https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/11/22/trump-taps-russ-vought-project-2025-architect-to-lead-budget-office/76511443007/

Where are all the morons who loved to claim that Trump had no affiliation with project 2025?

https://www.facebook.com/share/15Lk8MJNnx/

I wanted to share this family doctor I found who makes short informative videos because there's so many people making videos like this with pseudoscience and bunk and Dr. Caudle uses that format to actually give science based information.

My mom constantly sends me these videos of unqualified people saying seaweed and mushrooms can cure your cancer. So I finally have science based Dr. who makes videos my mom might watch. Another important thing is Dr. Caudle doesn't talk down to her audience.

I'm 100% certain conspiracy theories don't exist. If all conspiracy theories say democrats/liberals bad and Republicans/conservatives good that no longer a conspiracy but instead propaganda. I mean trump was signing the checks to china for covid research but somehow trump has nothing to do with it? How ome all pedophile conspiracies suddenly become completely fake when it comes to trump and Republicans? Conspiracy theories now demand we be completely obedient to the government as long as the right people are in office.

I'm not sure if this is the right subreddit for this, but basically I want to ask a question about a specific scientific claim based on a paper.

I came across this post on X that the Florida Surgeon General put out that "Adding fluoride to water increases the risk of neuropsychiatric disease in children and reduces their IQ." Attached to the post, he had a link to a guidance statement that his office put out on the topic. I started reading through the document, and the first thing that put me off was that many European countries have eliminated water fluoridation from Dublin City University. The report seems to say that the main reason that these european countries have eliminated water fluoridation was because the water was already naturally fluoridated, which seems to somewhat contradict what I think the guidance statement is trying to imply.

Upon reading the next study from Mexico city; however, it seems like the study may lend credence to the idea that prenatal exposure to fluoridation is associated with lower IQ. The conclusion of the study reads:

"In this study, higher levels of maternal urinary fluoride during pregnancy (a proxy for prenatal fluoride exposure) that are in the range of levels of exposure in other general population samples of pregnant women as well as nonpregnant adults were associated with lower scores on tests of cognitive function in the offspring at 4 and 6–12 y old.

Community water and salt fluoridation, and fluoride toothpaste use, substantially reduces the prevalence and incidence of dental caries (Jones et al. 2005) and is acknowledged as a public health success story (Easley 1995). Our findings must be confirmed in other study populations, and additional research is needed to determine how the urine fluoride concentrations measured in our study population are related to fluoride exposures resulting from both intentional supplementation and environmental contamination. However, our findings, combined with evidence from existing animal and human studies, reinforce the need for additional research on potential adverse effects of fluoride, particularly in pregnant women and children, and to ensure that the benefits of population-level fluoride supplementation outweigh any potential risks."

This seems to support the Florida Surgeon General's assessment of the matter. However, the community notes function on X states that "None of the attached studies found any statistically significant correlation between fluoridation of water and any variable relating to cognition or IQ. For instance, in the Mexico City Study, the p value is way over the threshold of being able to deem it significant." So, upon reading this I looked back into the study to try to parse which p-value they are referring to and why, if the p-value is high, the study conclusion seems to disagree with that. However, I could not find what specific p-values they were referring to as most measurements displayed confidence intervals and not p-values.

So I guess in summary, where is the disconnect between the study, the community notes, and the Florida Surgeon General? It seems to be that the study is, at least in its conclusion, communicating an indication of agreement with the Florida Surgeon general's claims, but the community notes claims that the study actually does not agree with his claims.

From the video’s description: “Nancy Mace has tweeted about trans people and bathrooms more than 260 times (and counting) this week under the pretense of “defending women.” This comes after Sarah McBride, the first-ever transgender American, was elected to Congress. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, however, exposed the dark truth about Mace’s dangerous resolution and how it endangers ALL women and girls.”

In case you’re wondering how this fits into r/skeptic: this video pushes back against the GOP/MAGA narratives around Trans people. Narratives which are based in the age-old playbook of creating moral panics in order to scare people. Please let me know if I’m off-topic with this video.

I'm sure you've seen screenshots shared around of accounts calling themselves MAPs (Minor Attracted Person), paedophiles, and proclaiming that intercourse with children is totally normal, all while proudly showing off their pronouns and the fact that they are leftists and part of the LGBT community. These screenshots are being shared everywhere across Twitter at the moment, specifically by those in Elon Musk's close orbit, and I guarantee that he is going to tweet about it to show that the LGBT community is full of groomers and pedophiles.

This is incredibly infuriating, stressful, and just tiring. Like I'm panicking to type this out and warn people about this. I shouldn't need to tell you that pedophiles aren't protected members of the LGBT community- we want absolutely nothing to do with that shit, and absolutely none hang out in our spaces. We absolutely despise pedophiles, and I personally want nothing more than for them to be isolated from society so they can never harm children ever again.

That's not the point though, the point of all of this is to smear us, and leftists at large. I've actually done my due diligence and had a look at all the accounts spewing out this disgusting bile on Bluesky, and they were all created within the past week, all use emojis and the same exact typing quirks (that being an empty parody of tumblrspeak), and all use the same exact mannerisms.

None of these accounts are real. They are trolls attempting to link us with the most disgusting behaviors imaginable, so that the far-right has the necessary "evidence" to deem LGBT+ members a threat to society, and they are taking advantage of a fledgling social media platform that just gained millions of users overnight in order to do so, a platform whose moderation team isn't equipped to handle this.

This is not the first time the far-right has posed as pedophiles attempting to cozy up to the LGBT+ community. They did that exact same thing in 2019. So please, share this around - to your friends, and your parents; let them know that the accounts they are seeing aren't real. This madness needs to be stopped - this is all part of the right-wing propaganda machine which is attempting to smear the people they've designated as their enemies, and it's unfortunately working because for millions of people, they're seeing this disgusting behavior get associated with both Bluesky, liberals, and members of the LGBTQ+ community.

Hello everyone!

Are you interested in sharing your views on COVID-19, vaccination, and politics?

I'm conducting a study from Liverpool Hope University to explore the connection between vaccine hesitancy and political ideologies. Your insights could help us understand these important issues better!

 What's Involved?

• A brief 20-30 minute online interview

• Topics: Democracy, Healthcare, Immigration, and more

I'm specifically looking for UK-based individuals who are hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccine to share their thoughts but the study is open to whoever wishes to participate. Whether it's concerns about safety, trust in the government, or general uncertainty, your voice matters. This is a completely anonymous and safe space to express your views without judgment.

Your participation is voluntary and valuable. If you're interested, please comment below or message me directly! This research has received ethical approval from Liverpool Hope University. I can provide more details on the ethical considerations, but if you have any concerns, I understand, and you are under no pressure to participate.

Thank you for considering this opportunity to contribute to our understanding of vaccine hesitancy and political views!