and are instead part of the proven fraudulent narrative that goes directly against (or is otherwise not supported by) what little science and data that we do have.
Then technically, all narratives are currently fraudulent, even the ones spread on here.
The article is crap in general though, I definitely agree with you on that.
Maybe that's how you react to weed. My friends smoke and they're perfectly productive people, not in a "stupor" as you put it. Some people have a glass of wine at the end of the day, other people smoke a joint. Different folks, different strokes. I think you've watched one too many D.A.R.E campaigns, because that "stupor" view is pretty outdated and disproven at this point.
Also, think about how much revenue it will bring into the economy, it's going to be a highly profitable industry.
I just read "What Technology Wants," which was pretty cool, it's about how humans and technology are as connected as a spider and it's web. Except we make iPhones and microwaves and on and on.
It would be cool to have a media megathread, where people can just discuss any media, whether it's books, movies, video games, etc. Don't you think?
Not sure if you're aware, but NYPost is right-leaning, just like NYTimes is left-leaning. They always post GOP talking points like this, same as Fox News, etc. So take it with a grain of salt.
As a New Yorker, weed is legal here now, so that's cool.
First: All 246 people got Covid, so it wasn't the vaccine that directly caused it.
Second, as it says in the article: “While the majority of the population develops full immunity within 14 days of completion of their vaccine series, a small proportion appear to take longer to mount a full antibody response. CDC is actively working to better understand the risk characteristics of this group”
The 3 people were all 65+ in age, which might explain why they hadn't developed full immunity yet.
NYPost is trash in general (I'm a New Yorker), I don't recommend it.
You do realize that insulting someone doesn't actually do anything, right?
My initial point is right and you're insecure about it, so you resort to name calling, like a 6-yr old.
I'm sorry I hurt your fee-fees.
Read the article, title is misleading.
Here's an example, remember the "March madness" that was being predicted?
Well, when that didn't happen, I asked someone if they had considered April/May.
I was banned. I guess someone thought I was being sarcastic, but regardless, it's ridiculous to be banned for something so inoffensive.
Dear member:
The problem is that no one is allowed to debate or discuss the evidence here.
On this board, no arguing is allowed, no counter-points are allowed, no discussion is allowed (unless it agrees with Q and the moderators).
I mean, I thought you were anti-censorship? What about free speech? And "free thinking"?
Nope, not here. If you disagree with the board, you're "cancelled", banned, etc.
To add to this, get a non-internet hobby, something that keeps you away from screens.
Play an instrument, write in a journal, go for daily walks in the park, read fiction, etc..
Most media consumption is addictive because of the excessive dopamine, which is bad for mental health (and posture).