I think it might do you well to read what you've just typed. It is somewhat riddled with personal attacks after you try to claim you used the word 'fucking' for emphasis, which might very well be true, and no I did not say I was offended but I do think when you resort to swearing in a debate that it is indicative of a weak position. I wonder what value personal attacks are adding to your position?

I read a lot of scientific literature and I can assure you the word literal is not used when reporting research where as estimate is, or more precisely levels of statistical significance are reported, but as I stated earlier this really is not a useful digression since the real point of debate here is your response to my original post. But before I address that again, I'll address the rest of your reply.

You just said you agree that toxoplasmosis is linked with certain mental illnesses but go on to claim this is no cause for concern because it has a very small link as you put it, which, if I may say so, is possibly a premature conclusion to draw since the field of research in the area is expanding and may likely provide a lot of insight we are not yet aware of. If something is identified as being a contributing factor to the mental suffering of a human being how exactly is this not of concern? What about factors such as exposure to the sun being linked with cancer? Is that too blowing it out of proportion and not worthy of concern because there are other factors that have been identified? I'd suggest you're not making a strong argument and it is my turn to suggest that you have proposed a poor analogy with regard to "participating in society". Where as not participating in society would be difficult, unhealthy for social beings such as humans and even dangerous, not rubbing ones mouth near the anus of a cat is none of those things.

Your 'point' about the number of down votes is desperate at best and reflects a lack of understanding in representative, generalisable quantitative measures. I think you'll find that Reddit has a few cat lovers and by the mere fact the title had the word cat in it would attract them. Now, this would be very unrepresentative of all the users of Reddit since it would appeal to a specific type of member in particular and therefore their response to something that could be construed as being negative towards cats would likely result in down votes. This proves exactly nothing about my post. I'll say it again, nothing. It also does nothing to back up what you are trying to say.

To wrap it up I'll summarise for you again. My original post was merely an observation. I did not elaborate on the health issues associated with toxoplasmosis but I can agree that it certainly is advisable to not contract a potentially dangerous parasite where possible and indeed by pointing out that this was a good way to contract it was arguably a suggestion to avoid the behaviour. This, as you pointed out, may have come across in the post but your reply which made a claim about the number of infected people on the planet had no context. It was a statement of fact, as you saw it. You did not elaborate on what it was supposed to show and later made dubious claims that it in fact showed that toxoplasmosis is of no concern even if linked with mental disorders and that it has no effect on the half of the population of the world.

You can reply and toss around more insults and you see fit but I think this has run its course. Your initial reply made little sense as it lacked contextual information to even start forming a coherent point. The digression of a debate that has evolved from this we're unlikely to agree on but I'm okay with that since we've both made clear our positions, albeit at different ends of the spectrum.