TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On Friday, February 22, 2013 2:57:34 PM UTC, Andy Champ wrote:
On 21/02/2013 23:44, Steve Firth wrote:

wrote:

On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:07:56 GMT, just as I was about to take a herb,

(Windmill) disturbed my reverie and

wrote:



They say that antibiotic resistance can even be spread from one type of

bacterium to another.



It is a fact, not a 'they say'.

Perhaps you could explain the mechanism of this fact?



snip



It's a fact. It's not even an obscure one, and I'm surprised you haven't

come across it.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer

and there was I thinking that was an athists term for the missionary position ;-)

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

whisky-dave wrote
Dave Liquorice wrote
Mark wrote

I agree there are some sites that are trustworthy.
However, take NHS direct, for example. It is so dumbed
down and simplified it's pretty much useless IMHO.

By heck it is. I don't look at it very often, if at all, but some
one posted a link elsewhere. That page was awful, any word
that was even vaugely "difficult" had a simple explanation
in brackets after it. Things like "incision (small cut)". Made
reading the information very much harder that it should be.

Makes you wonder why they use the word
incison rather than small cut, any ideas ?

They stupidly believe it reads better.

Same reason cops use fancy words when giving evidence in court.

This a web page FFS! Link the "difficult" words to a glossary
entry or is clicking a word to "difficult" as well? If so have a
the text that would be in the brackets appear in a float over
box. Don't disrupt the flow of the text.

Maybe it's because difernt browswers show things in slightly differtn
ways.

And it isnt obvious to everyone that they can get that effect
with words they arent sure of. Makes no sense to use a word
like incision with stuff that's sposed to be read by the general
public on a site like that.

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On Feb 22, 9:05*am, Mark
wrote:
On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 18:39:59 +0000, Tim Streater









wrote:
In article ,
DrTeeth wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 07:02:26 GMT, just as I was about to take a herb,
(Windmill) disturbed my reverie and
wrote:

So if doctors want to improve the chances that a course of antibiotics
will be taken to completion, it will be best to explain why rather than
relying on the doctor-is-God idea.

Do you think doctors will have the time to educate each of their
patients about antibiotic resistance? Many of the public have the
intellect of those in the Vicky Pryce jury. How would a doctor deal
with those dullards.

I'm sure you don't necessarily and automatically do everything an
expert tells you, not at least unless given reasons.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. If I go to an expert, I DO do what I am
told/advised...that is why I went to them and not to get 'educated'.

Twaddle. I expect the expert to understand that, for the most part, I'm
as intelligent as he is. And that he can take the time to translate his
jargon into layman's terms. We're talking health here, not quantum
physics. If the "expert" can't do that, it merely means he has not a
proper grasp of the subject.

And, from a practical standpoint, I am far more likely to remember the
instructions from an 'expert' if I understand the reasons for it. *I'm
sure I am not alone in this.

It particularly annoys me when some types of 'expert' seem to
deliberately conceal the reasons for their advice.

They don't like to dissimate information. If other people knew too
much the reason for their existence would disappear.

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On Feb 22, 9:18*am, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 23:36:17 -0800 (PST), harry wrote:
*However, take NHS direct, for example. *It is so dumbed down and
simplified it's pretty much useless IMHO.

By heck it is. I don't look at it very often, if at all, but some one
posted a link elsewhere. That page was awful, any word that was even
vaugely "difficult" had a simple explanation in brackets after it.
Things like "incision (small cut)". Made reading the information very
much harder that it should be.

This a web page FFS! Link the "difficult" words to a glossary entry or
is clicking a word to "difficult" as well? If so have a the text that
would be in the brackets appear in a float over box. Don't disrupt the
flow of the text.

People are pretty stupid these days. Eg, the Huhn business jury.

I can cope with people being poorly educated, they may well need
assistance to understand difficult words like "incision".

The problem is not stupid people but stupid "web designers" that screw up
the effective communication of information by trying to use the proper
words and have a simple english explanation inline. Have the word
explantions as links/float over pop-up boxes or drop the proper words and
do the whole thing in simple english.


I always wonder why they use the word "incision" when they could just
say "cut" and everyone would know what was meant.
Just to add to their mystique?

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On 22/02/13 18:00, harry wrote:


I always wonder why they use the word "incision" when they could just
say "cut" and everyone would know what was meant.

Thats cos you are a bit thick harry.

An incision is not just any old cut. Its a very carefully cosnidered
millimeter prefect cut.

Just to add to their mystique?


Oh. like calling your solar panels 'renewable energy' instead of
'legalised theft'?


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On Feb 22, 2:57*pm, Andy Champ wrote:
On 21/02/2013 23:44, Steve Firth wrote: *wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:07:56 GMT, just as I was about to take a herb,
*(Windmill) disturbed my reverie and
wrote:

They say that antibiotic resistance can even be spread from one type of
bacterium to another.

It is a fact, not a 'they say'.
Perhaps you could explain the mechanism of this fact?

snip

It's a fact. It's not even an obscure one, and I'm surprised you haven't
come across it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer

Andy

When you think, it must be so.
If bacteria multiply by division, how else could they change/evolve.?

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On 21/02/2013 21:31, geoff wrote:
In message , DrTeeth
writes
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 22:28:43 +0000, just as I was about to take a
herb, John Rumm disturbed my
reverie and wrote:

The more observant would note that Arfa is an electronic engineer
whose wife and daughter run a diner - but then that tends to make
the one attempting to condescend look rather more of a knob.

People should stick to their area of expertise. I do not mind
people asking questions, but when they cannot figure out why
something happens - the thought that they know ****-all about a
subject does not enter their heads. I get a bit jaded after
treating the public for 31 years - so many people think they know
better than I when they could not even spell 0.00001% of what I
know.

And I always thought that dentists were failed doctors ...

Miserable gits some of them... must be a down in the mouth job.

You're really not going to make friends and influence people with
such an attitude

quite


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On 22/02/2013 09:05, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 18:39:59 +0000, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article ,
DrTeeth wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 07:02:26 GMT, just as I was about to take a herb,
lid (Windmill) disturbed my reverie and
wrote:

So if doctors want to improve the chances that a course of antibiotics
will be taken to completion, it will be best to explain why rather than
relying on the doctor-is-God idea.

Do you think doctors will have the time to educate each of their
patients about antibiotic resistance? Many of the public have the
intellect of those in the Vicky Pryce jury. How would a doctor deal
with those dullards.

I'm sure you don't necessarily and automatically do everything an
expert tells you, not at least unless given reasons.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. If I go to an expert, I DO do what I am
told/advised...that is why I went to them and not to get 'educated'.

Twaddle. I expect the expert to understand that, for the most part, I'm
as intelligent as he is. And that he can take the time to translate his
jargon into layman's terms. We're talking health here, not quantum
physics. If the "expert" can't do that, it merely means he has not a
proper grasp of the subject.

And, from a practical standpoint, I am far more likely to remember the
instructions from an 'expert' if I understand the reasons for it. I'm
sure I am not alone in this.

Agreed, I much prefer to understand something in principle so that I can
answer my own questions, rather than to be told the answer on a case by
case basis.

The sensible approach is to find out from the person you are advising
what sort of answer they want. If they are not detail people, who just
wants to be told what to do, then fine. If on the other had the seeker
of advice indicates they are bright enough to understand the fuller
picture, and will be able to learn something from it, then let them have
the detail - or at least enough to deal with the particular line of
questioning.

It particularly annoys me when some types of 'expert' seem to
deliberately conceal the reasons for their advice.

Some seem to think it equates to job security... my experience suggests
the reverse, since being more open about "why" engenders more trust in
future.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On 21/02/2013 18:06, DrTeeth wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:00:50 +0000, just as I was about to take a
herb, John Rumm disturbed my reverie
and wrote:

Its that sort of attitude that contributes to the problem. Instructions
to blindly "do as I say" are rarely the best way to engender
co-operation from a good selection of people.

So how long to you expect me or a doctor to spend explaining a
pharmacological concept in enough detail for you?

Since I would be paying for your time, as long as it takes until either
I indicate I don't need more detail and am happy to simply be told what
to do, or I understand to a level I am satisfied with...

For example, how difficult would it be for a doctor to say :

"I am going to prescribe xyz, its very important that you finish the
whole course, even if you feel better in a couple of days. Do you
understand?"

If someone says "why", then explain why, and don't make yourself look
like a knob with an overinflated ego by saying "because I said so!"

Most people will be able to grasp the concept of antibiotic resistance
if explained in simple terms...


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

harry wrote:
On Feb 22, 2:57 pm, Andy Champ wrote:
On 21/02/2013 23:44, Steve Firth wrote: wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:07:56 GMT, just as I was about to take a herb,
(Windmill) disturbed my reverie and
wrote:
They say that antibiotic resistance can even be spread from one type of
bacterium to another.
It is a fact, not a 'they say'.
Perhaps you could explain the mechanism of this fact?
snip

It's a fact. It's not even an obscure one, and I'm surprised you haven't
come across it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer

Andy

When you think, it must be so.
If bacteria multiply by division, how else could they change/evolve.?

Random mutations, which is why life was stuck at the single cell stage
for billions of years. It wasn't until a random mutation or accidental
gene transfer from prey to predator started the whole sex thing off that
evolution *really* took off.

Or so various articles in Nature, Scientific American, New Scientist and
Science et Vie claim, anyway.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 22:11:10 +0000, John Williamson wrote:

If bacteria multiply by division, how else could they change/evolve.?

Random mutations, which is why life was stuck at the single cell stage
for billions of years. It wasn't until a random mutation or accidental
gene transfer from prey to predator started the whole sex thing off
that evolution *really* took off.

With just cloning a single mutation is just as likely to be terminal or
benefical in the next generation. If it's terminal all the beneficial
mutations in the line before are terminated as well.

Once you have sex and the mix 'n match a mutation might not be terminal
in the next generation and you also gain the beneficial mutations of the
other individual. It also allows a beneficial mutation to spread through
the population.

Interesting BBC World Service Discovery short series, part 1:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...ual_Nature_1_3

--
Cheers
Dave.

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

harry wrote:
On Feb 22, 2:57 pm, Andy Champ wrote:
On 21/02/2013 23:44, Steve Firth wrote: wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:07:56 GMT, just as I was about to take a herb,
(Windmill) disturbed my reverie and
wrote:

They say that antibiotic resistance can even be spread from one type of
bacterium to another.

It is a fact, not a 'they say'.
Perhaps you could explain the mechanism of this fact?

snip

It's a fact. It's not even an obscure one, and I'm surprised you haven't
come across it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer

Andy

When you think, it must be so.
If bacteria multiply by division, how else could they change/evolve.?

Oh FFS. They could evolve without the ability to transfer plasmids between
cells. It would just be slower.

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

Andy Champ wrote:
On 21/02/2013 23:44, Steve Firth wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:07:56 GMT, just as I was about to take a herb,
lid (Windmill) disturbed my reverie and
wrote:

They say that antibiotic resistance can even be spread from one type of
bacterium to another.

It is a fact, not a 'they say'.
Perhaps you could explain the mechanism of this fact?

snip

It's a fact. It's not even an obscure one, and I'm surprised you haven't come across it.

What makes you think I haven't come across it? I was manipulating plasmids
and transferring antibiotic resistance between species in the 1970s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer

Grandmother, eggs.

Clearly what you missed is that the pompous fang mangler didn't have a
clue.

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Feb 22, 2:57 pm, Andy Champ wrote:
On 21/02/2013 23:44, Steve Firth wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:07:56 GMT, just as I was about to take a herb,
(Windmill) disturbed my reverie
and
wrote:

They say that antibiotic resistance can even be spread from one
type of
bacterium to another.

It is a fact, not a 'they say'.
Perhaps you could explain the mechanism of this fact?

snip

It's a fact. It's not even an obscure one, and I'm surprised you haven't
come across it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer

When you think, it must be so.

If bacteria multiply by division, how else could they change/evolve.?

By random variation in the DNA combined with selection.

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
whisky-dave wrote
Dave Liquorice wrote
Mark wrote

I agree there are some sites that are trustworthy.
However, take NHS direct, for example. It is so dumbed
down and simplified it's pretty much useless IMHO.

By heck it is. I don't look at it very often, if at all, but some
one posted a link elsewhere. That page was awful, any word
that was even vaugely "difficult" had a simple explanation
in brackets after it. Things like "incision (small cut)". Made
reading the information very much harder that it should be.

Makes you wonder why they use the word
incison rather than small cut, any ideas ?

They stupidly believe it reads better.

Same reason cops use fancy words when giving evidence in court.

This a web page FFS! Link the "difficult" words to a glossary
entry or is clicking a word to "difficult" as well? If so have a
the text that would be in the brackets appear in a float over
box. Don't disrupt the flow of the text.

Maybe it's because difernt browswers show things in slightly differtn
ways.

And it isnt obvious to everyone that they can get that effect
with words they arent sure of. Makes no sense to use a word
like incision with stuff that's sposed to be read by the general
public on a site like that.


I'm actually having a real problem with the concept that the world is now so
dumb as to have difficulty with a word like "incision" ...

Arfa

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

Arfa Daily wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Dave Liquorice wrote
Mark wrote

I agree there are some sites that are trustworthy.
However, take NHS direct, for example. It is so dumbed
down and simplified it's pretty much useless IMHO.

By heck it is. I don't look at it very often, if at all, but some
one posted a link elsewhere. That page was awful, any word
that was even vaugely "difficult" had a simple explanation
in brackets after it. Things like "incision (small cut)". Made
reading the information very much harder that it should be.

Makes you wonder why they use the word
incison rather than small cut, any ideas ?

They stupidly believe it reads better.

Same reason cops use fancy words when giving evidence in court.

This a web page FFS! Link the "difficult" words to a glossary
entry or is clicking a word to "difficult" as well? If so have a
the text that would be in the brackets appear in a float over
box. Don't disrupt the flow of the text.

Maybe it's because difernt browswers
show things in slightly differtn ways.

And it isnt obvious to everyone that they can get that effect
with words they arent sure of. Makes no sense to use a word
like incision with stuff that's sposed to be read by the general
public on a site like that.

I'm actually having a real problem with the concept that the world
is now so dumb as to have difficulty with a word like "incision" ...

I'm not convinced that there weren't always some that ignorant.

It wasn't that long ago that some kids managed to
leave school without being able to read. You don't
see that much anymore and those might now be
reading sites like that at times tho not very often IMO.

Its not surprising that those doing sites like that to
at least try to cater for those that ignorant now.

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On Feb 22, 10:51*pm, Steve Firth wrote:
harry wrote:
On Feb 22, 2:57 pm, Andy Champ wrote:
On 21/02/2013 23:44, Steve Firth wrote: *wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:07:56 GMT, just as I was about to take a herb,
*(Windmill) disturbed my reverie and
wrote:

They say that antibiotic resistance can even be spread from one type of
bacterium to another.

It is a fact, not a 'they say'.
Perhaps you could explain the mechanism of this fact?

snip

It's a fact. It's not even an obscure one, and I'm surprised you haven't
come across it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer

Andy

When you think, it must be so.
If bacteria multiply by division, how else could they change/evolve.?

Oh FFS. They could evolve without the ability to transfer plasmids between
cells. It would just be slower.

How, when the cell divides into two parts identical to the one that
went before?

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

harry wrote
Steve Firth wrote
harry wrote
Andy Champ wrote
Steve Firth wrote
wrote
(Windmill) wrote

They say that antibiotic resistance can even be
spread from one type of bacterium to another.

It is a fact, not a 'they say'.

Perhaps you could explain the mechanism of this fact?

It's a fact. It's not even an obscure one, and
I'm surprised you haven't come across it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer

When you think, it must be so.
If bacteria multiply by division, how else could they change/evolve.?

Oh FFS. They could evolve without the ability to transfer
plasmids between cells. It would just be slower.

How, when the cell divides into two parts identical to the one that went
before?

Random mutation.

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On 23/02/2013 08:52, Huge wrote:

You forget that half the world has an IQ under 100.


Only people with an IQ lower than 100 forget that... Or is that "fail to
understand that"? :-)

--
Rod

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

harry wrote:
On Feb 22, 10:51 pm, Steve Firth wrote:
[snip]

Oh FFS. They could evolve without the ability to transfer plasmids between
cells. It would just be slower.

How, when the cell divides into two parts identical to the one that
went before?

Your assumption that both cells must always be identical is wrong. Also
after the cells have divided each may experience different mutagenic
events. for example one may get hit by ionising radiation, the other not.

Point mutation and transcription errors tend to be the greater causes of
variation. DNA repair and replication is good but it's not perfect.

If you had thought about it you would have realised that.
--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On 23/02/13 08:52, Huge wrote:
On 2013-02-23, Arfa Daily wrote:


"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
whisky-dave wrote
Dave Liquorice wrote
Mark wrote

I agree there are some sites that are trustworthy.
However, take NHS direct, for example. It is so dumbed
down and simplified it's pretty much useless IMHO.

By heck it is. I don't look at it very often, if at all, but some
one posted a link elsewhere. That page was awful, any word
that was even vaugely "difficult" had a simple explanation
in brackets after it. Things like "incision (small cut)". Made
reading the information very much harder that it should be.

Makes you wonder why they use the word
incison rather than small cut, any ideas ?

They stupidly believe it reads better.

Same reason cops use fancy words when giving evidence in court.

This a web page FFS! Link the "difficult" words to a glossary
entry or is clicking a word to "difficult" as well? If so have a
the text that would be in the brackets appear in a float over
box. Don't disrupt the flow of the text.

Maybe it's because difernt browswers show things in slightly differtn
ways.

And it isnt obvious to everyone that they can get that effect
with words they arent sure of. Makes no sense to use a word
like incision with stuff that's sposed to be read by the general
public on a site like that.


I'm actually having a real problem with the concept that the world is now so
dumb as to have difficulty with a word like "incision" ...

You forget that half the world has an IQ under 100.


MORE than half the world.. Its not an ideal distribution.







--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

DrTeeth writes:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:00:50 +0000, just as I was about to take a
herb, John Rumm disturbed my reverie
and wrote:

Its that sort of attitude that contributes to the problem. Instructions
to blindly "do as I say" are rarely the best way to engender
co-operation from a good selection of people.

So how long to you expect me or a doctor to spend explaining a
pharmacological concept in enough detail for you?


It would take all of 2 seconds to hand out an explanatory leaflet, and
if the matter was important there should be such a leaflet.

When it's important, most would read the leaflet, unless they'd seen it
before.


--
Windmill, Use t m i l l
J.R.R. Tolkien:- @ O n e t e l . c o m
All that is gold does not glister / Not all who wander are lost

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

"Rod Speed" writes:

Arfa Daily wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Dave Liquorice wrote
Mark wrote

I agree there are some sites that are trustworthy.
However, take NHS direct, for example. It is so dumbed
down and simplified it's pretty much useless IMHO.

By heck it is. I don't look at it very often, if at all, but some
one posted a link elsewhere. That page was awful, any word
that was even vaugely "difficult" had a simple explanation
in brackets after it. Things like "incision (small cut)". Made
reading the information very much harder that it should be.

Makes you wonder why they use the word
incison rather than small cut, any ideas ?

They stupidly believe it reads better.

Same reason cops use fancy words when giving evidence in court.

This a web page FFS! Link the "difficult" words to a glossary
entry or is clicking a word to "difficult" as well? If so have a
the text that would be in the brackets appear in a float over
box. Don't disrupt the flow of the text.

Maybe it's because difernt browswers
show things in slightly differtn ways.

And it isnt obvious to everyone that they can get that effect
with words they arent sure of. Makes no sense to use a word
like incision with stuff that's sposed to be read by the general
public on a site like that.

I'm actually having a real problem with the concept that the world
is now so dumb as to have difficulty with a word like "incision" ...

I'm not convinced that there weren't always some that ignorant.

It wasn't that long ago that some kids managed to
leave school without being able to read. You don't
see that much anymore and those might now be
reading sites like that at times tho not very often IMO.

To slightly change the subject, ISTM that with all these yobs using
their mobiles to text each other, in future nearly everyone is going to
be able to read and write.
There might be some question about the language(s) which will evolve
(Txtish? Txtese?), but they will be able to communicate in writing.


--
Windmill, Use t m i l l
J.R.R. Tolkien:- @ O n e t e l . c o m
All that is gold does not glister / Not all who wander are lost

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On 23/02/2013 08:52, Huge wrote:

8


You forget that half the world has an IQ under 100.



Just because the average is 100 doesn't mean half the world is less.

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On 23/02/2013 16:10, dennis@home wrote:
On 23/02/2013 08:52, Huge wrote:

8


You forget that half the world has an IQ under 100.



Just because the average is 100 doesn't mean half the world is less.


It does if they fix the median as 100.

But if you are referring to something else...?

--
Rod

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On 22/02/2013 22:51, Steve Firth wrote:
Andy Champ wrote:
On 21/02/2013 23:44, Steve Firth wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:07:56 GMT, just as I was about to take a herb,
lid (Windmill) disturbed my reverie and
wrote:

They say that antibiotic resistance can even be spread from one type of
bacterium to another.

It is a fact, not a 'they say'.
Perhaps you could explain the mechanism of this fact?

snip

It's a fact. It's not even an obscure one, and I'm surprised you haven't come across it.

What makes you think I haven't come across it? I was manipulating plasmids
and transferring antibiotic resistance between species in the 1970s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer

Grandmother, eggs.

Clearly what you missed is that the pompous fang mangler didn't have a
clue.

Looks to me as if he knew. It also looked to me as if you didn't - and
as I said I was surprised at your apparent implication that this was
*not* a fact. Still... is this a 5 minute argument or a 10 minute one?

Andy

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

Andy Champ wrote:
On 22/02/2013 22:51, Steve Firth wrote:
Andy Champ wrote:
On 21/02/2013 23:44, Steve Firth wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:07:56 GMT, just as I was about to take a herb,
lid (Windmill) disturbed my reverie and
wrote:

They say that antibiotic resistance can even be spread from one type of
bacterium to another.

It is a fact, not a 'they say'.
Perhaps you could explain the mechanism of this fact?

snip

It's a fact. It's not even an obscure one, and I'm surprised you haven't come across it.

What makes you think I haven't come across it? I was manipulating plasmids
and transferring antibiotic resistance between species in the 1970s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer

Grandmother, eggs.

Clearly what you missed is that the pompous fang mangler didn't have a
clue.

Looks to me as if he knew.

No he didn't.

It also looked to me as if you didn't

Your perception was wrong, as it often is.

- and as I said I was surprised at your apparent implication that this was *not* a fact.

I made no such implication.

Still... is this a 5 minute argument or a 10 minute one?

You tell me, it's you that started an argument and who apparently wants to
continue one.

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

In message , Tim
Streater writes
In article

rg,
Steve Firth wrote:

DrTeeth wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:07:56 GMT, just as I was about to take a herb,
lid (Windmill) disturbed my reverie and
wrote:

They say that antibiotic resistance can even be spread from one
type of
bacterium to another.
It is a fact, not a 'they say'.
Perhaps you could explain the mechanism of this fact?

It happens because bacteria exchange genetic material. I don't
personally know in any more detail than that.

I had to explain this to my sister once. She is a typical "nice but
clueless" LibDem, who one day harangued me that it "can't be right" to
be putting "a fish gene" into wheat. So I gently explained that there's
no such thing as a fish gene, as humans share, I dunno, at least 50% of
their genetic material with fish. Wheat and fish share something like
40%, IIRC.

Trouble is she's one of these folk who live on a "need to know" basis
(i.e. has no natural curiosity about the world around her) and so has
actually very little knowledge about anything at all.

Does she also think that wind farms are a viable alternative to
nuclear/gas/coal?
--
bert

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

In message , Arfa Daily
writes


"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
whisky-dave wrote
Dave Liquorice wrote
Mark wrote

I agree there are some sites that are trustworthy.
However, take NHS direct, for example. It is so dumbed
down and simplified it's pretty much useless IMHO.

By heck it is. I don't look at it very often, if at all, but some
one posted a link elsewhere. That page was awful, any word
that was even vaugely "difficult" had a simple explanation
in brackets after it. Things like "incision (small cut)". Made
reading the information very much harder that it should be.

Makes you wonder why they use the word
incison rather than small cut, any ideas ?

They stupidly believe it reads better.

Same reason cops use fancy words when giving evidence in court.

This a web page FFS! Link the "difficult" words to a glossary
entry or is clicking a word to "difficult" as well? If so have a
the text that would be in the brackets appear in a float over
box. Don't disrupt the flow of the text.

Maybe it's because difernt browswers show things in slightly
differtn ways.

And it isnt obvious to everyone that they can get that effect
with words they arent sure of. Makes no sense to use a word
like incision with stuff that's sposed to be read by the general
public on a site like that.


I'm actually having a real problem with the concept that the world is
now so dumb as to have difficulty with a word like "incision" ...

Arfa
It always was to a certain extent but now the lunatics have taken over
the asylum
--
bert

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

"Windmill" wrote in message
...
"Rod Speed" writes:

Arfa Daily wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Dave Liquorice wrote
Mark wrote

I agree there are some sites that are trustworthy.
However, take NHS direct, for example. It is so dumbed
down and simplified it's pretty much useless IMHO.

By heck it is. I don't look at it very often, if at all, but some
one posted a link elsewhere. That page was awful, any word
that was even vaugely "difficult" had a simple explanation
in brackets after it. Things like "incision (small cut)". Made
reading the information very much harder that it should be.

Makes you wonder why they use the word
incison rather than small cut, any ideas ?

They stupidly believe it reads better.

Same reason cops use fancy words when giving evidence in court.

This a web page FFS! Link the "difficult" words to a glossary
entry or is clicking a word to "difficult" as well? If so have a
the text that would be in the brackets appear in a float over
box. Don't disrupt the flow of the text.

Maybe it's because difernt browswers
show things in slightly differtn ways.

And it isnt obvious to everyone that they can get that effect
with words they arent sure of. Makes no sense to use a word
like incision with stuff that's sposed to be read by the general
public on a site like that.

I'm actually having a real problem with the concept that the world
is now so dumb as to have difficulty with a word like "incision" ...

I'm not convinced that there weren't always some that ignorant.

It wasn't that long ago that some kids managed to
leave school without being able to read. You don't
see that much anymore and those might now be
reading sites like that at times tho not very often IMO.

To slightly change the subject, ISTM that with all these yobs using
their mobiles to text each other, in future nearly everyone is going to
be able to read and write.
There might be some question about the language(s) which will evolve
(Txtish? Txtese?), but they will be able to communicate in writing.


All that is gold does not glister / Not all who wander are lost

There was a wonderful bit in the second (?) episode of "Derek" where a young
girl had to go and do community service at the home. The boss asked her if
she read. "Oh yes" she says. "And what sort of stuff do you read ?" asks the
boss. "Twitter" replies the girl ...

Well, I cracked up. A lot of people have panned that programme as being
insensitive and cruel, and I must admit I wasn't sure after the first one,
but I stuck with it, and I now think that it is one of the most brilliantly
observed pieces of writing that I have ever seen, and although I don't much
like Ricky Gervaise, I think he's to be commended on this one ...

Arfa

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On 23/02/2013 15:07, Windmill wrote:
There might be some question about the language(s) which will evolve
(Txtish? Txtese?), but they will be able to communicate in writing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_language

I'd always heard txtspk, but it seems there are many others.

Andy

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

"Andy Champ" wrote in message
. uk...
On 23/02/2013 15:07, Windmill wrote:
There might be some question about the language(s) which will evolve
(Txtish? Txtese?), but they will be able to communicate in writing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_language

I'd always heard txtspk, but it seems there are many others.

Andy


Thing is, the kids don't use much text speak nowadays - or so mine tell me -
as most of the phones that they use are now smartphones with touch screens
and full qwerty keyboards, so they just type the whole words exactly as they
would on a normal sized keyboard.

Arfa

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 18:49:17 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 22/02/2013 09:05, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 18:39:59 +0000, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article ,
DrTeeth wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 07:02:26 GMT, just as I was about to take a herb,
lid (Windmill) disturbed my reverie and
wrote:

So if doctors want to improve the chances that a course of antibiotics
will be taken to completion, it will be best to explain why rather than
relying on the doctor-is-God idea.

Do you think doctors will have the time to educate each of their
patients about antibiotic resistance? Many of the public have the
intellect of those in the Vicky Pryce jury. How would a doctor deal
with those dullards.

I'm sure you don't necessarily and automatically do everything an
expert tells you, not at least unless given reasons.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. If I go to an expert, I DO do what I am
told/advised...that is why I went to them and not to get 'educated'.

Twaddle. I expect the expert to understand that, for the most part, I'm
as intelligent as he is. And that he can take the time to translate his
jargon into layman's terms. We're talking health here, not quantum
physics. If the "expert" can't do that, it merely means he has not a
proper grasp of the subject.

And, from a practical standpoint, I am far more likely to remember the
instructions from an 'expert' if I understand the reasons for it. I'm
sure I am not alone in this.

Agreed, I much prefer to understand something in principle so that I can
answer my own questions, rather than to be told the answer on a case by
case basis.

The sensible approach is to find out from the person you are advising
what sort of answer they want. If they are not detail people, who just
wants to be told what to do, then fine. If on the other had the seeker
of advice indicates they are bright enough to understand the fuller
picture, and will be able to learn something from it, then let them have
the detail - or at least enough to deal with the particular line of
questioning.

It particularly annoys me when some types of 'expert' seem to
deliberately conceal the reasons for their advice.

Some seem to think it equates to job security... my experience suggests
the reverse, since being more open about "why" engenders more trust in
future.

Exactly. I have lost trust in solictors as a result of this. I'm
sure there are many good ones but, too many times, I have wasted
time/money/etc and come out of an appointment knowing no more than
when I went in. I particularly hate it when all they will say is
statements beginning with "you could try"
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) If a man stands in a forest and no woman is around
(")_(") is he still wrong?

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 23:09:55 -0000, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:



"Andy Champ" wrote in message
.uk...
On 23/02/2013 15:07, Windmill wrote:
There might be some question about the language(s) which will evolve
(Txtish? Txtese?), but they will be able to communicate in writing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_language

I'd always heard txtspk, but it seems there are many others.

Andy


Thing is, the kids don't use much text speak nowadays - or so mine tell me -
as most of the phones that they use are now smartphones with touch screens
and full qwerty keyboards, so they just type the whole words exactly as they
would on a normal sized keyboard.

Kids don't text much anymore IME. It's all farcebook and ****ter now.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) If a man stands in a forest and no woman is around
(")_(") is he still wrong?

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On Feb 25, 10:08*am, Mark
wrote:
On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 18:49:17 +0000, John Rumm









wrote:
On 22/02/2013 09:05, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 18:39:59 +0000, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article ,
DrTeeth wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 07:02:26 GMT, just as I was about to take a herb,
(Windmill) disturbed my reverie and
wrote:

So if doctors want to improve the chances that a course of antibiotics
will be taken to completion, it will be best to explain why rather than
relying on the doctor-is-God idea.

Do you think doctors will have the time to educate each of their
patients about antibiotic resistance? Many of the public have the
intellect of those in the Vicky Pryce jury. How would a doctor deal
with those dullards.

I'm sure you don't necessarily and automatically do everything an
expert tells you, not at least unless given reasons.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. If I go to an expert, I DO do what I am
told/advised...that is why I went to them and not to get 'educated'.

Twaddle. I expect the expert to understand that, for the most part, I'm
as intelligent as he is. And that he can take the time to translate his
jargon into layman's terms. We're talking health here, not quantum
physics. If the "expert" can't do that, it merely means he has not a
proper grasp of the subject.

And, from a practical standpoint, I am far more likely to remember the
instructions from an 'expert' if I understand the reasons for it. *I'm
sure I am not alone in this.

Agreed, I much prefer to understand something in principle so that I can
answer my own questions, rather than to be told the answer on a case by
case basis.

The sensible approach is to find out from the person you are advising
what sort of answer they want. If they are not detail people, who just
wants to be told what to do, then fine. If on the other had the seeker
of advice indicates they are bright enough to understand the fuller
picture, and will be able to learn something from it, then let them have
the detail - or at least enough to deal with the particular line of
questioning.

It particularly annoys me when some types of 'expert' seem to
deliberately conceal the reasons for their advice.

Some seem to think it equates to job security... my experience suggests
the reverse, since being more open about "why" *engenders more trust in
future.

Exactly. *I have lost trust in solictors as a result of this. *I'm
sure there are many good ones but, too many times, I have wasted
time/money/etc and come out of an appointment knowing no more than
when I went in. *I particularly hate it when all they will say is
statements beginning with "you could try"

Anagram for "solicitor"?

Clitoris.

Well near enough. ;-)

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On 25/02/2013 18:29, harry wrote:

Anagram for "solicitor"?

Clitoris.

Well near enough. ;-)

O

O


OOOOOOOOOOO

:-)

--
Rod

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

On 25/02/2013 18:37, polygonum wrote:
On 25/02/2013 18:29, harry wrote:

Anagram for "solicitor"?

Clitoris.

Well near enough. ;-)

O

O


OOOOOOOOOOO

:-)

Can't imagine having that much fun playing with a solicitor ;-)

(then again, being one does not preclude ownership of the other I guess!)


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

Andy Champ writes:

On 23/02/2013 15:07, Windmill wrote:
There might be some question about the language(s) which will evolve
(Txtish? Txtese?), but they will be able to communicate in writing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_language

I'd always heard txtspk, but it seems there are many others.

I'd think the dominant one is likely to be similar, at least slightly,
to either English or Chinese.

--
Windmill, Use t m i l l
J.R.R. Tolkien:- @ O n e t e l . c o m
All that is gold does not glister / Not all who wander are lost

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

"Arfa Daily" writes:



"Andy Champ" wrote in message
.uk...
On 23/02/2013 15:07, Windmill wrote:
There might be some question about the language(s) which will evolve
(Txtish? Txtese?), but they will be able to communicate in writing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_language

I'd always heard txtspk, but it seems there are many others.

Andy


Thing is, the kids don't use much text speak nowadays - or so mine tell me -
as most of the phones that they use are now smartphones with touch screens
and full qwerty keyboards, so they just type the whole words exactly as they
would on a normal sized keyboard.

Even better!


--
Windmill, Use t m i l l
J.R.R. Tolkien:- @ O n e t e l . c o m
All that is gold does not glister / Not all who wander are lost

TOT - if the lied about the beef being horse meat.......
 

In message , Windmill
writes
Andy Champ writes:

On 23/02/2013 15:07, Windmill wrote:
There might be some question about the language(s) which will evolve
(Txtish? Txtese?), but they will be able to communicate in writing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_language

I'd always heard txtspk, but it seems there are many others.

I'd think the dominant one is likely to be similar, at least slightly,
to either English or Chinese.



I read an article recently that said that inggris has reached critical
mass - it has reached the point where no other language will overtake it
--
geoff