#public health and environmental concern

[suicidepreventionday]

Preventing suicide by phasing out highly hazardous pesticides.

Self-poisoning with pesticides is among the most common means of suicide worldwide, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where highly hazardous pesticides (HHPs) are readily available. Multi-sectoral action is needed to phase out the use of HHPs to prevent suicide and other related issues of public health and environmental concern. This brochure aims to provide a brief overview of the issue of HHPs and approaches to phasing out HHPs to save lives, particularly suicides. It has been designed for a broad audience, including policy-makers (e.g. health, agriculture, and environment), pesticide regulators, local health and agricultural services, civil society organizations, academics, as well as the general public. It draws on the 2023 WHO/FAO Guidance on use of pesticide regulation to prevent suicide and the 2019 WHO/FAO publication. Preventing suicide: a resource for pesticide registrars and regulators

[publizero]

"When Injustice Becomes Law, Resistance Becomes Duty"

“When Injustice Becomes Law, Resistance Becomes Duty”: A Reflection on the Fight Against Discrimination and Oppression in Nigeria In today’s society, injustice and discrimination remain prevalent issues that continue to challenge humanity. Unfortunately, some societies establish laws that perpetuate oppression and discrimination, making resistance a necessary duty for those who are affected by…

[townpostin]

Jamshedpur's Air Quality Crisis: Funds Underutilized Despite Health Risks

Study Reveals Toxic Metals in Air as Pollution Control Efforts Lag Jamshedpur faces severe air pollution, with high levels of toxic metals detected, while only 35.78% of allocated funds for control measures have been utilized. JAMSHEDPUR – The Steel City grapples with a mounting air pollution crisis, as recent studies unveil alarming levels of toxic metals in the air amid significant…

[gottalottarocks]

Are you an American? Frustrated by the political process? Do you feel like you have no voice in our government? Let me introduce you to the wonderful world of public comments. 

This is where federal agencies propose new regulations asking for public feedback:

Regulations.gov

Here's a step by step on how to navigate this:

Look through the proposals on the explore tab and filter by "Proposed Rule". These are the regulations that have been proposed, but not finalized. 

If you click on these, they are pretty dense, text heavy explanations of the proposed rule changes. I definitely do a lot of googling when trying to understand what I'm reading. Also there are a lot of different topics here and I definitely don't comment on everything.

This is how you make a public comment. For example, for this proposed rule:

Start a new document and write the subject and docket number. Your comment NEEDS to have the docket number for them to count it most of the time, and the correct subject some of the time.

^^ this is ambiguous, but add the docket ID and subject just to be safe, it should look like this:

Ref: Docket ID No. NSD 104

Provisions Pertaining to Preventing Access to Americans' Bulk Sensitive Personal Data and U.S. Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern

Then address to the person at the very very end of the page. 

Scroll all the way to the end:

^^this is the person you address to. 

Then introduce yourself. If you have experience related to the proposed rule, talk about that. For rules related to the environment and public health I say that I'm a geologist with a master's degree and I work in environmental remediation. Otherwise, I just say I'm a concerned citizen. 

Then I say hey I agree/ disagree with this proposed rule and here's why. Oftentimes there will be lists that the federal agency is asking for specific feedback on.

Commenting on these will have a lot of impact. 

Here's an example comment I forgot to post for a rule regarding methane emissions in the oil and gas industry:

Administrator Michael Regan The United States Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20460

Ref: Docket ID No. __ Waste Emissions Charge for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems Dear Administrator Regan, My name is __ and I am writing to you as a geologist and graduate of ___.  I currently work in ____. Thank you for your interest in reducing methane pollution, which I believe to be one of the most important aspects in reducing the harm caused by the climate crisis. Within the short term, methane is a much more powerful force of global warming than carbon dioxide. It breaks down faster than carbon dioxide— but it traps significantly more heat that should be bouncing back into space. When scientists talk about taking our foot off the gas pedal in regards to the climate crisis, methane is at the forefront of our minds. Natural gas is often proposed as a solution to reducing our greenhouse gas emissions (since it produces less carbon dioxide than coal plants), but these methane leaks are a serious threat to public health. Not only is methane hazardous, it’s ability to cause short-term superheating is contributing to the rapid increase in wildfires within the U.S. and globally, further degrading air quality. Last summer in NYC skies were orange, caused by ash from Canadian wildfires. As someone who sets up air monitoring equipment every day to ensure the surrounding community is not impacted from the disposal of hazardous waste, I have a unique opportunity to see on a day-to-day basis how air quality is degrading. I strongly support the Environmental Protection Agency's proposed waste emissions charge. For EPA’s implementation of the fee to fulfill Congress’s goals, the final regulation must continue to include key requirements including: ·       Regulatory compliance exemptions must only become available after final standards and plans are in effect in all states and that these plans are at least as strong as the EPA's 202 methane emissions proposal. Operators filing for exemption must also demonstrate full compliance across their facilities; ·       Strong and clear criteria must remain in place for operators seeking an exemption based on unreasonable permitting delays; ·       When operators seek an exemption for plugged wells, they must clearly demonstrate that their wells have been properly plugged and are no longer polluting; ·       Transparent calculations and methodologies to accurately determine an owner or operator’s net emissions; and ·       Strong verification protocols so that fee obligations accurately reflect reported emissions and that exemptions are only available once the conditions Congress set forth are met. I urge the EPA to quickly finalize this proposal with limited flaring, strengthened emissions standards for storage tanks, and a pathway for enhanced community monitoring. Thank you, ___________

And then paste your comment in or upload a document and submit! You will be asked to provide your name and address. Also the FCC will only take comments on their website, but the proposed rule will be posted on the federal regulations website I put above and they should have a link to the FCC website within that post. 

[northgazaupdates]

19 April 2024

Journalist Momin Abu Owda documents the accumulation of waste due to the IOF’s sabotage of waste treatment facilities in Gaza. He reports that unless fuel is allowed into north Gaza that will enable the partial resumption of waste management practices, the area faces even more dire environmental and public health concerns. This has also been spoken about at length by environmental engineer Dr. Tamer Al-Najjar, who warned of the impacts the IOF’s infrastructural sabotage campaign, and has now fallen seriously ill to the diseases he tried to warn the world about.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Momin abu owda (@m_abuowda11)

[covid-safer-hotties]

Also preserved in our archive

Clean air and masking makes us all healthier.

By Hugo Francisco de Souza

In a recent study published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, researchers evaluated the relative risks of Long COVID following human exposure to several types of environmental pollutants. Their study leveraged data from the Catalonian COVICAT cohort (n = 2,853 Catalonian adults aged 40–65) and found that while air pollutant exposure (particularly particulate matter) increased Long COVID risk (PM2.5 RR = 1.14 [95% CI: 0.97–1.37], PM10 RR = 1.15 [95% CI: 0.98–1.39]), these associations were not statistically significant. Other environmental pollutants (noise, light, and green spaces) showed no such association.

Notably, study findings validate previous research suggesting the role of suspended particulate matter in COVID-19 severity and its indirect link to Long COVID risk through heightened initial infection severity, while highlighting subtle differences in Long COVID risk across sex, age, and education levels. It helps inform clinicians and policymakers of priorities when tackling this growing global public health concern.

Background Long COVID, also called ‘post-COVID-19 syndrome’ and ‘post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC)’ is an umbrella term for a group of symptoms that develop or persist for weeks, months, or even years following recovery from a coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Its symptoms vary substantially between patients and may include post-exertional malaise, fatigue, chest or muscle pain, and ‘brain fog’ (cognitive dysfunctions).

The duration and severity of Long COVID impart significant debilitation and socioeconomic stress to patients and their families, highlighting the need for identifying its risk factors and high-risk populations. Previous research has suggested that air pollution significantly contributes to COVID-19 infection severity and, in turn, Long COVID risk. However, such findings have often been limited by short study durations, reliance on self-reported data, and insufficient sample sizes. Furthermore, the impacts of other environmental pollutants remain unknown.

About the Study The present study aims to address present knowledge gaps by investigating the associations between urban environmental pollutant exposure and subsequent Long COVID risk. It leverages detailed, longitudinal self-reported online questionnaire data from the COVICAT cohort, a long-term prospective population-based cohort of Catalonian adults (40-65 years), supplemented with baseline medical data from the GCAT study (2019).

Study data was collected via three online questionnaires administered during the pandemic (2020, 2021, and 2023). Relevant data included sociodemographics (sex, age, education level) and clinical data (COVID-19 infection severity, body mass index [BMI], general health status, and vaccination details). Participants who remained unresponsive or provided incomplete data were excluded from statistical analyses.

The study further defined and investigated the prevalence and risk associations of ‘persistent Long COVID,’ symptoms which were reported in 2021 and persisted through 2023. Urban environmental pollutant exposure was assessed based on annual averages at participants' residential addresses. These included air (suspended particulate matter [PM2.5, PM10], nitrogen dioxide [NO2], and ozone [O3]), green space availability (including normalized difference vegetation index [NDVI]), nighttime road-traffic noise, and outdoor melanopic illuminance (blue light artificial light at night [ALAN]).

The association between each individual exposure and participant outcomes was evaluated using three mixed-effect robust Poisson regression models adjusted for sociodemographic, clinical, and infection severity factors. Statistical analyses included participants reporting COVID-19 infections but no subsequent Long COVID symptoms as controls.

Study Findings Out of the 2,853 participants included in the final dataset, 700 (24.5%) reported Long COVID symptoms, of which 153 (5%) reported persistent Long COVID. Women (n = 1,788, 27.6%) reported higher Long COVID prevalence than their male counterparts (n = 1,065, 19.4%). Education was found to be a significant determinant of Long COVID incidence, with university-educated participants (n = 1,557, 22.2%) demonstrating lower prevalence than those with only primary/lower education (n = 219, 29.2%).

Prior chronic disease substantially increased Long COVID risk (n = 1,013, 33.3%). COVID-19-associated clinical data revealed that infection severity and pre-infection vaccination administration were significant determinants, with the latter reducing Long COVID risk.

Notably, apart from suspended particulate matter exposure (PM2.5 RR = 1.14 [95% CI: 0.97–1.37], PM10 RR = 1.15 [95% CI: 0.98–1.39]), no other urban environmental pollutants were found to be associated with the heightened prevalence of Long COVID. These findings align with previous reports, albeit in a Catalonian-restricted sample cohort. Researchers speculate that particulate matter may influence Long COVID risk indirectly by increasing the severity of the initial infection.

Conclusions The present study investigates the impacts of several urban environmental pollutants (air, noise, green spaces, and light) on Long COVID or persistent Long COVID risk. Study findings reveal that suspended particulate matter increased the risk of Long COVID by exacerbating the severity of the initial COVID-19 infection. Women, participants with limited education, and those with pre-existing chronic diseases were found to demonstrate substantially higher Long COVID risk than their respective counterparts. Surprisingly, other evaluated environmental pollutants were not found to impact Long COVID incidence or prevalence.

“Further research focusing on Long COVID subtypes, symptom clusters, and potential mechanisms underlying observed associations will be crucial for enhancing our understanding of this complex condition,” the researchers concluded.

Journal reference: Saucy, A., Espinosa, A., Iraola-Guzmán, S., Castaño-Vinyals, G., Harding, B. N., Karachaliou, M., Ranzani, O., De Cid, R., Garcia-Aymerich, J., & Kogevinas, M. (2024). Environmental Exposures and Long COVID in a Prospective Population-Based Study in Catalonia (COVICAT Study). In Environmental Health Perspectives (Vol. 132, Issue 11). Environmental Health Perspectives, DOI – 10.1289/ehp15377, ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/EHP15377

[vague-humanoid]

When a massive pipeline ruptured in the steep slopes of Appalachia earlier this year, regulators in charge of environmental and community safety looked the other way. They shared no details with the residents living near the Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) who watched sediment pollute delicate ecosystems and municipalities’ water sources. Designed to push up to 2 billion cubic feet of methane gas through the mountains of West Virginia and southwest Virginia every day, the pipe ruptured during a standard water pressure test. 

The incident is emblematic of regulators’ unwillingness to hold the company accountable for safety concerns, leaving residents to live in fear of a deadly tragedy. 

A crisis of faith has emerged surrounding the regulatory agencies that are tasked with protecting public health and safety. For a decade, community members living along the Mountain Valley Pipeline route tried to convince officials and institutions—whose stated purpose is to protect us and the environment—to do their job. It doesn’t matter how many listening sessions an agency offers if they don’t meaningfully incorporate scientific and community feedback into their decisions. But these agencies have turned their backs on science and the common good, and they’ve made decisions that lock us into fossil fuels for decades.

At a critical point for our democracy and climate, regulatory agencies must immediately address the crisis by refusing to back polluters. Instead, they must listen to science and the public. Their unwillingness to do so directly impacts communities’ mental and physical health, and these conditions will only worsen as the climate crisis intensifies.

[autisticadvocacy]

The Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN) condemns the United States Supreme Court ruling on two combined cases, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless v. Department of Commerce. The decision overturns a decades-old legal principle known as the Chevron Doctrine, which gives federal agencies the authority to reasonably interpret ambiguous laws when they create federal regulations. These regulations are made legally binding through a rulemaking process that is shaped by the public servants within federal agencies, the input of subject area experts across fields, and anyone who chooses to share their opinion. Instead, federal courts will now have the final say in circumstances where knowledge of highly specialized, complex, and technical issues is required. This ruling will weaken the regulatory authority of all federal agencies, including the Departments of Labor (DOL), Education (ED), Health and Human Services (HHS), the Social Security Administration (SSA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Federal agencies create regulations or rules that fill in the gaps of laws intended to protect disability rights, civil rights laws, housing, healthcare, and more. The overturning of Chevron and the deference it gives to the courts will have devastating impacts on all marginalized people, including disabled people and particularly disabled people of color. Often, these rules concern subjects well outside of the scope of legal training, including, as Marissa Ditkowsky noted, drug safety evidentiary standards, eligibility criteria for public benefits, the threshold for disability discrimination, or guidance around worker protections. This change will lead to inconsistent and conflicting adjudication across the country, driving avoidable litigation, confusion, and decisions that do not work well for the people they affect. These harms will fall disproportionately on marginalized people, including the disability community. As the American Cancer Society explained in its amicus brief, “The resulting uncertainty would be extraordinarily destabilizing, not just to the Medicare and Medicaid programs but also – given the size of these programs – to the operational and financial stability of the country’s health care system as a whole.” The same can be said for programs within DOL, ED, SSA, and many other federal agencies. This decision is also undemocratic, moving crucial decisions out of a process where the public has an opportunity to weigh in and into the purview of the courts.

This decision invites challenges to the forty years of legal precedents relying on Chevron. While these cases and the existing Code of Federal Regulations are not automatically overturned by Loper and Relentless, many will be challenged in the months and years to come. Future regulations are also under threat. Agencies may be less ambitious in fulfilling their mandates, protecting the public, and using taxpayers’ resources well in the face of increased risk that courts will undo their work. The endangered regulations include the Home and Community Based Services (HCBS) Settings Rule, the final rule implementing Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the final rule implementing Title IX of the Education Amendments, and the final rule regarding section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

ASAN echoes the demands of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT): “Congress should urgently enact Chevron deference into law by passing the Stop Corporate Capture Act (H.R. 1507), a comprehensive blueprint for modernizing, improving and strengthening the regulatory system. That would ensure public input into regulatory decisions, promote scientific integrity and restore our government’s ability to help the workers and consumers it is meant to serve.”

ASAN will fight to safeguard federal agencies’ ability to protect the people we serve. We will continue to do what we always have: defend the rights, health, services, safety, and well-being of all people with disabilities.

Here are statements on this issue from our allies:

Democracy Forward

National Health Law Program (NHeLP)

National Education Association (NEA)

American Federation of Teachers (AFT)

The Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN) is a national grassroots disability rights organization run by and for autistic people. We believe that the goal of autism advocacy should be a world in which autistic people enjoy equal access, rights, and opportunities. ASAN works to make sure autistic people are included in policy-making, so that laws and policies meet our community’s needs. Our members and supporters include autistic adults and youth, cross-disability advocates, and non-autistic family members, professionals, educators, and friends.

[obsidian-pages777]

SEDNA IN YOUR ASTROLOGY CHART. Where is your Transformation and Sensitivity?

In astrology, Sedna is a relatively recently discovered trans-Neptunian dwarf planet. Its astrological interpretation is still evolving, but it's often associated with deep emotions, trauma, transformation, and issues related to sustainability and ecology.

When Sedna is placed in specific houses in an astrological chart, its influence can vary depending on the individual's birth chart and the aspects it makes to other planets. Here's a brief overview of how Sedna might manifest in each house:

First House: Sedna in the first house could indicate a deep sensitivity and emotional intensity that is very personal to the individual. They may have a strong sense of self-awareness and may experience profound transformations in their identity throughout life.

Second House: In the second house, Sedna may influence the individual's values and possessions, possibly bringing issues related to material security and sustainability to the forefront of their concerns.

Third House: Sedna in the third house might indicate intense communication styles, deep thinking, and perhaps issues related to siblings or the local community that need to be addressed and transformed.

Fourth House: With Sedna in the fourth house, there could be deep-seated emotional issues related to family, home, and roots. Transformations in these areas may be significant throughout life.

Fifth House: Sedna in the fifth house may suggest intense creativity, romantic experiences, or issues related to children that need to be transformed or healed.

Sixth House: In the sixth house, Sedna could indicate deep-seated issues related to health, work, and daily routines. There may be a need for transformation and healing in these areas.

Seventh House: With Sedna in the seventh house, there may be intense experiences in relationships, partnerships, and one-on-one interactions. Transformative experiences through partnerships are likely.

Eighth House: Sedna in the eighth house could indicate intense experiences related to shared resources, intimacy, and transformation. Issues related to trust and vulnerability may arise.

Ninth House: In the ninth house, Sedna may bring deep spiritual or philosophical insights and experiences related to travel, higher education, and belief systems.

Tenth House: Sedna in the tenth house could indicate intense experiences related to career, public image, and authority figures. There may be a need for transformation and healing in these areas.

Eleventh House: With Sedna in the eleventh house, there may be intense experiences related to friendships, groups, and social causes. Issues related to social justice and humanitarianism may be highlighted.

Twelfth House: Sedna in the twelfth house may indicate deep-seated issues related to the subconscious, spirituality, and hidden enemies. There may be a need for healing and transformation on a deeply spiritual level.

Examples:

Angelina Jolie: If Sedna were in Angelina Jolie's first house, it could contribute to her intense and transformative public image, as well as her deep emotional connections to humanitarian causes and family.

Leonardo DiCaprio: With Sedna in the eighth house, Leonardo DiCaprio might experience deep emotional transformations in his personal relationships and career pursuits, especially concerning environmental activism (a cause he's well known for).

Beyoncé Knowles: If Sedna were in Beyoncé's seventh house, it could indicate intense and transformative experiences within her relationships and partnerships, both personally and professionally.

Remember, the interpretation of Sedna in the houses can vary widely depending on the individual's unique birth chart and the aspects it makes to other planets and points. Consulting with a professional astrologer can provide more personalized insights.

[sempermoi]

Rant about generative AI in education and in general under the cut because I'm worried and frustrated and I needed to write it out in a small essay:

So, context: I am a teacher in Belgium, Flanders. I am now teaching English (as a second language), but have also taught history and Dutch (as a native language). All in secondary education, ages 12-16.

More and more I see educational experts endorse ai being used in education and of course the most used tools are the free, generative ones. Today, one of the colleagues responsible for the IT of my school went to an educational lecture where they once again vouched for the use of ai.

Now their keyword is that it should always be used in a responsible manner, but the issue is... can it be?

1. Environmentally speaking, ai has been a nightmare. Not only does it have an alarming impact on emission levels, but also on the toxic waste that's left behind. Not to mention the scarcity of GPUs caused by the surge of ai in the past few years. Even sources that would vouch for ai have raised concerns about the impact it has on our collective health. sources: here, here and here

2. Then there's the issue with what the tools are trained on and this in multiple ways:

Many of the free tools that the public uses is trained on content available across the internet. However, it is at this point common knowledge (I'd hope) that most creators of the original content (writers, artists, other creative content creators, researchers, etc.) were never asked for permission and so it has all been stolen. Many social media platforms will often allow ai training on them without explicitly telling the user-base or will push it as the default setting and make it difficult for their user-base to opt out. Deviantart, for example, lost much of its reputation when it implemented such a policy. It had to backtrack in 2022 afterwards because of the overwhelming backlash. The problem is then that since the content has been ripped from their context and no longer made by a human, many governments therefore can no longer see it as copyrighted. Which, yes, luckily also means that ai users are legally often not allowed to pass off ai as 'their own creation'. Sources: here, here

Then there's the working of generative ai in general. As said before, it simply rips words or image parts from their original, nuanced context and then mesh it together without the user being able to accurately trace back where the info is coming from. A tool like ChatGPT is not a search engine, yet many people use it that way without realising it is not the same thing at all. More on the working of generative ai in detail. Because of how it works, it means there is always a chance for things to be biased and/or inaccurate. If a tool has been trained on social media sources (which ChatGPT for example is) then its responses can easily be skewed to the demographic it's been observing. Bias is an issue is most sources when doing research, but if you have the original source you also have the context of the source. Ai makes it that the original context is no longer clear to the user and so bias can be overlooked and go unnoticed much easier. Source: here

3. Something my colleague mentioned they said in the lecture is that ai tools can be used to help the learning of the students.

Let me start off by saying that I can understand why there is an appeal to ai when you do not know much about the issues I have already mentioned. I am very aware it is probably too late to fully stop the wave of ai tools being published.

There are certain uses to types of ai that can indeed help with accessibility. Such as text-to-voice or the other way around for people with disabilities (let's hope the voice was ethically begotten).

But many of the other uses mentioned in the lecture I have concerns with. They are to do with recognising learning, studying and wellbeing patterns of students. Not only do I not think it is really possible to data-fy the complexity of each and every single student you would have as they are still actively developing as a young person, this also poses privacy risks in case the data is ever compromised. Not to mention that ai is often still faulty and, as it is not a person, will often still make mistakes when faced with how unpredictable a human brain can be. We do not all follow predictable patterns.

The lecture stated that ai tools could help with neurodivergency 'issues'. Obviously I do not speak for others and this next part is purely personal opinion, but I do think it important to nuance this: as someone with auDHD, no ai-tool has been able to help me with my executive dysfunction in the long-term. At first, there is the novelty of the app or tool and I am very motivated. They are often in the form of over-elaborate to-do lists with scheduled alarms. And then the issue arises: the ai tries to train itself on my presented routine... except I don't have one. There is no routine to train itself on, because that is my very problem I am struggling with. Very quickly it always becomes clear that the ai doesn't understand this the way a human mind would. A professionally trained in psychology/therapy human mind. And all I was ever left with was the feeling of even more frustration.

In my opinion, what would help way more than any ai tool would be the funding of mental health care and making it that going to a therapist or psychiatrist or coach is covered by health care the way I only have to pay 5 euros to my doctor while my health care provider pays the rest. (In Belgium) This would make mental health care much more accessible and would have a greater impact than faulty ai tools.

4. It was also said that ai could help students with creative assignments and preparing for spoken interactions both in their native language as well as in the learning of a new one.

I wholeheartedly disagree. Creativity in its essence is about the person creating something from their own mind and putting the effort in to translate those ideas into their medium of choice. Stick figures on lined course paper are more creative than letting a tool like Midjourney generate an image based on stolen content. How are we teaching students to be creative when we allow them to not put a thought in what they want to say and let an ai do it for them?

And since many of these tools are also faulty and biased in their content, how could they accurately replace conversations with real people? Ai cannot fully understand the complexities of language and all the nuances of the contexts around it. Body language, word choice, tone, volume, regional differences, etc.

And as a language teacher, I can truly say there is nothing more frustrating than wanting to assess the writing level of my students, giving them a writing assignment where they need to express their opinion and write it in two tiny paragraphs... and getting an ai response back. Before anyone comes to me saying that my students may simply be very good at English. Indeed, but my current students are not. They are precious, but their English skills are very flawed. It is very easy to see when they wrote it or ChatGPT. It is not only frustrating to not being able to trust part of your students' honesty and knowing they learned nothing from the assignment cause you can't give any feedback; it is almost offensive that they think I wouldn't notice it.

5. Apparently, it was mentioned in the lecture that in schools where ai is banned currently, students are fearful that their jobs would be taken away by ai and that in schools where ai was allowed that students had much more positive interactions with technology.

First off, I was not able to see the source and data that this statement was based on. However, I personally cannot shake the feeling there's a data bias in there. Of course students will feel more positively towards ai if they're not told about all the concerns around it.

Secondly, the fact that in the lecture it was (reportedly) framed that being scared your job would disappear because of ai, was untrue is... infuriating. Because it already is becoming a reality. Let's not forget what partially caused the SAG-AFTRA strike in 2023. Corporations see an easy (read: cheap) way to get marketable content by using ai at the cost of the creative professionals. Unregulated ai use by businesses causing the loss of jobs for real-life humans, is very much a threat. Dismissing this is basically lying to young students.

6. My conclusion:

I am frustrated. It's clamoured that we, as teachers, should educate more about ai and it's responsible use. However, at the same time the many concerns and issues around most of the accessible ai tools are swept under the rug and not actively talked about.

I find the constant surging rise of generative ai everywhere very concerning and I can only hope that more people will start seeing it too.

Thank you for reading.

[liesmyteachertoldme]

Autism Made in USA

Over the past few decades, the dramatic increase in autism spectrum disorders (ASD), now diagnosed in 1 in every 36 children, has often been attributed to improved definitions for ASD and diagnostic tools. However, a closer look at government statistics reveals alarming trends in children’s health that go far beyond better diagnostics. Since the early 1990s, there have been staggering increases in several chronic conditions: ADHD rates have risen by 890 percent, autism diagnoses by 2,094 percent, bipolar disease in youth by 10,833 percent, and celiac disease by 1,011 percent. These numbers beg the question—what has fundamentally changed in our children’s health over the past three decades?

Despite these concerning trends, our culture continues to elevate science as the ultimate authority on health and reality, often dismissing common sense, reason, and direct empirical observation. Ironically, physicians rely on patients to describe their symptoms—a testament to the importance of individual observations—while federal health agencies and influential organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics dismiss environmental factors in favor of subjective theories, such as genetic predispositions or chemical brain imbalances as the root causes for the majority of mental and behavioral disorders in children.

This reliance on ideology over empirical scrutiny extends to vaccine development, where standard double-blind placebo trials, the gold standard for FDA drug approval, are glaringly absent. Vaccines such as the hepatitis B shot for infants and the HPV vaccine Gardasil for adolescents have been approved with minimal scientific rigor, yet they are heavily promoted and, in many cases, mandated.

The media compounds the issue by amplifying the official narrative while systematically excluding dissenting voices. This failure of transparency has allowed federal health agencies like the CDC, NIAID, and HHS to evade accountability. These institutions, which should safeguard public health, have instead become ideologically and politically captured by private interests. Their close ties to pharmaceutical companies have led to the approval of insufficiently tested vaccines, the pathologization of normal childhood behaviors, and the delivery of subpar healthcare—all at a staggering cost of $5 trillion annually.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/autism-made-usa/5874947

[thedystopianexperiance]

Why is Project 2025 Extremely Problematic?

Project 2025 is problematic for several reasons, as it represents a significant shift in federal governance that could undermine democratic principles, civil rights, and environmental protections. Here are the main concerns:

1. Centralization of Power

- Undermines Democracy: By advocating for the unitary executive theory, Project 2025 seeks to give the president sweeping control over federal agencies, reducing checks and balances in government. This could lead to the politicization of traditionally nonpartisan institutions, like the Department of Justice and the FBI.

- Civil Service Overhaul: The plan includes replacing career civil servants with loyal appointees. Which could create a patronage system that prioritizes loyalty over expertise, reducing government efficiency and fairness.

2. Civil Rights Concerns

- LGBTQ+ Rights: The project targets policies that support LGBTQ+ rights, including restrictions on transgender participation in sports, preferred pronoun use in schools, and protections against workplace discrimination. This is discriminatory and harmful to marginalized groups.

- Women's Rights: It opposes reproductive rights, including access to abortion and certain forms of medical research, which undermines women's health and autonomy.

3. Environmental Rollbacks

- Climate Change Denial: The initiative proposes dismantling federal climate research and regulations, such as those overseen by NOAA and the EPA. Critics argue this prioritizes short-term economic gains over long-term environmental sustainability and public health.

4. Educational Restrictions

- Curriculum Censorship: The project advocates eliminating federal influence over education, particularly targeting teachings on critical race theory and gender identity. Opponents say this could limit academic freedom and ignore systemic issues like racism.

5. Threat to Social Programs

- Healthcare and Welfare Cuts: Project 2025's push for privatization and reduction of programs like Medicare and Medicaid could disproportionately harm low-income and vulnerable populations.

6. Bias Against Federal Media

- Defunding Public Broadcasters: The project proposes eliminating funding for public broadcasters like PBS and NPR, claiming they are ideologically biased. This undermines independent journalism and access to diverse perspectives.

7. Polarization and Partisanship

- The project’s sweeping goals align strictly with conservative ideologies, risking greater political polarization and alienating moderate or opposing viewpoints.

Overall, Project 2025 as a blueprint for consolidating partisan power at the expense of diversity, equity, and democratic processes. Supporters of the project, however, argue it restores limited government and upholds traditional American values, making its impact highly contentious.

[alpaca-clouds]

Cars are just not very economic

I just had this discussion with someone and I just kinda feel the need to talk about it here, because it is closely related to the entire Solarpunk thing.

If you look at it from a purely economic point of view, cars are just not a very efficient way of transport.

Now, this argument has been made to death, really. And literally economists have been arguing about this for literal decades. Again, I was discussing it and looked up sources - and I found sources going back to the 70s. So, yeah, this has been discussed for at least half a century.

But... yeah. Speaking from an economic point of view rails are most economic, followed by busses. Only then there is the cars. (No data on water transport and air transport is a bit more complicated from this point of view.)

Now, why is this?

Roads are all in all more expensive than rails, especially in maintenance. If you look into construction costs, you will find kinda contradictory information on this. But per kilometer costs a kilometer of rail is about equivalent to a kilometer of a four-lane highway to construct. But while both need maintenance, usually roads need more of it. Because the wear and tear on a road is harsher than on a rail (due to more friction and just the fact that concrete is just not a very durable material compared to metal). Admittedly: High speed rail does push both construction and maintanance costs for railways up a good notch, making it more comparable to a seven lane highway. Mostly because of safety concerns.

While trains are more expensive than cars, they usually will be longer in use than a car and will drive many more kilometers during this time. Part of this is also, of course, that while trains are in use for hours each day, most cars spend the most of their life just standing in garages and parking lots. While the average car will get retired after about 150 000 to 200 000 miles, the average locomotive will last 1 000 000 miles.

This comes even more into focus, when you take into consideration how many more passangers or haul the average car will transport during those 1m miles. A single train car can carry up to 150 passangers - and often during rush hours trains will carry about 800 to 1000 passengers at once. While a car will carry often only one or two people at once.

Additionally obviously car infrastructure takes up much more space. Even if we are talking about countries with not as crazy "minimum parking area" restrictions as the USA. Cars need a lot more space than a train or even bus would ever need. And this space also carries costs with it.

And in the end we obviously still do have all the kind of costs that comes from the environmental and health impact of cars. Be it the air pollution, the water polution, and the fallout from having those concrete deserts the cars need in their infrastructure. And to this you can STILL add costs from everything having to deal with accidents and the like.

But yeah... Cars are just economically not very efficient.

So, even if you just cared about the fucking money... Investing in trains and public transport is actually a way better use of that money, than investing in cars.

[rjzimmerman]

(Glyphosate is a chemical used in herbicides, such as Roundup.) Excerpt from this story from Nation of Change:

Quick summary:

• Glyphosate exposure in mice caused persistent brain inflammation and Alzheimer’s-like pathology.

• Even low doses of glyphosate, deemed safe for humans, resulted in lasting neurological damage.

• Glyphosate’s metabolite, AMPA, accumulates in brain tissue and crosses the blood-brain barrier.

• Widespread use of glyphosate exposes most Americans, especially farmworkers, to potential risks.

• Researchers challenge EPA safety standards, urging reevaluation of acceptable exposure limits.

• The herbicide’s effects on brain health add to existing concerns about its environmental impact.

• Scientists call for more research and stricter regulations to mitigate public health risks.

[leviathan-supersystem]

Mike DeWine, the Ohio governor, recently lamented the toll taken on the residents of East Palestine after the toxic train derailment there, saying “no other community should have to go through this”.

But such accidents are happening with striking regularity. A Guardian analysis of data collected by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and by non-profit groups that track chemical accidents in the US shows that accidental releases – be they through train derailments, truck crashes, pipeline ruptures or industrial plant leaks and spills – are happening consistently across the country.

By one estimate these incidents are occurring, on average, every two days.

“These kinds of hidden disasters happen far too frequently,” Mathy Stanislaus, who served as assistant administrator of the EPA’s office of land and emergency management during the Obama administration, told the Guardian. Stanislaus led programs focused on the cleanup of contaminated hazardous waste sites, chemical plant safety, oil spill prevention and emergency response.

In the first seven weeks of 2023 alone, there were more than 30 incidents recorded by the Coalition to Prevent Chemical Disasters, roughly one every day and a half. Last year the coalition recorded 188, up from 177 in 2021. The group has tallied more than 470 incidents since it started counting in April 2020.

The incidents logged by the coalition range widely in severity but each involves the accidental release of chemicals deemed to pose potential threats to human and environmental health.

In September, for instance, nine people were hospitalized and 300 evacuated in California after a spill of caustic materials at a recycling facility. In October, officials ordered residents to shelter in place after an explosion and fire at a petrochemical plant in Louisiana. In November, more than 100 residents of Atchinson, Kansas, were treated for respiratory problems and schools were evacuated after an accident at a beverage manufacturing facility created a chemical cloud over the town.

Among multiple incidents in December, a large pipeline ruptured in rural northern Kansas, smothering the surrounding land and waterways in 588,000 gallons of diluted bitumen crude oil. Hundreds of workers are still trying to clean up the pipeline mess, at a cost pegged at around $488m.

The precise number of hazardous chemical incidents is hard to determine because the US has multiple agencies involved in response, but the EPA told the Guardian that over the past 10 years, the agency has “performed an average of 235 emergency response actions per year, including responses to discharges of hazardous chemicals or oil”. The agency said it employs roughly 250 people devoted to the EPA’s emergency response and removal program.

[...]

The EPA itself says that by several measurements, accidents at facilities are becoming worse: evacuations, sheltering and the average annual rate of people seeking medical treatment stemming from chemical accidents are on the rise. Total annual costs are approximately $477m, including costs related to injuries and deaths.

“Accidental releases remain a significant concern,” the EPA said.

In August, the EPA proposed several changes to the Risk Management Program (RMP) regulations that apply to plants dealing with hazardous chemicals. The rule changes reflect the recognition by EPA that many chemical facilities are located in areas that are vulnerable to the impacts of the climate crisis, including power outages, flooding, hurricanes and other weather events.

The proposed changes include enhanced emergency preparedness, increased public access to information about hazardous chemicals risks communities face and new accident prevention requirements.

The US Chamber of Commerce has pushed back on stronger regulations, arguing that most facilities operate safely, accidents are declining and that the facilities impacted by any rule changes are supplying “essential products and services that help drive our economy and provide jobs in our communities”. Other opponents to strengthening safety rules include the American Chemistry Council, American Forest & Paper Association, American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers and the American Petroleum Institute.

The changes are “unnecessary” and will not improve safety, according to the American Chemistry Council.

Many worker and community advocates, such as the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, (UAW), which represents roughly a million laborers, say the proposed rule changes don’t go far enough.

[olrastrologytarot]

Astrology / Sixth House / 6H

The Sixth House in astrology, often referred to as the House of Health and Service, is a critical area of the natal chart that governs daily routines, work, health, and the ways we serve others. It is the house where we focus on the practical aspects of life, dealing with tasks that require discipline, organization, and attention to detail. The Sixth House also reflects our attitudes toward work and service, our approach to maintaining physical health, and how we manage our responsibilities. In this essay, we will explore the significance of the Sixth House, its influence on health, work, daily routines, and its broader role in the context of the natal chart.

The Sixth House: An Overview

The Sixth House is traditionally associated with the sign of Virgo and its ruling planet, Mercury. These associations emphasize the house’s connection to precision, analytical thinking, and a strong sense of duty. The Sixth House is where we focus on the details of daily life, from our work environment to our health habits, and how we contribute to the well-being of others through service.

In a natal chart, the sign on the cusp of the Sixth House, along with any planets located within it, provides insights into how an individual approaches their work, health, and daily responsibilities. For example, if the Sixth House is in Capricorn, the person might approach work with a sense of duty and discipline, valuing structure and long-term goals. If the Sixth House is in Gemini, the individual might prefer variety and mental stimulation in their daily routines, often juggling multiple tasks and interests.

Health and Wellness

One of the primary areas governed by the Sixth House is health and wellness. This house reflects our attitudes toward maintaining physical health, including our approach to diet, exercise, and overall well-being. It reveals the habits we develop to care for our bodies and how we deal with illness and stress.

The sign on the cusp of the Sixth House can indicate the areas of health that may require attention and the best ways to maintain physical well-being. For example, someone with Taurus on the Sixth House cusp might benefit from a steady, consistent approach to health, with a focus on good nutrition and regular physical activity. In contrast, an individual with Aquarius on the Sixth House cusp might prefer unconventional or innovative approaches to health, possibly exploring alternative medicine or unique wellness practices.

Planets in the Sixth House can also provide insights into health matters. For instance, Mars in the Sixth House might indicate a person with a strong physical constitution, who enjoys vigorous exercise and may be prone to minor injuries or inflammations. Neptune in the Sixth House, on the other hand, might suggest sensitivity to environmental factors or a tendency toward escapism when dealing with health issues, possibly leading to challenges in maintaining consistent health routines.

The Sixth House also governs mental health, reflecting how we manage stress, anxiety, and our overall psychological well-being. This house encourages us to develop healthy routines that support both our physical and mental health, emphasizing the importance of balance and self-care in our daily lives.

Work, Service, and Daily Routines

The Sixth House is closely associated with work and service, focusing on the tasks and responsibilities that make up our daily lives. Unlike the Tenth House, which governs career and public achievements, the Sixth House is concerned with the day-to-day aspects of work, including our work environment, relationships with colleagues, and the satisfaction we derive from our job.

The sign on the cusp of the Sixth House can reveal how an individual approaches work and the type of work environment that suits them best. For example, someone with Leo on the Sixth House cusp might thrive in a work environment where they can express their creativity and leadership skills, enjoying recognition for their contributions. In contrast, a person with Pisces on the Sixth House cusp might prefer a more compassionate or artistic work setting, where they can use their intuition and empathy to help others.

Planets in the Sixth House can also influence one’s approach to work and service. For example, Venus in the Sixth House might indicate a person who enjoys harmonious work relationships and takes pleasure in creating a pleasant work environment. They may be drawn to work that involves beauty, art, or helping others. Saturn in the Sixth House, on the other hand, might suggest a strong sense of duty and responsibility in work, with a preference for structure and order, possibly leading to a tendency toward workaholism or a focus on perfectionism.

Service is another key theme of the Sixth House, reflecting our desire to contribute to the well-being of others. This house governs how we serve others, whether through our work, volunteer efforts, or daily acts of kindness. The Sixth House encourages us to develop a sense of humility and dedication in our service, reminding us of the importance of contributing to the greater good through our daily actions.

Organization, Discipline, and Attention to Detail

The Sixth House emphasizes the importance of organization, discipline, and attention to detail in managing our daily lives. It governs the routines and habits we develop to maintain order and efficiency, whether in our work, health, or personal life. This house encourages us to be mindful of the small details that contribute to our overall well-being and success.

The sign on the cusp of the Sixth House can reveal how an individual approaches organization and discipline. For example, someone with Virgo on the Sixth House cusp might have a natural talent for organization, paying close attention to detail and striving for perfection in their daily tasks. In contrast, a person with Sagittarius on the Sixth House cusp might prefer a more flexible and spontaneous approach to their daily routines, valuing freedom and variety over strict schedules.

Planets in the Sixth House can also influence one’s ability to stay organized and disciplined. For example, Mercury in the Sixth House might indicate a person who excels at multitasking and enjoys organizing information and ideas, possibly leading to a career in writing, teaching, or communication. Mars in the Sixth House might suggest a dynamic and energetic approach to daily tasks, with a strong drive to get things done quickly and efficiently.

The Sixth House also governs our relationship with time, reflecting how we manage our schedules and prioritize our responsibilities. This house encourages us to develop healthy routines that support our goals and allow us to manage our time effectively, avoiding burnout and stress.

The Sixth House in Relation to the Rest of the Chart

The Sixth House interacts with other areas of the natal chart to provide a comprehensive understanding of how we approach work, health, and daily responsibilities. Aspects between the Sixth House and other houses or planets can highlight the connections between these practical areas of life and other aspects of our experience.

For example, a harmonious aspect between the Sixth House and the Second House, which governs finances, might suggest that the individual finds satisfaction in work that provides financial stability and allows them to manage their resources effectively. On the other hand, a challenging aspect between the Sixth House and the Twelfth House, which deals with the subconscious and hidden matters, might indicate difficulties in balancing daily responsibilities with the need for rest and introspection, possibly leading to issues with stress or burnout.

Conclusion

The Sixth House in astrology is a vital component of the natal chart, governing health, work, service, and the practical aspects of daily life. It represents the areas where we focus on organization, discipline, and attention to detail, shaping how we manage our responsibilities and contribute to the well-being of ourselves and others.

Understanding the Sixth House can provide valuable insights into our approach to work, health, and service, helping us to develop healthy routines and habits that support our overall well-being. Whether we are striving to maintain physical health, seeking satisfaction in our work, or finding ways to serve others, the Sixth House reminds us of the importance of discipline, organization, and dedication in achieving our goals and living a fulfilling life.