[diana_eva]

http://thehardtimes....ed-turned-fine/

Don't miss the comments

[Zelandakh]

Hard Times is like The Onion?

[barmar]

Everyone who got Jenner's original smallpox vaccine is dead now. Coincidence?

[olegru]

Quote

ABOUT HARM OF CUCUMBERS
Cucumbers will ruin you! Each eaten cucumber approaches you to death. It is surprising, as thinking people till now have not distinguished lethality of this vegetative product and even resort to its name for comparison in positive sense («as small cucumber!»). And in spite of on anything, manufacture of tinned cucumbers grows. All main corporal illnesses are connected to cucumbers and all in general human misfortunes. Practically all people, suffering chronic diseases, ate cucumbers. Effect is cumulative obviously. 99,9 % of all people died of a cancer, at a life ate cucumbers. 100 % of all soldiers ate cucumbers. 99,7 % of all persons becoming victims of automobile and aviation accidents, ate cucumbers within two weeks previous to fatal accident. 93,1 % of all juvenile criminals occur from families where cucumbers consumed constantly.
There are data that harmful action of cucumbers affects very for a long time: among people born in 1839 and eating subsequently cucumbers, death rate is equal 100%. All persons of a birth of 1869-1879 have a flabby wrinkled skin, have lost almost all teeth, practically became blind (if the illnesses caused by consumption of cucumbers, have not sent them already to the grave). The result received by known collective of scientists — physicians is even more convincing: porpoises whom compulsorily fed on 20 pounds of cucumbers per day within a month, have lost any appetite!
Unique way to avoid harmful action of cucumbers — to change a diet. Eat, for example, soup from marsh orchids. From it as far as we know, still nobody died.

Source: «The Journal of Irreproducible Results»

[olegru]

Yesterday I got a call from my sister in law, who asked if I still have phone number of our old friend who works for Pfizer. What happened?
Sister in law saw some German movie about harm caused by vaccination and now she worry if she should vaccinate her two daughters or not. I said what I think about her worries.
Well, I am not a health specialist. And movie she saw was made in German. You know, German movies never lie. So she is looking for somebody who she trusts and who works in the field to ensure her vaccination is save for kids.

[diana_eva]

I linked this because I found the reasoning hilarious and sadly very close to what I see on my facebook feed from people who are normally rational humans (including my own mom who vaccinated all her 4 kids yet now shares idiocy - I'm really happy she didn't have FB when I was born).

I don't know about USA but in Romania the Ministry of Health declared epidemics of measles at the end of last year, and is struggling to bring moms into their senses. This is in Romanian but you can prob get an idea if you pass it through google translate:
http://www.ms.ro/201...iei-de-rujeola/

[kenberg]

Skepticism is both a natural and often a very useful trait. And yet it can sometimes work against you. I think it will be very difficult to universally sell the argument "The government and or the medical experts say it is safe so obviously only an idiot would not believe this".

I have mostly been lucky with my health, but here and there I have had problems. The following will perhaps illustrate what I am trying to get at.

Maybe seven years ago I was staying in a hotel in D.C and developed terrible pains, nausea, etc. I could barely walk. We got a taxi, I went to the hospital, it was a kidney stone. They gave me morphine to calm me. After diagnosis. there was a procedure that I will spare you the details of, but it involves going inside of me and blasting the stone. Afterward, I was given a prescription for oxycodeine and some other stuff. I have a long standing reluctance to take any medicine I do not absolutely need. I was assured this stuff was safe so I took it for a day, maybe for two days, and then I stopped.
A similar story applies to my wife when she had her knees replaced. They were willing to give her far more pain medicine than she was willing to take.

So now, here in the US, we have an opioid epidemic. Yes, some of this is from idiots who take it for fun. But, as I understand it, a fair number of cases arise because of incautious prescribing. There is little point in getting into a detailed discussion of just who is to blame, I lack the expertise. But I look back on my caution, and Becky's caution, on the use of these approved drugs as a good use of skepticism. And I could cite several other examples.

If I were raising a child right now I would have him vaccinated. Of course I would. All I am saying is that if the desire is to put a parent at ease about the use of vaccines, it would be best not to treat him as a moron for being skeptical. Doctors make mistakes, medical experts make mistakes, the government certainly makes mistakes. I believe vaccines are safe. I take my flu vaccine, my pneumonia vaccine, and a couple of others that right now I forget. But I don't think it is crazy to ask questions. It may well be crazy not to listen carefully to the answers.

[barmar]

My father was a very intelligent and rational man. But before he went into (and eventually rose to the top position in) the family business, he was a chiropractor, and he had a huge mistrust of the conventional medical industry. He thought vaccinations were a scam, and wasn't a big believer in regular medines, either. When we got colds, he gave us adjustments.

At the end of his life, he died from multiple myeloma. It took the doctors quite a while to diagnose him, I wonder if he felt that this confirmed his assessment. On the other hand, the alternative treatments he pursued didn't help, either.

[Winstonm]

 kenberg, on 2017-January-16, 17:22, said:

Skepticism is both a natural and often a very useful trait....

....All I am saying is that if the desire is to put a parent at ease about the use of vaccines, it would be best not to treat him as a moron for being skeptical. Doctors make mistakes, medical experts make mistakes, the government certainly makes mistakes. I believe vaccines are safe. I take my flu vaccine, my pneumonia vaccine, and a couple of others that right now I forget. But I don't think it is crazy to ask questions. It may well be crazy not to listen carefully to the answers.

There is a distinct difference between skepticism about unproven claims and fearful mistrust of scientifically demonstrated facts - and to suggest that government errors are in any sense similar to the outcomes of the rigid scientific testing needed to develop a vaccine is grossly unfair to medical science.

I'm not convinced that it is best to avoid calling out a moronic claim or belief, as shame is a great promoter of change, but even if not moronic one has to be nearly debilitated by conspiracy-theory paranoia to fear vaccines.

That said, I understand you are speaking of interpersonal relationships rather than supporting doubt of facts.

[barmar]

 Winstonm, on 2017-January-17, 13:24, said:

There is a distinct difference between skepticism about unproven claims and fearful mistrust of scientifically demonstrated facts - and to suggest that government errors are in any sense similar to the outcomes of the rigid scientific testing needed to develop a vaccine is grossly unfair to medical science.

The problem is that people have long memories about debacles like thalidomide and the Dalkon Shield IUD.

But they forget that these were both pulled from the market shortly after the adverse effects came to light and were confirmed (thalidomide was on the market for 3 years). Also, medical testing procedures and regulations have become far more rigorous and extensive since then (thalidomide was almost 60 years ago, and medical devices didn't require FDA testing before the Dalkon Shield incident). Vaccines have stood the test of time, and the one study that showed the link with autism was totally debunked.

[Winstonm]

 barmar, on 2017-January-18, 09:43, said:

The problem is that people have long memories about debacles like thalidomide and the Dalkon Shield IUD.

But they forget that these were both pulled from the market shortly after the adverse effects came to light and were confirmed (thalidomide was on the market for 3 years). Also, medical testing procedures and regulations have become far more rigorous and extensive since then (thalidomide was almost 60 years ago, and medical devices didn't require FDA testing before the Dalkon Shield incident). Vaccines have stood the test of time, and the one study that showed the link with autism was totally debunked.

I think a lot of the trouble comes from people who would rather get their information from sources like Buzzfeed and Breitbart than to have to actually think, read, and use reasoning skills.

[barmar]

 Winstonm, on 2017-January-18, 15:44, said:

I think a lot of the trouble comes from people who would rather get their information from sources like Buzzfeed and Breitbart than to have to actually think, read, and use reasoning skills.

I have a little bit of sympathy for them. Modern life is complicated, it's really hard to know where to look. People can't be expected to research everything on their own. And even if they do, how is someone supposed to know which resources to trust? It's a Catch-22: If you're already knowledgeable about the field, you don't need to do this. If you're not, all sites seem equally credible. If you wait until you learn enough to make a knowledgeable decision, you'll never decide anything.

[diana_eva]

 Winstonm, on 2017-January-18, 15:44, said:

I think a lot of the trouble comes from people who would rather get their information from sources like Buzzfeed and Breitbart than to have to actually think, read, and use reasoning skills.

The article my mom shared was something along the lines of: "a very educated person is informed that his newborn baby will receive a mandatory vaccine in hospital. Said educated person asks about risks and side effects. Doctors reassure this very educated person that there's very little risk, the vaccine is part of the mandatory programme of the Ministry of Health and everyone does it. Educated person is not pleased with this answer and asks to see the prospect for the vaccine that will be administered to his newborn daughter. Doctor produces the prospect. Educated person goes to google and finds that all the ingredients are highly dangerous and not sufficiently tested, leaving the reader to draw their own conclusion about what these corrupt doctors are pumping into our newborn children"

[kenberg]

I think this "Who do you trust?" is a big deal. I rarely read medical literature and even if I do I am not so sure I have it right. I had reason to look at an old medical report of mine from 2012 in my "patient portal", and it begins with a warning to not jump to any conclusions without consultation with a medical professional. Good advice.

We, the non-experts, must decide when we can or cannot trust an expert. Barry mentions that his father was a chiropractor. I was seeing a chiropractor at one time and he was helpful. I had some limits on what I would be comfortable with, but we got along fine. During that time, I hurt my neck, I can't recall how, but for this i did not go to the chiropractor I went to a neck specialist, whatever her title actually was. She was accepting, sort of, when I told her about the chiropractor but she said "Don't let him adjust you. They really believe in that. I really don't". I continued seeing him, adjustments and all. I am sure you can find experts who agree with her, and experts who agree with him.

So I chose. And that may be the heart of the problem with vaccines. The idea is for parents not to be able to choose. I agree that it should be required, or at least I provisionally agree. I have not made a thorough study of the evidence. But if the evidence holds up as strongly as the advocates say that it does, then I think it should be required. For parents with religious objections to any form of medical intervention, it gets even trickier, but public health matters have to be addressed. I think that every effort should be made to treat the skeptics with respect and to help them understand, if they are at all willing to listen, why the community at large feels entitled and even required to overrule their parental authority. Sometimes it simply is necessary to ram something down someone's throat (or into their arm) but this should be done infrequently and reluctantly. In the case of vaccines I think it should be done, but we should not be surprised that not everyone likes it.

[mycroft]

My mother is a (retired, but becoming less retired by the month) librarian, with her career in the public school system. And yes, the public's basic idea of what a HS librarian does bears as much relation to reality as their idea of sysadminning, or bridge directing, for that matter.

The two things that were her priority in education: "How do I find the information I seek?" and "How do I evaluate the information I get?" (with a side note, because of course, academic, of "How, when, and why do I properly cite my sources?") Starting with card catalogues and (1960s) newspapers ("New York Times" or "Weekly World News"? "Washington Post" or "Washington Times"?) up to (for her advanced students) determining the provenance of a scientific journal (is it top-grade, not-top-grade, or the kind of publication that only peer-reviews the colour of your money?) to in later years "How to googlesearch" and "what's the worth of a Breitbart citation?"

Because that isn't "the three Rs" (although it's key to at least two of them, all three if you broaden to "science" or "technology"), and a library is just "a bunch of hoary old books nobody reads now that they have the Internet", the death of the school librarian pushes apace. I am not surprised to see that the number of people unable to sanely answer those two priority questions is rising.

I have my own opinions of whether that's a bug or a feature to our current overlords.

[kenberg]

 mycroft, on 2017-January-18, 16:24, said:

My mother is a (retired, but becoming less retired by the month) librarian, with her career in the public school system. And yes, the public's basic idea of what a HS librarian does bears as much relation to reality as their idea of sysadminning, or bridge directing, for that matter.

The two things that were her priority in education: "How do I find the information I seek?" and "How do I evaluate the information I get?" (with a side note, because of course, academic, of "How, when, and why do I properly cite my sources?") Starting with card catalogues and (1960s) newspapers ("New York Times" or "Weekly World News"? "Washington Post" or "Washington Times"?) up to (for her advanced students) determining the provenance of a scientific journal (is it top-grade, not-top-grade, or the kind of publication that only peer-reviews the colour of your money?) to in later years "How to googlesearch" and "what's the worth of a Breitbart citation?"

Because that isn't "the three Rs" (although it's key to at least two of them, all three if you broaden to "science" or "technology"), and a library is just "a bunch of hoary old books nobody reads now that they have the Internet", the death of the school librarian pushes apace. I am not surprised to see that the number of people unable to sanely answer those two priority questions is rising.

I have my own opinions of whether that's a bug or a feature to our current overlords.

When I was a senior i high school we had to do "research" papers on various topics. For my psychology class i did my paper on parapsychology and the work of J. B. Rhine at Duke. My teacher wanted me to writ on Freud, but I was 17 and, as Hank Williams sang, "I don't take no one's advice". Among other things I talked to a college prof who gave me some thoughts about reproducible of results. Now that I think of it, that might have applied to Freud as well.

Anyway, it's trickier than it sounds to accept expert opinion. In the modern lingo, we might ask 'Is that a BBO expert you are recommending that we trust?".

[mycroft]

More correctly, what we should ask is "how do I tell if that is a BBO expert that is recommending X?"

And, depending on what you mean by "BBO expert" (could be "the best player they've heard of, given that they play at the Fort McMurray Bridge Club", could be "prolific wanker of opinions on BBF, who clearly Just Can't Play", could be "if you don't call yourself an expert, you will only get Life Novices as partners, so I do (even though I'm a Life Novice)", could be "yeah, so you may not recognize him from his handle, but he's only not a GrandLM because he spends more time doing his real job than racking up 10K points, but it'll happen eventually/shortly"), that may mean "listen to them" or "close your ears before you, too, get polluted". And that's the issue. How do you tell? The skills required must be learned, and more and more frequently, they're not being taught. (*)

I've been searching the internet since before Google was Google (frankly, since before Netscape was Netscape. Ever heard of Netscape?) My mother is *not* a computer person (although she's had to use them since card catalogues (and book buying catalogues) went digital, and has been very happy about the improvement, most of the time). But, in a random field of information (one in neither her nor my spheres of knowledge), her googlefu is better than mine. Why? Because that *is* her sphere of knowledge, even if the tools have changed 4 times since she started.

(*) Yes, I am referring to myself with one of those. Speculations on which one should be detailed on a 8x5 index card and sent to "Anybody but me."

[diana_eva]

This bbo expert parallel completely ignores the studies required to become a doctor. There are corrupt doctors, bad doctors, careless doctors. But surely there are good doctors too, I can't imagine all the doctors chose to waste half of their youth studying and practicing for a profession they aren't going to respect.

[kenberg]

 diana_eva, on 2017-January-18, 18:20, said:

This bbo expert parallel completely ignores the studies required to become a doctor. There are corrupt doctors, bad doctors, careless doctors. But surely there are good doctors too, I can't imagine all the doctors chose to waste half of their youth studying and practicing for a profession they aren't going to respect.

Agreed, a bad analogy. It was a thought of the moment.

[barmar]

I heard on the radio a few weeks ago that some high schools and colleges have started giving classes on distinguishing real from "fake" news.

But now I'm wondering if that was real news.