Britannica Webshare

Here’s a fascinating program: the Encyclopedia Britannica is introducing Britannica Webshare:

Britannica WebShare is a program that makes it easy for Web publishers to use the information in the Encyclopaedia Britannica for their own research and to share it by providing their readers easy access to individual articles.

Anyone who publishes regularly on the Internet—bloggers, webmaster, and writers who publish on the Web—is eligible for a free subscription to Britannica Online, which includes the entire Encyclopaedia Britannica as well as other encyclopedias, an atlas, a dictionary, thesaurus, links to valuable Web sites selected by our editors, and more.

What’s more, anyone with a Web site can link to a Britannica article—or multiple articles—and readers who click on the links will see the articles in their entirety, even if the article is normally available only to paying subscribers.

Sounds nice, and a welcome companion/competitor to Wikipedia. I’ve applied, now it’s just a question of whether I’ve been regular enough as of late to get accepted. ;)

Lunchtime

Flickr has video now! This is a silly little meme that’s going around called Fridgets: short little videos with the camera inside the fridge.

Everything New is Old Again

A short quote from the end of an article about the Seattle Monorail: “Like so many inventions, lack of financial backing prevented further development.” What’s interesting about this (at least to Seattleites…er, well, at least to me…) is that it’s talking not about the recent monorail debacle, nor the existing monorail built for the 1962 Worlds Fair, but the 1911 William H. Boyes Monorail.

Boyes MonorailThis test track was built and demonstrated in 1911 in the tideflats of Seattle, Washington. The rails were made of wood and track cost was estimated to be around $3,000 per mile. A bargain! The Seattle Times commented at the time that “the time may come when these wooden monorail lines, like high fences, will go straggling across country, carrying their burden of cars that will develop a speed of about 20 miles per hour.” Like so many inventions, lack of financial backing prevented further development.

Neat!

(via Paleo-Future, quoted paragraph from Monorails in History)

Pet Dreams

glowkittens.jpg

These people need to get together with these people so that Prairie and I can get a hypoallergenic glow in the dark kitten.

South Korean scientists have cloned cats by manipulating a fluorescent protein gene, a procedure which could help develop treatments for human genetic diseases, officials said Wednesday.

In a side-effect, the cloned cats glow in the dark when exposed to ultraviolet beams.

Seriously.

This should happen.

Badass Bible Verses

Cracked has a list of the top nine ‘badass’ bible verses. Just for fun, I’ll list the verse citations here. Any guesses at what stories they’re referring to (before looking at the linked article or clicking through to the linked NIV versions, of course)?

  1. Exodus 2: 11-12
  2. II Kings 2: 23-24
  3. Ezekiel 23: 19-20
  4. Judges 3: 16-23
  5. Numbers 16: 23, 31-33
  6. Deuteronomy 25: 11-12
  7. I Kings 18: 24, 38-40
  8. Judges 15: 15-16
  9. I Samuel 18: 25-27

Ask Your Doctor For A Reason to Take It

Prairie and I have been alternately amused and appalled at the never ending onslaught of prescription drug commercials. Actually, it would be more accurate to characterize us as appalled and amused: appalled when yet another one pops up (as we find the whole idea more than a little sleazy — medicines should be prescribed by doctors, not self-prescribed on the basis of a thirty-second overgeneralized list of symptoms), and amused at the seemingly endless list of ever more disturbing sounding side effects. With most of these, it doesn’t take long at all before we decide that we’d prefer to just live with whatever issue the drug is supposed to alleviate rather than risk the side effects.

Apparently (and thankfully), we’re not the only ones watching these ads with more than a little distaste. Consumer Reports is starting what’s intended to be a series of video/weblog posts analyzing these DTC (“direct-to-consumer”) ads.

The problem with such “direct-to-consumer,” or DTC, advertisements is that they may generate excessive demand because people go straight to their doctors asking for this or that specific medication. In a 2006 survey by our National Survey Research Center, 78 percent of doctors said that patients asked them at least occasionally to prescribe drugs they had seen advertised on television, and 67 percent said they sometimes did so. And don’t expect the ad barrage to let up. While Congress recently gave the FDA more authority to regulate ads, it rejected a measure that would have allowed the agency to place a moratorium on ads for new drugs that raise safety concerns. The U.S. is one of only two countries in the world (the other is New Zealand) where such ads are legal.

The first entry of the series looks at an ad for a drug intended to treat RLS, or “restless leg syndrome.”

That condition may sound fanciful, but it’s a real problem. Something like 3 percent of Americans suffer from RLS, which is characterized by an uncontrollable impulse to keep moving your legs even when you are trying to go to sleep—which obviously could make sleep difficult.

Several years ago, doctors discovered that drugs that were originally developed to treat Parkinson’s disease could provide meaningful help to people who suffered from moderate to severe forms of this condition. But the drugs have serious side effects – one of the more bizarre involves a propensity for uncontrolled sexual or gambling impulses, as our video mentions. And while these medications may provide welcome relief to some RLS patients, the ads could leave anyone who ever suffered fidgetiness when trying to go to sleep to wonder whether he or she has RLS and should seek treatment.

Now, while Prairie and I are reasonably sure (though without any actual medical diagnosis) that there’s a chance that I have a mild case of RLS, in my case, it’s nothing that can’t be dealt with via a few relatively simple measures (a king-size bed, separate sets of sheets so I don’t yank hers off when I kick, and a guest bed for the really bad nights). Besides, the list of potential side effects in the ads themselves were enough to scare me away from even remotely considering the drugs to ‘treat’ RLS…and that was before I watched the Consumer Reports entry.

Kudos to Consumer Reports for starting this series. Hopefully it reaches beyond simply preaching to the choir.

I do have to admit to a little curiosity about what they might say about Panexa (acidachrome promanganate), though…. ;)

PANEXA is a prescription drug that should only be taken by patients experiencing one of the following disorders: metabolism, binocular vision, digestion (solid and liquid), circulation, menstruation, cognition, osculation, extremes of emotion. For patients with coronary heart condition (CHC) or two separate feet (2SF), the dosage of PANEXA should be doubled to ensure that twice the number of pills are being consumed. PANEXA can also be utilized to decrease the risk of death caused by not taking PANEXA, being beaten to death by oscelots, or death relating from complications arising from seeing too much of the color lavender. Epileptic patients should take care to ensure tight, careful grips on containers of PANEXA, in order to secure their contents in the event of a seizure, caused by PANEXA or otherwise.