Worse than I thought.

False dichotomy fella.

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Cost of living has forced me to reduce spending on such things and I can’t be the only one. Which is a shame of course.

Quite right, an important distinction.

Thanks for checking the figures, I think I used CIA factbook when i did it with some assumptions. Usual caveats apply, rich kids won’t get drafted, birth rate has seasonal variations, assume everyone lives to at least 18 etc.

Either way, the supply of meat is more than capable of weathering these losses. Not forever of course, but unless the casualty rate increases sharply and soon, then Russia can maintain this.

Our good friend Potholer54 did a great video on Graham Hancock and his ancient apocalypse bullshit

https://youtu.be/zU-wQVAqQnk?si=2u_DBST1CxqdlTfB

It’s a real injustice that it’s pretty lucrative to peddle horseshit for a living.

If you run the numbers of the back of an envelope then Russia has approximately 3,000 men turning 18 every single day. They won’t run out of meat anytime soon.

If they have to constantly be moving then that dramatically shortens their mission time and sacrifices stealth.

If that’s the plan the current design looks far too rigid, they’d need to adjust their cruising speed based on payload to ensure consistent depth keeping. How would they lurk without floating up?

Studies that self select their cohort and don’t include adequate controls are more susceptible to bias than those that do otherwise. Evaluating studies based on their susceptibility to bias is a vital part of the systematic review process.

You can read more about it here https://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp

They all use the same Newcastle-Ottawa system to score studies based on their likelihood of bias in the exact same way the Cass reviews do. The method you described as a joke.

Engine position below com, bow profile looks like it’ll try to push itself out of the water, ballast tanks what are those? And they want 50kph submerged?

The dinky torpedoes are cute I suppose.

Damn here’s another “joke” about contraceptives and bone fractures

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD009849.pub3/full

And one another abput yellow fever and HIV

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD010929.pub2/full

And influenza vaccines in cancer patients

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD008983.pub3/full

And there’s another 96 on the first search tab alone!

Just what are those clowns at the Cochrane Library up to eh?

Well ok fair. The mockup isn’t rendered, seems they were at an expo last year with it. As for the specs? I remain skeptical.

No money for the “Aye Write” book festival. £67k to pay some wierdos to spaff on stage.

That’s a new goalpost. It’s being used by Cass exactly the way it’s supposed to by scoring studies based on their susceptibility to bias.

If you’d bother to read that similar systematic review on postoperative inflammatory bowel disease you would have seen the exact same usage.

So strange that everyone waited over 20 years and 100’s of systematic reviews in medicine and science before, serendipitously, discovering that the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was infact no good during these two particular reviews into trans care in the UK.

Just what are the odds?

Don’t abdicate responsibility to someone else, you’ve clearly got a firmer grasp of the issue than the editorial board of the British Medical Journal. You would be neglecting your duty as “part of the scientific community” to abdicate responsibility on such an important matter.

Indeed the whole medical establishment must be told about the critical flaws in the Newcastle-Ottawa scoring system before other medical scandals are allowed to happen. Imagine having that on your conscience.