text:
Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Evidence in the fight against anti-vaccine movements

Introduction
Despite the common impression that anti-vaccination movements emerged through the Internet, they arose as soon as vaccination started being popularised. The vaccine against smallpox in the 1800s faced immediate hostility, seen as ‘unchristian’ and a violation of people’s personal liberty. Although the ways of expressing and spreading this opposition have evolved, the motives behind it today are still the same, opposing public health and medicine to civil liberty and choice.

Biology
Biological evidence promotes vaccination: the larger the vaccinated population, the better.

Yellow Fever
Yellow Fever is a disease prevalent in Africa that can be fatal, involving kidney deterioration and jaundice. It does not have any specific treatment and is responsible for 30,000 deaths every year, with a of 50% or higher in severe cases. Being spread by mosquitoes, it cannot be eradicated, hence the importance of vaccination to reduce the number of its victims. Research has shown that the 17D (YF-17D) vaccine is efficient after 10 days in 95% of the patients, lasting for up to 30-35 years. Although the recommends a single vaccination, study has shown that its efficiency is limited (with only 50.4% of Malian children still seropositive after 3-5 years), suggesting a second administration is required to reach an 80% immunity of the population, preventing yellow fever outbreaks.

Some evidence in the biological domain however shows harmful effects of the vaccine. Several pathologies have been linked to this vaccination, such as transverse myelitis, encephalitis , and peripheral facial paralysis. Nevertheless, the vaccine remains the most efficient way to prevent yellow fever and its adverse effects are very low, going from 0.4 to 0.8 cases per 100 000 vaccines.

Vaccine efficacy
Vaccine efficacy is calculated according to the difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated people who catch a disease. According to the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, is 90% effective against polio for two doses (99-100% for three doses), making the US polio-free since 1979, the vaccine against chickenpox is 90% effective (two doses), and  vaccine is about 93% effective for one dose (97% for two doses) at preventing measles, leading to a 99% reduction of cases in the US.

Biological quantitative evidence therefore largely promotes (compulsory) vaccination, as the vaccines administered often have very high efficacy rates and help stop the spread of (or even eradicate) diseases. The few biological evidence used by the anti-vaccine movements often aims to show the causality between certain vaccines and diseases or infant deaths. However this evidence is often flawed or irrelevant statistically, compared to the number of lives saved by vaccination – preventing 2 to 3 million deaths every year - raising nevertheless ethical questions about the 'collateral damage' of vaccination.

Ethics
Ethics focus mainly on qualitative evidence concerning people's freedom and safety, presenting arguments that tend to support optional vaccination.

Philosophy
Philosophy in Ethics prompts reflection on what can and cannot be done, representing anti-vaccination movements' main focus. Their concerns oppose utilitarianism and consequentialism, highlighting the risks of vaccination for individuals rather than the overall population's safety. The example of Andrew Wakefield and the Lancet MMR autism fraud illustrates this. His study in the ’90s falsely stated that autism was a side effect of the MMR vaccine, resulting in an epidemic of rubella in the USA, showing the dangers of anti-vaccination movements, harming the population's health. Furthermore, anti-vaccine activists question the government’s right to force an individual's vaccination to attain herd immunity, despite refusal, leading to cases like Henning Jacobson's trial in the 20th century. Anti-vaxxers perceive vaccination as an invasion of autonomy and freedom, especially of children's rights, asking when a parent’s objection can be overcome.

Religion
Religion is another central matter in Ethics, the freedom of belief being a fundamental right. Vaccines were long seen as evil, being considered « unnatural ». Christianism for instance rejects vaccines containing embryonic origins derived from aborted foetuses, considered morally incompatible. Islam on the other hand, is opposed to certain vaccines that contain traces of pork gelatine, not being halal. Those reasons are hard to overcome in movements to fight anti-vaccination as they are more than evidence but beliefs.

Internet and Social Media
Finally, Ethics are involved in the role of the Internet and social media, which represents an increasing threat for vaccination. 43% of websites on Google associated to the key words « vaccination » or « immunisation » are led by anti-vaccination movements  supported by accounts like « Beware the Needle » on Youtube or Instagram, spreading fake news that feed conspiracy theories. These websites represent dangerous content within anyone's reach, discrediting vaccination and governments' intentions, failing their ethical responsibility to inform, in addition to endangering the population.

Public Health
Public health as a discipline is the science of promoting the population’s health as a whole. It plays a crucial role in solving tensions in the evidence proposed in various disciplines, but also within them. Overall, public health professionals try to fight the anti-vaccine movement.

Compulsory vaccines
Governments can enforce mandatory vaccines to avoid the resurgence of a disease by promoting herd immunity, based on evidence relying on principles commonly used in Public Health. The “harm principle”, developed by John Stuart Mill, declares that unvaccinated people could be a danger to society as spreaders of the disease. Additionally, the “precautionary principle” states that preventive measures must be taken when a country is threatened by a virus. These principles apply utilitarianism, prioritising the well-being of the majority rather than the individual's. Hence, evidence in biostatistics, showing that punctual negative effects are negligible in front of the overall success of vaccines, mirrors public health’s goal of assuring the population’s safety (sometimes at the expense of the individual's).

However, vaccine exemptions for medical, religious, and philosophical reasons exist, based on the right of the individual's choice, although their validity varies widely. In the United States, 43 states allow religious exemptions, while only 15 allow philosophic exemptions. Overall, public health does not consider much personal choice – which is one of the arguments used by anti-vaccination movements –, and some countries like the US seek to consider ethics more by imposing less compulsory vaccines.

Education
In the fight against anti-vaxxers, education plays a crucial role. Today 70% of parents go to the internet to educate themselves on vaccination, but the overwhelming amount of misinformation leads to a confused population, often deprived of valid evidence. To educate families, trained healthcare providers remind the dangers of certain diseases and explain herd immunity as well as the process of vaccines' commercialisation. Online education campaigns have also proved to be efficient, with 66% of parents and 88% of pregnant women raising awareness and checking up on their children’s vaccination after having seen such campaigns in Australia. These strategies reduce interdisciplinary conflicts, simply by educating people instead of depriving them from their free will.

Conclusion
Altogether, the fight against the anti-vaccination movement is far from finished, due to contradictory evidence between disciplines. Today, as the Covid-19 vaccines are facing “vaccine hesitancy” and misinformation, it is necessary for Public Health to gain the trust of the population in order to reach enough vaccination coverage.


text:
Talk:Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Evidence in the fight against anti-vaccine movements

Zoom meeting on November 20th:
Issue chosen: Power

Disciplines in health and environment and societies

possibilities: things related to gender, growing importance of teenagers in society (climate change, BLM, gender issues), assisted reproduction, surrogacy, BLM, contraception, 'artificial' meat, anti-vaccines/vaccination

Zoom meeting on November 24th:
Topic chosen: the anti-vaccine movements

Disciplines we could talk about: Power of education (lack of education), sociology (social groups impacte by this movement), power of religion, ethics, politics/power of government --> certain vaccinations mandatory, media studies? (the role of the internet - the communication on secondary effects of vaccines, polemics on cases where these secondary effects caused someone's death, etc.), conspiracy theories (discipline?) Power of media in the sociology discipline. Impacts sociology, social groups involved/impacted by anti-vccine movements. Disparities between countries. Those who have/don't have access to vaccines. Power of biology (power acquired by humans - now able to fight against viruses), epidemiology. The impact of lobbies - power of lobbies and their role in politics.

Conflict between biology (pro-vaccine) and social sciences/ethics (anti-vaccine movement and effects on society :education, media representation, politics, religion). Solution/middleground: Communication (by Education and medias). Power of education, how you can shift the anti-vaccine to pro-vaccine perspective

Conflict: can you make vaccination mandatory? Biology - yes

Social sciences/Ethics/Philosophy - can you force people, despite greater good, can you sacrifice individuals? + is are vaccines actually good for your body?

Education - see actual risks of vaccines, very contrasted with representation in the media

Maybe pick Truth instead of power?

links found by Rose:

https://ucl-new-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo-explore/fulldisplay?docid=TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1637568208&context=PC&vid=UCL_VU2&lang=en_US&search_scope=CSCOP_UCL&adaptor=primo_central_multiple_fe&tab=local&query=any,contains,anti-vaccine%20movement&offset=0

https://www-tandfonline-com.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/doi/abs/10.4161/hv.18371

WHO identifies the anti-vaccine movement as one of the top ten risks for global health: power of this movement

Conclusion of the zoom : We have to read a bit more past works to examine structures and then choose between Power of Truth for the focus of our study

After further discussion we've decided to change the Issue we had chosen: we are now doing Evidence in the anti-accine movement

Found this article which looks interesting: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1586/14760584.2015.964212 Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 20:24, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Article on the link between the anti-vaccine movement and ethics: https://digitalcommons.dartmouth.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1027&context=dujs Saucesoja (discuss • contribs) 18:34, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Article on current issues related to anti vaccine movement & covid 19 : https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landig/article/PIIS2589-7500(20)30227-2/fulltext. --Api20 (discuss • contribs) 16:52, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Zoom meeting on November 30th:

How to structure our Wikibooks chapter:

1) Biology - biological evidence of vaccines' efficiency

2) Ethics - talk about religion but not only (just ethics in general, philosophy etc.)

3) Education - solution? allows people to have a critical view, to understand what a vaccine is and not speculation about it in the media, learn to have reliable sources (like scientific ones rather than things found in social media)

Saucesoja will mainly focus on the biology paragraph, Api20  on the ethics one and Chopsticks21 on the education one.

Introduction: defining the movement + what is the evidence behind people reluctant to Covid-19 vaccinations?

So, I started working on the introduction and am finding sources that may interest you so I'll put them here:

For ethics: Durbach, N. They might as well brand us: Working class resistance to compulsory vaccination in Victorian England. The Society for the Social History of Medicine. 2000;13:45-62. ( vaccine = “unchristian” as it has animal origins + seen as violation of civil liberty)

and https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1586/14760584.2015.964212

For biology (evidence that vaccines are safe): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) Project Priority Studies. Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 10:14, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Also I created sections to organise the page a bit but feel free to change the titles of your sections if you want to be more specific as my titles are quite broad Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 10:57, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

SauceSoja and myself have decided to switch our roles paragraph-wise Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 11:57, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Okay so I am almost done with my paragraph on evidence in biology, tell me what you think! I will try and find some sources to have facts on vaccines in general and adverse effects as a sort of conclusion to my section to show that the discipline promotes vaccination (quantitative evidence --> data suggests small adverse effects and important decrease in the diseases in general). Feel free to edit! Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 11:57, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

 * Hello Chopsticks21, thank you for all your links, I will have a look at them!

Overall your work is clear and seems well-referenced, you make some good points. The introduction (although it might be a bit too long) gives a concise summary of the context. We could try to open up on what is happening today in the conclusion, regarding the Covid-19 vaccine. I just have a few suggestions to make on the biology part:

- you could explain some scientific terms such as "case fatality rate", to ensure that the reader understands everything, and also reexplain some scientific concepts such as "herd immunity", the condition on which a vaccine relies to work

- you have a lot of numbers and percentages, which is great because it supports well your idea, but the reader might sometimes feel a bit lost. You could add some sentences to explain them a bit more and summarise the main idea of your paragraph

- Finally, it could be a good idea to add a small conclusion, to show that scientific evidence is mostly quantitative.

I can see in your last message above that your work isn't totally finalised anyways, I am just giving you some first feedback on your work, feel free to take it into account or not! Apart from those points I found your work very interesting. Saucesoja (discuss • contribs) 18:43, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I just read your work & comments and I found it great. I agree with Saucesoja comments, maybe highlight a bit more the nature of the evidence in the biology part. I also re-phrased some sentences. Tell me what you think of it. As for me, I am currently reading articles on evidence from an ethical/ social view. I will follow on the questions that these statistics ask. I will put some links when I'm done. Api20 (discuss • contribs) 19:30, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Okay thanks for oth your feedbacks, I will try and explan that a bit further, I was just worried about the word count! Will take a look at your rephrasing too Api20! Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 12:58, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Okay, so I've added a sort of concluding sentence/paragraph introducing Api20's, tell me what you think! Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 13:19, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Saucesoja, I was thinking that on your paragraph on education, which is kind if the intermediate discipline to resolve these tensions, you could start off with the tensions saying that for biology and ethics, both internal and external tensions are at play, as evidence in biology suports vaccination (overall positive effect) but also has evidence that go against vaccination (infant deaths, secondary diseases). Likewise, I think that Api20 (correct me if I'm wrong) will conclude that there is a tendency to promote vaccination: utilitarism = for the greater good, as well as a dilemma: can you force people to get vaccinated/to vaccinate your children - dimension of selfishness, vaccine is effective if a majority of the population is vaccinated, protecting the unvaccinated, etc. Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 12:12, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Chopsticks21, you make a very good point!

After further research and discussion with the other members of the group, the third part will be more globally on public health policies and the government’s strategy to fight anti-vaccine movements. The role of public policies concerning vaccines is important, because as Chopsticks21 has mentioned, they have to resolve tensions between the approach to evidence in biology and ethics. The aim of this part is hence to show how the anti-vaccine movement can be approached from an interdisciplinary point of view. As their goal is mostly to promote the health of the population, public health policies base themselves mostly on scientific evidence and quantitative data. Therefore, public health aims to fight anti-vaccination movements.

There are two main parts:

1)	Mandatory vaccines to ensure herd immunity. Public health justifies this thanks to utilitarianism and harm principle: what is better for society overall and individually. However, vaccine exemptions can exist (eg religious reasons) --> interdisciplinary approach to evidence

2)	Education has an important role because: - the new generation isn’t necessarily aware of the importance of vaccination as they can’t see their negative effects (as vaccination has already eradicated some diseases) - overall not enough knowledge - to fight all the conspiracy theories and fake news on the internet Here again, bases itself mostly on quantitative data. Saucesoja (discuss • contribs) 20:48, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Some articles I'm going to use for my part on Ethics in the anti vaccine movement : - https://publichealthreviews.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1007/BF03391666.pdf -https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/ethical-issues-and-vaccines Api20 (discuss • contribs) 13:09, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Rose I encourage you to read the end of this article which I found very relevant for your part! https://publichealthreviews.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1007/BF03391666.pdf Api20 (discuss • contribs) 16:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I have posted my first draft under the Public Health part. I still have to change few things, like rephrasing some sentences and adding a conclusion. I am also aware it is too long. I'm waiting to see what you will write Api20 as you may repeat a few things I have said about ethics to see how I'll shorten it! And thank you for the link, I have reused it in my part. Chopsticks21, I had started my introduction with your idea at first (internal/external tensions) but as I repeated it later on it was too repetitive and long, tell me if you think I should change it. And give me back all your feedback! Saucesoja (discuss • contribs) 21:25, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I've started readng your part Saucesoja and so far it is very good. I think that the introductory part was good and I think you were right to mention the tensions later on in your paragraphs. I took the liberty of editing certain phrases I hope you don't mind (you can always change them back if you think they don't imply the idea you were looking to convey)! Also I think we should rephrase "take more into account ethics" at the end of your section onn Compulsory vaccines but can't come up with anything good to replace it... please edit it if you find a better wording! Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 12:14, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

 * Thank you for the edits, Chopsticks21, some sentences are clearer now! They haven't changed at all the ideas i wanted to convey. For the last sentence, I'll think about it and see if I find a new wording, even though yours is already good. Saucesoja (discuss • contribs) 14:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Api20 for your submission. The ideas are great! I m doing a little of rephrasing at the moment that I will continue later on. Do you tink you could perhaps include a phrase or two un utilitarism? because you explain the principle of it (greater good > individual) but don't mention the term. Thanks! Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 14:23, 11 December 2020 (UTC) No problem Chopstick I will look at this suggestion ! And the rephrasing is very goog thank you ! Api20 (discuss • contribs) 20:52, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

I was reading the part on "New issues" in ethics and thought it might fit better in the paragraph on education(/public health) or in the conclusion as it doesn't really involve any ethicl issues. Tell me what you think about it Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 18:39, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Zoom meeting on December 12th:
We decided that a better title would be "evidence in the fight against anti-vaccine movements" instead of "evidence in the anti-vaccine movements". Also it seems that all the history of the page has disappeared after changing its title (hopefully we had copied our text + discussion page before doing so) but to resume our respective contributions: Api20 has mainly worked on the ethics paragraph and collaborated with Saucesoja especially on the topic of social media, I mainly worked on the introduction and the paragraph on biology, whereas Saucesoja mainly worked on the paragraph on public health and education. Overall we also all found some interesting links that we shared with each other and helped others by critiquing in a constructive way our paragraphs and rephrasing edits over zoom meetings and our whatsapp groupchat. Our main issue now is the word count so we decided to trim our parts the best we could to keep only the most relevant part of our research. Next zoom planned on Sunday (tomorrow) Chopsticks21 (discuss • contribs) 19:47, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Api20, I think this article could be relevant for your part on religion and ethics. The “ethical and legal issues regarding vaccination” paragraph of the article explains how the components of a vaccine, such as porcine gelatin in the MMR vaccine, can be a problem for certain religions. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6122668/ Saucesoja (discuss • contribs) 19:59, 12 December 2020 (UTC) Hello thank you very much Saucesoja ! I will read it ! Api20 (discuss • contribs) 20:52, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello everybody, today I will rephraze my paragraph on ethics and talk a bit much about ethics in religion and on the Internet taking Saucesoja's part about technology ! (what we agreed on) I also found some important people in the anti-vaccine movement. By tonight you should be able to read the final shot ! And thank you for your links there were very interesting and useful! Api20 (discuss • contribs) 15:44, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

 * Hello Api20, I have read your final shot, you raise some very interesting points! I edited a few sentences in your text, to make them a bit clearer and to gain some space in the word count. Feel free to change back anything! For my part, I have gone over the public health section to make some adjustments, and I added a conclusion. Saucesoja (discuss • contribs) 00:26, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

December 14h: final zoom call to go over the whole page one last time

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
User talk:AmelieZ

Thanks! I copied some of my notes from the OneNote and also from my notes in my notebook to show the research I did in making my section under the sociology part

title: User talk:AmelieZ


text:
Free Knowledge Culture Calendar/January 13

Today in 2010 OpenStreetMap volunteers started the first disaster relief mapping project in response to a devastating earthquake having struck Haiti the day before. First recent aerial imagery of the situation had just become available; – within a week they had accomplished the unprecedented feat of providing ground teams with up-to-date, street-level maps of the disaster zone. This began a tradition of humanitarian usage of OpenStreetMap, carried on by groups such as the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team, Missing Maps, and other groups.


text:
Albanian/Possesives

 * përemri pronor

Singular

 * Masculine
 * My : im
 * Your : yt
 * His : i ty/i saj
 * Our : ynë
 * Your : juaj
 * Their : i tyre
 * Feminine
 * My : ime
 * Your : jote
 * Her : e tij/e saj
 * Our : jonë
 * Your : juaj
 * Their : e tyre

Plural

 * Masculine
 * My : e mi
 * Your : e tu
 * His : i ty/i saj
 * Our : tanë
 * Your : tuaj
 * Their : e tyre
 * Feminine
 * My : e mia
 * Your : e tua
 * Her : e tij/e saj
 * Our : tona
 * Your : tuaja
 * Their : e tyre

title: Albanian/Possesives


text:
User talk:Uclqjh0

i'll take care of it tomorrow but i think we have to reduce the politics part

we need to reduce the word count, i this we should remove the part on the movie because it's not on the media nor on the political part, we have already reduce the historical part so maybe see in the politics and media ?

title: User talk:Uclqjh0


text:
Talk:Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Power in Contraception

Dates of Group Meetings
November 20, 2020 - brainstormed and chose a topic, brainstormed disciplines

November 26, 2020 - finalized disciplines (History and Pharmaceutical Sciences), divided who would do which disciplines

December 4, 2020 - met with our "discipline partners" to divide up the work within our disciplines, discuss content in multidisciplinary perspective

December 12, 2020 - met as a group to combine our individual sections together, discussed interdisciplinary ideas and tensions to use in our conclusion

December 13, 2020 - met as a group to review and edit, wrote introduction and conclusion as a group

Purpledinosaur17 (discuss • contribs) 09:49, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Group Contribution
Introduction: written by all members

Pharmaceutical Science: written together by Atta and Bonnie

History: written together by Amanda and Heloise

Conclusion: written by all members

Grammar Edit: all members contributed

Purpledinosaur17's first draft
(numbers in brackets indicate references that were added in the chapter)

Power in pharmaceutical science can be seen in the research related to the contraceptive pill. Women are somehow responsible for the burden of contraception (as evident in the vast variety of female contraception drugs available), yet women have to deal with the various side effects associated with contraception. (1) These include, but are not limited to headaches, nausea, mood swings, and more serious effects such as blood clots and breast cancer. (2) One study on the use of hormonal contraception by women found that it positively led to use of antidepressants. (3) This begs the question of why further research has not been done in the half century since the birth of contraception to reduce these side effects and make contraception safer for women. (1)

The issue lies in the sex bias present in the discipline of pharmaceutical science. Especially when it comes to drug research, most are conducted and carried out on men, without any regard for how the two sexes might react differently. (4) Because of this, the recognition of health problems, as a result of a drug specific to women, has been slow. Nancy Krieger posed this question, ‘Why, for four decades, since the mid-1960s, were millions of women prescribed powerful pharmacological agents already shown, three decades earlier, to be carcinogenic?’ (5) This lack of knowledge can also be seen specifically in contraception. The Pearl Index was created in 1933 by Raymond Pearl, a male biologist, to calculate the effectiveness of contraceptive drugs in preventing pregnancy. Still used today, the Pearl Index uses equations that do not factor in the side effects women experience taking the drugs. (6)

Purpledinosaur17 (discuss • contribs) 09:49, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Beans2002's first draft
The contraceptive pill, the revolutionary invention playing a significant role in female sexual liberation, and gender equality, may not be as feminist as we thought. Thus far, the two viable methods of male contraception include condoms and vasectomies.1 With the prevalence of unwanted pregnancies, the lack of effective and reversible male contraceptives is questionable.

The male contraceptive pill has been researched, in which results indicate that hormone regimens that induce azoospermia, the lack of viable sperm in the semen, prove to be very effective in pregnancy protection, comparable with the female contraceptive pill. (1) However, the great extent of research in female oral contraceptives is unparalleled to that of males. (1) Given the fatal and erratic nature of the pill’s side effects for women, it is questionable why research in male oral contraceptives has not further progressed. In a WHO study testing one male hormonal contraceptive, it was found that androgenic common adverse effects included acne, mood changes, and abnormal liver function tests — all of which are homogeneous to side effects in the female pill; This product was then deemed unacceptable to users. (3) There are claims implying further testing has not been done due to the risk that may accompany long-term use, although the first large scale human trial on the female pill was carried out by Gregory Pincus in 1950s Puerto Rico before it was approved in the U.S., in which three deaths occurred. REF

It is therefore not presumptuous to view the power imbalance in gender in the field of pharmaceutical sciences as partly responsible for this issue. The underrepresentation of women in STEM indubitably leads to the implicit bias towards androcentric scientific studies — a form of indirect as well as direct coercion rooted in the social identity theory. The male agentic nature of scientific research has led to an invisible advantage for male scientists and reticence in female, and therefore the evident bias towards progressive studies in female contraceptives, rather than male, despite the extensive opposing justifications.

women underrepresentation + proof that female scientists are less favoured. subconscious rooting for their own gender leads to implicit bias (social categorisation/identity bias) — indirect coercion. shows reticence in women. male agentic traits + androcentrism

144.82.8.123 (discuss) 15:36, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Caprithai's first draft
Through in-depth examination of source materials and being a key resource for how we construct opinions on historical landmarks, History as a discipline allows us to look at how we view the chronologies of contraception in a way that shapes our contemporary views on the subject. Yet as we use History as a powerful tool, unequal balances of power within the discipline distort how the history of contraception can be understood.

Within History there is an enduring gender bias in academia that sees the lack of female presence in reading lists, source syllabi and conference panels that discuss the specifics of what is taught within the curriculum; history in academia remains largely male. Only 20.8% of history professors in the UK are women even though 40% of overall staff are women. (in studying the history of contraception, because of a male majority there is less of a women’s voice and women’s perspective, curriculum looks more towards facts and events rather than personal narratives and subject these narratives to a generalisation of all women/women’s movement - with a female perspective on the subject allows more diversity of thought as their positionality brings along with them a experiential connection and understanding rather than just academic.) There have been efforts to dismantle these gender biases with the discipline, where more women are encouraged to pursue research and be present during discussion through holding sessions and offered fellowships. (we can say in a sense that the gender disparity is improving as contemporaries are aware of this institutionalised bias) However, this indirect coercion will continue if the industry remains dominated by men who hold the most senior positions, thus those in higher positions of power have greater control over the academic narrative.

The sources we draw upon are dominantly male → the rhetoric used to describe contraception construed its reality as the history presented needed to be beneficial to men. For the benefit of men, the history and presence of the pill needed to be digestible for their palette showing that their traditional family structure’s stability would be protected and the freedom of choice given to women did not threaten their male dominance. As such the language used to describe the pill in historical accounts are ones that are still perpetuated by historians and wider society today. Describing the pill as ‘purveyors of vice and sin’, ‘a threat to corrupt society’ and the need to protect ‘religious liberty’ was used as a strategy that still constructs our subjectivities. These kinds of implementations produce power where narratives that support the pill/contraceptives get dismissed or removed, replaced with distrust and conspiracy. --Caprithai (discuss • contribs) 15:41, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

--144.82.9.13 (discuss) 13:09, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

lolo9960's first draft
History as a discipline is written and re-written by historians who base themselves on primary sources and try to provide the most accurate account possible of the events. Historical positivism is the idea that primary sources are seen as the absolute truth by the academic field. For obvious socio-financial reasons, the access to higher education is still very white and very male. Two years ago, an applied history conference took place in Stanford featuring 30 executives, exclusively white males. What if the primary sources that historians use were the result of a western-centered, male-centered vision that has always gained the upper hand on what has been chosen to be told and the way it has been told ? History relies on people’s perceptions and the society’s way of experiencing and recalling events (objectivity in history dr Saul kundra 2017 page 1), but in a society where the prevailing perception is the male’s one, it is obviously difficult to be completely objective. There most definitely is an indirect, institutionalised form of power (Bachrach, P. & Baratz, M. (1970) Power and Poverty: Theory and Practice (New York, Oxford University Press)., p.33) within History, held by a certain group of people, which unconsciously stifles the voices of the minorities and sometimes generates a lack of collective truth and accuracy.Fortunately, we observe a paradigm shift thanks to which more and more women have the opportunity to express their voices on history. For example in ‘reproductive rights and wrongs, the global politics of population control and contraceptive choice’, Besty Hartmann tackles the until then undiscussed issue of the pressure that can be put on some women in several countries and socio-economic groups, by powerful figures that provide them contraception ‘often in an unsafe manner, for their own objectives, which are fundamentally disempowering of women and of poor people generally’ (Barbara Klugman, 1991, page 71/72).

lolo9960 (discuss • contribs) 15:37, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Introduction draft
The contraceptive pill, the revolutionary invention playing a significant role in female sexual liberation and gender equality, may not be as feminist as we thought. As a divided issue, it’s research in pharmaceutical sciences and portrayal in the history discipline offer a varied and interdisciplinary perspective on this controversial issue. Their contrasting scientific and subjective approach highlight tensions between the disciplines and how we approach the issue of power. When combined they offer a more comprehensive view on the causes and impacts of power in the issue of contraception.

Conclusion drafts/ideas
- with a more objective balanced equal less biased opinion in pharm sci — research can be done to equalise the responsibilities of contraception

- increase in female representation in history shift the biased view + supply readers with objective truth sothey acc know whats going on

- ultimately leading to gender equality in this domain cus once ppl realise whats happening (when they read what historians right) theyll push more for male contra research (in pharm sci)

Interdisciplinarity is vital in the future of contraception. With a more objective approach from historians, the impartial truth of the implicit power imbalance in contraception is elucidated to the public. In a world where the supply and demand model is profoundly influential, this collective shift in view may lead to an increase in unbiased research in contraception as the public advocate for more female representation in the scientific community. Progressive pharmaceutical science research can therefore be done to equalise the responsibilities of the two sexes in regards to contraception, and thus ultimately advancing gender equality within this domain.

Introduction
The contraceptive pill, the revolutionary invention playing a significant role in female sexual liberation and gender equality, may not be as feminist as we thought. Currently, the two viable methods of male contraception include condoms and vasectomies. With the prevalence of unwanted pregnancies, the lack of effective and reversible male contraceptives is questionable.

The issue of Power within the topic of contraception is better understood from an interdisciplinary perspective. The methods of contraception were first created by male scientists in the mid 20th century. Contraception back then was a taboo method of birth control and even illegal for a time. Indirect coercion can be seen in the disciplines of history and pharmaceutical sciences, and together, they give a picture of Power in contraception.

Power in History
History as a discipline is written and re-written by historians' selectivity of primary sources aiming to provide the most accurate account possible of events. However within History, there is an enduring gender bias within the discipline that sees a lacking female presence in reading lists, source syllabi and conference panels that discuss the specifics of what is taught within the curriculum; history in academia remains largely male. In the UK alone there are only about 20.8% female history professors. In another example, a Stanford applied history conference featured 30 executives, exclusively white males. What if primary sources were the result of a western-male centred authority on what has been chosen to be told and the way it has been told? History relies on people's perceptions and society's way of experiencing and recalling events, but in a society where the prevailing perception is a male one, it is difficult to be completely objective.

History as a discipline allows us to look at how we view the chronologies of contraception in a way that shapes our contemporary view on the subject. Yet as we use History for understanding, unequal balances of power within the discipline distort how the history of contraception can be understood. There is an indirect, institutionalised form of power within History, held by certain groups of people, which unconsciously stifles the voices of minorities and potentially generates a lack of collective truth and accuracy. In studying the history of contraception, the male majority gives less space to women's voices and perspectives. The curriculum then bases more on facts and events rather than personal narratives, and subject these narratives to a generalisation of all women and the women's movement. A female perspective on the subject allows more diversity of thought as their positionally brings along with them an experiential connection and understanding rather than just an academic one.

Fortunately, there have been efforts to dismantle these gender biases within the discipline, where more women are encouraged to pursue research and be present during discussions. In this sense, we can say that the gender disparity is improving as contemporaries are more aware of this institutionalised bias. For example, in Reproductive Rights and Wrongs, the Global Politics of Population Control and Contraceptive Choice, Betsy Hartmann tackles the, until then, undiscussed issue of the pressure that can be put on some women in several countries and socio-economic groups by powerful figures that provide them contraception 'often in an unsafe manner, for their own objectives, which are fundamentally disempowering of women and of poor people generally.' However, this indirect coercion will continue if the industry remains dominated by men who hold the most senior positions, thus those in higher positions of power have greater control over the academic narrative.

Power in Pharmaceutical Sciences
Side Effects in Female Contraception

Power in pharmaceutical science is present in research related to the contraceptive pill. Women are often responsible for the burden of contraception (evident in the vast variety of female contraception drugs available), yet are subjected to various side effects associated with contraception. These include, but not limited to, headaches, nausea, mood swings, and more serious effects such as blood clots and breast cancer. One study on the use of hormonal contraception by women found that it positively led to use of antidepressants. Why has further research not been done in the half century since the birth of contraception to reduce these side effects and make contraception safer for women?

The issue lies in the sex bias present in the discipline of pharmaceutical science. Especially in drug research, most are conducted and carried out on men, without regard for how the two sexes might react differently. Because of this, the recognition of health problems, from a drug specific to women, has been slow. Nancy Krieger posed this question: ‘Why, for four decades, since the mid-1960s, were millions of women prescribed powerful pharmacological agents already shown, three decades earlier, to be carcinogenic?’ This lack of knowledge can also be seen specifically in contraception. The Pearl Index was created in 1933 by Raymond Pearl, a male biologist, to calculate the effectiveness of contraceptive drugs in preventing pregnancy. Still used today, the Pearl Index uses equations not accounting for the side effects women experience taking the drugs.

Research in Male Hormonal Contraception

Meanwhile, research in the male contraceptive pill indicate that hormone regimens that induce azoospermia, the lack of viable sperm in the semen, prove to be effective in pregnancy protection, compared with the female contraceptive pill. Given the erratic nature of the pill’s side effects for women, it is questionable why research in male oral contraceptives has not progressed further. A WHO study testing one male hormonal contraceptive, found that androgenic common adverse effects included acne, mood changes, and abnormal liver function tests — homogeneous to side effects in the female pill. Yet, this product was deemed unacceptable to users. There claims implied further testing had not been done due to risks associated with long-term use, despite the first large scale human trial on the female pill, carried out by Gregory Pincus in 1950s Puerto Rico before it was approved in the U.S., resulted three deaths.

It is therefore not presumptuous to view the gendered power imbalance in the field of pharmaceutical sciences as partly responsible for this issue. The underrepresentation of women in STEM indubitably leads to the implicit bias towards androcentric scientific studies — a form of indirect, as well as direct coercion rooted in the social identity theory. The male agentic nature of scientific research has led to an invisible advantage for male scientists and reticence in female, stemming the bias towards progressive studies in female contraceptives, rather than male, despite extensive opposing justifications.

--Caprithai (discuss • contribs) 14:19, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

References Formatting
Lets all use this resource to build our references.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/administration-and-support-services/library/public/vancouver.pdf

Scroll down to page 18 for citing online journal articles.

Final references edit: Purpledinosaur17

Purpledinosaur17 (discuss • contribs) 19:27, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

First Draft References from Grammar Edit
Purpledinosaur17 (discuss • contribs) 19:58, 13 December 2020 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Truth in Body Image

Collaboration
For this project we communicated frequently through a WhatsApp groupchat and weekly Zoom calls to distribute workload and discuss the progress of the wikibook chapter.

Technical issues
ATKuser035 - I edited part of the page without being logged in so the 4th contributor (contributing on 12th December at 9pm) was also ATKuser035.


text:
User:Ambrose Nnanna

Theatetus

title: User:Ambrose Nnanna


text:
User talk:Piscesmoodphase

Hi! I think it's a lot better and clearer than it was before, you refocused it well on the tensions between religious studies and policy makers rather than education. If you don't minds some suggestions, maybe after the sentence "On the example of the USA, Christianity still holds the authority as the largest single religious denomination in the country [21] and therefore has a major impact on the curriculum of sex education (SE)" I would include a sentence explaining that this is a form a indirect coercion that is beyond the policy makers/educators' control, something they just have to accept that influences their work. I know you mention it towards the end, but I think it would be good to bring up early on. Also, the sentence that ends with "which makes an infant more likely to sexually explore."I would change the word infant refers to a baby younger than 1 year old. Maybe use children or adolescents? --Avotoast (discuss • contribs) 15:40, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

title: User talk:Piscesmoodphase


text:
LMIs in Control/Applications/An LMI for Multi-Robot Systems/Consensus for Multi-Agent Systems

LMIs in Control/Applications/An LMI for Multi-Robot Systems/Consensus for Multi-Agent Systems

This application gives an instance of the use of LMIs in achieving consensus for multi-agent systems. More focus is placed on the flocking algorithm, which is one of the consensus algorithms extensively used in multi-robot systems.

Introduction
A robot swarm is a network of multiple robots working together as a unit to achieve an objective. In order for robots in a swarm to work together, they need to come to consensus/agreement on a number of parameters. A number of algorithms called consensus algorithms exist to serve that purpose. Consensus Algorithms are algorithms that allow a set of agents to reach an agreement. Various areas such as graph theory, control theory and matrix theory overlap when it comes to designing consensus algorithms for multi-agent systems.

Flocking Algorithm
The flocking algorithm is one of the consensus algorithms used in trajectory planning for multi-agent networks. The algorithm helps in maintaining separation, so that the agents do not collide, alignment, so that the agents have the same headings, and cohesion, so that the agents do not wonder far away from each other. The flocking algorithm can be represented in a graph network form, where the nodes in the graph represent the agents or individual robots, and the edges/links represent the nature of interaction between the nodes. Consequently. the interactions between the nodes can be Below is the general equation for a flocking algorithm.

$$\dot {v_i}-\sum_{ i=N_i}^n i = (v_i - v_j) + \sum_{ i=N_i}^n i \Delta_{r_i} V_{ij} (r_{ij})$$, where

$$V_{ij}$$ is the artificial potential function

$$n $$ is the number of robots

$$\dot {v_i}$$ is the input/acceleration control

$$r_{i}$$ is the position vector of robot $$i$$

$$r_{ij} = r_i - r_j$$, which is the distance between two neighboring robots

Mathematical Model:
Before we begin, we need to obtain a state space representation for our system. Based on observation, it can be deduced that the general form of a consensus algorithm bears some resemblance to the state space equation. The general equation for a consensus algorithm in terms of the Laplacian matrix is:

$$\dot{x} = -Lx$$, where $$L$$ represents the Laplacian matrix.

Comparing the above equation to the state space equation, $$\dot{x} = Ax$$, we notice that the $$A$$ has been substituted with a $$-L$$.

The A, B and C matrices are represented as diagonal blocks because of the decentralized nature of the control framework. Each block in the A, B and C matrices is associated with its corresponding state, input, or output vector.

$$

\begin{align} \ A &= \begin{bmatrix} \ a_{11} & a_{1n} \\ \ a_{n1} & a_{nn} \\ \end{bmatrix}&

\ B = \begin{bmatrix} \ b_{11} & b_{1n} \\ \ b_{n1} & b_{nn} \\ \end{bmatrix}&

\ &C = \begin{bmatrix} \ c_{11} & c_{1n} \\ \ c_{n1} & c_{nn} \\ \end{bmatrix} \end{align} $$

x, u and y represent the state, input and output vectors respectively.

$$

\begin{align} \ x &= \begin{bmatrix} \ x_1 & ... &x_n \\ \end{bmatrix}^T &

\ y &= \begin{bmatrix} \ y_1 & ... &y_n \\ \end{bmatrix}^T &

\ u &= \begin{bmatrix} \ u_1 & ... &u_n \\ \end{bmatrix}^T & \end{align} $$

Further Discussion:
In Elham Semsar-Kazerooni and Khashayar's paper, "Optimal Consensus Seeking in a Network of Multi-Agent Systems", further work was done through a series of variable substitutions and other mathematical operations to obtain the an LMI as seen below. For more information on the LMI formulation procedure, and the details of the variables in the above LMI, please visit follow the link in the reference section to review the paper.

Objective: $$ \min trace(P) $$.

Subject to::

$$ \begin{align} \ \begin{bmatrix} \ \gamma & \bar{S}^*ZQ^{1/2} & \bar{S}^*W^*R^{1/2} \\ \ Q^{1/2}Z \bar{S} & -I & 0 \\ \ R^{1/2}W \bar{S} & 0 & -I \\ \end{bmatrix} \ < 0, \end{align}

$$


text:
LMIs in Control/Matrix and LMI Properties and Tools/Change of Subject

LMIs in Control/Matrix and LMI Properties and Tools/Change of Subject

A Bilinear Matrix Inequality (BMI) can sometimes be converted into a Linear Matrix Inequality (LMI) using a change of variables. This is a basic mathematical technique of changing the position of variables with respect to equal signs and the inequality operators. The change of subject will be demonstrated by the example below.

Example
Consider $$A \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times n}, B \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times m},K \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$$, and $$Q \in \mathbb{S}^{n}$$, where $$Q > 0$$.

The matrix inequality given by:

$$QA^{T} + AQ - QK^{T}B{T} - BKQ < 0 $$ is bilinear in the variables $$Q$$ and $$K$$.

Defining a change of variable as $$ F = KQ $$ to obtain

$$QA^{T} + AQ + - F^{T} B^{T} - BF < 0$$,

which is an LMI in the variables $$Q$$ and $$F$$.

Once this LMI is solved, the original variable can be recovered by $$ K = FQ^{-1}$$.

Conclusion
It is important that a change of variables is chosen to be a one-to-one mapping in order for the new matrix inequality to be equivalent to the original matrix inequality. The change of variable $$F = KQ$$ from the above example is a one-to-one mapping since $$Q^{-1}$$ is invertible, which gives a unique solution for the reverse change of variable $$ K = FQ^{-1}$$.


text:
Talk:Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Evidence in the Research and Diagnosis of Depression

=26th November=

-Creation of a WhatsApp group to facilitate discussion

-Discuss our interests, topic ideas...

@Anarmi632

=Zoom meeting notes 1: Ideation (3rd December)= - We met with our seminar leader to discuss possible ideas for our Wikibooks chapter.

- We had started off thinking we would do a combination of social and natural sciences but were unclear about which exact topic this is.

- Initially, we wanted to do evidence within amnesia or Alzheimers, possibly with the examination of interdisciplinary issues within the legal system as a result.

- Our seminar leader seemed to like the idea.

- However, as we researched a bit more, we decided through a later meeting on the same day that there did not seem to be enough relevant sources.

- We then decided to change to depression as a tangentially related topic, as it had a lot of research on it across different disciplines, allowing us to compare evidence within each discipline and find an interdisciplinary issue.

(RandomOmellette123)

= Zoom meeting notes 2: Role distribution and creating outline (7th December)=

- Global discussion on depression: symptoms, causes, people concerned by it, approach to it by the scientists but also by the society

- Choice of the three disciplines: sociology, psychology and biology.

- We discovered that these three disciplines were really interlinked for the diagnostic and for the study

- Distribution of the different parts : @RandomOmellette123 does biology as well as the introduction and conlusion of the evaluating evidence section, @Write&Leave does psychology and the body paragraph of the evaluating evidence section, and @Anarmi632 does sociology and the general introduction.

- We talk about the approach of depression : evidence in diagnostic or in the study of depression?

(@Write&Leave)

=Zoom meeting notes 3: Writing and editing (12th December)=

-Discussing about the final title for the chapter

- Finalising our text: last updates, edits, referencing errors, checking grammar...

-Starting to put our text from the google doc to the wikibook

-Discussing how we could improve the last part about the evaluation of evidence

-Searching for pictures to implement in our chapter

@Anarmi632


text:
LMIs in Control/Matrix and LMI Properties and Tools/Congruence Transformation

LMIs in Control/Matrix and LMI Properties and Tools/Congruence Transformation

This methods uses change of variable and some matrix properties to transform Bilinear Matrix Inequalities to Linear Matrix Inequalities. This method preserves the definiteness of the matrices that undergo the transformation.

Theorem
Consider $$ Q \in \mathbb{S}^{n}, W \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$$, where $$\operatorname{rank}(W) = n$$. The matrix inequality $$Q < 0$$ is satisfied if and only if $$WQW^{T} < 0$$ or equivalently, $$W^{T}QW < 0$$.

Example
Consider $$ A \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times n}, B \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times m}, K \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times p}, C^{T} \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times p}, P \in \mathbb{S}^{n}$$ and $$ V \in \mathbb{S}^{p} $$, where $$P > 0$$ and $$V > 0 $$. The matrix inequality given by

$$

\begin{align} \ Q &= \begin{bmatrix} \ A^{T}P + PA & -PBK + C^{T}V \\ \ * & -2V \\ \end{bmatrix} \ < 0, \end{align} $$

is linear in variable $$V$$ and bilinear in the variable pair $$(P.K)$$. Choose the matrix $$\operatorname{diag}(P^{-1},V^{-1})$$ to obtain the equivalent BMI given by

$$

\begin{align} \ WQW^{T} &= \begin{bmatrix} \ P^{-1}A^{T} + AP^{-1} & -BKV^{-1} + P^{-1}C^{T} \\ \ * & -2V^{-1} \\ \end{bmatrix} \ < 0, \end{align} $$

Using a change of variable $$X = P^{-1}, U = V^{-1}$$ and $$F = KV^{-1}$$, the above equation becomes

$$

\begin{align} \ WQW^{T} &= \begin{bmatrix} \ XA^{T} + AX & -BF + XC^{T} \\ \ * & -2U \\ \end{bmatrix} \ < 0, \end{align} $$

which is an LMI of variables $$X, U$$ and $$F$$. The original variable $$K$$ is recovered by doing a reverse change of variable $$K = FU^{-1}$$.

Conclusion
A congruence transformation preserves the definiteness of a matrix by ensuring that $$Q < 0$$ and $$W^{T}QW < 0$$ are equivalent. A congruence transformation is related, but not equivalent to a similarity transformation $$TQT^{-1} $$, which preserves not only the definiteness, but also the eigenvalues of a matrix. A congruence transformation is equivalent to a similarity transformation in the special case when $$W^{T} = W^{-1} $$.


text:
Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Evidence in Mindfulness and Personal Development

Introduction
Mindfulness was first presented in the Buddhist Satipatthana Sutta and has since grown in popularity as a technique said to lead to personal development, such as increased emotional awareness.

Today, the question remains as to how effective mindfulness is in personal development.

This article explores the evidence for mindfulness, and the different disciplinary methodologies for collecting this evidence, across the disciplines of philosophy, neuroscience and psychology. Some tensions exist between these disciplinary perspectives, including the lack of conversation between disciplines, inconsistent definitions and understanding of mindfulness-practise, and conflicting methodologies for gathering evidence. These issues lead to intra and interdisciplinary struggles in the formation of evidence and consensus.

Philosophy
The Satipatthana Sutta, the foundational text of mindfulness in philosophy, communicates the effects of regular mindfulness practise, including the overcoming of grief, suffering and rumination, and the attainment of Nirvana. The Satipatthana Sutta reached these conclusions using Guatama Buddha's personal experience of mindfulness. Early Buddhist texts claim that Guatama persistently meditated until he believed he had fully awakened. The evidence for the effectiveness of mindfulness was his Enlightenment. In terms of modern philosophical thought, Sam Harris explains how mindfulness creates a state of mind which is "undisturbed", thus improving the "character of our experience, and therefore, the quality of our lives". Philosopher Joseph Goldstein believes mindfulness practitioners become more accepting, peaceful, and less selfish.

In this discipline, philosophers gather evidence for the effectiveness of mindfulness through their experiences of direct participation in the practice. In his work, Harris stresses his "2 years on silent retreat" spent studying with monks. This touches on the importance of the oral tradition in gathering evidence within Buddhist philosophy. Whether or not practitioners develop an undisturbed mind as a result of mindfulness, they believe it to be an efficient technique, as they trust the experiences of their mentors. Furthermore, from an eastern perspective, Thich Nhat Hanh is often considered the Father of Mindfulness. A monk since age 16, he describes mindfulness as a “miracle” by which “we master and restore ourselves,” drawing upon his decades of experience practicing mindfulness.

Overall, philosophers cite their qualitative experiences as evidence for the effectiveness of mindfulness, rather than referring to scientific research which is now available to them. Philosophers' preference for their own disciplinary evidence may be attributed to the ambiguity in defining mindfulness in other disciplines, and that the benefits of mindfulness- such as 'Nirvana'- are hard to measure quantitively in neuroscientific research.

Neuroscience
Quantitative neuroscientific evidence demonstrates the personal impacts of mindfulness. Such evidence is vital in understanding the relationship between mindfulness meditation, an individual's self-perception, and their emotional processing. Neuroscientists study what they define as formal mindfulness- individuals practise specific exercises meant to stabilise their awareness of the present.

Neuroscientists use evidence of functional changes in brain activity to infer a causal relationship between mindfulness and cognitive processes relating to specific neural pathways. Berkovich-Ohana (2011) used electroencephalography (EEG) to compare three groups of mindfulness-meditators (long-term, intermediate, and short-term), with non-meditators. More experienced meditators had lower gamma wave frequency/activation in their Default Mode Network (DMN), a region linked to self-processing and 'mind-wandering'/attention. Mindfulness-practise also linked to enhanced gamma activity in posterior regions, including the temporal lobes, indicating heightened sensory awareness. All changes represented long-term brain functions, strongly observable in meditative states, but also visible during participants' resting states. This evidence suggests that the personal impact of mindfulness (e.g. emotional awareness/regulation) is the result of long-term changes in neural activity in the DMN and posterior regions, related to awareness and consciousness.

Holzel et al. (2010) studied structural brain developments in participants who partook in a Mindfulness-based stress reduction programme (MBSR), using MRI scans. The imaging indicated increased grey matter concentration (development of neurons and neural networks) in the left hippocampus and the posterior cingulate cortex of the MBSR group, associated with emotional processing, responsiveness to stress, and cognition and self-awareness, respectively. This research demonstrates the structural effects of mindfulness, corresponding with its impact on emotional regulation.

In contrast with philosophers, neuroscientists take a predominantly quantitative approach to mindfulness, which standardises participants personal development. Although a quantitative approach precisely measures the impacts of mindfulness, it does not encompass the subjectivity of the experience like philosophy does. Additionally, analysing changes in the brain fails to consider that the impacts of mindfulness may have varying behavioural manifestations across individuals.

Western Clinical Psychology
In contrast with philosophy and neuroscience, psychological studies utilise two different definitions of mindfulness. The first emphasises awareness- the individual focuses on their internal presence. The second definition details the intentional practice of openness and care towards others and oneself. These definitions of mindfulness are fundamental for developing evidence to demonstrate its effects on individuals. However, evidence from individual studies has found that aiming to measure mindfulness using a binary definition creates a multitude of divided results. Regardless, several psychological studies still demonstrate positive changes in behaviour, including increased hopefulness and decreased anxiety.

The methodology in gathering evidence for mindfulness within psychology is both quantitative and qualitative. One frequently used method of analysis is the Kentucky Inventory Mindfulness Scale (KIMS), which has a self-reporting evidence scheme, and is replicable, to enable efficient statistical analyses. The Mindfulness Awareness and Attention Scale (MAAS) is another questionnaire, which creates correlative understanding whilst incorporating qualitative methods through its' self-reporting schemes. Christopher et al. (2009) analysed the progress in personal development whilst examining the use and cross-cultural applications of western mindfulness using these methods. In examining Thai and US undergraduate students, they found that Thai students demonstrated a more cohesive understanding of mindfulness, as reflected in their KIMS results. This highlights different cultural approaches to mindfulness- the immersion of the practice in Thai culture, and the 'intermittent' mindfulness experienced in western psychology. The MAAS scale obtained similar results surrounding the two groups' personal development and their conceptualisation of mindfulness.

Differing definitions of mindfulness and methodology within psychology alter the evidence created within the discipline; an exhibition of this is the contrasting results of a study performed by Carmody et al., which detail that the evidence of mindfulness can be 'disidentification' which opposes the evidence of decreased anxiety, the result of a study by Sears. Furthermore, the combination of qualitative and quantitative methods used in psychology utilises techniques from philosophy, and the scientific method in neuroscience, in the attempt to grasp the personal effects of mindfulness. However, the hybrid methodology does not include different disciplinary perspectives which prevent a necessary broader conceptualisation.

Conclusion
The lack of communication between disciplines means that scholars don’t share a common definition of mindfulness, nor a shared understanding of its effects, leading to tensions between disciplines. Due to the different approaches to evidence in philosophy, neuroscience, and psychology, no single discipline can fully conceptualise the effectiveness of mindfulness. Different methodologies, aims, and definitions of mindfulness in each discipline's research are the root cause of this conflict. Mindfulness is, therefore, an interdisciplinary practice, and should be treated as such in the collection of evidence. This may be done by combining methodologies and the understanding of evidence across disciplines to fully appreciate how mindfulness affects personal development using quantitative (standard questionnaires and brain scans) and qualitative data, which considers individuals' unique experiences with the practise.


text:
Talk:Scouting/BSA/Pets Merit Badge

hi

title: Talk:Scouting/BSA/Pets Merit Badge


text:
LMIs in Control/Matrix and LMI Properties and Tools/Finsler's Lemma

LMIs in Control/Matrix and LMI Properties and Tools/Finsler's Lemma

This method It states equivalent ways to express the positive definiteness of a quadratic form Q constrained by a linear form L. It is equivalent to other lemmas used in optimization and control theory, such as Yakubovich's S-lemma, Finsler's lemma and it is wedely used in Linear Matrix Inequalities

Theorem
Consider $$\Psi \in \mathbb{S}^{n}, G \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times m}, \Alpha \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times p}, H \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times p} $$and $$ \sigma \in \mathbb{R} $$. There exists $$\Alpha$$ such that

$$\Psi + G \Alpha H^{T} + H \Alpha^{T} G^{T} < 0,$$

if and only if there exists $$\sigma$$ such that

$$\Psi - \sigma G G^{T} < 0$$

$$\Psi - \sigma H H^{T} < 0$$

Alternative Forms of Finsler's Lemma
Consider $$\Psi \in \mathbb{S}^{n}, Z \in \mathbb{R}^{p\times n}, x \in \mathbb{R}^{n} $$and $$ \sigma \in \mathbb{R}_{>0} $$. If there exists $$Z$$ such that

$$x^{T} \Psi x, 0$$

holds for all $$x$$ ≠ $$0$$ satisfying $$Zx = 0$$, then there exists $$\sigma$$ such that

$$\Psi - \sigma Z^{T} Z < 0$$

Modified Finsler's Lemma
Consider $$\Psi \in \mathbb{S}^{n}, G \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times m}, \Alpha \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times p}, H \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times p} $$and $$ \epsilon \in \mathbb{R}_{>0} $$, where $$ \Alpha^{T} \Alpha$$ is less that on equal to $$\R$$, and $$R > 0$$. There exists $$ \Alpha $$ such that

$$ \Psi + G \Alpha H^{T} + H \Alpha^{T} G^T{T} < 0,$$

there exists $$\epsilon$$ such that

$$ \Psi + \epsilon^{-1} G G^{T} + \epsilon H R H^{T} < 0.$$

Conclusion
In summary, a number of identical methods have been stated above to determine the positive definiteness of LMIs.


text:
Talk:Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Power of gender in sport

Note on collaboration and contribution
Bearing in mind that the Wikibook discussion page is fairly inefficient collaboration tool that does not really suit modern style of communicating, we as group have collectively chosen to use alternative channels of communication. Given that, in order to provide some evidence of our joint collaborative effort, we have decided to prepare this short note that presents the development of our ideas and approaches in chronological order.

Wiki-book workshop: We have used this session to brainstorm about some possible topics to explore. We started the meeting by articulating our personal academic interests which luckily and conveniently happened to coincide. The willingness to explore power in some societies-related issue emerged naturally in the conversation. Initially we’ve expressed some interest in the geopolitical analysis of USA actions towards Kurds in the Middle East, but after a short discussion we have decided to leave it on due to the freshness of the issue and limited access to academic resources. Our attention was then pointed towards gender studies and gender inequality which presented to be not only relevant but also extensively researched. Almost immediately, we have all agreed that although this area of study is interesting, it is far too broad to approach it meaningfully without exceeding the 1200 words limit. With the intention of narrowing the topic down, we have decided to draw on our personal experience and knowledge. As a result, we have ended up choosing Power of Gender in Sport as our primary issue. Following this decision, we had a brief discussion on some possible disciplinary approaches that we could employ- at that time, however, we have made no commitments to any of them yet.

After this session, WhatsApp has become our primary channel of communication. We have also been holding in-person meetings every Monday.

Week 1:
 * In the first week we have decided to individually research the topic. The aim was to broaden our knowledge and explore different disciplinary approaches.
 * All members of our group have come across some interesting ideas and concepts which were shared in the group chat. We have ended up discussing mainly two topics:
 * 1) transgender people in sports (with the focus on power dynamics related to maintaining fair competition without discrimination)
 * 2) women in sports (with the focus on power structures in global markets and social organisation)
 * After the careful consideration, we have decided to settle on the second issue. From pragmatical point of view, we have figured that it would be easiest if we had approached the problem from three different disciplinary angles. The disciplines that were most frequently referenced in our conversations were business, biology, and feminist theory.

Week 2:
 * A discussion about the value of interdisciplinary approach that we had in our seminar group made us realize that we might have failed to identify the necessary tension between chosen disciplines. It prompted us to revisit our choices. As a result, we have decided to entirely drop the idea of exploring biology- the scientific/biological approach to the issue of gender equality in sports seemed to offer very little insight to the investigation of power relations. Instead we have chosen to focus on the role of education and sociology (which were chosen as a means to ascribing feminist theory to some academic disciplines). The business part remained the same, although we have had some struggles in isolating its theoretical approach- initially we have fallen into the trap of describing business theory in terms of sociological concepts- a trap which we later identified to be the disciplinary tension that we were looking for.
 * When our understanding of the issue became a little bit clearer- we have structured the contents of the chapter, and established some division of work, with each member of the group focusing on the different discipline.

Week 3:
 * Week 3 was the time when most of the proper writing took place.
 * Early on, we have adjusted the structure of the chapter. In the development phase, it turned out that points made in the education and sociology sections would be quite similar, and including both of them would not add any value to our work. With the intention to avoid repetition, we have decided to merge those sections together (leaving it under the name of sociology which presented to be sufficient to cover its contents). Thanks to that, we have saved some space for a concise introduction and conclusion.
 * With the deadline approaching, we have assigned additional tasks for each member of the group. Marius was chosen to ensure that our referencing fits the Vancouver style, Molly was appointed to work on editing and conclusion, and I was assigned to write this short note on our collaboration and contributions. which we proudly regard to be evenly distributed.


text:
Cognitive Science: An Introduction/Computational theory of mind

Most cognitive scientists are computational functionalists. This means that a being is in a mental state not because of the physical properties of the being, but in terms of the computations implemented with the physical properties. So having a belief, or planning, is defined not by some set of neural processes, but the functional algorithm those neural processes are implementing. This idea originated with philosopher Hilary Putnam in the 1960s.

Let's take some information processing machine as an example. We might be able to characterize its behavior in terms of a flow chart that describes how one state might lead to another state. At the same time, we can describe the machine in terms of its physical parts--it might be made of wood, or circuitry. The flow chart, in this example, might be the functional description of the system, and the description of the physical parts and how they interact would be the physical description of the system. This is how we tend to think of the difference between software and hardware in computer systems.

Likewise, as computational functionalists believe, you can describe human minds the same way. There is a functional description (at the cognitive level) of how the information interacts, and then there is a physical description of how the neurons interact. The neurons implement the functional system.

Crucial to this is that there can be multiple physical ways to implement the same function. You might do multi-column addition in your head, and I might too. We would both be implementing the same algorithm or function. But at some level of physical detail, your brain is doing it differently than my brain is. Taken to an extreme, any physical system implementing the right functional algorithm would have that mental state--even if it's a "computer" made of swiss cheese, if it's implementing the right algorithm, it would have beliefs, feel pain, or be conscious.

We use functional definitions outside of cognitive science. Let's take the concept of a bandage. A bandage might be defined as something that can be or is being used to stop bleeding or to hold a limb in place. Whether the bandage is made of leaves, linen, cotton, or some other material is irrelevant, as long as it can implement the function. Computational functionalists view mental processes the same way. What makes addition addition and consciousness consciousness is the algorithm being run, no matter how it's implemented.

Identity Theory
This is in contrast with identity theory, which attempts to describe mental states in terms of their physical makeup. The might say that pain involves c-fibres, for example. This means that any being without c-fibres cannot be in pain. This strikes many as implausible.

Behaviorism
Behaviorism defines mental states in terms of behavioral dispositions. Pain might be described as the tendency of a being to avoid the harmful stimulus, screaming in the presence of harmful stimuli, and so on. It has the benefit of being objective, but falls prey to other criticisms that most contemporary cognitive scientists see as damning.


text:
Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Power in tax policies

Introduction
In 2014, Oxfam came to a shocking conclusion: The 85 richest people in the world owned as much wealth as the poorest half of the entire world population. This report sparked a recurring debate about wealth inequality and how to effectively redistribute wealth. The strongest economy of the world, the U.S.A. do not set a good example for other economies in this regard: data has proven the growth of wealth inequality in the US since the 1970’s and has been further rising in recent years. Redistributive Policies are vital theories and concepts in the economical and political world to reduce inequality and to find a sustainable way of development, with a fair trade-off between growth and equity. One major issue in the design of redistributive policies is the conflicting influence of economists and political scientists on policy-makers. These policies differ in nature, but one constant tool used for reallocating wealth has been taxation. However, the extent to which taxation should be used as a tool for redistributing wealth has caused a divergence in opinions between economists and political scientists. On the one hand economists see taxes as one way of solving problems of market failure ,but remain cautious on the effects on economic growth. On the other hand, political scientists focus on the social aspect of taxes, which should be used to provide financial stability, in order to build an inclusive society. From where stem these diverging opinions on wealth redistribution and why does economical influence appear to have the upper hand in this debate?

The US corporate tax: a focus on growth or on redistribution
Economists argue that a decrease in corporate investments may occur when firms face higher corporate tax-rates. This prevents potential further growth of the labour demand, leading to higher productivity, employment and an increase of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). A lower corporate tax thus benefits the US economy by increasing economic competitiveness and capital investment, linked to an expansion of the corporate tax base and living standards across the country. Thus, in order to prevent a reduction of the GDP due to the possibility of offshoring to countries where the corporate tax rate is lower (Cayman Island and Singapore) than in the home country By keeping low corporate taxes, tax neutrality is facilitated, allowing decisions not to be based on taxes but rather on other economic reasons. An example of how a reduction in corporate taxes is beneficial to the economy is the ’Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 9. The previous 35 percent federal corporate tax did not exploit all the economic opportunities because the new corporate tax of 21 percent is expected to become a more powerful tool in boosting the economy. Thus, the overall wealth of the country would increase, enhancing general welfare along with it.

‘A crude distinction between Economics and Politics would be that Economics is concerned with expanding the pie, while Politics about distributing it’. In the 1970s, growth was prioritized, which led to ‘the growing concentration of income-generating assets in private hands’( ,p.14)and to a reduction of the total revenue of governments. The corporate tax, which is one way for the government to collect revenue, is used to redistribute wealth and correct market failures. However, to which extent political action must be taken to equilibrate economic exchanges has been largely discussed. The moral political concept of distributive justice defined as the “study of the morality of the distribution of economic goods and services”, is a key concept of J.Rawls’ theory. It states that without knowing our initial birth conditions, anyone would choose a fair distribution of wealth. How citizens think about wealth redistribution and equity nowadays is mostly due to their own sociocultural perception of poverty. For example, Americans have a strong belief in the principle of meritocracy; being rich only depends on your willingness whereas Europeans see poverty as an economic scourge where high corporate taxes would rebalance the injustice.

The meritocratic belief of Americans is not always reflected in their public policies. As citizens generally dislike passing laws calling for new taxes, politicians rarely tend to use tax policy as an advantage for their electorate and consequentially, the established tax system mainly designed by lawyers and economists, is never questioned. In comparison to investments in other public services, the effects of taxation on the individual are hard to grasp. This incertitude allows knowledgeable persons of interest to step into the discussion on law implementation and subsequently leads to the creation of more flexible laws for high-income groups. Big corporations are one group that hugely benefit from this. As taxation is a burning topic in our society, elected governments will prefer inaction to please potential future voters rather than explain how raising certain taxes could be beneficial to a large proportion of its electorate.

Conflict of power between economics and political science
The campaigning process in the United States to become senator or representative amounts to a concerning sum spent to endorse candidates. In 2020 the total amount spent on congressional campaigning alone is estimated at more than $7 billion. Thus, candidates do not have sufficient funds for their own campaigns (except if they are extremely wealthy), and rely on donations to support them. By providing substantial funds, donors can give a competitive advantage to a candidate by raising his/her public visibility through ads, campaign events and fundraising for more donors.

This implies that wealthy stakeholders, including big corporations, can lobby their way into policy-making, by sponsoring their prefered candidates with substantial funds. The American campaign system can therefore be compared to a market, where buyers invest in certain candidates, hoping to get returns on their investments through beneficial policy-making. Taking this economical approach to the problem, shows how donors use economic principles to shape tax policies: they use power in form of resource dependency, by solely funding candidates with shared economic beliefs.

As for any other policy issue, the power that political scientists can exert, to convince candidates to propose higher or lower taxes as part of their agenda, is to raise public awareness about the issue. This will build a strong electorate for a candidate advocating for higher or lower taxes. Hence, political science uses the overt dimension of power: power as decision-making. It enhances collective knowledge about the issue to the electorate, which in turn influences the candidates because it elects them.

We mentioned the difficulty of explaining how raising taxes can be beneficial for most voters, which would lead to power as resource dependency dominating over power under the form of knowledge.

Conclusion
We have demonstrated that in the US, the pure aspiration for economic growth does not benefit everyone. The involved lobbying of big corporations in tax policies has led to the debate being centered around economical implications instead of also considering political dimensions. Within a political process, it leads us to be aware of inequalities through awareness-raising-campaigns. Finally, providing more unbiased platforms, where the benefits and limits of taxation are explained, could provide a stage for economists and political scientists to present their views in a more collaborative manner and mitigate their conflict.