Still waiting for the NEJM to retract or correct its Perspective OpEd from August 2022 with the dangerous advice, supposedly from an OBGyn, for a woman who left Texas for an abortion (that would have been allowed under the exceptions to restrictions on abortion) to "leave the placenta inside if you," if she delivered on a plane.
Aren't these the same...elites...who thought that psychological diagnoses of Trump by those who never met him was fine and acceptable...but as to obama.lite, aka Pal Joey, oh no, we can't do that.
I had the pleasure of listening to a Lecture by Dr Ben Carson several days ago.i felt that he addressed this issue in a rational way. If you had a Glioblastoma Multiforma in a very dangerous location and were offered the choice of two individual Neurosurgeons , what facts would determine your decision ?
One Neurosurgeon had a long history of very pleasant character, compassionate bedside manner, and acceptance by the overall community. His results in Surgery tended to be average or even questionable relative to his peers over many decades . The other Neurosurgeon was known as an arrogant, rude, driven, demanding, somewhat ruthless individual. He had however a fabulous reputation as a the far superior Neurosurgeon relative to his success in surgery based on all past performance on this type of lesion as well as on all related neurosurgical procedures and pre and postoperative care.
You need to ask yourself which Neurosurgeon would you choose . I know which Surgeon I would choose. Do you ?
I very often find myself agreeing with your substantive points. And your position in its broadest form and taking into account what you've said on many other issues seems to have been that we should conduct ourselves in a way that doesn't alienate those who disagree with us. That we should be considerate of how different well-meaning people can make different judgment calls based on different values and preferences without attributing them to nefarious intent or malice. I'm not sure this vein of your writing has been congruent with that.
But on the separate issue whether partisan pieces convince anyone, I also wonder: Does your writing change votes on editorial boards whether to publish partisan pieces? Does it persuade them to be apolitical? Yet you write these. Because even if no votes or minds are changed, I'm not sure that makes the writing necessarily meritless. Maybe the merit is just bearing witness. If your writing deserves that grace I wonder if so too does theirs. (To be fair, I'm aware the counter to my point is that your Substack is not a peer-reviewed scientific journal, and I give at least some credence to that counter-critique.)
Don't worry Dr. Prasad. It doesn't really matter who you vote into office. Anyone who fails to parrot the establishment narrative won't be on the ballot. The pre-election filtering process is quite efficient. As for "the science", that term is really getting on my nerves. People tend to speak of "the science" as if that is a body of knowledge. It is not. It is a method for determining truth in the physical world and the basic principles are quite simple. Nobody speaks for "the science". Journals that claim to be scientific would have to avoid politics. Politics is the antithesis of science. Some apologists for the political class call politics the "art of the possible". That is ridiculous. It is, instead, the art of the plausible---what you can get people to believe. It is a con and a very successful one at that. Don't forget that 99% of the politicians in all parties were all in on the Covid scam and the destruction of liberties that came with it. All of it with no true science behind it.
This is a very sad hangover of the CoVid era. They divided politically despite claiming to be "following the science" and claimed that only one group could be pro-science. I suspect we'll find someone else this time since CoVid is a less valuable thing to use in politics these days.
Forgetting? May 22, 1915 at a place called Quintinshill Signal Box in Scotland forgetting that an all-stops local was sitting in front of your signal box caused the signalman to let a 25-car troop train enter an occupied signal block at 70mph. The troop train had only 8.5 seconds between when they would have seen the stopped local and they hit it. Less than a minute later a Glasgow-bound express plowed into the wreckage at speed. "I forgot." the signalman said. 227 people, including 214 men of the Royal Scots, died in that disaster, the worst in British rail history.
Still waiting for the NEJM to retract or correct its Perspective OpEd from August 2022 with the dangerous advice, supposedly from an OBGyn, for a woman who left Texas for an abortion (that would have been allowed under the exceptions to restrictions on abortion) to "leave the placenta inside if you," if she delivered on a plane.
Checked today: still online, https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2207423#:~:text=Since%20September%201%2C%202021%2C%20Texas,in%20physician%2Ddocumented%20medical%20emergencies.
fyi
https://globalnews.ca/news/10300870/school-closures-ontario-not-prevent-covid-study/
https://open.substack.com/pub/socraticpsychiatrist/p/thoughts-on-the-goldwater-rule?r=2itqdq&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
What a great article.
No feces, Sherlock.
Alternate title: Gaslighting does not produce desired effect.
Aren't these the same...elites...who thought that psychological diagnoses of Trump by those who never met him was fine and acceptable...but as to obama.lite, aka Pal Joey, oh no, we can't do that.
Hippo? Meet crits.
I had the pleasure of listening to a Lecture by Dr Ben Carson several days ago.i felt that he addressed this issue in a rational way. If you had a Glioblastoma Multiforma in a very dangerous location and were offered the choice of two individual Neurosurgeons , what facts would determine your decision ?
One Neurosurgeon had a long history of very pleasant character, compassionate bedside manner, and acceptance by the overall community. His results in Surgery tended to be average or even questionable relative to his peers over many decades . The other Neurosurgeon was known as an arrogant, rude, driven, demanding, somewhat ruthless individual. He had however a fabulous reputation as a the far superior Neurosurgeon relative to his success in surgery based on all past performance on this type of lesion as well as on all related neurosurgical procedures and pre and postoperative care.
You need to ask yourself which Neurosurgeon would you choose . I know which Surgeon I would choose. Do you ?
Gerald M Casey MD
I very often find myself agreeing with your substantive points. And your position in its broadest form and taking into account what you've said on many other issues seems to have been that we should conduct ourselves in a way that doesn't alienate those who disagree with us. That we should be considerate of how different well-meaning people can make different judgment calls based on different values and preferences without attributing them to nefarious intent or malice. I'm not sure this vein of your writing has been congruent with that.
But on the separate issue whether partisan pieces convince anyone, I also wonder: Does your writing change votes on editorial boards whether to publish partisan pieces? Does it persuade them to be apolitical? Yet you write these. Because even if no votes or minds are changed, I'm not sure that makes the writing necessarily meritless. Maybe the merit is just bearing witness. If your writing deserves that grace I wonder if so too does theirs. (To be fair, I'm aware the counter to my point is that your Substack is not a peer-reviewed scientific journal, and I give at least some credence to that counter-critique.)
Don't worry Dr. Prasad. It doesn't really matter who you vote into office. Anyone who fails to parrot the establishment narrative won't be on the ballot. The pre-election filtering process is quite efficient. As for "the science", that term is really getting on my nerves. People tend to speak of "the science" as if that is a body of knowledge. It is not. It is a method for determining truth in the physical world and the basic principles are quite simple. Nobody speaks for "the science". Journals that claim to be scientific would have to avoid politics. Politics is the antithesis of science. Some apologists for the political class call politics the "art of the possible". That is ridiculous. It is, instead, the art of the plausible---what you can get people to believe. It is a con and a very successful one at that. Don't forget that 99% of the politicians in all parties were all in on the Covid scam and the destruction of liberties that came with it. All of it with no true science behind it.
LOL! Well said, Dr. Prasad. Should we just load the comments section for these journal "articles" and editorial "opinions" with STFU? Let's do it!
This is a very sad hangover of the CoVid era. They divided politically despite claiming to be "following the science" and claimed that only one group could be pro-science. I suspect we'll find someone else this time since CoVid is a less valuable thing to use in politics these days.
Same with art, movies, music etc. horrible.
Forgetting? May 22, 1915 at a place called Quintinshill Signal Box in Scotland forgetting that an all-stops local was sitting in front of your signal box caused the signalman to let a 25-car troop train enter an occupied signal block at 70mph. The troop train had only 8.5 seconds between when they would have seen the stopped local and they hit it. Less than a minute later a Glasgow-bound express plowed into the wreckage at speed. "I forgot." the signalman said. 227 people, including 214 men of the Royal Scots, died in that disaster, the worst in British rail history.
Biden could forget something.
Vinay, One of your best pieces ever. Thanks.
aAmost feels like they want us to doubt any utility to scientific publications.
Well, mission accomplished !
I will never vote for anyone who doesn't know what a woman is.
Adult human female.
"gender" is a word that needs to be rendered obsolete.