StringJunky

Aye. A lot of people against the jabs are looking at things in a vacuum, just like a lot of people who post their ideas here construct them in a vacuum.

It does seem though that the courts are dragged in an awful lot by parties. It seems to be an an accepted tactic to stall legislative progress. The last time there was any major judicial input in the UK was Brexit, I think. I suppose this is an issue of having states with more autonomy than our county councils.

Is that not a proper separation of powers?

It doesn't matter that covid finished them off... it's not covid's fault? You really are licking the bottom of the barrel.

We see what we want to see and ignore the rest. What our 'mind's eye' perceives usually matters more than just the optical representation.

I might be wrong, but there probably isn't the ecological niches available now on Earth to develop without competition from the existing organisms, or to avoid interacting with them in a parallel evolutionary path.

Snipped it for you.

What has 'women being misrepresented in senior roles got to do with pay equality?' Pro rata is what matters. If they are the same, the pay is the same. Same position, same pay =/= 'equivalent' job, same pay. The latter sems to be what feminists are arguing for... which is a different tree to bark up entirely. This may or may not be true, but lets not confuse different arguments. My observation seems to be that even though they are pro rata remunerated the same, they are still not happy. This is not about same job, same pay, this is something else that's not being elucidated correctly.

Rohypnol (or Roofie) and Gamma Hydroxybutyrate (GHB), I think would be the main ones to have in situ tests for, as they are commonly used as date rape drugs and victims don't remember anything afterwards. Did a quick search and detection straws are a thing, but still perhaps still under regulatory scrutiny. More info in link. I also found something called Sabre Drink Test for GHB and Ketamine that might be worth looking into.

From Wiki: "☐Mg2Mg5Si8O22(OH)2 (☐ is for a vacancy, a point defect in the crystal structure." Could that explain it? I wouldn't like that in my lungs!

Thanks

Relaxing public restrictions was already imminent iirc, so I don't think it made much sense to cause more problems for the NHS as a whole.

Phase 4 is done in the field after it's been approved and released for use to the public. That's where the information in a black box warning on prescribed drugs containers comes from, monitoring subjects in the field aka Phase 4. As for the minimum time required: You appear to be confidently making assertions that are factually wrong. This is the problem you are having because of your strong beliefs.

Cheers. The common one it seems found in talc that's fibrous is: "Anthophyllite is an amphibole mineral: Mg2Mg5Si8O22(OH)2" . What's with the Mg2Mg....in that formula, why not 3Mg....?

Let me emphasise the correct words in your quote: So, the studies are done after the trials and after they've been authorized fror use. You can only get long term data by putting it out in the field. Phase 3 trials test for acute reactions and efficacy.

Deleted. Quoted wrong post.

You can do safety tests two ways: Have a few thousand volunteer testers over some years, or have many millions of patients in a much shorter time. The data from real world application of a novel vaccine of so many subjects will provide vastly more, and higher quality, information into the potential adverse reactions. Couple that with intense collaboration between all disciplines, you have a much faster, as safe QC process. This analogy sums it up well:

The antithesis of UK SC selection then. Thank you for bringing the US judicial selection criteria to the fore.

Melodrama, much? Stop caricaturizing. You are getting old.

Cheers chaps. I was trying to figure where the asbestos come from in talc. I had a read about the J&J litigation.

Clearly, It is you that is endowing 'outrage' upon those whose ideas you oppose.

Yes. Create+ (top) > Topic > Click Poll tab

Probably because of the reach, speed and availability of the internet. Many topics are news now that the mainstream media never touched before, as there were higher priorities in the limited capacity of the media then. There was less transparency from institutions because of that lack of technology. This kind of public oversight is only going to increase. Everyone is seeing much more of the mechanics and reality of government through the media nowadays and have opinions about it, which they can easily broadcast, hence the increased noise.

Ignore the people doing that and focus on the ones with a reasonable rationale, with genuine concern for the matter. Here's how the UK appoints SC judiciary for comparison: https://www.judiciary.uk/about-the-judiciary/the-judiciary-the-government-and-the-constitution/jud-acc-ind/jud-appts/

I know you were being sarcastic, but that's an emotional response. You appear to be painting, all those holding a position contrary to yours, with the same brush. Your opposition are not monolithic.