tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1927010366472414830.post3312502895272521284..comments2023-02-26T11:12:34.025+01:00Comments on Idiotsingracia: El peligro del escepticismoIdiotsingraciahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17933877563914134276noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1927010366472414830.post-2953979577943888092009-12-13T16:08:26.889+01:002009-12-13T16:08:26.889+01:00Thank you for your constructive comment Jenny.
I ...Thank you for your constructive comment Jenny.<br /><br />I totally agree with you, maybe in the case of the AIDS there was not yet that huge consensus as today there is in the case of the global warming... but that does not serve as an excuse, Mbeki committed a big mistake following marginal theories, based primarily on skepticism...<br /><br />And of course, given that South Africa did not have the sufficient resources to provide all the needed drugs, Mbeki could have had a much better rest believing that the available treatments were useless... But I think we should not expect from our leaders to have a peaceful dream, they are expected to make difficult decisions and deal with the consequences..<br /><br />I wanted to remark that playing the skeptical sometimes can result in really bad consequences.. and the case of the global warming could be one of those times...<br /><br />Hope to see you around here from time to time Jenny!Jojimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05872118522787440103noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1927010366472414830.post-76377541866553821342009-12-10T21:33:46.708+01:002009-12-10T21:33:46.708+01:00Good point.
This also begs the question: to what...Good point. <br /><br />This also begs the question: to what extent does the blame rest with the scientists and to what extent are the politicians culpable? <br /><br />Many say that the purpose of science is to seek truth without hindrance, provided that the means are ethical (who, for instance, could condone the torture exacted by Dr. Josef Mengele, regardless of the results?). Scientists therefore, may pursue whatever course of research they desire, regardless of the potential applications of their discoveries. Unfortunately, this opinion has yielded some very tragic results. For example, it would be unjust to accuse Rutherford, Hahn, or Meitner for the later research conducted on the Manhatttan Project or for the subsequent US military "intervention"(read: homicide) in Hiroshima y Nagasaki during WWII, but numerous Japanese civilians died anyway. And whether to blame President Truman and his advisers, well, that's a more complicated matter.<br /><br />Concerning the science of AIDS, we can't completely blame the dissenting scientists of the late 80s because, even into the 90s, much was left unknown. When, in 1986, Luc Montagnier's virus was corroborated as the probable cause of AIDS, one would expect some dissension, and that is what we see in the rebuttal issued by Deusberg the following year. Zidovudine (AZT) was only approved for AIDS treatment in 1990, and the doses were so high that it seemed for many the the treatment was worse than the disease. <br /><br />However, as the 90s progressed, the effectiveness of anti-retroviral drugs, particularly HAART, became undeniable (as you've mentioned, many can live for years relatively unaffected). These days, Duesberg's denial of HIV as the sole cause of AIDS should be seen on par with the denial of the Holocaust--that is, socially unacceptable. <br /><br />Now, let's look at the political aspect at South Africa. The country guaranteed comprehensive healthcare for its citizens, but it was faced with a grave epidemic, one that the economy clearly could not withstand. Thus, when certain scientists suggested that the HIV drug therapy was useless, and perhaps even a cause of AIDS, it appeared an attractive solution. If you were Mbeki, wouldn't it be much easier to sleep at night believing that you haven't done anything to help your people because no treatment exists, rather than accepting that it exists but that your government is too feeble purchase all of the drugs that the people need? <br /><br />Futhermore, Thabo Mbeki came from pre-apartheid Africa, making his distrust of Western pharmaceutical companies more understandable. He saw these very expensive, clearly toxic drugs, marketed by Western companies as a means of exploitation, similar to what South Africa had only recently overcome. <br /><br />In the case of South Africa, we see elements of poverty and racism obscuring a politician's rationality regarding the AIDS epidemic. But in the denial of climate change? We see no such excuse. Rather, greed and self-interest appear to be the culprits. <br /><br />In both cases, fortunately, the scientific community has done its job, effectively eliminating these un-scientifically founded viewpoints via the democratic process of peer-review and chastising the politicians who encourage them. <br /><br />Still, this obviously does nothing to absolve the untimely deaths of thousands. You're right, let's hope that global cooperation regarding climate change will prevent a repeat of unethical collaboration between politicians and scientists.Jennynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1927010366472414830.post-85842310972930398772009-12-03T14:22:45.575+01:002009-12-03T14:22:45.575+01:00Gracias por tu comentario Luis.
Aunque no lo crea...Gracias por tu comentario Luis.<br /><br />Aunque no lo creas si que hay muchos escépticos del cambio climático, el antropogénico por supuesto... No solo de las teorías catástrofistas de las que hablas, esas no son nada más que POSIBLES (igual se podría decir probables) consecuencias si no actuamos a tiempo... En fin, a mi el Katrina no me gustó demasiado, sino vuelve a ocurrir nada parecido, mejor que mejor...<br /><br />Por cierto que yo también soy un gran escéptico, como tú. Lo que intentaba con este artículo era hacer ver que a veces hay que tener cuidado con lo que uno es escéptico, sobre todo si hay vidas humanas en juego.<br />Si uno se muestra escéptico con la ciencia suele estar equivocado... Einstein lo estaba cuando se negaba a aceptar la mecánica cuántica, y es díficil pensar en alguien más inteligente que él...Jojimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05872118522787440103noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1927010366472414830.post-28768581286623329562009-12-02T12:07:46.808+01:002009-12-02T12:07:46.808+01:00No creo que encuentres muchos escépticos al cambio...No creo que encuentres muchos escépticos al cambio climático. Si a lo que te refieres es a las teorías de la destrucción mundial en pocos años promovida por interés políticos y económicos me declaro absolutamente escéptico.<br />Por si a alguien le interesa me declaro escéptico en otras muchas cosas. Por ejemplo la mejora de la situación económica de España ( a pesar de que economistas de prestigio a sueldo del gobierno digan lo contrario). <br />Yo como Galileo, Servet ( grandes escépticos de la historia), u otros tantos grandes personajes de la historia no creo que una tontería por mucho que se rePita, o por muy poderosa que sea la maquinaria de propaganda que lleva detrás se convierta en verdad. <br /><br />Luis ( otro escéptico)Saohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02252356172578898100noreply@blogger.com