>it might as well mean soft on crime

Thats usually what it is.

Just a gentile reminder on what kind of "progressive" Larry Krasner is.

> Upon taking office Krasner released Hassan Elliot, earlier jailed for felony illegal gun possession. Later, Hasan violated parole when police caught him trying to sell cocaine, but Krasner released again. That same day, Elliot killed a man. Months later, Elliot murdered Philadelphia police corporal ames O’Connor who trying to apprehend Elliot.

This is not a unique example.

There is so much cope going around this morning after Chunk got his ass handed to him in last evenings debate.

Poor chunk.

I don’t understand the point of this pedantic argument.

> there exists a mechanism for avoiding its rigors and it has been exploited rather openly and documented in court cases with opioids most famously

How were the clinical trials for opioid pain killers exploited? Are opioid pain killers not effective for reducing pain?

> would you consider the label to be objectively accurate (aka: True):

Yes I would consider the label objectively true assuming it fell within the bounds of some purity standard.

> who > has yet to > answer.

Calm down champ, I have a life.

> > a) if .01% of a system is genuinely rigged, is this statement as a binary True or False: "The system is rigged."

Its false, the tiny minority does not define the overwhelming majority.

> b) if two people answer differently, is one of them correct and the other incorrect, objectively and necessarily?

Yes, one of them is correct and one is incorrect.

This entire article is based on the premise that the clinical trial process is flawed and rigged based on a few anecdotes of dangerous drugs that made it through this process. First, only 14% of drug candidates successfully passes clinical trial testing and regulatory approval. If the clinical trial process was truly rigged, wouldn't we see a much higher approval rate for them? When six out of seven of you experiments end in failure and the median cost for each failure is $20 million you'd think the process is very rigorous. The authors also mention the replication crisis in medial research, which is a real issue across all fields, but how does this compare to psychology (the authors specialty). The entire clinical process is a way to filter out bad and non reproducible research with actual experimentation and it seems to work fairly well. As bad as the replication crisis is in medicine its far worse in psychology ... perhaps they should clean their own rooms before pointing fingers at others.

he was basically a NEET for the majority of his adult life living of mommy and daddy.