The MMR vaccine is more effective after 12 months, i.e. there are fewer cases of the vaccine failing to confer immunity when first administered at 12 mos as opposed to earlier.
You can receive a first MMR dose earlier than 12 mos for certain grounds (e.g. international travel, military postings) but it is then recommended that the infant receive a second 'first dose' after 12 months.
German doctors have much lower school debt and relatively lower tort exposure. Salaries in Germany are significantly lower across the board, so German physicians enjoy similar financial positioning relative to other professionals, and high social status.
Any attempt to reduce physician salaries in the US is going to have to also address medical school debt and physician insurance requirements & administrative overhead.
This comment and its parent are both excellent. I've often heard security and freedom described as a tradeoff; the idea of a causal relationship is intriguing.
It seems from survey data that happiness really does increase in one's later years, after a nadir around midlife. So aging can be a joy, and younger people - especially those reading this in their 40s - may find it reassuring.
The stated objections make sense if you consider that they include an unstated risk component: e.g. "This isn't a useful mutation [given that its downside effects predispose carriers to more severe flu and West Nile + risks inherent in the technique itself]", or "the parents weren't informed properly [and will have to live with the guilt/shame that their ignorance may have caused serious harm to their progeny for generations]"
There are even network/ecosystem risks: if governments get the idea that CRISPR's practical potential is trivial, or if potential participants can't trust practitioners, the entire field could suffer setbacks.
Thus comment and the parent are spot-on. The main protection against the adversarial use of genetic databin the US, GINA, is currently facing several challenges, mostly through the backdoor of opt-in employee wellness plans.
Additionally, while the SNP- format generic data provided by 23andMe is of marginal medical use to the average consumer, it is very valuable to insurance companies and others constructing population-level actuarial models, where a very tiny increased probability of developing a condition is enough to justify increased rates.
And finally, as these relative-discovery stories suggest, there really is no such thing as anonymized genetic data above a panel of a few SNPs. This data is part of the inherence class of factors in multifactor authentication, and can even be derived from pooled anonymized data by a motivated party.
I agree that there is an interesting and potentially informative symmetry between the custody gap and the wage gap. They both describe situations that different groups find deeply unfair, but can be ascribed in large part to "different choices". It might be fruitful to take a more holistic view to understand why the "individual choice" explanation is so unsatisfying to many.
When I last looked it up, the US data indicated that
91% of custody cases are decided without recourse to the family court system. Of the 9% that go to family court system, 5% are decided after a custody evaluation, and the remaining 4% go to trial. Only 11% of custody cases go to mediation.
It appears that the majority of custody decisions
are made by the parents themselves, without recourse to the court, or even to an external mediator. If the judiciary is causing a disparity in custody outcomes, it must be indirectly.
Not to beat a dead horse, but I don't think Elena Ferrante has anything to do with #metoo or gender politics. The author/s claims to have been born in the 40s, and started writing in the 90s. As far as I understand, she writes relatively non-political literary fiction set in a particular historical milieu in Naples that is sensitive to the intimate lives of women. She is not allegorical or self-help-y like Coelho. She just writes in a way that speaks to a very broad audience of women.
I didn't downvote you, but those who did probably decided your response was not particularly well-informed. Men might dominate HN, but women are over-represented as consumers of fiction (and nonfiction), in both print and ebook format-in the UK market, for example, they buy over 2/3rds of fiction books. So simply being popular with women is enough to be a literary phenomenon.
She's a legitimate global superstar in fiction writing. Her books are popular enough to move the percentage of total book sales represented by translated fiction in English-speaking markets (she` writes in Italian).
Strangely enough, her approach is often considered a kind of anti-marketing: no book tours, few interviews, strangely downscale cover art - people, mostly women, just really love her writing.
The point above about splitting your attention between work and baby, even if another caregiver is at home, is spot on. This can occur even with the most sympatico caregiver with cat-like reflexes. It's best if you can put your complete trust in the caregiver and remove yourself from the premises.
If you decide to do this, take it seriously and treat homemaking as full-time work. Make regular payments into retirement and disability accounts in the stay-at-home parent's name. If you envision longer-term SAH parenting, make time for them to attend first aid, outdoorsmanship, pedagogy, home repair, etc. classes on occasion. If both parents will be at home, try to find activities that will allow you to have conversations with other adults outside of your family unit (occasional "continuing homemaker's ed" classes like those mentioned previously can help with this). Have a plan to ease back into the workforce gradually as the kids get older or suddenly if you suffer a financial shock.
The core of the issue to puzzle over: How was the buyer of the gift harmed?
The buyer demonstrated intent to purchase an item desired by the list owner, but was deceived into purchasing an article that did not meet that criterion. The buyer expended resources on this purchase that could have gone toward an actually-desired item, delivered at a socially-appropriate time (ie in time for a baby shower).
The real inconvenient truth is that marriage still works best as 'an economic institution designed to build wealth and raise children'. It is the best vehicle we have designed for doing those things; other arrangements have proven sub-optimal. It may also accommodate other needs, but those are secondary. Ironically, those who realize this tend to have happier, more loving marriages.
Agree. I certainly don't think the architecture was the primary cause of the dysfunction at RTH, but rather a visible symptom of Chicago's ill-considered, politicized, and often malevolent housing policy.
The most famous implementation of the social housing "towers in the park" model - the Robert Taylor Homes in Chicago - has been torn down. One of the many problems with the project was (in my opinion) that the tower:park proportions were way off, giving the complex an inhuman scale. I blame the influence of Le Corbusier, who does not seem to have ever met a human aesthetic instinct he did not try to subvert.
The mid-rise courtyard+playground styles I see in central and northern Europe today, on the other hand, are pretty much ideal for family life. Just enough density to support a walkable daily life with lots of serendipitous social encounters, eyes on the street, a view on the kids playing with enough proximity to intervene if something goes wrong, and the opportunity for first-floor private garden space and aesthetic personalization throughout.
The short-term benefit of a lower birthrate is called the "demographic dividend". Think of it like a Golden Age in the Civilization video game series. If you fail to fully capitalize on it, you are storing away trouble.
I don't think this essay is anti-intellectual at all. I think it is an exploration of the longstanding philosophical problem of trying to rationally design a world for irrational beings. The excerpt from Dillow on consequentialism brings to mind an idea from James Scott: that elites control policy discussions by limiting the accepted terms of the argument to legible, rationalizable factors - generally economic and technocratic variables visible from a top-down view. This can place serious limits on our access to the store of human knowledge embedded in emotion and practice. What we consider "irrational" impulses are sometimes the products of generations of evolutionary tuning that would seem to be feats of engineering brilliance if they came with the proper documentation. Meta-rationality includes exploring the bounds and the weaknesses of the tools in our contemporary rationalist arsenal, as well as searching under the couch cushions of irrationality for the occasional bit of value.
I've seen an argument tangential to this advanced as an explanation for why spanking is more accepted in some minority groups: the consequences of not eradicating certain bad behaviours early (disrespecting authority, not following instructions, not working hard) can be particularly dire for certain demographic groups (e.g. black men, immigrants trying to gain a foothold) and parents need to use every tool in their arsenal to mold their child's adult impulses. Relying on time-outs or conditioning children to expect to be allowed to argue with authority is seen as the privilege of those who can be expected to be given the benefit of the doubt later.
I'm not convinced of the efficacy of spanking for this purpose, but I can understand the impulse described here (though I doubt that this impulse motivates most spankings, which seem to be carried out in anger).
Imagine this capability existed in the US before miscegenation, or same-sex intercourse, or cannabis use, or concealed carry, were legal/broadly accepted. It could be used to harass non-criminal supporters of these measures(caught a SSM proponent jaywalking!) and prosecute those engaged in the target criminalized activity, preventing movements to legalize these activities from ever gaining momentum. Social mores would become ossified. Perfect prosecution is not desirable in an imperfect world.
Thinking Fast and Slow and various Malcolm Gladwellania have probably out-influenced anything on that list.
Nudge by Sunstein has probably had a lot of subtle influence. The Taleb books, esp. Black Swan should be on the list - he essentially introduced a term into common usage (as Gladwell did with the 10,000 hours idea). Piketty will probably have a long tail of influence.
A lot of these books describe social and historical phenomena - they may be the most authoritative scholarly text, but don't really influence broader society as much. The exception would be Critical Race Theory, which has outsized influence both inside and outside of academia.
> “We thought that we got away with not a lot of warming in both the ocean and the atmosphere for the amount of CO2 that we emitted,” said Resplandy, who published the work with experts from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and several other institutions in the United States, China, France and Germany. “But we were wrong. The planet warmed more than we thought. It was hidden from us just because we didn’t sample it right. But it was there. It was in the ocean already.”
Your comment makes me think I'm misunderstanding identity management on SSB: don't marginalized folk usually maintain multiple "firewalled" social media identities? Is this not the default state of the Manyverse, with users hacking identity correlation by claiming "I, X, am also Y (proof)"? The worst case scenario here in terms of false claims and doxxing does not seem different than the mainstream social media services - am I mistaken?
I maintain that alcohol-free beer is one of the best post-workout drinks available. As I see it, the proper place of alcohol-free beer is not as a replacement for regular beer, but as a replacement for energy drinks and sodas.
I'm agnostic about the GMV hypothesis, but I will note that is generally taken very seriously in behavioral genetics. Interestingly, the example of the significant female advantage in life expectancy is a relatively recent phenomenon thought to be significantly influenced at present (at the population level) to differences in smoking rates. Pregnancy and childbirth morbidity and mortality used to neutralize the difference or even tip the scales in favor of men in some places in the past.
Nature might not be fooled, but we can be fooled about nature, especially when complex behavior is involved.
I would credit the Prius with this shift in attitude. The Prius wasn't cool, but it was cool enough, and more affordable with a reputation for reasonable resale value.