Because it’s a massive franchise. When you go into a Starbucks they want it to taste the same no matter where you get one. People are creatures of habit and it’s easier to get someone to get the same thing than it is to try out local shops wherever they go because it might be bad or too different from what they normally prefer. It’s one of the reasons fast food chains are / were very popular in the US. It’s not about the quality, it’s about the consistency
Not really if you look into the literature. There were several studies done at Stanford and several hundred thousand people that took it for fat loss and less than 100 deaths from what I’ve seen. Also, a majority of those deaths were from suicide, which is both a sad thing and a terrible way to go. The deadly dose was about 5-6x the normal dose. There was a case of a girl ODing on it to get ready for spring break and I believe she was around 10x the standard dose. Note dosage is based off body weight.
Now there are other issues that can occur because of the MoA it causes you to burn through zinc and magnesium. There are thyroid issues that can occur, as well as the possibility of cataractics. Then there’s the proton slip and electron leakage within the mitochondria. This is what causes a majority of the problems as it’s a positive feedback loop for negative cascades. That can be almost entirely negated by keeping dose lower and doing your cardio. It can be done safely if you know what you’re doing but most people aren’t that reasonable.
Someone wrote an interesting book on it and took more of a conspiracy standpoint on it claiming it could be effective fat loss but because it was cheap and easy it would cut into big pharma making money. Can’t say I agree with everything in the book but there was some useful information.
There’s also a newer compound called BAM-15. In research it’s more effective at fat loss and can be taken at much higher doses safely. I believe they got up to 20x the dnp standard dose without negative side effects in the lab rats.
I think I may have been looking at older data without realizing it, my bad, thanks for the correction.
So I grabbed my source from NOAA which is the US govt agency that covers atmospheric and ocean patterns. I’m on mobile so you’ll have to forgive the non imbeded link.
https://research.noaa.gov/2023/11/07/recent-triple-dip-la-nina-upends-current-understanding-of-enso/
We’re entering a bit of uncharted territory when it comes to El Niño And La Niña (simplified explanation, El Niño hotter and La Niña colder). Normally they last about 9-12 months. We Just exited a triple dip La Niña (2020-2023), and the last one was 1998-2001, and before that 1973-1976. Now in the past this multi year La Niña followed a strong El Niño, and scientists had a few theories that mostly revolved around the planet cooling due to thermo differences across the surface. The issue with this recent La Niña is that it did not follow a strong El Niño, and the La Niña effect caused the jet stream to weaken significantly in 2023, it is very important for cooling different areas of the planet, weakening hurricanes, and many other things. Right now we’re in a neutral state and likely to shift over to an El Niño later this year. Meaning what we’ve seen as of late could be a good bit worse when El Niño occurs.
We are also in a time period where the solar cycle is peaking (most likely to peak in 2025). While we’re not exactly sure about the climate impacts of the solar activity, we do know it means more storms and magnetic waves hitting the Earth, and with global warming our atmosphere has expanded a bit and there could be more unexpected effects such as issues with GPS, aviation, and satellites…
All in all we’re not entirely certain as to why 2023 was that much hotter and there are many theories, , but based on history we could experience a significantly hotter 2024. Also, if the trend continues it could mean that’s 2023 was a freak year for us, but in the future it could become the norm.
I know this doesn’t really answer the question, but at the moment there is no finite answer. However, due to these irregularities occurring it does not look good down the road and we won’t know for certain until it happens.
Actually it’s worse than that, if you have enough unvaccinated people in an area you’ll increase the viral load received by the local population. Vaccines raise immunity significantly, but don’t make you fully immune. If you experience enough of a viral load despite being vaccinated you can still get sick. This is how outbreaks occur and why we’re seeing them in low vaccination communities. These viruses then spreads to others that shouldn’t normally get the virus. So in short it harms everyone including those vaccinated.