AdamSmith

Thursday, November 02, 2006 Love Beyond the Stratosphere: Q&A with Michael Behar and Ashley KissingerBy: Gordy Megroz outsideonline.com Photo: Courtesy Michael Behar For the December Outside feature story, "The Zero-G Spot," about exploring sex in space, Boulder, Colorado-based writer Michael Behar and his wife Ashley Kissinger took a ride in Zero Gravity Corporation's G-Force One to do a little "research." Since the modified Boeing 727-200 cargo aircraft achieves weightlessness by diving 10,000 feet at a time into zero-gravity parabolas, the couple was able to find out what it might take to do it where no man has done it before. Gordy Megroz caught up with the couple recently to get the dirt on the deed. Outside: Is orbital bliss a purely novel pursuit, or is there a nobler reason to get it on in space? MB: Missions to space are just going to get longer and longer. They already have. And astronauts are going to have sex. You can't tell an astronaut that he needs to abstain for three years. How can you make it comfortable for these people? A big issue is the shear messiness of it. There's fluid all over and in order to keep a spacecraft cool, they have very powerful fans everwhere. If you have bodily fluids all over the cabin being sucked into intake fans that are on every wall, you're going to have a problem. Things are going to start shorting out. It's disgusting, but it's a serious engineering issue. So exactly what does it takee to have sex in space? AK: Female leg strength. The only way we could get into the old missionary position, was for me to really wrap my legs around Michael and wrap them together because our bodies touching together creates a bounce-off, so I kind of had to keep my legs tight to keep us together.MB: And even if one person had her legs wrapped around the other person's waist, you're still going to separate from the waist up. So then you have to hold your arms together. And when you're in that position, you can't actually have sex because you can't really move. Michael, this was your idea, right? MB: Yeah, well there was sort of a chain of events that happened. In the mid-nineties I saw this James Bond movie [Moonraker, in which there's a sex scene in space]. So I just started keeping a clip file. And I kept that file from 1996 until now. Is that weird Ashley? AK: That he kept the clip file? No! I remember at one point Michael showing me some of his pending story ideas and I read that one and said 'Well that one's interesting.' And he said, oh yeah, I don't think that one's going anywhere. And he almost didn't pursue it. MB: One thing that made it happen, that made it a valid magazine story, was that there are current events that would make it possible. When I first looked at it, there was no Virgin Galactic, there was no Bigelow Space Hotel, and there was no way to get into space. There wasn't even the Soyez rocket possibility where you could pay $20 million. None of those existed. So now, if you have the money, you actually can get into space. And in a few more years, there's going to be a lot more access to it. So this was just a ploy to spice up your sex life?(Both Laugh)AK: Oh, it doesn't need any spicing up. MB: Well now that I've experienced 30 seconds of weightlessness, I would love to actually try to have sex in space. Maybe in 20 years they'll have some way to get into orbit that's cheaper and it's safe. Michael, you've been on a lot of crazy adventures for us, where does this one rank? MB: I think this was the most fun and unique. Once you get into zero gravity, it's pretty revolutionary. Unless you've experienced it, you can't imagine what it's like. It's definitely a once in a lifetime kind of thing.AK: It's really hard to wrap your head around unless you do it. When you're weightless and you get upside-down, you don't feel any blood rushing to your head like you would on earth. Your body feels exactly the same. So if you didn't have visual reference to tell you, oh, there's the top of the plane, there's the bottom of the plane, you wouldn't know up from down. MB: I think we were both incredibly surprised about how hard it was to just kiss or to get physically together. Was it weird trying out various positions in front of the other people on the plane? MB: Yeah, well, everyone else up there was a MENSA member.Did you tell them what you were doing?MB: I told one woman and she just got so grossed out. AK: She did?MB: Yeah, she had on a funny hat and one of those fanny packs.. They had originally leased the whole plane, but they couldn't fill all the spots. They had two spots left open, so that's how we got on. Sounds like a real turn-off. MB: Couldn't it have been the Playboy Bunny convention renting the plane? AK: Yeah, or Chippendales. http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/Love-Beyond-the-Stratosphere--Q-A-with-Michael-Behar-and-Ashley-Kissinger.html?page=2

Great idea! ...Wonder if hard-pressed NASA could scare up some extra coin by leasing out the Vomit Comet to folks lusting after weightless sex?

Yes! Of course, short of such a provider building (and somehow physically safeguarding every centimeter of) its own bespoke global physical infrastructure, the NSA would still be able to hoover up our data packets en route. Thus, it seems the ISP would also have to issue PGP-like encryption software for us to install on our PCs. And then find ways to win our confidence that a master decryption key had not been given behind doors to the authorities -- our'n, their'n, or other'n. That such distrust has now been sown essentially everywhere by the U.S. government's snooping seems to reveal, at heart, the true damage of it all. For greater success bin Laden could scarce have hoped.

A blunt Pope Francis targets free market economics Published: Tuesday, 6 Aug 2013 | 3:21 PM ET By: Mark Koba | Senior Editor, CNBC Since taking over as head of the Roman Catholic Church in March, Pope Francis has made several stark comments on world economic issues: He's cited the pitfalls of capitalism, decried global income inequality and equated low-wage labor to a form of "slavery." He's even described the financial corruption in the church he leads as a "spiritual sickness." Analysts say Pope Francis—leader of some 1.2 billion Catholics—is not necessarily calling for the demise of free market theory. Instead, he's issuing a very strong warning to economic leaders over its future. "Like many people he thinks capitalism won't survive unless it decreases income disparity," said George Haley, professor of marketing and international business at the University of New Haven. "I think it's fair to say he's arguing for a more European version of capitalism going forward, especially after the Great Recession, so there's more of a safety net for people when they need it," Haley added. "I don't think he's attacking capitalism or the wealthy, because if he did, that strategy would fail," said Joseph Pastore, a business professor at Pace University. "But he is rightly focusing on issues of equality and justice in economics," Pastore said. At least some in the business community have taken notice of the pope's message. "His comments are of high importance to me," said Rohit Arora, CEO of Biz2Credit, an online site that connects small-business owners with financing. "The kind of issues he's talking about are too often ignored by religious and business leaders," Arora said. Surprising as they may be, the pope's comments on global economics are in line with his personal thinking, said Mathew Schmalz, a professor of religious studies at the College of the Holy Cross. "Being a Jesuit priest and having spent so much time in Argentina as bishop and cardinal had a great effect on him," Schmalz said. "He's seen a lot of poverty close up and raised the issue in Argentina before becoming pope." A history of Papal comments Papal statements on social and economic justice are not new. During the past 100 years or so, popes have made their thoughts on the issues known through open letters—what the church calls encyclicals. In 1891, Pope Leo XIII issued an encyclical that rejected both communism and unrestricted capitalism, while affirming the right to private property. But he also supported the rights of labor to form unions, and the need for some "amelioration of the misery and wretchedness pressing so unjustly on the majority of the working class." Pope John XXIII issued an encyclical in 1961 backing free market ideas, but said that from a Catholic perspective, "the global economy serves a higher good; if the economy booms, but human dignity suffers, the result is unmistakably evil." Pope John Paul II, known for his strong anti-communist feelings, issued an encyclical in 1989 warning capitalist nations against letting the collapse of communism "blind them to the need to repair injustices in their own economic system." More recently, Pope Benedict, whose resignation in February of this year opened the way for Francis to head the chrurch, issued an encyclical in 2009 that called for a world political body to manage the global economy—as well as for more government regulation to pull the world out of the Great Recession. "Pope Francis speaks in continuity with all the popes that spoke about economic issues," said Mary Catherine Sommers, a professor of philosophy at the University of St. Thomas. "The church doesn't choose economic systems any more than political systems around the world but it does keep an eye on human systems," said Sommers, who is a member of the American Catholic Philosophical Association, a group that fosters Catholic discussion on issues. Michael Bellafiore, a Jesuit priest and professor of theology at the University of Scranton, said Francis and the church have a role to play in shaping the business world. "The church's task is to form consciences," said Bellafiore. "As such, corporations, banks, unions, investors all have to rise above their immediate interests and compromise. Pope Francis can promote leadership in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression." Attacked as socialist For his comments, Francis has been called a socialist or left-leaning by conservative economists. And not all Catholics share the same enthusiasm for his thoughts. "Personally, I"m much more market friendly, as was John Paul II," said Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, an anti-defamation group based in New York. "I certainly applaud him for recognizing that unrestrained capitalism needs more order," Donahoe said. "If he's emphasizing we can't forget the poor, I'm all for that. But if he's leaning toward a more liberation theology, the more socialist model, which I don't think he is, then I'm against it." "A lot of Catholics won't like what he says about economics," said Schmalz. "That includes the bureaucracy in the Vatican, which tends to be conservative on moral and economic issues," Schmalz added. For his part, Biz2Credit's Arora said he has faith in the pope's good intentions but would like to know more about which economic direction the pontiff's headed. "Right now, neither capitalism nor socialism offer solutions for the world's income inequality, which is the biggest problem." said Arora. "If the pope is serious about this, I think he needs to come up with specifics and a third way. So far he hasn't." Francis also has the problem of setting a good example from a church—reportedly worth at least $8 billion—that has had its share of controversies and issues of corruption. "The Catholic church is very wealthy, and that's why it's important he doesn't take an us-against-them attitude when he talks about the poor," said Pace University's Pastore. "It can look hypocritical." "He's called for reforms with the Vatican bank and he's rejecting the rich cars and living quarters popes have used in the past," said Schmalz. "But how far he can go with the church remains to be seen." The University of St. Thomas' Sommers said any pope is always walking a fine line between the spiritual and material world. "The church has to deal with reality and that means sometimes making compromises," Sommers said. "But the church has many priests who live in poverty voluntarily. There are more of them than other kinds of priests." Francis likely to keep talking Whether Francis or any religious figure can influence economic decision-making remains uncertain. The general public remains skeptical, or at least those on social networks are, according to findings from NetBase. The software firm surveyed online global comments (some 29,000) from March to Aug. 1, finding an overall 54 percent negative to 46 percent positive reaction to his statements on wage labor, capitalism and Income equality. But Arora argued the pope needs to take advantage of his role as a global leader to help the poor. "The debate is fine but we need solutions," Arora said. "How do we stop income inequality and low wages? I'd like him to tell us." One way to turn words into action is to use the full force of the church, said the University of New Haven's Haley. "If Francis is serious about this, he could use the Vatican's diplomatic corps to lobby various governments to come up with plans to deal with the world's economic woes," Haley said. And unlike other popes, Francis has an advantage now that others didn't, said Pastore. "Social media and media in general help him get his message out to a global public and he's being noticed because of that," Pastore said. "But what he needs to do is get folks that are capitalists to join the conversation." 'We need people to have wealth, we need the capacity to have economic activity and all this should be part of the discussion," Pastore added. "The problem is I think most of big business and many in government will ignore him." Whether Francis is condemned as a socialist, anti-capitalist or a liberal thinker, Schmalz said the pope is likely to keep talking about social and economic issues. "It would take a lot to pull him back and I don't see him tapering off," Schmalz said. "I think he feels compelled to bring these issues up. The question is, will there be any real concrete changes in economic thinking? We'll have to wait and see." http://www.cnbc.com/id/100931792

Tom Foolery! The musical based on the words and music of Tom Lehrer: http://www.tomlehrer.org/tomlehrer/enter.html "The material in TOMFOOLERY, such as it is, is drawn entirely from the works of Tom Lehrer, whose recordings of certain peculiar songs of his own devising won him a certain notoriety in the '50s and '60s. "In 1953 Tom Lehrer, an otherwise inoffensive graduate student and part-time teacher of mathematics at Harvard University, had the effrontery to issue on his own an LP entitled Songs by Tom Lehrer, the inexplicable success of which led to several years of nightclub and concert appearances in the U.S., U.K., and various other Lehrer-speaking countries, as well as two further recorded collections, An Evening Wasted with Tom Lehrer and That Was the Year that Was. To date these LPs have sold over a million and a half copies, God knows to whom. "A sparkling cast of four versatile and impenitent performers has now been assembled to inflict Mr. Lehrer's songs and prose upon theatre audiences in a lighthearted and heavy-handed (or is this the other way round?) review called TOMFOOLERY. "Mr. Lehrer's childish delight at the advent of this show is in sharp contrast to his otherwise jaundiced view of everything. He has actively participated in the compilation of TOMFOOLERY and made a general nuisance of himself at rehearsals, at the same time expressing considerable relief that his participation does not extend to the other side of the footlights." ...Who dat: http://www.casualhacker.net/tom.lehrer/jmazner/lehrhtml.html

Why I changed my mind on weed By Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN Chief Medical Correspondent updated 8:54 AM EDT, Thu August 8, 2013 (CNN) -- Over the last year, I have been working on a new documentary called "Weed." The title "Weed" may sound cavalier, but the content is not. I traveled around the world to interview medical leaders, experts, growers and patients. I spoke candidly to them, asking tough questions. What I found was stunning. Long before I began this project, I had steadily reviewed the scientific literature on medical marijuana from the United States and thought it was fairly unimpressive. Reading these papers five years ago, it was hard to make a case for medicinal marijuana. I even wrote about this in a TIME magazine article, back in 2009, titled "Why I would Vote No on Pot." Well, I am here to apologize. I apologize because I didn't look hard enough, until now. I didn't look far enough. I didn't review papers from smaller labs in other countries doing some remarkable research, and I was too dismissive of the loud chorus of legitimate patients whose symptoms improved on cannabis. Instead, I lumped them with the high-visibility malingerers, just looking to get high. I mistakenly believed the Drug Enforcement Agency listed marijuana as a schedule 1 substance because of sound scientific proof. Surely, they must have quality reasoning as to why marijuana is in the category of the most dangerous drugs that have "no accepted medicinal use and a high potential for abuse." They didn't have the science to support that claim, and I now know that when it comes to marijuana neither of those things are true. It doesn't have a high potential for abuse, and there are very legitimate medical applications. In fact, sometimes marijuana is the only thing that works. Take the case of Charlotte Figi, who I met in Colorado. She started having seizures soon after birth. By age 3, she was having 300 a week, despite being on seven different medications. Medical marijuana has calmed her brain, limiting her seizures to 2 or 3 per month. I have seen more patients like Charlotte first hand, spent time with them and come to the realization that it is irresponsible not to provide the best care we can as a medical community, care that could involve marijuana. We have been terribly and systematically misled for nearly 70 years in the United States, and I apologize for my own role in that. I hope this article and upcoming documentary will help set the record straight. On August 14, 1970, the Assistant Secretary of Health, Dr. Roger O. Egeberg wrote a letter recommending the plant, marijuana, be classified as a schedule 1 substance, and it has remained that way for nearly 45 years. My research started with a careful reading of that decades old letter. What I found was unsettling. Egeberg had carefully chosen his words: "Since there is still a considerable void in our knowledge of the plant and effects of the active drug contained in it, our recommendation is that marijuana be retained within schedule 1 at least until the completion of certain studies now underway to resolve the issue." Not because of sound science, but because of its absence, marijuana was classified as a schedule 1 substance. Again, the year was 1970. Egeberg mentions studies that are underway, but many were never completed. As my investigation continued, however, I realized Egeberg did in fact have important research already available to him, some of it from more than 25 years earlier. High risk of abuse In 1944, New York Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia commissioned research to be performed by the New York Academy of Science. Among their conclusions: they found marijuana did not lead to significant addiction in the medical sense of the word. They also did not find any evidence marijuana led to morphine, heroin or cocaine addiction. We now know that while estimates vary, marijuana leads to dependence in around 9 to 10% of its adult users. By comparison, cocaine, a schedule 2 substance "with less abuse potential than schedule 2 drugs" hooks 20% of those who use it. Around 25% of heroin users become addicted. The worst is tobacco, where the number is closer to 30% of smokers, many of whom go on to die because of their addiction. There is clear evidence that in some people marijuana use can lead to withdrawal symptoms, including insomnia, anxiety and nausea. Even considering this, it is hard to make a case that it has a high potential for abuse. The physical symptoms of marijuana addiction are nothing like those of the other drugs I've mentioned. I have seen the withdrawal from alcohol, and it can be life threatening. I do want to mention a concern that I think about as a father. Young, developing brains are likely more susceptible to harm from marijuana than adult brains. Some recent studies suggest that regular use in teenage years leads to a permanent decrease in IQ. Other research hints at a possible heightened risk of developing psychosis. Much in the same way I wouldn't let my own children drink alcohol, I wouldn't permit marijuana until they are adults. If they are adamant about trying marijuana, I will urge them to wait until they're in their mid-20s when their brains are fully developed. Medical benefit While investigating, I realized something else quite important. Medical marijuana is not new, and the medical community has been writing about it for a long time. There were in fact hundreds of journal articles, mostly documenting the benefits. Most of those papers, however, were written between the years 1840 and 1930. The papers described the use of medical marijuana to treat "neuralgia, convulsive disorders, emaciation," among other things. A search through the U.S. National Library of Medicine this past year pulled up nearly 20,000 more recent papers. But the majority were research into the harm of marijuana, such as "Bad trip due to anticholinergic effect of cannabis," or "Cannabis induced pancreatitits" and "Marijuana use and risk of lung cancer." In my quick running of the numbers, I calculated about 6% of the current U.S. marijuana studies investigate the benefits of medical marijuana. The rest are designed to investigate harm. That imbalance paints a highly distorted picture. The challenges of marijuana research To do studies on marijuana in the United States today, you need two important things. First of all, you need marijuana. And marijuana is illegal. You see the problem. Scientists can get research marijuana from a special farm in Mississippi, which is astonishingly located in the middle of the Ole Miss campus, but it is challenging. When I visited this year, there was no marijuana being grown. The second thing you need is approval, and the scientists I interviewed kept reminding me how tedious that can be. While a cancer study may first be evaluated by the National Cancer Institute, or a pain study may go through the National Institute for Neurological Disorders, there is one more approval required for marijuana: NIDA, the National Institute on Drug Abuse. It is an organization that has a core mission of studying drug abuse, as opposed to benefit. Stuck in the middle are the legitimate patients who depend on marijuana as a medicine, oftentimes as their only good option. Keep in mind that up until 1943, marijuana was part of the United States drug pharmacopeia. One of the conditions for which it was prescribed was neuropathic pain. It is a miserable pain that's tough to treat. My own patients have described it as "lancinating, burning and a barrage of pins and needles." While marijuana has long been documented to be effective for this awful pain, the most common medications prescribed today come from the poppy plant, including morphine, oxycodone and dilaudid. Here is the problem. Most of these medications don't work very well for this kind of pain, and tolerance is a real problem. Most frightening to me is that someone dies in the United States every 19 minutes from a prescription drug overdose, mostly accidental. Every 19 minutes. It is a horrifying statistic. As much as I searched, I could not find a documented case of death from marijuana overdose. It is perhaps no surprise then that 76% of physicians recently surveyed said they would approve the use of marijuana to help ease a woman's pain from breast cancer. When marijuana became a schedule 1 substance, there was a request to fill a "void in our knowledge." In the United States, that has been challenging because of the infrastructure surrounding the study of an illegal substance, with a drug abuse organization at the heart of the approval process. And yet, despite the hurdles, we have made considerable progress that continues today. Looking forward, I am especially intrigued by studies like those in Spain and Israel looking at the anti-cancer effects of marijuana and its components. I'm intrigued by the neuro-protective study by Lev Meschoulam in Israel, and research in Israel and the United States on whether the drug might help alleviate symptoms of PTSD. I promise to do my part to help, genuinely and honestly, fill the remaining void in our knowledge. Citizens in 20 states and the District of Columbia have now voted to approve marijuana for medical applications, and more states will be making that choice soon. As for Dr. Roger Egeberg, who wrote that letter in 1970, he passed away 16 years ago. I wonder what he would think if he were alive today. http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/08/health/gupta-changed-mind-marijuana/index.html?hpt=hp_c4

Five hundred new fairytales discovered in GermanyCollection of fairytales gathered by historian Franz Xaver von Schönwerth had been locked away in an archive in Regensburg for over 150 years Read one of the fairytales: The Turnip Princess Victoria Sussens-Messerer theguardian.com, Monday 5 March 2012 10.25 EST A whole new world of magic animals, brave young princes and evil witches has come to light with the discovery of 500 new fairytales, which were locked away in an archive in Regensburg, Germany for over 150 years. The tales are part of a collection of myths, legends and fairytales, gathered by the local historian Franz Xaver von Schönwerth (1810–1886) in the Bavarian region of Oberpfalz at about the same time as the Grimm brothers were collecting the fairytales that have since charmed adults and children around the world. Last year, the Oberpfalz cultural curator Erika Eichenseer published a selection of fairytales from Von Schönwerth's collection, calling the book Prinz Roßzwifl. This is local dialect for "scarab beetle". The scarab, also known as the "dung beetle", buries its most valuable possession, its eggs, in dung, which it then rolls into a ball using its back legs. Eichenseer sees this as symbolic for fairytales, which she says hold the most valuable treasure known to man: ancient knowledge and wisdom to do with human development, testing our limits and salvation. Von Schönwerth spent decades asking country folk, labourers and servants about local habits, traditions, customs and history, and putting down on paper what had only been passed on by word of mouth. In 1885, Jacob Grimm said this about him: "Nowhere in the whole of Germany is anyone collecting [folklore] so accurately, thoroughly and with such a sensitive ear." Grimm went so far as to tell King Maximilian II of Bavaria that the only person who could replace him in his and his brother's work was Von Schönwerth. Von Schönwerth compiled his research into a book called Aus der Oberpfalz – Sitten und Sagen, which came out in three volumes in 1857, 1858 and 1859. The book never gained prominence and faded into obscurity. While sifting through Von Schönwerth's work, Eichenseer found 500 fairytales, many of which do not appear in other European fairytale collections. For example, there is the tale of a maiden who escapes a witch by transforming herself into a pond. The witch then lies on her stomach and drinks all the water, swallowing the young girl, who uses a knife to cut her way out of the witch. However, the collection also includes local versions of the tales children all over the world have grown up with including Cinderella and Rumpelstiltskin, and which appear in many different versions across Europe. Von Schönwerth was a historian and recorded what he heard faithfully, making no attempt to put a literary gloss on it, which is where he differs from the Grimm brothers. However, says Eichenseer, this factual recording adds to the charm and authenticity of the material. What delights her most about the tales is that they are unpolished. "There is no romanticising or attempt by Schönwerth to interpret or develop his own style," she says. Eichenseer says the fairytales are not for children alone. "Their main purpose was to help young adults on their path to adulthood, showing them that dangers and challenges can be overcome through virtue, prudence and courage." In 2008, Eichenseer helped to found the Franz Xaver von Schönwerth Society, an interdisciplinary committee devoted to analysing his work and publicising it. She is keen to see the tales available in English, and a Munich-based English translator, Dan Szabo, has already begun work on stories ranging from a miserly farmer and a money-mill to a turnip princess. "Schönwerth's legacy counts as the most significant collection in the German-speaking world in the 19th century," says Daniel Drascek, a member of the society and a professor in the faculty of language, literature and cultural sciences at the University of Regensburg. http://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/mar/05/five-hundred-fairytales-discovered-germany

Another one for you-know-who...

Funny how "Be you, with us" has a somewhat Biblical ring to it (Be thou with me) but in that tin-eared style of the Book of Mormon which Mark Twain termed "chloroform in print."

Aha! That is your reaction to penises in general, so you DO see the penis in her necklace.

When Andre and I stayed at the Algonquin once, I enjoyed cracking him up at inappropriate times with La Parker's witticisms. The hallways there are today wallpapered with quotations from the Roundtable regulars. My mother gave me paregoric when I was little for stomach pains. I am amazed in hindsight that I did not manufacture fake tummy aches all the time. In fact that very bottle resides in her medicine chest still, with a few drops left. Hmm...

Quite likely no joke.