A fairly ubiquitous rule in all the labs I've ever worked in.
Reason: Do you really want to provide a walking mobile human host that has all the same growth characteristics as the thing you're growing in a dish.
Why do you think research labs pay people to donate samples of blood etc.
I used to entice Med students in with promises of beer, unfortunately as they became older they started asking questions: "If this makes a million I'll get a cut, right?"
Aks a neighbour for a sample, never use your own tissues, it's just asking for trouble.
Indeed, what are they doing? Lego resource exploitation (mining),Lego xenophobia (alien bug things).
No BLUE coloured bricks I see.
My dad gave mine away to the younger child next door. Luckily I protested vehemently enough to get the small child to reurn them when he moved house. Considering the hundreds of pounds my grandparents spent on the stuff over the years, I don't understand why parents want to give it away?
>What America needs is to have more privitised >utilities - look at the success we've had with >our health service, it is the envy of the world >with the best equipped hospitals to be found >anywhere.
Ohhhh, I'm sooooo envious. Can you see me turning green?
I live in the UK; along with every other citizen, I pay a small amount of my income to the government and they provide me with healthcare free at the point of use. I don't need to take my credit card with me when i go to hospital. We spend 7% of healthcare revenues on admin as opposed to 11% in the US.
Privatisation is not some kind of panacea to solve the problems of healthcare provision(or any other social issue that requires a proper debate). The last government we had tried to introduce a degree of privatisation. The only change I noticed at the hospital I was studying at was the arrival of a whole lot of middle aged managers and their BMW's in the parking lot; and the closure of many elective beds.
Now that the energy market has been deregulated the only change I see is that of people knocking on my door at 6pm (when I'm eating my dinner) telling me how much cheaper it'll be to switch to their generating company. Who pays for the people to come knocking at my door? The consumer perhaps? All they're interested in is increasing market share. We're the windiest country in Europe (an island surrounded by sea) but the Germans have more wind turbines than we do!
Privatisation is no substitute for debate and regulation. The market has no rationale, look at Adam Smith: we'll become better human beings and look after our resources-Whoops there's no fish left on the Grand Banks!
Also, companies _do_ share research with university labs. It's not necessarily common, but there is a flow of data between company labs working on proprietary work and university labs working on related projects with the result of both groups getting more work done. The biotech companies get marketable products (which the university labs buy) and the university labs produce more grant-attracting papers (which provide background data for the companies to work from). Everybodies happy.
Except for us folks who have to fork out for new seed every year, or have to purchase extortionate anti-virals of limited effectiveness (Tribavirin anyone?)
While the flow of data between corporations and academeis useful to society, some of those corporations are acting against ALL our interests.
I live in Cambridge.It is a very homogenous, flat landscape, intensively farmed, dotted by large white pharmaceutical factories. The university gets a lot of money to pursue biotech reearch. Do I trust the University to scrutinise the actions of the corporations they are in bed with? Do I trust these corporations to not fuck up the biosphere?
At UCL in London the pharmaceutical giant Wellcome (as it was at the time) were sited just next door.They were very friendly with the medical school. They even ran one of the 2nd year study modules. Where they had their crowning glory: a museum!
"The History of Medicine" brought to you by Wellcome.
I remember Sitting on the worlds most unergonomic chair (kept from the 50's and missing almost all it's padding) with one of the most amazing microscope/multilaser/camera/PC_with_a_huge_monito r setups.
The images were stunning, but my arse hurt all night long.
I would have preferred to go back to the setup I used when I learned to use a microscope as a child; lying on the floor with all my materials spread out in a big semi-circle. (but then I guess I was lucky)
The introduction of the ARV (Armed Response Vehicle) was in direct response to the number of firearms involved in serious crime.
ARV= Three police officers with firearms training, Beretta 92f's and H&K MP5's.
Of course they do have a tendency to kill people every once in a while (shot a depressed farmer here in Cambridge a while back) but they're probably criminals right?
Europe has *more* problems with gun toting terrorists than the US. Remember the Red Army faction, the Basque separatists, the IRA, Baeder-Meinhof(sp?).
Not forgetting the CIA backed right wing terrorists that pretended to be left wing to scare the populace from voting socialist in the 50's 60's and 70's.
Or the fact that the IRA needed money to buy guns in the 70's and got some of the cash from NORAID.
Gee thanks, a proxy war against the UK, we were worried that you guys were going to leave us out of your governments "Global proxy war" (TM) game.
Slashdot Mirror
A fairly ubiquitous rule in all the labs I've ever worked in.
Reason: Do you really want to provide a walking mobile human host that has all the same growth characteristics as the thing you're growing in a dish.
Why do you think research labs pay people to donate samples of blood etc.
I used to entice Med students in with promises of beer, unfortunately as they became older they started asking questions: "If this makes a million I'll get a cut, right?"
Aks a neighbour for a sample, never use your own tissues, it's just asking for trouble.
Indeed, what are they doing? Lego resource exploitation (mining),Lego xenophobia (alien bug things).
No BLUE coloured bricks I see.
My dad gave mine away to the younger child next door. Luckily I protested vehemently enough to get the small child to reurn them when he moved house. Considering the hundreds of pounds my grandparents spent on the stuff over the years, I don't understand why parents want to give it away?
>What America needs is to have more privitised >utilities - look at the success we've had with >our health service, it is the envy of the world >with the best equipped hospitals to be found >anywhere.
Ohhhh, I'm sooooo envious.
Can you see me turning green?
I live in the UK; along with every other citizen, I pay a small amount of my income to the government and they provide me with healthcare free at the point of use. I don't need to take my credit card with me when i go to hospital. We spend 7% of healthcare revenues on admin as opposed to 11% in the US.
Privatisation is not some kind of panacea to solve the problems of healthcare provision(or any other social issue that requires a proper debate). The last government we had tried to introduce a degree of privatisation. The only change I noticed at the hospital I was studying at was the arrival of a whole lot of middle aged managers and their BMW's in the parking lot; and the closure of many elective beds.
Now that the energy market has been deregulated the only change I see is that of people knocking on my door at 6pm (when I'm eating my dinner) telling me how much cheaper it'll be to switch to their generating company. Who pays for the people to come knocking at my door? The consumer perhaps?
All they're interested in is increasing market share. We're the windiest country in Europe (an island surrounded by sea) but the Germans have more wind turbines than we do!
Privatisation is no substitute for debate and regulation. The market has no rationale, look at Adam Smith: we'll become better human beings and look after our resources-Whoops there's no fish left on the Grand Banks!
Personally, I've always wanted more arms.
Also, companies _do_ share research with university labs. It's not necessarily common, but there is a flow of data between company labs working on proprietary work and university labs working on related projects with the result of both groups getting more work done. The biotech companies get marketable products (which the university labs buy) and the university labs produce more grant-attracting papers (which provide background data for the companies to work from). Everybodies happy.
Except for us folks who have to fork out for new seed every year, or have to purchase extortionate anti-virals of limited effectiveness (Tribavirin anyone?)
While the flow of data between corporations and academeis useful to society, some of those corporations are acting against ALL our interests.
I live in Cambridge.It is a very homogenous, flat landscape, intensively farmed, dotted by large white pharmaceutical factories.
The university gets a lot of money to pursue biotech reearch.
Do I trust the University to scrutinise the actions of the corporations they are in bed with?
Do I trust these corporations to not fuck up the biosphere?
At UCL in London the pharmaceutical giant Wellcome (as it was at the time) were sited just next door.They were very friendly with the medical school. They even ran one of the 2nd year study modules. Where they had their crowning glory: a museum!
"The History of Medicine" brought to you by Wellcome.
I remember Sitting on the worlds most unergonomic chair (kept from the 50's and missing almost all it's padding) with one of the most amazing microscope/multilaser/camera/PC_with_a_huge_monito r setups.
The images were stunning, but my arse hurt all night long.
I would have preferred to go back to the setup I used when I learned to use a microscope as a child; lying on the floor with all my materials spread out in a big semi-circle. (but then I guess I was lucky)
Citizens aren't armed, so police aren't armed.
Oh yes they are.
The introduction of the ARV (Armed Response Vehicle) was in direct response to the number of firearms involved in serious crime.
ARV= Three police officers with firearms training, Beretta 92f's and H&K MP5's.
Of course they do have a tendency to kill people every once in a while (shot a depressed farmer here in Cambridge a while back) but they're probably criminals right?
Europe has *more* problems with gun toting terrorists than the US. Remember the Red Army faction, the Basque separatists, the IRA, Baeder-Meinhof(sp?).
Not forgetting the CIA backed right wing terrorists that pretended to be left wing to scare the populace from voting socialist in the 50's 60's and 70's.
Or the fact that the IRA needed money to buy guns in the 70's and got some of the cash from NORAID.
Gee thanks, a proxy war against the UK, we were worried that you guys were going to leave us out of your governments "Global proxy war" (TM) game.