(Question)
Went straight from a facility that deals with homeless children (492 1st Ave, Manhattan, New York) to the extreme outskirts of Queens near Kennedy Airport about 20 miles away. It was winter and I had no coat. I had my book bag and my sole Trader Joe's bag of clothing and was loaded into a van with three social workers. During the long drive in traffic, I fell asleep, so waking up at my new home, I couldn't make out any street signs and the numbering on the houses did not indicate whether I was in a home in the Bronx or Eastern Queens (which share the same street numbering in certain instances). My foster parents showed me my room and left a plate of food on the table. They barricaded themselves in their bedroom quite like how pilots barricade themselves behind the fortified cockpit door. However, my room didn't have a lock, and neither did the bathroom. There were bars on my windows with a view of a church parking lot. I took great care to avoid waking a significantly older teen (I was 14, so he must have been 1920) sleeping on the other bed. I heard two other kids (my foster siblings) in the other room playing music and giggling loudly at 3 in the morning. At 4 in the morning, my foster father started reading the Quran pretty loudly, and then he goes back to bed. In the morning, my foster parents are gone. My foster siblings are all sleeping. I got up at 7, but I don't know how far I am from my high school, what buses/train will take me there, and still don't know anything about anything about my new home. I don't even know the names of those I'm relegated to living with. The unnerving strangeness and disorientation hat comes with knowing that your life has changed and the culture shock that comes with that is so scary and desensitizes you on that first day. The time it took for him to find a new house was probably - a lifetime - several years - a weekend - not enough information
(Answer)
a weekend

(Question)
It's October, which means it's that time of the year again: flu vaccination time! Back when I worked in a primary care clinic, this is when we made a big push to offer the seasonal flu shot to all of our patients. (And we got ourselves immunized, as well.) Not all of our patients agreed. Many older adults are skeptical of the need to get a yearly vaccination against influenza. They aren't sure it will help. Or they think that the vaccination will actually give them a mild case of the flu. Or they just don't like needles. Or maybe they aren't sure which type of seasonal flu shot to get: the regular one or one of the newer "stronger" versions, designed for older adults? I'm never surprised when people bring up these questions. Vaccination for seasonal influenza can indeed be a confusing topic. But it's certainly important to consider. Depending on the year, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) estimates that every year, influenza affects 9-60 million Americans, causes 140,000-710,100 hospitalizations, and results in 12,000-56,000 deaths. (Influenza is more severe in some years than others.) Most people get better without needing hospitalization, but some people get very sick. Older adults are especially likely to get dangerously ill from catching the flu. So I agree with the CDC's recommendation: everyone over the age of 6 months should get their seasonal flu shot. In fact, I'm about to go get mine. As a healthy woman in her 40s, I'm not that concerned about getting dangerously ill from influenza. Instead, I get my annual flu shot because I want to minimize my chance of getting sick and perhaps exposing my older patients to influenza. This month, you'll probably be encouraged to get vaccinated too. So in this article, I'll address some key things to know about influenza and the flu shot, along with some common questions and concerns. Here's what I'll cover: * The basics of influenza and vaccination against the flu * What to know about flu shots for older adults * What's new and resources for the 2017-2018 flu... How long did it probably take the author to get her flu shot? - a month - all of October - not enough information - a few minutes
(Answer)
a few minutes

(Question)
It has become increasingly common for academics to use social media to communicate with wider audiences. Twitter, like many other social platforms, typically measures success in terms of numbers of followers, likes and retweets, but this only tells us something about the spreading of messages but not necessarily whether the content of the messages is understood or embraced. One way to ascertain this is through network and language analysis, which, used together, can tell us how effective the communication is. Economists tweet less, mention fewer people and have fewer conversations with strangers than a comparable group of experts in the sciences, and use less accessible language with words that are more complex, with more abbreviations and with a more distant tone. Their tweets are less personal and less inclusive than those used by scientists. This is what appeared in April 2017 when we gathered data on tens of thousands of tweets from the Twitter accounts of both the top 25 economists and 25 scientists as identified by IDEAS and Science, including the top three economists at the time, Paul Krugman, Joseph Stiglitz, and Erik Brynjolfsson and, on the other side, the top three scientists, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Brian Cox, and Richard Dawkins. At that time those accounts covered roughly two thirds of all the following. The timing is significant because 2016 has been declared the year of post-truth politics, the year in which appeals to emotions (pathos) superseded the significance of factual evidence-based information (logos), affecting people's constructions and interpretations of events. This has been accompanied by the growing prominence of political "alt" movements (e.g. UKIP, the Alt-right) and their aggressive, provocative, and populist narratives, and "fake news" leading to political shock events such as Brexit and the Trump election. The relatively low traction of economists in these public debates has been and continues to be an important issue. Does the public not trust economists? Don't they understand... The writer probably believes: - Thinks their work is misrepresented in the media. - not enough information - That economist public debates are an important issue - That economists still communicate poorly.
(Answer)
That economists still communicate poorly.