3 ms·
> You don’t notice the specific genetic damage that actually caused cancer Actually we do notice stuff like that. Which is why it is advised that you don't inh
by zibby8 4y ago
> You don’t notice the specific genetic damage that actually caused cancer
Actually we do notice stuff like that. Which is why it is advised that you don't inhale asbestos particles, wear sunscreen, avoid smoking, etc.
My point still stands: it's understandable that heatwaves aren't considered as serious as hurricanes if the only impact of a heatwave you can point to is that lightbulbs theoretically burn out more quickly during a heat wave.
- desmosxxx 4y agoIf there are enough lightbulbs impacted then why not. We should measure these things and then compare them.
- Retric 4y agoI also mentioned paint and everything that rusts, not just lightbulbs. Let’s add all electronics exposed to the elements, tires, and just about every structure outside. > Actually we do notice stuff like that. Which is why it is advised that you don't inhale asbestos particles, wear sunscreen, avoid smoking, etc. No we don’t. Asbestos and others became such an issue because people didn’t notice the damage they inferred it after the fact based on exposure. It’s easy to correlate unusual symptoms with workplace hazards after the fact, but by then it’s too late: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium_Girls https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium_Girls
- zibby8 4y ago> No we don’t. Asbestos and others became such an issue because people didn’t notice the damage they inferred it after the fact based on exposure. Isn’t every observation just a causal inference after the fact? Look, you’re free to attempt to quantify the impact. Either via direct measurement or a theoretical calculation. However, a baseless opination without any data backing it up isn’t that convincing or interesting.
- Retric 4y ago> Isn’t every observation just a causal inference after the fact? No, instinctive reflex for example is a response to a stimulus without inference. If uranium had a horrific taste the radium girls wouldn’t have licked their uranium paint brushes thus avoiding Radium jaw. Horrific taste doesn’t always mean something is harmful, but it generally causes people to limit ingestion.
- zibby8 4y agoHow is “I licked my paint brush and then my mouth tasted bad” not causal inference?
- Retric 4y agoBad taste is simply a perception, you’re making an inference that the bad taste was caused by something but the perception precedes the inference. Further the perception and response to that taste isn’t a inference that something is physically harmful. You can dislike perfectly healthy food. That said, if uranium had a bad taste people wouldn’t have been as harmed demonstrating the lack of perception of the initial minute harm resulted in greater long term harm.