Jump to content

CharonY

Moderators
  • Content Count

    10510
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    52

CharonY last won the day on January 19

CharonY had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2384 Glorious Leader

6 Followers

About CharonY

  • Rank
    Biology Expert

Profile Information

  • Location
    somewhere in the Americas.
  • Interests
    Breathing. I enjoy it a lot, when I can.
  • College Major/Degree
    PhD
  • Favorite Area of Science
    Biology/ (post-)genome research
  • Biography
    Labrat turned grantrat.

Recent Profile Visitors

65299 profile views
  1. I think that is a reasonable assumption.
  2. Well, the disorders stay. Management means that folks exhibit normative behavior (or emulate it). But it is not that the folks will suddenly feel empathy. They might learn that folks expect not to behave a certain way, but that is the best you can hope for. The issue with harm is that folks with certain antisocial disorders simply are unable to see that doing harm is a bad thing. It is like trying to cure blindness by telling folks to behave as if they were able to see. Both require ongoing management. What makes it really difficult is that folks with this disorder are unable to see that something is wrong to begin with. While they can learn to pretend, it is often difficult as typically they do not feel to the need to fit social norms and do not understand soecietal expectations. I think the otherness of the disorder is really difficult to convey as you and me would frame it in a context that makes sense to us, but for people with this disorder it simply would be gibberish. Again, it is part of their personality and cannot be changed and it is quite a different beast than, say, mental illnesses.
  3. When reports came out that Trump had abolished Obama's pandemic response team, there was an Op-Ed in the NYTimes (I think) where the remaining folks Trump pandemic team claimed that they did not disband it but rather just restructured it to make it more nimble and agile. Well, whatever it was, the remaining bits and pieces were clearly not able to do anything beyond repeating Trump's random thoughts. Agile indeed.
  4. I think it should be then expanded to cover all mental illnesses. The important bit relevant to OP is that for many, if not most there is no cure or rehabilitation. It is about managing it. Punishment does nothing to improve things like antisocial personality disorder. In fact, they tend to make things worse. There are behavioural therapies that can help folks to fit in, but it is more expensive and time consuming and therefore typically not available. And if you are rich enough some of this behaviours might even be beneficial (i.e. there is also a socioeconomic component to it). So fundamentally I would say no to forcing a cure, as there is none. Treatment and support even if they do not want it, probably yes, if it can be done in a non-harmful way.
  5. The weird thing is that no one is really surprised that had no strategy. But it kind of boggles ones mind to some degree.
  6. And again, I think some of the discussion here is a bit problematic due to the different uses of "psychopathy". It is not quite clear what OP specifically meant. Hearing voices is not part of that, for example. Rather they are associated with a broad range of other psychiatric disorders but can also be caused by brain tumors. Not taking help is not a cure and could be caused by paranoid conditions, traumatic episodes and a whole range of other issues. Taking money or going to a shelter is not a cure, but would be consider normative behaviour, something that a person may willingly reject or is unable to conduct due to a disorder. Or to put it differently, someone suffering from the consequences of trauma cannot be cured per se and not certainly by forcing them to behave normally. Instead, they need help to manage their trauma and it is not something you can really force upon someone.
  7. I have not seen Fauci that happy since the start of the pandemic. Sorry, I meant "Gina-Virus".
  8. It goes toward the need for free and informed consent, which is a critical element in all medical procedures. However, there are of course many cases, even in recent times, when folks where compelled to certain unnecessary procedures, which goes against this principle. And there are still grey zones when there are medically relevant procedures, but the patient is, for whatever reasons, unable to give free consent.
  9. There is also confusingly a range of uses associated with the term psychopathy but I do not think it is diagnostic order in the proper sense. Rather there are commonly used to refer to a set of traits that are associated with certain disorders. At the same time MigL point about spectrum is relevant, as even the diagnosis of actual disorders are not trivial and rarely as black and white as some other medical diagnoses.
  10. I think I mentioned before that countries with strong centralized responses had typically better outcomes that fractured-state level regulations. Now that likely also applies to vaccine roll-outs. I mean, it is hard to say for the US, for example as apparently they had no real plans, at all.
  11. Again, I would be highly suspicious if there is only one researcher in the world being able to create a cohort that shows an effect.
  12. Yeah the poll is obviously made with a very specific viewpoint in mind. How about you are sexually abused but no one believes you? Or you are sexually abused, and report it but lose your career over it? How about you are sexually abused and have to explain your browser history in front of a jury? Or you are sexually abused and folks tell you not to be a slut? Or you are sexually abused and folks try to help you but you cannot overcome the resulting psychological problems? I mean, some things happen more commonly than others.
  13. I would look into the methodology in much more detail, but fundamentally if an effect is only found in one cohort, and not reproducibly it is generally not sufficient for a call to action. If there was a significant biological effect you would usually find many more studies pointing to various issues and from there a view emerges of potential issues. It takes years of efforts to get to the point and it is indeed strange if no one had found similar effects. That being said, I am not actually familiar with the current state of the lit in that regard. However, from a layperson's perspective, I would not start to be worried unless it is being reproduced in a broader context by other research groups. That being said, not being physically connected to your cellphone all day long probably has at least some mental health benefits....
  14. This also does not make sense. The believing the victim proposals are aimed at looking into the possible crimes in the first place. The actual trial will be as any other one. And again, that at least in part explains low conviction rates. It should be noted that the false rape allegation rate is roughly in line false accusations of other criminal acts and it is somewhat peculiar that this type of allegations is what get folks riled up. Indeed. One of the things that both prosecutors and defenders probe is credibility of the victim. And these types of probes can be very aggressive. E.g. and steeped in moralism. E.g. women who had multiple sex partners are more likely to be assumed to be responsible for being assaulted than men. Of course credibility is important as they need to look into motivations such as custody proceedings, financial interests and so on, but obviously it is quite a harrowing process for an actual victim and that on top of social stigma and psychological wounds.
  15. OK so perhaps one should look at broad picture and at the justice system rather than using individual anecdotes to extrapolate cases. We can address the rate of false accusations. Studies on college students have shown that in this group roughly 5% were false allegations. Or conversely 95% of allegations brought to police were not found to be false. Moreover, only about 10% of all rapes get reported to authorities to begin with. So from the get go we have a situation were we have 0.5% of wrongful allegations vs about 99.5% actual cases. The conviction rate is incredibly low, though. Even among the 10% reported cases only a fraction (again, about 10%) are actually resulting in conviction. So the likelihood of conviction in an actual rape is very low (~1%) and the likelihood of wrongful conviction much lower than that. So again, we are not talking about a symmetric situation here. There are a couple of issues, of course, especially in the absence of evidence convictions are unlikely and then of course victims (especially male victims) are very unlikely to come forward as they see no point in doing so and want to avoid social consequences. The other issue on the justice level side is that often rape allegations, even when reported, were simply not pursued. There are many reports, articles and internal investigations throughout at least UK, US and Australia which have shown that allegations from certain folks, especially indigenous folks, drug addicts, younger victims, victims from what are classified as problematic households, homeless and so on, were often routinely dismissed. In the US rape kits were often not submitted for analyses and so on. This is all because in those cases police deemed the victims unreliable from the get-go and decided not to even start investigating. It is also possible that due to low likelihood of success police focuses on the more winnable cases which might improve their statistics. Some of the campaigns, such as believe the victim slogans and alternative hotlines for rape reporting are attempts to address this systemic issue. Edit: crossposted with iNow, but same idea.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.