I for one would never trust EU-US data flows - the US side will always ignore any treaties about privacy and steal the personal information of EU citizens.
Always.
Without question.
This is why the US is 31st in download speeds - we reward insanity.
It's far more likely this is from austerity programs which have severely impacted the working poor and national health systems, to enrich the ultra-rich.
You can see it just by looking at the age differentials between the US and Canada - in Canada males live as long as females do now, about 10 years longer than US - originally both countries had about the same male/female disparity and the same lifespan.
Pretty obvious when you examine the underlying IHME stats.
(do the work yourself, there's this thing called google if you can't figure out what a search is)
Actually, facial recognition in the field has a high false positive rate, and tracking fails fairly easily.
It doesn't take much to throw it off - duck into a shop, walk with someone else, put on or take off a coat/hat - most facial recognition is at a fair distance, no matter what your TV shows tell you. The resolution is fairly low, as is the frame rate.
The way they usually track you is from your cell phone, which you think isn't on, but is. But even that is from log files, not real time data, so it's mostly used in a reconstructive manner. Most cities have hidden passive cell networks that "read" you as you move through chokepoints - those are used for real time data.
Anyone who thinks a 0.1% increased risk in a single SNP when dozens are involved, all of which have to show compatible mutations, means they will surely die of, well, anything is too stupid to live. Frankly, if that's your best objection, I think the test should be provided free across America and Britain. Get rid of at least some of the fools, rather than have them be a burden on society by running banks or whatever.
Good riddance to them. Hope the jumped-up twits die slowly.
>
You're assuming that people think logically when presented with results that may indicate severe impacts.
Medical studies have shown that people literally go into shock and don't really retain what it means.
This is yet another reason why you can't just do a one-of DNA test and "trust the system" when the system does not have genetic counseling or interpretation as part of it. People only hear or read part of the message, freak out, and than do drastic things.
You shouldn't be able to order such a test if it isn't regulated like any other medical diagnostic lab that tests much simpler things (routine urine and blood tests). You might as well be receiving people's lotto submissions.
I am quite willing to accept people's lotto submissions. Send them in a manilla envelope to Box IMCHEAT23, Pottstown PA
Thanks, but I don't need such favors from the FDA. I knew exactly what I was doing when I gave my DNA, and I've gotten valuable and entertaining information as a result.
Sorry, that wasn't your DNA your girlfriend got, it was mine.
Depends on how gathered. Are we doing random genetic sampling, family study where we know who has which markers and a higher confidence level, how large is our sample (p=512+), how are we ascertaining the diagnoses (survival method, impact), etc.
It's a whole can of worms.
Meanwhile some girl takes a blood sample with her friends at a sleepover, pops it in the mail, thinks she's going to die from breast cancer, and commits suicide.
Which is just the same as carrying a BRCA mutation that increases your likelihood of breast cancer. Yet almost every medical authority would agree you should only get BRCA testing done alongside counseling from an appropriately trained genetic counselor.
It's not about withholding the test. It's about making sure the test results are accurate, that the recipient understands what the test may uncover, and that they are equipped to rationally process the result.
Here's a fact. If you're female, you're at greater risk to develop AD, even accounting for age.
And, another thing, most impacts of AD are highly linked to other things - which these tests won't show you.
Yes, Apolipoprotein-E is a significant risk allele, but it's not the whole story. You'd be far better off getting enough sleep and moderate exercise and laying off the typical American diet.
I would actually be more likely to talk about the WSJ as a method of how to do digital - it's an add on but they still mostly sell physical papers. And buying a physical paper gets you the add ons for that day.
Also, why are you taking warfarin? Is it the only drug you are taking? Most people prescribed warfarin are also taking other medications, and the interaction of those drugs may behave differently from warfarin by itself. The dosage levels may be different.
Do not make medical decisions about which drug to take by yourself, it's a bad idea.
The real problem is that you people who buy these tests will incorrectly interpret what they say.
DNA is really only about 99.5 percent correct using PCR, for one thing.
Carrying a risk allele that is triggered by environmental conditions or requires other actions to trigger is another.
But the worst thing is you all incorrectly ascertain risk.
You overreact, and when you overreact, in medical studies without effective genetic counseling, and even in some of those cases, you almost always do the exact wrong thing.
Should you be able to order such a test? Yes.
Should you react to the test without proper genetic counseling? Never.
Um, no. Large industrial solar can use land space, but the land can also be used for other things - grazing land, fields for plants that require shade, etc.
Most home solar is done on roofs and walls, and these are PRIVATE buildings.
Why are you stopping us from making clean energy from OUR LAND instead of supporting terrorists by using oil and corn ethanol?
We're not all interconnected. I was one of the people, during Y2K planning, who made dang sure of that, so we wouldn't get a cascade grid failure if any of the circuitry software glitched. There are reasons for that - we literally had people at the physical switches just in case.
I get that you hate America and that Texas is going to wind power and solar power, but back when I was born in Texas it was a Blue state too.
Adapt. Because climate change is going to whallop Galveston again, and it ain't gonna be pretty, y'all.
I should point out that the Tesla that caught fire was here in Seattle (Redmond) and we get most of our energy from hydropower, so it actually is close to zero emission if you use it around here. Much of the rest of our power supply is from wind power and solar power. (yes, solar, I know you think solar cells don't work up here, but they work fine)
If you use a Tesla in Wisconsin where most electricity is from coal, it's actually MORE emission creating than gasoline, since the source is coal. Some efficiency losses accumulate.
Your green rating depends on your fuel mix - and electrics that you don't charge yourself from your home power plants use the median power mix of the sources they use.
Slashdot Mirror
Step 1 : Dismantle the NSA, and file criminal charges against their leadership.
Step 2 : There is no step 2.
Step 4. Profit from selling EU private data to US corporations!
I for one would never trust EU-US data flows - the US side will always ignore any treaties about privacy and steal the personal information of EU citizens.
Always.
Without question.
This is why the US is 31st in download speeds - we reward insanity.
It's far more likely this is from austerity programs which have severely impacted the working poor and national health systems, to enrich the ultra-rich.
You can see it just by looking at the age differentials between the US and Canada - in Canada males live as long as females do now, about 10 years longer than US - originally both countries had about the same male/female disparity and the same lifespan.
Pretty obvious when you examine the underlying IHME stats.
(do the work yourself, there's this thing called google if you can't figure out what a search is)
Actually, facial recognition in the field has a high false positive rate, and tracking fails fairly easily.
It doesn't take much to throw it off - duck into a shop, walk with someone else, put on or take off a coat/hat - most facial recognition is at a fair distance, no matter what your TV shows tell you. The resolution is fairly low, as is the frame rate.
The way they usually track you is from your cell phone, which you think isn't on, but is. But even that is from log files, not real time data, so it's mostly used in a reconstructive manner. Most cities have hidden passive cell networks that "read" you as you move through chokepoints - those are used for real time data.
I for one know many degreed people who spend their time developing, architecting and writing software. Most of them are women.
A lot of them are Biostatisticians, Web developers, and others who are not "software engineers".
You're mixing different population samples.
Maybe it helps if you know what it is you're trying to say, before you leap to conclusions?
Bonus: I get three passports then.
i'm going to write a strong letter using Helvetica Narrow
in actual practice, MDs are actually quite bad at making medical decisions on their own treatment too.
The problem is that your frame of reference shifts. You magnify certain aspects and minimize others when it's yourself.
Everyone does it.
I think your sig says it all.
I stand by my statement
Same thing.
Anyone who thinks a 0.1% increased risk in a single SNP when dozens are involved, all of which have to show compatible mutations, means they will surely die of, well, anything is too stupid to live. Frankly, if that's your best objection, I think the test should be provided free across America and Britain. Get rid of at least some of the fools, rather than have them be a burden on society by running banks or whatever.
Good riddance to them. Hope the jumped-up twits die slowly.
>
You're assuming that people think logically when presented with results that may indicate severe impacts.
Medical studies have shown that people literally go into shock and don't really retain what it means.
This is yet another reason why you can't just do a one-of DNA test and "trust the system" when the system does not have genetic counseling or interpretation as part of it. People only hear or read part of the message, freak out, and than do drastic things.
You shouldn't be able to order such a test if it isn't regulated like any other medical diagnostic lab that tests much simpler things (routine urine and blood tests). You might as well be receiving people's lotto submissions.
I am quite willing to accept people's lotto submissions. Send them in a manilla envelope to Box IMCHEAT23, Pottstown PA
Thanks, but I don't need such favors from the FDA. I knew exactly what I was doing when I gave my DNA, and I've gotten valuable and entertaining information as a result.
Sorry, that wasn't your DNA your girlfriend got, it was mine.
Depends on how gathered. Are we doing random genetic sampling, family study where we know who has which markers and a higher confidence level, how large is our sample (p=512+), how are we ascertaining the diagnoses (survival method, impact), etc.
It's a whole can of worms.
Meanwhile some girl takes a blood sample with her friends at a sleepover, pops it in the mail, thinks she's going to die from breast cancer, and commits suicide.
This is why the FDA gets involved.
Even better, I can find out if you have the DNA markers when I take the sample without your consent.
Now cue all the Slashbertarians ranting about how restricting unproven medical testing is an assault on freedom...
I own my DNA!
Actually, your parents do.
You're not supposed to even be able to enter into a legal contract before the age of 16.
Which is just the same as carrying a BRCA mutation that increases your likelihood of breast cancer. Yet almost every medical authority would agree you should only get BRCA testing done alongside counseling from an appropriately trained genetic counselor.
Are members of the public equipped to interpret a 55% or greater chance of their child developing Alzheimer's Disease?
It's not about withholding the test. It's about making sure the test results are accurate, that the recipient understands what the test may uncover, and that they are equipped to rationally process the result.
Here's a fact. If you're female, you're at greater risk to develop AD, even accounting for age.
And, another thing, most impacts of AD are highly linked to other things - which these tests won't show you.
Yes, Apolipoprotein-E is a significant risk allele, but it's not the whole story. You'd be far better off getting enough sleep and moderate exercise and laying off the typical American diet.
Paywalls are an illusion.
Information just wants to be free.
I would actually be more likely to talk about the WSJ as a method of how to do digital - it's an add on but they still mostly sell physical papers. And buying a physical paper gets you the add ons for that day.
Also, why are you taking warfarin? Is it the only drug you are taking? Most people prescribed warfarin are also taking other medications, and the interaction of those drugs may behave differently from warfarin by itself. The dosage levels may be different.
Do not make medical decisions about which drug to take by yourself, it's a bad idea.
The real problem is that you people who buy these tests will incorrectly interpret what they say.
DNA is really only about 99.5 percent correct using PCR, for one thing.
Carrying a risk allele that is triggered by environmental conditions or requires other actions to trigger is another.
But the worst thing is you all incorrectly ascertain risk.
You overreact, and when you overreact, in medical studies without effective genetic counseling, and even in some of those cases, you almost always do the exact wrong thing.
Should you be able to order such a test? Yes.
Should you react to the test without proper genetic counseling? Never.
because corn ethanol is subsidized heavily and even mandated.
see, you do like government cheese, you just PRETEND you don't.
Now wipe the cheese crumbs off your whiskers, mouse.
Um, no. Large industrial solar can use land space, but the land can also be used for other things - grazing land, fields for plants that require shade, etc.
Most home solar is done on roofs and walls, and these are PRIVATE buildings.
Why are you stopping us from making clean energy from OUR LAND instead of supporting terrorists by using oil and corn ethanol?
Actually, Texas is on a separate grid.
We're not all interconnected. I was one of the people, during Y2K planning, who made dang sure of that, so we wouldn't get a cascade grid failure if any of the circuitry software glitched. There are reasons for that - we literally had people at the physical switches just in case.
I get that you hate America and that Texas is going to wind power and solar power, but back when I was born in Texas it was a Blue state too.
Adapt. Because climate change is going to whallop Galveston again, and it ain't gonna be pretty, y'all.
I'm starting to think that the secret to Tesla's energy efficiency isn't electricity, as advertised, but Elon Musk's unlimited hot air.
While California does use some geothermal energy, much of their electricity comes from BC, WA, ID, and OR hydropower, wind power, and solar power.
We're green in the West. It's why jobs are being created here - green is cheaper than non-green.
You are correct.
I should point out that the Tesla that caught fire was here in Seattle (Redmond) and we get most of our energy from hydropower, so it actually is close to zero emission if you use it around here. Much of the rest of our power supply is from wind power and solar power. (yes, solar, I know you think solar cells don't work up here, but they work fine)
If you use a Tesla in Wisconsin where most electricity is from coal, it's actually MORE emission creating than gasoline, since the source is coal. Some efficiency losses accumulate.
Your green rating depends on your fuel mix - and electrics that you don't charge yourself from your home power plants use the median power mix of the sources they use.