Of gender-affirming surgical procedures identified among adults and minors, 1591 of 2664 (59.7%) and 82 of 85 (96.4%) were chest-related procedures, respectively.

This first part parses to me as “Of gender-affirming surgical procedures identified, 1591 of 2664 adult surgeries (59.7%) and 82 of 85 minor child surgeries (96.4%) were chest-related procedures, respectively.” However, the next sentence doesn’t seem to line up with that notion…

Of the 636 breast reductions among men, 507 (80%) were performed on cisgender men. Of the 151 breast reductions among boys, 146 (97%) were performed on cisgender boys (Figure 2).

To make this section easier to read, I replaced some words and phrases while hopefully keeping the meaning intact.

I kind of feel like this quote is referencing two different data sets, and is missing a segue. The numbers don’t seem to line up with each other any way I poke at them.

15 square meters isn’t the same as 15m×15m, it’d be a little smaller than 4m×4m. Still a big hole.

I was under the impression that the chemicals involved in recycling paper products, combined with the fact that virgin paper is almost entirely sourced from managed, quick-growing tree farms, make paper recycling also undesirable?

Jury nullification only helps if you get an actual jury.

Just a rock or a knife, if you wear the animal down enough. You’re probably not biting through the hide though.

Aaron Rodgers, since he turned into the Q-B

More like homicidally stupid.

We definitely whip shitties in WI, too.

For those wondering, this played out well! OP found someone to take the job. His wife bit on the prank gleefully, was actually thrilled by the idea that OP had a son he didn’t know about. When the prank was revealed, she thought it was hilarious. Ultimately pretty wholesome, OP married a keeper.