Slashdot Mirror

Nailed you.

And, not that you will read it, but Yes, people want meaningful work.

You are arrogant, egocentric, and probably too young to have experienced the soul-crushing sense of worthlessness that comes after the first few months of cold-turkey retirement.

You will eat your words if you ever directly experience the stark reality of pointless work for any length of time.

New LED light bulbs fit into my old fixtures just fine. They're all screw-in. The price has gone way down since the first days of LED bulbs, and they last a lot long than my old incandescent bulbs used to.

Prices have gone down, no doubt, but the cheaper ones in particular tend to flicker like the blazes due to sloppy rectification. Point a high-speed camera at one sometime and wonder to yourself what sort of biological and ecological effects will come to light a few decades down the road after widespread adoption.

There is a narcotic drug that has been out there awhile and it is plaguing our society, often used most by STEM types, and it causes; tremors, anxiety, irritability, sleep deprivation, over active bladder and racing thoughts among other things. It is so addictive that many cannot function without it and withdrawal symptoms are severe. We need to do something about trimethylxanthine before it is too late! Someone please think of the children!

I've heard your evolutionary ideas most often from lonely men who take their cue from online dating gurus and pickup artists.

I've heard them least often from men with kids.

That doesn't prove anything, but it does suggest to me that it might not be an evolutionarily successful attitude.

Its complicated. And as far as that goes, I'm not remotely lonely, married and with a child - grown now.

This all depends on how far you want to take the idea that and differences between men and women are 100 percent social construct, and not based upon built in physical attraction.

Note these are general traits, and that of course there are outliers.

Some things are social constructs. We've seen that in the workplace that within physical limitations of both sexes, women are capable of doing the same work as men.

But the idea that physical attraction is a social construct is bullshit. It's funny how after so many years, homosexuals are accepted as a built in preference, and not a choice, that certain groups of feminists are pretending now that everything is a choice, because you can if you want, raise a child to be a male or female, and if you want you can take a child born with a penis, which the evil world of cisgender would demand that he be called a boy social construct, and by social molding have him identify as both a female, and a lesbian. A female who identifies as a lesbian can have sex with this lesbian with a penis. and not be sexual, but a true lesbian who has never had sex with a male, and is repulsed by males. In the world ot total social construct, that is completely valid - if not quite sane.

So men in general have been hard wired to a certain body and face, and the same with women, although they have some added inborn traits as well.

This is not an unusual thing in the rest of the animal world, I've yet to see a convincing argument on why humans are totally exempt. An empty slate that can be molded any which way.

Here is an interesting example - young children were given the choice of I guess what you would call cis gendered toys. Fluffy and soft toys versus wheeled toys. Infant interest versus rough and tumble toys.

The female children were largely interested in soft and fluffy and infant interest toys, while the male children were more interested in wheeled devices and toys they could engage in rough and tumble activities with.

You might say "This is merely the example of cis gendered enforcement of proclivities by humans upon their offspring. This proves our thesis."

On little problem though - these children were Rhesus Monkeys. sauce: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

I'm attracted to exactly what I'm attracted to. Tall slender women with long hair, long legs, and small to medium bosom, big eyes and pretty face. No one told me this was what I was attracted to. As early as I noticed young ladies I noticed that was my preference. Still is, and ummm, I can sorta still tell that - yaknow?

Articles like this give me the impression that the field of study is still very uncertain: Circadian disruption and breast cancer: from melatonin to clock genes. (March, 2005)

Quote: "The global impact of breast cancer is large and growing. It seems clear that something about modern life is the culprit, yet there is thus far a lack of satisfactory explanations for most of the increases in risk as societies industrialize."

I've been experimenting with Melatonin: Schiff Melatonin Ultra 3 mg. 365 Tablets. ($11.94, but now, no one has stock, apparently. I have no idea why.)

Melatonin tablets seem to encourage sleep.

Over many years of having a business, I've developed a preference for working for an hour or 2 early in the morning, maybe 3 am, and later taking a nap in the morning or afternoon. I'm healthy. Do I have a different circadian rhythm?

I've noticed that people often act sure when their thinking is actually extremely sloppy. As quoted above, "... there is thus far a lack of satisfactory explanations..."

Wow! Good chart. I simplified the link: Everything we eat both causes and prevents cancer.

Lights? Melatonin? Sleep deprivation? Hah! I have a worse story. And a solution!

Combination Wrench, 5-7/8", 9mm, Chrome Vanadium Steel, Westward, 36A224

The California notice:

"WARNING: This product can expose you to chemicals including one or more listed chemicals which are known to the State of California to cause cancer or birth defects or other reproductive harm. For more information, go to www.P65Warnings.ca.gov"

Chrome causes cancer: Epidemiologic studies of chrome and cancer mortality: a series of meta-analyses.

Vanadium causes cancer: Toxic Substances Portal - Vanadium Quote: "Everyone is exposed to low levels of vanadium in air, water, and food; however, most people are exposed mainly from food."

There is poison in dirt! My solution: We need to find a new planet.

Then only 15000 count. If you are committing suicide, there are just as many non gun related ways to do that. Cars beat that as well as beer.

Wow, that's cold... You really think ~20,000 deaths a year don't matter?

Your statement belies an ignorance of how many suicides happen. A huge percentage of them are impulse decisions made feasible by access to a readily available firearm. Sure, some people are determined to kill themselves and will find another way if they don't have access to a gun. But a substantial percentage of them would not literally because of the effort involved, surprising as that may seem. Keep them away from firearms and a lot (not all) of those people would live to see another day. You cannot deny that access to a firearm is a rather convenient and efficient way for a person with suicidal thoughts to act upon those thoughts successfully.

Furthermore you are ignoring the fact that more than a few of those self inflicted deaths by firearm are not suicides. They are accidents of one form or another. Responsible gun ownership (which I support) comes with an acknowledgment of the real world dangers presented by ready access to firearms.

Epidemiology Without Biology: False Paradigms, Unfounded Assumptions, and Specious Statistics in Radiation Science

Bad science is the foundation for radiation regulations, the source of hysteria surrounding nuclear, and the cause of the outrageously increasing costs:

Nuclear Power Learning and Deployment Rates; Disruption and Global Benefits Forgone

This needs to be addressed, because the ordained "green" solutions aren't enough, and while we keep hearing about how cheap they are, they are mostly just making electricity more expensive.

Can you point me at the alternative models?

From my understanding of this paper, it seems like the alkaline vent is winning the debate.

I admit, though, that i may have sampling bias.

I accept your challenge.

From theUS Surgeon General Report "Smoking and Health"(big pdf)

No. 1103, p.112

Death rates for current pipe smokers were little if at all higher than for non-smokers, even with men smoking 10 pipefuls per day and with men who had smoked pipes for more than 30 years.

(No. 1103, page 92)

Among the pipe smokers.... The US mortality ratios are 0.8 for non-inhalers and 1.0 for inhalers.

...which means pipe smokers who inhale live as long as nonsmokers, and pipe smokers that don’t inhale live longer than non-smokers.

And everyone has cancer. Every single living human currently has cancer. It is the ability to slough off cancer cells that is what is important, you Dunning-Kruger Effect dipshit.

Your cell production HAS been outsourced, to bacteria. They outnumber your "human" cells about 10 to 1

That number you are citing is not accurate if you believe the latest research. Furthermore the numbers are estimates with huge error bars and variance around them. And the current estimates (closer to 1:1) are certain to be revised further as we learn more. The numbers you are citing come from a back of the envelope estimate based on flawed assumptions.

Furthermore the largest repositories of bacteria "inside" the human body is the gut which is technically outside the body. I'm oversimplifying of course but think of it topologically and you are essentially a weirdly shaped toriod. The bacteria in your gut serve vital functions in keeping you alive (outsourcing is a fairly accurate term) but bacteria located there are only inside your body in the same sense that a bit of food you haven't finished chewing yet is contained "inside". Until your body absobs the contents and it passes the wall of your intestines it isn't actually part of you. It's just some stuff you are carrying around no different than some bacteria on your outer skin.

Being smart is very often associated with someone is lands somewhere on the Autism Spectrum.

Of course that also means that they suffer from a lack of socialization skills, and thus, say stupid shit.

And another one:

> High blood glucose, also called blood sugar, can damage the blood vessels in your kidneys.

https://www.niddk.nih.gov/heal...

Do you believe everything you are told?

IQ obviously isn't meaningless, it measures how well you perform on an IQ test. It perhaps is not a great measure of intelligence, though I don't think we have anything better, but is certainly a correlate of intelligence.

You'l be pleased to find out that there is something better than IQ tests - Working memory capacity tests: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... They're accurate and reliable, i.e. predictive of performance on a range of tasks, and have greater validity than IQ tests.

Wrong

"Caffeine acutely increases blood pressure and peripheral vascular resistance, in part because of sympathetic stimulation. Its effects on large artery properties are largely unknown. In a double-blind crossover study, 7 healthy subjects 26+/-2.6 years of age (mean+/-SEM) were studied for 90 minutes while in the supine position on 2 occasions separated by a week in random order after ingestion of 250 mL caffeinated (150 mg) and decaffeinated (2 mg) coffee. Compared with baseline, arterial stiffness measured by carotid femoral pulse wave velocity increased progressively from 7.2+/-0.41 to 8.0+/-0.6 m/s (P0.05) at 90 minutes after caffeine intake, an effect that may be independent of changes in blood pressure. In addition, arterial wave reflection, measured by applanation tonometry from the aortic pressure waveform, also increased from -5.7+/-7.6% to 5.28%+/-5.6 (P0.01). No such changes were seen with decaffeinated coffee intake. Although the integral of the brachial systolic and diastolic blood pressure values over the 90 minutes was larger (P0.05) after caffeinated than decaffeinated coffee intake, the effect on aortic systolic and diastolic blood pressures was more pronounced (P0.05) than on the brachial artery. These results show a significant effect of caffeine intake on arterial tone and function and suggest that caffeine acutely increases arterial stiffness."

Let's define neurotoxin.

Neurotoxins are toxins that are poisonous or destructive to nerve tissue (causing neurotoxicity).[3]

In biology, poisons are substances that cause disturbances in organisms, usually by chemical reaction or other activity on the molecular scale, when an organism absorbs a sufficient quantity.[1][2]

Neurotoxicity is a form of toxicity in which a biological, chemical, or physical agent produces an adverse effect on the structure or function of the central and/or peripheral nervous system.[1]

What is capsaicin then?

The burning and painful sensations associated with capsaicin result from its chemical interaction with sensory neurons. Capsaicin, as a member of the vanilloid family, binds to a receptor called the vanilloid receptor subtype 1 (TRPV1).[52] First cloned in 1997, TRPV1 is an ion channel-type receptor.[53] TRPV1, which can also be stimulated with heat, protons and physical abrasion, permits cations to pass through the cell membrane when activated. The resulting depolarization of the neuron stimulates it to signal the brain. By binding to the TRPV1 receptor, the capsaicin molecule produces similar sensations to those of excessive heat or abrasive damage, explaining why the spiciness of capsaicin is described as a burning sensation.

It depolarizes your neurons and causes all kinds of effects on your nervous system. That covers both poison and neurotoxicity.

Here's a paper titled "Neurotoxic effect of capsaicin in mammals" - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

And here's one titled "Capsaicininduced neuronal degeneration in the brain and retina of preweanling rats" - https://onlinelibrary.wiley.co...

So if it looks like a neurotoxin, smells like a neurotoxin and acts like a neurotoxin, maybe it's a neurotoxin? And if he didn't get brain damage from eating it, the brain damage must have occurred prior to eating, because brain damaged he is. What sane person willingly consumes high quantities of neurotoxins as a sport?

How about the sum of accidental and deliberate gun death?

Both accidental and deliberate are extremely small especially if you take out suicide. Suicide on the other hand is the second leading cause of death of kids 10-17 but kids tend to use other methods like trains, jumping, and hanging rather than guns: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

At typical levels found on earth, radiation ranges from benign to beneficial. The fear however, causes real damage to both lives and the environment. The resulting hysteria and gross overreaction, needlessly displaced 150,000 people during the Fukushima accident, and the evacuation killed some 1600. The economic losses from the absurdly excessive cleanup efforts and the replacement of nuclear energy by imported fossil fuels, will be felt for decades. Worldwide, clean energy is slipping; despite our best efforts, the growth of fossil energy still outstrips that from all clean sources.

Unfortunately, the organizations which are responsible for protecting and informing the public have been complicit in propagating the lie that all radiation is dangerous, no matter how small the exposure. The evidence and science do not support this, yet 50 years later, it remains firmly entrenched as the foundation of policy. The disturbing means by which the establishment defends it, are covered in this excellent paper:
Epidemiology Without Biology: False Paradigms, Unfounded Assumptions, and Specious Statistics in Radiation Science.

I didn't realise it was that popular. I looked it up now and first hit on google says that 23% of sex-ed classes are abstinence. Of course that doesn't mean that birth control isn't taught and/or provided in those 23% of public schools.

Looking deeper into it (I wanted to see if any correlation exists between states with free BC and teenage pregnancies) and I found this public research over here.

Some interesting information from that document:

Among the 48 states in this analysis (all U.S. states except North Dakota and Wyoming), 21 states stressed abstinence-only education in their 2005 state laws and/or policies (level 3), 7 states emphasized abstinence education (level 2), 11 states covered abstinence in the context of comprehensive sex education (level 1), and 9 states did not mention abstinence (level 0) in their state laws or policies (Figure 1). In 2005, level 0 states had an average (± standard error) teen pregnancy rate of 58.78 (±4.96), level 1 states averaged 56.36 (±3.94), level 2 states averaged 61.86 (±3.93), and level 3 states averaged 73.24 (±2.58) teen pregnancies per 1000 girls aged 14â"19 (Table 3).

The most effective method (assuming that the study had a sound methodology) appears to be comprehensive sex-ee rather than BC only. The studies conclusion mentions this as well.

It is also interesting to note that even the states with comprehensive sex-ed had more than double the teen pregnancy rate of other countries. I take that to mean that there is some other factor on teen prengancy rates that has a larger impact on the rate than sex-ed.

For example, the difference in rate between comprehensive sex-ed and abstinence only sex-ed is 16.8 - this is a smaller difference than than the difference between the US rate and other developer countries' rates: the US' best rate is 30.6 higher, 37.56 higher, 44.56 higher, 27.16 higher and 15.06 higher than the other countries in the study.

This tells me that merely providing comprehensive sex-ed and banning abstinence-only sex-ed like other countries do would still leave the US with a rate so much higher it can only be regarded as an outlier.

These researchers should have looked at the results as an opportunity to research what factors influence the average rate in other countries to be so much lower than the lowest in the US.

Replacing absintence-only sex-ed with comprehensive sex-ed doesn't fix the US' teen pregnancy rate. It lowers it, yes, but not by much, comparatively.

Yeah, what you said. Tidal volume of human lungs (the amount we actually breath in and out per breath) is a bit over 0.5 liters. We breathe 12-20 times per minute, say 16. Thus we breathe in roughly 8 liters of air per minute just being inside a bathroom. A typical bathroom stay is (very roughly) 2 minutes or so if you are only urinating and are male, 4 or 5 minutes if you are urinating and are female (based on observations, not experience), and if you defecate anywhere from 5 to 15 minutes or even longer. Hence just using a bathroom for any purpose has you moving 16 to 120 liters of bathroom air through your lungs. When you smell bad smells in a bathroom, your olfactory system is literally reacting to microparticles of toilet water, urine, and feces in the air that are in the very ACT of being deposited on soft, wet, warm tissue.

One reason we have an evolved aversion to certain smells is that yes, just the act of breathing can nucleate you with bad bacteria or viruses, although our noses and sinuses are also evolved to at least try to protect us by trapping bad stuff before it reaches the lungs per se and flush it via nose drip either down to where it is swallowed (the stomach is a pretty good sanitizer for non-intestinal bacteria with a pH around 1) or blown or dripped out the nose itself. That runny nose you hate is your body trying to protect you from stuff riding along with the pollen and dust mites and human ejecta you are breathing all the time, although (of course) some bacteria and viruses make their living riding along with precisely that drip. It's a war between the collection of cells that somehow becomes "you" and every other cell or replicating molecule or oxidative/toxic molecule in the Universe, and life is one long holding action in the war.

Our immune systems do, in fact, get stronger with use. My wife is a physician -- she sees sick people, sometimes very sick people, almost every day. Sure, she practices hygiene to the point where the VA hospital where she works had a hard time fingerprinting her when she started there -- doctors actually wash their hands so frequently that they wash their own fingerprints nearly off -- but there is no way to eliminate a perpetual rain of contact with sneezed, breathed, coughed bacteria and viruses. My wife almost NEVER gets sick. She has the metaphorical immune system of a rhinoceros, kept strong by constant, daily use.

The truth is that we all tend to develop herd immunity to the bacteria and many of the viruses that are local to our community. E coli is at the same time bad, but also a normal resident of the human gut. Your family and probably most of your friends and co-workers have more or less the same strains of "tolerated" enterococcus. Your gut contains lots of other "pathogenic" bacteria -- notably streptococcus. A nice figure is here:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

Your stool IS almost entirely bacteria. The problems arise when you hit doses of e coli from DIFFERENT human herds, or different species. If you travel to mexico, or india, you are likely enough to get "Delhi Belly" -- a nasty infection arising from your body meeting perfectly normal bacteria from a DIFFERENT herd. Amazingly, people travelling from India to the US for the first time are not that unlikely to have the exact same thing happen to them even though our water supply is for the most part pretty clean and reasonably sterile, because you can't avoid being exposed to the principle herd bacteria of the place you live. You'll breathe them in in any public restroom, make contact with them on every doorknob, every dollar bill, every restaurant table, every human hand you shake, every breath you breathe in a public space where people are talking, laughing, coughing, sneezing.

The entire article misses this point. The more you protect yourself from your environment, the more difficult it is to develop and maintain the critical herd immunity that KEEPS you

It isn't. Ignoring the fact that you're a chimera and a mosaic, which means you can have multiple combinations of those, we know from genetic genealogy that 111 markers will be sufficient to uniquely identify the group that comprises every relative up to three steps away (so third cousins, great grandparents, etc).

Fine, if you don't like my 50 common variants number, then I'll suggest 120 variants: 111 [oddly-specific] to get down to familial group, and another 10 or so to identify a single person within that group. Whether it's 50 or 500, that's still well within the realm of cheap targeted SNPchip technology.

You'd need far, far more markers to uniquely identify you.... You'd need full genome sequences from multiple collection spots across the body, plus sequencing of the sample, for that.

There's a big difference between uniquely identifying someone, and fully describing their genome. I agree that a full description of a person's genome would require extensive whole-genome sequencing, but that's not necessary for forensic purposes. For monozygotic twins it gets a bit trickier, but for any other comparisons uniqueness is less than half an hour of nanopore sequencing away:

Rapid re-identification of human samples using portable DNA sequencing

At roughly $10,000 a pop, plus borrowing a computer powerful enough to determine the point of intercept from the nearest sample, you're looking at more than most police departments have in budget even for coffee and doughnuts

Moving away from SNPchips, 40X genome coverage can be done for less than $1000 now.

Estimated PromethION sequencing costs from Clive Brown

The reason antibiotics are losing effectiveness is due to agricultural practices and horizontal gene transfer as well as overuse or inappropriate use such as for viral infections or not finishing treatments. Most damage was done simply to make meat slightly cheaper to produce. It is fed 24/7/365 to animals stuffed cheek to jowl, with the overflow and waste washed into the waterways. This develops resistance faster than most any method short of purposefully engineering biological weapons. For that slim profit margin increase we have traded the modern safety that made dying of a small cut or inconsequential infection unheard of in most of the world. At this rate it's going to resemble ancient times when any surgery at all, even simple stitches, brought a high chance of a fatal infection.

just remember though, we can't have any regulations to fix it because that would not be 'business friendly', it would make you a pinko SJW commie fascist to suggest it.

This could help, in some way: "The connection between nutrition and depression" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

The reason antibiotics are losing effectiveness is due to agricultural practices and horizontal gene transfer as well as overuse or inappropriate use such as for viral infections or not finishing treatments. Most damage was done simply to make meat slightly cheaper to produce. It is fed 24/7/365 to animals stuffed cheek to jowl, with the overflow and waste washed into the waterways. This develops resistance faster than most any method short of purposefully engineering biological weapons. For that slim profit margin increase we have traded the modern safety that made dying of a small cut or inconsequential infection unheard of in most of the world. At this rate it's going to resemble ancient times when any surgery at all, even simple stitches, brought a high chance of a fatal infection.

So, folks who commit suicide aren't dead? Good to know. Or just not important? Irrelevant? Ignorable?

I think it's more that you're talking about a very small number of people. As individuals I'm sure somebody cares about them, but using suicides to inform policy that affects a large segment of the population (like increasing gun control) is stupid.

When guns are involved, they usually succeed.

But aren't guns everywhere in America? Something like a 40% household gun ownership rate? And yet of about 500k suicide attempts in a given year, about 45k of them succeed, half of those with guns. How do you explain that?

So firearms are used in about half of successful suicides, but around 5% of suicide attempts involve guns. How are you so sure that those 5% wouldn't try a different method and be successful at it? Here are some stats about suicide in Japan vs the US, btw: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

Obviously you wouldn't call for a ban of trains or ropes, because you realize that the number of people affected is very large compared to the number of people who use trains or ropes for suicide. Why don't you see the same for guns?

They actually won't. The higher you make the barriers to someone offing themselves, the less likely they are to do it. Suicidal person walks out onto a bridge to discover there's a high barrier preventing them from jumping off? They're not terribly likely to walk to another bridge and try again.

But why do you care so much about suicide? Let's analyze your bridge example a bit more. Most people don't try to jump off a bridge for some non-suicidal reason (very few base jumpers as a percent of population, for instance), so putting barriers up doesn't affect them. But imagine if we said, people are jumping off bridges so let's just ban bridges entirely! Now you're impacting a large number of people who use the bridge, to save a small number of people from suicide. Nobody would support that. People don't care that much about suicide.

Having a firearm easily accessible greatly increases the probability that the person attempting suicide will succeed in their endeavour.

Doesn't seem to stop the Japanese https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

A gun death is a gun death, whether it's self inflicted, accidental, or intentional.

Well you just divided them into meaningful subcategories, so no.

But even if you were right, why not extend it and say a death is a death, and not get so worked up about the subcategory of gun deaths?

> You've proven increasing the number of guns in the U.S. doesn't result in more people being murdered. Congratulations.

Nah, you've just proven how to hide truth with misleading statistics. For example you cited homicides in general, not gun deaths.

In fact, gun deaths and gun ownership are almost linerally correlated. Here is a chart of state gun deaths vs gun ownership rates.

And from a study published in the American Journal of Public Health:

Conclusions. We observed a robust correlation between higher levels of gun ownership and higher firearm homicide rates. Although we could not determine causation, we found that states with higher rates of gun ownership had disproportionately large numbers of deaths from firearm-related homicides.

GMO is not wide spread.

The USDA data says otherwise. So does data from the NIH. You might want to look into it. For many key crops the vast majority of acreage (80%+) is genetically engineered varieties.

Lol ... what a fucked argument is that?

It's called evolution. Do I really have to spell it out for you? 90+% of your genome is identical to dozens of other species and double digit percentages of it is identical to most species on earth. That's how evolution works. We have DNA from every species up the chain in our evolutionary tree, most of which are not human.

ALL DNA in a human is either human or from an RNA virus, as sure as hell you have no Dandoline or jelly fish DNA in your body ...

Wrong again my friend. A non-trivial percentage of your DNA is IDENTICAL to those species. And the origin of that DNA wasn't from humans.

The odds of success are even worse for student-athletes aiming for a career in professional sports. Yet the suicide rate among student athletes is lower than for other college students. Perhaps those jocks aren't as dumb as the nerds assumed them to be? None of my athlete friends from high school made it into professional sports, but all of them seem to have found successful and fulfilling careers in other fields.

I suspect what's going on is most people's mistaken approach to sunk costs. Post-grads have so much invested in their education in their chosen field that they find it difficult to give it all up in search of a job in other fields. Athletes knew from the beginning the odds were against them, so have always had the idea in the back of their minds that they might end up working in another field. So when their desired career path turns into misery, post-grads persist on their chosen self-destructive path, while athletes see the writing on the wall and drop back to one of their secondary career choices.

Note that they also show the rate of cancer based on the initial population of 90 subjects, regardless of how many died during the study.

For example, there were no heart cancers in the control group after two years, but only 25 of the original 90 rats were still alive. In the group with the highest level of exposure there was 1 cancer in the 60 that survived. Did the radiation cause that cancer? Or does the rate of cancer go up with age? Draw your own conclusions.

From TFA: "The culprit is a chemical produced in the bean roasting process that is a known carcinogen". Acrylamide in foods, including coffee, appears to be a byproduct of the Maillard reaction (the darker you make your toast, the more acrylamide you consume, for example, and bread crust itself contains acrylamide); it's also found in cigarette smoke, and is the primary source of exposure by smokers. An article about acrylamide points out that it has been part of humanity's diet for as long as we've been cooking our food.

Looks like we'll have to post a warning on our Grills that a nice steak with grill marks is a carcinogen. And lest vegans decide they are exempt, so is that grilled tofu.

And oddly enough, coffee drinkers live longer. https://www.healthline.com/nut...

This one will be overturned quickly.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised to find that someone marketed such cigarettes considering this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

Night owls don't stay up late and wake up late because they like to party and are lazy to wake up in the morning. Researchers have found that not everyone's biological clock runs at exactly 24 hours. Those whose clock runs slower (say 25 hours) are night owls - they tend to still be alert after the earth's rotation says they should've gone to sleep, and likewise tend to wake up later because their biological clock put them to sleep later. Those whose clock runs faster (say 23 hours) are morning larks - they tend to wake up earlier because their biological clock put them to sleep more quickly, and likewise they tend to fall asleep earlier in the night.

BTW, studies have shown people's average biological clock (when deprived of reference to day/night cycles) is 24.2 hours to 25 hours. So it's actually the night owls who are normal, and the morning larks who are abnormal.

From TFA: "The culprit is a chemical produced in the bean roasting process that is a known carcinogen". Acrylamide in foods, including coffee, appears to be a byproduct of the Maillard reaction (the darker you make your toast, the more acrylamide you consume, for example, and bread crust itself contains acrylamide); it's also found in cigarette smoke, and is the primary source of exposure by smokers. An article about acrylamide points out that it has been part of humanity's diet for as long as we've been cooking our food.

Yea... we don't share a common vocabulary and text has it's limits.

Read these and then try to read my statement below them in light of them.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

https://www.sciencedirect.com/...

https://www.fasciablaster.com/...

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

Note especially:

Massage Treatment

Each subject received a total of eight 30-minute massage therapy sessions during the 4-week treatment period. Two massage therapy sessions were administered each week and were separated by at least 48 hours. Massage therapy treatments were conducted by certified massage therapists, each with a minimum of 1000 hours of training and with 3 to 21 years of professional practice. A standardized, precise 30-minute massage treatment protocol was developed, refined, and practiced by each therapist for 4 weeks before the study began. The treatment protocol consisted of 6 distinct phases within the 30-minute time frame; brief descriptions of each phase follow.

Phase 1â"preparatory tissue warm-up

(3 minutes) included bilateral pressure moving from the lower cervical region to the occiput. This procedure was repeated, with completion of 3 passes bilaterally.

Phase 2â"myofascial release

(5 minutes) included 3 palmar glide passes each over the deltopectoral, deltoid, and posterior deltoid regions bilaterally. Additionally, 3 passes with a soft fist contact were made from the occiput to the lateral shoulder along the upper trapezius bilaterally.

Phase 3â"axial cervical traction

(2 minutes) included application of manual axial traction with 1 hand under the head and neck and the other hand on the forehead. Gentle traction was applied with the head first slightly flexed, then with slight right lateral flexion, and finally with the head in slight left lateral flexion. Traction was held for 15 seconds in each position.

Phase 4â"trigger point therapy procedure

(15 minutes) consisted of scanning palpation of the upper trapezius, sternocleidomastoid, suboccipital, splenius capitis, levator scapulae, and temporalis muscles to locate and manually treat trigger points.16 When located, active trigger points were treated by pincer or flat palpation with just enough pressure to elicit referred pain or autonomic referral phenomena. That pressure was maintained on the trigger point until the client reported that the referral pain had dissipated or for a maximum of 2 minutes. Pressure on the active trigger point was then slowly eased to elicit a vascular flushing. This procedure was repeated 3 to 5 times on each trigger point. Typically, 6 active trigger points were treated in the time allotted.

Results
A decrease in both frequency and duration of chronic headaches.

(But also notice a small sample size for this study. /shrug)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

----

Okay, so in light of those:

Imagine your entire body is enclosed by a layer beneath your skin of soft leathery material which can become less flexible in certain directions and put tremendous pressure on underlying tissues. Pressure applied in directions different than that of the pressure can soften, lengthen, and extend the soft leathery material, reducing pressure on the underlying tissues.

Especially in the case of chronic headaches and migraines this can reduce the duration and intensity of headaches and migraines ( migraines having nausea, light sensitivity, and visual distortion in addition to pain). In my personal experience, the migraines f

Yea... we don't share a common vocabulary and text has it's limits.

Read these and then try to read my statement below them in light of them.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

https://www.sciencedirect.com/...

https://www.fasciablaster.com/...

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

Note especially:

Massage Treatment

Each subject received a total of eight 30-minute massage therapy sessions during the 4-week treatment period. Two massage therapy sessions were administered each week and were separated by at least 48 hours. Massage therapy treatments were conducted by certified massage therapists, each with a minimum of 1000 hours of training and with 3 to 21 years of professional practice. A standardized, precise 30-minute massage treatment protocol was developed, refined, and practiced by each therapist for 4 weeks before the study began. The treatment protocol consisted of 6 distinct phases within the 30-minute time frame; brief descriptions of each phase follow.

Phase 1â"preparatory tissue warm-up

(3 minutes) included bilateral pressure moving from the lower cervical region to the occiput. This procedure was repeated, with completion of 3 passes bilaterally.

Phase 2â"myofascial release

(5 minutes) included 3 palmar glide passes each over the deltopectoral, deltoid, and posterior deltoid regions bilaterally. Additionally, 3 passes with a soft fist contact were made from the occiput to the lateral shoulder along the upper trapezius bilaterally.

Phase 3â"axial cervical traction

(2 minutes) included application of manual axial traction with 1 hand under the head and neck and the other hand on the forehead. Gentle traction was applied with the head first slightly flexed, then with slight right lateral flexion, and finally with the head in slight left lateral flexion. Traction was held for 15 seconds in each position.

Phase 4â"trigger point therapy procedure

(15 minutes) consisted of scanning palpation of the upper trapezius, sternocleidomastoid, suboccipital, splenius capitis, levator scapulae, and temporalis muscles to locate and manually treat trigger points.16 When located, active trigger points were treated by pincer or flat palpation with just enough pressure to elicit referred pain or autonomic referral phenomena. That pressure was maintained on the trigger point until the client reported that the referral pain had dissipated or for a maximum of 2 minutes. Pressure on the active trigger point was then slowly eased to elicit a vascular flushing. This procedure was repeated 3 to 5 times on each trigger point. Typically, 6 active trigger points were treated in the time allotted.

Results
A decrease in both frequency and duration of chronic headaches.

(But also notice a small sample size for this study. /shrug)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

----

Okay, so in light of those:

Imagine your entire body is enclosed by a layer beneath your skin of soft leathery material which can become less flexible in certain directions and put tremendous pressure on underlying tissues. Pressure applied in directions different than that of the pressure can soften, lengthen, and extend the soft leathery material, reducing pressure on the underlying tissues.

Especially in the case of chronic headaches and migraines this can reduce the duration and intensity of headaches and migraines ( migraines having nausea, light sensitivity, and visual distortion in addition to pain). In my personal experience, the migraines f

Yea... we don't share a common vocabulary and text has it's limits.

Read these and then try to read my statement below them in light of them.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

https://www.sciencedirect.com/...

https://www.fasciablaster.com/...

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

Note especially:

Massage Treatment

Each subject received a total of eight 30-minute massage therapy sessions during the 4-week treatment period. Two massage therapy sessions were administered each week and were separated by at least 48 hours. Massage therapy treatments were conducted by certified massage therapists, each with a minimum of 1000 hours of training and with 3 to 21 years of professional practice. A standardized, precise 30-minute massage treatment protocol was developed, refined, and practiced by each therapist for 4 weeks before the study began. The treatment protocol consisted of 6 distinct phases within the 30-minute time frame; brief descriptions of each phase follow.

Phase 1â"preparatory tissue warm-up

(3 minutes) included bilateral pressure moving from the lower cervical region to the occiput. This procedure was repeated, with completion of 3 passes bilaterally.

Phase 2â"myofascial release

(5 minutes) included 3 palmar glide passes each over the deltopectoral, deltoid, and posterior deltoid regions bilaterally. Additionally, 3 passes with a soft fist contact were made from the occiput to the lateral shoulder along the upper trapezius bilaterally.

Phase 3â"axial cervical traction

(2 minutes) included application of manual axial traction with 1 hand under the head and neck and the other hand on the forehead. Gentle traction was applied with the head first slightly flexed, then with slight right lateral flexion, and finally with the head in slight left lateral flexion. Traction was held for 15 seconds in each position.

Phase 4â"trigger point therapy procedure

(15 minutes) consisted of scanning palpation of the upper trapezius, sternocleidomastoid, suboccipital, splenius capitis, levator scapulae, and temporalis muscles to locate and manually treat trigger points.16 When located, active trigger points were treated by pincer or flat palpation with just enough pressure to elicit referred pain or autonomic referral phenomena. That pressure was maintained on the trigger point until the client reported that the referral pain had dissipated or for a maximum of 2 minutes. Pressure on the active trigger point was then slowly eased to elicit a vascular flushing. This procedure was repeated 3 to 5 times on each trigger point. Typically, 6 active trigger points were treated in the time allotted.

Results
A decrease in both frequency and duration of chronic headaches.

(But also notice a small sample size for this study. /shrug)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

----

Okay, so in light of those:

Imagine your entire body is enclosed by a layer beneath your skin of soft leathery material which can become less flexible in certain directions and put tremendous pressure on underlying tissues. Pressure applied in directions different than that of the pressure can soften, lengthen, and extend the soft leathery material, reducing pressure on the underlying tissues.

Especially in the case of chronic headaches and migraines this can reduce the duration and intensity of headaches and migraines ( migraines having nausea, light sensitivity, and visual distortion in addition to pain). In my personal experience, the migraines f

You see Jews everywhere, plotting against you? Seriously, you need to seek psychiatric help. You could be suffering from schizophrenia.

To my mind, providing an on-site service staffed with real people who make real mistakes is way different than collecting money for marketing someone else's product. I can see how Amazon will face the same lawsuit challenges that doctors in America current endure. A client will sue claiming that something got damaged or stolen. And talk about going after deep pockets; none deeper.

On the other hand, we know that Amazon is getting into the health-care biz. Perhaps this is a foot-in-the-door to at-home nursing services for the soon-to-be-senile baby boomers. Now there's a market waiting for exploitation.

I have and continue to struggle with chronic depression, including extended periods of suicidal ideation. To be frank, my own experience sounds closer to your own (in as much as such a brief description can tell me) - I am more familiar with a constant, extended period of suicidal 'desire' than I am with short lived, but perhaps more acute urges.

I am deeply sympathetic to your own experience and while I expect that there's a degree of commonality in what we and others go through, I don't expect that my own experiences necessarily reflect those of others. I was careful to state 'many' and not all and go on to stress that simply removing guns will not stop everyone who is suicidal. Perhaps I overstated the case, but it's based on studies and reports like this;

Suicide, Guns, and Public Policy
and less formally (although it has no links to the studies it presumably drawn on)
School Shootings and Gun Control: A Focus on Suicide

I am not sure that easy access to a firearm would have made much of a difference in my own experience, nor from the sound of it in yours - but I've seen this same information from various sources for some time, and can only conclude that for some people it can and will make a difference.

A quick google. Maybe you should do some more reading

Subject could be just poked, without actually being stuck with a needle.
Does not really work, as poking is enough in most cases.

Acupuncture Just As Effective Without Needle Puncture

Subject could be given acupuncture without knowing which kind is it ("right", "wrong", "fake") - while being informed that the choice will be random.
That is not what a double blind study is about. The subject has to be convinced that it gets the real thing.

Sham acupuncture may be as efficacious as true acupuncture: a systematic review of clinical trials

I really wonder why intelligent people like you claim that. Hint: you can not double blind (neither the applyer of the needle nor the receiver know where he needle is placed) manual treat a human body.

Not true at all. You can simulate the needle placement with other stimulus. An electric shock can feel like a needle prick as long as the patient cannot see it. And there have been studies about the effectiveness of double blinding for acupuncture specifically.

You want to tell me that you have a study in the US that proves that 4 billion people outside of the USA are treated wrong

First off there are NOT 4 billion people receiving acupuncture so lets dispense with that nonsense right away. Acupuncture is used by a small percentage of the population - most of whom are inclined towards "alternative medicine" which for the most part is a PC term for quackery. Second, there are studies on the effectiveness of acupuncture as a treatment and they mostly find that it is no better than placebo. So YES, I am saying EXACTLY that people are being treated wrong. People take all sorts of folk remedies all over the globe that have no evidence of efficacy.

Half the planet is using acupuncture and related medical treatment like Shiatsu and Thai Massage

More than half the planet also believes that there is an invisible man in the sky who created them and that they should obey despite there being precisely zero evidence for the existence of such a being. Just because a lot of people believe something doesn't equal evidence. There are quite a number of treatments that insurance pays for for which the evidence of effectiveness is scant to non existent. They pay for it because the evidence there is limited evidence for or against its effectiveness. Most insurance in the US will not cover acupuncture under normal circumstances. Some insurance companies will turn a blind eye to it with a prescription from a doctor but this is the exception rather than the rule.

It is much more plausible that the US pharm. and health care industry simply is funding fraud studies and dismisses simple treatments because they rather like to sell pharmaceutics instead.

Only to an idiot who is inclined to believe conspiracy theories over scientific studies. Are you seriously arguing that modern medicine does not work despite the ample proof that it does.

I really wonder why intelligent people like you claim that. Hint: you can not double blind (neither the applyer of the needle nor the receiver know where he needle is placed) manual treat a human body.

Not true at all. You can simulate the needle placement with other stimulus. An electric shock can feel like a needle prick as long as the patient cannot see it. And there have been studies about the effectiveness of double blinding for acupuncture specifically.

You want to tell me that you have a study in the US that proves that 4 billion people outside of the USA are treated wrong

First off there are NOT 4 billion people receiving acupuncture so lets dispense with that nonsense right away. Acupuncture is used by a small percentage of the population - most of whom are inclined towards "alternative medicine" which for the most part is a PC term for quackery. Second, there are studies on the effectiveness of acupuncture as a treatment and they mostly find that it is no better than placebo. So YES, I am saying EXACTLY that people are being treated wrong. People take all sorts of folk remedies all over the globe that have no evidence of efficacy.

Half the planet is using acupuncture and related medical treatment like Shiatsu and Thai Massage

More than half the planet also believes that there is an invisible man in the sky who created them and that they should obey despite there being precisely zero evidence for the existence of such a being. Just because a lot of people believe something doesn't equal evidence. There are quite a number of treatments that insurance pays for for which the evidence of effectiveness is scant to non existent. They pay for it because the evidence there is limited evidence for or against its effectiveness. Most insurance in the US will not cover acupuncture under normal circumstances. Some insurance companies will turn a blind eye to it with a prescription from a doctor but this is the exception rather than the rule.

It is much more plausible that the US pharm. and health care industry simply is funding fraud studies and dismisses simple treatments because they rather like to sell pharmaceutics instead.

Only to an idiot who is inclined to believe conspiracy theories over scientific studies. Are you seriously arguing that modern medicine does not work despite the ample proof that it does.

Acupuncture is not based on 'points' on meridians.

Acupuncture is pretty much not based on anything at all. Certainly not based on scientific evidence. The evidence regarding its efficacy is thin and it clearly is being used to "treat" far too many conditions for which there is no evidence that it has any effect. There appears to be some evidence that it can help certain pain conditions (though this is still being evaluated) but the mechanism of action is unclear and the clinical practice guidelines are inconsistent to put it mildly. The NIH has been researching acupuncture and until they can show with appropriate studies evidence of effectiveness beyond placebo and a mechanism of action acupuncture should be regarded with skepticism.

If layman do a 'double blind' study it is most likely that both needles are at the wrong point :)

Most double blind studies of acupuncture to date show that it is nothing but a placebo under most circumstances and for most conditions.

Yup. Pity it has nothing to do with 'nitric oxide' which was what the GP (you?) told people to look for.

Did you read the result? No difference between acupuncture and sham where here the sham was just needling anywhere that wasn't an 'acupuncture point'.

So the study shows that needling people works. Other studies that have tested with endorphin inhibitors have shown a reduced effect, so the primary mechanism for the analgesic effect of acupuncture is likely to be the release of same.

Needling anywhere reduces pain. No meridians. No acupuncture points. No effect on anything other than some forms of chronic pain.
I've acknowledge in another post that I'm aware of the studies that have shown that needling has an effect on some chronic pain. I've still got no idea what you think except that people don't believe you 'because racism'.

"The results of epidemiological studies in various countries show that radon and its progeny cause carcinogenic effects on mine workers. Therefore, it becomes of paramount importance to monitor radon concentrations and consequently determine the radon dose rates in coal mines for the protection of coal miners. " from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... ... Maybe abandoned salt mines? :-)

The only thing I can see referencing the NIH is the link in:

A study of much higher levels of cell phone radiofrequency (RF) radiation, from the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP), has also reported finding the same unusual cancer called Schwannoma of the heart in male rats treated at the highest dose.

You'll note the important point in the quote there: "much higher levels of cell phone radiofrequency (RF) radiation"; ie, not environmental levels.

You mean offices deliberately use a toxic substance that causes deadly lung disease to mask odors? I can't believe that is legal.

So we are to capture and freeze the state of mind right before death.

According to this study, neurons shut off upon sensing a diminishing amount of oxygen after heart failure, stopping to generate signals. So, there's no state to be preserved.

The fact that homosexuality is very widespread among other species suggests the trait has some fairly general survival utility (i.e. it's normal, as asserted by the OP).

It's probably more than just a speculation at this point.