/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11329324
He's pretty cringe. Watch potholer54 instead.

>>11329329
Well I dont know, I guess his videos popped up since I was watching anti feminist stuff, so I am not into /sci/ stuff, I came here to ask because something seems fishy about those videos, but since I have no idea I wanted to ask.

>>11329334
Oh, you're a cringelord too. Makes sense.

>>11329329
>potholer54
yawn, all he does is agw.

>>11329324
tf is based

>>11329350
you are a retard

a meme
the alex jones of stem

>>11329324
He's becoming sloppy. His arguments sometimes are not logical at all. His recent video on aluminium fuel cells didn't "debunk" anything at all, just rambling about how it wasn't a special technology (even though the inventors never claimed it was) and that it wasn't a battery (again, not claimed by the inventors). Still his fanboys suck it all up though.

Also I think he has ADHD or is losing it because his videos these days are an hour long with 50 tangents.

He used to mildly based, now he's a cringeworthy nerd with an ego that doesn't line up with his downward trajectory.

>>11329324
He might as well be clamped, vaccinated, and circumcised. Literally or figuratively.

>>11329366
What do you mean by "clamped"?

>>11329369

>>11329371
Why is it a problem? Dumb schizo.

>>11329350
you are not wrong, but I am a different kind of cringe I just watch cartoons OK?

>>11329365
Don't forget his weak as hell SpaceX "debunks".

>>11329350
commit sudoku
>>11329329
thunderf00t is fine but potholer is in fact good shit

>>11329376
Clamping the umbilical cord before the completion of palcental transfusion cuts off oxygen to the infant and causes permanent brain damage and developmental stunting. Clinical trials found measureable decrease in myelination at 4 months, and lower IQ.

Why am I wasting my time typing this. Fuck you, braindead asshole.

>>11329404
so clamping isn't a problem, just when it happens

RETARD

>>11329405
What are you even trying to say here guy?

>>11329405
>so clamping isn't a problem, just when it happens
Did you accidentally the sentence?

>>11329380
The only possible solution is if you had a larger brain

>>11329410
How is that relevant?

>>11329407
>>11329408
Dear confused, dumb, samefag

your issue is when the clamping occurs, not that it happens at all

off yourself

>>11329407
Never mind, I don't know why it didn't click.

The notion of "timing" is all wrong. You wait until it's done, then it can be "clamped" / cut. So yes, it's a matter of when it happens.

>>11329417
That makes more sense. Your wording was confusing. Lack of a period didn't help. Looked like you stopped your thought mid sente-

>>11329404
This is retarded. Where's your data?
99.9% sure the brain damage your referring to isn't "failure" to let the umbilical cord drain but rather hypoxia in regards to if the baby isn't yet breathing.
Post links and data.

>>11329417
>>11329426
dumb schizo can't even reply properly
take your meds

>>11329435
wut?

>>11329435
You're talking to two separately people.

Ashamed I filled out a captcha for this,

>>11329473
>separately
Also yes, the inside of my head feels as though it is under an incredible pressure. Things are not working correctly.

>>11329355
can't blaim the guy, there's so many retards to dab on it's real low hanging fruit.

>>11329404
Literal baby IQ

>>11330727
>t. Clamped.
>t. VACCINATEEEEEDDDDD
Circumclampifluoraccimated.

He is so jealous at ol boy musk its not even funny.
I remember him talking shit about how ridiculous reusable boosters are and yet here we are.

>>11330745
I thought it was funny when he used footage of a F9 landing that had contrails coming off it as proof that the boosters were coming in so fast that they're smoking and thus SpaceX are still finding reuse challenging.

>>11329404
Can you post reference to these studies?

>>11329380
Go back to plebbit SpaceX shill.

>>11330941
No. I like it here.

>>11329324
he is a below average engineer with a contrarian streak, not a good combination

>>11330948
>>11330922
>>11330770
>>11330745
>samefagging this hard

>>11330956
Only three of those are me though.

>>11329324
>Is the Youtuber Thunderf00t a shill and/or a phony
People still watch this guy?

>>11330996
i remember thinking he was a fag in like 7th grade

>>11329324
NoBark is still in Nipton I see

Thunderf00t is a mixed bag. Some of the videos are very good, but many are superficial and misleading.

TF00t's problem is that he never got a wife to busy his time with, so he spends that missing time tweeting at Elon

>>11329427
>>11330901

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30473033
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30278462
https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004074.pub3/references
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30193752
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30598672
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29101631
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30208504

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27654493

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30355293

He still goesof on Hypermemeloop and Tesla i think, havent heard much about SpaceX in a while

>>11331734
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30278462

So yes. You're born, you're stuck existing and you've got what you've got, and yet we let these clowns muse about when they should clamp off your oxygen and iron supply. It;s absurd. You leave the damn thing UNTIL IT'S DONE, then MILK IT IF APPLICABLE.

Was that so hard? No.

>>11329329
I watched a few videos by this potholer54 guy, but he seems more interested in the political side of an argument, rather than presenting objective scientific facts.

>>11331734
>expecting me to read

>>11331830
Clamped. It's 2020, it is the time of clear sight and the awakening. Unclamp.

>>11331734
>106 participants
>seemingly insignificant results, seems they p-hacked this shit
>most results not significant, additionally most results suggest clamping is a good thing (less blood loss, less death)
>comment on first article's results, not an actual study
>"Overall, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of developmental status at four months old", development assessed by questionnaire answered by parents, all results non-significant at the 1% level
>" However, this benefit did not persist till 3 mo PMA."
>No differences reported, conclusion is "We did not find an increased risk of adverse outcomes associated with the widespread use of DCC."
>Not an actual study or review, this is mostly an opinion piece with extremely limited support for the claims made.
>completely irrelevant to DCC, this is about how much women liked the doctors based on the kind of protocol that was followed, answered through a questionnaire on satisfaction for overall procedure

>>11331840
In conclusion, I find that:
- DCC is a clear winner for preterm children
- There is no statistically validated negative impact to DCC in healthy neonates
- Evidence of negative impact to ICC is both lacking and disputed
One problem I note is that the definition of DCC is not set. I suspect that if you ensured DCC means >= 5 minutes, you'd get better results, so you should focus on looking for relevant literature at this level.

>>11331840
>>11331850
You have to look at a lot of literature, the underlying physiology, and synthesize this into a general picture of the way of things. The difficulty with your request is it requires me to either include a wall of links with summaries, or write my own review. The brain myelination studies are fairly clear, and a few papers demonstrate an effect lasting longer than 3 months.

This is just one part of a large constellation. Many things are on the list.

>>11331869
>You have to look at a lot of literature, the underlying physiology, and synthesize this into a general picture of the way of things.
That's why I asked for literature overviews. There are no doubt thousands of papers about the topic and it's even harder to sift through them because related-term papers included, they will surely number in the tens of thousands.
At least a few examples to start with should be helpful.
> it requires me to either include a wall of links with summaries
No, it requires 3 good papers and that's it. You have provided 0. At best 0.5 since despite the low sample count in that study, it's still not THAT low that I would discount it irrevocably, but I'd only accept it in light of other studies to basically add to the sample count.
>or write my own review
You're just trying to find excuses now.
> and a few papers demonstrate an effect lasting longer than 3 months.
None of which you have provided.
> Many things are on the list.
I went through every one of the papers you posted and found nothing to support your claim outright. In fact, some of the papers you posted directly contradicted your claim, suggesting you have not actually read any of the papers you posted here.

>>11329365
You've missed the point of his videos completely. He's literally making videos "debunking" the cringeworthy ego filled shills selling their bullshit products to the world.

There's a reason he picks on products that have raised $1 milllion on kickstarter and/or have gotten news channels and universities to shill their garbage and he won't pick on people who sell things like telescopes and microwaves for $50 built in their garage for free. Next time, maybe watch the content before complaining about it.

t. someone who isn't even subscribed or liked even one of his videos, but recognizes that he's one of the good ones who's calling out scammers

>>11331977
Are you retarded? I literally responded to arguments in one of his videos.

>>11329365
I've realized he was never anything special. His "peak" was pretty much just dunking on the easiest targets, e.g. cherrypicking from creationists.