The thing about testing against just cells is that that you miss out on interactions that one may not anticipate. As a researcher we have drugs which have worked fantastically in the test tube, but don't do anything in a mouse because of the complexity of the overall system. Rats are necessary because it gives a good model of overall what will happen if the mouse is given a drug because it offers the full system not just cells in a tube.
As to later comments about using death row inmates, they live too long. The idea of a mouse model is you can observe there entire life within a couple years, think most research mice live 3 years. Which is better than having to observe a actual human over its entire life of 60-70 years on average.
I do agree that us scientists seem generally more aware of the problems facing humanity and many do make efforts towards this.
Though this is a good question to ask its not accurate for stem cells. Stem cells come from in vitro fertilization clinics because each couple fertilized multiple eggs which are then screened for the best one and injected back into the mother. Afterwards you usually have 8-9 or so leftover fertilized eggs, which are then frozen, but they can only remain frozen for so long.
So the real question is do you donate these extra fertilized eggs to stem cell research and potential help millions of people, or do you just chuck them in the fire. Either way the cells die but one way helps the other just gives off smoke. Of course Bush promotes these eggs being adopted, but of course some parents don't want to donate their eggs to another person.
Now we also have that group which claim they can cause normal cells to revert back to embryonic stem cells, though I haven't heard if there was any more information than the initial claim.
This is a cure for death, unless I'm badly mistaken.
It inhibits the procaspases from being activated into caspases. These also are activated by faulty DNA during DNA duplication. So if you were to take these constantly to not die, you would have a lot of problems as many of the environmental cancers are caused by over exposure your body can handle limited amounts of most things like UV light, smoke etc. By inhibiting the caspases you would be inhibiting apoptosis of cells with small DNA mutations which otherwise would not be a major problem. Smoking has other problems associated with it other than DNA mutations though so its not really a great example.
Reproducing would be a fun experience too if you were to make it a life plan to take these as you would have a huge chance of having one very messed up child.
"Once a plane is in the air, it is prety easy to control, assuming you don't care about surviving the landing.
A correct landing is hard because you are slowing down, need to keep your nose up, etc. .."
I agree totally but this wasn't in the air in a normal sense this was 5-10ft above the ground. I could be wrong considering limited flying knowledge but I would assume the plane would want to move up and down alot at this height due to the engines, and as the air came over the wings and smack down into the ground. It never hit the ground just straight into the building, maybe its just me but I can't fathom how someone who according to all accounts was a horribly pilot could do that.
I have read many of the theories around and though some are blatantly false like the missile one which makes no sense those are the ones people latch onto. Yes a plane flew into the pentagon but was it the plane that supposedly did? The thing that i find hard to believe about the pentagon strike solely is arab terrorists flew 5-10 ft off the ground at 300mph +. The same arabs who could not properly fly a Cessna or whatever they were flying in Florida thats quite an improvement. I'm not saying I believe that it was an inside job just that things should be questioned a little more such as wouldn't it be more plausable that the pilot, ex fighter pilot/counter terrorism trained would be more able to fly into a building at such a height at such speed?
Also its mentioned in Loose Change and various other sites that the highway cameras, gas station cameras, and hotel cameras all should have caught the crash or atleast the airplane on tape, so even if the security camera is normal with only a still every second why not release the other videos and really put a stop to the theories?
I'm not a crazy unpatriotic person I just feel we should question things no matter how straightforward it may seem since if we stop questioning they will start slipping stuff by us.
I was a repair tech for about 8 monthes at one of the big chain stores and had a totally different experience. All our four techs were incredibly smart, and only one held any form of certification. We never installed pirated software, though we did keep a copy of XP in the office so we could use the recovery console or copy needed files. Over 8 monthes, and about 20-30 repairs I only ever did 2 clean installs, and both times recovered the majority of the customers files. I think its a bit unfair to say that all the people working in these positions are idiots many are highschool students and the experience is very enlightening, though usually takes you one step closer to becoming a hermit.
Slashdot Mirror
The thing about testing against just cells is that that you miss out on interactions that one may not anticipate. As a researcher we have drugs which have worked fantastically in the test tube, but don't do anything in a mouse because of the complexity of the overall system. Rats are necessary because it gives a good model of overall what will happen if the mouse is given a drug because it offers the full system not just cells in a tube. As to later comments about using death row inmates, they live too long. The idea of a mouse model is you can observe there entire life within a couple years, think most research mice live 3 years. Which is better than having to observe a actual human over its entire life of 60-70 years on average. I do agree that us scientists seem generally more aware of the problems facing humanity and many do make efforts towards this.
Though this is a good question to ask its not accurate for stem cells. Stem cells come from in vitro fertilization clinics because each couple fertilized multiple eggs which are then screened for the best one and injected back into the mother. Afterwards you usually have 8-9 or so leftover fertilized eggs, which are then frozen, but they can only remain frozen for so long. So the real question is do you donate these extra fertilized eggs to stem cell research and potential help millions of people, or do you just chuck them in the fire. Either way the cells die but one way helps the other just gives off smoke. Of course Bush promotes these eggs being adopted, but of course some parents don't want to donate their eggs to another person. Now we also have that group which claim they can cause normal cells to revert back to embryonic stem cells, though I haven't heard if there was any more information than the initial claim.
This is a cure for death, unless I'm badly mistaken.
It inhibits the procaspases from being activated into caspases. These also are activated by faulty DNA during DNA duplication. So if you were to take these constantly to not die, you would have a lot of problems as many of the environmental cancers are caused by over exposure your body can handle limited amounts of most things like UV light, smoke etc. By inhibiting the caspases you would be inhibiting apoptosis of cells with small DNA mutations which otherwise would not be a major problem. Smoking has other problems associated with it other than DNA mutations though so its not really a great example.
Reproducing would be a fun experience too if you were to make it a life plan to take these as you would have a huge chance of having one very messed up child.
"Once a plane is in the air, it is prety easy to control, assuming you don't care about surviving the landing. A correct landing is hard because you are slowing down, need to keep your nose up, etc. . ."
I agree totally but this wasn't in the air in a normal sense this was 5-10ft above the ground. I could be wrong considering limited flying knowledge but I would assume the plane would want to move up and down alot at this height due to the engines, and as the air came over the wings and smack down into the ground. It never hit the ground just straight into the building, maybe its just me but I can't fathom how someone who according to all accounts was a horribly pilot could do that.
I have read many of the theories around and though some are blatantly false like the missile one which makes no sense those are the ones people latch onto. Yes a plane flew into the pentagon but was it the plane that supposedly did? The thing that i find hard to believe about the pentagon strike solely is arab terrorists flew 5-10 ft off the ground at 300mph +. The same arabs who could not properly fly a Cessna or whatever they were flying in Florida thats quite an improvement. I'm not saying I believe that it was an inside job just that things should be questioned a little more such as wouldn't it be more plausable that the pilot, ex fighter pilot/counter terrorism trained would be more able to fly into a building at such a height at such speed?
Also its mentioned in Loose Change and various other sites that the highway cameras, gas station cameras, and hotel cameras all should have caught the crash or atleast the airplane on tape, so even if the security camera is normal with only a still every second why not release the other videos and really put a stop to the theories?
I'm not a crazy unpatriotic person I just feel we should question things no matter how straightforward it may seem since if we stop questioning they will start slipping stuff by us.
I was a repair tech for about 8 monthes at one of the big chain stores and had a totally different experience. All our four techs were incredibly smart, and only one held any form of certification. We never installed pirated software, though we did keep a copy of XP in the office so we could use the recovery console or copy needed files. Over 8 monthes, and about 20-30 repairs I only ever did 2 clean installs, and both times recovered the majority of the customers files. I think its a bit unfair to say that all the people working in these positions are idiots many are highschool students and the experience is very enlightening, though usually takes you one step closer to becoming a hermit.