Slashdot Mirror

Get the dosage wrong, though, and you end up with a building full of Smurfs!

http://www.oprah.com/

Since hours actually and seems no one has noticed there yet or they are unable to fix it, or I get a cashed version of the site.

(And please don't ask me why I visited that site ;) )

> Ya, my family was positivily saved by crack and MDMA. What drugs saved your family?

Dude, even think-of-the-children central - Oprah is has been talking about the theraputic uses of MDMA.

Here's her list.

Where are the "stupid" books? William Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury? Gabriel Garcia Marquez's One Hundred Years of Solitude? A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens?

P.R. Alert: This Slashdot story is a public relations release. The misleading Slashdot summary says, "Other sources have picked up the story...". In reality, they are inserting press releases everywhere they can, and the kind of work being done is not new.

It was proven long ago that dogs can smell chemicals associated with cancer. For example, see this 2006 article in National Geographic News, Dogs Smell Cancer in Patients' Breath, Study Shows. That's part of what started the present interest in making a machine to detect cancer.

This February 2007 article is more interesting: Compact lung-cancer breath test may be possible. Quote: "The test uses 36 chemical dots that react to telltale compounds in a person's breath. The dots change colour when exposed to compounds that signify the presence of lung cancer."

This February 2007 article gives more information about how it is done: US Scientists Prototype Breath Test For Lung Cancer

Even Oprah's magazine had article in June 2009 about dogs sniffing cancer and making machines to imitate dogs: Sniffing Out Cancer. Quote: "The researchers are collaborating with scientists at the University of Maine, who are trying to mimic the dogs' cancer-sniffing abilities with laboratory machines." Another quote: "So far, the Pine Street Foundation dogs have done 25,000 scent trials for ovarian cancer."

Slashdot: Not quite as current as Oprah? Old news for nerds who were playing video games and wouldn't know the difference?

Many researchers are doing similar work. For example, see the February 2008 article, The Cancer Breathalyzer. Quote: "Dr Yousef ... believes that the breath test will provide a more convenient and rapid method for diagnosing serious diseases than blood or urine analysis, and will require minimal medical intervention."

Other researchers are studying the possibility of using blood tests to detect cancer. See the December 2007 article, Study points to possibility of blood test to detect lung cancer.

Here is a November 2005 research paper that surveys some of the issues of early detection of cancer: The Progress and Promise of Molecular Imaging Probes in Oncologic Drug Development.

This is going to be a first[1] ...

Calorie Restriction Diet

Normally, I dismiss the idea of dieting or coerced exercise (gymns) as the wrong answers to what are fundamentally very simple questions, but the concepts behind a calorie restricted diet may be rooted in our physiological makeup.

At the very least, it might encourage the submitter to question and possibly re-evaluate how and what he eats.

If he needs to improve on a sedentary lifestyle (and job), then he'll have to take advantage of what time he does have. Becoming more active while at work and doing such things as walking, running up and down stairs, or even Yoga might work, but I wouldn't rely on those approaches as anything more than brief respites as most workplace environments aren't conducive to anything but work.

By contrast, walking or biking all or a portion of the way to work would be a no-brainer.

------------
1. I have an excuse (honest!). Note that reading the article will spare you the estrogren-overloaded environment I experienced.

If I were Sarah Palin, I would first go have the sex talk with my daughter and show her how to use vibrators as commanded by Oprah herself: http://www.oprah.com/article/relationships/20090326-tows-talking-to-kids-about-sex/13

Then I would sit naked in front of a mirror and play with myself until I would probably die of starvation and dehydration .

I beg to differ. I think most of the /. community will agree that the 'top' 2% of the worlds scientist have to make up for the other 98% of people's ignorance. Celebrities typically sit on the lower 15% as far as I'm concerned. But there are plenty of people who look at certain celebrities as demi-gods. Whatever they say goes.

If Brittany Spears can tell kids what's fashionable, then they're certainly just as willing to agree with her if she made an absurd claim that the reason the moon stays in orbit is because it's being pulled away from the earth, otherwise it would crash.

Hell, if Natalie Portman said, "Pi is exactly 3!" I'm sure many dotter's might be inclined to agree.

You must watch Bill and Melinda Gates on [Pope]rah. http://www2.oprah.com/tows/pastshows/200604/tows_p ast_20060411.jhtml

Here are some websites to check out if you liked that!
http://www.successories.com/
http://www.oprah.com/
http://www.mjbovo.com/Affirmations.htm
http://www.lifetimetv.com/
http://fukkad.com/jokes/office/office.shtml
http://www.familycircus.com/
http://www.garfield.com/
http://www.afa.net/

http://bbsnews.net/bw2003-04-05.html http://www.rense.com/general20/innocentmanshot.htm http://www2.oprah.com/tows/pastshows/200505/tows_p ast_20050526.jhtml http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2735735.stm http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=local&id =4212279 http://www.local6.com/news/4174721/detail.html

I'm glad she tore into him as well. I actually ended up seeing it by accident and really got into it when she started asking all the big questions.

Still, why wasn't that her first reaction?
I think Oprah is just a naturally positive person. I also think that she thought the show's research team had done enough research on the book before she aired the original book club episode. I think she should be somewhat angry at her own research crew also; they should have been able to find out that the book wasn't completely fact from the very first show.

I have to say though, that this James Frey must have thought he was a real bigshot to want to lie to Oprah. Who in their right mind would even try and lie to Oprah about anything. This is what he gets...

Oprah ran lies about Hurricane Katrina on her show and she never retracted them. She allowed Mayor Ray Nagin on September 5th claim that "They're murdering people in there (the Superdome)." Louisiana National Guard and State health department officials said no one had been murdered inside the stadium. So what's worse? A book about an addict that was spiced up or a public official using Oprah's airwaves to promote false news to a nation that public policy might have been based off?

I'm not sure how Opera makes any money with its small user base, with as much money as they spend on advertising. First they gave away like 250 cars, and now they're subsidizing this Opera Book Club thing.

I'd be more impressed if Oprah offered support for BitTorrent.

Yeah, let's celebrate the spurious frittering away of wealth by the rich! Hooray for Mr. Branson for funding a school-boy dream project that will help his recently announced space-tourism company. Hooray for Steve Forbes for his ridiculous megalomaniacal presidential runs. ( I mean, who hasn't wanted to be president?) And Kudos to The Trump for walking away from bankruptcy with a cool $2 million a year at the expense of investors. Paris Hilton take note - you are a star every time you drop an absurd amount on... well whatever Paris Hilton spends her money on.

Really, all these folks are much better than those dull philanthropic types like Oprah , Bill Gates href=http://www.gatesfoundation.org/default.htm>Bi ll Gates and George Soros. What fun is there in championing human kidness and decency, public health and global economic fairness?

This world is full of people looking to satisfy their own ego-centric desires. Some have the moolah to fulfill the big ones, and some of them are more fun, but it is merely a question of scale. Branson is little better than the tight-fisted Krocs or Waltons. The really amazing people are the ones who use their wealth to do something to raise up their fellow humans.

You can find child prostitutes in any country in the world, including the US, UK, France, Germany, Austrailia, etc. It's not a problem that's unique to Asia, so don't try to paint it that way, please.

True, it's not a unique problem. But because Euro and US currency is so strong compared to these countries, you can get prostitutes for mere dollars. Secondly, law enforcement in these countries can literally be bought to turn a blind eye. The problem may be worldwide, but due to the ease of accessibility and the economics of the situation, Asian countries bear the brunt of the problem -- scratch that, poor countries with open borders for the influx of US and European "vacationers" bear the brunt of the problem.

Now back to the main point of this article. The social implications are chilling. Wives, do you know what your husbands did in that "business trip?" American women should be suspicious of their husband's behavior. It's a fact that a certain demographic of American women are unsuspectedly infected by their husbands.

I for one agree with proponents of the new law that if you commit a crime outside of your country, you can be prosecuted when you return, to the fullest extent of the law. If you were a Jon, preying upon children in Asian countries, the instant you step on US soil, your ass is grass. It's despicable what these Jons do. They have no idea of the global impact that these actions have -- ravaging the future of another country (the children), spreading disease and suffering, all for what? It's sick.

This is just free money.

No, it's not free money. It literally cost you a leg to get that money.

What tort reform like this does is give HMOs and insurance companies a hard number to factor in when calculating how much risk to take with someone's health.

If cutting a few corners will save 10 Million dollars over the course of the next 10 years but statistically there will be 30 people who are adversely affected by these cut corners, the company only has to do the math. 7.5 million dollars spent over 10 years as a result of settling the lawsuits, or 10 million dollars spent as a result of paying to do it right...

Capping awards has the effect of making profit more important than quality health care.

Medical mistakes kill more people in the US every year than tobacco! But who is it that the government shook down for money? "Big Tobacco"!

How about the guy who had his penis removed by mistake? Is $250,000 supposed to be just compensation for him? FUCK NO!

Tort "reform" would have the effect of limiting the responsibility that health care professionals have to take over the quality of their work.

LK

I believe my point of contention was with this part of the /. article:

Comic books are what novels used to be -- an accessible, vernacular form with mass appeal ... and then continued comparison to past novel writers in this thread's OP:

I'm pretty sure someone was saying that about Dickens in his day.

Within this, there seems to be two implicit issues. 1.) Both the original /. article and the OP are trying to push graphic novels into the same round hole of [often serialized, which I believe is part of why this cxn is being made] novels that are now easily part of the literary canon. 2.) There are certainly better heirs apparent to the "accessible, vernacular form with mass appeal" imo (granted I didn't touch on this at all originally) than the graphic novel.

Taken together, let me say that I simply explicitly disagree with the implied notion that graphic novels are taking over the spot originally held by "novel novels". Great authors are still writing novels that are great (aka "literature" in my book) and some are still hitting the mainstream culture with great success, of which I named two authors off the top of my head. Secondly, even within this ill-fated comparison, there are better pretenders to the crown -- the Silent Hill series comes to mind as a well-told story that's been quickly soaked up by the mass market, I imagine putting most every graphic novel to shame sales-wise. We should look to film and, in the future, Interactive Fiction, for the best fit in this category. Graphic novels are still a niche player in the field of general fictional stories.

Are graphic novels worthless? Obviously not, and your point is well taken -- I'm wrong to characterize them as simply mature outlets for superheroes. But are they "The New Mainstream Novels" as the NYT suggests and many here seem to believe? Certainly not. It would be wrong to believe an appreciation of the graphic novel is a good replacement for an appreciation of literatary novels. Heck folk, even Oprah's reading Tolstoy now. Get back on the bus.

That's right, Oprah.

She would win, by a landslide, and reverse all the EVILNESS that has been foisted upon us shrouded in patriotist clothing.

Go to her site and email her now!!!!!

That's right, you can get the latest Oprah browser here: ftp://ftp.oprah.com/pub/oprah/latest/.

Be sure to get the new DrPhil plugin. It will make every webpage tell it like it is!

(S'okay. I had to look up the spelling: Opera ;-) )

I hate Oprah's show. I give credit where credit is due the book club is a good list of modern literature. And the housewife comment I think proves how important the club was. Oprah helped to break down the idea that "literature" was only for the upper-middle class on up while the upper lower to middle-middle should be reading junk fiction.

Yes its a woman's list. Yes its a middle aged list. Yes its not my list. OTOH it was far and away the most important literature list produced in the United States during my lifetime. Anything that got millions of people reading quality books means a great deal.

Here's the real reason that women aren't taken seriously: www.oprah.com.

Since you care so much about your all mighty karma points, why don't you go hang out with Oprah Winfrey or something. Leave us the fuck alone, biznatch!

I think you mean Opera. Oprah is a talk-show host.
------

Interesting link referenced in this story. It links to none other than the web site of a well known creationist kook of talk.origins named Ted Holden.

The theory in his site is that dinosaurs must have experienced a reduced gravity (with respect to the present value) to be able support the massive weight of the larger species.

To support his argument he compares a very strong powerlifter to dinosaurs using the square cubed assumption for scaling (force produced by muscles goes up as a square of body length because it depends on cross section while weight goes up as the cube because it depends on volume).

Of course, the problem with all of this is that this scaling is way too simplistic since we are comparing apples to oranges (Homo sapiens to various sauropods, to be exact). Proof of this is that, contrary to Holden's claims, it doesn't even work for elephants.

From Holden's example, Kazmaier, weighing in at 340 lb., can do a 1000 lb. squat (not the strongest adjusting for body weight, see here, for an example). To see how this scales to a normal weight male (I shall consider myself at 175 lb. the norm for the sake of argument) we take the ratio my weight to Kazmaier's of 175/340 = 0.51. Taking the square cubed assumption it turns into .51^^(2/3) = .64 . meaning a normal 175 lb. person being able to lift .64 * 1340 lb. = 861 lb. to match Kazmaier's performance. As this figure includes body weight it turns into the ability to squat 861 lb.- 175 lb. = 686 lb.

Now, the most I've squatted is 450 lb. (which turns into 450 lb. + 175 lb. = 625 lb.) and I consider myself to have (for a nearly untrained person) near freakish lower body strength. I can assure any and all that I cannot move around comfortably with 450 lb. on my shoulders and can barely take some faltering steps in this situation (and, though I don't know the rules of powerlifting, I'pretty sure that the lift would not have been good enough to count in a competition --not that anyone would be likely to be impressed anyway).

Let's see what the most is that one can weight if the best lifting they can do would match my performance (better to compare myself --freakish lower body strength and all-- rather than a real athlete pushing the limits).

Using Holden's formula (which is correct, though its assumptions are flawed), we get:

625/175^^(2/3) = X/X^^(2/3)

Adult elephants, on the other hand, can weight a lot more than 8000 lb.. And to those who may point out that my own bipedalism puts me at a disadvantage, I shall point out that circus elephants seem to be able to get on their back feet with great ease (it certainly seems to take a lot less effort than it takes for me to squat a mere 450 lb.)

Thus, taking a more reasonable lift for the scaling exercise and following Holden's assumptions, not only should elephant's fail carrying around their own weight, but they should fail miserably.

But elephants, even very large ones, seem to manage quite well, thank you very much. Thus, my claim that Holden's assumptions do not really hold up under scrutiny is supported