Friday, 30 December 2011

I am a nihilist re research!


I am a nihilist re research!
Yet another ignorantly promulgated research: fast walkers / exercisers  live longer than slower ones.
Congratulations researchers!
 
How many sick - some very sick people are told by doctors to go for a walk? Do they not self - select themselves to earlier long term repose?
 
How many older people inately walk slowly for similar reasons? And similar resultant earlier deaths.
 
Essentially all research is almost certainly deeply flawed or fraudulent because the researchers are only interested in justifying the guitless pocketing the money instead of admitting they have been wasting their time and the sponsor's money!
 
It is so sad that studies involve those who either do not have the acuity, acumen or moral turpitude to carry out research which is always far too expensive to do properly. There is much evidence for this apparently unilateral claim. 'Climate lunacy research' is an example in another fraudulent  realm
 
Contemplate the current fuss about brain cancer and mobile phones. The 16 researchers have  finished their rant. Everyone will ignore it - and no one will remember understand or care  that 99% of experts do not support the group of 16 - no matter how many letters they have after  their name!
 

Geoff Seidner
13 Alston Grove
East St Kilda 3183
03 9525 9299
 
How about the below for your info?
 
 
How about making optuse, non - proven comparison with tobacco and asbestos?
 
I feel sorry for so - called experts ranting about their 'discovery' of the latest cancer scare of mobile phone use.
 

 

It must be tough to contemplate that their information as reported is always / unashamedly  couched with the classical modifiers such as  might, could, possibly etc.
 
Then they re - use the old scam / alternative medicine  - term of ''free radicals damaging the DNA, heart, brain, liver and hormone production.''
 
Maybe they should use the Rohrshah inkblot test -STATS: Rorschach For Dummies  and keep looking closely at the inkblots  until proof is seen by all?
 
Accusing  newspapers of publishing ''technical errors and misleading statements.'' is not beyond them either. Why not imply a clear conspiracy?
Or compare it all with the left's favourite shibboleth of magnetic power lines' danger?
 
All has failed because they are reduced to  re - using the old scam /weasel word / idea of alternative medicine. The term of ''free radicals damaging the DNA, heart, brain, liver and hormone production.'' is classical broadcasted ineptitude.
 
How about making optuse, non - proven comparison with tobacco and asbestos? Why do they not mention an equally irrelevant, strained  reference about Thalidemine?
 
Contemplate how delusionary the 16 co - authors will feel when not a single intelligent parent will even bother telling their children about not to use mobile phones.
Certainly history will not be kind to reseachers raving about ''non - ionising radiation.
Soon it will be forgotten - until the next wasted lifetime research hits us!
 

Geoff Seidner
13 Alston Grove
East St Kilda 3183
03 9525 9299
Posted by at No comments:

The Australian 30/12/2011- Cancer scare mobile phones


HEALTH AND SCIENCE

Row over cancer risk of mobiles

  • BY:ADAM CRESSWELL 
  • From:The Australian 
  • December 30, 2011 12:00AM
AUSTRALIAN brain surgeon Charlie Teo is one of 16 world experts who have accused a global newspaper of publishing "technical errors and misleading statements" in an article that rubbished the idea mobile phones cause cancer.
In an open letter, the experts, who work in Europe, the US and Australia and have qualifications in fields such as cancer medicine, public health, statistics and electromagnetism, said the article published in The Economist "fails to provide critical information about this important public health challenge", and demanded that the journal print a correction.
The experts wrote that history was "replete with failures to control highly profitable carcinogenic substances, ranging from tobacco to asbestos, until proof of harm became irrefutable", and suggested on a conservative analysis that mobile phones and other wireless radiation might be seeding 250,000 avoidable brain tumours every year.
Tile2_28DayPass
The document was released in riposte to an article published in the British-based Economist in September that ridiculed those who believe mobile phones are harming people as a "tinfoil-hat brigade" who continue to believe "deadly waves in the ether are frying their brains".
The Economist article implied that because radiowaves, microwaves and radiation from mobile phones and other devices was "non-ionising" radiation that lacked the energy to knock electrons out of atoms there was no plausible mechanism by which such radiation could trigger cancer.
The 16 co-authors replied that independent studies had shown mobile phone emissions could damage genetic material, increase the production of DNA-damaging free radicals, and affect the heart, brain, liver and hormone production.
In May, the World Health Organisation's International Agency for Research on Cancer upgraded its warning on mobile phone emissions to "possibly carcinogenic", which The Economist said put them in the same category as coffee and false teeth, but which the 16 experts say is also the same as for DDT, engine exhausts and fluorinated flame retardants.
Posted by at No comments:

Latest cancer scare of mobile phone use


How about making optuse, non - proven comparison with tobacco and asbestos?
I feel sorry for so - called experts ranting about their 'discovery' of the latest cancer scare of mobile phone use.
It must be tough to contemplate that their information as reported is always / unashamedly  couched with the classical modifiers such as  might, could, possibly etc.
Then they re - use the old scam / alternative medicine  - term of ''free radicals damaging the DNA, heart, brain, liver and hormone production.''
Maybe they should use the Rohrshah inkblot test -STATS: Rorschach For Dummies  and keep looking closely at the inkblots  until proof is seen by all?
Accusing  newspapers of publishing ''technical errors and misleading statements.'' is not beyond them either. Why not imply a clear conspiracy?
Or compare it all with the left's favourite shibboleth of magnetic power lines' danger?
All has failed because they are reduced to  re - using the old scam /weasel word / idea of alternative medicine. The term of ''free radicals damaging the DNA, heart, brain, liver and hormone production.'' is classical broadcasted ineptitude.
How about making optuse, non - proven comparison with tobacco and asbestos? Why do they not mention an equally irrelevant, strained  reference about Thalidemine?
Contemplate how delusionary the 16 co - authors will feel when not a single intelligent parent will even bother telling their children about not to use mobile phones.
Certainly history will not be kind to reseachers raving about ''non - ionising radiation.
Soon it will be forgotten - until the next wasted lifetime research hits us!



Geoff Seidner
13 Alston Grove
East St Kilda 3183
03 9525 9299
Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, 29 December 2011

Buts, Butts and Gareth Evans' Bullocks


Buts, Butts and Gareth Evans' Bullocks

Careful reading of his article Peaceful way in a world of grey The Australian 29/12 the former foreign minister Gareth Evans seems ignorant of his contradictory constructs. This is the way of the left - admirably purport to be ignorant - and if if high - flown leftist tripe gets in the way - simply ignore it /  reality.
However I am postulating that Evans could not be as ignorant as he is so manifestly depicts himself: he is indeed willfully blind! Another modus vivendi of the socially aware.
 
If it is not the troika [oops - it was four - but I could not resist troika!] of but - based modifiers - it is the carelesness he manifests in purporting to play the vainglorious ''good international citizen - activelly helping solve global public - goods challenges such as climate change human rights protection ...''
 
Puhleez!
Climate change and the meaningless conferences? Actually - the ''double - talk'' of these conferences!
How did this get here? One would think E would be ashamed to defacto excuse  climate change conferences!  In his brand of  socialist non - reality - anything can be explained with inane modifiers of buts, butts and bullocks!
 
Butt it does get worse. Evans really gets lost when he continues: ''cross - border protection flows'' - and the left's favourite - ''weapons of mass destruction''.
[Read Iran, North Korea.]
 
Evans has the chutzpah of using  'not only - butt also' trick:  the Hawk government' favourite leftie / intellectual minister insist that the regimes of North Korea and Iran are susceptible to ''boy scout good deeds'' and by us being ''good international citizens.''
 
By the end of his soft - left rant - Evans no longer cares how he vitiates reality and contradicts himself as follows:
 
''And a story couched in realist terms is likely to be easier to sell to domestic constituencies than one pitched as disinterested altruism.''
 
 
So much for boy scout / good deeds: it seems he now calls on reality as at the same time indicting realpolitic as ''disinterested altruism'' - which later contradicts as ''selfless co - operation'' and the need for a ''story to be couched in realist terms''
 
Oh there is so much more of the humbug the left seems incapable of avoiding.
 
Geoff Seidner
13 Alston Grove
East St Kilda 3183
03 9525 9299
 
con·struct   (kn-strkt)
tr.v. con·struct·ed, con·struct·ing, con·structs
1. To form by assembling or combining parts; build.
2. To create (an argument or a sentence, for example) by systematically arranging ideas or terms.
3. Mathematics To draw (a geometric figure) that meets specific requirements.
n. (knstrkt)
1. Something formed or constructed from parts.
2.
a. A concept, model, or schematic idea: a theoretical construct of the atom.
b. A concrete image or idea: "[He] began to shift focus from the haunted constructs of terror in his early work" (Stephen Koch).
[Latin cnstruere, cnstrct- : com-, com- + struere, to pile up; see ster-2 in Indo-European roots.]
modus vi·ven·di   (v-vnd, -d)
n. pl. modi vivendi
1. A manner of living; a way of life.
2. A temporary agreement between contending parties pending a final settlement.
''But if doubletalk were an indictable offence, there would be few left to attend international summits. The task is neither to pillory nor to sanctify political leaders caught in these traps, but somehow to reconcile what they will often see as hopelessly competing demands of moral values and national interests, and to find ways to get them to do more good and less harm.
A useful way forward in this respect may be to rethink fundamentally the concept of national interest. Traditionally seen as having just two dimensions, economic and geostrategic, there is a strong case for adding a third: every country's interest in being, and being seen to be, a good international citizen. Actively helping to solve global public-goods challenges (such as climate change, human rights protection, international piracy, drug trafficking, cross-border population flows and elimination of weapons of mass destruction), even when there is no direct economic or strategic pay-off, is not simply the foreign policy equivalent of boy scout good deeds. Selfless co-operation on these issues can actually work to a country's advantage by boosting its reputation and generating reciprocal support: my help in solving your drug-trafficking problem today will increase the chances of you helping with my asylum-seeker problem tomorrow.''
Posted by at No comments:

Monday, 26 December 2011

New ways to bring disadvantaged in from cold


NA INDEX STATIC FEATURE OPINION

New ways to bring disadvantaged in from cold

FOR most Australians, Christmas is a time of joy and togetherness shared with family and friends.
But it's also a time when loneliness and isolation are felt most keenly, particularly for the one in 20 Australians living with complex disadvantage not able to be remedied simply by putting a little more money in their pockets.
For those Australians, traditional social welfare approaches don't always work and the combination of disadvantages can severely limit their ability to participate productively in our community.
In the past few days, I have been asked: What is social inclusion? The best way to answer that question is to contrast social inclusion with the traditional analysis of disadvantage in Australia that centres on poverty.
Social inclusion recognises that disadvantage does not rest only on the amount of money you have in your pocket (though that is obviously important) but also on a range of other factors including educational opportunities, disability or mental illness, access to services and shelter, family and social relationships, and more.
Tile2_28DayPass
The concept of complex and multidimensional disadvantage is not particularly revolutionary. Where the rubber hits the road, though, is when governments are able to put together a multi-dimensional response, and that is the value of social inclusion.
Australians living with complex disadvantage interact with several government agencies and non-government organisations delivering government funded services. Traditionally, those agencies have stuck rigidly to their area of responsibility (such as income support or housing). This "silo" approach by government means that individuals end up having to tell their story over and over again. Worse, one arm of government rarely knows what the other is doing, which can result in duplication, gaps or, sometimes, serious mistakes.
Social inclusion encourages governments to build multidimensional policies and services for Australians living with complex disadvantage. It also encourages the development of innovative models, recognising that more traditional approaches to disadvantage simply don't work for a sizeable group in our community.
The social inclusion initiative is best placed in the Prime Minister's Department, able to look across the whole of government and connect the government's different agendas in a way that best supports disadvantaged people. A good example of where the initiative already has significant runs on the board is the co-location of Centrelink and Medicare offices. This initiative is changing the way services are delivered and providing better support to people when they need it.
Just before being sworn into the social inclusion portfolio, I saw first-hand the work being done by the Local Connections to Work Program in Campsie, Sydney. This program hosts 13 community partners - a combination of employment service providers and welfare organisations - all offering services on a rostered basis out of the Campsie Centrelink-Medicare centre.
What this means in practice is that disadvantaged jobseekers are able to have joint meetings with their Centrelink case worker and employment service provider. They're telling their stories just once, their needs are being quickly identified and they're being met with the right support.
Just as in Campsie, this new approach is paying dividends in other local communities where it's operating. More than 1200 highly disadvantaged Australians have found job and training placements thanks to Local Connections.
In my own portfolio, the government is introducing widespread reforms to the mental health system. We've invested heavily in a combination of services that break new ground and services that have been proven to work. We've made significant gains in clinical mental health services during the past decade, but more needs to be done to support people to live well in the community. People living with mental illness and their families tell me they need more support to manage their financial affairs, gain and retain employment, establish friendships and secure stable housing, and to integrate the different services the government gives them.
The new Partners for Recovery Initiative funded through this year's record mental health package symbolises a new approach to providing support for those Australians living with the most severe and chronic forms of mental illness. A care facilitator will take responsibility for co-ordinating all of a person's clinical and non-clinical needs, and require service providers to sign on to a single care plan.
This initiative will provide great comfort to families, who will know there is a single point of contact to call on when a gap or a need emerges, and I'm sure it will result in greater levels of recovery and social inclusion for some of the most severely disadvantaged Australians.
Teenage parents, jobless families, the homeless and people locked out of paid work because of mental illness or disability are the real, everyday faces of social exclusion and marginalisation.
While wrapping their needs up in the language of social inclusion is relatively new and perhaps unfamiliar, what's not new is our unwavering commitment to doing all we can to give those Australians a helping hand.
Mark Butler is Minister for Social Inclusion, Mental Health and Ageing and assisting the Prime Minister on Mental Health Reform.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)