5 ms·
""Some people were administering it to their kids," he says. " WTF , fair enough if you want to risk it on yourself but not your children with still developing
by lawless123 10y ago
""Some people were administering it to their kids," he says. "
WTF , fair enough if you want to risk it on yourself but not your children with still developing brains.
- gwbas1c 10y agoThe whole thing just reminds me about the radium water craze years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radithor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radithor https://67.media.tumblr.com/1899ba50f59df9c88dace35c13c2c1a7/tumblr_nvvm8tVOyn1rwjpnyo1_500.jpg https://67.media.tumblr.com/1899ba50f59df9c88dace35c13c2c1a7...
- DigitalJack 10y agoI watched a documentary on Netflix a while back that talked about the Radium health craze and carelessness. I think it was about the rise of investigative chemistry with regard to poisonings, etc. The radium portion was horrifying to think about.
- komali2 10y agoAs long as the mindset of "we're done hearing from experts!" is allowed to resurface again and again, we'll have this problem. See: Anti-vaccers, the insanity with radium, maybe even Bob Marley's toe cancer.
- mhurron 10y agohttp://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/poisoners/ http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/poisoners/ The Poisoner's Handbook The radium portion was especially sad, but fit in quite well with the lead section in american societies willingness to poison people to improve profit.
- ams6110 10y agoI once lived in a area that had naturally elevated levels of radium in the city water supply. Nice that each water bill had a warning about possible bone cancer risk in drinking the water. Needless to say we had a delivery service for our drinking water.
- nabla9 10y agoInsanity of proponents of pseudoscience has no boundaries.
- reachtarunhere 10y agoToo early to say if it pseudoscience. They don't know the effects yet. It is just risky tinkering.
- BlanketLogic 10y ago> They don't know the effects yet. That's what makes it 'pseudo'.
- Karunamon 10y agoSo by that definition, any new and untested-en-masse "thing" is "pseudoscience", with all the implied quackery baggage that term applies. That is not a useful definition.
- ricksplat 10y agoIt's pseudoscience if it's presented as "scientific fact"; science is the process by which such facts are established. Otherwise you're talking about a hypothesis.
- Karunamon 10y agohttp://jjodx.weebly.com/home/seven-papers-about-tdcs http://jjodx.weebly.com/home/seven-papers-about-tdcs Sounds like scientific fact to me. We know it works, it's just a matter of establishing effects on specific tasks.
- ricksplat 10y agoSigh did you read TFA? It's not "just" a matter of establishing effects - article goes into why it's not that straightforward ... as another commenter said TDCS is like using a sledge-hammer to tune a piano. We know that TDCS does "something" but all the hypotheses are "two tailed" which basically means all you can say is there is an effect - not whether it's a good one or bad one. The pseudoscience is claiming these hypotheses are certain.
- verbify 10y agoYup, same with anti-vaxxers. But they (like anti-vaxxers, or even vaxxers) think they're doing the kids a favour.