Good Articles

2

Comments

  • Report finds cases of STDs reach all-time high in California

    One of the interviewees for the article says the solution is better sex education. I'm skeptical. Do you expect them to learn sex education when they won't learn anything else?

  • It's a pretty pessimistic view to assert that the youth of California are incapable of learning... and pretty defeatist to assert that it's not worth educating someone, because they probably won't learn anything...

  • edited May 16

    I didn't say you shouldn't try. I questioned the probability of it working. A good size fraction of the country never masters the three Rs.

    Assuming that education isn't going to work, what is the solution?

  • What's the cognitive bias for when someone argues against something on the grounds that it's imperfect, even though everything else is too?
  • You're missing the point. Drug resistant STIs are increasing. This is a problem. There is no evidence that the proposed solution is going to solve the problem. Even a large percentage of gay men are again barebacking.

    I'm just giving those interested something to think about. In the near future there is a good chance that the death rate from all STIs combined is going to be larger than the AIDs crisis. Using the numbers from this Wikipedia article, I roughly estimate that a bit less than .6 percent of the U.S. population either has HIV or has died from it.

    Consider that about .75 of the California population currently has either chlamydia, gonorrhea, or syphilis, and all three diseases are becoming resistant to antibiotics. I suppose that researchers will eventually figure out how to combat them with phages, but in the meantime things might get grim.

  • If you google a chart of HIV incidence by year in the US, it shoots up and then shoots back down again. What caused the sharp decrease? Was it phages?

  • @Bill said:
    I didn't say you shouldn't try. I questioned the probability of it working. A good size fraction of the country never masters the three Rs.

    I then retract only my second point.

  • edited May 18

    Anyhoo I wouldn't worry to much about a resurgence of STDs, we have smart people in charge and they probably know what they're doing.

  • @fenomas said:
    If you google a chart of HIV incidence by year in the US, it shoots up and then shoots back down again. What caused the sharp decrease? Was it phages?

    Some people can learn, but the ability is variable.

  • "...And some, I assume, are nice people"
  • Indeed. Someone found them nice enough to give them a dose of the clap.

  • edited May 20
    Sex without a condom is more exciting? More likely to have any kind of sex with someone who's attractive? Wowee!

    Responding to the bareback article:

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/24/gay-men-barebacking-study_n_4848686.html
  • Well, not an article per se... but it mentions California STDs and also tells me that I'm going to die young due to my sleeping habits. (statistically).

    http://www.cracked.com/article_25608_california-gets-stds-other-breaking-health-news.html

  • @Clme said:
    tells me that I'm going to die young due to my sleeping habits. (statistically).

    http://www.cracked.com/article_25608_california-gets-stds-other-breaking-health-news.html

    That one needs a correlation is not causation warning.

  • Wow. Nice.

    The comments actually show google earth pictures going back quite some time, and the car was almost fully intact until 2013. It looks like a washout shifted the car position, buried the rear axle, and ripped off the hood. That is probably what got the windows too, assuming the heat didn't blow one or two of them out.

    Hope they post 'after' photos in a few years. :)

  • edited October 9

    This is old... but it came up in the discussion that has come out of the recent UN climate report.

    https://politics.theonion.com/republicans-vote-to-repeal-obama-backed-bill-that-would-1819572143

    Someone suggested that if it was an asteroid that was going to hit the planet in 30 years, rather than climate change, that it wouldn't become a politicized issue... others were not so certain. Although comedy; the article sounds so close to the kind of arguments that the Republicans would make, it's terrifying.

  • Uncle Pat dishing some recentish history. I'm a little to young to remember any of that. It does keep the current lunacy in perspective.

  • @UnclePat said:
    Eleven dead and a bunch of pipe bombs from right-wing terrorists this week
    Leftist activists have been shouting in restaurants
    Basically there's animosity on both sides

  • Hmm. I love how he opens up the article with a perfect example of the trope "Arson, Murder, and Jaywalking". with one paragraph each on mass murder, domestic terrorism, and 'leftist radicals' interrupting some appetizers.

    I know I'm dwelling, but if the 'leftist radicals' are limiting their terror to yelling in hallways and making dinner uncomfortable then things have really changed since 1968 on that front. At that point in history the leftists were the ones blowing things up.

    The rest is typical of Buchanan. Its an interesting take from his point of view, although we are supposed to forget that he, himself, has run for president on an extremist platform and is normally pretty open about his racism. [That said, I do find his reading interesting to read and miss his debates and segments with Rachel Maddow]

    Finally... what the fuck is he doing with his tags? I mean, I get he's one of the originators of refusing to call the Democratic party by their chosen name, but what is with some of the other tags? Hillary and Obama? Radical Left is included, which is fair for the 1968 connection, but he doesn't mention the Radical Right over the last few years?

    Yes, I'm going to feign confusion.

  • What radical right?

  • Yeah clme, what part of mass shootings, pipe bombs, and repealing the 14th amendment do you find "radical"?

  • Some, I'm sure, are very fine people.

  • Was it the "free press is the enemy of the people" stuff?

  • Hold on, it's not the cozying up to totalitarian foreign leaders is it?

  • edited October 31

    Well, the truth is really subtle, isn't it. Obviously the liberals are missing the subtext in the presidents very fine and not-at-all inflammatory actions/statements/history.

    After all, the 'fake news' would have you believe that the President was asked not to visit PA today because of comments he said implying that Jews brought a shooting on themselves for not having a phalanx of armed guards to prevent a shooting. Then they go on and on and on about how the 'shooter' was 'allegedly' able to injure four trained police officers.

    But really, anyone that isn't a crybaby liberal snowflake cuck knows that our great leader is speaking in metaphors. So, when the radical left hears words that sound, to them, like: "they brought it on themselves/probably deserved it anyway" what he really means is: "Don't shoot people. Just hold peaceful parties with festive stickers on your vans and show everyone how cool your long guns are. In fact, why don't you see if you can lighten the mood over at some Jewish cemeteries during the funerals?"

    But seriously its the "my critics are enemies of the state, and also not real Americans" lines of reasoning.

Sign In or Register to comment.