Adding the actual FDA link since it’s not behind a paywall. Looks like they’ve looked at data going all the way back to 1973 to assess the efficacy and safety of the dosage. That will be an important bit of knowledge when the inevitable lawsuit comes out “because the FDA didn’t do their due diligence.”
Here you go, approval in the UK from 2021.
In May, the World Health Organization released a report that laid out the economic reforms needed to improve global health. The report, entitled ‘Health for All’, set out a range of economic measures, such as the reformation of taxes on wealthy individuals and multinational corporations, and called for allowing debt relief for low-income countries during pandemics and natural disasters.
It also called for a fundamental reformulation of how we perceive health and well-being: not as an expenditure to be chopped during times of austerity, but as an investment in a country’s future economy and well-being. That is a call that must be heard and understood. Ultimately, we will not stand a chance of meeting the SDG health targets unless world leaders are willing to embrace the economic reforms necessary to reduce inequality.
Completely agree with that quote, but the current trajectory here in the US is back to a feudalistic model with corporations and billionaires owning all of the property. There needs to be a massive shift in how society views resources (money, property, time) and the social contract (what a government must provide for its citizens) before we can get back on track.
If she’s not a Russian asset, she’s at least parroting their talking points.
She’s been especially popular with conservatives, who promoted her as a perfect symbol of how overly theatric and inane progressives can be — like when she attacked the Supreme Court’s affirmative-action decision last week by saying “no Black person will be able to succeed in a merit-based system.” The tweet was viewed more than 27 million times.
There had to be signs before it got this far…had to be. Any word yet on who (or what group) was behind the account? This is like that “liberal leaning” TikTok account that was exposed as being faked. I’m very careful of quoting or up voting any emotionally charged hot-takes on things, especially when I agree with them. It’s hard to tell when people are acting in good faith these days.
Yeah, I agree with you on that. I think the article, and even the researchers, are utilizing a lot of word play between violence, aggression, vengeance, retribution, and anger. I think the study can be useful for showing that more research needs to be done in treating aggressive tendencies in people to make sure the proper methods are being used. However, I do not think it’s anywhere near debunking conventional wisdom.