They cite work showing that "oral microbiota dysbiosis is significantly correlated with various neuropsychiatric disorders, including autism spectrum disorder, dementia, Parkinson’s disease, schizophrenia, anxiety, epilepsy, and depression."
No claims are made that oral microbiota cause depression and anxiety. I find it easy to believe that after marriage, couples converge in depression and anxiety absent any kissing. And because of kissing, their oral microbiota will also converge. But that doesn't imply that kissing is the cause of the convergence in depression and anxiety. Maybe I am missing something.
This is Iran, so the researchers are often not great, or it's just straightup fraudulent. It's one of the epicenters of developing-world science fraud. So always worth keeping that in mind - there may not, in fact, be any facts that have to be explained.
"It can be argued that deriving a conclusive understanding from our preliminary findings is challenging without controlling for confounders (e.g., shared diet, stress exposure, and frequency of intimacy)." Seems like "stress exposure" is doing a lot of work there.
The study says sleep quality is also affected.
I have doubts about this transmission mechanism, but it is an idea made for speculative fiction with a Gothic tinge.
It's like a light version of vampirism without all the blood:
they kiss you (for a while), and you become morose and nocturnal.
in free countries you're free to point out the corrupting influences of those you feel are corrupting research, and to do your own, and then disprove incorrect things
in Iran you don't say anything the Ayatollah disagrees with, or they kill you. Glory be to God.
It's a false equivocance to say there is no difference simply because free countries aren't perfect, and because all people have biases
In free countries you still need funding to do research and they won’t give it to you if you want to study something they don’t want you to. The result is the same.
In a free country there are a lot of "theys" with different views who might give you money, and you are also free to start a business and create your own wealth since private property is part of what makes a free country free.
In a country like Iran "they" must, by law, be aligned with the Ayatollah. That's the difference.
Free countries aren't perfect but at least the law gives these rights; in Iran they are explicitly given to the Church instead.
You're making a patently absurd argument based on completely overblown cynicism
If you do research independently without the backing of a prestigious university and/or corporation your research won’t be taken seriously and it will be impossible to have it published, which is as good as not doing it in the first place.
Those fraudulent studies happened in "free" countries, sponsored by mega-corporations. And, if we are talking about Iranian repression, it's worth mentioning that in our "free" countries at the moment if you say the truth: that Israel is doing a genocide in Gaza, you can easily get arrested or worse (sometimes without due process).
One could also argue that the heating/burning planet we are having right now, the toxic water runoff that can't be rid of forever chems are much more harmful for life on earth than some backwards religious fundamentalists that suppress any dissent in their backwards medieval country (Iran). ON the topic of religious fundamentalism, the US, instead of looking at Iran, should maybe worry about its very own rise of religious fundamentalism and rampant repression and dissent-squashing tactics of its own government.
Can it be possible to do both:
- Worry about the quality of questionable studies done in a repressed country like Iran
- At the same time as doubting the veracity of corporate-sponsored studies done at the behest of all-powerful multinationals in "free" countries like the US.
Yes... it can be possible to do both of those things, but it's not remotely possible to create any credible equivalency between, them:
a.) your paper refuting those claims doesn't get widespread coverage
b.) your paper refuting those claims gets you beaten to death on the streets, or imprisoned and totured to death in prison (or even just imprisoned and released some time later)
Repressive countries tend to dislike scientific research, especially domains who are remotely involved with the theory of evolution when the regime is theocratic.
Not to mention any study involving romantic things.
They cite work showing that "oral microbiota dysbiosis is significantly correlated with various neuropsychiatric disorders, including autism spectrum disorder, dementia, Parkinson’s disease, schizophrenia, anxiety, epilepsy, and depression."
No claims are made that oral microbiota cause depression and anxiety. I find it easy to believe that after marriage, couples converge in depression and anxiety absent any kissing. And because of kissing, their oral microbiota will also converge. But that doesn't imply that kissing is the cause of the convergence in depression and anxiety. Maybe I am missing something.
After reading I’m confused how oral bacteria is shown to be the cause. What I’m reading is that moving in with a depressed person is depressing.
It appears they didn't control for folks who lived together or had begun open-mouth kissing before marriage. Am I missing something?
This is in Iran, so presumably there’s less of that than in other places in the world?
This is Iran, so the researchers are often not great, or it's just straightup fraudulent. It's one of the epicenters of developing-world science fraud. So always worth keeping that in mind - there may not, in fact, be any facts that have to be explained.
Not to mention how difficult it can be to transition to sleeping with a bed partner, let alone one who is an insomniac.
"It can be argued that deriving a conclusive understanding from our preliminary findings is challenging without controlling for confounders (e.g., shared diet, stress exposure, and frequency of intimacy)." Seems like "stress exposure" is doing a lot of work there.
The study says sleep quality is also affected. I have doubts about this transmission mechanism, but it is an idea made for speculative fiction with a Gothic tinge. It's like a light version of vampirism without all the blood: they kiss you (for a while), and you become morose and nocturnal.
HNed//.ed
Give it time to load (minutes).
[flagged]
Unlike in “free” countries where you definitely pinky-swear do not have politics or corporations manipulate research.
in free countries you're free to point out the corrupting influences of those you feel are corrupting research, and to do your own, and then disprove incorrect things
in Iran you don't say anything the Ayatollah disagrees with, or they kill you. Glory be to God.
It's a false equivocance to say there is no difference simply because free countries aren't perfect, and because all people have biases
In free countries you still need funding to do research and they won’t give it to you if you want to study something they don’t want you to. The result is the same.
The result is not the same.
In free countries there are many 'they' that can fund research. And 'they' can fund it without fear of the government.
It's not perfect but until we're post resource scarcity it's probably the best we can do.
In a free country there are a lot of "theys" with different views who might give you money, and you are also free to start a business and create your own wealth since private property is part of what makes a free country free.
In a country like Iran "they" must, by law, be aligned with the Ayatollah. That's the difference.
Free countries aren't perfect but at least the law gives these rights; in Iran they are explicitly given to the Church instead.
You're making a patently absurd argument based on completely overblown cynicism
If you do research independently without the backing of a prestigious university and/or corporation your research won’t be taken seriously and it will be impossible to have it published, which is as good as not doing it in the first place.
Each post of yours in this thread is doubling down on the false equivalence.
The grievances you are expressing are real, but so trivial in magnitude relative to what you're comparing them to, that you sound absurd.
- No risk of cancer from smoking: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3490543/
- Global warming isn't real, and if it is, definitely not caused by fossil fuels: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/18/the-forg...
- PFAS are totally safe, trust DuPont https://time.com/6284266/pfas-forever-chemicals-manufacturer...
- Opioids are not addictive, in fact, you need more of them to "manage" your pain, trust us, Purdue Pharma, and our very reliable studies: https://journals.library.columbia.edu/index.php/bioethics/ar...
Those fraudulent studies happened in "free" countries, sponsored by mega-corporations. And, if we are talking about Iranian repression, it's worth mentioning that in our "free" countries at the moment if you say the truth: that Israel is doing a genocide in Gaza, you can easily get arrested or worse (sometimes without due process).
One could also argue that the heating/burning planet we are having right now, the toxic water runoff that can't be rid of forever chems are much more harmful for life on earth than some backwards religious fundamentalists that suppress any dissent in their backwards medieval country (Iran). ON the topic of religious fundamentalism, the US, instead of looking at Iran, should maybe worry about its very own rise of religious fundamentalism and rampant repression and dissent-squashing tactics of its own government.
Can it be possible to do both:
- Worry about the quality of questionable studies done in a repressed country like Iran
- At the same time as doubting the veracity of corporate-sponsored studies done at the behest of all-powerful multinationals in "free" countries like the US.
Yes... it can be possible to do both of those things, but it's not remotely possible to create any credible equivalency between, them:
a.) your paper refuting those claims doesn't get widespread coverage
b.) your paper refuting those claims gets you beaten to death on the streets, or imprisoned and totured to death in prison (or even just imprisoned and released some time later)
This isn't even _good_ whataboutism
That's just so blantly weird stance.
What's your thought process? People in Iran should not kiss each other in marriage?
Repressive countries tend to dislike scientific research, especially domains who are remotely involved with the theory of evolution when the regime is theocratic.
Not to mention any study involving romantic things.