The 468 file is still there:
www.justice.gov/epstein/file...
They just removed the clickable link to it from the file listing.

Some of the files (like the 468 file showing photos in the drawer) are still available on the site. They just removed the clickable link to it. But the file is still there.

I look forward to Trump losing this one.

No. Next question.

I'm sure that if Netflix agree to spend a few tens of million dollars on one of the many fantastic offers from the Trump business empire, everything will work out just fine.

Jam tomorrow. Lots of jam tomorrow.

No. What's needed are carefully considered processes that have appropriate checks in place. The idea of using AI chatbots is an illusion of a solution.

It doesn't look good. We can take a small crumb of comfort that emissions per capita have flat-lined (probably peaked).

And maybe also mention that magnets aren't affected by water, and that price reductions of 400% are meaningless nonsense that indicates the speaker doesn't understand numbers.

This *is* the new golden age of the USA right?

I agree it's a really poor study. We already have evidence that consuming processed foods has negative health outcomes. If people want to test whether consumption of UPF has significantly different effects, it should be compared with consuming processed foods (compare NOVA groups 3 and 4).

The NOVA definitions are what almost everyone uses to define UPF. There are 4 groups: minimally processed, processed culinary ingredient, processed food and ultra processed food. But details of working out what is UPF are not precise and are somewhat subjective so yes, there's a definition problem.

White sugar is not UPF according to NOVA definitions, nor is salted butter.

There is zero evidence showing that consumption of UPF causes negative health outcomes. Various studies show correlations, but the definitions of UPF are so broad and vague, these studies have little value. A study also shows that professionals in nutrition do not agree on what foods are UPF.