Journal article critique

Neuroscience: Your brain on reddit

2009.03.03 20:39 Neuroscience: Your brain on reddit

/neuro, involving neuroscience: Discussion and news pertaining to neurobiology, cognitive studies, clinical neuroscience, the laboratory, and anything else related. We're a bit laid back here, you're free to post anything about neuroscience as long as it doesn't break the rules. For more academic discussions of journal articles, /neuroscience is a great place.
[link]


2009.08.12 00:59 ElXGaspeth Secure, Contain, Protect Official subreddit of the scpwiki.com collaborative fiction project

Secure, Contain, Protect Official subreddit of the SCP Wiki collaborative-fiction project scpwiki.com
[link]


2008.12.17 21:19 Etsy

The unofficial community for all things Etsy, buyers and sellers both welcome. We are not affiliated with or endorsed by Etsy.com.
[link]


2024.05.19 09:23 kiwasabi LGBTQ+ The Plus Stands For Pedophile: The Illuminati is coming for your kids with Drag Queen/ Groomer Clown Story Hour, books in elementary school libraries which depict and normalize sex between children and adults. Transgenderism is pushed because Baphomet possesses both breasts and a male phallus

LGBTQ+ The Plus Stands For Pedophile: The Illuminati is coming for your kids with Drag Queen/ Groomer Clown Story Hour, books in elementary school libraries which depict and normalize sex between children and adults. Transgenderism is pushed because Baphomet possesses both breasts and a male phallus
INTRODUCTION:
To anyone with eyes that are able to see, it's very obvious that LGBTQ+ is a social engineering and mind control propaganda weapon being waged against all of humanity by the Illuminati. There are many reasons for this endless onslaught of pushing and overnormalizing everything that is gay, trans, and pedophilic. The Illuminati itself is comprised of around 13 bloodlines which are all hereditary incestuous and pedophilic families. So when you hear their puppets telling the joke "The Aristocrats" (LINK) which consists of so called comedians telling the most disgusting tale of an Aristocratic bloodline family having sex with each other and ending with "And they're called The Aristocrats", you'll know they're utilizing Revelation of the Method and putting it right out in the open as a "joke".
The Illuminati utilizes Satanic Ritual Abuse and pedophilic incest in order to deliberately cause trauma to their progeny so that they can split their personalities and then program and control the new personality. This is called Project Monarch Trauma Based Mind Control. It was under Josef Mengele and the Nazis where this hereditary incest form of mind control was scientifically studied using the child prisoners of Auschwitz, most commonly with twin girls. After World War 2 and the fall of the Nazis, via Operation Paperclip, 1400 Nazi scientists and engineers were saved from the Nuremberg Trials via the Vatican Rat Line and were smuggled out of Germany into the United States, where they would go on to form the backbone of the Central Intelligence Agency and continue their Monarch Mind Control research. What's left out from the history books is that Josef Mengele "The Angel of Death" was also smuggled out of Nazi Germany and continued his horrific mind control research on twin girls for decades in the United States.
What does this all have to do with LGBTQ+? Well, basically that joke "The Aristocrats" is the endgoal and endgame for all of Earth humanity. It's my theory that The Illuminati wants to normalize pedophilia to the point where a parent is required to encourage their children to engage in sexual relationships with grown adults. And if the parent pushes back on this abomination, The Illuminati wants to be able to take possession of the children via CPS Child Protective Services, "for their own safety" of course.
BAPHOMET IS TRANSGENDER:
One of the reasons in which the Illuminati is so obsessed with the unnatural concept of transgenderism is because their demon god Baphomet is generally depicted as possessing both female breasts and a male phallus. On public statues of Baphomet such as at Satanic Temples, he (or is that he/she?) is depicted without breasts due to public decency laws. Once you understand that The Illuminati worships a transgender demon god, then you'll understand why they want your children to be gay and trans. Oh yeah, and did you notice the American Medical Association symbol coming out of Baphomet's crotch? How did that get there? Now does it make sense why it has wings as well?
https://preview.redd.it/jo74m4ybkp0d1.jpg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d9d23860fada0f893545ec59cd2f9861811bbff9
https://preview.redd.it/oatdlf64ar0d1.png?width=332&format=png&auto=webp&s=8be61945a59d912098cb3452b64d315c8102cec1
Now does it make sense why Target was selling a LGBTQ Transgender children's sweater with the Baphomet symbol on it? (LINK)
SATAN'S RAINBOW:
https://preview.redd.it/g4btql1t9r0d1.jpg?width=552&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6226bea836ac5ae09694acecf1217c57acb9b927
SEX IN LGBTQ SCHOOL LIBRARY BOOKS:
When I was growing up, I do recall reading some books such as Catcher in the Rye which did contain some sexual themes and profanity. However, in recent years the sexualization of children has been thoroughly ramped up via LGBTQ propaganda in the form of sexually explicit school library books. Children are still trying to figure out who they really are as a person, and by indoctrinating them with gender confusion propaganda at such a young age we are ensuring they will be steered in the wrong direction. Which is of course exactly what The Powers That Be really want. By the way, when I was searching for examples of LGBTQ books with sexual content, I had to scroll through 3 pages of LGBTQ apologist articles decrying about all these "banned LGBTQ books". What's interesting is that all of these CIA Mockingbird Media propaganda articles always say the books are being banned for their LGBTQ content, not for their explicit sexual content (which doesn't necessarily have to be gay or trans in any way). For instance, ABC News"Report: LGBTQ content drove book banning efforts in 2023" (LINK) and NBC News "More than half of 2023's most challenged books have LGBTQ themes" (LINK). Note how they're obfuscating the sexually inappropriate content by calling it "LGBTQ themes" instead. Perhaps this is The Illuminati actually revealing the truth out in the open, that "LGBTQ content" actually means sexually inappropriate content which is directed at children? Let's call LGBTQ elementary school library books what they really are: the sexualization and grooming of children by predators and pedophiles.
Sexualizing Schoolchildren: Classroom and Library Books (LINK)
"Parent and Child Loudoun reviewed and listed hundreds of age-inappropriate, sexually confusing, explicit, objectionable, and profane books that were placed in schools in classrooms and libraries in their district. Here are just a few examples:
  • When Kayla was Kyle, by Amy Fabrikant – An elementary school picture book about a boy who “transitions” into a girl.
  • Teach Me, by R.A. Nelson – The “young adult” (YA) novel tells the story of a 16-year-old girl and her seduction and statutory rape by her male high school teacher.
  • All Out: The No-Longer-Secret Stories of Queer Teens Throughout the Ages by S. Mitchell – The book in middle and high school libraries contains sexually explicit and homosexual content.
  • Dear Rachel Maddow,by A. Kisner – Another YA novel where the lesbian-identified protagonist, from a troubled home, writes emails to the stabilizing force in her life – MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow*. Contains some sexual content and more than 100 uses of profanity."*
Dearborn parents assail LGBTQ books with sexual themes at school hearing (LINK)
"The books in question are largely teen and young adult stories involving romance or sexual abuse, often with LGBTQ themes. Several were critically acclaimed. They include:
  • Eleanor & Park” by Rainbow Rowell, about a romance involving two 10th-graders. The girl lives with domestic violence at home and both teens struggle with traditional gender roles. The novel contains profanity.
  • Red, White & Royal Blue” by Casey McQuiston; a novel about a romance between the U.S. President’s bisexual son and a gay British royal*, both in their early 20s.* The book has some sex scenes and coarse language.
  • This Book is Gay” by Juno Dawson, an irreverent, nonfiction handbook on growing up LGBTQ, addressing issues like coming out, sex apps and sexually transmitted disease."
SATAN SUPPORTS PRONOUNS:
Target Sells Trans Clothing to Children Designed by Satanic Transgender (LINK)
A clothing line as part of Target's LGBTQ children's products was designed by a Satanist female to male transgender named Erik Kallen, under the brand name Abprallen. There were only three products being marketed by the Abprallen brand, and none of them depicted the blatant Satanic imagery that was shared around the internet as part of a hoax with AI generated images (LINK). However, as I pointed out above, one of the sweatshirts in the collection does contain the Baphomet symbol. And it doesn't take much exploring of Abprallen's Instagram profile to find some unsettling content (LINK). Erik Kallen made a statement saying, "My work was likely pulled following false accusations of being a Satanist and marketing my work to children, both claims have been debunked numerous times but members of the religious right refuse to back down".
https://preview.redd.it/7pdsq8r54q0d1.jpg?width=912&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d46c8d192bc50043e378c7be2d18fd162d67746c
Claims that you were a Satanist were thoroughly debunked, you say? Which "Guardian Angel" (Demon) is a transgender again? Oh yeah, Baphomet. And what were you doing at the Satanic Flea Market in London? Also, I thought you said "Satan Respects Pronouns"?
https://preview.redd.it/ferg6lr75q0d1.jpg?width=912&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5beef8365b280f2a9c251a2c396f1fcb0ad9df54
https://preview.redd.it/zpoyqsc96q0d1.jpg?width=728&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=67c22356d03ab50bea569d083afec37d10af5805
"I'm gay, trans, and a secret third thing..." Does anyone care to guess what is meant by that? "I support gay wrongs", "Gay supervillain", "Make More Gay Horror Movies".
https://preview.redd.it/w9lkj8et6q0d1.jpg?width=912&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=749874db6545c8fc670af031a46259f0912e7703
Take "Poppers" to open your "Third Eye" (Hint: He doesn't mean your pineal gland....he means your butthole"). Illuminati confirmed.
https://preview.redd.it/u3q7z0028q0d1.jpg?width=892&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=80dfd6b11268122d8c367867aa67782c8effeeea
https://preview.redd.it/s047iqvm8q0d1.jpg?width=892&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bbb51efe6a51b224d87aa937e5aac520dda684ee
https://preview.redd.it/bx4ewlx49q0d1.jpg?width=716&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6fcc28213453c8c6a88db6caec3663c1ef4fe003
https://preview.redd.it/r72gurpi9q0d1.jpg?width=892&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=611d83691ff3850796f873f2480f98f65ed50ed5
https://preview.redd.it/tmtv1dp0aq0d1.jpg?width=892&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=26615b9946de7722d59dca3be75a0145b9771956
As far as I'm concerned, all the claims about Erik Callen being a Satanist and marketing products to children have been thoroughly UNDEBUNKED just based on his products and post history on Instagram. This to me is clearly a case of classic bait and switch. Market some seemingly innocent "trans inclusive" clothing to children, get them hooked on the Abprallen brand while they're young, then "transition" them to the more seedy and shady product offerings. Based on the products and images shown above, can this really be considered a gender identity? Or is this more appropriately categorized as a mental illness and a cult? The embracing of confusion. The final culmination of the "Nothing is real" mind control psy op social engineering. Now literally GENDER ISN'T REAL. And "Men can get pregnant".
"MEN CAN GET PREGNANT"
As I previously posted, Arnold Schwarzenegger was replaced by an imposter in a mask wearing heavy facial prosthetics in 1990 (LINK). As part of the Illuminati's ongoing Ritual Mocking of the Victim / Humiliation Ritual against the name and image of Arnold Schwarzenegger, in 1994 the fake Arnold Schwarzenegger was placed into a travesty of a film called Junior (1994). As you can see from the film's poster, "Nothing is inconceivable". What a funny pun, right? They mean "conceive" as in conceiving and giving birth to a baby.... Except by a man. Ten years before that in 1984, Bob Saget was already joking about how, "men can breast feed", but at least he admitted he made it up (LINK). Once you understand that a core tenet of Satanism is to reverse the natural order, you'll understand why they want to normalize the completely unnatural idea that, "Men can get pregnant". This is a direct attack on women, men, children, and humanity as a whole. This is an attack on motherhood and gender roles. This is an attack on the family. This is a direct attack on your sanity. And as I've shown here, this has been planned for at least 40 years. The movie Junior from 1994 is a prime example of the Illuminati Revelation of the Method, where they put out their plans right in the open and as long as we laugh and don't consciously object to them, then it means we have subconsciously accepted them.
Junior is also a prime example of why the Illuminati would be motivated to replace an actor with an imposter. Here we have a movie that the real Arnold Schwarzenegger absolutely never would have signed on to star in. But since the real Arnold was killed and replaced, he was unable to object to his name and likeness being used in this atrocity of a film. Thus, Arnold Schwarzenegger was used against his will to push an evil agenda of the Illuminati while simultaneously being ritually humiliated by giving birth to a child and essentially being turned into a woman on screen. Notice the screenshots where he has let his hair grow out and he's wearing a pink outfit (dress?) with glasses and pearl necklaces. Does anyone really believe that Arnold Schwarzenegger would have ever stooped this low at the peak of his career?
https://preview.redd.it/dchs07c2eq0d1.jpg?width=1425&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ab849bbd8ad73659cbf353d4788914e1527edfe5
https://preview.redd.it/ex6c2k1geq0d1.jpg?width=1050&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=84731bec091800df7b9ab70ddc7d313d808bc70e
https://preview.redd.it/opfk3j3ziq0d1.jpg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1b3266508272a8c7ce0e099902b6cc8715346017
MINOR ATTRACTED PERSON / PEDOPHILE FLAG:
On June 13th 2018, a user on Tumblr created a flag for the NOMAP (Non Offending Minor Attracted Person) community. (LINK) Around June 12th 2018, an artist named Daniel Quasar updated the LGBTQ to add the colors light blue, light pink, and white to represent the Transgender Pride Flag colors. (LINK) These added stripes to the LGBTQ flag do not represent transgenderism. They represent pedophilia. Light blue represents attraction to young boys. Light pink represents attraction to young girls. The white stripe represents attraction to virginity. Coincidence theorists will have a field day on this one.
https://preview.redd.it/3vih368tmq0d1.jpg?width=1019&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e09e7fc60a833a24de638d527b061a4ce7e64570
https://preview.redd.it/zvbv2pkvmq0d1.png?width=399&format=png&auto=webp&s=43f924c9dbe068ad232f45b1b0a861ce01872a36
"WE'RE COMING FOR YOUR CHILDREN":
I've really liked this idea of no longer referring to them as "Drag Queens", but instead as "Groomer Clowns", since that's what they really are. Also, these people do not reproduce, which is why they are forced to recruit instead. Drag Queens at a march in New York were recorded as chanting "We're here, we're queer, we're coming for your children". In Florida, a Gay Pride parade was cancelled after it was made illegal to perform adult lewd performances in front of children. If they aren't coming for the children, then why the need to cancel the Gay Pride parade when the Groomer Clowns couldn't perform in front of children? Finally, the third link is about a homosexual couple who raped, filmed, and sex trafficked their two young adopted sons to other pedophiles.
https://preview.redd.it/fcn48gosqq0d1.jpg?width=597&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=29e1a9f8d97d52a858e7e3ed8f95db3368f4d72d
https://preview.redd.it/vr4rav30rq0d1.jpg?width=700&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e80d4063e16b7ae24c537b238630364b48ab0741
Video of Drag Marchers Chanting 'We're Coming For Your Children' Goes Viral (LINK)
***"***A video showing people chanting "we're coming for your children" has gone viral, sparking outrage on social media. New York City kicked off the last weekend of Pride Month with its annual Drag March on Friday". (LINK)
Hundreds of drag performers marched through Manhattan's East Village in elaborate costumes on their way to the iconic Stonewall Inn.
Video showing some of the march's participants chanting, "we're here, we're queer, we're coming for your children"
Gay pride parade canceled in southeast Florida after anti-drag show law passes (LINK)
"Officials in a southeast Florida city have canceled a gay pride parade and restricted other pride events to people 21 years and older in anticipation of Gov. Ron D. signing a bill meant to keep children out of drag shows.
The Florida House sent Ron D. a bill Wednesday that bans children from adult performances, a proposal aimed at the governor’s opposition to drag shows.
The legislation, which awaits the governor's signature, would allow the state to revoke the food and beverage licenses of businesses that admit children to adult performances. The Ron D. administration has moved to pull the liquor license of a Miami hotel that hosted a Christmas drag show, alleging children were present during "lewd" displays."
Gay couple charged with molesting their adopted sons also pimped them out to pedophile ring, report claims (LINK)
"A gay couple from Georgia charged with molesting their two adopted sons and using them to record child porn also allegedly pimped them out to members of a local pedophile ring, according to a disturbing new report.
A months-long investigation by Townhall revealed that William Dale Zulock, 33, and Zachary Jacoby Zulock, 35, allegedly used social media to prostitute their two elementary-aged sons.
William Zulock, a government worker, and Zachary Zulock, a banker, were indicted in August 2022 on charges of incest, aggravated sodomy, aggravated child molestation, felony sexual exploitation of children and felony prostitution of a minor.
But the shocking investigation reveals in more detail the sickening abuse the boys suffered.
For the first time, it was revealed that the men allegedly pimped out their older sons, now 11 and 9 years old, to two other men in a pedophile ring.
One of the men, Hunter Clay Lawless, 27, told investigators that Zachary — whose Instagram bio describes him as “Papa to our two wonderful boys” and an “activist” — invited him “multiple times” to take part in sexually abusing the boys, Townhall reported."
HOMOSEXUALITY AND PEDOPHILIA:
Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse (LINK)
***"***Homosexuals are overrepresented in child sex offenses: Individuals from the 1 to 3 percent of the population that is sexually attracted to the same sex are committing up to one-third of the sex crimes against children.
Homosexual Pedophiles are Vastly Overrepresented in Child Sex Abuse Cases
Homosexual pedophiles sexually molest children at a far greater rate compared to the percentage of homosexuals in the general population. A study in the Journal of Sex Research found, as we have noted above, that “approximately one-third of [child sex offenders] had victimized boys and two-thirds had victimized girls.” The authors then make a prescient observation: “Interestingly, this ratio differs substantially from the ratio of gynephiles (men who erotically prefer physically mature females) to androphiles (men who erotically prefer physically mature males), which is at least 20 to 1.”[17]
In other words, although heterosexuals outnumber homosexuals by a ratio of at least 20 to 1, homosexual pedophiles commit about one-third of the total number of child sex offenses.
Similarly, the Archives of Sexual Behavior also noted that homosexual pedophiles are significantly overrepresented in child sex offence cases:
The best epidemiological evidence indicates that only 2 to 4 percent of men attracted to adults prefer men (ACSF Investigators, 1992; Billy et al.,1993; Fay et al.,1989; Johnson et al.,1992); in contrast, around 25 to 40 percent of men attracted to children prefer boys (Blanchard et al.,1999; Gebhard et al.,1965; Mohr et al.,1964). Thus, the rate of homosexual attraction is 6 to 20 times higher among pedophiles.”
PEDOPHILIA AND PARASITES:
Parasite Pill 2.0
https://archive.org/details/parasite-pill-2.0
For those who really want to do some serious research, there's an 181 page document titled Parasite Pill (version) 2.0 which goes in depth about a theory that pedophilia may be linked to a mind controlled parasite such as toxoplasmosis. And that the parasite basically has a better chance of survival when infected into a younger victim with a still developing immune system. Plus the parasite breeds within the intestines. So it's theorized that this is why sodomy with children may be preferred by the parasite for reproduction. Also it's speculated that essentially the parasitic elites are LITERALLY PARASITES, as they are being mind controlled by brain parasites and this is why they all engage in sodomy with one another. The initiation ritual of being sodomized by all the upper ranking Illuminati members may also serve the purpose of ensuring that the cult's respective parasites are all passed on effectively to new recruits. Oh yeah, and the real reason they don't want anyone taking Ivermectin is because it destroys the parasites which are our secret masters.
https://preview.redd.it/3g7a1jrbwq0d1.png?width=653&format=png&auto=webp&s=ce403537c123741bbd259b0a4be215695e7966cb
CISGENDER? SIS, YOU'RE SIC(K) AND A SISSY:
Elon Musk’s X now treats the term ‘cisgender’ as a slur on the platform (LINK)
On June 20 2023, Elon Musk tweeted out that the term "cisgender" would now be treated as a slur on Twitter / X. On May 15th 2024, this promise was made into a reality. Attempting to post with the word "cis" or "cisgender" results in the user being given a warning and the option to delete the tweet.
This event today was what got me to finally sit down and pump out this post which has been sitting in my brain simmering for years. This also made me think about the real meaning of the term "Cis" which basically means "Normal" or "Same Gender As Assigned At Birth". "Cis" is pronounced the same as "Sis" (Sister), and can be expanded to "Cissy" / "Sissy" (Wimp). Also, "Cis" backwards is "Sic" or "Sick". So basically when you're called "Cis" gender, you're being called a woman, a wimp, and sick, all because you chose to remain a heterosexual during this assault on what it means to be a human. "Cis" is a CIA Tavistock style social engineering term which is meant to discourage you from being straight, and it's trying to bully you into the LGBTQ lifestyle (or is that "death style" since they don't reproduce?). "Cis" is an abnormal and weaponized term which was created to make what's natural seem unnatural, and to make what's normal sound abnormal. I would argue terms "gender normative" and "breeders" are also similar weaponized social engineering terms meant to covertly psychologically wage warfare against heterosexuality.
GET THEM WHILE THEY'RE YOUNG:
A recent study of 139 dysphoric male children who were monitored from age 7 up until age 20 showed that 87.8 percent of the boys grew out of this phase and reverted back to identifying as their birth gender by the time they were adults. And in other related news, a couple in Montana have claimed that the Montana CFS (Child and Family Services) have taken custody of their 14 year old daughter for refusing her gender affirming care. So now does it make sense why The Illuminati has to "get them while they're young"? Does it make sense why The Illuminati is pumping out so much gender confusion and LGBTQ propaganda into the brains of young and impressionable minds? It's because they are DELIBERATELY confusing children about their gender, and while they're still young and impressionable, they seek to prey on their confusion by pushing them to "change their gender" AKA mutilate their genitals, which is an irreversible procedure. Also, the powers that be are setting the precedent that parents who are not being "inclusive" and "open minded" by letting their children mutilate their genitals, that the state can then physically repossess your child from you, by saying it's CHILD ABUSE that you won't let them MUTILATE THEIR GENITALS. The Luciferians seek to reverse all that is natural, and they want us all to be like their demon god Baphomet. They are coming for your kids, and you'd better push back.
Vast Majority of Gender Dysphoric Boys Desist, Long-Term Study Finds (LINK)
*"*A long-term follow-up of male children with gender dysphoria has found that most study participants desisted over time and accepted themselves as boys. The groundbreaking study used the largest sample to date of boys referred to clinics for gender dysphoria. “A Follow-Up Study of Boys With Gender Identity Disorder” was published in the peer-viewed journal Frontiers in Psychology, and the research protocol was reviewed and approved by Clarke Institute of Psychiatry (now the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health) and the University of Toronto. Study participants were 139 male children assessed in the Gender Identity Service, Child, Youth, and Family Program at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) in Toronto between 1975 and 2009. 63.3% of the boys met DSM-III, III-R, or IV criteria for gender identity disorder (GID), while the rest of the 36.7% were subthreshold for a DSM diagnosis. Researchers first assessed the children at approximately age 7, following up with participants when they reached adolescence and again in early adulthood. At follow-up, researchers classified participants as persisters (which the study defines as “boys who continued to have gender dysphoria”) or desisters (boys who did not continue to have gender dysphoria), and deduced their sexual orientation based on fantasy and behavior. Researchers found that 17 (12.2%) of the participants persisted in their gender dysphoria, and the remaining 122 (87.8%) desisted."
Montana parents say they lost custody of daughter after opposing 14-year-old’s gender transition: report (LINK)
"Montana family claims they lost custody of their 14-year-old child after opposing her interest in changing genders — and while the governor’s office defended the move, it stressed to The Post that the state does not remove minors to provide gender transition services.
The state’s Child and Family Services (CFS) reportedly took custody of the teen from her father, Todd Kolstad, and stepmother, Krista, this month, leading the parents to speak out about how the action has “destroyed” their family and “trampled” their rights.
They showed up at our home to serve us with papers to take Jennifer out of our care,” Kolstad alleged. “They told me the reason was that we were ‘unable or refusing to provide medical care.’ That’s just not true.”
Jennifer returned in September to a Montana youth facility, where she remains. Earlier this month, a court put the teen in the custody of CFS, Reduxx reported.
“We were told that letting Jennifer transition and live as a boy was in her ‘therapeutic best interest’ and because we aren’t willing to follow that recommendation, the court gave CFS custody of Jennifer for six months,” Kolstad told the outlet."
AUTISM, TRANSGENDERISM AND TRANSHUMANISM:
Transgender and nonbinary people are up to six times more likely to have autism (LINK)
This article title really says it all. There's a clear link between autism and transgenderism. So now does it make sense why autism is deliberately created via aluminum in the vaccines and in deodorant, chemtrails, etc? Autism also makes a person more compatible with Artificial Intelligence according to a book called The Autism Epidemic: Transhumanism's Dirty Little Secret (LINK). Supposedly the type of brainwaves produced by an autistic brain are more similar to how Artificial Intelligence processes data than a normal brain. Basically the endgoal of the entire Illuminati LGBTQ and transgender agenda is transhumanism, which is the merging of humans with technology. Part of that agenda ties into transgenderism since if they can get you to mutilate your genitals and get you to change your whole gender identity, then getting you to put a neural chip implant in your head isn't much further to go. The endgoal of the New World Order is to turn you into a gay genderless cyborg who is completely mind controlled by brain microchips. This is why when you choose to support the woke agendas and official narratives, that you're literally choosing The Matrix, because merging us with machines, mind controlling us and creating a completely false reality in our heads is exactly where the woke rabbit hole leads.
CONCLUSION:
"We're here, we're queer, get used to it". We did get used to it. And then we let you legalize Gay Marriage, but still you wouldn't stop pushing us. So how far does the Satanic LGBTQ agenda have to push us before they will leave us alone? Well, they aren't planning on leaving us alone. LGBTQ is a major component of the New World Order. The end goal of LGBTQ is to openly normalize pedophilia, incest, bestiality, and all other sexual perversions since this is what "The Aristocrats" (The Illuminati families) actually take part in themselves. And they bully us into compliance by using terms like "Inclusive" and "Tolerance", which are weaponized social engineering terms that are used to beat us into submission of their depraved agendas. You're no longer straight or heterosexual, you're now "Cis" (Sis/Sick/Sissy), "Gender Normative" and a "Breeder". The Illuminati has made it a thoughtcrime for any person to remain straight and normal in this times of great deceit. Is it any wonder then that nearly 30 percent of all Generation Z adults now identify as LGBTQ? (LINK)
This post is the culmination of my years of research on multiple topics which all tie into pedophilia, LGBTQ, transgenderism, autism, transhumanism, and the New World Order. I hereby pass onto you all the knowledge I currently possess about this agenda, and I hope that you will consider it from a logical perspective and utilize it appropriately. By the way, I do not have a problem with gay or transgender people whatsoever so long as they would just please leave the children alone. They're just children and they're young and easily impressionable by LGBTQ gender confusion propaganda. Let them be kids, and if they still want gender affirming care when they're 18, then they are legally adults and are able to make that decision themselves. Stop encouraging children to make irreversible permanent alterations to their body just to serve an agenda of "inclusiveness" and "tolerance".
Also, this goes without saying, and it goes to all people not just LGBTQ: stop sexually abusing children. This is the most unnatural sexual depravity you can possibly take part in. You're destroying innocence and you're destroying lives. And you're just continuing the cycle of abuse, since it does appear that many pedophiles were also sexually abused when they were children (Jeffrey Epstein got really uncomfortable and refused to answer when he was asked about his own sexual abuse as a child).
Finally, I will again reiterate that there's no problem with being gay, lesbian, bisexual, non binary, transgender, etc. However, the specific group called LGBTQ is an extremist organization of The Illuminati which is pushing Satanic agendas as part of the New World Order. I recommend that no matter how you identify yourself, that you are able to identify a predatory social engineering mind control agenda for what it is.
submitted by kiwasabi to conservatives [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 08:42 bigjackaal48 "I'm gonna need proof that I'll ignore" ~ Anyone when Autism is still a psychotic condition or Early Schizophrenia

Swear these clowns are just useful idiots for the DSM V who don't even care at how stupid they come off as.
submitted by bigjackaal48 to Antipsychiatry [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 08:10 nomorelandfills California rescuers clamoring for adoption of AB 2265, Animal Shelter Transparency Act cheerfully agree to remove the bit about mandatory spay/neuter before a dog or cat is released to foster. Also, the law is another gateway for release of dangerous dogs.

California rescuers clamoring for adoption of AB 2265, Animal Shelter Transparency Act cheerfully agree to remove the bit about mandatory spay/neuter before a dog or cat is released to foster. Also, the law is another gateway for release of dangerous dogs.
https://preview.redd.it/8wd5vanfrb1d1.png?width=536&format=png&auto=webp&s=4348ee55b7aa2fd3a7d70737d11ffd1979b19f61
To be honest, I didn't read the dangerous dog part as thoroughly as I should. I think I may be somewhat burnt out on the recklessness and coldness shown by rescuers to others in their willingness to prioritize dangerous or marginal ownerless dogs over beloved pets and over people.
The spay/neuter part, that just galls me. It should gall anyone. This crisis, this hellscape of pit bull overpopulation that exists clearly calls for sterilization of any shelter dog in California. Shrugging off that as a lesser priority than rehoming existing dogs blows the whole deal. Any animal rescue plan that removes, downgrades or fails to prioritize spay/neuter for pit bulls is worthless. It's just a smokescreen, a way to play with puppies and posture as saviors without doing anything to improve the situation. Status quo, nothing to see here, #adoptdontshop.
https://preview.redd.it/if3jg07kpb1d1.png?width=873&format=png&auto=webp&s=bde9e6f11f3311da914d8c76a66d3907e0118374
SUMMARY: Under existing law, it is the policy of the state that no adoptable animal should be euthanized if it can be adopted into a suitable home, as provided.
This bill declares it the policy of the state that no animal be euthanized by a public animal control agency, shelter, or a private entity that contracts with a public animal control agency or shelter for animal care and control services (collectively, “eligible agency”). This bill requires an eligible agency to post, 24 to 72 hours before a scheduled euthanasia of a dog or cat, a daily list of any cat or dog scheduled for euthanasia on its public website or social media page and to post a physical notice on the kennel of a dog or cat scheduled to be euthanized.
This bill requires a public animal control agency or shelter that seeks to adopt a policy, practice, or protocol that may conflict with Hayden’s Law to give notice regarding the policy, practice, or protocol, as specified, and requires the city or county to schedule a public hearing regarding the policy, practice, or protocol.
https://preview.redd.it/r6ett982nb1d1.png?width=701&format=png&auto=webp&s=5a4b03df0544234fd1c1a32dc1ad2396314d7a75
And the sheer chutzpah of this
https://preview.redd.it/6jzq88epob1d1.png?width=588&format=png&auto=webp&s=01830f3ea95e94084d4bd927d96ba33fc7732b24
Rescuers - we will advocate for violent dogs and fund their owners' fights to keep them from being designated dangerous and harass communities into being extremely afraid of even starting a dangerous dog investigation.
Also rescuers - our new legislation to require more marketing of unadoptable dogs won't include dangerous dogs! Silly! There's no risk to the public!
Although I will say I had no idea that rescuers knew of the existence of the word 'transparency' so good for them. Perhaps this knowledge could be turned inward sometimes?
The CityWatch article
ANIMAL WATCH - An increasing number of reported vicious and fatal dog attacks across California, as reported by the L.A. Times—and worldwide—are ignored by AB 2265 (2024) authored by Assembly Member Kevin McCarthy and introduced in the CA Assembly—and, instead, it prohibits euthanasia of any dangerous animals, including dogs impounded in shelters for violent behavior.
AB 2265, (which has so far been amended twice, the latest change being when it was introduced in the Assembly on 3/18/2024) wants California legislators to assure that NO dog (or other aggressive animal) in a shelter can be euthanized, other than if it is irremediably suffering, regardless of its violent or even deadly behavioral history. However, it is the goal and purpose of shelters to place as many animals as possible directly into homes with families.
This bill went far beyond the purpose of the 1998 Hayden bill which had the intent to restrict euthanasia of healthy and adoptable animals.
No one with knowledge of the devastating outcome of attacks by currently popular Pit Bulls, XL and XXL Bullys, now banned in the UK, Wales, Scotland and India, along with other aggressive breeds, nor anyone who has been the victim of any vicious dog attack, could plausibly agree that this risk should be encouraged or can be afforded by the State of California or any governmental jurisdiction.
So far, it appears other legislators are skeptical of this bill. The only positive change with which some CA animal control agencies and legislators have expressed mutual agreement is the increase in spay/neuter deposits for dogs and cats being raised to $200 to match the much higher rates for surgical sterilization in today’s economy.
A CLOSER LOOK AT AB 2265
In the past few weeks we have seen countries such as England, Wales, Scotland and India joining those which ban Pit Bull, XL and XXL Bullys and other dangerous dogs in order to stop the trafficking of dangerous breeds, provide safety for communities and stop the horrific attacks and deaths of innocent children and adults whose lives are ended by other people’s “protection dogs” or “rescued” pets with a known history of violent behavior.
AB 2265 – A RISK CALIFORNIA CANNOT TAKE
There is value in telling the truth about dog behavior and the greatest is in public and personal safety. What weird whim—other than personal aggrandizement or a strong campaign supporter—would cause Senator McCarthy to encourage ignoring violent past history and risk human and animal lives on a gamble that a dog with a known history of unprovoked aggression will suddenly act differently?
If we want canines to continue to be known as man’s (or woman’s) best friends, we need—just as we do with humans—to assure they have earned that trust by not misusing their innate strength and survival skills to harm those who trust and love them.
CHANGING THE STATE’S EUTHANASIA GOAL
This bill, AB 2265, introduced on February 8, 2024, drastically changes the State’s animal shelter euthanasia goal—from ending euthanasia of adoptable animals to ending euthanasia of any animal. That includes vicious dogs, wild and/or dangerous animals, prohibited animals and regulated animals.
This would create chaotic danger for adopters and pet owners and innocent residents/neighbors throughout California, while ALSO negatively and disastrously affecting the insurance and veterinary industries, according to experts.
The only exceptions in the bill that allow a dangerous animal to be euthanized are very narrow categories for medical and behavior issues:
1) those that are irremediably suffering, which is defined as those for which “severe, unremitting physical pain” cannot be relieved by any medical means without regard to cost or local availability of that level of care; and
2) Those that have been declared “vicious” under the State’s regulatory scheme, which few agencies use, and which assumes that a hearing was held after an owner contested that declaration.
According to Fast Track Democracy, “Existing law prohibits animals that are irremediably suffering from a serious illness or severe injury from being held for owner redemption or adoption. This bill would instead declare it the policy of the state that no animal be euthanized by a public animal control agency or shelter or a private entity that contracts with a public animal control agency or shelter for animal care and control services, except as provided.”
“Existing law prohibits a stray dog or cat impounded by a public or private shelter from being euthanized before 6 business days after the stray dog or cat is impounded, not including the day of impoundment, and requires that the stray dog or cat, except those irremediably suffering, be released to a nonprofit animal rescue or adoption organization before the scheduled euthanasia of the stray dog or cat if requested by the organization, as specified.” The analysis summarizes the Bill (see Fast Track Democracy).
Existing law prohibits a stray dog or cat impounded by a public or private shelter from being euthanized before 6 business days after the stray dog or cat is impounded, not including the day of impoundment, and requires that the stray dog or cat, except those irremediably suffering, be released to a nonprofit animal rescue or adoption organization before the scheduled euthanasia of the stray dog or cat if requested by the organization, as specified.
WARNINGS ABOUT THIS ‘NO KILL’ PLAN FOR DANGEROUS DOGS
A California animal-control specialist offered the following thoughts based on his personal and professional experience.
(The following is not to be taken as legal advice, but merely as guidance in further considering some issues that appear to not have been considered in pursuing these severe changes to animal sheltering under existing California laws and practices.)
“This Bill would absolutely eviscerate Food and Agricultural Code Section 31683, which allows counties and cities to have their own regulatory process for dangerous dogs, and it would force everyone to use the very-flawed State process.”
AND he summarized that:
  • This bill eliminates the limitation by the 1998 Hayden-Bill mandate and requires shelters to advertise for release even those dogs that have mauled or killed a person, and forces animal control agencies (government and humane societies with animal control contracts) to announce the pending euthanasia of any of these dogs to “rescues,” so they can take them, often placing them in unsuspecting homes.
  • Even if the bill does not require that owner-relinquished dogs that are too vicious for placement even with a rescue be released to anyone who asks for it, the mere requirement that they be advertised creates unnecessary conflict and invites protest and even litigation over the decision not to release them.
  • What is a “qualified” nonprofit animal rescue or adoption organization? The term “qualified” is not defined in the bill. In light of an appellate court interpretation of the Hayden mandate to release stray dogs facing euthanasia to a “qualified” rescue, it is vital to have that defined. If “qualified” means any corporation that has obtained its 501(c)(3) tax exempt status—which is what many will assume—then animal control will have no way to ensure that the most vicious dogs are not placed in “foster” in unsuspecting neighborhoods by people who have no idea how dangerous they are.
  • Why must it be a nonprofit organization? This bill defines an animal rescue organization to include for-profit corporations. So why are they excluded from this Bill? A nonprofit organization can pay a high number of “employees” very exorbitant salaries. A nonprofit business model is no guarantee that more of the organization’s budget will go to help animals than other business models.
  • This Bill targets only municipal shelters and humane societies that have government contracts to provide animal control services. Those are the only organizations that cannot fully control their intake, and on which there are mandates to admit animals. They are the very organizations that most need the ability to engage in euthanasia for legitimate health and safety reasons, and for which the greatest levels of leniency and understanding are justified. Yet, any other organization can euthanize healthy, adoptable animals with impunity.
Although there are many other factors considered in the analysis, this article is intended merely to present some of the dangers of creating laws and policies at any legislative level without having a thorough analysis and discussion with leaders in the field of animal control and sheltering. There is information at the end of this article if anyone wishes to read more of this analysis.
FUNDRAISING – THE POWER OF THE ALMIGHTY DOLLAR
There is no better way to reach the wallets of animal lovers than through their heart strings, and sadly millions of dollars are going into pockets of executives in organizations that do not directly care for or protect animals and, of course, nothing speaks louder than donations at the lobbying and legislative level.
But, the needs of homeless animals should not be creating slush funds for campaigns nor playing on the emotions of those who are continually confronted by TV commercials and mailers, saying that just a few more dollars will save them all.
There are also human lives and safety to be considered and this is a primary responsibility of animal shelters and humane societies. It is important that they are asked what will help them do this thankless and seemingly hopeless job.
Pets are too often obtained as a short-term experience with little commitment and then abandoned within or outside these facilities that do not benefit from the money that is raised by large organizations or politicians ostensibly to help them.
Instead, these promises set unreachable goals and promote “feel-good” programs that overburden their staffing and emotions, without asking what they need to do this very difficult job from a realistic perspective.
THE BEST INDICATOR OF AN ANIMAL’S FUTURE BEHAVIOR IS ITS PAST
Not all animals are adoptable, nor should they be placed in homes where they are likely to harm, or be harmed because certain behavior is endemic to the breed. The AKC thrives on the fact that bloodlines of dogs determine or influence their predictable behavior.
Why is it this is so clear that it causes millions of people to buy purebreds for certain reasons; yet, animal shelters are expected to take in dogs with documented histories of anti-social behavior and attacks and rehome them with promises they will be “good family members” just to keep them alive?
LISTEN BEFORE VOTING, SACRAMENTO
Legislators need to listen to experts in animal control—not self-appointed voices for animals—many of whom have never worked in a shelter, before even considering new legislation.
They also need to ask their own community, “Do you feel safe from dog attacks? And/or “have you been a victim of an attack or live in fear of neighborhood animals?” They may be surprised at the number of injuries that have been suffered but didn’t make the press and how many victims may have permanent, life-limiting, disabilities for which they were never compensated.
Assembly Member McCarthy needs to walk through animal shelters in his district and ask those who work there or have been long-term volunteers, and those who take the responsibility for determining policies and the endless, sad challenges of management, “what will help you help them?”
DON’T WAIT FOR AN IRREVERSIBLE TRAGEDY
California has been very liberal (or very foolish) in allowing dogs known to have a history of aggression to be removed from shelters for adoption, but lawsuits and tragic, injuries or deaths of innocent victims have imposed limitations as to what can be tolerated philosophically and financially.
The safety of the dog itself must also be a consideration. People understandably react violently to dog attacks, using any weapon to inflict sufficient injury to stop the dog and save their own or another’s life.
Euthanasia can be the most humane option when it is indicated or determined that the animal poses a consistent threat to humans or animals in general, or poses a recurrent uncontrollable risk to the public’s and its own safety.
(Author’s note: If anyone would like to see more of the informal critique of the proposed CA law AB 2265, quoted in part in this article, you can contact me through the editor of CityWatchLA: ([jim@citywatchla.com](mailto:jim@citywatchla.com).)
(Phyllis M. Daugherty is a former Los Angeles City employee, an animal activist and a contributor to CityWatch.
submitted by nomorelandfills to PetRescueExposed [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 07:57 epistles_philippines Our Lady of Lipa, Mary, Mediatrix of All Grace

Our Lady of Lipa, Mary, Mediatrix of All Grace
https://epistlesph.com/our-lady-of-lipa-mary-mediatrix-of-all-grace/
I created this page to help spread the truth on the alleged Lipa apparitions in the Philippines. If you are a believer you can use the contents of this page to defend Lipa. If you are a critique with an open mind, this is a good start for you to study this controversial Marian apparition case.
Please, the least we can do is to pray for the reopening of the Lipa case. The biggest problem is that, against their conscience, the bishops were forced to sign a negative verdict in 1951 and that is where the controversy began.
In addition, in recent times, a journal was found that contained a very favorable opinion about Lipa’s apparitions. The author of the said journal was Father Angel de Blas, a Dominican priest who played an important role in the investigation of the Lipa apparitions, an eminent psychologist, philosopher, who was chosen by the ecclesiastical authorities to interview the visionary and others involved in the apparitions. He said that Sr. Teresing Castillo was a genuine visionary.
As Catholics who know how to think, whose side do we take now, do we favor, support, and defend the oppressed or do we blindly become collaborators of the oppressors?
https://epistlesph.com/our-lady-of-lipa-mary-mediatrix-of-all-grace/
submitted by epistles_philippines to Catholics_Philippines [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 07:13 Technical-Candle9924 DO NOT BE RECRUITED~! (DON'T INVITE PEOPLE, DO NOT ACCEPT INVITATION FOR EVANGELICAL MISSIONS)

10 Warning Signs of Cult Recruitment

Research shows that anyone is susceptible to joining a cult. “Not me!” you say. Yes, you. The self-serving bias that makes people think they’re the exception to the rule can make them feel invulnerable—and leave them unprotected from pathological salespeople. You don’t have to be particularly gullible, insecure, or emotionally needy to be successfully recruited. Cults exploit psychological elements that are hardwired in pretty much everyone. Here’s how they do it:
  1. Social isolation. If you are seeing less and less of your family and peers in favor of your new best friends, ask yourself why. Cults gradually chip away at your community until only cult members remain. If the cult is your entire world—a closed system—then leaving it can feel really scary.
  2. Cyber isolation. If all your Facebook friends agree with you, ask yourself why. Cyber isolation can lead to confirmation bias. That means you only see information that supports what you already believe. And your beliefs are also continually validated in the echo chamber of cyber isolation. The Facebook algorithm shows you things you want to see in a never-ending cycle of digital influence.
  3. Promised rewards. If you find that you’re on the verge of amazing accomplishments or the fulfillment of your wildest dreams, ask yourself why. Cults promise gifts like a spiritual Wheel of Fortune: enlightenment, self-actualization, love, unlicensed psychotherapy, companionship, exorcism, peace of mind, perfect health, eternal life, great sex, a forever home, a loving family. Over-the-top rewards are part of the conversion process. How can anyone say no?
  4. Phobia indoctrination. If you find that you have a lot of new fears, ask yourself why. Seeing threats everywhere? Cults use fear to induce people to stay within their ranks, where they’ll be safe. And naturally the only person who can truly protect you is the cult leader. Who is also responsible for punishing you. Their methods are effective because they alternate fear with love, leading to disorganized attachment.
  5. Heightened emotion. If you find yourself feeling extremely happy, angry, or scared, ask yourself why. Cults trigger big emotional responses and then direct that emotion toward a strategic target when you’re at your least rational.
  6. Love-bombing. If you find yourself feeling more loved than you ever have in your life, ask yourself why. This is a tactic that narcissistic manipulators use in interpersonal relationships, but it also applies to cultic attempts at thought reform. Cult members will spoil you with attention and affection in order to make you feel connected and important. And people keep coming back for the love drug.
  7. Us vs. them mentality. If you find that you have a lot of enemies all of a sudden, ask yourself why. Cults invent enemies to help solidify the group identity. When you envision yourself as a missionary for good versus evil, there might be too much at stake for you to abandon your cause.
  8. Social influence. If you find that everyone around you agrees on something, ask yourself why. Psychological studies show that compliance goes up with the number of people involved. Most people won’t reject an idea if the whole group supports it. And cult prospects are typically overwhelmed with group-ecstatic activities, which can lead them to poor information processing. Essentially, peer pressure makes it impossible for people to function at full capacity.
  9. Intelligence-dampening. If you find yourself too tired or confused to make decisions, ask yourself why. Cults use techniques like sleep-deprivation, alternate states of consciousness, repetition, and thought-stopping to overwhelm someone’s cognitive resources and critical thinking skills. They destabilize your view of reality. And when your mind is under threat, you keep returning to the safety and love of your leader. It doesn’t mean you’re stupid, even if you develop false beliefs. All humans have false beliefs and a tendency toward magical thinking. But cult members depend on the cult for direction when their brains are disoriented.
  10. Identity disturbance. If you feel like a new you–a better you–ask yourself why. Cults alternate reward and punishment to stress people out and disrupt their identities. From there, cults can inflict a new identity on a member, one that depends on submission and self-surrender. And it doesn’t help that other sources of identity, like work and school, are slowly taken over by cult participation.
source: https://thriveworks.com/blog/protect-yourself-from-mind-control-techniques
submitted by Technical-Candle9924 to exIglesiaNiCristo [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 07:00 regionaldailly theme for academic journal suggestion?

Hi guys,
I've just moved my academic journals website to Jekyll and set it to read-only, meaning no new articles will be published.
Everything is great, except I don't like the current style. Does anyone know of any free or premium templates that are suitable for a text+image academic journal theme?
submitted by regionaldailly to Jekyll [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 06:42 kainike Delusional Filipino actually turned out fine

im a harbinger of bad luck so cant believe things actually went okay-ish considering im not a competitive applicant
₊˚⊹♡.𖥔 ݁ Demographics
₊˚⊹♡.𖥔 ݁ Intended Major(s): Media Production / Film and Television Production / Communications / Media Studies
₊˚⊹♡.𖥔 ݁Academics
₊˚⊹♡.𖥔 ݁ Standardized Testing
₊˚⊹♡.𖥔 ݁ Extracurriculars/Activities:
i didnt plan my extracurriculars in high school i sure did a lot and most of them were scattered out HAHA. jack of all trades, master of none moments. i tried to include mostly my media and writing related activities. aside from the ones i listed on my common app, i was immersed in a lot of social justice and political advocacy works + other sports :)
₊˚⊹♡.𖥔 ݁ Awards/Honors
₊˚⊹♡.𖥔 ݁ Essay
₊˚⊹♡.𖥔 ݁ LORs
I did not read the letters but im basing it on how much they like me as a student. I chose these teachers because I got high grades in their subjects and they got PhDs.
₊˚⊹♡.𖥔 ݁ Interviewss- I got none and I was too busy to go for optional interviews. I really did not display any demonstrated interest.
₊˚⊹♡.𖥔 ݁ D*ecisionss *(ALL REGULAR DECISION, actually I filed my international applications late like 2-3 weeks after the deadlines because I was in a depressive episode last January)
ACCEPTANCES
WAITLISTS
REJECTED
₊˚⊹♡.𖥔 ݁Reflection
well that was krazy HAHA. ik many people here showcase ivies and T20s and im not that remarkable with my t40s to t100s but i'd like to think its not that shabby for an unknown international from a third world country. my biggest regret is not applying for NYU, its my dream school but again considering my depressive episode from November to January I wasnt able to file my application on time. its a miracle that universities still accept late applications and im grateful for all that I have and received. If i could turn back time I wish I was a little bit stronger and more stable to have been able to apply for NYU, my common app essay about my favorite author was actually an alumni from NYU :")
but we carry the burdens of choice under the merits of luck; even with merit scholarships, I cant afford any of the international schools I was accepted to. more likely i'll have to attend the top university in my country. but i dont want to give up man i'll still try to appeal for financial aid and if that wont work I'll apply for transfer during my sophomore year to ivies and top LACs that give full financial aid to international transfers. the odds are low but never 0 and no harm in trying !! see you all again next year for my transfer results :]
submitted by kainike to collegeresults [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 05:20 shellof_a_man my first review: Atavista - Childish Gambino Album Review, I would love any tips you guys have!

I just wrote my first album review and I know it needs work. Please offer tips of any kind!
I will post it for free here, but if you have medium please read it here:
https://medium.com/@benbrotmanb/secrets-heartbeat-atavista-by-childish-gambino-an-album-review-fce8f38ee5a0
But here's the full article:

“Secrets, Heartbeat” Atavista by Childish Gambino : an Album Review

Atavista released on May 13, 2024, a yearned-for date for fans of Childish Gambino’s former records like his most recent efforts Kauai (2014) and “Awaken, My Love!” (2016). It’s no secret that Donald Glover has carved into and entrenched himself in the inventive R&B and Hip-hop scene of the last 20-plus years, an extension of his creative and successful efforts as an actor. The following he’s amassed have waited a long seven years for the release of any project, unsure for much of that time if he even would.
Childish Gambino’s musical projects have improved with each release since 2011’s Camp. In those earlier years, his messages were met with overwhelmingly corny delivery and style, but his endeavors remained steady and he eventually found more profound and artistic ways to speak to his audience and the world. Gambino’s music includes but is not limited to addressing and critiquing American society and pop culture (see his smash hit “This is America”), while also pondering what life means and who he really is behind the fame.
The anticipation for this record was high for many having found enjoyment in his discography, including, most recently, the psychedelic, groovy, passionate, and emotional “Awaken, My Love!”.
The album art to represent this record seems to differ completely from all his previous. The jarringly blank white background with “ATAVISTA” pasted across the center to me indicated a significant change in his approach these many years later, but his style changes so drastically with each release that it was up in the air.
The introduction and title track “Atavista” fed us a short reflection on the word and it’s context — it meaning some sort of return to something ancestral or left behind, but this track didn’t reveal too much about how the rest would unfold.
By the third song “Time” with Ariana Grande, it was clear that Childish Gambino was taking another more pop-based approach to his regular variation on R&B — dappled with messages about his unique journey with self-love (see “To Be Hunted”) and the faults within social media(in “Algorhythm” and more).
A suprising first feature on the record, Ariana steps up to the plate. Her verse ends about as quickly as it begins, leaving something to be desired of her talent. The experience thus far felt lacking, but it was hard to put a finger on it.
What gave the album some kick after a slightly underwhelming beginning were two stand-out catchy and trademarked Gambino groove tracks: “Sweet Thang” with Summer Walker and “Little Foot Big Foot” with Young Nudy. The former is a sugary, southern, and soulful track that speaks on the ups and downs of relationships, neutrally expressing negative traits about his lover, but that they are a “sweet thang” regardless. “Little Foot Big Foot” showboats an earworm flow paired with a masterfully-utilized Nudy verse — a testament purely by his presence to the track’s message about the connection between absent fathers and drug dealing.
The album’s progression then begins to experience a falling action. Ther final few songs contributed little to the more passionate essence of what Gambino laid out just before. The production and overall sound of the the record (and especially the second half) was bland, monotonous, and drawn out — not something expected to hear after expecting the building momentum to continue. The wait was overall not worth the results of Childish Gambino’s efforts this time around, only creating a greater hole to fill for fans of his who feel the same.

5.5/10.

submitted by shellof_a_man to Music [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 04:58 Professional_Car250 Not so “brief” intro and question about tadalafil

Hi, all. Started to get pain then noticed a curve about 3 months ago. My wife went to Dr. google and said it was PD. Took me 2 months to get in to see a urologist. My appointment was 2 weeks ago, there was just talking and he said he could feel a quarter sized plaque had formed. What do you know, Dr. google was right for once. He didn’t do any injections to force erection, or an ultrasound. He told me xiaflex would be the route he’d go, but I’d have to wait 6 months or insurance wouldn’t cover it. I asked if there was anything I could do in the interim, he said not really… but you can try taking vitamin e and acetyl L-Carnitine. Curve doesn’t seem to be too terrible except for when trying to flex it. I’d say about 15° erect, but >45° when flexing. Also have an offset hour glass is how I’d explain it (indent on left closer to base and on right about 1/2” further up). As long as it’s not flexed when trying to penetrate, sex is still able to happen (wife said she actually likes the upward curve when flexed inside). However, I’ve noticed that it’s impossible for me to finish if we try two days in a row due to the pain from the day before, along with having to pay attention to care for the hinge effect I’ve been experiencing. Anyway, me being me, I decided to look at different research journals. And decided to try and see if I could help along as much healing as possible. Found this group (if that’s what it’s called… new to Reddit), and seems like there are quite a few well versed people on the subject. Sorry if this has all been gone over before, I did my best to search for answers before bothering anyone. Currently I’m taking (not all for PD, some are just general supplements) Vitamin E, Omega 3, Acetyl L-Carnitine, ashwagahnda, Maca, and Genius Mushroom something. My wife found an article about TENS Unit being a treatment option, so she’s been having me torture myself with that. Also started VED treatment and manual stretching. The urologist didn’t mention anything about tadalafil, but saw multiple papers on the possible efficacy in the acute stage (hoping I’m still early enough). Would that be something a GP would prescribe off of a request with PD being diagnosed? I have an appointment on Tuesday with my regular doc, and after reading the reviews for xiaflex, and the urologist going straight to that, I’m willing to try anything to help without that, and don’t know how much I trust him. Forgot to say, I’m 38 and not in the greatest shape, but trying to get healthy again now…
Sorry for the long post, but it was my first, and wanted to cover as much backstory as possible. Any info would be greatly appreciated.
P.S. don’t think trips to Utah are an option.
submitted by Professional_Car250 to PeyroniesSupport [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 04:16 geopolicraticus Scientia sub specie illuminatatis

The View from Oregon – 289
Re: Scientia sub specie illuminatatis
Friday 17 May 2024
Dear Friends,
In the past several newsletters I have discussed the lack of a science of science, and some of the ramifications of this absence. Another consequence of the absence of a science of science is the selective way in which science develops, and this in turn leads to Danilevsky’s philosophy of science, which acknowledges that science can be different in different social milieux. In other words, science is relative to the scientific community that practices science. Kuhn comes to an analogous conclusion, though for Kuhn it is the diachronic relativity of science that emerges from a history of scientific revolutions triggered by model crises and paradigm shifts. Kuhn’s work continues to be debated, are there are significant differences of interpretation that keep alive the controversy as to whether paradigm shifts are rational or irrational. (Why not both by turns?)
Danilevsky presents us with the prospect of the synchronic relativity of science, in which paradigms differ not down through historical time, but across ethnic communities. This strikes at the heart of Enlightenment universalism, but, as I have tried to argue in these newsletters, Enlightenment ideology is not intrinsically scientific, but for a time Enlightenment thinkers made common cause with the sciences as a way both to advance their interests and to fight the common enemy of traditionalism. But scientists themselves have so completely internalized Enlightenment ideology that, even if the Enlightenment can abandon science, scientists cannot abandon the Enlightenment. That science is the same, that it must be the same, for all who practice it, seems to be an unspoken presupposition of science practised sub specie illuminatatis.
I don’t know of any analytical philosophers who have taken up Danilevsky’s argument, even if only to refute it. Nor do I know of any analogous arguments, though my knowledge of contemporary philosophy of science is far from exhaustive. The closest we come to Danilevsky in the mainstream of Anglo-American analytical philosophy of science is the debate over Kuhn’s philosophy of science, which evades some of the most troubling aspects of Danilevsky’s account. But in the absence of a science of science, we cannot definitively exclude Danilevsky’s account, just as we cannot exclude the role of personalities in the development of science (the focus of last week’s newsletter), nor can we exclude the possibility of alternative sciences that explain as much of the world as our familiar sciences, but which are largely disjoint from the familiar sciences. This latter possibility is related as an anecdote in Eugene Wigner’s “The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences,” which I have quoted many times (though, strangely, apparently not in these newsletters, as I searched back several years just now and didn’t find this quoted, though I could have sworn that I have referenced this so many times my readers may be tired to hearing of it).
Another problem potentially soluble by a science of science: every special science undergoes its own crisis in its turn as it is forced to recognize that it cannot define either the object of its research or the fundamental theoretical terms it employs. There was the crisis in the foundations of mathematics, the crisis in physics, the crisis in psychology, the replication crisis (which falls hardest on social psychology, but which leaves few disciplines unscathed), the crisis in cosmology, and no doubt further crises yet to come. Some of these crises resemble each other, suggesting analogous structural problems within the sciences, while other crises seem to be highly specific to a particular subject matter (as with the crisis in cosmology generated by diverging measures of the Hubble constant). Further research into crises may reveal a deeper commonality, or may reveal each crisis to uniquely supervene on the objects of knowledge distinctive to each science.
The above assumes that a science of science would foreclose upon these troubling scenarios we would prefer not to contemplate. I think we can safely say that we have excluded some unwelcome scenarios for science, and this implies some rudimentary foundations of a science of science, and I think that if the project of a science of science ever came about, i.e., if it ever became a scientific research program on its own—or perhaps a meta-scientific research program—it would gradually foreclose upon the paradoxes of science, excluding them one by one, first taking care of the relatively simple problems, and then moving on to the more difficult ones. We don’t yet even know what the hardest problems are, or what they will be, when we earnestly turn toward formulating a science of science. It is all terra incognita to us.
In the absence of a science of science, however, we do have something to go on, and that is the record of the most successful special sciences, which, through their utility and fruitfulness, have provided a model for the other sciences to follow. And follow they do. A successful scientific discipline spurs imitation in the other special sciences, with the methods and the research program and theoretical structures copied. Science, then, has recourse to analogy. Later sciences are constructed along the lines of earlier successful sciences, and with good reason. The successful sciences have resolved many or most of their problems, and their methods have proved to be a successful way to derive knowledge from the empirical world.
But analogy itself is a theoretical problem. It has no standing as a formal principle of reasoning, and empirically it forces us into the kind of metaphysical speculation that most scientists hate—reflections on the uniformity of nature and such like. If nature is uniform, then a scientific methodology for the investigation of nature can be uniform, and we can know that it is (or will be) as effective in one region of experience as in another region of experience. Proof of this, however, is a metaphysical proof, and not anything scientific in the usual sense.
I should not belabor this idea of the absence of a science of science without acknowledging that it was, of course, the traditional idea that philosophy was the science of science, or, more narrowly, philosophical logic as it was elaborated prior to the mathematization of logic, that was understood to be the science of science, or, as it was also commonly known, the theory of science. Many logical works were called the theory of science, as, for example, Bernard Bolzano’s four volume Theory of ScienceWissenschaftslehre—which was completed in 1837, but the first complete English translation of which did not appear until 2014. In the meantime, between 1837 and 2014, logic, philosophy, and science all underwent rapid growth, and even, we could say, directional growth, that took them in a developmental direction of elaboration that was not anticipated prior to this time.
We can imagine a counterfactual history of logic (and of science) in which logic developed linearly, and did not experience a sudden growth along with a sudden realignment, gradually converging upon the ideal of a theory of science imagined by logicians like Bolzano. While mathematical logic transformed both logic and mathematics both, what was lost in the elaboration of mathematical logic was its connection to this traditional function of logic as the science of science. Moreover, the internal integration of logic was lost, though, it must be observed, other forms of integration appeared as logic was reconstructed analogously to mathematics.
Lately I have been thinking how, with the advent of mathematical logic and analytical philosophy, theory of meaning and theory of reference bifurcated, and with this bifurcation the inverse relationship between the two, explicitly recognized in traditional logic, was lost. Traditional logic asserts that as intension expands, extension narrows, and as extension expands, intension narrows. Intuitively it is easy to see that this is the case: a highly definite meaning applies only to a very few referents, while a generic meaning applies to a great many more referents. But with the development of mathematical logic and analytical philosophy, the theory of meaning and the theory of reference developed in different directions.
What happened? The whole of Western civilization was redirected and realigned by the industrial revolution. Some years ago I wrote about how the industrial revolution essentially hijacked other developments that were already taking place, and which therefore did not have the opportunity to come to a natural fruition because industrial change was so rapid and so catastrophic. I called this the preemption hypothesis (and gave it a further application in Late-Adopter Spacefaring Civilization: The Preemption that Didn’t Happen). We can understand preemption as a more generic historical process in which one historical process that is aggressively expansive overtakes another historical process that is slower and more gradual. An invasive weedy species of cognition expands universally and crowds out endemic species of cognition, driving them to extinction, and leaving us with a philosophical monoculture and its attendant disadvantages.
The kind of industrial civilization we might have gotten had the industrial revolution been an industrial evolution instead of a revolution, unfolding over millennia, as it is likely that the development of agriculture developed, would have been dramatically different. And the industrial revolution spawned revolutions in every adjacent sphere of life and thought. The preemption that was the industrial revolution can also be seen at work in intellectual history, and even in aesthetic and spiritual history. Science and philosophy began to transform early, more or less defining by themselves the advent of modernity when science and philosophy were modern but economics and industry were not. However, with the industrial revolution, science and philosophy were given a new and more violent spur to further growth and realignment.
These redirections and realignments of science, philosophy, and logic are vivid illustrations of the kind of selective development of science that Danilevsky imagined, though he thought of these selective developments in terms of their being embedded in cultural-historical traditions. Western science was embedded in the Western cultural-historical tradition (though Danilevsky called this the Romano-Germanic cultural-historical type), and when this tradition changed due to the industrial revolution, the science (and philosophy and logic) changed along with the tradition. Had the change been given an impetus in a different direction, or had the change not happened at all, science and its adjacent intellectual activities would look rather different today. I will not deny that change would have been much slower, but qualitatively different change might have had unprecedented impacts on history. Obviously, in the present context, what I am thinking of is a tradition like the logic of Bolzano being developed gradually, perhaps over hundreds of years, until it becomes the genuine science of science the want of which we feel at present.
It is ironically reflexive that we cannot exclude the possibility of a counterfactual science, based on a counterfactual logical tradition that grew into a mature theory of science, precisely because we lack this same theory of science. We also cannot prove that our rapid progress in science since the industrial revolution might stagnate for want of a proper theory of science, and due to the cognitive monoculture favored by rapid progress, nor that a counterfactual science, based on a counterfactual logic, might ultimately overtake and outstrip the rapid progress of science after an industrial revolution. It may be the case that, when a civilization experiences a rapid and violent industrial revolution, the accelerated rate of change cripples the other institutions of that civilization, and inevitably leads to both industrial and scientific progress eventually grinding to a halt, because the rate of progress was unsustainable. We could call the two implied scenarios of scientific and industrial development the tortoise scenario and the hare scenario, where slow and steady wins the race.
Best wishes,
Nick
PS—Last Wednesday I hiked up Dog Mountain again (previously in a PS to newsletter 239 I mentioned hiking Dog Mountain on 31 May 2023, almost exactly a year ago). This time I didn’t go all the way to the top, but I went as far as the Dog Mountain Lookout, which is a viewpoint over the Columbia Gorge just short of the top. Spring is one of the best times to do the Dog Mountain walk because of all the wildflowers.
PPS— The new number of Isonomia Quarterly, Volume 2 Issue 2, is now available, which includes a new essay by me, “The Coming Coeval Age” (a PDF version is also available). I plan to also record a video about this for my Today in Philosophy of History series. As with my recent big history paper, “A Complexity Ladder for Big History,” this essay for the Isonomia Quarterly isn’t specifically about philosophy of history, but it does have some interesting implications for history that I will explore and elaborate.
PPPS—I have finished listening to the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius. This is a classic I have skimmed many times but have not previously read through word-for-word. It always feels good to have the experience of the whole of a classic to better understand the references generated by said classic. Often we think of stoics as being distant and even possessed of an inhuman degree of self-control, but I was surprised by the repeated references to sociability in the Meditations. There is a pervasive sense in Marcus Aurelius of going along to get along.
Immediately upon finishing the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius I started listening to How to Think Like a Roman Emperor: The Stoic Philosophy of Marcus Aurelius by Donald J. Robertson. This is not exactly a commentary on the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius, but a kind of exposition, both filling in the backstory to the life of Marcus Aurelius, as well as the life of the author, and showing the relevance of Stoic philosophy in the present. This book is about twice as long as the Meditations themselves.

Newsletter link:

https://mailchi.mp/9c0106fe7105/the-view-from-oregon-289

submitted by geopolicraticus to The_View_from_Oregon [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 04:07 Typical_Conflict_162 Who Are Your Trusted Journalists For When You Read Articles?

I know there are some people that stick with certain news stations and companies because they feel as if they put out more honest news and articles but I've also seen that some of the journalism and opinions can be biased depending on who's writing it which takes away some of the credibility from said news stations and companies. Are there any specific journalists you look for?
submitted by Typical_Conflict_162 to Journalism [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 03:46 Downtown-Log-539 Publish under pen name?

Possibly neurotic question, but I’m self-publishing a children’s book with my aunt and niece, and separately have several articles accepted to a religiously affiliated journal. Should I publish under a pen name to decrease the likelihood a law firm will be able to easily google and find out my extracurriculars? I realize its illegal to discriminate against creed and I wouldn’t think anyone would object to a children’s picture book, but law firms tend to be sticks in the mud that don’t like anything that looks different, and so I’d rather err on the side of caution if it could be a risk.
submitted by Downtown-Log-539 to biglaw [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 03:23 JustRenea Traffic: A Problem with One Solution

There are many problems caused by our car dependent infrastructure:
•Road deaths •Traffic •Loss of Third Places •Terrible Land Use •Streets that are unsafe for everyone outside of a car •Financially insolvent cities (I grew up in Orange and it saddens me to see the city in a deficit all while the circle/plaza is still open to cars. It should be entirely pedestrianized.)
But traffic is the one problem we encounter on a daily basis. So that's what I'm going to address in this post. I'm sure the 2,301 people who have died on OC roads since 2012 were loved by someone but obviously road deaths don't lead to change or we wouldn't be fighting so hard for 4 miles of streetcar lines and continuing to have bicycle gutters instead of protected bike paths.
The worst excuse: we don't have the money for public transit. All while spending more than 100 million to “improve” the 71/91 interchange. Destroying land and the skyline in the process. (Yes, this pertains to OC, it's basically OC sprawling). These lanes will inevitably lead to induced demand and result in even more traffic.
The ONLY solution to car traffic: viable alternatives to driving.
The state/county/cities continue to implement the incorrect solutions. In part because citizens are oblivious to the correct solutions due to decades of car dependency.
I expect this post to get downvoted but if it reaches even a fraction of the population, maybe it can contribute to the changes that need to happen in our communities.
Notjustbikes Stroads Why American Cities Are Broke One More Lane A Sense of Place Strong Towns articles Lost Art of Mixed-Use The Long Road to Insolvency
Let's ask ourselves:
Should our kids be able to safely walk or cycle to and from school?
Do you enjoy using your time to wait in a line of cars just to pick up your kid from school?
When you're elderly, do you want to be able to safely get around the county without driving?
Should people with disabilities be dependent on those with a car in order to get somewhere?
When you're driving, do you enjoy being next to pedestrians and cyclists?
Do you live in a home on the side of a road? Wouldn't it be nice to not to have to worry about a car crashing into your home?
Is it unpleasant to walk anywhere outside of your neighborhood? Why do you think this is? Maybe it's the loud car traffic you're forced to walk next to.
Where do you enjoy yourself the most in this county? Maybe it's the beach, outdoor mall, a walkable downtown, Disneyland, college campus, hiking trails, or horse trails. Do you want your entire county to feel this way?
Are we really free if we're dependent on a car in order to get from A to B?
Should it continue to be acceptable for people to die and get injured on our roads? Or is it just like modern human sacrifice considering we have alternatives and we just choose to ignore them?
submitted by JustRenea to orangecounty [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 02:18 Sashcracker Stop the political frame-up of Ukrainian socialist Bogdan Syrotiuk!

By David North
On April 25, 2024, Bogdan Syrotiuk, the 25-year-old leader of the Young Guard of Bolshevik-Leninists (the YGBL), a socialist-Trotskyist organization active in Ukraine, Russia and throughout the former USSR, was arrested by the notorious state security service of the fascistic Zelensky regime, the SBU. Bogdan is being held in atrocious conditions in a high security prison in the city of Nikolaev (Mykolaiv), which is located in southern Ukraine.
The International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI), the world Trotskyist movement with which the YGBL is politically affiliated, has finally obtained the actual documents in which the SBU presents its charges against Bogdan Syrotiuk. These documents, which form the basis of his detention, make absolutely clear that Bogdan is the victim of a monstrous state frame-up. The allegations concocted by the SBU are a crude combination of lies, obvious fabrications, and political absurdities.
Moreover, the documents submitted by the SBU are directed not only against Bogdan. They are nothing less than a declaration of war against all left-wing and socialist opposition to the Zelensky regime and, specifically, the International Committee of the Fourth International and its public organ, the World Socialist Web Site.
The central allegation leveled against Bogdan Syrotiuk is that he is guilty of high treason. The basis of this charge is that Bogdan has been for the past two years “engaged in the preparation of publications commissioned by representatives of a Russian propaganda and information agency, the World Socialist Web Site” [emphasis added.]
The World Socialist Web Site is denounced as an instrument of “an active information war against Ukraine” being waged by Russia, which
uses the so-called “left-wing” propagandists and their information platforms (websites, media and social platforms) to discredit the support of Ukraine by international partners, justify Russia’s armed aggression against Ukraine, accusing Western countries of creating conditions under which Russia was forced to launch the so-called special military operation, fomenting wars in Ukraine by providing it with weapons, etc. As a result, they are used by Russia to systematically convey pro-Kremlin narratives to the population of Ukraine and Ukraine’s allied countries…
Since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the World Socialist Web Site “WSWS” has regularly published articles in various languages aimed at discrediting Ukraine and representatives of governments around the world for assisting Ukraine in its fight against the aggressor state.
The ICFI’s opposition to the US-NATO war in Ukraine is an essential element of its political program, deeply rooted in the socialist and internationalist principles of the Trotskyist movement. The attempt of the Ukrainian regime to portray this opposition as an instrument of Putin’s propaganda network is as viciously mendacious as it is politically absurd. The intransigent opposition of the International Committee of the Fourth International to the Putin regime—which emerged as a consequence of the Stalinist bureaucracy’s final betrayal of socialism and the restoration of capitalism in the former USSR—is a fundamental political fact that is substantiated not only in written texts numbering in the hundreds, but also in the exhaustively documented activity of the Trotskyist movement spanning decades.
True to its fascist character, the Ukrainian regime is operating on the basis of the well-known precept of Hitler and his propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels: “The bigger the lie, the more readily it will be believed.”
In this particular case, the Zelensky regime seems to believe that the scale of the SBU lies are of such a magnitude that they will simply overwhelm the thinking public. It thus expects that public opinion will accept that the Putin regime is directing the work of the WSWS, which the SBU indictment describes as
an online publication of the world Trotskyist movement, the International Committee of the Fourth International and its affiliated sections in the Socialist Equality Parties around the world, which covers the main socio-political problems around the world from the position of revolutionary opposition to the capitalist market system, with the aim of establishing world socialism through socialist revolution.
At no point does the SBU attempt to explain the contradiction that wrecks its case against Bogdan, i.e., that the political principles that he upholds as a socialist and internationalist opponent of wars waged by the capitalist ruling class are irreconcilably hostile to the policies of the Putin regime, including its invasion of Ukraine.
It attempts to evade the contradiction by simply lying. The indictment claims that Bogdan’s activities, “acting on the instructions of a representative of the World Socialist Web Site,” consisted of “supporting and justifying the conduct of the Russian aggressive war on the territory of Ukraine…”
Every word is a lie. The opposition of the ICFI, its affiliated organizations, and the WSWS to the Russian invasion, in line with its hostility to the Putin regime, is a political fact that is documented in hundreds of articles that have been posted since the first day of the invasion.
On February 24, 2022, the day of the Russian invasion, the ICFI posted a statement on the WSWS titled: “Oppose the Putin government’s invasion of Ukraine and US-NATO warmongering! For the unity of Russian and Ukrainian workers!” It began:
The International Committee of the Fourth International and the World Socialist Web Site denounce the Russian military intervention in Ukraine. Despite the provocations and threats by the US and NATO powers, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine must be opposed by socialists and class-conscious workers. The catastrophe that was set in motion by the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 cannot be averted on the basis of Russian nationalism, a thoroughly reactionary ideology that serves the interests of the capitalist ruling class represented by Vladimir Putin.
What is required is not a return to the pre-1917 foreign policy of tsarism, but, rather, a revival, in Russia and throughout the world, of the socialist internationalism that inspired the October Revolution of 1917 and led to the creation of the Soviet Union as a workers state. The invasion of Ukraine, whatever the justifications given by the Putin regime, will serve only to divide the Russian and Ukrainian working class and, moreover, serve the interests of US and European imperialism.
In the two major statements that he has made during the past week, Putin has justified his actions by enumerating the provocations and crimes of the United States. There is, no question, much that is factually true in his denunciation of Washington’s hypocrisy. But the viciously anti-communist and xenophobic ideology that he invokes and the interests that he claims to be defending are thoroughly reactionary and incapable of appealing to the broad mass of the working class in Russia, let alone in Ukraine and throughout the world. A substantial section of the working class in Russia and Ukraine will be repelled by the cynicism of Putin’s glorification of the heroic struggle waged by the Soviet Union against Nazi Germany in World War II while denouncing the October Revolution and the existence of the USSR as a multi-national state.
The ICFI insisted that the socialist opposition to imperialism was incompatible with any form of national chauvinism, and, therefore, rejected all the justifications given by the Putin regime and its apologists for the invasion. Their invocation of “national defense” could not be accepted by socialists. The defeat of imperialism and its overthrow was possible only through the revolutionary struggle of the international working class. The ICFI statement cited the words of Trotsky: “Not to bind itself to the national state in time of war, to follow not the war map but the map of the class struggle, is possible only for that party that has already declared irreconcilable war on the national state in time of peace.”
The ICFI called “for an immediate end to the war,” and explained: “In opposing the invasion of Ukraine, we denounce the policies of US/NATO imperialism, whose claims to be defending democracy and human rights are blood-drenched with hypocrisy.”
This political declaration elaborated the principles and policy that have guided the work of the ICFI and WSWS since the war began.
On February 26, 2022 the International Committee held an international webinar, in which its opposition to the war was emphatically advanced. Among the speakers, in addition to myself, were Nick Beams, a longtime leader of the International Committee’s Australian section, Johannes Stern, a leader of the ICFI in Germany, Thomas Scripps, a leading member of the ICFI’s section in Britain, Joseph Kishore, the national secretary of the Socialist Equality Party in the United States, and Evan Blake, another leading member of the SEP (US).
The ICFI has never wavered from the principled opposition to the policies of NATO and Russia that it advanced in the first days of the war.
The relationship between the ICFI and the comrades of the YGBL coincided almost exactly with the outbreak of the war. They were attracted to the ICFI precisely because of its opposition to both the war and the national chauvinism of the Russian and Ukrainian regimes.
The SBU indictment charges that the World Socialist Web Site assigned to Bogdan “the task of preparing, writing, editing and publishing … both on the WSWS website and other communist-oriented media, articles, publications, comments, etc. aimed at spreading pro-Russian narratives related to the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine, which began on February 24, 2022, to which [Bogdan Syrotiuk] gave his voluntary consent.”
In support of this claim, the SBU references a YGBL statement titled, “For the organization of an international movement of workers and young people against war!” It claims that this document, posted on the World Socialist Web Site on October 12, 2022, includes “fragments, statements, sentences and phrases… which contain justification of the armed aggression of the Russian Federation, which began in 2014…”
The actual document clearly exposes this claim to be a lie. There is not a single sentence in the YGBL declaration that indicates support for the invasion of Ukraine. The SBU cites selectively from the document, including passages only from numbered paragraphs 4, 7, 8, 10 and 13. Paragraphs 4 through 8—the SBU interrupts the continuity of the YGBL’s analysis by leaving out paragraphs 5 and 6—provide a concise Marxist explanation of the objective capitalist crisis and political aims that underlay the instigation of the war by the United States and its NATO allies. They state:
  1. The new world order that the United States wants to establish looks like this very possible picture: Russia and China are to be subordinated to imperialism and divided, if that is necessary to maintain direct control over their natural, industrial-technological and human resources.
  2. The European imperialist powers support the United States for their own place in the new redivision of the world. At the same time, European imperialism, while placed on rations by the United States, sees a way out of its economic and geopolitical predicament only in a redivision of the world in which it can regain its former greatness.
  3. Japan, South Korea and Australia support the US only as much as it suits their interests in the struggle against China in the Pacific region. These countries will support the US as long as it allows them to compete with China. The process of dividing spheres of influence will revive the contradictions between the Pacific capitalist powers, which are as much in limbo as Europe.
  4. The crisis of 2008 revived class struggles around the world. The Arab Spring of the early 2010s is vivid evidence of this revival. It forced US and European imperialism to take more decisive measures. In 2014, they supported a coup d'état in Ukraine. Through this coup, the US was able to create all the conditions to build a bridgehead in a future war against Russia.
  5. The Covid-19 pandemic that erupted in 2020 exacerbated the contradictions of capitalism and was the trigger for a more rapid expansion of US imperialism in preparation for war against Russia and China. The US embarked on a more provocative path of abandoning the “one-China” policy, and increasing its support for Ukraine, as expressed in the NATO summit in August 2021, which supported Zelensky’s “Crimean platform.”
Significantly, the SBU leaves out paragraph 9 of the YGBL declaration, which presents a scathing indictment of the Putin regime. That paragraph reads:
The reactionary regime of Vladimir Putin emerged from the treacherous dissolution of the Soviet Union by the Stalinist bureaucracy and the restoration of capitalism. The policies of Putin, in the final analysis, are aimed at safeguarding the wealth of the post-Soviet oligarchy against the pressure of Western imperialism from above and, even more critically, against the movement of the Russian working class from below.
The SBU does cite paragraph 10, which continues the critique of the Putin regime, stating:
Within this geopolitical and social context, Putin’s adventurist invasion of Ukraine on February 24 was the Russian oligarchy’s response to NATO’s relentless expansion to the east. The Putin regime’s main objective was to achieve through the pressure of its “Special Operation” a new round of talks with the US-NATO, since the last round ended up crossing “red lines” on the part of the US-NATO, which caused Putin’s invasion [emphasis added].
The characterization of Putin’s invasion as “adventurist” is in no way compatible with what the SBU claims to be a “pro-Russian narrative.” Obviously recognizing the fragility of its attempt to portray the YGBL statement as pro-Putin propaganda, the SBU decided against further citations from the document, leaving out the YGBL’s development of its denunciation of Putin’s policies in paragraphs 11 and 12, which assert:
  1. The Russian bourgeoisie’s desire for an “equal partnership” with the West was one of the most utopian delusions. This delusion, historically derived from Stalin’s policy of “Popular Fronts” and then “peaceful coexistence,” developed among the fledgling class of Russian capitalists in the 1990s.
  2. The Putin regime has not gotten rid of this utopian delusion. Its whole policy has been to maneuver and seek compromise with the West, with whom the Russian oligarchy wanted to be “on equal footing.” Except that Western imperialism, with its conquering ambitions for Russia, did not care about these conciliatory tones of Putin’s regime.
The SBU also chose not to cite paragraph 17 of the YGBL statement, which declares:
The course of the war after Putin’s invasion of Ukraine increasingly emphasizes the reactionary nature of this invasion. While claiming to be fighting for the independence of the Russian people from the threat of Western imperialism, Putin is in fact only defending the independence of the Russian oligarchy to exploit the Russian working class and the country’s raw material wealth.
Paragraph 18, which is also left uncited, further demolishes the SBU’s indictment of Bogdan, the YGBL and the WSWS as instruments of Russian propaganda. The paragraph asserts that
the Putin regime has no way out of the current crisis for Russian society. It will not have such a way out in the future. All of the military and political activities of the Putin regime will only contribute to the escalation of Western imperialism and the deterioration of conditions for the Russian, Ukrainian and international working class.
The SBU also failed to cite paragraphs 19 and 20, which presciently warned of the catastrophe to which the war could lead.
  1. The prospects for the present war, when thought within the framework of the capitalist system, are very bleak. First, this war will take on a long-term character and will not only be fought between Ukraine and Russia. It is the first step in inflaming the world situation to the point that the threat of a third world war is simply inevitable. All countries of the world will take part in the future war.
  2. Secondly, the nature of the war will be determined by the policies of the ruling classes, which now stand on a blatantly anti-human position. The ruling classes are recklessly moving toward the use of nuclear weapons in the conflict, thereby creating the real possibility of a nuclear Armageddon. The specter of planetary destruction arises from the insane policies of imperialist and capitalist governments. The recklessness of the ruling capitalist elite compels young people to ask whether they will be allowed any future at all.
The SBU specifically cites this document as proof of Bogdan Syrotiuk’s treasonable activity. But the text of this document conclusively refutes the charge that Bogdan and the YGBL are advancing a pro-Putin narrative.
Moreover, and most decisive, the Ukrainian regime does not present a scintilla of evidence to substantiate its absurd and lying claim that the World Socialist Web Site is a “Russian propaganda and information agency.” With this filthy slander, the Zelensky regime betrays—notwithstanding the ongoing war with Russia—the lingering influence of Stalinism’s rabid hatred of Trotskyism. As in Russia, the transfer of power in Ukraine from Stalinist bureaucrats to capitalist oligarchs has not required any change in the methodology of the political police. The same techniques of fabrication and slander, utilized by the Stalinist regime against Trotskyists in the era of the Moscow Trials and the terror of 1936-39, remain operative in Kiev.
Bogdan Syrotiuk stands accused of treason and faces the threat of a life-long prison term that is the equivalent of a death sentence. But the allegations against Bogdan are based entirely on articles and speeches he has posted on the World Socialist Web Site, in which he has declared his opposition, as a socialist internationalist, to the capitalist regimes of Zelensky and Putin and the ongoing war that has cost hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian and Russian lives.
The SBU indicts Bogdan for advancing in his speeches and writings posted on the World Socialist Web Site “which are accessible to everyone in the world, including citizens of Ukraine” information that exposes the reactionary character of the Ukrainian regime and the war.
The SBU declares that Bogdan’s “criminal actions were stopped only with the intervention of a law enforcement agency.” What a devastating self-exposure of the claims that the US-NATO proxy war is being waged to defend democracy in Ukraine.
The reality is that Ukraine is a fascistic dictatorship, which applies police methods to stop the expression of popular opposition to the policies that have brought untold suffering and death to the people.
The arrest of Bogdan Syrotiuk comes precisely at a point of mounting popular opposition to the Zelensky regime. On May 18, a new and vastly unpopular mobilization law that will vastly expand the recruitment dragnet of Ukrainian military goes into effect. Even the New York Times has expressed doubts about Zelensky’s ability “to find new troops to relieve a weary, often demoralized force.”
In an article posted on the World Socialist Web Site on April 30, Maxim Goldarb, a Ukrainian socialist who has been persecuted by the Zelensky regime, reported: “More and more Ukrainian men are desperately trying to flee the country, unwilling to die for someone else’s selfish purposes.”
He added:
It is not the rich minority, but the poor majority—the unemployed, workers, peasants, teachers, doctors, office workers—that will be sent into the bloody meat grinder. Now, with the adoption of the new law, the number of men deprived of basic human rights, who will be captured and hunted down like animals and sent to the front, will increase many times over.
The profits of those who benefit from this war will also increase many times over … These huge profits will be divided up between the military-industrial complex, its lobbyists in the American and European establishment, and the Ukrainian oligarchic top brass.
Bogdan Syrotiuk’s life is in danger. In the environment of terror that exists within Ukraine, he is deprived of all means to defend himself. Efforts to obtain competent legal representation have been undermined by government threats against defense lawyers. No less than five attorneys have declined to represent Bogdan because to do so would expose them to significant physical danger.
The significance of the fight to defend Bogdan and secure his freedom extends beyond Ukraine. His incarceration is yet another example of the growing international assault on democratic rights as imperialism escalates its military operations throughout the world. The political conspiracy to destroy Julian Assange set into motion a process that is replicated throughout the world.
Those who oppose and expose the crimes of the imperialist regimes are targeted for persecution by the state. The assault on basic democratic rights—first and foremost, freedom of thought and speech—is always justified on the basis of lies.
The opponents of Israel’s genocidal war against Gazans are denounced as anti-Semites, even when the protesters are Jewish. In the denunciation of Bogdan Syrotiuk as an agent of Russia for opposing the proxy war in Ukraine, the same lying method is at work.
The real reason for the arrest and persecution of Bogdan Syrotiuk is that he is fighting for the unity of the Ukrainian, Russian and international working class against the ruling capitalist elites of all countries. As Comrade Andrei Ritsky of the Russian branch of the Young Guard of Bolshevik Leninists explained so eloquently in a speech delivered at the May Day 2024 celebration held by the International Committee:
The only “crime” that Bogdan committed was his conviction that Ukraine can become truly free only through the independent struggle of the Ukrainian working class, acting together with the international working class against imperialism and war. He advanced a principled political position based on a Marxist understanding of the war, opposed to the fanatical worship of Ukrainian nationalism as well as the reactionary Russian nationalism of the Putin regime. Like our entire movement, he has fought for the unification of workers in Russia and Ukraine with the workers in the imperialist countries, to put an end to a fratricidal war that has claimed the lives of at least half a million Ukrainians and tens of thousands of Russians.
He concluded his remarks with a declaration of the fundamental perspective that underlies the work of the Fourth International:
No bourgeois regime is capable of resolving the crisis other than through war and destruction, because any other way would be contrary to its fundamental capitalist interests. The contradictions of capitalism cannot be resolved within national borders and on the basis of a defense of private property. Only the international working class armed with the program of world socialist revolution will be able to put an end to the wars and resolve the fundamental crisis. To do so, however, it must fight for its unity with its brothers and sisters around the world.
The International Committee of the Fourth International calls for a global campaign to demand the immediate release of Bogdan Syrotiuk from prison. The fight for Bogdan’s freedom must be taken up by workers, students and all those who are committed to the defense of democratic rights and opposed to the escalation of imperialist wars that, unless stopped, threaten humanity with a nuclear catastrophe.
Join the fight to Free Bogdan. Circulate this statement as widely as possible on social media. Bring this case to the attention of co-workers, fellow students, and friends. To sign a petition demanding Bogdan’s release, contribute funds toward the defense campaign, and become personally active in the fight for his freedom, go to wsws.org/freebogdan.
submitted by Sashcracker to Trotskyism [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 01:13 Gildedfilth My experience with a Calyceal Diverticulum

I am in recovery from my ureteroscopy on a calyceal diverticulum, and while I found some journal articles and a few stray posts on here about them, I want to paint a bigger picture about my actual experience and what I felt.
This is a very long post because I wanted to err on the side of more information so that other may feel much less alone than I have felt. I have included subheadings so you can read only what is useful to you.
To start, I am a 31-year-old female with endometriosis (I explain the implications of that in one of my subsections.). I live in New York City and was operated on by a surgeon at Smith Institute for Urology at Lenox Hill Hospital, which specializes in “complex anatomy” and kidney stones.
TL;DR Calyceal diverticula are pockets on the kidneys affecting 0.5% of the population. Stones can form and get trapped due to their narrow opening (infundibulum). As a result, their pain pattern is different and diagnosis can be delayed. To resolve the problem, you will need a surgeon to remove stones and expand the opening and/or ablate the lining of the diverticulum via ureteroscopy or percutaneous nephrolithotomy.
What is a calyceal diverticulum?
For a good scientific review of what calyceal (kay-luh-SEE-uhl) diverticula are, there is a review study from 2014 with primary author Nikhil Waingankar. In short, these are pockets within the kidneys that have much narrower entry points (“infundibula”) than a normal calyx, and they are theorized to only occur in 0.5% of the human population, with an estimated 96% of those who have them forming stones inside them.
They are often found incidentally on imaging because many people remain asymptomatic. In my case, we saw “a cyst requiring further imaging to rule out neoplasm” (cancer) when I was having my appendectomy in 2022 and had a CT scan in the ER.
They will look like cysts until you either get a radiologist who knows what to look for and sees a stone inside, or until you do a CT urogram, which is a more involved CT scan where you can see if the urinary system communicates with the “cyst.” Simple cysts and neoplasms will not show urine entering the mass; a calyceal diverticulum will, because it has an entrance.
Important stipulation in my experience: endometriosis and its surgeries
My story is complicated by the fact that I have endometriosis, which is a disease wherein cells resembling uterine cells occur outside the uterus. This is an extraordinarily painful condition that causes widespread inflammation due to the uterus-like cells’ having “menstrual periods” outside the uterus. It that can occur anywhere in the body; while most people’s disease presents primarily in the ovaries, uterus, and Fallopian tubes, the disease has been found in every organ in the body. In my case, my disease was confirmed to be extrapelvic as soon as my appendix pathology report revealed that my appendix had endometriosis on it; the cells existed beyond the typical pelvic organs.
I have already had two laparoscopies for endometriosis, and while these were immensely helpful in restoring my quality of life, every abdominal surgery comes with the risk of adhesions. Adhesions are bands of tissue that the body forms when it experiences inflammation or trauma. Endometriosis forms adhesions by itself, and surgery to remove it risks further adhesions. In 2020, when I had my radical excision surgery, my surgeon had to perform ureterolysis to cut my ureters free: whether from previous surgery in 2016 or the disease, my ureters were stuck to my uterus due to adhesions.
I share this because having endometriosis and its surgeries in my history affected my path to diagnosis and probably my pain pattern. (Endometriosis forms its own nerve endings, too!) But for the record, the kidney stones and the kidney surgery in my case were more painful than endometriosis…probably because they freaked out any remaining endometriosis.
(Sorry for no source on this endometriosis information. I am unfortunately very well-read on the disease! If you want to learn more, I recommend The Center for Endometriosis Care website and the book Beating Endo.)
What did the calyceal diverticulum feel like at first?
On a Tuesday in January 2024, I was trialing prazosin, an alpha blocker related to Flomax (tamsulosin) due to PTSD nightmares.
One day after taking this drug, I woke up with 8/10 pain muscle spasms in my “iliac crest,” which is the top edge of my pelvis, on the right side. I thought I had “slept funny” and the pain subsided after about 3 hours. I tried to roll around on a lacrosse ball, thinking it was a muscle spasm.
I took the prazosin for two more days. By that Thursday, the pain lasted more like 6 hours and did not go away; I had the muscle spasms as well as a feeling that there was “trapped gas” right at my waist, right on the side of my body. Because the pain stayed at 8/10, nothing would calm it down, and I couldn’t focus on work, I went to the ER. We did a CT scan and saw nothing different from my last CT for my appendectomy. They decided it was probably a kidney infection with strange presentation due to my endometriosis and sent me home with cefpodoxime, an antibiotic.
I finished the course of the antibiotic over 7 days and felt better.
But then the “trapped gas” feeling returned and lasted 18 hours. I went back to the ER, mostly concerned that I had failed antibiotics and the “infection” was getting worse. I made a urologist appointment while I was waiting in the ER because I suspected this might be beyond their mandate of ruling out anything life-threatening. We did another CT, and this time I really carefully read the results: inside what we had identified as a calyceal diverticulum in 2022 during my appendectomy CT scan were two kidney stones, each about 0.2mm. Because there was not much change from my last ER visit, the doctor at the ER did not think this explained how I was feeling. He did not want to send me home with antibiotics because he thought his colleagues were too cavalier with testing, but he did send for a urine culture and sent me home at least assured there was no emergency.
The culture came back, and I did test positive for E. Faecalis, which is a rarer bacteria to have, so the doctor at the ER urged me to get on Levaquin, an antibiotic, as soon as possible. (My endourologist later theorized this bacterium was an incidental finding; he thinks I just happened to be colonized with it and it was not causing symptoms. Regardless, it was not present in my culture before surgery.)
Again, I took almost the full course of the antibiotic and was feeling better and safer. I also saw a urologist, and she was skeptical it was an infection but told me to continue the course. She was pretty sure it was endometriosis-related but saw that I had seen my gynecologist, who has been treating me for 5 years, days prior who was pretty sure this was NOT consistent with what she had seen when we operated in 2020. The urologist said she felt this might be beyond her skills and referred me to one of her medical school colleagues who is a specialist in “complex anatomy” like calyceal diverticula as an endourologist professor at Lenox Hill in NYC.
But before I could see the endourologist, only one week after my last ER visit, I was in 9/10 pain for 7 hours overnight. I really did not want to go to the ER again, but I was vomiting, sweating, using the bathroom (both ways) constantly. After 7 hours not being able to get it to calm down, I went back to the ER.
The first thing they did was test me for sepsis, because I was being treated for an infection. They also did a CT scan again and then we saw it: one of the kidney stones had left the calyceal diverticulum and was stuck in the ureterovesicular junction (“UVJ”). By the time I was diagnosed, I was in 9/10 pain for 18 hours, so what we now know to be the renal colic phase lasted for 18 hours. They admitted me overnight to the hospital to observe and had me on ketorolac (Toradol) and oxycodone/acetaminophen (Percocet) every 6 hours alternating. The pain subsided the next morning.
Confirmation and surgery
Luckily, I had the endourologist appointment on the books already, and I got all of my images from the ER to bring to this doctor, letting him know I was confirmed to have passed the stone.
What he was able to do for me I will never forget: he showed me exactly why I was in enough pain for the ER each of the three weeks I went. Unlike a normal stone situation, a stone in a calyceal diverticulum has far more opportunities to get stuck. Also unlike a normal stone, you can feel the stone passing before it reaches the ureter because it has to leave via the narrow opening of the diverticulum. This means the pain can feel different and, due to its location within the kidney is more prone to being referred pain (pain you feel in a place other than where it originates). This is why I did not feel the pain in the classic place and why it felt much more like trapped gas. Furthermore, most radiologists do not have the same training as he did to identify where in the opening the stone was, which explained why they believed the stone was in the same place each time.
We wanted to take a “wait and see” approach on the second stone, but my body did not want to wait. As I was falling asleep one night in early March 2024, I felt that familiar “trapped gas” feeling, way too far right to be my intestines. This is 6/10 pain, so I could go to work for an important meeting, but I called to get an ultrasound and appointment right away. (We have since found that for my specific diverticulum, ultrasounds are not useful. I will need a CT urogram any time we want to visualize the kidney post-op.)
My doctor said that he wanted to attempt ureteroscopy before percutaneous nephrolithotomy because it is a less-invasive modality and we were worried about impacting any endometriosis. He had me sign paperwork consenting to either method, and it was a “game time” decision based on what he saw with the camera.
In the two-and-half week wait til surgery, his hypothesis gained traction: I would have days “on” with the pain and “off,” suggesting the stone was able to enter the diverticular opening and then flow back into the diverticulum. When I was in pain this time, I would also feel a lot of fatigue and brain fog that made it hard to work. This could be consistent with a kidney blockage, but it is hard to say for sure with an area so small.
The surgery, the stent, and the pain after the stent
The surgery itself went pretty well and only lasted 1.5 hours. The surgeon let me know that it was not easy to get into the diverticulum because the opening was not straight, as expected. He was, however, able to complete the surgery with only ureteroscopy. He removed a 0.2mm stone and observed that the stone was exactly the width of the opening, meaning it could absolutely flow into and out of it and get stuck for days. He widened the opening with laser to be “wider than a normal calyx” to allow for scarring, and, at my request to avoid further operations, ablated as much of the lining of the diverticulum as he could, encouraging it to close up.
While the surgery was uneventful, I am one of the unlucky ones who cannot tolerate a stent. This is probably due to my endometriosis, which leaves me in a heightened baseline of inflammation and nerve arousal, as well as the fact that, for me, the stent had to go into the diverticulum, which had been lasered and burned, in order for it to heal. I spent four hours in the recovery room while we tried to get my pain down to my goal of 7, which meant we needed to dose me, as we did in the ER, with ketorolac (Toradol) and oxycodone every 6 hours with no gaps in between.
I only had the stent in for 3 full days, and unfortunately, due to my specific circumstances, that was the worst pain I have ever been in. I was agnostic about 10/10 pain until this time, in which I felt like I was passing a stone and experiencing my worst endometriosis cramps at the same time. I was in 8-10/10 pain despite the painkiller regimen, and since we found that dilaudid does not work for me, this was good as they could do for me.
Thankfully, my surgeon listened to my experience and agreed to take the stent out as soon as was responsible: 72 hours later. The actual removal was uncomfortable but not painful beyond a “scrape” sensation in the urethra, and as soon as it was out, my husband noticed I could move as normal and was talking more like myself.
However, 1 out of 4 people will experience pain after the stent is removed, and risk factors include female anatomy, being “younger” (I am 31.) and having a stent in for less than or equal to 7 days.
The day of the removal I had some muscle spasms but was mostly so relieved that I slept all day.
34 hours after the removal, I experienced a feeling like I was passing a kidney stone. I was in 9/10 pain for 6 hours, feeling like I needed to move my bowels (which was not easy after opioids!) and having unrelenting spasms above my right iliac crest (top of pelvis). I was on ketorolac (Toradol) during this and knew what it was, but I otherwise may have gone back to the ER. I refused to take more opioids because my bowel was upset as well.
Today, I have had one episode of the iliac crest muscle spasms lasting an hour. I have found that crouching on the floor, against a wall, and/or going into “reclined butterfly pose” may help. It may just make me feel like I have more control over the situation.
I will update this post if I feel more pain in the coming days.
What’s next?
My endourologist/surgeon thinks it is very unlikely that I am “a stone-former” because the stones were only in the diverticulum and likely formed due to the urine reflux of that structure.
We will follow up in 3 weeks to see if the sensation I felt in March of the “trapped gas” recurs. If it does, only then would we do a CT urogram to see if the diverticular opening closer up to anywhere near its former width of 0.2mm.
This is unlikely because the surgeon lasered the opening very wide, “wider than a normal calyx,” to allow for scarring to take place. The ablation of the lining of the diverticulum should also take care of its tendency to collect urine.
I am not expected to have further stones or need for surgery, but he has seen cases of recurrence, so we need to manage my expectations.
Despite the extreme pain of the stent, I am content with my decision and hope that I do not have to go through this again. The one blessing in my case is, if this surgery succeeds, I should not have any further kidney stones.
submitted by Gildedfilth to KidneyStones [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 00:57 honeypuppy Are Some Rationalists Dangerously Overconfident About AI?

AI has long been discussed in rationalist circles. There’s been a lot of focus on risks from artificial intelligence (particularly the idea that it might cause human extinction), but also the idea that artificial general intelligence might happen quite soon and subsequently transform society (e.g. supercharging economic growth in a technological singularity).
I’ve long found these arguments intriguing, and probably underrated by the public as a whole. I definitely don’t align myself with people like Steven Pinker who dismiss AI concerns entirely.
Nonetheless, I’ve noticed increasingly high confidence in beliefs of near-term transformative AI among rationalists. To be fair, it’s reasonable to update somewhat given recent advances like GPT-4. But among many, there is a belief that AI advances are the single most important thing happening right now. And among a minority, there are people with very extreme beliefs - such as quite high confidence that transformative AI is just a few years away, and/or that AI is very likely to kill us all.
My core arguments in this post are that firstly, from an “epistemic humility” or “outside view” perspective, we should be suspicious of confident views that the world is soon going to end (or change radically).
Secondly, the implications of the most radical views could cause people who hold them to inflict significant harm on themselves or others.
Who Believes In “AI Imminence”?
The single person I am most specifically critiquing is Eliezer Yudkowsky. Yudkowsky appears unwilling to give specific probabilities but writings like “Death With Dignity” has caused many including Scott Alexander to characterise him as believing that AI has a >90% chance of causing human extinction)
As a very prominent and very “doomy” rationalist, I worry that he may have convinced a fair number of people to share similar views, views which if taken seriously could hold its holders to feel depressed and/or make costly irrevocable decisions.
But though I think Yudkowsky deserves the most scrutiny, I don’t want to focus entirely on him.
Take Scott Alexander - he frames himself in the aforementioned link as “not as much of a doomer as some people”, yet gave a 33% probability (later adjusted downwards as a result of outside view considerations like those I raise in here) to “only” ~20%. While this leaves enough room for hope that it’s not as potentially dangerous a view as Yudkowsky’s, I agree with how the top Reddit comment in the original post said:
Is AI risk the only field where someone can write an article about how they’re not (much) of a doomer when they think that the risk of catastrophe/disasteextinction is 33%?
Beyond merely AI risk, claims about “transformative AI” date back to ideas about the “intelligent explosion” or “singularity” that are most popularly associated with Ray Kurzweil. A modern representation of this is Tom Davidson of Open Philanthropy, who wrote a report on takeoff speeds.
Other examples can be seen in (pseudo-)prediction markets popular with rationalists, such as Metaculus putting the median date of AGI at 2032, and Manifold Markets having a 17% chance of AI doom by 2100 (down from its peak of around 50% (!) in mid-2023).
Why Am I Sceptical?
My primary case for (moderate) scepticism is not about the object-level arguments around AI, but appealing to the “outside view”. My main arguments are:
Why I’m Against Highly Immodest Epistemology
However, maybe appealing to the “outside view” is incorrect? Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote a book, Inadequate Equiibria, which in large part argued against what he saw as excessive use of the “outside view”. He advises:
Try to spend most of your time thinking about the object level. If you’re spending more of your time thinking about your own reasoning ability and competence than you spend thinking about Japan’s interest rates and NGDP, or competing omega-6 vs. omega-3 metabolic pathways, you’re taking your eye off the ball.
I think Yudkowsky makes a fair point about being excessively modest. If you are forever doubting your own reasoning to the extent that you think you should defer to the majority of Americans who are creationists, you’ve gone too far.
But I think his case is increasingly weak the more radically immodest your views here. I’ll explain with the following analogy:
Suppose you were talking to someone who was highly confident in their new business idea. What is an appropriate use of a “modesty” argument cautioning against overconfidence?
A strong-form modesty argument would go something like “No new business idea could work, because if it could, someone would already have done it”. This is refuted by countless real-world examples, and I don’t think anyone actually believes in strong-form modesty.
A moderate-form modesty argument would go something like “Some new business ideas work, but most fail, even when their founders were quite confident in them. As an aspiring entrepreneur, you should think your chances of success in your new venture are similar to those of the reference class of aspiring entrepreneurs”.
The arguments against epistemic modesty in Inadequate Equilibria are mainly targeted against reasoning like this. And I think here there’s a case where we can have reasonable disagreement about the appropriate level of modesty. You may have some good reasons to believe that your idea is unusually good or that you are unusually likely to succeed as an entrepreneur. (Though a caveat: with too many degrees of freedom, I think you run the risk of leading yourself to whatever conclusion you like).
For the weak-form modesty argument, let’s further specify that your aspiring entrepreneur’s claim was “I’m over 90% confident that my business will make me the richest person in the world”.
To such a person, I would say: “Your claim is so incredibly unlikely a priori and so self-aggrandising that I feel comfortable in saying you’re overconfident without even needing to consider your arguments”.
That is basically what I feel about Eliezer Yudkowsky and AI.
Let’s take a minute to consider what the implications are if Yudkowsky is correctly calibrated about his beliefs in AI. For a long time, he was one of the few people in the world to be seriously concerned about it, and even now, with many more people concerned about AI risk, he stands out as having some of the highest confidence in doom.
If he’s right, then he’s arguably the most important prophet in history. Countless people throughout history have tried forecasting boon or bust (and almost always been wrong). But on arguably the most important question in human history - when we will go extinct and why - Yudkowsky was among the very few people to see it and easily the most forceful.
Indeed, I’d say this is a much more immodest claim than claiming your business idea will make you the richest person in the world. The title of the richest person in the world has been shared by numerous people throughout history, but “the most accurate prophet of human extinction” is a title that can only ever be held by one person.
I think Scott Alexander’s essay Epistemic Learned Helplessness teaches a good lesson here. Argument convincingness isn’t necessarily strongly correlated with the truth of a claim. If someone gives you what appears to be a strong argument for something that appears crazy, you should nonetheless remain highly sceptical.
Yet I feel like Yudkowsky wants to appeal to “argument convincingness” because that’s what he’s good at. He has spent decades honing his skills arguing on the internet, and much less at acquiring traditional credentials and prestige. “Thinking on the object level” sounds like it’s about being serious and truth-seeking, but I think in practice it’s about privileging convincing-sounding arguments and being a good internet debater above all other evidence.
A further concern I have about “argument convincingness” for AI is that there’s almost certainly a large “motivation gap” in favour of the production of pro-AI-risk arguments compared to anti-AI-risk arguments, with the worriers spending considerably more time and effort than the detractors. As Philip Trammel points out in his post “But Have They Engaged with The Arguments?, this is true of almost any relatively fringe position. This can make the apparent balance of “argumentative evidence” misleading in those cases, with AI no exception.
Finally, Yudkowsky’s case for immodesty depends partly on alleging he has a good track record of applying immodesty to “beat the experts”. But his main examples (a lightbox experiment and the monetary policy of the Bank of Japan) I don’t find that impressive given he could cherry-pick. Here’s an article alleging that Yudkowsky’s predictions have frequently between egregiously wrong and here’s another arguing that his Bank of Japan position in particular didn’t ultimately pan out.
Why I’m Also Sceptical of Moderately Immodest Epistemology
I think high-confidence predictions of doom (or utopia) are much more problematic than relatively moderate views - they are more likely to be wrong, and if taken seriously, more strongly imply that the believer should consider making radical, probably harmful life changes.
But I do still worry that the ability to contrast with super confident people like Yudkowsky lets the “not a total doomer” people off the hook a little too easily. I think it’s admirable that Scott Alexander seriously grappled with the fact that superforecasters disagreed with him and updated downwards based on that observation.
Still, let’s revisit the “aspiring entrepreneur” analogy - imagine they had instead said: “You know what, I’ve listened to your claims about modesty and agree that I’ve been overconfident. I now think there’s only a 20% chance that my business idea will make me the richest person in the world”.
Sure - they’ve moved in the right direction, but it’s easy to see that they’re still not doing modesty very well.
An anti-anti-AI risk argument Scott made (in MR Tries the Safe Uncertainly Fallacy) is that appealing to base rates leaves you vulnerable to “reference class tennis” where both sides can appeal to different reference classes, and the “only winning move is not to play”.
Yet in the case of our aspiring entrepreneur, I think the base rate argument of “extremely few people can become the richest person in the world” is very robust. If the entrepreneur tried to counter with “But I can come up with all sorts of other reference classes in which I come out more favourably! Reference class tennis! Engage with my object-level arguments!”, it would not be reasonable to throw up your hands and say “Well, I can’t come up with good counterarguments, so I guess you probably do have a 20% chance of becoming the richest person in the world then”.
I contend that “many people have predicted the end of the world and they’ve all been wrong” is another highly robust reference class. Yes, you can protest about “anthropic effects” or reasons why “this time is different”. And maybe the reasons why “this time is different” are indeed a lot better than usual. Still, I contend that you should start from a prior of overwhelming skepticism and only make small updates based on arguments you read. You should not go “I read these essays with convincing arguments about how we’re all going to die, I guess I just believe that now”.
What Should We Make Of Surveys Of AI Experts?
Surveys done of AI experts, as well as opinions of well-regarded experts like Geoffrey Hinton and Stewart Russell, have shown significant concerns about AI risk (example).
I think this is good evidence for taking AI risk seriously. One important thing it does is raise AI risk out of the reference class of garden-variety doomsday predictions/crazy-sounding theories that have no expert backing.
However, I think it’s still only moderately good evidence.
Firstly, I think we should not consider it as an “expert consensus” nearly as strong as say, the expert consensus on climate change. There is nothing like an IPCC for AI, for example. This is not a mature, academically rigorous field. I don’t think we should update too strongly from AI experts spending a few minutes filling in a survey. (See for instance this comment about the survey, showing how non-robust the answers given are, indicating the responders aren’t thinking super hard about the questions).
Secondly, I believe forecasting AI risk is a multi-disciplinary skill. Consider for instance asking physicists to predict the chances of human extinction due to nuclear war in the 1930s. They would have an advantage in predicting nuclear capabilities, but after nuclear weapons were developed, the reasons we haven’t had a nuclear war yet have much more to do with international relations than nuclear physics.
And maybe AGI is so radically different from the AI that exists today that perhaps asking AI researchers now about AI risk might have been like asking 19th-century musket manufacturers about the risk from a hypothetical future “super weapon”.
I think an instructive analogy were the failed neo-Malthusian predictions of the 1960s and 1970s, such as The Population Bomb or The Limits to Growth. Although I’m unable to find clear evidence of this, my impression is that these beliefs were quite mainstream among the most “obvious” expert class of biologists (The Population Bomb author Paul Ehlrich had a PhD in biology), and the primary critics tended to be in other fields like economics (most notably Julian Simon). Biologists had insights, but they also had blind spots. Any “expert survey” that only interviewed biologists would have missed crucial insights from other disciplines.
What Are The Potential Consequences Of Overconfidence?
People have overconfident beliefs all the time. Some people erroneously thought Hillary Clinton was ~99% likely to win the 2016 Presidential election. Does it matter that much if they’re overconfident about AI?
Well, suppose you were overconfident about Clinton. You probably didn’t do anything differently in your life, and the only real cost of your overconfidence was being unusually surprised on election day 2016. Even one of the people who was that confident in Clinton didn’t suffer any worse consequences than eating a bug on national television.
But take someone who is ~90% confident that AI will radically transform or destroy society (“singularity or extinction by 2040") and seriously acts like it.
Given that, it seems apparently reasonable to be much more short-term focused. You might choose to stop saving for retirement. You might forgo education on the basis that it will be obsolete soon. These are actions that some people have previously taken, are considering taking or are actually taking because of expectations of AI progress.
At a societal level, high confidence in short-term transformative AI implies that almost all non-AI related long-term planning that humanity does is probably a waste. The most notable example would be climate change. If AI either kills us or radically speeds up scientific and economic growth by the middle of the century, then it seems pretty stupid to be worrying about climate change. Indeed, we’re probably underconsuming fossil fuels that could be used to improve the lives of people right now.
At its worst, there is the possibility of AI-risk-motivated terrorism. Here’s a twitter thread from Emil Torres talking about this, noticeably this tweet in particular about minutes from an AI safety workshop “sending bombs” to OpenAI and DeepMind.
To be fair, I think it’s highly likely the people writing that were trolling. Still - if you’re a cold-blooded utilitarian bullet-biter with short timelines and high p(doom), I could easily see you rationalising such actions.
I want to be super careful about this - I don’t want to come across as claiming that terrorism is a particularly likely consequence of “AI dooming”, nor do I want to risk raising the probability of it by discussing it too much and planting the seed of it in someone’s head. But a community that takes small risks seriously should be cognizant of the possibility. This is a concern that I think anyone with a large audience and relatively extreme views (about AI or anything) should take into account.
Conclusion
This post has been kicking around in draft form since around the release of GPT-4 a year ago. At that time, there were a lot of breathless takes on Twitter about how AGI was just around the corner, Yudkowsky was appearing on a lot of podcasts saying we were all going to die, and I started to feel like lots of people had gone a bit far off on the deep end.
Since then I feel there’s a little bit of a vibe shift away from the most extreme scenarios (as exhibited in the Manifold extinction markets), as well as me personally probably overestimating how many people ever believed in them. I’ve found it hard to try to properly articulate the message: “You’re probably directionally correct relative to society as a whole, but some unspecified number of you have probably gone too far”.
Nonetheless, my main takeaways are:
submitted by honeypuppy to slatestarcodex [link] [comments]


2024.05.19 00:09 MTGandP Could the reduced longevity for >140 min of resistance training be due to steroid use?

The article What is the optimal dose of resistance training for longevity? looked at a literature review which found that more resistance training was associated with reduced mortality up to 60 min per week, after which the trend reversed, and people who trained for >140 min/week saw no benefit relative to people who did not train at all.
I'm wondering if the inverse relationship above 140 min/week could be confounded by steroid use. Some limited research suggests that on the order of 5–20% of regular gym-goers, and 1% of the general population, have ever used steroids (Pope et al. (2014); Pereira et al. (2019); Molero et al. (2017); Hashim & Almukhtar (2021)). According to my back of the envelope calculations, that means it's plausible that >10%, and maybe even >50%, of people who lift weights >140 min/week have used steroids, which could significantly increase mortality rates.
I can't find any direct evidence that steroid use explains the increased mortality. We know steroids are bad for longevity, and it seems very likely that people who lift more frequently are also more likely to use steroids, but I don't know if steroid use is enough to explain the higher mortality risk. Also, the data on resistance training and longevity mostly looks at older individuals, and most steroid users are young.
Is anyone aware of better research on this? What do people think about how plausible this hypothesis is?
submitted by MTGandP to StrongerByScience [link] [comments]


2024.05.18 23:57 xc3xc3 What should I do with my life?

I am currently a year out of college working at a job that’s just wrecking my mental health because it’s so boring, and I feel like I’m making no positive contribution on anyone’s life. I majored in journalism and write click bait articles for the local newspaper. I strongly regret my choice in major and chose it without much knowledge of what I wanted to do at the time. Oh, and I could also make more money working at like any restaurant or store.
I am lucky not to have loans and the ability to go back to school. I’ve narrowed it down somewhat but can’t decide what to go back for. Everyone keeps telling me to wait and keep trying to figure it out. I don’t want to hear that here. I just want a straight answer.
Here’s what I’ve narrowed it down to:
  1. Go to law school
  2. Go to school to become a high school teacher
  3. Go to school for mental health counseling
  4. Go back to undergrad for athletic training/physical therapy
I really need a job where I am busier and don’t only have to sit in front of a computer. I am interested in running, the outdoors, psychology and video/photography. I have a good amount of anxiety around conflict but am pretty social and productive in work and school. Thanks!
submitted by xc3xc3 to careerguidance [link] [comments]


2024.05.18 23:38 SuperstarRockYou CEE PhD program research publication record

I am first year PhD student in CEE program in UWO who just get started in Summer 2024 term. I can understand that each PhD student would be required to publish research articles (conference/journal papers) during PhD journey from the beginning to the end. Also each advisor has had different requirements for the total number of papers PhD students have to publish (some advisors require 4-5 papers (including conference and journals) and some other advisors require 2-3 paper in total for conference and journals. But I just want to ask or inquire about the normal average number of papers CEE PhD students typically produce throughout the journey for PhD based on department and advisor. If anyone here can provide certain advice, I would appreciate it in advance.
submitted by SuperstarRockYou to uwo [link] [comments]


2024.05.18 23:34 Tesa_Tesanovic1988 Wellbeing as New Gross Domestic Product

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has been the standard measure of economic growth since World War II. It is widely believed that accelerating economic growth as measured by the GDP will translate into improved living standards. However, this view is being challenged with the argument that it is better to focus on measures of wellbeing than GDP because, despite robust economic growth over the past several decades, there are still millions of citizens living in poverty.Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has been the standard measure of economic growth since World War II. It is widely believed that accelerating economic growth as measured by the GDP will translate into improved living standards. However, this view is being challenged with the argument that it is better to focus on measures of wellbeing than GDP because, despite robust economic growth over the past several decades, there are still millions of citizens living in poverty.

Besides, GDP measures perpetual growth, which is unattainable. Because GDP is an outdated proxy measure of economic growth, wellbeing, which is a multidimensional approach of measuring the most important aspects of people’s life, is gaining popularity.

Perpetual Growth

Stagflation is simultaneous economic stagnation combined with high inflation. In the long run, economic growth is dependent on two drivers; productivity and labor (Dolar). Productivity is affected by multiple factors. Improvements in many facets of productivity growth have decreased or reversed since the global financial crisis. The foremost factor is the demographic crisis of western countries that threatens the growth of GDP. Developed countries have experienced deceleration of working-age population, stabilization of educational attainment, and expansion into various forms of production. Furthermore, labor reallocation from less productive to more productive sectors has decelerated since the global financial crisis. Besides, radical disruptions to education and income losses are likely to affect human capital negatively. The waning demographics of western countries imply that acceleration of productivity growth is needed. The McKinsey Global Institute projected that 80% productivity growth is required to mitigate the effects of changing demographics (49). This projection is unlikely to be achieved given the dwindling working-age population in western countries. On the contrary, productivity growth is likely to continue decreasing because of the significant changes in the demographics unless the working-age population begins to grow again.

Perpetual Growth

GDP as a measurement is very outdated because it does not measure wellbeing. It is a statistical tool used to measure how well the economy is performing. However, it neglects important factors that determine the wellbeing, such as inequality and environmental services (Gallup). GDP as a proxy measure of economic growth ignores certain aspects that do not involve monetary transactions, does not assess changes in human capital, does not discriminate activities that enhance welfare from activities that reduce welfare, does not account for cultural difference, and omits the environmental costs and rates of depletion of resources (Giannetti et al. 14). The Measure of Economic Welfare is one of the alternatives for a gross domestic product as it measures consumption in the economy as a proxy for economic welfare. It adds up the benefits of goods and services consumption and subtracts the costs associated with the consumption, such as environmental pollution, providing a picture of economic welfare. Other economic welfare measures were developed after the Measure of Economic Welfare, such as the Index of the Economic Aspects of Welfare which incorporates environmental costs in estimating economic welfare (Giannetti et al. 15). Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare is an index developed to account for the current environmental issues while addressing the long-term ecosystem and natural resource sustainable use. More indices were developed with recent ones such as the State of Global Well-Being, the Better Life Index, and the Global Well-Being Index measuring a myriad of aspects of wellbeing. The Gallup Global Well-Being measures the behavioral economics of gross domestic product growth. It estimates the percentage “thriving,” “struggling,” and “suffering” of individuals in different countries and regions (Gallup). The indexes focus on the percent thriving in at least elements of wellbeing such as purpose (liking what they do), social (supportive relationships), physical (good health), community (liking the surrounding community), and financial (managing economic life well) aspects.
One in six adults worldwide are considered thriving – or strong and consistent — in at least three of the five elements of well-being, as measured by the Gallup-Healthways Global Well-Being Index. For example residents of the Singapore score quite low at the 19%, while New Zealand leads in Asia – Pacific with 67%.
The Gallup Global Well-Being measures have opened up new opportunities to study issues that affect people in different communities around the world in ways that GDP would not. For example, life satisfaction aspects of the Gallup World Poll data have been exploited to measure inequality in the distribution of subjective wellbeing (Gluzmann & Gasparini 2). Measuring inequality in subjective wellbeing might be complementary to the various approaches aimed at computing unfairness in a society because it may in some way have benefits over the usual income inequality measurements. Some perceived income inequalities may arise due to personal choices if all constraints are observed thus cannot be considered unfair. A case in point is when two individuals facing similar opportunities make different choices. One choice might lead to a better, healthier lifestyle while the other subjects the individual to poverty. Free choices resulting in socially acceptable income inequality should not be regarded as unfair. The assessment of subjective wellbeing is less likely to be susceptible to such differences. Under evaluation of subjective wellbeing, differences in perceived happiness may better estimate social unfairness rather than income unfairness (Gluzmann & Gasparini 4). Gallup World Poll provides data that can be used to compare wellbeing in different countries. It cures one of the most significant problems associated with compering inequality across countries and regions, namely, the generation of homogenous information. The poll poses the same question across all countries in all areas, which significantly reduces spurious differences in estimating comparisons. This reduces sources of measurement error significantly. It is noteworthy that people may not interpret and answer the standardized questions the same in different countries, leading to additional errors. However, the advantages of estimating subjective wellbeing and its rising popularity imply that improvements in the measurements will yield better results.

Technological Revolution

Usually, information and communication technologies are considered a key driver of economic growth and productivity. Different reviews indicate that technological effects tend to be positive at the organizational level (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development [UNCTAD 34]). However, it has been reported that productivity tends to drop as economies entrench technologies in every sector. In other words, the rapid digitization of economies has not translated into strong productivity. On the contrary, productivity growth appears to have stunted over the past few decades, with the slowdown more pronounced in developed countries and also in developing countries (UNCTAD 34). This is a productivity paradox because as technological advancement and use have increased, productivity growth has decreased, which is contrary to popular expectations (Remes et al.). The digitization of economies into digital economies has thus far not translated into increased productivity. The paradox in the digital economy is attributed to different reasons. A more pessimistic perspective considers the technological effects on productivity as having fewer impacts on productivity growth than the revolutionary technological advances of the past (UNCTAD 34). A more optimistic view links the slow growth of productivity to the time lags between the time the technologies are introduced and the time actual effects are felt (European CEO). As a result, more visible impacts on productivity will occur when technologies are adopted widely within the economy. An additional contributing factor to the productivity paradox is the difficulties associated with measuring the digital economy. The slow growth in productivity might be explained by the lack of proper recording of technological activities in that in overall GDP estimation. Consequently, the proper measurement would be reflected in increased productivity. In developed countries, demographic factors associated with the aging population are also linked to the slow growth in productivity (UNCTAD 34). Therefore, the productivity paradox related to the technological revolution arises from multiple factors.

Quality of the GDP

Measuring economic growth in purely quantitative categories diminishes the significance of “high-quality growth.” High-quality growth encompasses increased technological self-reliance, significant production and welfare transformation, the establishment of a comprehensive safety net for the citizens, enhancement of quality healthcare, education, and employment, and reduction of inequality across regions and various demographic characteristics (Wärtsilä). It reflects a policy change that focuses on investment areas that guarantee increased productivity, such as production, consumption, healthcare, and education (Pfeffer). The concept of high-quality growth is being advanced by China to reorganize the economy in a way that focus on increased domestic consumption and investing in productive sectors to drive the overall economic growth. For example, after decades of heavy investments in infrastructural projects and the manufacturing sector, the country realizes that roads and bridges are not productive but rather facilitates productivity. Policy change to shift investment into more productive sectors of the economy might bring sustainable economic growth and wellbeing. At the sectorial level, administrative job control is one of the main factors impacting the health of the employees (Pfeffer). The return of line of sight to the work, workplace flexibility, autonomous fusion teams, fluidity in work practices, and organizational health can elevate the personal wellbeing of the employees. The functional organization provides an environment with less stress caused by micromanagement demands from the employees. Therefore, wellbeing is a product of economic policy at the national level and the contribution of the private sector in nurturing the wellbeing of employees.

Conclusion

The failure of GDP as a measurement proxy of economic growth is less effective in contemporary society. It assumes that an economy will experience perpetual growth, which is a difficult achievement. Even where economies have experienced phenomenal growth over the years, the economic expansion failed to transform the lives of millions of citizens. The technological revolution also has been unable to expand the GDP as it was initially believed despite the fact that the significant impacts technology has had on society. It led to the conclusion that GDP has limitations as a measure of economic growth because it does not account for the non-monetary aspects that matter to people. As a result, new indexes such as the Gallup Global Wellbeing have been developed and are experiencing rising popularity due to their ability to compute wellbeing. In particular, the estimation of subjective wellbeing creates opportunities for improved measurement of social inequality. Furthermore, the realization that wellbeing is important to citizens is supporting new ideas of measuring national economic growth. China’s shift to the assessment of the quality of economic growth indicates a paradigm shift where countries focus on national statistics that reflect their economic realities.

References

Dolar, Veronika. “Why stagflation is an economic nightmare – and could become a real headache for Biden and the Fed if it emerges in the US.” The Conversation (2022). https://theconversation.com/why-stagflation-is-an-economic-nightmare-and-could-become-a-real-headache-for-biden-and-the-fed-if-it-emerges-in-the-us-179036. Accessed 21 Mar. 2022.
European CEO. “Giving a voice to the digital revolution’s silent majority.” (2019). https://www.europeanceo.com/industry-outlook/giving-a-voice-to-the-digital-revolutions-silent-majority/. Accessed 21 Mar. 2022.
Gallup. “2014 Country Well-Being Rankings.”
Giannetti, Biagio F., et al. “A review of limitations of GDP and alternative indices to monitor human wellbeing and to manage ecosystem functionality.” Journal of cleaner production 87 (2015): 11-25.
Gluzmann, Pablo, and Leonardo Gasparini. “International inequality in subjective well‐being: An exploration with the Gallup World Poll.” Review of Development Economics 22.2 (2018): 610-631.
McKinsey Global Institute – “Global growth: Can productivity save the day in an aging world?” page 49
Pfeffer, Jeffrey. “The overlooked essentials of employee wellbeing.” McKinsey Global Institute (2018). https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/the-overlooked-essentials-of-employee-well-being. Accessed 21 Mar. 2022.
Remes, Jaana et al. “Solving the productivity puzzle.” McKinsey Global Institute (2018). https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/regions-in-focus/solving-the-productivity-puzzle. Accessed 21 Mar. 2022.
Wärtsilä. “Going beyond GDP: China targets a new path to growth.” (2021). https://www.wartsila.com/insights/article/going-beyond-gdp-china-targets-a-new-path-to-growth. Accessed 21 Mar. 2022.
Authors

Paul Lalovich

Organizational Effectiveness and Strategy Execution Practice

Tesha Teshanovich

Organizational Effectiveness and Strategy Execution Practice
submitted by Tesa_Tesanovic1988 to Open_innovation_model [link] [comments]


2024.05.18 23:21 Tesa_Tesanovic1988 What is a Venture Builder and how to design one?

A venture builder differs from other capital funds in that it depends mainly on the quality and dynamism of its networks (INSEAD, 2018). It means that a venture builder must find out which the best resource combination for creating the most explosive outcomes for it to gain market greater share faster than its rivals.

A venture builder differs from other capital funds in that it depends mainly on the quality and dynamism of its networks (INSEAD, 2018). It means that a venture builder must find out which the best resource combination for creating the most explosive outcomes for it to gain market greater share faster than its rivals.
Corporations tend to use VB to reduce the chances of negative black swan exposure while raising their positive black swan exposure (Thng, 2019). According to conventional knowledge, business enterprises’ systems, structures, and procedures focus more on delivery and performance than on change and innovation (de Alvarenga et al., 2019). Firms must pursue the former to succeed in today’s competition, but they are likely to jeopardize their future well-being if they overlook the latter. Many companies have tried versatile structures or techniques like open innovation to balance effectiveness and creativity. Among these approaches, establishing incubator groups to create relationships with emerging start-up enterprises is a significant contemporary method (Massiera, 2021). The logic behind it is straightforward: VBs tap into new business models and talent pools while also transforming their own corporate cultures in return for helping new ventures deal with the risk of newness and evolve into more stable organizations (Cryptix, 2022). The venture builder environment is significant because they attempt to improve new venture success rates.

Goals and purpose of Venture BuilderGoals and purpose of Venture Builder

A Venture Builder is similar to a fast-paced tech startup, where its product is the venture, the prototype is the business model, and deliverables means perfect and timely deployment.
Venture investors have a clear edge over firms that are leveraged or rely on grants for financing; it’s a possible solution to the funding gap that has been a challenge for early-stage companies (Massiera, 2021). Any start-up owned by the Venture Builder will almost certainly have some equity taken. Still, the start-up has the potential to accelerate in its early stages with the installation of shared services, expertise, and salary (Tkalich et al., 2021). It becomes a win-win situation for both parties, which boosts their chances of success. Venture builders either hire professionals or rely on extensive expertise and commercial experience. They exchanged technical experience with competent developers who can produce swiftly with the correct frameworks and assistance, as well as high-quality code (Tkalich et al., 2021). Even with a collection of proprietary technology that can be used to cut development time even more.
Over the past decade, many corporate innovation laboratories have sprung up. Cross-functional cooperation involving intrapreneurs in these laboratories helps companies come up with fresh ideas and concepts. On the other hand, these concepts are usually executed as startup priorities and get greater attention from the venture builders. Consequently, rather than forging new ground, venture builders often focus on boosting this young business. Meanwhile, corporate initiatives are designed to achieve mid to long-term goals. This eliminates the need for complicated integration concerns. With abundant resources, the venture builders may settle on innovative decisions at startup without facing the constraints of the corporate hierarchy. This results in quicker returns on investment and a better competitive edge for the startups. The startups are, thus, charged with exploring radical ideas and business models that address new consumer requirements, allowing the venture builder to diversify its risks of disruption.

The Distinction Between Incubators and Accelerators

Although each business is similar, its methods and target markets differ. Accelerators are short-term programs that target a wide range of start-ups, from pre-seed through scale-ups. Incubators are a kind of start-up help firm that is broader (Cryptix, 2022). Venture builders concentrate on bringing together teams and forming a group of start-ups simultaneously as part of a lengthier program that connects them to their network. Unfortunately, the phrase “venture builder” has only recently gained popularity in the entrepreneurial sector. “Accelerator” is a more often used word, yet it is still understudied. The words venture builder, accelerator, and incubator tend to be used interchangeably to gather as much information as possible, with the distinctions noted previously taken into account.
Because venture capital companies are not operating businesses, they are unique. They put their money into potential teams and company concepts that match their requirements. Venture Builders, however, are heavily engaged in day-to-day operations management (Cryptix, 2022). When a Venture Builder has shares in a firm, it came up with the concept and put in a lot of work to build it, not because it contributed funds. It is also apparent that many Venture Builders are setting up funds to help with funding (Gerhardt et al., 2021). Contrary to the case of incubators and accelerators, Venture Builders find company ideas from within their networks and allocate internal teams to initiate the building from the bottom up. The link between a Venture Builder and its ventures is long-term; it is heavily engaged with the businesses it creates until they depart.

Process of creating a Venture Builder

Venture studios create businesses by developing new concepts and allocating teams to those with commercial potential (Doyle, 2021). Any dangerous assumptions that must be true for your idea to have any potential are addressed after the business concept has been fully understood. The first step is to determine whether or not your target clients have issues that need to be addressed and, if so, whether or not your concept offers the appropriate answers. After these concepts have been verified and proven, they are backed up by resources to create a minimum viable product (INSEAD, 2018). Building a team is a crucial aspect of the process for smart individuals who want to achieve big things. While some venture builders fund the design process first, others have created a strong reputation that allows them to seek funds before the ideas are specified. If the feasibility is confirmed at this time, the studio works on growing the new venture before attempting to depart. This business model cycle is repeated several times, each time resulting in creating a new venture (Garcia-Luengo, 2017). It is anticipated that if an idea fails, resources will be shifted, or the business case will be abandoned outright.

Conclusion

The Venture Builder approach is becoming more popular. It is arguable if venture capital is a superior model. While each has its benefits, venture building is more facilitating and advantageous for a potential early-stage start-up firm, particularly one that has yet to support itself with working capital. It is indisputable that venture building is modernizing and deconstructing a process that was once somewhat of an art than a science, and equipping organizations and people by stressing the systematic use of human capital to create unique opportunities from the bottom up, thus boosting the possibilities of developing and growing successful companies. It is no longer a single personality that drives the company; instead it is the use of established procedures based on successful case studies, paired with the appropriate team and deployment at the right time that has enabled tales to be told.
References
Cryptix. (2022). The difference between Incubator, Accelerator and Venture Builder. Retrieved from https://cryptix.ag/blog/the-difference-between-incubator-accelerator-and-venture-builde
de Alvarenga, R., Junior, O. C., & Zeny, G. C. (2019). Venture Building & Startup Studios versus Acceleration Programs-Conceptual & Performance Differences. In . ISPIM Conference Proceedings (pp. 1-14). The International Society for Professional Innovation Management.
Doyle, M. (2021, March 15). The Venture Studio Business Model Explained. Retrieved from https://theworldwecreate.net/insights/the-venture-studio-business-model-explained
Garcia-Luengo, J. (2017, Aug 29). Venture Building, a new model for entrepreneurship and innovation. Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/venture-building-new-model-entrepreneurship-jorge-garc%C3%ADa-luengo/
Gerhardt, V., Santos, J. D., Rubin, E., Neuenfeldt, A., & Mairesse Siluk, J. C. (2021). Stakeholders´ Perception to Characterize the Start-ups Success. Journal of technology management & innovation, 16(1), 38-50.
INSEAD. (2018). The Emerging Role of Venture Builders in EarlyStage Venture Funding. Retrieved from chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.insead.edu/sites/default/files/assets/dept/centres/gpei/docs/insead-student-emerging-role-of-venture-builders-oct-2018.pdf
Massi, M., Shah, P., Eckel, J., & Loughridge, J. (2022, Jan 12). The Venture Builder Strategy for Principal Investors. Retrieved from https://www.bcg.com/publications/2022/the-venture-builders-strategy-for-principal-investors
Massiera, P. (2021). Teaching business models through student consulting projects. Journal of Business Models, 9(3), 25-38.
Thng, P. (2019, Oct). Successful venture building: What matters! An empirical Successful venture building: What matters! An empirical examination of effective incubation practices . Retrieved from Singapore Management University Singapore Management University : https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1253&context=etd_coll
Tkalich, A., Moe, N. B., & Ulfsnes, R. (2021). Making Internal Software Startups Work: How to Innovate Like a Venture Builder? International Conference on Software Business (pp. 152-167). Springer.
Authors

Paul Lalovich

Organizational Effectiveness and Strategy Execution Practice

Tesha Teshanovich

Organizational Effectiveness and Strategy Execution Practice
submitted by Tesa_Tesanovic1988 to innovationmanagement [link] [comments]


2024.05.18 23:18 Relevant-Trouble-291 I think we are getting close to the theory of everything: Reviewers on "Oscillating Spacetime: The Foundation of the Universe"

One of my favourite theory I have read is getting recognized and the reviewer has given their thoughts after reviewing process completion.
Full theory: Oscillating Spacetime: The Foundation of the Universe.
Newsletter: Oscillating Spacetime by John A. Macken.
Comments of reviewers :
One reviewer wrote: The paper is very well written and consists of intriguing discussions. Although it is quite interesting to read, there is a minor matter whose consideration can potentially contribute to the overall quality of the paper….
Another reviewer stated: This paper exemplifies the author’s deep knowledge and expertise in exploring fundamental physics concepts and their implications. After critically analyzing the article, I have formulated the following comments and suggestions to help enhance its overall quality and relevance to a wider range of readers. I would recommend revision throughout the manuscript before accepting it for publication in the prestigious Journal of Modern Physics (JMP)….
submitted by Relevant-Trouble-291 to TheoriesOfEverything [link] [comments]


http://rodzice.org/