I link 3 meta analysises accounting ~150-200 scientific papers AKA more than you've read in your entire life and you call me pseudoscientist and conspirational? I understand starting to questions the safety of things you have always assumed to be safe can be mentally scary but that does not justify empty dismissals. It's true though that this is not a scientific forum and it often shows. BTW did you know that human brains including yours loose 10% of their axons every decade? Take this fact as a reward for your low-effort.

edit: oicU00: Your thymus involute quickly.

I am not the poster you are replying to but I feel the need to point out that 200 papers isn't an obscenely high number that most people on HN will never reach.

I had to include at least 5 sources minimum for each paper that I wrote in undergrad. That means reading at least twice that number to find ones actually relevant to the subject I chose. Add this to the papers they require you read merely to supplement the text book, and your average student with 4 classes a semester can average 20 to 30 papers easily.

It's just reading research. It's not like you have to write the papers yourself.

I'd guess for my graduating thesis alone I burned through 50 papers over 3 months looking for supporting fundamentals before figuring out my experimental direction was stupid and I had to start again from scratch.

You should consider moving to a rural area and staying away from technology altogether. Having access to information seems to be making you insane via anxiety.

It’s nothing but upside for you; less WiFi radiation and conspiracy addled inner monologue.