• 3 Posts
  • 488 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 20th, 2023

help-circle


  • Brain blackout is kind of a dramatic word. I’m pretty sure the article is trying to refer to cortical spreading depression.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/nrneurol.2013.192

    This is a wave of decreased activity going across the brain. It’s not the whole brain though, just a portion, and it tends to happen more often in the posterior brain than anterior. That’s why visual and other sensory auras (posterior brain) auras are more common than motor/weakness auras (anterior brain). The visual aura itself is the spreading wave of decreased activity going across the brain. It happens in primary visual cortex, primarily dealing with lines and colors. Visual space is represented radially on the brain, so it can often be circular. The “fortifications” or lines on the edges some people see come from the fact that it’s neurons that deal with line detection. Pain usually follows shortly after, but we aren’t exactly sure how that works, and this article was posing a possible mechanism to help link these. The main bulk of the visual aura where it’s grey, blurry, and indistinct is the decreased activity itself in the visual cortex. The area can get larger as the wave spreads.

    Deja vu or jamais vu have been reported with migraines, though that’s a very rare aura in comparison. It’s all depending on what parts of the brain are involved with the cortical spreading depression for that migraine aura for that person in terms of what symptom will happen. Deja vu would be more temporal lobe. Temporal lobe is the most common localization for focal epilepsies. So deja vu as a symptom of a neurologic disease would more commonly be seen with seizures (focal seizures are sometimes called auras too, which gets confusing but are inherently different from what is happening in a migraine). But don’t worry, most deja vu is nothing to worry about.


  • Weird cause I’ve got the FTC act right here. Says this:

    (a) Declaration of unlawfulness; power to prohibit unfair practices; inapplicability to foreign trade (1) Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful.

    And then later on it has this whole entire section where it lays out the process for how the FTC is supposed to make rules in regards to unfair or deceptive practices

    Except as provided in subsection (h) of this section, the Commission may prescribe– (A) interpretive rules and general statements of policy with respect to unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce (within the meaning of section 45(a)(1) of this title), and (B) rules which define with specificity acts or practices which are unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce (within the meaning of section 45(a)(1) of this title)

    And more sections about how they can enforce those rules on individual rule breakers.

    Sure sounds like congress was trying to give the FTC the authority to make rules about unfair competition. Both general rules and with “specificity” apparently. Specifically here, non compete agreements have been declared an unfair practice and they followed all rule making procedures as laid out in the law.

    https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/statutes/federal-trade-commission-act/ftc_act_incorporatingus_safe_web_act.pdf






  • It’s mostly been conservatives that have a problem with this, not progressives for the most part. I mean sure some progressives are against but they’re by far the minority.

    I know progressives and democrats, and conservatives and Republicans, aren’t the same thing, but you get the picture. I think most on the left would prefer to stand up to authoritian genocidal governments, whereas many conservatives crazily see a lot they like in Russian government and want the US to embrace them.







  • Ranvier@sopuli.xyztoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldRock Eagle Flag
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    12 days ago

    Teaching kids to use guns doesn’t save kids’ lives. If you want to teach em to stay away from guns, that they’re deadly, they shouldn’t touch it and should tell an adult right away go ahead.

    Teaching kids to use guns in the name of gun safety is like saying you need to teach them how to drive in case they find some car keys lying around and decide to take it for a spin.


  • Already in the comment, click the links.

    https://www.safekidsinc.com/hero-program-overview

    Here’s where it goes through their curriculum per grade level including pre schoolers.

    The 'heroes" program is not teaching pre schoolers to use guns, it’s teaching them about active shooter situations.

    The other link was the one offering actual gun training (for 7 year olds and up so second graders potentially).

    My comment was that it’s sad we apparently need programs to to teach pre schoolers about how to deal with active shooting situations now.


  • Ranvier@sopuli.xyztoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldRock Eagle Flag
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    13 days ago

    The one I linked specifically mentions shooting afterwards for kids as young as 7…

    But yes if guns are at home they should be locked (and really locked, like a trigger lock plus a safe that’s set to something besides 1111, holy crap you’d be surprised at how cavelier some people are) and totally inaccessible to kids. Teaching single digit age kids about guns is not a substitute for that, but of course I’m not saying you shouldn’t teach your kids that they shouldn’t touch guns and what they can do.

    And teaching kids about guns will not solve the serious gun problems in America. The gun problems unique to America that pretty much every other industrialized nation has figured out already. And it’s a horrible tragedy that stuff like “the heroes program” to teach preschoolers how to deal with active shooters is necessary in this country. All to please gun nuts.

    https://www.safekidsinc.com/

    Most gun nuts aren’t too interested in education anyways:

    https://www.thetrace.org/2022/01/which-states-require-firearm-safety-course-concealed-carry/