Opioid Addiction Drives Grim Business

[LadyTevar]

Much easier to do when the "Government of (Northern) Virginia" is made up of those backing forming a new State.

I've always thought North Virginia would've made more sense as a name for the new state, since there are parts of Virginia that are further west than the westernmost point of WV, and no part of Virginia is further north than the northernmost point of WV. Any idea why it was named such?

At various times throughout the tumultuous years of 1861-62, different names were proposed for the new state. Kanawha, Alleghany, Columbia, New Virginia, and Augusta were considered before "West Virginia" was finally adopted. The initial favorite, Kanawha, was dropped in part because there was already a county and a river with that same name.

"West Virginia" was a favorite because the region was already known as "Western Virginia". A name not listed that was also considered was "Vandalia". Most of the split was done county-by-county, so the "Virginia Government in Exile" in Wheeling tried to get as many counties as they could to ignore Secessionist Richmond and remain in the Union. The counties that stayed in Virginia were the ones who supported Secession.

[biostem]

With regards to pain management - I realize the location and causes will vary, but if some dentists can use some sort of electrical device to prevent pain during certain procedures, could something similar be employed for some patients? Of course, the down side is such patients would have to wear these devices and deal with keeping them charged up, but there wouldn't be any addiction or withdrawal/drug interaction issues to deal with. My father has issues with nerves in his legs and feet "misfiring", which causes pain and spasms, but can be alleviated by wearing special socks that are embedded with nodes that generate electrical impulses, so perhaps something similar to a pacemaker can be utilized in some cases...

[Jub]

With regards to pain management - I realize the location and causes will vary, but if some dentists can use some sort of electrical device to prevent pain during certain procedures, could something similar be employed for some patients? Of course, the down side is such patients would have to wear these devices and deal with keeping them charged up, but there wouldn't be any addiction or withdrawal/drug interaction issues to deal with. My father has issues with nerves in his legs and feet "misfiring", which causes pain and spasms, but can be alleviated by wearing special socks that are embedded with nodes that generate electrical impulses, so perhaps something similar to a pacemaker can be utilized in some cases...

Doubtful, many kinds of internal pain travel along a very few thick nerve trunks. Some of these same pathways can also control vital unconscious processes within the body and thus any disruption to these paths could cause far more issues than the medications usually would. For chronic pain that happens to be of the acute local variety, this might have some merit. Of course, depending on the location, you run into issues with keeping the device attached to certain areas of the body or even with the area function correctly with electrical stimulation. There's a reason why the use of a TENS unit doesn't remove the need for further pain management. It's also only used in 10-15 minute sessions with lengthy breaks in between.

Also, this is shit you could have easily googled. Normally, I give people the benefit of the doubt, but given your attitude in other threads, you should do your own work instead of being a smug little shit.

[biostem]

Also, this is shit you could have easily googled. Normally, I give people the benefit of the doubt, but given your attitude in other threads, you should do your own work instead of being a smug little shit.

Wow, you're an arrogant ass, aren't ya. This is a discussion forum is it not? Try taking your own advice.

[Jub]

Wow, you're an arrogant ass, aren't ya.

And you're an idiot who doesn't do his own research. Now do you have any of value to add to this thread or are you satisfied asking a stupid question and getting indignant when called on it?

[biostem]

Wow, you're an arrogant ass, aren't ya.

And you're an idiot who doesn't do his own research. Now do you have any of value to add to this thread or are you satisfied asking a stupid question and getting indignant when called on it?

Pot, meet kettle.

[Jub]

Pot, meet kettle.

Try staying on topic, FFS.

-----

Now, to add something of substance here.

I wonder if there might be value in researching people who don't get addicted to pain medications to see if we can replicate their results in others. I personally function pretty well even on strong pain medications combined with muscle relaxants and valium.* If others could replicate my resistance while getting the same pain relief I do that would be amazing.

*I had a kidney stone that was thought to be a back spasm and was prescribed hydromorphone, valium, and a muscle relaxant I can't recall the name of for the pain. I still took a shift working tech support at

[Dragon Angel]

I'm not a mod so this is just my opinion, but from one chronic pain sufferer: Jub, this is not something that could be "easily googled". I, too, am learning more about things like TENS units and details about the origins of chronic pain sufferers can even be unknown to the doctors. Shit, half the doctors I've seen have different opinions as to where my pain originates from the other half, so it's not like there is some unanimous consensus. It's a very valid question that can even stump professionals, nevermind laymen.

Charting the pathways of pain is not exactly something you can easily learn simply from google searches. That's why there's like, an entire medical discipline dedicated to the human nervous system, and why one of the stereotypes of a smart person is "brain surgeon".

[Jub]

I'm not a mod so this is just my opinion, but from one chronic pain sufferer: Jub, this is not something that could be "easily googled". I, too, am learning more about things like TENS units and details about the origins of chronic pain sufferers can even be unknown to the doctors. Shit, half the doctors I've seen have different opinions as to where my pain originates from the other half, so it's not like there is some unanimous consensus. It's a very valid question that can even stump professionals, nevermind laymen.

Charting the pathways of pain is not exactly something you can easily learn simply from google searches. That's why there's like, an entire medical discipline dedicated to the human nervous system, and why one of the stereotypes of a smart person is "brain surgeon".

That much is true, but the question "Why can't we just use electricity in this specific way to treat chronic pain?" is pretty easily answered with only a cursory knowledge of how the human nervous system and electrical pain management works. I am by no means an expert on either topic but I know enough to know that a TENS unit isn't magic and that core nerves (the source of many a chronic pain) aren't likely candidates for this type of treatment. I also know that if I cared to I could go on google scholar and look for papers about the use of electricity for chronic pain and find out more than most people here on that particular topic.

So, that all said, I don't see why Biostem couldn't have at least looked into the systems behind his question before making himself look foolish by asking it.

[Simon_Jester]

Jub, I, too, don't see an obvious reason why just any scientifically literate person should know a priori that the "electric stimulation to block pain" idea is somehow super-stupid and worthy of mockery, while the "research chemical drug-dependency immunity" idea is obviously super-smart and worthy of praise. Note that the key word in that sentence was 'obvious.' You'd have to know several pieces of context, most of which are not covered in the typical education of a scientifically literate bachelor's degree student. Without knowing the medical context, the idea doesn't make sense.

And if there's an "easy Google search" that would allow me to know the difference so that it really would be obvious, I challenge you to provide me with the terms I'd need to enter into the search engine to make that happen.

[Jub]

Jub, I, too, don't see an obvious reason why just any scientifically literate person should know a priori that the "electric stimulation to block pain" idea is somehow super-stupid and worthy of mockery, while the "research chemical drug-dependency immunity" idea is obviously super-smart and worthy of praise. Note that the key word in that sentence was 'obvious.' You'd have to know several pieces of context, most of which are not covered in the typical education of a scientifically literate bachelor's degree student. Without knowing the medical context, the idea doesn't make sense.

And if there's an "easy Google search" that would allow me to know the difference so that it really would be obvious, I challenge you to provide me with the terms I'd need to enter into the search engine to make that happen.

I could be wrong, but I don't have any specific formal knowledge on this subject and I know these things so they're clearly not hard concepts.

As for your google search, I'd start by looking at his starting premise. Googling "Electronic pain management dental" where the second suggest result takes me to google scholar (https://www.google.ca/search?q=Electron ... e&ie=UTF-8). Then I'd do some reading to get an idea of what this system does.

Then I'd look up "Nerves governing chronic pain" and take the first link which leads straight to google scholar. (https://www.google.ca/search?q=Nerves+g ... e&ie=UTF-8) I'd read those papers and that should be enough to tell me that my idea has little merit in any near and foreseeable future.

Then, if wanted to suggest a new topic I'd start by circling back to the current commonly used techniques for chronic pain and try to find a novel way to improve upon them. In my case I might google something like "addiction resistant individuals and chronic pain" which again takes me right to google scholar. (https://www.google.ca/search?rlz=1C1CHB ... LYTF_sSzPM) Read, analyze, repeat.

Every single search result here comes from top of mind phrasing and basic search engine knowledge. I used stiff formal terms knowing that would be more likely to get me scholarly works. This is common sense stuff and I pity the US education system if your average high school graduate couldn't do this if prompted.

As for this being 'obvious', perhaps not, but I have no formal training in any of these areas having graduated high school in '06 and failing to go beyond a 1st year CIS degree at my local college several years after that. I do admit to an interest in science and having a high amount of science/education content in my Youtube subscriptions, but that's hardly exceptional, especially for someone on this forum.

[Simon_Jester]

It's not about whether the concepts are hard to understand, it's about having specific pieces of knowledge and fitting them together in a specific way.

The question isn't whether or not it's reasonable to expect Biostem to understand this once it is presented to him. The question is whether it's appropriate, as opposed to being churlish and pointlessly obnoxious, to condemn him for not having already known it before you said anything.

It is reasonable to expect Biostem to understand the statement "the nerves that govern chronic pain are not nerves that can be safely or easily affected by electrical stimuli, unlike the nerves in the jaw or in peripheral body parts like the feet." It is not necessarily reasonable to expect him to already know that and therefore not even need to ask the question "would electrical stimulation work?"

And you were holding the second expectation, not the former.

=====================================================================================================

I could be wrong, but I don't have any specific formal knowledge on this subject and I know these things so they're clearly not hard concepts.

As for your google search, I'd start by looking at his starting premise. Googling "Electronic pain management dental" where the second suggest result takes me to google scholar (https://www.google.ca/search?q=Electron ... e&ie=UTF-8). Then I'd do some reading to get an idea of what this system does.

Okay, so if I type in a plausible combination of other words that should produce comparable links... let's say...

dentist electrical pain

...I get a couple of relevant hits. I can refine my search terms or I can just go with those.
https://www.webmd.com/oral-health/contr ... ental-pain
https://www.elsevier.com/about/press-re ... nt-instead

The WebMD article clearly describes the process and gives an accurate description any scientifically literate person can understand... but it says nothing about central versus peripheral nerves.

The Elsevier article is less informative. We can keep looking, and find...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4312687/
...which might be very informative but is written in medical jargon and is NOT accessible to the average scientifically literate reader in a reasonable amount of time.

It actually links directly to another article on the subject at hand...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11687055
...and then I'd spend a few minutes reading THAT, and so on. It adds up.

So at this point, if you attacked me for asking "gee, what about using electrical stimuli to control chronic pain," you'd be attacking me for not spending fifteen or twenty minutes researching before posting a one-paragraph question on a casual fucking discussion thread, because CLEARLY I should spend fifteen or twenty minutes researching everything before writing anything. Moreover you'd be attacking me for asking a question that even the medical community thinks it's worth seriously considering and writing scientific papers on, namely "can electrical stimulation of nerves be used to treat chronic pain?"

So honestly, this standard of "how much research should Biostem have to do before having a right to ask a question somewhere you can see it" sounds less like a fair-minded way to treat other people...

And more like an excuse to say nasty things about other people and assume that just because YOUR string of Google searches bore fruit rapidly and easily and told you things you may well have already known anyway, another related and comparable string of searches would have done the same so quickly and efficiently that only laziness can POSSIBLY explain why the other person didn't just make those searches.

...

The blunt reality is, Google searches and other tools of auto-didactism are hit-or-miss when it comes to getting accurate, specific information on a subject one has limited understanding of in a timely manner. The argument that other people should have to put in considerable time wandering the Internet in hopes of maybe getting their answer without "bothering" you by posting their question on a board you had no obligation to answer or engage with seems absurd.

Every single search result here comes from top of mind phrasing and basic search engine knowledge. I used stiff formal terms knowing that would be more likely to get me scholarly works. This is common sense stuff and I pity the US education system if your average high school graduate couldn't do this if prompted.

I now demand evidence that the average Canadian high school graduate can deduce that electrical stimulation is a poor tool for treating chronic pain faster than he can write a one-paragraph question inquiring as to whether electrical stimulation is a good or bad tool for treating chronic pain.

Since you seem to think Americans are dumb for not doing that, despite the fact that there exist scholarly journal articles investigating that very question, which suggests it isn't even slightly obvious.

Who knows? Maybe you are the one oversimplifying how pain management works, and being arrogant and obnoxious and trying to throw your weight around by calling people 'stupid' for thinking questions are worth asking, when you incorrectly believe you know the answer.

[Dalton]

Pot, meet kettle.

Try staying on topic, FFS.

Both of you cut the shit.

[Jub]

It's not about whether the concepts are hard to understand, it's about having specific pieces of knowledge and fitting them together in a specific way.

The question isn't whether or not it's reasonable to expect Biostem to understand this once it is presented to him. The question is whether it's appropriate, as opposed to being churlish and pointlessly obnoxious, to condemn him for not having already known it before you said anything.

It is reasonable to expect Biostem to understand the statement "the nerves that govern chronic pain are not nerves that can be safely or easily affected by electrical stimuli, unlike the nerves in the jaw or in peripheral body parts like the feet." It is not necessarily reasonable to expect him to already know that and therefore not even need to ask the question "would electrical stimulation work?"

And you were holding the second expectation, not the former.

Conceded. I was posting far too late at night and disinclined to be charitable based on an interaction in another thread.

Okay, so if I type in a plausible combination of other words that should produce comparable links... let's say...

dentist electrical pain

...I get a couple of relevant hits. I can refine my search terms or I can just go with those.
https://www.webmd.com/oral-health/contr ... ental-pain
https://www.elsevier.com/about/press-re ... nt-instead

The WebMD article clearly describes the process and gives an accurate description any scientifically literate person can understand... but it says nothing about central versus peripheral nerves.

The Elsevier article is less informative. We can keep looking, and find...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4312687/
...which might be very informative but is written in medical jargon and is NOT accessible to the average scientifically literate reader in a reasonable amount of time.

It actually links directly to another article on the subject at hand...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11687055
...and then I'd spend a few minutes reading THAT, and so on. It adds up.

So at this point, if you attacked me for asking "gee, what about using electrical stimuli to control chronic pain," you'd be attacking me for not spending fifteen or twenty minutes researching before posting a one-paragraph question on a casual fucking discussion thread, because CLEARLY I should spend fifteen or twenty minutes researching everything before writing anything. Moreover you'd be attacking me for asking a question that even the medical community thinks it's worth seriously considering and writing scientific papers on, namely "can electrical stimulation of nerves be used to treat chronic pain?"

So honestly, this standard of "how much research should Biostem have to do before having a right to ask a question somewhere you can see it" sounds less like a fair-minded way to treat other people...

And more like an excuse to say nasty things about other people and assume that just because YOUR string of Google searches bore fruit rapidly and easily and told you things you may well have already known anyway, another related and comparable string of searches would have done the same so quickly and efficiently that only laziness can POSSIBLY explain why the other person didn't just make those searches.

While I do agree and have conceded above, I feel like going back 10 years in this boards history my assertion would be lauded instead of challenged. I sometimes still expect that level of ruthlessness and the level of pertinent readiness that accompanied it. It is my own failing but I hope an understandable one.

The blunt reality is, Google searches and other tools of auto-didactism are hit-or-miss when it comes to getting accurate, specific information on a subject one has limited understanding of in a timely manner. The argument that other people should have to put in considerable time wandering the Internet in hopes of maybe getting their answer without "bothering" you by posting their question on a board you had no obligation to answer or engage with seems absurd.

The flips idea of this is that google-fu is a very undervalued skill and one that increasingly shouldn't be dismissed. We do a diservice to our peers by saying 'Google is hard' and doing the work for others.

After all, in the land of the 45+ the man with Bing is king.

I now demand evidence that the average Canadian high school graduate can deduce that electrical stimulation is a poor tool for treating chronic pain faster than he can write a one-paragraph question inquiring as to whether electrical stimulation is a good or bad tool for treating chronic pain.

Since you seem to think Americans are dumb for not doing that, despite the fact that there exist scholarly journal articles investigating that very question, which suggests it isn't even slightly obvious.

Who knows? Maybe you are the one oversimplifying how pain management works, and being arrogant and obnoxious and trying to throw your weight around by calling people 'stupid' for thinking questions are worth asking, when you incorrectly believe you know the answer.

I posit that, had I not been online, his question would have taken an indeterminate amount of time to receive an answer. Likely hours, especially given when it was asked. Thus, while may have cost Biostem more personal time, he ensured a timely answer by doing the legwork himself. I don't think that this is at all an illogical stance to take.

As for what the average Canadian high school grad can do, I ufortunately lack the data set to provide proof. Thus, I will concede that it's possible that the average Canadian graduate with a level of computer skills expected of a person on these boards may fail to have found the solution I did. Though, I do expect that if prompted to do so most could find scholarly articles on a search engine and reach the conclusion I did.

----------

@Dalton:

Sorry for the trouble.

@Biostem:

Sorry for the insults.

[Simon_Jester]

While I do agree and have conceded above, I feel like going back 10 years in this boards history my assertion would be lauded instead of challenged. I sometimes still expect that level of ruthlessness and the level of pertinent readiness that accompanied it. It is my own failing but I hope an understandable one.

Kinda yes, kinda no? I mean, the basic problem with that ruthlessness is that it strongly discourages the people one attacks, discourages them from actually learning anything, and makes it very easy for the attacker to develop a raging arrogance-boner about their own superior intellect.

None of this actually makes intelligent discourse easier.

The blunt reality is, Google searches and other tools of auto-didactism are hit-or-miss when it comes to getting accurate, specific information on a subject one has limited understanding of in a timely manner. The argument that other people should have to put in considerable time wandering the Internet in hopes of maybe getting their answer without "bothering" you by posting their question on a board you had no obligation to answer or engage with seems absurd.

The flips idea of this is that google-fu is a very undervalued skill and one that increasingly shouldn't be dismissed. We do a diservice to our peers by saying 'Google is hard' and doing the work for others.

1) "Google-fu is valuable" does not lead to "therefore, mocking people for lacking Google-fu is a good idea." Being able to repair your own clothes or automobile is a fairly rare and valuable skill these days, but mocking other people for not knowing how to do that achieves nothing.

2) Insofar as Google-fu is a useful skill it is also a learned skill, and it requires competent explanation to learn. There are a lot of subtleties and unpredictabilities.

3) Related to (2), Google-fu is inherently probabilistic. There is no level of Google-fu that reliably leads to a quick determination of the truth. There are levels at which the odds are good, or bad. But very small alterations in phrasing can trigger a 'butterfly effect' in outcomes, and level of background knowledge has a huge effect by creating "unknown unknowns."

I now demand evidence that the average Canadian high school graduate can deduce that electrical stimulation is a poor tool for treating chronic pain faster than he can write a one-paragraph question inquiring as to whether electrical stimulation is a good or bad tool for treating chronic pain.

Since you seem to think Americans are dumb for not doing that, despite the fa that there exist scholarly journal articles investigating that very question, which suggests it isn't even slightly obvious.

Who knows? Maybe you are the one oversimplifying how pain management works, and being arrogant and obnoxious and trying to throw your weight around by calling people 'stupid' for thinking questions are worth asking, when you incorrectly believe you know the answer.

I posit that, had I not been online, his question would have taken an indeterminate amount of time to receive an answer. Likely hours, especially given when it was asked. Thus, while may have cost Biostem more personal time, he ensured a timely answer by doing the legwork himself. I don't think that this is at all an illogical stance to take.

More personal time spent at the cost of a delayed answer is a valid tradeoff. The point here isn't that the matter isn't debatable, it's that precisely because it's debatable, shitting on people for choosing a different tradeoff point is churlish at best.

Plus, Biostem may specifically have been wanting to suggest something, and to solicit feedback from specific people who are experts or quasi-experts. Flagg knows a lot about the qualitative experience of pain management (poor bastard). Broomstick knows a great deal about the general state of medicine and life with severe medical problems due to her career background. And so on. Biostem may (rightly) not have been 100% confident that just by doing his own Internet research, he could easily know everything relevant.

It is a super-bad intellectual habit to decide you know everything important about any issue without consulting and respectfully listening to other human beings.

As for what the average Canadian high school grad can do, I ufortunately lack the data set to provide proof. Thus, I will concede that it's possible that the average Canadian graduate with a level of computer skills expected of a person on these boards may fail to have found the solution I did. Though, I do expect that if prompted to do so most could find scholarly articles on a search engine and reach the conclusion I did.

Or they might have read different articles and arrived at a different conclusion, or missed something important, or all manner of things. Again, butterfly effect.

Soliciting the opinion of other knowledgeable human beings is still a normal and laudable activity, and no number of Google searches somehow makes it an obsolete or contemptible activity.

[Jub]

Kinda yes, kinda no? I mean, the basic problem with that ruthlessness is that it strongly discourages the people one attacks, discourages them from actually learning anything, and makes it very easy for the attacker to develop a raging arrogance-boner about their own superior intellect.

None of this actually makes intelligent discourse easier.

Yeah, that was certainly an issue back then. Didn't make some of the debates any less informative or entertaining from an outside persepective, but this board was certainly hard to jump into.

1) "Google-fu is valuable" does not lead to "therefore, mocking people for lacking Google-fu is a good idea." Being able to repair your own clothes or automobile is a fairly rare and valuable skill these days, but mocking other people for not knowing how to do that achieves nothing.

True, and I admitted that I was wrong to attack him and apologized for doing so.

2) Insofar as Google-fu is a useful skill it is also a learned skill, and it requires competent explanation to learn. There are a lot of subtleties and unpredictabilities.

True, though one would hope that such skills are being instilled either via normal internet usage (for adults) or at the primary school level. If only because not having this skill leads to things like having a line cook who's a 1st year CIS dropout as your tech because you have no idea how to google a model number and pull up a manual; this is literally me at my job dealing with a busted meat slicer. My middle-aged boss has no clue how to do what I take for granted.

3) Related to (2), Google-fu is inherently probabilistic. There is no level of Google-fu that reliably leads to a quick determination of the truth. There are levels at which the odds are good, or bad. But very small alterations in phrasing can trigger a 'butterfly effect' in outcomes, and level of background knowledge has a huge effect by creating "unknown unknowns."

True, but this is also where critical reading/thinking skills come into play. You don't need to know a subject inside and out to get a feel for if an article is on the level or not. Background knowledge obviously helps, but in the end you need logic and critical thinking to get anything done without someone else holding your hand.

More personal time spent at the cost of a delayed answer is a valid tradeoff. The point here isn't that the matter isn't debatable, it's that precisely because it's debatable, shitting on people for choosing a different tradeoff point is churlish at best.

I think you mean "Less personal time..." but I get the idea. I've also apologized and conceded that I was a dick earlier so can we drop this line of argument?

Plus, Biostem may specifically have been wanting to suggest something, and to solicit feedback from specific people who are experts or quasi-experts. Flagg knows a lot about the qualitative experience of pain management (poor bastard). Broomstick knows a great deal about the general state of medicine and life with severe medical problems due to her career background. And so on. Biostem may (rightly) not have been 100% confident that just by doing his own Internet research, he could easily know everything relevant.

I get that, but just looking at his wording tells us that he has no idea how any part of what he's suggesting works.

"I realize the location and causes will vary, but if some dentists can use some sort of electrical device to prevent pain during certain procedures, could something similar be employed for some patients?"

If this was coming from a middle school student I'd give them an A for effort, but from a grown adult on this forum, I think we can expect a little more. I've admitted to being a dick, but that's some sloppy ass question asking and I think we can do better.

It is a super-bad intellectual habit to decide you know everything important about any issue without consulting and respectfully listening to other human beings.

Very true. As much as it may not seem like it I have actually change my stance on several ideals based on debates I've participated in here. Such as my stance on the issues facing those living on reservations, where I had a 'Well why don't they just move?' stance before I now wish we would step up to the plate and give them the level of fundning needed to actually improve conditions so they don't have to move.

Or they might have read different articles and arrived at a different conclusion, or missed something important, or all manner of things. Again, butterfly effect.

Soliciting the opinion of other knowledgeable human beings is still a normal and laudable activity, and no number of Google searches somehow makes it an obsolete or contemptible activity.

Yes, my point now is less that Biostem shouldn't have asked at all but rather that I wish he'd have put in at least enough effort that he knew the name of "some sort of electrical device to prevent pain during certain procedures" and what those procedures are before asking his question. Is that more reasonable?

[Raw Shark]

It's news articles like the one in the OP that make me wonder if WV would have been better off being reabsorbed into VA during reconstruction.

Depends on how you look at it. They'd lose two senators total, but still have sixteen electoral college votes. Virginia has a better economy, and some bedroom communities relating to the conservative side of DC. West Virginia has hillbillies, shiners, and coal. Don't get me wrong, that's my kin, but it is what it is. Overall, I'd opine that West Virginia would have gained economically in a reunification, but lost in pride, culture, and self-respect.

[LadyTevar]

It's news articles like the one in the OP that make me wonder if WV would have been better off being reabsorbed into VA during reconstruction.

Depends on how you look at it. They'd lose two senators total, but still have sixteen electoral college votes. Virginia has a better economy, and some bedroom communities relating to the conservative side of DC. West Virginia has hillbillies, shiners, and coal. Don't get me wrong, that's my kin, but it is what it is. Overall, I'd opine that West Virginia would have gained economically in a reunification, but lost in pride, culture, and self-respect.

The question you have to consider is "Does Virginia Want Them Back?"
That answer has usually been a resounding "NO"
Asking a WVian if we want to rejoin Virginia would get you laughed out of the room.

[Raw Shark]

Asking a WVian if we want to rejoin Virginia would get you laughed out of the room.

That was my rough take on it.

[Gandalf]

It's news articles like the one in the OP that make me wonder if WV would have been better off being reabsorbed into VA during reconstruction.

Depends on how you look at it. They'd lose two senators total, but still have sixteen electoral college votes. Virginia has a better economy, and some bedroom communities relating to the conservative side of DC. West Virginia has hillbillies, shiners, and coal. Don't get me wrong, that's my kin, but it is what it is. Overall, I'd opine that West Virginia would have gained economically in a reunification, but lost in pride, culture, and self-respect.

The question you have to consider is "Does Virginia Want Them Back?"
That answer has usually been a resounding "NO"
Asking a WVian if we want to rejoin Virginia would get you laughed out of the room.

Do you mean now or during reconstruction when I posited that this probably should have happened?

[LadyTevar]

The bad part about moving back to my hometown? The town's full of Opioid users. They're still trying to find information on who burnt down a trailer to cover the deaths of a known dealer and his girlfriend. The woman who lives beside Mom shot a guy who wouldn't leave her house (more drug dealing). The neighborhood I grew up in, my aunt's house was burnt down during a domestic dispute between the renters.

Which is the other reason I'm moving in, Mom's been claiming for months she's hearing someone creeping about outside.

[Raw Shark]

Which is the other reason I'm moving in, Mom's been claiming for months she's hearing someone creeping about outside.

Let me know if you need any advice regarding firearm safety.

[Flagg]

West Virginia earned its senators and representatives as well as its ability to govern itself through loyalty to the Union.

[LadyTevar]

West Virginia earned its senators and representatives as well as its ability to govern itself through loyalty to the Union.

THANK YOU! Because the Virginians were damn dirty traitors

[Flagg]

West Virginia earned its senators and representatives as well as its ability to govern itself through loyalty to the Union.

THANK YOU! Because the Virginians were damn dirty traitors

You’re goddamned right.