trentmkelly/rationalwiki huggingface dataset:
Polychlorinated biphenyl

[[File:PCB general structure.svg|thumb|right|200px|The general structure of PCBs]]
{{Chemistry}}
'''PCB'''s, or '''polychlorinated biphenyls''' are a class of organic [[chemistry|chemicals]] consisting of two joined benzene rings (hence "biphenyl") and any number of their ten [[hydrogen]] atoms replaced with chlorine (hence "polychlorinated"). They have have had many industrial uses, notably in electronics where they can act as fluids in transformers or capacitors.

==Safety==
The toxic properties of PCB compounds were noted as early as the 1930s but didn't come to prominence until the 1970s when dead seabirds were found with high concentrations of PCBs in them. Effects of exposure to humans are well known, and include skin irritation and liver damage. According to International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), "There is sufficient evidence in humans for the [[Cancer|carcinogenicity]] of 2,3,7,8-tetra-chlorodibenzo-<i>para</i>-dioxin." 2,3,7,8-tetra-chlorodibenzo-<i>para</i>-dioxin, also known as TCDD or dioxin, is the most potent rodent carcinogen in the Carcinogenic Potency Database.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20170731215420/http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cpdb/chempages/2,3,7,8-TETRACHLORODIBENZO-p-DIOXIN.html Carcinogenic Potency Database: 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (CAS 1746-01-6)] (archived from July 31, 2017).</ref> Based on this evidence and broad mechanistic evidence, 3,4,5,3’,4’-Pentachlorobiphenyl (PCB-126) is considered to be a known human carcinogen.<ref>[http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol100F/mono100F-27.pdf International Agency for Research on Cancer, volume 100F: Chemical Agents and Related Occupations]</ref> IARC also considers dioxin-like PCBs (numbers 77, 81, 105, 114, 118, 123, 126, 156, 157, 167, 169, and 189) to be known human carcinogens based on mechanistic data.<ref>[http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol107/index.php International Agency for Research on Cancer, volume 107: Polychlorinated Biphenyls and Polybrominated Biphenyls]</ref>

Generally, PCBs aren't soluble in water, are persistent in the environment (due to fat solubility), are highly volatile and quite flammable. Some types of PCBs have similar toxic properties to dioxins. Basically, this is nasty shit that you don't want to be pouring into rivers and lakes… oh, wait.

==Contamination events==
Prior to their ban in the [[United States]] in 1979, PCBs were widely flushed into rivers and waters without much thought. General Electric is believed to have flushed nearly 600 metric tons of the stuff into the Hudson river in the thirty years leading up to the ban &mdash; this also led to a fishing ban on the Hudson as health and environmental effects became known.

==In popular culture==
''Zodiac'' by Neal Stephenson goes into great detail about the accursed stuff.

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Chemicals]]
[[Category:Environmentalism]]
[[Category:Human carcinogens]]

Categories: Chemicals, Environmentalism, Human carcinogens
Polysexuality

{{Sources needed}}
[[File:Polysexual.jpg|right|thumb|165px|Polysexual pride flag]]{{sex}}
'''Polysexuality''' (not be confused with [[polyamory]]) is a sexual orientation closely related to [[bisexuality]] and [[pansexuality]]. While bisexuality is defined as being attracted to two or more genders, and pansexuality is defined as being attracted to individuals regardless of their gender <ref group=note>This is a highly simplified definition. For a more in depth distinction between the two sexualities, see [[Pansexuality#Differences with bisexuality|Difference between bisexuality and pansexuality]].</ref>, polysexuality is defined as being attracted to multiple genders, but not necessarily all. 

==Examples==
A polysexual may find themselves attracted to men, [[women]], and [[bigender]] people and find themselves completely unattracted to other [[non-binary gender]] identities. A different polysexual person may find themselves attracted to women and [[agender]] people, but no other genders. Keep in mind, that some people may experience such forms of attractions and label themselves as being [[bisexual]].  There are no hard and fast rules here.  The distinction between bisexuality and polysexuality often boils down to how one feels about the word "multiple" in the description of their sexuality, and whether or not they want to carry the common connotations of being attracted to both men and women that frequently characterizes bisexuality.  It really comes down to what word one prefers, and how one feels best describes how they experience sexual attraction.  Some may insist upon only being polysexual, while others may insist upon being both bisexual and polysexual. There is no singular "correct" way to identify here,  though that doesn't necessarily entail anything goes. 

In short, polysexual people are attracted to multiple genders, but not ''necessarily'' all. That being said, some polysexual people may see themselves as also being omnisexual, that wouldn't contradict being polysexual. 

==See also==
*[[Pansexuality]]
*[[Bisexuality]]

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=note}}

{{stub|sexuality}}

[[Category:Sexuality]]

Categories: Sexuality
Polyvagal theory

{{Sources needed}}
[[File:Recurrent laryngeal nerve.svg|thumb|200px|The vagus nerve (shown here in orange)]]
{{psychology}}
'''Polyvagal theory''' is an unproven [[Neuroscience|neuroscientific]] and [[psychological]] theory focused on the vagus nerve's role in social psychology. First developed by {{wpl|Stephen Porges}} in the 1990s, polyvagal theory purports to explain how the vagus nerve is involved in emotional regulation, the fear response, and social connection. It is not endorsed and often criticized by mainstream psychologists or neuroscientists and may be found in the company of other [[pseudoscientific]] theories.{{cn}}

==Theory==
[[File:Polyvagal theory Ventral Vagal.png|thumb|left|A diagram explaining the autonomic responses]]
There are three major tenets of polyvagal theory:

# Hierarchy, how the autonomic nervous system reacts in three reaction patterns, which are activated in a specific order
# Neuroception, a cognition without awareness, triggered by a stimulus such as danger
# Co-regulation, the need to feel safe enough to allow oneself to be in relationships

According to polyvagal theory, there are essentially three pillars of the autonomic nervous system. In the traditional view, the sympathetic and the parasympathetic nervous systems activate the "fight-or-flight", mobilization response and the "rest-and-digest", immobilization response, respectively. Polyvagal theory elaborates by adding a third, social response. It splits the parasympathetic nervous system into two parts: the ventral vagal system and the dorsal vagal system. The dorsal vagal system concerns the relaxation response, but the ventral vagal system supports social engagement. The ventral vagal system allows one to feel safe, and thus open to interaction.

As may be apparent, polyvagal theory thus is a theory of social neuroscience that places great emphasis on how socialization influences emotional regulation. It comes up often in some branches of trauma studies.

A major part of polyvagal theory is how it interprets the "frozen" response which many experiences when they are afraid. According to polyvagal theory, this response is caused by a conflict between the mobilization and immobilization responses without feeling safe.

==Criticism==
Polyvagal theory has been criticized for inaccuracies in both its neurological and evolutionary claims.{{cn}} It also may not be [[falsifiable]], and thus pseudoscientific.

==See also==
* [[Éiriú Eolas]] – A pseudoscientific "breathing and meditation program" which draws on the polyvagal theory.

{{stub|psychology}}
{{reflist}}


[[Category:Psychology]]
[[Category:Medicine]]
[[Category:Pseudoscience]]

Categories: Psychology, Medicine, Pseudoscience
Post-designation

{{lognav}}{{hatnote|Not to be confused with a statistical "[[fishing expedition]]" (abusing p-values) or "[[cherry picking]]" (selecting a biased sample).}}
'''Post-designation''' (also '''fishing for data''') is a [[logical fallacy]] that occurs when a conclusion is drawn from correlations observed in a sample, but only after collection of the sample and without declaring in advance what correlations the experimenter was expecting to find. This fallacy thus circumvents the [[scientific method]] of having a pre-designated experimental [[hypothesis]] and testing for the [[null hypothesis]] or worrying about [[statistical significance]] ''before'' looking at the data.

The fallacy is a [[circular fallacy]], since any given data will ''always'' support some conclusion. Because we were looking for anything, we are bound to find it.

==Examples==
*In looking at the difference between 100 [[Christians]] and 100 [[atheists]], we found that Christians were significantly more likely to eat tuna fish.

*Three of my four children were born in February, and all three were left-handed. Apparently most people born in February are left-handed.

*We took a survey of our class and discovered that, out of 30 students, seven were born in January. We conclude that college students are much more likely to be born in January than in any other month.

==Legitimate use==
Using peculiarities in a sample to suggest new lines of research is ''not'' a bad idea, but requires going through the scientific process all over again. When this is done, the sample is the minor premise of a retroduction rather than the major premise of an induction.

==See also==
*[[Correlation does not imply causation]]

==External links==
*[http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/143-post-designation POST-DESIGNATION], Logically Fallacious
*[http://web.archive.org/web/20070410050755/http://www.cuyamaca.net/bruce.thompson/Fallacies/postdesignation.asp Fishing for Data (Post-Designation)], Bruce Thompson

{{logfal}}


[[Category:Informal fallacies]]

Categories: Informal fallacies
Postrationalism

{{Internet}}

{{cquote|The movement’s defining maxim — according to at least one person familiar with the movement I spoke to — might be a proclamation by writer Sarah Perry: “It is better to be interesting and wrong than it is to be right and boring.”|||Tara Isabella Burton<ref>Tara Isabella Burton, [https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/rational-magic Rational Magic: Why a Silicon Valley culture that was once obsessed with reason is going woo], ''The New Atlantis'', Spring 2023</ref>}}

'''Postrationalism''' or post-rationalism is a group of writers or way of thinking which responds to the [[LessWrong]] movement. Devotees give the impression that they learned about rationalism mainly by reading posts on the Internet, and not from attending the meetups or joining the [[Polyamory|polycules]] in Berkeley. Many of them are [[Twitter]] personalities, whereas the LessWronger's natural habitat is the mailing list or blog comment section. They are more likely to draw the occasional idea from [[anthropology]] or [[religious studies]] than a classic LessWronger, and to admit that some of their ideas are mystical, emotional, or religious not PURELY SCIENTIFIC AND LOGICAL. Where LessWrongers are very serious and formal, postrationalists are often snarky and ironic. Whereas [[Eliezer Yudkowsky]] promised followers that they could become like gods through the power of rationality, postrationalists are open to the possibility that the way to transcendence might be through a [[magic]] circle. Some postrationalists are influenced by western [[Buddhism]] and existentialism.

David Chapman (''Meaningness'', [https://meaningness.com/geeks-mops-sociopaths "Geeks, MOPs, and sociopaths in subculture evolution"]), Sarah Perry (''Every Cradle is a Grave'', an [[Antinatalism|antinatalist]] manifesto), and Venkatesh Rao (https://www.ribbonfarm.com/ and https://contraptions.venkateshrao.com/) are often called influential postrationalists, although rigid taxonomies and boundaries are not the postrationalist style. As of 2025 ribbonfarm has stopped accepting new posts and participants often hint that their movement is shrinking or less vibrant than in the 2010s.

==External Links==

* Tara Isabella Burton, [https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/rational-magic Rational Magic: Why a Silicon Valley culture that was once obsessed with reason is going woo], ''The New Atlantis'', Spring 2023. Sympathetic longform account from an outsider
* https://eigenrobot.substack.com/p/a-postrationalist-syllabus by an insider
* https://postrationalism.org/ also by insiders
* [https://www.thelastrationalist.com/ The Last Rationalist] - title apparently alludes to The Last Psychiatrist, another strange and sad blogger
* Orthonormal, [https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/2Ee5DPBxowTTXZ6zf/rationalists-post-rationalists-and-rationalist-adjacents Rationalists, Post-Rationalists, And Rationalist-Adjacents], ''LessWrong'', March 13, 2010. Another attempt to distinguish between movements within the rationalist sphere

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Internet culture]]
[[Category:Esotericism]]

Categories: Internet culture, Esotericism
Pragmatic fallacy

{{logicnav}}{{hatnote|Not to be confused with an [[appeal to convenience]]/[[appeal to utility|utility]].}}
A '''pragmatic fallacy''' is a [[logical fallacy]] that occurs when, because something helped ''someone'', it is assumed that it will help for ''everyone''.

The fallacy is the bastard child of [[hasty generalization]] and [[anecdotal evidence]]; it is therefore an [[informal fallacy]].

The fallacy is sometimes confused with an [[appeal to consequences]]; this is incorrect. An appeal to consequences uses the effects of holding a belief to argue for the truth value of a proposition, while a pragmatic fallacy uses an example where something "worked" to argue for its general efficacy.

==Alternate names==
*It worked for me!
*Fallacy of pragmatic justification

==Form==
{{syl
|2='''X''' helped person '''Y'''.
|4=([[Enthymeme|unstated]], often unconsidered) Things that work for person '''Y''' work for everyone.
|5=C|6='''X''' will help for everyone.
}}

==Explanation==
The only way to know whether something is likely to work in all cases is to try it in a representative sample of all cases. (In medicine, usually via [[double-blind|double blind studies]].) One or two people are ''not'' representative of the human race.

A big part of the fallacy is the [[vague]]ness of the term "works" — for some people, [[yoga]] "works" to make them happy, while for others, it "works" to bring them closer to [[Hinduism#Brahman|''brahman'']]. This vagueness is exploited by [[woo]]meisters worldwide. Customer satisfaction is often used as an argument for a treatment's effectiveness, when it may be nothing more than a [[placebo effect]] or their personal [[regression to the mean]].

==Examples==
*[[Deepak Chopra]] was a successful doctor, yet overworked, over-[[Caffeine|caffeinated]], and a [[Tobacco smoking|smoker]]. After he practiced [[Transcendental Meditation]], he lost some of these habits. Twenty years later, he's still preaching its benefits.
*I don't know [[Placebo effect|how magnetic bracelets relieve pain]], I just know that they do.

==See also==
*[[Appeal to consequences]]
*[[Magical thinking]]
*[[Wishful thinking]]

==External links==
*[http://skepdic.com/pragmatic.html pragmatic fallacy], [[Skeptic's Dictionary]]
*[http://www.thealmightyguru.com/Pointless/SkepticTerms.html Pragmatic Fallacy], TheAlmightyGuru

{{logfal}}

[[Category:Imprecision fallacies]]
[[Category:Informal fallacies]]

Categories: Imprecision fallacies, Informal fallacies
Pranic healing

{{altmed}}
'''Pranic healing''' is a [[pseudoscientific]] [[alternative medicine]] that claims to utilise "prana", or "life [[subtle energy|energy]]", to [[Healing|heal]] the body. "Prana" is the [[Sanskrit]] word for [[qi]]. It also uses [[chakra]]s and [[acupuncture]] meridians. [[Deepak Chopra]] is quite a fan.

==History==
For a practice [[appeal to tradition|claiming roots going back thousands of years]], it is quite recent, the book ''Pranic Healing'' having been published only in 1984. The [[woo]]-meister who synthesized the present form of pranic healing was Choa Kok Sui, the Grand Master, whose variant is called MCKS Pranic Healing.<ref>[http://www.meditationontwinheartslive.com/default.asp?page=gmcks GrandMaster Choa Kok Sui: A Modern Spiritual Teacher]</ref>

MCKS Pranic Healing claims only to ''complement'' medicine that works, not ''replace'' it. They focus on ''healing'', not ''curing'', don't you know. [[Quack Miranda Warning|The possibility of being arrested for practicing pseudomedicine]] has, of course, nothing to do with this.

==Practice==

The practitioner does not touch the patient, who sits eyes closed, palms upward, tongue on roof of mouth. The practitioner scans the client's energy body, to determine the size and state of the [[chakra]]s. The energy body is cleansed and energised using a [[crystal woo|crystal]].

==Evidence of effectiveness==
{{crickets}}

==See also==

*[[Reiki]]
*[[Therapeutic touch]]
*[[Qi]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Alternative medicine]]
[[Category:Energy therapy]]
[[Category:Indian medicine]]
[[Category:Orientalist woo]]

Categories: Alternative medicine, Energy therapy, Indian medicine, Orientalist woo
Preaching to the choir

{{Logic}}

'''"Preaching to the choir"'''  or "preaching to the converted" is a figure of speech that refers to a situation when someone is making an [[argument]] to an individual or group of people who already agree with that argument. The opposite is [[evangelism]], [[missionary]] work, or proselytization, which refer to winning new converts.

Such a [[rhetoric]]al strategy is meant to minimize {{wpl|dissent}} or further solidify a view. The range of responses to this, from fervent nodding ("So true, so true!") to disgruntled remarks ("Thank you for wasting my time, Captain Obvious!"), may all be expressed by commenting that that's preaching to the choir. The term implies that individuals who would be willing to sing in a church choir would be favorably inclined to whatever point of view the preacher was espousing.

As well as in [[church]]es, the practice is common in political meetings — for example, at a [[Political party|party]] conference or political rally, where everybody who attends is likely to already be a supporter of the party or politician. In a political context, the phrase "energizing the base" is often used, which has a slightly more positive connotation: rather than denoting futility, it suggests attempts to encourage the faithful to go out and do stuff.<ref>[https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/abortion-campaigners-seek-to-learn-from-gay-marriage-debate-1.2962411 Abortion campaigners seek to learn from gay marriage debate], Irish Times, Feb 4, 2017</ref>

The phrase "preaching to the choir" apparently dates from the 1970s; "preaching to the converted" is much older, from the late 19<sup>th</sup> century.<ref>[https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/preaching-to-the-choir.html Preaching to the choir], Phrase Finder</ref> The concept is older still, however. Christians argue endlessly whether and to what extent they should preach to the converted or to the unconverted; the {{wpl|Parable of the Sower}} suggests that [[God]]'s [[Gospel|word]] 
won't
 is at ''best'' unlikely to have any effect on unbelievers (and might get you shredded for your trouble),<ref group=note>When they say "Do not cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their hooves, then turn and rend you", it doesn't mean you're going to get a pleasant massage!</ref> but if it falls on the believer's ground (or ears), it will flourish ({{bible|Matthew|13|1|23}}, {{bible|Mark|4|1|20}}, and {{bible|Luke|8|4|15}}).<ref>[https://rcg.org/articles/sypto.html Should you preach to others?], The Restored Church of God</ref><ref>[https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g20020608/should-christians-preach-to-others/ Should Christians preach to others], ''Awake!'', [[Jehovah's Witnesses]], June 8, 2002</ref>

==See also==
*[[Apologetics]] tend to do a lot of this
*[[Cognitive dissonance]] — a problem for any argument's acceptance that this neatly avoids
*[[Backfire effect]] — what you risk by preaching outside the choir
*[[Fox News]]
*[[Groupthink]]
*[[MSNBC]]
*[[Religious leaders]]

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=note}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

{{stub|logic}}
[[Category:Rhetoric]]

Categories: Rhetoric
Precious Metals Nano Water

{{altmed}}
'''Precious Metals Nano Water''' is a substance put forward by Bruce McBurney as a [[panacea]]. He has hyped it as [[Panacea|curing all ailments]], including [[bacteria]]l infections, the [[H1N1]] [[virus]], as well as indigestion and prostate trouble.  

He came to international prominence in early 2010 after appearing on the Canadian version of ''Dragons' Den'', where he offered the investors (the titular "Dragons") a 25% stake in his company for "only" $2.5m.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20100208211602/http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/02/05/snake-oil-salesmen-shouldnt-meet-dragons/ "Snake oil salesmen shouldn't meet dragons"] ''Discover Magazine''. February 5th, 2010.</ref><ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20150414212130/http://livelikedirt.blogspot.co.uk/2010/01/precious-metals-nano-water.html Precious Metals Nano Water on Dragons Den]</ref> They laughed at the general claims, until he claimed the product could cure [[cancer]], at which point they just tore into him with more pointed derision.

What is "Precious Metals Nano Water"? It is "ultradistilled" [[water]] with tiny bits of silver in it. That's it. This is intended to cure every ailment known to man.

The same [[crank]] has also put forward a "supercarburetor" that will prevent people from getting cancer by cleaning most of the emissions from cars.

==Note of caution==
[[File:Argyria 2.jpg|thumb|left|Human and blueman]]
Drinking [[colloidal silver]] can be hazardous to your health. The World Health Organisation does not recommend drinking water with more than 0.002mg/litre of silver and never ingesting more than 52μg/kilogram of body mass.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20131028082746/http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/chemicals/silversum.pdf WHO: Guidelines for drinking water quality (silver)]</ref> It can also turn your skin — and internal organs! — blue.<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahihGKZC5Kk The Dangers of Colloidal Silver] (On the other hand, body mods don't come much more extreme than this... if that's what you're into.)</ref>

<br clear=left>

==See also==
*[[Colloidal silver]]
*[[Ormus]]

==External links==
*[https://web.archive.org/web/19991012082459/http://himacresearch.com/ His company's website]
*[https://web.archive.org/web/20060723133231/http://www.sciencelab.com/xMSDS-Colloidal_Silver-9924932 Colloidal Silver MSDS sheet]
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0A-RbZaS5w His famed ''Dragons' Den'' appearance] (posted by the show's official [[YouTube]] channel, no less)

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Alternative medicine]]
[[Category:Cancer woo]]
[[Category:Water woo]]

Categories: Alternative medicine, Cancer woo, Water woo