SpankyMcFarland

Mistakes were made, we looked foolish for a moment on the world stage…and then everybody else forgot about Canada again. I want to see fixes for the numerous serious problems we face as a country. We all have some version of that list.

I think there are lot of Chinese students at Waterloo in the science areas. I imagine they’d also be competitive for the staff positions.

My requirements for the head of state position. 1. Lives in Canada. 2. Good health. 3. Good character. 4. Under 75.

Politics is a complex, learned set of skills. If you wander in from the outside to take the top job you are likely to cause mayhem.

Of course, head of state. I suspect he will be obliged to divulge more about his condition before somebody else reveals it.

What democracy anything like our size, apart from another hapless place on the other side of the globe, has an absentee head of state? In addition their deputy here is effectively appointed by the PM. I wish to assure readers that these arrangements don’t keep me awake at night but they seem to be a decidedly odd way of doing things.

Yes that is possible. However, I doubt he would have insisted his core duties will be unaffected if he was facing life-threatening surgery any time soon. And we know it’s not a benign skin lesion because cancer (malignancy) was already described. I would also imagine a low grade malignancy of the skin like basal cell carcinoma would have simply been announced and dealt with. I think we may have to wait a little longer for a visit from our head of state. https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/canadian-diplomat-says-king-charles-could-visit-canada-within-several-months/article_ed1513f2-4f86-542a-9296-10169d3fb8f3.html Isn’t it 14 years now?

The King lies at the heart of a global publicity machine that his family stoke constantly. That’s fine when you’re well but the pressure to tell all will mount inexorably. The press hyenas may say nice things about him generally but they are still hyenas.

It has already been revealed he will be receiving outpatient treatment so I doubt it’s a massive tumour in his colon etc. or they would not have let him out.

What about this guy: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/19/biden-netanyahu-two-state-solution-israel-palestine And this guy: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/01/uk-could-recognise-a-palestinian-state-before-a-two-states-deal-david-cameron

Here is the statement: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-68205659 In the last line, it is claimed that this has been made public ‘to prevent speculation’ but that will not be the case because so many details have been withheld.

King Charles has just been diagnosed with cancer. Apparently, it’s not prostate cancer according to CNN and was discovered incidentally during his recent hospitalization for benign prostatic enlargement. So one might wonder about leukaemia or lung cancer found on routine pre-operative screening with blood tests or a chest radiograph. Let’s hope they give us more details soon to prevent the sort of needless and alarmist speculation I have just indulged in. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/live/2024/feb/05/king-charles-cancer-royal-health-latest-news-updates

I find it curious that none of our resident monarchists have commented on our head of government’s cancer diagnosis yet. Apparently, it’s not prostate cancer according to CNN and was discovered incidentally during his recent hospitalization. So one might wonder about leukaemia or lung cancer. Let’s hope they give us some more details soon.

Russia would have its hands full taking on Austria these days - a full blown invasion of any of those neutral countries is highly unlikely. However, there is concern with recent Russian naval activity off the coast of Ireland where many cables and pipelines run. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468294220300605 https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/04/russia-china-iran-could-target-uk-irish-backdoor-thinktank-warns

Individual practitioners are unreliable as a guide to best practice at the time but obviously those with expertise are better placed to understand the data in its full medical context. If I’m looking for answers to a medical question, give me a scientist over a politician any day of the week. The best sources of advice come from large studies that review as much reliable data as possible.

I don’t like to rely on what one scientist claims. Numbers matter which is why anecdotal reports about what happened to somebody’s friend or relative are useless even if they come from a scientist. Scientists are also prone to irrational beliefs especially when a field of research has been distorted by politics. Large reviews of appropriately gathered data matter. Double blind prospective trials matter too when they can be employed. Of course, in any epidemic, especially with a novel infectious agent, the recommendations will change as knowledge of the virus changes. With Covid we are still looking at a rapidly evolving field of knowledge where errors are constantly being corrected. That’s how science works.

That is terrible. I don’t defend them at all.

That wasn’t my question. Lord, give me strength. I will try to make this simpler: Do you believe yours is the only true religion?

That’s terrible but it’s not what I asked.

If the evidence really does change I am more than happy to change my opinion. Show us a similar large review from 2023 with a different opinion.

So what are the names of the teachers who actually killed Jews and the profs who admired those particular people? I can’t imagine too many of us being happy with profs who do that in Canada. That would be a very serious issue.

There are risks associated with any treatment. What one has to do is assess the risks against the benefits. Here’s a large review of the subject: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9538893/#ejhf2669-bib-0044

I wouldn’t have a strong opinion on pronouns either way.

The accusation that Trump is a liar is baseless? What sort of people am I corresponding with here?

So you believe you profess the only true religion in the history of mankind? Doesn’t that sound unlikely? As one writer put it: “I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” —Stephen F Roberts Now I don’t dismiss religion lock, stock and barrel - the fact that every culture has had at least one suggests it played a key role in human groups - but I wouldn’t be playing favourites and naming one as the winner.