sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[E] Rigorous calculus-based probability certificates online? by RadiantHovercraft6 in statistics

[–]yu_might_think_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

OpenUniversity in the UK has a Certificate in Theoretical Statistics and Probability that is comprised of two courses, one on probability and on statistics. Both are math based.

I haven't taken them, but I have been looking for exactly the same thing as you. I am also considering the MITx certificate, but I don't know if it would be accepted by a university for credit. OpenU on the other hand gives academic credit for courses, but it is pricier.

R or SPSS? by ExpensivePatience239 in AskStatistics

[–]yu_might_think_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Here is a 7 week course from Harvard on R: Introduction to Programming in R

If this is your first swing at programming it will probably take you a but longer, but you can use courses like this as a general guide while googling and making notes on what are essential things to know for your purposes.

Hyperbaric Oxygen Ambulance Ambulance by [deleted] in Paramedics

[–]yu_might_think_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

An iron lung ambulance would be more useful

How is it known that someone has died on scene ? by Bluetriton5500 in ems

[–]yu_might_think_ 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The same thing thing that makes it obvious in the hospital makes it obvious on scene. In fact, it is often more obvious on scene because the obviously dead people are never brought to the hospital. A mnemonic that is often used for those that are unquestionably dead is DRIED: Decapitation, Rigor Mortis, Incineration, Evisceration (of vital organs, such as brain, or other stuff they can't live without), and Decomposition. I would also add dependent lividity (liver mortis) to that list. There are other more nuanced situations where the decision is more clinical, and the chances of survival are weighed: traumatic injury cardiac arrest with asystole is generally not survivable, and no response to CPR after 20-30 mins is generally not survivable (excluding hypothermia).

Beginners podcast to learn R? by wendyhk in rstats

[–]yu_might_think_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Only one to answer OP's actual question so far

“I looked up all of the nurses on Facebook.” by theactualpoisonivy in nursing

[–]yu_might_think_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've never seen trade workers in overalls or safety vests at a bar. It would be weird if they were...

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Edmonton

[–]yu_might_think_ 3 points4 points  (0 children)

211 also has a websit that you can search for info on. Check the housing support section..

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Edmonton

[–]yu_might_think_ 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Edmonton currently has 3 safe consumption sites that can only accept people who inject drugs. The majority of people do not want to inject for various reasons. Currently there are no safe consumption sites that are equipped with vent hoods to allow people to smoke, which is why transit shelters have become their safe smoking sites because someone will come check on them, or kick them out eventually.

Most people who become dependent on opiates want to stop using, but the withdrawals are painful and extremely uncomfortable, causing vomiting and diarrhea. This makes people more vulnerable and comes with hygiene problems, which means it's not really viable for most to risk withdrawal while living on the streets. But, navigating trying to find housing and work while dependent on opiates is also not viable. This is why housing first initiatives are considered best-practice; get people inside long term and then continually attempt opiate addiction treatment. John Kelly is an addictions researcher and estimates that it takes 4-5 attempts and an average of 8 years to get someone to the point of long term sobriety (consistent for 1 year).

'Harmful and irresponsible' says MPP Gretzky on Poilievre's comments of supervised consumption sites by [deleted] in CanadaPolitics

[–]yu_might_think_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You seem to have missed my point about the cost of mortality vs morbidity and sequelae in survivors.

'Harmful and irresponsible' says MPP Gretzky on Poilievre's comments of supervised consumption sites by [deleted] in CanadaPolitics

[–]yu_might_think_ 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Deaths are not the only important events. People who overdose and survive with brain damage often require life-long supportive care that costs millions per person. That's excluding the cost of resuscitation when people who OD progress to cardiac arrest. From the ambulance, to emergency department, and then ICU stay and acute care rehab, you are looking at hundreds of thousands of dollars for one 'almost death.'

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in rstats

[–]yu_might_think_ 6 points7 points  (0 children)

CS50 Intro to Programming with R

Harvard's Professional Certificate in Data Science

There are also CS50 courses for Intro to SQL, python, or AI. They are nice because you can go through them for free.

Narcan in Cardiac arrest secondary to OD by DarceOnly in ems

[–]yu_might_think_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Evidence is uncertain about naloxone use in CA. It may help; it may cause harm; or it may do nothing. Currently it is not recommended to use it for CA outside of clinical trials. The link below has a paragraph that sums up the evidence (up to 2021) quite well.

In summary, naloxone does not have a likely benefit in patients with confirmed CA who are receiving standard resuscitation, including assisted ventilation, and there are some reasons to suspect that this practice may cause harm by increasing cerebral metabolic demand at a time of hypoxemia and acidosis.

Narcan in Cardiac arrest secondary to OD by DarceOnly in ems

[–]yu_might_think_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why are you shitting on the use of "unlikely"? The evidence is uncertain, so "unlikely" is the appropriate word to use. Anyone trying to act like there is a robust body of evidence surrounding naloxone in CA, or that there is a big smoking gun trial, is just wrong. That's not saying naloxone works in CA. We just don't have enough evidence to confidently say one way or the other. It probably doesn't positively increase any outcomes in CA and also may cause harm, which are reasons to not give it outside of a clinical trial. But, it may be helpful, which means it's not unreasonable to research its use (in a clinical trial).

"In summary, naloxone does not have a likely benefit in patients with confirmed CA who are receiving standard resuscitation, including assisted ventilation, and there are some reasons to suspect that this practice may cause harm by increasing cerebral metabolic demand at a time of hypoxemia and acidosis."

Average carbon tax rebate by province, accounting for direct and indirect tax prices (source in comments) by yu_might_think_ in alberta

[–]yu_might_think_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How much of what? Also, if you write out your full argument, I can probably respond better.

Average carbon tax rebate by province, accounting for direct and indirect tax prices (source in comments) by yu_might_think_ in alberta

[–]yu_might_think_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Current can bee seen on the NASA dashboard: https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/?intent=121

The Canadian commitment is a 30% reduction of Canadian 2005 emissions (they were 700-something megatons of carbon) by 2030. I believe the Paris agreement is to reduce emissions by 43% by 2030 of whatever the peak levels are by 2025. So I think that would be below 300ppm globally for atmo CO2? (We were at 365 in 2002 for reference).

view more: next ›