This article is from January. It has since been peer reviewed and published in Cell. But, having been peer reviewed has no bearing on reproducibility unless within this study they were to have multiple independent groups repeat their experiments. Which I don’t think they did. Still, good study I think.

https://archive.ph/2024.05.07-220842/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/05/07/astrazeneca-withdrawing-covid-vaccine/

6x7?

I think The Lancet is a reputable journal. They seem to have conveyed the findings of this article well. With quotes from the authors as well. Seems like an adequately scientific article with very little exaggeration. So, by my standards I wouldn’t consider it click bait.

Good idea in principle. Do peer-reviewed journals only count as credible? If not, what is your proposed criteria?

Here’s a transcript to peruse if anyone is interested. Then you can search for keywords to see if they were mentioned, quickly flick through Putin’s rambling and you avoid providing Tucker with a click. Here’s also an archive link if anyone prefers that.

What city was this that tried housing first and it didn’t work? I’m interested in reading the details

Section 6. Except as provided for in Section 4, nothing in this act shall be construed as limiting or preventing psychologists, psychological technicians, and master’s level licensed mental health professionals from rendering the services for which they are qualified by training or experience involving the application of recognized principles, methods, and procedures of the science and profession of psychology and counseling. Section 7. Nothing in this section shall be construed to establish a new or separate standard of care for hospitals or physicians and their patients or otherwise modify, amend, or supersede any provision of the Alabama Medical Liability Act of 1987 or the Alabama Medical Liability Act of 1996, or any amendment or judicial interpretation of either act.

If affirming care means socially affirming as well as medical (drugs / surgery) then the law isn’t entirely against affirming care because it doesn’t mention anything against social affirmation and explicitly allows for psychologists to make appropriate decisions in that realm.

I’m not saying I’m for this law, but it is important to be precise about what the law is. It’s actually not a very long read.

Why martyr him when you can slowly turn him into Emmanuel Goldstein?

Pathetic. Given the seriousness of what he said, and continues to say even this month, no one with a working brain could possibly believe anything in this sad non-attempt at an apology message. It doesn’t resolve anything, it doesn’t make clear that he understands what was wrong with what he said, it doesn’t specify what he is going to do differently going forward, and it isn’t even clear that it is truly a message from him or genuine.

Ok, that was in March/June. What does that have to do with Israel now? Still not quite understanding how

“Israel is about to cause peace in the Middle East.”

is implied by

“Iran and Saudi Arabia normalized.”

This? or this? or something else?

Iran and Saudi Arabia normalized?

It doesn’t prevent the rape, but they do have “cul-de-sac pouches en route, that could prevent fertilisation by capturing unwelcome sperm.” So they can choose whether or not they get fertilized. Which is at least some sort of a defense. Edit: link for quote

Moment silence definitely warranted

Wait until we start sentencing pedophiles to whole body CRISPR mutation of the oxytocin and serotonin gene so they only get 21 years but become incapable of love and happiness forever. Do you think that would be a better punishment?

Roads? What are you smoking?

Try this on for size: Tipping is a Legacy of Slavery

This opinion by Michelle Alexander always stuck with me.

Here’s the graphs of all objects in the universe.

Here’s the figure legend: Masses, sizes, and relative densities of objects in our Universe. Time-dependent background densities are color-coded as in Fig. 1. The diagonal white dashed isodensity lines correspond to the intersections in Fig. 1 of the vertical isochron lines with the black density line. Gravity and quantum uncertainty prevent objects of a given mass from being smaller than their corresponding Schwarzschild radius [Eq. (6)] or Compton wavelength [Eq. (7)]. Schwarzschild black holes lie on the black m∝r diagonal line which is the lower boundary of the “forbidden by gravity” region. The masses and Compton wavelengths of the top quark (t), Higgs boson (Ho), proton (p), electron (e), and neutrinos (ν) are plotted along the Compton (⁠m∝r−1⁠) diagonal line. Among these, the top quark has the smallest Compton wavelength, because it has the largest mass: 173GeVc−2⁠. The smallest possible object is a Planck-mass black hole indicated by the white dot labeled “instanton” (Ref. 20). Its mass and size are (m,r)=(mp,lp)⁠. The smallest observable (not yet evaporated) primordial black hole (PBH) that could have survived until today has approximately the same size as a proton (Ref. 21). The large low-mass black dot in the SMBH (super massive black hole) range is the 4 × 106 solar mass black hole at the center of our galaxy (Ref. 22), while the more massive large black dot is Ton 618. The dashed horizontal line at m=mp emphasizes the orthogonal symmetry of black holes (⁠m∝r⁠) and particles (⁠m∝r−1⁠). Our Universe is represented by the “Hubble radius” and has a mass and size that places it on the black hole line, seemingly suggesting that our Universe is a massive, low-density black hole (Sec. III A). The black rectangle containing neutron stars (“NS”), white dwarfs (“WD”), and brown dwarfs (“BD”) indicates the size of the parameter space plotted in Fig. 3. Less comprehensive versions of this plot can be found at Refs. 20 and 23–28.

Drop the conspiracy kool-aid and just try to evaluate the facts as they are presented. Very prevalent rape in India is not new and likely increasing.