The article is much better than the headline, and details how companies are trying to make the devices less of an ecological problem. But the framing in the headline just made me think of this.
this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2024
435 points (100.0% liked)
196
18702 readers
256 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts are not allowed
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The article is literally not saying healthcare is "the problem" or that you should "just die." It's just talking about how it's unfortunate that something people need to live can have a negative effect on the environment and talking about ways to mitigate that by changing the way they're manufactured. It doesn't say to stop using them or whatever.
Edit: Cool edit, 100x worse
You went from misinterpreting it as saying something it wasn't to straight up telling people not to get diabetes and that the state should enforce nutrition. What the fuck is wrong with you people?