ProHypster

Well at least they are not tazering homeless people now.

????

 

 

Anyways, Doomshepherd, we shouldn't go outside because there is a possibility something bad will happen?

We shouldn't make firends with strangers because they could be criminals?

 

Everything we do is a risk, stopping us from doing everything is very unnecessary.

What happened, happened. Nonetheless humans can't live without sport because we are humans. All we are given in this life is freedom, sport disasters like that one will take freedom from some people away, banning sports will take freedom from everybody away. Do you really want to take everybody's freedom away so that everybody has guaranteed security? Guaranteed security in which they can't do shit because that is the safest way to stay alive?

 

What is living if you can't have freedom? Living isn't security my friend.

 

I believe security should go only as far as when the actions we do directly harm another person mentally.

 

So if I punch you its ok?

 

Also Soccer and Rugby have riot issues -.-

That would be harming me mentally if you didn't read.

That is due to the fact that theo or God is a very vaguely defined word. In some defintions it's almost certain that god exists so one can assume it as a fact.

For example I consider myself monotheist because I believe that this world is guided by some force towards something and that for me is god.

But right now I am talking about an omniscent intellectual spirit that created us which is unknowable.

Electrode Experiment Shows Promise as a Paralyzed Man Stands

 

A young man paralyzed by an injury to his spinal cord has regained the ability to stand for short periods, take steps with help and move his legs and feet at will, with the help of an electrical stimulator implanted in his lower back.

Enlarge This Image

 

Rob Summers, 25, paralyzed for five years, regained some ability to stand after surgeons implanted electrodes in the lower part of his back to stimulate his spinal cord.

Related

 

*

Times Topic: Paralysis

 

The device is experimental and not available to other patients, and because it has been studied in only one person it is not known whether it would work as well in other people with different types of spinal injury.

 

But the researchers say that scientifically the work is an important advance, because it shows that a bit of electrical stimulation can unlock the ability of the spinal cord to control movement — even if its signals from the brain have been cut off by injury. Similar findings had been made in animals.

 

“It’s been thought that the brain controls all our movement,” said Susan Harkema, research director at the Kentucky Spinal Cord Injury Research Center in Louisville and the lead author of an article about the research being published online on Thursday in the journal Lancet. “But the spinal cord is the primary controller.”

 

Another author, V. Reggie Edgerton, a leading expert at the University of California, Los Angeles, on animal research on paralysis, said: “People think everything below the injury dies and is nonfunctional. But in fact in most injuries, the damage is just to a few segments, and the neurons below it remain intact.

 

“These neurons are very smart. They know what to do. They play a major role in your normal movement.”

 

A researcher not involved in the study, Dr. W. Zev Rymer, vice president of research at the Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago, said: “From a scientific and research standpoint, it’s outstanding. Will it make a difference in the lives of many people with spinal cord injury? I don’t know yet.”

 

Animal studies had suggested that signals from the brain were not needed to control the details of movement, but just to activate the spinal cord.

 

The man in the study was Rob Summers, now 25, who has been paralyzed since he was hit by a car when he was 20. He lost all motor control in his legs, but retained some feeling, and could use his hands and arms. He had been an athlete — a baseball player for Oregon State University — and was determined to walk and even play ball again.

 

At the center in Louisville, he underwent 170 sessions over 26 months in which he was placed in a harness and therapists worked to helped him stand and make stepping motions on a treadmill. He made almost no progress.

 

Then, in December 2009, surgeons implanted electrodes in the lower part of his back to stimulate his spinal cord. The electrodes are attached to a pulse generator, similar to a pacemaker, which is also fully implanted and controlled by a remote device outside the body. The device was switched on for about two hours a day, for therapy sessions.

 

On his third day of electrical stimulation, Mr. Summers managed to stand on his own. He did not rise from a sitting position, but managed to support his own weight briefly when the harness that had been holding him was gradually released.

 

“It was unbelievable,” he said in a telephone interview. “There was so much going through my head at that point; I was amazed, was in shock.”

 

Dr. Harkema was surprised, too. “It certainly fits with the theory we were testing, but we didn’t expect it to happen this early,” she said. Mr. Summers went through hundreds more therapy sessions and began to gain strength and muscle mass, and his overall health improved. He still hopes to walk someday.

 

Dr. Harkema said that four more patients would receive electrode implants, but that the research had a long way to go.

 

The study was paid for by the National Institutes of Health and the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation.

Could this be the million dollar advance?????!

I'm not the one to tell you what you should drink and what you shouldn't, what you should smoke and what you shouldn't, or otherwise tell you whether you can put something in your body or not. I'm a liberal.

 

I know alcohol is only dangerous in large doses (unless, of course, one gets behind the wheel of a car), but again, it's far more harmful than marijuana (which, apparently, you can't OD on).

Actually that quote was misleading, most of the post was directed to Alphabetagamma ?

The Nuclear weapon is really going to kill us all sometime....

We just don't know when.

The most dangerous so far is the countries in a dictatorship with nukes.

I mean how long until another Mao Zhe Dung appears... with his retard logic....ready to click that button.

And the worst part is, there's nothing you can do about it since the technology is out.

MAD will not stop a psychopath.

There's a "slight" different between marijuana and methamphetamine, too. Cigarettes and alcohol are far more harmful than marijuana.

Cigarettes are like breathing smoke in, apparently they don't really make you even feel better or more relaxed, but really the opposite, more stressful, and they are kind of addictive so I'm never going to smoke nicotine myself, but I would allow you to smoke for example, because I am willing to give you the freedom of that, just don't harm my friend "Personwhodoesn'tlikecigarettes"

Alcohol is only dangerous in big doses actually. And the worst proven part of it physically is actually the high amount of cholestorol and a mixture that is bad to your kidney (IF YOU DON'T PLAY SPORTS LIKE ME DUH!) which is found in every fast food too.. On other dangers, apparently some bodies take in alcohol differently then others. And yes, I do drink occasionally. Never threw up or had a hangover in my life yet and I've had vodka after a martini.... the thing is I'm not stupid enough to mix martini with orange juice like one of my friend did who threw up soon after... -_-...

Marijuana I don't know much about, but I know it can be used for medicine, if it approves of that it reallly shouldn't be banned, oh and it smells good.

Now to the point....how are you supposing we should classify which "slightly" different harmful things should be banned and which not, I suppose you are going to be the one who is going to tell me what I should drink and what I'm not

Well, I'm sorry if that was harsh, you may believe in karma but....well... if you don't get back what you gave and are going to wait for it... I have no control over you, whatever makes you happy, life is the pursuit of happiness after all, the happiest person in this world is a winner

That's okay. I don't expect to get everything I give back, but I do expect to get more out of life by giving.

And that worked for me so far

Life is so weird when I think deeper. It is such a bump to understand that I will probably not find out in my life what life is about and that it is possibly due to the fact that it's not about anything and that the question is merely a personal illusion. As far as I know the road to happiness is the only road that everyone takes, even suicides are done because of the illusion that there will be more happiness in death.

In any ways, I do not recommend anyone to think too long about life and the existence of self being, just think about what you have in life, it is much more practical and for some reason enjoyable, hence the conclusion that whatever made us did obviously not make us so that we understand those deep questions

Something I've thought about for some time and never really got it together well, it's a work in progress.

We know that in Holland they are currently discussing rights and piracy laws and whether they should just legalize software sharing for personal use since there is no control over it and move on.

The two main sides are of course "for software sharing" and "against software sharing". Now remember that if you are using whatever art you download for a Set (DJ Mix) or a showcase for money or on any commercial project you would still need to pay legitimately, this is checked by police then at parties, they check for some stats in the file, I don't even know how it works but they catch people nowadays and fine them as far as I know.

Well I've been thinking for a long time about how it could actually economically work if software sharing was legalized, since I can see the facts are problematic. I've noticed how hard it really is nowadays for new artists to make money. And how such few (often talentless and through commercialization) people dominate the whole market of genres.

I've been thinking why the government cannot give a steady sort of paycheck for all starting artists who legitimately work required hours as an "Artist". While concerts, live shows, showcases could be private money for the artists the government could collect a tax which will redistribute it to the artists and make sure ALL artists in need will get the appropriate salary from it. New Artists could get a fund.

This is my social idea of it, what do you think? I know it has it's flaws here and there especially since I don't know how much tax would be required and how the government would find out what the appropriate salary would be for each artist and that the government in many cases could not be trusted, but we are talking about a stable government here. And welfare in Germany for example has been fair so far hasn't it, in fact it's almost unfair TO the government...

Anyone else have a proposal how legal sharing in the future could work, please add because I do know my proposal is very unstable even ideologically , but it's just a thought.

Well, I'm sorry if that was harsh, you may believe in karma but....well... if you don't get back what you gave and are going to wait for it... I have no control over you, whatever makes you happy, life is the pursuit of happiness after all, the happiest person in this world is a winner

Offtopic:

Actually that's all very cool but I don't even think there is one person on earth who can truly call himself a gnostic theist/atheist....

But I guess you can call some a very hard believer.

Ontopic:

I have to say Kiev's winters are not like they used to be..... they are now sort of slushy... and they were very solid winters since the middle ages to the late 1990's.

Indeed, either change in climate is a quick sudden effect or we are contributing to global warming very badly.

The title says it all. Might be worth a laugh or two.

I was once taught how to make napalm

That.... is.... awesome....

Until I saw that video of how napalm actually looks like, and it's not a firy splitting explosion it's just a very constant fire. -__-

And by the way of from memory, for that you have to mix solid gas with plastic right ?

Great, other people don't care about you, so you shouldn't care about them.

Logical.

But think about it this way:

Reality is there is almost certainly no karma, generally people will be nice to you if you are nice to them but that doesn't mean they have to be, that's where the whole theory of karma even started... I for once never had any problems with any people, except for my own family occasionally which I try to simply avoid.

Listen, my friend, kindness is a good thing not even because it makes another person happy but because it should make you happier gradually and remove all the guilt you have. But kindness really doesn't cut it if you want to be popular or get something back in return. Are you a humorous person? A talkative person? A intelligent person who can talk about any subject? A sportive person? People tend to like and talk to those they can remember. Imagine a kind grandpa who is very boring to talk to...

On the other had are you sure you are kind for the reason of kindness? If you are kind specifically for someone else to be kind to you and you are act to obvious you shouldn't expect anything back.

The world can be unfair at times, but when unfairness kicks you in the ass you will give in to it's doctrine which merely consist of existing, and become unfair yourself?

See why people who are unfair are called losers? It's easier to be the bad guy than the good guy...

But as I said, in the end kindness should make you feel better on itself, if it doesn't maybe you should see a psychologist. (Hopefully that wasn't rude because here in Ukraine we say what we think and I'm just trying to help you)

If you really can't find anything in common with the people around you, move the hell out. A different culture can be the answer.

I'm against legalizing an industry that addicts people to poisons. Why can't companies form monopolies if they want too? Because they'd take advantage of people. Corporations can't be allowed to take advantage of people.

While you are at it, why don't we ban coca cola or cheeseburgers or hot tea too, I mean it kills people and leaves a lot of them injured.

Hot tea?

Researchers say that letting a hot beverage cool off for four minutes can substantially lower the risk of esophageal cancer.

 

According to Bloomberg, a team researching high esophageal cancer rates in northern Iran found that people who drank tea within two minutes of pouring it, or while it was more than 158 degrees Fahrenheit, had an “eightfold increased risk” of developing cancer of the esophagus. The study, which was published in the British Medical Journal, included 571 healthy people and 300 people with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

 

The study’s findings echo what researchers have suspected for years. A 1996 article on tea in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Consumer Magazine said that parts of China, Japan and Iran have higher rates of esophageal cancer, and noted the areas’ tea consumption.

 

The magazine quoted an FDA scientist, Joseph Betz, who said that theories were “bounced back and forth” over whether tea’s polyphenols or “habitual consumption of a very hot beverage” was responsible for the esophageal cancer rates.

Sounds scary doesn't it? Let's ban it.

The country of Mexico has been tearing itself apart with all of the drug-related violence occurring. The war isn't on some seventeen-year old lighting up a joint, but rather the money he paid that goes through an entire network of people who end up making mass graves in soccer fields because some guy became involved with the wrong people.

 

"The number of bodies pulled from two sets of clandestine graves -- one in the border state of Tamaulipas and the other in Durango state to the southwest -- is climbing toward 300 as violence in Mexico takes an often mind-numbing toll."

On the other hand the country of the netherlands has had athletic and economic prosperity since it's easy on drugs and prostitution reforms...

EDIT: Not to forget cultural prosperity

I would AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNG!

What would you do if Arnold Schwarzenegger became official Sob of 2011.

This is a pretty famous game.. and a sequel to the AoE series.

the only person we could harm physically (Not to say that it can heal/inspire mentally) is ourselves.

Second hand smoke? And what about the families of people who loose someone mentally/physically to drugs? Aren't they harmed too? Drugs take advantage of people's shortsightedness and/or selfishness.

If the person complains about his health due to second hand smoke the smoker shall not go close to where he is, thus making smoke areas and non smoke areas.

Problem solved.

While the people losing people due to drugs, that's just horseshit, it's not due to drugs they are losing them but due to the condition the person was in when starting to take these drugs. I don't believe I know one person who suffered due to the fact that he was "unaware" that the drug he took or the amount he took was certainly going to kill him/her or injure him/her.

And then since when do people own people??? It's not like the person who died was their property.

As I said, don't promote drugs, tell the dangers in school, go ahead, but legalize them.

While you are at it, why don't we ban coca cola or cheeseburgers or hot tea too, I mean it kills people and leaves a lot of them injured.

I think you've got to stop thinking you know better than the person himself what is best for him.

Most of us are mature enough and those who aren't should not take away others' freedom too.

In fact I've always thought there should be a maturity/stability test to pass before allowing anyone soft drugs/liquor, but that is just unnecessary horseshit, we cannot feel guilty for allowing someone's freedom to take his own life. We are not responsible for the self-security of others. Self security should be taught in schools, and at home not at the government level.

This is about people abusing their rights.

So Greece is in a crysis.... again.

I was there recently, aparently the locals don't care to much... they say, "germany will just give us more money"

And follow this. More than 20% of German citizens are unemployed, a very high unemployment rate, why you may ask a local, he would answer, "Why work as a plumber if you get welfare for the same amount of cash"

Does this happen in the USA?

Does this bother anyone else?

Yes.... why?

Why take away even more little freedom we have in which in any case the only person we could harm physically (Not to say that it can heal/inspire mentally) is ourselves.

It shall be legalized but not encouraged in my thinking. But I'm a liberal...

EEdobaba: Drug Traffic happens because Drugs are illegal.

Well at least they are not tazering homeless people now.

????

Anyways, Doomshepherd, we shouldn't go outside because there is a possibility something bad will happen?

We shouldn't make firends with strangers because they could be criminals?

Everything we do is a risk, stopping us from doing everything is very unnecessary.

What happened, happened. Nonetheless humans can't live without sport because we are humans. All we are given in this life is freedom, sport disasters like that one will take freedom from some people away, banning sports will take freedom from everybody away. Do you really want to take everybody's freedom away so that everybody has guaranteed security? Guaranteed security in which they can't do shit because that is the safest way to stay alive?

What is living if you can't have freedom? Living isn't security my friend.

I believe security should go only as far as when the actions we do directly harm another person mentally.

Ross's chart is behind Ross's progress, this is one weird sight... Still I enjoyed that video!!!

Thanks for bringing this topic up

This is by far one of the worst polls on this forum. Forgetting about Asia, Africa, South America.... (By the way do we even have any asians here on this forum :/ ?) If you were to do it euro-centric like you obviously did, at least you would put European countries by population first not the countries with the lowest population in Europe, thus Germany, Italy, Spain should be included. Then why did you put England, my educated guess tells me you are an american from english descent because you put U.S.A first and England second as the poll choices , besides you put U.S.A. there correctly, not like some people put it as "America". And then you suspicioulsy put english colonized countries which are close allies to the U.S.A. and must be known to most americans... then the rest of the countries starting with Russia of course because that is the "enemy" of the states .... anyway everything implies that you are from the U.S.A., is that correct? Well, the proper term is United Kingdom, sir. Another minus because you didn't put Ukraine as a choice :'(.......

Nice and hot!

UN-UN-UN

UN-UN-UN

UN-UN-UN

UNTZ-UNTZ-UNTZ

UNTZ-UNTZ-UNTZ

UN-UN-UN

Swoooooooosh

UNTZ-TSHUNTZ-UNTZ-TSHUNTZ

UNTZ-TSHUNTZ-UNTZ-TSHUNTZ

Swoosh

UNTZ-TSHUNTZ-UNTZ-TSHUNTZ

UNTZ-TSHUNTZ-UNTZ-TSHUNTZ

Swooooooooooosh

UNTZ-UNTZ-UNTZ

UNTZ-UNTZ-UNTZ

UN-UN-UN

UN-UN-UN

UN-UN-UN

One of my favies.

I always wondered where the hell the scientists could put the syringe since gordon is basically covered in the suit.... Unless they put it in his face :S