Let's do a little digging, shall we? Who is 80,000 Hours? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/80,000_Hours https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/80,000_Hours "[80,000 hour

Let's do a little digging, shall we? Who is 80,000 Hours? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/80,000_Hours https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/80,000_Hours "[80,000 hours is]...one of the nonprofits funded by startup accelerator Y Combinator in 2015...William MacAskill is the Founder and President of 80,000 Hours..." Who is William MacAskill? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_MacAskill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_MacAskill He is a proponent of Effective Altruism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_altruism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_altruism For an article that says it will cover " What types of events are causing people to have the crises that lead to attempted suicide?" All the commentary we have is this: > "Robert Wiblin: Do you know what kinds of events are causing people to have these crises and attempt suicide? > Leah Utyasheva: Well, as I said, quite often it is a cry for help. It is the acceptability of using suicide as means of solving certain life problems. For example, if a child is having, a student is having problems at school, or an old person feeling sick, or a couple argues. So, all this could lead to an attempted suicide. And quite often, as I said, people just need a little bit more time to think about it, and then maybe they decide that this is not a good solution to their problems. Then they move on. That doesn't sound like a very robust discussion around the real problem. More importantly, for such a lengthy discussion about pesticide use, nobody speaks about who benefits from switching pesticides. Leah informs us that: "I must point out that the United Nations and the WHO agencies are highly behind this, and they are supportive of the ban of the most hazardous substances. There are a lot of guidelines and tools developed to find out what alternatives to highly hazardous pesticides are available, and what other substances or agricultural production methods could be used instead of highly hazardous pesticides." We have an enormous amount of posturing without a single mention of what the replacement pesticide should be. It sounds more like the UN and WHO woud like some kind of "moral" ground to push their own agenda. I find it all very disingenuous.