Zombie

By definition vaccines are made by man. Jenner made his vaccine before Pasteur - therefore Pasteur's vaccine cannot be "the first human made vaccine in history". What you are describing is the different methodologies used by Pasteur and Jenner. But despite their different approaches the outcome was the same: creating "any preparation used to confer immunity to a disease by inoculation", which is the definition of vaccine [Collins English dictionary]. Jenner's work and Pasteur's work both fulfill this standard definition of "vaccine" And so were Jenner's

This will probably be of no interest to most GA members but I thought a pic of scrum-half Danny Care might be appropriate to celebrate his sneaky try on Sunday. Sadly the only pic I could find was this pose for Cosmo - all the others seem to have mysteriously disappeared... And here's the French team fly-half, Jules Plisson. Unfortunately, as you can see, he's a little mud-smeared after a heavy work-out session with his teammates but again, sadly, this was the only pic I could find of him...

Well none was permanently maimed, they were happy to sign up for the cash and it's paid business for the hospitals so it's all good Sorry you got all bothered and bewildered by the blank second post - I jabbed the wrong button by mistake

"Louis Pasteur in his testing of the Rabies' vaccine, the first human made vaccine in history" This is not correct. The first vaccine was developed not in France by Pasteur in the 19th century, but in England and Germany during the 18th century. And it was Edward Jenner who performed the first "unethical" testing, in 1796, by inoculating an 8 year old boy with a smallpox vaccine. The boy was selected because "he was healthy". Happily his treatment was successful and he lived until 1853 - so the lawyers all went home hungry...

.

Pain and suffering A popular genre of trash TV is watching other people suffering. It started off with shows that humiliated people and made them look stupid. This kind of TV still exists, with shows like the X-Factor where deluded trailer-trash expose their pitiful lack of talent so that the celebrity judges can crush and destroy them on national TV. And it gets even better if the cameras can zoom onto the outraged mother offstage, mouthing bleeped obscenities and threatening to rip off Simon Cowell's dangly bits with a rusty claw hammer (actually, I might pay for a ticket to see that... ) so that the audience at home, slumped on their couches, can chortle, point and laugh while simultaneously stuffing more high-salt, high-fat, nutritionally valueless snack items down their distended gullets. Hmm, I've just had an idea for a new TV show... But this wasn't enough. Appetites were getting jaded and viewers wanted more - people had to suffer physical and psychological pain to maximise viewer enjoyment. As I understand it shows like this originated in Japan and victims were just ordinary members of the public. But again that wasn't enough. Who were these people anyway? Why should viewers waste their valuable time gawping at the pain and misery of nonentities no-one's heard of? That's the beauty of trash TV. It's endlessly inventive. So it moved onto the next level - taking those "celebs" who'd mocked and guffawed at the trailer-trash and doing a 180 - inflicting pain and suffering on the "celebs". And we're talking real pain, suffering and misery. What's not to like? Shows like I'm A Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here! offer top quality entertainment - "celebs" suffering in a God-awful Hell hole (Australia ) and being forced to eat giant grubs while sitting in a bathtub full of live maggots and watching re-runs of Simon Cowell. Then came Splash! This moved the game on with real actual injuries shown in hi-def as the "celebs" belly flopped from the diving board. The bruises were just spectacular (you'll be happy to learn Dan Osborne was completely unharmed in the making of that programme ) Then, as a warm up to Sochi, came Channel 4's The Jump where our viewing pleasure included watching "celebs'" perform dangerous winter sports activities. And when it all went horribly wrong - as we knew it would - watching the exact moment when their bones snapped and they were rushed off to ER for emergency, and hopefully painful, surgery. But for me the best bit was watching these creatures do the "skeleton", with a backwards head-cam transmitting their eye-bulging terror and horrific screams as they hurtled head first down the ice track at 100kph+ I dunno, maybe it's just me, but I find I can't tear my eyes away. Does that make me a bad person? .

Well evidently horse meat doesn't taste that different from beef because it was only uncovered in the recent UK horse meat scandal because of food testing by public trading standards officers. None of the punters complained - they were too busy stuffing more burgers down their throats The reason we don't eat horse meat is purely cultural. Provided the welfare of animals is assured and we are not misled about what we are eating then it shouldn't matter. The same argument could be made about cats and dogs. But I have a personal issue about eating dogs. They have been domesticated by humankind over thousands of years and dogs are capable of forming such close bonds of trust, loyalty - and, yes, love - with their owners that it just seems wrong to betray them and eat them

life's just too short for this... post me an update after he's been banged up with the sex-starved muscle guy covered in mean looking tats

I lost interest in football - oops, "soccer" - a long time ago partly for this reason and also it's become such a cynical business corrupted by money. Rugby for me is just a much better game all round, more exciting to watch and more mature, fans are not segregated, they can drink beer responsibly while enjoying the game, it's family friendly and everyone has a really good time. Oh yeah, and one of the best top rank Refs, Nigel Owens, is openly gay - no-one cares

England Triple Crown Champs! Wales really were asleep to let Danny Care get his sneaky try - but they all count

Happy birthday of yesterday! - sorry to be late

That is a real problem with farmed meat and poultry - routine, unnecessary overuse of antibiotics which isn't good for them or us Another reason to catch your own meat.

There's also a whole other discussion to be had on squeamishness about buying, preparing and cooking animal organs like kidneys you mentioned, and liver and heart and such. Handling these is quite literally visceral and while your grandma's generation had no problem, now it's definitely an issue for many. As for trotters, tripe and sheep's head *licks lips * ... ooo, and brains on toast...

That'd be a one-horse town then In Britain you have to have a landline in order to get an affordable broadband connection Same reason people leave the phone "off the hook" and "hang up" after a call - from the old days when the ear piece used to dangle from a hook

I don't think this is about survivalists, Bill, it's about the growing disconnect between urban and country life. For all their cultural sophistication / urban lifestyles, city dwellers are as dependent on farming and agriculture as humans have ever been. The big change has been that they can now live their lives with no knowledge of how food gets onto their plate. And that's a bad thing all round .

There's an important difference. The gay to straight "therapy" is an organised belief system involving group pressure against a targeted individual to achieve the group's objective of making everyone they have power over fall into line with their very narrow belief of what is "normal". In reality this often means young people who are not yet independent and are therefore especially vulnerable The gay trope is just, er, one-on-one lurrrve

A family butcher in Suffolk has been forced to remove the carcasses hanging in its window display after a petition because the dead animals on display "upset children". Richard Balson, manager of Dorset butchers RJ Balson & Sons, expressed dismay at the petition: "The people kicking up a fuss about this man have gone soft. They've lost touch with reality. When our family business was founded in 1515, the animals would have been walked into the middle of the towns, where they'd be slaughtered in front of everyone. I appreciate that it's a completely different world that we live in now. But this is over the top". Understandable, perhaps, for non meat eaters. But some meat eaters obviously have a problem with the reality of their dietary habits and it seems dishonest to shield their kids from this reality. Perhaps they need reminding that the neatly packaged, plastic-wrapped portions displayed on supermarket shelves are not synthesized by some Startrek Replicator - they come from real animals http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2014/feb/24/butcher-meat-window-display-row-suffolk *And, yes, it is true - Richard Balson's family butcher business has been going continuously since 1515* .

I can't really improve on what Kitt said for all the nominees and winners... Every single one of you deserve Congratulations!

Just to concur with what's already been said, I think you're doing a pretty fine job doing what you're doing, Graeme. If all kids had open lines of communication with responsible and caring parents they respect, trust and love like yours obviously do with you, then many of the problems we see around us would just disappear As for addiction, well that applies to internet use generally and sitting for long periods every day is definitely not healthy. Maybe you could agree a daily limit to all online activities so they can get off their butts, give their eyes a rest and go do all the stuff that kids used to do Talking of which, what should I do about my GA addiction?

.

I agree with much of what you say except for this para. "Almost every illness" I'd change to "Many illnesses" because a significant number of diseases have genetic causes over which the individual has no control. It is those diseases where "personal responsibility" has no relevance - because they are part of the lottery of life, pure chance whether you're blessed with "good" genes or "bad". And it is those same diseases where advanced medicine offers real solutions to problems. Also, we've evolved to eat food that tastes good. Nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is that food manufacturers have deliberately chosen to make food that "tastes good" but which is actually harmful - full of cheap sugar that they know we love and become addicted to but which is nutritionally valueless and causes people to suffer health problems like diabetes and obesity; or maybe transfats that are a cheap way to achieve the taste they know we like but, again, are nutritionally valueless and harmful. These manufacturers know this but cynically they do it anyway because it increases their profits. Governments give manufacturers an ordered society - and therefore a "market" - for these manufacturers to exploit, but when those manufacturers set out to harm people for the sake of their greed and profit then it is the role of government to intervene, control and regulate these companies to stop them harming the people in the society they govern.

Move house. Leave the dolls. Now!

Business is at last starting to get off the fence. Today global insurance and financial services giant Standard Life announced plans to relocate from Scotland to England if Scotland votes to leave the United Kingdom. Standard and Poor's expects other major financial services companies and banks would also leave because Scotland's economy would simply be too vulnerable if there was a repeat of the 2008 banking crisis without the financial support of London. So that's the pound gone, EU membership and terms up in the air, and now the flight of big business. All of these have been assumed by Samond to be in place in his White Paper and in his bland assurances to Scottish voters. What could possibly go wrong next, Alex?

Oh I understand that, Daddy. But there is a real public good when a case goes to trial and the wrongdoers are publicly exposed for their wrongdoing. Public humiliation and exposure of wrongdoers in court is an excellent outcome - it denies them the option to issue weaselly mealy-mouthed statements and denials such as were reported in the article, essentially claiming they'd done nothing wrong, the settlement was just a business decision by their insurers and it was business as usual...

The settlement was a pittance for such a gross breach of trust. It's a shame this didn't go to trial for exemplary damages and expose the culprits to the full glare of publicity with all of them being named and shamed. That's a very powerful punishment. And I think the law needs to be changed to make officers of public bodies liable to be personally surcharged by the courts - with insurance cover made illegal - for all breaches of trust and maladministration. It's not acceptable merely to fine the organisation - basically that's just fining the taxpayer. The individuals should be made to pay for their own wrongdoing and feel real financial pain and not be allowed to hide behind the corporate entity.