virusrex comments

Settle down

Are people not allowed to express themselves now?

Actual historians of Nazis, fascism and holocaust have clearly expressed their opinions about this:

https://x.com/waitmanb/status/1881446968679088467

https://x.com/ruthbenghiat/status/1881460628164120641

Finally science and sanity come together, as Trump states the obvious facts.

Wait, you think science and sanity is decided by political declarations? What makes you think this is something that scientists and doctors agree with?

No virusrex, in is society that will ultimately decide whether it is acceptable to blur the lines of natures decision.

You are talking about different things, if something can be objectively proved then society can decide in a correct or a mistaken way. If for example a society decides that one race is superior that will be "aceptable" in that society, but it will still be wrong. Currently societies aim to make correct decisions based on the best method we have to finding out what is actually real, but there will be always people that want to drag everybody to worse times and pretend that making a mistake popular will magically make it true.

It is not yours or mine, "personal authority" to insist otherwise.

It is when you can't make any argument or bring any reference that proves your claim. Appeal to popularity is a well known fallacy, where a person pretends that something popular is the same as something true. To a point is accepting defeat because a real argument can't be used.

As if these figures were almighty infallible entities.

Not at all, it is simply that claiming they (as in the whole community in the world) is wrong without being able to argue or present evidence of this being the case makes the claim worthless.

On one side you have the scientists and doctors of the world with their thousands of studies saying something, on the other hand you have one nameless person on the internet saying the opposite and supporting it with "just trust me, bro". It is not difficult to see which side is actually much more likely to be correct.

Not all world doctors and scientists agree

Not all doctors and scientists agree with the existence of microbes, there will be always inept, unprofessional, self serving people that are not really qualified to be professionals.

But when you can't find even one respected institution anywhere in the world that supports a claim, then the safe bet is to consider that claim as false. I mean, the alternative is that every single institution of the planet is wrong and the scientific method (which is the basis for the conclusions on those institutions) is actually worthless. That is not even remotely believable.

These same pseudo scientist have yet to explain why would a full grown man claiming to be a girl be had to be believed or a teenage girl saying she wants to be a boy be believed and affirmed, and not someone black claiming to be white or a boy claiming to be turtle or an alien inside. How they differentiate delusion from non-delusion or outright lies is unfathomable.

No they don't, all about gender and why is a construct and a personal matter is well explained, just because you refuse to accept the explanation that does not make it disappear, someone saying that scientists have never explained how the planet is not flat is trying to use the same fallacy.

Not to mention the fact that doctors and scientists can also be biased, bought, act on their own agendas and plain and simple be as evil as any politician.

Which obviously applies much more easily to those that contradict the consensus without offering any evidence or scientific arguments of their claims. Again, one side the full community of the world, on the other outliers that are unable to prove their beliefs.

The fact that there are 2 sexes and thus 2 genders

Not a fact, and again making personal appeals to your own authority is nonsensical from an anonymous account.

So, how about that reference where a respected institution, anywhere in the planet supports the original claim.

None? well, that clears the situation.

if the pseudo scientists are correct, the planet is already screwed therefore there is no reason to act as reversal effect can not be made....

Completely mistaken, the best scientists of the world don't become "pseudo-" just because they can demonstrate something you refuse to accept, and they do not say that there is nothing to do, that is just an effort from antiscientific groups to mislead people into making wrong decisions.

Sanity returns

Being in denial of proved scientific facts is not sanity, is the opposite of sanity.

Nature decide your sex, your gender, from your first struggle for breath at birth.

What happens afterwards is the bitter twisted 21st century toxicity to troll society into believing otherwise.

Any respected institution of human health, medical science, etc. that supports this claim? because just making an appeal to your personal authority to decide this is obviously invalid, specially from an anonymous account.

One major issue producing the birthrate collapse is feminism. Hypergyny is a real human condition, and the statistics prove it.

Which statistics? Do they eliminate the much more obvious causes like important reduction of economic stability, all members of a family needing to work full time, impossibly high prices for houses, etc. etc.?

Also, do this statistics blindly assume that reduced human rights for women are justified because then they can be forced to have more children, or are they included in a proper discussion of the actual causes?

"This is a socially awkward autistic man's wave to the crowd where he says 'my heart goes out to you.'"

There is a minimum of coherence necessary for an excuse to be believable.

The article starts with a weird premise. Has anybody ever claimed that obesity in itself is a "disease"? I have never heard that.

The article clearly mentions why this is the case:

At the same time, some patients and doctors believe obesity needs to be considered a disease so that it receives the attention -- and ambitious policy -- required for such a major public health issue.

 It is a symptom, not a "disease".

if someone is purely obese, without any other health problem, is he having a symptom of what disease? The point is that obesity is not necessarily related to disease in all people.

At 59 I guess he could still be living with his parents and unemployed or this is just poor translation or journalism.

Being unemployed is a simple enough fact to report, he may have never been employed, or work freelance sometimes, be in between part-times jobs, have been "restructured" from his company, etc. etc. Which would require cooperation from the accused to properly report, which may not be possible.

At the end it is a side detail not really important for the incident, so it is understandable that people will not go to great lengths to investigate it.

In gender it is very easy to identify two opposite sides in countries like the US, politicians and religious figures in one side and doctors and scientists on the other.

When you side yourself with politicians against doctors it becomes clear your interest is not what is objectively best, just impose a prejudice by force.

One word of caution is that one very frequent way to consume cucumbers in Japan is in "Tsukemono" pickles, that is quite high on sodium, so people must be careful not to surpass healthy levels of consumption. Fortunately other ways of eating it (fresh, in salads, in vinegar as "sumono", etc.) don't have this problem.

At least he could not make up an actually useful excuse, if there were no witnesses or camera he may have gotten away by denying everything, but with his lame "my hand hit her" he is done for.

That's because the "health experts" haven't exactly sported a stellar record in the last few years.

Yes they have, people live longer and healthier lives than ever before, even counting countries where social, economic, genetic, etc. factors make their work more difficult.

You know who has less successthan the health experts? those that reject the recommendations of those experts.

Obesity is not an "illness," for Pete's sake. It's almost exclusively the result of people's behavior and life choices.

Still wrong, the experts have the evidence behind the claim, they use arguments. You on the other hand just like to call them wrong for making the population in general much more healthier than ever before.

This "illness" didn't seem particularly prevalent prior to the advent of social media, smartphones, video games, a massive increase in the number of fast-food joints, kids not playing outdoors so often anymore, and a host of other waist-expanding behaviors.

You are just listing some of the many different factors that promote obesity. Are you going to say that diabetes is not a disease? because those same factors promote it, according to you that would make it also "just a decision".

True, it's "not always about a lifestyle choice" -- but in the vast majority of cases, it is.

Probe with actual epidemiological data, the experts can easily prove that many factors intervene and is it not just a choice as you misrepresent. Unless you can present that data in a peer reviewed report so others can validate your methods the experts are simply much more likely to be right here, not just nameless people on the internet saying that the experts must be wrong just because.

Yes, there are cases where obesity results from situations outside the person's control. But they are exceptions to the rule.

The genetics are not under the person control, the culture of his place of birth either, the wealth of his family, etc. you are simply trying to ignore very important factors that drive the obesity pandemic and pretend it is as easy as just decide to lose weight. That is precisely what make the problem such a disaster in countries like the US.

So we shouldn't say anything as someone balloons to well over 250-300 pounds -- at least not until it actually starts affecting their organs?

If there ir no organ affection vigilance is enough. Of course you first have to find out that 300 pound healthy patient. After all you are the one here that says this is possible, or even likely.

Shouldn't we warn people against allowing that to happen in the first place

Why? because living a healthy life independently of their weight is so bad according to you? the problem here is that you are baselessly assuming this can only mean disease, which is not the case.

In the vast majority, they are behavioral factors and lifestyle choices; decisions people make like overeating, eating unhealthy food, and not exercising.

Choices that are not importantly affected by things not in the control of the patient? no, not at all. The problem is that you are trying to ignore these very important factors because you yourself may not be subjected to them, which betrays a deep lack of empathy and understanding of the problem.

But there are many who try hard to lose weight but fail miserably because they are given poor advice, from the "respected experts".

Again, when the ones doing worst are those that don't listen to the experts that is where the problem is, not in the advice as you try to misrepresent.

Fewer students means fewer teachers needed.

But not fewer people in need of work, nor fewer retirees in need of economic activity to produce what they will keep consuming. You keep trying to say that decades worth of imbalance would have no importance, but never explain how, just claiming that people not working and not producing would mean no problem, that is just irrational.

I'm sure when Brookhaven National Laboratory came out with the predecessor to "Pong" people never envisioned what video games would become,

And for each example there are 100 that failed, with people thinking that "game changers" like electrified water, blimps or solid tires, each promoted as the next revolution by the developers and here we are, decades later and no change thanks to them.

"The surgeon showed it is possible to operate remotely" AI facilitates this

So you just proved yourself the surgeon is still necessary, even when real world conditions are not yet part of the operation. You contradict your own claim.

Do you imagine AI can't explain things to people?

Do everything, including explaining why the patient died. Probably you would like AI instead of any healthcare professional reciting excuses for anything wrong that happened to a member of your family, most people would not find that acceptable.

put the patient under anesthesia"...good thing the entire population won't become extinct and that there will still be 50% of current jobs remaining for those who are desperately in need of work, eh?

You still are trying to dodge the fact that the people doing those jobs will be the first ones that will not be there, and the people that need those jobs will still have decades to deal with the shortage until they themselves die so things can balance. Trying to dismiss the problem because you have no solution is not acceptable, it is just persisting in a mistake after it was proved a mistake.

Japan is already transitioning into a ditial healhcare provider

And you think this in any way reduce the need for healthcare workers? how do you think a digital hospitalization work? a digital nurse to take samples? You are willingly trying to make a false equivalence between giving doctors a tool to reach people and pretending the tool can replace the doctors, that is obviously not valid.

There is zero realistic use of AI in surgery for the foreseeable future, nor will AI prepare the operating room, clean up and deliver the surgical instruments, put the patient under anesthesia, bring him back to his room, explain things to the family, etc. etc. etc.

Once again your are misrepresenting tools that will allow single tasks to be done more efficiently with replacing a professional that have to do dozens of such tasks continuously to perform a job.

Initially, as that one doctor will likely be replaced by AI that can identify the task, do the diagnostics necessary and perform the surgery...remotely.

That is as believable as Musk when he promised full autonomous cars in any situation in less than a year, in 2015...

Currently AI is not even able to make diagnosis except on crystal clear, textbook like, no unexpected variables, cases. Pretending it will be able to fully replace a doctor in the foreseeable future is beyond believable, have you bought a bridge maybe?

Yes, and often those choices are made based on bad advice, not with the goal of becoming obese.

The medical consensus is clear in the way that this is not simply a choice, that kind of reductionist approach is what made the US develop the current crisis.

Is smoking a disease? It affects the function of the lungs.

That is not an argument, the explanation never said that affecting function is the only necessary parameter to decide if something is a disease, just that it is one of them. Again, according to your flawed logic malnutrition is not a disease, since it obviously is that evidence the argument is not rational.

Should and ought are not is and are.

When valid arguments are given to justify the change that means the current situation is the one in the wrong.

Obesity is a lifestyle choice.

No, it is a very complicated condition that is heavily promoted by many factors, including socioeconomic status, culture, genetics, etc. The mistaken concept of obesity being just a choice is what facilitates crisis like the one happening in the USA.

WTF?

Can someone please untangle this pretzle logic. 

That is your logic, when people argued to you that doctors, nurses, etc would retire your answer was that magically people would stop needing them, even if they (including the retired doctors and nurses) still had decades of life. The whole point is that is your logic the one that is obviously mistken.

What does "fewer jobs will beome unnecassary mean" in this context. The fact is fewer workers will BE necessary due to their jobs being rendered obsolete.

Yet they would still need jobs (for which you offer no solution) for much longer than just two decades) and that this mass-automation is not even close to be applicable in general, specially on health care. No prediction says this will happen, yet the availability of people working in fields like this will decrease importantly even if the demand will remain the same if not increase.

It's not a disease. It's a contributing factor in various diseases such as heart disease or diabetes.

This flawed definition would make many other things "not a disease", for example malnutrition, that would also be "only" a contributor factor, that is not useful. As the article clearly explains the much more useful definition would be that:

When obesity affects the functions of people's organs, it should be considered a distinct illness called "clinical obesity," the commission said.

I've conceded as much. The problem is not fewer people, but fewer jobs for which the solution is not more people.

The solution of pretending fewer jobs will magically become unnecessary (both for those that want those jobs and those that want the services provided) as soon as they are reduced is not a solution either.

I read that as advice to the accused.

For someone standing close to another person sitting down, avoidance would not require boarding a different train, changing places where you stand would be an immediate and relatively easy solution. Depending on the train and the time (4:10 PM doesn't seem like rush hour) the person standing up can even change cars.

OK...the problem is not fewer people, but fewer jobs...

Again, this is a contradiction of your original point which was that there is no problem to solve, you are giving solutions to something you said was not a problem.

This means now you accept there is a problem, that you want to solve by pretending people stops using services as soon as there is nobody to offer them.

The problem isn't in the number of people

Your original claim was not that "this" was not a problem, your origican claim was literally "It isn't exactly a problem either" It was very easy to demonstrate it is a problem. That you think adjusting the economy is the solution only makes it clear you yourself think there is a problem after all, you just disagree with the way it should be solved.

The problem is not having fewer people

The problem is having fewer people without doing anything about it, if there was "no problem" as you mischaracterized there would be no need to do anything about it, no adjust on the economy would be necessary and things would be not worse for it.

When those doctors, nurses etc. retire...there will be far fewer patients. 

Because everybody (including those retired doctors and nurses) become suddenly immune to any health problem? or are you suggesting they should be disposed off so the need is immediately adjusted to the lack of offer of medical services?

It isn't exactly a problem either

If nothing is done, negative consequences would follow? then it is a problem.

The part where you get confused is thinking that if the solution proposed is not of your liking then the situation is not a problem.

There's one tactic used by companies, 'create conflicting "research" results

The article is not an example of conflicting research, BMI has been know for a long time to be an incomplete way to evaluate health risks, it is just a convenient one that unfortunately leads to invalid generalizations too often to be used as it is right now.

The point is not to consider obesity as a normal, desirable thing for people, but to actually differentiate when it affects the health or not, the blanket determination of treating a person as diseased when it surpass an arbitrary number (in weight or BMI) is not as precise as making a more detailed evaluation. For those in the majority that have elevated health risks the situation would be as normal, while those that are still healthy then obesity itself would require nothing more than vigilance.

This is not something that is happening only in weight related problems, other metabolic risks are being treated in the same way, things like genetic markers of risk for dementia or serologic evidence of risk for cancer have been previously taken as signs of disease but may be better treated as indications of vigilance but the patient still be considered not yet affected by the disease.

One has to admire the almost prescient design of the mascot, faithfully depicting the chaos and monstrosity of the organization of the expo long before it was as obvious as it is right now.

The description on the article make it seem a really strange incident, since the accused was standing while the apparent victim seated it would be natural to expect that finding the cough irritating would make Onomura simply move to another place to avoid it.

So simple, get off at nearest station, then board the next train. Avoidance is best.

As the article reads the victim did not escalate things, just that the police were involved (which would make perfect sense and it is desirable).

Hmmm, could it be that there is something wrong with the advice and treatments people are getting from the health care system?

Since the people that have a lower life expectancy are much more likely to NOT follow the advice and treatment from the health care system it is easy to see the problem is not the advice but the people following an easier, more pleasurable lifestyle that have a negative impact in their health.

Fasting adds life to one's health span

Depending on the specific case, recent studies seem to indicate this is beneficial after certain ages, but may be detrimental on young people.

That would still leave other methods that could involve bystanders, like attempts that involve trains at crossings and stations. By all means security at buildings must be improved, but if that only makes other methods more popular maybe it should be only a part of a much more comprehensive system to prevent the attempts.

False argument. Holocaust denial isn't a conspiracy, it's just senseless denial of reality.

The same as antivaxxers, flatearthers, etc. It is a senseless denial of reality that uses a conspiracy as the excuse to supposedly support the nonsense. Clear evidence proves the belief is wrong? that is because there is a global conspiracy that hides the "real" evidence that the person wants to believe.

Sorry, but I disagree. Only practice and reality are causing and making 100% of the problems, not whatever conspiracy or the counterparts, widely accepted theories. Freedom of thoughts and speech therefore should be untouchable in all cases.

This would depend on being in denial of reality, for example vaccines have proved beyond any reasonable doubt to be a hugely successful medical intervention that have saved millions of lives, safe and effective way to prevent disease and death. What makes people reject these safe and effective measures is not reality or practice but the disinformation being propagated by antivaxxer groups. Eliminating demonstrably false claims would solve the vaccine hesitancy problem without modifying vaccines in any way since the actual experts in the topic would still be working to improve them as usual.