7 ms·

What has actually disappeared? pubmed went down for a little bit - but it's back now. What is all this about?

apical_dendrite 2y ago
See pages 6 to 12 of this declaration: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69608613/6/1/doctors-for-america-v-office-of-personnel-management/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69608613/6/1/doctors-fo...
AlphaSite 2y ago
I don't think this is exhaustive and things have expanded since this was published, but this[1] somewhat covers this > CDC webpages currently note that the "CDC's website is being modified to comply with President Trump's Executive Orders." Specifically, the CDC has been purging its website of topics related to diversity, gender identity, and LGBTQ issues. In addition, CDC researchers have been ordered to retract papers submitted to journals that use words or phrases like non-binary, transgender, LGBT, pregnant people, and more. Ive heard HIV and contraception related information was also removed [2]. > Among the many pages that remain down are Health Disparities Among LQBTQ Youth, Interim Clinical Considerations for Use of Vaccine for Mpox Prevention, and Fast Facts: HIV and Transgender People. Other government sites [3] had similar purges for different topics: > The Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York alleges the agency illegally scrapped essential webpages without public notice last month, after USDA Director of Digital Communications Peter Rhee ordered staff to archive or publish “any landing pages focused on climate change.” [1] https://www.medpagetoday.com/obgyn/generalobgyn/114078 https://www.medpagetoday.com/obgyn/generalobgyn/114078 [2] https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/public-health/removal-pages-cdc-website-brings-confusion-dismay https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/public-health/removal-pages-cdc-w... [3] https://news.bloomberglaw.com/environment-and-energy/climate-info-purge-case-to-test-bounds-of-government-records-law https://news.bloomberglaw.com/environment-and-energy/climate...
- cupcakecommons 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - apical_dendrite 2y ago
    Judge Bates issued a temporary restraining order to the CDC to restore certain websites.
    - cupcakecommons 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - telchior 2y ago
        The blanket removal of all pages in the women's health category is certainly an interesting choice. I guess the next step after denying that there may be more than two genders is to ... deny that there's more than one? Or that gender exists at all? Equality at last! (for reference: https://www.cdc.gov/womens-health/mhh-continuing-education/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/womens-health/mhh-continuing-education/i...)
        cupcakecommons 2y ago
        [flagged]
        stonogo 2y ago
        https://analytics.usa.gov/center-disease-control https://analytics.usa.gov/center-disease-control "Top pages data over the previous calendar year is unavailable." looks like they don't want these sorts of questions answered either.
        telchior 2y ago
        Honestly, no idea; but I'd certainly wonder why the question flipped from what pages were removed that shouldn't have been, to whether they got enough traffic to merit talking about at all. Maybe acknowledge the prior answer before moving the goalpost?
- unification_fan 2y ago
  > pregnant people I'm usually not a bigot but that one is dumb
  - nocab 2y ago
    [dead]
  - southernplaces7 2y ago
    And it's not bigoted to point out a completely absurd phrase.
  - steego 2y ago
    Let's find out if you're a bigot or not. I'll throw up Webster's definition for reference. Bigot – a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices. The capacity for pregnancy is not confined to individuals with a female (46,XX) chromosomal pattern. The real world is complicated, and intersex people can be born with a (46,XY) karyotype or mixed (46,XX) and (46,XY) karyotypes as a result of chimerism. People with Swyer syndrome (46,XY) develop female reproductive anatomy (a uterus and fallopian tubes) but do not produce eggs. However, pregnancy can be achieved with donor eggs and assisted reproductive technology. So here's the question: Are you devoted to your first opinion, or are you capable of acknowledging that the medical community may have had legitimate reasons, grounded in actual biology, to choose a more inclusive word?
    - Vuska 2y ago
      Sex is defined by which gametes are produced, not chromosomes.
      - me-vs-cat 2y ago
        What do you expect for people born without the capability to produce gametes?
      - defrost 2y ago
        What of the people that are born who don't produce gametes? ( For example, no gametes are produced in 85% of individuals with streak gonads ) The whole human sex | gender thing seems superficially clearcut but the real world edge cases are messy AF. The aspect I personally find confusing is that the exceptions are relatively rare .. human births are straighforward enough for 98% of births, and of the 2% that pose a challenge the really curvy edge cases are rare (but real). Why then do some people seeming lose their collective minds over real but rare occurrences and attempt to hammer every triangle into either a round or a square hole? I have a purely empirical observational view of the world at large, forced a priori prescriptiveness at odds with the world seems more than a little flat earthy.
AnotherGoodName 2y ago
https://www.meatpoultry.com/articles/31530-lawmakers-urge-trump-to-lift-gag-order-with-growing-threat-of-bird-flu https://www.meatpoultry.com/articles/31530-lawmakers-urge-tr...

See pages 6 to 12 of this declaration: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69608613/6/1/doctors-for-america-v-office-of-personnel-management/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69608613/6/1/doctors-fo...

AlphaSite 2y ago

I don't think this is exhaustive and things have expanded since this was published, but this[1] somewhat covers this > CDC webpages currently note that the "CDC's website is being modified to comply with President Trump's Executive Orders." Specifically, the CDC has been purging its website of topics related to diversity, gender identity, and LGBTQ issues. In addition, CDC researchers have been ordered to retract papers submitted to journals that use words or phrases like non-binary, transgender, LGBT, pregnant people, and more. Ive heard HIV and contraception related information was also removed [2]. > Among the many pages that remain down are Health Disparities Among LQBTQ Youth, Interim Clinical Considerations for Use of Vaccine for Mpox Prevention, and Fast Facts: HIV and Transgender People. Other government sites [3] had similar purges for different topics: > The Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York alleges the agency illegally scrapped essential webpages without public notice last month, after USDA Director of Digital Communications Peter Rhee ordered staff to archive or publish “any landing pages focused on climate change.” [1] https://www.medpagetoday.com/obgyn/generalobgyn/114078 https://www.medpagetoday.com/obgyn/generalobgyn/114078 [2] https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/public-health/removal-pages-cdc-website-brings-confusion-dismay https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/public-health/removal-pages-cdc-w... [3] https://news.bloomberglaw.com/environment-and-energy/climate-info-purge-case-to-test-bounds-of-government-records-law https://news.bloomberglaw.com/environment-and-energy/climate...

cupcakecommons 2y ago
[flagged]
- apical_dendrite 2y ago
  Judge Bates issued a temporary restraining order to the CDC to restore certain websites.
  - cupcakecommons 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - telchior 2y ago
      The blanket removal of all pages in the women's health category is certainly an interesting choice. I guess the next step after denying that there may be more than two genders is to ... deny that there's more than one? Or that gender exists at all? Equality at last! (for reference: https://www.cdc.gov/womens-health/mhh-continuing-education/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/womens-health/mhh-continuing-education/i...)
      - cupcakecommons 2y ago
        [flagged]
        stonogo 2y ago
        https://analytics.usa.gov/center-disease-control https://analytics.usa.gov/center-disease-control "Top pages data over the previous calendar year is unavailable." looks like they don't want these sorts of questions answered either.
        telchior 2y ago
        Honestly, no idea; but I'd certainly wonder why the question flipped from what pages were removed that shouldn't have been, to whether they got enough traffic to merit talking about at all. Maybe acknowledge the prior answer before moving the goalpost?
unification_fan 2y ago
> pregnant people I'm usually not a bigot but that one is dumb
- nocab 2y ago
  [dead]
- southernplaces7 2y ago
  And it's not bigoted to point out a completely absurd phrase.
- steego 2y ago
  Let's find out if you're a bigot or not. I'll throw up Webster's definition for reference. Bigot – a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices. The capacity for pregnancy is not confined to individuals with a female (46,XX) chromosomal pattern. The real world is complicated, and intersex people can be born with a (46,XY) karyotype or mixed (46,XX) and (46,XY) karyotypes as a result of chimerism. People with Swyer syndrome (46,XY) develop female reproductive anatomy (a uterus and fallopian tubes) but do not produce eggs. However, pregnancy can be achieved with donor eggs and assisted reproductive technology. So here's the question: Are you devoted to your first opinion, or are you capable of acknowledging that the medical community may have had legitimate reasons, grounded in actual biology, to choose a more inclusive word?
  - Vuska 2y ago
    Sex is defined by which gametes are produced, not chromosomes.
    - me-vs-cat 2y ago
      What do you expect for people born without the capability to produce gametes?
    - defrost 2y ago
      What of the people that are born who don't produce gametes? ( For example, no gametes are produced in 85% of individuals with streak gonads ) The whole human sex | gender thing seems superficially clearcut but the real world edge cases are messy AF. The aspect I personally find confusing is that the exceptions are relatively rare .. human births are straighforward enough for 98% of births, and of the 2% that pose a challenge the really curvy edge cases are rare (but real). Why then do some people seeming lose their collective minds over real but rare occurrences and attempt to hammer every triangle into either a round or a square hole? I have a purely empirical observational view of the world at large, forced a priori prescriptiveness at odds with the world seems more than a little flat earthy.

AnotherGoodName 2y ago

https://www.meatpoultry.com/articles/31530-lawmakers-urge-trump-to-lift-gag-order-with-growing-threat-of-bird-flu https://www.meatpoultry.com/articles/31530-lawmakers-urge-tr...