Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2022 July 24

= July 24 =

Which countries like pork meat the most?
It seems everywhere outside lamb, people tend to like steak or chicken. Not to known down on races, but there seems to be a correlation that Whites like steak meat the most, while Africans like chicken meat the most. So are there any countries in the world that seem to like pork meat the most? (At least over steak and chicken.). Despite that, we have 2 major religions that condemn eating pork, so. 67.165.185.178 (talk) 04:01, 24 July 2022 (UTC).
 * You also asked this question on the Science desk and it was answered there. --←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:59, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * For the 1st part, not quite. 67.165.185.178 (talk) 07:20, 24 July 2022 (UTC).
 * There is only one question above: "So are there any countries in the world that seem to like pork meat the most?". That question was answered at the Science section of the desk, although it was, strictly speaking, not asked over there; instead, its future being posted here – at the Humanities section – was announced. --Lambiam 11:50, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * And just to close the loop… the answer they gave at the science desk was “China”. Blueboar (talk) 12:30, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Lambiam, if your comment was not directed to my reply to Baseball Bugs reply, you should not have indented after mine. I was talking about Baseball Bugs 1st part, not my 1st part. I 100% agree with his 2nd part, but not his 1st part. 67.165.185.178 (talk) 16:36, 24 July 2022 (UTC).
 * Ukraine and probably Poland. See also Salo (food) and Jamón. Ghirla-трёп- 16:49, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * According to our article Pork: "Pork is the most popular meat in the Western world, particularly in Central Europe. It is also very popular in East and Southeast Asia". The world's top producers of pork, after China and the USA, are Russia, Brazil and Japan. Ghirla-трёп- 16:53, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, the Germans are the wurst. The full English breakfast is also pork orientated. Alansplodge (talk) 10:32, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * China with its enormous population consumes the most pork in total but the "like pork meat the most" formulation implies pork consumption per capita. Helgi Libraries reports that Spain, Poland and Croatia are the top three, and that China is #13 per capita. Cullen328 (talk) 17:02, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

One should be aware that high levels of consumption do not necessarily mean high levels of appreciation. It may just be a matter of that's what's available, economical, or "the way we've always done it." Hence, the largest per capita consumption of pork may very well be because pigs will eat just about anything, and so are a lower cost source of meat than other options. DOR (HK) (talk) 17:16, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * No. People in Spain and Poland consume large quantities of jamón and salo because they really love it rather than because they have nothing else to eat. --Ghirla-трёп- 18:22, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Seeing Spain on the list is interesting to me. Spain used to be Muslim for about 700 years. But I never knew the demographics for that, was it at peak, 50/50 Christian and Islam? 67.165.185.178 (talk) 19:20, 24 July 2022 (UTC).
 * You're forgetting the Spanish Inquisition. There was a choice between leaving or acquiring a taste for pork. Alansplodge (talk) 10:32, 25 July 2022 (UTC)


 * China doesn't have as high per capita meat consumption, due to lower GDP. Rather that per capita mass, it would be more interesting to see what fraction of meat consumed is pork. — kwami (talk) 19:54, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @67.165 - My (admittedly limited) knowledge of Spanish history is that the entire country was occupied by the Moors, with the exception of the small Christian kingdom of Asturias in the north.  It appears to have been protected by mountains. 92.31.140.208 (talk) 10:21, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was, a long time ago. The reconquista was completed by the late 15th century, though, while everyone would not have converted instantly, in the intervening 550 years or so, there had been more than enough time for various cultural changes to have occurred.  -- Jayron 32 13:09, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * While a large part of the Iberian Peninsula was under Moorish rule, there was no large-scale conversion, and plenty of pork was presumably still eaten there. You cannot easily change the agriculture of a large area, in particularly not in pre-modern times, where there was little surplus production and most of the population was working in agriculture. As for "who likes what", pork is popular in most of Europe. The "African/white" distinction proposed is likely much more an economic reality converted into a cultural preference - chicken is a lot cheaper and easier to obtain and process than beef. And before refrigeration, there are few situations in which it is economically suitable for a subsistence farmer to kill cattle. They would not be able to consume much of the meat before it spoiled. So beef was a rare treat and its regular consumption is the product of large-scale organised societies and/or technologically advanced groups. People tend to like the food they were brought up on. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 19:51, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Then what % of Spain's population went down / were killed, from the reconversion? Must have been a notable decline? 67.165.185.178 (talk) 22:36, 26 July 2022 (UTC).
 * Check Reconquista. The Arab invasion started in 711, the Reconquista was complete in 1492. There are nearly 800 years of history in there - about as much as from Bastard Willy to Queen Victoria, or from Augustus to Charlemagne. A lot of that was quite peaceful, and conflicts were not strictly along religious lines. A systematic religious persecution started only after 1492 - see Spanish Inquisition, Moriscos and Expulsion of Jews from Spain. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 23:09, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Borrowing from your U.S. retirement funds
Equitable says, "You’ll pay taxes twice. You will pay back the loan using after-tax dollars, then you’ll be taxes again when you take the money out at retirement." I have two questions. This disadvantage applies only to traditional plans, right, because borrowing from Roth would mean that after you've repaid the plan, you're not taxed when you take distributions upon retirement? Otherwise, it seems like a good point that even my employer's pension people aren't aware of.

Second, the page doesn't mention that the interest you pay (albeit to yourself) is not tax-deductible, as interest on a first mortgage would be. I guess it's better to pocket your own interest than to save 30% (24% federal and 6% state, say), but still, that's a con, right? 74.64.73.24 (talk) 11:24, 24 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Wild guess: a professional financial and taxation adviser is going to give you better insight on this topic than random people on the internet. And, we don't offer advice normally given by professionals. DOR (HK) (talk) 17:18, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * First, I'm not asking for advice, only clarification. Second, Wikipedia doesn't give medical or legal advice. I see no restrictions on financial advice, although U.S. laws have things to say about that. Does Wikipedia have anything to say about sarcasm though? 74.64.73.24 (talk) 21:07, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Regardless of rules, when seeking clarification or advice, for matters which can have such a large impact on your health, legal status, or finances, it is best to contact people who have training in such areas, rather than asking randos from the internet. -- Jayron 32 12:16, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

The advice from Equitable is at least as good as what you'll get here. I'll just say that they are correct, you pay taxes twice when borrowing from a pre-tax instrument like a traditional IRA or 401(k). If you borrow from a Roth IRA, I'd say it shouldn't matter because you already paid the tax going into it (I mean, that would be logical, right?), but ask a financial adviser. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:15, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Italian magazine Panorama online?
Anyone knows if archive of Panorama (Panorama, no. 567-575. Mondadori, 1977) from 1977 is available online? --Soman (talk) 16:40, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Carl Djerassi's pill
This states that Carl Djerassi invented "the very first pill [...] in the late 1940's" and "whilst the pill had been invented in chemical form, Dr Carl Djerassi was not equipped for proper testing or manufacturing, so distribution of the pill was still years away". I couldn't confirm that claim elsewhere and neither Carl Djerassi nor Combined_oral_contraceptive_pill articles mention it. But the source is LloydsPharmacy, so looks acceptable. Did such pill actually appear in the 1940s? Brandmeistertalk  22:08, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * "The pill" was not, of course, invented one day by a single person as a fully developed product. Beginning in the 1930s the substances involved were discovered, their properties investigated, means were found to extract or synthesise them, and medicines containing them (some liquid, some in solid 'pill' form) were developed over many years of testing and trials leading to eventual approval. The Carl Djerassi article you link to above describes how from 1949 he led a team (one of several) that worked on this. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.201.73.20 (talk) 12:36, 25 July 2022 (UTC)