Riobard

Who was I kidding? Why would internet trolls, having appropriated a down arrow emoticon as a signal begging to go down on me when they are consistently stuck for something intelligent to post, accommodate my request to refrain from it? Keep doing it if it’s the one thing that gets you trolls slithering up from under your rock for a few seconds to bathe in smart folks’ sunlight. Stupid is as stupid does. But no still means no.

Never really understand this notion. YMMV

SubSaharan Africa-based clinical research colleagues and patients regionally as well as SubSaharan diaspora poz patients call the 10,000 estimate an extreme distortion and resoundingly agree with my take that it constitutes ‘denominator neglect’. The substantial transmission prevention conferred by male circumcision and the still alarming mortality:infection ratio, applied to the poz constituency and the complexity (albeit measurable) of cascade effect reduces the mortality rate denominator, all sexes collectively, extremely substantially for noncircumcision status relative to circumcision where numerator 1 is held constant. The contextual burden of disease makes .01% an unfunny joke to some because noncircumcision particularly in LMIC settings vastly eclipses it. Maybe some of the more contrarian members here would care to do some of the heavy lifting around these metrics in order to shift up F seminar grades a bit.

Lights out for the inmate. Gone fishing.

No, you may not go down on me. Stop persisting. Sorry nobody clued you in to advanced interpretation of lazy emoticons. Your vote does not count, you lack suffrage rights, accommodating you well it’s unprofessional and I have standards apart from interest conflicts on top of that. I cannot recall all images and try to redact many for personal wellbeing but my reliable spidey sense says resoundingly no.🤮

Did you wiggle out of it? I must be out of practice. Yes, I’ll accompany you personally. We know you depend on Keethquiff but it’s a cunttrolled product … all we can offer is sedation. Oh wait, boredom progressing to narcolepsy is one of the indications. You’re golden if you can tell Siri to reach your dealer. Maybe it’s coded, you know, a number within your ranting, what with your AI deficits and all. While at it ask for basically understood colloquial meanings … do or don’t … I don’t give a shit.

First rule of thumb with desperate sociopaths activate! Refuse bait. Straitjacket on standby. Be the management.

Multiple? What membership percentage is that now, trending to .00000 big fat zero % … emphasis big zero? 0+0=0. Try that seminar for two. Stragglers up to you. You can braid each others’ hair while figuring out how to convince trade that two dollars is an impressive multiple of one. You may be conflating multiple with your personality splitting. While Madame Guillotine is redundant as the wannabe Emperor’s head is already lost and his cronies chasing marbles. And who shit in your poutine? I’d like to give them a piece of my mind. It’s usually curdsy.

Said the insufferable bot to the mirror after hit in the ass by the door upon being ejected from what could be otherwise a fairly interesting seminar but for crashers.

Thanks, local. I have it covered.

This is lazy, no?

Not sure whether to respond to the AI half or the implicit lobotomy half, either of which could be profoundly limited. Exactly where did some evident transorbital/ prefrontal tapping take place? Would help illuminate. I think you yourself may be bungling up AI to the point of unforced error. Neither procedure should be routine, even if at varying levels of applicability, but one explains a lot. I suppose that some people should not be faulted for lacking an attention span well beyond the 8 seconds that would be required to read the content and intent of the specific metasynthesis referenced. No clinical position was put forward that suggested that circumcision should not be discretionary. If you spent more time reading and less time trolling you might realize that the paper is but one component of the topic’s broad narrative. At least try to be effectual either way. You’re shit at both conceptual ability and taking the piss. Screen nomenclature I’m aware of is ‘Block’ or ‘Ignore’. Nonutilization does not mean conceding the worth of any sad troll.

The Keethqueef … street name you may recall … is a non-issue, correct. That pill is out of the running for any attribution of non-toxicity. Metabolized. Done. Antidote. Done. All shit flushed. Done. Drug label includes: May give backhanded compliment according to well established obnoxious adverse effects. Noted. May be gateway to similarly generically engineered simpleton in arms product. Noted.

The meta-analysis is an Australian and American clinical collab. Of the 36 studies meeting quality criteria I tallied about 6 as American and the remainder distributed broadly globally. Geolocation did not factor into selectivity criteria. Gold standard is predicated on established ratings of strength of methodology and analysis. A meta-analysis does not typically present a null hypothesis, subject to bias, to be tested as supported or refuted, but involves an extensive literature scan and a synthesis of the highest quality proportion of related topic research to yield a judgement about the reality of a specific procedure. An ambiguous weighting of relative harm versus absence of deleterious consequences doesn’t get much traction with peer review, yet a paper is equally publishable with a meta-analytical finding of no particular outcome one way or the other as long as it is not wishy-washy. It is merely inquiry, and doesn’t completely resolve the conundrum of ascertaining whether something is salutary versus not bad. The data are scattered among these distinctions and the best research practices paradoxically militate against near universal consensus regarding the practice because it’s about a binary balance and there is no established set point between 51% and 100% on the more heavily weighted side of the question’s answer. This largely accounts for positional variability and cherry-picked contrarianism. Silo clinical context also plays a role, say, if one’s practice is weighted with HIV transmission considerations and circumcision status’ loading into risk.

You are quite the wanderer. Where’s your minder? Tripartite Orientation assessment: time after time annoyingly boring; spaced out; fails to know his place. Ask her. Help may be out there.

I think that if one reads the thread thoroughly and neutrally the meta analytical research conclusions prevail. In some circles the expanded notion of metasynthesis might emerge, that a cost/benefit conclusion be nevertheless contextualized within bioethics. Metananalysis does not dismiss concepts of beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy/ selfdetermination, societal wellbeing, fairness, etc, but there may be a faction that purports that autonomy is essentially retroactively inappropriately nullified by default with infant circumcision. That’s life. This can be binned with parental decision substitution across a broad clinical range and the best that can be attempted in actual application is policy steered by the scales of research data. Digging heels in the sand on the view that consent is vitiated will not likely be amenable to shifts when conceit surrounding perspectives is so ingrained. We cannot give babies, say, standard gamble tradeoff options but latent figurative tantrums are not particularly surprising. All that can be done is be factual, not get too caught up in cherry-picked refute dosed with rebuke, and electively express some degree of empathy regarding a contrarian position whether entrenched in belief systems or actual delusion. Fortunately it’s not equivalent in scope to, say, HIV denialism at point of care.

Patrick Chan also had a piano music short program with a high score at the time that I watched over and over; may have been Chopin. Of course there is dual aspect commentary but there is only so much language option and if you follow all seasonal competitions with the same network hosts it gets no less repetitive than trick ticking.

I’ve never considered an acidic sad sack clown to represent the acid test of acceptable expression style. Maybe a peanut gallery handful stand by you but what other than rampant narcissism and lack of insight makes you think I give a shit? Ask her. Add that it’s pertinent to skating and that with such a permanent single dbl triple quad double axe to grind you uniformly fail to stick the landing … splat! orthopaedics contacts, etc?

Your anxiety reflects such multi factorial pathology. Ask her.

Well I don’t buy that external hype should influence one’s enjoyment and I just liked it without significant media exposure. Also knew the expected plot trajectory and only wondered if there were to be marked deviation from the novel. Translating interior narrative to moving pic script is a challenge. There are no gaps and silences in written fiction. Part 2 is much psychologically deeper IMHO and reflects typical couple developmental theory and practice. I think it will be harder to capture. It’s unclear how much other characters headlined within her collective works will feature. But the viewers are primed and I wonder if there will be audience testing to determine and finesse enjoyment. The two main book characters have consistently been able to overcome their genital anomalies, one a micro penis, the other hypospadias and associated surgical scarring constricting tumescence.

Did somebody ask or pressure you to view the series? You seem quite passionate about thumbing down on an offering that wasn’t intended or made for Pornhub. Is there a paywall? What might incentivize you to watch any program that doesn’t contain material matching your arousal template? I ask because I deem you as being uniquely bright and interesting. The backdrop of sports is quite minimalistic compared to the novels. But I get the somatotype disparity and might consider gymnastics or diving a better match. I’m in Colombia and won’t see the GG taping for weeks unless I make an effort through some other platform. I may have been primed to tear up because I got misty long ago reading the books, where upon a blank canvass could be imagined the players.

Ah, from the incessant troll that broke the sound barrier of boredom years ago to the degree that nothing meaningful can be discerned from her blather, but there’s no escaping awareness of her constant run on verbal wilderness diarrhea.

She got to use her other hand counting up and still bellyaching.

But surely you realize you are lecturing to a substantial proportion of contributors to the thread who lack reading comprehension and whine about how put upon they are when content mismatches their level of intelligence.

You were perhaps expecting a fever dream. You need to watch Tierney’s Shoresy, several seasons set in mining town Sudbury, where my mother ended up in LTC in her 90’s, to realize the budget constraints behind this new sleeper hit’s prep and inexplicable success. It obviously didn’t need the specifications you personally outline. I think Reid’s novels are better, though.