I used to be "fan of science".
This has dramatically decreased the past 2 years though. The reason for this is because politics gets involved into the research in the way that it can and WILL abuse human rights.
For example, mentally abnormal people will be forced to take medication or accept a "cure" for their "abnormalities". Science and research helps pave this way. We are not talking about abnormal people who commit a crime, but people who may or may not recieve welfare.
Today the Danish government went one step further: They want to make it a DUTY for Danish citizens, if chosen, to participate in scientific research projects for the common good of society.
http://www.dr.dk/Nyheder/Indland/2013/10/11/070311.htm (http://www.dr.dk/Nyheder/Indland/2013/10/11/070311.htm)
(Danish article).
Today, the the local municipality already have the opportunity to force depressive patients to recieve electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). They can also force physically ill people to undergo risky surgery.
This law will inevitably lead to a massive abuse of our basic human rights. All in the name of science.
I hate science!
So you hate science because it is abused by politicians?
That doesn't seem very consistent. You should hate politicians instead, they're the ones making a mess of things.
Quote from: "The Article"I lovforslaget står der, at danskerne bare kan smide breve ud, hvis de ikke vil være en del af en undersøgelse.
Quote from: "Google Translate"The bill says that the Danes can just throw out letters if they do not want to be part of a study.
Either Google Translate is way off, or no one is being forced to do anything.
Quote from: "mediumaevum"For example, mentally abnormal people will be forced to take medication or accept a "cure" for their "abnormalities". Science and research helps pave this way. We are not talking about abnormal people who commit a crime, but people who may or may not recieve welfare.
Today, the the local municipality already have the opportunity to force depressive patients to recieve electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). They can also force physically ill people to undergo risky surgery.
Sick people don't always make the best decisions. Doctors have a duty of care towards their patients and are responsible should they discharge a patient at risk.
I love the smell of troll in the morning.
Come with me. You're not well.
(//http://i1281.photobucket.com/albums/a502/scott_myers3/Facebook/Timeline%20Photos/408422_2666325714380_108608134_n.jpg)
Quote from: "Jason78"Quote from: "mediumaevum"For example, mentally abnormal people will be forced to take medication or accept a "cure" for their "abnormalities". Science and research helps pave this way. We are not talking about abnormal people who commit a crime, but people who may or may not recieve welfare.
Today, the the local municipality already have the opportunity to force depressive patients to recieve electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). They can also force physically ill people to undergo risky surgery.
Sick people don't always make the best decisions. Doctors have a duty of care towards their patients and are responsible should they discharge a patient at risk.
The problem is that this is the decision of the municipality, not that of doctors. In many cases, the doctor actually directly says to the local municipality that medication/treatment will only worsen the condition, but because of the Danish law on Social Welfare, the local municipality can actually overrule that of a doctor or specialists.
Quote from: "Plu"That doesn't seem very consistent. You should hate politicians instead, they're the ones making a mess of things.
Politicians will abuse everything, but science is so easy to exploit by politicians, that I think we should carefully pick what we want to prioritize in research, and leave some stuff alone.
It's ok for scientists to conduct cosmological research or nuclear research, but I don't think medical research is a good idea after all.
QuoteIt's ok for scientists to conduct cosmological research or nuclear research, but I don't think medical research is a good idea after all.
:rolleyes:
Quote from: "mediumaevum"This law will inevitably lead to a massive abuse of our basic human rights. All in the name of science.
I hate science!
(//http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/4600/derpometer.gif)
In Britain, this is know as 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater.'
Quote from: "mediumaevum"It's ok for scientists to conduct cosmological research or nuclear research, but I don't think medical research is a good idea after all.
Of course. We were so much better off when we were bleeding ourselves to balance out the humours.
:Hangman: :Hangman: :Hangman: :Hangman:
Quote from: "Youssuf Ramadan"Quote from: "mediumaevum"This law will inevitably lead to a massive abuse of our basic human rights. All in the name of science.
I hate science!
[ Image (//http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/4600/derpometer.gif) ]
In Britain, this is know as 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater.'
It's not crazy to be against scientific research, when one knows that one's social welfare depends on lack of scientific research.
In fact, it's quite logical. Not only that, it is completely rational.
Not being against scientific research is like a Catholic not waging war against Lutherans in the renaissance.
It's your very income that's at stake, you know!
That seems like a totally reasonable position :roll:
Quote from: "Plu"That seems like a totally reasonable position :roll:
Yes. It is.
Consider this:
You get a serious illness. Its not one that causes your death, but it causes you to be unable to work.
You know that if you get cured, you'd lose your welfare income and end up in the eternally long unemployment queue without an income and with hard social, economical, political and judicial pressure on you.
Who'd like to be cured from the serious illness? You got to be stupid if you want that cure!
To want a cure for a serious illness that grants you economic security is nothing but political, economical, judicial and social suicide.
I have nothing against working, and I work what I am able to.
But I don't want to be under the pressure that it causes if my situation goes away.
Fortunately I have a marketable talent, so that situation is irrelevant to me.
Quote from: "mediumaevum"I used to be "fan of science".
This has dramatically decreased the past 2 years though. The reason for this is because politics gets involved into the research in the way that it can and WILL abuse human rights.
For example, mentally abnormal people will be forced to take medication or accept a "cure" for their "abnormalities". Science and research helps pave this way. We are not talking about abnormal people who commit a crime, but people who may or may not recieve welfare.
Today the Danish government went one step further: They want to make it a DUTY for Danish citizens, if chosen, to participate in scientific research projects for the common good of society.
http://www.dr.dk/Nyheder/Indland/2013/10/11/070311.htm (http://www.dr.dk/Nyheder/Indland/2013/10/11/070311.htm)
(Danish article).
Today, the the local municipality already have the opportunity to force depressive patients to recieve electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). They can also force physically ill people to undergo risky surgery.
This law will inevitably lead to a massive abuse of our basic human rights. All in the name of science.
I hate science!
Psychology and psychiatry are not science, just opinions of who is abnormal or mentally ill. Solitary
Quote from: "mediumaevum"It's not crazy to be against scientific research, when one knows that one's social welfare depends on lack of scientific research.
In fact, it's quite logical. Not only that, it is completely rational.
Let me know how that works out for ya. :rolleyes:
Quote from: "mediumaevum"It's ok for scientists to conduct cosmological research or nuclear research, but I don't think medical research is a good idea after all.
Yep, they need to put a stop to all that medical research...great idea genius!
Quote from: "mediumaevum"You get a serious illness. Its not one that causes your death, but it causes you to be unable to work.
You know that if you get cured, you'd lose your welfare income and end up in the eternally long unemployment queue without an income and with hard social, economical, political and judicial pressure on you.
Who'd like to be cured from the serious illness? You got to be stupid if you want that cure!
Having a serious illness isn't as much fun as you think it is. It isn't sitting at home getting a fat welfare check and hanging out on the couch all day watching TV. It fucking sucks.
Call me stupid if you like, but I like living! I like being able to go out into the world and do stuff. So I'd quite happily take that cure thank you very much.
Quote from: "bericks999"Quote from: "mediumaevum"It's ok for scientists to conduct cosmological research or nuclear research, but I don't think medical research is a good idea after all.
Yep, they need to put a stop to all that medical research...great idea genius!
And the best part is that it's such an easily-implemented goal. Sorry guys, no more medical research, mediumaevum thinks it's a bad idea. *shuts down medical R&D around the globe*
mediumaevum, move to the US and become a tea party darling.. Your future seems quite bright..
Quote from: "mediumaevum"Quote from: "Plu"That seems like a totally reasonable position :roll:
Yes. It is.
Consider this:
You get a serious illness. Its not one that causes your death, but it causes you to be unable to work.
You know that if you get cured, you'd lose your welfare income and end up in the eternally long unemployment queue without an income and with hard social, economical, political and judicial pressure on you.
Who'd like to be cured from the serious illness? You got to be stupid if you want that cure!
To want a cure for a serious illness that grants you economic security is nothing but political, economical, judicial and social suicide.
I have nothing against working, and I work what I am able to.
But I don't want to be under the pressure that it causes if my situation goes away.
You do realise that being unable to work due to a permanent condition involves inconveniences right? Like being blind or something?
Right?
(//http://th03.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/i/2013/090/a/2/mario_facepalm_by_toadmushroom95-d5zzajr.jpg)
Quote from: "mediumaevum"You get a serious illness. Its not one that causes your death, but it causes you to be unable to work.
You know that if you get cured, you'd lose your welfare income and end up in the eternally long unemployment queue without an income and with hard social, economical, political and judicial pressure on you.
Who'd like to be cured from the serious illness? You got to be stupid if you want that cure!
To want a cure for a serious illness that grants you economic security is nothing but political, economical, judicial and social suicide
I'm sure that people in that sort of situation just looove being dependent on the government dole (I've heard it's super pleasant and secure, especially in the US) and don't have any career ambitions whatsoever.
Kitchen knives can be used by criminals to kill people! I hate kitchen knives! :rolleyes:
Jason78 wrote in part:
QuoteCall me stupid if you like, but I like living! I like being able to go out into the world and do stuff. So I'd quite happily take that cure thank you very much.
I'm on disability and most days I feel like I have a mild case of the flu. Some days I can barely stay awake. My wife won't let me drive very far without someone with me. Damn right I would take the cure.
It sounds like instead of fixing the political abuses, mediumaevum wants to through the baby out with the bathwater. :-?
Heh.. I worked HARD physical labor for years till my heart and legs crapped out on me so now I've applied for disability. (Government dole) If I had the option to get my health back so I could resume hard physical labor as opposed to a few hundred bucks a month..
Yeah, the security of a few hundred bucks a month compared to several hundred a week, sometimes several thousand a week..
Damned, if only my health could get even worse. :lol:
Sorry, it went a little too fast, when I was writing about welfare/permanent condition. I couldn't finish it before I was interrupted, and I barely could edit it.
Here is an extended version, and I sure hope people read it:
First of all, I am NOT talking about welfare fraud. I hate fraud, especially welfare fraud, because that makes it harder for people who genuinly need help.
Secondly, I am NOT talking about disabled, mentally or physically, being lazy at all. I have my issues too (more about that later in this post), and I've been told that I am not lazy.
I don't see myself as lazy either.
Thirdly, I am NOT talking about completely abolishing all kinds of medical research or medical cures etc. I will elaborate here:
Imagine that you suddenly or gradually become blind. Who would like to see again? I doubt anyone would say no.
Now, imagine someone who was born blind, and have lived 20 or 30 years of age without ever knowing what it means to see again.
I am sure it would create so many new impressions that everything seems scary. I know, because I often close my eyes and hold on my ears when there's too much stimula/impressions/sounds/light.
I hate to be honest about my issues, and last time I told about them on another forum... I got banned.
Anyway, I take the chance. I have ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder) and other issues that makes me wierd in such a way that I cannot support myself without adequate assistance.
It sucks, because I can't get an education, I can't work under pressure etc. I am lucky to have a occupation working under conditions that I am able to.
My life sucks, but if someone gave me the opportunity to be cured of autism, I would say no, and if someone tried to force me to be cured of autism, I will commit suicide.
There's absolutely no discussion about that.
The reason is that I don't want to be another person than the one I am. Surely, my life sucks sometimes, but I'd rather have a life that sucks big time than having an altered personality from the one that I was born with.
Surely, if I break an arm or leg I'd be happy to be able to walk again.
What I was talking about in my OP is my worries that some scientist would come up with a cure for autism, because according to the Danish Social Welfare Laws, you have to recieve any cure there is, no matter how intervening, no matter how extreme it may be, no matter how dangerous it is, you have to say yes, or you are subject to penalties.
It's not about that I don't want to work. Its not about that I love to have support from community, municipality etc.
It's about that I don't want mind altering drugs or surgeries, which will be the reality if a cure for autism is found.
I am telling you this, ONLY because I feel I am under pressure to say so. I know I am now subject to a risk of bullying and ridicule.
It's a risk I have to take. The other (not telling the truth) is certain bullying and ridicule.
Quote from: "mediumaevum"I know I am now subject to a risk of bullying and ridicule.
Don't worry, you crossed that threshold long before making this thread.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Quote from: "mediumaevum"I know I am now subject to a risk of bullying and ridicule.
Don't worry, you crossed that threshold long before making this thread.
You people have hated me ever since I wrote my intro post saying that I am not an atheist.
Back then someone, I don't remember who, said that I wouldn't last long on this forum, and you surely are not making it any easier for me.
It's like when I was a kid and the other kids didn't even know me, they've never seen me before, but they instantly said:
"I don't want to play with YOU!"
QuoteYou people have hated me ever since I wrote my intro post saying that I am not an atheist.
It's more about the weird bullshit you post all the time than about not being an atheist.
That said; you're finally starting to make sense on this topic. And the thing with Autism is that most of the time it's a disorder, not a problem. So I can see where you're coming from, except you're blaming the wrong side. Science is not to blame; it's merely trying to understand stuff.
The blame lies on those who seek to abuse that knowledge and do things that are not ethical/moral. Which in this case is basically politicians/society.
Quote from: "Plu"Which in this case is basically politicians/society.
Something is wrong with some scientists, I think. They should be more responsible to the results of their work and not allow politicians to manipulate them. From whom did politicians get nuclear, chemical and bacteriological weapon? Scientists gave them all this shit. And after politicians have got all these weapons, scientists have launched a campaign to ban weapons of mass destruction. Does this make sense?
Quote from: "Eugeny Anatolievich"Quote from: "Plu"Which in this case is basically politicians/society.
Something is wrong with some scientists, I think. They should be more responsible to the results of their work and not allow politicians to manipulate them. From whom did politicians get nuclear, chemical and bacteriological weapon? Scientists gave them all this shit. And after politicians have got all these weapons, scientists have launched a campaign to ban weapons of mass destruction. Does this make sense?
Many of those weapons were never intended to be weapons but rather were byproducts of research for other uses. And even then much of the weaponizing work was conducted by scientists other than the original researchers.
QuoteYou people have hated me ever since I wrote my intro post saying that I am not an atheist.
Until you posted this, I was not aware you were a theist. And I don't particularly have anything against you, you just say some really stupid shit sometimes... such as this thread.
Quote from: "Shiranu"the weaponizing work was conducted by scientists other than the original researchers
These other scientists are scientists too. Scientist must be responsible. I say it me too, 'cos I'm a scientist, a chemist. Sometimes I think about my personal responsibility and responsibility of my collegues for everything we do. Modern science is expensive, so we depend on the rich men, industry, and politicians. They grant money for researches. I can not do what I'm wondering without a budget.
Autism is a tough condition for us to understand. Doesn't mean we should try though.
I think I understand better where mediumaevum is coming from. Ask yourself, if thought the goons were looking for you to hand you over to Doctor Josef Mengele, (SS Officer in Nazi Germany) how would you feel about "science?" If I thought I might be experimented on, I would like to be in control of whether I actually took part in those experiments or not. Sure, I want a cure for my diseases and conditions, but I don't want to be forced to be part of an experiment to find those cures.
Currently, all valid experiments on humans must first be approved by an ethics board. Which is good. Still, with a nationalized health care system, couldn't someone down the line decide the good of the many is more important than the good of the one? I don't see why not. Our bill of rights has been trampled before, it is naive to think it won't be trampled again. In fact, the current administration and the administrations before it have trampled on the bill of rights many times. Why not one more time?
That being said, scientists tend to do more good than harm towards society. If I could help with experiments, where there was reasonable disclosure to me before the tests took place, I think I would be happy to help. But, that choice should be mine, not society's decision.
QuoteAsk yourself, if thought the goons were looking for you to hand you over to Doctor Josef Mengele, (SS Officer in Nazi Germany) how would you feel about "science?"
Thank god there is nothing even remotely close to this going on in the article, so I see no reason for that to be a valid concern for fearing science (in this context, anyways).
Quote from: "mediumaevum"It's about that I don't want mind altering drugs or surgeries, which will be the reality if a cure for autism is found.
So because
you don't want to be cured, the millions of people who
do want to be cured shouldn't be?
BTW, did you read the part in the article that says that you can choose to not participate? Or did your ASD prevent you from understanding that?
Quote from: "mediumaevum"It's ok for scientists to conduct cosmological research or nuclear research, but I don't think medical research is a good idea after all.
Oh. Well this seems like sound reasoning. DOWN WITH SCIENCE!
Quote... but I don't think medical research is a good idea after all.
Holy fuck, I just saw that.
My brain just shit itself.
I opened the water bottle thread before this one and I was all :-s
But now I am all 8-[
...and please, hate the science. Don't hate the scientists. :(
Quote from: "mediumaevum"You people have hated me ever since I wrote my intro post saying that I am not an atheist.
Hate is such a strong word. You make a lot of arguments I find to be bewilderingly stupid, but if that's all it took for me to hate someone I would hate most of the population of planet Earth.
Shiranu wrote:
QuoteQuote:
QuoteAsk yourself, if thought the goons were looking for you to hand you over to Doctor Josef Mengele, (SS Officer in Nazi Germany) how would you feel about "science?"
Thank god there is nothing even remotely close to this going on in the article, so I see no reason for that to be a valid concern for fearing science (in this context, anyways).
Not that we know of. The Tuskegee experiments went from 1932 til 1972. Project MKUltra went from 1953 til 1973. Both were done in secret and we learned about them after they were halted. There was a well known eugenics program in the US during 1930's, in fact it was the model for the German program at the same time. While not exactly as bad as Dr. Mengele, the government knowingly ruined people's lives and caused deaths.
Seems to me that we should be on the look-out for any type of "program" along those lines. Not necessarily paranoid about them, but aware that they can and did happen. It is not my "duty" to be forced into doing somebody's medical experiment. My mother volunteered for a cancer "experiment" of her own free will. At least for her it was not a success. But, maybe they learned something from her death. At least that is what we hope. But, it was not her "duty" to take part in it. She volunteered knowing she could have a bad outcome from it.
Those who don't suffer from mental illness may not understand why so many of us who do are so leery of "scientists" doctors who treat us. Often it is along the lines of "Well, let's try this and see what happens." Sometimes what happens is the patient commits suicide. They may have anyway, but I know from personal experience, that some of the drugs I was put on caused me to just not give a damn rather I died or not. They also caused me to gain over a hundred pounds, which I didn't need. Still trying to get it off.
Anyway, I think I understand why some don't want to be cured. The old, "The operation was a success, but the patient died." Seems very real to those of us having been practiced on.
Quote from: "LikelyToBreak"Seems to me that we should be on the look-out for any type of "program" along those lines.
If only there was some sort of organization set up to do just that (//http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_review_board).
Being on the "look-out" for a "program" is to rely on public perceptions rather than empirical data. Not a good idea.
Hydra009 wrote in part:
QuoteBeing on the "look-out" for a "program" is to rely on public perceptions rather than empirical data. Not a good idea.
While I think I understand your point, the "experts" can't always be counted on to watch out for our best interests. From the site Hydra009 referenced:
QuoteAlthough designed to protect the rights and welfare of the research subjects, IRBs have been criticized by bioethicists for conflicts of interest resulting in lax oversight.
Another concern we in the public should have, are the black op projects like MKUltra, which were hid from the public and the IRB's.
Quote from: "LikelyToBreak"While I think I understand your point, the "experts" can't always be counted on to watch out for our best interests.
Obviously, it's not perfect. No organization is. But when you don't rely on the experts, what do you rely on? Gut feeling? Alex Jones?
Hydra009 wrote:
QuoteObviously, it's not perfect. No organization is. But when you don't rely on the experts, what do you rely on? Gut feeling? Alex Jones?
If something seems off, I guess that could be called a gut feeling, you can try to research the program or see if you can get a reporter, there are other reporters besides Alex Jones, to research it. If something still seems off about it, then ask your Congresscritter to check up on it. If they won't or you don't like their answers, then see if you can get other reporters involved to validate and expose the program.
Bottom line, if you rely solely on the "experts" you are going to get screwed. Just like those guys in the Tuskegee experiment did.
Um. I'd just like to point out that "researchers" have families and medical problems just like everyone else. To suggest that they regularly breach ethics at the behest of someone else is something I have issue with. There have been some pretty bad events in history, and there have been regulatory bodies formed as a result of these. The Tuskeegee experiments are disgusting to everyone and should never ever be repeated.
I'd also like to point out that there is a big difference between focus on profitable medical interventions and actual ethical breaches.
Mermaid wrote in part:
QuoteTo suggest that they regularly breach ethics at the behest of someone else is something I have issue with.
I have not meant to suggest any such a thing. Others may have, but I have not. Just that legitimate experiments, would be open about what they are doing. If I go into an medical experiment knowing that I might or might not be in the control group, than that is fine. If they hide their true objectives and promise the experiment's participants things which they have no intention of doing, then they are being unethical.
I would allow some deception with psychological studies though. But, then I should know if I am taking part in a study when I do, if it requires anything other than mere observation. In other words, they can't shock me in an experiment, unless I agreed to be shocked before hand. Them saying, "But, you agreed to do the study, so we can shock you if we want to." Doesn't fly.
Quote from: "LikelyToBreak"Mermaid wrote in part: QuoteTo suggest that they regularly breach ethics at the behest of someone else is something I have issue with.
I have not meant to suggest any such a thing. Others may have, but I have not. Just that legitimate experiments, would be open about what they are doing. If I go into an medical experiment knowing that I might or might not be in the control group, than that is fine. If they hide their true objectives and promise the experiment's participants things which they have no intention of doing, then they are being unethical.
I agree. So controlled study subjects are informed of the objectives of the study and give consent to participate.
Most of the so-call research by scientist is not actually done by the scientific method or scientists that I have seen. Solitary
Quote from: "Solitary"Most of the so-call research by scientist is not actually done by the scientific method or scientists that I have seen. Solitary
Can you elaborate on this?
Quote from: "Mermaid"Quote from: "Solitary"Most of the so-call research by scientist is not actually done by the scientific method or scientists that I have seen. Solitary
Can you elaborate on this?
Any research posted on Microsoft or Fox News which owns it, or research that isn't done by a double blind study, or is biased. Solitary
Quote from: "Solitary"Quote from: "Mermaid"Quote from: "Solitary"Most of the so-call research by scientist is not actually done by the scientific method or scientists that I have seen. Solitary
Can you elaborate on this?
Any research posted on Microsoft or Fox News which owns it, or research that isn't done by a double blind study, or is biased. Solitary
Which is the vast minority of all research not the majority.
You mean if scientists becomes the pawns in the game?
That reminds me of MGS1, when Otacon was used into making a nuclear weapon.
[youtube:2lue8hbz]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le5izNSDuds[/youtube:2lue8hbz]