deleted by creator

The 22,600 figure is most likely a severe underestimate of the people murdered by occupation forces in Gaza (and elsewhere, because they’ve been murdering people in the West Bank and Lebanon as well). I shared this in another comment but The Lancet published this which determined there was no evidence that the Gaza Ministry of Health is inflating these statistics, if anything they are being under reported.

As for how many are “actual civilians” the way that is being reported currently heavily favors the narrative of the occupation because the assumption is simply that all males over the age of 13 are combatants, and even using this absurd framing around 61% of those killed are women and children. The occupation forces have proportionately killed more journalists and UN aid workers than in any other conflict in recent history.

History will judge Israel and its supporters harshly.

Israeli soldiers have repeatedly been found using human shields and forcing civilians to risk their lives performing military tasks.

The Lancet is generally regarded as one of the most reputable and trustworthy medical journals. An assessment of the figures from the Gaza Ministry of Health published in the Lancet found that there was no evidence of inflated mortality statistics, and even went beyond that to say that it is considerably more likely that the Gaza Ministry of Health is under reporting the casualties providing the most conservative figures.

If MoH mortality figures were substantially inflated, the MoH mortality rates would be expected to be higher than the UNRWA mortality rates. Instead, the MoH mortality rates are lower than the rates reported for UNRWA staff (5·3 deaths per 1000 vs 7·8 deaths per 1000, as of Nov 10, 2023). Hypothetically, if MoH mortality data were inflated from, for example, an underlying value of 2–4 deaths per 1000, it would imply that UNRWA staff mortality risk is 2·0–3·9 times higher than that of the public. This scenario is unlikely as many UNRWA staff deaths occurred at home or in areas with high civilian populations, such as in schools or shelters.

Mortality reporting is difficult to conduct in ongoing conflicts. Initial news reports might be imprecise, and subsequent verified reports might undercount deaths that are not recorded by hospitals or morgues, such as persons buried under rubble (appendix pp 1–2). However, difficulties obtaining accurate mortality figures should not be interpreted as intentionally misreported data.

Although valid mortality counts are important, the situation in Gaza is severe, with high levels of civilian harm and extremely restricted access to aid. Efforts to dispute mortality reporting should not distract from the humanitarian imperative to save civilian lives by ensuring appropriate medical supplies, food, water, and fuel are provided immediately.

Here’s a link to the source of this quote.

If you’re consistently seeing the same pattern then the most likely culprits will either be your tamp or a clogged shower screen. Water is going to follow the path of least resistance, so if you’re getting faster extraction at the back there is either less coffee there, it’s less tightly packed (tamped), or there’s an obstruction to the flow at the head (probably the shower screen) causing more water to flow to the back.

Considering the consistency, I’d wager it’s a bad habit in tamping method. It tends to be easier to put more weight down closer to your body, meaning less pressure applied at the back, meaning water has less resistance flowing there. Something you might try to see if it makes a significant difference is to change the orientation of the portafilter while tamping. For instance, if you usually hold the handle straight out from the counter, you can try rotating it to the left, applying a light tamp, then going to the right and applying full pressure, or something like that. If you find that the pattern changes significantly when you make adjustments like that, then you know where the problem lies.