Online activists are silencing us, scientists say • Hacker News Board

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#291

Post by prepend » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:52 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #173

jmcqk6 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I'm following, so I want to make sure I've got this right. You are claiming that there are medical professionals are telling their patients that psychosomatic and mental illnesses are not real illnesses?

There are certainly people going to their doctors complaining of various sorts of chronic pain and/or tiredness, who may be given some tests and test negative, who are then told "it's all in your head" and not offered further treatment. (It's bad enough with physical-but-hard-to-diagnose problems like endometriosis; I know someone who's only just got a diagnosis after several years.) The level of treatment you receiv…

It also depends on whether the healthcare worker is able to help or knows of any treatment.

Sometimes a healthcare worker’s treatment options are honestly exhausted. “Mental illness or psychosomatic” doesn’t mean the patient isn’t suffering, it just means that doc has no idea what to do and that others should be consulted.

It doesn’t it stop the condition from being a mental illness.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#292

Post by Consultant32452 » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:53 PM UTC

aikah wrote: post #72

cm2187 wrote: post #31

Another field where science is on a collision course with online (and offline) activists is genetics. As we decode and understand more of the genome, it is possible that our genes affect more of our behavior than what the partisans of tabula rasa hold for truth. And unless the political climate evolves, in a power struggle between activists and science, I wouldn't bet on the scientists.

"behavioural genetics" and something else I will not even talk about for fear of being hunted and bullied by an angry mob on the internet. These topics are so sensitive because of the current political climate that they are literally career suicide for any western scientist. It has become way too easy to bully people into submission with tools such as Twitter, but not only, too easy to create harassment brigades agai…

If you say the wrong-think loud enough, Twitter will be the least of your worries. When the credit card companies and banks start refusing to do business with you, you're completely lost in modern society. This has already happened for some people.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#293

Post by dragonwriter » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:53 PM UTC

cm2187 wrote: post #46

dragonwriter wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As we decode and understand more of the genome, it is possible that our genes affect more of our behavior than what the partisans of the tabula rasa hold for truth What “partisans of the tabula rasa”? Activists of both the left and right seem more likely to be partisans of genetic determinism, though of which aspects of intellect, identity, and behavior varies between them.

Well a lot of our policies are based on the tabula rasa theory. Gender or racial imbalances between professions for instance are attributed to cultural bias and discrimination. It may be the case, I think only science will provide a definitive answer. And you are right, far right activists do assume full genetic determinism and they may also be proven wrong by advances in genetics. But they are kind of a smaller marg…

> Well a lot of our policies are based on the tabula rasa theory.

I don't think very many policies actually are.

> Gender or racial imbalances between professions for instance are attributed to cultural bias and discrimination.

That's not based on tabula rasa theory, that's based on actual experience of (often, until quite recently, overt and direct) gender and racial discrimination. It certainly tends to involve a belief that certain traits (whether or not genetically determined) are not intrinsically associated with gender or race (or, sometimes, when there is evidence that such an association does exist, that the association is not strong enough to explain the outcome difference.) But that's very different from, and entirely neutral toward, the question of tabula rasa vs. genetic determinism.

> partisans of the tabula rasa are pretty powerful, particularly in academics.

The closest thing I can see to "partisans of the tabula rasa" in the real world, with any kind of power, are religious conservatives, who have a very strong incentive to believe that things for which there is already very strong evidence are genetically determined are choices, so as to ascribe moral virtue to certain traits and moral vice to others. But plenty of them have over time adopted a model of accepting genetic predisposition in (at least some of) those areas while still finding a moral command to act in a certain way regardless of predisposition, so even with them I don't see things quite so irreconcilable as the upthread characterization.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#294

Post by new12345 » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:54 PM UTC

btilly wrote: post #246

Here is a simple rule. Any condition that can be improved with a placebo, has a possible psychological component that can either be a cause or a contributing factor. This is not to say that it is all in your head, or that all people with it have it due to psychological reasons. But some of the people have at least some of their symptoms worsened by psychological factors. Anyone who finds this controversial has psycho…

I agree with possible psychological components is several health conditions. But saying that all acupuncture treatments are placebo is contradicting your first point, besides there are scientific studies that explains mechanisms behind acupunture.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#295

Post by magduf » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:55 PM UTC

nabnob wrote: post #127

This is also happening with research on detransition - >Bath Spa University is conducting an internal inquiry into claims that it turned down an application for research on gender reassignment reversal because it was “potentially politically incorrect” and would attract criticism on social media. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/sep/25/bath-spa-u...

I don't see the problem here; if something is going to bring so much flak, it's prudent for an organization to avoid the situation altogether, even if society at large may be losing out.

I do think, however, that when decisions like this are made, it should be publicized so everyone can know what we're missing out on and why. Moreover, when online activists do ruin stuff like in the original article here, there should be a public record, so that concerned people can see "well, there were these scientists trying to investigate CFS, but they were abused by all these online activists (with all available information about these activists publicly posted), and so they left the field and no one's bothering to research it any more."

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#296

Post by elefanten » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:56 PM UTC

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #73

stdbrouw wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are other handwaving statements towards vaccines, global warming, and GMO It's not entirely clear from the layout, but that bit of content is a kind of "info box", a bit of extra information that in a printed magazine you'd find in a box alongside the main article, meant more as context than as a substantial article on its own. That explains why it merely points out these other cases where activism might clas…

1. Yes, the extra information provides context, but not a solid and deep exploration. 2. Yes, it would be different and I think it's very interesting that the broad journalistic investigation "is research influenced by activism?" does not reach to the most prominent topics that come to mind of "topics that have a lot of controversy, for which there are claims that research in this sphere is influenced by activism". T…

I don't think you should draw conclusions about any other areas of research from this piece. I didn't get the impression the article was trying to make any broader statement about activism vs research. The piece gives one example of that tension, but that tension is not the focus of the piece.

The article was a specific investigation into the dynamics between vocal CFS activists and researchers pursuing a particular path of treatment.

In short, the conclusions you are trying to draw are completely out of scope for this article.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#297

Post by sleepysysadmin » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:56 PM UTC

bjlorenzen wrote: post #220

sleepysysadmin wrote: post #69

I feel like the topic of CFS is irrelevant to the story. Why is there such toxicity online creating these echochambers. If you point out anything that might question climate change for example, you will be called all kinds of names. Nobody looks at the points you are making. Let's test it right now. I'm sure I'll get downvoted and nobody will respond. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_temperature_record#/m... Ov…

Thanks for posting this, I now have a new opinion on climate change :)

Certainly not my intention. The take away I want you to have from this comment isn't climate change but the fact that you should be open to looking at evidence from either side of any subject.

I'm 100% certain the earth isn't flat.

If someone is proposing the earth is flat, you shouldn't call them a moron. You should find out their evidences. Talk to them about their evidences and see if they can change your mind.

You are aware of the westboro baptist church law firm where they say inflammatory things like God hates gays to get people to get angry and then they sue the person and press charges for damages.

Most people would never talk to these people. However https://www.ted.com/talks/megan_phelps_roper_i_grew_up_in_th...

By engaging in conversation you can change people. IF you think you are right about flat earth. Talk to them.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#298

Post by dragonwriter » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:58 PM UTC

alexandercrohde wrote: post #105

dragonwriter wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As we decode and understand more of the genome, it is possible that our genes affect more of our behavior than what the partisans of the tabula rasa hold for truth What “partisans of the tabula rasa”? Activists of both the left and right seem more likely to be partisans of genetic determinism, though of which aspects of intellect, identity, and behavior varies between them.

There are huge proponents of tabula rasa. Consider, fore example, I do research and realize trait X correlates with IQ. Also suppose trait X is highly visible so that I can easily identify who has it (just for concreteness, let's say it's black eyebrows, and 20 IQ points). This would drive the internet batty. The same is true if any such correlations are found for a number of other traits.

What you point out isn't (even we accept its true as described, which I will disagree with in a minute) about people being proponents of tabula rasa: the problem they have is not with the idea that either X or IQ have strong genetic determinants, but with the conclusion that they are correlated.

And, actually, I would argue that in the real world, the correlation isn't even the thing that's problematic, its when the correlation is used as a basis for accepting discrimination on the basis of X. No one is upset about the widely known height/IQ correlation, but that's because no one is using it to justify discriminating based on height, because it is an easily-visible proxy for IQ.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#299

Post by magduf » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 4:59 PM UTC

maxmunzel wrote: post #186

I think one of the basics ways for us to combat this kind of situations is to be more mindful about the people who do good. A single, thankful email from someone who profited from his work goes a long way.

Some thankful emails isn't going to make up for a bunch of angry activists doxxing you and getting you fired.

Re: Online activists are silencing us, scientists say

#300

Post by pard68 » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 5:00 PM UTC

SubiculumCode wrote: post #257

btilly wrote: post #246

Here is a simple rule. Any condition that can be improved with a placebo, has a possible psychological component that can either be a cause or a contributing factor. This is not to say that it is all in your head, or that all people with it have it due to psychological reasons. But some of the people have at least some of their symptoms worsened by psychological factors. Anyone who finds this controversial has psycho…

Curious, if put in practice, what is the reference group for the placebo group?

Not parent, but don't we buy into our own placebos all the time? I was told I had RSI. I got a trackball and a ergodox. I don't have any issue when I use these two devices. When I use my planck my hand is a giant cramp within five minutes.

Sure, I think that the ergodox' layout helps and the trackball sure feels better. But based on the level of difference these two things have made and so quickly, I can't help but believe this is just a placebo.

Before the ergodox I used a planck and a vortex vibe and had zero problems with them. I initially purchased these two devices to combat my RSI and they too worked. Then I was recommended the ergodox and after using it the other keyboards are no longer effective. Swapped one placebo for another.