QuotePrehistoric women were stronger than modern rowers, say Cambridge scientists
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/prehistoric-women-strength-muscles-men-rowers-upper-body-university-cambridge-a8082591.html#gallery
Grinding corn, lugging wster, carrying babies, digging for roots . . all tough jobs if you spend every day of most of your life at them. I remember seeing film of African women doing all those things whilst the men sat in the shade of a tree discussing the last and next hunt.
Analysis of bones found in England showed that Stone Age kids (and probably those of later times) started work carrying things before their bones were fully formed. Tasks like carrying waterskins puts a tensile stress on the muscle attachment points, causing them to develop "spurs" which are found, IIRC, mainly on female skeletons.
People treat me like a fragile doll because I'm skinny, but I'd like to see them pin and stick needles in a dog they've only got 30lb on.
Science is biased as hell when it comes to women's health.
Quote from: Pasta Chick on December 02, 2017, 01:57:24 PM
People treat me like a fragile doll because I'm skinny, but I'd like to see them pin and stick needles in a dog they've only got 30lb on.
Science is biased as hell when it comes to women's health.
Yeah, there was a lot about that a few months ago, using data gathered from trials on men only to treat women - think Silver had some pungent things to say about the subject :D
My female archaeologist friend could swing a pickaxe or a 14lb sledge with more force than me - and I was no mean swinger in those days! My policy is to try to
hint that I will help if needed, otherwise assume women can do any task they want to attempt. But I kerp my eye on them, even do that with blokes though.
Quote from: Pasta Chick on December 02, 2017, 01:57:24 PM
Science is biased as hell when it comes to women's health.
Has this to do with menstrual cycles throwing off the numbers
We don't want to drug test the baby droppers in fear of effect
Quote from: Bad Penny II on December 02, 2017, 04:21:40 PM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on December 02, 2017, 01:57:24 PM
Science is biased as hell when it comes to women's health.
Has this to do with menstrual cycles throwing off the numbers
We don't want to drug test the baby droppers in fear of effect
Er, no.
More to do with things like dosing rates and assuming female bodies react in exactly the same way as males to any given medication.
Quote from: Dave on December 02, 2017, 04:30:06 PM
Quote from: Bad Penny II on December 02, 2017, 04:21:40 PM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on December 02, 2017, 01:57:24 PM
Science is biased as hell when it comes to women's health.
Has this to do with menstrual cycles throwing off the numbers
We don't want to drug test the baby droppers in fear of effect
Er, no.
More to do with things like dosing rates and assuming female bodies react in exactly the same way as males to any given medication.
Er, ye.
It's all about the same thing.
Quote from: Bad Penny II on December 02, 2017, 04:55:16 PM
Quote from: Dave on December 02, 2017, 04:30:06 PM
Quote from: Bad Penny II on December 02, 2017, 04:21:40 PM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on December 02, 2017, 01:57:24 PM
Science is biased as hell when it comes to women's health.
Has this to do with menstrual cycles throwing off the numbers
We don't want to drug test the baby droppers in fear of effect
Er, no.
More to do with things like dosing rates and assuming female bodies react in exactly the same way as males to any given medication.
Er, ye.
It's all about the same thing.
Not giving certain medications soon before or during pregnancy is certainly a factor. But in respect to the overall picture of how drugs are tested and then how they are used is a far wider and more nuanced matter.
Quote from: Dave on December 02, 2017, 05:11:57 PM
Not giving certain medications soon before or during pregnancy is certainly a factor. But in respect to the overall picture of how drugs are tested and then how they are used is a far wider and more nuanced matter.
Sweet, you know of all the nuances.
Females are more difficult test subjects, they are somewhat different creatures one part of the month compared to another.
So tests are done on the stable male.
I thought this was common knowledge.
Quote from: Bad Penny II on December 02, 2017, 05:48:30 PM
Quote from: Dave on December 02, 2017, 05:11:57 PM
Not giving certain medications soon before or during pregnancy is certainly a factor. But in respect to the overall picture of how drugs are tested and then how they are used is a far wider and more nuanced matter.
Sweet, you know of all the nuances.
Females are more difficult test subjects, they are somewhat different creatures one part of the month compared to another.
So tests are done on the stable male.
I thought this was common knowledge.
Yes, but the whole point is that drugs tests done on "the stable male" may not yield appropriate data for using those same drugs on females at any point in their cycle, or even when prepubescent or post menopause. The solution to the problem might be to carry out entirely separate test protocols on men and women, but that is more expensive. Got to up the prices because you can't reduce the profits.
Quote from: Dave on December 02, 2017, 08:45:05 AM
QuotePrehistoric women were stronger than modern rowers, say Cambridge scientists
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/prehistoric-women-strength-muscles-men-rowers-upper-body-university-cambridge-a8082591.html#gallery
Grinding corn, lugging wster, carrying babies, digging for roots . . all tough jobs if you spend every day of most of your life at them. I remember seeing film of African women doing all those things whilst the men sat in the shade of a tree discussing the last and next hunt.
Analysis of bones found in England showed that Stone Age kids (and probably those of later times) started work carrying things before their bones were fully formed. Tasks like carrying waterskins puts a tensile stress on the muscle attachment points, causing them to develop "spurs" which are found, IIRC, mainly on female skeletons.
That's very interesting, Dave! :smilenod:
I remember seeing a documentary a long time ago on hunter-gatherer tribes and how the women were mainly responsible for feeding the group, as they were the gatherers while the men were hunters...and hunts failed more often while what was reaped via gathering was more constant.
~~~
I know that many top journals nowadays are putting out a call for more studies done on females as well.
Quote from: Bad Penny II on December 02, 2017, 05:48:30 PM
Females are more difficult test subjects, they are somewhat different creatures one part of the month compared to another.
So tests are done on the stable male.
What's more, many preclinical studies are done on animals such as rats or mice, and the females of those species cycle every few days (approx. 4 to 5 days, which is influenced by factors such as light and the presence of a male). That's
really got to mess with their heads. Poor things.
Female rats are very difficult subjects in memory studies, and even though women are more prone to suffering from anxiety disorders such as PTSD, in which traumatic memories are pathologically robust and triggered out of context, fewer studies are done on female animals to understand the neurobiological mechanisms underlying that disorder.
BBC's "Inside science" take on the subject, first 7 min:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09gbnfx
Quote from: Pasta Chick on December 02, 2017, 01:57:24 PM
People treat me like a fragile doll because I'm skinny, but I'd like to see them pin and stick needles in a dog they've only got 30lb on.
Science is biased as hell when it comes to women's health.
I'm sure it's a more common assumption with women but it happens with men too. A friend of mine is just a tiny little guy but I've seen him manhandle sheets of plywood up flights of stairs on jobs when the "big guys" needed at least two people to get it done. I need help for stuff like that! ;D
Quote from: jumbojak on December 03, 2017, 02:32:03 PM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on December 02, 2017, 01:57:24 PM
People treat me like a fragile doll because I'm skinny, but I'd like to see them pin and stick needles in a dog they've only got 30lb on.
Science is biased as hell when it comes to women's health.
I'm sure it's a more common assumption with women but it happens with men too. A friend of mine is just a tiny little guy but I've seen him manhandle sheets of plywood up flights of stairs on jobs when the "big guys" needed at least two people to get it done. I need help for stuff like that! ;D
Us little people have to work out clever ways to do things whilst the big guys just chuck it about.
:grin:
Quote from: Dave on December 03, 2017, 03:22:49 PM
Quote from: jumbojak on December 03, 2017, 02:32:03 PM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on December 02, 2017, 01:57:24 PM
People treat me like a fragile doll because I'm skinny, but I'd like to see them pin and stick needles in a dog they've only got 30lb on.
Science is biased as hell when it comes to women's health.
I'm sure it's a more common assumption with women but it happens with men too. A friend of mine is just a tiny little guy but I've seen him manhandle sheets of plywood up flights of stairs on jobs when the "big guys" needed at least two people to get it done. I need help for stuff like that! ;D
Us little people have to work out clever ways to do things whilst the big guys just chuck it about.
:grin:
Well, there is the advantage of having lower centers of gravity. Little people can be more difficult to topple over! :P
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on December 03, 2017, 03:36:12 PM
Quote from: Dave on December 03, 2017, 03:22:49 PM
Quote from: jumbojak on December 03, 2017, 02:32:03 PM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on December 02, 2017, 01:57:24 PM
People treat me like a fragile doll because I'm skinny, but I'd like to see them pin and stick needles in a dog they've only got 30lb on.
Science is biased as hell when it comes to women's health.
I'm sure it's a more common assumption with women but it happens with men too. A friend of mine is just a tiny little guy but I've seen him manhandle sheets of plywood up flights of stairs on jobs when the "big guys" needed at least two people to get it done. I need help for stuff like that! ;D
Us little people have to work out clever ways to do things whilst the big guys just chuck it about.
:grin:
Well, there is the advantage of having lower centers of gravity. Little people can be more difficult to topple over! :P
With my ass and short, bandy legs - yeah! I threw the csptain of the second rugby eleven round so much in my RAF unarmed combat training he refused to partner me! Just had to make sure I kept out of his bear hugs... I really enjoyed the judo element!
Quote from: Dave on December 02, 2017, 06:11:03 PM
Yes, but the whole point is that drugs tests done on "the stable male" may not yield appropriate data for using those same drugs on females at any point in their cycle, or even when prepubescent or post menopause. The solution to the problem might be to carry out entirely separate test protocols on men and women, but that is more expensive. Got to up the prices because you can't reduce the profits.
Quote from: Pasta Chick on December 02, 2017, 01:57:24 PM
Science is biased as hell when it comes to women's health.
So we are agreed then?
Quote from: Bad Penny II on December 06, 2017, 01:11:47 PM
Quote from: Dave on December 02, 2017, 06:11:03 PM
Yes, but the whole point is that drugs tests done on "the stable male" may not yield appropriate data for using those same drugs on females at any point in their cycle, or even when prepubescent or post menopause. The solution to the problem might be to carry out entirely separate test protocols on men and women, but that is more expensive. Got to up the prices because you can't reduce the profits.
Quote from: Pasta Chick on December 02, 2017, 01:57:24 PM
Science is biased as hell when it comes to women's health.
So we are agreed then?
Yes, so long as you agree the matter is more complex than merely where a woman is in her reproductive cycle.
Quote from: Dave on December 06, 2017, 01:28:35 PM
Yes, so long as you agree the matter is more complex than merely where a woman is in her reproductive cycle.
Yes I agree, the matter is more complex.
Quotethan merely where a woman is in her reproductive cycle.
Quote from: Bad Penny II on December 06, 2017, 02:25:04 PM
Quote from: Dave on December 06, 2017, 01:28:35 PM
Yes, so long as you agree the matter is more complex than merely where a woman is in her reproductive cycle.
Yes I agree, the matter is more complex.
Quotethan merely where a woman is in her reproductive cycle.
I wouldn't use "merely" when referring to woman's business.
The "merely" was to imply this was the only consideration - nothing trivial about womens' repro cycles as I understand what I have been told!