Hulver's site || Go to work on a leg.

Diaries
Everything
Who's Online?
FAQ / Help

Go to work on a leg.

By Herring (Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 02:18:07 AM EST) (all tags)

--

I must admit to being tremendously impressed by this Bad Science column. For thos who can't be bothered to read, it's an extract from an "alternative medicine" journal where an animal study on Healing (doesn't say what sort) produced identical results in the controls. Apparently this is because of "resonance theory" which means that that "healing" affects the control subjects as well. It's not because the "healing" is in fact bollocks.

Yes, that's right dears. We gave a knighthood to Rushdie just to annoy you. Fucking worked, didn't it. YHBT.

I didn't rate the Satanic Verses that highly. I liked Midnight's Children a lot though. Haven't read any others.

In work early today. In theory, that means leaving early. Which would be nice. I a have yet to spend time explaining stuff to my new colleague. In fact I've hardly spoken to her. Very superficial impression: looks a bit Bollywood, sounds very South London (innit). The latter isn't surprising considering where we are.

With that varenicline anti-smoking stuff, it took me all weekend to get through those last 20 fags. They just didn't work. Doesn't mean I couldn't fancy one now though.

Anyhow, I suppose I should got and see how these users are getting on with this new version.

< Returning | BBC White season: 'Rivers of Blood' >

Login

Poll

Votes: 5
Results	\|	Other Polls

Related Links

- Bad Science column
- just to annoy you
- Herring's Diary

Google

Comment Controls

Go to work on a leg. | 48 comments (48 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback

Final thank you from Blair by jump the ladder (4.00 / 2) #1 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 02:45:39 AM EST

To the muslim "community" as represented the MCB and the like for their loyalty and help in fighting terrorism.

Also a big thanks going out to the iranians as well for their Naval hospitality.

If that were true by Herring (4.00 / 1) #2 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 02:51:21 AM EST

then my respect for Tony just went up a notch.

I'm English, and as such I crave disappointment. - Bill Bailey
[ Parent ]

I'm pretty sure it's true by jump the ladder (4.00 / 1) #3 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:19:32 AM EST

For months there's been lots of hints that co-operation on terrorism has been less than forecoming. All the major leads have been from Pakistan or communication interception not from the UK.

Anyway we've already annoyed the radicals to the point where they've already engaged in terrorism so we might asd werl, be hung for a shhep as well as goat.

[ Parent ]

Did you get distracted near the end of that post? by gazbo (4.00 / 1) #8 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:54:59 AM EST

Just asking...

"Engarde!" cried the larvae, huskily. - Scrymarch

[ Parent ]

: Yep by jump the ladder (4.00 / 1) #9 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:58:11 AM EST

The fit girl at work walked past my desk...

[ Parent ]
: Looks like the booze kicked in... by wiredog (2.00 / 0) #24 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 08:26:54 AM EST

Earth First!
_{(We can strip mine the rest later.)}
[ Parent ]

Here is a question by cam (2.00 / 0) #18 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 07:34:59 AM EST

would you accept a knighthood? Would any republican or egalitarian values negate you personally, ethically, or morally from accepting one?

cam
Freedom, liberty, equity and an Australian Republic
[ Parent ]

I'd love one by jump the ladder (4.00 / 2) #19 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 07:39:07 AM EST

Prefer a peerage though as you get £160 a day attendence allowance for just turning up.

[ Parent ]

I'd say no by nebbish (4.00 / 2) #20 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 07:55:47 AM EST

I'd say it quietly though. Making a fuss about refusing one is worse than accepting.

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!
[ Parent ]

Really by cam (2.00 / 0) #26 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 08:35:06 AM EST

I would say no, and would shout it from the rooftops. Then again I am a dirty colonial.

It always surprises me when literary moralists, which I would probably call Rushdie one, accept these kinds of things.

cam
Freedom, liberty, equity and an Australian Republic
[ Parent ]

I think by jump the ladder (4.00 / 1) #28 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 08:38:30 AM EST

He accepted for the same reasons that it was given, to annoy the islamists.

[ Parent ]

: I doubt it, if he really wanted to annoy by cam (2.00 / 0) #29 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 08:46:00 AM EST

the islamics he would write something like, I don't know, the Satanic Verses?
cam
Freedom, liberty, equity and an Australian Republic
[ Parent ]

What's immoral about a knighthood? by ambrosen (4.00 / 2) #30 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 08:54:09 AM EST

Unless you're a republican.

[ Parent ]

liberalism promises political equality by cam (2.00 / 0) #36 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 09:47:57 AM EST

accidents of birth don't equal political elevation - which the monarchy is. Also read the Harpur quote from here:

They are republicans, in short, and mostly democrats also, before they can render a definite reason, it may be, for the faith that is in them. And this results, I repeat it, from a moral and social progress purely natural to civilized men, though quickened by peculiar circumstances.

Harpur calls liberalist political equality an inner moral choice, and a natural one that is only suppressed by inequality/tyranny. He is arguing, like Kant, that the natural inner morality is republican and to release the 'inner faith' then republican morality is the only mechanism to achieve that.

I agree with Harpur that republicanism is a moral choice and a sign of moral (and hence social) progress.

cam
Freedom, liberty, equity and an Australian Republic
[ Parent ]

So once we've got rid of Liz and the Windsors by jump the ladder (4.00 / 2) #39 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 10:09:44 AM EST

We'll be elevated into moral beings and no longer subject to tyranny. Funnily enough the most advanced and liberal societies on the earth are consititutional monarchies like Holland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark whereas I can think of plenty of immoral and dictatorial republics.

My point is that the consititution and apparent forms of government doesn't as matter as much as you think. It's unwritten customs and assumptions of the host society that matter.

[ Parent ]

: No I am not saying those that want monarchy by cam (2.00 / 0) #41 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 10:24:13 AM EST

are immoral.
I am saying that the morality of democracy is incompatible with Westminster - but the morality of democracy is only a new thing. For instance Au still has an appointed GG and a monarch in England. Even NSW had an appointed upper house until the 1970s.
But when there was a poll in 1999 on the republican debate 50% wanted to elect the President directly. Which is the morality of democracy being expressed. Australian Republicanism is probably best described in world terms as liberal democratism, and a very strong strand of it.
The analogy of monarchies being stable and republics being unstable fails it. Hussein called his haven of tyranny a republic, when it was anything but.
Unwritten customs and assumptions end up being under the power of sovereign, not the multitude. Convention has no force of custom, tradition or practice. Anonimouse had a good example with the peerages for life. A convention that the sovereign (Labor's executive) asserted their power over, and when the next one comes in, the convention is back. But then it isnt a convention, it is a practice that is maintained by the force of the sovereign - not the force of history.
Another good example of the differences, especially in checks and balances exposing tyranny, is that in the US Bush has been under all sorts of pressure for FISA. In Australia, because the executive is the legislative too, the executive has done 26 time per capita more wire tapping than the US. The difference is, the Au executive can get away with it because of an unstrict constitution and poor separation of powers.
The Washington system exposes tyranny faster, and consequently can recover from it quicker too IMO.
cam
Freedom, liberty, equity and an Australian Republic
[ Parent ]
: Careful by TurboThy (2.00 / 0) #48 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 07:48:49 PM EST

100% of the Danes hanging around this site are staunch republicans.
__
You can't fix anything, you can't change anything, so just tell them that everything is A. The Fuck OK. —Rogerborg
[ Parent ]

Thing is by jump the ladder (4.00 / 2) #31 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 09:01:04 AM EST

I haven't got such a bee in the bonnet about the monarchy and Westminister system as it is part of the long history and culture of the UK. And you must admit it's been a very sucessful system for the UK at least. Over 300 years without a revolution, civil war or invasion of the country.

[ Parent ]

: I dont have a bee in the bonnet by cam (2.00 / 0) #38 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 10:07:46 AM EST

I just consider it an inferior political system. Technology has moved beyond it. The Westminster was basically a hack to route around the then real executive power of the monarch. However the King was still powerful enough that he couldn't be kicked out altogether like he could in the US; so no Montesqiue separation of powers for the UK. The fact remains that Executive is embedded in the Legislative which pollutes checks and balances and causes all sorts of problems. It and the Swiss system were about the best political systems that came out of the long centuries of monarchic rule, but the enlightenment and the US have changed that dynamic.
cam
Freedom, liberty, equity and an Australian Republic
[ Parent ]
: Agreed by nebbish (2.00 / 0) #40 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 10:10:01 AM EST

It's not so much me having a massive problem with these remnants of feudalism - I don't like them, but I think they're pretty harmless - as not wanting to be part of all that myself. It's embarrassing - the freeloading, self-importance, vanity and shallowness of it all.
Still, not something I need worry about for the near future I reckon :)
--------
It's political correctness gone mad!
[ Parent ]

Making a fuss by anonimouse (2.00 / 0) #45 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:35:36 AM EST

...like this perhaps?

Girls come and go but a mortgage is for 25 years -- JtL
[ Parent ]

: No not like that by cam (2.00 / 0) #47 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:32:26 PM EST

at all: "Mr Corre said his decision "in no way reflects on my opinion of the Queen whom I respect and would be honoured to have as a customer".
His rejection of it is political - Blair Iraq Afghanistan etc etc - not because of republican morality.
cam
Freedom, liberty, equity and an Australian Republic
[ Parent ]

you are alan bennett by Merekat (4.00 / 1) #46 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:55:20 AM EST

And I claim my five shillings.

[ Parent ]

Absolutely! by wiredog (4.00 / 1) #25 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 08:33:43 AM EST

Think how it'd look on a resume! "Received Order of the Garter in 2007 for Coding Above and Beyond the Call of Duty".

Earth First!
_{(We can strip mine the rest later.)}
[ Parent ]

Yes by anonimouse (2.00 / 0) #33 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 09:18:07 AM EST

Although like JTL, a peerage is better (not one of those "Life" jobbies either); at least Baron Anonimouse (preferably with droit de seigneur privileges). More seriously, I'd like a say in Law related matters.

Girls come and go but a mortgage is for 25 years -- JtL
[ Parent ]

Unfortunately by jump the ladder (2.00 / 0) #34 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 09:27:11 AM EST

They only do life peerages these days.

[ Parent ]

: Only until a change of guvmint by anonimouse (2.00 / 0) #35 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 09:41:29 AM EST

As far as I'm aware, awarding of hereditary peerages has not been abolished, simply not done nowadays. When the next election comes, it'll be back to business as usual.
Girls come and go but a mortgage is for 25 years -- JtL
[ Parent ]

I might be wrong however by jump the ladder (2.00 / 0) #12 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 05:29:28 AM EST

After reading this.

[ Parent ]

I try not to go to Bad Science too often by Phage (4.00 / 1) #4 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:21:16 AM EST

It alternatively enrages me, and fills me with despair.

The Czar of Accounting. No Nit Too Small To Pick

I am tempted by Herring (2.00 / 0) #5 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:31:51 AM EST

to get into the business of selling "cures" myself. I know a couple of scientific-sounding terms.

I am undecided though on the morality of fleecing the gullible.

I'm English, and as such I crave disappointment. - Bill Bailey
[ Parent ]

It could be viewed as murder ? by Phage (4.00 / 2) #6 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:44:31 AM EST

I have nothing but the utmost contempt for charlatans that sell 'cures' to the desperate. And yes that includes all the faith healers who really believe that they do good.
Profiting from the suffering from others...Sometimes I wish for looser regulations on assault shotguns.

The Czar of Accounting. No Nit Too Small To Pick
[ Parent ]

It;s a grey area by Herring (4.00 / 1) #10 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 05:11:55 AM EST

Selling a silver-painted brick for £100 to someone who believes WiFi is giving them headaches is borderline acceptable. Telling someone they don't need to bother with that silly chemotherapy and they should have this bottle of water instead is probably not.

I'm English, and as such I crave disappointment. - Bill Bailey
[ Parent ]

Agreed by Phage (2.00 / 0) #11 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 05:17:42 AM EST

I think that using the placebo effect may actually do them some good.

The Czar of Accounting. No Nit Too Small To Pick
[ Parent ]

: Placebo effect by Herring (2.00 / 0) #14 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 05:35:01 AM EST

Yes, it's real and measureable, however "conventional" doctors are pretty much prohibited by law from using it (although 20mg dose of Fluoxetine is, effectively, a widely prescribed placebo). Alternative practitioners aren't hamstrung by these pesky regulations though.

I'm English, and as such I crave disappointment. - Bill Bailey
[ Parent ]

Dunno by nebbish (4.00 / 1) #21 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 07:59:52 AM EST

Stupid often means badly educated. Of course it can just be willful stupidity, but it's hard to tell.

You'd need to survey each client before deciding whether to rob them.

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!
[ Parent ]

: I have worked out the survey: by Herring (4.00 / 3) #27 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 08:37:20 AM EST

I get my health advice from (tick all that apply):
[ ] Newspaper articles
[ ] Daytime TV
[ ] BBC "Science" programmes
[ ] My personal herbalist
[ ] Doctors or professional medical researchers

I'm English, and as such I crave disappointment. - Bill Bailey
[ Parent ]

Next time I get ill by TPD (4.00 / 2) #7 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:51:29 AM EST

I'm just going to make friends with someone who's getting treatment. FREE HEALING! Bonus.

In reality that article isn't science at all it's spin.

Rock Hard Abs are just a sw-sw-swivel away!

Rushdie by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #13 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 05:29:56 AM EST

Never read The Satanic Verses myself, but I rate Midnight's Children as one of the most important novels I've read, and love Haroun and the Sea of Stories for its easy to read and gentle hearted but firm allegory to the darkness that Islamicism or indeed any fanaticism can cause to a society.

Ben Goldacre's great. He's going to go against the medical establishment on a subject and liberty I hold dear to my heart soon. For some reason the BMA decided to take an intuitive stance on it, when the epidemiological evidence is counterintuitive.

On what ? by Phage (2.00 / 0) #15 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 06:07:28 AM EST

What is he jousting with the BMA about ?

The Czar of Accounting. No Nit Too Small To Pick
[ Parent ]

Bike helmets. by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #16 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 07:15:01 AM EST

[ Parent ]

I wear my motorcycle helmet 98% of the time. by garlic (2.00 / 0) #32 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 09:10:37 AM EST

but I can only see requiring a bicycle helmet when you're on the road with cars.

[ Parent ]

: Unexpectedly by Vulch (2.00 / 0) #42 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:16:33 AM EST

Proper research has apparently shown, and casual investigation around Cambridge confirmed, that car drivers give cyclists wearing helmets far less room than they do those without, making it more likely you'll get knocked off. In that event there are only a small number of situations where a helmet helps, and they increase the risk of neck injury in many others.
A cycling helmet is nowhere near as protective as a motorbike helmet, to give a similar degree of protection would mean a drastic increase in size and weight.
Other research has shown (in Australia IIRC) that making helmets compulsory has little effect on overall accident numbers, but increases the accidents per mile as people will stop cycling instead.

[ Parent ]
: If I were you, by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #43 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:22:06 AM EST

I'd take it off when going to bed. But seriously, a motorbike helmet is strong enough to actually make a difference. There's not much evidence that a bike helmet is. The studies that show it benefits for head injuries show an equal reduction in leg injuries for helmet wearers. Which is to say that the helmet wearers suffered less severe injuries overall, presumably because of a greater likelihood of being law abiding, having working brakes etc.
Due to the fact that energy increases quadratically with speed, cycle helmets are only going to dissipate a few percent of any impact with a car at close to driving speed.

[ Parent ]

How do you know ? by Phage (2.00 / 0) #37 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 09:48:58 AM EST

I can't find anything on the site.

The Czar of Accounting. No Nit Too Small To Pick
[ Parent ]

: Reported by people by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #44 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:24:51 AM EST

In email correspondence about it.

[ Parent ]

Varenicline. by toxicfur (4.00 / 1) #17 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 07:17:18 AM EST

That was my experience as well. I wanted a smoke, but when I had one, it was just meh. By the end, it was actually pretty revolting. I haven't had a smoke in 23 days now, and the cravings (and bitchiness) have largely gone away. I still reach for my pack when I go outside sometimes, though, and I don't know quite what to do with my hands when I'm waiting for the dog to do his business.
-----
If you don't get a Bonnie, my universe will not make sense. --blixco

: I could by blixco (4.00 / 1) #22 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 08:11:33 AM EST

eat a pack of cigarettes right now, but the aftereffects (addiction, nostalgia, that certain cool that only people who are addicted to standing around in bad weather have) are much too risky. But yeah, it's all the ritual stuff that I miss. That and being able to get up and walk outside with no excuse.
---------------------------------
"You bring the weasel, I'll bring the whiskey." - kellnerin
[ Parent ]
: All in all, it's going OK by Herring (4.00 / 1) #23 Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 08:14:31 AM EST

Almost 72 hours without an actual cigarette. Occaisionally fancy one, but as I say it took ages to get through the last pack. Did contemplate throwing them away but it seemed ... wrong somehow. I'm fairly sure that if I smoked one now I'd get little or nothing out of it but I wouldn't tempt fate.

I'm English, and as such I crave disappointment. - Bill Bailey
[ Parent ]

Go to work on a leg. | 48 comments (48 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback