StorminNorman @ StorminNorman @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

230

Joined

2 yr. ago

Of course people can get addicted to guns you giant idiot.

For many people who have survived their attempts (and I mean suicide in general, not just jumping off this specific bridge), a lot of them say that they instantly regretted it the moment they passed the point of no return. Plus, these nets have been used on other similar hotspots, and whilst some people do just jump off of the net, the vast majority do not and there has been a sharp reduction in the number of deaths at these spots.

Hmmmmm, do we trust the news article linked with more than one expert quoted and a bunch of actual figures, or some random person on Lemmy with no data to back their claim? What a puzzler...

I mean, I don't think that's entirely a bad thing. At least it's not gushing grannies mkII...

Nobody expected it because there is a literal convention preventing it. Sure, Erdogan is a cunt, but this isn't the first time Turkey has denied passage. They've done it to Russia. They've done it to the US. And for all your talk of Erdogan wanting his pound of flesh, nobody is stupid enough to go up against the US defence forces unless they have very solid backing for their stance. Which the convention gives them. This scenario would be completely different if they were making exceptions for some but not others, but they're not.

It became a candidate because nominations (and the votes) are all community based. Steam has the final say, but yeah, it's the users who are driving this.

Dunno why you're dying on this hill when it literally says in the article that nobody expected the ships to be allowed to travel to the Black Sea. It's almost like the experts know more than some anonymous armchair expert on Lemmy...

I mean, the legal system usually does. There's been a bit of a shit fight as to who should pay, the state or Kim. Might boggle your mind more to know that she still had the position up until 2019...

That was the channel they had when they did WWI. So, same concept and core team, but different channel.

I am a terrible watcher of wrestling. I'll watch a show, then not watch one for two years. But I caught his SummerSlam match, and the kid can go. Like, he had all the fundamentals down. The whole going slow that takes forever for wreztlers to learn. He can sell moves with the best of em. His moves were super crisp. Calling the next sequence etc. Do I think he's way overpaid? Yes. Do I hate that some internet guy is being made famous when they squander literal Olympic level wrestlers? Yes. But, I mean, he's putting out good matches..

And yeah, I've never really followed him, so this was always his "redemption" to me. If he's still doing the horseshit I have heard him and Jake do well... But I wanna hope!

What the fuck. Literally not maiming them. 100% reversible. Nothing is cut off of them. It also says a lot that you can't speak to the other points I raised too. You're a white knight who is out of their depth. Fuck off and annoy someone else...

Yeah, but I'm not. I was talking about how using hormones might be okay in this one instance. I couldn't give two shits about hormonal contraception and it's consequences for women at this time as it's completely irrelevant to my point. I will say this much though, one, your second paragraph is so poorly worded it makes literally no sense. And two, you aren't as smart as you think you are if you think this is what makes the medical system mysognistic. The whole thing is set up to favour white men. This is a tiny drop in the bucket as to how fucked the whole system is. Cos an incredibly low number of women, statistically, getting depressed when using one form of medication is nothing compared to how many of them die of easily treated heart conditions, as just one example.

Can we get back to the point now? The one that chemical castration is maybe okay as a punishment cos it's reversible?

Ahhh, so you just give up when proven wrong. Strong move. Bet it's served you well in life.

And my day is fine. Been drinking beers and smoking weed for 5hrs now cos I have literally nothing to do tomorrow but sleep til my new years party tomorrow. 8ts cute that you think you've bothered me though. I mean, come on, I've had more intelligent convos with my mates 3yo...

Oh spare me, I have a half dozen conditions ranging from annoying to life threatening with less chances of happening than your 0.05%. I know exactly what it's like to be "statistically insignificant". Changes nothing. You treat the majority. Not the minority. And when a side effect causes a a 0.05% increase? Yeah, don't worry about it. I mean, don't suddenly not be a doctor and not treat those affected, but given how 99.95% of the population are aided by it and don't suffer the side effect, then maybe still use it? Like, what the actual fuck. I just don't get why you came into this spouting off all this shit you didn't understand. Like, how do you think that "there was a significant amount of recent information" about this issue? Cos you sure didn't show it. And we've known about it for quite a while, a search on scholar.google shows that. All it means is it that drs should be aware that we may need to treat depression for a really small cohort of our contraceptive patients. Thats it. But go on, sy something dumb again...

And don't come at me with this "I did my best with my resources" malarkey. I literally used the resources you said you used to prove you wrong. You tried to be smart. You got caught out. Take the L and walk it off.

And given you don't have any idea how they work or with what incidence their side effects affect the general population, I'll kindly ignore your opinion on the matter in the final paragraph. Especially cos I'm not a mad fan of it too, but because you goddamn anti science activists wanna make a thing out of it for completely incorrect reasons, here I am...

Statistically, no it's not. Sure, it covers a large number of individuals, but it covers so little of the total population that it's pretty insignificant. There are side effects that occur more frequently with these drugs, and we don't care much about them either cos they are so low. I mean, yeah treat those who do get side effects bu the STATISTICAL likelihood of that happening is so low, they aren't gonna pull the drug from the shelves. And I didn't say that none of the population who takes these drugs suffer mental side effects. I said most of them don't. And given the best counter argument I've been given is "2% of them do", well, I'm gonna stand by my original assertion. Also, your maths is way off. If 2% of the population is a little under half a million (and I haven't checked the other person's maths, but I skimmed it and it seemed fine so I have no reason to distrust it), then 0.5% of the population is not "hundreds of thousands of people". At most, it's a bit over 125k people...

And let's get back to why I said this. It's about chemical castration of convicted criminals (whether they are actually guilty is kinda immaterial, they're convicted and the point of doing this is so we don't kill them if they are actually innocent and can later prove it). When the fuck did we suddenly care that 2% of them might get depressed?! I guarantee being in prison raises their risk of depression by way more than 2%... I mean, I bet none of you expected that you were teeing off on a pathologist who can point out why you're wrong, but Jesus, how was this ever an issue? Like I said, 100% reversible (from a quick read of two papers, contraceptive depression gwnerally resolves upon cessation) and 100% preferable to executing an innocent person. Fuck me. You people are insane...

Not sure why you've posted all of this given I've not once mentioned hormonal contraceptives and there's not much data here to support your claim... 2% is an incredibly low number. Sure, when you have such a large population it involves a lot of people, but statistically, it's stupid low. You've also misinterpreted the data given a bit, the risk of depression when on a hormonal contraceptives was 2.2%. The risk of depression when not on one is 1.7%. Again, that affects a lot of people, but it's not the number you've calculated being caused by the contraceptive alone, and is still statistically very low. So, I'm just gonna completely ignore your anecdotal observations given at the start of your comment and rely on the hard data you've given. Which, admittedly, is only for one branch of hormonal medicine, but the data given does neatly support my claim that most people don't experience these wild side effects you initially ascribed to the treatments.

I edited that bit cos I knew someone would think that was my entire point. But as you said yourself "it CAN have" (emphasis mine) undesirable effects. Most medications, hormonal or not, CAN have these effects. But the vast majority of people on these medications don't get these effects. And even if every person who was chemically castrated suffered these effects (and again, they don't, we wouldn't use it to treat some diseases if it did), the fact it's reversible makes it infinitely better than the death penalty. Reality isn't perfect. There's always gonna be compromises.

No probably about it, he's one of their top paid stars (although still a ways off of Roman reigns and Lesnar). Which is wild given he only wrestled 6 times this year. But he brings eyes to the product, so WWE have done the maths and deemed it to be worthwhile.

In this case, it might actually be okay if they're wrongly convicted and chemically castrated rather than executed as chemical castration can usually be reversed (you have to scroll down a bit, but it's mentioned).. It's not like you burn off anyone's genitals.

They don't "just" wipe em clean. Yeah, me and you might think they do, but there's a bunch of steps they have to perform. Because if they don't, people literally die. And here's a study that emphasizes that being a risk with such a innocuous device. I mean, the WHO guidelines for cleaning them are literally 10 steps long.

And as I was finding the who guidelines again, I found another article that states that oximeters should be disposable when more than one patient is hooked to a machine. Guarantee a field hospital doesn't have dozens of those devices on hand, so we're back to disposables anyway.