Random Thought of the Day

Quote: kenarman

'Legitimate' is a subjective term so there is no universal agreement on what might be legitimate or not.

There is a right way and a wrong way to do science.

Quote: GenoDRPh

There is a right way and a wrong way to do science.

I am surprised you know about the right way as you seem to be so well versed in the wrong way.

Quote: kenarman

I am surprised you know about the right way as you seem to be so well versed in the wrong way.

How?

Quote: kenarman

I am surprised you know about the right way as you seem to be so well versed in the wrong way.

How?

----------------

"Legitimate scientific research is never wasteful."

----------------


Very good answers to my follow-up posts.

So do you want to modify the above statement or are you sticking with the word "legitimate"?



You later wrote:

---------------------

"There is a right way and a wrong way to do science."

---------------------



Did you change your argument from "Legitimate" to "Ethical"?



If so, how does a medical scientist determine what is ethical or not?

Also if so, is mRNA administration (vax) indirectly affecting the chromosomes of a person ethical or not?

So the first "known" study occurred right before the C19 outbreak.

Recall, it took 40 years before USA journalists discovered the horrendous Tuskegee experiment and another 20 years for Clinton to offer a formal apology.


Did medical scientists incorporate these different gene expressions in the C19 vax patents?

---------------

African Ancestry Affects Gene Expression

Dec 11, 2019
.
.
.
First study to compare gene production among African Americans
.
.
.
There were at least 28 genes whose expression (mRNA level) varied with the proportion of African ancestry. These genes were linked to 220 diseases or clinical outcomes such as coronary heart disease and triglyceride levels. Some of the identified genes that vary with African ancestry are related to drug metabolism (CYP2C19), renal disease (APOL1) and are an important target for cancer therapy (VGEF.).
.
.
.
https://news.feinberg.northwestern.edu/2019/12/11/african-ancestry-affects-gene-expression/

--------------------

Quote: DoubleGold

----------------

"Legitimate scientific research is never wasteful."

----------------


Very good answers to my follow-up posts.

So do you want to modify the above statement or are you sticking with the word "legitimate"?



You later wrote:

---------------------

"There is a right way and a wrong way to do science."

---------------------



Did you change your argument from "Legitimate" to "Ethical"?



If so, how does a medical scientist determine what is ethical or not?

Also if so, is mRNA administration (vax) indirectly affecting the chromosomes of a person ethical or not?

Sticking with the word "legitimate". Here's why, and answering most of your questions all at once: Legitimate scientific experiments or research comply with legal requirements, comply with ethical/moral standards as well as being properly designed and conducted to enable high confidence in the scientific validity of the results or observation. So there is more to it than ethics. Legitimacy complies with multiple requirements.

A medical scientist determines what is ethical or not, or what is legal or not, or whether the study complies to the rigors of the scientific method or not by proper training beforehand, and consultation with experts., proper study design and constant monitoring while the experiment is ongoing. I mean, we learn the scientific method in 7th grade, and continuously use it long afterwards, for a reason.

{q}Also if so, is mRNA administration (vax) indirectly affecting the chromosomes of a person ethical or not?

Harvard's Gay resigned

Quote:

[in her statement] “It has been distressing to have doubt cast on my commitments to confronting hate and to upholding scholarly rigor—two bedrock values that are fundamental to who I am—and frightening to be subjected to personal attacks and threats fueled by racial animus”

Is it possible that she does not know that her Harvard story is about a type of racism alright, but of the completely opposite nature?

What is this world coming to? We just forced another Gay out.

Technically she was defending free speech of the most offensive kind.

But Harvard has this policy.

Quote:

Discriminatory harassment may be considered to violate Harvard University Policy when it is so severe or pervasive and objectively offensive that it creates a work, educational, or living environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive and denies the individual an equal opportunity .

Is carrying a sign with "so and so group should die" tolerated or not? I know getting in someone's face with same message would be an easier call. Or carrying a sign, "we will kill all ____ group" is probably an outright threat. I know it would be if directed at a specific person.

She could have just told Stefanik they will burn all offensive books at Harvard.