Wednesday, January 13, 2016

goodness me, goodness me

If I'm to believe what the Silent T reports this AM, Glorious First Black President Obama promised in his State of the Onion that Neil Kinnock's Plagiarist is going to helm the good ship Cure Cancer.

That's an interesting one.

****************

In the days of my lower higher education, I happened into the path of studying biology for a BS.  Quite some time ago, it was.  And even back then, The Cancer was a demon terrorizing humanity.

At least in most modern countries.

Some 30 years later it's got more variants.  Our boy Suderman gets a few things right, it's not monolithic.  There are many types.  There are cancers of all kinds of tissue.  There are blood cell cancers, bone cell cancers, skin cell cancers, nerve cell cancers.  You can almost say that if there's a differentiated kind of cell, it's seen a cancerous variant.

Also, The Cancer is not sole-causative-element in its etiology.  Multiple causative factors are theorized for even a single type of cancer.  And there's the whole generic etiology Q, why Cancer?  What biological purpose does it serve for cells to undertake that transformation to a cancerous cell type?

We're pretty much ignorami when it comes to these questions, so I can understand Barry's desire to repel the ignorance that is causing this reactionary disease to plague Americans.

I'm sure we can just educate the cells with a good public schooling program.  STEM seems to be the future in humanity's supra-organismal biofuture.  That's what the good stewards of progress tell us, anyway. 

And hey -- look at the parallels!  In biology, "stem cells" are pre-differentiated generic cells with all kinds of capacity for unique growth.

*****************

Like many of America's problems, this Big C issue has its roots in things Americans don't want to discuss.

Cancer is a disease of industrial origins.

Space Age = Cancer Age.

I'll predict that this is a safe bet prediction:  in the latter half of the 21st Century, the few disinterested (not prostituted) scientists studying cancer cell biology will determine that cancer arose in the human body in notable per capita doses mostly, but not exclusively, after industrialization.  Industrialization will be seen as the cause of cancer's spiking in prominences of type, frequency and severity.

Organic chemistry will be one prime driver.

(Asbestos product creation and use was one we've already recognized.  However reluctantly.)

People will maddeningly continue to use their Modern Faith in Technological Progress and will insist that despite industrialization's causative role, industrialization (technology) will save us.





--Karl Franz Ochstradt, who seems to remember more about biology after 30 years than people who have been using their BS in Bio every day, "professionally," during that same period

13 comments:

Paul Behrer said...

As pub rockers, Dire Straits knew well about the 80s pushing industrialization on musicians for commercial ends.

Record company rep: "Like your sound, but it needs more synthesizer. That's what all the kids are going for these days. Go back and record with synthesizer or we'll sue for breach of contract."

Harold Caidagh said...

I don't know a single kid of that era who thought synthesizers were great, or who relished the synth-pop shoved down people's throats by record companies and radio station programmers. I didn't know anyone who said, "man I am so tired of electric guitars and electric bass and drums and pianos and Farfisas and Acetones. I want something that sounds like a computer made it. Humanity is boring."

I don't know anyone who said or admitted to thinking that. And I knew some geeky music-heads and sci-fi heads who would be eager to see 2001 arrive quickly. This technoprogress did not infest their musical tastes.

Instead, it was foisted upon everyone.

American TOP FORTY!

Honoria Helper, L.C.S.W. said...

But without synthesizer-based pop music being introduced to us, thanks to future-visionary record producers, record company marketing people, radio programmers, and music critics, we'd never have Bon Iver today.

You seem unable to admit that they saw the future, while you did not. Should you be predicting anything, Mr Ochstradt?

Karl Franz Ochstradt said...

Did you even hear what Paul said?

Karl Franz Ochstradt said...

Or, for that matter, what Hal said? I know you'd like to have Hal on "ignore," Ms Helper, but he did make a case for how choice is removed from the equation when marketing gets involved.

Perhaps you still believe that rusty, round-toothed saw wielded in Econ 101 still cuts pure and true and without a snag, and still demonstrates that demand always precedes supply.

That would be interesting if it were so. You are in the field, aren't you?

Honoria Helper, L.C.S.W. said...

If we can turn music into something made by manipulating 0s and 1s, then we'll do the same for the human organism, which means that curing cancer will be easy.

Coders know more than cell biologists anyway. Don't you watch TED lectures? Even those insane Randroids at reason.com understand that 0s and 1s form the basis of all reality, and synthetic manipulation of organics is the future.

Charles F. Oxtrot said...

The shorter my attention span, the more instantaneous and constantly-replenishing is my vision of the future.

Q.E.D.

Honoria Helper, L.C.S.W. said...

Q.E.D.?

Queen Elizabeth's Dictionary?

That's your source?

Karl Franz Ochstradt said...

Source.

...

...

You need an expert to confirm this, don't you?

Charles F. Oxtrot said...

The source, my good doctor, is my own mind.

Perhaps if you try using yours for something other than memorization of categories and their descriptors, it may yield some new fruits.

H.M. Lohmann said...

I don't even have 1/10th the imagination of CF, and even I can see the value in what he's suggesting. Don't we humans generally progress past spoon-feeding and having mommy wipe our ass for us, and into adulthood, Dr Helper?

dufus the roofie'd monocyte slayer said...

There's simply no demand for the product you're trying to push here, Ochstradt. Real skeptical soi-dissant intellectuals know that technology will save us, and your crackpot theories are just like the fire-and-brimstone preaching of a kooky fundamentalist named The Good Reverend Sham. You're just trying to get rich off a stupid conspiracy theory, appealing to those idiot shut-ins who can't find a job because they got a liberal arts degree and couldn't see how economics dictates a STEM career and didn't see how that was obvious when they were in 10th grade. It's their stupid-head fault that they didn't go into STEM when the signs were there and completely obvious.

Karl Franz Ochstradt said...

Have you ever noticed the brittleness of the Silent T Commentariat & Silent T Editorial position?

It's ironic, isn't it?

The way they are just like their arch-enemies the progressives, on this question of technological progress being the inevitable savior of humanity, and the attendant lust toward ever-new ever-better technogadgets to ensure our eternal prominence in the universe?

So terrified of being wrong. They are most like the Xtian Fundies each likes to mock, blind to all other alternatives but the one on which one's view of reality is based, however fictitious that basis and however divorced from objectively seen and detachment-rooted analyzed data surrounding us.

How can you not see endless sources of comedy in this?