3 ms·

> it is impossible to make a rational choice about the issue. I think this is over-reaching. I agree there should be a better system, but I am perfectly willin

> it is impossible to make a rational choice about the issue. I think this is over-reaching. I agree there should be a better system, but I am perfectly willing to do the work and research the warning. Thus, I am able to make a rational decision based on the best information I can find. As with all science, what is rational today may change as new information becomes available. THat is the price we pay to stay informed, versus ignorance.

ogre_codes 6y ago
The current state of making everything share the same warning directly benefits the companies who sell the most dangerous chemicals. This is literally the exact opposite outcome of what the measure is supposed to have.
- SoSoRoCoCo 6y ago
  Not following. Are you're saying this is "Gish Gallop" tactic [1]: flood your opponent with so much BS they can't possibly respond? If so, I see what you are saying: the same level warning for thalidomide vs. something less deadly is a problem. If everything is bad, the bad guys sneak by? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
  - 35fbe7d3d5b9 6y ago
    Process engineers know this as "alarm fatigue": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alarm_fatigue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alarm_fatigue And it's a real thing. It kills people in hospitals because nurses tune out the constant beeps of machines.
    - SoSoRoCoCo 6y ago
      Yep, that's what I thought you/they meant. I'm glad you admitted it, because it is clearly a matter of opinion, and it seems the only people bothered by this have similar political affiliations (if their post history is any indicator).
      - ogre_codes 6y ago
        I think you are commingling "Think it should be fixed" with "Think it should be trashed entirely". I like the idea of warning labels. I don't like that they are currently not very good at communicating what is actually dangerous. That doesn't mean I want to get rid of them, it means I want them improved.
      - 35fbe7d3d5b9 6y ago
        Mate, going by politics alone I'd wager "those people" would write my opinions off – I'd get called a filthy statist at best, and if they only knew what I really believed... ;) But I think you've got this wrong. I absolutely want to know what my exposure is to carcinogens, but in the absence of context it isn't helpful. Very few people are equipped to understand and evaluate the real risks they face – and I count myself in this bucket. That's why regulations and governments are a good thing. That's why I want meaningful warning labels that indicate what risks I face over time, not just "there's a carcinogen here".
    - btach 6y ago
      I can verify. In the ED I work at, we recently "upgraded" our monitors for vitals in every room. The new system has insanely ill-thought-out defaults that cannot be changed - the settings revert with every new patient. A patient moving a little and thus creating artifact in his/her cardiac rhythm frequently triggers a "v-tach" alarm. It sometimes signals the v-tach alarm even if the patient is in normal sinus rhythm with a slightly widened QRS. If a patient removes the pulse ox for just enough time for the machine to alarm, but then puts it back on, the machine will continue WAILING until somebody can shut it off. Unfortunately, if that patient happens to be a COVID-suspected or positive patient, we do not just walk in the room and fix the issue. The respiratory rate measurement takes its measurement from the cardiac rhythm signal. It works sometimes, but I never have found it to be reliable or accurate. However, the machines default to sounding the exact same loud alarm if it thinks somebody is apneic (nevermind an SPO2 of 100% with a good waveform). Since there are so many rooms being monitored at the staff station all at once, the exact same alarm goes off almost every minute for one thing or another. Ok, here is the point of my agreement with parent - the usual alarm tone went off on a patient with an all-too-familiar "V-Tach" message. I hit the button to silence the stupid thing and found a button to "view event". I hit that button (feeling very annoyed again) just for the sake of never having seen that function yet (like I said, the system is new). What do you know... the patient was in a run of v-tach for several seconds. Pretty useful diagnostic information (and if they never converted, pretty damn important to know to keep them alive).

ogre_codes 6y ago

The current state of making everything share the same warning directly benefits the companies who sell the most dangerous chemicals. This is literally the exact opposite outcome of what the measure is supposed to have.

SoSoRoCoCo 6y ago
Not following. Are you're saying this is "Gish Gallop" tactic [1]: flood your opponent with so much BS they can't possibly respond? If so, I see what you are saying: the same level warning for thalidomide vs. something less deadly is a problem. If everything is bad, the bad guys sneak by? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
- 35fbe7d3d5b9 6y ago
  Process engineers know this as "alarm fatigue": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alarm_fatigue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alarm_fatigue And it's a real thing. It kills people in hospitals because nurses tune out the constant beeps of machines.
  - SoSoRoCoCo 6y ago
    Yep, that's what I thought you/they meant. I'm glad you admitted it, because it is clearly a matter of opinion, and it seems the only people bothered by this have similar political affiliations (if their post history is any indicator).
    - ogre_codes 6y ago
      I think you are commingling "Think it should be fixed" with "Think it should be trashed entirely". I like the idea of warning labels. I don't like that they are currently not very good at communicating what is actually dangerous. That doesn't mean I want to get rid of them, it means I want them improved.
    - 35fbe7d3d5b9 6y ago
      Mate, going by politics alone I'd wager "those people" would write my opinions off – I'd get called a filthy statist at best, and if they only knew what I really believed... ;) But I think you've got this wrong. I absolutely want to know what my exposure is to carcinogens, but in the absence of context it isn't helpful. Very few people are equipped to understand and evaluate the real risks they face – and I count myself in this bucket. That's why regulations and governments are a good thing. That's why I want meaningful warning labels that indicate what risks I face over time, not just "there's a carcinogen here".
  - btach 6y ago
    I can verify. In the ED I work at, we recently "upgraded" our monitors for vitals in every room. The new system has insanely ill-thought-out defaults that cannot be changed - the settings revert with every new patient. A patient moving a little and thus creating artifact in his/her cardiac rhythm frequently triggers a "v-tach" alarm. It sometimes signals the v-tach alarm even if the patient is in normal sinus rhythm with a slightly widened QRS. If a patient removes the pulse ox for just enough time for the machine to alarm, but then puts it back on, the machine will continue WAILING until somebody can shut it off. Unfortunately, if that patient happens to be a COVID-suspected or positive patient, we do not just walk in the room and fix the issue. The respiratory rate measurement takes its measurement from the cardiac rhythm signal. It works sometimes, but I never have found it to be reliable or accurate. However, the machines default to sounding the exact same loud alarm if it thinks somebody is apneic (nevermind an SPO2 of 100% with a good waveform). Since there are so many rooms being monitored at the staff station all at once, the exact same alarm goes off almost every minute for one thing or another. Ok, here is the point of my agreement with parent - the usual alarm tone went off on a patient with an all-too-familiar "V-Tach" message. I hit the button to silence the stupid thing and found a button to "view event". I hit that button (feeling very annoyed again) just for the sake of never having seen that function yet (like I said, the system is new). What do you know... the patient was in a run of v-tach for several seconds. Pretty useful diagnostic information (and if they never converted, pretty damn important to know to keep them alive).