Science given the boot at White House

Which is all manner of funny, because you don't even know who I am.


Read the article you posted. Down at the bottom, it speaks of how Obama jacked up the Science office, under the imaginary pretense of doing good and all that. Expand the size and power of the Exec. Branch, of the Federal Gov't...

Proper functions of the office. It's not a President's job to " promote " science. There doesn't need to be an office in the W.H. for this , at all.

Looking for more and more ways to justify expansion of federal power, involvement and ultimately, control ? No thank you.

We made the atomic bomb and went to the moon with out this office. It's not a big deal.

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Yeah, we don't NEED science to tell us pesticides are bad...but yanno, it gets in the way of all that cashy money!

http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/chlorpgen.html

Persistent health effects[edit]

Gestation, infancy and childhood[edit]

Epidemiological and experimental animal studies suggest that infants and children are more susceptible than adults to effects from low dose exposure.[16][17] The young have a decreased capacity to detoxify chlorpyrifos and its metabolites. This results in disruption in nervous system developmental processes, as observed in animal experiments.[16]

Human studies: In multiple epidemiological studies, chlorpyrifos exposure during gestation or childhood has been linked with lower birth weight and neurological changes such as slower motor development and attention problems.[17] Exposure to organophosphate pesticides in general has been increasingly associated with changes in children's cognitive, behavioral and motor performance.[18]

Animal experiments: In experiments with rats, early, short-term low-dose exposure to chlorpyrifos resulted in lasting neurological changes, with larger effects on emotional processing and cognition than on motor skills.[17] Such rats exhibited behaviors consistent with depression and reduced anxiety.[17] In rats, low-level exposure during development has its greatest neurotoxic effects during the period in which sex differences in the brain develop. Exposure leads to reductions or reversals of normal gender differences.[19] Exposure to low levels of chlorpyrifos early in rat life or as adults also affects metabolism and body weight.[20] These rats show increased body weight as well as changes in liver function and chemical indicators similar to prediabetes, likely associated with changes to the cyclic AMP system.[20]

Adulthood[edit]

Adults may develop lingering health effects following acute exposure or repeated low-dose exposure. Among agricultural workers, chlorpyrifos has been associated with slightly increased risk of wheeze, a whistling sound while breathing due to obstruction of the airways.[21]

Among 50 farm pesticides studied, chlorpyrifos was associated with higher risks of lung cancer among frequent pesticide applicators than among infrequent or non-users. Pesticide applicators as a whole were found to have a 50% lower cancer risk than the general public, likely due to their nearly 50% lower smoking rate. However, chlorpyrifos applicators had a 15% lower cancer risk than the general public, which the study suggests indicates a link between chlorpyrifos application and lung cancer.[22][23]

Twelve people who had been exposed to chlorpyrifos were studied over periods of 1 to 4.5 years. They were found to have a heightened immune responses to common allergens and increased antibiotic sensitivities, elevated CD26 cells, and a higher rate of autoimmunity, compared with control groups. Autoantibodies were directed toward smooth muscle, parietal cell, brush border, thyroid gland, myelin, and the subjects also had more anti-nuclear antibodies.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/03/30/trump_s_epa_just_rej
ected_its_own_science_to_shut_down_a_pesticide_ban.html



The ruling by Mr. Pruitt in one of his first formal actions as the nation’s top environmental official, rejected a petition filed a decade ago by two environmental groups that had asked that the agency ban all uses of chlorpyrifos. The chemical was banned in 2000 for use in most household settings but still today is used at about 40,000 farms on about 50 different types of crops, ranging from almonds to apples.


Late last year, and based in part on research conducted at Columbia University, E.P.A. scientists concluded that exposure to the chemical that has been in use since 1965 was potentially causing significant health consequences. They included learning and memory declines, particularly among farm workers and young children who may be exposed through drinking water and other sources.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Eleanor Celeste should find time to update her Linkedin profile in between her comedy tweets.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

How Fake News Breaks Your Brain

Short attention spans and a deluge of rapid-fire articles on social media form a recipe for fake news epidemics

Pope Francis shocks world, endorses Donald Trump for president." “Clinton's assistant J. W. McGill is found dead.” “‘Tens of thousands’ of fraudulent Clinton votes found in Ohio warehouse.” These shocking news headlines of the past year all had one thing in common: They weren’t true. Not in the slightest. Each was manufactured, either out of malice or an attempt to cash in on advertising revenue, in an effort to deceive as many unwitting Internet readers as possible. They were, in other words, “fake news.”


Fake news, of course, is nothing new. In the past it took the form of pamphlets created to smear political enemies or sensationalist stories designed to “go viral” the old-fashioned way through newspaper sales. But the recent surge of false information enabled by our new social media landscapes has propelled it forward as a serious problem worthy of national and even international debate.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/how-fake-news-breaks-your
-brain-180963894/

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Which is all manner of funny, because you don't even know who I am.


Read the article you posted. Down at the bottom, it speaks of how Obama jacked up the Science office, under the imaginary pretense of doing good and all that. Expand the size and power of the Exec. Branch, of the Federal Gov't...

Proper functions of the office. It's not a President's job to " promote " science. There doesn't need to be an office in the W.H. for this , at all.

Looking for more and more ways to justify expansion of federal power, involvement and ultimately, control ? No thank you.

We made the atomic bomb and went to the moon with out this office. It's not a big deal.

---

Read it again rappy. I'll quote some of it so you get the point. We did the things you mention because when America was established it embraced science. Science the rest of the world claimed was heresy. Those who lead the world in discovery, science, lead the world. Obama knew this. Trump is clueless and you too would take a laissez-faire attitude that would handicap us.

As for me not knowing you. You have been revealing who you are through years of posts. I can't label you physically, but I sure can measure you intellectually and where you stand philosophically. I see you as being on par with Jack.

---

"Garg, the Obama-era OSTP staffer who tweeted Friday, said the size of the office under the Obama administration reflected Mr. Obama's "strong belief in science, the growing intersection of science and technology in a range of policy issues, and as showcased in the OSTP exit memo, in a sweeping range of [science and technology] accomplishments by the Obama science team."

The Trump administration hasn't demonstrated the same commitment to science to date, most notably by naming climate change skeptic Scott Pruitt to run the Environmental Protection Agency and announcing the U.S. would withdraw from the Paris climate agreement."

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Trump isn't interweaving any big gov't agenda into every fiber of our being, like Obama did, and to YOUR brainwashed mind, that = Trump not supporting science ? No commitment ?

Obama doesn't know jack shit about science. He just used it as another indoctrination tool, thanks Sal Alinksy.

What did Barry say was NASA's #1 job ? Tell Muslim countries how great their contributions to science are, historically, and help them feel good about themselves !!

* Charles Bolden, a retired United States Marines Corps major-general and former astronaut, said in an interview with al-Jazeera that Nasa was not only a space exploration agency but also an "Earth improvement agency".

Mr Bolden said: "When I became the Nasa administrator, he [Mr Obama] charged me with three things.

"One, he wanted me to help reinspire children to want to get into science and math; he wanted me to expand our international relationships; and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math, and engineering."

He added: "It is a matter of trying to reach out and get the best of all worlds, if you will, and there is much to be gained by drawing in the contributions that are possible from the Muslim [nations]."



Not the proper function of govt !! Sorry, it just isn't ! Obama's actions are 100% political in nature, and science is nothing but a gorram means to an end.

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME