerates China and doesn't denounce them as much as they normally would because they are too afraid to lose the economic benefits.