Yes. The skepticism was less around whether the goal of D&I is a good thing and whether it might be more important for us to invest in other things for the success of our business.
We believe that inclusion is worth the investment. At the core, creating an inclusive environment is about employee engagement. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employee_engagement) One company that studies the importance of employee engagement consistently is Gallup. Here is an interesting article on the intersection of diversity and engagement: http://www.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/190103/using-employee-e... "Engagement and inclusiveness are closely related. Gallup has also found that engaged employees are more likely to say their company values diverse ideas."
I will offer that platitude over and over again, Einstein's wonderful definition of insanity be damned. If I could end bigotry tomorrow, I would, but what I won't do under any circumstances is ally myself with people who cry racism at the drop of a hat. They do more harm than good.
double ninja edit: that's not right. I don't really understand what the figures on that page are supposed to represent... anyone want to try clearing it up for me?
I will clear it up for you: The numbers on that page are meaningless and misleading.
Firstly, the AUM column in the table doesn't represent anything. It overstates their _global_ AUM by 2 to 20 times for the companies I checked.
Secondly, this is by no means an exhaustive list of institutional investors in the UK. There are, well, I don't know but there are a huge number of small nameless investors sitting in the UK investing private funds globally, that are not and never will be on this list and whose assets will never be known, only estimated.
You do know that City of London (separate entity from London) is the Financial Capital of the world (a clear cut above New York or Hong Kong)? 1/5 sounds correct to me, if maybe even a bit too low. You completely underestimate the amount of global investors that would choose British Mutual Funds for their portfolio on account of the above fact.
I'm familiar with the moniker. I don't contest it. I still don't believe it represents 20% of global wealth. For one thing, if 20 trillion GBP, twice the U.S. GDP, had left the global economy in a week's time, we wouldn't even need to argue the point. It would be the only story on the news.
If the claim is that muscles don't fatigue, then I am skeptical.
In college, I took a weightlifting class with a bunch of athletes in it. One day, we did lunges (no weight) around and around, in a line like ants. Nearing the end, my brain thought I was totally fine. I cannot stress that enough. Bam, like a light switch, my legs went from 60% strength to 2% three quarters of the way through the last lap. Had the instructor not caught me, I would have fallen right over.
Why do you suppose your legs went from 60% to 2% so rapidly? Do you think your muscle really depleted in function that quickly, or did your brain cut off the electrical signals to the leg in order to protect it from permanent damage?
But you're correct in that there is more to it. Adrenaline masks fatigue. It allows you to temporarily exceed what your brain would normally allow you to do in order to save your life. You pay for it later, though.
I would recommend reading the article, it is fairly interesting and suggests based on the body of research that the brain (subconsciously) creates the emotion of fatigue prior to muscle "exhaustion" to prevent injury.
"These sensations of fatigue are unique to each individual and are illusionary since their generation is largely independent of the real biological state of the athlete at the time they develop."
No, I think you are anecdotally supporting the posted article: you worked your muscles to physical exhaustion but you did not feel "fatigue", ergo, the conventional theory that "fatigue" is caused by lactic acid or other muscle chemistry is disproved.
> If the claim is that muscles don't fatigue, then I am skeptical.
No, the article isn't claiming that at all. It is saying there is an extra system in the brain which generates the sensation of fatigue. This usually happens before the muscles reach their limit (and this has been demonstrated).
As others have noted, it may not have been your muscles. Why would your muscles suddenly go from 60% strength to 2%? I suspect either it was central fatigue (which can also manifest as muscle weakness), or perhaps your form was wrong on the last lap.
It was to a medical study that showed a possible side effect of marijuana use is paranoia. The actual event happened some time last year and trying to dig it up on Facebook is a pain.
