-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
State leaders speak out about plans to expand the Islamic Academy of Alabama
- By BCP1928
- News & Current Events (Articles Required)
- 100 Replies
But you still haven't explained how Muslims in this country can get past the Constitution and the majority of voters.I've provided the numbers before, pretending the two are equivalents would be dishonest.
One clearly has a higher propensity for that type of preference for power consolidation.
State religion - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Roughly half of the ~50 Muslim majority countries end up with an officially codified state religion that gets special constitutional treatment (and severe punishments for insulting the faith or leaving the faith)
Of the ~120 Christian majority countries, a much smaller percentage of those have an official state religion, and of the ones that do, most are a historical holdover/relic that's no longer enforced or carries any legal weight. (for example, the Icelandic government isn't throwing rocks at anyone for leaving the Church of Iceland)
So while one can say "they both do it, so that means it's a wash", that's too blunt an instrument to perform any pragmatic problem solving or knowing what needs more focus.
In the same way that if:
Bill drinks 4 beers a night
Ted drinks 15 beers every night
Yeah, we can say "they both have a drinking problem", sure...but clearly one needs more urgent "priority focus" in regards to tackling the problem.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
RFK Adjusts Hepatitis B Vaccine Recommendations; Democrats Lose Their Minds
- By probinson
- American Politics
- 60 Replies
Simply pointing out that your contention that it's not "just" Democrats is somewhat less than honest, since the organizations you cited are primarily Democrat.
And you don't see a problem with that?
Objective To investigate whether funding of drug studies by the pharmaceutical industry is associated with outcomes that are favourable to the funder and whether the methods of trials funded by pharmaceutical companies differ from the methods in trials with other sources of support.
...
Results 30 studies were included. Research funded by drug companies was less likely to be published than research funded by other sources. Studies sponsored by pharmaceutical companies were more likely to have outcomes favouring the sponsor than were studies with other sponsors (odds ratio 4.05; 95% confidence interval 2.98 to 5.51; 18 comparisons). None of the 13 studies that analysed methods reported that studies funded by industry was of poorer quality.
Conclusion Systematic bias favours products which are made by the company funding the research. Explanations include the selection of an inappropriate comparator to the product being investigated and publication bias.
Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review - PMC
Objective To investigate whether funding of drug studies by the pharmaceutical industry is associated with outcomes that are favourable to the funder and whether the methods of trials funded by pharmaceutical companies differ from the methods in ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
This next article is talking specifically about the food industry, but it illustrates just how much finance bias factors into these studies:
One study detected that research articles sponsored exclusively by food and beverage companies were 4-8 times more likely to have conclusions favorable to the financial interests of the sponsoring company than articles that were not sponsored by food or beverage companies. A subsequent comprehensive review by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) examining sponsor influences on the quality and independence of health research cited that industry-sponsored studies were about 30 times more likely than non-industry sponsored studies to report statistically significant findings in favor of the sponsor.
Navigating Industry Funding of Research • The Nutrition Source
Scientific research is costly. However, a concern with industry funding is a potential influence on study outcomes, even if unintended.
nutritionsource.hsph.harvard.edu
Industry-sponsored studies are about THIRTY TIMES more likely than non-industry sponsored studies to report findings in favor of the sponsor. You're in denial if you think that pharmaceutical companies' funding doesn't impact the findings of their studies and the recommendations that the medical organizations make that are funded by them.Hand-wringing seems more appropriate.
So they say.
Has anyone asked them why other countries that don't recommend a universal birth-dose don't have these issues?
Sure they are, if they were evidence-based.
Here comes the slippery slope...
That's amusing. Prior ACIPs have been in the pocket of the industry for years. They weren't selected for their "independent expertise". They were selected for their willingness to rubber-stamp things. They have all been selected for their ideological purity. It's just now they're "concerned" because the "ideological-purity" in place now isn't the one that puts financial gain first.
It's funny you should mention that there was not a single public-health based reason to support this, because when the universal birth-dose was instituted, there also was not a single public-health based reason to recommend it to newborns at low-risk. Prior to the 1991 recommendation, it was common practice to only vaccinate newborns whose mother tested positive for Hep B. That was evidence-based and logical. No evidence was presented that there was a public-health benefit to indiscriminately vaccinating all newborns. Someone just decided that an evidence-based, risk-stratified approach was not as easy as a universal approach. It's odd that only now people are upset that recommendations are changing without evidence.
And for crying out loud, if you want the Hep B vaccine for your child, you can still get it. Just because it's not recommended does not mean it's not available. "Talk to your doctor". Works for just about everything else.
Did you watch the 20/20 clips I posted from January 1999 about the Hep B vaccine? The parents of the children who died and are permanently injured from the vaccine are not "theoretical". That was at a time when industry capture wasn't nearly as pervasive as it is today and mainstream media wasn't afraid to do real investigations. Alas, that is no longer the case today.
There's the slippery slope I was waiting for!
Upvote
0
State leaders speak out about plans to expand the Islamic Academy of Alabama
- By Lukaris
- News & Current Events (Articles Required)
- 100 Replies
I do warehouse and janitorial work and if I lived in India, I would probably be a Dalit stuck in a caste system with thousands of years of formal structure. It would be the result of my karma and my underclass status would be deserved because of past lives I supposedly wasn’t “enlightened” to deserve better. Capitalism hasn’t discriminated against me religiously, culturally or socioeconomically. Capitalism can thrive if people have civil rights and economic opportunity. If I didn’t have a low IQ, I would probably do better in a capitalist system.
It seems like secularists can rationalize a caste system from economic data in a secular economy and equate wealth & poverty ( which is a human condition) with a structural economic disparity of a formal caste system that is based on primitive religiosity of a concept like karma. Capitalism can be good or bad depending on obvious economic and social conditions.
The case of the Dalits in holdovers from the caste system in India:
Socioeconomic status and discrimination
Discrimination against Dalits has been observed across South Asia and among the South Asian diaspora. In 2001, the quality of life of the Dalit population in India was worse than that of the overall Indian population on metrics such as access to health care, life expectancy, education attainability, access to drinking water and housing.[64][65][66] According to a 2007 report by Human Rights Watch (HRW), the treatment of Dalits has been like a "hidden apartheid" and that they "endure segregation in housing, schools, and access to public services". HRW noted that Manmohan Singh, then Prime Minister of India, saw a parallel between the apartheid system and untouchability.[67] Eleanor Zelliotalso notes Singh's 2006 comment but says that, despite the obvious similarities, race prejudice and the situation of Dalits "have a different basis and perhaps a different solution".[27] Though the Indian Constitution abolished untouchability, the oppressed status of Dalits remains a reality. In rural India, stated Klaus Klostermaier in 2010, "they still live in secluded quarters, do the dirtiest work, and are not allowed to use the village well and other common facilities".[68] In the same year, Zelliot noted that "In spite of much progress over the last sixty years, Dalits are still at the social and economic bottom of society."[27]According to the 2014 NCAER/University of Maryland survey, 27 per cent of the Indian population still practices untouchability; the figure may be higher because many people refuse to acknowledge doing so when questioned, although the methodology of the survey was also criticised for potentially inflating the figure.[69] Across India, Untouchability was practised among 52 per cent of Brahmins, 33 per cent of Other Backward Classes and 24 per cent of non-Brahmin forward castes.[70] Untouchability was also practised by people of minority religions – 23 per cent of Sikhs, 18 per cent of Muslims and 5 per cent of Christians.[71]According to statewide data, Untouchability is most commonly practised in Madhya Pradesh (53 per cent), followed by Himachal Pradesh (50 per cent), Chhattisgarh (48 per cent), Rajasthan and Bihar (47 per cent), Uttar Pradesh (43 per cent), and Uttarakhand (40 per cent).[72]
Dalit - Wikipedia
Ecclesiastes 12:1-14, Romans 13:1-14
Upvote
0
