LUCOM inaugural class stats...

[Awesome Sauceome]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Agreed I'm very concerned with lbgtq patients and lucom doctors.​

Indeed I am too. I agree that religious views should be held in certain facets of medicine (like a family doc talking religion with one of his patients if the patient would benefit from that). I am not into mixing the two specifically in a medical teaching environment. You want to learn about God, learn it at church or a study group. You want to learn about medicine, learn it at a medical school. Never the twain shall meet.

 

[DoctorSynthesis]

Indeed I am too. I agree that religious views should be held in certain facets of medicine (like a family doc talking religion with one of his patients if the patient would benefit from that). I am not into mixing the two specifically in a medical teaching environment. You want to learn about God, learn it at church or a study group. You want to learn about medicine, learn it at a medical school. Never the twain shall meet.

Glad to see we are on the same page

 

[SpartanWolverine]

^ right. Are they going to lecture their female patients not to have period sex?

If they believe it enough to publish about it, probably...

Unfortunately, their belief that sex during menstruation is a bad thing (based on one outdated paper, as far as I can tell), does not seem to be founded. Surprise. I'll just leave these here...

1) sex during menstruation doesn't lead to endometriosis.
http://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378(09)01980-2/abstract
2) sex during menstruation might actually lead to decreased risk for endometriosis.
http://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/58368

Note that neither article mentions "honor".

 

[touchpause13]

Orgasms also help menstrual cramps! 🙂

 

[Alegrete]

Meh I don't really see how evolution would come up in practice. I have no idea what my physicians think about it. What I care about is how my physician treats me. If it's crappy because of my sexuality, or they are cruel/judgemental towards me I'm going to find someone else. Speakers like in that video make me fear that LU grads won't treat LGBTQ patients with respect.

Yep. If the professors believe that sex during menstruation is "dishonorable" and watching pornography messes with your "virtue", this points to personal feelings/convictions getting mixed into a medical education. It's not the place of a doctor to judge someone for when they have sex (their argument of endometriosis risk being increased is not true), whether or not they watch porn, or anything else that does not actually detrimentally affect health.

It's concerning to me that they might teach that these things are detrimental to health regardless of the majority of scientific literature in opposition to these views. It's like teaching creationism in the face of scientific literature. They argue that fundamentalist views won't be included in the medical education... but I suppose only time will tell.

Do LL graduates treat LGBTQ people with disregard? How about all the other religious medical schools (MD or DO) out there (Marian, NYMC, Creighton, Loyola)? What about nom-religious medical schools, aren't we concerned they won't treat religious people with respect because of their personal beliefs? Is it possible for non-religious doctors to hold personal beliefs that are contrary to scientific knowledge? Does that make them bad, non-trusworthy doctors? Is Dr. Ben Carson a good, trustworthy neurosurgeon because of his professional training and experience or is he non-trustworthy because of his views regarding homosexuality, despite his professional training and experience? What truly constitutes a good doctor: his personal beliefs or how he treats his patients?

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Do LL graduates treat LGBTQ people with disregard? How about all the other religious medical schools (MD or DO) out there (Marian, NYMC, Creighton, Loyola)? What about nom-religious medical schools, aren't we concerned they won't treat religious people with respect because of their personal beliefs? Is it possible for non-religious doctors to hold personal beliefs that are contrary to scientific knowledge? Does that make them bad, non-trusworthy doctors? Is Dr. Ben Carson a good, trustworthy neurosurgeon because of his professional training and experience or is he non-trustworthy because of his views regarding homosexuality, despite his professional training and experience? What truly constitutes a good doctor: his personal beliefs or how he treats his patients?

Carson is a tool who's only compartmentalized capacity is in neurosurgery. Anything beyond that presents causal evidence for early onset stupidity.

All of those schools have protection clauses as the AAMC or the school themselves require it,


Finally liberty university is the child of essentially a neo-con/ theocon who believed aids was god punishment for not stoning gays despite it being a disease that almost worldwide kills mostly heterosexual black women.


Point blank, no other school can be compared to liberty. All others from Loyola and Creigh to Linda are world respected and seek to find cures. Liberty exists to make money and disrespect and cheapen higher education.

 

[Alegrete]

Carson is a tool who's only compartmentalized capacity is in neurosurgery. Anything beyond that presents causal evidence for early onset stupidity.

All of those schools have protection clauses as the AAMC or the school themselves require it,


Finally liberty university is the child of essentially a neo-con/ theocon who believed aids was god punishment for not stoning gays despite it being a disease that almost worldwide kills mostly heterosexual black women.


Point blank, no other school can be compared to liberty. All others from Loyola and Creigh to Linda are world respected and seek to find cures. Liberty exists to make money and disrespect and cheapen higher education.

Dr. Carson did a lot of good in the medical field. Regardless on what he believes, he is/was a good doctor (he is probably retired by now).

AT Still believed anything beyond OMM was anathema and should not be part of osteopathy. Does that disregard the entire DO population?

My point is, until LUCOM graduates go out to practice as doctors, we can't truly know how they will be. Respect is achieved through time and repetition. As DO's we had (and still have to) wade through prejudice. Let's not ourselves be hypocrites by being prejudice towards colleagues who will graduate from LUCOM. Give them a chance to prove their valor, just how you give the Caribbean graduates a chance as well.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Dr. Carson did a lot of good in the medical field. Regardless on what he believes, he is/was a good doctor (he is probably retired by now).

AT Still believed anything beyond OMM was anathema and should not be part of osteopathy. Does that disregard the entire DO population?

My point is, until LUCOM graduates go out to practice as doctors, we can't truly know how they will be. Respect is achieved through time and repetition. As DO's we had (and still have to) wade through prejudice. Let's not ourselves be hypocrites by being prejudice towards colleagues who will graduate from LUCOM. Give them a chance to prove their valor, just how you give the Caribbean graduates a chance as well.

Carson is now the token black for the GOP. Half of the medical progenerators believed in weird stuff. It's about today and what we want to say about our profession to be about. LUCOM brings no honor to our profession or eases our graduates chances of matching. It does no honor to AT Still or medicines founding fathers and stands as a testament to everything to stands to reject good medicine.

 

[SpartanWolverine]

Dr. Carson did a lot of good in the medical field. Regardless on what he believes, he is/was a good doctor (he is probably retired by now).

AT Still believed anything beyond OMM was anathema and should not be part of osteopathy. Does that disregard the entire DO population?

My point is, until LUCOM graduates go out to practice as doctors, we can't truly know how they will be. Respect is achieved through time and repetition. As DO's we had (and still have to) wade through prejudice. Let's not ourselves be hypocrites by being prejudice towards colleagues who will graduate from LUCOM. Give them a chance to prove their valor, just how you give the Caribbean graduates a chance as well.

Naw. AT Still believed in rationality in treatment and preventative medicine. He was interested in technology and treatments that had real, demonstrable effects.

...Regardless, I don't know what I'm doing on here. I have my final exam for the semester tomorrow. Have a nice Thursday -- I'm OUT!

 

[Alegrete]

Naw. AT Still believed in rationality in treatment and preventative medicine. He was interested in technology and treatments that had real, demonstrable effects.

...Regardless, I don't know what I'm doing on here. I have my final exam for the semester tomorrow. Have a nice Thursday -- I'm OUT!

Try again. Read "The DO's" by Norman Gevitz. It will do you (and others in this forum) good.

 

[Awesome Sauceome]

Try again. Read "The DO's" by Norman Gevitz. It will do you (and others in this forum) good.

I have read the book and I would argue that his post is pretty accurate... maybe add in "wanted to avoid using pharmaceuticals" to the description but I would say he hit the nail on the head...

Not to mention he is a DO student... I would argue that he has a better idea of osteopathic medicine than we do as pre-meds.

 

[Alegrete]

I have read the book and I would argue that his post is pretty accurate... maybe add in "wanted to avoid using pharmaceuticals" to the description but I would say he hit the nail on the head...

Not to mention he is a DO student... I would argue that he has a better idea of osteopathic medicine than we do as pre-meds.

In chapter 5 AT Still states something to the effect that "the true osteopaths will reject ______". When I get home I will quote it here, but I'm pretty sure it involved not only pharmaceuticals but also surgical procedures.

The point remains, however. One cannot discredit a profession based on their founder's view. The same should be done do LUCOM and all other institutes of higher learning.

 

[TurkTurkleton92]

In chapter 5 AT Still states something to the effect that "the true osteopaths will reject ______". When I get home I will quote it here, but I'm pretty sure it involved not only pharmaceuticals but also surgical procedures.

The point remains, however. One cannot discredit a profession based on their founder's view. The same should be done do LUCOM and all other institutes of higher learning.

Hey Alegrete,
I'm currently reading the book (almost done. The last chapters are kind of tough to get through), and AT Still promoted OB and basic surgery after a couple years. From what I remember, the true osteopaths (vs broad) rejected the use of pharmaceuticals and the teaching of the (allopathic based) medicina materia. Maybe that's what you were referring to?
Regardless, if AT Still knew what osteopathic schools were teaching now, he'd have a heart attack. As osteopathic medicine transitioned to the more current approaches, he didn't agree and DID fight it. Your point is still relevant that a profession shouldn't be discredited based on the founder's view, though. I just wanted to clear up some things since the material is still relatively fresh in my head.

 

[Alegrete]

Hey Alegrete,
I'm currently reading the book (almost done. The last chapters are kind of tough to get through), and AT Still promoted OB and basic surgery after a couple years. From what I remember, the true osteopaths (vs broad) rejected the use of pharmaceuticals and the teaching of the (allopathic based) medicina materia. Maybe that's what you were referring to?
Regardless, if AT Still knew what osteopathic schools were teaching now, he'd have a heart attack. As osteopathic medicine transitioned to the more current approaches, he didn't agree and DID fight it. Your point is still relevant that a profession shouldn't be discredited based on the founder's view, though. I just wanted to clear up some things since the material is still relatively fresh in my head.

I haven't reached that part of the book yet. Way to go, Alegrete (ns)! I was pretty sure he rejected something else besides medicina medica and pharmacology, but I stand corrected.

The bolded is the point I was trying to make. LUCOM is new, so they have no track record of producing doctors - good or bad. Let's be professional and treat their future graduates with the same respect we expect others to have for us.

 

[Alegrete]

Carson is now the token black for the GOP. Half of the medical progenerators believed in weird stuff. It's about today and what we want to say about our profession to be about. LUCOM brings no honor to our profession or eases our graduates chances of matching. It does no honor to AT Still or medicines founding fathers and stands as a testament to everything to stands to reject good medicine.

1 - LUCOM is not for you, so don't apply there.
2 - Clearly you don't know LUCOM's faculty. You sound like some of my fellow South American friends who never came to the US but believe all Americans are fat, dumb people who love guns and going to war ("Because that's what we see on TV!").
3 - Let's not throw out the baby with the bath water.

 

[mlee7716]

From what I can tell from that users history is that he/she is part of the LGBTQ community. He/She has legitimate concerns about a school that is being hateful and prejudiced against him. "So?" you ask. "Just don apply there?:..

Wrong. Liberty is representing itself with other DO school's. In a way, they are giving the profession disrespect and for every step foward the profession has taken, liberty has pulled it back. You are naive if you believe the undergrad/this article posted many times/their blatantly prejudiced views won't affect the way they teach or the students they want to produce.

Everyone, please let @Alegrete @TurkTurkleton92 and others who wish to go to liberty just go. I think sdn lurkers have a good enough picture of this school with all the posts already made 🙂

1 - LUCOM is not for you, so don't apply there.
2 - Clearly you don't know LUCOM's faculty. You sound like some of my fellow South American friends who never came to the US but believe all Americans are fat, dumb people who love guns and going to war ("Because that's what we see on TV!").
3 - Let's not throw out the baby with the bath water.

 

[Alegrete]

From what I can tell from that users history is that he/she is part of the LGBTQ community. He/She has legitimate concerns about a school that is being hateful and prejudiced against him. "So?" you ask. "Just don apply there?:..

Wrong. Liberty is representing itself with other DO school's. In a way, they are giving the profession disrespect and for every step foward the profession has taken, liberty has pulled it back. You are naive if you believe the undergrad/this article posted many times/their blatantly prejudiced views won't affect the way they teach or the students they want to produce.

Everyone, please let @Alegrete @TurkTurkleton92 and others who wish to go to liberty just go. I think sdn lurkers have a good enough picture of this school with all the posts already made 🙂

Let's not throw out the baby with the bath water.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

1 - LUCOM is not for you, so don't apply there.
2 - Clearly you don't know LUCOM's faculty. You sound like some of my fellow South American friends who never came to the US but believe all Americans are fat, dumb people who love guns and going to war ("Because that's what we see on TV!").
3 - Let's not throw out the baby with the bath water.

I don't intend on it. Secondly I live in the area of LU so read my lips, the school is considered a joke by everyone, giving them a COM was a ridiculous choice and it will not bring the profession any glory.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

From what I can tell from that users history is that he/she is part of the LGBTQ community. He/She has legitimate concerns about a school that is being hateful and prejudiced against him. "So?" you ask. "Just don apply there?:..

Wrong. Liberty is representing itself with other DO school's. In a way, they are giving the profession disrespect and for every step foward the profession has taken, liberty has pulled it back. You are naive if you believe the undergrad/this article posted many times/their blatantly prejudiced views won't affect the way they teach or the students they want to produce.

Everyone, please let @Alegrete @TurkTurkleton92 and others who wish to go to liberty just go. I think sdn lurkers have a good enough picture of this school with all the posts already made 🙂

To be completely frank my issue with the school utterly is void of its pertinence towards me, but towards the community at large. I am not against religious physicians, but I am against an institute who's founder was so vile as to rejoice over the suffering of other's as god's good will possessing a medical school. Truth is that aside from the negative history and the foundation on money linked theoconservatism the school is ill equipped to possess a DO school and truthfully they will make the worse match lists of RVU look like Harvard level.

 

[AlteredScale]

Carson is a tool who's only compartmentalized capacity is in neurosurgery. Anything beyond that presents causal evidence for early onset stupidity.

All of those schools have protection clauses as the AAMC or the school themselves require it,


Finally liberty university is the child of essentially a neo-con/ theocon who believed aids was god punishment for not stoning gays despite it being a disease that almost worldwide kills mostly heterosexual black women.


Point blank, no other school can be compared to liberty. All others from Loyola and Creigh to Linda are world respected and seek to find cures. Liberty exists to make money and disrespect and cheapen higher education.

D: No way, source?

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

D: No way, source?

AIDS is the wrath of a just God against homosexuals. To oppose it would be like an Israelite jumping in the Red Sea to save one of Pharaoh's charioteers. AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals. It is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.
1993, quoted in Robert S. McElvaine (2009-04-07). Grand Theft Jesus. Random House. p. 35. ISBN 9780307395801.

 

[Dr. Zombie]

AIDS is the wrath of a just God against homosexuals. To oppose it would be like an Israelite jumping in the Red Sea to save one of Pharaoh's charioteers. AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals. It is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.
1993, quoted in Robert S. McElvaine (2009-04-07). Grand Theft Jesus. Random House. p. 35. ISBN 9780307395801.

So...where's the virus for liars, cheaters, incestuals, pedophiles, murderers, lust, greed, gluttony...etc etc etc.? Or do those not count because last time I checked, some of these made it to cardinal sins and the 10 top commandments...but yet homosexuality made it onto either...so...

EDIT: I forgot that God works in mysterious ways.

 

[user3]

even Goro doesn't recommend this school.

 

[el_duderino]

D: No way, source?

"AIDS is the wrath of a just God against homosexuals. To oppose it would be like an Israelite jumping in the Red Sea to save one of Pharaoh's charioteers. AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals. It is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals."

 

[GUH]

So...where's the virus for liars, cheaters, incestuals, pedophiles, murderers, lust, greed, gluttony...etc etc etc.? Or do those not count because last time I checked, some of these made it to cardinal sins and the 10 top commandments...but yet homosexuality made it onto either...so...

EDIT: I forgot that God works in mysterious ways.

Incest and pedophilia are neither part of the 10 commandments nor are they part of the cardinal sins (which are a Catholic teaching anyways and not part of evangelical theology).

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Incest and pedophilia are neither part of the 10 commandments nor are they part of the cardinal sins (which are a Catholic teaching anyways and not part of evangelical theology).
Should we also oppose medical schools within universities that teach that conservative Christians or white people are evil?

Totally, we should close all HBCUs because they're actually not pro-black they're anti-white.


No seriously, I'm waiting for a token anti-semetic statement to follow from your stupid red face.


Also congrats on side stepping the selective outrage towards gays and not others who actually cause societal issues. You must fit into California great!

 

[TheBoneDoctah]

.

 

[Dr. Zombie]

Incest and pedophilia are neither part of the 10 commandments nor are they part of the cardinal sins (which are a Catholic teaching anyways and not part of evangelical theology).

Thank you for pointing that out, even though I specifically said "some" not "all."

 

[Ismet]

This is a reminder to keep your posts civil, courteous, and professional in line with SDN TOS.

 

[dutchie000]

"I am libruulllll and sooooooo open-minded."
"I don't like backward hick towns and schools full of people who think differently than me"

That's not what I said. Actually, I went to college in a rural town that is way smaller than Lynchburg. It was a melting pot of people from all over Virginia with many different values and I loved it there and was friends with people from all sorts of backgrounds and religious beliefs. I volunteered next to said town in a town way smaller than Lynchburg. I live 45 minutes away from Lynchburg in a city that is surrounded by "backward hick towns" that I go to constantly for work. I don't mind those "backward hick towns", which by the way I would never use that terminology. I love the mountains, but I've been here for the past 8 years and I can tell you that if you're looking for somewhere with a little more liveliness and excitement Lynchburg isn't the place for you. Granted, some pretty sweet beer and wine festivals come through there. But I'm sorry to say that if you attend Liberty alcohol consumption is looked down upon.

By the way, Lynchburg isn't a rural, small "hick" town by any means, it's a city.

Have you read any of the above posts about this school? I don't mind people who think differently than me and I am willing to listen to anyone about their point of view. However, as others have mentioned I would be concerned about going to a school who teaches so much from a one-sided perspective. If someone doesn't believe that things like sex before marriage, homosexuality, etc are ok that's fine, I don't care. That is your belief. But if they are going to be treating patients who come from all different backgrounds, sexualities, religions, etc they should be able to treat those patients the same as they would anyone else, and I am genuinely concerned in Liberty's ability to produce physicians who do so. I'm not saying it's not possible, but personally I would rather go to a school with a diverse student population of many different belief systems. Liberty may be the perfect place for some and that's perfectly fine, but it sure isn't the place for me. There are schools built specifically for people of specific religious beliefs, races, etc and then there are those of us who don't fall into any of those specific categories or those who do but want a bigger mix of people. I'm sorry my original post came across as hypocritical as I know there are plenty of open-minded Christians.

Being liberal and open-minded doesn't mean you accept everything. It just means you lean politically one way and are willing to listen and evaluate the other side. Many of us have done that with LUCOM and came to the conclusion that the school is garbage.

Thanks, that's exactly what I meant 🙂

Off to go enjoy the mountains of the surrounding "backward hick towns" I clearly dislike so much, have a nice day!

 

[GUH]

That's not what I said. Actually, I went to college in a rural town that is way smaller than Lynchburg. It was a melting pot of people from all over Virginia with many different values and I loved it there and was friends with people from all sorts of backgrounds and religious beliefs. I volunteered next to said town in a town way smaller than Lynchburg. I live 45 minutes away from Lynchburg in a city that is surrounded by "backward hick towns" that I go to constantly for work. I don't mind those "backward hick towns", which by the way I would never use that terminology. I love the mountains, but I've been here for the past 8 years and I can tell you that if you're looking for somewhere with a little more liveliness and excitement Lynchburg isn't the place for you. Granted, some pretty sweet beer and wine festivals come through there. But I'm sorry to say that if you attend Liberty alcohol consumption is looked down upon.

By the way, Lynchburg isn't a rural, small "hick" town by any means, it's a city.

Have you read any of the above posts about this school? I don't mind people who think differently than me and I am willing to listen to anyone about their point of view. However, as others have mentioned I would be concerned about going to a school who teaches so much from a one-sided perspective. If someone doesn't believe that things like sex before marriage, homosexuality, etc are ok that's fine, I don't care. That is your belief. But if they are going to be treating patients who come from all different backgrounds, sexualities, religions, etc they should be able to treat those patients the same as they would anyone else, and I am genuinely concerned in Liberty's ability to produce physicians who do so. I'm not saying it's not possible, but personally I would rather go to a school with a diverse student population of many different belief systems. Liberty may be the perfect place for some and that's perfectly fine, but it sure isn't the place for me. There are schools built specifically for people of specific religious beliefs, races, etc and then there are those of us who don't fall into any of those specific categories or those who do but want a bigger mix of people. I'm sorry my original post came across as hypocritical as I know there are plenty of open-minded Christians.



Thanks, that's exactly what I meant 🙂

Off to go enjoy the mountains of the surrounding "backward hick towns" I clearly dislike so much, have a nice day!

You do realize that Adventists and Catholics have strict teachings about things like homosexuality and abortion, right? Yet they somehow produce competent physicians through their medical schools.
Just because a school has some kind of affiliation does not mean that it will produce poor physicians - the way a doctor treats patients is decided by the doctor. Just because you don't like a school's social environment or the words of its founder doesn't mean that the school should not exist.
And one-sided perspectives on social issues are commonplace in academia. I have yet to hear a professor in undergrad or med school present the anti-abortion or anti-gay marriage perspective. Some professors have displayed outright hostility to Christians and religious people in general. Is that okay in your opinion, or should those schools be shut down as well?

 

[Goro]

100% agree here, but the proof of the pudding will be how LUCOM's curriculum is organized and delivered. From the hints I'm getting already, I am concerned. I guess when they get to Sexual Medicine we'll know the answer.

You do realize that Adventists and Catholics have strict teachings about things like homosexuality and abortion, right? Yet they somehow produce competent physicians through their medical schools.
Just because a school has some kind of affiliation does not mean that it will produce poor physicians - the way a doctor treats patients is decided by the doctor. Just because you don't like a school's social environment or the words of its founder doesn't mean that the school should not exist.
And one-sided perspectives on social issues are commonplace in academia. I have yet to hear a professor in undergrad or med school present the anti-abortion or anti-gay marriage perspective. Some professors have displayed outright hostility to Christians and religious people in general. Is that okay in your opinion, or should those schools be shut down as well?

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

You do realize that Adventists and Catholics have strict teachings about things like homosexuality and abortion, right? Yet they somehow produce competent physicians through their medical schools.
Just because a school has some kind of affiliation does not mean that it will produce poor physicians - the way a doctor treats patients is decided by the doctor. Just because you don't like a school's social environment or the words of its founder doesn't mean that the school should not exist.
And one-sided perspectives on social issues are commonplace in academia. I have yet to hear a professor in undergrad or med school present the anti-abortion or anti-gay marriage perspective. Some professors have displayed outright hostility to Christians and religious people in general. Is that okay in your opinion, or should those schools be shut down as well?

Again, has the founder of Marian said America sucks because we don't stone gays or that AIDS is good? Has Loyola's integrity been destroyed by PR linking it to enormous campaigns to harm the country? Was Linda Loma founded as a method to export conservatism and make money?

No? Then kindly stop trying to defend the indefensible.

 

[GUH]

100% agree here, but the proof of the pudding will be how LUCOM's curriculum is organized and delivered. From the hints I'm getting already, I am concerned. I guess when they get to Sexual Medicine we'll know the answer.

Yup. I would love to hear an LUCOM student's report (or a few different reports) when they get there.

 

[touchpause13]

Yup. I would love to hear an LUCOM student's report (or a few different reports) when they get there.

As would I. But that paper correlating endometriosis and period sex....

 

[John Doughnut]

Hey if its ignorant then so be it. I'm just not comfortable with people that can ignore obviously scientifically valid theories and then trust that person to make scientific decisions.

scientifically valid facts*, not theories; facts bore out by the rigorous, unbiased, unflagging scientific method.

 

[hallowmann]

This is a reminder to keep your posts civil, courteous, and professional in line with SDN TOS.

Wait, when did Ismet become a mod? Nice!

 

[Ismet]

Wait, when did Ismet become a mod? Nice!

It's been just shy of a year now actually. I'm not one of the official pre-osteo mods but a lot of us help out across the site now.

Now back to the regularly scheduled programming 😉

 

[DoctorSynthesis]

scientifically valid facts*, not theories; facts bore out by the rigorous, unbiased, unflagging scientific method.

Evolution is a theory as is gravity.

If you are talking about some of the facts they deny then sure. I was referring to the theory of evolution.

However I hate when people make the arguments evolution is only a theory. They clearly don't understand what a theory signifies.

 

[allantois]

Evolution is a theory as is gravity.

If you are talking about some of the facts they deny then sure. I was referring to the theory of evolution.

However I hate when people make the arguments evolution is only a theory. They clearly don't understand what a theory signifies.

I wouldn't trust any man of science (physicians included) who thinks that evolution is not a scientific fact.

They don't have to believe it but I would inevitable question their ability to get their facts straight in the world of misinformation.

 

[GUH]

I wouldn't trust any man of science (physicians included) who thinks that evolution is not a scientific fact.

They don't have to believe it but I would inevitable question their ability to get their facts straight in the world of misinformation.

Anthropogenic global warming, too. Next time I find myself in the ER I'll be sure to quiz my doctor about his stance on well-established scientific knowledge before allowing him to touch me.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Anthropogenic global warming, too. Next time I find myself in the ER I'll be sure to quiz my doctor about his stance on well-established scientific knowledge before allowing him to touch me.

A physician is a member of his or her community. She/He is a leader in many respects, and by being a denier of truth they harm their community.

Our words and our views have weight in the minds of those whom we interact. So please bare that in mind when you decide that denial of scientific fact is irrelevant for someone who has significant weight in much if their patient's lives.

 

[DoctorSynthesis]

I wouldn't trust any man of science (physicians included) who thinks that evolution is not a scientific fact.

They don't have to believe it but I would inevitable question their ability to get their facts straight in the world of misinformation.

Well evolution isnt a fact. It is a theory as gravity is a theory. However you don't see people jumping out buildings do you? It takes a lot for something in science to become a theory. Its a big deal and scientists are extremely sure theories are true.

If it was a fact it would be a law.

I get what you are trying to say and I agree with that.

 

[allantois]

Well evolution isnt a fact. It is a theory as gravity is a theory. However you don't see people jumping out buildings do you? It takes a lot for something in science to become a theory. Its a big deal and scientists are extremely sure theories are true.

If it was a fact it would be a law.

I get what you are trying to say and I agree with that.

Well yeah by "fact" I referring to an ability to understand what is considered truth in science.

And facts are not called laws in Biology anyways 🙂

 

[DoctorSynthesis]

Well yeah by "fact" I referring to an ability to understand what is considered truth in science.

And facts are not called laws in Biology anyway 🙂

Yea I was just pointing at the difference.

I understand what you're trying to say(I agree) I just wanted to clarify it.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Doesn't

Well evolution isnt a fact. It is a theory as gravity is a theory. However you don't see people jumping out buildings do you? It takes a lot for something in science to become a theory. Its a big deal and scientists are extremely sure theories are true.

If it was a fact it would be a law.

I get what you are trying to say and I agree with that.

Actually the issue is the nomenclature within science, what is a theory within science =/= a theory in regular day life. Evolution cannot be a law because it is a collection of principle forces that produce a phenomena i.e the diversity of life. Likewise the theory of gravity is a multivariate phenomena that is produced by a collection of principles. This as opposed to say the law of indep assortment or thermo which are simple and overarching principles that pretty much apply to very specific circumstances.

Simply put evolution is a fact. But it is a theory because it is inherently not something that is conservatively describing an event, but rather an all encompassing premise for many events.

 

[DoctorSynthesis]

Doesn't



Actually the issue is the nomenclature within science, what is a theory within science =/= a theory in regular day life. Evolution cannot be a law because it is a collection of principle forces that produce a phenomena i.e the diversity of life. Likewise the theory of gravity is a multivariate phenomena that is produced by a collection of principles. This as opposed to say the law of indep assortment or thermo which are simple and overarching principles that pretty much apply to very specific circumstances.

Simply put evolution is a fact. But it is a theory because it is inherently not something that is conservatively describing an event, but rather an all encompassing premise for many events.

Well we are getting more specific now. It is both fact and theory.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_fact_and_theory

 

[Mr Roboto]

I'm friends with a few of them irl. Will be passing on anecdotes after accumulating more.

Yup. I would love to hear an LUCOM student's report (or a few different reports) when they get there.

 

[meatie]

scientifically valid facts*, not theories; facts bore out by the rigorous, unbiased, unflagging scientific method.

... Are you serious?

 

[John Doughnut]

Evolution is a theory as is gravity.

If you are talking about some of the facts they deny then sure. I was referring to the theory of evolution.

However I hate when people make the arguments evolution is only a theory. They clearly don't understand what a theory signifies.

You're right. It's easy to forget the usage of the term 'theory' outside of the lay person's idea that theory means a sort of hunch. And when speaking generally, when one person hears "theory of (yada yada yada)" they instantly think of it as being some contentious thing.

Something like the theory of evolution or theory of heliocentricity (for what it's worth) is so firmly planted that likely no other body of evidence could feasibly come about disproving them. Essentially these things are both theory and fact.