Chicago Open History discussion

Elaborate on the merits of specific tournaments or have general theoretical discussion here.
Post Reply
User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5473
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Important Bird Area » Mon Jul 20, 2015 1:32 pm

(Note: this set will be read in the irc starting Tuesday, July 21st. If you would like to play the set in the irc, please don't read this thread.)








OK, this is your discussion thread for 2015 Chicago Open History. A lot of the questions in this tournament were wacky/experimental/the entities in my notebook judged "too strange to inflict on DI ICT," so I hope there will be plenty to discuss.
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6514
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Cheynem » Mon Jul 20, 2015 5:56 pm

I had a lot of fun. The set seemed fairly guerrilla-esque in that it seemed Jeff was pretty lenient in letting through some really hard stuff (submissions or not, I cannot say). I really enjoyed the historiography stuff; it was pretty much all things I encountered in an academic setting.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5473
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Important Bird Area » Mon Jul 20, 2015 6:18 pm

I definitely did not need to add more difficult answers to submitted packets for this event!

In general, the submissions were well-written but significantly more difficult than my original intent for this tournament. It's very possible that the finals packets are more accessible than the prelim rounds.
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred

User avatar
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea
Auron
Posts: 1882
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Periplus of the Erythraean Sea » Mon Jul 20, 2015 6:27 pm

I had a blast playing this tournament. Despite my inclination to stylistically favor well controlled sets with good tossups on accessible answers, I enjoyed the super-hard material at this tournament, including a bunch of stuff I thought I would NEVER see tossed up (Burebista! Peruvian elections! The tian ma of Dayuan!)

That being said, I am inclined to say that next year's CO History should probably try to emulate this year's CO Visual Arts more. If my own side event is well received, I'd be interested in editing the CO History event next year and try to curve it to such a model, though I'd want to have the event be packet-submission since I greatly enjoy seeing what people come up with.
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16, Columbia Business School '21
NAQT Writer and Subject Editor

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6514
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Cheynem » Mon Jul 20, 2015 6:54 pm

I buzzed in very early on the Peruvian election and said "the election where Fujimori won and defeated Vargas Llosa." I feel like that should have been acceptable at that point. I'm not sure if it would have been a good idea to say something like "year required."
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

User avatar
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea
Auron
Posts: 1882
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Periplus of the Erythraean Sea » Mon Jul 20, 2015 6:59 pm

Cheynem wrote:I buzzed in very early on the Peruvian election and said "the election where Fujimori won and defeated Vargas Llosa." I feel like that should have been acceptable at that point. I'm not sure if it would have been a good idea to say something like "year required."
It's been quizbowl convention for a while to require the year for US elections, so I don't think this really needed to be added into the question. Now, I don't think your position that the year should be required is unreasonable, I just want to know if you'd apply this to the US as well. Would you argue that the same should be true of United States elections? Should "Truman Defeats Dewey" be acceptable for the Election of 1948?
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16, Columbia Business School '21
NAQT Writer and Subject Editor

User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5473
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Important Bird Area » Mon Jul 20, 2015 7:10 pm

Cheynem wrote:I buzzed in very early on the Peruvian election and said "the election where Fujimori won and defeated Vargas Llosa." I feel like that should have been acceptable at that point. I'm not sure if it would have been a good idea to say something like "year required."
That should definitely have been acceptable; my apologies.
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred

User avatar
hydrocephalitic listlessness
Forums Staff: Moderator
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 1:26 pm

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by hydrocephalitic listlessness » Mon Jul 20, 2015 7:27 pm

I wrote that question, and it never occurred to me to put that alternate answerline in--as (other) Will said above, that's how I've seen most "this election" questions labeled. I would've accepted Mike's answer because it's unique, but I'm not a huge fan of the alternate answerline acrobatics instituting this might necessitate in the future: "prompt on 'the election in which Fujimori won,' do not accept or prompt on 'the second election Fujimori won,'" etc.
Will H-M
Harvard '16
ACF

Adventure Temple Trail
Auron
Posts: 2613
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:52 pm

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Adventure Temple Trail » Mon Jul 20, 2015 7:58 pm

bird bird bird bird bird wrote:
Cheynem wrote:I buzzed in very early on the Peruvian election and said "the election where Fujimori won and defeated Vargas Llosa." I feel like that should have been acceptable at that point. I'm not sure if it would have been a good idea to say something like "year required."
That should definitely have been acceptable; my apologies.
Why? This is never done for questions on US presidential elections; is this merely in deference to the idea that players are less likely to know the specific year of foreign elections?
Matt J.
ex-Georgetown Day HS, ex-Yale
member emeritus, ACF

Sailing away on my copper boat

User avatar
Important Bird Area
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5473
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Contact:

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Important Bird Area » Mon Jul 20, 2015 8:37 pm

Adventure Temple Trail wrote:is this merely in deference to the idea that players are less likely to know the specific year of foreign elections?
Yes (and in general, I'm fine with using "what are players likely to actually know" as a metric for answer-line instructions at this kind of tournament).
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF

"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6514
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Cheynem » Mon Jul 20, 2015 8:55 pm

I'm actually sympathetic to the idea that "Truman Defeats Dewey" should be acceptable for election of 1948 tossups. But I don't like years.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

User avatar
Cody
2008-09 Male Athlete of the Year
Posts: 2283
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:57 am
Location: Richmond

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Cody » Tue Jul 21, 2015 8:11 am

bird bird bird bird bird wrote:
Adventure Temple Trail wrote:is this merely in deference to the idea that players are less likely to know the specific year of foreign elections?
Yes (and in general, I'm fine with using "what are players likely to actually know" as a metric for answer-line instructions at this kind of tournament).
In my opinion, this should be the standard editors use for election questions in most tournaments. There are certain uniquely identifying pieces of information about elections that are extremely famous and I think they should be accepted (until read) -- things that come to mind include "the Corrupt Bargain election", "LBJ's defeat of Goldwater", and the above referenced tidbits. You don't have to descend all the way to accepting "the second time FDR won" to accept the above for their appropriate year.
Cody Voight, VCU ‘14. I wrote lots of science and am an electrical engineer.
VCU Tournament Director ‘13-‘17. HSAPQ President ‘15-16.
Hero of Socialist Quizbowl Labor (NSC ‘14). “esteemed colleague” of Snap Wexley, ca. 2016. Stats Hero (Nats ‘16).
Quizbowl at VCU

User avatar
Tees-Exe Line
Tidus
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:02 pm

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Tees-Exe Line » Tue Jul 21, 2015 10:20 am

I very much enjoyed both the set and the experience of playing it with great (and admirably tolerant) teammates and tough competition. I was expecting a little bit more of Jeff and a little less of the rest of you people in the regular rounds, and I'm glad we did well enough to experience Jeff's magic in the finals.

I want to open discussion about the substance of one of the questions: the one about early victims of AIDS. I enjoyed that because I saw "And the Band Played On" a couple of months ago (highly interesting and recommended, though not a great film-as-such, and with a strangely naive anti-sex posture), which sparked a tour through the Wikipedia pages on early AIDS history. My question is for those with some epidemiology experience who may be on here: the question referenced Robert Rayford, a teenager who died in St. Louis in 1969 and, according to Wikipedia, was determined to have died of AIDS in 1987. I found his story especially disturbing as a window on to the dark, horrible underbelly of humanity, but also at odds with my preconceived notions about how epidemiology works. If Wikipedia's information about him is right, that suggests AIDS was widely present in the United States 15 years before its first reported case in Denmark. I can understand that immune system compromise would mean AIDS cases would not be recognized as such, especially before anyone knew the disease existed, but it still seems weird to me that retrospectively we've been unable to assemble more facts to corroborate the evidence of one such early victim. Is my skepticism warranted?
Marshall I. Steinbaum

Oxford University (2002-2005)
University of Chicago (2008-2014)

Get in the elevator.

User avatar
1.82
Rikku
Posts: 291
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 9:35 pm
Location: Atlanta area
Contact:

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by 1.82 » Tue Jul 21, 2015 1:49 pm

The semi-guerrilla nature of this event might have muddied the battlefield a little in terms of finding a winner, but I enjoyed this tournament very much and I'm glad that there was a place where detailed knowledge of the Robert Rayford incident came in handy. One aspect of the tournament that I particularly liked was the "description acceptable" tossups; while a few of them were a little confusing in that they allowed for description of things that clearly had names, they were generally clear in terms of what they were referring to and they allowed for some interesting answerlines.

I negged the Peru question with 1991 instead of 1990, which obviously was my own fault. I do think it's worth noting that the United States is unusual in that all its presidential elections have always been held on a strict four-year cycle, which makes asking years easier because it significantly narrows down the possible answer space. That said, I'm not sure how feasible it is to include alternate answerlines on foreign elections in general. For the Canadian election of 1993, which was also the answer to a question at this tournament, what other answers would be accepted? The election where the Progressive Conservatives were annihilated? The first Bloc Québécois election?
Naveed Chowdhury
Maryland '16
Georgia Tech '17

User avatar
Nabonidus
Wakka
Posts: 113
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Nabonidus » Tue Jul 21, 2015 1:53 pm

Tees-Exe Line wrote:I want to open discussion about the substance of one of the questions: the one about early victims of AIDS. I enjoyed that because I saw "And the Band Played On" a couple of months ago (highly interesting and recommended, though not a great film-as-such, and with a strangely naive anti-sex posture), which sparked a tour through the Wikipedia pages on early AIDS history. My question is for those with some epidemiology experience who may be on here: the question referenced Robert Rayford, a teenager who died in St. Louis in 1969 and, according to Wikipedia, was determined to have died of AIDS in 1987. I found his story especially disturbing as a window on to the dark, horrible underbelly of humanity, but also at odds with my preconceived notions about how epidemiology works. If Wikipedia's information about him is right, that suggests AIDS was widely present in the United States 15 years before its first reported case in Denmark. I can understand that immune system compromise would mean AIDS cases would not be recognized as such, especially before anyone knew the disease existed, but it still seems weird to me that retrospectively we've been unable to assemble more facts to corroborate the evidence of one such early victim. Is my skepticism warranted?
Speaking as the author of that question, I agree that the case is pretty bizarre, and there is good reason to be suspicious of that sort of claim. I actually had to cut several parts of that tossup after failing to find reasonable sources for some of the cases often given as examples of early AIDS. Rayford at least was published in JAMA (http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.asp ... eid=374422) and the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/1987/10/28/us/bo ... times.html). And while I wouldn't trust a retroactive diagnosis 100%, I think the very fact that a solid case was made for HIV's presence in Missouri in the early 60s is probably important enough in its own right to be a valid clue within the context of a history side event.
Last edited by Nabonidus on Tue Jul 21, 2015 6:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Derek So
McGill

User avatar
theMoMA
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5662
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 am

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by theMoMA » Tue Jul 21, 2015 1:53 pm

Perhaps just stating "year required" or "year or opponents required" at the beginning of the tossup could signal to players the kind of information sought, much as the "description acceptable" designation did at this tournament. Alternately, you could just write on "one election between these two candidates..." if you wanted to test the same information without requiring the year. In the context of the Vargas Llosa/Fujimori election, you could have a question beginning "two answers required," with clues like "one of these people gave a speech..." or "the other of these people wrote a book..." You could do this with pretty much any two-candidate (or two-major-candidate) election across the world, including in the U.S.
Andrew Hart
Minnesota alum

User avatar
Tees-Exe Line
Tidus
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:02 pm

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Tees-Exe Line » Tue Jul 21, 2015 2:04 pm

Nabonidus wrote:
Tees-Exe Line wrote:I want to open discussion about the substance of one of the questions: the one about early victims of AIDS. I enjoyed that because I saw "And the Band Played On" a couple of months ago (highly interesting and recommended, though not a great film-as-such, and with a strangely naive anti-sex posture), which sparked a tour through the Wikipedia pages on early AIDS history. My question is for those with some epidemiology experience who may be on here: the question referenced Robert Rayford, a teenager who died in St. Louis in 1969 and, according to Wikipedia, was determined to have died of AIDS in 1987. I found his story especially disturbing as a window on to the dark, horrible underbelly of humanity, but also at odds with my preconceived notions about how epidemiology works. If Wikipedia's information about him is right, that suggests AIDS was widely present in the United States 15 years before its first reported case in Denmark. I can understand that immune system compromise would mean AIDS cases would not be recognized as such, especially before anyone knew the disease existed, but it still seems weird to me that retrospectively we've been unable to assemble more facts to corroborate the evidence of one such early victim. Is my skepticism warranted?
Speaking as the author of that question, I agree that the case is pretty bizarre, and there is good reason to be suspicious of that sort of claim. I actually had to cut several parts of that tossup after failing to find reasonable sources for some of the cases often given as examples of early AIDS. Rayford at least was published in JAMA (http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.asp ... eid=374422) and the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/1987/10/28/us/bo ... times.html). And while I wouldn't stake my life on a Western blot, I think the very fact that a solid case was made for HIV's presence in Missouri in the early 60s is probably important enough in its own right to be a valid clue within the context of a history side event.
Right, no disagreement there, and great question. Does this idea of isolated initial introductions of HIV that failed to thrive until the late 70s make sense? The NY Times piece implies that gay men were having a lot more sex in the late 70s than in the early 60s. Is that actually true? I know the record on this for straight people is not so clear.
Last edited by Tees-Exe Line on Tue Jul 21, 2015 2:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Marshall I. Steinbaum

Oxford University (2002-2005)
University of Chicago (2008-2014)

Get in the elevator.

User avatar
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea
Auron
Posts: 1882
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Periplus of the Erythraean Sea » Tue Jul 21, 2015 2:07 pm

On an irrelevant side note, I've spoken with Jordan and he seems agreeable to the idea of writing next year's edition of this tournament with me. Are there any major objections to this?
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16, Columbia Business School '21
NAQT Writer and Subject Editor

User avatar
Auks Ran Ova
Forums Staff: Chief Administrator
Posts: 4027
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: Minneapolis
Contact:

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Auks Ran Ova » Tue Jul 21, 2015 2:54 pm

Does every single CO really need a history tournament? I'd like to see the subjects shaken up a little more--year after year of history gets a little monotonous (and more selfishly limits the events I care about playing, though, say, a science tournament would certainly do the same)
Rob Carson
University of Minnesota '11, MCTC '??
Member, ACF
Member, PACE
Writer and Editor, NAQT

User avatar
Tees-Exe Line
Tidus
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:02 pm

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Tees-Exe Line » Tue Jul 21, 2015 2:57 pm

Auks Ran Ova wrote:Does every single CO really need a history tournament? I'd like to see the subjects shaken up a little more--year after year of history gets a little monotonous (and more selfishly limits the events I care about playing, though, say, a science tournament would certainly do the same)
Speaking as a onetime editor of CO History, I considered it a great privilege to which I'd aspired for several years and only volunteered for when I felt I was ready. I think that explains why supply is positive. For demand, the enrollment speaks for itself. Is there some other large body of players demanding a subject tournament that's being crowded out by history year after year?
Marshall I. Steinbaum

Oxford University (2002-2005)
University of Chicago (2008-2014)

Get in the elevator.

User avatar
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea
Auron
Posts: 1882
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Periplus of the Erythraean Sea » Tue Jul 21, 2015 3:20 pm

To be entirely honest I would prefer to write or edit a myth/religion ("Theology and Beliefs") tournament next year but I don't know that I'm qualified to do such a side event for the premier open tournament of the year. Hence, I would like to try my hand at a subject that it's clear I know well for an event that's well-established while I try to develop knowledge and understanding of other subject areas adequately, or maybe write such an event for a less prestigious occasion instead.
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16, Columbia Business School '21
NAQT Writer and Subject Editor

Urech hydantoin synthesis
Tidus
Posts: 523
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:35 pm

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Urech hydantoin synthesis » Tue Jul 21, 2015 3:31 pm

Back in 2012/2013 Eric Mukherjee and I had this idea for a myth side event, with either a partially or wholly filled out answersheet (I can't remember), but it didn't really end up being written.
Ben Zhang

Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell '23
Columbia University '18
Ladue Horton Watkins HS '14

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6514
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Cheynem » Tue Jul 21, 2015 3:32 pm

I FUCKING LOVE HISTORY
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

gyre and gimble
Tidus
Posts: 716
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 2:45 am

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by gyre and gimble » Tue Jul 21, 2015 4:54 pm

christino wrote:Back in 2012/2013 Eric Mukherjee and I had this idea for a myth side event, with either a partially or wholly filled out answersheet (I can't remember), but it didn't really end up being written.
Do this!
Stephen Liu
Torrey Pines '10
Harvard '14
Stanford '17

User avatar
Sima Guang Hater
Auron
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Sima Guang Hater » Tue Jul 21, 2015 5:23 pm

Tees-Exe Line wrote:If Wikipedia's information about him is right, that suggests AIDS was widely present in the United States 15 years before its first reported case in Denmark. I can understand that immune system compromise would mean AIDS cases would not be recognized as such, especially before anyone knew the disease existed, but it still seems weird to me that retrospectively we've been unable to assemble more facts to corroborate the evidence of one such early victim. Is my skepticism warranted?
I'm not sure what facts you'd want in this particular case; the guy's tissue tested positive by Western Blot, which is something like 99.5% specific. If you meant facts about the early introduction of HIV into the Americas, that's actually something that's the subject of interesting scientific history.

Probably the best paper I've seen on the introduction of HIV to the US was a molecular clock analysis published in 2007, where the authors used archival tissue samples to show that the pandemic clade of HIV came to the US in 1969 via Haitian immigrants (http://www.pnas.org/content/104/47/18566.full), which suggests that the virus was cryptically spreading for 12 years before its emergence.

Here comes the best part: this paper inspired a huge firestorm of calls of "scientific racism", including from quizbowl-favorite author Edwidge Danticat (http://www.progressive.org/mp_danticat110707) and medical anthropologist Paul Farmer (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2268778/), which was pretty much the only time I've ever seen Tumblr-SJW like reasoning published in a scientific journal. The authors took it in stride and duly responded to all of the criticism (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2290816/), but of course the controversy continues to this day (Farmer's AIDS And Accusation is actually a good overview of the subject, though the actual scientific experiments disprove his thesis).
And while I wouldn't stake my life on a Western blot
Millions of people do, at least for this particular Western Blot.
Does this idea of isolated initial introductions of HIV that failed to thrive until the late 70s make sense?
On some level, yes, and there's a few reasons. First, you need a fairly substantial population of infected people for a disease to really take off into the log phase. Second, people can be infected for years without showing symptoms (in fact the time between infection and seroconversion is incredibly variable - for one strain common in Haiti it was around 5-7 years on average). Third, because of the state of public health at the time (remember molecular biology was still in its infancy), it seems sensible that this wasn't well detected until clusters of the disease began to take off; AIDS really became a public health concern in the US in 1981, when a group of doctors published a morbidity and mortality report with the CDC about 5 gay men who died of pneumocystis (which they'd only seen in transplant patients before, I believe).
The NY Times piece implies that gay men were having a lot more sex in the late 70s than in the early 60s. Is that actually true? I know the record on this for straight people is not so clear.
This I don't actually know much about.
Eric Mukherjee, MD PhD
Washburn Rural High School, 2005
Brown University, 2009
Medical Scientist Training Program, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, 2018
Intern in Internal Medicine, Yale-Waterbury, 2018-9
Dermatology Resident, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 2019-

Member Emeritus, ACF
Member, PACE
Writer, NAQT, NHBB, IQBT

"The next generation will always surpass the previous one. It's one of the never-ending cycles in life."

User avatar
Nabonidus
Wakka
Posts: 113
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Nabonidus » Tue Jul 21, 2015 6:12 pm

...yeah, that was some pretty terrible (and kind of insensitive) phrasing on my part, sorry. I'm not even sure why I mentioned the western blot in particular; I meant to say "I wouldn't have complete trust in an HIV diagnosis done on stored tissue samples from the sixties", since according to my research for the tossup there has been a lot of debate over some of the retroactive diagnoses for early AIDS cases. Tissues from David Carr, an English guy who died in 1959, were tested positive by some researchers and negative by others. But I'm not sure why this was the case.
Derek So
McGill

User avatar
Sima Guang Hater
Auron
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Sima Guang Hater » Tue Jul 21, 2015 6:14 pm

Nabonidus wrote:"I wouldn't have complete trust in an HIV diagnosis done on stored tissue samples from the sixties", since according to my research for the tossup there has been a lot of debate over some of the retroactive diagnoses for early AIDS cases.
That's very reasonable; I know there are issues with handling. I think this particular case was seen as very strong because all nine proteins in the western blot tested positive, but there's still some issues with that of course.
Eric Mukherjee, MD PhD
Washburn Rural High School, 2005
Brown University, 2009
Medical Scientist Training Program, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, 2018
Intern in Internal Medicine, Yale-Waterbury, 2018-9
Dermatology Resident, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 2019-

Member Emeritus, ACF
Member, PACE
Writer, NAQT, NHBB, IQBT

"The next generation will always surpass the previous one. It's one of the never-ending cycles in life."

User avatar
theMoMA
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5662
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 am

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by theMoMA » Tue Jul 21, 2015 7:17 pm

For what it's worth, I thought that was a very, very interesting idea for a tossup. And this discussion has been enlightening as well. Kudos to all involved.
Andrew Hart
Minnesota alum

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6514
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: Chicago Open History discussion

Post by Cheynem » Tue Mar 13, 2018 1:26 pm

When will Jordan do CO History
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

Post Reply