Category: Uncategorized

Political Junk Science: Stress from Trump election to kill minorities, reports New England Journal of Medicine

Political Junk Science: Stress from Trump election to kill minorities, reports New England Journal of Medicine

via JunkScience.com
https://junkscience.com

I got the the editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association fired in January 1999 for this kind of political junk science. I want another hide for my office.

The media release for the new NEJM study is below.

Click for the JunkScience.com doings that got former JAMA editor George Lundberg fired on Jan. 15, 1999.

###

Recent presidential election could have negative impact on health
HARVARD T.H. CHAN SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH

Boston, MA – Stress, increased risk for disease, babies born too early, and premature death are among the negative health impacts that could occur in the wake of the 2016 U.S. presidential election, according to a new article from Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and Massachusetts General Hospital/McLean Hospital.

Marginalized groups are likely to be most affected, the authors said. That’s because hostile attitudes toward racial and ethnic minorities, immigrants, and Muslims–which appear to have been brought more to the surface with the presidential candidacy of Donald Trump–have been linked in previous studies with both mental and physical adverse health effects.

The article appears in the June 8, 2017 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine.

“Elections can matter for the health of children and adults in profound ways that are often unrecognized and unaddressed,” said David R. Williams, Florence Sprague Norman and Laura Smart Norman Professor of Public Health at Harvard Chan School and Professor of African and African American Studies at Harvard University, and lead author of the article.

Williams and co-author Morgan Medlock, a psychiatrist at Massachusetts General Hospital/McLean Hospital, explored a small but growing body of evidence on how election campaigns can influence health, and considered the implications for health care providers. They looked at existing studies that examined health impacts in the wake of the elections of former U.S. presidents, including President Donald Trump.

Studies conducted after President Obama was elected found an uptick in racial animosity among white Americans and a proliferation of hate websites and anti-Obama sentiment on social media. Donald Trump’s election appeared to heighten already hostile attitudes toward racial and ethnic minorities, immigrants, and Muslims, according to some early research.

Williams and Medlock cited a number of studies suggesting that such societal hostility can have serious health effects. For example:

A January 2017 national survey by the American Psychological Association found that a large proportion of U.S. adults–more Democrats than Republicans, and more minorities than non-Hispanic whites–are stressed by the current political environment.
An August 2016 University of California, Berkeley study of 1,836 U.S. counties found an elevated risk of death from heart disease among both black and white residents of high-prejudice counties, with a stronger effect among blacks than whites.
A February 2006 University of Chicago study of birth outcomes among women of multiple racial and ethnic groups in California revealed that, in the six months after 9/11, when hostility against Arab Americans was intense, only among Arab American women was there a pattern of increased risk of low-birthweight babies or preterm births, as compared with the preceding six-month period.

The authors also warned that cuts to health and social services, such as the threatened repeal of the Affordable Care Act, are likely to further exacerbate the health challenges of poor and marginalized populations in the U.S. They reviewed studies that documented increases in infant mortality, preventable childhood diseases, and chronic disease among adults when such cuts were made early in the Reagan administration.

The authors suggested several ways that health care providers can respond if they find postelection “side effects” among their patients. For example, clinicians could directly address their patients’ emotional distress, suggesting psychotherapy or medication; clinicians and health care organizations could take a strong stance against hate crimes, discriminatory political rhetoric, and incivility; and the health care community can advocate for further research, or conduct their own, on potential negative health effects related to elections and the societal climate, as well as on identifying effective interventions to reduce their adverse effects on health.

###

Preparation of the article was supported by funding from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

“Health Effects of Dramatic Social Events – Ramifications of the Recent Presidential Election,” David R. Williams and Morgan Medlock, New England Journal of Medicine, June 8, 2017, doi: 10.1056/NEJMms1702111

Visit the Harvard Chan School website for the latest news, press releases, and multimedia offerings.

Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health brings together dedicated experts from many disciplines to educate new generations of global health leaders and produce powerful ideas that improve the lives and health of people everywhere. As a community of leading scientists, educators, and students, we work together to take innovative ideas from the laboratory to people’s lives–not only making scientific breakthroughs, but also working to change individual behaviors, public policies, and health care practices. Each year, more than 400 faculty members at Harvard Chan School teach 1,000-plus full-time students from around the world and train thousands more through online and executive education courses. Founded in 1913 as the Harvard-MIT School of Health Officers, the School is recognized as America’s oldest professional training program in public health.

via JunkScience.com https://junkscience.com

June 7, 2017 at 10:47AM

The sun is slumping – And headed even lower

The sun is slumping – And headed even lower

via Ice Age Now
http://ift.tt/2qcAwB3


Solar cycle 24 has seen very low solar activity, likely the lowest in 100 years.


Ap Index 1932 – 2017

When you look at the Ap Index from 1932 to 2017, you can see that the Sun’s magnetic output changed in 2004.  Prior to that, there seemed to be a floor of activity at solar minima. In 2009 the Ap Index dropped far below that level, and has now dropped back to the previous floor. This even though Solar minimum is likely still three years away.


F10.7 flux

In a similar manner, the floor of activity for the F10.7 flux was presumed to be 64. However, the F10.7 flux shows that the Sun has declined from solar maximum to the current stage over the last 3½ years.  Even though it is still presumably still three years to minimum, the Sun is now back to that level.

See several more graphs:
http://ift.tt/2r35ctr/

Thanks to Dean Koehler, Laurel and Heidii13 for this link


 

 

The post The sun is slumping – And headed even lower appeared first on Ice Age Now.

via Ice Age Now http://ift.tt/2qcAwB3

June 7, 2017 at 09:12AM

Inside the Snowflake Academy

Inside the Snowflake Academy

via Science Matters
http://ift.tt/2oqIky9

 

 

Snowflakes: Overly sensitive persons, incapable of dealing with any opinions differing from their own. Snowflakes are light-weight and suffer meltdown when exposed the the light or heat of complex ideas in conflict. They can often be seen congregating in “safe zones” on college campuses.

A previous post (Retreat from Reason) provided a look into the mentality of today’s college professors teaching humanities and social sciences. The dominant mindset is termed “postmodern” to distinguish this perspective from the “modern” viewpoint born of the age of reason or enlightenment.

That text came from Professor Jordan Peterson who recommended reading a book by Stephen Hicks called Explaining Postmodernism. This post provides some descriptions (lightly edited) from Hicks regarding the education of today’s students and the liberal arts attitude toward science.

 

Hicks presents two hypotheses regarding the worldview embraced by postmoderns, which they pass on to their students.

Hypothesis 1: Postmodernism is the first ruthlessly consistent statement of the consequences of rejecting reason, those consequences being necessary given the study of knowledge since Kant.

Thomas Kuhn published in 1962 his landmark book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, signifying the result of four decades of analytic philosophy and the dead end it had reached. If science’s tools are perception, logic, and language, then science, one of the Enlightenment’s prized children, is merely and evolving, socially objective enterprise with not more claim to objectivity than any other belief system. The idea that science speaks of reality or truth is an illusion. The is no Truth; there are only truths, and truths change.

Consequently, by the 1960s, the pro-objectivity, pro-science spirit had collapsed in the Anglo-American philosophical tradition.

Hypothesis 2: Postmodernism is the academic far Left’s stance in response to the crisis caused by the failures of socialism in theory and practice.

Postmodern thinkers inherit an intellectual tradition that has seen the defeat of all of its major hopes.

While the neo-Enlightenment thinkers have come to terms with the modern world, from the postmodern perspective the universe has been intellectually shattered. We can not turn to God or to nature, and we cannot trust reason or mankind.

The failure of Left politics to achieve the vision of a beautiful collectivist society was merely the last straw. To the postmodern mind, the cruel lessons of the modern world are that reality is inaccessible, that nothing can be known, that human potential is nothing, and that ethical and political ideals have come to nothing. The psychological response to the loss of everything is anger and despair.

But the postmodern thinkers also find themselves surrounded by an Enlightenment world that does not understand. Postmoderns confront a world dominated by liberalism and capitalism, by science and technology, by people who still believe in reality, in reason, and in the greatness of human potential. The world that they said was impossible and destructive has both come to be and is flourishing. The heirs of the Enlightenment are running the world, and they have marginalized the post-modernists to the academy. Resentment is then added on top of anger and despair.

The Enlightenment world is proud, confident, and knows it is the wave of the future. This is unbearable to someone invested totally in an opposed and failed outlook. That pride is what such a person wants to destroy. The best target to attack is the Enlightenment’s sense of its own moral worth. Attack it as sexist and racist, intoleratly dogmatic, and cruelly exploitative. Undermine its confidence in its reason, its science and technology. The words do not even have to the true or consistent to do the necessary damage.

The College as Snowflake Academy

In education, postmodernism rejects the notion that the purpose of education is primarily to train a child’s cognitive capacity for reason in order to produce an adult capable of functioning independently in the world. That view of education is replaced with the view that education is to take an essentially indeterminate being and give it social identity. Education’s method of molding is linguistic, and so the language to be used is that which will create a human being sensitive to its racial, sexual, and class identity.

Our current social context, however, is characterized by oppression that benefits whites, males, and the rich at the expense of everyone else. That opresssion in turn leads to an educational system that reflects only or primarily the interests of those in positions of power. To counteract that bias, educational practice must be recast totally. Postmodern education should emphasize works not in the canon; it should focus on the achievements of non-whitges, females, and the poor; it should highlight the historical crimes of whites, males, and the rich; and it should teach students that science’s method has not better claim to yielding truth than any other method and, accordingly, that students should be equally receptive to alternative ways of knowing.

Moderns thought science and technology are good for all, extending our knowledge of the universe and making the world healthier, cleaner, and more productive. Postmoderns say science betrays its elitism, sexism and destructiveness by making the speed of light the fastest phenomenon, thereby unfairly privileging it over other speeds–by having chosen the phallic symbol i to represent the square root of negative one–by asserting its desire to “conquer” nature and “penetrate” her secrets–and, having done so, by having its technology consummate the rape by buiilding bigger and longer missiles to blow things up.

And previously it had been generally thought liberalism, free markets, technology, and cosmopolitanism are social achievements that can be enjoyed by all cultures. On the contrary, Postmoderns think non-Western cultures are superior, since they live simply and in harmony with nature. They find the West is arrogantly blind, elitist and imperialistic, and imposes its capitalism, its science and technology, and its ideology upon other cultures and an increasingly fragile ecosystem.

Conclusion

And thus are grads fully equipped and predetermined to believe in climate change.

 

 

 

via Science Matters http://ift.tt/2oqIky9

June 7, 2017 at 08:43AM

California Once Again Tops the U.S. Clean Tech Leadership Index… But Falls a Penny Short of the Highest Electricity Prices in the Lower 48

California Once Again Tops the U.S. Clean Tech Leadership Index… But Falls a Penny Short of the Highest Electricity Prices in the Lower 48

via Watts Up With That?
http://ift.tt/1Viafi3

California Once Again Tops the U.S. Clean Tech Leadership Index… But Falls a Penny Short of the Highest Electricity Prices in the Lower 48

Guest post by David Middleton

The featured image is a photo of a greenschist from the French Alps.

For some reason, the following article from EcoWatch and the NRDC made me think of something that sounds like greenschist:

Top 10 States Leading the Renewable Energy Revolution

 By Ralph Cavanagh

California continues to lead the way on clean energy, but energy efficiency and renewables are gaining major ground across the country, a new ranking of states and cities shows. Six states now get at least a fifth of their power from non-hydro renewable sources such as wind and solar—further confirmation that regardless of the Trump administration’s efforts to promote fossil-fuel interests, clean energy is making undeniable inroads.

The Golden State and Massachusetts lead the eighth annual U.S. Clean Tech Leadership Index from the research firm Clean Edge for a fifth year in a row, the latter bolstered by its strong record of energy efficiency and private investment in clean tech. Vermont, Oregon and New York round out the top five.

[…]

EcoWatch

I just couldn’t resist comparing electricity prices to the “Clean Tech Leadership Index” (CTLI) and I was not disappointed.  Six of the ten States with the most expensive electricity are in the CTLI top ten.

 CTLI Rank Residential ¢/kWh Rank
Hawaii     55.5 10 29.04 1
Alaska     17.6 21.58 2
Connecticut     58.7 6 20.06 3
Massachusetts     77.8 2 19.84 4
New Hampshire     44.6 18.98 5
California     92.0 1 18.87 6
Rhode Island     51.3 18.01 7
Vermont     72.2 3 17.39 8
New York     63.6 5 17.02 9
Maine     45.5 15.92 10
New Jersey     44.7 15.57 11
Michigan     50.1 15.38 12
Wisconsin     34.5 14.51 13
Maryland     46.9 14.16 14
Pennsylvania     42.2 14.08 15
Delaware     43.3 13.86 16
Illinois     55.3 13.76 17
Kansas     16.9 13.3 18
Alabama     18.1 12.82 19
New Mexico     48.1 12.76 20
South Carolina     28.6 12.64 21
Minnesota     55.9 9 12.58 22
Ohio     35.0 12.35 23
Nevada     36.9 12.13 24
Indiana     24.6 11.99 25
Colorado     58.4 7 11.89 26
Florida     20.7 11.76 27
Arizona     32.8 11.73 28
Georgia     25.6 11.73 29
Iowa     36.1 11.65 30
Mississippi     12.1 11.53 31
West Virginia     14.5 11.52 32
Virginia     35.9 11.46 33
Texas     40.2 11.31 34
South Dakota     21.7 11.11 35
North Carolina     36.5 11 36
Wyoming     13.6 10.91 37
Utah     38.9 10.74 38
Montana     29.0 10.74 39
Tennessee     25.5 10.63 40
Oklahoma     21.8 10.54 41
Nebraska     17.0 10.52 42
Oregon     69.6 4 10.51 43
Kentucky     22.2 10.48 44
Missouri     28.6 10.43 45
Idaho     36.6 9.92 46
Arkansas     23.5 9.85 47
North Dakota       8.0 9.56 48
Louisiana     14.1 9.46 49
Washington     57.4 8 9.28 50

Oregon and Washington benefit from massive hydroelectric resources, while Hawaii and Alaska would have expensive electricity due to their remoteness.  So, I cross-plotted electricity prices vs. CTLI for all 50 States and 46 States (deleting AK, HI, OR & WA).

Elec_CTLI

References

[1] 2017 U.S. Clean Tech Leadership Index

[2] US EIA Table 5.6.A. Average Price of Electricity to Ultimate Customers by End-Use Sector, by State, March 2017 and 2016 (Cents per Kilowatthour)

in Energy.

via Watts Up With That? http://ift.tt/1Viafi3

June 7, 2017 at 07:32AM

Iowa Climate Change