4 ms·

This goes for any social construct, and is just about meaningless to say. The only reason you have a family is because you believe you have a family. The only

by kqr 4y ago

This goes for any social construct, and is just about meaningless to say. The only reason you have a family is because you believe you have a family. The only reason you have a manager is because you believe you have a manager. The only reason you're in a soccer team is because you believe you're in a soccer team. The only reason you have a grocery store is because you believe you have a grocery store. And so on.

SemanticStrengh 4y ago
wtf you are totally 100% missing my point, the current recession is a self-fulfilling prophety that is auto-amplified in mediatic echo chambers and by sell feedback mechanism on stock values.
- idealmedtech 4y ago
  I think it's clear from the pandemic that stock values do not correlate with the economy.
  - SemanticStrengh 4y ago
    off-topic: Since you made idealmedtech, you should be interested in publicising the effect of ALCAR on glycemia/insulin. Since it nudge the mitochondria to increase the ratio of lipids/fatty acid consumption and reduce the consumption of glucose, it is very positive for the protection of both kinds of diabetes, in a side effect free manner. The number of lives/quality of life that could be saved if this information was more widespread is astonishing, especially since your website help to measure the impact.
    - idealmedtech 4y ago
      We're not really in the business of drugs/supplements, so unfortunately I can't comment on the efficacy of ALCAR and other drugs on the treatment of diabetes. If you have any papers on the topic, feel free to email me (linked on my profile) and I would be happy to discuss when there's time! Also, as much as I wish we had any sort of platform through idealmedtech.com, our traffic is quite low, mostly from investors and people pitching SaaS products
      - SemanticStrengh 4y ago
        well take a look at this for example https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19620516/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19620516/
        idealmedtech 4y ago
        That's fascinating! Insulin sensitivity is an incredibly complex mechanism, and is always in flux. Hyperinsulemic clamps are one way to measure the boundaries of insulin sensitivity, but doesn't really help you understand the day to day individual dynamics very well. Like I said, drugs are _not_ our area of expertise, so I can't comment much more than that. State of the art treatment these days (at least in artificial pancreas land, where I spend all of my time) is more focused on sensitivity-agnostic treatment; figuring out the insulin sensitivity dynamically rather than trying to control the sensitivity itself (it's much more multifaceted than a few hormones, we're talking hundreds of possible ways it can change). Also, and I'm sure the authors would acknowledge this, n=32 is enough to demonstrate a possible effect, but not nearly enough to show this effect in the population at large. You usually need n~5000 or more for such effects to be shown generally, though the actual number depends a lot on the drug and what you're trying to treat. We're conducting our first human study at a world renowned US diabetes center soon, I'll see what our PI thinks of this work. Thanks for sharing.
  - vkou 4y ago
    They do correlate with the economy, they just don't correlate solely with the economy.
- dageshi 4y ago
  What goes up must come down (at least a little bit). Stocks ran up A LOT during covid, it couldn't continue forever and it didn't. People who felt rich because they made a ton of paper profits on the stock market now feel poorer because they have paper losses in the stock market. That and inflation of course is really taking money out of peoples pockets. Real world things that effect the way people act have occurred.
  - mathgladiator 4y ago
    Yep, I feel it. I was about to impulse buy a deck, and then after looking at the market decided not to. I'm not alone in tightening spend.
    - SemanticStrengh 4y ago
      this is those kinds of mob behaviours that induce crisises, the self-fulfilling cause of a crash of consumption that will then actually make you need to tighten spending. The first initiators are the most responsible.
      - dageshi 4y ago
        It's cause and effect. You can't convince people not to worry about things they're worried about.
        SemanticStrengh 4y ago
        Well if you actually convince them you solve the crisis. Since this mindset is not taught in public education it is left as an individual responsibility. I would promote autocratic censorship/tamming down of hysteric/fear mongering mediatic reporting on this specific topic but our government are not ready for that.
- kqr 4y ago
  It might be the case that I just haven't communicated my point clearly enough. To a surprising extent, "self-fulfilling prophety that is auto-amplified in mediatic echo chambers and by feedback mechanism on X, Y and Z" describes a large portion of the human social condition.
mancerayder 4y ago
While stated like fact, you're espousing a relatively radical philosophical perspective about reality. It might drive radical social change (or desire to), but most people don't think like this.
- kqr 4y ago
  I fail to see how it's anything other than a logical consequence -- much less radical. I know from first-hand experience that if a team don't believe they have a particular person as their manager, that person is, in fact, not their manager. It's impossible for that person to be their manager. I also know from first-hand experience that once a group of people no longer believe themselves to be a soccer team, they stop being a soccer team. (Well, actually, this is not about a soccer team but the real example is too fresh and personal to be detailed about so let's pretend it's about a soccer team.) Similarly, I know from second hand experience that once people don't believe a person is part of a family, that person is, in effect, not part of that family anymore. I have third hand experience of people not believing a grocery store to be such, and indeed it ceased to be such very quickly and tragically to its former owner. And so on. I can't think of any social construct that does not require buy-in from the affected parties.
  - quesera 4y ago
    This is essentially nonsensical though. You can internally reject social consensus or even objective measurement, but you cannot choose the frame in which you are evaluated by others. > I can't think of any social construct that does not require buy-in from the affected parties. "Prisoner", "slave", and "taxpayer" spring to mind (but I repeat myself). These are artifacts of social consensus, enforced by people with stronger-than-usual opinions about the correctness of their evaluations. Viktor Frankl, Nat Turner, and Warren Buffett, as exceptions, do not disprove the larger point.
    - kqr 4y ago
      I think I see where the misunderstanding comes from! I did not mean to say that you, as an individual, can disappear the grocery store by ceasing to believe in it, any less than you can wish away a recession by choosing not to believe in it. These social constructions (recession, manager, grocery store) are the product of the belief of a majority of the relevant people. One person believing this way or that way changes nothing. Only when most people stop believing do we see change. Slavery is a great example of a type of social relationship that ends when people stop believing in it. This goes for the recession just as well as the other examples I gave.

by kqr 4y ago

SemanticStrengh 4y ago

wtf you are totally 100% missing my point, the current recession is a self-fulfilling prophety that is auto-amplified in mediatic echo chambers and by sell feedback mechanism on stock values.

idealmedtech 4y ago
I think it's clear from the pandemic that stock values do not correlate with the economy.
- SemanticStrengh 4y ago
  off-topic: Since you made idealmedtech, you should be interested in publicising the effect of ALCAR on glycemia/insulin. Since it nudge the mitochondria to increase the ratio of lipids/fatty acid consumption and reduce the consumption of glucose, it is very positive for the protection of both kinds of diabetes, in a side effect free manner. The number of lives/quality of life that could be saved if this information was more widespread is astonishing, especially since your website help to measure the impact.
  - idealmedtech 4y ago
    We're not really in the business of drugs/supplements, so unfortunately I can't comment on the efficacy of ALCAR and other drugs on the treatment of diabetes. If you have any papers on the topic, feel free to email me (linked on my profile) and I would be happy to discuss when there's time! Also, as much as I wish we had any sort of platform through idealmedtech.com, our traffic is quite low, mostly from investors and people pitching SaaS products
    - SemanticStrengh 4y ago
      well take a look at this for example https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19620516/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19620516/
      - idealmedtech 4y ago
        That's fascinating! Insulin sensitivity is an incredibly complex mechanism, and is always in flux. Hyperinsulemic clamps are one way to measure the boundaries of insulin sensitivity, but doesn't really help you understand the day to day individual dynamics very well. Like I said, drugs are _not_ our area of expertise, so I can't comment much more than that. State of the art treatment these days (at least in artificial pancreas land, where I spend all of my time) is more focused on sensitivity-agnostic treatment; figuring out the insulin sensitivity dynamically rather than trying to control the sensitivity itself (it's much more multifaceted than a few hormones, we're talking hundreds of possible ways it can change). Also, and I'm sure the authors would acknowledge this, n=32 is enough to demonstrate a possible effect, but not nearly enough to show this effect in the population at large. You usually need n~5000 or more for such effects to be shown generally, though the actual number depends a lot on the drug and what you're trying to treat. We're conducting our first human study at a world renowned US diabetes center soon, I'll see what our PI thinks of this work. Thanks for sharing.
- vkou 4y ago
  They do correlate with the economy, they just don't correlate solely with the economy.
dageshi 4y ago
What goes up must come down (at least a little bit). Stocks ran up A LOT during covid, it couldn't continue forever and it didn't. People who felt rich because they made a ton of paper profits on the stock market now feel poorer because they have paper losses in the stock market. That and inflation of course is really taking money out of peoples pockets. Real world things that effect the way people act have occurred.
- mathgladiator 4y ago
  Yep, I feel it. I was about to impulse buy a deck, and then after looking at the market decided not to. I'm not alone in tightening spend.
  - SemanticStrengh 4y ago
    this is those kinds of mob behaviours that induce crisises, the self-fulfilling cause of a crash of consumption that will then actually make you need to tighten spending. The first initiators are the most responsible.
    - dageshi 4y ago
      It's cause and effect. You can't convince people not to worry about things they're worried about.
      - SemanticStrengh 4y ago
        Well if you actually convince them you solve the crisis. Since this mindset is not taught in public education it is left as an individual responsibility. I would promote autocratic censorship/tamming down of hysteric/fear mongering mediatic reporting on this specific topic but our government are not ready for that.
kqr 4y ago
It might be the case that I just haven't communicated my point clearly enough. To a surprising extent, "self-fulfilling prophety that is auto-amplified in mediatic echo chambers and by feedback mechanism on X, Y and Z" describes a large portion of the human social condition.

mancerayder 4y ago

While stated like fact, you're espousing a relatively radical philosophical perspective about reality. It might drive radical social change (or desire to), but most people don't think like this.

kqr 4y ago
I fail to see how it's anything other than a logical consequence -- much less radical. I know from first-hand experience that if a team don't believe they have a particular person as their manager, that person is, in fact, not their manager. It's impossible for that person to be their manager. I also know from first-hand experience that once a group of people no longer believe themselves to be a soccer team, they stop being a soccer team. (Well, actually, this is not about a soccer team but the real example is too fresh and personal to be detailed about so let's pretend it's about a soccer team.) Similarly, I know from second hand experience that once people don't believe a person is part of a family, that person is, in effect, not part of that family anymore. I have third hand experience of people not believing a grocery store to be such, and indeed it ceased to be such very quickly and tragically to its former owner. And so on. I can't think of any social construct that does not require buy-in from the affected parties.
- quesera 4y ago
  This is essentially nonsensical though. You can internally reject social consensus or even objective measurement, but you cannot choose the frame in which you are evaluated by others. > I can't think of any social construct that does not require buy-in from the affected parties. "Prisoner", "slave", and "taxpayer" spring to mind (but I repeat myself). These are artifacts of social consensus, enforced by people with stronger-than-usual opinions about the correctness of their evaluations. Viktor Frankl, Nat Turner, and Warren Buffett, as exceptions, do not disprove the larger point.
  - kqr 4y ago
    I think I see where the misunderstanding comes from! I did not mean to say that you, as an individual, can disappear the grocery store by ceasing to believe in it, any less than you can wish away a recession by choosing not to believe in it. These social constructions (recession, manager, grocery store) are the product of the belief of a majority of the relevant people. One person believing this way or that way changes nothing. Only when most people stop believing do we see change. Slavery is a great example of a type of social relationship that ends when people stop believing in it. This goes for the recession just as well as the other examples I gave.