help me figure this one out

steve_inhidingsteve_inhiding Posts: 41
edited December 2007 in A Moving Train
Amy plans Christmas 'blow out'

http://www.metro.co.uk/fame/article.html?in_article_id=79777&in_page_id=7

"Friends say the heroine and cocaine addict will stage a festive binge for her pals at her new East London pad in Bow."

Now I'm 99% sure Amy isn't into heroin (note the spelling) and just as sure that she has used cocaine. Is the spelling of heroine here a clever way to make things sound worse than they are, thus gaining more readers? Or is it just shoddy journalism? The more I read it, the more confused I become.

ps, this is more just for my own amusement. I'm really not that bothered either way.

Cheers,
Steve
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • She'll probably end up killing herself on the stuff. If anyone, she's a prime candidate for an overdose. What a waste of talent.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • NoKNoK Posts: 824
    So you prefer to discuss what kind of drugs Amy Whine-house takes than a novel scientific discovery related to sexual behaviour.

    "All Encompassing Trip"... look into it.
  • KannKann Posts: 1,146
    NoK wrote:
    So you prefer to discuss what kind of drugs Amy Whine-house takes than a novel scientific discovery related to sexual behaviour.

    That discovery is a bit overrated. It took the authors a combination of gene switching and drugs to get a positive result, all this to state "This fundamentally changes how we think about this behaviour".
    To try to implicate that such a mecanism can be extrapolated to infinitely more complex animals such as mammals is an intellectual fraud. Fruit flies are a much too simple genetic model.
  • tybirdtybird Posts: 17,388

    Now I'm 99% sure Amy isn't into heroin (note the spelling) and just as sure that she has used cocaine. Is the spelling of heroine here a clever way to make things sound worse than they are,
    Cheers,
    Steve
    Heroin=a drug
    heroine=a female hero

    at least, in the U.S.
    All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a thousand enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, prince with the swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed.
  • NoKNoK Posts: 824
    Kann wrote:
    That discovery is a bit overrated. It took the authors a combination of gene switching and drugs to get a positive result, all this to state "This fundamentally changes how we think about this behaviour".
    To try to implicate that such a mecanism can be extrapolated to infinitely more complex animals such as mammals is an intellectual fraud. Fruit flies are a much too simple genetic model.

    Overrated or not is your own view. Its a novel scientific discovery. Science works in small steps, scientists don't just wake up one day and get enlightened.

    "To test this, researchers genetically altered the synapse strength, independent of the GB. They also gave flies drugs to change the synapse strength."

    It wasn't a combination of mutations and drugs. The mutations and drugs are independent experiments which confirmed each other. In the first instance the genetic mutations caused the flies to change sexual preference. They hypothesised that the flies were experiencing higher synapse strength so they gave them drugs which altered their synapses and their hypothesis was right. Judging by what you typed you seem to not understand the actual study yet you labelled it as overrated :rolleyes:

    Plus the behaviour was not extrapolated to complex animals such as mammals.

    "GB sends out a neurotransmitter called glutamate to brain cells, which can alter the strength of the synapses that play a key role determining human and animal behaviour."

    This is the only place the connection is made and it is valid. There is no exaggeration here.

    Fruit flies may be a simple genetic model but that is how all science starts with simple genetic models. You don't get ethical approval to fuck around with mammals until you've shown to a great extent you can back your work in simple genetic models.

    Anyways this isn't the thread to debate this. This one discusses which drugs whiney likes.
  • tybird wrote:
    Heroin=a drug
    heroine=a female hero

    at least, in the U.S.

    This is what I was trying to highlight. I really just want people to give their opinions as to whether the media are using this ambiguity the "sell" extra copies or whether it was simply a typo.

    Deliberate or not.
    Discuss.

    Cheers,
    Steve
  • KannKann Posts: 1,146
    NoK wrote:
    Overrated or not is your own view. Its a novel scientific discovery. Science works in small steps, scientists don't just wake up one day and get enlightened.
    It has nothing novel as similar results were already found on the same model. I understand that science does not work with big gaps, but this is not nove. And the "This fundamentally changes how we think about this behaviour" was a little too dramatic for me. Sorry.
    Judging by what you typed you seem to not understand the actual study yet you labelled it as overrated :rolleyes:
    It seems I overread that part, my bad. However, its the conclusions I found overrated, and still do. I went to see the original article to see if I had missed something. The abstract states:"Genderblind (gb) mutant males showed no alteration in heterosexual courtship or copulation, but were attracted to normally unappealing male species"...
    Fruit flies may be a simple genetic model but that is how all science starts with simple genetic models. You don't get ethical approval to fuck around with mammals until you've shown to a great extent you can back your work in simple genetic models.
    What bothered me was the "I never thought we'd be able to do that sort of thing, because sexual orientation is supposed to be hard-wired", it may well be so in fruit flies but his statement seemed to speak for all living specie.
    Anyways this isn't the thread to debate this. This one discusses which drugs whiney likes.
    The subject of this debate wasn't interesting, I actually agreed with you on that point.
  • flywallyflyflywallyfly Posts: 1,453
    Kann wrote:
    That discovery is a bit overrated. It took the authors a combination of gene switching and drugs to get a positive result, all this to state "This fundamentally changes how we think about this behaviour".
    To try to implicate that such a mecanism can be extrapolated to infinitely more complex animals such as mammals is an intellectual fraud. Fruit flies are a much too simple genetic model.

    I think she has fruit flies in her big hair.
  • Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • ugh, part of me is slightly sad for this trainwreck of a woman. She's such a mess. Who plans a "blowout" and publicizes it before going into rehab???? Hopefully she doesn't kill herself. She seriously needs an intervention.

    But, knowing addicts and having a very good friend being a heroin addict I know how difficult it is to truly kick it AND get through to them, unless they want to stop it's impossible.

    She's too young and so talented. Every time you see a picture of her she's just a mess. So sad. She doesn't want to stop and it's obvious from that statement.
    "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. "
    Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

    I saw Hard To Imagine LIVE at MSG!
  • NoK wrote:
    Overrated or not is your own view. Its a novel scientific discovery. Science works in small steps, scientists don't just wake up one day and get enlightened.


    I understand this thread is not about this subject, but I wanted to point out if it were really true that Health science preformed on less complex organisms was the best way to correct problems in humans then we would all be living to 200 years old right now.

    We can cure cancer in rats and we have mapped out the brain of a cat, but we are no closer to the cure for the common cold.




    You have to ask your self:

    "Are you a man, or are you a mouse?" ~Jello/Ministry~
    I hate quotations. Tell me what you know.
    ~Ralph Waldo Emerson~

    The Tie-Dye Lady is HOT!!!
  • NoKNoK Posts: 824
    I understand this thread is not about this subject, but I wanted to point out if it were really true that Health science preformed on less complex organisms was the best way to correct problems in humans then we would all be living to 200 years old right now.

    We can cure cancer in rats and we have mapped out the brain of a cat, but we are no closer to the cure for the common cold.




    You have to ask your self:

    "Are you a man, or are you a mouse?" ~Jello/Ministry~

    When exactly did I say "health science performed on less complex organisms was the best way to correct problems in humans"?
  • NoKNoK Posts: 824
    Kann wrote:
    It has nothing novel as similar results were already found on the same model. I understand that science does not work with big gaps, but this is not nove. And the "This fundamentally changes how we think about this behaviour" was a little too dramatic for me. Sorry.


    It seems I overread that part, my bad. However, its the conclusions I found overrated, and still do. I went to see the original article to see if I had missed something. The abstract states:"Genderblind (gb) mutant males showed no alteration in heterosexual courtship or copulation, but were attracted to normally unappealing male species"...


    What bothered me was the "I never thought we'd be able to do that sort of thing, because sexual orientation is supposed to be hard-wired", it may well be so in fruit flies but his statement seemed to speak for all living specie.

    I don't recall similar research identifying GB gene mutations leading to homosexual behaviour in fruit flies and then identifying the cause as changing synapse strength. I don't work with fruit flies so I might have missed readying about this research. I know there are studies studying the behaviour in flies already but none that have gone to isolating a specific gene involved. I say "a specific gene" involved because there will be more most likely and that answers:

    "Genderblind (gb) mutant males showed no alteration in heterosexual courtship or copulation, but were attracted to normally unappealing male species"

    Their results are not a direct switch from heterosexual to homosexual but a switch from heterosexual to bisexual which makes it even more interesting if you tell me.

    I don't know what the guy is referring to when he states "I never thought we'd be able to do that sort of thing, because sexual orientation is supposed to be hard-wired". It is too general of a statement to really bother me. If he had said something actually referring to humans and mammals then I would see your point.

    Finally, I do wanna mention that this is a newspaper article and things will most likely get exaggerated to strike interest in the article. Like: "This fundamentally changes how we think about this behaviour". You have to go back to the real research like the abstract or the whole article in order to see what the authors have stated. Its true it doesn't fundamentally change how we think about this behaviour because many already think there is a genetic background to it. Selling the science if you tell me.
    Kann wrote:
    The subject of this debate wasn't interesting, I actually agreed with you on that point.

    Classic.
  • Overrated or not is your own view. Its a novel scientific discovery

    Sorry I cut your quote to soon.


    This is what I got out of your previous post. Here in the US we have become almost mesmerized by science done on animals but our over all health has not improved. We rely to much on what drug scientist can come up with to cure toe nail fungus or stapling our stomachs to loose weight then actually taking steps to make our self’s healthier.

    I apologize if that was not what you were trying to get across.
    I hate quotations. Tell me what you know.
    ~Ralph Waldo Emerson~

    The Tie-Dye Lady is HOT!!!
  • NoKNoK Posts: 824
    Overrated or not is your own view. Its a novel scientific discovery

    Sorry I cut your quote to soon.


    This is what I got out of your previous post. Here in the US we have become almost mesmerized by science done on animals but our over all health has not improved. We rely to much on what drug scientist can come up with to cure toe nail fungus or stapling our stomachs to loose weight then actually taking steps to make our self’s healthier.

    I apologize if that was not what you were trying to get across.

    No I agree with you when it comes to health but I think that is more a problem with society than science.

    I think things like plastic surgery are around because society demands it which goes back to the point that it is more society than science.

    Some things cannot be cured with a healthy lifestyle and that is where research comes. I don't like taking medication myself even though I work in the field. You know scientists can't experiment on mammals before they've done a lot of work on smaller genetic models. You know how many ethical approval papers you have to sign to work with primates.
  • NoK wrote:
    No I agree with you when it comes to health but I think that is more a problem with society than science.

    I think things like plastic surgery are around because society demands it which goes back to the point that it is more society than science.

    Some things cannot be cured with a healthy lifestyle and that is where research comes. I don't like taking medication myself even though I work in the field. You know scientists can't experiment on mammals before they've done a lot of work on smaller genetic models. You know how many ethical approval papers you have to sign to work with primates.


    We agree then.

    But I do not want to make this another sicko thread. I do not think the author of the post meant it to go in that direction. It is more directed towards illicit drugs.
    I hate quotations. Tell me what you know.
    ~Ralph Waldo Emerson~

    The Tie-Dye Lady is HOT!!!
Sign In or Register to comment.