@fuq the OP is known for posting ... shall we say ... less than politically-correct questions. I'm not surprised by this one at all. Maybe close-vote as "Primarily opinion-based"?
@MattDMo Relatively, multiple of my points of confusion towards homosexuality were clarified by both @YviDe and @James this morning. It may of took a couple attempts but, I found it incredibly helpful.
@YviDe The last sentence was a bit unclear, in my opinion (in the first comment). I wasn't quite sure what you were asking. I clicked with the first part, though.
@fuq when people talk about non-heterosexual people being harmed by their sexuality, they often mean the psychological harm that comes from living in a society that doesn't accept their sexuality. I think that was what I meant
Basically, LGBT people being depressed more often does not mean that the depression is caused by them being LGBT itself
@YviDe Ahhh, I understand. Thank you. I was assuming that the OP was making an reference to physical or maybe even viral bodily harm associated with certain acts that may be related to sexual intercourse (male and female) side of things. That'd be me, speaking under the wrong influence however e.g. stereotypes. I might suggest an edit to correct it - if possible.
I keep using sexual intercourse as a marker for defining sexuality. I need to stop that!
Well, I was basically trying to ask "what harm do you mean" and also saying "higher depression rates because people's parents disown them is not what I mean" in one sentence. I have no idea what the OP means with individual harm here
I think that it could all be resolved if he came into the chat room. It'd be more fluid, than posting answers. Especially, as the question is quite confusing.
Hopefully, he will.
newscientist.com/article/… Personally, i like this article - it's not like the rest :) It attends to most of the common questions about homosexuality in a very decisive manner. Come to think of it, why is so much money being invested in searching for a reason? It won't change anything surely.
@MattDMo Can i ask you a question? (I noticed that work/ed on cancer research)
@MattDMo I was just wondering, why does cancer of the Parotid gland cause issues with jaw movement (muscular) and why does it cause neuropathy related issues such as, facial twitching?
It is right on the top. "This edit deviates from the original intent of the post. Even edits that must make drastic changes should strive to preserve the goals of the post's owner."
Your edits made the answer more tempered than the OP and even though there answer is likely not very good, the edits you chose changed the , shall we say, exuberance that they OP had for the subject.
@AMR I see that but, I can't see how. I only changed a couple of words and corrected brevity. I wouldn't have thought that making the user seem less enthusiastic about the subject would affect the probability that the question is answered.
@fuq In this case, the word choice implies the original intent of the OP. "Emphatically" sets an entirely different tone than theoretically. "Correlated with" is more correct, but their choice of "linked to" is telling of their view on the subject and it therefore allows people reading it to have a more accurate idea of who is posting the link; Sometimes knowing who is providing you with a reference gives you a way of evaluating the quality of the source.
@fuq Also "overdosing" implies harm, where as "megadosing" doesn't necessarily imply harm, especially for those that believe that there is efficacy to using much greater than the RDA of a vitamin.
@fuq First, check out where the parotid salivary glands are located in relation to the main facial nerve:
and you can pretty much tell why the effects you are asking about occur. Any cancerous growth in the gland could significantly impinge on one or more branches of the facial nerve, and also affect the movement of the mandible (lower jaw).
Don't feel stupid, it was a good question. Yes, any kind of growth, whether or not it turns out to be cancerous (only about 25-30% of parotid tumors are actually cancerous), can press against nerves and cause issues, or in some cases potentially grow entirely around them and cut them off from blood supply.
The easiest way of seeing how pressure affects nerves is by recalling the last time you hit your "funny bone" in your elbow.
@MattDMo Would mortality be affected by the position of the cancerous growth? Providing that it was malignant (can cancerous growths on the parotid gland be malignant?)
@AMR Why is megadosing not the same as overdosing? If you exceed the RDA, you are over-dosing? Surely?
Yes, the definitely can be malignant, I was just saying that not all of them are. I am not aware of any studies linking the exact position of the tumor within the gland with mortality, but there may be correlation. What is more important is the size of the tumor, how soon it is caught, and whether or not it presents with pain or other neurological issues. If the nerves are already involved, the prognosis is less positive, but the majority of parotid cancers can be cured with surgical intervention, and sometimes post-operative radiation.
It seems like accompanying facial pain is not a good sign. The size of the tumor is also an issue, with large, bulky tumors carrying a poorer prognosis. Other than that, I think it just depends on exactly where in the tissue the tumor arose and what exactly caused its appearance - you know, the usual things in cancer.
The good news is that many parotid tumors are benign - tumors arising in the smaller salivary glands have a poorer prognosis.
Megadose: (Pharmacology) a very large dose, as of a medicine, vitamin, etc.
There are times when a megadose may be medically necessary. You will often hear it referred to as a bolus. In medicine, a bolus (from Latin bolus, ball) is the administration of a discrete amount of medication, drug or other compound in order to raise its concentration in blood to an effective level. As there are 5 liters or more of blood in the average human, to get a concentration to a certain level you may need to give much larger than the normal dose.
The thing to remember about cancer is that it's just another disease, and medical science has had a tremendous amount of success in dealing with it. My impression is that parotid tumors typically present in old age, and surgical resection is often completely sufficient to cure it.
I do want to say, though, is that I'm a scientist, and not a medical doctor (although I have a lot of experience in medicine for a variety of reasons...), so if you or a loved one has this disease (or any, really), you should go straight to your doctor and get it checked out. Go get a second opinion if you're not sure.
@MattDMo Here goes. The side-reason other than curiosity, for my interest was that. Not too long ago (a little less than a year ago), I noticed how my Parotid gland seemed to be growing in a smooth and even manner and only on one side. So, as you do, i payed a visit to the doctors office and he put me on a course of the relevant antibiotics, to rule out whether it was an infection or even if it was in relation to the lymphatic branch that runs along the area.
To no avail, however - as it was unhindered by the medical intervention. After that, a large batch of blood samples were taken to explore any inflammatory causes and just general immune function factors, the results didn't show anything abnormal either. I haven't went back since then. Inevitably, it has steadily increased in size since then. I never considered it as worth looking into, further. Which is stupid, I know.
Although, the prominence of the pain has increased (a dull ache not affected by touch), and I'm querying whether or whether not I should book another appointment, I worry that i'd be wasting doctoral time? My dentist mentioned how my bite and jaw motion was inconsistent, too.
Furthermore, my family mentioned to me how my face appeared to by asymmetrical, now. They pointed out that area in particular as being the cause for asymmetry. Say, if i did book another appointment, is there anything particularly valuable to bring up?
Usually i'm good at independent decision making, i just figured that it'd useful to have additional insight.
@fuq Basically anything that your doctor might need to know in order to diagnose what is occurring. Where you live. If, when, and where you have travelled to. OTC meds you take. Familial history of cancer, with age of onset. Any injuries sustained to your head or neck. Any personal information that your doctor may not know that may be of relevance. Antibiotics won't do anything against fungi or parasites.
@fuq The most important thing is not to try and self diagnose or try and seek out an answer on line. Go to your doctor and let them do their job. Also you need to be completely open and honest with them, no matter how embarrassing the information may be, or how trivial you might think it is. The more data they have on you, the more they can rule out and get to a proper diagnosis.
@AMR I'm so confused. I don't remember writing any of this, at all.
I know that mumps can definitely be ruled out - I haven't had any direct or indirect contact with anybody that would have caught the virus. Still yet, I believe that he did test for mumps. Although, even if he didn't, it wouldn't have persisted for this long and could be subsequently ruled out - I believe. Of course, I couldn't agree more. I disclose even the most cringing details with my MD.
Oh no, self-diagnosis is far from my agenda. We, ourself, can't judge what is normal no matter the experience or expertise. Even MDs.
The familial history is quite prominent. I'll make sure to not forget about that!
@AMR I nearly forgot: Thank you for your help :)
if I delete a question, would all of the reputation lost, be regained? Likewise, would the rep gained on the answers, be revoked also?
@Chris, There's only one way to find out ;) Although, I don't really want @AMR to lose the rep gained on his answer for question. I suspect that the down votes will continue, however.
I'll leave it for a little while longer. If I get down voted again, I might be forced to delete it.
Damn!
Was walking in my home,
just woken up,
was finding my way to washroom,
was yawning,
and boom,
The mosquito flew straight into my mouth.
I am afraid, what if the mosquito just drank blood of a HIV infected person, will I get the infection too.. or some other disease??
I tried to take h...
Is there any database or book that has an index of organic reactions where the mechanisms are written out, complete with curly arrows? It would really help if I could look up a reaction and see a proposed mechanism with curly arrows.
@AMR At OP's level, learning about Partial pressure of Oxygen, will be included under Biology. It might be confusing to ask it under Chemistry.SE. OP would need it in context too as, those questions usually ask you to write about the relationship of PO2 to the binding of oxygen to Hb. Modern exam/homework question are a lot less unspecific and they often require extra info that's not requested, on the side.
Instead of arguing every decision made on the site, try to use that time and energy to look at the patterns of moderation on the site to gain an understanding of how the moderation model on the site works. I try to base my decisions on how the rest of the active users on the site would address the issue.
And while there will be some disagreement, most of the time you will see that those users, over time, tend to make very similar decisions and take very similar actions. That is because they have taken the time to understand how things are being moderated by the group as a whole. There is a…
What tools are available to moderators?
Moderators are our human exception handlers and will get involved when users and room owners can't handle a situation on their own. If flags are raised or they are notified of something, then a moderator will step in to investigate and resolve the problem...
"A user attempts to use chat as a dating site: suspend on main" hahaha. Does this actually happen?
You wrote: ""push" in order to learn boundaries." I would say quite a few people think of your actions as trolling, if I think back the the chat from yesterday evening
In the old days of Usenet (does anyone still remember it?) there was an analogy: People sitting together in a pub, welcoming somebody new. But instead of listening to the ongoing talk and seeing how the rules on the table are, the new guy tries to turn around the conversation and not listening. Soon he complains about sitting alone in the dark corner.
@Chris I think, it's an SE issue. Some of the users on here seem too sensitive or maybe it's that I'm *too* insensitive? I have a callous work background where, the way enquire about things is acceptable and highly preferred. I just need to try adapt and be more fitting as *that* and *this* are very distant.
Hmm, I like that analogy. I wouldn't say that it applies to all though: you could argue that if he sits in the dark corner for long enough, would he lose interest in wanting to actually be part of the group? A lesson would not be learned albeit, a new (possibly less favorable) characte…
@YviDe Young Earth Creationist, they may not respond too kindly to your implication that the Earth is a million years old, let alone 5 BILLION DOLLARS... I mean years old (Dr. Evil reference)
So, I figured I'd check up on the question from yesterday about measuring child growth. Thought the best way to find my way back to it might be through my comment history - 'cause I'm pretty sure I dropped one or two in, along with the chat discussions here. But I don't see any related comments in the activity feed on my profile. Possibilities:
1. I actually didn't comment, and am mis-remembering. 2. Comments got nuked after question cleanup. 3. Question ultimately got nuked.
@MadScientist Ah, I see. And unless I've got a caching problem it seems the user never did fix their screen name? Reminds me of a meta thread (ultimately closed as dupe, I think) where I asked how to flag a user's profile.
@YviDe The last question http://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/41020/what-is-the-maximum-magnetic-field-that-organisms-can-withstand... I think there is some person who is selling that you can tell the earth is about 10,000 years old by calculating different things...
This week it must be fishes. Maybe the new thing is they are going to try and use Hardy Wineberg equilibrium to show that there are too few fish to have been around for more than 10 millennia...
@MadScientist Yeah, I know. Still a little lame. On Sec.SE our workaround is usually just to holler at a mod in chat. They tend to be pretty well available and responsive.
@YviDe I love that the first line of the profile seems completely contrary to that explanation.
@Iszi I think this is what you are referring to. biology.stackexchange.com/questions/41590/… @MadScientist Technically they reverted back to the original question, but no sense resurrecting the past.
@Iszi I prefer flags, talking about other users in chat can get problematic very quickly, and as a moderator I tend to avoid it completely, if possible
@MadScientist Usually the stuff that gets brought up doesn't go too far in-depth. It tends to be of the type: Hey, this guy has a high volume of crap Q&A/comments. Sometimes it's better/quicker to just raise that in chat than to have to go around flagging everything.
@MadScientist In general and not related to any specific question... Do the 5 close votes all need to be in the same reason, or is it just 5 votes total
@Chris Close vote was strictly because it was too broad of a question that couldn't be answered succinctly.
@AMR It's not a total roll-back, but I find it mildly amusing that every edit by the OP either maintained or re-established the explicit mention of child porn. Still trying to figure out how they can seriously claim to not be a troll.
You may want to read the Chat Room conversation between them and James. http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/33089/discussion-about-homosexuality if what they said happened is true, then that could explain.
@Chris Only option is to permalink or flag for moderators. No more option to delete
@AMR I flagged the Q. Noted refusal to change screen name, and their re-inclusion of certain content in the question, both of which had received near-unanimous criticism and calls for change/removal from the community members who participated in the discussions.
@Iszi I provided an answer because I saw that the chat went no where, and as I thought I made clear in the answer, it is up to the reasonableness of the Jury and not necessarily the actual forensic of scientific evidence that has more sway.
@AMR Accurate enough, but that just further reinforces the fact that bringing the courts into the discussion completely hijacks what could otherwise be a legitimate biology question. More than half your answer is about law, not biology.
I put in the disclaimer that as they made their question about criminality that that was what I was going to explain for the most part.
What I did find interesting, but kind of suspected was the issue of forensics evidence being unreliable because most of what we know about gauging age from growth plates is based on data from US and European children.
@Chris If you decide to rollback, then my answer will pretty much be out of context with YviDe's edit. If you decide to do that, you or I will need to put a disclaimer in that the answer was provided to a question that was moderator edited.
@AMR I'm not saying your answer is necessarily wrong for being what it is. More that the question drove the answer to be what it is, and that due to this the answer is just further proof that the question's expressed context drives it off the site's topic.
@Chris One could argue that the question no longer brings courts into the discussion, as "evidence" is a term which is used in many more contexts than just court - and especially so in scientific discussions. But that's more an observation than actual complaint from me.
@AMR I think the most interesting bits are, as you said, that there really isn't enough scientific data gathered worldwide to support analysis of measurements for the general case. Essentially, the answer boils down to "No, videographic evidence alone is not sufficent to determine age to within an acceptable margin of error."
At the very least, you also need some medical history information, to determine whether there are any conditions in play which would affect a patient's appearance in relation to the expected appearance of an average person at a given age.
@Chris If you add evidence of criminal acts against a minor, in place of evidence it actually keeps the overall intent the same, as many states have different statutes and punishment if the crime is realty to a minor. You can leave your child in the car while you run in to buy diapers, and that could be construed as endangering the welfare of a child, while leaving your grandmother who suffers from dementia while you ran into the pub wouldn't have anyone batting an eyelash.
@AMR Well, nobody on-scene would likely take notice. But if it ends up in court for any reason (such as grandma dying of heat stroke), and you're the assigned caretaker, you're probably hosed.
In any case, keeping the courts in the Q&A just keeps driving it off-topic for the site. There is a biology-specific question here, with a biology-specific answer. No need for law to be in it.
Ultimately, the law answer would (in most reasonable jurisdictions) fall back to the biology answer anyway - if it's impossible to establish someone's age based on vidographic evidence alone, then the videographic evidence will not be allowed to be used for that purpose without something else to corroborate it.
Only exception to law not following science in this case would be jurisdictions where the definition of the crime is so subjective that the actual age does not matter - in which the question here is moot anyway.
I suppose, but the courts and laws often handle the age of the victim differently.
Iszi, I was the one that made the argument in the first place that the answer was off topic because the scope of the question was about criminal evidence.
@Iszi I answered because OP insisted that the question was valid and there did not appear to be enough support to close the question.
I gave the analogy in the chat that was removed that you could change the question to say that a store clerk or a night club bouncer wanted to know if there was a way to visually determine a person's age as they wanted to make sure the person wasn't using a fake id, and it would have the same biological question and the same answer. No.
Good analogy. But also consider: Why does the question even need a case example? It's fairly straightforward and answerable without any. If we really feel it needs one, then one of two things is probably happening:
1. The question is actually weak, or unclear, and does not really belong or needs more edits besides context. 2. We've been so distracted by the obscenity (perceived or actual) of the original context that we're just reaching around for replacements when none are needed.
@fuq No, and I doubt you do either. Or you only do because you were looking for some justification to avoid having to change your name. Since you supposedly just hit three random keys on the keyboard.
@fuq Honestly, I don't care. My point is you previously claimed to have just hit three random keys on the keyboard, which renders your argument of your name having originated from a French term highly dubious. Also, you did say that you were going to change your name at one point due to the multiple complaints you received. And you either haven't, or you changed your mind and went back in spite of the community's objections.
@Iszi When I used the case analogy I did so to show that there was an underlying, on-topic question about biology or more likely forensics, which may or not be on topic, and that whatever the reason for finding out the answer to the question, it was irrelevant to the on-topic question of whether or not a persons age can be determine by simple visual inspection, to which I would say the answer is No.
@fuq French Connection used that anagram for the shock value of it, the implication of irreverence in seeking to build a brand following with teens and 20-somethings. Their intention was indeed profane and deliberate.
@AMR Ah, I thought you were suggesting an actual edit. And I'll back off on the law bit of your answer - I still don't agree with it, but I do understand why it's there.
@fuq There's no fear here at all. However, focusing the question on child porn - or any court-related purposes - diverts the topic from one of biology (which is relevant and on-topic here) to one of law (which is not so much).
Once you bring law into the discussion, the law supersedes all scientific matters up until the point that it actually relies upon science. With a global audience, this point cannot be universally defined because there actually are some cases where it does not exist at all.
If i was asking, "How can avoid relevant prosecutions in relation to filming Child Porn" that, would be very much so unwelcome anywhere albeit, there is no such mention of that being my intention.
@fuq It's not a matter of "Child porn" being included in a question. It's the irrelevent nature of child porn being including in that particular question. Most people here agree that the question easily could have been boiled down to its biologically relevant parts; "can the age of a person be determined from videographic evidence", without including mention of child porn, or indeed, the law at all.
@user19679 Like @AMR said, there's another very valid case example available that has nothing to do with porn. But, even though it's a valid context, it is equally irrelevant to the question.
@user19679 Context is everything when it comes to providing the right answer to a question. And if that context is indeed a legal one, then it's entirely off-topic for this site.
@user19679 It's irrelevant because the only biology-specific question there is "Can you tell a person's age from videographic evidence alone?" - that's it. It requires absolutely zero context, because the operating conditions and goals are fully laid out in the question.
@user19679 It's not a matter of people acting "immaturely". Indeed, the mature thing to do would be to avoid unnecessarily talking about sensitive topics that could provoke a negative emotional reaction in readers. It's more immature to bring up "edgy" topics to try and bring attention to yourself.
@user19679 And so it is the same with your case. The addition of child porn to the question is only purposeful in gaining attention and creating controversy - especially after it had already been edited out, and heavily objected to, by the community and you put it back in.
While this may not be a valid reason, if at this point I were to remove the law references, then honestly, I have an poorly researched answer on the methods used by forensic scientists to determine physical age, which would really only come into play in paleoanthropology or identification in criminal matters.
Even though the answer to can you accurately determine a person's age by visual inspection is no, I have not researched or provided evidence, other than from the perspective of how a court would view it, and in the absence of proof, it would then be up to the reasonableness of the jury.
If you actually have a child porn case on your hands, you need to be talking to a lawyer rather than a biologist. Only they can tell you if the answer to this question would even be relevant to your case. And if it is, it still does not matter whether the case has anything to do with child porn or not - if the answer is "yes", then you need to seek a medical consultant willing to help with, and testify for, your case. If the answer is no, then you're just out of luck. That's how science works.
@Iszi Many words can be mistaken for others. What you can see, cannot be manipulated, though. If a Ukrainian women says triangle and it sounds as if she is saying "Tree-angle", which word is intending to pronounce?
@Iszi No. I absolutely do not. We have been over this!!!!!
@user19679 I don't see at all how that relates to my previous message. And for whomever flagged it, I would appreciate an explanation - feel free to invite me to a separate room if you prefer.
@Quill-HATMANIAC Continuation of a long discussion about a controversial question from yesterday. My fault for the continuation, to be honest. But the fact remains that the person who posted the question had reverted community edits which had removed objectionable content, and until recently (some minutes ago) their screen name had remained as a homophone to an English expletive - something which was also objected to by community members, and promised to be changed.
@Quill-HATMANIAC The point is that law is irrelevant in a discussion of whether science can prove a fact when given a constrained amount and type of evidence.
@Quill-HATMANIAC i'm not asking if the evidence would hold up in court. Just, that, are there any observations that are so significant that they may do so. Also, if there are any child development cues that may estimate their age
@Quill-HATMANIAC And, in fact, the law issue was supposedly only raised to give a case example of where the science might be applied. Which could be a fair argument, except that @user19679 is rather particular about which sort of legal case should be used to give context and the chosen sort is one which many take offense to.
@Quill-HATMANIAC Oh, we most certainly have been. About both the post and the former name.
At this point though, I believe a moderator has cleaned up the post - despite @user19679's objections - and locked it. And somebody at some point changed the name.
@Chris Are you okay with the strike out edit or do you want the entire passage to go. If so, or if the total reference to evidence is removed, as I said to Iszi, it becomes a rather poorly researched answer, which might not stand on its own. Let me know what you think.
I'm only here because of the flag, but is there any chance of asking a Law.SE mod about whether it'd be a good idea to post some variation of the original question on that site and then apply AMR's answer to it?
@AMR Heh. I'm reasonably confident one could write a fairly solid answer to this without any research or supporting evidence, which also could not be refuted by any available research or evidence, and still be correct. And you don't even need to be a biologist to know that. (I'm not.) But I defer to local expertise and customs for that matter.
Well, I'd suggest taking this to another chatroom (like just for the two of you to slog it out), and to incorporate more evidence, you both seem like individuals who can respect evidence
@user19679 1. I never said I was actually offended by it. Just that many obviously were. 2. "Offensive" is entirely subjective. So even if I did give you a reason, it would not mean that my reason is shared by the majority or that you would even be able to relate to it. More likely, my giving you a reason would just give you something else to argue against. So, no. I won't be explaining.
@Ixrec That's heavily debatable. Some may argue that it desensitizes the issue of 'child pornography' so it can be more fluidly discussed - which is beneficial. For example, discussing sexuality help bring awareness about the topic and also, helps create an even foundation for it to be discussed upon.
@user19679 "Heavily debatable" is exactly my point. However, when several community members object to its inclusion, and it ultimately is irrelevant to the question, then it is only prudent to remove the reference in order to maintain peace and objectivity among those who may otherwise actually find the question useful and/or interesting. The Q got several close-votes and down-votes simply because of the inclusion of that subject. You're only hurting your reputation score by keeping it there.
@Ixrec Another example, a friend of mine mentioned how he finds it angering that discussing racism is still taboo-like and that in particular creates more power to the derogatory words that are so hurtful towards him.
including a discussion of racism as part of a biology question would still be pretty strange and probably detrimental to the question, whether or not racism is or should be a taboo (though I agree it shouldn't be)
@Ixrec I mean, that saying it's offensive to discuss such sensitive topics, is very detrimental and fickle as most are just following the flock and accepting it is how it is and don't have a justifiable reason.
@Ixrec I could see certain areas of evolution where it might be a relevant topic, but that's a bit of a stretch and there's really not much place outside of that. Certainly, there are other topics where one might discuss features unique to certain races. But "racism" itself would still be irrelevant.
@user19679 That's the thing about community-defined order. You don't, strictly speaking, need a "justifiable reason". Only consensus among an authoritative majority.
@user19679 again, I agree it shouldn't be taboo to discuss racism/child porn/whatever, and the potential benefits of discussion them are important, but that's totally unrelated to the current issue of whether any of that discussion belongs in a question on the main site; under normal circumstances it probably does not
It has nothing to do with offense. It has to do with relevance to the site. The site is about biology, and as I have said on numerous occasions that if you stripped away the example, there may have been a valid question about biology (as I am not 100% sure whether pure forensics questions are on topic or not).
Using an example that some may find offensive or even provocative can be seen as unnecessarily calling attention to yourself and not the question. The goal of the site is to ask / answer / and curate quality questions related to biology. If you are putting things into those questions…
@Iszi Using profanity would be improper on public TV because, it can create offense as a result to the words nature. Wearing an "ugly" pair of shoes that people don't like would be classed as them being judgmental and purposely trying sling harm towards the person for wearing them - the shoes them-self are just shoes; to cushion your feet.
@AMR Just had a thought: If the video is clear enough to identify "baby teeth" vs. "adult teeth", then it's possible that a professional could make a fair guess at least at the upper limit of the child's probable age.
@user19679 However, there's a certain margin of error to be considered. This is why medical history is important, to know whether there are any underlying conditions which could deform the teeth or delay their proper growth or removal.
The age ranges at which children begin and finish loosing their teeth is fairly wide, even without any medical conditions affecting them.
@Ixrec I can see why it may be considered as provocative. Although, that would subjective and prejudicial. If a child says he doesn't like you, and is not totally aware of why that may be hurtful, that doesn't give the receiver the justification to react and physically harm the child. The child wasn't provoking him.
@user19679 No, but if the child goes around saying things which many children in the classroom take offense to - regardless of how objectively harmless the things may be - that child is most certainly going to get a stern talking to and probably some time out.
agreed, but if the child posts something on a website saying "user1234 sucks", other users are within their rights to edit out that hurtful comment; I believe what happened here is closer to this scenario
And if the child continues to say those things despite the stern conversation, or posts "user1234 sucks" again in spite of the community censorship, they do face the possibility of harsher punishment.
@Iszi I agree. Considering all that we have discussed in relation to biology, it would be fair to say that the answer is No/very unlikely, right? (That was all that i wanted to know by asking the question - honestly haha)
@Iszi @Ixrec What about if the child had Autism (specifically affecting situation as such) and couldn't understand why (on top of other things), as nobody was willing to break it down for them?
@Iszi Oh no. No-no-no-no. That'd be counterproductive. And having a special classroom, would imply that they were less able than the other students and hence be less likely to find success (I can personally act as proof against that - if you know what i'm hinting?)
As for the answer being "No", I somewhat disagree now that I've thought more about it. There are certain factors which can be used to determine age within a certain - albeit wide for most purposes - margin of error. So, we've got a few things that need to be considered:
1. What exactly is clearly visible in the video? 2. How accurate do you need the age determination to be? 3. What sort of age ranges are we seeking to find ways of identifying?
You may choose to include any of these or not. Any of the above would substantially change the answer to the question. If you leave everything out,…
@user19679 It might be counterproductive for the individual, but in this case it's a matter of the needs of the many versus the needs of the few. Most children in the school are relatively well-behaved, and/or capable of understanding and properly reacting to criticism and disciplinary actions. People with certain mental disabilities such as autism are incapable of that and threaten to disrupt the learning experience of the majority.
This is why they are typically separated into their own environment where specially-trained instructors can give them the attention and guidance they need.
@user19679 It was edited out because it was very closely bound to the other factors which had offended the community. If you really are interested in identifying that narrow of an age group, to a rather fine (and probably impossibly so) level of precision, then feel free to define that. However, this requires no mention of anything that anyone would be likely find offensive.
1. HD video of what? Their back? Their feet? Their butt? A 360-degree rotation at 10 feet range?
2. How rough? If we can say the estimate is +/- 5 years, is that close enough?
3. So are you saying you want to be able to exclusively distinguish a 15-year old from all other ages? Nothing else is of interest?
@Iszi I had no issues at school... people freely discussed topics that were particularly sensitive and were very open minded towards me and provided a vast selection of perspectives for me to comprehend
@Iszi Although, I still don't understand why, I am willing to just drop it for the sake of not dividing the community and to try keep it as safe as possible. Also, to make sure that i do not infringe any rules.
Damn!
Was walking in my home,
just woken up,
was finding my way to washroom,
was yawning,
and boom,
The mosquito flew straight into my mouth.
I am afraid, what if the mosquito just drank blood of a HIV infected person, will I get the infection too.. or some other disease??
I tried to take h...
Is there any database or book that has an index of organic reactions where the mechanisms are written out, complete with curly arrows? It would really help if I could look up a reaction and see a proposed mechanism with curly arrows.
