One way to push the U.S. toward metric right now
I likened it to bilingualism since the accepted belief at one time was that it was detrimental to ones development for the same reasons you listed but brain studies have shown that not to be true so it would seem logical that someone fluent in both metric and customary could have the same benefits. It's just another language is it not? I don't know if anybody has done a study on the brains of people that fluent in both and those that only know one, I think it would be interesting.
As for why we should pressure other countries to adopt our form of weights and measurements, I don't know because they put pressure on us to learn theirs? Perhaps some reciprocation is in order on their end. Customary units are preferable for a lot of things, it's not going away and I don't know why people want to damn it to the dustbin of history. What about diversity? I don't see why STEM and medicine have to determine everything we do, the evidence shows that people will use metric for things where it has a better utility such as in those areas.
I think the problem is that American public education is so garbage that they can't teach anything well let alone metric.
So far the discussion has been on an intellectual level. Perhaps we need to look at this subject from a practical point of view??? Perhaps we can just look at light bulbs, something everyone is familiar with.
If we adopt metrics we'll find a metric light bulb won't screw into my bedside lamp. So now I either have to replace ALL the light fixtures in my home (including those in my flashlight and refrigerator, etc.), or buy a special adapter to try to fit the new bulbs in place. What's that you say? Just use both systems until the original fixture or appliance wears out (?)....my lamps, flashlights, (and etc.) won't wear out for many many years...will suppliers have to stock dual parts for decades? What about people who can't afford to go out and buy new items???
In the above example I've barely touched the subject of light bulbs and already there's a problem. And this is one of the tiniest and and simplest examples...imagine doing this with almost everything in your sight...it's unbelievably huge, and for those who can't grasp large numbers, perhaps look up at the stars at night for a comparison.
I don't know if anyone has determined the cost to change but it would be billions and billions. Instead let's do due diligence by making sure the kids in school today know how to convert and become familiar with conversions to avoid errors, and increase training and testing for people in health fields This was done in the '50s and again in the '70s when there was a push for metrics so there's no reason this can't be taught in classrooms today (or perhaps it already is).
The ability to understand and use different types of language in measurement is the same as learning two different spoken languages; it affects the user positively. If this were not the case we'd probably all be speaking Esperanto, but since we're not this bears out the decision by most people to avoid change unless there is an overriding positive benefit in sight, which in this situation, there is not, only huge added expense.
As for why we should pressure other countries to adopt our form of weights and measurements, I don't know because they put pressure on us to learn theirs? Perhaps some reciprocation is in order on their end. Customary units are preferable for a lot of things, it's not going away and I don't know why people want to damn it to the dustbin of history. What about diversity? I don't see why STEM and medicine have to determine everything we do, the evidence shows that people will use metric for things where it has a better utility such as in those areas.
I think the problem is that American public education is so garbage that they can't teach anything well let alone metric.
I must agree. Of the teachers I had throughout school I'd say perhaps a half dozen (not very metric I'm afraid) were good teachers who could really get students interested in learning, and who seemed interested in the students. The rest seemed to be marking time until the next escape to the teacher's lounge, and didn't show much interest in student's achievements (with the exception of teacher's pet of course).
But what's the answer?
If we adopt metrics we'll find a metric light bulb won't screw into my bedside lamp. So now I either have to replace ALL the light fixtures in my home (including those in my flashlight and refrigerator, etc.), or buy a special adapter to try to fit the new bulbs in place. What's that you say? Just use both systems until the original fixture or appliance wears out (?)....my lamps, flashlights, (and etc.) won't wear out for many many years...will suppliers have to stock dual parts for decades? What about people who can't afford to go out and buy new items???
In the above example I've barely touched the subject of light bulbs and already there's a problem. And this is one of the tiniest and and simplest examples...imagine doing this with almost everything in your sight...it's unbelievably huge, and for those who can't grasp large numbers, perhaps look up at the stars at night for a comparison.
I don't know if anyone has determined the cost to change but it would be billions and billions. Instead let's do due diligence by making sure the kids in school today know how to convert and become familiar with conversions to avoid errors, and increase training and testing for people in health fields This was done in the '50s and again in the '70s when there was a push for metrics so there's no reason this can't be taught in classrooms today (or perhaps it already is).
The ability to understand and use different types of language in measurement is the same as learning two different spoken languages; it affects the user positively. If this were not the case we'd probably all be speaking Esperanto, but since we're not this bears out the decision by most people to avoid change unless there is an overriding positive benefit in sight, which in this situation, there is not, only huge added expense.
If you don't have enough of a feel for metric units to recognize that an obviously wrong reading is, well, obviously wrong, then all the training in the world isn't going to help you. The only way to get a feel for it is experience, lots of it! It's obvious that with printing both customary and metric units, people will pay zero attention to the metric units, so under the current system people aren't getting a feel for those units. The way to do it is to give them that experience, to remove the customary crutch!
_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin
As for why we should pressure other countries to adopt our form of weights and measurements, I don't know because they put pressure on us to learn theirs? Perhaps some reciprocation is in order on their end. Customary units are preferable for a lot of things, it's not going away and I don't know why people want to damn it to the dustbin of history. What about diversity? I don't see why STEM and medicine have to determine everything we do, the evidence shows that people will use metric for things where it has a better utility such as in those areas.
I think the problem is that American public education is so garbage that they can't teach anything well let alone metric.
The research overwhelmingly shows that using multiple units for the same measurement creates confusion and mix-ups. Measurements and human languages are two totally different beasts. If you have any evidence other than speculation, we'd be happy to take a look.
And, actually, we spend more money per pupil than most other countries do (including developed countries). The problem with teaching multiple units like this, the metric system plus the fragmented customary units, is that it makes things more confusing for students. In order to tie all these different units together, you must teach conversion factors, increasing the difficulty. So before you can even get to actual measuring, you're already sinking most students by futzing around with redundant units. With metric only, you can teach the basic idea (milli- is 1/1000, kilo- is 1000/1, etc.), and get right to work. Instead, now we're wasting time futzing around with multiple units and conversion factors, which eats up classroom time.
_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin
that kind of thing has to be gradual. it takes generations and coordinated planning. it has to be consistent (or else the transition doesn't happen), but it can't be aggressive (or else there will be too much resistence). if it can't be consistent nationwide and in the long term (and patriotism in the u.s. does seem like a very significant obstacle to that), and if nobody is willing to implement a long-term plan (which nobody these days seems to care about, especially considering that politicians won't want to irk the patriotic crowd), then i think it's very unlikely that it's going to happen anytime soon, no matter what
conversion itself is very easy these days. you don't even need an app, just plain google. just google 4 in in cm and you get the answer right away. the real problem (besides near-total incompatibility between the two systems when it comes to tools and parts that require precision) is the intuitive feel, which does matter. and it's hard to learn if you're not a kid anymore
luckily the most important american unit (the inch) is pretty easy. very close to 2.5cm (exactly 2.54, when precision matters. still easy to remember). so, roughly, 4" = 10cm. other units get trickier, but inches are really the only american unit we do need to work with down south here in the other america (piping of all types, in particular, is all measured in inches afaik). for quick mental conversions just to get a rough estimate (like when watching an american movie or something), there are reasonable shortcuts. 3 feet = 1 yard ~ 1 meter, 2 pounds ~ 1 kilogram, 1 ton ~ 1 tonne, 2 fahrenheit up/down ~ 1 celsius up/down (all of these are closer to 0.9 for some reason, but rounding it up to 1 is usually good enough). and 2 miles ~ 3 kilometers
ounces and gallons though, i have no idea (it's pretty neat that 1 liter of water weighs exactly 1 kilogram. it can really come in handy sometimes). people's heights get very tricky to picture mentally (because small differences matter, and it's feet and inches combined). i just know that under 5 feet means "very short" and above 6 feet means "tall". absolute temperatures... i don't even try. i just know that f and c meet somewhere around -40, 0c (freezing point) is somewhere around 30f, standard room temperature (slightly above 20c) is somewhere around 70f, and 100f means "extremely hot weather" (somewhere around 40c). but if i want a number, i google it (because, like with people's heights, small differences usually matter)
there are actually some pre-metric units still in use here too (curiously, the symbol for one of them is @, so the name of that unit survives in popular usage as the name of that character in email addresses, which has no other usage or meaning in my language. in italian it's called a "snail" instead. cute! lol). but those units are totally obscure for anyone who doesn't work with cattle or crops (and they're probably falling out of use by now). sometimes people use informal pseudo-units like "fingers" (the width of an index finger), but i don't think there ever was a standard for those
another curious thing: did you guys know that the word "billion" actually means "trillion" in most countries? in my country it does mean a billion though. and it seems like the american meaning is gradually taking over globally (it has already been established as standard in the u.k.). i knew that there were places where it meant a trillion, but until a couple weeks ago i thought those places were the exception. in a few decades they probably will be, but so far they're not. so in most of europe, there are no billionaires. only "thousand-millionaires" or "milliardaires" instead. freaky
As for why we should pressure other countries to adopt our form of weights and measurements, I don't know because they put pressure on us to learn theirs? Perhaps some reciprocation is in order on their end. Customary units are preferable for a lot of things, it's not going away and I don't know why people want to damn it to the dustbin of history. What about diversity? I don't see why STEM and medicine have to determine everything we do, the evidence shows that people will use metric for things where it has a better utility such as in those areas.
I think the problem is that American public education is so garbage that they can't teach anything well let alone metric.
The research overwhelmingly shows that using multiple units for the same measurement creates confusion and mix-ups. Measurements and human languages are two totally different beasts. If you have any evidence other than speculation, we'd be happy to take a look.
And, actually, we spend more money per pupil than most other countries do (including developed countries). The problem with teaching multiple units like this, the metric system plus the fragmented customary units, is that it makes things more confusing for students. In order to tie all these different units together, you must teach conversion factors, increasing the difficulty. So before you can even get to actual measuring, you're already sinking most students by futzing around with redundant units. With metric only, you can teach the basic idea (milli- is 1/1000, kilo- is 1000/1, etc.), and get right to work. Instead, now we're wasting time futzing around with multiple units and conversion factors, which eats up classroom time.
The research overwhelmingly shows that using multiple units for the same measurement creates confusion and mix-ups (Because it isn't taught properly). Measurements and human languages are two totally different beasts (Oh, no they're not).
If you have any evidence other than speculation, we'd be happy to take a look.
Two people have already stated learning two mathematical languages is similar to learning two spoken languages; being familiar with both systems I can assert this is true. If you feel this is in error, and you have had different learning experiences then you must show how this is incorrect. You have not done so it's you who must prove these statements false (which, of course, you will be unable to do). It's a simple thing to understand actually.
Yes, it's true, some people may have a problem learning to understand both systems, but some people also have issues learning just one system. The answer for this is not to "dumb down" or take away learning opportunities from those more capable, but instead to increase the ease of those who have learning problems. It just makes good sense and makes better use of our greatest asset: people.
Hi ZenDen,
My evidence is incidents like that below.
His actual weight of 35 pounds—about 16 kilograms—had erroneously been entered into the EHR as 35 kilograms during the pre-surgical admission process. The nurse hand wrote “35” onto a form without noting whether it was in pounds or kilograms. When the information was copied into the child's electronic health record, the software automatically interpreted the weight in kilograms—its default setting—or 77 pounds. The boy was prescribed more than twice the normal dose of a drug at discharge.
Emergency medical technicians raced the child back to the hospital, where he was revived and readmitted, according to a report filed with the CMS.
There are other such errors mentioned in the article. This researcher's statement is my thoughts exactly:
Source: http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article ... /150509993
_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin
And this:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ritarubin/2 ... ecd7139643
A study found that having both metric and customary increases the number of errors parents made in the medicines they were asked to dose for their children. These errors can have consequences for children, resulting in them either receiving too little of the medicine and not benefiting or receiving too much and getting more side effects as a result. The metric-only group had fewer errors.
This shows that having both systems increases confusion and makes errors more likely. There should be only one system to eliminate this effect. Of course, it won't eliminate errors entirely, but it will make them less frequent.
_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin
And this:
In other countries, where people are familiar with metric and use it in their everyday lives, they likely would have taken one look at that child and known that there was no way the child was 25 kg! They would have recognized there was an error and taken steps to correct it. The problem in America, however, is that even if we know how the metric system works we aren't very familiar with it, so we don't really have a feel for the units. Because of that, to them, 25 kg was just some number they were supposed to use: they did not realize how ridiculous the weight/mass given was, because they lacked the intuition to discern it on the spot!
What is the solution? Go to metric nationwide so people start becoming familiar with metric units, so they develop an intuition for them. That way, we can prevent other such errors from happening.
Source, which also discusses other cases where the pharmacist rather than the hospital made the error. In one case, the doctor prescribed 6 mL of a liquid medication for the child, but the pharmacy misprinted it as 6 teaspoons, which comes out to 29.38 mL! So the child received 5 times the dose they were supposed to get, resulting in a massive overdose that brought the child to the emergency room!
http://www.teammetric.org/the-metric-sy ... ealthcare/
_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin
(See the last 3 posts on page 6.)
So show us your evidence, ZenDen, or are we supposed to depend solely on your word?
_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin
So show us your evidence, ZenDen, or are we supposed to depend solely on your word?
This is one:
beneficii wrote:
The FDA and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend the use of metric-only instructions and dosing tools in children's medicines:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ritarubin/2 ... ecd7139643
A study found that having both metric and customary increases the number of errors parents made in the medicines they were asked to dose for their children. These errors can have consequences for children, resulting in them either receiving too little of the medicine and not benefiting or receiving too much and getting more side effects as a result. The metric-only group had fewer errors.
This shows that having both systems increases confusion and makes errors more likely. There should be only one system to eliminate this effect. Of course, it won't eliminate errors entirely, but it will make them less frequent.
It seems these testers played a little trick on these children's parents, who were NOT accustomed to the metric measurement system. (Please tell me EXACTLY what the testers thought they were doing.)
These very ignorant people set up these people to fail.
We have over 300 million people using the present system of weights and measures in the U.S. and someone thinks it's better to give patient doses in metric form????? And are surprised when problems ensue????? Please check the information you present for reasonableness.
I saw a brief clip yesterday, on TV, about different forms of government.
One of the subjects was how governments view and govern their populace.
An example was the Nazi government of Adolph Hitler.
Briefly they mentioned the totalitarian government in Germany during those days
was predicated upon the belief the populace was not capable of governing itself and
needed to be instructed in every manner. Perfect for an insane individual like A.H.
to run things the way he wanted.
We've pretty much the opposite in the U.S. because of something we (in the U.S.)
call DEMOCRACY. Now people in other countries that do not have our style of
home-grown Democracy may not understand what this means.
In many other countries in the world there is more of a TOTALITARIAN attitude,
and the people who grew up with, and are accustomed to this rigid type look at the
U.S. and think: "How sloppy and disorganized." and "How can they NOT use the far
superior metric system?" And as far as it goes this makes sense.
And, yes. Our Democracy may seem flawed and clumsy to outsiders or those who
pay little attention to the goings on of government, but to many this "sloppy"
difference is part of what makes out country GREAT. Not to say there are not detractors
amongst us that would promote a more TOTALITARIAN form of government. But
our form of government put astronauts on the moon (and YES I'm proud of it...why not?)
and other countries with all their metrics could NOT do so. This shows us the superiority
of our way of doing things...but it has nothing to do with the metric controversy.
We love our Democracy. We may not always show it. But this is the reason, I believe,
why the OP and many others can not understand our actions. WE DON'T WANT IT. NO
OTHE REASON IS REQUIRED. And we don't much care if all of Europe and every industrialist
in the world whines about it either.
Thank you.
A lot would insist the US is not a democracy, but a republic, however.
_________________
The red lake has been forgotten. A dust devil stuns you long enough to shroud forever those last shards of wisdom. The breeze rocking this forlorn wasteland whispers in your ears, “Não resta mais que uma sombra”.
that has always confused me. i see how those things are different, but i don't understand how they came to label the two opposing parties in a two-party system (after all, the u.s. is officially a democratic republic, right?). just remnants of a time when there really was a fundamental contrast between one thing and the other in context? or do the concepts of republic and democracy (and not just the parties named after those words) still represent a contrast?
It's a representative republic. Which is a type of democracy. True democracy would mean every issue is out to a vote by all 320million Americans . Try getting anything done in a timely manner. Easier when you deal with 100-1000 but over that you can't even fit them all in a building and be able to hear everyone. So a republic was born so we elect people to represent us in such matters. I don't think there's any actual democracy type gov in place in the world.
Imagine Russia attakcs but we have to wait for all 320million people to vote and see what the majority want before we respond.
