News roundup

Monday, July 5th, 2004 09:35 pm
robinturner: (Default)
[personal profile] robinturner
In a day dominated by news of Microsoft's appeal against its conviction of crimes against humanity and Internet Explorer causing holes in Slobodan Milosovitch, some of the more important news may have passed you by.

American English and tastes in censorship have definitely arrived in Britain. The British advertising watchdog, OFCOM has banned an advert for faggots on the grounds that the term is offensive (I should point out for the benefit of American readers that in Britain a faggot is a kind of food). The company claim that no innuendo was intended, though it's hard to believe that with a line like "I've nothing against faggots, I just don't fancy them." Still, it seems to be over-reacting, considering that OFCOM received a grand total of three letters of complaint. And this only a week after Dick Cheney demonstrated his mastery of political repartee with the comment "go fuck yourself". This makes Berlusconi's unfortunate remarks about concentration camp guards seem like the epitome of Churchillian political wit.

Speaking of auto-impregnation, the Telegraph reports that girls as young as fourteen are seeking fertility treatment. Four of them, to be precise - the rest is extrapolation: if four teeny-boppers at a clinic in Swindon have asked for IVF in the past year, then either thousands are doing so across the nation, or Swindon is not the kind of place you want to send your daughter to school. Perhaps Swindon is getting back to traditional values: in most of the world and most of history, fourteen is a pretty normal age to have your first child (the Spartans were considered strange because their young women didn't marry until they were eighteen).

The sport for modern Spartans, cage-fighting, is also causing some controversy in the UK, with calls for it to be banned. Despite the dramatic name, which calls to mind Thunderdome, most of these events are, IMHO, a lot safer than ice hockey or mountaineering, so I am rather skeptical of claims that it leads to brain damage. I could make some snide comments about activities which I think are more likely to cause brain damage, but on to our last item ...

Surgeon's have just performed the first "ex-vivo" liver operation. In other words, they extracted the patient's liver, removed a tumour, and re-inserted the organ. This strikes me as such a sensible way to do surgery, I'm surprised no one has done it before. Presumably there are very good medical reasons why, but it just strikes me as common sense: whip it out, clean it up, put it back.

Date: 2004-07-05 12:26 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tristan-moore.livejournal.com
In other words, they extracted the patient's liver, removed a tumour, and re-inserted the organ. This strikes me as such a sensible way to do surgery, I'm surprised no one has done it before. Presumably there are very good medical reasons why, but it just strikes me as common sense: whip it out, clean it up, put it back.

It would be a sensible way to do surgery if there were not so many nerves involved between the working organ and the brain. Its a very tricky procedure to remove an organ/fix it/ and put it back. The liver (if my memory serves me right) is the only organ in the body capable of totally regenerating before it deteriorates to a certain point. Therefore, its no surprise why the liver would be the first organ to be removed, cleaned up, and put back. Unfortunatly the nerves and tissues attaching the other organs to the body that discuss how that organ is going to work with the brain, stop talking once theyre cut. Very rarely would most of the organs go back to communicating with the brain once removed.

Date: 2004-07-05 12:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tristan-moore.livejournal.com
Very rarely would most of the organs go back to communicating with the brain once removed. This is largely to do with the nerves involved that are necessary to make them work. you can't just "sew nerves back together" and expect the organ to start working again immediatly. Unfortunatly, once an organ dies it has to be removed.

Date: 2004-07-05 01:03 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] bram.livejournal.com


















What can I say to such noncensical news? What would trouble me is if 14 year olds were *given* such treatment. 14 year olds are nuts enough to think they'll get such.

I thought "faggots" were piles of wood for burning.

Also, if Rev. Moon crowns himself messiah maybe Cheney thinks his critics can do self-action as well.

I dance in a dramatically named "cage" and all its given me is temporal lobe epilepsy. Go figure!





















Date: 2004-07-06 10:42 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] wabi.livejournal.com
So what exactly are faggots?

(Now that is a question I never thought I'd be asking!)

Date: 2004-07-06 11:14 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] solri.livejournal.com
A large, soggy meatball, usually in some kind of sauce. Spicy by the bland standards of British cuisine.

Date: 2004-07-08 07:53 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] bram.livejournal.com
Now, I have a friend who plays the oboe. Turns out it's also called ein "Heldenfaggot" and you better believe this friend of mine got grief in high school for a t-shirt announcing her playing of the Heldenfaggot.

So there you go. Heldenfaggot=reed instrument. The stereotypical homosexual lisps from playing reed instruments?

Date: 2004-07-13 01:52 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sjcarpediem.livejournal.com
I thought a faggot was a cigarette in Britain...?

Date: 2004-07-13 02:49 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] solri.livejournal.com
A cigarette is a fag. I suppose at one time it was short for "faggot", but no one thinks of it like that.

Date: 2004-07-13 04:20 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sjcarpediem.livejournal.com
A'ight, cool.

Profile

robinturner: (Default)
Robin Turner

June 2014

M T W T F S S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
232425 26272829
30      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags