Re: Helmet efficacy test

On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 22:12:13 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On 4/17/2025 8:21 PM, AMuzi wrote:

On 4/17/2025 7:09 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:

Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> writes:
>

AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

On 4/15/2025 4:04 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:

AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> writes:
>

On 4/15/2025 3:27 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:

Am 15.04.2025 um 02:40 schrieb Radey Shouman:

zen cycle <funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> writes:

>

A direct effect of the anti-vax movement.

>
I'm in favor of measles vaccination, and never said otherwise.  I
took
the vaccine back when it was quite new, and never regretted it.  I
believe most of the Texas and New Mexico measles cases are among
Mennonites, who may have a different opinion.  I am not in favor of
trying to force them to vaccinate.
>
The anti-vax movement used to be the province of wealthy,
overprivileged, nutty granola types.  Why do you suppose it has
spread
more widely?

The Anti-vax movement has been strongly linked to the Nazis since
the early 1930's "we cannot have Jewish doctors poison our pure
aryan blood lines".
The "Jewish Domination" Consipracy claims of those times have lived
on in the alt-right movement, just replacing the word "Jewish" by
the word "globalist".  I am absolutely not surprised that the rise
to power of the Alt-Right has given popularity to the Anti-Vaxxers
as well.

>
Maybe in Germany, I truly don't know.
>
But here, the rise in anti-vax was driven by upper class suburban
mothers and Hollywood celebrities who skew soft left.  (as with any
social phenomenon there are of course many flavors of opinion and
politics)  It was unusual before that quack Wakefield (1998?) but
snowballed after that.
>
Regarding anti-Semitism, one of the notable groups here resistant to
vaccination generally are Hasidim.
>
https://forward.com/news/417390/measles-is-hitting-ultra-orthodox-
communities-why-arent-they-vaccinating/

>
This agrees with my US-centric impressions.  Regarding Nazi anti-vax
feelings, I understand Hitler was a vegetarian.  Maybe all vegetarians
are secretly Nazis.
>

>
A vegetarian nonsmoking teetotaler I might well add.
>

>
The brain injury from the 1st world war, is probably more likely if
one was
going for external influences, that and that Eugenics was popular.

>
My point was that I would be amazed to find a person with whom I either
agreed or disagreed on every particular.  "Nazis liked it, therefore it
must be bad" is an ad hominem argument.
>

 
Or  'Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc'
 
https://helpfulprofessor.com/post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc-examples/

>
One should be careful when claiming something a "post hoc" fallacy.
Because, as should be obvious, many times "propter hoc" actually is
true. From your cited web page, "Such inferences may sometimes be
reasonable to make and sometimes not."
>
One of the jobs of science is to tell when the inferences are true. In
fact, I'd say the great bulk of science knowledge consists of true
instances of "post hoc ergo propter hoc."
>
We have one poster here who seems dedicated to claiming that correlation
_never_ indicated causation - or at least, raising an argument like that
for any correlation he dislikes. That's throwing the baby out with the
bathwater.

Fools ague that because there is correlation between one event that
causes another event means that correlation implies causation.

Simple fact is that correlation, by itself, does not even imply a
relationship.

https://www.fastcompany.com/3030529/hilarious-graphs-prove-that-correlation-isnt-causation

Using correlation as an agument for causation is falatious in the
first degree, yet some people continue to do it.

Too bad that critical thinking isn't taught in schools. 

--
"when will they ever learn?"
--Pete Seeger