Slashdot Mirror

You know what's even weirder? If you went by what he said (instead of what you said) a lot of venomous snakes wouldn't actually be venomous http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

"Prior to the 1980s there were no GMO organisms anywhere in the world"

Wrong.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

The best design for a solar plane with the capabilities of current planes might well be a regular solar farm powering a conventional fuel synthesis plant.

This. As one example, researchers are investigating ways to use sunlight, water, and carbon dioxide in the air itself to synthesize kerosene. If we can manage to do that on an economically viable scale (which would mean building these plants on a massive scale), it would make a serious dent in curbing our fossil fuel appetite.

You simply can't beat the efficiency of hydrocarbon fuels in terms of released energy for a given weight and volume (as fuzzy gives us some hard numbers below), and that's crucially important for aviation. At the moment, there simply isn't any viable alternative.

Serious question: what's with the medium.com hate? I really don't get it.

This is not hate, by engineering standards, only mild scorn. Speaking for myself, I like good factual information backed by references if possible - Wikipedia matches that in many cases, so something like that, or perhaps articles on Science Daily:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/in...

The thing about medium.com is that it is targeted for a completely different audience; the people that like modern 'nature programs', with lots of movie-style cutting, funky sound-track, replayed sequences etc - probably very artistic, but tedious and drawn out ad infinitum and with very little factual information. Or, perhaps a bit like BBC's Horizon series, which also tends to be tediously sparse on real information (and I am a great fan of BBC in general, it has to be said).

Obviously the CFC industry wasn't as big and powerful as the fossil fuels industries, didn't spend enough money obfuscating the issues, ....

Nonsense. The producers of CFCs realized that there was more money to be made in producing (and patenting) the replacements. As an example, look at the price of an Albuterol inhaler. Or think about the cost of recharging an A/C system in comparison to the cost before Freon was banned.

Related to this?

"Study pinpoints the likeliest rodent sources of future human infectious diseases"

http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

go red team! http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

Must I, or are you just dodging?
You see, I asked you for yours, because upon googling, I could find no such study information.

Now, if you google "gender differences in spatial intelligence", you're going to have quite a different result. The consensus is moving toward spatial ability gender differences being a matter of nurture, not nature. Determined by culture, not sex organs.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...
http://www.sciencedirect.com/s...
http://pss.sagepub.com/content...
Wikipedia has probably the most comprehensive list of scientific citations on the topic, with the debunkings of decades-old studies that failed to account for even a modicum of non-physiological possibilities. You should read up. Learn something new.

Ultimately, though, given just how much information there is on the topic, I'm pretty sure you're playing off of some pre-conceived cultural leanings.

Did you write that Wikipedia gender war agit-prop yourself. Here's something I Googled up for a quote just now

http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

Although suicide rates are lower among women, women lead men two to one in suicide attempts. So, Murphy says at least 200,000 women are involved in suicide attempts annually. But he points out that attempted suicide most often is not an attempt to actually end one's life. Its purpose, he says, is to survive with changed circumstances.

"An attempted suicide is not really an attempt at suicide in about 95 percent of cases. It is a different phenomenon. It's most often an effort to bring someone's attention, dramatically, to a problem that the individual feels needs to be solved. Suicide contains a solution in itself," he says.

Off you go to prove this Muphy guy was a stinking misogynist. It must be true because he's so mean. You should tweet about it.

Facebook can be useful if you have this problem: Are you too happy? Is it uncomfortable being happier than everyone else? Do you want to be miserable like everyone you see around you? Facebook has an answer. Read Facebook use predicts declines in happiness, new study finds. Or download the scientific paper.

How to avoid the abusers:
Adblock Edge
NoScript
Ghostery
Better Privacy
Cookies Manager Plus (Does not delete one particular Google cookie.)

That's all definitely interesting speculation, but the point remains: As far as quantum effects go, it is all speculation. Nothing like what you suggest has been discovered; further, no effect has been detected that cannot be attributed to one or more of the chemical, electrical or topological mechanisms we're already aware of.

I will kindly refer you to this type of phenomena:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_helmet

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcranial_magnetic_stimulation

These are alterations of the magnetic fields from sources outside the cranium and outside the myelin sheath which impact the neural processing. Would this not be indicative of quantum influences in neural processing?

Given that these effects are sourced outside the cranium, it would seem plausible then that the current generated as a signal propegates down the axon of neuron A would have an impact on parallel neuron B firing due to the magnetic field generated from A's firing. These generated magnetic fields are strong enough to be detected outside the cranium and are the basis of some FMRI techniques.

http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/meg/pdfs/Xiong%20et%20al%202003.pdf

Taking into account the inverse square law, the noise coming off a neuron firing is MUCH LOUDER one parallel neuron over than for a sensor located outside the cranium.

There are actual articles on inter-neuronal communication via electromagnetic waves: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/02/110202132617.htm and Neural and Brain Modeling by Rondald MacGregor

Ultimately what this points to is that our mathematical models of neural networks and dynamic bayesian networds are not exactly what is happening inside the brain. At best its a discrete approximation to a continuous space which exists in a feedback loop with itself. Kinda like a Summation approximation for the Integral of a function.

The topological graph structure of the nueron connections through dendrite and axons is dominant, but it is not dominant enough to eliminate the influence of the fluctuations in the ambient electromagnetic fields. The above articles provide evidence of this. It's not just speculation.

It is this kind of simplistic outlook that really misleads people, yourself included. There is a difference between 12 grams of sugar in strawberries and a banana, and 12 grams of sugar mixed into water. First, the body metabolizes different sugars using different organs. Second, it is notoriously old and well known that natural sugars in fruits enter the bloodstream more slowly than, e.g. refined cane sugar or high fructose corn syrup mixed into flavored water. That makes a difference in how the body processes it. If the sugar is coming too fast to be dumped into the bloodstream all at once, it may be stored as fat. If it metabolizes more slowly, more of it can be burned as needed. Third you completely MISSED the fact that the guy is consuming these calories in the morning. WHEN someone eats could matter even more that what they eat. http://www.sciencedaily.com/re... The morning is probably the best possible time to eat some fruits, especially if they are mixed with protein. Really, you should limit your daily output of reductionist tripe. Nutrition and metabolism are incredibly complex. Don't over-simplify.

"monstrous surveillance engine" He left out evil. Should be: "evil monstrous surveillance engine"

But Facebook can be useful: Are you too happy? Is it uncomfortable being happier than everyone else? Do you want to be miserable like everyone you see around you?

Facebook has an answer. Read Facebook use predicts declines in happiness, new study finds. Or download the scientific paper.

Psychopaths do not fear prosecution/punishment;
http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

How to fix it?

Are you too happy? Is it uncomfortable being happier than everyone else? Do you want to be miserable like everyone you see around you?

Facebook has an answer. Read Facebook use predicts declines in happiness, new study finds. Or download the scientific paper.

DARPA Is Developing Implants To Heal Soldiers’ Bodies and Minds link
Verified case in courts of electronic harassment of targeted individual James Walbert with MRIs of implants in the neck and head youtube
NASA Develops System To Computerize Silent, 'Subvocal Speech' sciencedaily
Harold Holt Murder - Gary's CT Scan Images of device in throat (1979) harold-holt.net
Powering micro-implants using high frequency waves extremetech.com
Literal Smart Dust Opens Brain-Computer Pathway to "Spy on Your Brain" activistpost
Scientists use brain imaging to reveal the movies in our mind berkeley.edu
Who is Elisa Lam? (1 hour long) vimeo youtube
http://www.mindjustice.org/200...
Small implants to trigger muscle spasms for remote harassment link
Whats been possible since the 70's link
https://linux.conf.au/wiki/Tin...

And the ocean has continued to warm over the past 20 years.

No, it hasn't.

NASA is a big proponent of AGW, and even they admit the oceans are not warming to the extent required to explain the pause.

Psychopaths do not fear prosecution/punishment;
http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...
Caste system created millions of psychopaths in India;
http://www.hrw.org/legacy/engl...
What else do you expect when Upper caste Brahmin Jyoti singh PANDEY abused/exploited Lower caste Mukesh singh YADAV for over 2000 years?
https://petitions.whitehouse.g...

New study: Salt causes hypertension
http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

The significant problems we have cannot be solved at the same level of thinking with which we created them.

Psychopaths do not fear punishment;
Caste system created millions of Psychopaths in India;
http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/re... -- resource for the above quote.

"Pricking yourself with something that an infected person used is a sure-fire way to get an infection.

It's as if you don't even know how diabetic test strips, and other test strips like this one, work, or even that lancets of all kinds are disposable.

If you RTFA and click through to the Science Daily article, you'd read this:

"During the field testing in Rwanda, health care workers were given 30 minutes of training, which included a user-friendly interface to aid the user through each test, step-by-step pictorial directions, built-in timers to alert the user to next steps, and records of test results for later review. The vast majority of patients (97%) said they would recommend the dongle because of its fast turn-around time, ability to offer results for multiple diseases, and simplicity of procedure."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

That is fucking spectacular.

Shut the fuck up.

--
BMO

Here is a link to the original article cited by the Times that contains more detail.

Indeed it is, just not what you're expecting.

How is this a Troll? Because it goes against the groupthink?

GMO is different, it's a fundamentally different approach to breeding plants which goes way beyond breeding, and it permits outcomes which were not feasible or even possible before. That is cause for alarm. It's not reason not to experiment, of course. Science is how we progress as a species. I object to using the wide world for these experiments, not to doing the science.

This is a perfectly reasonable point of view. It is objectively true that GMO is different from traditional breeding methods. How many generations of selective breeding would it take to breed a glow-in-the dark strawberry plant? I have no idea, but I bet if you started at the dawn of agriculture you still wouldn't have one. What would you even select for? But now we can do that directly with genetic engineering, in one generation. Genetic engineering of crops is a second agricultural revolution, except with even more potential impact both to human health and the health of ecosystems.

And what effect did the first agricultural revolution have on human health? It was good, right? Not necessarily:

When populations around the globe started turning to agriculture around 10,000 years ago, regardless of their locations and type of crops, a similar trend occurred: The height and health of the people declined.

... Many people have this image of the rise of agriculture and the dawn of modern civilization, and they just assume that a more stable food source makes you healthier," Mummert says. "But early agriculturalists experienced nutritional deficiencies and had a harder time adapting to stress, probably because they became dependent on particular food crops, rather than having a more significantly diverse diet.

Sound familiar?

... "Culturally, we're agricultural chauvinists. We tend to think that producing food is always beneficial, but the picture is much more complex than that," says Emory anthropologist George Armelagos, co-author of the review. "Humans paid a heavy biological cost for agriculture, especially when it came to the variety of nutrients. Even now, about 60 percent of our calories come from corn, rice and wheat."

... "I think it's important to consider what exactly 'good health' means," Mummert says. "The modernization and commercialization of food may be helping us by providing more calories, but those calories may not be good for us. You need calories to grow bones long, but you need rich nutrients to grow bones strong."

People have become healthier because of agriculture, but not because the food is healthier--it probably isn't healthier. Rather, we've become healthier in the long run because agriculture allowed us to produce enough food to have doctors and clean water and sanitation. In the short term, agricultural food made us less healthy.

In principle, a genetically engineered food supply could be overall better, maybe even incredibly better. But in practice it isn't clear we're getting that, or even if that's what we're trying to get. Instead, we're just continuing to make food even cheaper, not necessarily healthier, with even more dependence on particular crops.

Agriculture freed enough people from the burden feeding themselves to create modern civilization. But today almost nobody is a farmer--we're just making agriculture more profitable, but at what cost? Genetic engineering so far has mostly been used to maximize crop yield over nutrition and diversity, just like we've always done.

Which is to say nothing about the potential ecological implications. "The picture is much more complex than that" is an understatement. This won't be the first time we've forged ahead with some technology completely oblivious to the ecological impacts.

Nice comment, thank you. I had no idea there's an MAOI in cigarette smoke.

Then it turns out that nicotine use was self-medication and now you can't use any of a new class of drugs being developed that are all based on nicotine. OOPS

This is particularly interesting... I hadn't though of that. It does seem likely some good drugs will be coming out based on nicotine. I see research published regularly (on my favorite science news site: sciencedaily.com) about nicotine, leaving me with the impression that it is a bit of a wonder drug. That is in stark contrast to it's reputation outside of science as evil life-destroying poison.

It should be said that the benefits of quitting smoking outweigh the future possible benefits of nicotine drugs. The drugs may work anyway, depending on how specific the vaccine is to nicotine. And Wikipedia says "Nicotine stimulates angiogenesis and promotes tumor growth and atherosclerosis," siting this research, so nicotine might not be so safe after all.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/re... (Study debunks common myth that urine is sterile)

Since a majority of biological scientists are women, we just need to spin up the feminist machine and the grant money will flow.

See, with more women in the roles of running labs, women will become the majority of biological scientists.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2014...

http://www.theguardian.com/sci...

False. http://www.sciencedaily.com/re... [sciencedaily.com]

The GP said harmful bacteria. There will be bacteria in your bladder, hell there will be bacteria on your genitals as well when it comes out, but chances are it's going to be benign in nature, much the same as bacteria commonly found on your skin. The bacteria found on your hands and in your mouth is invariably going to be far more dangerous.

The bacteria may not, but dehydration definitely can, and that's the effect of drinking urine.

That depends on the content of the urine. If it is super high in electrolytes (which isn't atypical,) then yeah it probably would dehydrate you. The contents vary from person to person and further depending on that person's diet at the time they took a piss.

Human waste contains heaps of harmful bacteria.

Poo? Yes. Piss? No.

False. http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

While urine smells foul and probably tastes worse, it wouldn't kill you to drink it.

The bacteria may not, but dehydration definitely can, and that's the effect of drinking urine.

German researches found already similar clues about brown fat. At home my work room temperature has been around +15C (59F) during winter, just to cut heating costs of the old house. It's great to see, that it's not the only benefit.

Here's some more handy links about this research:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_...

Unfortunately, Latin was not one of the languages they investigated in this research, but I do find it very interesting how Latin, which is one of Spanish's parent languages, is far, far more efficient (in dI/dS terms) than Spanish is, and in fact is probably more efficient and complex than any of its derivatives.

This isn't surprising, in light of 2008 research that showed that the same blue light dentists use to cure filling material slows the growth of tumors in mice.

You claim to be hyper rational, but I see what sexism does to women first hand. In fact, your supposedly hyper rational view is provably pathetic nonsense. Women are discriminated against in STEM fields. Your argument is a typical horns of a dilemma, "if not this, then clearly that". You can't see any other reasons than 'choice'? Either you are knowingly posting a misleading argument, or you have shit for brains. Those seem to be the only choices.

Try searching for 'discrimination against women in STEM' for more information. In case you can't figure out how to use google, here is one.

With everyone from the federal government to corporate America working to encourage more women to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering and math fields, you would think the doors would be wide open to women of all backgrounds. A new study shows that this could not be further from the truth and that gender bias among hiring managers in STEM fields is extraordinarily prevalent.

Here is another one:

Despite efforts to recruit and retain more women, a stark gender disparity persists within academic science. Abundant research has demonstrated gender bias in many demographic groups, but has yet to experimentally investigate whether science faculty exhibit a bias against female students that could contribute to the gender disparity in academic science. In a randomized double-blind study (n = 127), science faculty from research-intensive universities rated the application materials of a student—who was randomly assigned either a male or female name—for a laboratory manager position. Faculty participants rated the male applicant as significantly more competent and hireable than the (identical) female applicant. These participants also selected a higher starting salary and offered more career mentoring to the male applicant. The gender of the faculty participants did not affect responses, such that female and male faculty were equally likely to exhibit bias against the female student. Mediation analyses indicated that the female student was less likely to be hired because she was viewed as less competent. We also assessed faculty participants’ preexisting subtle bias against women using a standard instrument and found that preexisting subtle bias against women played a moderating role, such that subtle bias against women was associated with less support for the female student, but was unrelated to reactions to the male student. These results suggest that interventions addressing faculty gender bias might advance the goal of increasing the participation of women in science.

Concerning indians, here is another reference.

MIT has developed methods of splitting water molecules by means of solar energy based on research into photosynthesis. Sadly I haven't heard anything new about this since I first heard about it awhile back and I hope they're still working on it.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

I expected little less than this

Why have public relationships? Public internet relationships are a fad of fake, self-destructive behavior, like the way women dressed in the 1950's.

All of the LinkedIn requests I've ever received have been attempts to pretend that a relationship exists that is more meaningful than in reality.

Sometimes a large percentage of people do crazy things. Don't follow them. I have friends, customers, and business contacts who sometimes read and reply to only the first paragraph of an email, and don't read the rest. It's part of the nonsense of the times.

I told a dentist with a Facebook page that Facebook was showing an ad for another dental clinic on his Facebook page. The dentist just accepted the abuse.

The free open source diaspora* social network software allows privacy.

This book is about the development of Diaspora: More Awesome Than Money: Four Boys and Their Heroic Quest to Save Your Privacy from Facebook. The book is poorly written by someone with no programming experience and no interest in learning, but it does tend to show the difficulties of developing software.

Are you too happy? Is it uncomfortable being happier than everyone else? Facebook is the answer. Read Facebook use predicts declines in happiness, new study finds. Or download the scientific paper.

The first result in a Google search for 50's clothing and hairstyles says, "Ever ready to suffer for the cause of soft feminine looking Fifties styles, after the perm, we still had to roll, curl our hair." A Wikipedia article says, "One ingredient in 1950s hair spray was vinyl chloride monomer; used as an alternative to chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), it was subsequently found to be both toxic and flammable."

Avoid the craziness you see around you.

Aside from the fact that you're comparing the supposed collective seeping of a liquid into the ocean with human bloodloss and a bunch of random numbers you pulled out of your bum, I'm sure the fishers that are out of business due to the incredible damage to the marine food web are very thrilled that you think oil contamination is harmless, let alone the effects of Corexit, the extremely toxic that BP wantonly sprayed all over the spill to help hide evidence of the crime.
http://www.theguardian.com/env...


So now there are several hundred meter-thick swaths of death sludge, 100 meters thick in some places..
http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...
But a little oil's harmless, right guys?

Who needs social networks online?

Facebook solves a very serious problem. Are you too happy? Is it uncomfortable being happier than everyone else? Facebook is the answer. Read Facebook use predicts declines in happiness, new study finds. Or download the scientific paper.

That's okay. Since you can't be bothered to google it yourself, I'll help GP a bit and show you one.

I think you may have linked to the wrong paper.

The one you linked to doesn't have the word "geothermal" in it, and the science daily write up about the paper didn't mention this either.

"Estrogens ain't estrogens (Sol)"
http://www.arhp.org/publicatio...

@butchersong
And why is this not "the best source" - peer reviewed... did I miss some bad science?

I thought an experiment based on a false belief that estrogen from the Pill is the same estrogen that is found in waterways was bad science - like the flawed UK research it was "based on".

The researcher refers to "estrogen-like" in the science press, but the term "birth control pills" is quoted in the non-science press. Need for publicity, bad reporting, or both?

cough*Dairy farmers*cough(??)

This is a problem but it seems like we might have multiple contributors of estrogens in drinking water with birth control pills not the most significant. Not the best source but: http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

20,500 types of proteins and loads more awkward to measure non-protein data (the stuff comically known as 'noncoding DNA').

So how much ground displacement was there in 2011 during the Great East Japan Earthquake?

By analyzing over 500 GPS stations, the GFZ scientists Rongjiang Wang and Thomas Walter have found that horizontal displacements of up to five meters in an eastern direction occurred at the east coast of Japan. The cause lies in the earthquake zone, i.e. at the contact interface of the Pacific plate with Japan. Computer simulations of this surface show that an offset of up to 25 meters occurred during the earthquake. Calculations of the GFZ modeling group headed by Stephan Sobolev even yielded a displacement of up to 27 meters and a vertical movement of seven meters.

And then there is the permanent subsidence which was up to 1.2 m (3.93 ft) in the Oshika Peninsula, Miyagi Prefecture.

So building new expensive technological infrastructure in earthquake country and ignoring known problems seems to be a common occurrence. And I'm sure it's a world wide blind spot with respect to a lot of other potential natural disasters as well.

Porn shrinks your brain

Lack of sleep shrinks your brain

Multi-tasking shrinks your brain

Religion shrinks your brain

Fat shrinks your brain

Elevated Blood Sugar shrinks your brain

Stress shrinks your brain

Aging shrinks your brain

Alcohol shrinks your brain

Vegetarianism shrinks your brain

Type 2 diabetes shrinks your Brain

Cell phones shrink your brain

I think medical fear mongering is shrinking our brains.

And yes, I did search for "Climate Change is shrinking our brains." No hits. So there you go MSM; a perfectly good theme that no one has used yet.

For anything in the solar system to be YOUNGER than the sun, it would have to be MADE by the sun, or as a byproduct of the sun achieving fusion. Our planet is younger than the sun itself, but the elements that comprise it are much, much older.

That only applies to atoms, not molecules. I can point to oodles of molecules that in a "most recent step" sense were made by the sun (e.g., through UV radiation or 'solar bleaching') and oodles of molecules that in that same sense were not (e.g., plastics).

TFA is referring to molecules of water and whether they tended to form during planetary disk formation and consolidation:

[Shielding from cosmic radiation] makes it quite hard for these regions in the disk to synthesize any new molecules. This was an 'aha' moment for us -- without any new water creation the only place these ices could have come from was the chemically rich interstellar gas out of which the solar system formed originally."

There is still active debate over when and where the typical water molecule arose in the course of events leading to the formation of water-bearing planets. See this article, for example. If verified, this theory tends to favor interstellar formation.

> Why reduce CO2? Higher CO2 concentration also improves crop yields.

Higher CO2 levels improve yields inside carefully tended greenhouses. In the real world plants need more than just co2, when you increase co2 you also increase the requirements for everything else like water, minerals and fertilizer - if those aren't available then the plants don't get any benefit from the extra co2. Furthermore some plants become less efficient at photosynthesis when co2 levels go up (after all they evolved in the current environment). Other plants like soy become more vulnerable to insects. Plants evolved to grow in specific temperate zones, you bump up the heat, change the weather systems (like more flash floods and less gentle rainstorms) and now the plants aren't as well adapted to grow in their environment.

Nature is a million different systems all interrelated. You poke at just one parameter and the result is never straightforward or simple.

Citation, please.

Well, you can read all the headline news about how all the malware is on Android because Apple keeps it off of iWhatever, or you can try to figure out which system is better for the stuff you're actually going to use:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131011092523.htm

You can read the false equivalence narrative about how both Apple and google suffered data breaches recently, or you could use your brain and realize that you have seen evidence that it's pretty easy to get "private" stuff out of Apple's cloud, but there's not much evidence of getting it out of google's cloud:

http://www.v3.co.uk/v3-uk/news/2364799/google-confirms-five-million-customer-data-dump-but-denies-breach

You can read about how Apple is going to revolutionize payments, or you can read some of the user stories here about how people have been using google for payments for a long time with no problems, and you might think about how, even a few months ago, Apple had a major https problem:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/24/apples-security-breach-should-scare-you-more-than-targets-did/

And finally, you can ooh and aah about how iOS is now encrypting everything in a way that only the user can decrypt it "unlike [Apple's] competitors" and google is playing catchup, or you can dig deeper and find out that this has been an option on Android for three years, and all google has to do to match Apple is turn it on by default. (They probably had it off by default simply so Apple wouldn't be beating them in storage benchmarks.)

So you actually approve of a Business Model based on Tracking (and Selling) your every online move?

Now I have to ask you for a citation. Google targets ads to you, but AFAIK, unlike, say, Facebook, they don't actually sell your data directly to others. That's because, believe it or not, it is precious to them. Whether or not I approve the business model is immaterial, but I reject the premise that Apple is capable of handling data better because their business isn't based on handling data. Seriously, doesn't that sound like a stupid claim?

...and people think Apple aficionados are delusional???

That's only because enough of them are that it's a thing.

You have obviously never done any research in this area. Start here. Then go here. Also I put a good bit of information (complete with some more links of Ted.com talks) in this post

If you're still not convinced, go get you a good couple of doses of a strong series of antibiotics, see if you have any experience that resembles mine. After that you're on your own.

And to any medical doctors out there, you should inform your patients when you give them strong antibiotics about the concerns of stomach flora. Let them know that eating raw fruit, yogurt (kefir is better) and taking probiotics after completing their antibiotics is a wonderful idea.