Recent comments in /f/science

LawnChairMD t1_jctylp1 wrote

This field (of translating hard-core science to layman's terms, and reaching out to the public) is called scientific communications/ communicators. Think Allie Ward, and Bill Nye. But they aren't gonna hit something so specific/political as this. Imo I don't think scientist should use their energy to explain their work in laymens terms.The scientist already decided to dedicate their career to their field. The least we can do is google every 3ed word. Plus they will often send you the article if it's behind a pay wall. Which I also think is nice.

1

Georgie___Best t1_jcttxk0 wrote

>The metaphor reflects reality better than the nihilistic assertion that nothing matters in evolution.

No one made any assertion that nothing matters in evolution. Somewhat ironically, given you are talking about absent-minded misunderstanding, you apparently need to refresh yourself on what nihilism is.

>Yeah and what I've been telling you is that the fittest species are those that utillise death rather than some immortals. Being immortal is actually pretty bad in terms of the long term fitness of a species.

So you're under the impression that mankind is still under the same selection pressures as we were 100,000 years ago? Or is it that that we shouldn't bother with medical interventions, because we are lowering the fitness of the population by allowing people to live/reproduce when they otherwise wouldn't?

It's genuinely amazing how people with the least understanding are always the ones who speak with the most authority. The evolutionary benefit of death is something I would expect a high school student to understand. The fact that we are able to escape the consequences of evolution in the modern world is something I would expect a kid to know.

3

Lateralis85 t1_jcth3dm wrote

I am well aware that rugby is not like soccer. I thought about putting something to that effect in my comment but thought it was plainly unnecessary.

My comment still stands. Soft scrum caps (or "helmets") are of no use against impacts, which a header is, but they give the illusion of safety which might encourage more headers and paradoxically make the situation worse.

If there is a problem with headers causing long-term injuries, the solution isn't a "soft helmet". That's the point.

3

D74248 t1_jctdgad wrote

The reason boy's soccer reports less injuries is obvious to anyone who has had both boys and girls in high school sports. Football is the prime sport for boys, soccer is the prime sport for girls.

You can google scholar studies yourself. It is unfortunate that you feel so threatened by women.

−3

sweetbizil t1_jctajka wrote

Agreed, jogging is horrible on the joints and long distance low intensity especially. I do a lot of long distance running but I make sure I balance it out and keep my body strong to limit the joint damage. Sprinting does not suffer the same fate however and is very healthy in moderation.

As long as swimming isn’t done indoors I would agree. There is something really unsettling to me about swimming in an indoor pool that smells like a vat of radioactive liquid (to make it “safe” from other peoples’ bodily fluids).

In general, high intensity or low impact (elliptical, biking) training without brain trauma involved is going to be just fine long term imo.

−7