I think you misunderstand the accuracy of modern genetic testing. In most cases "markers" are identified that are associated with an increased risk of a condition or disorder. Increased risk != a guarantee that the person will develop the disorder or condition. Further, many (myself included) would consider screening for disorders or conditions (like alzheimer's) for which there is no cure and no benefit to early intervention in children unethical. (Once you become an adult, you are free to make your own choices.) Who is to say that living a life with an increased risk of _____ (alzheimer's, breast cancer, skin cancer, etc.) is not a life worth living?
It has nothing to do with what you want. It has everything to do with what they can sell. They make much more money on bundling the various "packages" together because it forces people to buy features they really don't want.
Have you compared the rent in DC to the rent anywhere in Kentucky? The cost of living in DC is much, much higher and as a result you would expect them to spend more on facilities and personnel.
By analyzing only "average" spending, you miss the true tragedy of U.S. public education - we have some of the best public schools in the world and some of the worst. The best schools tend to be attended by the children of the wealthy (if they attend public schools), and the worst are much more likely to be attended by the poor. And while money by itself doesn't "solve" anything, money provides the opportunity to implement reforms and changes that can make a big difference in quality. Improvement without spending more money seems quite unlikely.
Please go visit an underfunded school - a school that has a crumbling, dangerous building, too few or outdated textbooks, under-prepared, under-paid, and over-worked teachers who are charged with teaching too many students - and tell them that "money does not solve this problem." Unfortunately in the U.S., you won't have to go too far to find such a school.
Homework is one thing, but many online courses are moving to require proctored examinations (either in person at a testing center or using a webcam and screen monitor). So unless you can fake your photo and all of your personal info (which the online proctors use to verify your identity), you may actually have to demonstrate some kind of skill or knowledge.
I don't see why seasonal produce is better. You can get nearly anything "in season" if you are willing to ship it. Sure, a tomato grown down the street tastes better in August than a tomato from Brazil in February, but I don't see any way to get a tomato to grow here in February. If I want to eat a balanced diet year-round, it is not possible to eat locally all the time.
As a country we spend millions of dollars every year on cancer research. New treatments are being investigated and studied all the time. What are we doing to prevent gun violence?
Because kids also die in car accidents and from hunger, we shouldn't be bothered to do anything about gun violence? That is illogical. Please explain how the so-called "fiscal cliff," related to taxes and spending, has anything to do with school security, gun violence, or mental health care.
Excellent points. It could also be the case the people who drink more coffee have more money, and are therefore more able to afford cancer treatment (thus reducing the "risk"). I would recommend this article in The Atlantic: Lies, Damned Lies, and Medical Science. It points out many of the fallacies of this kind of medical research.
You can also look at prison population and the violent deaths in the U.S, both of which feature a larger proportion of men. I'm certainly not opposed to programs to support women or minority groups. But where is the outcry for programs to help men graduate from school, stay out of prison, and avoid violent death?
At one point the Federal Department of Education wanted to require ALL distance education programs to acquire permission from each state where they did business. But that has now been withdrawn (http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/07/31/education-department-wont-enforce-state-authorization-distance-education-programs).
I wouldn't be surprised at all if other states also still implement this policy, although it seems like overkill for a site that is not trying to offer degrees or actual credits.
All media outlets have one objective: make money. They do that by getting your attention (to their tv channel, or website, etc.). If they have to bend the "truth" a bit to get your attention, then so be it.
buy an LCD (or LED) screen. That will save much more electricity than changing the colors you use on it. I can never figure out why so many energy saving tips focus on such small things (e.g., turn off the water when you brush your teeth) but ignore the big issues (like my neighbors who water all afternoon in 100 degree heat and have a stream of water running directly into the sewer).
Do you carefully watch every commercial during your favorite television program? Do you carefully read every advertisement in your favorite magazine? Do you turn up the volume on the radio during the ads on your favorite program?
It's my eyeballs and my computer. I get to choose what I view.
is that they don't always know which genes result in which traits. In fact, it could be possible to have the "fast-twitch" ability based on a different presentation or combination of genes. So not having these specific gene expressions does NOT absolutely guarantee that someone won't have this fast-twitch ability.
Our genetics understanding is just not advanced enough to say definitively that this gene expression = this ability / trait for most traits of interest.
It's not hard to make a fake license plate. There was an article a few years ago about students creating fake plates for their cars (using the license number from a teacher from their school), then driving around town and running through the red-light cameras to rack up tickets for their teacher.
What worries me is the ability to get tickets, or other, more serious violations, based on something that is very easy to spoof. Mad at your neighbor? Run a red light, get him a ticket. Mad at someone who cut you off in traffic? Steal gasoline from a station and get him arrested.
The more these plate-tracking systems are implemented and upheld in courts, the more we will see abuse of such systems.
Treatments for smallpox are being researched. CMX001 (developed by Chimerix) is a candidate for smallpox treatment (and for treating a range of other viruses as well). See: Chimerix.com
Chimerix has also been involved in a number of legal battles with Siga regarding the awarding of this contract.
I too like R. You might link it with TINN-R (http://sciviews.org/Tinn-R/) to simplify some of the coding process. Last I had heard there was also some work on a GUI for R but I don't know if that's progressed very far.
SPSS is fairly easy to use and I would recommend it over SAS for basic analyses, but, as parent suggested, it really depends on what you want to do. You might be pretty happy just downloading some Excel macros which can be found through web searches (or, better yet, writing your own).
The model can be fine for the existing data. But the problem with any model comes in extrapolating to data points beyond your current data set.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrapolation#Quality_of_extrapolation
It's not a surprise that many models extrapolate poorly.
Schools address poverty (by preparing students for careers and to develop new products and career fields), domestic violence (by teaching the importance of non-violence) and healthcare (by teaching hygiene, health lifestyle choices, etc.).
I agree that schools can't fix everything, but they play a major role in improving our society.
Making student loans dischargeable would make them much more expensive (i.e., substantially higher interest rates) because they would be much riskier loans. This would make higher education inaccessible for all but the rich.
In addition, there are plenty of benefits that result from higher education regardless of the degree program. We need more higher education, not less.
"Individuals who have earned a bachelor’s degree report a lower unemployment rate (United States Department of Labor, bureau of Labor Statistics, 2006), use seatbelts at a higher rate, earn considerably more money over their lifetime than those with only a high school diploma, have a higher worklife expectancy at birth and a longer life expectancy, participate in government assistance programs at lower rates, smoke cigarettes at a lower rate, visit the dentist and participate in women’s health activities at higher rates, participate or attend art, movies and sporting events at a higher rate, have children who score higher in elementary school tests, answered more questions about the U.S. government correctly, and participate in community organizations at higher rates (Mortenson, 1999). Specifically for earnings, the wage premium, defined as the ratio of earnings for white men 18-64 years of age with a college degree to white men 18-64 years of age with a high school diploma, for earning a bachelor’s degree increased from 1.44 in 1970 to 1.58 in 1990 (Cuadras-Morato & Mateors-Planas, 2006). At the personal level, college students “achieve significant gains in critical thinking, general knowledge, moral reasoning, quantitative skills, and other competencies” (Bok, 2006, p. 8) during their time in college."
Exactly - in fact, investing in education will save money on other government programs. For example, research has shown that individuals who complete a bachelor's degree are much less likely to be on government assistance programs. So you'll essentially pay either way, it's just a question of whether it is for higher education or for welfare.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you misunderstand the accuracy of modern genetic testing. In most cases "markers" are identified that are associated with an increased risk of a condition or disorder. Increased risk != a guarantee that the person will develop the disorder or condition. Further, many (myself included) would consider screening for disorders or conditions (like alzheimer's) for which there is no cure and no benefit to early intervention in children unethical. (Once you become an adult, you are free to make your own choices.) Who is to say that living a life with an increased risk of _____ (alzheimer's, breast cancer, skin cancer, etc.) is not a life worth living?
It has nothing to do with what you want. It has everything to do with what they can sell. They make much more money on bundling the various "packages" together because it forces people to buy features they really don't want.
Have you compared the rent in DC to the rent anywhere in Kentucky? The cost of living in DC is much, much higher and as a result you would expect them to spend more on facilities and personnel. By analyzing only "average" spending, you miss the true tragedy of U.S. public education - we have some of the best public schools in the world and some of the worst. The best schools tend to be attended by the children of the wealthy (if they attend public schools), and the worst are much more likely to be attended by the poor. And while money by itself doesn't "solve" anything, money provides the opportunity to implement reforms and changes that can make a big difference in quality. Improvement without spending more money seems quite unlikely.
Please go visit an underfunded school - a school that has a crumbling, dangerous building, too few or outdated textbooks, under-prepared, under-paid, and over-worked teachers who are charged with teaching too many students - and tell them that "money does not solve this problem." Unfortunately in the U.S., you won't have to go too far to find such a school.
Homework is one thing, but many online courses are moving to require proctored examinations (either in person at a testing center or using a webcam and screen monitor). So unless you can fake your photo and all of your personal info (which the online proctors use to verify your identity), you may actually have to demonstrate some kind of skill or knowledge.
I don't see why seasonal produce is better. You can get nearly anything "in season" if you are willing to ship it. Sure, a tomato grown down the street tastes better in August than a tomato from Brazil in February, but I don't see any way to get a tomato to grow here in February. If I want to eat a balanced diet year-round, it is not possible to eat locally all the time.
As a country we spend millions of dollars every year on cancer research. New treatments are being investigated and studied all the time. What are we doing to prevent gun violence?
Because kids also die in car accidents and from hunger, we shouldn't be bothered to do anything about gun violence? That is illogical.
Please explain how the so-called "fiscal cliff," related to taxes and spending, has anything to do with school security, gun violence, or mental health care.
Excellent points. It could also be the case the people who drink more coffee have more money, and are therefore more able to afford cancer treatment (thus reducing the "risk").
I would recommend this article in The Atlantic: Lies, Damned Lies, and Medical Science. It points out many of the fallacies of this kind of medical research.
You can also look at prison population and the violent deaths in the U.S, both of which feature a larger proportion of men. I'm certainly not opposed to programs to support women or minority groups. But where is the outcry for programs to help men graduate from school, stay out of prison, and avoid violent death?
At one point the Federal Department of Education wanted to require ALL distance education programs to acquire permission from each state where they did business. But that has now been withdrawn (http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/07/31/education-department-wont-enforce-state-authorization-distance-education-programs).
I wouldn't be surprised at all if other states also still implement this policy, although it seems like overkill for a site that is not trying to offer degrees or actual credits.
All media outlets have one objective: make money. They do that by getting your attention (to their tv channel, or website, etc.). If they have to bend the "truth" a bit to get your attention, then so be it.
buy an LCD (or LED) screen. That will save much more electricity than changing the colors you use on it. I can never figure out why so many energy saving tips focus on such small things (e.g., turn off the water when you brush your teeth) but ignore the big issues (like my neighbors who water all afternoon in 100 degree heat and have a stream of water running directly into the sewer).
New research suggests ethanol produces more energy than it takes to produce due to newer crop production methods and methods for converting corn into ethanol. See: http://deltafarmpress.com/university-study-shows-ethanol-fuel-efficient
I know the link is from a farm-based website but it was done by a researcher I trust.
Production of ethanol from other sources may be even more efficient.
Not for free.
Do you carefully watch every commercial during your favorite television program? Do you carefully read every advertisement in your favorite magazine? Do you turn up the volume on the radio during the ads on your favorite program?
It's my eyeballs and my computer. I get to choose what I view.
"If it has to be there tomorrow, call the other guys. If it had to be there two weeks ago, call us."
http://www.hulu.com/watch/285313/saturday-night-live-jiffy-express
is that they don't always know which genes result in which traits. In fact, it could be possible to have the "fast-twitch" ability based on a different presentation or combination of genes. So not having these specific gene expressions does NOT absolutely guarantee that someone won't have this fast-twitch ability.
Our genetics understanding is just not advanced enough to say definitively that this gene expression = this ability / trait for most traits of interest.
It's not hard to make a fake license plate. There was an article a few years ago about students creating fake plates for their cars (using the license number from a teacher from their school), then driving around town and running through the red-light cameras to rack up tickets for their teacher.
What worries me is the ability to get tickets, or other, more serious violations, based on something that is very easy to spoof. Mad at your neighbor? Run a red light, get him a ticket. Mad at someone who cut you off in traffic? Steal gasoline from a station and get him arrested.
The more these plate-tracking systems are implemented and upheld in courts, the more we will see abuse of such systems.
Treatments for smallpox are being researched. CMX001 (developed by Chimerix) is a candidate for smallpox treatment (and for treating a range of other viruses as well).
See:
Chimerix.com
Chimerix has also been involved in a number of legal battles with Siga regarding the awarding of this contract.
I too like R. You might link it with TINN-R (http://sciviews.org/Tinn-R/) to simplify some of the coding process. Last I had heard there was also some work on a GUI for R but I don't know if that's progressed very far.
SPSS is fairly easy to use and I would recommend it over SAS for basic analyses, but, as parent suggested, it really depends on what you want to do. You might be pretty happy just downloading some Excel macros which can be found through web searches (or, better yet, writing your own).
The model can be fine for the existing data. But the problem with any model comes in extrapolating to data points beyond your current data set. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrapolation#Quality_of_extrapolation It's not a surprise that many models extrapolate poorly.
Schools address poverty (by preparing students for careers and to develop new products and career fields), domestic violence (by teaching the importance of non-violence) and healthcare (by teaching hygiene, health lifestyle choices, etc.).
I agree that schools can't fix everything, but they play a major role in improving our society.
Making student loans dischargeable would make them much more expensive (i.e., substantially higher interest rates) because they would be much riskier loans. This would make higher education inaccessible for all but the rich.
In addition, there are plenty of benefits that result from higher education regardless of the degree program. We need more higher education, not less.
"Individuals who have earned a bachelor’s degree report a lower unemployment rate (United States Department of Labor, bureau of Labor Statistics, 2006), use seatbelts at a higher rate, earn considerably more money over their lifetime than those with only a high school diploma, have a higher worklife expectancy at birth and a longer life expectancy, participate in government assistance programs at lower rates, smoke cigarettes at a lower rate, visit the dentist and participate in women’s health activities at higher rates, participate or attend art, movies and sporting events at a higher rate, have children who score higher in elementary school tests, answered more questions about the U.S. government correctly, and participate in community organizations at higher rates (Mortenson, 1999). Specifically for earnings, the wage premium, defined as the ratio of earnings for white men 18-64 years of age with a college degree to white men 18-64 years of age with a high school diploma, for earning a bachelor’s degree increased from 1.44 in 1970 to 1.58 in 1990 (Cuadras-Morato & Mateors-Planas, 2006). At the personal level, college students “achieve significant gains in critical thinking, general knowledge, moral reasoning, quantitative skills, and other competencies” (Bok, 2006, p. 8) during their time in college."
Exactly - in fact, investing in education will save money on other government programs. For example, research has shown that individuals who complete a bachelor's degree are much less likely to be on government assistance programs. So you'll essentially pay either way, it's just a question of whether it is for higher education or for welfare.