I don't know the actual voltage but dry piles of that type generally generate thousands of volts. It's probably a good thing the current is so weak! Effectively, it's a source of static electricity.
In general, nicotine probably isn't all sunshine and lolipops. Smoking is much worse. But it seems that the vaccine approach is probably not a good way to stop smoking. It may or may not affect a great many valuable drugs coming down the pipe. It certainly won't be pleasant for the patient (all that craving, no way to answer it).
Nicotine replacement isn't ideal, but it has the advantage of working without introducing new risks. It seems that in many cases, a less structured long term approach causes eventual reduction or cessation while short programmed steps result in a return to cigarettes. It also allows those who are unknowingly self-medicating to continue doing so.
The tumor enhancing effect of angiogenesis is troubling but at the same time, that would benefit a coronary artery blockage.
It may be that nicotine in the absence of smoking is worth it.
That varies a lot. Some people go with crazy strong ejuice with a PV that resembles a fog machine and still have that initial transition difficulty.
But certainly, over time people generally settle on significantly less nicotine than they were comfortable with when they smoked. Often to the point where withdrawal effects become minimal to unnoticed.
But people do have a right to be free of some of the consequences of free speech. For example, no matter how offensive someone's speech is, you cannot legally shoot them dead even if your only motive to do so was their speech (as opposed to fear of their next action implied by that speech, that is, a credible threat).
The actual point where "fist meets face" is where a person infected with a disease contacts others. The question then is how reasonable was your belief that you had no communicable diseases. Being vaccinated is certainly one way to make that belief reasonable (but you can still be wrong, vaccination isn't 100% effective).
But consider how our society handles going to work sick. In that case, you have no reason at all to believe you won't make someone else sick. In theory, an employer who imposes any penalty whatsoever for not going to work when you believe you are sick joins you in liability. Yet, both happen all the time and nobody is being held liable.
The line is difficult to draw. We could consider the seriousness of the harm that might be expected. We know someone with the flu may miss work and be financially damaged. We know some people who get the flu die of it (mostly the infirm). We know measles is more likely to be fatal but we also know most people are vaccinated against it. We know further that whatever we might be sick with, measles is unlikely, vaccinated or not (though that may change).
I personally believe that the benefits of measles vaccination outweigh the risks by far. If I worked for Disney and hadn't been vaccinated, I would take them up on their free vaccination offer. But that's my choice.
Actually, that is highly questionable. People who make that choice get hassled all the time. At best, they can go somewhere they will probably not be noticed.
Reducto Ad Absurdem is a perfectly valid argument. He is simply pointing out that there is necessarily a limitation to your viewpoint that you haven't addressed. Somewhere there is a line where the choice becomes non-free. "Your money or your life" is a good example of something over that line.
The real question is which side of the line is "get vaxed or get out" on and why.
We're fairly clear which side you believe it is on. Care to address the why part?
Or it took a year to realize that she might either be able to actually do something about it that wouldn't harm her worse or to decide that the harm it would do her was better than the harassment.
The problem is that they are connecting a serial to IP adapter with no access control to a device with a serial port that also has no access control. The former device is meant to be used for servers where there will be a login prompt and the latter were meant to be locally connected and protected by physical security.
So given that combination, ANYONE can obtain what amounts to admin privileges.
You seem to be in denial yourself. You have conflated the effect of nicotine delivered as cigarette smoke with the MAOI for the effects of just nicotine.
All of those claims for nicotine having devastating cardiovascular effects are actually the other components of cigarette smoke having devastating effects.
That quote of mine was a quote of the very article you pointed out to me. They, in-turn were quoting Scalise and his adviser. At this point, your worship might even start creeping HIM out a little.
In spite of evidence that ecigs and snus eliminate most if not all of the harmful effects of smoking, the American Lung Association has been strongly against them.
Only if they are well trained little monkeys. The vapor doesn't tend to persist in the air like cigarette smoke does. It has none of the bad smell of cigarettes and very little nicotine is left on the exhale.
You sound like one of those people I used to use for my own amusement by holding an unlit cigarette just so I could watch you start coughing obnoxiously as a Pavlovian response.
Some of the most interesting new research in psychiatry is the positive effects of nicotine on sufferers of schizophrenia. It is one of the few thinghs that can treat the negative symptoms of the disease and it is the only one that has no nasty side effects (as long as the delivery mechanism isn't smoking).
Then it turns out that nicotine use was self-medication and now you can't use any of a new class of drugs being developed that are all based on nicotine. OOPS
Nicotine has been far too politicized. It is practically impossible to find proper research. Most of it conflates smoking and nicotine use. Most of the really nasty effects of smoking are from the many other things in cigarettes, not the nicotine. There is evidence that that includes much of the the addiction. Practically everyone who has switched to e-cigarettes has noticed this. Even though the e-cig is giving you as much or even more nicotine than the cigarette, it somehow doesn't get rid of all the craving at first. There is a definite 3 day to two week period before the user is comfortably on the e-cig. A while after that, most users find that they want the e-cig but not in the urgent way they used to crave a smoke break. Many, if not most, choose to reduce the nicotine level in their ecig even if their intent was never to quit nicotine.
A leading theory is that the harmaline (an MAO inhibitor) found in cigarette smoke is responsible. It potentiates the addictive effect.
Once the tar, particulates, carbon monoxide, and most of the nitrosamines are eliminated from the delivery mechanism, nicotine use is much more benign and for some people, even beneficial.
All of this would be much better known if nicotine wasn't such a political bogeyman.
Scalise, 49, who ascended to the House GOP’s third-ranking post this year, confirmed through an adviser that he once appeared at a convention of the European-American Unity and Rights Organization, or EURO.
What part didn't you understand. That is him copping to it.
But the adviser said the congressman didn’t know at the time about the group’s affiliation with racists and neo-Nazi activists.
Many companies are finding that offshoring isn't working out all that well and are moving the work back onshore. We do have the option of placing tariffs on the companies that want to take but not give back.
Note that at the same time I would like to cut off H1-B, I want to make a green card easier to get. It's much harder to treat a green card holder like an indentured servant.
The argument is even simpler and your post hints at it. He is arguing for platform neutrality but trying to inappropriately wrap it in network neutrality.
He is now learning the importance of the old saying "be good to people when you're on your way up because you'll see them again on your way back down".
Too many CEOs are petulant 5 year olds at heart. After spending all day grabbing other people's toys and screaming MINE! they get mad when others don't feel like sharing with them.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know the actual voltage but dry piles of that type generally generate thousands of volts. It's probably a good thing the current is so weak! Effectively, it's a source of static electricity.
In general, nicotine probably isn't all sunshine and lolipops. Smoking is much worse. But it seems that the vaccine approach is probably not a good way to stop smoking. It may or may not affect a great many valuable drugs coming down the pipe. It certainly won't be pleasant for the patient (all that craving, no way to answer it).
Nicotine replacement isn't ideal, but it has the advantage of working without introducing new risks. It seems that in many cases, a less structured long term approach causes eventual reduction or cessation while short programmed steps result in a return to cigarettes. It also allows those who are unknowingly self-medicating to continue doing so.
The tumor enhancing effect of angiogenesis is troubling but at the same time, that would benefit a coronary artery blockage.
It may be that nicotine in the absence of smoking is worth it.
The CDC is a very political organization. Google is your friend here. First look up "schizophrenia nicotine" There are far too many hits to post here.
Next up, search on "nicotine MAOI". Again, far too many hits to post here.
That varies a lot. Some people go with crazy strong ejuice with a PV that resembles a fog machine and still have that initial transition difficulty.
But certainly, over time people generally settle on significantly less nicotine than they were comfortable with when they smoked. Often to the point where withdrawal effects become minimal to unnoticed.
But people do have a right to be free of some of the consequences of free speech. For example, no matter how offensive someone's speech is, you cannot legally shoot them dead even if your only motive to do so was their speech (as opposed to fear of their next action implied by that speech, that is, a credible threat).
The actual point where "fist meets face" is where a person infected with a disease contacts others. The question then is how reasonable was your belief that you had no communicable diseases. Being vaccinated is certainly one way to make that belief reasonable (but you can still be wrong, vaccination isn't 100% effective).
But consider how our society handles going to work sick. In that case, you have no reason at all to believe you won't make someone else sick. In theory, an employer who imposes any penalty whatsoever for not going to work when you believe you are sick joins you in liability. Yet, both happen all the time and nobody is being held liable.
The line is difficult to draw. We could consider the seriousness of the harm that might be expected. We know someone with the flu may miss work and be financially damaged. We know some people who get the flu die of it (mostly the infirm). We know measles is more likely to be fatal but we also know most people are vaccinated against it. We know further that whatever we might be sick with, measles is unlikely, vaccinated or not (though that may change).
I personally believe that the benefits of measles vaccination outweigh the risks by far. If I worked for Disney and hadn't been vaccinated, I would take them up on their free vaccination offer. But that's my choice.
You have a choice. You can always leave society.
Actually, that is highly questionable. People who make that choice get hassled all the time. At best, they can go somewhere they will probably not be noticed.
Reducto Ad Absurdem is a perfectly valid argument. He is simply pointing out that there is necessarily a limitation to your viewpoint that you haven't addressed. Somewhere there is a line where the choice becomes non-free. "Your money or your life" is a good example of something over that line.
The real question is which side of the line is "get vaxed or get out" on and why.
We're fairly clear which side you believe it is on. Care to address the why part?
In today's economy, that is Hobson's choice. Which is to say, not actually a choice.
But they do. They offer free vaccinations to their employees.
Or it took a year to realize that she might either be able to actually do something about it that wouldn't harm her worse or to decide that the harm it would do her was better than the harassment.
The problem is that they are connecting a serial to IP adapter with no access control to a device with a serial port that also has no access control. The former device is meant to be used for servers where there will be a login prompt and the latter were meant to be locally connected and protected by physical security.
So given that combination, ANYONE can obtain what amounts to admin privileges.
You seem to be in denial yourself. You have conflated the effect of nicotine delivered as cigarette smoke with the MAOI for the effects of just nicotine.
All of those claims for nicotine having devastating cardiovascular effects are actually the other components of cigarette smoke having devastating effects.
There was some yelling, but I';ll need a citation for anyone returning anything.
There is talk now in the UK about possibly clawing back some bonuses but it hasn't happened yet.
In any event, that is only happening because of government intervention, not an internal process.
That quote of mine was a quote of the very article you pointed out to me. They, in-turn were quoting Scalise and his adviser. At this point, your worship might even start creeping HIM out a little.
I think it's the latter.
In spite of evidence that ecigs and snus eliminate most if not all of the harmful effects of smoking, the American Lung Association has been strongly against them.
Only if they are well trained little monkeys. The vapor doesn't tend to persist in the air like cigarette smoke does. It has none of the bad smell of cigarettes and very little nicotine is left on the exhale.
You sound like one of those people I used to use for my own amusement by holding an unlit cigarette just so I could watch you start coughing obnoxiously as a Pavlovian response.
Much of that addiction is due to MAO inhibitors you get along with the nicotine when you smoke.
Some of the most interesting new research in psychiatry is the positive effects of nicotine on sufferers of schizophrenia. It is one of the few thinghs that can treat the negative symptoms of the disease and it is the only one that has no nasty side effects (as long as the delivery mechanism isn't smoking).
The vaccine sounds like a really bad idea.
A person who got a heroine vaccine would be in for a world of suffering if they ever needed pain medication.
Then it turns out that nicotine use was self-medication and now you can't use any of a new class of drugs being developed that are all based on nicotine. OOPS
Nicotine has been far too politicized. It is practically impossible to find proper research. Most of it conflates smoking and nicotine use. Most of the really nasty effects of smoking are from the many other things in cigarettes, not the nicotine. There is evidence that that includes much of the the addiction. Practically everyone who has switched to e-cigarettes has noticed this. Even though the e-cig is giving you as much or even more nicotine than the cigarette, it somehow doesn't get rid of all the craving at first. There is a definite 3 day to two week period before the user is comfortably on the e-cig. A while after that, most users find that they want the e-cig but not in the urgent way they used to crave a smoke break. Many, if not most, choose to reduce the nicotine level in their ecig even if their intent was never to quit nicotine.
A leading theory is that the harmaline (an MAO inhibitor) found in cigarette smoke is responsible. It potentiates the addictive effect.
Once the tar, particulates, carbon monoxide, and most of the nitrosamines are eliminated from the delivery mechanism, nicotine use is much more benign and for some people, even beneficial.
All of this would be much better known if nicotine wasn't such a political bogeyman.
Scalise, 49, who ascended to the House GOP’s third-ranking post this year, confirmed through an adviser that he once appeared at a convention of the European-American Unity and Rights Organization, or EURO.
What part didn't you understand. That is him copping to it.
But the adviser said the congressman didn’t know at the time about the group’s affiliation with racists and neo-Nazi activists.
And saying it was a mistake.
Wipe the stars out of your eyes!
Many companies are finding that offshoring isn't working out all that well and are moving the work back onshore. We do have the option of placing tariffs on the companies that want to take but not give back.
Note that at the same time I would like to cut off H1-B, I want to make a green card easier to get. It's much harder to treat a green card holder like an indentured servant.
The argument is even simpler and your post hints at it. He is arguing for platform neutrality but trying to inappropriately wrap it in network neutrality.
He is now learning the importance of the old saying "be good to people when you're on your way up because you'll see them again on your way back down".
Too many CEOs are petulant 5 year olds at heart. After spending all day grabbing other people's toys and screaming MINE! they get mad when others don't feel like sharing with them.
They knew the law and they knew how many calls they were making...
Still, I don't want to see all those people out of work, so perhaps they should be forcibly converted to a non-profit until they work off the fines.