Ashi

When you live with someone for so long, it's natural you'll feel the way you do when he is suffering. Be strong, though I know it's tough.

I am not against the research. I am for educating the public first, and advocate let's think thoroughly and critically about the implication before we say go ahead. I am very against regulation of any kind, but for things of this nature, it's like giving a key to a child and tell them to drive. The technology is so immature at this point, people haven't thought thoroughly about the responsibility that's given. Just because we can doesn't mean we should. I am arguing let's set the rules and let the general public debate about the issue (therefore, open up thinking process) before we let open the Pandora's Box. Hopefully by the time the tirades on both sides end, everyone is smarter with the issue and know pros and cons. If you give a fool some knowledge, they're out to wreck the world. I think I've said this before. Right now everyone is in the naive optimism stage, and people have yet to think deeply about the possibility how this can seriously cheapens the meaning of life. Like when Nobel invented dynamite, he thought he was making the life better (but people used it to kill each other). When Industrial Revolution began, it was to improve quality of life by making things more affordable to all people (did it happen?). Or when Marx thought communism is going to make people more equal (did that happen?). No, none of those ideals fulfilled their original prophecy because the execution was incorrect. Human races are not as intelligent as we'd like to think. As long as there are selfishness and greed, there will be evil, even when the original concept is well-intended. No, I am not saying we should abolish all activities of advancement all together, but we should try to understand our own conducts. Many genetically modified foods are already made with deeply troubling conducts. Do you know genetically modified soy beans is a result of connecting a soy DNA with a fish's DNA? That is not a natural food. It's neither plant nor animal. That's why even the pests that used to eat soy beans do not eat it (that's the whole purpose of such genetic engineering, supposedly to reduce chemicals we ingest). A lot of people are allergic to genetic engineered foods, and now you know why. If you were vegan for religious reason, shouldn't you know that the soy beans you eat aren't exactly vegetables? People are already doing things that are very close to "human centipede" and how low should human race fall until life is no longer life? Let's not even talk about hormone chicken and antibiotics in meat we eat. People will find a way to abuse every technological "advance." Despite of all that, I am not completely against the possible benefit the stem cell research. All I am asking for is, people (entire human race) should discuss the issue fully. Every single solution to a problem will create a new problem, but one needs to know whether the new problem is better than the old one (i.e., the fundamental concept of decision making). Once people fully understand the whole issue, people will make a smarter decision. A concept that's not thoroughly thought out before the execution will make life more miserable, not better. When I was in business school, I thought why the companies simply don't install some price checking machines, and instead hire people to do such meaningless, menial jobs nobody wants to do (and as a customer, it's more convenient). But once I am actually working, I know there is a point of NOT using machines, because it creates jobs (aren't we all still need money to survive?). Life isn't all about efficiency. Adam Smith's Wealth of Nation is actually talking about government's role in creating jobs. If you believe humanity has no value and can/should be replaced by machines, then are you truly living? It says more about your cynicism about people than anything. By the way, the most abundant gas in the air is nitrogen. We need oxygen as part of respiratory system. We need a little bit of hydrogen, but mostly it's a waste product we urinate out of our body (Hydrogen ion increases acidity level in chemistry, and our body constantly monitors hydrogen ion level to keep blood pH level to keep everything in homeostasis). (nitrogen's role in human metabolism is still unknown. Human race isn't as sophisticated as you think. While we are able to send man-made object to Mars, we are still yet to figure out some fundamental stuff about human body)

Long weekend at dorms.... With too much time on your hands.... Hand job marathon?

The new disease is a virus. However, there is a study on Lyme Disease (another tick-borne disease) and how lizards help to cleanse the bacteria worth thinking about. Don't know if they found out the agent that cleanses the Lyme disease spirochete yet. http://berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/1998/0429/lizard.html The abundance of deers is a result of thinning population of their natural predators. Hunting with bows and arrows is usually allowed in some areas of California wilderness.

Billy Joel's ballad, Piano Man Minnie Riperton, Lovin' You (this one is a good cover) That's Why They Call It the Blues (Elton John) My friend gave me this Prince cover, Nothing Compares 2 U. The cover artists aren't pretty boys, but good cover. Listen to the lyrics. It's gay. (My friend is straight..., isn't that weird?) Sorry got to split into two posts. For those who like the trance (or acid hardcore, or whatever they call this type of club song). Another one from the same friend. Born Slippy (Underground). The store I used to work at the people could this type of thing impromptu after work! We really had a cool crowd, until the new manager ruined our culture. Chose this version obviously because I am a Jonny Lee Miller fan. http://youtu.be/z_RQDsY8M-E Nina Simone Ain't Go No I've Got A Life (can easily be a gay anthem): Don't know if this can be considered an oldie.... The Middle (Jimmy Eat World)

There are two sides of the argument on stem cell research of course. While in general it's a good thing, but I think it's a good idea to let people think about the issue for a little longer and let moral arguments be discussed a little more extensively before people realize what it means to have a life before we can let people take life for granted.... You don't have to be religious to talk about moral, and I don't think all moral arguments must arise from religion. Don't know if you have read a manga called Phoenix. In one of the chapters it talks about human cloning. In that chapter (one of the future chapters) people are bored with current reality TV shows, so the newest idea of a show is to hunt down clone human beings. The twist at the end of the story is, the reality TV show host was hunted down, because nobody knows which one is real and which one is the clone anymore. So yeah, there are a lot of issues to be worked out before something of this complexity can be carried out. Do you think people will value life more if death is no longer a threat? Do think a successful stem cell research that leads to the end of many diseases will increase quality of life? Do you think such research may lead to even more unemployment and aging population? Will there people who make artificial organs and sell them in black markets, though they have no license to make them (and could cause more problem to the person who receive the organ more than it benefits?). There are tons of details much be sorted out. Don't be blinded by the initial optimism. History tells us human beings are not to be trusted, if you give them new knowledge. That's why Nobel Prize was formed in the first place isn't it? And the reason why Einstein didn't want to unleash the knowledge of nuclear power.

Hypothesis is fine, but be ready to support the hypothesis with some legitimate basis. A speculation has no basis. I believe a scientist who makes the hypothesis are ready to defend their argument with their existing knowledge. Sometimes the differences between speculation and hypothesis is a fine line apart, so what W_L isn't all that shocking or majorly offensive. He didn't do it with malicious intent, but a gentle reminder or a question raised out of skepticism is generally a good practice. Even when a scientist made a perfectly legitimate hypothesis, other peers will ask him/her very difficult questions to check if the theory is sounding (nothing personal, really). When I wrote my speculation reply, I did my best to do some preliminary research just to make sure the information out of my memory is correct. Fortunately I found some mistakes before posting, or it would be giving misinformation. Don't know if you have heard of the saying something like, "When you hear it once, it's easy to dismiss it. When you hear it twice, you treat it with skepticism. When you hear it three times, it shakes your belief." That's the thing about Internet, anyone can have their three minutes (which can be both good and bad). When people post and repost misinformation, even a fictional account may appear to be a well-founded principal just because something has been repeated by many different people with the aid of the Internet, though the origin of the misinformation was stemmed from one single source (that's the danger of plagiarism, or citing from a tertiary source). I wrote my response as a precautionary reminder. It's not meant to be a personal attack. I think maybe TetRefine is the same, but I am not him, so I cannot speak on his behalf. Also noted, a well-written sci-fi (and other genre) fiction, the author would do their research so the story is believable.

I am not angry at you, nor I think TetRefine was angry. We're merely pointing out try not to speculate too much. Viruses are mysterious critters. What you said about them is right. However, some viruses are single-strand DNA or incomplete DNA, on top of the RNA you mentioned. Virus's original is still in theory stage only. What stops virus from considered as a life form is because they cannot reproduce on their own (must have a host cell to replicate the DNA/RNA/structures of virus for them). Some virus can move! A famous type of virus is bacteriophage. Click on the link to see the structure of it. The virus itself cannot make all those structures, but it uses the unlucky bacteria it injects its RNA/DNA into to make create more images of itself (bacteriophage means "bacteria eater"). Some theories of virus's origin including: they're mutated organisms, mutated body cells, or part of our body's DNA (made by mistake or merely a fragments of it that has turned loose). Some cancers are said to be virus-induced (some are known to be genetically linked, but not all. Cancer is a very general/loose term of disease with different causes). Keep in mind "mutated" is the keyword here. It's not just monkey practice that can give disease. Harmless practice like feeding squirrels or seagulls can also cause genetic mutation by crossing breeding bacteria on human with bacteria on the wild animals you feed, so those once squirrel-only disease can now become contagious to humans. That's the reason why there are signs in parks telling you "do not feed animals." All those avian flu or pig flu are results of such success in crossbreeding mutation. Whether viruses can mutate/crossbreed the same way as bacteria is debatable.

RIP. Lots of things happened in late 60's....

Oh, and another thing I need to add. Just because it gives AIDS like symptoms, doesn't mean it's incurable like HIV. HIV is very stubborn because unlike many other viruses, it actually uses part of the host white cell's membrane to disguise itself, so even before it starts to become a problem, your body thinks these HIVs are actually normal T-cells..., so they don't attack HIVs. That said, if the new disease doesn't use GP120 to disguise itself (the surface protein that is used to tell your body which cell is which, in this case GP120 tells your body this cell is T-cell), then it's possible to target the virus and neutralize it.

Okay, try not to make this into a fight. Anyways, try not to speculate something we don't know is a good practice. As you know, Internet is very good at spreading maybe not HIV but misinformation, so do restrain from making unfounded theory is good practice. If you want to speculate, do make sure that everyone knows you're only making speculation. That said, here is what I do know about HIV (I was in pre-med before, studied some stuff to be a radiologist, and being an AIDS nurse was one of the area that interested me also, though I didn't do it). HIV is the virus that caused AIDS. AIDS is the symptom, not a disease. People infected with HIV can become immuno-compromised, if triggered. People don't die from HIV, but usually from other diseases that healthy people's immune system can fend off easily. Pneumonia is a common cause of death. But often some "opportunistic pathogens" can take advantage of the situation and kill people when those bacteria/viruses/fungi etc., usually aren't strong enough to poses threat to healthy human beings. BUT when they do strike, some of them can be very nasty. That's why AIDS patients tend to die without dignity, with their skins all infected with all sort of fungi, hideous looking marks, ruptures and stuff that are caused by these opportunistic pathogens (skin is our first line of defense to pathogens. Our skins have loads of Staphylococcus epidermidis and Staphylococcus aureus and many other germs at all time, but they don't pose any threat to us because our healthy immune systems take care of them, so it's business as usual, but not to an immuno-compromised person) That said, the article doesn't say anything specific about the cause of the new disease. It's a very general article talking about a new phenomenon. It says it's not genetic, nor is it contagious. The part that's interesting is it affects elderly people more. This is already not very HIV-like. HIV, like all other viruses, attaches itself to healthy body cells and make them abandon their normal functions. In HIV's case, it attacks T-cell, like the article said, but the article is super simplified about how it works. It affects T-cell that is responsible to signal other white blood cells to produce antibody. Without it functioning normally, no antibody is produced. Though other types of white blood cells are still working, but the immune system is extremely compromised, because specific immune system, like antibody (which one type of antibody is specialized in neutralize only one type of pathogen), is much more effective than non-specific immune system. The article does say it affects interferon... We don't know which interferon it affects (there are many types of interferon) since the article doesn't say. BTW, you can google how HIV works. I just want to mention one thing, genetic engineering uses gene splicing techniques to reproduce DNAs we want. Some vaccines are also produced this way. Scientists "invented" this technique from studying how virus work. In other words, the process of gene splice is exactly the same how HIV works, except we use gene splice to produce things we want, but HIV destroy what we want. It's possible the new "HIV-like disease" is a result of genetic engineering gone wrong, and then it mutated and then mutated, until the newly mutated virus can start to reproduce itself. There is a good reason why high-tech stuff like this are highly classified info that we don't want anybody/any country to do it, especially people with low moral/ethical practice, because it can easily become bio-weapons if the wrong person got the hold of it, and start to sell to enemy nation to unleash terror even scarier than nuclear bombs.

Oh man. I was only thinking the other day what happened to Yettie? I guess so many things are going on in your life now. Yeah, nice advice. I guess my temper isn't so nice lately and sometimes I would tell my mom I am so pissed at her, well, it's because I was pissed at her. LOL! I am a mama's boy also. But my mom and I are so close, our relationship don't falter even when we're so brutally honest with each other. Do tell your close ones you love them. Do treat each other with some respect though. Hope you're holding up well and may your mom recover to good health soon.

My cat (passed away) was very depressed in his later years. Partly due to a neighbor cat coming to our backyard, and my dad was cruel enough to like the new cat better than our very own cutest cat in the world. Cats aren't like dogs, so it's opposite of your dog is experimenting (cats don't like other cats. Cats are very jealous), but I believe the situation is similar. You have to give more attention to your dog. Maybe you have to walk him a little more so he doesn't feel he is by himself? I think dogs need more physical attention (play with them and do all sort of activities). Not sure if getting a puppy would be good for an old dog (it would be the absolutely the wrong thing for cats). And another thing. Do pay attention to his diet. My cat ate a lot less. And the emotion problem eventually grew into a physical one. So do check if there is anything else that could be potentially serious, not just feed him love and forget about the physical well being. Check if his teeth are free of plaques. Older dogs (and cats) are more likely to get illness (just like human or any animals). My cat died from kidney failure, so do pay attention to such problem.

Not supernatural, but weird dream anyways. When I woke up this morning it was because of this dream I had. In that dream I was sleeping in my bed (nested dream?), but was constantly bothered by the sound of high wind by the window so I couldn't sleep, but I was too tired, so I didn't get out of bed and kept my eyes shut. Then I heard cats (two separate neighbors', though they permanently live in our yard) began to bang our backyard door with their claws (it's not exactly knocking, but like making noises with their claws with the glass window). Initially it was just irritating, as they often do that when they want foods (cats wake up rather early in the morning. My late cat did the same, and I had to let him out like 6:00 in the morning or he wouldn't stop meowing. I spoiled him too much). But as the storm began to intensify, the clawing on the window of the door was getting restless. It's almost like saying, "please let us in, or we'll die." (they really don't speak much, very different from my old cat, so they do it with actions) It had that mood of a psychological horror film feel to it. I was so tired, but I thought I MUST let them in, so I tried very hard to get myself out of the bed to open the door. When I woke up, I was out of my bed..., and there was no cat pleading for help or storm outside, because I was waking up for real.... It felt so weird. I was so exhausted, just like how I had felt in my dream. Everything felt real and flowed so smoothly, like there was not a cut off line between the dream and reality.

I could get used to that accent. Don't know why I like southern accent.... Oh, you were making fun of me. As much I hate to agree with Y_B, but he may have a point. I am approaching non-sexual status.... I no longer looks like I was 18 (and I looked pre-mature when I was that age). I looked younger when I was 24.... Sad but true. That's just me though. Thank you Y_B, for reminding me of my age....

I am 6'1". (See, I can't even talk straight... j/k) My GPA (Gay Point Average) is over highest possible number (6 points) because I took the advance placement. Just to ensure I won't turn straight somehow. And let him speak for himself. I want to hear his Texan accent. LOL!

Okay.... I am definitely over 6.... I don't think there is anything that can turn me straight. Anyways.... Are you speaking Texan again?

What the F does that mean?

I can relate to that thing about a dad who bad-mouthing his own son. I agree with you, Y_B, on the coming out thing. You may have misunderstood my intention (I do have an ulterior motive, but it's not what you think). When I was younger, I didn't find a need to come out, and when people told me I must come out or I am not honest, I felt pissed. Everyone has their own pace and situation, and I only had things to lose, and nothing to gain. Anyways, long story short, it's your life. Most gay activists wanted people to be out because it'll make the gay issues more visible and hopefully speed up the gay rights, but I never believe in hastening the progress more than its natural course. It actually creates more problems than it solves. I was outed, and it only sent me into depression and no real progress whatsoever to me. Still no boyfriend, no love, and I lost all my online friends in one moment. I don't care you're out or not, but I do care if you figured out your sexuality yet (maybe that's not apparent in my many responses to you.... Or my opinions on Anderson Cooper's coming out, all should say much on how I see the issue). It's a very heavy and suffocating issue for me, so I'll leave it at that.

OMG. That's so much more interesting than my own coming out. It's so nice what your mom did for you though. Okay..., how about you? I can hardly believe you started this thread without a reason. There must be something that's bottling up inside. I am not going to speculate your feeling. I would rather hear your own personal feeling from you.

LOL. Internet phenomenon.

Can't understand a word he was singing, but it is really funny just looking at it.

Oh good. :-)

Thanks Y_B for adding the link of the source of the letter. It is now more clear (though my suspicion was that the gay son isn't officially out yet, but the dad got some hint, so he decided to write the letter first). You brought up a good point Cia. Parents have their expectation, but things don't always come out that way. Heck, my own life doesn't even follow my own expectation, however I would like to feel I am in control of my own life.... And it's a very complicated mind game between the pre-out child and his/her parents. I mean, would any (straight) parent wish their son/daughter is gay? But what if every indication shows the love child is gay? Should they be in denial or confront the issue? Would there be a new type of relationship? On top of that layer is the gay son/daughter's expectation of how their parents would receive the news.... Would the gay son/daughter like the new relationship with their parents after they're out to the parents? Just a few scenarios that may complicate the decision of when and how (or not at all) to come out to their parents. As for the waiter thing. I am very good at making Plato (or was it Socrates) type of question. It's half humorous, half serious rhetorical question to make people think. I mean it's almost stereotypical (and cliche) that waiters, retail sales and other type of service oriented guys are gay. I was questioning that social expectation, even among gay people. I remember when I was looking at myself, as a gay man at a younger age, I felt I didn't want to be a fashion designer who would say things like, "Oh girl, you gotta have more fashion sense than that!" Now I am more okay with that concept (self-acceptance is in progress). Now, now..., who wants to be my girlfriend, and be insulted by my fake French accent? I know..., my sense of humor is queer. Anywayz..., wonder if people have read the original letter (father disowned his gay child) that inspired this hypothetical letter. The poster of that original letter said, "This is how hate sounds." And that's a food for thought, because the letter is level-minded, and rational. Doesn't that scare you? Hate can disguise itself in reason. It's almost like a psychopath who doesn't even flinch after tortured his victim, and you called that person dad for many years. (*patiently awaits Y_B's answer*) Come out at your own pace (gay or straight ), but just want to know the answer.

Why hypothetical gay son? (need the context) Why is the metaphor drawn between gay and waiter.... (are all waiters gay? ) I would think mom know the embryo better than dad.... Is his sister gay also? j/k Did you tell your parents you're straight yet?