Something cannot come from nothing

What suncream should I use to defend myself from cancer and not soak too much estrogen through my skin

Reminder that sci said this a year ago

traumatology -edition

old thread >>13628301
We discuss research, DO NOT offer advice (just fucking go see your doctor) make fun of gunner premeds and shitpost. Please keep vaccination/clamping/vitamin K etc. out of this thread and start your own because it takes a lot of space.
>inb4 not science
>inb4 poor amerimutts wanting medical advice

My coworker uses "laser therapy" on her dog and herself. It looks like a scam but I'm not sure. Thoughts?

scientifically speaking, isn't lgbt people good for the world? they help the world with overpopulation risks and do not spread their terrible genes. isn't that why everyone suddenly started approving of lgbt?

even their consoomer mindset is good for capitalism. Did I miss something? am I wrong?

Scientifically speaking, what do you think will cause our next financial meltdown?

>386 million US doses given
>700k sore arms
>60k hospitalizations
>0.0155% vaccine induced hospitalizations (>implying)

Why should I take a vaccine which has a 0.0155% chance of hospitalizing me, to protect me from a virus which I have a 99.995% chance of surviving?

Also given that I am a 30 year old male, I am at a heightened risk of myo and perocardititis.
Given that the results of the study into why my group is at that risk is not set to be finished until 2024 doesn't it seem irresponsible of me to take the vaccine until after that time?

Is it possible that another human subspecies was more intelligent than homo sapiens?

In nature the most intelligent animals are always predators and social animals.
These traits require theory of mind and the ability to understand, predict events.

Social skills can also negatively affect intelligence. In our modern life we can see many extreme examples of this as we keep individuals alive that would die in harsh times or if left on their own. Many even successfully breed.

Early homo sapiens were hunters, then later became agricultural.
I cant let go of the idea that the first agricultural humans were dumber, or became dumber than their hunter-gatherer homo sapiens brothers and sisters and were eventually subdued.
Because in ancient agricultural societies it is often seen that they transformed back to hunter-gatherer lifestyles. And simply because if a successful agricultural society were to exist, it wouldnt be hard to imagine a small group of stronger hunter-gatherers (stronger and smarter because they have been hunting) to take over that society and subdue the others.
Because the farmers are dumber and weaker, yet can continue a relatively good quality life if they DONT risk fighting their oppressors, this would then continue on.

but that would be homo sapiens vs homo sapiens. perhaps a homo sapiens+denisovan/naenderthal hybrid would be better suited at that?
What did homo sapiens excell at compared to other species? As far as I know we were (probably) more violent, and lived in larger groups at least compared to neanderthals