141–150 of 339 posts
The author states with authority that he is the father, but doesn't mention the tests confirming it whereas every other finding is linked to the tests involved.
Please don't tell me, in an article praising science, that this was left to faith or trust or whatever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is only 'worth it' because your genes needs you to protect the next generation. Rationally there is no point in having children at all. And speaking statistically, research shows that parents are no more happy than are those who are not parents.
And speaking statistically, research shows that parents are no more happy than are those who are not parents. [citation needed] Also, since we're being rational and all, define happiness. Contrast it with "fulfillment".
Short version: Basically, the evidence is to the contrary. Parents are "more happy."
As a father with a son with severe autism (not to suggest it's equivalent to Bertrand's condition), there is an important lesson here that might not be apparent at first read. Before you have children, understand that it's for the rest of your life. Really understand the impact. Your concerns are second, beyond anything you've ever understood. Marriage is about compromise. Children, however, afford no such privilege.…
Sorry, not worth it at all. Years 1-10 - you will loose all your time - cleaning diapers, making the child eat, making it study, teaching it values - waking up at night - and doing a lot of things for it. Yes you'll see it learn, smile, grow up and you're genetically conditioned to like it. But you will not be able to play your games, go to your parties - read book or contemplate on life, or code without expecting in…
Does your comment assume that the hypothetical subject (i.e., ``you'') has a stay-at-home spouse?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Marriage is about compromise. Children, however, afford no such privilege. No, marriage is having one heck of a good time living your life with your spouse. Being a single parent is better than a bad marriage. And marriage can only be good if the parents know and acknowledge that they together go first, kids come second. Period. Your spouse is the person you spend rest of your life (or at least decades, if you're luc…
I don't mean to be rude, but I think your comment illustrates the attitude prevalent in countries with 50% marriage failure rates. Your ideal is simply unsustainable and impossible. First: Are you married now (or have you been) and do you have kids? I'll assume you are married/committed but I'm not sure you are a parent, given your views. This is a tremendously important point to help frame this discussion. I fear yo…
PS: Describing Marriage as a Nash Equilibrium is probably a better description for HN.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whow, are you arrogant. Can you even contemplate somebody who doesn't want to have children?
"Whow, are you arrogant. Can you even contemplate somebody who doesn't want to have children?" Can you contemplate that if you are having heterosexual/breeder sex, you may have children even if you never planned to?
"Unfortunately, we can't just order a batch and inject Bertrand. We need to get FDA approval, and we'll need Genzyme's cooperation. Even though his disease is life-threatening, his seizures are worsening and he continues to lose white matter, we'll need to prove that it's safe." It's shit like this that makes me hate the FDA.
So, what? You'd prefer no enforcement of basic drug safety testing?
There are reasons why we have the controls we do in medical trials, other than just to provide busy work to career bureaucrats and generally make trouble for sick people. There is a process for getting patients access to investigational drugs, but you still typically need to do some paperwork in order to provide the drug to the patient.
Given this is a new use of an existing, approved drug, this should go fairly quickly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>You might even end up doing something that benefits humanity more than trying to make the next Facebook! Data is piling up faster than we know what to do with it. It's worth mentioning that some of the best tools for letting us do something with it come from the current facebook. I'm constantly tempted to move into academic research rather than helping people get their porn faster, but it seems like a very superfici…
Fair enough, but who is to say those tools wouldn't have been developed if those people were doing bioinformatics research instead. It is frustrating seeing all of the failed startups that thought their poorly thought out plan and execution would create a product that is actually useful. We would be much better off if someone would take the time to explain to people why their idea sucks and save them the time and mon…
It pays to become an expert in your own (or your family members') medical conditions, because you'll quickly become more of an expert than 99% of the doctors you will rely on for care. It helps when they all ask the same dumb questions, which they will do. If your condition is mildly rare, you'll notice when you see a new doctor, that their knowledge will be limited to what you found out in the first hour of internet…
For diseases, you should try reading through the Merck manual (available online). Everything from gynecology, oncology, psychiatric conditions, is all there. If your doctor does a correct diagnosis by asking the correct "dumb questions" that is already amazing. Why should a general doctor be more of an expert in every condition than a person who has it? Look up any individual thing in the Merck manual and it has 2-7 pages. Why shouldn't a person who has that particular disease know more about it?
Let's make an analogy. Say your computer has obscure memory errors because you work in a place that bombards them with alpha particles (or whatever). ECC memory is very important to you. And, therefore, I would expect you to know more about ECC memory than "anyone except two engineers doing active research in this exact condition."
It's just one tiny thing in a myriad list of things to know. There is no reason individuals shouldn't take control over their individual conditions and become educated on this subject.
Let me put it this way. If you have a pet guinea pig with asthma, then within a day of learning that you should (or at least could) know more about asthma in guinea pigs than your vet does, because guinea pigs are just 1 species he or she deals with, and asthma is just one condition. Why shouldn't you know more?
Of course, there are systemic things that are very hard for you to understand about what you're reading, and on this you might have a much poorer understanding than your vet...you don't know how the parts work together. it might be obvious to your doctor that asthma puts the guinea pig at risk of - whatever, lung cancer if you smoke near it or whatever, I'm just making it up - just due to the organs involved, whereas you don't know this unless you read it. The point is that you can read all about one CONDITION but not about the whole system, which is what takes so much time to learn. If you MEMORIZE 3 pages of facts about your condition and read them out loud, then there are parts that you would read aloud that say nothing to you, but are deeply meaningful to a doctor.
When it's prescriptions and proscriptions, it's obvious. ('don't feed it raw meats'). When it's general descriptions then it is harder.
Basically, the proper relationship between a person with a rare illness and a GENERAL doctor is, person: "I read that this condition also puts me at risk of a stroke. Could you tell me what that means?" Because you don't UNDERSTAND what a stroke even means, the way a doctor does.
Then your dr. can proceed to fill you in on the parts you don't understand...even though they might not have even recalled that your condition increases the risk of stroke. (or heart attack or whatever). They're not walking encyclopedias, you know: they're experts, just like any other expert in any other field.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, not worth it at all. Years 1-10 - you will loose all your time - cleaning diapers, making the child eat, making it study, teaching it values - waking up at night - and doing a lot of things for it. Yes you'll see it learn, smile, grow up and you're genetically conditioned to like it. But you will not be able to play your games, go to your parties - read book or contemplate on life, or code without expecting in…
This thing that can only cry learns to: talk, walk, read, express themselves, formulate opinions, ride a bike, conquer fears, grow etc. They do this all the while looking at you as a hero with nothing but complete and selfless love for you. All your minor faults are irrelevant to them. You are their everything. Yes, it's genetic conditioning, but I have been on this planet 37 years and have never experienced emotion…