Bohurt

The issue with your original comment is that it's simplified on many levels beyond what is acceptable. China has companies working on delivering highest financial output regardless of other citizens and their rights to have fair share in produced goods. They are by no means controlled by workers (why would they accept e. g. 996?) nor creating fair rules to others economically (e.g. Taobao and their alghorims pushing many sellers to sell bellow profitable levels just to maintain visibility on their site). Put it also into wider perspective: China started to move forward in quality of life only after Deng. US system is by no means bad but it doesn't make Chinese one perfect.

You don't even realise how strong capitalism is in China.

I believe it's just US thing, I literally never happened to hear that they cancel something that they pledged to secure, not wanting to accept certain claim - that happens regularly but not saying outright to cancel important part of the deal

Lol is it really possible to withdraw from something like that? What's the point of having an insurance then?

Polish C is also described as /t͡s/ (e.g. co /t͡sɔ/). According to wiki both are dental and voiceless although one is plosive and the other affricate. As I've read their descriptions on wiki, they made a lot of sense - /t͡s/ starts with a blockade of airway (just as /t/) but the air is released slightly differently thus making the difference in sound produced.

D-ark MAGA

Looks weired but a sound of C and T has to be somehow connected, at least it feels like they are to me. Based on my experience, sound of Polish Ć and Czech Ť are transitional between Polish/Czech T/C. Proper linguist might put some more light on it than just my speculation.

I didn't expect such paper to be questioned on pubpeer at all

Some even forget to remove unnecessary parts of the AI's answer, check out first sentence of the abstract down there 👇

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468023024002402

Unfortunately, the Chads used wrong argumentation that gets close to populism.

Even so clavicles can be asymmetrical due to previous injury. We are pretty asymmetrical overall if you look closely enough.

Such a small groups are fine for initial investigation, they have enough of a size to be acceptable statistically for most of the performed studies. I don't think they'd get approval from ethical committee overseeing animal experiments without initial study like this to conduct something on very high groups.