Qaueckernaeck comments

Qaueckernaeck. Thank you.

Panboo, where else would I live? Comparatively, I'm very happy about living in here. That of course does not preclude it can't be even better.

I am also surprised nobody mentioned smoking in restaurants yet! Even though in generally smokers here behave quite well, this should be BANNED!

What about ambulances in a hurry to get to the ER, chanting through megaphones, apologizing and asking for consideration, while driving ... 40 km/h tops. I'm sure the guy operating the megaphone in the passenger seat has more important things to do?

Hope I'll never have a heart-attack here... or anywhere else for that matter.

gotta love MADAME RiRi :D

Nicky Washida, does your husband check JT? If so you have a commendable marriage!

I'm with Combinibento on this one! Ivan Coughanoffalot, keep 'm coming!! As always I am enjoying Nicky Washida's honest insights too.

I would like to add that for a people as thoughtful and safe-conscious as the Japanese, the irresponsible overcrowding in subways during rush hour is mind-boggling on certain lines. It is unacceptably irresponsible--at some point an accident will happen and many more than necessary people will get injured. It's like putting 10 people in a car that fits 5 at times. I realize it is an difficult-to-circumvent problem, but cramping everybody in the train and shoganai-ing it away is NO solution.

I wonder what kind of embarrassing charade statements will be given out if the above happens.

JapanGal - I find it annoying that people that are guests here constantly complain about things they cannot change as it is not their culture.

I don't agree; you say we should not complain because we are guests--I say we provide a unique perspective and it is interesting to hear what we have to say; coming from other eastern, or western countries. On a side note; I am a lot more critical towards my own country than I am towards Japan, trust me, and moreover I would appreciate it if other people stated their issues with my country as to better understand my own background; even though it might now be always easy to hear and accept.

The joke is on jesus

Southsakai, without complaining, how would humanity know what to improve and work on?

– Early morning sun in summer (Canadian man) “It gets light at 4:30 a.m. There must be a better way to optimize sunlight efficiently.”

I agree, both during summer and winter, the only sunlight I get is when I go to work in the morning--it is slightly depressing. I suppose all the neon-signs are trying to make up for it.

I guess I should try some pachinko-therapy?

*be more specific

TelPorter please specific--when would you deem a complaint justified?

A Japan-related example would be nice.

Perhaps Noda & co should ask Germany for advice/help; oh wait ... god forbid!

One of the best aspects of Japan, for me, is the fact multiculturalism is virtually non-existent (in a social context, not technologically of course). At times I nearly feel bad for messing it up. Wish human nature was more lenient towards change and differencee; if we could sponge up different perspectives and ideas more easily and ignore/lay aside what we have been taught; multiculti would have a chance.

some14some - I second that!

Cleo I think you have some very good points there, thanks for the post!

NinjaDave I think genetic modification is a misnomer, regardless of what a wiki says, altering the genetic information of an organism via recombinant DNA would be best called genetic engineering. Notwithstanding it is a form of GM. Conversely, by exposing a plant to radiation or a mutagen many genetic modifications can be induced, but this is a more random and a non-targeted strategy, and this too should be considered a form of GM--but is distinct from genetic engineering.

In the case of the crop of the article, a mutagen was used to increase the amount of mutations that occur in a plant's DNA. Then they selected plants with desired traits. Therefore, to me this is a genetically modified plant, but not a genetically engineered plant. I believe it is very important to distinguish these two.

Moreover I think it is important for all of us to take Cleo's words to heart and force the industry to higher standards and more clarity. Rather than fooling us with misleading labels, clearly visible labels with careful descriptions and explanations should be provided for each product.

Cleo, I generally like your posts. Would you care to elaborate on your issue with genetically engineered crops? I agree that the genetically engineered crops and and selectively bred crops are technically not the same, but are they fundamentally not simply different means to the same end?

Genetic engineering relies on our knowledge of how a gene functions molecularly within a cell & organism, and by shuffling useful genes from one plant to another we can improve a certain trait of a crop/animal, in an agricultural context. Selective breeding is less based on our understanding of a plant's inner-workings, but by selecting plants with desired traits (as a result of natural/unnatural mutations that occur by chance) and crossing them with other variants we, quite similarly, try to improve certain traits of a crop/animal.

I think it is great that you don't want them, that is your choice to make of course. And I understand your concern, for example I am not happy about initiatives such as the engineered GloFish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glofish) myself.

Conversely, I want to stress that things are not simply black or white, and that it is important to realize that the same knowledge is being used to try and feed the world (millions are still starving on our planet) and to develop ways to treat diseases such as cancer, Alzheimer and Huntington's disease, via gene therapy--efforts that might deserve our support.

Nicky Washida, please don't worry. All cultured crops are already genetically modified via breeding/selection, from apples to potatoes. While traditional breeding relies on chance trait combinations/mutations and selection, here researchers have sped up the process by increasing the mutation rate in plants and selected those plants resilient to certain conditions or that had higher yields per plant. Bear in mind that mutations in general are a natural phenomenon.

I am not sure whether this comforts you but most of what you eat has probably been genetically modified in one way or another, excluding perhaps seaweed, wild fish and mammals that are not suitable for husbandry, like whales.

Gr-r-reat!

Please read what the author said, carefully (see quote below). Providing a proper context is critical for good comedy, irrespective of culture in general, but becomes even more important in case of cross-culture comedy.

Let's not get side-tracked and rage about American and British comedy, and get all confused about what is good and what is popular comedy. I love Japanese comedy as it is and am happy it is not SNL- or Monty Python-esque. If that was what I'd want, I'd be watching it instead. The "people hitting each other over the head with baseball caps after insulting them" does not make bad comedy per se, it's just an element.

It’s from this that we learn a lesson. Some people may argue that people’s sense of humor varies from culture to culture, others that in essence, comedy is a universal language. In the end, it’s all about walking a fine line balancing between not only what the audience knows, but also what they feel comfortable hearing.

Since the Tohoku disaster, I have had the feeling that I do not want to be apart from Japan.

I can understand that she prefers Japan over the US, as do I. But I don't see how the Tohoku disaster comes into play here. To me, using the Tohoku disaster in such an inappropriate context is appalling, yet she and so many others do so and get away with it.

In Tokyo, besides the extremely unsafe—and in fact by JR/Tokyo Metro supported—overcrowding during rush hour, it's as good as it can be. As long as nothing out of the ordinary happens, the Tokyo subway system is overall one of the finest in the world.

It's great to see that everyone feels so involved, my 2 cents;

Seashepard-esque antiwhaling activists should be criticized; their unlawful methods deserve as much!

Likewise, whaling in the ANTARCTIC, as supported by the Japanese government, should be deplored for operating under the false pretense of "research"; making whaling there in effect illegal.

Both these parties should be forced to cease and desist their actions immediately, and then lawfully dealt with, without interference of endless political filibustering. Everybody here is aware of the elephant in the room: both parties have crossed the line of what is true and rightful. The first government to truly deal with it as such and ACTS accordingly, will have my utmost respect.

There is no scientific reason to justify why a limited amount of commercial whaling can not be carried out

Great we agree, i too believe that a limited amount of commercial whaling is OK if they choose to do so. But keep in mind that commercial whaling in Japanese waters is OK, but it is not allowed in the Antarctic. The japanese have no business whaling in the Antarctic under false pretences e.g. Research. If you think they are doing great science, we have very different standards of quality and our discussion end here.

There is no scientific reason to justify why a limited amount of commercial whaling can not be carried out Great we agree. But keep in mind that commercial whaling in Japanese waters is OK, but it is not allowed in the Antarctic. The japanese have no business whaling in the Antarctic under false pretences e.g. Research. If you think they are doing great science, we have very different standards of quality and our discussion end here.

Heda_Madness, please indicate which publication and scientific finding justify whaling in the Antarctic, a International Whaling Commission assigned whale sanctuary.

I have no objections against whaling in Japanese waters; it is for Japan as a nation to decide its course and policy regarding these practises--hopefully there is enough transparancy regarding the whaling sector so that the general public can form their own opinion on these delicate matters.

However, the whaling fleet operating in the Antarctic does so on the notion of "Research". THIS is a disgrace to all Japanese scientists (and there are extremely many excellent researchers in Japan), because even a layman realizes that the Institute of Cetacean Research's meager publication record does not justify killing hundreds of whales in the Antarctic under the banner of research. In fact, looking at their track-record, even one whale might have been enough to do most of the research. For more details on their publication history, in below average scientific journals, please check -- http://www.icrwhale.org/NewPublication.html.

Therefore, I believe that the Japanese have no business whaling in the Antarctic in the name of Science. Unless more concrete correlation, between the research they perform and the amount of whales they cull, is presented - and because commercial whaling is not allowed in the international Antarctic waters - the international community needs to stand up for their rights and bar further whaling in these waters by the Japanese fleet. However, few governments actually have the backbone to take such an incentive -- people just don't seem to care enough and governments worry about the diplomatic (and in turn economic) consequences.