▲ | NoTeslaThrow 9 days ago | |||||||
> There are no known health problems caused by this syndrome Presumably they mean there's no evidence of this syndrome causing health issues (presumably the "known" part is redundant). Trying to position a causal hypothesis as a matter-of-fact-finding is crazy. EDIT: that article is insanely poorly written and even worse cited. How are these websites giving super-sketchy medical advice even legal. There's no author to hold accountable, no way to remediate the quality of the article, no sources cited, and it's making statements that wouldn't hold up in a court of law. | ||||||||
▲ | Noumenon72 9 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||
I don't understand what you are objecting to. What would the causal hypothesis be, "this syndrome causes no diseases"? It's just an ordinary claim that if the syndrome is harmful, it's not as immediately apparent as something like sniffing glue. It's saying "this is harmless" can't be ruled out. | ||||||||
|