I Am a PHD student in the Medical university OF Graz and my field of interest is cancer biology
understanding the basics of biological life.
After more than 50 years of R & D we are only able to bring down the mortality rate due to cancer by just 5%, why? Is it that AS A Research community we are not asking enough questions ? or is it that we are asking the wrong questions? My personal perspective is that we are probably asking the wrong questions. The issue is that we ask a lot of questions..but the majority of them just starts and end in the same point "can this drug cure cancer" ?? "yes it does a bit better than placebo"!! "and of course it cure cancer in Mice" . Dont you think as a an average normal citizen of this world that there is something that we are doing wrong here?? 3 years before starting my research career i thought the same and now I Have almost completed My PhD and my conclusion is that ..yes we ask enough questions but not the right one's. If you want to tackle cancer you would first need to Understand the disease and The problem is that we dont ask enough questions to understand the disease?
This member doesn't have any favorite talks yet.
TEDCred score: +1.90 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A reply on Talk: Ken Robinson: How to escape education's death valley
And that defines whether you are the next Steve Jobs or a great musician or whatever u decide to be..Just follow your heart and intuitions..it will exactly tell you where you have to go..
I understand your situation as I went through the same during the school days most of the time either sleeping through the school ours or day dreaming..
To be frank it doesn't matter.. All it matters is find that thing that you love to do in life and which you would keep on doing independent of whatsoever happening in your life..best wishes
A reply on Conversation: Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.
And for the decrease in crime rate
"Based on this, framework, one model for the per-capital gun death rate D would be D = V * G * k, where V is the average tendency toward violence and G is availability of guns, with killing power k factored in. One could get fancier by through stratification: different groups have a different rate of V, and different guns have different effects, and so on. But the core idea is the same."
So here you are comparing a city with high V to a city with Low V.
Further this article say
Horgan points out that since 1993, the number of gun homicides has decreased, despite the fact that there are more guns than ever. Therefore, he asserts, more guns (G) do not lead to more killing.
"The logical hole here is that the parameter V has declined over time, as part of an overall decrease in crime." And in the same period non violent crimes also decreased suggesting that its not the guns its a tendency to do the crime has decreased over a time from 1993.
A reply on Conversation: Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.
A reply on Conversation: Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.
But lets say if guns are not available in market , then you don't need guns to protect yourself from some one having guns. And every illegal gun in America is legally made.
A reply on Conversation: Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.
stats don't lie , higher the percentage of average house holds having a gun , higher is the gun related death rates.So you ahve to bring down that percentage to less than 10 to really curb the gun related death rate.
Comparison with in America
http://election.princeton.edu/2012/12/22/scientific-americans-gun-error/
Comparison world
http://guncontrol.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/moregunsmoredeaths2012.pdf
A reply on Conversation: Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.
.anyways all will die some day...so you can argue that it doesn't make a difference. But the question is not just of death. the question is also about the morality of a civilized society where people like John Moonstroller think its a part of your culture.
I am an outsider and I don't have a say in your culture, but as an average human being I feel saddened to see innocents dying and when nothing is done about it. I feel the same in Kashmir and I feel the same here.
A reply on Conversation: Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.
Completely wrong, The more normal house holds possess fire arms the more is the fire arm related death, Come on guys this is not rocket science. I don't understand why would people make such Bizarre arguments. Ok I can make another bizarre counter argument, better to wear bullet proof jackets and travel around,
Just have a look at the below article which compares the percentage of population per country having firearms and gun related death rate
http://election.princeton.edu/2012/12/22/scientific-americans-gun-error/
http://guncontrol.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/moregunsmoredeaths2012.pdf
A reply on Conversation: Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.
Country Total firearm-related death rate
El Salvador 50.36
Jamaica 47.44
Honduras 46.70
Guatemala 38.52
Swaziland 37.16
Mexico 25.14
Colombia 11.10
Brazil 11.01
Panama 10.92
United States 10.2
I think you guys are the only developed country who could make it to the top 10 list, Congrats
A comment on Conversation: Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.
A reply on Conversation: Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.