Search:

• government warned Israel about coming attack. (Several governments told them their intelligence agencies had info on the planning of oct7).
• IDF whistleblower Oct 7 stand down order
• Hannibal directive active Oct 7
• IDF crossfire oct 7
• IDF tank attacked kibutz
• ISIS flag oct 7 kibbutz (ISIS is an enemy of Hamas, and an Israeli proxy in Syria, there is no way they knew about the attack from Palestine)
• non-Palestinian Arabic accent from oct7 terrorists videos
• Israel bury cars of victims of oct7
• Helicopters mowing down oct7 rave attendants
• Israels ban on investigating and auditing oct 7

And get that info yourself.

They also destroyed a huge missile stockpile that was in the middle of the city, and which is still burning and throwing rockets around. The whole district was evacuated.

Go learn to use a search engine please. Damn these zios are annoying

I mean, I don’t know how much are you familiar with the legislation and family and primary education programs in Western countries, but you can find really like just similar items in there that also indoctrinate our kids into loving and believing in the system in which we are functioning currently.

You all sing the anathems of your countries, praise the flags, wear uniforms and are acknowledged with the supposed history that happened and built the nation, you inhabit blah, blah, blah. Like it’s all basic propaganda, like on the same level that you are here quoting from the Chinese state.

But that’s even beyond the discussion of this article, since the article is claiming that there is like a genocidal or discriminatory intent in this legislation, when it’s literally the opposite of that.

And also, there is a very general misinformation about the Han ethnicity in China. The Han ethnicity in China isn’t and never was homogeneous ethnic group, the Han was formed by the integration of other ethnical groups through the history of China, which by the way did it in a voluntary way.

They didn’t genocided other populations like the western, predominantly pink ethnicity, have done in the course of centuries, but they just accepted the addition of the surrounding ethnicities into their own, which did it to gain favor with the richer provinces and kingdoms.

The present Han are mix of dozens of older ethnicities.

And China is currently following the same “tradition”.

What they do not accept on our very strict against are the existence of a technical or cultural group that are proactively trying to divide themselves from the hegemonical or the status quo cultural background that China is trying to project.

And for a good reason, because those groups are the ones that predominantly get undermined and infiltrated by foreign interests and end up creating ethnicities into their own, which did it to gain favor with the ruling classes, which did it to gain a better division and chaos in the regime, which we already have seen happening in other countries including Russia, where the Chechens were used by Saudis and US for that same reason.

Sure, forceful integration in these cases isnt the “cleanest” solution, but its far more effective and human than the discriminatory and alienating policies of the west, that market “diversity and democracy”, only on certain levels, while the top is all pink, male, “judeo-christian”.

Yeah, pretty normal law:

Here’s an English summary of this document — the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Promoting Ethnic Unity and Progress, adopted March 12, 2026 by the National People’s Congress, effective July 1, 2026.

Purpose & framing The law aims to strengthen a shared sense of Chinese national/ethnic community identity, promote unity among China’s ethnic groups, and support the “great rejuvenation” of the Chinese nation. It affirms equality of all citizens and ethnic groups before the law and bans discrimination or oppression of any ethnic group, while emphasizing Communist Party leadership over ethnic affairs work.

Structure (7 chapters, 65 articles):

1. General Provisions – Legal basis, guiding ideology (Marxism-Leninism through Xi Jinping Thought), core principle of “forging a strong sense of Chinese national community,” and rejection of foreign interference in China’s ethnic affairs.

2. Building a Shared Spiritual Home – Promotes patriotic/socialist education, shared cultural symbols, protection of heritage sites, and nationwide promotion of Standard Mandarin Chinese as the primary language in schools and government (while still protecting minority languages). Includes provisions on education curricula, media/propaganda work, family education, and outreach to Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, and overseas Chinese communities.

3. Promoting Interaction and Integration – Encourages mixed-ethnic communities, cross-regional migration/employment/education exchanges, youth exchange programs, tourism, and regulation of online content — banning material that incites ethnic hatred or discrimination.

4. Advancing Shared Prosperity – Focuses on economic development in ethnic minority regions: infrastructure, industry, poverty alleviation, border-area development, public services, and ecological protection.

5. Safeguards and Oversight – Assigns responsibilities to government bodies, party organizations, businesses, religious groups, military, and grassroots organizations. Establishes a “Ethnic Unity Progress Publicity Week” (last week of September) and mechanisms for public complaints and prosecutorial public-interest lawsuits.

6. Legal Liability – Penalties for officials or organizations that fail to prevent ethnic-unity violations, discrimination (e.g., employment discrimination based on ethnicity), or online violations. Serious violations (terrorism, separatism, religious extremism) are treated as criminal offenses, including for actions by foreign entities targeting China.

7. Supplementary Provisions – Allows provincial/local governments to enact supporting local regulations; law takes effect July 1, 2026

CNN propaganda bs confirmed… From a country with 80% black jail population, legal slavery of them, and currently hunting brown people and disappearing their kids at that…

Source: main US propaganda shitposting network…

Where do you read there that “women shouldn’t take it despite being prescribed that by their medics”??? Or text is showing differently here for each of us??? Oh but i forgot, you just like arguing with yourself just to have something to grasp on to…

Where did said that women taking antidepressant should stop taking them?

You are arguing with your own imaginary pancakes and waffles

Where did I stated that women should not take antidepressants after their doctor has prescribed them?

stop arguing with your imaginary self.

Your opinion is as irrelevant as mine. Do yourself a favor, and do some reading before trying to judge what others say on things that go well over your head.

regardless of how safe and effective they can be.

Your post’s study only refers to ADHD and Autism. It doesnt imply safety for anything else. You are implying safety and effectiveness for the whole, based on two specifics. That is dangerous.

Its like telling someone to drink a hepatoxic compound, because it doesn’t hurt other organs.

You’re wrong

As per your uneducated opinion.

women should work with their doctors on treatment plans.

Of course they should.

Your opinion is dangerous to spread online, and toxic on top of that.

Pregnant women should listen to and work with their doctors,

They surely have to.

And who people take advice from is their problem, not yours.

even when doctors prescribe them to pregnant women.

Where is that? Stop arguing for things you imagine in your triggered mind my dude. It affects your wellbeing.

Thats my personal opinion, and the basis for that opinion (with some links provided a couple comments above, since seems that “common sense” isn’t as common as one would hope).

There isn’t any “pushing” for ignoring medical advice or opinion, nor any imperative statements on the requirement of avoiding taking them .

Again, you’re arguing with imaginary projected things here, and are a supertoxic person on top of that.

I did not wrote that they shouldnt take antidepressants. I wrote that their effects should be taken into account and researched before taking them.

Its controversial to you. Since if you had read my comments you would be aware that I never stated the contrary.

But you’re some random triggered toxic lemmy user with zero lecture comprehension, just arguing with imaginary statements and little context knowledge it seems.

“Pushing”??? Again, go read again the comment, dont discuss with your personal projections.

It’s a dangerous statement that you’ve pushed here and it is literally just your uneducated opinion.

You are now assuming my education and what I used to give my opinion?

Can I ask you whats your degree field? Or if you have one to start with as to put on yourself the selfentitlement to have the right to judge my opinion?

Because you’re here feverishly fighting against my statements about psychoactive compounds chronically saturating the mother’s bloodstream affecting the development of the child thats connected to that bloodstream for 9 months; and that this should be taken into account by the mother to inform herself of the potential repercussions of blindly taking said compounds.

Your opinion is dangerous in itself, not to mention that pretending to take away the right people have to take informed decisions, based on your personal belief (and maybe experience, sadly). Who are you to take on yourself the right of what people have to know or not?

I’m honestly really heavily doubting about not only your qualifications and background education here; since you’re trying to invalidate basic biochemical processes caused by strong hormonal modulators that are proven to affect even already formed and developed brains; let alone the fetus neural tissue.

Please have some reading here:

• 25% to 30% of infants exposed to SSRI/SNRI in late pregnancy experience transient symptoms such as jitteriness, restlessness, rapid breathing, and altered muscle tone. https://fn.bmj.com/content/109/3/294

• In utero SSRI exposure, interacting with the maternal mood, is associated with distinct epigenetic alterations. Specifically, neonates show increased DNA methylation, an epigenetic signature that has also been linked to alterations in birth weight. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4622680/

• Alterations to the Fetal HPA Axis and Cortisol Levels: Infants prenatally exposed to SSRIs exhibit altered early programming of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) stress axis. This is demonstrated by significantly reduced early evening basal cortisol levels measured at three months of age when compared to unexposed infants. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4821181/

• Prenatal SSRI exposure is associated with an early gray matter volume expansion in the amygdala and insula, as well as increased structural connectivity between these regions. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10469300/

• Even after strictly adjusting for confounding variables, prenatal exposure to antidepressants is associated with decreases in gestational age and birth weight , alongside a modestly increased risk for moderate-to-late preterm birth. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9117424/

You know that there are hundreds of neurological problems outside of ADHD and Autism don’t you? And if not, please inform yourself before pushing people to decide what to take or not based on what you believe is important, because its probably the popular thing you’re paying attention to.

You really have 0 lecture comprehension and are basically arguing against something you made up my dude.

My opinion is my opinion, and its the problem of whomever reads it to take it into account or not.

As I personally do not take your opinion for nothing of importance in this regard, as you’re toxic and basically delusional at this point if not just malicious in trying to reframe what I said.

Have a nice day, and please, don’t forget to take your antidepressants.

Did i wrote anywhere that i should be weighting the decision itself? wtf are you on? Maybe take some online course on lecture comprehension.

You are here just trying to invalidate my opinion to include important factors within the frame of the decision making process, because you personally disagree with that.

And trying to give weight to your invalidation with a strawman.

There are ways to reduce depression without packing your blood with psychoactive substances that go directly to a developing brain.

And again, reread my comment: information should be given for the right decisions to be made. If the mother still desires to use psychoactive substances for her own good after her research on the topic, her right. But she should know of the potential repercussions of her decisions.