I was thinking more dreamy.
Yeah? Gotta problem with facile bromides?
That’s got to be one of those papers written as a deliberate trap, to show off how disreputable a journal is. They couldn’t have made it more obvious if they had made the “author’s” name “Woo”.
I’m sure the paper went through 1,048,576 peer reviews that confirmed the diagrams were perfectly moʊligpmytinp उपonnuns.
The new misinformation? Sunscreen. Just in time for (Burned) White Boy Summer.
So, this is what “influencers” actually do, then? Convince people, with no rational basis, to go against their best interests, just because they said so?
Call me a jerk, but if people want to give themselves cancer because of some “influencer’s” home sunscreen mix, who am I to care? No skin off my nose. Or head, shoulders, back…
In many instances yes, exactly that. Or more specifically, they’ll say anything, whatever they need to increase their audience because on many platforms they’re paid based on the number of views. Scaring people gets more attention than reassuring them.
In nations where there is publicly funded healthcare there is the concern about avoidable expense to the public.
If you’re in the US, OK, no skin off your nose, you’re right. It doesn’t cost you anything. You are not obligated to care about your fellow human beings.
You might want to ask yourself how reliable the information you use might be, though. Are you following facts or an influencer?
In nations with publicly funded healthcare, the increase in skin cancer cases cause taxes to go up to cover the cost.
If you’re in the US, either your insurance premium goes up or the deductibles / coinsurance goes up.
It’s not quite as bad as anti-vax propaganda, in that skin cancer (and premature aging of the skin, and all the other problems caused by overexposure to the sun) are not contagious per se.
In any case, what can be done by us individuals to counter this anti-sunscreen trend among influencers, aside from not being the kind of person who pays attention to influencers? I suspect, or at least hope, that most of the people reading this thread are already that.
…and paid disinformation trolls from other governments. Sow doubt, undermine the credibility of institutions.
Hey, there are plenty of journal articles authored by Woo.
Not all Woos are successful though.
The coroner later said the victim, 41-year-old Allen Ray McGrew, had ignited a large firework on top of his head. Witnesses told investigators he was wearing a large top hat, and put the firework on top of the hat before lighting it. The device exploded, causing “massive head injuries.”
McGrew was pronounced dead at the scene.
At least the top hat was a nice touch. 
Ah, a victim of “Hey guys, watch this” syndrome…
Press on.
Everyone knows you use a sombrero to launch fireworks.
At least he went out with a bang.
And I thought the Mad Hatter was a fictional character.
The Mad Hatter was simply mad. This guy is dead.
Based on hatmakers of the day who often suffered from mercury poisoning from the felt used in hat making.
Though the term predates the hat making profession and likely originally was “mad as an atter”; with “mad” meaning “poisonous” and “atter” being a variation of “adder”.
In any sense it’s all apocryphal, as the term is so old that there are few contemporary sources available, and when it first appeared in print (decades before Alice in Wonderland) it was already an old saying.
Carroll himself was clearly inspired by the idea of an insane hatmaker.
Best left to the professionals, like Arthur Brown
Really? What putz decided that this was worthy of a fine?