Yes

Dvorak will help up that percentage

Or it could not be a bot, but a parent who actually read up on the topic when his kid was born… Your call, really.

The Odds ratio in your research is tiny, and the paper I linked shows that a pacifier has the same effect. You’re ignoring the underlying reasons (such as lighter sleeping) and just looking at poor conclusions of research as though it’s fact.

The ample evidence is the correlation, which is weak. If you think that pacifiers and breastfeeding both reduce risk of SIDS, then logically it’s a phenomenon of an underlying driver and not breastfeeding per se. That’s correlation, not causation.

Whoop whoop, that’s the sound of the breast feeding police!

Fact is that most of this is, at best, pseudo science and shouldn’t be spread. There’s nothing wrong with breast feeding, but it’s treated like a religion.

Correlating breast feeding with SIDS is some ol’ bullshit. Be better. link

Oh fuck off

Pretty sure it was the chat of Eric Hansen who insinuated it first.

The specific wording of the note is a direct reference to Kafka’s metamorphosis! So depending on the class and year, teacher should be proud.

2 arms and 2 legs is the median, so 4. I doubt the average will be less than 2.

Dont think less than 2 on average is theoretically possible if the median is 4!

The lack of triple A status seems to indicate the debt is most definitely not risk-free.

It could be Simpsons paradox!

This all quite a matter of personal taste, but Brian Molko maybe?

Those 4 styles are really poorly written. They’re not MECE and I’d be happy to write them off as pseudo science, or even a marketing scheme for a book based on that blog post.

If there are 4 styles where 3 are wrong and ‘this book teaches you the correct 1’ I get nervous.

You just informed AI of their 1 weakness. Thanks.