This question is a follow-up of this one.
Now I'm trying to prove that the torsion submodule of $\prod \mathbb{Z}_p$ is not a direct summand of $\prod \mathbb{Z}_p$.
I found this interesting because it's an example that over a PID, a non-finitely generated module may fail to be decomposed as torsion $\oplus$ something free, showing even that it can't be decomposed as torsion $\oplus$ anything.
Now, it is easily proven that the torsion submodule of $\prod \mathbb{Z}_p$ is $\bigoplus \mathbb{Z}_p$.
So if we could decompose $\prod \mathbb{Z}_p$ as torsion $\oplus$ something it would have to be $\prod \mathbb{Z}_p = \bigoplus \mathbb{Z}_p \oplus \frac{\prod \mathbb{Z}_p}{\bigoplus \mathbb{Z}_p}$ (this is correct, right?)
Now, using the question linked above, we know the right summand is divisible ($\iff$ injective), besides it is torsion-free ($\iff$ flat).
(I think) I've learned my lesson from my previous question, so I also tried proving that there is a member in $\prod \mathbb{Z}_p$ which can't be written as a sum of something in $\bigoplus \mathbb{Z}_p$ plus something in $\frac{\prod \mathbb{Z}_p}{\bigoplus \mathbb{Z}_p}$, but I couldn't advance any further in this direction either.