Science is now cancelled? [USERS NOW BANNED FOR POLITICS]

[Caballus]

Lol okay so I was curious and did some digging.

I really couldn't find anything like you said. I found a really good study that compared the effects of mefloquine and doxycycline. To be honest, I'd be wary of the results because I had to fill out questionaries' like they asked and I always bullshited them to just be done. Vivid dreams was not reported as an adverse side effect, it was mostly GI issues and photosensitivity. I did find some stuff that indicated vivid dreams to doxycycline but it wasn't anything official literature. The study is really long, and goes into detail so its hard to make sense of it, but it says short-term efficacy studies have shown variable rates of side effects among patients taking various forms of chemoprophylaxis, though reliable safety and tolerability data on long-term use are limited. This was in 2015 which is fairly recent so it does seem like there is a gap in research

It seems like there was media attention with mefloquine. I don't really know how big it was because I wasn't old enough to pay attention to this stuff but I can see old news articles about it. I saw something that said US Army discontinued mefloquine around 2006 or 2009 but on Wikipedia it says the US Army stopped giving it to Special Forces in 2013, I went in 2014. I know for a fact that doxycycline was prescribed. Knowing the Army, it wouldn't surprise me if the label just said doxycycline but the pills were really mefloquine. I never had a TBI over there, but I felt really stupid when I got back, like I always would forget stuff and I was never like that. You can never trust them, the military does what it wants.

It is surprising, because Plasmodium, the parasite that causes malaria is not bacteria. I wonder what is it about mefloquine that makes it destroy your brain. The compound Quinine is extracted from a bark in Peru and is a natural way to prevent malaria. So all of those quine drugs are similar chemically speaking.

Wow, that's impressive digging. Well done. I operated through all of the eras you mentioned and many (many) years prior and after. I always understood the risk, and whether I had a choice or not, I've always seen it as acceptable risk. I consider Doxy to be somewhat benign (may be naive), in a relative sense. It's not just used for malaria, it's doled out to guys with VD or just about any other infection. So, it's like the motrin of antibiotics (in my simple mind)--no one objects to vitamin M, despite what it does to the liver.

Edit: My British buddy attributes his lack of malaria to his love of gin and tonic (tonic has quinine). He may be on to something.

Sponsored

 

[5.Oh Crush]

You can say that about literally everything though.

It's always about the money. Power is second. From the division of politics (dems. and reps), to climate, to the con of religion (trillions of tax free money).

They want your money and you need to spend it, give it away, or they will take it. One way or another.

 

[Gregs24]

Someone made the statement the other day that Asia was moving away from coal. The truth is not so much.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Coal/China-Doubles-Down-On-Coal-Despite-Global-Push-To-Go-Green.html

Asia includes a lot more than China

 

[Gregs24]

Edit: My British buddy attributes his lack of malaria to his love of gin and tonic (tonic has quinine). He may be on to something.

You would need to drink a hell of a lot of tonic water for it to be anywhere near therapeutic levels these days. Back in the old days it had a lot more quinine but was terribly bitter and was combined with Gin to make the experience less unpleasant.

 

[Gregs24]

The story is talking about China.

Indeed, but it was you that mentioned that Asia was moving away from coal. Some of it is!

 

[CJJon]

The only true energy source we have is fossil fuels.

Huh? Can you explain this statement?

What about solar, atomic, wind, water, etc.?

 

[Burkey]

Check out the exhibit and you will know.

It was a pretty simple question. Do you know the answer or not?

 

[Burkey]

Can you produce any of those without oil? Could you use any of those to produce the others?

Could you produce ANYTHING at all without the sun? Let’s turn it off and find out.
“The energy of the sun is the original source of most of the energy found on Earth”

 

[Burkey]

Any other time I have posted information about China in the past of member burkey has jumped right in with a defense of China and often throws in a dig at the USA.

Please don’t make the mistake of taking my comments as some sort of suggestion that China is doing an awesome job.
I was simply pointing out that they’re (broadly speaking) doing a better job than the US.
Thunk of it like this:
You can have a dogshit sandwich OR, you can just have the dogshit without the bread.
Which one would you prefer?

 

[Burkey]

And that is exactly why we should default to the sun for the change in temperature. Is it more likely the sun’s solar cycles could change our climate or burning of fossil fuels? Seems like the original source of all the energy we consume plays a bigger part in warming than a complex theory about gasses trapped in the atmosphere. The problem is we can’t change the sun.

Like I have said, we are crapping on this planet and need to stop but the sun could have far more impact on our climate than we currently understand.

Yes, solar cycles most certainly play a role, but they don’t explain the EXTENT of ANY warming (or cooling) in isolation, either now or in the past. That’s the part you guys just don’t seem too grasp.
The suns role is pretty well understood. Yes, there’s always more to learn, but you’re talking subtle nuances at this point rather than some idea that overturns everything we already know.
Do I need to show the chart AGAIN where solar irradiance is going down whilst temps are rising?

What predictive power does your solar theory hold in the following scenario?
We know that a reduction in solar input of around 1-2% can easily trigger an ice age.
So, how would YOU go about explaing a planet that is hotter than it is now, with a sun that is only 70% as “bright” as it is today? (I’ve simplified it for ease of discussion).

Put differently, if 2% freezes the planet, by what magic did 30% NOT freeze the damn planet?

 

[sk47]

Please don’t make the mistake of taking my comments as some sort of suggestion that China is doing an awesome job.
I was simply pointing out that they’re (broadly speaking) doing a better job than the US.
Thunk of it like this:
You can have a dogshit sandwich OR, you can just have the dogshit without the bread.
Which one would you prefer?

Hello; In no way is China doing better than the USA. Their emissions are going up and are already greater than the USA. I posted a link showing they do not plan to met any goals by 2030 or 2035 or beyond. The per capita argument does not change the overall.

The USA with perhaps a bigger economy has reduced emissions. You must dislike my country with a passion.

 

[Burkey]

Hello; In no way is China doing better than the USA. Their emissions are going up and are already greater than the USA. I posted a link showing they do not plan to met any goals by 2030 or 2035 or beyond. The per capita argument does not change the overall.

The USA with perhaps a bigger economy has reduced emissions. You must dislike my country with a passion.

You keep ignoring anything and everything that doesn’t fit your narrative of “China bad”.
We’ve already been over the per capita thing,
You omit the part where China are getting rid of older tech plants, and the new ones that replace them are less polluting than most of the stuff in the US.
Perfect? Nope.

Dont take it so personally. The US isn’t the only country doing nowhere near s it’s share. My country is also procrastinating.
.

 

[CJJon]

Can you produce any of those without oil? Could you use any of those to produce the others?

Absolutely

 

[CJJon]

Hello; In no way is China doing better than the USA. Their emissions are going up and are already greater than the USA. I posted a link showing they do not plan to met any goals by 2030 or 2035 or beyond. The per capita argument does not change the overall.

The USA with perhaps a bigger economy has reduced emissions. You must dislike my country with a passion.

Again, so what? What does whatever China has to do with MMGW effect our (the US) contribution to it? Shall we continue to shit in our own backyard because the other big kid on the other side of town takes a bigger shit than us?

Maybe vulgarity will get your attention.

 

[RPDBlueMoon]

And that is exactly why we should default to the sun for the change in temperature. Is it more likely the sun’s solar cycles could change our climate or burning of fossil fuels? Seems like the original source of all the energy we consume plays a bigger part in warming than a complex theory about gasses trapped in the atmosphere. The problem is we can’t change the sun.

Like I have said, we are crapping on this planet and need to stop but the sun could have far more impact on our climate than we currently understand.

We are defaulting to the sun though. The reason why we have oxygen in the atmosphere is because of sunlight. Sunlight, and carbon go hand in hand.

Cyanobacteria are responsible for the Great Oxidation Event which gave rise to multicellular life (Eukarya). Photosynthesis is the sole reason we have organic carbon, you can look up the biogeochemical cycle of carbon. Photosynthesis takes gaseous inorganic carbon turns it into its organic form. Every organic molecule of carbon is from photosynthesis (primarily, by an enzyme called Rubisco). More inorganic carbon is being released into the environment than what can be processed. 50%-80% of photosynthesis occurs in the ocean by phytoplankton such as cyanobacteria, it is a huge carbon sink. Ocean Acidification, nutrient pollution, and the destruction of forests create positive feedback loops which decrease photosynthesis and increase inorganic CO2. There are marine organisms that can obtain carbon from different ways, one being photosynthesis. fluctuations in pH cause them to avoid photosynthesis. More than 70% of the Earth is covered in the ocean. So why isn't anything being done to address this?

There was a event called the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum that happened ~55 million years ago. There were abnormal amounts of green house gas emissions like CO2 and CH4 (methane) being released. Basically a bunch of volcanos and hydro thermic vents went apeshit, and this caused the temperatures to dramatically spike creating positive feedbacks which made it even higher.

There have been mass extinctions throughout earths history that we had no play in. However just like you said, playing with nature can come back to bite you in the ass.

Sponsored