Since Google is pushing Collections towards new users, so I’m sharing this here even though it isn’t part of my…

Since Google is pushing Collections towards new users, so I’m sharing this here even though it isn’t part of my science collection. Here’s some help to get the most out of G+ for new users.

Comment on the original post.

Originally shared by Chad Haney

Adding you back: December 2015

If you just added me based on one of my Collections being recommended, let me introduce myself. I also have a few tips if you are new to G+. My main interest on G+ is science outreach. I’m a scientist and my science posts are often related to medical imaging (my area of research, which is often a recommended Collection). However, since I’m busy with work (and all work and no play makes me a dull lad) I post a fair amount of silly stuff too. Please introduce yourself in the comments. Taking a page from Richard Green, I would suggest you also give a link to what you consider your “showcase” post. So I and others know what you are about.

Out of curiosity for the long time G+ users, when is the last time you circled a new person?

One of the reasons G+ is so awesome is that you can become friends with people across the globe who share a common interest/passion. 

For the people new to G+, here are a few tips to help me and others add you back.

¤ Don’t Spam. If you create a Community, don’t send out invitations to everyone you have circled because a lot of them haven’t circled you back. It clogs up everyone’s notifications. Share public (see below) but don’t share directly with your circles all of the time. Again, this will clog up notifications. Sure, if something is important like an Amber alert but not every single post, especially if the recipient hasn’t added you back. People will mute or block you and that’s no way to start the great interaction on G+.

Please see the section

UPDATE about Google+ Community invitations: and Posting to Public and Notifying only certain people or circles:

http://goo.gl/UW5wV via +Jaana Nyström 

¤ Fill out your profile. If you just have your gender in your profile, I have no idea what your interests are and which of my circles I should put you in. If you are concerned about privacy, I think it’s safe to at least list your interest. I can’t assume everyone loves the   #detroitredwings and magnetic resonance imaging. If you look at the image below, Google has been letting spambots slip through their filters and they are spamming Communities a lot. Go to any decent size community, click on members and you’ll see a lot of blue heads with names that start with a punctuation mark.

¤ Don’t be a blue head, i.e., change your profile picture to something other than the default blue head. If you really don’t want to use your real picture, use a clever avatar. Personally, I’m not a big fan if you don’t use some type of portrait but I don’t hold it against people.

¤ Post a few things Public. If people can’t see what you posted, they have no idea if they would like the kinds of things you post. Again, they don’t know what circle to add you to.

¤ Interact! G+ (for me) is all about interaction. Engage other people. Comment on their posts. + 1 a post or picture if you can’t think of a comment but find the post/picture interesting. + 1 if you like or agree with a comment. Leaving simple comments like “cool” or “wow” are nice but aren’t really engaging. Try not to be shy, tell us what you really think.

¤ Don’t forget to credit people when you re-share. We all like a pat on the back right? For Chrome users, the Google Image search extension is super handy. http://goo.gl/M6yMd

¤ Please don’t be offended if I or others don’t add you back. Some of my G+nius friends have thousands of people circle them. It’s not possible to go through all of the profiles of people that have added them. If you follow the suggestions above, trust me, even some of the people that have reached the 5k limit for circled peoples, will make room for you.

¤ Finally, please don’t be a RAJEEV see link below. No body likes “hey how r u? want to chat?”

http://goo.gl/pb68v

¤ The majority of my posts are public and I rarely post to circles. However, the few circles that I do share to specifically and sometimes limited, are dogs, hockey, formula 1, and beer. Let me know if those interest you.

¤ Have fun. I look forward to exchanging ideas, humor, knowledge, and more! (Don’t get carried away with the and more part)

Sleep Paralysis

Sleep Paralysis

Stephanie Pappas writes an interesting article about sleep paralysis (SP) and the distress that occurs after one experiences sleep paralysis. I experienced SP quite a bit when I was younger. I can see where some might pursue supernatural explanations of SP.

Perhaps Chris Robinson or Zuleyka Zevallos care to dig into the journal article as I think the objective of the journal article was more on understanding the distress caused by SP. However, psychology is not my area by any stretch of the imagination.

Sleep Paralysis Postepisode Distress Modeling Potential Effects of Episode Characteristics, General Psychological Distress, Beliefs, and Cognitive Style

James Allan Cheyne and Gordon Pennycook

Clinical Psychological Science 2167702612466656, first published on February 12, 2013

http://cpx.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/02/12/2167702612466656.abstract

Originally shared by LiveScience

Sleep paralysis occurs when the brain and body aren’t quite on the same page when it comes to sleep.

http://oak.ctx.ly/r/4328g

Do you science? Are you in?

Do you science? Are you in?

Check out this HOA to ask questions about the Citizen Science project: The GMO Corn Experiment.

Read more here: https://experiment.com/u/n4zonQ

Originally shared by Biology Fortified, Inc.

Drs. Karl Haro von Mogel and Anastasia Bodnar will be talking about Biology Fortified’s exciting Citizen Science project: The GMO Corn Experiment. For more information or to join the project, see:

http://www.GMOexperiment.com

Still not much info and trouble brewing for Theranos

Still not much info and trouble brewing for Theranos

The WIRED story below reports on an article from the Wall Street Journal about Theranos having trouble living up to their claims. I was skeptical about the company when news hype circled about Theranos over a year ago.

Minimal volume with minimal information

https://plus.google.com/u/0/+ChadHaney/posts/Zd4UKZizmkP

There wasn’t much detail about the science behind their idea and that’s a red flag. The Wired article below even mentions peer reviewed journal articles. You’ve probably heard me and other moderator’s of the Science on Google+ community always tell ‘skeptics’ (often conspiracy theorists that call themselves skeptics), that only peer reviewed publications can be trusted when one has extraordinary claims.

I’ve written about skepticism already:

Skepticism doesn’t equal question all teh things

https://plus.google.com/u/0/+ChadHaney/posts/iXZqcz7bDqB

an hype with preclinical results:

Overselling preclinical results

https://plus.google.com/u/0/+ChadHaney/posts/UWn7Q9hTuHm

Finally, if you missed my piece on how drugs get to market, you might want to read:

Bench to Bedside

http://goo.gl/63mKa

http://www.wired.com/2015/10/theranos-scandal-exposes-the-problem-with-techs-hype-cycle/?mbid=social_gplus