puff

Based

My condolences

I miss Corbyn )';

Yeah I honestly don't know. His interview with Novara (on youtube) sorta made me feel better about it but then not really. He said some good things (about respect and dignity) but then some bad things (won't repeat here because it's offensive). He's a massive missed opportunity but he's not the whole party. Looks like they have a huge number of minority candidates who seem like genuinely good people and not terfs or homophobes.

Sigh. You're probably not wrong. Galloway is a strange beast. Problem with Greens is that they're pro-Israel in that they spew the usual lines about Hamas.

Thanks, forgot we had that.

Link broken

Edit: won't play with certain VPNs. God he's so fucking old. Could we get a leader who isn't over 60?

Jesus christ he refers to the Biden administration as a "progressive coalition". So genocide and corporate capitalism. Go fuck yourself, Joe Sims.

Extremely interesting development. Do you think it's simply because he sees popular support globally for Palestine and wants to piggy-back some of it?

This is such exaggeration. No, COVID has not disabled half of the world. And it won't. IQs didn't suddenly drop "right after COVID entered the chat". This sort of speculation doesn't help.

If you've had covid, even woth no symptoms, you will on average score 3 points lower on an IQ test and be at greater risk of early death from other causes

These associations are not demonstrably casual. Just because someone ran a logistic regression or similar model on a cohort or cross sectional sample does not mean they have identified a causal association. It's more likely that confounding was poorly adjusted for. Almost every study published on these techniques is bullshit. Spurious associations can be found in any dataset between any two variables if you fuck with the covariates and categories enough. Try it yourself. I am way too burned by the medical publishing industry. The more clickbaity the article, regardless of how bogus the analysis, the more likely it is to be published and distributed widely by science communicators, and sadly peer review does an extremely poor job of detecting and rejecting this stuff. I say this as a scientist in the field; the field is absolutely fucked. Another issue is that null findings (e.g., 'we found no association between COVID infection and IQ') rarely ever get published because journals prefer to publish exciting studies that will get them more clicks and downloads (i.e., ad revenue and article purchases). I would ask that you be more skeptical of correlation you read about in the media. They've had a frenzy over shitty COVID studies.

I wore a mask for three years including a month or two before they even started telling people to wear masks (and even when they told people NOT to wear a mask, the idiots). I've been vaccinated four times against COVID. I am not at risk of long COVID because I don't have any of the risk factors associated with long COVID. I am not in contact with disabled or immunocompromised people and I am rarely in densely populated indoor places. I stay inside when I'm sick, which is rarely ever. COVID was pretty fucking deadly when it first hit because we had no understanding of how to treat it, no treatment options available, and no immunity across the population. We have all of those things now, which is why COVID hospitalisation is relatively rare and patients hospitalised with COVID now have a very similar risk of dying to those hospitalised with flu (adjusted death rate, 5.70% vs 4.24% at 30 days; peer-reviewed source: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.7395). I've never been hospitalised with flu and I won't be hospitalised with COVID, and I'm not going to spread it to anyone else because I'm not in contact with people that way. I appreciate your concerns and have shared them but they are misdirected.