CharonY

A survey in the UK by KCL foud about a quarter of folks that COVID19 was a hoax, about a third think it was a conspiracy of sorts. https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/conspiracy-belief-among-the-uk-public.pdf Suveys in 2020 in the US showed around 15% going up 20% depending on time (Fox and Trump effect, before he got sick) but they had slightly different questions. At the low end there were 10% with 20% being not sure. I don't think there are good disaggregated data sets as most somewhat conflate various conspiracy theories. However, relevant to the claim that there was universal agreement on COVID-19, almost immediately there was a splintering of public opinion with values up to 30% mistrusting public health officials. The effects were associated higher death rates and lower vaccination rates. In Europe vaccination rates varied significantly with some areas with over 96% (e.g., Ireland, Portugal), 80-85-ish (Germany, Austria) and to very low rates in parts of Eastern Europe (Poland, 66%, Bulgaria 35%). The USA as a whole is around 70%, for comparison. During an active pandemic, that is plenty to pose a serious public health risk, not to mention the much more sizeable portion of folks downplaying the risk. Even if only 10% are fully denying an ongoing reality can have immediate impact on public health. Imagine the same number of folks denying that cars can injure ppl on the road. Also, there were massive protests against vaccinations and even masking (if charitable, one could make an argument regarding lockdowns). The response was far from universal and flummoxed public health. Early on folks did think that it would be a time where folks would pull together. And we were quite wrong. Folks clearly did not universally agree on working against the virus. And it turns out, there is a sizeable pro-virus faction.

It is also a soil bacterium.

I read in another report that Ratcliffe said that the operative was not covert (but who knows whether that is true). I am also wondering, since they declared that nothing sensitive was discussed, is the journalist now free to publish the whole conversation?

Interesting question. Was Dr. Phil in the chat?

Another thing that I read is that Signal is not allowed to be run on government issued safe communication devices, suggesting that the communication happened with unsecured devices. From the Atlantic article: Elsewhere in the article, they noted that military activities should have been discussed in SCIFs or approved government equipment, as you noted.

Are they allowed to?

I am confused, isn't the administration pro-virus? A jeez, are they trying to use the flooding the zone strategy for every single thing now? They keep arguing contradictory things, even in court, like in the DOGE and deportation cases (no, DOGE is not an official agency and not run by Musk, but yes it is run by Musk, and it has full authority; no we cannot disclose details on the likely illegal deportations, and we cannot even say why this is a national security risk as even it is super top secret. Also here is a music video of the deportation).

I think the fact that this is being normalized is a huge issue in itself. Rather unfortunately flooding the zone really works in the age of short - SQUIRREL!

No, dude. Being woke is against the law.

That makes a lot of sense. A key element of this administration is to minimize transparency and accountability.

Thanks, that makes a lot of sense. Which makes the security breach way worse. But then on balance, perhaps not too surprising. Those folks are not much for rules. Or laws.

I did not expect the US to be run by a bunch of 12 year old bullies. Beside the point, but is anyone else surprised that the US government is not using or do not have an internal tool for communications?

That would make a lot of sense. Like vaccinating folks against, you know, measles. Or perhaps not. I don't even know anymore. USA turned into North Korea. A brain worm seems to be leading health agencies, and folks consider one of their children dying from a preventable disease worth it to not vaccinate folks. I am fairly sure something is pranking us all, but I cannot figure out who.

They would eat a mirror to own the libs.

Also, to further flog the dead horse on the GOP's commitment to merit: Hegseth accidentally texted war plans to a journalist https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/03/trump-administration-accidentally-texted-me-its-war-plans/682151/ https://apnews.com/article/war-plans-trump-hegseth-atlantic-230718a984911dd8663d59edbcb86f2a Apparently putting a white guy in charge does not make things automatically better.

Disagree, it was like this for perhaps two weeks. But there were plenty of folks who decided that it was not real, and even those dying from it claimed that the it is actually the hospitals that is killing them.

I think microplastics wouldn't be my biggest worry. While I would agree that acute toxicity is likely not an issue, common materials such as PVC can leach plasticizers, such as phthalates. The immediate health impact is low, though accumulation over time is a worry here. I think typical water filters are certified to NSF 42 and 53 (and sometimes 401) which don't test for phthalates (I think). There are PVCs sold as fish or food safe, but not sure whether they are actually compliant to any standards.

I tried getting to provide a kind of review on the topic but it tends to be too narrow or ends up being list with with often dubious relevance.

I have tried the tools on a topic I am currently writing on. They tend not to synthesize findings very well I found, either it is a list or just a highlight from a handful of usually recent publications. The area is somewhat cutting edge, though. They look better when asking specific questions, but the best answer is basically just citing one paper over and over.

Sorry, no he didn't (yet). I was being, well, I am not sure what that was. He did however declare the right to designate anyone as terrorist or invader as he so chooses and defied court orders for the deportation of folks without due process (by simply designating them gang members). This would be the second constitutional crisis (the first being the dismantling of USAID by stepping on congressional powers). Considering his other unconstitutional desires (including birthright citizenship), it would not be a huge stretch that he could try to revoke citizenship. But again, he didn't do it and I apologize if anyone thought he did. For now, at least.

Mighty optimistic for you tho think that the Canadians (except perhaps Albertans) are allowed to vote. Quite optimistic for you to assume that a Kenyan national (as determined by executive order) is allowed to run.

There is also a broader issue that you do not want to have uncontrolled bacterial growth in your products. If it is not safeguarded against "safe" bacteria, they may also be vulnerable to harmful ones. And generally speaking, it is better to prevent issue rather than letting it run its course until someone is harmed. That is, unless the penalty is cheaper than safeguarding, which then would be a regulatory issue.

Methane is also produced naturally and for some reasons we still worry about it...

Except again, he is business man, but not a scientist. Bezos founded Blue Origin, but no one calls him a scientist because of that. It is fine to say that one admires his entrepreneurship and his business sense (until recently, perhaps). But I don't think it helps your argument by describing him as something he isn't.

! Moderator Note This is not the place to share really really bad advice, especially not medical advice (if we want to call it that).