4 ms·

> In this case, the apartment complex appears to have over 1,800 units, which makes it surprising that only a single person is experiencing such dramatic effect

> In this case, the apartment complex appears to have over 1,800 units, which makes it surprising that only a single person is experiencing such dramatic effects. I don’t disagree with what you are saying overall but you reference this “1 out of 1,800” point at least three times in your comment. It’s important to keep in mind that it’s not necessarily relevant as any number of people in those 1,800 units may or may not be experiencing a variety of issues related to this.

ryanobjc 6y ago
Also the gp has no proof or basis for this statement other than: a) they read a story about 1 persons experience b) the site has 1800 units The gp has to prove a counter factual now: no one else had symptoms. They can’t do that. Do you know the history of all the move outs of that complex? Do you doubt the owner is highly litigious? In addition, some people are just more sensitive. They act like a form of early warning system. Does living there give you an increased 10% of lifetime cancer? It would be hard to prove. And a final note: doesn’t everyone deserve a safe place to live that isn’t poisoning them? The sheer amount of naysaying in these comments is disappointing and reveals a profound lack of understanding of the science and a severely over constrained mindset: if it cannot be proven immediately by an individual without a budget and no resources, then it cannot be true.
- birdyrooster 6y ago
  To be fair its nonsense rhetoric to ask someone to prove the non-existence of something you aren't able to measure (given we can't just barge into people homes and start probing them). But there is a likelihood that other people who have symptoms will now come forward seeing this, so the people of Santa Clara Square still might have more for us. I would be surprised it doctors can't detect if the patient has been poisoned.

ryanobjc 6y ago

Also the gp has no proof or basis for this statement other than: a) they read a story about 1 persons experience b) the site has 1800 units The gp has to prove a counter factual now: no one else had symptoms. They can’t do that. Do you know the history of all the move outs of that complex? Do you doubt the owner is highly litigious? In addition, some people are just more sensitive. They act like a form of early warning system. Does living there give you an increased 10% of lifetime cancer? It would be hard to prove. And a final note: doesn’t everyone deserve a safe place to live that isn’t poisoning them? The sheer amount of naysaying in these comments is disappointing and reveals a profound lack of understanding of the science and a severely over constrained mindset: if it cannot be proven immediately by an individual without a budget and no resources, then it cannot be true.

birdyrooster 6y ago
To be fair its nonsense rhetoric to ask someone to prove the non-existence of something you aren't able to measure (given we can't just barge into people homes and start probing them). But there is a likelihood that other people who have symptoms will now come forward seeing this, so the people of Santa Clara Square still might have more for us. I would be surprised it doctors can't detect if the patient has been poisoned.