6,776 Matching Annotations
  1. Jan 2019
    1. Consider film of the same thickness as paper, although thinner film will certainly be usable.

      Or no film at all, just a digital version that records it on a device that can easily be transferred to a computer with just a cord.

    2. The cord which trips its shutter may reach down a man's sleeve within easy reach of his fingers.

      Now the common public has selfie sticks that take pictures on a phone that can do more than simply call someone.

    3. They have done their part on the devices that made it possible to turn back the enemy, have worked in combined effort with the physicists of our allies. They have felt within themselves the stir of achievement. They have been part of a great team. Now, as peace approaches, one asks where they will find objectives worthy of their best.

      This makes me think of A Farewell to Arms where one of the surgeons was considered the best in his field during WW1 but how his knowledge of amputation and dealing with bullet wounds would not work for him after he returned home from the war as that is not a common need when away from the battlefield.

    4. burying their old professional competition in the demand of a common cause, have shared greatly and learned much. It has been exhilarating to work in effective partnership. Now, for many, this appears to be approaching an end.

      What is interesting is how individuals still share their knowledge to create new things, artists and scientists collaborating together, but how there is still that tight restriction that controls what can be done. New inventions, artworks, music, and tools are still copyrighted and individuals must apply to work with them. You also have inventors that place an outrageous price tag on some of their products, limiting the number of people who can buy them and find out what things they can do that are beyond even the mind of the tool's creator.

    5. A memex is a device in which an individual stores all his books, records, and communications, and which is mechanized so that it may be consulted with exceeding speed and flexibility. It is an enlarged intimate supplement to his memory.It consists of a desk, and while it can presumably be operated from a distance, it is primarily the piece of furniture at which he works. On the top are slanting translucent screens, on which material can be projected for convenient reading. There is a keyboard, and sets of buttons and levers. Otherwise it looks like an ordinary desk.

      A desktop computer, but via a transparency projector...in any case, fun that Bush named his early PC "meme." I'm imagining his concept of a network to accomplish this would be something of a vacuum-tube system.

    6. The personnel officer of a factory drops a stack of a few thousand employee cards into a selecting machine, sets a code in accordance with an established convention, and produces in a short time a list of all employees who live in Trenton and know Spanish. Even such devices are much too slow when it comes, for example, to matching a set of fingerprints with one of five million on file.

      Tonally, post-apocalyptic – there's a wonder at the future in this article, but also a strong current of fear. This very common, current technology reads like something straight out of 1984 – a book which would not be published for another 4 years.

    7. Two centuries ago Leibnitz invented a calculating machine which embodied most of the essential features of recent keyboard devices, but it could not then come into use. The economics of the situation were against it: the labor involved in constructing it, before the days of mass production, exceeded the labor to be saved by its use, since all it could accomplish could be duplicated by sufficient use of pencil and paper. Moreover, it would have been subject to frequent breakdown, so that it could not have been depended upon; for at that time and long after, complexity and unreliability were synonymous.

      Reminds me of the current struggle with things like quantum-computing and renewable energy. Their complexity and cost, in a capitalist economic system which values profit over all else, make it so that investing in technology which would improve over time or has the potential for greater uses down the line, just for the sake of improvement (or even for more pressing reasons) when their work can be replicated with existing technology no matter how laborious or harmful, is dis-incentivized.

    8. it has provided a record of ideas and has enabled man to manipulate and to make extracts from that record so that knowledge evolves and endures throughout the life of a race rather than that of an individual.

      Wikipedia anyone? Though, generally this seems like what would now be a reference to many institutions and libraries' efforts to digitize books, research, and culture – I doubt that Bush could have imagined (or wanted) the limitations on access to this information that broadly exist (or its use as a vector with which to make money).

    9. Science has provided the swiftest communication between individuals

      Seems a lot like internet messaging and texting – although I'd imagine here, Bush is talking about more basic telecommunications.

    1. he was 6 foot 3, 6 foot 4 at that age.

      I noticed that Branch brings up Boogaard's height a lot and uses the word "big" repeatedly. As we go into Boogaard's past, we learn that he was picked on for his height and even though he kept a smile, he was still internally brought down by it. But I think his height is what fed him during hockey fights, he realizes that bigger is stronger in the hockey world and although he may not feel useful outside of the hockey world, he instead feels strong when the hockey game starts.

    1. if you tell people that they have a genetic predisposition to certain health characteristics, such as a low capacity for exercise or a tendency to overeat, their bodies start to respond accordingly. Even if their DNA does not actually contain the gene variants in question.

      I think if someone does tell you about this genetic disposition about overeating or not exercising, and our body tends to respond differently it's because our mind is telling our body that we need to slow down and watch what we eat and then we make plans to go to the gym or for runs.

    1. "defamiliarization": how to tell a well-known tale so as to "make it new."4

      The ability to take a well known social issue like the slave trade and present it in a different way than it has been throughout history (rendering it unfamiliar to readers), brings a new light to the topic and can be very powerful in magnifying public perception.

      I see this concept carried over into a lot of the publishing produced today in a variety of ways. I've even came across a post on the internet that I think used defamiliarization to describe Disney movies in a disturbing way: "Girl kidnapped by a man driven insane by his grotesque disfigurement grows to love her captor in a case study of Stockholm Syndrome." (Beauty and the Beast)

      Using defamiliarization in writing helps us to truly see a story or idea again, since we may have become desensitized to it from seeing it on a daily basis.

    1. I think this is such a powerful statement. It is very important that we as educators are finding new and efficient ways of learning so that every student can understand and soak in new information. It is so crucial that you know your students and know that everyone learns in a different way and may not be able to understand the way others do.

  2. Dec 2018
    1. The Museum of Viral Memory’s House Mac, Vicki, reading User 23187425’s search queries (from I feel better after I type to you):

      Vime writes: "Visit Lot49 and read the text for yourself. As well, take the time to read the comments on Mr. Claburn's blog about user 23187425. There is a great deal of conjecture, and perhaps the beginning of an outline of who or what made these wonderfully enigmatic searches. The voice of Vicki may be more appropriate than we initially imagined." Perhaps the voice of Vicki, a robotic computer default, may be especially appropriate in reading this text due to the methodical nature of the entires (approximately every 30 seconds) or, as a commentator from Search-ID: Psychic analysis of AOL users and their search logs writes, "I think something else is going on here, though I'd have no idea how and why…". Perhaps something in the search-engine backend holds clues about this user's search history.

    1. Narrator: The danger of their new occupation helped cultivate an air of reckless bravado among the pilots of the Escadrille. “If I should be killed in this war,” one of Chapman’s fellow pilots wrote home, “I will at least die as a man should.” Michael Neiberg, Historian: They throw outlandish parties. They have two lion cubs, Whiskey and Soda, as their mascots. Celebrities from all over Europe want to have dinner with them, want to see them. So they have this devil-may-care attitude. They don’t really need the French army’s discipline. The French army needs them more than they need the French army. They fly in their bathrobes. They do more or less whatever they want. Narrator: The Lafayette Escadrille made headlines in the United States and an American film crew arrived in France to chronicle the exploits of Victor Chapman and his fellow aviators. Voice: Victor Chapman: Dear Father, [We] roared and buzzed . . . past the camera man, up into the air. Then one at a time we rushed by him. I must say that he had nerve. . . You will see it all, I expect, sometime this summer; for it is to be given to some American cinema company in Paris Andrew Carroll, Writer: They’re very popular and regardless of what Americans felt about the war itself, these guys were in a way heroes. They were kind of like the early astronauts. Narrator: For all their fame, and often reckless bravery, the pilots of the Lafayette Escadrille understood that the odds against their survival were daunting. On June 23rd, Victor Chapman dove into a dogfight, trying to rescue some of his comrades. He shot down three German planes, before being overwhelmed, his plane riddled with bullets. He became the first American flier to give his life for France. A French friend of the Chapman’s wrote to Victor’s father shortly after his death. “I have just left the Church . . . after attending the service in honor of your son… The self sacrifice of this one who comes to us, and places himself at our side, for no other reason than to make right triumph over wrong, is worthy of . . . honor. America has sent us this sublime youth, and our gratitude for him is such that it flows back upon his country.” Richard Rubin, Writer: They were handsome, well-bred young men who went off to do what they thought was right, even though the United States didn’t want to get involved in the fight at that point. And they were flying airplanes which captured the imagination of the entire world. To this day, the image that we think of often when we think of World War I is an aviator with his goggles and his leather cap and his long silk scarf. They were a very tiny minority of any fighting force. But they were, in essence, the face that all the armies wanted to show the enemy and the world.

      How did war shape masculinity?

    2. Horrified by what the war had become, in April of 1915, a group of delegates from the Woman’s Peace Party set off for the International Congress of Women, in The Hague. The WPP numbered more than 40,000 women nationwide, and their goal was the creation of an internationally sanctioned framework for an end to the war. The president was Jane Addams. Helen Zoe Veit, Historian: Jane Addams was in some ways the preeminent progressive. She founded a settlement house in Chicago called Hull House that was a place where immigrants and poor people could go to get help, to get education. She toured the country as a lecturer, in the name of peace. She was one of the most visible women in America at this time. Narrator: “We do not think that by raising our hands we can make the armies cease slaughter.” Addams admitted, “[But] we do think it is fitting that women should meet and take counsel to see what may be done.” One of the peace movement’s harshest critics, former president, Theodore Roosevelt, lashed out at Addams and her fellow pacifists.  “It is base and evil to clamor for peace in the abstract,” he thundered, “when silence is kept about concrete and hideous wrongs done to humanity at this very moment.”  The women were undeterred. Roosevelt was a “barbarian”, they responded, “out of his element” and “half a century out of date. More than a thousand women, from 12 different nations, attended the conference, including representatives from Germany and Austria-Hungary. Kimberly Jensen, Historian: Addams and women from many nations gathered to say war must end, and we must not engage in this conflict. The world has come too far to allow a barbarous war like this to happen and to really destroy what we have built. She saw alliances among women across national boundaries to be a very important pathway to peace. Michael Kazin, Historian: The reason why Jane Addams and other pacifist feminists go to The Hague is to put pressure on Wilson to get involved in really backing up with actions what he’s been saying all along which is that it is the role of the United States to help mediate the war. And so in a sense this is a citizen’s peace initiative which is trying to nudge Wilson to do the right thing.   Narrator: On her return to America, Jane Addams met with Wilson six times. Christopher Capozzola, Historian: He hears from her about what she’s seen in Europe. And I think it clearly influences him by making him think that his instinct that America should have a leadership role in settling the peace is a correct one.

      How did women's pacificsm lead to involvement in politics?

    1. NewsNightly NewsMeet the PressDatelineMSNBCTODAYSearchSponsored ByHalf of women in STEM have experienced gender discrimination at work, study finds Share this —U.S. newsHalf of women in STEM have experienced gender discrimination at work, study finds An Assistant Professor of Genetics and Developmental Biology works on stem cells.Spencer Platt / Getty Images filemps._execAd("interstitial");Breaking News EmailsGet breaking news alerts and special reports. The news and stories that matter, delivered weekday mornings.SUBSCRIBEJan. 9, 2018 / 2:26 PM CST / Updated Jan. 9, 2018 / 2:26 PM CSTBy Elizabeth ChuckHalf of all women working in science, technology, engineering and math have experienced gender discrimination at work, according to a new study released the day after a disgraced Google engineer filed a lawsuit claiming white conservative men are the true victims of Silicon Valley.James Damore was fired from Google after writing a 10-page memo citing women's "neuroticism" as a reason there are fewer female workers in high-stress jobs at the search giant. The lawsuit he filed Monday argues that Google was so overly concerned with filling gender and racial quotas that it was hurting male employees as well as potential male employees.Video Will Begin In...3Fired Google engineer James Damore defends his manifesto about diversityAug. 10, 201702:34But a study out on Tuesday from the Pew Research Center, which polled more than 4,900 workers in the U.S., found that in the traditionally male-dominated fields of science, technology, engineering and math (STEM), only 19 percent of men said they had experienced gender discrimination at work, versus 50 percent of women.mps._execAd("boxinline");In certain STEM subsets, the proportion of women reporting discrimination was even higher: 78 percent of those who work in majority-male workplaces reported gender discrimination, followed by 74 percent of those working in computer jobs.Even outside of STEM, the numbers were high, with 41 percent of women in non-STEM jobs saying they've dealt with discrimination, the Pew study found."The challenges that women in STEM face often echo the challenges of all working women," said Cary Funk, lead author of the report and Pew's director of science and society research. "What the study does is take a broad-based look at the issues facing the STEM workforce. I think they really speak to the complex issues surrounding diversity in the workplace."The Pew study, which was conducted last July and August, before Hollywood's sexual misconduct scandal led to a national reckoning, also polled women on sexual harassment. Both groups were equally likely to say they had experienced sexual harassment at work — 22 percent.mps._execAd("boxinline",0,1,false);Both groups were less likely than their male counterparts to think that women are "usually treated fairly" when it comes to opportunities for promotion and advancement.RecommendedVideo Will Begin In...3Penny Marshall, famed actress and comedian, dead at 75Video Will Begin In...3Actress Penny Marshall dead at 75Damore's viewpoint, both in and outside of Google, is disputed. Google faces a separate suit filed by three women who allege the company pays women less than men for similar work and gives them less opportunity for promotions, bonuses and raises — a claim Google denies.Stephanie Newby, the CEO of Crimson Hexagon, an artificial intelligence company that provides consumer insights based on publicly available data, said she was "not at all surprised" by Pew's findings.In 2004, Newby founded Golden Seeds, an investment firm that provides capital to women-led businesses. At Crimson Hexagon, she said she has made a point of hiring and promoting qualified female candidates after seeing first-hand the challenges that women entrepreneurs and women in male-oriented jobs face.mps._execAd("boxinline",0,2,false);"We need environments where women can thrive, not be cornered about how they look or have to think about the kinds of things that make them worry about being different or trying to prove themselves, because so much energy can be expended on that instead of getting the job done," she said. "I think it provides a competitive advantage for us that we have women in senior positions."by Taboolaby TaboolaSPONSORED STORIESNationLandlines Are Disappearing with This Increasingly Popular OptionNationUndoExperianWhat is Alternative Credit Data?ExperianUndoby Taboolaby TaboolaSPONSORED STORIESDroneX ProThis $99 Drone Might Be The Most Amazing Invention In 2018DroneX ProUndoMy Smart Gadgets19 Insanely Cool Gadgets That Are Going To Sell Out This YearMy Smart GadgetsUndoUSA TodayMilitary Dad Comes Home To Unexpected ReactionUSA TodayUndogo.gadgetspost.com23 Cool Products Flying Off Shelves These Holidaysgo.gadgetspost.comUndoMicrosoft AzureHere’s What Makes An Azure Free Account So Valuable...Microsoft AzureUndoGadgets PostThe 19 Best Products Of 2018 RankedGadgets PostUndoTactical WatchMilitary Watch Everybody in United States is Talking AboutTactical WatchUndoTact WatchFinally. The Smart Watch Every Man In United States Has Been Waiting For!Tact WatchUndoU.S. newsSenate passes sweeping criminal justice reform billThe House is expected to take up the Senate version of the bill at a later date before sending it to the president.Senate Majority Leader Republican Mitch McConnell speaks during a news conference on negotiations to avoid a partial shutdown of the federal government on Capitol Hill on Dec. 18, 2018.Michael Reynolds / EPABreaking News EmailsGet breaking news alerts and special reports. The news and stories that matter, delivered weekday mornings.SUBSCRIBEDec. 18, 2018 / 8:02 PM CST / Updated 8:38 PM CSTBy Rebecca Shabad and Phil HelselWASHINGTON — The Senate passed a huge criminal law reform bill on Tuesday night, seizing on bipartisan support for the broadest set of changes to federal crime statutes in a generation.A rare coalition of conservatives, liberals, activists, prosecutors and defense attorneys — spanning the political spectrum — pushed senators to pass the "First Step Act" by a final vote of 87-12.mps._execAd("boxinline",0,3,false);The House is expected to take up the Senate version of the bill at a later date. The House passed a similar version of the bill back in May by a wide margin, 360-59.President Donald Trump announced in November that he backs the legislation.Supporters of the bill claim that changes passed in the Senate would make America's criminal justice system fairer, reduce overcrowding and save taxpayer dollars — much to the benefit of drug and non-violent offenders.The bill would not affect state prisons. It only covers federal prisoners, who make up less than 10 percent of America's prison population.mps._execAd("boxinline",0,4,false);Trump quickly jumped on Twitter to hail the bill’s passage, and said "America is the greatest Country in the world and my job is to fight for ALL citizens, even those who have made mistakes.""This will keep our communities safer, and provide hope and a second chance, to those who earn it. In addition to everything else, billions of dollars will be saved. I look forward to signing this into law!” the president tweeted.Durbin: Kushner 'very important partner' in passing criminal justice reform billDec. 18, 201802:44The Senate bill overcame late obstacles by Sens. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and John Kennedy, R-La.RecommendedSchool district police officer hit and run caught on cameraMcConnell convinced government shutdown won't happenCotton railed against the First Step Act as a "jailbreak" and said too many crimes were being included to allow prisoners consideration for early release.mps._execAd("boxinline",0,5,false);Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, in urging senators to reject an amendment sponsored by Cotton, said “this law is centered towards those people that are the least violent people that are in prison already," and that “we’re only going to help low-level offenders.""Let's see if we can keep our bipartisan coalition together, to pass a bill that the president said that he is ready to sign," Grassley said. The amendment was defeated.A major provision of the bill gives judges more leeway to diverge from strict mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders with criminal histories.House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., tweeted after the Senate vote: "Criminal justice reform is about giving more Americans a chance at redemption. The House looks forward to sending it to the president to become law."Rebecca ShabadRebecca Shabad is a congressional reporter for NBC News, based in Washington.Phil HelselPhil Helsel is a reporter for NBC News.David K. Li and Frank Thorp V contributed.MORE FROM newsAboutContactCareersPrivacy policyTerms of ServiceSiteMapAdvertiseAdChoices© 2018 NBC UNIVERSAL

      What is our praxis here? What do we advocate for here? The whole article is just stating problems.

    1. Individualism is a concept that is highlighted in every motivational spiel, but does it really exist? The child in me would like to believe that it does, but I cannot ignore the clones that wandered the hallways of my high school. Society promotes individuality, yet there are little to no changes in our tendency to conform. As teenagers, we want to fit in, so we follow the crowd. Who would willingly outcast themselves from society? Even beyond high school, we are naturally inclined to assimilate ourselves into a community. That is why, when words such as “individuality” are defined, it seems a little far-fetched. The Merriam-Webster dictionary states that individuality is a “total character peculiar to and distinguishing an individual from others.” Is it possible to be this unique? Or are we unconsciously mimicking those around us? To what extent are we influenced by social norms and the behaviors of others?

      In my first draft, the introductory paragraph was a weak set up for the remainder of the essay. I not only failed to hook the audience, but I also questioned the existence of individualism without explaining why I had those doubts. The paragraph as a whole was rushed and impersonal. In the final draft, I had to split the introductory paragraph into two. I wanted to use the opening paragraphs to successfully introduce individuality and explain why its existence may be farfetched. I switched to first person to give the essay a more personal, dynamic feel; I introduced my high school to catch the audience's attention and explain why I, as a writer, feel passionate about this topic. By using the definition of individualism and the anecdote of my high school, I think I am able to effectively convince my audience that this is a question worth exploring.

    1. I stood under the beating sun, my shoes covered in rust-colored dirt, as the Himba (an indigenous Namibian tribe)’s signature earthly smell from the clay they use to cover their bodies wafted into my nostrils. My family had just presented the tribe with some gifts as a sign of respect, but there was no way to communicate what our gifts were to be used for, or any way to tell if they were pleased, offended, or simply confused. At the time, I was too focused on the obvious language barrier, but as I look back, I realize that maybe I couldn’t tell what the Himba were thinking because they used body language or wore facial expressions different than the ones we were used to. Although judging someone’s emotion based on what we see may be considered an innate ability, perception of facial expressions of emotion may actually be culturally bound. For example, would someone in Arkansas be able to tell what someone in Japan is feeling, just from the expression on their face? When traveling, I often wonder if it is just the language barrier that impedes tourists and locals from understanding each other, or if there is more in the way of full comprehension between these two groups, such as the way people convey their emotions through the expressions on their faces. 

      I deleted my whole introduction and replaced it with this vignette to engage the reader and show why my topic matters to me. Originally, I was never satisfied with how I started the paper and thought I had a weak introduction but wasn't sure how to change it. Although I knew why I was interested in the topic, I tried to go deeper and think about what might've influenced my interest and realized it came from interacting with people of different cultures from a young age.

    1. I think this deserves a longer annotation. I suspect that the "let's get on with it" sentiment, as attractive as it is, may be unrealistic for a couple of reasons First, the tools being leveraged are not uniquely employed by traditional humanities disciplines. When the topic modelling community consists of social scientists and search engine creators, there will inevitably be talk about how they can be applied within the context of literary criticism. Second, the lit crit field itself has passed through a period in which those who do not examine their methods critically are stamped as committers of the most heinous intellectual (and political) crimes. When digital humanists engage in such introspection, however, the terms in which they do so are so foreign that those who follow more traditional paradigms tend to have knee-jerk reactions. So the problem will probably never go away. But you are right that we can get on with our own research and satisfy ourselves that we have learnt something. Ultimately, achieving a critical mass of people who can use DH methods to do so will quiet down some of the angst.

      As an added note, much of the defensiveness and polemic dates back five years or so. It's worthwhile looking at Andrew Piper's Enumerations to see the difference in tone in 2018.

    1. shouldn’t struggle to find employment

      Interesting. Thus far I have seen a tremendous problem with government jobs. I have seen first hand how people with guaranteed jobs can be difficult, lack motivation and bring down the rest of the team. Not sure that guaranteeing a job is a great thing. As with the two issues above, Medicare and Housing, your solution is to increase the role of government. But each time you cite a government program that should take the responsibility we find corruption, complexity and/or inefficiency. So, can it be done? Sure. But at what cost? Is the main issue really that there are structural barriers to employment? I am not sure.

      How will you assess success. Is 100% employment the measure of a successful plan? Would you cut other assistance programs since now all people would be able to pay for all their needs? How will you pay the estimated $200-400B required to enact this plan? Oh, yeah, a tax on the middle class, again.

      Just a few things to think about.

      Minimum wage laws tend to increase unemployment. I know, you may say it's those evil capitalist again, squeezing the working person. But no, the majority of businesses in America are small businesses. 89% of all firms have fewer than 20 workers.

      https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=NES_2015_00A1&prodType=table

      So, minimum wage laws are a great way of hurting the small business, the majority of business, in favor of the large business. If a mom and pop store has to pay wages that are higher than what they can afford, they will either cut employees or cut hours, or cut low skilled workers and hire only skilled workers. In Seattle in 2016, there was an attempt to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour. The net result was decrease in low-skilled jobs, and an expansion of large businesses.

      So, minimum wages sound great, but they tend to concentrate wealth in the hands of the already wealthy. Unintended consequences of well-intentioned policies.

      There is a theme here. Good intentions with a particularly marxian point of view inevitably lead to bad results.

      What is the role of a low-paying job. The role has always been as a training ground for inexperienced workers to have a sort of internship where they learn basic job skills. Then they move on to better jobs. We know that this is still how low-wage jobs function. These are valuable places of transition. They are entry points into the market.

    2. Medicare For All +

      Love this idea. I really want all people to have optimal health. Good health benefits the individual and the greater community.

      However, expanding a poorly running system seems like a bad idea.

      The costs of Medicare for All for 10 years are estimated to be about $32 trillion, according to the Mercatus Center, a free market-oriented think tank at George Mason University, as well as an earlier study by the Urban Institute's Health Policy Center.

      Cortez has no way of paying for this. So, it has to be paid for by the middle class, as all things are. If you tax the rich, that may not increase revenue. Cortez claims $2T in increased revenues by taxing the rich. Revenue sometimes goes up when there are tax cuts, sometimes when there are tax increases. Just wishing that more revenue will come from taxing the "rich" has no inherent truthfulness to it.

      Medicare and health care in the US is several times more expensive than similar systems in Europe. Why? I don't see her analysis of why the best universal system, that of the UK can cost about $3,400 per person, whereas in the US the cost is $8,500. Expanding this expensive, inefficient system to all people seems like a bad idea. Why not propose a better system?

      Unlike most European countries, in the USA pharmaceuticals are allowed to market directly to consumers. Plans similar to Medicare may work out well in Europe, but the exact same plan will have drastically different end results in America.

      She claims that prices for co-pays, premiums and deductibles are skyrocketing under our current health system that includes The Affordable Care Act. How is this going to be any different under Medicare for All? Medicare prices are rising. Compared to European models, Medicare participants pay a lot more and get a lot less.

      Medicare as of 2018 is drawing down its trust fund assets. The fund will be depleted by 2026. So, we can't even keep the current Medicare alive, how is Cortez going to pay for Medicare for All? Wishful thinking and good intentions cannot pay for it. The only people that will end up paying are the diminishing middle class.

      Medicare is bloated, complex and inefficient. So, unless I see more specifics on this plan (Medicare for All) and how it will differ from Medicare, how it will cut prices, how it will limit pharmaceutical's direct access to consumers, and how this plan is not just expansion of a decrepit system, I am not convinced at all.

      Sources: Comparison of health care systems: https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror-wall-2014-update-how-us-health-care-system

      UK: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/05/americans-uk-health-system-trump-nhs

    1. Any given book_ of his library /_and presumably other textual material, such as notes/ can thus be called up and consulted with far greater facility than if it were taken from a shelf

      This passage in Vannevar Bush's "As We May Think" may be the first mention of what we now think of as digital annotation. The passage in the original article is slighly different... you can see it here.

    1. An alien . . . whose removal is unlikely in the reasonably foreseeable future, may be detained for additional periods of up to six months only if the release of the alien will threaten the national security of the United States or the safety of the community or any person.

      The government can detain someone for as long as they want if they think the person might be dangerous. That seems to go against due process, but at the same time it might prevent a terrorist attack. It seems are we are sacrificing privacy for security .

    1. n particular, describing all struggles against imperialism as ‘decolonizing’ creates a convenient ambiguity between decolonization and social justice work,especially among people of color, queer people, and other groups minoritized by the settler nation-state. ‘We are all colonized,’ may be a true statement but is deceptively embracive and vague, its inference: ‘None of us are settlers.’ Equivocation, or callingeverything by the same name, is a move towards innocence that is especially vogue in coalition politics among people of color

      Category 1: Close Reading

      This passage reminds me a little of the Paris reading we did last week. I don't think these two are saying the same message (altough I would imagine the authors would agree with each other), however, I think there is a link between what both authors are saying. The commonality I found is that both authors are saying we need to be better in the language we use. Some of the things we are saying -- "none of us are settlers", "cultural relevance" -- aren't helping make change happen.

      This passage in particular is reminds me of the phrase "all lives matter". This phrase is, as the passage says, "creates a convenient ambiguity between decolonization and social justice work, especially among people of color, queer people, and other groups minoritized by the settler nation-state." Saying "all lives matter" is blatantly ignoring the actual issues that sparked the "Black lives matter" movement in addition to trying to relieve responsability from themselves. This language and ideology does nothing to actually work towards any form of decolonization.

    2. ather, because the prevalence of the adoption narrativein American literature, film, television, holidays and history books far exceeds the actual occurrences of adoptions, we are interested in how this narrative spins a fantasy that an individual settler can become innocent, indeed heroic and indigenized, against a backdrop of national guilt. The adoption fantasy is the mythical trump card desired by critical settlers who feel remorse about settler colonialism, one that absolves them from the inheritance of settler crimes and that bequeaths a new inheritance of Native-ness and claims to land (which is a reaffirmation of what the settler project has been all along).

      Category 1: Opinion

      I have encountered instances of people doing this to justify their cultural appropriation. I have had people who are racialized as White tell me that it's okay for them to wear certain forms of tradtional, culturally and historically rooted dress. Their reasoning was because they know a lot about the history and culture regarding the dress. However, I think it's important to point out that you may have knowledge of every aspect of a certain culture, but that knowledge does not translate into ownership or absolution from Whiteness/coloniality.

  3. Nov 2018
    1. However, we can all think of examples in which the music does not match what appears to be developing as part of the visual narrative and dialogue. For example, in the context of a slasher film, if several fun-loving teenagers are talking and laughing amongst themselves, but mid-conversation the musical score introduces an ominous, low synthesizer tone (a la Alan Howarth horror film scores), the incongruity between the laughing teenagers and the menacing musical sound will trigger an emotional response in the viewer-listener. In such situations, while the visual portion of the film may portray one meaning, the musical score is allowed to express a different (in this case, underlying psychological) meaning, providing a sense of foreboding…a harbinger of unpleasant events likely to follow.

      A great example of when scene and music do not align, but the music leads viewers to what should be expected in the near future. The music manipulates audience members to portray a scene within a scene.

    1. n the latter half of the 20th century, youth participated in social movements?from the Civil Rights Movement to the recent WTO demonstrations (McAdam, 1988; Tarrow, 1998). However, the lack of a recent social movement that follows previous models of focusing on a single, monolithic issue may be linked to what Foucault (1994) describes as the diffuse and dispersed ways in which power and oppression operate in the current period. P

      I think the youth has started to find their voice again. we're being heard. we just need to be listened to.

    1. These days I tend to think of dystopias as being fashionable, perhaps lazy, maybe even complacent, because one pleasure of reading them is cozying into the feeling that however bad our present moment is, it’s nowhere near as bad as the ones these poor characters are suffering through. Vicarious thrill of comfort as we witness/imagine/experience the heroic struggles of our afflicted protagonists—rinse and repeat. Is this catharsis? Possibly more like indulgence, and creation of a sense of comparative safety. A kind of late-capitalist, advanced-nation schadenfreude about those unfortunate fictional citizens whose lives have been trashed by our own political inaction. If this is right, dystopia is part of our all-encompassing hopelessness. On the other hand, there is a real feeling being expressed in them, a real sense of fear. Some speak of a “crisis of representation” in the world today, having to do with governments—that no one anywhere feels properly represented by their government, no matter which style of government it is. Dystopia is surely one expression of that feeling of detachment and helplessness. Since nothing seems to work now, why not blow things up and start over? This would imply that dystopia is some kind of call for revolutionary change. There may be something to that. At the least dystopia is saying, even if repetitiously and unimaginatively, and perhaps salaciously, Something’s wrong. Things are bad.
    1. Models such as these might lead us to suspect that what we need may be less an innovation in the delivery system for higher education today than a new conception of the community that we are building both within our institutions and between those institutions and the public they should serve

      This discussion reminds me of a few episodes of season one of the podcast Revisionist History by Malcolm Gladwell. He discusses philanthropy, university grants and how different models can support either 1) a few geniuses or 2) many average people. Here is a link to what I think is the correct episode (but it's worth listening to them all to get to the point, if you're interested in the topic of educational equity. Also: it is definitely just an amazing podcast!)

      http://revisionisthistory.com/episodes/06-my-little-hundred-million

    1. because mainstream readers often do not understand our prose, they are able to assume (sometimes dismissively, and sometimes defensively) that the ideas it contains are overblown and unimportant

      I think this is another important point, though I may just be throwing repeat statements. As people putting out knowledge to the public, we should aim to write in a way that makes our work approachable without compromising its arguments. Michelle's recommendation for training graduate students in different methods of scholarly communication below is a great idea.

    1. support a multi-enumerator environment and the potential for quantitative analysis of observations drawn from shadowing.

      The choice to develop coding after the shadowing is interesting. I can certainly see the advantages based on the discussion that follows. Are there disadvantages to this? I had expected that the coding would be defined in advance. I wonder if there are advantages to defining the coding scheme in advance? This may merit discussion. Even if the author does not think there are advantages it may be worth noting. Often times in social science we want the enumeration process, the coding process, or other stages of the data collection/coding to be independent of one another to avoid bias. So, for example, when administering lab experiments, often times the researchers administering the experiments do not know what the research question is. Or when coding text data the coders often times do not know what the RQ is. Here the author is suggesting that the coder use the information learned from the shadow notes to inform the coding scheme. There are clearly merits to this approach, but the tradeoffs may merit a bit more discussion.

    1. Sahih al-Bukhari 4986 Zayd ibn Thabit said: Abu Bakr sent for me at the time of the battle of al-Yamama, and ‘Umar ibn al-Kattab was with him. Abu Bakr said: ‘Umar has come to me and said, “Death raged at the battle of al-Yamama and took many of the reciters of the Qur’an. I fear lest death in battle overtake the reciters of the Qur’an in the provinces and a large part of the Qur’an be lost. I think you should give orders to collect the Qur’an.” “What?” I asked ‘Umar, “Will you do something which the Prophet of God himself did not do?” “By God,” replied ‘Umar, “it would be a good deed.” ‘Umar did not cease to urge me until God opened my heart to this and I thought as ‘Umar did. Zayd continued: Abu Bakr said to me, “You are a young man, intelligent, and we see no fault in you, and you have already written down the revelation for the Prophet of God, may God bless and save him. Therefore go and seek the Qur’an and assemble it.” By God, if he had ordered me to move a mountain it would not have been harder for me than his order to collect the Qur’an. “What?” I asked, “Will you do something which the Prophet of God himself, may God bless and save him, did not do?” “By God,” replied Abu Bakr, “it would be a good deed.” And he did not cease to urge me until God opened my heart to this as he had opened the hearts of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar. Then I sought out and collected the parts of the Qur’an, whether written on palm leaves or flat stones or in the hearts of men. Thus I found the end of the Surah of Repentance, which I had been unable to find anywhere else, with Abu’l-Khuzayma al-Ansari. These were the verses: “There came to you a Prophet from among yourselves. It grieves him that you sin . . .” to the end. The leaves were with Abu Bakr until his death, then with ‘Umar as long as he lived, and then with Hafsa the daughter of ‘Umar.

      Abu Bakr tells Zayd that because of a war happening many Muslims are dying. He then tells Zayd to collect the Quran. Zayd says he can't do it but Umar says that It would be a good deed. Abu tells him to collect the Quran and Zayd says no, and Abu says that it would be a good deed. After that Zayd went to collect parts of the Quran. This shows how much they revered the Quran.

    1. how the theory that intelli-gence is fixed and unchangeable can lead students to in-terpret academic challenges as a sign that they may lackintelligence

      I think that this is huge especially in elementary school. Since the students are so young, they are all at different developmental levels and educational levels. So when they see their classmates succeeding while they are struggling, they automatically think they are dumb. I often found myself thinking these things as well. If we can change this mindset, students will be more willing to face challenges

    1. de!ne issues of public concern and to exercise power in relation to them.

      I like how the authors included this aspect as well. I think sometimes that we forget about the voice that we have as individuals when we think about strictly solitary actions, as there are many people who may feel and think the same as us

    1. Recently a young woman was gang raped in a university in Nigeria, I think some of us know about that. And the response of many young Nigerians, both male and female, was something along the lines of this: "Yes, rape is wrong. But what is a girl doing in a room with four boys?" Now, if we can forget the horrible inhumanity of that response, these Nigerians have been raised to think of women as inherently guilty, and they have been raised to expect so little of men that the idea of men as savage beings without any control is somehow acceptable. We teach girls shame. "Close your legs." "Cover yourself." We make them feel as though by being born female they're already guilty of something. And so, girls grow up to be women who cannot see they have desire. They grow up to be women who silence themselves. They grow up to be women who cannot say what they truly think, and they grow up -- and this is the worst thing we did to girls -- they grow up to be women who have turned pretense into an art form.

      The fact that we always ask why she was there instead of helping the female who was the victim of a gang rape is just disappointing in a way because we focus more on the fact that SHE was with multiple males, not the fact that we all know that gang rape is wrong and the fact that the males had the nerve to touch a female in such a way is sickening. They have go through out their life traumatized with the fact that this happen to her, possibly making them see a therapist, taking their lives, or living in fear of most me, yet us as people have the nerve to say that she should have covered themselves or closed her legs because of how she dressed that day while she was with them or how she acted around them that may have "sent a hint" to the males in some impossible way.

    2. Now, when a woman says, "I did it for peace in my marriage," she's usually talking about giving up a job, a dream, a career. We teach females that in relationships, compromise is what women do. We raise girls to see each other as competitors -- not for jobs or for accomplishments, which I think can be a good thing, but for attention of men. We teach girls that they cannot be sexual beings in the way that boys are. If we have sons, we don't mind knowing about our sons' girlfriends. But our daughters' boyfriends? God forbid.

      As Adichie said, we tend teach young women to compete for the attention of some young man that they may like, whether that women be a teenager or at least in her 20's (it may be a bigger age but we'll stick a smaller one for the sake of the explanation) and sometimes, it's indirect due to, for example, if the young female is in highschool...since normally you see this issue often here, more than in the real world (unless you look at social media, then you see it more frequently).

    1. n terms of “intimacy” and “openness,” those are traits that we might consider feminine versus perhaps maybe thicker walls, and things that are stronger, and privacy as things that are masculine.Suzanne: I think of Zaha, one of the first female architects that “shifted the plane” and went with softer angles. So softening the plane of an environment, and making things more circular — no square sides at all — it’s more fluid, and we’re seeing a lot more fluidity in workplaces.

      Q: How exactly does the layout of a company encourage or discourage women from joining the workforce? Would it be more fair to say that this feeling of acceptance is contingent upon the people who actually comprise the company?

      Speculative Response: While that may be true in some regard, the layout subtly indicates the overall preferences and beliefs of the company itself, thus either encouraging or discouraging women from joining the company.

    1. o unified military to step in to end the uprisings,

      I feel as an Egyptian who was not directly involved in the revolution, but still followed it closely and was directly affected by many of the outcomes and events, that a lot of both media and Egyptian people themselves were fixed in the romanticism of revolution as a whole. It’s very scary to think of a military coup as liberation. But many Egyptians believed in the perhaps too idealistic notion that some just some simple and peaceful protests would easily bring the swift action of the good-willed and honorable military to dispose of the former regime (here’s a song from the time to show how highly we praised the military - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dskl5eMNmco ). In contrast, Diab’s film paints a much more real image (at some points uncomfortably so) of the daily scenes on the streets during this revolution time. This could present as a shock to many Egyptians that were still involved in the revolution, but may not have actually been on the streets, per se.

    1. He desires to preserve the Government, that it may be administered for all as it was administered by the men who made it. Loyal citizens everywhere have the right to claim this of their government, and the government has no right to withhold or neglect it.

      Constitution is theirs despite not wanting it. I think we have a lot of conflict still in this realm. Some don't see the Constitution as their protection so unnecessary in the 14th, for example, but essential in the 2nd Amendment.

    1. I think this looks great and it should make a great template for further inquiries from other sources in the future! I agree with Prof Kleinman about the year time frame, that's where the rest of the project starts. Another idea we could consider would be to try to look at time frames that correspond with Ben Schmidt's humanities crisis time frames. However...like you say, that's a lot of local news transcripts. The tricking thing is that we don't know how much useable data we will get from one year vs 10 years...but we know that we will get a lot of raw data to sort through when they send us big chunks of time. Processing transcript data for our purposes may prove pretty time consuming so we want to consider that. I'm not sure, as you note, what they would be able to give us, so maybe its good to ask for more and accept less...?

      Anyway I think it's brilliant, Thank you Leo!

  4. Oct 2018
    1. Ex­orcise is good for you, and human beings are past the point at which Na­ture is a help. Our continued survival, and therefore the survival of the planet we're now dominating beyond all doubt, depends on our thinking past Nature.

      This quote seems to hold a lot of weight to it and by saying that we can basically put nature aside is a rather bold statement. I believe that nature is part of the equation and although we may need to think outside of the box, i do not think it has to be in such a drastic manner. The fact that nature is a "ghost" seems a little ambiguous as well. In my opinion nature is not a ghost but most definitely a material concept.

    1. The memex is the name of the hypothetical proto-hypertext system that Vannevar Bush described in his 1945 The Atlantic Monthly article "As We May Think".

      memex

    1.  "What a sublime conception is that of a last judgment!" said he, -- "a righting of all the wrongs of ages! -- a solving of all moral problems, by an unanswerable wisdom! It is, indeed, a wonderful image."    "It is a fearful one to us," said Miss Ophelia.    "It ought to be to me, I suppose," said St. Clare stopping, thoughtfully. "I was reading to Tom, this afternoon, that chapter in Matthew that gives an account of it, and I have been quite struck with it. One should have expected some terrible enormities charged to those who are excluded from Heaven, as the reason; but no, -- they are condemned for not doing positive good, as if that included every possible harm."    "Perhaps," said Miss Ophelia, "it is impossible for a person who does no good not to do harm."    "And what," said St. Clare, speaking abstractedly, but with deep feeling, "what shall be said of one whose own heart, whose education, and the wants of society, have called in vain to some noble purpose; who has floated on, a dreamy, neutral spectator of the struggles, agonies, and wrongs of man, when he should have been a worker?"    "I should say," said Miss Ophelia, "that he ought to repent, and begin now."    "Always practical and to the point!" said St. Clare, his face breaking out into a smile. "You never leave me any time for general reflections, Cousin; you always bring me short up against the actual present; you have a kind of eternal now, always in your mind."    "Now is all the time I have anything to do with," said Miss Ophelia.    "Dear little Eva, -- poor child!" said St. Clare, "she had set her little simple soul on a good work for me."    It was the first time since Eva's death that he had ever said as many words as these to her, and he spoke now evidently repressing very strong feeling. -451-    "My view of Christianity is such," he added, "that I think no man can consistently profess it without throwing the whole weight of his being against this monstrous system of injustice that lies at the foundation of all our society; and, if need be, sacrificing himself in the battle. That is, I mean that I could not be a Christian otherwise, though I have certainly had intercourse with a great many enlightened and Christian people who did no such thing; and I confess that the apathy of religious people on this subject, their want of perception of wrongs that filled me with horror, have engendered in me more scepticism than any other thing."    "If you knew all this," said Miss Ophelia, "why didn't you do it?"    "O, because I have had only that kind of benevolence which consists in lying on a sofa, and cursing the church and clergy for not being martyrs and confessors. One can see, you know, very easily, how others ought to be martyrs."    "Well, are you going to do differently now?" said Miss Ophelia.    "God only knows the future," said St. Clare. "I am braver than I was, because I have lost all; and he who has nothing to lose can afford all risks."    "And what are you going to do?"    "My duty, I hope, to the poor and lowly, as fast as I find it out," said St. Clare, "beginning with my own servants, for whom I have yet done nothing; and, perhaps, at some future day, it may appear that I can do something for a whole class; something to save my country from the disgrace of that false position in which she now stands before all civilized nations."    "Do you suppose it possible that a nation ever will voluntarily emancipate?" said Miss Ophelia.    "I don't know," said St. Clare. "This is a day of great deeds. Heroism and disinterestedness are rising up, here and there, in the earth. The Hungarian nobles -452- set free millions of serfs, at an immense pecuniary loss; and, perhaps, among us may be found generous spirits, who do not estimate honor and justice by dollars and cents."    "I hardly think so," said Miss Ophelia.    "But, suppose we should rise up to-morrow and emancipate, who would educate these millions, and teach them how to use their freedom? They never would rise to do much among us. The fact is, we are too lazy and unpractical, ourselves, ever to give them much of an idea of that industry and energy which is necessary to form them into men. They will have to go north, where labor is the fashion, -- the universal custom; and tell me, now, is there enough Christian philanthropy, among your northern states, to bear with the process of their education and elevation? You send thousands of dollars to foreign missions; but could you endure to have the heathen sent into your towns and villages, and give your time, and thoughts, and money, to raise them to the Christian standard? That's what I want to know. If we emancipate, are you willing to educate? How many families, in your town, would take a negro man and woman, teach them, bear with them, and seek to make them Christians? How many merchants would take Adolph, if I wanted to make him a clerk; or mechanics, if I wanted him taught a trade? If I wanted to put Jane and Rosa to a school, how many schools are there in the northern states that would take them in? how many families that would board them? and yet they are as white as many a woman, north or south. You see, Cousin, I want justice done us. We are in a bad position. We are the more obvious oppressors of the negro; but the unchristian prejudice of the north is an oppressor almost equally severe."    "Well, Cousin, I know it is so," said Miss Ophelia, -- "I know it was so with me, till I saw that it was my duty to overcome it; but, I trust I have overcome it; and I know there are many good people at the -453- north, who in this matter need only to be taught what their duty is, to do it. It would certainly be a greater self-denial to receive heathen among us, than to send missionaries to them; but I think we would do it."    "You would I know," said St. Clare. "I'd like to see anything you wouldn't do, if you thought it your duty!"    "Well, I'm not uncommonly good," said Miss Ophelia. "Others would, if they saw things as I do. I intend to take Topsy home, when I go. I suppose our folks will wonder, at first; but I think they will be brought to see as I do. Besides, I know there are many people at the north who do exactly what you said."    "Yes, but they are a minority; and, if we should begin to emancipate to any extent, we should soon hear from you."    Miss Ophelia did not rely. There was a pause of some moments; and St. Clare's countenance was overcast by a sad, dreamy expression.    "I don't know what makes me think of my mother so much, to-night," he said."I have a strange kind of feeling, as if she were near me. I keep thinking of things she used to say. Strange, what brings these past things so vividly back to us, sometimes!"    St. Clare walked up and down the room for some minutes more, and then said,

      Why must he repent before dying? Why does he see his mother?

    1. They engage in safety behaviors, such as rehearsing exactly what to say in aconversation,

      I do believe this is very common, even in people who don't have SAD. For an example, If you go for an interview tomorrow, there are many people who i'm sure will be having a conversation with themselves in the shower or just in general, making up questions that the interviewer may ask you and you will come up with the best answers you can think of for those questions. Another example would be a first date. I know that my friends and I would always ask eachother what we could say to the guy if theres a time where no one is saying anything. Then, we would come up with questions and answers, just incase it was awkward.

    2. Recent evidence has suggested that people with SAD are actuallyconcerned with both positive and negative evaluation.

      Although i think it is true that people with SAD are concerned with both negative and positive evaluations i definitely think the greater emphasis is placed on the negative aspect of an evaluation process because as humans and social creatures we prefer to be seen in a positive light although i can understand the anxiety in being evaluated positively because it does raise expectations that people may see as impossible to maintain. But being seen negatively can greatly dampen a persons self esteem and willingness to try to do better and may also create more anxiety as more pressure is placed on an individual to do better especially if they felt they did their best during the first evaluation. overall, SAD has both a negative and positive component with a greater contribution to anxiety from the negative component.

    1. The wider public is not, in fact, a major consumer of OA research, George Monbiot notwithstanding. OA may have benefits from the point of view of the consumption of knowledge, but it is less clear that it has equivalent benefits from the perspective of the production of knowledge and, more importantly, the ecology of that production (which includes publishers aligned with academic interests and our learned societies and associations).

      It is far too soon in the transition to OA (which I believe is inevitable even if the business models are as yet unknown), to know what the many benefits will be. And, we in North America and Europe need to think more expansively and listen to researchers in other parts of the world (see, for instance, https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2018/10/25/ask-the-community-and-chefs-how-can-we-achieve-equitable-participation-in-open-research-part-2/).

  5. allred720fa18.commons.gc.cuny.edu allred720fa18.commons.gc.cuny.edu
    1. The advancing speck was observed by the blacks. Their shouts attracted the attention of Don Benito, who, with a return of courtesy, approaching Captain Delano, expressed satisfaction at the coming of some supplies, slight and temporary as they must necessarily prove. Captain Delano responded; but while doing so, his attention was drawn to something passing on the deck below: among the crowd climbing the landward bulwarks, anxiously watching the coming boat, two blacks, to all appearances accidentally incommoded by one of the sailors, violently pushed him aside, which the sailor someway resenting, they dashed him to the deck, despite the earnest cries of the oakum-pickers. “Don Benito,” said Captain Delano quickly, “do you see what is going on there? Look!” But, seized by his cough, the Spaniard staggered, with both hands to his face, on the point of falling. Captain Delano would have supported him, but the servant was more alert, who, with one hand sustaining his master, with the other applied the cordial. Don Benito restored, the black withdrew his support, slipping aside a little, but dutifully remaining within call of a whisper. Such discretion was here evinced as quite wiped away, in the visitor’s eyes, any blemish of impropriety which might have attached to the attendant, from the indecorous conferences before mentioned; showing, too, that if the servant were to blame, it might be more the master’s fault than his own, since, when left to himself, he could conduct thus well. His glance called away from the spectacle of disorder to the more pleasing one before him, Captain Delano could not avoid again congratulating his host upon possessing such a servant, who, though perhaps a little too forward now and then, must upon the whole be invaluable to one in the invalid’s situation. “Tell me, Don Benito,” he added, with a smile–“I should like to have your man here, myself–what will you take for him? Would fifty doubloons be any object?” “Master wouldn’t part with Babo for a thousand doubloons,” murmured the black, overhearing the offer, and taking it in earnest, and, with the strange vanity of a faithful slave, appreciated by his master, scorning to hear so paltry a valuation put upon him by a stranger. But Don Benito, apparently hardly yet completely restored, and again interrupted by his cough, made but some broken reply. Soon his physical distress became so great, affecting his mind, too, apparently, that, as if to screen the sad spectacle, the servant gently conducted his master below. Left to himself, the American, to while away the time till his boat should arrive, would have pleasantly accosted some one of the few Spanish seamen he saw; but recalling something that Don Benito had said touching their ill conduct, he refrained; as a shipmaster indisposed to countenance cowardice or unfaithfulness in seamen. While, with these thoughts, standing with eye directed forward towards that handful of sailors, suddenly he thought that one or two of them returned the glance and with a sort of meaning. He rubbed his eyes, and looked again; but again seemed to see the same thing. Under a new form, but more obscure than any previous one, the old suspicions recurred, but, in the absence of Don Benito, with less of panic than before. Despite the bad account given of the sailors, Captain Delano resolved forthwith to accost one of them. Descending the poop, he made his way through the blacks, his movement drawing a queer cry from the oakum-pickers, prompted by whom, the negroes, twitching each other aside, divided before him; but, as if curious to see what was the object of this deliberate visit to their Ghetto, closing in behind, in tolerable order, followed the white stranger up. His progress thus proclaimed as by mounted kings-at-arms, and escorted as by a Caffre guard of honor, Captain Delano, assuming a good-humored, off-handed air, continued to advance; now and then saying a blithe word to the negroes, and his eye curiously surveying the white faces, here and there sparsely mixed in with the blacks, like stray white pawns venturously involved in the ranks of the chess-men opposed. While thinking which of them to select for his purpose, he chanced to observe a sailor seated on the deck engaged in tarring the strap of a large block, a circle of blacks squatted round him inquisitively eying the process. The mean employment of the man was in contrast with something superior in his figure. His hand, black with continually thrusting it into the tar-pot held for him by a negro, seemed not naturally allied to his face, a face which would have been a very fine one but for its haggardness. Whether this haggardness had aught to do with criminality, could not be determined; since, as intense heat and cold, though unlike, produce like sensations, so innocence and guilt, when, through casual association with mental pain, stamping any visible impress, use one seal–a hacked one. Not again that this reflection occurred to Captain Delano at the time, charitable man as he was. Rather another idea. Because observing so singular a haggardness combined with a dark eye, averted as in trouble and shame, and then again recalling Don Benito’s confessed ill opinion of his crew, insensibly he was operated upon by certain general notions which, while disconnecting pain and abashment from virtue, invariably link them with vice. If, indeed, there be any wickedness on board this ship, thought Captain Delano, be sure that man there has fouled his hand in it, even as now he fouls it in the pitch. I don’t like to accost him. I will speak to this other, this old Jack here on the windlass. He advanced to an old Barcelona tar, in ragged red breeches and dirty night-cap, cheeks trenched and bronzed, whiskers dense as thorn hedges. Seated between two sleepy-looking Africans, this mariner, like his younger shipmate, was employed upon some rigging–splicing a cable–the sleepy-looking blacks performing the inferior function of holding the outer parts of the ropes for him. Upon Captain Delano’s approach, the man at once hung his head below its previous level; the one necessary for business. It appeared as if he desired to be thought absorbed, with more than common fidelity, in his task. Being addressed, he glanced up, but with what seemed a furtive, diffident air, which sat strangely enough on his weather-beaten visage, much as if a grizzly bear, instead of growling and biting, should simper and cast sheep’s eyes. He was asked several questions concerning the voyage–questions purposely referring to several particulars in Don Benito’s narrative, not previously corroborated by those impulsive cries greeting the visitor on first coming on board. The questions were briefly answered, confirming all that remained to be confirmed of the story. The negroes about the windlass joined in with the old sailor; but, as they became talkative, he by degrees became mute, and at length quite glum, seemed morosely unwilling to answer more questions, and yet, all the while, this ursine air was somehow mixed with his sheepish one. Despairing of getting into unembarrassed talk with such a centaur, Captain Delano, after glancing round for a more promising countenance, but seeing none, spoke pleasantly to the blacks to make way for him; and so, amid various grins and grimaces, returned to the poop, feeling a little strange at first, he could hardly tell why, but upon the whole with regained confidence in Benito Cereno. How plainly, thought he, did that old whiskerando yonder betray a consciousness of ill desert. No doubt, when he saw me coming, he dreaded lest I, apprised by his Captain of the crew’s general misbehavior, came with sharp words for him, and so down with his head. And yet–and yet, now that I think of it, that very old fellow, if I err not, was one of those who seemed so earnestly eying me here awhile since. Ah, these currents spin one’s head round almost as much as they do the ship. Ha, there now’s a pleasant sort of sunny sight; quite sociable, too. His attention had been drawn to a slumbering negress, partly disclosed through the lacework of some rigging, lying, with youthful limbs carelessly disposed, under the lee of the bulwarks, like a doe in the shade of a woodland rock. Sprawling at her lapped breasts, was her wide-awake fawn, stark naked, its black little body half lifted from the deck, crosswise with its dam’s; its hands, like two paws, clambering upon her; its mouth and nose ineffectually rooting to get at the mark; and meantime giving a vexatious half-grunt, blending with the composed snore of the negress. The uncommon vigor of the child at length roused the mother. She started up, at a distance facing Captain Delano. But as if not at all concerned at the attitude in which she had been caught, delightedly she caught the child up, with maternal transports, covering it with kisses. There’s naked nature, now; pure tenderness and love, thought Captain Delano, well pleased. This incident prompted him to remark the other negresses more particularly than before. He was gratified with their manners: like most uncivilized women, they seemed at once tender of heart and tough of constitution; equally ready to die for their infants or fight for them. Unsophisticated as leopardesses; loving as doves. Ah! thought Captain Delano, these, perhaps, are some of the very women whom Ledyard saw in Africa, and gave such a noble account of. These natural sights somehow insensibly deepened his confidence and ease. At last he looked to see how his boat was getting on; but it was still pretty remote. He turned to see if Don Benito had returned; but he had not. To change the scene, as well as to please himself with a leisurely observation of the coming boat, stepping over into the mizzen-chains, he clambered his way into the starboard quarter-gallery–one of those abandoned Venetian-looking water-balconies previously mentioned–retreats cut off from the deck. As his foot pressed the half-damp, half-dry sea-mosses matting the place, and a chance phantom cats-paw–an islet of breeze, unheralded, unfollowed–as this ghostly cats-paw came fanning his cheek; as his glance fell upon the row of small, round dead-lights–all closed like coppered eyes of the coffined–and the state-cabin door, once connecting with the gallery, even as the dead-lights had once looked out upon it, but now calked fast like a sarcophagus lid; and to a purple-black tarred-over, panel, threshold, and post; and he bethought him of the time, when that state-cabin and this state-balcony had heard the voices of the Spanish king’s officers, and the forms of the Lima viceroy’s daughters had perhaps leaned where he stood–as these and other images flitted through his mind, as the cats-paw through the calm, gradually he felt rising a dreamy inquietude, like that of one who alone on the prairie feels unrest from the repose of the noon. He leaned against the carved balustrade, again looking off toward his boat; but found his eye falling upon the ribbon grass, trailing along the ship’s water-line, straight as a border of green box; and parterres of sea-weed, broad ovals and crescents, floating nigh and far, with what seemed long formal alleys between, crossing the terraces of swells, and sweeping round as if leading to the grottoes below. And overhanging all was the balustrade by his arm, which, partly stained with pitch and partly embossed with moss, seemed the charred ruin of some summer-house in a grand garden long running to waste. Trying to break one charm, he was but becharmed anew. Though upon the wide sea, he seemed in some far inland country; prisoner in some deserted château, left to stare at empty grounds, and peer out at vague roads, where never wagon or wayfarer passed. But these enchantments were a little disenchanted as his eye fell on the corroded main-chains. Of an ancient style, massy and rusty in link, shackle and bolt, they seemed even more fit for the ship’s present business than the one for which she had been built. Presently he thought something moved nigh the chains. He rubbed his eyes, and looked hard. Groves of rigging were about the chains; and there, peering from behind a great stay, like an Indian from behind a hemlock, a Spanish sailor, a marlingspike in his hand, was seen, who made what seemed an imperfect gesture towards the balcony, but immediately as if alarmed by some advancing step along the deck within, vanished into the recesses of the hempen forest, like a poacher. What meant this? Something the man had sought to communicate, unbeknown to any one, even to his captain. Did the secret involve aught unfavorable to his captain? Were those previous misgivings of Captain Delano’s about to be verified? Or, in his haunted mood at the moment, had some random, unintentional motion of the man, while busy with the stay, as if repairing it, been mistaken for a significant beckoning? Not unbewildered, again he gazed off for his boat. But it was temporarily hidden by a rocky spur of the isle. As with some eagerness he bent forward, watching for the first shooting view of its beak, the balustrade gave way before him like charcoal. Had he not clutched an outreaching rope he would have fallen into the sea. The crash, though feeble, and the fall, though hollow, of the rotten fragments, must have been overheard. He glanced up. With sober curiosity peering down upon him was one of the old oakum-pickers, slipped from his perch to an outside boom; while below the old negro, and, invisible to him, reconnoitering from a port-hole like a fox from the mouth of its den, crouched the Spanish sailor again. From something suddenly suggested by the man’s air, the mad idea now darted into Captain Delano’s mind, that Don Benito’s plea of indisposition, in withdrawing below, was but a pretense: that he was engaged there maturing his plot, of which the sailor, by some means gaining an inkling, had a mind to warn the stranger against; incited, it may be, by gratitude for a kind word on first boarding the ship. Was it from foreseeing some possible interference like this, that Don Benito had, beforehand, given such a bad character of his sailors, while praising the negroes; though, indeed, the former seemed as docile as the latter the contrary? The whites, too, by nature, were the shrewder race. A man with some evil design, would he not be likely to speak well of that stupidity which was blind to his depravity, and malign that intelligence from which it might not be hidden? Not unlikely, perhaps. But if the whites had dark secrets concerning Don Benito, could then Don Benito be any way in complicity with the blacks? But they were too stupid. Besides, who ever heard of a white so far a renegade as to apostatize from his very species almost, by leaguing in against it with negroes? These difficulties recalled former ones. Lost in their mazes, Captain Delano, who had now regained the deck, was uneasily advancing along it, when he observed a new face; an aged sailor seated cross-legged near the main hatchway. His skin was shrunk up with wrinkles like a pelican’s empty pouch; his hair frosted; his countenance grave and composed. His hands were full of ropes, which he was working into a large knot. Some blacks were about him obligingly dipping the strands for him, here and there, as the exigencies of the operation demanded. Captain Delano crossed over to him, and stood in silence surveying the knot; his mind, by a not uncongenial transition, passing from its own entanglements to those of the hemp. For intricacy, such a knot he had never seen in an American ship, nor indeed any other. The old man looked like an Egyptian priest, making Gordian knots for the temple of Ammon. The knot seemed a combination of double-bowline-knot, treble-crown-knot, back-handed-well-knot, knot-in-and-out-knot, and jamming-knot. At last, puzzled to comprehend the meaning of such a knot, Captain Delano addressed the knotter:– “What are you knotting there, my man?” “The knot,” was the brief reply, without looking up. “So it seems; but what is it for?” “For some one else to undo,” muttered back the old man, plying his fingers harder than ever, the knot being now nearly completed. While Captain Delano stood watching him, suddenly the old man threw the knot towards him, saying in broken English–the first heard in the ship–something to this effect: “Undo it, cut it, quick.” It was said lowly, but with such condensation of rapidity, that the long, slow words in Spanish, which had preceded and followed, almost operated as covers to the brief English between. For a moment, knot in hand, and knot in head, Captain Delano stood mute; while, without further heeding him, the old man was now intent upon other ropes. Presently there was a slight stir behind Captain Delano. Turning, he saw the chained negro, Atufal, standing quietly there. The next moment the old sailor rose, muttering, and, followed by his subordinate negroes, removed to the forward part of the ship, where in the crowd he disappeared. An elderly negro, in a clout like an infant’s, and with a pepper and salt head, and a kind of attorney air, now approached Captain Delano. In tolerable Spanish, and with a good-natured, knowing wink, he informed him that the old knotter was simple-witted, but harmless; often playing his odd tricks. The negro concluded by begging the knot, for of course the stranger would not care to be troubled with it. Unconsciously, it was handed to him. With a sort of congé, the negro received it, and, turning his back, ferreted into it like a detective custom-house officer after smuggled laces. Soon, with some African word, equivalent to pshaw, he tossed the knot overboard. All this is very queer now, thought Captain Delano, with a qualmish sort of emotion; but, as one feeling incipient sea-sickness, he strove, by ignoring the symptoms, to get rid of the malady. Once more he looked off for his boat. To his delight, it was now again in view, leaving the rocky spur astern. The sensation here experienced, after at first relieving his uneasiness, with unforeseen efficacy soon began to remove it. The less distant sight of that well-known boat–showing it, not as before, half blended with the haze, but with outline defined, so that its individuality, like a man’s, was manifest; that boat, Rover by name, which, though now in strange seas, had often pressed the beach of Captain Delano’s home, and, brought to its threshold for repairs, had familiarly lain there, as a Newfoundland dog; the sight of that household boat evoked a thousand trustful associations, which, contrasted with previous suspicions, filled him not only with lightsome confidence, but somehow with half humorous self-reproaches at his former lack of it. “What, I, Amasa Delano–Jack of the Beach, as they called me when a lad–I, Amasa; the same that, duck-satchel in hand, used to paddle along the water-side to the school-house made from the old hulk–I, little Jack of the Beach, that used to go berrying with cousin Nat and the rest; I to be murdered here at the ends of the earth, on board a haunted pirate-ship by a horrible Spaniard? Too nonsensical to think of! Who would murder Amasa Delano? His conscience is clean. There is some one above. Fie, fie, Jack of the Beach! you are a child indeed; a child of the second childhood, old boy; you are beginning to dote and drule, I’m afraid.” Light of heart and foot, he stepped aft, and there was met by Don Benito’s servant, who, with a pleasing expression, responsive to his own present feelings, informed him that his master had recovered from the effects of his coughing fit, and had just ordered him to go present his compliments to his good guest, Don Amasa, and say that he (Don Benito) would soon have the happiness to rejoin him. There now, do you mark that? again thought Captain Delano, walking the poop. What a donkey I was. This kind gentleman who here sends me his kind compliments, he, but ten minutes ago, dark-lantern in had, was dodging round some old grind-stone in the hold, sharpening a hatchet for me, I thought. Well, well; these long calms have a morbid effect on the mind, I’ve often heard, though I never believed it before. Ha! glancing towards the boat; there’s Rover; good dog; a white bone in her mouth. A pretty big bone though, seems to me.–What? Yes, she has fallen afoul of the bubbling tide-rip there. It sets her the other way, too, for the time. Patience. It was now about noon, though, from the grayness of everything, it seemed to be getting towards dusk. The calm was confirmed. In the far distance, away from the influence of land, the leaden ocean seemed laid out and leaded up, its course finished, soul gone, defunct. But the current from landward, where the ship was, increased; silently sweeping her further and further towards the tranced waters beyond. Still, from his knowledge of those latitudes, cherishing hopes of a breeze, and a fair and fresh one, at any moment, Captain Delano, despite present prospects, buoyantly counted upon bringing the San Dominick safely to anchor ere night. The distance swept over was nothing; since, with a good wind, ten minutes’ sailing would retrace more than sixty minutes, drifting. Meantime, one moment turning to mark “Rover” fighting the tide-rip, and the next to see Don Benito approaching, he continued walking the poop. Gradually he felt a vexation arising from the delay of his boat; this soon merged into uneasiness; and at last–his eye falling continually, as from a stage-box into the pit, upon the strange crowd before and below him, and, by-and-by, recognizing there the face–now composed to indifference–of the Spanish sailor who had seemed to beckon from the main-chains–something of his old trepidations returned. Ah, thought he–gravely enough–this is like the ague: because it went off, it follows not that it won’t come back. Though ashamed of the relapse, he could not altogether subdue it; and so, exerting his good-nature to the utmost, insensibly he came to a compromise. Yes, this is a strange craft; a strange history, too, and strange folks on board. But–nothing more. By way of keeping his mind out of mischief till the boat should arrive, he tried to occupy it with turning over and over, in a purely speculative sort of way, some lesser peculiarities of the captain and crew. Among others, four curious points recurred: First, the affair of the Spanish lad assailed with a knife by the slave boy; an act winked at by Don Benito. Second, the tyranny in Don Benito’s treatment of Atufal, the black; as if a child should lead a bull of the Nile by the ring in his nose. Third, the trampling of the sailor by the two negroes; a piece of insolence passed over without so much as a reprimand. Fourth, the cringing submission to their master, of all the ship’s underlings, mostly blacks; as if by the least inadvertence they feared to draw down his despotic displeasure. Coupling these points, they seemed somewhat contradictory. But what then, thought Captain Delano, glancing towards his now nearing boat–what then? Why, Don Benito is a very capricious commander. But he is not the first of the sort I have seen; though it’s true he rather exceeds any other. But as a nation–continued he in his reveries–these Spaniards are all an odd set; the very word Spaniard has a curious, conspirator, Guy-Fawkish twang to it. And yet, I dare say, Spaniards in the main are as good folks as any in Duxbury, Massachusetts. Ah good! At last “Rover” has come. As, with its welcome freight, the boat touched the side, the oakum-pickers, with venerable gestures, sought to restrain the blacks, who, at the sight of three gurried water-casks in its bottom, and a pile of wilted pumpkins in its bow, hung over the bulwarks in disorderly raptures. Don Benito, with his servant, now appeared; his coming, perhaps, hastened by hearing the noise. Of him Captain Delano sought permission to serve out the water, so that all might share alike, and none injure themselves by unfair excess. But sensible, and, on Don Benito’s account, kind as this offer was, it was received with what seemed impatience; as if aware that he lacked energy as a commander, Don Benito, with the true jealousy of weakness, resented as an affront any interference. So, at least, Captain Delano inferred. In another moment the casks were being hoisted in, when some of the eager negroes accidentally jostled Captain Delano, where he stood by the gangway; so, that, unmindful of Don Benito, yielding to the impulse of the moment, with good-natured authority he bade the blacks stand back; to enforce his words making use of a half-mirthful, half-menacing gesture. Instantly the blacks paused, just where they were, each negro and negress suspended in his or her posture, exactly as the word had found them–for a few seconds continuing so–while, as between the responsive posts of a telegraph, an unknown syllable ran from man to man among the perched oakum-pickers. While the visitor’s attention was fixed by this scene, suddenly the hatchet-polishers half rose, and a rapid cry came from Don Benito. Thinking that at the signal of the Spaniard he was about to be massacred, Captain Delano would have sprung for his boat, but paused, as the oakum-pickers, dropping down into the crowd with earnest exclamations, forced every white and every negro back, at the same moment, with gestures friendly and familiar, almost jocose, bidding him, in substance, not be a fool. Simultaneously the hatchet-polishers resumed their seats, quietly as so many tailors, and at once, as if nothing had happened, the work of hoisting in the casks was resumed, whites and blacks singing at the tackle. Captain Delano glanced towards Don Benito. As he saw his meagre form in the act of recovering itself from reclining in the servant’s arms, into which the agitated invalid had fallen, he could not but marvel at the panic by which himself had been surprised, on the darting supposition that such a commander, who, upon a legitimate occasion, so trivial, too, as it now appeared, could lose all self-command, was, with energetic iniquity, going to bring about his murder. The casks being on deck, Captain Delano was handed a number of jars and cups by one of the steward’s aids, who, in the name of his captain, entreated him to do as he had proposed–dole out the water. He complied, with republican impartiality as to this republican element, which always seeks one level, serving the oldest white no better than the youngest black; excepting, indeed, poor Don Benito, whose condition, if not rank, demanded an extra allowance. To him, in the first place, Captain Delano presented a fair pitcher of the fluid; but, thirsting as he was for it, the Spaniard quaffed not a drop until after several grave bows and salutes. A reciprocation of courtesies which the sight-loving Africans hailed with clapping of hands. Two of the less wilted pumpkins being reserved for the cabin table, the residue were minced up on the spot for the general regalement. But the soft bread, sugar, and bottled cider, Captain Delano would have given the whites alone, and in chief Don Benito; but the latter objected; which disinterestedness not a little pleased the American; and so mouthfuls all around were given alike to whites and blacks; excepting one bottle of cider, which Babo insisted upon setting aside for his master. Here it may be observed that as, on the first visit of the boat, the American had not permitted his men to board the ship, neither did he now; being unwilling to add to the confusion of the decks. Not uninfluenced by the peculiar good-humor at present prevailing, and for the time oblivious of any but benevolent thoughts, Captain Delano, who, from recent indications, counted upon a breeze within an hour or two at furthest, dispatched the boat back to the sealer, with orders for all the hands that could be spared immediately to set about rafting casks to the watering-place and filling them. Likewise he bade word be carried to his chief officer, that if, against present expectation, the ship was not brought to anchor by sunset, he need be under no concern; for as there was to be a full moon that night, he (Captain Delano) would remain on board ready to play the pilot, come the wind soon or late. As the two Captains stood together, observing the departing boat–the servant, as it happened, having just spied a spot on his master’s velvet sleeve, and silently engaged rubbing it out–the American expressed his regrets that the San Dominick had no boats; none, at least, but the unseaworthy old hulk of the long-boat, which, warped as a camel’s skeleton in the desert, and almost as bleached, lay pot-wise inverted amidships, one side a little tipped, furnishing a subterraneous sort of den for family groups of the blacks, mostly women and small children; who, squatting on old mats below, or perched above in the dark dome, on the elevated seats, were descried, some distance within, like a social circle of bats, sheltering in some friendly cave; at intervals, ebon flights of naked boys and girls, three or four years old, darting in and out of the den’s mouth. “Had you three or four boats now, Don Benito,” said Captain Delano, “I think that, by tugging at the oars, your negroes here might help along matters some. Did you sail from port without boats, Don Benito?” “They were stove in the gales, Señor.” “That was bad. Many men, too, you lost then. Boats and men. Those must have been hard gales, Don Benito.” “Past all speech,” cringed the Spaniard. “Tell me, Don Benito,” continued his companion with increased interest, “tell me, were these gales immediately off the pitch of Cape Horn?” “Cape Horn?–who spoke of Cape Horn?” “Yourself did, when giving me an account of your voyage,” answered Captain Delano, with almost equal astonishment at this eating of his own words, even as he ever seemed eating his own heart, on the part of the Spaniard. “You yourself, Don Benito, spoke of Cape Horn,” he emphatically repeated. The Spaniard turned, in a sort of stooping posture, pausing an instant, as one about to make a plunging exchange of elements, as from air to water. At this moment a messenger-boy, a white, hurried by, in the regular performance of his function carrying the last expired half hour forward to the forecastle, from the cabin time-piece, to have it struck at the ship’s large bell. “Master,” said the servant, discontinuing his work on the coat sleeve, and addressing the rapt Spaniard with a sort of timid apprehensiveness, as one charged with a duty, the discharge of which, it was foreseen, would prove irksome to the very person who had imposed it, and for whose benefit it was intended, “master told me never mind where he was, or how engaged, always to remind him to a minute, when shaving-time comes. Miguel has gone to strike the half-hour afternoon. It is now, master. Will master go into the cuddy?” “Ah–yes,” answered the Spaniard, starting, as from dreams into realities; then turning upon Captain Delano, he said that ere long he would resume the conversation. “Then if master means to talk more to Don Amasa,” said the servant, “why not let Don Amasa sit by master in the cuddy, and master can talk, and Don Amasa can listen, while Babo here lathers and strops.” “Yes,” said Captain Delano, not unpleased with this sociable plan, “yes, Don Benito, unless you had rather not, I will go with you.” “Be it so, Señor.” As the three passed aft, the American could not but think it another strange instance of his host’s capriciousness, this being shaved with such uncommon punctuality in the middle of the day. But he deemed it more than likely that the servant’s anxious fidelity had something to do with the matter; inasmuch as the timely interruption served to rally his master from the mood which had evidently been coming upon him. The place called the cuddy was a light deck-cabin formed by the poop, a sort of attic to the large cabin below. Part of it had formerly been the quarters of the officers; but since their death all the partitioning had been thrown down, and the whole interior converted into one spacious and airy marine hall; for absence of fine furniture and picturesque disarray of odd appurtenances, somewhat answering to the wide, cluttered hall of some eccentric bachelor-squire in the country, who hangs his shooting-jacket and tobacco-pouch on deer antlers, and keeps his fishing-rod, tongs, and walking-stick in the same corner. The similitude was heightened, if not originally suggested, by glimpses of the surrounding sea; since, in one aspect, the country and the ocean seem cousins-german. The floor of the cuddy was matted. Overhead, four or five old muskets were stuck into horizontal holes along the beams. On one side was a claw-footed old table lashed to the deck; a thumbed missal on it, and over it a small, meagre crucifix attached to the bulk-head. Under the table lay a dented cutlass or two, with a hacked harpoon, among some melancholy old rigging, like a heap of poor friars’ girdles. There were also two long, sharp-ribbed settees of Malacca cane, black with age, and uncomfortable to look at as inquisitors’ racks, with a large, misshapen arm-chair, which, furnished with a rude barber’s crotch at the back, working with a screw, seemed some grotesque engine of torment. A flag locker was in one corner, open, exposing various colored bunting, some rolled up, others half unrolled, still others tumbled. Opposite was a cumbrous washstand, of black mahogany, all of one block, with a pedestal, like a font, and over it a railed shelf, containing combs, brushes, and other implements of the toilet. A torn hammock of stained grass swung near; the sheets tossed, and the pillow wrinkled up like a brow, as if who ever slept here slept but illy, with alternate visitations of sad thoughts and bad dreams. The further extremity of the cuddy, overhanging the ship’s stern, was pierced with three openings, windows or port-holes, according as men or cannon might peer, socially or unsocially, out of them. At present neither men nor cannon were seen, though huge ring-bolts and other rusty iron fixtures of the wood-work hinted of twenty-four-pounders. Glancing towards the hammock as he entered, Captain Delano said, “You sleep here, Don Benito?” “Yes, Señor, since we got into mild weather.” “This seems a sort of dormitory, sitting-room, sail-loft, chapel, armory, and private closet all together, Don Benito,” added Captain Delano, looking round. “Yes, Señor; events have not been favorable to much order in my arrangements.” Here the servant, napkin on arm, made a motion as if waiting his master’s good pleasure. Don Benito signified his readiness, when, seating him in the Malacca arm-chair, and for the guest’s convenience drawing opposite one of the settees, the servant commenced operations by throwing back his master’s collar and loosening his cravat. There is something in the negro which, in a peculiar way, fits him for avocations about one’s person. Most negroes are natural valets and hair-dressers; taking to the comb and brush congenially as to the castinets, and flourishing them apparently with almost equal satisfaction. There is, too, a smooth tact about them in this employment, with a marvelous, noiseless, gliding briskness, not ungraceful in its way, singularly pleasing to behold, and still more so to be the manipulated subject of. And above all is the great gift of good-humor. Not the mere grin or laugh is here meant. Those were unsuitable. But a certain easy cheerfulness, harmonious in every glance and gesture; as though God had set the whole negro to some pleasant tune. When to this is added the docility arising from the unaspiring contentment of a limited mind and that susceptibility of blind attachment sometimes inhering in indisputable inferiors, one readily perceives why those hypochondriacs, Johnson and Byron–it may be, something like the hypochondriac Benito Cereno–took to their hearts, almost to the exclusion of the entire white race, their serving men, the negroes, Barber and Fletcher. But if there be that in the negro which exempts him from the inflicted sourness of the morbid or cynical mind, how, in his most prepossessing aspects, must he appear to a benevolent one? When at ease with respect to exterior things, Captain Delano’s nature was not only benign, but familiarly and humorously so. At home, he had often taken rare satisfaction in sitting in his door, watching some free man of color at his work or play. If on a voyage he chanced to have a black sailor, invariably he was on chatty and half-gamesome terms with him. In fact, like most men of a good, blithe heart, Captain Delano took to negroes, not philanthropically, but genially, just as other men to Newfoundland dogs. Hitherto, the circumstances in which he found the San Dominick had repressed the tendency. But in the cuddy, relieved from his former uneasiness, and, for various reasons, more sociably inclined than at any previous period of the day, and seeing the colored servant, napkin on arm, so debonair about his master, in a business so familiar as that of shaving, too, all his old weakness for negroes returned. Among other things, he was amused with an odd instance of the African love of bright colors and fine shows, in the black’s informally taking from the flag-locker a great piece of bunting of all hues, and lavishly tucking it under his master’s chin for an apron. The mode of shaving among the Spaniards is a little different from what it is with other nations. They have a basin, specifically called a barber’s basin, which on one side is scooped out, so as accurately to receive the chin, against which it is closely held in lathering; which is done, not with a brush, but with soap dipped in the water of the basin and rubbed on the face. In the present instance salt-water was used for lack of better; and the parts lathered were only the upper lip, and low down under the throat, all the rest being cultivated beard. The preliminaries being somewhat novel to Captain Delano, he sat curiously eying them, so that no conversation took place, nor, for the present, did Don Benito appear disposed to renew any. Setting down his basin, the negro searched among the razors, as for the sharpest, and having found it, gave it an additional edge by expertly strapping it on the firm, smooth, oily skin of his open palm; he then made a gesture as if to begin, but midway stood suspended for an instant, one hand elevating the razor, the other professionally dabbling among the bubbling suds on the Spaniard’s lank neck. Not unaffected by the close sight of the gleaming steel, Don Benito nervously shuddered; his usual ghastliness was heightened by the lather, which lather, again, was intensified in its hue by the contrasting sootiness of the negro’s body. Altogether the scene was somewhat peculiar, at least to Captain Delano, nor, as he saw the two thus postured, could he resist the vagary, that in the black he saw a headsman, and in the white a man at the block. But this was one of those antic conceits, appearing and vanishing in a breath, from which, perhaps, the best regulated mind is not always free. Meantime the agitation of the Spaniard had a little loosened the bunting from around him, so that one broad fold swept curtain-like over the chair-arm to the floor, revealing, amid a profusion of armorial bars and ground-colors–black, blue, and yellow–a closed castle in a blood red field diagonal with a lion rampant in a white. “The castle and the lion,” exclaimed Captain Delano–“why, Don Benito, this is the flag of Spain you use here. It’s well it’s only I, and not the King, that sees this,” he added, with a smile, “but”–turning towards the black–“it’s all one, I suppose, so the colors be gay;” which playful remark did not fail somewhat to tickle the negro. “Now, master,” he said, readjusting the flag, and pressing the head gently further back into the crotch of the chair; “now, master,” and the steel glanced nigh the throat. Again Don Benito faintly shuddered. “You must not shake so, master. See, Don Amasa, master always shakes when I shave him. And yet master knows I never yet have drawn blood, though it’s true, if master will shake so, I may some of these times. Now master,” he continued. “And now, Don Amasa, please go on with your talk about the gale, and all that; master can hear, and, between times, master can answer.” “Ah yes, these gales,” said Captain Delano; “but the more I think of your voyage, Don Benito, the more I wonder, not at the gales, terrible as they must have been, but at the disastrous interval following them. For here, by your account, have you been these two months and more getting from Cape Horn to St. Maria, a distance which I myself, with a good wind, have sailed in a few days. True, you had calms, and long ones, but to be becalmed for two months, that is, at least, unusual. Why, Don Benito, had almost any other gentleman told me such a story, I should have been half disposed to a little incredulity.” Here an involuntary expression came over the Spaniard, similar to that just before on the deck, and whether it was the start he gave, or a sudden gawky roll of the hull in the calm, or a momentary unsteadiness of the servant’s hand, however it was, just then the razor drew blood, spots of which stained the creamy lather under the throat: immediately the black barber drew back his steel, and, remaining in his professional attitude, back to Captain Delano, and face to Don Benito, held up the trickling razor, saying, with a sort of half humorous sorrow, “See, master–you shook so–here’s Babo’s first blood.” No sword drawn before James the First of England, no assassination in that timid King’s presence, could have produced a more terrified aspect than was now presented by Don Benito. Poor fellow, thought Captain Delano, so nervous he can’t even bear the sight of barber’s blood; and this unstrung, sick man, is it credible that I should have imagined he meant to spill all my blood, who can’t endure the sight of one little drop of his own? Surely, Amasa Delano, you have been beside yourself this day. Tell it not when you get home, sappy Amasa. Well, well, he looks like a murderer, doesn’t he? More like as if himself were to be done for. Well, well, this day’s experience shall be a good lesson. Meantime, while these things were running through the honest seaman’s mind, the servant had taken the napkin from his arm, and to Don Benito had said–“But answer Don Amasa, please, master, while I wipe this ugly stuff off the razor, and strop it again.” As he said the words, his face was turned half round, so as to be alike visible to the Spaniard and the American, and seemed, by its expression, to hint, that he was desirous, by getting his master to go on with the conversation, considerately to withdraw his attention from the recent annoying accident. As if glad to snatch the offered relief, Don Benito resumed, rehearsing to Captain Delano, that not only were the calms of unusual duration, but the ship had fallen in with obstinate currents; and other things he added, some of which were but repetitions of former statements, to explain how it came to pass that the passage from Cape Horn to St. Maria had been so exceedingly long; now and then, mingling with his words, incidental praises, less qualified than before, to the blacks, for their general good conduct. These particulars were not given consecutively, the servant, at convenient times, using his razor, and so, between the intervals of shaving, the story and panegyric went on with more than usual huskiness. To Captain Delano’s imagination, now again not wholly at rest, there was something so hollow in the Spaniard’s manner, with apparently some reciprocal hollowness in the servant’s dusky comment of silence, that the idea flashed across him, that possibly master and man, for some unknown purpose, were acting out, both in word and deed, nay, to the very tremor of Don Benito’s limbs, some juggling play before him. Neither did the suspicion of collusion lack apparent support, from the fact of those whispered conferences before mentioned. But then, what could be the object of enacting this play of the barber before him? At last, regarding the notion as a whimsy, insensibly suggested, perhaps, by the theatrical aspect of Don Benito in his harlequin ensign, Captain Delano speedily banished it. The shaving over, the servant bestirred himself with a small bottle of scented waters, pouring a few drops on the head, and then diligently rubbing; the vehemence of the exercise causing the muscles of his face to twitch rather strangely. His next operation was with comb, scissors, and brush; going round and round, smoothing a curl here, clipping an unruly whisker-hair there, giving a graceful sweep to the temple-lock, with other impromptu touches evincing the hand of a master; while, like any resigned gentleman in barber’s hands, Don Benito bore all, much less uneasily, at least than he had done the razoring; indeed, he sat so pale and rigid now, that the negro seemed a Nubian sculptor finishing off a white statue-head. All being over at last, the standard of Spain removed, tumbled up, and tossed back into the flag-locker, the negro’s warm breath blowing away any stray hair, which might have lodged down his master’s neck; collar and cravat readjusted; a speck of lint whisked off the velvet lapel; all this being done; backing off a little space, and pausing with an expression of subdued self-complacency, the servant for a moment surveyed his master, as, in toilet at least, the creature of his own tasteful hands. Captain Delano playfully complimented him upon his achievement; at the same time congratulating Don Benito. But neither sweet waters, nor shampooing, nor fidelity, nor sociality, delighted the Spaniard. Seeing him relapsing into forbidding gloom, and still remaining seated, Captain Delano, thinking that his presence was undesired just then, withdrew, on pretense of seeing whether, as he had prophesied, any signs of a breeze were visible. Walking forward to the main-mast, he stood awhile thinking over the scene, and not without some undefined misgivings, when he heard a noise near the cuddy, and turning, saw the negro, his hand to his cheek. Advancing, Captain Delano perceived that the cheek was bleeding. He was about to ask the cause, when the negro’s wailing soliloquy enlightened him. “Ah, when will master get better from his sickness; only the sour heart that sour sickness breeds made him serve Babo so; cutting Babo with the razor, because, only by accident, Babo had given master one little scratch; and for the first time in so many a day, too. Ah, ah, ah,” holding his hand to his face. Is it possible, thought Captain Delano; was it to wreak in private his Spanish spite against this poor friend of his, that Don Benito, by his sullen manner, impelled me to withdraw? Ah this slavery breeds ugly passions in man.–Poor fellow! He was about to speak in sympathy to the negro, but with a timid reluctance he now re-entered the cuddy. Presently master and man came forth; Don Benito leaning on his servant as if nothing had happened. But a sort of love-quarrel, after all, thought Captain Delano. He accosted Don Benito, and they slowly walked together. They had gone but a few paces, when the steward–a tall, rajah-looking mulatto, orientally set off with a pagoda turban formed by three or four Madras handkerchiefs wound about his head, tier on tier–approaching with a saalam, announced lunch in the cabin. On their way thither, the two captains were preceded by the mulatto, who, turning round as he advanced, with continual smiles and bows, ushered them on, a display of elegance which quite completed the insignificance of the small bare-headed Babo, who, as if not unconscious of inferiority, eyed askance the graceful steward. But in part, Captain Delano imputed his jealous watchfulness to that peculiar feeling which the full-blooded African entertains for the adulterated one. As for the steward, his manner, if not bespeaking much dignity of self-respect, yet evidenced his extreme desire to please; which is doubly meritorious, as at once Christian and Chesterfieldian. Captain Delano observed with interest that while the complexion of the mulatto was hybrid, his physiognomy was European–classically so. “Don Benito,” whispered he, “I am glad to see this usher-of-the-golden-rod of yours; the sight refutes an ugly remark once made to me by a Barbadoes planter; that when a mulatto has a regular European face, look out for him; he is a devil. But see, your steward here has features more regular than King George’s of England; and yet there he nods, and bows, and smiles; a king, indeed–the king of kind hearts and polite fellows. What a pleasant voice he has, too?” “He has, Señor.” “But tell me, has he not, so far as you have known him, always proved a good, worthy fellow?” said Captain Delano, pausing, while with a final genuflexion the steward disappeared into the cabin; “come, for the reason just mentioned, I am curious to know.” “Francesco is a good man,” a sort of sluggishly responded Don Benito, like a phlegmatic appreciator, who would neither find fault nor flatter. “Ah, I thought so. For it were strange, indeed, and not very creditable to us white-skins, if a little of our blood mixed with the African’s, should, far from improving the latter’s quality, have the sad effect of pouring vitriolic acid into black broth; improving the hue, perhaps, but not the wholesomeness.” “Doubtless, doubtless, Señor, but”–glancing at Babo–“not to speak of negroes, your planter’s remark I have heard applied to the Spanish and Indian intermixtures in our provinces. But I know nothing about the matter,” he listlessly added. And here they entered the cabin. The lunch was a frugal one. Some of Captain Delano’s fresh fish and pumpkins, biscuit and salt beef, the reserved bottle of cider, and the San Dominick’s last bottle of Canary. As they entered, Francesco, with two or three colored aids, was hovering over the table giving the last adjustments. Upon perceiving their master they withdrew, Francesco making a smiling congé, and the Spaniard, without condescending to notice it, fastidiously remarking to his companion that he relished not superfluous attendance. Without companions, host and guest sat down, like a childless married couple, at opposite ends of the table, Don Benito waving Captain Delano to his place, and, weak as he was, insisting upon that gentleman being seated before himself. The negro placed a rug under Don Benito’s feet, and a cushion behind his back, and then stood behind, not his master’s chair, but Captain Delano’s. At first, this a little surprised the latter. But it was soon evident that, in taking his position, the black was still true to his master; since by facing him he could the more readily anticipate his slightest want. “This is an uncommonly intelligent fellow of yours, Don Benito,” whispered Captain Delano across the table. “You say true, Señor.” During the repast, the guest again reverted to parts of Don Benito’s story, begging further particulars here and there. He inquired how it was that the scurvy and fever should have committed such wholesale havoc upon the whites, while destroying less than half of the blacks. As if this question reproduced the whole scene of plague before the Spaniard’s eyes, miserably reminding him of his solitude in a cabin where before he had had so many friends and officers round him, his hand shook, his face became hueless, broken words escaped; but directly the sane memory of the past seemed replaced by insane terrors of the present. With starting eyes he stared before him at vacancy. For nothing was to be seen but the hand of his servant pushing the Canary over towards him. At length a few sips served partially to restore him. He made random reference to the different constitution of races, enabling one to offer more resistance to certain maladies than another. The thought was new to his companion. Presently Captain Delano, intending to say something to his host concerning the pecuniary part of the business he had undertaken for him, especially–since he was strictly accountable to his owners–with reference to the new suit of sails, and other things of that sort; and naturally preferring to conduct such affairs in private, was desirous that the servant should withdraw; imagining that Don Benito for a few minutes could dispense with his attendance. He, however, waited awhile; thinking that, as the conversation proceeded, Don Benito, without being prompted, would perceive the propriety of the step. But it was otherwise. At last catching his host’s eye, Captain Delano, with a slight backward gesture of his thumb, whispered, “Don Benito, pardon me, but there is an interference with the full expression of what I have to say to you.” Upon this the Spaniard changed countenance; which was imputed to his resenting the hint, as in some way a reflection upon his servant. After a moment’s pause, he assured his guest that the black’s remaining with them could be of no disservice; because since losing his officers he had made Babo (whose original office, it now appeared, had been captain of the slaves) not only his constant attendant and companion, but in all things his confidant. After this, nothing more could be said; though, indeed, Captain Delano could hardly avoid some little tinge of irritation upon being left ungratified in so inconsiderable a wish, by one, too, for whom he intended such solid services. But it is only his querulousness, thought he; and so filling his glass he proceeded to business. The price of the sails and other matters was fixed upon. But while this was being done, the American observed that, though his original offer of assistance had been hailed with hectic animation, yet now when it was reduced to a business transaction, indifference and apathy were betrayed. Don Benito, in fact, appeared to submit to hearing the details more out of regard to common propriety, than from any impression that weighty benefit to himself and his voyage was involved. Soon, his manner became still more reserved. The effort was vain to seek to draw him into social talk. Gnawed by his splenetic mood, he sat twitching his beard, while to little purpose the hand of his servant, mute as that on the wall, slowly pushed over the Canary. Lunch being over, they sat down on the cushioned transom; the servant placing a pillow behind his master. The long continuance of the calm had now affected the atmosphere. Don Benito sighed heavily, as if for breath. “Why not adjourn to the cuddy,” said Captain Delano; “there is more air there.” But the host sat silent and motionless. Meantime his servant knelt before him, with a large fan of feathers. And Francesco coming in on tiptoes, handed the negro a little cup of aromatic waters, with which at intervals he chafed his master’s brow; smoothing the hair along the temples as a nurse does a child’s. He spoke no word. He only rested his eye on his master’s, as if, amid all Don Benito’s distress, a little to refresh his spirit by the silent sight of fidelity. Presently the ship’s bell sounded two o’clock; and through the cabin windows a slight rippling of the sea was discerned; and from the desired direction. “There,” exclaimed Captain Delano, “I told you so, Don Benito, look!” He had risen to his feet, speaking in a very animated tone, with a view the more to rouse his companion. But though the crimson curtain of the stern-window near him that moment fluttered against his pale cheek, Don Benito seemed to have even less welcome for the breeze than the calm. Poor fellow, thought Captain Delano, bitter experience has taught him that one ripple does not make a wind, any more than one swallow a summer. But he is mistaken for once. I will get his ship in for him, and prove it. Briefly alluding to his weak condition, he urged his host to remain quietly where he was, since he (Captain Delano) would with pleasure take upon himself the responsibility of making the best use of the wind. Upon gaining the deck, Captain Delano started at the unexpected figure of Atufal, monumentally fixed at the threshold, like one of those sculptured porters of black marble guarding the porches of Egyptian tombs. But this time the start was, perhaps, purely physical. Atufal’s presence, singularly attesting docility even in sullenness, was contrasted with that of the hatchet-polishers, who in patience evinced their industry; while both spectacles showed, that lax as Don Benito’s general authority might be, still, whenever he chose to exert it, no man so savage or colossal but must, more or less, bow. Snatching a trumpet which hung from the bulwarks, with a free step Captain Delano advanced to the forward edge of the poop, issuing his orders in his best Spanish. The few sailors and many negroes, all equally pleased, obediently set about heading the ship towards the harbor. While giving some directions about setting a lower stu’n’-sail, suddenly Captain Delano heard a voice faithfully repeating his orders. Turning, he saw Babo, now for the time acting, under the pilot, his original part of captain of the slaves. This assistance proved valuable. Tattered sails and warped yards were soon brought into some trim. And no brace or halyard was pulled but to the blithe songs of the inspirited negroes. Good fellows, thought Captain Delano, a little training would make fine sailors of them. Why see, the very women pull and sing too. These must be some of those Ashantee negresses that make such capital soldiers, I’ve heard. But who’s at the helm. I must have a good hand there. He went to see. The San Dominick steered with a cumbrous tiller, with large horizontal pullies attached. At each pully-end stood a subordinate black, and between them, at the tiller-head, the responsible post, a Spanish seaman, whose countenance evinced his due share in the general hopefulness and confidence at the coming of the breeze. He proved the same man who had behaved with so shame-faced an air on the windlass. “Ah,–it is you, my man,” exclaimed Captain Delano–“well, no more sheep’s-eyes now;–look straight forward and keep the ship so. Good hand, I trust? And want to get into the harbor, don’t you?” The man assented with an inward chuckle, grasping the tiller-head firmly. Upon this, unperceived by the American, the two blacks eyed the sailor intently. Finding all right at the helm, the pilot went forward to the forecastle, to see how matters stood there. The ship now had way enough to breast the current. With the approach of evening, the breeze would be sure to freshen. Having done all that was needed for the present, Captain Delano, giving his last orders to the sailors, turned aft to report affairs to Don Benito in the cabin; perhaps additionally incited to rejoin him by the hope of snatching a moment’s private chat while the servant was engaged upon deck. From opposite sides, there were, beneath the poop, two approaches to the cabin; one further forward than the other, and consequently communicating with a longer passage. Marking the servant still above, Captain Delano, taking the nighest entrance–the one last named, and at whose porch Atufal still stood–hurried on his way, till, arrived at the cabin threshold, he paused an instant, a little to recover from his eagerness. Then, with the words of his intended business upon his lips, he entered. As he advanced toward the seated Spaniard, he heard another footstep, keeping time with his. From the opposite door, a salver in hand, the servant was likewise advancing. “Confound the faithful fellow,” thought Captain Delano; “what a vexatious coincidence.” Possibly, the vexation might have been something different, were it not for the brisk confidence inspired by the breeze. But even as it was, he felt a slight twinge, from a sudden indefinite association in his mind of Babo with Atufal. “Don Benito,” said he, “I give you joy; the breeze will hold, and will increase. By the way, your tall man and time-piece, Atufal, stands without. By your order, of course?” Don Benito recoiled, as if at some bland satirical touch, delivered with such adroit garnish of apparent good breeding as to present no handle for retort. He is like one flayed alive, thought Captain Delano; where may one touch him without causing a shrink? The servant moved before his master, adjusting a cushion; recalled to civility, the Spaniard stiffly replied: “you are right. The slave appears where you saw him, according to my command; which is, that if at the given hour I am below, he must take his stand and abide my coming.” “Ah now, pardon me, but that is treating the poor fellow like an ex-king indeed. Ah, Don Benito,” smiling, “for all the license you permit in some things, I fear lest, at bottom, you are a bitter hard master.” Again Don Benito shrank; and this time, as the good sailor thought, from a genuine twinge of his conscience. Again conversation became constrained. In vain Captain Delano called attention to the now perceptible motion of the keel gently cleaving the sea; with lack-lustre eye, Don Benito returned words few and reserved. By-and-by, the wind having steadily risen, and still blowing right into the harbor bore the San Dominick swiftly on. Sounding a point of land, the sealer at distance came into open view. Meantime Captain Delano had again repaired to the deck, remaining there some time. Having at last altered the ship’s course, so as to give the reef a wide berth, he returned for a few moments below. I will cheer up my poor friend, this time, thought he. “Better and better,” Don Benito, he cried as he blithely re-entered: “there will soon be an end to your cares, at least for awhile. For when, after a long, sad voyage, you know, the anchor drops into the haven, all its vast weight seems lifted from the captain’s heart. We are getting on famously, Don Benito. My ship is in sight. Look through this side-light here; there she is; all a-taunt-o! The Bachelor’s Delight, my good friend. Ah, how this wind braces one up. Come, you must take a cup of coffee with me this evening. My old steward will give you as fine a cup as ever any sultan tasted. What say you, Don Benito, will you?” At first, the Spaniard glanced feverishly up, casting a longing look towards the sealer, while with mute concern his servant gazed into his face. Suddenly the old ague of coldness returned, and dropping back to his cushions he was silent. “You do not answer. Come, all day you have been my host; would you have hospitality all on one side?” “I cannot go,” was the response. “What? it will not fatigue you. The ships will lie together as near as they can, without swinging foul. It will be little more than stepping from deck to deck; which is but as from room to room. Come, come, you must not refuse me.” “I cannot go,” decisively and repulsively repeated Don Benito. Renouncing all but the last appearance of courtesy, with a sort of cadaverous sullenness, and biting his thin nails to the quick, he glanced, almost glared, at his guest, as if impatient that a stranger’s presence should interfere with the full indulgence of his morbid hour. Meantime the sound of the parted waters came more and more gurglingly and merrily in at the windows; as reproaching him for his dark spleen; as telling him that, sulk as he might, and go mad with it, nature cared not a jot; since, whose fault was it, pray? But the foul mood was now at its depth, as the fair wind at its height. There was something in the man so far beyond any mere unsociality or sourness previously evinced, that even the forbearing good-nature of his guest could no longer endure it. Wholly at a loss to account for such demeanor, and deeming sickness with eccentricity, however extreme, no adequate excuse, well satisfied, too, that nothing in his own conduct could justify it, Captain Delano’s pride began to be roused. Himself became reserved. But all seemed one to the Spaniard. Quitting him, therefore, Captain Delano once more went to the deck. The ship was now within less than two miles of the sealer. The whale-boat was seen darting over the interval. To be brief, the two vessels, thanks to the pilot’s skill, ere long neighborly style lay anchored together.

      Mapping Melville: An Exploration of the Literature Responding to Benito Cereno Using Story Maps

    1. [14] I have already computed the Charge of nursing a Beggars Child (in which list I reckon all Cottagers, Labourers, and four fifths of the Farmers) to be about two Shillings per Annum, Rags included; and I believe no Gentleman would repine to give Ten Shillings for the Carcass of a good fat Child, which, as I have said will make four Dishes of excellent Nutritive Meat, when he hath only some particular friend, or his own Family to Dine with him. Thus the Squire will learn to be a good Landlord, and grow popular among his Tenants, the Mother will have Eight Shillings neat profit, and be fit for Work till she produceth another Child. [15] Those who are more thrifty (as I must confess the Times require) may flay the Carcass; the Skin of which, Artificially 17  dressed, will make admirable Gloves for Ladies, and Summer Boots for fine Gentlemen. [16] As to our City of Dublin, Shambles 18  may be appointed for this purpose, in the most convenient parts of it, and Butchers we may be assured will not be wanting, although I rather recommend buying the Children alive, and dressing them hot from the Knife, as we do roasting Pigs. [17] A very worthy Person, a true Lover of his Country, and whose Virtues I highly esteem, was lately pleased, in discoursing on this matter, to offer a refinement upon my Scheme. He said, that many Gentlemen of this Kingdom, having of late destroyed their Deer, he conceived that the want of Venison might be well supplyed by the Bodies of young Lads and Maidens, not exceeding fourteen Years of Age, nor under twelve; so great a Number of both Sexes in every County being now ready to Starve, for want of Work and Service: And these to be disposed of by their Parents if alive, or otherwise by their nearest Relations. But with due deference to so excellent a friend, and so deserving a Patriot, I cannot be altogether in his Sentiments, for as to the Males, my American acquaintance assured me from frequent Experience, that their flesh was generally Tough and Lean, like that of our School-boys, by continual exercise, and their Taste disagreeable, and to Fatten them would not answer the Charge. Then as to the Females, it would, I think, with humble Submission, be a loss to the Publick, because they soon would become Breeders themselves: And besides it is not improbable that some scrupulous People might be apt to Censure such a Practice, (although indeed very unjustly) as a little bordering upon Cruelty, which, I confess, hath always been with me the strongest objection against any Project, how well soever intended. [18] But in order to justify my friend, he confessed, that this expedient was put into his head by the famous Sallmanaazor, 19  a Native of the Island Formosa, who came from thence to London, above twenty Years ago, and in Conversation told my friend, that in his Country when any young Person happened to be put to Death, the Executioner sold the Carcass to Persons of Quality, as a prime Dainty, and that, in his Time, the Body of a plump Girl of fifteen, who was crucifyed for an attempt to Poison the Emperor, was sold to his Imperial Majesty's prime Minister of State, and other great Mandarins 20  of the Court, in Joints from the Gibbet, 21  at four hundred Crowns. Neither indeed can I deny, that if the same use were made of several plump young Girls in this Town, who, without one single Groat 22  to their Fortunes, cannot stir abroad without a Chair, 23  and appear at a Play-House, and Assemblies in Foreign fineries, which they never will Pay for; the Kingdom would not be the worse.

      His plan is to eat the kids, make more kids and then eat those kids. He talks about how people find children tasty.

    1. But Trump's gamble may not be universally successful. His clamorous approach could backfire in the more moderate suburban districts where the battle for the House will be decided and he ran behind Hillary Clinton in 2016.Read Moreclose dialog Receive Fareed Zakaria's Global Analysis including insights and must-reads of world newsPlease enter aboveActivate Fareed's BriefingBy subscribing you agree to ourprivacy policy. Thanks For SubscribingPlease check your inbox to confirm your signupContinue Readingclose dialog/* effects for .bx-campaign-655004 *//* rendered styles .bx-campaign-655004 */.bxc.bx-campaign-655004.bx-active-step-1 .bx-creative> *:first-child {width: 780px;padding: 38px 40px 30px 40px;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004.bx-active-step-1 .bx-creative> *:first-child {width: 400px;padding: 20px;}}@media all and (min-width: 737px) and (max-width: 1024px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004.bx-active-step-1 .bx-creative> *:first-child {width: 737px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004.bx-active-step-1 .bx-creative:before {min-height: 285px;}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004.bx-active-step-1 .bx-creative {background-color: #1a1a1a;border-style: none;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004.bx-active-step-1 .bx-creative:before {min-height: 170px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004.bx-active-step-1 .bx-close {width: 20px;stroke: rgb(169, 169, 169);}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-group-655004-WRqyYJF {width: 100%;padding: 0px;text-align: left;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-group-655004-WRqyYJF {width: 90%;padding: 0px;text-align: center;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-UC84ER9 {width: 80px;text-align: left;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-UC84ER9 {text-align: center;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-UC84ER9> *:first-child {position: absolute;left: 30;top: 20px;width: 80px;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-UC84ER9> *:first-child {position: relative;left: 0;top: -10px;width: 80px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-Oo3RSns {width: 100%;padding: 20px 0 20px;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-Oo3RSns {padding: 0 0 15px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-Oo3RSns> *:first-child {font-size: 36px;font-family: CNN,Helvetica Neue,Verdana,Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif;font-weight: 400;color: white;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-Oo3RSns> *:first-child {font-size: 25px;}}@media all and (min-width: 737px) and (max-width: 1024px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-Oo3RSns> *:first-child {font-size: 30px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-c4p3nuh {padding: 0px 0px 20px;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-c4p3nuh {width: auto;padding: 0px 0px 10px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-c4p3nuh> *:first-child {font-size: 17px;font-family: CNN,Helvetica Neue,Verdana,Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif;font-weight: 400;color: white;letter-spacing: 0.01em;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-c4p3nuh> *:first-child {font-size: 13px;padding: 0px 20px ;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-group-655004-q9bLmdQ {width: 100%;padding: 0px;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-group-655004-q9bLmdQ {width: 300px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-sqLogHZ .bx-el {padding: 15px;font-size: 12px;font-family: CNN,Helvetica Neue,Verdana,Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif;font-weight: 400;border-style: solid;border-color: rgb(220, 220, 220);}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-sqLogHZ .bx-el {font-size: 12px;padding: 12px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-sqLogHZ {width: 60%;padding: 0px;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-sqLogHZ {width: 100%;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-WyGkyzr {width: 40%;padding: 0px;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-WyGkyzr {width: 100%;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-WyGkyzr> *:first-child {padding: 15px;font-size: 14px;font-family: CNN,Helvetica Neue,Verdana,Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif;font-weight: 400;border-style: solid;border-color: #262626;border-width: 1px;background-color: #cc0300;line-height: 14px;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-WyGkyzr> *:first-child {font-size: 14px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-group-655004-YABdd0k {text-align: left;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-group-655004-YABdd0k {text-align: center;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-NFMXMIR {width: auto;padding: 10px 5px 0px 0px;}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-NFMXMIR> *:first-child {font-family: CNN,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif;font-weight: 400;font-size: 12px;color: white;}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-hHC74e5 {width: auto;padding: 10px 5px 0px 0px;}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-hHC74e5> *:first-child {font-family: CNN,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif;font-weight: 400;font-size: 12px;color: white;text-decoration: underline;}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004.bx-active-step-2 .bx-creative> *:first-child {width: 780px;padding: 38px 40px 30px 40px;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004.bx-active-step-2 .bx-creative> *:first-child {width: 400px;padding: 20px;}}@media all and (min-width: 737px) and (max-width: 1024px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004.bx-active-step-2 .bx-creative> *:first-child {width: 737px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004.bx-active-step-2 .bx-creative:before {min-height: 285px;}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004.bx-active-step-2 .bx-creative {background-color: #1a1a1a;border-style: none;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004.bx-active-step-2 .bx-creative:before {min-height: 170px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004.bx-active-step-2 .bx-close {width: 20px;stroke: rgb(169, 169, 169);}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-group-655004-WgXDCRA {width: 100%;padding: 0px;text-align: left;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-group-655004-WgXDCRA {width: 100%;padding: 0px;text-align: center;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-3LTIrsx {width: 80px;text-align: left;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-3LTIrsx {text-align: center;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-3LTIrsx> *:first-child {position: absolute;left: 30;top: 20px;width: 80px;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-3LTIrsx> *:first-child {position: relative;left: 0;top: -10px;width: 80px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-MBEqoef {width: 100%;padding: 0 0 20px;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-MBEqoef {padding: 0 0 15px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-MBEqoef> *:first-child {font-size: 36px;font-family: CNN,Helvetica Neue,Verdana,Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif;font-weight: 400;color: white;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-MBEqoef> *:first-child {font-size: 25px;}}@media all and (min-width: 737px) and (max-width: 1024px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-MBEqoef> *:first-child {font-size: 30px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-fBHaAez {padding: 0px 0px 20px;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-fBHaAez {width: auto;padding: 0px 0px 10px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-fBHaAez> *:first-child {font-size: 17px;font-family: CNN,Helvetica Neue,Verdana,Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif;font-weight: 400;color: white;letter-spacing: 0.01em;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-fBHaAez> *:first-child {font-size: 14px;padding: 0px 20px ;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-group-655004-XevO9fF {width: 100%;padding: 0px;text-align: left;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-group-655004-XevO9fF {width: 300px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-krkhHod {width: 30%;padding: 0px;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-krkhHod {width: 100%;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-krkhHod> *:first-child {padding: 15px;font-size: 14px;font-family: CNN,Helvetica Neue,Verdana,Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif;font-weight: 400;border-style: solid;border-color: #262626;border-width: 1px;background-color: #cc0300;}@media all and (max-width: 736px) {.bxc.bx-campaign-655004 .bx-element-655004-krkhHod> *:first-child {font-size: 14px;}}#bx-campaign-655004 #bx-close-inside-655004 { z-index: 1; }And his strategy -- which is essentially a case of a President grabbing some of the most emotive, divisive political issues and demagoguing them in a fear-based campaign for his own benefit -- is likely to leave the nation more polarized and unable to reach solutions to its most pressing problems.READ: Trump's making the migrant caravan a political issue. Here are the facts.The President's midterm onslaught is playing out in rallies across the nation that mostly target conservative regions where he is most popular.His latest stop was Texas, where he appeared alongside former GOP presidential primary rival Sen. Ted Cruz on Monday night."The Democrats have launched an assault on the sovereignty of our country, the security of our nation and the safety of every American," Trump said, blaming Democrats for "the crisis on our border."His hardcore approach sometimes overshadows the story of success that the President has to tell and would be the top talking point for most presidents, including the lowest jobless rate in half a century, an economy that has thrived since he has been in office and the two conservative Supreme Court justices he has installed.In his most extreme attack, Trump is accusing Democrats of organizing a migrant caravan trekking through Mexico that he says will lay siege to the US border. He has claimed without offering any evidence that the caravan includes criminals and "unknown Middle Easterners." Reporters walking with the caravan say it's made up of desperate Hondurans and Guatemalans fleeing repression and poverty.White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said that there was "absolutely" evidence of Middle Easterners in the caravan -- but did not provide any.Trump also argues that Democrats want to create a socialist system of "gridlock, poverty and chaos" like Venezuela. That's a big leap since the Nicolas Maduro regime and its predecessor destroyed the economy and triggered mass economic migration and the worst humanitarian crisis in the Western hemisphere.Trump has also warned of voter fraud, which doesn't exist at significant levels, and claims the Democratic Party has been taken over by proponents of "unhinged" mob rule -- even though his rallies are the ones where supporters yell for his political opponents to be locked up, and he praised a lawmaker for assaulting a reporter. He said most Democrats opposed his opioid initiative, even though it passed 98-1 in the Senate and 393-8 in the House. On Monday, in an exchange with reporters, he could not support his earlier claim that there were riots in California over so-called sanctuary cities.Vehemence of rhetoricTrump is certainly not the first politician to distort the profiles and positions of his opponents or to suggest that their positions are un-American.President George W. Bush, for instance, warned during the 2006 midterm campaign that with Democrats "the terrorists win and America loses." And rough campaigning has been a feature of elections involving Thomas Jefferson and John Adams to Barack Obama and Mitt Romney.But the volume and vehemence of Trump's rhetoric, and his willingness to fling explosive claims even though they are demonstrably untrue is unlike any campaign in decades.In Arizona, over the weekend for instance, a huge chunk of his speech was on immigration. Trump voters, many of whom believe politicians failed to do anything about what they see as undocumented migrants undercutting their wages and taking their jobs, see the President's rhetoric as legitimate. And they reject media critiques that the President lies and many see his unchained rhetoric as exactly the kind of anti-establishment behavior that made him an attractive candidate in the first place.The television footage of people marching across Mexico plays directly into Trump's rhetorical law-and-order construct of a nation under siege from outside criminal elements -- no matter what the reality on the ground may be. Trump's claims are also relayed by conservative media."A Democratic victory in November would be a bright flashing invitation to every trafficker, smuggler, drug dealer and illegal alien on the planet. Come on in, folks," Trump said in Arizona."A Republican victory would send the message that America will enforce our borders and defend our citizens. It's important."Trump's tough approach has highlighted one of his most useful political assets that also makes him the most dangerous threat to the conventions of the political system in decades -- his lack of shame and willingness to make brazen arguments based on lies, which most presidents would avoid.His energy and willingness to campaign like he is on the ballot may also be a factor."We've added a lot of spice to it, when I say we, maybe it's I, and others perhaps. They see that I am coming here," Trump said, in an interview with ABC 13 News in Houston.How do Democrats respond?Trump's spiced up rhetoric has left Democrats facing questions about how to respond since they have no one on the national political stage with the star power of the President. Former Vice President Joe Biden on Monday accused Trump of scaremongering over the border and a caravan that is still 1,000 miles away."He's making it sound like they're breaking through the border. This is hysteria on his part," Biden, a potential 2020 Democratic candidate, told CNN while campaigning in Florida.On Saturday, the top two Democrats in Congress, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, argued that Trump's harsh turn was a sign of weakness rather than strength."The president is desperate to change the subject from health care to immigration because he knows that health care is the number one issue Americans care about," they said in a joint statement.In some ways, Trump does not have many options but to go on such a rampage. He's built his presidency on keeping his base angry -- and in the process has alienated many more moderate voters. So only a presidential-election-level turnout from his base in a midterm election is likely to stave off big Democratic gains at a time when the opposition party is also enthusiastic.And he knows that immigration -- from the moment he stepped on the escalator in Trump Tower in 2015 to be a candidate -- is the issue that has helped him at the ballot box more than any other, despite political missteps like the separation of undocumented immigrant families and their children earlier this year."I think Donald Trump is President because of the immigration issue," Scott Jennings, a former campaign aide to Bush, told CNN on Monday."He wants to paint a line between a party that wants border security and a party that doesn't."But former Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook argued that the fragmented nature of the Senate and House races meant that Trump's immigration rhetoric represented a high-risk strategy."I don't think it is going to save them in these suburban areas that are so important for the House map or the gubernatorial map," Mook told CNN's Erica Hill.CNN's Arlette Saenz and Jeremy Diamond contributed to this story /* dynamic basic css */ .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {margin:0;padding:0;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container .ob-clearfix {display:block;width:100%;float:none;clear:both;height:0px;line-height:0px;font-size:0px;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container.ob-multi-row {padding-top: 2%;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {position:relative;margin:0;padding;0;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-link, .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-link:hover {text-decoration:none;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon-container {position:absolute;left:0;height:50%;width:100%;text-align:center;top:25%;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon {display:inline-block;height:100%;float:none;opacity:0.7;transition: opacity 500ms;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon:hover {opacity:1;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_what{direction:ltr;clear:both;padding:5px 10px 0px;} .AR_36 .ob_what a:after {content: "";vertical-align:super;;;background-image: url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/achoice.svg');background-size:75% 75%;width:12px;height:12px;padding-left:4px;display:inline-block;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-position:right center;border-left:1px solid #999;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_what a{color:#999;font-size:11px;font-family:arial;text-decoration: none;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_what.ob-hover:hover a{text-decoration: underline;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_amelia, .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_logo, .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo, .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo, .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{vertical-align:baseline !important;display:inline-block;vertical-align:text-bottom;padding:0px 5px;box-sizing:content-box;-moz-box-sizing:content-box;-webkit-box-sizing:content-box;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:22px;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_feed_logo.png') no-repeat center top;width:86px;height:23px;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_smartFeedLogo.min.svg') no-repeat center top;width:140px;height:21px;} @media only screen and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(min-resolution: 192dpi) { .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px; background-size:16px 32px;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px; background-size:67px 24px;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:20px; background-size:67px 40px;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_feed_logo@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:86px;height:23px;background-size: 86px 23px;} } @media only screen and (max-width: 600px) { .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo{width:90px;height:20px;background-size:90px 20px;} } .AR_36.ob-widget:hover .ob_amelia, .AR_36.ob-widget:hover .ob_logo, .AR_36.ob-widget:hover .ob_text_logo{background-position:center bottom;} .AR_36.ob-widget {position:relative;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_what{position:absolute;top:5px;right:0px;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_what{text-align:right;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-image {display:block;} /* dynamic smartfeed-strip css */ .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container {position:relative;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-image-ratio {height:0px;line-height:0px;padding-top:60.0%;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container img.ob-rec-image {width:100%;position:absolute;top:0;bottom:0;left:0;right:0;opacity:0;transition:all 750ms;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container img.ob-show {opacity:1;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-label {position:absolute;bottom:0px;left:0px;padding:0px 3px;background-color:#666;color:white;font-size:10px;line-height:15px;} .AR_36.ob-widget {width:auto;min-width:120px;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {display:inline-block;vertical-align:top;min-width:50px;width:48.85%;box-sizing:border-box;-moz-box-sizing:border-box;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandName, .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandLogo-container, .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandLogoAndName {display:inline-block;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandLogo {width:20px;height:20px;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandName {vertical-align:bottom;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandName {vertical-align:super;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {direction: ltr;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {margin-left:0;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container ~ .ob-dynamic-rec-container {margin:0 0 0 2.3%; } .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-widget-header {direction:ltr; } .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-unit {display:block;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-text {max-height:60.0px;overflow:hidden;} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-source {} .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-date {font-weight:bold;} [data-idx="1"] .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {box-shadow:0px 2px 2px rgba(0, 0, 0, .28);margin-bottom:20px;padding-bottom:4px;padding-top:0;background-color:white;} [data-idx="1"] .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-widget-header {margin-left:10px;} [data-idx="1"] .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-text {margin-left: 10px; margin-right:10px;} [data-idx="1"] .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-source {margin-left: 10px; margin-right:10px;} [data-idx="1"] .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-description {margin: 5px 10px 2px 10px; font-size:16px;} .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN {padding:0; margin-top:20px;} [data-idx="1"] .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container {clear: both;} [data-idx="1"] .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-label {background-color: #4a90e2; bottom:10px;right:0px;left:auto; font-family: helvetica;} [data-idx="1"] .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container.ob-multi-row {padding-top: 0%;} [data-idx="1"] .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_what {padding-top: 0; margin-top:0px; top: 0;} [data-idx="1"] .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-logo-container .ob-rec-logo {background-size: contain;border-radius: 50%;background-position: center;background-repeat: no-repeat} [data-idx="1"] .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container:not(:last-child) {box-shadow: none;margin-bottom: auto;} /* dynamic customized css */ .AR_36.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-widget-header {font-family:inherit;font-size:16px;color:black;padding-bottom:15px;padding-top:0px;} .AR_36.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container {max-width:500px;} .AR_36.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-text {font-family:inherit;color:black;margin:5px 0 0px;text-align:left;line-height:1.25;font-size:16px;} .AR_36.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-text:hover {color:#c00;} .AR_36.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container {margin:5px 0 0px;} .AR_36.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-source {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:4px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:14px;} .AR_36.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-date {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .AR_36.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-author {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .AR_36.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-description {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .AR_36.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-brandName {font-family:inherit;margin:5px 0 0px;line-height:1.25;font-size:13px;font-weight:400;} .AR_36.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-brandLogo {width:20px;height:20px;} /*****DARK TEMPLATE*****/ .t-dark .OUTBRAIN .AR_36 .ob-widget-header { background-color: #404040 !important; border-bottom: 1px solid #404040 !important; color: #fefefe !important; } .t-dark .OUTBRAIN .AR_36 .ob-rec-text, .t-dark .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_1 .ob-rec-text, .t-dark .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_2 .ob-rec-text, .t-dark .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_3 .ob-rec-text, .t-dark .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_4 .ob-rec-text { color: #fff !important; } .pg-politics .AR_36.ob-widget .ob_what a { color: #fff; } /*****DARK TEMPLATE*****/ .OUTBRAIN .AR_36.ob-widget, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget { width: 100%; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget { padding: 12px 0 24px; } .AR_36.ob-widget, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget { padding: 0 0 24px; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget { border-bottom: solid 1px #e6e6e6; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .AR_36.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-widget-header { display: block; width: 100%; color: #404040; height: 36px; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; border-bottom: solid 1px #e6e6e6; margin-bottom: 24px; font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; font-stretch: condensed; letter-spacing: 2px; padding-top: 7px; text-transform: uppercase; font-family: "CNN Condensed", CNN, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .AR_36.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-widget-header:after { content: ''; display: BLOCK; width: 16px; height: 4px; background-color: #737373; position: relative; top: 6px; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_3 .ob-rec-text, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_2 .ob-rec-text { font-family: "CNN", Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 1.25; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: left; color: #262626; padding-bottom: 8px; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_2 .ob-rec-text { padding-bottom: 0; } .OUTBRAIN .AR_36 .ob-rec-text, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_1 .ob-rec-text, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_4 .ob-rec-text { font-family: "CNN", Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 22px; font-style: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 1.25; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: left; color: #262626; margin: 0; } .OUTBRAIN .AR_36 .ob-rec-text { padding-top: 8px; } .OUTBRAIN .AR_36 .ob-rec-text, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_2 .ob-rec-text, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_4 .ob-rec-text { font-weight: 500; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_1 .ob-rec-text, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_3 .ob-rec-text { font-weight: bold; } .OUTBRAIN .AR_36 .ob-rec-source, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_2 .ob-rec-source, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_4 .ob-rec-source { font-family: "CNN", Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-weight: 500; font-style: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 1.63; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: left; color: #737373; padding: 0; } .OUTBRAIN .AR_36 .ob-rec-source, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_4 .ob-rec-source { padding-top: 4px; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_1 .ob-rec-source, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN .SFD_STP_3 .ob-rec-source { font-family: "CNN", Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 1.63; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: left; color: #737373; } .AR_36.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-p .ob-rec-source:before, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_2 .ob-p .ob-rec-source:before, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_4 .ob-p .ob-rec-source:before { content: 'Sponsored: '; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container~.ob-unit.ob-rec-source, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container~.ob-unit.ob-rec-source { margin-left: 0; } .AR_36.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container { max-width: none; } /*****SMARTFEED*****/ .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container:before, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container:before { box-sizing: content-box; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .AR_36.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-widget-items-container, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-widget-items-container, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-widget-items-container, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-widget-items-container, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-widget-items-container { box-shadow: none; margin-bottom: 0; background-color:initial; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container.ob-multi-row { padding-top: 24px; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_1.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_3.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_4.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container { max-width: none; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .AR_36.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-widget-header { margin-left: 0px; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .AR_36.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-unit.ob-rec-text, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-unit.ob-rec-text, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-unit.ob-rec-text, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-unit.ob-rec-text, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-unit.ob-rec-text { margin-left: 0px; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .AR_36.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-unit.ob-rec-source, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-unit.ob-rec-source, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-unit.ob-rec-source, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-unit.ob-rec-source, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-unit.ob-rec-source { margin-left: 0px; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .AR_36.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob_what { top: 4px; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container .ob-rec-logo, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container .ob-rec-logo { border-radius: 0; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container { margin-left: 0; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_1.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_3.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container { position: absolute; } .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container .ob-rec-logo, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container .ob-rec-logo { position: absolute; top: -5px; z-index: 3; } /*****VIDEO ICON*****/ .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon-container, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon-container, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon-container, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon-container, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon-container { position: absolute; left: 8px; height: 32px; width: 32px; text-align: left; top: auto; bottom: 8px; object-fit: contain; } .AR_36.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon, .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon { opacity: 1.0; } Paid Content The Crazy Facial That Celebrities Say “Takes 10 Years Off” Your… Town & Country The 2019 Vehicles Are Released And The Best 2019 SUVS for… Auto Today | Sponsored Links /* dynamic basic css */ .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {margin:0;padding:0;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container .ob-clearfix {display:block;width:100%;float:none;clear:both;height:0px;line-height:0px;font-size:0px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container.ob-multi-row {padding-top: 2%;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {position:relative;margin:0;padding;0;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-link, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-link:hover {text-decoration:none;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon-container {position:absolute;left:0;height:50%;width:100%;text-align:center;top:25%;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon {display:inline-block;height:100%;float:none;opacity:0.7;transition: opacity 500ms;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon:hover {opacity:1;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_what{direction:ltr;clear:both;padding:5px 10px 0px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_what a{color:#999;font-size:11px;font-family:arial;text-decoration: none;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_what.ob-hover:hover a{text-decoration: underline;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_amelia, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_logo, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{vertical-align:baseline !important;display:inline-block;vertical-align:text-bottom;padding:0px 5px;box-sizing:content-box;-moz-box-sizing:content-box;-webkit-box-sizing:content-box;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:22px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_feed_logo.png') no-repeat center top;width:86px;height:23px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_smartFeedLogo.min.svg') no-repeat center top;width:140px;height:21px;} @media only screen and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(min-resolution: 192dpi) { .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px; background-size:16px 32px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px; background-size:67px 24px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:20px; background-size:67px 40px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_feed_logo@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:86px;height:23px;background-size: 86px 23px;} } @media only screen and (max-width: 600px) { .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo{width:90px;height:20px;background-size:90px 20px;} } .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget:hover .ob_amelia, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget:hover .ob_logo, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget:hover .ob_text_logo{background-position:center bottom;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget {position:relative;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_what{position:absolute;top:5px;right:0px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_what{text-align:right;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-image {display:block;} /* dynamic smartfeed-strip css */ .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container {position:relative;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-image-ratio {height:0px;line-height:0px;padding-top:60.0%;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container img.ob-rec-image {width:100%;position:absolute;top:0;bottom:0;left:0;right:0;opacity:0;transition:all 750ms;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container img.ob-show {opacity:1;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-label {position:absolute;bottom:0px;left:0px;padding:0px 3px;background-color:#666;color:white;font-size:10px;line-height:15px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget {width:auto;min-width:180px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {display:inline-block;vertical-align:top;min-width:50px;width:31.8%;box-sizing:border-box;-moz-box-sizing:border-box;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandName, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandLogo-container, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandLogoAndName {display:inline-block;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandLogo {width:20px;height:20px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandName {vertical-align:bottom;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandName {vertical-align:super;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {direction: ltr;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {margin-left:0;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container ~ .ob-dynamic-rec-container {margin:0 0 0 2.3%; } .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-header {direction:ltr; } .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-unit {display:block;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-text {max-height:60.0px;overflow:hidden;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-source {font-style:italic;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-date {font-weight:bold;} [data-idx="8"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {box-shadow:0px 2px 2px rgba(0, 0, 0, .28);margin-bottom:20px;padding-bottom:4px;padding-top:0;background-color:white;} [data-idx="8"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-header {margin-left:10px;} [data-idx="8"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-text {margin-left: 10px; margin-right:10px;} [data-idx="8"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-source {margin-left: 10px; margin-right:10px;} [data-idx="8"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-description {margin: 5px 10px 2px 10px; font-size:16px;} .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN {padding:0; margin-top:20px;} [data-idx="8"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container {clear: both;} [data-idx="8"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-label {background-color: #4a90e2; bottom:10px;right:0px;left:auto; font-family: helvetica;} [data-idx="8"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container.ob-multi-row {padding-top: 0%;} [data-idx="8"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_what {padding-top: 0; margin-top:0px; top: 0;} [data-idx="8"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-logo-container .ob-rec-logo {background-size: contain;border-radius: 50%;background-position: center;background-repeat: no-repeat} [data-idx="8"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container:not(:last-child) {box-shadow: none;margin-bottom: auto;} /* dynamic customized css */ .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-widget-header {font-family:inherit;font-size:16px;color:black;padding-bottom:15px;padding-top:0px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container {max-width:400px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-text {font-family:inherit;color:black;margin:5px 0 0px;text-align:left;line-height:1.25;font-size:16px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-text:hover {color:#c00;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container {margin:5px 0 0px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-source {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:4px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:14px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-date {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-author {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-description {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-brandName {font-family:inherit;margin:5px 0 0px;line-height:1.25;font-size:13px;font-weight:400;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-brandLogo {width:20px;height:20px;} Why This Medigap Plan Is the Most Popular ZagLine [Gallery] Anthony Bourdain’s Will Reveals He’s Left His Entire Fortune To One Individual Scribol Government Pays To Renovate Your Home If You Live Near Cincinnati (You Must Qualify) The Mortgage Savers /* dynamic basic css */ .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {margin:0;padding:0;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container .ob-clearfix {display:block;width:100%;float:none;clear:both;height:0px;line-height:0px;font-size:0px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container.ob-multi-row {padding-top: 2%;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {position:relative;margin:0;padding;0;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-link, .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-link:hover {text-decoration:none;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon-container {position:absolute;left:0;height:50%;width:100%;text-align:center;top:25%;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon {display:inline-block;height:100%;float:none;opacity:0.7;transition: opacity 500ms;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon:hover {opacity:1;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_what{direction:ltr;clear:both;padding:5px 10px 0px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_what a{color:#999;font-size:11px;font-family:arial;text-decoration: none;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_what.ob-hover:hover a{text-decoration: underline;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_amelia, .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_logo, .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo, .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo, .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{vertical-align:baseline !important;display:inline-block;vertical-align:text-bottom;padding:0px 5px;box-sizing:content-box;-moz-box-sizing:content-box;-webkit-box-sizing:content-box;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:22px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_feed_logo.png') no-repeat center top;width:86px;height:23px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_smartFeedLogo.min.svg') no-repeat center top;width:140px;height:21px;} @media only screen and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(min-resolution: 192dpi) { .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px; background-size:16px 32px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px; background-size:67px 24px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:20px; background-size:67px 40px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_feed_logo@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:86px;height:23px;background-size: 86px 23px;} } @media only screen and (max-width: 600px) { .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo{width:90px;height:20px;background-size:90px 20px;} } .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget:hover .ob_amelia, .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget:hover .ob_logo, .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget:hover .ob_text_logo{background-position:center bottom;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget {position:relative;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_what{position:absolute;top:5px;right:0px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_what{text-align:right;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-image {display:block;} /* dynamic smartfeed-strip css */ .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container {position:relative;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-image-ratio {height:0px;line-height:0px;padding-top:60.0%;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container img.ob-rec-image {width:100%;position:absolute;top:0;bottom:0;left:0;right:0;opacity:0;transition:all 750ms;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container img.ob-show {opacity:1;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-label {position:absolute;bottom:0px;left:0px;padding:0px 3px;background-color:#666;color:white;font-size:10px;line-height:15px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget {width:auto;min-width:120px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {display:inline-block;vertical-align:top;min-width:50px;width:48.85%;box-sizing:border-box;-moz-box-sizing:border-box;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandName, .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandLogo-container, .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandLogoAndName {display:inline-block;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandLogo {width:20px;height:20px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandName {vertical-align:bottom;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandName {vertical-align:super;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {direction: ltr;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {margin-left:0;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container ~ .ob-dynamic-rec-container {margin:0 0 0 2.3%; } .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-widget-header {direction:ltr; } .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-unit {display:block;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-text {max-height:60.0px;overflow:hidden;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-source {font-style:italic;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-date {font-weight:bold;} [data-idx="9"] .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {box-shadow:0px 2px 2px rgba(0, 0, 0, .28);margin-bottom:20px;padding-bottom:4px;padding-top:0;background-color:white;} [data-idx="9"] .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-widget-header {margin-left:10px;} [data-idx="9"] .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-text {margin-left: 10px; margin-right:10px;} [data-idx="9"] .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-source {margin-left: 10px; margin-right:10px;} [data-idx="9"] .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-description {margin: 5px 10px 2px 10px; font-size:16px;} .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN {padding:0; margin-top:20px;} [data-idx="9"] .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container {clear: both;} [data-idx="9"] .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-label {background-color: #4a90e2; bottom:10px;right:0px;left:auto; font-family: helvetica;} [data-idx="9"] .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-logo-container {float: left;margin-left: 5px;margin-right: 10px;} [data-idx="9"] .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-logo-container ~ .ob-unit.ob-rec-source {margin-left: 55px;} [data-idx="9"] .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container.ob-multi-row {padding-top: 0%;} [data-idx="9"] .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob_what {padding-top: 0; margin-top:0px; top: 0;} [data-idx="9"] .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-rec-logo-container .ob-rec-logo {background-size: contain;border-radius: 50%;background-position: center;background-repeat: no-repeat} [data-idx="9"] .SFD_STP_1.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container:not(:last-child) {box-shadow: none;margin-bottom: auto;} /* dynamic customized css */ .SFD_STP_1.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-widget-header {font-family:inherit;font-size:16px;color:black;padding-bottom:15px;padding-top:0px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container {max-width:400px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-text {font-family:inherit;color:black;margin:5px 0 0px;text-align:left;line-height:1.25;font-size:16px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-text:hover {color:#c00;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container {margin:5px 0 0px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-source {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:4px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:14px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-date {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-author {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-description {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-brandName {font-family:inherit;margin:5px 0 0px;line-height:1.25;font-size:13px;font-weight:400;} .SFD_STP_1.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-brandLogo {width:20px;height:20px;} Politics Supreme Court blocks deposition of Commerce chief Ross over… Bleacher Report Bleacher Report - MLB Hall of Famers disgusted by current MLB play /* dynamic basic css */ .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {margin:0;padding:0;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container .ob-clearfix {display:block;width:100%;float:none;clear:both;height:0px;line-height:0px;font-size:0px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container.ob-multi-row {padding-top: 2%;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {position:relative;margin:0;padding;0;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-link, .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-link:hover {text-decoration:none;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon-container {position:absolute;left:0;height:50%;width:100%;text-align:center;top:25%;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon {display:inline-block;height:100%;float:none;opacity:0.7;transition: opacity 500ms;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon:hover {opacity:1;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_what{direction:ltr;clear:both;padding:5px 10px 0px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_what a{color:#999;font-size:11px;font-family:arial;text-decoration: none;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_what.ob-hover:hover a{text-decoration: underline;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_amelia, .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_logo, .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo, .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo, .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{vertical-align:baseline !important;display:inline-block;vertical-align:text-bottom;padding:0px 5px;box-sizing:content-box;-moz-box-sizing:content-box;-webkit-box-sizing:content-box;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:22px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_feed_logo.png') no-repeat center top;width:86px;height:23px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_smartFeedLogo.min.svg') no-repeat center top;width:140px;height:21px;} @media only screen and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(min-resolution: 192dpi) { .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px; background-size:16px 32px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px; background-size:67px 24px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:20px; background-size:67px 40px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_feed_logo@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:86px;height:23px;background-size: 86px 23px;} } @media only screen and (max-width: 600px) { .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo{width:90px;height:20px;background-size:90px 20px;} } .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget:hover .ob_amelia, .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget:hover .ob_logo, .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget:hover .ob_text_logo{background-position:center bottom;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget {position:relative;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_what{position:absolute;top:5px;right:0px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_what{text-align:right;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-image {display:block;} /* dynamic smartfeed-strip css */ .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container {position:relative;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-image-ratio {height:0px;line-height:0px;padding-top:60.0%;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container img.ob-rec-image {width:100%;position:absolute;top:0;bottom:0;left:0;right:0;opacity:0;transition:all 750ms;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container img.ob-show {opacity:1;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-label {position:absolute;bottom:0px;left:0px;padding:0px 3px;background-color:#666;color:white;font-size:10px;line-height:15px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget {width:auto;min-width:180px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {display:inline-block;vertical-align:top;min-width:50px;width:31.8%;box-sizing:border-box;-moz-box-sizing:border-box;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandName, .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandLogo-container, .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandLogoAndName {display:inline-block;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandLogo {width:20px;height:20px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandName {vertical-align:bottom;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandName {vertical-align:super;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {direction: ltr;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {margin-left:0;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container ~ .ob-dynamic-rec-container {margin:0 0 0 2.3%; } .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-widget-header {direction:ltr; } .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-unit {display:block;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-text {max-height:60.0px;overflow:hidden;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-source {font-style:italic;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-date {font-weight:bold;} [data-idx="10"] .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {box-shadow:0px 2px 2px rgba(0, 0, 0, .28);margin-bottom:20px;padding-bottom:4px;padding-top:0;background-color:white;} [data-idx="10"] .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-widget-header {margin-left:10px;} [data-idx="10"] .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-text {margin-left: 10px; margin-right:10px;} [data-idx="10"] .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-source {margin-left: 10px; margin-right:10px;} [data-idx="10"] .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-description {margin: 5px 10px 2px 10px; font-size:16px;} .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN {padding:0; margin-top:20px;} [data-idx="10"] .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container {clear: both;} [data-idx="10"] .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-label {background-color: #4a90e2; bottom:10px;right:0px;left:auto; font-family: helvetica;} [data-idx="10"] .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-logo-container {float: left;margin-left: 5px;margin-right: 10px;} [data-idx="10"] .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-logo-container ~ .ob-unit.ob-rec-source {margin-left: 55px;} [data-idx="10"] .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container.ob-multi-row {padding-top: 0%;} [data-idx="10"] .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob_what {padding-top: 0; margin-top:0px; top: 0;} [data-idx="10"] .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-rec-logo-container .ob-rec-logo {background-size: contain;border-radius: 50%;background-position: center;background-repeat: no-repeat} [data-idx="10"] .SFD_STP_3.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container:not(:last-child) {box-shadow: none;margin-bottom: auto;} /* dynamic customized css */ .SFD_STP_3.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-widget-header {font-family:inherit;font-size:16px;color:black;padding-bottom:15px;padding-top:0px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container {max-width:400px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-text {font-family:inherit;color:black;margin:5px 0 0px;text-align:left;line-height:1.25;font-size:16px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-text:hover {color:#c00;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container {margin:5px 0 0px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-source {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:4px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:14px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-date {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-author {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-description {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-brandName {font-family:inherit;margin:5px 0 0px;line-height:1.25;font-size:13px;font-weight:400;} .SFD_STP_3.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-brandLogo {width:20px;height:20px;} Politics Donald Trump gets sweet revenge on Ted Cruz today in Texas Politics Hurricane forces Florida to ease voting rules CNN Underscored Underscored Genius morning habits, as told by five of the world's most successful people /* dynamic basic css */ .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {margin:0;padding:0;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container .ob-clearfix {display:block;width:100%;float:none;clear:both;height:0px;line-height:0px;font-size:0px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container.ob-multi-row {padding-top: 2%;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {position:relative;margin:0;padding;0;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-link, .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-link:hover {text-decoration:none;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon-container {position:absolute;left:0;height:50%;width:100%;text-align:center;top:25%;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon {display:inline-block;height:100%;float:none;opacity:0.7;transition: opacity 500ms;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon:hover {opacity:1;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_what{direction:ltr;clear:both;padding:5px 10px 0px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_what a{color:#999;font-size:11px;font-family:arial;text-decoration: none;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_what.ob-hover:hover a{text-decoration: underline;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_amelia, .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_logo, .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo, .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo, .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{vertical-align:baseline !important;display:inline-block;vertical-align:text-bottom;padding:0px 5px;box-sizing:content-box;-moz-box-sizing:content-box;-webkit-box-sizing:content-box;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:22px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_feed_logo.png') no-repeat center top;width:86px;height:23px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_smartFeedLogo.min.svg') no-repeat center top;width:140px;height:21px;} @media only screen and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(min-resolution: 192dpi) { .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px; background-size:16px 32px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px; background-size:67px 24px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:20px; background-size:67px 40px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_feed_logo@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:86px;height:23px;background-size: 86px 23px;} } @media only screen and (max-width: 600px) { .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo{width:90px;height:20px;background-size:90px 20px;} } .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget:hover .ob_amelia, .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget:hover .ob_logo, .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget:hover .ob_text_logo{background-position:center bottom;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget {position:relative;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_what{position:absolute;top:5px;right:0px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_what{text-align:right;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-image {display:block;} /* dynamic smartfeed-strip css */ .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container {position:relative;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-image-ratio {height:0px;line-height:0px;padding-top:60.0%;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container img.ob-rec-image {width:100%;position:absolute;top:0;bottom:0;left:0;right:0;opacity:0;transition:all 750ms;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container img.ob-show {opacity:1;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-label {position:absolute;bottom:0px;left:0px;padding:0px 3px;background-color:#666;color:white;font-size:10px;line-height:15px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget {width:auto;min-width:120px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {display:inline-block;vertical-align:top;min-width:50px;width:48.85%;box-sizing:border-box;-moz-box-sizing:border-box;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandName, .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandLogo-container, .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandLogoAndName {display:inline-block;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandLogo {width:20px;height:20px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandName {vertical-align:bottom;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandName {vertical-align:super;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {direction: ltr;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {margin-left:0;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container ~ .ob-dynamic-rec-container {margin:0 0 0 2.3%; } .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-widget-header {direction:ltr; } .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-unit {display:block;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-text {max-height:60.0px;overflow:hidden;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-source {font-style:italic;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-date {font-weight:bold;} [data-idx="11"] .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {box-shadow:0px 2px 2px rgba(0, 0, 0, .28);margin-bottom:20px;padding-bottom:4px;padding-top:0;background-color:white;} [data-idx="11"] .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-widget-header {margin-left:10px;} [data-idx="11"] .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-text {margin-left: 10px; margin-right:10px;} [data-idx="11"] .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-source {margin-left: 10px; margin-right:10px;} [data-idx="11"] .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-description {margin: 5px 10px 2px 10px; font-size:16px;} .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN {padding:0; margin-top:20px;} [data-idx="11"] .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container {clear: both;} [data-idx="11"] .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-label {background-color: #4a90e2; bottom:10px;right:0px;left:auto; font-family: helvetica;} [data-idx="11"] .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container.ob-multi-row {padding-top: 0%;} [data-idx="11"] .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob_what {padding-top: 0; margin-top:0px; top: 0;} [data-idx="11"] .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-rec-logo-container .ob-rec-logo {background-size: contain;border-radius: 50%;background-position: center;background-repeat: no-repeat} [data-idx="11"] .SFD_STP_4.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container:not(:last-child) {box-shadow: none;margin-bottom: auto;} /* dynamic customized css */ .SFD_STP_4.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-widget-header {font-family:inherit;font-size:16px;color:black;padding-bottom:15px;padding-top:0px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container {max-width:400px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-text {font-family:inherit;color:black;margin:5px 0 0px;text-align:left;line-height:1.25;font-size:16px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-text:hover {color:#c00;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container {margin:5px 0 0px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-source {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:4px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:14px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-date {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-author {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-description {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-brandName {font-family:inherit;margin:5px 0 0px;line-height:1.25;font-size:13px;font-weight:400;} .SFD_STP_4.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-brandLogo {width:20px;height:20px;} Leading Long Distance Moving Companies. Search for Long… Office Moving Companies | Sponsored Listings [Gallery] Each State Hilariously Depicted By One Stereotypical… Daily Stuff /* dynamic basic css */ .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {margin:0;padding:0;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container .ob-clearfix {display:block;width:100%;float:none;clear:both;height:0px;line-height:0px;font-size:0px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container.ob-multi-row {padding-top: 2%;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {position:relative;margin:0;padding;0;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-link, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-link:hover {text-decoration:none;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon-container {position:absolute;left:0;height:50%;width:100%;text-align:center;top:25%;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon {display:inline-block;height:100%;float:none;opacity:0.7;transition: opacity 500ms;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon:hover {opacity:1;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_what{direction:ltr;clear:both;padding:5px 10px 0px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_what a{color:#999;font-size:11px;font-family:arial;text-decoration: none;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_what.ob-hover:hover a{text-decoration: underline;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_amelia, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_logo, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{vertical-align:baseline !important;display:inline-block;vertical-align:text-bottom;padding:0px 5px;box-sizing:content-box;-moz-box-sizing:content-box;-webkit-box-sizing:content-box;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:22px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_feed_logo.png') no-repeat center top;width:86px;height:23px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_smartFeedLogo.min.svg') no-repeat center top;width:140px;height:21px;} @media only screen and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(min-resolution: 192dpi) { .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px; background-size:16px 32px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px; background-size:67px 24px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:20px; background-size:67px 40px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_feed_logo@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:86px;height:23px;background-size: 86px 23px;} } @media only screen and (max-width: 600px) { .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo{width:90px;height:20px;background-size:90px 20px;} } .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget:hover .ob_amelia, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget:hover .ob_logo, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget:hover .ob_text_logo{background-position:center bottom;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget {position:relative;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_what{position:absolute;top:5px;right:0px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_what{text-align:right;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-image {display:block;} /* dynamic smartfeed-strip css */ .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container {position:relative;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-image-ratio {height:0px;line-height:0px;padding-top:60.0%;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container img.ob-rec-image {width:100%;position:absolute;top:0;bottom:0;left:0;right:0;opacity:0;transition:all 750ms;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container img.ob-show {opacity:1;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-label {position:absolute;bottom:0px;left:0px;padding:0px 3px;background-color:#666;color:white;font-size:10px;line-height:15px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget {width:auto;min-width:180px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {display:inline-block;vertical-align:top;min-width:50px;width:31.8%;box-sizing:border-box;-moz-box-sizing:border-box;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandName, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandLogo-container, .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandLogoAndName {display:inline-block;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandLogo {width:20px;height:20px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-brandName {vertical-align:bottom;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandName {vertical-align:super;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {direction: ltr;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {margin-left:0;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container ~ .ob-dynamic-rec-container {margin:0 0 0 2.3%; } .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-header {direction:ltr; } .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-unit {display:block;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-text {max-height:60.0px;overflow:hidden;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-source {font-style:italic;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-date {font-weight:bold;} [data-idx="12"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {box-shadow:0px 2px 2px rgba(0, 0, 0, .28);margin-bottom:20px;padding-bottom:4px;padding-top:0;background-color:white;} [data-idx="12"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-header {margin-left:10px;} [data-idx="12"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-text {margin-left: 10px; margin-right:10px;} [data-idx="12"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-source {margin-left: 10px; margin-right:10px;} [data-idx="12"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-unit.ob-rec-description {margin: 5px 10px 2px 10px; font-size:16px;} .ob-smartfeed-wrapper .OUTBRAIN {padding:0; margin-top:20px;} [data-idx="12"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container {clear: both;} [data-idx="12"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-label {background-color: #4a90e2; bottom:10px;right:0px;left:auto; font-family: helvetica;} [data-idx="12"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container.ob-multi-row {padding-top: 0%;} [data-idx="12"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob_what {padding-top: 0; margin-top:0px; top: 0;} [data-idx="12"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-rec-logo-container .ob-rec-logo {background-size: contain;border-radius: 50%;background-position: center;background-repeat: no-repeat} [data-idx="12"] .SFD_STP_2.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container:not(:last-child) {box-shadow: none;margin-bottom: auto;} /* dynamic customized css */ .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-widget-header {font-family:inherit;font-size:16px;color:black;padding-bottom:15px;padding-top:0px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container {max-width:400px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-text {font-family:inherit;color:black;margin:5px 0 0px;text-align:left;line-height:1.25;font-size:16px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-text:hover {color:#c00;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-logo-container {margin:5px 0 0px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-source {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:4px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:14px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-date {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-author {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-description {font-family:inherit;color:black;padding:0px 0 0px;text-align:left;font-size:12px;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-brandName {font-family:inherit;margin:5px 0 0px;line-height:1.25;font-size:13px;font-weight:400;} .SFD_STP_2.ob-smartfeed-strip-layout .ob-rec-brandLogo {width:20px;height:20px;} Cincinnati Ohio: These Stair Lifts are Better Than You Ever Thought Possible Yahoo! Search The Secret Behind Mayweather’s Amazing Smile Revealed SNOW 30 TV Shows Of The 70s That Were Total Failures ALOT Living /* dynamic basic css */ .AR_13.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container {margin:0;padding:0;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container .ob-clearfix {display:block;width:100%;float:none;clear:both;height:0px;line-height:0px;font-size:0px;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob-widget-items-container.ob-multi-row {padding-top: 2%;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-container {position:relative;margin:0;padding;0;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-link, .AR_13.ob-widget .ob-dynamic-rec-link:hover {text-decoration:none;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon-container {position:absolute;left:0;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon {display:inline-block;height:100%;float:none;opacity:0.7;transition: opacity 500ms;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-video-icon:hover {opacity:1;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_what{direction:ltr;clear:both;padding:5px 10px 0px;} .AR_13 .ob_what a:after {content: "";;;background-image: url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/achoice.svg');background-size:75% 75%;width:12px;height:12px;padding-left:4px;display:inline-block;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-position:right center;border-left:1px solid #999;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_what a{color:#999;font-size:11px;font-family:arial;text-decoration: none;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_what.ob-hover:hover a{text-decoration: underline;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_amelia, .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_logo, .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo, .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo, .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{vertical-align:baseline !important;display:inline-block;vertical-align:text-bottom;padding:0px 5px;box-sizing:content-box;-moz-box-sizing:content-box;-webkit-box-sizing:content-box;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:22px;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_feed_logo.png') no-repeat center top;width:86px;height:23px;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_smartFeedLogo.min.svg') no-repeat center top;width:140px;height:21px;} @media only screen and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(min-resolution: 192dpi) { .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px; background-size:16px 32px;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px; background-size:67px 24px;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:20px; background-size:67px 40px;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_feed_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_feed_logo@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:86px;height:23px;background-size: 86px 23px;} } @media only screen and (max-width: 600px) { .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_sfeed_logo{width:90px;height:20px;background-size:90px 20px;} } .AR_13.ob-widget:hover .ob_amelia, .AR_13.ob-widget:hover .ob_logo, .AR_13.ob-widget:hover .ob_text_logo{background-position:center bottom;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_what{text-align:right;} .AR_13.ob-widget .ob-rec-image-container .ob-rec-image {display:block;} /* dynamic classic css */ .AR_13.ob-classic-layout {width:auto;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout:after {content:"";display:block;height:0px;float:none;clear:both;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-widget-section {width:50%;box-sizing:border-box;-moz-box-sizing:border-box;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-widget-section > * {margin:0px 10px;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-widget-section { float:left; } .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-widget-header, .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container, .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container .ob-unit{direction:ltr;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-brandLogo {width:20px;height:20px;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container {display:block;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container:hover {text-decoration:underline;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-unit{display:inline;margin-bottom:10px;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-widget-header {font-weight:bold;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-unit.ob-rec-text {} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-unit.ob-rec-source {font-style:italic;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-unit.ob-rec-date {font-weight:bold;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-brandName, .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-brandLogo-container, .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-unit.ob-rec-brandLogoAndName, .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-brandLogo {display:inline-block;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-brandLogo {vertical-align: bottom;} /* dynamic customized css */ .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-widget-header {font-family:inherit;font-size:16px;color:#fff;padding-bottom:32px;padding-top:0px;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-widget-items-container {padding:0px 0px 0px 10px;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container {color:#262626;margin-bottom:0px;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container:hover {color:#c00;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-link {color:#262626;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-link:hover {color:#c00;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-text {color:#262626;font-family:CNN,"Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif;;font-size:16px;line-height:1.25;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-source {font-family:CNN,"Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif;;color:#737373;font-size:14px;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-date {font-family:CNN,"Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif;;font-size:12px;color:black;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-author {font-family:CNN,"Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif;;font-size:12px;color:black;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-description {font-family:CNN,"Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif;;font-size:12px;color:black;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-brandName {font-family:CNN,"Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif;;padding:$dynamic:TitleMarginTop$px 0 $dynamic:TitleMarginBottom$px;line-height:1.25;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-brandLogo {width:20px;height:20px;} .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-widget-section.ob-last { padding-left: 2%; } .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-widget-section { width: 48%; } .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-widget-header { color: #404040; font-family: CNN Condensed, CNN, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; font-stretch: condensed; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; text-transform: uppercase; border-bottom: 1px solid #e6e6e6; height: 36px; line-height: 1.43; letter-spacing: 2px; padding-top: 7px; margin: 0; } .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-widget-header::after { content: ""; display: block; width: 16px; height: 4px; background-color: #737373; position: relative; top: 8px; } .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-last .ob-widget-header::after { background-color: #1a6aff; } /*container*/ .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-widget-items-container { margin: 0; padding: 0; } .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container:not(:first-of-type) { border-top: 1px solid #d9d9d9; } .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container { min-height: 63px; padding: 7px 0; } .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container:hover { text-decoration: none; } .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container:hover .ob-rec-text, .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-dynamic-rec-container:hover .ob-rec-video::before { color: #c00; } /*title source*/ .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-text { font-family: CNN Condensed, CNN, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 400; font-style: normal; font-stretch: condensed; line-height: 1.5; letter-spacing: -0.1px; text-align: left; color: #1a1a1a; } .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-source { font-family: CNN Condensed, CNN, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-style: italic; font-stretch: condensed; color: #959595; font-size: 14px; font-weight: 300; } .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-video img { display: none; } .AR_13.ob-classic-layout .ob-rec-video::before { display: inline-block; margin-top: -3px; content: "\f147"; font-family: cnn-icons; color: #a6a6a6; font-style: normal; speak: none; text-decoration: inherit; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; text-transform: none; vertical-align: middle; font-size: 1rem; line-height: 1.25; font-weight: 300; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; } .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_what { border-top: 2px solid #e6e6e6; position: relative; top: 10px; } .AR_13.ob-widget .ob_what a { width: 93px; height: 14px; font-family: CNN Condensed, CNN, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-size: 10px; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-stretch: condensed; line-height: normal; letter-spacing: 1px; color: #959595; text-transform: uppercase; } Paid Content Tesla Semi looks set to tower over the competition Roadshow Enter A Name, Wait 13 Seconds, Brace Yourself www.peoplewhiz.com Gone With The Wind Secrets The Actors Were Forbidden To Reveal Definition Cornell MD "I Beg Americans To Throw Out This Vegetable Now" landers.unitednaturals.com More from CNN This stylish standing desk could revolutionize your work routine CNN Underscored Garmin releases GPS smartwatch that holds up to 500 songs CNN Underscored Kelly grabbed Lewandowski by the collar last winter How Netflix outgrew 'House of Cards' and 'Orange is the New… Recommended by .voterDiv .ob_bctrl{display:none;} .ob_pdesc IMG{border:none;} .HOP_69 .ob_what{direction:ltr;text-align:right;clear:both;padding:5px 10px 0px;} .HOP_69 .ob_what a{color:#999;font-size:10px;font-family:arial;text-decoration: none;} .HOP_69 .ob_what.ob-hover:hover a{text-decoration: underline;} .HOP_69 .ob_clear{clear:both;} .HOP_69 .ob_amelia, .HOP_69 .ob_logo, .HOP_69 .ob_text_logo {display:inline-block;vertical-align:text-bottom;padding:0px 5px;box-sizing:content-box;-moz-box-sizing:content-box;-webkit-box-sizing:content-box;} .HOP_69 .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px; } .HOP_69 .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px; } .HOP_69 .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:22px; } @media only screen and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(min-resolution: 192dpi) { .HOP_69 .ob_amelia{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_16x16@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:16px;height:16px;margin-bottom:-2px; background-size:16px 32px;} .HOP_69 .ob_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_logo_67x12@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:12px; background-size:67px 24px;} .HOP_69 .ob_text_logo{background:url('https://widgets.outbrain.com/images/widgetIcons/ob_text_logo_67x22@2x.png') no-repeat center top;width:67px;height:22px; background-size:67px 44px;} } .HOP_69:hover .ob_amelia, .HOP_69:hover .ob_logo, .HOP_69:hover .ob_text_logo{background-position:center bottom;} .HOP_69 .ob_container{width:100%;position:relative;overflow:hidden;} .HOP_69 .strip-img{width:150px;height:150px;border:none !important;margin:0px !important;display:block;padding:0px !important;} .HOP_69 .item-link-container{text-decoration:none;} .HOP_69 .strip-rec-link-title{font-size:13px;font-weight:normal;line-height:16px;} .HOP_69 .strip-rec-link-source{font-size:12px;line-height:16px} .HOP_69 .strip-like{padding-bottom:4px;font-size:14px;line-height:16px;height:20px;font-weight:bold;} .HOP_69 .item-container a,.HOP_69 .item-container a:hover,.HOP_69 .item-container a:visited{border:medium none;text-decoration:none;} .HOP_69 .ob_video{border:medium none;position:absolute;top:5px;left:5px} .HOP_69 .ob-rec-link-img{position:relative;} .HOP_69 .wbr:before {content: \"\200B\"} .HOP_69 .ob_container_recs{width:100%;position:absolute;} .HOP_69 .ob_container_recs A{display:inline;direction:ltr;text-align:left;} .HOP_69 .ob-text-content A{width:100%;padding:0px 0px;} .HOP_69 .ob-text-content{padding-top:6px;} .HOP_69 .item-container A.ob-text-content{display:block;} .HOP_69 .ob_container_recs .item-container{float:left;direction:ltr;width:152px;margin-bottom:300px;padding-right:12px;} .HOP_69 .ob_container_recs .ob-last{padding-right:0px;} .HOP_69 .ob_container_shadow_outer{position:static;width:100%;} .HOP_69 .ob_container_shadow .item-container-shadow{position:static;overflow-x:hidden;width:0px;float:left;direction:ltr;} .HOP_69 .ob_container_shadow .item-container{width:152px;visibility:hidden;float:left} .HOP_69 .ob-oc-label {border-color:#FFF;border-style:solid;border-width:2px 2px 0 0;color:#FFF;float:left;direction:ltr;font-family:verdana,arial,sans-serif;font-size:9px;font-size-adjust:none;font-stretch:normal;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;padding:2px 4px; position:relative; top:-18px; z-index:10;clear:both;} /* new cnn politics source styling */ .OUTBRAIN .HOP_69 .ob_org_header { display: block; width: 100%; color: #1a1a1a; height: 31px; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; border-bottom: solid 1px #e6e6e6; margin-bottom: 10px; font-family: CNN Condensed,CNN,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; font-stretch: condensed; line-height: 1.43; letter-spacing: 2px; color: #1a1a1a; text-transform: uppercase; } .HOP_69 .strip-rec-link-title { width: 234px; font-family: CNN Condensed,CNN,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-stretch: condensed; line-height: 1.5; letter-spacing: -0.1px; text-align: left; color: #1a1a1a; letter-spacing: normal; font-weight:300px; } .HOP_69 .ob-text-content { border-bottom: solid 1px #e6e6e6 !important; margin-top: 0px; } .HOP_69 span.ob_org_header:after { content: ''; display: BLOCK; width: 16px; height: 4px; background-color: #1a6aff; position: relative; top: 6px; } .HOP_69 .ob-text-content { padding: 0 0 0 80px; height: auto; } .OUTBRAIN .HOP_69 .odb_div:hover a { color: #c00 !important; } .HOP_69 .odb_div { padding-bottom: 5px; } .HOP_69 a.rec-link { color: #fff; font-weight: 400; font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.33333; } .OUTBRAIN .HOP_69 .ob-rec-link-img { margin: 0px 10px 10px 0; border-top: solid 1px #404040 solid; } .OUTBRAIN .HOP_69 .ob_source { display: none; } .OUTBRAIN .HOP_69 .ob_source { font-style: italic; color: #737373; font-size: 15px; font-weight: lighter; } .OUTBRAIN .ob_bctrl img { width: auto; } #ob_modal_inner { z-index: 214748364 !important; } #ob_modal_inner img { width: auto } .HOP_69 .ob_container_recs { width: 100%; position: absolute; height: auto; clear: both; } .HOP_69 .ob_container_recs .item-container { float: left; direction: ltr; width: 300px; margin-bottom: 5px; padding-right: 6px; float: left; display: block; height: 79px; display: block; /* clear: both; */ } .OUTBRAIN .HOP_69 .ob-rec-link-img { margin: 0px 10px 10px 0; border-top: solid 1px #404040 solid; float: left; } .HOP_69 .ob-text-content { padding: 0px 0 0 68px; height: 68px; /* display: inline-block; */ /* position: absolute; */ width: 330px; float: left; /* display: inline; */ position: absolute; font-weight:300; } .HOP_69 .strip-rec-link-source.ob-lcolor { display: none; } .HOP_69 .ob_container { width: 100%; position: relative; overflow: hidden; height: 420px; } .HOP_69 .strip-rec-link-title.ob-tcolor { font-family: CNN Condensed,CNN,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Utkal,sans-serif; font-weight: 400; color: #262626; width: 80%; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; font-size: 1rem; line-height: 1.25; margin-left: 7px; } .HOP_69 .strip-rec-link-title.ob-tcolor:hover { color: #c00; } .HOP_69 .strip-video-img { display: none; } .OUTBRAIN .HOP_69 .ob-rec-link-img { position: relative; width: 100%; } .HOP_69 .ob_video { background: rgba(12, 12, 12, .3); color: #fefefe; padding: 5px; font-family: CNN, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, Utkal, sans-serif; font-weight: 400; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; font-size: 18px; font-size: 1.125rem; line-height: 1; position: absolute; bottom: 0; top: inherit; left: 0; } .HOP_69 .ob_video:before { content: "\f147"; font-family: cnn-icons; } .OUTBRAIN .HOP_69 .ob-rec-link-img:hover .ob_video:before { color: #c00; } .ob_strip_container.HOP_69 { height: 210px; } .HOP_69 .strip-img { width: 60px; height: 60px; } .OUTBRAIN .HOP_69 .item-container:hover .ob-text-content .strip-rec-link-title { color: #c00;}

      Still have to rub that one in huh?

    1. Why does boredom seem painful? Shouldn’t it just be boring?

      While self-shattering is nonviolent, there are many other ways that thanatos, the destructive instinct, is twinned with boredom

      Renata Salecl acknowledges the twinning of boredom and aggression when she writes that the society “which allegedly gives priority to the individual’s freedoms over submission to group causes” (2006) and filters choice through the prism of “opportunity cost” is one that “causes aggression towards [the self] and apathy in relation to contemporary social problems which are completely ignored by the emporium of individualist choices” (2013a).

      Sometimes the aggression turns outward, as well. The Internet troll as bored, isolated malcontent is well established as a cultural trope and borne out by empirical data (Sanghani 2013). Liam Mitchell (2013) even ups the ante on this notion by proposing that the troll tackles the “desire for desires” problem by erecting “a conscious barrier to unconscious desire” by eliding investment in its principal object, which is amusement at another’s expense, or “lulz.” In Mattathias Schwartz’s (2013) formulation, lulz is “a quasi-thermodynamic exchange between the sensitive and the cruel”; humour derived from “disrupting another’s emotional equilibrium.” In pursuing lulz, the troll establishes “a distance from other trolls (with whom he may or may not feel a bond) and from the people who are governed by normal formations of desire” (Mitchell 2013). Insofar as the troll’s pursuits “bypass or forestall normal formations of desire, they may be characterized as non-subjective.” This is significant because, as Mitchell says, our choices only “have lasting meaning, for others and for ourselves … when we can be held accountable to our promises,” and this is impossible in a condition of both online anonymity and refusal of subjectivity.

      The study “Just think: The challenges of the disengaged mind” (Wilson et al. 2014) asked participants to spend some time alone thinking in an empty room. There were three study conditions, in all of which participants generally gave high ratings of boredom. In one condition the experimenters gave people the option of giving themselves a mild electric shock. 67% of men and 25% of women shocked themselves. So goes the saying “the devil makes work for idle hands.”

      Or more broadly: there are many ways, as Baudelaire said in Les Fleurs du Mal (1857, xxv), that “ennui makes your soul cruel.”

    1. As students move through the grades, they learn to use a general set of strategies, such as predicting, questioning, and summarizing a text, to support their comprehension and response to texts across the curriculum.

      Students are constantly learning ways that best work for them when reading something new or something challenging. I think that it is important that we help them fine tune the strategies that they already know work for them as well as include new ones that may be content specific

    1. One might, for example, speak to a microphone, in the manner described in connection with the speech controlled typewriter, and thus make his selections. It would certainly beat the usual file clerk.

      The note of technocratic celebration is so striking here in the age of Alexa and Siri. Now that we're all thinking about "weapons of math destruction" and the asymmetries that characterize the relationship between ordinary citizens and Big Data in so many contexts, it's strange to hear this sunny celebration of frictionless data in the hands of, well, everyone.

    1. the Palestinians’reward for their good behavior, in the form of a buttocks aimed directly at their faces

      I love how Sulieman showed the Palestinian POV, both literally and figuratively. There was clearly just the Israeli side dictating the order. Although they are awaiting the mayor, once he arrives he waits to receive his summons from the Israeli side, hardly appearing like a figure that holds any sort of power. While I understand Sulieman’s point of demonstrating that the Israeli forces came in practically bullying the mayor of Nazareth into signing the terms of surrender, but I feel like Sulieman portrays the mayor as being way too weak of a figurehead. He shows almost no sort of resistance at all, reflecting poorly on his state, while the Palestinian public seem to be the only ones taking action and resisting, as seen in the conflicts on the streets against the Israeli troops. Unless there a disparity or conflict between the public and the higher ups in government, leading the public to not respect their mayor (and thus this depiction of the mayor may be correct in the public’s POV), I feel like this hurts the nationalistic cause that we see in other areas of the film. What do you guys think? Would a different portrayal of the mayor, perhaps as stronger or more resistant or is this just one of Sulieman’s many satirical elements?

    1. it may have been misperceived as a lover’s spat by someone who just wanted to go back to sleep.

      It's scary thought, but we can be very good at lying to ourselves and justifying our own immoral actions when we have the motivation. This is chilling idea, but I think it's ultimately true.

    2. Whenever we are feeling sad, we can use helping someone else as a positive mood boost to feel happier.

      This textbook focuses much more on the intangible rewards of helping people, which I think are often the most applicable. While sometimes our motivations may be social or monetary in the case of altruistic professions, often time we are seeking an emotional gain.

    1. he diffi cult choice between the two foci is captured in Reinhold Neibuhr’s prayer (now best known as Alcoholics Anonymous’s “Serenity Prayer”), which asks for the serenity to bear the things we cannot change, the courage to change the things we can, and the wisdom to tell the difference.

      Since one of the earlier articles mentioned this i've been thinking about the quote a lot. I have a family friend who is in AA and this is the quote that AA uses to empower their recovery individuals. I think that if we all took this to heart, we may live in a kinder and less "helpful" (that is, trying to be helpful) community/world.

    1. It is not that the Author may not 'come back' in the Text, in his text, but he then does so as a 'guest'. If he is a novelist, he is inscribed in the novel like one of his characters, figured in the carpet; no longer privileged, paternal, aletheological, his inscription is ludic.

      I love this passage. Once you publish something, it ceases to be yours, or at least exclusively yours. If you return to it, you are just another reader or critic. Think of all the readings you've been to when someone from the peanut gallery disagrees with the author's take on the motives of a character or the after-life of the plot! In a few weeks, we will literalize this idea via the Ivanhoe concept, having Melville visit Billy Budd as a "guest" among its characters, narrator, critics, editors, etc.

    1. [AUDIENCE APPLAUDING] We've been talking about identities. Names are actually an important part of our identities. My name is Binna Kandola. I was doing some research a few years ago. I'm a psychologist. I was doing some research a few years ago and had to issue some questionnaires to a group of students. One of the tools of a psychologist is you test and then you retest. So I went to his college, I tested the students. And a few months later, I came back. I was testing the same students again. The principal, who I had met before, was introducing me to the two lecturers whose session I was about to interrupt. And he said, this is Janice, and this is James. And I'd like to introduce you to Mr. Tandoori. And their mouths dropped open. And I thought, I better put him straight here. I said, actually my name's not Tandoori. My name's not Tandoori, it's Kandola. It's chicken Kandola. [AUDIENCE LAUGHS] We can all make mistakes. Well, I'm a psychologist, I work with organizations. One of the things I noticed—I work in the diversity area. One of the things I noticed a few years ago now was that our clients were coming up to us and saying, they've been working in the diversity field for 10, 15 years. They'd made progress. But if they had thought about it 10 or 15 years before, they probably would have liked to have made more progress than they had done. And this was universal. It didn't matter about the sector, it was public or private, it didn't matter, it was manufacturing, it was finance, it was everywhere. And of course clearly something was going on here. There's something getting in the way. And I thought, this is worth investigating a bit further. So I did a big literature review, I did some studies. And it quickly became apparent that there is a problem. And the problem is us. We are the problem. And the problem is we're all biased without exception. So there's 7 billion people on the planet, and the 7 billion people have bias of some shape or form. The world is not divided up into those people who have bias and those who don't. It is divided up, though, into those people who recognize they have bias and those people who think they have none. And ironically— and the work on unconscious bias is full of ironies— one of the ironies is that those people who believe they have no bias probably are the most biased because there's no reflection going on. If I believed I had no bias, why on earth would I ever need to reflect on my behavior, review my decisions, or change anything about myself? Because I'm perfectly content in what I'm doing. So what I want to do in this session is actually just introduce you to how the biases we're talking about apply in organizations, and some of the things that we can do, perhaps, to minimize the effects of some of the biases that we have. So there are two lines there. There are two orange lines. There is a small one in the middle between the three blocks, and there is a thicker one at the top. Which one looks longer to you? Top one. Yeah. The top one looks longer. It's not going to help this, but— because it looks like it gets smaller as it goes down. But they are in fact the same size. They're the same size. The illusion works. And I know they're the same size because my assistant did it for me. She said, is this what you want? I said, no, they're meant to be the same size. [AUDIENCE LAUGHS] I actually measured them, so I can assure you they are the same size. And the converging lines means that we automatically turn that two-dimensional image into a three-dimensional one. It's automatic, we can't help it. If something is further away and it looks like it's the same size as something that's closer, it must, by definition, be bigger, right? So we interpret the whole time. We did a study three years ago. We asked people to take part in a psychology experiment. They walked into the room. At the bottom end of the room there was a counter with somebody standing behind the counter with a sign above them saying "experiment." They walk over to the counter, where they are handed a consent form. They complete the consent form, hand it back to the person behind the counter, who says, oh, I need to staple this. They duck down underneath the counter, staple the form, come back up, give it back to the person, say, can you go to the room over there, please? What they didn't realize was that was the beginning and the end of our experiment. Right? That was the beginning and the end of our experiment. [AUDIENCE LAUGHS] The person who went down underneath the table was not the same person who came up. [AUDIENCE LAUGHS] And in the room over there, people were asked, what did you notice? And people noticed the counter, noticed the form, stapled, the sign that said experiment. But something like 80% of the time, people did not notice it was a different person. They did not notice it was different. It doesn't sound credible, but it is true, they didn't notice. And it wasn't like we use identical twins. They were two different people. We had them wearing similar clothes to begin with, but in the end, we had them wearing very different clothes. But there were two changes that we could never make without them noticing. We could never change their gender or their color without the other person noticing. We notice some difference more than others. It's automatic. It's like that. We just notice. Noticing isn't necessarily bad, but as we've heard, actually there are associations or stereotypes associated with different groups. And the groups— the difference we notice more than others are color, gender, age, and physical disability. And clearly that's related to the visual cues that we're picking up on. But we notice difference. And the difference actually has associations with them, which are related to stereotypes. Who is that? Yeah. It's Barack Obama is your president, upside down. It kind of is, it kind of isn't. To paraphrase some British comedians, he's got all the right features, just not necessarily in the right order. His mouth and his eyes were, in fact, the right way up the first time, when he was upside down. His mouth and his eyes where, in fact, the right way. They are now upside down. There are two things going on here. One, we're very quick decision makers. Once we've made a decision about something, we stop scanning, right? We've made our minds up, we stop scanning. So we're not processing anymore. And secondly, it's about experience and expectations. We've never experienced him looking like this, and so we don't expect it. We create in effect, a self-fulfilling prophecy. So in interviews, for example, we know that untrained interviewers will make their minds up about a candidate within the first two minutes. And clearly, they're basing it on some physical characteristics, and maybe color, gender, age, disability. The points I was making a moment ago. But it may be related to other things, it may be the grip when you shake hands, how firm is that handshake? We like people who do give us a firm handshake and look you straight in the eye. I was in Canada earlier this year. I was told that First Nation people— some First Nation groups in Canada are told, it's disrespectful to shake somebody hard by the hand. So we're making these very quick, superficial judgments about people, which may not be accurate. The second thing is about experience and expectations. Women can't park a car. can't parallel park, can't reverse park. Lack of spatial reasoning means you can't do it. All right? So I was in my local supermarket on Saturday and somebody is taking 12 goes to reverse park into that bay. And I'm thinking, why don't you just give it to your husband? And then you drive past and you see it is a man behind the wheel and you think, what sort of man are you? [AUDIENCE LAUGHS] Now, a piece of research was published last year in Britain on this topic of parking. And you got two groups of people asked to park a car. The women in the first group are told, we know you can't park, we know you can't park, lack of spatial reasoning and all that, we know you can't park, just do the best you can. It's only cones, it's only cones. You'll never damage the car, you'll never damage the car. And if you flatten a cone, we'll replace it with another one, we've got loads more available. All right? Do the best you can. The women in the second group are told, all this stuff you've heard about lack of spatial reasoning and women can't park a car, it's all a load of rubbish. You can park a car just as well as any man. So why don't you prove everybody wrong? So you've got prove everybody wrong versus do the best you can. And the women in the second group not only performed as well as the men, they actually outperformed the men. Whereas the women in the first group actually significantly underperformed. So we can create our own self-fulfilling prophecies. We can actually— by our own expectations, we can impact other people's behavior and see what we're expecting to see. In this particular image here, a lot of people see— there's one predominant image that people see here. Sometimes people see more than one thing, sometimes people don't see the most dominant thing, they see other things. What do you see? A dog? Yeah? Yeah. There's a dog. A lot of people see a dog. I was with a group recently, and nearly everybody in the room could see a dog. And one of their colleagues couldn't see a dog, and another one of his colleagues helped him out and said of course you can see the dog, it's below the whale. [AUDIENCE LAUGHS] Strictly speaking, strictly speaking, there's no outline of anything there. There's two things going on there. One, we don't like random. We're always trying to make sense of the world around us. And secondly, I told you there was something there to be seen. All right? I told you there was something there to be seen. I created a motivation, a goal in you to start searching for something. And it's an example of what's known as priming. And priming are the ways in which we can be influenced without realizing that we have been influenced. Ways in which we can be influenced without realizing that we have been influenced. A French psychologist had two groups of interviewers about to interview the same people. They're interviewing the same candidates. One group of people is told, go and meet your candidate, bring them back to your office, and then, when you're finished, escort them from the premises. The other group of people is told, meeting the same people, remember, are told, go meet your elderly candidates, bring them back to your office, and when you finish, escort from the premises. What they found was, the people who thought they were going to be meeting an elderly candidate actually walked more slowly to meet them. Their behavior had changed. Their behavior had changed even before they'd met the people. It was clearly a set of— there was clearly a set of associations that they were making, elderly, aged, infirm, slow, I'd better slow down. And whether those associations were conscious or unconscious, they were clearly being made or impacting and actually having an impact on their behavior. So priming is another way. So we've got two sources of bias. We notice difference, and we notice some differences more than others. And secondly, about the way that we interpret the world around us. Now, there's a football team, a soccer team, that I support, it's called Aston Villa. All right? You may not have heard of them. But we did win the European championship in 1982. [AUDIENCE LAUGHS] Our local rivals are a team called Birmingham City. They're two miles away. Literally next door to one another. So our local rival team is called Birmingham City. Intellectually, I know that the fans must be the same. It's the same catchment area, it's the same city, basically the same people. We must be the same. Intellectually, I know that. Emotionally, I know we are better than them. And not only that, my children know it, too. [AUDIENCE LAUGHS] I think it's one of the proudest achievements I may have had as a parent. But anyway— we form groups. We're very social animals. So the third area of bias is about the way we form groups. We form in-groups and out-groups. The groups that we're part of, they're our in-groups, and then, by definition, the other groups are our out-groups. And there are some very interesting things that happen. We actually view our in-group differently from the out-group. So we actually view them differently in the sense that we see people in the in-group as individuals and we accept difference. We actually think about them differently. So actually we are more likely to remember the positive contributions from in-group members and we're more likely to remember the things that they do. And thirdly, we behave differently towards in-group members. We are more likely to make sacrifices and we're more likely to be helpful towards other in-group members. And we view out-groups, consequently, in a very different way. So out-groups are viewed as being homogeneous. They're are all the same. We minimize difference. The French, dot, dot, dot. You complete that sentence in your heads. It doesn't matter whether you finish that sentence positively or negatively, the French will have been treated as a homogeneous group of people. They are all the same. We will remember the negative things they've done, we will forget their contributions, and generally speaking, we won't be so helpful towards them. This can have an impact in terms of societies. It can also have an impact in teams. In a team, you could actually get groups of people who— create in-groups and out-groups within your teams. And it may be that we value the contributions of some people more than others. We don't listen to people. We actually miss out on the talent that's available to us. So what can we do? Well, one of the things that we can do is actually turn the mirror on ourselves. Instead of thinking that bias is somebody else's problem, which is what we tend to do, it's actually a problem for me. One of the ways that we can do— one of the things we can do to increase our self-awareness is actually to do some tests of unconscious bias. One of them developed— it's actually on the Harvard website. One of the academics who developed it is actually here at Harvard, but there's two other academics who developed it, as well. It's called the Implicit Association Test. If you Google IAT, it will take you to the test. It's easier to do than to describe It's a reaction time test. Basically stimuli come to the screen and you react as quickly as you can. Right? And I did this for the first time 10 years ago. In the United Kingdom, I'm described as an Asian person. So people from the Indian subcontinent are described as Asian. And I did the first test. What I gravitated towards, for kind of obvious reasons, was Asian and white faces, and good and bad words. Asian, white faces, good and bad words, they come up on screen. You react as quickly as you can. Just to go over my background again, I am a psychologist, it is a science, very rigorous, highly methodical, very analytical, highly statistical. And also I work in the diversity field, so I'm not judging people, not stereotyping them, not making assumptions. So essentially, the fairest person in Britain. [AUDIENCE LAUGHS] I took this test. And it gave me a result at the end. It said that I had a bias associating Asian people with good. All right? This never surprises anybody, but it really shocked me. So given my background education, experience, and training, I did exactly what you'd expect me to do in the circumstances. I went, OK, best of three. [AUDIENCE LAUGHS] So I did it again. Got the same result. Best of five. Got the same result. I did it three times in a row and I got the same result three times. And I walked away from my desk thinking, what a load of rubbish. What a load of rubbish. I'm clearly the fairest person in Britain. And that test did not validate it, so the test has to be wrong. The next day, we were making a DVD. I was in studios in North London. Seven actors. Didn't know them. We broke for lunch. There's a table with sandwiches on there. And there's just chairs scattered in the room. I picked up a sandwich, sat down next to one of the actors. And as soon as I sat down, I realized I'd parked myself next to the only other Asian person in the room. Right? Now, my act was unconscious. At no point did I think, aha, Asian person, I must go and sit next to him. My act was unconscious, but also it was not random. Unconscious, but not random. I may not be aware of it, but something impelled me to go in one direction rather than another. And just that self awareness is actually an important first step in, kind of, tackling things to do with bias. And the secondary, ridiculous as it may seem, is actually just to tell ourselves not to do it. Just tell ourselves to stop. I am not going to do it. It takes a conscious effort. The unconscious processes are obviously wearing away, but through a conscious effort we can actually make ourselves stop. I am not going to stereotype. You can actually— one of the things that we've done actually is to actually set fairness as a goal when you're making decisions. Set fairness as a goal. And we've found that that can reduce the levels of unconscious biases exhibited by a group of people. And you can take it a step further. Give yourself an instruction. When I'm doing these interviews, then I will do— I will try my hardest to be as objective as possible. Or when I'm doing interviews, then I will not stereotype. Those when-then statements we found to be very powerful. And we actually found that you can reduce unconscious bias by those mechanisms. Very simple things. And there's lots of other things that you can do. I'm just concentrating on some of the more straightforward things that we can undertake. So we can turn the mirror on ourselves, tell ourselves to stop and instruct ourselves to be fair and set fairness as the goal. And the final point, essentially, is about everybody taking responsibility for this. There is a particular responsibility for leaders to role model the behavior. If a leader can actually talk about topics like bias, actually role model the behavior that they're expecting of other people, it has a huge impact on other people. But we can also challenge one another. I know it can be difficult in some circumstances so maybe not challenge on our own. Maybe get some allies with us and actually challenge collectively. But actually, this challenge and questioning, are we being fair here? Challenge doesn't have to be unpleasant, maybe just like telling a story. It may be asking a question, it doesn't have to be aggressive. This process of challenging is actually important to make us rethink decisions. I did some work with an accounting firm a couple of years ago. Six partners about to make promotion decisions the next day. And I met with them and said— I told them this stuff about bias. I subsequently found out that there was one candidate who met all the criteria, who they— five out of the six was going to reject. Met all the criteria. Five out of six were going to reject him. And the sixth one said, well, why are we turning him down? He meets all the criteria. He said because he's too big, he's actually too big. He needs to lose weight. And he said, so you're saying if he loses five or six stones, if he would have come in five or six stones lighter, we would have appointed him? And they went, yeah. It's for his own good. So if he loses the weight, comes back next year, we'll appoint him. He said, but what about all that training we did on bias yesterday? He said, yeah, well, that's about women and minorities, isn't it? It's not about big people. But they changed their minds. He stuck to his guns and obviously he's in a peer group. That makes it easier. But he stuck to his guns and they actually did appoint him. So challenge. So there are three, kind of, areas of bias that operate in organizations. One is, we notice difference and there are associations. And there's some difference we notice more than others. And there are associations and stereotypes associated with those particular groups. Secondly, it's the way we interpret the world around us: priming, quick decision making, experience and expectations. And thirdly, it's about the way that we socialize in groups. And we have a different set of expectations for in-groups than we do for out-groups. And there are three things that we can do. I mean, lots of other things, but three that we could do immediately. One is that we can turn the mirror on ourselves. Instead of blaming other people, actually just kind of reflect on our own behavior, increasing our own self awareness. That can make a difference. Secondly, we can actually just tell ourselves not to do it. Consciously try not to display bias in decisions we're making. And the third thing we can do is actually to challenge, in an appropriate manner, people around us. Get us to review decisions. And leaders in particular, have a higher role here in terms of being role models to other people in the organization. So finally, I just want to leave you with the thoughts of a British broadcaster and comedian, Jeremy Hardy. He did a program about prejudice. And he was looking at various phobias, Islamophobia, xenophobia, homophobia, amongst others. And he's made the point, actually, that these fears and these hatreds are genuinely felt. They are feelings that are genuinely felt. But all phobias are genuinely felt. There are, in fact, people who have a fear of buttons. Believe it or not, there are people who have the fear of buttons. And he points out that actually— and, of course, this is a genuine fear that they have, and we shouldn't revile them for having this particular phobia, but we should gently point out to them that whilst they may have this fear of buttons, the fault actually lies with them and not with the buttons. Thank you.

      ONE MORE TIME!!!

    2. Unconscious, but not random.

      Our biases are so deep into us that we make decisions unconsciously based on them, and we may not even know. We may think that we just sitting next to a random person, or starting a conversation with a random person, but we identify our in-group and are automatically, unconsciously, drawn to them as a result. In order to stay away from the out-group, the "others."

    3. I know that the fans must be the same. It's the same catchment area, it's the same city, basically the same people. We must be the same. Intellectually, I know that. Emotionally, I know we are better than them. And not only that, my children know it, too. [AUDIENCE LAUGHS] I think it's one of the proudest achievements I may have had as a parent.

      most sports fans can relate to this, it doesn't make sense but we all have a team we hate, and apply that to their fans

    1. attending to the outrageous feels less like writing a check and more like setting up an automatic withdrawal.

      I am a member of the Human Right Campaign, which is rights for the LGBTQ community in the workplace, and when I signed up I didn't realize that it was a monthly payment system, but I did it anyways. In one of my classes we studied the HRC and how they're run by money and they may not seem as good as you'd think they are, so I canceled my membership.

    1. At an early age, webegin learning cultural norms for what is considered masculine and feminine. For example,children may associate long hair or dresses with femininity. Later in life, as adults, we oftenconform to these norms by behaving in gender-specific ways: as men, we build houses; aswomen, we bake cookies

      This statment is as true as can be as an young girl I was always taught that is was an girls job to take care of the inside of the house. It was an girls job to take care of her husband. It was her responsibility to make sure he had an hot meal and clean clothes and come home to a clean house and well kept wife. Although in my personal opinion I think this should be changed I do not feel that there should be things as gender roles boys and girls should be free to do as they please.

  6. Sep 2018
    1. (gender role) representations of biological sex.

      I think that now and days, particularly we are seeing some change in the views of traditional gender roles in the USA. We are seeing more women in the workforce as well as seeing men taking the more at home role and this change may be due to the increasing of societal participation by women.

    1. We stopped a while in the little garden, where Miss Cynthia gave me some magnificent big marigolds to put away for seed, and was much pleased because I was so delighted with her flowers. It was a gorgeous little garden to look at, with its red poppies, and blue larkspur, and yellow marigolds, and old-fashioned sweet, straying things, -- all growing together in a tangle of which my friend seemed ashamed. She told me that it looked as ordered as could be, until the things begun to grow so fast she couldn't do any thing with 'em. She was very proud of one little pink-and-white verbena which somebody had given her. It was not growing very well; but it had not disappointed her about blooming.

      Lovely lines, contain aspects of visual imagery and scents that these different flowers bring-- smells like summer. Also makes me think on the ways in which Jewett may be comparing women to flowers and how one might cultivate the growth of a child.

    1. When we disclose certain private things about ourselves, we increase the potential intimacythat we can have with another person, however, we also make ourselves vulnerable to gettinghurt by the other person. What if they do not like what I have disclosed or react negatively?It can be a double-edged sword. Disclosing positive news from one’s day is a great opportunityfor a daily deposit if the response from the other person is positive. What constitutes a positiveresponse?

      By us disclosing certain parts of our lives we can get personal with someone without exposing our whole life to someone who may end up hurting us. l also think it hurts a relationship as we hide stuff and the fact that we feel as though we can't share everything in our life with our partner.

    1. What if we design our games to be more socially meaningful?

      Even better; Why don't we design our social networks to be more socially meaningful? But first we need to consider deconstruction and re-engineering them as robust against the predatory environment of corporate and political exploitation.

      There is sooooo much going wanting in the areas of privacy, autonomy anti-fragility and economic rationalization and yes... user relevance and psycho/socio-ergonomics would fall into line in and around all that, but I do wish we could see the priority of undermining the existing tyranny of greed and power requires restructuring and winding back the entrenched dependencies on existing infrastructure and modalities. Walled gardens, phishing scams, Non-hierarchical network topology held captive and dependent upon on DNS and such hierarchical protocols and network topologies. Websites are forever usurping desktops and re-inventing the center and now apps all vying to be the new centrist portal/platform and gateway to corner a market if not a monopoly.

      If these fundamentals are not addressed there seems little point in meddling with top down procedural micro-management strategies designed to preempt the behavioral dynamics of players and bloat the front end interface codebase with more to manage in the eminent transition. I think we are over due for universal back-end overhaul and time to dial back the development of interface and the codebases of existing infrastructure dependency is somewhere from imminent to well over due.

      There may be many futile efforts put into redundancies far too late in the day. Cutting of losses and looking for the efficiency in fundamentals, may call for broad depreciation of 'legacy' code still in service. A couple to a few years down the track the dawning of a new paradigm will reward us and pay back our sacrifice.

      Having said that, I do actually like these ideas and not just for the game environment but for the plethora of dis jointed incompatible social apps/networks that avoid cross pollination and standardization of integration (compatibility/interoperability/profile-portability) and devour user contribution and conscription of their extended contact base as a commodity to exploit them with, rather than a commodity they should be rewarded for providing the platform.

      Open platforms of interoperable networking could be made to usurp the walled garden or to force them to segregate their platform and account code from the profile/user data base which they could hold in an encrypted and non-permanent form. Revoke their key and destroy their record of the user profile. Now they will play as responsible competitive providers for independent users with rewards to trade/revoke conditional. Now all these transaction provisions to describe the environment become relevant to the developers and the need to be feature and compatibility relevant cross-platform and retain profile agnostic interoperability, would drive an arms race in this customer centrist marketplace and a social experience of true value might rise from the source that matters.

    1. the self may be seen as a social actor, who enacts roles and displays traits by performing behaviors in the presence of others. Second,

      I feel like this is somewhat related to what most of us said in reference to inner and outer self. We enact different roles and behaviors depending on who we're with and how comfortable we are with that person. In the presence of others, I feel like we all have some social morals and behaviors we all uphold which I think what this idea is trying to say.

    2. the self may be seen as a social actor, who enacts roles and displays traits by performing behaviors in the presence of others.

      I find this very intreguing because although someone may be putting on a persona in the presence of others, it very rarely is intentional. Our bodies and minds snap into a certain act when we encounter situations and immediately react in whatever way we think will protect us the best. If its a group of mean girls the best form of protection is to put on a fake nice act and comply with what they say. With someone in a position of power people will adjust their disposition to be more submissive.

    1. When it happens: Have you ever felt proud of yourself for bringing lunch from home all week and then gone out for expensive meals over the weekend? What about working out in the morning only to binge on late-night snacks?The progress bias explains our tendency to overestimate the effects of our positive or goal-supportive actions (like exercising) and underestimate the effects of negative actions (like eating poorly), which can lead to making poor choices as we think we’re in a better position than we are.

      I understood that eating home made food during the weekdays and going out to eat on weekends doesn't benefit you much. As the author said It's like working out in the morning and binge on late-night snacks, sure it may save some money but in longer run it doesn't benefits you much.

    1. Communication technology, social media, electronic parenting, and many otherrecent technological advances may reduce social behaviors

      It’s very common in today’s society to see everyone sitting in a room on their phones. Even if two people are having a conversation, if there’s an awkward silence automatically someone will grab out their phone. I think this generation and younger generations are finding it harder and harder to communicate with others face to face, and that could be a possible reason as to why so many young people suffer from loneliness and depression. Even though we can sit on our phones and text or message multiple people, there is still a lack of connection that you can get from talking to someone face to face.

    1. "We have to start changing the climate of schools," Mr. Rose said, "and when we change the climate of schools, it takes time."

      Even though it may take a long time to change school climates and the ways we view those different than us, I absolutely think it's worth it. It's only natural to want a more immediate change, but I think it's going to take a lot of hard work and a lot of patient teachers, involved parents, and willing children to make the changes we need within our schools and society as a whole.I absolutely think it's possible that knowledge and compassion are the best ways to unite us all as people, no matter what our differences are.

    1. We are marching fast and steadily towards free trade. We must meet the views of the people of the Lower Provinces, who are hostile to high tariffs, and the demand of the Imperial authorities that we should not tax their manufactures so heavily as—in their phrase—almost to deprive them of our market. It was distinctly and officially stated the other day, in Newfoundland, that assurance had been given to the Government of Newfoundland that the views of the Canadian Government are unmistakably in this direction. And I do not think there is any mistake about that, either. To show how people at home, too, expect our tariff to come down, I may refer to the speech of Mr. HAMBURY TRACY, in seconding the Address in answer to the Speech from the Throne, in the House of Commons the other day. He could not stop, after saying generally that he was pleased with this Confederation movement, without adding that he trusted it would result in a very considerable decrease in the absurdly high and hostile tariff at present prevailing in Canada.

      §.121 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

    1. Our point is that this perspective is itself an implicit valuation. Itis simply arguing that nature is more valuable than any possiblealternative. While in many cases this may be true, society hasmade decisions that imply it is not always the case (Russell-Smith et al., 2015). Every time we build homes, schools, and hospi-tals, which are essential for human wellbeing, we appropriateecosystems and impact our natural capital. Thus, being more expli-cit about the value of ES and NC can help society make better deci-sions in the many cases in which trade-offs exist

      Very important. If we do not make an effort to value ecosystems with the argument that nature should be always protected, What we are saying is that nature has a higher value than enything else. Even when this might sound convincing, obviously we as society or individuals do not think so: We built houses and hospitals with the agreement of everyone and the obvious consequence of running over nature.

  7. inst-fs-iad-prod.inscloudgate.net inst-fs-iad-prod.inscloudgate.net
    1. Convinced that reality has noinherent nature, which he might hope to identify as the truthabout things, he devotes himself to being true to his own nature.

      I don't buy this. I don't think most people have the time to be thinking about the nature of their reality or be solipsistic. It is a rather privileged position to be in to be able to spend one's time pondering about the social construction of reality.

      The author also fails to provide examples of what he means as "anti-realist" doctrines. So I am just speaking on my interpretation of his writing.

      In practice, perhaps what the author is talking about are those who believe in "alternative facts" are anti-realists. I think it takes a lot of time, education, intellectual engagement to b able to triangulate data, and be media literate -- i.e. privileged, in order to really have an 'objective' view on the world. While the author does state that objectivity may never be achieved but its a goal, he fails to consider what type of society/culture, education system, values, institutions, resources are needed to create a democracy of "informed" citizens.

      I think for many people in the world their sense of reality is based on patterns they see, socialization, personal experiences, in addition to appeals of authority, etc, So I think we should be more understanding of where and why anti-realist doctrines come from in social life

    2. His eyeis not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of theliar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest ingetting away with what he says

      Getting away with what he says or getting what he wants.

      I think there may be something here in the relationship of the parties. We wouldn't be able to "bullshit" someone who knew us well or intimately. That would be lying.

      Also, we would definitely try to bullshit our way through an interview or an exam essay, but would not lie. Unless we were stating an untrue opinion because we were afraid our true feelings would be judged negatively, which again comes back to the relationship question.

    3. think of him.

      Similar to mawaters comment above, I feel like there's a bit of a leap being taken here, while other rhetorical motives are being ignored. I'm not really buying the 'self-impression' motive. He may believe what he is saying, or he may not, but what does not change is the position from which he is speaking, and the audience he is speaking to. I feel as though there is definitely room in between those two objective points to recognize the humbuggery-- that being a statement and a motive which we cannot fully discern, yet one we are certain holds an ulterior agenda-- and to come up with a number of reasons as to the intentions of the orator.

    1. Everything is not provided for, because a great deal is trusted lo the common sense of the people. I think it is quite fair and safe to assert that there is not the slightest danger that the Federal Parliament will perpetrate any injustice upon the local legislatures, because it would cause such a reaction as to compass the destruction of the power thus unjustly exercised. The veto power is necessary in order that the General Government may have a control over the proceedings of the local legislatures to a certain extent. The want of this power was the great source of weakness in the United States, and it is a want that will be remedied by an amendment in their Constitution very soon. So long as each state considered itself sovereign, whose acts and laws could not be called in question, it was quite clear that the central authority was destitute of power to compel obedience to general laws. If each province were able to enact such laws as it pleased, everybody would be at the mercy of the local legislatures, and the General Legislature would become of little importance. It is contended that the power of the General Legislature should be held in check by a veto power with reference to its own territory, resident in the local legislatures, respecting the application of general laws to their jurisdiction. All power, they say, comes from the people and ascends through them to their representatives, and through the representatives to the Crown. But it would never do to set the Local above the General, Government. The Central Parliament and Government must, of necessity, exercise the supreme power, and the local governments will have the exercise of power corresponding to the duties they have to perform. The system is a new and untried one, and may not work so harmoniously as we now anticipate, but there will always but p ¡war in the British Parliament and our own to remedy any defects that may be discovered after the system is in operation. Altogether, I regard the scheme as a magnificent one, and I look forward to the future with anticipate- tins of seeing a country and a government possessing great power and respectability, and of being, before I die, a citizen of an immense empire built up on our part of the North American continent, where the folds of the British flag will float in triumph over a people possessing freedom, happiness and prosperity equal to the people of any other nation on the earth.

      §.90 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

    2. And, besides that, we have provision made for extending the representation east or west, as occasion may require, according to the increase of our population shown at the decennial periods for taking the census. Any thing fairer than that could not possibly be demanded. And if Lower Canada increases more rapidly in population than Canada West, she will obtain representation accordingly. For, although the number of her members cannot be changed from sixty-five, the proportion of that number to the whole will be changed relatively to the progress of the various colonies. On the other hand if we extend, as I have no doubt we will do, westward, towards the centre of the continent, we will obtain a large population for our Confederation in the west. In that quarter we must look for the largest increase of our population in British America, and before many years elapse the centre of population and power will tend westward much farther than most people now think. The increase in the representation is therefore almost certain to be chiefly in the west, and every year will add to the influence and power of Western Canada, as well as to her trade and commerce. The most important question that arises relates to the constitution of the Upper House. It is said that in this particular the scheme is singularly defective—that there has been a retrograde movement in going back from the elective to the nominative system. I admit that this statement is a fair one from those who contended long for the application of the elective principle to the Upper House; but it can have no weight with another large class, who, like myself, never believed in the wisdom of electing the members of two Houses of Parliament with coordinate powers. I have always believed that a change from the present system was inevitable, even with our present political organization. (Hear, hear.) The constitution of an Upper House or Senate seems to have originated in the state of society which prevailed in feudal times ; and from being the sole legislative body—or at least the most powerful—in the State, it has imperceptibly become less powerful, or secondary in importance to the lower chamber, as the mass of the people became more intelligent, and popular rights became more fully understood. Where there is an Upper House it manifestly implies on the part of its members peculiar duties or peculiar rights. In Great Britain, for instance, there is a large class of landed proprietors, who have long held almost all the landed property of the country in their hands, and who have to pay an immense amount of taxes. The fiscal legislation of Britain for many years has tended to the reduction of impost and excise duties on articles of prime necessity, and to the imposition of heavy taxes on landed property and incomes. Under such a financial system, there are immense interests at stake, and the House of Lords being the highest judicial tribunal in the kingdom, there is a combination of peculiar rights and peculiar duties appertaining to the class represented which amply justify its maintenance. We have no such interests, and we-impose no such duties, and hence the Upper House becomes a mere court of revision, or one of coordinate jurisdiction ; as the latter it is not required ; to become the former, it should be constituted differently from the House of Assembly. The United States present the example of a community socially similar to ourselves,

      §§.24 and 51 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

    1. “There’s worry that you can’t remove the plastic without removing marine life at the same time,” said George Leonard, chief scientist at the Ocean Conservancy. “We know from the fishing industry if you put any sort of structure in the open ocean, it acts as a fish-aggregating device.”

      This is a great risk they will have to take. I think if they work with marine biologists they may be able to find a solution that will be potentially less harmful to the wildlife.

    1. As I saw that they were very friendly to us, and perceived that they could be much more easily converted to our holy faith by gentle means than by force, I presented them with some red caps, and strings of beads to wear upon the neck, and many other trifles of small value, wherewith they were much delighted, and became wonderfully attached to us. Afterwards they came swimming to the boats, bringing parrots, balls of cotton thread, javelins, and many other things which they exchanged for articles we gave them, such as glass beads, and hawk’s bells; which trade was carried on with the utmost good will. But they seemed on the whole to me, to be a very poor people. They all go completely naked, even the women, though I saw but one girl. All whom I saw were young, not above thirty years of age, well made, with fine shapes and faces; their hair short, and coarse like that of a horse’s tail, combed toward the forehead, except a small portion which they suffer to hang down behind, and never cut. Some paint themselves with black, which makes them appear like those of the Canaries, neither black nor white; others with white, others with red, and others with such colors as they can find. Some paint the face, and some the whole body; others only the eyes, and others the nose. Weapons they have none, nor are acquainted with them, for I showed them swords which they grasped by the blades, and cut themselves through ignorance. They have no iron, their javelins being without it, and nothing more than sticks, though some have fish-bones or other things at the ends. They are all of a good size and stature, and handsomely formed. I saw some with scars of wounds upon their bodies, and demanded by signs the of them; they answered me in the same way, that there came people from the other islands in the neighborhood who endeavored to make prisoners of them, and they defended themselves. I thought then, and still believe, that these were from the continent. It appears to me, that the people are ingenious, and would be good servants and I am of opinion that they would very readily become Christians, as they appear to have no religion. They very quickly learn such words as are spoken to them. If it please our Lord, I intend at my return to carry home six of them to your Highnesses, that they may learn our language. I saw no beasts in the island, nor any sort of animals except parrots.” These are the words of the Admiral.

      First concern is whether a war will have to break out, but the Admiral sees this, finally, as a conversion opportunity.

      He then goes into detail, in the next passages, about the dress and customs of the Taíno people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ta%C3%ADno

      With this stroke, indigenous history and customs is erased.

      I think it's important to keep in mind that this ideological work - suppressing the cultures of the native peoples - is just as necessary a part of the eventual conquest of the Caribbean and North and South America as the diseases and the military and economic might of the settling forces.

    1. This suggests that displacement of physical activity may not be a strong link between screen time and obesity.

      This was very interesting to read and I am going to have to say I disagree with this statement. Like stated in the article, there are difficulties when it comes to measuring screen media exposure and physical activity. Based off of experience such as babysitting, once the kids are glued in to a show or game, there is no way I am getting them to go outside. A 3 year old that I babysat threw a tantrum when I told him we were done watching TV and it was time to go on a walk. I think physical activity and screen time directly correlates with obesity.

    1. The first way you may think to use Wikipedia is as a source—that is, as a text you can quote or paraphrase in a paper.

      Schools I've been taught at never mentioned that you could do this. I like how this is challenging our perceptions over what is a good source. Just because our past teachers said it was not a good way to research, but now we are doing a complete 180 and now it is acceptable.

    1. "More availability means more usage and honestly, I don't think Utah voters … understand that this is really a whole new system of distribution," he said, leading to a major influx of dispensaries in a newly opened market. "We don't use Rite Aid, we don't use Walgreens." Plumb and the Utah Medical Association have each argued that giving patients marijuana through a dispensary is playing fast and loose with a potent substance, skipping the pharmaceutical safeguards required for the distribution of other drugs.

      In this passage, I feel that Plumb is trying to inflict fear into the community about a "new system of distribution." Creating separate dispensaries is not a bad thing and I believe he is blowing the issue out of proportion. Having a separate building may actually be safer for the community since the dispensaries in other states won't let anyone under the age of 21 walk in the door or without a licensed medical card. At Rite Aid and Walgreen's, everyone in the public is welcome inside no matter the age. There are no security guards or other precautionary measures taken to guard the prescriptions in these pharmacies. In these pharmacies there are far more addictive and life threatening drugs than marijuana. If anything, there needs to be tighter measures taken if at pharmacies if he is afraid of theft. If someone steals a bottle of Opioids form Walgreens, there is a good chance that the person could die, while if someone stole marijuana, there is no chance of causing death. Marijuana would not skip "pharmaceutical safeguards" as he claims. Other states test and monitor the plants to make sure they are clean and consumable. Marijuana, unlike the other medications, do not require chemicals and labs to produce the product. They require sunlight, soil and water, just like vegetables. He is trying to inflict doubt into something that is far safer than the prescription drugs pumped out of labs.

    1. Large computer networks (and their associated users) may “wake up” as superhumanly intelligent entities.

      The great "AI" has been around for a while now, we human are largely working on a computer machine to think for "itself". As fascinating as it sounds, aren't we just being lazy; depending on a robot to do the work for us. What will happen with the human race if these AI start producing more and better equipped AI. We have a brain that can produce so much if we just decide to do things on our own.

    1. So please do read the Code and Google’s values, and follow both in spirit and letter, always bearing in mind that each of us has a personal responsibility to incorporate, and to encourage other Googlers to incorporate, the principles of the Code and values into our work. And if you have a question or ever think that one of your fellow Googlers or the company as a whole may be falling short of our commitment, don’t be silent. We want – and need – to hear from you.

      Main purpose of the code of ethics. Everyone is included and everyone must be held to the standards that the company sets.

    1. This is unquestionably a grave and serious subject of consideration, and especially so to the minority in this section of the province, that is the English-speaking minority to which I and many other members of this House belong, and with whose interests we are identified. I do not disguise that I have heard very grave and serious apprehensions by many men for whose opinions I have great respect, and whom I admire for the absence of bigotry and narrow-mindedness which they have always exhibited. They have expressed themselves not so much in the way of objection to specific features of the scheme as in the way of apprehension of something dangerous to them in it— apprehensions which they cannot state explicitly or even define to themselves. They seem doubtful and distrustful as to the consequences, express fears as to how it will affect their future condition and interests, and in fact they almost think that in view of this uncertainty it would be better if we remained as we are. Now, sir, I believe that the rights of both minorities—the French minority in the General Legislature and the English-speaking minority in the Local Legislature of Lower Canada—are properly guarded. I would admit at once that without this protection it would be open to the gravest objection ; I would admit that you were embodying in it an element of future difficulty, a cause of future dissension and agitation that might be destructive to the whole fabric ; and therefore it is a very grave and anxious question for us to consider —especially the minorities in Lower Canada —how far our mutual rights and interests are respected and guarded, the one in the General and the other in the Local Legislature. With reference to this subject, I think that I , and those with whom I have acted—the English speaking members from Lower Canada—may in some degree congratulate ourselves at having brought about a state of feeling between the two races in this section of the province which has produced some good effect. (Hear, hear.)

      §.93 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

    2. of the scheme, without which it would certainly, in my opinion, have been open to very serious objection. (Hear, hear.) I will not now criticize any other of the leading features of the resolutions as they touch the fundamental conditions and principles of the union. I think there has been throughout a most wise and statesmanlike distribution of powers, and at the same time that those things have been carefully guarded which the minorities in the various sections required for their protection, and the regulation of which each province was not unnaturally desirous of retaining for itself. So far then as the objection is concerned of this union being federative merely in its character, and liable to all the difficulties which usually surround federal governments, I think we may fairly consider that there has been a proper and satisfactory distribution of power, which will avert many of those difficulties. (Hear, hear.)

      §§.91 and 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

    1. There has been considerable concern that television may negatively influence young children’s executive function, especially the ability to focus and sustain attention in task situations.

      I feel like technology in general has positive and negative aspects just like anything else. I believe that it is important for children to have a balance with technology. I think I grew up at a nice time because I know how to use technology, but it was not as dominant. I played outside and created special bonds with people, but also got a Game Boy and electronics for birthdays and special occasions. I think society today is a lot more dependent on technology I know from high school until now I have became a lot more attached. I think moderation is the biggest thing we should focus on when it comes to technology.

    1. Professionally our methods of transmitting and reviewing the results of research are generations old and by now are totally inadequate for their purpose. If the aggregate time spent in writing scholarly works and in reading them could be evaluated, the ratio between these amounts of time might well be startling. Those who conscientiously attempt to keep abreast of current thought, even in restricted fields, by close and continuous reading might well shy away from an examination calculated to show how much of the previous month's efforts could be produced on call. Mendel's concept of the laws of genetics was lost to the world for a generation because his publication did not reach the few who were capable of grasping and extending it; and this sort of catastrophe is undoubtedly being repeated all about us, as truly significant attainments become lost in the mass of the inconsequential.

      The results of research that are finalized now are becoming outdated due to the fact that we continue to grow and have no purpose for that type of research.

    2. Certainly progress in photography is not going to stop. Faster material and lenses, more automatic cameras, finer-grained sensitive compounds to allow an extension of the minicamera idea, are all imminent.

      I find this quote very relatable to today's society because everyday new research and experiments are being conducted to improve technology in any way whether it's so make it faster, smaller, or more efficient. Technology is constantly growing and becoming a part of our daily lives.

    3. There is a growing mountain of research. But there is increased evidence that we are being bogged down today as specialization extends.

      This reminds me of how people say technology is making us more stupid, because it is becoming so advanced it does so much for us. It should stay simple and to the point.

    4. For years inventions have extended man's physical powers rather than the powers of his mind

      Inventions are created to make doing tasks easier, however, there is no technological supplement that could enhance brain power (e.g, a device to help you absorb information in studying for a test)

    5. For the biologists, and particularly for the medical scientists, there can be little indecision, for their war has hardly required them to leave the old paths. Many indeed have been able to carry on their war research in their familiar peacetime laboratories. Their objectives remain much the same.

      In the medical field, there is great repetition in terms of objective. There is more innovation coming out in the medical field, however, it remains associated with the same ideas of traditional medicine rather than new medical research. Medicine is a field that relies on old facts to create new discoveries. Functional medicine or holistic/alternative medicine is becoming more popular today.

    6. They have given him increased knowledge of his own biological processes so that he has had a progressive freedom from disease and an increased span of life. They are illuminating the interactions of his physiological and psychological functions, giving the promise of an improved mental health.

      Technology has given us great insight into our internal/mental well-being. With the technology of today we have more knowledge of how our body works to thereby increase one's lifespan and promote better quality of life. Technology betters not only the physical aspects of life (communication, education, etc.,) but also the intangible aspects (mental health).

    1. I’m going to assume most people in the room here have read Vannevar Bush’s 1945 essay As We May Think. If you haven’t read it yet, you need to.

      I seem to run across references to this every couple of months. Interestingly it is never in relation to information theory or Claude Shannon references which I somehow what I most closely relate it to.

    1. We have heard much about the proposed new constitution of the Legislative Council. We have been told it was political necessity that first forced the elective system of minds that were by no means enamoured of it, and this, I think, has been fully established. Now, it would ill become me, as an elected member, to dwell on any merits or excellences the elective system may have possessed as applied to this branch of the Legislature— it is a subject we can none of us touch upon with the same freedom which we might if we were not ourselves elected—but I may call the attention of the House to this, that none of the evils that were dreaded, as likely to flow from the elective system, have yet shown themselves, and I do not think it at all reasonable, much less necessary, that they should be anticipated in time to come. My own views were in perfect accord with those of hon. gentlemen who protested against the system when it was first introduced. I did not then consider it an improvement, and my views have not changed since ; I have, consequently, no personal predilections for an Elective Council, but far prefer a Chamber nominated by the Crown.

      §.24 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

    1. And yes, we must be ready to receive their guidance as well.

      I like this, I think people may overlook the fact that there is a lot that can be learned from students too, not just adults/professors/elders

    1. Students who receive encouraging feedback from teachers may feel more personally efficacious and work harder to succeed

      I believe that this is extremely important to note as future teachers. At an early age, positive feedback is going to work much more effectively than anything else. My fourth grade teacher was very strict on what we could write about in our writing time. Other teachers allowed more creativity than mine did so I think that tarnished my view of writing as a whole when I was younger.

    1. Filthy Lucre' Is A Modern Remix Of The Peacock Room's Wretched Excess 'Filthy Lucre' Is A Modern Remix Of The Peacock Room's Wretched Excess Listen· 7:267:26Queue Toggle more options Download Embed Embed <iframe src="https://www.npr.org/player/embed/408226983/408407242" width="100%" height="290" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="NPR embedded audio player"> Transcript Facebook Twitter Flipboard Email May 21, 20153:34 AM ET Heard on Morning Edition Susan Stamberg James McNeill Whistler lavishly decorated the Peacock Room — an actual London dining room — for shipping magnate Frederick Leyland in 1876. Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian hide caption toggle caption Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian An artist has just converted a legendary piece of 19th-century art into an utter ruin. And two Smithsonian institutions — the Freer and Sackler galleries of Asian art — have given their blessings. The Peacock Room at the Freer Gallery is an actual dining room from London, decorated by James McNeill Whistler in 1876. Its blue-green walls are covered with golden designs and painted peacocks. Gilded shelves hold priceless Asian ceramics. It's an expensive, lavish cocoon, rich in beauty with a dab of menace. Freer security guard Shaquan Harper spends hours at a time in the Peacock Room — and says it's a peaceful, meditative experience. "Blue is my favorite color, and whenever I wear jewelry it's gold," he says. "So I kind of make a personal connection with the room. This is one of my favorite galleries in the Smithsonian." "Even though it's a room, it's really a six-sided painting that you literally walk into. ... You have no sense whatsoever of the outside world. It's a world in which art has completely overtaken life." Curator Lee Glazer Curator Lee Glazer agrees that the Peacock Room is a completely immersive experience. "Even though it's a room, it's really a six-sided painting that you literally walk into," she says. The Peacock Room is a gorgeous, gilded cage. "You have no sense whatsoever of the outside world," says Glazer. "It's a world in which art has completely overtaken life." It was shipping magnate Frederick Leyland's world. It was created in the Victorian era when self-made men with new fortunes were buying their way into British society through fine houses and important works of art. Whistler paints his wealthy patron as a golden peacock, at one end of the dining room. Nearby, another peacock — representing the "poor" artist. "They're actually in a face-off," Glazer says. Article continues after sponsorship Fighting, for reasons to be revealed in a bit. It's a dispute about art and money — although Whistler named the room Harmony in Blue and Gold. Next door, in the Sackler Museum of Asian Art, painter Darren Waterston has reproduced and re-interpreted Whistler's dining room in an installation called Filthy Lucre — which means "dirty money." This "Peacock Room Remix" looks as if a wrecking ball has been slammed into Whistler's work. The priceless Asian vases in the original are smashed — their shards litter the floor. "The shelves are all broken," Waterston says. "The gold gild is either melting off or puddling on the floor." Enlarge this image In Darren Waterston's Filthy Lucre it looks as if a wrecking ball has been slammed into Whistler's lavish work. Hutomo Wicaksono/Freer Sackler Gallery hide caption toggle caption Hutomo Wicaksono/Freer Sackler Gallery In Darren Waterston's Filthy Lucre it looks as if a wrecking ball has been slammed into Whistler's lavish work. Hutomo Wicaksono/Freer Sackler Gallery The original room feels claustrophobic in its excess. The remix feels scary as if there's been an earthquake and another tremor is coming any minute. "There's a sense of danger," says Waterston. He seems cheerful and sweet, but don't be fooled: "My work absolutely has a perversity," he says. "There's always an underbelly to it." Enlarge this image Shards of smashed Asian vases litter the floor of Waterston's Filthy Lucre. Amber Gray/Freer Sackler Gallery hide caption toggle caption Amber Gray/Freer Sackler Gallery Shards of smashed Asian vases litter the floor of Waterston's Filthy Lucre. Amber Gray/Freer Sackler Gallery Here, Waterston says he wanted to show the volatility of beauty. The big, cancerous, gilded cysts he's blobbed onto Whistler's reproduced golden shelves, the spilled paint oozing onto the rug — these are his reactions to what's happening between art and money these days. "This is what it means to be a living artist in this contemporary art world," Waterston says. "It is so filled with excess and this incredible consumption, this insatiable consumption of the object and of aesthetics." The most vivid, even yuck-making example is what Waterston's done to Whistler's two golden peacocks; in this remix, the birds aren't just fighting, they're eviscerating each other. They're "literally disemboweling each other," he describes. "One has the other's entrails being pulled out — talons are out." The golden peacocks in Filthy Lucre are "literally disemboweling each other," Waterston says. Hutomo Wicaksono/Freer Sackler Gallery hide caption toggle caption Hutomo Wicaksono/Freer Sackler Gallery They hate each other's guts! Which is exactly what happened between Whistler and Leyland. The patron asked the artist to just make some modest adjustments in his new dining room. Glazer says Whistler put a few wavy dabs of gold paint here, some metal color there, "and everyone was very happy with that." Leyland and his family left London for the summer. And that, Glazer says, is when Whistler's imagination took flight. He transformed the room, covering every surface with blue and gold paint. He worked like a madman. "Whistler talks about being up on the scaffolding at 6 in the morning and not coming down until 9 at night," says Glazer. " 'I'm blind with sleep and blue peacock feathers,' he says." He kept his friend and patron more or less informed about what he was doing: "All through the summer Leyland received letters from Whistler talking about the gorgeous surprise that Whistler was preparing for him and the family," Glazer explains. Well, Leyland comes home, sees the extent of work — and the 2,000 pounds that Whistler wanted to be paid for it (about a quarter of a million dollars today) — and, as they used to say in Victorian days: Leyland blew a gasket. In the middle of the dispute, with Leyland paying half of what Whistler requested, the artist went back to the dining room to finish up. "And that was really when he exacted his vengeance," says Glazer. Enlarge this image James McNeill Whistler's mother — immortalized in his 1871 painting Arrangement in Grey and Black No. 1: Portrait of the Artist's Mother — worried about all the time and energy her son was pouring into the Peacock Room. "A gentleman's house isn't an exhibition," she told him. Detroit Institute of Arts via Getty Images hide caption toggle caption Detroit Institute of Arts via Getty Images James McNeill Whistler's mother — immortalized in his 1871 painting Arrangement in Grey and Black No. 1: Portrait of the Artist's Mother — worried about all the time and energy her son was pouring into the Peacock Room. "A gentleman's house isn't an exhibition," she told him. Detroit Institute of Arts via Getty Images He painted those fighting peacocks — the just-plain-angry ones, not Waterston's gut-wrenching birds — and laid on even more blue paint. Then Whistler left, and never saw the Peacock Room again. Now, we can't end this story without talking about Whistler's mother — that iconic profiled figure in gray and black. What did Mama Whistler think of the whole thing — the frenzied work, the manic effort? Glazer reports that Anna Whistler was worried about her son; she thought he was working too hard, not eating, not sleeping: "She chides him about that and says, 'You know, Jimmy, a gentleman's house isn't an exhibition' — meaning: Get out there and make some money and make some things that are going to sell," says Glazer. "And so, always listening to his mother — Whistler was kind of a Momma's boy — he did invite the press in to watch him work in the Peacock Room." Yet another thing he forgot to tell Frederick Leyland! The results of this delicious dispute can be seen on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. — at the Freer, site of the original Peacock Room, and the Sackler, where Filthy Lucre, Darren Waterston's remix, is on display until January 2017.

      The struggle of an artist who is aprreciated by the audience but not able to recive the amount that is supposedly what must come after as a reward. The article also tells the corruption and no exchange of artist from the buyers.

    2. 'Filthy Lucre' Is A Modern Remix Of The Peacock Room's Wretched Excess 'Filthy Lucre' Is A Modern Remix Of The Peacock Room's Wretched Excess Listen· 7:267:26Queue Toggle more options Download Embed Embed <iframe src="https://www.npr.org/player/embed/408226983/408407242" width="100%" height="290" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="NPR embedded audio player"> Transcript Facebook Twitter Flipboard Email May 21, 20153:34 AM ET Heard on Morning Edition Susan Stamberg James McNeill Whistler lavishly decorated the Peacock Room — an actual London dining room — for shipping magnate Frederick Leyland in 1876. Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian hide caption toggle caption Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian An artist has just converted a legendary piece of 19th-century art into an utter ruin. And two Smithsonian institutions — the Freer and Sackler galleries of Asian art — have given their blessings. The Peacock Room at the Freer Gallery is an actual dining room from London, decorated by James McNeill Whistler in 1876. Its blue-green walls are covered with golden designs and painted peacocks. Gilded shelves hold priceless Asian ceramics. It's an expensive, lavish cocoon, rich in beauty with a dab of menace. Freer security guard Shaquan Harper spends hours at a time in the Peacock Room — and says it's a peaceful, meditative experience. "Blue is my favorite color, and whenever I wear jewelry it's gold," he says. "So I kind of make a personal connection with the room. This is one of my favorite galleries in the Smithsonian." "Even though it's a room, it's really a six-sided painting that you literally walk into. ... You have no sense whatsoever of the outside world. It's a world in which art has completely overtaken life." Curator Lee Glazer Curator Lee Glazer agrees that the Peacock Room is a completely immersive experience. "Even though it's a room, it's really a six-sided painting that you literally walk into," she says. The Peacock Room is a gorgeous, gilded cage. "You have no sense whatsoever of the outside world," says Glazer. "It's a world in which art has completely overtaken life." It was shipping magnate Frederick Leyland's world. It was created in the Victorian era when self-made men with new fortunes were buying their way into British society through fine houses and important works of art. Whistler paints his wealthy patron as a golden peacock, at one end of the dining room. Nearby, another peacock — representing the "poor" artist. "They're actually in a face-off," Glazer says. Article continues after sponsorship Fighting, for reasons to be revealed in a bit. It's a dispute about art and money — although Whistler named the room Harmony in Blue and Gold. Next door, in the Sackler Museum of Asian Art, painter Darren Waterston has reproduced and re-interpreted Whistler's dining room in an installation called Filthy Lucre — which means "dirty money." This "Peacock Room Remix" looks as if a wrecking ball has been slammed into Whistler's work. The priceless Asian vases in the original are smashed — their shards litter the floor. "The shelves are all broken," Waterston says. "The gold gild is either melting off or puddling on the floor." Enlarge this image In Darren Waterston's Filthy Lucre it looks as if a wrecking ball has been slammed into Whistler's lavish work. Hutomo Wicaksono/Freer Sackler Gallery hide caption toggle caption Hutomo Wicaksono/Freer Sackler Gallery In Darren Waterston's Filthy Lucre it looks as if a wrecking ball has been slammed into Whistler's lavish work. Hutomo Wicaksono/Freer Sackler Gallery The original room feels claustrophobic in its excess. The remix feels scary as if there's been an earthquake and another tremor is coming any minute. "There's a sense of danger," says Waterston. He seems cheerful and sweet, but don't be fooled: "My work absolutely has a perversity," he says. "There's always an underbelly to it." Enlarge this image Shards of smashed Asian vases litter the floor of Waterston's Filthy Lucre. Amber Gray/Freer Sackler Gallery hide caption toggle caption Amber Gray/Freer Sackler Gallery Shards of smashed Asian vases litter the floor of Waterston's Filthy Lucre. Amber Gray/Freer Sackler Gallery Here, Waterston says he wanted to show the volatility of beauty. The big, cancerous, gilded cysts he's blobbed onto Whistler's reproduced golden shelves, the spilled paint oozing onto the rug — these are his reactions to what's happening between art and money these days. "This is what it means to be a living artist in this contemporary art world," Waterston says. "It is so filled with excess and this incredible consumption, this insatiable consumption of the object and of aesthetics." The most vivid, even yuck-making example is what Waterston's done to Whistler's two golden peacocks; in this remix, the birds aren't just fighting, they're eviscerating each other. They're "literally disemboweling each other," he describes. "One has the other's entrails being pulled out — talons are out." The golden peacocks in Filthy Lucre are "literally disemboweling each other," Waterston says. Hutomo Wicaksono/Freer Sackler Gallery hide caption toggle caption Hutomo Wicaksono/Freer Sackler Gallery They hate each other's guts! Which is exactly what happened between Whistler and Leyland. The patron asked the artist to just make some modest adjustments in his new dining room. Glazer says Whistler put a few wavy dabs of gold paint here, some metal color there, "and everyone was very happy with that." Leyland and his family left London for the summer. And that, Glazer says, is when Whistler's imagination took flight. He transformed the room, covering every surface with blue and gold paint. He worked like a madman. "Whistler talks about being up on the scaffolding at 6 in the morning and not coming down until 9 at night," says Glazer. " 'I'm blind with sleep and blue peacock feathers,' he says." He kept his friend and patron more or less informed about what he was doing: "All through the summer Leyland received letters from Whistler talking about the gorgeous surprise that Whistler was preparing for him and the family," Glazer explains. Well, Leyland comes home, sees the extent of work — and the 2,000 pounds that Whistler wanted to be paid for it (about a quarter of a million dollars today) — and, as they used to say in Victorian days: Leyland blew a gasket. In the middle of the dispute, with Leyland paying half of what Whistler requested, the artist went back to the dining room to finish up. "And that was really when he exacted his vengeance," says Glazer. Enlarge this image James McNeill Whistler's mother — immortalized in his 1871 painting Arrangement in Grey and Black No. 1: Portrait of the Artist's Mother — worried about all the time and energy her son was pouring into the Peacock Room. "A gentleman's house isn't an exhibition," she told him. Detroit Institute of Arts via Getty Images hide caption toggle caption Detroit Institute of Arts via Getty Images James McNeill Whistler's mother — immortalized in his 1871 painting Arrangement in Grey and Black No. 1: Portrait of the Artist's Mother — worried about all the time and energy her son was pouring into the Peacock Room. "A gentleman's house isn't an exhibition," she told him. Detroit Institute of Arts via Getty Images He painted those fighting peacocks — the just-plain-angry ones, not Waterston's gut-wrenching birds — and laid on even more blue paint. Then Whistler left, and never saw the Peacock Room again. Now, we can't end this story without talking about Whistler's mother — that iconic profiled figure in gray and black. What did Mama Whistler think of the whole thing — the frenzied work, the manic effort? Glazer reports that Anna Whistler was worried about her son; she thought he was working too hard, not eating, not sleeping: "She chides him about that and says, 'You know, Jimmy, a gentleman's house isn't an exhibition' — meaning: Get out there and make some money and make some things that are going to sell," says Glazer. "And so, always listening to his mother — Whistler was kind of a Momma's boy — he did invite the press in to watch him work in the Peacock Room." Yet another thing he forgot to tell Frederick Leyland! The results of this delicious dispute can be seen on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. — at the Freer, site of the original Peacock Room, and the Sackler, where Filthy Lucre, Darren Waterston's remix, is on display until January 2017.

      Filthy Lucre composes of fragments from the original Peacock room and overall of the article it explains not the comparison but the interpretation of why Filthy Lucre is as it is in addition to extra research.

    1. The elective principle, kept within proper bounds, is very good indeed, and hitherto, no doubt, has worked well in this House. But I doubt whether, in the course of time, this House would not lose its present high status if the elective principle was continued in it for ever. As regards this, however, I merely state my own opinion, and other honorable gentlemen may hold contrary opinions, as they are perfectly entitled to do. (Hear, hear.) Having thus, honorable gentlemen, explained the reasons which induced the Government, m 1856, to propose that the elective principle should be extended to this House, with the concomitant circumstances which assisted in bringing that about—and having also explained the reasons which have induced the Government now to look for another state of political existence, as we may call it, by Confederation with the Maritime Provinces, I think I am clear from any imputation of inconsistency or levity of purpose.

      §.24 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

    2. I think that the engrafting of this system of government upon the British Constitution has a tendency to at least introduce the republican system. It is republican so far as it goes, and that is another reason why I do not approve of it. If we commence to adopt the republican system, we shall perhaps get the idea of continuing the system until we go too far. I t is also said that we are to have a new nationality. I do not understand that term, honorable gentlemen. If we were going to have an independent sovereignty in this country, then I could understand it. I believe honorable gentlemen will agree with me, that after this scheme is fully carried into operation, we shall still be colonies. HON. SIR E. P. TACHÉ—Of course. HON. MR. MOORE—NOW, that being the case, I think our Local Government will be placed in a lower position than in the Government we have now. Every measure resolved upon in the Local Government will be subject to the veto of the Federal Government—that is, any measure or bill passing the Local Legislature may be disallowed within one year by the Federal Government. HON. SIR E. P. TACHÉ—That is the case at present as between Canada and the Imperial Government. HON. MR. MOORE—I beg to differ slightly with the honorable gentleman. Any measure passed by this province may be disallowed within two years thereafter by the Imperial Government. But the local governments, under Confederation, are to be subjected to having their measures vetoed within one year by the Federal Government, and then the Imperial Government has the privilege of vetoing anything the Federal Government may do, within two years. The veto power thus placed in the hands of the Federal Government, if exercised frequently, would be almost certain to cause difficulty between the local and general governments. I observe that my honorable friend, Sir ETIENNE P. TACHÉ, does not approbate that remark. HON. SIR E. P. TACHÉ—You understand me correctly.

      Preamble and §.90 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

    1. It envisioned a 1km stretch of dual carriageway between Salford University and Manchester city centre as a 4-lane linear Park. One lane is grassed, another a water channel, another sand and the last a running track. Commuters leave their cars in a multi-storey Car (P)Ark. The interchange also incorporates a suburban train station, cycle docking station, stables, and a boathouse and changing rooms. From the Car (P)Ark commuters head east into Manchester walking, jogging, cycling, rollerblading, horse riding, swimming or rowing. The Park terminates at a Suit Park where commuters can shower, change and get a coffee. (The word “suit” refers to the business suit). Eight hours later, on their way home, commuters deposit their clothes and return through the Park, to the interchange to collect their car or catch a train. The scheme could be extended to each of the radial routes into Manchester and at intervals these Parks could link, completing a comprehensive green commuter infrastructure. Save this picture! The Park + Jog proposal, 1998. Image Courtesy of Henley Halebrown Rorrison Architects Save this picture! Rendering of the Park + Jog proposal, 1998. Image Courtesy of Henley Halebrown Rorrison Architects What is striking about these parks is the positive impact they can have on their surrounding neighbourhoods, particularly when one considers the alternative. With roads, be it a dual carriageway or a street, comes heavy traffic, noise and pollution, at the expense of those who live and work around it. In the case of a High Street we forego certain types of shops, cafés and restaurants that engender a street life. At the scale of the dual-carriageway the A40 that tears through west London illustrates beautifully how dramatic the blight on homes can be, as this Mid-20th Century residential avenue has been transformed into a slum wrapped around a congested commuter road. These zones lack the 'density' of the city centre and the space of the suburb. And, each successive wave of Greenfield development adds to the expanse of this grey space.Active transportation routes and linear parks, on the other hand, regenerate their surroundings, bringing activity and value to blighted sections of the city. They also radically alter the political situation for the suburb and its inevitable commute. Of course, the creation of these green networks need not be at the expense of the motorist. On the 10th July London’s Transport Commissioner Peter Hendy launched a study for London that envisaged burying sections of the North and South Circular ring roads, and stretches of road close to the Thames. The initiative would create linear parks overhead, much as the Big Dig did for Boston. Save this picture! The Olympic Sculpture Park in Seattle, Washington, designed by Weiss Manfredi. Image © Benjamin Benschneider Although originally conceived for Manchester, I believe that Park+Jog may be adapted to any city worldwide and serve as an example for how Cycle Space could lay the ideological foundation to change our cities for the better. Combining new transportation methods that encourage the principles of a healthy life style with traditional roads can raise land values, attract investment and activate the urban environment. The social revolution that Bazalgette offered London in the 19th Century, Cycle Space might just bring to London and our world’s cities in the 21st. Simon Henley is a teacher, author of the well-received book The Architecture of Parking, and co-founder of London-based studio Henley Halebrown Rorrison (HHbR). His column, London Calling, looks at London’s every-day reality, its architectural culture, and its role as a global architectural hub; above all, it will explore how London is influencing design everywhere, whilst being forever challenged from within. You can follow him @SiHenleyHHbR and be a fan of his Facebook page, HHbR Architecture.Further Reading Park+JogLondon’s answer to Boston’s Big DigRogers 80th Birthday retrospective at the Royal AcademyThe Lidoline, YN Studio's "Swim to Work" Proposal AIA Presents 2013 Educational Facility Design Excellence Awards Architecture News Tretyakov Gallery Competition Entry / PAPER | TOTEMENT Unbuilt Project Save this article Share in Whatsapp About this author Simon Henley Author Follow See more: News Articles London CallingLondonBicyclingUrban Planning Cite: Simon Henley. "Why Cycle Cities Are the Future" 06 Aug 2013. ArchDaily. Accessed 3 Sep 2018. <https://www.archdaily.com/409556/why-cycle-cities-are-the-future/> ISSN 0719-8884 Read comments Browse the Catalog Ceramic Sunscreen - ALPHATUBE® Shildan Danpalon 3DLITE - Solar Control Danpal Elevator in Round Stairs Brembo Ascensori - The Elevator Company Upholstery Fastening System - Textile Range Fastmount® Frameless Sliding Doors - Sky-Frame Plain Sky-Frame Stainless Steel Bollards Reliance Foundry Please enable JavaScript to view the <a href='http://disqus.com/?ref_noscript'>comments powered by Disqus.</a> › 世界上最受欢迎的建筑网站现已推出你的母语版本! 想浏览ArchDaily中国吗? 是 否 翻译成中文 现有为你所在地区特制的网站?想浏览ArchDaily中国吗? Take me there » Recommended for you Hawkins\Brown's London Pride Float Celebrates the "Dual Identities" of LGBT+ Architects Bicycle Club / NL Architects 10 Points of a Bicycling Architecture London Skyline Debate Taken to City Hall More Articles Could You Live in 15 Square Meters of Space? SUMATORIA's 'Tiny Home' May Make You Think Twice 17 Spectacular Living Roofs in Detail What it Means to Build Without Bias: Questioning the Role of Gender in Architecture More Articles » most visited 22 of the World’s Greatest Architecture Projects Selected by Time Magazine Dragons, Rocks, and Sails Inspire Sceno Light's Floating Theater in Vietnam's Ha Long Bay New Concrete House / Wespi de Meuron Most visited products Structural wood boards in Freiland-Hof Home | EGGER WEBNET Stainless Steel Frames | Jakob Siding Façade System | Technowood

      This shows that the architect has a clear plan for the bicycle sharing plan.

    1. had the right of making selections from all over the country. If that had been proposed, I think many honorable gentlemen would have found fault with it. (Hear, hear.) It was due to courtesy that the members of this House should not be overlooked, and not only that, but there were acquired rights which had to be respected. My honorable friend appears to dissent from this statement. Well, the last choice of the people are now in this House, and by the fact of their election they have acquired a right to a seat ; and I think those gentlemen who have been appointed for life have gained rights which should not be overlooked. (Hear, hear.) HON. MR. CURRIE—The honorable and gallant gentleman says we have an acquired right. I admit we have a right to sit here during the term for which we have been elected ; but what right have we to seat ourselves here for the remainder of our lives ? The people did not send us here to make this change in the composition of this House. (Hear, hear.) And what right even have the appointed members of this House to seats here during their lifetime? I have a despatch here, written by the late Duke of NEWCASTLE, who will be considered pretty good authority upon the point, to the Lieutenant-Governor of Prince Edward Island, on this very question. I need not read the words of the despatch, but the sense of it is, that legislative councillors have no right of property in their position, but simply a naked trust which the Legislature may at any time call upon them to surrender to other hands, if, in their opinion, the public interest shall require such transfer. HON. SIR E. P. TACHÉ—That is merely a matter of opinion. That may for a time have been the view of the Imperial authorities, but previous to 1856 they held and said directly the contrary. (Hear, hear.) They then said that they had granted certain privileges to certain gentlemen for life, and that they would not commit the injustice of withdrawing those privileges when the gentlemen had done nothing to forfeit them. (Hear, hear.) HON. MR. CURRIE—I am surprised at the honorable and gallant Premier questioning the ability of the distinguished gentleman who wrote the despatch to which I have just referred. Whatever may have been the opinion of the Colonial Office in 1856, this is a later opinion, for the despatch is dated the 4th of February, 1862, The honorable and gallant gentleman says they do not propose to take from any honorable gentleman the rights he now enjoys. I could understand this argument if they did not propose to take away the rights of any honorable member of this House ; but I cannot understand it when you propose to drive from this House faithful subjects who have served their country honestly in the Legislature, and I am afraid we have not yet had from the gallant Premier that explanation to which the House is entitled. (Hear, hear.) Why is it that the legislative councillors from Prince Edward Island are excepted ? In that province, as we know, the Legislative Council is elective, and it is an elected Chamber that is now in existence there, but the members of it are excepted from the provisions that apply to the legislative councils of the other provinces. Why is this ? I think there must be some reason, in the first place, for breaking the good rule that in no way shall the prerogative of the Crown be restricted ; and, in the second, for making an exception in regard to one that does not apply to the others. I think a reason may be found for this in the fact, that it was doubted whether the resolutions in a different shape would have passed through some of the chambers that compose the legislatures of the different provinces. (Hear, hear.) I would like to know what justice will be done if this change is carried out ? What, for instance, will be done with regard to two honorable members who come from the city of Hamilton ? One of them (the Hon. Mr. MILLS) is an appointed member ; the other (the Hon. Mr. BULL) was the almost unanimous choice of the people only a few months since. Under the working of the resolutions, one of these honorable gentlemen will forfeit his seat. HON. MR. ROSS—Why ? (Hear, hear.) HON. MR. CURRIE—If it does not follow that one of these honorable gentlemen will lose his seat, it must follow that some other portion of Upper Canada will be unrepresented in this House. (Hear, hear.) Let honorable gentlemen take either horn of the dilemma they please. It may be quite true that the gentlemen who have been sent here possess the confidence of their constituents, but it does not follow that they will be retained in their seats. It is plain that a great injustice will be done these honorable gentlemen, some of whom have served their country faithfully, without, in any way trenching upon the rights of the Crown or infringing on those of the people; and I think the conclusion this House and the country, as well as the other branch of the Legislature, will arrive at, is that those re-

      §§.24, 25 and 146 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

    1. Teachers not only like attractive childrenbetter but also perceive them as less likely tomisbehave, more intelligent, and even morelikely to get advanced degrees.

      This statement is surprising to me! I feel like this is a classic example that can apply to the saying mentioned above as, "Don't judge a book by it's cover." Out of all the members in society, i would not think teachers would judge their student's potential by their attractiveness. That honestly seems pretty biased and unethical. The attractive students may catch their eye (not in a creepy way), but to perceive them as more troublesome behaviorally, more intelligent, or more successful is uncalled for in my opinion. Every child should be treated the same in regards to their education. But, we all know that hardly ever happens. It is what is right though.

  8. Aug 2018
    1. Design history has long overlooked women in our narrative, despite continuously having a large group of women active in the field of graphic design over the past century. Lucinda Hitchcock is a professor in Graphic Design at the Rhode Island School of Design, as well as a member of the Design Office in Providence, Rhode Island. “For me, it has to do with the imbalance of genders in the educational environment and in the framework of the design history that is being taught,” Hitchcock explains. Careful to point out it may not be the same situation in all design schools, Hitchcock adds, “Why does design history still teach about male designers 80% more than women designers? Why do we have 80 % women in the student body (in our [RISD] department) and 80% men in the faculty?”

      i think it is strange that female students is more than male but designer male are more than female. i have many female designer tutor in my school, and i know a lot of famous female designer. i think this issue is better than before

    2. Forty or fifty years ago, the workforce was overwhelmingly a man’s world. In the design field, many women may have been assistants or “office girls” and so few held the top titles, such as art director or creative director. In a basic sense, women’s careers have rarely followed the same path of men’s, since there has historically been immense pressure placed on women to be solely homemakers and nurture families (see: Beyond The Glass Ceiling: an open discussion, Astrid Stavro, Elephant #6) with more sinister pressures of socially-accepted sexism and segregation discouraging, or even disqualifying, the career ambitions of capable women.

      Because of social issue, female suffer the unfair treatment, i think it is a loss of design development. because female designer has many different idea with male designer. Design should be variety and creative. it should not limited by gender.

    3. As discussed earlier, the US design profession is not predominantly male— just over half of the profession is female— yet with celebrity designers so often male, the representation is primarily male. In “Type Persons Who Happen to be Female” Susanne Dechant explains that despite many typographic achievements, women remained underrepresented at type conferences. “TypoBerlin (2009: 5% female presenters) or Atypl (2009: 12%), as well as in various type foundries (Linotype 2005: 12.3%; Myfonts.com 2008: 14%). Today an equal number of women and men are studying type design—so we can expect or at least hope for a levelling of the playing field.”

      Discrimination happens in both genders and not only women (from what a person may think when they first read the article.)

    1. But almost all arguments about student privacy, whether those calling for more restrictions or fewer, fail to give students themselves a voice, let alone some assistance in deciding what to share online.

      I think students' voices need to be heard since they have grown up with technology their whole lives. They are being represented by adults who may or may not use technology as frequently and have definitely not grown up from a young age with the advanced technology there is today.

  9. instructure-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com instructure-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com
    1. learningasasocialundertakingandaccomplishmentshapedbypolitical,cultural,historicalandeconomiccontexts

      I am especially interested in this aspect of the class, as we consider intersectionality, and the inability of untangling social systems of oppression - I think solutions may lie in finding where they tangle.

    1. HON. MR. MCCREA—Does the honorable member from Grandville not remember the increase of members in the representation of the other House, in 1853, and the amendment of the constitution of this House in 1856, the very question I am now debating ? Surely these measures were amendments of that act, and who knows but under the new Constitutional Act—the favorite measure of my honorable friend—the election of members of this House, may not again be resorted to, if the nominative principle shall not be found to work well ? But let us examine for a moment what the amendment of my honorable friend from Wellington is intended to effect. It will be seen by referring to the amendment itself, that the honorable gentleman proposes that the members of this House from Canada and from the Maritime Provinces shall have a different origin or, as it were, a different parentage, elected by the people with us, and appointed by the Crown from the eastern provinces. I take it that it is very desirable that in whatever way the members of this House may be chosen, there should be uniformity in the system. By the honorable gentleman’s plan we shall have one-third of the members from below representing the Crown, and two-thirds from above, representing the people ; a curious sort of incongruity which I think should by all means be avoided. I may be answered that our present House is constituted in that very way ; but honorable gentlemen must remember that the life member» are not the sole representatives of any particular section of the province, but are chosen indiscriminately from all parts of the province. This is not likely to lead to a sectional collision like the scheme of my honorable friend, and be sides that, the appointment of life members in this House is not to be continued after the seats of the present members shall have become vacant from any cause whatever. I think the scheme of my honorable friend the most objectionable of all.

      §.24 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

    2. HON. MR. REESOR—Well, there it is. The honorable gentleman acknowledges his determination to reward his political supporters. Is this the way to obtain an independent branch of the Legislature, one that will operate as a wholesome check on hasty legislation? Those who receive favors from a political party are not likely to turn their backs upon that party. I think we are not likely, under any circumstances, to have a more independent House under the proposed system than we now have, or one which will better advance the interests of the country. If you wish to raise the elective franchise, for elections to the Upper House—if you would confine their election to voters on real estate of $400 assessed value, and tenants holding a lease-hold of $100 annual value, and thus place these elections out of the reach of a mere money influence that may sometimes operate upon the masses—if you think this body is not sufficiently conservative—let them be elected by a more conservative portion of the community— that portion which has the greatest stake in the community—but do not strike out the elective principle altogether.

      §.24 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

    1. HON. MR. REESOR—There are several other provisions in the proposed Constitution which seem to be ambiguous in their meaning, and before discussion upon them it would be well to have them fully explained. In the eleventh clause of the twenty-ninth resolution, for instance, it is declared that the General Parliament shall have power to make laws respecting ” all such works as shall, although lying wholly within any province, be specially declared by the acts authorizing them to be for the general advantage.” It would appear from this, that works like the Welland canal, which yield a very large revenue, will be given over to the General Government; and this being the case, surely this is a sufficient setoff, five times over, for the railways given by New Brunswick, without the annual subsidy proposed to be given to that province of $63,000. HON. MR. MACPHERSON—The cost of these works forms part of the public debt of Canada, which is to be borne in part by the Lower Provinces under the Confederation. HON. MR. CAMPBELL—The honorable gentleman will see that there are some works which, although local in their geographical position, are general in their character and results. Such works become the property of the General Government. The Welland canal is one of them, because, although it is local in its position, it is a work in which the whole country is interested, as the chief means of water communication between the western lakes and the sea. Other works, in the Lower Provinces, may be of the same character, and it is not safe to say that because a certain work lies wholly in one province, it is not to belong to the General Government. HON. MR. REESOR—I do not object to the General Government having the control of these works. It is, I believe, a wise provision to place them under such control. But I do say that it is unfair that an express stipulation should be made to pay one province a large sum per annum for certain works, while, at the same time, we throw in our public works, such as the Welland and St. Lawrence canals, without any consideration whatever. This, I think, is paying quite too much for the whistle. Then the answer of the Commissioner of Crown Lands about the export duty on minerals in Nova Scotia is not at all satisfactory. Whatever dues may be levied on minerals in Canada—and Canada, although it may contain no coal, is rich in gold, silver, copper, iron, and other ores—in the shape of a royalty or otherwise, go to the General Government, while in Nova Scotia they accrue for the benefit of the Local Government. HON. MR. ROSS—NO, they will not go to the General Government. HON. MR. REESOR—Well, there is nothing to the contrary in the resolutions, and you may depend upon it that whatever revenues the General Government may claim, under the proposed Constitution, will be fully insisted upon.

      §.92(10) of the Constitution Act, 1867.

    2. HON. MR. AIKINS—The honorable gentleman says they will have the power, through their representatives, to make their appointments. Well, after reading the fourteenth resolution, it does appear to me that, after the first election of the Chamber, the people will have nothing at all to do with it. (Hear, hear.) The honorable gentleman says, however, that the representatives of the people will have the power of making these appointments. Who are the representatives of the people he refers to? The members of the Government, who will have this power ; or, in other words, the Crown will make the appointments. Hon. MR. MACPHERSON—With the advice of the representatives of the people. HON. MR. AIKINS—Yes, undoubtedly; but the people, nevertheless, will have nothing at all to do with the matter ; we advert again, in fact, to the old principle when the Crown made all the appointments. (Hear, hear.) Now, with regard to this question, I feel myself in this position, that although I may be in favour of the Crown making these appointments— upon which principle I express no opinion at this moment—if I voted for these resolutions I would give a vote, and every member of this House would give a vote, by which they would give themselves seats in this House as long as Providence thought fit to let them main. (Hear, hear.) I came here, honorable gentlemen, to conserve certain interests, to represent certain classes, and to reflect the views of those who sent me here so far as they accorded with my own judgment. But they did not send me here to change the Constitution under which I was appointed, and to sweep away at one dash the privileges they possess, one of which is, to give a seat in this House to him in whom they have confidence. It does not appear right to me that the members of this House should declare, by their own votes, that we shall remain here for all time to come. (Hear, hear.) The reasons given for the proposed change are various, and to some extent conflicting. We find one member of the Government telling us that it is because the Maritime Provinces are opposed to an elective Chamber, and hence we in Canada—the largest community and the most influential—give way to them, and set aside a principle that was solemnly adopted here, and so far has worked without prejudice to our interests. We find another gentleman, who, when the question came up years ago, Strongly opposed the elective principle, quite as strongly opposes it now, because since then certain municipalities have borrowed more than they are able to pay ! These are somewhat extraordinary reasons, and I trust the House will give them their due weight. I think, honorable gentlemen, that prior to the proposed change taking place, we ought not to declare by our own votes that we are entitled to permanent seats in this House,— without, at any rate, knowing whether the people consent to it or not ; and I do not think I am wrong in using this line of argument, when we have reason to believe that, even if the Crown-appointed members remain here, a large number of the elected members will also remain.

      §.24 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

    1. Think of regular media as a one-way street where you can read a newspaper or listen to a report on television, but you have very limited ability to give your thoughts on the matter. Social media, on the other hand, is a two-way street that gives you the ability to communicate too.

      Very interesting, I would've never thought of there being completely two different media outlets. Being a staff of Met Media, specifically with the Metropolitan, it's promotes questions on how we as the newspaper can promote more active users in the traditional media outlets. I think of how we upload the newspaper also on the web so that students may access it quicker and more convenient.

    1. It is said they have not [Page 89] the power. But what is to prevent them from enforcing it? Suppose we had a conservative majority here, and a reform majority above— or a conservative majority above and a reform majority here—all elected under party obligations,—- what is to prevent a dead-lock between the chambers ? It may be called unconstitutional—- but what is to prevent the Councillors (especially if they feel that in the dispute of the hour they have the country at their back) from practically exercising all the powers that belong to us ? They might amend our money bills, they might throw out all our bills if they liked, and bring to a stop the whole machinery of government. And what could we do to prevent them ? But, even supposing this were not the case, and that the elective Upper House continued to be guided by that discretion which has heretofore actuated its proceedings,—still, I think, we must all feel that the election of members for such enormous districts as form the constituencies of the Upper House has become a great practical inconvenience. I say this from personal experience, having long taken an active interest in the electoral contests in Upper Canada. We have found greater difficulty in inducing candidates to offer for seats in the Upper House, than in getting ten times the number for the Lower House. The constituencies are so vast, that it is difficult to find gentlemen who have the will to incur the labor of such a contest, who are sufficiently known and popular enough throughout districts so wide, and who have money enough — (hear) — to pay the enormous bills, not incurred in any corrupt way,—do not fancy that I mean that for a moment—but the bills that are sent in after the contest is over, and which the candidates are compelled to pay if they ever hope to present themselves for re-election. (Hear, hear.) But honorable gentlemen say—” This is all very well, but you are taking an important power out of the hands of the people, which they now possess.” Now this is a mistake. We do not propose to do anything of the sort. What we propose is, that the Upper House shall be appointed from the best men of the country by those holding the confidence of the representatives of the people in this Chamber. It is proposed that the Government of the day, which only lives by the approval of this Chamber, shall make the appointments, and be responsible to the people for the selections they shall make. (Hear, hear.) Not a single appointment could be made, with regard to which the Government would not be open to censure, and which the representatives of the people, in this House, would not have an opportunity “of condemning. For myself, I have maintained the appointed principle, as in opposition to the elective, ever since I came into public life, and have never hesitated, when before the people, to state my opinions in the broadest manner ; and yet not in a single instance have I ever found a constituency in Upper Canada, or a public meeting declaring its disapproval of appointment by the Crown and its desire for election by the people at large. When the change was made in 1855 there was not a single petition from the people asking for it—-it was in a manner forced on the Legislature. The real reason for the change was, that before Responsible Government was introduced into this country, while the old oligarchical system existed, the Upper House continuously and systematically was at war with the popular branch, and threw out every measure of a liberal tendency. The result was, that in the famous ninety-two resolutions the introduction of the elective principle into the Upper House was declared to be indispensable. So long as Mr. ROBERT BALDWIN remained in public life, the thing could not be done ; but when he left, the deed was consummated. But it is said, that if the members are to be appointed for life, the number should be unlimited— that, in the event of a dead lock arising between that chamber and this, there should be power to overcome the difficulty by the appointment of more members. Well, under the British system, in the case of a legislative union, that might be a legitimate provision. But honorable gentlemen must see that the limitation of the numbers in the Upper House lies at the base of the whole compact on which this scheme rests. (Hear, hear.) It is perfectly clear, as was contended by those who represented Lower Canada in the Conference, that if the number of the Legislative Councillors was made capable of increase, you would thereby sweep away the whole protection they had from the Upper Chamber. But it has been said that, though you may not give the power to the Executive to increase the numbers of the Upper House, in the event of a dead-lock, you might limit the term for which the members are appointed. I was myself in favor of that proposition. I thought it would be well to provide for a more frequent change in the composition of the Upper House, and lessen the danger of the chamber being largely composed of gentlemen whose advanced years might forbid the punctual and vigorous discharge of their public [Page 90] duties. Still, the objection made to this was very strong. It was said : ” Suppose you appoint them for nine years, what will be the effect ? For the last three or four years of their term they would be anticipating its expiry, and anxiously looking to the Administration of the day for re-appointment ; and the consequence would be that a third of the members would be under the influence of the Executive.” The desire was to render the Upper House a thoroughly independent body—one that would be in the best position to canvass dispassionately the measures of this House, and stand up for the public interests in opposition to hasty or partisan legislation. It was contended that there is no fear of a dead-lock. We were reminded how the system of appointing for life had worked in past years, since Responsible Government was introduced ; we were told that the complaint was not then, that the Upper Chamber had been too obstructive a body—not that it had sought to restrain the popular will, but that it had too faithfully reflected the popular will. Undoubtedly that was the complaint formerly pressed upon us—{hear, hear)—and I readily admit that if ever there was a body to whom we could safely entrust the power which by this measure we propose to confer on the members of the Upper Chamber, it is the body of gentlemen who at this moment compose the Legislative Council of Canada. The forty-eight Councillors for Canada are to be chosen from the present chamber. There are now thirty-four members from the one section, and thirty-five from the other. I believe that of the sixty-nine, some will not desire to make their appearance here again, others, unhappily, from years and infirmity, may not have strength to do so ; and there may be others who will not desire to qualify under the Statute. It is quite clear that when twenty-four are selected for Upper Canada and twenty-four for Lower Canada, very few indeed of the present House will be excluded from the Federal Chamber ; and I confess I am not without hope that there may be some way yet found of providing for all who desire it, an honorable position in the Legislature of the country. (Hear, hear.) And, after all, is it not an imaginary fear—that of a dead-lock ? Is it at all probable that any body of gentlemen who may compose the Upper House, appointed as they will be for life, acting as they will do on personal and not party responsibility, possessing as they must, a deep stake in the welfare of the country, and desirous as they must be of holding the esteem of their fellow-subjects— would take so unreasonable a course as to imperil the whole political fabric ? The British House of Peers itself does not venture, à l’outrance, to resist the popular will, and can it be anticipated that our Upper Chamber would set itself rashly against the popular will? If any fear is to be entertained in the matter, is it not rather that the Councillors will be found too thoroughly in harmony with the popular feeling of the day ? And we have this satisfaction at any rate, that, so far as its first formation is concerned—so far as the present question is concerned—we shall have a body of gentlemen in whom every confidence may be placed.

      §§.24, 26, and 29 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

    1. In this context, the rather linear practice of stratigraphic excavation with its institutional, disciplinary, and performative underpinnings gives way to the raucous and uneven performance of punk rock music which often eschews expertise, barriers to access, and specialized knowledge (see Gnecco 2013)

      I like to think of the practice of stratigraphic excavation as our attempt to rein in the chaos that inevitably results as we are continually faced with and misunderstand the remains of the past. I would argue that disciplined stratigraphic excavation and a punk spirited practice are not entirely incompatible. You can rebel against the system in every aspect of your practice as long as you stand in the dole queue (and fill out your paperwork and context sheets properly). This may be slightly off your main argument.

    1. The grosser feeds the purer, Earth the Sea, Earth and the Sea feed Air, the Air those Fires Ethereal, and as lowest first the Moon; Whence in her visage round those spots, unpurg'd Vapours not yet into her substance turnd. [ 420 ] Nor doth the Moon no nourishment exhale From her moist Continent to higher Orbes. The Sun that light imparts to all, receives From all his alimental recompence In humid exhalations, and at Even [ 425 ] Sups with the Ocean: though in Heav'n the Trees Of life ambrosial frutage bear, and vines Yield Nectar, though from off the boughs each Morn We brush mellifluous Dewes, and find the ground Cover'd with pearly grain: yet God hath here [ 430 ] Varied his bounty so with new delights, As may compare with Heaven; and to taste Think not I shall be nice. So down they sat, And to thir viands fell,

      Where does this concept of hierarchical feed come from? Is it pure Milton invention?

    1. These possibili- ties are more likely to be seen if we think of large crises as the outcome of smaller scale enactments. When the enactment perspective is applied to crisis situations, several aspects stand out that are normally overlooked. To look for enactment themes in crises, for example, is to listen for verbs of enactment, words like manual control, intervene, cope, probe, alter, design, solve, decouple, try, peek and poke (Perrow, 1984, p. 333), talk, disregard, and improvise. These verbs may signify actions that have the potential to construct or limit later stages in an unfolding crisis

      Curious why temporality is never mentioned as a dynamic of enactment. It's somewhat implied in the idea of acting in the moment or responding after the fact, but sensemaking and social construction is inherently temporal.

    1. I made him just and right, Sufficient to have stood, though free to fall.

      Yes, and God also made mankind ignorant, with strong sensory appetites (for fruit like apples), with a desire for pleasure etc. etc. (I'm thinking of my mother who was so unattuned to childrearing that she expected me to act like an adult when I was 2 years old and punished me for acting by impulse according to reason). Just how much time did God spend teaching Adam and Eve how to control their desires, or role model such behavior for them?

      It seems to me that anyone who is authoritarian and makes strong rules- especially for someone who is not yet really adult, experienced and knowledgeable -is asking for rebellion. The gestalt therapists speak of Topdog and Underdog. When there is an authoritarian Topdog, there's bound to be an Underdog who rebels. What's needed is to assimilate Topdog (integrating some facets of our SHOULDs and throwing out others that are not necessary), building a self in the process that it is NOT split in two. In Freudian terms, we're talking about a healthy ego that can help us integrate our id and superego rather than a strict superego that is authoritarian with a rebellious id. But the root of the Old Testament is such a split.

      Adam and Eve were just born, right, though born as adults? (Personally, I think we can get beyond the split too of Creationism vs. Evolution. Why not view God as having given a lightning blast to chimpanzees which quickly led to ther evolving into humans?). So they weren't likely to have a lot of experience or become very mature yet. Of course they needed to go through the rebellious terrible twos!

      In Greek mythology too, we have the first female Pandora who almost immediately after she is created is left in a room with a box and told that she must not open it. So she does, of course. Her curiosity gets the better of her. And so she is blamed for all the evil in the world, as Eve is blamed. Unfair!

      Both of these situations are "set ups". What I don't understand is why God set up a test which Adam and Eve were bound to fail. So that he could fully assert His power over them?

      The Old Testament seems to me to be based on a split consciousness with a Topdog God and an Underdog mankind. This is a kind of parent/child, authority /subordinate setup. But it is not the only way to live.

      Yes, I'm trying to understand Milton, but in the process clarifying my own attitude toward his interpretation of The Fall AND that of the Bible and Christianity. As a Gnostic deeply influenced by Elaine Pagel's Gnostic Gospels and her Adam, Eve and the Serpent, I highly recommend these two books. To me, the make much more sense than the Fall in the Old Testament or the Miltonian interpretation.of it.

      Those of us who are expressing our own views here abd criticizing Milton and the Bible (and certainly I'm doing a lot of it) may be at odds with those who are dedicated believers in the Bible and take Genesis literally. But I'd be happy to hear a variety of views.

    1. Consult how we may henceforth most offendOur Enemy, our own loss how repair,How overcome this dire Calamity,What reinforcement we may gain from Hope, [ 190 ]If not what resolution from despare.

      Ironic, I think. The Fallen Angel has just rejected Satan's proposal of out right war as a bad idea. It would end in a disaster all over again. So he calls for a consultation of the fallen demons, one might say that he is call for a Parliament, which can come up with a better idea! I would rather suspect that Milton has in mind the "success" of resent English Parliament, as I might have of the US Congress, as he will unfold this grand consult. Love it!

    1. not conclusive

      I think "not conclusive" is still too certain based on the actual level of confidence in the paper. I'd have said "tentative" would reflect the paper more accurately. eg. The paper uses the term "risk averse approach" for the proposed 2C threshold, and say "we cannot exclude the risk...". It also use caveated language such as "could" and "may" a lot, and talk of "probability ... difficult to quantify".

    1. Why should a republic be small?  What happens, according to Rousseau, when a republic is too large?

      I think Rousseaus argument makes sense in the context of his era, but as Julie suggested, modern transportation and communication may have shrunk our nation to some degree. I also think Rousseau fails to address the other component that our Founders incorporated--Federalism. Some of Rousseaus issues are addressed through Federalism. We maintain smaller republics within a whole republic.

    1. It should be in miniature an exact portrait of the people at large. It should think, feel, reason, and act like them.

      This is the foundation of republicanism as the government should be based on popular sovereignty. However, a discussion question for students may be, how can we expect the government to act like the people when there are so many other influences such as money? or is the government truly a reflection of the people if only 58% of eligible voters vote? What is a solution to this problem?

    1. More importantly non-symbolic expressions of reality are traditionally understood to be outside the disciplinary boundaries of the human social sciences. These reasons may explain the convention but they cannot justify it. We can accept that for us to be able to talk and think about time necessitates our putting it into words. If this is all that is being expressed, it is not very much; if it equates reality with the symbol, it goes too far. There is no need to deny that all humans formulate meanings symbolically or that this is a fundamentally social process. There is an urgent need, however, to appreciate that time is an aspect of nature, and that nature encompasses the symbolic universe of human society. Once we recognise ourselves as bearers of all the multiple times of nature, and once we allow for nature to include symbolic expression, the gulf between the symbolic knower and nature as an external (unknowable) object can be dispensed with. The mutually exclusive dichotomies of nature and culture, subject and object become irrelevant.

      This is pretty dense but I think Adam is arguing that "social time" can exist without symbols and that "natural time" can itself be symbolic. If this is true, then conceptualizing time can be more holistic and rely less on dichotomy.

  10. Jul 2018
    1. Scholars have known for decades that people tend to search for and believe information that confirms what they already think is true. The new elements are social media and the global networks of friends who use it. People let their guard down on online platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, where friends, family members, and coworkers share photos, gossip, and a wide variety of other information. That’s one reason why people may fall for false news, as S. Shyam Sundar, a Pennsylvania State University communication professor, explains in The Conversation. Another reason: People are less skeptical of information they encounter on platforms they have personalized — through friend requests and “liked” pages, for instance — to reflect their interests and identity.
    1. There was, after all, public humanities before there (quite recently) was the phrase “public humanities”, and those of us for whom the term has meaning know that there are still many more public humanists than the very small proportion who now claim the name explicitly.

      And I think we still have a common conception of a "public intellectual" that may be a humanist, or someone like Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Is it useful to claim and apply a term that has baggage to describe working with the public in mind as an audience?

  11. course-computational-literary-analysis.netlify.com course-computational-literary-analysis.netlify.com
    1. The moment he saw me, he pulled out the pocket-book and pencil, and obstinately insisted on taking notes of everything that I said to him.

      In Mr.Jenning's narrative, the word "obstinate" has been used to describe Betteredge several times, and it seems from his descriptions of their interactions that Betteredge is indeed an obstinate old man, but a quick search through the story gives a peculiarly high frequency of this certain adjective. I think we could run an analysis on which characters have been described as "obstinate" more often, details of their character traits and what led to this comment. Or do some narrators use the word more often and it may be a particular way they see the difference in personality from themselves and other people?

    2. “What do you mean by pitying me?” she asked in a bitter whisper, as she passed to the door. “Don’t you see how happy I am? I’m going to the flower-show, Clack; and I’ve got the prettiest bonnet in London.” She completed the hollow mockery of that address by blowing me a kiss–and so left the room.

      Rachel's moodiness seems bizarre and creepy to me, and I suspect that huge disturbance to one's mind might be one of the verifications of the curse from the moonstone.Of course, I also think that the description of Rachel’s abnormal behavior here may because of Miss Clack's prejudice against her, which magnifies those negative qualities.I have to say,we can vividly feel from this part that a strong subjectivity of the narrative content is a significant feature of using first-person perspective to describe a story.

    3. And what of that?–you may reply–the thing is done every day. Granted, my dear sir. But would you think of it quite as lightly as you do, if the thing was done (let us say) with your own sister?

      Mathew Bruff carefully anticipates the reader's objections, and tries to persuade him ("my dear sir") to reconsider his assessment of Godfrey Ablewhite. To better understand how and why The Moonstone's various narrators directly address readers, we could run a word collocation analysis and/or a sentiment analysis on each moment that features a narrator addressing a reader. Then, we would be informed enough to speculate about the extent to which such addresses prove effective.

    4. For a wonder, he had had a good night’s rest at last; and the unaccustomed luxury of sleep had, as he said himself, apparently stupefied him.

      I think this action(good night's rest) is abnormal. We have known Mr. Franklin care about the moon stone very much and he has fell in love with Ms. Rachel. How could he have a good night's rest after the loss? It's so strange that something may happened to him at night.

    1. In these analyses of plasticity we see how, like clock time, digital time is not simply a property of technologies, nor does it straightforwardly emerge as a sociotechnical con-vention associated with their use. Rather, it has coevolved with broader shifts in the temporality of everyday life, such as the emergence of fractured rhythms, and the associated need to fill the gaps between them.

      Digital time is a type of sociotemporality that has co-evolved through influence of technology and its influence on technology AND rhythms/trajectories/horizons of modern life. See Rattenbury above.

      Think more about how Reddy's and Pschetz's work may be important here re: social coordination.

    1. “I support a social transition for a kid who is in distress and needs to live in a different way. And I do so because I am very focused on what the child needs at that time,” said Johanna Olson-Kennedy, medical director of the Center for Transyouth Health and Development at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, the largest transgender youth clinic in the United States with some 750 patients. A social transition to the other gender helps children learn, make friends, and participate in family activities. Some will decide later they are not transgender, but Olson-Kennedy says the potential harm in such cases may be overstated.

      This is one of the major problems in how so many approach this whole issue weather as a topic or in deciding a course of action for their own child. Furthermore the possibility of that happiness now rests on either on secrecy and passing or as is more often the case today it rests on the cooperation and orchestration of a comprehensive enough segment of the total people with whom your child is interacting to support this transition. What if we did that for gay kids. How much different would things be if tital 9 applied to all gender nonconforming kids even those who identified as gay? What if 12 states didn't have laws against speaking positively about gay as an identity in schools. What if parents where expected to do the work to insure that a self identified gay student was provided a social network for similarly identified adults and young people. And for just about any teen how might life be different emotionally speaking if we had been chemically castrated during our teen years. What if gay kids had the same wealth of support materials - public discourse etc. The reaason they don't is because we can not deal with their difference and we can not deal with it being about their sexual desire because we are unnerved by a the fact that children can identify and feel and act on sexual interests at a very young age. Gay kids know this and that is a big hurdle to comming out. I wished so much to have a boyfirend then I felt I could come out because it wouldn't mean telling my parents that I think about boys in a sexual way but I love this boy and won't deny him to anyone. No sad to say as was noted when oposition was initially raised amoung APA members over the introduction of GID to the DSM when they stated that it may just be that gay is a normal healthy worthy course of human development that as part of that process involves being in some way emotionally maimed by which they meant that there are certain painfull encounters with being different than ones own parents and most people in your community that gay people by dfinitioon must edure and untill society changes being gay is known to be a bad undesirable thing by children at a tremendously young age. So to be and develop as a person who is homosexual is not going to happen without certain paiuns and obsticles that others can easily avoid and mostly do.

    1. Do you think that this question can be substantively answered via your report-generating processes?

      As an assessment person, my desired learning outcome for instructors is that they can "align their instructional approaches and assessments with their desired student learning outcomes". This skill is a basic instructional design skill to ensure that we're teaching what we think we're teaching and testing what we think we're testing. There are a number of ways that instructors can demonstrate this. Looking at how instructors articulate their alignment in a report (possibly using a rubric) is an efficient way for a single assessment person to identify the areas of the college that are more and less in need of a deeper dive.

      Philosophically, I see assessment as a formative process rather than a summative one. I'm here to help, not to punish. The assessment reports give instructors an opportunity to show me what they understand about teaching and learning principles and share how they're systematically tackling their departmental problems. This gives me a starting point for a conversation with a department about areas of strength and weakness and to then assist them where needed. Sometimes the assistance is training and other times it may be to help them make a case for more resources. (Many professors in higher education get no training in teaching and learning as part of their graduate education. How can we expect people to be good at something without having had opportunities for training and practice with feedback?)

    1. On 2017 Oct 19, Polina Vishnyakova commented:

      Dear colleagues, in order to maintain a healthy scientific debate we need to clarify the statement, which you provided in Discussion of this paper. You wrote: «These findings are inconsistent with the findings of Vishnyakova et al. who reported that OPA1 was upregulated in PE placentas. […] The findings of Vishnyakova et al. were mainly based on gene expression. Levels of DNA or RNA may be unable to predict protein levels accurately, as they do not account for post-transcriptional/translational modifications». It is important to note than in our work we observed changes both on mRNA and protein content level of OPA1 and these findings surely disagree with your data. But we think that this could be explained by the difference in patients characteristic: we divided patients with preeclampsia basing on gestational age while you included women only with severe preeclampsia. Plus in current paper you analyzed only OPA1-L form, but not both forms (full OPA1-L and cleaved OPA1-S). So obtained difference in our findings could be explained with these points. Best regards.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Aug 25, Jason R Richardson commented:

      Drs. Blakely and Melikian, thank you both for your insightful comments. In working with these cells over a number of years, we have found that while the cell line expresses all of the necessary components to be identified as dopaminergic, it neither synthesizes a significant amount of dopamine nor has functional dopamine uptake. This is likely because of the diffuse nature of the protein expression identified by Dr. Melikian, which may be because it was generated by immortalizing cells from embryonic day 12 rat. I believe when I was a postdoc, I did some co-labeling and observed that the DAT was primarily present in the ER and golgi in these cells, suggesting that the intracellular machinery may not be mature enough to fully generate a functional and fully glycosylated DAT. I should note that the original group that made the N27 line recently re-cloned it and purified cells from this new clone had higher expression levels of both TH and DAT (Gao et al., 2016). Although, there were no functional studies for DAT-mediated uptake with the re-cloned line, they did show a modest increase in susceptibility to 6-OHDA and MPP+. Our primary goal for this paper was to better characterize the role of histone acetylation and transcription factor binding in the epigenetic regulation of DAT expression based on our previous studies in SK-N-AS cells (Green et al., 2015) in a rat cell line that we could then translate to in vivo studies. I certainly agree that additional studies in cells that display a more mature phenotype that allow for determination of function are warranted. I think both comments bring out a very important point regarding the study of transporter regulation. That is, cell context and system are critical to the interpretation and translation of mechanisms regulating the DAT to in vivo systems.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Jun 21, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      (Comment #2)

      The three sentences of the conclusion (which I annotate below, in its entirety, reflects the article's utter lack of content:

      1. *"Motion information generated by moving specularities across a surface is used by human observers when judging the bumpiness of 3D shapes." *

      The boundaries of specularities are effectively contour lines. It would be thoroughly unrealistic to predict that they would not play a role, moving or not. And the observation had already been made.

      1. "In the presence of specular motion, observers tend to not rely on the motion parallax information generated by the matte-textured reflectance component."

      The two parts of this sentence seem to be a non-sequitur - how could observers of specular motion employ information generated by matte-textured objects (i.e. objects other than the ones they were observing)? What the authors mean to say is that observers don't use the motion parallax info generated by the specular stimulus. While they frame this as though it were an actual finding, it is, as discussed above, a purely speculative attempt to explain the poorer performance with specular objects.

      1. *"This study further highlights how 3D shape, surface material, and object motion interact in dynamic scenes." *

      It really doesn't, given the mixed results and failed predictions. It couldn't for a number of other reasons, discussed below.

      1. All of the heavy lifting in this article is done by computer programmers, whose renderings are supposed to qualify as "specular" "specular motion" "matte-textured" etc. These renderings rest on theoretical assumptions most of which are never made explicit. They are, however, inadequate; we learn that observers sometimes saw the moving specular stimuli as non-rigid. This is a problem. There is no objective description of the phenomenon "specular object in motion around an axis" other than "objects generated by this particular program." Is there any doubt that results would have been different if the renderings had accurately mimicked the physical phenomenon? If the surface of the object is seen as changing, don't this affect the "motion parallax" hypothesis? The speed with which a particular point on a surface is moving optically is confounded with the speed with which it is moving on its own.

      2. The so-called matte-textured objects appeared purely reflective when not in motion. The apparent specularities were "stuck-on" so that they moved with the surface. I have never seen a matte surface with this characteristic. I would be curious to see the in-motion renderings, because I cannot imagine what they look like. What is clear is that a simple reference to matte textured objects is not appropriate. We are talking about a different phenomenon, which may not correspond to any physically actualizable one. This latter fact wouldn't matter if the theoretical framework were tight enough that such stimuli allowed isolation of some particular factor of interest. Here, however, it is just means that "matte" doesn't mean what it normally is thought to mean.

      3. Observers were confused about the meaning of the term "bumpiness." Stimuli involve hills and ridges of various extents as well as varying apparent heights. The authors were interested in height. They instructed observers who asked for clarification (not the others) that they were interested in "the amplitude not the frequency." I would say a large hill or a wide ridge could qualify as more ample for people not thinking in terms of graphs with height in the ordinate. In other words, I think there is a observational confound between extent and height of the bumps.

      4. In the introduction, the authors refer to previous papers which came to opposite conclusions. Presumably, this means that some relevant factors/confounds were not considered. But the authors don't attempt to analyze these conflicted citations, which thus merely function as window-dressing. They move on to their experiments, on the slightest and vaguest of pretexts, with poorly described stimuli and poorly controlled tasks.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Jun 14, Youhe Gao commented:

      I found two "overexpression"s in the paper. "Although the extent of bait overexpression is difficult to judge and varies across IP's, previous experimentation has shown that over-expression has little effect on identification of true interacting partners (Sowa et al., 2009)" "VAPBWT overexpression strongly increased the association of EGFP-LSG1 and OSBP with the ER (Figure 7E,G)" Personally, I am not sure if those are enough. In a system, increasing [A] or [B] will lead to more [AB]. As we know more about protein interaction now, this kind of systematic false positive should not be ignored any more. In cells, overexpression with tag may even change the location of the protein. That is why I think the next generation of massive protein interaction studies should start from in vivo crosslinking. I do not want to overemphasize the problem. Most of the protein interactions identified are probably true in cells. The amount of work done is very impressive and respected. I hope users who is using a particular interaction data as the only clue for their future experiment design, maybe they should start with an in vivo crosslinking as a conformation of that interaction. It may make them more confident to proceed.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 May 22, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      Part 1 This publication is burdened with an unproductive theoretical approach as well as methodological problems (including intractable sampling problems). Conclusions range from trivial to doubtful.

      Contemporary vision science seems determined to take organization of the retinal stimulation out of the picture, and replace it with raw numbers, whether neural firing rates or statistics. This is a fundamental error. A statistical heuristic strategy doesn’t work in any discipline, including physics. For example, a histogram of the relative heights of all the point masses in a particular patch of the world wouldn’t tell anything about the mechanical properties of the objects in that scene, because it would not tell us about distribution and cohesiveness of masses. (Would it tell us anything of interest?)

      In perception, it is more than well established that the appearance of any point in the visual field –with respect to lightness, color, shape, etc - is intimately dependent on the intensities/spectral compositions of the points in the surrounding (the entire) field (specifically their effects on the retina) and on the principles of organization that the visual process effectively applies to the stimulation. Thus, a compilation of, for example, the spectral statistics of Purves’ colored cube would not allow us either to explain or predict the appearance of colored illumination or transparent overlays. Or, rather, it wouldn’t allow us to predict these things unless we employed a very special sample of images, all of which produced such impressions of colored illumination. Then we might get a relatively weak correlation. This is because, within this sample, a preponderance of certain wavelengths would tend to correlate with e.g. a yellow, illumination impression, rather than being due, as might be true for the general case, to the presence of a number of unified apparently yellow and opaque surfaces. Thus, we see how improper sampling can allow us to make better (and, I would add, predictable) predictions without implying explanatory power. In perception, explanatory power strictly requires we take into account principles of organization.

      In contrast, the authors here take the statistics route. They want to show, or rather, don’t completely fail to corroborate the observation that when surfaces are wet, their look colors are deeper and more vivid, and also to corroborate the fact that changes in perception are linked to changes in the retinal stimulation. Using a set of ready-made images (criteria for the selection of which are not provided), they apply to them a manipulation (among others) that has the general effect of increasing the saturation of the colors perceived. One way to ascertain whether this manipulation causes a surface to appear wet would be to simply ask observers to describe the surface, without any clues to what was expected. Would the surface be spontaneously be described as “wet” or “moist”? This would be the more challenging test, but is not the approach taken.

      Instead, observers are first trained on images (examples of which are not provided - I have requested examples) that we are told appear very wet (and the dry versions), and include shape-based cues, such as drops of water or puddles. They are told to use these as a guide to what counts as very wet, or a rating of 5. They are then shown a series of images containing both original and manipulated images (with more saturated colors, but lacking any shape-based cues), and asked to rate wetness from 1 to 5.

      The results are messy, with some transformed images getting higher ratings than the originals and others not, though on average they are more highly rated. But the ratings for all the images are relatively low; and we have to ask, how have the observers understood their task? Are they reporting an authentic perception of wetness or moistness, or do they believe are they trying to guess at how wet a surface actually is, based on a rule of thumb adopted during the training phase, in which, presumably, the wet images were also more color-saturated? (In other words, is the task authentically perceptual, or is it more cognitive guesswork?) What does it mean to rate the wetness of a surface at e.g. the “2” level?

      The cost of ignoring the factor of shape/structure is evident in the authors’ attempt to explain why the ratings for all images were so low, reaching 4 in only one case. They explain that it may be because their manipulation didn’t include areas that looked like drops or puddles. Does this mean that the presence of drops or puddles actually changes the appearance of the surrounding areas, and/or that perhaps those very different training images included other organized features that were overlooked and that affected perception? Did the training teach observers to apply a cue in practice that by itself produces somewhat different perceptual outcomes? I suppose we could ask the observers about their strategy, but this would muddy the facade of quantitative purity.

      At any rate, the manipulation (like most ad hoc assumptions) fails as a tool for prediction, leading the authors to acknowledge that “The image transformation greatly increased the wetness rating for some images but not for others…” (Again, it isn’t clear that “wetness rating” correlates with an authentically perceptual scale). Thus, relative success or failure of the transformation is image-specific, and thus sample-specific; some samples and sample sets would very likely not reach statistical significance. Thus the decision to investigate further (Experiment 1b) using (if I’m reading this correctly) only a single custom-made image that was not part of the original set (on what basis was this chosen?) seems unwise. (This might seem to worsen the sampling problem, but the problem is intractable anyway. As there is no possible sample that would allow the researchers to generate reliable statistics-based predictions for the individual case, any generalization would be instantly falsifiable, and thus lack explanatory power).

      The degree to which any conclusions are tied to the specific (and unrationalized) sample is illustrated by the fact that the technical manipulations were tailored to it (from Experiment 1a): “In deciding [the] parameters of the WET transformation, we preliminarily explored a range of parameters and chose ones that did not disturb the apparent naturalness of all the images used in Experiment 1a.” Note the lack of objective criteria for “naturalness.”). (We’re not told on what basis the parameters in Experiment 1b were chosen). In short, I don’t think this numbers game can tell us anything more from a theoretical point of view than casual observation and e.g., trial and error by artists, already have.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 May 06, Hilda Bastian commented:

      The conclusion that implicit bias in physicians "does not appear to impact their clinical decision making" would be good news, but this systematic review does not support it. Coming to any conclusion at all on this question requires a strong body of high quality evidence, with representative samples across a wide range of representative populations, using real-life data not hypothetical situations. None of these conditions pertain here. I think the appropriate conclusion here is that we still do not know what role implicit racial bias, as measured by this test, has on people's health care.

      The abstract reports that "The majority of studies used clinical vignettes to examine clinical decision making". In this instance, "majority" means "all but one" (8 out of 9). And the single exception has a serious limitation in that regard, according to Table 1: "pharmacy refills are only a proxy for decision to intensify treatment". The authors' conclusions are thus related, not to clinical decision making, but to hypothetical decision making.

      Of the 9 studies, Table 1 reports that 4 had a low response rate (37% to 53%), and in 2 studies the response rate was unknown. As this is a critical point, and an adequate response rate was not defined in the report of this review, I looked at the 3 studies (albeit briefly). I could find no response rate in any of the 3. In 1 of these (Haider AH, 2014), 248 members of an organization responded. That organization currently reports having over 2,000 members (EAST, accessed 6 May 2017). (The authors report that only 2 of the studies had a sample size calculation.)

      It would be helpful if the authors could provide the full scoring: given the limitations reported, it's hard to see how some of these studies scored so highly. This accepted manuscript version reports that the criteria themselves are available in a supplement, but that supplement was not included.

      It would have been helpful if additional important methodological details of the included studies were reported. For example, 1 of the studies I looked at (Oliver MN, 2014) included an element of random allocation of race to patient photos in the vignettes: design elements such as this were not included in the data extraction reported here. Along with the use of a non-validated quality assessment method (9 of the 27 components of the instrument that was modified), these issues leave too many questions about the quality rating of included studies. Other elements missing from this systematic review (Shea BJ, 2007) are a listing of the excluded studies and assessing the risk of publication bias.

      The search strategy appears to be incompletely reported: it ends with an empty bullet point, and none of the previous bullet points refer to implicit bias or the implicit association test.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Apr 24, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      This article’s casual approach to theory is evident in the first few sentences. After noting irrelevantly, that “Since their introduction (Wilkinson, Wilson, & Habak, 1998), RF patterns have become a popular class of stimuli in vision science, commonly used to study various aspects of shape perception,” the authors immediately continue to say that “Theoretically, RF pattern detection (discrimination against a circle) could be realized either by local filters matched to the parts of the pattern, or by a global mechanism that integrates local parts operating on the scale of the entire pattern.” No citation is offered for this vague and breezy assertion, which begs a number of questions.

      1. How did we jump from “shape perception” to “RF detection against a circle”? How is the latter related to the former?

      2. Is the popularity of a pattern sufficient reason to assume that there exist special mechanisms – special detectors, or filters – tailored to its characteristics? Is there any basis whatsoever for this assertion?

      3. Given that we know that the whole does determine the parts perceived, why are we talking about integration of “local” elements? And how do we define local? Doesn’t a piece of a shape also consist of smaller pieces, etc? What is the criterion for designating part and whole in a stimulus pattern (as opposed to the fully-formed percept)?

      Apparently, there have been many ‘models’ proposed for special mechanisms for “RF detection against a circle,” addressing the question in these local/local-to-global terms. Could the mechanism involve maximum curvature integration, tangent orientations at inflection points, etc.? These simply take for granted the underlying assumption that there are special “filters” for “RF discrimination against a circle.” The only question is to what details of the figure are these mechanisms attuned.

      What if we were dealing with different types of shapes? What if the RF boundary shape were formed by different sized dots, or dashes, or rays of different lengths radiating from a center? Would we be talking about dot filters, or line length filters? Why put RF patterns in general, and RF patterns of this type in particular, on such an explanatory pedestal?

      More critically, how is it possible to leverage such patterns to dissect the neural processes underlying perception? When I look at one of these patterns, I don’t have any trouble distinguishing it from a circle. What can this tell me about the underlying process?

      A subculture of vision science has opted to uncritically embrace the view that underlying processes can be inferred quite straightforwardly on the basis of certain procedures that mimic the general framework of signal detection. This view is labeled “signal detection theory” or SDT, but “theory” is overstating it. As noted in my earlier comment, Schmidtmann and Kingdom (2017) never explain why they make what, to a naïve observer, must seem very arbitrary methodological choices, nor does their main reference, Wilkerson, Wilson and Habak (1998). So we have to go back further to find some suggestion of a rationale.

      The founding fathers of the aforementioned subculture include Swets, Tanner and Birdsall (e.g. 1961). As may be seen from a quote from that article (below), the framing of the problem is artificial; major assumptions are adopted wholesale; “perception” is casually converted to “detection” (in order to fit the analogy of a radar observer attempting to guess which blip is the object of interest).

      “In the fundamental detection problem, an observation is made of events occurring in a fixed interval of time and a decision is made; based on this observation, whether the interval contained only the background interference or a signal as well. The interference, which is random, we shall refer to as noise and denote as N; the other alternative we shall term signal plus noise, SN. In the fundamental problem, only these two alternatives exist…We shall, in the following, use the term observation to refer to the sensory datum on which the decision is based. We assume that this observation may be represented as varying continuously along a single dimension…it may be helpful to think of the observation as…the number of impulses arriving at a given point in the cortex within a given time.” Also “We imagine the process of signal detection to be a choice between Gaussian variables….The particular decision that is made depends on whether or not the observation exceeds a criterion value….This description of the detection process is an almost direct translation of the theory of statistical decision.”

      In what sense does the above framework relate to visual perception? I think we can easily show that, in concept and application, it is wholly incoherent and irrational.

      I submit, first, that when I look around me, I don’t see any noise, I just see things. I’m also not conscious of looking for a signal to compare to noise; I just see whatever comes up. I don’t have a criterion for spotting what I don’t know will come up, and I don’t feel uncertain of - I certainly hardly ever have to guess at – what I’m seeing. The very effortlessness of perception is what made it so difficult to discern the fundamental theoretical problems. This is not, of course, to say that what the visual system does in constructing the visual percept from the retinal stimulation isn’t guesswork; but the actual process is light years more complex and subtle than a clumsy and artificial “signal detection” framework.

      Given the psychological certainty of normal perceptual experience, it’s hard to see how to apply this SDT framework. The key seems to be to make conditions of observation so poor as to impede normal perception, making the observer so unsure of what they saw or didn’t see that they must be forced to choose a response, i.e. to guess. One way to degrade viewing conditions is to make the image of interest very low contrast, so that it is barely discernible; another way is to flash it for very brief intervals. Now, in these presentations, the observer presumably sees something; so these manipulations don’t necessarily produce an uncertain perceptual situation (though the brevity of the presentation may make the recollection of that impression mnemonically challenging). Where the uncertainty comes in is in the demand by investigators that observers decide whether the impression is consistent with a quick, degraded glimpse of a particular figure, in this case an RF of a certain type or a circle. I don’t see how one can defend the notion put forth by Swets et al (1961) that this decision, which is more a conscious, cognitive one than a spontaneous perceptual one, is based on a continuously varying criterion. The decision, for example, may be based on a glimpse of one diagnostic feature or another, or on where, by chance, the fovea happens to fall in the 180ms (Schmidtmann and Kingdom, 2017) or 167ms (Wilkerson et al, 1998) interval allowed. But the forced noisiness (due to the poor conditions), the Gaussian presumptions, the continuous variable assumption, and the binary forced choice outputs are needed for the SDT framework to be laid on top of the data.

      For rest of comment (here limited by comment size limits), please see PubPeer.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Aug 06, John Greenwood commented:

      (cross-posted from Pub Peer, comment numbers refer to that discussion but content is the same)

      To address your comments in reverse order -

      Spatial vision and spatial maps (Comment 19):

      We use the term “spatial vision” in the sense defined by Russell & Karen De Valois: “We consider spatial vision to encompass both the perception of the distribution of light across space and the perception of the location of visual objects within three-dimensional space. We thus include sections on depth perception, pattern vision, and more traditional topics such as acuity." De Valois, R. L., & De Valois, K. K. (1980). Spatial Vision. Annual Review of Psychology, 31(1), 309-341. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.31.020180.001521

      The idea of a "spatial map” refers to the representation of the visual field in cortical regions. There is extensive evidence that visual areas are organised retinotopically across the cortical surface, making them “maps". See e.g. Wandell, B. A., Dumoulin, S. O., & Brewer, A. A. (2007). Visual field maps in human cortex. Neuron, 56(2), 366-383.

      Measurement of lapse rates (Comments 4, 17, 18):

      There really is no issue here. In Experiment 1, we fit a psychometric function in the form of a cumulative Gaussian to responses plotted as a function of (e.g.) target-flanker separation (as in Fig. 1B), with three free parameters: midpoint, slope, and lapse rate. The lapse rate is 100-x where x is the asymptote of the curve. It accounts for lapses (keypress errors etc) when performance is otherwise high - i.e. it is independent of the chance level. In this dataset it is never about 5%. However its inclusion does improve estimate of slope (and therefore threshold) which we are interested in. Any individual differences are therefore better estimated by factoring out individual differences in lapse rate. Its removal does not qualitatively affect the pattern of results in any case. You cite Wichmann and Hill (2001) and that is indeed the basis of this three-parameter fit (though ours is custom code that doesn’t apply the bootstrapping procedures etc that they use).

      Spatial representations (comment 8):

      We were testing the proposal that crowding and saccadic preparation might depend on some degree of shared processes within the visual system. Specific predictions for shared vs distinct spatial representations are made on p E3574 and in more detail on p E3576 of our manuscript. The idea comes from several prior studies arguing for a link between the two, as we cite, e.g.: Nandy, A. S., & Tjan, B. S. (2012). Saccade-confounded image statistics explain visual crowding. Nature Neuroscience, 15(3), 463-469. Harrison, W. J., Mattingley, J. B., & Remington, R. W. (2013). Eye movement targets are released from visual crowding. The Journal of Neuroscience, 33(7), 2927-2933.

      Bisection (Comments 7, 13, 15):

      Your issue relates to biases in bisection. This is indeed an interesting area, mostly studied for foveal presentation. These biases are however small in relation to the size of thresholds for discrimination, particularly for the thresholds seen in peripheral vision where our measurements were made. An issue with bias for vertical judgements would lead to higher thresholds for vertical vs. horizontal judgements, which we don’t see. The predominant pattern in bisection thresholds (as with the other tasks) is a radial/tangential anisotropy, so vertical thresholds are worse than horizontal on the vertical meridian, but better than horizontal thresholds on the horizontal meridian. The role of biases in that anisotropy is an interesting question, but again these biases tend to be small relative to threshold.

      Vernier acuity (Comment 6):

      We don’t measure vernier acuity, for exactly the reasons you outline (stated on p E3577).

      Data analyses (comment 5):

      The measurement of crowding/interference zones follows conventions established by others, as we cite, e.g.: Pelli, D. G., Palomares, M., & Majaj, N. J. (2004). Crowding is unlike ordinary masking: Distinguishing feature integration from detection. Journal of Vision, 4(12), 1136-1169.

      Our analyses are certainly not post-hoc exercises in data mining. The logic is outlined at the end of the introduction for both studies (p E3574).

      Inclusion of the authors as subjects (Comment 3):

      In what way should this affect the results? This can certainly be an issue for studies where knowledge of the various conditions can bias outcomes. Here this is not true. We did of course check that data from the authors did not differ in any meaningful way from other subjects (aside from individual differences), and it did not. Testing (and training) experienced psychophysical observers takes time, and authors tend to be experienced psychophysical observers.

      The theoretical framework of our experiments (Comments 1 & 2):

      We make an assumption about hierarchical processing within the visual system, as we outline in the introduction. We test predictions that arise from this. We don’t deny that feedback connections exist, but I don’t think their presence would alter the predictions outlined at the end of the introduction. We also make assumptions regarding the potential processing stages/sites underlying the various tasks examined. Of course we can’t be certain about this (and psychophysics is indeed ill-poised to test these assumptions) and that is the reason that no one task is linked to any specific neural locus, e.g. crowding shows neural correlates in visual areas V1-V4, as we state (e.g. p E3574). Considerable parts of the paper are then addressed at considering whether some tasks may be lower- or higher-level than others, and we outline a range of justifications for the arguments made. These are all testable assumptions, and it will be interesting to see how future work then addresses this.

      All of these comments are really fixated on aspects of our theoretical background and minor details of the methods. None of this in any way negates our findings. Namely, there are distinct processes within the visual system, e.g. crowding and saccadic precision, that nonetheless show similarities in their pattern of variations across the visual field. We show several results that suggest these two processes to be dissociable (e.g. that the distribution of saccadic errors is identical for trials where crowded targets were correctly vs incorrectly identified). If they’re clearly dissociable tasks, how then to explain the correlation in their pattern of variation? We propose that these properties are inherited from earlier stages in the visual system. Future work can put this to the test.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Apr 05, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      You say that what you mean by “reduced ability to resolve figure-ground competition…is an open question.” But the language is clear, and regardless of whether concave or convex regions are seen as figure, the image is still being resolved into figure and ground. In other words, your experiments in no sense provide evidence that older people are not resolving images into figure and ground, only that convexity may not be as dispositive a factor as in younger people. Perhaps they are influenced more by the location of the red dot, as I believe that it is more likely that fixated regions will be seen as figure, all other things being equal.

      In your response you specify that ‘failure to resolve’ may be interpreted in the sense of “decreased stability of the dominant percept and increased flipping.” However, in your discussion, you note, that, on the contrary, other researchers have found increased stability of the initial percept and difficulty in reversing ambiguous stimuli in older adults. If your inhibition explanation is consistent with BOTH increased flipping and greater stability, then it’s clearly too flexible to be testable. And, again, increased flipping rate is not really the same thing as “inability to resolve.”

      The second alternative you propose is that stimuli are “not perceived to have figure ground character, perhaps being perceived as flat patterns.” This is obviously also in conflict with the other studies cited above. If the areas are perceived as adjacent rather than as having a figure-ground relationship, this also involves perceptual organization. For normal viewers, such a percept – e.g. simultaneously seeing both faces and vase in the Rubin vase, is very difficult, so it hard to imagine it occurring in older viewers, but who knows. If such an idea is testable, then you should test it.

      You say the logic of your hypothesis is sound and your interpretations parsimonious, but in fact it isn’t clear what your hypothesis is, (what failure to resolve means). If your results are replicable, you may have demonstrated that, under the conditions of your experiment, convex region is less dispositive a factor in older adults. But in no sense have you properly formed or tested any explanatory hypotheses as to why this occurred.

      In addition, I don’t think its fair to say that you’ve excluded the possible effect of the brevity of the stimulus. 250ms is still pretty short, considering that saccades typically take about 200ms to initiate. We know that older people generally respond more slowly at any task. The fact that practical considerations make it hard to work with longer exposure times doesn’t make this less of a problem.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Apr 04, Jordan W Lass commented:

      The interpretation that “differences in the ability to resolve the competition between alternative figure-ground interpretations of those stimuli" comes from the combination of results across experiments, and the literature on figure-ground and convexity context effects in specific. Given that we used a two-alternative forced choice paradigm, which has been commonly used to measure perception even when stimuli are presented below threshold, chance performance is P(convex=figure) = .5. Our observation was regressions to chance in the older group in both convexity bias and CCEs, which is consistent with the interpretation that the older group showed reduced ability to resolve figure-ground competition. Interestingly, as you may be getting at, what "reduced ability to resolve figure-ground" means is an open question: could it be decreased stability of the dominant percept and increased flipping between them or time spent in transition states? could it be that the stimuli are not perceived to have figure-ground character, perhaps being perceived as flat patterns? These are interesting questions indeed, which your idea of adding another response option "no figure-ground observed" is one way of addressing, although it comes with its own set of limitations.

      Alternatively, as you propose, it may be the case that the older adults are resolving equally well as younger adults, but with increased tendency of perceiving concave figures compared to the younger group, which would also bring P(convex=figure) closer to .5. However, I can think of no literature or reasoning as to why that would be the case, so I see that as a less parsimonious interpretation. I am intrigued though, and if you are able to develop a hypothesis as to why this would be the case, it could make for an interesting experiment that might shed light into the nature of figure-ground organization in healthy aging.

      Critically, the results of Experiment 4 showed a strong CCE in older adults when only concave regions were homogeneously coloured, which is a stimulus class that has been shown to be processed more quickly in younger adults (e.g., Salvagio and Peterson, 2012). Since no conCAVity-context effects were observed when only convex regions were homogeneously coloured (the opposite stimulus properties of the reduced competition stimuli), the Experiment 4 results are strongly supportive of the notion that older adults do show the CCE pattern well-characterized in younger adults, but that the high competition stimuli used in Experiment 1 are are particularly difficult for them to resolve.

      The logic of our hypothesis is sound, and our interpretation is the most parsimonious we are aware of based on all the results. Thank you for your question, I would be happy to discuss further if you would like further clarification, or are interested in discussing some of these interesting followups.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Mar 04, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      What Ratnasingam and Anderson are doing here is analogous to this imaginary example: Let’s say that I have a strong allergy to food x, a milder one to food y, none to food z, and so on, and that my allergies produce various symptoms. Let’s assume also that some of these effects can be interpreted fairly straightforwardly in terms of formal structural relationships between my immune system and the molecular components of the foods, and others not. For these others, we can assume either a functional rationale or perhaps consider them a side effect of structure or function. We don’t know yet. For other individuals, other allergy/food combinations have corresponding effects. Again, if we know something about the individual we can predict some of the allergic reactions based on known principles.

      How much sense would it make now, to conduct a study whose goal is: “to articulate general principles that can predict when the size of an allergic reaction will be large or small for arbitrarily chosen food/patient combinations…. What (single) target food generates the greatest allergic difference when ingested by two arbitrarily chosen patients?” (“Our goal is to articulate general principles that can predict when the size of induction will be large or small for arbitrarily chosen pairs of center-surround displays…. What (single) target color generates the greatest perceptual difference when placed on two arbitrarily chosen surround colors?”)

      Furthermore, having gotten their results, our researchers now decline to attempt to interpret them in terms of the nuanced understanding already available.

      The most striking thing about the present study is that a researcher who has done (unusually) good work in studying the role of structure and chromatic/lightness relationships in the perception of color is now throwing all this insight overboard, ignoring what is known about these factors and lumping them all together, in the hope of arriving at some magic, universal formula for “simultaneous contrast” that is blind to them. Obviously the effort is bound to fail, and the title – framed as a question, not an answer – is evidence of this. Here is a sample, revealing caveat:

      “Finally, it should also be noted that although some of our comparisons involved target–surround combinations in which some targets can appear as both an increment and decrement relative to the two surrounds, which would induce differences in both hue and saturation (e.g., red and green). Such pairs may be rated as more dissimilar than two targets of the same hue (e.g., red and redder), but it could be argued that this does not imply that the size of simultaneous contrast is larger in these conditions. However, it should be noted that such conditions are only a small subset of those tested herein.” Don’t bother us with specifics, we’re lumping.

      As the authors discuss in their introduction, studies (treating “simultaneous contrast” in a crude, structure-and-relationship-blind way) produce conflicting results: “The conflicting empirical findings make it difficult to articulate a general model that predicts when simultaneous contrast effects will be large or small, since there is currently no model that captures how the magnitude of induction varies independently of method used…. “ Of course. When you don’t take into account relevant principles, and control for relevant factors, your results will always mystify you.

      The conflation between, or refusal to distinguish explicitly, cases in which transparency arises and in which it does not arise is really inexplicable.

      "The suggestion that the strongest forms of simultaneous contrast arise in conditions that induce the perception of transparency gains conceptual support from evidence showing that transparency can generate dramatic transformations in both perceived lightness and color..." But the contextual conditions that produce transparency are really quite...transparent...There's no clear reason to lump these with situations that are perceptually and logically distinct.

      Also: "In simultaneous contrast displays, the targets and surrounds are also texturally continuous, in the sense that they are both uniform, but there are no strong geometric cues for the continuation of the surround through the target region of the kind known to give rise to vivid percepts of transparency (such as contours or textures). It is therefore difficult to generate a prediction for when transparency should be induced in homogeneous center-surround patterns, or how the induction of transparency should modulate the chromatic appearance of a target as a function of the chromatic difference between a target and its surround."

      First, I'll pay him the compliment of saying that I don't think that it would be that difficult for Anderson to generate predictions for when transparency should occur...(I think even I could do it). Second, if this theoretical gap really exists, then this is the problem that should be addressed, not "what happens if we test a lot of random combinations and average the results." It might be useful to take into consideration a demo devised by Soranzo, Galmonte & Agostini (2010) which is a case of transparency effect that lacks the "cues" mentioned here - and thus by these authors' criteria qualifies as a basic simultaneous contrast display. (I don't think its that difficult to explain, but maybe I haven't thought about it enough.)


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 08, Cicely Saunders Institute Journal Club commented:

      We selected and discussed this paper at our monthly journal club on 1st November 2017.

      The paper generated a lot of discussion and we felt that this was an important concept, especially for clinicians, to think about. The topic of QALYs was unfamiliar to some of us and we found that the authors explained it very clearly in the paper. We were intrigued by the use of an integrative review method and discussed this at length. It may have been helpful to read more explanation of this method and know how it differs from other types of review methods. We also wondered about some of the inclusion/exclusion criteria such as the exclusion of reviews and the decision making process for the theoretical papers included. We enjoyed discussing the themes which emerged from this paper and the wider debate around the most appropriate measures for palliative care populations, particularly in light of the recent paper by Dzingina et al. 2017 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28434392). We feel this paper will be a useful educational resource.

      Commentary by Dr. Nilay Hepgul & Dr. Deokhee Yi on behalf of researchers at Cicely Saunders Institute of Palliative Care, Policy & Rehabilitation, King’s College London.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Feb 15, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      I don’t think the authors have addressed the unusual aspects of the dress in saying that “The perceived colors of the dress are due to (implicit) assumptions about the illumination.” As they note themselves, “This is exactly what would be predicted from classical color science…”

      The spectrum of light reflected to our eye is a function of the reflectance properties of surfaces and the spectrum of the illumination; both are disambiguated on the basis of implicit assumptions, and both are represented in the percept. The two perceptual features (surface color and illumination) are two sides of the same coin: Just as we can say that seeing a surface as having color x of intensity y is due to assumptions about the color and intensity of the illuminants, so we can say that seeing illumination of color x and intensity y is due to implicit assumptions about the reflectance (how much light they reflect) and the chromaticity (which wavelengths they reflect/absorb) of the viewed surfaces. We haven’t explained anything unless we can explain both things at the same time.

      The authors are choosing one side of the perceptual coin – the apparent illumination – and claiming to have explained the other. Again, it’s a truism to say that seeing a patch of the dress as color “x” implies we are seeing it as being under illumination “y,” while perceiving the patch as a different color means perceiving a different illumination. This doesn’t explain what makes the dress unusual - why it produces different color/illumination impressions in different people.

      The authors seem to want to take the “experience” route (“prior experiences may influence this perception”); this is logically and empirically untenable, as has been shown and argued innumerable times in the vision literature. For one thing, such a view is circular, since what we see in the first place is a product of the assumptions implicit in the visual process. It’s not as though we see things first, and then adopt assumptions that allow us to see it…In addition, why would such putative experience influence only the dress, and not each and every percept? (The same objection applies to explanations in terms of physiological differences). Again, the question of what makes the dress special is left unaddressed.

      It’s odd that, for another example of such a phenomenon, vision researchers need to turn to “poppunkblogger.” If they understood it in principle, then they would be able to construct any number of alternative versions. Even if they could show the perception of the dress to be experience-based (which, again, is highly unlikely to impossible), this would not not help; they would still be at a loss to explain why different people see different versions of one image and not most others. To understand the special power of the dress, they need at a minimum to analyze its structure, not only in terms of color but in terms of shape, which is the primary mediator of all aspects of perception. Invoking “scene interpretation” and “the particular color distributions” are only placeholders for all the things the authors don’t understand.

      The construction of images that show that the dress itself can produce consistent percepts is genuinely interesting, but it is a problem that the immediate backgrounds are not the same (e.g. arm placements). This produces confounds. The claim that these confounds are designed to produce the opposite effect of what is seen, based on contrast effects, is not convincing, since the idea that illusions involving transparency/illumination are based on local contrast effects is a claim that is easy to falsify empirically, and has been falsified. So we are dealing with unanalyzed confounds, and one has to wonder how much blind trial and error was involved in generating the images.

      Finally, I’m wondering why a cutout of the dress wasn’t also placed against a plain background as a control; what happens in this case? Has this been done yet?


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Nov 03, Elisabeth Schramm commented:

      In reply to a comment by Falk Leichsenring

      Allegiance effects controlled

      Elisabeth Schramm, PhD; Levente Kriston, PhD; Ingo Zobel, PhD; Josef Bailer, PhD; Katrin Wambach, PhD; Matthias Backenstrass, PhD; Jan Philipp Klein, MD; Dieter Schoepf, MD; Knut Schnell, MD; Antje Gumz, MD; Paul Bausch, MSc; Thomas Fangmeier, PhD; Ramona Meister, MSc; Mathias Berger, MD; Martin Hautzinger, PhD; Martin Härter,MD, PhD

      Corresponding Author: Elisabeth Schramm, PhD, Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Hauptstrasse 5, 79104 Freiburg, Germany (elisabeth.schramm@uniklinik-freiburg.de)

      We acknowledge the comment of Drs. Steinert and Leichsenring (1) on our study (2) reasoning that our findings may at least in part be attributed to allegiance effects. Unfortunately, they provide neither a clarification of what they exactly refer to with the term “allegiance effects” nor a specific description of the presumed mechanisms (chain of effects) through which they think allegiance may have influenced our results. In fact, as specified both in the trial protocol (3) and the study report (2), we took a series of carefully safeguarded measures to minimize bias. Unlike stated in the comment, training and supervision of the study therapists and the center supervisors were performed by qualified and renowned experts for both investigated approaches (Martin Hautzinger for Supportive Psychotherapy and Elisabeth Schramm for Cognitive Behavioral Analysis System of Psychotherapy). Moreover, none of them has been involved in treating any study patients in this trial. We are confident that any possible allegiance of the participating researchers, therapists, supervisors, or other involved staff towards any, both, or none of the investigated interventions is very unlikely to have been able to surmount all of the implemented measures against bias and to affect the results substantially.

      References

      (1) Steinert C, Leichsenring F. The need to control for allegiance effects in psychotherapy research. PubMed Commons. Sep 08 2017

      (2) Schramm E, Kriston L, Zobel I, Bailer J, Wambach K, Backenstrass M, Klein JP, Schoepf D, Schnell K, Gumz A, Bausch P, Fangmeier T, Meister R, Berger M, Hautzinger M, Härter M. Effect of Disorder-Specific vs Nonspecific Psychotherapy for Chronic Depression: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Psychiatry. Mar 01 2017; 74(3): 233-242

      (3) Schramm E, Hautzinger M, Zobel I, Kriston L, Berger M, Härter M. Comparative efficacy of the Cognitive Behavioral Analysis System of Psychotherapy versus supportive psychotherapy for early onset chronic depression: design and rationale of a multisite randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry. 2011;11:134


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Feb 08, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      To make clear what Adamian and Cavanagh (2017) do, and what they don’t do, in this publication. What they don’t do is to test a hypothesis. What they do is present a casual, ad hoc explanation of the Frohlich effect based on the results of past experiments, which they replicate here. The proposal remains untested. Even the ad hoc, untested assumptions (“we assume that the critical delay in producing the Fröhlich effect is not just the delay of attention in arriving at the target but also the time a saccade would then need to land on the target, if one were executed;”) can’t explain the results of their experiments, requiring more ad hoc proposals about complex processes: “The results suggest that the simultaneous onsets may be held in iconic memory and the cued motion trajectory can be retrieved if the cue arrives soon enough;” “A late SOA implies a longer memory retention period, and that means that the reported shifts could arise from working memory limitations and might not be perceptual in nature.”

      Is Adamian and Cavanagh’s assumption that “the critical delay is not just the delay of attention….but also the time a saccade would then need to land on the target…” testable?

      How would one go about testing it, as well as the additional assumptions the authors feel obliged to make with respect to memory?

      Why didn’t the authors attempt to test their proposal to begin with, rather than simply performing replications that, even if successful, could do no more than leave the issue unresolved? They have not even proposed possible tests.

      Obviously, replication was the safer choice, but one, again, that is essentially uninformative vis a vis an ad hoc proposal. It should be clear that the subject of eye movements and their role in perception is extremely complex and that casual speculations are unlikely to be borne out, if properly tested.

      I think Adamian and Cavanagh’s proposal is so vague, the confounds so many, and (least of all, at present) the technical demands so great, that it cannot be tested. If all of the main and subsidiary assumptions, and their implications, were clarified enough to allow them to be critically assessed for logical coherence and consistency with other known facts, it might well fail at this stage, obviating the need for experimental tests.

      Of course, I could be wrong in the present case; the authors may intend, post-replication, to attempt to concretize and subject their proposal to a genuine test; that would be genuinely refreshing.

      I would note, as an afterthought, the uninformative nature of the title of the article, which is typical of many vision science articles and reflects the essentially uninformative nature of the work itself. The title tells us what the article is about, but not what it concluded or implied.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Aug 05, Jon-Patrick Allem commented:

      There are at least five problems with this paper: First, the authors simply assume that the pro-e-cigarette tweets are wrong and need their corrective input. What if users are right to be positive? The authors have not demonstrated any material risk from vapour aerosol. To the extent that there is evidence of exposure the levels so low as to be very unlikely to be a health concern. The presence of a hazardous agent does not in itself imply a risk to health, there has to be sufficient exposure to be toxicologically relevant.

      This critique is misguided. The goal of this paper was to characterize public perception of e-cigarette aerosol by using a novel data source (tweets) and not to demonstrate any material risk from e-cigarette aerosol.

      Second, they have also not considered what harmful effect that their potentially misleading 'health education messages' may have. For example, by exaggerating a negligible risk they may be discouraging people from e-cigarette use, and potentially causing relapse to smoking and reducing the incentive to switch - thus doing more harm than had they not intervened. We already know the vast majority of smokers think e-cigarettes are much more dangerous than the toxicological profile of the aerosol suggests - see National Cancer Institute HINTS data. The authors' ideas would aggravate these already highly damaging misperceptions of risk.

      This critique is misguided. This study did not design educational messages. It described people’s perceptions about e-cigarette aerosol.

      Third, as so often happens with tobacco control research, the authors make a policy proposal for which their paper comes nowhere close to providing an adequate justification. Public health and regulatory agencies could use social media and traditional media to disseminate the message that e-cigarette aerosol contains potentially harmful chemicals and could be perceived as offensive. They have not even studied the effects of the messages they are recommending on the target audience or tested such messages through social media. If they did, they would discover that users are not passive or compliant recipients of health messages, especially if they suspect they are wrong or ill-intentioned. Social media creates two-way conversations in which often very well-informed users will respond persuasively to what they find to be poorly informed or judgemental health messages. Until the authors have tested a campaign of the type they have in mind, they have no basis for recommending that agencies spend public money in this way.

      This critique is misguided. There was no policy proposal made in the passage highlighted here. The suggestion that social media platforms can be used as a communication channel is not a policy. It is a communication strategy. The idea that social media can be used to obtain information and later communicate messages is completely in line with the work presented in this paper. The notion that every paper answers every research question pertaining to a topic is an unreasonable expectation.

      Fourth, the authors suggest that users should be warned by public health agencies that "e-cigarette aerosol ... could be perceived as offensive". If there were warnings from public health and regulatory agencies about everything that could be perceived as offensive by someone, then we would be inundated with warnings. This is not a reliable basis or priority for public health messaging. Given the absence of any demonstrable material risk from e-cigarette aerosol, the issue is one of etiquette and nuisance. This does not require government intervention of any sort. Vaping policy in any public or private place should be a matter for the owners or managers, who may not find it offensive nor wish to offend their clientele. It is not a matter for legislators, regulators or health agencies.

      This critique here is based on one’s own opinion about the role of government and could be debated with no clear stopping point.

      Fifth (and with thanks to Will Moy's tweet), the work is pointless and wasteful. Who cares what people are saying on twitter about e-cigarettes and secondhand aerosol exposure? Why is this even a subject worthy of study and what difference could it make to any outcomes that are important for health or any other policy? What is the rationale for spending research funds on this form of vaguely creepy social media surveillance? Updated 21-Jan-17 with fifth point.

      Big social media data (Twitter, Instagram, Google Webs Search) can be used to fill certain knowledge gaps quickly. While one study using one data source is by no means definitive, one study based on timely data can provide an important starting-off point to address an issue of great import to public health. This paper describes why understanding public sentiment toward e-cigarette aerosol is relevant and utilizes a data source that allowed people to organically report on their sentiment toward e-cigarette aerosol unprimed by a researcher, without instrument bias, and at low costs. Also, policy development and communication campaigns are two distinct areas of research. The goal of this study was to inform the latter.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2017 Jan 21, Clive Bates commented:

      There are at least five problems with this paper:

      First, the authors simply assume that the pro-e-cigarette tweets are wrong and need their corrective input. What if users are right to be positive? The authors have not demonstrated any material risk from vapour aerosol. To the extent that there is evidence of exposure the levels so low as to be very unlikely to be a health concern. The presence of a hazardous agent does not in itself imply a risk to health, there has to be sufficient exposure to be toxicologically relevant.

      Second, they have also not considered what harmful effect that their potentially misleading 'health education messages' may have. For example, by exaggerating a negligible risk they may be discouraging people from e-cigarette use, and potentially causing relapse to smoking and reducing the incentive to switch - thus doing more harm than had they not intervened. We already know the vast majority of smokers think e-cigarettes are much more dangerous than the toxicological profile of the aerosol suggests - see National Cancer Institute HINTS data. The authors' ideas would aggravate these already highly damaging misperceptions of risk.

      Third, as so often happens with tobacco control research, the authors make a policy proposal for which their paper comes nowhere close to providing an adequate justification.

      Public health and regulatory agencies could use social media and traditional media to disseminate the message that e-cigarette aerosol contains potentially harmful chemicals and could be perceived as offensive.

      They have not even studied the effects of the messages they are recommending on the target audience or tested such messages through social media. If they did, they would discover that users are not passive or compliant recipients of health messages, especially if they suspect they are wrong or ill-intentioned. Social media creates two-way conversations in which often very well-informed users will respond persuasively to what they find to be poorly informed or judgemental health messages. Until the authors have tested a campaign of the type they have in mind, they have no basis for recommending that agencies spend public money in this way.

      Fourth, the authors suggest that users should be warned by public health agencies that "e-cigarette aerosol ... could be perceived as offensive". If there were warnings from public health and regulatory agencies about everything that could be perceived as offensive by someone, then we would be inundated with warnings. This is not a reliable basis or priority for public health messaging. Given the absence of any demonstrable material risk from e-cigarette aerosol, the issue is one of etiquette and nuisance. This does not require government intervention of any sort. Vaping policy in any public or private place should be a matter for the owners or managers, who may not find it offensive nor wish to offend their clientele. It is not a matter for legislators, regulators or health agencies.

      Fifth (and with thanks to Will Moy's tweet), the work is pointless and wasteful. Who cares what people are saying on twitter about e-cigarettes and secondhand aerosol exposure? Why is this even a subject worthy of study and what difference could it make to any outcomes that are important for health or any other policy? What is the rationale for spending research funds on this form of vaguely creepy social media surveillance?

      Updated 21-Jan-17 with fifth point.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Jan 21, Clive Bates commented:

      How did the author manage to publish a paper with the title "E-cigarettes: Are they as safe as the public thinks?", without citing any data on what the public actually does think? There is data in the National Cancer Institute's HINTS survey 2015. This is what it says:

      Compared to smoking cigarettes, would you say that electronic cigarettes are…

      • 5.3% say much less harmful
      • 20.6% say less harmful
      • 32.8% say just as harmful
      • 2.7% say more harmful
      • 2.0% say much more harmful
      • 1.2% have never heard of e-cigarettes
      • 33.9% don’t know enough about these products

      Which brings me to the main issue with the paper. The author claims that there is insufficient knowledge to determine if these products are safer than cigarettes. This is an extraordinary and dangerous claim given what is known about e-cigarettes and cigarettes. It is known with certainty that there are no products of combustion of organic material (i.e tobacco leaf) in e-cigarette vapour - this is a function of the physical and chemical processes involved. We also know that products of combustion cause almost all of the harm associated with smoking. There is also extensive measurement of harmful and potentially harmful constituent of cigarette smoke and e-cigarette aerosol showing many are not detectable or present at levels two orders of magnitude lower in the vapour aerosol (e.g. see Farsalinos KE, 2014, Burstyn I, 2014). So the emissions are dramatically less toxic and exposures much lower.

      The author provides a familiar non-sequitur: "There are no current studies that prove that e-cigarettes are safe". There never will be. Firstly because it is impossible to prove something to be completely safe, and almost nothing is. Secondly, no serious commentators claim they are completely safe, just very much safer than smoking. Hence the term 'harm reduction' to describe the benefits of switching to these products.

      This view commands support in the expert medical profession. The Royal College of Physicians (London) assessed the toxicology evidence in its 2016 report Nicotine without smoke: tobacco harm reduction and concluded:

      Although it is not possible to precisely quantify the long-term health risks associated with e-cigarettes, the available data suggest that they are unlikely to exceed 5% of those associated with smoked tobacco products, and may well be substantially lower than this figure. (Section 5.5 page 87)

      This is a carefully measured statement that aims to provide useful information to both users of the products and health and medical professionals while reflecting residual uncertainty. It contrasts with the author's information leaflet for patients, which even suggests there is no basis for believing e-cigarettes to be safer than smoking:

      If you are smoking and not planning to quit, we don't know if e-cigarettes are safer. Talk to your health care provider.

      But we do know beyond any reasonable doubt that e-cigarettes are very much safer - the debate is whether they are 90% safer or 99.9% safer than smoking. Regrettably, only 5.3% of American adults correctly believe that e-cigarettes are very much less harmful than smoking, while 37% incorrectly think they are as harmful or more harmful (see above). The danger with these misperceptions of risk is that they affect behaviour, causing people to continue to smoke when they might otherwise switch to much safer vaping. The danger with a paper like this and its patient-facing leaflet is that it nurtures these harmful risk misperceptions and becomes, therefore, a vector for harm.

      To return to the author's title question: E-Cigarettes: Are They as Safe as the Public Thinks?. The answer is: "No, they are very much safer than the public thinks".


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Feb 04, DAVID LUDWIG commented:

      Boiling down his comment of 3 Feb 2017, Hall disputes that the metabolic process of adapting to a high-fat/low-carbohydrate diet confounds interpretation of his and other short term feeding studies. If we can provide evidence that this process could take ≥ 1 week, the last leg of his attack on the Carbohydrate-Insulin Model collapses. Well, a picture is worth a thousand words, and here are 4:

      For convenience, these figures can be viewed at this link:

      Owen OE, 1983 Figure 1. Ketones are, of course, the hallmark of adaptation to a low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet. Generally speaking, the most potent stimulus of ketosis is fasting, since the consumption of all gluconeogenic precursors (carbohydrate and protein) is zero. As this figure shows, the blood levels of each of the three ketone species (BOHB, AcAc and acetone) continues to rise for ≥3 weeks. Indeed, the prolonged nature of adaptation to complete fasting has been known since the classic starvation studies of Cahill GF Jr, 1971. It stands to reason that this process might take even longer on standard low-carbohydrate diets, which inevitably provide ≥ 20 g carbohydrate/d and substantial protein.

      Yang MU, 1976 Figure 3A. Among men with obesity on an 800 kcal/d ketogenic diet (10 g/d carbohydrate, 50 g/d protein), urinary ketones continued to rise for 10 days through the end of the experiment, and by that point had achieved levels equivalent only to those on day 4 of complete fasting. Presumably, this process would be even slower with a non-calorie restricted ketogenic diet (because of inevitably higher carbohydrate and protein content).

      Vazquez JA, 1992 Figure 5B. On a conventional high-carbohydrate diet, the brain is critically dependent on glucose. With acute restriction of dietary carbohydrate (by fasting or a ketogenic diet), the body obtains gluconeogenic precursors by breaking down muscle. However, with rising ketone concentrations, the brain becomes adapted, sparing glucose. In this way, the body shifts away from protein to fat metabolism, sparing lean tissue. This phenomenon is clearly depicted among women with obesity given a calorie-restricted ketogenic diet (10 g carbohydrate/d) vs a nonketogenic diet (76 g carbohydrate/d), both with protein 50 g protein/d. For 3 weeks, nitrogen balance was strongly negative on the ketogenic diet compared to the non-ketogenic diet, but this difference was completely abolished by week 4. What would subsequently happen? We simply can’t know from the short-term studies.

      Hall KD, 2016 Figure 2B. Hall’s own study shows that the transient decrease in rate of fat loss upon initiation of the ketogenic diet accelerates after 2 weeks.

      The existence of this prolonged adaptive process explains why metabolic advantages for low-fat diet are consistently seen in very short metabolic studies. But after 2 to 4 weeks, advantages for low-carbohydrate diets begin to emerge, as summarized in my comment of 3 Feb 2017, below.

      Fat adaptation on low-carbohydrate diets has admittedly not been thoroughly studied, and its duration may differ among individuals and between experimental conditions. Nevertheless, there is strong reason to think that short feeding studies (i.e., < 3 to 4 weeks) have no relevance to the long-term effects of macronutrients on metabolism and body composition.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Dec 28, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      Cherniawsky and Mullen’s (2016) article lies well within the perimeter of a school of thought that, despite its obvious intellectual and empirical absurdity, is popular within the vision science community.

      The school persists, and is relentlessly prolific, because it has insulated itself from the possibility of falsification, mainly by ignoring both fact and reason.

      Explanatory schemes are concocted with respect to a narrow set of stimuli and conditions. Data generated under this narrow set of conditions are always interpreted in terms of the narrow scheme of assumptions, via permissive post hoc modeling. When, as here, results contradict expectation, additional ad hoc assumptions are made with reference to the specific, narrow type of stimuli used, which then, of course, may subsequently be corroborated, more or less, using those same stimuli or mild variants thereof.

      The process continues ad infinitum via the same ad hoc route. This is the reason that, as Kingdom (2011) has noted, the study of lightness, brightness and transparency (and I would add, vision science in general) is divided into camps “each with its own preferred stimuli and methodology” and characterized by “ideological divides.“ The term “ideological” is highly appropriate here, as it indicates a refusal to face facts and arguments that contradict or challenge the preferred view. It is obviously antithetical to the scientific attitude and, unfortunately, very typical of virtually all of contemporary vision science.

      The title of this paper ”The whole is other than the sum...” indicates that a prediction of “summation” failed even under the gentle treatment it received. The authors don’t quite know what to make of their results, but a conclusion of “other” is enough by today’s standards.

      The ideological camp to which this article belongs is a scandal on many counts. First, it adopts the view that there are certain figures whose retinal projections trigger visual processes such that the ultimate percept directly reflects local “low-level” processes. More specifically, it reflects “low-level” processes as they are currently (and crudely) understood. The figures supposed to have this quality are those for which the appropriate “low-level” story du jour has been concocted.

      The success of the method is well-described by Graham (1997, discussed in PubPeer), who notes that countless experiments were "consistent" with the behavior of V1 neurons at a time when V1 had only begun to be explored and when researchers were unaware not only of the complexities of V1 but also of the many hierarchically higher-level and processes that intervene between retina and percept. This amazing success is rationalized (if we may use the term loosely) by Graham, who with magical thinking reckons that under certain conditions the brain becomes “transparent” down to the initial processing levels. Teller (1984) had earlier (to no apparent effect) described such a view as “the nothing mucks it up proviso,” and pointed out the obvious logical problems.

      Cherniawsky and Mullen premise their article on this view with their opening sentence: “Two-dimensional orthogonal gratings (plaids) are a useful tool in the study of complex form perception, as early spatial vision is well described by responses to simple one-dimensional sinusoidal gratings…” In fact, the “one-dimensional sinusoidal gratings” in question typically produce 3D percepts of light and shadow, and the authors’ plaids in Figure 1 appear curved and partially obscured by a foggy overlay. So as illogical as the transparent brain hypothesis is to begin with, the stimuli supposed to tap into lower level processes aren’t even consistent with a strictly “low-level” interpretive process.

      The uninitiated might wonder why the authors use the term “spatial vision.” It is because they have uncritically adopted the partner of the transparent brain hypothesis, the view that the early visual processes perform a Fourier analysis on the retinal projection. It is not clear that this is at all realistic at the physiological level, but there is also no apparent functional reason for such a challenging process, as it would in no way further the achievement of the goal of organizing the incoming light into figures and grounds as the basis for further interpretation leading to a (usually) veridical representation of the environment. The Fourier conceit is, of course, maintained by employing sinusoidal gratings while ignoring their actual perceptual effects. That is, the sinusoidal gratings and combinations thereof are said to tap into the low-level frequency channels, which then determine contrast via summation, inhibition, etc, (whatever post hoc interpretation the data of any particular experiment seem to require). These contrast impressions, though experienced in the context of, e.g. impressions of partially-shadowed tubes, are never considered with respect to these complex 3D percepts. Lacking necessary interpretive assumptions, investigators are reduced to describing their results in terms of “other,” precisely described, but theoretically unintelligible and tangled effects.

      The idea that “summation” of local neural activities can explain perception is contradicted by a million cases, and counting, including the much-loved sinusoidal gratings and their shape-from-shading effects. But ideology is stronger and, apparently, good enough for vision science today.

      Finally, the notion of “detectors” is a staple of this school and the authors’ discussion; for a discussion of why this concept is untenable, please see Teller (1984).

      p.s. As usual, I’ll ask why its ok for an author to be one of a small number of subjects, the rest of whom are described as “naïve.” If it’s important to be naïve, then…

      Also, why use forced choices, and thus inject more uncertainty than necessary into the results? It’s theoretically possible that observers never see what you think they’re seeing…Obviously, if you’re committed to interpreting results a certain way, it’s convenient to force the data to look a certain way…

      Also, no explanation is given for methodological choices, e.g. the (very brief) presentation times.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Oct 22, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      Part 1 This paper is all too similar to a large proportion of the vision literature, in which fussy computations thinly veil a hollow theoretical core, comprised of indefensible hypotheses asserted as fact (and thus implicitly requiring no justification), sometimes supported by citations that only weakly support them, if at all. The casual yet effective (from a publication point of view) fashion in which many authors assert popular (even if long debunked) fallacies and conjure up other pretexts for what are, in fact, mere measurements without actual or potential theoretical value is well on display here.

      What is surprising in, perhaps, every case, is the willful empirical agnosia and lack of common sense, on every level – general purpose, method, data analysis - necessary to enable such studies to be conducted and published. A superficial computational complexity adds insult to injury, as many readers may wrongly feel they are not competent to understand and evaluate the validity of a study whose terms and procedures are so layered, opaque and jargony. However, the math is a distraction.

      Unjustified and/or empirically false assumptions and procedures occur, as mentioned, at every level. I discuss some of the more serious ones below (this is the first of a series of comments on this paper).

      1. Misleading, theoretically and practically untenable, definitions of “3D tilt” (and other variables).

      The terms slant and tilt naturally refer to a geometrical characteristic of a physical plane or volume (relative to a reference plane). The first sentence of Burge et al’s abstract gives the impression that we are talking about tilt of surfaces: “Estimating 3D surface orientation (slant and tilt) is an important first step toward estimating 3D shape. Here, we examine how three local image cues …should be combined to estimate 3D tilt in natural scenes.” As it turns out, the authors perform a semantic but theoretically pregnant sleight of hand in the switch from the phrase “3D surface orientation (slant and tilt)” to the phrase “3D tilt” (which is also used in the title).

      The obvious inference from the context is that the latter is a mere short-hand for the former. But it is not. In fact, as the authors’ finally reveal on p. 3 of their introduction, their procedure for estimating what they call “3D tilt” does not allow them to correlate their results to tilt of surfaces: “Our analysis does not distinguish between the tilt of surfaces belonging to individual objects and the tilt (i.e. orientation [which earlier was equated with “slant and tilt”]) of depth discontinuities…We therefore emphasize that our analysis is best thought of as 3D tilt rather than 3D surface tilt estimation.”

      “3D tilt” is, in effect, a conceptually incoherent term made up to coincide with the (unrationalised) procedure used to arrive at certain measures given this label. I find the description of the procedure opaque, but as I am able to understand it, small patches of images are selected, and processed to produce “3D tilt” values based on range values collected by a range finder within that region of space. The readings within the region can be from one, two, three, four, or any number of different surfaces or objects; the method does not discriminate among these cases. In other words, these local “3D tilt values” have no necessary relationship to tilt of surfaces (let alone tilt of objects, which is more relevant (to be discussed) and which the authors don’t address even nominally). We are talking about a paradoxically abstract, disembodied definition of “3D tilt.” As a reader, being asked to “think” of the measurements as representing “3D tilt” rather than “3D surface tilt” doesn’t help me understand either how this term relates, in any useful or principled way, to the actual physical structure of the world, nor to the visual process that represents this world. The idea that measuring this kind of “tilt” could be useful to forming a representation of the physical environment, and that the visual system might have evolved a way to estimate these intrinsically random and incidental values, is an idea that seems invalid on its face - and the authors make no case for it.

      They then proceed to measure 3 other home-cooked variables, in order to search for possible correlations between these and “3D tilt.” These variables are also chosen arbitrarily, i.e. in the absence of a theoretical rationale, based on: “simplicity, historical precedence, and plausibility given known processing in the early visual system.” (p. 2). Simplicity is not, by itself, a rationale – it has to have a rational basis. At first glance, at least the third of these reasons would seem to constitute a shadow of a theoretical rationale, but it is based on sparse, premature and over-interpreted physiological data primarily of V1 neuron activity. Furthermore, the authors’ definitions of their three putative cues: disparity gradient, luminance gradient, texture gradient, are very particular, assumption-laden, paradoxical, and unrationalised.

      For example, the measure of “texture orientation” involves the assumption that textures are generally composed of “isotropic [i.e. circular] elements” (p. 8). This assumption is unwarranted to begin with. Given, furthermore, that the authors’ measures at no point involve parsing the “locations” measured into figures and grounds, it is difficult to understand what they can mean by the term “texture element.” Like tilt, reference to an “isotropic texture element” implies a bounded, discrete area of space with certain geometric characteristics and relationships. It makes no sense to apply it to an arbitrary set of pixel luminances.

      Also, as in the case of “3D tilt” the definition of “texture gradient” is both arbitrary and superficially complex: “we define [the dominant orientation of the image texture] in the Fourier domain. First, we subtract the mean luminance and multiply by (window with) the Gaussian kernel above centered on (x, y). We then take the Fourier transform of the windowed image and comute the amplitude spectrum. Finally, we use singular value decomposition ….” One, two, three….but WHY did you make these choices? Simplicity, historical precedence, Hubel and Wiesel…?

      If, serendipitously, the authors’ choices of things to measure and compare had led to high correlations, they might have been justified in sharing them. But as it turns out, not surprisingly, the correlations between “cues” and “tilt” are “typically not very accurate.” Certain (unpredicted) particularities of the data which to which the authors speculatively attribute theoretical value (incidentally undermining one of their major premises) will be discussed later.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Oct 27, James Yeh commented:

      Editor's Comment Obesity and Management of Weight Loss — Polling Results

      James Yeh, M.D., M.P.H., and Edward W. Campion, M.D.

      Obesity is increasingly prevalent worldwide, and about 40% of Americans meet the diagnostic criteria for obesity.[1] The goal of weight loss is to reduce the mortality and morbidity risks associated with obesity. Patients with a body-mass index (BMI) in the range that defines obesity (>30) have a risk of death that is more than twice that of persons with a normal BMI.[2] Obesity is also associated with increased risks of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and several cancers. A recent study suggests that being overweight or obese during adolescence is strongly associated with increased cardiovascular mortality in adulthood.[3] Studies suggest that even a 5% weight loss may reduce the complications associated with obesity.[4]

      In September 2016, we presented the case of Ms. Chatham, a 29-year-old woman with class I obesity (BMI, 32) who leads a fairly sedentary lifestyle, with frequent reliance on takeout foods and with infrequent physical activity.[5] Readers were invited to vote on whether to recommend initiating treatment with one of the FDA-approved drugs for weight loss along with lifestyle modifications or to recommend only nonpharmacologic therapies and maximizing lifestyle changes. The patient has no coexisting medical conditions, but her blood pressure is slightly elevated (144/81 mm Hg). In the past, Ms. Chatham has tried to lose weight using various diets, each time losing 10 to 15 lb (4.5 to 6.8 kg), but she has never been able to successfully maintain weight loss.

      Over 85,000 readers viewed the Clinical Decisions vignette during the polling period, and 905 readers from 91 countries voted in the informal poll. The largest group of respondents (366) was from the United States or Canada, representing nearly 40% of the votes. A large majority of the readers (80%) voted against prescribing one of the FDA-approved medications for weight loss and instead recommended maximizing lifestyle modification and nonpharmacologic therapies first.

      A substantial proportion of the 64 Journal readers who submitted comments expressed concern about the absence of efficacy data on long-term follow-up and about the side effects associated with current FDA-approved medications for weight loss. Some suggested that simply treating obesity with a prescription medication is shortsighted and that it is important to uncover patients’ motivations for existing lifestyle choices and for weight loss. The commenters emphasized the need for a multifaceted approach to obesity management that includes nutritional and psychological support, as well as stress management, with the goal of long-lasting improvement in exercise and eating habits that will lead to weight reduction and maintenance of a healthier weight.

      Some commenters, noting the difficulty of lifestyle changes, felt that pharmacotherapy can be a complementary and reasonable part of a multidisciplinary treatment plan. Some wrote that obesity should be managed as a chronic disease is managed and that an inability to lose weight should not be seen as a disciplinary issue, especially given the importance of genetic and physiological factors. These commenters argued that the use of pharmacotherapy as part of the treatment plan to achieve weight loss should not be stigmatized.

      Overall, the results of this informal Clinical Decisions poll indicate that a majority of the respondents think physicians should not initially recommend the use of an FDA-approved drug as part of a weight-loss strategy, at least not for a patient such as Ms. Chatham, and that many respondents were troubled by the current uncertainties about the long-term efficacy and safety of weight-loss drugs.

      REFERENCES 1. Flegal KM, Kruzon-Moran D, Carroll MD, Fryar CD, Ogden CL. Trends in obesity among adults in the United States, 2005 to 2014. JAMA 2016;315:2284-91. 2. Global BMI Mortality Collaboration. Body-mass index and all-cause mortality: individual-participant-data meta-analysis of 239 prospective studies in four continents. Lancet 2016;388:776-86. 3. Twig G, Yaniv G, Levine H, et al. Body-mass index in 2.3 million adolescents and cardiovascular death in adulthood. N Engl J Med 2016;374:2430-40. 4. Kushner RF, Ryan DH. Assessment and lifestyle management of patients with obesity: clinical recommendations from systematic reviews. JAMA 2014;312:943-52. 5. Yeh JS, Kushner RF, Schiff GD. Obesity and management of weight loss. N Engl J Med 2016;375;1187-9.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Oct 13, Giorgio Casari commented:

      Increased or decreased calcium influx?

      In this elegant paper the authors propose that loss of m-AAA (i.e. the depletion of both SPG7 and AFG3L2) facilitates the formation of active MCU complexes through the increased availability of EMRE, thus (i) increasing calcium influx into mitochondria, (ii) triggering MPTP opening and (iii) causing the consequent increase of neuronal cytoplasmic calcium leading to neurodegeneration. We previously reported that loss or reduction of AFG3L2 causes (i) decreased mitochondrial potential and fission, thus (ii) decreased calcium entry and (iii) the consequent augmented neuronal cytoplasmic calcium leading to neurodegeneration. While the functional link of m-AAA with MAIP and MCU-EMRE represents a new milestone in the characterization of the roles this multifaceted protease complex, we would like to comment on the conclusions pertaining to the calcium dynamics. 1. In SPG7/AFG3L2 knock-down HeLa cells (Figure S6A) mitochondrial matrix calcium is dramatically reduced (approx. from 100 to 50 microM) following histamine stimulation, which triggers IP3-mediated calcium release from ER. This reduction is in complete agreement with the one we previously detected in Afg3l2 ko MEFs (Maltecca et al., 2012), and that we also confirmed in Afg3l2 knock-out primary Purkinje neurons (the cells that are primarily affected in SCA28) upon challenge with KCl (Maltecca et al., 2015). The decreased mitochondrial calcium uptake correlates with the 40% reduction of mitochondrial membrane potential in SPG7/AFG3L2 knock-down cells (Figure S6B), as expected since the mitochondrial potential is the major component of the driving force for calcium uptake by MCU. Accordingly, these data are in line with the decreased mitochondrial membrane potential observed in Afg3l2 knock-out Purkinje neurons (Maltecca et al., 2015). We think that this aspect is central, because the respiratory defect is the primary event associated to m-AAA deficiency and neurodegeneration. So, the data of König et al. agree with our own findings that mitochondrial matrix calcium is reduced after m-AAA depletion. 2. By a different protocol (SERCA pumps inhibition and ER calcium leakage; Figure 6 C-F), the authors detected a small increase of mitochondrial calcium concentration in SPG7/AFG3L2 knock-down HeLa cells (from approx. 3 to 6 microM). The huge difference in calcium concentration detected in the two experiments (100 to 50 microM in Figure S6A and 3 to 6 microM in Figure 6 C) possibly reflects the stimulated (histamine) vs. unstimulated (calcium leakage) conditions, this latter being more difficult to correlate to physiologic neuronal situation. 3. The authors show increased sensitivity to MPTP opening in the absence of m-AAA and they propose the consequent calcium release as the cause of calcium deregulation and neuronal cell death. ROS are strong sensitizers of MPTP to calcium and thus favor its opening. It is well known that m-AAA loss massively increases intramitochondrial ROS production. Thus, higher ROS levels, rather than high calcium concentrations, can be the trigger of MPTP opening. Taking all this into consideration, we think that mitochondrial depolarization (as shown in Figure S6B) and decreased mitochondrial calcium entry (Fig S6A), even in the presence of increased amount of MCU-EMRE complexes, may lead to inefficient mitochondrial calcium buffering and, finally, to cytoplasmic calcium deregulation. ROS dependent MPTP opening, which may occur irrespective of a low matrix calcium concentration, may additionally contribute to this final event.

      Minor comment At page 7 we read: “Notably, these experiments likely underestimate the effect on mitochondrial Ca2+ influx observed upon loss of the m-AAA protease, since the loss of the m-AAA protease also decreases ΔΨ (i.e., the main force driving mitochondrial Ca2+ influx), as revealed by the significant impairment of mitochondrial Ca2+ influx triggered by histamine stimulation (Maltecca et al., 2015) (Figures S6A–S6E)”. The reference is not appropriate, since in Maltecca et al., 2015 the reduced mitochondrial calcium uptake has been demonstrated in Afg3l2 knock-out Purkinje neurons upon challenge with KCl and not with histamine. We used histamine stimulation, which triggers IP3-mediated calcium release from ER, in Afg3l2 ko MEF in a previous publication (Maltecca F, De Stefani D, Cassina L, Consolato F, Wasilewski M, Scorrano L, Rizzuto R, Casari G. Respiratory dysfunction by AFG3L2 deficiency causes decreased mitochondrial calcium uptake via organellar network fragmentation. Hum Mol Genet. 2012, 21:3858-70. doi: 10.1093/hmg/dds214).


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Feb 06, GARRET STUBER commented:

      *This review was completed as part of a graduate level circuits and behavior course at UNC-Chapel Hill. The critique was written by students in the class and edited by the instructor, Garret Stuber.

      Comments and critique

      Written by Li et al., this paper investigated a class of oxytocin receptor interneurons (OxtrINs) on which the same group first characterized in 2014 [1]. OxtrINs are a subset of somatostatin positive interneurons in the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) that seem to be important for sociosexual behaviors in females, specifically during estrus and not diestrus. To complement their previous story, here the authors concluded that OxtrINs in males regulate anxiety-related behaviors through the release of corticotropin releasing hormone binding protein (Crhbp). While we agree that these neurons could be mediating sexually dimorphic behaviors, it is unclear how robust these differences really are.

      We had some technical issues with this paper. First, it is unclear exactly how many mice were allotted to each experimental group, and it would have been useful to see individual data in each of the behavioral experiments, so that we can better understand some of the variability in the authors’ graphs. Even among different experiments, there were variable sizes of n (e.g. Fig. 5F-H, “n = 8-14 mice per group”). There was also no mention of how many cells per animal were tested for each brain slice experiment; instead, we received total numbers of cells tested per group. This paper did not include the complementary female data to Fig. 4F-G and Fig. 5A-B, the experiments pairing blue light with Crhr1 antagonist or Crhbp antagonist. We would have appreciated seeing this data adjacent to that for the males. In addition, there was no mentioned control for the optogenetic experiments. The authors only compared responses between light on and light off trials. Typically in optogenetic approaches, a set of control mice are also implanted with optic fibers and flashed with blue light in the absence of virus to test whether the light alone influences behavior. Incidentally, there is evidence that blue light influences blood flow, which may affect neuronal activity [2]. It was also unclear during the sociosexual behavioral testing whether the males were exposed to females in estrus or diestrus. In all, lack of detailed sample sizes and controls made it difficult to assess how prominent these sex differences were.

      These issues aside, knocking out endogenous Oxtr in their targeted interneuron population was a key experiment, as it demonstrated that oxytocin signaling in OxtrINs is important in anxiety-related behaviors in males, but not in females regardless of the estrus stage. They did this using a floxed Oxtr mouse and deleted OxtR using a Cre-inducible virus, allowing for temporal and cell-type-specific control of this deletion, and subsequently measured the resulting phenotype using an elevated plus maze and open field task. The authors also validated that changes in exploration were not due to hyperactivity. We think these experiments are convincing.

      TRAP profiling, which the same research group pioneered in 2014 [3], provided a set of genes enriched in OxtrINs. TRAP targets RNAs while they are translated into proteins, so we think their results here are particularly relevant. Moreover, the authors provided a list of genes enriched in sex-specific OxtrINs, a useful resource for those interested in gene expression differences in males and females. Once they identified Crhbp, an inhibitor of Crh, they hypothesized that OxtrINs were releasing Crhbp to modulate anxiogenic behaviors in males. The authors next measured Crh levels in the paraventricular nucleus of the hypothalamus and found that Crh levels are higher in females than males. They thus concluded Crh levels were driving sex differences associated with OxtrINs. We wonder whether Crh levels are also higher in the female mPFC, but we agree here too.

      To demonstrate that Crhbp expressed by OxtrINs is important in modulating anxiety-like behaviors in males, the authors targeted Crhbp mRNA using Cre-inducible viral delivery of an shRNA construct and subsequently tested anxiety-related behaviors. They found that knocking down Crhbp was anxiogenic in males and not in females. This was a critical experiment, but the shRNA constructs targeting Crhbp were validated solely in a cell line. It would have been more appropriate to perform a western blot on mPFC punches of adult mice, showing whether this lentiviral construct knocked down Crhbp expression in the mouse brain prior to behavioral testing. In fact, it also would have been useful to see a quantification of the shRNA transfection rate, as well as its specificity in vivo. As stated above, we also do not know the distribution of behavioral responses here either. Without these pieces of information, it is difficult to assess how reliable or robust their knockdown was.

      The authors concluded that sexually dimorphic hormones act through the otherwise sexually monomorphic OxtrINs to regulate anxiety-related behaviors in males and sociosexual behaviors in females. We agree that OxtrINs interact with oxytocin and Crh to bring about sex-specific phenotypes, but we also think that using additional paradigms testing anxiety and social behaviors, such as a predator odor, novelty-suppressed feeding or social grooming, could shed more light on the nuances of mPFC circuitry. In addition, the authors suggested that OxtrINs are sexually monomorphic because they are equally abundant in males and females. The authors’ TRAP data however suggested that OxtrINs of males and females have different gene expression profiles (Table S2), thus indicating that these interneurons may form different connections in each sex that mediate the electrophysiological and behavioral differences we see in this study.

      It would be interesting to overexpress Crhbp in female mice, preferably in a cell-type-specific manner, to see whether female mice would demonstrate the anxiety-like behavior seen in males. If the Crh:Crhbp balance is in fact mediating this sexually dimorphic behavior through OxtrINs, we would expect that doing these manipulations may “masculinize” the females’ behavior. Regardless, we believe that this study opens opportunities for future work into how oxytocin and Crh release from the hypothalamus may act together to coordinate behavior. It will also be interesting to see if single-cell RNA sequencing could provide insight into whether OxtrINs can be further divided into sexually dimorphic subtypes. As the authors pointed out, understanding the dynamics of Crh and oxytocin in the mPFC will be important for gender-specific therapy and treatment.

      [1] Nakajima, M. et al. Oxytocin modulates female sociosexual behavior through a specific class of prefrontal cortical interneurons. Cell. 159, 295-305 (2014).

      [2] Rungta, R. L. et al. Light controls cerebral blood flow in naïve animals. Nature Communications. 8, 14191 (2017).

      [3] Heiman, M. et al. Cell-type-specific mRNA purification by translating ribosome affinity purification (TRAP). Nature Protocols. 9, 1282-1291 (2014).


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Sep 16, Hilda Bastian commented:

      Thanks, John, for the reply - and for giving us all so much to think about, as usual!

      I agree that there are meta-analyses without systematic reviews, but the tagged meta-analyses are included in the filter you used: they are not additional (NLM, 2016). It also includes meta-analysis in the title, guidelines, validation studies, and multiple other terms that add non-systematic reviews, and even non-reviews, to the results.

      In Ebrahim S, 2016, 191 primary trials in only high impact journals were studied. Whether they are typical of all trials is not clear: it seems unlikely that they are. Either way, hundreds of reports for a single trial is far from common: half the trials in that sample had no secondary publications, only 8 had more more than 10, and none had more than 54. Multiple publications from a single trial can sometimes be on quite different questions, which might also need to be addressed in different systematic reviews.

      The number of trials has not been increasing as fast as the number of systematic reviews, but the number has not reached a definite ongoing plateau either. I have posted an October 2015 update to the data using multiple ways to assess these trends in the paper by me, Paul Glasziou, and Iain Chalmers from 2010 (Bastian H, 2010) here. Trials have tended to fluctuate a little from year to year, but the overall trend is growth. As the obligation to report trials grows more stringent, the trend in publication may be materially affected.

      Meanwhile, "systematic reviews" in the filter you used have not risen all that dramatically since February 2014. For the whole of 2014, there were 34,126 and in 2015 there were 36,017 (with 19,538 in the first half of 2016). It is not clear without detailed analysis what part of the collection of types of paper are responsible for that increase. The method used to support the conclusion here about systematic reviews of trials overtaking trials themselves was to restrict the systematic review filter to those mentioning trials or treatment - “trial* OR randomi* OR treatment*”. That does not mean the review is of randomized trials only: no randomized trial need be involved at all, and it doesn't have to be a review.

      Certainly, if you set the number of sizable randomized trials high, there will be fewer of them than of all possible types of systematic review: but then, there might not be all that many very sizable, genuinely systematic reviews either - and not all systematic reviews are influential (or even noticed). And yes, there are reviews that are called systematic that aren't: but there are RCTs called randomized that aren't as well. What's more, an important response to the arrival of a sizeable RCT may well be an updated systematic review.

      Double reports of systematic reviews are fairly common in the filter you used too, although far from half - and not more than 10. Still, the filter will be picking up protocols as well as their subsequent reviews, systematic reviews in both the article version and coverage in ACP Journal Club, the full text of systematic reviews via PubMed Health and their journal versions (and the ACP Journal Club coverage too), individual patient data analyses based on other systematic reviews, and splitting a single systematic review into multiple publications. The biggest issue remains, though, that as it is such a broad filter, casting its net so very wide across the evidence field, it's not an appropriate comparator for tagged sets, especially not in recent years.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2016 Sep 16, John Ioannidis commented:

      Dear Hilda,

      thank you for the very nice and insightful commentary on my article. I think that my statement "Currently, probably more systematic reviews of trials than new randomized trials are published annually" is probably correct. The quote of 8,000 systematic reviews in the Page et al. 2016 article is using very conservative criteria for systematic reviews and there are many more systematic reviews and meta-analyses, e.g. there is a factory of meta-analyses (even meta-analyses of individual level data) done by the industry combining data of several trials but with no explicit mention of systematic literature search. While many papers may fail to satisfy stringent criteria of being systematic in their searches or other methods, they still carry the title of "systematic reviews" and most readers other than a few methodologists trust them as such. Moreover, the 8,000 quote was from February 2014, i.e. over 2.5 years ago, and systematic reviews' and meta-analyses' publication rates rise geometrically. Conversely, there is no such major increase in the annual rate of published randomized controlled trials. Furthermore, the quote of 38,000 trials in the Cochrane database is misleading, because it includes both randomized and non-randomized trials and the latter may be the majority. Moreover, each randomized controlled trial may have anywhere up to hundreds of secondary publications. On average within less than 5 years of a randomized trial publication, there are 2.5 other secondary publications from the same trial (Ebrahim et al. 2016). Thus the number of published new randomized trials per year is likely to be smaller than the number of published systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized trials. Actually, if we also consider the fact that the large majority of randomized trials are small/very small and have little or no impact, while most systematic reviews are routinely surrounded by the awe of the "highest level of evidence", one might even say that the number of systematic reviews of trials published in 2016 is likely to be several times larger than the number of sizable randomized trials published in the same time frame.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Aug 25, Clive Bates commented:

      As I think Professor Daube's comment contains inappropriate innuendo about my motives, let me repeat the disclosure statement from my initial posting:

      Competing interests: I am a longstanding advocate for 'harm reduction' approaches to public health. I was director of Action on Smoking and Health UK from 1997-2003. I have no competing interests with respect to any of the relevant industries.

      My hope is that prominent academics and veterans of the struggles of the past will adopt an open mind towards the right strategy for reducing the burden of death and disease caused by smoking as we go forward. While he may not like the idea, Professor Daube can surely see that 'tobacco harm reduction' is a concept supported by many of the top scientists and policy thinkers in the field, including the Tobacco Advisory Group of the Royal College of Physicians. It is not the work of the tobacco industry and cannot be dismissed just by claiming it is in their interests.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 May 24, Jordan Anaya commented:

      I think readers of this article will be interested in a comment I posted at F1000Research, which reads:

      I would like to clarify and/or raise some issues with this article and accompanying comments.

      One: Reviewers Prachee Avasthi and Cynthia Wolberger both emphasized the importance of being able to sort by date, and in response the article was edited to say: "Currently, the search.bioPreprint default search results are ordered by relevance without any option to re-sort by date. The authors are aware of the pressing need for this added feature and if possible will incorporate it into the next version of the search tool."

      However, it has been nearly a year and this feature has not been added.

      Two: The article states: "Until the creation of search.bioPreprint there has been no simple and efficient way to identify biomedical research published in a preprint format..."

      This is simply not true as Google Scholar indexes preprints. This was pointed out by Prachee Avasthi and in response the authors edited the text to include an incorrect method for finding preprints with Google Scholar. In a previous comment I pointed out how to correctly search for preprints with Google Scholar, and it appears the authors read the comment given they utilize the method at this page on their site: http://www.hsls.pitt.edu/gspreprints

      Three: In his comment the author states: "We want to stress that the 'Sort by date' feature offered by Google Scholar (GS) is abysmal. It drastically drops the number of retrieved articles compared to the default search results."

      This feature of Google Scholar is indeed limited, as it restricts the results to articles which were published in the past year. However, if the goal is to find recent preprints then this limitation shouldn't be a problem and I don't know that I would classify the feature as "abysmal".

      Four: The article states: "As new preprint servers are introduced, search.bioPreprint will incorporate them and continue to provide a simple solution for finding preprint articles."

      New preprint servers have been introduced, such as preprints.org and Wellcome Open Research, but search.biopreprint has not incorporated them.

      Five: Prachee Avasthi pointed out that the search.biopreprint search engine cannot find this F1000Research article about search.biopreprint. It only finds the bioRxiv version. In response the author stated: "The Health Sciences Library System’s quality check team has investigated this issue and is working on a solution. We anticipate a quick fix of this problem."

      This problem has not been fixed.

      Competing Interests: I made and operate http://www.prepubmed.org/, which is another tool for searching for preprints.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Jun 24, Ole Jakob Storebø commented:

      We think that the clinicians prescribing methylphenidate for ADHD and others have been insufficiently critical of the literature for decades, trusting that the quality of methylphenidate research was reasonable. In accordance, Shaw in an editorial accompanying our JAMA article Storebø OJ, 2016 stated that the Epstein et al. review on methylphenidate for adults with ADHD was an example of good assessments of quality Shaw P, 2016. It seems Shaw erred, as the Epstein et al. review has now been withdrawn from The Cochrane Library due methodological flaws Epstein T, 2016.

      Banaschewski et al. suggest that we included five trials in our analyses that should have been excluded. We think they are wrong. They highlight four trials which they cite as having used “active controls” whereas these are actually co-interventions, used in both the methylphenidate and the control group. Such trials are includable in accordance with our protocol Storebø OJ, 2015. Moreover, excluding these trials from our review would only have produced negligible changes in our results. Furthermore, the trial including children aged 3 to 6 years ought also to have be included in accordance with our protocol. Excluding all five trials would not have changed our conclusions at all. We concluded that methylphenidate might improve teacher reported symptoms of ADHD. However, the very low quality of the evidence, the magnitude of that effect size is uncertain. A change in the effect size of 0.12 points on the standardised mean difference of this outcome would not change anything.

      In a subgroup analysis comparing parallel trials and crossover trials, we did not find a significant difference either. However, we noted considerable heterogeneity between the two groups of trials. It is not recommended to pool cross-over trials which only have “end-of-trial data” with parallel group trials (http://handbook.cochrane.org/) and had we done so we would have would risked introducing a “unit-of-analysis error” as we only had “end-of-trial data” from these cross-over trials.

      We agree that the variability of the minimal relevant difference is important which is why we reported the 95% confidence interval of the transformed mean value in our review Storebø OJ, 2015. Banaschewski et al. also suggest that we have overlooked information in the Coghill 2007 trial and thereby wrongly assessed this as a trial with “high risk of bias”. We stated in our protocol that we would consider trials with one or more unclear or high risk of bias domain as trials with high risk of bias Storebø OJ, 2015.

      We did not overlook information from the Coghill 2007 trial but twice emailed the authors for additional information. They did not respond. The information required is not available in the published study. We presented the risk of bias assessments for the various domains of all 185 included trials. It is correct that we assessed seven cross-over trials as low risk of bias and not six as reported. Thank you for spotting this error. The seventh trial is reported, however, in our table in which the risk of bias assessments for all the domains is shown. All trials, irrespective of vested interest bias, were regarded as having a high risk of bias due to broken outcome assessor blinding given the easily recognisable, well-known adverse effects of methylphenidate. When adding this seventh cross-over trial to the subgroup analysis on the outcome “teacher-rated ADHD symptoms – cross-over trials”, we now find significant differences between the trials with “high” compared to “low” risk of bias (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.96 [95% confidence interval -1.09 to -0.82] compared to -0.64 [-0.91 to -0.38]. Test for subgroup difference: Chi² = 4.27, df = 1 (P = 0.04), I² = 76.6%).

      Banaschewski et al. focus only on our assessment of risk of bias and do not mention the core instrument for assessing quality of meta-analyses namely the Grades of Recommendation Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach Andrews J, 2013. Our assessment of the evidence as “very low quality” is not only based on the assessment of risk of bias, but also on other factors such as heterogeneity, imprecision, and indirectness of the evidence. This is clearly reported in our review.

      We downgraded the quality of the included trials in the meta-analysis for imprecision and for moderate heterogeneity. The durations of included trials were short, with an average of 75 days. Most patients receive methylphenidate treatment for substantially longer periods and the beneficial effects may diminish over time Jensen PS, 2007 Molina BS, 2009. The short trial duration could suggest the need for further downgrading for “indirectness” according to GRADE Andrews J, 2013. We did not downgrade for this, but we could have. This further underlines that the evidence for the benefits and harms for the use of methylphenidate for children and adolescents with ADHD is of very low quality.

      We have assessed 71 trials as having high risk of bias in the “vested interest” domain as they were funded by the industry and/or the authors were affiliated with the industry.

      It is not incorrect for us to state that none of the trials funded by the pharmaceutical industry showed a low risk of bias in all other areas as we considered all the trials as high risk of bias on the domain of blinding. This is clearly reported in our review.

      We have now conducted the requested subgroup analysis comparing those trials with high compared to low risk of vested interest bias on the teacher-rated ADHD symptoms outcome. The effect of methylphenidate in the 14 trials with high risk of vested interest bias was SMD -0.86 [-0.99 to -0.72] compared to SMD -0.50 [-0.69 to -0.31] in the 5 trials with low risk of vested interest bias. Test for subgroup differences is Chi² = 8.67, df = 1, P = 0.003. So even in this small sample we find a significant difference.

      We recommend Banaschewski et al. to read the essay by John P Ioannidis about vested interests Ioannidis JP, 2016.

      It is important to stress that the results of our review would have been the same had we disregarded the issue of vested interest.

      Had there been inconsistencies regarding one domain of bias in a few trials they would not change the fact that these trials are to be considered as trials at high risk of bias. For example, in two trials, Konrad 2004 and Konrad 2005, there is inconsistency in how our author teams assessed the randomisation process. However, both trials have several other domains at “unclear risk of bias” or “high risk of bias”. In the Ullman 2006 trial, three domains are assessed as “unclear risk of bias”. In Wallace 1994, five domains are assessed as being of “unclear risk of bias” and one as “high risk of bias”. In Wallander 1987, five domains are assessed as “unclear risk of bias”. Even if there was inconsistency between one or two items, these trials are high risk of bias trials. There may well be small differences in our judgements, but that does not change the fact that the trials included are, in general, trials at high risks of bias Storebø OJ, 2015. It is important to understand that we followed the Cochrane guidelines in every aspect of our review.

      Conclusions

      We have demonstrated that the trial selection in our review was not flawed and was undertaken with sufficient scientific justification The effect sizes are not too small. We have followed a sound methodology for assessing risk of bias and our conclusion is not misleading. We are concerned about the state of the academic literature and at the financial and academic waste that has occurred, given that more than 250 reviews and 3000 single works have been published on psychostimulants for ADHD treatment. Despite this, there is still no sound evidence regarding the benefits and harms of methylphenidate.

      Ole Jakob Storebø, Morris Zwi, and Christian Gluud.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Jul 03, P Jesper Sjöström commented:

      Thanks for your interest in our work. I would like to make the following points:

      1. We did not actually say 'no connections in mature cortex' -- that quote is certainly not lifted from Mizusaki et al Nat Neurosci 2016. We said "In fact, it was recently reported that, surprisingly, pyramidal cells in visual cortex of mature animals do not seem to interconnect at all, neither bidirectionally nor unidirectionally12," where 12 refers to Jiang et al. We thus say that Jiang et al report that PCs do not seem to interconnect, we do not say that there are no PC-PC connections in mature cortex. What Jiang et al state and what our opinion about that statement is, those are different things.

      2. The intention of that passage in Mizusaki et al is to point out that Brunel is using my data from Song et al as a gold standard, but this may or may not be appropriate, since my connectivity data was acquired from a developmental snapshot in time (just after eye opening, typically postnatal day 14-16), whereas Brunel is in fact focussing on the functioning of the mature brain, when circuits are wired up. Our intention was thus to acknowledge that my own data need not be the ground truth, and this has important implications for the validity of the Brunel study. The Tolias study provides an alternative view: "the most compelling and consistent difference across experiments is the age of the animals tested, suggesting that mature cortical circuits are not identical to developing circuits." Such a developmental difference would important in the context of the Brunel study. Again, this is not necessarily my opinion, but as scientists, we have to acknowledge this possibility.

      3. In the Tolias study, they report in Fig S14 that they found precisely zero L5 PC-PC connections even after 150 attempts, which is in stark contrast to my connectivity data presented in Song et al. Indeed, if you do a Chi-squared test for 931/8050 versus 0/150, you will find that this is a highly significant difference. We can debate the accuracy of the Tolias measurement (like they do in Barth et al Science 2016 353:1108, as you point out), but if we do so, we should also debate the accuracy of my measurements in juveniles, as presented in Song et al. While it is true that my data in Song et al is more in line with e.g. Thomson et al Cereb Cortex 2002 than with Jiang et al, the key point in the context of Brunel's theoretical study is that the ground truth is not necessarily well established.

      In summary, I certainly believe in my own connectivity data set, and I think Brunel's study provides a very compelling theoretical framework for explaining such connectivity patterns, but I feel obliged to point out a few possible caveats associated with my connectivity data set. Jiang et al provide one such key caveat. I hope this clarifies somewhat.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Mar 24, Jeromy Anglim commented:

      Thanks for posting a comment. I just wanted to add a few thoughts on your points.

      Relationship between type D and outcomes were not moderated by illness group. For us, this was the important conclusion that we want researchers to think about. There is a lot of research done examining Type D in specific illness groups. To some extent implicit in such research is the idea that the effect of Type D might vary based on illness type. While this may be true, this study presents some evidence that at least for the illness groups and variables studied, this is not the case.

      The effect of negative affect on social support and the effect of social inhibition on health behaviours failed to reach statistical significance. I would not say that it failed. This is actually an important finding that supports the idea that the subscales of Type D provide different correlates (i.e., negative affectivity is related more to affective processes, and social inhibition is related more to social processes). Presumably, this is as we would expect. Although if you wanted to be critical, there is the idea that NA is merely neuroticism, and SI is a mix of neuroticism and introversion (see Horwood, Anglim, Tooley, 2015). Whether that is a problem probably depends on how primary you view Big 5 personality.

      Limitations: I think we note the limitations you mention in the limitations section. That said, those limitations only relate to certain points of the paper. For me personally, I think that the paper has two fairly important implications for researchers working with Type D personality. The first relates to the general lack of variation in effects by group as discussed above. Second, we did a comparative regression analysis comparing a range of different scoring systems for Type D personality. The results suggested that binary Type D is a poor predictor, and there was limited evidence for NA by SI interactions effects. Rather entering NA and SI as two separate predictors generally resulted in the best prediction of outcomes. This goes agains the implicit claims of Type D that there is an interactive effect and that cut-offs are appropriate for Type D. Importantly, all these analyses also speak to the novelty of the Type D construct and the rationale for choosing the two particular subscales for inclusion.

      Thus, for me, the paper provides a nuanced and critical assessment of the predictive validity of Type D personality. In particular, I'd encourage other researchers working with Type D personality (and some are doing this already) to run the comparative regression analyses in their samples.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Jun 21, Evelina Tutucci commented:

      We have also recently discussed Nelles et al. Nelles DA, 2016. Since we are interested in developing new techniques for studying gene expression and mRNA localization at the single molecule level, a potential tag-less system to detect mRNAs in fixed and live cells would be a further advance. As pointed out by the Duke RNA Biology journal club we think that Nelles et al. represents an attempt to apply the Cas9 System to detect endogenous mRNA molecules. Unfortunately, no evidence is presented to demonstrate that this system is ready to be used to study gene expression at the single molecule level, as the MS2-MCP system allows. The RNA letter by Garcia and Parker Garcia JF, 2015 showed that in S. cerevisiae the binding of the MS2 coat protein to the MS2-loops diminished tagged mRNA degradation by the cytoplasmic exonuclease Xrn1. However, these observations were not extended to higher eukaryotes. Previous work from our lab described the generation of the beta-actin-MS2 mouse, whereby all the endogenous beta-actin mRNAs were tagged with 24 MS2 loops in the 3’UTR (Lionnet T, 2011, Park HY, 2014). This mouse is viable and no phenotypic defects are observed. In addition, control experiments were performed to show that the co-expression of the MS2 coat protein in the beta-actin-MS2 mouse allowed correct mRNA degradation and expression (Supplementary figure 1b, Lionnet T. et al 2011). Furthermore, multi-color FISH (Supplementary figure 6, Lionnet T. et al 2011) showed substantial co-localization between the ORF FISH probes and MS2 FISH probes, demonstrating the validity of this model. We think that the observations by Garcia and Parker are restricted to yeast because of the short half-life of their mRNAs, wherein the degradation of the MS2 becomes rate-limiting. Based on our extensive use of the MS2-MCP system, we think that higher eukaryotes may have more time to degrade the high affinity complexes formed between MS2-MCP, providing validation for this system to study multiple aspects of gene expression. In conclusion, we think that the MS2-MCP system remains to date the best method to follow mRNAs at the single molecule level in living cells. For the use of the MS2-MCP system in S. cerevisiae we have taken the necessary steps to improve it for the study of rapidly degrading mRNAs and are preparing this work for publication.<br> Evelina Tutucci and Maria Vera, Singerlab


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2016 May 17, Duke RNA Biology Journal Club commented:

      These comments were generated from a journal club discussion:

      We were excited to read and discuss this paper as many of us have questions pertaining to mRNA localization. This technique theoretically allows for imaging of mRNAs without genetic manipulation meaning mRNAs at native expression levels can be tracked in live cells. However, as with many cutting-edge papers, more work is needed before this will become commonplace in the lab.

      Most current methods to track mRNAs in live cells involve aptamer based methods which require genetic manipulation of mRNA PMCID: PMC2902723. Additionally, the most commonly used aptamer system, the MS2-MCP system, has become controversial in light of recent findings that the MS2 coat protein stabilizes the aptamer bearing constructs Garcia JF, 2015. In this paper, Fig 1F and 1G replicated these findings and also reassured us that the RCas9 technique would not have the same downfall. While this is certainly a good thing, we were unconvinced this technique was better than FISH (Fig 2), other than having the potential for live cell imaging.

      Unfortunately, we found the live cell imaging, which was limited to Fig 3B, to be disappointing. First, we observed that unless an mRNA is strictly localized, as in stress granules, live imaging shows a diffuse mass within the cytosol. Second, imaging was performed with ACTB mRNA which is highly abundant. We don’t think live cell imaging would work as well for low abundance mRNAs due to high background signal. Finally, while specialized imaging software can detect the pile-ups of mRNA in localized foci, we are concerned that tracking individual mRNA may prove a hurdle. Cell models for mRNA localization are large cells such as fibroblasts and neurons, we would be interested to see the ability of this system within these cell types.

      One major flaw with this system is the lack of ability to monitor nuclear localized RNA such as lncRNA or splicing machinery. Since since the RCas9 and sgRNA have to first be produced in the nucleus, the majority of the signal in all the figures came from the nucleus. There is a split-GFP-PUM-HD system that has been used to successfully track mRNA in mitochondria Ozawa T, 2007. Perhaps a similar concept could be used with the Cas9 system. This would prove an advantage to the Pumilio system since only the sgRNA needs to be modified instead of the entire protein.

      Overall, this is a great start towards a new, tagless, method of mRNA tracking. We look forward to future developments and improvements of this exciting technique.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Mar 25, Michael R Blatt commented:

      Dear Boris,

      There’s nothing grand in these statements nor are they exempt from a cost-benefit analysis. It just happens that my measures of cost and benefit are (obviously) different from yours. Of course, it may be that we can still find common ground, and I would hope this is the case.

      As to your question “Is it a good thing to alert readers … to possible problems?”, clearly the answer is yes. I have said so repeatedly in my editorials and here on PubMed Commons. However, in my opinion, this needs to be done in a way that does not open the door to abuse, misrepresentation, sock-puppetry, and other antisocial or ethically unsound behaviours. I don’t think this is a particularly difficult concept, even if its solution is more complex in practice.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2016 Mar 22, Michael R Blatt commented:

      Dear Boris,

      I really do not think that we are so far apart in our views. We both are dismayed by some of what we see in scientific publishing and communication today, and we both want the same for the scientific community as a whole. Where we differ is only in some details of the means to this end.

      The point you raise is of measures, ‘averages’, and quantity, rather than of principle. I do not doubt that there are many comments on PubPeer that are thoughtful and constructive. I certainly never suggested that all comments on PubPeer “abuse the system” (nor did I ever suggest coersion, so let us not confuse the issue here). The point on which we differ is whether the quantitative argument for anonymity that you pose outweighs the foundational arguments I have set out against it. I think not.

      You raise the analogy to the utility of cars and whether these should be banned. Of course analogies are poor vehicles (pun intended) for ideas, but let’s follow it for a moment. It would be virtually impossible to ban anonymous commenting from social media, just as it is impossible to ban reckless driving (I recall you had this discussion with Philip Moriarty previously). However, this is not to say that either should be actively encouraged. There are norms for interpersonal interaction that we generally follow and that protect civil society (e.g. accountability), just as there are rules of the road and legal requirements (e.g. the need for a driving license) that are there to protect us when we are on the road.

      I think it is always important to look for other ways to a solution. Answers sometimes come from taking an entirely different perspective rather than looking for the common denominator. So, to follow your analogy one step further, rather than banning cars (and anonymous commenting), would it not be better to make them less attractive as a whole while making the use of public transport (and of open, accountable commenting) more attractive? Are we not both in a position to influence the process of PPPR?

      I alluded, at the end of my March 2016 editorial, to what I hope will be an approach to such a ‘third solution.’ It comes straight out of discussions with Leonid Schneider who, I think you will recall, was originally one of my fiercest critics last October. I am convinced this alternative is worth a try and, at this point, have a number of my opposite numbers from other publishers on board. You may be convinced as well in due course. Again, I hope that I will have much more to say on this matter later this year.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Mar 20, Linda Z Holland commented:

      In my review, I did not intend to criticize the ability of ascidian development to say something about the role of gene subnetworks in developing systems in vivo—it is a fruitful approach worthy of vigorous pursuit. Ascidians are highly tractable for experimental embryology and have scaled-down genomes and morphologies (at least with respect to vertebrates). As a result, noteworthy progress is being made in elucidating the gene networks involved in ascidian notochord development (José-Edwards et al. 2013, Development 140: 2422-2433) and heart development (Kaplan et al. (2015. Cur Opin Gen Dev 32: 119-128). It is currently a useful working hypothesis to make close comparisons between gene subnetworks in ascidians and other animals (Ferrier 2011. BMC Biol 9: 3). At present, however, the genotype-to-phenotype relationship is an unsolved problem in the context of a single species, and to consider the problem across major groups of animals is to venture deep into terra incognita. Much more work on the development in the broadest range of major animal taxa will be required to determine how (or even if) genotypes can predict phenotypes in vivo in embryos and later life stages. Studies of this complex subject, which are likely to require a combination of experimental data and computational biology (Karr et al, 2012. Cell 150: 389-401) are still in their infancy. That said, when I consider the developmental biology of animals in general, I think it is very likely that the highly determinate embryogenesis and genomic simplifications of ascidians are evolutionarily derived states. It is possible that this ancestor may have been more vertebrate-like than tunicate-like. For example, it might have had definitive neural crest, and the situation in modern ascidian larvae, which apparently have part of the gene network for migratory neural crest, may represent a simplification from a more complex ancestor. In the absence of fossils that could represent the common ancestor of tunicates and vertebrates, we cannot reconstruct a reasonable facsimile of this ancestor. Given that tunicates are probably derived, it is not very likely that any amount of research on modern chordates will solve this problem.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Feb 04, Ivan Shatsky commented:

      It is a fruitful idea to use a high- throughput assay to fish out sequences that regulate translation initiation. I like this idea. It may result in very useful information provided that the experimental protocol is correctly designed to reach the goal of a study. However, while reading the text of the article I had an impression that the authors did not make a clear difference between the terms “IRES-driven translation” and “cap-independent” translation. In fact, cap-independent mechanisms may be of two kinds: a mechanism that absolutely requires the free 5’ end of mRNA (see e.g. Terenin et al. 2013. Nucleic Acids Res. 41(3):1807-16 and references therein and Meyer et al. 2015. Cell 163(4): 999-1010 ) and that which is based on internal initiation. Only in the latter case a 5’ UTR starts penetrating the mRNA binding channel of ribosomes with an internal segment of the mRNA rather than with a free 5’ end. Consequently, the experimental design should be distinct for these two modes of cap-independent translation. The method of bicistronic constructs used by the authors is suitable exclusively to identify IRES-elements. However, this approach is sufficiently reliable when it is employed in the format of bicistronic RNAs transfected into cultured cells. It is repeatedly shown that the initial format of bicistronic DNAs is extremely prone to almost unavoidable artifacts (for literature, see ref. 48 in the paper and the review by Jackson, R.J. The current status of vertebrate cellular mRNA IRESs. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol, 2013; 5). The control tests to reveal these artifacts which are still used (unfortunately!) by many researchers are not sensitive enough to detect formation of few percents of monocistronic mRNAs. (To this end, one should perform precise and laborious experiments which are not realistic in the case of high-throughput assays.). The capping of these aberrant mono- mRNAs can produce a dramatic stimulation of their translation activity (20-100 fold, depending on cell line). Therefore, even few percents of capped mono-mRNAs may result in a high activity of the reporter as compared to an almost zero activity of empty vector (see Andreev et al. 2009. Nucleic Acids Res.37(18):6135-47 and references therein). Real-time PCR assessment of mRNA integrity (Fig. S4) is an easy way to miss these few percents of aberrant transcripts. The other concern is genome-wide cDNA/gDNA estimation. The ratio for e.g. “c-myc IRES” is 2<sup>-1.6</sup> which is roughly 1/3 (Fig. S3). Does this mean that 2/3 of c-myc transcripts are monocistronic rather than bicistronic? I had a general impression that the authors were not aware of serious pitfalls inherent to the method of bicistronic DNA constructs and simply adapted this method to their high throughput assay. At least, I did not find citations of papers that discussed this important point.

       The data in section Supplementary materials (Figs. S5 and S6) give us expressive and compelling  evidence of such kind of artifacts: indeed, some  174 nt long fragments from the EMCV IRES possessed an IRES activity. Moreover, one of them with GNRA motif had the activity similar to that for the whole EMCV IRES (!?).  This result is in an absolute contradiction with our current knowledge on this picornaviral IRES, one the best studied IRES elements! Parts of the EMCV IRES are known to have no activity at all! Thus, the most plausible explanation is that the EMCV fragments harbor cryptic splice sites. The same is true for other picornavirus IRESs examined in these assays. The HCV IRES tested by the authors in the same experiments worked only as a whole structure (Fig.S6B), in a full agreement with data of literature. However, this result may not encourage us as it just means that the data obtained in this study may be a mixture of true regulatory sequences with artifacts.   
        We should keep in mind that the existence of viral IRES-elements is a firmly established fact. They have a complex and highly specific organization with well defined boundaries and THEY ARE ONLY ACTIVE AS INTEGRAL STRUCTURES. The minimal size of IRESs from RNAs of animal viruses is  >300 nts. Their shortening inactivates them and therefore, they cannot be studied with cDNA fragments of 200 nt long or less. Thus, I think it was a mistake to mix viral IRESs with cellular mRNA sequences. As to cellular IRESs, none of them has been characterized and hence we do not know what they are and whether they even exist. For none of them has been shown that they do not need a free 5’ end of mRNA to locate the initiation codon. Some of them have already been disproved (c-Myc, eIF4G, Apaf-1 etc.).  By the way, I do not know any commercial vector that employs a cellular IRES. Thus, I think that we should first find adequate tools to identify cellular IRESs, characterize several of them, and only afterwards we may proceed to transcriptome-wide  searching for cellular IRESs.
      


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Jun 24, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      The authors do two things in this study:

      First, they point out that past studies on “constancy” have been hopelessly confounded due a. to condition-sensitivity of and ambiguity in what is actually percieved and b. questions that are confusing to observers because they are vague, ambiguous, unintelligible or unanswerable on the basis of the percept, thus forcing respondents to try to guess at the right answer. As a result, the designers of these studies have generated often incoherent data and proferred vague speculations as to the reasons for the randomness of the results.

      Second, as though teaching (what to avoid) by example, they produce yet another study embodying all of the problems they describe. Using arbitrary sets of stimuli, they ask an arbitrary set of questions of varying clarity/answerability-on-the-basis-of-the-percept, and generate the typically heterogeneous, highly variable set of outcomes, accompanied by the usual vague and non-committal discussion. (The conditions and questions are arbitrary in the sense that we could easily produce a very different set of outcomes by (especially) changing the colors of the stimuli or (less importantly) changing the questions asked.) Thus, the only possible value of these experiments would be to show the condition-dependence of the outcomes. But this was an already established fact, and it is, furthermore, a fact that any experimenter in any field should be aware of. It's the reason that planning an experiment requires careful, theory-guided control of conditions.

      The authors make no attempt to hide the fact that some of the questions they ask participants cannot be anwered by referring to the percept. For example,, they are asked about some physical characteristic of the simulus, which, of course, is inaccessible to either the human visual system and unavailable in the conscious percept. In these cases, we are not studying perception of the color of surfaces, but a different kind of problem-solving. The authors refer to answers “based on reasoning.” If we're interested in studying color perception, then the simple answer would be not to use this type of question. The authors seem to agree: “Although we believe that the question of how subjects can reason from their percepts is interesting in its own right, we think it is a different question from how objects appear. Our view is that instructional effects are telling us about the former, and that to get at the latter neutral instructions are the most likely to succeed...In summary, our results suggest that certain types of instructions cause subjects to employ strategies based on explicit reasoning— which are grounded in their perceptions and developed using the information provided in the instructions and training—to achieve the response they believe is requested by the experimenter.” This was all clearly known on the basis of prior experimence, as described in the introduction.

      So, at any rate, the investigators express an interest in what is actually perceived by observers. But what is the question they're interested in answering? This is the real problem. The question, or goal, seems to be, “How do we measure color constancy?” But we don't measure things for measurement's sake. The natural follow-up is “Why do we want to measure color constancy?” What is the theoretical goal, or question we want to answer? This question matters because we can never, ever, arrive at some kind of universal, general, number for this phenomenon, which is totally condition-dependent. But I'm not able to discern, in these authors' work, any indication of their purpose in making these highly unreliable measurements.

      Color constancy refers to the fact that sometimes, a surface “x” will continue to appear the same color even as the kind and intensity of the light it is projecting to the eye changes. On the other hand, it is equally possible for that same surface to appear to change color, even as the kind and intensity of the light it is reflecting to the eye remains the same. In both cases – constancy and inconstancy – the outcome depends on the total light projecting to the eye, and the way the visual system organizes it. In both cases – constancy and inconstancy – the visual principles mediating the outcome are the same.

      The authors, in this and in previous studies, “measure constancy.” Sometimes it's higher, sometimes it's lower. It's condition-dependent. Even if they were actually measuring “constancy” in the sense of testing how an actually stable surface behaves under varying conditions, what would be the value of this data? We already know that constancy is condition-dependent, that it is often good or good enough, and that it can fail under certain well-understood conditions. (That these conditions are fairly well-understood is the reason the authors possess a graphics program for simulating “constancy” effects). How does simply measuring this rise and fall under random conditions (random because not guided by theory, meaning that the results won't help clarify any particular theoretical question) provide any useful information? What is, in short, the point?

      Yet another twist in the plot is that in their experiments, the authors aren't actually measuring constancy. Because we are talking about simulations, in order to exhibit “constancy,” observes need (often) to actually judge two surface with different spectral characteristics as being the same. This criterion is based on assumptions made by the investigators as to what surfaces should look the same under different conditions/spectral properties. But this doesn't make sense. What does it mean, for example, if an observer returns “low constancy” results? It means that the conditions required for two actually spectrally different surfaces to appear the same simply didn't hold, in other words, that the investigators' assumptions as to the conditions that should produce this “constancy” result didn't hold. If the different stimuli were designed to actually test original assumptions about the specific conditions that do or do not produce constancy, fine. But this is not the case. The stimuli are simply and crudely labelled “simplified” and “more realistic.” This means nothing with respect to constancy-inducing conditions. Both of these kinds of stimuli can produce any degree of “constancy” or “inconstancy” you want.

      In short, we know that color perception is condition-sensitive, and that some questions may fail to tap percepts; illustrating this this yet again is the most that this experiment can be said to have accomplished.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Jan 27, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      A little way into their introduction, the authors of this article make the following clear and unequivocal assertion:

      “These findings underscore the idea that the encoding of objects and shapes is accomplished by a hierarchical feedforward process along the ventral pathway (Cadieu et al., 2007; Serre, Kouh, Cadieu, Knoblich, & Krei- man, 2005; Serre, Oliva, & Poggio, 2007; Van Essen, Anderson, & Felleman, 1992). The question that arises is how local information detected in the early visual areas is integrated to encode more complex stimuli at subsequent stages.”

      As all vision scientists are aware, the processes involved at every level of vision are both hierarchical and parallel, feedforward and feedback. These processes do not consist of summing “local information” to produce more complex percepts; a small local stimulus change can reconfigure the entire percept, even if the remaining “local information” is unchanged. This has been solidly established, on a perceptual and neural level, on the basis of experiment and logical argument, for many decades. (The authors' use of the term “complex stimuli,” rather than “complex percepts” is also misjudged, as all stimuli are simple in the sense that they stimulate individual, retinal photoreceptors in the same, simple way. Complexity arises as a result of processing - it is not a feature of the retinal (i.e. proximal) stimulus).

      The inaccurate description of the visual process aligns with the authors' attempt to frame the problem of vision as a “summation” problem (using assumptions of signal detection theory), which, again, it decidedly is not. If the theoretical relevance of this study hinges on this inaccurate description, then it has no relevance. Even on its own terms, methodological problems render it without merit.

      In order to apply their paradigm, the authors have constructed an unnatural task, highly challenging because of unnatural conditions - very brief exposures resulting in high levels of uncertainty by design, resulting in many errors, and employing unnaturally ambiguous stimuli. The task demands cut across detection, form perception, attention, and cognition (at the limit, where the subjects are instructed to guess, it is purely cognitive). (Such procedures may be common and old (“popular” according to the authors), but this on its own doesn't lend them theoretical merit).

      On this basis, the investigators generate a dataset reflecting declining performance in the evermore difficult task. The prediction of their particular model seems to be generic: In terms of the type of models the authors are comparing, the probability of success appears to be 50/50; either a particular exponent (“beta”) in their psychometric function will decline, or it will be flat. (In a personal communication, one of the authors notes that no alternative model would predict a rising beta). The fitting is highly motivated and the criteria for success permissive. Half of the conditions produced non-significant results. Muscular and theory-neutral attempts to fit the data couldn't discover a value of “Q” to fit the model, so the authors “have chosen different values for each experiment,” ranging from 75 to 1,500. The data of one of five subjects were “extreme.” In addition, the results were “approximately half as strong as some previous reports, but “It ...remains somewhat of a mystery as to why the threshold versus signal area slopes found here are shallower than in previous studies, and why there is no difference in our study between the thresholds for Glass patterns and Gabor textures.” In other words, it is not known whether such results are replicable, and what mysterious forces are responsible for this lack of replicability.

      It is not clear (to me) how a rough fit to a particular dataset, generated from an unnaturally challenging task implicating multiple, complex, methodologically/theoretically undifferentiated visual processes, of a model that makes such general, low-risk predictions (such as can be virtually assured by a-theoretical methodological choices) can elucidate questions of physiology or principle of the visual, or any, system.

      Finally, although the authors state as their goal to decide whether their model “could be rejected as a model of signal integration in Glass pattern and Glass-pattern-like textures” (does this mean they think there are special mechanisms for such patterns?)” they do not claim to reject the only alternative that they compare (“linear summation”), only that “probability and not linear summation is the most likely basis for the detection of circular, orientation-defined textures.”

      It is not clear what the “most likely” term means here. Most likely that their hypothesis about the visual system is true (what is the hypothesis)? Most likely to have fit their data better than the alternative? (If we take their analysis at face value, then this is 100% true). Is there a critical experiment that could allow us to reject one or the other? If no alternatives can be rejected, then what is the point of such exercises? If some can be, what would be the theoretical implications? Is there a value in simply knowing that a particular method can produce datasets that can be fit (more or less) to a particular algorithm?

      The "summation" approach seen here is typical of an active and productive (in a manner of speaking) subdiscipline (e.g. Kingdom, F. A. A., Baldwin, A. S., & Schmidtmann, G. (2015). Modeling probability and additive summation for detection across multiple mecha- nisms under the assumptions of signal detection theory. Journal of Vision, 15(5):1, 1–16; Meese, T. S., & Summers, R. J. (2012). Theory and data for area summation of contrast with and without uncertainty: Evidence for a noisy energy model. Journal of Vision, 12(11):9, 1–28; Tyler, C. W., & Chen, C.-C. (2000). Signal detection theory in the 2AFC paradigm: Attention, channel uncertainty and probability summation. Vision Research, 40, 3121–3144.)


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2015 Dec 10, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      This seems rather an odd choice of theme for a "Research Topic" in that it inspired a collection of papers with no conceptual coherence, out of many others that could have been selected on the basis of a common technique. It is somewhat like saying we'll put together an issue of physics papers that all used spectrometers. It's not really a "topic" unless you're specifically focussing on, e.g., pros and cons of the method.

      The editors summary expresses the situation well: "In sum, this Research Topic issue shows several ways to use diverse kinds of noise to probe visual processing." As discussed in their exposition, noise has been historically used in multifarious ways for multifarious purposes.

      I think the emphasis on technique rather than on theoretical problems is symptomatic of the conceptual impoverishment of the field. The use of the term "probe" has become common in this field, at least, indicating that a study is an exercise in a-theoretical data collection, rather than a methodic attempt to answer a question.

      I would also add that noise as a technique to probe normal perception in normal conditions should be employed with caution, since it does not characterise normal scenes, but rather places unusual stress on the system which may respond in unusual ways.

      Predictably, the results of the articles described seem undigested and of unclear value: E.g. "Hall et al. (2014) find that adding white noise increased the center spatial frequency of the letter-identification channel for large but not small letters;" (so...? how large is large...?) "Gold (2014) use pixel noise to investigate the visual information used by the observer during a size-contrast illusion. By correlating the observers頣lassification decision with each pixel of the noise stimuli, they find that the spatial region used to estimate the size of the target is influenced by the size of surrounding irrelevant elements" (or your theoretical definition of "irrelevant" needs adjustment).

      If the goal of this issue was to show that you can make noise and get published, then it's a big success.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2015 Nov 20, David Keller commented:

      Why the blinding of experimental subjects should be tracked during a study, from start to finish

      I wish to address the points raised by Folmer and Theodoroff in their reply [1] to my letter to the editor of JAMA Otolaryngology [2] concerning issues they encountered with unblinding of subjects in their trial of therapeutic MRI for tinnitus. These points are important to discuss, in order to help future investigators optimize the design of future studies of therapies for tinnitus, which are highly subject to the placebo, nocebo, Pygmalion and other expectation effects.

      First, Folmer and Theodoroff object to my suggestion of asking the experimental subjects after each and every therapy session whether they think they have received active or sham placebo therapy in the trial so far (the "blinding question"). They quote an editorial by Park et al [3] which states that such frequent repetition of the blinding question might increase "non-compliance and dropout" by subjects. Park's statement is made without any supportive data, and appears to be based on pure conjecture, as is his recommendation that subjects be asked the blinding question only at the end of a clinical trial. I offer the following equally plausible conjecture: if you ask a subject the blinding question after each session, it will soon become a familiar part of the experimental routine, and will have no more effect on the subject's behavior than did his informed consent to be randomized to active treatment or placebo in the first place. Moreover, the experimenters will obtain valuable information about the evolution of the subjects' state of mind as the study progresses. We have no such data for the present study, which impairs our ability to interpret the subjects' answers to the blinding question, when it is asked only once at the end of the study.

      Second, Folmer and Theodoroff state that I "misinterpreted" their explanation of why so many of their subjects guessed they had received placebo, even if they had experienced "significant improvement" in their tinnitus score. They object to my characterization of this phenomenon as due to the "smallness of the therapeutic benefit" of their intervention, but my wording summarizes their lengthier explanation, that their subjects had a prior expectation of much greater benefit, so subjects incorrectly guessed they had been randomized to sham therapy even if they exhibited a small but significant benefit from the active treatment. In other words, the "benefit" these subjects experienced was imperceptible to them, truly a distinction without a difference.

      A therapeutic trial hopes for the opposite form of unblinding of subjects, which is when the treatment is so dramatically effective that the subjects who were randomized to active therapy are able to answer the blinding question with 100% accuracy.

      Folmer and Theodoroff state that, in their experience, even if subjects with tinnitus "improve in several ways" due to treatment, some will still be disappointed if their tinnitus is not cured. Do these subjects then answer the blinding question by guessing they received placebo because their benefit was disappointing to them, imperceptible to them, as revenge against the trial itself, or for some other reason? Regardless, if you want to know how well they were blinded, independent of treatment effects and of treatment expectation effects, then you must ask them early in the trial, before treatment expectations have time to take hold. Ask the blinding question early and often. Clinical trials should not be afraid to collect data. Data are good; more data are better.

      References:

      1: Folmer RL, Theodoroff SM. Assessment of Blinding in a Tinnitus Treatment Trial-Reply. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015 Nov 1;141(11):1031-1032. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2015.2422. PubMed PMID: 26583514.

      2: Keller DL. Assessment of Blinding in a Tinnitus Treatment Trial. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015 Nov 1;141(11):1031. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2015.2425. PubMed PMID: 26583513.

      3: Park J, Bang H, Cañette I. Blinding in clinical trials, time to do it better. Complement Ther Med. 2008 Jun;16(3):121-3. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2008.05.001. Epub 2008 May 29. PubMed PMID: 18534323.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Apr 07, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      Readers should read the last paragraphs of this article first. It indicates that the current results contradict the authors' previous results, and that they have no idea why that is. Nevertheless, they assume that one of the two must be right, and use a crude rule of thumb (the supposedly "simpler" explanation) to make their choice. I would take the third option.

      "We see two possible explanations for the inconsistency between our previous work and that here:

      The correct conclusions about the extent of contrast integration are drawn in our current work, with previous work being compromised by the loss of sensitivity with retinal eccentricity. For example, Baker and Meese (2011) built witch's hat compensation into their modeling, but not their stimuli (in which they manipulated carrier and modulator spatial frequencies, not diameter). A loss of experimental effect in the results (such as that in Figures 2a and 3a here) limits what the analysis can be expected to reveal. Indeed, Baker and Meese (2011) found it difficult to put a precise figure on the range of contrast integration, and aspects of their analysis hinted at a range of >20 cycles for two of their three observers. Baker and Meese (2014) made no allowance for eccentricity effects in their reverse correlation study. The contrast jitter applied to their target elements ensured they were above threshold, and so the effects of contrast constancy should come into play (Georgeson, 1991); however, we cannot rule out the possibilities that either (a) the contrast constancy process was incomplete or (b) internal noise effects not evident at detection threshold (e.g., signal dependent noise) compromised the conclusions.

      The correct conclusions about the extent of contrast integration come from our previous work. Our current work points to lawful fourth-root summation, but not necessarily signal integration across the full range. On this account, signal integration takes place up to a diameter of about 12 cycles and a different fourth-root summation processes take place beyond that point. For example, from our results here we cannot rule out the following possibility: Beyond an eccentricity of ∼1.5° the transducer becomes linear and overall sensitivity improves by probability summation (Tyler & Chen, 2000), but uncertainty (Pelli, 1985; Meese & Summers, 2012) for more peripheral targets causes the slope of the psychometric function to remain steeper than β = 1.3 (May & Solomon, 2013).

      We think Occam's razor would favor the first account over the second."


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 May 25, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      When Todd et al say that understanding their demonstrations requires “a broader theoretical analysis of shape from shading that is more firmly grounded in ecological optics,” do they mean that there are things about the physics of how light interacts with surfaces that we don't understand? What kind of empirical investigations are they suggesting need to be performed? What kind of information do they think is missing, optically-speaking?

      The fundamental issues are formal (having to do with form) not the details of optics and probabilities of illumination structure - as these authors have shown.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2015 Nov 17, Johan van Schalkwyk commented:

      SPRINT strikes me as a work of pure genius. Conceive the following scenario: Take a carefully selected mixture of high-risk patients with a variety of blood pressures and risk factors, making sure that the low threshold for selection into the study is below the current sytolic blood pressure 'standard' of 140 mmHg. Apply two protocols, one that will aggressively reduce blood pressure in the intermediate term, another that's far more conservative. It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that a group of smart statisticians using current simulation methods and access to large hypertension databases might even predict the intermediate-term outcomes with a fair degree of confidence.

      The fact that this trial is exactly what every manufacturer of anti-hypertensives needs at this point, that it was stopped very early, and that it seems to contradict the prior evidence that has informed treatment guidelines to date should make us pause and think. Particularly as the results from a highly selected group, treated for a few years, may well be extrapolated to lifetime treatment of many or even most people with a systolic blood pressure of over 130 mmHg. Let's see how this is marketed.

      You may well choose to ignore the fact that one of the principal authors has received "personal fees" and/or grants from Bayer, Boeringer Ingelheim, GSK, Merck, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Arbor, Amgen, Medtronic and Forest. Your choice. Everyone has to make a living.

      Of greater concern might be the near tripling of the rate of acute kidney injury or acute renal failure in the intensive-treatment group, as these conditions are not cheap to manage. We might also be a bit puzzled that almost half of the "extra deaths" in the standard therapy group were NOT from cardiovascular causes. How on earth does this work?

      But anyone who understands a bit about MCMC methods should be in awe of the way this study was put together.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Aug 27, Robert Goulden commented:

      Hi David

      Many thanks for your comments. Your key objection, in the comment here, your letter to Am J Med, and your PubMed commons comment on my response to that letter, is around the use of occasional drinkers as the reference category. You are completely right that this use of a reference category is the principal (but not sole) reason that I don’t find evidence of a benefit to moderate alcohol consumption. I had hoped that the use of this reference category was adequately explained in the paper, but it’s an important point so I’m happy to discuss it further.

      Studies of the association between alcohol consumption and health are plagued with the problem of confounding. Non-drinkers and moderate drinkers differ in myriad important ways which conventional regression analyses cannot adequately adjust for (1). This leaves us with the difficult question of how to isolate the effects of alcohol on health, as opposed to the effect of all the other health-related variables which differ between non-drinkers and drinkers. One proposed solution is to use occasional drinkers as the reference category – not a novel “statistical maneuver” developed by me – but an approach used in the largest ever study of this question (2) (they were called light drinkers in that study, but the volume of alcohol consumed [0-2 g/day] meant they were occasional drinkers, as the accompanying editorial noted (3)). As I say in my paper, occasional drinkers “drink at levels for which a physiologic effect of alcohol is not plausible, but are likely to be more similar in other characteristics to moderate drinkers than long-term abstainers, thus reducing confounding”.

      When this approach to addressing confounding is taken, my results are actually consistent with the wider literature, as Stockwell and Naimi note in their commentary on my paper (4). Their systematic review (5) reported “similar findings” and had my paper been included in their meta-analysis (it was published after their search window) it would have been coded as “high quality”. Other approaches which try to isolate the causal effect of alcohol and minimize confounding, such as mendelian randomization, also find no evidence of a benefit of moderate alcohol consumption (6).

      Making sense of all the evidence is tricky, but my gut instinct (for what it's worth!), based on my paper and the wider literature, is that moderate alcohol consumption (up to 21 drinks per week) likely has very little effect (positive or negative) on health. My paper only finds unambiguous evidence of harm for those drinking over 21 drinks per week; of course, whether that association is driven by residual confounding is hard to say, but it’s certainly consistent with well-established links between heavy alcohol use and adverse outcomes such as liver disease, certain cancers, and trauma.

      I think the claim that my abstract is ‘misleading’ isn’t warranted; I explicitly state in the abstract that occasional drinkers are the reference category, but by necessity this choice can only be fully explained in the main text.

      Finally, you make some explicit causal claims about alcohol’s effects on health which I think go beyond what the observational literature can tell us. You state “the non-drinker can lower his Hazard Ratio for all-cause mortality…by starting the light consumption of alcohol” and “an average non-drinker can significantly lower their risk of call-cause mortality by adding one standard 14 gram serving of ethanol per day”. Until we have an RCT to demonstrate this, I think claims about what alcohol can and cannot do should be made more cautiously. If such a study were performed, and indeed showed benefit, I’d be the first to raise a glass to the results!

      Regards,

      Rob

      References

      1: Naimi TS, Brown DW, Brewer RD, Giles WH, Mensah G, Serdula MK, et al. Cardiovascular risk factors and confounders among nondrinking and moderate-drinking U.S. adults. Am J Prev Med. 2005 May;28(4):369–73.

      2: Bergmann MM, Rehm J, Klipstein-Grobusch K, Boeing H, Schütze M, Drogan D, et al. The association of pattern of lifetime alcohol use and cause of death in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study. Int J Epidemiol. 2013 Dec 1;42(6):1772–90.

      3: Stockwell T, Chikritzhs T. Commentary: Another serious challenge to the hypothesis that moderate drinking is good for health? Int J Epidemiol. 2013 Dec 1;42(6):1792–4.

      4: Stockwell T, Naimi T. Study raises new doubts regarding the hypothesised health benefits of “moderate” alcohol use. Evid Based Med. 2016 Jul 7;ebmed-2016-110407.

      5: Stockwell T, Zhao J, Panwar S, Roemer A, Naimi T, Chikritzhs T. Do “Moderate” Drinkers Have Reduced Mortality Risk? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Alcohol Consumption and All-Cause Mortality. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2016 Mar;77(2):185–98.

      6: Holmes MV, Dale CE, Zuccolo L, Silverwood RJ, Guo Y, Ye Z, et al. Association between alcohol and cardiovascular disease: Mendelian randomisation analysis based on individual participant data. BMJ. 2014;349:g4164.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2015 Oct 09, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      Dear Mike,

      Take your time. I think our conversation has run its course. You believe that Taylor and Francis may have acted properly, that it is sometimes OK for a publisher to ban an author. I believe the opposite, to the point that I find it difficult to believe they were within their legal rights. If and when you find the time to inform yourself to your satisfaction about this particular case, we can continue the conversation.

      If I had been particularly concerned with guarding my anonymity on PubPeer, you would have needed to be far more clever to unmask me. Your attempt to make this conversation about me (to label me as "highly emotional" - another evasive tactic on your part) and your triumph in "unmasking" me as Peer 14, as though this mattered (did I make any comments there I should be ashamed of?) is one of the reasons I support anonymity. Fortunately, my participation in future PubPeer discussions, when I choose to remain anonymous, won't be subject to such unworthy, ad hominem tactics.

      Regards, Lydia


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2015 Oct 08, Michael R Blatt commented:

      Dear Lydia:-

      I can see that this is a highly emotionally-charged issue for you, whereas it appears less so for Jaime (though I can fully imagine why it might be otherwise). So, I do think it important to step back for a moment.

      Let me relate another matter to you. This pertains to a case that goes back more than a quarter of a century and took place in a university in the mid-West of the United States. I was peripherally associated with the case, primarily because of my knowledge of the professor involved (a good friend, as it happens, and we remain so still). The professor, let’s call him Fred for now, became embroiled in an argument with his head of institute. The details of the argument are less important than the consequences. Fred was so aggrieved by the way he felt he had been treated, that he became disruptive, aggressive and threatening to other academic staff and students alike. In the end, following disciplinary proceedings, Fred was barred from the institute and took ‘early retirement.’ From my own perspective, I could understand why Fred was aggrieved – I, too, felt that the initial handling of the argument was problematic – but I could also see that his reaction was inappropriate and disproportionate, and that the institute had no choice but to bar him. In effect, Fred was within his rights, but was unwilling to accept responsibility for his actions and their consequences.

      I am not suggesting that there is a parallel here, but I recall the story to point out that there are always two sides to an argument. In Fred’s case, I was close enough to the events that it was easy to see what was going on, from both sides. In Jaime’s case, I have gathered what information I can from RetractionWatch, but I note that the information is presented almost entirely from his perspective. In your insistence that I choose a side, do you really mean to deny me the right to hear both sides of the argument?

      Bests,

      Mike

      p.s. I’ll need to attend to my own day job now, so it may be a few days before I respond to any more comments.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 May 19, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      Below is my reply to the author. My polemic tone notwithstanding, I appreciate his taking the time to respond. I've interspersed my responses with his text.

      Author: A researcher I highly respect once told me that a good review paper is one that engages and stimulates the reader to think critically and broadly about a particular phenomenon. In this sense I appreciate the commentary by Prof. Maniatis, which suggests the review at least succeeded in stimulating critical thought in at least one distinguished reader. And I will add that, though my initial reaction was that Prof. Maniatis' commentary is a polemic, it is clear that my critic takes the issues very seriously and raises some important research questions suggesting future experimental work.

      Me: My commentary is a polemic, if by that you mean it raises serious objections. I'm not recommending future work along the same lines; I'm saying the rationale for such work is vague to non-existent, not least because it conflicts with known facts. (My (ongoing) comments on Ariely (2001), which this article and many others treat as as “seminal,” as well as the other comments I've cited here, may make this clearer. Disagreement with the facts is supposed to be disqualifying in science, unless and until theoretical alignment can be achieved. Avoiding the (easy) possibility of falsification by choosing the route that Runeson describes (quoted in my second comment on Dube and Sekuler) is not the same thing as subjecting a hypotheses to serious tests. Inconclusive tests and an avoidance of critical discussion to point out logical inconsistencies/inconsistencies with the phenomena ensures that more work is always needed.

      Author: Nonetheless, the response, roughly a third of which seems to revolve around a passing reference to work by Koffka that has little to no bearing on the main points and conclusions of the review (and which misses the point of the reference to Koffka)...

      Me: If I've missed the point, then please let me know what I've missed. I consider the mistake that I flagged serious because it implies that the work of the Gestaltists supports the work being discussed here, when in fact the opposite is true.

      Author:...contains a number of misintepretations of the points made in the review. I take responsibility for any lack of clarity that may have produced this. I will detail a couple of examples that seem most directly related to the review (discussion of modeling methods, which don't fit algorithms as Prof. Maniatis stated but use algorithms to fit models, has to do with standard practice in the field itself and not the review).

      Me: Standard practice isn't necessarily good practice.

      Author: Encoding and retrieval of statistical information about stimuli, such as the average diameter of circles in a set of circles with different diameters, may or may not involve direct "perception" of the average in the sense used by Prof. Maniatis. The relevant experiments, I suspect, have yet to be conducted.

      Me: Encoding and retrieval of statistical information about stimuli, such as the average diameter of circles, may or may not actually happen. Scientific hypotheses are indeed guesses, but to be worthy of testing there needs to be a rationale and a clear articulation of associated assumptions. Relevant experiments pre-suppose that the idea has been developed enough to specify, for the purpose of testing, what these assumptions are. If investigators, after decades, haven't even decided whether direct perception is involved (which it clearly isn't – it's the nature of direct perception to be self-evident), then what have they been doing?

      Author: For this reason, "perceptual" may not be the best term and several different terms for the effects we have described are in in use (ensemble representation, statistical summary representation, etc). In my prior work (Dubé et al., 2014) I have discussed conceptual difficulties related to this term, and in my current work I favor "statistical summary representation" for this reason. However, the findings detailed in the review are indisputable.

      Me: I dispute them, partly along the lines of Runeson. I think when we look on a case by case basis, we find serious problems of method and/or misrepresentations in the interpretation.

      Author: There is a clear consensus in the literature that participants can accurately recall the average.

      Me: It's interesting that experimenters jump to the recall stage but skip the (presumably less challenging) perception stage. Why are observers being forced to recall what they are supposed to be perceiving?

      Author: If they can accurately recall it, they must have encoded and stored it. There is no question as to whether such memories exist. I just returned from VSS at which there were around 50 presentations on the topic of summary statistical representation, according to one talk, and the special issue of JoV in which our review appeared was devoted entirely to summary statistical representation. Clearly a decent number of scientists remains convinced that the effects exist!

      Me: Numbers of proponents is not an argument. I've criticized some of these authors' work, and when there's a response its not very convincing.

      Author: The final comment in the review, which Prof. Maniatis takes as our own admission that the existence of statistical representation is questionable, was meant to be somewhat tongue-in-cheek. How can the effects that have been attributed to remembered averages be due to memory for fine details of individual items when several studies, including the seminal one by Ariely (2001), demonstrate memory for the average despite chance performance on memory tests of the individual items from which the average was computed?

      Me: I'm in the process of commenting on Ariely (2001). His methods and interpretations are questionable and his arguments are full of inaccuracies and inconsistencies. It is an extremely casual, not a seminal, study.

      Author: It is in no way a statement that the effects don't exist (or even that we suspect they don't), even if taken at face value, and as I have detailed there is a quite large amount of empirical evidence to contradict the philosophical position of Prof. Maniatis. I will not detail all of these studies here, since a review detailing them already exists: Dubé and Sekuler (2015).

      Me: There are often other ways to interpret performances that have been attributed to some kind of mental calculation. The brain can use rules of thumb, as Gigerenzer has discussed. One example is how baseball players can catch a ball without subconsciously doing the complex math that some thought was required. When you a. ignore falsifying facts and b. don't consider alternative interpretations, then you have no doubts.

      Author: In my view, the conceptual nuances involved in discussion of summary statistical representation are suggestive of a need for more concrete, computational modeling, less verbal theorizing, and more neural data in this area."

      Me: If by verbal theorizing you mean critical discussion and exchange of ideas, I would say that more is desperately needed. The conceptual problems aren't “nuances,” they're huge. Useful data collection presupposes clear theories; otherwise its a waste of time, money and people. (As Darwin said, if you don't have a hypothesis, you might as well count the stones on Brighton Beach). The normalized view (espoused by journal editors) that critical discussion is the enemy of progress is convenient, but unscientific and wasteful.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    2. On 2016 May 18, Chad Dube commented:

      A researcher I highly respect once told me that a good review paper is one that engages and stimulates the reader to think critically and broadly about a particular phenomenon. In this sense I appreciate the commentary by Prof. Maniatis, which suggests the review at least succeeded in stimulating critical thought in at least one distinguished reader. And I will add that, though my initial reaction was that Prof. Maniatis' commentary is a polemic, it is clear that my critic takes the issues very seriously and raises some important research questions suggesting future experimental work. Nonetheless, the response, roughly a third of which seems to revolve around a passing reference to work by Koffka that has little to no bearing on the main points and conclusions of the review (and which misses the point of the reference to Koffka), contains a number of misintepretations of the points made in the review. I take responsibility for any lack of clarity that may have produced this.

      I will detail a couple of examples that seem most directly related to the review (discussion of modeling methods, which don't fit algorithms as Prof. Maniatis stated but use algorithms to fit models, has to do with standard practice in the field itself and not the review).

      Encoding and retrieval of statistical information about stimuli, such as the average diameter of circles in a set of circles with different diameters, may or may not involve direct "perception" of the average in the sense used by Prof. Maniatis. The relevant experiments, I suspect, have yet to be conducted. For this reason, "perceptual" may not be the best term and several different terms for the effects we have described are in in use (ensemble representation, statistical summary representation, etc). In my prior work (Dubé et al., 2014) I have discussed conceptual difficulties related to this term, and in my current work I favor "statistical summary representation" for this reason. However, the findings detailed in the review are indisputable. There is a clear consensus in the literature that participants can accurately recall the average. If they can accurately recall it, they must have encoded and stored it. There is no question as to whether such memories exist. I just returned from VSS at which there were around 50 presentations on the topic of summary statistical representation, according to one talk, and the special issue of JoV in which our review appeared was devoted entirely to summary statistical representation. Clearly a decent number of scientists remains convinced that the effects exist!

      The final comment in the review, which Prof. Maniatis takes as our own admission that the existence of statistical representation is questionable, was meant to be somewhat tongue-in-cheek. How can the effects that have been attributed to remembered averages be due to memory for fine details of individual items when several studies, including the seminal one by Ariely (2001), demonstrate memory for the average despite chance performance on memory tests of the individual items from which the average was computed? It is in no way a statement that the effects don't exist (or even that we suspect they don't), even if taken at face value, and as I have detailed there is a quite large amount of empirical evidence to contradict the philosophical position of Prof. Maniatis. I will not detail all of these studies here, since a review detailing them already exists: Dubé and Sekuler (2015).

      In my view, the conceptual nuances involved in discussion of summary statistical representation are suggestive of a need for more concrete, computational modeling, less verbal theorizing, and more neural data in this area.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2015 Sep 16, Morgan E Levine commented:

      Daniel Himmelstein, thank you for your comments. I will try to address them to the best of my ability.

      We acknowledge that the sample size is very small, which we mention in our limitations section of the paper. Because we are studying such a rare phenotype, there is not much that can be done about this. “Long-lived smokers” is a phenotype that has been the subject of a number of our papers, and that we think has strong genetic underpinnings. Despite the small sample size, we decided to go ahead and see if we could detect a signal, since there is evidence to suggest that the genetic influence may be larger for this phenotype compared to many others—something we discuss at length in our introduction section.

      To the best of our knowledge the finding that highly connected genes contain more SNPs, has not been published in a peer-reviewed journal. Therefore, we had no way of knowing or evaluating the importance of this for our study. Similarly, we used commonly used networks and do acknowledge the limitations of these networks in our discussion section. The network you link to was not available at the time this manuscript was accepted.

      We acknowledge the likelihood of over-fitting in our PRS, which is probably due to our sample size. This score did validate in two independent samples. Therefore, while it is likely not perfect, we feel that it may still capture some of the true underlying signal. We followed standard protocol for calculating our score (which we reference). In the literature there are many examples of scores that have been generated by linearly combining information from SNPs that are below a given p-value threshold in a GWAS. While, not all of these replicate, many do. Our study used very similar methods, but just introduced one additional SNP selection criteria—SNPs had to also be in genes that were part of an FI network. I don't think this last criteria would introduce additional bias that would cause a type I error in the replication analysis. However, we still recognize and mention some of the limitations of our PRS. We make no claim that the score is free from error/noise or that it should be used in a clinical setting. In fact, in the paper we suggest future methods that can be used to generate better scores.

      We feel we have provided sufficient information for replication of our study. The minor alleles we used are consistent with those reported for CEU populations, which is information that is readily available. Thus, the only information we provide in Table S2 pertain to things specific to our study, that can't be found elsewhere. Lastly, the binning of ages is not 'bizarre' from a biogerontology and longevity research perspective. A number of leaders in the filed have hypothesized that the association between genes and lifespan is not linear (variants that influence survival to age 100+ are not the same as variants that influence survival to age 80+). Thus, using a linear model would not be appropriate in this case and instead we selected to look at survival by age group.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2017 Feb 18, Clive Bates commented:

      Erroneous interpretations have been placed on these results and overly confident conclusions drawn from very small numbers of imperfectly characterised teenagers. The headline recommendations were based on the behaviour of six out of 16 baseline e-cigarette users in a sample of 694 adolescents deemed not to be susceptible to smoking. Large conclusions drawn from small numbers should always be a cause for caution, as discussed in this article about this study by Five Thirty-Eight:

      Ignore The Headlines: We Don’t Know If E-Cigs Lead Kids To Real Cigs by Christie Ashwandan, 11 September 2015

      One should expect the inclination to use e-cigarettes to be caused by the same things that cause an inclination to smoke - they are similar habits (the former much less risky) and it is quite likely that those who used e-cigarettes first would have become smokers first in the absence of e-cigarettes - a concept known as shared liability. A range of independent factors that create a common propensity to smoke or vape, such as parental smoking, rebellious nature, delinquency etc. explain the association between vaping and smoking incidence but without this relationship being causal.

      The authors try to address this by characterising teenagers non-susceptible to smoking if they answer “definitely no” when asked the following: “If one of your friends offered you a cigarette, would you try it?” and “Do you think you will smoke a cigarette sometime in the next year?”. The study concentrates on this group.

      This is not a foolproof way of characterising susceptibility to smoking, which in any case is not a binary construct but a probability distribution. Nor is susceptibility a permanent condition for any young person - for example, if a teenage girl starts seeing a new boyfriend who smokes that will materially changes her susceptibility to smoking. The fact that some were deemed unsusceptible to smoking but were already e-cigarette users is grounds for further unease - these would be more likely to be the teens where the crude characterisation failed.

      It is a near-universal feature of tobacco control research that the study presented is a wholly inadequate basis for any policy recommendation drawn in the conclusion, and this study is no exception:

      These findings support regulations to limit sales and decrease the appeal of e-cigarettes to adolescents and young adults.

      The findings do not support this recommendation, not least because the paper is concerned exclusively with the behaviour of young people deemed not susceptible to smoking and, within that group, a tiny fraction who progressed from vaping to smoking. Even for this group (6 of 16) the authors cannot be sure this isn't a result of mischaracterisation and that they would not have smoked in the absence of e-cigarettes. The approach to characterising non-susceptibility is far too crude and the numbers involved far too small to draw any policy-relevant conclusions.

      But this isn't the main limitation. Much more troubling is that the authors made this policy recommendation without considering the transitions among young people who are susceptible to smoking - i.e. those more likely to smoke, and also those much more likely to use e-cigarettes as well as or instead of smoking. This group is much more likely to benefit from using e-cigarettes as an alternative to smoking initiation, to quit smoking or cut down or as a later transition as they approach adult life.

      There are already findings (Friedman AS, 2015, Pesko MF, 2016, Pesko MF, Currie JM, 2016) that regulation of the type proposed by the authors designed to reduce access to e-cigarettes by young people has had unintended consequences in the form of increased smoking - something that should not be a surprise given these products are substitutes. While one may debate these findings, the current study makes no assessment of such effects and does not even cover the population that would be harmed by them. With these limitations, it cannot underpin its own over-confident and sweeping policy recommendation.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 May 17, Annika Hoyer commented:

      With great interest we noticed this paper by Nikoloulopoulos. The author proposes an approach for the meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies modelling random effects while using copulas. In his work, he compares his model to the copula approach presented by Kuss et al. [1], referred to henceforth as KHS model. We appreciate a lot Nikoloulopoulos referring to our work, but we feel there are some open questions.

      The author shows in the appendix that the association parameter from the copula is estimated with large biases from the KHS model, and this is what we also saw in our simulation study. However, the association parameter is not the parameter of main interest which are the overall sensitivities and specificities. They were estimated well in the KHS model, and we considered the copula parameter more as a nuisance parameter. This was also pointed out by Nikoloulopoulos in his paper. As a consequence, we are thus surprised that the bad performance in terms of the association parameter led the author to the verdict that the KHS method is 'inefficient' and 'flawed' and should no longer be used. We do not agree here, because our simulation as well as your theoretical results do clearly show that the KHS estimates the parameters of actual interest very well. Just aside, we saw compromised results for the association parameter also for the GLMM model in our simulation.

      Nikoloulopoulos also wrote that the KHS approximation can only be used if the 'number of observations in the respective study group of healthy and diseased probands is the same for each study'. This claim is done at least 3 times in the article. But, unfortunately, there is no proof or reference or at least an example which supports this statement. Without a mathematical proof, we think there could be a misunderstanding in the model. In our model, we assume beta-binomial distributions for the true positives and the true negatives of the i-th study. They were linked using a copula. This happens on the individual study level because we wanted to account for different study sizes. For estimating the meta-analytic parameters of interest we assume that the shape and scale parameters of the beta-binomial distributions as well as the copula parameter are the same across studies, so that the expectation values of the marginal distributions can be treated as the meta-analytic sensitivities and specificities. Of course, it is true that we used equal sample sizes in our simulation [1], however, we see no theoretical reason why different sample sizes should not work. In a recently accepted follow up paper on trivariate copulas [2] we used differing sample sizes in the simulation and we also saw a superior performance of the KHS model as compared to the GLMM. In a follow-up paper of Nikoloulopoulos [3], he repeats this issue with equal group sizes, but, unfortunately, did not answer our question [4,5] with respect to that point.

      As the main advantage of the KHS over the GLMM model we see its robustness. Our SAS NLMIXED code for the copula models converged better than PQL estimation (SAS PROC GLIMMIX) and much better that Gauss-Hermite-Quadrature estimation for the GLMM model (SAS PROC NLMIXED). This was true for the original bivariate KHS model, but also for the recent trivariate update. This is certainly to be expected because fitting the KHS model reduces essentially to the fit of a bivariate distribution, but without the complicated computations or approximations for the random effects as it is required for the GLMM and the model of Nikoloulopoulos given here. Numerical problems are also frequently observed if one uses the already existing methods for copula models with non-normal random effects from Liu and Yu [6]. It would be thus very interesting to learn how the authors’ model performs in terms of robustness.

      Annika Hoyer, Oliver Kuss

      References

      [1] Kuss O, Hoyer A, Solms A. Meta-analysis for diagnostic accuracy studies: A new statistical model using beta-binomial distributions and bivariate copulas. Statistics in Medicine 2014; 33(1):17-30. DOI: 10.1002/sim.5909

      [2] Hoyer A, Kuss O. Statistical methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic tests accounting for prevalence - A new model using trivariate copulas. Statistics in Medicine 2015; 34(11):1912-24. DOI: 10.1002/sim.6463

      [3] Nikoloulopoulos AK. A vine copula mixed effect model for trivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies accounting for disease prevalence. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2015 11 Aug; Epub ahead of print

      [4] Hoyer A, Kuss O. Comment on 'A vine copula mixed effect model for trivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies accounting for disease prevalence' by Aristidis K Nikoloulopoulos. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2016; 25(2):985-7. DOI: 10.1177/0962280216640628

      [5] Nikoloulopoulos AK. Comment on 'A vine copula mixed effect model for trivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies accounting for disease prevalence'. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2016; 25(2):988-91. DOI: 10.1177/0962280216630190

      [6] Liu L, Yu Z. A likelihood reformulation method in non-normal random effects models. Statistics in Medicine 2008; 27(16):3105-3124.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2015 Aug 12, Liam McKeever commented:

      Dear Ms. Gluck,

      Thank you for your comments. Training in the use of multiple databases was not the point of this paper. This paper was written in response to a recognition that many of the methods researchers use to perform their systematic reviews are not in fact systematic. A systematic review is meant to bring scientific methods into the process of writing a review. This means the methods of the review must be reproducible. Currently, many reviews that attempt to be truly systematic employ only the MEDLINE database because of its organized system of medical subject headings. If they do this correctly, they can perform an exhaustive search of the MEDLINE database. Our paper provided a technique for taking this systematic approach into an exhaustive search of both the MEDLINE and the PubMed databases, leading to a master formula, which could then be picked apart and improved upon by the scientific community. The techniques translate well to other databases and have recently been translated to EMBASE.

      The argument that a complete systematic review should include an attempt to collect all relevant articles from multiple databases is well taken and commonly accepted. Preventing publication bias however is a much bigger picture than including multiple databases in a search strategy and was beyond the scope of this paper. To get all the null findings necessary to overcome publication bias would also mean including studies that either never entered or did not survive the peer review process. While such attempts should be made, a more achievable goal would be the thorough analysis of the publication bias present in a review where the search methodology is both explicit and reproducible.

      The selection of appropriate databases for a systematic review, as you implied, varies greatly by profession. It was therefore also not in the scope of this paper. I do think there is some value in considering what it actually means than not all databases contain all journals. I find it highly unlikely that a bio-medically relevant journal would not be indexed in MEDLINE simply because they neglected to apply. It is much more likely that they applied and were rejected. Just as a systematic review has inclusion criteria at the level of the articles selected, databases have inclusion criteria at the level of the journals selected for cataloging. The degree of research quality and scope of topic areas are considered and determined to either meet or not meet the standards of the database. When we select a database for a systematic review, we are defining our inclusion criteria at the level of the journal. With this in mind, assuming adequate search methods were used and provided a thorough analysis of publication bias has been performed, one could make the argument that a properly selected major database pairing, like MEDLINE and PubMed may be acceptable for a systematic review. From a scientific methods perspective, we feel what is most important is that the inclusion criteria at all levels are explicit and that is what this paper attempts to facilitate.

      Sincerely, Liam McKeever, MS, RDN


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 May 23, Stanton A Glantz commented:

      In June 2015 we published our paper “The smoking population in the USA and EU is softening not hardening” in the journal Tobacco Control. We showed that as smoking prevalence has declined over time, quit attempts increased in the USA and remained stable in Europe, US quit ratios increased (no data for EU), and consumption dropped in the USA and Europe. These results contradict the hardening hypothesis which is often used as part of the tobacco industry’s strategy to avoid meaningful regulation and protect its political agenda and markets, claiming that there is a need for harm reduction among those smokers who “cannot or will not quit.” Indeed, rather than “hardening” the remaining smoking population is “softening.”

      In February 2016 we received an email from Robert West, editor of the journal Addiction, informing us that Addiction was about to publish an article by Plurphanswat and Rodu entitled “A Critique of Kulik and Glantz: Is the smoking population in the US really softening?” whose sole purpose was to critique our Tobacco Control paper, and offered to let us respond to the criticism.

      The fact that Plurphanswat and Rodu sent their paper to Addiction was unusual because normal scientific procedure would have had them sending a letter to the editor of the journal that originally published the work (Tobacco Control).

      As detailed below, we did respond, noting that Plurphanswat and Rodu’s paper followed the well-established pattern of tobacco industry-funded researchers trying to create controversy about research inconsistent with industry interests, the fact that Rodu had understated his financial ties to the industry, and, of course, showing how their criticism was based on statistical error that they made.

      Addiction rejected our response because we would not delete the first two points and limit our response only to the statistical issue.

      This blog post includes the response that Addiction rejected so that readers of Plurphanswat and Rodu’s critique do not think we did not have a response. We also include a summary of our interactions with the journal and the related email correspondence.

      THE REJECTED RESPONSE

      Consider the Source

      “Harm reduction” is a key part of the tobacco industry’s strategy to avoid meaningful regulation and protect its political agenda and markets.[1] This agenda is premised on the existence of “hard core” smokers who “cannot or will not” quit.[2-4] Our paper, “The smoking population in the USA and EU is softening not hardening”,[5] undermined this agenda because it showed that, contrary to the hardening hypothesis, as smoking prevalence has declined over time, quit attempts increased in the USA and remained stable in Europe, US quit ratios increased (no data for EU), and consumption dropped in the USA and Europe.

      There is a longstanding pattern of tobacco industry-funded experts writing letters criticizing work that threatens the industry’s position, first described in 1993 by then-JAMA Deputy Editor Drummond Rennie.[6] Rodu and various co-authors have written several such letters.[7-10] Another similarity to past efforts is industry-linked experts submitting critiques of a paper published in one journal to another,[11-15] which is also the case here, with this critique of our paper published in Tobacco Control being published in Addiction. One would have expected any criticism to have been published as a letter in Tobacco Control.

      Addiction requires “full disclosure of potential conflicts of interest, including any fees, expenses, funding or other benefits received from any interested party or organisation connected with that party, whether or not connected with the letter or the article that is the subject of discussion.” As with another investigator supported by the tobacco industry,[16] the conflict of interest statement Plurphanswat and Rodu provide may not truly reflect the extent of Rodu’s involvement with the tobacco industry. For example:

      • Rodu’s Endowed Chair in Tobacco Harm Reduction Research at the University of Louisville is funded by the U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Company (US Tobacco) and Swedish Match North America, Inc.[17]

      • Rodu is a Senior Fellow at the Heartland Institute, which has received tobacco industry funding.[18-20]

      • Rodu is a Member and Contributor to the R Street Institute, which has received tobacco industry funding.[19,21]

      • Before moving to Louisville, Dr. Rodu was supported in part by an unrestricted gift from the United States Smokeless Tobacco Company to the Tobacco Research Fund of the University of Alabama at Birmingham.[8]

      • Rodu was a keynote speaker at the 2013 Tobacco Plus Expo International, a tobacco industry trade fair to discuss “How has the tobacco retail business evolved; where was it fifteen years ago, where is it today and where is it going”.[22]

      • Rodu has worked with RJ Reynolds executives between at least 2000 and 2009 to help promote industry positions on harm reduction, including specific products.[23-26]

      The substance of Plurphanswat and Rodu’s criticism is that the statistically significant negative association between smoking prevalence and quit attempts and the positive association between prevalence and cigarettes smoked per day both become non-significant when more tobacco control variables are included in the model (state fixed effects, cigarette excise taxes, workplace smoking bans and home smoking bans). The problem with including all these variables is that it results in a seriously overspecified model, which splits any actual effects between so many variables that all the results become nonsignificant. The regression diagnostic for this multicollinearity is the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF); values of the VIF above 4 indicate serious multicollinearity. For the United States, adding all the other variables increases the VIF for the effect of changes in smoking prevalence from 1.8 in our model for quit attempts to 16.7, and from 1.8 in our model to 17.9 for cigarettes per day, respectively. Plurphanswat and Rodu’s model is a textbook case of why one has to be careful not to put too many variables in a multiple regression.

      The Plurphanswat and Rodu criticism misrepresents our conclusions. We did not argue that drops in prevalence caused increased quit attempts and reduced consumption; we simply present the observation that, as prevalence falls, quit attempts increase and consumption fall or remain constant, which is the exact opposite of what the hardening hypothesis predicts.

      The references and the full email correspondence with Addiction is available at http://tobacco.ucsf.edu/addiction-refuses-allow-discussion-industry-ties-criticism-our-“softening-paper”


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2015 Nov 10, Toni Schneider commented:

      The comment of Marco Weiergräber is full of speculation. But scientific progress depends on careful control of novel hypotheses, especially when results of a similar research project are opposite. Scientific reports must mention opposite results, when new data are published. Siwek et al (Sleep 2014 May 1;37(5):881-92) did not refer to our results published a year earlier (Somnologie, September 2013, Volume 17, Issue 3, pp 185-192) but they speculate since then in an unscientific manner about our data, which were presented in our publication in an absolute transparent way (single data, in parallel to the resulting mean values). Our data are as reliable as the data from Siwek et al (2014). Taking this premise serious, one has to think about reasons for differences of results in an objective way. Two different mouse models were used in the two sleep studies mentioned. Logically, one must look for differences in these two mouse models, which we have discussed in an objective and fair way, without questioning the careful investigation done by Siwek et al (2014). To think about the different remnants left in the two different Cav2.3-knockout mouse lines should generate new hypotheses instead of condemning the results of a competing laboratory. We estimate the risk of an aminoterminal Cav2.3-peptide (resulting from the expression of exon 1) lower to contribute to calcium current disturbances as the risk of a "hemichannel".

      The last chapter of Marco Weiergräber's comments also stays speculative, as long as he has not tested the transfer capacity of the transmitter device under discussion (a F20EET radiotransmitter from DSI). We tested the frequency bands under standardized conditions and can confirm that the bandwidth is broader than mentioned by him. Instead of repeating again and again the same critisism without mentioning e.g. a correction published by us (Schneider T. and Dibué M., 2015 in Somnologie 17, 307-308) and without presenting new proofing data, it seems to be a fight for something else but not for progress in Science.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2015 Sep 06, Lydia Maniatis commented:

      The claims of Blakeslee and McCourt are flawed on logical, methodological, theoretical, and empirical grounds.

      Perhaps the core error is the denial of perceptual facts, as described below (and as noted also by Gilchrist in his commentary on this article).

      In the Adelson checker-shadow illusion (to take one example), a check in apparent shadow looks white, while an equiluminant check, apparently in plain view, looks black. Aside from the additional presence of the apparent shadow, the experience of the two surfaces is similar to looking at a white check and at a black check under homogeneous illumination. Kohler (1935), describes a “real-world” version wherein a white and a black paper appear white and black, respectively, even if the illumination is adjusted so that the two surfaces are actually equiluminant.

      Imagine, now, what would happen if we asked a naive observer to report on “the intensity of the light coming from the surface of each of the two checks.” First, he or she would likely assume the question referred to the apparent illumination of the surfaces. In this case, the white, “shadowed” check should receive a lower rating than the black “plain-view” one. If we then tried to clarify that we want the observer to make matches based on “the amount of light each surface is sending to the eye,” (its luminance) I think the observer would have trouble a. understanding what we are asking and b. performing the required task. And I'm not sure anyone would be able to judge, with confidence, whether the two checks in the Adelson checkerboard are, or are not, in fact equiluminant. That's what makes the demo so impressive. Even if observers could estimate this value, the task would be difficult and the results unreliable. To achieve it, they would have to focus narrowly on each square, isolating it from the surround.

      Yet, Blakeslee and McCourt maintain that the latter task, which requires viewers to overide their spontaneous, salient perceptual experience, is “strictly based on appearance,” while the former, effortless experience is “based on an inferential judgment.” If, however, we define “appearance” as “what something looks like,” then the authors' arguments are obviously false, as can be confirmed by any observer.

      The authors' argue that the experience which is quite literally based on appearance, is actually a product of learning. This is a major claim (implying that learning can actually alter a percept from black to white), but the authors offer no evidence for it. All of the arguments and available evidence is against. As Gilchrist (2015) points out, even fish seem to naturally achieve this kind of learning. A child can see the Adelson checker-shadow effect as effortlessly as an adult. Our perceptions aren't affected by what we learn about the nature of light and the properties of surfaces, we don't have to learn how to judge when a surface is in shadow or merely darker than its neighbor, or when it is covered by various types of transparency, we don't even have to learn that at night things don't actually change color. Given the difficulty scientists have in analyzing and modelling percieved lightness, and given that massive, early exposure to artificial images mimicking illumination variation has no discernible effect on our perception of the “real” world, the claim that people go through a process of learning to make the inferences necessary to achieve veridical percepts in natural conditions does not seem credible. B and M have certainly not tested it.

      The quality that the authors argue is “strictly based on appearance” is a quality that they term “brightness,” defined as the perceptual correlate of luminance. The view that there is a perceptual correlate of luminance seems to be uncontroversial among lightness researchers (e.g. Kingdom, 2011; Gilchrist, 1999)), although Anderson (2014) seems to define brightness (more properly, in my opinion) as apparent illumination. The claim seems easy to refute.

      Suppose we observe a set of surfaces lacking cues to differential illumination, and that some appear white, some gray, some black. Suppose, then, that we observe the same set of surfaces, at a different time, under a different degree of illumination. Assume that have completely forgotten the previous experience with the surfaces, and are again asked to judge their white/gray/black character. Our responses will typically be similar to those we gave in the first (now forgotten) instance. In other words, even though the illumination (and consequently the luminance) of the surfaces will have changed, our responses will remain the same. If the range of luminances is complete enough, they will, in both cases, be correlated with reflectance and not with luminance. Thus, even under homogeneous illumination, we cannot say that we are perceiving luminance, or that perception is more direct than in other situations. As always, the percept is the product of a complex visual process based on luminance values and structural assumptions.

      When it comes to the case of non-homogenous (apparent) illumination, the authors seem to be treating illumination boundaries as though they were directly-perceived facts serving to support “inferentially” perceived lightness judgments. They say, for example, that “when the illumination component is clearly visible” the observer can use “brightness contrast” at the boundary to infer the magnitude of the illumination. There are a number of problems with this description.

      First, if a shadow is perceived – is “clearly visible” - as the cause of the luminance boundary, then viewers are perceiving a double-layer – a surface with lightness x and an apparent shadow of darkness y lying on top of it. They are not perceiving a single “brightness” value. The authors are using the term “brightness” when they actually mean luminance.

      Relatedly, the illumination boundary only becomes “clearly visible” after the visual process has inferred its presence based on the luminance structure – including the relative luminances at luminance boundaries - of the image. Whether the darker side of an edge will be perceived as being similar in reflectance, but lower in illumination than its neighbor, or as darker than its neighbor due to a lower reflectance, or any other combination of possibilities, depends on the global structure of the image. Given certain conditions, even a non-existent luminance edge may produce an apparent lightness difference, as in the case of illusory surfaces. So the argument that perceiving a surface as continuing beneath a “shadow” boundary is more inferential than perceiving a particular surface as gray due to its luminance relative to other surfaces in an image is naive. If “appearance-based” means “based on luminances”, then all perception is appearance-based. If it means that surfaces are perceived based on local luminance conditions, then it never is. Local conditions do not even determine photoreceptor activity in the horseshoe crab.

      As corroborating evidence, the authors point to a few references, including Blakeslee and McCourt (2008), which is supposed to prove the existence of “brightness” judgments. Their stimuli consist of the classic simultaneous contrast demo plus variations that create weak impressions of differential illumination. The “brightness” judgments are defined as those that arise when observers are instructed to focus narrowly on the targets. This is similar to applying a mask. Effectively, we are talking about the same visual process acting on a different stimulus, not about a different type of judgment. Due to the weakness of the structural cues to differential illumination in B and M's (2008) stimuli, the ability of observers to isolate the target in this way is very easy. The demand would be much more difficult, and the results surely very different, if the stimulus had been the Adelson checkerboard.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2016 Jan 29, Martin Pusic commented:

      Thank you for this insightful review - we're glad that the article created such a rich discussion. Here are a couple of other thoughts:

      . "different tracks for different learners" - what a learning curve makes manifest is the time component of an assessment. As a medical educators, we have the privilege of teaching highly motivated learners who almost always get over whatever bar we set for them. If we grade ourselves as teachers by counting how many learners get over the bar, it is easy to perceive ourselves as successful; however, if instead we grade ourselves on the SLOPE of the learning curve, now we have a metric that challenges us to grade our efforts in terms of learning efficiency, which is amount of learning per unit of learning effort expended. This does three good things: 1) it orients us towards maximizing the most precious student commodity - time; 2) it prompts educators to consider more closely the PROCESS of learning as that's how you improve the slope and 3) it allows us to use the variability in paths/slopes to learn the best ways of teaching and learning. So it may be that we do not need customized learner development charts, as well as those work for pediatrics, but rather to learn from those outliers who fall away from the average curve so as to feed that back into the system to improve the learning for everyone.

      .in the "life-cycle of clinical education" we would also encourage you consider the asymptote. The asymptote defines the "potential" of a learning system. "How good can we possibly be, if we used this system an infinite number of times?" Improving the slope means we get people up to competence more efficiently. Improving the asymptote means we get even better competence. In some cases we only need "x" amount of minimum competence and we're fine (think hand washing); but in most areas of medicine, we can always do better. The path to competence is all-important, but our learning systems would do well to also map out the path from competence to excellence, defined as being the very best any of us can be. The asymptote, along with the very shallow slope of the learning curve as it approaches it, gives us an idea of what excellence takes.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2015 Jan 22, Yuriy Pankratov commented:

      This discussion could be more enlightening and even reach a consensus of some sort if our respected opponents, instead of making ungrounded accusations and avoiding inconvenient facts, tried to address the most serious issues, raised in our comments at PubMed Common and JNS website. These issues include: stark contradiction between the EGFP and LacZ expression phenotypes shown in Fujita et al. and data shown in previous publications (all of which went through rigorous peer review by the way); lack of direct evidence of notable impairment of synaptic transmission in dnSNARE mice and existence of clear evidence of the opposite; large pool of evidence supporting physiological role of astroglial exocytosis which does not rely on the dnSNARE mice at all. Neither paper itself nor Authors’ responses to comments (which basically repeats what was said in the article) address these issues.

      Still, we think that some consensus might be found. Before going to that point, we would like to clarify points raised by our opponents in their last post. 1) For the sake of unbiased discussion, citing one paper showing a lack of VAMP2 expression in astrocytes (Schubert et al.2011) one might mention at least one paper from the large pool showing the opposite (Martineau et al 2013).

      More importantly, one should not swap between quantitative and “all-or-none” kind of reasoning to one’s convenience. If we assume that level of astrocytic expression of VAMP2 of tenth of that in neurons is low enough to make VAMP2 non important for function of astrocyte, than we have to assume the existence of certain level of expression below which dnSNARE transgene will not significantly affect neuronal function as compared to astrocytes. OK, it may be not tenth but hundredth fraction, dose not matter.

      We thankful to our opponents for bringing up an example of tetanus and botulinum toxins. Even theses deadliest toxins act in dose-dependent manner. Both on the levels of whole organism and single presynaptic terminals, smaller doses of these toxins (as compared to LD50 and IC50) have milder effects. So, it is very likely that effects of dnSNARE expression are dose-dependent (if not to believe in homeopathy, of course).

      The same is applicable to the action of doxycycline, which is also dose-dependent. So one could not expect 100% inhibition of transgenes, especially at oral administration of Dox. To answer first part of opponents comment 2), the Figure 1O-R from Halassa et al. shows efficient, but incomplete suppression by Dox, rather than “leaky” EGFP expression. To what extent the same is applicable to Fig.2C of Fujita et al, let the reader to decide. Of course, non-complete suppression by Dox is a downside of tetO/tetA system but this can be easily remedied by comparing On-Dox and Off-Dox data.

      2) Theoretically speaking, concern that “neurons express the dnSNARE transgene at all “ may be applicable to any glia-specific transgenic mice. One could not a priori expect an absolute specificity of expression of neuronal and glial genes, the data of Cahoy et al. 2008 are the good illustration. This, rather philosophical, question goes far beyond the current discussion. There is no molecular genetic tool to ensure 100% glial specificity. On practice, one could only expect to obtain a negligible (again, in relative sense) level of neuronal transgene expression and verify the lack of significant impact on neuronal function.

      3) Regarding the putative “dramatic and unpredictable “ effects of neuronal dnSNARE expression, the TeNTx and BoNT give a good indication of what to expect. However, dnSNARE mice do not show any notable deficit of motor or respiratory function. On a level of synapses, there was no evidence of any significant decrease (not saying about complete inhibition) of vesicular release of main neurotransmitters (Pascual et al. 2005; Lalo et al. 2014). On contrary, our data show an impairment of signals triggered by activation of Ca2+-signalling selectively in astrocytes (Lalo et al. 2014; Rasooli-Nejad et al. 2014). Let it to the reader to decide, to what extent available functional data support the opponents’ notion that “synaptic transmission may directly be suppressed by dnSNARE expression in neurons “ and that “Even very low levels of expression of dnSNARE in neurons invalidate any conclusion based on this transgenic mouse “.

      One might argue that dnSNARE transgene could be expressed only in the certain subset of neurons or in some specific brain region thus strongly affecting some specific function rather than causing general, milder, functional deficit. However, this is unlikely for the supposed basal leakiness of the tet-off system and further experiments would be required to identify such regions/neuronal subsets.

      4) Addressing the second half of the point 2) – One can only wonder why, in 2012, already knowing that their results contradict to data presented by that time by several studies, our respected opponents did not contact authors of those publications to request mice from them? Again, one might only wonder why PCR data generated from 2 batches of mice have sample size of n = 3 – 4 (meaning 1-2 tissues per batch) ?

      5) Regarding the intrinsic limitations of dnSNARE mice, anyone working with them is aware of fact that EGFP, LacZ, and dnSNARE genes were inserted independently. However, their expression is controlled by the same factors so their expression probabilities depend on the same set of parameters and therefore are not truly independent, from mathematical point of view. The correlation in expression of these transgenes is supported by the co-inheritance. Furthermore, data of Halassa et al. show that 97% of cells expressing the dnSNARE, also express EGFP. We would like to emphasize that the opposite - the presence of true mosaic expression pattern in dnSNARE mice, i.e. existence of number of individual cells expressing dnSNARE and not expressing EGFP and number of EGFP-only cells, has not be shown so far; Fig.3 from Fujita et. al 2014 does not show this either.

      Thus, even assuming the leakiness of the “tet-off” system, one might expect probability of EGFP expression to be of the same order of magnitude as that of dnSNARE, this is also agrees with data of Fujita et al. So, in case of absence of EGFP expression in a large population of neurons, the presence of even small fraction of neurons expressing dnSNARE is very unlikely. From mathematical point of view, the probability of certain population of neurons to express only dnSNARE will fall exponentially with the expected size of population.

      Finally, one could hardly deny the large difference in the phenotype of the cohort of dnSNARE mice, described by Fujita et al. and the cohort of mice used by other groups. The point of some consensus could be that in some, still unidentified conditions, the tetA/tetO system may suddenly became leaky, causing some level of expression GFAP-driven transgenes dnSNARE, EGFP and lacZ genes in neurons. So, in experiments with dnSNARE mice extra care should be done to verify the lack of neuronal dnSNARE expression. This can be done by showing the absence of surrogate reporters EGFP or lacZ in neuronal populations of interest combined with electrophysiological data showing the lack of deficit of synaptic neurotransmitter release. This could be a good practice for any glia-specific inducible transgene.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2015 Jan 24, Todd Lee commented:

      As stated in our paper, we need the data from IMPROVE-IT to better inform us on the use of ezetimibe. However, rather than relying on a conference presentation and press releases we will also need to await the peer-reviewed and sponsor-independent analysis of the IMPROVE-IT trial to judge the quality of the results and evaluate their impact on general practice. Given interim analysis was performed (and the study was subsequently re-sized) any multiple comparisons performed will require expert statistical review.

      Furthermore, given no other positive studies exist, it may be prudent to perform an independent individual patient data analysis of all similar studies to better refine or confirm the estimate of effect prior to making any final conclusions from one trial.

      The net conclusion of this study, if the presented data is taken at face value, is a number needed to treat (NNT) of 50 over 7 years for the composite outcome. Overall mortality was not reduced. At generic Canadian prices it would cost approximately $58,765 to prevent 1 event over 7 years (Ontario formulary price as of January 2015). However, at US brand name prices of approximately $8.50 per day (Lexicomp 2015) the cost of preventing one composite outcome would be more than $1,000,000.

      It is also important to note that IMPROVE-IT was a secondary prevention study (acute event within 10 days) and not primary prevention. In primary prevention, the NNT is likely much higher and the corresponding costs per event prevented would increase proportionately and likely be substantial even at generic prices. In our cohort 6/17 (35%) were receiving ezetimibe for primary prevention.

      Whether the drug lowers event rates in the absence of a statin remains unproven and cannot be inferred from this study. Nonetheless, it will be interesting to see the effects on monotherapy uptake given the publicity around this study and also when IMPROVE-IT is ultimately published.

      The impact of this study on the uptake of other drugs approved on the basis of LDL as a surrogate marker is also not to be underestimated. The issue of treating to specific LDL targets is currently being debated amongst experts after recent changes to the guidelines. It would be somewhat naive to think that there isn't a substantial market pressure behind bringing back targets to be measured and obtained through additional medications.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2015 Nov 30, John P A Ioannidis commented:

      Dear Joshua,

      thank you again for your comments. I am worried that you continue to cut and paste to distort my sentences.

      1. The headline over my text was written by the Nature editors as their introduction to the paper, so perhaps you should blame them and ask them to replace it with "Here follows a horrible paper by Ioannidis". Yet, I think you would still be unfair to blame them, because their headline says "most innovative and influential", not just "most innovative". The terms "influential", "influence", "major influence" pervade my paper multiple times, but you pick one sentence with "innovative" instead, and interpret it entirely out of its context.<br>
      2. The phrases "the most important" and "very important" are not identical. Very important papers may not necessarily be THE most important. But they are very important - and influential. [As an aside, honestly, this repeated cross-examining quotation-comment style makes me feel as if I am answering the Spanish Inquisition. Am I going to be burnt at the stake now (please!) or there is one more round of torture?]
      3. We agree we need evidence, more evidence - evidence is good, on everything, including the current NIH funding system, which has practically no evidence that it better than other options, but still distributes tens of billions of dollars per year. Wisely, I am sure.<br>
      4. "your list contains...". This is not my list. This is the Scopus list. Right or wrong, I preferred not to manipulate it. Your colleagues did manipulate it and did not even share the data on how exactly they manipulated it.
      5. You continue to use the term "innovative thinker" out of its context. I scanned again carefully my paper and I can't find the word "excellent". In my mind, a student who has authored as first author a paper that got over 1000 citations (and the paper is not wrong/refuted) is already worthy to be given a shot as a principal investigator. If you disagree, what can I say, feel free not to fund him/her. And please don't worry, most of these guys are not funded anyhow currently, many of them even quit science. Hundreds of principal investigators who publish absolutely nothing or publish nothing with any substantial impact get funded again and again. Hurray!<br>

      I am afraid it is unlikely there will be more convergence in our views at this point. A million thanks once again, I have learnt a lot from your comments.

      John


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

    1. On 2015 Jul 15, Raphael Levy commented:

      Thanks Harald for commenting on my blog post about SmartFlares / Nanoflares with reference to this paper.

      I reproduce the conversation below. I hope it continues and others join in.

      Raphael


      "Hi everybody, as the correspending author of a Stem Cell paper in which we have used the SmartFlares on different pluripotent cells of human, murine and porcine origin I want to reply to two of the above mentioned questions.

      Why do we see a signal at all in the scramble control? I think one cannot expect a negative control which does not produce a fluorescent signal at all. The fluorophore may not be quenched by 100% and may be subject to degradation, especially when applied for a longer time (two days or more). Nevertheless, within 16 to 24 hours after the application of the nanoparticles we see a clear-cut difference of fluorescence intensity when comparing scramble control and gene-specifc Smart Flares. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25335772

      We believe that this difference is reliable and specific. We have selected freshly reprogrammed murine iPS cells based on their Nanog-specific fluorescence intensity in situ. In downstream experiments we could confirm that only colonies with a high fluorescence intensity expressed higher amounts of endogenous pluripotency factors and showed a superior capacity to differentiate. Therefore, we belive that these functional data strongly support the idea that the fluorescence intensity was indeed correlated to a specific interaction with the Nanog mRNA in these clones.

      Why do different cells take up varying amounts of SmartFlares? I think this difference is not surprising as the nanoparticles are engulfed by endocytosis. This process is influenced by the cell type, the differentiation status and the cellular ability to perform phago- and macropinocytosis. Therefore, we think that a uniform uptake rate cannot be expected."

      I replied "Hi Harald

      Thanks again for commenting here and sorry for the delay in replying. It is interesting that you see some differences but the big question that remains is how could the technology possibly work?

      It can only work if the particles escape endosomes, but: 1) there is no reason why they should, 2) this problem is not discussed in the original publication introducing the technology, 3) there is no direct evidence in the literature that it happens, and, 4) all the data we are accumulating indicates that the particles are indeed in vesicular compartments (more on this soon on the open notebook as we have just had our cell electron microscopy results this week).

      The images shown in your articles are low mag overviews of many cells and therefore the resolution does not allow to discuss any cellular localization. Do you have any higher resolution images that you could share? Do you have any (direct) evidence and/or proposed mechanism for endosomal escape?

      The unequal distribution of uptake (cell to cell variability) is also a big concern. I don鴠believe that it relates to differences between rate of uptake of different cells. Such differences would average over an 18 hour period and they should also be seen in the dextran uptake. A possible interpretation would be some degree of nanoparticle association/aggregation before interaction with the cells (this is to be tested experimentally).

      Raphael"


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.