They’ve been making superhero comics for 84 years. There are times of abundance and lean times, but they haven’t stopped. I’ve personally been reading them weekly for 14 years and am not fatigued.

This whole thing sounds like a version of “You can’t fire me! I quit!”

That level of swagger seems like it was probably justified after the first Wonder Woman (“As the only one here to make an entry in this franchise with a favorable Metacritic score, you’ll forgive me if I’m not looking for suggestions from the people who greenlit the Marthaverse.”)

I’d have just sent back the review aggregates for WW84. “Any notes would be appreciated.”

It sounds like she thought she had more clout than she did. I lol’d at the petty passive aggressive move of sending her boss a Wikipedia link for character arcs. That’s some god tier narcissism.

I mean no offense to Patty here, but if WW84 was any indication of the direction you wanted to take things, well... I have to say that, for once, I’m siding with the WB brass on this one.

Popularity.

This is the result of 8 mile a day runs, moderate weight training, combined with good sleep at my ripe old 50 yrs!

Or -- and hear me out, because this is a little wild -- two well-crafted shows can succeed without either of them needing to be a reaction to the other or their audiences.

I don’t know, I’ve decided that purposefully inhaling any carcinogens into my lungs is not something I need to do going forward. 

I’m surprised weed isn’t on this list, as there isn’t a lot of solid evidence to back up the various claims about its benefits. One thing I’m surprised I don’t see more often is discussion around the health effects of smoking it. Over the past couple of months I’ve made a shift from smoking to other methods of…

With all of these the dose makes the poison or the cure, except for which exercise is best. Exercise is in and of itself stress to the body, but it also helps your body better deal with stress.

And for me, Caesar

Yes... the body reacts to caloric restriction through a process called metabolic adaptation. However, that is accounted for in the Calories Out part of CICO. Just like calories in isn’t a static amount, calories out isn’t a static amount either. It adjusts which is why as you continue to diet you have to further lower…

Lock yourself in a room and eat nothing for a month. I guarantee you’ll lose weight. Anybody that says they diet all the time and can’t lose weight are sneaking pizza slices and ice cream bars.

Read the comments here and see how many people are resistant to the fact that calories in, calories out governs how our body gains, maintains, and loses weight. The sugar one is my personal favorite of misinformation.

You were in a caloric deficit therefore you lost weight. Intermittent fasting allowed you to be in a caloric deficit so you could lose weight. However, if you were in an equivalent caloric deficit WITHOUT intermittent fasting, you’d still have lost weight. That is what the study is saying.

The theory however is wrong. All benefits of time restrictive eating are a result of caloric restriction. There are peer reviewed high quality studies showing this, they’re in agreement, time restrictive eating has no physiological difference in the long term on human health as opposed to any other form of caloric…

Literally everything this dude wrote is wrong, though lots of hucksters pushing it on social media. 

Nice mechanistic theory. Literally no study supports this. The insulin model has been discredited countless times. This is quackery. I eat over 100 grams of sugar a day and over 300 carbs most days, while maintaining 13% body fat and have lost and maintained over a 60 lbs of fat loss. If your theory was correct that…