Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (780037)	4/15/2014 5:56:29 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574452

I believe it. It points to discrepancies in the quality of parenting and family life. Institutionalization of 3 and 4 year olds is a poor substitute. Since we have screwed the family model for several generations now, it is no surprise that poor single moms are not up to the task. We have devalued the idea of marriage and family so much that poor single moms don't even see the need to work on it. I recommend we put some resources into revitalizing the concept. Personally, I think some parent education would do a whole lot more good.

To: koan who wrote (780037)	4/15/2014 6:37:30 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	3 Recommendations Recommended By FJB i-node TideGlider Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1574452

Koan, if you take a new born and put it in a family where they speak 5 different languages, we all know by the time the kid is 6 or 7 they will be speaking all 5 languages fluently. Another bit of "wisdom" from Koan. No 7-year-old kid can speak 5 languages fluently. The best you can hope for is two languages, and even after that, you have to keep immersing the kid in both languages in order to maintain fluency. Tenchusatsu

To: koan who wrote (780037)	4/16/2014 1:58:43 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574452

It has been my experience conservatives don't much believe in science? It's been my experience that liberals "don't much believe" in science when it contradicts what they believe in. (To be fair it's not just liberals.) For example the liberal celebrities who don't believe in vaccinations, or in your case not believing the research about the relative lack of long run benefits from pre-K education. Of course the best scientific information can easily be wrong. I wouldn't call disagreeing with one point from the research the same thing as "not believing in science", but you seem pretty quick to bring that charge against other who may disagree with some scientific finding.

To: koan who wrote (780037)	4/16/2014 6:21:21 PM
From: jlallen	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Respond to of 1574452

It has been my experience conservatives don't much believe in science? If that's your experience (which I doubt because there is no bigger moron on SI than you) you need to get out more.

To: koan who wrote (780037)	4/16/2014 9:29:11 PM
From: Brumar89	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Respond to of 1574452

Don't believe in science? Does koan believe the science that shows marijuana use affects the brain adversely? Casual Marijuana Use Harmful to Brain Development: Harvard From what I can see, no other scientific question brings out the banshees so much as a study that finds that use of marijuana/cannabis is detrimental. So too has been the reaction to Harvard Medical School research, published in the Journal of Neuroscience, that details permanent damage to the brain as a result of even casual use. The study is hardly unique in its findings, such as this one, for example. The study used 3-D imaging of subjects' brains to determine physical alterations and found a significant statistical correlation. The test consisted of 40 college students divided into two groups of those who have used cannabis in varying degrees and who have not used it at all. "The scientists found that the more cannabis the 40 subjects had used, the greater the abnormalities." The author of the study was Dr Hans Breiter, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Northwestern University Feinburg School of Medicine: This study raises a strong challenge to the idea that casual marijuana use isn't associated with bad consequences. Some people only used marijuana to get high once or twice a week. People think a little recreational use shouldn't cause a problem…. Our data directly says this is not the case. Areas within the brain that were examined involved emotion, motivation and addiction. Anne Blood, assistant professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School: These are core, fundamental structures of the brain. They form the basis for how you assess positive and negative features about things in the environment and make decisions about them. Jodi Gilman of the Massachusetts General Center for Addiction Medicine: It may be that we're seeing a type of drug learning in the brain. We think when people are in the process of becoming addicted, their brains form these new connections. One detractor criticizes the size of the sample, "not big enough to draw conclusions". Standing alone, that is a true if not necessarily accurate statement. A solid conclusion can be drawn if the differences between the two groups are significant, as this study alleges. The appropriately named Professor Nutt goes on to say, "Whatever cannabis does to the brain its not in the same league as alcohol which is a proven neurotoxin." [sic] Yet the study is not about alcohol, is it? However often this tired distraction is dragged out, the fact that alcohol can be a toxic agent does not alter the fact that cannabis is pernicious. Acute alcohol usage over time does destroy brain cells; use of marijuana in the young alters the brain structure in a malign way. On the political side of the argument, that marijuana usage is a matter of free will and liberty, I have to argue – conservative that I am – that society has an obligation to protect itself from the more nihilistic aspects of human nature. Liberty does not equate with license. I have met more than a few purported Libertarians who are particularly focused on the issue of pot legalisation, but fade away on any other subject. I question the quality of the woolen coverings of their canine appetite. And as I began this piece, sometimes the quality of the argument is measured by the numbers of its stentorian enemies. Let us not forget that a typical side effect of marijuana usage is pronounced paranoia. *** As if by coincidence, today marks the anniversary (1943) of the discovery that LSDis an hallucinogenic drug. Much like cocaine, it was initially proclaimed to be benign until overwhelming evidence finally prevailed upon the pop culture that it was anything but.** http://plbirnamwood.blogspot.com/2014/04/casual-marijuana-use-harmful-to-brain.html