Zaphrasz, I am not taking either side of the argument (though I do have a strong opinion on the matter) when I say that the studies you cited were not well done. Yes, their statistics (which, dependent on the form of analysis used, can significantly change the result) exhibited significant changes (p<0.05). However, all the studies exhibited significant bias (statistical bias:detection, selection, etc.). Further, numerous confounding variables were not corrected for or, quite frankly, even addressed. None of them were proper prospective cohort (it would be quite difficult getting IRB approval for a clinical trial) and the actual long term results weer quite lacking. Also, there is an equal amount of data arguing in the opposite direction, all with its own problems (usually the exact same issues). The problem with the "research" in this area is that its almost impossible to find a study that doesn't have major bias or hypothetical manipulation to achieve the intended result. Its the same kind of research manipulation we see with manufacturer's of several of our testing methodologies (the HIV sensitivity-specificity example being the most common).
With that said, subjectively I believe physical discipline, when used sparingly and appropriately (enough force to attain their attention but not yield any genuine tissue damage), is the right course. It cannot be used with frequency because it loses any meaning as a punishment and as such should be withheld for only the most deserving behaviors (which should be well delineated to the child when they are old enough to understand). However, I also believe in creative punishment/corrective education. One of my coworkers got his willful daughter to eat her fruits and veggies by showing her pictures of people rickets and scurvy (here behavior changed overnight, though it was likely a nightmare filled night; she's only 6). My father would make me hold buckets of water with my arms outstretched to the sides (as a 5'9'' individual, lets just say I earned my 44'' shoulders as a child) or would make me spend time dismantling and reassembling things around the house (hated it then as it seemed like pointless busywork but as an adult I can fix just about everything in my house). My mother was keen on book reports. (Which, as an educator, she would grade and make me redo until satisfactory. She would also choose books she knew I would hate). I was only spanked a few times, but boy did I earn them and they held meaning. Further, in the case of small children with whom logical arguments or even basic speech cannot be used, a smack on the hand or an open palm to the rear (its hard to hurt someone of any age with a smack to the bottom, the gluteals are thick muscles and are covered by an ample fat pad) is the only way to get the point across. Again, it should only be used when absolutely necessary in this age bracket and should be used with the child's well-being in mind (i.e. to discourage behaviors where the child can bring harm to his or herself).
I apologize for the lengthy nature of this response, it started to more as I wrote it. I fully respect those parents that opt against physical discipline, but in my experience if used properly it makes a significant difference in the outcomes.
As for my qualifications to review the articles, summa *** laude in biology with 3 years biochemistry research as an undergrad, 4 years med school and now 3 years into my anatomic and clinical pathology residency with extended training on evidence based medicine and critical interpretation of research.
I've been following the idea for the liquimetal destruction decks and agree with the idea that it only functions in the shell of something using the coating for metalcraft. I have opted to use blue as a support color for the trinket mage and new counterspell. Please not that this is a very loose preliminary decklist and I would gladly appreciate input from any and all.
Basically, the Coating acts to help boost my metalcraft spells and allows the Vandal and Dragon to act as removal for any permanents with the Coating in play. Again, this is a very rough draft and any input would be appreciated.
I've been lurking this thread for a while now and have proxied a copy of the deck myself. My build is very similar to kspaeth123's with the exception of fewer lands and no Font of Mythos in exchange for 4 Wall of Omens and have been happy with the results. I did find 1 card that I might test with in place of Angelsong though, Repel the Darkness. For one more mana I fog the 2 biggest threats and get a cantrip, whereas Angelsong only draws if it is cycled. Further, it doesn't compete for a 2nd turn Howling Mine or Wall of Omens. Just wanted to get some thoughts from all of you if this will be a waste of my time or a worthwhile effort.
Here is my primary EDH deck, with the final picture being alternates for it (sorry for the poor picture quality, my camera is on the fritz and I had to use my cell).
And here is my only piece of power and the highlights from my Sol Ring collection.
Sorry to nerd this up any more, but point #3 is completely off base. The primary colors are typically presented as red, blue, and green (the additive combination) and is based upon light. You are thinking the subtractive combination of colors used in pigments (these are typically magenta, cyan, and yellow). The red-yellow-blue combination was developed long before scientific knowledge had advanced to the point where it could effectively explain colors and it cannot produce all colors (which is why the printing industry uses the aforementioned subtractive triad). It should be noted that we use these triads simply because our vision is based on three colors.
There are a few corrections I would like to make for some of the posters here from scientific viewpoint (likely won't help get your brother to quit as that is his choice).
Shaharazad: It actually does induce chemical dependence (not addiction, which is psychological). The reasoning behind this is that the body adapts to having a certain level of the toxins circulating within it (hence becoming the norm for your body). By depriving the body of those toxins its ability to function is diminished as it is no longer in its normal range; hence withdrawal. (Which despite common belief, does exist for marijuanna. See Jones, RT. Human effects in marijuana research findings: 1976. NIDA Research Monograph 14. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1977; 128. as one of many quality examples)
XxTalonxX: It does not help anyone focus. It does the opposite. Why do you think one of the most commonly noted side effects is cognitive impairment.
Sibtiger: The question of cost is variable vs. alcohol. You are using bars as the comparison when most true alcoholics drink more privately. Alcohol is actually quite cheap per content when purchased from a a liquor store.
Spadrick: 1. It doesn't help with pain any more than codeine (which is substandard for end of life care anyway). (See Campbell, FA, Tramer, MR, Carroll, D, et al. Are cannabinoids an effective and safe treatment option in the management of pain? A qualitative systematic review. BMJ 2001; 323:13.) What it helps treat in those patients is cachexia (wasting in layman's terms) by helping to improve appetite. It can further be used as an antiemetic (for which he have plenty), intractable hiccups (easy to treat), glaucoma (actually a decent drug for this, but we have dronabinol to use specifically and its nothing more than purified THC), and to help treat the symptoms of multiple sclerosis (see dronabinol).
2. About the deaths, while there aren't any true statistics to show increased mortality, that is due to the fact that nearly all studies are done on patients who ceased use within a short time (years vs. decades) and typically also smoked tobacco. However, it's smoke contains nearly four times as much tar and 50 percent more carcinogens than tobacco (see Wu, TC, Tashkin, DP, Djahed, B, Rose, JE. Pulmonary hazards of smoking marijuana as compared with tobacco. N Engl J Med 1988; 318:347.) Further, there is a definitive link between weed and COPD (which eventually leads to right-sided heart feailure and subsequently death). I, like many medical professionals, don't agree with the idea that psych issues arise from its use and instead those who are more predisposed to psych problems are more likely to use. There is also a definitive link between motor vehicle accidents and weed, hence many of these deaths are directly attributable top its use. Finally, for the guys, it leads to decreased testosterone which can cause decreased libido, impotence, infertility, and gynecomastia (man-boobs in layman's).
On the basis of legality, the law is what it is. Personally, I say legalize, regulate, and tax the hell out of it like we do with tobacco and EtOH, if for no other reason than to decrease my tax burden by its influx. This is all coming from someone who previously smoked quite heavily in my youth (quit in college) and is about to receive his MD. On the note of those references, those are but a drop in the bucket of many peer-reviewed studies of significant repute.
With that said, subjectively I believe physical discipline, when used sparingly and appropriately (enough force to attain their attention but not yield any genuine tissue damage), is the right course. It cannot be used with frequency because it loses any meaning as a punishment and as such should be withheld for only the most deserving behaviors (which should be well delineated to the child when they are old enough to understand). However, I also believe in creative punishment/corrective education. One of my coworkers got his willful daughter to eat her fruits and veggies by showing her pictures of people rickets and scurvy (here behavior changed overnight, though it was likely a nightmare filled night; she's only 6). My father would make me hold buckets of water with my arms outstretched to the sides (as a 5'9'' individual, lets just say I earned my 44'' shoulders as a child) or would make me spend time dismantling and reassembling things around the house (hated it then as it seemed like pointless busywork but as an adult I can fix just about everything in my house). My mother was keen on book reports. (Which, as an educator, she would grade and make me redo until satisfactory. She would also choose books she knew I would hate). I was only spanked a few times, but boy did I earn them and they held meaning. Further, in the case of small children with whom logical arguments or even basic speech cannot be used, a smack on the hand or an open palm to the rear (its hard to hurt someone of any age with a smack to the bottom, the gluteals are thick muscles and are covered by an ample fat pad) is the only way to get the point across. Again, it should only be used when absolutely necessary in this age bracket and should be used with the child's well-being in mind (i.e. to discourage behaviors where the child can bring harm to his or herself).
I apologize for the lengthy nature of this response, it started to more as I wrote it. I fully respect those parents that opt against physical discipline, but in my experience if used properly it makes a significant difference in the outcomes.
As for my qualifications to review the articles, summa *** laude in biology with 3 years biochemistry research as an undergrad, 4 years med school and now 3 years into my anatomic and clinical pathology residency with extended training on evidence based medicine and critical interpretation of research.
4 Scalding Tarn
10 Island
10 Mountain
Spells
4 Galvanic Blast
4 Stoic Rebuttal
2 Hoard-smelter dragon
2 Kuldotha Phoenix
4 Trinket Mage
4 Manic Vandal
Artifacts
4 Liquimetal Coating
4 Everflowing Chalice
4 Chimeric Mass
1 Nihil Spellbomb
1 Elixir of Immortality
1 Pithing Needle
1 Brittle Effigy
Basically, the Coating acts to help boost my metalcraft spells and allows the Vandal and Dragon to act as removal for any permanents with the Coating in play. Again, this is a very rough draft and any input would be appreciated.
And here is my only piece of power and the highlights from my Sol Ring collection.
Shaharazad: It actually does induce chemical dependence (not addiction, which is psychological). The reasoning behind this is that the body adapts to having a certain level of the toxins circulating within it (hence becoming the norm for your body). By depriving the body of those toxins its ability to function is diminished as it is no longer in its normal range; hence withdrawal. (Which despite common belief, does exist for marijuanna. See
Jones, RT. Human effects in marijuana research findings: 1976. NIDA Research Monograph 14. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1977; 128. as one of many quality examples)
XxTalonxX: It does not help anyone focus. It does the opposite. Why do you think one of the most commonly noted side effects is cognitive impairment.
Sibtiger: The question of cost is variable vs. alcohol. You are using bars as the comparison when most true alcoholics drink more privately. Alcohol is actually quite cheap per content when purchased from a a liquor store.
Spadrick: 1. It doesn't help with pain any more than codeine (which is substandard for end of life care anyway). (See Campbell, FA, Tramer, MR, Carroll, D, et al. Are cannabinoids an effective and safe treatment option in the management of pain? A qualitative systematic review. BMJ 2001; 323:13.) What it helps treat in those patients is cachexia (wasting in layman's terms) by helping to improve appetite. It can further be used as an antiemetic (for which he have plenty), intractable hiccups (easy to treat), glaucoma (actually a decent drug for this, but we have dronabinol to use specifically and its nothing more than purified THC), and to help treat the symptoms of multiple sclerosis (see dronabinol).
2. About the deaths, while there aren't any true statistics to show increased mortality, that is due to the fact that nearly all studies are done on patients who ceased use within a short time (years vs. decades) and typically also smoked tobacco. However, it's smoke contains nearly four times as much tar and 50 percent more carcinogens than tobacco (see Wu, TC, Tashkin, DP, Djahed, B, Rose, JE. Pulmonary hazards of smoking marijuana as compared with tobacco. N Engl J Med 1988; 318:347.) Further, there is a definitive link between weed and COPD (which eventually leads to right-sided heart feailure and subsequently death). I, like many medical professionals, don't agree with the idea that psych issues arise from its use and instead those who are more predisposed to psych problems are more likely to use. There is also a definitive link between motor vehicle accidents and weed, hence many of these deaths are directly attributable top its use. Finally, for the guys, it leads to decreased testosterone which can cause decreased libido, impotence, infertility, and gynecomastia (man-boobs in layman's).
On the basis of legality, the law is what it is. Personally, I say legalize, regulate, and tax the hell out of it like we do with tobacco and EtOH, if for no other reason than to decrease my tax burden by its influx. This is all coming from someone who previously smoked quite heavily in my youth (quit in college) and is about to receive his MD. On the note of those references, those are but a drop in the bucket of many peer-reviewed studies of significant repute.