The Great SSP Canada Cancel Culture & Wokeism Thread

[dleung]

Originally Posted by lio45

Huh? It's almost like you're trying to be as wrong as you possibly can when forming your trollish opinion of me. Everyone who knows me knows what I think of these "pieces of paper": meaningless. Only useful for opening doors in the academic world. Almost zero correlation with brains and competence.

I've known a few really useless people with PhDs in Physics - though, nearly all of them were from overseas, and clearly the product of lower-quality institutions. (Hey, I just confirmed myself xenophobic yet again! I just can't stop!)

To suggest that I have "PhD envy", wow.

I don't hv a PhD either - you missed the point again

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by esquire

The Esq. thing is common enough in US circles that I suspect it doesn't raise much of an eyebrow. To my knowledge though it isn't attached to any kind of credentials or anything, I am pretty sure it is a totally unofficial, self-styled honorific. I don't know why it caught on so much in the US. I don't recall ever seeing a Canadian lawyer using it although I'm sure someone out there does it.

The US lawyers going by Dr. is something I have only ever heard of in the context of reading about whether a JD makes you a doctor or not, I think some examples were mentioned in an article I read but that was years ago and I can't remember the details. I've never encountered that myself.

And of course yes, for people who have Ph.Ds in law (which wasn't that common until that recently... LL.M.s used to be the standard qualification for academics in that field), I'd say they are entitled to be called Dr. in the appropriate context, the same way as any other Ph.D. holding academic.

lol your username is apt for this discussion.

[le calmar]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I am a lot smarter than that!

I'd be shocked if there is no "Jacques" in your name though (either first name or last name).

[saffronleaf]

Another great example of wokeism. And this time it's harder to dismiss as just one person or them not being popular or what have you. It's institutional wokeism.

https://twitter.com/NEJM/status/1339616345353154560

"Sex designations on birth certificates offer no clinical utility, and they can be harmful for intersex and transgender people. Moving such designations below the line of demarcation would not compromise the birth certificate’s public health function but could avoid harm."

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

Another great example of wokeism. And this time it's harder to dismiss as just one person or them not being popular or what have you. It's institutional wokeism.

I beg to disagree, and I'm surprised the NEJM is taking this stance. I presume the authors must be psychiatrists or clinical psychologists (one is a JD).

Sex is important.

There are a number of sex linked diseases and disorders, and it can be important to know the patient's actual phenotypic sex in order to come up with a proper diagnosis. In addition, a number of fairly common generalized diseases (diabetes, cardiovascular disease etc) affect males and females differently, and can even have a bearing on treatment.

This is woketarianism amok!!!

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I beg to disagree, and I'm surprised the NEJM is taking this stance. I presume the authors must be psychiatrists or clinical psychologists (one is a JD).

Sex is important.

There are a number of sex linked diseases and disorders, and it can be important to know the patient's actual phenotypic sex in order to come up with a proper diagnosis. In addition, a number of fairly common generalized diseases (diabetes, cardiovascular disease etc) affect males and females differently, and can even have a bearing on treatment.

This is woketarianism amok!!!

MDs rely on birth certificates for this info? I had no idea.

[dleung]

Some of the people insisting that extreme-left wokeness is worse than racism itself are the same ones on the Current Events section going "oh don't be so paranoid, Proud Boys number only in the thousands and couldn't even pull off a kidnapping"

[Acajack]

I think it's worth mentioning that this isn't the New England Journal of Medicine taking a position on the matter. It's just a paper or study among many that are published in the journal. Though obviously if they agree to publish it it's because they consider it worthwhile and not a tin-foil-hat thing.

As everyone probably knows this is the most prestigious medical publication in the world, along with The Lancet from the UK.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

lol your username is apt for this discussion.

Ha. My handle is named after the brand of wristwatch I was wearing at the time I signed up for this forum

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think it's worth mentioning that this isn't the New England Journal of Medicine taking a position on the matter.

I realize, but by the same token, an article in the NEJM is subject to rigourous peer review and editorial selection. This implies at least tacit support amongst the editorial staff and reviewers of the journal to at least bring the subject up for discussion. Perhaps they intend to be provocative.

Again, genotype and phenotype are very important in medicine for differential diagnosis, and the management and treatment of many diseases. To ignore biological sex in medicine is pure folly...………

I can't imagine any case presentation at rounds beginning with anything other than "the patient is a 74 year old female presenting with (list of symptoms followed by observable findings)".

[saffronleaf]

edit-nvm

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I realize, but by the same token, an article in the NEJM is subject to rigourous peer review and editorial selection. This implies at least tacit support amongst the editorial staff and reviewers of the journal to at least bring the subject up for discussion. Perhaps they intend to be provocative.

Again, genotype and phenotype are very important in medicine for differential diagnosis, and the management and treatment of many diseases. To ignore biological sex in medicine is pure folly...………

I can't imagine any case presentation at rounds beginning with anything other than "the patient is a 74 year old female presenting with (list of symptoms followed by observable findings)".

But as KW asked, would you get that info from a birth certificate or need it from there?

Though you are correct that you may need it at some point. But perhaps not from the bc.

But this birth certificate change is really just cosmetic, to be nice.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

But as KW asked, would you get that info from a birth certificate or need it from there?

Though you are correct that you may need it at some point. But perhaps not from the bc.

But this birth certificate change is really just cosmetic, to be nice.

Yeah, I'm actually perfectly fine with the birth certificate saying something like: "Gender identity in adulthood: TBD" (but then I'm also perfectly fine with it saying: "Sex chromosomes: XY")

We might have to eventually revise the (old school) ways our societies have traditionally ensured proper identification of individuals. Can you imagine if Later Michael Jackson had been trans? "Hmm, sorry but this Official ID Paperwork of yours says you're a black man..."

[lio45]

Originally Posted by dleung

I don't hv a PhD either - you missed the point again

? I never said anything to suggest I ever believed you had a PhD. (I'm pretty sure you're in a STEM field, though.)

And what was your point exactly? That to feel good, I need people out there (such as: blacks; people who wouldn't be able to get PhDs; etc.) on whom I can look down to?

If so, I didn't miss it at all, rather I laughed at how totally and incredibly off the mark it is.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

But as KW asked, would you get that info from a birth certificate or need it from there?

Though you are correct that you may need it at some point. But perhaps not from the bc.

But this birth certificate change is really just cosmetic, to be nice.

I’ve never thought to carry my birth certificate with me to medical appointments or to hospital, but then again there would be no reason to be in doubt as to whether I’m male (I shouldn’t think).

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

I’ve never thought to carry my birth certificate with me to medical appointments or to hospital, but then again there would be no reason to be in doubt as to whether I’m male (I shouldn’t think).

Does the registration of your birth automatically "populate" other banks of information about you, though, including your medical dossier?

I suppose it could - at least in some places. We are talking about an American study using the Canadian references we are most familiar with right now.

[saffronleaf]

Another example.

https://twitter.com/lhfang/status/1339980921659801600

"CDC guidelines for vaccine priority recommend 87 million non-healthcare “essential workers” — an amorphous group that includes various interest groups, journalists, the financial industry — over the elderly in part b/c the elderly are overwhelmingly white."

[Read the thread]

Link to CDC report: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/me...04-Dooling.pdf

Relevant image:

[someone123]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

"CDC guidelines for vaccine priority recommend 87 million non-healthcare “essential workers” — an amorphous group that includes various interest groups, journalists, the financial industry — over the elderly in part b/c the elderly are overwhelmingly white."

Often these are bad multivariate analyses where they slice and dice the data and find that ethnic groups aren't all identical (why should this be guaranteed?) but don't talk about how much the differences can be determined by other factors like age, health problems, or living arrangements. For covid, risk factors like age and living arrangements (care home) completely swamp many other factors. The media are on an Easter egg hunt for 20% effects here and there tied to race but age can affect covid death risk by 1000x. The social justice angle tends to muddy the waters rather than bringing clarity if we actually care about slowing the spread of the virus and preventing deaths.

Also note that men are at higher risk of dying of covid but this tends to be presented as either a biological inevitability or the result of individual choices (Healthline says "Men are actually the ‘weaker sex’", the quotes suggest men suffer from "invincibility syndrome", and speculate that their increased risk may come from things like sporting events). I doubt the treatment would be the same if the risks were reversed by sex.

[LakeLocker]

Originally Posted by dleung

Some of the people insisting that extreme-left wokeness is worse than racism itself are the same ones on the Current Events section going "oh don't be so paranoid, Proud Boys number only in the thousands and couldn't even pull off a kidnapping"

The reason you're so out to lunch on this one isn't ironic.

Racism doesn't in any shape or form get the top down re-enforcement that wokism gets.

Case in point, the proud boys was started by a guy who wanted a better world for his native american children.



Something tells me if most people seen this picture talk of the proudboys wouldn't exist.





If you think this is the roadmap to hitler you got mental issues.

Regardless wokism is a symptom not the cause.

The left is philosophically bankrupt.

Their ideology doesn't currently have any answers for dealing with biological determinism. It isn't any more complicated than that. The more a handful of elite academic learn about social behavior, the harder they have to twist to stave off the eventual collapse of the left. It's an belief system based on change, in a world where biology determines life outcomes, you can't change society without instituting social engineering projects.

Molson Export is a prime example of this, he knows the score and his answer is for us plebeians to know our place and let the social engineers do their thing.

In contrast tucker carlson quite clearly has a very solid road map for how to deal with the effects of biological determinism. Change nothing full stop!

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by someone123

Often these are bad multivariate analyses where they slice and dice the data and find that ethnic groups aren't all identical (why should this be guaranteed?) but don't talk about how much the differences can be determined by other factors like age, health problems, or living arrangements. For covid, risk factors like age and living arrangements (care home) completely swamp many other factors. The media are on an Easter egg hunt for 20% effects here and there tied to race but age can affect covid death risk by 1000x. The social justice angle tends to muddy the waters rather than bringing clarity if we actually care about slowing the spread of the virus and preventing deaths.

Also note that men are at higher risk of dying of covid but this tends to be presented as either a biological inevitability or the result of individual choices (Healthline says "Men are actually the ‘weaker sex’", the quotes suggest men suffer from "invincibility syndrome", and speculate that their increased risk may come from things like sporting events). I doubt the treatment would be the same if the risks were reversed by sex.

Exactly.

The report says that more lives will be saved by giving vaccines to the elderly first because they are more at-risk when compared to the general populationi than some minority groups (by many, many magnitudes).

I think other countries like the UK are also prioritizing the elderly over this broadly defined group of essential workers.

I don't think it makes sense to push down priority for the elderly just because they are not as racially diverse as the other age groups.