evident-truths

[evident-truths]

What Happens to the Stay-at-Home Girlfriend After a Breakup?

[evident-truths]

The parts you’re calling racist are under the “racist” heading. Meaning @blackswallowtailbutterfly is calling the statements below the “racist” heading racist. You’re agreeing with OP. It is not a racist manifesto.

Not racist:

--Black and brown men don't belong in women's spaces anymore than white men do. Their oppression on the basis of race doesn't take away from them being male oppressors of women.

--A woman who happens to be white is not bigoted for avoiding a man who happens to not be white. Men in general pose a threat to women. Being a target of racism does not stop a man from wanting to harm women. Stop telling women to ignore their appropriate fear responses.

--Men of colour using misogynistic slurs against women is actually as bad as white people using racist slurs, straight people using homophobic slurs, etc..

--We should not ignore the misogyny of men of colour. It primarily affects women of colour so the notion that you're protecting people of colour doesn't hold up. It just means you think misogyny isn't important.

--All rapists deserve to die, regardless of race. Barring that, they should all be in prison for life.

--Men raping, regardless of race, is a feature, not a bug.

--Refusing to listen to women of colour about the ways in which men of colour abuse them is both racist and misogynistic.

Racist:

--When a man of colour rapes a woman or girl, especially a white woman or girl, this is proof of the depravity of men of colour. The same is not true of white men when they rape women and girls, especially women and girls of colour.

--In spite of women saying otherwise throughout all of history, both white women in their own countries, and women of colour in theirs, white men are just safer to be around somehow.

--My noticing it more with men of colour, having normalized it with white men for a long time, means all the other women who say white men are just as bad must be lying to themselves.

--That many western countries have better rape laws than many other countries is proof of the superiority of white culture, rather than the tooth-and-nail fight by women. The recent history of western countries destabilizing other countries, including the feminist movements in those countries, and setting them back decades or even centuries, is not proof of the depravity of white culture.

--The history of western colonization and all the rapes committed by white men around the world cannot be used to judge western countries today. The history of men of other countries raping women absolutely can be used against them.

--When a man of colour rapes a woman it's a feature. When a white man does it it's a bug.

--Immigrant men, men of colour, and Muslim men are all the same thing.

--Even though statistics say that women are most at risk from rape by men of their own race, white women are somehow at special risk from men of colour.

--If a man of colour displays sexism it's because of his race. If a white man displays sexism it's because he's an asshole.

--A news report of a man of colour committing a horrific crime and getting a light sentence is proof of special protections afforded to men of colour. A white man committing a similar crime, with a similar sentence, and not getting reported on is proof that white men are not protected.

[evident-truths]

"When bloodstream infections set in, fast treatment is crucial — but it can take several days to identify the bacteria responsible. A new, rapid-diagnosis sepsis test could cut down on the wait, reducing testing time from as much as a few days to about 13 hours by cutting out a lengthy blood culturing step, researchers report July 24 [2024] in Nature.

“They are pushing the limits of rapid diagnostics for bloodstream infections,” says Pak Kin Wong, a biomedical engineer at Penn State who was not involved in the research. “They are driving toward a direction that will dramatically improve the clinical management of bloodstream infections and sepsis.”

Sepsis — an immune system overreaction to an infection — is a life-threatening condition that strikes nearly 2 million people per year in the United States, killing more than 250,000 (SN: 5/18/08). The condition can also progress to septic shock, a steep drop in blood pressure that damages the kidneys, lungs, liver and other organs. It can be caused by a broad range of different bacteria, making species identification key for personalized treatment of each patient.

In conventional sepsis testing, the blood collected from the patient must first go through a daylong blood culturing step to grow more bacteria for detection. The sample then goes through a second culture for purification before undergoing testing to find the best treatment. During the two to three days required for testing, patients are placed on broad-spectrum antibiotics — a blunt tool designed to stave off a mystery infection that’s better treated by targeted antibiotics after figuring out the specific bacteria causing the infection.

Nanoengineer Tae Hyun Kim and colleagues found a way around the initial 24-hour blood culture.

The workaround starts by injecting a blood sample with nanoparticles decorated with a peptide designed to bind to a wide range of blood-borne pathogens. Magnets then pull out the nanoparticles, and the bound pathogens come with them. Those bacteria are sent directly to the pure culture. Thanks to this binding and sorting process, the bacteria can grow faster without extraneous components in the sample, like blood cells and the previously given broad-spectrum antibiotics, says Kim, of Seoul National University in South Korea.

Cutting out the initial blood culturing step also relies on a new imaging algorithm, Kim says. To test bacteria’s susceptibility to antibiotics, both are placed in the same environment, and scientists observe if and how the antibiotics stunt the bacteria’s growth or kill them. The team’s image detection algorithm can detect subtler changes than the human eye can. So it can identify the species and antibiotic susceptibility with far fewer bacteria cells than the conventional method, thereby reducing the need for long culture times to produce larger colonies.

Though the new method shows promise, Wong says, any new test carries a risk of false negatives, missing bacteria that are actually present in the bloodstream. That in turn can lead to not treating an active infection, and “undertreatment of bloodstream infection can be fatal,” he says. “While the classical blood culture technique is extremely slow, it is very effective in avoiding false negatives.”

Following their laboratory-based experiments, Kim and colleagues tested their new method clinically, running it in parallel with conventional sepsis testing on 190 hospital patients with suspected infections. The testing obtained a 100 percent match on correct bacterial species identification, the team reports. Though more clinical tests are needed, these accuracy results are encouraging so far, Kim says.

The team is continuing to refine their design in hopes of developing a fully automated sepsis blood test that can quickly produce results, even when hospital laboratories are closed overnight. “We really wanted to commercialize this and really make it happen so that we could make impacts to the patients,” Kim says."

-via Science News, July 24, 2024