Oh yeah, I've no qualms with the study itself. It effectively acknowledges what I've said here, and uses the word "is associated with" as opposed to "may lead to".

As per usual, the problem is less with the study itself and more with how (in this case social) media headlines misconstrue it to put forward a simplified "pop science" narrative.

Yeah this could very well be more of correlation than causation. I'd wager it's, in a way, both -- a complex intersecting network of factors and feedback loops. As I described in more detail in my other comment on this thread.

But yeah, any straightforward simple causative narratives should be met with critical analysis and skepticism. If there's one lesson to learn from science it's that matters are rarely that simple.

As per usual: correlation is not necessarily causation.

Is too much screen time the cause, or is it an underlying symptom itself?

ADHD, for example, inherently comes with executive dysfunction, emotional regulation, impulse control issues, etc. It also drives a compulsive need for dopamine and stimulation seeking, in turn making one more susceptible to addictions (whether it be TV, video games, gambling, drugs, sex, etc.)

Furthermore, it has a strong genetic component. If a kid has it chances are at least one of their parents also has it. Executive dysfunction in adults leads to greater propensity to get exhausted and burnt out more quickly, and the same dopamine seeking, meaning on average they may be more inclined to let their kids have free reign of screens to give them a break.

And of course there's hundreds of other factors and variables. Single parent households would have similar issues with burn out, plus just needing to keep kids occupied while you cook, do laundry, etc. That (and higher likelihood of poverty on a single income) could incentivize more reliance on microwavable dinners and fast food, adding the possibility that less than ideal nutrition could play a part.

Also: is it an abundance of screen time in particular, or rather a lack of human connection and communication? Would it make a difference if their screen time was replaced with reading books or playing with toys, as long as they still have the same lack of human interaction? And what if the screentime includes human interaction such as playing a multiplayer video game or watching and discussing shows with siblings or friends?

Now don't get me wrong, I don't believe that there's no causation there at all. There likely is. I just think describing it in terms of a simple straightforward narrative isn't wise. Realistically it's more of a complex intersecting network of factors and feedback loops.

None of those claims are true.

Castro had widespread support during the revolution. The Batista regime was incredibly unpopular, a major aspect of why the revolution was successful in the first place.

Executions post-revolution were around 500 people tried for war crimes. I suppose one could call that "pretty murdery", but compared to most other revolution's executions it's a small number. The USA media went all out trying to paint it as egregious, but that's pretty easily debunked propaganda and regardless of what the US media said there was popular support from the Cuban public.

As for your last claim that it included co-revolutionaries...I've never heard that before, nor can I find any evidence to substantiate it. Did you just make that claim up yourself?

Seems like somewhat contradictory conclusions to me. Successfully protecting new power structures against reactionary forces is an essential key aspect in toppling existing power structures.

Or...you could also just have majority support from the population?

The assassination attempts came from the CIA through Cuban exiles and USA-based mafia outfits. Oppressive local measures in response would be largely pointless -- and unless you want to provide evidence to the contrary as far as I'm aware they didn't exist. He just had a competent intel and security team (and some luck.)

It's not a matter of violence "solving the root problem", it's a matter of violence being the most reliable means to overthrow established power structures.

You can't vote yourself out of a well entrenched status quo.

"Timid revolutionaries get murdered by their opponents who keep power."

Fixed that for you.

Also Castro, ruthless? Give me a break.

From what I understand it's not a lack of dopamine receptors so much as one's dopamine reuptake system being "too efficient" -- effectively cleaning up the dopamine before it's had the opportunity to actually finish doing its neurological job.

But yeah, ADHD in particular is a very multifaceted, complex, and nuanced topic. Being a neurological disorder already makes it such, but the way it intersects and interacts with social contexts makes for such a large variety of manifestations, many seemingly contradictory.

I did mostly fine as a kid because structure was imposed on me by school and parents...and because I had intense rejection sensitivity (and validation euphoria) which shaped my coping mechanisms. Yeah I hated and procrastinated on homework until the very last minute, but I'd ultimately do it because the prospective shame of teachers and parents being disappointed in me was overwhelming. Yeah I'd fidget, but to save myself from attention and embarrassment I'd keep them subtle and unnoticeable by others, like little tiny finger movements (imagining I'm playing an instrument -- in my case initially the recording and then the violin). Yeah I'd daydream and lose focus in class, but if there was a chance the teacher would call on me to answer something I'd be laser focused -- don't wanna disappoint.

Because of this no one knew I had ADHD, including myself. Always just figured I was just a "creative daydreamer" and "sensitive hopeless romantic". Never even considered the possibility as all I knew was the stereotype of hyperactive disruptive children with poor grades who couldn't focus where I was the opposite: a quiet and reserved kid with good grades who would hyperfocus on a good book or video games for hours (gee who would've thought that hyperfocus on things you're very interested in is itself a symptom of something called "attention-deficit" disorder.)

In middle school my family and I suspected social anxiety and got some SSRIs to medicate which ended up being terrible (made me feel incredibly apathetic to everything.)

And so for the longest time I figured I was just doomed to be an introverted socially anxious person.

Then adulthood came and I lost the externally imposed life structures of childhood and just fell apart. Still took me a decade to figure out I had ADHD, but in retrospect it all made so much sense...and my so-called social anxiety was primarily me subconsciously leaning into my rejection sensitivity as a coping mechanism to fight against other ADHD symptoms.

"while you can survive by being on a vegan diet - you have to exert far more resources to get the same gains someone that has meat in their diet does"

That isn't true in the least.