It seems like the same discussions come up around Reddit a lot, so I figured I'd gather up some common topics, and their rebuttals.
Many of these arguments can be expanded with more points and sources but I'm trying to keep this as compact and to the point as possible.

Myth 1: "Sexism against men is never institutional or systematic"

Many forms of sexism and discrimination against men are explicitly institutionalized or systemic in society.
Examples include police violence, court biases, incarceration, child custody discrimination, military service, educational biases, health research and spending, insurance, housing discrimination, reproductive rights, bodily autonomy rights, and many others.
The widespread ignorance and denialism around these issues can itself be interpreted as a form of systemic discrimination against men as well.
Note that some of these are institutional because they boil down to statutory legal rights which exist in the realm of government policy and administration. And the government is obviously an institution.

Myth 2: "Most politicians and CEOs are men, and this has led to a society that privileges men and disenfranchises women"

The fact that many positions of formal power are occupied by men does not translate into measurable privileges for the average man.
The assumption this is based on is the idea that men have an in-group bias and prefer other men over women.
Which is an idea that has been debunked over and over again in the academic literature. The gender bias among men is almost zero, and sometimes manifests as an out-group bias sightly in favor of women, not other men.
In-group bisses do exist among women though. In fact some research has found evidence for very strong gender biases among women. Including when it comes to educators, bosses, and hiring managers. Women in formal positions of power do actually seem to prefer other women over men, in much the same way that men are accused of behaving. So maybe this is just projection: people who themselves have gender biases assume that everyone else does as well.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15491274
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022103101915112
https://link.springer.com/chapte10.1007/978-3-030-04384-1_9

Myth 3: "Women were uniquely oppressed in history compared to men"

Much like today, sexism in history was often two sides of the same coin. If it was unfair that women had to stay home and take care of their children then it was also unfair that men had to work long hours outside the comfort of their homes. Many people try to equate sexism to the history of racism, as if men were unilaterally oppressing women for their own benefit. And that's simply not an accurate view of history (nor is it a very healthy belief to have).
Gender norms were often unfair to women. But for most of history, women could own property, get divorced (where they usually took most of their husband's money), run businesses, and even be heads of state. Many large empires were ran by women, for example.
The reality of the situation though is that pregnancy (and breastfeeding) often dictated the need for women to have men supporting them. Birth control and baby formula didn't exist. So your options were basically abstinence, or marriage. Which was the same choice that men also had.
https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Privileged_Sex.html?id=4szznAEACAAJ&source=kp_book_description
https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:2e88e3f6-b270-4228-b930-9237c00e739f/download_file?file_format=application/pdf&safe_filename=Item.pdf&type_of_work=Journal%20article
https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199582174.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199582174-e-036
https://archive.org/details/legalsubjection00baxgoog/
https://www.marxists.org/archive/beard/woman-force/index.htm
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1855/f217b082603d0ab37ea80c4741fceb8a4a23.pdf
"What about voting rights?"
Voting rights were historically tied to military service and the draft. It was never something that men got "for free" just for being men.
In England, most men couldn't vote until 1918, and that was only because they instituted a draft for all men during WWI.
Women aged 30 and older were also given the right to vote in 1918, and this came without the same obligation to serve in the military that men had. Women over 21 were given voting rights just 10 years later in 1928, which was the same age that men could vote. And that temporary age difference had a practical purposes: so many men died in WW1 that there was a need to even out the gender ratio.
So men have been allowed to vote for a whopping 10 years longer than women, at most. And that was only because of the mass, involuntary slaughter that they experienced around the world during WW1.
Other obligations that men had were paying taxes, attending caucuses, and signing up for bucket bridges to fight fires.
It took a few decades in some parts of the world for people to decide that it was fair for women to be able to vote without giving anything back to the state, but I think it's important to understand the context here. It wasn't misogyny or oppression but political theory. Specifically the question of whether or not it was fair to give women voting rights without equivalent responsibilities that were required from men (something known as a moral hazard, and that can be contextualized as "female privilege also sometimes harming women").
https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/electionsvoting/womenvote/parliamentary-collections/collections-the-vote-and-afterepresentation-of-the-people-act-1918/
http://www.familyofmen.com/when-did-men-and-women-have-the-right-to-vote-in-canada/
See also:
https://www.reddit.com/MensRights/comments/iu2ebj/women_could_and_did_own_property_and_have_rights/
https://www.reddit.com/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/l1byes/suffrage_was_primarily_a_class_issue_not_a_gende

Myth 4: "Domestic violence and sexual assault are primarily women's issues"

Domestic violence and sexual assault affects everyone, and at nearly identical rates between men and women.
In the US, roughly 37.3% of women have been victims of domestic violence, stalking, sexual harassment, and sexual abuse. Including 1.4 million women who experience sexual assault annually.
For men that same figure is 30.9%. Including 1.7 million men who experience sexually assault annually (defined as "made to penetrate"). The vast majority of these men are also victimized by women, not by "other men" (which is another myth).
This pattern is similar across the world, including in poor and underdeveloped nations (see here for a collection of studies), and is consistent with a wide range of research demonstrating "gender parity" between men and women for this topic.
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/NISVS-StateReportBook.pdf
http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Faculty/bibs/stemple/Stemple-SexualVictimizationPerpetratedFinal.pdf
https://1in6.org
It's also not true that there's a significant difference in severity between male and female victims. Around 66% of intimate partner homicides do have women as victims (which is hardly a staggering majority), but when you include intimate partner related suicide deaths (including assisted suicides), a greater number of men are killed because of domestic violence than women. These statistic also ignore the fact that lesbian relationships are more violent than heterosexual and gay male relationships. Which inflates these numbers and doesn't necessarily back up the idea that women are being uniquely victimized by men.
We should obviously work to fight against abuse in any form, but our current, gendered approach to this doesn't seem to be helping very much. It is also commonly used as an excuse for misandry. Many people who discuss abuse against women do not actually care about female victims. All they care about is advancing a culture of hatred and sexism against men.
https://web.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.5042/jacpr.2010.0141/full/html
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01506/full
See also:
https://www.reddit.com/MensRights/comments/f4rvop/some_sources_on_the_severity_of_domestic_violence/
https://www.reddit.com/MensRights/comments/koinom/some_sources_on_the_sexual_abuse_of_men_and_boys/
https://www.reddit.com/MensRights/comments/f5tes5/gender_parity_for_sexual_assault_academic_studies/
"But women are afraid to walk down dark alleyways at night!"
As they should. And as do men. Most violent crime targets men. And fear is subjective. This is hardly evidence of some kind of unique oppression against women (at least one that doesn't also affect men), and it ignores the fact that men are usually afraid of finding themselves in those same situations as well.
Men are stronger and more capable of defending themselves so I wouldn't blame someone for having gendered views or assumptions here. But let's try not to minimize male victimization or blame it on things like "male oppression".

Myth 5: "False allegations are extremely rare"

Multiple studies have found alarmingly high rates of false allegations in society.
As many as 1 in 7 men have been falsely accused at some point in their life, and they often have to live with those allegations even after proving their innocence.
In addition, around 1 in 20 women have also been falsely accused at some point during their life.
False allegations are particularly common when it comes to child custody and divorce, where well over half of all allegations have been estimated to be false. There is also a common racial element that targets minority men. Especially in history during the era of lynchings in the US.
http://www.saveservices.org/dv/falsely-accused/survey/
http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/psurvey-over-20-million-have-been-falsely-accused-of-abuse/
https://quillette.com/2019/04/16/divorce-and-the-silver-bullet/
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/14977/14977-h/14977-h.htm
See also:
https://www.reddit.com/MensRights/comments/e6w4yc/i_call_bullshit_on_the_false_rape_accusation/

Myth 6: "Men commit suicide more often than women, but women still attempt suicide more often than men"

This idea has its origins with faulty hospital reporting which lumps suicide attempts in with self-harm (which is something that's more common among women). Women are also more likely to report their suicide attempts than men. And even if this statistic were accurate, it ignores the obvious fact that a suicide survivor can attempt again, thus artificially inflating this statistic.
The fact is, most suicid deaths are men, and most evidence points to there being more unique attempts by men. Any evidence that men are "better" at it than women has been interpreted as evidence for greater motivation of success, due to the very same factors that lead them to attempt suicide to begin with. Not as evidence that women are somehow attempting suicide at rates similar to men in the background.
https://bmcpsychiatry.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12888-017-1398-8
See also:
https://www.reddit.com/MensRights/comments/cvpyve/comment/ey5xeda

Myth 7: "Men make more money because of their gender, and this is evidence of male privilege"

Existing gender norms encourage men to earn money in order to meet the financial demands that are placed on them by women.
This causes them to work harder and sacrifice more for their careers than women. Which they do in part because their income is tied to how successful they are with women, and whether or not they qualify as "marriage material".
The wage gap is therefore an example of a gender norm that harms men just as much as it does women.
92% of workplace deaths are men. Men work on average an extra 4 to 10 hours a week (depending on your source) than women. They start working at a younger age (often skirting child labor laws). They retire later (which is also during their peak earning years). And they die sooner than women. Men have worse health outcomes than women and that's largely because of the pressures that society puts on them to be successful and earn money to spend on women.
This is the other side of the wage gap that is equally as important, and that is equally as harmfully to men as it is to women. And it's really just the tip of the iceberg.
In many ways the wage gap is just a reflection of the financial exploitation of men in society. Which is facilitated by things like hypergamy and unfair marriage and divorce practices.
See also:
https://www.reddit.com/MensRights/comments/kzvfcg/about_the_wage_gap/
https://www.reddit.com/MensRights/comments/dxaimc/the_wage_gap_is_created_by_women_and_reflects/

Myth 8: "Men don't go to the doctor because of toxic masculinity"

The main reason that men sometimes don't seek help is a lack of time to see a doctor.
Men work longer hours than women at jobs that are less flexible, and more stressful, than jobs that women usually work at. Men overall engage in an extra hour of paid and unpaid labor per day compared to women, and an extra 45 minutes commuting to jobs that are further away. Meaning men on average have quite a bit less free time to go see a doctor than women do.
This is also something that changes during retirement: retired men are just as likely to go to the doctor as retired women.
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/3/8/e003320
A general lack of help and support, especially financial support, for men who need medical help also contributes to this. There is a myth that men are better taken care of than women which has resulted in gendered policies that help women, but exclude men. Even though it's men who often need that help more.

Myth 9: "Men don't speak up about sexism as much as women, so it's obviously not as big of an issue"

This is because people are less likely to care or listen to them. In part because many men who do speak up are silenced and accused of being misogynistic. A situation known as testimonial injustice or epistemic oppression.
Men are told to keep quiet and many end up internalizing the idea that only women can be discriminated against, since this is what society tells us to believe. Instead, men often adopt different terminology when they discuss gender issues. Like referring to differences in treatment between men and women as "double standards" instead of sexism or discrimination.

Myth 10: "Most men's issues are caused by men themselves"

Most men's issues are caused by gender norms and those gender norms are enforced by women just as much as they are by men.
Men's issues are often just one side of the coin, and usually reflect disadvantages that women face as well.
One of the biggest gender norms in society is hypergamy, or the tendency for women to try to marry up, and for men to marry down. And this gender norm is mostly enforced by women, not by men.
Two other gender norm that are enforced by women is the providership gender norm, and the childcare gender norm. Which also causes women to perform more unpaid work and earn less money than men in the labor market.
A fourth gender norm that is enforced by women more than men is the "boys don't cry bias". Which is mainly instilled in young boys by their mothers and by female school teachers. In fact, fathers and male school teachers actually fight against this gender norm.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1053535711000321
https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/04/messages-of-shame-are-organized-around-gende275322/
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/09/24/chapter-1-public-views-on-marria
https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/akillewald/files/money_work_and_marital_stability.pdf
https://www.fatherhood.org/fatherhood/maternal-gatekeeping-why-it-matters-for-children
https://news.uoguelph.ca/2019/11/mothers-push-gender-stereotypes-more-than-fathers-study-reveals/
See also:
https://www.reddit.com/MensRights/comments/gjtj10/most_people_regardless_of_gender_prefer_to_stay/

Myth 11: "Toxic masculinity is harming men and their mental health"

The concept of toxic masculinity has never been empirically tested, and some research questions the validity of it in the context of psychology and mental health.
Even if you do think it is valid though, it is still commonly used in a way that is sexist and hateful torwards men.
In recent years it has become associated with female supremacy, feminist hostility towards men, and misandry in general. And as a result, the vast majority of men find the term to be sexist and offensive.
Men who identify with traditional masculine values have greater self-esteem, better mental health, better relationships with women, and are usually better educated than men who are opposed to masculinity or who accept feminist views about the patriarchy and toxic masculinity.
The key to better mental health for men might therefore be an embracement of masculinity, not a shunning of it. Instead of trying to redefine masculinity, we should work to understand it better, and offer men better services based on an honest acknowledgement that men's and women's mental health might require different approaches.
Men are not "defective women", and treating men's mental health in that context does not seem to be working very well.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/apa-guidelines-men-boys.html
https://zenodo.org/record/3871217#.X-p1ji2l2J_
https://link.springer.com/chapte10.1007/978-3-030-04384-1_5

Myth 12: "Most men's activists just hate women or are opposed to feminism. They don't really care about men."

This rhetoric is normally used to silence the voices of men (and women) who support men's rights and prevent them from expressing themselves. Which makes it another example of testimonial injustice or epistemic oppression.
The fact is that many people do care about men's issues, and that's why they become MRAs. Feminism does get discussed in the men's movement, but there are a couple reasons for that:

1. Many feminists, "radical" or otherwise, have advocated against men and have even pushed for public policy in ways that are harmful to men or discriminates against men. Feminists themselves tend to not fight against this, meaning it's often up to MRAs to address it.
   
2. Many MRAs are themselves current or ex-feminists who were ostracized for daring to take the feminist rhetoric about "also caring about men" a little too seriously.
   

Warren Farrell is a great example of this. He used to be on the board of directors for NOW, the world's largest feminist organization.
And then he said that we need to work on child custody equality and reproductive rights for men. Topics that he assumed should fall under the umbrella of feminism since they are issues pertaining to gender equality. Instead of agreeing with him though, he ended up being excommunicated from the feminist movement. And now he's often regarded as the "father of the modern men's movement" for carrying on his advocacy outside of feminism.
The problem that many MRAs have with feminism is that it usually stops half way when advocating for gender equality.
So sometimes what MRAs are doing is just taking it the rest of the way towards actual gender equality. Our frustration with feminists comes from the fact that they refuse to see this as valid (or do it themselves to begin with).
See also:
https://www.reddit.com/MensRights/comments/ihmb2p/by_denying_that_the_feminist_establishment_is/
https://www.reddit.com/MensRights/comments/9v6tqj/a_list_about_feminism_misandry_for_anyone_who/

Myth 13: "Men don't receive custody of their children because they're bad fathers and don't bother requesting custody"

Academic research simply does not back this up. The only study that ever found something like this was discovered to be purposefully fraudulent, although that hasn't stopped people from trying to repeat this. The fact is that men are widely discriminated against on numerous different fronts when it comes to child custody and other areas involving family court law.
Note also how hateful this rhetoric is. This is the kind of stuff that you find repeated by feminists, and it simply doesn't treat this topic in a fair and honest manner. Fathers love their children and many fight tooth and nail just to get a few hours a week to spend with them. The system is broken and it represents a grave social injustice that is deeply unfair to fathers and their children.
https://www.sharedparenting.org/2019-shared-parenting-report
See also:
https://www.reddit.com/MensRights/comments/ilzceq/cmv_equal_child_custody_for_mothers_and_fathers/

Myth 14: "Most child abusers are men"

A majority of child abuse is actually committed by women, and especially by mothers. This is even more true when you include emotional abuse and neglect instead of just physical abuse.
By some metrics, the biological father is the safest person for a child to be with. This is because when men do abuse children, it often happens while under the custody of the mother. Who is sometimes complicit in the abuse or even encourages it.
Close to half of child abductors and traffickers are also women, not men. And many of their victims are boys. Boys face sexual abuse and are also used for forced labor and organ harvesting. They are less likely to survive or escape, are less likely to be reported on or identified, and they suffer from higher rates of abuse than girls who are trafficked.
And yet very little attention is given to this. Missing boys, and especially missing minority boys, are often ignored by society and the media. To the point that people often assume that most of the victims are girls. Something which is known as the missing white woman syndrome (although in Canada there is a lot of attention given to missing indigenous women, even though 71% of missing indigenous people are men and boys).
Note that I'm not saying these things to attack women, imply that they shouldn't receive custody, or to downplay the plight of girls. Which is a lot more than you can say about people who try to paint men as the villains in this picture. We should however be fair about what the facts are, and give male victimization, including victimization by women, the attention that it deserves.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16165212
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/childmaltreatment-facts-at-a-glance.pdf
http://www.breakingthescience.org/SimplifiedDataFromDHHS.php
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0145213416302599
https://www.savethechildren.org/us/charity-stories/child-trafficking-myths-vs-facts
Fair is fair and equal is equal. Gender equality will never be fixed if we refuse to look at both sides of the coin. We need to be honest about what the problems are, and stop ignoring them when they involve men, fathers, and boys.

https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ajcn/nqaa236/5901950

Children and adults should avoid consuming animal products to reduce risk for chronic disease: NO

Frédéric Leroy, Neal D Barnard
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, nqaa236, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqaa236
Published: 05 September 2020

ABSTRACT

Excessive attention to the animal versus plant binary food choice reflects society's moral views on eating right. To claim that avoidance of animal products is required to prevent chronic disease is not supported by evidence, makes little sense from an evolutionary perspective, and distracts policy makers from common-sense approaches to achieve adequate nutrition. Animal products provide highly bioavailable nutrients, some of which are not easily obtained from plants, and can play a key role in meeting the nutritional challenges of populations in both high- and low-income countries. This role goes beyond the need for protein and relates to vitamins, minerals, and numerous often-overlooked nutrients, such as long-chain fatty acids, taurine, and choline. Restrictive dietary prescriptions that exclude animal products complicate the quest for optimal nutrition by undermining dietary diversity and flexibility, and by introducing a dependency on fortification and supplementation. Thus, a vegan diet may put the general population at increased risk of poor nutrition, a problem of particular concern for those with special nutritional requirements.
adequate essential nutrition, protein, micronutrients, nutritional needs, animal products

Main Argument (Leroy)

An evolutionary perspective argues against the need to eliminate animal-source foods

As with all animals, human nutritional requirements have been influenced by dietary composition throughout the evolution of our species (1). Reliance on substantial amounts of animal foods from both terrestrial and aquatic origin (marrow, organs, fat, meat, eggs, fish, and/or seafood) is characteristic of the human diet throughout the Pleistocene and more recent hunter-gatherers, which can—to some degree—serve as models for ancestral behavior (2). Depending on which resources are available within each habitat, the share of animal products in such diets (as a proportion of total energy) usually exceeds what is now consumed in the West, with only occasional incidences of chronic “diseases of modernity” (3). These evolutionary relationships have influenced our reproductive, digestive, and metabolic functions, fulfilling the nutritional requirements for the development of a large brain (1, 2). The consumption of (fermented) milk exerted an additional evolutionary influence since the Neolithic in populations with access to livestock. The relatively short time frame during which lactase persistence developed indicates that dairy provided strong nutritional benefits for crop-based and malnourished populations in need of protein and micronutrients. The fact that animal products have provided indispensable nutrition for at least 1.5 million years (1) is hard to reconcile with arguments for their exclusion from current diets (2, 4).

The intake of animal foods cannot be causally linked to the incidence of chronic diseases

Available epidemiological studies predominantly point toward neutral or protective associations for such animal foods as dairy, fish, and poultry (5–8). In contrast, various (but not all) observational studies have shown weak relative-risk estimates for high red- or processed-meat intake (i.e., amounts far exceeding 1 serving/d). However, the latter diminish with studies having a lower risk of bias (9) or when cross-cultural assessment is performed (4). In less-Westernized settings, associations tend to disappear or even invert, indicating strong effect modification and confounding by baseline nutritional status and healthy user bias. Regarding the latter, lifestyle characteristics of low versus high consumers of red and processed meats indicate likely bias among these associations in Western countries. Vegetarians differ from nonvegetarians with respect not only to the amount of meat consumed, but also to smoking, physical activity, alcohol consumption, and processed-food intake. Overall, evidence for a causal connection between red- or processed-meat intake and chronic diseases or mortality is inconsistent and inconclusive. Indeed, there is at most “low” to “very low” certainty evidence that higher intakes of red and processed meats result in small reductions in cancer mortality and incidence (10) or cardiometabolic outcomes and all-cause mortality (11). Similarly, there is little evidence that severe restriction of animal foods beyond a well-formulated omnivorous diet would reduce the prevalence of overweight and obesity (12).
Animal and human intervention studies of causal mechanisms typically address only short-term and intermediate surrogate outcomes, whereas markers of oxidative and inflammatory stress or cardiovascular risk fail to indicate harm (4, 13). While a modest increase in LDL cholesterol may occur, animal foods decrease apoB-to-apoA1 ratio, a strong marker of small, dense LDL particles and future cardiovascular disease. In a recent rigorous systematic review involving the use of Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria, the quality of evidence linking red and processed meats to potential adverse health outcomes was found to be “low” to “very low,” and not sufficient to support recommendations to reduce their consumption (14).

Animal foods provide high-quality nutrition

Animal products are the best source of nutrient-rich food for children <2 y old (15), while also providing the general population with important nutrition. A key benefit of animal foods is their protein amount and anabolic superiority (8, 12, 16), an advantage that becomes evident with consideration of essential amino acids content and ileal digestibility. The “Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score” (DIAAS) for animal protein is usually ≥1, outperforming plant proteins (legumes: 0.6; cereals: 0.3–0.5) and only approximated by soy (0.8–0.9). With use of state-of-the-art DIAAS, rather than conventional protein scoring systems, nuts, seeds, tofu, and pulses cannot be considered good sources of dietary protein (17).
Animal foods also provide essential fatty acids, with distinct benefits related to the content of EPA and DHA. These long-chain omega-3 fatty acids, abundantly present in oily fish and some other animal foods, are critical for normal brain development in childhood, fertility, immunity, and general health. Their shorter-chain precursor, ɑ-linolenic acid (ALA, 18:3n−3; available in plants), is poorly converted in vivo (5–10% for EPA, 1–5% for DHA) (16, 18). Thus, to achieve the equivalent of the commonly recommended 250 mg/d of EPA or DHA may require many grams of ALA daily, well above the consumption level of most Western vegetarians and vegans (19).
As with EPA and DHA, vitamin A is more efficiently obtained by direct intake from animal foods than from plant precursors. The biological value of the latter depends on the dose and species of the carotenoid, genetic and ethnic variability, and dietary context. Vegan diets are often low in fat, which further compromises absorption. For β-carotene, absorption varies between 5% and 65% and conversion between 4:1 to 28:1 (20). Other vitamins that may become problematic with restriction of animal foods include vitamin D, riboflavin, and niacin. Adequate supply of vitamin B-12 is of particular concern, as vegans have lower serum vitamin B-12 concentrations and, consequently, higher plasma homocysteine than omnivores (4, 12, 16). Whereas animal foods are excellent sources of vitamin B-12 (the Recommended Daily Intake can be delivered by a 100-g serving of beef, tuna, trout, or sardines), vegan diets require supplementation to avoid adverse psychiatric, neurological, and hematologic effects of deficiency. Moreover, supplementation and fortification are not always adequate to achieve sufficiency (4, 16). With the possible exception of some foods foreign to Western cuisine (e.g., the sea vegetable nori), dietary sources of vitamin B-12 are limited to animal products. Furthermore, vitamin K-2 found in animal products (e.g., egg yolks and dairy) may play a protective role for bone and cardiovascular health, beyond the effects associated with plant-associated vitamin K-1 (21).
Animal products provide highly bioavailable minerals (4, 8). Multiple servings of vegetables are often needed to match a single portion of animal food, a problem that may be exacerbated by the presence of antinutrients such as oxalates and phytates (16). For some key minerals, it may be impractical to obtain optimal intakes from plant foods (1, 16). For example, calcium, iron, and zinc are readily absorbed from dairy, fish with edible bones, and red meat; bioavailability of these critical minerals is characteristically lower from plant foods (12). For selenium, availability in crops depends strongly on the mineral status of the soil, whereas animal products vary to a much lesser degree in this regard. In addition, iodine status is often problematic in vegans and somewhat less so in vegetarians, with dairy being a good source (4).
Thus, a plant-based food-supply system would be dependent on fortification and supplementation to avoid risk of widespread micronutrient deficiencies (16). Furthermore, plant-based diets would also lack health benefits derived from the matrix of whole animal foods, beyond macro- and micronutrients (8). For instance, animal foods contain commonly overlooked bioactive components that promote neurological health, cognitive functions, antioxidant defenses, and muscle physiology (2, 4). Relative or absolute deficiencies of choline, carnosine, anserine, creatine, taurine, carnitine, and glutathione may occur with avoidance of animal products (2, 4, 16, 22).

Avoidance of animal-source foods undermines dietary robustness and causes unnecessary risk

Considering the important benefits of animal products as nutrient-dense foods and the absence of evidence for harm, their elimination from the diet comes with unnecessary risks (12). By omitting entire food groups, veganism is a highly restrictive approach that may undermine dietary robustness (4). According to a recent analysis, the greatest food-security challenge in 2050 will be the provision of nutrient-dense foods rather than adequacy of calories or carbohydrates (23). Many of the most problematic nutrients are optimally provided by animal products, including high-quality protein, calcium, iron, zinc, and vitamins A, D, and B-12 (23), as well as choline and DHA (22).
From an international perspective, a lack of access to animal foods can exacerbate malnutrition in vulnerable populations (15). Animal foods supply many nutrients that may be lacking in the cereal-based diets in low-income regions of Asia, Africa, and South America. Provision of meat, eggs, fish, or dairy to children is an effective way to reduce stunting and promote cognitive development (1, 8, 15, 24). But even in high-income populations, vegan diets require careful planning and supplementation to avoid major health problems (4, 16). The required nutritional knowledge, dietary discipline, culinary skills (e.g., proper processing of dried legumes), and resource availability are not consistently present in the general population. Even among the most sophisticated consumers, vegan diets may not be suitable for many people, especially children (24) and those unable to convert plant-derived precursors in sufficient amounts into their bioactive forms (as considered above). In fact, suboptimal nutrient concentrations have been frequently encountered among vegan and vegetarian populations—for instance, with respect to long-chain omega-3 fatty acids, iodine, and vitamin B-12 (4, 16). Concerningly, >90% of vegans and 70% of vegetarians were reportedly deficient in vitamin B-12 (compared with ∼1 in 10 omnivores), with use of the most sensitive diagnostics (25). Moreover, vegetarian and vegan mothers often have low long-chain omega-3 fatty acid and vitamin B-12 status (24, 26, 27), putting the health of their offspring at risk, as underscored by clinical case reports describing severe pathologies (4). Although harmful dietary practices can also be found among omnivore parents, failure to thrive and serious malnutrition syndromes appear to be more strongly linked to vegan and vegetarian upbringing (28), with implications to health later in life (29).

Conclusions

Rather than being portrayed as a cause of a public health crisis, animal products should be recognized as being at the forefront of the battle against malnutrition and diet-related disease, including cardiometabolic diseases. These foods are nutrient dense, highly satiating, and provide a basis for diets aiming to restore metabolic health and prevent age-related diseases (8, 12, 30).
The excessive focus of dietary discourse on animal versus plant foods in the prevention of chronic disease is poorly supported by scientific evidence, especially with regard to calls for the total elimination of animal products. The argument against animal foods is largely based on observational studies that lack the causal data required to inform policy interventions. On the contrary, animal products offer quality nutrition, components of which cannot be easily substituted by plants. Food policies that aim to minimize animal-food consumption will expose populations to unnecessary risk, especially in the face of projected global nutritional challenges. Such narrow approaches to human diets may cause harm and distract from greater dietary priorities that find common ground at both sides of the animal versus plant foods debate, such as the importance of avoiding excessive intakes of nutrient-poor, highly processed foods in globalizing foodscapes.

Refutation (Barnard)

Dr. Leroy has recounted several common myths that merit correction. The romantic notion that hunter-gatherers have been free of “diseases of modernity” was contradicted by the extensive atherosclerosis found in autopsies of Masai individuals (31) and in ancient Inuit remains (32). Meat ingestion clearly contributes to atherosclerosis.
The effect of diet on brain size is mere conjecture. Whales, elephants, and dolphins have larger brains than humans, as did Neanderthals; shrews have a greater brain-to-body-size ratio. Meat and saturated fat consumption is associated with accelerated cognitive decline, increased risk of Alzheimer disease, and brain atrophy.
While a genetic mutation fostering lactase persistence prevents lactose-induced diarrhea, evolution provided no protection against milk's longer-term hazards, notably prostate, breast, and ovarian cancer. In 2020, the Adventist Health Study-2 reported that women with the highest (compared with the lowest) milk consumption had a 50% higher risk of incident breast cancer (33).
The benefits of vegetarian and vegan diets are not attributable to differences in smoking, physical activity, or alcohol use. These and many other confounders have been controlled for in epidemiologic studies. Randomized trials confirm that avoiding animal products reduces body weight, blood pressure, and lipids. A 2015 meta-analysis showed that vegetarian diets lowered total and LDL cholesterol by 14 mg/dL (0.36 mmol/L) and 13 mg/dL (0.34 mmol/L), respectively (34).
The risks of elevated LDL-cholesterol concentrations caused by animal product ingestion are not mitigated by particle-size differences. LDL particles are atherogenic, regardless of particle size (35). In the Women's Health Study, higher concentrations of both small and large LDL particles significantly increased the HR for incident cardiovascular disease (36).
The cited meta-analyses of observational studies that had calculated the benefits of reducing meat consumption by 3 servings/wk were described by Dr. Leroy as discounting these benefits. They actually confirm them. One (10) predicted a reduction in cancer mortality by 7%. A similar reduction in processed meat would be expected to reduce esophageal (30%), colorectal (7%), and breast (10%) cancer incidence, and overall cancer mortality (8%). The second (11) predicted a reduction in cardiovascular mortality by 10%, stroke by 6%, myocardial infarction by 7%, and type 2 diabetes by 10%, all statistically significant. The effects of avoiding meat altogether would likely be much greater.
The characterization of the evidence against meat as being of “low” or “very low” certainty was based on the highly controversial GRADE system, which is not suited to evaluating nutrition studies. It mistakenly discounts even the most rigorous prospective studies and would similarly have discounted studies demonstrating passive smoking's dangers. The benefits of avoiding animal products have been amply demonstrated in both prospective studies and controlled trials.
The idea that malnourished populations have used animal products as a hedge against malnutrition or starvation provides no guidance for individuals seeking to improve their health. Even in populations with marginal nutrition, reliance on animal products is a disastrous strategy. As meat-eating increased in China between 1990 and 2016, cardiovascular disease prevalence doubled.
Protein requirements in children and adults are easily met by a diet of legumes, vegetables, grains, and fruits. According to the WHO, "Protein deficiency is almost always accompanied by inadequate energy intake...," meaning the problem is a lack of food, not a lack of meat (37).
Regarding fatty acids, the European Prospective Investigations into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)–Norfolk Study found that, while long-chain fatty acid intake was lower in vegans than in fish-eaters, plasma concentrations of long-chain fatty acids were remarkably similar, suggesting better conversion from precursor fatty acids in the vegan group.
Ingesting preformed vitamin A has no advantage; it has potential toxicity not seen with β-carotene and other carotenoids.
While meat and dairy products contain vitamin B-12, absorption is often poor due to gastric atrophy, medications, and other causes, leading to marginal vitamin B-12 status in ∼20% of elderly individuals. Fortification or supplementation is more effective and cheaper.
Dr. Leroy cites iodine as one of milk's helpful attributes. However, cows do not synthesize iodine or any other element. Iodine in milk comes from iodine-containing disinfectants used to clean contaminated udders and milking equipment and from supplements fed to cattle (38). Better (and cheaper) nutritional strategies are the use of iodized salt, which greatly reduced iodine deficiency in the United States, or the use of sea vegetables, as is common in Asia. These strategies avoid the saturated fat, cholesterol, sugars, estrogens, and cancer risk associated with milk.
Similarly, animals do not synthesize iron or calcium. They obtain them from plants, as humans do. Green leafy vegetables are particularly good sources of both. Iron intakes among vegetarians are typically similar to or even slightly higher than those of omnivores (39). There is no value—and there are significant risks—of excessive iron intake. The same is true for taurine (which promotes intestinal production of genotoxic hydrogen sulfide) and choline (which is prothrombotic and promotes trimethylamine N-oxide production).
Animal products lack dietary fiber, vitamin C, and complex carbohydrate. Overall nutrient intake on an omnivorous diet is inferior to that on a healthful vegan diet. In a 2008 study, adopting a vegan diet increased total vitamin A activity, β-carotene, vitamins K and C, folate, magnesium, and potassium, while reducing intake of saturated fat and cholesterol (40).
Dr. Leroy's citation of inadequate nutrition related to “vegetarian and vegan upbringing” had nothing to do with the adequacy of vegan diets. Rather, it described a 1970s Israeli religious group that limited breastfeeding to 3 mo and then used an improper infant formula. The answer is not meat or bovine milk; it is breast milk or formula. As noted by the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, “…appropriately planned vegetarian, including vegan, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits … for all stages of the life cycle.”
To nourish a growing population, feeding plants to animals and then consuming their muscles, milk, or eggs is resource-intensive, adds unwanted cholesterol, saturated fat, and pathogenic microorganisms, and displaces healthful nutrients.

Rebuttal (Leroy)

Dr. Barnard's dismissal of the rareness of diseases of modernity in ancestral populations and the link between animal foods and _Homo sapiens_’ cognitive development as “myths” and “romantic notions” was less unexpected than his reference to George Mann (31). Being a critic of the diet–heart hypothesis, Mann precisely described the Masai as almost free of cardiovascular disease, despite intimal thickening and high intakes of animal fat. Likewise, the authors reporting on Inuit mummies not only mentioned that atherosclerosis could as well have been due to indoor fires, but also that they remained agnostic about clinical outcomes, especially as cardiovascular deaths were rare among mid-20th century Inuit (32).
The rebuttal relies heavily on nutritional epidemiology of chronic disease. As practiced in the West, the latter mostly expresses responses to cultural norms of “eating right” rather than identifying diet–chronic disease relations (41). Its limitations have been mentioned; adjustment for isolated lifestyle factors (e.g., smoking) remains inadequate to correct for the full spectrum of confounders and biases. Dr. Barnard's interpretation of the Nutritional Recommendations (NutriRECS) studies misses the point; the merit of GRADE, described as “controversial” but officially endorsed by >100 organizations worldwide, is to relate associations to quality of evidence. Statistical significance as such is not a sufficient basis for causal interpretation and guideline formulation if the evidence is low quality. Epistemologically, there is no reason nutritional sciences should settle for lower standards.
Controlled trials may strengthen observation-driven hypotheses but, as argued above, this has not been the case for animal foods. Isolating LDL cholesterol from a broader view of disease risk factors is poorly informative. The evidence disagrees with the claim that LDL particle-size differences do not mitigate risk (42, 43); and the importance of triglycerides and other components of the metabolic syndrome should not be disregarded. If anything, associations between LDL cholesterol and mortality are of a protective nature for most elderly individuals (44), the group in which most deaths occur and for which animal foods are largely beneficial in view of healthy aging (4).
The assertion that reliance on animal foods would be a “disastrous strategy,” even for populations with marginal nutrition that suffer from deficiencies and rampant stunting incidences in children, originates from a higher-income, urban, and Western-centric perspective (15). Even in the West, however, dietary restrictions driven by ideological choice (rather than income) often lead to malnourishment of infants, children, and adolescents [the list of clinical case reports is long, the pathologies severe (4, 24)]. The position paper on vegan diets by the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics largely reflects the perspective of Seventh-Day Adventists (45) and has been contradicted by warnings issued by other authorities (e.g., the Belgian Royal Academy of Medicine and the Swiss Federal Commission for Nutrition).
Animals concentrate nutrients from plants, which make them very robust sources of nutrition. The various deficiencies at the population level in people not being able (or not willing) to access them attest to that (4). Neither the boosting of “complex carbohydrates” nor the restriction of animal fat and “unwanted” cholesterol will meet the nutritional challenges of mid-century. The provision of essential nutrition will.

Most people know that every skin has a randomly generated float range, and many knows that float caps of individual skins exist and alter this range. Where most people lack knowledge however, is when it comes to 'float caps'.
Float.db (csgofloat.com) published a few years ago an article on the matter, and found that the skins have a given chance to drop in every condition, and that the distribution within these conditions were equally distributed (given a float range of 0-1). What makes this system unintuitive is that when the float ranges shift, the distribution is compressed instead of recalculated, which leads to some float values being more common than others within the same float bracket (FN,MW, etc), which isnt the case with a normal 0-1 distribution. According to the same article, some float steps are completely missing for some skins(ex M4A4 magnesium 0.07-0.08). I havent been able to include this in this post.
This post is targeted more at buyorder users than snipers, as most of the following applies to this group in particular. When placing a buyorder for a skin, an expected amount of the skins are to be resold, as you will buy both 'bad' and 'good' floats. Lets assume that most of the skins sold at buyorder price is by case openers (this is an reasonable assumption, as for many of these 'tradeup skins' only people opening them and trading them up have any interest in them), and that the skins bought by the buyorder fits the normal distribution that valve has made and csgofloat has figured out.
Step 1: Set up a general function picturing the %chance of getting a drop at a given 0.01 float step:
First, the chance pr 0.01 floatstep is calculated within each of the 5 wear levels. The table from the article is used as a datapoint for this. The graph will look something like this, where the x-axis shows the float and the y-axis shows the percentage chance to get the float pr 0.01 interval. The increases/decreases lines perfectly up with the change in condition.
Then, the 'float range compression' part of the formula is added. The formula goes like this:

final_float = float * (max_float - min_float) + min_float 

We now have a fully functioning function that can be adjusted for every skin in the game.
Step 2: The interesting part, calculating the odds of receiving a 'good' float from a buyorder:
With a function like this, it is pretty simple to find the ratio between two definite integrals, one representing the entire float range of the condition (fx FN 0-0.07), and one the target range (fx FN <0.04). By doing this, it is possible to determine the odds of getting a skin within a target float range from a buyorder of that wear class (Math). Lets look at an example, lets say we are buying FN skins, and our target float is <0.04. Lets plot our odds of achieving this when we let the lower limit be 0 (we dont want a capped skin that prevents us from getting the ultra-low float skins), and the upper limit be represented by y (that is on the bottom axis, sorry, but it had to be like this to work..): https://imgur.com/Z0NoOdV
As you can see, the float range has a huge implication on your chance of success - a skin with a float cap of around 0.6 is much worse than everything else, and will 'fail' 3 times as often as one with the full 0-1 range. If we would apply this to the breakout collection millspecs fx, an old favorite, (Breakout case), then the urban hazard and the Negev desert strike will less often give us our wanted result compared to the other skins in the case due to their cap of 0.5.
0.6 is not necessarily the worst float cap you can have, it all depends on your target float and the condition you are buying - this cap is actually one of the best for good float MW:
For both these graphs the min_float = 0, and the max_float is the plotting variable:
Same graph for MW <0.09
Same graph for FT <0.21
​
Tldr: The float range has a huge, calculateable inpact on your buyorder success, and calculating these will often be helpful finding the best skin for your tradeup.

Product Description:
Product complete : Meticore Supplement 2021
Official website : Meticore Official Website
Money-Back Guarantee: Yes, it's Refundable
Guarantee: 60 day money-back guarantee.
​
In this article am going to reveal to you everything you need to know about this latest weight loss supplement Meticore. In this Meticore review 2021, we will look at Meticore customer reviews 2021 and also every possible Meticore Complaints 2021. For general overview you can simply scroll down to the ending part of this article.
To lose one pound of muscle to fat ratio, an individual must make a 3,500 calorie deficiency in seven days. Regardless of whether you work out each and every day, in case you’re actually eating more than you’re consuming, you’ll put on weight. Making a shortfall through exercise alone is enormously troublesome, especially since individuals regularly overestimate the number of calories they’ve consumed, and tends to overeat to make up for the active work they did. Extreme cardio can likewise leave individuals hungry for more food than the calories they’ve consumed warrant.
​

Meticore still Works ( LOWEST PRICE GUARANTEE ) Get Meticore Special Deal Today – Few Bottles Left! CLICK HERE and Get a bottle of Meticore now From Its Official Website. Enjoy!

​
Running or swimming for 30 minutes may consume off 350 calories, for example, however couple of individuals are willing or ready to do that all week long. Alternately, removing two 16-ounce soft drinks every day would have a similar impact, and needs far less exertion. That’s not to say that exercise won’t improve your health, fitness, or overall well-being, but rather that you can’t outrun poor nutrition. So how can you alter your diet to lose weight?

Here Are 10 Convincing Reasons Why You Should Lose Weight

In the event that you battle with your weight, you might just realize that the dressing rokm is one of only a handful few places that presents a dull rude awakening. In any case, is finding a way into some jeans, swimwear, or even a decent top one of the main motivations to get more fit?
Read on to find a few bits of knowledge into how your body and way of life can change in the wake of shedding a few pounds. You'll have even more motivation to fight the excess body fat as scientists have discovered that when you think of solid inspirations to get thinner prior to setting out on your excursion, you lose more weight than the individuals who are less propelled!
1. You'll Have Less Joint Pain.
Yes, you heard what i said. Being overweight can put some genuine strain on your joints—particularly your knees. While everybody needs to manage regular mileage on their joints, the individuals who are overweight development overabundance weight on these equivalent joints. What's more, fiery elements that are related with weight gain could add to inconvenience in more modest joints, for example, your hands too. That's why an anti-inflammatory diet has been shown to help alleviate arthritis symptoms.
2. You May Get A Raise. Ends up, one reason to get more fit is that your manager may treat you better after you've thinned down. Obese individuals, particularly ladies, make about 2.5 percent less than their colleagues with normal weight, according to an examination by Health Economics.
3. Or on the other hand you can Get Offered Your Dream Job. As exploitative as it might appear, researchers have discovered that weight may even adversely affect your odds of finding a new line of work. In an examination distributed in the International Journal of Obesity, analysts found that employing choices were affected contrarily when the photograph demonstrated an individual who was overweight compared with a photograph of that same individuals post weight reduction medical procedure.
Another survey in Occupational Medicine and Health Affairs showed that individuals with high BMIs are frequently neglected for beginning propositions for employment, administrative positions, and advancements compared with their more slender colleagues. Thinning down won't simply change your questioner's or manager's inclination, it will likewise make you more confident—and make interviewing much easier!
4. You Won't Pull Out Your Hair As Much. Of course, your requesting position can add to constant feelings of anxiety, yet so too does your eating routine. Simply investigate these best foods for stress. A large number of the foods that intensify feelings of anxiety are the very food sources that reduces your weight reduction progress, while the food sources that alleviate stress are those you'd eat during your slim-down journey. For example, foods high in refined sugar—like soda or ice cream—can increase levels of stress hormones like cortisol.
5. Food Will Taste Better. This is something you likely haven't heard previously: After dropping your extra weight, your meal will taste surprisingly better. Specialists from Stanford University found that overweight individuals have less taste affectability than their slimmer partners, maybe in light of the fact that their taste buds become dulled with abuse. Another hypothesis conjectures that hormonal movements that happen during weight reduction may change the way taste receptors speak with the cerebrum.
6. Furthermore, You'll Enjoy Sex More! A Duke University Medical Center review of 1,210 individuals of different weights found that obese individuals were multiple times bound to report disappointment with their time between the sheets than their more slender partners. The uplifting news? Shedding a simple 10% loss of your body weight appeared to help soar sexual fulfillment. So you could even receive the benefits in the room before you've hit your goal weight!
7. Individuals Will Be Nicer To You. On the off chance that it were up to us, it wouldn't be this way. In any case, truth is, our general public regularly victimizes overweight individuals. But, after you've shed pounds, you'll begin to see things change. Individuals who once disregarded you may welcome you cheerfully or considerably offer to keep the door open for you.
8. You Won't Sweat As Much. Does it actually feel like you're in a heated oven when it's only just a slight increase in the temperature of your environment? This is on the grounds that fat protects the body and raises center temperature, causing you to feel hotter than the individuals who are slimmer. For a similar explanation, overweight people will in general sweat more. Drop the over weight and you won't need to walk directly to the washroom to dry off in the wake of strolling anyplace.
9. You'll Experience Fewer Colds. Fruitful weight reduction ordinarily accompanies a way of life redesign—one that incorporates getting a decent night's rest, filling up with a micronutrient-dense diet high in fresh produce and whole grains, and burning some serious calories regularly. As indicated by Harvard Medical School, every one of these progressions can assist with improving your body immunity framework.
10. You'll Feel More Energized. In the wake of dropping the pounds, you may notice that you have substantially more energy. It's not on the grounds that you're eating more nourishments that keep up your energy levels. It's additionally in light of the fact that when you're carrying around less weight, your body needs less energy to keep you alive. Having said all this let's get right in Meticore Reviews 2021.

What Exactly is Meticore supplement?

The item centers around giving Meticore customers a remarkable, new natural unique method of managing issues like slowing metabolism and low vitality. With powerful inside working, consumers will have the option to get the advantage of a supercharged digestion.
Meticore is an all natural wholesome supplement that centers around the main root cause of slow metabolism, and low core body temperature. The Meticore healthy metabolism support formula is made with 6 high quality plant-based nutrients that not only targets low core body temperature, but supercharges metabolism in both men and women.
This ground breaking Meticore supplement is exclusively only available on Meticore Official Website here where customers can access and enjoy a whooping 80% off discount pricing today. In this Meticore reviews 2021, I will reveal to you everything you need to know about this latest weight loss supplement. And also show you why this unique supplement is the most complete and thorough research healthy metabolism support supplement on the Internet.
​

Meticore still Works ( LOWEST PRICE GUARANTEE ) Get Meticore Special Deal Today – Few Bottles Left! CLICK HERE and Get a bottle of Meticore now From Its Official Website. Enjoy!

​
While there is a lot of supplements on the lookout for weight reduction, this one has gone famous rapidly. The maker of the item have endeavored to reveal why the vast majority battle to get more fit or defeated levels. In doing as such, they had the option to discover that most people simply have lower average body temperatures. The temperature of one's body largely affects different things. Among them is the digestion. With the digestion being deteriorated, it is very difficult that one will actually have the option to arrive at their ideal weight.
This implies that except if one changes this inward issue, their weight reduction diets and activities may all be to no end. Meticore supplement properly centers around supporting the consumer with vital supplements and minerals. Utilizing its effective ingredients and well-informed recipe, it guides consumers towards a more advantageous future. The markers of the enhancement accept that their research is what has allowed them to create such a stunning final product. They worked broadly to convey an supplement that truly gets to the foundation of the issues. Rather than basically floating around the surface, consumers of this item get a very desired outcomes.
This gives them an approach to conquer the greatest obstacles that are available in their way. In the event that you are attempting to get in shape and burn fat, Meticore digestion promoter tends to be the elephant in the weight reduction and obesity industry, low core body temperature.

Who Should Use Meticore?

In the event that you have tried so many eating regimens and exercise designs that don't work for you, at this point I would recommend that you try Meticore. All things considered, you don't have anything to lose however that additional weight.
Meticore is a unique dietary supplement that is not like other weight loss supplements out there that you might have attempted previously. It focuses on the underlying root cause of low metabolism, which is answerable for the ceaseless depositions of fat tissue in various parts of the body.
At the point when digestion is quickened, fat will be scorched in a flash and at a steady pace. After some time, this enhancement will help keep up the body's upgraded digestion, and you won't need to stress over the yo-yo weight pick up impact once more.
Consuming that additional fat will likewise bring medical advantages and some other benefits as I have listed above. In the event that you are beginning to stress over your future and you would prefer not to procure the wellbeing hazards brought by being obese and overweight, Meticore may be best weight loss solution that you truly need for 2021.
Meticore Reviews 2021
Meticore will help you cut and maintain a normal healthy weight, which will diminish the danger of hazardously elevated levels of cholesterol, glucose, and blood pressure. Meticore will likewise cause you to feel more energetic in light of the fact that the fat consumed will be changed over to usable energy.
A portion of the principle things that consumers can expect when they use Meticore supplement are:
A simplified journey towards their ideal body that does not take advantage of any kind of chemical or otherwise harmful additions.
Independence from the limitations of prohibitive weight control plans and other difficult to-follow practice schedules.
Not burning through huge number of dollars on pills and other weight reduction methods that never work.
Guaranteeing that the body stays protected from all sort of harmful side effects and different issues that spin out of control at times.
Ensuring that one's weight reduction sticks and doesn't simply restore minutes subsequent to losing it.
Permitting one to have a broad measure of control in the manner they wish to consume weight. Simplified weight loss, without making weight reduction feel like a task, rather joining it into one's standard way of life.

What I Like about Meticore Supplement?

Having used Meticore supplement myself, one thing I love about this product is that it has a unique way of assisting a consumer with getting in shape and by addressing the root cause of fat accumulation and poor metabolism. It additionally improves, the general working of the body regarding keeping up a sound working digestion and weight. All the ingredients contained in the the supplement are natural and are all effective for maximum weight loss. This also implies there are no negative results to the wellbeing since Meticore is 100% natural with no synthetic additives. Coming up next are the various advantages that this uncommon formula of Meticore gives to the consumers in terms of helping in the process of weight loss and energizing the metabolism so that it supports the overall health of the person incorporating the product in their lives.
It is an potent item, as the recipe helps in the regular cycle of weight reduction.
This recipe helps as far as empowering the digestion to capacity to the maximum capacity. It permits the consumer to recover energy as the added ingredients give a truly incredible energy.
The recipe serves to be a natural product that is supported and backed up by science researches. It permits the consumer to be careful that they are utilizing an excellent quality item. It is a reliable item.
This item is a safe formula that empowers the body to naturally manage the burned-through and existing fats. This item helps most organically and naturally.

What I don't care for about Meticore supplement?

It is somewhat expensive when compared with other dietary supplements. Although, it's worth the price. The product is only accessible on the official Meticore's site here.

What are Meticore Ingredients?

The organization behind Meticore records a few capabilities on their site to help tight down the ingredients utilized in their brand name formula. The entirety of the ingredients utilized in Meticore are all-natural, vegan, non-GMO, "totally safe," without energizers, and non-addictive. The majority of these qualifiers are very necessary in the dietary supplement industry. For instance, it is very important that you know and avoid any supplement that utilizes addictive synthetics in its formula. Meticore ingredients include :
Turmeric
Ginger
Moringa
Bitter orange
African mango
Quercetin
Fucoxanthin
Accepting that there are no extra fixings in Meticore, these high profile substances and well-studied compounds pass the qualifications listed above.The greater part of these ingredients have been regularly utilized in different enhancements, and not many side effects are related with them— even in the highest of possible dosages. Here are some of the most important benefits of this ingredients -
Ginger: it is one of the most advantageous ingredient utilized in this item. Ginger is filled with numerous medical advantages and lessens internal inflammation in the body. Inner inflammation regularly brings about reduced body metabolism and unfortunate excessive weight gain. This ingredients guarantees the decrease of sickness and other related indications.
African Mango: This is the amazing ingredients used to advance weight reduction. This ingredientsm is immersed with the decency of fiber that guarantees that the purchasers feel full and eat less consequently. Notwithstanding that, African Mango has numerous medical advantages, including bringing down cholesterol levels and adjusting the glucose levels.
Moringa Oleifera: Moringa Oleifera is incredibly wealthy in cancer prevention agents. The cell reinforcements present in this ingredient permits it to detoxify the body effectively. The unfortunate poisons present in the body are the guilty party behind low body metabolism. This ingredient battles and flushes out every one of these poisons from the body.
Earthy colored Seaweed Extract: It is one of the key ingredients utilized in the arrangement of this dietary supplement. The role of brown seaweed extract is to trigger anti-obesity effects while boosting the body’s natural insulin resistance.
Bitter Orange: Known the same number of various monikers, bitter orange concentrate is a knowledgeable home grown compound that is common in Africa, Syria and Southeast Asia. With numerous examinations utilizing the Seville orange, acrid orange, bigarade orange or jelly orange concentrate, all pieces of the plant, including the natural product, leaf, blossom and strip have been utilized for its recuperating properties in Chinese medication. It's related medical advantages incorporate acid reflux, indigestion, nausea, constipation, heartburn and weight loss due to its active ingredient p-synephrine.
Quercetin: Quercetin has gotten something reasonable of spotlight in 2020 because of the COVID-19 insusceptibility fever that has been going on since the pandemic previously began. Referred to principally as polyphenol, this plant flavonol is found in a large number of the regular products of the soil just as vegetables and fruits and is known for its anti-carcinogenic, anti-inflammatory, and antiviral qualities. It might likewise have anti-inflammatory properties that can likewise ease hypersensitivities and manage pulse levels.
Turmeric (curcumin): Last, and unquestionably not least, as it is one of the most medicinally examined and explored ingredients on the planet, this brilliant flavor fixing should be in the medication bureau of pretty much every individual hoping to improve their day by day wellbeing. In a similar plant family as ginger, its pain relieving qualities are at the top of the list of health benefits but also has a long list associated with helping manage oxidative (free radicals) and inflammatory-induced stresses. As a rich wellspring of cancer prevention agents, turmeric curcumin is an absolute necessity for boosting digestion and losing low core body fat fast.

How Exactly Does Meticore Work?

The essential thought behind Meticore is to help consumers dissolve, put away fat and transform it into energy. It will essentially energize the body's metabolic rate that will empower it to support energy level, improve absorption, raise mind-set, and help get a decent night's sleep. It will essentially lift one's way of life while facilitating healthy weight reduction. Every one of these variables will add to empower the body to shed excessive pounds while making you vivacious and new.
As I have said above already, as you start to take this supplement, consumers of this enhancement will start to take note of that their interior internal heat level will rise. This is something to be thankful for as this is expected to ensure that the metabolic pace of the body goes up. This is fundamental to ensure that one's weight reduction is happening and that their body isn't deteriorating in any capacity. A portion of the cycles that this supplement may involve are:
As one devours it, their body will steadily get helped in temperature. This is done via the countless natural additions that have been added to the overall. composition. The composition is designed to provide organic betterment to the users.
At last, this extra temperature makes the body's metabolic rate fire ticking up. In this manner, one's digestion gets supercharged and can begin consuming fats at a quicker rate.
At long last, with one's fat consuming rate quickening, they can get to their optimal body weight easily. One thing to note is the way that this enhancement is best utilized related to other weight reduction strategies. While one doesn't need to do just extensive hard exercises, incorporating some into one’s lifestyle is a good idea.

Is Meticore A Scam?

How would you believe others if all you see thousands of consumers who are greatly affected by the Meticore? You might not be aware of the fact that each day people are up to buy the supplement with zeal and zest. Around in excess of 1,000,000 stories are available in the market that illustrates the outright estimation of Meticore as it is a 100% natural item. Nonetheless, you may run over contenders (competitors) who promises you similar powerful outcomes by utilizing the name. so, it is to notice that you may only access the original product on the official website of the company.
Most digestion boosting weight reduction supplements available guarantee to furnish excellent outcomes with almost no extra eating less junk food limitations or exercise prerequisites. While Meticore is cut from the same cloth as those dime a dozen nutritional fat burning products out there, Meticore separates itself with distinct properties and the focus of lowering core body temperature that can induce effective weight loss results without changing anything else.
In conclusion, Meticore supplement is not a scam, having used the product myself. I can proudly tell you that it's not a scam.

For what reason is the Product So Effective?

Meticore supplement is powerful in light of the fact that it is made with thorough research and science, so it arrives at the core of your weight reduction issue and gives a unique amazing outcome. All the ingredients utilized in this item are added after broad examination. They are mixed to make this ground-breaking supplement.
The advantages of this supplement are not restricted to weight reduction as it were. The item additionally supports generally mental and actual wellbeing and guards individuals from numerous infections. It should be noticed that obesity itself is the underlying driver of numerous sicknesses, and thus this item normally spares individuals from numerous possible diseases.
​

Meticore still Works ( LOWEST PRICE GUARANTEE ) Get Meticore Special Deal Today – Few Bottles Left! CLICK HERE and Get a bottle of Meticore now From Its Official Website. Enjoy!

​

What Are Meticore Side Effects?

Meticore is made uniquely from 100% natural, excellent ingredients that passed the producer's severe principles. This dietary enhancement is additionally a non-GMO and vegetarian item. Additionally, this enhancement is made in FDA and cGMP approved offices, guaranteeing that strict health protocols are followed in the creation of Meticore.
Meticore's ingredients are simply natural, with no dangerous side effects. Side effects usually come from synthetic ingredients packed in supplements, and you can be assured that there are none of that in Meticore.
Meticore might be an exclusive mix, yet the makers are straightforward when they state that this item doesn't contain energizers or stimulants or habit-forming ingredients. Generally, energizers and addictive substances are what causes unfavorable effects on medications and supplements.
The ingredients and their ideal estimations are read by wellbeing specialists for quite a long time to make Meticore. Escalated innovative work were performed prior to delivering this item to people in general. You can be guaranteed that this enhancement won’t bring about any incapacitating results on your wellbeing.
Meticore Reviews 2021

Does Meticore Require Any Diet?

Numerous individuals go to severe eating regimens when they are attempting to get fit as a fiddle. They cut their number one food and starve themselves in the desire for getting results. In spite of all that, they neglect to accomplish their ideal outcomes and surrender trust. Some even gotten powerless, and their wellbeing disintegrates, yet the weight doesn't change a lot.
Numerous individuals don't consider shedding pounds in light of the fact that their way of life is occupied to such an extent that they don't have the opportunity to plan sound meals. Others simply don't have any desire to abandon a portion of their foods and like to remain fat and unfortunate. For every single such individual, Meticore is a gift.
Meticore doesn't expect individuals to follow a too-exacting eating regimen design or starve themselves each other day. It doesn't anticipate that them should totally chop down their number one nourishments by the same token. All consumer have to do is eat healthily, stay active, and use the supplement consistently.

Is It Necessary to Spend Hours in Gym while Taking Meticore?

The consumer of this item are not expected to exhaust themselves in exercise centers by the same token. The item producers know that everybody doesn't have time, cash, and energy to spend on costly exercise centers. A functioning way of life with some sound active lifestyle should be adequate for a great many people to get fit as a fiddle while taking this supplement. Having a regular and straightforward exercise routine can additionally improve the effectiveness of this item.

Cost of Meticore

I have referenced in this article before that the Meticore is only accessible on the official site of the organization here. Although the capsules are available at a very reasonable range, however, the company provides deals and discount offers frequently to avoid any hassle and difficulty for the customers.
The following are a portion of the current packs accessible on the official site. you may pick whichever suits you the best.
Meticore permits customers to choose out their desired package and would thus be able to choose the one that is ideal for them. Coming up next are the bundles that customers can get:

1. You can get one bottle of this product for $59
   
2. In a package of 3 bottles of this supplement, each comes for $49 (most popular)
   
3. In a package of 6 bottles, each comes for $39 (most economical)
   

From this, it becomes abundantly clear that the supplement incentivizes users to get larger packages. This not only leads to greater savings but gives users access to a greater supply.
Note: the current offer may not last long as it is available at a huge discount. So, you wait until the stock is finished. Grab the open opportunity of low price right away.

Meticore Refund Policy

The organization guarantees that your request is completely refund by a 100% money-back guarantee. Why will you be skeptical about such an organization that guarantees you 100% money-back guarantee in case their product didn't work for you? They guarantee you compelling weight reduction as well as in general wellbeing and prosperity is sure. In any case, in the event that you don't feel totally happy with the item and it seems to you that your body fat is still there, you may claim your money back. The company promises over a full refund and won't ask for any further details.

Recommended Meticore Dosage 2021 and Tips to Start

Meticore comes in capsule structure, and it is taken by means of the oral route. It gives a lot of comfort since you don't have to carefully quantify the measure of the item you need to take.
You just take one capsule every morning before breakfast with a glass of water, and the process is done. Taking this capsule before breakfast jumpstarts the weight loss process upon waking up, and you will continue to burn fat even when you are sleeping!
The producers suggest taking Meticore for in at least an event of 90 days to begin getting results. For amplified weight reduction results, this supplement can be utilized for as long as 180 days.
Utilizing this supplement for an all-inclusive period will additionally rush the body's digestion, and it will be kept up by this enhancement after arriving at the ideal digestion level.
Appropriate nutrition and exercise are verifiably powerful in consuming fat. Meticore will harvest better outcomes in the event that it is joined with healthy nutrition and exercise. Work will also help you to get more muscle definition.

Conclusion

Meticore is an enhancement that plans to assist consumers with improving their metabolisms by increasing core body temperature and preventing weight gain. The high profile, well-versed listed ingredients of this supplement help to support its mission. Meticore is one of the only healthy metabolism support formulas on the market that attacks the root cause of age-related metabolic slowdown and the ingredients can help regenerate and revive the body’s fat burning processes with continued use. About the Meticore, you have recognized all the ingredients and the advantages you will enjoy if you start consuming this supplement today. Every ingredient has properties that suit best every individual in light of the fact that no synthetic substance was added during the making.
Meticore not only influences healthy digestion but also boosts your metabolism that promotes a healthy lifestyle. Hence, a healthy body enables your life easier and blow out the fat regularly.

Meticore FAQ - Meticore Reviews 2021

Is Meticore Supplement A Scam? As referenced over, the item accompanies a 2 month (60 days) money back guarantee. On the off chance that somebody isn't fulfilled or satisfied with the results gotten while consuming this product, they can just request for a refund and get their cash back with no questions asked. This makes it scam proof. For more details on how to claim a refund visit the official website here.
What are Meticore benefits?
Based on an all-natural formula
Can also be used by vegans
Induces weight loss, burns fat, and brings people back in shape
Safe and effective
Can likewise be utilized by vegetarians
Numerous other medical advantages
How can you take Meticore supplement? One capsule of Meticore should be taken every day for ideal outcomes. A 30-day supply of Meticore incorporates 30 pills. As usual, it is suggested As always that a consumer should take this supplement over an extended period; immediate results are still unlikely. Meticore should be taken with water, but it does not appear that any adverse side effects will occur if users don’t use water.
What number of capsules does each container contain? Each jug of the supplement has 30 capsules present. This implies that a single container should last about a month, in the event that one takes it on the right measurement.
What are Meticore Side effects? It is important that you know that Meticore is 100 % Natural. Meticore's ingredients are absolutely natural, with no side effects . Side effects normally come from manufactured products stuffed in synthetic chemicals and additives, and you can be guaranteed that there are none of that in Meticore.
How to Buy Meticore? Regardless of all these incredible advantages, Meticore is accessible at a truly reasonable costs. The cost of one jug that contains 30 pills is $59. Those who buy more can also benefit from deals and save a lot of money. The individuals who buy three containers will get $10 off each, and the individuals who purchase six jugs will get $20 off on each.
The item is sponsored with 60-days money back guarantee, and henceforth individuals can likewise get a full refund in the event that they are not happy with the outcomes. You can get a bottle of Meticore now From Its Official Website by clicking on the link below now.
​
​

Meticore still Works ( LOWEST PRICE GUARANTEE ) Get Meticore Special Deal Today – Few Bottles Left! CLICK HERE and Get a bottle of Meticore now From Its Official Website. Enjoy!

def FormFit(performances): matrix = deepcopy(performances) for performance in matrix: if performance[1] >= 380: performance.append(1) else: performance.append(NSV) for index0, performance0 in enumerate(matrix): WeightSum = 0 Form = 1 Sum = 0 for index1, performance1 in enumerate(matrix): Weight = (1 / (SD * (2 * math.pi) ** 0.5) * math.e ** -((index1 - index0) ** 2 / (2 * SD ** 2))) * \ performance1[3] Sum += Weight * performance1[2] WeightSum += Weight performance0[2] = Sum / WeightSum return matrix OHFirstPass = {team: [] for team in Teams} OAFirstPass = {team: [] for team in Teams} DHFirstPass = {team: [] for team in Teams} DAFirstPass = {team: [] for team in Teams} for team in Teams: OHFirstPass[team] = FormFit(OffenceHomePerformances[team]) OAFirstPass[team] = FormFit(OffenceAwayPerformances[team]) DHFirstPass[team] = FormFit(DefenceHomePerformances[team]) DAFirstPass[team] = FormFit(DefenceAwayPerformances[team]) def StrengthFit(performances, opponentForms): MatchList = [{'Team': 0, 'Opponent': 0, 'TeamPerformance': 0, 'OpponentForm': 0} for index in range(len(df))] FittedPerformances = {team: [] for team in Teams} FittedForms = {team: [] for team in Teams} for team in Teams: for performance in performances[team]: MatchList[performance[1]]['Team'] = team MatchList[performance[1]]['TeamPerformance'] = performance[2] for form in opponentForms[team]: MatchList[form[1]]['Opponent'] = team MatchList[form[1]]['OpponentForm'] = form[2] for index, match in enumerate(MatchList): FittedPerformances[match['Team']].append([0, index, match['TeamPerformance'] / match['OpponentForm']]) for team in Teams: FittedForms[team] = FormFit(FittedPerformances[team]) return FittedForms global OHRecursive, DARecursive, OARecursive, DHRecursive OHRecursive = StrengthFit(OffenceHomePerformances, DAFirstPass) OARecursive = StrengthFit(OffenceAwayPerformances, DHFirstPass) DARecursive = StrengthFit(DefenceAwayPerformances, OHFirstPass) DHRecursive = StrengthFit(DefenceHomePerformances, OAFirstPass) for repeat in range(10): OHRecursive = StrengthFit(OffenceHomePerformances, DARecursive) DARecursive = StrengthFit(DefenceAwayPerformances, OHRecursive) OARecursive = StrengthFit(OffenceAwayPerformances, DHRecursive) DHRecursive = StrengthFit(DefenceHomePerformances, OARecursive) for i in sorted( [[team, OHRecursive[team][-1][2], OARecursive[team][-1][2], DHRecursive[team][-1][2], DARecursive[team][-1][2]] for team in SeasonTeams], key=lambda i: i[1] / i[3] + i[2] / i[4])[::-1]: print(i[0], OHRecursive[i[0]][-1][2], OARecursive[i[0]][-1][2], DHRecursive[i[0]][-1][2], DARecursive[i[0]][-1][2]) 

I've been watching a lot of YouTube sailing channels for the last couple of years and I'm getting ready to but a boat. I've had a couple smaller sailboats (the largest being 26ft) over the years but I'd really like to spend some time sailing the Caribbean and Central America. I saw a 30ft Erickson for sail in my area, while that's a little smaller than the boats I'm looking at, I know that's what they sail in Project Atticus. I looked up the specs on Sailboatdata.com and a couple of the numbers surprised me. Two particular, but maybe I'm interpreting the numbers wrong? The Comfort Ratio is 22.73. That really is just a coastal cruiser, right? And even low on the scale for a coastal cruiser. And the Capsize Screening Formula is 2.02. It's my understanding that any boat that rates over 2.00 is considered a Capsize hazard.
How reliable are these numbers?

[AN: This is my first piece for this subreddit, created primarily by beating my forehead on the keyboard until it came out. I apologize in advance for any grammatical errors. It spun out of considering Star Trek's Prime Directive... and what would happen should such a directive be violated on Modern Day Earth. Probably not the most original premise, but I hope you enjoy anyway.]
-----
The Galactic Scouting and First Contact Division was a prestigious organization. They risked life and extremity to go out into the unexplored, if at least somewhat scanned, wilderness of the galaxy and to be the first point of contact for emerging sentience. Of course, such a weighty and hazardous occupation required extensive training beyond Basic, indeed requiring no less than three Advanced prerequisites before one could even apply to the Academy.
As a branch which is funded by and answers to the Council, it has many foibles and no few security checks to ensure that only well-adjusted beings are selected for these often very long journeys within relatively compact vessels and no real contact with civilization for the tour period. There are also some courses which are security-flagged for other reasons. One which is most often remarked upon was a final-stage course whose title was simply [REDACTED].
Many students often wonder about this course, which appears to be a relatively short one as courses go, and whose passing is one of the highest bars and mandatory for graduation. Furthermore, the class came with a waiver of permission for mental blockage for all who fail the course. Rumors abound about the contents and nature of the course, ranging from the ribald supposition of a course on the mating habits of pre-FTL species to the hypothetical black hole map and navigation technique that was the joke of the physics department. But no one who knew would tell, so the students were unaware of what they were getting into as they filed into class.
It was clearly held in a lecture hall, although with Security being so tight it might simply be a staging area, some supposed. Eventually the electromagnetic blip signaled the beginning of class. Role call was taken, and was double-checked. Absentees were noted, and security personnel were sent to detain and remove these individuals from the academy. Then, the doors were sealed and locked, which caused a slight murmur to ripple along the spectra of communication.
"Greetings, class. Before we begin, I am legally required to advise you that what you are about to endure today has been given a Category IV Content Advisory for concepts and/or subjects potentially damaging to the mental and emotional health and well-being of an average Citizen. If this is sufficient to discourage you from wishing to participate, this is your opportunity to indicate so and leave. Needless to say, you will fail the Academy, however no other prejudice will be appended to your record, and you will be offered positions in related fields according to your specialty. Also please note at this time that any who are unable to handle the material and find themselves in mental or emotional distress will receive counseling and possible memory alteration at the Academy's cost as per regulations regarding such restricted materials and the necessity of presenting them. This will of course also disqualify you, however as before you will be referred to another branch without prejudice. And of course, you can never share this with anyone not cleared for the selfsame reason."
Electronic buzz filled the room briefly, clear up to the microwave carrier bands as students discussed this among themselves. A few made their indications, they were politely escorted out by security, and the doors re-locked. Soon, the class settled down, and the instructor spoke up again.
"I suppose many of you are wondering about the nature of this class. Well, it fulfills several purposes simultaneously. First, a Scout needs to keep their wits about themselves under even the most vulgar and vile of scenarios. To be blunt, even if this didn't need to be covered specifically, something of this nature would need to be covered to ensure the stability of those going out into the Black.
"However, even should that not be a consideration, this would still need to be addressed so that no one can... well, I get ahead of myself, I suppose. Today is a history lesson, and you learn just how horrific this job can be. In your Regs and Requirements entry level course, it may have been mentioned that we have a very strict policy of non-interference with pre-FTL civilizations, and that the punishment for failing to follow this stricture is one of the most severe any branch can ever levy. You may also have become aware that this was not always the case, but never was it explained to you why that change of policy, why that strict punishment, needed to take place. Today... I will. For today, you learn of the event we few in the Scouts refer to simply as The Great Sin." The third-degree articulation of seriousness was out of proportion to the second-category religious term used, which caused a murmur of confusion among the classroom.
"It happened, oh... heck, why bother going over dry and boring dates? You know the date the policy was changed, that's close enough. Our scouts, and no you will never learn of the names of the captain or crew of this mission, out of respect for their kin and their memory, found life -sapient life, no less- on one of the most inhospitable planets imaginable. It was an Oxy/Nitro atmosphere with a dense nickel/iron core that gave it a ridiculously deep gravity well, some thirty to fifty percent above galactic standards and, previously, at least twenty percent outside scouting parameters. It was also at least fifteen percent inside the Standard Habitable Belt for the star it was orbiting contributing to an ambient temperature average that can only be described as 'absurdly hot and humid', which should also have excluded it from survey, had they not received electromagnetic transmissions of an obviously artificial origin coming from it. The survey group initially expected to find a probe or other marker indicating a previous exploration attempt, but what they found was an orbital space-faring civilization. But it was a particularly strange one. Alas, we didn't know how strange until it was far, far too late." The fourth-degree mourning gesture caused a shocked silence to fall over the lecture hall.
"They seemed well on their way to achieving FTL. They had gotten into orbit, had quite a few satellites, at least one habitable station, a surprising collection of debris just left up there that they were just getting around to realizing was probably a bad idea to leave unchecked... all the things you'd expect from a post-industrial but pre-FTL civilization. Except they were badly factionalized. There were not an extremity's full, but over a hundred independent factions and tribes, and many of them used entirely different communication protocols from each other, requiring translators to communicate -internally within their own species-. And this, may I remind you, in a species who had managed to cheat the thrust to weight ratio formula on one of the highest gravity planets to grace sapience ever discovered and somehow get themselves into orbit. They had to discover rocketry with a specific impulse of over 400 just to get out of atmosphere! And, thanks to a geological anomaly, they were able to achieve it without nuclear fission OR fusion. Apparently, their planet had seen multiple die-offs, sequestering truly staggering amounts of carbon which, under geologic pressures, formed into a surprisingly energy dense solid or semi-fluid mass of carbon chains. This was then further refined and used as a fuel source, allowing them to bootstrap themselves into this phase very early in their technological development, relatively speaking. Then again, it's also why they advanced from muscle, wind, and water power to electric in as short a period of time as they did... due to the high Oxygen content of the atmosphere, combustion could continue practically indefinitely given sufficient fuel from ambient atmosphere alone, they were able to boil a liquid into its gaseous form, and use that expansion to spin turbines to generate power, entirely bypassing entire fields of chemistry until much later. And to be fair, they were obsessively curious beings, and geniuses at intuitive research. Once they realized a concept was -possible-, nothing would stop them until they had managed to achieve it somehow. In less than a few dozen Standard Solar Cycles, they had gone from crude electron signal via conductive wire to controlled fission. Sadly, we didn't realize until it was too late why they had advanced so rapidly.
"You see, this species was a predatory omnivore. Yes, your teachers probably told you how rare that combination is, but in this case there can be absolutely no mistake. A pursuit predator, no less, they simply chased their prey until it fell over from exhaustion, capable of nonstop motion for shift-periods at a time without tiring. Which meant they had a very strong pack mentality, and this carried over to their social development... such as it was and what there was of it. Unfortunately, their high oxygen level atmosphere also permitted them to discover combustion at an absurdly early period in their development, which quickly gave rise to basic metallurgy and even alloying... all while just barely having settled down from a huntegatherer societal structure. However, as with any apex predator, they needed a certain range to sustain themselves, and were fiercely territorial. In other words, they applied predatory pressure on themselves. And if resource scarcity wasn't enough of a reason for them to fight among themselves, there was a variant on philosophy they came up with which focused on the idealization and idolization of one or many fictional beings of arbitrary power, and would then proceed to fight each other over differences in those beliefs. In short, they were the single most hyper-aggressive species ever recorded to achieve space flight.
"However, when the Scout team reached them, they appeared to have mostly -finally- gotten past that phase in their development. They had a central global body where the various tribes could diplomatically work out their differences. You could see the beginnings of a true planetary government starting to form. And so, as was the practice at the time, the Scout team initiated contact, and informed them that one of the requirements for entry to the galactic civilization was a single governing body for the planet." The fourth-tier mourning gesticulation coupled with the third-level hazard appellate indicated something truly horrifying was about to occur.
"The various tribal leaders received and acknowledged this message, and held a great meeting in their Tribes United hall. The Scouts were pleased at having successfully nudged another species to the path of Enlightenment. That was when it began.
"At first, the Scouts didn't understand what they were seeing, then they simply were incapable of believing it. You see, to escape the down-dragging gravity well of this dense planet, they had extensive research into rocketry. Unfortunately, they had also created rockets for the expressed and implicit purpose of... for lack of better terms, intentionally crashing into a target for the purpose of causing damage as a weapon of war. But not content with the kinetic payload of such a device, they did something worse... far, far worse. They'd had the capability of Fission for some time, although they were apparently loathe to actually harness its power despite how relatively common radioactive isotopes were in its crust, likely due to the crudity of their process for harnessing fission energy. The Scouts had read reports of runaway fission reactions being instigated on purpose, but had dismissed them as works of fiction. Unfortunately, they were not. These rockets had enough of a targeting package to hit an inhabited sector, and cause an unstable runaway Fission reaction to decay rapidly in the center of that population zone. In less than a single rotation of the planet, billions were dead." The instructor paused to permit the students to soak up the sheer horror and scale of the atrocity.
Shock and horror swept through the lecture hall. Some few actually passed out. The instructor made notes of whom, and to get them Therapy afterwards. He didn't blame them, of course, no one could. There was a reason the Scouts had the single highest requirement for emotional stability, and it wasn't just for the absurdly long tours of duty away from any civilized port. They simply had to handle situations that no normal Being would be required to encounter over their lifespan. And while it was physically as well as emotionally painful for the instructor to inflict this upon his students, he also realized the necessity. Flipping manipulators up in a calming gesture, he finally brought the class back under emotional control, more or less.
"But that's not the worst part." His emission was flat and toneless, merciless in its transmission, yet duty forced him onward anyway. "The worst part was that the survivors then proceeded to hail the Scout team. Yes, the detonation of hundreds -if not thousands- of runaway fission reactions was not sufficient to exterminate the species, they are simply that hardy and resilient, as well as apparently prepared for such a possibility. I suppose that at least is to be expected from a species who no only has a phrase-concept but an acronym for the idea of 'we limit our hostility only because to refrain from doing so would mean our suicide as well as the death of all life on this planet'. Normally, one would consider any survivors to be a cause for rejoice, were it not for the contents of that transmission. I play that transmission back to you now, unedited, so that the full horror of this may be known to you."
A data crystal was inserted into a playback device. And the transmission, appropriately translated into GalStand of course, played out.

"Galactic Scout Mission. This is Under-Secretary Bragg, senior surviving member of the remaining political faction. Please be advised that according to our remaining satellite feeds, all other nations have been exterminated, and this planet is now governed by a single polity. As such, we respectfully request admission to your Galactic Civilization. Over."

One could almost hear the neutrino background noise the chamber was so silent.
"So you see, my unfortunate students... not only did they see the near extermination of their entire species be the only solution to the problem issued... -they saw nothing morally wrong with what they did-! He offered no apology for the atrocities committed, upon further communication, it became apparent that he didn't even comprehend that an apology *should* have been necessary.
"That, my students, is why we call this 'The Great Sin'. Not their great sin... ours. Due to our interference, this occurred. Because of our misjudgment, billions of sentient beings died in one of the most horrific ways possible. An entire planet was rendered practically uninhabitable, even by -their- hellish standards, for longer than their industrial age lasted. And. This. Was. Our. Fault." Every word spat out as a complete sentence to drive home the importance of the topic at hand, that there be no misunderstanding or mistake in THIS room.
"When you go out into the Black, when you encounter species who are about to achieve Uplift, you too may have to make a judgment call. Remember always, when you do, that the consequences of your judgments are also yours to bare. This scout team, who shall remain unnamed forevermore and whose records are otherwise completely sealed under the Security Act, made a judgment call. One which was within protocol of their time. But one which, nonetheless, resulted in... this." The instructor paused, then added with a second-degree casual gesture which was understated for effect.
"They all suicided, you know. The Scout team, that is. Therapy couldn't get to them in time. They turned in their reports, and apparently by unanimous decision, went to full impulse... without gravitational dampeners active. The ship's AI had to navigate the ship back to dock, apparently pre-programmed to do so. They just couldn't take what had happened, what they *caused* to happen. Sure, -maybe- they might have done it to themselves, given enough time and space. But there might always have been a chance that they might not have either. And it is that uncertainty that, according to the final log entry countersigned by the entire crew, that drove them to that expatiation of their sins. Should they have? Well, of course not. Two wrongs do not make a right, compounding atrocities with yet another atrocity -if on a smaller scale- doesn't help anyone. For that matter, they acted within Regulation, the true burden of guilt lays not at their pseudopods but at the ones who wrote those Regulations they adhered to. But, maddened with grief and sickened in mind and emotional center, they made yet another poor decision.
"The lessons, then, are manifold and clear. First, that we have set down these regulations not arbitrarily, but out of experience and hard-won knowledge at costs too staggering to contemplate for long. Violate these regulations at your peril, and risk another Great Sin. Second, that there are always possible complications, and that one should never act overly hasty or without proper consideration of the consequences of your actions. Third, that sometimes terrible consequences can come from actions which still fall within regulatory parameters, despite all you can do. Fourth, that we never forget, so that we never repeat this tragedy again. And finally, that Therapy is always there to help. No matter how horrific, no matter how traumatic, Therapy can help you, even if it means memory wipe. Just please, come back to us and let us help you, if the burden becomes too heavy." After an extended pause for effect, he closed with "I now open the forum to questions."
Shocked silence prevailed until one student, perhaps more hardy than his fellows, perhaps simply morbidly curious, indicated question status, which was then accepted and permitted broadcast. "What happened to them? The primitives, I mean. Did they... did they go... yanno... extinct?" The timid tone was natural for such a normally taboo topic as extinction. Even the word itself was second-degree vulgarity under most circumstances. Yet the instructor neither admonished nor even warned the student. It was, after all, the proper term, and the instructor inwardly applauded the student with the gizzard necessary to ask it.
"Astonishingly enough, no. Apparently it takes more than extended gamma-wave emissions to kill off this particular species. And the fecund things have already recouped their numbers... and then some! They now have four planets in various systems in their sector, and have joined the Galactic Civilization. Indeed," there was a second-degree humor manipulation associated with the answer "due to their preference for planets which no one else can colonize, they've taken to colonizing planets in systems which have already been surveyed and rejected, obtaining rights to the systems for tiny percentages of what it would normally cost to expand for most species, due to lack of counter-bids on the property." The instructor surveys his hall again before asking "Any other questions?"
One student indicated a query with an urgency flag, and was put at the top of the queue for answering "Do you indicate, then, that this species not only achieve FTL but was accepted, and is still alive today?"
"Correct. They tend to be a bit shy, which is no bad thing, but they are a full member of the Galactic Civilization Pool. Generally, of course, we tend to leave them to their own devices unless actively requested otherwise."
"Because it is feared that they may do this again?" The student asks in macabre astonishment
"No, because having seen what they were willing to do to themselves... we have no desire to see what they might do to us if their paranoia indicates that we are somehow a hindrance to them. They seem to be peaceful so far, and no one is particularly in any hurry to poke that Hk'nrrt on the olfactory receptor."
A first-degree gesture of zen-acceptance accompanies the last statement before concluding "Any further questions? No? Then for today, class dismissed. Any who feel unwell are to report to Therapy immediately. And please remember the security protocol concerning this class. Should you be seen discussing it with uncleared personnel... well, you should already be familiar with the punishment for that, so I bid you a good rest period. Class is dismissed."