No it hasn't. late clamping increase jaundice risk. A risk worth taking if you are in an iron poor community. Otherwise don't do it. Jaundice can cause brain damage, among other things. Even in the iron poor community, the statistical difference is much about noise. Meaning, more study is needed.
When did asking for someone to show there data make them Nazis? Are we suppose to just let people like you continue to spread lies? I, for one, will not do that. SO you can keep making your ad hom attack, but I will not stop trying to get people to see accurate information and be able to find good data.
That's not a theory. It's a wild ass guess based on the naturalistic fallacy.
The current data shows this: Late clamping (>60 seconds) increase iron but also increase jaundice risk.
SO, if you are iron poor, then late clamping may be worth the jaundice risk. If you are not iron poor, then late clamping has no gain and still carries the jaundice risk.
That is a cochrane review. Since it is a review of the literature, it is a good place to start. Reviews aren't always the best place to make policy from. Depending on method a size of available data to review.
oh, and while people relate jaundice to 'just yellow skin' it can actual cause liver and brain problems.
That study show they there really isn't a difference.
I mean,. then numbers are far to low to rule out 'noise'. They do warrant further study on a larger population. Say 10 groups of 500, each in a different population.
Although I am pleased to see people looking at actual studies.
Just to be clear: Just because a study is on PubMed doesn't make it a good one. Likelihood is high, but hardly perfect.
My opinion, and it's just that an opinion, is that with further study we will see a slight difference depending on diet and iron the the population being studied.
The only dog I have in this show is the desire for good solid data, and people making decision have access to good data.
Fact: The human race is going to be replaced by another species any time soon, if ever.
7 billion people. DO you think 'only' have 2 kids would threaten the species? I mean, if all people who have kids only had 2 kids, in about 200 years we might be down to 6 billion people. Right on the brink of being replaced~
5 kids IS selfish.
Here is the question: Is he prepared to send them to college?
10 years ago, I would have said no. However some thing have changed.
People moving into management now have seen the value open drivers can bring.
They understand the controlling the drivers has no impact on value, and has little or no return. If they, and others, include cost analysis arguments, then they have a chance.
While we will still see official drivers, we will have other options . Plus, opening up drivers means you can maintain a tree to review and possible integrate other peoples changes. Of course ego maniac developers won't like it because others will see 'their' precious' code.
yes. religion in general, really. well up to about 200 years ago.
In the past, smart people would go to monasteries(or there religious equivalent) because it was better then pounding dirt.
So you got a lot of smart people with free time and regular food. They may, or may not of actually believed.
Now? people can get jobs, make money and have free time. Or even better, work for an institution that allows them to you their intellect to pursue intellectual paths as their job.
So there is no reason to belong to a religions organization for survival in most of the US. So only people who believe join out of tradition, not because it's a logical move for survival.
1) GOP has had a sharp increase over the years with religious right, and evans. To deny this is stupidity. Many of these people have come right out and said science is wrong if it conflicts with their beliefs.
2) Rush Limbaugh's job is to get sponsors and to anger people for attention. He should be ignored he ads nothing to public discourse. That said, RL praising an engineered apple product isn't the same his science denial.
" I remember the religious zealotry coming out of the scientific community at the time." That makes no sense. Are you implying the science is a religion? if you are you are provable wrong.
"That's not anti-science, that is foresight." no, it was pure anti-science. He has no control over the scientific community at large, but he did cut federal grants which put is about 8 years behind in the tech. Undermining, yet again, American scientific advancement in medical science.
" and restricted the harvesting of new embryonic stem cells. " And that tell my you are fucking clueless about the subject matter and don't know where they get new embryonic stem cells.
HInt, they aren't harvested so much as saved from the trash. The are the left over from ivitro fertilization. THAT is what the are initially harvested for. I couldn't help but notice they didn't come out against invitro fertilization. Why? hypocrasy and ignorance, that's why. SO not the left overs from invitro are thrown away. Man, isn't that smart? And ignorant people like you go right long with it instead ogf bother to learn about something before forming your opinion.
Shame on you.
"Look at the sex slave trade we have going on now. Back during the stem cell debate, science was claiming that conservatives cared nothing for human life. Had they permitted free reign for embryonic stem cells, then sex slave trading would be the "better" outcome if you were a female child and kidnapped....... What The Fuck? Again, that has NOTHING TO DO WITH EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS.
the increase in religious right evangelical involvement.
While correlation does not imply causation, we need to take this along with other data where the religions have outright denied scientific facts, fave systematically been attacking science, and well as lying to undermine it's credibility.
Yet another reason while people need to treat religion like masturbation. Best done at home and out of the public eye.
Slashdot Mirror
No it hasn't. late clamping increase jaundice risk. A risk worth taking if you are in an iron poor community. Otherwise don't do it. Jaundice can cause brain damage, among other things. Even in the iron poor community, the statistical difference is much about noise. Meaning, more study is needed.
When did asking for someone to show there data make them Nazis? Are we suppose to just let people like you continue to spread lies? I, for one, will not do that. SO you can keep making your ad hom attack, but I will not stop trying to get people to see accurate information and be able to find good data.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18591323
A few minutes, sheesh.
I have some crystal that help word off evil spirits. I guarantee no haunting, bigfoot attacks, or alien abductions. Only 250,000 dollars.
I mean, you can't put a price on piece of mind, right? and you don't want to be a materialistic bastard that puts things over you loving children.
That's not a theory. It's a wild ass guess based on the naturalistic fallacy.
The current data shows this:
Late clamping (>60 seconds) increase iron but also increase jaundice risk.
SO, if you are iron poor, then late clamping may be worth the jaundice risk.
If you are not iron poor, then late clamping has no gain and still carries the jaundice risk.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18591323
That is a cochrane review. Since it is a review of the literature, it is a good place to start. Reviews aren't always the best place to make policy from. Depending on method a size of available data to review.
oh, and while people relate jaundice to 'just yellow skin' it can actual cause liver and brain problems.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed
there you go, search. Be sure the study has good controls, blinded and has significant results, and has been repeated.
That study show they there really isn't a difference.
I mean,. then numbers are far to low to rule out 'noise'.
They do warrant further study on a larger population. Say 10 groups of 500, each in a different population.
Although I am pleased to see people looking at actual studies.
Just to be clear: Just because a study is on PubMed doesn't make it a good one.
Likelihood is high, but hardly perfect.
My opinion, and it's just that an opinion, is that with further study we will see a slight difference depending on diet and iron the the population being studied.
The only dog I have in this show is the desire for good solid data, and people making decision have access to good data.
Fact: The human race is going to be replaced by another species any time soon, if ever.
7 billion people. DO you think 'only' have 2 kids would threaten the species? I mean, if all people who have kids only had 2 kids, in about 200 years we might be down to 6 billion people. Right on the brink of being replaced~
5 kids IS selfish.
Here is the question: Is he prepared to send them to college?
Just to point out, your odds a based on buying 1100 different numbers in the same draw.
Not necessarily. If the thought have there origins in nonsense, then no one is better off.
It's like listening to idiots discuss which kind of acupuncture is real.
Putting it into a college fund would have been far more helpful to your children.
Hint: there was no SCIENCE thousands of years ago.
Hi! MeeGO user here.
It wasn't compelling.
Yes, they close there source when new one comes out. They don't take the source you already have away. Feel free to add to it.
I wouldn't be so quick to second guess Google. They have done a lot of interesting things better then the current status quo.
10 years ago, I would have said no. However some thing have changed.
People moving into management now have seen the value open drivers can bring.
They understand the controlling the drivers has no impact on value, and has little or no return.
If they, and others, include cost analysis arguments, then they have a chance.
While we will still see official drivers, we will have other options . Plus, opening up drivers means you can maintain a tree to review and possible integrate other peoples changes. Of course ego maniac developers won't like it because others will see 'their' precious' code.
Why? why would you write that? Clearly flamebait.
And the hypothesis posited by your link has been ruled out. It doesn't match the data. Do you really think no one looked at that or studied it?
why? Tornadoes don't stop anyone from doing that here.
Spoken like a spoiled first worlder.
If it's so bad, why does Africa accept them?
Maybe it's more complex then you think.
Can you be more stupid? Africa is a big place and it's not all desert.
Why don't [people get that? IT's like looking at Alaska and saying America is too frozen to grow wheat.
It works like this:
Water
food
shelter
safety.
When you have that down to the point where you have some free time then:
Education
"see how much food you ate that overpasses what you really need."
irrelevant.
It is a distribution problem in that food and tools that go there often gets waylaid by warlords.
So..what? no one should farm because nature will sort itself out?
If you buy any food, then you are a hypocrite.
Africa is a big place. It's not all like how you describe.
1) Kill all the warlords,
2) Set up locals to own their own shops
3) set up infrastructure to be able to utilize local resource.
yes. religion in general, really. well up to about 200 years ago.
In the past, smart people would go to monasteries(or there religious equivalent) because it was better then pounding dirt.
So you got a lot of smart people with free time and regular food. They may, or may not of actually believed.
Now? people can get jobs, make money and have free time. Or even better, work for an institution that allows them to you their intellect to pursue intellectual paths as their job.
So there is no reason to belong to a religions organization for survival in most of the US. So only people who believe join out of tradition, not because it's a logical move for survival.
".. then who are we to argue as to how they do it?"
the people who don't participate i it yet still get poisoned by it.
I can sit next to you and drink all day, any you won't get drunk. completely different then smoking. Smokers FORCE there choice on other people.
1) GOP has had a sharp increase over the years with religious right, and evans. To deny this is stupidity. Many of these people have come right out and said science is wrong if it conflicts with their beliefs.
2) Rush Limbaugh's job is to get sponsors and to anger people for attention. He should be ignored he ads nothing to public discourse. That said, RL praising an engineered apple product isn't the same his science denial.
" I remember the religious zealotry coming out of the scientific community at the time."
That makes no sense. Are you implying the science is a religion? if you are you are provable wrong.
"That's not anti-science, that is foresight."
no, it was pure anti-science. He has no control over the scientific community at large, but he did cut federal grants which put is about 8 years behind in the tech. Undermining, yet again, American scientific advancement in medical science.
" and restricted the harvesting of new embryonic stem cells. "
And that tell my you are fucking clueless about the subject matter and don't know where they get new embryonic stem cells.
HInt, they aren't harvested so much as saved from the trash. The are the left over from ivitro fertilization. THAT is what the are initially harvested for. I couldn't help but notice they didn't come out against invitro fertilization. Why? hypocrasy and ignorance, that's why. SO not the left overs from invitro are thrown away. Man, isn't that smart? And ignorant people like you go right long with it instead ogf bother to learn about something before forming your opinion.
Shame on you.
"Look at the sex slave trade we have going on now. Back during the stem cell debate, science was claiming that conservatives cared nothing for human life. Had they permitted free reign for embryonic stem cells, then sex slave trading would be the "better" outcome if you were a female child and kidnapped.......
What The Fuck? Again, that has NOTHING TO DO WITH EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS.
You are beyond stupid.
the increase in religious right evangelical involvement.
While correlation does not imply causation, we need to take this along with other data where the religions have outright denied scientific facts, fave systematically been attacking science, and well as lying to undermine it's credibility.
Yet another reason while people need to treat religion like masturbation. Best done at home and out of the public eye.
We should shame people who deny scientific facts.
And you seem to forget that was a lie.