And thank you for engaging in good faith! Appreciate you 💜

As an aside I have a degree in neurobiology and work in health care and would be happy to discuss things with you if you ever have questions.

Yes, antidepressants are not considered addictive by the same big pharma companies who told us that Oxycodone was not totally fine.

No, I’m talking about how researchers, who do not have conflicts of interest, have to say about these drugs.

What is the difference between a physical dependence and addiction?

Googling this will give you plenty of pages drawing the distinction between the two. For example, here’s a webmd article on the difference. In short, it’s meaningful to draw clear distinctions and definitions around where an urge is coming from. Withdrawing from a substance does not necessarily mean you desire the substance. Taking the substance to avoid withdrawal symptoms might happen because you wish to avoid the negative symptoms, and treating the symptoms could be enough to get someone off the substance causing problems. Addiction, on the other hand, is characterized by a strong desire to continue drug use despite the ways in which it is negatively affecting one’s life. It is possible for addiction and physical dependence to have overlap (and for many drugs this is common) but they are mutually exclusive - one does not necessarily imply the other and the presence of one does not mean there is the presence of the other.

If they aren’t addictive, but cause the same withdrawal symptoms which result from addiction, in some cases severely, then what should we call them?

While withdrawal symptoms can vary with the nature of addiction, one does not need to be addicted to experience withdrawal symptoms. Many common, non-addictive chemicals have withdrawal symptoms. Nearly every drug has some kind of withdrawal symptoms. Withdrawal symptoms are the direct biological consequences of a human changing their equilibrium with the addition of or removal of an exogenous substance or the regular use of said substance and the long-term biological changes it can have on one’s body.

At a high level, I would highly suggest you educating yourself on drug dependence and recovery as well as the psychology of addiction. These are high level basic concepts which are taught to you in any human-centered biology and psychology coursework.

I’m removing this because Sabine has repeatedly been lambasted by the media for junk science, and because she’s a known transphobe.

Antidepressants are highly addictive and it doesn’t get talked about

SSRIs are not addictive and almost no antidepressants have addictive qualities. Many can cause withdrawal symptoms, which is very different from addiction, and a few select agents have been misused in contexts where access to drugs are low and quality of life are low, such as prison, but this kind of use needs to be considered in context, as these individuals are desperate for escape.

Please do not spread misinformation.

It’s a big step up from literally drowning lab rats as an experiment, but we’ve got a long way to go before we get even reasonably ethical with lab animals 😔

To be fair if anyone was gonna not kill them when they’re done, this lab seems like they might be the ones.

Yes, but if a review board were to sign off on them and then someone managed to significantly hurt or damage themselves, one could theoretically apply some of the blame to the review board for not doing their job to ensure that a study was safe. The whole idea of having ethics as a part of the review board was born of some of the studies they used to sign off on that were ultimately problematic and resulted in seriously damaging some individuals, such as minorities and kids.

Been really disappointed in my states recent measure track record. NIMBYism is currently winning and we’re headed back towards a tough on crime approach that never worked. It’s really sad to see

Sorry by experimental what I meant here is something which is not ready to be tested in humans - this scientist was skipping a bunch of the necessary steps to show this is a safe thing to do (in lab grown cells first, for example) to proceed to human experimentation.

Ethically speaking, we should not be experimenting on humans, even with their explicit consent. It’s not allowed by any credible review board (such as the IRB) and in many countries you can be held legally liable for doing experiments on humans.

With that being said, there have been exceptions to this, in that in some countries we allow unproven treatments to be given to terminal patients (patients who are going to die from a condition). We also generally don’t have repercussions for folks who experiment on themselves because they are perhaps the only people capable of truly weighing the pros and cons, of not being mislead by figures of authority (although I do think there is merit of discussing this with regards to being influenced by peers), and they are the only ones for which consent cannot be misconstrued.

Bbhh hope you’ve been well friend 💜

Would love to see you start posts and discussions about what next! I’ve personally been really energized by all the activity I’ve been seeing in activism, queer, and anarchist groups since the election results were clear.

Absolutely. If someone is being openly fash, please report them so we can remove them.

But I’ve seen a lot of really heated infighting where people were treating others in bad faith. Let’s not do that.

My dude, I told you to chill and take a step back. People were reporting you for being confrontational. I flagged my comment to help you understand that this was me helping you understand how we do things on Beehaw. If you think someone reminding you of the rules, asking you to take a step back, asking you to not be confrontational and doing their best to treat your comment with good faith and providing you educational material is “rude and condescending” or that it is “talking down to others” then you’re probably not a good fit for this instance.

I’m going to time you out from our instance for 7 days. Please take that time to reflect. If you repeatedly show this behavior on our instance, you may find yourself with longer timeouts or even being removed.

Sadly not surprising that AI will be weaponized to disenfranchise voters and disproportionately affect the kind of people those who are pushing for it’s adoption don’t want to vote.

Hey there, I’ve removed this comment because it reads as rather aggressive (and was reported for such). Maybe take a step back and re-assess if you’re treating others with good faith and be(e)ing nice.

that still doesn’t make this about colonialism because this is about capitalism.

FYI- there is wide overlap between these two and they are not mutually exclusive. If you’re unfamiliar with the use of these terms, you should ask how they are defined or how they are being used, rather than pushing a pedantic lens on the words definition.

Genuinely asking, because I always assume US billionaires are effectively untouchable

They’re certainly less touchable because they mostly exist outside of normal spaces - private drivers, private planes, curating who’s at events, etc. They’re not untouchable so much as it’s too much annoyance/effort to deal with them. I mean, hell, the very idea of a hired assassin is basically entirely made up by Hollywood. The military assassinates people all the time during war and coups on foreign soil (albeit a lot less than they used to) and civil disrupt in the homeland, but that’s because they have the backing of a government to protect them. There are some rare targeted instances of sabotage (Havana syndrome may be a modern version of that) but those are also suspected to be tied to government. Any overt assassinations in another first world country, even if backed by a strong military, would likely be considered tantamount to a declaration of war, and I cannot imagine a situation in which it would not be difficult to figure out that another country was behind it.

you should filter out irrelevant details like names before any evaluation step

Unfortunately, doing this can make things worse. It’s not a simple problem to solve, but you are generally on the right track. A good example of how it’s more than just names, is how orchestras screen applicants - when they play a piece they do so behind a curtain so you can’t see the gender of the individual. But the obfuscation doesn’t stop there - they also ensure the female applicants don’t wear shoes with heels (something that makes a distinct sound) and they even have someone stand on stage and step loudly to mask their footsteps/gait. It’s that second level of thinking which is needed to actually obscure gender from AI, and the more complex a data set the more difficult it is to obscure that.

I didn’t hit a paywall, but here’s the 12ft.io link

Interesting question, I bet it’s at least partially spurred on by the musk PAC paying people to vote nonsense. That one is likely even more clearly illegal than this, but I’m not against little nudges like this to get people to do their civic duty. I suppose we’ll see how it plays out in court.