Measuring Pollution In Humans 423
CHaN_316 writes "Scientists have begun measuring pollutants in our body and the results sound like a chemical clean-up site. They've found things such as flame retardants, chemicals derived from DDTs, mercury, uranium, cotinine, and many more. The concern is a lot of this stuff is ending up in mother's milk. But hey, at least in the event of spontaneous combustion, I'll be partially protected."
Junkfood (Score:0, Funny)
Re:Prevention? Antidote? (Score:1, Funny)
What I find most interesting is that morticians (Score:5, Funny)
Live fast, eat a lot of antioxidant ladden potato chips, leave a durable, good looking (if somewhat corpulent) corpse.
Gives you more time for a clean dehydration as well, so you can make that trip to Orion in all your leathery splendor.
KFG
Hmm... (Score:1, Funny)
Bad idea (Score:2, Funny)
"Well, it's not good. Three, maybe four humans and there's no wind to blow them out to sea."
"You sick, sick man...."
Re:Hmm... (Score:1, Funny)
Careful (Score:0, Funny)
Shhhhhhh! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Prevention? Antidote? (Score:3, Funny)
DONT DO THAT!
Your body is 98% water! You'll drown!
Measuring Pollution In Humans? (Score:1, Funny)
Re:What I find most interesting is that morticians (Score:5, Funny)
What I find most interesting is that the morticians keep digging them up to check.
what a bunch of hooey! (Score:5, Funny)
Don't you hate it when people writing articles make up their own units? Whoever heard of measuring pollution in "humans"? This is pure bunk. Most useful units are standardized and published by ISO [www.iso.ch], and "humans" sure aren't listed anywhere I can see. And anyway, what's the symbol going to be, "hm"?
Standardized units are essential when doing studies which claim repeatability. Anything less is simply not science. I shudder to think what useless arguments this will produce, when a swedish team checks their pollution readings in scandinavian humans, while an italian teams does the same in latin humans. At sufficiently high readings, the difference could be several percent! Then there are issues of hair colour and hair style, which could even change the results of the experiment years after the fact! And don't get me started on the problems every time bell bottoms get back into fashion.
If you ask me, shoddy science begins with the wrong units. And humans are definitely the wrong unit to use in this case.
Re:Prevention? Antidote? (Score:5, Funny)
One of my favorite bits is the reference to "award-winning U.S. scientist Nathan Zohner" who showed that "scientist Nathan Zohner concluded that roughly 86 percent of the population supports a ban on dihydrogen monoxide." This is true [snopes.com].
If you're a
Re:Prevention? Antidote? (Score:1, Funny)
Re:you can overdose on water (Score:2, Funny)
Isn't that called drowning?
Re:Prevention? Antidote? (Score:3, Funny)
And how, precisely, is this a problem?
Oh wait. The women, too, you mean. Eew.