New Category: Politics?

More
1 year 5 months ago - 1 year 5 months ago #1 by Diedrich_Duo
Greetings, Fellow Nth Circlers,

First, a disclaimer: This new thread is NOT a reaction to any recent posts / threads / comments on Nth (so please, don't take any of this personally -- I promise you, I am not directing this at anyone in particular). Rather, it has been something I've been thinking about for a long time.

Having been a member here for over 3 years, I've noticed that many threads end up with political overtones / undercurrents, almost to the point of obscuring the original intent of the thread. This is probably just part of our society these days, and I realize how hard it is to separate politics from the rest of what is going on in the world.

That said, I personally find it extremely uncomfortable when some of us "hijack" threads for the purpose of espousing political views, especially since I try to be as apolitical as possible here. I truly believe that everyone's ideas and opinions deserve respect, even when they are different from mine... but am I the lone voice in the wilderness as far as this is concerned?

That is why I am starting this thread, to suggest see if there is interest in starting a new category of "Politics", which would be the appropriate place for anyone and everyone to say whatever is on their mind with no rules (other than the rules that govern Nth Circle), plead and argue their cases, and let All Things Political be discussed within this new category.

What do you think? Thank you in advance for sharing your opinions!

EDIT: Changed some of the wording in paragraph 4, above, based on feedback / replies received to date (shown in strikeout and italics).
The following user(s) said Thank You: Chelle, sovashadow, Isamorph, puppydude, tech-stitch

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 year 5 months ago - 1 year 5 months ago #2 by Soteria 2.0
Replied by Soteria 2.0 on topic New Category: Politics?
Reviving the US CDC
The Lancet Published:May 16, 2020DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31140-5
PlumX Metrics

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to worsen in the USA with 1·3 million cases and an estimated death toll of 80 684 as of May 12.

www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31140-5/fulltext


If you are referring to this article, in terms of hijacking the covid-19 thread.
It begins,
The COVID-19 pandemic.

This was in response and to refute those that maintain the rest of the world laughs at us.

U.S. Now Has the World’s Deadliest Coronavirus Outbreak

This is a misrepresentation.

The Lancet is a weekly peer-reviewed general medical journal. It is among the world's oldest and best-known general medical journals, although it has been at the center of recent controversies.
It is a British publication.
The Lancet has taken a political stand on several important medical and non-medical issues.
and a call for Americans to put a U.S. president in the White House in 2021 who "will understand that public health should not be guided by partisan politics".

Autism and vaccine controversy (1998)
Main article: MMR vaccine controversy § 1998
The Lancet was criticized after it published a paper in 1998 in which the authors suggested a link between the MMR vaccine and autism.

Iraq War death toll controversy (2004)
The Lancet also published a controversial estimate of the Iraq War's Iraqi death toll—around 100,000—in 2004. In 2006, a follow-up study by the same team suggested that the violent death rate in Iraq was not only consistent with the earlier estimate, but had increased considerably in the intervening period (see Lancet surveys of casualties of the Iraq War). The second survey estimated that there had been 654,965 excess Iraqi deaths as a consequence of the war.
The NEJM article stated that the second Lancet survey "considerably overestimated the number of violent deaths" and said the Lancet results were "highly improbable, given the internal and external consistency of the data and the much larger sample size and quality-control measures taken in the implementation of the IFHS."

Fabricated articles withdrawn (2006)

In January 2006, it was revealed that data had been fabricated in an article
by the Norwegian cancer researcher Jon Sudbø and 13 co-authors published in The Lancet in October 2005.
Several articles in other scientific journals were withdrawn following the withdrawal in The Lancet. Within a week, the New England Journal of Medicine published an expression of editorial concern regarding its published research papers by the same author, and in November 2006, the journal withdrew two oral cancer studies led by the Norwegian researcher.

India and superbugs (2010) Edit
In August 2010, The Lancet Infectious Diseases published an article about an enzyme conferring multi-drug-resistance properties in bacteria,[24] which had previously been named New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase or NDM-1 based on the assumed origin of the mechanism.
The article reported 44 clinical isolates of bacteria positive for NDM-1 from Chennai, 26 from Haryana, 37 (from 29 patients) from the UK, and 73 from other sites in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. Of the 29 UK patients, 17 had a history of travel to India or Pakistan within 1 year, and 14 had been admitted to hospital in these countries. The authors of the article cited medical tourism to India for the spread of bacteria carrying NDM-1, which the Indian government denied.

Health impact of alcohol (2010) Edit
A December 2010 article determined that alcohol had the worst medical and social effects compared to other recreational substances such as heroin and crack cocaine. The drugs marijuana, ecstasy, and LSD scored far lower in terms of related harms. The authors did not advocate alcohol prohibition, but they suggested that the government raise the price of alcohol until it was no longer widely available. Gavin Partington, spokesman of the Wine and Spirit Trade Association, responded to the report by saying that alcohol abuse affects "a minority" needing "education, treatment and enforcement". He also remarked that millions of British citizens enjoy alcohol as "a regular and enjoyable social drink".

Alcohol worse than crack.

PACE study (2011) Edit
In 2011, The Lancet published a study by the UK-based "PACE trial management group", which reported success with graded exercise therapy and cognitive behavioural therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome;[31] a follow-up study was published in Lancet Psychiatry in 2015.[32] The studies attracted criticism from some patients and researchers, especially with regard to data analysis that was different from that described in the original protocol.


Open Letter for the People of Gaza (2014)

In August 2014 and during the 2014 Israel–Gaza conflict, The Lancet published an "Open letter for the people of Gaza" in their correspondence section. As reported in The Daily Telegraph, the letter "condemned Israel in the strongest possible terms, but strikingly made no mention of Hamas' atrocities."The authors of the letter include doctors who "are apparently sympathetic to the views of David Duke, a white supremacist and former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard."
One of the doctors responded by saying: "I legitimately use my right of freedom of opinion and do not agree or value the politics of the government of Israel, nor of many others, including Jews in and out of Israel."
A second one responded with: "I didn't know who David Duke was, or that he was connected to the Ku Klux Klan. I am concerned that if there is any truth in the video, that Jews control the media, politics and banking, what on earth is going on? I was worried."

The editor of The Lancet, Richard Horton, said: "I have no plans to retract the letter, and I would not retract the letter even if it was found to be substantiated."

However, Horton subsequently came to Israel's Rambam Hospital for a visit and said that he "deeply, deeply regret[ted] the completely unnecessary polarization that publication of the letter by Paola Manduca caused."

Mark Pepys, a member of the Jewish Medical Association, wrote: “The failure of the Manduca et al. authors to disclose their extraordinary conflicts of interest... are the most serious, unprofessional and unethical errors.
The transparent effort to conceal this vicious and substantially mendacious partisan political diatribe as an innocent humanitarian appeal has no place in any serious publication, let alone a professional medical journal, and would disgrace even the lowest of the gutter press."


In addition, Pepys accused Richard Horton personally, saying: "Horton's behavior in this case is consistent with his longstanding and wholly inappropriate use of The Lancet as a vehicle for his own extreme political views.


It has greatly detracted from the former high standing of the journal."


In response, Horton said: "How can you separate politics and health?
The two go hand-in-hand."



Reviving the US CDC

On 16 May 2020, The Lancet published an article on the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) that, amongst other things, faulted the Trump administration for its July 2019 termination of a CDC programme under which the CDC stationed officers in China, ostensibly to serve as a distant early warning system. The writers opined that CDC director Robert R. Redfield was frightened of Trump and in any case had not "the technical capacity to lead today's complicated effort." The article concluded with a call to the American people to elect someone other than Trump in November 2020.

Mark Pepys, a member of the Jewish Medical Association, wrote: “The failure of the Manduca et al. authors to disclose their extraordinary conflicts of interest... are the most serious, unprofessional and unethical errors.
The transparent effort to conceal this vicious and substantially mendacious partisan political diatribe as an innocent humanitarian appeal has no place in any serious publication,
let alone a professional medical journal, and would disgrace even the lowest of the gutter press."

In addition, Pepys accused Richard Horton personally, saying: "Horton's behavior in this case is consistent with his longstanding and wholly inappropriate use of The Lancet as a vehicle for his own extreme political views.
It has greatly detracted from the former high standing of the journal." In response, Horton said: "How can you separate politics and health? The two go hand-in-hand."

inappropriate use of The Lancet as a vehicle for his own extreme political views.

He has already been accused of using the Lancet for his own political views.


The critique, should start at home.
They are just not credible.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 year 5 months ago - 1 year 5 months ago #3 by Diedrich_Duo

If you are referring to this article, in terms of hijacking the covid-19 thread.
It begins,
The COVID-19 pandemic.

No, I was not. Please let me repeat: This new thread is NOT a reaction to any recent posts / threads / comments on Nth (so please, don't take any of this personally -- I promise you, I am not directing this at anyone in particular). Rather, it has been something I've been thinking about for a long time.

Getting back on topic: Are you, or are you not, in favor of starting a new category titled "Politics"?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 year 5 months ago #4 by KentE
Replied by KentE on topic New Category: Politics?
Disclaimer: I'm politically active.
That said, this forum is not a particularly good place to discuss politics. I think most of the readers here are here for other reasons. There are plenty of more appropriate, and possibly even productive, places & forums to discuss politics.

That said, it seems inevitable that one's political views will creep in to discussions about any interest, especially in times of worry and discontent. I imagine somewhere on a stamp collector forum, there's a squabble about whether a perforation error was a result of The Deep State, big-money corruption, administration incompetence, global warming, or part of the moon-landing hoax, instead of just a machine failure..

(Just for clarity, I've enjoyed many of the posts shared on this forum about Covid-19. It's more interesting to me when they're more focused on science, statistics, advice, studies, etc., than on political views. And I definitely appreciate the tips on how to cope with the side-effects of the pandemic, including shopping, recipes, streaming, etc.)
The following user(s) said Thank You: Isamorph, realLexusl21, Diedrich_Duo, Soteria 2.0, puppydude, tech-stitch

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 year 5 months ago #5 by realLexusl21
I pass over all political (ads) posts.

I am here for phone/carrier deals and discussions and the online friendships I made.

I owe a few on this board a great deal of gratitude.

I started on r+ with a Moto flip phone. Did not want to pay a carrier $20 per month for using a flip phone anymore.
The following user(s) said Thank You: sovashadow, Diedrich_Duo, Soteria 2.0, puppydude

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 year 5 months ago #6 by sovashadow
Replied by sovashadow on topic New Category: Politics?
I am VERY much AGAINST the idea. Its always an uncomfortable situation for everyone. Lets have this topic never show up on this bipartisan forum.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Diedrich_Duo, Soteria 2.0, y4vix

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 year 5 months ago #7 by tech-stitch
Replied by tech-stitch on topic New Category: Politics?
I don't have a problem with it, but I would likely be off that thread. I've seen far too much trouble when it comes to politics (like relationships strained).

I prefer to stay neutral.

PS. If I've made any post that seems politically motivated or offended anyone, my apologies. I am here for the tech and cell knowledge and corresponding discussions!
The following user(s) said Thank You: Isamorph, Diedrich_Duo, Soteria 2.0, puppydude

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 year 5 months ago #8 by Soteria 2.0
Replied by Soteria 2.0 on topic New Category: Politics?

If you are referring to this article, in terms of hijacking the covid-19 thread.
It begins,
The COVID-19 pandemic.

No, I was not. Please let me repeat: This new thread is NOT a reaction to any recent posts / threads / comments on Nth (so please, don't take any of this personally -- I promise you, I am not directing this at anyone in particular). Rather, it has been something I've been thinking about for a long time.

Getting back on topic: Are you, or are you not, in favor of starting a new category titled "Politics"?


No.
I have been an advocate for the use of hydroxychlorquine.
I take this medication.
I am aware of the risks and adverse reactions.
Most of which the press exaggerates.
Some believe that hydroxychloroquine, is an euphemism for political position.
Therefore making derogatory comments.

Thursday, May 14, 2020

NIH begins clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin to treat COVID-19

People living with HIV and pregnant and breastfeeding women also are eligible to participate in the study. The first participant enrolled today in San Diego, California.

“We urgently need a safe and effective treatment for COVID-19. Repurposing existing drugs is an attractive option because these medications have undergone extensive testing,
allowing them to move quickly into clinical trials and accelerating their potential approval for COVID-19 treatment,” said NIAID Director Anthony S. Fauci, M.D.

When possible, participants will come to the clinical research site for an in-person visit at day 20.

Must not be that dangerous.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 year 5 months ago - 1 year 5 months ago #9 by Chelle
Replied by Chelle on topic New Category: Politics?

I pass over all political (ads) posts.

I am here for phone/carrier deals and discussions and the online friendships I made.

I owe a few on this board a great deal of gratitude.

I started on r+ with a Moto flip phone. Did not want to pay a carrier $20 per month for using a flip phone anymore.


I agree!

You'll notice that I avoid political posts like the plague.

And when non political threads turn political I stop reading them.

I stay abreast of politics on a daily basis, so it's not that I'm uninformed.

I come here to get away from politics, though. I don't know which of you are liberals and which are conservative because I read absolutely none of those threads.

My experience with politics on social media is that the people with the strongest opinions are usually the least informed. There is a lot of nuance and gray area in politics. Most topics are too complicated to be reduced to a meme. Most topics end up being infantilized on social media.

If someone is able to reduce everything down to good and evil then their opinion isn't worth my time.

Part of me would like to see a politics category with a way to optionally hide it from view.

And part of me would just like to see politics removed from this forum all together.
The following user(s) said Thank You: realLexusl21, Diedrich_Duo

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • PEW
  • PEW's Avatar
  • Telepathy
  • Telepathy
More
1 year 5 months ago - 1 year 5 months ago #10 by PEW
Replied by PEW on topic New Category: Politics?
We actually need a TL;DR thread for people to post whole articles. Imagine, we can archive the whole internet on nthcircle. ;)
The following user(s) said Thank You: Diedrich_Duo, Mark, uhthisb, y4vix

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.