calr751 comments

kickboard Aug. 06, 2013 - 09:40AM JST

WTF? Care to elaborate?

from Wikipedia:

Measuring toxicity[edit source]

Toxicity can be measured by its effects on the target (organism, organ, tissue or cell). Because individuals typically have different levels of response to the same dose of a toxin, a population-level measure of toxicity is often used which relates the probabilities of an outcome for a given individual in a population. One such measure is the LD50. When such data does not exist, estimates are made by comparison to known similar toxic things, or to similar exposures in similar organisms. Then, "safety factors" are added to account for uncertainties in data and evaluation processes. For example, if a dose of toxin is safe for a laboratory rat, one might assume that one tenth that dose would be safe for a human, allowing a safety factor of 10 to allow for interspecies differences between two mammals; if the data are from fish, one might use a factor of 100 to account for the greater difference between two chordate classes (fish and mammals). Similarly, an extra protection factor may be used for individuals believed to be more susceptible to toxic effects such as in pregnancy or with certain diseases. Or, a newly synthesized and previously unstudied chemical that is believed to be very similar in effect to another compound could be assigned an additional protection factor of 10 to account for possible differences in effects that are probably much smaller. Obviously, this approach is very approximate; but such protection factors are deliberately very conservative, and the method has been found to be useful in a deep variety of applications.

Assessing all aspects of the toxicity of cancer-causing agents involves additional issues, since it is not certain if there is a minimal effective dose for carcinogens, or whether the risk is just too small to see. In addition, it is possible that a single cell transformed into a cancer cell is all it takes to develop the full effect (the "one hit" theory).

It is more difficult to determine the toxicity of chemical mixtures than a pure chemical, because each component displays its own toxicity, and components may interact to produce enhanced or diminished effects. Common mixtures include gasoline, cigarette smoke, and industrial waste. Even more complex are situations with more than one type of toxic entity, such as the discharge from a malfunctioning sewage treatment plant, with both chemical and biological agents.

99.99%

I doubt it. it all depends on how you do the calculation.

“Kirobo will remember Mr Wakata’s face so it can recognize him when they reunite up in space,”

I doubt it.

fresh water is a limited resource in south Africa. do not throw it away. you can save a lot of children with a bucket of fresh water.

“I want to make it clear that the Abe cabinet will never view the Nazi government positively,”

what about those war criminals enshrined at yasukuni shrine?

The coolness of goldfish

this isn't cool at all. is this safe for goldfish? I don't see water filters running. I don't see air pump. it requires a lot of work to take care of goldfish. you have to know biology and water chemistry. you have to keep ph at certain level and maintain the balance of good bacteria. you need to have serious commitment/time/money if you want to make your goldfish happy. you are not looking at the coolness of goldfish. you are looking at how they kill goldfish slowly.

Fireworks

they look pretty but they are also very dangerous. so many toxic chemicals are released from fireworks like potassium perchlorate, cadmium, strontium, aluminum, dioxins and so on. some of them are radioactive and carcinogens. potassium perchlorate is know to cause cancer and thyroid diseases in humans/animals. they also contaminate water/soil and creep into human food chain.

paulinusa Jul. 23, 2013 - 08:52AM JST

Being synchronized is something the Japanese should be really good at.

the first girl from right has her mouth open weirdly. its completely out of sync with the rest. its not clear whether she is trying to smile or trying to scream or desperately trying to take in some air. it looks very confusing.

anybody knows why this is considered art?

Higgs boson creates what scientists call a “sticky” energy field that acts as a drag on other particles and gives them mass, without which particles wouldn’t hold together — and there would be no matter.

sounds like a bullshit. does it mean these particles don't have mass? then how do they know some particles are 1000 times heavier than other particles? stupid people.

he doesn't look like abe. I think abe sent a body double.

Cube-shaped watermelons

what are the long term health effects of these strange looking watermelons? altering the natural growing process must have some unknown effects on these funny looking water melons. do they have any bad effects on children's health/brain? thorough investigations should be conducted before they are put on the market. I wish they leave the watermelons alone and change refrigerator design/shape instead.

smithinjapan Jul. 14, 2013 - 06:51PM JST

A stunning picture

what a fantastic display of Japanese artistic quality and craftsmanship!

it is clearly shows that the Japanese people love and honor the war criminals with all their heart and soul.

better than arlington national cemetery.

it really inspires me to become a war criminal.

traffic barrier

I have to admit that the pink bunnies look cute. but this is supposed to be a traffic barrier. the main purpose of a traffic barrier is to alert people about the dangers on the road. so usually orange color is used for this purpose because orange color is highly visible to human eyes. pink is considered a very confusing color for this purpose. so not a good choice for a traffic barrier. pink bunnies might cause confusion among children on the street thinking that they are toys but not a traffic barrier. this is very dangerous and would definitely defeat the purpose of using a traffic barrier. in conclusion pink bunnies are very poor choice for a traffic barrier.

smithinjapan Jul. 12, 2013 - 08:55AM JST

I'm not surprised you'd see a woman and ask if she might be a man.

when I see a woman, then I will know. but here on the picture, I don't see a woman. I see a person who has some features that could be found on other women. I can't prove that this person is really a female only by looking at the picture. can you?

papigiulio Jul. 12, 2013 - 08:43AM JST

such nicely shaved legs and long hair.

you don't know if this person really has such nicely shaved legs. you are looking at a photo. it all depends on the shooting condition. too much light and a little bit of blur by out of focus shot can make any human legs look nicely shaved. if you are using a digital camera, then the image will be distorted further by poor compression algorithms.

JeffLee Jul. 12, 2013 - 06:26AM JST

and the girl in front had at least 2 layers of clothing on.

how do you know this person is a female? by just looking at the picture, there doesn't seem to be anything definitive to indicate that this person is a female. what makes you think this person is a female?

cleo Jul. 10, 2013 - 11:18AM JST

they can tell with some accuracy what your last meal was and when you ate it

only when they get lucky. lol.

the scientists do know quite a bit about the 'chemical reactions' that go on inside the stomach.

do they know if mammoths had different stomach that did different chemical reactions that nobody knows about? ha ha ha.

Tokiyo Jul. 10, 2013 - 10:43AM JST

I assume the earth is 2013 years old to you as well?

the earth never gets old.

SimondB Jul. 10, 2013 - 10:22AM JST

plenty of cave paintings of mammoths.

cave paintings are not science.

Other mammothshave been found frozen with vegitation in their stomachs.

do you think this is scientifically possible? if they had teeth, they would chew vegetation first. then inside stomach, some chemical reaction that we don't know would damage the chewed vegetation. to stop the chemical reaction instantly, they have to go through an instant death. and then followd by instant preservation of the dead body. it just doesn't add up.

Meguroman Jul. 10, 2013 - 08:53AM JST

not so different from an elephant, they know a lot about the physiology of mammoths.

and how do they know that? the problem is nobody saw a live mammoth. since nobody saw a live mammoth, nobody knows what a live mammoth looks like. then how do they even know what they have is a mammoth? and how can you possibly find out anything about the physiology of mammoths since they are all dead? it doesn't seem right to make any conclusion about a dead mammoth or whatever the thing is based on the physiology of an elephant. we have live elephants that we can take a sample population from but we don't have any population of live mammoths. it just doesn't seem scientific at all.

female woolly mammoth

this doesn't make sense. how do they know its sex since no one ever seen a live female/male mammoth?? it could be a male. or maybe they were asexual. nobody knows.

it can recognize a child waving to it

not so impressive. it can be done with any laptop. simple image processing: I'=I(t+1)-I(t)

Kumi Koda sizzles on cover of new CD

meh, too much photoshop.

paid respects at the Yasukuni shrine, which honors 2.5 million Japanese war dead including war criminals.

this doesn't make sense. why do Japanese people honor war criminals?

The Osprey were observed flying after 10 p.m. on Monday

how can you see anything clearly after 10pm??

Alex80 Jun. 15, 2013 - 08:00AM JST

still healthier than a hamburger

pasta and hamburgers are both bad for health. fruits and veggies are good for health.

lucabrasi Jun. 14, 2013 - 11:13AM JST

Goggles

yeah something like that.

Hide Suzuki Jun. 14, 2013 - 10:44AM JST

complains about everything about everything

it's a dirty job but somebody's gotta do it.

a 11 gram toy

well lets be honest. it could injure a child. think about it. a small motorized toy mobile in the air with fast spinning blades. you would definitely want to put a safety helmet on your child.

this doesn't make sense. a small motorized toy with blades spinning fast will become a great danger to children, especially to their eyes. according to us consumer product safety commission, 262,300 children(under 15) were injured by toys in 2011 and some died. about 40% of the injuries were in the head/face area. when children play with motorized toys, you can expect the worst for sure. maybe the company should come up with some kind of a safety helmet to go with this toy to protect eyes and face.