Slashdot Mirror

• ...
• death

what's so terrible for this particular source?

I think the (legitimate) gripe about this particular site was the garrish design. The whole thing is very, very 1990s-college-freshman in the way it looks.

Diesel exhaust is a known human carcinogen.

http://www1.umn.edu/eoh/hazards/hazardssite/diesel exhaust/dieselhealtheffects.html
http://www.cdc.gov/eLCOSH/docs/d0600/d000609/d0006 09.html

Everyone likes to think they have the answer. Your's is rich in carbon AND causes cancer.

And my refutation rhymed too.

On the other hand, if you are talking about fuel cell for laptop, you don't really want to use anhydrous ammonia. It is damned lethal esp in confined space (read: in aircraft)... Many people seem to overlook the danger of ammnonia because they've handled diluted (5-10%) ammnonia solution at home. But, in gaseous form, it is even more toxic than carbon monoxide. The concentration that is Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health (IDLH) for ammmonia is 500ppm whereas it is 1200ppm for carbon monoxide.

The smell of ammonia is a good warning. However, it does not always mean you can run away quickly... Once upon a time, I was almost choked by a small amount of ammonia when I spent my summer working in an industrial control lab. Some guy tripped the fuse when I was working in the fume hood. I inhaled the stream of ammonia released by the reaction before realising that. I could barely speak for almost five minutes afterwards.

On the other hand, if you are talking about fuel cell for laptop, you don't really want to use anhydrous ammonia. It is damned lethal esp in confined space (read: in aircraft)... Many people seem to overlook the danger of ammnonia because they've handled diluted (5-10%) ammnonia solution at home. But, in gaseous form, it is even more toxic than carbon monoxide. The concentration that is Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health (IDLH) for ammmonia is 500ppm whereas it is 1200ppm for carbon monoxide.

The smell of ammonia is a good warning. However, it does not always mean you can run away quickly... Once upon a time, I was almost choked by a small amount of ammonia when I spent my summer working in an industrial control lab. Some guy tripped the fuse when I was working in the fume hood. I inhaled the stream of ammonia released by the reaction before realising that. I could barely speak for almost five minutes afterwards.

Romans and Greeks used lead paints to make their faces white. After the fall of Rome, people selectively poisoned themselves with arsenic to make themselves look paler. And, given the health impacts of stuff like silicosis and asbestos damage, both of which are related to particle size and shape, I'd say that any small particle had better be eyed pretty warily by anyone with brains, no matter what idiots in the past have done with it.

does porn increase promiscuity?

Tell me where those "ethics training" courses are held?

Accredited Computer Science curriculums for one...

Aside from that, you have to realize, at that young of an age, telling someone "Hey do this and you get paid money!!!" is really a hard lure. How ethical where YOU back when you were 13? Would you have thought that typing commands into a computer to copy electronic signals from point a to point b would constitute theft?

Hell, the qustion STILL comes up here at /. all the time, and is constantly debated by (for the most part) grown adults. Indeed, just a few days ago /. posted survey results showing that the majority of teenagers thought there was nothing wrong with copying a music CD they had bought and giving it to a friend, and this is after years of RIAA advertising telling us how wrong pirating is. You expected teenagers back in 1993 to have come to conclusions that both teenagers and adults still cannot all agree on today?

The President and FEMA - nearly a year ago to the day - let thousands of people die when they had five (5) days notice that Katrina was headed into the Gulf. We have Tom Delay and Duke Cunningham as sterling examples of thieves in government (with Duke in the Stir and The Hammer soon to follow).... ...

How about the Physicians in the US who left untreated Syphilis in black males from 1932 through 1972! See, http://www.cdc.gov/nchstp/od/tuskegee/time.htm/

Notice those are all called lapses in ethics. Or when not being so politically correct about it unethical f*ckups.

You can't teach what you don't know.

I didn't ask you to turn them over to the government, I have no doubt that in such cases they would continue to follow right on down the path they were already on.

Heck, I wouldn't trust turning my DOG over to the government.

Now, you talk about training prodigies - in the traditions and ethics of the technology professions???! What are you talking about?

I linketh to the jargon file: The Story of Mel.

THOSE kinds of traditions. Honoring others work and truthfullness in ones actions.

The pursuit of perfection in what one does, taking pride in one's work.

Old fashion things like that.

How about Marie Curie who literally died from her contributions to science? Who donated the metal her nobel prizes to the war effort of the Allies?

How about Richard Stallman, who forgave the "work until 35, retire a millionaire" life that geniuses of his caliber so often obtain, and instead has chosen to devote his entire life to a cause that he believes will help the world?

How about the tradition of countless technicians who, unpaid, off company time, explain computers and technology to people all around them, solely so that others can gain a better understanding of computers? Heck if I (or almost any other technically minded person!) was paid the same as motivational speakers for the work we do trying to get people over their fear of technology, I could go out and buy a new sports car right now.

But you know what? We don't demand that kind of payment. For the same reason we troll newsgroups, discussion groups, and other forums. Because there is an innate feeling, and innate need, telling us that we have been given this "gift" as it where of understanding technology (never mind that it involved hard work and hours of screwing things up then having to fix them!), and that we have a responsibility to help others achieve at least some part of that understanding.

That is either religion, or a set of ethics. And with the decline of the

"Ethics Training?" What do you do, live in Wonderland with Alice?

The President and FEMA - nearly a year ago to the day - let thousands of people die when they had five (5) days notice that Katrina was headed into the Gulf. We have Tom Delay and Duke Cunningham as sterling examples of thieves in government (with Duke in the Stir and The Hammer soon to follow)....

Tell me where those "ethics training" courses are held? And don't tell me "Church" because All OF THE TOP LEADERS of the US Government vigorously claim that they are "true believers." And I haven't noticed a waive of ethics washing over the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches. (Go see this: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0121051judge1 .html/ or this: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0928051delay1 .html/ and tell me all about the "ethics" of our leaders.

You can't teach what you don't know.

Turning to the porn issue: yeah, I'd agree most people want to see images close to their ages - from about 16 - 28; but, after they get older and flabby most people are interested in pictures of the hard bodies of 18-28 year olds. BUT, that wasn't the case here - this was material that was ILLEGAL TO POSSESS and that was the lure. The porn was for trading for other goods.

Now, you talk about training prodigies - in the traditions and ethics of the technology professions???! What are you talking about? Wiretapping was invented as soon as Bell had a network up (and the telegraph was constantly intercepted from the day that lines were strung where access could be had without a witness).

Are you perhaps talking about the traditions of the munitions-makers? Alfred Nobel, the inventor of a stable nitroglycerine (Dynamite), donated a vast fortune made from the deaths of untold thousands - to create the Nobel Prize in the fervent hope that he could atone for the misery and suffering that his invention brought to the victims - while making him rich....HE COULD HAVE STOPPED PRODUCTION - but didn't. Was that the tradition that you refer to?

How about the Physicians in the US who left untreated Syphilis in black males from 1932 through 1972! See, http://www.cdc.gov/nchstp/od/tuskegee/time.htm/

As for the skills these kids brought, hmm, is a willingness to invade the private data and personal financial records of as many people as they could a skill that transfers well to modern society? How about trafficking in WAREZ? And, trafficking in illicit pornography? Yep, regular little "G-Men" - ready and willing to set to work for the Homeland Security wiretapping party.

As for Mom and Pop - well, they had a polite call from a polite attorney and they were just to damn stupid to bother to go look at little Cartman's computer. I know that my clients and I cost them a small fortune in attorney's fees. Damn shame that they didn't get to have their parental rights terminated and thrown in the slammer for the rest of their reproductive years.

Where do you think the botnet creators came from but idiotic parents who didn't monitor their kids.
I'm still running my Copernic Searches for their names..... If you are one of the two guys, speak up - I know a nice prison or two....
For the record, I had an ISDN line in my home in 1993. The Well had a substantial presence as did Byte Magazine through the (mostly UNIX command line) community BIX - and it was dumped in 1993 when McGraw Hill sold it off.... There was a heck of a lot out there in 1993 - try looking at the WAYBACK MACHINE.....
Finally, when you have been screwed a few more times by nasty little shits - you will adopt my "take no prisoners" viewpoint. OR, tell me how you will solve the SPAM problem with peace, love and understanding? Ball's in your court....

http://www.burnsurgery.com/Modules/prevention/gaso line/sec1.htm

http://www.cdc.gov/nasd/docs/d000701-d000800/d0007 60/d000760.html

The important information goes like this:

"the vapor of one cup of gasoline has the explosive power of about five pounds of dynamite".
ergo flammable is a minor point. The stuff burns so rapidly, as to constitute an explosion.
Explosions are rapidly expanding walls of gases.

You may not even be avoiding the risk of prion diseases by eating this stuff. If the "input" protein source was contaminated, the culture will be too, and I don't expect they'll be sourcing high-quality sterile protein for this stuff. Hell, we don't make that much effort for human tissue allografts.

I figure you can look at this one of two ways: either you can run down the street screaming about Soylent Meat (tm), or you can just roll your eyes and say "makes for funny sci-fi, dismally unworkable in real life." Either way, I'll continue to take my steaks the old-fashioned way: off a cow that ate grass and wasn't shot full of steroids and antibiotics.

HIV is an STD, people. In most cases, HIV is transfered via sexual contact between either a man and a woman, or a man and a man.

One might even go as far to say that HIV is a Male Sexually Transmitted Disease. In fact, statistically, you can probably count the number of Woman to Woman HIV transmissions on your fingers and toes

Realistically, Female to Female transmission probably does occur on some level, but en gross, it is rare. If you solve Male to transmission, the primary means of infection are transfusion and needle sharing; and vaccinating most men would resolve this as well.

If Birth Defects are involved, there remain a couple questions:
A) Do birth defects result from the male side? (Rare, but a possible side effect; sperm deformation).
B) Can vaccinated individuals carry the virus? Are vaccinated individuals infectious?
C) Is the vaccine useful for wiping out existing infections? At what point during the HIV lifecycle will the vaccine still be effective? At what point during the HIV lifecycle will the vaccine still prevent transmission.

Given that it is an STD that is extremely difficult to transmit female to female, vaccinating all men will take a significant bite out of the problem without risking birth defects. This would immediately reduce HIV from a worldwide epidemic to a niche population disease (probably HIV positive gay women whom have multiple sexual partners), one which would be much easier to address via testing/standard prevention techniques, and would also be a much smaller probably area to focus medical resources on.

Mankind can afford HIV cocktails for .25% of the population. We cannot afford HIV cocktails for 25% of the population.

FTFA: "I think there needs to be warning labels on MMORPGs like World of Warcraft, similar to warning labels on cigarettes. People should know that these games are potentially harmful."

Comparing a video game to tobacco on any level is one of the most irresponsible analogies I have ever heard anyone in the medical community make. When a video game starts to have even 1/10th the social impact as cigarettes then maybe, just maybe, we should revisit this ridiculous topic. By most estimates tobacco kills approximately 1 million people just in the U.S. per year. And according to the CDC costs about $92 billion in lost productivity. http://www.cdc.gov/od/oc/Media/pressrel/r050630.ht m

Trust me, I am fully aware of the "dangers" involved with gaming addictions. For me it resulted in C's and D's for two semesters in college while hooked on a MUD back in the early ninety's. But getting a bad GPA because I cannot pull myself away from the monitor to go to class and huffing gasoline or Krylon are two completely different animals.

On a separate note: Estimated US casualties for a bird-flu epidemic are between 100-300 people. At least, that's what the government is telling us employees.

That's what they tell you to persuade you not to give up going to work and absconding to some remote area as soon as the first signs of epidemic show up. Seriously: a normal flu can kill a lot more than this. According to CDC figures, there are 36,000 deaths from flu per annum on average. An epidemic ought to double these figures, at least.

If I saw the other comments I wouldn't have posted however you clearly are quite stupid. You make a statement in which you have no evidence to back it up; this makes you look very dumb and ignorant. You should have at least one scientific journal to source, which would still be lacking. Quoting a documentary is the dumbest thing I have ever heard, as if a documentary does not have a bias. As for the avian flu it would be simple to provide a link, such as:

http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/

Of course from the way you have been responding I can understand why this would be too difficult for you to understand or most likely even do.

There is no obesity problem.

Do you have statistics? References? Facts of any kind? Anything but your own anecdotes and baseless statements rooted in unhealthy paranoia? No?

Well, here, let me help you out. Of course, I expect you'll choose to deny the hard science that's been done which demonstrates that childhood obesity is a) a significant health problem and b) on the rise at an alarming rate, because it doesn't fit your particular world view. But, remember, the difference between you and them is: they have facts on their side. You don't.

Last November 2005 I placed an engine online, for free, No Charge.. I could not patent it because if I had the government would have seized it and eaten it whole. None of you would have heard of it or me again. Which of course would possibly be considered a blessing I'm sure by a whole lot of doctors who feel that same way RIGHT NOW. I placed my Internet branding iron against the CDC and the AMA for allowing ongoing atrocities being worked against me {and the rest of Roanoke VA patients}. I don't just WRITE about what George Orwell's World is doing to us {processing us all through a meat grinder} because I know I am not the only one going through various kinds of AMA-approved doctor hell.

The United States Government talks a good line to us about how GREAT OUTER SPACE EXPLORATION & DISCOVERY IS GOING TO BE but here in George Orwell's REAL WORLD, Fact is they want Outer Space ruled by their {{our?}} Military. In all truthfulness, th

When people get it through their heads that drugs don't make the pain go away, only getting off your ass and doing something makes the pain go away, (except in the case of medical painkillers, for the hard of comprehension) then we can talk about legalising drugs. Until then, people really do need to be protected from their own stupidity, or from the stupidity of their peers. Because trying anything once can be a terminal philosophy.

I grew up with people, friends, who used all sorts of drugs recreationally but I didn't know one of them who was addicted to the illegal drugs they used but I knew quite few who were addicted to the legal drug alcohol. Most of those I knew who did use drugs used them to relax though there were some who liked to experiment and others who liked to expand their minds. The ones who wanted to escape reality were the same ones addicted to alcohol. If you want to make laws to protect people from their own stupitity then why not have laws making junk food illegal, alcohol, or driving? Maybe we can also make bathtubs and pools illegal. In California, drowning is the number one cause of accidental death for children 1-4 years of age. In the city of West Covina, there are more swimming pools per capita than any other city in Los Angeles County. Approximately one in every six West Covina households has a backyard swimming pool - with a total of 5,500 pools. Fire Department emergency response records indicate that five to fifteen children drown or near drown within the West Covina city limits every year.

SUBMERSION HOSPITALIZATIONS OF CHILDREN IN HAWAI`I

Ten (10)% of all submersions occurred in the bathtub or toilet; the average child was one (1) year old.

Water-Related Injuries: Fact Sheet
# In 2003, there were 3,306 unintentional fatal drownings in the United States, averaging nine people per day. This figure does not include drownings in boating-related incidents (CDC 2005).
# For every child 14 years and younger who dies from drowning, five receive emergency department care for nonfatal submersion injuries. More than half of these children require hospitalization (CDC 2005). Nonfatal drownings can cause brain damage that result in long-term disabilities ranging from memory problems and learning disabilities to the permanent loss of basic functioning (i.e., permanent vegetative state).

Interesting thing about peaches is that they contain cyanide. From that respect I could see why the scanner would go off...

MySpace pulled out the plug on their server in order to plug in Michael Moore's electric car.

Given the week+ long power outages in Saint Louis and Queens (in New York City) and Westchester County(NY), do we need any more evidence that the US electrical system is not prepared to add in the load of millions of plugin electric cars?

We need to solve the first problems first... The massive power outage that cascaded from Ohia and Indiana, through Ontario, and knocked off the entire Northeast US in August 2003 for days was a big wakeup call.

So the people who have been trying for decades to shut down the Indian Point nuclear power point - where do they think the power is going to come from to power the central air conditioning in their mansions? The Electricity Fairy?

On an even more off topic aside, these people in Westchester County (and Fairfield County CT) are the same people who opposed spraying insecticides to kill mosquitoes when West Nile virus was first detected across the East River from the United Nations and when the disease might have been eradicated completely. As a result of that "conservative" approach to controlling the Virus, West Nile has now spread nationwide and has now killed at least 771 people, including 119 people in the US in 2005 (not to mention the huge number of birds and horses that have suffered horrible deaths).

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/westnile/surv&cont rolCaseCount05_detailed.htm

"Take the murders caused by hand guns out of the US stats, and our murder rates are similar."

I don't know...but, aren't there more people in the US than in Canada?

The stats for both countries are based on murder rates per capita, so the difference in population is irrelevent.

As for "being safe from it", check out these stats from the Centers for Disease Control:
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5003a1. htm

Problem/Condition: A substantial percentage of all homicides in the United States are committed by intimate partners of the victims. Among females, approximately 1 in 3 homicides are intimate partner homicides (IPHs).

Or this ...
http://www.now.org/issues/violence/043003pregnant. html

Homicide was found to be the leading cause of death for pregnant women in Maryland, according to a March 2001 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Using death records and coroner reports, state health department researchers found 247 pregnancy-associated deaths between 1993 and 1998. Among those deaths, 50 were murders. By comparison, homicide was the fifth-leading cause of death among Maryland women. And, nationwide, the maternal mortality rate was just 9.9 percent in 1999, the most recent year for which statistics are available.

Nationally, homicide is a leading killer of young women--pregnant or not. In 1999, homicide was the second-leading cause of death among women ages 20 to 24. It was fifth among women ages 25-34. Accidents are the top cause of death in both age groups.

Besides, how often did you (or some other poster from the "guns are good for protecting own life/property/whatever" club) actually shot somebody who was threatening you? I suppose, for the most people around here, the answer will be "never".

Just as the answer is "never" for most people who have used a gun to protect their life/property/whatever.

Against an armed criminal, to whom your life means *nothing at all* and who probably already has some blood on his hands, you wouldn't stand much chance if he sees you pulling your glock out of the drawer.

And how often does that really happen? According to you it must be less than 160 times per year, nationwide.

The odds are you'll actually panick and shoot that neighbours kid sneaking out of your daughters bedroom in the middle of the night instead.

So, better than 50/50 odds it is a kid and you accidentally kill him right? Well, the latest numbers (2003) from the CDC show that for the population aged 0-20, the number of accidental deaths by firearm was 157 nationwide. So, at most 156 ruthless criminals vs 157 innocent kids. And those 157 kids include plenty of cases where mistaken identity was not a factor, like self-inflicted gunshots, kids playing with guns and shooting their friends, etc.

Consider the hundreds of thousands of times per year where simply brandshing a gun was enough to ward off an attack (the NRA's number is about 4.5million times per year), it is quite reasonable to expect that more than 157 lives were saved by a gun. Even reasonable to expect that many, many more than 157 lives where saved by a gun.

Source for my numbers of pediatric accidental (unintentional) firearms deaths: http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.h tml

Of the 133 patients with investigated vaccine history, 87 (65%) had documentation of receiving 2 doses, 19 (14%) 1 dose, and eight (6%) no doses; vaccine status could not be documented in 19 (14%) patients.

It happens all too often in manure pits and silos. To sewer workers as well. Request for Assistance in Preventing Deaths of Farm Workers in Manure Pits, Sewer Gas

All the same...

There are questions worth asking:

Methane gas has been killing american farmers for generations. Fatalities Attributed to Methane Asphyxiain (in) Manure Waste Pits -- Ohio, Michigan, 1989

The up-front costs for the farmer can be huge. From Waste to Profit (1988)

If I were the cynical Yankee, I'd be asking why, if Vermont Power really believes in Cow Power, it isn't bulding economical centralized facilites for waste collection and processing under more controlled comditions.

First of all Christianity is the final chapter so to speak of Judaism. Judaism has existed since people recorded history so good luck with that. Marriage has seen some different cultural views. In some cultures just having sex means people are married. Sex and marriage have always been linked. So this brings up the acceptability of MSM. Personally I think it is morally objectionable. But then so it looking at Porn and I've been known to on occasion. So it's not worse then anything else and some people think it's ok. There is one good reason to outlaw MSM (Men having sex with Men) though. That is because rashes of MSM activity lead to outbreaks of sexually transmitted diseases and we the taxpayers have to pay for it in the end. http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/hepatitis/msm/i ndex.htm However if MSM remains legal I could care less. I'm not here to force my views on other people. Just here to give all the facts. So Gay Marriage though would be linked with MSM (in the case of two men marrying). I don't know if that is a good idea. But people are going to do what they want anyways. And like you said it is two consenting adults. But why do homosexual people have a fixation with this word marriage? Like I said Civil Unions should include all of the rights. Why can't you be happy with that? Is there some kind of adjenda here?

we deal with some fairly large customers

Those must be the American customers then...

(I meant this to be a joke, but I was surprised that almost 1/3 of Americans are classified as obese. I'd have to put on more than 45 pounds to be obese, so that's pretty fucking scary. As Mr. Slave says, Jesus Christ!)

School violence has not been increasing, it's just the media sensationalizing the death of suburban white kids (I used to be one myself)

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeindicators/Indica tors.asp?PubPageNumber=1&ShowTablePage=TablesHTML/ table_1.1.asp

Violent Deaths at School and Away From School:

Years School Away

1992-93 34 3,584
1993-94 29 3,804
1994-95 28 3,552
1995-96 32 3,305
1996-97 28 2,952
1997-98 34 2,728
1998-99 33 2,366
1999-00 14 2,126
2000-01 12 2,047
2001-02 17 2,036

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_violence

The percentage of students who reported being afraid of being attacked at school or on the way to and from school decreased from 12 % in 1995 to 6 % in 2001.

Between 1993 and 2003, the percentage of students in grades 9-12 who reported carrying a weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school property within the previous 30 days declined--from 12 % to 6 %

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/fact_book/23_School_Viole nce.htm

Fewer than 1% of all homicides among school-age children occur on or around school grounds or on the way to and from school. ...the total number of events has decreased steadily since 1992-1993 school year...

"An operator who is properly secured by a seatbelt has a better chance of maintaining control of the vehicle in an emergency situation and of surviving a crash."

"I drive a race car for fun, not professionally (SpecE30 Mid-Atlantic #59). The first thing that they teach you in a car control clinic is that the primary purpose of your 3-point seatbelt or 5/6/7/8-point harness is to keep you in a position where you can control the vehicle; keeping you from vaulting through the windshield is just an added benefit. (Preventing serious injury requires airbags or an SFI 38.1-certified head and neck restraint system.)"

"Also, the safety belt helps belted drivers maintain control of the car by keeping them in the driver's seat. This increases the chance of preventing a second crash."

U.S. Surgeon General Richard H. Carmona today issued a comprehensive scientific report which concludes that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke. ... "The scientific evidence is now indisputable: secondhand smoke is not a mere annoyance. It is a serious health hazard that can lead to disease and premature death in children and nonsmoking adults," [Carmona said].

Statistically, the gun most likely to shoot you is the one you own/carry,

That's because most firearms-related deaths are suicides. http://www.cdc.gov/NCIPC/wisqars/

Measures aimed at stopping homicides aren't going to impact suicides (or accidents).

Wow Tim, that was quite a little rant. Have you ever been to India? (If not, I have some travel photos at...enjoy :-)

Those are great snapshots, Mark. They really change the substance of my argument. After all, a few vacation photos tell the whole story of India better than the many, many, many, resources that tell us that India is a third-world country.

India has one of the worst infant mortality rates on the planet, they have a sickening gap between rich and poor, they have high rates of diseases that are all but eradicated in the first world, and they have...suburbs in Bangalore.

The reality of the situation is very simple: labor in India is cheap because it is a very poor country. They have abysmal standards for public health, medicine and sanitation, and tens of thousands of people die every year from diseases that are completely preventable. International aid organizations funnel billions of dollars a year into the country to fight things like polio and malaria, and meanwhile, the Indian goverment spends massive amounts of money on technical education that benefits only a relative few members of the highest castes.

It would be easy for the USA to compete on cost of labor, if we allowed our infrastructure to degrade to match that of a third-world country. If we stopped filtering our water, treating our sewage, and housing our homeless (just in the poor regions, of course), we could save billions on taxes. Then, we could deny higher education to 2/3rds of our students, label them as "laborers" or "merchants" and tell them that they could never aspire to a higher standard of living, due to birthright. Think of the savings!

Yessir, we could make those changes, and we would almost certainly become internationally "competitive"...I wonder why we don't?

Except in a zero sum system like spending tax dollars this is not a false dichotomy. There is an opportunity cost to spending our money on a paranoid police stateeque spying apparatus. I'd rather my tax dollars were spent on something that won't infringe my civil liberties and would be guaranteed to save lives like a serious educational campaign about Americans poor dietary habits.

A nation of people that according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention has a 20% obesity rate has FAR more serious problems to deal with FIRST besides the almost non existent threat of terrorism.

http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/trend/maps /

Yeah, but salt levels aren't associated with leukemia clusters . Tunsten is (warning, PDF).

Without RTFA, my first thought is why the hell are idiot celebrities in charge of choosing finalists? Unless these celebrities are also scientists. After all, the cheeseholes at VH1 keep telling me that Apathy is Lethal and we've gotta do something about AIDS killing 3rd-world kids, but take a look for yourself: where does AIDS fit on this list? I'll give you a hint: it's nowhere near 1. And what is? Severe rotavirus diarrhea. What's that you say? Sheryl Crow never told you about that one.

Honestly, I'm sick of those commercials telling me that I'm not doing enough about AIDS; not only have I done more than enough to help, there are frankly much bigger fish to go after if you really want to save lives.

If celebrities are the initial filtering mechanism, then this entire contest is moot.

Are you serious? There is no question that the U.S. Ban on DDT has resulted in supply shortages such that millions of Africans and South Americans are dying each year from malaria. This site and this reference at the the CDC are good places to start.

Even the New York Times has begun to accept the truth on this.

What is worse is that the philisophical routes of this ban were explicitly anti-human. Rachel Carson barely mentioned any negative impact on humans in 'Silent Spring'. Certainly, there were no such studies at the time (and studies since then have shown 0 ill effects to humans). Carson's main complaint was that DDT weakened the shells of bird eggs, thereby disrupting their cycle. This too has been disproven.

So, we have essentially sacrificed the lives of millions of humans in the name of speculation regarding the potential damage to birds! If that's not religion, I don't know what is.

But you need to understand something: We are at WAR. And the enemies of our country do not give a goddamn about our liberties, or freedoms, our lives, and do not operate by any societal rules whatsoever. We therefore have to conduct ourselves under this reality, and understand something basic such as knowing that if an enemy combatant (or agent or participant, or whatever) is making a PHONE CALL to someone else, and either (or both ends) of that phone call happen to be in that country... the government MUST have that information, period.

Congress is the only body in the United States that can declare war. It never did so, therefore we are not at war. The military may be engaged in overseas actions, but without a congressional declaration it is not a war.

Do you realize how bizzare it is to read "The enemy doesn't care about our liberties and freedoms" and then "We need to abandon them to defeat the enemy" in the very next sentence? In particular when considering the overwhelming threat that these enemies present. How many people have been killed or wounded by terrorism in the last 15 years? Ten thousand in Israel, 3000 on 9/11, thousands by Basque separatist attacks in Spain, 50000 Iraqis and 2000 American soldiers killed in Iraq, thousands by separatists in Indonesia? Even if the number comes in at almost 120000, you realize that that means you're willing to sacrifice critical liberties to stop an "enemy" who has killed as many people total in 15 years as America's highway system did since mid-2003? Who has killed as many Americans in those 15 years as our highways have since last month? An enemy about twice as dangerous as being hit by lightning?

The reason you're willing to sacrifice your liberties to stop "Terrorists" and not to stop highway deaths (which are 180 times more likely to kill you), is because terrorist attacks are spectacular. They scare you, and when people get scared they turn off rational thought and abandon all other considerations in the pursuit of safety or perceived safety. The terrorists know this, and corrupt governments the world over know this.

The terrorists know that if they can just strike occasionally, repeatedly shattering the perceived safety, they can destroy a democracy by making it's people give up anything (and eventually everything) to anyone who promises safety. It worked in Israel. It's working on the United States. Terrorists terrorize because they know it works, and it works because people let it work.

Governments also know that a scared populace is a compliant populace, which will allow them to do nigh anything without risk of reprisal. Throughout history, evil leaders have either used existing enemies or otherwise created fictitious ones that served just as well to sow fear and help them take power. Robert Mugabe uses fear (and hate) of Whitey to keep himself in control of Zimbabwe. Fidel Castro uses fear of evil running-dog exploitative Capitalists. Hitler burned the Reichstag and blamed the Communists to get elected, then he told everyone it was das Jugen that were threatening them. And so the Bush administration uses the fear of Terrorists and terrorism to keep people scared and in line.

LIKE IT OR NOT, NATIONAL SECURITY CONCERNS TRUMP CIVILIAN PRIVACY CONCERNS, PERIOD. DEAL WITH IT. Blocking the government's ability to get the information it needs to potentially save lives or avert an attack, simply because you don't want the governement to know what you said to whomever is, in my view, giving indirect assistance to the enemy. YES, I SAID THAT.

We just have a fundamental divide here. I don't believe that giving up civil liberties in the name of fighting a nebulously-defined "enemy" which is somewhat more threatening than lightning and far less threatening than drunken assholes behind the wheel is acceptable.

And there was nothin

Antibacterial soaps are a marketing ploy and nothing more

Bzzt. Wrong.

Many antibacterial soaps contain additives such as triclosan or triclocarbon. Both the AMA and the CDC have recommended against the use of antibacterial soaps vs. regular soaps. The antibacterial soaps themselves don't seem to save you from any cough, colds and flus as at least one study published in Annals of internal medicine shows.

As for just being marketting, manufacturers would be at risk of false advertising, violations of which are the domain of the FTC

These particular antibiotic additives are effective in controlled settings (eg. hospitals) with proper application, but indescriminate use at home doesn't seem provide benefits, and in fact raises concerns about the development of resistant strains of bacteria.

From TFA: SIDS -- the sudden, unexplained death of an infant under 1 year old -- is estimated to cause 2,500 infant deaths each year.

For the UK, I found this BBC article http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4617976.stm which states "But still over 300 babies every year in the UK are dying as cot deaths" (the Brits seem to prefer the term 'cot death' to SIDS) ... a 75% reduction after awareness was raised by a education campaign in 1991.

Umm, there are some craters in NYC and PA and a lot of relatives of dead people that differ with you on your opinion of "nebulous". One of them is a firefighter cousin of mine.

While 9/11 was certainly tragic, you and the rest of the populous need a little perspective:

Number of people killed in 9/11: 2,819

Number of people killed by heart attacks (2002): 696,947
Number of people killed by malignant neoplasms (cancer?) (2002): 557,271
Number of people killed by cerebrovascular disease (stroke) (2002): 162,672

I apologize for not finding 2001 figures, but there you have it. 9/11 was tragic, but by no means a large or even relatively significant cause of death in this country. There are bigger fish to fry if we're hell-bent on "protecting" citizens.

There's no hard evidence to suggest that we're going to be attacked anytime in the near future, either, and all indications were that some tweaking to the existing 2001 system could have and would have prevented 9/11.

Do we tweak things slightly as indicated? Of course not. We listen to stories about ghosts and goblins who will attack us if we don't spy on our neighbors, submit to invasive searches every time we fly, allow the government to sidestep warrants and due process, and a whole host of other normally heinous things that seem reasonable if it will keep us safe.

While we should certainly shore up holes in the system, begging our benevolent rulers to take away our freedoms to protect us from the boogeyman only leads to the same kind of oppressive government we like to brag about toppling and replacing with democracies in other countries.

Umm, there are some craters in NYC and PA and a lot of relatives of dead people that differ with you on your opinion of "nebulous". One of them is a firefighter cousin of mine.

While 9/11 was certainly tragic, you and the rest of the populous need a little perspective:

Number of people killed in 9/11: 2,819

Number of people killed by heart attacks (2002): 696,947
Number of people killed by malignant neoplasms (cancer?) (2002): 557,271
Number of people killed by cerebrovascular disease (stroke) (2002): 162,672

I apologize for not finding 2001 figures, but there you have it. 9/11 was tragic, but by no means a large or even relatively significant cause of death in this country. There are bigger fish to fry if we're hell-bent on "protecting" citizens.

There's no hard evidence to suggest that we're going to be attacked anytime in the near future, either, and all indications were that some tweaking to the existing 2001 system could have and would have prevented 9/11.

Do we tweak things slightly as indicated? Of course not. We listen to stories about ghosts and goblins who will attack us if we don't spy on our neighbors, submit to invasive searches every time we fly, allow the government to sidestep warrants and due process, and a whole host of other normally heinous things that seem reasonable if it will keep us safe.

While we should certainly shore up holes in the system, begging our benevolent rulers to take away our freedoms to protect us from the boogeyman only leads to the same kind of oppressive government we like to brag about toppling and replacing with democracies in other countries.

Umm, there are some craters in NYC and PA and a lot of relatives of dead people that differ with you on your opinion of "nebulous". One of them is a firefighter cousin of mine.

While 9/11 was certainly tragic, you and the rest of the populous need a little perspective:

Number of people killed in 9/11: 2,819

Number of people killed by heart attacks (2002): 696,947
Number of people killed by malignant neoplasms (cancer?) (2002): 557,271
Number of people killed by cerebrovascular disease (stroke) (2002): 162,672

I apologize for not finding 2001 figures, but there you have it. 9/11 was tragic, but by no means a large or even relatively significant cause of death in this country. There are bigger fish to fry if we're hell-bent on "protecting" citizens.

There's no hard evidence to suggest that we're going to be attacked anytime in the near future, either, and all indications were that some tweaking to the existing 2001 system could have and would have prevented 9/11.

Do we tweak things slightly as indicated? Of course not. We listen to stories about ghosts and goblins who will attack us if we don't spy on our neighbors, submit to invasive searches every time we fly, allow the government to sidestep warrants and due process, and a whole host of other normally heinous things that seem reasonable if it will keep us safe.

While we should certainly shore up holes in the system, begging our benevolent rulers to take away our freedoms to protect us from the boogeyman only leads to the same kind of oppressive government we like to brag about toppling and replacing with democracies in other countries.

Numbers vary by source, but here are the very interesting links:

http://www.cdc.gov/Malaria/faq.htm
http://www.junkscience.com/malaria_cost.htm
http://www.cdc.gov/Malaria/impact/index.htm

I was off by a little. The CDC claims 300,000,000 to 500,000,000 per year, with 1 million+ deaths.

It is an astounding number.

  Charles

Numbers vary by source, but here are the very interesting links:

http://www.cdc.gov/Malaria/faq.htm
http://www.junkscience.com/malaria_cost.htm
http://www.cdc.gov/Malaria/impact/index.htm

I was off by a little. The CDC claims 300,000,000 to 500,000,000 per year, with 1 million+ deaths.

It is an astounding number.

  Charles

Malaria is a leading cause of death and disease worldwide, especially in developing countries. Most deaths occur in young children. For example, in Africa, a child dies from malaria every 30 seconds. Because malaria causes so much illness and death, the disease is a great drain on many national economies. Since many countries with malaria are already among the poorer nations, the disease maintains a vicious cycle of disease and poverty.

While I don't disagree that AIDS is a threat to all sexualities, I would like to point out that the percentage of gay males exhibiting symptoms of AIDS is greater than 57% discounting IV drug usage and gay sex+drug usage.

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/basic.h tm

Gay males, being a very small minority in this country have a disproportionate rate of infection. It's like when you have California with a 7% population of Blacks incarcerating them at a rate of 32% of the total prison population. Something is definitely askew.

So you can say that AIDS is a gender-equal disease, and that straight women get infected far more frequently than straight men, but it doesn't change the fact that the disease is primarily borne by homosexual men.

Also, could you tell us how likely it is that you would have BOTH versions of the flu at the same time? Seems to me that would be pretty small.

You're not getting it. It only takes one person with Avian flu to get the the regular flu as well, and you've got a pandemic. Period. So how unlikely is it for someone with Avian flu, who's immune system is already seriously compromised to get the regular flue as well? Not terribly unlikely.

You see, when you get the Avian flu, you're immune system isn't what saves you, it's what kills you. That's why in flu pandemics, it's the young healthy people who tend to die. Your body starts sending a massive immune response that destroys lung tissue. While your lungs are in this perilously compromised state, you are far more vulnerable to any other illness, so simply exposure to human flu is just about a guarantee that you'll get it.

There are so many sources to site, jesus man, learn to use Google. Start of at Wikipedia. Look up Asian flu, Hong Kong Flu, Spanish Flu, H5N1 flu. Check their references. Check here, and here, and here.

And frankly, if you can't figure it out yourself from that stuff, then you're just never going to get it and there's no point in me wasting my time trying to explain it to you. You'll just figure it out when your friends and family start dropping dead left and right, if you don't go first.

In my college years as a Microbiologist, my teachers always ranted and raved about how bad pandemics were.
I didnt fear anything until I saw the statistics of one of the pandemics..

Here is a link from the cdc - about the 1918 Avian Flu Pandemic
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol12no01/05-0979.ht m

"The "Spanish" influenza pandemic of 1918-1919, which caused 50 million deaths worldwide.."

Hundreds of millions were infected and millions died... Bird Flu is a real threat.

Yes, because they wanted to compare apples-with-apples. As you may have noticed on monday, the USA has a different ethnic make-up to the UK. There's also a side-effect of the methodology in that it effectively removes a huge chunk of poor people from the american data. This may or may not be defensible, but the fact that the US scored so badly even without the poorest section of society is extremely depressing. Comparing an African American from Detroit with an African from Nigeria wouldn't be a fair comparison. The Detroiter lives in the richest nation in the world, which has the highest per capita expenditure on health services per person. 13.2% of the US GDP goes on health. And still the non-white stats are appalling: Infant mortality is always a useful measure of how broken your health system is. http://www.cdc.gov/omh/AMH/factsheets/infant.htm http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/hea_inf_mor_ra t - US figures aren't in the Nation Master data set, for some reason. Embarrassment, possibly. 6.9 deaths per thousand is at the bottom of the industrialised nations: (Between Cuba and Croatia). African-American infant mortality runs at 14.1 per thousand however: below Jamaica ffs!

I guess I misheard the statistic. The US Census Bureau confirms that 18.9% of people are uninsured.

But on to the actual point: How was TB eradicated? Let's ask the CDC. Well, what do you know, it was tax-funded public health departments who ran treatment facilities, not private industry. There was federal funding from 1944 thru the 1960s.

Still, never let the facts get in the way of right-wing dogma, eh?