One amateur bomb in a field full of people can kill a LOT more people that a bomb of similar effort in a building. You wouldn't have to bury it either. Just walk through the crowd and drop a duffel bag in the middle.
Pertussis being a bacterial disease is irrelevant. Pertussis only lives within humans, just like the viruses that cause polio and measles, and unlike the viruses that cause rabies and black plague, and the bacteria that cause Lyme disease.
Zero. The risk of serious side effects from the pertussis vaccination is very, very small. If there were a case in such a small area over such a short period of time it would be a statistical fluke.
The decision to offer a vaccination, never mind recommend it, requires that the benefit from that vaccination vastly outweigh the risks. People figure these things out, carefully, in advance, then watch to make sure they're right.
Ignorance is, and should be, a defence for negligence. You can't be negligent if you don't know there's a danger. The situations you've described are where situations where the claim of ignorance is not believable. Vaccination is another - if you truly don't know that you should get your kids vaccinated, you're not guilty of negligence. If, as in the real world, you're told that you should and decide not to, then you are.
The US has some nice land in Nevada and other desert states that could be used for idiot, I mean anti-vaccine, reserves. Here you go, your new home. Might want to build yourself some shelter. Don't try to cross the fence.
Yes, your made up example of hitting a cockroach with a needle, that has nothing to do with what we're discussing. I realize your silliness, started there, with something you made up without actually reading the paper we're talking about.
Why not? Most countries force everybody to cover their genitals and not wave flamethrowers around randomly when they interact with society. Don't want to get vaccinated? Okay, leave the country (if anyone will take you). Or go live on this unvaccinated idiots reserve. No, your kids can't go with you.
It's odd that so many Americans are just fine with making it a criminal offence to abort a few cells stuck together and yet so violently opposed to making it illegal to endanger your sentient child by not getting him or her vaccinated.
If vaccines caused autism at any rate that made getting them anywhere near more dangerous than not getting them, you wouldn't have the option to get your kids vaccinated. You'd have to go to some third world alley to get a vaccine.
The second article reviews a bunch of studies in a bunch of plant and animal species, showing lifespan extension, improved immune function and better reproductive success when exposed to various low level doses of ionizing radiation.
You're right, there isn't any absolutely conclusive evidence that low dose ionizing radiation is beneficial, but there also isn't any evidence that it's harmful either. Your statement "there is no net benefit. This does not stop some wishful thinking radiologists from postulating otherwise" is unjustified, as is your original statement "radiation is bad in any amount and it doesn't do any good to deny this fact."
Sorry, you've lost me. I read the whole thread. I was following your "emperor has no clothes" metaphor. What is it we're thinking about? Your vague assertion that "even making Europa would be kind of like hitting a cockroach with a needle from across a football stadium" followed by some silliness about Vegas and grants?
You're just a trash tabloid staff editorialist unless you actually read the paper and comment intelligently on their methods. I suppose you might get some play on the National Enquirer... I mean Slashdot, but that doesn't make you clever or insightful.
You should never be ironic about a technical scientific issue in a public forum, at least not without a disclaimer at the end. You left off the disclaimer. I added it for you.
There is evidence. Please don't get your science from crazies like Coulter or reactions to them. The SBM article you link to is quite rightly addressing refuting Coulter's claims, but there is reasonable evidence that radiation exposure at levels quite a bit less than what Coulter and the SBM article are talking about, and similar to what we're talking about here, may be beneficial.
Yes, I should have said "may be beneficial." The evidence is stronger that normal background-level radiation has a beneficial effect than that it has a clinically significant detrimental effect. Your statement that "radiation is bad in any amount" is unfounded. You also didn't distinguish the type of radiation - the vast majority of radiation people encounter in their daily lives has a variety of very beneficial effects.
It does work. I'm actually curious why it works so well (at the moment). I suspect that as kickstarter becomes more popular they're going to have to do something to addresses scammers though.
No, no. Rick Santorum was going to make the US a beacon again for the rest of the world. He said so in his speech. Fortunately he said he's going to keep working on it. After all, what would we do without our beacon?
Slashdot Mirror
"Yet web designers insist on adding so much extra crap within a web page that one must scroll horizontally to view a web page in a 680px window."
In a sane browser you just zoom the window until you have it where you want it, then resize so all the crap on either size falls outside the window.
One amateur bomb in a field full of people can kill a LOT more people that a bomb of similar effort in a building. You wouldn't have to bury it either. Just walk through the crowd and drop a duffel bag in the middle.
Pertussis being a bacterial disease is irrelevant. Pertussis only lives within humans, just like the viruses that cause polio and measles, and unlike the viruses that cause rabies and black plague, and the bacteria that cause Lyme disease.
It's not misleading. Who do you think they caught it from?
Zero. The risk of serious side effects from the pertussis vaccination is very, very small. If there were a case in such a small area over such a short period of time it would be a statistical fluke.
The decision to offer a vaccination, never mind recommend it, requires that the benefit from that vaccination vastly outweigh the risks. People figure these things out, carefully, in advance, then watch to make sure they're right.
Ignorance is, and should be, a defence for negligence. You can't be negligent if you don't know there's a danger. The situations you've described are where situations where the claim of ignorance is not believable. Vaccination is another - if you truly don't know that you should get your kids vaccinated, you're not guilty of negligence. If, as in the real world, you're told that you should and decide not to, then you are.
The hypothesis of infections memes has not been proven scientifically.
However, I'm pretty sure if I kidnapped your kid and brainwashed him, I could be charged with something.
The US has some nice land in Nevada and other desert states that could be used for idiot, I mean anti-vaccine, reserves. Here you go, your new home. Might want to build yourself some shelter. Don't try to cross the fence.
Pick your age. Eight, ten, twenty, thirty-six, one hundred and three. All of them can be killed by idiots who don't vaccinate.
Yes, your made up example of hitting a cockroach with a needle, that has nothing to do with what we're discussing. I realize your silliness, started there, with something you made up without actually reading the paper we're talking about.
"You simply cannot force vaccinations on people."
Why not? Most countries force everybody to cover their genitals and not wave flamethrowers around randomly when they interact with society. Don't want to get vaccinated? Okay, leave the country (if anyone will take you). Or go live on this unvaccinated idiots reserve. No, your kids can't go with you.
It's odd that so many Americans are just fine with making it a criminal offence to abort a few cells stuck together and yet so violently opposed to making it illegal to endanger your sentient child by not getting him or her vaccinated.
If vaccines caused autism at any rate that made getting them anywhere near more dangerous than not getting them, you wouldn't have the option to get your kids vaccinated. You'd have to go to some third world alley to get a vaccine.
The second article reviews a bunch of studies in a bunch of plant and animal species, showing lifespan extension, improved immune function and better reproductive success when exposed to various low level doses of ionizing radiation.
You're right, there isn't any absolutely conclusive evidence that low dose ionizing radiation is beneficial, but there also isn't any evidence that it's harmful either. Your statement "there is no net benefit. This does not stop some wishful thinking radiologists from postulating otherwise" is unjustified, as is your original statement "radiation is bad in any amount and it doesn't do any good to deny this fact."
Sorry, you've lost me. I read the whole thread. I was following your "emperor has no clothes" metaphor. What is it we're thinking about? Your vague assertion that "even making Europa would be kind of like hitting a cockroach with a needle from across a football stadium" followed by some silliness about Vegas and grants?
I do enjoy how you reply to a couple of peer reviewed journal articles with nothing but assertions of truth and your own poor analogies. Bravo.
Fortunately rocks aren't light. Their atoms tend to stay clumped together instead of spreading out uniformly like photons.
Most non-dinosaur killing meteorites land cold.
Some of them are big enough, others hitch a ride on comets or asteroids.
There are pieces of Mars littering Earth. It happens.
You're just a trash tabloid staff editorialist unless you actually read the paper and comment intelligently on their methods. I suppose you might get some play on the National Enquirer... I mean Slashdot, but that doesn't make you clever or insightful.
Why not just imagine instant, and free, teleportation? Both violate the lawsof physics as we know them.
You should never be ironic about a technical scientific issue in a public forum, at least not without a disclaimer at the end. You left off the disclaimer. I added it for you.
http://bjr.birjournals.org/content/78/925/3.short
http://informahealthcare.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/20014091111956
etc.
There is evidence. Please don't get your science from crazies like Coulter or reactions to them. The SBM article you link to is quite rightly addressing refuting Coulter's claims, but there is reasonable evidence that radiation exposure at levels quite a bit less than what Coulter and the SBM article are talking about, and similar to what we're talking about here, may be beneficial.
Yes, I should have said "may be beneficial." The evidence is stronger that normal background-level radiation has a beneficial effect than that it has a clinically significant detrimental effect. Your statement that "radiation is bad in any amount" is unfounded. You also didn't distinguish the type of radiation - the vast majority of radiation people encounter in their daily lives has a variety of very beneficial effects.
It does work. I'm actually curious why it works so well (at the moment). I suspect that as kickstarter becomes more popular they're going to have to do something to addresses scammers though.
No, no. Rick Santorum was going to make the US a beacon again for the rest of the world. He said so in his speech. Fortunately he said he's going to keep working on it. After all, what would we do without our beacon?