Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
HuckleB
HuckleB's Journal
HuckleB's Journal
March 17, 2016
Yeah, science!
We are getting better and better at detecting small amounts of almost anything!
Now, what to do with that information?
Let people know that we can detect things at very small amounts that will not affect them unless they eat tons of the fish in a single sitting, or go out and try to scare the crap out of people for no good reason?
I think we know what usually happens.
March 16, 2016
"An op-ed penned this month by Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and published online appears to be blatantly plagiarized from an article written days earlier under former rival Ben Carson’s name, The Daily Caller has determined.
The similar op-eds were written on the topic of America’s territories and commonwealths.
Both pieces appear under the by-lines of the candidates. Carson’s piece, published Feb. 26, was published in the Marianas Variety in the Northern Mariana Islands.
Trump’s op-ed — published in the Pacific Daily News in Guam, part of the USA Today Network — was published 12 days later on March 9."
--------------------------------------------------------------
This guy is a cheater all the way.
Trump Appears To Have Heavily Plagiarized Op-Ed From Carson
http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/16/trump-appears-to-have-heavily-plagiarized-op-ed-from-carson/"An op-ed penned this month by Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and published online appears to be blatantly plagiarized from an article written days earlier under former rival Ben Carson’s name, The Daily Caller has determined.
The similar op-eds were written on the topic of America’s territories and commonwealths.
Both pieces appear under the by-lines of the candidates. Carson’s piece, published Feb. 26, was published in the Marianas Variety in the Northern Mariana Islands.
Trump’s op-ed — published in the Pacific Daily News in Guam, part of the USA Today Network — was published 12 days later on March 9."
--------------------------------------------------------------
This guy is a cheater all the way.
March 15, 2016
"...
Richard Feynman was the first to compare the contemporary social sciences, including psychology, to a cargo cult. For those not familiar, the term “cargo cult” originates with the natives in Melanesia, who were awestruck by the planes that landed on their islands during WWII bringing all kinds of supplies. They had no understanding of what airplanes were or where they came from. Magical thinking led them to create bamboo replicas of planes and control towers in the superstitious belief that it would attract planes and bring them material goods. Similarly, many psychology researchers have been imitating the methods of science without really understanding how science is supposed to work. They go through the motions, but their research designs are so poorly thought out and the methodology so poor that their results are meaningless. And then they use those meaningless results to guide therapy. They have been led astray, have deceived themselves, and have harmed patients.
Witkowski’s book starts with a brilliant discussion of how the human mind works and how it evolved thinking processes that frequently lead to errors. Next he provides a thorough discussion of cargo cults, with far more detail than I have read elsewhere. It’s fascinating stuff, especially about the huge variety of cargo cults (at least 55) and the ones that have persisted into the 21st century because of deliberate deception, self-deception, and confusion of reality and beliefs.
...
It’s not all doom and gloom. The book ends on a positive note, with a letter to Richard Feynman chastising him for calling the whole field a cargo cult. Witkowsi draws Feynman’s attention to examples of good science in psychology that have had demonstrable benefits for society, for instance the studies on reaction time in response to different configurations of brake lights that led to laws requiring a third brake light on vehicles, dramatically reducing the number of rear-end collisions, injuries, and repair costs.
There are some errors in the book: AIDS is lumped with untreatable diseases, and the chapter on statistics is poor, with a misleading explanation of p values. But on the whole, there is a lot of valuable information here. Even if you don’t agree with calling these travesties of science cargo cults, it will make you wonder which other generally-accepted psychological principles and therapies are based on good science. This book is the second part of a trilogy; I look forward to volume 3."
-----------------------------------------------
It's good to see the acknowledgment that the field is not all ignorance, but it is clear that we need a campaign to increase the professionalism across the board.
Cargo Cult Psychology: How The Field Went Astray Over And Over
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/cargo-cult-psychology/"...
Richard Feynman was the first to compare the contemporary social sciences, including psychology, to a cargo cult. For those not familiar, the term “cargo cult” originates with the natives in Melanesia, who were awestruck by the planes that landed on their islands during WWII bringing all kinds of supplies. They had no understanding of what airplanes were or where they came from. Magical thinking led them to create bamboo replicas of planes and control towers in the superstitious belief that it would attract planes and bring them material goods. Similarly, many psychology researchers have been imitating the methods of science without really understanding how science is supposed to work. They go through the motions, but their research designs are so poorly thought out and the methodology so poor that their results are meaningless. And then they use those meaningless results to guide therapy. They have been led astray, have deceived themselves, and have harmed patients.
Witkowski’s book starts with a brilliant discussion of how the human mind works and how it evolved thinking processes that frequently lead to errors. Next he provides a thorough discussion of cargo cults, with far more detail than I have read elsewhere. It’s fascinating stuff, especially about the huge variety of cargo cults (at least 55) and the ones that have persisted into the 21st century because of deliberate deception, self-deception, and confusion of reality and beliefs.
...
It’s not all doom and gloom. The book ends on a positive note, with a letter to Richard Feynman chastising him for calling the whole field a cargo cult. Witkowsi draws Feynman’s attention to examples of good science in psychology that have had demonstrable benefits for society, for instance the studies on reaction time in response to different configurations of brake lights that led to laws requiring a third brake light on vehicles, dramatically reducing the number of rear-end collisions, injuries, and repair costs.
There are some errors in the book: AIDS is lumped with untreatable diseases, and the chapter on statistics is poor, with a misleading explanation of p values. But on the whole, there is a lot of valuable information here. Even if you don’t agree with calling these travesties of science cargo cults, it will make you wonder which other generally-accepted psychological principles and therapies are based on good science. This book is the second part of a trilogy; I look forward to volume 3."
-----------------------------------------------
It's good to see the acknowledgment that the field is not all ignorance, but it is clear that we need a campaign to increase the professionalism across the board.
March 15, 2016
Why do people pay attention to campaign ads?
It's not hard to figure out that they are not a good way to figure out who one thinks is best for office.
Yet, most of us seem to pay an inordinate amount of attention to them?
I mean, most parents spend plenty of time helping their kids question ads for various products, And pointing out the real reason for those ads makes them less than helpful in choosing a good product.
Hmm.
March 14, 2016
"Media Matters for America has published a report detailing US broadcast news coverage of climate change in 2015, and their findings are stunning.
2015 was a banner year for climate news. February, June, October, November, and December were each their respective hottest months on record, and 2015 shattered the record for hottest year. The pope delivered a climate encyclical.Investigative journalists at Inside Climate News discovered that Exxon knewabout the dangers of human-caused global warming while it funded a climate misinformation campaign, and the New York attorney general launched an investigation into the company’s behavior. President Obama’s Clean Power Plan went into effect, and he rejected the Keystone XL pipeline. And most importantly, 195 countries agreed to cut carbon pollution as much as possible to stem global warming.
Despite all these critically important stories, as in the presidential debates, climate change was largely absent from US broadcast news. Climate coverage fell in 2015.
Most of the decline was due to ABC, which only spent 13 minutes in 2015 covering climate change – three times less than even Fox. While Fox’s coverage increased, most of the network’s climate segments featured interviews with guests who criticized efforts to address global warming.
..."
---------------------------------------------
During the most important year for climate news, TV coverage fell
http://www.skepticalscience.com/during-most-important-year-tv-climate-coverage-fell.html"Media Matters for America has published a report detailing US broadcast news coverage of climate change in 2015, and their findings are stunning.
2015 was a banner year for climate news. February, June, October, November, and December were each their respective hottest months on record, and 2015 shattered the record for hottest year. The pope delivered a climate encyclical.Investigative journalists at Inside Climate News discovered that Exxon knewabout the dangers of human-caused global warming while it funded a climate misinformation campaign, and the New York attorney general launched an investigation into the company’s behavior. President Obama’s Clean Power Plan went into effect, and he rejected the Keystone XL pipeline. And most importantly, 195 countries agreed to cut carbon pollution as much as possible to stem global warming.
Despite all these critically important stories, as in the presidential debates, climate change was largely absent from US broadcast news. Climate coverage fell in 2015.
Most of the decline was due to ABC, which only spent 13 minutes in 2015 covering climate change – three times less than even Fox. While Fox’s coverage increased, most of the network’s climate segments featured interviews with guests who criticized efforts to address global warming.
..."
---------------------------------------------
March 14, 2016
"Gluten-free bread. Gluten-free cookies. Gluten-free cereal. With all of the new options to avoid gluten, there’s got to be something about the ingredient that’s bad for you, right?
Wrong. As Alan Levinovitz points out in The Gluten Lie, the scary-sounding ingredient is not to be feared. Far from a dangerous toxin, gluten is a type of protein found in wheat and other similar grains, from hearty barley to bitter-tasting rye. It’s what makes bagels chewy and lets fresh-baked bread rise.
Still, a minority of people can’t eat the delicious stuff. Roughly 1 percent of Americans have coeliac disease, a genetic, autoimmune disorder that causes people who eat gluten to experience damage to their small intestine.
...
So while cutting gluten may seem like it causes weight loss or clearer skin, in reality, something else is probably the real cause, like swapping fast food for cooking at home. Peter Gibson, Monash University Australia’s Director of Gastroenterology who’s led multiple studies on gluten, tells Levinovitz:
..."
-------------------------------------------------------
So many food marketing fads get out of hand, and so many of us keep jumping on the next bandwagon?
Why don't we learn?
The reason (most) people go gluten-free isn't because they're allergic
http://www.sciencealert.com/the-reason-people-go-gluten-free-isn-t-because-they-re-allergic"Gluten-free bread. Gluten-free cookies. Gluten-free cereal. With all of the new options to avoid gluten, there’s got to be something about the ingredient that’s bad for you, right?
Wrong. As Alan Levinovitz points out in The Gluten Lie, the scary-sounding ingredient is not to be feared. Far from a dangerous toxin, gluten is a type of protein found in wheat and other similar grains, from hearty barley to bitter-tasting rye. It’s what makes bagels chewy and lets fresh-baked bread rise.
Still, a minority of people can’t eat the delicious stuff. Roughly 1 percent of Americans have coeliac disease, a genetic, autoimmune disorder that causes people who eat gluten to experience damage to their small intestine.
...
So while cutting gluten may seem like it causes weight loss or clearer skin, in reality, something else is probably the real cause, like swapping fast food for cooking at home. Peter Gibson, Monash University Australia’s Director of Gastroenterology who’s led multiple studies on gluten, tells Levinovitz:
..."
-------------------------------------------------------
So many food marketing fads get out of hand, and so many of us keep jumping on the next bandwagon?
Why don't we learn?
March 14, 2016
The piece covers topics from climate change, the EPA, and vaccination. It also covers his bad ideas regarding Planned Parenthood and the ACA.
It ends...
"In summary, Trump’s proposals have not won over the scientists we consulted. Hotez expressed hope that Trump will bring experts onboard to make more informed proposals if he becomes the Republican nominee. But Lane says he’s skeptical even of that.
“Who would he recruit to his science team?” asks Lane. “How capable would they be of providing advice? Of course, I don’t have the answer to that. But it’s a question voters should have in their minds.”
-------------------------------------------------------
We cannot afford this type of ignorance.
The (Complete Lack Of) Science of Donald Trump by Scientific American
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/the-science-of-president-trump/The piece covers topics from climate change, the EPA, and vaccination. It also covers his bad ideas regarding Planned Parenthood and the ACA.
It ends...
"In summary, Trump’s proposals have not won over the scientists we consulted. Hotez expressed hope that Trump will bring experts onboard to make more informed proposals if he becomes the Republican nominee. But Lane says he’s skeptical even of that.
“Who would he recruit to his science team?” asks Lane. “How capable would they be of providing advice? Of course, I don’t have the answer to that. But it’s a question voters should have in their minds.”
-------------------------------------------------------
We cannot afford this type of ignorance.
March 14, 2016
"...
For about two years, a STAT investigation has found, The Trump Network sold customized vitamins and scientific testing kits, claiming they would yield health benefits. But according to many outside experts, the network was selling bad science.
Among other claims, The Trump Network asserted that it could use a urine test to recommend customized nutritional supplements, its signature products. It also offered products that purportedly tested for allergies and bone health. But scientists said such claims were never backed up by modern medicine.
“They make an outrageous statement, which is that this testing and supplement regimen, this process, are a necessity for anyone who wants to stay healthy,” said Dr. Pieter Cohen, a general internist at Cambridge Health Alliance and an expert on dietary supplement safety who reviewed some of The Trump Network’s marketing materials at the request of STAT. “That’s quite (beep).”
...
The firm was a network marketing company, or multilevel marketing company, that sold products through a team of marketers who were financially incentivized to make sales and to recruit others into the network.
..."
-------------------------------------------------
There are so many things wrong with this Trump venture that it's hard to know where to start. It certainly had no viable underpinning of any kind. It was unethical to the core, selling worthless products falsely advertised, using multilevel marketing, ...
Donald Trump, bad science, and the vitamin company that went bust
https://www.statnews.com/2016/03/02/donald-trump-vitamin-company/"...
For about two years, a STAT investigation has found, The Trump Network sold customized vitamins and scientific testing kits, claiming they would yield health benefits. But according to many outside experts, the network was selling bad science.
Among other claims, The Trump Network asserted that it could use a urine test to recommend customized nutritional supplements, its signature products. It also offered products that purportedly tested for allergies and bone health. But scientists said such claims were never backed up by modern medicine.
“They make an outrageous statement, which is that this testing and supplement regimen, this process, are a necessity for anyone who wants to stay healthy,” said Dr. Pieter Cohen, a general internist at Cambridge Health Alliance and an expert on dietary supplement safety who reviewed some of The Trump Network’s marketing materials at the request of STAT. “That’s quite (beep).”
...
The firm was a network marketing company, or multilevel marketing company, that sold products through a team of marketers who were financially incentivized to make sales and to recruit others into the network.
..."
-------------------------------------------------
There are so many things wrong with this Trump venture that it's hard to know where to start. It certainly had no viable underpinning of any kind. It was unethical to the core, selling worthless products falsely advertised, using multilevel marketing, ...
March 14, 2016
"You’ve probably heard of species of spiders whose females will eat males during sex. But did you know that in some of these species, the males will try to protect themselves by binding the females’ legs with silk before copulation? It’s true, and according to this study, it has led to the evolution of males with longer legs to help restrain females. In other words, an arms race–or to be more specific…a legs race.
Benefits of size dimorphism and copulatory silk wrapping in the sexually cannibalistic nursery web spider, Pisaurina mira.
“In sexually cannibalistic animals, male fitness is influenced not only by successful mate acquisition and egg fertilization, but also by avoiding being eaten. In the cannibalistic nursery web spider, Pisaurina mira, the legs of mature males are longer in relation to their body size than those of females, and males use these legs to aid in wrapping a female’s legs with silk prior to and during copulation. We hypothesized that elongated male legs and silk wrapping provide benefits to males, in part through a reduced likelihood of sexual cannibalism. To test this, we paired females of random size with males from one of two treatment groups—those capable of silk wrapping versus those incapable of silk wrapping. We found that males with relatively longer legs and larger body size were more likely to mate and were less likely to be cannibalized prior to copulation. Regardless of relative size, males capable of silk wrapping were less likely to be cannibalized during or following copulation and had more opportunities for sperm transfer (i.e. pedipalpal insertions). Our results suggest that male size and copulatory silk wrapping are sexually selected traits benefiting male reproductive success.”
..."
-------------------------------------------------------------
Be careful out there. Evolution is in play, apparently.
Spider sex is kinkier than you thought!
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/seriouslyscience/2016/03/09/5167/#.VucH--IrIdU"You’ve probably heard of species of spiders whose females will eat males during sex. But did you know that in some of these species, the males will try to protect themselves by binding the females’ legs with silk before copulation? It’s true, and according to this study, it has led to the evolution of males with longer legs to help restrain females. In other words, an arms race–or to be more specific…a legs race.
Benefits of size dimorphism and copulatory silk wrapping in the sexually cannibalistic nursery web spider, Pisaurina mira.
“In sexually cannibalistic animals, male fitness is influenced not only by successful mate acquisition and egg fertilization, but also by avoiding being eaten. In the cannibalistic nursery web spider, Pisaurina mira, the legs of mature males are longer in relation to their body size than those of females, and males use these legs to aid in wrapping a female’s legs with silk prior to and during copulation. We hypothesized that elongated male legs and silk wrapping provide benefits to males, in part through a reduced likelihood of sexual cannibalism. To test this, we paired females of random size with males from one of two treatment groups—those capable of silk wrapping versus those incapable of silk wrapping. We found that males with relatively longer legs and larger body size were more likely to mate and were less likely to be cannibalized prior to copulation. Regardless of relative size, males capable of silk wrapping were less likely to be cannibalized during or following copulation and had more opportunities for sperm transfer (i.e. pedipalpal insertions). Our results suggest that male size and copulatory silk wrapping are sexually selected traits benefiting male reproductive success.”
..."
-------------------------------------------------------------
Be careful out there. Evolution is in play, apparently.
March 14, 2016
"If the above photo makes you cringe, you’re not alone. The fear of these beasts, called arachnophobia, is surprisingly common. Somewhere between 15 and 55 percent of people get anxious around spiders or even pictures of spiders. Even many who can stomach the sight of these eight-legged animals would be hesitant to perform the a brazen act of actually holding one—after all, everyone knows spider bites fester into giant, gaping sores which leave hideous scars.
At least, that’s what we grow up believing. In reality, though, there are some 40,000 species of spiders, only a dozen or so are actually dangerous to humans. And of those, only the venom of recluse spiders can cause the kind of tissue death (called necrosis) that we so often attribute to spider bites. Recent studies have shown that, instead, people assume the worst of innocent spiders when much more sinister species, such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are to blame for their wounds.
We would hope that doctors would be more discerning—that they would be able to properly identify spider bites when they (very rarely) occur. But a new paper suggests that our trusted physicians may not be better than the rest of us. A review of clinical literature found that a whopping 78% of “spider bite” cases may be misattributed.
In a paper published online ahead of print this past week in Toxicon, Marielle Stuber and Wolfgang Nentwig from the University of Bern in Switzerland examined 134 cases of “spider bites” published in medical journals from 1939 to 2014. They discovered that the overall quality of the information in these case reports is low, and rarely is a spider bite properly verified. Thus, the authors conclude, “their scientific value is negligible.”
..."
---------------------------------------------------------
Well, then. Look! Spider!
Arachnophobia in the Medical Literature: Are Published “Spider Bites” Reliable?
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/science-sushi/2016/02/28/spider-bite-blame-game/#.VucHRuIrIdU"If the above photo makes you cringe, you’re not alone. The fear of these beasts, called arachnophobia, is surprisingly common. Somewhere between 15 and 55 percent of people get anxious around spiders or even pictures of spiders. Even many who can stomach the sight of these eight-legged animals would be hesitant to perform the a brazen act of actually holding one—after all, everyone knows spider bites fester into giant, gaping sores which leave hideous scars.
At least, that’s what we grow up believing. In reality, though, there are some 40,000 species of spiders, only a dozen or so are actually dangerous to humans. And of those, only the venom of recluse spiders can cause the kind of tissue death (called necrosis) that we so often attribute to spider bites. Recent studies have shown that, instead, people assume the worst of innocent spiders when much more sinister species, such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are to blame for their wounds.
We would hope that doctors would be more discerning—that they would be able to properly identify spider bites when they (very rarely) occur. But a new paper suggests that our trusted physicians may not be better than the rest of us. A review of clinical literature found that a whopping 78% of “spider bite” cases may be misattributed.
In a paper published online ahead of print this past week in Toxicon, Marielle Stuber and Wolfgang Nentwig from the University of Bern in Switzerland examined 134 cases of “spider bites” published in medical journals from 1939 to 2014. They discovered that the overall quality of the information in these case reports is low, and rarely is a spider bite properly verified. Thus, the authors conclude, “their scientific value is negligible.”
..."
---------------------------------------------------------
Well, then. Look! Spider!
Profile Information
Member since: 2002Number of posts: 35,773
