That depends. In Nevada a driver is required to be behind the wheel at all times. The same is expected in California. While it would be nice if self-driving cars allowed disabled people (such as myself) to drive, it seems more likely that--at least for a long time--a licensed and non-disabled driver will be required just in case an override is needed.

You're correct--they have to report any side effect patients experience, even if the effect isn't truly a side effect. For instance, if someone happens to develop schizophrenia and experiences a first psychotic episode while testing a new allergy pill, hallucinations/paranoia have to be reported, even if those effects are unrelated to the drug. I hear that the guideline in the medical community is to compare the % of side effects with the active pill to the % of side effects reported with the placebo. If a side effect occurs twice as often with the active pill vs the placebo, then it is statistically significant. That said, statistics are very easy to misunderstand and misinterpret. Even if a pill can cause some nasty side effect like diabetes when taken over the course of, say, 20 years... if it only happens to one out of every 10,000 patients and you're being treated for psychosis or unprovoked tonic-clonic seizures, it's probably worth the (almost non-existent) risk.

You also have to understand the severity and what a report actually means. For example, migraine and seizure sufferers sometimes experience an "aura" before a migraine or seizure. This can include "hallucinations," such as the taste of metal or alcohol in your mouth. The word "hallucinations" sounds like a terrifying side effect to have, but most likely it's not like you're going on a full on vision trip and interacting with dead family members--it might just mean you smell rose petals or chocolate for an hour after the pill kicks in.

Even more interesting (to me) is the fact that placebos tend to work even if the patient is aware that they have ingested a placebo. The placebo effect and activities of mirror neurons are still very poorly understood. I think a lot of the comments here suggesting that "the increasing effectiveness of placebo suggests that our culture is becoming more gullible/suggestible" are premature and show the bias of the people making those comments. Whether or not their conclusions are accurate, correlation does not equal causation and it could simply be that humans are developing more mirror neurons (or whatever else), giving us more--and not less--control over the power our minds have over our lives.

I'd be shocked, huh? Let's look at what some Muslims are saying on Twitter. Ones from the Middle East, even: fifarahman from Bandar Kuala Lumpur, Kuala Lumpur "So sad that #Malaysia has deported #HamzaKashgari.I cant imagine standing there sending some1 away to sure death. It's against human nature." Hala_Aldosari This is a sad world, we haven't moved far from the Middle ages #HamzaKashgari asteris Asteris Masouras What'd it take for your people to call for your murder & your country to order your arrest for tweeting? For #HamzaKashgari, 3 poetic tweets Hmm, so it looks like plenty of Muslims *over there* don't even support this. My best friend and also a coworker of mine, both Muslims, are also completely opposed to this. Religion isn't some inherently evil thing. You need to look at which parts are cultural and separate those out.

I'd mod you up if I had mod points right now. I'm a Thelemite, which is a religion that doesn't require belief in a god or the supernatural, and many of us are atheists. As it stands, I can't go anywhere without some Dawkins or Hitchens type atheist telling me that I'm "delusional" for being religious. Every time a news article mentions religion, a bunch of atheists have to chime in about how destructive "religion" is. At this point, at least where I'm standing, it's worse than Christians who try to force their views on people. Honestly, if it weren't for religion, any philosophy or political ideology (even democracy, capitalism, etc) would be used to justify the same fucked up things that a tiny minority of people use religion to justify.

There's a reason Upton Sinclair wrote "The Jungle" and a reason we have regulation in the first place. Unregulated business turns into corporate tyranny. Competition would disappear overnight through monopolistic hoarding of resources, price fixing, and other forms of collusion and founding a company to compete and change the industry would go right out the window with it.

It's not legal, actually. It's illegal under the name "parading without a permit."

The place my neurologist sent me for testing only tested with fluorescents, but it did show up on the EEG. Psychogenic seizures don't show up. Also, I've had seizures when friends accidentally forgot to screw in incandescent lights instead of their normal CFLs when I came to visit. I didn't have any prior knowledge that they were using CFLs and we only discovered it *after* I reacted to them. It's hard enough to get an appointment for testing (let alone getting to the appointment; my girlfriend is the only way I can get there since I can't drive and need to best escorted in with a blindfold), let alone asking them to set up something specific with multiple lamps, different types of lights, lampshades, etc, which may not be all that accurate anyway because the people slamming me on /. would just claim it wasn't truly blind because maybe I could distinguish between the bulbs based on the colour of the light. I don't get why people are attacking me on here. I have a serious health problem and I'm not asking for a ban on CFLs or a change in anyone's lifestyle... I do however want people to be aware of what I'm going through.

As far as the people who say everyone would know about this if I truly had this problem, it's simply not true. The media had no interest in picking this up, I wrote to all of the politicians in my state (California) and only got generic template responses, I tell everyone I meet, but the information just doesn't spread. I'm not looking for handouts, to push some agenda, or anything. I just want to be able to see in my house after dark.

Mine is one of the many that uses LED backlights. CCFL (cold cathode fluorescent) is on the way out.

I can't enter buildings. I work from home and have to go blindfolded when I see a doctor or dentist. My girlfriend has to lead me into buildings and people constantly stare and ask rude questions. My LCD monitor with a DC-powered LED backlight is just fine.

I never said anything about banning CFLs, I said I should be able to use incandescent lights. The kind of seizure you describe is called a grand mal seizure. There are other kinds of seizures that are also pretty horrible. I do in fact lose consciousness and fall to the ground under these lights. Don't think I've bitten my tongue, but I've hit my head pretty hard. I think my neurologist knows a lot more about this than you do.

You are just about the rudest person I've ever met. Guess what? I can't drive a car, go into office buildings, etc. I wear a blindfold to the dentist and can't go bowling or to the movies with my friends. I can't look at old "box" style TVs either. It's pretty awful and people like you don't help. Computers are fine because my LED-lit flatscreen monitor runs on DC power and doesn't flicker.

Mod this guy up. That's exactly it. Stating that they are "technically" not banned doesn't change the reality of the situation. Also, whoever modded me as a troll, I'm not trolling. I have serious adverse health effects from CFLs.

Modern LED "replacement bulbs" are directional and too dim. They still have a long way to go. Also, if hooked up to alternating current or put on a dimmer, they most certainly do strobe. As for CFLs not strobing... everyone says that they flicker at 22 kHz or something ridiculous, but they give me instant seizures anyway, so I'm not quite convinced. I'm sorry, but it's not the government's business to be telling people what kind of lighting they can use in their own homes, *especially* before there is a *real* alternative. Even if they made an exception for people with health problems, it'll still be next to impossible for me to get these lights as there won't be much financial motivation for companies to continue producing them.

Now maybe they can reverse that ridiculous incandescent light ban. CFL bulbs give me seizures and I have no viable alternative to incandescents. I'd rather not live in the dark.