/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14617570
Sorry, I just assumed there was enough info in that sentence to make you conclude that there would be difficulty with engaging people on the subject because of various cognitive barriers in most people that would likely make them not want to be a part of the test.. i.e. the common conclusion that - "it's a test that assholes do".

As an asshole, I'm curious though and perhaps there are enough assholes out there to get a sample size.
But "gay" assholes? I doubt it. That's sacrilege to their cult and unethical!

That's what I meant.

Fortunately, I have a sizable pool of transsexuals in my basement that I whip daily so perhaps it's not impossible to extract, painfully and vigorously, such data from said sla- .. I-I mean test subjects, but it's certainly not going to be ethical.
Besides, I bet that data has already been extracted somewhere by this machine and then analysed by "professionals" who are probably trying to eradicate the problem already... For science of course.

>>14594712
Why respond to me at all then?
I came here mainly out of curiosity and you didn't need to respond. I just thought it would stimulate discussion or something peripheral that a doc doesn't discuss with patients. There's no way in hell I would actually take advice from here.

I'm mainly whining (I did get a bit whiny, apologies) because you went "hurr durr we no advice here baka senpai" without thinking about why I am using my situation as a thought experiment. You need to distinguish from mere advice requests to generalized discussion content.
Why I brought this up is mainly because I knew there were major concerns in this area that really are not being discussed on a professional front as much as you'd think it would.

>>14584552
Can't sue if they're dead from their next batch of pharma product targeting them.