upworthy
Democracy

No, Joe Biden isn’t going to take your gas stove. He actually wants to buy you a new one.

Isn’t that nice?

gas stoves, gas stove ban, ted cruz
via Wikimedia Commons and Pixabay

Joe Biden's kickoff rally for his 2020 presidential campaign and a gas stove burner.

When politicians find an issue that affects the average person, it’s an easy way to gain leverage over their opponents. They’re called “kitchen table” issues and the Republicans have found a great one with the “gas stove ban.” Conservative lawmakers are claiming that the Biden administration wants to ban gas ovens and stoves.

Heck, it’s not just a figurative kitchen table issue, it’s a problem that’s in voters’ kitchens. The problem for Republicans is that no one wants to take away anyone’s kitchen stove.

The kerfuffle began on January 9 when Richard L. Trumka Jr. of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission told Bloomberg that a ban “was on the table” for gas stoves. "Products that can't be made safe can be banned," Trumka added.

Gas stoves have been on regulators' radars after a recent study found that roughly 13% of all childhood asthma cases can be attributed to having a gas stove—a risk level that’s on par with secondhand smoke.

Trumka’s comments caught the attention of Republican lawmakers who quickly tried to use the issue to their benefit. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) tweeted Monday that "the Biden Administration is once again going to extreme lengths to appease Green New Deal fanatics — they're considering a national ban on gas stoves."

GOP Rep. Ronny Jackson of Texas weighed in as well.


Joe Manchin III of West Virginia, the most conservative Democrat in the Senate, jumped into the fray, too.

The good news for the 38% of Americans who prefer to have their food cooked over a hot blue flame is that the government has no interest in barging into your kitchen and taking your stove.

The chair of the CPSC, Alexander Hoehn-Saric, clarified the issue on Wednesday indicating that the CPSC is looking for ways to reduce the dangers that come with gas stoves but has no interest in confiscating your appliances. “But to be clear, I am not looking to ban gas stoves and the CPSC has no proceeding to do so,” he said.

The White House has also denied any interest in banning gas stoves. “The President does not support banning gas stoves – and the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which is independent, is not banning gas stoves,” a White House spokesperson told CNN on January 11.

Joe Biden and a group of jack-booted thugs aren’t going to be knocking down your front door and stealing your gas stove anytime soon. But the Biden administration does want to make it easier for you to transition to an electric stove if you so choose.

The Inflation Reduction Act includes $4.5 billion in funding for states to give rebates to people who purchase new electric appliances, including wall ovens, ranges and cooktops. Those who switch from gas or propane to electric can get up to an additional $500 rebate.

So if politicians were being honest, they’d be saying, “Joe Biden doesn’t want to steal your stove. He’d like to buy you a new one.” But that doesn’t get people talking on cable news, now does it?

From Your Site Articles
joe biden
Culture

Dad’s 5-year-old daughter's hilarious answers to his questions have the internet screaming

“Do I have to change my name if I get married? Call me Shredder.”

via James Breakwell / Twitter

Raising kids is tough, but there's a lot of laughs along the way. Comedy writer James Breakwell has four daughters under the age of eight and shares their hilarious conversations on Twitter. And, from Breakwell's tweets, it looks like his five year old has a future in comedy. Here's a sampling of some Breakwell's funniest kid-inspired tweets.


1.

2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


8.


9.


10.


11.



12.


13.


14.


15.


16.



17.


18.


19.


20.


21.


22.


23.


24.


25.




His 5-year-old isn't the only (often unintentionally) hilarious child in the house; the 7-year-old and 3-year-old turn up from time to time. There's also a 2-year-old, but she hasn't been the subject of many tweets yet.


26.


27.


28.


29.


30.


31.


32.


33.



34.


35.


36.



37.


38.


This article originally appeared four years ago.

From Your Site Articles
comedy
Joy

Proud owners of this dog breed quickly call out a trainer who dubbed it a 'terrible choice'

The trainer thought these dogs were "frenzied lunatics." Others heartily disagreed.

Photo credit: Canva

Are Springer Spaniels really "frenzied lunatics?"

Will Atherton, an England based Clinical Canine Behaviourist (MSc), recently dubbed the Springer Spaniel a “terrible choice” of dog breed for most people. In a video posted to his TikTok, Atherton explained that while many people get them because they “look awesome” and “match a barber jacket which makes it cool for Instagram pictures,” they aren’t taking into account what Springer Spaniel were bred for—hunting.

These dogs, Atherton notes, are bred to “work non-stop like frenzied lunatics,” rather than sit on the “sofa and chill.” Since the latter is so “rarely achievable” with Springer Spaniels (since they “don’t have an off-switch”) Atherton sees so many of them being sent to his center for “problem behaviors.”

However, an overwhelming amount of Springer Spaniel owners were quick to disagree.


@iamwillatherton Let’s talk about the honest truth behind Spaniels shall we... p.s. before you comment I know there are some that are chill but they’re the outliers and congratulations you got lucky! And remember, I’m honest about these things because I want people to be happy with their dogs and I see SO many that aren’t with their Spaniel because their Spaniel was a terrible choice for them because they can’t train it well. #springerspaniel #springer #spaniel #englishspringerspaniel #cockerspaniel #dogtraining #dogtrainer #dogtrainingtips #dogtrainingadvice #dogbreeds ♬ original sound - Will Atherton (MSc)


“My springer is probably the laziest dog I’ve ever seen.”

“My springer just sleeps most of the time.”

“Mine is either running around like a lunatic or sleeping and chilling, just two extremes it’s great.”

“My springer must be a bit dodgy because you’ll never meet a dog who wants nothing more than [to] cuddle. Yes when he’s out he’s a lunatic but as soon as he’s home all he wants is sleep and hugs, love them.”

“I must be lucky my Springer [is] both brilliant outside and chilled outside.”

“We had a Springer Spaniel when I was growing up. Yes he was very active but he was also very friendly and good around kids. I loved that dog.”

Photo credit: Canva

While the American Kennel Club does echo Atherton’s sentiment that Springer Spaniels are built for “long days in the field,” the site notes that they are also “highly trainable people-pleasers,” in addition to being highly affectionate, good with both children and other dogs. The AKC also recommends adding enrichment activities that require not only physical exercise, but mental exercise as well. Otherwise they’ll find their own projects, “and they probably won't be the kind of projects you'd like.”

And while everyone might not agree with Atherton’s point of view, it does provide a great reminder of the importance of researching dog breeds before you buy one. Studies have shown that certain behaviors are indeed passed down through lineages (this goes double for purebreds). And those natural behaviors might not align with a person’s lifestyle, making a satisfying situation for both dog and human.

Still, other research indicates that environment plays a much bigger role in a dog’s personality. So providing things like training and/or socialization from an early age can help things mesh better.

Bottom line: Dogs are individuals, with their own personalities. Not carbon copies. However, in order to give them the best possible life (which is what every dog owner wants to do, right?), one should probably know about a dog’s breed before purchasing.

media0.giphy.com

From Your Site Articles
animals
Pop Culture

Cool video shows why everyone used to wear hats and then suddenly stopped

The change started around 1960.

via Warmbru Curiosity/YouTube

When did everyone stop wearing hats?

If you see old newsreel footage of men in the office or on commuter trains from the advent of the motion picture camera to the early ‘60s, nearly everyone is wearing a hat. Hats were just as common for women in that era. For a woman to go out without a hat in the first half of the 20th century was akin to going out without clothes.

The funny thing is that everyone’s headgear is so similar in the old-timey footage that it makes previous generations look like big-time conformists. Then, in the early ‘60s, everything changed, and men and women started to go out in public with their hair exposed. Why did such a big aspect of fashion seem to change overnight?

Warmbru Curiosity investigated the question recently in a popular YouTube video. Warmbru’s channel is a lighthearted look at some of the more unusual people and events from our history and how they have influenced the world in which we live.

Why did people stop wearing hats?

Warmbru says fashion changed dramatically after World War II, when people in developed countries began to care less about expressing their social status. “This was especially true among the younger generation the rise of youth culture in the 1950s and 1960s emphasized rebellion against traditional norms, including formal dress codes,” the YouTuber says.

- YouTubeyoutu.be

Another big reason for the change in fashion was technology. Cars became the preferred mode of transportation for many after World War II and indoor environments became more hospitable. “People spent far less time exposed to the elements as people increasingly moved to urban areas and started using cars,” Warmbru says. “The practicality of wearing hats diminishes. Hats can be cumbersome in cars and on public transport, improvements in heating and air conditioning reduce the need for hats to provide warmth.”

Warmbru adds that President John F. Kennedy, elected in 1960, rarely wore a hat and his decision to go bareheaded became associated with modernity. Further, in 1963, the mop-topped Beatles proudly flaunted their hatless heads as they shook them while singing, “Wooooo.” Hat-wearing among women began to decline around the same time as the restrictive and complex headgear clashed with the burgeoning women’s liberation movement.



The decline in hat purchases meant that manufacturers closed and the headgear became harder to come by. This reduced availability further contributed to the decline in hat-wearing. As fewer people wore hats, there became a greater demand for high-quality hair products and services. “Why spend a fortune at the hairdressers or the barbers just to cover the end result with a hat?” Warmbru asks.

Ultimately, there were many reasons why people stopped wearing hats. It appears that it was a combination of technology, influential people such as Kennedy and The Beatles, and the overwhelming mood of change that swept most of the Western world in the 1960s. But if one thing is true about fashion, it goes in cycles. So, it seems that hats may be ready for their big comeback.

This article originally appeared last year.

From Your Site Articles
history
Parenting

How often should you bathe your kids? Experts say when they're visibly dirty.

This parenting debate probably goes back generations but we have the answer.

Photo credit: Canva

Bathing kids only when they're visibly dirty is expert advice

When it comes to bathing children there doesn't seem to be a universal consensus among parents, who are generally the ones doing the bathing. Some people feel strongly that children starting from infancy should be bathed daily while others are fine with a couple of baths a month. There are even some parents that skip baths for their kids for the entire summer because they rely on swimming pools and other water play to do the job.

Some grandmother somewhere just audibly gasped at the thought of swimming in a pool counting as bathing. But in reality, people really just try to do what they think is best for their kids or what makes the most sense to them, though some parents may need to put down the soap. Specifically the parents who are bathing little ones daily or multiple times a day, because experts say that's entirely too much for young humans.

A couple of years ago a few famous celebrity couples made headlines for openly admitting that they don't bathe their children often. In fact, Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher extended that revelation to include that they don't bathe themselves often either. The couple waits until they visibly see dirt, while their pals Dax Shepard and Kristen Bell admit to only washing their kids if the catch a whiff of something funky.

How Did I Get Here Baby GIF by TLC EuropeGiphy

In an episode of the "Him & Her Show," Veronica Max, a holistic Nurse Practitioner shares that she does not dictate her kids' bath schedule. She explains to the hosts that her four children might bathe once a week, admitting that in the summer it's even less.

"If it's once a week? You know, like now they sw...so they swim. We have a pool and they swim in the summer so I guess we call that bathing so it's probably even less than that," Max admits.


@thehimandhershow Is it crazy to only bathe your child once a WEEK?! 🛁 🤔 (Ep with Veronica Max 🤍) #childcare #momlife #motherhoodunfiltered #parenting #delayedbathing ♬ original sound - HIM & HER Show - thehimandhershow

Another mom shares that once her children starts going out side of the home to be around other children like at daycare or school, that's when they need to bathe every day. Bathing daily is one of her house rules and her explanation may make sense to others that have similar concerns.

"I just can't imaging them running around recess, sitting on the floor at school, rubbing each other with their classmates, sitting on the bus...the school bus, with their jeans and they just come right home and just lounge on their bed and go to bed overnight, wake up the next morning and come down and eat breakfast with me. I just cannot imagine that would happen, ever.


@fine_lvoe #stitch with @halliemkc #momlife #parentlife #parenting #parentingtips ♬ original sound - fine_lvoe

Every parent is different but according to Harvard Health kids only need to bathe once to three times a week. Any more than that and it can cause skin issues, "Lots of bathing can lead to dry, irritated skin. But also, the skin has natural protective oils, and natural bacteria, that help to keep us healthy and safe — and that can get washed away with daily bathing."

There are exceptions such as visible dirt, the use of bug sprays, sun screen or being in a pool with chlorine. Otherwise, they say it's perfectly fine to only bathe children infrequently during the week, though they point out that this doesn't go for teens and the gnarly smells they can emit.

Season 3 Smell GIF by Nanalan'Giphy

While dermatologist, Joan Tamburro, DO, tells the Cleveland Clinic children under the age of six should spend time in the bath tub two to three times per week max, but 2-3 times a week at a minimum for children 6-11 year old. But Dr. Tamburro advises against using pool days as bath days saying, "It’s important to bathe or shower after swimming in a pool, lake or ocean."

So there you have it, parents. Kids under the age of 13 don't need to bathe daily but they may need to wash more than once a week if they're sweaty, visibly dirty or covered with chemicals from chlorine, sunscreen or bug spray. Harvard also says using wet wipes between baths on the important bits and visibly soiled areas also work in between bath days.

Turns out the parents who were against daily bathing were closer to the opinion of experts than not.

From Your Site Articles
how often to bathe kids
Science

Scientists at Hebrew University may have found a way to predict earthquakes

Researchers discover the slow, silent process that ignites earthquakes

Photo credit: Canva

Scientists are getting a better understanding on how and when earthquakes occur.

One of the biggest challenges regarding earthquakes is preparation. Aside from recognizing where faultlines lay and determining which areas are the most prone to earthquakes and earthquake damage, there is very little we can do to prepare for the next “big one.” Earthquakes can occur at any time and happen with little to no warning, at least not enough warning for people to seek safety before they hit. Scientists at Hebrew University in Israel may have found a way for us to predict earthquakes in the future.

Through a study done in Israel, Prof. Jay Fineberg and his team of researchers at the Racah Institute of Physics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem possibly found the causes that lead up to shaking tremors. Through experiments and theoretical models, they theorize that a fault’s geometry along with slow and steady displacement at certain stress points in the Earth’s crust typically precede a seismic rupture that leads to earthquakes.

Richter scaleThis new study could lead into better preparation for earthquakes.Photo credit: Canva

Tremors occur when cracks in the Earth’s crust suddenly give way, and previous studies have shown that slow movements do precede the formation of these cracks. Yet until now, the data of these processes has been relying on two-dimensional generalizations rather than practical or theoretical three-dimensional studies. Fineberg’s team looked into how slow, aseismic stress came into play within earthquake activity, how that stress evolves and nucleates into a budding and sudden tremor.

“Our findings challenge and refine conventional models of rupture dynamics," said Fineberg in a press release. "We show that slow, aseismic processes are a prerequisite for seismic rupture, driven by localized stress and geometric constraints. This has profound implications for understanding when and how earthquakes begin.”

A torn down house and rubble from an earthquakeBeing able to predict an earthquake could help prevent further injuries.Photo credit: Canva

Further testing needs to be made in order to further confirm Fineberg and his team’s conclusions, however this leads to a greater understanding into how earthquakes happen and identify new focal points. Should these solid theories become reality, it could lead to better warnings of earthquakes before they start, leading to better systems to inform the public so they can better prepare before the tremor fully hits.

Meanwhile, if you live near or in an area prone to earthquakes, it’s best to be prepared for the worst. According to experts at the U.S. Geological Survey, if you are caught in the middle of an earthquake, take cover under a heavy desk or table, away from any windows or top-heavy furniture. Stay in place, as most people injured inside a building during an earthquake are those trying to move to a different building or leave their current position. Ready.gov recommends packing an earthquake kit with clothes, water, medication, a first aid kit, a hand-crank flashlight, batteries, cell phone charger, and other such items at the ready in your home or car case you need to leave. There are also apps like MyShake that could give you alerts and other information about earthquakes around your area through your mobile phone, too.

A man and a woman taking shelter under a wooden tableIf you're experiencing an earthquake, hide under a table away from any windows.Photo credit: Canva

It takes time and study to learn how the world around us works, which can take years if not lifetimes before we fully understand it. Even when we get better understanding, it might only provide more prep time for emergencies. Regardless of how much more understanding we obtain about earthquakes, there will always be the need to prepare and to be ready, for ourselves and for our neighbors.

From Your Site Articles
earthquakes
Trending Stories