Another absurd example of drug policy going haywire. The sugar content and artificial coloring, and the empty calories are deadly menaces to public health. Very minute traces of cocaine are probably totally inefficient, maybe even beneficial according to old South American Indian tradition. Certainly the coffeine is more dangerous. It will be interesting if such traces will be found in other foodstuffs.
The illegal cocaine alkaloid – one of 10 found in coca and representing only 0.8% of the plant’s chemical make-up – is chemically removed before use, as mandated by international anti-narcotics agencies.
A father who asked an undercover police officer posing as a prostitute to take his 14-year-old son’s virginity has been given a suspended prison sentence. ** We consider this a victimless crime and see no scientific proof that young kids need protection from their sexual drives.
A different take on the age 0ld issue: why do people smoke, eat unhealty. Why don’t they listen to health advice about dangers that happen in the far future.
While the article does not give clear good answers, nevertheless it gives some funny and interesting suggestions.
By David Spiegelhalter Professor of risk understanding, University of Cambridge
The threat from bacon sandwiches gave the opportunity for The Sun to produce the classic headline “Careless pork costs lives”, while the Daily Telegraph was true to form and frothed on about the nanny-state denying us our bacon birthright.
But all these health warnings tend to have little influence on behaviour, just as scientific derision for homeopathy appears to have no effect on many people’s enthusiasm.
The blog put up a very very nice listing of persecution of scientists, of repression of scientific research by dogmatic people. It is correctly called radical left. I would not sign off blindly on all their statements.
[Disclaimer: My main topic is “defense of free research”, “freedom to find the scientific true facts” without getting death threats. This is not a crusade for underage sex, it is rather about unbiased truth & freedom of research versus dogmatic preconceived ideas]
In the only instance of a U.S. Congressional resolution against a scientific paper, the House of Representatives, with only minimal opposition, denounced a study by Dr. Bruce Rind & others, published in the scholarly review, Psychological Bulletin, in 1998.
If a man to believes that his sexual problems stem from being “abused” by an attractive female when he was fourteen, this normally would not pass as scientific evidence. But on issues with dogmatic preconceived dogmas, such faulty evidence can be presented in scientific conferences.
This not an example of profound human stupidity. It is even understandable that some want to protect their kids from foul language.
Nevertheless, the “Golden Globe Rule” seems to be going overboard.
This is just an amusing example of exaggerated dogmatic conservativism. It must be quite expensive to have all live television programs delayed a few seconds, so that professional who dedicates his live to beeper-button-pressing can bleep out any indecent word that could possibly be spoken.