shitrichcollegekidssay
It doesn’t matter how the poor got poor, I refuse to treat them any differently than the rich. If I can make it, they can make it; it’s as simple as that! [long libertarian bullshit no one cares about …] This is why I believe we should tax everyone the same amount, if we have to tax them at all.
First Year Economics Major (via shitrichcollegekidssay)
stardustkr7
goodstuffhappenedtoday:

Sixth-Grader’s Science Fair Finding Shocks Ecologists

When 12-year-old Lauren Arrington heard about her sixth-grade science project, she knew she wanted to study lionfish. Growing up in Jupiter, Fla., she saw them in the ocean while snorkeling and fishing with her dad.
Her project showed that the lionfish can survive in nearly fresh water. The results blew away professional ecologists. The invasive species has no predators on the Florida coast, so if they were to migrate upstream in rivers, they could pose a threat to the ecosystem.
"Scientists were doing plenty of tests on them, but they just always assumed they were in the ocean," Lauren, now 13, tells NPR’s Kelly McEvers. "So I was like, ‘Well, hey guys, what about the river?’ "In the beginning, she wanted to conduct her test by placing the lionfish in cages at different points in the river, but she had to simplify the project.
"It was just a small, sixth-grade project, and I really didn’t have all the tools necessary," she says. Her dad, who has a Ph.D. in fish ecology, suggested that she put the fish in tanks instead.
Lauren then put six different lionfish in six different tanks where she could watch her subjects closely. Lauren was given a strict set of rules by the science fair organizers. The most important one: Her fish could not die.
Lionfish had been found to live in water with salt levels of 20 parts per thousand. But no one knew that they could live in water salinity below that.
One of the six lionfish was her control fish, and the rest were the experimental fish. Every night for eight days, she would lower the salinity 5 parts per thousand in the experimental tanks. On the eighth day of her experiment, she found her experimental fish were living at 6 parts per thousand. She was amazed.
Her research did not stop there. Craig Layman, an ecology professor at North Carolina State University, confirmed Lauren’s results. “He credited a sixth-grader for coming up with his idea,” Lauren says ecstatically. Layman’s findings were published this year in the science journal Environmental Biology of Fishes. Lauren is mentioned in the acknowledgments.
Lauren’s father says he talks about science with her a lot. “We’re a science bunch of dorks in our family,” he tells McEvers.

goodstuffhappenedtoday:

Sixth-Grader’s Science Fair Finding Shocks Ecologists

When 12-year-old Lauren Arrington heard about her sixth-grade science project, she knew she wanted to study lionfish. Growing up in Jupiter, Fla., she saw them in the ocean while snorkeling and fishing with her dad.

Her project showed that the lionfish can survive in nearly fresh water. The results blew away professional ecologists. The invasive species has no predators on the Florida coast, so if they were to migrate upstream in rivers, they could pose a threat to the ecosystem.

"Scientists were doing plenty of tests on them, but they just always assumed they were in the ocean," Lauren, now 13, tells NPR’s Kelly McEvers. "So I was like, ‘Well, hey guys, what about the river?’ "

In the beginning, she wanted to conduct her test by placing the lionfish in cages at different points in the river, but she had to simplify the project.

"It was just a small, sixth-grade project, and I really didn’t have all the tools necessary," she says. Her dad, who has a Ph.D. in fish ecology, suggested that she put the fish in tanks instead.

Lauren then put six different lionfish in six different tanks where she could watch her subjects closely. Lauren was given a strict set of rules by the science fair organizers. The most important one: Her fish could not die.

Lionfish had been found to live in water with salt levels of 20 parts per thousand. But no one knew that they could live in water salinity below that.

One of the six lionfish was her control fish, and the rest were the experimental fish. Every night for eight days, she would lower the salinity 5 parts per thousand in the experimental tanks. On the eighth day of her experiment, she found her experimental fish were living at 6 parts per thousand. She was amazed.

Her research did not stop there. Craig Layman, an ecology professor at North Carolina State University, confirmed Lauren’s results. “He credited a sixth-grader for coming up with his idea,” Lauren says ecstatically. Layman’s findings were published this year in the science journal Environmental Biology of Fishes. Lauren is mentioned in the acknowledgments.

Lauren’s father says he talks about science with her a lot. “We’re a science bunch of dorks in our family,” he tells McEvers.

stimmyabby

stimmyabby:

IDK, there’s this thing I get, maybe other people feel this way too 

like maybe if I talk about good things too much, I will lose the right to talk about bad things .

like “yesterday you were happy about deviled eggs and today you are having a panic attack? No! Be QUIET, go to JAIL!”

I have the opposite — I feel like I need to talk about good things more than I talk about bad things. So that I don’t depress my readers or something.

I totally understand the thing you get, though! People are very quick to say you have no right to talk about whatever you’re talking about if you say something they don’t want to hear.

ladykaymd

Guys, seriously

ladykaymd:

Time for some real talk. 

image

image

image

image

image

I’ve had to turn anon messaging off for a while.

I would like to sincerely apologize to the 99% of you who use it to send me nothing but sweet things, genuine questions, or honest concerns. I left anon messages on for so long because I know there are a TON of you who really like to ask your questions anonymously especially about thing like scores or personal problems. 

And I love giving you guys this chance.

BUT

Over the last couple of days a very tiny subset of the people who follow this blog have taken it upon themselves to send me a couple of really nasty messages. Here’s today’s set.

I’ve gotten 1-2 nasty messages every month since I started this blog. It’s just how the internet works. People have too much time and decide that they’ll send hate into the universe instead of just focusing on making themselves better people. I usually just delete them. 

But they’ve picked up. 

Most of them center around one thing: YES, I am an adult. I date. I have decided NOT to talk about it on this blog because of things like this. 

Because it’s none of your business. It’s my personal life and I’m keeping it personal. 

Unfortunately, this is a reality of being a visible woman on the internet. And that—that is 100% bullshit that we still live in a world like this.

Because the world shouldn’t still be like this. 

For those of you who don’t understand how this works: people can be successful, career driven women and still happy in their lives. In fact, real, adult, mature partners are not threatened by women who are smart and successful. 

Clearly, those of you who decided to send messages like this are not mature adults. And I feel sorry for you. 

Let’s face it, if you’re one of the people who’s taken it upon yourself to send me one of these messages I have one thing to say to you: 

SHAME ON YOU. 

SHAME ON YOU. 

I’m honestly sorry that you have nothing better to do with your time than send hateful messages out into the universe. 

I’ve always tried to be very open on this blog about what my real life is like, to support people who needed it, and to encourage people who wanted a chance to go to medical school. 

I believe I’ve done just that with almost everything I’ve ever posted here (I’m sure there have been errors and I apologize for those). 

But if you have absolutely nothingbetter to do with your time than send out this kind of hate, well get a hobby. 

For the record: I’m very happy with where I am with my life. I will continue to not share my personal dating information here because who I chose to date, or see, or love is my business and theirs. 

It’s something I really would have liked to get to share with you all because I know there are a lot of people who have concerns about how relationships and dating work in medical school. 

Again, I’m very very very sorry I’ve had to do this to the well over 99% of you who have been using anon messaging for nothing but nice messages and honest questions. I will continue to blog here—hopefully for years and years to come and get the chance to connect with many of you. Messaging through your blog or through fan mail will ALWAYS remain open and if you want a question answered anonymously just write “answer privately” somewhere in the message and I won’t post it on the main blog. 

I fully intend to turn anon messaging back on in the future—but for me personally, I need a couple days away from this. I’m sorry. 

That right there would be why I’ve never allowed anon messaging on my blog! Never have, never will.

You’re braver and more committed to your readership than I am for ever having it, and all the more so for your willingness to turn it back on.

You have nothing to apologize for.

scienceofeds

scienceofeds:

(cut a lot of convo)

I think a big reason is that it is what is at their disposal. Maybe it might just work. They can prescribe anti-depressants. They are pretty safe drugs, compared to a helluva lot of other stuff that really probably shouldn’t be prescribed. And so I think when they see a patient that is in need, even though the drugs are sub-par, they might not be for that person, and what else can the psychiatrist really do? Particularly, I’d say, in the US. (My psychiatrist totally does therapy/hates just playing a role of monitoring meds, but that’s a dying breed, unfortunately.)

I don’t think it has much to do with misunderstanding the literature. Is there evidence of this? You are so damn prejudiced against psychiatrists, it is like aarghegd.

I do think pharma reps play a role, for sure, and maybe that’s where some of the misunderstanding is coming from, but we don’t have the same culture of that in Canada, at least as far as I know/from what I understand. 

I really, really, really hate that SSRIs are called antidepressants. It is such a misnomer. 

I wouldn’t say I’m prejudiced against psychiatrists so much as the system under which American psychiatrists operate (namely, their education). How many [American] medical schools teach statistics/research methods beyond what you would find in a bachelor’s or maybe master’s program? From what I’ve seen, very few (unless students are actively seeking that out on their own through electives). And I think that’s a major issue.

Considering PhDs have enough trouble understanding pretty simple concepts like statistical significance, I’d be surprised if MD’s were any better given they have even less training.

Fair enough. I do think that most people have difficult with statistical concepts. PhDs too. 

Loads of American psychiatrists still think depression is a medical problems stemming from a chemical imbalance.

I’m not in the US, so I don’t know, but do you have evidence for this? I actually wonder what %age of psychiatrists think that about depression and how it varies by age/when they were trained/where they were trained, etc. 

And that might be heavily due to the pharmaceutical companies stressing that idea.

Probably. 

Further, why aren’t they being taught about psychological treatments? Why aren’t they being taught, “hey psychological treatments are better long-term and pose less risk of adverse effects”? Or are they and they are just neglecting it? Either way, it’s a problem either within their education or within them, depending on the source.

Power. Capitalism. Inertia. Influence of pharmaceutical industry. I generally always tend to put way more blame on institutions than on individuals. 

(Disclaimer: I do not deny the distinct possibility that the individuals they are seeing simply cannot afford psychological treatment, though typically if you have insurance that would cover psychatric drugs then they often cover ~8-16 sessions of therapy, sometimes more.)

In Ontario, psychiatrists are covered by government insurance. I’ve paid nothing out of pocket. Psychologists are not. (I don’t agree with this, and don’t think it should be the case, but that’s how it is right now.) 

I don’t think the long-term data would support the idea that most any psychotropic drug is “safe” long-term. Even SSRIs. Maybe safer than others, but I would be hesitant to label it safe.

Well, we don’t have sufficiently long-term data, do we? But certainly safer than benzos and antipsychotics.

stimmyabby asked:

Blue :-)

Three fears.

I can’t tell from the question whether it means serious fears, like, “I’m really afraid of this happening to me” or more silly fears, like “I have an irrational fear of spiders.”

I’m going to answer it as if it were the latter, because the former is depressing.

1. Bugs walking on me or flying close to me

2. Cicada husks. (For some reason, I find those incredibly creepy)

3. Finding sleeping cicadas in the ground

…. LOL. All of those turned out to be some variation on “bugs”.