Republicans: A War On Science and how you are letting them win

[Measure_for_Measure]

Back in reality: Walsh’s claim is “absolute nonsense,” said Mark I. Evans, president of the Fetal Medicine Foundation of America and a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York. “This is scientific and political malpractice.”

Abortions can save the lives of pregnant women suffering from many conditions, said Lawrence Platt, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California at Los Angeles and the director of the Center for Fetal Medicine and Women’s Ultrasound. A leading cause is ectopic pregnancy, in which a fetus develops outside of the normal location in the womb and can cause the uterus or tube to rupture, leading women to bleed to death. …

According to the Centers for Disease Control, there were 1,294 maternal deaths related to pregnancy in the U.S. in 2006 and 2007, the most recent data available. The rate of pregnancy- related deaths was 15.1 per 100,000 live births during 2006 and 2007, the center said.

“Get out of our exam rooms,” the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists said in a statement. “Many more women would die each year if they did not have access to abortion to protect their health or to save their lives.” Where do Republican crackpots obtain their delusions? They seem to be motivated primarily by cognitive dissonance. Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

More commentary by health care professionals: Doctors dispute 'inaccurate' abortion claim from Rep. Joe Walsh

Representative Walsh’s office declined 2 attempts to speak with the Business Week reporters. A couple of hours ago, his office penned a press release: “When it comes to having an abortion to save the life of a mother, I will say again that, outside of the very rare circumstances such as ectopic pregnancies, during which both the mother and baby will die if the baby is not aborted, and other rare health issues, the research is pretty clear that with the advances in modern medicine, an invasive and traumatic procedure like an abortion is not necessary to save the life of a mother. In those very rare cases where a mother’s life may be in danger past the point of viability for the baby, today’s doctors work to induce labor or perform a caesarean section in an attempt to save BOTH lives. These cases are extremely rare…” LA Times article: Dr. David Grimes, a clinical professor in obstetrics and gynecology at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine in Chapel Hill who has provided abortions for four decades and formerly led a department that studied abortion safety at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, described some potentially life-threatening circumstances.

In his practice, he said, he’s often cared for women who are newly diagnosed with breast cancer or leukemia whose oncologists refuse to administer treatment until the pregnancy is over. Type 1 diabetes can be severely aggravated by pregnancy, and an abortion may be necessary to save a patient’s eyes or kidney function. And in some severe cases of pre-eclampsia, the liver can begin to die — and the only treatment is ending the pregnancy. Man up and stop digging Congressman. Don’t pile ignorance on top of falsehood. It’s not just ectopic pregnancy. Stop interceding between women and their physicians like Mitt Romney did in 1983 as a heavy-handed representative of the Mormon church. Change your mind like Mitt did in the early 1990s before he changed it back.

[John_Stamos_Left_Ear]

I cannot imagine that this law came about because of Democrats…

Judge rules doctors must lie to patients and say abortion causes suicide

In a blow to judicial prudence and common sense a South Dakota federal appeals court ruled 7 - 4 that it was indeed legal to require doctors to tell abortion patients the day before their procedure that they will be at risk for suicide. The warning of suicide that doctors are now forced to give has never been medically or scientifically proven.

The Examiner

More regulations based on pseudo-science. The war on science can overlap the war on women, apparently!

[Bricker]

In this thread, we have a liberal claiming that colony collapse disorder was caused in part my genetically modified plants, a claim that has questionable support at best, and a claim supported by woo-repository Gaia Health that Roundup is teratogenic and is linked to cancers in mice and rats. Jackmanii is doing a yeoman’s job of rebutting the claims but given the ardent desire expressed in this thread to see the truth of science win out, I thought perhaps someone might want to weigh in there.

And, of course, to point out that liberals do it too.

[Bosstone]

@Bricker

In this thread, we have a liberal claiming that colony collapse disorder was caused in part my genetically modified plants, a claim that has questionable support at best, and a claim supported by woo-repository Gaia Health that Roundup is teratogenic and is linked to cancers in mice and rats. Jackmanii is doing a yeoman’s job of rebutting the claims but given the ardent desire expressed in this thread to see the truth of science win out, I thought perhaps someone might want to weigh in there.

And, of course, to point out that liberals do it too.

I oppose the GMO hysteria and the nuclear power plant hysteria.

Now can we please get these assholes off the science committee?

[Bricker]

@Bosstone

I oppose the GMO hysteria and the nuclear power plant hysteria.

Now can we please get these assholes off the science committee?

You have my vote. I have particular antipathy for conservatives who, by their idiocy, bring conservatism into disrepute, and I’d love to shitcan the lot of them.

[Bricker]

@Bricker

In this thread, we have a liberal claiming that colony collapse disorder was caused in part my genetically modified plants, a claim that has questionable support at best, and a claim supported by woo-repository Gaia Health that Roundup is teratogenic and is linked to cancers in mice and rats. Jackmanii is doing a yeoman’s job of rebutting the claims but given the ardent desire expressed in this thread to see the truth of science win out, I thought perhaps someone might want to weigh in there.

And, of course, to point out that liberals do it too.

No one else has taken up this invitation. And this loon I mentioned is claiming that the US ordered Iraqi farmers to stop using natural seed and only use GM seed, under Iraqi Order 81.

But it’s an anti-science screed palatable to Leftists, so I guess it’s not worth contradicting.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

…or none of us are qualified to add anything that the pathologist already refuting that nonsense hasn’t pointed out, maybe?

[John_Stamos_Left_Ear]

@Bricker

And, of course, to point out that liberals do it too.

That poster should be drummed off the House Committee of Science immediately.

[Trinopus]

@Bricker

No one else has taken up this invitation. And this loon I mentioned is claiming that the US ordered Iraqi farmers to stop using natural seed and only use GM seed, under Iraqi Order 81.

But it’s an anti-science screed palatable to Leftists, so I guess it’s not worth contradicting.

No, just no one is convinced that the two parties do it in anywhere near the same numbers and to the same degree.

Both the U.S. and the USSR shot their own military personnel in WWII. We did it once; they did it several thousands of times.

“They do it too” is a puny argument. You use it an awful lot, and it just isn’t convincing.

(I know, it’s the pit; I should say “Fuck” a few times. Shrug.)

[GIGObuster]

@Bricker

No one else has taken up this invitation.

You know, I thought at first you just forgot what is the subject of the thread, but now I do have to wonder of you are that obtuse, or are you actually saying that the poster there is a congress critter?

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

@Smeghead

Meanwhile, Sarah Palin is complaining that we’re studying fruit flies instead of curing Down syndrome, which amuses me, as I am studying fruit flies in an attempt to understand the processes that cause Down syndrome.

Of course one of the ‘processes’ that causes Down, or at least one that greatly increases its incidence, is having a baby at 44! As Sarah Palin did.

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

@gamerunknown

First of all, there were only brief periods where the Senate had “fillibuster proof majorities” and even then they were scuppered by Blue Dogs.

In any parliamentary-democratic republic–a description that covers most of the other industrialized countries–what the Dems had 2009-2010 was no majority, but a loose coalition of every political stripe except the radical right. Frankly it’s astonishing they got as much done as they did.

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

@elucidator

What happened was everybody else lost WWII, and we won. Winning WWII destroyed Great Britain, and made it into England. Russia lost millions upon millions of people. It wasn’t because our capitalist philosophy was so great, or our policies so sane and reasonable, its because all the other guys were playing with a broken leg. Sometimes two.

And after the war, our relatively laissez-faire approach helped create the largest middle class in the history of the world. But that resulted mainly from the fact that capitalists/entrepreneurs and American workers truly needed each other, since shipping jobs out to China was impossible. Compared with today, CEO salaries were comparatively low, labor in general was far stronger in terms of its negotiating position, and, as a result, wages were higher in the real-world terms of a factory worker being able to support a family on one income. Income generally was more evenly spread around; you could almost call it a sort of free-market socialism. Left to its own devices, there is no way in hell the free market would do this today.

[John_Stamos_Left_Ear]

@GIGObuster

You know, I thought at first you just forgot what is the subject of the thread, but now I do have to wonder of you are that obtuse, or are you actually saying that the poster there is a congress critter?

False equivalency: It’s what’s for breakfast.

[Bricker]

@GIGObuster

You know, I thought at first you just forgot what is the subject of the thread, but now I do have to wonder of you are that obtuse, or are you actually saying that the poster there is a congress critter?

No, I doubt that poster is a member of Congress.

But it was not clear to me that this thread was limited to refusals to accept science only from members of Congress. Is that really a useful distinction?

It seems to me that the attitude is worth condemning – and fighting – wherever it appears.

No?

[Bricker]

@Trinopus

No, just no one is convinced that the two parties do it in anywhere near the same numbers and to the same degree.

Both the U.S. and the USSR shot their own military personnel in WWII. We did it once; they did it several thousands of times.

“They do it too” is a puny argument. You use it an awful lot, and it just isn’t convincing.

(I know, it’s the pit; I should say “Fuck” a few times. Shrug.)

You’re right – it’s a concession I’ve made before and will repeat: when it comes to denying science, while neither party has a monopoly, the loudest, most influential mouths doing the denying belong to the GOP.

But I fail to see why that means only the GOP’s denials can be condemned.

[John_Stamos_Left_Ear]

@Bricker

But it was not clear to me that this thread was limited to refusals to accept science only from members of Congress. Is that really a useful distinction?

Random poster on message board compared to policy maker in Washington. Yes, I’d say there’s a big fucking difference. It’s kinda silly that you would not see a difference.

[John_Stamos_Left_Ear]

@Bricker

You’re right – it’s a concession I’ve made before and will repeat: when it comes to denying science, while neither party has a monopoly, the loudest, most influential mouths doing the denying belong to the GOP.

And every vote for a GOP candidate is a vote for that ignorance.

You vote for ignorance.

Oh sure, you’ll excuse it by saying you don’t support those candidates (maybe, probably because they happen to not be in your jurisdiction) - although Mitt Romney is also guilty as we established. So that doesn’t work.

You’ll just say that you hold your nose and vote for ignorance because of other political positions.

Of course, this makes you posting on a forum devoted to fighting ignorance hypocritical. But to be sure, you’ve been called that before. So wear it like a badge of honor.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Bricker

No, I doubt that poster is a member of Congress.

But it was not clear to me that this thread was limited to refusals to accept science only from members of Congress. Is that really a useful distinction?

It seems to me that the attitude is worth condemning – and fighting – wherever it appears.

No?

Whether or not both are worth condemning and whether distinguishing between the two is useful are separate questions.

We should fight ignorance wherever it appears. We should be really, really worried about it when it appears in a Congressional science committee hearing.

If I choose to believe that I can master my chakras and the universe through the healing power of colonic irrigation, it probably won’t make a huge difference in your life. If Representative Dumbfuck demands that farmers start putting Brawndo on their crops, we might all be screwed.

[Bricker]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Whether or not both are worth condemning and whether distinguishing between the two is useful are separate questions.

We should fight ignorance wherever it appears. We should be really, really worried about it when it appears in a Congressional science committee hearing.

If I choose to believe that I can master my chakras and the universe through the healing power of colonic irrigation, it probably won’t make a huge difference in your life. If Representative Dumbfuck demands that farmers start putting Brawndo on their crops, we might all be screwed.

True.