This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Afraid I don't remember the specifics (last looked at the evidence years ago, in the spirit of "honest reassessment of all widely-mocked right wing conspiracy theories"), but iirc there were Sailer Confounders on the IQ loss, and I wasn't convinced.
But yeah, I think putting literally any medication in the water supply is foolish. We try not to do it with livestock these days because you have no idea what dosage is actually being given. The same people who don't brush their teeth are likely to drink nothing but cola rather than tap water. And if you up the concentration to dose those people, you will absolutely give Water-Chugging Georg skeletal fluorisis.
When I was little kids got bottles of fluoride tablets from the county health department, which seems like a better option.
You have to count the hits and the misses. Lets just concede that fluoride in drinking water was or is now a mistake. There is still chlorine/chloramine. Also gov't mandates and/or influence in the food supply: iodine, vit D, niacin, folate, iron, thiamine, riboflavin etc.
Interestingly, the gov't got I think niacin temporarily wrong, assuming the cause of pellagra was a corn heavy diet, delaying the addition of niacin. Which is fine I guess as extreme caution with the food supply is probably a good idea.
More options
Context Copy link
That sounds more dangerous to me, but it really depends on the amount in the bottles. AFAIK, the only known death from fluoride poisoning was a 3-year-old chugging a bottle of fluoride solution, but it was a bigger one at a dentist's office.
The main thing is that swallowing fluoride is fairly useless, and where the risks are. You want it to stay in your mouth.
Yeah in retrospect it actually doesn't seem great vs "literally just brush your teeth", but at least it was better for getting a measured dose.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
What's a "sailer confounder"?
(and @jeroboam) I was using it in the general sense of "uncorrected for demographics because everyone knows you're only supposed to use proxies". It's not specifically blacks because the studies come from all over the world. Rural/urban demographics in every country are a unique complicated mess to untangle and don't respond well to a simple "correcting for income." The kitchen-sink "self-sufficiency index" in that one paper is a good example.
The exciting parts of these studies were the natural experiments with existing ppm differences with (ideally) no correlation to demographics. Unless Sweden banished all retards to the Speckle-Tooth Mountains sometime in the 1700s.
More options
Context Copy link
Presumably he is referring to Steve Sailer, who has written about the accuracy of stereotypes and is known for his Sailer's Law of Mass Shootings, and Sailer's Law of Female Journalists.
The implication, presumably, is that there are somehow more black people in the fluoridated group, and, furthermore that this is not being measured since the researchers falsely believe that all races have the same IQ. I don't know what the evidence for this claim would be though.
Surely the researchers would correct for income which would probably be good enough for fixing these problems.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link