Slashdot Mirror

But, but, it's still vital we all give up our essential liberties for a little temporary freedom, right?

Because the world's so dangerous, what with terrorists, rogue states, the completely proportionate concern about avian 'flu, nuclear proliferation and the tidalwave of violent crime that's sweeping the US, UK and entire western world... and not forgetting, of course, all those evil video games turning our kids into gun-toting killers.

Of course it's important - we're in so much danger it's amazing we make it through each day without being shot, stabbed, infected, exploded or bum-raped to death in an alleyway somewhere, and anyone who says differently is a loony liberal, terrorist sympathiser or against our boys in Iraq.

Right?

But, but, it's still vital we all give up our essential liberties for a little temporary freedom, right?

Because the world's so dangerous, what with terrorists, rogue states, the completely proportionate concern about avian 'flu, nuclear proliferation and the tidalwave of violent crime that's sweeping the US, UK and entire western world... and not forgetting, of course, all those evil video games turning our kids into gun-toting killers.

Of course it's important - we're in so much danger it's amazing we make it through each day without being shot, stabbed, infected, exploded or bum-raped to death in an alleyway somewhere, and anyone who says differently is a loony liberal, terrorist sympathiser or against our boys in Iraq.

Right?

Wow!
That
was
easy.

Are you sure you got all A's and B's?

Nothing compared to the 418,690 killed by cigarettes each year. And while it's hard to live without risking your life in a car, cigarettes are entirely avoidable, except for the second hand smoke that only kills 3,000 a year (same source) -- coincidentally about the same number as died in the WTC. Where's the shock and awe against BAT? Why aren't tobacco executives in Gitmo? (Rhetorical questions, no need to reply.) They kill 100 times more every year than the relatively benign Mr bin Laden ever did.

The most interesting thing about HIV tests is that they actually check for AIDS instead! The most common test, the one claimed to be false-positive proof, works by counting your white blood cells. If you have HIV but not AIDS (Yet?) it will read negative. If you are feeling under the weather due to job stress and the flu, it will read positive. If you have lukemia, positive. If you have been exposed to radiation, positive. If you are taking certain herbal anti-fungal agents that supress the immune system, positive. In other words, it is all but useless.

It does sound all but useless, which makes me wonder whether you got the facts right. I did a quick google, and found this link, showing effectiveness of different tests. None of these look like simple white cell counts. Doesn't say anything about which is the most common, but this page from the FDA would seem to have all the common ones - note the one that was withdrawn because it was unreliable. So where did you see this information about using white blood cells?

Bah, talk about mangled post :/

This is the link to how the HIV tests work.

Yes, you would expect that. A quick look at the statistics for infection show that in relation to population, whites (Europeans) have a very low rate of infection in comparison to others.

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/stats.htm#aidsrace

The low rate among Asians is also noteworthy.

Here's are the seriously inflated CDC statistics. They're claim 36,000/year
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/keyfacts.htm

Here are the actual numbers as reported by the American Lung Association (see page 9)
http://www.lungusa.org/atf/cf/%7B7A8D42C2-FCCA-460 4-8ADE-7F5D5E762256%7D/PI1.PDF

...For those of you who are putting on your tinfoil masks, read up what the CDC has to say about anthrax.

Tobacco addicts endanger our lives more than by the carcinogens they exhale into the air. Their habit also is the leading cause for fire-related deaths. If you live in an apartment building and smokers also live in that building, you are depending on them not to fall asleep with a cigarrette burning in an ashtray on their beds. It's really common for an entire building to go up in flames due to unsupervised cigarrettes. So, yeah, smoking is a pretty significant threat to non-smokers.

Seth

Cigarette smoking is the single most preventable cause of premature death in the United States. Each year, more than 400,000 Americans die from cigarette smoking. In fact, one in every five deaths in the United States is smoking related. Every year, smoking kills more than 276,000 men and 142,000 women.

Malaria causes more deaths in children under 5 years old than even AIDS. (http://www.cdc.gov/malaria/impact/) Bill is certainly doing the right thing and I'll feel a bit less dirty writing this post on a WinXP machine because of it.

True, DMHO vapor has been intimately associated with the "greenhouse effect". Not to mention, high levels of DMHO are found in the bodies of cancer victims. Is this really the stuff we want to be making more of? It's corrosive, for pete's sake!

Won't somebody please think of the children?

Indeed! In 2000, in the USA alone, for example, this so called harmless chemical directly killed over 3000 people. Worldwide, it was much, much higher.

Trichinosis is a serious problem unless the animal and the meat are treated properly.

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dpd/parasites/trichinosi s/factsht_trichinosis.htm/

There is, more importantly for religious concerns, the fact that a pig eats anything. Including dead diseased animals. Free-ranging pigs will dig up and eat the corpses from graves. And yes, pigs can smell a dead body six feet or more underground, and that funny-looking snout is an excellent digging tool; pigs are considered better than dogs for finding rare and valuable truffle mushrooms, which grow underground.

While modern farming methods and meat handling may reduce or even eliminate these issues in pork, ancient or primitive cultures did not have access to modern methods. The meat of a pig was quite likely to be very unclean, if not outright causing disease in the eater.

Driving a herd of pigs into a cemetary was considered an excellent method of forcing a hidden enemy into the open, as they would naturally be frantic to keep the pigs from uprooting and eating their dead. It was also a way to show contempt for one's enemies. One step away from ritual cannibalism. My pig eats your dead, and I eat the pig.

If you look at human life expectancies, they have been increasing for the past 500 years.

The life expectancy at birth has gone up quite a lot, yes. But that mean less that people are living a lot longer than that more people are living what we think of as a "normal" lifespan of 75 years or so. For example, here the CDC has some nice tables of historical life expectancy in the US by age. So, from 1900 to 2002 the US life expectancy at birth increased from 49 to 77 years. Impressive, no?

But the life expectancy at age 85 has only increased from 4.0 to 6.5 years. That is, if you were 85 in 1900 you could expect to live to be 89. If you were 85 in 2002 you could expect to live to be 92. That's much less impressive.

"Maybe once a virus or disease is labeled an epidemic then funding should come directly from the government for said development?" ~Cylix


Oh no! He's on to us!

Are OTTO fuels, diesel fuels, atomic fuels all nice and safe when exposed to sea water and sea life?
Submarines are a fact and will be for quite some time, keeping them intact is a good thing.

The "drugs" mentioned in the article are mostly stomach acid reducers, many of which are available without a prescription. For more information concerning the US CDC suggested regimen, see http://www.cdc.gov/ulcer/md.htm

It would only take a solid establishment of the current avian influenza (H5N1) into the human population for that to happen. And get this. IT COULD HAPPEN LITERALLY AT ANY TIME. There have 35 confirmed cases of this influenza actually making the leap to human beings with a 65% fatality rate.

When the CDC wants to talk about serious viruses, they generally focus on flu. This surprises a lot of people. Want a sobering read? Go here:

http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/outbreaks/asia.htm

C//

ok ill not argue you any more about circumcision, despite your hilarious delusions on that subject. However, you do not have a grasp of the facts or the arguments you argue.

Stem cells are not banned at all, billions of dollars have been spent on stem cell research in the US.
For the CDC and condoms, maybe you could actually look at what they say, from their website: Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in preventing transmission of HIV,

I hear the word fuck all the time on tv, I see nudity all the time on tv. Not during the day on broadcast or public channels though, but I can still hear fuck and see tits if I want.

Kansas may be having a dicussion right now about Intelligent Design, but thats a discussion that the people of Kansas will vote on and decide, not some religious decree from a religious dictator (for the record I think ID is stupid and should not be taught), even if it was taught, thats only Kansas and parents do not have to send their children to school, they can teach them at home, or at a private school.

For you're Georgia claim, perhaps you should read the news(or at least use google): Judge: Evolution stickers unconstitutional,

and yes, half the country is against abortion (I am not) and for freeing the Iraqi people and death penalty (I am). Do you have any more arguments that the first link on google doesnt completely disprove?

I also trust cigarette companies to tell me all the negative side effects of smoking tobacco.

Have you read the actual 1964 Surgeon General's report on smoking and health, you know, the one that put all the warning lables on the packages in multiple countries?

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/sgr/sgr_1964/sgr64.htm

Just because a study is funded by the government doesn't mean there isn't a biased agenda at work and it's not a steaming pile of poo whose actual results weren't as badly handled by the press as the case currently in question.

And if you don't believe me just refer to what's going on right now with ID and the "faith based" American government administration;and the press. Governments are perfectly willing to tell you what to think and offer "scientific studies" to back it up; and the clueless journalism majors who don't understand even the basics of the issues (or even of journalism) are perfectly willing to misreport it, as fact.

KFG

Quite a few of them, if This is any judge.

The quicker you can catch it, the easier(and cheaper) it is to treat.

Early detection could substantially reduce the billions of dollars spent on cancer treatment each year. Not only does cancer screening save lives by detecting breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers early; it also is the first step in preventing many cases of colorectal and cervical cancers from ever developing:

There are several major flaws in your analysis.

1) You confuse the intent of the program with the actual success and outcome of the program. Aggressive abstinence-based anti-AIDS campaigns may also increase AIDS awareness, causing couples to get tested, use condoms, etc.
2) You miss the fact that correlation does not imply causation: countries pushing condoms may be doing so *precisely because* their AIDS rates are high.
3) The 8% failure rate you quote (uncited??) sounds like a "per year per couple" statistic, and sounds suspiciously close to the failure to prevent PREGNANCY, not AIDS transmission. (It's generally harder to transmit AIDS than get pregnant) not a "per sexual encounter". And, at least against pregnancy, failure rates for condoms are highly dependent on education, proper handling, quality, and consistency of use. (Much like successful abstinence.)

The CDC claims "Epidemiologic studies that are conducted in real-life settings, where one partner is infected with HIV and the other partner is not, demonstrate conclusively that the consistent use of latex condoms provides a high degree of protection." (my emphasis). (This probably refers to a Western context.)

The FDA claims "A 1994 European study published in the New England Journal of Medicine looked at HIV transmission rates of heterosexual couples with one HIV-infected partner. The study compared the transmission rates for couples who used condoms consistently to those who didn't. Of the 123 couples who consistently used condoms, none of the HIV-free partners became infected during the study, whereas 12 of the 122 partners who didn't consistently use condoms became infected."

Condoms do not cause people to have more sex. The ability of an African woman to insist that her husband/male provider use a condom and have him concede to do so, however, greatly reduces the chance that he will transmit the AIDS virus he got from a prosititute to her and her newborn children.

Availability of condoms does not mean that condoms will be used.
People are careless with *and* without condoms. They are just protected more with condoms.
Encouraging abstinence does not mean that sex will cease.
People do not always behave as the government wants them to.
People sometimes do respond to education and information by changing their behavior.

It's called a water purifier http://www.rei.com/product/47575396.htm?vcat=REI_S SHP_CAMPING_TOC.

The good ones have a ceramic filter that gets alot of the nasty microbes out of the water. Go camping some time and get Giardia http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dpd/parasites/giardiasis /factsht_giardia.htm for a couple days you'll always have one with you after that.

>> My current waist size is 36 @ 210 lbs. I'm 6'1", I'm not overweight.

If you're 210 pounds and 6'1", medical science calls you fat.

You got modded as Funny, but should have been as insightful. According this this then because I am now 40, I will "average" living until I am at least 80 (rough math from extracting data in first document, USA, white, male).

Seems that middle age starts at 40, NOT 30. Even at birth, the average life expectancy in the US is 73 years, and gets higher as you get older, especially after you are 25.

Skin cancer is the most common kind of cancer, because our skin is our main "interface" with a world of carcinogens. It's also among the most treatable kinds of cancer, posing a much lesser threat to our essential health than its rate of onset. We can learn from our own biological infosystems how to survive in a world where attacks and damage are part of the ecosystem. A compromised browser shouldn't equal a strike to the heart of our computer systems. We should be able to spread on and wash off the info equivalent of sunscreen, and grow a new layer once our outer perimeters show the stinging-red signs of breakdown in a hostile environment.

What's his BMI? (or in US measure)

Amen! For your money you do far better with almost any other brand. Many, many moons ago I worked at Circuit City and had the chance to closely compare all the speakers in the selection (Polk Audio Speakers sounded the best to *me*). The key is to compare different speakers (2 at a time) with music you're very familiar with and choose the ones that sound best to *you*. Also make sure the base, treble, and any other sound enhancement settings on the receiver you're using are set flat and that no Sub is engaged (unless it's part of the package you're gonna buy).

Bose knows that on a side by side comparison with some of the other audio brands they are likely to no come up on top, this is why the Wave Radio (and the "Acoustic" version) are direct mail purchase items - except in rare circumstances such as a Bose outlet store). They try to get you listen to their product in an environment where you won't have easy access to the competition (plus it would be a pain to return it in the mail, so you feel compelled to just keep it).

I'm not saying Bose is a bad brand overall (especially when compared to say cheap boombox speakers or tv speakers :) But they are way overpriced (and ok, some of their products are crap - like the bose center channel).

Back on topic, OSHA has guidelines as to what noise level is appropriate according to how long the noise is to be endured. A sound pressure level meter may be a good investement for some (or you can try to borrow one). Take it home and listen to some music and make a note on how far you can set the dial before you get into the dangerous 90db + zone (or 85 db according to some). In the case of portable players you can put your headphones next to the meter's mic (as close as your ears would be) and make a note of where the dial is set. Note that of course some music will by nature be softer or louder but this should give you a good basis to enjoy your music in a safe manner. (On a side note a SPL meter is a great way to balance out the sound levels of your speakers).

The leading causes of death in the US between the ages of 14-40 (when you'd expect most reproductive opportunities) are;

1 Unintentional Injury
37,874

2 Suicide
13,032

3 Malignant Neoplasms
12,487

4 Homicide
11,839

5 Heart Disease
10,082

6 HIV
5,240

7 Diabetes Mellitus
1,842

8 Cerebro-vascular
1,802

9 Liver Disease
1,670

10 Congenital Anomalies
1,333

Source http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/leadcaus10.htm l

so those are your selection pressures at work. Let's see if someone can draw a hypothesis out of that. Maybe predict the shape of future Americans...

I wonder if Wikipedia plagiarized the article from the CDC, or the other way around? It looks like the Wiki article was modified more recently...

Stop spreading FUD against cats. You can get toxoplasmosis by eating raw meat or fresh feces, not just infected cat's, but any mammal's. Eating poorly cooked meat is the most common way of getting toxoplasmosis. It can be dangerous to people with weakened immune system, e.g. people with HIV, young babies and fetuses. For most healthy people (and cats) toxoplasmosis infection will go away on its own without any symptoms.

Toxoplasmosis is not especially nasty disease. The infection can be easily prevented. The world is filled with much nastier contagious diseases that you should be afraid of more than toxoplasmosis, e.g. rabies. Are you next suggesting of "STOPPING" dogs. Dogs are the principal host of rabies in many parts of the world. I hope not, or eventually you probably end up "STOPPING" humans too.

This isn't for residential pools, so the math is not relevant; you're adding $100K of cost for even $1K-$3K plastic pools or hottubs, which is nonsense. You want the number of public pools. Those are the only ones that will have a life gaurd in the first place. You also want to include near drownings, which are at least six times more common and can lead to death in the hospital or permanent brain damage.

As an aside, read this CDC report Prevalence of Parasites in Fecal Material from Chlorinated Swimming Pools and you probably won't want to swim in a public pool again. The CDC also has a hand healthy swimming site for more information.

This isn't for residential pools, so the math is not relevant; you're adding $100K of cost for even $1K-$3K plastic pools or hottubs, which is nonsense. You want the number of public pools. Those are the only ones that will have a life gaurd in the first place. You also want to include near drownings, which are at least six times more common and can lead to death in the hospital or permanent brain damage.

As an aside, read this CDC report Prevalence of Parasites in Fecal Material from Chlorinated Swimming Pools and you probably won't want to swim in a public pool again. The CDC also has a hand healthy swimming site for more information.

I know that there will soon be people chomping at the bit to mandate these things.

I did some calculations. There are 7.6 million residential pools in the US, and 832 drownings per year among children age 0-14. This number includes non-pool drownings, so the cost to save each child is actually higher than below. There are also a smaller number of adult deaths. Assuming a pool lasts for 20 years:

Cost per pool per year:
$100,000/20 = $5,000.

Cost per year, nationwide:
$5,000 * 7.6M = $38B

Cost per life saved:
$38B / 832 = $45.6M

The per capita Gross Domestic Product of the US is $40,100. At this rate, one person must work 1,140 years to save someone else's life. I realize that it's very chic to say you can't put a price on life, but if you don't, the entire population of the world will quickly be working full-time to do nothing but save lives.

It's a shame that logic always loses out to "Please, won't someone think about the children!"

From vCJD (Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease) page at the CDC:

Evidence for Relationship with BSE (Mad Cow Disease)

Since 1996, evidence has been increasing for a causal relationship between ongoing outbreaks in Europe of a disease in cattle, called bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, or 'mad cow' disease), and vCJD. there is now strong scientific evidence that the agent responsible for the outbreak of prion disease in cows, BSE, is the same agent responsible for the outbreak of vCJD in humans.

I don't want to respond to intelligent, useful questions like these with a variation of "Google it, you @#?!". However, if one readjusts one's information resources for the fact that one is searching for disease info, it is still practical to read the FAQ and use a search engine.

Especially since the guy was in France.

Vaccinate before you travel! (yeah i know, none for measles

According to the CDC, a measles vaccine has been available and used since 1963.

Funny thing is I was just reading here: http://www.cdc.gov/nip/diseases/measles/faqs.htm

If the chance of the diseases is so low, why do I need the vaccine?

It is true that vaccination has enabled us to reduce measles and most other vaccine-preventable diseases to very low levels in the United States. However, measles is still very common -- even epidemic -- in other parts of the world. Visitors to our country and U.S. travelers returning from other countries can unknowingly bring this disease into the United States, and if we were not protected by vaccinations, it will quickly spread causing an epidemics here. The disease is very contagious. We should be vaccinated protect ourselves and our children. Even if we think our chances of getting measles is small, the disease still exists and can still infect anyone who is not protected.

And circumcision? Man, that's sick. God/Evolution (delete as applicable) put it there for a reason. But I think it's common in the US. Everywhere else in the world it's only done for medical or religious reasons.

Endoscopes are sterilized by keeping them in a chemical bath. Cidex OPA (ortho-phthalaldehyde) is the primary chemical used. Here is a CDC paper about the issue for anyone interested: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol7no2/rutala.htm.

The camera, comnputer, etc don't need to be sterilized.

So what difference is there in "breeding supergerms" and "killing off weaker strains, resulting in only the stronger strains and mutations to survive hence being 'stronger' and near or entirely resistant"?
I suppose you have never heard about vancomycin resistant enterococci or Staphylococcus aureus?

I was trying to sound cynical, djeez.

So what difference is there in "breeding supergerms" and "killing off weaker strains, resulting in only the stronger strains and mutations to survive hence being 'stronger' and near or entirely resistant"?
I suppose you have never heard about vancomycin resistant enterococci or Staphylococcus aureus?

I was trying to sound cynical, djeez.

the odds are not all that good:

Traffic crashes are the leading cause of death in the United States for all age groups from 1 through 34 years. Almost half of all traffic fatalities are alcohol-related, and an estimated 40% of all persons in the United States may be involved in an alcohol-related traffic crash sometime during their lives Center for Disease Control - Current Trends Alcohol-Related traffic Fatalities - United States, 1982-1989

even a relatively minor traffic injury can cost you serious money these days: in uninsured medical expenses, higher insurance premiums, time lost at work, and so on.

Consider this:

Traffic crashes are the leading cause of death in the United States for all age groups from 1 through 34 years. Almost half of all traffic fatalities are alcohol-related, and an estimated 40% of all persons in the United States may be involved in an alcohol-related traffic crash sometime during their lives. Current Trends Alcohol-Related traffic Fatalities - United States, 1982-1989

The genetics of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and the case of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad are discussed at length in one chapter of a recent book, Human Genome Epidemiology (HuGE). This chapter is freely available on the CDC's website. The chapter addresses the issues: "...are genetic risks likely to be important in these cases of CTS; and is there a scientific rationale for testing these workers?" The authors of the article conclude that... "There is no information indicating that equally exposed workers, with and without various genotypes, are at different risks of CTS. What data are available suggest that genetic factors play a very minor role, if any in male railroad track workers. Ultimately, some genetic factors may be found that contribute along with occupational factors to CTS but such information is not available at this time." More literature for the ambitious at PubMed.

A blob of cells, which is what most fetus's are when abortions are performed, can't be a victum of anything. Third trimester abortions are a different study, but good luck finding anyone who actually wants those to be performed.

As I understand it, extra weight isn't unhealthy (and may actually be healthier on average than "proper" weight), but true obesity (defined as 25% to 30% body fat content, depending on what sources you use)...

The most common indication of obesity I see sited is BMI. Every BMI calculator I have found takes into account no more than three variables: gender, height and weight. (the cdc calculator in the link doesn't even factor gender in). BMI does not measure body fat and, as a result, is very misleading.

Um, no. In fact, the link is the other way around. Permissive sexual attitudes reduce teen pregnancy. (And measuring 'illegitimacy' is idiotic. 'illegitimacy' just means 'children born to unmarried parents. It doesn't day anything about anything. For all you know, they all got married the next day, or just lived together for the next 20 years. And the 'legitimate' parents got divorced.)

Teen pregnancy rates, however, have never risen, not since we've been measuring them in 1976.

As for your European statistics, correlation does not imply causation. Furthermore, American TV shows plenty of sex on television - MTV, soap operas, the Super Bowl, etc. Do you have anything to support that TV in Switerland is racier than TV here? Or TV in Japan? Here, you can get hardcore pornography delivered to your TV in three clicks. I'm not sure I accept your premise that this country is less "sexually permissive" than Europe.

Which states have the highest teen pregnancy rates? Well, it almost exactly follows the divorce rate. The highest one?

Mississippi, that cesspool of moral filth, at 6.5 per 100. Then Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and Arkansaw, all at or above 6 per 100.

I am not moralizing, I am simply stating facts. My wife worked in an inner city school, and fatherlessness is a huge problem. It leads to lack of discipline in school, and ultimately an unproductive life. Marriage is simply a stabilizing influence in the lives of children.

Um, no. In fact, the link is the other way around. Permissive sexual attitudes reduce teen pregnancy. (And measuring 'illegitimacy' is idiotic. 'illegitimacy' just means 'children born to unmarried parents. It doesn't day anything about anything. For all you know, they all got married the next day, or just lived together for the next 20 years. And the 'legitimate' parents got divorced.)

Teen pregnancy rates, however, have never risen, not since we've been measuring them in 1976.

As for your European statistics, correlation does not imply causation. Furthermore, American TV shows plenty of sex on television - MTV, soap operas, the Super Bowl, etc. Do you have anything to support that TV in Switerland is racier than TV here? Or TV in Japan? Here, you can get hardcore pornography delivered to your TV in three clicks. I'm not sure I accept your premise that this country is less "sexually permissive" than Europe.

Which states have the highest teen pregnancy rates? Well, it almost exactly follows the divorce rate. The highest one?

Mississippi, that cesspool of moral filth, at 6.5 per 100. Then Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and Arkansaw, all at or above 6 per 100.

I am not moralizing, I am simply stating facts. My wife worked in an inner city school, and fatherlessness is a huge problem. It leads to lack of discipline in school, and ultimately an unproductive life. Marriage is simply a stabilizing influence in the lives of children.

Depends.

Metallic tin is not very toxic due to its poor gastrointestinal absorption.

Aluminum ... is not a necessary substance for our bodies and [though] too much may be harmful.

However, both of these refer to minute aluminum particles, not large (>1cm^2) pieces of foil, and much less amounts than a tinfoil hat would consist of.

Additionally, the aluminum foil will react violently with hydrochloric acid in your stomach, producing aluminum chloride and hydrogen. Assuming your stomach doesn't rupture from the pressure, AlCl3 has toxicity of Oral rat LD50: 3311 mg/Kg. Oral mouse LD50: 770 mg/kg
Tin is unreactive with HCl.

So assuming he got real tin foil, he should be fine. The Al foil would be quite dangerous, depending on how much his hat is made out of. There is also the added danger of being cut from the foil.