COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events - Page 440

starting strength gym
Page 440 of 2310 FirstFirst ... 3403904304384394404414424504905409401440 ... LastLast
Results 4,391 to 4,400 of 23099

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #4391
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    1

    Default

    • starting strength seminar august 2022
    • starting strength seminar october 2022
    • starting strength seminar december 2022
    Not sure if this has been mentioned here already (at least I couldn't find it), there has been a study in Norway whether going to the gym is safe or not regarding COVID-19:
    In Norway, Gymgoers Avoid Infections as Virus Recedes - The New York Times

    If you want to read the paper without any extra journalism spices:
    Randomized Re-Opening of Training Facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic | medRxiv

    In short, it is safe, if appropriate precautions are taken. Happy training everybody!

  2. #4392
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    49,210

    Default

    NYT has a paywall, as if their assessment is valuable. Just read at the second link.

  3. #4393
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Ozarks
    Posts
    1,135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laramie Hartmann View Post
    Yes, I've heard your liberal trope about variance within an "ethnicity" group. It's meaningless. Comparing the variance between groups uses the average of said groups, while the variance within a group uses every member. The distribution curves overlap.

    Do you think that I'm so simplistic in my thinking that I don't realize that traits exist on a spectrum within a group? Do you take offense when someone claims that men are stronger than women?

    The problem with stupid people is that we live within a social structure where they have control over how I live my life. They can vote. And in my experience, they are far more likely to vote for piss poor policies/representatives than those of a higher intellect.

    If we don't allow ourselves to accept that their are certain important differences between populations (like IQ) because it might hurt someones feelings, we cannot properly explain why these populations have different outcomes.
    alsbos nailed this one down pretty well, so I'll leave that alone. But I will say that, while I don't think you're simplistic, I think if you think I'm "liberal" beyond the sense of being a classical liberal then your reading comprehension is lacking. Is it?

    See my replies to Yngvi below with regard to your other question.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yngvi View Post
    Oh fuck.
    Concur. Yikes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yngvi View Post
    What would be your opinion on the statement: "Men are genetically superior athletes to women"?
    How about the statement: "There are more male geniuses than female geniuses, but there are also more male retards than female retards"?
    Or "gender is a social construct"?
    I agree that men are genetically superior athletes with regards to many of the prevailing markers we can measure clinically and empirically.

    I agree with what you posit on the spread of the bell curve difference between these two groups, as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yngvi View Post
    Nearly all of us have friends of all races and have known intelligent individuals of all races. The question is accretive and probabalistic; it is not binary or deterministic.
    Agreed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yngvi View Post
    At this point, I have been lied to so much in my life that I feel highly obligated to ask the questions I was told not to ask.

    Once again, no response necessary. These are just questions to be considered.
    I actually feel the same way. I don't mind if we ask, scientifically, these questions and accept our limited understanding in an attempt to move said understanding forward. I don't mind when the answers don't line up with our expectations, either.

    And skipping the issue of ethnicity with regard to intelligence, I'll instead use strength training. I don't take issue with the fact that men are stronger and more physically capable than women because I do not judge people ethically or pragmatically (their "worth" as a person, if you will) on the mere basis of physical capacity. Even though I'm really shitty at it, I do ascribe to the Christian principle of divine worth of the individual.

    Each individual, regardless of any one spectrum or factor, such as gender, possess a genotype set at birth. I simply believe that we should all be free, and encouraged to, work hard to develop our phenotypes to their fullest potential. How much better might the world be if we all acknowledged and developed our own potential in such a way?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicholas Laureys View Post
    Relax, David, with your passive aggressive "idiots" and "assholes.". The whole of American culture, MSM, and institutions supports your opinion on the lack of correlation between race and anything other than skin pigmentation.
    You've simply found one of the few places left where people can at least openly debate the topic without fear of being called an -IST (!), and someone it seems that is causing you to feel threatened about the opinions that you hold (or you can explain better than me how thinking differently about race makes one an idiot, in your opinion).
    When I call someone an idiot that's not being passive aggressive. Relax, Nicholas. I'm not going to fuck your best friend. (There you go... two whole layers of passive aggressive)

    American culture, the MSM and our academic institutions do NOT share my opinion. My opinion is not that there are not genetic factors between populations along many, many different spectrum, but that there exists such a variance between individuals that it's fucking pointless to use as a metric. And now we're already back to treating people as individuals which has jack and shit to do with ignoring traits such as intelligence, strength, creativity, etc. It simply means you can't assume shit based on group identity beyond the common factors by which the group is constituted. How that is anywhere close to Identity Politics™ beats the fuck out of me.

    Frankly, I don't feel threatened by any of you who seem to take significant issue at my opinion (fucking ironic, eh?). You guys seem to get butthurt when I point out that I think you're wrong, and that you're wading knee-deep into an ocean of thought to high-five yourselves because you feel like that justifies you having your whites-only (or any other IDENTITY) tree house. Huddle behind the walls of your Benedict options, but when you withdraw your voice and the force of your actions from the world... don't be surprised when you find yourself trapped and hopelessly besieged one day with no where else in the world to run off to.

  4. #4394
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    423

    Default

    Attorney General William Barr speaks on what he's doing regarding riots and censorship.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HVqRE-6bkc

  5. #4395
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Village of Afton, Virginia
    Posts
    947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    NYT has a paywall, as if their assessment is valuable. Just read at the second link.
    I leave my cookies off and NYT lets me read most. With the Washington Post, since I have Foxfire at full ad block (I've never figured out how to turn it off), I have to click the shield icon next to the address and turn off "enhanced tracking protection" Then I can read most articles.

  6. #4396
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alsbos View Post
    The Bell Curve is based on IQ tests, which no one (expect you it seems) believes is an accurate measure of intelligence when testing across widely different economic and social groups. There isn't a trusted method of measuring intelligence which isn't polluted with environmental factors. That's why you need to dump your reliance on such tests, and go straight to genome-proteins-phenotypes. But that connection is too complex and isn't understand.
    The thing is, intelligence, as measured by IQ scores, is a decent measure of the cognitive skills that you need in order for technical innovation or more routine science and engineering. Certain traits help you succeed and IQ tests have value in measuring a certain subset of those traits.

    The usual error is conflating learned knowledge gained in a social, cultural context with the ability to think and reason.

    Populations with low average intelligence - as measured by IQ tests - produce very few individuals that are good at innovation. If there were one or a few kinds of intelligence that were not measured well by IQ tests, but allowed people with low IQs to accomplish remarkable things – you’d think we would notice and we'd have to take this culturally-bound, environmentally-influenced definition of intelligence very seriously.

  7. #4397
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    224

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alsbos View Post
    No need for us to break it down, as others already have. The human genome project has been underway for 20 years and as a whole has failed to connect the lines between genes, expressed proteins, and disease. The entire scientific community has accepted the fact that we don't have the ability to go from genome to phenotype expect in a few examples. That's just the way it is, that is the current state of the science. Bioinformaticians continue to churn through billions of DNA sequences, attempting to dig out some correlations. And of course they look at different ethnicities since this can be issue an issue in clinical trials. There's a lot of money to be made. But it just doesn't work well (or at all)...and this is looking for simple things, like correlations to heart disease, alzheimers, or certain kinds of cancer.



    The Bell Curve is based on IQ tests, which no one (expect you it seems) believes is an accurate measure of intelligence when testing across widely different economic and social groups. There isn't a trusted method of measuring intelligence which isn't polluted with environmental factors. That's why you need to dump your reliance on such tests, and go straight to genome-proteins-phenotypes. But that connection is too complex and isn't understand.

    Regarding dogs. Yes, you could breed humans. We all know this. But the different ethnicities weren't purposefully 'bred' towards a certain phenotype. There has been evolutionary pressure, but we have no clue if that made some groups more 'intelligent' than others. It could have, but how would you measure it anyways, you can't strip away the environmental factors.

    And back to dogs. You can sequence the parent's genome, and x-ray them...but you still won't know if your labrador (or shepard) will have hip dysplasia. Breeders can't even figure out how to predict that, and that's WITH DNA testing the parents. And dyslpasia is easy to diagnose, and dogs are purposefully bred, and you can breed through many generations quickly in a controlled manner. Its not simple stuff.

    And back to the Bell Curve again. This is a purely correlational study. That's another red flag. This is not proven, accepted stuff, at all.
    Many experts in the field do believe in the usefulness and validity of IQ testing. The tests have been developed to eliminate cultural and environmental factors as much as possible. Twin studies are just one of the methods used to prove the validity of IQ testing. I can agree that there may be some unintended bias, but that doesn't render testing ineffective. High test scores strongly correlate with many factors that most consider positive, such as high income, low criminality, and marital stability.

    Why would you believe that selective evolutionary pressures wouldn't select for higher intelligence in certain populations? We were able to breed dogs with specific traits in just a few hundred years; humans have had far longer for variance to develop, and intelligence is an incredibly useful trait, especially in unforgiving climes.

    To your point on hip displasia, you're correct that phenotypic expression for an individual cannot be perfectly predicted from genetic sequencing, but accurate predictions on group outcomes can be made.

    They're not everything, but genetic differences between populations are important factors to look at when considering the causes for various group outcomes.

  8. #4398
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Posts
    2,821

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Staccato View Post
    Populations with low average intelligence - as measured by IQ tests - produce very few individuals that are good at innovation. If there were one or a few kinds of intelligence that were not measured well by IQ tests, but allowed people with low IQs to accomplish remarkable things – you’d think we would notice and we'd have to take this culturally-bound, environmentally-influenced definition of intelligence very seriously.
    “You’d think we would have noticed” is not a compelling argument. See what I’m saying?

  9. #4399
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    731

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Chan View Post
    Not sure if this has been mentioned here already (at least I couldn't find it), there has been a study in Norway whether going to the gym is safe or not regarding COVID-19:
    In Norway, Gymgoers Avoid Infections as Virus Recedes - The New York Times

    If you want to read the paper without any extra journalism spices:
    Randomized Re-Opening of Training Facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic | medRxiv

    In short, it is safe, if appropriate precautions are taken. Happy training everybody!


    Methods: we randomized members 18 to 64 years with no COVID-19 relevant comorbidities at five training facilities
    That's a pretty healthy subset.
    Not one comorbiditiy allowed?. That means no obese people.
    And then the older folks in that group? Say a 55-64 y.o. with NO! HBP, no diabetes, not obese, etc etc?

    I bet they were doing (because globo gyms, and no one is doing SS there) light weights, high reps, circuit training, and cardio-esque training.

  10. #4400
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    476

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •