https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353762832_Antenatal_and_perinatal_factors_influencing_neonatal_blood_pressure_a_systematic_review
Maternal ethnicity/race. The effect of maternal ethnicity on neonatal BP is uncertain. Schachter et al. found higher DBP in term neonates of African-American mothers at 3 days after birth compared to white American infants (51.9 ± 6.7 mmHg versus 50.1 ± 6.6 mmHg; p =0.047), but no significant difference in SBP was observed (76.4 ± 8.3 mmHg versus 75 ± 8.4 mmHg) [23]. In contrast, Zinner et al. reported no significant difference in SBP (74.1 ± 9.2 mmHg and 75.1 ± 11.2 mmHg respectively) or DBP (51.3 ± 9.0 mmHg and 51.3 ± 10.6 mmHg) in neonates born to white or African-American mothers [10]. Another prospective cohort study by Schachter et al. comparing 111 African-American with 136 white term newborn infants on day 3 after birth reported a marginally higher SBP for the African-American newborns (mean SBP 76.7 mmHg versus 74.3 mmHg; SD not reported; p=0.04). However, when adjusted for number of feeds since birth, there was no longer a significant difference [24] So the significance was p < 0.05 only because 0,047 < 0.05 when not rounded. -- rec -- On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 3:55 PM Frank Wimberly <wimber...@gmail.com> wrote: > The full paper about newborn heart rate by race > > > https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XRv3_a7Es2FjEP6aUMxx2x-hspBd-2KD/view?usp=drivesdk > > > --- > Frank C. Wimberly > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, > Santa Fe, NM 87505 > > 505 670-9918 > Santa Fe, NM > > On Fri, Oct 8, 2021, 1:04 PM Frank Wimberly <wimber...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> This post actually has to do with newborn heart rate by race >> >> Here is a link to the abstract. I'm going to see if I have the full >> paper in case anyone's interested >> >> >> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/22148609_Newborn_Heart_Rate_and_Blood_Pressure_Relation_to_Race_and_to_Socioeconomic_Class >> >> Frank >> >> On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 9:18 AM <thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I’m with David on this one. Distinguishing between “real” and random >>> effects is what learning IS. Of course, such judgements are never more >>> than probably true. >>> >>> >>> >>> N >>> >>> >>> >>> Nick Thompson >>> >>> thompnicks...@gmail.com >>> >>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Prof David West >>> *Sent:* Friday, October 8, 2021 2:49 AM >>> *To:* friam@redfish.com >>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate >>> >>> >>> >>> David Eric Smith wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> *"I cannot juggle hundreds of variables, and produce a result that would >>> fail _any_ test for randomness. I can conceive that maybe there are people >>> smart enough to do that, but cannot imagine any-wise what it would feel >>> like to be one of them."* >>> >>> >>> >>> But . . . . every human being does exactly that, all the time, more or >>> less effortlessly — certainly below the threshold of "conscious" awareness. >>> Billions of variables, including certain cell receptors "detecting" and >>> responding to quantum effects (like changes in spin induced by magnetic >>> fields). >>> >>> >>> >>> Some Asian philosophies (Jnana Yoga, Tibetan Tantra) and most of the >>> Alchemical literature can be read as efforts to "decompile" this ability, >>> make it conscious, and apply it in "ordinary reality." >>> >>> >>> >>> davew >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 6, 2021, at 9:28 AM, David Eric Smith wrote: >>> >>> Gilding the lily, since I don’t disagree with anything that has >>> specifically been said. >>> >>> >>> >>> I have felt like, somewhere between the deliberate distortion of Emerson >>> that reads “consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds” >>> >>> (Fun ref see >>> https://www.lawfareblog.com/foolish-consistency-hobgoblin-little-minds-metadata-stay >>> ) >>> >>> and what Scott Aaronson might call “the blankfaces of consistency”, >>> >>> there should be a sort of Herb Simon Watchmaker’s consistency. The >>> ability to check a form for consistency — even if I am alert that the >>> system within which I am checking might be subject to overruling or >>> revision — allows me to get past one thing and go to the next. To clip >>> together a sub-component of the watch and set it on the shelf, while >>> assembling other sub-components, or to take the sub-components and assemble >>> them relative to each other without having to constantly actively maintain >>> the innards of each. >>> >>> >>> >>> To somebody with my innate limitations, that seems among the most >>> valuable things in the world. >>> >>> >>> >>> DaveW wrote this fabulous paean to never calling anything done, some >>> months ago. I can’t resurrect the text, and on my best living day could >>> not compose its equal, but the gist was that sciences in which one arrives >>> at conclusions are the pastimes of trivial minds. Real Men do >>> anthropology, where nothing is ever closed. In a lovely rant on what a day >>> in the life of a Real Man is like, a sentence contained a clause I am >>> pretty sure I do have verbatim: “ . . . , juggling hundreds of variables, . >>> . . “. >>> >>> >>> >>> I cannot juggle hundreds of variables, and produce a result that would >>> fail _any_ test for randomness. I can conceive that maybe there are people >>> smart enough to do that, but cannot imagine any-wise what it would feel >>> like to be one of them. >>> >>> >>> >>> It seems it must be possible in this sense to cling to consistency like >>> a life-raft, yet not elevate it to aa religious icon. After all, life >>> rafts only keep you alive, and in the big sweep of things, that isn’t _all_ >>> that important. >>> >>> >>> >>> Eric >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Oct 5, 2021, at 11:56 AM, uǝlƃ ☤>$ <geprope...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Yeah, I'm perfectly aligned with the freak among freaks sentiment, >>> though I'd argue we *do* live in that world, we just deny it with our false >>> beliefs. "The problem with communication is the illusion that it exists." >>> >>> >>> >>> But the more important part of the argument surrounds whether >>> consistency, itself, is a matter of degree or kind. The analog world is >>> full of graded [in]consistency. You see it a lot with artifacts resulting >>> from welding, baking, brewing, etc. ... I even saw it often with the level >>> 3 drafting at lockheed. Any inconsistencies resulting from our designs, the >>> effete knowledge engineers, were *easily* overcome by the gritty >>> on-the-ground engineers ... like smoothing out burrs or gluing together >>> pieces that don't quite fit. >>> >>> >>> >>> In the special case of refined, crisply expressed propositions of >>> digital computation, inconsistency finding becomes a (perhaps the) powerful >>> tool. Debugging a serial program relies on it fundamentally. But it's >>> softened a bit in parallel algorithms. Inconsistency is broken up into >>> multiple, yet still crisp, types (race conditions, deadlocks, etc.). As >>> approach "the real world" and move away from digital computation, it seems, >>> to my ignorant eye, that [in]consistency softens more and more. Whether >>> that softening takes the form of a countable set of types or something >>> denser, I don't know. But it definitely takes on a different form. >>> >>> >>> >>> Discussions like Frank and EricS are having about the stability of a >>> limit point (never mind the ontological status of that point) get at this >>> nicely. If you change the frame entirely (e.g. move to position-momentum) >>> and the "inconsistency" of the singularities *moves* (or disappears >>> entirely), then a focus on consistency is not as powerful of a tool. The >>> focus becomes one of which frame expresses the target domain "less >>> inconsistently" ... aka with fewer exceptions to the rule. >>> >>> >>> >>> Yes, I know I've completely abused the word and its normal meaning. >>> >>> >>> >>> On 10/4/21 12:03 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote: >>> >>> I agree with some of that. I mentioned the dependently typed >>> programming language as one technology to know when I am being >>> inconsistent. It doesn't mean I stop everything to resolve the >>> inconsistency, but I might point the headlights in some other direction to >>> avoid the inconsistency (breadth first search instead of depth first). >>> Inconsistency finding is a tool, and preferably a semi-automated one. >>> >>> >>> >>> I'd rather have the option of being a depth first searcher and not worry >>> about shelter and food and health care. I'm not talented enough to be >>> among the small number of people that can survive (adequately) doing that >>> sort of thing. I think I wouldn't even like it in general, even if I >>> were. I don't like being the person that says something is irrelevant >>> because everything is irrelevant. I'd like to be a freak among billions >>> of freaks that all admire the accomplishments of other freaks. This is >>> not the world we live in, though. >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> >>> From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$ >>> >>> Sent: Monday, October 4, 2021 10:16 AM >>> >>> To: friam@redfish.com >>> >>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate >>> >>> >>> >>> OK. But academia is in serious trouble, not least exhibited by the rise >>> of populism and anti-intellectual distrust of those who might be attracted >>> to depth-first search. >>> >>> >>> >>> Another story: At the last salon, an entomologist asked me "Why do you >>> know so much philosophy?" My guess is he was actually trying to politely >>> criticize my incessant concept-dropping, referring to oblique discussions >>> that only occur amongst such depth-first people. The answer is I don't know >>> any philosophy. I'm the worst kind of tourist, trampling endangered species >>> while snapping selfies on my iPhone. >>> >>> >>> >>> But the deeper answer is that we don't need the academy anymore. What we >>> need are social safety nets that facilitate the diverse exploration of the >>> information field splayed out before us. If an unemployed snowboarder wants >>> to do the work to propose a new theory of everything, so be it. I'm willing >>> to sacrifice some of my income to help that happen, even if, or perhaps >>> because it may eventually be found contradictory to some other ToE >>> somewhere. But a consistency hobgoblin would nip that nonsense in the bud >>> at the first hint of contradiction ... like a blankface academic advisor in >>> some Physics department at some elitist institution. >>> >>> >>> >>> A focus on consistency is nothing more than subculture gatekeeping < >>> https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Gatekeeping>. >>> >>> >>> >>> On 10/4/21 10:01 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote: >>> >>> In some depth first search one might find a sub-problem that was >>> uncrackable. If it is one of 100 problems to solve, it is dumb to get >>> hung-up on it, especially if it is of no practical significance. But it >>> is a problem that will attract a certain kind of (autistic) academic >>> attention as well. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> "Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie." >>> >>> ☤>$ uǝlƃ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - >>> . >>> >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> >>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> >>> un/subscribe >>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,7f2mPq52aCiNP-NOFihSaR-cg_kz1iAkDMpygFlJfkcSgmEZmEFic7x62k1cZn98hMplDRUf7uz95gbzVN3rKoTgwWmKH46EfJ8sTtv1&typo=1 >>> >>> FRIAM-COMIC >>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,MomHJhYAIbAGPpxMBmUS3Ni9pCKbgGErtd46zkPFkQf2j-muY5IANU5y7QJpsNrH0lQXfle6j44F-jxs5eeUUX6KitPZlGLQZUQcy9q1NaaVMA4,&typo=1 >>> >>> archives: >>> >>> 5/2017 thru present >>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,dwZL0XPERidEln6ak4dQwZ2pi8qaqBY_64JWdl_o-CrDSu2V8E0Dy9QaTmHOrVvw3bOxdJwbiUjVsjDceZnYl0NwzUPoDwlOoVOuncTMoNHFBg,,&typo=1 >>> >>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>> >>> >>> >>> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - >>> . >>> >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> >>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> >>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> >>> archives: >>> >>> 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>> >>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - >>> . >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> archives: >>> 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>> >> >> >> -- >> Frank Wimberly >> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz >> Santa Fe, NM 87505 >> 505 670-9918 >> >> Research: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2 >> > > .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: > 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >
.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
