"We estimate with medium-high confidence that the Spark intervention generates about $28 in village-level income per dollar spent over the first 10 years of the program when villages purchase livestock."
This screams bullshit. If you believe this to be true, why don't you invest in this for profit? You could subsequently donate 10x more in just 10 years even if you only capture 1/3 of the value added.
Depression =/= low mood. Its just one of a plethora of ways to have sustained periods of low mood. The real question is how larger proportion of mood is determined by the top genes
"The team advised a group about a local person with many reports about them making people uncomfortable at events. The person currently isn’t attending, but the group now has steps they plan to take if the person expresses interest in attending."
Who else recently stopped attending their local group and is now paranoid this is about them?
The changes between each section are highlighted in bold, as it is in every section before and after. The bolded section is literally 14 words long; the tl;dr would be longer than the text.
Can you elaborate more on how this affects your career decision? We'll be able to give more useful feedback with this context
If I offered you a free solar panel upgrade, in return for 1/3 of the additional revenue it generates, would you accept?
"We estimate with medium-high confidence that the Spark intervention generates about $28 in village-level income per dollar spent over the first 10 years of the program when villages purchase livestock."
This screams bullshit. If you believe this to be true, why don't you invest in this for profit? You could subsequently donate 10x more in just 10 years even if you only capture 1/3 of the value added.
Depression =/= low mood. Its just one of a plethora of ways to have sustained periods of low mood. The real question is how larger proportion of mood is determined by the top genes
People should do shit like this more often!
Very nice!
Core argument isn't convincing and the interventions suggested don't seem to have much of an evidence basis.
If I were to guess, I'd say that's why this and the other post has been downvoted and not really the writing style.
"The team advised a group about a local person with many reports about them making people uncomfortable at events. The person currently isn’t attending, but the group now has steps they plan to take if the person expresses interest in attending."
Who else recently stopped attending their local group and is now paranoid this is about them?
Beautifully written summary
The changes between each section are highlighted in bold, as it is in every section before and after. The bolded section is literally 14 words long; the tl;dr would be longer than the text.