A random study of predictability of non-linear, randomized, non-deterministric and chaotic systems under consideration of external influencing factors.
Really, enough of putting the blame on abstract agents like technological objects and start finding the real culprits: stressed or incompetent teachers, corrupt or incompetent politicians, sloppy or absent parents. This obsessive mania for wanting to put non-human causes at the root of human problems should be understood as a symptom of something much more serious.
Studies that support Haidt’s thesis are prominent, and information that does not conform is omitted or downplayed. In Figure 1.11, Haidt plots the percentage of Nordic teens with high psychological distress and highlights its rise between 2010 and 2015 (from Health Behavior in School Children data), especially among girls. However, the overall results of the HBSC, which surveyed more than 100,000 youths worldwide, does not show an increase in psychological symptoms or a decrease in life satisfaction between 2002 and 2014. These indicators are rather stable, with, at best, only a slight increase (see, studies by Dierckens and colleagues or Cosma and colleagues).
Haidt often relegates non-conforming information to the endnotes, like the fact that there “are a few studies that report little to no effect of screen use on sleep” (Chapter 5, note 36).
Researchers who focus on the complex relationships between various technologies and adolescents’ wellbeing have no evidence that engagement with digital technology is resulting in worse impacts on adolescents’ mental health problems over time. There is only a little evidence for the negative effects of digital screen engagement on adolescent wellbeing."
Oh lord, apparently Hillary Cass has bought into the conspiracy theory that "sissy hypno porn is turning the kids trans!" It's absolutely infuriating and naked bigotry that anyone pretends she is a neutral, honest, or scientific researcher. I am going to bet within the year that she will blame either George Soros or Bill Gates for the transes, or come out as an anti-vaxxer.
Great write-up by @annaleen on the modern history of the pseudoscience of "brainwashing" and how it has been (/tried to be) used for mostly nefarious ends.
We can say this "psychopolitics" is part and parcel of what the great political scientist Richard Hofstadter termed the "paranoid style in American politics".
Awesome to see a mention of Liang Qichao and how his term "xinao" (wash-brain) which meant modernization was usurped and became a negative connotation. He was one of the great early reformers who wanted to modernize Chinese philosophy by seeking a radical break from Confucianism. Pankaj Mishra's "From the ruins of empire" does a great job of his intellectual response to western imperialism in remaking Asia.
First time also hearing/reading about "stochastic terrorism".
Interestingly, that BBC story gives no numbers and no evidence that there is an unusual level of cancer downwind of the Trinity test site. Anecdotes are interesting, but they're about the weakest form of evidence. It says someone "has documented" something (without sharing any details), but words like "rate" and "percent" don't even appear in the story. The Beeb really needs to hire back some science writers.
'Entire Country Taken For A Ride, You Shut Eyes For 2 Years!': Supreme Court Pulls Up Union Govt For Inaction On Patanjali Ayurved Ads
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (February 27) expressed displeasure at the Union Government for not taking action under the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act 1954 in respect of the advertisements of Patanjali Ayurved claiming cure for several ailments.
Given the trash from Pamela Paul in the NY Times the other day, it's worth upping this again. From @juliaseranolast May, debunking Paul's word salad months before it was written.
Note how none of these meticulous examinations of the science ever make it into the NY Times.
"The first step when confronting a pseudoscientific belief is to not bother arguing it"
This has been my strategy for years, and it's worked pretty well. People with hokum ideas are often frustrated that they get insta-corrected before they get to explain their reasoning, and that makes them more entrenched. Convincing them out of that position often means more listening than talking on my part.