samohTmaS

@samohTmaS@mastodon.social

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. For a complete list of posts, browse on the original instance.

halcionandon , to longcovid group
@halcionandon@disabled.social avatar

https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/from-long-covid-odds-to-lost-iq-points-ongoing-threats-you-dont-know-about


@longcovid

samohTmaS ,

@halcionandon @longcovid

Lynn Parramore's commends are spot on. Excellent !!

The referenced National Academy paper, as with most of their papers is hamstrung by the narrow charge they were given. ALL Academy papers suffer severely from this.

They were narrowly charged with long COVID. That is needed, but way overly narrow. They are disallowed from exceeding their charge even a little.

Further, it is very much based on economics and production, not on people's health!

wdlindsy , to random
@wdlindsy@toad.social avatar

"IN THE FIRST WEEK OF HIS CRIMINAL TRIAL, Donald Trump raised about $5.6 million online by warning his small dollar-donors that the 'Deep State' was out to lock him up."

Trump sent out an email when jury selection began, saying Biden's attacking him, and his disciples responded by sending $1.6 million in response to the email. He took in another $1 million the rest of the week, mostly from small donors.

~ Marc Caputo

#Trump #crime #trial #grift
/1

https://www.thebulwark.com/p/trump-making-bank-off-his-criminal-trial

samohTmaS ,

@wdlindsy Er, no. The Saddam Hussein of America more like.

Alexlee , to AcademicChatter group
@Alexlee@sciences.social avatar

In an era of post-truth, the strategy of rigidly defending your version of truth and attacking other people's view of the truth is a largely self-destructive excercise that just creates a never ending argument

Understanding the logics and rationales of those people we disagree with is a far better way but requires humility and nuance

Naomi Klein in Doppelganger and Büscher in The Truth About Nature show us how this can be done with #Covid, #Palestine and #ClimateChange

@academicchatter

samohTmaS ,

@Alexlee @academicchatter

Using logic to overcome ignorance.

As much as it might seem like this is an answer, it largely isn't. When people place their 'tribes' views of truth over actual truth, no amount of reason can penetrate.

Other solutions are required. One such is to break the problem into the smallest undeniable truths possible, and to keep repeating them over and over again to as many nany ears as possible, Eventually they break down the barriers. It takes about a decade.

samohTmaS ,

@GhostOnTheHalfShell @Alexlee @academicchatter
As true and satisfying as it is and may feel, attacking the falsehoods, willful as they are, only hardens the beliefs and feelings of the pretend conservatives.

Logic and reason cannot penetrate.

In large part this is the hardened shell of tribalism, only made tougher by attack.

One key here is to recognize that this is all about emotion. You cannot emote reason, or think feelings. Each mode operates under its own methods and rules.

samohTmaS ,

@GhostOnTheHalfShell @Alexlee @academicchatter

I believe I did "get" what you said. I have tried that approach unsuccessfully for decades. I philosophically agree with it. Perhaps I am a somewhat slow learner in that regard.

Or perhaps, I just don't understand it well enough.

More likely I suspect that may own moral core won't allow me to use those tools to fight back.

Do you suggestions for methods that have worked for you, and which adhere to moral behavior and honest exchange?

samohTmaS ,

@thelovebing @Alexlee @GhostOnTheHalfShell @academicchatter
That is a major part of it.

Another is to recognize that humans tend to be inherently tribal. We tend to identify with a group, bond with them, and then defend strongly against others.

Another too us that much of humanity at its core behaves and responds from emotion. Emotions must be emoted. They can't be thought.

Similarly thinking must be reasoned, it can't be emoted.

Trying to emote reason doesn't work. Even within ourselves.

samohTmaS ,

@GhostOnTheHalfShell @thelovebing @Alexlee @academicchatter Thank you.

samohTmaS ,

@GhostOnTheHalfShell @thelovebing @Alexlee @academicchatter

I am not suggesting an either/or proposition, nor that "our" side, whatever that is - is right and valiant ... That is tribalism.

What I am suggesting is that even within our own minds that we cannot successful use logic to persuade emotion, or emotion to persuade logic.

To the degree we are dominated by one mode, we are inhibited from successfully communicating in the other.

And trying to do that is largely futile anywy.

samohTmaS ,

@GhostOnTheHalfShell @Alexlee @academicchatter
BTW My reactions about tribalism and emotional reasoning come not from thr current political issues but rather from decades of arguing over technical and science issues,

These same tribal us vs them issues arise. What seemingly should be straight forward discussions in logic based on data, devolve into pitched battles of emotion based on beliefs, with encampments, attacks, responses, and worse.

It seems to be much the same in every field.

samohTmaS ,

@GhostOnTheHalfShell @Alexlee @academicchatter

lol. true. And reputations and cherished beliefs seem always to be involved, while often nit be apparent at all.

samohTmaS ,

@Alexlee @GhostOnTheHalfShell @academicchatter
Except that reality is the truth.

This clash (post truth world) relies on truth being relative.

While what we value individually and hence what we judge right or good or wrong or bad can vary. And our perceptions and situations vary.

That doesn't change the reality, rather only our interpretation or valuation of it.

We aren't in a post truth world. We are in an Alice in Wonderland world where truth is regarded as flexible and fungible.

samohTmaS ,

@thelovebing @GhostOnTheHalfShell @Alexlee @academicchatter
Relating to people directly to understand their reasonings, motivations, fears, desires, intents, ... is crucial to true communication.

Trying then to meld that with reality and truth is often a challenge.

Understanding and assuaging the fears is a powerful first step.

samohTmaS ,

@GhostOnTheHalfShell @Alexlee @academicchatter

Yes ... from each persons perspectives and based upon their history.

For an example of the difficulties, try engaging a radiation health physicist on hormesis.

Hormesis isn't inherently a wrong idea. However, for radiation it is easily demonstrated to not exist.

However for strongly pro-nuclear advocates hormesis is a foundational belief.

If all levels of exposure are understood to cause harm, then the whole industry is put at risk.

samohTmaS ,

@GhostOnTheHalfShell @Alexlee @academicchatter
True.

Though if integrity, full honesty, and moral values prohibit use of coercive or deceptive techniques, the majority of the tools they employ are off limits.

Using the thousand methods of NLP, winning such arguments is often trivial.It is also wrong. And it doesn't accomplish permanent change.

Worse, it is often abusive and dishonest.

samohTmaS ,

@TEG @Alexlee @GhostOnTheHalfShell @academicchatter

Even here there are difficulties. There are mental traps to avoid.

E.g. the misinterpretation that "defines: science (wrongly) as being the "scientific method". That is not definitional of science. It is but one tool, a very flawed tool, used in science to elucidate truth.

There are myriad others - embedded ideas that were and remain wrong, but which form key parts f the foundations of science.

Some are straight forward errors.

samohTmaS ,

@GhostOnTheHalfShell @Alexlee @academicchatter

No, you can't escape exposure. And hence there is a background.

The error comes in defining the background as absolutely rather than relatively "safe:, and then arguing that added exposure below that level then must be safe... which increases the "background" - recursively - until the whole house of cards collapses.

samohTmaS ,

@GhostOnTheHalfShell @Alexlee @academicchatter

Only potentially in intent. If pathos is used with the intent to deceive, which is the usual case, there is no difference.

Pathos is used as a tool, not an end or purpose.

samohTmaS ,

@GhostOnTheHalfShell @Alexlee @academicchatter

Asbestosis is a horrible disease. Entirely unnecessary. Similar to silicosis and others with similar mechanisms.

The same ideas of background and acceptable exposure often are or were applied and abused with asbestos exposure.

Ditto, lead, mercury and myriad others until we are swimming in a soup of microplastics and bathed in forever chemical toxins, breathing ozone and photochemical smog.

Nonilex , to random
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

officially requested Judge in his trial recuse himself, AGAIN.

Trump attys argued the judge’s daughter works for a marketing firm that benefits from politically targeting Trump because it works for some Democrats—making the exact same argument that failed before.


https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/5de1e0d7-8488-4b16-ac1c-207ae9668720/downloads/2024.04.03%20-%20DJT%20Recusal%20Motion%20-%20Brief.pdf?ver=1712345705474

samohTmaS ,

@Nonilex

Lock Trump up.

appassionato , to bookstodon group
@appassionato@mastodon.social avatar

Pandora's Gamble: Lab Leaks, Pandemics, and a World at Risk by Alison Young

This fearless, deeply reported book about laboratory accidents asks the haunting question some elite scientists don’t want the public to entertain: Did the COVID-19 pandemic start with a lab leak in Wuhan, China?

@bookstodon
#books
#nonfiction
#InfectiousDiseases
#pandemics
#leaks
#accidents
#COVID19

This is an obvious question. Yet there’s been an extraordinary effort by government officials in China, as well as leading scientific experts in the United States and around the world, to shut down any investigation or discussion of the lab leak theory. In private, however, some of the world’s elite scientists have seen a lab accident as a very real and horrifying possibility. They know what the public doesn’t. Lab accidents happen with shocking frequency. Even at the world’s best-run labs. That’s among the revelations from Alison Young, the award-winning investigative reporter who has spent nearly 15 years uncovering shocking safety breaches at prestigious U.S. laboratories for USA Today and other respected news outlets. In Pandora’s Gamble, Young goes deep into the troubling history -- and enormous risks -- of leaks and accidents at scientific labs. She takes readers on a riveting journey around the world to some of the worst lab mishaps in history, including the largely unknown stories of the lab workers at the U.S. Army’s Camp Detrick who suffered devastating infections at alarming rates during World War II. And her groundbreaking reporting exposes for the first time disturbing new details about recent accidents at prestigious laboratories – and the alarming gaps in government oversight that put all of us at risk.
ALT
  • Reply
  • Expand (10)
  • Collapse (10)
    • samohTmaS ,

    @appassionato @bookstodon

    Short answer: No. It didn't.

    Longer anseer. These labs do dangerous work. They do need to more rigorously apply precautionary principles. They need a lot of scrutiny, testing, oversight, monitoring, AND isolation.

    Cost conscious leaders often scrimp when they absolutely shouldn't.

    But No, dud NOT come from a lab leak.

    samohTmaS ,

    @militant_dilettante @nosat @appassionato @bookstodon

    And the earth is flat sitting atop a stack of giant turtles.Its turtles all the way down.

    I assure you, nuclear weapons are very real, very terrible, and unfortunately very plentiful.

    I have personally seen them. I knew Harold Agnew. I have friends who lost family at both Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    I worked hard to eliminate then, and to prevent new designs from ever coming into being.

    These fearsome terrible devices are quite real.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines
    •