Links 3/5/13

Links for you. Science:

Coughing Manequins Shed Light On Flu Transmission
Life Stands on the shoulders of Giants (Viruses)
On the annotation of functionality in GENCODE (or: our continuing efforts to understand how a television set works).
Ridiculous statements by mental health experts. (anyone have this pdf?)
Opinion: We Didn’t Domesticate Dogs. They Domesticated Us.


Louis Menand and New Deal Denialism in The New Yorker
The Neighborhood
Who Should We Listen To?
On being given pause, as a Jew
New Cars Increasingly Out of Reach for Many Americans (and the markets where it’s hardest to afford a car are where one needs one the most)
How the Californian condor’s fate rests on the Sandy Hook gun debate
“Download this gun”: 3D-printed semi-automatic fires over 600 rounds
Government and Medical Costs, Continued
Boston humming as appeal of life in city booms (though it also notes that rental prices are climbing)
Medicare Patients May Lose Their Doctors Under Sequestration
Allston: Then and Now (awesome photoset)
Obama economic adviser: Using the sequester to cut benefits was “part of the DNA from the start”
The Orange Line’s portal to another dimension

This entry was posted in Lotsa Links. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Links 3/5/13

  1. Prof.Pedant says:

    The ISSN of the journal is 1558-0490. WorldCat lists 35 libraries in the US that have a copy, including two in Massachusetts. The OCLC Accession # is 60626352. If you give your friendly neighborhood Interlibrary Loan Librarian the above information and the citation you should have a copy in no more than a couple of days.

    Bernet, W. (2011). Ridiculous statements by mental health experts. Child and adolescent psychiatric clinics of North America, 20(3), 557–564. doi:10.1016/j.chc.2011.03.003

  2. TheBrummell says:

    I downloaded the PDF through my university library. I could email it to you if you like.

    I skimmed it. There are a few cases presented as summaries, with a brief discussion following each describing the ridiculous statement and its effects on the case (all appear to be legal suits involving children that may or may not have been injured or abused). It’s good to see a clear, well-described definition for the concept “ridiculous statement”, as found in the Abstract.

Comments are closed.