Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
5 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Your post is purely about how correlation is the same as causality. Again. .. I am very thankful that you are not the one who makes meaningful decisions. Always find the silver lining. 

No, my point was that if you, say, see an uptick in abnormalities within a certain region that say utilizes certain chemicals, you don't just ignore it and pass it off as a "conspiracy theory" or make up some nonsense like your previous post to justify ignoring

Posted
1 minute ago, West said:

No, my point was that if you, say, see an uptick in abnormalities within a certain region that say utilizes certain chemicals, you don't just ignore it and pass it off as a "conspiracy theory" or make up some nonsense like your previous post to justify ignoring

If it was me.. I would look at ALL of the possible factors. Basing all of my theories on one of hundreds of possible factors is lazy.. But that is your wheelhouse. Believe it or not.. there is more to the story than the SSRI's ingested by some (not all) of the shooters. But that demands that you expand your focus... which you routinely demonstrate that you are incapable of. 

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

If it was me.. I would look at ALL of the possible factors. Basing all of my theories on one of hundreds of possible factors is lazy.. But that is your wheelhouse. Believe it or not.. there is more to the story than the SSRI's ingested by some (not all) of the shooters. But that demands that you expand your focus... which you routinely demonstrate that you are incapable of. 

Sure.. but I wouldn't call someone a "conspiracy theorist" for pointing out the drastic uptick in autism rates as an example since certain environmental factors have been introduced. Especially when very little is know about its cause. 

 

At least RFKJr is open to talking about it and not allowing billionaires to dictate the terms of the discussion. 

Edited by West
Posted
2 minutes ago, West said:

Sure.. but I wouldn't call someone a "conspiracy theorist" for pointing out the drastic uptick in autism rates since certain environmental factors have been introduced

Autism is not the topic of my posts... 

Conspiracy theories.. are 99.9% of the time just folks being intellectually lazy. Can't actually explain something and give concrete evidence so they fill in the blanks. In this case, assuming that the only reason that a shooting happens is that the shooter (which not all do) takes SSRI's is just simply laziness.

 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, impartialobserver said:

Autism is not the topic of my posts... 

Conspiracy theories.. are 99.9% of the time just folks being intellectually lazy. Can't actually explain something and give concrete evidence so they fill in the blanks. In this case, assuming that the only reason that a shooting happens is that the shooter (which not all do) takes SSRI's is just simply laziness.

 

This is part of basically any dialogue. People tend to fill in the blanks until a better explanation can be had. 

There's a pretty big mistrust in the institutions because of their reactions and censorship. 

Posted
Just now, West said:

This is part of basically any dialogue. People tend to fill in the blanks until a better explanation can be had. 

There's a pretty big mistrust in the institutions because of their reactions and censorship. 

Well.. unlike you, I can be a grown up and hold off on forming strong opinions until the sufficient evidence is produced. Two people walk into a room and three days later one of them does something... that is not evidence that the meeting made the event happen. Not even close to being enough. However, you do not come off as someone who can be objective. A theory that fits your ideology is put out there and you unquestioningly buy into it. Its a good thing that you are not a lawyer, judge, or on a jury. 

Posted
3 hours ago, Radiorum said:

I would say this is a valid concern.

In addition to the fact that Drs can get kickbacks, there's no law preventing congressmen and senators from insider investing (ergo the need for Josh Hawley's "Nancy Pelosi Insider Trading Bill), and that includes investing in biotech companies applying to the FDA for new patents. Are senators and congressmen involved with the FDA? Wiki:

 

There are also some very concerned, preeminent doctors that are very unhappy with the level of integrity in major health publications, the FDA, CDC, AMA, etc. Those publications are always under pressure from Big Pharma's powerful lobbyist groups, and there were 12 pharmaceutical companies that grossed more than $40.0 Billion USD in 2024. 

There's also no law preventing Big Pharma execs from getting jobs at major health publications, or preventing execs from health publications from getting jobs with Big Pharma. 

 

Bottom line is, no matter where you are on the drug-approval ladder, or in the gov't, or in a major health publication, Big Pharma lobbyists can be in touch with you, or you could end up with a job there if they like you

  • Like 1

If CNN gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed.

If you missed something on the Cultist Narrative Network, don't worry, the dolt horde here will make sure everyone hears it. 

Ex-Canadian since April 2025

Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Well.. unlike you, I can be a grown up and hold off on forming strong opinions until the sufficient evidence is produced. Two people walk into a room and three days later one of them does something... that is not evidence that the meeting made the event happen. Not even close to being enough. However, you do not come off as someone who can be objective. A theory that fits your ideology is put out there and you unquestioningly buy into it. Its a good thing that you are not a lawyer, judge, or on a jury. 

I have no strong opinions on autism other than I know that if you are the parent or family member who wants answers you get targeted by the harassment mob and called all sorts of names. 

The financial backing of the communications experts who target and attack anybody who doesn't toe the line is pretty massive. RFKJr is facing the full force of this apparatus which makes billions off the status quo. Therefore I tend to take the propaganda against the man with a grain of salt

Edited by West
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, West said:

I have no strong opinions on autism other than I know that if you are the parent or family member who wants answers you get targeted by the harassment mob and called all sorts of names. 

The financial backing of the communications experts who target and attack anybody who doesn't toe the line is pretty massive. RFKJr is facing the full force of this apparatus which makes billions off the status quo. Therefore I tend to take the propaganda against the man with a grain of salt

I have a son with autism.. This bullying that you speak of must be something that you cherry pick from the internet. As for answers, blaming meds that one takes at minimum 8 years after being born and thinking that explains the condition... that is simply special. 

So you admit to viewing propaganda as objective fact that can be trusted.. That tells me a lot about you. In short, you seek affirmation not information. 
 

Edited by impartialobserver
  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

I have a son with autism.. This bullying that you speak of must be something that you cherry pick from the internet. As for answers, blaming meds that one takes at minimum 8 years after being born and thinking that explains the condition... that is simply special. 

So you admit to viewing propaganda as objective fact that can be trusted.. That tells me a lot about you. In short, you seek affirmation not information. 
 

Definitely if you even dare question the vaccine schedule you'll be maliciously attacked just like RFK. You must say all the right things therefore you don't notice

Posted
Just now, West said:

Definitely if you even dare question the vaccine schedule you'll be maliciously attacked just like RFK. You must say all the right things therefore you don't notice

Now we are jumping to vaccines... wow.  The difference is that I do not go online to search for "answers". We had him tested and then have adapted our life around that. Has it helped? Yes. No need to converse with strangers who most likely have no clinical knowledge (much like you). 

Posted
32 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Now we are jumping to vaccines... wow.  The difference is that I do not go online to search for "answers". We had him tested and then have adapted our life around that. Has it helped? Yes. No need to converse with strangers who most likely have no clinical knowledge (much like you). 

First you have no idea what knowledge I have on the subject

Secondly, I don't go online for answers either because there's very little to be found on this specific topic. Hence why there should be more research that's not automatically targeted by the corporate world as "disinformation". There's knowledge on how to address some of the challenges associated with raising kids with autism, then there is advocacy to ensure that the root causes are being addressed. Sounds like you are attacking someone for hoping to address the latter

Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, West said:

There's knowledge on how to address some of the challenges associated with raising kids with autism,

Yes there is. You would be shocked at the volume of it. And yet how is it there if it is being "Automatically targeted by the corporate world as "disinformation""? Website after website... hmmm these corporate types are very lazy. 

Folks do not have to seek the services of licensed clinicians. However, if you want a diagnosis that will be recognized then it is necessary. Lots of folks on the internet are supposed experts at topic XYZ and yet know nothing and have no training. Best one is that drinking lemon juice dissolves gall stones within hours. Any knowledge of the human gastrointestinal system tells you that is not how it works. 

If you had actual clinical knowledge.. you would be presenting it as a means to win this meaningless debate. 

Edited by impartialobserver
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Yes there is. You would be shocked at the volume of it. And yet how is it there if it is being "Automatically targeted by the corporate world as "disinformation""? Website after website... hmmm these corporate types are very lazy. 

Folks do not have to seek the services of licensed clinicians. However, if you want a diagnosis that will be recognized then it is necessary. Lots of folks on the internet are supposed experts at topic XYZ and yet know nothing and have no training. Best one is that drinking lemon juice dissolves gall stones within hours. Any knowledge of the human gastrointestinal system tells you that is not how it works. 

If you had actual clinical knowledge.. you would be presenting it as a means to win this meaningless debate. 

The bolded is again irrelevant to my point. 

There's little to no information on what the cause is of autism. 

Yes there's a variety of research into appropriate methods for learning, behavioral support, etc but any time to try to peel back the curtain on the cause you will be a target of an onslaught of attacks from corporate media generally funded by major corporate interests.

Just like RFKJr experiences right now. 

As a person who's family member has autism, I would rather they figure out how to avoid it (whether it's due to pharmaceuticals, chemicals in food etc) than just be given some information on how to deal with it. 

Edited by West
Posted
1 minute ago, West said:

There's little to no information on what the cause is of autism. 

Yes there's a variety of research into appropriate methods for learning, behavioral support, etc but any time to try to peel back the curtain on the cause you will be a target of an onslaught of attacks from corporate media. Just like RFKJr experiences right now. 

If I said the cause was folks watching CNN... my guess is that you would agree with me and tell me that I am the smartest person ever. 

Most have came to the data-driven conclusion that it is genetic in cause. It is not like having a cold, flu, or lung cancer where you can reasonably who is going to contract it and so on. As to why person X is autistic and not person Y...  that is complex. Far too complex for internet know-it-alls and politicians with agendas. 

Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

If I said the cause was folks watching CNN... my guess is that you would agree with me and tell me that I am the smartest person ever. 

Most have came to the data-driven conclusion that it is genetic in cause. It is not like having a cold, flu, or lung cancer where you can reasonably who is going to contract it and so on. As to why person X is autistic and not person Y...  that is complex. Far too complex for internet know-it-alls and politicians with agendas. 

"The exact cause of ASD is not known.

 

While both genetics and environment likely play a role, its exact cause remains unknown"

-Government of Canada

 

So there are potential environmental components as well. Cause still unknown. 

Looks like you aren't smarter than me just cause you are a leftist who spews the talking points now are you? 

 

Edited by West
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, West said:

"The exact cause of ASD is not known.

 

While both genetics and environment likely play a role, its exact cause remains unknown"

-Government of Canada

 

So there are environmental impacts as well.

 

So then you could understand that it is complex and simplifying it to someone taking SSRI's is intellectually lazy. If that was the only factor.. this would have been uncovered years ago. Second, it does not present the same in each person... unlike Tay-Sachs (for example). 

 

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/autism-spectrum-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20352928

Edited by impartialobserver
Posted
10 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

So then you could understand that it is complex and simplifying it to someone taking SSRI's is intellectually lazy. If that was the only factor.. this would have been uncovered years ago. Second, it does not present the same in each person... unlike Tay-Sachs (for example). 

 

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/autism-spectrum-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20352928

I'm not sure your point. Finding the environmental factors that contribute and minimizing their impacts would be a positive thing

 

Posted (edited)
On 2/19/2025 at 2:03 PM, West said:

I'm not sure your point. Finding the environmental factors that contribute and minimizing their impacts would be a positive thing

 

You also have no idea what percent of it is caused by environmental factors? It could be 1%, 2%, or less. If it is 1% then you are wasting your time. Also.. being that it presents itself differently in each person.. the unknown environmental impacts are going to vary wildly. 

Edited by impartialobserver
Posted
On 2/19/2025 at 1:40 PM, impartialobserver said:

If it was me.. I would look at ALL of the possible factors. Basing all of my theories on one of hundreds of possible factors is lazy.. But that is your wheelhouse. Believe it or not.. there is more to the story than the SSRI's ingested by some (not all) of the shooters. But that demands that you expand your focus... which you routinely demonstrate that you are incapable of. 

About half of suicides are committed using firearms. Pretty clear that gun ownership causes depression. 

Posted (edited)
48 minutes ago, Hodad said:

About half of suicides are committed using firearms. Pretty clear that gun ownership causes depression. 

many of the rest are caused by rope. Does that prove that rope causes depression?

Edited by CdnFox

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
On 2/19/2025 at 10:40 AM, Radiorum said:

it is more likely that underlying mental health issues lead to violence, as well as the prescription of mood-altering drugs

This makes sense. And I do agree that SSRIs do help people. A lot of people argue that the conventional scientific opinion on why they work is wrong, but they still work. But isn't it also possible that in some cases certain SSRIs could have a causal factor. People on SSRIs usually start them on a trial basis and sometimes try multiple medications before they find one that works. You are usually advised to contact your doctor if one of these drugs leads to an uptick in suicidal thoughts for instance. If a drug can cause that in certain individual why would it be wrong to look into whether or not in some cases it could be the drug and not the underlying condition.?

Posted
1 hour ago, CouchPotato said:

This makes sense. And I do agree that SSRIs do help people. A lot of people argue that the conventional scientific opinion on why they work is wrong, but they still work. But isn't it also possible that in some cases certain SSRIs could have a causal factor. People on SSRIs usually start them on a trial basis and sometimes try multiple medications before they find one that works. You are usually advised to contact your doctor if one of these drugs leads to an uptick in suicidal thoughts for instance. If a drug can cause that in certain individual why would it be wrong to look into whether or not in some cases it could be the drug and not the underlying condition.?

 

If you have any evidence of a causal link between SSRIs and violence, I invite you to share it.

Also - to note - violence directed outward towards other people requires a different psychology than violence directed inward towards oneself.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,903
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    LinkSoul60
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Barquentine went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dave L earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Ana Silva earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Scott75 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Political Smash went up a rank
      Rising Star
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...