(╯°□°）╯
I often post here that I look forward to getting my genetic profile mapped. (Still saving my pennies.) But one gap seems to be in doctors agreeing what data is important and what is a waste. If my genes tell me I have a high risk of breast cancer, THAT apparently is useful to know. But if my genes tell me I have a high risk of Alzheimer's, apparently there is no benefit to me knowing that. Or maybe there is. I forget. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303505504577404283606716506.html
(✌ﾟ∀ﾟ)☞
LEAKING as in the Revelation of Related CONTENTS Matter ''significantly'' at the correct ''moment'' ... is the approprate, proper and right place plus time; is in oder to get what data or information EVIDENTLY is of ''greater'' INTERESTS REALLY ! http://shar.es/qPwy4
⊙▂⊙
OMG, Regardless of your beliefs, this is unconstitutional & dangerously on the road toward Big Brother ... Legislating what scientists can research, publish and present data! And what data can be seen & used! http://e360.yale.edu/feature/north_carolina_costly_mistake_on_climate_change/2543/#.T-TOLilX5SI.facebook
॓_॔
I don't know what data they use to make these predictions, but keep in mind that it is much too early to say for sure where this storm may go.
(✿ σ_σ)
"People in conservative and religious groups that would be affected the way Robert Wright hypotheses did not show changes in the way they view trust in science vs religion. At the same time, more people from liberal groups disagree with the statement indicating that they trust science more than before. How exactly this is a sign of weaking trust in science?" http://kartyush.wordpress.com/2012/06/19/what-data-behind-changes-in-trusting-science-really-show/
(❍ᴥ❍ʋ)
try to know this http://bit.ly/fhE6nl
No comments:
Post a Comment