Jack Brewer
@jackbrewer.bsky.social
800 followers 310 following 1.7K posts
Writer, researcher, and board member at Expanding Frontiers Research Website: https://www.expandingfrontiersresearch.org/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/c/ExpandingFrontiersResearch YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@expandingfrontiersresearch
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Pinned
Flacco plays like he's been working with the Bengals receiving corps all his life & the following players start Week 7 at 1-0:

@binnall.bsky.social
@blackwolfjohnoates.bsky.social
@tiredoframen.bsky.social

Flacco went 31/47 for 342 yards & 3 TDs - & would've had 4 if they weren't icing the game.
The stars really aligned for Flacco and Chase, yes!
Rodgers was 23/34 for 249 yards & 4 TDs. Not too shabby. But he had 2 picks & the Bengals receivers were simply superior for yards after catch, as well. Good win for Cinci.
Reposted by Jack Brewer
Flacco plays like he's been working with the Bengals receiving corps all his life & the following players start Week 7 at 1-0:

@binnall.bsky.social
@blackwolfjohnoates.bsky.social
@tiredoframen.bsky.social

Flacco went 31/47 for 342 yards & 3 TDs - & would've had 4 if they weren't icing the game.
Let the BrewPool record show Karen submitted her PIT pick during the second half with the Steelers trailing. She's being a good sport & forfeiting the game either way. I say let's wait & see if it would affect the pool outcome later to perhaps make a ruling. 👍
Yeah, they were asking Flacco pregame what it's like to not be the oldest QB for a change. 😆
Is this tariff revenue in the room with us now?
Leavitt: "The president tapped into tariff revenue to keep WIC money going out the door. He found a creative solution to keep the troops paid. And rather than congratulate him for doing that, this unprecedented action to get our troops paid, Dems want to sue him for it. They're saying it's illegal."
Reposted by Jack Brewer
Wait a second. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth called you to give you your job at a private news outlet back?

OANN, anyone care to explain the government's role in your hiring decisions or do we need to FOIA to find out?
Even having a vested interest in a Pittsburgh win, I'm really glad to see a competitive game and a part of me just has to cheer for Flacco.
Yes! Lots of possible outcomes!
Reposted by Jack Brewer
Alright, if ever there was a week that required a commemorative special edition BrewPool scorecard, it's this one. Best of luck to all competitors!
Reposted by Jack Brewer
If any IU alums out there are interested in taking part in a coordinated response to IU’s attack on the Media School and the IDS, please slide into my DM’s and drop your email. #IU #IUB #iufb

Please share widely!
Reposted by Jack Brewer
Without formal reviews BEFORE experiments on humans are conducted, there are no real rules.
It’s important to understand what someone like Russel Vought is saying when he terminates the entire CDC IRB. It’s a statement that there should be no limits on the ways a marginalized person’s bodily integrity can be violated, and he knows that.
Formal review procedures for institutional human subject studies were originally developed in direct response to research abuses in the 20th century.
Among the most notorious of these abuses were the experiments of Nazi physicians, which became a focus of the post-World War II Doctors' Trial, the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, a long-term project conducted between 1932 and 1972 by the U.S.
Public Health Service, and numerous human radiation experiments conducted during the Cold War. Other controversial U.S. projects undertaken during this era include the Milgram obedience experiment, the Stanford prison experiment, and Project MKULTRA, a series of classified mind control studies organized by the CIA.
The result of these abuses was the National Research Act of 1974 and the development of the Belmont Report, which outlined the primary ethical principles in human subjects review; these include
"respect for persons", "beneficence", and "justice".
An IRB may approve only research for which the risks to subjects are balanced by potential benefits to society, and for which the selection of subjects presents a fair or just distribution of risks and benefits to eligible participants. A bona fide process for obtaining informed consent from participants is also generally needed. However, this requirement may be waived in certain circumstances - for example, when the risk of harm to participants is clearlv minimal.
Reposted by Jack Brewer
It’s important to understand what someone like Russel Vought is saying when he terminates the entire CDC IRB. It’s a statement that there should be no limits on the ways a marginalized person’s bodily integrity can be violated, and he knows that.
Formal review procedures for institutional human subject studies were originally developed in direct response to research abuses in the 20th century.
Among the most notorious of these abuses were the experiments of Nazi physicians, which became a focus of the post-World War II Doctors' Trial, the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, a long-term project conducted between 1932 and 1972 by the U.S.
Public Health Service, and numerous human radiation experiments conducted during the Cold War. Other controversial U.S. projects undertaken during this era include the Milgram obedience experiment, the Stanford prison experiment, and Project MKULTRA, a series of classified mind control studies organized by the CIA.
The result of these abuses was the National Research Act of 1974 and the development of the Belmont Report, which outlined the primary ethical principles in human subjects review; these include
"respect for persons", "beneficence", and "justice".
An IRB may approve only research for which the risks to subjects are balanced by potential benefits to society, and for which the selection of subjects presents a fair or just distribution of risks and benefits to eligible participants. A bona fide process for obtaining informed consent from participants is also generally needed. However, this requirement may be waived in certain circumstances - for example, when the risk of harm to participants is clearlv minimal.
Week 7 at a glance:

15 games
9 players
4 unanimous picks (CHI, NE, KC, GB)
Just 2 with only 1 of us in dissent (NYGvDEN, HOUvSEA)
PITvCIN is a 6-3 Steelers split
I admit I haven’t seen much of the Texans, but I really don’t understand how that QB is not being put to better use. A really good talent that I guess doesn’t have the system around him that he needs.
I also found it tough to pick WAS in DAL. I think even the most jaded find a little something extra in that rivalry.
Yeah, the Cleveland defense isn't really hurting.
Yep, it could go either way. I kept going back and forth on ATLvSF.
When Kavanaugh said stops were a "minor inconvenience," I guess we didn't know he was referring to children.
The Bengals backers are joined by @binnall.bsky.social! Anarchy in the BrewPool!
A lot of difference in picks from one player to the next this week! We're not going to have a lot of unanimous picks. Even the primetime games are getting some relevance.
So far we have @blackwolfjohnoates.bsky.social & @tiredoframen.bsky.social fading the sportsbooks & picking a Bengals TNF win! Classic AFC North matchup just hours away.