by Zoë Pollock
Will Wiles remembers John B. Calhoun, who created a utopia for mice, called Universe 25, in 1972:
[T]here was no scarcity of food and water in Calhoun’s universe. The only thing that was in short supply was space. This was, after all, “heaven”—a title Calhoun deliberately used with pitch-black irony. The point was that crowding itself could destroy a society before famine even got a chance. In Calhoun’s heaven, hell was other mice.
(Photo by Flickr user mooshemazhab)
by Zoë Pollock
Peter Murray reports on Santa Cruz's foray into ‘predictive policing.’ Two mathematicians, an anthropologist and a criminologist created a mathematical model that uses past crime data to forecast the future:
The current, real world test of the software involves generating a map of the city areas most likely to be burglarized, the time of day they are most likely to get hit, and deploying personnel accordingly. The software is recalibrated every day when burglaries from the previous day are added to the dataset. They don’t actually expect to catch people in the act, but to deter more crimes with more effective patrolling. … The program led to five arrests in July. Even more impressive, compared to July 2010 burglaries, the number of July 2011 burglaries are down 27 percent.
(Hat tip: Josh Rothman)
by Zoë Pollock
Slow-mo surfing:
by Maisie Allison
A group of scientists is trying to explain it:
The next big set of questions will be about what brain regions and networks of circuits are involved in producing anesthesia,” [says] Columbia’s [Neil] Harrison. “The ‘how’ of anesthesia may be partially solved, but certainly not the ‘where,’ ” he says. What’s most remarkable about that is the fundamental mystery that it exemplifies…All of biology, from plants to tadpoles to people, can be reversibly immobilized with just about the same concentration range of drug, [Penn chemist Ivan J. Dmochowski] explains. “It’s almost a defining characteristic of life that we can be anesthetized,” he says. Because of these similarities, anesthetic target discovery might someday point researchers to the proteins and processes behind consciousness itself. “It’s bigger than anesthesia,” he says. “It’s one of the last frontiers in pharmacological research.”
Hat tip: Boing Boing.
by Zoë Pollock
Marya Hornbacher shares how she sobered up without God:
I believe that the most important spiritual principle of AA is humility. The recognition that we are flawed, that we can and must change and that our purpose not only in sobriety but in life is to be of service to others. I believe that I exist at random, but I do not exist alone; and that as long as my quarks cohere, my entire function on this hurtling planet is to give what I can to the other extant things. That keeps me sober. Amen.
by Zoë Pollock
Aylin Zafar reports on the rise of internet use among older Americans:
An upcoming study to be published by Dr. Shelia Cotten, a sociologist and Associate Professor from the University of Alabama, Birmingham, reveals that Internet use was associated with a 30 percent decrease in depressive symptoms among older adults who used it regularly, while other studies have shown similarly impressive results. The 74-plus demographic is the fastest growing demographic among social networks, according to the Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project, and social networking among Internet users ages 65 and older grew 100 percent between April 2009 and May 2010, jumping from 13 percent to 26 percent.
Real-world like button by Mario Klingemann.
by Zoë Pollock
Kiera Butler itemized the ways in which triclosan, an anti-microbial agent, isn't necessary and may do more harm than good. One major cause for concern, related to our hospitals thread:
A number of recent studies have shown that anti-bacterial products might be contributing to antibiotic resistance (here are a few to start with). Then there's the fact that triclosan is known to be completely ineffective against "gram negative" bacteria like pseudomonas and serratia, both of which cause major infections in hospitals. In fact, notes Janssen, a hospital outbreak of serratia was traced back to anti-bacterial soap dispensers.
Kiera then rounded up a short history of the right's attachment to the stuff. Money quote from Americans for Tax Reform:
Clearly moving to eliminate a product used by almost 75 percent of Americans should be based on evidence stronger than speculation. None exists, and research clearly shows Americans would prefer being free to choose these products rather than being restricted by regulatory caprice.
Or by science. The Weekly Standard's Jonathan V. Last added it to his running tally of evil Nanny State items including "low-flow toilets, dishwasher soap that doesn’t work, encroaching bans on plastic bags, and a looming mandate outlawing good light bulbs."
Chianti, Tuscany, Italy, 4.43 pm
by Zoë Pollock
Anneli Rufus delves in:
Psychologists call comfort food a "social surrogate" — in other words, not quite replacing real companions but reminding us of them. Participants in yet another recent study felt less lonely after writing about—and not even necessarily eating—comfort foods. The psychologists who designed that study theorized correctly that consuming comfort foods soothes us in the exact same ways as wearing our favorite clothes or watching our favorite TV shows.
Jennifer Gibson recounts the findings of a more recent study where participants "received an infusion of either saline or fatty acids directly into the stomach":
Traditionally, the sensations, such as sights and smells and tastes, were believed to induce emotional changes associated with food — a mind-to-body connection. But, this research proves that the link may be bidirectional, involving a body-to-mind influence, too. The participants did not know what type of infusion they received, yet they still experienced the emotional effects of comfort food. Emotions may influence food choices, but food also influences emotions.
by Chris Bodenner
A reader writes:
Although I like dogs, I have never owned one. I'll say this though: for almost every letter from the anti-dog people, especially that first reader, replace the word "dog" with the "child" and you'll have my position. Exactly. And I'll bet a lot of your readers feel the exact the same way.
Another demonstrates:
So, the third letter here had me thinking that I know lots of people who don't like kids say nearly the same things about dogs. Let's change the appropriate words…
I'm sorry, but parents are the very worst at judging where they should and shouldn't take kids, even when their kids exhibit terrible behavior. I have encountered terribly behaved kids at coffee shops, at bars, even at rock shows (which are probably incredibly damaging to kids' ears). Parents are so myopic about their own children's behavior and presence. "Oh, it's okay that she's throwing things at you…she's a sweetheart, trust me."
You are bringing a child into other peoples' personal spaces and asking them to deal with it. Have a little bit of respect. Not everyone thinks your kid is okay or cute or a real sweetheart.
Another does the same thing and adds:
No, I'm not arguing dogs = kids. Dogs shouldn't be allowed (and are not allowed) inside restaurants and most other establishments for health reasons. On the other hand, my experience is that inconsiderate and non-empathetic parents outdo rude and non-empathetic dog owners in both number and degree. In misbehaving children and dogs, the problem is the adult caretaker. The solution is generally 1) to politely ask that they control their charges, and 2) accepting the fact that some people are just assholes.
Circling back to the original debate, a fellow Brooklynite testifies better than I can:
Your reader writes: "The only regulation I would favor would be that the default be dogs not allowed unless the ownership posts a dogs allowed sign. Dog owners could then congregate at doggie diners as they do now at dog parks, and the rest of the public can dine without the bother and the threats to health and safety posed by many dogs."
This is basically the way it works in New York City already, and people who complain about dog owners who think they can take their dog "anywhere" are knocking down a straw man. Any responsible NYC dog owner knows that dogs aren't *technically* allowed in any bar. Nonetheless, in my neighborhood in Brooklyn there are three or four bars (none of which serve food) that are well known as the "dog bars." They have water dishes. One of them sometimes writes "We Love Dogs" on the sidewalk chalkboard. I occasionally take my dog to those bars. I don't take him to any others – and there are many, many others. The community has already done an excellent job of answering the dogs-in-bars question … no intervention from the city necessary.
Another great place for dog people: Germany. I lived in Stuttgart as a kid and have fond memories of meeting dogs in restaurants almost every time we went out to dinner. German dogs tend to be super well-behaved; my family would often have a entire meal without noticing that a pooch was resting at the feet of its owner in the adjacent booth. A reader backs me up:
I went to Germany a few years ago to visit my brother and was surprised to find dogs everywhere. Malls, restaurants, bars etc. All of them were very well-mannered and the owners kept them in line.
Another perspective from Europe:
I have two dogs who have traveled the world with us, and we especially love going to France, where dogs can go just about anywhere (except museums, churches, and,
oddly enough, most parks). But we made damn sure they had good "cafe manners" before we even thought of taking them to restaurants. And we always ask the folks at the neighboring tables if they mind the dogs being near. No one has ever objected. To be honest, our dogs behave better than most kids I've seen in restaurants. Which is why I always have to laugh when I see parents getting their panties in a knot when a restaurant owner tries to enforce a "no child" policy. My dogs might shed a few hairs but at least they don't scream and throw food.
Our reader adds, "That's Phoebe having a kir in a Paris cafe after a long day." Another cultural anecdote: When my mother adopted our dog Scooter from a German pound, officials required that she and my stepdad take a week off work – each – to housetrain and discipline Scooter. An official would show up to our house several times, unannounced, to make sure Scooter was being adequately cared for. From how my mom explains it, Germans were very wary of American expats buying dogs, particularly US servicemembers like her, because of high rates of dog abandonment when expats moved back to the States.
On that note, and segueing back to New York, check out this fantastically titled story from the summer, "Drunk Puppy Buying Banned By West Village Pet Stores":
"I feel like they always come in drunk," said Fernanda Moritz, the manager of Le Petite Puppy at 18 Christopher St. which has implemented a policy against letting customers buy — or even hold — animals if they've been drinking. The shop is surrounded by bars, and Moritz said many of her would-be customers stop in after happy hour around 6 p.m. "They come from there and say 'let's stop by to see the puppies,'" said Moritz. …
Even though turning down drunken customers might seem bad for business, Moritz and Jacoby both say they'd prefer to lose the sale. "We make sure they can take care of the dog. We make sure they go to a good home," Jacoby said.
(Image via J.P. Moore)
The Dish 