Cryptolution

C'mon, everyone knows the first rule of Gene's is that you can't ask for more wishes DNA repair sequences.

I don't like paying Reddit for it's virtual currency but I've given you a table slap award which is everything I gots.

Live the best life you can and good luck man!

I would just like to reply to say that there are plenty of common sense arguments that you can use. The top comment references the ranges between televisions and wireless signals which is a great common sense argument.

The best argument you have against virus transmission in relationship to wireless technology is to talk about pandemics that occurred before the advent of technology. The bubonic plague killed 200 million people and this was 600 years before technology was even invented.

A great common sense point to bring up is that we have been living around this technology for multiple decades which means that for quite a few of us reading this is our entire lives. Yet miraculously we don't have cancer. Some of us do but not at any greater rate than anywhere else.

What about societies that transitioned from no technology to technology? Do we have any good data on say African nations that Leapfrogged landlines straight to wireless technology? Have there been any large population studies on cancer incidence before and after?

Can't speak for runners, but I ride freestyle flatland BMX and have friends who occasionally do heavy psilocybin trips while training. The first stage is difficult because of vasoconstriction, but once you get past that and can start to acclimate to the flow state I have seen them do things they had never done before.

I personally almost landed something I had spent 3 months straight trying on about hour 4-5 of LSD, and it most definitely was the breakthrough that allowed me to dial it in and start landing the trick on the regular.

I generally don't encourage any psychedelic use while doing any hard physical activity (other than hiking), but it is possible to have very positive experiences. But with any mind altering substance, you must be aware of the increased risks.

ProPublica/NPR:

In face of the PR semantics going on regarding the difficulties of building permanent homes vs providing shelter (or 'transitional' shelters) I really feel the fact that 7,500 permanent homes were built by the Canadian Red Cross really hits the nail in the coffin regarding the excuses the American Red Cross is giving.

In this comment from a Red Cross PR guy in this AMA, he states:

A “build it and they will come” is a strategy that has been tried, and does not work in Haiti.

Do you feel that the Canadians were less effective in their approach at focusing on permanent structures vs transitioning homes, and do you feel that the downplay of difficulties being expressed by the American Red Cross is just excuses to cover up poor decisions vs foul play (read: profiteering off catastrophe) ?