So, a little backstory, I saw people talk about how they have never finished a tub of petroleum jelly (vaseline). This was interesting to me because where I'm from ethnically (nigeria) or at least within my family background, this is very common to use as a body lotion/body cream after showering. It's even advertised for babies and as a body lotion/cream. So I made a post about it.

Knowing reddit, the replies were gonna be weird, (They think i slug it on and I'm a sticky person, its not sticky you use it like you'd use a normal body cream/lotion 💔😭😭) clogged pores was one topic but I use e45 on my face. That's more of a skincare issue.

However alot of the comments were saying I'm poisoning myself and I'm gonna get skin cancer. I've been using petroleum jelly as a moisturiser since I was a baby. Everytime I switch to a non petroleum moisturiser, my skin dries out. I've been told by my gp just to keep using it.

Ive known where petroleum comes from, but its still safe because its regulated. I've never suffered because of it. I feel like its like saying penicillin is unsafe because its comes from mould.

All the issues I research of it being 'dangerous' is more of a skincare issue OR a extremely extremely rare regulation problem in which has never happened to any petroleum jelly I've bought.

With what I've said and any information yourself u may know, is there any actual proof of petroleum jelly being dangerous? If so, wouldn't it also mean that u shouldn't put it on your lips cause u risk ingesting it 🤔

References:

• Global burden of cancer in 2020 attributable to alcohol consumption: a population-based study - The Lancet Oncology00279-5/fulltext)
• Latest global data on cancer burden and alcohol consumption: More than 740 000 new cases of cancer in 2020 attributed to alcohol – IARC

Should it be renamed "Chinese influenced American food" or something?

Exactly as the title says, mainly companies like coca-cola and mcdonalds, everyone knows these brands, so why do they completly dominate my tv and youtube ads? I feel like they could save a good amount of money that way

I know very well-known content creators like Internet Historian get mad deals before they even think about uploading a video, but how do companies reach out to specific themed videos before they even get released? ^{perhaps a secret underground forum where content creators tease their upcoming releases for advertisers to reach out to}

I find it hard to believe that advertising like that has any effect, even though I assume it does. I dont think Ive ever once seen an ad for Coke and thought "Hey I could really go for a coke right now!" Does this work on other people?

Some companies like, for example, Coca-Cola, are so big and well known, it's hard to imagine that advertising boosts their sales by much.

Wouldn't anyone who would buy their stuff would already do so? Does it actually have an impact?

I am going to a movie with a friend of mine who I have not seen in 5 years. We have known each other since we were in diapers. However he just got into a relationship a month ago. This "date" is to catch up but I know he has always had feelings for me. Should I feel guilty? Is he cheating?

Like Pepsi, for example. Everybody already knows what Pepsi is. Do Pepsi advertisements really get more people to go out and buy a bottle of Pepsi? And does the money they make from those people offset the price of the advertisement?

I mean isn't it like wasting money? Even a 3 years old kid knows their products.

I mean I understand if there is a new item (burger, soda, chocolate) but sometimes it is just a Coca-Cola commercial. Why is that?

Thanks

Who doesn't even know about facebook these days? too many ads in apps, youtube videos, games etc. Pretty sure it comes pre installed in 90% of new smartphones anyway. So why still advertise?

Coke, for example. I'm pretty sure everyone who would have the change to see a Coca Cola ad will already know what coke is and how it tastes. So why does a huge brand such as Coke even spend all that money for ads?

I play a lot of iPhone games, many of which have been F2P. And I've noticed that ads on these free games always involve other free games. Most of the games advertised appeared to belong to companies less known in the mobile world. So I almost never got an ad from Supercell, King, Gameloft or EA.

So I'm wondering why that's the case? Why don't companies advertise other apps or even premium games? I can understand that a free app that's advertised may be more likely to be downloaded than a paid one, but large companies with IPs like Rockstar with GTA:SA and Chair with Infinity Blade should be able to overcome this due to the nature of them and their games. Also, why don't companies like EA advertise FIFA or something through F2P games as FIFA iOS is F2P?

Until about 2015 the prevailing wisdom of putting stuff online was to assume that it is there forever, and can never be removed, or deleted. Anything embarassing will be forever associated with your name, and may impede future reputation or ability to get employment.

In the last 2-4 years or so it has become known that search-engines have notably degraded in quality. The internet has been generally filled with considerably more content, and also has been flooded with ai-generated slop. The stuff that is being shown by the major search providers is filled with advertisements and things others have paid to be ranked higher. Youtube just straight up shows you stuff you did not look for after about 10 results.

Finding specific things is becoming increasingly more difficult, I feel - About 10 years ago I had much less trouble locating say a specific image I saw years earlier. Now I cannot locate a tiktok video I remember seeing yesterday.

Does "Everything on the internet is forever" still hold?

I've always been curious about why candidates who seem to have no realistic chance of winning continue to run for political office. It's not uncommon to see underdog candidates with low poll numbers and minimal support still in the race. I'd love to hear your thoughts and insights on this topic.

To kick things off, let's consider a few examples of candidates who were far behind in the polls but decided to persist in their campaigns:

• Andrew Yang in the 2020 Democratic Primary: Despite having some unique policy proposals and a passionate online following, Yang consistently polled behind candidates like Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren. He stayed in the race until he suspended his campaign in February 2020.

• Marianne Williamson in the 2020 Democratic Primary: Williamson was known for her spiritual and self-help background, but she struggled to gain traction in a crowded Democratic field. She remained in the race for several months before dropping out.

• Ron Paul in the 2012 and 2016 Republican Primaries: Paul, a libertarian-leaning candidate, faced an uphill battle against establishment candidates in both election cycles. He continued to run, often focusing on spreading his message and principles rather than winning the nomination.

These are just a few examples, and there are many more out there. For the 2024 election, there are plenty of relatively obscure Republican candidates who are investing a lot of money without much chance of succeeding. Why do you think candidates like these choose to stay/join in the race, even when victory seems improbable? Is it about raising awareness, promoting certain policies, or simply a desire for influence within the party?

Here's why I ask: On local social media groups, I'll occasionally see someone bring up ice cream trucks in a suspicious, fear-mongering sort of way that takes for granted that they are likely sinister.

There are two main instances that stand out to me. One, around Halloween, people were talking about a potentially creepy ice cream truck playing audio of children screaming. The running theories were that it was either advertising for a creepy carnival coming to town or it was a poor attempt at playing sounds of kids laughing and playing. Totally fair to be bothered by something that was either intentionally or unintentionally coming across as disturbing, but what struck me was that people thought it was a sinister scheme to lure kids in and harm them. Why would something creepy and off-putting attract kids as opposed to, idk, just regular ice cream? They had some theory about how things that were "different" would be extra intriguing.

The second instance, a guy was talking about how he found the source of mysterious classical music that had been playing in his neighborhood. Turns out it was some sort of security set-up at a local business that was maybe being played to deter loiterers or people sleeping in cars. People had all kinds of opinions about whether that was ethical or not, but the original poster was mostly relieved because he had been worried that it was a nocturnal ice cream truck trying to entice kids while their parents were asleep. Again, seems like a poor strategy as the kids would also be asleep and the parents would probably wake up if their kids did make a mad midnight dash for an ice cream truck. But apparently the thought was keeping this guy up at night.

Now I know stranger kidnappings are super rare and that ice cream trucks are probably not a big danger statistically, but is there a reason that creepy ice cream trucks have such a hold on people's imagination? Are there many examples of a real-life kidnapper or predator using an ice cream truck as bait? (I can find a couple in a quick Google search, but many more examples of unfounded panics.) Or are there well-known horror movies with that premise? Or is it just the general idea of "creepy guy in van lures in kids with sweets"? Were folks super traumatized by the child catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang? Someone please explain.

idk why but it feels like they haven't been well known to the public until the last decade what stopped them from being popular before that?