What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

Kepler said:
In 1986, we almost scarred an entire generation of children. No, I mean even worse than "Rock Me Amadeus."
Click to expand...

Yeah, Thank God that didn't happen. Although I'm kind of surprised that they didn't go with one of the smaller Muppets to do something like that. Grover comes to mind. And I don't see how they could have gotten Big Bird into space, as if I'm not mistaken, you're supposed to wear a space suit on the ride up, and the top end size of one of those is at about 6'3" or 6'4. some Astronauts have had issues with that on the return flight home because their spines decompress and they get taller and don't fit into their suits for the return flight.
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

ShirtlessBob said:
Paleo proponents now claiming government persecution
Click to expand...

From that blogger:

Academia clearly has it’s (sic) place, although I am continually pushed to define or understand exactly what that role is other than protecting hegemony.
Click to expand...

Or, ya know, scientific rigor and peer review. :rolleyes:

I love them casting it as a "free speech" argument. I guess in a world where people argue with a straight face that we should "teach the controversy" of Creationism, other types of junk science hide in the hems of lady liberty's garments.
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

ShirtlessBob said:
Paleo proponents now claiming government persecution
Click to expand...

I read the proposed bill (it's only two pages), and the language modifications from the 1992 version are marginal. This isn't going to stop a local gym from having a fad diet challenge, or a paid blogger from extolling the supposed benefits of his/her fad diet in exchange for sponsor cash, so long as they don't falsely claim to be trained medical/dietary authorities (which was already illegal, duh :rolleyes:).
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

Kepler said:
From that blogger:



Or, ya know, scientific rigor and peer review. :rolleyes:

I love them casting it as a "free speech" argument. I guess in a world where people argue with a straight face that we should "teach the controversy" of Creationism, other types of junk science hide in the hems of lady liberty's garments.
Click to expand...

When I hear "functional medicine practitioner," they're saying "I'm a quack and I want you to give me all your money."
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

ShirtlessBob said:
When I hear "functional medicine practitioner," they're saying "I'm a quack and I want you to give me all your money."
Click to expand...

THe word "medicine" should be reserved for actual doctors. It should be illegal to give yourself a title of "medical" anything without an actual M.D.
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

dxmnkd316 said:
THe word "medicine" should be reserved for actual doctors. It should be illegal to give yourself a title of "medical" anything without an actual M.D.
Click to expand...

So, an EMT, nurse, and physician's assistant walk into a bar...
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

St. Clown said:
So, an EMT, nurse, and physician's assistant walk into a bar...
Click to expand...

None of them have "medicine" or "medical" in their title with the exception of an EMT. Which I think we need to change to first responder or something else to really drive it home that they aren't doctors. You have to look at this from a complete idiot's perspective. They see "medical technician" or "functional medical practitioner" and think, "Oh, that makes them qualified to provide medical advice!"

All it does is give these loonballs a chance to separate idiots from their money. As noble as that is, the problem comes when the idiots have a loud enough voice that it starts to catch on with the "not idiots". Then suddenly, gluten is a toxic substance...
 
Last edited:
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

dxmnkd316 said:
None of them have "medicine" or "medical" in their title with the exception of an EMT. Which I think we need to change to first responder or something else to really drive it home that they aren't doctors. You have to look at this from a complete idiot's perspective. They see "medical technician" or "functional medical practitioner" and think, "Oh, that makes them qualified to provide medical advice!"
Click to expand...
First responders are different than EMTs, EMTs have more training than first responders. Both are technical terms used by police, fire and ambulance workers (trying to stay extremely generic in the wording there) and each have technical sub-levels to them. Nurse practioners and Physician Assistants can both dole out medical advice, and legally do so in medical clinics, so long as there's a supervising doctor on premise. EMTs can even do as much in very limited capacity for when a person refuses to go to the hospital or refuses an ambulance ride to get there. You might be more interested in setting the degree to which advice can be dispensed.

As a side note, I know way too many fire fighters and nurses. A lot of the conversations when a group of my friends get together turns into shop talk. It's exciting for us not on the inside, let me tell you.
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

dxmnkd316 said:
All it does is give these loonballs a chance to separate idiots from their money. As noble as that is, the problem comes when the idiots have a loud enough voice that it starts to catch on with the "not idiots". Then suddenly, gluten is a toxic substance...
Click to expand...

To hear the "gluten-free by choice" crowd tell it, naturopaths, Paleo, etc tell it:

Refined sugar/gluten is more diabolical than a Bond villain.
(Gluten: No, ShirtlessBob, I expect you to die!)

Sugar, grains, dairy, alcohol, legumes, and seed-based oils all had a meeting. Sugar spoke up and said "tonight, Bob sleeps with the fishes."

Conventional/GMO produce will smash my face into a car windshield, then take my mother out for a nice seafood dinner, and never call her again.
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

St. Clown said:
First responders are different than EMTs, EMTs have more training than first responders. Both are technical terms used by police, fire and ambulance workers (trying to stay extremely generic in the wording there) and each have technical sub-levels to them. Nurse practioners and Physician Assistants can both dole out medical advice, and legally do so in medical clinics, so long as there's a supervising doctor on premise. EMTs can even do as much in very limited capacity for when a person refuses to go to the hospital or refuses an ambulance ride to get there. You might be more interested in setting the degree to which advice can be dispensed.

As a side note, I know way too many fire fighters and nurses. A lot of the conversations when a group of my friends get together turns into shop talk. It's exciting for us not on the inside, let me tell you.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

ShirtlessBob said:
To hear the "gluten-free by choice" crowd tell it, naturopaths, Paleo, etc tell it:

Refined sugar/gluten is more diabolical than a Bond villain.
(Gluten: No, ShirtlessBob, I expect you to die!)

Sugar, grains, dairy, alcohol, legumes, and seed-based oils all had a meeting. Sugar spoke up and said "tonight, Bob sleeps with the fishes."

Conventional/GMO produce will smash my face into a car windshield, then take my mother out for a nice seafood dinner, and never call her again.
Click to expand...

Here is an interesting blog recently started by a former naturopath. I really enjoy it because she is one of the few "apostates" who is quite vocal about the training and practice of naturopaths from her experience. May be worth a read.

http://www.naturopathicdiaries.com/
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

WisconsinWildcard said:
Here is an interesting blog recently started by a former naturopath. I really enjoy it because she is one of the few "apostates" who is quite vocal about the training and practice of naturopaths from her experience. May be worth a read.

http://www.naturopathicdiaries.com/
Click to expand...
A naturopath tried to tell me I had adrenal fatigue last year; adrenal fatigue is a fictional illness.
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

ShirtlessBob said:
A naturopath tried to tell me I had adrenal fatigue last year; adrenal fatigue is a fictional illness.
Click to expand...

My sister is all balled up by these charlatans. She's got a degree from a good school and a background in education. It's not like she's an idiot. But my lord they can play her like a fiddle; they're the contemporary equivalent of spirit mediums.
 
Last edited:
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

Not quite sure whether this issue belongs here or in the SCOTUS thread....

Communities across the country are grappling with a surge in drone use that’s raising safety and privacy concerns—and thorny legal questions—about a slice of sky officials have largely disregarded.

State and local police say complaints are soaring about drones flying above homes, crowds and crime scenes. At least 17 states, meanwhile, have passed laws to restrict how law enforcement and private citizens use the devices....

few have paid much attention to the airspace within a few hundred feet above the ground. Since 1930, planes have been largely restricted from flying below 500 feet, leaving lower altitudes mostly to birds, kites, model planes and, in some cases, helicopters.

....

[Proposed federal] rules [for commercial use of drones] don’t address private use by individuals, where some of the most vexing issues lie, such as how to prevent people from using drones to spy into neighbors’ windows, or flying them into manned aircraft. Those issues are falling into a regulatory no-man’s land.

The Federal Aviation Administration ... says that state and local authorities can’t regulate drone flights because it is the sole regulator of the airspace.

Northampton, Mass., has challenged the FAA with a resolution declaring that local landowners control the 500 feet above their property. The town cites a 1946 Supreme Court ruling, in a case involving North Carolina chicken farmers angry about flights overhead, that landowners have “exclusive control over the immediate reaches” above their land.

Many attorneys have cited that 1946 case as a looming dilemma for regulators and the drone industry. They say it poses tough legal questions, such as where does “navigable airspace” begin and the control of property owners end?
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top