"...but modern nuclear plants have zero chance of damaging humanity, and an infintesimal chance of killing those in the immediate vicinity."
Guess there's nothing wrong with quoting it again:
"September 30, 1999 - Japan's worst nuclear accident ever takes place at a uranium reprocessing facility in Tokaimura, Ibaraki prefecture, northeast of Tokyo, Japan. The direct cause of the accident was workers putting uranyl nitrate solution containing about 16.6 kg of uranium, which exceeded the critical mass, into a precipitation tank. The tank was not designed to dissolve this type of solution and was not configured to prevent eventual criticality. The incident exposes workers and residents in the surrounding area to extremely high levels of radiation."
If the foregoing makes me a head-in-the-sand Boomer Anti-Nuclear Satanist, then at least I'm older, wiser and sadder than you young idiots. It's no wonder they send boys of your age to war, you're too stupid to accept that you'll die.
Thank you. I was getting rather concerned with the impression that everyone here was knee-jerk pro-nuclear for some reason. And, to help you with your concerns about the younger generation, I'm only 25.
No, Chernobyl and Three Mile Island are definitely not the most recent screw ups.
"September 30, 1999 - Japan's worst nuclear accident ever takes place at a uranium reprocessing facility in Tokaimura, Ibaraki prefecture, northeast of Tokyo, Japan. The direct cause of the accident was workers putting uranyl nitrate solution containing about 16.6 kg of uranium, which exceeded the critical mass, into a precipitation tank. The tank was not designed to dissolve this type of solution and was not configured to prevent eventual criticality. The incident exposes workers and residents in the surrounding area to extremely high levels of radiation."
Uh... I think his point is that it was lucky that the nuclear bomb didn't explode. It is a good thing the failsafe worked, because if it didn't, many people would be dead and a large area of the US would now be a radioactive wasteland.
"The meltdown process physically triggers events that shut the reaction down, stopping the meltdown."
The Chernobyl power station had 4 state-of-the-art (1986) Russian RBMK reactors, and was constructing two more. Chernobyl was caused by an uncontrollable reaction in the core. The "physical triggers" you speak of are nothing but emergency shut down triggers, and have nothing to do with physics. It is dangerous thinking to believe that nuclear reactions are inherently stable. Far from it, they are inherently unstable. Nuclear power is produced by a controlled nuclear reaction. In case the nuclear reaction becomes out of control, safety mechanisms shut down the reactor. In Chernobyl, these emergency shut down processes were disabled during testing. The controlled reaction got out of control, and after reaching 120 times its full power the reactor exploded, killing 30 people and releasing tons of radioactive material into the atmosphere. In only a month, this material was detected as far as Canada, Saudi Arabia, and almost to Japan. Radioactive material from Chernobyl has been detected in the United States. Many heroic firefighters, other emergency workers, and construction workers putting out fires and covering the still reacting reactor with tons and tons of cement after the accident, later died from exposure to the radiation. Robots were also sent in to clear away radioactive material, but the transistors malfunctioned in the radioactive environment and the robots would often crash into walls and each other. Fires were put out in 4 hours, and it was said to be luck that the roof did not collapse on reactor 3 which would have caused an even greater catastrophe. The radiation levels were 15,000 times greater than a normal person's exposure in a year. Over 100,000 people were evacuated to more than 30 km away from the area. Most coniferous trees died within a 10 km radius of the plant. Food in much of Eastern Europe was banned for up to two years. Large amounts of milk in Poland, Hungary, Austria, and Sweden were contaminated. In Sweden, meat from about 50,000 reindeer had to be thrown away, some containing more than 12 times the permissible amount of radiation (Cesium-137).
After the accident, thyroid cancer rates increased by more than 750%. The core of the reactor is still actively reacting and producing radiation today, 18 years later. Just last year, Russia's atomic energy minister, Alexander Rumyantsev, said the cement encasing is collapsing and urgently needs reinforcement.
"At the animal farm of the Petrovsky collective farm I was shown a suckling pig whose head looked like that of a frog: instead of eyes there were large tissue outgrowths with no cornea or pupil. 'They usually die soon after birth but this one has survived.'"
These effects are far worse than anything that could happen with a wind turbine or other conventional explosions. There is no comparison.
"The meltdown process physically triggers events that shut the reaction down, stopping the meltdown."
The Chernobyl power station had 4 state-of-the-art (1986) Russian RBMK reactors, and was constructing two more. Chernobyl was caused by an uncontrollable reaction in the core. The "physical triggers" you speak of are nothing but emergency shut down triggers, and have nothing to do with physics. It is dangerous thinking to believe that nuclear reactions are inherently stable. Far from it, they are inherently unstable. Nuclear Power is produced by a controlled nuclear reaction. In case the nuclear reaction becomes out of control, safety mechanisms shut down the reactor. In Chernobyl, these emergency shut down processes were disabled during testing. The controlled reaction got out of control, and after reaching 120 times its full power the reactor exploded, killing 30 people and releasing tons of radioactive material into the atmosphere. In only a month, this material was detected as far as Canada, Saudi Arabia, and almost to Japan. Radioactive material from Chernobyl has been detected in the United States. Many heroic firefighters, other emergency workers, and construction workers putting out fires and covering the still reacting reactor with tons and tons of cement after the accident, later died from exposure to the radiation. Robots were also sent in to clear away radioactive material, but the transistors malfunctioned in the radioactive environment and the robots would often crash into walls and each other. Fires were put out in 4 hours, and it was said to be luck that the roof did not collapse on reactor 3 which would have caused an even greater catastrophe. The radiation levels were 15,000 times greater than a normal person's exposure in a year. Over 100,000 people were evacuated to more than 30 km away from the area. Most coniferous trees died within a 10 km radius of the plant. Food in much of Eastern Europe was banned for up to two years. Large amounts of milk in Poland, Hungary, Austria, and Sweden were contaminated. In Sweden, meat from about 50,000 reindeer had to be thrown away, some containing more than 12 times the permissible amount of radiation (Cesium-137).
After the accident, thyroid cancer rates increased by more than 750%. The core of the reactor is still actively reacting and producing radiation today, 18 years later. Just last year, Russia's atomic energy minister, Alexander Rumyantsev, said the cement encasing is collapsing and urgently needs reinforcement.
"At the animal farm of the Petrovsky collective farm I was shown a suckling pig whose head looked like that of a frog: instead of eyes there were large tissue outgrowths with no cornea or pupil. 'They usually die soon after birth but this one has survived.'"
These effects are far worse than anything that could happen with a wind turbine or other conventional explosions. There is no comparison.
You're writing 8x bytes = x bits. If you solve for x = 8, you get (8)(8) bytes = 8 bits. 64 bytes = 8 bits. Which is wrong.
I wrote x bytes = 8x bits. If you solve for x, you get 8 bytes = (8)(8) bits. 8 bytes = 64 bits. Which is right.
However, in progamming, you WOULD write it the first way: bytes = bits / 8 or bits = bytes * 8.
There is important differences between both the assignment operator and comparison operators in progamming and mathematicial equality. (and if anyone wants to explain it in depth, feel free. I've demonstrated it, and that's all I have the energy to do right now.).
Bonus Algebra info!
If you have 8x bytes = y bits, then if you solve for say, x = 20, you get (8)(20) bytes = y bits, 160 bytes = y bits. Which gets you nowhere. If you say, solve for y = 160, you get 8x bytes = 160 bits, then you end up with x bytes = 20 bits. Which, similarily gets you nowhere (even though the answer is staring you in the face).
The way you can solve the equation is to say that x bytes = y bits and you are given the information that 1 byte = 8 bits. Therefore, 1 = 8 bits/byte.
Solve for x = 20.
x bytes = y bits
20 bytes = y bits
20 bytes * 1 = y bits
20 bytes * 8 bits/bytes = y bits
20 * 8 bits = y bits
160 bits = y bits
160 = y
I think I know what you're saying (kinda). You're saying that when you walk in faith, the more you feel Jesus relieving you of your sins. So, it's like when you're without your meds, you are putting all trust and faith in the Lord and He is healing you. So that's good then. I'd just say that since the Lord created all things, the food we eat, the water we drink, the air we breath, the earth to grow our crops, then taking your meds if you need to isn't showing that you're unfaithful or anything, more it shows that you are kind of "taking of His earth". But I'm not *that* religious, so I can't be sure. What I'm really trying to say is that this might be the best way for you to be faithful, but I think that Jesus, in His way, has given you the meds just in case you stumble upon life's path, as all His children do at one time or another. So, good luck and God Bless. Have faith that Jesus has provided for you in one way or another and keep praying in all faithfulness.
Dude, if the guy is hallucinating and thinks he's being spied on and thinks the tv is sending him secret messages when he takes cold medicine then I'd wonder what the hell was in the cold medicine or if he's got some other problem.
I'm not saying "don't smoke weed," I'm saying, if you're a schizophrenic, don't smoke weed. Weed is a psychotropic drug, cold medicine is just alcohol.
From cannabisnews.com:
The Okayama report confirms the results of a 1987 study conducted in Sweden in which higher incidents of schizophrenia were discovered among army conscripts who had used marijuana.
The Swedish study showed that the incidence of schizophrenia among conscripts who were "heavy" and "chronic" users of marijuana was six times higher than it was among those who had not smoked.
Marijuana, however, has only been linked to schizophrenia in those who are already genetically prone to the disease. There is little evidence to suggest that it poses any such risk to those not genetically predisposed to schizophrenia.
It doesn't sound serious. And it sounds like the bothersome part is mainly when you get caught! I'm not a doctor, but I guess it could be a mild form of ADD?
"Take these, these, these... and these."
"Thank you doctor"
"Oh I'm not a doctor"
That's a little harsh. Most people who are religious aren't always pathologically so. You also neglected good old indoctrination. Most people learn religion and use it to express spirituality and gain an understanding of the unknownable (yes it's an oxymoron, but whatever). People with schizophrenia sometimes make up their own religion and call it reality. I think that's a big difference. There is more than enough evidence to prove that humans are spiritual creatures. While you are entitled to your views (and by all means it would take books and books to discuss it), you'd think an M.D. would understand the human condition a little better than you seem to. More importantly, you'd think an M.D. wouldn't choose a serious discussion about a medical condition to espouse their views on religion.
If you feel the need to reply, don't expect one in return.
While people with schizophrenia might not always be rational (duh), they are usually safe to be around. That they are somehow dangerous is a myth. Furthermore, trust is probably the most important thing you can give to someone who has schizophrenia.
"Contrary to popular media images of the "violent mental patient," people with schizophrenia tend to be vulnerable and fragile...not violent. If anything, violence is
self-inflicted; many contemplate suicide." http://www.schizophrenia.ca/reachingout/schizophre niatext.html
It's not "anti-pot propaganda" do some frickin' research into the subject. My friend is schizophrenic and he used to smoke heavily. He stopped when he finally got help on stayed on his meds. I was with him and a friend smoking pot one time when he decided to "give it a try" again and had a couple of puffs. Needless to say, it wasn't long before he was trying to distract the imaginary man sitting next to him. He didn't have that much and so still had the presence of mind to go to bed when Star Trek started giving him secret messages. He hasn't smoked since.
Fox News isn't biased towards the left or right. It's biased towards yellow rag journalism and alarmist reations towards exagerated events. The best news agency I've run across is the BBC. The days of the so called free press in AMerica are gone. It's hard to call it free when the same few people and multinational conglomerates own and operate over 90% of Americas news media. Ever wonder why every outlet is reporting the same story with the same spin?
No, no, Fox News is also biased to the right and it's CNN et al. who are just biased towards yellow rag journalism and alarmist reations towards exagerated events.
though I don't know what yellow rag journalism is:P.
I think you can still take your meds and still submit to The Lord and Saviour. Obviously you're a very religious person, but I think He only needs you to accept Him with your heart. The meds help your head not your heart, right? I think He would understand? You don't need to be able to see demons flying out of you. Jesus Christ will cast them out as long as He is in your heart. That's what I think.
Before you listen to this guy, keep in mind he is not a doctor. Neither am I, but a friend of mine is schizophrenic, and I do know that schizophrenics sometimes stop taking their medication because, since they feel better on their meds, they deem themselves "cured" and stop taking them. This usually results in major problems because they aren't cured at all. My friend told me that one day he decided he was cured and stopped taking his meds. The next day he was literally ripping open his pillow to find the bugs that the CIA had planted during the night. He said that it was rather difficult to get him back on his meds. While he is on his meds though, he is fine, if a little forgetful.
Marijuana and other drugs exacerbate schizophrenic psychoses. Statistical studies have shown that marijuana use might be linked to the onset of the disease. I'm sure there are few, if any, diagnosed and medicated schizophrenics who smoke marijuana. My friend, who has been on his meds for I think 10 years, and who used to smoke marijuana heavily, tried it again (still on his meds of course) while I was at his house one time. A couple puffs later and there was a man sitting next to us spying on him (there was no one there, and he was saying things out of nowhere "to distract him"). He didn't have that much, and when Star Trek started to send him secret messages he thankfully still had the presence of mind to just go to bed. He hasn't smoked again since then.
By all means question psychiatric philosophy if you want, but don't give out bad advice.:/
Hah, what are *you* smoking? Mandatory doesn't mean state-funded, it means you have to buy private health insurance or you will go to jail for tax fraud. In other words, the government is forcing you to buy from a private company. That's not centrist, that's corporatist.
"Most of the uninsured are members of the middle class; a third have annual incomes of more than $50,000. Requiring them to devote up to a certain percentage of their income to purchasing basic coverage would be imposing a significant, though not ruinous, financial burden -- but they themselves would be the primary beneficiaries. "
New America foundation is centrist my ass. More like neoconservative libertarians. Centrists are moderate and look for consensus. I don't see that here. I always considered myself a moderate liberal, and now they are saying they are centrist. Apparently their "centrism" can drive a moderate liberal crazy.
What are they teaching Kids in schools these days?
They're teaching kids that kilo means 1000, and kibi means 1024. That's the whole point of the metric system, so it works all across the board! Like how 1 g of water = 1 cm^3 = 1 mL. Or how E=mc^2 and that's all you need to figure it out. x J = y kg * speed of light m^2/s^2. No converting of calories and feet and pounds. F = ma, PV = nRt. It is exactly one billion times easier to calculate this when you use metric and kilo always means the same thing.
Kibi and Mebi have nothing to do with computers and all to do with binary. They are powers of 2, whereas kilo and mega are powers of 10.
Complain all you want that it is stupid and how new terms frighten and confuse you, but it is too ****ing late! This is how it is. Kibi is a factor of 2^10. Should you choose to use that to represent 1024, that's your choice. I think the words are lame, but there's nothing to argue about. Someone made up this way to represent powers of 2. Use it or not however you deem fit.
For ruining non-genetically modified crops. If their seeds breed with non-genetically modified crops and create hybrids, farmers could sue them for all their worth. That's why I think they discontinued selling the round-up wheat. While I don't like the Supreme Court's decision, I think they ruled correctly. imho this isn't a matter of patent law, it's a matter for Parliament.
That is what I was saying is wrong, because it is wrong. It should be bytes/sec = bits/sec * 8. Those who don't agree are stupid morons and should go back to math class.
And while I'm on it, this equation is also garbage.
bytes/sec != bits/sec * 8, rather a factor around 13 or 14
The reason this statement is wrong is because 1 byte = 8 bits. I'm not the one nitpicking here, he is. It's like saying 2 + 2 basically equals 5, I mean c'mon. I get his point (the one he completely failed to mention, that they commonly measure different things) but some people are replying as if it is literally true. This makes me think there is a case of "utter stupidity induced by technojargon" going around. Common in newb-nerds. 8 bits is 1 byte. It's called binary mathematics, not Micro$hiat XPMath 3000!
Because it is backwards the way it was written. The person wrote bits/sec = bytes/sec * 8. This is like saying feet per hour equals miles per hour times 5280.
Which is wrong. That would mean if you have 4 bits, you have 32 bytes, or if you 2 feet, you have 10560 miles which is backwards.
This is the proper way to do it. There are 8 bits per byte, right?
8 bits/1 byte (and we don't need to write the 1)
Say we have 4 bytes/second, how many bits would it be? Since we know what bits/byte is, we can multiply.
4 bytes/second * 8 bits/byte
Divided out the bytes and we are left with bits/second
Slashdot Mirror
"...but modern nuclear plants have zero chance of damaging humanity, and an infintesimal chance of killing those in the immediate vicinity."
d ents
Guess there's nothing wrong with quoting it again:
"September 30, 1999 - Japan's worst nuclear accident ever takes place at a uranium reprocessing facility in Tokaimura, Ibaraki prefecture, northeast of Tokyo, Japan. The direct cause of the accident was workers putting uranyl nitrate solution containing about 16.6 kg of uranium, which exceeded the critical mass, into a precipitation tank. The tank was not designed to dissolve this type of solution and was not configured to prevent eventual criticality. The incident exposes workers and residents in the surrounding area to extremely high levels of radiation."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_acci
If the foregoing makes me a head-in-the-sand Boomer Anti-Nuclear Satanist, then at least I'm older, wiser and sadder than you young idiots. It's no wonder they send boys of your age to war, you're too stupid to accept that you'll die.
Thank you. I was getting rather concerned with the impression that everyone here was knee-jerk pro-nuclear for some reason. And, to help you with your concerns about the younger generation, I'm only 25.
No, Chernobyl and Three Mile Island are definitely not the most recent screw ups.
d ents
"September 30, 1999 - Japan's worst nuclear accident ever takes place at a uranium reprocessing facility in Tokaimura, Ibaraki prefecture, northeast of Tokyo, Japan. The direct cause of the accident was workers putting uranyl nitrate solution containing about 16.6 kg of uranium, which exceeded the critical mass, into a precipitation tank. The tank was not designed to dissolve this type of solution and was not configured to prevent eventual criticality. The incident exposes workers and residents in the surrounding area to extremely high levels of radiation."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_acci
Uh... I think his point is that it was lucky that the nuclear bomb didn't explode. It is a good thing the failsafe worked, because if it didn't, many people would be dead and a large area of the US would now be a radioactive wasteland.
"The meltdown process physically triggers events that shut the reaction down, stopping the meltdown."
The Chernobyl power station had 4 state-of-the-art (1986) Russian RBMK reactors, and was constructing two more. Chernobyl was caused by an uncontrollable reaction in the core. The "physical triggers" you speak of are nothing but emergency shut down triggers, and have nothing to do with physics. It is dangerous thinking to believe that nuclear reactions are inherently stable. Far from it, they are inherently unstable. Nuclear power is produced by a controlled nuclear reaction. In case the nuclear reaction becomes out of control, safety mechanisms shut down the reactor. In Chernobyl, these emergency shut down processes were disabled during testing. The controlled reaction got out of control, and after reaching 120 times its full power the reactor exploded, killing 30 people and releasing tons of radioactive material into the atmosphere. In only a month, this material was detected as far as Canada, Saudi Arabia, and almost to Japan. Radioactive material from Chernobyl has been detected in the United States. Many heroic firefighters, other emergency workers, and construction workers putting out fires and covering the still reacting reactor with tons and tons of cement after the accident, later died from exposure to the radiation. Robots were also sent in to clear away radioactive material, but the transistors malfunctioned in the radioactive environment and the robots would often crash into walls and each other. Fires were put out in 4 hours, and it was said to be luck that the roof did not collapse on reactor 3 which would have caused an even greater catastrophe. The radiation levels were 15,000 times greater than a normal person's exposure in a year. Over 100,000 people were evacuated to more than 30 km away from the area. Most coniferous trees died within a 10 km radius of the plant. Food in much of Eastern Europe was banned for up to two years. Large amounts of milk in Poland, Hungary, Austria, and Sweden were contaminated. In Sweden, meat from about 50,000 reindeer had to be thrown away, some containing more than 12 times the permissible amount of radiation (Cesium-137).
After the accident, thyroid cancer rates increased by more than 750%. The core of the reactor is still actively reacting and producing radiation today, 18 years later. Just last year, Russia's atomic energy minister, Alexander Rumyantsev, said the cement encasing is collapsing and urgently needs reinforcement.
"At the animal farm of the Petrovsky collective farm I was shown a suckling pig whose head looked like that of a frog: instead of eyes there were large tissue outgrowths with no cornea or pupil. 'They usually die soon after birth but this one has survived.'"
These effects are far worse than anything that could happen with a wind turbine or other conventional explosions. There is no comparison.
"The meltdown process physically triggers events that shut the reaction down, stopping the meltdown." The Chernobyl power station had 4 state-of-the-art (1986) Russian RBMK reactors, and was constructing two more. Chernobyl was caused by an uncontrollable reaction in the core. The "physical triggers" you speak of are nothing but emergency shut down triggers, and have nothing to do with physics. It is dangerous thinking to believe that nuclear reactions are inherently stable. Far from it, they are inherently unstable. Nuclear Power is produced by a controlled nuclear reaction. In case the nuclear reaction becomes out of control, safety mechanisms shut down the reactor. In Chernobyl, these emergency shut down processes were disabled during testing. The controlled reaction got out of control, and after reaching 120 times its full power the reactor exploded, killing 30 people and releasing tons of radioactive material into the atmosphere. In only a month, this material was detected as far as Canada, Saudi Arabia, and almost to Japan. Radioactive material from Chernobyl has been detected in the United States. Many heroic firefighters, other emergency workers, and construction workers putting out fires and covering the still reacting reactor with tons and tons of cement after the accident, later died from exposure to the radiation. Robots were also sent in to clear away radioactive material, but the transistors malfunctioned in the radioactive environment and the robots would often crash into walls and each other. Fires were put out in 4 hours, and it was said to be luck that the roof did not collapse on reactor 3 which would have caused an even greater catastrophe. The radiation levels were 15,000 times greater than a normal person's exposure in a year. Over 100,000 people were evacuated to more than 30 km away from the area. Most coniferous trees died within a 10 km radius of the plant. Food in much of Eastern Europe was banned for up to two years. Large amounts of milk in Poland, Hungary, Austria, and Sweden were contaminated. In Sweden, meat from about 50,000 reindeer had to be thrown away, some containing more than 12 times the permissible amount of radiation (Cesium-137). After the accident, thyroid cancer rates increased by more than 750%. The core of the reactor is still actively reacting and producing radiation today, 18 years later. Just last year, Russia's atomic energy minister, Alexander Rumyantsev, said the cement encasing is collapsing and urgently needs reinforcement. "At the animal farm of the Petrovsky collective farm I was shown a suckling pig whose head looked like that of a frog: instead of eyes there were large tissue outgrowths with no cornea or pupil. 'They usually die soon after birth but this one has survived.'" These effects are far worse than anything that could happen with a wind turbine or other conventional explosions. There is no comparison.
bump bump bump bump bump bump bump bump bump bump + 5 informative AAAAAAAAAAAAAGHHHHHHHHHHHh
You're writing 8x bytes = x bits. If you solve for x = 8, you get (8)(8) bytes = 8 bits. 64 bytes = 8 bits. Which is wrong.
I wrote x bytes = 8x bits. If you solve for x, you get 8 bytes = (8)(8) bits. 8 bytes = 64 bits. Which is right.
However, in progamming, you WOULD write it the first way: bytes = bits / 8 or bits = bytes * 8.
There is important differences between both the assignment operator and comparison operators in progamming and mathematicial equality . (and if anyone wants to explain it in depth, feel free. I've demonstrated it, and that's all I have the energy to do right now.).
Bonus Algebra info!
If you have 8x bytes = y bits, then if you solve for say, x = 20, you get (8)(20) bytes = y bits, 160 bytes = y bits. Which gets you nowhere. If you say, solve for y = 160, you get 8x bytes = 160 bits, then you end up with x bytes = 20 bits. Which, similarily gets you nowhere (even though the answer is staring you in the face).
The way you can solve the equation is to say that x bytes = y bits and you are given the information that 1 byte = 8 bits. Therefore, 1 = 8 bits/byte.
Solve for x = 20.
x bytes = y bits
20 bytes = y bits
20 bytes * 1 = y bits
20 bytes * 8 bits/bytes = y bits
20 * 8 bits = y bits
160 bits = y bits
160 = y
Therefore, 20 bytes = 160 bits.
I think I know what you're saying (kinda). You're saying that when you walk in faith, the more you feel Jesus relieving you of your sins. So, it's like when you're without your meds, you are putting all trust and faith in the Lord and He is healing you. So that's good then. I'd just say that since the Lord created all things, the food we eat, the water we drink, the air we breath, the earth to grow our crops, then taking your meds if you need to isn't showing that you're unfaithful or anything, more it shows that you are kind of "taking of His earth". But I'm not *that* religious, so I can't be sure. What I'm really trying to say is that this might be the best way for you to be faithful, but I think that Jesus, in His way, has given you the meds just in case you stumble upon life's path, as all His children do at one time or another. So, good luck and God Bless. Have faith that Jesus has provided for you in one way or another and keep praying in all faithfulness.
Dude, if the guy is hallucinating and thinks he's being spied on and thinks the tv is sending him secret messages when he takes cold medicine then I'd wonder what the hell was in the cold medicine or if he's got some other problem.
h tml
I'm not saying "don't smoke weed," I'm saying, if you're a schizophrenic, don't smoke weed. Weed is a psychotropic drug, cold medicine is just alcohol.
From cannabisnews.com:
The Okayama report confirms the results of a 1987 study conducted in Sweden in which higher incidents of schizophrenia were discovered among army conscripts who had used marijuana.
The Swedish study showed that the incidence of schizophrenia among conscripts who were "heavy" and "chronic" users of marijuana was six times higher than it was among those who had not smoked.
Marijuana, however, has only been linked to schizophrenia in those who are already genetically prone to the disease. There is little evidence to suggest that it poses any such risk to those not genetically predisposed to schizophrenia.
http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/13/thread13350.s
It doesn't sound serious. And it sounds like the bothersome part is mainly when you get caught! I'm not a doctor, but I guess it could be a mild form of ADD?
"Take these, these, these... and these."
"Thank you doctor"
"Oh I'm not a doctor"
That's a little harsh. Most people who are religious aren't always pathologically so. You also neglected good old indoctrination. Most people learn religion and use it to express spirituality and gain an understanding of the unknownable (yes it's an oxymoron, but whatever). People with schizophrenia sometimes make up their own religion and call it reality. I think that's a big difference. There is more than enough evidence to prove that humans are spiritual creatures. While you are entitled to your views (and by all means it would take books and books to discuss it), you'd think an M.D. would understand the human condition a little better than you seem to. More importantly, you'd think an M.D. wouldn't choose a serious discussion about a medical condition to espouse their views on religion.
If you feel the need to reply, don't expect one in return.
While people with schizophrenia might not always be rational (duh), they are usually safe to be around. That they are somehow dangerous is a myth. Furthermore, trust is probably the most important thing you can give to someone who has schizophrenia.
e niatext.html
"Contrary to popular media images of the "violent mental patient," people with schizophrenia tend to be vulnerable and fragile...not violent. If anything, violence is self-inflicted; many contemplate suicide."
http://www.schizophrenia.ca/reachingout/schizophr
It's not "anti-pot propaganda" do some frickin' research into the subject. My friend is schizophrenic and he used to smoke heavily. He stopped when he finally got help on stayed on his meds. I was with him and a friend smoking pot one time when he decided to "give it a try" again and had a couple of puffs. Needless to say, it wasn't long before he was trying to distract the imaginary man sitting next to him. He didn't have that much and so still had the presence of mind to go to bed when Star Trek started giving him secret messages. He hasn't smoked since.
Here's a link to an informative video about schizophrenia from the Schizophrenic Society of Canada. http://www.schizophrenia.ca/reachingout/quicktimel arge.html
Fox News isn't biased towards the left or right. It's biased towards yellow rag journalism and alarmist reations towards exagerated events. The best news agency I've run across is the BBC. The days of the so called free press in AMerica are gone. It's hard to call it free when the same few people and multinational conglomerates own and operate over 90% of Americas news media. Ever wonder why every outlet is reporting the same story with the same spin?
:P.
No, no, Fox News is also biased to the right and it's CNN et al. who are just biased towards yellow rag journalism and alarmist reations towards exagerated events.
though I don't know what yellow rag journalism is
I think you can still take your meds and still submit to The Lord and Saviour. Obviously you're a very religious person, but I think He only needs you to accept Him with your heart. The meds help your head not your heart, right? I think He would understand? You don't need to be able to see demons flying out of you. Jesus Christ will cast them out as long as He is in your heart. That's what I think.
Before you listen to this guy, keep in mind he is not a doctor. Neither am I, but a friend of mine is schizophrenic, and I do know that schizophrenics sometimes stop taking their medication because, since they feel better on their meds, they deem themselves "cured" and stop taking them. This usually results in major problems because they aren't cured at all. My friend told me that one day he decided he was cured and stopped taking his meds. The next day he was literally ripping open his pillow to find the bugs that the CIA had planted during the night. He said that it was rather difficult to get him back on his meds. While he is on his meds though, he is fine, if a little forgetful.
:/
Marijuana and other drugs exacerbate schizophrenic psychoses. Statistical studies have shown that marijuana use might be linked to the onset of the disease. I'm sure there are few, if any, diagnosed and medicated schizophrenics who smoke marijuana. My friend, who has been on his meds for I think 10 years, and who used to smoke marijuana heavily, tried it again (still on his meds of course) while I was at his house one time. A couple puffs later and there was a man sitting next to us spying on him (there was no one there, and he was saying things out of nowhere "to distract him"). He didn't have that much, and when Star Trek started to send him secret messages he thankfully still had the presence of mind to just go to bed. He hasn't smoked again since then.
By all means question psychiatric philosophy if you want, but don't give out bad advice.
:D
Hah, what are *you* smoking? Mandatory doesn't mean state-funded, it means you have to buy private health insurance or you will go to jail for tax fraud. In other words, the government is forcing you to buy from a private company. That's not centrist, that's corporatist. "Most of the uninsured are members of the middle class; a third have annual incomes of more than $50,000. Requiring them to devote up to a certain percentage of their income to purchasing basic coverage would be imposing a significant, though not ruinous, financial burden -- but they themselves would be the primary beneficiaries. "
New America foundation is centrist my ass. More like neoconservative libertarians. Centrists are moderate and look for consensus. I don't see that here. I always considered myself a moderate liberal, and now they are saying they are centrist. Apparently their "centrism" can drive a moderate liberal crazy.
What are they teaching Kids in schools these days?
They're teaching kids that kilo means 1000, and kibi means 1024. That's the whole point of the metric system, so it works all across the board! Like how 1 g of water = 1 cm^3 = 1 mL. Or how E=mc^2 and that's all you need to figure it out. x J = y kg * speed of light m^2/s^2. No converting of calories and feet and pounds. F = ma, PV = nRt. It is exactly one billion times easier to calculate this when you use metric and kilo always means the same thing.
Kibi and Mebi have nothing to do with computers and all to do with binary. They are powers of 2, whereas kilo and mega are powers of 10.
Complain all you want that it is stupid and how new terms frighten and confuse you, but it is too ****ing late! This is how it is. Kibi is a factor of 2^10. Should you choose to use that to represent 1024, that's your choice. I think the words are lame, but there's nothing to argue about. Someone made up this way to represent powers of 2. Use it or not however you deem fit.
For ruining non-genetically modified crops. If their seeds breed with non-genetically modified crops and create hybrids, farmers could sue them for all their worth. That's why I think they discontinued selling the round-up wheat. While I don't like the Supreme Court's decision, I think they ruled correctly. imho this isn't a matter of patent law, it's a matter for Parliament.
No, he continued after that to say:
;)
Shouldn't it be bits/sec = bytes/sec * 8?
That is what I was saying is wrong, because it is wrong. It should be bytes/sec = bits/sec * 8. Those who don't agree are stupid morons and should go back to math class.
And while I'm on it, this equation is also garbage.
bytes/sec != bits/sec * 8, rather a factor around 13 or 14
The reason this statement is wrong is because 1 byte = 8 bits. I'm not the one nitpicking here, he is. It's like saying 2 + 2 basically equals 5, I mean c'mon. I get his point (the one he completely failed to mention, that they commonly measure different things) but some people are replying as if it is literally true. This makes me think there is a case of "utter stupidity induced by technojargon" going around. Common in newb-nerds. 8 bits is 1 byte. It's called binary mathematics, not Micro$hiat XPMath 3000!
Because it is backwards the way it was written. The person wrote bits/sec = bytes/sec * 8. This is like saying feet per hour equals miles per hour times 5280.
Which is wrong. That would mean if you have 4 bits, you have 32 bytes, or if you 2 feet, you have 10560 miles which is backwards.
This is the proper way to do it. There are 8 bits per byte, right?
8 bits/1 byte (and we don't need to write the 1)
Say we have 4 bytes/second, how many bits would it be? Since we know what bits/byte is, we can multiply.
4 bytes/second * 8 bits/byte
Divided out the bytes and we are left with bits/second
Then we have 4 * 8 bits/second = 32 bits/second.