Deja_vecu

PhD. Trying to locate the socioemotive control rods to this physiological reactor chamber we now exist in.

[Deja_vecu @DejaVecu_O2]

@SageTheStrange @jk_rowling Punching bag for some. Tokens for others. My goal is for people to get the highest quantity medical care available…if they need it. If they don’t or it’s dangerous & people are pushing for it because of feelings or activism vs need, then they aren’t actually helping anyone.

[Deja_vecu @DejaVecu_O2]

@SageTheStrange @jk_rowling Things like curative surgery in persons requiring a DSM diagnoses given the vulnerability & potential effects on psychiatric conditions in the future as a response to the intervention.

[Deja_vecu @DejaVecu_O2]

@SageTheStrange @jk_rowling Interestingly, Yale tried to claim there wasn’t a need for RCT trials or longitudinal (the highest form of evidence). Rather, they advocated for relying on observational studies which is unusual given medical interventions require robust RCTs for the different dimensions of…

[Deja_vecu @DejaVecu_O2]

@SageTheStrange @jk_rowling If you care, actually read the articles & data without political or personal bias as much as possible. Exaggerating or making up persons intent is low-tier & it seems you aspire to more than that. I actually enjoyed the convo, but it could have been way better. Take care.

[Deja_vecu @DejaVecu_O2]

@SageTheStrange @jk_rowling You don’t even read the research or data critically, even when it pertains to a group you claim to advocate for. The fact you aren’t embarrassed by how little you know about the so-called 1-5% you espouse reveals you aren’t interested in best outcomes or actual well being.

[Deja_vecu @DejaVecu_O2]

@SageTheStrange @jk_rowling I didn’t mention a number…at all. I simply pointed out the studies providing your numbers are embarrassingly flawed. I directly engaged them. Add straw man to your list of things you don’t understand. Ironically, you straw-manned my position by inserting claims I never made.

[Deja_vecu @DejaVecu_O2]

@SageTheStrange @jk_rowling It does, actually. This would be obvious to anyone that has ever researched & understands how to read research articles—-particularly methodology. To Cass, that’s not what was said…you are taking statements from different contexts. Read the report, then let’s chat if you want.

[Deja_vecu @DejaVecu_O2]

@SageTheStrange @jk_rowling Why don’t you actually read the articles you reference instead of relying on an AI tool you don’t even know how to prompt correctly.

[Deja_vecu @DejaVecu_O2]

@SageTheStrange @jk_rowling Cited by the authors to NOT reflect a true long term rate citing the actual percentage couldn’t be below a double digit rate.

[Deja_vecu @DejaVecu_O2]

@SageTheStrange @jk_rowling The specific flaws cited. I’ve read the entire document.

[Deja_vecu @DejaVecu_O2]

@SageTheStrange @jk_rowling Over a lifespan & not via commercial insurance databases where only instances are captured. As to CASS reviews it’s a 388 page document which criticized the very Dai & related studies promoting the 1-1.5% #. It was a massive critique article commissioned by the NHS. What are…

[Deja_vecu @DejaVecu_O2]

@SageTheStrange @jk_rowling I literally cited sources & welcome you to challenge any aspect of it. I will provide even more specific references, page numbers, for any part that is goop & provide more robust details. These are simply the reality of the data you cite without actually having read the study.

[Deja_vecu @DejaVecu_O2]

@Senzor148 @ericweinstein There are public documents, unsealed documents which describe this specifically, it was all designed as a shell to test weaponry within the states & have a public driven narrative to explain it away.

[Deja_vecu @DejaVecu_O2]

@Senzor148 @ericweinstein Record & narrative. While being able to conduct these experiments in rural areas where if caught, explanation exists which is all people want—think religion, in the event of sighting. It also was used as international tech propaganda aimed at governments working on similar tech.