I haven't been as consistent as I should with it, and it's always hard to be entirely sure that what you're noticing is from it or placebo or just random daily variability, but from a mechanistic angle, it makes all the sense in the world to focus a lot on proper hydration and electrolyte balance!
If you experiment with it too, let me know how it goes, and thanks for reading and the comment π π₯
On LMNT: I have it and definitely notice a difference. I got a personal record in my 5K the first time I used it and felt great during and after.
Will admit that it is a little pricey for what is effectively just salt, and it may be a bit of a placebo, so I try to use it only for when I am sweating like crazy (long cardio days) or feeling exceptionally sore/fatigued after a workout. I sometimes will use a pinch of salt with lemon and a banana as a snack to get going in the morning for a smaller boost.
Do you notice any drop off between LMNT & Leanfit? Have you tried making your own mix at home?
I had never tried LMNT until last week. I didn't feel a big different when it comes to flavor with Leanfit. HArd to say when it comes to effect, since there are so many factors and it's hard to judge.
It's a bit more than salt, though, but at the end of the day, salt + potassium + magnesium shouldn't be that different from one brand to another as long as they are reputable. I'd probably go with whatever tastes decent to you because you'll be more likely to drink it more often than something that tastes bad Β―\_(γ)_/Β―
As a classic liberal (as The Economist would define it), which means I consider myself pretty centrist, and I agree with you completely Liberty. I've spent a lot of time of the last couple years debating right wing investors online, and I still can't say I understand them, but I think they understand that their policies will make us poorer, but it seems like something else is the priority for them. They are enjoying "their guy" (how they feel their guy represents them is beyond me) being in the drivers seat and sticking it to all the ppl they feel have been looking down on them for so long. Kinda like a socialist mindset of wanting the would to be more perfect than is practically possible, and more perfect to them is if their old jobs were considered as high status as they once were over 50 years ago. You and I know that's not possible. Likewise, the individualistic mindset of wanting to make it "ourselves" trusts anyone of the 350M people within our borders arbitrarily determined by some politicians long ago to make stuff, but not anyone outside those borders. The national flag creates a powerful US vs them team mindset. I've been making plans for my family to have an escape route should this guy succeed in dismantling rule of law completely, as I've read and watched this movie too many times before.
On bulldogs β even if you canβt be one yourself (young in your career, donβt have the personality for it, or whatever the case may be), just donβt be the anti-bulldog!! Support your local bulldogs and make sure even if you have disagreements on the βhowβ, that you loudly support the pace at which they want to operate.
We need as many pro-bulldog supporters as we need bulldogs.
That would be a tough person to work with. Channeling energy, organizational cache, and a βget it doneβ attitude to implement really bad ideas. Yikes!
This reduces trade policy to GDP math and βbig countries produce moreβ logic, completely missing the point.
The issue isnβt whether Vietnam or China can buy as much from us as we buy from them. Of course they canβt. Theyβre poorer. Thatβs exactly the problem: weβve offshored critical supply chains to countries that either exploit slave labor (China) or canβt afford to buy what we make (Vietnam), creating permanent dependency and strategic vulnerability.
This isnβt about efficiency anymoreβitβs about sovereignty. Itβs about whether the U.S. can build what it needs in a crisis, without begging our rivals for the parts. Itβs about national security, industrial resilience, and moral clarity.
If your trade framework doesnβt account for any of that, then youβre not serious. Youβre just rearranging numbers on a spreadsheet while the country gets hollowed out.
This is a different topic than what I was writing about, but there can be justification for trade policy that includes tariffs and targeted barriers for national security.
But what we're seeing is definitely not that. Good policy isn't this blunt and crude and improvised; broad-based tariffs on everyone based on nonsensical math and assumptions about trade deficits, huge supply chain disruptions popping up rapidly and unpredictably, changing daily and weekly, removing any predictability necessary to conduct business and invest. It's pushing away every ally and making it harder and more expensive to manufacture in the US at the same time. Counterproductive.
What we're seeing is hurting that objective of a stronger country with more robust sovereignty.
Youβre still framing this through the old lensβlike weβre living in a stable, rules-based global system where predictability matters more than sovereignty. Weβre not. That world is gone. You donβt get to critique todayβs policies using yesterdayβs assumptions.
In times where national security is on the line, yesβthings move fast, lines blur, and disruption happens. Thatβs not failure. Thatβs what transition looks like when youβre unwinding decades of dependency on adversaries and slave labor.
Youβre asking for clean and quiet change in a world that no longer allows it. Thatβs the part youβre not seeingβand youβre not getting back the system you think youβre defending.
Definitely interested in hearing about your experiments with electrolyte supplements!
Thanks Sebastian!
I haven't been as consistent as I should with it, and it's always hard to be entirely sure that what you're noticing is from it or placebo or just random daily variability, but from a mechanistic angle, it makes all the sense in the world to focus a lot on proper hydration and electrolyte balance!
If you experiment with it too, let me know how it goes, and thanks for reading and the comment π π₯
On LMNT: I have it and definitely notice a difference. I got a personal record in my 5K the first time I used it and felt great during and after.
Will admit that it is a little pricey for what is effectively just salt, and it may be a bit of a placebo, so I try to use it only for when I am sweating like crazy (long cardio days) or feeling exceptionally sore/fatigued after a workout. I sometimes will use a pinch of salt with lemon and a banana as a snack to get going in the morning for a smaller boost.
Do you notice any drop off between LMNT & Leanfit? Have you tried making your own mix at home?
I had never tried LMNT until last week. I didn't feel a big different when it comes to flavor with Leanfit. HArd to say when it comes to effect, since there are so many factors and it's hard to judge.
It's a bit more than salt, though, but at the end of the day, salt + potassium + magnesium shouldn't be that different from one brand to another as long as they are reputable. I'd probably go with whatever tastes decent to you because you'll be more likely to drink it more often than something that tastes bad Β―\_(γ)_/Β―
https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2025-man-meltdown/
As a classic liberal (as The Economist would define it), which means I consider myself pretty centrist, and I agree with you completely Liberty. I've spent a lot of time of the last couple years debating right wing investors online, and I still can't say I understand them, but I think they understand that their policies will make us poorer, but it seems like something else is the priority for them. They are enjoying "their guy" (how they feel their guy represents them is beyond me) being in the drivers seat and sticking it to all the ppl they feel have been looking down on them for so long. Kinda like a socialist mindset of wanting the would to be more perfect than is practically possible, and more perfect to them is if their old jobs were considered as high status as they once were over 50 years ago. You and I know that's not possible. Likewise, the individualistic mindset of wanting to make it "ourselves" trusts anyone of the 350M people within our borders arbitrarily determined by some politicians long ago to make stuff, but not anyone outside those borders. The national flag creates a powerful US vs them team mindset. I've been making plans for my family to have an escape route should this guy succeed in dismantling rule of law completely, as I've read and watched this movie too many times before.
It's sad that it has come to this. It's a bit like that meme from Breaking Bad.. You had a good thing going, but you had to ruin it!
On bulldogs β even if you canβt be one yourself (young in your career, donβt have the personality for it, or whatever the case may be), just donβt be the anti-bulldog!! Support your local bulldogs and make sure even if you have disagreements on the βhowβ, that you loudly support the pace at which they want to operate.
We need as many pro-bulldog supporters as we need bulldogs.
Yep! As long as the goals given to these bulldogs are good goals, of course!
There are also Bulldogs making organizations worse out there, I'm sure.
That would be a tough person to work with. Channeling energy, organizational cache, and a βget it doneβ attitude to implement really bad ideas. Yikes!
That's why leadership at the top is so important. Bad leadership can ruin great businesses, great products, great cultures, great teams...
This reduces trade policy to GDP math and βbig countries produce moreβ logic, completely missing the point.
The issue isnβt whether Vietnam or China can buy as much from us as we buy from them. Of course they canβt. Theyβre poorer. Thatβs exactly the problem: weβve offshored critical supply chains to countries that either exploit slave labor (China) or canβt afford to buy what we make (Vietnam), creating permanent dependency and strategic vulnerability.
This isnβt about efficiency anymoreβitβs about sovereignty. Itβs about whether the U.S. can build what it needs in a crisis, without begging our rivals for the parts. Itβs about national security, industrial resilience, and moral clarity.
If your trade framework doesnβt account for any of that, then youβre not serious. Youβre just rearranging numbers on a spreadsheet while the country gets hollowed out.
This is a different topic than what I was writing about, but there can be justification for trade policy that includes tariffs and targeted barriers for national security.
But what we're seeing is definitely not that. Good policy isn't this blunt and crude and improvised; broad-based tariffs on everyone based on nonsensical math and assumptions about trade deficits, huge supply chain disruptions popping up rapidly and unpredictably, changing daily and weekly, removing any predictability necessary to conduct business and invest. It's pushing away every ally and making it harder and more expensive to manufacture in the US at the same time. Counterproductive.
What we're seeing is hurting that objective of a stronger country with more robust sovereignty.
Youβre still framing this through the old lensβlike weβre living in a stable, rules-based global system where predictability matters more than sovereignty. Weβre not. That world is gone. You donβt get to critique todayβs policies using yesterdayβs assumptions.
In times where national security is on the line, yesβthings move fast, lines blur, and disruption happens. Thatβs not failure. Thatβs what transition looks like when youβre unwinding decades of dependency on adversaries and slave labor.
Youβre asking for clean and quiet change in a world that no longer allows it. Thatβs the part youβre not seeingβand youβre not getting back the system you think youβre defending.
We'll have to agree to disagree. I think even with your framing, the way this is approached is counter-productive and hurts these objectives.
I guess we'll see what happens either way.
Well, JP is definitely right that weβre not living in a βstable, rules-based global systemβ anymore ππ.
That part is definitely correct π―