Is the biology section of Physics Forum out of line with the other sections?

[jeffinbath]

Summary:: Only "mainstream" views allowed here !

In the very recent OP on “symptomless superspreaders of Covid 19” (which is now locked), the moderator berkeman had posted:

“Please post mainstream medical science links to start this discussion thread, or it will be locked.”

On this section of PF it is clear that one is not supposed to post any fresh suggestions or insights that do not accord with the mainstream herd view of things.

Since the OP was an original view and not in the “mainstream”, it was not possible to find direct support in the literature. This means that only mainstream views are allowed here. This is completely out of line with the other sections of Physics Forum.

 

[Dale]

This means that only mainstream views are allowed here. This is completely out of line with the other sections of Physics Forum.

Only mainstream views are allowed anywhere on PF. It is part of the forum rules:

We wish to discuss mainstream science. That means only topics that can be found in textbooks or that have been published in reputable journals.

I am not sure what makes you think this is not the case throughout the forum.

As a clear and explicit rule we wish to discuss mainstream science only. One of the key mechanisms of promoting that is the tradition of asking for and providing references from the professional scientific literature. Such requests should always be honored. That is how this forum works.

@berkeman‘s actions were correct.

 

[Vanadium 50]

This means that only mainstream views are allowed here. This is completely out of line with the other sections of Physics Forum.

I point you to another non-mainstream thread of yours that was also locked for the very same reason. Dale is right - we to discuss mainstream science only.

mainstream herd

"Herd" isn't very nice. Besides, it opens up the question that if most of us are sheep or cows, are there other animals around too? Like maybe jackasses?

 

[Rive]

The biology section is indeed a bit out of line: since there is an actual 'hot' topic now (Covid19), with the 'reputable journals' always limping behind the events, 'biology' now often allows topics started based on journals only (without the 'reputable' part), and allowing to add the follow up only later.

But the requirement for the discussion to be based on mainstream science is still on, so a topic based only on a personal theory instead won't last long without the support of publications, even if it's about Covid19.

I think the emphasis in this case should be on the 'personal theory' instead of the mainstream.
You just failed to prove that it's not only a personal theory => lock.

By my opinion it was actually handled very politely.

 

[jeffinbath]

I must say that I have appreciated many of the helpful posts that my original postings have provoked on PF over the years.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Early on we communicated that because Covid was a worldwide threat we were leaving more discretion of debatable material to the judgement of staff.

 

[Algr]

“symptomless superspreaders of Covid 19”

It's a pity I missed that thread, as there is a pretty easy response to your original objection: Just measure how much energy is involved.

The human body is filled with hundreds of different processes, from making toenails, to beating your heart, to your immune system. My quick research suggests 80 watts is a typical rest energy consumption for a human. What if the virus consumes 0.1 watts in reproducing itself? Would you notice that? A successful virus is one that keeps its energy demands low enough to be undetected by your immune system, while still spreading. By random luck, COVID 19 keeps its energy consumption in that sweet spot for a long time. That is part of why it became so widespread.

 

[mfb]

This has nothing to do with power demand.
A 0.1 W source of radioactivity in your body can kill you within hours.

 

[Algr]

This has nothing to do with power demand.
A 0.1 W source of radioactivity in your body can kill you within hours.

Yes it was. jeffinbath's original question was that the energy demand would be noticeable to your metabolism, and I suggest it could easily hide among other bodily processes. (Our bodies monitor energy use, but not down to the milliwatt.)

No one in this or the other thread mentioned radioactivity.