impulse

Money wasn't their problem. The money was their grift.

It's not so absurd to those of us who suffer from vaccine injuries.

Then why is there a booming business in the northern states from Canadians crossing over to pay for healthcare that they'd have to wait for back home? Sooner or later, you run out of OPM.

I'd gladly welcome Alberta with their oil and Banff National Park. And their can-do attitude. We can call them North Montana. Their snowflakes in the East, not so much.

You can call out whatever you want. But that's not what you want. You want to prevent others from posting stuff you disagree with.

There's another take here... As it stands, most kids are afraid of the water. Teaching kids water survival could motivate more of them to get in the water because they no longer fear it. I don't claim to know which is safer and which would result in more drownings. Personally, I'm in favor of teaching kids to swim. But I do acknowledge the other side of the coin.

I wonder if the residents' rice tasted funny?

You mean like the bullies that cancelled the truckers' bank accounts?

Looks a lot like Weird Al Yankovic.

If you stroke it too much, you can go blind.

I think the real correlation there isn't gun culture. It's the ethnic make-up, but it's considered racist to call that out. Though the FBI stats are pretty clear on who's shooting who.

While that seems like the most likely scenario, if I was a bent baggage handler, I may be tempted to load some weed into some random bags and let my baggage handler buddy on the other end know which bag it's in. 4 times in the past 2 years, I've had a sticker on my checked bag indicating that BKK opened it for a security inspection.

On paper, I'd agree. But it rarely works out that way in real life. Rent control generally leads to poorly maintained and scarce rentals.

I can think of a dozen reasons the CDC data may not match. But if I was a working age adult (like in the Cleveland study), I'd forgo this year's batch. And If I were RFK, Jr, that would be the official recommendation based on the science. Maybe the old farts need it, but not working age adults. It just makes things worse for them. And that sounds familiar... That's always been a point of contention when the CDC recommends one size fits all. It doesn't.

Covid-19's XEC Variant Spreads Like Wildfire, Says Thai Health Ministry Meanwhile, in another Covid thread a few hours ago: In terms of variant breakdown, data from the Department of Medical Sciences from January 2024 to May 6, 2025, indicate the overwhelming prevalence of the Omicron JN.1 variant, which constitutes 63.92% of cases. By comparison, the previously concerning XEC variant has dwindled to a mere 3.07%. Other existing variants remain under observation as they maintain their presence but without causing more severe symptoms. Hard to keep up... Also very hard to figure out which preventative measures to take. Here's my link:

You advocated rent control. To keep landlords from passing on their cost of doing business.

That's where my mind went. I could have easily rung up the OP's bill in my one bedroom top floor apartment in Bangkok had I run both units 24/7. I only ran them when I needed them (not when I was out at the office) and only the bedroom when I was sleeping, and I still paid about $150-200 USD a month. But I liked to top floor so it was worth it to me. And I paid the apartment more than the PEA rate. Again, okay with me. I suspect the OP would have cut back the usage for the other 3-1/2 months had he gotten a bill after the first month. Live and learn.

They're allowed to do 4.5 month rentals. Without a hotel license.

Office Mate is where I bought mine. After my bypass surgery, I needed better back support. So I tried out all their floor models and bought the ones that felt the best to me. One for home and one for the office. No way I was going to trust that to a photo or someone else's review on Lazada.

You're demonstrating a very poor understanding of the scientific method. The scientific method is a systematic process used by scientists to explore questions and test ideas. It typically involves the following steps: Observation: Making observations about the world. Question: Formulating a question based on those observations. Hypothesis: Developing a hypothesis or educated guess to answer the question. Experimentation: Conducting experiments to test the hypothesis. Data Analysis: Analyzing the data collected during the experiments. Conclusion: Drawing conclusions based on the data and determining whether the hypothesis is supported or refuted. You should have learned that on day 1 of your first lab class whether that was in physics, chemistry, political science or economics or business science. From the OP: The paper claimed that having individuals sign an honesty pledge at the start of a form—rather than at the end—led to more truthful responses.

Conclusions This study found that influenza vaccination of working-aged adults was associated with a higher risk of influenza during the 2024-2025 respiratory viral season, suggesting that the vaccine has not been effective in preventing influenza this season. Summary Among 53402 working-aged Cleveland Clinic employees, we were unable to find that the influenza vaccine has been effective in preventing infection during the 2024-2025 respiratory viral season. You must be living in upside down Bizzaro World.

The fact that I have reviewed papers for 40+ years is why I recognize standard boilerplate language and weasel words like "not peer reviewed". That study wouldn't have seen the light of day if it weren't true. That's something else you learn when you get paid to do studies.

It would also go a long way toward making sure nobody builds new properties to rent.

Color me cynical, but I doubt we'll be seeing refunds or apologies from Big Pharma. And they're immune from lawsuits.

What do you think "the science" is if it's not observational studies? I have a mechanical engineering degree from one of the best schools in the US. My disdain for "the science" comes from 40 years of publishing and peer reviewing studies that were deliberately slanted to make something look better or worse than it really was. That's how the science works in real life.