Steph

A hybrid would be nice' date=' but the speed is a concern. As long as it can hit 90mph without trouble then it could be alright.

 

I think the opening "Yes! Today, if I could." option isn't the best way to phrase it, who wouldn't, "if they could" buy a gulfstream jet?[/quote']

 

why 90mph????

 

anyways... the Accord Hybrid is faster than the EX-V6 version.

It seems that you are suggesting that AIDS spread from the Gay community in the U.S. internationally to poor countries. If this is what you are suggesting' date=' then your facts are all a'jumble. Its actually the other way around. The Patient Zero story compiled by Dr. W. Darrow, mythologized by Randy Shilts, has been completely discredited. A plasma sample taken in 1959 from an adult male living in what is now the Democratic Republic of Congo is the earliest known instance of HIV infection. AIDS began in Africa, spread to Asia, where Gay American servicemen contracted it during the Vietnam war (R&R leaves to Thailand) and brought it home to the United States just in time for the sexual revolution.

 

AIDS was never a Gay disease...its a human disease.[/quote']

 

That makes more sense. There is no reason why homosexuals would be more at risk of getting AIDS than heterosexuals.

Yea, I would say either the top or contamination... where did the samples come from?

90+ percent of the first 100,000 cases of AIDS created personal losses for almost all the gay population.

really? I'd like to see your sources for such an affirmation.

Why would that be a foregone conclusion?

uhm, everything that goes up goes down? you have delusions if you think the US can somehow keep the top spot for all eternity.

This may shed some light with respect to natural and unnatural. Almost all our instincts are geared around survival of the individual. For example' date=' breathing, drinking, eating, shelter, clothing, etc., are all needed for individual human survival. One can go maybe 7mins without breathing, maybe a week without drinking, a month or so without eating, maybe 1/2 hour to a few days in cold exposure, seconds to days in heat, etc.,

 

Sexuality is different in that it is connected to the survival of the species. It is not centered around the survival of the individual. One can go a whole lifetime without sex and they would not die. They would miss out on one of the exteme pleasures of life, but it would not kill them. Because it is not inidivudal life treatening or life sustaining it is not part of our individual survival instincts, but is a species survival instinct.

 

Let us run an experiment. We take a million people, all with a clean bill of health, and place them on an island. We allow them to do whatever comes naturally or unnaturally in terms of sexuality. Without providing medical assistance or technology to create an artificial situation, the odds are STD would result in a relatively short time, especially among the permiscuous bum blasters. Sexuality would eventually become associated with survival of the individual, not due to individual pleasure but due to fear of death. If we let the experiment run the course, without artifical medical help, only the monoganous or limited relationships will continue to thrive. All the rest that are infected might produce mutant offspring, or would go the way of dinosaurs. Mother Nature would weed out natural human sexuality from unnatural. I am not saying we should run such an experiment, but how confident is everyone that their cphilosophy of human sexuality would survive under this natural and nonartifically supplimented experiment.

 

Medicine is creating a means for unnatural/artifical to survive alongside natural instinct. If one wanted to constantly jump into ice water to the point of unconsciousness, but had doctors to constantly revive them, this might become socially acceptable behavior, that has nothing to do with our natural instinct. It would be a new artifical instinct made possible by modern technology.[/quote']

 

 

I guess you are implying with this that homosexuality would weed itself out? because of STDs? that's a nice urban legend that homosexuals have more STDs. Also, this argument is not very good, since the exact opposite of what you are saying would happen. The promiscuous would actually have more children, and more children that are healthy(simply because of numbers). it might become morally inacceptable, but it would stay the norm. If you look at society, monogamy has not been a viable option for that long (due to medecine producing healthy babies nearly everytime). Its enforcement by the religions only led to people keeping their other partners secret.

 

There may well be a correlation. But it is the interpretation of it that is important.

 

One interpretation is evolution saying "Because you can not control your loins, I have to apply the corrective mechanism to your offspring."

 

The children pay the price of their parents selfishness.

 

Evolution does not say anything. it won't suddenly decide to apply a mechanism to a species. what pink_trike said is that this would be a natural use for homosexuality in keeping the species in check.

 

here is the article i was thinking about

 

...genetic factors, transmitted in the maternal line, both increase the probability of being homosexual in males and increase fecundity in females.

 

The example pink_trike gave actually goes against this, but i think it may be more of an exception.

Reverse had the right word' date=' it is "abnormal". It is a genetic abnormality that, without positive discrimination should breed itself out. It is an evolutionary deadend because it is counter-reproductive.

 

Those who contribute usefully to species propagation should be sympathetic to the afflicted. To those who feel very strongly it is an argument in favour of eugenics.

 

Give me one strong argument as to why homosexuality serves any genetic purpose.

 

Stop *****-footing around and being apologists for this aberation.[/quote']

 

not sure if I said this in this thread before but. There is a correlation between homsexual kids and the amount of brothers and sisters then have. basically, a fertile family will have more homosexual children (its more than just probability since its been looked at from the homosexual's point of view). So, it won't "weed itself out".

 

Second, serving a genetic purpose is a stupid reason to say something is wrong. Actually, love and mating are two different things, and, as far as I know homosexuals are not sterile. many of them do have kids, just not with their lovers.

regular iPods and iPod Mini use hard-drives,

Nanos and Shuffles use flash drives...

I think Gigabyte released a card where you can put RAM. the card will supply power to the memory (via a rechargeable battery or via the powersupply as long as it is plugged) enabling you to use it as a hard-drive. Maximum is 4GB i think, but this is enough to put to OS on and have an near-instant on and completely quiet boot (note, it uses a s-ATA inteface, but I forgot which one... I would think 2.0).

Flash memory is faster. the reason it seems slower is because there is a bottleneck due to your USB interface, and the physical distance to your CPU.

oh and IDE cables are sooo 20th century! get s-ATA cables already!

its not an ethical issue. unless it would be for other reasons than to help makes vaccines, or cures, etc.

in that case, its simply a security issue.

As much as I would hate anyone experimenting on me without my consent, I think I would hate even more a person who would withold a cure because of that fact. What is done is done and if good can come from it, then it'd make the sacrifice a little easier to bear in my opinion.

genetic engineering is far from established. We can do many things, true, but we still have an awful lot to learn.

Vit D deficiency is actually getting to be more recognised. There are people campaigning for the elderly in care homes to be put on vit D supplements because they're not getting enough sunlight and are getting worse osteoporosis. Also it is well known in the UK at least that vit D deficiency is a risk for women who for religious/cultural reasons cover themselves all the time (esp if they have darker skin) and traditionally have a low vitamin D diet. They are at increased risk of osteoporosis and if they have children relying on their breast milk then the children can be at risk of rickets. Lancet review

I stand corrected. I was saying this though, because i live in Canada and I'm black. during the winter months, I used to spend weekdays without seeing the sun (waking up early, going to school then coming out when its dark again). This would technically be enough to have symptoms if it wasn't for what i'm getting in my diet no? and I'm not taking any supplements.

well, I may be wrong but, in my point of view, patriotism is following the people of your country, while following the government would be (in nation-states at least) nationalism.

in the end though, both are (also in my point of view) roots to many wars. (whether those wars were necessary or not is a whole other topic though)

this is deoxythymidine but the only difference is that you take the H on the ribose and add an oxygen for the regular thymidine (which is by the way the name of thymine+sugar).

so... the base (thymine) is the structure with the two nitrogens, the ribose is the pentagon structure in the middle and the phosphate is attached to the other side of the ribose.

hope that helps

wow... this is pretty interesting stuff. really interesting actually. IKDC's... well if this works out, this is a new field for immunology!

Well... I would think that it was pretty evident that ocean temperatures would affect hurricane strength. else, we'd have them all over the world.

 

My idea behind the engineering them was coding them so that they target specific proteins on specific species of bacteria.

They already do that. You, however, have to find the right Phage.

Ok' date=' first, yes bacteriophages can be used to cure diseases. But mostly, they are used in topic agents (on the skin) to kill bacterias that would infect open wounds. In the glorious time of USSR, a dried powder made out of dehydrated (not killed) bacteriophages was of common usage among the soldiers to apply on wounds and prevent infection.

 

Second, as bacteriophages kill bacterias,we DO NOT have to engineer them to do this job. They will NOT infect human. The reason why we don't inject them in the blood or other is because they could create an immune response as they are made out of proteins.

 

Third. Escherichia coli (E.coli) is in fact the flesh-eating bacteria.

 

Fourth. This story of injecting E.coli into a brain tumor is quite dubious, although not impossible. But if it worked (reduced the tumor size), it has more to do with the very robust immune response that occured after this injection. The engaged immune response would have been strong and therefore also "noticed" the tumor and start attacking it.

 

I think it answer every questions for the moment.

 

See you![/quote']

 

I just want to state that you made a mistake, the bacteria commonly know as "flesh-eating" are Streptococcus pyogenes (Strep-A).

also, another reason, which is linked to the one you gave, for not injecting bacteriophages, is that, you have some phages that kill bacteria by lysing them. this releases every single immunogenic material that was normally contained inside the cell, including something called LPS (lipopolysaccharide). LPS will ellicit a vigorous immune response, but if there is too much LPS, you will get a response that is way too strong - - -> Anaphylactic shock (which can kill you).

Off topic here but first to azure: hey I AM a socially akward asthmatic whatcha tryin to say! and to demosthenes i just got the postal service cd and they are awesome. Oh and im still for the sterilization thing. Does anyone NEED to have more then 3 children? Seriously

actually some people do. and its the whole reason why industrialization (with all that comes with it) reduces birthrate dramatically. in certains areas of the world, having a small army of kids is the only way for a family to survives. Not only is the child mortality incredibly high, but also, the children, when they grow up (7 or 8 years) can be of tremendous help to the family (growing or earning food). Most people do not have 10 kids because they really want to, but because they have to.

wow. The majority of people are FOR eugenics? on a science forum? this is interesting and rather scary.

eugenics is simply not doable for a simple reason : the vast majority of people on earth have at least one allele of a dangerous genetic disease. I guess you could argue that 100 000 healthy people on earth could repopulate without genetic disease but, by the time they do, through mutation, we will have been brought back to the level where we are now... or humanity would have stopped existing (if you weed out "mutants"). So it wouldn't be just a few people undergoing minor surgery.

Its not even a question or being ethical or not, its just not doable. (oh and how do you go about neutering the majority? without getting killed in the process i mean.)

EDIT: to anyone talking about IQ tests... these are NOT valid tests of intelligence whatsoever. immigrants, and minorities in general, will score lower on those tests. poor people will score lower on those tests. Also, forcing people is doing exactly what the Nazis were doing. the gassing was not an integral part of their plan, it was a weird digression, an escalation of it (killing is lest costly than sterilization).

I'm talking really basic stuff. I mean really basic. Like:

 

"The sun is A) God B) The largest lightbulb known to man C) A blimp that caught fire D) A star."

 

I'm more interested in weeding out the agressively ignorant than I am simply perserving the "smart." Of course' date=' those with mental disabilities will be exused, but the fundies will not be.

 

This is an effort for a perfect world.[/quote']

 

this question is not a test of intelligence. it's a test of knowledge. it is of course what you are talking about (weeding out the ignorants) but I wanted to point this out.

 

now, i'm appalled by the whole idea and by the fact that no one else thinks this is barbaric (or more accurately hitlerish). you don't go around sterilizing a group of people on such a basis. whatever the answer that you have, realize that there IS a chance that you are wrong (it may be small but it is there)

I think they used a flu virus grown in chicken eggs so they can't hurt humans. I don't think you're supposed to get a flu shot if you're allergic to eggs.

they grow it in eggs, since its the easiest way to do so. Its inactivated, but you can get the symptoms of the flu since those (fever, muscle pain, etc.) are general symptoms of an immune response, which is the whole point of the vaccine. however those symptoms will be much milder than getting the disease.

At any rate... I find lucid dreams very stimulating. No matter what, it cheers you up in the morning, and since you aren't losing much sleep (a few minutes) you aren't more tired.

From what I remember, H1N1 would be first, followed by H1N2, which would be a minor variant. The next completely different strain would be H2N1, etc.

no... with viruses you can have something called antigenic shift and antigenic drift. drift is mild, and is the reason we get the flu every year or so, its just slight difference in the proteins of the virus that makes it harder for you immune system. Shift is a major change and this is where you change the numbers. antigenic shift means a larger and stronger (deadlier) flu epidemic. so H1N1 to H1N2 would be a shift, as well as H1N1 to H2N1. also, both numbers can change independantely of the other. like the Spanish Flu was H1N1 but the next one could have shifted either in the hemagglutinin or neuraminidase genes (H2N1 or H1N2) or both. now the main strains are H3N2 (and some H1N1) which means that H5N1's introduction would lead to an epidemic. the other problem though, is that H5N1 is particularily virulent (this is an information not contained in just the name).

about a convention in naming viruses. well, i'm not sure there is a global one. its true that strains are sometimes named by their point of origin (same is true with the flu) though.

I agree, that might be Penicillium. Pretty common on old fruit. Rhizopus/Mucor[/i'] are also quite common.

Rhizopus and Mucor are usually darker. Penicillium makes sense, although I'm not a mycologist... its actually hard to not have fungi in bacterial cultures left at room temperature. you have be careful and sterile. I don't know how you inoculated or anything. if you left it to the air, this happens, if you just swabbed something, again this would happen. The best way to get bacteria (as well as fungi but less) is to incubate at closer to human temp 35-37oC. how? uhm... only way i can think of right now... an idle (recent AMD) computer runs at about this temperature. Pentiums are a little higher. so if you can make a box around one, and leave it there, it could work. oh and the computer chips can withstand around 80oC so you wouldn't have to worry about that (as long as your box doesn't catch fire)

EDIT: btw, the white colony is also fungi