Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Submission + - University of Toronto Homeopathy Course to be Discontinued->

Gallenod writes: Apparently wiser heads finally prevailed at UoT and they will not be teaching homeopathy (as much a type of medicine as astrology is a type of astronomy) at their university any longer. From the article:

=====
The UTSC Health Studies Program has indicated that the course in question will not be taught in the 2015-16 academic year, or over the summer term.

As Provost of this academic institution, I must at all times respect the diversity of opinions and views of academic colleagues and sessional instructors. However, I do note with respect that the Deans of the University’s Faculty of Medicine and Dalla Lana School of Public Health have released a statement commenting on the education of their students regarding vaccinations. It includes the following:

“As deans of two of the health sciences faculties at the University of Toronto, we teach our students that vaccines are safe, effective and vital to children’s health. Vaccines are one of history’s most important and significant achievements in public health and medicine. The best evidence that science can provide proves that the health benefits of vaccines far outweigh their potential side effects, and we instruct our students accordingly.”

=====

Link to Original Source

Comment Course Discontinued (Score 4, Informative) 273 273

Fortunately, wiser heads have finally prevailed:

    http://www.provost.utoronto.ca...

From the article:
=====
The UTSC Health Studies Program has indicated that the course in question will not be taught in the 2015-16 academic year, or over the summer term.

As Provost of this academic institution, I must at all times respect the diversity of opinions and views of academic colleagues and sessional instructors. However, I do note with respect that the Deans of the University’s Faculty of Medicine and Dalla Lana School of Public Health have released a statement commenting on the education of their students regarding vaccinations. It includes the following:

“As deans of two of the health sciences faculties at the University of Toronto, we teach our students that vaccines are safe, effective and vital to children’s health. Vaccines are one of history’s most important and significant achievements in public health and medicine. The best evidence that science can provide proves that the health benefits of vaccines far outweigh their potential side effects, and we instruct our students accordingly.”
=====

Comment The Poll is Too Simplistic (Score 1) 278 278

The poll choices frame the question as a simple science vs. politics issue. It's a bit more complex than that. On the anthropomorphic global warming/climate change side, you have both evidence-based scientific thinkers and non-scientific wishful thinkers. On the anti-AGW/anti-climate change side you have some very smart cynical people with a vested interest in the current energy economic status quo and a group ideological, unthinking wing-nuts.

The problem for the AGW/CC scientists is that they are not just battling both the cynics trying to preserve their current economic advantages and the wing-nuts who will believe anything as long as it's not "Liberal." They're also handicapped by their supposed allies: the "Lefty Loonies" who undermine the scientific case for AGW/CC by being just as ridiculous as the loonies on the anti-AGW/CC side.

Maybe next time we can get a poll like this:

The Debate Over Climate Change Is:
1. The most critical debate over the fate of humanity ever.
2. An important one, but not the most important.
3. Less important than deciding who will be the next American Idol.
4. Not a debate any more, just people talking past each other.
5. Over, and my side won!
6. Uh, climate change? What's that?

Comment What's The Difference? (Score 1) 70 70

You can follow a suspect in plain clothes. You can photograph someone from a distance even if he's on his own personal property. You can follow someone in an unmarked car. You can observe someone from a helicopter or via satellite photo.

You can even send people moving traffic violation tickets based on photos taken via automatic cameras.

All of which you can do without a warrant because the subject is publicly visible.

So how is drone surveillance any different from a legal/ethical/moral standpoint?

Comment Foxy Cherry Picking (Score 1, Troll) 545 545

And Fox News, of course, pushed a story that only referenced the part of the study that found that climate change "skeptics" scored higher (by one point, 51 to 50) on a test of general scientific literacy, proving once (and for Fox) that the "skeptics" know more about science than climate change "alarmists" and are therefore right to doubt anything related to climate change.

Fox News: the experts at picking the one cherry on the entire tree that satisfies them since 1993.

The Internet

Submission + - Vint Cerf Questions Whether Internet Access Should->

Gallenod writes: In an op-ed for the New York Times (registration/subscription required), Vint Cerf writes that civil protests around the world, sparked by Internet communications, 'have raised questions about whether Internet access is or should be a civil or human right." Cerf argues that "technology is an enabler of rights, not a right itself," and contends that for something to be considered a human right, it "must be among the things we as humans need in order to lead healthy, meaningful lives, like freedom from torture or freedom of conscience. It is a mistake to place any particular technology in this exalted category, since over time we will end up valuing the wrong things.'
Link to Original Source

Disobedience: The silver lining to the cloud of servitude. -- Ambrose Bierce

Working...