TimHauck

Like you said in the other thread, it looks like there's a lot missing from the list, even official amounts and not counting what SBF claimed to have donated dark. At first glance that seems to includie much of what co-CEO Ryan Salame gave which was mostly to Republicans. I didn't say it was "even," but there was a significant amount that went to Republicans as well. My centrist take is that this isn't a partisan issue (and frankly I'd doubt that ANY politician knew about their scam), FTX was simply donating to people that they thought could help their business.

Depends on your definition of "overwhelmingly" I guess. The top 2 alone are probably roughly ~20% of the total, that's about what I had estimated previously.

Lol wut? Two of the top four were to republicans. That’s a pretty significant amount. And that’s not even counting how SBF claimed to have donated additional dark money to Republicans. The most interesting thing about that tweet in my opinion is them asking for the money back. I wonder how much of them actually will. I did think it was odd when a lot of the recipients said they donated it to charity. You had to know something like this might happen

I actually don’t think this study is too far off. I’ve always said I think masks might make like a ~10% difference, which I think was within the margin of error for the study. One thing that some people pointed out was this only looked at “community” masking, so it’s still not really proven one way or the other if someone who wears an N95 religiously for example might actually have a lower chance of catching it. Interestingly the study apparently found that handwashing had a significant impact, which is surprising considering the recent data suggested it was primarily spread through aerosols.

I'm not aware of any Cracker Barrells in a mall, but could be wrong...

They do have security - the Capitol Police. But apparently they don't really care to monitor it when Nancy isn't home.

Well yeah, whether or not one is a conspiracy theorist should depend on what the information is that you don't trust, not simply the source it's coming from. Their raw data for example, is trustable. But I have criticized them for things in the past too. Such as when they released a mask "study" based on phone surveys. I did see the study you posted @RLLD, but I'm a little skeptical since most of the studies were from pre-covid. I like Vinay Prasad for example, but he's always been against masks and has rightfully criticized the CDC for never doing a real study on them. But he has jumped all over this study as "proof" they don't work, when it's really just looking at the studies that have already been done and he himself has said there haven't hardly been any large studies done (except for the Bangladesh one which did find some benefit). But I really dislike talking about masks as I think it detracts from real conversations on things like vaccines.

Joe Rogan the voice of reason

Interesting video: oh and @shorepatrol is still a dummy

I’ve seen a few takes and critiques on this study. I think this right here is the biggest takeaway, and is counter to one of the critiques that “Covid myocarditis is usually found in old people that are already sick and may not have actually been caused by the virus.”

Yes

Was there a recent update? Will try to watch video later

Avocado toast

CDC is not following the science in this case

Boosters for people under ~50 aren’t supported by science