you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Snow 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

[–]Chipit 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Pop science magazines. You're out of your depth, kid.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

take the L kid he showed you proof

[–]Only71Genders 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

In his defense, the article refers to psychosis and not schizophrenia. Two completely different things.

Also, we should limit ourselves to one argument point each so this semantics debate can drag in as many people as possible. Keeping in true nature of semantics.

[–]Snow 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It COULD be schizophrenia, that's why I used a question mark on there.

[–]Only71Genders 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I was talking about your article, not your OP