Slashdot Mirror


Dye Used In Blue M&Ms Can Lessen Spinal Injury

SydShamino writes "Researchers at the University of Rochester Medical Center have found that the dye used in blue M&Ms and other foods can, when given intravenously to a lab rat shortly after a spinal injury, minimize secondary damage caused by the body when it kills off nearby healthy cells. The dye is called BBG or Brilliant Blue G. Given that 85% of spinal injury patients are currently untreated (and some doctors don't trust the treatment given to the other 15%), a relatively safe treatment like this could help preserve some function for thousands of patients. The best part is that in lab rats the subjects given the treatment turn blue." The researchers are "pulling together an application to be lodged with the FDA to stage the first clinical trials of BBG on human patients."

249 of 324 comments (clear)

  1. Sound Methods? by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Funny

    "... so every year we have a bring-your-child-to-work day where we inject some M&M dye into the lab rats and let the kids play with them. And Gunderson's kid has this nasty tendency to just baseball them into the wall and, well, we noticed the blue colored mice were recovering much better from the wall impact injuries ..."

    Seriously though is there like a lab out there giving rats spinal injuries and jacking them full of chemicals? Cause if there is, I've got my resume handy!

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Sound Methods? by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's probably better than actual conditions for lab rats.

      How do you think they determine what dose kills you? They inject 200 rats with an overdose of, say, acetaminophen, and wait for horrifyingly painful liver failure. I guess it's better than testing it on humans though.

    2. Re:Sound Methods? by 32771 · · Score: 1

      HA, that is funny!

      "Nedergaard knew that BBG could thwart the function of P2X7, and its similarity to a blue food dye approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1982 gave her the confidence to test it intravenously." still leaves this possibility open I guess.

      --
      Je me souviens.
    3. Re:Sound Methods? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      They inject 200 rats with an overdose of, say, acetaminophen, and wait for horrifyingly painful liver failure. I guess it's better than testing it on humans though.

      Why? Are rats less deserving of our sympathies than "intelligent" humans? Wouldn't it be /more/ humane to test on those creatures that can give informed consent?

    4. Re:Sound Methods? by petehead · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Wired article http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/07/bluerats/ notes that they dropped a 10 gram weight onto the backs of the mice while the mice were under anesthesia (it doesn't specify if the weight was made by ACME).

    5. Re:Sound Methods? by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      Yeah and if less than 100 rate die then it passes the LD50 Lethal Dosage 50% test. And then it can go on to be further tested for usage by the general public. This is the first thing PETA and animal rights activists point to when talking about testing cosmetics on animals, etc., "how much of this can we inject into a rabbit before 50% die, then run that through an FDA equasion to properly dilute it, package it and sell it for topical use only". I'm not a PETA fanatic, I just had to write a report about it in biology in 9th grade.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    6. Re:Sound Methods? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The funny thing is, if you want to poison a rat for scientific reasons, or (as in this case) break a rat's spine for scientific reasons, there are all sorts of rules to be followed, standards to be upheld, forms to be filed, etc.

      If you just have rats in your house/warehouse/store/(or heck, even your lab, as long as they aren't lab rats) you can put out backbreaking traps, glue traps that cause slow death by dehydration, warfarin baits, whatever you want and nobody will say a thing. No standards, just the maintanence guy hittin' em with a shovel if they are twitching too much for the garbage.

      Same thing in other areas: You don't need to deal with an IRB to raise feedlot pigs. And, for human testing, you (ostensibly at any rate) need informed consent, and various safeguards, IRB oversight, etc. If you need to spray your nerve toxin/probable human carcinogen on your crops, you just hire some undocumented mexican for $3.50 an hour, and throw him away if he breaks...

      I'm not arguing that science needs less scrutiny(unethical conduct is always bad, and "trust us, its for the greater good" doesn't have an especially noble history; but I do think that science draws flack well out of proportion to its relative ethical risk, for reasons I don't fully understand. Numerous fields of human endeavor kill, maim, or cripple far more animals and humans, to far less benefit, than science, and somehow get away with less scrutiny and opposition. Why is science the target?

    7. Re:Sound Methods? by JPLemme · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You guess it's better than testing it on humans?

      I agree with you that it's unfortunate that animals are sacrificed for medical research, and I hope and expect that the researchers are aware of their moral obligations to the animals under their care. But fixing spinal cord injuries so that people can walk again is worth the lives of millions of rats.

    8. Re:Sound Methods? by interkin3tic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why? Are rats less deserving of our sympathies than "intelligent" humans?

      Yes.

      Wouldn't it be /more/ humane to test on those creatures that can give informed consent?

      No.

    9. Re:Sound Methods? by RichardJenkins · · Score: 1

      So let me get this straight? Blue M&Ms can heal your back AND turn you into a smurf?!?! Why the hell do they even put the other colors in there? From now on it's blue all the way.

    10. Re:Sound Methods? by bembleton · · Score: 1

      Except that we didn't really need to kill the first 999,999 rats. Only the last one made a difference apparently.

    11. Re:Sound Methods? by digitrev · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, we did need the first 999,999 rats. So we could figure out what doesn't work. To (mis)quote Edison, "I didn't fail, I just found a thousand ways not to make a lightbulb".

      --
      Cynical Idealist
    12. Re:Sound Methods? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Cool. Can we use your dog?

    13. Re:Sound Methods? by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      Science is just one target. I mean, didn't you know that chickens are just feathery jews?

    14. Re:Sound Methods? by dffish · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, they're rats. Bred specifically for scientific purposes. If they have to experiment on millions of rats to ease the suffering of one human, then experiment away. I'm always amazed when I see a comment like that. It says to me that you find it more important to have a rat live to its ultimate potential...whatever that is...spreading disease most likely, than helping humanity. The only creature capable of informed consent IS humanity... So...what are you saying really?

    15. Re:Sound Methods? by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, I guess it's better.

      How many rat deaths exactly is a person walking again worth? A million? Could you stomach the hundred thousand gallons of blood flowing from the chopping block, knowing it was saving someone's mobility?

      Are you sure you're comfortable with the ramifications of throwing out a number like one human life = 1 million rat lives? You know, the only reason it's not the other way around (1 million human lives for 1 rat life) is because we're the apex predators with the cages and the needles and the power. But what if some alien civilization more intelligent than us needs a million human lives to save one of theirs?... fair?

    16. Re:Sound Methods? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Most of those procedures are less about caring for the rats and more about proper bookkeeping, budgeting, specimen tracking, etc. It's procedural controls to keep it science instead of just injecting rats with food coloring.

      As to why science is the target: probably because it's so procedural, and done for reasons many people can't understand properly or deem to be wasteful. A dozen rabbits getting maimed in a wheat thresher is just an unfortunate side effect of your vegan diet; a dozen rabbits getting experimented on for a reason you don't understand is torture and unethical, even if it may alleviate pain and suffering for untold numbers of fellow humans.
      =Smidge=

    17. Re:Sound Methods? by KDR_11k · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, that's my dinner!

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    18. Re:Sound Methods? by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      Even from an evolutionary perspective, yes. Aren't rats kind pretty low on the totem pole?

    19. Re:Sound Methods? by msormune · · Score: 1

      It's because you have to make sure the lab rats are in good health and without diseases etc. for the lab tests, to insure the test results are reliable.

    20. Re:Sound Methods? by KDR_11k · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Humans are really unique in how much they argue about the ethics of killing something for the benefit of their group. Pretty much all animals just kill it and go their merry way. Either they kill it for food or they kill it because it violated their territory or whatever. Sometimes they just kill for fun. None of them complain about the ethics of all that.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    21. Re:Sound Methods? by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You may not even use my rat. Buy your own, or go to your local animal shelter.

    22. Re:Sound Methods? by masshuu · · Score: 1

      pet rats are clean, disease free pets that don't need lots of food don't bark and or hump your leg(dogs) don't claw up the couch or your face(Cats) don't bite the shit out of you if you don't hold them for a while(hamsters) don't try to kill each other over a piece of food(gerbals) can be kept indoors 24/7(bunnys) Although i love my rats, here are reasons why they may make good experimental subjects: They posses an intelligence level on the same level as a dog They are built very similar to us Unlike many other animals, most drugs and disease affect humans and rats in similar, if not identical ways They piss me off when they attack my nipple cause i don't have food for them.

      --
      O.o
    23. Re:Sound Methods? by masshuu · · Score: 1

      YAY for reverting to HTML, although i clicked plain old text.

      can someone tell me how to make plain old text the default

      --
      O.o
    24. Re:Sound Methods? by maxume · · Score: 1

      Which totem pole?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    25. Re:Sound Methods? by s0l1dsnak3123 · · Score: 1

      Numerous fields of human endeavor kill, maim, or cripple far more animals and humans, to far less benefit, than science, and somehow get away with less scrutiny and opposition. Why is science the target?

      Because science is (for the most part) open and honest. The things you talk about aren't, or are for our "security".

    26. Re:Sound Methods? by spud603 · · Score: 1

      Where is this evolutionary totem pole you refer to?
      (I'm not sure 'evolution' means what you think it does)

    27. Re:Sound Methods? by spud603 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is that supposed to be an argument that we shouldn't care about ethics? Most other species also don't cook their food.

    28. Re:Sound Methods? by linzeal · · Score: 3, Informative

      As far as I know almost all organic labels make no mention of killing "critters" with guns. Almost all farmers out here shoot deer, rabbits and the like so vegans indirectly contribute to untold numbers of animal deaths.

    29. Re:Sound Methods? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Yes. Plenty of them.

      My roommate used to give rats strokes and fill them full of stem cells. Much the same thing.

    30. Re:Sound Methods? by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      I draw the line at complete rat genocide.*

      After all, you've got to leave at least one breeding pair so you can restock for the next round of experiments.

      *I don't know if "genocide" applies to rats but I think you get the idea.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    31. Re:Sound Methods? by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      How many rat deaths exactly is a person walking again worth?

      How many can we sustainably produce? As long as we're not killing 'em faster than we can breed 'em, I'm OK with it.

      There isn't some magic number where it becomes evil.

    32. Re:Sound Methods? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, just like that, except whenever possible they're filled full of anaesthetic or pain killers first.

      Animal testing isn't brutal. You have to have a very good case that it's necessary, you can't use any more animals that strictly necessary and you have to do everything possible to make sure there's as little suffering as possible.

      Contrast that to what happens to thousands of rats, cats, dogs, etc. every day outside the lab.

    33. Re:Sound Methods? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How many rat deaths exactly is a person walking again worth? A million? Could you stomach the hundred thousand gallons of blood flowing from the chopping block, knowing it was saving someone's mobility?

      You exaggerate, a rat has nowhere near a pint of blood in him. Probably not more than ten thousand gallons, tops.

      Are you sure you're comfortable with the ramifications of throwing out a number like one human life = 1 million rat lives?

      Yes, in fact I am.

      You know, the only reason it's not the other way around (1 million human lives for 1 rat life) is because we're the apex predators with the cages and the needles and the power. But what if some alien civilization more intelligent than us needs a million human lives to save one of theirs?... fair?

      "Fair" has nothing to do with it. We're the apex predator, and all those prey animals will just have to suck it up.

      And if some alien civilization wanders in and displaces us as the apex predator in these parts, we'll just have to suck it up too.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    34. Re:Sound Methods? by The_Duck271 · · Score: 1

      Simply eating meat places an implicit upper bound on the value of an animal's life. Think about how many animal lives will be sacrificed over the course of your one life to put meat on your table. And this is just for taste; it's possible to eat a pretty healthy diet without meat. Thus I, and all other meat-eaters, have placed an extremely low value on animal lives. In fact, unless you feel a little bit guilty whenever you eat meat, you're valuing animals' lives at virtually zero.

    35. Re:Sound Methods? by catbertscousin · · Score: 1

      But what if some alien civilization more intelligent than us needs a million human lives to save one of theirs?... fair?

      And what? They're going to look at us and say, "Hmm, they experiment on each other to save less intelligent creatures - let's leave them alone and go experiment on the creatures on Planet 473 instead"? It's not like we grade rats for their kindness and care of other rats or cockroaches before we experiment on them - or poison the wild ones living in our crawlspaces.

      --
      No good deed goes unpunished. - Avon, Blake's 7
    36. Re:Sound Methods? by yincrash · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Also, we happen to be sentient.

    37. Re:Sound Methods? by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      "Humans are really unique in how much they argue about the ethics of killing something for the benefit of their group."

      Humans also have many times the brain power of other animals, I'm sure if other animals had our brainpower they would do similar things.

    38. Re:Sound Methods? by steelfood · · Score: 1

      These things are subject to intense scrutiny because of their high profile. If PETA had their way, it'd be illegal to kill rats with anything other than rat poison that slowly puts them to sleep. Hell, they'd make it illegal to step on bugs if they could.

      It's absurd. The entire concept of ethical treatment of animals is absurd, especially when we don't even ethically treat each other most of the time. Tell me how animal fighting is illegal, but underground fighting is not (only the gambling is). Tell me why I can eat pigs, cows, and sheep, rabbits, and deer, but dogs and cats somehow are exempted (not that they're any good to eat after being vaccinated). But some very loud, opinionated, and mostly illogical people got their 5 minutes on the soapbox, and this is the result when lots of far more sensible people do their best to avoid getting hit by the bullshit coming out of their mouthes.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    39. Re:Sound Methods? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      You are right. the ablity of one human to walk is worth all the rats that our, have been, and will be.

      "s because we're the apex predators with the cages and the needles and the power. "
      that, and rats are simple animals.

      "But what if some alien civilization more intelligent than us needs a million human lives to save one of theirs?"
      Then we will dominate them and put them in cagtes, but iof we can't...
      "Fair?"
      Yes, yes it is. Not only is it fair, it's imperative to their species that they do.

      Survival of the species must always be the number one priority, all else is second.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    40. Re:Sound Methods? by mhajicek · · Score: 1

      Assuming you're starting with preexisting rats, what is the value of what a typical rat does for the betterment of society? While some rats do provide value by being lovable pets, if you eliminate lab rats I'd bet the average value of a rat's life to society would be negative. One should also take into account the fact that lab rats are specially bred for the purpose, so if there were not a demand for lab rats those particular rats would not exist. With that in mind, the use of rats for experimentation contributes to the biological success of the rat species.

    41. Re:Sound Methods? by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      Don't bet on it. A canid would have the same biological imperatives- ditto a felinoid.

      To be sure, there'd be some arguing, but you wouldn't find them arguing about NOT killing lesser animals because they haven't ANY choice. They're carnivores . Keep in mind, it's not our natural diet either- we're omnivores, we're supposed to eat some meat.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    42. Re:Sound Methods? by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Same thing in other areas: You don't need to deal with an IRB to raise feedlot pigs. And, for human testing, you (ostensibly at any rate) need informed consent, and various safeguards, IRB oversight, etc. If you need to spray your nerve toxin/probable human carcinogen on your crops, you just hire some undocumented mexican for $3.50 an hour, and throw him away if he breaks...

      I don't know about an IRB, but there's several organizations with other 3 letter acronyms who would be on your case about that last one depending on the specifics.

    43. Re:Sound Methods? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The $3.50/hr Mexican is a myth! I know because I can't afford those guys standing out in front of HomeDepot. The one guy willing to take $10/hr quit after 1/2 a day.

    44. Re:Sound Methods? by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like your 9th grade teacher was a card carrying member of PETA though. I remember in 8th or 9th grade (that was a decades ago) having a lecture on what animal parts were in cosmetics. Fish scales in lipstick and the like. Seeing most of the girls come into school with little or no makeup on the following days was a sight. Plus we got to see who the natural pretty girls were. Now if I can only get my girlfriend to let me see her without makeup on.

    45. Re:Sound Methods? by EtherMonkey · · Score: 1

      How many rat deaths exactly is a person walking again worth? A million? Could you stomach the hundred thousand gallons of blood flowing from the chopping block, knowing it was saving someone's mobility?

      Yes, undoubtedly. I would wield the ax. Even x10, or x100. Well, maybe not for your life. 8^)

      Let's put another twist on your question. You have kids? BANG!, I just shot one in the back. Maybe, with a few years of research and a couple thousand dead rats, monkeys and pigs, we will have an experimental treatment that might allow your son or daughter to walk again. Truthfully, would you say no to save the lives of those laboratory animals?

      --
      --- A man with a briefcase can steal more money, than any man with a gun. [Don Henley]
    46. Re:Sound Methods? by morcego · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it be /more/ humane to test on those creatures that can give informed consent?

      I think you should volunteer yourself to take the place of a rat on one of those deadly experiments. Not only you will be saving one rat, but you will also help us clean our gene pool. It is a win-win situation.

      --
      morcego
    47. Re:Sound Methods? by Turiko · · Score: 2, Informative

      erm... once the cure is there, it's there forever. Sooner or later, the ratio of 1-1 WILL be overtaken.

    48. Re:Sound Methods? by morcego · · Score: 1

      Think about how many animal lives will be sacrificed over the course of your one life to put meat on your table.

      Not nearly enough.

      MORE MEAT PLEASE!!!! I'M HUNGRY!!!!

      --
      morcego
    49. Re:Sound Methods? by morcego · · Score: 1

      Are you sure you're comfortable with the ramifications of throwing out a number like one human life = 1 million rat lives?

      Hey, here is an idea. There are millions of people dying worldwide for reasons that could be prevented. Why don't you get your ass out of your chair and go help, lets say, the people dying from tuberculosis in Africa ? Or the people dying from cold/hunger in NYC ?

      No ? Too much work ? Well, I guess you better just stay comfortable on your chair, complaining about people killing rats trying to save human beings. Or maybe you think all those human being that are dying gave their "informed consent" for it ? "Yes sir. I was informed. Here is my consent form, so please give me the tuberculosis now so I can die and save some rat from starving." ... idiot.

      --
      morcego
    50. Re:Sound Methods? by jeffliott · · Score: 1

      The parent post is as informative as this post is funny, interesting, or informative. Further demonstration of it's non-informative nature:

      Why? Are rats less deserving of our sympathies than "intelligent" humans?

      Yes.

      I disagree.

      Wouldn't it be /more/ humane to test on those creatures that can give informed consent?

      No.

      I disagree.

    51. Re:Sound Methods? by morcego · · Score: 1

      Heck, contrast that to what happens to thousands of HUMANS outside the lab.

      --
      morcego
    52. Re:Sound Methods? by EtherMonkey · · Score: 2, Informative

      I draw the line at complete rat genocide.* After all, you've got to leave at least one breeding pair so you can restock for the next round of experiments.

      Have you ever owned or bread rats? 3 weeks gestation, litter size of 6 to 16, sexual maturity after 90 days... it doesn't take long to be completely overwhelmed. I tried it once as an alternative to driving 45 minutes to a pet store to feed my 10-ft python. It only took me a few months to give up.

      --
      --- A man with a briefcase can steal more money, than any man with a gun. [Don Henley]
    53. Re:Sound Methods? by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Ask stupid questions, get stupid answers. I on the other hand only answered questions, I didn't ask if anyone disagreed.

    54. Re:Sound Methods? by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      Yes but if you look at our own history we've done much much worse, we've had every stripe of behaviour, things like cannibalism and on and on.

      In fact if hitler had won the world might look a lot different, or if the USSR hadn't collapsed for instance.

    55. Re:Sound Methods? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, they're rats. Bred specifically for scientific purposes.

      I agree with your conclusion, but not your argument. The fact that they are "bred specifically for scientific purposes" doesn't have any impact on the moral aspect of animal testing. We've had people who were specifically bred for farm labor but that didn't make slavery moral.

      The reason animal testing for medicine is OK is because we agree that the life of a human is more valuable than the life of a lab rat. Whether or not I may agree with that assumption doesn't change the fact that it has become a consensus. The best we can do as far as creating a moral framework for human society is to accept such a consensus. It's imperfect, but I don't see another way, unless you're willing to abrogate moral responsibility to the pronouncements of an imaginary deity, which really means "a bunch of guys who wrote moral pronouncements and then claimed they came from god". I happen to prefer the consensus method to the imaginary deity method.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    56. Re:Sound Methods? by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 1

      Survival of the species must always be the number one priority, all else is second.

      Evolution tends to produce individuals who value the survival of the species, but that doesn't mean it's a "priority." Evolution also produces homicidal people, suicidal people, and ethical people. You are who you are; evolution doesn't need your help. We're a very social people, some of whom conscientiously decline eating meat despite it not being as good for the species.

    57. Re:Sound Methods? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Which totem pole?

      The ones the rats didn't make.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    58. Re:Sound Methods? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it be /more/ humane to test on those creatures that can give informed consent?

      I think he means "poor people", morcego.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    59. Re:Sound Methods? by AshtangiMan · · Score: 1

      Or to answer graphically.

    60. Re:Sound Methods? by JPLemme · · Score: 1

      Just to distinguish myself from the typical anti-vegetarian crowd, I don't think you're an idiot for placing a high value on life. I think that the ability to torture or kill animals (at least vertebrates) without remorse is the sign of a psychopath.

      But sacrificing rats to advance medicine is fine by me. I would draw the line at making rats extinct to help one person walk again, because I don't think eliminating a species is wise (we might need more rats!) But frankly I would happily kill 99.99999% of all the rats in the world if it could fix broken spinal cords, and I don't care if they're killed for research or as a sacrifice to the Nerve God, as long as it works.

      I don't value rats lives as highly as human lives, period. If 100,000 gallons of rat blood was a magical elixir that could make paraplegics walk, then I would want many rats to die so we could bottle their blood.

      (This should be the part where I say "I'm typing this from my wheelchair after a tragic diving accident", but I'm blessedly free from any ironic ailments.)

    61. Re:Sound Methods? by maxume · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ah, the one in Toledo.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    62. Re:Sound Methods? by evilbessie · · Score: 1

      don't know why you have to pick on rats. These were mice, which are far dirtier, not having bladders and all. Rats are relatively clean animals, and no the black plague was not spread by rats but by flies.

    63. Re:Sound Methods? by Dantu · · Score: 1

      I happen to prefer the consensus method to the imaginary deity method.

      Amen brother!

      But seriously, I wish I had mod-points today.

    64. Re:Sound Methods? by rubi · · Score: 2, Informative

      And how many "human test subjects" would volunteer and how many would be mandated to do it? Better test in rats and such than MAKE humans do it; the pool of volunteers is really small.

    65. Re:Sound Methods? by Sehnsucht · · Score: 1

      Menchi?

    66. Re:Sound Methods? by Dantu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Even from an evolutionary perspective, yes. Aren't rats kind pretty low on the totem pole?

      Depends what totem pole. The totem pole of "most like humans", then they are a little ways down, but still FAR above the 1/2 way point if you include non-mammals.

      In terms of "most evolved" rats are exactly where humans are. If there was any argument to be made, you could say they are MORE evolved, since they have a shorter life span and more children - more chance for natural selection to work it's magic.

      Evolution works towards optimizing a species for survival; not for "becoming human" or "becoming smart" or anything else that puts people on top. I don't mean to be "anti-human", but evolution doesn't care about those things.

    67. Re:Sound Methods? by BigDXLT · · Score: 1

      Or more accurately.

    68. Re:Sound Methods? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I got into a discussion with a friend about lab rats once. She was appalled by the things being done to the poor little fellas. She implied that one day the evil scientists would get what was coming to them. I asked her why? Because of karma? When she said yes I told her google the Black Death. The little fuckers deserve it. :)

    69. Re:Sound Methods? by lena_10326 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just some thoughts as to an explanation why.

      1. Slippery slope argument. Institutionalizing a careless regard for animal life will eventually lead to a general careless regard for human life.
      2. Role model argument. Scientists as a group form a body of people who are commonly recognized as figureheads of authority, leadership, thought shapers, yadda yadda. E.g. role models. As such they are commonly held to higher standard because they are (supposedly) professionals possessing an elevated level of education, power, or influence. You'll see this with other figureheads. Examples. A cheating politician creates a big public stir when caught, but no one cares when a citizen does the same. A sports hero caught doing steroids. A NASA scientist caught up in a love triangle. A 24 yo high school teacher dating an 18 yo student. A movie star busted for DWI.
      3. Priority argument. Animals invading a home represent a health risk to human inhabitants. We value human health higher than animal health so humans win. Animals lose. In the case of scientific experimentation with animals, the existence of those animals possess no (immediate) health risk since they are caged and disease free (at least before the experiment begins). The importance of the rat's health becomes elevated because no one is harmed by their existence.
      4. Responsibility argument. Animals in the wild choose to procreate and invade our homes. They bear a certain level of responsibility for not avoiding humans. In the lab, humans choose to breed (or capture) those animals. In that case humans bear the responsibility for the ethical treatment of them.
      --
      Camping on quad since 1996.
    70. Re:Sound Methods? by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      ... the black plague was not spread by rats but by flies.

      Don't you mean fleas?

    71. Re:Sound Methods? by rantingkitten · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your answers are coming off as really, really callous. Strictly speaking, you are probably right -- a rat is not worth as much as a human from a purely objective ethical or moral standpoint (though I suspect there are some who would debate this, and the discussion could get interesting).

      But even if you're right, that does not mean we should be completely carefree about inflicting harm against creatures that can feel pain or fear or both, merely because they're not human. Tossing off one-word yes/no responses to that guy's questions makes it sound like there is nothing further to discuss, when in fact the issue of animal testing is a hotly contested one and not so easily answered.

      --
      mirrorshades radio -- darkwave, industrial, futurepop, ebm.
    72. Re:Sound Methods? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If they have to experiment on millions of rats to ease the suffering of one human, then experiment away.

      Don't underestimate the magnitude of what is being done.

      No, you have the numbers all wrong.

      The experimentation on perhaps millions of will not ease the suffering of just one human, if the experiments are successful.

      It will ease the suffering of millions and millions of humans, perhaps billions, until another solution is found.

      But we do have the moral obligation to the experimental animal, whether rat or mouse or dog or cat or pig or monkey to keep its suffering due to our experiment to a minimum.

    73. Re:Sound Methods? by LeoPercepied · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't feel bad, lab mice are just using us to find the question to Life the Universe and everything.

    74. Re:Sound Methods? by morcego · · Score: 1

      Ah, so means to help those people get enough information to give informed consent.

      I mean, surely he is not there, just sitting on his ass, saying this type of thing. He MUST be doing something productive.

      --
      morcego
    75. Re:Sound Methods? by kdemetter · · Score: 1, Troll

      There's nothing wrong with rats , there are just misunderstood.

      Harming any animal , just to get a little more profit , is wrong , and everyone knows it.
      But it is easier to close your eyes , and pretend it's not happening.

    76. Re:Sound Methods? by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      Well , what about people with back injuries , who are interested in recovering better , even if it does include some risks.
      I'm sure there are people enough who would volunteer , if it was sufficiently rewarded.

      But this , offcourse , means it will cost more money . It's cheaper then kill rats than to lose money being honorable.

    77. Re:Sound Methods? by truckwash · · Score: 1

      Not flies, fleas. Which live on rats, for example.

    78. Re:Sound Methods? by Dravik · · Score: 1

      If they were more evolved then they would be experimenting on us.

      --
      The purpose of language is communication, If the idea is clear the grammar ain't important
    79. Re:Sound Methods? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I'm sure you missed it, but what he's referring to is the fact that it's much more likely for vegans to blabber on about animal rights and how experimentation is torturous and unethical. Yet somehow accidentally shredding the same amount of cute fuzzies is just part of the magical cycle of life.

    80. Re:Sound Methods? by megrims · · Score: 1

      Yeah! Damn us, and our ability to reason.

    81. Re:Sound Methods? by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 3, Informative

      Tell me how animal fighting is illegal, but underground fighting is not (only the gambling is).

      If you don't understand the difference between two consenting adults getting into a ring and beating the crap out of each other or 2 animals being driven into a fury and then placed in a small enclosement I very much doubt you'll be able to grasp any answer you'll get.

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    82. Re:Sound Methods? by Kashgarinn · · Score: 1

      ""Fair" has nothing to do with it. We're the apex predator, and all those prey animals will just have to suck it up.
      And if some alien civilization wanders in and displaces us as the apex predator in these parts, we'll just have to suck it up too."

      So apex predator/prey relationship is ok between different species as well as different alien races. What about different groups of humans?

      (close, but I didn't Godwin this thread.. yet ;P)

    83. Re:Sound Methods? by DamienNightbane · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you should have bought more pythons.

    84. Re:Sound Methods? by bugg · · Score: 1

      Or a freezer!

      --
      -bugg
    85. Re:Sound Methods? by hot+soldering+iron · · Score: 1

      I'd MUCH rather the testing was done on rats, than humans. Not much is talked about the time-honored tradition of using soldiers as medical guinea pigs (I personally saw a "standard" over-seas inoculation drop a company of tough infantry soldiers within hours, and some of us had symptoms of nerve agent poisoning). Or how about the programs of using the homeless, or prisoners, as subjects in human trials (usually they have a choice in it though). Having seen the horrific effects of just "recreational" drugs gone wrong, I'd happily sacrifice a metric shit-load of animals to prevent human suffering.

      --
      When you want something built, come see me. If you want correct grammar and spelling, get a F*ing liberal arts student.
    86. Re:Sound Methods? by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      mod parent up :-)

    87. Re:Sound Methods? by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      But even if you're right, that does not mean we should be completely carefree about inflicting harm against creatures that can feel pain or fear or both, merely because they're not human.

      Carefree? You've never had to submit a proposal to an IRB.

      Tossing off one-word yes/no responses to that guy's questions makes it sound like there is nothing further to discuss, when in fact the issue of animal testing is a hotly contested one and not so easily answered.

      -Because- it is so hotly contested -elsewhere-, and because the subject was spinal cord injuries, not the ethics of animal models for research, I think one word answers are more than sufficient. It's kind of like how any time a story is posted about human genetics, and someone mentions evolution, some creationist is always there wanting to get into an extended debate about how evolution is "just a theory" using the same old arguments that have been floating around since Darwin's time. Sure, they may have something resembling a point, but there is no shortage of places to discuss that, bringing it up when it's really off topic is just trolling.

    88. Re:Sound Methods? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      I think it's an argument that the animals would consider it fair.

    89. Re:Sound Methods? by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 1

      If we were more evolved then we wouldn't be killed by a single bacterium or virus.

    90. Re:Sound Methods? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      So apex predator/prey relationship is ok between different species as well as different alien races. What about different groups of humans?

      "Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." -- Thucydides

      (close, but I didn't Godwin this thread.. yet ;P)

      And neither did I....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    91. Re:Sound Methods? by sfarmstrong · · Score: 1

      It's imperfect, but I don't see another way, unless you're willing to abrogate moral responsibility to the pronouncements of an imaginary deity, which really means "a bunch of guys who wrote moral pronouncements and then claimed they came from god". I happen to prefer the consensus method to the imaginary deity method.

      Slashdot forums: Diverting ethical questions into off-topic anti-religion screeds since 1997.

      More to the point, your perspective is limited. There are many, many conceptions of morality and ethics that don't devolve into "because God said so" or "because the majority says so."

    92. Re:Sound Methods? by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Harming any animal , just to get a little more profit , is wrong , and everyone knows it.

      And the Retarded College Kid Of The Year Award goes to ....

      The "profits" you refer to would be things like a cure for cancer, gene therapy, organ transplants, and, oh, I dunno ... maybe a better quality of life for people living with spinal injuries? I know that wannabe-communists like you find it much easier to blame everything on "profits" and "fat-cats" than to actually discuss the issues, but you're making yourself look like a fool, and even the real commies are embarrassed by your shenanigans.

    93. Re:Sound Methods? by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      The animal world has cannibalism, also. It's not really a moral issue as far as I'm concerned - once I'm dead I don't really give a damn what happens to my body. If some chef can turn it into a culinary masterpiece, have at 'er! Serve me up with some Pinot Noir!

      No, the real atrocities humans commit are things like torture and willful cruelty. Animals may kill for food, but they rarely inflict unnecessary suffering on their victim.

    94. Re:Sound Methods? by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      We're a very social people, some of whom conscientiously decline eating meat despite it not being as good for the species.

      Some peoples sole purpose in life is to serve as an example of what not to do.

    95. Re:Sound Methods? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      There are many [wikipedia.org], many [wikipedia.org] conceptions of morality and ethics that don't devolve into "because God said so"

      Not here in the US.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    96. Re:Sound Methods? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Diverting ethical questions into off-topic anti-religion screeds since 1997.

      It's an "anti-religion screed" because I said I prefer consensus to supernatural pronouncements?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  2. Exchange? by A+little+Frenchie · · Score: 1

    I give you my red one, you give me your blue one?

  3. Re:So eating M&M by bigattichouse · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ok.. my father-in-law died from ALS (Lou Gherig's disease) - I wonder if this might be relevant in the nerve death suffered there.

    --
    meh
  4. Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by deathcow · · Score: 1

    Notice that the eyes have completely changed color as well. I'm thinking I do not want my eyes filled with blue tint.

    1. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by NFN_NLN · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Notice that the eyes have completely changed color as well. I'm thinking I do not want my eyes filled with blue tint.

      Yeah, given the choice between blue tinted eyes and spinal injury most people will chose spinal injury, I know I would.

    2. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by TinBromide · · Score: 1

      I dunno, ask this guy what being blue does to his vision. He used colloidal silver (i.e. silver dissolved in water) as a folk medical treatment for so long that it tinted him blue.

      The guy reports no side effects beyond an urge to hold concerts based on performance art. /humor...

      --
      Is it sad that I am more likely to recognize you and your posts by your sig than your name or UID?
    3. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by jeffasselin · · Score: 2, Funny

      Do rats with blue eyes pray to earthworms?

      I wouldn't mind being a Fremen myself...

      --
      If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
    4. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Funny

      Did he possibly play blues?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    5. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      A different take on the old song "don't it make my brown eyes blue?"

      Maybe it's the spice melange? Better than a yellow tint. If the whites of your eyes turn yellowish, you're in deep medical trouble.

    6. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by CorporateSuit · · Score: 1

      Not only are the blue mice absolutely adorable, but they've also taken a new appreciation of Emily Dickenson's poetry.

      --
      I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
    7. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by Trahloc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wish someone would invent something that creates light ... like ... well ... a bulb of some sort ... maybe .. ahh... a light bulb? No too crazy, yes much better to be in a wheel chair pissing all over yourself than potentially have your night time vision affected for a short while. The lil rodents turned blue for only a short time, it wasn't permanent, even a year is a short while vs permanent spinal damage.

      --
      The Goal: A long simple life filled with many complex toys.
    8. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by himself · · Score: 1

      >
      > Yeah, given the choice between blue tinted eyes and spinal injury most people will chose spinal injury, I know I would.
      >
            I have (naturally) blue eyes, you insensitive clod!

    9. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      The spice must flow!?

    10. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Given the frequency and severity of combat nerve damage, this stuff might have numerous "Long live the fighters!" applications...

    11. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by Kyont · · Score: 1

      "Give it to me straight, doc."

      "Well, the good news is you'll regain full function of your legs. The bad news is the only guy you'll feel comfortable hanging out with is Paul Karason."

      --
      You shall see a cow on the roof of a cotton house.
    12. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by thisnamestoolong · · Score: 1

      So? That is like arguing that a potential cure for AIDs causes headaches.

      --
      To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
    13. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by speedtux · · Score: 1

      I assure you that you won't notice:

      (1) You'll be pumped full of drugs.

      (2) If you aren't pumped full of drugs, you'll be in pain.

      (3) You'll mostly be thinking about whether you'll ever be able to use your weenie again.

      (4) Your brain compensates anyway.

    14. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by LanMan04 · · Score: 1

      Their skin/eyes returned to normal color after a week.

      Interestingly, when they dissected the rat much later the damaged area of his spinal cord was still blue.

      --
      With the first link, the chain is forged.
    15. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by Tanman · · Score: 1

      Why choose just one?

    16. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      Notice that the eyes have completely changed color as well.

      They look the normal black to me, surrounded by blue skin.

    17. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by InverseParadox · · Score: 2, Informative

      According to TFA, the blue tint disappeared within a week, and the regained mobility didn't manifest till the sixth week (at which point they killed the rat to dissect it) - so I doubt that this will be a long-term problem.

      They did mention that they were surprised, upon dissection, to find out that the spinal cord was still blue even at the six-week mark. I imagine that even that would go away with time, though.

      --
      -- The Wanderer
    18. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by reverseengineer · · Score: 1

      Actually, if you look at the other picture, of the rat prior to injection, it seems "normal" for its eyes is in fact red, so there's definitely been some alteration of color.

      --
      "FDA staff reviewers expressed concern about the number of patients who were left out of the study because they died."
    19. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Add to that, if they could find a way to safely change eye color, the inventor would become very well off.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    20. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by Renegrade · · Score: 1

      You know your rod cells are sensitive through the blue range, right? In fact, they're not sensitive in the low frequency range - a blue filter would have less effect at night than during the day as you wouldn't be losing the 'red' range (as you aren't seeing that anyways if you're relying entirely on rod cells anyways).

      Vision is a logarithmic type response - losing half or three quarters of available light is only "one or two stops". If you're at an "adequate vision" status, it won't suddenly drop to "OMG IM BLIND WTFBBQ", but rather "not quite as adequate as before but still mostly adequate vision" status.

      Finally, the rats (or people if so treated) would only have to worry about this if the cornea, lens, or humors of the eye became blue. The iris and sclera of the eye can be as blue as they want without impacting vision. In fact, as these structures are supposed to be opaque, the blue is actually helping!

    21. Re:Blue Eyes? Blue Vision? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      If I looked through my iris, I'd be pretty severely blind anyway. That's what the pupils are for.

  5. The Matrix by billy901 · · Score: 1

    If you take the red dye nothing happens. You will never know. :O

    --
    Please visit http://www.mederbil.com/ i7, GTX 275, 4 1TB Caviar Green in RAID 0+1 array, EVGA X58 3X SLI Board, Silver
  6. And all this time... by jbarr · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...I've been focusing on the green ones!

    --
    My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
    1. Re:And all this time... by TinBromide · · Score: 4, Funny

      But have you been injecting them intravenously?

      --
      Is it sad that I am more likely to recognize you and your posts by your sig than your name or UID?
    2. Re:And all this time... by RabidMoose · · Score: 1

      Well, he has been injecting them, but not intravenously.

    3. Re:And all this time... by SnarfQuest · · Score: 4, Funny

      I tried, but couldn't get them to squeeze out the little needle. Tried using a caulking gun, but that was just extremely painful.
      Turned out as badly as when I tried snorting coke. The bubbles just about killed me.

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    4. Re:And all this time... by MartinSchou · · Score: 1

      Turned out as badly as when I tried snorting coke. The bubbles just about killed me.

      I know how you feel. When I tried it I also got an ice cube stuck in my nose.

    5. Re:And all this time... by snspdaarf · · Score: 1

      "No, no, Nurse, I said 'intraVENOUSly'!"

      --
      Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
    6. Re:And all this time... by noidentity · · Score: 1

      And all this time I've been focusing on the green ones!

      Are you sure they were real green ones, not deep infrared ones with tiny optical crystals to double the wavelength?

    7. Re:And all this time... by ignavus · · Score: 1

      Turned out as badly as when I tried snorting coke. The bubbles just about killed me.

      Bubbles? That's odd. When I tried snorting coke, I just got big lumps of grey ash caught up my nose.

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
  7. Blue pill by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Funny

    Don't take the red pill. Take the blue pill. It's better for your spine.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  8. Blue Rat Group by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    The best part is that in lab rats the subjects given the treatment turn blue.

    Do they also start taking part in voiceless percussion stage performances?

    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    1. Re:Blue Rat Group by Maestro485 · · Score: 1

      lol priceless, i wish i had mod points.

  9. Blue red by greg1104 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Glad to see the blue M&Ms won't be going the way the red ones did in 1976.

  10. So it's true! by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 1

    M&Ms are good for your health... provided that you've just suffered a crippling spine injury.

  11. The only problem is... by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

    There aren't enough dang Blue M&M's!

    Seriously! Enough Red, Brown, and Yellow! I get like an entire bage of those!

  12. after years of inadvertant preparation... by FatRichie · · Score: 1

    my spinal cord is now impervious to injury. also, my arteries are impervious to blood flow and my waist is impervious to pants.

  13. So, is it the blue, or the estrogen? by tekrat · · Score: 1

    Isn't blue the sexy girl M&M that makes Red and Yellow act stupid all the time?

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:So, is it the blue, or the estrogen? by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

      That's Green actually. And the Orange one is all Jittery. I can't remember the Blue one's personality at all...

    2. Re:So, is it the blue, or the estrogen? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      I can't remember the Blue one's personality at all...

      Disaffected.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  14. diamonds + insulin + blue dye + proteins = by ground.zero.612 · · Score: 1

    Akira?! I for one look forward to our blue-skinned gut-bar-arm having pyscho-kinetic energy wielding japanese manga overlords!

    --
    "Be prepared, son. That's my motto. Be prepared." --Joe Hallenbeck
  15. natgeo article with more pictures by yincrash · · Score: 2, Informative

    nat geo posted an article. basically, the blue dye helps prevent the initial swelling which compresses spinal cord tissue to the point of tissue death. less tissue death = better recovery.

    1. Re:natgeo article with more pictures by speedtux · · Score: 1

      Nope. The blue dye actually keeps the nerves from being overstimulated.

  16. Time limit by El+Gigante+de+Justic · · Score: 1

    The summary and CNN article don't mention it in detail, but other articles on this study have said that the first application of BBG has to come within 15 minutes of injury for it to have any benefit. If it does get approved at some point, you'd almost want carried by first responders instead of having to wait until you reach the emergency room.

  17. Re:So eating M&M by NFN_NLN · · Score: 2, Funny

    Can be considered healty now?

    At least if you have a spinal injury or possibly other type of nerve damage?

    Or will you have to eat a truckload of M&M before there is any effect?

    Depends, if you can eat blue smarties INTRAVENOUSLY they might be helpful. I would work up to it by taking them in suppository form first.

  18. Nuked Blue by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 1

    Instead of being nuked blue when you smoke at LSC, you also get nuked blue when you get a spinal injury.

    Cool.

  19. Speaking strictly for myself.. by dotmax · · Score: 1

    I would prefer to be called The Blue Max than ... matt.

  20. It must be injected immediately after injury by piojo · · Score: 1

    All the dye does, according to the article, is prevent the body from damaging itself further following a spinal cord injury. It must be injected before that additional damage can occur--I wonder if this will end up in every first-aid kit? That's the only way I see it helping.

    --
    A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
  21. How about yellow? by DoktorSeven · · Score: 2, Informative

    Now can we really make M&Ms (and tons of other foods) better by getting rid of the awful yellow dye garbage (tartrazine)? It's been shown to affect tons of people negatively and some even link it to childhood obsessive-compulsive disorder and hyperactivity.

    Seriously, we can do without yellow foods or find something much safer, can't we? Why do we continue to put use this as a food dye when there are so many issues with it?

    It's a real pain in the ass to analyze ingredient lists of every single thing I buy to make sure it doesn't have that in it, and it's in very non-obvious things as well (things that don't even look that yellow). Plus they don't draw attention to it like other food allergies, it's just hidden near the bottom of ingredient lists. And I'm sure I've accidentally had it at restaurants causing me to feel like crap and get headaches and feel sick afterwards.

    Ban tartrazine.

    --
    This is a sig. Deal with it.
    1. Re:How about yellow? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Seriously, we can do without yellow foods

      No need, there are lots of naturally occuring yellow foods. Some tomatos, some potatos, squash, egg yolk, corn...

    2. Re:How about yellow? by vlm · · Score: 3, Funny

      No need, there are lots of naturally occuring yellow foods. Some tomatos, some potatos, squash, egg yolk, corn...

      Yellow snow... no, wait, scratch that off the list.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    3. Re:How about yellow? by Menkhaf · · Score: 1

      Hey, if you ain't gonna eat that ice, I will. Might be whiskey!

      --
      A proud member of the Onion-in-Hand alliance
    4. Re:How about yellow? by BluBrick · · Score: 1

      It might have been whiskey at one time. But you usually don't call it whiskey once it's been filtered through the kidneys.

      --
      Ahh - My eye!
      The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
    5. Re:How about yellow? by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Some tomatos, some potatos, squash, egg yolk, corn...

      Wait, corn can be a food? I thought it was some kind of fuel source. You know, like dirt in Texas.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    6. Re:How about yellow? by SkimTony · · Score: 1

      Here's as hint: if it's frozen, it's probably not whiskey.

    7. Re:How about yellow? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Most corn isn't used for "food", per se. Most of it is used to make sweeteners, which are used in almost all of your preprocessed food and in almost all soft drinks. Half the lists of ingredients on the food containers in your kitchen include "High fructose corn syrup".

    8. Re:How about yellow? by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Not in my kitchen. I might still have a can or two of Cherry Coke imported from the States somewhere, but most of my sweet foods contain, well, sugar.

      But you kind of backed up my point - that people are growing good food (corn) and using it for non-good-food purposes (artificial sweeteners, biofuels, etc).

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  22. Tough choice by ItsColdOverHere · · Score: 1

    "Well sir, you have a choice; you can turn blue and maybe regain some function or you can stay paralysed and not look like an alien".

    I'd need to be pretty damn convinced before I willingly had myself turned a light blue.

    1. Re:Tough choice by dotmax · · Score: 1

      i dunno... that bald chick on Farscape was pretty hott.

    2. Re:Tough choice by pushing-robot · · Score: 1

      Judging by the rat, I think you'd look more like Chiana. Which would be awesome.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    3. Re:Tough choice by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      I'd need to be pretty damn convinced before I willingly had myself turned a light blue.

      You'd definitely want to avoid running at dusk and getting hit by a car . . .

      "How is he?"

      "It looks like he's dead."

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    4. Re:Tough choice by RulerOf · · Score: 1

      I would personally take either. You really shouldn't be picky with space babes.

      Though, for what it's worth, they always described Chiana as "gray."

      --
      Boot Windows, Linux, and ESX over the network for free.
  23. Random! by EEBaum · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm sure there are sound methods involved in this, but it sounds kinda like some lab techs have two dartboards, one labeled "thing to do to mouse" and another labeled "thing to inject into mouse to see if it gets better" and are playing a drinking game.

    "Well, the Tide With Color-Safe Bleach injection didn't fix Squeaky's 'beetus. Your turn, Roy!"

    --
    -- I prefer the term "karma escort."
    1. Re:Random! by PeterM+from+Berkeley · · Score: 1

      No, I don't think it's like that at all. Apparently "oxidized ATP" does the same thing as this blue dye, but suffers some drawbacks:
      a) it must be injected into the damaged site directly
      b) it has known dangerous side effects.

      They were looking for a better alternative, and it seems this blue dye is one they found.

      The blue dye they're using doesn't have any known drawbacks and they want to test it to find if there are any problems and if it's really effective.

      --PM

    2. Re:Random! by Toonol · · Score: 1

      Although it's a bit gruesome, it does speak to the benefits of thoroughly testing products on animals. There is something to be said for systematically generating nerve injuries, cancers, diabetes, and so forth in animals and studying the effect of... well, EVERYTHING on their systems. we have nowhere near enough knowledge to predict or model the behavior of chemicals on the chaotic systems of life; we need to still rely on serendipity, so we might as well be rigorous about it.

  24. Better than red dye, apparently by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    The red dye is made from bugs!

    I couldn't find what this blue dye is made out of in wikipedia. It doesn't mention M&Ms but does mention it's used in chemistry for determining protein concentration in a solution, and there's a link to a BBC article about reducing the effects of spinal injury. I wish someone who is knowledgeable about this would update the wiki.

    1. Re:Better than red dye, apparently by CannedTurkey · · Score: 1

      Blue No. 1 is called "brilliant blue" and, as is typical of modern dyes, was originally derived from coal tar, although most manufacturers now make it from an oil base. Blue No. 2, or "indigotine," on the other hand, is a synthetic version of the plant-based indigo that has a long history as a textile dye. Indigo, which comes from the indigo plant (Indigofera), has been used for probably at least 4,000 years. There is a written recipe for dying wool with indigo on a Babylonian cuneiform tablet dated to the seventh century B.C. There is evidence that it was used in neolithic Europe and in pharaonic Egypt. It also comes from the woad plant (Isatis tinctoria), and was used by the Celts in Scotland to dye their faces.

      --
      Ingredients: Turkey, Mechanically Separated Turkey, Water, Salt, Flavour.
    2. Re:Better than red dye, apparently by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      The red dye is made from bugs! [wikipedia.org]

      I shudder to think what the green dye is made from.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  25. 85% are untreated!!??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I guess I'm a little confused. So I'm up on my roof, cleaning my gutters or hanging Christmas lights; I fall off and break my spine in half. The ambulance takes me to the hospital and the doctor says what, "Just walk it off, you'll be fine." What am I missing here?

    I would think all those people walking around with broken spines would like at least SOME treatment.

    1. Re:85% are untreated!!??? by Lordplatypus · · Score: 2, Informative

      As someone who has permanent nerve damage in my back that makes me unable to feel my legs below the knee I can tell you exactly what several doctors have told me.

      "At least you can walk." "Let me know if it gets worse."

      Consider hiring people to clean your gutters or hang your Christmas lights.

      --
      Diplomacy is the art of saying, 'Nice doggie!' till you can find a rock.-- Wynn Catlin
    2. Re:85% are untreated!!??? by Carnildo · · Score: 3, Informative

      We can fix the mechanical damage to the bones and ligaments, but the current best-practice treatment for the nerve damage consists of waiting to see how bad it is, followed by physical therapy. After hundreds of years of research, we haven't found anything more effective, which is what makes this such big news.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
  26. Re:Blue red by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 1

    I do love how they replaced the red colouring in M&Ms with cochineal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochineal_dye - made from insect juice - to placate consumer concerns.

    --
    Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
    altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
  27. Gimme some M&Ms!!! by erroneus · · Score: 1

    Now available in prescription strength!

  28. HOLY SHIT! So Carlin was really on to something... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Not exactly immortality though...

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  29. It's not just for M&Ms anymore... by my_left_nut · · Score: 1

    Back in the 70s, I always thought Frank Rizzo was a little "out there" when he had all of the Philly police vehicles painted bright blue like this one.

    Now, with this new finding, over 35 years later, it all starts to make sense.

  30. Re:Mobsters, the new clinical trialists. by VxMorpheusxV · · Score: 5, Informative

    That is the nature of research with animals. There is regulation (here in the U.S) that attempts to minimize pain when possible and guidelines that must be followed to acquire animals for research, but there has been substantial progress made through animal research. If you've got a viable alternative I'm sure it would be considered. Take a look at the wiki page for more info.

  31. The actual research article by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    The actual research article mentioned in the CNN blurb is in the most recent (as in today) issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:The actual research article by Maestro485 · · Score: 1

      I realize that pnas.org is a reputable organization, but didn't anyone look closely at that acronym before making it official?

  32. Re:Mobsters, the new clinical trialists. by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

    Do you have a better alternative?

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  33. Good thing it wasn't Brown by Alzheimers · · Score: 1

    or else David Lee Roth would definitely refuse this treatment!

    He'd probably trash the OR, too.

  34. Why M&M? by Relic+of+the+Future · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Why are M&Ms getting attached to this story? This dye is used in all kinds of foods, not just M&Ms.

    Maybe M&M/Mars, thanks to all the free and undeserved publicity, would be willing to help fund the necessary study, since no drug company seems interested in doing so (after all, there's no profit in selling a commodity food coloring.)

    --
    Those who fail to understand communication protocols, are doomed to repeat them over port 80.
    1. Re:Why M&M? by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, despite evidence the research and trials are actually taking place - it's impossible for them to actually be taking place because no drug company will fund it.
       
      Take your tinfoil hat bullshit elsewhere.

    2. Re:Why M&M? by Kligat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or maybe instead of blaming the scientists, you could be blaming the stupid U.S. media that wants you to associate science with candy, and candy is delicious, so you'll think science is delicious and click. I originally read the story on BBC, and they never mentioned M&M's once.

    3. Re:Why M&M? by tsstahl · · Score: 1

      Do you think they'll pay in M&M's? Where do I sign up?

    4. Re:Why M&M? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Why not? There is profit is selling aspirin.

      Add tot hat it's not actually a commodity food coloring.

      Of course there is profit, more if it is already at commodity pricing. The real effect from something like this is that only 1 or 2 companies will compete. More then that and they need to sell too close to the margins.

      Also, storing, administration method, and other factors need to be taken into account as well.

      Bottom line, if it turns uot to be this useful, someone will pay for it.
      Plus it could lead to a greater understanding of how to treat these injuries and lead to other drugs.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:Why M&M? by Dark_Gravity · · Score: 1

      Why are M&Ms getting attached to this story?

      Possibly because at one time you could bribe your favorite computer geek with a 2 liter bottle of Mountain Dew Code Red and a bowl of blue M&Ms.

      News for nerds and all that.

    6. Re:Why M&M? by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      I remember when the Blue Raspberry craze hit in the early '90s. Suddenly just about every candy was available in blue raspberry - not normal regular raspberry, just blue. Reminds me of when ciabatta bread and chipotle sauce hit fast food a couple years ago, a month before nobody had heard of them, and suddenly they were everywhere.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    7. Re:Why M&M? by sjames · · Score: 1

      Probably because the blue M&M is a good example of the coloring that most people will readily recognize.

  35. Who would think by hamburgler007 · · Score: 1

    that blue M&M's would be this centuries aspirin?

  36. Also used as a fabric dye by damn_registrars · · Score: 1
    From the research article:

    BBG is lower due to the high binding affinity of BBG for proteins, as is characteristic for all Coomasie dyes (14). Never- theless, BBG outside the lesion was minimal, indicating that BBG primarily entered the lesion via the disrupted bloodspinal cord barrier.

    Our mutual friend wikipedia tells us that Coomassie blue started as a fabric dye in Africa.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  37. Re:Mobsters, the new clinical trialists. by Ardaen · · Score: 1

    Isn't it nice that they leave out the part where they break the backs of the animals first.

    Isn't it nice how you make it sound so straightforward, like hurting animals is unjustifiable.
    Vegan are you? Live in a mouse or rat infested home? Use any over the counter or presecription medications?

    Sadly the line is not clear or easy to draw.

  38. Re:Mobsters, the new clinical trialists. by 32771 · · Score: 1

    Depends on the newssource:

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/07/photogalleries/blue-rats-food-dye-heals-pictures/

    explains:

    "Fifteen minutes after researchers intentionally paralyzed this rat by dropping a weight on its back..."

    I know - poor thing, and so much cuter when blue.

    --
    Je me souviens.
  39. Hello? by tnk1 · · Score: 1

    Notice that the eyes have completely changed color as well. I'm thinking I do not want my eyes filled with blue tint.

    Umm, actually that would be AWESOME. You would have a cured spinal injury and you'd look like fuckin' Muadib!

    1. Re:Hello? by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      You would have a cured spinal injury and you'd look like fuckin' Muadib!

      The blue spinal dye must flow!

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  40. Thanks a lot by greymond · · Score: 1

    Now I have another reason to keep stuffing my face and getting fatter - jerks! :P

  41. Who would take the red coloured one? by goobermaster · · Score: 1

    Lets compare red to blue coloured things:

    In Health:
    Fire is less healthy when inserted into your body than water (+1 blue)

    In money:
    20 Euro blue note buys more at Quiznos than 10 Euro red note (+1 blue)

    In the Matrix:
    Red pill allows you to live in a decrepit city underground, implanted with large amounts of metal in your head and constantly hunted by squid robots itching to place dendrites through your ribcage and/or face.
    Blue Pill allows you to live in a nice modern city with noticeable lack of said squid robots. And now it helps you avoid and/or lessen the impact of spinal injuries. (+11!!one1 blue)

    Winner? Blue!

  42. Forget the medical advancement... by asdf7890 · · Score: 1

    Forget the medical advancement. Where can I get me a cool blue/white rat?!

  43. How?! by Fuzzums · · Score: 1

    How the *#%)( do you inject a blue M&M. And is that with or without peanut?

    --
    Privacy is terrorism.
  44. Misery Loves Company by mindbrane · · Score: 1

    Finally the blue man won't be singing the bluez all alone

    --
    ideopath @ play
  45. Re:Mobsters, the new clinical trialists. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Funny

    Seems to me we should be contracting out mobsters as researchers. Because they also just 'happen' to find people who suffer spinal cord injuries.

    That's a good idea. They'd probably do it for free, too, because if there's one thing mobsters hate, it's a rat.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  46. In related news... by omnivagus · · Score: 1

    In related news, the sexual partners of male lab rats injected with Yellow #5 reported far less damage to vaginal tissue following copulation...

    Seriously, I can't believe the shit we put into our food! What other crazy effects do dyes like this have that we don't know about?

  47. Re:Blue red by Trahloc · · Score: 1

    All cultures eat bugs, we Americans just like having it hidden behind weird names that sound like any other chemical.

    --
    The Goal: A long simple life filled with many complex toys.
  48. there's more to science then just hurting animals by Kenja · · Score: 1

    ... sometimes you actually discover something and have to write a paper about it.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  49. This is going to be a can of worms by overshoot · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Apparently this is one of those things like clotbusters after a CVI or MI where time counts -- only more so: waiting an hour or two can make the difference between walking and not walking.

    Which means that restricting it to use in trauma centers is going to end up with a lot of nonurban victims left paralyzed for life. Trouble is, administering it outside of a trauma center is going to cause a lot of problems with licensure etc. Which causes me, as a nonurban first responder, to simultaneously stress out and reach for the popcorn.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  50. Blue! Hahaha by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 1

    Here dude, this will get you HIGH!!!

    Next day -

    Holy shit dude. You're blue!

    This is better than that sleeping drunk girl whose friends write all over her.

    --
    ...
  51. Re:They need FDA approval? by Ironica · · Score: 1

    I prefer my chocolate to be chocolate-covered

    chocolate COLORED, not covered. Bah.

    Then again, chocolate-covered chocolate does sound pretty good...

    --
    Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
  52. Yup by overshoot · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If it does get approved at some point, you'd almost want carried by first responders instead of having to wait until you reach the emergency room.

    And since it's an injected drug, there are all sorts of legal restrictions on who can administer it. The list does not include EMT-Bs (basic emergency medical techs), only full paramedics [1] -- who are not always around when you need one.

    [1] Training for paramedics beyond the standard "field medic" is extensive, including cadaver labs and stuff like that. Even so, they don't administer drugs without explicit direction from medical control (typically nearby ER doc.)

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Yup by Mong0 · · Score: 1

      Not quite true on the Paramedic statement. Most paramedics operate on what is called Standing Orders or protocol. The doctor who is supervising the paramedic program in your area is tasked with creating a standard response to most types of calls that will be encountered in the field. As long as the paramedic stays within this protocol they are allowed to start IV's and administer drugs all without contacting medical control.
      Even EMT-I (Intermediates) are allowed to administer certain drugs without any direction from medical control as it has already been spelled out in the Standing Orders.

      Now if this drug proved to be useful and was added by the doctor overseeing the paramedic program then a paramedic could administer this drug in the field for a suspected spinal injury without medical control intervention.

      --

      --- Errr......No I don't need more oral sex thank you, Windows goes down on me all the time.

    2. Re:Yup by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      Both of you are off base on this one: the "drug" in question is in mass production, and is so common that you can literally buy it by the pound. Every american eats grams and grams of it every year. If it wasn't safe, we'd know by now.

      I'd HOPE that they would treat this more like a saline IV or a compression bandage...A necessary part of triage, in appropriate situations, rather than withholding a treatment that could potentially be the difference between walking with a limp and learning to use a wheelchair.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    3. Re:Yup by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      If this stuff turns out to be safe and efficacious, I'd suspect that they would produce an easy-to-use variant for first responders and other comparatively lightly trained; but quickly available, people. Something along the lines of the EpiPen.

    4. Re:Yup by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      Very true. As an emergency responder I absolutely could never administer this - or really anything else except the oxygen I'm trained to provide.

      But EMT service as my office is about 7-8 minutes away. That's not soon enough for a heart attack (and thus we have our emergency responder program), but it's soon enough to administer the blue.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
  53. Re:there's more to science then just hurting anima by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2, Funny
  54. Re:Mobsters, the new clinical trialists. by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

    And singing canaries, we could test if the effect specific to mammals or if birds have the same reaction.

  55. Sudden urge.. by Kaptain+Kruton · · Score: 1

    "The best part is that in lab rats the subjects given the treatment turn blue."

    If they test this on fat people, don't blame me if I have the sudden urge to start singing an Oompa Loompa song.

    1. Re:Sudden urge.. by BluBrick · · Score: 1

      Why so? Are you an orange dwarf with green hair and white eyebrows?

      --
      Ahh - My eye!
      The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
  56. Re:Mobsters, the new clinical trialists. by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

    Makes it sound almost like an animal hospital taking in injured creatures and saving them with the food dye.

    Says the troll who will still be eating all the blue M&Ms he can stuff down his mouth the next time he has a spinal cord injury.

    Anyway, they aren't trying to pull a fast one and slide that by you. It should be pretty obvious that they're breaking rats' backs, they're not denying it or trying to hide it.

  57. oblig. Starblazers ref by tekrat · · Score: 1

    So, this *explains* how Desslok could survive being blown to smithereens every season and then come back next season for more punishment. "I do so hate a man who laughs at his own jokes..... HAAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA"

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  58. Amazing that... by falken0905 · · Score: 1

    Amazing that so far no one has made any Dr. Manhattan jokes. I'm seriously disappointed.

  59. Re:Mobsters, the new clinical trialists. by nedlohs · · Score: 1

    It isn't nice. It's common sense.

    The ones that get their back's broken get off easily, the ones that are get assigned get picked by the guy trying some random cancer treatment aren't so lucky.

    Frankly kill a million mice so that a nicer blue color can be found for eyeliner sounds perfectly acceptable to me.

  60. Re:Blue red by Forbman · · Score: 1

    No, it's made from an extract from their exoskeletons...

  61. Re:Blue red by greg1104 · · Score: 1

    Bug juice has a proud military history and is Disney approved.

  62. Re:Blue red by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 1

    The juice is made from boiling their dried bodies, if I recall correctly.

    --
    Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
    altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
  63. Makes no difference by overshoot · · Score: 1

    Both of you are off base on this one: the "drug" in question is in mass production, and is so common that you can literally buy it by the pound. Every american eats grams and grams of it every year. If it wasn't safe, we'd know by now.

    So is aspirin -- and it's off-limits to EMT-B or equivalent personnel. I kid you not -- if I'm treating someone who has an epi pen, asthma inhaler, or even oral aspirin, I can "help" them do it themselves but not actually administer it.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Makes no difference by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      This isn't aspirin. Aspirin is sold in child-proof bottles because an overdose could hurt you.

      This is commonly added to candy and weird colored kid beverages. It's a whole different ballgame.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    2. Re:Makes no difference by jonwil · · Score: 1

      What dose of this chemical is necessary to achieve the effect? And how many blue M&Ms does that equate to?

      Just because the small amounts in M&Ms are safe to consume doesn't necessarily mean the larger doses in this drug will be safe (especially not if they are being injected vs taken orally)

    3. Re:Makes no difference by sjames · · Score: 1

      Yes, but even the most die hard junk food junkie doesn't take enough of it intravenously to turn him blue like the pictured rat. Even distilled water given intravenously can be fatal.

  64. There are a few minor considerations by overshoot · · Score: 1

    Gosh, you'd think something that's FDA-approved to be present in visible quantities in foods marketed heavily to children wouldn't need *additional* FDA approval for these clinical trials.

    There are some minor differences between "ingested" and "injected" that come into play. For instance, Coca-Cola is approved for ingestion, but I really don't think you want it squirted directly into your bloodstream.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:There are a few minor considerations by Nick+Number · · Score: 1

      There are some minor differences between "ingested" and "injected" that come into play. For instance, Coca-Cola is approved for ingestion, but I really don't think you want it squirted directly into your bloodstream.

      Yeah, that could lead to some serious side-effects, such as toejam football and monkey finger.

      --
      Promote proofreading. Don't mod up sloppy posts.
  65. Smurf by mwvdlee · · Score: 2, Funny

    This articles begs to be tagged "smurf".
    I mean, healing people with blue dye...

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  66. Re:Um... mods? by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

    Because I'm informing the AC as to the correct answers.

    (Half joking there.)

  67. Re:They need FDA approval? by geekoid · · Score: 1

    Blue dye administred in these doses and injected into your body.

    It is't the same as eating M&Ms.

    Unless you eat hunderads of pounds of blue M&Ms a day. In which case you ahve bigger problems to worry about.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  68. So conflicted by symbolset · · Score: 5, Funny

    Are these humans lawyers, music industry executives, or Microsoft programmers? Context is key.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
    1. Re:So conflicted by rubi · · Score: 1

      Are these humans lawyers, music industry executives, or Microsoft programmers? Context is key.

      Well, I would agree to use some lawyers/politicians or music execs. (almost = rats, but rats do not disguise what they are). MS Programmers? don't know any, bu one never knows. ;)

  69. suppository by beckett · · Score: 1

    cornhole, not piehole.

  70. Great. by Sj0 · · Score: 1

    Great. Now I'm paralysed from the neck down and I look like Dr. fucking Manhattan.

    --
    It's been a long time.
  71. Maybe that's why by Trogre · · Score: 1

    Ozzie won't go on stage without a brandy glass of one fousand bvown M&Ms. Maybe his stagehand just misheard the colour.

    All those stage antics do carry a high risk of spinal injury, after all.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  72. Re:They need FDA approval? by Qzukk · · Score: 1

    you mean, blue dye might not be entirely safe?

    FDA approval comes in several stages: you prove that it's safe, then you prove that your drug does what you claim it can do. The first step eliminates the use of arsenic and such in treatments (unless you can show that the disease is worse than the cure). The second step eliminates snake oil and homeopathic remedies formed from dilutions of the refined glandular excretions of serpents.

    --
    If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  73. Nonurban by overshoot · · Score: 1

    But EMT service as my office is about 7-8 minutes away. That's not soon enough for a heart attack (and thus we have our emergency responder program), but it's soon enough to administer the blue.

    And my "office" (a ski resort) is a minimum of 30 minutes from the nearest hospital, and even by helicopter more often an hour.

    Did I mention that we get a lot of cerebrospinal injuries?

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Nonurban by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      Well that's simple then. You guys need an on-staff EMT, or need to train one of your existing employees as an EMT.

      Where do you work, so I can be sure never to visit? I'd expect any ski resort to have an EMT on hand.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
  74. I find this .. worrisome. by lena_10326 · · Score: 1

    The fact that an artificial food additive possessing chemical side-effects gets into our food supply without detection for decades is worrisome. This time it was a lucky happenstance with a positive outcome. Other times it's not (red dye). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amaranth_(dye)

    --
    Camping on quad since 1996.
  75. poorly understood chemicals in our food... by TermV · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is pretty scary, actually. We're randomly adding this stuff to food for no reason other than to turn it blue. So it turns out it has some sort of medicinal power, but it could just have easily caused cancer or horrible birth defects.

    If our factory food looks so disgusting that it needs dyes, maybe we shouldn't be eating it in the first place.

  76. Only for federally-funded research by Boawk · · Score: 1

    And, for human testing, you (ostensibly at any rate) need informed consent, and various safeguards, IRB oversight, etc.

    Interesting thing is that the Institional Review Board (IRB) only has jurisdiction over (U.S.) federally-funded research.

  77. The Blue Man Group... by macraig · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... will be filing a lawsuit shortly to block this attempted copyright infringement.

  78. I wonder ... by dword · · Score: 1

    ... how does it behave and what does it do to you when ingested?

  79. It's July, not April... by jhfry · · Score: 1

    why are we posting April Fools stories today?

    Seriously though, it really does read like an April Fools story!

    --
    Sometimes the best solution is to stop wasting time looking for an easy solution.
  80. Re:HOLY SHIT! So Carlin was really on to something by SkimTony · · Score: 1

    Indeed. Text link, for those who can't watch youtube where they are:
    http://snltranscripts.jt.org/75/75acarlin2.phtml

  81. EMTs at ski resorts by overshoot · · Score: 1

    Well that's simple then. You guys need an on-staff EMT, or need to train one of your existing employees as an EMT.

    All of the ski patrol (/me included) are at least EMT-B equivalent [1]; several are paramedics and a couple are MDs. None of which is much help when the nearest trauma center is 150 miles by air and the altitude is enough that choppers are just short of ceiling. [1] OEC is a nonurban equivalent to EMT-B.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:EMTs at ski resorts by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      So you could inject this dye, then. What's the problem?

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
  82. Disconnect by overshoot · · Score: 1

    So you could inject this dye, then. What's the problem?

    Nope. Drug administration (other than oxygen) is beyond the scope of practice for EMT-Bs.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."