Bad ‘medical science’…

February 12, 2009 — xanthippa

I hate bad science.

I REALLY hate bad science.

‘Modern medicine’ is riddled with bad science.  As a matter of fact, I think that the term ‘medical science’ is a oxymoron.

Yes, I think the whole ‘medical industry’ is riddled with deep problems.  And, I promise to rant on this later…at great length!  (It is one of my ‘buttons’ – once you ‘push’ it, it is difficult to get me to shut up again…)

Yet, here, I would like to concentrate not on the ‘systemic faults’, but on ‘downright fraud’ in medical science!

Autism is a problem.

Yes, I know that many high-functioning Auties – as well as Aspies – do not consider themselves to be ‘disabled’, or their so-called ‘condition’ to be ‘a problem’.  To the contrary – many think it is an integral part of what makes us ‘us’, and would not wish it changed.  Even regarding it as a problem is offensive to some of us….and some even consider Aspies to be the next step on the evolutionary ladder of humanity.

However, comparing Aspies – and high-functioning Auties – to people who are seriously affected by Autism is like comparing a person who has a little-bit looser ligaments/tendons, and therefore excell in gymnastics and similar things, to a person whose ligaments/tendons are so loose, they cannot stand up, hold a pen or a spoon….  Obviously, a little bit may be an advantage:  a lot may be crippling!

And, perhaps because I am an Aspie – as is all of my immediate family and most of my extended family – I am very interested in any medical study about Autism and/or Aspergers.  (For the uninitiated:  both Aspergers and Autism seem to have a ‘similar cause’… a large number of ‘undifferentiated’ (not ‘properly specialized) cells in the brain.  However, where Auties have most of these ‘undifferentiated’ cells in their frontal lobes, Aspies have them in the amygdala.  This localization difference accounts for the difference in manifestation/’symptoms/characteristics’ – though, in many instances, there is some overlap which makes exact ‘differentiated’ diagnosis difficult.)

OK, re-focusing…

Parents of ‘significantly affected’ kids are often very desperate to help their kids be ‘more normal’.  Of course, this is more pronounced in the more severe cases, which are ‘obvious’ earlier on in life (many ‘high-functioning’ Auties and Aspies can ‘hide’ their symptoms for many years – or they may simply live in an area where the ‘mild’ symptoms are interpreted as ‘being mean’ or ‘antisocial’ and ‘merely’ scar the person for life, without recognizing what is happening).  What I am trying to say is that the more ‘outwardly obvious’ the symptoms are, the more eager loving parents are to find answers.

Many parents are so desperate to help their kids, they will grasp at straws.

There has, for a long time, persisted a perceived ‘connection’ between the MMR vaccine and Autism.  As a parent of a child who had suffered significant motor-nerve damage within days of receiving the MMR vaccine – and being told by his physician that the ‘damage is typical of what he has seen with this vaccine, but he cannot report it because he had been warned that if he reports yet another adverse vaccine reaction, he will be stripped of his ‘Canadian Medical Association’ membership, and thus no longer allowed to practice medicine….and that though this damage is ‘well known’ among doctors, I will never find one brave/reckless enough to testify about this reality in court…’, I have been very keen on ‘any news’ about vaccination in general and the MMR vaccine in particular…

Which is why the following story is so disturbing…

…

The reporter also discovered that Dr. Wakefield’s interest in a MMR vaccine-autism connection began when he was retained as an expert witness two years earlier by a lawyer representing the parent of an autistic child. The parents were planning to sue the MMR vaccine makers because they believed the vaccine caused their child’s illness.  According to Mr. Deer, Dr. Wakefield then launched the Jabs program, the name for clinic that led to the study.  The program was advertised by the lawyer’s firm, and the clinic was not a routine screening, accuses Mr. Deer.

…

England’s General Medical Council has brought charges of medical misconduct against Wakefield and two other co-authors, Dr. John Walker-Smith and Dr. Simon Murch (the authors who continued to support the paper).  The charges revolve around the ethics of the researchers testing on children, not the new accusations.  The paper, though, has forwarded its results to the board and expects new charges to be forthcoming. {Note:  the new accusations are of having falsified the data…}

So, which is it?

Is this a case of a doctor who truly is telling the truth, but whose team has been ‘bought’ by the people who fund most medical research?  And the ones who would not budge are being subjected to a ‘witch hunt’?

Or, is this a case of a crooked doctor, who had ‘fixed’ the tests to show that the MMR vaccine was ‘at fault’, so he could get money for his testimony?  Have we (parents) wasted time and effort here, when we should have been trying to find other ways to help our kids?

What about ‘my doctor’ (who has since entered dentistry school, because ‘he could not stand the politics subverting medicine today)? Were his claims true?

He also said Ontario MD’s got a substantial monetary ‘bonus’ if they could prove they convinced more than 98% (or was it 95% – it has been a while…high nineghties, anyway) of the parents of their child-patients to allow their children to be vaccinated with the full spectrum of ‘childhood vaccines’?  He said this money did not come from the government, but the vaccine manufacturers.  Was he lying to me? If so, why?  I was not paying him to…  If not, what is the significance of this kickback?

What is a parent left to think?

Perhaps it is not surprising that so many people today mistrust ‘scientists’!  Actually, I would call them all ‘pseudo-scientists’ – but they give a really, really bad name to us all!!!

And, perhaps this explains why I consider the term ‘medical science’ to be an oxymoron….  Medicine may use some scientific tools – but ‘modern medicine’ itself does not, under any definition of the term, qualify as ‘scientific’.  Just like because you ‘live in a house’ does not mean you are ‘an architect’, so ‘using scientific instruments/tests’ does not make medicine ‘science’.

And, something pretending to be science when it is not only undermines the credibility of ‘real, proper science’!!!

Did I mention I hate bad science?!?!?

Posted in Aspergers, education, politics, science, society. Tags: , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

Aspergers and learning: understand, not memorize

January 21, 2009 — xanthippa

We, Aspies, each have our own, individual way of learning.  However, in my online searches of how the Aspie brain differs from others, I have come across a few things that might be helpful when designing a learning strategy for an Aspie.

These things create an environment that helps Aspies learn:

  • CLEAR GOAL – having a plan worked out (especially with the Aspie’s help) with very clear, specific goals to be achieved in each learning session and in the overall plan clearly posted or otherwise available for the Aspie to see.
  • CLEAR EXPECTATIONS – before a learning session is started, the Aspie knows what will be the task, what goal will be achieved and how it will be achieved.  This is very important to Aspies – no surprises, changes in routine, and so on – even if other people cannot understand why.
  • CLEAR PROGRESS –  clearly indicating progress within each session, as well as the progress each session makes towards the overall goal is very, very comforting and motivating for us, Aspies.
  • CONSISTENT ENVIRONMENT – it may be corny, but having a ‘special place’ with ‘special tools’ used only for learning – even if it is just a simple tray with the ‘special tools’ that gets brought out for the study session and put onto the dining room table or coffee table, etc. – can be comforting and help an Aspie get into the ‘right frame of mind’ for learning.  It is the ‘little ritual’ of ‘getting down to studying’ which helps the Aspie mind ‘settle’.
  • ENGAGEMENT -whatever motivator is used, the Aspie must want to succeed – or the whole exercise is pointless.

Yet, no learning environment will be effective if the method of learning is one that the Aspie cannot master.

Many of the studies I have read have found that Aspies have very poor memory – as in, rote memory.  We are much, much worse at it than our peers of comparable intelligence.  We are even worse at remembering things ‘in order’.  (As in, if a person is shown a list of words, objects or numbers and is then requested to repeat or identify them in the same order as originally presented – Aspies rate so low, it is unbelievable.)

(Aside:  this does not mean that an Aspie cannot benefit from improving their rote memory – to the contrary!  But, that will have to be a separate post of its own…  What it does mean is that forcing an Aspie to rely on memory for learning is setting him/her up for failure, with all the emotional baggage this carries.)

Therefore, any system of learning which will rely on memorizing or sequencing or any such thing is setting an Aspie up for failure.  Be it multiplication tables or spelling/reading/writing or vocabulary or history dates – using this approach will only lead the Aspie to conclude that they are stupid and that there is no point in trying….and the Aspie will work hard to avoid these tasks, or simply refuse to perform them altogether.  This is because the internal pain of having it reinforced that ‘they are incompetent’, ‘not performing up to expectations’ and so on is so great, no amount of punishment would be worse for the Aspie.  The Aspie will either appear unwilling or unable…

This can be frustrating!  For everyone involved. 

However, there is a light at the end of the tunnel!

These same studies show that Aspies are much better than their peers at remembering things they ‘figure out on their own’.  This is very, very important – and supports the whole ‘Aspies like rules’ thing!

This is just my little hypothesis, no more than that.  Yet, I think the facts fit…  One major ‘coping mechanism’ Aspies develop to compensate for poor ‘reteniton’ using ‘memory’ is to use ‘understanding’ instead. 

And what a coping mechanism!  By understanding, instead of remembering, Aspies do not learn about a subject, they learn the subject!

Aspies like rules because when we analyze something, breaking it down into small components ‘according to rules’ helps us ‘figure it out’.  That is when ‘understanding’ (or ‘comprehension’) happens.  It has certainly been my personal experience:  I went to study Physics, because it was the only subject where I did not have to remember anything!  I could (and usually did) derive each and every equation I needed from first principles – which I understood, and therefore did not have to remember.

Many Aspies (especially male Aspies) are attracted to the science and technology fields, because this is one area of learning where ‘understanding’ is much more important to success than ‘memorizing’.  Here, the ‘coping mechanism’ gives Aspies an edge over others!

Everyone is familiar with the description of the ‘young Aspie’ as ‘a little professor’, where large amounts of information are absorbed and retained.  How can this be achieved without a good memory?  

As the Aspie learns new information, it is ‘figured out’ – what each bit means, how it fits into this ‘field’ or ‘subject-matter’.  It is not so much ‘memorized’ as it is ‘absorbed into the framework of understanding’ of that subject matter.  So, it is not ‘memory’ but ‘understanding’ that the Aspie uses to learn so much about so little!

Test it for yourself.  If an Aspie were to be simply ‘memorizing’ new information about a favorite subject, they will only be able to answer the questions that are directly answered by quotes from the new information.  Yet, I am willing to bet that if you do try this little experiment, the Aspie will have – after a single read – integrated all that is contained in the new information into everything else they know about the subject. Their young mind will have cross-referenced, catalogued and analyzed all the new information as it is being read.  The answers they’ll give will be at a much deeper level of understanding than simple memorization would permit.  (Aside:  this also explains why Aspies often have a difficulty citing their source for specific facts – all the information is ‘fused’ into the common ‘understanding’ as it is absorbed and not really ‘stored’ separately.)

This suggests that ‘figuring out’/’understanding’/’comprehension’ are essential to a successful learning strategy of an Aspie.

add to del.icio.usDigg itStumble It!Add to Blinkslistadd to furladd to ma.gnoliaadd to simpyseed the vineTailRank

Posted in Aspergers, education, science, society. Tags: , , , , . 8 Comments »

Are we delving into dark matter?

November 4, 2008 — xanthippa

Here is an exciting bit of news from the Fermilab’s old (and therefore not as sexy as the new Large Hadron Collider) Tevatron particle accelerator.  Apparently, some rather unusual muons have been detected – ones that were not exactly expected.  (Please, refrain from ‘leptoning’ to any ‘mesonic conspiracy theories’!)

However, (and this is the exciting bit) these muons conform rather well to some theoretical predictions about dark matter… (dramatic music, please).

Of course, the experiment has to be repeated and the same data has to be gathered for this to be conclusive, so it is too soon to tell what it is that has popped up.  However, whether it turns out to be the elusive dark matter (dramatic music, please), or if it turns out to be some sort of an error, I am guessing that science will have learned something new, either way!

Posted in philosophy, science. Tags: , . Leave a Comment »

Fireball – will we see it tonight?

October 6, 2008 — xanthippa

Just a quick note:  a rather biggish (I love technical terms) bit of rock is expected to enter the Earth’s atmosphere tonight (October 6th, 2008).  It is big enough to have many astronomers anticipate a ‘fun fireball’, but not so big that it would not be expected to burn up before it can hit anything.

All right, I don’t know if it will even be visible from our part of the world, but…

If you are out about 10-ish (Eastern Daylight), keep your eyes open.  You never know – you might see a really big shooting star!

And if you know more (or if you get to see it) – please, share.

UPDATE: Hat-tip to Dvorak Uncensored :0)


Fireball during the Leonid meteor shower

Read the story here.

Posted in science. Tags: . Leave a Comment »

Particularly fun day at CERN

September 10, 2008 — xanthippa
turn-on

xkcd: 'turn-on'

Today, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in CERN was turned on!

How exciting!

Despite the dire predictions of ‘generating black holes which will end our Universe’ – predictions which were accompanied by death threats, something most physicists are not used to and unexplicably find mildly funny – things would appear to have gone relatively well!  I guess science’s search for interactions between  Truth and Beauty continues!  (Well, at least scientists expect to see SUperSYmmetry (SUSY) ).

From today’s xkcd (above) and the ‘Scott Adams Blog’ which gives advice to all the bosons our there on ‘Nerdy pick-up lines’, it seems that events like these would appear to open up the horizons to an increase in puns among certain demographics….

Currieous!

P.S. – special mention to the person who can find all the puns in this post….there may be a few.

Posted in Humour, language, science, society, technology. Tags: , , . 9 Comments »

If a tree falls in the forest….

August 27, 2008 — xanthippa

Having spent time in such serene surroundings like this:

Canada has magnificent trees. This one looks like it's in the thralls of a wild, primal dance!

Canada has magnificent trees.

…is it not surprising that my mind had taken a break from the ‘everyday’ and slipped into a bit of philosophising?

If a tree falls in the forest, and no-one is there to hear it, would it make a sound?

In the past, when discussing this with my kids and husband, we have invariably fallen into the pitfalls like, for example, trying to define what does ‘sound’ mean:  is it simply the movement of air molecules in a particular way, or does it have to be ‘perceived’ by human ears?  (If it is recorded, then the sound we hear is made by the recorder, not the tree…and endless possibilities along these chains of thoughts.)

This year, I began so see it from a different perspective…

Richard Feynman is perhaps my favourite genius of the 20th century – and I am convinced he is an ‘Aspie’ to boot! ( Just reading his most awesome book, ‘Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman!’, is an excellent lesson in how an ‘Aspie’ mind organizes thoughts and commits them onto paper – plus it is fun and curiously comforting to read).  In his Lectures (available as podcasts, and ideal for relaxing with while ‘away from it all’), specifically, in the ‘Quantum Mechanics’ lecture, he also visits this question about the proverbial tree falling in the forest… 

Dr. Feynman gives some very specific qualifications regarding this issue:  he would not be a physicist had he not done that.  He states that in the real world, even if there is no observer when the tree falls, there are still unmistakable physical signgs that it had, indeed, made a sound.  These signs, perhaps as minute as little scratches from vibrating leaves/needles as the sound energy is transferred to them, could then be observed after the event itself and the presence of such sound would be conclusively demonstrated.  Thus, he concludes that ‘in a real world, of course, a tree falling in a forest makes a sound‘.

He is, of course, absolutely correct – given the qualifications he does.  

Yet, listening to him made me think that perhaps his ‘after the fact observer’ – as our familial discussions from the past – were really missing the whole point of the question!

Whether during the act of the tree falling, or afterwards; directly or through recording devices of some sort (even leaves and needles) – this introduces an observer.   And the fact remains that if an observer is present, and the original condition (or, rather, its intent) is breeched.

Yes, I’ll gladly concede that in the real world, it might be impossible to have a ‘no observer’ scenario – but that is not the point.  The question asks us about a hypothetical situation, where no observation (during or after the event) occurred (even had it been possible). 

Let us imagine an observer who makes a direct observation that 999 trees, as they fell, indeed did make a sound.  Then the observer leaves, and our proverbial tree falls.  No observation as to the sound of any kind had been made during the event.  The scene has since been altered so much that no additional evidence can be gathered.  How can we answer the question now?  Did our proverbial tree make a sound, or not?

And this, in my never-humble-opinion, is the crux, the core, of this principle:  one can only say that one does not know.

It would be reasonable to predict that it is highly likely that the tree had made a sound, based on previous observations.  But one would not know !

This is the difference between direct observation and a guess.  Perhaps it might be an ‘educated guess’ (based on the previous 999 observations) , but it is still only a guess.  And that is the whole point:  to get us to stop and think, to learn to recognize that difference between what we know and what we are making educated guesses about (or a semi-educated guess about).

One of my sons thought this simply reduced the question to the ‘Schrodinger’s Cat’ scenario, but I think there is a difference.  This is not about probability curves and their collapses, this is about learning to recognize the blinders we all wear which let us treat guesses (whether ors or those of others) as equally valid to observed facts. 

And it is about time that some of these blinders statred coming off! 

After all, guesses, even educated ones, are not facts – and we must not fall into the easy trap of treating them as such.  Especially in cases where the guess is not based on 999 direct observations of this very event…or not on even one such event having ever happened!

Which leads me to the next question:  If the global temperatures change by 0.6 of a degree, and no well-financed lobby group is there to use it as a pretext to organize a scare-mongering, funds-transfering campaign, would anyone notice?

Perspective - we all need it!

Perspective - we all need it!

Posted in Aspergers, illusions, perceptions, philosophy, politics, science. Tags: , , , , . 7 Comments »

Observations do not match IPCC’s predictions

July 14, 2008 — xanthippa

This is the beauty of ‘scientific theories’!

In order for something to qualify as a ‘scientific theory’, it must include a set of predictions of ‘actions or reactions’, which will prove or disprove said theory.  Though not usually well understood, this is what makes ‘scientific theories’ ‘respectable’.

The IPCC’s report formulated a theory.  This theory predicted that due to human activity, there has been (and continues to be) an increase in the Carbon Dioxide levels in our atmosphere, AND that this difference is CAUSING specific, observable changes in world climate.  It then makes a set of specific predictions of how the climate will change as a result of this.

OK.  So far, so good.

Now, back when it came out, there were a LOT of us criticizing the IPCC’s report.  Whether it was: their methodology, their underlying data – whatever the causes, there was much criticism.  This was answered by the supporters of the IPCC report in various ways, which were not always satisfactory.  Much bickering ensued.

But, all this is slowly and surely becoming irrelevant, thanks to the IPCC’s report itself.  WHY?  Because of the predictions it made.  The very ones which – if observed to occur – will confirm that the IPCC report was accurate and the critics were full of dingo’s kidneys.  If, on the other hand, observations are made which are NOT in agreement with the IPCC report’s predictions, it proves the sceptics were correct and that the IPCC report itself is a load of dingo’s kidneys!

Well, over the last little while, much data has indeed been coming in.  Like, loads of it.  And, as many actua scientists (as opposed to advisors to policymakers) had predicted, the bits which ‘fail to support the IPCC report’s predictions’ are the ones most favourable to that ‘report’.  Most of the data coming our actually directly contradicts it…. 

Here is just the tip of the iceberg:

‘Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered’

Abstract

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) concluded that anthropogenic CO2 emissions probably caused more than half of the “global warming” of the past 50 years and would cause further rapid warming. However, global mean surface temperature has not risen since 1998 and may have fallen since late 2001. The present analysis suggests that the failure of the IPCC’s models to predict this and many other climatic phenomena arises from defects in its evaluation of the three factors whose product is climate sensitivity:

  1. Radiative forcing ΔF;
  2. The no-feedbacks climate sensitivity parameter κ; and
  3. The feedback multiplier ƒ.

Some reasons why the IPCC’s estimates may be excessive and unsafe are explained. More importantly, the conclusion is that, perhaps, there is no “climate crisis”, and that currently-fashionable efforts by governments to reduce anthropogenic CO2 emissions are pointless, may be ill-conceived, and could even be harmful.

Just in case you like ‘graphic representations’, the article has some nifty graphs.  Not as alarmist as Mr. Gore’s graphs were, but they DO show actual temperature measurements:  please, follow the link to the article and look at them….using plain linear regression, they demonstrate the temperatures are going down…

According to the IPCC’s graphs, these should be going up.  And, before you say ‘this is natural variation and does not prove anything’, let me point out that the IPCC’s predictions say these graphs cover a long enough period to demonstrate warming.

The article then inclused more colourful and pretty charts, diagrams and graphs, a ‘ton’ of actual physics, and comes up with this closing statement:

In short, we must get the science right, or we shall get the policy wrong. If the concluding equation in this analysis (Eqn. 30) is correct, the IPCC’s estimates of climate sensitivity must have been very much exaggerated. There may, therefore, be a good reason why, contrary to the projections of the models on which the IPCC relies, temperatures have not risen for a decade and have been falling since the phase-transition in global temperature trends that occurred in late 2001. Perhaps real-world climate sensitivity is very much below the IPCC’s estimates. Perhaps, therefore, there is no “climate crisis” at all. At present, then, in policy terms there is no case for doing anything. The correct policy approach to a non-problem is to have the courage to do nothing.

Thanks to Jenifer Marohasy for the story!  But that site also had another interesting article:  ‘Global Warming is a myth:  a Note from Jim Peden’.  It has a respected physicist, looking not at ‘climate change’ itself, but analyzing the physics of the very mechanism that the ACC crowd claims is responsible for ‘Greenhouse gasses’ causing ‘Global Warming’.  This is how it starts:

As a dissenting physicist, I simply can no longer buy the notion that CO2 produces any significant warming of the atmosphere at any rate.

I’ve studied the atomic absorption physics to death, from John Nicol’s extensive development to the much longer winded dissertation by Gerlich & Tscheuschner and everything in between, it simply doesn’t add up.

In case you are not familiar with the claims made by the ACC crowd, they say that the atoms of ‘greenhouse gasses’ absorb energy in the visible and UV spectrum, break it down into smaller bits (heat) which they then release, and which are then ‘trapped’ in our atmosphere.  Here, a physicist who specializes in atomic absorption (and is respected and recognized as an expert in this), calls their claims a load of dingo’s kidneys…. 

Gosh, I hope everyone loves kidney pie!

 

Please note:  the original post contained an unjustified statement by me, where I jumped to conclusions instead of properly checking my sources.  This was spotted by ‘tamino’, who commented on it.  Many thanks for his help, as getting the correct information is essential.  The incorrect claim has been removed.

 

IMPORTANT UPDATE:  Viscount Moncton, author of the American Physical Society’s ‘Forum on Physics & Society’ article, which is the 1st of the articles I linked to and quoted from, has some questions for the American Physical Society….  (via SmallDeadAnimals and TheCorner)

Posted in politics, science, society. Tags: , , , , . 3 Comments »

‘Blue Planet in Green Shackles’ – the ISBN#

May 28, 2008 — xanthippa

This is the mystery of the disappearing planet….as in – where in the world can one purchase a copy of the English-language version of ‘Blue Planet in Green Shackles – What is Endangered: Climate or Freedom?’

The English translation of this book by Czech Republic’s President, Vaclav Klaus, was released this week in Washington, D.C. – as I have learned from ‘The Reference Frame’, and wrote about earlier. I must admit, I was rather exited! Finally, I could get my hands on it and read what all this excitement is about.

Yet, I could not find how to get my hands on it! Judging from some of the responses I got, I am not alone…

My Mom always used to say: “If ever you are in doubt, ask a physicist!’ (Well, she said something like that – I think…) So, I did – and Mr. Motl from ‘The Reference Frame’ was kind enough to send me this reply:

Dear Xanthippa, the book is now printed in 17,000 copies only so it will disappear rapidly.

bn.com, http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Blue-Planet-in-Green-Shackles/Vaclav-Klaus/e/9781889865096/

has its ISBN codes:

* ISBN: 1889865095
* ISBN-13: 9781889865096
* Format: Paperback, 100pp
* Pub. Date: May 2008

Thank you, Mr. Motl!

Finally, here is a head of state who has actual scientific credentials! O.K., he’s not a physicist like Mr. Motl, but, Vaclav Klaus is pretty close: he may have been a mere economist (though a respected professor thereof), but he did spend most of his life at the Czech Academy of Sciences. Once politics no longer shackled his career (oh, I love how I worked that ‘shackled’ word in…sorry, it does not take much to amuse me…), he worked at Prognostics at the Academy of Science…. meaning, his professional expertise is in looking at scientific theories, understanding their implication, and then evaluating their long-term economic impact.

This means that President Klaus, more than any other world leader today, is eminently qualified to assess the IPCC report, both in what it says and in what the ‘remedial measures’ currently being implemented will have. I, for one, am very curious to read what he has to say. I wish that the World’s leaders would be, too!

Here is a link to Mr. Klaus’ speaking notes for the Washington D.C. release of his book:

“The whole process is already in the hands of those who are not interested in rational ideas and arguments.”

“The real debate should be about costs and benefits of alternative human actions, about how to rationally deal with the unknown future, about what kind and size of solidarity with much wealthier future generations is justified, about the size of externalities and their eventual appropriate “internalization”, about how much to trust the impersonal functioning of the markets in solving any human problem, including global warming and how much to distrust the very visible hand of very human politicians and their bureaucrats. Some of these questions are touched upon in my book. “

I, for one, am very curious to read what he has to say. Excuse me, I have to go talk to my local bookstore now…. in the meantime, here is Glenn Beck’s interview with Mr. Klaus on the topic of Global Warming activism:

Posted in freedoms, opression, politics, science, society. Tags: , , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

Blue Planet in Green Shackes

May 22, 2008 — xanthippa

Finally, there is a release date for the much-awaited English version of Czech President’s Vaclav Klaus’ book,

‘BLUE PLANET IN GREEN SHACKLES 

What is endangered:  Climate of Freedom?’

President Klaus will be presenting it on May 27th, 2008 at the National Press Club in Washington D.C..

Thanks to Lubos Motl from ‘The Reference Frame’ for the tip!

Posted in debate, education, freedoms, philosophy, politics, science. Tags: , , , , , . 7 Comments »

Yet another reason to skip the Beijing Olympics

May 21, 2008 — xanthippa

As if continuing to opress its population were not enough!

As if forcing women to undergo ‘abortions’ against their will were not enough! 

As if China’s continuous disregard for the environment were not enough!

As if its exploitation of Africa were not enough!

After all – all these things could not possibly outweigh our desire to ‘not dissapoint our athletes – or so we have been told by so many apologists…. 

Now, we have another reason for not going to the Olympic games in Beijing.  And this one actually poses danger to the athletes – and all the spectators – themselves!  No, not just the smog, or something equally long-term.  We are talking about real, immediate, physical danger.  And not just to them alone, but to everyone back home when they return, especially the kids.

What, do you say, could this be?

The National Post has an interesting article about the outbreak of the infectious hand-mouth-foot disease (HMFD) in China!  According to CDC, HMFD can be caused by several different viruses, some of them mild, some potentially deadly, especially to children.  The National Post article says this outbreak is caused by EV71, of which the CDC says:

“Another cause of HFMD, EV71 may also cause viral meningitis and, rarely, more serious diseases, such as encephalitis, or a poliomyelitis-like paralysis. EV71 encephalitis may be fatal. Cases of fatal encephalitis occurred during outbreaks of HFMD in Malaysia in 1997 and in Taiwan in 1998.”

This disease can be spread by such innoculous means as cutlery not washed in hot enough water (CDC).  It is usualy only serious for children and people with weakened health, but strong adults (like, say, athletes) can become infected without becoming symptomatic, and spread the virus for several weeks (like, say, when they return home to their kids).

In other words, the athletes and millions of Olympic spectators could become infected, without being symptomatic.  Most visitors and athletes would likely fly home – and airplanes, with their re-circulated air, are perfect incubators for infectious pathogens… ask any nurse! Once home, all these people will celbrate, hug and kiss their kids, relatives, friends….get together to show photos and talk….

This sounds like an ‘ideal’ way to spread this disease!

Oh, but China would take all precautions to contain the infection, right?  Ask world’s leading experts to help them do all it takes to protect its own citizens as well as Olympic athletes and visitors?  Right?

As luck would have it, Taiwan is seen as having some of the best expertise in containing this disease – they have successfully done it two times recently!  Nice and close – except that…  China is not willing to accept help! 

Not only has it refused Taiwanese experts entry, it has also banned Taiwanese journalists.  Its own official newspapers are not exactly forthcoming with information on the epidemic…  Nice to see how well they are handling it…their traditional way of deny, deny, deny!  No problem here!  Yeah, and you expect us to trust any assurances after this, too?  Some track record!

It would be foolish to allow people to attend the Olympics in the midst of a deadly epidemic (and children in China have died during this outbreak already).  Or, in the least, governments which allow its citizens to travel to the Beijing Olympics MUST, as a matter of national health policy, establish quarantine areas where anyone returning from Beijing will have to be detained for several weeks, until any danger of spreading the disease has passed (both athletes and visitors).

Now, this is a thoroughly NON-POLITICAL reason not to go to this Olympics! 

It would not be a political boycot.  Rather, it would be a prudent and responsible policy to prevent the worldwide spread of a disease that kills children.

Will THIS be enough to make the world do the right thing?

Posted in freedoms, opression, politics, science, society. Tags: , , , , . 1 Comment »
« Older posts
Newer posts »