I just lost my dog after her needing people around pretty constantly. My partner and I can mostly arrange working from home, so the situation is not the same. What is the same is how you approach how your dog feels and how to tell when it’s ‘the time’.

You’re probably the most important part of his life. The shelter might let him find a home that can care for him better or it might not (because people are hesitant to adopt older dogs with health issues). What they can’t give is the stability he gets from staying with you. It really sucks that we can’t ask them what they want. I know that my pup would never have chosen a longer life if it meant giving us up.

When is it time? There are resources online about how to judge quality of life. For us it was as simple as picking her favorite things to do and watching to see if she still wanted to do them.

I have second guessed myself a lot - should we have done more vet care, should we have spent more time with her, etc. You’re in a hard situation. The decicions don’t get easier and sometimes are no win. My advice is to make your decisions for him as best you can knowing that your best is not ever going to be the perfect ideal AND it will be good enough.

Something sweet to pair with the salty. Apple chips, dried fruit, caramel corn, or something like that

The op has it right. Definitely dahlias. I can see why you’d think zinnias though. It’s interesting how different (or similar) we can make plants look with dedicated breeding efforts.

Look up “pink tax” and “gender pay gap”.

Try it without the “e”

Yeah, that makes sense. I have a friend who grows stevia indoors and just uses the dried, ground up leaves for sweetening her tea. That’s a cheap way to get a sweetener if you have some window space to spare.

Isn’t it a little inconsistent to worry over the amount of refinement in plant sweeteners (stevia, cane, beet, etc) but not the intense process that goes into creating whole molecules of artificial sweetener? At some point you have to drop the level of refinement as an important criteria if you consider artificial products viable options.

Reading the article - this is a know effect of stress (like forcing an immune response) and had no impact on health outcomes or fertility. I see the point in doing the study to confirm expectations, but I don’t see the point in reporting on it or posting it.

Sticks can be bad for dogs because of mouth splinters and certain woods are hard enough to damage teeth. This product makes sense to me even if I would never buy it.

Read it again without the word ‘anti-vaxx’ and see if you agree with the ban under the site rules. Now imagine it said ‘trolling and weightloss pill spammer.’ Would you be upset because there is no rule against that specific type of spammer?